Shaqs prime years

[Doctor Rivers]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObgYw_L7FI8

>>

anything Dwight Howard has ever done

[magnax1]

It was a tough year due to the coaching change, Rodman distraction, a big midseason trade during a shortened season ect. So I can understand the struggles, I still think he has to be held accountable to some degree.

The team would've been better off keeping Eddie Jones instead of trading him for Rice as well as keeping Rodman. Having those guys the following year with Phil could've made them even better and an amazing defensive team(they were the best defensive team in 2000 as it was).

Yeah, I definitely agree. If they kept those two, that might've been the best team ever in 00. Especially since Jones had an incredible season in 00. The only problem is that I don't think Jones and Kobe really fit well, but I think that would've been pretty minor.

[EnoughSaid]

That makes D-Wade even more of a beast.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Yeah, I definitely agree. If they kept those two, that might've been the best team ever in 00. Especially since Jones had an incredible season in 00. The only problem is that I don't think Jones and Kobe really fit well, but I think that would've been pretty minor.

Yeah, Jones had a career season in 2000(though he continued his disappointing playoff career with a poor series and 1st round exit). With Shaq and Kobe having their best defensive seasons, it's hard to imagine how good they could've been.

Regardless of how Jones fit, it's not like Rice was a good fit himself. Phil and Glen both talked about that. The one thing Rice brought was a guy who was a threat to make 3s(though he wasn't as good as he was pre-elbow surgery), but would stand around when he didn't have the ball and kind of resisted the role of spot up shooter.

Jones was also a capable 3 point shooter while being an elite defender, which was the opposite of Rice who got benched late in some games for being a defensive liability.

I'm also not sure Jones playoff struggles would've been a problem. He'd be the 3rd option instead of the 2nd option like he had been in LA or 1st option like he was when he went to Charlotte and Miami so his offense would be much less important. Especially since Rice didn't have a great regular season and then fell off dramatically himself in the playoffs and they still won.

I think that even an old Dennis Rodman would've helped as well. The reason that Sacramento took them to 5 and Portland almost beat them was because Green got abused by C-Webb and Sheed, and Horry was better as a team defender than as a 1 on 1 defender vs big, athletic PF, imo. I don't see C-Webb playing as well or Sheed having the series of his life with Rodman there.

Phil also wanted Pippen instead of Rice which would've helped as well considering 2000 Pippen was still elite defensively and very good overall, just not quite the player he was with Chicago, but a great fit in the system.

As it is, I find it hard to believe that the Lakers won 67 games and could've gone 69-13, but Phil said they didn't see the significance of tying the franchise record. Considering they had clear weaknesses, it was their first season learning the triangle and Kobe missed the first 15 games, I'd think they'd have won 10 fewer games.

Interesting is with those long streaks, Phil said that they won early and during that 16 game streak more due to their defense and the 19 game streak later due to their offense. Goes to show the adjustment period when it comes to the triangle. Shaq himself averaged 36 ppg the last 20 games which I'm wondering if it has more to do with him getting more comfortable in the triangle or "playing his way into shape" which he seemed to do a lot, though he seemed to be in good shape to start the season.

[ItsTwisted]

Uhm why is Shaq the GOAT?

Greatest and most unstoppable 0ffensive player the league has ever seen or had.
One of the best defensive C's ever.
2nd greatest playoff performer of all time after Jordan.

I judge players based on Playoff Production/Intagibals and Performances.
In this regards Jordan and Shaq are clearly the Top 2.

I dont even rank Shaq as the GOAT he is #2 behind Jordan.

And btw dont fu***** lecture me with your 72 posts you dumbass rand.

I was obviously mocking a Troll if you really think I equate Bryant to being a used daiper or being useless then your just to stupid to notice whats going on around you.

Winning rings is about consistently having good supporting casts + luck it has no bearing on individual greatness in my book.

As a playoff performer Shaq's 10 best years trump Kobe's best year there is no comparison between the two players.

When Shaq's teams failed it was 99% of the time because of his teammates he was usually the best player on the court in those series.

Also when Oneal and Bryant split seperate Ways Oneal was declining and in the final years of his Prime thats why Bryant had more sucuess. Put Shaq from 95-04 on any team in the late 00's and they are practically guranteed the championship.

even Grandpa Shaq + Wade almost won 2 rings together.

I think you are misunderstanding me, I am not attacking you or in lecturing mode. I am a fellow Shaq fan, and I actually believe Shaq could have had a case for GOAT if he tried harder, maintained his body longer and put more effort in at certain games, and he only has himself to blame.

I will agree with you that like Jordan, Shaq was a force on the offensive side, and was unguardable most of the time. However, Jordan was just dominant from the get go. His rookie year I believe he averaged 28.2 points per game on a 51.5 fg %. I believe that season he scored more points than any other player and he was a rookie. People say Jordan couldnt have done it without Pippen but if we go back and look, Jordan was dominant from the start, and slowly but surely was bringing the Chicago Bulls back up on his own. His first years, he truly didnt have great players to rely on. His first year they made the playoffs, while going 27-55 the year before. Shaq however truly become who he is today once he joined the Lakers. In his years with Orlando, he was dominant but he had Hardaway, Anderson and etc. and I believe this hurt his chances to excel. From the get go, you could see Shaq had the desire to be the man, Jordan HAD to be the man, and he rose to the occasion immediately. He made the Bulls what they were, even before Pippen, Rodman and etc.

What discredits Shaq is the fact that he had Kobe for the championships. Even though Shaq was the main, many people will use it against him at the fact that he had Kobe who was already blossiming into an exceptional player himself. Pippen never outplayed Jordan in a series, but the same cant be said for Shaq and Kobe. Jordan had Pippen and Rodman, but you knew at the end of the game, the ball was in Jordans hands. However, the same cant be said for Shaq, the offense did run through him I will agree, but during closing minutes, or when it was time to step it up, Phil trusted Kobe more. Had Shaq been alone on those championship teams, and had Kobes production been less, he could have a strong case, and that is very unfortunate for both of them. However, had they stayed together, both of them could be very well in the top 10 by now with who knows how many championships, but thats the beauty of basketball.

When Shaq left the Lakers, I got the sense that he almost didnt care. He cared to the point where he wanted to win a championship but that was only to prove to people that he can do it without Kobe. His prime wouldnt have ended as soon as it did had he worked hard, but thats what separates him and Jordan. Jordan prided himself on staying in shape and working hard, and proving everyone wrong. At age 40 playing for the Wizads he averaged 20 ppg and was the only player on the roster to play in all 82 games. Very sad considering he was the oldest, but thats what makes him the greatest. If we went by stats alone, Shaq might have a case, but if you go by their careers, there is no question Jordan is better and rightfully number 1.

Again this is my opinion, I am sure yours may be different. Also just because I have a low post count does not mean I dont know basketball. Ish certainly isnt my life, but I do like to come here from time to time, unfortunately because it is so flooded with morons, you cant have a reasonable argument and thats all I was trying to get out of you, instead of just getting stats thrown in my face. I also dont understand why you have to go insult my intelligence when you dont know me, and I know I havent stated anything that many people dont agree with.

[magnax1]

Yeah, Jones had a career season in 2000(though he continued his disappointing playoff career with a poor series and 1st round exit). With Shaq and Kobe having their best defensive seasons, it's hard to imagine how good they could've been.

Regardless of how Jones fit, it's not like Rice was a good fit himself. Phil and Glen both talked about that. The one thing Rice brought was a guy who was a threat to make 3s(though he wasn't as good as he was pre-elbow surgery), but would stand around when he didn't have the ball and kind of resisted the role of spot up shooter.

Jones was also a capable 3 point shooter while being an elite defender, which was the opposite of Rice who got benched late in some games for being a defensive liability.

I'm also not sure Jones playoff struggles would've been a problem. He'd be the 3rd option instead of the 2nd option like he had been in LA or 1st option like he was when he went to Charlotte and Miami so his offense would be much less important. Especially since Rice didn't have a great regular season and then fell off dramatically himself in the playoffs and they still won.

I think that even an old Dennis Rodman would've helped as well. The reason that Sacramento took them to 5 and Portland almost beat them was because Green got abused by C-Webb and Sheed, and Horry was better as a team defender than as a 1 on 1 defender vs big, athletic PF, imo. I don't see C-Webb playing as well or Sheed having the series of his life with Rodman there.

Phil also wanted Pippen instead of Rice which would've helped as well considering 2000 Pippen was still elite defensively and very good overall, just not quite the player he was with Chicago, but a great fit in the system.

As it is, I find it hard to believe that the Lakers won 67 games and could've gone 69-13, but Phil said they didn't see the significance of tying the franchise record. Considering they had clear weaknesses, it was their first season learning the triangle and Kobe missed the first 15 games, I'd think they'd have won 10 fewer games.

Interesting is with those long streaks, Phil said that they won early and during that 16 game streak more due to their defense and the 19 game streak later due to their offense. Goes to show the adjustment period when it comes to the triangle. Shaq himself averaged 36 ppg the last 20 games which I'm wondering if it has more to do with him getting more comfortable in the triangle or "playing his way into shape" which he seemed to do a lot, though he seemed to be in good shape to start the season.

Yeah, I pretty much agree. I think the only question would be what to do with Rodman. He was a pretty big offensive liability at that point, as he wasn't really the same offensive rebounding threat he used to be so played didn't have to stick on him in quite the same way. He also wasn't really the amazing defender he used to be either. He was still great at getting guys angry and playing mind games, but in just plain defensive terms, he was not that fantastic. He was obviously still a good player and an asset to a team, but I think he was better suited to coming off the bench so that his lack of offense wouldn't have been as big of an issue.
Also, I definitely don't think Shaq was playing into shape at all that year. That was one of maybe 3 seasons (with an emphasis on maybe) where he came in at the start of the season being at 100% in terms of conditioning.
Anyway, that team with Rodman and Jones would've been really cool to watch. I wish it would've happened.

[La Frescobaldi]

This is the exact argument I have been having for 40 years.

Wilt Chamberlain's teams could never beat the no-free-agency era Celtics teams. They were stacked, totally stacked at every single position and off the bench. No matter how great Wilt was, no matter how far above everybody else HE was, his teams were pathetically weak. Why else would a coach ever tell his team 'in order for us to win, your center has to get 50 points a game' ?? Crazy weak teams

People been calling Chamberlain a loser, a choker or whatever all these years. That's nothing but the full load. Basketball fans that know the game always knew better.

You understand that perfectly talking about the early Shaq teams.

Ya Penny was the man all right but him and Shaq had some real fall down on the job guys around them

[The Iron Fist]

Yup

Russell > Sam Jones > Horry > Jordan > Fisher/Kobe

Yup, Fisher>>>>Shaq

[ILLsmak]

As someone who was a Shaq fan and watched all of those series (without as much bias as you'd think; I have the ability to look at a situation objectively), I can say that it was never Shaq's fault when they lost.

Just like you can say with someone like MJ that it was NEVER his fault. The way things unfolded, when people are missing wide open jump shots or not giving you the ball when you should get it, or when you finally get the ball you know if you pass it they are going to mess it up, so you just force it over a double.

Nick the quick was trash. Eddie Jones was okay... he was a good spot up shooter. Glen Rice was not as good of a spot up shooter as he should have been. All Shaq needed was a player alongside him that could HIT a midrange J and box out his man. Remember, Shaq won with AC Green as his PF.

The teams Shaq had COULD have won in 95. 96-98 nobody was beating the bulls. But they could have gone further if people didn't choke. 99 was the lockout, then he won 3 in a row.

It's like this, you can take the the 11 greatest players and put them on a team with Shaq and if, in their moment, they don't do their job then they lose.

A role player operates in a small role, the ball is kicked out to role player A and nobody is guarding him. He shoots the jumper. If he makes it, he's a good role player. If the defense is closer, he has to make a decision, hit Shaq on the re-post, try to make a play himself by driving, or swing the ball. And making the WRONG decision (such as shooting it over the defense when he could have penetrated or driving only to turn the ball over by trying to do too much) is a loss. I think stats are very misleading, but if you look at the shooting percentages of the teams when Shaq lost and other things such as turnovers, they were pretty telling.

-Smak