colts18 wrote:I definitely think Peak Shaq could lead that TWolves team past the Lakers. He was in a similar situation in 2000. In 2000, The pacers had much more talent than his supporting cast.
Let's compare 00 Shaq vs 04 KG:
2000 Pacers: 56 wins, 4.16 SRS
2004 Lakers: 56 wins, 4.35 SRS
Those are equal quality team so we can compare what Shaq and KG did.
Shaq's cast played worse than KG's. Here is what their casts did in those series. The situations were even comparable because Cassell missed 2 games and so did Kobe (In a previous post I showed that 04 Cassell>00 Kobe).
per 36 minutes:
Shaq: 12.1 PPG, 4.5 AST, 3.8 AST-1.6 TOV, .510 TS%
KG: 12.2 PPG, 4.9 Reb, 2.6 AST-1.4 TOV, .528 TS%
Advanced:
Shaq: 6.56 game score per 36, 0 guys with a 10+ game score, 109 O rating-117 D rating, -7.3 O rating- D rating diff
KG: 6.70 game score per 36, 1 guy with a 10+ game (14.4), 107 O rating-108 D rating, -0.7 O rating- D rating diff
As you can see, KG's cast performed better than Shaq's cast against similar caliber opponents. Do you want to know why Shaq's team won and KG's lost? It's because Shaq stepped up when his team was overwhelmed while KG wilted. Shaq had a 31 game score while his next best player only had a 9.7 game score. KG puts up only a 18 game score while his next best player puts up a 14.4 game score. Shaq steps up with a 116 O rating (best player at 96 O rating) while KG steps down with a 100 O rating (next best player at 105). Shaq puts up a 35 PER, KG only puts up a 22 PER. It's easy to see why Shaq was a much superior player
OK, stop for a second and let's think about this logically. You're making this abstract and about numbers, when this is a specific example where we actually have context and facts. Numbers can do a good job of summarizing a player's contributions over a time period, but the game isn't played with numbers. So I want you to explain, using basketball logic, how this starting line-up:
2004 Michael Olowokandi, Kevin Garnett, Trenton Hassell, Latrell Sprewell, Darrick Martin...swaps out KG for 2000 Shaq (and maybe moves Olowokandi to the bench in exchange for Mark Madsen) and wins a best-of-7 series against the 2004 Lakers. Shaq's actual 2000 numbers against Rik Smits and the Pacers are completely irrelevent, because he is on longer facing Rik Smits in the paint. No, he'd be facing the 2004 version of Shaq, with a little Karl Malone chaser. Similarly, the numbers of the 2004 supporting cast of the Wolves are no longer valid either, because they are no longer playing with KG, so we now need to figure out what they would produce next to Shaq.
Here's some questions for you:*What is the Wolves' new offensive strategy? It can't be to pound it in to 2000 Shaq, because news flash: the Lakers would probably be defending against that. 2004 Shaq is leaning his monster frame all over 2000 Shaq (2004 Shaq might be bad against the pick-and-roll, but he's even bigger than 2000 Shaq and he LOVES to stay in the paint and lean). And oh yeah, Karl Malone isn't guarding Mark Madsen...ever. Instead, Malone is parked in the lane too, with his full attention focused on Shaq. And oh, Devean George and Gary Payton also aren't guarding Trenton Hassell and Darrick Martin...ever. Instead, they are parked around the key, waiting for someone to try to enter the ball to 2000 Shaq so that they can either steal it or triple (quadruple?) team poor 2000 Shaq. This team has no spacing. Sprewell can shoot to his heart's content, much like he did in the actual 2004 series, because even Kobe only has 1 eye on him and the other is focused on the superstar. But 2000 Shaq is surrounded in the paint, and he can't bring his game out of the paint because that'd be dumb, it's not his strength. So what is the team to do?
I know! Maybe the Wolves will go to their bench. Bring in Wally and Hoiberg for Hassell and Martin. This leads to the follow-up question:
Who is playing point guard for the Wolves? KG's NEVER been a point guard. But he had to be for long stretches of that series because the main 2 point guards on the team (Cassell and Hudson) were injured and the only one left was signed to a 10-day contract. So now, Martin's on the bench. Wally (oh yeah, did I mention Wally was playing through 3 cracked vertebrae in that postseason? Just a note) and Hoiberg are shooters. Shaq's in the paint. Madsen (or whoever is playing the 4) shouldn't touch the ball ever. So who's setting up the team and creating offense? With the shooters out there George and Payton are now actually paying attention to their men. 2000 Shaq "only" has to deal with 2004 Shaq on his back and Karl Malone fronting him (because, you know, he's NEVER going to guard Madsen). Kobe still has 1 eye on Sprewell, so maybe he can still score some points. But other than that...yeah, the Wolves are still stuck on offense. And oh yeah, on defense...
When the Wolves have their shooter line-up in, who's guarding...anyone on the Lakers? 2000 Shaq has his hands absolutely full trying to deal with 2004 Shaq's big body in the paint. Which means that Sprewell, Wally, Hoiberg and Madsen are now on islands against Kobe, Mailman, Payton and George (or Fisher). I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say that the 2004 Lakers are having an offensive FIELD DAY right now. Do you disagree?
Summary: I think the 2004 Wolves are getting swept with 2000 Shaq in there instead of KG. Actually, Cassell was able to go (at some attenuated percentage) for 2 games, so maybe the Shaq Wolves might win a game or two. But I see no way they make this a series. You keep talking about how the other Wolves were producing not-terrible offensive numbers in the 2004 playoffs. Question: why do you think that was? With their starting point guard limping and eventually out, who do you think was creating offense for them? Who do you think was creating spacing so that they could maneuver? Who do you think was either making the pass, or making the pass-that-led-to-the-pass for open shots? Often from the high-post, mind you, because the paint was filled with huge superstars. Heck, who do you think was bringing the ball up the court more times than not?
Peak Shaq was a MONSTER. But his skill set doesn't allow for him to create under these conditions. He would have still produced, because he was that great. But I see no realistic way that he produces enough, in those conditions, to beat Shaq, Kobe and those Lakers 4 times in 7 games. If you disagree, then tell me how. Only, don't tell me with numbers. I want you to explain, using basketball strategy, how your theory might have played out.
