PDA

View Full Version : Is Shaq a top 10 player of all time?



Pages : [1] 2

Sadds The Gr8
06-01-2011, 04:03 PM
Basic Stats:

23.7 PPG
10.9 RPG
2.5 APG
2.3 BPG
58.2 FG%

Achievements

15x All-star
4x NBA champion
3x Finals MVP
1x NBA Regular Season MVP
14x All-NBA
91-92 Rookie of the Year
3x All-NBA Defense
3x All-Star Game MVP
28596 Total Points scored (5th All-Time)
13099 Total Rebounds (12th All-Time)

I think this makes for a good argument.

Bruno
06-01-2011, 04:04 PM
Absolutely. And in an argument of peak he could be argued as high as top three, IMO.

MiamiWadeCounty
06-01-2011, 04:05 PM
The answer is yes.

Hellcrooner
06-01-2011, 04:08 PM
no.
In no order id rather have Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, Bird, Robertson, Hakeem, Duncan, Dr J, Lebron, Russell before him

Baller1
06-01-2011, 04:09 PM
Yes, and he'd probably crack my top 5.

MagicHero3
06-01-2011, 04:10 PM
in his prime, at that era, he was the most dominant player in the NBA hands down. top 10 of all time? maybe...Hall Of Famer? without a doubt.

97NYer
06-01-2011, 04:10 PM
yes

heyman321
06-01-2011, 04:11 PM
No doubt

MiamiWadeCounty
06-01-2011, 04:11 PM
no.
In no order id rather have Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, Bird, Robertson, Hakeem, Duncan, Dr J, Lebron, Russell before him

At this point I would not have Lebron, Duncan, Dr J, or Hakeem ahead of Shaq.

Sadds The Gr8
06-01-2011, 04:11 PM
i was watching a show, and one of the guys mentioned that he's not ahead of MJ, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Hakeem, Kobe, West, Duncan, Russell, Kareem, or Oscar so he's not top 10.

smith&wesson
06-01-2011, 04:12 PM
Basic Stats:

23.7 PPG
10.9 RPG
2.5 APG
2.3 BPG
58.2 FG%

Achievements

15x All-star
4x NBA champion
3x Finals MVP
1x NBA Regular Season MVP
14x All-NBA
91-92 Rookie of the Year
3x All-NBA Defense
3x All-Star Game MVP
28596 Total Points scored (5th All-Time)
13099 Total Rebounds (12th All-Time)
I think this makes for a good argument.

i thought he would be alot higher then 12 on the rebound numbers.

anyways, as for the poll question, i think he is easily a top 10 player of all time. shaq in his prime was un-stop-able.

SB1
06-01-2011, 04:14 PM
yes

Bruno
06-01-2011, 04:14 PM
no.
In no order id rather have Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, Bird, Robertson, Hakeem, Duncan, Dr J, Lebron, Russell before him

Dr. J?!?

smith&wesson
06-01-2011, 04:15 PM
i was watching a show, and one of the guys mentioned that he's not ahead of MJ, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Hakeem, Kobe, West, Duncan, Russell, Kareem, or Oscar so he's not top 10.

but i would take him over wilt & west.. if shaq played in those times he would have dominated the league worst then he did when he actually played.

m26555
06-01-2011, 04:16 PM
no.
In no order id rather have Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, Bird, Robertson, Hakeem, Duncan, Dr J, Lebron, Russell before him
:laugh2:

MiamiWadeCounty
06-01-2011, 04:17 PM
i was watching a show, and one of the guys mentioned that he's not ahead of MJ, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Hakeem, Kobe, West, Duncan, Russell, Kareem, or Oscar so he's not top 10.

I would take Shaq over West, Wilt, Hakeem, Duncan, and maybe Russell, although 11 rings would give the nod to Russell.

alucard1122
06-01-2011, 04:17 PM
Shaq thanks for all the moments on all teams that you were in special when you were in Miami Heat :)

dtmagnet
06-01-2011, 04:17 PM
Of course.

Law25
06-01-2011, 04:17 PM
no.
In no order id rather have Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, Bird, Robertson, Hakeem, Kobe,Duncan, Dr J, Lebron, Russell before him

Are you just citing alltime greats? Or would you seriously take Dr J and Lebron ( at this point in his career) ahead of Shaq? and you forgot an nmae on your list :)

Chronz
06-01-2011, 04:18 PM
no.
In no order id rather have Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, Bird, Robertson, Hakeem, Duncan, Dr J, Lebron, Russell before him
Sounds like you dont know your history

rhino17
06-01-2011, 04:19 PM
Michael Jordan
Magic Johnson
Kareem Abdul-Jabar
Bill Russel
Wilt Chamberlain
Larry Bird
Hakeem Olajuwon
Shaquille O'Neal
Tim Duncan
Kobe Bryant

So yes

MiamiWadeCounty
06-01-2011, 04:20 PM
You could make an argument for Shaq being the MVPOAT. (Most Valuable Player of All-Time) If I had to to start a team with one player in their prime for one season, I would take Shaq over any other player ever to play the game.

TheHighLife
06-01-2011, 04:21 PM
How would this make a good argument? Even the biggest Shaq haters will admit he's one of the top 10 players of all time.

Hellcrooner
06-01-2011, 04:21 PM
Sounds like you dont know your history

oh i know it very well, thats why i can talk

Hellcrooner
06-01-2011, 04:22 PM
Are you just citing alltime greats? Or would you seriously take Dr J ahead of Shaq? and you forgot an nmae on your list :)

i would. i maybe forgot Mikan on the list.

and no i wouldnt pick hogging dude before shaq

Eagles4Lyfe
06-01-2011, 04:22 PM
i was watching a show, and one of the guys mentioned that he's not ahead of MJ, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Hakeem, Kobe, West, Duncan, Russell, Kareem, or Oscar so he's not top 10.

See this is the same debate me and this guy had at work, we can also include KG, Dawkins, DR.J into top 10 debates too. I say yes shaq is def top 10 probably ahead of duncan and russel

llemon
06-01-2011, 04:23 PM
i was watching a show, and one of the guys mentioned that he's not ahead of MJ, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Hakeem, Kobe, West, Duncan, Russell, Kareem, or Oscar so he's not top 10.

Of course, that's according to 'one of those guys' on a 'show'.

Pretty convincing.

m26555
06-01-2011, 04:24 PM
oh i know it very well, thats why i can talk
You just said that Dr. J and LeBron were better than Shaq, so you obviously don't.

Ebbs
06-01-2011, 04:25 PM
Yea

Sadds The Gr8
06-01-2011, 04:26 PM
Of course, that's according to 'one of those guys' on a 'show'.

Pretty convincing.

i'm not saying he's right. the main part of the post was to show that those are the guys that he'd be in the discussion with as a top 10 player.

Bruno
06-01-2011, 04:27 PM
Guys, Shaq is top 10. Lets be honest with ourselves on this one. If you don't like the guy, fine. But not top 10? Ya'll better than that. :laugh2:

smith&wesson
06-01-2011, 04:30 PM
Sounds like you dont know your history

Chronz would you select shaq as the best C of all time ? i know that bill russle has more rings, and wilt and kareem may be better statistically but it i think those guys played in an era where shaq would dominate even more if he was around back then.

to me shaq and hakeem are my personal fav C's of all time.

Eagles4Lyfe
06-01-2011, 04:32 PM
Guys, Shaq is top 10. Lets be honest with ourselves on this one. If you don't like the guy, fine. But not top 10? Ya'll better than that. :laugh2:

Who are you preeching too?? So far the votes are 21-0 in favour of yes he is top 10.
I haven't seen one vote saying otherwise so I don't get who your talking to:confused:

AllOut305
06-01-2011, 04:32 PM
You could make an argument for Shaq being the MVPOAT. (Most Valuable Player of All-Time) If I had to to start a team with one player in their prime for one season, I would take Shaq over any other player ever to play the game.


Over Jordan? That's a tall order. Shaq's inability to finish games because of his poor freethrow shooting puts Jordan ahead of Shaq in my MVPOAT list

1. Jordan
2. Shaq
3. Magic
4. Bird
5. Isiah Thomas ... (being he's the only player who is able to say he beat Bird/Magic/Jordan)

Hellcrooner
06-01-2011, 04:33 PM
has people forgotten how a PAST HIS PRIME hakeem simply tore appart Shaq?

championships
06-01-2011, 04:33 PM
poll says 100% unanimous.

I have to agree

KmB728
06-01-2011, 04:34 PM
Relax guys im pretty sure Hellcrooner would take Pau and Marc Gasol before Shaq :laugh:

Shaq is CLEARLY a top 10 player

smith&wesson
06-01-2011, 04:34 PM
I would take Shaq over West, Wilt, Hakeem, Duncan, and maybe Russell, although 11 rings would give the nod to Russell.

ya see thats the thing, guys like that you have to give your respect too for winning that many ships .. but then you gotta wonder if shaq played in thoughs times would he have like 15 rings ? shaqs size and athletisicm would have dominated great C's in the past imo.

Ty Fast
06-01-2011, 04:35 PM
Absolutely. And in an argument of peak he could be argued as high as top three, IMO.

top 10, yes. top 3, no.

smith&wesson
06-01-2011, 04:36 PM
Who are you preeching too?? So far the votes are 21-0 in favour of yes he is top 10.
I haven't seen one vote saying otherwise so I don't get who your talking to:confused:

probably hellscrooner.

Hellcrooner
06-01-2011, 04:36 PM
Relax guys im pretty sure Hellcrooner would take Pau and Marc Gasol before Shaq :laugh:

Shaq is CLEARLY a top 10 player

no i wouldnt.

Unless you are talking 1st of july of 2011 of course :D

m26555
06-01-2011, 04:38 PM
has people forgotten how a PAST HIS PRIME hakeem simply tore appart Shaq?
It can be legitimately argued that Hakeem is the second best player of all-time, so I don't why this is such a big deal.

MiamiWadeCounty
06-01-2011, 04:38 PM
ya see thats the thing, guys like that you have to give your respect too for winning that many ships .. but then you gotta wonder if shaq played in thoughs times would he have like 15 rings ? shaqs size and athletisicm would have dominated great C's in the past imo.

Yep. I'm trying to be fair. I have seen Shaq play in his prime and throughout his career. I have seen very, very little footage of Bill Russell playing to be honest. Bill is a proven winner and team player, but it is hard to say Shaq wouldn't dominate even more with his athletic abilities back in the 50s-70s.

Eagles4Lyfe
06-01-2011, 04:40 PM
probably hellscrooner.

Oh he said guys so i was confused, should've quoted him if that was the case. Hellcrooner hasn't voted so its still a gooseegg:p

RaiderLakersA's
06-01-2011, 04:41 PM
Chronz would you select shaq as the best C of all time ? i know that bill russle has more rings, and wilt and kareem may be better statistically but it i think those guys played in an era where shaq would dominate even more if he was around back then.

to me shaq and hakeem are my personal fav C's of all time.

I hear this often, but I can't honestly say that Shaq would have been better given that the NBA rules back then weren't nearly as malleable as they are now. How refs called games changed because of Shaq.

But what if the reverse was true? If Shaq was forced to change his game to accommodate, well, the rules (!!!) would he have been more dominant than, say, Wilt who was a confluence of power, finesse and grace? Would he have been as nimble and brilliantly effective as the "undersized" Russell?

Rebounds aren't everything, but there is a reason why Shaq doesn't rank as high as Wilt, Russell and Kareem...and much of it has to do with focus and exertion. While Shaq may always be considered the most dominant, I have a hard time believing that he wouldn't have been routinely outworked and out-hustled by some of the other great centers that have played this game. Very hard to believe.

Law25
06-01-2011, 04:42 PM
You could make an argument for Shaq being the MVPOAT. (Most Valuable Player of All-Time) If I had to to start a team with one player in their prime for one season, I would take Shaq over any other player ever to play the game.

I'll take Kobe. Get Kobe an serviceable big and your almost guaranteed an ring. With Shaq you need an Great two guard. In 95 Penny Hardaway averaged 20pts 7ast 4rebs and 20pts 7ast 4rebs in the playoffs with Shaq and they recieved no rings in three seasons.

FriedTofuz
06-01-2011, 04:43 PM
without a doubt, its not even a question. Hes 5th all time in scoring, and one of the best centers to ever play this game.

RaiderLakersA's
06-01-2011, 04:45 PM
As for whether or not Shaq is All Time top 10, like many of the views posted here, I'm inclined to say yes...BUT...who the heck do I bump out of the Top 10 to make room for him?

blastmasta26
06-01-2011, 04:45 PM
There should be no debate, Shaq is a top 10 player for sure.

blastmasta26
06-01-2011, 04:48 PM
I'll take Kobe. Get Kobe an serviceable big and your almost guaranteed an ring. With Shaq you need an Great two guard. In 95 Penny Hardaway averaged 20pts 7ast 4rebs and 20pts 7ast 4rebs in the playoffs with Shaq and they recieved no rings in three seasons.
When has Kobe won with just a "serviceable big"? He's only won titles with Shaq and Gasol/Bynum. Shaq is a top 10 player all time. Gasol could possibly be a HOF and Bynum is also one of the best bigs in the game when he plays.

RaiderLakersA's
06-01-2011, 04:49 PM
no.
In no order id rather have Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, Bird, Robertson, Hakeem, Duncan, Dr J, Lebron, Russell before him

My primary issue is that you mention some that haven't retired yet.

Not singling anyone out, but if LeBron died today, heaven forbid, without winning a single championship, how could you possibly annoint him TOP 10 ALL TIME GREAT and maintain any credibility?

Hellcrooner
06-01-2011, 04:51 PM
My primary issue is that you mention some that haven't retired yet.

Not singling anyone out, but if LeBron died today, heaven forbid, without winning a single championship, how could you possibly annoint him TOP 10 ALL TIME GREAT and maintain any credibility?

cause rings arent everything.
Skill matters.
thats fore example what gets Dr J.

SKILL

MelkyNYY
06-01-2011, 04:55 PM
I would take Shaq over Wilt and Hakeem any day of the week. Shaq dominated the Dream, and Wilt played in a crappy era where the pace was different.

MelkyNYY
06-01-2011, 04:56 PM
Wilt in his Prime guarding Shaq in his prime would be laughable. Shaq would turn Wilt into Greg ****ing Ostertag.

Hellcrooner
06-01-2011, 04:59 PM
^you should see some footage, he was a FREAK athlete.

would he average 50 and 25 today? No

but 35 and 15 for sure.

Hawkeye15
06-01-2011, 05:03 PM
no doubt. He is a top 6-7 player ever.

MelkyNYY
06-01-2011, 05:03 PM
^you should see some footage, he was a FREAK athlete.

would he average 50 and 25 today? No

but 35 and 15 for sure.

I've seen footage of Wilt Chamberlain and I'm not impressed. Did he dominate his era? Yes. But if you told me Wilt's Lakers vs Shaq's Lakers would play in their prime and my life was on the line, I'd pick Shaq's Lakers.

Wilt and Shaq 1 on 1, same rules? Shaq every time. And I'd laugh while I watched Shaq own Wilt.

RaiderLakersA's
06-01-2011, 05:04 PM
cause rings arent everything.
Skill matters.
thats fore example what gets Dr J.

SKILL

Right, but Dr. J has a ring, too. :D

RaiderLakersA's
06-01-2011, 05:07 PM
I would take Shaq over Wilt and Hakeem any day of the week. Shaq dominated the Dream, and Wilt played in a crappy era where the pace was different.

I seem to recall the Dream handling Shaq fairly well, and when it mattered most, but why bother with small details like that? :D

MelkyNYY
06-01-2011, 05:07 PM
I seem to recall the Dream handling Shaq fairly well, and when it mattered most, but why bother with small details like that? :D

What were you watching? I watched Houston Rocket Double-Teams.

Hawkeye15
06-01-2011, 05:08 PM
Right, but Dr. J has a ring, too. :D

he does, but he wasn't even the best player on his team then.

Dr J is not a top 10 player of all time imo.

Hawkeye15
06-01-2011, 05:10 PM
I seem to recall the Dream handling Shaq fairly well, and when it mattered most, but why bother with small details like that? :D

Houston doubled him nearly ever time he caught the ball...

Bruno
06-01-2011, 05:10 PM
top 10, yes. top 3, no.

Not saying he's top three. I said in the sub-discussion of "peak" that he could be argued top three.

Chronz
06-01-2011, 05:11 PM
Chronz would you select shaq as the best C of all time ? i know that bill russle has more rings, and wilt and kareem may be better statistically but it i think those guys played in an era where shaq would dominate even more if he was around back then.

to me shaq and hakeem are my personal fav C's of all time.
Before I say anything I just want to say that I teeter back and forth between these guys over the years but I think I have a firm grip on my values now.

They all have their weaknesses, Im the kind of guy who values Prime Run above anything else and Shaqs prime run included the greatest combination of individual dominance and team success over that period of time.

Kareem won his title early and late in his career when he was just about done, never during the course of his prime, you could argue he won atleast 1-2 at his peak but I have my suspicions that his production could have been artificially enhanced by playing alongside Big O or an easier era (Before the ABA merger). Also unlike Shaq, he was dominated individually to such a degree that it cost his superior teams series. Shaq has been outplayed by Hakeem but he held his own, it doesnt compare to what Moses and Thurmond did to Kareem, to a lesser extent Walton/Unseld.

Wilt holds the greatest PEAK argument IMO but the problem with Wilt was he never knew what he wanted or how he wanted to play, though part of this problem was due to the fact that nobody knew what to do with a guy like that yet, he was the first of his kind. Wilt had the most diverse change of roles throughout his career than anyone I can think of.
Every other year it seemed he wanted to disprove critics about alleged weaknesses in his game, which doesnt sound bad until it becomes an obsession that can hurt the team. Like when he began trying to accrue assists out of the natural flow of the game. He would stop passing to certain players if they didnt shoot immediately after he passed it them. He didnt care enough defensively when he was younger and probably the hardest guy to coach out of everyone on the list. Still if I had my choice of 1 center during any given year it would Wilt with Dream/Shaq in 2nd.

Russ isnt in the discussion, the only people who put Russ this high are people who dont care about skillset and overall ability but stress the importance of LEGACY, things like title counts, rebounding titles, winning, and nostalgia. I have D-Rob and Moses ahead of Russ.




oh i know it very well, thats why i can talk
I call BS

llemon
06-01-2011, 05:11 PM
i'm not saying he's right. the main part of the post was to show that those are the guys that he'd be in the discussion with as a top 10 player.

Again, according to some guy on some show.

Bravo95
06-01-2011, 05:13 PM
Yes.

Cowboys4Life619
06-01-2011, 05:13 PM
A resounding yes...

People forget dominance after a few years of watching him be mediocre. Before he lost his legs...no one was more dominant in the post...EVER! The guy averaged 40/20 in the finals in 01 (if i remember correctly). In his prime, he was one of the top 5 of all time.

Much love, but to say Dr J, and LBJ?? You can make arguements for the rest...and no disrespect to Dr J (he was an innovator), but no way are these in the conversation with the rest of that list.

Chronz
06-01-2011, 05:14 PM
has people forgotten how a PAST HIS PRIME hakeem simply tore appart Shaq?

Yea you definitely dont know your history, when Hakeem was PAST HIS PRIME, he couldnt put up a decent fight. Shaq DESTROYED Dream to the point where he claimed "Ive finally slayed the final dragon" or someshit when he eliminated him from the playoffs.


If you referring to the Finals I have some breaking news for you, Hakeem WAS IN HIS PRIME that Finals and he didnt tear Shaq apart. Shaq did his damage, it wasnt anything like what Hakeem did to Ewing.

So yea like Ive been saying, update your history books

RaiderLakersA's
06-01-2011, 05:14 PM
What were you watching? I watched Houston Rocket Double-Teams.

Right, but Hakeem was awarded the Finals MVP with Shaq being on the same floor, outperforming him in most respects. And let's not pretend that Orlando wasn't trying to stop the Dream. Hell, that was Shaq's job! Couldn't do it. Didn't do it.

I'm just saying... let's not get too carried away with how dominant Shaq was. Because if the Dream could get the advantage, Wilt would have seriously warped the Big Aristotle. In fact, we'd probably be calling him the Big Copernicus for being so wrong-centered.

RaiderLakersA's
06-01-2011, 05:16 PM
Houston doubled him nearly ever time he caught the ball...

Right, but whose job was it to stop Hakeem?

Chronz
06-01-2011, 05:17 PM
I'll take Kobe. Get Kobe an serviceable big and your almost guaranteed an ring. With Shaq you need an Great two guard. In 95 Penny Hardaway averaged 20pts 7ast 4rebs and 20pts 7ast 4rebs in the playoffs with Shaq and they recieved no rings in three seasons.

LMFAO Kobe in his prime isnt even a guaranteed playoff birth. Shaq as a Rookie almost gets that done on an expansion team, Shaq at his peak forget about it.

Besides comparing the amount of support needed to win a title favors Shaq. No amount of irrelevant per game stats of a single player is going to change that

Hawkeye15
06-01-2011, 05:17 PM
Right, but Hakeem was awarded the Finals MVP with Shaq being on the same floor, outperforming him in most respects. And let's not pretend that Orlando wasn't trying to stop the Dream. Hell, that was Shaq's job! Couldn't do it. Didn't do it.

I'm just saying... let's not get too carried away with how dominant Shaq was. Because if the Dream could get the advantage, Wilt would have seriously warped the Big Aristotle. In fact, we'd probably be calling him the Big Copernicus for being so wrong-centered.

well, Hakeem was at his peak, with a superior team, and Shaq was a kid. The Rox still doubled Shaq everytime he touched the ball is the point. Hakeem did indeed outplay him, but I would love to see a 1994 Hakeem go up against a 2001 Shaq. I think the outcome would be much different.

Chronz
06-01-2011, 05:19 PM
cause rings arent everything.
Skill matters.
thats fore example what gets Dr J.

SKILL

Skills only matter if you can utilize those skills in a superior manner. I dont give a **** if the guy is a sumo wrestler or if he takes shots with 1 hand on his crotch, 2PTS ARE 2PTS.

All that skill doesnt make Dr.J the more impactful player so why the **** would I value something that doesnt help my team win as much?

IMPACT

Is of MOST importance

Chronz
06-01-2011, 05:22 PM
Wilt in his Prime guarding Shaq in his prime would be laughable. Shaq would turn Wilt into Greg ****ing Ostertag.
Yes just like when we saw Shaq turn Dennis Rodman into Shawn Bradley huh.

Your a cool poster and I like how youve just taken the site by storm but your wrong here. Wilt is the ONLY player who could have checked Shaq 1 on 1 without being embarrassed AND still provide help on the interior.


^you should see some footage, he was a FREAK athlete.

would he average 50 and 25 today? No

but 35 and 15 for sure.
LOL you should do some statistical research, those #'s you gave have absolutely ZERO chance of happening.

Hawkeye15
06-01-2011, 05:23 PM
Right, but whose job was it to stop Hakeem?

The Magic defense......

One man can't guard Hakeem or Shaq in their primes dude. I can guarantee you that if neither team sent help in that series Shaq would have won the individual matchup. But that isn't how basketball works. Hakeem was simply better, smarter, and more experienced at the time, and his team was flat out stronger. But even at 21, if you didn't double Shaq, he would crush anyone down low. Houston simply sent help everytime.

Anyways, what is your point? Are you attempting to say Hakeem was the better of the two all time?

RaiderLakersA's
06-01-2011, 05:25 PM
well, Hakeem was at his peak, with a superior team, and Shaq was a kid. The Rox still doubled Shaq everytime he touched the ball is the point. Hakeem did indeed outplay him, but I would love to see a 1994 Hakeem go up against a 2001 Shaq. I think the outcome would be much different.

I agree that Shaq Prime versus Hakeem Prime would have been a battle, especially since the Lakers didn't regularly face any centers of Hakeem's timber in all of Shaq's dominant years.

Even though I consider Shaq one of the most dominant -- and I'm kind of playing devil's advocate here by arguing contrarily to that -- I wish some would show some restraint when it comes to automatically assuming that Shaq easily trumps some of the greatest centers to ever play the game. It's never as clear cut as that.

smith&wesson
06-01-2011, 05:25 PM
Before I say anything I just want to say that I teeter back and forth between these guys over the years but I think I have a firm grip on my values now.

They all have their weaknesses, Im the kind of guy who values Prime Run above anything else and Shaqs prime run included the greatest combination of individual dominance and team success over that period of time.

Kareem won his title early and late in his career when he was just about done, never during the course of his prime, you could argue he won atleast 1-2 at his peak but I have my suspicions that his production could have been artificially enhanced by playing alongside Big O or an easier era (Before the ABA merger). Also unlike Shaq, he was dominated individually to such a degree that it cost his superior teams series. Shaq has been outplayed by Hakeem but he held his own, it doesnt compare to what Moses and Thurmond did to Kareem, to a lesser extent Walton/Unseld.

Wilt holds the greatest PEAK argument IMO but the problem with Wilt was he never knew what he wanted or how he wanted to play, though part of this problem was due to the fact that nobody knew what to do with a guy like that yet, he was the first of his kind. Wilt had the most diverse change of roles throughout his career than anyone I can think of.
Every other year it seemed he wanted to disprove critics about alleged weaknesses in his game, which doesnt sound bad until it becomes an obsession that can hurt the team. Like when he began trying to accrue assists out of the natural flow of the game. He would stop passing to certain players if they didnt shoot immediately after he passed it them. He didnt care enough defensively when he was younger and probably the hardest guy to coach out of everyone on the list. Still if I had my choice of 1 center during any given year it would Wilt with Dream/Shaq in 2nd.

Russ isnt in the discussion, the only people who put Russ this high are people who dont care about skillset and overall ability but stress the importance of LEGACY, things like title counts, rebounding titles, winning, and nostalgia. I have D-Rob and Moses ahead of Russ.




I call BS


ya they all had theyre weaknesses, imagine if shaq could sink thoughs free throws.

so your going with wilt! its a tough race.. but i agree with shaq/hakeem being right up there.

RaiderLakersA's
06-01-2011, 05:26 PM
he does, but he wasn't even the best player on his team then.

Dr J is not a top 10 player of all time imo.

I know, I was simply pointing out to Hellcrooner that there was an obvious fly in his ointment.

I don't consider Dr. J in my top 10, either.

Hawkeye15
06-01-2011, 05:27 PM
I know, I was simply pointing out to Hellcrooner that there was an obvious fly in his ointment.

I don't consider Dr. J in my top 10, either.

we finally agree on something RL :hi5:

bringinwood
06-01-2011, 05:27 PM
Hakeem beat Shaq in the 95 finals but, it was like child abuse...

The fact that Orlando even made the finals that year was an accomplishment...

Shaq wasn't close to hitting his peak...

Hakeem didn't "destroy" Shaq... I'd say Hakeem displayed a sizable advantage over Shaq during that series...


Put vintage dream on Shaq during the 00 finals and dream gets "destroyed"...

Shaq is a top 10 player all time and was the best center since Jabbar... You can arguably say he's the best center since Wilt...

Chronz
06-01-2011, 05:28 PM
But even at 21, if you didn't double Shaq, he would crush anyone down low. Houston simply sent help everytime.


Ive always wanted to do a series breakdown of that Finals, a touches count for both Dream and Shaq. I do remember Shaq getting more attention (just like D-Rob when he faced Hakeem) but I cant speak with as much certainty as you guys have. I dont remember a frequent dose of doubles but I wouldnt be surprised by it.

Teeboy1487
06-01-2011, 05:30 PM
Most definitely. Shaq is in my top 6-7. He was that good. A true dominant force in every phase of the game. There will never be nothing like him again. Truly a once in a lifetime talent.

AllBall
06-01-2011, 05:32 PM
2,732 blocks (7th All Time)

Hawkeye15
06-01-2011, 05:32 PM
Ive always wanted to do a series breakdown of that Finals, a touches count for both Dream and Shaq. I do remember Shaq getting more attention (just like D-Rob when he faced Hakeem) but I cant speak with as much certainty as you guys have. I dont remember a frequent dose of doubles but I wouldnt be surprised by it.

I am going of pure memory, but I remember seeing the Rockets double hard early, and as the game wore on a bit less. I honestly think Shaq was tired in that series. It was his first extended playoff run, and Hakeem wore him out, as did the swarming defense early.

I could be off, but I remember thinking that during the series. Hakeem was just on a different level at the time, due to his experience and skill level at the time. The instances where no help came, Shaq usually ended up with a layup/dunk/FT early in games.

SLOnLucky
06-01-2011, 05:38 PM
He was so dominant, everyone has a "Hack A Shaq" defense for certain players. Its a big as that insane shift everyone did for BBonds back in the day...the entire league changed D for the guy.

Chronz
06-01-2011, 05:39 PM
ya they all had theyre weaknesses, imagine if shaq could sink thoughs free throws.

so your going with wilt! its a tough race.. but i agree with shaq/hakeem being right up there.

Ill take Wilt if its for 1 particular season.

Peak: Wilt
Prime Run: Shaq
Career Longevity: Kareem

Really no way to go wrong here

Hakeem is known as the most complete player of them all, many will cite how he was flat out dominant on both ends and if you looked at his career in a vacuum they would be right, sadly what gets lost is the fact that his career was basically split into to separate phases of his career. A defensive prime during his youth and an offensive one by his 30's, there was really only 2-3 years where the 2 intertwined and he was a total force on both ends and even then his best days defensively came in his youth.

Aside from working on his post skill Hakeem took FOREVER to embrace the art of passing, and once he did, he mastered it and it was over for the league. Sadly he was 30 by then and would only have a few more years of his athletic prime left by then.

JordansBulls
06-01-2011, 05:41 PM
has people forgotten how a PAST HIS PRIME hakeem simply tore appart Shaq?

Will people stop saying this *******.

Hakeem averaged in that series.

32.8 ppg / 11.5 rpg / 5.5 apg / 2.0 spg / 2.0 bpg on 48% FG


Shaq averaged in that series.

28.0 ppg / 12.5 rpg / 6.3 apg / 0.3 spg / 2.5 bpg on 60% FG


If Hakeem played that is one thing but to say he tore him apart is ridiculous.

SportsAndrew25
06-01-2011, 05:42 PM
Basic Stats:

23.7 PPG
10.9 RPG
2.5 APG
2.3 BPG
58.2 FG%

Achievements

15x All-star
4x NBA champion
3x Finals MVP
1x NBA Regular Season MVP
14x All-NBA
91-92 Rookie of the Year
3x All-NBA Defense
3x All-Star Game MVP
28596 Total Points scored (5th All-Time)
13099 Total Rebounds (12th All-Time)

I think this makes for a good argument.Shaq was one of the best in his prime, so yes.

Il Mago50
06-01-2011, 05:52 PM
Basic Stats:

23.7 PPG
10.9 RPG
2.5 APG
2.3 BPG
58.2 FG%

Achievements

15x All-star
4x NBA champion
3x Finals MVP
1x NBA Regular Season MVP
14x All-NBA
91-92 Rookie of the Year
3x All-NBA Defense
3x All-Star Game MVP
28596 Total Points scored (5th All-Time)
13099 Total Rebounds (12th All-Time)

I think this makes for a good argument.

Shaq has played 4-5 years where his stats have been deflated. Before his decline, he was in the 25-26 PPG, 11-12 RPG, 2-3 BPG. Just had to point that out because he overextended his career which makes certain parts of his career stats slightly less impressive.

Shaq is the greatest center in NBA history without a doubt. Wilt played against much weaker competition. Russell is an all-time great but his effect was felt much more on the defensive end. You can make cases for Hakeem and Kareem and others as well but this is the way I see it:

- Who in the history of the league has put as much fear into the opposing team as Shaquille O'Neal. Before him, who had ever seen a 7'1, 350 pound man as strong as an elephant move as quickly as he did with the kind of athleticism many people forget he possessed most of his career.
- How many players in the NBA could legitimately pose a threat to Shaq on defense? Vlade Divac gave him the occasional fit. Arvydas Sabonis banged a little bit with him. Besides that, no one. The entire opposing big man core would be in bandages or fouled out by the end of the game because there was no legitimate way to stop the guy on offense, hence reverting to the guy's only kryptonite to stop him: the hack-a-shaq
- Has any other player except maybe MJ ever won 3 titles in such convincing fashion as Shaq did. He averaged something like 38, 20 and 4 in the finals against the Pacers and went 16-1 in a playoff run and most games weren't even close.

Finally,

-Tell me ten guys you would rather have on your team throughout NBA history that would instantly make you a championship contender because of his meer presense.

The only guys I can think of as arguments are MJ, Magic, and Bird. Lebron to some extent but I would rather have Shaq then Lebron ten times out of ten if it meant getting 10 years of Shaq in his prime versus Lebron in his prime.

From the dominance and sheer ability to give any team he is on legitimate shots at a title, for me at least, I would rank only MJ, Magic, and Bird ahead of him as a player, ignoring the "skill-level that people seem to bring into the conversation.

King P
06-01-2011, 05:53 PM
Yes

And Dr. J is Top 10 too. Top 15-20 at the worst

Il Mago50
06-01-2011, 05:56 PM
Also imagine what he would've done in his career had he taken a bit better care of himself and avoided injury.

Probably wins that title with the Heat when him and Wade were both hurt against the Pistons.

Probably beats the Pistons with the Lakers.

Probably is the highest scorer of all-time.

Il Mago50
06-01-2011, 05:58 PM
Shaq is top 5 as a player in the league ignoring "level of skill of player".

There is no one ahead of Bird, MJ and MJ that anyone would rather start a team with.

blastmasta26
06-01-2011, 06:00 PM
Also imagine what he would've done in his career had he taken a bit better care of himself and avoided injury.

Probably wins that title with the Heat when him and Wade were both hurt against the Pistons.

Probably beats the Pistons with the Lakers.

Probably is the highest scorer of all-time.
If Shaq was more committed to improving each aspect of his game and keeping himself in shape like many other all time greats including Jordan and Kobe, Shaq could have been the best player of all time.

Il Mago50
06-01-2011, 06:10 PM
If Shaq was more committed to improving each aspect of his game and keeping himself in shape like many other all time greats including Jordan and Kobe, Shaq could have been the best player of all time.

Of course, Shaq was a big partier and never took care of himself in terms of diet which is why he packed on so much dead weight over the year. Even late in his career, had he shed 20-30 pounds off his frame I still think he could've put up 20 a game because his feet and speed would be drastically better.

The one year Shaq had a free throw coach, he shot something around 60-65 % from the stripe and had he done that for his career, he would've averaged 30 a game for multiple years and easily been highest scorer of all-time.

Shaq is a top 5 ever to play the game but like you said, if he had the work ethic that turned Kobe from a very good player to a top 15 player all-time, he'd easily be in the conversation with MJ.

Chronz
06-01-2011, 06:13 PM
If Shaq was more committed to improving each aspect of his game and keeping himself in shape like many other all time greats including Jordan and Kobe, Shaq could have been the best player of all time.

Yea but you could say this for just about every legend. For example just replace Shaqs name with Larry Bird (a guy with a great work ethic but just didnt keep his body in great shape) and it still holds true.

Shaq wasnt the fat lazy slob people like to perceive him as, the fact that Shaq was so big and avoided serious injury problems throughout his career is proof enough to me that he knew how to handle his body. If he wanted to rest on company time it was because he knew the team needed him healthy and ready for the playoffs. When he first bulked up he said it was because Phil told him he needed the mass to absorb the contact. When he trimmed down it was because Riley wanted him to be able to run up and down for a full year, the end result that he got injured anyways.

Chronz
06-01-2011, 06:16 PM
Also imagine what he would've done in his career had he taken a bit better care of himself and avoided injury.

Probably wins that title with the Heat when him and Wade were both hurt against the Pistons.

Probably beats the Pistons with the Lakers.

Probably is the highest scorer of all-time.

Funny you mention the series against the Pistons, neglecting the fact that it was the year Shaq lost weight, whos to say he couldnt have stayed healthy had he stayed at his previous weight?

Im sure Shaq could have done better with his body but I dont see how its our place to judge when the man has done better than anyone his size in terms of staying in the league.

Knicks21
06-01-2011, 06:21 PM
Easily Top 10. He's in my top 5.

KnicksR4Real
06-01-2011, 06:26 PM
yes

LALakersKC
06-01-2011, 06:42 PM
Top 10 for me.

showtym24
06-01-2011, 06:55 PM
Yes. His 00-02 run solidified that.

RaiderLakersA's
06-01-2011, 07:00 PM
Shaq is top 5 as a player in the league ignoring "level of skill of player".

There is no one ahead of Bird, MJ and MJ that anyone would rather start a team with.

I'm with you on Magic and Jordan, but there are a couple of players that I would pick over Bird without even mentioning Shaq.

LakeShowRaider
06-01-2011, 07:11 PM
Is that a rhetorical question??

blastmasta26
06-01-2011, 07:13 PM
Yea but you could say this for just about every legend. For example just replace Shaqs name with Larry Bird (a guy with a great work ethic but just didnt keep his body in great shape) and it still holds true.

Shaq wasnt the fat lazy slob people like to perceive him as, the fact that Shaq was so big and avoided serious injury problems throughout his career is proof enough to me that he knew how to handle his body. If he wanted to rest on company time it was because he knew the team needed him healthy and ready for the playoffs. When he first bulked up he said it was because Phil told him he needed the mass to absorb the contact. When he trimmed down it was because Riley wanted him to be able to run up and down for a full year, the end result that he got injured anyways.

I see what you're saying, in terms of handling his body, he wasn't as bad as some people made it out to be but it still was poor nonetheless. Regardless, I was focusing more on how he didn't have the great work ethic to improve his game. If he had just been a slightly better free throw shooter for example, he would've actually been unstoppable.


Of course, Shaq was a big partier and never took care of himself in terms of diet which is why he packed on so much dead weight over the year. Even late in his career, had he shed 20-30 pounds off his frame I still think he could've put up 20 a game because his feet and speed would be drastically better.

The one year Shaq had a free throw coach, he shot something around 60-65 % from the stripe and had he done that for his career, he would've averaged 30 a game for multiple years and easily been highest scorer of all-time.

Shaq is a top 5 ever to play the game but like you said, if he had the work ethic that turned Kobe from a very good player to a top 15 player all-time, he'd easily be in the conversation with MJ.

Yeah, free throws were crucial and the one thing that could prevent Shaq from dominating at all times. Still, even the 60-65 range that you point out could have been sufficient for him to be the best.

magichatnumber9
06-01-2011, 07:16 PM
In 2003 many sports writers put Shaq in the top 3, I don't know what changed other then getting old and a little fat. He still played about 7-8 years longer then he probably should of givin his frame.

DR_1
06-01-2011, 07:18 PM
No doubt.

RaidersLakers24
06-01-2011, 07:31 PM
LMFAO Kobe in his prime isnt even a guaranteed playoff birth. Shaq as a Rookie almost gets that done on an expansion team, Shaq at his peak forget about it.

Besides comparing the amount of support needed to win a title favors Shaq. No amount of irrelevant per game stats of a single player is going to change that

Yeah dude MJ was gonna take atkins,mihm,butler(not as good as today) lamar and a bunch of scrubs to the playoffs? Right and dude if you didn't know Kobe missed like 20 games that year so umm your logic is stupid and what's up with u always making Kobe seem like a regular player?

LA_Raiders
06-01-2011, 07:31 PM
Yes

Sixerlover
06-01-2011, 07:32 PM
Of course.

smith&wesson
06-01-2011, 07:33 PM
Ill take Wilt if its for 1 particular season.

Peak: Wilt
Prime Run: Shaq
Career Longevity: Kareem

Really no way to go wrong here

Hakeem is known as the most complete player of them all, many will cite how he was flat out dominant on both ends and if you looked at his career in a vacuum they would be right, sadly what gets lost is the fact that his career was basically split into to separate phases of his career. A defensive prime during his youth and an offensive one by his 30's, there was really only 2-3 years where the 2 intertwined and he was a total force on both ends and even then his best days defensively came in his youth.

Aside from working on his post skill Hakeem took FOREVER to embrace the art of passing, and once he did, he mastered it and it was over for the league. Sadly he was 30 by then and would only have a few more years of his athletic prime left by then.

I remember hakeem and shaq rumours about a 1 on 1 game on paper view lol do you remember that ? it obviously never happened.

I remember hakeem when he went to the raptors and was basically on leg at that point but i was still soo excited to have him come play in canada. i always found it odd that he retired in toronto.

I would say hakeem was shaqs greatest advesary

RaidersLakers24
06-01-2011, 07:36 PM
Mj
Magic
kaj
kobe
shaq
bird
Duncan
Wilt
o.robertson
hakeem

Sixerlover
06-01-2011, 07:39 PM
If you have Shaq over Wilt, Russell, Big O and Hakeem you have to have Duncan above them too.

Cromedome
06-01-2011, 07:41 PM
Top 3 Center of ALL TIME! I saw him during his prime...and he was unstoppable.

Kashmir13579
06-01-2011, 07:41 PM
Top 5 hands down. The most dominant player of all time, imo. Imagine Shaq playing in Wilt's era...

thawv
06-01-2011, 07:41 PM
He's one of the biggest underachiever's I've ever seen. For his size and weight, it's hard to believe he only averaged 24/11! He was a giant that was allowed to charge and travel every time he touched the ball. And to shoot 53% from the line is just ignorant. With all the advantages he was given, and I'm talking his size, the fact that he got to the line over 9 times a game, and preferential ref treatment, he should have been at around 35/18 for his career.

stawka
06-01-2011, 07:43 PM
Top 8 easily, in his peak I'd say top 5. I'm actually ****ing sad today!

Kashmir13579
06-01-2011, 07:44 PM
LMFAO Kobe in his prime isnt even a guaranteed playoff birth. Shaq as a Rookie almost gets that done on an expansion team, Shaq at his peak forget about it.

Besides comparing the amount of support needed to win a title favors Shaq. No amount of irrelevant per game stats of a single player is going to change that

:)

mrbtp
06-01-2011, 07:46 PM
no doubt in my mind, he was the best center for a decade

Lil Half Dead
06-01-2011, 08:20 PM
Without question Shaq is a top 10 player of all-time.

Stack_NJNets
06-01-2011, 08:30 PM
Yes, Shaq in his prime was the best player in the league.

Lakerhead4ever
06-01-2011, 08:47 PM
easily yes

Hangtime
06-01-2011, 08:54 PM
I hear this often, but I can't honestly say that Shaq would have been better given that the NBA rules back then weren't nearly as malleable as they are now. How refs called games changed because of Shaq.

But what if the reverse was true? If Shaq was forced to change his game to accommodate, well, the rules (!!!) would he have been more dominant than, say, Wilt who was a confluence of power, finesse and grace? Would he have been as nimble and brilliantly effective as the "undersized" Russell?

Rebounds aren't everything, but there is a reason why Shaq doesn't rank as high as Wilt, Russell and Kareem...and much of it has to do with focus and exertion. While Shaq may always be considered the most dominant, I have a hard time believing that he wouldn't have been routinely outworked and out-hustled by some of the other great centers that have played this game. Very hard to believe.You make some excellent points. I tend to believe when it comes to comparisons to other all time great centers in particularly, that they are simply better skill wise. Some of those centers, WILT Kareem and Hakeem in particular would make Shaq work hard on the defensive end as well. They can also score out side the paint. Wilt was equally strong and would have the length to bother Shaq and he would not be easily dislodged. And we are talking about all these guys in their prime so they also have the athleticism and agility. I still beleive Shaq ranks 5th amongst centers. I put Wilt, Kareem, Russel and Olajuwon ahead of him.

Hangtime
06-01-2011, 09:02 PM
Wilt in his Prime guarding Shaq in his prime would be laughable. Shaq would turn Wilt into Greg ****ing Ostertag.

Please don't insult Wilt by comparing him to Ostertag. That's the joke.

delinquent4
06-01-2011, 09:07 PM
hell yes and the most physically dominant player to play the game

MrX27
06-01-2011, 09:15 PM
Dr. J?!?

Anyone questioning whether or not Dr J. is a top 10, needs to define what is it they are questioning?

If you "just" take Doc J during his time in the NBA, then maybe he's not top 10.

BUT if you include his time in the ABA, not only is he top 10, he may be top 5.

Before LeBron, before Kobe, before Jordan, before Bird, before Magic,
Doctor J showed them all how to carry a league on your back!

naztrack
06-01-2011, 09:19 PM
unstoppable when he was in his prime.....dont be fooled by his last few years those were just him collecting a little insurance the man could ball in his prime.

Chronz
06-01-2011, 09:31 PM
I see what you're saying, in terms of handling his body, he wasn't as bad as some people made it out to be but it still was poor nonetheless. Regardless, I was focusing more on how he didn't have the great work ethic to improve his game. If he had just been a slightly better free throw shooter for example, he would've actually been unstoppable.

I cant explain that but can you point out a comparable player who perfected on all or any of their glaring deficiencies? How hard is it to improve your FT% when your that big and youve spent your entire life mastering how to utilize your size inside, I cant imagine it would be an easy transition shooting that far away. MJ never got a consistent 3pt shot, he never needed one but he wasnt like Reggie. Same for Kobe, he can hit the 3 when hes hot but hes not a consistent knock down shooter. I do remember Shaq trying fall aways his rookie year but his coaches drilled the idea of attacking the paint into his head.

Look at what happened to Ewings career when he "expanded his range", it took away from his own efficiency and didnt make his team any harder to defend. Just a theory of mine but I think players can only devote so much time to the game of basketball and can really only craft their games in one way, there will never be a player who is perfect in every sense of the game, there will be an aspect they are lacking in no matter what. The way they choose to play will be most importantly determined by their physical traits.

This is why in the end it really doesnt matter what we think they should have done with their talents, even if what your saying is technically correct, a Shaq who could hit even 65% of his FT would have been that much better, but all things being equal (meaning in terms of practice,training,film,etc.) a Shaq who devoted that time into those traits could have lost something in other areas. And even if they add something late in their careers, without repetition they could lose their technique in other spots. A good example of this is Rose this year, everyone talks about his improved 3pt shot, and with good reason but nobody discusses how his in between and midrange game has dwindled. Granted it was a smart move to replace the spots on the floor with more efficient zones.

hard_candy
06-01-2011, 09:34 PM
Artis Gilmore and George McGinnis would be Top 10 All Time based upon ABA stats alone. Which is why these stats are usually heavily discounted in such appraisals.

I love Doc, but he had some notable weaknesses, such as very average ballhandling skills and a mediocre jump shot.

Doc is an all time legend, but top 10 is really pushing it.


Anyone questioning whether or not Dr J. is a top 10, needs to define what is it they are questioning?

If you "just" take Doc J during his time in the NBA, then maybe he's not top 10.

BUT if you include his time in the ABA, not only is he top 10, he may be top 5.

Before LeBron, before Kobe, before Jordan, before Bird, before Magic,
Doctor J showed them all how to carry a league on your back!

Chronz
06-01-2011, 09:41 PM
Yeah dude MJ was gonna take atkins,mihm,butler(not as good as today) lamar and a bunch of scrubs to the playoffs? Right and dude if you didn't know Kobe missed like 20 games that year so umm your logic is stupid and what's up with u always making Kobe seem like a regular player?
MJ wouldve easily, those players you mentioned were better than what a rookie Shaq had and he did better than Kobe.

Besides your wrong, the Lakers had a decent record when Kobe missed 20 games it wasnt until Odom went down that the Lakers fell off the cliff, Kobe was healthy when the team went through their 2-20 stretch or whatever it was. Not that it mattered, the team had sported a poor efficiency differential despite one of the easiest schedules, if any team was going to slide it was them, and their disastrous finish proved it. Kobe was playing ****** without the triangle, overall it was a horrible year for Kobe and he finished on All-NBA 3rd team.

Whats up with you making Kobe seem greater than he is?

kArSoN RyDaH
06-01-2011, 09:42 PM
kobe
mj
magic
bird
shaq
wilt
duncan
russell
kareem
west/big O.

;)

kArSoN RyDaH
06-01-2011, 09:50 PM
MJ wouldve easily, those players you mentioned were better than what a rookie Shaq had and he did better than Kobe.

Besides your wrong, the Lakers had a decent record when Kobe missed 20 games it wasnt until Odom went down that the Lakers fell off the cliff, Kobe was healthy when the team went through their 2-20 stretch or whatever it was. Not that it mattered, the team had sported a poor efficiency differential despite one of the easiest schedules, if any team was going to slide it was them, and their disastrous finish proved it. Kobe was playing ****** without the triangle, overall it was a horrible year for Kobe and he finished on All-NBA 3rd team.

Whats up with you making Kobe seem greater than he is?

MJ could not have taken that roster anywhere. No one could have.

kArSoN RyDaH
06-01-2011, 10:05 PM
I might just rescind my top 10 talk of Shaq.


I was merely thinking of his glory days. But if you look at his entire career he NEVER EVER improved. EVER! I think after his 2nd year his RPG start declining and never increase.


It's hard to be a top 10 or top 5 player all time if you never managed to improve your game.

kArSoN RyDaH
06-01-2011, 10:09 PM
Shaq had the potential to be the GOAT. He could have easily shattered every record. He just had absolutely no work ethic.


Imagine if Shaq worked out and tried to improve?

Chronz
06-01-2011, 10:18 PM
MJ could not have taken that roster anywhere. No one could have.
YoUr RiGhT, hOw CoUlD I bE sO fOoLiSh To DeNy Da MaMbA

kArSoN RyDaH
06-01-2011, 10:21 PM
YoUr RiGhT, hOw CoUlD I bE sO fOoLiSh To DeNy Da MaMbA

It has nothing to do with Kobe. It's just that team was horrible.


No one could have taken that team anywhere.

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 10:37 PM
Nope.

There are 4 bigs ahead of him overall maybe 5.

I'll take......

1. Russell
2. Chamberlain
3. Abdul-Jabbar
4. Olajawuan
5. O'Neal/Duncan/Mikan

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 10:38 PM
No knock on Shaquille but there's a lot of elite bigs in the leagues history and we generally lack an appreciation for the depth of this leagues history. Top 20 clearly but top 10 no.

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 10:41 PM
You have to have

1. MJ
2. Russell
3. Wilt
4. The Big O
5. Jerry West
6. Magic
7. Bird
8. Abdul-Jabbar

Then you have a war for the last two spots in the top 10 and I think many people could justifiably include or omit him. It's really tough.

I'd go...

9. Erving
10. Moses Malone / olajuwaun

Chronz
06-01-2011, 10:42 PM
It has nothing to do with Kobe. It's just that team was horrible.


No one could have taken that team anywhere.
It was horrible nobody is denying that, but its still the kind of team Shaq could get into the playoffs. Hes gotten alot more done with alot less talent than what Kobe had and that was a young Shaq. You take an in his prime Shaq, they are easily in the playoffs and possibly a 50 win team.

This isnt a knock on Kobe, well atleast not his skill level (which is what matters to your kind), hes just not 7"1 and doesnt warp the court in the same way.

A frontline of Odom/Butler/Shaq would be AWESOME.

Hellcrooner
06-01-2011, 10:42 PM
Will people stop saying this *******.

Hakeem averaged in that series.

32.8 ppg / 11.5 rpg / 5.5 apg / 2.0 spg / 2.0 bpg on 48% FG


Shaq averaged in that series.

28.0 ppg / 12.5 rpg / 6.3 apg / 0.3 spg / 2.5 bpg on 60% FG


If Hakeem played that is one thing but to say he tore him apart is ridiculous.

4-0 WITH A WORSE SUPPORTING CAST , so yep, he tore him appart.

BigCityofDreams
06-01-2011, 10:44 PM
Michael Jordan
Magic Johnson
Kareem Abdul-Jabar
Bill Russel
Wilt Chamberlain
Larry Bird
Hakeem Olajuwon
Shaquille O'Neal
Tim Duncan
Kobe Bryant

So yes

no West or Oscar

Chronz
06-01-2011, 10:47 PM
You have to have

1. MJ
2. Russell
3. Wilt
4. The Big O
5. Jerry West
6. Magic
7. Bird
8. Abdul-Jabbar

Then you have a war for the last two spots in the top 10 and I think many people could justifiably include or omit him. It's really tough.

I'd go...

9. Erving
10. Moses Malone / olajuwaun
Please rationalize Big O and West. Not because I can see the rest as arguable but because I know what most people cite for the reasoning behind it, Big O and West however, Ive never seen anyone argue for them.

BigCityofDreams
06-01-2011, 10:47 PM
ya see thats the thing, guys like that you have to give your respect too for winning that many ships .. but then you gotta wonder if shaq played in thoughs times would he have like 15 rings ? shaqs size and athletisicm would have dominated great C's in the past imo.

add to the fact how much of an edge the Celtics had during that run especially in the beginning.

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 10:49 PM
The point is this is so tough and this takes nothing away from Shaquille or anyone else who would be omitted from one persons list to the next.

People could include him a top 10 and they wouldn't be wrong and they could omit him and they wouldn't be wrong and the arguments could last months trying to justify one side versus the other

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 10:51 PM
Many people who saw both play still argue Chamberlain was the more physically imposing of the two so to say shaq would have dominated a previous era is unfair to try and do.

I'm not saying wrong but it's impossible to do subjectively

BigCityofDreams
06-01-2011, 10:55 PM
Before I say anything I just want to say that I teeter back and forth between these guys over the years but I think I have a firm grip on my values now.

They all have their weaknesses, Im the kind of guy who values Prime Run above anything else and Shaqs prime run included the greatest combination of individual dominance and team success over that period of time.

Kareem won his title early and late in his career when he was just about done, never during the course of his prime, you could argue he won atleast 1-2 at his peak but I have my suspicions that his production could have been artificially enhanced by playing alongside Big O or an easier era (Before the ABA merger). Also unlike Shaq, he was dominated individually to such a degree that it cost his superior teams series. Shaq has been outplayed by Hakeem but he held his own, it doesnt compare to what Moses and Thurmond did to Kareem, to a lesser extent Walton/Unseld.

Wilt holds the greatest PEAK argument IMO but the problem with Wilt was he never knew what he wanted or how he wanted to play, though part of this problem was due to the fact that nobody knew what to do with a guy like that yet, he was the first of his kind. Wilt had the most diverse change of roles throughout his career than anyone I can think of.
Every other year it seemed he wanted to disprove critics about alleged weaknesses in his game, which doesnt sound bad until it becomes an obsession that can hurt the team. Like when he began trying to accrue assists out of the natural flow of the game. He would stop passing to certain players if they didnt shoot immediately after he passed it them. He didnt care enough defensively when he was younger and probably the hardest guy to coach out of everyone on the list. Still if I had my choice of 1 center during any given year it would Wilt with Dream/Shaq in 2nd.

Russ isnt in the discussion, the only people who put Russ this high are people who dont care about skillset and overall ability but stress the importance of LEGACY, things like title counts, rebounding titles, winning, and nostalgia. I have D-Rob and Moses ahead of Russ.




I call BS

When you bring that up to other ppl how do they react? I'm guessing not good since Russ is held in high regard.

kArSoN RyDaH
06-01-2011, 10:59 PM
It was horrible nobody is denying that, but its still the kind of team Shaq could get into the playoffs. Hes gotten alot more done with alot less talent than what Kobe had and that was a young Shaq. You take an in his prime Shaq, they are easily in the playoffs and possibly a 50 win team.

This isnt a knock on Kobe, well atleast not his skill level (which is what matters to your kind), hes just not 7"1 and doesnt warp the court in the same way.

A frontline of Odom/Butler/Shaq would be AWESOME.

Yeah, Shaq possibly could, but that roster was horrendous. I don't think they would have gotten past the 1st round. Might have more wins but same result. Loss in 1st round.




And for the guy who put WEST?FRAZIER?&BIG O? ahead of Kobe what are you smoking?


Kobe belongs in the top 10.

kArSoN RyDaH
06-01-2011, 11:03 PM
Chronz- what's your top 10? IN ORDER.

THE MTL
06-01-2011, 11:05 PM
Shaq is EASILY TOP 10 of All-Time! I think he might be the best center of all time. No offense to Wilt but seriously he played when there was no real competition. And Bill Russel was small, iono how'd he hold up during Shaq's era full of dominant centers.

Meaze_Gibson
06-01-2011, 11:06 PM
Shaq was at he beginning of his prime when he faced Hakeem..And got swept.. by a one man superstar team. Hakeem could play the whole game and finish you in the 4th. Shaq couldn't.

MJ, Magic, Wilt, Big O, Hakeem, Kareem, Shaq, Kobe, West, Lebron

BigCityofDreams
06-01-2011, 11:10 PM
Please rationalize Big O and West. Not because I can see the rest as arguable but because I know what most people cite for the reasoning behind it, Big O and West however, Ive never seen anyone argue for them.

Yea those two guys seem to be automatics on a lot of ppls list. Not saying they don't belong or weren't great but....

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:12 PM
Please rationalize Big O and West. Not because I can see the rest as arguable but because I know what most people cite for the reasoning behind it, Big O and West however, Ive never seen anyone argue for them.

Sure off the top of my head, the Big 0 averaged a triple double for two full seasons possibly 3. His career totals were like an average of 28-10-8. I know he's got an Mvp and a championship which are two great bench marks.

West averaged like 28 ppg was an NBA champion, MVP, finals MVP, a multiple time scoring champion and all defensive player and was like 12 time all NBA frst team. As far as overall impact he became the iconic image of the NBA.

This is all off top of my head so I maybe wrong on the frequency of which things occurred but I know that my argument for them in the top 10 is valid and as far as longevity goes greater than that of ONeal.

Could you argue others ahead of them? probably but it would be tough and I think most subjective lists would agree with me however if you looked at my other posts I have stated to argue for a top 10 is very difficult and would lead to endless arguments for players who all in their own right could lay claim to the distinction.

It's extremely tough and probably the best approach would probably be to avoid cross generation comparisons because of the change in styles of the game itself.

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:16 PM
Please rationalize Big O and West. Not because I can see the rest as arguable but because I know what most people cite for the reasoning behind it, Big O and West however, Ive never seen anyone argue for them.

And I certainly respect your questioning of my statements but I find it hard to believe that as a basketball fan you've never heard Oscar Robertson and Jerry West in the discussion of top 10 of all time. The fact that they were recognized in the top 50 of all time by the NBA itself would have to put them In that category of player. As a fan I could probably make at least one argument why any player in the NBA's identified top 50 could crack the top 10.

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:19 PM
Yea those two guys seem to be automatics on a lot of ppls list. Not saying they don't belong or weren't great but....

Oscar Robertson averaged a TRIPLE DOUBLE for two consecutive seasons. Oscars career average 28 ppg 9.5 Asst and 8 reb. On what planet isn't that top 10? Come on now

And he has the obligatory title that most view as a necessity to being in the conversation.

Again i think some of us make arguments without a full understanding of some of the older player's historical impact and performances

camador22
06-01-2011, 11:21 PM
You have to factor two things when it comes to someone's career. Thier resume and how good they were in bringing success to theit teams. Shaq in his prime is a top 2 player but after his prime and work ethic is what places him lower.

1. Jordan
2. Magic
3. Wilt
4. Bird
5. Kareem
6. Shaq
7. Duncan
8. Kobe
9. Hakeem
10. Russell

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:24 PM
I mean we have people in here questioning the historical impact of a guy with 2 college titles, 11 NBA titles, who owned Wilt Chamberlain every time they matched up (many ppl's best of all time),and who arguably had the greatest will to win in NBA history outside of Jordan.

But ppl have the nerve to say Russell isn't in the top 10.

BigCityofDreams
06-01-2011, 11:26 PM
Oscar Robertson averaged a TRIPLE DOUBLE for two consecutive seasons. Oscars career average 28 ppg 9.5 Asst and 8 reb. On what planet isn't that top 10? Come on now

And he has the obligatory title that most view as a necessity to being in the conversation.

Again i think some of us make arguments without a full understanding of some of the older player's historical impact and performances

There is some truth to that because a number of us never saw them play so we go on stats, stories, and opinions from ppl that were around for that era of basketball.

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:27 PM
You have to factor two things when it comes to someone's career. Thier resume and how good they were in bringing success to theit teams. Shaq in his prime is a top 2 player but after his prime and work ethic is what places him lower.

1. Jordan
2. Magic
3. Wilt
4. Bird
5. Kareem
6. Shaq
7. Duncan
8. Kobe
9. Hakeem
10. Russell


Russell is top 2 of all time and owned Wilt every time they faced off. You can't have a center with 11 titles behind 4 other centers, it's affront to history.

BigCityofDreams
06-01-2011, 11:29 PM
I mean we have people in here questioning the historical impact of a guy with 2 college titles, 11 NBA titles, who owned Wilt Chamberlain every time they matched up (many ppl's best of all time),and who arguably had the greatest will to win in NBA history outside of Jordan.

But ppl have the nerve to say Russell isn't in the top 10.

I think the issue some ppl have with Russell is the era he played in and his offensive production

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:29 PM
No excuses Jordan, Russel, and Chamberlain have to be top 5 on any list or that list is null and void. There's plenty of room foe discussion after those 3 but they have to be top 5 on every list

BullsFTW
06-01-2011, 11:31 PM
Shaq was by far one of the most dominant player to ever play in the NBA. I would definitely put him in the top 3 of all time. He was one of the most unique centers I'd ever seen. If he shot 70-80% at the free throw line. I would have probably consider him the 2nd best player of all time. Just the way he impacted the game in an era full of better athletes, it's just remarkable. You can argue that Wilt or Russell was a better center/player, but let's face it, they were in a league full of Steve Blakes, Luke Waltons, and Brian Scalabrines. Shaq went up againsts centers like Dwight, Mourning, Ewing, Motumbo, Olajuwon, Robinson, Duncan, Smits, and Divac.

I'm not a Shaq fan, but I acknowledge his accomplishments.

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:31 PM
I think the issue some ppl have with Russell is the era he played in and his offensive production

That is why but it's not accurate. You cant devalue Russel without devaluing chamberlain

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:32 PM
Shaq was by far one of the most dominant player to ever play in the NBA. I would definitely put him in the top 3 of all time. He was one of the most unique centers I'd ever seen. If he shot 70-80% at the free throw line. I would have probably consider him the 2nd best player of all time. Just the way he impacted the game in an era full of better athletes, it's just remarkable. You can argue that Wilt or Russell was a better center/player, but let's face it, they were in a league full of Steve Blakes, Luke Waltons, and Brian Scalabrines. Shaq went up againsts centers like Dwight, Mourning, Ewing, Motumbo, Olajuwon, Robinson, Duncan, Smits, and Divac.

I'm not a Shaq fan, but I acknowledge his accomplishments.


For maybe a 3-5 season window I'd agree but in career totality and longevity no

BigCityofDreams
06-01-2011, 11:32 PM
That is why but it's not accurate. You cant devalue Russel without devaluing chamberlain

Understood but Wilt was such a freak.

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:37 PM
Understood but Wilt was such a freak.

Many argue he was a compiler. Just a guy who padded his stats in the regular season but really could careless about winning. Many say the real number he cared about was the one he compiled off the court.

He was a freak and those who saw him and Shaq both play have in many cases said the Wilt was actually the more physically imposing/dominant of the two players. An argument which would only help Russell in the face of critics that said he played against soft competition. If he outplayed someone many viewed as more physically impressive than shaq, than that's damn impressive for Russell

BigCityofDreams
06-01-2011, 11:41 PM
Many argue he was a compiler. Just a guy who padded his stats in the regular season but really could careless about winning. Many say the real number he cared about was the one he compiled off the court.

He was a freak and those who saw him and Shaq both play have in many cases said the Wilt was actually the more physically imposing/dominant of the two players. An argument which would only help Russell in the face of critics that said he played against soft competition. If he outplayed someone many viewed as more physically impressive than shaq, than that's damn impressive for Russell

Yea that is a check in the column for Russell...can't deny that

Crackadalic
06-01-2011, 11:41 PM
If the nba has to change certain rules because certain players were too dominate your top 10 IMO. Shaq is top 10

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:42 PM
I'm too passionate about my knowledge of NBA history and I just get plain heated when arguing some of these points....

So I'll leave by simply requesting that you all rightfully place Wilt, Russell, and Jordan in the top 5 of all time. After that enjoy your arguments because they are plenty fair and justified ones to be made. It's just an argument I've had too many times.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone and I do value and respect all your opinions

Meaze_Gibson
06-01-2011, 11:43 PM
Now I wasn't there BUT it seems like Russell was a tremendous defensive player. But dude never shot over 50% from field and was a horrible free throw shooter. Plus, out of those 11 chips, I dont think he ever got a finals mvp. A center shooting 44% for his career? Nah not top 10 to me. No wonder he got all them rebounds!

LakersMaster24
06-01-2011, 11:43 PM
no.
In no order id rather have Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, Bird, Robertson, Hakeem, Duncan, Dr J, Lebron, Russell before him

You forgot Pau...:rolleyes:

JasonJohnHorn
06-01-2011, 11:44 PM
Shaq was PHYSICALLY gifted. He could pass out of a double team, but he used his size and officials blind eye to score. He was never as good a shot blocker as Hakeem, or Robinson, or even Nate Thurmond for that matter. He didnt pass the ball as well as Wilt (who was clearly more dominant and I cant think of an arguement one could use with a straight face to argue that, dude lead the league in assists! from the center position!), and he ain't no Bill Russell.

If Shaq had the work ethic and conditioning of Jordan, or Kareem, or Karl Malone, this guy would still be posting 20/10 games TODAY! If he worked on his game the way Robinson and Hakeem did, the dude would have been scoring 40+ without trying. But he wasted his talents and rested on the physical gifts, none of which helped him until the truly great centers of the previous generation were all retired or past their prime (Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing to a lesser extent, and to some extent Mourning, who was of Shaq generation, but plagued by injury). In a center weak league he dominated.

Here is how I see:
I CANNOT put him over WILT, RUSSELL or KAREEM AT ALL!!!! And I cant see how anybody else could. I wouldnt put him over Hakeem or Robinson either, but those to guys are GROSSLY underapprciated, so i imagine most would put Shaq above them despite the fact that they were both better scorers, better rebounders, better shot blockers, better defenders, better passers, got more steals, and were better FT shooters. That is pretty much ever statistical catagory.

That is just centers. I CANNOT put him over Jordan. I cannot put him over Magic or Bird. I cannot put him over the Big O (the guy pretty much averaged a triple double for most of his career).

I could not with an honest heart put him over Duncan either. All the things that apply to Hakeem and Robinson in comparison to Shaq can be said of Duncan as well.

And while we are talking power forwards, there is no way I got Shaq over Karl Malone, Elgin Baylor or Bob Petit. Look at how long Malone was posting 20/10. not just for a season, but for almost TWENTY seasons. Malone was a better scorer, better rebounder and better passer, a better FT shooter and took care of himself so he could play twenty season and only once miss more than three games. And as amazing as Malone's numbers were, they never touched Petit and Baylor.

Kobe and James I'm up in the air about, but at shooting guard I have over Shaq is Jordan, West and Dr. J. The logo, the guy that redefined the SG position (Dr J) and the guy who perfected it (Jordan).

At PG, Magic obviously, and Stockton. There is nobody who dominated their position the way Stockton did. He did everything a PG is supposed to do, over .500 from the PG position year in and year out, CRAZY! FT% CRAZY! His assist to turnover ration is sick. And then just look at his numbers. He has the two most untouchable records in the league: Career assists and career steals. Only two other guys ever got 1000+ in a season before him, nobody has since, and he did it for nearly 8 or 9 seasons (though he came up short).

Jordan
West
Bryant
Magic
Stockton
Big O
James
Bird
Wilt
Russell
Kareem
Hakeem
Robinson
Baylor
Petit
Dr. J

I'm sorry, but anybody who puts Shaq above any of those guys for over-all career has no appreciated for skill, work ethic and team play. Top fifty. Absolutley. Top ten. Was never even in the conversation.

TheRunKiller
06-01-2011, 11:45 PM
Basic Stats:

23.7 PPG
10.9 RPG
2.5 APG
2.3 BPG
58.2 FG%

Achievements

15x All-star
4x NBA champion
3x Finals MVP
1x NBA Regular Season MVP
14x All-NBA
91-92 Rookie of the Year
3x All-NBA Defense
3x All-Star Game MVP
28596 Total Points scored (5th All-Time)
13099 Total Rebounds (12th All-Time)

I think this makes for a good argument.

:speechless: I'd say yes I'd take him over anyone in his prime besides Jordan...Most dominating big man the nba has ever seen.

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:46 PM
If the nba has to change certain rules because certain players were too dominate your top 10 IMO. Shaq is top 10

Again fair argument that couldnt be more true however my problem with Shaq is the longevity of those dominant peak years

BigCityofDreams
06-01-2011, 11:48 PM
Now I wasn't there BUT it seems like Russell was a tremendous defensive player. But dude never shot over 50% from field and was a horrible free throw shooter. Plus, out of those 11 chips, I dont think he ever got a finals mvp. A center shooting 44% for his career? Nah not top 10 to me. No wonder he got all them rebounds!

I think the Finals MVP didn't start until 1969.

SeoulBeatz
06-01-2011, 11:48 PM
Prime Shaq was the most dominant force the NBA has ever seen.

Sure Wilt put up bigger numbers, but cmon, look at the way they played back then. If Shaq played in Wilt's era he wouldve gotten 100 ppg. (alright, that's obviously a stretch, but Shaq was in a league of his own).

The man was a freak of nature.

Def a top 10 player of all time.

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:48 PM
:speechless: I'd say yes I'd take him over anyone in his prime besides Jordan...Most dominating big man the nba has ever seen.

Nobody questions his dominance in his peak years but the all time greats were the best for 5-10 year spans. Not the three years of dominance I'll give Shaq

Chi StateOfMind
06-01-2011, 11:51 PM
In one word: Yes

TheRunKiller
06-01-2011, 11:51 PM
Nobody questions his dominance in his peak years but the all time greats were the best for 5-10 year spans. Not the three years of dominance I'll give Shaq

what? he was dominant for only 3 seasons? hook me up with your dealer

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:53 PM
Think about the league outside of his three year title run in which I will not deny his status as best in the league over those 3 years.

Prior to the three peat it was the Jordan-olajuwan-stockton-Malone dominated league. After the three peat it was a league owned by the Duncan and Kobe and nash and lebron. He was wades sidekick when he won it all with the heat.

Nobody again is arguing his dominance over those three years with the laker title teams.

Meaze_Gibson
06-01-2011, 11:54 PM
I think the Finals MVP didn't start until 1969.

Good looking out. I didn't know that.

bedford1829
06-01-2011, 11:55 PM
what? he was dominant for only 3 seasons? hook me up with your dealer

Olajuwon was more dominant before hand and Duncan after ward. Fair statements. I'd give him a 3-5 year window at most where he was the clear cut best center in the league

BigCityofDreams
06-01-2011, 11:59 PM
Good looking out. I didn't know that.

Neither did I.

Learn something new everyday.

NYtilIdie
06-02-2011, 12:01 AM
You forgot Pau...:rolleyes:

Don't forget about Rudy Fernadez.....

But, yes Shaq is without a doubt a top 10 player.

bedford1829
06-02-2011, 12:03 AM
what? he was dominant for only 3 seasons? hook me up with your dealer

Again you dismiss someone's argument that is valid and degrade me as a drug user. I have stated my empsasis on longevity as a major component of how I measure players. Just because it's not big to you doesn't kea I'm wrong.

Ive already stated how difficult and subjective it is to name a top 10 all time and said I respect that many different arguments can be made none of which are necessarily wrong. I personally put Shaq in the top 15 all time but not top 10 but you'll nonchalantly attack my reasoning as being as dumb as someone on drugs.

I haven't attacked you like that and I have made any argument that is so unfair or outlandish that merits such a dismissal or attack. I've been a serious follower of the NBA for 20 years and have followed up much more than that studying it's history. If I said manure Bol was better thank Shaq you could attack me outside of that have respect for an opinion that I've substantially justified with my reasoning and respect that it is just that...my opinion

Korman12
06-02-2011, 12:04 AM
I know I won't be with the majority with his, but he's #11 on my ranking. Had he stayed in LA and the relationship with Kobe not deteriorated, he'd probably be there.

bedford1829
06-02-2011, 12:14 AM
Shaq never averaged over 30 points ppg for the regular season. Has 1 MVP. Career average of 23 ppg and 10 reb per game. Four titles.

Im saying those aren't clear cut top 10 of all time numbers.

Korman12
06-02-2011, 12:15 AM
Now I wasn't there BUT it seems like Russell was a tremendous defensive player. But dude never shot over 50% from field and was a horrible free throw shooter. Plus, out of those 11 chips, I dont think he ever got a finals mvp. A center shooting 44% for his career? Nah not top 10 to me. No wonder he got all them rebounds!

Wh-what?

Did you just downplay a guy getting 11 titles?

bedford1829
06-02-2011, 12:20 AM
To me it's a shame that a guy as physically imposing as he was, and as dominant as everyone is arguing him to be, that he didn't have bigger numbers.

His size an strength should have easily allowed him to average 30 plus ppg for a season and he only topped 28 ppg once. Or at least dominate the boards and he never averaged more than 13 boards a game for a season. Rodman was half shaq's size and much more dominant of a rebounder

Hellcrooner
06-02-2011, 12:20 AM
I never saw any " tonight at MSG Shaq vs the Ny Knicks" posters.

Nor did eh basically win every ring while he was playing.

Nor did he average a Triple Double.

Nor his body is the logo of a league.

Nor MANY rules were changed to try to stop him

Nor Made his team a champion right away

Nor Became the icon for a team forever.

Nor had Nike making a brand shoe with his name and figure , and brainwashing people.

Nor Was present on the REAL Dream team.

Nor wa selected as THE PLAYER to represnet the Basketball essence in a Movie.

Nor had to carry the league on his shoulders.

Nor improved a differnet part of its game every year.

and etc etc.

bedford1829
06-02-2011, 12:22 AM
Again shaq's in my top 15 but those of you saying he's the best center of all time or a top 3 player of all time just need to look at the stats.

I won't disrespect those of you who want to put him top 10 but going further than that is too much

RaidersLakers24
06-02-2011, 12:26 AM
MJ wouldve easily, those players you mentioned were better than what a rookie Shaq had and he did better than Kobe.

Besides your wrong, the Lakers had a decent record when Kobe missed 20 games it wasnt until Odom went down that the Lakers fell off the cliff, Kobe was healthy when the team went through their 2-20 stretch or whatever it was. Not that it mattered, the team had sported a poor efficiency differential despite one of the easiest schedules, if any team was going to slide it was them, and their disastrous finish proved it. Kobe was playing ****** without the triangle, overall it was a horrible year for Kobe and he finished on All-NBA 3rd team.

Whats up with you making Kobe seem greater than he is?

I'm not it's stupid posters like you who make me prove a point and please you act like Jordan is >>>>> so much better then Kobe I mean yes he's better but let's see him miss 20 games and still carry that scrub team to the playoffs(possibly worst team ever)

Jahari Kavi
06-02-2011, 12:34 AM
easily.

RaidersLakers24
06-02-2011, 12:36 AM
Shaq was PHYSICALLY gifted. He could pass out of a double team, but he used his size and officials blind eye to score. He was never as good a shot blocker as Hakeem, or Robinson, or even Nate Thurmond for that matter. He didnt pass the ball as well as Wilt (who was clearly more dominant and I cant think of an arguement one could use with a straight face to argue that, dude lead the league in assists! from the center position!), and he ain't no Bill Russell.

If Shaq had the work ethic and conditioning of Jordan, or Kareem, or Karl Malone, this guy would still be posting 20/10 games TODAY! If he worked on his game the way Robinson and Hakeem did, the dude would have been scoring 40+ without trying. But he wasted his talents and rested on the physical gifts, none of which helped him until the truly great centers of the previous generation were all retired or past their prime (Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing to a lesser extent, and to some extent Mourning, who was of Shaq generation, but plagued by injury). In a center weak league he dominated.

Here is how I see:
I CANNOT put him over WILT, RUSSELL or KAREEM AT ALL!!!! And I cant see how anybody else could. I wouldnt put him over Hakeem or Robinson either, but those to guys are GROSSLY underapprciated, so i imagine most would put Shaq above them despite the fact that they were both better scorers, better rebounders, better shot blockers, better defenders, better passers, got more steals, and were better FT shooters. That is pretty much ever statistical catagory.

That is just centers. I CANNOT put him over Jordan. I cannot put him over Magic or Bird. I cannot put him over the Big O (the guy pretty much averaged a triple double for most of his career).

I could not with an honest heart put him over Duncan either. All the things that apply to Hakeem and Robinson in comparison to Shaq can be said of Duncan as well.

And while we are talking power forwards, there is no way I got Shaq over Karl Malone, Elgin Baylor or Bob Petit. Look at how long Malone was posting 20/10. not just for a season, but for almost TWENTY seasons. Malone was a better scorer, better rebounder and better passer, a better FT shooter and took care of himself so he could play twenty season and only once miss more than three games. And as amazing as Malone's numbers were, they never touched Petit and Baylor.

Kobe and James I'm up in the air about, but at shooting guard I have over Shaq is Jordan, West and Dr. J. The logo, the guy that redefined the SG position (Dr J) and the guy who perfected it (Jordan).

At PG, Magic obviously, and Stockton. There is nobody who dominated their position the way Stockton did. He did everything a PG is supposed to do, over .500 from the PG position year in and year out, CRAZY! FT% CRAZY! His assist to turnover ration is sick. And then just look at his numbers. He has the two most untouchable records in the league: Career assists and career steals. Only two other guys ever got 1000+ in a season before him, nobody has since, and he did it for nearly 8 or 9 seasons (though he came up short).

Jordan
West
Bryant
Magic
Stockton
Big O
James
Bird
Wilt
Russell
Kareem
Hakeem
Robinson
Baylor
Petit
Dr. J

I'm sorry, but anybody who puts Shaq above any of those guys for over-all career has no appreciated for skill, work ethic and team play. Top fifty. Absolutley. Top ten. Was never even in the conversation.

Stockton
Robertson
Baylor
Pettit
Dr.j
And Lebron ahead of shaq?

WTF are you smoking??
Shaq is easily top 10 maybe top 6-7 damn people forget how great he is!!

MJ
Magic
Kareem
Kobe
Shaq(he's in my top 5)
Bird
Duncan
Russel
Wilt
Hakeem
Big O #11

blams
06-02-2011, 01:08 AM
**** yes

Chronz
06-02-2011, 01:15 AM
When you bring that up to other ppl how do they react? I'm guessing not good since Russ is held in high regard.
Theres a chain of command you grow up learning about as an NBA fan, Russ is seen as deity in ways that only the ignorant dare ignore, scoffing at his greatness isnt taken lightly. But heres the thing, the way you can tell they actually know very little about the player is when they start listing their mythical per game averages, look for flashy references to triple doubles, leading the league in assists and/or scoring, and how he averaged 20 rebounds. Personally more and more are coming to the realization that its all just folklore.

You cant begin the discussion about these players from such an infantile stance because from the onset of the conversation they are given an unfair advantage. There may be various variables to consider in any players stat line but by and large the most glaring problem is also the easiest to account for. If your going to talk stats, you must account for pace/efficiency. If your going to talk about Team accomplishments you must contextualize the road traveled, talent and matchups matter along the way.


Yeah, Shaq possibly could, but that roster was horrendous. I don't think they would have gotten past the 1st round. Might have more wins but same result. Loss in 1st round.
Well look that depends on matchups and seeding, sometimes 1st round knockouts are better teams than teams that make the 2nd round, still I think this team with Shaq can be 2nd round material.

Didnt think I needed to remind you that Ray Allen and the Seattle Supersonics made it to Round 2 with Rashard Lewis and a plethora of offensive rebounders as the main support. Still they only won the 3rd seed with 52 Wins because of a fluke rule where the division was awarded a top3 seed. In actuality the 3rd seed should have been Dallas(57-Wins).

That changed history because instead of Houston taking on the much easier Sonics, they had to face the battle tested Mavs. And instead of the Kings vs Sonics crapshoot, both teams would have been eliminated. So where the Lakers are eliminated in this hypothetical world revolves around what they would have done to manipulate the seedings.


And for the guy who put WEST?FRAZIER?&BIG O? ahead of Kobe what are you smoking?
Crack


Kobe belongs in the top 10.
Yup





Sure off the top of my head, the Big 0 averaged a triple double for two full seasons possibly 3. His career totals were like an average of 28-10-8. I know he's got an Mvp and a championship which are two great bench marks.
The problem with going by off the top of your head responses is that you lose sight of CONTEXT. Firstly citing stats without accounting for pace/efficiency starts you off at a disadvantage. He was a fine player when he won a championship but he was hardly at the top of his game in doing so. As great as he was, its not as emphatic of a career statement as winning 3 straight while terrorizing the league.



I know that my argument for them in the top 10 is valid and as far as longevity goes greater than that of ONeal.

Usually this is something that can be argued, if your the type who would rather have 12 years of so and so more than 8 years of so and so, how exactly am I to disprove that stance? But in the case of Shaq, his longevity is greatly underrated. What many people cite is how he fell off early but nobody mentions how he entered young. Now I say usually because people will compare Shaq to Kareem and everyone falls short, but compared to these 2 I cant see your argument.

Consider the following FACTS:

Shaq entered the league as a star at age 20, he would have stayed in College as was customary at the time but he grew tired of the criticism and the constant swarming defenses (Which ultimately helped his growth as a player), he struggled out the game in the NBA game but he played in a role very much superior to West his first year.

He became a fixture in the playoffs for the next 15 years, he was a 15 time All-Star. While these figures do not in any way dwarf West, they do supercede him from that starting point. If you wish to add context to these claims Id LOVE to hear you out, but ultimately the fact that Shaq was more DOMINANT at his PEAK, tells me if you dont completely own the longevity department (which neither do) you aint touching Shaq without something else in your favor.


Could you argue others ahead of them? probably but it would be tough and I think most subjective lists would agree with me however if you looked at my other posts I have stated to argue for a top 10 is very difficult and would lead to endless arguments for players who all in their own right could lay claim to the distinction.

It's extremely tough and probably the best approach would probably be to avoid cross generation comparisons because of the change in styles of the game itself.

And I certainly respect your questioning of my statements but I find it hard to believe that as a basketball fan you've never heard Oscar Robertson and Jerry West in the discussion of top 10 of all time. The fact that they were recognized in the top 50 of all time by the NBA itself would have to put them In that category of player. As a fan I could probably make at least one argument why any player in the NBA's identified top 50 could crack the top 10
Sorry I just cant fathom a world where anyone would be convinced Pippen would be considered a serious threat to MJ. Whatever argument you could muster would fall short at the counter evidence or total accomplishments. And thats what matters most.

Bruno
06-02-2011, 01:15 AM
Glad to see 90% of the poll swaying in favor of yes.

Chronz
06-02-2011, 01:19 AM
I'm not it's stupid posters like you who make me prove a point and please you act like Jordan is >>>>> so much better then Kobe I mean yes he's better but let's see him miss 20 games and still carry that scrub team to the playoffs(possibly worst team ever)

The way I define stupid is being so ignorant as to ignore the fact that its a statement that would be held by plenty of Lakers fans, one of them in this very thread admitting they are a possible playoff team. Shaq was THAT good, and personally if Shaq was that good then the GOAT would be comparable.

LOL at the possibly worst team ever notion, not even close.

Meaze_Gibson
06-02-2011, 01:27 AM
Wh-what?

Did you just downplay a guy getting 11 titles?

Aye, I respect Bill Russell. One of the greatest to play the game. He didn't dominate both ends. To be top 10, in my opinion, you have to have carried, or at least look like you could carry a team on your back, playing both ends of the court.

Chronz
06-02-2011, 01:36 AM
Shaq was PHYSICALLY gifted. He could pass out of a double team, but he used his size and officials blind eye to score.
Any talk of Shaq and the way he was reffed has to begin by acknowledging the fact that defenses were given more leeway with roughing him up. Shaq was the most beaten upon player of all time, that had alot to with how refs let players use more of their leverage against him.


He was never as good a shot blocker as Hakeem, or Robinson, or even Nate Thurmond for that matter.
They were better defenders for the most part but only Hakeem can match him in terms of overall dominance.


He didnt pass the ball as well as Wilt (who was clearly more dominant and I cant think of an arguement one could use with a straight face to argue that, dude lead the league in assists! from the center position!), and he ain't no Bill Russell.
Honestly this just tells me youve been spoonfed the same glorious chicken scratch as the rest of the hens. Its almost as if you hadnt realized Wilts obsession with statistics and disproving critics got bad enough that he began to freeze out certain players and discourage them from dribbling after receiving the outlet look from him. Granted this didnt last long, but its a footnote that must accompany any talk of this feet. If your going to argue Wilt against Shaq I doubt you will find any Shaq supporter that takes offense to that. So yes hes a valid choice


Here is how I see:
I CANNOT put him over WILT, RUSSELL or KAREEM AT ALL!!!! And I cant see how anybody else could. I wouldnt put him over Hakeem or Robinson either, but those to guys are GROSSLY underapprciated, so i imagine most would put Shaq above them despite the fact that they were both better scorers, better rebounders, better shot blockers, better defenders, better passers, got more steals, and were better FT shooters. That is pretty much ever statistical catagory.

Your statistical comparison is lacking in the context department. Playoff performance matters, D-Rob was a physical specimen but no matter what you want to hold against Shaq, the fact remains he had a longer prime than D-Rob the rest I wont get into right now but I do remember D-Rob physically deteriorating right before our eyes the last few years. D-Rob was a fantasy regular season performer, arguably moreso than Shaq. But come playoff time, his face up game was easier to contain. He didnt make his teammates better to the same degree that Shaq did. Russell doesnt belong in this conversation, Kareem has his flaws, Hakeem is misunderstood historically. Overall if your going to try to summarize their statistical achievements youve got a long way to go. And youve got some discrepancies to atone for.


That is just centers. I CANNOT put him over Jordan. I cannot put him over Magic or Bird. I cannot put him over the Big O (the guy pretty much averaged a triple double for most of his career).

BUZZ WORDS ALERT


I could not with an honest heart put him over Duncan either. All the things that apply to Hakeem and Robinson in comparison to Shaq can be said of Duncan as well.

And while we are talking power forwards, there is no way I got Shaq over Karl Malone, Elgin Baylor or Bob Petit. Look at how long Malone was posting 20/10. not just for a season, but for almost TWENTY seasons. Malone was a better scorer, better rebounder and better passer, a better FT shooter and took care of himself so he could play twenty season and only once miss more than three games. And as amazing as Malone's numbers were, they never touched Petit and Baylor.

Wrong on so many counts, I would love for once that you showed proof to your quantifiable claims. Ive never taken you for a statistical expert so excuse me if you think Im stepping out of line.



I'm sorry, but anybody who puts Shaq above any of those guys for over-all career has no appreciated for skill, work ethic and team play. Top fifty. Absolutley. Top ten. Was never even in the conversation.

Im sorry but anyone who tries to leave Shaq out because of skill is only doing so because its blatantly obvious they want you to ignore just how dominant he was. Why the **** would I care about skill when its not what wins games? IMPACT does. Kobe Bryant was always more skilled than Shaq, but youd be a fool to claim hes ALWAYS been superior. Outright ignorant, so much so that it pretty much tells you how insignificant skills are in the face of overall IMPACT.

Korman12
06-02-2011, 01:45 AM
Aye, I respect Bill Russell. One of the greatest to play the game. He didn't dominate both ends. To be top 10, in my opinion, you have to have carried, or at least look like you could carry a team on your back, playing both ends of the court.

I understand seeing that he doesn't have the offensive merit that any of the other players in the hypothetical top ten do, but to an emphatic degree you cannot displace Russell's impact of whenever he was on floor.

The Auerbach offense was essential on Russell's defense and the situations his talents on that end created. No one, in any era, had an impact on the defensive side of the ball like he did. And while he wasn't hitting 50% of his shots, he was never shooting more than 16 per game - ever.

Looking at it from a flat angle - being good at both ends of the floor - misses too much of the point. This was player who knew the boundaries of his abilities and utilized them unlike anyone else. The only player I can compare him to is Duncan, with his insane ability to curate the SA defense into a complete offense.

Also, winning two of those 11 titles while he's coaching the team means something. I just like saying that.

DeyAce
06-02-2011, 01:47 AM
Hell Yes

tredigs
06-02-2011, 02:00 AM
Any talk of Shaq and the way he was reffed has to begin by acknowledging the fact that defenses were given more leeway with roughing him up. Shaq was the most beaten upon player of all time, that had alot to with how refs let players use more of their leverage against him.


They were better defenders for the most part but only Hakeem can match him in terms of overall dominance.


Honestly this just tells me youve been spoonfed the same glorious chicken scratch as the rest of the hens. Its almost as if you hadnt realized Wilts obsession with statistics and disproving critics got bad enough that he began to freeze out certain players and discourage them from dribbling after receiving the outlet look from him. Granted this didnt last long, but its a footnote that must accompany any talk of this feet. If your going to argue Wilt against Shaq I doubt you will find any Shaq supporter that takes offense to that. So yes hes a valid choice


Your statistical comparison is lacking in the context department. Playoff performance matters, D-Rob was a physical specimen but no matter what you want to hold against Shaq, the fact remains he had a longer prime than D-Rob the rest I wont get into right now but I do remember D-Rob physically deteriorating right before our eyes the last few years. D-Rob was a fantasy regular season performer, arguably moreso than Shaq. But come playoff time, his face up game was easier to contain. He didnt make his teammates better to the same degree that Shaq did. Russell doesnt belong in this conversation, Kareem has his flaws, Hakeem is misunderstood historically. Overall if your going to try to summarize their statistical achievements youve got a long way to go. And youve got some discrepancies to atone for.


BUZZ WORDS ALERT


Wrong on so many counts, I would love for once that you showed proof to your quantifiable claims. Ive never taken you for a statistical expert so excuse me if you think Im stepping out of line.


Im sorry but anyone who tries to leave Shaq out because of skill is only doing so because its blatantly obvious they want you to ignore just how dominant he was. Why the **** would I care about skill when its not what wins games? IMPACT does. Kobe Bryant was always more skilled than Shaq, but youd be a fool to claim hes ALWAYS been superior. Outright ignorant, so much so that it pretty much tells you how insignificant skills are in the face of overall IMPACT.

Precisely. Mass X Acceleration = Force, right?

NBA: Physical Ability X Skill = Impact. Impact X Health + Determination = Dominance. PSD Threads + Logic = Futile.

Truly though, it really is tough to quantify the top ten in the league with any certainty. You can adjust for pace and take context into account as seemingly best as possible, but rule changes, unfair advantages of modern players concerning training/nutrition (supplements) in relation to those of the 50's (i.e., human athleticism is not what's improved over the last 60 years to improve the 100 meter dash time, it's nutrition/supplements and training techniques), etc create too many variables to be certain in creating a crisp top 10-15.

But, that's what makes arguments like these fun, if not ultimately futile except for the top of the top; Jordan, Wilt and Magic are top ten players regardless of what your criteria may be. I consider Shaq as part of that list, but I understand some arguments having him as low as ~12.

PHX2daDEATH
06-02-2011, 08:20 AM
a better question would be how does he rank among the Centers? Still think Jabbar was better and Wilt well I don't know...and Yes Hakeem is ahead of Shaq so..the 4th best center in league history on the top ten? Id say he's more top 15 or 12 ..

BRADfromOZ
06-02-2011, 08:38 AM
No, but only because he couldn't shoot FT's to save himself.

ldawg
06-02-2011, 08:56 AM
everyone can't be in top ten. He was a dominant force that lacked shooting skills so it hard to say if his brutal style was better than the way more skilled big men of the past if they called offensive fouls. After all he was schooled by an older Hakeem and Penny, Kobe and Wade had to close games. from a skill stand point i say no but most dominant ever no question. Of all the pass big men he was the least skilled so i have a few other centers over him but because the game was dominated with great big men i have to go with yes. It was not until jordan small men could climb over big men.

BigCityofDreams
06-02-2011, 08:58 AM
@ Chronz thank you for sharing you opinion on Russell. It was interesting reading how someone else views him because a majority of the time you don't get that type of feedback on the Celtic great. I never questioned Russell because like you said "theres a chain of command you grow up learning about as an NBA fan" It wasn't until a couple of yrs ago until I sat back and looked at his career without being bias. Now before someone flips out I still consider him a top ten player and a top 5 center but I no longer just out him there without putting it in context.'

"If your going to talk stats, you must account for pace/efficiency."

Can you expand on that?

ChicagooooBulls
06-02-2011, 09:52 AM
without a doubt. one of the most dominant big guys that ever played...not to mention all of the championships and finals mVPs

Mile High Champ
06-02-2011, 10:16 AM
How anyone can argue against Shaq not being a top 10 player all time is beyond me. Shaq in my mind is the second most dominant player all time behind only Wilt. Nobody was able to stop Shaq in his prime and that 99-00 season was one of the best seasons I have ever seen from a player in the modern basketball era. I would even go as far as to argue his position in the top 5 though he maybe on the outside looking in behind guys like Jordan, Wilt, Magic, Bird, & Kareem. I have nothing but respect for Shaq and what he accomplished in his career and I can be proud to say that I saw one of the most dominant players ever to play the game.

Mile High Champ
06-02-2011, 10:18 AM
The scary thing to me is that Shaq could of bene so much better had he not let some weight issues get in his way.

bagwell368
06-02-2011, 10:45 AM
i was watching a show, and one of the guys mentioned that he's not ahead of MJ, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Hakeem, Kobe, West, Duncan, Russell, Kareem, or Oscar so he's not top 10.

Hunh? So a guy on a show says something, and that's - what? The word of truth? What do you think?

Shaq is a tough guy to rate.

The bad: couldn't shoot FT's well, didn't dominate enough on the boards, the period he was a great defender was short, the time he wasn't was much longer. He wasn't any good in an up tempo game. Seemed to rely on what he could do offensively, and didn't seem to improve over time.

The good: brutally difficult to cover w/o fouling on the low post - I.E. dominant. A huge lightening rod, his teammates were often able to cruise under the media spotlight due to Shaq. Was a rugged and healthy player. He had limits but within them he was consistent.

I think Hakeem and Jabbar career wise that can be argued ahead of Shaq - but they both had flaws too. Whomever said Russell is just wrong. Before you start the serenade on the titles tell me how many teams he had to beat in a given year? Yeah, 7 and 8 cover most of the 13. Wilt maybe, but I have to know who he is going to play for and what is expected of him.

And oh yeah other guys said West and Dr. J? No way either of those guys can touch Shaq.

I say borderline. Clearly top 15. Clearly not top 5. Is he #9 or #11?

Mile High Champ
06-02-2011, 10:51 AM
Hunh? So a guy on a show says something, and that's - what? The word of truth? What do you think?

Shaq is a tough guy to rate.

The bad: couldn't shoot FT's well, didn't dominate enough on the boards, the period he was a great defender was short, the time he wasn't was much longer. He wasn't any good in an up tempo game. Seemed to rely on what he could do offensively, and didn't seem to improve over time.

The good: brutally difficult to cover w/o fouling on the low post - I.E. dominant. A huge lightening rod, his teammates were often able to cruise under the media spotlight due to Shaq. Was a rugged and healthy player. He had limits but within them he was consistent.

I think Hakeem and Jabbar career wise that can be argued ahead of Shaq - but they both had flaws too. Whomever said Russell is just wrong. Before you start the serenade on the titles tell me how many teams he had to beat in a given year? Yeah, 7 and 8 cover most of the 13. Wilt maybe, but I have to know who he is going to play for and what is expected of him.

And oh yeah other guys said West and Dr. J? No way either of those guys can touch Shaq.

I say borderline. Clearly top 15. Clearly not top 5. Is he #9 or #11?

He was joking around... :p

bagwell368
06-02-2011, 10:57 AM
Theres a chain of command you grow up learning about as an NBA fan, Russ is seen as deity in ways that only the ignorant dare ignore, scoffing at his greatness isnt taken lightly. But heres the thing, the way you can tell they actually know very little about the player is when they start listing their mythical per game averages, look for flashy references to triple doubles, leading the league in assists and/or scoring, and how he averaged 20 rebounds. Personally more and more are coming to the realization that its all just folklore.

So true. In Boston where I grew up it was Ted, Orr, Bill, and the Cahdinal Cushing...

I believed it, believe me. I loved defense and the greatest dynasty of all time...... I think it was literally Hakeem in '86 that hooked my attention. I had seen Bill's last 3 years, and I knew right away that Hakeem would have mopped the floor with Bill. Maybe only a healthy Walton was in the same league - not Wilt, not Kareem (see Malone's continued punking of Jabbar). But how? why? Well I'll leave out all the arguments and crap I've had to deal w/ over it, but a a few months ago there was another titanic 500 post Bill as Goat thread here - with the faithful Boston fan misreading stats and mixing it with all this semi-religious green fervor.

Wake up folks. Russell was a great player pre 1960, but by 1965 when every team had an effective 7 footer, he was a poor offensive player, and a god becoming mortal on defense, with the best Coach/GM combo the league has ever seen, and enough of the dynasty team to squeeze out a few more - against 7 and 8 other teams most years...

AIMelo=KillaDUO
06-02-2011, 11:15 AM
no.
In no order id rather have Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, Bird, Robertson, Hakeem, Duncan, Dr J, Lebron, Russell before him

I see you're smoking that stuff again Crooner lol

hype707
06-02-2011, 11:17 AM
Shaq is one of a kind and yea with out a question top 10

RaiderLakersA's
06-02-2011, 11:17 AM
If the nba has to change certain rules because certain players were too dominate your top 10 IMO. Shaq is top 10

Well, yes and no. It all hinges on whether or not the rules were changed to enable said dominant player or to hinder him. The difference? When the NBA changed rules for Shaq, it enabled him. However when professional golf started redesigning golf courses under the transparent veil of making them more challenging for all, we all know they did it to hinder Tiger Woods. So called "Tiger Proof" golf courses became the latest rage. In my opinion, Tiger's example makes your assertion valid, but Shaq...not so much. And I say that fully appreciative of Shaq's irrefutable mantle as the most dominant center of our era by far.

The NBA's changes actually were designed to enable Shaq. Dislodging defenders who are clearly set in their stance was an offensive foul before Shaq came along. In fact, in today's game it's once again being called an offensive foul. You can't say he changed the rules when they change it back the minute that said player loses relevance.

The Hack-a-Shaq away from the ball foul also enabled Shaq, because we all know that Shaq was Brick City from the charity stripe. Teams used it effectively to get back into games, especially late in the game, until the NBA changed how they officiated those fouls. Given that the Hack-a-Shaq ploy actually imposes a monetary demand on NBA games by increasing a game's duration (as with the NFL, the longer a game is played, the more it cuts into overall profits) and given how few players, even some superstars, have the fundamentals to shoot well from the free throw line, this rule will probably remain in place for a bit longer. But we'll see.

ink
06-02-2011, 11:20 AM
no.
In no order id rather have Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, Bird, Robertson, Hakeem, Duncan, Dr J, Lebron, Russell before him

Totally agree with most of your list ...

jrm2054
06-02-2011, 11:31 AM
yes he is top 10. Most dominate player of the mid 90's to mid 2000's. He is a legend in this game.

ink
06-02-2011, 11:34 AM
yes he is top 10. Most dominate player of the mid 90's to mid 2000's. He is a legend in this game.

He was an unrivaled side of beef for a decade. Watching him dominate because of sheer size and mass made for some of the most boring finals I have ever watched.

JasonJohnHorn
06-02-2011, 12:15 PM
Any talk of Shaq and the way he was reffed has to begin by acknowledging the fact that defenses were given more leeway with roughing him up. Shaq was the most beaten upon player of all time, that had alot to with how refs let players use more of their leverage against him.

The onyl reason LA beat Philly is because the officials let Shaq throw his arm over Mutumbo's shoulder and looked the other way when he committed over-the-back fouls, check the game shape. Officials KILLED the guys who fouled shaq. Check the game tape, and try not to simply repeat that stuff Phil Jackson spewed out in post game interviews to try and sway the officiating.



They were better defenders for the most part but only Hakeem can match him in terms of overall dominance.

So they are more skilled and Shaq is just bigger? So he is a better player?



Honestly this just tells me youve been spoonfed the same glorious chicken scratch as the rest of the hens.

Personal attacks dont help an arguement, simply illustrate how few point you have.




Wrong on so many counts, I would love for once that you showed proof to your quantifiable claims. Ive never taken you for a statistical expert so excuse me if you think Im stepping out of line.

Again, personal attack, not a point. Again, illustrates that you have no vaild point and just aim to insult the poster, rather than tackle the issues, which is something you do often.



Im sorry but anyone who tries to leave Shaq out because of skill is only doing so because its blatantly obvious they want you to ignore just how dominant he was. Why the **** would I care about skill when its not what wins games? IMPACT does. Kobe Bryant was always more skilled than Shaq, but youd be a fool to claim hes ALWAYS been superior. Outright ignorant, so much so that it pretty much tells you how insignificant skills are in the face of overall IMPACT.

you think a guy is good because he happens to be big? That's fine, your opinion. But in my book, being big doesnt make one a good player, it makes them a big player, and illustrates how little respect you have for skill, work ethic, drive, team play and endurance. Those things, to me, are what makes a player a good PLAYER. A big @$$ and blind officials, they dont make a good player.

And as for dominance, there is more than one way to dominate. Stockton dominated his position the way no other player other than Wilt ever did. His FG% was disgustingly high, his assist to turnover ration set the gold standard, he did something only two players ever did one, and then went on to do it for several years (1000+ assists a season). Magic the Big O also dominated their positions the way no other player has, EVER. You want to down play the triple double, do ahead, you are just burying your head in the sand. That is a strong indication of a skilled, complete player, something Shaq was not.

Jordan
Dr. J
West
Kobe
Magic
Stockton
James
Bird
Duncan
Baylor
K. Malone
Petite
Robinson
Hakeem
Kareem
Russell and
Wilt

You cannot look me straight in the face and tell me Shaq has more skill, work ethic, team mentality, endurance or drive than any of these players. And that to me is what makes a good PLAYER. Is shaq one of the ten most dominante? Sure, but he was only dominante when the league saw all of its dominate centers in the twilight of their careers, or on the shelf for unjury, so I am not impresed by that. You can be if you want, and you can ignore the things that make a player good, and just put Shaq int he top ten because he had a fat @$$, that's your perogative, but for me, he is not even in the conversation. I was NBA classics, and I've been watching ball for close to 30 years, so dont claim that I'm 'spoonfed'. It jsut insulting. You think dominance makes a guy a good player, then you probably think Billy Madinson was a top ten dodge ball player because as an adult he dominated 8 years olds, that's fine. Not a mentality I endorse.


Robinson and Hakeem and Duncan didnt need all-stars to sign on every yaer to keep winning the way LA did. Shaq always had emense talent surrounding him.
But as for insulting posters and thinking that makes an arguement, nope. It doesnt, it just shows how completely ignorant you are.

Cheers!

P.S. Now, I will not quarrel with you further, for in false quarrel there is not true valour, and you are falser than vows made in wine.

ManRam
06-02-2011, 12:28 PM
Jason, you can't overlook his physical stature. Sure, he lacked the skill a ton of guys have. JJ Redick is easily one of the most skilled basketball players in the league, but his physical ability holds him back. Is he a better player than Shaq because he's more skilled? You can't completely write off how big and hulking he was. Skill isn't 100% of the equation in the formula that determines a player's greatness. Dwight isn't very skilled at all, but his physical ability makes him easily a top 5 player in the league. Do you rate him lower because he isn't as skilled as a JJ Redick?

Michael Jordan wouldn't be Michael Jordan if he didn't have Michael Jordan's body. If Michael Jordan was stuck in JJ Redick's body, he'd hardly be better than JJ Redick. Do you think Bill Russell was only good because of his freakish height at the time (there were few people even close to his height in his time)? I doubt it. Same with Wilt. Their size is what made them great to a huge extent, and that isn't a fault or something to discredit them. Shaq's size and girth are a huge part of his success, but again, you can't discredit him for that. His success and his legacy should be based on what he did and accomplished, period.

Shaq is a top 10 player in my book. In his prime, he was easily the best player in the league. Discredit him by pointing out that the bigs he went against were in the "twilight of their career"...but again, that doesn't make him any less of a player. That's not something he can control. Can't fault him for dominating the best the league had to offer.

JasonJohnHorn
06-02-2011, 12:54 PM
Jason, you can't overlook his physical stature. Sure, he lacked the skill a ton of guys have. JJ Redick is easily one of the most skilled basketball players in the league, but his physical ability holds him back. Is he a better player than Shaq because he's more skilled? You can't completely write off how big and hulking he was. Skill isn't 100% of the equation in the formula that determines a player's greatness. Dwight isn't very skilled at all, but his physical ability makes him easily a top 5 player in the league. Do you rate him lower because he isn't as skilled as a JJ Redick?

Michael Jordan wouldn't be Michael Jordan if he didn't have Michael Jordan's body. If Michael Jordan was stuck in JJ Redick's body, he'd hardly be better than JJ Redick. Do you think Bill Russell was only good because of his freakish height at the time (there were few people even close to his height in his time)? I doubt it. Same with Wilt. Their size is what made them great to a huge extent, and that isn't a fault or something to discredit them. Shaq's size and girth are a huge part of his success, but again, you can't discredit him for that. His success and his legacy should be based on what he did and accomplished, period.

Shaq is a top 10 player in my book. In his prime, he was easily the best player in the league. Discredit him by pointing out that the bigs he went against were in the "twilight of their career"...but again, that doesn't make him any less of a player. That's not something he can control. Can't fault him for dominating the best the league had to offer.

This is a fair assessment. It is not that I overlook his physical gifts, its that I dont count them as high as others.

Jordan wouldnt have been jordan without his body, but Jordan's body wouldnt have been Jordan's body without his work ethic and drive.

That is the reason Kareem, and Malone, and Mutumbo and Stockton and Jason Kidd have all had long career, because of their work ethic on conditioning.

jordan could have been a guy that could drive to the hoop and dunk based on speed, but his skill is what allowed him to win in 98 when his speed was much slower, and remain an all-star at 40 despite the fact he was playing against the likes of prime McGrady, Carter and Kobe.

Shaq is a top ten center, and a top 50 player all time, top twenty even. But I cant put him in the top ten myself simply because he had physical gifts, and that he won only in an era that lacked depth at center, and I watch so many of his games and saw him get away with so many calls, I just can then offer him full credit for his offensive accomplishments.

I think shaq was a great guy, and entertaining, family friendly player, always interesting to hear talk, and I hope he comes back next year. But i think the treatment he got from officials hurt the league, and I think compared to others, top ten players, he simply lacked the skill to be in the same conversation as the likes of Magic, Bird, Jordan and Hakeem.

PrettyBoyJ
06-02-2011, 01:04 PM
Top 10 def. He was the most dominant force in the league for awhile.. and played against great centers early in his career

Sadds The Gr8
06-02-2011, 01:05 PM
Hunh? So a guy on a show says something, and that's - what? The word of truth? What do you think?

Shaq is a tough guy to rate.

The bad: couldn't shoot FT's well, didn't dominate enough on the boards, the period he was a great defender was short, the time he wasn't was much longer. He wasn't any good in an up tempo game. Seemed to rely on what he could do offensively, and didn't seem to improve over time.

The good: brutally difficult to cover w/o fouling on the low post - I.E. dominant. A huge lightening rod, his teammates were often able to cruise under the media spotlight due to Shaq. Was a rugged and healthy player. He had limits but within them he was consistent.

I think Hakeem and Jabbar career wise that can be argued ahead of Shaq - but they both had flaws too. Whomever said Russell is just wrong. Before you start the serenade on the titles tell me how many teams he had to beat in a given year? Yeah, 7 and 8 cover most of the 13. Wilt maybe, but I have to know who he is going to play for and what is expected of him.

And oh yeah other guys said West and Dr. J? No way either of those guys can touch Shaq.

I say borderline. Clearly top 15. Clearly not top 5. Is he #9 or #11?

i already said before that i wasn't saying that the guy was right. The point of the post was to mention that those are the guys that Shaq would be in the discussion with for top 10.

Sadds The Gr8
06-02-2011, 01:09 PM
I think the "good because he's big argument" is complete crap. There have been several 7 footers that have been busts and **** the bed when it came to playing in the NBA. People claiming he only had his size are people who only watched him from 2000-2011. In Orlando he was a slim, athletic freak, and still put up the dominating #s that he did when he bulked up.

The "good because he's big" point can be used for pretty much every big player, in any sport.

ManRam
06-02-2011, 01:33 PM
Jordan wouldnt have been jordan without his body, but Jordan's body wouldnt have been Jordan's body without his work ethic and drive.

That is the reason Kareem, and Malone, and Mutumbo and Stockton and Jason Kidd have all had long career, because of their work ethic on conditioning.

jordan could have been a guy that could drive to the hoop and dunk based on speed, but his skill is what allowed him to win in 98 when his speed was much slower, and remain an all-star at 40 despite the fact he was playing against the likes of prime McGrady, Carter and Kobe.

Shaq is a top ten center, and a top 50 player all time, top twenty even. But I cant put him in the top ten myself simply because he had physical gifts, and that he won only in an era that lacked depth at center, and I watch so many of his games and saw him get away with so many calls, I just can then offer him full credit for his offensive accomplishments.

I think shaq was a great guy, and entertaining, family friendly player, always interesting to hear talk, and I hope he comes back next year. But i think the treatment he got from officials hurt the league, and I think compared to others, top ten players, he simply lacked the skill to be in the same conversation as the likes of Magic, Bird, Jordan and Hakeem.

There's nothing Jordan could do to be 6-6 if he was only 5-6. There's nothing any of us can do to be 7 foot, 300 pounds and move as well as Shaq did. It's not all work-ethic and drive. Again, back to JJ Redick...he works harder than any player on the Magic, but he'll never have a body like Brandon Bass or Jason Richardson.

Physical ability is what makes NBA players. Athleticism, height, size, strength speed, etc. and all that are a huge part of what makes an NBA player great. A lot of those things can be altered, but to an extent. Our genetics determine a lot. Shaq was blessed with a perfect NBA body. Dwight was blessed in a different way. Jordan was blessed...they all were.

I have a huge problem discrediting any player because of their athleticism or frame, especially when you consider that's probably the main reason they're in the league. It isn't something I take into account really, in a negative way, when comparing players.

I really just think it's laughable to discredit a guy because of his physical gifts. That's hilarious to me. Is Dwight Howard a terrible basketball player because he has marginal skill, but amazing athleticism? No. Athleticism is as imperative as skill is in sports...often far more important. How you are born, your DNA, is more important 99% of the time than how much time you spend in the gym. If Reggie Miller or Ray Allen were 5-4 and stocky, it wouldn't matter what their work ethic was; they wouldn't ever sniff the NBA. They could still be equally skilled as they were, but never even make a top D1 school, let alone the NBA.


Assuming you are saying that the "treatment from the refs" he got helped him, well, I also couldn't disagree less. He was the hardest player to officiate ever. He got hacked, bullied and beaten more than any big I've ever seen, and since he's 300 pounds it often went overlooked. Dwight suffers the same thing (it frustrates him to the point where it's detrimental). You can hit Shaq 50 times as hard as you could hit KD and it would look the same. He didn't get any favorable treatment, at least not to the point it made him better.

Mile High Champ
06-02-2011, 01:47 PM
This is a fair assessment. It is not that I overlook his physical gifts, its that I dont count them as high as others.

Jordan wouldnt have been jordan without his body, but Jordan's body wouldnt have been Jordan's body without his work ethic and drive.

That is the reason Kareem, and Malone, and Mutumbo and Stockton and Jason Kidd have all had long career, because of their work ethic on conditioning.

jordan could have been a guy that could drive to the hoop and dunk based on speed, but his skill is what allowed him to win in 98 when his speed was much slower, and remain an all-star at 40 despite the fact he was playing against the likes of prime McGrady, Carter and Kobe.

Shaq is a top ten center, and a top 50 player all time, top twenty even. But I cant put him in the top ten myself simply because he had physical gifts, and that he won only in an era that lacked depth at center, and I watch so many of his games and saw him get away with so many calls, I just can then offer him full credit for his offensive accomplishments.

I think shaq was a great guy, and entertaining, family friendly player, always interesting to hear talk, and I hope he comes back next year. But i think the treatment he got from officials hurt the league, and I think compared to others, top ten players, he simply lacked the skill to be in the same conversation as the likes of Magic, Bird, Jordan and Hakeem.

How can you not include or look at a players physical stature and size when examining how good a player was? I just don't understand it. The conversation is about if Shaq was a top 10 player all time, not a top 10 skilled player ever. Shaq was dominant because of his size but also because of his skill. Sure he used his size to his aadvantge but how many other big guys fail to use that advantage playing in this league? I can think of hundreds of guys that had size (maybe not the weight) Shaq had and failed to put that god given talent to great use.

In the first 10 years of Shaq's career, he was a good athlete. He was typically around that 280-3100 pound mark and was very well conditioned for his size. Yes later in his career he did let himself go and his conditioning faltered but that is not the player he truly was. I remember the Shaq that used his strength, size and skill to overpower any of the leagues best big men. Shaq's bay hook and drop step were two of his best moves, 2 moves he mastered through constant repetition and practice. Shaq was more than just a big body and his numbers prove that.

To take away a player physical abilities and use them as an excuse for their dominance is not a fair assessment by any means. Shaq is easily one of the top 5 most dominant players all time and without a doubt in my mind I would take him over any center in NBA history except Wilt and maybe Kareem.

There will never again be a player like Shaq, at least never anytime soon. I

BUCSFORLIFE123
06-02-2011, 01:58 PM
there was never a dominant big man like shaq when he was in his prime.. shaq down low was unstoppable offensively and defensively top 10 for sure

ink
06-02-2011, 02:13 PM
I think the "good because he's big argument" is complete crap.

I don't think he was good BECAUSE he was big. But his size reduced the competitiveness in the games he dominated. Sure he still had to have skill but ultimately it's about entertainment and I never found much entertaining about having the The Big Tostada throwing down everything without much opposition around the rim. It was boring. That's an opinion obviously, but I really hated watching him play. Plus he brought a new level of ****ing soap opera melodrama to the league.

Statistically though, he's close to top 10 FWIW.

MrX27
06-02-2011, 02:16 PM
If people want to discredit Shaq by saying his size made him dominate and during those times there weren't other dominate Centers, then doesn't the same apply to Bill Russell.
Russell was imposing during the era he played, not many matched his size and agility at his best.

Now let's push it a step further.

I don't remember many point guards that stood as big as Magic did, should we discredit him too because he could shoot and pass over any point guard of his era?

Let's go beyond that.

If you take one thing away from a player such as Shaq's size, do you take away one thing from every player across the board?
Take away Kareem's sky hook, Hakeem's turnaround fade, Duncan's bank, Jordan's drives, Bird's range, Doctor J's ups, Karl Malone's elbows, Stockton's pick and roll, Nash's uptempo style, LeBron's skillset, Reggie Miller's 3 pt shooting, Tim Hardway's crossover, Horry's clutch, and so on (not everyone listed is a top player, but hopefully you get the point, if not you're slow)

Shaq made his size part of his skillset, there have been other big men in the league that has size advantages but didn't utilize them like Shaq did. (see height in Minute Bol, George Murasan (sp?) and Shaun Bradley)

Is Shaq top 10? Borderline call on it.

Top 8= Jordan, Wilt, Magic, Kareem, Bird, Doc J. (if including ABA years), Robertson and Hakeem.

A case can be made for the last 2 spots:
Shaq- Most Dominate.
Kobe- Almost a Jordan clone.
Russell- Has the rings but rings don't mean everything, Robert Horry is the only player of the top 9 players with the most rings that wasn't on those celtic teams, think about that.
Duncan- The Big Fundamental.
Karl Malone- Pick and roll.
Isiah Thomas- 1 of the few pure point guards ever capable of taking over a game.
West- He's the logo for a reason.
Stockton- If Malone is the elbow, Stockton is the joint.

I tend to believe that Malone and Stockton would be outside the bubble on this, but everyone else has a legitimate claim to the remaining spots in the top 10.

MrX27
06-02-2011, 02:18 PM
There's nothing Jordan could do to be 6-6 if he was only 5-6. There's nothing any of us can do to be 7 foot, 300 pounds and move as well as Shaq did. It's not all work-ethic and drive. Again, back to JJ Redick...he works harder than any player on the Magic, but he'll never have a body like Brandon Bass or Jason Richardson.

Physical ability is what makes NBA players. Athleticism, height, size, strength speed, etc. and all that are a huge part of what makes an NBA player great. A lot of those things can be altered, but to an extent. Our genetics determine a lot. Shaq was blessed with a perfect NBA body. Dwight was blessed in a different way. Jordan was blessed...they all were.

I have a huge problem discrediting any player because of their athleticism or frame, especially when you consider that's probably the main reason they're in the league. It isn't something I take into account really, in a negative way, when comparing players.

I really just think it's laughable to discredit a guy because of his physical gifts. That's hilarious to me. Is Dwight Howard a terrible basketball player because he has marginal skill, but amazing athleticism? No. Athleticism is as imperative as skill is in sports...often far more important. How you are born, your DNA, is more important 99% of the time than how much time you spend in the gym. If Reggie Miller or Ray Allen were 5-4 and stocky, it wouldn't matter what their work ethic was; they wouldn't ever sniff the NBA. They could still be equally skilled as they were, but never even make a top D1 school, let alone the NBA.


Assuming you are saying that the "treatment from the refs" he got helped him, well, I also couldn't disagree less. He was the hardest player to officiate ever. He got hacked, bullied and beaten more than any big I've ever seen, and since he's 300 pounds it often went overlooked. Dwight suffers the same thing (it frustrates him to the point where it's detrimental). You can hit Shaq 50 times as hard as you could hit KD and it would look the same. He didn't get any favorable treatment, at least not to the point it made him better.

No, JJ Redick is not in the top 5 most skilled NBA players today, despite your love affair with him.

ink
06-02-2011, 02:24 PM
I don't get who is discrediting him because of his size. Shaq still accomplished everything he accomplished. But there were some big flaws in his game as we all know. The FT problem he had seriously damaged his credibility as a complete player. Others in the top 10 are pretty complete.

The fact that he let himself drop to Oliver Miller standards in terms of fitness for a few years also works against him. This is just subjective on my part, but the absolute crap he spewed during the endless Kobe-Shaq garbage also damages him. But others find that exciting in a reality TV kind of way ....

tredigs
06-02-2011, 03:37 PM
I don't get who is discrediting him because of his size. Shaq still accomplished everything he accomplished. But there were some big flaws in his game as we all know. The FT problem he had seriously damaged his credibility as a complete player. Others in the top 10 are pretty complete.

The fact that he let himself drop to Oliver Miller standards in terms of fitness for a few years also works against him. This is just subjective on my part, but the absolute crap he spewed during the endless Kobe-Shaq garbage also damages him. But others find that exciting in a reality TV kind of way ....

#1, he shot no worse than Wilt Or Rusell from the line, so if hurts his credibility as a top ten player than the same goes for those two.

#2, countless players in the top ten were considered far more insufferable than Shaq, and had far worse media relations. That should have no bearing on a players legacy as a basketball player. And for what it's worth, Shaq is one of the most widely loved superstars in any sport in American history.

ink
06-02-2011, 03:44 PM
#1, he shot no worse than Wilt Or Rusell from the line, so if hurts his credibility as a top ten player than the same goes for those two.

#2, countless players in the top ten were considered far more insufferable than Shaq, and had far worse media relations. That should have no bearing on a players legacy as a basketball player. And for what it's worth, Shaq is one of the most widely loved superstars in any sport in American history.

re: #2 I did say that it was completely subjective on my part.

re: #1 that didn't matter much when teams could exploit it so openly and systematically. It was laughable and I don't really remember any other athlete being so openly mocked about a weakness.

I consider a lot of this comparison BS bogus anyway so subjective opinions are just as valid to me. Not trying to disguise the opinion btw, just making the point.

sweet-d
06-02-2011, 04:11 PM
Yes of course Shaq is a top 10 player of all time.

ManRam
06-02-2011, 04:18 PM
No, JJ Redick is not in the top 5 most skilled NBA players today, despite your love affair with him.

A) I don't really like JJ that much
B) I never said he was a top 5 most skilled player :laugh: He's not even close. He is very skilled, at least compared to most players on my favorite team, hence why I used him.


But thanks for putting words in my mouth. He's definitely more talented than Dwight is. My point is, just judging players based on talent is laughable, especially if you are totally writing off physical tools.

Korman12
06-02-2011, 04:28 PM
#1, he shot no worse than Wilt Or Rusell from the line, so if hurts his credibility as a top ten player than the same goes for those two.

#2, countless players in the top ten were considered far more insufferable than Shaq, and had far worse media relations. That should have no bearing on a players legacy as a basketball player. And for what it's worth, Shaq is one of the most widely loved superstars in any sport in American history.

But among them, only Wilt and Kareem were ever so insufferable that they were actually traded, and none of them played for more than 3 teams in their careers because of it.

I think the point the might be trying to make here is that Shaq's deterioration with Kobe took away a lot more potential dominance.

For me, it's only a couple minor factors - he wasn't a vital player since his first season in Miami and he dominated in the weakest era since the NBA merger. It's tough to really say where he is.

ManRam
06-02-2011, 04:32 PM
I don't think he was good BECAUSE he was big. But his size reduced the competitiveness in the games he dominated. Sure he still had to have skill but ultimately it's about entertainment and I never found much entertaining about having the The Big Tostada throwing down everything without much opposition around the rim. It was boring. That's an opinion obviously, but I really hated watching him play. Plus he brought a new level of ****ing soap opera melodrama to the league.

Statistically though, he's close to top 10 FWIW.

Even if he was good because of his size (he really was to a huge extent, I just don't use that as a way to fault him) that doesn't make him less of a basketball player. All that matters is how good you were, how well you did and what you achieved...not why/how you did it.

8th most WS ever. Top 20 in defensive win shares. Top 10 in offensive win shares. #1 all time in eFG%. #3 all time in PER. 8th most blocks ever. Career 24/11 career player (only Wilt and Kareem can say that). 3 Finals MVPs. 4 Rings. 1 MVP, 15 AS games. 8x 1st team all-NBA (14 total all-NBA teams which is second most ever). All-time FG% leader....so on and so on.

Stats aren't everything, but he got it done. And if you are just arguing that he got it done by cheating the system because he was just bigger, wider and stronger than everyone....well, props to him. That doesn't make him less of a player.


EDIT: I read your post out of context. Going back and reading the rest, I don't think you were saying what I thought...so this isn't directed towards you as much as I thought. Still, it's how I feel.

mikealike305
06-02-2011, 04:34 PM
hes great. top 15 all time.

Mile High Champ
06-02-2011, 04:35 PM
Even if he was good because of his size (he really was to a huge extent, I just don't use that as a way to fault him) that doesn't make him less of a basketball player. All that matters is how good you were, how well you did and what you achieved...not why/how you did it.

And boring? Who cares? Are you using that too as a way to discredit Shaq? That still doesn't detract from how good he was. Duncan is boring, and he's the best PF ever. Soap-opera, melodrama, movie star, rapper...that also doesn't matter.

It seems like you are letting things that are totally irrelevant shape your opinion. I may be wrong, but why else are you bringing it up?

8th most WS ever. Top 20 in defensive win shares. Top 10 in offensive win shares. #1 all time in eFG%. #3 all time in PER. 8th most blocks ever. Career 24/11 career player (only Wilt and Kareem can say that). 3 Finals MVPs. 4 Rings. 1 MVP, 15 AS games. 8x 1st team all-NBA (14 total all-NBA teams which is second most ever). All-time FG% leader....so on and so on.

Stats aren't everything, but he got it done. And if you are just arguing that he got it done by cheating the system because he was just bigger, wider and stronger than everyone....well, props to him. That doesn't make him less of a player.

Manram, I don't Ink was saying that at all. I think he does Respect Shaq for what he was.

Dallas Tx4Life
06-02-2011, 04:56 PM
wow... i think hes easily top 10 but over 90% agree??? thats pretty awesome. shaq was so beast. kobe needs to squash the beef and thank him for the leg up on lebron

kjdills13
06-02-2011, 04:58 PM
ANY who says shaq IS NOT a top 10 player of all time is foolish. The NBA CHANGED RULES due to SHAQS dominance. If you have rules changed because you are TOO GOOD it means you are a top 10 player of all time and IMO the Most Dominate big man of the last 60 years if not of all time.

Rules shaq effected

Defensive 3 seconds

Charge cirlce


Both of these rules were added because of shaq's size. He would stand under the hoop with his hands up and allow anyone to run into him running full speed. NO one could make a lay up because they would hit shaq like a wall fall down and miss the shot.

These rules were changed to disable shaq from standing under the hoop and just letting people bounce off of him.

AIMelo=KillaDUO
06-02-2011, 05:17 PM
I like Dr J. as much as the next guy. But he's not top ten lol

Jaji
06-02-2011, 05:21 PM
Pretty much. Name one person who could stop him in his prime. Name one person who could slow him in his prime (other than Kobe jacking shots).

Jaji
06-02-2011, 05:22 PM
I like Dr J. as much as the next guy. But he's not top ten lol

It depends. Are we counting his ABA years? Because that's when he was at his best.

TomTerrific
06-02-2011, 05:27 PM
Yes, EASILY. What a silly thread, Shaq was one dominant son of a *****.

ink
06-02-2011, 05:29 PM
Manram, I don't Ink was saying that at all. I think he does Respect Shaq for what he was.

Yeah I'm more or less playing devil's advocate and pointing out some problems with his career, but there's no doubt he was dominant. Dominant enough to be top 10 FWIW. But subjectively, and since this is a forum, I'm chipping in 2 cents on the opinion that I'm happy enough to see him retire. Never really enjoyed his era and it became somewhat painful to watch him in decline since the MIA championship year.

ink
06-02-2011, 05:30 PM
Yes, EASILY. What a silly thread, Shaq was one dominant son of a *****.

The NBA has seen a hell of a lot of unbelievable talent.

tredigs
06-02-2011, 07:52 PM
re: #2 I did say that it was completely subjective on my part.

re: #1 that didn't matter much when teams could exploit it so openly and systematically. It was laughable and I don't really remember any other athlete being so openly mocked about a weakness.

I consider a lot of this comparison BS bogus anyway so subjective opinions are just as valid to me. Not trying to disguise the opinion btw, just making the point.

We weren't around in the 50's though, things like mockery of ones free throw shooting is something that I suspect dies out over the generations when an ex-great's name is mentioned. That said, Shaq's shooting WAS indeed pretty g'damn notorious, but not so much as to diminish his dominance (see: Best/most impactful player on the court for 3 rings/finals MVP's, as well as ~2 years in either direction of those 3).

I hear you that you're just voicing your opinion on the guy, and all I'm doing is playing devil's advocate to your own subjective devil's advocacy. My point being that as a whole, I think his personality legacy is a net +, where as other greats are undeniably negative (Wilt, Kareem, Rick Barry for example). Only in Barry's case was it so resoundingly negative that I feel it actually had a tangible negative impact on how he is seen in this league. But regardless of everyones hatred of him (including mine based on personal interaction with the old douche from sports camps in the North Bay), he was undeniably one of the fiercest/best competitors in the games history. I try not to let my own feelings cloud my judgement of a players dominance.

John Walls Era
06-02-2011, 08:01 PM
Found a decent article that I agreed with (to some degree)LINK (http://www.suntimes.com/sports/5737317-419/where-is-shaquille-oneals-place-in-nba-history.html)


How about this: Shaq is the most popular big man to ever play the game.

Russell was at times mean; Kareem distant; Wilt arrogant; Hakeem ornery. You’d be hard-pressed to find anyone (except for maybe his ex on basketball wives) to say a bad word about Shaq. That might be why he’s by far the most popular athlete in the world on Twitter with almost 3.6 million followers.

Shaq didn’t possess the fierce competitiveness of Jordan or Russell. (Even Scottie Pippen would agree on this.) He wasn’t driven to win at all costs. He seemed to enjoy the game/life more. That might explain why despite winning the Title four times and being named Finals MVP three times, Shaq’s teams were swept six other times in the playoffs.


He’s a Top 12 player and a Top 5 center in my book.

I'm gonna have to agree that he is a top 5 C and a top 15 player. Hes arguably top 10 though.

MrX27
06-02-2011, 08:04 PM
A) I don't really like JJ that much
B) I never said he was a top 5 most skilled player :laugh: He's not even close. He is very skilled, at least compared to most players on my favorite team, hence why I used him.


But thanks for putting words in my mouth.

Your exact quote was just as bad

..... JJ Redick is easily one of the most skilled basketball players in the league.....

That's too funny. You said "League", not team. Thanks for the laugh.


He's definitely more talented than Dwight is. My point is, just judging players based on talent is laughable, especially if you are totally writing off physical tools.

Physical tools if used correctly add to the skillset. There have been other "big" players in the league, but none used their size the way Shaq did.

You play with what you have, point blank.

MrX27
06-02-2011, 08:14 PM
I like Dr J. as much as the next guy. But he's not top ten lol

Doctor J is easily Top Ten if you count the ABA years.

If you just count the NBA years then probably not.


The Fish that saved Pittsburgh! :win: