Peaks - Shaq vs. Hakeem

[Nairobi]

O'Neal doesn't have the most likeable personality, and these players have their biases as much as the next guy, I mean, Jordan says he takes Hakeem over Stilt???? .

This is irksome because people invariably take the quote out of context. Jordan explicitly prefaced his statement with, quote: "It's going to be somewhat biased because I didn't play back in the days of Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell, some of the great stars prior to me." He was limiting his choices to his contemporaries, people he actually played against. His choices can be used as evidence of what x player's contemporaries said/thought about him, but he stated from the beginning that he didn't play back in the days of the great players in the past, so they weren't going to be included. It's the same as posters who don't include players they never saw on their "GOAT" lists; Jordan didn't include anyone he didn't play with or against. But people always conveniently omit that part.

My mistake; I honestly didn't read the entire quote, I admit error there

Jordan would've mopped the floor with Hakeem if they had ever met in the Finals. He knows this (even with that quote of his showing doubt that I'm sure you might pull up), I know this, and deep down inside, you know this as well.

[ceiling raiser]

O'Neal doesn't have the most likeable personality, and these players have their biases as much as the next guy, I mean, Jordan says he takes Hakeem over Stilt???? .

This is irksome because people invariably take the quote out of context. Jordan explicitly prefaced his statement with, quote: "It's going to be somewhat biased because I didn't play back in the days of Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell, some of the great stars prior to me." He was limiting his choices to his contemporaries, people he actually played against. His choices can be used as evidence of what x player's contemporaries said/thought about him, but he stated from the beginning that he didn't play back in the days of the great players in the past, so they weren't going to be included. It's the same as posters who don't include players they never saw on their "GOAT" lists; Jordan didn't include anyone he didn't play with or against. But people always conveniently omit that part.

My mistake; I honestly didn't read the entire quote, I admit error there

Jordan would've mopped the floor with Hakeem if they had ever met in the Finals. He knows this (even with that quote of his showing doubt that I'm sure you might pull up), I know this, and deep down inside, you know this as well.

Please elaborate, I'm very interested in your reasoning for this.

[ThaRegul8r]

Jordan would've mopped the floor with Hakeem if they had ever met in the Finals. He knows this (even with that quote of his showing doubt that I'm sure you might pull up), I know this, and deep down inside, you know this as well.

What, exactly, does this have to do with what was being discussed and what was quoted?

I couldn't care less about agendas or zealotry. I only care about the facts regarding the subject being discussed.

[Nairobi]

Olajuwon makes up the difference with Shaq all-time due to longevity and durability.

What does this mean? Olajuwon's nowhere near O'Neal in the rankings. The 5 rankings though, yes

[acrossthecourt]

Olajuwon makes up the difference with Shaq all-time due to longevity and durability.

What does this mean? Olajuwon's nowhere near O'Neal in the rankings. The 5 rankings though, yes

From what I've heard from many people, Olajuwon and O'Neal are ranked pretty close all-time, but people regularly say it's hard to rank Shaq because at his best he was nearly the GOAT (i.e. amazing peak and better than Olajuwon's.) If you want one year, I would have figured people pick Shaq in '00, but I can see taking Olajuwon for a ten year stretch because Shaq gets injured or coasts.

People who peak Hakeem: how long are you defining "peak?" Three years? One year? Or just at someone's absolute best level (can be one year, two, etc?)

[FuShengTHEGreat]

My mistake; I honestly didn't read the entire quote, I admit error there

Jordan would've mopped the floor with Hakeem if they had ever met in the Finals. He knows this (even with that quote of his showing doubt that I'm sure you might pull up), I know this, and deep down inside, you know this as well.

More strawman arguments with no relevance to the issue at hand.

He didn't bring up Wilt because he never played against him.

Jordan suffered defeat at the hands of Shaq who'd go on to lose to you know who in the Finals and yet he'd have "mopped the floor" with Hakeem? Jordan "showed doubt" in '93 of beating the Rockets if you value quotes so much

You bring up Wilt vs. Hakeem and MJ vs. Hakeem.....none of which have relevance here. You obviously have to stray off course when countered. You actually need someone to show proof Hakeem was a superior defensive force to Shaq at his peak,lol? You obviously like arguing for the sake of arguing.

Have a good day.

[Nairobi]

My mistake; I honestly didn't read the entire quote, I admit error there

Jordan would've mopped the floor with Hakeem if they had ever met in the Finals. He knows this (even with that quote of his showing doubt that I'm sure you might pull up), I know this, and deep down inside, you know this as well.

More strawman arguments with no relevance to the issue at hand.

He didn't bring up Wilt because he never played against him.

Jordan suffered defeat at the hands of Shaq who'd go on to lose to you know who in the Finals and yet he'd have "mopped the floor" with Hakeem? Jordan "showed doubt" in '93 of beating the Rockets if you value quotes so much

You bring up Wilt vs. Hakeem and MJ vs. Hakeem.....none of which have relevance here. You obviously have to stray off course when countered. You actually need someone to show proof Hakeem was a superior defensive force to Shaq at his peak,lol? You obviously like arguing for the sake of arguing.

Have a good day.

So instead of replyin to the points I addressed to you, you quote a post not even directed towards you instead, wow

[Nairobi]

Olajuwon makes up the difference with Shaq all-time due to longevity and durability.

What does this mean? Olajuwon's nowhere near O'Neal in the rankings. The 5 rankings though, yes

From what I've heard from many people, Olajuwon and O'Neal are ranked pretty close all-time, but people regularly say it's hard to rank Shaq because at his best he was nearly the GOAT (i.e. amazing peak and better than Olajuwon's.) If you want one year, I would have figured people pick Shaq in '00, but I can see taking Olajuwon for a ten year stretch because Shaq gets injured or coasts.

People who peak Hakeem: how long are you defining "peak?" Three years? One year? Or just at someone's absolute best level (can be one year, two, etc?)

I guess I should ask, what did you mean when u said that Akeem "made up the difference..."?

[Nairobi]

This is irksome because people invariably take the quote out of context. Jordan explicitly prefaced his statement with, quote: "It's going to be somewhat biased because I didn't play back in the days of Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell, some of the great stars prior to me." He was limiting his choices to his contemporaries, people he actually played against. His choices can be used as evidence of what x player's contemporaries said/thought about him, but he stated from the beginning that he didn't play back in the days of the great players in the past, so they weren't going to be included. It's the same as posters who don't include players they never saw on their "GOAT" lists; Jordan didn't include anyone he didn't play with or against. But people always conveniently omit that part.

My mistake; I honestly didn't read the entire quote, I admit error there

Jordan would've mopped the floor with Hakeem if they had ever met in the Finals. He knows this (even with that quote of his showing doubt that I'm sure you might pull up), I know this, and deep down inside, you know this as well.

Please elaborate, I'm very interested in your reasoning for this.

Patrick ******* Ewing took Houston to task in '94, and was a Starks triple away from makin' NBC not actually regret showin all those Knickerbocker games, and this is with Ewing clangin' it left, right, and center I just don't see Houston gettin' past Chicago either year, especially '94. I don't believe Grant leaves if Jordan never retires, but even if he does, I still don't see it.

The older fans on here will remember Olajuwon gettin' the best of Chicago during a stretch, and Jackson and Jordan both with their humble quotes regardin' Houston and their MVP. That's all fine and dandy but...who's gonna guard Pimpin'? Who's gonna guard Jordan? The supposed Jordan stopper in Starks could never contain him, Dumars never contained him, Byron Russell couldn't, Gary Payton put forth a valiant effort, yet Chicago still won. I just don't see Maxwell being anymore effective. Am I really to believe that The Zen Master, in the post-season, is gonna make the same mistake and double Olajuwon again? What u do with teams like this, is: a) let those bigs get theirs; don't double, Chicago has the bigs that can just play straight up and not have to worry about fouling out, and then just double and shadow when the substitutions affect the spacing b) Chicago's got the perimeter covered c) again, who's gonna guard Jordan & Pippen? And this is with Chicago's sharpshooters, and the Zen Master with his coaching wit

And with Grant probably stayin' even, I really don't see it in '95 either. Not sayin' that this series wouldn't go six games, possibly seven. This strategy worked fine against Shaq before Bean, and it worked against Akeem, as he was bounced in the first round NINE times in his career, and was blown the **** out more than half the time

[nolunch]

Shaq vs Olajuwon in 95 NBA Finals

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rN70IuofGw[/youtube]

[FuShengTHEGreat]

Shaq vs Olajuwon in 95 NBA Finals

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rN70IuofGw[/youtube]

Yeah.....at 1:27:37 you can see the so-called MDE breaking down in tears. That's the effect facing Hakeem on top of his game had on him. Fortunately for Shaq by the time he started winning titles the competition that forced him to break a sweat at both ends of the floor died down leaving him to bruise n batter the aging 90s leftovers of big men.

And equally important Kobe grew enough in stature as a player that he could win as a sidekick vs. the Spurs when he never proved to be the best player in any of those playoff matchups.

[bastillon]

Shaq vs Olajuwon in 95 NBA Finals

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rN70IuofGw[/youtube]

Yeah.....at 1:27:37 you can see the so-called MDE breaking down in tears. That's the effect facing Hakeem on top of his game had on him. Fortunately for Shaq by the time he started winning titles the competition that forced him to break a sweat at both ends of the floor died down leaving him to bruise n batter the aging 90s leftovers of big men.

And equally important Kobe grew enough in stature as a player that he could win as a sidekick vs. the Spurs when he never proved to be the best player in any of those playoff matchups.

1:11:25

Marv: It does not appear that Shaquille O'Neal has played with the same kind of fire we saw earlier in the playoffs and through regular season. Is it too much respect for Olajuwon ?

Walton: Hakeem has been successful taking Shaq out of his game and I think Shaq needs to get more physical. Maybe take another offensive foul. You can't have over-respect or over-confidence in your opponent's abilities.

that's in the middle of game 4, before Hakeem took Shaq on a ride in that game. yet people will talk about how Shaq outplayed Hakeem

Shaq actually had one of his worst per minute scoring series of his career. his efficiency, particularly outside ouf G2's 2nd half was also much lower than usually (including tos). Shaq himself admitted that Hakeem whooped his ass, that Hakeem dominated him. really, you could certainly argue that Shaq outplayed Hakeem in G1 though it's kinda 50/50 including team defense and game-winning shot. but after game 1 Shaq was getting dominated. he was severely outplayed in games 2 and 4 and just outplayed in game 3.

meanwhile Rockets won mainly because they were forcing a lot of turnovers. Hakeem played a huge part in that. he forced about 3 tov a game on Shaq alone. defensively Hakeem was far better in transition and was always protecting the paint.

also Shaq was forced outside of the paint guarding Hakeem and Cassell/Drexler were driving inside time after time. in game 2 Rockets were playing through Hakeem all of first half, Magic were trying to contain Hakeem 1 on 1 and he put up 22 pts. in the 2nd half they moved Hakeem out of the paint to take Shaq out of it too and nobody was protecting the paint. it's nowhere in the statsheet, you just see Cassell putting up the game of his life (at that point). that would never happen with Shaq patrolling the paint which he could not do because of Hakeem's shooting.

I'm pretty sure Magic would win this title if you swapped their centers. imagine their defense with Hakeem/Grant and no rebounding issues Shaq is a great player no doubt, he was phenomenal considering who he was going up against. it's just that Hakeem was even better. it's not a shot at Shaq by any means. it's a testimony of how legendary both of them were.

[RayBan-Sematra]

that's in the middle of game 4, before Hakeem took Shaq on a ride in that game. yet people will talk about how Shaq outplayed Hakeem

I don't think anyone has said that Shaq outplayed Hakeem in G4.

People have said that when looking at the series as a whole Shaq either outplayed Hakeem or played Hakeem to a wash and I would agree with that narrative.
Based on my past views I always felt Hakeem was better in that series but that the gap was very small.
Slightly outplayed would be the term I would use.

However... now that I have re-watched some of the games and re-examined the statistics I start to get the feeling I am doing Shaq a disservice.

I would give Shaq the edge over Hakeem in G1 & possibly G3 also.
Hakeem was obviously better in G4.

G2 again to me seems like a case where Hakeem just got better support from his cast.
I mean.
Shaq : 33 / 12 / 7ast on 59%TS (4TOV)
VS
Hakeem : 34 / 11 / 2ast on 50%TS (3TOV)

Pretty clear edge for Shaq as an individual.
The "stat-padding" excuse doesn't hold water for me since Shaq brought his teams deficit below 10 while there were still many minutes remaining.

The key player in G2 was Sam Cassell who dropped 31pts on 90%TS
He was the difference maker for the Rocket's not Hakeem who clearly got outplayed by Shaq individually over the course of the entire game.

So overall in the series there is only 1 game where Hakeem clearly outplayed Shaq (G4).
The other games were generally a wash or in Shaq's favor.

I don't know why some people find it so hard to except that while Hakeem generally played well the main reason his team won is because his supporting cast stepped up while Shaq's shrunk in a very untimely manner.

I guess some people just formed a certain view of that event at some point and have no interest in changing it even if the facts point them in that direction.

Also @Bast the "per minute" argument is imo quite silly.
Production & impact over 48 minutes is what matters and Shaq clearly outplayed Hakeem offensively in 3 of the 4 games.

Games 1-3.

Shaq : 29 / 7.3apg on 60%FG / 62%TS
Keem : 32 / 5.3apg on 47%FG / 50%TS

Shaq himself admitted that Hakeem whooped his ass, that Hakeem dominated him.

Since when do Shaq's words hold any value?
He has over his public career said lots of stuff he obviously didn't believe or mean.

Shaq truly liked & respected Hakeem and they were represented by the same agent back then.
Shaq was just giving him "media props" as he was expected to.
I don't think it would have been good for his image if he said "Hakeem got lucky his supporting cast stepped up but he knows who the best C truly is" etc...

Plus Shaq was much more humble in his early career and before he won his titles and fueded with Kobe.
While he was always a confident man his ego back then was 1/25th the size it was post 02.

I'm pretty sure Magic would win this title if you swapped their centers.

I believe if you merely swapped their casts the Magic (with O'neal) would have won in 4 or 5 games.

[Mr MoJo Risin]

Hakeem vs Shaq.

Hakeem took games over when it counted. Shaq got worked by a better center. 95 finals is a clear indication of who the better center is. Shaq didn't even put up a fight. Hakeem broomed him.

[bastillon]

I don't think anyone has said that Shaq outplayed Hakeem in G4.

People have said that when looking at the series as a whole Shaq either outplayed Hakeem or played Hakeem to a wash and I would agree with that narrative.

reading comprehension would be useful. game 4 is non debatable, Shaq was looking like a lost kid out there. the comments made by Marv Albert and Bill Walton were refering to the entire series. consider that Walton thought Shaq outplayed Hakeem in game 1 as he was praising his rebounding in the preview of game 2. but Hakeem was so dominant in games 2-3 that at the beginning of the 4th game they were already saying stuff like "Shaq had too much respect for Olajuwon".

not only didn't you watch the clip I was refering to, but you didn't even read my post. next time do me a favor and just don't post at all if you don't even know what you're talking about. I'm expecting people to read the stuff they're replying too.

G2 again to me seems like a case where Hakeem just got better support from his cast.
I mean.
Shaq : 33 / 12 / 7ast on 59%TS (4TOV)
VS
Hakeem : 34 / 11 / 2ast on 50%TS (3TOV)

Pretty clear edge for Shaq as an individual.
The "stat-padding" excuse doesn't hold water for me since Shaq brought his teams deficit below 10 while there were still many minutes remaining.

The key player in G2 was Sam Cassell who dropped 31pts on 90%TS
He was the difference maker for the Rocket's not Hakeem who clearly got outplayed by Shaq individually over the course of the entire game.

yeah... Magic were in single digit deficit for 1 possession... that's clearly not a blowout. Rockets with still 23 points ahead with like 3 mins remaining in the 3rd quarter. the game was never really there for the Magic but whatever. you will believe your story.

Shaq was scoring most of his points with Rockets up 20 points. that's a fact. what you failed to understand is Rockets strategy in the 2nd half. they knew they had a big lead so they did this: Hakeem was spotting up on the baseline taking Shaq out of the paint. this is how Cassell had 30 pt game. here's a story at the time:

The Houston center's early outburst virtually eliminated the shot blocking of Shaquille O'Neal, who had 33 points but no snuffs. As the game progressed, Olajuwon drifted farther out on the wings and his Magic counterpart had to stick with him. The lack of interior defense made the Magic easy prey for Rocket penetrators Cassell and Clyde Drexler.

In fact, it was Drexler's one-on-one offense that effectively countered Orlando's desperate pressure defense down the stretch. With O'Neal looking on helplessly, Drexler delivered 10 of his 23 points with a variety of slashing moves to the hoop.

with Hakeem taking Shaq out of the paint and Grant guarding Horry, Magic were helpless in terms of interior defense. it's not reflected in the boxscore but Hakeem had huge impact on Cassell/Drexler points in the 2nd half. you really have to watch that game to know this, and clearly you haven't watched the game at all since you're bringing up Cassell's numbers without any context.

Halftime game 2
Hakeem 22 pts/8 Boards
Shaq 10 pts/6 boards
Rockets up 20

Final rockets by 11
Shaq 33 / 12 / 7 (23 in 2nd half)
Hakeem 34 / 11 / 2 (12 in 2nd half)

The final Boxscore was a classic case of stats not showing what actually happened

the reason why Houston got off to the big lead is a tactical mistake of trying to guard Hakeem 1 on 1. that aint happening, several sources were refering to that:

"It's been tried before, I think that's how we got out to the big lead. He was being played one-on-one and he didn't miss a shot, basically. That put a lot of pressure on them at the offensive end.

"It was very surprising. Those are layups for him. He can make his moves and make layups. If they want to play him single coverage, it gave us the opportunity to get a big lead. He's too good."

That would be the proper perspective for Orlando. The Magic needs to stretch and dig for any sliver of hope. Except for this desperate wish that recent history can repeat itself, Orlando doesn't have much else to which it can cling.

This championship quest looks over. It looks like gloom and doom, maybe even broom, for the Magic. No team has ever lost the first two games at home and come back to win the Finals.

It's time to sweep out these sun-kissed dustballs because they probably have no hope of preventing Hakeem from rising to the top once again.

On Wednesday night, the Magic swarmed Rocket center Hakeem Olajuwon with, at times, too many defenders and he still scored 31 points. Because of those 31, Houston's sharpshooters were left open to down a record 14 three-pointers.

Last night, Orlando mainly called off the dogs, Olajuwon burned them for 22 first-half points and, because of those 22, the gates again opened for other Rockets.

you can hear announcers talking about this during the game. Hakeem dominating Shaq is what made it easy for the other Rockets. it's nice to mention that they stepped up but that's ignoring the context. they stepped up because of Olajuwon's impact. Shaq had almost no impact in the first half. he didn't score for like 15 mins. that never happened with Hakeem. every possession went through the post. if Magic didn't double, he'd score, and that's exactly what happened during this game. so to say that Rockets won because of their supporting cast is a sign of not watching the game and looking at the boxscore. the reason why they got off to the big lead is Hakeem being guarded 1 on 1 and Shaq completely disappearing for the large portion of the first half. they were still +23 late in the 3rd and the game was basically out of reach.

Rockets on the other hand made a tactical choice not to double Shaq at all in the 2nd half. so Shaq would score points but Magic couldn't make 3s because everyone was on their man. it made sense because Magic needed to make 3s to come back from that deficit. playing Shaq 1 on 1 made it possible. but those points with Rockets ahead with a big lead.

so the story was this: Hakeem completely dominated Shaq in the first half, then they were playing Shaq man to man, while Hakeem was stretching out the lane for the guards. if you look at the boxscore Shaq eats Hakeem alive but it was a tactical maneuver that made sense given their 20 pt lead. Rockets were in control of the game all the time. Orlando never really regained after Hakeem demolished Shaq in the first half. so he could score points in bunches in the 2nd half but it doesn't change much to me.

and with that context, to say that Cassell was the key to game 2 and not Olajuwon is nonsensical.

Also @Bast the "per minute" argument is imo quite silly.
Production & impact over 48 minutes is what matters

you really have no idea what you're talking about here. seriously, you gotta try to understand what you're replying to. the per minute argument, as you called it, was a response to people who thought Hakeem can't guard Shaq. as it was in those finals, Shaq's offensive effectiveness was limited. he was easily getting taken out of the game when it was necessary, and he could be handled 1 on 1 when it was necessary. Shaq was turning the ball over a lot more than in any series in his career. for example you're mentioning game 1... Shaq's stats are looking good at first, but then you look at those 9 turnovers and realise just how many times that led to 4-pt swings in transition. Hakeem was controlling Shaq. he was letting him score when he was close to the basket because he'd get in foul trouble. but when it was time to guard Shaq 1 on 1 and Hakeem was supposed to get a stop, that's what he did. IIRC that's what was happening during key stretches of G1 and G3. so you have to consider the mins to understand what was happening. Hakeem was limiting Shaq's touches. he was only letting him score when he would have to foul him. but with Shaq's touches limited, Hakeem could control the game offensively more. per minute was only a response to people who thought Hakeem's defense on Shaq was not impressive. it was remarkable, considering what the Rockets were trying to do.

[JimmyTD3]

OK the question is peak Shaq vs peak Hakeem, what does the 95 finals have to do with that?

Anyways, this is Shaq for me. At his peak he was a GOAT-level force.

[RayBan-Sematra]

Shaq was looking like a lost kid out there.

A lost kid? Really? He got outplayed but also had a good game himself. No need for hyperbole.

the comments made by Marv Albert and Bill Walton were refering to the entire series.

No they were clearly referring to the game at hand and nothing they said would lead you, me or anyone else to believe otherwise.

yeah... Magic were in single digit deficit for 1 possession... that's clearly not a blowout.

Agree to disagree I suppose.
When you have 6-8 minutes on the clock and the lead is only 9 you cannot call that a blowout.
That is a potentially 3-4 possession game. I don't think anyone with knowledge of the game would label that a blowout.

you will believe your story.

I will believe the facts and what I saw with my own eyes.

Shaq was scoring most of his points with Rockets up 20 points. that's a fact.

So? Hakeem dominated Shaq in the first half and Shaq dominated Hakeem in the second half.
The only difference is Shaq didn't have one his key offensive roleplayers go off for 30points on insane effiency.
If he did then the Magic would have easily won that game.

Hakeem was spotting up on the baseline taking Shaq out of the paint. this is how Cassell had 30 pt game.

I don't understand the logic at all in this statement.
Hakeem should get special credit for the poor perimeter defense of Orlando and the inside/out offensive domination by Cassell in that game?

here's a story at the time:

I watched the game myself. I don't need a media article to tell me what happened.
Hakeem got way more offensive support from his cast and thus was able to win.
He did not contribute more to his team then O'neal did.

Plus the article basically says the same thing I do.
"Orlando's perimeter defense sucked and with Shaq playing good defense and sticking to Hakeem on the perimeter they were able to get many easy baskets without Shaq being able to cover up their constant mistakes."

it's not reflected in the boxscore but Hakeem had huge impact on Cassell/Drexler points in the 2nd half.

And yet Hakeem drew less defensive attention then Shaq did and he had way less assists so he was not helping his cast more then or even as much as Shaq did.
So I don't see how this is a good argument when trying to argue Hakeem over Shaq.

you really have to watch that game to know this, and clearly you haven't watched the game at all since you're bringing up Cassell's numbers without any context.

I did watch the game and I saw how well Cassell played.
Certainly Hakeem helped him in someways and I wouldn't argue otherwise but Shaq helped his teammates to a much greater degree and they just simply didn't perform well.

Also Cassell being able to burn his man and get easy buckets in the paint is a testament to his own greatness.
Hakeem should not get credit for that because he was able to pull Shaq away from the basket.

it's nice to mention that they stepped up but that's ignoring the context. they stepped up because of Olajuwon's impact.

And again I will repeat that Shaq in comparison to Hakeem drew more defensive attention, more double teams and averaged more apg.
Hakeem was not helping his roleplayers more then Shaq was helping his. They simply performed better.

If I felt differently about the bolded then I would probably agree with you but isn't the case.

Shaq had almost no impact in the first half. that never happened with Hakeem.

Hakeem had almost no impact in the second half.

That never happened to Hakeem? Then how did Shaq end up producing more offensively on way better efficiency?

But of course Hakeem scored his points during times that mattered and Shaq scored his when they were irrelevant. Because as you know there are special moments during the game which matter more then others and unless you score then you are just having no impact.

So to say that Rockets won because of their supporting cast is a sign of not watching the game and looking at the boxscore.

Well I have watched the game and the boxscore only reinforces my opinion.
Hakeem got significantly better offensive support from his roleplayers (Cassell) which is why despite Shaq outperforming him significantly over the course of the game Houston still easily won.

so the story was this:

No matter how you slice it or twist it the reason Houston won is because their roleplayers dominated the Magic roleplayers.
If Cassell had a poor game and D. Scott went off for 30 on 90%TS then the Magic would have won easily.

[richboy]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rN70IuofGw[/youtube]

If you say that isn't Shaq's peak. IMO its debatable to suggest that 00 Shaq is actually that much better than the Shaq that Hakeem faced. Still even if Shaq was 15% better in 00. He still wouldn't be in the class of Hakeem. For me its tough to say 00 Shaq had a GOAT peak when he nearly lost in the playoffs with subpar performances.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_-9Z2LF4fI

From someone who played with Shaq, Duncan, and Dream.

[Gregoire]

I have 1993 Olajuwon slightly above 2000 Shaq but I wouldn't really get into a long-winded back and forth if somebody chose Shaq since there's definitely an argument for him depending on what you value. They are the second and third best peaks I've seen respectively.

Fair argument... And whats your top-3 peaks in order you witnessed?

[MacGill]

1:11:25

Marv: It does not appear that Shaquille O'Neal has played with the same kind of fire we saw earlier in the playoffs and through regular season. Is it too much respect for Olajuwon ?

Walton: Hakeem has been successful taking Shaq out of his game and I think Shaq needs to get more physical. Maybe take another offensive foul. You can't have over-respect or over-confidence in your opponent's abilities.

that's in the middle of game 4, before Hakeem took Shaq on a ride in that game. yet people will talk about how Shaq outplayed Hakeem

Well tbh Hakeem didn't have a great first time in the finals either, right. And he also had to gain experience in area's (attitude) to become the latter player he was. And if your being 100% honest here, he was never in that situation before, on the biggest stage, with the expectations on him...against a top 5 talent of all time. Shaq's team flopped, plain and simple and I am sure it deflated Shaq as well.

I have one placement between these two players, there is arguably no real gap here! Different sure, but both players are on the exact same level to me. I seen the same look on Walton's face guarding KAJ...he's not one to talk here. Team is what makes the difference.

Shaq actually had one of his worst per minute scoring series of his career. his efficiency, particularly outside ouf G2's 2nd half was also much lower than usually (including tos). Shaq himself admitted that Hakeem whooped his ass, that Hakeem dominated him. really, you could certainly argue that Shaq outplayed Hakeem in G1 though it's kinda 50/50 including team defense and game-winning shot. but after game 1 Shaq was getting dominated. he was severely outplayed in games 2 and 4 and just outplayed in game 3.

Shaq shot .599% for the entire series on only 18.5 FGA/game???? Hakeem had 29FGA/game. What do you think Shaq would have done with 10.5 more attempts on .600 efficiency?? My honest take is that Shaq made Hakeem work much harder to score then vice versa, but when you have a player at 6'10 making Kobe fade aways, you tip your hat. No other player in the history of the league scores but Hakeem did. But Shaq made him work very hard for those buckets when matched up.

meanwhile Rockets won mainly because they were forcing a lot of turnovers. Hakeem played a huge part in that. he forced about 3 tov a game on Shaq alone. defensively Hakeem was far better in transition and was always protecting the paint.

NO, Rockets won because Orlando didn't feed Shaq (I'll add in Walton makes these claims throughout the series ) and Houston's teammates hit their shots. Hakeem's efforts on Shaq alone made little difference in the series. Orlando teammates did a much better job keeping Shaq out of the game then Hakeem ever did.

also Shaq was forced outside of the paint guarding Hakeem and Cassell/Drexler were driving inside time after time. in game 2 Rockets were playing through Hakeem all of first half, Magic were trying to contain Hakeem 1 on 1 and he put up 22 pts. in the 2nd half they moved Hakeem out of the paint to take Shaq out of it too and nobody was protecting the paint. it's nowhere in the statsheet, you just see Cassell putting up the game of his life (at that point). that would never happen with Shaq patrolling the paint which he could not do because of Hakeem's shooting.

Dude, Hakeem torched Horace Grant much more than Shaq when guarding them. Hakeem played inside on Grant and a lot more outside on O'Neal. The strategy made sense for Houston but Grant couldn't do jack against him.

I'm pretty sure Magic would win this title if you swapped their centers. imagine their defense with Hakeem/Grant and no rebounding issues Shaq is a great player no doubt, he was phenomenal considering who he was going up against. it's just that Hakeem was even better. it's not a shot at Shaq by any means. it's a testimony of how legendary both of them were.

No, cause Hakeem wouldn't get 29FGA's/game on Orlando, which was needed apparently.

**Won't let me edit properly***