You're the GM building a team. Do you draft Shaq or Jordan?

[oarabbus]

You got the first pick of the draft as the GM of your personal favorite team. You can construct the team around your draft choice as you wish, any way you want.


Shaq and Jordan are both eligible in this draft, and whoever you pick, you build around.


who you gonna pick?

[knicksman]

Well as long as theyre better than 2/5, you can draft them

[Random_Guy]

shaq
no knock on jordan

[Harison]

Jordan, no shortcomings, more loyal.

[Dr Hawk]

Jordan
Kareem
Shaq

Those could be my first 3 choices, in that order. Gaps are really close though.

[warriorfan]

Jordan brings you chips, shaq leaves your franchise for LA

[keep-itreal]

6 Rings > 3.5 Rings

[Sportal]

People always use hindsight in these things...

People never remember that it is:

Shaq coming out of LSU.
Jordan coming out of NC.

Portland didn't choose Jordan because they already had Drexler, I don't think people really had Jordan on their radar as becoming a GOAT player.

With that stuff in mind, if you were a GM building a team... You'd be an idiot not to take Shaq.

[Budadiiii]

Jordan.

Obsessive competitor, elite skills, elite athleticism, high basketball IQ, elite work ethic, and I'd rather build around him because of he's a more reliable shooter/ball handler and can create from anywhere on the court. No glaring weakness like you have with Shaq's FT shooting, he's harder to double team because of his ball handling and speed, and he thrived on pressure more than anyone.

Never watched either one play but give me Jordan.

[Budadiiii]

And didn't Jordan kill his father? That's a dude I want on my side and someone elses. Give me the sociopathic personality any day.

[JohnFreeman]

Shaq. Jordan's dick too small

[Dragonyeuw]

This question requires content: are you asking this based on what we know of both's career? Or is it being asked based on both coming out of college?

Because if its the latter, you take Shaq ten out of ten times using conventional basketball logic of building around a dominant big. Furthermore, MJ was projected as an allstar coming out of college, but not THE MJ that we now know. In fact, if it was a draft strictly of perimeter players coming out of college( or high school), there's a few guys that would be drafted over him. High school Lebron would have been drafted over NC junior MJ, for one.

[Sportal]

As an example:

Shaq at LSU (3 years): 21.6ppg, 13.5rebs, 4.6blks
Jordan at NC (3 years): 17.7ppg, 5rebs, 1.8ast, 1.7stl

Shaq's last 2 years were: 27.6/14.7/5blks and 24.1/14/5.2
Jordan's last 2 years were: 20/5.5rebs/2.2stls and 19.6/5.3rebs/2.1asts

As a GM you'd be slaughtered if you didn't pick Shaq.

[Dragonyeuw]

The hype for Shaq was massive back in 1992, not sure if it was Lebron-level( in 2003 the league was still in a 'looking for the next MJ' mode, and Lebron was projected as a can't miss, possible GOAT candidate coming into the league). There's few players in league history you take over LSU Shaq in a draft.

[Quickening]

Shaq... If you give him a Pippen level option for majority of his career, he wins every year from 23-32. He would have won 4 in a row if kobe didn't become a cancer.

[iamgine]

Knowing what we now know, definitely Jordan.

Impact wise, arguable.

Marketability wise, Jordan wins by a long mile.

[Budadiiii]

This question requires content: are you asking this based on what we know of both's career?
Of course!

[Dragonyeuw]

Of course!

In that case, the answer would be obvious. Shaqs peak was unbelievable but MJ had the better career. Its equally obvious that Shaq is the answer if we don't have the benefit of hindsight, and simply drafting based on their college careers.

[Prime_Shaq]

Shaq. Only because I believe its easier to build around a big man.

[Budadiiii]

In that case, the answer would be obvious. Shaqs peak was unbelievable but MJ had the better career. Its equally obvious that Shaq is the answer if we don't have the benefit of hindsight, and simply drafting based on their college careers.
Agreed!

But some might prefer to build around a dominant big man, while others prefer the perimter BEAST.

You can't really go wrong with either guy. You're basically guaranteed rings no matta what, jack.

Just give me a Pippen or a Kobe to play second fiddle and I'm dancing, smoking the finest herb, snorting the purest coke, ****ing the classiest broads, eating the most decadent food, sipping on the most expensive wine, all while watching my team DOMINATE the league for YEARS.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Shaq... If you give him a Pippen level option for majority of his career, he wins every year from 23-32. He would have won 4 in a row if kobe didn't become a cancer.

I disagree. Part of the issue was also Shaq's work ethic. He was notoriously lazy and would get into basketball shape during the course of a season. Jordan is one of the hardest workers. He's just a more safe choice, IMO. Shaq has too many shortcomings. But this is all in hindsight, after all. If you didn't know how their careers would turn out, you would take Shaq obviously.

[Dragonyeuw]

Agreed!

But some might prefer to build around a dominant big man, while others prefer the perimter BEAST.

You can't really go wrong with either guy. You're basically guaranteed rings no matta what, jack.



Conventional wisdom is to always take the dominant big, that was the blueprint for many years. Jordan was pretty much the first perimeter player which you could build a championship dynasty around without needing an offensively dominant big man/post presence, and he did it in an era with several dominant bigs. That, to me, is one of the reasons why he has a great case for GOAT, moreso than comparing rings, mvps, and numbers which formulates the usual arguments.

[Prime_Shaq]

Conventional wisdom is to always take the dominant big, that was the blueprint for many years. Jordan was pretty much the first perimeter player which you could build a championship dynasty around without needing an offensively dominant big man/post presence, and he did it in an era with several dominant bigs. That, to me, is one of the reasons why he has a great case for GOAT, moreso than comparing rings, mvps, and numbers which formulates the usual arguments.
Great post :applause:

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Just give me a Pippen or a Kobe to play second fiddle and I'm dancing, smoking the finest herb, snorting the purest coke, ****ing the classiest broads, eating the most decadent food, sipping on the most expensive wine, all while watching my team DOMINATE the league for YEARS.

:cheers:

[Mr Exlax]

Hell I'd take Shaq over jesus cuh

[Shade8780]

In hindsight, Jordan.

If both are coming out of college with no knowledge of their future, Shaq. Don't think anyone would take college Jordan over Shaq.

[warriorfan]

Agreed!

But some might prefer to build around a dominant big man, while others prefer the perimter BEAST.

You can't really go wrong with either guy. You're basically guaranteed rings no matta what, jack.

Just give me a Pippen or a Kobe to play second fiddle and I'm dancing, smoking the finest herb, snorting the purest coke, ****ing the classiest broads, eating the most decadent food, sipping on the most expensive wine, all while watching my team DOMINATE the league for YEARS.


welcome to my life

[DatAsh]

People always use hindsight in these things...

People never remember that it is:

Shaq coming out of LSU.
Jordan coming out of NC.

Portland didn't choose Jordan because they already had Drexler, I don't think people really had Jordan on their radar as becoming a GOAT player.

With that stuff in mind, if you were a GM building a team... You'd be an idiot not to take Shaq.

This.

Without hindsight, it's definitely Shaq.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Is this a pick where we know how their careers turned out? If not, Shaq by a mile.

[Pushxx]

In hindsight, Jordan.

If both are coming out of college with no knowledge of their future, Shaq. Don't think anyone would take college Jordan over Shaq.

This covers it.

[Done_And_Done]

In hindsight, Jordan.

If both are coming out of college with no knowledge of their future, Shaq. Don't think anyone would take college Jordan over Shaq.

This sums it up quite sublimely

[Akrazotile]

Shaq, because my second pick would be Pippen and I dont need any distractions with MJ and his inadequacy issues.

[Roundball_Rock]

All-time draft:

1) KAJ
2) Wilt
3) Shaq
4) MJ
5) LeBron

This is without knowing about loyalty issues with Shaq, LeBron and flaky retirement issues with MJ.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Shaq, because my second pick would be Pippen and I dont need any distractions with MJ and his inadequacy issues.

:roll:

[Straight_Ballin]

You got the first pick of the draft as the GM of your personal favorite team. You can construct the team around your draft choice as you wish, any way you want.


Shaq and Jordan are both eligible in this draft, and whoever you pick, you build around.


who you gonna pick?

If you want to showcase a team that contains the most dominant player to ever touch a basketball and win some rings, you pick Shaq.

If you want to win 6 rings, you pick MJ :lol


This sums it up quite sublimely

Nice avy. NES kids above any other.

[Done_And_Done]

If you want to showcase a team that contains the most dominant player to ever touch a basketball and win some rings, you pick Shaq.

If you want to win 6 rings, you pick MJ :lol



Nice avy. NES kids above any other.

This man knows :cheers:

[inclinerator]

lebron

-smak

[Mikebball1]

Gimme jordan....6/6 is saying something

[Jud]

Definitely Jordan.

Shaq was great but he was all about money and playing in the big markets.

[Beastmode88]

You must be on drugs to pick MJ. You can not teach 7 feet. Shaq is the obvious choice if you were to draft someone straight out of college. But if you were to look back at their careers and pick them it would be Jordan.

[Straight_Ballin]

This thread gets made every year.

[Jud]

You must be on drugs to pick MJ. You can not teach 7 feet. Shaq is the obvious choice if you were to draft someone straight out of college. But if you were to look back at their careers and pick them it would be Jordan.
If Shaq wasn't all about big money and playing in a big market, then I'd obviously pick him. That was never the case though. Why would I wanna pick a player just to see them leave 6 or 7 years later?

[TheMan]

No hindsight? You take the dominant big, Shaq easily.

Hindsight, you'd be insane not to take Jordan.

[Smoke117]

Shaq. You always take the dominant big man over the dominant perimeter player. Easier to build around.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Since I've been watching, draft order:

1) Jordan
2) LeBron
3) Shaq

[DMV2]

In hindsight, Jordan.

If both are coming out of college with no knowledge of their future, Shaq. Don't think anyone would take college Jordan over Shaq.
This.

Traditional thinking from the first draft until the early 2000's is always go big. Although that has changed in the last 10 years.

[T_L_P]

Jordan, obviously.

[Smoke117]

This.

Traditional thinking from the first draft until the early 2000's is always go big. Although that has changed in the last 10 years.

With HINDSIGHT I still draft Shaq. Jordan isn't ending up on the bulls here...we don't know what help he'll have. It's going to be easier to build a contender around Shaq.

[oarabbus]

With HINDSIGHT I still draft Shaq. Jordan isn't ending up on the bulls here...we don't know what help he'll have. It's going to be easier to build a contender around Shaq.

Yup, this. Pretty surprising how many people say "take Jordan with hindsight". In this hypothetical Shaq and Jordan are being drafted at the same time. Jordan isn't guaranteed to be gifted Pippen and it's way easier to build a contender around Shaq.

[TheMan]

With HINDSIGHT I still draft Shaq. Jordan isn't ending up on the bulls here...we don't know what help he'll have. It's going to be easier to build a contender around Shaq.
I see what you're saying but Shaq needed two of the GOAT SGs to win titles. It's not like you could surround him with good role players and win...

[DatAsh]

With HINDSIGHT I still draft Shaq. Jordan isn't ending up on the bulls here...we don't know what help he'll have. It's going to be easier to build a contender around Shaq.

Why though? Shaq had significantly more help and still won less. The goal should be to give your team the best chances of winning over time. Give Jordan Shaq's teams and he likely has more titles - ignoring Kobe redundancies.

[TheMarkMadsen]

People saying Shaq is easier to build around are high

Easier to find Pippen than Kobe & 06 Wade


Shaq had Penny who was a first team all nba guard and didnt win.

[Roundball_Rock]

Why though? Shaq had significantly more help and still won less. The goal should be to give your team the best chances of winning over time. Give Jordan Shaq's teams and he likely has more titles - ignoring Kobe redundancies.

On paper Shaq did but on the court what happened to Orlando, L.A. and Miami after he left? Plus when he was hurt LA and MIA were consistently 0.500 teams--even though when Kobe and Wade were hurt LA and MIA continued to approximate the team's overall winning percentage. So it wasn't just about losing a star--only when that player was Shaq was there a dramatic decline. A large sample size of those teams, due to his departures and his frequent injuries, shows them as average without Shaq, irrespective of Kobe or Wade.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Peak vs peak, I would probably take Shaq (the most dominant player I ever saw). Drafting is a bit different though. You gotta accept the good with the bad, and along with Mike winning more titles, Shaq had a history of being lazy and so-so in crunchtime because of freethrows. Those are glaring weaknesses that aren't easy to overlook.

[Smoke117]

People saying Shaq is easier to build around are high

Easier to find Pippen than Kobe & 06 Wade


Shaq had Penny who was a first team all nba guard and didnt win.

If it's so easy than why hasn't another one come along? Stick to what you know clown...Kobe. You know absolutely nothing about basketball not related to him, so don't embarrass yourself. (if you can help it)

The closest player to come along to Pippen is Kevin Garnett and HE'S BETTER, so it doesn't really count.

[DMV2]

People saying Shaq is easier to build around are high

Easier to find Pippen than Kobe & 06 Wade


Shaq had Penny who was a first team all nba guard and didnt win.
Good point. Both Kobe and Wade are proven franchise players/#1 option. Shaq has played with all-timers too.

[TheMarkMadsen]

If it's so easy than why hasn't another one come along?


...


The closest player to come along to Pippen is Kevin Garnett...and HE'S BETTER


So another one has come along.. And he's better.. Thanks for proving my point

:lol :roll:

[SamuraiSWISH]

Shaq needed a top 10 player ever, and a top 25 player ever to really win his rings. Scottie Pippen isn't top 25. I think that needs to be taken into account. And the marketability, style of play of both MJ, and LeBron would not only produce basketball wins, but money through casual fandom.

[Smoke117]

So another one has come along.. And he's better.. Thanks for proving my point

:lol :roll:

Except KG is a big man and Pippen is a perimeter player...you can't really be this dumb to grasp onto something so pathetic as this...can you? Also, do you realize what you just said? Most list have Pippen as a top 30 player of all time...AND KEVIN GARNETT IS BETTER. No shame in that. I was only alluding to the fact that Scottie and KG are arguably the two most versatile players to ever play, that just simply going out and finding a "Pippen" is a ridiculous notion. You catch up, I'll wait.

[Roundball_Rock]

Shaq joined a 20 win team and improved them to 41 wins as a rookie putting up 23 ppg. Imagine prime Shaq joining such a team. There was no Penny on the 93' squad and Shaq was not even a top 5 level player in 93'. It is true he played with elite guards in his career but he proved what kind of impact he could make on a team without a second star as a rookie--and then when Kobe, Wade got hurt and he kept the team afloat.

Shaq turned Orlando, LA and Miami into contenders--and they fell into an abyss after he left. :pimp:

[TheMarkMadsen]

Except KG is a big man and Pippen is a perimeter player...you can't really be this dumb to grasp onto something so pathetic as this...can you? Also, do you realize what you just said? Most list have Pippen as a top 30 player of all time...AND KEVIN GARNETT IS BETTER. No shame in that. I was only alluding to the fact that Scottie and KG are arguably the two most versatile players to ever play, that just simply going out and finding a "Pippen" is a ridiculous notion. You catch up, I'll wait.

Let me hold your hand through this..

It's easier to find a top 30 player, than a top 10 player.

Which is the original statement that you had a problem with, now hop off my dickk you jabroni

[Smoke117]

Let me hold your hand through this..

It's easier to find a top 30 player, than a top 10 player.

Which is the original statement that you had a problem with, now hop off my dickk you jabroni

Shaq never played with any top 10 players though? :confusedshrug:

[TheMarkMadsen]

Shaq never played with any top 10 players though? :confusedshrug:

Alright so you're a troll who doesn't even attempt to have an honest discussion.

Moving along.

[Smoke117]

Alright so you're a troll who doesn't even attempt to have an honest discussion.

Moving along.

Kobe stan logic: Disagree with me? Troll.

[Wade's Rings]

Shaq joined a 20 win team and improved them to 41 wins as a rookie putting up 23 ppg. Imagine prime Shaq joining such a team. There was no Penny on the 93' squad and Shaq was not even a top 5 level player in 93'. It is true he played with elite guards in his career but he proved what kind of impact he could make on a team without a second star as a rookie--and then when Kobe, Wade got hurt and he kept the team afloat.

Shaq turned Orlando, LA and Miami into contenders--and they fell into an abyss after he left. :pimp:


Wade without Shaq in the Playoffs= 2-0
Shaq without Wade in the Playoffs= 0-1

:bowdown:

[Bay Area Baller]

You take Tracy Mcgrady, most versatile and biggest net impact on offense.

[Soundwave]

Normally I would take the big man over a wing player on principal, but in this case, I'd have to disagree and pick Jordan.

Main reason is Jordan can dominate the first 3 quarters of a game just like Shaq could, but 4th quarter? No contest. Jordan is the ultimate closer and big game finisher ... Shaq? Depends. Is Robert Horry around? Lets be honest Kobe did a lot of the heavy lifting for the Lakers in those scenarios too.

He's a liability in the clutch because of his inability to his free throws and in tight games it's not so easy to just turn and dunk your way to victory.

Beyond that the generally laziness that Shaq could have at times (showing up to camp out of shape and overweight for example on purpose) would also lead me to chose Jordan. Simply none of those headaches.

Jordan never lost a playoff round in which he had the equal/better team either, Shaq lost several times in that scenario.

And Shaq always had talent around him. First (healthy) Penny Hardaway + Horace Grant in Orlando, then Kobe + Horry in LA, then Wade in Miami.

If Jordan had 10+ seasons with that same supporting casts, IMO he'd have 8+ titles instead of Shaq's 4.

Like for example replace Shaq with Jordan on the 1995 Magic (even a 1988 Jordan to be equivalent) and I think the Magic win the title.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Kobe stan logic: Disagree with me? Troll.

They're still convinced he's a top-10 player, it'd be funny if it wasn't so sad.

[STATUTORY]

They're still convinced he's a top-10 player, it'd be funny if it wasn't so sad.

top 10 player of all time?

how is he not :biggums:

[24-Inch_Chrome]

top 10 player of all time?

how is he not :biggums:

How is he? I'm not saying that he's bad, the man is still an all-time great and a legendary player...but with MJ/Wilt/Russell/Hakeem/Magic/Bird/Shaq/Duncan/Kareem as locks the best he should be able to do on anyone's list is scrape in at #10 (personally I'd take LeBron/Oscar/Irving over Kobe, especially considering LeBron's career is ongoing).

[Optimus Prime]

Jordan
Kobe
Shaq
.
..
...
Brian Scalabrine
2/5

:kobe:

[STATUTORY]

How is he? I'm not saying that he's bad, the man is still an all-time great and a legendary player...but with MJ/Wilt/Russell/Hakeem/Magic/Bird/Shaq/Duncan/Kareem as locks the best he should be able to do on anyone's list is scrape in at #10 (personally I'd take LeBron/Oscar/Irving over Kobe, especially considering LeBron's career is ongoing).

not locks over Kobe at all, stahp

[24-Inch_Chrome]

not locks over Kobe at all, stahp

Hakeem, Bird, Shaq, and Duncan should all be locks over Kobe for spots in the top-10.

[navy]

With hindight you pick Jordan.

If it was a draft you pick Shaq and you would be looked at crazily if you didnt. Albeit you would have made a better choice.

[Sportal]

It's good to see the OP still hasn't clarified whether it is with hindsight or not, lol.

[T_L_P]

top 10 player of all time?

how is he not :biggums:

Because Jordan, Kareem, Shaq, Russell, Wilt, Duncan, Bird, Magic, Hakeem, LeBron etc all have arguments over him.

Very few players are an actual lock for the top 10. :confusedshrug:

[Angel Face]

Jordan, but won't mind drafting Shaq either. From a non biased stand point, MJ loyal, more clutch and won't be a liability in ft line in late game situations.

[oarabbus]

top 10 player of all time?

how is he not :biggums:


MJ
Kareem
Hakeem
Shaq
Russell
Wilt
Bird
Magic
___

Those guys are all top 10 locks no matter how you slice it.

The remaining two spots, depending on personal assessment, will go to:

Duncan
Kobe
LeBron
Oscar Robertson

etc...

Someone can definitely construct a top players of all time list with Kobe at 12 or something.



It's good to see the OP still hasn't clarified whether it is with hindsight or not, lol.

Take all the hindsight you want, it doesn't matter. I made this topic because even with hindsight you're talking about the GOAT (considering circumstances) vs. the MDE at his peak.

You're building around who you draft that's what's important.