Starting a Team: Nash/Shaq or Kobe/Ewing

[NYK 455]

Peak, Nash/Shaq by a good amount.

[Doormatt]

Peak, Nash/Shaq by a good amount.

I'm curious as to why you think it would be by "a good amount"

With shaq, one of nash's best attributes (transition/fastbreak) is greatly neutralized. He's forced into more of a half court game, where he is still very effective, but not nearly as much. Plus they are just much worse defensively. Nash doesn't even compare to Kobe, and IMO Ewing is a better defender than shaq because of his versatility.

[J08]

kobe with a good big means ring.

[Krodis]

ITT: People pretend that Nash isn't an amazing half-court player.

[tsherkin]

With shaq, one of nash's best attributes (transition/fastbreak) is greatly neutralized.

What? It was always said of Shaq basically before 03 that he was a phenomenal transition player at his position. Where have you been for the last 20 years? Or have you been around just the last 7? Seriously, Shaq played on some teams that were as fast as the blooming peak-Nash SSOL Suns when he was back in Orlando and they did pretty darn well for themselves.

He's forced into more of a half court game, where he is still very effective, but not nearly as much.

Ah, fallacy... (not the poster!)

Nash does love to play up-tempo, but people seem to love to forget that the vast majority of the games he plays and the majority of the possessions in said games more particularly, end up in the halfcourt. It's not literally pull-up three after transition layup after dunk after pull-up three the way everyone seems to imagine. He's a consummate pick-and-roll player who can dribble penetrate exceptionally well even still because of his shot and his handles and who creates very well in broken-play scenarios.

Plus they are just much worse defensively. Nash doesn't even compare to Kobe, and IMO Ewing is a better defender than shaq because of his versatility.

No, Ewing was a better defender because he was a superior shot-blocker who put more effort into defense and really relished the challenge of being a defensive stopper... and because he was a defensive player first, rather than an offensive player first.

[Doormatt]

With shaq, one of nash's best attributes (transition/fastbreak) is greatly neutralized.

What? It was always said of Shaq basically before 03 that he was a phenomenal transition player at his position. Where have you been for the last 20 years? Or have you been around just the last 7? Seriously, Shaq played on some teams that were as fast as the blooming peak-Nash SSOL Suns when he was back in Orlando and they did pretty darn well for themselves.

He's forced into more of a half court game, where he is still very effective, but not nearly as much.

Ah, fallacy... (not the poster!)

Nash does love to play up-tempo, but people seem to love to forget that the vast majority of the games he plays and the majority of the possessions in said games more particularly, end up in the halfcourt. It's not literally pull-up three after transition layup after dunk after pull-up three the way everyone seems to imagine. He's a consummate pick-and-roll player who can dribble penetrate exceptionally well even still because of his shot and his handles and who creates very well in broken-play scenarios.

Plus they are just much worse defensively. Nash doesn't even compare to Kobe, and IMO Ewing is a better defender than shaq because of his versatility.

No, Ewing was a better defender because he was a superior shot-blocker who put more effort into defense and really relished the challenge of being a defensive stopper... and because he was a defensive player first, rather than an offensive player first.

By any definition of versatile, ewing was moreso than shaq. Better shotblocker and better PnR defender, he wasnt KG versatile, but he was a better defender than shaq.


I also wasn't trying to imply Nash isn't amazing in the half court, because he is (was), but to me a lot of his damage, especially for those Phoenix teams, was in the transition/fastbreak game with an extremely athletic and agile big in amare. I remember the old school shaq, but I sure as hell don't see him running up and down, up and down, up an down, like the suns used to do for years. Shaq could definitely do it and be a beast, but I think that it would be less devastating than what a Kobe/Ewing duo could do.


The shaq I remember most was the one incapacle of being guarded by a double team and score at will. He was also a damn good passer out of the post. I think he's a more useful weapon in the half court than transition, which is really where Nash shines in this comparison.

[tihsad]

Doormat sums this up pretty nicely. Did the Shaq/Nash have a higher individual peak then Ewing/Kobe, sure, but they just don't mesh play style wise. If I'm not mistaken this was an issue when they were teammates in PHX. Nash, while competent in a half court set, shines in the full court - Shaq went half court from pretty much 97 on.

Conversely, KB and Ewing complement each other almost to a tee. A defensively capable C, willing to defer, play in the half court, and able to play strong D without massive ego issues (and no, I'm not a Kobe lover and think Shaq was the clearly better player).

It's a simple question of complementary players - sorta like MJ and Wilt would be tough.

[tsherkin]

By any definition of versatile, ewing was moreso than shaq. Better shotblocker and better PnR defender, he wasnt KG versatile, but he was a better defender than shaq.

I don't disagree that Ewing was mostly a better defender but really, he wasn't that much better at defending the PnR, and the reason he was a "better" shot-blocker is that Shaq stopped really emphasizing that element of his game after his rookie season, apart from his MVP year. "Better" implies a higher level of skill, which was not present. Ewing's approach to the game was defense-first; offense developed later in his career. It was not the same with Shaq. Diesel could turn it on well enough, which is why he shares the Finals records for blocks with Ewing. Also, in 97, 04 and 05, Shaq was a fairly similar shot-blocker to Ewing... and in 00, he had a year that was defensively comparable to almost anything Ewing managed (and his rookie year was similar). Like I said, it was as matter of effort and focus, not ability.

Year in and year out, Ewing tended to be better, but situationally, he didn't have any real abilities that Shaq didn't, unless you're talking about 04 and later Shaq, when he was in his 30s and slowing down.

Anyway, we're arguing semantics since we both agree Ewing was typically the more impactful defender on a game-to-game basis in the RS.

[quote[of his damage, especially for those Phoenix teams, was in the transition/fastbreak game with an extremely athletic and agile big in amare.[/quote]

Yeah, but that's incorrect. Most of the damage came from PnR plays with Amare and action that came out of that. Only about 25% of Phoenix's points came out of the fast break. Keep that in mind, it's an overplayed trope in discussions of Nash, just as it was in ages past of Magic and even Kidd. The guy who mostly did damage in transition was Marion, not Amare. Stoudemire was more there for the secondary break, which usually resulted in a quick pick-and-roll and really had little to do with the tempo. Most of the Suns' damage in transition was wing guys getting in there or Nash/Barbosa taking pull-up 3s.

I remember the old school shaq, but I sure as hell don't see him running up and down, up and down, up an down, like the suns used to do for years.

Right, but you're wrong because he did it. Not when he was in L.A., but when he was in Orlando absolutely. His first three years in the league, he was doing that at the same pace as the Suns were managing, 95 - 96 possessions per game. Then in 98 he was just under 94 possessions per game with the Lakers, in 00 just over 93, almost 93 again in 2003. Almost 97 with the Suns in 2008 over those last few games. 96 with the 09 Suns at the age of 36, playing 30 mpg, which pretty much shatters your basic point right there. If he could do what he did at 36 at that speed, then a decade younger, he'd tear people apart. After the first 26 games of the season, Nash was ripping it up with Shaq and their offense was terrifying, even after Amare went down. Shaq averaged around 20 ppg over the middle chunk of the season of around 50 games. 19.2 ppg over 51 games there with Nash. At 36. In 30 mpg. A good chunk of that alongside Amare. At 96 possessions per game.

Give the man the credit he deserves.

Shaq could definitely do it and be a beast, but I think that it would be less devastating than what a Kobe/Ewing duo could do.

Again, I don't disagree, just don't misrepresent what Shaq could do. The difference there is more the difference between the Kobe/Ewing chemistry working out perfectly and Kobe being >>>>> Nash defensively.

He was also a damn good passer out of the post. I think he's a more useful weapon in the half court than transition, which is really where Nash shines in this comparison.

Yes, Shaq's primary value is in the halfcourt but the Suns figured out that you could run and look for an early shot, then back off and let Shaq set up when he caught up... which is effectively what they did with Amare, just setting up for a wing PnR or a midscreen play instead of iso post for Shaq. Seven Seconds or Shaq, they called it, and they had a sky-high offensive efficiency as a result, even sans Amare.

Trust me, you're wrong in your evaluation of the Shaq/Nash dynamic. I watched it for a year and a bit with Old Shaq. Young Shaq would tear that apart.

[Rapcity_11]

Ewing/Kobe. For the reasons Tsherkin has said.

Shaq's transition play and Nash's halfcourt play are being heavily underrated by a few posters though. Just because playing together doesn't maximize their skills, they are both generational offensive talents who would manage to work well together.

[SDChargers#1]

Obviously having a prime Shaq with anyone would probably do well, never the less combining him with a future HoFer, and as you said Kobe / Ewing fit so well together. There defense would be incredible, while Shaq / Nash would struggle (especially in the pick and roll).

Also, people are underrating Ewing's peak...29/11 with 4 blocks per game and 60% TS. Honestly, that is better than anything Nash ever did pretty easily. Just because Nash has two of the weakest MVP awards ever does not make his peak better than Ewing's.

I would take

29 ppg 11 rpg 4 bpg with 60% TS
and
32 ppg 6 rpg 5 apg with 58% TS

over

30 ppg 14 rpg 4 apg 3 bpg with 58% TS (jeez I had almost forgotten just how amazing that season was)
and
19 ppg 11 apg 4 rpg with 63% TS

[Doormatt]

I'm not gonna lie, I didn't watch/see shaq on orlando so i can't comment too much.

Pretty sure I gave the man his credit, he sure as hell could be effective in transition with Nash. I just stated that Kobe/Ewing would be more devastating, mostly due to cohesion offensively, and dominance defensively.

[Shaqsquatch]

Shaq and Ewing would be an even battle when head to head for the most part. But Kobe would DEMOLISH Nash.

Wrong, Shaq owned Ewing from the start. Ewing was the first of the HOF centers to fall to Shaq. And I'm talking less than halfway through Shaqs rookie season. Dont let the stats fool you. Shaq would beast Ewing inside until Ewing started hitting 18 foot sideline jumpers. But is that where you want your HOF center - 20 feet out? Shaq was simply bigger faster stronger and more explosive. Horrible match up.

[tsherkin]

I'm not gonna lie, I didn't watch/see shaq on orlando so i can't comment too much.

Pretty sure I gave the man his credit, he sure as hell could be effective in transition with Nash. I just stated that Kobe/Ewing would be more devastating, mostly due to cohesion offensively, and dominance defensively.

And as I said, the general premise (that the Kobe/Ewing pair would be a better overall pair) is right, just don't do on the basis of Shaq's supposed inability to keep up. At opposite ends of his career, he's proven his efficacy in offenses of the speed we're discussing, so it's a moot point.

[bringinhinkie]

build around its easily kobe/ewing.. better question would be all peaked.. young/prime ewing was a monster, but prime shaq > prime ewing.. kobe it didnt take long to become a monster, nash obviously didnt peak till later on but regardless prime kobe >>> prime nash

[bringinhinkie]

I have to go with Kobe / Ewing.

They are vastly superior defensively to Shaq / Nash...VASTLY. Can you imagine how much they would get destroyed on the pick and roll. Also, with Shaq not being the most mobile center (when he was younger he was), it would hurt Nash's fast break style.

When the hell do you think the OP meant?

Do you think he meant Ewing now too? Then you are absolutely stupid for picking Kobe and a 50 year old retired superstar.

hes still got it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZEDB-0AhH8

[Slap]

Kobe/Ewing

[Sun Scorched]

Interesting. Here is the problem.

PG - Nash vs. Average
SG - Average vs. Bryant
SF - Average vs. Average
PF - Average vs. Average
C - O'Neal vs. Ewing

So what's the problem? All of the average players on Nash's team become decidedly above average playing next to Captain Canada. Christ, Nash made Earl Barron look decent in the PNR, Gortat is now an 18/11 guy.

[tsherkin]

Gortat had more talent than he was showing in Orlando, he was locked behind Dwight. Nash is helping him, to be sure, but a little more respect for his ability is in order. Not that it necessarily derails your point, I'm really just picking nits.

[Sun Scorched]

Gortat had more talent than he was showing in Orlando, he was locked behind Dwight. Nash is helping him, to be sure, but a little more respect for his ability is in order. Not that it necessarily derails your point, I'm really just picking nits.

But it sounded so much more impressive when I was intentionally downplaying is natural ability....

[tsherkin]

But it sounded so much more impressive when I was intentionally downplaying is natural ability....

Yeah but Nash stands on his own merits and in this particular thread, transparency is of importance if we're to avoid massive homerism.