Was Hakeem Olajuwon's post-up game a little overrated?

[Im Still Ballin]

His shooting percentages (FG%, 2PT%, TS%) were never as high as Shaq's, Kareem's, Barkley's, Dantley's, Wilt's, Jokic's, and McHale's. And yet, he's often considered the best in the post. My personal opinion is that, while still one of the pivot greats, his post-up game was overrated due to its aesthetic appeal. No one has a prettier low-post highlight reel than The Dream.

IMO, what hurt his back-to-the-basket game was shot selection and, to a lesser degree, passing. He wasn't as good at getting the high-percentage looks, often settling for that tough baseline fadeaway jump shot. His touch in the paint was very good, but a level below Jokic, McHale, Dantley, and Kareem—the gold standards. He wasn't a huge foul drawer, and his FT% was below league average.

[Real Men Wear Green]

No.

[Carbine]

Wtf kind of thread is this?

[Im Still Ballin]

Hakeem career 2pt%: 51.6
Kareem career 2pt%: 55.6
Shaq career 2pt%: 58.0
Wilt career 2pt%: 53.8
Barkley career 2pt%: 57.8
McHale career 2pt%: 55.8
Dantley career 2pt%: 54.0
Jokic career 2pt%: 60.4

[Kblaze8855]

Unless you have numbers that isolate actual postup shots from him facing up in the mid range, I’m not sure what those numbers really show.

When these shots don’t go in….


https://i.ibb.co/rGqJ3XMG/IMG-1747.gif

https://i.ibb.co/mV5yCygt/IMG-1749.gif

https://i.ibb.co/W4xg8gDY/IMG-1748.gif

Is that being a worse post scorer or just a worse scorer?

Barkley and Jokic are the only ones who shot threes and other than Jokic every player you mentioned had their primes and peak before shot tracking data to say from where inside the arc shots were taken so it would be pretty hard to say definitively wouldn’t it?

[Im Still Ballin]

Unless you have numbers that isolate actual postup shots from him facing up in the mid range, I’m not sure what those numbers really show.

No play-type player-tracking data prior to 2004-05. 2PT% and TS% are good general correlates for overall scoring efficiency. They're the best we can do, and they're worth a mention. They show that Hakeem had a lower 2PT% and TS% compared to the listed players. Why is that? Was he taking more difficult shots? Was he not as good at making shots?


When these shots don’t go in….


https://i.ibb.co/rGqJ3XMG/IMG-1747.gif

https://i.ibb.co/mV5yCygt/IMG-1749.gif

https://i.ibb.co/W4xg8gDY/IMG-1748.gif

Is that being a worse post scorer or just a worse scorer?

Both? There are definitely vague, subtle lines of demarcation between play types. e.g., what constitutes post-up play.


Barkley and Jokic are the only ones who shot threes and other than Jokic every player you mentioned had their primes and peak before shot tracking data to say from where inside the arc shots were taken so it would be pretty hard to say definitively wouldn’t it?

It would, and a discussion can be had.

[tontoz]

Hakeem is overrated in general, at least on offense. He settled for jumpers a lot and his jumper was mid.

When he was motivated and hitting his J he was incredible to watch but he wasn't a lunchpail guy who you could count on night in night out. He didnt always play well with others.

[tpols]

Hakeem career 2pt%: 51.6
Kareem career 2pt%: 55.6
Shaq career 2pt%: 58.0
Wilt career 2pt%: 53.8
Barkley career 2pt%: 57.8
McHale career 2pt%: 55.8
Dantley career 2pt%: 54.0
Jokic career 2pt%: 60.4


Yolk out here GOATing again.

I do agree with OP that Hakeems short comings are rarely highlighted, only his success is celebrated. He doesn't get one ounce of the microscope treatment other GOATs get.

[StrongLurk]

His peak is not overrated, but his general prime years have gotten overrated recently.

[Im Still Ballin]

Yolk out here GOATing again.

I do agree with OP that Hakeems short comings are rarely highlighted, only his success is celebrated. He doesn't get one ounce of the microscope treatment other GOATs get.

Here's what the 2PT% and TS% looks like relative to league average:

Hakeem: 106 2PT+, 103 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 109 2PT+, 106 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
Kareem: 119 2PT+, 114 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 112 2PT+, 109 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
Shaq: 123 2PT+, 111 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 119 2PT+, 107 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
Wilt: 125 2PT+, 113 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 120 2PT+, 107 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
Barkley: 119 2PT+, 114 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 113 2PT+, 109 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
McHale: 113 2PT+, 112 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 114 2PT+, 115 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
Dantley: 112 2PT+, 116 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 109 2PT+, 113 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)
Jokic: 116 2PT+, 112 TS+ (REGULAR SEASON); 105 2PT+, 107 TS+ (PLAYOFFS)

[Kblaze8855]

Hakeem is overrated in general, at least on offense. He settled for jumpers a lot and his jumper was mid.

When he was motivated and hitting his J he was incredible to watch but he wasn't a lunchpail guy who you could count on night in night out. He didnt always play well with others.


I would say he’s generally underrated and misunderstood. Those clips I posted. I made a while back in response to someone who was adamant that he didn’t shoot at all. That he was a strictly back to the basket post up player who would have no place in today’s league. Dude actually told me to show him five clips of Hakeem taking a midrange jump shot believing I couldn’t do it. He obviously didn’t know me at all, but he was so adamant and I was incredulous.

People legitimately don’t know shit about so many even relatively recent legends.

But I’d say he’s underrated overall because of his defense. 95% of the discussion around him is his beautiful post game when he was one of the freakiest defenders in history.

If someone wanted to argue that he was the greatest defensive player of all time once he stopped being such a foul Pro jumping jack, I might not agree, but I wouldn’t disagree enough to fight about it.

If you come up with a list of people, you think we’re better on offense the number of them who are as good on defense as well? We’re talking about top five all-time types like wilt or Jordan if you believe Jordan was as good on defense.

Maybe someone really high on David Robinson could say him as well but that’s about the worst name you can mention.

It’s hard for me to call someone overrated when they are at least a worthy nominee for the greatest player ever on defense, but they can also give you 30 something a game on a title run.

on ball in the post. Switching onto a guard if necessary. Blocking shots. Being an absolute pest off the ball. He was one of the few big men who had that Scottie Pippen move where he could transition from being posted up to fronting so fast he would steal the entry pass flat footed.

That guy was so so freakishly quick on defense for his size while also jumping out of the gym and having crazy timing blocking and changing shots.

He’s legitimately a goat tier defensive player, but his whole legacy is post moves.

[tontoz]

Thats why i specifically mentioned offense. He actually took a lot of jumpers and wasn't that good at making them. It is like he became a better offensive player after he retired and people forgot that he was frequently a black hole that bricked a lot of jumpers.

He won 1 MVP in his career and was top 3 only twice. I see people on here saying he is top 10 all time and i don't see it.

[Carbine]

It's because of his two post season runs, one of which was one of the biggest carry jobs of all time. He is one of the only players to have a claim as best offensive and best defensive player during his peak.

The players who played against him revere him. The players who played with him, perhaps even more so.

Robert Sorry "Hakeem is 100 times the player Tim was"

He played with both, at or near their peaks.

[Kblaze8855]

Thats why i specifically mentioned offense. He actually took a lot of jumpers and wasn't that good at making them. It is like he became a better offensive player after he retired and people forgot that he was frequently a black hole that bricked a lot of jumpers.

He won 1 MVP in his career and was top 3 only twice. I see people on here saying he is top 10 all time and i don't see it.

I think it’s pretty simple. There’s almost no one generally accepted in the top 10, who would appear to be on a different tier from him on the same floor. There are a few others you can say that about Who don’t generally get put up there but Moses is the only one of them who won as the man. Off the top of my head at least.

he’s justifiable just from a basketball perspective. But you add a couple rings on top of it?

Who else has the “ Well, yeah, if we’re just talking basketball…” Along with his level of winning and isn’t put up there?

Kevin Durant?

How many people we really talking about?

[L.Kizzle]

Is this a low-key Kevin McHale boost thread, looks like it.

[Meticode]

https://www.reactiongifs.com/r/tbt.gif

[FultzNationRISE]

Hakeem career 2pt%: 51.6
Kareem career 2pt%: 55.6
Shaq career 2pt%: 58.0
Wilt career 2pt%: 53.8
Barkley career 2pt%: 57.8
McHale career 2pt%: 55.8
Dantley career 2pt%: 54.0
Jokic career 2pt%: 60.4

Okay Chuck.

Damn.

[tontoz]

I think it’s pretty simple. There’s almost no one generally accepted in the top 10, who would appear to be on a different tier from him on the same floor. There are a few others you can say that about Who don’t generally get put up there but Moses is the only one of them who won as the man. Off the top of my head at least.

he’s justifiable just from a basketball perspective. But you add a couple rings on top of it?

Who else has the “ Well, yeah, if we’re just talking basketball…” Along with his level of winning and isn’t put up there?

Kevin Durant?

How many people we really talking about?


He won his first ring at 31. Prior to that he wasn't sniffing MVP. He was 3rd team All-NBA the year he won the title.

[SouBeachTalents]

He won his first ring at 31. Prior to that he wasn't sniffing MVP. He was 3rd team All-NBA the year he won the title.
He did make the Finals his 3rd year knocking off the showtime Lakers, the only team to beat them from '85-'88, and took 2 games off a consensus top 3-5 team of all time in the '86 Celtics.

Him being 3rd Team in '95 was a function of him being a center with Robinson & Shaq both having MVP caliber seasons, he's likely 1st Team if he plays any other position.

[tpols]

Okay Chuck.

Damn.


That was the most impressive of all considering he was only 6'5. Dantley as well I guess. Super crafty skill to do that.

[Kblaze8855]

Id say MVP can be sniffed from 2nd place which is where he finished the year before he won it. Not that It matters.

And I suspect a good 75% of the championships ever won didn’t involve beating a team as good as the 86 Lakers. Magic and Kareem only lost one of the time in the west and that was a three game series. The Rockets beat them in a real 7 game series.

I’d say he was pretty proven both in his youth and his later years. They lost to what might’ve been the best team ever against bird playing the best basketball of his life with a much superior team around him.

He got knocked out the next season putting up like 50/25. He did as much in the playoffs early in his career as some others in the top 15 range did in their entire careers as a teams franchise player.

What…would’ve be better getting a couple more second round exits in the middle nobody would care about?

[Kblaze8855]

He did make the Finals his 3rd year knocking off the showtime Lakers, the only team to beat them from '85-'88, and took 2 games off a consensus top 3-5 team of all time in the '86 Celtics.

Him being 3rd Team in '95 was a function of him being a center with Robinson & Shaq both having MVP caliber seasons, he's likely 1st Team if he plays any other position.


yeah, that’s kind of a weird take to me. Criticizing his all NBA ranking in a season where both of the people ahead of him had the most famous ass beatings of their entire career when they matched up?

And I don’t even think they got out played by as much as history remembers, but the series that both of them had against Hakeem is literally the career low light for both of those guys The very year after he had Ewing have one of the worst finals in history.

he was going against the absolute best of the best, and they all had the most embarrassing and notorious performances of their lives.

[tontoz]

Id say MVP can be sniffed from 2nd place which is where he finished the year before he won it. Not that It matters.

And I suspect a good 75% of the championships ever won didn’t involve beating a team as good as the 86 Lakers. Magic and Kareem only lost one of the time in the west and that was a three game series. The Rockets beat them in a real 7 game series.

I’d say he was pretty proven both in his youth and his later years. They lost to what might’ve been the best team ever against bird playing the best basketball of his life with a much superior team around him.

He got knocked out the next season putting up like 50/25. He did as much in the playoffs early in his career as some others in the top 15 range did in their entire careers as a teams franchise player.

What…would’ve be better getting a couple more second round exits in the middle nobody would care about?


He didn't finish 2nd or even 3rd in the MVP race until after he won his first ring at 31. How many guys in the top 10 all time werent even top 3 in the MVP race prior to age 31?

Jokic has 3 MVPs and he's only 29.

[Kblaze8855]

You might be right about 93 but I feel like he was second to Barkley that year and that isn’t the kind of thing I usually get wrong but I’m driving right now just doing talk to text so somebody else can check. It would be pretty unlike me to forget something like that.

[Kblaze8855]

And I don’t know what the ages have to do with anything anyway. You don’t really get extra credit for winning at some specific age. The exact years you won something and completely different leagues for completely different competition isn’t really a way to evaluate basketball players is it? Having gas like magic, bird and Jordan on the greatest teams of all time winning MVPs and rings isnt really saying much about somebody playing with Robert Reed and Maxwell.

What was he supposed to win in the late 80s and early 90s?

[tontoz]

You might be right about 93 but I feel like he was second to Barkley that year and that isn’t the kind of thing I usually get wrong but I’m driving right now just doing talk to text so somebody else can check. It would be pretty unlike me to forget something like that.


I might be a year off on the timing because i am supposed to be working lol. But still the point remains that during most of his prime he wasn't even a MVP finalist. He was typically 5-7 in the voting.He was 31 in '93.

[Im Still Ballin]

Is this a low-key Kevin McHale boost thread, looks like it.

Come on, bro. Do I really look like a poster with a plan? If I wanted to boost Kevin's post-up game at the expense of Hakeem's, I would've mentioned the 1986 NBA Finals. McHale put up 25.8 ppg on 57.3% 2PT and 62.9% TS in comparison to 24.7 ppg on 47.9% 2PT and 52.6% TS for Olajuwon.

Kevin won the battle of the post-up greats. Granted, Hakeem didn't guard McHale, but his help defense was too slow for Kevin's laser-quick catch-and-finish post possessions. On the flipside, McHale did guard Olajuwon, blocking him on a number of possessions in the post:

https://i.ibb.co/27s8kPBx/95ad5f43123a4289a224421f55818d99.gif
https://i.ibb.co/W49HW316/22cedf908e774efca204d979de9bf604.gif
https://i.ibb.co/Kjz3BgCJ/121d43a221b94310b43c463eabd184bf.gif

[Im Still Ballin]

https://i.ibb.co/ZpPLnt9V/e451de28dbb04465abc80b06b9a47d1a.gif
https://i.ibb.co/KcRcGvGQ/4a56deef0c8b4297a3d3623fb2c126bc.gif
https://i.ibb.co/JFbQR1Kp/396f7906ceb14edcb157b876154e989e.gif

[Im Still Ballin]

https://i.ibb.co/PZ1XgCWC/d33802db7cd2490fb8abe9c38cade6e1.gif

[Im Still Ballin]

That was a 23 year old Hakeem, though. Have to give him some grace. McHale was 28.

[Im Still Ballin]

Also, the 1995 NBA Finals H2H duel between post-up greats was largely a wash. dankok stat-tracked the 4 games a year ago; this was his analysis:


For much of the series, the two men guarded each other. In fact, for most of the time they were on the floor, they were matched up unless one of them was in foul trouble. In those instances, Orlando used Horace Grant on Hakeem and Houston used Charles Jones on Shaq. On a few possessions, both Hakeem and Shaq were switched onto other smaller players who contested them.

Apart from shooting, the tracking also includes fouls drawn and turnovers but I only included turnovers caused by the other player. For example, if Hakeem drew a charge on Shaq or stripped Shaq of the ball, I counted those but if Shaq threw a bad pass that got intercepted by Kenny Smith, I didn't count that.



Game 1: Orlando 118 - 120 Houston (OT)

Shaq: +6 ON, -8 OFF
Hakeem: -7 ON, +9 OFF

When Both ON: Orlando 90 - 77 Houston

When Defending Each Other
Shaq: 19 points, 7/12 shooting, 5/7 FT, 4 fouls drawn, 3 turnovers
Hakeem: 19 points, 8/17 shooting, 3/5 FT, 3 fouls drawn, 1 turnover



Game 2: Orlando 106 - 117 Houston

Shaq: -3 ON, -8 OFF
Hakeem: +5 ON, +6 OFF

When Both ON: Orlando 92 - 93 Houston

When Defending Each Other
Shaq: 18 points, 8/15 shooting, 2/2 FT, 2 fouls drawn, 1 turnover
Hakeem: 18 points, 8/19 shooting, 2/5 FT, 3 fouls drawn, 0 turnovers



Game 3: Houston 106 - 103 Orlando

Shaq: +1 ON, -4 OFF
Hakeem: +4 ON, -1 OFF

When Both ON: Houston 96 - 95 Orlando

When Defending Each Other
Shaq: 23 points, 10/16 shooting, 3/4 FT, 4 fouls drawn, 1 turnover
Hakeem: 16 points, 7/20 shooting, 2/3 FT, 2 fouls drawn, 0 turnovers



Game 4: Houston 113 - 101 Orlando

Shaq: -16 ON +4 OFF
Hakeem: +15 ON -3 OFF

When Both ON: Houston 106 - 87 Orlando

When Defending Each Other
Shaq: 18 points, 9/16 shooting, 0/0 FT, 3 fouls drawn, 3 turnovers
Hakeem: 17 points, 7/17 shooting, 2/2 FT, 2 fouls drawn, 2 turnovers *one 3pt make



Series Summary

Scoring Margin: Houston +28

Shaq: -12 ON -16 OFF
Hakeem: +17 ON +11 OFF

When Both ON: Houston +7

Per 100 Possessions

Shaq ON: 111.8 ORtg, 115.2 DRtg, -3.4 Net Rtg
Hakeem ON: 115.3 ORtg, 110.5 DRtg, +4.8 Net Rtg

Shaq OFF: 89.3 ORtg, 136.9 DRtg, -47.6 Net Rtg
Hakeem OFF: 134.9 ORtg, 104.0 DRtg, +30.9 Net Rtg

Shaq ON-OFF: +44.2 Net Rtg
Hakeem ON-OFF: -26.1 Net Rtg



Series Totals - Man Defense

Hakeem
Defended by Shaq: 70 points, 44.0 %TS (30/73 FG, 9/15 FT), 10 fouls drawn, 3 turnovers
Defended by Grant: 42 points, 62.6 %TS (18/30 FG, 6/8 FT), 4 fouls drawn, 2 turnovers
Defended by Others/Undefended: 19 points, 66.3 %TS (8/13 FG, 3/3 FT), 4 fouls drawn

Shaq
Defended by Hakeem: 78 points, 59.3 %TS (34/60 FG, 10/13 FT), 13 fouls drawn, 8 turnovers
Defended by Jones: 19 points, 60.4 %TS (6/10 FG, 7/13 FT), 8 fouls drawn, 3 turnovers
Defended by Others/Undefended: 15 points, 67.9 %TS (4/4 FG, 7/16 FT), 9 fouls drawn



Conclusions:

In the direct matchup, Shaq got the better of Hakeem scoring more on much higher efficiency and drawing more fouls on the other. Although Hakeem forced more turnovers on Shaq than vice versa, it's hard to say that Hakeem didn't lose the matchup.

it was a contrast of styles with Shaq overwhelming Hakeem with raw strength and athleticism and Hakeem getting the better of Shaq in face up situations beating him off the dribble and with his jukes, spins, and dream shakes.

As for who was the better overall player in the series, I'd probably call it a wash. Hakeem dominated when defended by Horace Grant who is a really good defender more so than Shaq dominated Charles Jones. Hakeem also had an edge in overall team defense although Shaq was quite good in this area himself. Shaq not only did a great job defending Hakeem but he blocked more shots than Olajuwon in the series and was very active defensively.

Ultimately the play of these two monsters isn't what determined the series. Excluding Drexler and Penny who in my opinion also played each other close to a draw, the supporting cast of the Rockets completely outplayed that of Orlando. Anderson after infamously missing the four free throws at the end of regulation in Game 1 was shook and never the same afterwards. Dennis Scott's shooting was off all series and he gave the team virtually nothing as well and since Anderson and Scott averaged around 40 mpg, that hurt the Magic a lot. On the other hand, the likes of Horry, Cassell, Elie and Kenny Smith were amazingly clutch, devastating in transition and shot the lights out from 3pt range. It was the Rockets' role players that won this series.

[Kblaze8855]

You wanna go one on one with the great one in a misleading clip off? You know I’ll make this the rest of my day. I have that little to do when it’s hot out and I’m actually at home.

I’ll make Kevin McHale the poster boy for the next “We done with the 90s!” trend And only you guys will know that I didn’t mean it.

[Baller234]

Kblaze where do you land on the Hakeem/Shaq debate?

[Kblaze8855]

Hakeem was a better total basketball player But that doesn’t mean he was more effective than Shaq at his peak for any number of reasons. Who I would take depends on the situation. It’s close enough that I can’t get mad at either choice. I do believe I would take Hakeem for right now but right now is a really small slice of history

[Kblaze8855]

Hakeem was a better total basketball player But that doesn’t mean he was more effective than Shaq at his peak for any number of reasons. Who I would take depends on the situation. It’s close enough that I can’t get mad at either choice. I do believe I would take Hakeem for right now but right now is a really small slice of history

[tontoz]

Hakeem would certainly be better off in this era on both ends. The spacing would allow him to get to the rim more and on defense he would be the perfect big that can protect the rim and defend guards on switches.

[Baller234]

Hakeem was a better total basketball player But that doesn’t mean he was more effective than Shaq at his peak for any number of reasons. Who I would take depends on the situation. It’s close enough that I can’t get mad at either choice. I do believe I would take Hakeem for right now but right now is a really small slice of history

Interesting. I only asked because I enjoyed your posts and it looked like you had a lot of perspective when it came to Hakeem. Having said that I don't know if I agree. It's very close I'm with you on that but think I can make a better case for Dream.

Shaq was more effective in his spot but he was more limited outside of it. Dream on the other hand could score in a more variety of ways and could also shoot free throws better when it counted. That on top of his defensive superiority and emotional maturity.

You said it depends on the situation. I'm curious, in what situation would you rather have Shaq on your team?

[sdot_thadon]

Not at all, Dream could operate and be effective from anywhere in the post in his prime. Perhaps the most complete post arsenal well ever see. He wasn't as willing a passer in his early career but became very good at passing out of doubles, I wanna say those rockets were the 1st to surround an elite paint threat with shooting and make you pick your poison. Low Post, Mid post and even occasionally from the high post. His efficiency might be a similar argument to Kobes perimeter game....complete bag but sometimes consists of less gimme buckets. He had every shot, hooks, fades, counters and at his best counters for your counters up to several times in the same possession. Think the post equivalent of Kyries handles.

[Xiao Yao You]

Playing 4 out around hakeem was certainly the latest evolvement in the game at the time.

[Rocket]

https://hickamsdictum.com/the-g-o-a-t-who-is-the-best-basketball-player-of-all-time-e43c7e53a9a7

[HoopsNY]

Thats why i specifically mentioned offense. He actually took a lot of jumpers and wasn't that good at making them. It is like he became a better offensive player after he retired and people forgot that he was frequently a black hole that bricked a lot of jumpers.

He won 1 MVP in his career and was top 3 only twice. I see people on here saying he is top 10 all time and i don't see it.

We can't track data prior to 1997, but the last good years for him were 1997-99. From 10-16ft and 16-29ft, Hakeem shot 44% and 46%. Lookup Ewing and Robinson's numbers those same years and he shot better.

Robinson: 36%/43%
Ewing: 41%/43%

So what's Hakeem doing in his peak years? In the years mentioned, his FG% was 50.5%. From '93-'96 (peak years), his FG% was 52.5%.

[HoopsNY]

It's because of his two post season runs, one of which was one of the biggest carry jobs of all time. He is one of the only players to have a claim as best offensive and best defensive player during his peak.

The players who played against him revere him. The players who played with him, perhaps even more so.

Robert Sorry "Hakeem is 100 times the player Tim was"

He played with both, at or near their peaks.

Why do people rely only on those 2 years, as if Hakeem was not a statistical juggernaut before then? Here's Hakeem's stat-line prior to 1994:

Hakeem PS '85-'93: 26/13/3/2/4 on 54%

I'm genuinely curious, how many players from that era were doing this not named Michael Jordan?

[tontoz]

We can't track data prior to 1997, but the last good years for him were 1997-99. From 10-16ft and 16-29ft, Hakeem shot 44% and 46%. Lookup Ewing and Robinson's numbers those same years and he shot better.

Robinson: 36%/43%
Ewing: 41%/43%

So what's Hakeem doing in his peak years? In the years mentioned, his FG% was 50.5%. From '93-'96 (peak years), his FG% was 52.5%.



*yawn*

Hakeem's career best TS was 57.7%. Barkley's career average was 61.2% in spite of bricking 3s.

[HoopsNY]

*yawn*

Hakeem's career best TS was 57.7%. Barkley's career average was 61.2% in spite of bricking 3s.

Tim Duncan's highest was 57.9%. Giannis' career TS% is 61.1%. Who has better post moves?

Magic's TS% is 61%, Kyrie's is 58%...who has the bigger bag?

Kobe's TS% is 55%. Allen's is higher at 58%. Who has the bigger bag?

[sdot_thadon]

Tim Duncan's highest was 57.9%. Giannis' career TS% is 61.1%. Who has better post moves?

Magic's TS% is 61%, Kyrie's is 58%...who has the bigger bag?

Kobe's TS% is 55%. Allen's is higher at 58%. Who has the bigger bag?

Exactly this.

[Tavr]

Tim Duncan's highest was 57.9%. Giannis' career TS% is 61.1%. Who has better post moves?

Magic's TS% is 61%, Kyrie's is 58%...who has the bigger bag?

Kobe's TS% is 55%. Allen's is higher at 58%. Who has the bigger bag?

Good post, I like the Duncan and Giannis comparison.

In fairness to the user tontoz, though, TS is fantastic for encapsulating all-around efficiency. Its just there's obviously no way of knowing what percentage came from post ups. We'd need to see their shooting chart (the data only goes back to 1997, which is a year or so removed from their prime).

[warriorfan]

Tim Duncan's highest was 57.9%. Giannis' career TS% is 61.1%. Who has better post moves?

Magic's TS% is 61%, Kyrie's is 58%...who has the bigger bag?

Kobe's TS% is 55%. Allen's is higher at 58%. Who has the bigger bag?

I like TS and use it a lot but this is a decent post.

That being said…numbers don’t lie and TS is a much more accurate metric than most in terms of scoring.

Doesn’t have to be the end all to be all but still it provides a lot more context than straight up FG%

Free throws matter! Usually the term game of inches is reserved for football and baseball but realistically every sport is the game of inches once you get to a certain level. Game of 1/8th of inches, 1/16th even. As we keep progressing every little fraction of an inch matters. FG% doesn’t account for a lot of things and especially in today’s game where getting to the stripe and hitting your 3’s is such an important thing.

[Phoenix]

He did make the Finals his 3rd year knocking off the showtime Lakers, the only team to beat them from '85-'88, and took 2 games off a consensus top 3-5 team of all time in the '86 Celtics.

Him being 3rd Team in '95 was a function of him being a center with Robinson & Shaq both having MVP caliber seasons, he's likely 1st Team if he plays any other position.

Yep, and then proceeded to go through both in en-route to his 2nd title lol. There's a reason that 94 and 95 run is so( rightfully) revered. I can't think of a better example where a player went through a gauntlet of his immediate positional rivals to that degree.

[HoopsNY]

Good post, I like the Duncan and Giannis comparison.

In fairness to the user tontoz, though, TS is fantastic for encapsulating all-around efficiency. Its just there's obviously no way of knowing what percentage came from post ups. We'd need to see their shooting chart (the data only goes back to 1997, which is a year or so removed from their prime).

I get his premise but there's too much emphasis on it. For one, let's look at the PS leaving out the tail ends of their careers:

Hakeem '85-'97: 57.5% TS%
Barkley: '85-'97: 58.4% TS%

Barkley also shot 54.4% TS% in the finals (1993). Hakeem made it 3 times and his TS% was 53.4%. It's a smaller sample for Barkley, and still higher, but again the difference isn't significant.

Mainly, we should consider who was more skilled. And that's where the separation occurs.

Basically, we're splitting hairs at this point.

[Tavr]

I get his premise but there's too much emphasis on it. For one, let's look at the PS leaving out the tail ends of their careers:

Hakeem '85-'97: 57.5% TS%
Barkley: '85-'97: 58.4% TS%

Barkley also shot 54.4% TS% in the finals (1993). Hakeem made it 3 times and his TS% was 53.4%. It's a smaller sample for Barkley, and still higher, but again the difference isn't significant.

Mainly, we should consider who was more skilled. And that's where the separation occurs.

Basically, we're splitting hairs at this point.

Reading through the thread again it looks like the conversation evolved beyond post-ups and into overall offense, ie. jumpshooting. My bad. I'd also take Hakeem over Barkley if we're just talking offensive skill. Barkley turned into a pretty respectable jumpshooter in Phoenix and had more range than Hakeem, but he never could maintain good efficiency from 3 (despite attempting quite a few of them). Splitting hairs is a good way to put it.

[Im Still Ballin]

Barkley was the more impactful offensive player when they were teammates, if you go by RAPM. IIRC, it's not even close.

[1987_Lakers]

To me, I don't think his post-up game is overrated, it's his lack of playmaking that held him back from being a GOAT tier offensive big.

[Phoenix]

Reading through the thread again it looks like the conversation evolved beyond post-ups and into overall offense, ie. jumpshooting. My bad. I'd also take Hakeem over Barkley if we're just talking offensive skill. Barkley turned into a pretty respectable jumpshooter in Phoenix and had more range than Hakeem, but he never could maintain good efficiency from 3 (despite attempting quite a few of them). Splitting hairs is a good way to put it.

His 3point attempts went up with his physical decline as he got older( pretty common transition as players age) but only slightly. What's really crazy is his 2point % from like 87-91. For a guy listed 6'6 but was really 6'4, that is absolute bonkers interior scoring ability, especially when in terms of height he was pretty much playing amongst trees. For comparison sake, Shaq at the apex of his dominance never reached Barkley's 2% efficiency.

[tontoz]

Tim Duncan's highest was 57.9%. Giannis' career TS% is 61.1%. Who has better post moves?

Magic's TS% is 61%, Kyrie's is 58%...who has the bigger bag?

Kobe's TS% is 55%. Allen's is higher at 58%. Who has the bigger bag?



Jumping around to different eras is lame. Barkley and Hakeem were drafted the same year so we dont need any era adjustments.

Barkley was a true beast in the low post. He was a back to the basket player and this thread is about post play.


Kyrie? Are you trying to say Kyrie is a post player? Or are you just rambling incoherently?

Hakeem has a reputation as a post player but the reality is that he was more of a midrange jump shooter that sometimes played in the post. He had great highlights in the post but day in day out his post game wasnt as big a factor as his reputation would suggest.

Barkley led the league in 2pt% 5 straight years. 4 of those years were over 63%. Hakeem never shot 54% on 2s in his career.

[Tavr]

His 3point attempts went up with his physical decline as he got older( pretty common transition as players age) but only slightly. What's really crazy is his 2point % from like 87-91. For a guy listed 6'6 but was really 6'4, that is absolute bonkers interior scoring ability, especially when in terms of height he was pretty much playing amongst trees. For comparison sake, Shaq at the apex of his dominance never reached Barkley's 2% efficiency.

With the Suns, his three point attempts actually went up in the postseason. Barkley shot around 4 per game (quite a bit for his era) during that 94-96 run. I thought he began to show a physical drop in the 96 playoffs just before going to Houston. Incredibly efficient from 2 like you said, though. For what he lacked in height, he definitely made up for with center of mass. Chuck was an absolute bulldozer.

[Carbine]

I keep hearing about Hakeems lack of "play making" but his playoff games in his peak I never once came away saying "Hakeem isn't seeing the floor well" or an unwilling passer. It didn't hold him back at all?

Maybe that was a problem pre peak. I don't know the answer to that, but he was not any different than Tim Duncan in this regard a decade later and nobody goes around saying Duncan lacked a playmaking element to his game.

[tontoz]

I keep hearing about Hakeems lack of "play making" but his playoff games in his peak I never once came away saying "Hakeem isn't seeing the floor well" or an unwilling passer. It didn't hold him back at all?

Maybe that was a problem pre peak. I don't know the answer to that, but he was not any different than Tim Duncan in this regard a decade later and nobody goes around saying Duncan lacked a playmaking element to his game.


In his first 7 postseasons he had more turnovers than assists in 6 of them.

[Im Still Ballin]

A great post on the other forum from a highly respected poster who has tracked a huge number of games of various older players. Some great insights here; for instance, Olajuwon as a post player was extremely one-sided dominant, reliant on the right block at the rate of about 70-75/30-25. And on that side, he largely went to one shot: the baseline fadeaway.


A few things to add:

1. Hakeem is often overrated as an offensive player for reasons already mentioned: relatively weak game managing, ball-dominance, reliance on tough shot making, mediocre floor vision etc. He was a very good offensive player, clearly an offensive star, but he never approached the best offensive player in the league category.

2. If people want to argue that Hakeem is a little overrated as a offensive post-up player (because he's definitely not overrated defensively in that regard), then it's fine when you focus on his passing and playmaking limitations, along with the relatively static off-ball approach compared to guys like Shaq or Kareem, who were way more involved in the possession when they didn't have the ball.

3. All of that absolutely doesn't mean he's overrated post-up SCORER. I have tracked around 40 Hakeem games from 1992/93 and 1993/94 seasons and his post-up scoring are truly remarkable. I am out of my country right now, so I won't be able to provide them but he was extremely efficient for a post up isolation scorer, especially at such a huge volume. The thing is that isolations are not very efficient in general and Hakeem relied heavily on it for his scoring game, which made his raw efficiency not spectacular, but it is spectacular in the context of his shot selection. Hakeem was remarkably efficient and effective post scorer, people might be shocked at the fact that he's more efficient ISO scorer than Shaq (and comparable to Kareem) - though on lower volume overall.

4. At the same time, Hakeem's post game is a bit misunderstood. People view him as the most versatile post scorer with million moves and counters, but when you go beyond highlight reels and start breaking down his scoring game, it's actually remarkably simple. First of all, Hakeem did over 70% of his post work on one side - right block. That's extremely one-dimensional, players like Kareem and Shaq had the 55/45 proportions. In that aspect, Hakeem was more similar to Wilt Chamberlain who also preferred the right block (though, not to that degree from my tracking data). Wilt's comparison is adept in another way - Hakeem relied heavily on his baseline fadeaway jumper. It was his go-to move and he used it extensively. Again, I don't have the data in front of me, but if I remember correctly it's like 7 fadeaways per game (almost 40% of his total shots and over half of total post-up attempts). It's also not true (which was suggested in previous posts) that Hakeem didn't rely on that shot in postseason, he took them on ridiculous volume. Of course, Hakeem had plenty of counter moves. He had a nice jumphook to the middle and he used fakes, spins, dropsteps etc. to blow by slower defenders. On the left block, his go-to move was a fadeaway to the middle. He attacked baseline when players overplayed the middle. Interestingly, he didn't seem to use fadeaway shot from the left shoulder much, although he could take such shots.

I wouldn't say Hakeem's post game is overrated outside of 1990s cultists, but it's a bit misunderstood. The same thing can be said about any great post player - Shaq, Kareem, Wilt etc. because people don't pay attention to details and don't track games.

I wouldn't call Hakeem the best offensive post player because of his playmaking limitations and off-ball tendencies, but when you want to pick the best isolation scorer in the post, it would be hard to find a better option. I think that only Kareem is overall better in that regard.

[Carbine]

Hakeem was doing like 33 ppg with 4apg

The only other players that exceeded this type of scoring production is peak MJ.

That's the list.

Shaq never eclipsed that PPG or APG total in any of his playoff runs and most would put him in that best offensive player ever discussion during his peak.

Hakeem is definitely in the GOAT discussion for offense for big men. I would say Jokic has the title but it's so hard to compare eras 25-30 years apart. I honestly don't know what Hakeem would be capable of in today's NBA offensively. It wouldn't surprise me whatsoever if he was Embid plus with a heart and durability.

[Carbine]

In his first 7 postseasons he had more turnovers than assists in 6 of them.

Ok, but Hakeem is not judged on what he did in the 80s.

What he eventually became, is what I think is more important. He kept evolving. That's the whole point.

[Im Still Ballin]

The proliferation of the three-point shot & its usage by HOU under coach Rudy T is an important detail to acknowledge. How much did Hakeem improve as a passer, and how much did the available passing opportunities improve? These are interesting questions to be asked.

[tontoz]

Ok, but Hakeem is not judged on what he did in the 80s.

What he eventually became, is what I think is more important. He kept evolving. That's the whole point.


So we are only supposed to judge him based on 3 seasons in a 18 year career? Cool story bro

[Carbine]

We aren't talking about career greatness here. The subject is his offense. It's perfectly fine to use a players peak in this case.

[Im Still Ballin]

If we're talking about the best offensive bigs, I'd first ask what is meant by bigs. Just centers? What about forwards? And are we talking peak, prime, or a career aggregated mean?

C: Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, Jokic
PF/C: Dirk
PF/SF: Barkley

I might be missing some, but that's where I'd start. Wilt more so for his 1967 peak.

[tontoz]

We aren't talking about career greatness here. The subject is his offense. It's perfectly fine to use a players peak in this case.

So it is ok to only look at 57 games in a career of 1383 games?

:facepalm

[Carbine]

If we're talking about the best offensive bigs, I'd first ask what is meant by bigs. Just centers? What about forwards? And are we talking peak, prime, or a career aggregated mean?

C: Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, Jokic
PF/C: Dirk
PF/SF: Barkley

I might be missing some, but that's where I'd start. Wilt more so for his 1967 peak.

If you're going to include for his 1967 peak, why wouldn't you include Hakeem with that group? His peak was as good or better than any of Shaqs best. That is undeniable, against better direct competition as well.

[Carbine]

So it is ok to only look at 57 games in a career of 1383 games?

:facepalm

If you value some random third game in four nights regular season game the same as a playoff game be my guest.

If you value any of his games in Toronto, be my guest.

I value what you were at your relative best. What your final form was. Shows me that you worked on your game and eventually had it all come together.

Let me rephrase it for you so you don't become argumentative just for the sake of it. Hakeem is definitely in the GOAT offensive peaks ever for big men.

[tontoz]

If you value some random third game in four nights regular season game the same as a playoff game be my guest.

If you value any of his games in Toronto, be my guest.

I value what you were at your relative best. What your final form was. Shows me that you worked on your game and eventually had it all come together.

Let me rephrase it for you so you don't become argumentative just for the sake of it. Hakeem is definitely in the GOAT offensive peaks ever for big men.


:roll:


Even at his peak in the playoffs his scoring efficiency was nothing special. He isn't even in the same ZIP code as Jokic on offense. Jokic has a career average in the playoffs of 27 pts 8 assists.

Advanced stats are even more lopsided. Jokic has a career postseason average OBPM of 8 which is double what Hakeem had during his "peak".

[Carbine]

If you're going to believe that Hakeem in his two championship runs had less of an offensive impact on his team (7.5 combined OBPM) than Chauncey Billups did for the Pistons when they made back to back finals (8.1 combined OBPM) I don't really want to discuss any further.

I'm not interested in debating stats like that. If that's how you do it, good for you man. You better stay consistent about that. For example, LeBron's peak shits on Currys OBPM for any playoff run. Actually he has two that are above and beyond anything Curry has ever done.

CJ McCollum regular season two peak years are about equal to Gilbert Arenas regular season two year peak.

If that's the route you wish to take..... Tread carefully

[tontoz]

If you're going to believe that Hakeem in his two championship runs had less of an offensive impact on his team (7.5 combined OBPM) than Chauncey Billups did for the Pistons when they made back to back finals (8.1 combined OBPM) I don't really want to discuss any further.

I'm not interested in debating stats like that. If that's how you do it, good for you man. You better stay consistent about that. For example, LeBron's peak shits on Currys OBPM for any playoff run. Actually he has two that are above and beyond anything Curry has ever done.

CJ McCollum regular season two peak years are about equal to Gilbert Arenas regular season two year peak.

If that's the route you wish to take..... Tread carefully


I don't need to tread carefully when Jokic's numbers are double Hakeem's. :lol

During Hakeems title runs he scored only a few points more than Jokic's career playoff average, with barely more than half the assists and worse efficiency.

If someone wants to say Hakeem was a better player overall i would disagree but wouldn't care enough to argue because Hakeem was such a strong defender. But saying Hakeem was better on offense is laughable. Jokic is a better shooter from everywhere and the best passing center ever.

During his title runs Hakeem had an ORTG of 109-110. Jokic's career playoff average is 123.

[sdot_thadon]

:roll:


Even at his peak in the playoffs his scoring efficiency was nothing special. He isn't even in the same ZIP code as Jokic on offense. Jokic has a career average in the playoffs of 27 pts 8 assists.

Advanced stats are even more lopsided. Jokic has a career postseason average OBPM of 8 which is double what Hakeem had during his "peak".

Yet he could completely take over and control games on both ends of the floor simultaneously. Joker could never dream of controlling a game defensively.

[tontoz]

Yet he could completely take over and control games on both ends of the floor simultaneously. Joker could never dream of controlling a game defensively.


That is a separate argument. This discussion is about offense. Try to keep up.

[Jasper]

akeem was defender first in league besides a weak side offense and boards man...

When the 2 chips , his game was polished and his foot work was supreme.

Players today go to him to immolate his foot work to create open shoots.

Remember Giannis's early years.. Now he has Dirk one legged as well as left wing foot work like Akeem/

[Phoenix]

The Hakeem/ Jokic thing is interesting, because they really do have different responsibilities on top of how different their eras are. Jokic is very clearly a better shooter and passer, and that's regardless of era. Hakeem is no doubt light years ahead on defense, and that also would be in any era( you can see that Hakeem would be fine on defense in 2025 because he was mobile enough to switch on the perimeter if need be). I do wonder what Hakeem would be like offensively if he took his foot off the pedal on defense. I don't find he and Jokic to be all that comparable just trading numbers. I can more easily see the things and attributes they're each better at regardless of the era they played in. Really, any player that is an inherently great passer would feast today. Can you imagine Magic playing with today's spacing, when his entire reputation as a passer was build on sleight of hand threading the needle in clogged paints?

[sdot_thadon]

That is a separate argument. This discussion is about offense. Try to keep up.

Its just a small point to illustrate how much the advanced stats only tell you some of what really was. Olajuwon was just as much the hub of the Rockets offense as Joker was just more post gravity than playmaking. The rockets literally put 4 guys around him who could anywhere from shoot well to kinda shoot ok occasionally and let him work down low. Hed either score or create an open shot for one of those guys. It worked well enough to win back to back titles. Joker does have pretty stats, I cant deny that but Dream would eat him alive.

[tontoz]

Its just a small point to illustrate how much the advanced stats only tell you some of what really was. Olajuwon was just as much the hub of the Rockets offense as Joker was just more post gravity than playmaking. The rockets literally put 4 guys around him who could anywhere from shoot well to kinda shoot ok occasionally and let him work down low. Hed either score or create an open shot for one of those guys. It worked well enough to win back to back titles. Joker does have pretty stats, I cant deny that but Dream would eat him alive.

Again it is a separate discussion who is the better player overall. There is no question who is better on offense. Jokic shoots better than Hakeem from anywhere and is the best passing center ever.

When people talk about playmaking from the center position Hakeem's name doesn't come up.

[Carbine]

I already said Jokic was the best offensive center ever?

I'm just not sure if it's 100 percent because of eras. I don't care about either player, so I'm as unbiased in this as anyone here. It's perfectly logical to say Jokic numbers are definitely helped out by the era in which he has played in. That is pretty obvious to me. Perhaps not to you.

So yes, Jokic is the best offensive big ever, but there's some room for logical era centric debates.

The whole reason I got into this is not MENTIONING Hakeem in the GOAT discussion for offensive bigs. Not that he's better than Jokic, so for someone saying "Try to keep up" to other posters, you're failing to do that as well.

Again, if you want to judge Hakeem by OBPM then he's not anywhere near the discussion. He's just a pretty good offensive player. A player like Billups had more impact on offense for his team than Peak Hakeem did according to it. That's not a path I want to go down because in my mind that is so badly wrong and so misguided and a reason NOT to take OBPM seriously that it's a rabbit hole or me finding 100 examples of shit that doesn't make sense.

[tontoz]

I already said Jokic was the best offensive center ever?



You also said this

]


Let me rephrase it for you so you don't become argumentative just for the sake of it. Hakeem is definitely in the GOAT offensive peaks ever for big men.


That is simply not true, in the absolute sense or taking into account the era difference.

Hakeem was first team all NBA defense 5 times, and 2nd team a few others. With that being the case why was he top 3 in the MVP voting only twice in his career? Because other guys had a much bigger impact on offense.

I certainly understand why you dismiss stats that don't support you, while freely quoting basic stats that support you. The problem is that you have to dismiss stats other than just OBPM. ORTG is also hugely in favor of Jokic, as are offensive win shares. It isn't even close.

[HoopsNY]

Barkley was the more impactful offensive player when they were teammates, if you go by RAPM. IIRC, it's not even close.

Yea, but that's because Houston ran the offense through Barkley, and then we have to consider things once they added Pippen. But we should contextualize based on a series of variables.

RS Hakeem ORAPM '97: +1.92
RS Barkley ORAPM '97: +0.85

PS Hakeem ORAPM '97: +1.55
PS Barkley ORAPM '97: +0.73

Barkley missed 29 games in 1997. Houston had a 110 ORTG with Barkley and a 107 ORTG without him. With Barkley, Hakeem put up 22/9/2/1/2 on 51%. Without him, he put up 25/10/4/2/2 on 50%.

But here's the thing, Clyde also missed 20 games in 1997 and both him and Barkley missed the majority of their games during the same time (Feb-March).

1998 gets weird because Hakeem missed half of the season, and '99 was the lockout season, but they also added Pippen. I believe '97 is the best indication of who the better offensive player was, all things considered, and it wasn't Barkley.

[HoopsNY]

To me, I don't think his post-up game is overrated, it's his lack of playmaking that held him back from being a GOAT tier offensive big.

Hakeem was part of the first original 3 and D team, and a major reason why they improved between '92 to '93 offensively (20th in ORTG to 6th in ORTG) was because Rudy T made the offense run through Hakeem. Hakeem became a master at hitting spots and finding his shooters.

Okay sure, that's not comparable to Wilt or Jokic, but why wouldn't it put him on the same tier when during his playoff peak he put up 30 PPG, 4.4 APG, on 52.4% shooting?

PS Shaq '00-'03: 29.4 PPG | 3.1 APG | 54.9 FG%
PS Hakeem '93-'95: 29.8 PPG | 4.4 APG | 52.4% FG%

I think you'd say Shaq's peak was GOAT tier offense. I don't see why Hakeem's wouldn't be. If you wanna say their entire careers then okay, fair. But I think a lot of that had to do with coaching.

[HoopsNY]

Jumping around to different eras is lame. Barkley and Hakeem were drafted the same year so we dont need any era adjustments.

Barkley was a true beast in the low post. He was a back to the basket player and this thread is about post play.


Kyrie? Are you trying to say Kyrie is a post player? Or are you just rambling incoherently?

Hakeem has a reputation as a post player but the reality is that he was more of a midrange jump shooter that sometimes played in the post. He had great highlights in the post but day in day out his post game wasnt as big a factor as his reputation would suggest.

Barkley led the league in 2pt% 5 straight years. 4 of those years were over 63%. Hakeem never shot 54% on 2s in his career.

First of all, why the insult? lol

Secondly, I'm not rambling, I'm merely drawing comparisons based on a criteria. I never said anything about Kyrie having a post-up game. I merely drew an analogy based on what I thought was your underlying argument.

Perhaps I mis-read your original intent. I think you're saying Barkley had a better post up game. You might be right, but I don't have any data to objectively make that call.

We can assume based on raw percentages that this is the case, but Hakeem had a good mix of face up, post up, spot up, slashing, etc. Yea, it might be safe to assume Barkley had the better post up game, but we can't definitively prove that.

[tontoz]

Barkley was better on offense period. Basic stats and advanced stats both tell the same story.

Barkley didn't age well but was a monster when young.

[Im Still Ballin]

Per Djoker/dankok's tracking:

1995 NBA Finals

Hakeem defended by Shaq: 70 points, 44.0 %TS (30/73 FG, 9/15 FT), 10 fouls drawn, 3 turnovers, 0.85 PPP
Shaq defended by Hakeem: 78 points, 59.3 %TS (34/60 FG, 10/13 FT), 13 fouls drawn, 8 turnovers, 1.06 PPP

[HoopsNY]

Barkley was better on offense period. Basic stats and advanced stats both tell the same story.

Barkley didn't age well but was a monster when young.

I don't think the debate is that simple. Yea, we can focus solely on the regular season, but what about the postseason?

PS Hakeem: 26 PPG | 53% FG% | 57% TS%
PS Barkley: 23 PPG | 51% FG% | 58% TS%

I don't fault you for placing Barkley > Hakeem offensively, but I don't think they're worlds apart as you're making it seem.

[1987_Lakers]

Barkley was better on offense period. Basic stats and advanced stats both tell the same story.

Barkley didn't age well but was a monster when young.

Yea, if we are talking offense, I'm probably taking Barkley. Could score in more ways and more efficient, also a better playmaker than Hakeem. Only downside to Barkley's offense was all those 3's he took.

[Im Still Ballin]

FWIW, Squared2020's 85-96 RAPM sample (https://squared2020.com/2025/01/26/historical-rapm-1985-1996/) has Hakeem & Barkley at:

4. Hakeem Olajuwon +4.57 RAPM (+2.88 ORAPM; +1.70 DRAPM) [113 games]
14. Charles Barkley +3.21 RAPM (+5.32 ORAPM; -2.10 DRAPM) [171 games]

Only MJ (+7.31) and Magic (+6.67) have a higher ORAPM than Chuck. And that's with Barkley taking those low-percentage threes.