How is Kobe better than Olajuwon in the all time list?

[AK47DR91]

Both guys have the same 2-1 Finals series record as the main man. Hakeem's Rockets lost to the Celtics in 1986, then Kobe in 2008 lost to the Celtics also. Both are 1-time MVP and two-time Finals MVP.

Hakeem's 2 Finals MVP is much more impressive than Kobe's 2 Finals MVP since Hakeem had to carry one of the least stacked rosters of any championship teams.

So we have established that Hakeem is the better #1 option, main man. Not only did Hakeem matched Kobe's accolades but he also did it better and longer (1984-1997). 13 years as the sole go-to #1 guy.

Now how much does Kobe's 3 rings as a sidekick play as an equalizer to Hakeem's non-championship years(1984-93) during Hakeem's prime/peak?

[Round Mound]

Hakeem was Better. More Dominant, Scary and Efficient than Kobe.

He is the Best Mixture of Offensive and Defensive Player from 86 beyond.

[Fazotronic]

Totally disagree. Hakeem was crazy athletic for any size, so at 6' 6" he would still have been an amazing player. He is top ten all time in steals as a centre, so imagine how he would be as an SG or SF. He was graceful and fast and had violent athleticism at times.

thats what im saying

[get these NETS]

the short answer

kobe is seen by modern day fans as a clear number 2 at his position..shooting guard


olajuwon is generally overshadowed by 3 other centers....Wilt and Kareem....their stats and numbers are at the top of damn near every list while Russell has 11 rings...

I have Dream as greatest modern day center BUT....his stats, numbers, rings..etc don't compare favorably to Wilt,Kareem,Russell or Moses


Kobe's accolades point to him being clear #2 to Jordan...

[BlackVVaves]

I'd pick the Dream over Kobe if we are simply drafting All-Time Greats and both are available.

If we are talking career? Yes, Kobe is ranked higher, and all the reasons have been provided by now. Kobe has been the best shooting guard in the game for nearly all of the last 12 years. Though Shaq was the more dominant player during Kobe's first 3 rings, Kobe was still dominating the perimeter and game in ways that were amazing, especially in 2001 and 2002. He wasn't putting up 18 points per game, like one would assume from the way people speak about his first 3 rings as if he was a role player.

[longtime lurker]

Here's my post from another thread and it pretty much sums up this whole thread:

LOL no it's all just luck. I have a theory that this rings doesn't matter line of thinking was created from the fact that people dislike Kobe. First it was that he needed Shaq to win, then when he proved that wrong the argument became "rings as the man". I can't think of any other player who's rings get diminished despite playing with multiple all star/hall of fame teammates. I have a hard time believing that before all these advanced stats metrics people really believed that rings don't matter.

[BlackJoker23]

kobe>>>>hakeem


but hakeem is a top 2 center and way better than all those 50s and 60s trash

[Smoke117]

He's not better. Hakeem Olajuwon is BY FAR the greatest defensive player of the modern era (lets say 80 to now, so that's 32 seasons) and he was a great scorer and one of the best first options ever. Let's just forget about defense though...disparity in the impact Olajuwon made defensively to Kobe is so monstrous that it's outrageous that Kobe could ever be over Olajuwon. Were not talking about Mutombo, Alonzo Mourning, or Dwight Howard here either. Hakeem Olajuwon is the greatest defensive player from 80 to on and maybe a bit before that and he did that while being a great scorer and all around player at that. Kobe Bryant over Hakeem Olajuwon is a complete ****ing joke.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

Hakeem was a great player and he's really high up on my all-time list. In my opinion he isn't on Kobe's level though. Kobe's got all the hardware and he's played at this level for such a long time. He won mutliple chips with two different teams. Hakeem gets marked down in my eyes because he only won when Jordan retired. It's really hard to compare guys that don't play the same position. Big men and guard's responsabilities are so vastly different that it's really comparing apples and oranges.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

He's not better. Hakeem Olajuwon is BY FAR the greatest defensive player of the modern era (lets say 80 to now, so that's 32 seasons) and he was a great scorer and one of the best first options ever. Let's just forget about scoring though...disparity in the impact Olajuwon made defensively to Kobe is so monstrous that it's outrageous that Kobe could ever be over Olajuwon. Were not talking about Mutombo, Alonzo Mourning, or Dwight Howard here either. Hakeem Olajuwon is the greatest defensive player from 80 to on and maybe a bit before that and he did that while being a great scorer and all around player at that. Kobe Bryant over Hakeem Olajuwon is a complete ****ing joke.

How can a guard have the same defensive impact as a center? If that is such an important factor then Kareem should be ranked over Jordan as the GOAT.

[lbj23clutch]

If we take away those 3 rings because Shaq was dominant,
Lebron wouldn't have any either, he had 2 star teammates

But yeah, overall, Kobe's career achievements just push him over Hakeem.

LOL @ this guy 99% of his posts are to degrade LeBron even when the thread isn't about LeBron.




Anyways to the answer the OP, you can't just ignore 3 rings like it didn't count. Kobe is simply the more accomplished basketball player. Only thing Hakeem got on Kobe is a better peak, but Kobe got accomplishments and longevity.

[StateOfMind12]

He is usually ranked higher than Olajuwon due to superior accolades and accomplishments. I don't agree with that though which is why Hakeem is higher than Kobe for me.

Kobe has a better argument over Duncan and I flip flop between those two a lot. Hakeem is quite clearly better than both though.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Hakeem was a flat out better player than Kobe. I don't know how anyone could watch them both and come to any other conclusion.

Hakeem was not only arguably one of the 5 best post scorers of all time, but he had an excellent face up game, he became a great passer and he's one of the 5 greatest defensive players ever, imo.

Hakeem was always an unbelievable shot blocker, but when he matured in the 90's, he limited how much he'd bite on fakes, which was his primary weakness, he had phenomenal hands which allowed him to strip the post player or know away the entry pass, and his overall help defense became as good as you could imagine from a defensive anchor.

Hakeem could guard screen/rolls unlike some less mobile centers, and he could switch to a smaller player, stay in front of him, but get back in the paint to help out and block and alter shots. He was all over the court.

And when Rudy T built the offense around him with everything going through Hakeem in the post with their 4 out/1in system spacing the floor with shooters, Hakeem did a remarkable job carrying the offense. No championship team has had an offense centered more around one player. If Hakeem wasn't scoring with his variety of moves, he was drawing double teams and finding the open shooters.

Everything on both ends relied on Hakeem. Even when they made the trade for Drexler in '95, and players like Cassell and Horry became bigger offensive threats, Houston still relied just as much on Hakeem with Houston not having any big men around him. They had to play Horry out of position at the 4.

And Hakeem averaged 33/10/5 during the '95 run while beating teams that won 60, 59, 62 and 57 games without homecourt advantage.

But everyone knows about those years, how about what he was doing in the playoffs before his prime? Just to clear up misconceptions that Hakeem was only great from '93-'95.

In '86, Hakeem carried Houston to the finals as a raw second year player. He upset a Laker team with Kareem, Magic, Worthy and a loaded team overall. Hakeem averaged 31/11 with 4 bpg and 2.2 spg in the Lakers series, and he also took the best team ever, imo, the '86 Celtics to 6 games.

Hakeem's cast fell off even more in '87 with Sampson injured and never approaching his all-star level again. Hakeem put the Rockets on his back in game 6 vs Seattle and had 49/25/6 in a double OT loss, and they should've won that game. Hakeem got robbed on a non-call which should've been goaltending and given him a shot at a 3 point play, instead, he made both free throws. Sampson also missed a key free throw or 2, that would've clinched the game. Hakeem averaged 31/13/4 in that series.

In '88, Hakeem lost in the 1st round to a loaded Mavs team that would take the champion Lakers to 7. Hakeem averaged 38/17 in the series.

Hakeem was one of the players who consistently raised his game in the playoffs. Imagine if he had opportunities to win a title before his 30's. That's why comparing rings is flawed.

Hakeem was as good in '93 as he was when he won titles, his cast just wasn't quite as good. But Hakeem also nearly carried his Rockets past a loaded Sonics team, and probably should've if not for some bad calls. And I rarely use excuses like that, but watch game 7 if you don't believe me. Hakeem was a monster that year, and consider the disparity in talent between Houston and Seattle.

If you're going to rank Kobe over Hakeem, you should just stop pretending you watch basketball. Go to basketball-reference, and call it a day, because you clearly don't need to watch games for your rankings.

[G-train]

Hakeem was a flat out better player than Kobe. I don't know how anyone could watch them both and come to any other conclusion.

Hakeem was not only arguably one of the 5 best post scorers of all time, but he had an excellent face up game, he became a great passer and he's one of the 5 greatest defensive players ever, imo.

Hakeem was always an unbelievable shot blocker, but when he matured in the 90's, he limited how much he'd bite on fakes, which was his primary weakness, he had phenomenal hands which allowed him to strip the post player or know away the entry pass, and his overall help defense became as good as you could imagine from a defensive anchor.

Hakeem could guard screen/rolls unlike some less mobile centers, and he could switch to a smaller player, stay in front of him, but get back in the paint to help out and block and alter shots. He was all over the court.

And when Rudy T built the offense around him with everything going through Hakeem in the post with their 4 out/1in system spacing the floor with shooters, Hakeem did a remarkable job carrying the offense. No championship team has had an offense centered more around one player. If Hakeem wasn't scoring with his variety of moves, he was drawing double teams and finding the open shooters.

Everything on both ends relied on Hakeem. Even when they made the trade for Drexler in '95, and players like Cassell and Horry became bigger offensive threats, Houston still relied just as much on Hakeem with Houston not having any big men around him. They had to play Horry out of position at the 4.

And Hakeem averaged 33/10/5 during the '95 run while beating teams that won 60, 59, 62 and 57 games without homecourt advantage.

But everyone knows about those years, how about what he was doing in the playoffs before his prime? Just to clear up misconceptions that Hakeem was only great from '93-'95.

In '86, Hakeem carried Houston to the finals as a raw second year player. He upset a Laker team with Kareem, Magic, Worthy and a loaded team overall. Hakeem averaged 31/11 with 4 bpg and 2.2 spg in the Lakers series, and he also took the best team ever, imo, the '86 Celtics to 6 games.

Hakeem's cast fell off even more in '87 with Sampson injured and never approaching his all-star level again. Hakeem put the Rockets on his back in game 6 vs Seattle and had 49/25/6 in a double OT loss, and they should've won that game. Hakeem got robbed on a non-call which should've been goaltending and given him a shot at a 3 point play, instead, he made both free throws. Sampson also missed a key free throw or 2, that would've clinched the game. Hakeem averaged 31/13/4 in that series.

In '88, Hakeem lost in the 1st round to a loaded Mavs team that would take the champion Lakers to 7. Hakeem averaged 38/17 in the series.

Hakeem was one of the players who consistently raised his game in the playoffs. Imagine if he had opportunities to win a title before his 30's. That's why comparing rings is flawed.

Hakeem was as good in '93 as he was when he won titles, his cast just wasn't quite as good. But Hakeem also nearly carried his Rockets past a loaded Sonics team, and probably should've if not for some bad calls. And I rarely use excuses like that, but watch game 7 if you don't believe me. Hakeem was a monster that year, and consider the disparity in talent between Houston and Seattle.

If you're going to rank Kobe over Hakeem, you should just stop pretending you watch basketball. Go to basketball-reference, and call it a day, because you clearly don't need to watch games for your rankings.

Agreed.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Good post SA.