Is this an All-NBA player?

[Roddy B for 3]

Boston Celtics Shaq with 75+ games health and 38MPG stamina.

Basically prime Shaq with the athleticism and mind of 2010 Shaq.

MVP favorite? All time great? Simply an all-star, you decide!

[tsherkin]

Boston Celtics Shaq with 75+ games health and 38MPG stamina.

Basically prime Shaq with the athleticism and mind of 2010 Shaq.

MVP favorite? All time great? Simply an all-star, you decide!

Boston Shaq was a roughly 16 and 8.5 player per36 in Boston for those 37 games. His defense wasn't good apart from iso-post man D. I mean, that's still a lot better than Kendrick Perkins, but it's not an MVP candidate, and probably not even an AS.

[70sFan]

I think he would be slightly better than Al Jefferson. He could make an all star, but definitely not in MVP discussion.

[tsherkin]

I think he would be slightly better than Al Jefferson. He could make an all star, but definitely not in MVP discussion.

Offensively, he WAS better than Al Jefferson if you project out the ability to stay on the floor for that many minutes over that many games. It behooves one to remember that he was shooting almost 67% from the floor and would have been scoring 16.3 PTS36 on 9.6 FTA36.

[Roddy B for 3]

I think he would be slightly better than Al Jefferson. He could make an all star, but definitely not in MVP discussion.

Offensively, he WAS better than Al Jefferson if you project out the ability to stay on the floor for that many minutes over that many games. It behooves one to remember that he was shooting almost 67% from the floor and would have been scoring 16.3 PTS36 on 9.6 FTA36.

I belive he could have an offense run through him and boost those numbers up. Excellent passing, plus brital low-post strength.

Do you think you could have a top 16 offense run though him? Do you think if engaged his defense would be good enough to be a respectable anchor, just due to his size/mind combination?

[tsherkin]

I belive he could have an offense run through him and boost those numbers up. Excellent passing, plus brital low-post strength.

Do you think you could have a top 16 offense run though him? Do you think if engaged his defense would be good enough to be a respectable anchor, just due to his size/mind combination?

Mmm. His mobility wasn't great, but if you wanted to run a slower team and pound the ball into him, one assumes that he'd still be able to give you a decent level of production, though that FG% would decline as FGA/g rose. He was shooting 55.7% at the line, which was prime level for him, and he was drawing at a strong rate of .652. Couple that with shooting a comparatively weak percentage (for him) around the rim and still shooting 71.9%, and he'd have been pretty good regardless of how his shooting rate moved (within sane tolerance).

His defense would not be good, though. His body was limiting him too much. He was never a stunner at PnR defense, but in his earlier years, he was able to be a mobile enough rim intimidator. In Boston, he was glued to the floor and really not moving around all that well. I mean, if you had some really strong perimeter defenders (like a mix of long guys with good lateral quicks and who fought over screens), then he could hang back and cover the paint... but you would really need some specific personnel.

[Winsome Gerbil]

Ok, I remember old fat Shaq well, it was kind of funny if it had not been sad.

No, not MVP. Not close to MVP or even in the conversation. As was mentioned, Per 36, which is what you were asking, this was a 16.3-8.5 guy with bad defense at that point.

But in the East could he make the All Star team? If they won, maybe he could. Be kind of like having prime Nikola Pekovic in the East. There are no dominant bigs there, so any one of the good bigs in the Conference who plays for a winner has a shot.

All NBA? Well...I wouldn't put him there, but that Third Team slot is not exactly wrapped up, and when you get down to it despite people going bonkers over him, Mark Gasol is only a 17.5pt 7.8reb guy. Shaq as a 16.3pt 8.5reb 36min a night 350lb unmoveable landmass scoring on 8 at the rim dunks a game could get considered I guess.

[Roddy B for 3]

Ok, I remember old fat Shaq well, it was kind of funny if it had not been sad.

No, not MVP. Not close to MVP or even in the conversation. As was mentioned, Per 36, which is what you were asking, this was a 16.3-8.5 guy with bad defense at that point.

But in the East could he make the All Star team? If they won, maybe he could. Be kind of like having prime Nikola Pekovic in the East. There are no dominant bigs there, so any one of the good bigs in the Conference who plays for a winner has a shot.

All NBA? Well...I wouldn't put him there, but that Third Team slot is not exactly wrapped up, and when you get down to it despite people going bonkers over him, Mark Gasol is only a 17.5pt 7.8reb guy. Shaq as a 16.3pt 8.5reb 36min a night 350lb unmoveable landmass scoring on 8 at the rim dunks a game could get considered I guess.

I don't think per36 numbers are fair. The guy i'm describing can play more than 36 mpg. Old 'Shaq couldn't even play 22mpg without wearing down.

You have to think a guy who CAN play 40+ mpg would put up better numbers in 22mpg than a guy who can BARLEY play 22. Therefore his per 36 numbers would change, making them irrelevant.

Old Shaqs numbers would be higher than his per 36 shows, due to the fact that he would be in better shape.

I belive his defense could be at the level of a bigger, stronger, meaner, way less explosive and way less quick Deandre Jordan. While the offense, with elite stamina and Shaqs size + mind could be eliteish.

[tsherkin]

I don't think per36 numbers are fair. The guy i'm describing can play more than 36 mpg. Old 'Shaq couldn't even play 22Mpg without wearing down.

You have to think a guy who can play 40+ mpg would put up better numbers in 22mpg than a guy who can just BARLEY play 22.

Old Shaqs numbers would be higher than his per 36 shows, due to the fact that he would be in better shape.

Durability doesn't actually inform anything about his quickness or other physical traits. Being able to handle the wear and tear of 36 mpg is still a very different kind of trait from the other things which helped him be as dominant as he was in his day. I don't think there's much sense to projecting HIGHER volume than his PER36 numbers indicate at all.

I mean, if you want to straight out make the hypothetical "what if 2011 Shaq could play 40 mpg," then that changes the particulars some, but only my taking the per-minute rates from his per36 numbers and stretching them out an extra 4 mpg.

[Roddy B for 3]

[url][/url]

I don't think per36 numbers are fair. The guy i'm describing can play more than 36 mpg. Old 'Shaq couldn't even play 22Mpg without wearing down.

You have to think a guy who can play 40+ mpg would put up better numbers in 22mpg than a guy who can just BARLEY play 22.

Old Shaqs numbers would be higher than his per 36 shows, due to the fact that he would be in better shape.

Durability doesn't actually inform anything about his quickness or other physical traits. Being able to handle the wear and tear of 36 mpg is still a very different kind of trait from the other things which helped him be as dominant as he was in his day. I don't think there's much sense to projecting HIGHER volume than his PER36 numbers indicate at all.

I mean, if you want to straight out make the hypothetical "what if 2011 Shaq could play 40 mpg," then that changes the particulars some, but only my taking the per-minute rates from his per36 numbers and stretching them out an extra 4 mpg.

I feel your looking at durability in a vaccum, I'm changing his durability from poor to elite. That means his production (even at 22mpg) will change.

Shaq couldn't go hard for those 22mpg, evidenced by the fact he missed so many games. Hypothetical Shaq could go hard for 36-40 mpg. What I really want to know is, how well could someone with that size, body, mind, skills and physical limitations do.. With the drive of PEAK Shaq and elite stamina + durability.

[Dr Positivity]

Well getting 38mpg out of a C without production dropping is a lot so that helps. Someone mentioned Pek which is a good comparison but even he wasn't even close to 38. Overall I think he could have an all-star season like he did in Phoenix one with less production per minute, but more minutes. Old Shaq remains a concern on defense

[Winsome Gerbil]

[url][/url]

I don't think per36 numbers are fair. The guy i'm describing can play more than 36 mpg. Old 'Shaq couldn't even play 22Mpg without wearing down.

You have to think a guy who can play 40+ mpg would put up better numbers in 22mpg than a guy who can just BARLEY play 22.

Old Shaqs numbers would be higher than his per 36 shows, due to the fact that he would be in better shape.

Durability doesn't actually inform anything about his quickness or other physical traits. Being able to handle the wear and tear of 36 mpg is still a very different kind of trait from the other things which helped him be as dominant as he was in his day. I don't think there's much sense to projecting HIGHER volume than his PER36 numbers indicate at all.

I mean, if you want to straight out make the hypothetical "what if 2011 Shaq could play 40 mpg," then that changes the particulars some, but only my taking the per-minute rates from his per36 numbers and stretching them out an extra 4 mpg.

I feel your looking at durability in a vaccum, I'm changing his durability from poor to elite. That means his production (even at 22mpg) will change.

Shaq couldn't go hard for those 22mpg, evidenced by the fact he missed so many games. Hypothetical Shaq could go hard for 36-40 mpg. What I really want to know is, how well could someone with that size, body, mind, skills and physical limitations do.. With the drive of PEAK Shaq and elite stamina + durability.

At a certain point you aren't even talking about the same player though. it becomes "what if 2011 Shaq wasn't fat, wasn't worn down by injuries, and had the stamina he did at 30". At which point you are kind of asking how 30 year old Shaq would have done instead of 38yr old Shaq.

38 year old Shaq was huge, HUGE, fat, slow and lumbering. He got winded quickly. He was also probably the most powerful creature ever to step on an NBA floor. I watched a game he played against a young Cousins and Boogie just bounced off him like he was little kid. But Shaq was really really fat and could not move anymore. That defined his limitations. If we take all that away, say what if he wasn't fat, injured, old, limited by any of those things...well, different player.

[tsherkin]

I feel your looking at durability in a vaccum, I'm changing his durability from poor to elite. That means his production (even at 22mpg) will change.

Shaq couldn't go hard for those 22mpg, evidenced by the fact he missed so many games. Hypothetical Shaq could go hard for 36-40 mpg. What I really want to know is, how well could someone with that size, body, mind, skills and physical limitations do.. With the drive of PEAK Shaq and elite stamina + durability.

You need to understand that improving his stamina and durability doesn't change his footspeed, nor does it alter his lift. These are things which contributed to his youthful dominance.

Yes, his production would change. Shaq as he was in 2011 was an 18.1 PTS40, 9.5 REB40 player. He was humongous, was way slow chugging up and down the court, the weakest he'd been at any point in his career on the offensive glass and all of what he was doing was happening on the basis of his low-usage occupation of the low block. He was getting over 83% of his shots inside of 3 feet because he was shooting less than 10 times per game and cranking out nearly 81% of his buckets as assisted buckets.

That helps you understand some of his production, and his projected production over more minutes, and over more isolations and so forth. You're also forgetting that lumbering Old Shaq was averaging 6.4 fouls per 40 minutes.

This is another thing you've failed to account for: as an older guy with diminished footspeed and explosion, he was fouling the CRAP out of people on the defensive end. He would, on average, foul out over 40 minutes. That was also a heavy limitation on his game, and one which stamina/durability would not at all improve. Most of them were not offensive fouls: he had 120 fouls on the season and only 13 of them were offensive fouls. 73 of them were shooting fouls, though, and obviously the rest were various defensive fouls. Hack, hack, hack, hack. He couldn't D up anymore because he was too glacially slow, calcifying beneath the rim like Houston Mutombo.

So again, the odds of his production dramatically differing from his PER36 numbers are quite limited for a fairly broad variety of reasons, not the least of which would be his great difficulty even staying ON the court for that long as a result of foul trouble.

Understand, Shaq could finish inside of 3 feet still, and he still had a reasonable amount of touch on his hook shots, but he just couldn't handle things on the other end of the floor anymore. Magically improving his stamina and durability wouldn't even change that a little bit. Fatigue was not his issue on the defensive side of the floor.

[Roddy B for 3]

I feel your looking at durability in a vaccum, I'm changing his durability from poor to elite. That means his production (even at 22mpg) will change.

Shaq couldn't go hard for those 22mpg, evidenced by the fact he missed so many games. Hypothetical Shaq could go hard for 36-40 mpg. What I really want to know is, how well could someone with that size, body, mind, skills and physical limitations do.. With the drive of PEAK Shaq and elite stamina + durability.

You need to understand that improving his stamina and durability doesn't change his footspeed, nor does it alter his lift. These are things which contributed to his youthful dominance.

Yes, his production would change. Shaq as he was in 2011 was an 18.1 PTS40, 9.5 REB40 player. He was humongous, was way slow chugging up and down the court, the weakest he'd been at any point in his career on the offensive glass and all of what he was doing was happening on the basis of his low-usage occupation of the low block. He was getting over 83% of his shots inside of 3 feet because he was shooting less than 10 times per game and cranking out nearly 81% of his buckets as assisted buckets.

That helps you understand some of his production, and his projected production over more minutes, and over more isolations and so forth. You're also forgetting that lumbering Old Shaq was averaging 6.4 fouls per 40 minutes.

This is another thing you've failed to account for: as an older guy with diminished footspeed and explosion, he was fouling the CRAP out of people on the defensive end. He would, on average, foul out over 40 minutes. That was also a heavy limitation on his game, and one which stamina/durability would not at all improve. Most of them were not offensive fouls: he had 120 fouls on the season and only 13 of them were offensive fouls. 73 of them were shooting fouls, though, and obviously the rest were various defensive fouls. Hack, hack, hack, hack. He couldn't D up anymore because he was too glacially slow, calcifying beneath the rim like Houston Mutombo.

So again, the odds of his production dramatically differing from his PER36 numbers are quite limited for a fairly broad variety of reasons, not the least of which would be his great difficulty even staying ON the court for that long as a result of foul trouble.

Understand, Shaq could finish inside of 3 feet still, and he still had a reasonable amount of touch on his hook shots, but he just couldn't handle things on the other end of the floor anymore. Magically improving his stamina and durability wouldn't even change that a little bit. Fatigue was not his issue on the defensive side of the floor.

I don't doubt that he would be weak defensivley, but if he was the focus of the teams offense (instead of a bench player) the coach (+ Shaq) would skem a way to keep Shaq out of foul trouble (Al Jefferson style).

I am not attempting to change Shaqs foot speed or his vertical. I am asking what would PEAK 38 year old Shaq look like over a full season.

If you look at the high lights of Celtic Shaq you will see a very usefull (potentially star) player. Now imagine instead of him being worn down but a big dunk he got up the way Boogie does.

I think of Celtic Shaq with PEAK Shaq durability and stamina as a offensive anchor on a playoff team. A more powerfull Al Jefferson with Joakim Noah post passing instead of black holeness. And similar defensive deficiencies.

I would rank the centers:
Boogie Cousins
Marc Gasol
Healthy Dwight
Old "PEAK" Shaq
Healthy Noah
Pau Gasol

[tsherkin]

I don't doubt that he would be weak defensivley, but if he was the focus of the teams offense (instead of a bench player) the coach (+ Shaq) would skem a way to keep Shaq out of foul trouble (Al Jefferson style).

No, he wouldn't. The Celtics weren't using any kind of focal defensive scheme and he still couldn't do anything but hack at guys near the rim. There would be no scheme for that: he didn't have the footspeed to move around and be any kind of net positive on D. THere's not really much getting around it.

I am not attempting to change Shaqs foot speed or his vertical. I am asking what would PEAK 38 year old Shaq look like over a full season.

And you're getting your answer.

If you look at the high lights of Celtic Shaq you will see a very usefull (potentially star) player. Now imagine instead of him being worn down but a big dunk he got up the way Boogie does.

That's what you're missing: you wouldn't get that, at all.

I think of Celtic Shaq with PEAK Shaq durability and stamina as a offensive anchor on a playoff team. A more powerfull Al Jefferson with Joakim Noah post passing instead of black holeness. And similar defensive deficiencies.

And you're fairly off-base in this regard.

[Roddy B for 3]

I don't doubt that he would be weak defensivley, but if he was the focus of the teams offense (instead of a bench player) the coach (+ Shaq) would skem a way to keep Shaq out of foul trouble (Al Jefferson style).

No, he wouldn't. The Celtics weren't using any kind of focal defensive scheme and he still couldn't do anything but hack at guys near the rim. There would be no scheme for that: he didn't have the footspeed to move around and be any kind of net positive on D. THere's not really much getting around it.

I am not attempting to change Shaqs foot speed or his vertical. I am asking what would PEAK 38 year old Shaq look like over a full season.

And you're getting your answer.

If you look at the high lights of Celtic Shaq you will see a very usefull (potentially star) player. Now imagine instead of him being worn down but a big dunk he got up the way Boogie does.

That's what you're missing: you wouldn't get that, at all.

I think of Celtic Shaq with PEAK Shaq durability and stamina as a offensive anchor on a playoff team. A more powerfull Al Jefferson with Joakim Noah post passing instead of black holeness. And similar defensive deficiencies.

And you're fairly off-base in this regard.

You don't think old shaq could be a offensive force just because of his size + skills?

[tsherkin]

You don't think old shaq could be a offensive force just because of his size + skills?

Not particularly. He was good enough on offense in some ways even in that final year; we saw what he was doing on a per-minute basis, after all. But there's a real difference between what that means and being an offensive titan. The guy couldn't move his feet or get up off of the ground, and that's majorly important. The quickness wasn't there, the explosion, the ability to run in transition. There is a lot more to being good in the league than just not getting injured and being able to handle the minutes, the more so when you can't fall back on a J.

2011 Shaq with durability and stamina would be good, but it wouldn't change how much he'd regressed as an offensive rebounder, how foul-prone he was, how SLOW he was, and so forth.

[JohnWall2]

If he had elite level stamina do we assume he was also in much better shape and therefore probably a bit more mobile and quicker? He was pretty good in Phoenix but that was with their get training staff, Shaq himself said that.

I thought when Shaq played in Boston and was somewhat healthy that was a really good team. That starting lineup of Rondo, Allen, PP, KG and Shaq worked a treat when they were all together on the court and thats why Boston felt comfortable trading Perk. The fact that Shaq pretty much strait after the Perk trade couldn't get back on the court lead to that team's demise.