PDA

View Full Version : How good would shaq be?



DrDEADalready
04-09-2009, 02:32 PM
Now I know shaq was great in his prime. and still is to this day. But has he ever had a elite point guard feeding him the ball? how much better would shaq have been if he had a Stockton. cp3 Dwill feeding him the ball in his prime?

what54!?
04-09-2009, 02:35 PM
Well he has peeny feed him the ball in his magic days. :shrug:

But if he had a true point guard feed him the ball he might have 5 or 6 scoring titles and maybe 2 0r 3 leauge MVPs by now

Mr.ATLHawks
04-09-2009, 03:01 PM
I dont know if he would be that much better. Look at the Spurs b4 Parker and after. Tim Duncan was good and his stats didnt change much. Shaq is a post beast and it doesnt take a brainiac to feed the big man in the post. Pick and Roll isnt really Shaq's forte hence the problems in Phoenix. Mediocre players benefit from people setting them up exactly where they can be effective i.e. Tyson Chandler, Andrew Bynum. Shaq has/had the ability to abuse his opponet physically in the post and pretty much have his way before these teams could play these zones. But Shaq has adjusted to the zones and has adjusted his game and is still a top 5 center to me.

Hawkeye15
04-09-2009, 03:10 PM
He had a great guard with him, regardless of point or not. If Shaq was going to be better, it would have been from FT shooting.

DitchDat
04-09-2009, 03:24 PM
I don't think it would make that much of a difference... It's not like he can't get points on his own.

CP3 The Great
04-09-2009, 03:28 PM
a good point guard feeding him the ball would make a big difference because no matter what he would get the ball he would probally average 40 and 15 in the playoffs with chris paul only because chris paul can get him the ball everysingle possession down.

Derick713
04-09-2009, 03:41 PM
There are a lot of WHAT-IFS in Shaq's legacy. Everyone pretty much knows that Shaq and Kobe let their egos get in the way of creating a dynasty that could have produced 5 to 7 titles. Shaq should have passed Wilt Chamberlain in scoring some time ago.

Looking back at everything you have to get the feeling that Shaq's resume should have more accomplishments than it currently does. Shaq should have at least three NBA MVPS and he should have won at least two more titles. Can anyone imagine how many titles Shaq could have won if he was more dedicated in his younger days? Some could argue that Shaq is the greatest player not to average 30 points in a season.

Derick713
04-09-2009, 03:44 PM
Shaq needs a backcourt that can guard against penetration and shoot the three. CP3 can make Shaq better at this stage of his career. A true point guard could've allowed Shaq to average 35 and 13 in his best years.

superkegger
04-09-2009, 03:50 PM
Don't think it would have changed anything.

Kobe and Penny didn't feed shaq, but they were big enough threats that they kept some pressure off Shaq, because while you still had to double Shaq a lot, those guys would kill you if you did it all the time. Not that you wouldn't have to do that with CP3 or stockton, but if he had stockton, you would feel more comfortable doubling on shaq and letting stockton beat you.

A better question would be, how good would have been if he hit 70% from the line. You then can't just hack-a-shaq, and you leave him in at the end of games. How much more lethal would he be then.

Jacob K.
04-09-2009, 03:59 PM
I dont know if he would be that much better. Look at the Spurs b4 Parker and after. Tim Duncan was good and his stats didnt change much. Shaq is a post beast and it doesnt take a brainiac to feed the big man in the post. Pick and Roll isnt really Shaq's forte hence the problems in Phoenix. Mediocre players benefit from people setting them up exactly where they can be effective i.e. Tyson Chandler, Andrew Bynum. Shaq has/had the ability to abuse his opponet physically in the post and pretty much have his way before these teams could play these zones. But Shaq has adjusted to the zones and has adjusted his game and is still a top 5 center to me.

you read my mind.