PDA

View Full Version : Why isn't Shaq considered the greatest center ever?



CB29
06-03-2011, 01:24 PM
When analysts discuss the all time lists of the greatest players ever why does so much credit go to players who play in the 50's-70's. Players like Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem, Oscar Robertson, Dr j. all are stated to be in lists of the best players ever but more modern day players like Shaq, Hakeem, Karl Malone etc... never end up being in those conversations.

Now i realize that the older guys i mentioned were innovators of the game. If they had not been there we may not have had many of the modern players today but is that fact simply enough to say that Kareem Abdul Jabbar is the greatest center of all time. The reason for my argument is this: The quality of players, the pace and tempo of the game and the overall quality of teams is vastly superior to the ones the older players encountered. Bill Russell and WIlt chamberlain did not have the regular competition at the center position like Shaq did (Robinson, Hakeem, Ewing, Mourning etc..) You could argue that spanning from the 50's to the 70's, the only great centers were Bill Russell, George, Mikan, Wilt Chamberlain and Willis Reed. The average length, skill and size of the remaining centers was very lackluster compared to these giants which in part contributed to their dominance and reputations. I mean by that same logic if you put shaq into one of those rosters back in the day, he would've probably destroyed that league and averaged 50ppg and 20+ rpg... Look at the career numbers of shaq vs those guys. It's pretty decent when you consider that shaq faced much tougher on a daily basis than those guys.

http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/4de7c1dc49e2ae3115070000/all-time-centers.jpg

I dunno its just my opinion and feeling but i think that modern day players get the shaft simply because they weren't the innovators of basketball.. I just don't think its fair that a guy like shaq at his center position or Hakeem when he played would not be even in the conversation for all time greats simply because they didn't play at a time when the day-to-day competition was easier...And its not like Kareem didn't have magic or Russel didn't have the entire celtics team. You also have to factor in the fact that dunking was minimal during their times which made them look like even shot blockers than they were since they didn't have 6'6 guards flying at them trying to posterize. I just think that its disrespectful to a guy like shaq and his legacy that he isn't considered a top center of all time.

zB_#85
06-03-2011, 01:32 PM
Hakeem is the greatest C of all time. No other C had his skillset, moves, and footwork. He would have been a nightmare for opponents in any era.

Shaq is definitely justifiably excluded from the greatest C conversations IMO. He didn't have the work ethic to keep his weight and conditioning under control. He grew lazy and complacent at times and was the reason for his own demise with injury problems late in the career because his legs couldn't handle all that weight. With a better work ethic, Shaq could have been the GOAT, but with millions of dollars I could also be f***ing Jennifer Aniston right now so could doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

rapjuicer06
06-03-2011, 01:34 PM
i think he is considered the most dominant, not best ever

Chronz
06-03-2011, 01:36 PM
There are 4 cases to be made before Shaq and I have no problem with any of them, Kareem, Wilt and Hakeem. In the coming years I may have to accept Duncan among them.

People hate on Shaq for not getting the most out of his talent when neither Kareem/Wilt/Hakeem got the most out of theirs. People harp about his conditioning and lack of fitness contributing to his longevity but he played longer than just about everyone, at his size the fact that he stayed healthy for so long tells me all I need to know about Shaq's approach. People will say he wasnt skilled (however it is they measure that is a completely different topic) but greatness isnt measured by how hard you have it, it doesnt weigh the difficulty of a hook shot any different than a dunk. If Shaq makes the game look easy then its a testament to his dominance. People will say he didnt have the drive but they base this on his body conditioning, quite frankly there is no correlation and history has proven so. From Larry Bird to Wilt Chamberlain, which would you say had more drive and which would you say took better care of his body?

People will say his lack of skills is what prevented him from dominating at a late age, but the facts still remain he had one of the longest runs of dominance, he was an All-Star caliber player up until Phoenix so Im pretty sure hes among the best in history in terms of all-league/all-star caliber play.

nickdymez
06-03-2011, 01:38 PM
Once upon a time there was this man named Hakeem Olajuwan.....

smith&wesson
06-03-2011, 01:46 PM
shaq
wilt
hakeem
kareem

you can put them in any order really. couldnt go wrong with any of them.

Trace
06-03-2011, 01:47 PM
Hakeem is the greatest C of all time. No other C had his skillset, moves, and footwork. He would have been a nightmare for opponents in any era.

Shaq is definitely justifiably excluded from the greatest C conversations IMO. He didn't have the work ethic to keep his weight and conditioning under control. He grew lazy and complacent at times and was the reason for his own demise with injury problems late in the career because his legs couldn't handle all that weight. With a better work ethic, Shaq could have been the GOAT, but with millions of dollars I could also be f***ing Jennifer Aniston right now so could doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

+1
:clap:

Had Hakeem signed a lucrative deal with Nike, he would be on all of our lists when talking about the past greats.

ThornMo
06-03-2011, 01:48 PM
because you are 15 years old and don't know who hakeem, wilt, kareem, bill russell, and dave robinson are. jk that was mean. for about 6 years shaq was the man. if he was able to make free throws consistently he'd be top 3. not taking anything away from him, he is one of the best. but lets not take anything away from the other greats

Chronz
06-03-2011, 01:48 PM
Hakeem is the greatest C of all time. No other C had his skillset, moves, and footwork. He would have been a nightmare for opponents in any era.
For a 3 year stretch that footwork made him an elite offensive contributor but what do you do with the first few years of his career as he slowly refined his game and what do you do with the 10 years before he even bothered to hone the art of passing? By the time Hakeem was this complete player he was 30 and his defensive abilities were waning compared to his youth.

Like Ive said I have no problem with Hakeem but lets keep in mind that those skills took FOREVER to develop, in comparison Shaq mastered NBA double teams by year 2 at age 21. As for this talk of skills, consider the fact that Dave Cowens was more "skilled" than Shaq, he tried his hardest every night, fought for every rebound. Shaq was still a greater player. Get my drift?


Shaq is definitely justifiably excluded from the greatest C conversations IMO. He didn't have the work ethic to keep his weight and conditioning under control. He grew lazy and complacent at times and was the reason for his own demise with injury problems late in the career because his legs couldn't handle all that weight. With a better work ethic, Shaq could have been the GOAT, but with millions of dollars I could also be f***ing Jennifer Aniston right now so could doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

Show me the worlds perfect player in every regard and Ill show you a poster whos full of ****.

210Don
06-03-2011, 01:48 PM
most dominant aka dunked a lot
hes not the best C ever....

CB29
06-03-2011, 01:48 PM
alright but would u guys agree that shaq and hakeem don't get as much credit as they should simply because they weren't in the nba earlier

rapjuicer06
06-03-2011, 01:51 PM
alright but would u guys agree that shaq and hakeem don't get as much credit as they should simply because they weren't in the nba earlier

hakeem surely doesn't. shaq does

CB29
06-03-2011, 01:52 PM
because you are 15 years old and don't know who hakeem, wilt, kareem, bill russell, and dave robinson are. jk that was mean. for about 6 years shaq was the man. if he was able to make free throws consistently he'd be top 3. not taking anything away from him, he is one of the best. but lets not take anything away from the other greats

i've watched the entire careers of shaq, hakeem and david robinson and even seen them play live... i've seen all the finals appearances of kareem and i've seen some footage of bill russell and wilt but not that much... shaq dominated in an era of other great big men but upon his retirement i didn't hear one analyst say that he's in the all time top 10... something doesn't sound right

rapjuicer06
06-03-2011, 01:55 PM
i've watched the entire careers of shaq, hakeem and david robinson and even seen them play live... i've seen all the finals appearances of kareem and i've seen some footage of bill russell and wilt but not that much... shaq dominated in an era of other great big men but upon his retirement i didn't hear one analyst say that he's in the all time top 10... something doesn't sound right

shaq was in his prime when the other good ones were just getting out of their prime. he was the most dominant player ever because of how huge he was, not for his bball skill persay

llemon
06-03-2011, 01:59 PM
Because everyone has their own opinion.

You are certainly free to consider Shaq the best NBA Center of All-Time.

Sadds The Gr8
06-03-2011, 02:00 PM
shaq was in his prime when the other good ones were just getting out of their prime. he was the most dominant player ever because of how huge he was, not for his bball skill persay

then why couldn't guys like Desagana Diop or Erick Dampier or Eddy Curry be dominant? they have size...

Shaq had size, plus alot of skill too. people who say Shaq was "only good because he was big" never watched his Orlando years. You can't be dominant and have no skill...IMPOSSIBLE.

CB29
06-03-2011, 02:05 PM
then why couldn't guys like Desagana Diop or Erick Dampier or Eddy Curry be dominant? they have size...

Shaq had size, plus alot of skill too. people who say Shaq was "only good because he was big" never watched his Orlando years. You can't be dominant and have no skill...IMPOSSIBLE.

yea... shawn bradley... one of the tallest players ever but a complete stiff... shaq was in a league of his own

rapjuicer06
06-03-2011, 02:10 PM
then why couldn't guys like Desagana Diop or Erick Dampier or Eddy Curry be dominant? they have size...

Shaq had size, plus alot of skill too. people who say Shaq was "only good because he was big" never watched his Orlando years. You can't be dominant and have no skill...IMPOSSIBLE.

um because shaq was 7'1 325 pounds and the others weren't even close to that size? maybe? curry 7' 295, erick dampier? really? 6'11 265? diop? 7' 280? shaq has 30-65 lbs on them. curry just didn't have it. shaq had skill, i didn't say he didn't, i said he was dominant because of his skill, he was dominant because he had 40+ lbs on everyone. and if the guy can dribble a ball, or have ANY kind of back to the basket game, its donzo

flea
06-03-2011, 02:10 PM
Hakeem or Kareem are the best. Wilt and Russell both had their flaws and played in a less talented league. I'd take Shaq 3rd out of all centers.

Avenged
06-03-2011, 02:13 PM
Because of a certain retired player who goes by the name Kareem.

thedon01
06-03-2011, 02:16 PM
it always takes time to define a great player, remember that. Their excellence has to stand the test of time. There's always arguments over whether or not a player from one generation would be better than a player from another, or how 1 player would dominate in a different era, but people look at stats to base that argument rather than intangiables. A couple examples would be the rules of the league, the competition, athleticism of players, medicine, etc. As in any sport, the rules have evolved over time. An example, would George Mikan still be a great center in today's game? Would he be able to compete against a Dwight Howard?

As great as Shaq was you have to remember there were a lot of flaws to his game. Not one flaw by itself should keep Shaq out of the discussion of being one of the best centers in the game, but collectively they help to argue against Shaq being the greatest of all time. Now imo i believe that if Shaq would have remained healthy and in good shape for most of his career he would have dominated the league a lot longer than he did.

I can remember when Shaq was crushing the competition more NBA teams started looking outside of the US to find bigger centers to help contain Shaq because he was so dominant. I would also argue that when Shaq was healthy no one could control him, he was too good. Heck, think about how many points Shaq would have put up each night if he was better at the line!!

Hakeem is underrated imo and people tend to forget how defensively solid he was, but defense never gets the glory that offense does, and that's in every sport not just basketball.

I would argue that Shaq is a top 5 center of all time, but not number 1. I don't think anyone can dispute Kareem as the number 1 center of all time. Many people forget about the older centers or older players because they didnt get to witness their performances first hand. People today who never saw Jordan play think that Lebron is the best player of all time, but that's rooted in bias because they don't have an actual comparison to remember. The same can be said about people who never saw Russell or Wilt play, or even some who have never saw Kareem play, but just look at their accomplishments. So in my order of top 5 i might have to say

1. Kareem
2. Wilt
3. Russell
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem

Sadds The Gr8
06-03-2011, 02:18 PM
um because shaq was 7'1 325 pounds and the others weren't even close to that size? maybe? curry 7' 295, erick dampier? really? 6'11 265? diop? 7' 280? shaq has 30-65 lbs on them. curry just didn't have it. shaq had skill, i didn't say he didn't, i said he was dominant because of his skill, he was dominant because he had 40+ lbs on everyone. and if the guy can dribble a ball, or have ANY kind of back to the basket game, its donzo

Shaq wasn't always 325 pounds.

rapjuicer06
06-03-2011, 02:19 PM
Shaq wasn't always 325 pounds.

your right, in college he was 7'1 300

wjmoffatt
06-03-2011, 02:20 PM
Hakeem- Your correct on, he definitely deserves more consideration on being one of the best centers of all time. He played in a time (the 90's) where all the best players (except MJ and stockton) were bigs. He lead the league in steals, which is astonishing. Also, dominated a young and athletic Shaq in the finals. He was the best big of the 90's without many wholes in his game.


Shaq- Sure, we all know his dominant. But if you say that Kareem, Wilt, and Bill played against less talent players during their time, and that's why they dominate all of these stats. Then you can say the same for Shaq. Who in the 2000's (when shaq was playing at his prime) was a great center, or yet even worthy of one of the top 20 centers ever? No one comes to my mind. Robinson was gone, Dwight was to young (if you consider him, then you must consider Shaq for Hakeem), Duncan and Garnett were Power Forwards. So he as well as those before him benefited from an inflation in stats due to inferior competition, but only difference is, he didn't have the stats to compare with them.

Malone- Sure his statistical categories were there for points, All Star appearances, and rebounds. But there were also as many negatives to his game as good, he is the NBA's all time leader in Turnovers! That's hard to do, espically considering in viewing our recent years stats that those that lead in that category are normally guards that dominate the ball every position. Duncan is far superior to Malone!

NYtilIdie
06-03-2011, 02:25 PM
There are 4 cases to be made before Shaq and I have no problem with any of them, Kareem, Wilt and Hakeem. In the coming years I may have to accept Duncan among them.

People hate on Shaq for not getting the most out of his talent when neither Kareem/Wilt/Hakeem got the most out of theirs. People harp about his conditioning and lack of fitness contributing to his longevity but he played longer than just about everyone, at his size the fact that he stayed healthy for so long tells me all I need to know about Shaq's approach. People will say he wasnt skilled (however it is they measure that is a completely different topic) but greatness isnt measured by how hard you have it, it doesnt weigh the difficulty of a hook shot any different than a dunk. If Shaq makes the game look easy then its a testament to his dominance. People will say he didnt have the drive but they base this on his body conditioning, quite frankly there is no correlation and history has proven so. From Larry Bird to Wilt Chamberlain, which would you say had more drive and which would you say took better care of his body?

People will say his lack of skills is what prevented him from dominating at a late age, but the facts still remain he had one of the longest runs of dominance, he was an All-Star caliber player up until Phoenix so Im pretty sure hes among the best in history in terms of all-league/all-star caliber play.

This.

Purple&Gold24
06-03-2011, 02:26 PM
what llemon said.

Purple&Gold24
06-03-2011, 02:28 PM
Because of a certain retired player who goes by the name Kareem.

And this..so true. but shaq was a little more dominant.

nastynice
06-03-2011, 02:35 PM
Good to see hakeem the dream getting so much love in here. Dude's skillset was just ridic for a center. Dream shake = legendary. There's only a handful of players you can't blame a team for drafting ahead of jordan, and the dream is one of them. Unfortunately, sam bowie isn't :(

Gotta pay respects to the diesel tho, maybe not the best imo, but its understandable if people think so. I wish he came in the league 4-5 years earlier, 90's was the golden era for dominant centers. Shaq was still a bit young then

diesel vs the dream in 95 finals:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hRoMOAirnU

Chronz
06-03-2011, 02:36 PM
he was dominant because he had 40+ lbs on everyone. and if the guy can dribble a ball, or have ANY kind of back to the basket game, its donzo
There you have it folks, all you need to do to be a successful bigman at that mass is have a back to the basket game. THATS ALL YOU NEED.

Now lets get that message out there and revive the center position shall we.

Blazers#1Fan
06-03-2011, 02:50 PM
If this was a draft and I had to take a center it sure as hell would be shaq

I think shaq was the best center of all time but you don't have to agree his hook his fake then dunk he was the inside center everybody wished they had he was the greatest I careless about hakeems shake or wilts 100 points shaq was still the player you couldn't stop! Remember his bringing down the house dunk when he took down the rim they guy was a beast some people forget how good he was! He was unstoppable!

D Roses Bulls
06-03-2011, 02:53 PM
when shaq was with the lakers the 3 times they won it, he was the most dominate ive ever seen at his position ever. i watched hakeem, ewing, mourning, robinson, and ect and shaq in those 3 years imo was better then all all. the guy was unstoppable.

ChicagoJ
06-03-2011, 02:55 PM
I didn't watch the 70s players since my NBA days started in the late 80s. I know the reputations, but it's hard to compare when you didn't watch those guys play. From what I have seen Shaq didn't have the skill set that some Centers had, but he did have very good skill combined with a dominating physical presence. Defiantly one of the all time great centers and one of a kind.

Sly Guy
06-03-2011, 03:05 PM
why? cuz he never averaged 50 and 25.

TheHoopsProphet
06-03-2011, 03:07 PM
Approach doesn't matter, no center during any year of their prime can compare to 1999-00 Shaq.

BudGrant
06-03-2011, 03:09 PM
When analysts discuss the all time lists of the greatest players ever why does so much credit go to players who play in the 50's-70's. Players like Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem, Oscar Robertson, Dr j.

Point guard/shooting guard buddy..

ewing
06-03-2011, 03:32 PM
cause of other great centers

lavell12
06-03-2011, 03:41 PM
Shaq isn't even the most dominate C for all time like people claim. Wilt was the most dominate, he averaged over 50/25 in a few seasons. Shaq was never a great rebounder or defender. Remeber the first time Kareem tried his hook shot against Wilt it was blocked. Kareem had never had his hook blocked but Wilt welcomed him into the NBA.

Muttman73
06-03-2011, 03:56 PM
Because Wilt was better...

amos1er
06-03-2011, 04:00 PM
Shaq could have been considered the greatest center ever if he had a better work ethic.

3RDASYSTEM
06-03-2011, 04:04 PM
Gotta agree with CHRONZ on SHAQ, if anybody wanna get in a SHAQ debate about his work ethic or blah blah go look at the film and basically how he was a walking FINALS during his career, now the 2 most dominant of my time is gone AI&SHAQ(MJ was on his last Bulls run)...Imagine if they would have teamed up when they came in the league,would have been crazy...
I'd go SHAQ - HAKEEM - KAREEM - RUSSELL - WILT

JordansBulls
06-03-2011, 04:07 PM
For dominant peak he can be, but for prime I'd say Kareem and Wilt were greater and Kareem and Russell had the greater careers. Also it does not help when you only have 1 mvp.

magichatnumber9
06-03-2011, 04:11 PM
short memories, and maybe Shaq played way to long.

CB29
06-03-2011, 04:32 PM
Point guard/shooting guard buddy..

i know who the big o is... my general point was that players in that era are called the greatest ever but they might not match up that well with the players we have today

3RDASYSTEM
06-03-2011, 04:36 PM
Yea its really sad when he only won 1 MVP and he said in his career he 'did it his way'...he was truly ANDRE THE GIANT of the NBA during his Laker yrs, meaning the NBA couldnt keep him off a FINALS/TITLE cause he wouldnt stick to the script(The WWF had to beg ATG to throw matches cause he was the only wrestler who could never lose if he chose not to cause of his size ala SHAQ)...they triple teamed him before the ball reached half court, and this is the most athletic of the eras by a unaminous landslide so to me avg 24 and 13 from day one and having people think PENNY/KOBE(crazy right? i know) was better than JORDAN cause of his presence is amazing within itself...and all this work ethic talk like people is there watching, i heard the same thing about AI thru the negative media and then i hear diff. from players and 'actual media' who be there and observing and saying things diff.

SHAQ was out of shape maybe like 1 or 2yrs out of 19seasons and that makes a terrible work ethic? thats like saying BIRDs back went out cuz of his poor work ethic, was it ever thought that the beating he took from all defenders made his decision to put on all that mass and use it against the competiton? i think so...AI played the same style and they said he had a terrible work ethic,but my ? is this,how can they play at a high level for so many yrs strait and dominant with a terrible work ethic?GOD gave them that natural talent but they sustained it thru work,maybe they didnt have to work as hard as a COWENS or BJ ARMSTRONG but that doesnt mean that COWENS/ARMSTRONG outworked them,its just a perception created by the media cause SHAQ speaks the truth and did it his way like that lil guy did also....and SHAQ came in the game in like 92 and ZO was there and EWING/OLAJUWON/ROBINSON were all in their 7-9yrs so they were far from old,they were primed and a young SHAQ beasted'em,so imagine what he would have done to WILT who was scared to attack a injured player(SHAQ would have put REED on sideline for good in 1st qtr) or a 6'8 RUSSELL who a timid WILT dominated individually,now WILT was the athlete of SHAQ but thats bout it, SHAQ was vicious and that seperates him from the pack cuz they cant match his physical ability or his sheer dominance, im still trying to figure out how do you 'triple team a guy before the ball passes halfcourt especially in the NBA(the highest level of all you can reach) , maybe that has to do with SHAQs dominance? just maybe

numba1CHANGsta
06-03-2011, 04:50 PM
Shaq and Wilt were the most dominant centers of all time, but over all center Shaq is top 5

1. Kareem
2. Wilt
3. Hakeem
4. Russell
5. Shaq

FriedTofuz
06-03-2011, 04:52 PM
because kareem was better and leads the nba all time in scoring.

asandhu23
06-03-2011, 04:55 PM
Wilt was an insane player. He did everything except make free throws which is understandable because he was tall and its hard to make them at that wierd angle

Tony_Starks
06-03-2011, 05:01 PM
Shaq is probably number two on my list right behind Hakeem. I give Hakeem the edge because look at the Centers he took out (in the playoffs) in their primes. Shaq, David Robinson, and Patrick Ewing. Not only did he take them out but he was making a complete mockery of them offensively and still getting boards and blocking shots. Completely unstoppable. Thats pretty impressive......

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 05:02 PM
He isn't even top 5, maybe 6.

KingPosey
06-03-2011, 05:21 PM
There are 4 cases to be made before Shaq and I have no problem with any of them, Kareem, Wilt and Hakeem. In the coming years I may have to accept Duncan among them.

People hate on Shaq for not getting the most out of his talent when neither Kareem/Wilt/Hakeem got the most out of theirs. People harp about his conditioning and lack of fitness contributing to his longevity but he played longer than just about everyone, at his size the fact that he stayed healthy for so long tells me all I need to know about Shaq's approach. People will say he wasnt skilled (however it is they measure that is a completely different topic) but greatness isnt measured by how hard you have it, it doesnt weigh the difficulty of a hook shot any different than a dunk. If Shaq makes the game look easy then its a testament to his dominance. People will say he didnt have the drive but they base this on his body conditioning, quite frankly there is no correlation and history has proven so. From Larry Bird to Wilt Chamberlain, which would you say had more drive and which would you say took better care of his body?

People will say his lack of skills is what prevented him from dominating at a late age, but the facts still remain he had one of the longest runs of dominance, he was an All-Star caliber player up until Phoenix so Im pretty sure hes among the best in history in terms of all-league/all-star caliber play.
When did Shaq stay healthy? He has missed significant time almost every season since 94-95, his 3rd season.....

Raph12
06-03-2011, 05:22 PM
Easily the most dominant offensively, but not the best overall... Hakeem, Wilt and Kareem all rank ahead of him IMO.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 05:26 PM
Dominant offensively? Must have been tough making all those dunks and 2 footers. Wilt scored 100, I don't think Shaq did.

Tony_Starks
06-03-2011, 05:40 PM
Dominant offensively? Must have been tough making all those dunks and 2 footers. Wilt scored 100, I don't think Shaq did.


So you think Wilt was shooting jumpers?

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 05:43 PM
So you think Wilt was shooting jumpers?

:laugh2: Not all the time but a hell of a lot more than Shaq did! He still couldn't get unattested free throws down after 19 years. Only thing Shaq was is he was ****ing gigantic. **** Shaq.

netsgiantsyanks
06-03-2011, 05:44 PM
because you are 15 years old and don't know who hakeem, wilt, kareem, bill russell, and dave robinson are. jk that was mean. for about 6 years shaq was the man. if he was able to make free throws consistently he'd be top 3. not taking anything away from him, he is one of the best. but lets not take anything away from the other greats

:hide: how did you find out?

Bruno
06-03-2011, 05:45 PM
For dominant peak he can be, but for prime I'd say Kareem and Wilt were greater and Kareem and Russell had the greater careers. Also it does not help when you only have 1 mvp.

When future NBA fans look back and see that Shaq was only awarded one MVP they'll have no choice but to reconsider the way they value it. Shaq only having one MVP is more of a disservice to the MVP award, than it is to Shaq, IMO.

Raph12
06-03-2011, 05:51 PM
Dominant offensively? Must have been tough making all those dunks and 2 footers. Wilt scored 100, I don't think Shaq did.

Wilt was 7'1 300lbs with the athleticism of Dwight Howard and he was playing with guys who were 6'9 220 (a la Bill Russell) lol... Shaq dominated the era of legit centers (Hakeem, Ewing, DRob, etc...), he's played against the best and dominated offensively at all times in his prime.

Btw Wilt got more easy baskets than any player in the history of the sport so idk where you're going with that one.

Bruno
06-03-2011, 05:52 PM
Dominant offensively? Must have been tough making all those dunks and 2 footers. Wilt scored 100, I don't think Shaq did.

Pace. Possessions per game.

Bruno
06-03-2011, 05:56 PM
For dominant peak he can be, but for prime I'd say Kareem and Wilt were greater and Kareem and Russell had the greater careers. Also it does not help when you only have 1 mvp.

Also, despite one MVP, he is still 6th all time in MVP award-shares. He is one of two players in the top ten who only won the award once. The fact that he's 6th despite only winning it once is a pretty great feat. Everyone else high up on this list has at least two MVPs.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/mvp_shares_career.html

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 05:59 PM
Wilt was 7'1 300lbs with the athleticism of Dwight Howard and he was playing with guys who were 6'9 220 (a la Bill Russell) lol... Shaq dominated the era of legit centers (Hakeem, Ewing, DRob, etc...), he's played against the best and dominated offensively at all times in his prime.

Btw Wilt got more easy baskets than any player in the history of the sport so idk where you're going with that one.

He didn't win a ring until these guys were all gone or at the end of their career. All those centers are better than Shaq as well. No one was as big as Shaq either during the time he played. I am 30, I remember the 90's NBA when it was good.

Tony_Starks
06-03-2011, 06:05 PM
Shaq is never really going to get the entire credit he deserves because people that don't really know about basketball are always going to say "he was just big." Guess what Greg Ostertag was just as big and look how his career turned out? Or Eddie Curry? Its one thing to be big, another to be big and talent AND have the heart to put it all together.

If you watched the big Fella during the Lakers run his footwork and athleticism was really off the charts. Spin moves in the lane, hook shots, drop steps baseline. Far from just dunks. He really is one of the best to ever do it.......

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:07 PM
Shaq is never really going to get the entire credit he deserves because people that don't really know about basketball are always going to say "he was just big." Guess what Greg Ostertag was just as big and look how his career turned out? Or Eddie Curry? Its one thing to be big, another to be big and talent AND have the heart to put it all together.

If you watched the big Fella during the Lakers run his footwork and athleticism was really off the charts. Spin moves in the lane, hook shots, drop steps baseline. Far from just dunks. He really is one of the best to ever do it.......

He was bigger than all those guys. I know everything about basketball.

8kobe24
06-03-2011, 06:08 PM
Greatest Center of all time is debatable. But he is in my top 5 all-time. His size and dominance was unmatched. I am fortunate to have watched him from his rookie year.

Hangtime
06-03-2011, 06:11 PM
This really is an endless debate. Reading many of these posts I see mostly everyone at least has Shaq in their top 5. IMO it's no disrespect to Shaq if you rank him 5th because it doesn't mean that the other greats are leaps and bounds ahead of him. He was equally great and earned his place in history.

I think it boils down to who many of you had more respect for as far as their game and other intangibles that they brought to the game.

If you respected Russel's defense, toughness and leadership then you probably choose him.
Hakeem's all around abilities on both ends of the floor then you choose him.
Wilt's individual achievements and records and just being a freak of nature athlete then it's him.
Kareem's longevity and accomplishments spanning decades at a competitive level as well as all time leading scorer then it's him.
And of course Shaq being one of the most unstoppable forces in the paint during the modern era.

For me personally Shaq ranked 5th on my all time great centers list year ago and just because he retired this week doesn't change that. The bottom line is we are discussing his name with those all time greats which speaks volumes about him as a player. I don't care what era these guys played in they all contributed to the game in different ways and helped it evolve. That greatness they all embody stands the test of time and people will never forget.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:12 PM
He is 6.

Hangtime
06-03-2011, 06:13 PM
So you think Wilt was shooting jumpers?

Actually very early in his career Wilt was capable of shooting bank shots and fadeaways outside the paint. He wasn't one dimensional.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:15 PM
Yep^

Tony_Starks
06-03-2011, 06:17 PM
He was bigger than all those guys. I know everything about basketball.



Shaq rookie: 7'1, 294lbs

Ostertag rookie: 7'2, 280lbs


Looks pretty close to me but hey?................

Bruno
06-03-2011, 06:21 PM
He didn't win a ring until these guys were all gone or at the end of their career. All those centers are better than Shaq as well. No one was as big as Shaq either during the time he played. I am 30, I remember the 90's NBA when it was good.

Robinson and Ewing don't hold a candle to Shaq. I'm fine with arguments in favor of Russell, KAJ, Wilt, or Dream, but the list ends there (Duncan is a PF).

There is zero statistical evidence backing Robinson or Ewing over Shaq. Shaq had higher peaks, better statistics, greater longevity, more championships and more personal accolades than either of those guys.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:25 PM
Shaq rookie: 7'1, 294lbs

Ostertag rookie: 7'2, 280lbs


Looks pretty close to me but hey?................

I don't give a **** about a rookie specs.... what about the other 18 years? But hey....... After Shaq grew up he got huge..... Ostertag? Really? Great comparison.

nycsports2
06-03-2011, 06:26 PM
wilt
bill russell
kareem
hakeem
shaq

Bruno
06-03-2011, 06:26 PM
He didn't win a ring until these guys were all gone or at the end of their career. All those centers are better than Shaq as well. No one was as big as Shaq either during the time he played. I am 30, I remember the 90's NBA when it was good.

Also, would it come as any surprise that Shaq didn't win until these guys were gone or at the end of their careers? Naturally, the age difference mandated that Shaq wasn't in his physical prime until the physical decline of the other centers you referenced.

Shaq- 1972.
Dream- 1963.
Robinson- 1965
Ewing- 1962

All of those guys were at least 7-10 years older than Shaq. Shaq was 23 during the '95 finals. Can you name me another example of a player as young as 23 knocking off the reigning finals MVP/champions? You're ignoring the natural pecking order.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:27 PM
Robinson and Ewing don't hold a candle to Shaq. I'm fine with arguments in favor of Russell, KAJ, Wilt, or Dream, but the list ends there (Duncan is a PF).

There is zero statistical evidence backing Robinson or Ewing over Shaq. Shaq had higher peaks, better statistics, greater longevity, more championships and more personal accolades than either of those guys.

He also played with Kobe, Wade, Penny etc.... His stats are so inflated because he was huge putting in put backs, dunks, posting up inferior players etc. He was a force and I don't think he has that talented at the game of basketball at all. How old are you?

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:29 PM
Also, would it come as any surprise that Shaq didn't win until these guys were gone or at the end of their careers? Naturally, the age difference mandated that Shaq wasn't in his physical prime until the physical decline of the other centers you referenced.

Shaq- 1972.
Dream- 1963.
Robinson- 1965
Ewing- 1962

All of those guys were at least 7-10 years older than Shaq. Shaq was 23 during the '95 finals. Can you name me another example of a player as young as 23 knocking off the reigning finals MVP/champions? You're ignoring the natural pecking order.
Who did Shaq PLAY WITH during those finals? Oh yea, I forgot, Not John Starks, Charles Oakley etc.

topdog
06-03-2011, 06:30 PM
Not even a debate. Shaq got the benefit of special rules that catered to him. Was he dominant? No doubt. Was he anywhere near as talented or special as guys like Kareem and Wilt? No f'n way.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:31 PM
Not even a debate. Shaq got the benefit of special rules that catered to him. Was he dominant? No doubt. Was he anywhere near as talented or special as guys like Kareem and Wilt? No f'n way.

Thank you. Someone remembers...

Bruno
06-03-2011, 06:32 PM
He also played with Kobe, Wade, Penny etc.... His stats are so inflated because he was huge putting in put backs, dunks, posting up inferior players etc. He was a force and I don't think he has that talented at the game of basketball at all. How old are you?

And Dream played with Drexler and Robinson played with Duncan. Great players need other great players to win. His stats were not inflated at all, he played through the slowest paced era in NBA history.

Yes, they were inferior.

Totally irrelevant.

Bruno
06-03-2011, 06:32 PM
Who did Shaq PLAY WITH during those finals? Oh yea, I forgot, Not John Starks, Charles Oakley etc.

Present the argument for Ewing over Shaq.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:34 PM
And Dream played with Drexler and Robinson played with Duncan. Great players need other great players to win. His stats were not inflated at all, he played through the slowest paced era in NBA history.

Yes, they were inferior. Because he was phenomenal.

Totally irrelevant.

Drexler and Robinson were at the end of their ropes there guy. There best days were way before they played with Hakeem and Duncan.

They were inferior because of his physical stature.

Relevant.

CB29
06-03-2011, 06:35 PM
He also played with Kobe, Wade, Penny etc.... His stats are so inflated because he was huge putting in put backs, dunks, posting up inferior players etc. He was a force and I don't think he has that talented at the game of basketball at all. How old are you?

Weren't wilt and bill facing inferior players too... Hell they were playing centers who were barely 6 feet tall. You think that isn't an advantage when it comes to rebounding and blocking shots. Bill Russell played with great celtics, WIlt played with great lakers, Kareem with magic and oscar etc... EVeryone had great players to lean on. SHaq was mvp of all finals he won with kobe. Speaks high volumes.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:35 PM
Present the argument for Ewing over Shaq.

He could shoot jump shots.

Heediot
06-03-2011, 06:35 PM
Top 5

Wilt
Russell
Kareem
Shaq
Hakeem

Bruno
06-03-2011, 06:37 PM
Drexler and Robinson were at the end of their ropes there guy. There best days were way before they played with Hakeem and Duncan.

They were inferior because of his physical stature.

Relevant.

Present the statistical argument for Ewing or Robinson over Shaq.

Hangtime
06-03-2011, 06:37 PM
Shaq just blossomed at the perfect time. His adversaries were either on the downside of their careers (Ewing, Robinson, Hakeem) or forced out the game due to a ailment ( Mourning) offensively challenged (Mutumbo) or more finesse ( Divac). We never saw what was once the great Sabonis in the NBA. Shaq was just primed to take over and be successful.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:38 PM
Weren't wilt and bill facing inferior players too... Hell they were playing centers who were barely 6 feet tall. You think that isn't an advantage when it comes to rebounding and blocking shots. Bill Russell played with great celtics, WIlt played with great lakers, Kareem with magic and oscar etc... EVeryone had great players to lean on. SHaq was mvp of all finals he won with kobe. Speaks high volumes.

:laugh2: But yea they were playing smaller guys too but not centers barely 6 feet.. but they had game Shaq didn't.

MVP in finals equate to his unique skill of dunking and put backs....therefore inflating his stats.. Hell they could have been even better even he knew how to shoot.

llemon
06-03-2011, 06:38 PM
Actually very early in his career Wilt was capable of shooting bank shots and fadeaways outside the paint. He wasn't one dimensional.

The question, as always, is why was Wilt shooting fadeaways.

Bruno
06-03-2011, 06:38 PM
He could shoot jump shots.

Great debating with you. :cheers:

Tony_Starks
06-03-2011, 06:39 PM
Not even a debate. Shaq got the benefit of special rules that catered to him. Was he dominant? No doubt. Was he anywhere near as talented or special as guys like Kareem and Wilt? No f'n way.



Special rules that catered to him? You mean like when they instituted the zone defense allowing you to double team Shaq without even having the ball just because nobody could stop him? Yeah right.


People want to discredit Shaq so bad its really funny. Sort of reminds me how they do this other great Laker champion.......

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:40 PM
Present the statistical argument for Ewing or Robinson over Shaq.

Different time, different game. Therefore statistical comparisons are irrelevant.

Hangtime
06-03-2011, 06:40 PM
Weren't wilt and bill facing inferior players too... Hell they were playing centers who were barely 6 feet tall. You think that isn't an advantage when it comes to rebounding and blocking shots. Bill Russell played with great celtics, WIlt played with great lakers, Kareem with magic and oscar etc... EVeryone had great players to lean on. SHaq was mvp of all finals he won with kobe. Speaks high volumes.

Centers in the 60's were barely 6 ft tall? That's a new one on me.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:41 PM
Great debating with you. :cheers:

No prob Bruno

SLOnLucky
06-03-2011, 06:41 PM
...because Wilt Chamberlain exists!

Heediot
06-03-2011, 06:42 PM
Wilt was 7'1 300lbs with the athleticism of Dwight Howard and he was playing with guys who were 6'9 220 (a la Bill Russell) lol... Shaq dominated the era of legit centers (Hakeem, Ewing, DRob, etc...), he's played against the best and dominated offensively at all times in his prime.

Btw Wilt got more easy baskets than any player in the history of the sport so idk where you're going with that one.

Russell was the reason Wilt has less ships b/w the two. Celtics were stakced though.

No matter what era, Wilt could easily score 30 ppg. Who can guard that type of athleticism.

Kareem also said, teams were less diluted. For example, Lebron socres less with Miami than in Cleveland. Less teams = better teams and better competition.

Edit: Shaq started winning ships when those guys u mentioned retired.

Hangtime
06-03-2011, 06:46 PM
The question, as always, is why was Wilt shooting fadeaways.

My explanation would be that it wasn't used to keep guys from blocking but rather it was a shot that he developed that helped him shoot better from outside. Whatever works for you I always say. Being over 7ft and having long arms maybe made that shot more comfortable for him.

ne3xchamps
06-03-2011, 06:51 PM
i think he is considered the most dominant, not best ever

+1. Easily the most dominant.

kingkenny01
06-03-2011, 06:52 PM
because kareem abdule jabaar exist

ne3xchamps
06-03-2011, 06:52 PM
...because Wilt Chamberlain exists!

and bill russell.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:53 PM
And Olajuwon.

Bruno
06-03-2011, 06:53 PM
Different time, different game. Therefore statistical comparisons are irrelevant.


Dominant offensively? Must have been tough making all those dunks and 2 footers. Wilt scored 100, I don't think Shaq did.

I find it interesting that you'd make such a comment in the very same thread where you said "Wilt scored 100, I don't think Shaq did" as a point of interest in your case. Do you recognize the contradiction in that?


Drexler and Robinson were at the end of their ropes there guy. There best days were way before they played with Hakeem and Duncan.

They were inferior because of his physical stature.

Relevant.

Drexler posted the 3rd highest PER of his career the year he joined The Rockets in '95. Robinson led the league in WS/48 the year he and Duncan lead the Spurs to the title. in '99. Best days behind them at those points in time? Yes. On their last legs? No.

Sure. But so what? Skill isn't everything is basketball. Physical size and presence are important factors that shouldn't be undermined when assessing all aspects of the game.

If I have a decent grasp on statistical analysis, and I have multiple family members who have VCR tapes from NBA Finals from the 90's, then how is my age relevant. The 87 in my username is only there because Sidney Crosby is my favorite NHL player, it has nothing to do with my actual age :win:


No prob Bruno

Not the first time Mike, probably won't be the last. :cheers:

Tony_Starks
06-03-2011, 06:54 PM
Im pretty sure Shaq will gladly take the 4 rings, all the individual achievements, and the mere mention globally as being among the best ever as a pretty satisfying career......

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 06:58 PM
I find it interesting that you'd make such a comment in the very same thread where you said "Wilt scored 100, I don't think Shaq did" as a point of interest in your case. Do you recognize the contradiction in that?



Drexler posted the 3rd highest PER of his career the year he joined The Rockets in '95. Robinson led the league in WS/48 the year he and Duncan lead the Spurs to the title. in '99. Best days behind them at those points in time? Yes. On their last legs? No.

Sure. But so what? Skill isn't everything is basketball. Physical size and presence are important factors that shouldn't be undermined when assessing all aspects of the game.

If I have a decent grasp on statistical analysis, and I have multiple family members who have VCR tapes from NBA Finals from the 90's, then how is my age relevant. The 87 in my username is only there because Sidney Crosby is my favorite NHL player, it has nothing to do with my actual age :win:



Not the first time Mike, probably won't be the last. :cheers:

All this is a moot point. Shaq is 6. I'm done.

lukeem21
06-03-2011, 06:58 PM
Shaq is a great Center, not one of the all time great imo

How Bill Russell only got one or two mentions in the first two pages was a joke


Wilt Chamberlain - greatest player of all time in my opinion, but pretty much a fact that he was the most dominat player ever and one of the great centers of all time

Bill Russell

Kareem Abdul Jabbar

Hakeem Olajuwan

are the all time great centers, one of them is from this era (I would put wilt first and the next three would be pretty close together)... In terms of who else is close to that list, I believe that David Robinson is real close, Ewing somewhat close, Dwight looks well on his way.

CowboysKB24
06-03-2011, 06:59 PM
It's very close. Kareem was really good, but he does not get enough credit because many people don't like him. Kareem and Shaq are very close along with Wilt and Russell, who get discredited because of the era the two played in. Shaq was the most dominant of all time and best in his era undoubtedly. I'd take him over any center at the end of the day.

Chronz
06-03-2011, 06:59 PM
When did Shaq stay healthy? He has missed significant time almost every season since 94-95, his 3rd season.....

Look they played every game but D-Rob was done in by injury for a season and only played 1108 Career REG/Playoff Games. Hakeem tops out at 1383. Shaq tops them all with 1423 career games. His 216 Playoff Games ranks 3rd in NBA History, behind Kareem and Horry. How is that not staying healthy?

But for clarification, no Shaq was not bullet proof, but he always had the mindset of gearing up for the playoffs with his bodies own demands in mind.

When you play his style your going to get a steady dose of injuries. All this undermines Shaqs regular season, as if it were some massive shortcoming to have a span where you come up short to Hakeem and D-Rob. What a bum

CowboysKB24
06-03-2011, 07:01 PM
I think about it like this...
If I was a GM and Wilt, Kareem, Hakeem, Russell, and Shaq were in a draft, I would take Shaq. He only real flaw was foul shooting. A short jump shot would have been nice, but he was such a monster it was more practical for him to post up. Hack a Shaq

MTar786
06-03-2011, 07:04 PM
shaq is the greatest C of all time. (most) guys who say wilt and russel were better didnt even see them play. its the popular thing to say. ur argument for russel is that he had 11 rings or 8 in a row. how many nba teams were there back then? when u have so few teams chances are likely u win more often once u build a solid core. wilt the best? why? cuz he scored 100 at the cost of his team? (he was going for 100) or because he played against small centers? or because WILT had west and baylor and still could barely get it done?
You can argue Kareem.. maybe even Hakeem.. but in my books shaq was the best center to ever play. a center should be dominating.. ur pf should be able to post up and be all finess. let ur pf shoot jumpers.. the center should be pinning down other players in the paint for a dunk. or MAKE the other team foul you and get them in the penalty early with like 6mins left in te quarter. small little touch fouls will get ur other players on the line and make them play weaker defense. shaq had more 3 point play opportunities than anyone in history.
give me shaq. the nba had to change the rules to cater to OTHER players. if u guys even watched back then. tim duncan was the lebron of then. david stern LOVED duncan.
The lakers were unstoppable because of shaq. Kobe just helped them become one of the all time great teams.
shaq put up many of the greatest finals performances ever too.
hakeem is one of my fav players ever too.. but how can you argue that he was better than shaq? hakeem has 2 rings
you can argue kareem because of his many rings, mvps, finals mvps.. teams he played for. and the most unguardable shot ever. IMO its between kareem and shaq.

Shaq
Kareem
Hakeem
Wilt
Russel


btw.. whoever said ewing was better than shaq is delusional lol.

Chronz
06-03-2011, 07:05 PM
Present the argument for Ewing over Shaq.
its da skills. shaq couldnt hint the j, he wasnt the fire breathing defensive beast of a center like ewin g

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 07:08 PM
shaq is the greatest C of all time. (most) guys who say wilt and russel were better didnt even see them play. its the popular thing to say. ur argument for russel is that he had 11 rings or 8 in a row. how many nba teams were there back then? when u have so few teams chances are likely u win more often once u build a solid core. wilt the best? why? cuz he scored 100 at the cost of his team? (he was going for 100) or because he played against small centers? or because WILT had west and baylor and still could barely get it done?
You can argue Kareem.. maybe even Hakeem.. but in my books shaq was the best center to ever play. a center should be dominating.. ur pf should be able to post up and be all finess. let ur pf shoot jumpers.. the center should be pinning down other players in the paint for a dunk. or MAKE the other team foul you and get them in the penalty early with like 6mins left in te quarter. small little touch fouls will get ur other players on the line and make them play weaker defense. shaq had more 3 point play opportunities than anyone in history.
give me shaq. the nba had to change the rules to cater to OTHER players. if u guys even watched back then. tim duncan was the lebron of then. david stern LOVED duncan.
The lakers were unstoppable because of shaq. Kobe just helped them become one of the all time great teams.
shaq put up many of the greatest finals performances ever too.
hakeem is one of my fav players ever too.. but how can you argue that he was better than shaq? hakeem has 2 rings
you can argue kareem because of his many rings, mvps, finals mvps.. teams he played for. and the most unguardable shot ever. IMO its between kareem and shaq.

Shaq
Kareem
Hakeem
Wilt
Russel


btw.. whoever said ewing was better than shaq is delusional lol.

Ewing was better than Shaq. You are delusional with that list too.

llemon
06-03-2011, 07:09 PM
its da skills. shaq couldnt hint the j, he wasnt the fire breathing defensive beast of a center like ewin g

C'mon, players feared meeting Shaq at the rim much more than they feared Ewing.

Tony_Starks
06-03-2011, 07:10 PM
I think about it like this...
If I was a GM and Wilt, Kareem, Hakeem, Russell, and Shaq were in a draft, I would take Shaq. He only real flaw was foul shooting. A short jump shot would have been nice, but he was such a monster it was more practical for him to post up. Hack a Shaq


Shaq actually did have a short jumper he would use and believe it or not even a turn around shot he would use from time to time. Didn't really make the highlight reels but he actually did have a nice arsenal of moves that he never really got credit for. Not to mention to be that big and routinely beat the other center down the floor for a slam is a pretty amazing feat in itself...

MTar786
06-03-2011, 07:16 PM
Ewing was better than Shaq. You are delusional with that list too.

tony starks and cowboy agree with me. thats just two people i dont even know. so how am i delusional. NO ONE agrees with you. Theres no point in arguing with you.. u are obviously.. nvm :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Heediot
06-03-2011, 07:20 PM
shaq is the greatest C of all time. (most) guys who say wilt and russel were better didnt even see them play. its the popular thing to say. ur argument for russel is that he had 11 rings or 8 in a row. how many nba teams were there back then? when u have so few teams chances are likely u win more often once u build a solid core. wilt the best? why? cuz he scored 100 at the cost of his team? (he was going for 100) or because he played against small centers? or because WILT had west and baylor and still could barely get it done?
You can argue Kareem.. maybe even Hakeem.. but in my books shaq was the best center to ever play. a center should be dominating.. ur pf should be able to post up and be all finess. let ur pf shoot jumpers.. the center should be pinning down other players in the paint for a dunk. or MAKE the other team foul you and get them in the penalty early with like 6mins left in te quarter. small little touch fouls will get ur other players on the line and make them play weaker defense. shaq had more 3 point play opportunities than anyone in history.
give me shaq. the nba had to change the rules to cater to OTHER players. if u guys even watched back then. tim duncan was the lebron of then. david stern LOVED duncan.
The lakers were unstoppable because of shaq. Kobe just helped them become one of the all time great teams.
shaq put up many of the greatest finals performances ever too.
hakeem is one of my fav players ever too.. but how can you argue that he was better than shaq? hakeem has 2 rings
you can argue kareem because of his many rings, mvps, finals mvps.. teams he played for. and the most unguardable shot ever. IMO its between kareem and shaq.

Shaq
Kareem
Hakeem
Wilt
Russel


btw.. whoever said ewing was better than shaq is delusional lol.

The celtics dominated during Wilt's era, so your argument is futile about him not winning ships when there were less teams. That Boston team may be the greatest dynasty in all of sports. He won one time during their reigh, and one shortly after. With his size, and athleticism, Wilt could average a min 25ppg in any era.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 07:21 PM
tony starks and cowboy agree with me. thats just two people i dont even know. so how am i delusional. NO ONE agrees with you. Theres no point in arguing with you.. u are obviously.. nvm :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

I hate Shaq and i can't help it. :)

Hangtime
06-03-2011, 07:23 PM
I think about it like this...
If I was a GM and Wilt, Kareem, Hakeem, Russell, and Shaq were in a draft, I would take Shaq. He only real flaw was foul shooting. A short jump shot would have been nice, but he was such a monster it was more practical for him to post up. Hack a Shaq

To be honest, you can't go wrong with any of those guys as long as you surround them with the proper talent. They are all difference makers for your team. They all except Russell can score big inside.You team them with another high caliber potent playmaker on the perimeter and it's a championship.

topdog
06-03-2011, 08:03 PM
Special rules that catered to him? You mean like when they instituted the zone defense allowing you to double team Shaq without even having the ball just because nobody could stop him? Yeah right.


People want to discredit Shaq so bad its really funny. Sort of reminds me how they do this other great Laker champion.......

Ummm... so every good player has seen at least a double if not a triple team and if he didn't have the ball then his teammates should have been scoring at will.

So, you think it was normal for a guy to shoot free throws when he thrashes in the post and knocks the defender to the ground?

DR_1
06-03-2011, 08:09 PM
Two words...Wilt and Kareem.

llemon
06-03-2011, 08:15 PM
Two words...Wilt and Kareem.

Again, it all boils down to opinions.

effen5
06-03-2011, 08:17 PM
Shaq was the most dominant

Not the best.

Tony_Starks
06-03-2011, 08:23 PM
Ummm... so every good player has seen at least a double if not a triple team and if he didn't have the ball then his teammates should have been scoring at will.

So, you think it was normal for a guy to shoot free throws when he thrashes in the post and knocks the defender to the ground?


First off a lot of that was flopping. Secondly it was widely acknowledged that Shaq was the hardest player to referee. Players were basically allowed to wrestle him, and plenty of that went uncalled. And with his free throw % I seriously doubt him going to the line gave him an advantage.

But you seriously missed the point. The NBA allowing teams to go to an illegal defense to contain him basically tells you how dominant he was. They were in essence saying "its impossible to defend him normally."

Luv Da New Pack
06-03-2011, 08:32 PM
No disrespect.....but because he's not.

Personally, he's done a lot for the game in terms of branching out to the masses but even he would say that he's not the greatest Center (or from his words, "big men") ever.

He is still in awe of Hakeem and what he did to Shaq early.

Didn't he himself state that Wilt, Mikan, Kareem, Russell, and Hakeem are above him on the court?

Once again, people get swept up in the "greatest" arguments. Some would speculate that it wasn't even Shaq's intention to be the greatest because, if it had, he would have done more to keep himself in shape and add that desire to keep up with Kobe...he would have slimmed down a lot. Personally, I think he's fine with being placed in the top 10 of most dominating...as long as his name in remembered for dominance.

Witness06
06-03-2011, 08:41 PM
You make some great points and I agree that the evolution of sports is that players are bigger faster, stronger. The rules and the game has changed.

At the same time, back in the day players were tougher, hungrier, and played for the love of the game. They didnt make loads of cash, most of them had jobs in the off season. No health care and no union. Black athletes couldnt even compete in most instances, so that they were not just competing against the competition, but the refs and the crowds with racist practices trying to literally hurt them. So that mental toughness is a huge component.

I think in the end its about paying respect, homage to those who paved the way and respecting each generations heros for what they meant to the fans and the game.
Whos the best is about more than numbers, we love them and cheer for them and stand in awe even of the black and white footage of a 100 pt game, or 11 rings (one as a player coach), or Kareems Sky hook , MVP's and rings

And still We love Air Jordan, Magic and Bird, Shaq, and Hakeem, Kobe and Lebron. The new school has its own heros, but that doesnt mean because they are new that they are better. Whos the best.....depends on who you ask and thats what we love about sports.

Tony_Starks
06-03-2011, 08:46 PM
You make some great points and I agree that the evolution of sports is that players are bigger faster, stronger. The rules and the game has changed.

At the same time, back in the day players were tougher, hungrier, and played for the love of the game. They didnt make loads of cash, most of them had jobs in the off season. No health care and no union. Black athletes couldnt even compete in most instances, so that they were not just competing against the competition, but the refs and the crowds with racist practices trying to literally hurt them. So that mental toughness is a huge component.

I think in the end its about paying respect, homage to those who paved the way and respecting each generations heros for what they meant to the fans and the game.
Whos the best is about more than numbers, we love them and cheer for them and stand in awe even of the black and white footage of a 100 pt game, or 11 rings (one as a player coach), or Kareems Sky hook , MVP's and rings


A rational, non-biased, non-hating, thought out, mature post with actual perspective of the game....... I can tell you haven't been here very long! :clap:

Welcome aboard sir!

topdog
06-03-2011, 08:52 PM
First off a lot of that was flopping. Secondly it was widely acknowledged that Shaq was the hardest player to referee. Players were basically allowed to wrestle him, and plenty of that went uncalled. And with his free throw % I seriously doubt him going to the line gave him an advantage.

But you seriously missed the point. The NBA allowing teams to go to an illegal defense to contain him basically tells you how dominant he was. They were in essence saying "its impossible to defend him normally."

These are the kind of excuses I just can't stand. I don't get how it can be that hard to call if there is contact and force. If I see a baseball thrown at a person or thrown at a brick wall at the same velocity, it doesn't change the fact that they were thrown just as hard just because the one thrown at a person knocks the guy down.

It is an excuse to me just like "Shaq can't shoot free throws because his hands are too big." Believe me, I've shot my fair share of free throws one handed (working on mechanics). One-handed free throws lack a guide hand, however, if your hands are large enough to palm a ball, your thumb acts as the guide. He should have been able to improve his shooting, but didn't.

And he was "impossible to defend" because he was allowed to bang through guys and run them over as "Big Diesel."

THE GIPPER
06-03-2011, 09:05 PM
people need to stop saying, "wilt scored 100. hes the best. did shaq score 100???" because we all know wilt could NOT score 100 pts in a game if he played today.

Tony_Starks
06-03-2011, 09:13 PM
people need to stop saying, "wilt scored 100. hes the best. did shaq score 100???" because we all know wilt could NOT score 100 pts in a game if he played today.



You know whats funny is people use that argument for Wilt over Shaq but if you try to use that same principle and say "Kobe scored 81 against a zone, second most in history, Jordan never did that" its a whooooooooooole different story!

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 09:23 PM
The only thing good about this thread is Bria Myles.

Shaq was like William Perry lining up at fullback. No talent. Just a huge bastard that you couldn't take down/control.

mdlr52192
06-03-2011, 09:34 PM
Ummmm......because Andrew Bynum is playing...duh

mdlr52192
06-03-2011, 09:34 PM
The only thing good about this thread is Bria Myles.

Shaq was like William Perry lining up at fullback. No talent. Just a huge bastard that you couldn't take down/control.

And it's a ****** quality picture.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 09:45 PM
Yea, I am kinda pissed it's not more high quality...

3RDASYSTEM
06-03-2011, 09:46 PM
Its funny how people claim that EWING/OLAJUWON/ROBINSON were old when SHAQ came in but i see it diff. and he just dominated from day 1

Ewing was 29-30 and scored between 1700-1900pts between the DIESELS first 4-5yrs so thats far from old, i thought that was 'prime' yrs?

Olajuwon was 29-30 also and put up 1500-2100pts between those same yrs

Robinson was 26 when SHAQ first entered and when he had Duncan in 2001 WCF he was 35 and SHAQ destroyed arguably the best D-Anchor PF ever and one of the top Def/Off of his time and they both HOF's and he destroyed'em

So for those saying he was old do some research before acting like SHAQ didnt dominate the best of the best athletes/skilled big men and the reason why i put him over WILT is because he got outplayed on the biggest stage by a 1legged player while SHAQ's mentality would have been to break his whole body down just for disrepecting SHAQ and playing against him that injured and barely walking, HAKEEM is almost like 1A but i can say the same for ALCINDOR also cause even tho WILT may have blocked his skyhook like someone said earlier,WILT also said this was the 1st time ever in his career where he needed help guarded his man,ALCINDOR was a beast, what SHAQ lacked in skill he made up for it 10x in the other areas and he was way skilled enough,why would you want him playing like Ewing when his advantage was 2ft away and Ewing was more finesse,how come Ewing didnt use his size more like Shaq instead of more like Dirk?

a case can be made i guess for each ones list/fav

CowboysKB24
06-03-2011, 09:47 PM
To be honest, you can't go wrong with any of those guys as long as you surround them with the proper talent. They are all difference makers for your team. They all except Russell can score big inside.You team them with another high caliber potent playmaker on the perimeter and it's a championship.

Shaq would dominate any of those guys down low because of his size advantage offensively and defensively. Remember playing against those big tall heavy kids when you were little? You can't move them and they push you around all game. His strength is unreal.

Tony_Starks
06-03-2011, 10:04 PM
I find it funny and ironic that people try to discredit Shaqs greatness due to his size, but yet will give Wilt his props. Thats pretty hypocritical especially considering the racial composition of the league when Wilt came in. The majority of the time early on he was being defended by slow, unathletic white guys nowhere close to his size or ability. Thus the 100 point game. He was literally a man playing among boys, sans Bill Russell of course who he couldn't beat.

Mike Oxlong
06-03-2011, 10:06 PM
Wilt had basketball skills though.

bagwell368
06-03-2011, 11:15 PM
Its funny how people claim that EWING/OLAJUWON/ROBINSON were old when SHAQ came in but i see it diff. and he just dominated from day 1

Who claims that? Hakeem vs Shaq happened 20 times, and the first 9 which covered 4 years went to Hakeem. Look it up. Hakeem started to age and Shaq won the battles. Even so, Hakeem averaged more blocks, less TOV's, a .753 > .474 FT% edge (chasm is more like it), and more steals - head-2-head.

Shaq was more dominant offensively, but Hakeem was overall a better player that could fit more different styles (IE fast break), and not have to be removed at the end of close games due to pathetic FT shooting, and Hakeem was a much better defensive player throughout his career, while Shaq was only good for a few years.

llemon
06-03-2011, 11:19 PM
Wilt had basketball skills though.

Wilt was an incredible athlete Really, a record setting (at that time, I believe) hurdler. His sport was track (if you consider that a sport). If he had a heart for the game of basketball, that would have been incredibly scary story.

But Wilt was different.

bagwell368
06-03-2011, 11:20 PM
He was literally a man playing among boys, sans Bill Russell of course who he couldn't beat.

Correction: The 76'ers of 1967 blasted Russell and the Celtics - the only year Wilt clearly played for a superior team of the years he faced Russell - with perhaps the exception of the '69 Lakers. Russell had the best team, and the best Coach/GM of all time behind him. So I can't accept that formulation given the advantages Russell had.

Storch
06-03-2011, 11:23 PM
Shaq was only exceptional for a few years, there are other centers that were dominant from "nearly" start to finish.

Cano4prez
06-03-2011, 11:29 PM
Probably because he isn't :shrug:

Master Mind
06-03-2011, 11:34 PM
Because he's a shapeless turd.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBTBToJBAIk&feature=related

RaidersLakers24
06-04-2011, 12:05 AM
Outside of Kareem I would take shaq over any other center ever

All-time players id take Jordan, and then Kobe 2nd since he's my favorite player ever!

Law25
06-04-2011, 12:20 AM
Shaq had and decent low post game but what worked against him was what made him great which is his raw power. He was so damn strong and athletic and no one could handel that and he knew it. Shaq knew he was special and that made him lazy. Had he had the drive of an less gifted player he would have been the greatest ever with no comparisons.

Sadds The Gr8
06-04-2011, 12:22 AM
Shaq was only exceptional for a few years, there are other centers that were dominant from "nearly" start to finish.

lol? from 1993-2006 he dominated...since when is nearly 15 "a few"?

DoJoTheSlasher
06-04-2011, 12:26 AM
Kareem, Wilt, Russell and Hakeem were all better.

Kareem is the greatest scorer of all time.
Russell is the greatest defender and rebounder of all time.
Wilt has an argument for greatest scorer and rebounder of all time.
Hakeem was the greatest low post scorer of all time and a much better defender than Shaq.

JNA17
06-04-2011, 12:34 AM
1. Kareem
2. Hakeem
3. Shaq
4. Wilt
5. Russell

THE MTL
06-04-2011, 01:40 AM
shaq was in his prime when the other good ones were just getting out of their prime. he was the most dominant player ever because of how huge he was, not for his bball skill persay

Well, there were still quite a few great centers in the league when Shaq played. However, in Russell-Chamberlain era not so much.

ppl are quick to put those guys ahead of shaq. however, how would a 6'10" skinny frame center hold up in today's age? im not knocking Russel at all but some things u just gotta think about.

Chamberlain averaged 50ppg one season, however ppl that actually seen him play just say that he was so big that no one could match up with him. He would simply get the ball and score over smaller players all day long. (effortless)

I totally consider Shaq the best center of all time. He was so dominant and competition level was still high.

But you cannot go wrong with any of the following though: Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem, Wilt, and Russell.

THE MTL
06-04-2011, 01:46 AM
Shaq was only exceptional for a few years, there are other centers that were dominant from "nearly" start to finish.

Umm, learn ur history dude. Shaq was dominant since he got into the league until 2006 (Miami Heat championship). And then he even had that comeback season in Phoenix.

The difference is that those guys knew when to retire (outside of Kareem who played in his 40s). Russell played 13 seasons. Wilt played 16 seasons. Shaq played 19 seasons.

EaglePride615
06-04-2011, 02:23 AM
because one, kareem is better, two hakeem is better, three wilt is better, four no

FUKudomeYOMOMMA
06-04-2011, 02:50 AM
the greatest center of ALL TIME is the one and only ARVYDAS SABONIS!.... too bad there isnt much video of him in prime form due to politics at the time... he was pretty much a young shaq with an awesome outside shot... he was too beast, the physicality of shaq with the fundamentals and finesse of hakeem

Bruno
06-04-2011, 03:16 AM
All this is a moot point. Shaq is 6. I'm done.

Not a single point I mentioned was mute. You chose to not answer it because you can't.

Bruno
06-04-2011, 03:20 AM
its da skills. shaq couldnt hint the j, he wasnt the fire breathing defensive beast of a center like ewin g

Well Chronz, when you put it like that it encourages me reconsider my position.

Law25
06-04-2011, 03:40 AM
Weren't wilt and bill facing inferior players too... Hell they were playing centers who were barely 6 feet tall. You think that isn't an advantage when it comes to rebounding and blocking shots. Bill Russell played with Cousy and the celtics, WIlt played with West the logo his last years as an Laker, Kareem with magic and oscar etc... EVeryone had great players to lean on. SHaq was mvp of all finals he won with kobe. Speaks high volumes.

Thought i'll help your point. :D

24/7
06-04-2011, 04:10 AM
1. Hakeem
2. Kareem
3. Shaq.

llemon
06-04-2011, 12:14 PM
Umm, learn ur history dude. Shaq was dominant since he got into the league until 2006 (Miami Heat championship). And then he even had that comeback season in Phoenix.

The difference is that those guys knew when to retire (outside of Kareem who played in his 40s). Russell played 13 seasons. Wilt played 16 seasons. Shaq played 19 seasons.

Wilt played 14 seasons.

Shaq entered the NBA at 20, Wilt at 23.

Compare Wilt's stats to Shaq's when they were 36 years old.

justinnum1
06-04-2011, 12:17 PM
A lot happened before 1995, do some research

Hangtime
06-04-2011, 03:48 PM
Shaq would dominate any of those guys down low because of his size advantage offensively and defensively. Remember playing against those big tall heavy kids when you were little? You can't move them and they push you around all game. His strength is unreal.

Hmmm........so what happens on the other end when Shaq has to play defense against those guys in their prime? Were they not great scorers in and out the paint as well?

Are you telling me they can't score on Shaq as well? Being dominant means not only scoring on a man but being able to stop him from scoring and rebounding as well as being a factor defensively blocking shots. Most of those other greats have other ways of scoring on Shaq. He doesn't get the night off not having to play defense against Mutumbo, Ben Wallace, or some of the other offensively challenged centers. Shaq can't just save his energy on the offensive end when Hakeem, Wilt, and Kareem are able to put points up as well.

JasonJohnHorn
06-04-2011, 04:03 PM
Because he's not. He has the range of a yard stick, lacked in defensive dominance, was not as prolific a play maker as other great centers, and was never even a league leader in rebounds. Wilt. Russell. Kareem. Hakeem. Robinson. Then Shaq. I put him over Moses because he was a better passer than Moses, and over Ewing because he was a better rebounder and scorer. I dont think there are any other centers from the shot clock era that are capable of unseeding any of those guys save Dwight Howard, but we have yet to see what Howard makes of his career.

mrbtp
06-04-2011, 04:08 PM
simple: Bill Russel

KingPosey
06-05-2011, 12:28 AM
:laugh2: Not all the time but a hell of a lot more than Shaq did! He still couldn't get unattested free throws down after 19 years. Only thing Shaq was is he was ****ing gigantic. **** Shaq.

your knowledge kills me sometimes oxlong. Look at Wilt's free throw percentages and keep comparing him and shaq. Shaq is a better freethrow shooter.:facepalm:

KingPosey
06-05-2011, 12:37 AM
All this is a moot point. Shaq is 6. I'm done.

your done debating? I was unaware you even started, I have been sitting here waiting for you to actually bring something to the table in this discussion.

KingPosey
06-05-2011, 12:43 AM
Special rules that catered to him? You mean like when they instituted the zone defense allowing you to double team Shaq without even having the ball just because nobody could stop him? Yeah right.


People want to discredit Shaq so bad its really funny. Sort of reminds me how they do this other great Laker champion.......

In his prime, the 3 second rule did not exist for Shaq when he was in the key.

Hiphopopotamus
06-05-2011, 12:53 AM
simple: Bill Russel

+1.

I love Shaq, I think he will always be held in slightly less regard then Russell or Wilt because you can't beat ghosts, also it is perceived that he didn't get the most out if his talent.

1.Russell
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem
6. Robinson

Chronz
06-05-2011, 01:12 AM
How come shaq is the only legendary center who gets called out for not getting the most out of his talent but the rest get a free pass. I would understand if it was because he had the most potential by and large but wilt had even greater potential. None of them maximized their talents and its fair to say this is the norm for stars, we expect so much from them that we ignore how great they truly were .

34Dayz
06-05-2011, 01:56 AM
Gotta love the fool's who act like all Shaq could do was dunk the ball and nothing else, ignoring the fact that in his semi-young and prime years he had a plethora of post moves and decent range on most of his hook shot especially on that lefty hook from the side of the hoop. Although he was a once in a generation "freak athelte" who couid really dunk at will on just about anyone im pretty certain 60-70% of his shots came on hooks and other post moves which he developed.

Also Shaq was an elite post defender and shotblocker until around 2004/05 and didnt really fully degrade as a defensive player in my mind until he left miami. There is a reason why in ORL and LA most guards were afraid to drive the lane and that was because they would either get there shot sent deep into the backrows by Shaq or be forced to jump into a brick wall.

The Shaq haters will pretend like he wasnt one of the best defensive centers in the league during his time in Orl and LA and act like he didnt anchour the defense for those teams its pathetic. This guy is without a doubt a Top 3 center of all time. I consider him the greatest center of all time. I dont have a problem with someone saying theyd rather have Wilt,Kareem, or Even Hakeem over him but those are the only centers that even have a argument over the big fella. Still none of those players were as dominant as Shaq was or as unstoppable. In his prime you could throw your entire team at him and if he wanted he would still either get a dunk or be fouled.

34Dayz
06-05-2011, 02:05 AM
Infact other then Hakeem, Shaq's range was on par with every other Center in the top 4 (I dont include russel because he wasnt an offensive player)

I've seen Video of Wilt and his range on his fall away and hook shots wasn't any farther out then from where Shaq shot from on his Hook's and I'd say 95% of Kareem's shots and Sky-Hook's were in the same area and rarely further out, you act like Shaq is somehow less skilled because he was alot stronger and able to dunk more often but this is simply 100% false.

Shaq had 2-4 Reliable Hook Shot's and 3-4 under and around the Basket post moves and no one and I mean no one was ever able to stop them.