[QUOTE=plowking]This alone shows that Shaq was a more effective, more influential, more dominant [B]and in turn better[/B] player the Oscar.[/QUOTE]
Wrong. You need to go back to Basketball 101 to learn this apparently.
Printable View
[QUOTE=plowking]This alone shows that Shaq was a more effective, more influential, more dominant [B]and in turn better[/B] player the Oscar.[/QUOTE]
Wrong. You need to go back to Basketball 101 to learn this apparently.
[QUOTE=72-10]Wrong. You need to go back to Basketball 101 to learn this apparently.[/QUOTE]
You'd find that most people agree that Shaq is the better player. His achievements enough show that he was the better player, whether or not he had a better supporting cast.
Shaq can be argued to be in the top five. Although I would personally rank him #6.
But he is without a doubt in the top 8 and that is not arguable. If you don't have him in the top 8 you are just wrong.
[QUOTE]Uhh Bird was in several All-Defensive teams. Drazen was no slouch, and held his own against much more athletically gifted guards. Averaged 1.3 steals per game in 37 mpg with New Jersey.[/QUOTE]
Russell has finished top-10 in assists (more than once) and averaged 20+ ppg in multiple Finals' series (including the 1965 one, when he shot at a Finals' record clip of 70.2% FG). So, if you think Bird and Drazen (especially Drazen, whose 1.3 steals in 37 mpg is nothing to brag about anyway) qualify as good defenders, then Russell also qualifies offensively.
[QUOTE]LOL.
There is no need to argue here. Half of his plays are offensive fouls? Obvious agenda against Shaq if you actually believe this to be the case.
Shaq often had 3 players guarding him at one time, I never heard of Oscar ever getting that much attention. This alone shows that Shaq was a more effective, more influential, more dominant and in turn better player the Oscar.[/QUOTE]
No, it just shows that Shaq was more unstoppable going one-on-one and verifies the rule that centers get more defensive attention. After all, Shaq gets more attention than any guard ever. Doesn't make him greater than any guard ever.
That's despite my ranking Shaq over Oscar during these years.
Not even in my top 15.
Anyone who blatantly "half-a[SIZE="2"]ss[/SIZE]es it" and talks about it with no shame does not deserve to be called great in my book.
[QUOTE=72-10]You appear to lack reading comprehension. I said he bulled his way in the paint, not bully. And I was not referring to every play or half of the plays. I was referring to the difference in field goal percentages, and the difference largely stems from these plays where he used weight and girth to bull people out of his way, and he had several of those in each game. Shaq is considered almost universally one of the hardest players in history to referee. [B]It's difficult to give him full credit for his achievements when you could make an argument that half of his plays are offensive fouls.[/B] Shaq is of course more dominant than Oscar, he has just as much impact in deciding factors in games despite some pitiful shortcomings, but he is not a better player, in fact he is not quite as good of a player. I've seen Shaq's entire career.[/QUOTE]
If thats the case you can also make an argument that there were just as many defensive fouls against Shaq that were never called. Shaq got so beat up but it never seemed to visibly affect him, so he didn't draw even more fouls. If it actually did visibly affect him, I'm sure alot more fouls would've been called in Shaq's favor.
And anyone who thinks Oscar is better due to a "significant statistical advantage" is wrong. 60s were inflated, especially in rebounding. For example, anyone honestly think that Oscar would average 12.5 rpg in a season during Shaq's era like he did in the triple double season? Not a chance. On the other hand, Shaq would've probably average 20+rpg easily in the 60s.
Another thing, which I forgot to mention. Even if you don't adjust for the inflated stats, where is this "significant statistical advantage?" Oscar: 25.7 ppg/7.5 rpg/9.5 apg in 14 seasons, Shaq: 25.2 ppg/11.5 rpg/2.7 apg in 16 seasons. They're just about equal in points, while Shaq has the advantage in rebounds and Oscar has the advantage in assists. Sounds about equal to me.
[QUOTE=Psileas]Russell has finished top-10 in assists (more than once) and averaged [B]20+ ppg in multiple Finals' series [/B](including the 1965 one, when he shot at a Finals' record clip of 70.2% FG). So, if you think Bird and Drazen (especially Drazen, whose 1.3 steals in 37 mpg is nothing to brag about anyway) qualify as good defenders, then Russell also qualifies offensively.[/QUOTE]
In a whole series? Great, I mentioned whole seasons.
Also Drazen isn't mentioned ever in top 10 discussions, thoug you mentioned Magic as well. You do realise Magic has 2spg over his whole career, and that in a season he averaged 3.4spg. Like I said he was brilliant on the offensive end, and was a decent defender.
[QUOTE=Da KO King]Not even in my top 15.
Anyone who blatantly "half-a[SIZE="2"]ss[/SIZE]es it" and talks about it with no shame does not deserve to be called great in my book.[/QUOTE]
I agree with this. These things have to be taken into account.
[QUOTE=bleedinpurpleTwo]I agree with this. These things have to be taken into account.[/QUOTE]
Jordan punched a teammate in the face. How many spots does he lose for that? He also has a gambling problem. I put him in my top 50 barely.
Wilt slept with over 20,000 women, and is probably the father of many children who are not able to get by, due to single parenthood. How many spots does he lose?
[QUOTE=Da KO King]Not even in my top 15.
Anyone who blatantly "half-a[SIZE="2"]ss[/SIZE]es it" and talks about it with no shame does not deserve to be called great in my book.[/QUOTE]
How is it relevant how good he could have been? Unless of course the two sentences above have no direct correlation. Even then though, Shaq's accomplished more than enough to warrant a top 15 selection in just about anyone's list.
[QUOTE=bleedinpurpleTwo]I agree with this. These things have to be taken into account.[/QUOTE]
But my point has been that they already have been taken into account since he didn't achieve more as a result, which would've made his ranking higher.
[QUOTE=RidonKs]How is it relevant how good he could have been? Unless of course the two sentences above have no direct correlation. Even then though, Shaq's accomplished more than enough to warrant a top 15 selection in just about anyone's list.[/QUOTE]
Agreed.
I know Bird is a legend and all, but why do people act like its not close between Shaq and Larry? Shaq has more titles, more finals MVP's, less MVP's, more all star MVP's, and I think the same number of all NBA team selections.
Where is the great disparity that I am missing here? Someone fill me in? Is it simply because Bird is "the great white saviour"?
72-10,
you really gotta give Shaq more credit.
You know a crazy Shaq stat that can't be put into numbers?
Well his last two season kinda ruined it but up until 2006 or so, you can say that Shaq's team is a legit title contender EVERY YEAR except his rookie year.
Every year of Shaq's career, his team is a top 4 or 5 ish title contender. He has been to what, 9 Conference Finals in his career. So 9 years of his career his team finished in the final four.
And he didn't do this in Bill Russell's era of like 8 team leagues. he was doing this against 26, 28, and 29 other teams throughout his career. He is a winner. I don't have exact numbers but I'm sure his regular season win record is among one of the highest out of any player. Off the top of my head I can only think Bill Russell and Duncan who would have a better win % and/or win-loss record in the regular season IN THEIR CAREER over Shaq. (and i'm only counting 1st or 2nd option, so guys like Kerr wouldn't qualify)
The man's impact on the game was almost inarguably greater than any guard in the history of the league not named Michael and Magic. Oscar Robertson and Jerry West don't stand a chance. How many rings have they won? How many rings have they won as the best guy on their team? (ZERO) Was there ever a time West and Oscar ruled the league the way Shaq ruled it for a three year stretch?
Shaq should be in the argument with LARRY AND MAGIC (check the accomplishments, Shaq rivals both of them easily). Not with guys a level lower like Hakeem and Oscar.
[QUOTE=EricForman]72-10,
you really gotta give Shaq more credit.
You know a crazy Shaq stat that can't be put into numbers?
Well his last two season kinda ruined it but up until 2006 or so, you can say that Shaq's team is a legit title contender EVERY YEAR except his rookie year.
Every year of Shaq's career, his team is a top 4 or 5 ish title contender. He has been to what, 9 Conference Finals in his career. So 9 years of his career his team finished in the final four.
And he didn't do this in Bill Russell's era of like 8 team leagues. he was doing this against 26, 28, and 29 other teams throughout his career. He is a winner. I don't have exact numbers but I'm sure his regular season win record is among one of the highest out of any player. Off the top of my head I can only think Bill Russell and Duncan who would have a better win % and/or win-loss record in the regular season IN THEIR CAREER over Shaq. (and i'm only counting 1st or 2nd option, so guys like Kerr wouldn't qualify)
The man's impact on the game was almost inarguably greater than any guard in the history of the league not named Michael and Magic. Oscar Robertson and Jerry West don't stand a chance. How many rings have they won? How many rings have they won as the best guy on their team? (ZERO)
Shaq should be in the argument with LARRY AND MAGIC (check the accomplishments, Shaq rivals both of them easily). Not with guys a level lower like Hakeem and Oscar.[/QUOTE]
Co-sign.
:cheers: