RayBan-Sematra wrote:RSCD3_ wrote:RBS are you in this project?
Not currently.
I have been super busy recently and mentally I am burned out.
I find it hard to gather my thoughts and formulate good posts when I am tired like this.
I know you frequently compare Shaq to other bigs but curious why ( assumedly ) you would have peak Shaq over Jordan.
I can try and explain though now is not a good time for it.
Anyway.
A big part of why I rank Shaq higher is rebounding & defense.
Peak Jordan might have been an equal or even slightly superior offensive anchor but I don't think his defensive impact in the early 90's was close to what Shaq could/did give you at his Peak (2000).
Same gos for any version of Lebron. I cringe when I see some people semi-insinuating that Lebron might have had the kind of defensive impact Shaq was having in 2000. He never even came close in my opinion.
That isn't a knock on MJ or Bron its just that no wing or guard is ever gonna come close to having the defensive impact of a legit DPOY C (which Shaq was in 2000).
Consider that O'neal dragged a pretty mediocre cast to 67 wins out West and made them the best defensive team despite Kobe missing 16 games and not starting in another 4 upon his return.
LAL's defense actually improved during Bryant's absence and really outside of Kobe that team didn't exactly have any great defenders.
Harper & Green were "ok defenders" (per my memory) but both were already 36 years old and well past their physical Primes.
They also only played 23-25mpg.
Rice wasn't a good defender and he was the only guy outside of Shaq/Kobe playing 30+ mpg.
Then you factor in Shaq's ultra elite rebounding and yeah I do think his overall impact was greater then Jordan's.
He gave you similar offensive value + dominant rebounding + DPOY caliber defense at the C position.
He also had many unique intangibles like the black hole effect he had on defenses and the high level of defensive attention he drew off the ball.
As his defender you couldn't give him any breathing room or he'd immediately react & get open for an easy catch & finish or an alley-oop.
Even if you had defenders in the paint if you gave him room to "take off" he could just dunk over them.
He was just so deadly and unstoppable. Like a man among boys or a cheat code.
Being the most unstoppable & consistent scorer ever from the field is not without its advantages.
Opposing teams around the league were stockpiling bigs just to foul him with because he was so unstoppable.
They were basically waving the white flag at him.
I don't think there is any player I would take over 00 or 01 Shaq.
Absolute Peak MJ is really the only guy I wouldn't mind seeing ranked ahead of him currently.
There is no way I would take any version of Lebron over Peak Shaq. No.
You certainly like Shaq but you go way too far to make a point going his way.
So LeBron or MJ can't have the same impact on D as a C. So far so good, but there is a need to adjust per position.
That's like saying: Shaq was never half the ball handler LeBron or MJ were. Yeah he wasn't, and I mean, he shouldn't. It's dangerous to evaluate players of diferent positions without any kind of context.
MJ and LeBron were both elite defenders at their position. Both very quick, both rotating well, Jordan a better gambler, LeBron a better transition defender (probably GOAT in that regard). I don't consider LeBron's peak 12 or 13, but many people do. So here is another one: how many teams had a SF protecting the middle of their D and winning a championship? I think no other did that.
LeBron and Jordan were elite at their positions, and Shaq, while very good and a fantastic rim protector, still had some problems with his pick&roll defense.
Another thing: LeBron and MJ have more APG than Shaq. Maybe it's just natural with the position, don't you think? Or should we say Shaq was not a good passer? (he actually was, fantastic passer out of the post, but by your logic he could have never been at the level of LeBron or MJ in the playmaking department).
Evaluating players requires adjustment per position. I won't hurt CP3 (for example) for not protecting the rim because that can't be his job, and I certainly won't hurt Tim Duncan for not shooting 3 pointers (again, not his job).
Now that this is out of the question, you want to create a myth about the 00 LAL team not having a good enough supporting cast. This is not even close to being true. That team was very good in every single department, and please don't come with PPG averages to justify that. The things that make a supporting cast strong are: they can provide you impact in a ton of areas. They can defend, spread the floor, create shots, provide diferent types of solutions, etc. And the Lakers had it all. Cleveland 09 didn't, or even Heat 12 or 13.
Rim protection - Shaq
Shot creators - Shaq, Kobe
Spreading the floor - Fisher, Kobe, Horry, Rice, Fox
Man to man post defenders - Shaq, Green
Great perimeter defenders - Horry, Kobe, Harper, Fox
Great coaching - PJ
Ability to make diferent lineups - switch Harper and Fisher and you get totally diferent things. Fox as a great defender at SF, Rice as an elite floor spacer. Green providing a bigger lineup, that can be even bigger with Horry at SF. Horry providing the stretch PF. There is every possible solution.
There is no single area where the Lakers are flawed.
If you look into the 09 Cavs they lack rim protection and elite shot creation besides LeBron. If you look into the Heat squads they lack rim protectors and have rebounding issues. Their coaching (specially Cle 09) is not even close to the Lakers 00. Everything counts.
I'm sorry but the cast argument is just as false as it gets. The 00 Lakers was a much better team than the 09 Cavs, 12 or 13 Heat.
“These guys have been criticized the last few years for not getting to where we’re going, but I’ve always said that the most important thing in sports is to keep trying. Let this be an example of what it means to say it’s never over.” - Jerry Sloan
