RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 (Shaquille O'Neal)

Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal

SHAQ32
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,638
And1: 3,314
Joined: Mar 21, 2013
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#21 » by SHAQ32 » Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:06 am

DQuinn1575 wrote:
SHAQ32 wrote:Yet another antishaq post: Another thing I keep in mind is Shaq and LA's glory years coincided with a relative lull for the league and competition. The NBA needed franchise players but had to settle on Jalen Rose and Allan Houston.

Jalen Rose never made an all-star team, Houston made 2.

Right, but what I'm saying is the NBA's marketing campaigns at the very early millennium included Jalen Rose and Allan Houston, among others. And Jalen never made an ASG but Michael Finley and Wally Szczerbiak did. And those guys were solid don't get me wrong, but they shouldn't have been a-s.

Shaq competed against Duncan, Garnett at top of the league. Earlier Hakeem and Jordan. Once you hit the merger, it’s pretty hard to call one eta a lot weaker than another.


Other all-stars-via-watered-down-league included Dale and Antonio Davis, Theo Ratliff, Anthony Mason, Kenyon Martin, Jamaal Magloire. I mean, who's next, Samuel Dalembert?
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,694
And1: 8,332
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#22 » by trex_8063 » Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:05 am

1st vote: Shaquille O'Neal
The biggest statistical footprint left on the table, while also having an impact profile that can hold its own next to just about anyone left on the table [save maybe Magic, who has notably lesser longevity].

He's [imo] the clear best peak left on the table, his '00 campaign being one that is memorable to me 20 years after the fact.
During an era of slow paced, iso-heavy, lower efficiency defensive grudge matches, peak Shaq was averaging very nearly 30/14/4 with 3 blocks and barely 3 turnovers. He led the league in scoring while also leading it in FG% and anchoring the #1-defense in the league (who were #1 in opp. eFG% and #3 in DREB%).
In terms of rate metrics, this translated to a PER of 30.6, WS/48 of .283, and a BPM of +9.3 (all of these best in the league), and this while playing 40.0 mpg.
Any "player analysis" I did at that time was certainly in its infancy, but I remember wondering at the time if he was just as dominant as [or more than] Michael Jordan had ever been.......which, being a Bulls/Jordan fan in the 90's and still in the thrall of the Jordan mythos, this was NOT a place my brain wanted to wander; it felt sacrilegious to even entertain such a thought. But I have specific memories of thinking on that.

Shaq then basically did same or marginally better in the playoffs en-route to a title that year.

Was just a phenomenal scorer with tremendous gravity.
He didn't have a myriad of post moves, but I think sometimes people confuse complexity [and "prettiness"] with effectiveness. Some people will laud Hakeem for all the moves and counter-moves he had in the post......but at the end of the day if he's still not as effective scoring there as Shaq [with all his brutish, ugly, and mostly one-dimensional style] was, what does the prettiness matter?

And he's got basically about a 13-year prime where he was a superstar level player [albeit with a few of those years a little injury-hit], plus ~2 other seasons at "merely star-level", and a few other years as fair-to-good role player. From a total career value standpoint, I don't think he has ANY seasons that are not adding value (though '10 and '11 certainly aren't adding much).

Good-to-elite offenses seem to follow in his wake wherever he went during his prime; and although he had his weaknesses defensively (most pnr defense or defending on the perimeter), he was enough of a rebounding, shot-blocking, and low-post defensive presence to be at least a small plus defender most of his career. imo, it's only his final five seasons (which comprise only 17% of his career minutes) where he was perhaps a net-negative defender.

He's got some off-court intangible issues, although for me this is one of the primary reasons he's not a clear top 5 player. And he's not the only player with similar considerations in this region: e.g. Wilt, Kobe.


Having a hard time deciding on a 2nd and 3rd vote, though. Kinda leaning toward Hakeem as my 2nd, and maybe Garnett for my 3rd (though Larry Bird is definitely in the mix, too).
Honestly don't think I'll need to decide on this round for purposes of the vote, but I need to think on this. Traditionally [in recent history], I've had the order as Hakeem > Bird > Garnett, but I'm seriously reconsidering the last two in particular.
I think I'd need some convincing on KG's off-court intangibles to push him ahead of Hakeem; Doc MJ tried to do so, but I didn't find the linked materials very compelling (or even terribly on-topic [with the exception of one], if I'm being honest). Hmmm.....
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Hal14
RealGM
Posts: 22,303
And1: 21,199
Joined: Apr 05, 2019

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#23 » by Hal14 » Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:33 am

SHAQ32 wrote:Yet another antishaq post: Another thing I keep in mind is Shaq and LA's glory years coincided with a relative lull for the league and competition. The NBA needed franchise players but had to settle on Jalen Rose and Allan Houston.


Yup. It was a lull for competition across the rest of the league - and the 2 best players in the world (Shaq and Kobe) were on the same team so of course they won the title. If anything, it should be looked at as a failure that they only won 3 titles. With the amount of talent they had, they should have also won it in 2003, 2004 and maybe even 99.
Nothing wrong with having a different opinion - as long as it's done respectfully. It'd be lame if we all agreed on everything :)
SHAQ32
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,638
And1: 3,314
Joined: Mar 21, 2013
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#24 » by SHAQ32 » Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:37 am

Hal14 wrote:
SHAQ32 wrote:Yet another antishaq post: Another thing I keep in mind is Shaq and LA's glory years coincided with a relative lull for the league and competition. The NBA needed franchise players but had to settle on Jalen Rose and Allan Houston.


Yup. It was a lull for competition across the rest of the league - and the 2 best players in the world (Shaq and Kobe) were on the same team so of course they won the title. If anything, it should be looked at as a failure that they only won 3 titles. With the amount of talent they had, they should have also won it in 2003, 2004 and maybe even 99.

On paper it should've been Bulls vs Lakers in 98
mailmp
Sophomore
Posts: 173
And1: 124
Joined: Oct 16, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#25 » by mailmp » Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:49 am

Oh if only it had been more competitive like in the 1980s, when legendary talents like Andrew Toney, Kelly Tripucka, Rickey Green, Norm Nixon, and Rolando Blackman were reliable all-stars.
SHAQ32
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,638
And1: 3,314
Joined: Mar 21, 2013
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#26 » by SHAQ32 » Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:54 am

Also interesting that Shaq started 52 and 57 games in 96 and 98, yet both teams still won 60+ games
User avatar
2klegend
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,333
And1: 409
Joined: Mar 31, 2016
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#27 » by 2klegend » Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:04 am

1. Bird
2. Shaq
3. Hakeem

I flip flop between Bird and Shaq and have to think very deeply about who I think deserves the #8 spot.

Bird has 3 titles, Shaq 4 but Shaq 4th is a complimentary star. Shaq got 3 Final MVP to Bird 2. However, the MVP count. Bird got 3 to Shaq just 1. This tells me that Shaq doesn't take the regular season seriously and I know someday he will get penalized for that on his legacy. Shaq has the potential to grab at least 3 MVPs, and if he does that, Shaq GOAT latter should move much higher and the choice for #8 should be very easy to make. Also worth noting that Magic is at #7 which make Bird at #8 almost a foregone conclusion since both guys NBA accomplishment are very similar.
My Top 100+ GOAT (Peak, Prime, Longevity, Award):
viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1464952
Amares
Pro Prospect
Posts: 812
And1: 414
Joined: Aug 29, 2011

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#28 » by Amares » Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:22 am

2klegend wrote:1. Bird
2. Shaq
3. Hakeem

I flip flop between Bird and Shaq and have to think very deeply about who I think deserves the #8 spot.

Bird has 3 titles, Shaq 4 but Shaq 4th is a complimentary star. Shaq got 3 Final MVP to Bird 2. However, the MVP count. Bird got 3 to Shaq just 1. This tells me that Shaq doesn't take the regular season seriously and I know someday he will get penalized for that on his legacy. Shaq has the potential to grab at least 3 MVPs, and if he does that, Shaq GOAT latter should move much higher and the choice for #8 should be very easy to make. Also worth noting that Magic is at #7 which make Bird at #8 almost a foregone conclusion since both guys NBA accomplishment are very similar.


I don't know why people still follow media awards and base their choice on them. I could say that Shaq just 1 MVP tells me voters are idiots and this 2001 MVP for AI is just the greatest example of it. Also winning MVP differs in weight among the years, especially decades.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 30,220
And1: 25,489
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#29 » by 70sFan » Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:29 am

Amares wrote:
2klegend wrote:1. Bird
2. Shaq
3. Hakeem

I flip flop between Bird and Shaq and have to think very deeply about who I think deserves the #8 spot.

Bird has 3 titles, Shaq 4 but Shaq 4th is a complimentary star. Shaq got 3 Final MVP to Bird 2. However, the MVP count. Bird got 3 to Shaq just 1. This tells me that Shaq doesn't take the regular season seriously and I know someday he will get penalized for that on his legacy. Shaq has the potential to grab at least 3 MVPs, and if he does that, Shaq GOAT latter should move much higher and the choice for #8 should be very easy to make. Also worth noting that Magic is at #7 which make Bird at #8 almost a foregone conclusion since both guys NBA accomplishment are very similar.


I don't know why people still follow media awards and base their choice on them. I could say that Shaq just 1 MVP tells me voters are idiots and this 2001 MVP for AI is just the greatest example of it. Also winning MVP differs in weight among the years, especially decades.

Duncan should have won the MVP in 2001 ;)
Amares
Pro Prospect
Posts: 812
And1: 414
Joined: Aug 29, 2011

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#30 » by Amares » Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:40 am

70sFan wrote:
Amares wrote:
2klegend wrote:1. Bird
2. Shaq
3. Hakeem

I flip flop between Bird and Shaq and have to think very deeply about who I think deserves the #8 spot.

Bird has 3 titles, Shaq 4 but Shaq 4th is a complimentary star. Shaq got 3 Final MVP to Bird 2. However, the MVP count. Bird got 3 to Shaq just 1. This tells me that Shaq doesn't take the regular season seriously and I know someday he will get penalized for that on his legacy. Shaq has the potential to grab at least 3 MVPs, and if he does that, Shaq GOAT latter should move much higher and the choice for #8 should be very easy to make. Also worth noting that Magic is at #7 which make Bird at #8 almost a foregone conclusion since both guys NBA accomplishment are very similar.


I don't know why people still follow media awards and base their choice on them. I could say that Shaq just 1 MVP tells me voters are idiots and this 2001 MVP for AI is just the greatest example of it. Also winning MVP differs in weight among the years, especially decades.

Duncan should have won the MVP in 2001 ;)


It was between Duncan and Shaq, but according to most AI was equal to them because of his MVP. Also 2001 Shaq > Bird peak, so this MVP media award supremacy is bad argument for Bird.
Owly
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,723
And1: 3,194
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#31 » by Owly » Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:31 am

SHAQ32 wrote:Also interesting that Shaq started 52 and 57 games in 96 and 98, yet both teams still won 60+ games

Not really. Just supports (through a noisy measure, binary W-L) that those teams were good overall, likely were pretty good without Shaq and very good, contender level with him in those seasons.

ElGee's old WoWY spreadsheet had
'96 Magic: 9.3 SRS with Shaq in. Notional SRS impact (i.e. SRS change) of 6.2. Implicit, sans-Shaq, SRS 3.1.
'98 Lakers: 7.7 SRS with Shaq in. Notional SRS impact of 4. Implicit, sans-Shaq SRS 3.7.

Which fits pretty neatly the hypothesis.
Slightly more fine grained analysis further confirms his impact.
'96 faux RAPM has him 7th.
'98 NPI RAPM (Per "A Screaming ...") has him 1st.
Owly
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,723
And1: 3,194
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#32 » by Owly » Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:05 pm

90sAllDecade wrote:1. Hakeem
2. Shaq
3. Bird


Hakeem and Shaq have the higher peaks but Hakeem has the best longevity of the three.
Shaq and Bird are amazing, but both had much better team support and coaching and Bird didn't fare as well in the playoffs having a drop off in offense from the RS and I can't place his defensive impact above the others.

Image


Hakeem Vs HOF Centers


Hakeem also outplayed or dominated his HOF peers at center in the playoffs. He also won all the playoff series listed in the videos.








Did Hakeem outplay Shaq in the '95 finals? I've seen a post (I think it's OP from this thread viewtopic.php?t=1242882) that seems to suggest otherwise.
mailmp
Sophomore
Posts: 173
And1: 124
Joined: Oct 16, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#33 » by mailmp » Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:34 pm

Maybe you should have read the entire thread. Two posts later on write even more in-depth analyses of why the OP was not really covering the entire picture.
Hal14
RealGM
Posts: 22,303
And1: 21,199
Joined: Apr 05, 2019

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#34 » by Hal14 » Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:50 pm

trex_8063 wrote:1st vote: Shaquille O'Neal
The biggest statistical footprint left on the table, while also having an impact profile that can hold its own next to just about anyone left on the table [save maybe Magic, who has notably lesser longevity].

He's [imo] the clear best peak left on the table, his '00 campaign being one that is memorable to me 20 years after the fact.
During an era of slow paced, iso-heavy, lower efficiency defensive grudge matches, peak Shaq was averaging very nearly 30/14/4 with 3 blocks and barely 3 turnovers. He led the league in scoring while also leading it in FG% and anchoring the #1-defense in the league (who were #1 in opp. eFG% and #3 in DREB%).
In terms of rate metrics, this translated to a PER of 30.6, WS/48 of .283, and a BPM of +9.3 (all of these best in the league), and this while playing 40.0 mpg.
Any "player analysis" I did at that time was certainly in its infancy, but I remember wondering at the time if he was just as dominant as [or more than] Michael Jordan had ever been.......which, being a Bulls/Jordan fan in the 90's and still in the thrall of the Jordan mythos, this was NOT a place my brain wanted to wander; it felt sacrilegious to even entertain such a thought. But I have specific memories of thinking on that.

Shaq then basically did same or marginally better in the playoffs en-route to a title that year.

Great - but let's look at who he did it against. Ewing, Olajuwon, Robinson were all either retired or well past their prime. Yao Ming entered the league AFTER the Lakers 3-peat. Dwight Howard didn't enter the league until AFTER the Lakers 3-peat. Mutombo was past his prime, Mourning was good in 2000 but then missed the majority of the 2001 season and went downhill after that.

Yes, Shaq did dominate for that 3 year stretch, but a) the 2nd best player in the world was on his team - Kobe was so good that there was many stretches during that 3 year span where Shaq wasn't even the best player on his own team and b) He did it against competition that was suspect at best.

Still, even while playing with the league's 2 best players and going against suspect competition (the 00 Pacers, the 01 Sixers and 02 Nets are three of the worst teams to make the NBA finals in a LONG time), the Lakers came extremely close to getting knocked out in the WCF in both 00 and 02. It took a monumental collapse by the Blazers in 00 and the refs giving the game to the Lakers in 02 for the Lakers to advance to the finals.

Look, Shaq was a great player, but seems to be getting a little overrated on this board (I even saw a post by someone not long ago who went as far as calling him top 5 all time).

Meanwhile, Bird won 3 straight MVPs..during that time he won 2 titles, 2 finals MVPs and led his tea to the finals all 3 years..was hands down the best player on his team all 3 years - while playing in arguably the most competitive era of all time. Less teams in the league and every night he's going toe to toe with guys like Magic, MJ, Dr. J, Mark Aguirre, Dominique Wilkins, Marques Johnson, Bernard King, Alex English, James Worthy, Charles Barkley, Dennis Rodman, Karl Malone, etc.

Not to mention the Celtics had their worst record in franchise history and2nd worst record in the league the year before Bird's rookie year. He joins the team and they improve their record by 32 games, he wins rookie of the year over Magic and in his 2nd year in the league he leads the Celtics to the championship. Bird stayed with the Celtics his entire career - as opposed to Shaq who bounced around from team to team because he couldn't get along with star teammates, let his ego get in the way, couldn't share the spotlight. That Magic team with Shaq and Penny could have been a dynasty but he was too selfish, leaves for LA where him and Kobe have one of the nastiest feuds in sports history that 2 teammates ever had, it got. ridiculous - like a soap opera to the point they couldn't be on the same team anymore so he had to be traded to Miami. Shaq wins a 4th title in Miami but Wade was by far the Heat best player, Shaq was along for the ride and 06 was a pretty weak year for the league overall..I mean, the west was pretty good as the Mavs, Spurs and Suns were all really tough but the east was really weak that year..

My picks this round:

8) Larry Bird
9) Hakeem Olajuwon
10) Kobe Bryant (yes, I have Kobe just barely ahead of Shaq)
Nothing wrong with having a different opinion - as long as it's done respectfully. It'd be lame if we all agreed on everything :)
Owly
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,723
And1: 3,194
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#35 » by Owly » Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:03 pm

mailmp wrote:Maybe you should have read the entire thread. Two posts later on write even more in-depth analyses of why the OP was not really covering the entire picture.

I will assume - and I can only guess given the non-quote - that this is to me.

Firstly, would re-iterate that the post was a question. You will note that I do not make a claim.

Secondly if you think two posts are especially pertinent it might allow for a clearer exchange of ideas if you were to highlight them somehow (for instance quoting or linking), as it is hard to discuss them otherwise.

I would guess you mean posts 65 viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1242882&start=60#p35362482 and 76 viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1242882&start=60#p35383814

If so, I would concur that they add value.

My first glance inclinations would be (1) to concur with fatal9 that a 4 game sample size isn't something that should really be moving the needle in how we perceive players and (2) that insofar as it matters (see 1) I would want more stuff more comprehensively tracked (by multiple people) from a better quality video. Then maybe a discussion on how we aggregate information in small samples such as series or individual games.
mailmp
Sophomore
Posts: 173
And1: 124
Joined: Oct 16, 2020

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#36 » by mailmp » Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:41 pm

1. Hakeem Olajuwon
Won a title with the weakest supporting cast of the past forty years, and won a second title against arguably the toughest gauntlet in league history with a bottom five supporting cast of the past forty years. Strong claim to best defender post-Russell, incredible postseason elevator in general (even if some of the offensive numbers are a tad overstated by the competition), and stacked right up there with Jordan throughout his career (particularly on a season-to-season basis). For comparison, I do think Shaq’s peak gets a tad overrated by circumstance — centre competition was indeed stronger a few years before his peak, his pnr weaknesses were not really going to be a major liability in the early 2000s, and I still personally believe he loses in the playoffs during his “GOAT” individual season had Duncan been healthy...

2. Shaquille O’Neal
... However, a lot of the anti-Shaq analyses have been pretty disingenuous thus far. Shaq generally has fantastic postseason results and is a profoundly dominant player on paper and in actuality (fun exercise to consider how he could have looked in place of Wilt). He does have commitment concerns, but those are why he is not in discussions for top three, and why he deservedly only won a single MVP; they are not reasons why he deserves to be slotted in at ten or anything. Is there evidence that he might in some sense “need” an elite wing partner? Sure. But failing to beat the 1997/98 Jazz is not much of a blemish (Hakeem had the same losses to 1997 with much more “help”), and certainly not one by comparison with Bird.

3. TBD (in the event of a specific Garnett/Bird tiebreak, I side with Garnett)
Magic went a little earlier than I would have liked, but he was the final player in my A-tier. The next bunch I am looking at is Garnett, Kobe, Bird, Robertson, Dirk... Not especially inclined to give any of them attention yet, but inasmuch as Bird and Garnett are both regular season impact legends who drop to varying degrees in the playoffs, I think Garnett’s defensive value maintained better and his longevity obviously dwarfs Bird’s. With that clarification, I think based on the prior vote Shaq should have this one comfortably, so not really something I urgently need to decide.
Hal14
RealGM
Posts: 22,303
And1: 21,199
Joined: Apr 05, 2019

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#37 » by Hal14 » Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:55 pm

Amares wrote:
70sFan wrote:
Amares wrote:
I don't know why people still follow media awards and base their choice on them. I could say that Shaq just 1 MVP tells me voters are idiots and this 2001 MVP for AI is just the greatest example of it. Also winning MVP differs in weight among the years, especially decades.

Duncan should have won the MVP in 2001 ;)


It was between Duncan and Shaq, but according to most AI was equal to them because of his MVP. Also 2001 Shaq > Bird peak, so this MVP media award supremacy is bad argument for Bird.


That's debatable. Peak Bird was an animal, nobody ever affected the game in more ways in a positive way for their team, combined with his insane basketball IQ and ability to get in his opponent's head / throw them off their game. 3 straight MVPs, 3 finals appearances in a row, 2 titles, 2 finals MVPs during a 3 year span.

And in 2001 the best centers Shaq had to go against were old/past his prime Robinson, old/past his prime Divac and most of the other 26 centers in the league were bums.

Also - it wasn't until the 2000s that MVP voting started to really get questionable. Many people think that Iverson shouldn't have won in 2001, many people think Nash shouldn't have got the MVPs he got, many people think LeBron should have won in 2009, Rose won a questionable MVP, etc. Ever since 2001 the MVP voting has gotten really sketchy..but up until then, most people think the awards for the most part went to the right guys - except maybe Barkley and Malone winning over MJ caused some head scratching but prior to the 90s, you don't really hear many complaints.
Nothing wrong with having a different opinion - as long as it's done respectfully. It'd be lame if we all agreed on everything :)
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,694
And1: 8,332
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#38 » by trex_8063 » Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:57 pm

Owly wrote:
mailmp wrote:Maybe you should have read the entire thread. Two posts later on write even more in-depth analyses of why the OP was not really covering the entire picture.

I will assume - and I can only guess given the non-quote - that this is to me.

Firstly, would re-iterate that the post was a question. You will note that I do not make a claim.

Secondly if you think two posts are especially pertinent it might allow for a clearer exchange of ideas if you were to highlight them somehow (for instance quoting or linking), as it is hard to discuss them otherwise.

I would guess you mean posts 65 viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1242882&start=60#p35362482

.


Just my 2c on watching this first short video, but I feel it's the double-team by Robert Horry that is more responsible for forcing the turnover in the first play shown, as well as the one at 1:38. They're still turnovers, but merely saying wrt who should get credit for "forcing" an error.

And the play at 2:04 looks like a flop by Hakeem to me, fwiw (actually the play before that, at 1:50, looks a little "floppy" too, though Shaq does clear out with the arm a little [oddly it's basically AFTER the shot, though]).
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
90sAllDecade
Starter
Posts: 2,264
And1: 818
Joined: Jul 09, 2012
Location: Clutch City, Texas
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#39 » by 90sAllDecade » Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 pm

Hakeem outplayed Shaq overall imo. Especially when looking at everything including combined two way impact for offense, defense and other metrics.

As with many Shaq comparisions, many only look at offense and raw pretty dunks or brute force, but don't analyze things like Pick and Roll Defense, running and defense in transition, turnovers and help defense.

Shaq averaged almost 5.3 turnovers a game with an 18.5% turnover rate that series highest for him by far that playoffs.
In comparision Hakeem had 2.8 and a 7.9% rate.

Also for gamescore Hakeem had 24.5 gamescore to O'neal's 21.8, again this doesn't factor things like PnR defense, transition and help defense as Olajuwon was better there as well.

Many get enamored with offense but don't look at defense and combined two way impact, where for that series and thier careers for that matter Hakeem was a better player overall.

Here are those posts you mentioned that point some of these things out:

Spoiler:
fatal9 wrote:Here is Hakeem forcing 10 turnovers in one on one situations with Shaq over the series by either stripping him or playing good positional defense, beating him to the spot and drawing an offensive foul or making him shuffle the feet. Note the two plays in the first game that were called travels should have been actually called offensive fouls, but same result in the end; dead ball turnover.



Shaq had the highest TO series of his career (5.3 per game), and Hakeem’s good positional defense clearly had a major part in that. This is significant and in the boxscore it shows in Shaq’s offensive rating, -9 compared to the sum of the previous three series (as well as lower than his career, as well as prime avg). But people are so hung up over FG%. Add the turnovers and Shaq's PPP is nothing special.

And while OP posted good information (though I like to know things in even more detail, as in location/type of each shot and how the defense played it, I also track each game separately in the playoffs, IF I'm to draw conclusions from stats the way they are presented in the OP), but most people here seem to be using it the wrong way and assuming it means Shaq outplayed Hakeem, when that didn't happen. What about the superior help defense? Hakeem single handedly probably created 20+ turnovers in that series, changed more shots, was a more active defensive presence. Hakeem's teammates hit threes at a better rate in the series (9 threes per game at 39.6%, Shaq's hit 10.25 @ 34.7%), but how much is it due to Hakeem's more dynamic, unpredictable playmaking in the post? What about the fact Hakeem can beat double teaming by stepping out on the perimeter and take on a higher volume role if that's the strategy his team wants to use (Hakeem didn't have stretches where he didn't score for like 10+ minutes, unlike Shaq)? What about the fact Hakeem can play off the ball spotting up from midrange jumpers all over the court opening up the paint for his teammates? Hakeem was the better all around presence and this was in a year (1995) when his on court activity had began slipping compared to previous years ('93 and '94). Whatever though. 10 years from now people are going to act like Durant didn’t get outplayed by LeBron in the finals because he scored 30.6 ppg on 55 FG%/65TS% and LeBron only scored 28.6 ppg on 47%/55.7 TS%.

In game 1, Shaq outplayed Hakeem offensively but again, with defense factored in (especially in the second half), it's hard to say. Game 2, Hakeem outplayed Shaq. While I agree you can't just throw away Shaq's second half, the fact that Shaq went something like 15 minutes without scoring while his team was getting its ass kicked (by Hakeem) is hard to overlook. Game 3, very efficient game for Shaq but Hakeem was the better all-around player on the court again to me, at worst it's a wash. Game 4, Hakeem outplayed him heavily. Regarding the point of "quiet" stretches, Shaq’s volume could be limited by double teaming. This is often an issue with post players when you build your offense around them, you can limit their volume significantly (which is why Hakeem is maybe the best 4 around 1 center ever, more dynamic playmaker, more versatile scorer, amazing at making adjustments to different defenses), it was easier to quiet him through double teaming than Hakeem who could step out and beat doubles. Anyways, I've always maintained Shaq and KAJ are the greatest offensive centers (though in the playoffs, Hakeem is closer to them than a lot of people realize) so if you want to say Shaq had the better series offensively, I would find it acceptable (though would ultimately disagree, more like a wash), but "outplaying" someone to me means who made the most impact and who was the superior presence on the court, which was Hakeem.

Look, NOBODY stops Shaq when he gets position on you or in a one on one situation if he gets enough dribbles in. I’m not sure what new piece of information people are finding here, Shaq’s FG% would be higher because of the type of shots he takes and because he's unstoppable against basically any kind of a defender in single coverage. Hakeem took away some of the efficiency by generally playing solid D on post ups and by forcing turnovers, but still, when Shaq gets position, it’s over (keeping Shaq under 1 PPP is a great accomplishment though). I will admit, I'm a little surprised by Hakeem's individual efficiency vs. Shaq based on what is written in OP. Hakeem didn't really have an efficient series overall by his standards, but that seems lower than expected. Shaq played very disciplined individual defense on Hakeem, Shaq's post defense in general is very good because of what wide body he has, I would have to track the games myself to see if those numbers are accurate and account for the help defense on each shot as well as opportunities that were created more so by teammates than Hakeem/Shaq themselves, among other things (as I mentioned, I like to know things in even more detail than what is written in OP). But really, if you can watch and understand the game, all this stuff isn’t even needed.

I agree that the idea that "Hakeem dominated" Shaq isn't an accurate picture of what happened, but he clearly showed him self to be the superior player. Shaq likely says “he embarrassed me” because of the way the series ended. Hakeem outplayed him heavily in game 4, especially in the second half. He was completely outclassed in that game. Sometimes that's what people remember most, how a series ends, whether wrongly or not, but that's a reason why I think that narrative took off.

Regardless, it's a 4 game sample size, I prefer to breakdown a player's game to analyze skills that stay consistent in the long run than rely on stats from a handful of games which is subject to variance. BTW, I really don't understand some posts in this thread saying that "this is the only argument peak Hakeem had over peak Shaq", if that's really what you believe, then I think you need to gain a deeper understanding of the game and of what makes both players so great. If 4 games makes you change your opinion drastically in either direction (ie. Hakeem is better than Shaq!! or Shaq is better than Hakeem!1!!), then I think you need to change your methodology of evaluating players a little bit. Neither player was at his peak in this series, Hakeem closer to his than Shaq, but the point of peak Hakeem > peak Shaq was never built on him allegedly dominating Shaq for 4 games or even him being a superior offensive player to Shaq. Hakeem's greatness lies in his ability to impact the game in so many ways on both ends of the floor. He's the closest thing to a one man team for that reason, because he covers up more flaws for a team than any player...ever. But that's another discussion.


Spoiler:
Double Clutch wrote:First of all, great work OP.

In your breakdown, you stated Hakeem took 62 jumpers in this series meaning that 53.4% of his FGA were jumpers which is safe to say wasn't the norm for him even though the jumpshot was a major part of his arsenal. I had a quote from Rudy T before the series started but I can't seem to find it anymore but as you can see below, Mario Elie talks about how they wanted Hakeem to step out more so it took Shaq away from the paint to negate Shaq's shot blocking and presence in the middle which has generally been a big factor as Shaq has always been a great paint defender.


"maybe try to get Hakeem outside a little bit more to take Shaq away from the basket so if guys cut, there will be no shot-blocking and that leaves the boards open for a couple of offensive rebounds," Houston's Mario Elie said.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/4631 ... STARS.html

This is something that is evident on several possessions over the course of the series but especially in the second half of game 2.



A journalist talks about it below and I'll give a few specific examples as well.

It won't matter which of the Rocket point guards step up if the Magic keeps making the tactical mistake of single-covering Olajuwon, who is having one of the game's all-time postseason runs with a 32.9-point average in 20 playoff games.
The Houston center's early outburst virtually eliminated the shot blocking of Shaquille O'Neal, who had 33 points but no snuffs.As the game progressed, Olajuwon drifted farther out on the wings and his Magic counterpart had to stick with him. The lack of interior defense made the Magic easy prey for Rocket penetrators Cassell and Clyde Drexler.
In fact, it was Drexler's one-on-one offense that effectively countered Orlando's desperate pressure defense down the stretch. With O'Neal looking on helplessly, Drexler delivered 10 of his 23 points with a variety of slashing moves to the hoop.
"It's been tried before," Smith said of the Magic's decision not to double Olajuwon. "I think that's how we got out to the big lead. He was being played one-on-one and he didn't miss a shot, basically. That put a lot of pressure on them at the offensive end.

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. ... ug=2125564

For example, in the game 2 link I posted above, fast forward to the 1:04:00 mark and you'll see Hakeem positioned behind the 3 pt line and due to illegal defense rules, Shaq is forced to come out and guard him above the foul line unless he really commits a hard double because if he would've floated around or positioned himself below the foul line, he would've been illegal. In that play, Drexler posts up Anderson and is able to spin and drive past him for the score without any shot blocking threat. This is an intangible quality which the stats won't show but Hakeem is helping the team offense here in an indirect sense. Another example is the possession at the 1:33:34 mark with Cassell isolating on the left side of the court with Hakeem spacing himself on the right wing and Cassell is able to penetrate inside and draw the foul without Shaq really being able to challenge the shot. You see the same thing at the 1:36:27 mark with Houston spacing/overloading themselves on one side of the court so Drexler can just get a clearout isolation on the other side and he's able to go inside with the Magic being unable to provide help in time due to Houston's dangerous perimeter shooting as well as the illegal defense rules. This clearly has a certain amount of value to me as he's drawing Shaq away from the basket and opening up the middle for his teammates. Basically, floor spacing is a very valuable asset to have since it can make the game easier for your teammates. I'd also some of it has to do with the illegal defense rules hindering Orlando's ability to play effective help defense in this situation.

Another example of how Hakeem's spacing helped the rest of the team from game 4.

8:55 mark in the video below. Rockets run a PnR between Drexler and Horry and they get the switch with Grant on Drexler. You'll see Hakeem space himself along the weakside/right wing where Shaq is forced to come out and guard him. Drexler isolates vs Grant from the 3 pt line, is able to beat him off the dribble with ease and nobody is there to challenge Drexler in the lane. Hakeem is basically making it easier for his teammates by pulling Shaq out of the paint.



0:12 mark in the video below. They show a replay of the play above and listen to what Matt Guokas says, a problem the Magic have been having with Sam Cassell and Drexler getting beat off the dribble and nobody shuts down the lane.



Something else you have to consider when comparing the volume of their shot attempts is Hakeem's diverse repertoire does allow him to be more effective in terms of creating his own shot and often negate, evade or split the double team (couple of examples in a Hakeem game 1 highlight video below) and he was also more aggressive in terms of looking for his shot as he often made his move quickly instead of waiting for the double team.



1:05 - Example of Hakeem going to the baseline turnaround which can be used to evade the double team. Shaq's one hand baseline turnaround wasn't quite developed yet in regards to consistency, range or accuracy. He didn't feel comfortable shooting it. Hakeem could and would go to the baseline turnaround throughout the series, a shot that isn't particularly high percentage but he can use it to turn away from the double.

3:30 - Grant goes to double down on Hakeem, he sees the double coming, turns baseline away from the double and is able to get the bucket and the foul.

We also have to keep in mind Hakeem's ability to hit the perimeter jumpshot also negates double teams allowing him to shoot more often and take on either a bigger role or a more varied role depending on what the team wants to do strategically. I see some people saying "well, Hakeem took 29 shots compared to Shaq's 18" so you have to analyze their skillsets and find a reasoning as to why that occurred. Shaq, on the other hand, could have his shot attempts limited a bit by quick double teams as he did not quite have the skill-set to break down double teams or the jumper to step out and beat them which could often force him into a passive rhythm. By a passive rhythm, I mean there were instances you'd notice he wouldn't look for his shot at all and he'd pass the ball before the double team would even get there since he was so programmed to do so. For the most part, he did do a great job passing out of the double teams but at times, when his team would need a bucket, that could be a factor though I'm not really criticizing him for finding the open man as he's making the appropriate decision in theory. And another thing you could say in defense of Shaq is it's easier to force a low-post player to give the ball up if you double team him on the catch as you haven't initiated your move or put the ball on the floor yet which is what the Rockets did while the Magic switched it up more often in terms of the angles they came at, the timing as they'd sometimes double him on the catch or during his move although you can also say, that can at times confuse an offensive player too since you don't know how the defense is going to play you at this particular possession and you aren't able to get a consistent rhythm and feel in terms of how to react to the defense. I also don't think Shaq's game had fully developed yet in terms of offensive skill although he had really improved compared to his rookie and second year since he could hit the one hand turnaround occasionally, had better range and touch on his jump hook, was more effective with the drop-step to the baseline and read the double teams a LOT better. He'd peak during the 3 peat where his footwork would continue to improve, his low-post game was more diverse while obviously having the brute strength and physical dominance (also added weight).

I'd also say Hakeem's ability to face up on the perimeter sort of skews the percentage of double teams they saw. I'd vouch those numbers would be closer if you strictly looked at how much they were double teamed with their back to the basket.

Another thing I'd like to touch on is the issue regarding Shaq's "stat-padding" in game 2 which was discussed earlier. I don't think it's fair to say Shaq was stat-padding because it's a ridiculous assertion to expect a team to give up at halftime in a game of this magnitude. If anything, he deserves credit for playing hard and doing his best to bring Orlando back into the game but it's also not exactly unusual to see the team with a big lead coast while the losing team plays with a real sense of urgency. On top of that, I didn't feel Houston was ever in real danger of losing the game because of the way they played on offense late in the 4th. You'll notice Orlando cut the lead down to 9 around midway in the 4th quarter but Houston then really started to run the clock down on offense and Orlando was also resorting to pressure defense which took time off the clock anyway since they were looking to force turnovers and make it harder for Houston to get the ball up the floor. This strategy clearly worked for Houston with Drexler just isolating and letting the clock run down as the rest of the team spaced the floor allowing him to penetrate and it was the reason Houston had the game in the bag. The lead they had established earlier allowed them to play this way from a strategic standpoint. At the 1:42:20 mark, Guokas talks about how Drexler milking the clock was successful for them.

Hakeem was great in the first half this game (22 pts on 9/17 FG), Orlando chose to play him straight up with Shaq in the first quarter and once he got accustomed to it a bit and knew the double wasn't coming at all, he was able to get to the middle and he drew two fouls on Shaq in a span of 90 seconds which forced them to switch Grant on him and mix up single coverage with some double teaming for the rest of the first half. You can hold Shaq accountable for Hakeem's big first half (even though not all of Hakeem's pts were scored vs him) when you consider Orlando's strategy of guarding him straight up didn't work early on, allowed Houston to establish a big lead and Shaq getting into foul trouble played a part in that. The Magic also stated that they should've double teamed Hakeem more often in this game which you'll see in one of the quotes below. Shaq was mostly getting double teamed right off the catch in this game, did a good job finding the open man but he also had a big "quiet stretch" in the first half as Houston could take away his individual shot creation with quick double teaming and that impacted his ability to get in rhythm. He only had 10 pts on 3/10 shooting at halftime with Houston up 22 but a big time second half with 23 pts on 9/12 shooting though the commentator(s) do mention he wasn't a dominating factor. If you're comparing their box score production for this game, you have to consider Houston's strategy in terms of the way they used Hakeem in the second half, especially the 4th quarter and Hakeem also had to take a couple of late in the clock/bailout shots too (he missed both) with the way those possessions had played out (1:16:50 and 1:47:28). That's the difference between a 14/28 and a 14/30 shooting night.

Next, 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. ... ug=2125909

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/1995-0 ... omjanovich

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/j ... ard-title/

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.



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.



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.



Also, did you track how many shots Shaq and Hakeem created in general as opposed to assists? These would include hockey assists, open looks they create that their teammates missed or got fouled on etc. I'd imagine they both had quite a few. In general, I did think they both did a great job reading the defense, it was rare to see them force the issue and they often made quick, split second decisions in finding gaps and openings in the defense and were able to hit shooters or cutters. Shaq's passing was probably the biggest improvement in his game from second to third year. I remember both Walton and Guokas also commending his passing in this series.

It would've also been interesting to record the shots they altered, the deflections they had, the turnovers they forced and how well they played help/team defense in general though I understand this in particular is hard to account for. Both in this series and in general, Hakeem was superior in these aspects of the game. I've already talked about Shaq's subpar transition defense but Hakeem did a pretty good job at getting back on defense and on top of that, Hakeem's help defense was also superior albeit he wasn't able to help out as much as he normally did largely due to the concern of Shaq benefiting from it in the sense of being able to finish plays and get OREB/putback opportunities. Hakeem did well altering shots in the paint with his quick reflexes, length, the quickness of his jump and how well he'd react and anticipate to plays developing. There were instances where he'd deflect passes breaking up a play, save a basket here and there and also his ability to shade/double on defense allowing him to dictate the offensive player's decision making on the court. Here's an example of this at the 1:18 mark in the video below. You'll notice Orlando running a play for Penny in the post vs Cassell which is a mismatch in single coverage so Hakeem comes over to help and Penny immediately backs his dribble out towards the perimeter.



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 and keep in mind with Hakeem often pulling Shaq out of the middle, it meant he was unable to protect the rim. It may seem like cherry-picking to isolate one possession but we have to keep in mind basketball is a possession game so every possession matters. fatal9 posted a compilation of 10 turnovers Hakeem was able to force against Shaq but that's just against Shaq; he had a few more deflections and steals in the series and there were a couple of instances where he was able to force a bad pass resulting in a TO due to his presence since he was quick to provide help and managed to cut off a passing lane or forced a tougher passing angle. The second play in the Shaq turnovers compilation fatal9 made is an example of Hakeem stripping Shaq but I'm not sure if he got credit for the steal since he wasn't the one who secured the possession (a lot of times I've seen the person who forced the deflection get credit but at times I haven't) and this is a big play because it resulted in a defense to offense opportunity as Houston was able to get an easy transition bucket due to the steal. Turnovers to transition buckets are crucial due to this since they're possible 4 pt turnarounds. Shaq had 10 more turnovers than Hakeem in this series so it's a safe bet that a greater number of his turnovers led to fastbreak opportunities and thus hurt his team more so than Hakeem's. Another example is the play at 1:30 from fatal9's video as Hakeem strips Shaq, Drexler secures the ball and is able to get in the open court, draw the foul and nails both free throws. That's another possible 4 pt turnaround.

Also, game 2 features an example of Hakeem not getting credit for the appropriate number of steals. The box score credits Hakeem with 1 steal but he had two deflections and both resulted in turnovers forced. I've posted the link above so you can fast forward to the 40:40 mark and you'll see Hakeem strip Anderson on the drive and Cassell is able to secure the ball. Fast forward to the 1:12:40 mark and you'll see a turnover forced by Hakeem as him and Drexler trapped Dennis Scott who was the ball handler on the PnR and Hakeem was able to deflect the pass by getting his arms up and Horry was able to secure the ball.

Also, how many of their defensive plays in general were able to successfully ignite the break? Besides the two examples in the "shaq tos" video where Hakeem's 2 strips on Shaq lead to fastbreak buckets, go to 2:50 in the Hakeem game 1 highlight video I posted above in which I cited some of the plays showcasing Hakeem's ability to evade the double and you'll see Hakeem make a block on Shaw which ignites the fastbreak and Houston is able to get a score. Another at 3:45 in a Hakeem game 4 highlight video which you can see below; Penny tries to hit Shaq with a drop-off, Hakeem steals the ball, feeds Cassell on the outlet and Drexler is able to get a transition bucket + the foul. Igniting the break isn't credited for in the box score but often results in easy offense so this is something that Hakeem should get credit for. I definitely feel he had more plays that ignited the break than Shaq in this series with his defensive prowess with his steals, blocks, outlet passes and even though he's not directly igniting the break by boxing Shaq out, he is allowing his teammates to get the DREB and get out in transition taking advantage of Orlando's poor transition defense.



Another thing that would've been nice to record is how many shots players missed while double teamed and whether the man who was being double teamed off of was able to benefit from it or not. For example, if you go to the 1:05:35 in game 2, Shaq shot the jump hook over Hakeem with Horry leaving Grant to contest Shaq's shot. Grant was able to slip in towards the basket for an offensive rebound. I do not consider this a negative on Shaq's behalf since he was double teamed, was able to get the shot up and Horace Grant benefited from it since his man left to attend to Shaq. How many plays did Hakeem have like this especially as Mario Elie had alluded to in that they wanted Hakeem to play outside due to strategic reasons and if he misses, it could open up opportunities for everyone else to crash the offensive glass with Shaq away from the paint? An offensive rebound by Hakeem's teammates on a missed jumper isn't something I'd necessarily credit to Hakeem but we have to keep in mind this is a way Houston wanted him to play strategically.

In general, I came away thinking Shaq played well in this series (certainly better than Ewing and Robinson in their respective series vs Houston) but I also didn't feel Shaq was nearly as impactful as Hakeem in the 5v5 team setting which is really what basketball is all about. If you want to look at their match up strictly from a 1v1 perspective, sure you could say Shaq was able to do a better job scoring against Hakeem than Hakeem did against Shaq but overall in the 5v5 game, Hakeem definitely seemed more impactful to me. Was it a big difference? No, but Hakeem did enough to prove himself as the superior player but I'll also say the center match up didn't really decide the series. Scott and Anderson didn't play up to expectations, lack of experience was big, Horry was big with his all around play and was a mismatch for Grant and their transition defense (not just Shaq but the entire team) was also poor where Houston was able to thrive largely due to Drexler who was terrific in the open court. Orlando actually pointed to three reasons why they were down 0-3 which you can see below (transition defense, outside shooting and guarding Hakeem).

Orlando denies that lack of experience is the main factor in a finals that looks to be much shorter than the Magic figured. Players point to poor outside shooting, problems in transition and the defensive dilemma posed by Hakeem Olajuwon.

But Orlando's veteran, Horace Grant, sees the look of a champion in Houston's eyes and something else in his team.

"For the younger guys, being down 0-3, they have a tendency to be a little anxious, to play a little tight," he said. "It just comes from being in this situation before."

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. ... ug=2126301
NBA TV Clutch City Documentary Trailer:
https://vimeo.com/134215151
90sAllDecade
Starter
Posts: 2,264
And1: 818
Joined: Jul 09, 2012
Location: Clutch City, Texas
   

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 

Post#40 » by 90sAllDecade » Thu Oct 29, 2020 6:30 pm

Also for those that never saw young Hakeem, he was still an all time great dominant center especially defensively and in the playoffs.

We should also focus on his longevity compared to Shaq and Bird, look at thier whole careers and number of games played in these seasons. As well as the team support and coaching given in comparision.

Here is game three of the 1986 playoffs with Hakeem vs Kareem and Magic.

He dominates that series, beating a #1 seed former champion 62 win Laker team as a second year player vs older Kareem and prime Magic as well as Pat Riley coaching:

Hakeem vs Kareem & Magic 1986 Playoffs Game 3

Let the playlist play to watch the full game:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL879534B3D971C6BE


Game 5 for a Bonus:



Image
Image

Image
Image

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1986-nba-western-conference-finals-rockets-vs-lakers.html
NBA TV Clutch City Documentary Trailer:
https://vimeo.com/134215151

Return to Player Comparisons