RealGM

seems like lebron has the best numbers but how does shaqs stuff look vs everyone else?

I think Kareem, Chamberlain and Russell were all more impactful - primarily because of their defense. Russell and Chamberlain's correlation with defense and winning seems more valuable to me. Kareem is not in their class but still way ahead of Shaq on defense while being a comparable offensive threat, if not a slightly superior one. (better range, can't get hacked, seems more comfortable as a passing hub)

Jordan was a better scorer than Shaq period.

HeartBreakKid wrote:I think Kareem, Chamberlain and Russell were all more impactful - primarily because of their defense. Russell and Chamberlain's correlation with defense and winning seems more valuable to me. Kareem is not in their class but way ahead of Shaq while being a comparable offensive threat, if not a slightly superior one. (better range, can't get hacked, seems more comfortable as a passing hub)

Jordan was a better scorer than Shaq period.

wat about mj defense

Jordan vs shaq for defense is interesting cause shaq plays a more important defensive role but jordan is a better defender for his position

ShaqAttac wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:I think Kareem, Chamberlain and Russell were all more impactful - primarily because of their defense. Russell and Chamberlain's correlation with defense and winning seems more valuable to me. Kareem is not in their class but way ahead of Shaq while being a comparable offensive threat, if not a slightly superior one. (better range, can't get hacked, seems more comfortable as a passing hub)

Jordan was a better scorer than Shaq period.

wat about mj defense

About as good as it can be for a guard.

HeartBreakKid wrote:

ShaqAttac wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:I think Kareem, Chamberlain and Russell were all more impactful - primarily because of their defense. Russell and Chamberlain's correlation with defense and winning seems more valuable to me. Kareem is not in their class but way ahead of Shaq while being a comparable offensive threat, if not a slightly superior one. (better range, can't get hacked, seems more comfortable as a passing hub)

Jordan was a better scorer than Shaq period.

wat about mj defense

About as good as it can be for a guard.

was he better than shaq on d then

ShaqAttac wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:

ShaqAttac wrote:wat about mj defense

About as good as it can be for a guard.

was he better than shaq on d then

Is hard to know tbh, but i am low on shaq defense

Most people i see having shaq defense over jordan

ShaqAttac wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:

ShaqAttac wrote:wat about mj defense

About as good as it can be for a guard.

was he better than shaq on d then

I don't know.

I certainly think if they both played today, Jordan would be. As for how they were in their time which is a bit more relevant...it's more difficult to say.

Shaq was really bad when he was not close to the rim. Shaq was a fast sprinter when he was in shape, but his lateral movement wasn't good, and he was incredibly uncomfortable guarding anyone who could shoot.

But Shaq was a great a shotblocker and rebounder. Being a big body in the paint helped a lot in those days, and bigs who played on the perimeter were not that common, and high pick and roll was not used enough to punish players like Shaq. I'm not sure how to factor that in because Shaq's weaknesses were not pronounced for his era (I suppose you could say that for every all time great).

I'm starting to come around that Jordan might be a better defender than Shaq. Shaq was a good anchor but ultimately he had a lot of help on his better defensive teams and good coaching. Shaq has some holes you could exploit.

HeartBreakKid wrote:

ShaqAttac wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:About as good as it can be for a guard.

was he better than shaq on d then

I don't know.

I certainly think if they both played today, Jordan would be. As for how they were in their time which is a bit more relevant...it's more difficult to say.

Shaq was really bad when he was not close to the rim. Shaq was a fast sprinter when he was in shape, but his lateral movement wasn't good, and he was incredibly uncomfortable guarding anyone who could shoot.

But Shaq was a great a shotblocker and rebounder. Being a big body in the paint helped a lot in those days, and bigs who played on the perimeter were not that common, and high pick and roll was not used enough to punish players like Shaq. I'm not sure how to factor that in because Shaq's weaknesses were not pronounced for his era (I suppose you could say that for every all time great).

I'm starting to come around that Jordan might be a better defender than Shaq. Shaq was a good anchor but ultimately he had a lot of help on his better defensive teams and good coaching. Shaq has some holes you could exploit.

did shaq or mj have more defensive help? realgm say shaq defense went away in the playoffs but realgm also says bullls d was fine with no mj

ShaqAttac wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:

ShaqAttac wrote:was he better than shaq on d then

I don't know.

I certainly think if they both played today, Jordan would be. As for how they were in their time which is a bit more relevant...it's more difficult to say.

Shaq was really bad when he was not close to the rim. Shaq was a fast sprinter when he was in shape, but his lateral movement wasn't good, and he was incredibly uncomfortable guarding anyone who could shoot.

But Shaq was a great a shotblocker and rebounder. Being a big body in the paint helped a lot in those days, and bigs who played on the perimeter were not that common, and high pick and roll was not used enough to punish players like Shaq. I'm not sure how to factor that in because Shaq's weaknesses were not pronounced for his era (I suppose you could say that for every all time great).

I'm starting to come around that Jordan might be a better defender than Shaq. Shaq was a good anchor but ultimately he had a lot of help on his better defensive teams and good coaching. Shaq has some holes you could exploit.

did shaq or mj have more defensive help? realgm say shaq defense went away in the playoffs but realgm also says bullls d was fine with no mj

Jordan second three peat bulls were stacked defensively and the first three peat ones are probably still better defensive cast than any of prime shaq teams, so the answer here is likely jordan

00 Lakers had the #1 defense in the league. Shaq was committed defensively that year but it's not like he carried them on that end. Kobe, Fish, Horry, Harper...they were as good or better than any of the early 90s Bulls defensive supporting casts.

The entire premise of the thread (i.e. that Lebron had the best peak and it's Shaq vs. everyone else) is highly debateable to say the least. But I do think Shaq's 00 year stacks up well vs. 67 Wilt and 77 Kareem. The fact that he 1. won the chip, and 2. played well throughout definitely helps his case. It's a similar narrative to 91 MJ. I just have a hard time with the idea that 00 Shaq was as important/impactful offensively despite his dominance.

67 Wilt's stats decreased in the playoffs where Hal Greer became the main guy. Kareem was incredible offensively vs. Portland in 77, but Walton and Lucas did a number on him on the other end. Their cases aren't as clean imo.

ShaqAttac wrote:

HeartBreakKid wrote:I think Kareem, Chamberlain and Russell were all more impactful - primarily because of their defense. Russell and Chamberlain's correlation with defense and winning seems more valuable to me. Kareem is not in their class but way ahead of Shaq while being a comparable offensive threat, if not a slightly superior one. (better range, can't get hacked, seems more comfortable as a passing hub)

Jordan was a better scorer than Shaq period.

wat about mj defense

Peak or generally speaking. MJ was more consistent year to year, Shaq had more defensive impact at his peak, MJ overall.

VanWest82 wrote:67 Wilt's stats decreased in the playoffs where Hal Greer became the main guy.

Greer didn't become the main guy, he just shot more than Wilt. Chamberlain was still their main offensive force, their playmaker and their best defender.

Kareem was incredible offensively vs. Portland in 77, but Walton and Lucas did a number on him on the other end.

Walton had the worst offensive series against Kareem in 1977.

Their cases aren't as clean imo.

Shaq's defense collapsed in the playoffs and Lakers were below average defensively in 2000. Teams really abused his lack of quickness. I know that defense isn't captured by stats, but if you want to criticize Kareem for his defense, Shaq's defense was tiers below that.

70sFan wrote:

VanWest82 wrote:67 Wilt's stats decreased in the playoffs where Hal Greer became the main guy.

Greer didn't become the main guy, he just shot more than Wilt. Chamberlain was still their main offensive force, their playmaker and their best defender.

Kareem was incredible offensively vs. Portland in 77, but Walton and Lucas did a number on him on the other end.

Walton had the worst offensive series against Kareem in 1977.

Their cases aren't as clean imo.

Shaq's defense collapsed in the playoffs and Lakers were below average defensively in 2000. Teams really abused his lack of quickness. I know that defense isn't captured by stats, but if you want to criticize Kareem for his defense, Shaq's defense was tiers below that.

This. People really overlap "score the most points" with being the best offensive player and sometimes the best player in general and it makes no sense

Greer went from 19 shots per game in the regular season to over 25 in the playoffs compared with 15 for Wilt. Greer also upped his play making to over 5 apg. His playoff USG was greater than Wilt's even taking play making into account. That doesn't mean Wilt wasn't still the best all around player for them in the playoffs, but when you're splitting hairs comparing GOAT peaks then it's notable.

Walton and Lucas both averaged better numbers in WCF than they did in the regular season, and Portland won primarily because of those guys. Who was the player that abused Shaq defensively in 00? Vlade? Rik Smits? No one? I don't think it's even remotely correct to suggest Shaq's defense collapsed in 00 playoffs or that he was tiers below Kareem as a defender those years. I'd say they were very similar, except Shaq won instead of having has man go off en route to a sweep.

VanWest82 wrote:Walton and Lucas both averaged better numbers in WCF than they did in the regular season, and Portland won primarily because of those guys.

Walton in RS: 18.6/14.4/3.8 on 56.3 TS% in 34.8 mpg
Walton vs Sixers: 18.5/19.0/5.0 on 57.6 TS% in 37.7 mpg

Walton vs Lakers: 19.3/14.8/5.8 on 50.7 TS% in 43.5 mpg

Now please, explain me how these numbers are better.

Who was the player that abused Shaq defensively in 00? Vlade? Rik Smits? No one?

How about Portland? Indiana? Kings? Players don't play one on one games on the court. Shaq was abused by teams in P&R situations and he struggled a lot against spread out offenses of Portland, Indiana and Sacramento, that's why they all overperformed against Lakers in their series.

I don't think it's even remotely correct to suggest Shaq's defense collapsed in 00 playoffs

I mean, Lakers went from the best defense in the league to below average. How can you call that differently?

or that he was tiers below Kareem as a defender those years. I'd say they were very similar, except Shaq won instead of having has man go off en route to a sweep.

Only someone who never watched 1977 and then 2000 Lakers playoff games can say that Shaq was similar defensively to Jabbar.

VanWest82 wrote:00 Lakers had the #1 defense in the league. Shaq was committed defensively that year but it's not like he carried them on that end. Kobe, Fish, Horry, Harper...they were as good or better than any of the early 90s Bulls defensive supporting casts.

The entire premise of the thread (i.e. that Lebron had the best peak and it's Shaq vs. everyone else) is highly debateable to say the least. But I do think Shaq's 00 year stacks up well vs. 67 Wilt and 77 Kareem. The fact that he 1. won the chip, and 2. played well throughout definitely helps his case. It's a similar narrative to 91 MJ. I just have a hard time with the idea that 00 Shaq was as important/impactful offensively despite his dominance.

67 Wilt's stats decreased in the playoffs where Hal Greer became the main guy. Kareem was incredible offensively vs. Portland in 77, but Walton and Lucas did a number on him on the other end. Their cases aren't as clean imo.

I mean, I know blocks aren't everything, but Kareem averaged the most amount of blocks that series at 3.8 BPG. The next closest was Walton at 2.3.

Also, I think the Geer point is highly debatable. He scored more on notably worse efficiency. And I don't know if I would say he was their main offensive creator. To each their own.

70sFan wrote:

VanWest82 wrote:Walton and Lucas both averaged better numbers in WCF than they did in the regular season, and Portland won primarily because of those guys.

Walton in RS: 18.6/14.4/3.8 on 56.3 TS% in 34.8 mpg
Walton vs Sixers: 18.5/19.0/5.0 on 57.6 TS% in 37.7 mpg

Walton vs Lakers: 19.3/14.8/5.8 on 50.7 TS% in 43.5 mpg

Now please, explain me how these numbers are better.

Who was the player that abused Shaq defensively in 00? Vlade? Rik Smits? No one?

How about Portland? Indiana? Kings? Players don't play one on one games on the court. Shaq was abused by teams in P&R situations and he struggled a lot against spread out offenses of Portland, Indiana and Sacramento, that's why they all overperformed against Lakers in their series.

I don't think it's even remotely correct to suggest Shaq's defense collapsed in 00 playoffs

I mean, Lakers went from the best defense in the league to below average. How can you call that differently?

or that he was tiers below Kareem as a defender those years. I'd say they were very similar, except Shaq won instead of having has man go off en route to a sweep.

Only someone who never watched 1977 and then 2000 Lakers playoff games can say that Shaq was similar defensively to Jabbar.

It's interesting how on one hand you're trying to narrow the argument to specifically how ONLY Walton did vs. Kareem (career high 5.8 apg in a playoff series btw), but then when it comes to Shaq it's all about how the team defense performed.

Also, 00 Lakers playoff DRTG with Shaq ON = 104 in 1000 mins vs. 107.5 DRTG total 1109 mins. So their DRTG with him off the floor was what...139?? Yeah, sure seems like Shaq was the problem lol.

They were a +1.6 relative defence in the postseason, and were it not for the Suns series it would be even worse. You do not think it is odd how the “#1 defence” saw three of their four opponents perform above their season average offensive efficiency? How they went from a 98 regular season defensive rating to a 109.5 one against the Blazers and a 114.5 one against the Pacers? Come on now.

Also, not sure your source for that 104 number, but in any case, that would still be like seven points worse than their regular season Shaq-on level…

VanWest82 wrote:

70sFan wrote:

VanWest82 wrote:Walton and Lucas both averaged better numbers in WCF than they did in the regular season, and Portland won primarily because of those guys.

Walton in RS: 18.6/14.4/3.8 on 56.3 TS% in 34.8 mpg
Walton vs Sixers: 18.5/19.0/5.0 on 57.6 TS% in 37.7 mpg

Walton vs Lakers: 19.3/14.8/5.8 on 50.7 TS% in 43.5 mpg

Now please, explain me how these numbers are better.

Who was the player that abused Shaq defensively in 00? Vlade? Rik Smits? No one?

How about Portland? Indiana? Kings? Players don't play one on one games on the court. Shaq was abused by teams in P&R situations and he struggled a lot against spread out offenses of Portland, Indiana and Sacramento, that's why they all overperformed against Lakers in their series.

I don't think it's even remotely correct to suggest Shaq's defense collapsed in 00 playoffs

I mean, Lakers went from the best defense in the league to below average. How can you call that differently?

or that he was tiers below Kareem as a defender those years. I'd say they were very similar, except Shaq won instead of having has man go off en route to a sweep.

Only someone who never watched 1977 and then 2000 Lakers playoff games can say that Shaq was similar defensively to Jabbar.

It's interesting how on one hand you're trying to narrow the argument to specifically how ONLY Walton did vs. Kareem (career high 5.8 apg in a playoff series btw), but then when it comes to Shaq it's all about how the team defense performed.

Also, 00 Lakers playoff DRTG with Shaq ON = 104 in 1000 mins vs. 107.5 DRTG total 1109 mins. So their DRTG with him off the floor was what...139?? Yeah, sure seems like Shaq was the problem lol.

Per basketball-reference, the Lakers in 2000 PS with Shaq ON is 105.6 and Off is 114.6.

You are using the PER 100 estimates which are not an actual calculation for Defensive Rating. What you are using is a formula which derives an "estimate" on defensive rating for a player, but isn't an actual =/- calculation.

But yeah, the Lakers struggled defensively against Indiana and Portland [they were solid against the Kings and great against the offensive trio of Rodney Rogers, Jason Kidd and Shawn Marion [all sub-50 TS%] Suns [16th/29th in the RS in terms of Ortg and miraculously won against the 2000 Spurs in round 1 with a, wait for it, 92 Ortg]...think about that, A suns team who put up a whopping 92 Ortg in round 1 put up 101 Ortg against the Lakers.