ISH's #7 Player of Alltime

[QUOTE=Inception28]That being said, I usually like to use eFG% when calculating perimeter player's shooting/scoring efficiency. There isn't too much of a point in using eFG% with big men specifically Hakeem and Shaq because it is not like either one of those guys were capable of hitting 3s outside of luck pretty much.

Kobe in '08 playoffs: 51.4 eFG%
Kobe in '09 playoffs: 49.2 eFG%
Kobe in '10 playoffs: 50.6 eFG%

Hakeem in '94 playoffs: 52.1 eFG%
Hakeem in '95 playoffs: 53.3 eFG%

Shaq in '00 playoffs: 56.6 eFG%
Shaq in '01 playoffs: 55.5 eFG%


Kobe pretty much was less efficient as far as shooting is concerned, not scoring.[/QUOTE]

The opponents defenses and the volume of shots also have to be factored in, imo.

Kobe
'08- 30.1 ppg, 22 FGA
'09- 30.2 ppg, 23 FGA
'10- 29.2 ppg, 22.2 FGA

'08 defenses
Denver- 106.3 defensive rating
Utah- 106.5 defensive rating
San Antonio- 101.8 defensive rating
Boston- 98.9 defensive rating

'09 defenses
Utah- 107.3 defensive rating
Houston- 104 defensive rating
Denver- 106.8 defensive rating
Orlando- 101.9 defensive rating

'10 defenses
Oklahoma City- 104.6 defensive rating
Utah- 105 defensive rating
Phoenix- 110.2 defensive rating
Boston- 103.8 defensive rating

Shaq
'00- 30.7 ppg, 22 FGA
'01- 30.4 ppg, 21.5 FGA
'02- 28.5 ppg, 20.2 FGA

'00 defenses
Sacramento- 102.1 defensive rating
Phoenix- 99 defensive rating
Portland- 100.8 defensive rating
Indiana- 103.6 defensive rating

'01 defenses
Portland- 101.8 defensive rating
Sacramento- 99.6 defensive rating
San Antonio- 98 defensive rating
Philadelphia- 98.9 defensive rating

'02 defenses
Portland- 104 defensive rating
San Antonio- 98.7 defensive rating
Sacramento- 101.1 defensive rating
New Jersey- 98.5 defensive rating

Hakeem
'94- 28.9 ppg, 22.3 FGA
'95- 33 ppg, 26.2 FGA

'94 defenses
Portland- 105.5 defensive rating
Phoenix- 106.8 defensive rating
Utah- 104.1 defensive rating
New York- 98.2 defensive rating

'95 defenses
Utah- 105.7 defensive rating
Phoenix- 110.4 defensive rating
San Antonio- 105.4 defensive rating
Orlando- 107.8 defensive rating

There are some things defensive rating doesn't tell you, for example, the '95 season is skewed somewhat due to the shortened 3 point line. Also, Boston's defense was even better than their defensive rating suggests, imo, this is probably due to all of those blowouts during the regular season where they rested their starters. Also worth noting is that Portland defended Shaq tougher than any other team, imo, despite them not being the best defensive team he faced statistically.

All 3 had some of the best playoff runs of all time, Kobe before the finals in '08 was doing whatever he wanted. 32 ppg on 51 FG%/61 TS% in the first 3 rounds of '08.

Magic led the Lakers to an NBA record highest team FG% of .545 in the 1984-85 season
:bowdown:

[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]Whats wrong with Magic at 4?

and for those who say he had Kareem:
[B]
1987 Playoffs[/B]
Magic - 21.8 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 12.2 apg on 53.9 FG%
Kareem - 19.2 ppg, 6.8 rpg, 2.0 apg on 53 FG%

[B]1988 Playoffs[/B]
Magic - 19.9 ppg, 5.4 rpg, 12.6 apg on 51.4 FG%
Kareem - 14.1 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 1.5 apg on 46.4 FG%[/QUOTE]

Not just Kareem (and it's not really fair to simply look at playoff stats; the season is a long one, and the Big Guy made those glossy w-l records and accompanying seeding a lot easier to attain). Worthy. Cooper. McAdoo. Scott. Great teammates.

Magic was a fantastic player and, as I said earlier, still unique to this day. Don't really mean to knock him; he's a top 10. But placing him over Wilt is one of the more ridiculous things I've ever seen.

[QUOTE=Inception28]:facepalm Magic is arguably the greatest offensive player to ever play the game..[/QUOTE]

Then let's hear the argument. It'll be the first.

[QUOTE=JMT]Not just Kareem (and it's not really fair to simply look at playoff stats; the season is a long one, and the Big Guy made those glossy w-l records and accompanying seeding a lot easier to attain). Worthy. Cooper. McAdoo. Scott. Great teammates.

Magic was a fantastic player and, as I said earlier, still unique to this day. Don't really mean to knock him; he's a top 10. [B]But placing him over Wilt is one of the more ridiculous things I've ever seen.[/B][/QUOTE]

I disagree, Wilt is not a great playoff performer like Magic

guess who shot 1-11 from the freethrow line in a game 7 of the NBA Finals?

[QUOTE=JMT]Then let's hear the argument. It'll be the first.[/QUOTE]
Ok.

-Magic was one of the biggest, if not the biggest mismatch to ever play the game. He was a PG at 6'9 and 250 lbs.
-Magic ran some of the greatest offenses of all-time
-Magic made the best use of his teammates better than anyone else ever did.
-Magic was the greatest passer/playmaker/creator of all-time, averaged 11.2 apg in the RS and 12.3 apg in the PS in his career.
-Magic was an ultra efficient scorer, shooting a TS% of 61.0%. Magic could have scored more points if he actually wanted to, but realize that it was better for the sake of the team to set his teammates up and make them better.

Nobody could anchor an offense better than him. You could probably surround him with a bunch of nobodies and his team offensively would still be elite.


Give me some players you think were better than Magic offensively.

Inception28, only 83 posts but already 2 green boxes of reputation :applause:

[QUOTE=JMT]I can tell you. There are 3-4 guys on the candidate list that belong ahead of Shaq.

[b]Duncan[/b], Robertson and [b]Bryant are easily ahead[/b]. You can debate Hakeem and West.



That's what makes it so absurd that Shaq is in consideration.[/QUOTE]

On a scale of 1-10, how delusional would you describe yourself?

I'm not even dealing with Oscar and West here because I don't know about them as players though I've researched enough to rank Oscar over West as the best guard of his era.

Hakeem is the only guy out of Duncan and Bryant I can see over Shaq. But that's looking at Hakeem's peak, he's not quite at that level if you extend their primes.

Duncan was neither as good in his prime or peak and doesn't have the edge in longevity either. I guess Duncan being a more stable, consistent leader helps his case because I don't see him bolting anywhere though he did come close to signing with Orlando early in his career. Who would you rather have on your team or who would you rather draft, if that matters then Duncan definitely closes the gap.

Kobe just wasn't as good. Its the best way I can put it and I like Kobe. He's fun to watch when he's on his scoring binges but I draw a line at some point when it comes to how good a player is, their playoff performances and then their career. Kobe just isn't as good as Shaq.

[QUOTE=NugzHeat3]
Duncan was neither as good in his prime or peak and doesn't have the edge in longevity either. I guess Duncan being a more stable, consistent leader helps his case because I don't see him bolting anywhere though he did come close to signing with Orlando early in his career. Who would you rather have on your team or who would you rather draft, if that matters then Duncan definitely closes the gap. .[/QUOTE]
Duncan also has the intangibles and was a consistently better regular season performer than Shaq was. I would say they were a push when it comes down to playoff performances. Neither one of Duncan's or Shaq's playoff performances stand out over the other. They were both consistently excellent when it came down to the post-season.

It's hard to ignore that Duncan had the better intangibles though. How much you value them is up to you.

[QUOTE=Inception28]Duncan also has the intangibles and [B]was a consistently better regular season performer than Shaq was[/B]. I would say they were a push when it comes down to playoff performances. Neither one of Duncan's or Shaq's playoff performances stand out over the other. They were both consistently excellent when it came down to the post-season.

It's hard to ignore that Duncan had the better intangibles though. How much you value them is up to you.[/QUOTE]
:wtf:

[QUOTE=NugzHeat3]On a scale of 1-10, how delusional would you describe yourself?

I'm not even dealing with Oscar and West here because I don't know about them as players though I've researched enough to rank Oscar over West as the best guard of his era.

Hakeem is the only guy out of Duncan and Bryant I can see over Shaq. But that's looking at Hakeem's peak, he's not quite at that level if you extend their primes.

Duncan was neither as good in his prime or peak and doesn't have the edge in longevity either. I guess Duncan being a more stable, consistent leader helps his case because I don't see him bolting anywhere though he did come close to signing with Orlando early in his career. Who would you rather have on your team or who would you rather draft, if that matters then Duncan definitely closes the gap.

Kobe just wasn't as good. Its the best way I can put it and I like Kobe. He's fun to watch when he's on his scoring binges but I draw a line at some point when it comes to how good a player is, their playoff performances and then their career. Kobe just isn't as good as Shaq.[/QUOTE]

People can make a case for Kobe because of his 2008-2010 run without Shaq
2 championships and 3 Finals in a row

Also for Duncan, he never had as good as a teammate as Kobe like Shaq did and still managed to get 4

But I still got Shaq over both of them

[QUOTE=JMT]Yes. As a guy who saw both, I believe Robertson was unquestionably a better basketball player.

[b]Let's start with the fact that I'm a Shaq fan. Immensely entertaining and, at his best, a truly dominant player. But in one of the weakest eras of big men in league history, Shaq wasn't a dominant rebounder for an extended period during his career. He was never a great shot blocker, and for half his career was a real liability as a pick & roll defender. He was essentially a power player on the offensive end, and only really increased his repetoire as his age and conditioning dictated. And his lack of conditioning accelerated his decline. His last 5 years in the league he was a shadow of his former self who survived because of the lack of quality bigs in the NBA.[/b]

Robertson was as complete a basketball player as has ever stepped on the floor. He faced up and shot the ball effectively; had a post game that Shaq should have aspired to (and that would make LeBron James an all time great if he developed); defended, often the best scorer on the other side; rebounded like a much bigger player; and did it all, for the most part, with an inferior cast of teammates. Yes, he won with Kareem at the tail end of his career, but he certainly never played with guys the caliber that Shaq did.

I kind of lost faith in this list when Magic came in at #4 ( a great player and unique to this day, but not close to the 4th best player of all time). I chalk it up to the youth of the people voting in your poll. Their knowledge of players prior to Jordan is obviously pretty spotty, and they appear to be more influenced by threads on Ish than how well guys actually played the game.

Just my .02. Thanks for asking.[/QUOTE]
The weak big men theory has been shattered on several occasions but lets begin.

- The guy averaged 40 points on Ewing in the 1995 season over the span of 4 games.

- The only big man that he didn't outplay was Hakeem in the 1995 finals and that's hardly a shame with the level he was playing at.

- He easily got the better off the Duncan/Robinson Spurs in 2001. 27/13 on 54% FG. He often played good defense on Duncan too when switched onto him save for the 2003 series.

- Half the time the great defensive big isn't what matters; its the team defense, how well they rotate, quality of help and weakside defense, quick double teams ect. You tell me who guarded Shaq better; the 2000 Blazers or the 2001 Sixers with their DPoY Mutombo?

Shaq was definitely a dominant rebounder to me. He's finished runner up a few times and a lot of times he didn't bother crashing the defensive glass because he had a PF to clean it up like Horace Grant in Orlando. Shaq beasted the glass in his rookie year but he wasn't required to. Not his role. A lot of defensive rebounds go unchallenged. We've seen Shaq dominate the boards in the playoffs; like his 2000, 2001 and 2003 runs. When it was required, he generally did it.

The point about shot blocking has a lot to do with how much he makes guards adjust at the rim and how much he got contested. His BPG peaked in his rookie year because that's when he got challenged the most. People don't want to drive in and get fouled hard by Shaq. LA's paint defense (hoopdata.com) has also been good in Shaq's best years. Wonder why.

His lack of conditioning and underachieving is irrelevant anyway because he peaked and played at a higher level than some of the guys you are bringing up despite not playing to his potential. Talent means something.

[QUOTE=RRR3]:wtf:[/QUOTE]
It has to do with health. Shaq would half ass and would sit out of games under injuries that weren't bothering him much. Shaq more than likely would have played with if it was a playoff game instead of a regular season game though. If you followed Shaq's career you would know this.

[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]People can make a case for Kobe because of his 2008-2010 run without Shaq
2 championships and 3 Finals in a row

Also for Duncan, he never had as good as a teammate as Kobe like Shaq did and still managed to get 4

But I still got Shaq over both of them[/QUOTE]
They can make a case but I disagree. Reaching a certain level matters to me and its not like Shaq was a one hit wonder.

You should see some of the teams Duncan beat too. His competition hasn't been that impressive though you can't really hold that against him because he can only play who he faces. Its just that it makes the others' and their runs look more impressive.

[B]Vote: Hakeem![/B]

him or shaq are easily the next two. no way a gm would ever take duncan over those two. shaq was way more dominant and ther is nothing hakeem can't do better than duncan besides doing a bank shot.

[QUOTE=Inception28]Duncan also has the intangibles and was a consistently better regular season performer than Shaq was. I would say they were a push when it comes down to playoff performances. Neither one of Duncan's or Shaq's playoff performances stand out over the other. They were both consistently excellent when it came down to the post-season.

It's hard to ignore that Duncan had the better intangibles though. How much you value them is up to you.[/QUOTE]
I don't know about better regular season performer. He was less injury prone IIRC but not necessarily playing at a higher level.

Also, leadership isn't the only intangible out there. An intangible is anything that can't be measured in stats. I'm sure you've followed both these guys extensively. Can you say Duncan drew more attention than Shaq, how much pressure he put on the defense, how much fouls he drew putting teams in penalty early causing the opposing team to play less aggressive on defense?

Its the mental edge Shaq gives your team knowing others have to deal with him. Its something I can show you by giving you an example of their peers and one of my own. If you guard a like Shaq in a pick up game as opposed to Duncan, you'll know they'll both get theirs but you know Shaq is going to leave you hopeless while Duncan is the guy you want to try and guard. Its a gut feeling that you have knowing you'll stop him even though you won't.

Here's one where Ben Wallace and McDyess compare these two right after the Heat vs Pistons ECF and before the Spurs vs Pistons series.

[QUOTE]The 6-foot-9 Wallace, the Pistons' defensive player of the year the past two seasons, could not see how any other challenge could be bigger.

''Bigger than Shaq?'' Wallace said, shaking his head.

Thirty minutes after the Pistons' 88-82 victory on Miami's home court in Game 7, Wallace was still revved.

''Tim Duncan's a great player,'' he said. ''He's a Hall of Famer. But Shaq, he's Shaq. That's a tall task.''
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Rasheed Wallace played his best in the clutch despite battling foul trouble, and he may take turns with Wallace guarding Duncan, the Spurs' 7-foot center. Duncan may revel in his unassuming profile, but his pure post game makes him the man to watch as he goes for his third championship in seven years.

''I think Shaq set us up for Tim Duncan,'' the Pistons reserve power forward Antonio McDyess said Monday night. He was smiling despite having hyperextended his right knee and said he felt little pain.

''He prepared us well,'' McDyess said of O'Neal. ''You can't compare anybody to Shaq.''

He said of Duncan: ''I think it's a little easier. He's more mobile. He can go out on the floor a little better.''
[/QUOTE]
[url]http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00911F6385C0C7B8CDDAF0894DD404482[/url]

[QUOTE=NugzHeat3]The weak big men theory has been shattered on several occasions but lets begin.

- The guy averaged 40 points on Ewing in the 1995 season over the span of 4 games.

- The only big man that he didn't outplay was Hakeem in the 1995 finals and that's hardly a shame with the level he was playing at.

- He easily got the better off the Duncan/Robinson Spurs in 2001. 27/13 on 54% FG. He often played good defense on Duncan too when switched onto him save for the 2003 series.

- Half the time the great defensive big isn't what matters; its the team defense, how well they rotate, quality of help and weakside defense, quick double teams ect. You tell me who guarded Shaq better; the 2000 Blazers or the 2001 Sixers with their DPoY Mutombo?

Shaq was definitely a dominant rebounder to me. He's finished runner up a few times and a lot of times he didn't bother crashing the defensive glass because he had a PF to clean it up like Horace Grant in Orlando. Shaq beasted the glass in his rookie year but he wasn't required to. Not his role. A lot of defensive rebounds go unchallenged. We've seen Shaq dominate the boards in the playoffs; like his 2000, 2001 and 2003 runs. When it was required, he generally did it.

The point about shot blocking has a lot to do with how much he makes guards adjust at the rim and how much he got contested. His BPG peaked in his rookie year because that's when he got challenged the most. People don't want to drive in and get fouled hard by Shaq. LA's paint defense (hoopdata.com) has also been good in Shaq's best years. Wonder why.

His lack of conditioning and underachieving is irrelevant anyway because he peaked and played at a higher level than some of the guys you are bringing up despite not playing to his potential. Talent means something.[/QUOTE]

I've never seen the weak big men fact refuted.

4 games vs Ewing doesn't a career make. You give a lot of weifght to those, but excuse his performance vs Hakeem. Which is it? Do a few games matetr or not?

Again, one series where he got the better of Duncan matters, but the one where he couldn't guard him doesn't.

You then go on to make excuses for his shot blocking, declare big man defense unimportant :eek: , and poor conditioning and underachieving not a big deal. Maybe not if we're talking about rank & file players, but we're not. We're discussing the all time best of the best. What separates those guys from everyone else? Commitment. Playing at their peak for an extended period. Bringing their best every night, not just when it's easy.

I have Shaq a Top 12 player all time. I just believe those factors...which you don't deny, jujst whitewash as unimportant...are what make the difference.

[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]I disagree, Wilt is not a great playoff performer like Magic

guess who shot 1-11 from the freethrow line in a game 7 of the NBA Finals?[/QUOTE]


Then I suppose Paul Pierce should rank ahead of everyone. Didn't he have the best Finals FT% for a single game?

I know you're smarter than to look at that as a defining factor in Wilt's career.

[QUOTE=Inception28]Ok.

Give me some players you think were better than Magic offensively.[/QUOTE]

Already listed them, but OK. Wilt. Oscar.

Magic was a generational playmaker who was surrounded by great players. That's not a knock, just a fact.

You've chosen to focus solely on his offense, which is smart because his defense speaks for itself as well.

A great player. Not as great a player as Wilt.

[QUOTE=JMT]I've never seen the weak big men fact refuted.

4 games vs Ewing doesn't a career make. You give a lot of weifght to those, but excuse his performance vs Hakeem. Which is it? Do a few games matetr or not?

Again, one series where he got the better of Duncan matters, but the one where he couldn't guard him doesn't.

You then go on to make excuses for his shot blocking, declare big man defense unimportant :eek: , and poor conditioning and underachieving not a big deal. Maybe not if we're talking about rank & file players, but we're not. We're discussing the all time best of the best. What separates those guys from everyone else? Commitment. Playing at their peak for an extended period. Bringing their best every night, not just when it's easy.

I have Shaq a Top 12 player all time. I just believe those factors...which you don't deny, jujst whitewash as unimportant...are what make the difference.[/QUOTE]
Actually, he's dominated Ewing ever since that year. Those are just an example. You also didn't refute how an individual defender doesn't constitute a great defense. More often than not a team defense can overcome the limitations at a certain position.

I do put consideration into that series with Hakeem but Shaq is 23 years old and had room to improve and he's going up against a guy people were saying played the game as well as anybody ever did. Shaq still played very well in the series and had nothing to do with the sweep.

Well, Duncan is not Shaq's man plus Shaq at that point was too overweight to keep up with Duncan. I'd like to see Orlando Shaq go up agianst him. But Shaq has shut down Duncan on occasions. There's a Christmas Day Lakers vs Spurs game where Duncan ends up shootin 2/14 or along the lines of it. That was sort of selective stats on my behalf of though. I admit. Shaq didn't really do that well against the Spurs in 1999 or 2002(injury IIRC) but he still made an impact just because of his presence.

I never declared big man defense unimportant. Show me where I did. You can't do it. What I was saying is Shaq made a bigger impact defensively than you think. His shot blocking numbers aren't elite but neither are Duncan's which is proof BPG does not equal great defense. Marcus Camby blocked a lot of shots by excessively gambling.

If conditioning and playing up to one's potential mattered that much, I'd guess you'd take Patrick Ewing over Shaq too because he was much more of a hard worker. I'm ranking Shaq for who he was anyway, not based on what he could have potentially done. In that case, he may have been the GOAT.

[QUOTE=NugzHeat3]I never declared big man defense unimportant. Show me where I did. You can't do it. [/QUOTE]

"[I]Half the time the great defensive big isn't what matters[/I]"

You go on to say he couldn't guard Duncan because he was overweight. Conditioning.

Again, it's not a big deal...until we're trying to separate the elite of the elite. When we're gtting that particular, looking for that final factor that separates one player from another, a commitment to the game and staying in the best shape possible absolutely is a factor imo.

shaq .

[QUOTE=JMT]"[I]Half the time the great defensive big isn't what matters[/I]"

You go on to say he couldn't guard Duncan because he was overweight. Conditioning.

Again, it's not a big deal...until we're trying to separate the elite of the elite. When we're gtting that particular, looking for that final factor that separates one player from another, a commitment to the game and staying in the best shape possible absolutely is a factor imo.[/QUOTE]
You badly misinterpreted that quote though I did a poor job explaining it to be honest. Let me give you a few more examples.

A great defensive big isn't required to have a great defensive team. That's my point.

Look at the 1996 Seattle Sonics. They had Ervin Johnson who was a scrub and Sam Perkins, sure good length, good post defender but he's not a great defensive C. Why was that team so successful at guarding Hakeem in the playoffs that year?

Swarming defense. Help from the perimeter, guards executing their traps well, double teaming right at the entry pass and often without the ball which was illegal back then. After double teaming, recovering right after to get to the shooters.

So they were able to limit Hakeem without a great defensive C. It's the perimeter that did the job.

Same with the 2000 Blazers. Its not Sabonis though he was a good initial defender. Its Pippen dropping down from the perimeter, Sheed helping from the weakside as well as Sabonis doing well in holding his own position that's bothering Shaq. TEAM defense overcoming the lack of individual defense.

Hakeem vs Robinson 1995 WCF. Hakeem was double teamed but they were soft double teams and he was guarded one on one for some games. You know the result. Great defensive C got SMOKED.

Shaq vs Mutombo like I mentioned earlier.

Shaq vs Ben Wallace 2004 finals. 1 on 1, Shaq had his way and would've done better if he got more touches.

As for your second point, that's a rather obscure example. Saying Shaq couldn't guard Duncan in 2003 is like saying Jordan couldn't do a good job on Magic in 1991 though for different reasons.

The only thing you can point to his conditioning his injuries which caused him to miss season games thus hurting his MVP chances. I don't think home court was decided by Shaq's conditioning issues. Conditioning was definitely an issue in Miami where he had to be taken out of games and couldn't log heavy minutes.

[QUOTE=NugzHeat3]You badly misinterpreted that quote though I did a poor job explaining it to be honest. Let me give you a few more examples.

[B]A great defensive big isn't required to have a great defensive team. That's my point.[/B]

[I]As for your second point, that's a rather obscure example. Saying Shaq couldn't guard Duncan in 2003 [/I]is like saying Jordan couldn't do a good job on Magic in 1991 though for different reasons.

[I]The only thing you can point to his conditioning his injuries which caused him to miss season games thus hurting his MVP chances.[/I] I don't think home court was decided by Shaq's conditioning issues. Conditioning was definitely an issue in Miami where he had to be taken out of games and couldn't log heavy minutes.[/QUOTE]

(1)You're right. A great defense doesn't require a great defensive big. Which doesn't change at all the fact that the guy being presented as the #7 player all time wasn't a great, or even particularly good, defender. Which is a big strike against in my book.

(2) Maybe an obscure example...but one that you brought up, not me.

(3) His conditioning issues were brought about by his decision that he didn't need preseason or the first half of the regular season, and could play himself into shape by the playoffs. And you want to limit it to Miami? You brought up 2002-03 when he was too overweight vs Spurs. 2003-04 vs Detroit. Cleveland. Phoenix. Boston, though that one may have been more injury driven. So basically, from the age of [B]30[/B] he wasn't fit enough to play full time minutes or defense against other top players at his position.

Again, we're discussing the all time best of the best. Taking that laissez faire attitude toward conditioning, team and responsibility isn't a trait befitting a player ranked this high imo.

Shaq.

Oscar Robertson

[QUOTE=Inception28]As much as I love Shaq my vote goes to Tim Duncan.[/QUOTE]
Same here, Duncan.

Oscar Robertson

shaq

[B]This was hard for me but[B] Timmy.[/B]


[SIZE="4"]Shaq has the better peak but he's half the player Duncan is on defense.
Plus, Duncan is the GOAT at his position.[/SIZE]
[/B]
[IMG]http://tucsoncitizen.com/morgue/files/2008/04/l83729-2.jpg[/IMG]

If you want great team chemistry, an ultimate team player, an unselfish leader, and a much better defender along with superior intangible assets, you gotta go with Tim Duncan over Shaq.

Statistically, Shaq is probably better, as he was a more dominant scorer and only a slightly worse rebounder. Shaq has never shot below 50% in his career, while Tim has a few times. Shaq's prime years are also more impressive.

IMO, Tim Duncan achieved more with a worse supporting cast. He never had Kobe Bryant or Dwyane Wade on his team.

This is a hard choice, but I'm voting for Tim Duncan.

[QUOTE=OmniStrife][B]This was hard for me but[B] Timmy.[/B]


[SIZE="4"]Shaq has the better peak but he's half the player Duncan is on defense.
Plus, Duncan is the GOAT at his position.[/SIZE]
[/B]
[IMG]http://tucsoncitizen.com/morgue/files/2008/04/l83729-2.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]

what about hakeem? nothing he can't do better than duncan.

Update for the vote so far


17 - Shaquille O'Neal
10 - Tim Duncan
6 - Hakeem Olajuwon
3 - Oscar Robertson



[QUOTE=Fazotronic]what about hakeem? nothing he can't do better than duncan.[/QUOTE]
Duncan was a better and a more willing passer than Hakeem. Duncan also made his teammates better than both Hakeem and Shaq did. That being said, I don't think Duncan had a better peak than Hakeem did. If we were just talking about peaks, Hakeem would be top 3 or 5 on my list and he would have a case for #1.

shaq

[QUOTE=Inception28]Update for the vote so far


17 - Shaquille O'Neal
10 - Tim Duncan
6 - Hakeem Olajuwon
3 - Oscar Robertson




Duncan was a better and a more willing passer than Hakeem. Duncan also made his teammates better than both Hakeem and Shaq did. That being said, I don't think Duncan had a better peak than Hakeem did. If we were just talking about peaks, Hakeem would be top 3 or 5 on my list and he would have a case for #1.[/QUOTE]

Where did you get the 17th vote for Shaq from?
and the 6th vote for Hakeem?

My count is this
[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]16 - Shaquille O'Neal
10 - Tim Duncan
5 - Hakeem Olajuwon
3 - Oscar Robertson

Total - 34 votes[/QUOTE]

[IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/25q8wnp.png[/IMG]

One of these two.


7-8 respectively

[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]Where did you get the 17th vote for Shaq from?

My count is this[/QUOTE]
Shaq is pretty much going to win either way. How much longer do we have to vote?

[QUOTE=Inception28]Shaq is pretty much going to win either way. How much longer do we have to vote?[/QUOTE]

12 ET, that is for all of them except if the voting isn't even close

Tim Duncan

[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]12 ET, that is for all of them except if the voting isn't even close[/QUOTE]

deuce

this one's a rap

let's get into #8 while we chillin
on a sunday watchin football