94 & 95 Shaq on the 94 & 95 Rockets

[SHAQ32]

I really don't think that's a good argument. Shaq was more mobile in Orlando, but his fundamentals were even worse and his engagement was also very questionable.

I don't think there are many (if any) reasons to believe that Shaq didn't peak defensively in LA.

Mobility trumps fundamentals when it comes to Centers guarding the perimeter. You can have all the experience and fundamentals, but if you don't have the mobility, or in Shaq's case, massively overweight, it doesn't matter.

And Shaq might have peaked, on paper, defensively in 2000, but that's because he had a much better defensive cast and coaching. And the league in general was more defensive oriented during that era - teams were struggling to score 95 points. But most people that were watching the NBA in the early 90s will tell you otherwise - those were the years where Shaq was more engaged defensively. Those were the years where he was diving for loose balls, and giving it all that he had.

Even when he was younger and more lean in Orlando that wavered. On the biggest stage possible in Game 4 of the Finals Bill Walton commentating rightfully said during the game: "Shaq has not been effective in transition in the Finals".

His 1 on 1 defense on Hakeem was very good in the series, but lethargic in terms of getting back off of missed shots and fastbreaks by Houston or defending outside of the paint.

Inexcusable given it was the Finals and he was on the younger team on average age wise.

Bill Walton was a known Shaq-Hater.

[AEnigma]

Guess Shaq’s coach hated him too.

I want to mention that Orlando (including Shaq) played horrible transition defense in this series. It was a major reason why they lost this series and since Shaq was one of the guys not hustling back on defense, this is something Shaq can be criticized for.

The quote below is Orlando's reasoning for why they lost game 2:

The Magic viewed films of its Game 2 debacle yesterday, and while the failure to double-team Olajuwon in certain situations was scrutinized, everyone was in agreement as to where the problem lies. Transition defense, they believe, is the key.
"As we viewed the tapes, we kept seeing the same thing: no one getting back," Rollins said. "I don't know. You look at Houston. Sometimes, I don't think any of us are giving them enough credit. They've beaten all the teams with the best records in the playoffs."

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19950611&slug=2125909" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Brian Hill asked about Shaq's transition defense:

When the coach of the Houston Rockets speaks about half-court offense and floor spacing and "running with a purpose," people write it down and nod their heads. When everyone's opinion is suddenly that you could very well be a genius, the hard thing to do is avoid agreeing with it.
"Anybody can have a philosophy and a game plan," Tomjanovich said. "Getting players to believe it, that's the important part."
Like getting your star to run back on defense? Hill was asked how he suggests that maybe Shaquille O'Neal should do more of that. "Very carefully and with great thought," said Hill.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1995-06-14/sports/9506140014_1_orlando-s-brian-hill-sam-houston-rudy-tomjanovich" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Below is a journalist being critical of Shaq's defense. He counted 8 pts at the minimum where Houston scored with Shaq not getting back and this is just for game 3.

The obvious difference between Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O’Neal is that Olajuwon is art and O’Neal is craft.
Another one is that Olajuwon runs back on defense.
While the first is why Houston is aesthetically superior to Orlando, the second is why the Rockets are leading the Magic by three games to none in the NBA Finals.
“Transition,” said Orlando coach Brian Hill. “Again they beat us in transition.”
For the casually curious watching at home, and there should be less and less now that this thing has all the suspense of an execution, let me explain what transition is. That is when you see everybody running to one side of the television screen. Then they kind of all slow down and throw the ball around. Eventually coming into the picture will be No. 32 of Orlando. Maybe not.
This is because the Magic will inconsiderately run down the floor before O’Neal is ready to join them.
Sometimes O’Neal does not even play with his own teammates, allowing them to go four on five.
I counted at least eight points scored by Houston because O’Neal was still on the other side of halfcourt when he should have been back on defense.

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/1995/jun/12/while-shaq-slacks-houston-rockets-toward-title/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I believe this is purely a case of lackadaisical effort on Shaq's part because I vividly remember a couple of plays where he actually beat Hakeem down the floor for a transition bucket but on defense, he didn't nearly exert as much energy although you can certainly argue had he exerted more energy, that could've wore him down on offense. This issue isn't just relegated to Hakeem beating Shaq in transition either but rather the entire team could also take advantage of this. Obviously, not every transition bucket for Houston can be attributed to Shaq not getting back since Shaq is standing in the paint and there were some turnovers/bad shots Houston forced from the perimeter and were able to quickly get in the open court so that's something the perimeter players should be held accountable for. However, there were definitely a number of plays where Houston did take advantage of the fact that Shaq did not get back in the appropriate time.

Just a couple of examples:

5:38 mark in the video below. Chucky Brown was Shaq's man at this point in this game and you'll notice, Brown and Shaq are essentially side by side when Houston gets possession of the ball. However, you'll notice Brown outruns Shaq and is able to get putback after the Houston miss. The rest of the Magic aren't playing good transition defense either but Shaq certainly isn't holding up his end of the bargain.

Watch on YouTube

2:40 mark in the video below. Drexler takes advantage of the fact that Shaq isn't getting and is able to get to lane without any rim protection. This link has Spanish commentary but on the English broadcast, Matt Guokas says, Shaquille not getting back on defense, Drexler recognized it, took it right to the hole, nobody to challenge his shot.

Watch on YouTube

Another point I have to mention, albeit it is minor, is that Shaq's unwillingness to box out hurt Orlando on a few possessions since his man was able sneak in and get a second chance opportunity. I could point to specific examples if you want me to. I can recall about 3-4 instances. Shaq often did not box out and relied more on his physical attributes which was fine since his presence took up so much space in the middle and he was a good rebounder but it could allow for OREB opportunities for his man. This is something both Walton and Guokas mentioned at some point in the series. It didn't hurt them a lot because Shaq was guarding Hakeem for the most part and Hakeem often chose to get back on defense rather than attack the offensive glass since he was often positioned on the perimeter. Hakeem actually did a pretty great job at boxing Shaq out in games 2-4 of the series after having some trouble due to often face-guarding him in game 1. He changed his strategy after game 1 and you'll notice Shaq didn't really have his usual big series on the offensive glass. Shaq only had a 6.8 OREB% in the 1995 finals, the lowest of any playoff series in his Magic or Laker years. This is keeping in mind that 1995 was one of Shaq's best years on the offensive glass and up to the finals, he was averaging a whopping 16.2 OREB%. Also, Shaq got quite a few OREBs when Hakeem went to help/block a shot; against Hakeem alone, Shaq either had 3 or 4 OREBs. This is something that the box score won't necessarily show since Hakeem boxing out Shaq often meant he won't be the one able to get the DREB. Although, in a way, you can see it in Shaq's relatively low OREB numbers. Another thing to note is that Hakeem boxing out Shaq meant the Houston perimeter players could get the DREB and get out in transition and along with Orlando's awful transition defense, this allowed them to be successful in the open court.

4:56 mark in the video below. Bill Walton: And again, Hakeem forced to block out, rather than grab that rebound himself.

Watch on YouTube

Shaq did change a few shots in the lane as well but he was also late on his rotations on a few occasions and I can remember a couple of instances where Guokas talked about it

[FuShengTHEGreat]

Bill Walton was a known Shaq-Hater.

His own coach who called him out for this.....during the series was a Shaq hater too huh?

[SHAQ32]

Watch on YouTube

January 16 1993

20 year old Shaquille O'Neal completely controls the painted area, offense and defense, for the Orlando Magic en route to an overtime victory against the Chicago Bulls. O'Neal would finish with 29 points, 24 rebounds, and 5 blocks, completely dominating the reigning and future champ's combination of centers, Bill Cartwright and Will Perdue. Before the days of Dennis Rodman, the Bulls had real problems with Shaq and other big men. Shaq looked like a bully out there, except they both are around 10 years his elder.

[70sFan]

You're thinking of the wrong Shaq.

I really don't think that's a good argument. Shaq was more mobile in Orlando, but his fundamentals were even worse and his engagement was also very questionable.

I don't think there are many (if any) reasons to believe that Shaq didn't peak defensively in LA.

Mobility trumps fundamentals when it comes to Centers guarding the perimeter. You can have all the experience and fundamentals, but if you don't have the mobility, or in Shaq's case, massively overweight, it doesn't matter.

And Shaq might have peaked, on paper, defensively in 2000, but that's because he had a much better defensive cast and coaching. And the league in general was more defensive oriented during that era - teams were struggling to score 95 points. But most people that were watching the NBA in the early 90s will tell you otherwise - those were the years where Shaq was more engaged defensively. Those were the years where he was diving for loose balls, and giving it all that he had.

That's exactly why 40 years old Duncan playing on one leg was better defender than any version of Shaq.

[Ol Roy]

Bill Walton was a known Shaq-Hater.

You mean, he was in a long line of people whose criticism Shaq, always a petty person with a fragile ego, decided to take personally.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

Bill Walton was a known Shaq-Hater.

You mean, he was in a long line of people whose criticism Shaq, always a petty person with a fragile ego, decided to take personally.

It's a cop out to save face for not admitting something others even his own coach called him out for.

The beef with Walton didn't even really start with Shaq until the comments about him in Miami but he was always a Shaq hater? Lol

Bill Walton did that memorable commercial with Shaq when he was in Orlando, there was definitely no ill will between them in the 90s.

[OhayoKD]

Obviously they don't win, you have to give Hakeem his credit as the anchor for those 2 years, but 'holy Shaq insecurities' by many of the posters here

Prooo-jecccc-tioooooon

[OhayoKD]

I really don't think that's a good argument. Shaq was more mobile in Orlando, but his fundamentals were even worse and his engagement was also very questionable.

I don't think there are many (if any) reasons to believe that Shaq didn't peak defensively in LA.

Mobility trumps fundamentals when it comes to Centers guarding the perimeter. You can have all the experience and fundamentals, but if you don't have the mobility, or in Shaq's case, massively overweight, it doesn't matter.

And Shaq might have peaked, on paper, defensively in 2000, but that's because he had a much better defensive cast and coaching. And the league in general was more defensive oriented during that era - teams were struggling to score 95 points. But most people that were watching the NBA in the early 90s will tell you otherwise - those were the years where Shaq was more engaged defensively. Those were the years where he was diving for loose balls, and giving it all that he had.

That's exactly why 40 years old Duncan playing on one leg was better defender than any version of Shaq.

Bill Walton was extremely gracious and patient towards Shaq. Very wierd approach lol. One of if not the most wholesome figure in the sport.

[OhayoKD]

I really don't think that's a good argument. Shaq was more mobile in Orlando, but his fundamentals were even worse and his engagement was also very questionable.

I don't think there are many (if any) reasons to believe that Shaq didn't peak defensively in LA.

Mobility trumps fundamentals when it comes to Centers guarding the perimeter. You can have all the experience and fundamentals, but if you don't have the mobility, or in Shaq's case, massively overweight, it doesn't matter.

And Shaq might have peaked, on paper, defensively in 2000, but that's because he had a much better defensive cast and coaching. And the league in general was more defensive oriented during that era - teams were struggling to score 95 points. But most people that were watching the NBA in the early 90s will tell you otherwise - those were the years where Shaq was more engaged defensively. Those were the years where he was diving for loose balls, and giving it all that he had.

That's exactly why 40 years old Duncan playing on one leg was better defender than any version of Shaq.

Do you have any tracking regarding lakers shaq and orlando shaq in terms of paint-protection?

[MacGill]

Obviously they don't win, you have to give Hakeem his credit as the anchor for those 2 years, but 'holy Shaq insecurities' by many of the posters here

Prooo-jecccc-tioooooon

Luv it, man! You're dedicated to your craft! You'll be in the Klutch HOF some day!

Modern NBA FTW

[70sFan]

Mobility trumps fundamentals when it comes to Centers guarding the perimeter. You can have all the experience and fundamentals, but if you don't have the mobility, or in Shaq's case, massively overweight, it doesn't matter.

And Shaq might have peaked, on paper, defensively in 2000, but that's because he had a much better defensive cast and coaching. And the league in general was more defensive oriented during that era - teams were struggling to score 95 points. But most people that were watching the NBA in the early 90s will tell you otherwise - those were the years where Shaq was more engaged defensively. Those were the years where he was diving for loose balls, and giving it all that he had.

That's exactly why 40 years old Duncan playing on one leg was better defender than any version of Shaq.

Do you have any tracking regarding lakers shaq and orlando shaq in terms of paint-protection?

No, only Lakers Shaq.

[henshao]

The Rockets obviously lose a great deal on defense, how much is debatable but even lost-a-step Hakeem is in contention for greatest defensive player of all time before you even consider what Shaq does or doesn't bring (easy to forget there is more to it than disrupted shots). But what about offense? O'neal is considered the better player on this side, scoring-wise this is easy to see with +volume at +efficiency. But there's more to offense than low-post scoring at a generational rate.

[OhayoKD]

The Rockets obviously lose a great deal on defense, how much is debatable but even lost-a-step Hakeem is in contention for greatest defensive player of all time before you even consider what Shaq does or doesn't bring (easy to forget there is more to it than disrupted shots). But what about offense? O'neal is considered the better player on this side, scoring-wise this is easy to see with +volume at +efficiency. But there's more to offense than low-post scoring at a generational rate.

Bill Russell literally was more valuable than anyone in nba history on defense alone...

[bkkrh]

The Magic win

N. Anderson and D. Scott weren't clutch like K. Smith, M. Elie and R. Horry

Luckily for the Magic the 2 other starters on their team were Penny Hardaway and Horace Grant^^.

[Owly]

Answer depends on what the question is.

Is there an assumption of making the finals baked in.

As a referendum on the players it isn't great because, at whatever level we're starting from (finals births locked in or not) the Rocket's IRL outcomes - (with or without the specific player[here Olajuwon]'s subsequent standard of play locked in) weren't certain so so - even just comparing them in the context of particular series one should probably think of it in terms of shifting of percentages.

In terms of how they happened to play in the '95 series my impression off boxscore and stuff posted on here is Shaq may have played HO at least even and a fair chunk of Orlando's relatively small (given the sweep) negative differential was done in time he was off the court (and ditto the inverse for Olajuwon). Though that stuff didn't tend to focus on help D as far as I can recall where Olajuwon might typically be expected to have an advantage.

There's a possibility resetting at the start of the season Shaq helps Houston's probability without being" better" by being more available in '95 and giving his team an easier route.

There's also the chance that with original or swapped teams, teams don't make the final that did IRL.

Orlando only outscored Indy by 2 in the ECF (4-3, both sides have seemingly flippable games: Magic wins by 5, 4 and 2; Pacers wins by 5 and 1).

Rockets outscore:
Spurs by 10 ('95 WCF)
Suns by 3 ('95 WCSF)
fwiw, even versus Jazz where the margin is a healthier 20 over 5 games it came down to a game 5 and whilst not the closest game (Jazz won G1 by 2) Houston win by 4 there ...

and were outscored in the '94 finals by 5.

That is to say it wouldn't require much change, including perhaps none in the exchanged players notionally assessed, for the title to go elsewhere.

The Magic win

N. Anderson and D. Scott weren't clutch like K. Smith, M. Elie and R. Horry

Luckily for the Magic the 2 other starters on their team were Penny Hardaway and Horace Grant^^.

Fwiw I think this is a shorthand (somewhat flawed) way of comparing the shooters/shooting/shooting luck of the two teams ... it's incomplete either way without Shaw and Hardaway and Cassell and Drexler ...

But it's not so far of as an approximation of the most frequent 3pt firers.

If it were an attempt to account for supporting cast in the sense of "superstardom", player goodness in the playoffs, player goodness in the series not just Penny on the one side but Drexler on the other would be glaring omissions ... so I don't think it was about that.

Scott in particular was brutal but kept playing 38mpg (far above his RS mpg) because Orlando's main RS starter, Donald Royal, who played marginally more mpg (though it's kind of a shared job DR: 26.3mpg, 1841 total mins over 70g; DS: 24.2mpg, 1499 tot mins, 62 games) blasted his way out of the playoff rotation in earlier rounds: 2.6PER, -0.052WS/48, -7.7BPM. No one player decides a series and the "clutch" label isn't always helpful, as such whilst I think I understand why Scott's (and Anderson's) performance is brought up, a more comprehensive view of the teams would indeed have been a better prism to understand how - and particularly the context in which - the two players performed.