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

[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 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.