Shaq hasn't helped his team the last three seasons

[bastillon]

Can anyone compile the stats for Shaq since Gentry took over?

post ASG stats are the same as "since Gentry took over". I posted them earlier in comparison to pre-ASG.

If you're discussing the 08-09 season, you know that's an 8-game sample and completely inadmissible based on small sample size, right? 8 games isn't enough to take any kind of meaningful analysis from the results.

I think it's 9 games. besides, Nash played in 2483 mins on the court... but he also didn't play in 1466 mins. that's what 82G's stats refer to. 1466 and 2483 are big samples and they prove Nash's impact on their ORtg.

[tsherkin]

Can anyone compile the stats for Shaq since Gentry took over?

post ASG stats are the same as "since Gentry took over". I posted them earlier in comparison to pre-ASG.

The 8 games where Nash didn't play is CONSIDERABLY different than the 31 games Gentry coached.

I think it's 9 games. besides, Nash played in 2483 mins on the court... but he also didn't play in 1466 mins. that's what 82G's stats refer to. 1466 and 2483 are big samples and they prove Nash's impact on their ORtg.

It's 8, he played 74 games last year.

48*8 = 384 minutes at his position where he didn't play, of which he would normally have played roughly 269, because he averaged 33.6 minutes per game. That's for the games where he didn't play at all.

It's true that there were minutes where he didn't play during the games in which he did play, but you're then comparing the effectiveness of the team with Nash versus the effectiveness of the team with Goran Dragic (as a rookie), Grant Hill or Leandro Barbosa running the point... none of whom were anything approaching even replacement-level for an NBA point guard.

So that's an AWFUL way to use that stat, because it tells you that the team was worse when its starting point guard wasn't on the floor and guys who had no business running the offense were playing in his stead, which isn't terribly enlightening.

[_BBIB_]

They still need Shaq to win a title.

And if you go by win percentage with and without a player, then the Lakers didn't need Kobe during their 3 peat seeing how they were a .500 team without Shaq and actually had a better win percentage without Kobe

[NYK 455]

Shaq size, post defense, and ability to be a reliable second option will be very important to the Cavs against the Lakers and Cavs.

[bastillon]

The 8 games where Nash didn't play is CONSIDERABLY different than the 31 games Gentry coached.

Code: Select all

        PPG36   TS%   ast   TOV
    pre  20.4  61.0   1.9   2.6
    past 22.7  64.2   2.2   2.7

I posted this earlier. I don't know what you mean.

It's true that there were minutes where he didn't play during the games in which he did play, but you're then comparing the effectiveness of the team with Nash versus the effectiveness of the team with Goran Dragic (as a rookie), Grant Hill or Leandro Barbosa running the point... none of whom were anything approaching even replacement-level for an NBA point guard.

So that's an AWFUL way to use that stat, because it tells you that the team was worse when its starting point guard wasn't on the floor and guys who had no business running the offense were playing in his stead, which isn't terribly enlightening.

anything approaching even replacement-evel for an NBA PG ? really ? Dragic was admittedly awful, but Barbosa and Hill are solid bench players on any team. nothing spectacular but to call them "below replacement level" is pretty insulting to both of them.

also, Suns had some offensive-minded players which should let them operate at reasonable level as far as playmaking's concerned. Shaq, Amare were considered as premier offensive bigs in the NBA and they still couldn't get it done unless Nash was playing.

there are numerous teams in NBA history with scrub PGs yet doing great on offense. there's where value of your offensive players is. obviously you're gonna play great alongside one of the best PGs in history... but are you gonna play at the same level once he's gone ?

also,

ORtg w/ Shaq = 116.5
ORtg w/o Shaq = 112.1

backups: Amundson, rookie Robin Lopez - neither of whom can be considered as replacement level players... yet Shaq never approached the impact that Nash had on their offense.

just saying...

[NO-KG-AI]

I'm loling at the idea of Nash inflating Shaq's stats.

[ManOfSteel]

I'm loling at the idea of Nash inflating Shaq's stats.

Me2

I watched almost all suns games last season, and saying that shaq benefits much from nash is a quite ridiculous statement.

Shaq and Nash didn't run much P&R(actually closer to never), and its not like shaq had 2-3 ally oops from nash every game.
They run a play for him, clear up the side and watch him go 1on1 if no double.
And the reason why his FG% was the highest in his carreer that year had nothing to do with nash, it's mostly cause he took high precentage shots and wasn't doubled as often as before.
He would probably have equal or higher FG% this year but a bad start, and now injury has prevented him from that.(he shoot 63.8% over the last 25 games)
He is at 56.6% atm

Nash is a great player, but get real its not like he can turn every d-leaguer to an allstar...

[The Diesel]

Here is a long post regarding Shaq's unsuccessful stay in Phoenix.

- Certainly, he deserves a lot of blame for their first round exit in 2008. He struggled a lot, but so did other people and bad luck certainly didn't help, either.

The Suns entered the 2008 playoffs with the best record in the Western Conference over the last 20 games of the season at 15-5 with Shaq in the line-up and everything was going perfectly.

Amare was averaging 28/10 and they finally got it together UNTIL:

- They lost Grant Hill to an injury right before the playoffs started; costing them their only quality defender on Tony Parker, their best all-round player, and he is also a future Hall of Famer who is still playing at a very high level. This was frustrating because, as I said, the Suns were just starting to click until Hill got hurt.

- Tim Duncan's 3 pointer which single-handedly started their downfall in that series.

The Suns were on the verge of beating the defending champions on the road in Game 1 which would have given them home-court advantage and continued their great momentum until Duncan hit that shot which saved the Spurs, cost the Suns the game, and in the process, destroyed their momentum completely.

Nash said the loss sucked a ton of energy out of the team and D'Antoni said it "changed us."

Popovich admitted the Spurs were "incredibly fortunate" to win Game 1.

Honestly, how often does Tim Duncan hit 3 pointers? It was the first 3 pointer of the season for him!

Remember, the Suns and Spurs played twice in the regular season after Phoenix got Shaq and Phoenix won both games, including a 96-79 win on the road during their last meeting of the regular season.

They outplayed San Antonio for 99.9% of that Game 1 until suffering an extremely unlucky loss.

We have seen examples in the past where suffering a tough loss like that can impact future games.

Look at how the 1995 Orlando Magic got crushed by Houston in Game 2 after they blew that 20 point lead in Game 1 and lost in over-time.

Look at how the 2006 Mavericks blew that 15 point lead with 5 minutes to go in Game 3 with a chance to go up 3-0 until they fell apart and got crushed in Game 4.

Look at the 2008 Spurs who blew a 20 point second half lead against the Lakers in Game 1 of the Conference Finals only to get crushed in Game 2.

I remember Jon Barry correctly predicting after that Game 1 loss that "This loss is going to hurt the Phoenix Suns because they blew so many chances to win it and it's a major lingering loss."

That Game 1 double-overtime loss was one of the unluckiest losses you will ever see in sports.

So, it was all downhill after that Game 1 loss.

A healthy Hill would have made a HUGE difference, in my opinion.

Shaq struggled, but so did others.

Let's continue from there:

Steve Kerr idiotically runs Mike D'Antoni out of town even though D'Antoni made the trade work at the end of the season (and also pushed for it), averaged 58 wins a season in his 4 years there, made the Conference Finals twice, and would have won the whole thing in 2007 if not for the suspensions.

D'Antoni was also EXTREMELY popular with the players.

So Kerr, for some strange reason, runs him out of town and replaced him with the very inexperienced Terry Porter who came in with a totally different system and personality.

Was Shaq to blame for that? Shaq LOVED playing for D'Antoni. D'Antoni left because him and Kerr did not see eye to eye. End of story.

So Porter took an offensive-minded, run and gun team and tried to turn them into a defensive-minded, half-court team built around an aging Shaq and minimized the effectiveness of their two best players in Stoudemire and Nash.

It was a horrible idea because, as Grant Hill said, "He took away what made us who we are."

So Porter lost the team very quickly and he turned out to be a disaster.

Shaq was NOT to blame for that. Shaq was the only one who played well for Porter and Porter ruined the first half of the season for them.

If Porter hadn't tried to change the offense, things would have gone better. Shaq's role under D'Antoni was perfect for him in the sense that all he had to do was rebound and guard the opposing team's best big-man while letting Amare do the scoring. That was perfect. Then Porter tried to change that.

Enough with this "He hurt Amare's game" nonsense...Amare averaged 28/10 with Shaq under D'Antoni.

Phoenix was not built to play the way Porter wanted them to play. They were better suited to play the way they did under D'Antoni and the way they are currently playing under Gentry.

Kerr was wrong for thinking Porter's system would be a good fit for them and Porter was wrong to slow the team down as much as he did.

Remember, under Porter, they averaged 104 PPG with the team at full-strength.

Under Gentry, they averaged 118 PPG WITHOUT Amare, who was a 28 PPG scorer in that offense with Shaq.

Just imagine how many PPG they would have averaged if Amare hadn't missed the second half of the season!

If that doesn't show how much Porter slowed the team down, I don't know what does.

The Seven Seconds or Shaq offense was one of the greatest offenses in NBA history and they scored 140 points in the only two games Amare was healthy after Gentry took over.

Seriously, they would have averaged over 120 PPG if Amare was healthy.

So, basically, the 2008/2009 season was a disaster because:

- Terry Porter ruined the first half of the season.

- The most dominant big-man in basketball missed the final 29 games of the season.

- Diaw/Bell were traded, which cost the Suns a very talented back-up for Amare and an excellent defender in Bell.

Let's continue:

- The 2009/2010 Suns were 31-22 this season at the All-Star break, just ONE game better than last season's record (30-23) which is when they lost Amare for the rest of the season.

Let's see Frye or Lopez average 18/8 on 61% shooting and lead a team to a 118 PPG scoring average without Amare getting all the attention and make the All-Star team and All-NBA 3rd team like Shaq did.

Oh, did I also mention that Shaq led the league in FG% and had one of the highest player efficiency ratings in the NBA last year?

AND, the difference is that these guys actually like playing for their coach, unlike last season when they made it no secret they hated playing for Porter.

Even Gentry has said "Shaq gets blamed for a lot of things he wasn't responsible for."

ALSO:

Shawn Marion has SUCKED since leaving Phoenix. He couldn't even last a full year in Miami and only averaged 11/7 this season for Dallas.

This is the same guy who forced his way out of Phoenix because they didn't give him a $20,000,000 a year contract extension.

This led to his trade demand and he has sucked ever since he left.

The media's treatment towards Shaq has been disgusting.

- Why not mention the bad luck they suffered when he was in Phoenix?

- Or that he has outplayed Shawn Marion?

And why blame him completely for Miami's 15 win season in 2007/2008?

Did he play well? No. But he also got hurt in the pre-season and his relationship with Riley deteriorated to the point where they nearly came to blows earlier that season and led to him demanding a buy-out.

There are many reasons Miami struggled in 2007/2008.

- Wade did not make a full recovery from his off-season surgeries.

- They let their only two good 3 point shooters leave in Jason Kapono and James Posey.

- They gave up a 1st round pick for Ricky Davis which turned out to be a disaster.

- Riley couldn't convince Mo Williams and Rashard Lewis to sign with them that summer.

- Shaq got hurt in the pre-season.

Shaq gets a raw deal from the media.

So, to recap, yes, Shaq deserves a lot of blame for their 2008 first round exit, but he does NOT deserve the blame for the Suns missing the playoffs last season and doesn't deserve ALL of the blame for the Heat's 15 win season two years ago.

One more thing I would like to add:

You have the media now saying that Shaq was a locker-room cancer in Phoenix and he's a "quitter" and stuff like that...really?

Is that why his own team-mates in Phoenix voted him as team captain last year?

Do they not know that Shaq turned down a move to Portland at the trade deadline last season?

Have they forgotten Shaq wanted to return to Phoenix even though everybody kept blaming him for everything?

Even Kerr said that "Shaq played better than we ever could have hoped for and did everything that was asked of him."

There were 15 teams interested in him this summer, according to Kerr.

And people still want to blame him?

[Silver Bullet]

I said it before the season, during the season, and still say it now.

The Cavs are probably better without Shaq against most of the league.

Problem? Most of the league doesn't matter. The Lakers and Magic are easily the two biggest(literally and figuratively) blockades to an NBA championship for the Cavs, the Cavs brought him in mainly to battle those two teams, and so far it has been a success. Other things that have happened because of Shaq are that the Cavs are one of the best teams in the league as far as defending the paint, the Cavs now have many more cohesive offensive sets for a half-court playoff style game, we have multiple options offensively.

Also remember that Shaq got almost no time with a "Stretch 4" next to him, which is where the team and Shaq would be at their best. Also remember that Shaq's slow start(first month or two) was inevitable because of adjustments he had to make and that the team had to make, and again, remember how great he started looking for a good 2 month stretch before he got injured.

The Cavs are better off with Shaq than without him and the on/off numbers you throw out are skewed and irrelevant at this point. I personally don't care if we beat the Pacers by 8 instead of 20 because of Shaq. I do care that without Shaq, we are likely to get dominated by L.A. and Orlando, much like last season.

This is the best post in this thread by far, but as is usual, it will get overlooked because of other longer misinformed posts.
Anybody who has watched Shaq the past 2-3 seasons will agree, he is hurting his teams for the most part.

But he helped the Suns a lot against the Spurs, and I'm certain he'll neutralize Dwight, if and when Cleveland plays the Magic. And that is the only reason either of those teams brought him in.

[MagicFan32]

The Cavs got him for LA and Orlando...only that and nothing else. He did quite fine against those teams with 4-1 record so far (and in the only loss he went for 20 points on 9/10 shooting). Last year? 3-9.

Nuff said.

i notice you didn't point out both cavs wins vs the magic, were both on b2b's, the second of which was a 4th in 5 nights, and its no coincidence a game the magic led, got away from them in the 4th quarter. 1st meeting, no lewis, no anderson, magic b2b, cavs win.

the magic will pick n roll shaq and ilgauskas all night

[Dupp]

hes been good for the cavs this year. obviously there was a slow start but after that and up untill his injury hes been good for us. and hes going to be a HUGE help these playoffs, cant win it without him.

[Bomb_First]

The Cavs got him for LA and Orlando...only that and nothing else. He did quite fine against those teams with 4-1 record so far (and in the only loss he went for 20 points on 9/10 shooting). Last year? 3-9.

Nuff said.

i notice you didn't point out both cavs wins vs the magic, were both on b2b's, the second of which was a 4th in 5 nights, and its no coincidence a game the magic led, got away from them in the 4th quarter. 1st meeting, no lewis, no anderson, magic b2b, cavs win.

the magic will pick n roll shaq and ilgauskas all night

cool story bro. Way not to look insecure or anything.

[sp6r=underrated]

I got criticized for making this case in multiple threads all year. Phoenix was better off without Shaq.

Cavs get bounced in second round. Shaq had a bad plus minus for the season. Cavs went 40-13 in the games he played but 19-3 in the games he didn't.

Suns are in Conference finals, after Shaq was replaced with Channing Frye.

Nothing against the Big Fella. You can make a great case had the best single season of all time, and he was almost a top 5 player from 93-06 which is insane.

But after that his box score stats have overstated his value the last few years, and I got tired of people raving about his season last year.

[Bank Shot]

Shaq shouldn't have played a minute this series. He could have been useful against Dwight, but he killed the team on offense and defense against the Cs.

[sp6r=underrated]

I don't think the loss against Boston is all on him or anything. But he sure wasn't helping his team. Just like he didn't help the Cavs in the RS. Just like he didn't help the Suns.

[jaypo]

Yeah, and changing coaches twice, total systems twice, trading 2 key players mid season, and losing your best player for half the season didn't make a big difference, did it?????? It was all on the 37 yr old center that put up numbers equal to the 2nd best C in the league. RIGHT!

[JordansBulls]

I got criticized for making this case in multiple threads all year. Phoenix was better off without Shaq.

Cavs get bounced in second round. Shaq had a bad plus minus for the season. Cavs went 40-13 in the games he played but 19-3 in the games he didn't.

Suns are in Conference finals, after Shaq was replaced with Channing Frye.

Nothing against the Big Fella. You can make a great case had the best single season of all time, and he was almost a top 5 player from 93-06 which is insane.

But after that his box score stats have overstated his value the last few years, and I got tired of people raving about his season last year.

The weird thing about this is the Cavs vs Celtics went 7 when Boston was much better in 2008 and the Cavs much worse, now all of a sudden the Celtics win in 6 without the HCA while being much worse and the Cavs being much better.
But I've felt all along that the Cavs should have been playing Hickson at Center against Boston instead of Shaq.

[tsherkin]

Yeah, I'm inclined to say that perimeter defense was a bigger issue than anything Shaq caused in the BOS/CLE series. Particularly since Rondo basically played as if Mo Williams wasn't even on the court for most of Game 6. Most of the damage Garnett did was when he was matched up against Varejao, not Shaq. He didn't get any of those cheapie buckets where he got super-deep position and threw up a hook from like 4 feet, but he got 2 or 3 of them in the 4th against Andy because he couldn't deny post position, and he gave up a ton of open jumpers, too. Shaq actually did a decent job defensively. He certainly couldn't take over or anything, but he also wasn't asked to.

Also, Jamison looked like horrible corn-studded poop all game long, and Varejao couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. The Cavs were ice cold in the second half, apart from Lebron getting to the line, hitting a couple of 3s and otherwise trying to key the offense.

The Cavs are really limited by the absence of a third scorer. Shaq was in foul trouble all game and is nearly 40, so it was no surprise he didn't score more than his 11 points in 24 minutes. Also, Mike Brown's "offensive schemes" (read: iso Lebron, yay!) certainly didn't help against a well-prepared Boston defense. Lebron didn't finish well and turned the ball over a LOT (near quadruple double with turnovers, actually) but when no one else is rolling for an entire half, that crap will happen against a good defensive team.

[semi-sentient]

Shaq is the reason that the Cavs are going to get over the hump this season and win a championship.

WHATEVER YOU SAY, DUMBASS.

[NO-KG-AI]

Shaq is definitely an upgrade over Ben Wallace last year.