RealGM

After reading through the "When was Jordan considered the best?" thread, it got me thinking. Even though I myself accept MJ as basketball's personal lord and savior, deep within the recesses of my soul, I know that I would still take a team with prime Shaq over a team with prime Jordan all else being equal.

Even though we all sit around and suck GOAT balls, can you REALLY look at yourself in the mirror and say you would take MJ over the ABSOLUTE UNTAMED MONSTER that was prime Shaq?







Please.......Don't kid yourself

prime Shaq is the greatest player in basketball history.

no

only if shaq had MJs work ethic!

There's no telling what Prime Shaq. In Orlando, he was at his physical peak, yet he didn't bring trophies. In LA he was a fat ass, and regarded as the most dominant center of all time.

I'll take the one who I can't just foul at the end of the game.

Pancho_Pantera wrote:There's no telling what Prime Shaq. In Orlando, he was at his physical peak, yet he didn't bring trophies. In LA he was a fat ass, and regarded as the most dominant center of all time.

That fat kinda helped, because then there was NO WAY you could hold him.

Depends. If all things are equal, does MJ get to face absolute scrubs at his position too?

i'd still take MJ

Shaq clearly had enough work ethic.

There's certainly a case to be made for taking Prime Shaq over any other player. He was a completely ridiculous killing machine, and utterly unstoppable. However, so was Jordan in his prime; his peak TS% was higher than Shaq's, and that's basically why you'd take Shaq, no? Jordan was actually a more efficient scorer at his peak, and his perimeter defense was better than Shaq's interior defense. The only real argument you can make is that Shaq's rebounding, coupled with the ridiculous scoring ability, offsets MJ's advantages in other areas (including playmaking).

So while I have the utmost respect for Shaq, and would probably place him, in his prime, as the #2 best player of all time (with apologies to Wilt).

mitchweber wrote:I'll take the one who I can't just foul at the end of the game.

It

MJ no doubt...

Not only he brings you championship, he also brings you huge $$$...

Well the thing is that a Prime Shaq had injury concerns... and how long was his absolute prime? MJ had none of these concerns and could close out games and wasn't a liability at the end of games.

Bill Russell

As, great as Prime-Shaq was, he's only won 4 titles. (as if winning 1 title isn't hard enough, I know!)

But, there is still something about MJ that can't push me the other way, and I'm not sure what it is....

Paydro70 wrote:Shaq clearly had enough work ethic.

There's certainly a case to be made for taking Prime Shaq over any other player. He was a completely ridiculous killing machine, and utterly unstoppable. However, so was Jordan in his prime; his peak TS% was higher than Shaq's, and that's basically why you'd take Shaq, no? Jordan was actually a more efficient scorer at his peak, and his perimeter defense was better than Shaq's interior defense. The only real argument you can make is that Shaq's rebounding, coupled with the ridiculous scoring ability, offsets MJ's advantages in other areas (including playmaking).

So while I have the utmost respect for Shaq, and would probably place him, in his prime, as the #2 best player of all time (with apologies to Wilt).

Thats the whole point. You could double the ball out of Jordans hands to a wide open Paxson. But with Shaq, THERE IS NOTHING YOU CAN DO.

Still take MJ.

Prime Shaq was great, probably the second best of all time. But prime MJ was unstoppable, he was Kobe, but better at every aspect of the game, he always won the games that counted, and he always came up huge.

Flash3 wrote:As, great as Prime-Shaq was, he's only won 4 titles. (as if winning 1 title isn't hard enough, I know!)

But, there is still something about MJ that can't push me the other way, and I'm not sure what it is....

I think that is a very underrated point... Shaq has a peer in TD in the same era that has perhaps just as good of a resume. There is no peer to compare MJ to, and I think that says alot about MJ.

Flash3 wrote:As, great as Prime-Shaq was, he's only won 4 titles. (as if winning 1 title isn't hard enough, I know!)

But, there is still something about MJ that can't push me the other way, and I'm not sure what it is....

It

Mike wouldn't be doing this to Shaq








For all the crap Shaq takes about facing no elite big men. Jordan never faced any elite big men in the playoff's either and yeah Ewing don't count.....