Tim Duncan is greater than Shaq, and here are the numbers to PROVE it

[QUOTE=Dizzle-2k7]shaq had penny in his first 5 years along with a pretty damn good orlando cast.

to call drob a "superstar" while he was with duncan is really reaching. he was in the twilight of his career when duncan arrived. yes, he was effective, but hardly a superstar.

shaq has played with penny, kobe, and wade. i still dont understand why someone would take shaqs 3-5 years of dominance over tim duncan's CAREER of dominance. not to mention all of shaqs antics and drama that get in the way.

tim duncan is a professional and a winner at that. end of story.[/QUOTE]

[B]Avgs Career 26ppg at 58% FG. Postseason 27ppg 56% FG[/B].

3 times came close to avg 30ppg in the reg season. Avg over 30ppg 3 times in the postseason for his career. Thats dominance.

Since Shaq has been in the NBA what NBA Center has come close to avg 30ppg+ for a regular season? How about 30 ppg+ in the postseason? List them all. If you cant keep your mouth shut.

[QUOTE=GOBB][B]Avgs Career 26ppg at 58% FG. Postseason 27ppg 56% FG[/B].

3 times came close to avg 30ppg in the reg season. Avg over 30ppg 3 times in the postseason for his career. Thats dominance.

Since Shaq has been in the NBA what NBA Center has come close to avg 30ppg+ for a regular season? How about 30 ppg+ in the postseason? List them all. If you cant keep your mouth shut.[/QUOTE]

See career averages for both players; they don't lie, no matter how much you wish they would in favor of Shaq.

[QUOTE=GOBB][B]Avgs Career 26ppg at 58% FG. Postseason 27ppg 56% FG[/B].

3 times came close to avg 30ppg in the reg season. Avg over 30ppg 3 times in the postseason for his career. Thats dominance.

[B]Since Shaq has been in the NBA what NBA Center has come close to avg 30ppg+ for a regular season?[/B] How about 30 ppg+ in the postseason? List them all. If you cant keep your mouth shut.[/QUOTE]

I think DRob's output of 29.9 in 1995 was higher than any of Shaq's regular season average. Hakeem has averaged 30+ PPG in the PO more than once since Shaq has been in the league.

:banana:

:pimp:

[quote=Dizzle-2k7][COLOR=SlateGray][B]shaq had penny in his first 5 years along with a pretty damn good orlando cast.

to call drob a "superstar" while he was with duncan is really reaching. he was in the twilight of his career when duncan arrived. yes, he was effective, but hardly a superstar.

shaq has played with penny, kobe, and wade. i still dont understand why someone would take shaqs 3-5 years of dominance over tim duncan's CAREER of dominance. not to mention all of shaqs antics and drama that get in the way.

tim duncan is a professional and a winner at that. end of story.[/B][/COLOR] [/quote]
[COLOR=Teal][B]DRob averaged 22, 11, 3 & 3 on 51 FG% in Duncan's rookie year. Shaq almost won an MVP putting up similar numbers. He might not have been a superstar in terms of productivity, but he was no ordinary star either. But that's not here nor there. My point was clear. Duncan had an accomplished veteran presense, and a big man no less, to guide his path, alongside a more competent coach/management during the first five years of his career, which we all agree about.

And in terms of winning, Duncan would not have won more than Shaq had he played against the likes of Jordan, Hakeem etc.. if he was playing for Orlando. And Shaq proved he's a winner four times playing for two different franchises.

And Shaq has always been dominant (prior to his recent decline). That's at least 10 years of dominance, and that includes the likes of Duncan as well.[/B][/COLOR]

[QUOTE=poeticism707]See career averages for both players; they don't lie, no matter how much you wish they would in favor of Shaq.[/QUOTE]

Duncan hasnt been the scorer Shaq has been in both the regular and postseason. Fact not fiction. Its called total domination. Duncan has never been on Shaq's level in scoring.

[QUOTE=sbw19][COLOR=Teal][B]DRob averaged 22, 11, 3 & 3 on 51 FG% in Duncan's rookie year. Shaq almost won an MVP putting up similar numbers. He might not have been a superstar in terms of productivity, but he was no ordinary star either. But that's not here nor there. My point was clear. Duncan had an accomplished veteran presense, and a big man no less, to guide his path, alongside a more competent coach/management during the first five years of his career, which we all agree about.

And in terms of winning, Duncan would not have won more than Shaq had he played against the likes of Jordan, Hakeem etc.. if he was playing for Orlando. And Shaq proved he's a winner four times playing for two different franchises.

And Shaq has always been dominant (prior to his recent decline). That's at least 10 years of dominance, and that includes the likes of Duncan as well.[/B][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

Tim Duncan beat the Lakers enroute to 2 titles, Shaq beat Spurs enroute to 2 titles. Where is this so called dominance? :confusedshrug:

:confusedshrug:

[QUOTE=poeticism707]:confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]

i hate you

Duncan will never ever have the level of complete domination Shaq had and how much fear prime Shaq puts in big men.

[quote=poeticism707][B][COLOR=Gray]Tim Duncan beat the Lakers enroute to 2 titles, Shaq beat Spurs enroute to 2 titles. Where is this so called dominance?[/COLOR][/B] :confusedshrug:[/quote]

[COLOR=Teal][B]In practically every game Shaq has played while healthy before his decline, and even in many games after it. There's a clear difference between Shaq dominated, and his team winning titles. Same goes with Duncan, and all other great players. Shaq just did it better and for a longer time than any basketball great not named Jordan, Magic or Bird in the last 25 years, and that includes Hakeem and Duncan.

Btw, let me know when a Duncan-led team actually achieves a threepeat since you believe winning titles is the be-all, end-all sign of a player's dominance. :cheers:[/B][/COLOR]

[QUOTE=sbw19][COLOR=Teal][B]In practically every game Shaq has played while healthy before his decline, and even in many games after it. There's a clear difference between Shaq dominated, and his team winning titles. Same goes with Duncan, and all other great players. Shaq just did it better and for a longer time than any basketball great not named Jordan, Magic or Bird in the last 25 years, and that includes Hakeem and Duncan.

Btw, let me know when a Duncan-led team actually achieves a threepeat since you believe winning titles is the be-all, end-all sign of a player's dominance. :cheers:[/B][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

These are very solid points. However, the last time I checked, 1+1+1=3, whether it is consecutive or no.

On the day Shaq came into the nba,I hated him...I hated the hype and the attitude...
Now,when I look back over the last decade....
he is truely -imo- the best and most dominating center in the last 20 years...
and maybe because I

Here is a system that NBA_Analyst (And ISH poster) has been working on for 2 years, and Here he compares Shaq and Tim Duncan.

Here is the system:

[QUOTE=NBA_Analyst][B]This system tells which of the 2 players is better TODAay[/B]... So name 2 players and I'll tell you who is better... Based on numerous amounts of things...From individual performance, to winning...System is purely Objective.....By the way, I love to get reviews!...And don't worry, it doesn't have too many errors or faults in it, I have been working on it for 2 years...It is at its finest...
(Tells which 2 players are better today, so no use of previous stats)

(YOU CAN DO HISTORIC Players as well...But be aware that the system is less accurate on historic players, but still is accurate...Historic Matchups take MUCH longer...You probably will receive results of those matchups the next day...So there is a limit from me on historic matchups...)

[B]But lets start out, no historic players yet...[/B]


[SIZE="3"][CENTER]This system is broken to 4 parts[/CENTER]

[B][SIZE="3"]Individual Score[/SIZE][/b]- All stats only on player based on this year...

[SIZE="3"][b]Team Impact Score[/SIZE][/b]- All stats on player impacting team based on this year...

[SIZE="3"][b]Winning Score[/SIZE][/b]- How good the player has been at winning in his career, so rings, and everything... Needed, cuz rings count...

[SIZE="3"][b]Award Score[/SIZE][/b]- How many awards has the player gotten in career, it doesn't factor in that as much as others... Reduced for players out of prime [/SIZE]
[/B]

***************************************************************
[B]READ MORE FOR
DETAILS:
[/B]
Here are all the factors again (per game)

[SIZE="4"][B][CENTER]Individual Factor[/CENTER]
[/B][/SIZE]

1.Scoring Score- combines, points, points per 48, and non assisted shot %

2.Rebounding Score- Combines rebounds, reb per 48, and a reb rate,

3.Assist Score- assist, assist per 48, and assist rate

4.Steal Score- steals, and steal per 48

5.Block Score- blocks, and blocks per 48

6.TO score- TOs, TOs per 48, and TO/Ast Ratio

7.3pt Score- Combines 3pt%, 3pt M, 3pt A

8.FT Score- FT % and FT M

9.FG Score- FG%, FG M, FG A, eFG%, TS%

10.PER

11.EFF

12.Defensive Counterpart PER

13.Defensive Award addition: Defensive awards total *2(Extra on defense cuz, this is one of the only places where you can measure defense in numbers)

13.Clutch- counts eFG%, wins, and points in clutch




[B][CENTER][SIZE="4"]TEAM Impact[/SIZE][/CENTER][/B]


Team Impact is the least complex...It just measures, how you well you fit into your team, and how well you and your team plays...

It uses team success, with you on and off the court...As well as how your team does period WITH you on the court

Great, because, Players need to fit in the team too, and not just take stats



[B][CENTER][SIZE="4"]WINNING[/SIZE][/CENTER][/B]

Age doesn't matter. How can age not matter when talking about awards and titles, u'll see.
I broke it down to Total titles and awards, and % titles and awards. The totals support the older players, and the % support the young ones.
Percentages work like this, if a player has won 3 titles in 10 years, then he has 30%, if a player has won 1 titles in 3 years, then 33%, and so on. You will understand more as we get the totals.


TOTALS
Titles +5
CHOOSE 1
Role Titles(R.Horry) +6
Lead Titles (B.Wallace or M.Ginobili) +10
Finals MVPs +15

Lead to Finals but lost +6
Playoff Apps +2
Led team to 50+ wins (seasons) +3
Led team to 60+ wins (seasons) +5
TOTAL:


PERCENTAGES
ROUND TO NEAREST WHOLE NUMBER
Titles + %/6
R Titles + %/4
L Titles + %/1
Finals MVP + %/1 (20- # of years played)
Lead to Finals MVP but lost + %/4
Lead to Playoffs + %/10
Lead to 50+ wins + %/8
Lead to 60+ wins + %/5
% Total:Total *1.5

Grand Total:Average % total, and total total, up to get grand total




[CENTER][B][SIZE="4"]AWARDS FACTOR
[/SIZE][/B][/CENTER]
Age doesn't matter. How can age not matter when talking about awards and titles, u'll see.
I broke it down to Total titles and awards, and % titles and awards. The totals support the older players, and the % support the young ones.
Percentages work like this, if a player has won 3 titles in 10 years, then he has 30%, if a player has won 1 titles in 3 years, then 33%, and so on. You will understand more as we get the totals. But I guess it matters some with VERY young players...When the player is very young, the award section won't be added...

All-Star App: +5
MVP: +15
1st Team: +10
2nd Team: +7
3rd Team: +4
DPOY: +8
D 1st team: +6
D 2nd Team: +4
TOTAL:

PERCENTAGES
All-Star + %/5
MVP + %/1 + (20-# of years played)
1st Team + %/1
2nd Team + %/3
3rd Team + %/6
DPOY + %/2
1st D Team + %/4
2nd D Team + %/6
% Total:Total *1.5

Grand Total:Average % total, and total total, up to get grand total, and then divide by 2


ON PLAYERS THAT DON'T PLAY THIS YEAR OR YOU DON'T WANT MEASURED THIS YEAR, AWARDS WILL BE DOUBLED...



NOTE:

Even though the Award and Winning thing does take care of age differences, it doesn't do well on players that very young vs. veterans

like Anthony, Bosh, Howard, etc.

So I recommend taking the Awards especially OFF...Winning, its alrite usually...

But remember, you can still do VERY YOUNG vs. Old...[/QUOTE]

Here are the results from page 15 of the current ISH thread entitled:
Re: ***Super ACCURATE Player System***

[QUOTE=NBA_Analyst][B][FONT="Palatino Linotype"][CENTER][SIZE="4"]Tim Duncan vs. Shaquille O'Neal[/SIZE][/CENTER][/FONT][/B]

[FONT="Georgia"]
Scoring Score: O'Neal by 6


Rebounding Score: Duncan by 6


Assist Score: Duncan by 12


Stealing Score: Duncan by 7


Blocking Score: Duncan by 2


TO Score: Duncan by 5


3pt Score: Tie


FT Score: Duncan by 6


Shooting and Scoring Score: O'Neal by 13


Clutch Score: O'Neal by 13


PER: O'Neal by 5


EFF: Duncan by 4


Individual Defense: Duncan by 23




TOTAL TEAM SCORE: Duncan by 5



TOTAL WINNING SCORE: O'Neal by 6



TOTAL AWARDS SCORE: Duncan by 24




Individual Score: Duncan by 41
Team Score: Duncan by 5
Winning Score: O'Neal by 6
Awards Score: Duncan by 24


FINAL SCORE: Duncan by 66


[B]WINNER: Tim Duncan[/B][/QUOTE]

It wouldn't be redundant, considering the thread, to say I told you so...:banana: :roll: :banana: :roll: :banana: :roll: :banana: :roll:

[QUOTE=poeticism707]Here are the results from page 15 of the current ISH thread entitled:
Re: ***Super ACCURATE Player System***



It wouldn't be redundant, considering the thread, to say I told you so...:banana: :roll: :banana: :roll: :banana: :roll: :banana: :roll:[/QUOTE]
That is Duncan vs. Shaq NOW. Not prime vs prime.
Face it dude, Shaq is top 3 in most dominant to ever play the game.

[QUOTE=RagingBull33]That is Duncan vs. Shaq NOW. Not prime vs prime.
Face it dude, Shaq is top 3 in most dominant to ever play the game.[/QUOTE]

This is a comparison of their total careers to date. I could care less about some mystical, 3 years of someone's "prime."

:s:sleeping

:rollingeyes:

How many great centers did shaq face in his prime? how many great PF's did Duncan face in his prime? I think it would be easier for shaq to dominate IMHO.:cheers:

One of the reasons Duncan is so good is his teammates. If you replace Garnett with Duncan on Minnesota for the past 10 years, they wouldn't get any more wins. From my limited Duncan watching experience (playoffs last 10 years, big national TV games), it seems to me that he can't do sh!t when he's doubled. He passes off to an excellent 3-pt shooter who knocks down a 3. Or makes a nice pass in the lane to a slasher who is a great finisher. He only dominates with single coverage (and he does dominate). Shaq throws it down with 2 dudes hanging off of him all the time.

Shaq dominated Mutumbo's face a lot more than Duncan.

Yeah, Duncan is greater than Shaq. who did Shaq play with during the 3 peat run? the lakers were packed with veterans that know how to win games. Glen Rice? the laker squad that lifted the lakers up, arguably the key to win the 2000 nba championship. Ron Harper? MJ's second best sidekick 1 of PJ's favorite players from the bulls dynasty. Robert Horry, Hakeem's boy. do i need to tell u that this guy is a killer. Derek Fisher. Rick Fox. Lindsey hunter. these are very reliable players. [U]they can fulfill their roles[/U]. not to mention that Shaq had Kobe Bryant, the greatest sidekick of all time.

throughout Shaq's entire career he has been playing with top notch swingmen. [U]Penny Hardaway[/U](a lesser version of Kobe, 1 of the best young players at that time), [U]Kobe bryant[/U], and [U]Dwade[/U] who is almost as good as Kobe in terms of skills. Shaq couldn't win a single chip with Penny because he did not have enough help, not enough well experienced players around him. and he couldn't make those players better. unlike when he's with the lakers and the heat, he had tons of veterans in both teams. and they helped him win 4 championships.

Who did Timmy have? a few players with some experiences and new guys. if the spurs didn't get Timmy, do u think that Drob could lead the spurs to the nba title? would Drob win the championship without Timmy? would TP and Manu be as affective as they are now playing with Drob? nah. Tim made them better. period. the spurs wouldn't be a contender team without Tim Duncan. how else would u explain the transformation of the spurs? [U]Tim is the reason why the spurs have become 1 of the most successful franchises in the nba history. [/U]

Shaq definitely is 1 of the greatest big men of all time. he led the lakers to championships, the leader of the team. he is great, but sorry he is not better than Tim Duncan. :no:

[QUOTE=ChrisConley]From my limited Duncan watching experience.[/QUOTE]

Stfu now?

[QUOTE=td21spurs]Yeah, Duncan is greater than Shaq. who did Shaq play with during the 3 peat run? the lakers were packed with veterans that know how to win games. Glen Rice? the laker squad that lifted the lakers up, arguably the key to win the 2000 nba championship. Ron Harper? MJ's second best sidekick 1 of PJ's favorite players from the bulls dynasty. Robert Horry, Hakeem's boy. do i need to tell u that this guy is a killer. Derek Fisher. Rick Fox. Lindsey hunter. these are very reliable players. [U]they can fulfill their roles[/U]. not to mention that Shaq had Kobe Bryant, the greatest sidekick of all time.

throughout Shaq's entire career he has been playing with top notch swingmen. [U]Penny Hardaway[/U](a lesser version of Kobe, 1 of the best young players at that time), [U]Kobe bryant[/U], and [U]Dwade[/U] who is almost as good as Kobe in terms of skills. Shaq couldn't win a single chip with Penny because he did not have enough help, not enough well experienced players around him. and he couldn't make those players better. unlike when he's with the lakers and the heat, he had tons of veterans in both teams. and they helped him win 4 championships.

Who did Timmy have? a few players with some experiences and new guys. if the spurs didn't get Timmy, do u think that Drob could lead the spurs to the nba title? would Drob win the championship without Timmy? would TP and Manu be as affective as they are now playing with Drob? nah. Tim made them better. period. the spurs wouldn't be a contender team without Tim Duncan. how else would u explain the transformation of the spurs? [U]Tim is the reason why the spurs have become 1 of the most successful franchises in the nba history. [/U]

Shaq definitely is 1 of the greatest big men of all time. he led the lakers to championships, the leader of the team. he is great, but sorry he is not better than Tim Duncan. :no:



Stfu now?[/QUOTE]

:cheers:

NEW UPDATED STATISTICS!

Titles:

Duncan- 4
Shaq- 4

Congrads Tim Duncan and San Antonio Spurs!

another good bump

Duncan got all 4 championships with 1 team whereas shaq had to move. although he got them closer (as in the year)

[QUOTE=poeticism707]Here are Tim Duncan and Shaq's career numbers and accomplishments

Lets take it to the scorecard as it stands right NOW:

titles: Shaq 4, Duncan 4
finals mvps: Shaq 3, duncan 3
season mvps: Shaq 1, Duncan 2
1st team all nba: Shaq 7, Duncan 9
1st team all defense: Shaq 0, Duncan 7 (Shaq only has 3 2nd team all defense!)
Shaq career: 25.9ppg, 11.6 rpg, 2.8apg, 2.8bpg
Duncan Career: 21.8 ppg, 11.9rpg, 3.2apg, 2.4bpg

Now lets discuss the obvious. Shaq has been in the league 5 more years than Duncan, both are even with 4 titles, both even in finals mvps, Duncan with one more season mvp at 2-1. Here is where it gets shocking: Shaq has been in the league over 14+ years, but only 7 first team all nba elections? That a mere 50%! Also, Shaq has never, not even once been voted first team all defense- with only 3, count it 3 total 2ND TEAM all defense selections! Wow! He's a bigger defensive liability than Steve Nash! Even with all this "dominant" scoring, career wise he leads Duncan by only four points in career average! It is obvious that all you who swear by Shaq's dominance have been utterly duped!

Anyone please look at these numbers and prove Shaq is better than Duncan! According to their career numbers and stats, Duncan is already ahead of Shaq, and its not even close! One more title and finals mvp will simply be icing on the cake.[/QUOTE]

You are one incredible number-crunching putz, aren't you? 1+1= Duncan! 2-3=Duncan! if x=y to the power of z, then x= Duncan!

I see it as Duncan had 3-4 years where he was just a monstrous beast. Duncan never had a better individual season than Shaq's best. Duncan, however, has been more consistent which payed off in a slightly better career (awards wise). Overall though, a winner is a winner. And they have each won 4 times and that is what matters. One side can argue that Duncan's longevity makes him better, while Shaq's 3 years of dominance makes him better. It all depends on your perspective.

Overall if I was asked who I'd rather have, it depends on what specifically is asked:
Who would I take for 1 year in their prime? Shaq.
Who would I take for an entire career? Duncan.

[QUOTE=RainierBeachPoet]another good bump[/QUOTE]
:cheers:

Shaq was robbed of the MVP in 99', 00' and 05' so he should have 4. As far as All NBA Duncan just starts at PF so he can start in the all star game and be all nba first team..he really plays center. Also did Duncan ever average 38 and 17 in an NBA finals...nope didn't think so.

[QUOTE=VCMVP1551]Shaq was robbed of the MVP in 99', 00' and 05' so he should have 4. [/QUOTE]

Uh? He did not deserve it in 1999. 2000 WAS the year he got it. In 2005 nobody was really deserving of an MVP, but I do agree that he should have beat out Nash for that one. Shaq did deserve it in 2001 though IMO. That should have been 3 (with 2 of them being truly deserving).

If Shaq played his seasons like he played his playoffs, then he would have deserved even more, but he didn't.

[QUOTE=VCMVP1551]Shaq was robbed of the MVP in 99', 00' and 05' so he should have 4.[/QUOTE]

Duncan deserved MVP in '99. Not Shaq.

[QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]Duncan deserved MVP in '99. Not Shaq.[/QUOTE]

[img]http://www.patandkat.com/pat/weblog/images/webber-dunk1.jpg[/img]

Chris Webber is the real MVP in 1999 after the Sacramento Kings have a turn around season in that year.

[B]Chris Webber stats in 1998-99[/B]

20.0 PPG, 13.0 RPG, 2.1 BPG, 4.1 APG ( lead the NBA in rebounds)

[B]Chris Webber stats in the 2000-01[/B]

27.1 PPG, 11.1 RPG, 1.7 APG, 2.0 BPG ( 4th in NBA Voting)

[B]Sacramento Kings: [/B] 55 Wins 27 loses

[QUOTE=Lebron23][img]http://www.patandkat.com/pat/weblog/images/webber-dunk1.jpg[/img]

Chris Webber is the real MVP in 1999 after the Sacramento Kings have a turn around in that year.

[B]Chris Webber stats in 1998-99[/B]

20.0 PPG, 13.0 RPG, 2.1 BPG, 4.1 APG ( lead the NBA in rebounds)

[B]Chris Webber stats in the 2000-01[/B]

27.1 PPG, 11.1 RPG, 1.7 APG, 2.0 BPG ( 4th in NBA Voting)

[B]Sacramento Kings: [/B] 55 Wins 27 loses[/QUOTE]

Good point although I stick to Shaq especially in 2001

28.7 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.8 bpg, 56-26 record. Shaq also turned around the season after Kobe almost chucked it away. Shouldn't have been a question.

C-Webb deserved it in 2001-2002

24.5 ppg, 10.1 rpg, 4.8 apg, 1.7 spg, 1.4 bpg, 61-21 record.

[QUOTE=VCMVP1551]I stick to Shaq especially in 2001

28.7 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.8 bpg, 56-26 record. Shaq also turned around the season after Kobe almost chucked it away. Shouldn't have been a question.[/QUOTE]

On that, I'll agree with you.

EDIT: Hold up. I just remembered that was during the Shaq-Kobe feud when Shaq said, "When the dog is fed, he’ll guard the yard. When he’s not, anybody can come in." Nah, that's not the attitude of an MVP.

[QUOTE=VCMVP1551]

C-Webb deserved it in 2001-2002

24.5 ppg, 10.1 rpg, 4.8 apg, 1.7 spg, 1.4 bpg, 61-21 record.[/QUOTE]

I don't think a 3 game difference is enough to offset Duncan's:
25.5 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 0.7 spg, 2.5 bpg, 58-24 record (with better defense).

Just my opinion though.

[QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]On that, I'll agree with you.

EDIT: Hold up. I just remembered that was during the Shaq-Kobe feud when Shaq said, "When the dog is fed, he

[QUOTE=VCMVP1551]The quote is "If the big dog aint me the house won't get guarded" Shaq was telling the truth Kobe was averaging 30 ppg and Shaq about 26 but they weren't winning much and once Kobe got injured Shaq took over and the team started dominating and Kobe noticed and came back as a 26 ppg with Shaq as the 30 ppg. That is what an MVP does he turned a struggling team into one of the most dominant teams ever down the stretch and in the playoffs. Chick Hearn said they were playing as well as any Laker team. Shaq had every right to be mad about Kobe chucking early on..Shaq was coming off one of the best seasons ever in which he was the league MVP, scoring champion, 2 in rebounds, 3 in blocks, 2 in DPOY voting and had a 38 ppg, 16.7 rpg NBA finals when Kobe had a terrible finals literally carrying the Lakers during the finals not to mention leading them to 67 wins during the regular season.[/QUOTE]

I know what the quote was, [B]I took it directly from the source[/B]. I gave the [U]exact quote[/U]. The fact is that feud cost him the MVP. With all the publicity the whole Shaq-Kobe thing got and the way the Lakers season went up until the playoffs, he wasn't going to win MVP. It's as simple as that. I had forgotten about that.