Does anyone actually have Shaq ahead of Duncan all time?

[clutchinho]

Lets talk about the best big man of this generation, and the general consensus is always that it's a toss up between Duncan and Shaq

But then you sit down and think it over, and there's no argument for Shaq being ahead of Duncan all-time.

-Duncan's got more titles
-Duncan's got more individual awards
-Duncan's got the longevity, he's still relevant in his 16th season while Shaq was a walking corpse at that stage of his career.
-Duncan wasn't ever a liability in the 4th quarter
-Duncan never got swept 5 times in 6 years in his prime like Shaq did.
-Intangibles aren't even comparable, Duncan's one of the best teammates in the league and a rock for his franchise.

Shaq was the more dominant scorer at his best,and for a 2-3 year stretch in the early 2000's you would have taken him in front of Duncan if you wanted to win a title.

But apart from that, it's not even close.

[andremiller07]

OF course shaq has more rings bruh
They both got 4?

[longtime lurker]

Lets talk about the best big man of this generation, and the general consensus is always that it's a toss up between Duncan and Shaq

But then you sit down and think it over, and there's no argument for Shaq being ahead of Duncan all-time.

-Duncan's got more titles
-Duncan's got more individual awards
-Duncan's got the longevity, he's still relevant in his 16th season while Shaq was a walking corpse at that stage of his career.
-Duncan wasn't ever a liability in the 4th quarter
-Duncan never got swept 5 times in 6 years in his prime like Shaq did.
-Intangibles aren't even comparable, Duncan's one of the best teammates in the league and a rock for his franchise.

Shaq was the more dominant scorer at his best,and for a 2-3 year stretch in the early 2000's you would have taken him in front of Duncan if you wanted to win a title.

But apart from that, it's not even close.

The both have the same amount of titles. Duncan has one more MVP and we all know MVP voting is bullshit. Duncan has never 3 peated, Shaq had. Shaq has also been to the finals more times than Duncan. Really it's a toss up between the two depending on personal preference.

[dh144498]

5 for shaq

:wtf: :biggums:

[andremiller07]

5 for shaq
x3 with the Lakers x1 with the Heat = 4?

[Dragonyeuw]

-Duncan's got more titles
-Duncan's got more individual awards
-Duncan's got the longevity, he's still relevant in his 16th season while Shaq was a walking corpse at that stage of his career.
-Duncan wasn't ever a liability in the 4th quarter



- They both have 4

- Steve Nash has more MVPs that Shaq. What does that say?

-Shaq was a dominant force from 1992-2006. People act like his stretch of dominance was only in the 2000's. He was a dominant force from day one. Duncan has also had a few 'lean years' by his standards( injuries most likely) but has rebounded the past 2 years. But overall, Shaq's longevity is underrated, especially taking into account that his work ethic wasn't stellar.

-Maybe, but Duncan wasn't exactly a stellar free-throw shooter either. Both of them relied on perimeter players (Kobe, Parker,Ginobli) to make late-game clutch baskets and free throws.

[keep-itreal]

let's put it like this. if you're a center, who do you think would be more difficult to guard, prime shaq or prime duncan?

No doubt it is Shaq

[clutchinho]

- They both have 4

- Steve Nash has more MVPs that Shaq. What does that say?

-Shaq was a dominant force from 1992-2006. People act like his stretch of dominance was only in the 2000's. He was a dominant force from day one. Duncan has also had a few 'lean years' by his standards( injuries most likely) but has rebounded the past 2 years. But overall, Shaq's longevity is underrated, especially taking into account that his work ethic wasn't stellar.

-Maybe, but Duncan wasn't exactly a stellar free-throw shooter either. Both of them relied on perimeter players (Kobe, Parker,Ginobli) to make late-game clutch baskets and free throws.

1. Check Shaq's support he had on those titles, compared with Duncan's, Shaq has almost always had the undisputed best guard in the game in his title seasons.

2. More MVPs, More All D teams, more DPOYS, more All NBA teams

3. Dominant force from 92-06 :lol :lol, what sort of dominant force gets swept 5 times in 6 seasons with the amount of help he had? Shaq was dominant in 2000-2002, get it right



If anything, Shaq has never really been able to prove he can get past Duncan in his prime. His first title season(99-00) came in a season where Duncan missed the playoffs as the defending champs. and the following 2 title years, it was Kobe's play that the Spurs had no answer for.

[kobeef24]

God the people in this thread are retarded. They both have 4 rings and 3 finals mvps. I have Duncan ahead of Shaq all time due to individual awards and longevity, but Shaq is ahead of Duncan in terms of peak play. It's really a toss up.

[clutchinho]

let's put it like this. if you're a center, who do you think would be more difficult to guard, prime shaq or prime duncan?

No doubt it is Shaq


right..... so that's why Shaq got swept 5 times in 6 years in his prime, cause he's unguardable.... so unguardable he couldnt even win one game.


Greg Ostertag got inside prime Shaq's head and sent him home with broomsticks

Have you only started watching basketball since Lebron went to the Heat? do you really believe everything Shaq tells you about himself on TNT :lol :lol :lol

[dh144498]

right..... so that's why Shaq got swept 5 times in 6 years in his prime, cause he's unguardable.... so unguardable he couldnt even win one game.


Greg Ostertag got inside prime Shaq's head and sent him home with broomsticks

Have you only started watching basketball since Lebron went to the Heat? do you really believe everything Shaq tells you about himself on TNT :lol :lol :lol

:oldlol:

[Burgz V2]

5 for shaq

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[KobesFinger]

1. Check Shaq's support he had on those titles, compared with Duncan's, Shaq has almost always had the undisputed best guard in the game in his title seasons.

2. More MVPs, More All D teams, more DPOYS, more All NBA teams

3. Dominant force from 92-06 :lol :lol, what sort of dominant force gets swept 5 times in 6 seasons with the amount of help he had? Shaq was dominant in 2000-2002, get it right



If anything, Shaq has never really been able to prove he can get past Duncan in his prime. His first title season(99-00) came in a season where Duncan missed the playoffs as the defending champs. and the following 2 title years, it was Kobe's play that the Spurs had no answer for.

Neither of them have a DPOY. Shaq was a dominant force, individual players don't get swept

[Twiens]

Prime - Shaq easily
Longetivity- Timmy

[NumberSix]

I do.

[clutchinho]

Neither of them have a DPOY. Shaq was a dominant force, individual players don't get swept

Dominant no doubt, but what makes him more dominant than Duncan? because he dunks the ball harder??

If he was so dominant, why couldnt he lead his team to at least one win in a series. How could he couldn't get past the Spurs or Duncan until Kobe was averaging 30 a game

[Dragonyeuw]

1. Check Shaq's support he had on those titles, compared with Duncan's, Shaq has almost always had the undisputed best guard in the game in his title seasons.

2. More MVPs, More All D teams, more DPOYS, more All NBA teams

3. Dominant force from 92-06 :lol :lol, what sort of dominant force gets swept 5 times in 6 seasons with the amount of help he had? Shaq was dominant in 2000-2002, get it right



If anything, Shaq has never really been able to prove he can get past Duncan in his prime. His first title season(99-00) came in a season where Duncan missed the playoffs as the defending champs. and the following 2 title years, it was Kobe's play that the Spurs had no answer for.

1.Shaq had Kobe, then who? Derek Fisher? Rick Fox? Robery Horry? Then with Miami he had Wade, then who? Jason Williams? Antoine Walker? An aging Payton and Mourning? You really gonna act like those players are some cut above the role players Duncan has played with? Kobe wasn't considered the best guard in the game when LA won in 2000,BTW. Duncan for the 2005 and 2007 titles had two legit all-star players in Parker and Ginobli next to him, and role players easily on par with the role players Shaq played with in LA and Miami.

2. Again, Nash has two MVPs. I guess he's better than Shaq too? Granted Duncan has been the better defender, no argument there. But the difference in their defense isn't as wide as the overwhelming gap between them in scoring prowess. Peak Shaq was UNSTOPPABLE on offense. DPOY? Duncan doesn't have any DPOY awards. Duncan has 10 first team selections.Shaq 8 first team. Whoopty-do big difference, nor is it an apples to apples comparison as Shaq's come at the center position, Duncan's at the forward spot for the most part.

3. Shaq, as an INDIVIDUAL talent, was dominant from day one. You're crazy if you think otherwise. He got swept 5 times.... Do you forget to who, and when? 95 Rockets, as an up and coming talent, against Hakeem playing GOAT level basketball. The 72-10 Bulls, widely regarded as one of the great teams ever. He got swept by Duncan's Spurs in 99 with a still raw Kobe as the next best player. I guess I don't have to remind you in 2001, when both were at their peak, Shaq swept Duncan? And while Kobe was great in that series, let's not act like Shaq wasn't a dominant force inside against BOTH Duncan and Robinson.

- So it was Kobe's play that was the deciding factor against the Spurs in 2001 and 2002, perhaps you should add a dose of context to that by looking up Shaq's stats against the Spurs in 2001 and 2002 playing inside against BOTH Duncan and Robinson as I said before. Spurs really had no answer for Shaq either.

[Dragonyeuw]

If he was so dominant, why couldnt he lead his team to at least one win in a series. How could he couldn't get past the Spurs or Duncan until Kobe was averaging 30 a game

Just maybe, because the Spurs were an overall better team than the Lakers until Kobe developed into a great player? Are you saying that Shaq isn't that dominant because he couldn't get past a superior team until he had enough help? The 2000's Lakers were very top heavy with Shaq and Kobe, and then a HUGE dropoff in talent and production. The Spurs, from 1-12 were a better overall team than the Lakers.

This is also like saying Michael Jordan or Lebron James weren't 'that dominant' until they actually had good enough talent around them to win titles.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan

In that order, imo. Depending how TD plays from here on out, I may move him up.

[edrick]

People are already forgetting how dominate prime Shaq was. :wtf:

[MavAlbert]

People are already forgetting how dominate prime Shaq was. :wtf:


Dominant.

[jzek]

I do (but that's because I don't like Timmay [I think he's boring to watch]).

[jzek]

Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan

In that order, imo. Depending how TD plays from here on out, I may move him up.

Why do you have Shaq over Hakeem? Just curious. As far as I'm concerned, Shaq has one MAJOR weakness (you can't put him at the end of close games since he can't hit FTs) whereas Hakeem has none and obliterated every single dominant center in his prime (Ewing, Robinson, Shaq, etc.)

No weakness > one MAJOR weakness

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Why do you have Shaq over Hakeem? Just curious. As far as I'm concerned, Shaq has one MAJOR weakness (you can't put him at the end of close games since he can't hit FTs) whereas Hakeem has none and obliterated every single dominant center in his prime (Ewing, Robinson, Shaq, etc.)

No weakness > one MAJOR weakness

Mostly for longevity reasons. Shaq had a longer prime and, especially at his peak, played well above his standards in every NBA Finals he was in.

As far as careers go, they're about equal. I wouldn't have a problem with anyone ranking Hakeem over Shaq.

[daprunus]

The longevity is not a factor here. O'neal played great so many years.

At least I don't consider Duncan better for play with regularity 3 or 4 more years than Shaq.

[ispin69]

Clutchinho
April 2013

[pauk]

Everybody?

Shaq was just a much more dominant player / better player, probably the most dominant player i ever seen....

[cookiemonster]

Prime - Shaq easily
Longetivity- Timmy

I don't quite get the longevity argument. Duncan is 37 now. Wasn't Shaq 38 when he was in Phoenix?

[jzek]

Does anyone know the head to head stats between Shaq and Duncan? Stats for both as well as wins/losses?

[dh144498]

Does anyone know the head to head stats between Shaq and Duncan? Stats for both as well as wins/losses?

regular season:

Shaq: 18 wins, 14 loses
21.7 - 10.6 - 1.7 2.7 blks 53.3%FG

Duncan: 14 wins 14 loses
22.0 - 12.1 - 2.7 1.4blks 45.2%FG


playoffs:

Shaq: 15w 15l
22.4 - 12.8 - 2.2 2.8blks 52.6%FG

Duncan: 15w 15l
25.6 - 13.0 - 3.8 2.4blks 48.5%FG

[RichieW]

If you're looking to win a title in a single season, everyone takes prime Shaq over prime Duncan. That's not a slight on Duncan, prime Shaq may have been the most dominant player ever.

If I'm looking for a player to draft and build my franchise around, I take Duncan. Stronger work ethic, longevity and he still had an excellent prime.

Remember Duncan swept Shaq/Kobe in '99 and beat them in '03. He lost to them in '01, '02 and '04. It's not like it was a completely one sided affair, and Kobe was a better #2 than anyone Duncan had in any of those years.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Majority:
Shaq 8th
Duncan 10th

ISH:
Shaq 7th
Duncan 9th

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

regular season:

Shaq: 18 wins, 14 loses
21.7 - 10.6 - 1.7 2.7 blks 53.3%FG

Duncan: 14 wins 14 loses
22.0 - 12.1 - 2.7 1.4blks 45.2%FG


playoffs:

Shaq: 15w 15l
22.4 - 12.8 - 2.2 2.8blks 52.6%FG

Duncan: 15w 15l
25.6 - 13.0 - 3.8 2.4blks 48.5%FG

Do you have their H2H stats pre-2007?

[KobesFinger]

Dominant no doubt, but wht makes him more dominant than Duncan? because he dunks the ball harder??

If he was so dominant, why couldnt he lead his team to at least one win in a series. How could he couldn't get past the Spurs or Duncan until Kobe was averaging 30 a game

It was harder to stop him from getting his. From 1992-2006 he averaged 26/12 on .580 shooting. He reached the Finals in 95, so I don't know where you get the idea that he couldn't win playoff games from. As other people have said, the 3 peat Lakers were reliant on Shaq and Kobe whereas Duncan's title teams had more balance.

[dh144498]

Do you have their H2H stats pre-2007?

pre 2007-2008 season
regular season:

14W 10L
shaq - 24.1 - 11.4 - 2.1 54.3%FG


10W 14L
duncan - 22.5 - 12.7 - 2.8 45%FG



just did the playoffs:

pre 2007

Shaq: 14w 11L
23.8 - 13.52 - 2.44 2.84 blks 53.8%FG

Duncan: 11w 14L
25.8 - 12.84 - 4 2.4blks 48.3%FG

[TheCorporation]

Duncan was never dominant like Shaq was. Hell, I don't know if many players ever were.

Duncan played alongside David Robinson, and then Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli. Coaches are a wash (Pop and PJax).

Take a gander at some of Shaq's Finals performance averages, and then come back and tell me it wasn't one of the most dominant Finals performances of all time.


Shaq's Finals performance average in 2000

38-17-2 with 1 steal and 3 blocks, on 61% (PER 31.1)

:lol :lol :lol

Let me know when Duncan gets close to this in the Finals.

[Jacks3]

Shaq was a better basketball player and it's not really all that close.

And that should be the only thing that matters.

[COnDEMnED]

OF course shaq has more rings bruh
DUDE!!

[JMT]

Shaq was a better basketball player and it's not really all that close.

And that should be the only thing that matters.

Shaq is bigger and was, when he cared to be in shape, a dominant force.

But a better basketball player? uh-uh. Duncan does more things well, even at this late stage, than Shaq did for most of his career.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

pre 2007-2008 season
regular season:

14W 10L
shaq - 24.1 - 11.4 - 2.1 54.3%FG


10W 14L
duncan - 22.5 - 12.7 - 2.8 45%FG



just did the playoffs:

pre 2007

Shaq: 14w 11L
23.8 - 13.52 - 2.44 2.84 blks 53.8%FG

Duncan: 11w 14L
25.8 - 12.84 - 4 2.4blks 48.3%FG

Nice. Thanks. :cheers:

Here are Shaq's H2H stats against Duncan/Robinson in the playoffs
24.4ppg / 2.2 / 13.1 / 51% shooting

And Duncan's stats vs Shaq in the playoffs (with Robinson)
27.2ppg / 2.7 / 13.0 / .486% shooting

Just some food for thought ...

[StocktonFan]

lol @ duncan's longetivity... shaq was drafted in 92 you idiots. Duncan was drafted around kobe's draft date +/- a year.

[Jacks3]

"Doing more things well" doesn't make someone the better player, or else Pippen would be considered as good as Magic.

Bottom-line, Shaq from 00-02 completely obliterates any version of Duncan as a basketball player. Duncan never, ever inspired the type of fear and awe that Shaq did in his prime.

[Micku]

Lets talk about the best big man of this generation, and the general consensus is always that it's a toss up between Duncan and Shaq

But then you sit down and think it over, and there's no argument for Shaq being ahead of Duncan all-time.

-Duncan's got more titles
-Duncan's got more individual awards
-Duncan's got the longevity, he's still relevant in his 16th season while Shaq was a walking corpse at that stage of his career.
-Duncan wasn't ever a liability in the 4th quarter
-Duncan never got swept 5 times in 6 years in his prime like Shaq did.
-Intangibles aren't even comparable, Duncan's one of the best teammates in the league and a rock for his franchise.

Shaq was the more dominant scorer at his best,and for a 2-3 year stretch in the early 2000's you would have taken him in front of Duncan if you wanted to win a title.

But apart from that, it's not even close.

Actually, Shaq's longevity is not that bad. In his 17th season, Shaq did average:

17.8 ppg, 8.4 rbs, on 60.9% FG.

And you probably forgot that Duncan when he was 34/35 he averaged:

13.4 ppg, 8.9 rbs, on 50% shooting. It's not bad, but everyone else thought he was just going to go downhill from there because of injuries and age.

Shaq was not bad at all, but since he been with a lot of teams, was never really healthy in the post season in his latter years, ppl seem to underrate his play. This is where Duncan is better. You have to credit Pop for managing his minutes well and Duncan for being in shape to play this long. And his defense this year is better has been the best since 2007 probably.

But still, Duncan was never the player that Shaq was in his prime. He wasn't the player that Shaq was from 1993-03 really. He was never that dominant.

[TonyMontana]

Shaqs longevity > Duncans Shaq has the most consecutive 20-10 seasons of any bigman in NBA History. His longevity is amazing. Just because you didn't watch him until he got to Miami and the Suns doesn't mean he wasn't dominating the NBA longer than anyone. I dont care about Duncan being better at 37 years old. 37 year old Duncan wont win you a title without having arguably the best point guard on his team on top of the best coach on top of the best supporting cast.

Ask any bigman that played in the late 90s and early 00s about who they would have rather guarded. Shaq gave these guys nightmares. You knew what Shaq was going to do, but there was nothing you could do about it, but try and save yourself an emergency room visit.

[Jacks3]

But still, Duncan was never the player that Shaq was in his prime. He wasn't the player that Shaq was from 1993-03 really. He was never that dominant.
This.

[lpublic_enemyl]

wow duncan is a great player but shaq was more dominant.. Think about it they had to change the rules in the nba because of shaq:bowdown:

[Mr. Jabbar]

I do. Shaq was able to win with way different systems & teammates, Duncan under Pops tutelage his whole career has denied us of witnessing what e was able to do w/o him. no need to even mention the gap in performance during shaqs prime

[ShaqAttack3234]

Yes, I do have Shaq ahead of Duncan. Take it with a grain of salt if you like, I really don't care. But fwiw, I saw both play in their primes, and was convinced Shaq was the better player. Considering both proved you could win multiple titles with them, it's as simple as that to me.

[SCdac]

http://www.celticstown.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/celtics-huddle-shaq-kevin-garnett-500x281.jpg

Shaq's "longevity" is so overrated.

He ring-chased basically up until the very moment he became a tv commentator... Like he stepped right off the court into TNT studios :oldlol:

Career-wise I'd take Duncan, peak-wise I'd take Shaq.

If only Sahq put in more effort and work, dude could of been even more of a HOF'er.

Duncan seems like the opposite, is a team player, and is getting the most out of his career.

Would have loved seeing Duncan teamed up with Lebron, Nash, or KG in the last few years.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Shaq's "longevity" is so overrated.

How is his longevity overrated when he's often brought up as an example of a player who lacked longevity? People these days only bring up the 3 years the Lakers won a title, and forget completely that he had 10 consecutive years where his lowest scoring average was 26.2 ppg and lowest rpg was 10.7 rpg and his team won 50 games all of those seasons except for the lockout when they were on pace to do it, and then won 50 games 3 additional years.

He entered the league as a 23/14, 3.5 bpg player whose team improved by 20 wins, was in the finals by his 3rd year while leading the league in scoring and finishing 2nd in MVP voting in '95, and then is runner up in MVP voting a decade later in '05 while improving the Heat from a barely .500 team to a 59 win title contender, and a year after that wins a title at 34 years old while still a 20/9 player.

That's 14 years as a top 10 player, 12 as a top 5 player and all for a guy who some act like was only dominant for the 3peat.

I don't care much to argue who the better player is with you. You take Duncan, I take Shaq, which is cool, neither of us will change our minds, and shouldn't have to. But there's simply no basis for Shaq's longevity being "overrated."

[ninephive]

Shaqs longevity > Duncans Shaq has the most consecutive 20-10 seasons of any bigman in NBA History. His longevity is amazing. Just because you didn't watch him until he got to Miami and the Suns doesn't mean he wasn't dominating the NBA longer than anyone. I dont care about Duncan being better at 37 years old. 37 year old Duncan wont win you a title without having arguably the best point guard on his team on top of the best coach on top of the best supporting cast.

Ask any bigman that played in the late 90s and early 00s about who they would have rather guarded. Shaq gave these guys nightmares. You knew what Shaq was going to do, but there was nothing you could do about it, but try and save yourself an emergency room visit.
If Shaq's longevity was that amazing, he wouldn't have become a journeyman that no one wanted. We're talking about a guy who played for SIX different teams. How many all-time greats have been tossed around like that?

The problem with Shaq's longevity is that he was never a great defender. Even when Duncan aged and couldn't score as well, his value as a defender has made the Spurs keep him as the second-best player on a team headed to the Finals yet again at age 37. AND Duncan's career isn't over (he's actually IMPROVED the last 2 years statistically and in team success). Who's to say next year isn't the same when people were calling Duncan old and done 5 years ago? Now he's arguably the best defender in the league. What he's doing is unprecedented.

[Dragonyeuw]

How is his longevity overrated when he's often brought up as an example of a player who lacked longevity? People these days only bring up the 3 years the Lakers won a title, and forget completely that he had 10 consecutive years where his lowest scoring average was 26.2 ppg and lowest rpg was 10.7 rpg and his team won 50 games all of those seasons except for the lockout when they were on pace to do it, and then won 50 games 3 additional years.

He entered the league as a 23/14, 3.5 bpg player whose team improved by 20 wins, was in the finals by his 3rd year while leading the league in scoring and finishing 2nd in MVP voting in '95, and then is runner up in MVP voting a decade later in '05 while improving the Heat from a barely .500 team to a 59 win title contender, and a year after that wins a title at 34 years old while still a 20/9 player.

That's 14 years as a top 10 player, 12 as a top 5 player and all for a guy who some act like was only dominant for the 3peat.



:cheers: And yet, the guy I was arguing with earlier claims Shaq was only dominant from 2000-2002.

[JellyBean]

I have Shaq ahead of Duncan on the all-time list. When the league creates rules to stop you (Shaq), that puts you head and shoulders ahead of Big Fundamental Tim Duncan.

[KG215]

Shaq's "longevity" is so overrated.

Please explain. He was basically a top level player from the time he stepped into the league in 1992-1993 and stayed at the elite level until 2005-2006, with a resurgence (not to elite status necessarily) a few years later in Phoenix.

[TonyMontana]

If Shaq's longevity was that amazing, he wouldn't have become a journeyman that no one wanted. We're talking about a guy who played for SIX different teams. How many all-time greats have been tossed around like that?

The problem with Shaq's longevity is that he was never a great defender. Even when Duncan aged and couldn't score as well, his value as a defender has made the Spurs keep him as the second-best player on a team headed to the Finals yet again at age 37. AND Duncan's career isn't over (he's actually IMPROVED the last 2 years statistically and in team success). Who's to say next year isn't the same when people were calling Duncan old and done 5 years ago? Now he's arguably the best defender in the league. What he's doing is unprecedented.

Yep another little kid that just knows Shaq as the journeyman in his late 30s.

13 consecutive years of 20-10 play(the record).

How many did Duncan have? 8. Both of them had their first non 20-10 year in 2006 despite Shaq entering the league 5 years before Duncan.

I don't give a **** about what Duncan is doing at age 37 nor do I about Shaq. These guys arn't getting to the hall of fame for what their doing at that age. Their getting in there for their ability to dominate the entire league for when they were younger and Shaq was on a different level than Duncan.

[SCdac]

How is his longevity overrated when he's often brought up as an example of a player who lacked longevity? People these days only bring up the 3 years the Lakers won a title, and forget completely that he had 10 consecutive years where his lowest scoring average was 26.2 ppg and lowest rpg was 10.7 rpg and his team won 50 games all of those seasons except for the lockout when they were on pace to do it, and then won 50 games 3 additional years.

He entered the league as a 23/14, 3.5 bpg player whose team improved by 20 wins, was in the finals by his 3rd year while leading the league in scoring and finishing 2nd in MVP voting in '95, and then is runner up in MVP voting a decade later in '05 while improving the Heat from a barely .500 team to a 59 win title contender, and a year after that wins a title at 34 years old while still a 20/9 player.

That's 14 years as a top 10 player, 12 as a top 5 player and all for a guy who some act like was only dominant for the 3peat.

I don't care much to argue who the better player is with you. You take Duncan, I take Shaq, which is cool, neither of us will change our minds, and shouldn't have to. But there's simply no basis for Shaq's longevity being "overrated."

I get the gist of your post, but anybody who cites how long in total he played in the NBA in terms of his longevity is overrating it. That's my point. He could have/should have retired sooner. In the tail end of his career, he was thriving mostly on his huge size and stature yet was out of shape and basically going through the motions. He missed a ton of games through out his career which Duncan didn't do. Just not impressed with Shaqs exit from the NBA or his supposed longevity. At 33/34 he won as a second option (his scoring went down in the postseason), and there's nothing about Duncan's career that suggests to me he couldn't win as a second option playing next to prime 27-28 ppg Dwayne Wade. Let alone somebody like Lebron.

[SCdac]

Please explain. He was basically a top level player from the time he stepped into the league in 1992-1993 and stayed at the elite level until 2005-2006, with a resurgence (not to elite status necessarily) a few years later in Phoenix.

lol Phoenix... his phoenix team got knocked out the first round by Duncan's team... and they missed the playoffs the next season... Big whoop.

[Myth]

Duncan is one of my favorite players of all time while Shaq played for my most hated team in his prime, so I have no reason to favor Shaq. But I have Shaq ranked over Duncan. In his prime, he was unstoppable. Duncan had the better career, so if we are ranking career accomplishments then Duncan is ranked higher, but if we are taking players at their best, I take Shaq.

[rzp]

Duncan's got more titles


retard

[305Baller]

Prime = Shaq
Career = Duncan

[Sharmer]

Anyway you thinks TD could handle Shaq is not thinking straight.

Shaq>> TD.

[KG215]

lol Phoenix... his phoenix team got knocked out the first round by Duncan's team... and they missed the playoffs the next season... Big whoop.
Great rebuttal. I was talking in terms of individual performance/ability. He had a resurgence that year; he averaged 18 and 8 on 61% shooting at 36 years old. I never said it was anything eye-poppingly special, but he was still pretty good for a 36 year old in his 17th season. I'm not saying Shaq's longevity is as good as Duncan's, but you're severely disrespecting how long he was an elite player.

[SCdac]

The problem with Shaq's longevity is that he was never a great defender. Even when Duncan aged and couldn't score as well, his value as a defender has made the Spurs keep him as the second-best player on a team headed to the Finals yet again at age 37. AND Duncan's career isn't over (he's actually IMPROVED the last 2 years statistically and in team success). Who's to say next year isn't the same when people were calling Duncan old and done 5 years ago? Now he's arguably the best defender in the league. What he's doing is unprecedented.

It's very impressive, definitely agreed. Duncan isn't the Spurs best scorer nowadays, but he's easily their best two-way player on the Spurs.

At 37, I'd say he's had better longevity for sure. He's in the best shape of last couple years, which is the opposite of how Shaq finished his career.

He can still throw it down with the best of em too.
http://ballislife.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Untitled-33.jpg

[Sharmer]

Prime = Shaq
Career = Duncan

Shaq career > TD.

[Myth]

I do. Shaq was able to win with way different systems & teammates, Duncan under Pops tutelage his whole career has denied us of witnessing what e was able to do w/o him. no need to even mention the gap in performance during shaqs prime

I have Shaq above Duncan too, but this argument is not a great one. Depending on how you phrase it, it can favor one player or the other. You can say that Shaq won in more than 1 system, but you can also say that he was ring chasing or was run out of winning situations. Or even that those teams that he won with recovered and won without him. A Wade team was able to win without Shaq and a Kobe team was able to win without Shaq. Spurs never won without Duncan, including when they had David Robinson. Pop's only season without Duncan they were the worst team in the league. Those are just a few examples of how that argument can be turned on its head.

You say "no need to even mention the gap in performance during shaqs prime," but really that is the only reason Shaq is considered greater than Duncan by many.

[DMAVS41]

How is his longevity overrated when he's often brought up as an example of a player who lacked longevity? People these days only bring up the 3 years the Lakers won a title, and forget completely that he had 10 consecutive years where his lowest scoring average was 26.2 ppg and lowest rpg was 10.7 rpg and his team won 50 games all of those seasons except for the lockout when they were on pace to do it, and then won 50 games 3 additional years.

He entered the league as a 23/14, 3.5 bpg player whose team improved by 20 wins, was in the finals by his 3rd year while leading the league in scoring and finishing 2nd in MVP voting in '95, and then is runner up in MVP voting a decade later in '05 while improving the Heat from a barely .500 team to a 59 win title contender, and a year after that wins a title at 34 years old while still a 20/9 player.

That's 14 years as a top 10 player, 12 as a top 5 player and all for a guy who some act like was only dominant for the 3peat.

I don't care much to argue who the better player is with you. You take Duncan, I take Shaq, which is cool, neither of us will change our minds, and shouldn't have to. But there's simply no basis for Shaq's longevity being "overrated."

It's definitely not one sided, but the problem I have is that I really feel like Duncan wins more than 4 titles playing his career in shaq's place. Not sure if Shaq wins 4 in place of Duncan...in fact i'd bet he wins less.

That is kind of my tiebreaker...that and Duncan was a better teammate and defender...and you never had to worry about off court stuff impacting on court stuff.

[RichieW]

"Doing more things well" doesn't make someone the better player, or else Pippen would be considered as good as Magic.

Bottom-line, Shaq from 00-02 completely obliterates any version of Duncan as a basketball player. Duncan never, ever inspired the type of fear and awe that Shaq did in his prime.

I don't think anybody is arguing that, but what about when Duncan swept Shaq in '99 and beat him with retiring Robinson and rookies in '03?

[305Baller]

Shaq career > TD.

I dont know about that one. Duncan's longevity is legit.

[Harison]

7. Hakeem
8. Shaq
9. Duncan
10. Kobe

Duncan (and Kobe) might have more accolades, but they never were as dominant as Shaq/Dream.

[RichieW]

Also, if Shaq was as dominant as everybody says, why is he not higher on all time lists? If players value prime > longevity, surely Shaq should be in the Top 3.

[SCdac]

I don't think anybody is arguing that, but what about when Duncan swept Shaq in '99 and beat him with retiring Robinson and rookies in '03?

Not to mention winning 2 MVP's in the middle of Shaq's prime.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I get the gist of your post, but anybody who cites how long in total he played in the NBA in terms of his longevity is overrating it. That's my point. He could have/should have retired sooner. In the tail end of his career, he was thriving mostly on his huge size and stature yet was out of shape and basically going through the motions. He missed a ton of games through out his career which Duncan didn't do. Just not impressed with Shaqs exit from the NBA or his supposed longevity. At 33/34 he won as a second option (his scoring went down in the postseason), and there's nothing about Duncan's career that suggests to me he couldn't win as a second option playing next to prime 27-28 ppg Dwayne Wade. Let alone somebody like Lebron.

I almost never hear somebody cite Shaq playing 19 seasons or until 39 as an example of his longevity, though. And I very rarely hear somebody rank Shaq high and follow it up with longevity as the primary reason.

I don't think Shaq's impact on the '06 Heat should be diminished either. They were 10-13 without him(just 10-11 even when Wade played in those games) and that was with a backup center in Zo who was still better than most starting centers(giving Miami 12/9 with 4 bpg and 30 mpg as a starter) He was still an enormous factor because even at that stage he was getting teams into foul trouble, changing their defenses and drawing doubles while still good for close to 20/10 per game. Closed out Chicago with a 30/20/5 game and averaged 20/10/2/2, 61% for the series. Also closed out the 64 win Pistons with one of the better frontcourts with a 28/16/5, 12/14 FG game while Wade was limited with the flu(put up 14/4/10 on 6/15 shooting) and averaged 22/11/2 on 66% for the series.

Even though he had a mediocre series vs Dallas, his impact was still there because of how often Dallas doubled him. He wasn't always immediately doubled on the catch, though he often was, but it was rare for a second defender not to come when he went to make his move. In fact, he appeared to be the primary focus of the Mavs defense until at least game 5, when of course, they had more reason to be worried about Wade by that point. And overall, he did play well in games 3-5 when Miami established control of the series and put up 14/10/3 for the series.

II think it also shows that even then Shaq was still an anomaly at the center position as far as offensive impact. Even if it was partially based on reputation at that point, and much of the rest was based on the fact he was 7'2", 350 and you couldn't match up with him, I believe he did make things easier on Wade. In a good sample size, Wade shot a shade under 45% in the 21 games he played with Shaq, and almost 52% in the 54 games he played with him..

Duncan was roughly the same age as 2006 Shaq within 2 months during the 2009-2010 season, and in his 14th season during the 2010-2011 season. I don't know which would be more fair to use as a comparison, but I'd say 2006 Shaq was definitely a better player than 2011 Duncan, though 2010 Duncan is reasonably close.

I have no idea if they still win with 2010 Duncan instead of 2006 Shaq. They're a different team, but it's impossible to say how much that affects things. Would it be improbable for them to win? I wouldn't say that, but is it a lock they still beat Detroit? Definitely not.

I will say that the last 3 years, the Spurs have been pretty damn stacked so I don't see how Duncan's odds improve in Shaq's position at the same stage in his career especially since those teams weren't nearly as well-built, or in the case of Phoenix, nearly as well-coached as well.

As far as Cleveland? Shaq was 2 years farther along in his career at that point and a year older, so I don't think that comparison is particularly relevant. As a side point, I'd be willing to discuss my views on that year in a follow up post, but don't wish to make this current one any longer.


Also, if Shaq was as dominant as everybody says, why is he not higher on all time lists? If players value prime > longevity, surely Shaq should be in the Top 3.

On what "all-time lists?" You're acting as if there's an established list we can all agree. Those lists are subjective and vary from person to person, and also vary from generation to generation. Shaq is a case of a guy who was clearly more highly regarded from a historical standpoint during his prime than he currently is, though. Take that for what it's worth, but there was a good amount of talk of him being the greatest big man ever from a number of players and coaches old enough to have seen 60's basketball.

[Sharmer]

I almost never hear somebody cite Shaq playing 19 seasons or until 39 as an example of his longevity, though. And I very rarely hear somebody rank Shaq high and follow it up with longevity as the primary reason.

I don't think Shaq's impact on the '06 Heat should be diminished either. They were 10-13 without him(just 10-11 even when Wade played in those games) and that was with a backup center in Zo who was still better than most starting centers(giving Miami 12/9 with 4 bpg and 30 mpg as a starter) He was still an enormous factor because even at that stage he was getting teams into foul trouble, changing their defenses and drawing doubles while still good for close to 20/10 per game. Closed out Chicago with a 30/20/5 game and averaged 20/10/2/2, 61% for the series. Also closed out the 64 win Pistons with one of the better frontcourts with a 28/16/5, 12/14 FG game while Wade was limited with the flu(put up 14/4/10 on 6/15 shooting) and averaged 22/11/2 on 66% for the series.

Even though he had a mediocre series vs Dallas, his impact was still there because of how often Dallas doubled him. He wasn't always immediately doubled on the catch, though he often was, but it was rare for a second defender not to come when he went to make his move. In fact, he appeared to be the primary focus of the Mavs defense until at least game 5, when of course, they had more reason to be worried about Wade by that point. And overall, he did play well in games 3-5 when Miami established control of the series and put up 14/10/3 for the series.

II think it also shows that even then Shaq was still an anomaly at the center position as far as offensive impact. Even if it was partially based on reputation at that point, and much of the rest was based on the fact he was 7'2", 350 and you couldn't match up with him, I believe he did make things easier on Wade. In a good sample size, Wade shot a shade under 45% in the 21 games he played with Shaq, and almost 52% in the 54 games he played with him..

Duncan was roughly the same age as 2006 Shaq within 2 months during the 2009-2010 season, and in his 14th season during the 2010-2011 season. I don't know which would be more fair to use as a comparison, but I'd say 2006 Shaq was definitely a better player than 2011 Duncan, though 2010 Duncan is reasonably close.

I have no idea if they still win with 2010 Duncan instead of 2006 Shaq. They're a different team, but it's impossible to say how much that affects things. Would it be improbable for them to win? I wouldn't say that, but is it a lock they still beat Detroit? Definitely not.

I will say that the last 3 years, the Spurs have been pretty damn stacked so I don't see how Duncan's odds improve in Shaq's position at the same stage in his career especially since those teams weren't nearly as well-built, or in the case of Phoenix, nearly as well-coached as well.

As far as Cleveland? Shaq was 2 years farther along in his career at that point and a year older, so I don't think that comparison is particularly relevant. As a side point, I'd be willing to discuss my views on that year in a follow up post, but don't wish to make this current one any longer.



On what "all-time lists?" You're acting as if there's an established list we can all agree. Those lists are subjective and vary from person to person, and also vary from generation to generation. Shaq is a case of a guy who was clearly more highly regarded from a historical standpoint during his prime than he currently is, though. Take that for what it's worth, but there was a good amount of talk of him being the greatest big man ever from a number of players and coaches old enough to have seen 60's basketball.

One of the best posts in ISH history.

He puts you clowns to shame.

[RichieW]

The worst part of this debate is that if Shaq had the work ethic of a player like Kobe or Duncan it wouldn't even be close. He hit the genetic lottery but didn't put the work in to his game that other greats did. If he did, he could have been in the conversation with Jordan.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Ppl only bring in BS intangibles for Duncan here noone that saw both em play in the prime would say Duncan was better Shaq. Shaq has underrate longevity he was 15 times all star and Duncan was 14. Shaq has 14 allnba teams and so does Duncan. Shaq was GOAT finals player and David guarded prime Shaq better than Duncan.

[RichieW]

Another point is how much better Duncan was on the defensive end. Shaq had 3 career nominations to the All-Defensive team, all second team. Duncan had 13 consecutive nominations and 14 in his 16 years.

No question Shaq was the more dominant offensive player, (although I think Duncans stats are skewed downwards because the Spurs always played such a slow pace) but there's also no question Duncan was the better defensive player.

I think theres a fair argument for either to be ahead of the other.

[TonyMontana]

Another point is how much better Duncan was on the defensive end. Shaq had 3 career nominations to the All-Defensive team, all second team. Duncan had 13 consecutive nominations and 14 in his 16 years.

No question Shaq was the more dominant offensive player, (although I think Duncans stats are skewed downwards because the Spurs always played such a slow pace) but there's also no question Duncan was the better defensive player.

I think theres a fair argument for either to be ahead of the other.

Shaq is underrated defensively.

His P&R defense blew(i dont even think duncan is a good P&R defender, but with Shaq its overblown), but he made teams not want to go into the paint. We are looking at a guy that is 7'1 with a 7'7 wingspan with elite athletisicm and 350 pounds.

Not to mention it was impossible to post Shaq up. You can't back him down at all because of his monster strength and size. Cleveland got him at 40 years old solely because Dwight Howard couldn't post him up. The only way to get Shaq in trouble is if the refs are penalizing him for his size and strength which happened a lot at the end of his career when his movements weren't as quick.

When Shaq actually did foul people it made them think twice and change their game. All it takes is one foul from Shaq to a penetrating guard to start taking jumpers for the rest of the game.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Shaq is underrated defensively.

His P&R defense blew(i dont even think duncan is a good P&R defender, but with Shaq its overblown), but he made teams not want to go into the paint. We are looking at a guy that is 7'1 with a 7'7 wingspan with elite athletisicm and 350 pounds.

Not to mention it was impossible to post Shaq up. You can't back him down at all because of his monster strength and size. Cleveland got him at 40 years old solely because Dwight Howard couldn't post him up. The only way to get Shaq in trouble is if the refs are penalizing him for his size and strength which happened a lot at the end of his career when his movements weren't as quick.

When Shaq actually did foul people it made them think twice and change their game. All it takes is one foul from Shaq to a penetrating guard to start taking jumpers for the rest of the game.

Duncan was bad pick and roll defender. Kobe always torch spurs and he always struggle with suns but refs help him and GOAT coach and perimeter defense bail him out. Amare average 26/11 50% shoot with 1.5 turnovers in 07:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[SCdac]

I will say that the last 3 years, the Spurs have been pretty damn stacked so I don't see how Duncan's odds improve in Shaq's position at the same stage in his career especially since those teams weren't nearly as well-built, or in the case of Phoenix, nearly as well-coached as well.

I disagree that Duncan's teams have been "pretty damn stacked". That's an exaggeration. He's teamed with a couple AS's (who also fluctuate in performance) sure and they've been deep, but stacked? .... Nah.

Duncan/Kobe
Duncan/Wade/older Zo
Duncan/Nash/Amare
Duncan/Lebron
Duncan/KG/Pierce/Rondo

I think any one of those collective combinations is better than Duncan/Parker/Manu, with the only one I see debatable is in Phoenix.

Coaching, I can understand. But Shaq chose to bounce from team to team, he was a part of leaving LA not just a bystander.

[RossTalksSports]

I have Shaq ahead of Duncan as well, but people seem to forget Duncan had one of the most dominant finals performances of all time in 03.

Points per game: 24.2
Boards per game: 17.0
Assists per game: 5.3
Blocks per game: 5.3
PER: 32.0


Plus putting up 21-20-10-8 in the clinching game 6.

Peak for Peak give me Shaq ahead of Duncan, but Duncan has gotten more out of his talent and came closer to reaching his potential.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Duncan's lack of ability to lead his team to back to back Finals appearances ...

And his GOD AWFUL horrific 2004 Olympic performance, which conveniently gets overlooked or swept under the rug by his over defensive fans.

And yes, I absolutely rank Shaq ahead of Duncan all-time.

[RichieW]

Duncan's lack of ability to lead his team to back to back Finals appearances ...

I don't get the obsession certain fans have over repeating. Bird never repeated and he's generally ahead of Kobe, Shaq, Hakeem etc...

The reality is that Duncan was a Ginobili foul away from a back to back Finals in 2006. If Manu gives Dirk the layup, all the Spurs need to do is hit free throws and it's likely over. Not guaranteed, but in all probability Spurs face the Heat in the '06 Finals and maybe the Spurs 3peat with '07.

I'm torn on Shaq v Duncan. Duncan never had an All-NBA teammate in his championships, whereas Shaq always had one. Duncan has defence, Shaq offence. I think it can really go either way.

[SamuraiSWISH]

I don't get the obsession certain fans have over repeating. Bird never repeated and he's generally ahead of Kobe, Shaq, Hakeem etc...
It's a better testament to a champion being able to climb the mountain twice. To retain your position on the throne when facing all challengers and comers. It is significantly more difficult when you're the champion and you're facing the best performance from every team and player coming at your throne every night.

Winning once, and the journey to the championship has been stated numerous times by past winners as being significantly easier than defending a crown.

Being a defending champion is a prestigious accomplishment, in my book. A better definition of a true dominant champion. It doesn't come off as fluke like ... EX Dirk in 2006 and then 2007, or Dirk in 2011 and then 2012.

Bird never repeated, but at least he brought the Celtics to back to back Finals appearances. That is extremely difficult.

Say what you want about Kobe in comparison to Duncan, but he didn't not only win back to back, he took the Lakers to three straight Finals appearances. Duncan couldn't even manage two straight appearances. It's not arbitrary.

Oh, and once again ... Duncan's ATROCIOUS performance in the 2004 Olympics is once again not even addressed.

:facepalm

[SCdac]

"Snack" missed so many games too. I take his longevity and durability with a large grain of salt.

His most absent regular seasons (not counting lock out):

37 / 82
40 / 82
51 / 82
53 / 82
54 / 82
59 / 82
60 / 82
61 / 82
67 / 82
67 / 82
67 / 82

Duncan has had two seasons in which he played 67 games or less and deserves credit for being the constant on the longtime successful Spurs

I wonder what it would have been like had Shaq been in better shape, hadn't nursed so many injuries, and put more effort in. Maybe he wouldn't have found himself desperately ring-chasing at the end.

[Carbine]

Shaq was very clearly a more dominant force on offense. If Duncan was an 8.5, Shaq was a 10.

However Tim was a better, way more consistent defender....and if you value being a great teammate, then Tim is clearly the better of the two in that category as well.

Duncan didn't have major weaknesses to his game either, like Shaq did with pick and roll defense (a huge flaw for a big man) or free throw shooting.

I believe Shaqs dominance was much, much more easily seen. You could clearly identify the dominance when he backs someone down and bangs on them. Just a physical monster. He made you shake your head (in a good way) by the things he could do.

With Timmy....you had to watch closer to feel his impact. You almost had to be a true fan of the Spurs to appreciate what he does. I know I would probably miss half the stuff he does that would go unnoticed if I didn't care if the Spurs won or not.

He was/is the master of the little things. Always in position and on time in his defensive rotations and help. Bank shots are boring to pretty much everyone. Rebounding due to position and boxing out, rarely out jumped or had people bouncing off him or having put back dunks like Shaq. Backing someone methodically down and doing a hook is boring to most. Properly reading a defense/double team doesn't make it on the top 10 sportscenter.

With all that said, Shaq would still get the nod for me. His offensive ability/advantage is hard to ignore.

But let's not undersell Duncan when it pertains to his prime.... even judging by numbers alone (and Duncan was much more than just numbers) he was absolutely fantastic. Look no further than the playoffs.

2003 - 25ppg, 15.5 rpg, 5.25 apg, 3.3 bpg and winning a title.....that is unbelievable.

[ShaqAttack3234]

It's definitely not one sided, but the problem I have is that I really feel like Duncan wins more than 4 titles playing his career in shaq's place. Not sure if Shaq wins 4 in place of Duncan...in fact i'd bet he wins less.

That is kind of my tiebreaker...that and Duncan was a better teammate and defender...and you never had to worry about off court stuff impacting on court stuff.

If that's what you think, then I think that's fair. It's sort of tough to imagine them just switching places though, and for me, primarily comes down to offense vs defense, based both on what they provide for their teams and how their teams function. Shaq's teams were typically more offensive teams and Shaq was significantly better offensively, while Duncan's teams were more defensive teams and he was significantly better defensively. So this alters these teams significantly.

I think both Shaq's teams and Duncan's teams were better off with each player because they were built around their strengths. I don't think Shaq fits nearly as well with Robinson as Duncan did, but I don't think Duncan wins as much as Shaq did in his place looking at those teams and their opponents year by year.

Which years do you think they would have won with Duncan instead of Shaq?


I disagree that Duncan's teams have been "pretty damn stacked". That's an exaggeration. He's teamed with a couple AS's (who also fluctuate in performance) sure and they've been deep, but stacked? .... Nah.

Duncan/Kobe
Duncan/Wade/older Zo
Duncan/Nash/Amare
Duncan/Lebron
Duncan/KG/Pierce/Rondo

I think any one of those collective combinations is better than Duncan/Parker/Manu, with the only one I see debatable is in Phoenix.

Coaching, I can understand. But Shaq chose to bounce from team to team, he was a part of leaving LA not just a bystander.

Well, I won't compare the Cleveland and especially Boston year for reasons I previously stated, but these last 3 years have been Duncan's 14th, 15th and 16th, right?

So you'd have him on the '06 Heat, '07 Heat and '08 Suns.

How good were the '06 Heat really without Shaq if they were 10-13 without him? Wade accounts for a lot by himself since I considered him the 2nd best player in the game that year, but aside from Manu and Parker, the Spurs had 5, nearly 6 players averaging double figures for the entire season(Gary Neal was at 9.8) and the Spurs were the best 3 point shooting team in the league at 39.7% while Miami was the 11th worst at 34.5%. Plus, the Spurs had the sixth highest scoring bench, while Miami was again in the bottom half in this category.

Shaq definitely had the better player, but is there any question the Spurs were considerably deeper? Or that the gap between their 2nd best teammates was quite large.

Remember, this was Duncan's worst season. Would you even say he was the 2nd best player on his team in this particular year? And it's not like they had comparable success in this year either since Shaq won a title and Duncan lost in the 1st round. And yes, I realize Manu was injured, which brings me to 2007.

Wade was injured in February and couldn't play near his usual level. He really didn't fully recover until the summer of '08. So while there's no question Duncan had the better 15th season than Shaq(the second half of the season was the start of this remarkable resurgence for Duncan), Duncan still isn't winning with that old '07 Heat team, particularly with Wade limited so much. And it's clear who had the better situation in their 15th years with Parker taking his game to a new level and winding up top 5 in MVP voting and all-nba 2nd team, the second highest scoring bench(0.1 ppg behind Denver) and the best 3 point shooting team again at 39.3%.

Duncan very well may win his 5th title this year and there's no comparison between him and '08 Shaq. That's obvious, but I don't see how he would be in a better situation on the '08 Suns. Parker has clearly been a top 10 player this season, and the Spurs are again really deep. 6, nearly 7 players averaging double figures for the season, 4th in 3P% at 37.6% and 5th in bench scoring.

'08 Suns would be dangerous with current Duncan, though. They had a lot of offensive firepower and they're better defensively with Duncan instead of Shaq without losing offense. I still don't see them as being a great defensive team though. Really, the difference here is that I like the Spurs system and Pop so much more than D'Antoni and his system. I do see current Duncan as a better fit with Nash than Shaq was though since Duncan has adjusted to become more of a jump shooter to reduce wear and tear.

I see those Suns as a legit contender, but not better than the current Spurs.

[veilside23]

shaq imagine how many rings he would have collected if he stayed in LA .

[TonyMontana]

"Snack" missed so many games too. I take his longevity and durability with a large grain of salt.

His most absent regular seasons (not counting lock out):

37 / 82
40 / 82
51 / 82
53 / 82
54 / 82
59 / 82
60 / 82
61 / 82
67 / 82
67 / 82
67 / 82

Duncan has had two seasons in which he played 67 games or less and deserves credit for being the constant on the longtime successful Spurs

I wonder what it would have been like had Shaq been in better shape, hadn't nursed so many injuries, and put more effort in. Maybe he wouldn't have found himself desperately ring-chasing at the end.

Shaq missing games is why he only has one MVP.

It doesn't matter though beause he always played in the playoffs which is where the season really matters. He never missed any playoff games like Duncan(01 i think).

[Shepseskaf]

shaq imagine how many rings he would have collected if he stayed in LA .
He and Kobe couldn't co-exist any longer.

[Shih508]

Both Shaq and Duncan are ahead of Kobe all time list THAT'S FOR SURE

[SpecialQue]

He and Kobe couldn't co-exist any longer.

Shaq wants everyone to kiss his ass all the time. It's amazing that this egocentric child and an angry sociopath like Kobe were able to co-exist as long as they did.

[Round Mound]

Shaq Was More Dominant and Had a Higher Peek
Duncan Has Longevity On Him, Thats It

[SCdac]

Well, I won't compare the Cleveland and especially Boston year for reasons I previously stated, but these last 3 years have been Duncan's 14th, 15th and 16th, right?

The point is, the amount of top-level talent Shaq has played with outweighs the deep teams Duncan has had. I think we can fairly assume Duncan is not going to jump ship and join some established team like Shaq did at the end, so it's not unreasonable to throw in Shaq's last few seasons in terms of comparing teammates. Duncan will most likely retire alongside whoever Spurs brass teams him with, and I doubt it's Lebron, KG, etc. I appreciate your year by year analysis but I don't have time to address every point you've made. A guy like Gary Neal is noteworthy (and other average players), but lets be real he's a role player. Duncan's deep teams are teams full of role players who generally specialize in something. I have a hard time viewing teams like Spurs of now or Mavs 2011 as "stacked" even though they're deep teams. Also, teams are built differently/TD and Shaq are different, and postulating who would do what in who's position based off what they did at "age x" is largely speculative. All I know is, Duncan + Kobe would be sick. Duncan plus Nash + Amare would be sick. Even if you paired Duncan with Lebron next season or season after it would be a great duo.

[GoSpursGo1984]

If Duncan wins a Championship this year would it change how you look at who is better?

[RichieW]

If Duncan wins a Championship this year would it change how you look at who is better?

For those who put a lot of emphasis on Duncan never repeating, I'm not sure it would make a difference.

[RichieW]

Shaq missing games is why he only has one MVP.

It doesn't matter though beause he always played in the playoffs which is where the season really matters. He never missed any playoff games like Duncan(01 i think).

Pop wouldn't let Duncan play in the '00 playoffs. He supposedly pleaded with Pop to play, said he was able, but Pop put Duncans career over a single playoff run. Considering it was a knee injury and the problems he has had with his knee the last few years, it could be the difference between Duncan being All NBA this year or retired by now.

[Straight_Ballin]

Wow, only on ISH would someone think Shaq has 5 rings. Put the weed down kid....

[ShaqAttack3234]

The point is, the amount of top-level talent Shaq has played with outweighs the deep teams Duncan has had. I think we can fairly assume Duncan is not going to jump ship and join some established team like Shaq did at the end, so it's not unreasonable to throw in Shaq's last few seasons in terms of comparing teammates. Duncan will most likely retire alongside whoever Spurs brass teams him with, and I doubt it's Lebron, KG, etc. I appreciate your year by year analysis but I don't have time to address every point you've made. A guy like Gary Neal is noteworthy (and other average players), but lets be real he's a role player. Duncan's deep teams are teams full of role players who generally specialize in something. I have a hard time viewing teams like Spurs of now or Mavs 2011 as "stacked" even though they're deep teams. Also, teams are built differently/TD and Shaq are different, and postulating who would do what in who's position based off what they did at "age x" is largely speculative. All I know is, Duncan + Kobe would be sick. Duncan plus Nash + Amare would be sick. Even if you paired Duncan with Lebron next season or season after it would be a great duo.

I agree that Duncan won't jump to a team like Cleveland or Boston, I'm just saying that I won't comment on what Duncan will look like a year or 2 down the road.

If you view those teams as different, I have no problem, but I think when teams have as many good players as the current Spurs do(becoming a pretty big fan of Leonard's game in particular) as well as a duo playing at the level Parker and Duncan are, I'd call them stacked. They're as deep as any team in the league right now.

I agree, Kobe and Duncan would be sick, but then again, so was Shaq and Kobe.

I also agree that you can't know how these teams would look, but I was responding to your claims about Duncan/Nash/Amare ect. or DMavs claim about Duncan in Shaq's place. I don't see what other way to do it then compare them at the same stages of their career. I'm personally not basing my ranking on what I think may or may not have happened.


Pop wouldn't let Duncan play in the '00 playoffs. He supposedly pleaded with Pop to play, said he was able, but Pop put Duncans career over a single playoff run. Considering it was a knee injury and the problems he has had with his knee the last few years, it could be the difference between Duncan being All NBA this year or retired by now.

It probably was a good move, especially considering Duncan was still bothered by that knee the first few months of the '00-'01 season and wearing a knee brace, iirc.

[longtime lurker]

If Duncan wins a Championship this year would it change how you look at who is better?

Duncan. I give more credit to players for what they've done not pseudo hypothetical scenarios.

[DMAVS41]

If that's what you think, then I think that's fair. It's sort of tough to imagine them just switching places though, and for me, primarily comes down to offense vs defense, based both on what they provide for their teams and how their teams function. Shaq's teams were typically more offensive teams and Shaq was significantly better offensively, while Duncan's teams were more defensive teams and he was significantly better defensively. So this alters these teams significantly.

I think both Shaq's teams and Duncan's teams were better off with each player because they were built around their strengths. I don't think Shaq fits nearly as well with Robinson as Duncan did, but I don't think Duncan wins as much as Shaq did in his place looking at those teams and their opponents year by year.

Which years do you think they would have won with Duncan instead of Shaq?



Well, I won't compare the Cleveland and especially Boston year for reasons I previously stated, but these last 3 years have been Duncan's 14th, 15th and 16th, right?

So you'd have him on the '06 Heat, '07 Heat and '08 Suns.

How good were the '06 Heat really without Shaq if they were 10-13 without him? Wade accounts for a lot by himself since I considered him the 2nd best player in the game that year, but aside from Manu and Parker, the Spurs had 5, nearly 6 players averaging double figures for the entire season(Gary Neal was at 9.8) and the Spurs were the best 3 point shooting team in the league at 39.7% while Miami was the 11th worst at 34.5%. Plus, the Spurs had the sixth highest scoring bench, while Miami was again in the bottom half in this category.

Shaq definitely had the better player, but is there any question the Spurs were considerably deeper? Or that the gap between their 2nd best teammates was quite large.

Remember, this was Duncan's worst season. Would you even say he was the 2nd best player on his team in this particular year? And it's not like they had comparable success in this year either since Shaq won a title and Duncan lost in the 1st round. And yes, I realize Manu was injured, which brings me to 2007.

Wade was injured in February and couldn't play near his usual level. He really didn't fully recover until the summer of '08. So while there's no question Duncan had the better 15th season than Shaq(the second half of the season was the start of this remarkable resurgence for Duncan), Duncan still isn't winning with that old '07 Heat team, particularly with Wade limited so much. And it's clear who had the better situation in their 15th years with Parker taking his game to a new level and winding up top 5 in MVP voting and all-nba 2nd team, the second highest scoring bench(0.1 ppg behind Denver) and the best 3 point shooting team again at 39.3%.

Duncan very well may win his 5th title this year and there's no comparison between him and '08 Shaq. That's obvious, but I don't see how he would be in a better situation on the '08 Suns. Parker has clearly been a top 10 player this season, and the Spurs are again really deep. 6, nearly 7 players averaging double figures for the season, 4th in 3P% at 37.6% and 5th in bench scoring.

'08 Suns would be dangerous with current Duncan, though. They had a lot of offensive firepower and they're better defensively with Duncan instead of Shaq without losing offense. I still don't see them as being a great defensive team though. Really, the difference here is that I like the Spurs system and Pop so much more than D'Antoni and his system. I do see current Duncan as a better fit with Nash than Shaq was though since Duncan has adjusted to become more of a jump shooter to reduce wear and tear.

I see those Suns as a legit contender, but not better than the current Spurs.

I was looking at it from an amount of help standpoint...not specific players as those teams were obviously built around them each.

But who knows with all that stuff...just my opinion.

No doubt Shaq was better at his best...and that definitely matters. I'd just rather have the guy that causes less problems both on and off the court...and can play more styles in my opinion as well.

But one thing you say that I definitely agree with is that Shaq seems to get a little under-rated now since he retired.

[gengiskhan]

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

Duncan will never ever be ahead of Shaq. NEVER!!

[ShaqAttack3234]

I was looking at it from an amount of help standpoint...not specific players as those teams were obviously built around them each.

But who knows with all that stuff...just my opinion.

Ok, personally, I try to avoid the discussion of help(though I don't always) when it comes to winning teams because it's so subjective, and because of how much that depends on their opponents. For example, what's considered enough help vs the '95 Pacers isn't necessarily enough help vs '96 Bulls, or may not even be close.


No doubt Shaq was better at his best...and that definitely matters. I'd just rather have the guy that causes less problems both on and off the court...and can play more styles in my opinion as well.

Yeah, that's a valid point.

[AintNoSunshine]

I value Shaq's peak dominance level over Duncan's longevity, given Shaq had very decent longevity himself. Top 2 most unstoppable player ever.

[ninephive]

Yep another little kid that just knows Shaq as the journeyman in his late 30s.

13 consecutive years of 20-10 play(the record).

How many did Duncan have? 8. Both of them had their first non 20-10 year in 2006 despite Shaq entering the league 5 years before Duncan.

I don't give a **** about what Duncan is doing at age 37 nor do I about Shaq. These guys arn't getting to the hall of fame for what their doing at that age. Their getting in there for their ability to dominate the entire league for when they were younger and Shaq was on a different level than Duncan.
Hahahaha I've been watching since a few years before DRob, who I saw give Hakeem far more trouble in the playoffs than Shaq ever did. Shaq could never get it done without another top 5 player in the league.

[ninephive]

I do. Shaq was able to win with way different systems & teammates, Duncan under Pops tutelage his whole career has denied us of witnessing what e was able to do w/o him. no need to even mention the gap in performance during shaqs prime
How is it impressive that Shaq won in 2 systems out of SIX? You honestly don't think Duncan would have been carried to a title (like Shaq was in 06) if he had been in SIX different environments? Come on. And especially if your teammates are prime Hardaway, Bryant, Wade, Lebron, and a good Nash/Stoudemire, and good Celtics big 3. This guy has had the best supporting/carrying cast of anyone by far. Talk about ring chasing...and all the right teams too. He just couldn't score one. He definitely put more effort into ring chasing than he ever did into defense though, that's for sure.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Hahahaha I've been watching since a few years before DRob, who I saw give Hakeem far more trouble in the playoffs than Shaq ever did. Shaq could never get it done without another top 5 player in the league.

:oldlol: Shaq fared much better against Hakeem than Robinson did in '95, the only year Robinson faced him in the playoffs. Shaq wasn't able to stop Hakeem, but he slowed him down more than Robinson did, but Shaq was able to get his against Hakeem far more than Robinson.

Hakeem certainly outplayed both, but he outplayed Robinson far more decisively than he outplayed Shaq. Of course, this was a 3rd year 23 year old Shaq compared to a peak 29 year old David Robinson as well.

By the way, Kobe wasn't a top 5 player when Shaq won his first title in 2000 either. Of course, this is ignoring the fact that summing up an entire cast based on just the 2nd best player requires such minimal thought that you have to question the intelligence of anyone who does it.

[ninephive]

Ppl only bring in BS intangibles for Duncan here noone that saw both em play in the prime would say Duncan was better Shaq. Shaq has underrate longevity he was 15 times all star and Duncan was 14. Shaq has 14 allnba teams and so does Duncan. Shaq was GOAT finals player and David guarded prime Shaq better than Duncan.
What?! Duncan single-handedly cut Shaq's prime off. Not to mention Kobe there to help. I remember the Lakers crying when the Spurs beat them by 30 on their home floor to end their dynasty, courtesy of Duncan doing WHATEVER HE WANTED to Shaq. I would definitely argue Duncan has a case simply for ending the Shaq/Kobe reign for good.

[ninephive]

:oldlol: Shaq fared much better against Hakeem than Robinson did in '95, the only year Robinson faced him in the playoffs. Shaq wasn't able to stop Hakeem, but he slowed him down more than Robinson did, but Shaq was able to get his against Hakeem far more than Robinson.

Hakeem certainly outplayed both, but he outplayed Robinson far more decisively than he outplayed Shaq. Of course, this was a 3rd year 23 year old Shaq compared to a peak 29 year old David Robinson as well.

By the way, Kobe wasn't a top 5 player when Shaq won his first title in 2000 either. Of course, this is ignoring the fact that summing up an entire cast based on just the 2nd best player requires such minimal thought that you have to question the intelligence of anyone who does it.
Fair enough, but let's not minimize Kobe's impact in Shaq's title years. We're just saying it helps to have a top 10 GOAT on your team.

[inclinerator]

shaq was the most unstoppable force of all time in his prime he is higher than duncan

[TonyMontana]

How is it impressive that Shaq won in 2 systems out of SIX? You honestly don't think Duncan would have been carried to a title (like Shaq was in 06) if he had been in SIX different environments? Come on. And especially if your teammates are prime Hardaway, Bryant, Wade, Lebron, and a good Nash/Stoudemire, and good Celtics big 3. This guy has had the best supporting/carrying cast of anyone by far. Talk about ring chasing...and all the right teams too. He just couldn't score one. He definitely put more effort into ring chasing than he ever did into defense though, that's for sure.

Nobody gives a **** about what Shaq did when he was like 40 years old with Cleveland, and Boston. His play with those teams isn't why he will be in the hall of fame.

Shaq didn't get "carried" in 2006. He was All NBA 1st Team that year(Wade was 2nd All NBA). The Heat were 10-11 and sucked ass in the time he missed that year and 43-12 with him playing.

He didnt have a great Finals series, but hes the biggest reason Dallas was constantly in the penalty and why Wade got free throws no non shooting fouls.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Fair enough, but let's not minimize Kobe's impact in Shaq's title years. We're just saying it helps to have a top 10 GOAT on your team.

Of course. Kobe was great, and I made no attempt at diminishing his impact in my post. I don't wish to diminish anyone's impact, but it does seem like you're trying to diminish Shaq's impact.

[ninephive]

shaq was the most unstoppable force of all time in his prime he is higher than duncan
Then how in tbe world did Duncan stop him on MULTIPLE occasions in his "prime". That overarching statement sounds great, but you just forget the times he actually got eliminated. We're not talking about Jordan here. Shaq was very stoppable and it happened a lot. Otherwise he would have more titles than Duncan or Kobe.

[ninephive]

Nobody gives a **** about what Shaq did when he was like 40 years old with Cleveland, and Boston. His play with those teams isn't why he will be in the hall of fame.

Shaq didn't get "carried" in 2006. He was All NBA 1st Team that year(Wade was 2nd All NBA). The Heat were 10-11 and sucked ass in the time he missed that year and 43-12 with him playing.

He didnt have a great Finals series, but hes the biggest reason Dallas was constantly in the penalty and why Wade got free throws no non shooting fouls.
Of course no one cares about what Shaq did in his late 30's, because he didn't do anything except try and chase rings. Meanwhile, a 37 year-old Duncan might put a fifth on his hand and has 2 more years on his contract...and the Spurs are getting better every year. No one cares about what Shaq did at the end of career, but history WILL care about what Duncan did.

[aj242]

What?! Duncan single-handedly cut Shaq's prime off. Not to mention Kobe there to help. I remember the Lakers crying when the Spurs beat them by 30 on their home floor to end their dynasty, courtesy of Duncan doing WHATEVER HE WANTED to Shaq. I would definitely argue Duncan has a case simply for ending the Shaq/Kobe reign for good.

Then the Spurs got sent home again the very next year by the Lakers. It comes down to Shaq's Peak being better & he 3peated. That's the difference really. Even if Duncan wins another one I keep it that way.

[gengiskhan]

Shaq Was More Dominant and Had a Higher Peek
Duncan Has Longevity On Him, Thats It

Many foget.

Shaq is a '90s era part of the all-time great center lists along with morning.

He debuted in 1992.

Shaq has 2 scoring titles. how many duncan has.

Shaq has highest FG% for seasons. How many duncan has.

Shaq has taken 2 franchises to NBA finals. Duncan is a product of SAS system.

Shaq has clearly underachieved with 1 mvp & 0 DPOY titles.

A reason why he is Top 8 GOATs.

when Shaq debuted. He was expected to be ahead of Hakeem & Bird in top 5 GOATs along with Wilt, kareem & MJ.

Thats how big of a FORCE OF NATURE he was in 1992 as rookie.