How Much of Shaq's Dominance Can Be Explained by the Lack of Quality Centers?

[onedayattatime]

disclaimer: this isn't really a shaq-bashing post. his dominance is simply what happened. but i noticed that his peak occurred at the same time that his main rivals from the 90s had aged out, and in the early 2000s, there were so few centers of note. would his legacy have turned out differently if he had to deal with prime olajuwon, robinson, and ewing in the 2000s?

[70sFan]

I guess more competition would cause his resume look less impressive, but other than that I don't see the major change. Maybe he'd struggle more in some postseason series, but he already faced Twin Towers 4 times in 5 years (1999-03), you can't get anything tougher than that outside of prime Nate Thurmond.

I think people are often unaware that Shaq actually had a strong center contemporary who was on his level during the early 2000s and who often could outplay him h2h.

[falcolombardi]

I guess more competition would cause his resume look less impressive, but other than that I don't see the major change. Maybe he'd struggle more in some postseason series, but he already faced Twin Towers 4 times in 5 years (1999-03), you can't get anything tougher than that outside of prime Nate Thurmond.

I think people are often unaware that Shaq actually had a strong center contemporary who was on his level during the early 2000s and who often could outplay him h2h.

Yep, lots of people wrongly assume that as lakers often beat the spurs (not in 99 or 03 tho) that shaq must have been outplaying duncan

[FuShengTHEGreat]

The Mike Tyson of NBA history.

Both cut of the same cloth. They were champions and are all time greats. Both never outperformed any prime all time greats when winning at their apex. A lot of career defining performances vs intimidated lesser foes/guys past their physical prime.


All the guys that could score and rebound as good as he could (Hakeem Olajuwon, Karl Malone, Tim Duncan) ran both Shaq and his teams outta the playoffs. Just like Tyson when he ran into Evander and Lennox of comparable talent who weren't overrawed by his KO aura.

Nevertheless definitely a top 5 Center of all time

[70sFan]

The Mike Tyson of NBA history.

Both cut of the same cloth. They were champions and are all time greats. Both never outperformed any prime all time greats when winning at their apex. A lot of career defining performances vs intimidated lesser foes/guys past their physical prime.


All the guys that could score and rebound as good as he could (Hakeem Olajuwon, Karl Malone, Tim Duncan) ran both Shaq and his teams outta the playoffs. Just like Tyson when he ran into Evander and Lennox of comparable talent who weren't overrawed by his KO aura.

Nevertheless definitely a top 5 Center of all time

I can't agree with that extreme opinion when I watch Lakers dominating my Spurs in 2001 playoffs. Yeah, Shaq sometimes struggled against good two-way bigs (who wouldn't?), but I don't agree that he never outperformed any all-time greats.

[ty 4191]

disclaimer: this isn't really a shaq-bashing post. his dominance is simply what happened. but i noticed that his peak occurred at the same time that his main rivals from the 90s had aged out, and in the early 2000s, there were so few centers of note. would his legacy have turned out differently if he had to deal with prime olajuwon, robinson, and ewing in the 2000s?

Games vs. HOF Centers:

Wilt: 828 of 1205 career games vs. HOF Centers:

HOF Opponent Games
Russell 143
Bellamy 100
Embry 98
Reed 72
Beaty 67
Pettit 63
Lucas 82
Schayes 54
Thurmond 64
Lanier 16
Unseld 19
Hayes 22
Jabaar 28
Total 828

Kareem: 659 of 1797 career games vs. HOF Centers:

HOF Opponent Games
Bob Lanier 52
Artis Gilmore 50
Robert Parish 59
Hakeem Olajuwon 28
Wilt Chamberlain 28
Walt Bellamy 24
Zelmo Beaty 2
Patrick Ewing 6
Bill Walton 35
Ralph Sampson 30
Moses Malone 41
Willis Reed 21
Dave Cowens 43
Jack Sikma 64
Nate Thurmond 53
Dan Issel 50
Bob McAdoo 28
Wes Unseld 45
Total 659

Russell: 757 of 1128 games played vs. HOFers:

Russell
HOF Opponent Games Played
Chamberlain 143
Bellamy 75
Embry 100
Reed 52
Beaty 49
Pettit 91
Lucas 62
Schayes 100
Thurmond 47
Johnston 27
Unseld 6
Hayes 5
Total 757

Thurmond: 524 of 1045 games played vs. HOFers:

HOF Opponent Games
Jabaar 53
Beaty 57
Bellamy 62
Chamberlain 64
Gilmore 2
Lanier 34
Unseld 42
Hayes 49
Parish 2
Walton 5
Malone 2
Reed 46
Cowens 30
Sikma 3
McAdoo 18
Lovellette 8
Total 524

Hakeem: 359 of 1383 games played vs. HOF Centers:

HOF Opponent Games
Jabaar 28
Robinson 48
Parish 28
Malone 19
Shaq 28
Mutumbo 27
Divac 48
Ewing 35
Sikma 14
Gilmore 19
Wallace 10
Mourning 15
Issel 6
McAdoo 4
Sabonis 13
Walton 11
Sampson 6
Total 359

Shaq: 223 of 1423 games played vs. HOF Centers:

HOF Opponent Games
Olajuwon 28
Robinson 40
Parish 16
Mutumbo 29
Ewing 26
Malone 3
Mourning 16
Divac 48
Ming 18
Total 224

The quality of Shaq's opposing HOF Centers is extremely low, relative to the others I surveyed. The % of total games vs. HOFers, relative to the other players I surveyed, is ALSO incredibly low, I'd say.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

The Mike Tyson of NBA history.

Both cut of the same cloth. They were champions and are all time greats. Both never outperformed any prime all time greats when winning at their apex. A lot of career defining performances vs intimidated lesser foes/guys past their physical prime.


All the guys that could score and rebound as good as he could (Hakeem Olajuwon, Karl Malone, Tim Duncan) ran both Shaq and his teams outta the playoffs. Just like Tyson when he ran into Evander and Lennox of comparable talent who weren't overrawed by his KO aura.

Nevertheless definitely a top 5 Center of all time

I can't agree with that extreme opinion when I watch Lakers dominating my Spurs in 2001 playoffs. Yeah, Shaq sometimes struggled against good two-way bigs (who wouldn't?), but I don't agree that he never outperformed any all-time greats.

The Spurs had too much trouble with Kobe shredding their non existent perimeter defence in that series

Elliott and Porter were at the end of the road. Daniels was undersized. And Derek Anderson missed the entire series injured. Kobe was blowing past them in the halfcourt and in transition. A big reason why they signed Bruce Bowen in the off-season.

Duncan had a monster game 2, outperforming both Kobe and Shaq, but that didn't stop SA from losing

Shaq definitely was effective, but Kobe was more problematic for the Spurs to deal with. And in any event
Shaqs performance in 01 vs SA wasn't as impressive as Duncan vs Los Angeles in '99, 02 & 03 as far as I'm concerned.

[Cavsfansince84]

I don't think its lack of quality centers. Shaq's numbers aren't even really that eye popping box score wise tbh. I mean, he maxed out at 29.7ppg on ts+ of 111, 13.9rpg as a rookie when there were many great centers in the league. Embiid last year was at 30.6 on a ts+ of 109 and averaged 13.6rpg 4 years ago.

[penbeast0]

disclaimer: this isn't really a shaq-bashing post. his dominance is simply what happened. but i noticed that his peak occurred at the same time that his main rivals from the 90s had aged out, and in the early 2000s, there were so few centers of note. would his legacy have turned out differently if he had to deal with prime olajuwon, robinson, and ewing in the 2000s?

Games vs. HOF Centers:

Wilt: 828 of 1205 career games vs. HOF Centers:

HOF Opponent Games
Russell 143
Bellamy 100
Embry 98
Reed 72
Beaty 67
Pettit 63
Lucas 82
Schayes 54
Thurmond 64
Lanier 16
Unseld 19
Hayes 22
Jabaar 28
Total 828

Kareem: 659 of 1797 career games vs. HOF Centers:

HOF Opponent Games
Bob Lanier 52
Artis Gilmore 50
Robert Parish 59
Hakeem Olajuwon 28
Wilt Chamberlain 28
Walt Bellamy 24
Zelmo Beaty 2
Patrick Ewing 6
Bill Walton 35
Ralph Sampson 30
Moses Malone 41
Willis Reed 21
Dave Cowens 43
Jack Sikma 64
Nate Thurmond 53
Dan Issel 50
Bob McAdoo 28
Wes Unseld 45
Total 659

Russell: 757 of 1128 games played vs. HOFers:

Russell
HOF Opponent Games Played
Chamberlain 143
Bellamy 75
Embry 100
Reed 52
Beaty 49
Pettit 91
Lucas 62
Schayes 100
Thurmond 47
Johnston 27
Unseld 6
Hayes 5
Total 757

Thurmond: 524 of 1045 games played vs. HOFers:

HOF Opponent Games
Jabaar 53
Beaty 57
Bellamy 62
Chamberlain 64
Gilmore 2
Lanier 34
Unseld 42
Hayes 49
Parish 2
Walton 5
Malone 2
Reed 46
Cowens 30
Sikma 3
McAdoo 18
Lovellette 8
Total 524

Hakeem: 359 of 1383 games played vs. HOF Centers:

HOF Opponent Games
Jabaar 28
Robinson 48
Parish 28
Malone 19
Shaq 28
Mutumbo 27
Divac 48
Ewing 35
Sikma 14
Gilmore 19
Wallace 10
Mourning 15
Issel 6
McAdoo 4
Sabonis 13
Walton 11
Sampson 6
Total 359

Shaq: 223 of 1423 games played vs. HOF Centers:

HOF Opponent Games
Olajuwon 28
Robinson 40
Parish 16
Mutumbo 29
Ewing 26
Malone 3
Mourning 16
Divac 48
Ming 18
Total 224

The quality of Shaq's opposing HOF Centers is extremely low, relative to the others I surveyed. The % of total games vs. HOFers, relative to the other players I surveyed, is ALSO incredibly low, I'd say.

As the league grows and matures, it becomes much harder to get into the Hall of Fame since you are competing not only against 30 teams worth of featured players rather than 8, but you are also competing against guys from previous eras that still have champions. Wayne Embry, to use the most egregious example, would have no chance at the HOF if he had performed the same in Shaq's era.

So, this comp may tell more about the expansion of the NBA than about Shaq's ability to dominate. Compare Shaq's "quality of HOF centers" to those of Duncan and you will get a more interesting breakdown. If Shaq still comes up considerably short of Duncan's percentage of HOF caliber opponents, then I'd be interested.

[Doctor MJ]

disclaimer: this isn't really a shaq-bashing post. his dominance is simply what happened. but i noticed that his peak occurred at the same time that his main rivals from the 90s had aged out, and in the early 2000s, there were so few centers of note. would his legacy have turned out differently if he had to deal with prime olajuwon, robinson, and ewing in the 2000s?

If you're looking to imagine a different scenario where Shaq struggles, imagining more Classic 5's is going in the wrong direction.

Put him in an era without the ass-backwards approach to NBA rules that was "illegal defense", have defenders regularly look to flop on him, and simply use the superior approach known as "pace & space" to attack him on the other end of the floor, and you're going to have a less fundamentally less effective Shaq.

Having his career lineup more time-wise with other HOF 5's would reduce some of his accolades, but none of those guys were the cure to Shaq as a player. He was bigger and stronger than everyone else, and so the smart play is to try to turn those advantages into disadvantage - make him move, make yourself look like a victim.

[Statlanta]

O'Neal's peak happened 7 years after his draft

Using that same time marker would put his competition
Olajuwon 1992-1993
Ewing 1994-1995
Robinson 1997-1998(later draftee so would peak even earlier)
K. Malone 1992-1993
Duncan 2004-2005
Parish 1983-1984
M. Malone 1982-1983
Mutombo 1998-99
Mourning 1999-2000
Divac 1997-1998

[FuShengTHEGreat]

disclaimer: this isn't really a shaq-bashing post. his dominance is simply what happened. but i noticed that his peak occurred at the same time that his main rivals from the 90s had aged out, and in the early 2000s, there were so few centers of note. would his legacy have turned out differently if he had to deal with prime olajuwon, robinson, and ewing in the 2000s?

And add Karl Malone.

I was extremely disappointed in how meekly the Lakers went out in that series. I really expected them to come for blood after getting beaten up in 97 (another series Shaq didnt play well vs Utah). The aging injury hit 8th seeded 41-41 Rockets almost eliminated the same Jazz.

The only area Shaq excelled at in that series was 1-1 scoring. He didn't compete on the glass or rim protection.

Of course the Lakers guards (van exel, Jones, Bryant) shot poorly which contributed but Shaqs performance in the 98 at the defensive end in that series left a lot to be desired. He simply just mailed it in at that end of the floor.

Like I've said, guys that could score and rebound as good as Shaq could not only outperformed him, but led their teams to lopsided victories. Karl wasn't afraid to drive the ball at him, or put off by his physicality and held his own on some occasions guarding Shaq 1 on 1.

The Jazz repeatedly pulled him away from the rim on switches, it usually resulted in Malone getting fouled, open basket at the rim.

I don't think he ever figured these guys out.....it was more of them getting older and fading out the picture.

[LukaTheGOAT]

I would say he was the 2nd best center of the 90s with only Hakeem surpassing him, so I am not that worried about how he would look. And considering that was before he peaked, I still don't know if the dialogue changes that much with him.

Shaq might have been the best offensive player in the league in 1995 (which is rare to say for a center).

In the 1994-95 postseason, Shaquille O’Neal (IA per 75):

•) 27.8 points
•) 12.9 rebounds (4.9 off.)
•) 3.6 assists
•) 3.0 stocks
•) +5.6 opponent-adjusted rTS%
•) Led a +7.4 opponent-adjusted rORtg

I think Shaq was really just a special talent. I really don't think any player other than Hakeem demonstrated such PS dominance. Maybe you could argue Robinson with a better pick and roll creator, could have been more resilient in the PS, but there is definitely so uncertainty.

I think if anything, it is not so much stopping Shaq, but rather, could better offensive centers have gotten some points back on him on the other end. I think Shaq was mobile enough to guard face-up bigs straight up to defender the jumper; however, when you can get Shaq moving side to side a bit, when he has to defend the pick and roll, I think that is more so where he can possibly get exposed. However, I don't know if that is just so much about having great quality centers...it is about having a dynamic pick-and-roll duo who can work together to keep him off balance.

Remember, for all his warts as a defender, Shaq WAS a strong man defender. From 1998-2003, All-Star centers scored shot 3.6 TS% when they faced him versus how they did against the rest of the league. For comparison, this is similar to to how Dikembe Mutombo performed against All-Star centers during his defensive prime from 1992-98 (Ben Taylor, Backpicks Write on Shaq).

Other highlights of Shaq's dominance from the 90's:

The Orlando Magic finished 1st in ORTG in 1995 and had a rORTG of +8.7.

Then in 1996, the Magic were the 3rd best offense in the league and had a +5.3 rORTG. The caveat is this was with Shaq out for 28 games that season. At full strength (all 25 min players playing) the Magic had a +10.8 rORTG, one of the best offenses of all time (44 games). Keep in mind, this was somewhat of a down season for Shaq with all his injuries, so such a figure really is quite impressive.

The 94-96 Orlando Magic were one of the best playoff offenses ever too. Their 3-year PS rORTG (7.5) was better than their 3-year RS rORTG (5.5).

[MiamiBulls]

I would say he was the 2nd best center of the 90s with only Hakeem surpassing him, so I am not that worried about how he would look. And considering that was before he peaked, I still don't know if the dialogue changes that much with him.

Shaq wasn't better than David Robinson during the 1990s. Robinson had consistently available two way impact on his teams compared to Shaq. Shaq played on a lot really good teams without Shaq's presence on the court.

In 1996 Shaq misses 28 games in those 28 games Magic were playing at 60+ Win Pace.

1997 Shaq missed 31 games and the Lakers played at about 48 Win Pace in those games.

1998 Shaq missed another 22 games where the Lakers played at 55 Win Pace without him in those games and had the 3rd Best Offense in the Regular Season without Shaq in those 22 games.

He missed too many games and his impact on some of those 90s teams can be a tad overstated.

[LukaTheGOAT]

I would say he was the 2nd best center of the 90s with only Hakeem surpassing him, so I am not that worried about how he would look. And considering that was before he peaked, I still don't know if the dialogue changes that much with him.

Shaq wasn't better than David Robinson during the 1990s. Robinson had consistently available two way impact on his teams compared to Shaq. Shaq played on a lot really good teams without Shaq's presence on the court.

In 1996 Shaq misses 28 games in those 28 games Magic were playing at 60+ Win Pace.

1997 Shaq missed 31 games and the Lakers played at about 48 Win Pace in those games.

1998 Shaq missed another 22 games where the Lakers played at 55 Win Pace without him in those games and had the 3rd Best Offense in the Regular Season without Shaq in those 22 games.

He missed too many games and his impact on some of those 90s teams can be a tad overstated.

In Shaq's rookie season, the Magic were a laughing-stock around the league and became a playoff team immediately. The Magic improved on defense from 2.3 points worse than league average to 0.9 points better than average — and their offense jumped made a 5.2-point jump in relative offensive rating (rORtg). Shaq was the leading scorer and easily the best player on the Magic in his rookie year.

As with some of the information I provided in the post, the Magic were indeed a good offense without Shaq. But Shaq's presence catapulted them to all-time highs. Like in 96, an offense Orlando played at a 65-win pace at full-strength and a 50-win pace without O’Neal. Their offensive rating that year at full-strength almost doubled, and that is really noteworthy to me.

You bring up the Lakers stint, and I still come out blown away.

In 1998, the Lakers offense were a +4.5 rORTG in 26 games without O’Neal and a +7.3 with him.

From 2000-03, LA played 32 full-strength games without Shaq and posted and had a measly +0.4 rORtg. With him, they were an earth shattering rORTG +7.3, which once again gets you back up to touching that all-time range.

And the work he did with that Lakers squad should not be taken lightly.

From 01-04, the Lakers with Shaquille O’Neal on the court and without Kobe Bryant produced a +3.9 rORTG, and a +5.3 net-rating (57-win pace).

In this same string of time, the Lakers with Kobe on the court and WITHOUT Shaq, the Lakers produced -0.9 rORTG, and a -2.3 net-rating (34-win pace).

We have an example of another MVP level guy buy Shaq's side, who seemingly didn't provide near the same lift to the squad that Shaq did.

Now with that being said, Robinson was the better REGULAR SEASON player. However, I don't think Robinson was necessarily better than Shaq in the PS. The amount to which Robinson dropped off offensively in the PS, is enough such that I think there is an overall debate to be had regarding who was better between the two.

[OhayoKD]

I guess more competition would cause his resume look less impressive, but other than that I don't see the major change. Maybe he'd struggle more in some postseason series, but he already faced Twin Towers 4 times in 5 years (1999-03), you can't get anything tougher than that outside of prime Nate Thurmond.

I think people are often unaware that Shaq actually had a strong center contemporary who was on his level during the early 2000s and who often could outplay him h2h.

Yep, lots of people wrongly assume that as lakers often beat the spurs (not in 99 or 03 tho) that shaq must have been outplaying duncan

Do you guys have opinions/reasoning on 02 Duncan vs 02 Shaq?

[Rich Michmond]

Shaq: 223 of 1423 games played vs. HOF Centers:

HOF Opponent Games
Olajuwon 28
Robinson 40
Parish 16
Mutumbo 29
Ewing 26
Malone 3
Mourning 16
Divac 48
Ming 18
Total 224

The quality of Shaq's opposing HOF Centers is extremely low, relative to the others I surveyed. The % of total games vs. HOFers, relative to the other players I surveyed, is ALSO incredibly low, I'd say.

To be fair, there are some missing names on that list. Shaw played 45 games against Ben Wallace, 39 against Sabonis, and 12 against Dwight. There are also 18 games against Pau (who will be in the HoF very soon).
I guess we're not counting Dino Radja (though it is worth mentioning that he did average 27/9 in 1995 against Shaq, at least in the regular season).

[70sFan]

The Mike Tyson of NBA history.

Both cut of the same cloth. They were champions and are all time greats. Both never outperformed any prime all time greats when winning at their apex. A lot of career defining performances vs intimidated lesser foes/guys past their physical prime.


All the guys that could score and rebound as good as he could (Hakeem Olajuwon, Karl Malone, Tim Duncan) ran both Shaq and his teams outta the playoffs. Just like Tyson when he ran into Evander and Lennox of comparable talent who weren't overrawed by his KO aura.

Nevertheless definitely a top 5 Center of all time

I can't agree with that extreme opinion when I watch Lakers dominating my Spurs in 2001 playoffs. Yeah, Shaq sometimes struggled against good two-way bigs (who wouldn't?), but I don't agree that he never outperformed any all-time greats.

The Spurs had too much trouble with Kobe shredding their non existent perimeter defence in that series

Elliott and Porter were at the end of the road. Daniels was undersized. And Derek Anderson missed the entire series injured. Kobe was blowing past them in the halfcourt and in transition. A big reason why they signed Bruce Bowen in the off-season.

Duncan had a monster game 2, outperforming both Kobe and Shaq, but that didn't stop SA from losing

Shaq definitely was effective, but Kobe was more problematic for the Spurs to deal with. And in any event
Shaqs performance in 01 vs SA wasn't as impressive as Duncan vs Los Angeles in '99, 02 & 03 as far as I'm concerned.

I know Bryant was the bigger issue in that series, but Shaq still played well against extremely tough opponent for his strength. Again - you're saying he wouldn't and couldn't deliver against good positional opponents, but he faced Spurs Twin Towers 4 times in postseason (and another one in 2004 without Admiral). What can be more challenging for post player than that? I guess Kareem facing Thurmond 3 times and Wilt 2 times in 1971-73 could be argued as even tougher, maybe Wilt facing Russell and Thurmond in 1967 but that's it.

[Dutchball97]

I guess more competition would cause his resume look less impressive, but other than that I don't see the major change. Maybe he'd struggle more in some postseason series, but he already faced Twin Towers 4 times in 5 years (1999-03), you can't get anything tougher than that outside of prime Nate Thurmond.

I think people are often unaware that Shaq actually had a strong center contemporary who was on his level during the early 2000s and who often could outplay him h2h.

Yep, lots of people wrongly assume that as lakers often beat the spurs (not in 99 or 03 tho) that shaq must have been outplaying duncan

Do you guys have opinions/reasoning on 02 Duncan vs 02 Shaq?

I see them as the clear best 2 players in the regular season that year with not much between them on a per game basis but Duncan clearly in the lead due to playing 15 more games than Shaq. Then while Shaq won a 3rd straight ring, Duncan outplayed everyone when the Spurs faced the Lakers in the second round. Duncan led both teams in ppg, rpg and bpg and I don't think it's a crazy take to say he was both the best offensive and defensive player in that series. Gamescore isn't super accurate but when the gaps are this big I'm not above using it. Duncan had a gamescore of 23.3, Kobe had 16.4, Shaq 15.9 and nobody else above 10 (Parker was 4th across both teams with 8.2).

Shaq still has an argument due to being able to accumulate more stats/cast away more doubts in the wcf and finals but when he has to make up some ground from the regular season and got outplayed head to head, I don't think it's enough.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

I can't agree with that extreme opinion when I watch Lakers dominating my Spurs in 2001 playoffs. Yeah, Shaq sometimes struggled against good two-way bigs (who wouldn't?), but I don't agree that he never outperformed any all-time greats.

The Spurs had too much trouble with Kobe shredding their non existent perimeter defence in that series

Elliott and Porter were at the end of the road. Daniels was undersized. And Derek Anderson missed the entire series injured. Kobe was blowing past them in the halfcourt and in transition. A big reason why they signed Bruce Bowen in the off-season.

Duncan had a monster game 2, outperforming both Kobe and Shaq, but that didn't stop SA from losing

Shaq definitely was effective, but Kobe was more problematic for the Spurs to deal with. And in any event
Shaqs performance in 01 vs SA wasn't as impressive as Duncan vs Los Angeles in '99, 02 & 03 as far as I'm concerned.

I know Bryant was the bigger issue in that series, but Shaq still played well against extremely tough opponent for his strength. Again - you're saying he wouldn't and couldn't deliver against good positional opponents, but he faced Spurs Twin Towers 4 times in postseason (and another one in 2004 without Admiral). What can be more challenging for post player than that? I guess Kareem facing Thurmond 3 times and Wilt 2 times in 1971-73 could be argued as even tougher, maybe Wilt facing Russell and Thurmond in 1967 but that's it.

The 2001 WCF was more of a coming out party for Kobe Bryant than it was a series that Shaq chiefly dominated.
Shaq shot very poorly in game 2, while Duncan has a monster 40/15 game and the Lakers were still able to win.
.
3peat Shaqs career defining performances came against the likes of Rik Smits, Mutombo......both older lesser versions of their better 90s decade versions of themselves. Smits actually retired from injuries right after the 00 Finals. As did backup C Sam Perkins who was 39 years old.

Shaq ]faced[/i] the Twin Towers, and in 02 and 03 Robinson was a aging shell of himself. He missed 2 games in the 02 series and Duncan still thoroughly outperformed Shaq

It's funny to read on RealGM by some how much ahead of Duncan peak Shaq was and yet Duncan can outperform Shaq in 99, 02 and 03, being SAs best player at both ends of the floor whereas Shaq needed Kobe to supplant him offensively in their series victories for the Lakers to be able to win in 01, 02 & 04.

Having Kobe was much more valuable than aging David Robinson.

I would also add in terms of tough frontcourts that a HOFer had to face...chiefly Hakeem vs the Robinson/Rodman duo and Shaq/Horace Grant duo in b2b series, .