Wildcard → Lag Board → Hakeem Olajuwon
Hakeem Olajuwon vs Michael Jordan
1986-87 Fleer #82 (printed “Akeem”) against 1986-87 Fleer #57 — measured, not predicted.
Building a baseline Same set Basketball
Measuring Hakeem Olajuwon against Michael Jordan — 1 of 8 observations needed before a baseline means anything.
- Ratio now
- 5.6%
- Baseline
- not established yet
- Vs baseline
- —
- Observations
- 1
- Michael Jordan, 30d
- —
- Hakeem Olajuwon, 30d
- —
Not enough observations to draw a history yet. The index records one ratio per pairing per scan; this chart appears once there are at least two.
Every recorded observation
| Observed | Ratio | Peer | Anchor | vs baseline |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-27 | 5.6% | $85 | $1,514 | — |
Why these two
Both are rookie cards in the same 132-card set — Fleer's return to basketball after a 25-year absence — so they share a print run, a stock, and the grading population of a set collectors opened chasing one card. Olajuwon went first in the 1984 draft and Jordan third, which is the pairing in one line: the same class, the same set, and a market that has since priced them very differently.
What would make this wrong
The 86-87 Fleer Jordan is a market of its own and can re-rate on Jordan demand that has nothing to do with the set or with Olajuwon. A ratio that never recovers is not a discount, it is a repricing — and nothing here can tell you which one you are looking at while it is happening.
How this is measured
Each scan records one number: the fair value of Hakeem Olajuwon's 1986-87 Fleer #82 (printed “Akeem”) divided by the fair value of Michael Jordan's 1986-87 Fleer #57, both from comparable sales. The baseline is the median of those observations over 90 days — excluding the most recent 21, so a fresh move cannot drag down the very number it is being measured against. Below 8 observations there is no baseline and this page says so instead of showing one.
The baseline is never authored. It is the median of what was recorded, or it does not exist. Nobody types a target ratio into this system.
This is an observation about a historical relationship, not a forecast. A gap that never closes means the market permanently re-rated Hakeem Olajuwon rather than temporarily forgot him — that is the risk in every pairing here, and it does not mean-revert on a schedule.