RealGM

Peak only, how would you rank them from 1-4?

Jokic
Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan

Shaq, Hakeem, Duncan, Jokic

Olajuwon, Shaq, Duncan, Jokic

Olajuwon's two way play was phenomenal in his peak. Probably a top 5 peak in truth.

Duncan
Shaq
Hakeem

Jokic

4 different #1s in 4 posts—very interesting.

(Future Jokic )
Duncan
Hakeem
Shaq
Jokic

O'Neal
Jokić
Olajuwon
Duncan

1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Jokic
4. Hakeem

It's splitting hairs, there's no order here that upset me too much.

Shaq

Hakeem

Duncan

Jokic

Think there’s a bigger gap between 2 and 3 than 3 and 4 though

probably Jokic
Shaq
Olajuwon
Timmeh

Seeing how every single order possible has been mentioned, it looks like I need to finish my project very quickly

MyUniBroDavis wrote:Shaq

Hakeem

Duncan

Jokic

Think there’s a bigger gap between 2 and 3 than 3 and 4 though

dont duncan cook shaq in impact?

ShaqAttac wrote:

MyUniBroDavis wrote:Shaq

Hakeem

Duncan

Jokic

Think there’s a bigger gap between 2 and 3 than 3 and 4 though

dont duncan cook shaq in impact?

Not based on the RAPM i've seen?

Im Your Father wrote:

ShaqAttac wrote:

MyUniBroDavis wrote:Shaq

Hakeem

Duncan

Jokic

Think there’s a bigger gap between 2 and 3 than 3 and 4 though

dont duncan cook shaq in impact?

Not based on the RAPM i've seen?

Both the extended sourced sets we have for that time frame(cheema, je) have duncan(and kg) clearing over most any time frame(and that includes when data is playoff-weighted)

Duncan sees significant granular improvement in the postseason, is playing way more minutes than his teammates(thus seeing his apm and on/off such suffer from staggering with bad replacements), and even in box on/off hybrid clears(aupm). Duncan's teams also tend to go just fine when teammates miss time(robinson and many in 2003).

I very much do not think there's a impact winning case to be made for shaq. Even in 1999, he is winning dominantly with a greatly diminished version of a guy who came about as close as the jordan-less bulls to a champtionship. Duncan also posts the best extended splits of anyone from the 2000's, 90's and 80's save for Lebron and Magic and then extends that for his post-prime.

With all due respect to the big diesel, you are not making a serious case for him based on emperics

How impactful on offense was Shaq really? He destroyed the offensive boards and was like a black hole drawing defenders into the paint. But I don’t think the Lakers really capitalized on that gravity as well as they could’ve given the dogma of that era. So he was taking up a lot of space in the paint and really wasn’t as valuable for team spacing as he should’ve been.

Aside from 2001 when everyone was firing on all cylinders, the Lakers didn’t really have an outlier offensive playoffs worthy of the talent that they had.

Peregrine01 wrote:How impactful on offense was Shaq really? He destroyed the offensive boards and was like a black hole drawing defenders into the paint. But I don’t think the Lakers really capitalized on that gravity as well as they could’ve given the dogma of that era. So he was taking up a lot of space in the paint and really wasn’t as valuable for team spacing as he should’ve been.

Aside from 2001 when everyone was firing on all cylinders, the Lakers didn’t really have an outlier offensive playoffs worthy of the talent that they had.

I mean, they were +8.7 in 2000, how is that not an outlier? How is that below expectations?

Shaq
Hakeem
Joker
Duncan

Shaq, Duncan, Jokic, Hakeem

70sFan wrote:

Peregrine01 wrote:How impactful on offense was Shaq really? He destroyed the offensive boards and was like a black hole drawing defenders into the paint. But I don’t think the Lakers really capitalized on that gravity as well as they could’ve given the dogma of that era. So he was taking up a lot of space in the paint and really wasn’t as valuable for team spacing as he should’ve been.

Aside from 2001 when everyone was firing on all cylinders, the Lakers didn’t really have an outlier offensive playoffs worthy of the talent that they had.

I mean, they were +8.7 in 2000, how is that not an outlier? How is that below expectations?

Nash, Lebron, and Magic have all led multiple much better playoff offenses though I guess help is fair(do think Kobe's minutes jumping is an underrated factor). That said, even if you like the offensive stuff(and it does improve from the rs), the defensive drop-off outweighs the offensive improvement.

If we use sansterre's psrs, Lakers drop from +8.4 to +7.79 in the playoffs and that playoff-rating is probably inflated given a 10-point win over the suns after they beat the duncan-less spurs(something to consider for those under the impression duncan wasn't the best player in 1999 ). For reference, that is worse than all 4 of Lebron's championship winners(worst was 2013 Heat at +10), worse than all of Duncan's(worst was 2003 at +10), and worse than both the 08 Celtics and the 06 Heat(both at +8). It ranks 96th among playoff teams post-shotclock which is a pretty staggering fall considering that the Lakers rs-rating ranked 17th.

Certainly not anything close to a "historic outlier" among champions. 2001 is really the only time a Shaq team plays like a "historic outlier" on offense(2nd highest rating at +13!) and overall(1st at +20) and the main driver of that elevation is almost certainly Kobe