Peak Shaq (00-02') vs Peak MJ (91-93')

[3ba11]

.
REGULAR SEASON

MJ........ 31.4 ppg.. 58.2% ts.. 122 ORtg.. 0.288 WS/48.. 3 All-Defense 1st Team.. 2 MVP
Shaq..... 28.6 ppg.. 58.0% ts.. 115 ORtg.. 0.264 WS/48.. 2 All-Defense 2nd Team.. 1 MVP


PLAYOFFS

MJ........ 33.7 ppg.. 57.2% ts.. 120 ORtg.. 0.267 WS/48
Shaq..... 29.9 ppg.. 56.2% ts.. 113 ORtg.. 0.238 WS/48


FINALS

MJ........ 36.3 ppg.. 52.6% fg.. 84.3% ft.. played #5, #3, #9 defenses.. beat Magic-Drexler-Barkley
Shaq..... 35.9 ppg.. 59.5% fg.. 50.6% ft.. played #13, #5, #1 defenses.. beat Miller-Iverson-Kidd


* MJ defeated maximum defensive attention all 3 years (carried scoring load), versus only 1 year for Shaq (00')

* Rebounds/Assists cancel out in the stats above because they play different positions.. Ditto for Steals/Blocks and FG/FT%

[SouBeachTalents]

Definitely Shaq

[AirBonner]

Shaq was scoring 36ppg on 60% in the finals. GOAT SHIT

[Baller789]

Shaq. Basically over anyone in NBA history.

[3ba11]

Shaq was scoring 36ppg on 60% in the finals. GOAT SHIT


Shaq shot 50% on FT's, so Jordan's true shooting and clutch stats are far superior.

Shaq also had Kobe to nearly match him and close, while Jordan had to defeat maximum defensive attention (carry scoring load) and close every 4th quarter

I'll post the 4th quarter and clutch stats later today (we don't have the 91-93' clutch stats, so we'll use old man Jordan's stats from 97/98 versus 00-02' Shaq)

[AirBonner]

Shaq shot 50% on FT's, so Jordan's true shooting and clutch stats are far superior.

Shaq also had Kobe to nearly match him and close, while Jordan had to defeat maximum defensive attention (carry scoring load) and close every 4th quarter

Uh MJ basically had a parade to the freethrow line. The guy couldn’t be touched without drawing a foul

[3ba11]

Uh MJ basically had a parade to the freethrow line. The guy couldn’t be touched without drawing a foul


I'll post the 4th quarter and clutch stats later today (we don't have the 91-93' stats, so we'll use old man Jordan's stats from 97/98 versus 00-02' Shaq)

Preview: it won't be pretty

[RRR3]

Shaq easily.

[Wally450]

What's the point of the thread if you're just going to argue in Jordan's favor anyways?

[8Ball]

Shaq

Close thread.

[3ba11]

What's the point of the thread if you're just going to argue in Jordan's favor anyways?


I posted the stats so everyone could see that Jordan averaged more points on better true shooting and points per possession (ortg)

Then I mentioned that Jordan defeated maximum defensive attention for all 3 titles (carried scoring load), while Shaq only did it for 1.

^^^ Argue against that.. Jordan was clearly more dominant and needed less help

[AirBonner]

Shaq was the last player to eliminate MJ in the playoffs. 3ball is shook

[SATAN]

Shaq by a country mile.

[hold this L]

Peak Shaq is the most dominant player of all time.

[Axe]

https://c.tenor.com/SLU9OF7U3zcAAAAC/shaq-big-dunk.gif

[SATAN]

Close thread.

This. Shaq wins unanimously.

[Phoenix]

I posted the stats so everyone could see that Jordan averaged more points on better true shooting and points per possession (ortg)

Then I mentioned that Jordan defeated maximum defensive attention for all 3 titles (carried scoring load), while Shaq only did it for 1.

^^^ Argue against that.. Jordan was clearly more dominant and needed less help

Who asked though?

[3ba11]

Peak Shaq is the most dominant player of all time.


^^^ That's what the dumb media says

But intelligence and reality says that Shaq needed an "MJ" at sidekick like Kobe or Wade, which confirms that he wasn't as dominant as MJ..




Peak Shaq is the most dominant player of all time.


^^^ That's what the dumb media says

But the historical record shows that Jordan averaged more points on better efficiency (true shooting and points per possession, aka ortg)

The historical record also shows that Jordan defeated maximum defensive attention for all 3 titles (carried scoring load), while Shaq only did it for 1 (00')

[Phoenix]

^^^ That's what the dumb media says

But intelligence and reality says that Shaq needed an "MJ" at sidekick like Kobe or Wade, which confirms that he wasn't as dominant as MJ..






^^^ That's what the dumb media says

But the historical record shows that Jordan averaged more points on better efficiency (true shooting and points per possession, aka ortg)

The historical record also shows that Jordan defeated maximum defensive attention for all 3 titles (carried scoring load), while Shaq only did it for 1 (00')

Thanks for letting us know.

[AirBonner]

It’s funny because op is trying to tear down Shaq to prop up Kobe. He’s doing a terrible job at it

[3ba11]

It’s funny because op is trying to tear down Shaq to prop up Kobe. He’s doing a terrible job at it


No, but Nick Wright marveled how Shaq averaged 36 for a 3-year stretch in the Finals and how no one had ever reached that level.

Except Jordan did that from 91-93' with better efficiency (true shooting and ortg), while defeating maximum defensive attention (carrying scoring load)..

Shaq had Kobe or Wade match him in every Finals and close every 4th quarter (except 00').. So it's night and day

[Phoenix]

No, but Nick Wright marveled how Shaq averaged 36 for a 3-year stretch in the Finals and how no one had ever reached that level.

Except Jordan did that from 91-93' with better efficiency (true shooting and ortg), while defeating maximum defensive attention (carrying scoring load)

Interesting.

[AirBonner]

Shaq dropped 27 a game on wallace at 65% shooting. MJ vs the glove? Not as good

[ShawkFactory]

3ball: who’s better player A or B

Someone else: player B

3ball: No, it’s a FACT that player A is better are you kidding?

Someone else: ok cool thread

[tpols]

So MJ produced more, on better efficiency, and was the better defensive player AND he won with less help? (Kobe >> Pippen especially 2001 and beyond)

What's the argument for Shaq?

[AirBonner]

So MJ produced more, on better efficiency, and was the better defensive player AND he won with less help? (Kobe >> Pippen especially 2001 and beyond)

What's the argument for Shaq?

The league changed to make it more difficult for Shaq. The league changed to be easier for MJ

[SouBeachTalents]

3ball: who’s better player A or B

Someone else: player B

3ball: No, it’s a FACT that player A is better are you kidding?

Someone else: ok cool thread
I'm surprised OP went with Jordan tbh.

[Shooter]

Both had their Pippen/Robin and no doubt both excelled; HOWEVER, Shaq knew how to maximize his Pippen and MJ did not.

Shaq just did it better, as he was able to elevate his Pippen better by being a defensive anchor himself (MJ was not an anchor, he relied on Pippen too much). Also, Shaq was not a ball hog chucker taking 35 shots per game (thus shutting out Pippen and making him a spot up shooter in the corner).

2ez

[Shooter]

Elite scorer:
Shaq
MJ

Defensive anchor:
Shaq only

Ball hog chucker:
MJ only

Imagine wondering why your sidekick isn't dropping 25 a game when you force them to do all the dirty work, rebounding and defender and you also take 35 shots per game and leave the scraps for your #2 option. Imagine wondering why...:lol

Any questions?

[AirBonner]

Both had their Pippen/Robin and no doubt both excelled; HOWEVER, Shaq knew how to maximize his Pippen and MJ did not.

Shaq just did it better, as he was able to elevate his Pippen better by being a defensive anchor himself (MJ was not an anchor, he relied on Pippen too much). Also, Shaq was not a ball hog chucker taking 35 shots per game (thus shutting out Pippen and making him a spot up shooter in the corner).

2ez

True. Shaq molded his Pippen into a better player. Shaq wins by default

[3ba11]

Also, Shaq was not a ball hog chucker taking 35 shots per game (thus shutting out Pippen and making him a spot up shooter in the corner).





Reggie Miller was an off-ball player, so he could take 35 shots alongside Pippen and Pippen would have the ball in his hands the entire time..

Similarly, MJ was an off-guard and off-ball player with an assisted rare of over 50%,, so he could take a lot of shots while Pippen had the ball in his hands immediately prior (with the opportunity to call his own number or otherwise make the play)

Again, off-ball experts like Curry, MJ or Miller could carry the scoring load with a good brand of ball (ball movement) that can beat Finals teams, so they can win with secondary scorers at sidekick like Wiggins or Pippen.. Otoh, ball-dominators like Luka/Lebron can't carry the scoring load with sufficient brand to beat Finals teams, so they need all-time scorers and elite 1st options at sidekick like Wade, AD or Kyrie

[Phoenix]

So MJ produced more, on better efficiency, and was the better defensive player AND he won with less help? (Kobe >> Pippen especially 2001 and beyond)

What's the argument for Shaq?

I would argue the Bulls had a better 3rd player though in Horace Grant, even if Kobe 2001 onwards> Pippen.

Frankly the biggest difference between the two was MJ didn't have a blatantly obvious weakness( free throws) to exploit, which elevated Kobe's importance in the clutch. If Shaq was even a 70% FT shooter, never mind 83-85% like MJ/Kobe were, he'd have been the GOAT.

[zeerghit]

give me Shaq

[Shooter]

Reggie Miller was an off-ball player, so he could take 35 shots alongside Pippen and Pippen would have the ball in his hands the entire time..

Similarly, MJ was an off-guard and off-ball player with an assisted rare of over 50%,, so he could take a lot of shots while Pippen had the ball in his hands immediately prior (with the opportunity to call his own number or otherwise make the play)

MJ was a ball hog chucker that could not maximize his Robin.
Shaq easily maximized his Pippen by being a ball passer.

It's not close.

Ball passer > Ball chucker

[3ba11]

I would argue the Bulls had a better 3rd player though in Horace Grant, even if Kobe 2001 onwards> Pippen.

Frankly the biggest difference between the two was MJ didn't have a blatantly obvious weakness( free throws) to exploit, which elevated Kobe's importance in the clutch. If Shaq was even a 70% FT shooter, never mind 83-85% like MJ/Kobe were, he'd have been the GOAT.


Those Lakers had Horace in 01 or 02 (9/7), Harper and 3rd option Glen Rice

And Horry (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?499833-Comparing-Pippen-s-6-Finals-performances-to-peak-Horry-performance-(95-Finals))...

[Shooter]

True. Shaq molded his Pippen into a better player. Shaq wins by default

Amen brother :cheers:

It's just the facts that leave'm squirming the most.

MJ was a ball hog that couldn't maximize talent. He created his own scoring deficit by taking 35 shots per game and somehow it's supposed to be a surprise with his #2 option was putting up more points per game...? Um...:lol

[Phoenix]

Those Lakers had Horace in 2002 (9/7) and 3rd option Glen Rice

And Horry (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?499833-Comparing-Pippen-s-6-Finals-performances-to-peak-Horry-performance-(95-Finals))...

Thanks for replying, the list was due an update:

27 year old 14/10/58% 1992 Horace =36 year old 9/7/46% 2001 Horace
I dunked on Zach Randolph 4 times in a row
2022 Warriors win/lose depending on Wiggins paralleling player's scoring ppg from 30 years ago
2022 Cetlics=90's Bulls....................no wait never mind
Wiggins>Pippen ( who didn't see this one coming?)
Poor reading comprehension
05 Hughes
89 Pippen
09 Mo
95 finals Horry
Criteria
Curry is most overrated ever....I mean top 5 GOAT
Giannis is Pippen-level bum.... I mean top 10 GOAT
Oubre
I have I N T E G R I T Y
Brand of Ball
Organic chips
Talent-based winning
Weak jumpshooting
Beginner format
Defeating maximum defensive attention


Also Glen Rice left the Lakers after the 2000 chip, nice try squeezing him onto the squad after that.

[RRR3]

Thanks for replying, the list was due an update:

27 year old 14/10/58% 1992 Horace =36 year old 9/7/46% 2001 Horace
2022 Warriors win/lose depending on Wiggins paralleling player's scoring ppg from 30 years ago
2022 Cetlics=90's Bulls....................no wait never mind
Wiggins>Pippen ( who didn't see this one coming?)
Poor reading comprehension
05 Hughes
89 Pippen
09 Mo
95 finals Horry
Criteria
Curry is most overrated ever....I mean top 5 GOAT
Giannis is Pippen-level bum.... I mean top 10 GOAT
Oubre
I have I N T E G R I T Y
Brand of Ball
Organic chips
Talent-based winning
Weak jumpshooting
Beginner format
Defeating maximum defensive attention
Bout time for an update
You forgot “I dunked on Zach Randolph 4 times in a row” and “I could score at will on Raja Bell”

[Phoenix]

You forgot “I dunked on Zach Randolph 4 times in a row” and “I could score at will on Raja Bell”

Duly noted...

[Phoenix]

Those Lakers had Horace in 01 or 02 (9/7), Harper and 3rd option Glen Rice

And Horry (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?499833-Comparing-Pippen-s-6-Finals-performances-to-peak-Horry-performance-(95-Finals))...

37 year old Ron Harper dropping 7/3/2/47% was definitely the key to that 2001 title. :oldlol:

[AlternativeAcc.]

Jordan

[Bacchus]

Amen brother :cheers:

It's just the facts that leave'm squirming the most.

MJ was a ball hog that couldn't maximize talent. He created his own scoring deficit by taking 35 shots per game and somehow it's supposed to be a surprise with his #2 option was putting up more points per game...? Um...:lol

Get your facts right. You keep saying Jordan took 35 shots per game when he only took 22

Prime Shaq over every one

[Shooter]

Get your facts right. You keep saying Jordan took 35 shots per game when he only took 22

Prime Shaq over every one

He averaged 26 from 91-93. In 93 alone he took 34% of the shots....

[FilmyCogTurner]

37 year old Ron Harper dropping 7/3/2/47% was definitely the key to that 2001 title. :oldlol:

Harpers role with the team was never measured in stats and playing time - everyone knew back then he was the personality glue guy for the squad.

[Phoenix]

Harpers role with the team was never measured in stats and playing time - everyone knew back then he was the personality glue guy for the squad.

I never said it was. 3ball dropped his name in response to me saying that Horace Grant in the first 3peat was a better 3rd player than what the Lakers had between 2000-2002. If you're gonna respond with 'but Ron Harper' than I'm compelled to drop exactly what his contributions were at that point. I could just as easily say Bill Cartwright was a personality and glue guy for the Bulls, if we wish to go the intangibles route.

[2much_knowledge]

Shaq was scoring 36ppg on 60% in the finals. GOAT SHIT

Finals centers were trash tho. Its a valid point

Austin crosher, rik smiths, dale davis, old perkins
Todd mcallough, matt geiger, old mutombo
Jason collins, kenyon martin, scalabrine and todd M. Again

Does it surprise you?

[Phoenix]

Finals centers were trash tho. Its a valid point

Austin crosher, rik smiths, dale davis, old perkins
Todd mcallough, matt geiger, old mutombo
Jason collins, kenyon martin, scalabrine and todd M. Again

Does it surprise you?

True but 3rd year Shaq dropped 28 on 60% vs peak Hakeem, and he wasn't nearly the player he was by 2000. Point taken that those names above aren't exactly a who's who list of centers, but Shaq 2000 is dropping numbers in any mano a mano situation no matter who was in front of him.

[Shooter]

Finals centers were trash tho. Its a valid point

Austin crosher, rik smiths, dale davis, old perkins
Todd mcallough, matt geiger, old mutombo
Jason collins, kenyon martin, scalabrine and todd M. Again

Does it surprise you?

Uh while you're at it, post MJ's shooting guard competition:

Terry Porter, Jeff Hornacek, Byron Russell, John Starks,

:roll: Come on man!

[ImKobe]

MJ had better numbers and didn't need a closer and was never the 2nd or 3rd best player in any of his series.

[dankok8]

Definitely not weird to choose Shaq because he has a case for the greatest peak in NBA history particularly 2000 Shaq but MJ was more consistent even over a 3-year stretch. I would take MJ by a hair personally because he just had no weaknesses. Shaq couldn't close games, could be exploited by Hack-a-Shaq, could be exploited in P&R etc.

[Axe]

MJ was a ball hog chucker that could not maximize his Robin.
Shaq easily maximized his Pippen by being a ball passer.

It's not close.

Ball passer > Ball chucker
Yikes he can't even counter this, slick. And yet we have some completely braindead people around here still believe in him.

[ImKobe]

MJ was a ball hog chucker that could not maximize his Robin.
Shaq easily maximized his Pippen by being a ball passer.

It's not close.

Ball passer > Ball chucker

Shaq needed others to set up his offense and he was a liability in crunch time. Idiot.

[Baller789]

Uh while you're at it, post MJ's shooting guard competition:

Terry Porter, Jeff Hornacek, Byron Russell, John Starks,

:roll: Come on man!

Whos Byron Russell?

Was he a shooting guard?

[plowking]

So MJ produced more, on better efficiency, and was the better defensive player AND he won with less help? (Kobe >> Pippen especially 2001 and beyond)

What's the argument for Shaq?

Is there anyone that actually believes Jordan was a better "defensive" player than Jordan?

Who do you think was preventing more points in their hay day? The 6'5 SG or the 7 foot behemoth in the middle of the paint that people were scared to drive in on? Even without the best instincts defensively, Shaq was one of the biggest deterrents for opposing players even thinking about driving in.

[Shooter]

Yikes he can't even counter this, slick. And yet we have some completely braindead people around here still believe in him.

I have defeated 3ball, slick. He has no rebuttal. He goes down in flames, we win again :rockon:

:dancin

[Shooter]

Whos Byron Russell?

Was he a shooting guard?

https://i.postimg.cc/8PKQjprJ/Jordans-competition-lol.png

[3ba11]

Definitely not weird to choose Shaq because he has a case for the greatest peak in NBA history particularly 2000 Shaq but MJ was more consistent even over a 3-year stretch. I would take MJ by a hair personally because he just had no weaknesses. Shaq couldn't close games, could be exploited by Hack-a-Shaq, could be exploited in P&R etc.


Shaq never averaged 40 in the Finals and he was 1a/1b with Kobe from 2001 onwards

That doesn't conpare to Jordan, who never needed a 1b or closer teammate, while averaging more ppg on better efficiency (TS and ortg).

Jordan averaged 40 in the Finals against better opponents - he beat Barkley, Magic, and Drexler, while Shaq beat Iverson and Kidd (while Kobe was 1st option in the 4th)

[WhiteKyrie]

Peaks that I have seen

1) Mike ‘89 - ‘93
2) Shaq ‘98 - ‘02
3) Hakeem ‘91 - ‘95
4) LeBron ‘09 - ‘13
5) D-Rob ‘91 - ‘95
6) Kobe ‘06 - ‘10
7) D-Wade ‘05 - ‘10
8) Curry
9) KD
10) Giannis

[3ba11]

Peaks that I have seen

1) Mike ‘89 - ‘93
2) Shaq ‘98 - ‘02
3) Hakeem ‘91 - ‘95
4) LeBron ‘09 - ‘13
5) D-Rob ‘91 - ‘95
6) Kobe ‘06 - ‘10
7) D-Wade ‘05 - ‘10
8) Curry
9) KD
10) Giannis


Not bad

[3ba11]

:facepalm:

[3ba11]

.
Clutch PPG (last 5 within 5)


2000 PLAYOFFS

1) Kobe........ 4.8 ppg

3) Shaq........ 4.3 ppg


2001 PLAYOFFS

3) Kobe........... 3.7

38) Shaq......... 1.3


2002 PLAYOFFS

16) Kobe......... 2.9

18) Shaq......... 2.6


1997 PLAYOFFS

1) MJ.............. 5.0

23) Pippen...... 1.6


1998 PLAYOFFS

1) MJ.............. 5.4

22) Pippen...... 1.7



https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional/?sort=PTS&dir=-1&Season=1997-98&SeasonType=Playoffs




So Shaq needed Jordan at sidekick to win (Kobe or Wade clutch assassin), while Jordan needed a Wiggins-level player

[kawhileonard2]

MJ no contest. He three peated for a franchise that never won before. Shaq had to switch teams to one of the top 2 winniest organizations to win.

[Shooter]

Anyone? MJ was a ball hog chucker that could not maximize his Pippen.
Shaq easily maximized his Pippen by being a ball passer.

It's not close.

Ball passer > Ball chucker

[SouBeachTalents]

Peaks that I have seen

1) Mike ‘89 - ‘93
2) Shaq ‘98 - ‘02
3) Hakeem ‘91 - ‘95
4) LeBron ‘09 - ‘13
5) D-Rob ‘91 - ‘95
6) Kobe ‘06 - ‘10
7) D-Wade ‘05 - ‘10
8) Curry
9) KD
10) Giannis
You're obviously entitled to your opinion, but D-Rob did not have the playoff performance to be put top 5 like that imo.

[kawhileonard2]

Anyone? MJ was a ball hog chucker that could not maximize his Pippen.
Shaq easily maximized his Pippen by being a ball passer.

It's not close.

Ball passer > Ball chucker
MJ no contest. He three peated for a franchise that never won before. Shaq had to switch teams to one of the top 2 winniest organizations to win. Let me know when wrong? Want to see when Shaq 3 peated for a franchise that never won.

[HoopsNY]

True but 3rd year Shaq dropped 28 on 60% vs peak Hakeem, and he wasn't nearly the player he was by 2000. Point taken that those names above aren't exactly a who's who list of centers, but Shaq 2000 is dropping numbers in any mano a mano situation no matter who was in front of him.

There's more to this than what the box score will tell you. For one, in game 1, Shaq managed just 1 point in the OT loss against Hakeem, which is completely forgotten in the minds of people when they look at the box score.

In game 2, Shaq went almost 15 minutes without scoring, and Hakeem had his team up by 20. Shaq put up buckets when his team was down by 20 in the second half, but that game was basically over (I think Orlando managed to come within 10 at one point but that was it). Shaq was just 3-10 in the first half when the game really mattered.

Then there's game 4 where Shaq put up 25/12/3/0/4 on 58%, but Hakeem put up 35/15/6/3/0 on 50%. Hakeem outplayed Shaq in game 4, the elimination game.

In addition, Hakeem was a defensive behemoth that is overlooked in this series. He had 11 total TOs himself, but Shaq had twice as many TOs, mostly forced by Hakeem. Most of Shaq's turnovers were forced by Hakeem, something again that is left out of the conversation.

And then there was Hakeem's playmaking. Hakeem wasn't a stand still player. He drew Shaq out of the paint, opening up the floor for his teammates, and he also spread the floor by drawing doubles and opening shots for his shooters. Yes, Shaq averaged more assists, but they weren't largely because of any playmaking ability.

Shaq played better one on one vs Hakeem, but that doesn't speak about Hakeem's ability in transition, nor does it speak to Hakeem's defensive efforts throughout the series (which was huge), added to what he brought to the team offensively.

I also wouldn't say Shaq would put up just any numbers against anyone. Guys like Smits and Mutombo were over the hill, and MacCulloch was a scrub. Yes, Mutombo was DPOY, but he was 38. Between 1993-99, Shaq put up 23 PPG on 53% against Mutombo.

Against Sabonis in 2000 PS, Shaq put up 26 PPG on 54%.

Against Sabonis in 2001 PS, Shaq put up 27 PPG on 48%.

Against Robinson in 2001 PS, Shaq put up 27 PPG on 54%.

Against Duncan in 2002 PS, Shaq put up 21 PPG on 44%.

RS 1993-99 vs. Hakeem, 23 PPG on 57%

RS 1993-99 vs Robinson, 26 PPG on 54%

RS 1993-99 vs Mutombo, 23 PPG on 53%

RS 1993-99 vs Ewing, 28 PPG on 54%

RS 1993-94 vs Daughtery, 24 PPG on 53% (Okay Shaq was rookie in 1993, but in '94 he put up 25 PPG on 52%)

There seems to be a benefiting of the demise of the elite center as the years went on, something that can't be ignored. And we haven't even begun speaking about the potential of the league fixing games, something the Bucks, Blazers, and refs alleged in 2001 and 2002.

[WhiteKyrie]

You're obviously entitled to your opinion, but D-Rob did not have the playoff performance to be put top 5 like that imo.

That is for his insane regular season peak, that it would be obvious.

[Baller789]

Uh while you're at it, post MJ's shooting guard competition:

Terry Porter, Jeff Hornacek, Byron Russell, John Starks,

:roll: Come on man!





https://i.postimg.cc/8PKQjprJ/Jordans-competition-lol.png

*Bryon Russell

:hammerhead:

[3ba11]

.
Thread Cliffs


1) Jordan scored more with better efficiency (TS and ortg)

2) Jordan led the playoffs in clutch (last 5 within 5), while Shaq was a role player in the clutch (Kobe led the clutch for the 00-02' Playoffs)

3) Jordan needed a Wiggins-level player (Pippen), while Shaq needed a Jordan-level player (Kobe or Wade)

4) Jordan defeated maximum defensive attention (carried scoring load) for all 3 chips, while Shaq only did it for 1 (00"). Shaq never averaged 40 like MJ did

[GrayGoat]

MJ didn’t have the post game that Shaq had

[2much_knowledge]

Uh while you're at it, post MJ's shooting guard competition:

Terry Porter, Jeff Hornacek, Byron Russell, John Starks,

:roll: Come on man!

Bronnies in a nutshell. I list all of the centers AND power fowards that Shaq faced.

And he magically skips Drexler, KJ, Majerley, Detlef AND Payton

Come on man/woman?

[ClipperRevival]

.
REGULAR SEASON

MJ........ 31.4 ppg.. 58.2% ts.. 122 ORtg.. 0.288 WS/48.. 3 All-Defense 1st Team.. 2 MVP
Shaq..... 28.6 ppg.. 58.0% ts.. 115 ORtg.. 0.264 WS/48.. 2 All-Defense 2nd Team.. 1 MVP


PLAYOFFS

MJ........ 33.7 ppg.. 57.2% ts.. 120 ORtg.. 0.267 WS/48
Shaq..... 29.9 ppg.. 56.2% ts.. 113 ORtg.. 0.238 WS/48


FINALS

MJ........ 36.3 ppg.. 52.6% fg.. 84.3% ft.. played #5, #3, #9 defenses.. beat Magic-Drexler-Barkley
Shaq..... 35.9 ppg.. 59.5% fg.. 50.6% ft.. played #13, #5, #1 defenses.. beat Miller-Iverson-Kidd


* MJ defeated maximum defensive attention all 3 years (carried scoring load), versus only 1 year for Shaq (00')

* Rebounds/Assists cancel out in the stats above because they play different positions.. Ditto for Steals/Blocks and FG/FT%

Finals #s for Shaq is a bit inflated given the cake walk teams he played. We all know the East was the sacrificial lamb for the West. The real chip was in the West, where Kobe was spectacular.

Not to mention, Lakers barely squeezed by Portland in 2000 and Kings in 2002.

Would be interesting to see the 50+ teams beat during this run for both.

[ClipperRevival]

Jordan

Forgot to switch accounts? :yaohappy:

[RRR3]

There's more to this than what the box score will tell you. For one, in game 1, Shaq managed just 1 point in the OT loss against Hakeem, which is completely forgotten in the minds of people when they look at the box score.

In game 2, Shaq went almost 15 minutes without scoring, and Hakeem had his team up by 20. Shaq put up buckets when his team was down by 20 in the second half, but that game was basically over (I think Orlando managed to come within 10 at one point but that was it). Shaq was just 3-10 in the first half when the game really mattered.

Then there's game 4 where Shaq put up 25/12/3/0/4 on 58%, but Hakeem put up 35/15/6/3/0 on 50%. Hakeem outplayed Shaq in game 4, the elimination game.

In addition, Hakeem was a defensive behemoth that is overlooked in this series. He had 11 total TOs himself, but Shaq had twice as many TOs, mostly forced by Hakeem. Most of Shaq's turnovers were forced by Hakeem, something again that is left out of the conversation.

And then there was Hakeem's playmaking. Hakeem wasn't a stand still player. He drew Shaq out of the paint, opening up the floor for his teammates, and he also spread the floor by drawing doubles and opening shots for his shooters. Yes, Shaq averaged more assists, but they weren't largely because of any playmaking ability.

Shaq played better one on one vs Hakeem, but that doesn't speak about Hakeem's ability in transition, nor does it speak to Hakeem's defensive efforts throughout the series (which was huge), added to what he brought to the team offensively.

I also wouldn't say Shaq would put up just any numbers against anyone. Guys like Smits and Mutombo were over the hill, and MacCulloch was a scrub. Yes, Mutombo was DPOY, but he was 38. Between 1993-99, Shaq put up 23 PPG on 53% against Mutombo.

Against Sabonis in 2000 PS, Shaq put up 26 PPG on 54%.

Against Sabonis in 2001 PS, Shaq put up 27 PPG on 48%.

Against Robinson in 2001 PS, Shaq put up 27 PPG on 54%.

Against Duncan in 2002 PS, Shaq put up 21 PPG on 44%.

RS 1993-99 vs. Hakeem, 23 PPG on 57%

RS 1993-99 vs Robinson, 26 PPG on 54%

RS 1993-99 vs Mutombo, 23 PPG on 53%

RS 1993-99 vs Ewing, 28 PPG on 54%

RS 1993-94 vs Daughtery, 24 PPG on 53% (Okay Shaq was rookie in 1993, but in '94 he put up 25 PPG on 52%)

There seems to be a benefiting of the demise of the elite center as the years went on, something that can't be ignored. And we haven't even begun speaking about the potential of the league fixing games, something the Bucks, Blazers, and refs alleged in 2001 and 2002.
Maybe you’d have a point if old washed up Shaq didn’t brutalize peak Ben Wallace in 2004. Also Mutombo was not 38 he was 34, when you have to lie so blatantly you’ve already lost. Love how Mutombo is “washed up” when he won DPOY at 34 but LeBron is the worst ever for missing the playoffs in an injury riddled year at 37 according to Jordan myghologists.

[RRR3]

I love shook Jordan fans are of peak Shaq :oldlol:


“But but but free throws! The finals don’t count”

[Phoenix]

There's more to this than what the box score will tell you. For one, in game 1, Shaq managed just 1 point in the OT loss against Hakeem, which is completely forgotten in the minds of people when they look at the box score.

In game 2, Shaq went almost 15 minutes without scoring, and Hakeem had his team up by 20. Shaq put up buckets when his team was down by 20 in the second half, but that game was basically over (I think Orlando managed to come within 10 at one point but that was it). Shaq was just 3-10 in the first half when the game really mattered.

Then there's game 4 where Shaq put up 25/12/3/0/4 on 58%, but Hakeem put up 35/15/6/3/0 on 50%. Hakeem outplayed Shaq in game 4, the elimination game.

In addition, Hakeem was a defensive behemoth that is overlooked in this series. He had 11 total TOs himself, but Shaq had twice as many TOs, mostly forced by Hakeem. Most of Shaq's turnovers were forced by Hakeem, something again that is left out of the conversation.

And then there was Hakeem's playmaking. Hakeem wasn't a stand still player. He drew Shaq out of the paint, opening up the floor for his teammates, and he also spread the floor by drawing doubles and opening shots for his shooters. Yes, Shaq averaged more assists, but they weren't largely because of any playmaking ability.

Shaq played better one on one vs Hakeem, but that doesn't speak about Hakeem's ability in transition, nor does it speak to Hakeem's defensive efforts throughout the series (which was huge), added to what he brought to the team offensively.

I also wouldn't say Shaq would put up just any numbers against anyone. Guys like Smits and Mutombo were over the hill, and MacCulloch was a scrub. Yes, Mutombo was DPOY, but he was 38. Between 1993-99, Shaq put up 23 PPG on 53% against Mutombo.

Against Sabonis in 2000 PS, Shaq put up 26 PPG on 54%.

Against Sabonis in 2001 PS, Shaq put up 27 PPG on 48%.

Against Robinson in 2001 PS, Shaq put up 27 PPG on 54%.

Against Duncan in 2002 PS, Shaq put up 21 PPG on 44%.

RS 1993-99 vs. Hakeem, 23 PPG on 57%

RS 1993-99 vs Robinson, 26 PPG on 54%

RS 1993-99 vs Mutombo, 23 PPG on 53%

RS 1993-99 vs Ewing, 28 PPG on 54%

RS 1993-94 vs Daughtery, 24 PPG on 53% (Okay Shaq was rookie in 1993, but in '94 he put up 25 PPG on 52%)

There seems to be a benefiting of the demise of the elite center as the years went on, something that can't be ignored. And we haven't even begun speaking about the potential of the league fixing games, something the Bucks, Blazers, and refs alleged in 2001 and 2002.

Shaq wasn't just putting up those numbers in mano a mano encounters, as I said earlier. It was Sabonis and Wallace, or it was Divac and Webber, or Robinson and Duncan. The West had some brutal frontlines in the early 2000s. Now, that's not to say that I think if you put like 95 Robinson against Shaq that he's dropping 38/17 or whatever. Only that no single defender is going to prevent 2000 era Shaq from dropping 30 without heavy assistance from another frontline defender and/or double teaming. He turned it up a notch that year.

[Sulico]

MJ.

Shaq was good but not like Jordan. The only knock we have on Jordan is quality of his opponents. Same thing applies to 2000-2002. Shaq got his threepeat in between eras.

[NBAGOAT]

MJ.

Shaq was good but not like Jordan. The only knock we have on Jordan is quality of his opponents. Same thing applies to 2000-2002. Shaq got his threepeat in between eras.

jordan's competition from 91-93 is good. shaq had an easier run in 01 but the lakers dominated. blazers and kings in 00 and 02 arent superteams but still are really great teams. most eras dont have 2 loaded teams in a year.

[HoopsNY]

Maybe you’d have a point if old washed up Shaq didn’t brutalize peak Ben Wallace in 2004. Also Mutombo was not 38 he was 34, when you have to lie so blatantly you’ve already lost. Love how Mutombo is “washed up” when he won DPOY at 34 but LeBron is the worst ever for missing the playoffs in an injury riddled year at 37 according to Jordan myghologists.

You're correct, I am mistaken. Actually, Mutombo was almost 35 (a couple of weeks away from his 35th bday). And he was DPOY as I already mentioned, but not nearly the same defensive player as he was in the '90s. 35 by that time is past your prime for most centers. I think we all can agree to that. Just look at Robinson, Ewing, Hakeem, and Shaq himself. I watched Mutombo in 2001, yea he was good, but he wasn't Dikembe of 1997 per se.

Furthermore, what's up with your tone against me? Where did I ever say that LeBron is the "worst ever" for missing the playoffs at 37? You're beginning to annoy me with how you consistently confuse me with other posters, almost willfully. Kinda like how Roundball used to do.

[HoopsNY]

Shaq wasn't just putting up those numbers in mano a mano encounters, as I said earlier. It was Sabonis and Wallace, or it was Divac and Webber, or Robinson and Duncan. The West had some brutal frontlines in the early 2000s. Now, that's not to say that I think if you put like 95 Robinson against Shaq that he's dropping 38/17 or whatever. Only that no single defender is going to prevent 2000 era Shaq from dropping 30 without heavy assistance from another frontline defender and/or double teaming. He turned it up a notch that year.

Yea, I agree with you to that extent. I guess my point is that we often hear about peak Shaq, largely because of what he was able to do in those finals series against Smits, Mutombo, and MacCulloch. They don't really tell the entire story, though, as evidenced by how he performed against other centers.

I also think Shaq was helped immensely by the league. There was a big controversy about it back then in the way that the game was officiated for him. Now in fairness, Shaq took a lot of hits, and he claimed the only reason he became such a bully was because he wasn't getting calls. I'm not so sure I believe the league wasn't officiating him properly prior to 2000.

Shaq was 1st or 2nd in FTA every year between 1994-1999. The exceptions were the years he got injured where he didn't qualify for the rankings, but statistically his averages were still 1 or 2.

This matters when looking at Shaq's overall production, and I remember watching him commit offensive foul after offensive foul with it never being called.

[Phoenix]

Yea, I agree with you to that extent. I guess my point is that we often hear about peak Shaq, largely because of what he was able to do in those finals series against Smits, Mutombo, and MacCulloch. They don't really tell the entire story, though, as evidenced by how he performed against other centers.

I also think Shaq was helped immensely by the league. There was a big controversy about it back then in the way that the game was officiated for him. Now in fairness, Shaq took a lot of hits, and he claimed the only reason he became such a bully was because he wasn't getting calls. I'm not so sure I believe the league wasn't officiating him properly prior to 2000.

Shaq was 1st or 2nd in FTA every year between 1994-1999. The exceptions were the years he got injured where he didn't qualify for the rankings, but statistically his averages were still 1 or 2.

This matters when looking at Shaq's overall production, and I remember watching him commit offensive foul after offensive foul with it never being called.

Shaq was pretty much impossible to call correctly at one point, because what would be a normal movement for a smaller/weaker big wouldn't have the defender bouncing off him like we saw with Shaq. Sometimes the defender initiated the contact and still took the worse of it, so then it's like was that an offensive or defensive foul? :confusedshrug:

[PeroAntic]

Very close but MJ is better because hes more unpredictable and going off from the guard position changes the game. he hit free throws and didn't get in foul trouble either

[WhiteKyrie]

Very close but MJ is better because hes more unpredictable and going off from the guard position changes the game. he hit free throws and didn't get in foul trouble either
Plus clutch. Saw superior competition at his positional competition than 00 - 02 Shaq did. And even if Shaq was the best and most important player on those Lakers, Kobe Bryant is a top 10 player of all time, and in 2001 and 2002 was basically co alpha almost. That relieves so much pressure.