RealGM

I feel like Shaq can be argued anywhere from about 4-10. I put him at about 5-7 myself. I think it depends on how good you think he was from 94-99, how good he was defensively and how much you want to penalize him for his health issues and possibly his leadership/intangibles which were ok but not really great imo.

I've got Shaq at 7 overall on what is my GOAT Tier II sandwiched as such:

Olajuwon
Wilt
Shaq
Duncan
KG
Bird
Magic

I can envision criteria consistent enough to put Shaq ahead of Olajuwon & Wilt - slanting things towards offensive production more. So while I don't have him there, if you weight offense heavier and/or heavily dis-regard the 60's, I can see a case where Shaq squeezes past Wilt/Olajuwon. So while I don't have him in my Top 5, I don't think it's unreasonable to have him as such.

I don't think i can put Shaq in the top 5. I know he accomplished a lot and most believe he has a top 5 peak of all time. I just feel he underachieved. I think he should have at least 4 mvps along with at least 6 titles( With at least 5 of them with him being a dominant force.It would be ok if the other one came in the form of him being a declining player next to a superstar. Like 2006).

Just like how I want to put Olajuwon in the top 10 all time, but I can't. He's just missing something off of his resume. But unlike Shaq Olajuwon didn't underachieve.

Not in my top 10...

Here are 11 players easily better than him (in no order): Kobe, MJ, Magic, Bird, LeBron, Duncan, KG, Olajuwon, KAJ, Russell and Wilt.

contestedlayups wrote:Sure, Shaq was dominant. Don't forget though that Duncan was a 1st team All-defense 8 times, 1st team All-NBA 10 times.

For all of Shaq's dominance, he was never a 1st team All-defense, and only a 1st team All-NBA 8 times. Duncan does have that one more championship, one more MVP, and a 3x FMVP, just like Shaq. So, no Shaq shouldn't be ranked above Duncan at all. The accolades speak for themselves.

The problem with this line of thinking is as a forward Duncan has 2 times the available slots for all NBA and all defensive teams for example in 2000 shaq was 2nd in DPOY voting yet made 2nd team all Defense.
There is no denying that Duncan was the better defender and was gonna have more defensive teams than shaq but if he was listed as a center he’d have lost a number of all defensive teams to the zo’s Wallace’s and Mourning’s of the NBA and he certainly would have lost a couple first team all nba’s to Shaq as well. (As Shaq would have lost some 1st teams to Duncan in the mid 00’s as well in all fairness)

hyoyatika23 wrote:Not in my top 10...

Here are 11 players easily better than him (in no order): Kobe, MJ, Magic, Bird, LeBron, Duncan, KG, Olajuwon, KAJ, Russell and Wilt.

Their all easily better than shaq? Lol it’s one thing to think they are better but easily? Among the top 10 players there’s very varying degrees of seperation but each for the most part has a case over another so I don’t see the reason to be making outrageous claims like easily

hyoyatika23 wrote:Not in my top 10...

Here are 11 players easily better than him (in no order): Kobe, MJ, Magic, Bird, LeBron, Duncan, KG, Olajuwon, KAJ, Russell and Wilt.

Kobe at his peak was never a top 2 player in the league. Shaq at his peak was one of the most dominant players in the history of the game. LOL @ Kobe being “easily” better. Personally I’d have Shaq #4 on my all-time list and Kobe #18.

iggymcfrack wrote:

hyoyatika23 wrote:Not in my top 10...

Here are 11 players easily better than him (in no order): Kobe, MJ, Magic, Bird, LeBron, Duncan, KG, Olajuwon, KAJ, Russell and Wilt.

Kobe at his peak was never a top 2 player in the league. Shaq at his peak was one of the most dominant players in the history of the game. LOL @ Kobe being “easily” better. Personally I’d have Shaq #4 on my all-time list and Kobe #18.

Lol,not really subtle with the trolling there, pal.

hyoyatika23 wrote:

iggymcfrack wrote:

hyoyatika23 wrote:Not in my top 10...

Here are 11 players easily better than him (in no order): Kobe, MJ, Magic, Bird, LeBron, Duncan, KG, Olajuwon, KAJ, Russell and Wilt.

Kobe at his peak was never a top 2 player in the league. Shaq at his peak was one of the most dominant players in the history of the game. LOL @ Kobe being “easily” better. Personally I’d have Shaq #4 on my all-time list and Kobe #18.

Lol,not really subtle with the trolling there, pal.

Definitely not trolling. He never had one season top 2 in any box score composite which should favor his heavy usage mediocre defense type of game, and he was never top 3 in RAPM. His best seasons were 2009 and 2010 and Bron and Wade were both much better than him both of those seasons.

Peak Shaq had the best season of all time imo. As far as his whole career goes, he's somewhere in the 5-7 range for me.

I have him right after Hakeem.

Mj kaj Russell Wilt bron Magic Hakeem Shaq.

But some will rank him after Garnett

No. I can't justify him ahead of James/Russell/Kareem/Duncan/Jordan, at all.

Colbinii wrote:No. I can't justify him ahead of James/Russell/Kareem/Duncan/Jordan, at all.

I had him neck and neck with Duncan until a year or so ago when the 97-01 and 02-06 RAPM studies were released. The data says that Shaq's defense probably isn't as good as most people think it was.

I have James, Russell, Jordan, Kareem, Duncan, Garnett, and possibly Hakeem above Shaq now. Hakeem and Shaq are very close for me.

DatAsh wrote:

Colbinii wrote:No. I can't justify him ahead of James/Russell/Kareem/Duncan/Jordan, at all.

I had him neck and neck with Duncan until a year or so ago when the 97-01 and 02-06 RAPM studies were released. The data says that Shaq's defense probably isn't as good as most people think it was.

I have James, Russell, Jordan, Kareem, Duncan, Garnett, and possibly Hakeem above Shaq now. Hakeem and Shaq are very close for me.

Oh, I also have KG above Shaq but see and understand I am not perfect in player evaluation.

The 5 I listed were simply players where I see no arguments with relation to how I view basketball. Add in guys like Wilt and Magic and it is very likely Shaq slips out of the top 10 for me.

No. Shaq had tons of talent around him and underachieved way too many times before 2000, no matter what his stats said.

Prime-wise, Shaq has the same issue as Wilt, Kareem, and Lebron in that their team success does not match their statistical output in many years, given the quality of teammates they had. The 95 Magic were considered the most talented in the league, but lost to the Rockets badly due to inexperience and inferior chemistry. Obviously these great all had underachieving issues for different reasons: Shaq's was definitely related to not driving his teammates hard enough in practice or serving as a positive example, as well as acting petty and acrimonious. Unlike the others, Shaq was also lazy in certain seasons, especially the loafing around after 2006 which he admits to in his book was a really bad showing. Both Wilt and Kareem criticized him heavily in his first several years on the Lakers for various intangibles that don't show up on the stat sheet, quite rightly in my view.

But to be fair, Shaq's stated reason for leaving the Magic was due to money. The Magic wanted to pay Penny more than Shaq and make Penny their centerpiece, and he got a better deal in LA. While someone like Tim Duncan might have managed that effectively, that is primarily the Magic's fault, not Shaq's. Phil Jackson also gave a much more positive assessment of Shaq than Kobe in his 2004 book, so I don't think its entirely fair to blame that schism on Shaq. But Shaq did have issues with taking criticism from coaches (i,e whining at Tex Winter, trying to resist Pat Riley's training methods while sneaking his teammates out late partying all the time) and clearly was not great at unifying his teams outside of maybe 2000. His negatives as a team leader and off-court may not be as bad as it seems at first glance, but he was absolutely nowhere near a positive in the way that say Larry Bird was.

Prime-wise, Shaq has the same issue as Wilt, Kareem, and Lebron in that their team success does not match their statistical output in many years, given the quality of teammates they had.

What? This does not make sense on multiple levels. Lebron had atrocious teammates before Miami. Wilt’s teammates on the Warriors were nothing special (young Thurmond aside), and if anything he overachieved in 1962 by pushing the Celtics to seven games. Kareem was awesome on the Bucks and was a perpetual title contender (sadly too dependent on Oscar’s health), and on the Lakers he again had no one special until Magic. And Shaq lost to the Hakeem/Drexler Rockets and then the 72-win Bulls; neither is an underperformance.

I agree with the rest, but this was baseless.

To me he has no case for top 5 whatsoever. Considering his height and athleticism he was a comparatively poor rebounder compared to all time greats like Kareem, Wilt and Russell. My main problems with him are his attitude which led to him being out of shape at the beginning of the season and not being able to play a lot of minutes comparatively speaking. Shaq only reached 40 mpg once in his career, Wilt for example averaged almost a staggering 46 minutes, Russell a great 42 minutes and Kareem 37 over a 20 year career. I am also not convinced that he has THE greatest peak ever, though he for sure has an argument. Wilt, MJ, LeBron, Kareem and Duncan 03 all have cases for an equal maybe even better peak considering they could play more minutes, played more games and were never out of shape on top of being arguably better defenders, so it depends on what exactly you value. Shaq was an intimidating presence in the paint but so where the others, but Shaq was poor at help defense, especially on p&r. On top of all of that he was a noticeably worse rebounder, never won a rebounding title, unlike Wilt, Russell and Kareem. I do not expect a SG like MJ or SF like LeBron to win a rebounding title, not their job in the end considering their ball handling and passing duties on their team.
Lastly his competition at the center position during the 3 peat was pretty lackluster imho, best being Mutombo who was what, top 50 all time? Otherwise he was mostly competing against slow, old heavily declining centers like Rik Smits and Sabonis who were a shadow of their former self, and it cannot be denied that he was allowed to get away with murder. What he was allowed to do to Mutombo in 2001 was imho a disgrace, hammering elbows into his face, shoulder tackles and just in general barreling through him and the zone with hardly any care for whistles. Was not a pretty sight either.

70sFan wrote:He has strong case for top 5, but I have him around 8th spot (below Kareem, Russell, James, Jordan, Duncan, Wilt and Hakeem).

You don't have Larry Bird above Shaq? Does Birds lack of longevity hurt his stock or is it something else?

Personally, I have him somewhere at the bottom of my Top 10 but I can't argue with anyone who has him in his Top 5.
I'm not much of an advanced stats guy, I'm more of an "eye test"-guy and I just never liked his attitude. I've never seen the desire to win a championship I've seen with guys like Jordan nor did I see the willingness to sacrifice his own stats/reputation like Russell, Duncan, etc... He was one of those players that underachived because of their own ego.
Yes, he won 4 championships but three of them (2000 vs POR, 2002 vs SAC and 2006 vs MAVS) are at the very least suspicious. So I don't see that as an big advantage over guys like Wilt or Hakeem who have "only" won two 'ships.

Jack Dempsey wrote:

70sFan wrote:He has strong case for top 5, but I have him around 8th spot (below Kareem, Russell, James, Jordan, Duncan, Wilt and Hakeem).

You don't have Larry Bird above Shaq? Does Birds lack of longevity hurt his stock or is it something else?

Personally, I have him somewhere at the bottom of my Top 10 but I can't argue with anyone who has him in his Top 5.
I'm not much of an advanced stats guy, I'm more of an "eye test"-guy and I just never liked his attitude. I've never seen the desire to win a championship I've seen with guys like Jordan nor did I see the willingness to sacrifice his own stats/reputation like Russell, Duncan, etc... He was one of those players that underachived because of their own ego.
Yes, he won 4 championships but three of them (2000 vs POR, 2002 vs SAC and 2006 vs MAVS) are at the very least suspicious. So I don't see that as an big advantage over guys like Wilt or Hakeem who have "only" won two 'ships.

Yes, I do. Bird's lack of longevity definitely hurts him here but there are other aspects too.

For once, as inconsistent as Shaq was defesnsively, he was better than Bird. Larry was good defender for about half of his career but Shaq was clearly better.

Secondly, Shaq was more consistent in playoffs. Bird didn't actually struggle against the best competition he faced, he was simply inconsistent. He had some great series like 1984 vs Knicks, 1986 vs Bucks and Rockets, 1987 vs Pistons but he also had some poor performances like 1985 vs Lakers, 1983 vs Bucks or 1988 vs Pistons. His style of play (off-ball game and reliance on jumpshot) is less consistent by its nature. It's not a bad thing, because it makes Bird more portable player but Shaq was 2nd best center of all-time offensively. Only Wilt is comparable to him (and Kareem is better).

I do think that Shaq's intangibles and lack of effort hurts him (and durability issues, that's why I have him below Wilt and Hakeem) but not enough to have him below Bird.

I have Shaq 8th all time and Bird is around 11-12th spot.

I think he deserves to be considered. I toss him, Duncan and KG back and forth. In the past, i had Shaq ahead of those two, but over the years i've been starting to value all the important nuances that Duncan and KG offer as players on and off the court. But i'm not mad at anyone putting Shaq in the top 5, dude was unstoppable when he was checked in.