put prime Shaq in the '95 Magic... do they still lose to Hakeem's Rockets?

[jzek]

Yay?
Nay?

[Prime_Shaq]

No.

[Harison]

yes

[TiagoSimoes]

Yay?
Nay?

The player or the ISH poster?

Depends on your answer

[LAZERUSS]

He outplayed Hakeem as it was. However, Hakeem's teammates annihilated his.

[navy]

Shaq wasnt to bad in those finals

[magic chiongson]

shaq is already in-prime in '95

[dh144498]

shaq is already in-prime in '95

this. But if you put Phil JAckson in as the coach on the 95 Magic, they probably will win.

[OldSchoolBBall]

No way.

[chocolatethunder]

Shaq had nothing to do with his team losing those games. I doubt many of you here were even alive to see those games. Shaq was killing it and so was Hakeem. Neither could stop the other. Nick Anderson? Well he sure didn't help the Magic much lets just say that. But the rockets were a better team and Shaq really couldn't have played much better than he did.

[Soundwave]

Orlando Shaq wasn't really that far off from his peak. If anything early career Shaq was in better shape and better athletically.

He started to get a bit too fat even during the Lakers run.

[Orlando Magic]

Shaq had nothing to do with his team losing those games. I doubt many of you here were even alive to see those games. Shaq was killing it and so was Hakeem. Neither could stop the other. Nick Anderson? Well he sure didn't help the Magic much lets just say that. But the rockets were a better team and Shaq really couldn't have played much better than he did.

This.

That game effectively ended Nick Anderson's career.

On top of that, the Magic were just too young. If they had a few more years under their belt in terms of experience/maturity, they would have destroyed those Rockets teams.

What if's are fun. Oh well.

[AkronAngel]

shaq is already in-prime in '95

As an athlete, yes, but there is no denying that 2000 Shaq took things to another level.

[AkronAngel]

^That said, Magic still lose. The gap between the teams as a whole was too big.

[DonDadda59]

The main difference between '00-'02 Shaq and '95 Shaq was him playing the Todd McCallouchs of the world instead of Hakeem Olajuwon. Not like he pulled a LeBron in the finals, he was his usual dominant self and the Magic were stacked to the rafters with talent. They just ran into a team led by an ATG that was on a mission.

[OldSchoolBBall]

The main difference between '00-'02 Shaq and '95 Shaq was him playing the Todd McCallouchs of the world instead of Hakeem Olajuwon. Not like he pulled a LeBron in the finals, he was his usual dominant self and the Magic were stacked to the rafters with talent. They just ran into a team led by an ATG that was on a mission.

Nah, Shaq's passing, game management, and post game variety were worlds better in '0-'02 than in '95. He was still very raw in 1995.

[jzek]

Nah, Shaq's passing, game management, and post game variety were worlds better in '0-'02 than in '95. He was still very raw in 1995.

Agree with this. Wasn't his rookie year 1992? Can't be in his prime already 3 years later.

I still think early '00 Shaq would have beaten the Rockets regardless of how badly his teammates played (which was only one really - Nick Anderson).

He averaged like 25 and 13 that series but those are prime Shaq's numbers by halftime!

[mehyaM24]

Nah, Shaq's passing, game management, and post game variety were worlds better in '0-'02 than in '95. He was still very raw in 1995.
this.

shaq's game took off to sights not seen in HUGE part thanks to phil. shaq was motivated by phil, who challenged him to work on his footwork & defense.

orlando shaq is close to PEAK shaq, but there's a noticeable difference - skills & intangibles being the biggest variables.

tbh, i think he should be placed in everyone's top 5. wilt & kareem can be put up ahead of him, but shaq doesn't really fall behind too many other players. not only has he dominated on a personal level, but one of his most underrated characteristics was being able to bring other players into the limelight with him. penny, kobe, & wade - they became elite in the game because shaq was on their teams.

you can't say that about many centers, if any.

[ILLsmak]

yes

yeah cuz his teammates choked. If they would have made shots, I think they could have at least tested them. Not saying they would have won, but that was a huge choke. You can't win as a C with shooters choking.

-Smak

[DonDadda59]

Nah, Shaq's passing, game management, and post game variety were worlds better in '0-'02 than in '95. He was still very raw in 1995.

Shaq was fatter, slower, lazier, and less active defensively during the 3-peat. He just had the great fortune of playing when all the great centers of the 90s were either gone or on their way out.

Compare his numbers/production during the 3-peat when he face McCulloch and when he faced Duncan/Robinson.

[PsychoBe]

he was still in his prime. you could go by the numbers and tell that he was still in his prime. shaq dominated when the ewings and olajuwon's and robinsons were gone, that's all.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Shaq was fatter, slower, lazier, and less active defensively during the 3-peat. He just had the great fortune of playing when all the great centers of the 90s were either gone or on their way out.

3-peat Shaq was better than the Orlando versions; dude was still green in Orlando and relied too much on his physical attributes. Shaq never had a better year than in 2000, though, when there were a handful of legit centers left in the game.


Compare his numbers/production during the 3-peat when he face McCulloch and when he faced Duncan/Robinson.

Well yeah, D-Rob and Timmy were on the same team. :oldlol:

[SugarHill]

Shaq was fatter, slower, lazier, and less active defensively during the 3-peat. He just had the great fortune of playing when all the great centers of the 90s were either gone or on their way out.

Compare his numbers/production during the 3-peat when he face McCulloch and when he faced Duncan/Robinson.

averaged 24/12 on 50% against them which is ehh by Shaq standards

27/13 in 01 against them tho

[MJistheGOAT]

Yes, because Hakeem

[AkronAngel]

Shaq was fatter, slower, lazier, and less active defensively during the 3-peat. He just had the great fortune of playing when all the great centers of the 90s were either gone or on their way out.

Compare his numbers/production during the 3-peat when he face McCulloch and when he faced Duncan/Robinson.

Wait, there are people who believe 95 Shaq was better than 2000 Shaq? :wtf:

[Kobe_6/8]

Nah, Shaq's passing, game management, and post game variety were worlds better in '0-'02 than in '95. He was still very raw in 1995.

http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Shaquille-ONeal-and-Michael-Jordan-Play-One-on-One-at-All-Star-Game-Shootaround.gif

[L.Kizzle]

Shaq from 00-02 might do worse.

95 Shaq was young and in shape. Running one man fast breaks, ect. His weight gain in those 5-7 years was not all muscle like young Wilt to older mature Wilt.

[DonDadda59]

averaged 24/12 on 50% against them which is ehh by Shaq standards

27/13 in 01 against them tho

Exactly. When he faced a front line as formidable as the ones he used to see in the playoffs during the 90s (think Hakeem-Thorpe, Ewing-Oakley) he didn't put up the same gaudy numbers he did against Todd MacCulloch. I honestly don't see 2000 Shaq doing any better than his '95 self against the Dream. If anything, Hakeem does even better offensively against a slower, fatter Shaq.

[iznogood]

IMHO three-peat Shaq with the ref treatment he was getting at the time does better, but not enough to beat the Rockets. Shaq was fat during the 3-peat, but extra weight suited his style of play. It's very physicall demanding to battle for postion with someone that much heavier. Especially since Shaq was still a formidable athlete. His quickness was still even though he was overweight.

[rzp]

Exactly. When he faced a front line as formidable as the ones he used to see in the playoffs during the 90s (think Hakeem-Thorpe, Ewing-Oakley) he didn't put up the same gaudy numbers he did against Todd MacCulloch. I honestly don't see 2000 Shaq doing any better than his '95 self against the Dream. If anything, Hakeem does even better offensively against a slower, fatter Shaq.

Really? are u expecting Shaq to make 40/20's against TD and DROB at same time? GTFO

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Really? are u expecting Shaq to make 40/20's against TD and DROB at same time? GTFO
Yeah was actually surprised Don of all people made that oversight.

[Prime_Shaq]

1995 Shaq was close to prime Shaq physically but his skill set and mentality was completely different. 2000 Shaq was a better passer and defender. He also learned how to dominate a game in more ways than just physically.

[DonDadda59]

Really? are u expecting Shaq to make 40/20's against TD and DROB at same time? GTFO

No I'm not expecting that, which is my point. Just like I wouldn't expect him to put up 40/20 against Hakeem.

You follow now?

[dreamwarrior]

Shaq was best from 96-98. 00-05 Shaq was too fat and kept getting into foul trouble

[Prime_Shaq]

Shaq was best from 96-98. 00-05 Shaq was too fat and kept getting into foul trouble
:roll: :roll: :roll:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

No I'm not expecting that, which is my point. Just like I wouldn't expect him to put up 40/20 against Hakeem.

You follow now?
We all get what you're saying, but using the tandem of Duncan/DRob doesn't really make sense. Most ATG centers would've likely fared the same.

Macculloch doesn't equal Hakeem. Obviously. But Macculloch not equaling Duncan/DRob is just stating the obvious, and a gross exaggeration. Peak Shaq would have put up similar stats in the 90's, just as he did in the early 2000s against elite defenses/centers (Mourning/Yao/Wallace/Mutombo).

[MJistheGOAT]

I think we all get what you're saying, but using the tandem of Duncan/DRob doesn't really make sense. Most centers would have likely fared the same.

Macculloch doesn't equal Hakeem. Obviously. But Macculloch not equaling Duncan/DRob is just stating the obvious, and a gross exaggeration. Peak Shaq would have put up similar stats in the 90's, just as he did in the early 2000s against elite defenses/centers (Mourning/Yao/Wallace/Mutombo).

Hakeem, Ewing, D Rob = Yao, Wallace??

Zo and Mutombo played in both eras.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Hakeem, Ewing, D Rob = Yao, Wallace??

Zo and Mutombo played in both eras.
No. I said peak Shaq dominated those guys along with elite defenses (defenses were NEVER better than in the early 2000's), and that, if you were to transplant peak Shaq into the 90's, he would dominate Hakeem, Ewing and D-Rob all the same.

Peak Shaq is arguably the GOAT people. Time to brush up on your gametape.

[DonDadda59]

We all get what you're saying, but using the tandem of Duncan/DRob doesn't really make sense. Most ATG centers would've likely fared the same.

Macculloch doesn't equal Hakeem. Obviously. But Macculloch not equaling Duncan/DRob is just stating the obvious, and a gross exaggeration. Peak Shaq would have put up similar stats in the 90's, just as he did in the early 2000s against elite defenses/centers (Mourning/Yao/Wallace/Mutombo).

You honestly think a fat Shaq from '00-'02 is dropping 40/20 on Hakeem backed up by Thorpe/Horry or Ewing backed up by Oakley? Couldn't do it against an old shop-worn Robinson, but he's going to do it with prime Robinson backed up by Rodman? :biggums:

I really don't see him doing better than the great 28/13/6/3 (60% FG) he put up in a sweep loss.


No. I said peak Shaq dominated those guys along with elite defenses (defenses were NEVER better than in the early 2000's), and that, if you were to transplant peak Shaq into the 90's, he would dominate Hakeem, Ewing and D-Rob all the same.

Peak Shaq is arguably the GOAT people. Time to brush up on your gametape.

:roll:

Based on what exactly? Him playing an old Mutumbo or soft ass Yao Ming who was as imposing defensively as Shawn Bradley? :wtf:

Shaq feasted on the decline of great centers. He really didn't improve as dramatically as some people like to make believe. He was just in the right place at the right time.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

You honestly think a fat Shaq from '00-'02 is dropping 40/20 on Hakeem backed up by Thorpe/Horry or Ewing backed up by Oakley? Couldn't do it against an old shop-worn Robinson, but he's going to do it with prime Robinson backed up by Rodman? :biggums:
Shaq in 2000 makes circa '95 look like childs play. He eats anyone in his path alive.

Don't know what he averages per individual numbers, but that guy was MDE.

[warriorfan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kshvbcihXKI

MDE :lol



If Rodman could give Shaq problems imagine what prime Hakeem would do to him.

[DonDadda59]

Shaq in 2000 makes circa '95 look like childs play. He eats anyone in his path alive.

Don't know what he averages per individual numbers, but that guy was MDE.

Again... what are you basing this on?

If '95 Shaq had played Todd MacCulloch instead of Hakeem he would've looked like the MDE then as well instead of being a 2nd or 3rd all NBA teamer.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

What are you basing this on?

Based on watching him play, fool. Have you lost your marbles? :oldlol:

[MJistheGOAT]

Shaq in 2000 makes circa '95 look like childs play. He eats anyone in his path alive.

That guy was MDE.

I agree that 00-03 Shaq > 95 Shaq and he is arguably MDE.

But rest of 95 Magic got so outplayed by 95 Rockets that result will be the same, Houston champs in 5-6 games.

He probably wins the duel with the Dream, though. Slightly. He is not going to get 38/16 or 33/15 lines.

[warriorfan]

What is the case for Shaq over Wilt for "MDE"?

[DonDadda59]

Based on watching him play, fool. Have you lost your marbles? :oldlol:

I saw Shaq play in the 90s and when he was feasting on Todd MacCulloch in the finals. He was clearly fatter, slower, and less motivated in LA, to the point that it caused friction with Kobe. He wasn't doing anything on the Lakers that he didn't do quicker and more efficiently in Orlando.

Let '95 Shaq play the sort of front courts '00 Shaq did and you'd see the same results and vice versa.

[MJistheGOAT]

What is the case for Shaq over Wilt for "MDE"?

I think related to his peers he was in 00-03. But competition was not so good.

I have Wilt and MJ as MDE (against better competition)
Then Kareem and Shaq.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I agree that 00-03 Shaq > 95 Shaq and he is arguably MDE.

All that needs to be said. I can't believe people are seriously comparing '95 Shaq, his 3rd year in the league, with the 2000 version...thinking the only difference between them was a Todd Macculloch. :oldlol:

Am I in the f*cking twilight zone??

[DonDadda59]

All that needs to be said. I can't believe people are seriously comparing '95 Shaq, his 3rd year in the league, with the 2000 version...thinking the only difference between them was a Todd Macculloch. :oldlol:

Am I in the f*cking twilight zone??

Who were Shaq's contemporaries at the C in the mid 90s when he was 2nd and 3rd team All NBA compared to when he became MDE? List them.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Who were Shaq's contemporaries at the C in the mid 90s when he was 2nd and 3rd team All NBA compared to when he became MDE? List them.
I'll go ahead and list them after you repeat, 1995 Shaq = 2000 Shaq. Just wanna make sure nobody is mincing words. :oldlol:

[DonDadda59]

I'll go ahead and list them after you repeat, 1995 Shaq = 2000 Shaq. Just wanna make sure nobody is mincing words. :oldlol:

I never said they were the same. One was fatter, slower, and lazier... to the point it almost destroyed the team's chemistry and caused beef with the second best player on the team. How many times did Penny and Shaq beef because the Diesel showed up to camp overweight or was phoning it in during the season?

You really think Shaq from '95 couldn't dominate an old Mutumbo and Smits or Todd MacCulloch? :oldlol:

He'd have 3 rings and 3 MVPs.

What did 2000 Shaq do that 1995 Shaq couldn't? :confusedshrug:

[PsychoBe]

the only difference between shaq in the 95' vs shaq in the 3-peat was that he had kobe to play off of instead of penny.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I never said they were the same. One was fatter, slower, and lazier... to the point it almost destroyed the team's chemistry and caused beef with the second best player on the team. How many times did Penny and Shaq beef because the Diesel showed up to camp overweight or was phoning it in during the season?

You really think Shaq from '95 couldn't dominate an old Mutumbo and Smits or Todd MacCulloch? :oldlol:

He'd have 3 rings and 3 MVPs.

What did 2000 Shaq do that 1995 Shaq couldn't? :confusedshrug:

In terms of impact, say the 2 were hypothetically playing during the same season, against one another -- who is the better player? That's what I'm asking.

[DonDadda59]

In terms of impact, say the 2 were hypothetically playing during the same season, against one another -- who is the better player? That's what I'm asking.

What point in the season? MDE Shaq needed time during the season just to get into semi-playing shape. '95 Shaq runs circles around him. :oldlol:


Kobe Bryant Says Shaquille O'Neal's Laziness Drove Him 'Crazy'
By Grant Hughes , National NBA Featured Columnist Mar 25, 2014

It's a good thing Kobe Bryant's post-playing career interests are in the entrepreneurial arena—he'd never make it as a personal trainer.

Then again, nobody affiliated with the Los Angeles Lakers had much luck in convincing Shaquille O'Neal to slim down more than a decade ago, so Bryant's not alone in that failure.

In an interview with Ben McGrath of The New Yorker, Bryant opened up about his frustration with O'Neal during the Lakers' title runs of the early 2000s. Lakers Nation's Serena Winters provides two key excerpts below:


Serena Winters @SerenaWinters
Kobe on Shaq in the @NewYorker: "It used to drive me crazy that he was so lazy."


Ouch. But wait, there's more:


Serena Winters @SerenaWinters
More Kobe on Shaq: "You got to have the responsibility of working every single day. You can't skate through sh--."


Bryant doesn't mention O'Neal's weight specifically, but it's pretty clearly implied in the jabs at the big man's work ethic. Remember, O'Neal was legendary for coming into training camp overweight. He'd typically play himself into better shape as the season progressed, but for a guy like Bryant, whose training intensity switch remains stuck on "push to brink of death" at all times, that wasn't enough.

As early as the 2002-03 season, media outlets were talking about O'Neal's issues with weight and motivation. This excerpt from ESPN's Charley Rosen shows Bryant wasn't alone in his frustration:


But in the absence of a public weighing on a cattle scale, nobody really knows how much poundage The Big Load is really carrying around. Yet the fact that Shaq not only shuns any kind of scale, but totally freezes out any media maven bold enough to bring up the subject of his weight is a strong indication that Shaq is well aware of the problem. ...

... With his size and his skills, Shaq remains the monster of the midway. At the same time, his effectiveness has diminished in direct proportion to the increase of his body mass.

If O'Neal was aware of the problem, he certainly didn't make a major effort to correct it. And the gap between Bryant's and his preparation habits was merely one more brick in the wall that eventually separated the two entirely.

The personality clash between Bryant and O'Neal ran deeper than their differing opinions on work ethic, but one can't help but wonder if a fitter Shaq might have been able to keep an all-time great one-two punch together for a few more years.

What's most important for the Lakers' future is Bryant's ability to ease his demands on accompanying stars. With the team looking for free-agent talent during the next two summers, the way Bryant treats incoming players will be important.

Bryant's criticisms of O'Neal are fair, but he'll have to dial back the intensity if L.A. is ever going to pair him with another big name.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2005414-kobe-bryant-says-shaquille-oneals-laziness-drove-him-crazy

But because he could sleep walk through Todd MacCulloch while eating krispy kreme and big kahuna burger at half time, he's gonna drop 40/20 on prime Hakeem or Ewing? F*ck outta here :oldlol:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

2000 Shaq was in excellent game shape, playing 79 games in the regular season.

All of that stuff happened post 2000. Once again, I asked you, specifically, who you thought was the better player between 2000 and 1995 Shaq.

Thanks in advance.

[DonDadda59]

2000 Shaq was in excellent game shape, playing 79 games in the regular season.

All of that stuff happened post 2000. Once again, I asked you, specifically, who you thought was the better player between 2000 and 1995 Shaq.

Thanks in advance.

I don't think there's much difference in their half court play style or impact. With '95 Shaq you get a better conditioned athlete known to run the full length of the floor on defense and offense. The only difference between them (not counting weight) was their opposition.

What did 2000 Shaq do that 1995 Shaq couldn't?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I don't think there's much difference in their half court play style or impact. With '95 Shaq you get a better conditioned athlete known to run the full length of the floor on defense and offense. The only difference between them (not counting weight) was their opposition.

What did 2000 Shaq do that 1995 Shaq couldn't?
Other than being, statistically, a better player? Shaq's impact on offense and defense per impact metrics were better, as were his skills; better off-hand, drop step, and use of his pivot. On defense, he led the Lakers to the #1 defensive rating, and his man defense was a HUGE reason for that. Hoopdata has the Lakers that year in least held: ppg against centers, fg% against centers, and second in the the least FTA per game against centers.

By the way, Shaq's Lakers were also a -7.1 TS% relative to average, which beat the twin towers (Robinson/Duncan) by 3.1 TS%....for 1st place.

Yeah, 95 Shaq is gonna carry that kinda impact. :oldlol:

[Stringer Bell]

Shaq played well in those finals. He wasn't badly outplayed like Ewing was by Olajuwon in the 94' Finals, or like D-Rob was in the 95 WCF.

The rest of the Rockets just outplayed the rest of the Magic.

Shaq put up outstanding numbers. Even if he would have played a little better it is highly unlikely the Magic would win

[DonDadda59]

Other than being, statistically, a better player? Shaq's impact on offense and defense per impact metrics were better, as were his skills; better off-hand, drop step, and use of his pivot. On defense, he led the Lakers to the #1 defensive rating, and his man defense was a HUGE reason for that. Hoopdata has the Lakers that year in best held: ppg against centers, fg% against centers, and second in the the least FTA per game against centers.

By the way, the Lakers were -7 TS% relative to average, which beat the twin towers (Robinson/Duncan) by 3.1 TS% for 1st place.

Yeah, 95 Shaq is gonna carry that kinda impact. :oldlol:

Again, who were these centers that they played against? :confusedshrug:

You give Shaq credit for their #1 DRTG... but let me guess it wasn't his fault when they dropped 21st the very next season?

And the only way '00 Shaq was personally better statistically than '95 Shaq was assists really. And that was only because of the offensive system they were running (triangle obviously) and everything with that starts in the post. Orlando gave the bulk of the playmaking responsibilities to Penny and seconds to Anderson. '95 Shaq was a very competent passer and knew how to read double/triples and find the open man. The difference in rebounding was only due to Horace Grant joining the team and taking some of the slack. Rookie Shaq averaged more boards and blocks than MDE Shaq.

They scored at about the same clip (29-30 PPG) with '95 Shaq shooting higher percentages across the board.

Shaq had all of those abilities and skills you listed (pivot, drop step, hooks with either hand, etc) and had the ability to run the floor in a way a heavier, lazier Shaq wasn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RgEwVdQV78

'95 Shaq wins as much in the same manner as '00 Shaq and vice versa if they were switched.

[Im Still Ballin]

Oh my God don get the **** off Michaels jock

[warriorfan]

95' Shaq on the 00' Laker teams would wreck shit even harder than fat shaq

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Again, who were these centers that they played against? :confusedshrug:

You give Shaq credit for their #1 DRTG... but let me guess it wasn't his fault when they dropped 21st the very next season?

I'm talking about 2000 Shaq. Not the 2001 version, who I've admitted was criticized for his laziness post 2000.

Mourning/Duncan/DRob/Smits/Mutombo/Ewing/Sabonis/Divac

We gonna act like that's chopped liver now? Get real.


And the only way '00 Shaq was personally better statistically than '95 Shaq was assists really.

And his playoff numbers? I'm going off advanced metrics as well, like I quoted in my last post.

What do you think about Shaq engineering the #1 defensive-rating along with leading the league in least held opposing stats: points, shooting percentages, and FTA?

Over the twin towers.


Shaq had all of those abilities and skills you listed (pivot, drop step, hooks with either hand, etc) and had the ability to run the floor in a way a heavier, lazier Shaq wasn't.

Shaq perfected them in 2000, as noted per PJax and Shaq himself.

There is nothing objective that suggests Shaq in 1995 was the SAME impact player he was in 2000. Absolutely nothing.

Metrics aren't on your side.
Raw numbers aren't on your side
The eye test is definitely not on your side
The teams' results aren't on your side

Give it up, Don.

[DonDadda59]

I'm talking about 2000 Shaq. Not the 2001 version, who I've admitted was criticized for his laziness post 2000.

Mourning/Duncan/DRob/Smits/Mutombo/Ewing/Sabonis/Divac

AKA past prime and 5th tier centers from the 90s and a PF :oldlol:


We gonna act like that's chopped liver now? Get real.

When was Ewing a factor past early 1998?

Robinson was past his best but still made Shaq look pedestrian by his MDE standards.

Smits, Deke, Sabonis, and Divac weren't even afterthoughts during the golden era of 90s Centers and they were all past prime.


And his playoff numbers? I'm going off advanced metrics as well, like I quoted in my last post?

All good except for when he saw the Spurs.


What do you think about Shaq engineering a #1 defensive rating along with leading the league in least held opposing stats: points, shooting percetanges, and FTA?


I don't think he was the engineer :oldlol:

Couple of guys that were on the #1 rated defense in '00 weren't around the next season when they dropped to the #1 rated defense. Shaq was there though. Played and started all but 8 games.



Shaq perfected them in 2000, as noted per PJax and Shaq himself.

There is nothing objective that suggests Shaq in 1995 was the SAME impact player he was in 2000. Absolutely nothing.

Metrics aren't on your side.
Raw numbers aren't on your side
The eye test is definitely not on your side
The teams' results aren't on your side

Give it up, Don.

Give what up? :lol

You haven't made a compelling argument in the least. You tell me that metrics show that Shaq held past prime Rik Smits or Dikembe or other 90s all NBA 10th-12th teamers to lower production than prime Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing, etc and I'm supposed to be impressed?

There is literally nothing that fat 2000 Shaq did that '95 Shaq couldn't do quicker and more efficiently and just as dominant given the chance to play Todd MacCulloch in the finals. Not one thing.

Replace Hakeem's Rockets with any of the teams the Lakers played in the finals from '00-'02 and the Magic win all series with '95 Shaq looking like the MDE.

[Rose'sACL]

Who were Shaq's contemporaries at the C in the mid 90s when he was 2nd and 3rd team All NBA compared to when he became MDE? List them.
who were Jordan's contemporaries at SG in the 90s? the best perimeter defender played on his team at the SF spot.

[Im Still Ballin]

who were Jordan's contemporaries at SG in the 90s? the best perimeter defender played on his team at the SF spot.
:pimp:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I've backed up all my posts with data and logic. You've given me nothing but crazy ass opinions. Just saying.


All good except for when he saw the Spurs.

No center is going to completely dominate a front-line of Duncan and DRob. You keep repeating this, just not sure why. :oldlol:


I don't think he was the engineer :oldlol:
Everything points to Shaq being the anchor of those teams defensively.

Engineer? I suppose we can give to PJax. But again, Shaq was definitely the "anchor".


AKA past prime and 5th tier centers from the 90s and a PF :oldlol:

Duncan, Robinson, and Mourning were/would be 5th tier centers in the 90s? You're outta ur mind, son.

Don't know what the agenda at play here is, but I know it doesn't involve either '95 or 2000 Shaq. :oldlol:

[DonDadda59]

who were Jordan's contemporaries at SG in the 90s? the best perimeter defender played on his team at the SF spot.

Drexler, Hardaway, Miller, Richmond, Sprewell, Smith, Hornacek, Dumars and even lower tier guys like Jackson, Rider, Hawkins, Petrovic (RIP), Gill.

But why do certain people bring up Jordan in a Shaq thread? :confusedshrug:

[DonDadda59]

I've backed up all my posts with data and logic. You've given me nothing but crazy ass opinions. Just saying.

How are my opinions 'crazy'? You brought up data that shows that Shaq did well against old washed up mid tier 90s Centers and the Lakers' defense went from 1st to 21st with him as the 'engineer'.

What reason is there to believe that '95 Shaq wouldn't drop the same numbers MDE Shaq did against Smits, Mutombo, MacCulloch?




No center is going to completely dominate a front-line of Duncan and DRob. You keep repeating this, just not sure why. :oldlol:

You're just proving my point that MDE's dominance was contingent on who he played. MaCulloch- 40/20, old Robinson- pedestrian numbers.


Everything points to Shaq being the anchor of those teams defensively.

OK, and they went from 1 to 21st when AC Green left, Fisher missed most of the season. Shaq played 74-79 games both seasons. So he was the anchor of the best defense in the league and then a few months later one of the worst? :wtf:


Engineer? I suppose we can give to PJax. But again, Shaq was definitely the "anchor".

Whatever you want to call it, the Lakers went from 1st to 21st with Shaq as the anchor.


Duncan, Robinson, and Mourning were/would be 5th tier centers in the 90s? You're outta ur mind, son.

Duncan was a PF. Robinson was old and Mourning was a 5th tier center in the 90s. :oldlol:

Zo couldn't make an All NBA team until '99 (drafted in '92) despite being a 20/10/3-4 BPG player. What does that tell you about the competition?


Don't know what the agenda at play here is, but I know it doesn't involve either '95 or 2000 Shaq. :oldlol:

There's no agenda. I just find it hilarious that people think that a fat, lazy Shaq beating garbage competiton means he was somehow vastly superior to his younger self who was a All NBA 3rd teamer despite being an absolute monster.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

How are my opinions 'crazy'? You brought up data that shows that Shaq did well against old washed up mid tier 90s Centers and the Lakers' defense went from 1st to 21st with him as the 'engineer'.

And in reality? Supertars at their position, and high impact players.
http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ratings/2000.html

Once again, just because you say these guys were 'washed up' doesn't make it true. You're gonna have to back up your claims.


What reason is there to believe that '95 Shaq wouldn't drop the same numbers MDE Shaq did against Smits, Mutombo, MacCulloch?

As I said, don't know what '95 Shaq would average, but he wouldn't have the same impact. No objective measure hints at a 3rd year player being just as good as a guy in his peak.


You're just proving my point that MDE's dominance was contingent on who he played. MaCulloch- 40/20, old Robinson- pedestrian numbers.

That's one tandem; a better tandem than anything the 90's offered. Checkout his splits vs the other centers.



OK, and they went from 1 to 21st when AC Green left, Fisher missed most of the season. Shaq played 74-79 games both seasons. So he was the anchor of the best defense in the league and then a few months later one of the worst? :wtf:

Injuries, laziness, and lack of conditioning. Once again, I'm talking about 2000, not 2001 Shaq, who I've admitted was not the same dude (until the postseason).

AC Green, Fisher, aren't making up for those opposing center stats, Shaq led the league in. Sorry, you're reaching again.


There's no agenda. I just find it hilarious that people think that a fat, lazy Shaq beating garbage competiton means he was somehow vastly superior to his younger self who was a All NBA 3rd teamer despite being an absolute monster.

2000 Shaq was in excellent shape, just as his career averages suggest.

[Rose'sACL]

Drexler, Hardaway, Miller, Richmond, Sprewell, Smith, Hornacek, Dumars and even lower tier guys like Jackson, Rider, Hawkins, Petrovic (RIP), Gill.

But why do certain people bring up Jordan in a Shaq thread? :confusedshrug:
Because it relates to your comment. Not one player you mentioned was as great as Hakeem. By your logic Jordan can't be the GOAT because he didn't play against SGs who were in the class of wade, Kobe, west etc. Forget about having careers like those, none of the SGs you mentioned had all time great seasons when Jordan won.
I think Jordan is the GOAT but you clearly don't going by your comment about Shaq.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Be uase it relates to your comment. Not one player you mentioned was as great as Hakeem. By your logic Jordan can't be the GOAT be a use he didn't play against SGs who were in the class of wade, Kobe, west etc. Forget about having careers like those, none of the SGs you mentioned had all time great seasons when Jordan won.
I think Jordan is the GOAT but you clearly don't going by your comment about Shaq.
Well damn, ain't that some shit? :oldlol:

Anyway I'm outta here. Peace out fellas.

[DonDadda59]

And in reality? Supertars at their position, and high impact players.
http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ratings/2000.html

Once again, just because you say these guys were 'washed up' doesn't make it true. You're gonna have to back up your claims.

OK.

Players you mentioned as Shaq's competition during the 3-peat...

Alonzo Mourning (age 29-31): 18.4 PPG/ 8.9 RPG/ 3.1 BPG (54% FG)
Patrick Ewing (Ages 37-39): 10.1 PPG/ 7 RPG/ 1.1 BPG (45% FG)
David Robinson (Ages 34-36): 14.8 PPG/ 8.9 RPG/ 2.2 BPG (50% FG)
Dikembe Mutombo (Ages 33-35): 11 PPG/12.8 RPG/2.8 BPG (52% FG)
Arvydas Sabonis (Age 35-36): 11 PPG/ 6.6 RPG/ 1.1 BPG (49% FG)
Rik Smits (Age 33): 12.9 PPG/ 5.1 RPG/ 1.3 BPG (48% FG)

What am I missing here? Are we really going to compare those guys to Shaq's competition in the mid 90s... really? :biggums:

Seriously doe... really?



As I said, don't know what '95 Shaq would average, but he wouldn't have the same impact. No objective measure hints at a 3rd year player being just as good as a guy in his peak.

So forget metrics and answer the question I've been asking you since the beginning... what did Shaq in '00 do that Shaq in '95 couldn't? Would it be enough to keep him from dominating washed up centers in their mid-late 30s?




That's one tandem; a better tandem than anything the 90's offered. Checkout his splits vs the other centers.


Prime Robinson and Rodman? :confusedshrug:

Rodman on his own gave Shaq tremendous fits.


Injuries, laziness, and lack of conditioning. Once again, I'm talking about 2000, not 2001 Shaq, who I've admitted was not the same dude (until the postseason).

So a fat, lazy, unconditioned Shaq who 'engineered' and 'anchored' the 21st ranked defense was able to win the championship but a younger, healthier, more motivated version of him couldn't?

OK.


AC Green, Fisher, aren't making up for those opposing center stats, Shaq led the league in. Sorry, you're reaching again.

Yup, I'm reaching when I say the Lakers went from 1st to 21st with Shaq playing in 74+ games both seasons when those guys were out.

If you want to make believe a fat, lazy, unmotivated Shaq is somehow vastly superior to his younger self... go ahead. But can you at least admit playing facing Todd MacCulloch isn't the same thing as facing a prime Hakeem Olajuwon? :confusedshrug:

[DonDadda59]

Because it relates to your comment. Not one player you mentioned was as great as Hakeem. By your logic Jordan can't be the GOAT because he didn't play against SGs who were in the class of wade, Kobe, west etc. Forget about having careers like those, none of the SGs you mentioned had all time great seasons when Jordan won.
I think Jordan is the GOAT but you clearly don't going by your comment about Shaq.

What the f*ck are you talking about?

Even if none of the players I mentioned were as great as Hakeem... the Dream couldn't win shit until Jordan was out of the league. Same with all of the other great centers and players of every position in the league. Think about that for a second- When the greatest collection of centers/big men played in the league, it was a SG that did all the winning.

And for the record, Jordan clowned a prime Drexler in the '92 finals (when a portion of the media was questioning if Clyde was the better SG).

Who did Kobe beat in the playoffs or finals in that manner? Iverson who was a 'PG' when Kobe wasn't even the best player on his own team? Old Ray Allen who clowned him in '08? Same question with Wade. Same with the logo.

Shoot.

[ILLsmak]

What the f*ck are you talking about?

Even if none of the players I mentioned were as great as Hakeem... the Dream couldn't win shit until Jordan was out of the league. Same with all of the other great centers and players of every position in the league. Think about that for a second- When the greatest collection of centers/big men played in the league, it was a SG that did all the winning.

And for the record, Jordan clowned a prime Drexler in the '92 finals (when a portion of the media was questioning if Clyde was the better SG).

Who did Kobe beat in the playoffs or finals in that manner? Iverson who was a 'PG' when Kobe wasn't even the best player on his own team? Old Ray Allen who clowned him in '08? Same question with Wade. Same with the logo.

Shoot.

I'm a big Shaq fan. In fact, I'd say I am almost a Shaq expert... in terms of watching him. I watched him from 95 to 2009. Not every game, but enough. In the playoffs, I did.

Dude's right, though. Shaq was considerably better in 2000. Shaq was GOAT tier in 2000. He was a monster in 95, but he didn't have the same confidence. Even if it was only mental (and I think it was) that still means he was better. Even if he had 'more ability' in 95. He was better in 2000 because he knew how to play.

I definitely think 2000 Shaq would have done better vs Hakeem in the Finals, but they still lose because of the shooters. Shaq would have thrown more elbows tho.

-Smak

[AirFederer]

I agree with you for the most part, but still think fat Shaq played with higher bbiq.

But still, 95 Shaq on 2000-2004 Lakers would kill it.


AKA past prime and 5th tier centers from the 90s and a PF :oldlol:



When was Ewing a factor past early 1998?

Robinson was past his best but still made Shaq look pedestrian by his MDE standards.

Smits, Deke, Sabonis, and Divac weren't even afterthoughts during the golden era of 90s Centers and they were all past prime.



All good except for when he saw the Spurs.




I don't think he was the engineer :oldlol:

Couple of guys that were on the #1 rated defense in '00 weren't around the next season when they dropped to the #1 rated defense. Shaq was there though. Played and started all but 8 games.




Give what up? :lol

You haven't made a compelling argument in the least. You tell me that metrics show that Shaq held past prime Rik Smits or Dikembe or other 90s all NBA 10th-12th teamers to lower production than prime Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing, etc and I'm supposed to be impressed?

There is literally nothing that fat 2000 Shaq did that '95 Shaq couldn't do quicker and more efficiently and just as dominant given the chance to play Todd MacCulloch in the finals. Not one thing.

Replace Hakeem's Rockets with any of the teams the Lakers played in the finals from '00-'02 and the Magic win all series with '95 Shaq looking like the MDE.

[kennethgriffin]

Shaq cant win without a top 5 player all time... or atleast a rigged finals that makes a different guy look like a top 5 player all time


So unless kobe can go back in time with him or the refs from 06 can replace the ones from 1995. Then its not happeningļ

[LAZERUSS]

The Hakeem-Shaq matchup in '95 was an interesting one from the standpoint of "primes."

Many observers claim that Hakeem was at his peak in '95...and at age 32. If that were the case, he was certainly an outlier. Some here have claimed that Shaq was, at the least, very near his peak in '95...and at age 22. Again...an outlier.

It has been my observation that most players hit their peaks EARLY in their careers. Typically around ages 23-25. Kareem, McAdoo, Thurmond, Bellamy, Durant, Hayes, probably Dr. J, and many others. You could also argue Wilt, whose '62 season came at age 25. And even MJ had his best statistical seasons by age 25.

In any case, there have been very few superstars who were not putting up near-best seasons by age 25.

Statsitically, Shaq's best season was his 2000 season, and at age 27. He had a career high 40.0 mpg; a career high 29.7 ppg; a career high 13.6 rpg; and a career high 3.8 apg. He also blocked 3.0 shots per game. His post-season dominance was off-the-charts, as well.

But, having said that,...take a look at SECOND year, and at age 21. A career high in games played, at 81. He had his second highest season, at 39.8 mpg. He averaged 29.3 ppg; 13.2 rpg; and shot .599 from the field.

Athletically, Shaq was probably at his peak by age 21-22. He weighed somewhere around 300 lbs at that time, and no doubt had his highest NBA vertical around then. Watch the footage of a young Shaq. He was much quicker, and leaped considerably higher early in his career, than he did in 2000.

Now, a 2000 Shaq probably weighed between 325-350. His footwork was better, too. But the biggest difference...sheer power. What he lacked in athleticism, he made up for in strength. And his athleticism had declined little.

And I get a kick out of those that claim that he had a"conditioning" problem. The man played 40 mpg at age 27, and at 325+ lbs. Then, in a 23 game stretch in the playoffs, he averaged a career high 43.5 mpg.

Not only that, but Shaq played 20 seasons, and for a good 12 of them, he was probably a top-5 player in the game (and certainly a top-10.) Furthermore, from '98 thru '02 he was the best player in the game (sorry Timmy, but there was no way Duncan was even close to Shaq in that period.)

The biggest difference between a younger Shaq, and a mid-career Shaq, was that O'Neal was a better defensive player in the late 90's to early 00's. His athleticism was more of a help early in his career in terms of shot-blocking, though. He had a career high 3.5 bpg in his rookie season (and in only 38 mpg.)


The Hakeem fans will claim that Olajuwon's peak was in his championship run years. And statistically, it was. In his '94 season, he played a career high 41.0 mpg, and averaged 27.3 ppg, on a .528 FG%, with 11.9 rpg, 3.6 apg, and 3.7 bpg. He also won his second straight DPOY that season. In his '95 season, he averaged 39.6 mpg, a career high 27.8 ppg, on a .517 FG%, with 10.8 rpg, 3.5 apg, and 3.4 bpg.

However, a younger Hakeem was already a force by his second season. In fact, Hakeem's career high FG% came in his rookie season, and at .538. In his second season ('85-86), he played 36.3 mpg, averaged 23.5 ppg, shot .526 from the floor, 11.5 rpg, and 3.4 bpg. Had that Hakeem been able to play at the same level for 41 mpg, like his ''94 counterpart, and his numbers would have translated to 26.5 ppg, 13.0 rpg, and 3.8 bpg. And while his '94 and '95 playoff runs were, overall, the best of his career, his second year run, and against the likes of the Lakers and the Celtics, was very impressive. His third year playoff run was statistically right there with his '94 and '95 runs, as well.

Hakeem's peak rebounding years also came relatively early in his career, as well. By ages 26 and 27 he was leading the league at 13.5 and 14.0. He also had his best post-season rebounding seasons around that age, as well.

Hakeem's defense was outstanding later in his career, when he won back-to-back DPOY's in '93 and '94, but it is worth noting that he was already 2nd team all-defense in his rookie season, and 1st team by his third season ('86-87.) He also had his bpg season at age 27 (4.6 bpg.)

Continued...

[LAZERUSS]

Continuing...

I would argue that Shaq was very close to his peak by the '95 season, and that Hakeem was at his. And the reality was, Shaq outplayed Hakeem in the '95 Finals. Hakeem slightly outscored him, but did so on 10 more FGAs per game. Shaq outrebounded Hakeem; outassisted Hakeem; outblocked him; and badly outshot him from the field (.595 to .483.)

Don't take my word for it, though, but how about Colts18...


I decided to rewatch the 1995 finals and chart each possession to see to how effective Shaq and Hakeem were on the court. A special shout out to Jordanbulls for providing the video of this series


Total:
Hakeem: 253 touches, 140 doubles (55.3%)
Shaq: 221 touches, 146 doubles (66.1%)

Here are their stats when they were guarded by each other:
Shaq 32-57 (56.1 FG%), 6-8 FT, 67.3 double teamed%, .578 TS%, 17 assists, 1 O-reb allowed to Hakeem
Hakeem: 31-75 (41.3 FG%), 9-13 FT, 60.2 double teamed%, .446 TS%, 8 assists, 3 O-reb allowed to Shaq

Shaq blocked 2 Hakeem shots, Hakeem blocked 0 Shaq shots. Hakeem did make a 3P on Shaq. Hakeem guarded Shaq on 73.3% of the touches he had, while Shaq guarded Hakeem on 69.6% of his touches. Hakeem got a lot more fastbreak touches than Shaq so in the halfcourt, they guarded each other about even.

When they weren't being guarded by each other, Shaq was being guarded by Charles Jones and Hakeem by Horace Grant.

Shaq vs Jones: 7-11 FG (63.6 FG%), 35 doubles in 52 touches (67.3%), 2 assists
Hakeem vs Grant: 13-24 (54.2 FG%), 33 double teams in 58 touches (56.9%), 6 assists

Jump shots:
Hakeem: 27-62 (43.5%)
Shaq: 2-7 (28.6%)

The vast majority of Shaq's shots were close range hooks.

Dunks:
Hakeem: 1 dunk (vs grant)
Shaq: 9 dunks (2 of them were in Hakeem's face)

Fouls drawn on offense:
Shaq: 37 (17 on Hakeem)
Hakeem: 21 (9 on Shaq)

Hakeem did draw 4 Shaq charges.

Shaq was called for 5 travels, Hakeem 2.

Plus/Minus (Houston outscored Orlando by 28 points total):
On court:
Shaq: -12 in 180 minutes
Hakeem: +17 in 179 minutes

Off court:
Shaq: -16 in 16:37 of action (Houston scored 133 points per 48 in the minutes Shaq missed)
Hakeem: +11 in 17:11 of action (134 points per 48 in the minutes he was off the court)

Interestingly enough, in 2 of the games, the Magic outscored the Rockets when Shaq was on the court. The magic were -8 in about 9 minutes of action without Shaq in game (lost by just 2 points). In game 3, they were -4 in the minutes Shaq missed in a game where they lost by 3 points. In game 1, the Rockets outscored the magic by 9 in the minutes Hakeem missed, but they were outscored by a combined 4 points in games 3 and 4 without Hakeem.

Observations:
-Orlando was for some reason really committed to doubling Hakeem in game 1. They were throwing a lot of hard doubles. Hakeem had 5 assists in that game, all of them 3 pointers, 4 came off of doubles (one was a triple team). I'm guessing it was a response to Hakeem's series vs Robinson. For the rest of the series, Orlando didn't double Hakeem as much and they threw softer doubles.

-Hakeem made like 5 or 6 baskets in transition to Shaq's 1 or so. So while Shaq didn't get credit for giving up those buckets since he didn't guard, a few of those times Shaq was slow in transition. Shaq got about 3 or shots

-One of the commentators compared Horry to Scottie Pippen and Walton took the comment seriously. They are vastly different players IMO

-I'm not sure why Penny wasn't more aggressive. Kenny Smith couldn't guard him at all. When Penny did drive to the basket, he made a few shots over Hakeem.

-Drexler was the man in this series. He really wanted to get his first title badly. For some reason, people rarely talk about him despite him getting more WS than Hakeem in that playoff run

-It's fashionable these days to **** on Hakeem's cast in 94, but this cast was much better than that one. The guards outplayed Orlando's guards. Horry played really well. The 3P shooters benefited a lot from the shortened 3P line.

-Contrary to popular belief, handchecking wasn't allowed in 95. The refs called like 2 handchecking fouls in this series

-I'm so thankful the NBA got rid of the illegal defense. The refs called like 5 of them in each game. It destroyed the flow of the game and limited the ways you could double team a player.


Furthermore, I broke down their teammates contributions...


Hakeem's TEAMMATES, collectively, had a considerably higher TS% in that series, than Hakeem, himself. So, those that favor this stat, had better prepared to explain that. Looks to me like Houston won that series DESPITE Hakeem.

Meanwhile, Shaq's TS% in that Finals was far greater than what his teammates gave him.

Hakeem shot 55-115 from the field, 1-1 from the arc, and 18-26 from the line.
His teammates shot 70-136 from 2pt range, 36-91 from the arc, and 77-97 from the line.

Shaq shot 44-74 from the field, and 24-42 from the line.
His teammates shot 78-156 from 2 pt range, 41-118 from the arc, and 37-47 from the line.

Using a TRUE TS%, Hakeem shot .508. His teammates collectively shot .589.

Shaq shot a TRUE TS% of .589. His teammates shot a collective .533.


Hell, Hakeem didn't even shoot the post-season NBA average in eFG% (.488 to the league average of .504.)

BTW, the Hakeem fans NEVER bring up the Hakeem-Shaq playoff H2H in '99, either. Shaq just slaughtered Hakeem. And it wasn't just a statistical massacre, either, but just watch the footage that is on YouTube. Hakeem simply didn't want any part of Shaq in that series. He was completely helpless on defense, and was completely intimated by Shaq's defense.

Of course, Hakeem was past his prime, and Shaq was very close to his peak.

In any case, over the course of their entire careers, Shaq was the better H2H player:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=olajuha01&p2=onealsh01

[Rose'sACL]

What the f*ck are you talking about?

Even if none of the players I mentioned were as great as Hakeem... the Dream couldn't win shit until Jordan was out of the league. Same with all of the other great centers and players of every position in the league. Think about that for a second- When the greatest collection of centers/big men played in the league, it was a SG that did all the winning.

And for the record, Jordan clowned a prime Drexler in the '92 finals (when a portion of the media was questioning if Clyde was the better SG).

Who did Kobe beat in the playoffs or finals in that manner? Iverson who was a 'PG' when Kobe wasn't even the best player on his own team? Old Ray Allen who clowned him in '08? Same question with Wade. Same with the logo.

Shoot.
you do realize that you are contradicting yourself, right?

[Cali Syndicate]

the only difference between shaq in the 95' vs shaq in the 3-peat was that he had kobe to play off of instead of penny.

Triangle offense

[Paul George 24]

No.

YES..............

[rzp]

The Hakeem-Shaq matchup in '95 was an interesting one from the standpoint of "primes."

Many observers claim that Hakeem was at his peak in '95...and at age 32. If that were the case, he was certainly an outlier. Some here have claimed that Shaq was, at the least, very near his peak in '95...and at age 22. Again...an outlier.

It has been my observation that most players hit their peaks EARLY in their careers. Typically around ages 23-25. Kareem, McAdoo, Thurmond, Bellamy, Durant, Hayes, probably Dr. J, and many others. You could also argue Wilt, whose '62 season came at age 25. And even MJ had his best statistical seasons by age 25.

In any case, there have been very few superstars who were not putting up near-best seasons by age 25.

Statsitically, Shaq's best season was his 2000 season, and at age 27. He had a career high 40.0 mpg; a career high 29.7 ppg; a career high 13.6 rpg; and a career high 3.8 apg. He also blocked 3.0 shots per game. His post-season dominance was off-the-charts, as well.

But, having said that,...take a look at SECOND year, and at age 21. A career high in games played, at 81. He had his second highest season, at 39.8 mpg. He averaged 29.3 ppg; 13.2 rpg; and shot .599 from the field.

Athletically, Shaq was probably at his peak by age 21-22. He weighed somewhere around 300 lbs at that time, and no doubt had his highest NBA vertical around then. Watch the footage of a young Shaq. He was much quicker, and leaped considerably higher early in his career, than he did in 2000.

Now, a 2000 Shaq probably weighed between 325-350. His footwork was better, too. But the biggest difference...sheer power. What he lacked in athleticism, he made up for in strength. And his athleticism had declined little.

And I get a kick out of those that claim that he had a"conditioning" problem. The man played 40 mpg at age 27, and at 325+ lbs. Then, in a 23 game stretch in the playoffs, he averaged a career high 43.5 mpg.

Not only that, but Shaq played 20 seasons, and for a good 12 of them, he was probably a top-5 player in the game (and certainly a top-10.) Furthermore, from '98 thru '02 he was the best player in the game (sorry Timmy, but there was no way Duncan was even close to Shaq in that period.)

The biggest difference between a younger Shaq, and a mid-career Shaq, was that O'Neal was a better defensive player in the late 90's to early 00's. His athleticism was more of a help early in his career in terms of shot-blocking, though. He had a career high 3.5 bpg in his rookie season (and in only 38 mpg.)


The Hakeem fans will claim that Olajuwon's peak was in his championship run years. And statistically, it was. In his '94 season, he played a career high 41.0 mpg, and averaged 27.3 ppg, on a .528 FG%, with 11.9 rpg, 3.6 apg, and 3.7 bpg. He also won his second straight DPOY that season. In his '95 season, he averaged 39.6 mpg, a career high 27.8 ppg, on a .517 FG%, with 10.8 rpg, 3.5 apg, and 3.4 bpg.

However, a younger Hakeem was already a force by his second season. In fact, Hakeem's career high FG% came in his rookie season, and at .538. In his second season ('85-86), he played 36.3 mpg, averaged 23.5 ppg, shot .526 from the floor, 11.5 rpg, and 3.4 bpg. Had that Hakeem been able to play at the same level for 41 mpg, like his ''94 counterpart, and his numbers would have translated to 26.5 ppg, 13.0 rpg, and 3.8 bpg. And while his '94 and '95 playoff runs were, overall, the best of his career, his second year run, and against the likes of the Lakers and the Celtics, was very impressive. His third year playoff run was statistically right there with his '94 and '95 runs, as well.

Hakeem's peak rebounding years also came relatively early in his career, as well. By ages 26 and 27 he was leading the league at 13.5 and 14.0. He also had his best post-season rebounding seasons around that age, as well.

Hakeem's defense was outstanding later in his career, when he won back-to-back DPOY's in '93 and '94, but it is worth noting that he was already 2nd team all-defense in his rookie season, and 1st team by his third season ('86-87.) He also had his bpg season at age 27 (4.6 bpg.)

Continued...

damn nice job :bowdown:

[ArbitraryWater]

Continuing...

I would argue that Shaq was very close to his peak by the '95 season, and that Hakeem was at his. And the reality was, Shaq outplayed Hakeem in the '95 Finals. Hakeem slightly outscored him, but did so on 10 more FGAs per game. Shaq outrebounded Hakeem; outassisted Hakeem; outblocked him; and badly outshot him from the field (.595 to .483.)

Don't take my word for it, though, but how about Colts18...




Furthermore, I broke down their teammates contributions...



BTW, the Hakeem fans NEVER bring up the Hakeem-Shaq playoff H2H in '99, either. Shaq just slaughtered Hakeem. And it wasn't just a statistical massacre, either, but just watch the footage that is on YouTube. Hakeem simply didn't want any part of Shaq in that series. He was completely helpless on defense, and was completely intimated by Shaq's defense.

Of course, Hakeem was past his prime, and Shaq was very close to his peak.

In any case, over the course of their entire careers, Shaq was the better H2H player:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=olajuha01&p2=onealsh01

Colts did a great job, you on the other hand went full retard when you said Houston won "DESPITE" of Hakeem.

[LAZERUSS]

Colts did a great job, you on the other hand went full retard when you said Houston won "DESPITE" of Hakeem.

Well, let me put it to you this way, then...

this MYTH that Hakeem didn't have good teammates in his '94 and '95 title runs has been blown to bits.

The reality was, in '94 he didn't beat any teams with any more talent than he had...and in his '95 run, he was fortunate to have his teammates completely wipe the floor with Shaq's.

[mehyaM24]

lazeruss, kuniva & rose'sACL shutting it down :rockon:

lmao at shaq being better in 1995 than in 2000. jordan stans are freaking mental :roll:

[julizaver]

Continuing...

I would argue that Shaq was very close to his peak by the '95 season, and that Hakeem was at his. And the reality was, Shaq outplayed Hakeem in the '95 Finals. Hakeem slightly outscored him, but did so on 10 more FGAs per game. Shaq outrebounded Hakeem; outassisted Hakeem; outblocked him; and badly outshot him from the field (.595 to .483.)

Don't take my word for it, though, but how about Colts18...


O'Neal in 1995 was in his physical prime - in 2000 he was more mature and had his career year. And although 15-20 pounds heavier he was in good condition that season, playing both ends.

To answer simply to the thread title: No, it wouldn't change the outcome. The Rockets were far more experienced team than Magic and the series outcome was too one sided. Had it been 4:3 or 4:2 we could discussed it.
Shaq played good in the Finals, but he did not outplay Hakeem. He did not dominate Hakeem and the view at the time was that Hakeem outplayed, schooled Shaq.
It is good that we have this break down by Colt18, because it proved something I had argue for years: That Hakeem and O'Neal match up was more closed than the outcome of the series suggests. And I have the impression at the time that O'Neal should have receive more touches than he had especially in 4th quarters and with his teammates struggled.
Anyway for me the main reason for Magic sweep was the inexperienced squad, they were too young to win it over Rockets.
Hakeem inspired his team and lead them to title, Shaq admitted that he was outplayed (although the 1 to 1 stats suggested otherwise). Prime Hakeem was too quick, skiillful and versatile - so it would be almost impossible for more heavier and slow prime '00 Shaq to effectively neutralize him. But given him two or three more touches he could post even better stats in offense without changing significantly the outcome.

[julizaver]

Continuing...

I would argue that Shaq was very close to his peak by the '95 season, and that Hakeem was at his. And the reality was, Shaq outplayed Hakeem in the '95 Finals. Hakeem slightly outscored him, but did so on 10 more FGAs per game. Shaq outrebounded Hakeem; outassisted Hakeem; outblocked him; and badly outshot him from the field (.595 to .483.)




For me it is more of a even match up. It was a nice match up - both players played the way they were supposed to play.

[LAZERUSS]

For me it is more of a even match up. It was a nice match up - both players played the way they were supposed to play.

I'll take Shaq, but no matter...

:cheers:

[OldSchoolBBall]

What don't some people understand? It's not about whether 2000 Shaq could (he certainly could) or would put up better numbers than 1995 Shaq did in those Finals, it's about how much more polished and mature Shaq was from a team, mental, offensive arsenal, and game management standpoint. 2000 Shaq was simply much better at leading a team and controlling the flow of a game, the same way 1991 Jordan was far better at this than 1987 Jordan. 2000 Shaq on the 1995 Magic almost assuredly wins that series.

[Kobe_6/8]

Is '95 Shaq really better than '00 Shaq? Who peaks in their 3rd year in the league?

[jzek]

What don't some people understand?

Some ppl are arguing that '95 Shaq was "better" than '00 Shaq. Why? '00 Shaq according to them was fatter and lazier and faced the likes of Todd McCulloch and thus inflating his stats.

[Chadwin]

Continuing...

I would argue that Shaq was very close to his peak by the '95 season, and that Hakeem was at his. And the reality was, Shaq outplayed Hakeem in the '95 Finals. Hakeem slightly outscored him, but did so on 10 more FGAs per game. Shaq outrebounded Hakeem; outassisted Hakeem; outblocked him; and badly outshot him from the field (.595 to .483.)

Don't take my word for it, though, but how about Colts18...




Furthermore, I broke down their teammates contributions...



BTW, the Hakeem fans NEVER bring up the Hakeem-Shaq playoff H2H in '99, either. Shaq just slaughtered Hakeem. And it wasn't just a statistical massacre, either, but just watch the footage that is on YouTube. Hakeem simply didn't want any part of Shaq in that series. He was completely helpless on defense, and was completely intimated by Shaq's defense.

Of course, Hakeem was past his prime, and Shaq was very close to his peak.

In any case, over the course of their entire careers, Shaq was the better H2H player:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=olajuha01&p2=onealsh01

ORtg and DRtg

Hakeem 107 106
Shaq 109 115

[ILLsmak]

I'll take Shaq, but no matter...

:cheers:

well that's good. It's nice to see someone who isn't saying Shaq got kilt in the finals. Cuz he didn't, but in a way it is all about the W and he did get swept.

He def got humbled. I think he came out way better after that, but the thing is... he just couldn't win vs MJ. Think about it, MJ was winning, then went to an LA team that was scrubby, then had 99 which was a lockout and nobody practiced. 2000 was Shaq's year.

Like I said before, I remember watching an early season game and Shaq caught it on the baseline block like 15 feet out and did one of his turn around fade aways and at that point I knew they were gonna win.

Of course, when I watched them losing to Portland, I was devastated, but... it all worked out.

Shaq's team in 95 was very good. Probably a better team than 2000 Shaq, but the issue was just that they shit the bed. He did have way better teammates than Hakeem, but Hakeems knew their role and outplayed them. Really, who you are doesn't matter. It's how you play. Horry, Smith, Cassell, Drexler, even Mario Elie. Man I only have memories of those guys doing work. Dagger after dagger. And Shaq's dudes bricking. Shaq n Penny came to play, but no shooters.

-Smak