RealGM Top 100 List #4

[colts18]

Where does the myth that Shaq didn't play defense come from? The stats certainly don't bear that.

RAPM stats for Shaq:

93: +4.1 def (8th overall in xRAPM)
94: 4.0 def (2nd overall)
95: 2.5 def (2nd overall)
96: 2.2 def (2nd overall) (93-96 stats are from xRAPM)
97: 2.1 def (18th overall)
98: 2.50 def (1st overall)
99: 1.70 def (2nd overall)
00: 2.31 def (1st overall)
01: 0.7 def (2nd overall)
02: 3.4 def (1st overall) (better defensive RAPM stats than Duncan, Robinson, and KG)
03: 0.7 def (3rd overall)
04: 1.8 def (1st overall)
05: 1.4 def (3rd overall)
06: 1.5 def (5th overall)

That's really elite production. In overall RAPM he finished in the top 3 every year from 98-05 (8 straight years) and had a top 5 finish in 12 out of 14 years. His defense was positive in every single one of those years.

More on Shaq's defense. Shaq's defense was elite because he was an all-time great at man defense. Here is an example of some of his work

vs. Ewing 93-98, Ewings numbers, 18 games:
Expected: 21.7 PPG, 49.4 FG%
Actual: 24.5 PPG, 45.6 FG%

Shaq's numbers vs. Ewing:
Expected: 25.0 PPG, 58.0 FG%
Actual: 25.6 PPG, 54.2 FG%

vs. Hakeem 93-99, 14 games:
Expected: 22.4 PPG, 51.6 FG%
Actual: 20.3 PPG, 45.3 FG%

Shaq's numbers:
Expected: 23.7 PPG, 57.8 FG%
Actual: 20.1 PPG, 57.4 FG%

Playoffs:
vs. Hakeem, 8 games:
Expected: 22.3 PPG, 51.6 FG%
Actual: 21.9 PPG, 46.5 FG%

Shaq's numbers:
Expected: 24.3 PPG, 57.8 FG%
Actual: 25.2 PPG, 55.6 FG%

vs. Robinson 93-01, 19 games:
Expected: 20.3 PPG, 50.8 FG%
Actual: 20.4 PPG, 47.4 FG%

Shaq's numbers:
Expected: 25.5 PPG, 57.8 FG%
Actual: 24.2 PPG, 55.3 FG%

playoffs:
vs. Robinson, 8 games:
Expected: 18.8 PPG, 49.4 FG%
Actual: 17.1 PPG, 44.1 FG%

Shaq's numbers:
Expected: 25.4 PPG, 57.4 FG%
Actual: 23.4 PPG, 51.2 FG%


vs. Alonzo Mourning, 93-02, 15 games:
Expected: 22.7 PPG, 52.5 FG%
Actual: 23.9 PPG, 44.3 FG%

Shaq's numbers:
Expected: 25.4 PPG, 57.8 FG%
Actual: 28.6 PPG, 56.2 FG%


Total numbers (per 36 minutes), 66 games:
Shaq: 24.7 PPG, 11.5 Reb, 55.6 FG%
Elite: 22.3 PPG, 10.1 Reb, 45.7 FG%

Expected vs. Actual numbers:
Elite guys:
Expected: 22.0 PPG, 50.8 FG%
Actual: 22.3 PPG, 18.6 FGA, 45.7 FG%
Dropoff: +0.3 PPG, -5.1 FG%

Here is how other good offensive big men did vs Shaq. Once again Shaq did a good job at limiting their FG%

Brad Daughtery vs Shaq:
Expected: 18.6 PPG, 53.1 FG%
Actual: 18.3 PPG, 41.5 FG%
Dropoff: -0.3 PPG, -11.5 FG%

Yao Ming vs Shaq:
Expected: 18.4 PPG, 52.3 FG%
Actual: 18.6 PPG, 47.3 FG%
Dropoff: +0.2 PPG, -5.1 FG%

Dwight Howard vs Shaq:
Expected: 18.3 PPG, 58.0 FG%
Actual: 16.5 PPG, 54.8 FG%
Dropoff: -1.8 PPG, -3.2 FG%

Here are some facts from Hoopsstats.com. Here are the best opposing Center PPG and FG% defense since hoopsstats started collecting the stat (from 1998-2014)

Top opponent Center PPG defense from 98-14:
06 Heat: 12.8 PPG (Shaq)
04 Lakers: 12.9 PPG (Shaq)
06 Jazz: 12.9 PPG

Top opponent Center FG% defense from 98-14:
00 Lakers: 40.7 FG% (Shaq)
99 Spurs: 41.1 FG% (Duncan/Robinson)
99 Hawks: 41.9 FG% (Mutombo)
Shaq’s teams finished #1 in 00 and 05, #2 in 01, 02 and #3 in 98 and 06.

Playoff defense:
Hakeem vs Shaq, 95 Finals :
RS avg- 27.8 PPG, .563 TS%, 110 O rating
vs Shaq: 32.8 PPG, .514 TS%, 107 O rating
Diff: +5 PPG, -4.9 TS%, -3 O rating

Hakeem, 99 Playoffs:
RS avg- 18.9 PPG, .559 TS%, 23.1 PER, 105 O rating
Vs Shaq- 13.3 PPG, .461 TS%, 13.8 PER, 95 O rating
Diff: -5.6 PPG, -9.8 TS%, -9.3 PER, -10 O rating

Yao, 04 Playoffs:
RS avg: 17.5 PPG, .586 TS%, 21.9 PER, 110 O rating
Vs Shaq- 15 PPG, .497 TS%, 14.9 PER, 95 O rating
Diff: -2.5 PPG, -8.9 TS%, -7 PER, -15 O rating

Robinson, 99+01 Playoffs:
RS Avg- 15.1 PPG, .561 TS%
Vs Shaq- 13.8 PPG, .499 TS%
Diff: -1.3 PPG, -6.2 TS%

2000 playoffs (regular season averages in parenthesis):
Divac: 11.2 PPG, 35.7 FG%, 423 TS% (12.3 PPG, 50.3 FG%, .552 TS%)
Longley: 5.2 PPG, 37.1 FG%, .330 TS% (6.3 PPG, 44.6 FG%, .512 TS%)
Sabonis: 8.3 PPG, 38.2 FG%, 22.2 3P%, .471 TS% (11.8 PPG, 50.5 FG%, 36.8 3P%, .568 TS%)
Smits: 10 PPG, 46.6 FG%, .495 TS% (12.9 PPG, 48.4 FG%, .518 TS%)
Average dropoff: -2.2 PPG, -9.3 FG%, -10.8 TS%

[RayBan-Sematra]

I hate to simplify things this much, but just to come back to Shaq... let's take a look at Shaq. One of the big points often raised in regards to Duncan is how it's unfair to look at his success, because he was in a great situation. As I pointed out, that's not entirely true, but to the extent it is true it is also true that Shaq is a player who was in a better situation over his career.

I think that is a shortsighted view formed without truly comparing their circumstances fairly.
Duncan may have had weaker #2's but he had a consistently strong core to go with a GOAT level coach for many years.

Let us imagine Duncan replacing Shaq on ORL/LAL/MIA.

3rd year Duncan was injured and is not gonna be leading the Magic to the Finals.
4th Year Duncan is not gonna be leading the Magic past the 96 Bulls.

Duncan in years 5 through 7 is not gonna be leading those shoddy late 90's choker Laker casts to titles.

8th year Duncan is not even close to being good enough to replace Shaq and lead the Lakers to a title in 2000.
9th year Duncan is not even close to 2001 Shaq but considering how good Kobe played that year perhaps they could still pull it off. Definitely not a sure thing though.
10th year Duncan is not close to 2002 Shaq and there is no way the Lakers win with him in Shaq's place.
11th year Duncan is not close to 2003 Shaq. No way he and an injured Kobe win anything that year assuming they were facing the same Spurs team (with a clone Duncan).
12th year Duncan is not on the level as 2004 Shaq. Even if you think he is there is no way they win that year let alone beat the Piston's who would completely nerf Duncan offensively 20x worse then they did Shaq who actually had a decent offensive series.
13th year Duncan was injured and worse then 2005 Shaq. They won't make it out of the East.
14th year Duncan was badly injured and terrible. No way they come close to making the Finals.
15th and 16th year Duncan (2012 - 2013) might by now be an upgrade over (07-08) Shaq but Wade was injured so he isn't winning anything on those Heat Squad's.

So... all in all he is probably at the very most winning one title in 2001.

Why did he win only 4 rings then? And only 3 as the best player on his team? I think it's clear he underachieved a lot, and he has himself to blame for it mostly.

95 - Has an ATG Finals performance and arguably plays onpar with Peak Hakeem.
Hakeem gets much better support from his cast and wins.
Shaq's fault? I don't think so.

96 - Shaq has a dominant series VS an ATG team (96 Bulls). Penny disappoints (Pippen arguably outplayed him) and his main roleplayers are just beyond putrid.

97 - Van Exel has a decent series but Jones is terrible and Kobe is not yet on the scene.
Shaq does underperform in this series but I don't see them winning even if he had played better.
That Utah team was simply better and had years to refine their craft (under a much better coach) while Shaq had one regular-season to try and make it work with a mediocre coach.

98 - Another monster series from Shaq. Van Exel & Kobe are terrible. Jones is mediocre.
Shaq's fault? I don't think so.

99 - Shaq underperforms in this series and deserves some blame.

03 - Shaq has a monster series VS SA. Kobe is injured and has a mediocre series on the whole & his roleplayers are terrible. Phil was also dealing with health problems and the team had chemistry issues.

04 - Do I need to explain this one?

05 - Shaq has a great series VS Detroit. Wade gets injured costing them a Finals berth.

[microfib4thewin]

. Hakeem is the only player in NBA history to win a championship without an all star, HOF talent or elite/GOAT level coach. Wings need more help, bigs can do more with less because they are historically more impactful overall.

small sidetrack because I wanted to get your opinion on who prevents Dirk from the same accomplishment in 2011? The only thing I can consider is that you believe Rick Carlisle to be a GOAT-level coach because he clearly had no all-star and while Kidd is a HOF'r, you certainly can't describe his play that year as anywhere near that level.

He called 03 Parker and Manu HOF talent based on their career. Personally I take his supporting cast argument with a grain of salt. I've also not seen the rebuttals from him on the con-Hakeem arguments from the Hakeem vs Duncan thread, namely:

1. The HOF centers that he defeated head on was 1986 Kareem, 1986 Parish, 1994 Ewing, and 1995 Drob. He was not slaughtering HOF centers left and right like 90sAlldecade claimed. As for context, 1986 Kareem was 38, Parish was never considered a guy in the top 30 who made the hall only because he was on a good team, Ewing and Drob had struggles with playoff scoring for their whole career, so how much does it mean to have Hakeem outplay them?

2. His team was not always defeated by juggernauts. They have lost to the 1987 Sonics(0.08 SRS), 1988 Mavs(3.59 SRS), and 1989 Sonics(2.44 SRS). The 1987 Sonics had the strength of a non-playoff team, while the 1988 Mavs and 1989 Sonics were decent they are not some impossible wall that some have made it out to be. There were no top 50 players on those teams and they were coached by John Macleod, who retired three years later, and Bernie Bickerstaff, who just started out as an NBA head coach and he hasn't had much success since.

3. Yes, there was the cocaine incident, but the Rockets remained irrelevant for the following six years. Did the incident hit the team so hard that the great Hakeem was not able to remedy the situation that it took him seven years to dig the Rockets out of the hole?

4. The 1991 Rockets were 16-10(.615) without Hakeem and 36-20(.642) with him. That's a mere difference of a 50 win and 52 win pace. The Rockets had 3.92 MOV with Hakeem and 2.34 MOV without him, so that favored Hakeem slightly.

5. Some Hakeem supporters have talked about the lack of coaching that Hakeem had, but Fitch was a coach that won a title with Boston and he was also a part of the 86 Finals run. The Rockets faded to irrelevance at his watch before Chaney took over.

6. I do not believe Hakeem's offensive peak and defensive peak has ever coincided in the same year. Similar to Kobe I think some people are combining his peaks at both ends of the floor and stretched it out for several years and proclaim he was both an ATG offensive and defensive player for an extended period. Hakeem was a raw offensive player and no evidence has suggested that he was an ATG offensive player before 1993. By the time he did reach that offensive peak he no longer had the same rebounding and defensive numbers, or to be more precise, it was in 1995 when Hakeem had an obvious dropoff in both rebounding and defensive numbers. Hakeem's career arc to me seem to be one where he was a great defensive player for the early part of his career with an all-star level but not ATG offense and he turned into an ATG offensive player but with average-good defense to finish his prime.

Until I see these points addressed properly I have a hard time believing Hakeem should be anywhere in the top 8.

[ThaRegul8r]

Tim Duncan is a forward, and wasn't Shaq's cover. Robinson was.

Tim Duncan is an ATG big who defends the post and usually does his work offensively in the post.
Also Duncan did cover Shaq at times and was also a secondary defender who would frequently enforce a double team on Shaq.
Shaq also did guard Duncan at times either directly or as a help defender.

Defensive attention has repeatedly been referred to as a "pro" for Shaq. Read what I posted.

One player outplaying another is relevant as far as leading their team to victory, but if they weren't guarding each other, I'm not sure how that's relevant regarding the concern expressed during the time about no centers to oppose Shaq, and how people didn't even want to play the position anymore.

Do star players always cover eachother?
Did Russell always guard Wilt? Did Wilt always guard Russell?
Did Kobe guard Pierce in the 10 Finals?

Shaq and Duncan were both ATG bigs who operated in the post on both O & D.
I don't see how the comparison is wrong unless you only use h2h's where the two stars guard eachother most of the time which far as I know isn't that common.

People in this project have specifically done just that. If it is, it needs to be balanced and not pulled out only when it helps one's case. It's easy for people to dish it out, but they can't take it very well. (Or it can only be done against players they didn't watch and therefore don't care about.)

That was already accounted for, and is in the "PRO" side in my notes. I'm not out to rip a player, but at the same time I want BOTH sides to consider, not just one. That still doesn't address how some posters talk about how not having someone to make you work on defense makes it easier for a player offensively. Using that same criteria and not selectively applying it when it suits one's argument, I want to know, with the ages of the following centers:

• Olajuwon was 36 years, 285 days old
• Robinson was 34 years, 88 days old
• Ewing was 37 years, 89 days old

Who was doing so for Shaq when he was at his absolute peak and at the highest of his defensive powers when he was 27 years, 241 days old as of opening day. That question still has not been answered.

I thought I helped answer your concerns here by showing how well a young pre-Peak Shaq performed VS a Peaking Hakeem.

I'm very explicit and specific in what I say. Which is why it's sometimes annoying when I read things already covered by me. It makes me impatient, so I apologize in advance if I come off as brusque.

He played against a few of the best centers but only when he was young and rising, not in his prime. No one coming up will develop in time to meet him at his best.

I have the numbers by colts18 in my notes about Shaq in 98-03. They do nothing to refute the above quote. Nor the question I asked about '00 Shaq which is often listed as a Top 3 GOAT peak. I'm very thorough in acquiring information to make a decision. My question isn't about numbers. To repost an article I already posted:

Spoiler:

I take back what I said about Shaquille O’Neal
Shaq is the most dominant player in the 21st century game of basketball

From the Bench
By John J. Mesh

About 7-8 years ago, I wrote a column about then-Orlando Magic center Shaquille O’Neal.

In it, I blasted O’Neal for being a one-dimensional player. At that time, he had just one move—he could dunk.

His free throw-shooting was atrocious. He was shooting about 40 percent from the free throw line.

If it weren’t for journeyman center Chris Dudley (Doo-No-Right) and his sub-30 percent adventures at the charity stripe, Shaq would have been the worst foul shooter in the league.

Shaq and the Magic were swept in four games by the Hakeem Olajuwon-led Houston Rockets in the 1995 NBA Finals.

A couple years later, he signed a $20-million plus a year contract with the Los Angeles Lakers, who also traded a high school phenom named Kobe Bryant.

When he arrived in La-La-Land, it seemed that Shaq was more interested in making CDs and movies than playing basketball.

Shaq and Bryant — all of 23 — have won three straight NBA championships together. The Lakers swept the New Jersey Nets in four games, which included Wednesday night’s 113-107 win in Game 4.

They have been guided — in the basketball and spiritual sense — by coach Phil Jackson.

Jackson posited his third “three-peat” and tied the legendary Boston Celtics’ coach Red Auerbach for NBA titles with nine. Jackson posted two three-peats with some guy named Michael Jordan when Jackson was coach of the Chicago Bulls.

Jackson has also won a record 156 NBA playoff games.

The Lakers won their 14th NBA title, second only to the Boston Celtics with 16.

Shaq’s NBA Finals performance was impressive. He scored 36, 40, 35 and 34 points in the four games.

The 7-foot-1 Shaq has improved his overall game despite playing on an arthritic big toe which may or may not have contributed to his weight of 382 pounds.

He no longer is just a mere dunker. He has a wide array of shots around the basket and is quite athletic for his size.

He is virtually unstoppable five feet from the basket. This is amazing because the NBA now lets teams play some zone defense, and most zones are designed to defend against Shaq.

O’Neal destroyed the three stiffs New Jersey deployed at center to try to stop him.

And now Shaq is no longer embarrassing himself or his team at the free throw line. He was worked hard to improve his free throw shooting.

While his form isn’t anything to brag about, Shaq, who shot 52 percent from the line during the regular season, hit 45-of-68 attempts in the Finals (66 percent).

He also made 24-of-32 charities in the last two games of the Western Conference finals against Sacramento (the Lakers-Kings series would have made for a better Finals matchup).

Teams can no longer resort to the “Hack-A-Shaq” strategy of fouling him in crunch time.

Shaq is the key to the Lakers’ defense with his intimidation and shot blocking. He is also the focal point of the Tex Winter-designed triangle or triple-post offense with his ability to pass the ball. He is the best passing big man in basketball.

Shaq said he’ll decided [sic] on when and if he’ll have surgery on his toe. It would be amazing to see what a healthy Shaq would do.

When the NBA put Shaq on its 50 Greatest Players list a few years ago, I scoffed. At that time, he had yet to win a championship.

Does Shaq rank up there with the likes of George Mikan, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, a healthy Bill Walton and Hakeem Olajuwon as one of the greatest centers to play the game?

He’s close.

Give him a few more years and a few more championships and he should be on the list. Shaq also benefits from lack of competition.

Wilt Chamberlain had Bill Russell — their matchups were the stuff of legends.

Shaq has the likes of Sacramento’s Vlade Divac and Scot Pollard and New Jersey’s Todd McCullough — hardly worthy adversaries.

But you don’t have to tell me that Shaq is a great player.

You’re preaching to the converted.

He admitted he was wrong about Shaq, noted the improvement in Shaq's game, yet also that there was no competition now that Shaq was at his best.

Top opponent Center FG% defense from 98-13:
00 Lakers: 40.7 FG% (Shaq)

I asked for names of some offensive centers whose FG% he held down taking into account the ages of the centers I listed. If you cannot provide any, simply say so. Otherwise it's wasting time. I'm taking everything into consideration and weighing them.

Also you complain about Shaq not facing an ATG two way C at his Peak who could challenge him on both ends but when did Wilt face such a C?
Russell and Thurmond were both defensive oriented players.
Sure he faced Kareem later on but that was past his Peak. Faced Reed also I think but lost?

Firstly, I'm not complaining about anything. I'm gathering information in order to make a decision, and I'm asking for answers from the people who should be able to give them since Shaq is their advocate. Evidently my questioning is something most aren't prepared for, but I'm not satisfied with the numbers given because quantitative analysis alone isn't sufficient, particularly when people are tailoring their argument to sway voters to begin with.

Secondly, I'm not arguing for Wilt. I had/have questions about him as well, which I've expressed in the past. I have no player that I'm advocating for, no one I'm arguing for, no one I'm trying to get into a certain spot. I'm not even a voter in this project, so I have no affect upon any outcomes and thus no motivation to sway anyone. There's nothing to interfere with the acquisition of information.

I have no GOAT list, and I'm using this project as a means of gathering information to go with the qualitative data I have in order to help me come to a decision, one which I've never bothered with before and thought I might try my hand at with this project.

Shifting the focus to Wilt is avoiding the question I posed, which causes me to suspect that you don't in fact have an answer, which means that you cannot aid me. I want to cut through player ties and emotional attachment in order to get down to the information I need to make a decision. So unless you do have answers for the exact questions posed, with all due respect—and no offense intended, there's no reason to continue this as I don't wish to derail the thread, but am hoping for more detailed discussion.

[ThaRegul8r]

I do not believe Hakeem's offensive peak and defensive peak has ever coincided in the same year. Similar to Kobe I think some people are combining his peaks at both ends of the floor and stretched it out for several years and proclaim he was both an ATG offensive and defensive player for an extended period. Hakeem was a raw offensive player and no evidence has suggested that he was an ATG offensive player before 1993. By the time he did reach that offensive peak he no longer had the same rebounding and defensive numbers, or to be more precise, it was in 1995 when Hakeem had an obvious dropoff in both rebounding and defensive numbers.

This is a concern I myself have about Hakeem. I've researched rebounding rates for the Finals and noted Hakeem's diminished rebounding during his title run, but it's brushed off because they won. However, if one is going to say Hakeem is a "perfect" player, as I've seen some say, that can't be swept away.

That's one reason why people can't even come to a consensus about when Hakeem's peak was. '95 was when he began being discussed historically, but he was a worse rebounder and defender at that point. But, of course, offensive (i.e., scoring) is what's most important anyway, so...

[Baller2014]

I think that is a shortsighted view formed without truly comparing their circumstances fairly.
Duncan may have had weaker #2's but he had a consistently strong core to go with a GOAT level coach for many years.

The NBA is a star game, so if you've got the 3rd-5th best player in the NBA as your Robin then pieces 3-12 don't matter very much (nor was it as though guys 3-12 usually sucked, at least compared to what Duncan often had). But sure, let's play the "what if Duncan had Shaq's circumstances" game. Just to make it easy for more recent fans, let's go backwards.

In 2011 Shaq was the same age as Duncan this year when he won the title, playing on Boston's big 4 team, a team who coasted the regular season, but who were capable of playing much better in the playoffs. There really should be no doubt whatever that this years Duncan on that team instead of old man Shaq would have won the title.

In 2010 the Cavs had the best record in the NBA and desperately needed more consistent help for Lebron, whose 2nd best player was Mo Williams. Put all-nba 1st teamer Duncan from 2013 onto that Cavs team and they win the title. Not even close IMO.

In 2010 the Suns made the WCFs and gave the Lakers a good run, they did this once they got rid of Shaq, who had presented huge problems for their team (especially with Porter's insistence the offense run through him). Adding 2012 Duncan to the younger version of this team the year before would likely have resulted in the Suns winning the title, or close to it.

That's already 3 probable titles. I have a hard time believing Duncan wouldn't have won at least 4 more, between playing with an all-nba to prime Kobe for 6 years, through to being Wade's robin for several years, and so on. Maybe they don't win a title with the Magic, I don't think anyone's too harsh for Shaq on that account, but Duncan would have more than 4 titles, that's for sure. Let's remember as well that sometimes what stopped Shaq from winning a title was Duncan, so if you replace Duncan with Shaq those years it's Shaq whose boned on terrible teams like 01-04 (terrible in the playoffs for 04 anyway), and Duncan who is dominating to the finals with a superior team. The whole reason Kobe and Shaq fell apart was their egos clashed, Duncan would certainly have helped with that a lot, and then maybe Kobe doesn't sabotage the team with ridiculous chucking displays in the 04 finals.

[ThaRegul8r]

. Hakeem is the only player in NBA history to win a championship without an all star, HOF talent or elite/GOAT level coach. Wings need more help, bigs can do more with less because they are historically more impactful overall.

small sidetrack because I wanted to get your opinion on who prevents Dirk from the same accomplishment in 2011? The only thing I can consider is that you believe Rick Carlisle to be a GOAT-level coach because he clearly had no all-star and while Kidd is a HOF'r, you certainly can't describe his play that year as anywhere near that level.

I consider Carlise an elite coach who will go to the HOF someday if he puts in more years.

Question.

If Carlisle becomes a HOF coach "if he puts in more years," does that retroactively make him a HOF coach at the time the Mavericks won in 2011?

[Purch]

-You'll note my fixation on Duncan here. In part that's always because these two players are so closely linked. In part it's because Duncan's riding a new wave of enthusiasm. The pre-list Top 50 saw Duncan rise to the 4th spot while Garnett lingers at the 13th. I actually don't think that placement of Duncan is all that crazy...but the increased separation over Garnett is an issue.

Don't you think increased separation and distinction between players as they get to the later stages of their career is a natural thing? As young power fowards, fans had no idea who would end up being remembered as the better of the two, however as with all great players, as it moves towards the end of their career everything about them starts to be put into perspective and compared with the players that have come before them. I think you see a similar thing with Dirk, fans are looking at him much more favorably as his career comes to a close, and are starting to realize how special of a talent he really was. What makes that really interesting is that Dirk was largely overshadowed by Garnett and Duncan during his career,and not considered as good a player. However now the separation between him and Garnett is at an all time low in the year 2014, and a lot of people actually rank him higher.

[fatal9]

Where does the myth that Shaq didn't play defense come from? The stats certainly don't bear that.

RAPM stats for Shaq:

93: +4.1 def (8th overall in xRAPM)
94: 4.0 def (2nd overall)
95: 2.5 def (2nd overall)
96: 2.2 def (2nd overall) (93-96 stats are from xRAPM)
97: 2.1 def (18th overall)
98: 2.50 def (1st overall)
99: 1.70 def (2nd overall)
00: 2.31 def (1st overall)
01: 0.7 def (2nd overall)
02: 3.4 def (1st overall) (better defensive RAPM stats than Duncan, Robinson, and KG)
03: 0.7 def (3rd overall)
04: 1.8 def (1st overall)
05: 1.4 def (3rd overall)
06: 1.5 def (5th overall)

That's really elite production. In overall RAPM he finished in the top 3 every year from 98-05 (8 straight years) and had a top 5 finish in 12 out of 14 years. His defense was positive in every single one of those years.

Those are actually a pretty mediocre defensive RAPM numbers for an all-time center who is being argued to be a great/good "defensive anchor" (xRAPM is meaningless here btw as it's inferred from boxscores), and that's what I'm arguing here, that his defense, especially pre-Phil, leaves a lot to be desired. His offensive RAPM is sensational as expected, which is why his overall RAPM is good, but his defensive RAPM for a center who is slated to go in the top 10...not so much. According to your numbers, if anything it's consistently mediocre, and that's without considering the issues he can run into against the better offensive teams in the playoffs.

Looking at his with/without in the 90s, he barely improved his teams defensively. For '98 Shaq I have the Lakers at 104.5 d-rating in games he missed (their season D-rating was 103.7, so with Shaq it was probably around ~103). For '96 Shaq I have the Magic at 108.0 d-rating in games he missed, 107.2 if you take out the 4 games Grant/Shaq missed together and their season D-rating was 106.9. But even then, like I said, those numbers don't tell me about the matchup weaknesses he had defensively that show up in the playoffs. It's not even so much that he's making some grand defensive mistakes, it's more so an issue with what other bigs could provide vs. what Shaq could provide. The same bread and butter plays of opposing teams that other bigs could disrupt, Shaq had trouble with or needed his PF to cover, that ends up creating a huge defensive gulf in a playoff series against certain matchups.

[ceiling raiser]

For Hakeem advocates (he's one of the players I'm considering), or guys who watched a ton of him in general, I'm hoping you can help me out with something...

I didn't start watching until 92-93, which was the first season of the three-year period often considered his peak. I feel like I have a pretty good idea of how I value his defense those years. For earlier seasons though, I'm limited to watching available playoff games, and the handful of regular season matchups that I've seen after the fact.

I'm wondering though, how would you guys rate his defense over the course of his career? Was it constant through the end of his prime? Were there any noticeable improvements/declines?

[RayBan-Sematra]

People in this project have specifically done just that. If it is, it needs to be balanced and not pulled out only when it helps one's case. It's easy for people to dish it out, but they can't take it very well. (Or it can only be done against players they didn't watch and therefore don't care about.)

I can agree with that but on the other hand I still see the value in comparing h2h's even when the two opposing stars are not covering eachother the majority of the time.

I'm very explicit and specific in what I say. Which is why it's sometimes annoying when I read things already covered by me.

Well I apologize if I overlooked something you wrote when making my response.
I am feeling kind of unfocused today tbh.

It makes me impatient, so I apologize in advance if I come off as brusque.

Its cool man.

I have the numbers by colts18 in my notes about Shaq in 98-03. They do nothing to refute the above quote. Nor the question I asked about '00 Shaq which is often listed as a Top 3 GOAT peak. I'm very thorough in acquiring information to make a decision. My question isn't about numbers. To repost an article I already posted:

I think you misunderstood my point.
I was trying to explain that if Shaq in his first 3 years could play onpar with a Peak Hakeem (a player who has a very highly ranked Peak on this board) then it would be reasonable to assume that later on a Peak Shaq would handle himself just fine against any level of C competition.

Firstly, I'm not complaining about anything.

I know you weren't. Bad use of words on my part.

Shifting the focus to Wilt is avoiding the question I posed, which causes me to suspect that you don't in fact have an answer, which means that you cannot aid me.

I only mentioned Wilt because you brought him up along with Russell when discussing h2h's.

[fatal9]

For Hakeem advocates (he's one of the players I'm considering), or guys who watched a ton of him in general, I'm hoping you can help me out with something...

I didn't start watching until 92-93, which was the first season of the three-year period often considered his peak. I feel like I have a pretty good idea of how I value his defense those years. For earlier seasons though, I'm limited to watching available playoff games, and the handful of regular season matchups that I've seen after the fact.

I'm wondering though, how would you guys rate his defense over the course of his career? Was it constant through the end of his prime? Were their any noticeable improvements/declines?

Later on he was more disciplined, bit less on fakes so didn't get in foul trouble as much and his post defense was also a lot better (as he was stronger, savvier and again, more disciplined).

[RayBan-Sematra]

The NBA is a star game, so if you've got the 3rd-5th best player in the NBA as your Robin then pieces 3-12 don't matter very much (nor was it as though guys 3-12 usually sucked, at least compared to what Duncan often had).

I agree that having a solid star level #2 is usually better then having some good roleplayers.
However Duncan had two guys who were at times at and usually at worst near All-Star level in Parker/Gino to go along with good roleplayers and a great coach.

Also there is a great deal of value in career stability.
Getting to play with the same core group of players in the same system under the same coach builds team cohesiveness. Gives the team once developed time to refine their craft and perfect it.

Hopping from franchise to franchise, playing with different key pieces and under different coaches is harder.

In 2011 Shaq was the same age as Duncan this year when he won the title, playing on Boston's big 4 team, a team who coasted the regular season, but who were capable of playing much better in the playoffs. There really should be no doubt whatever that this years Duncan on that team instead of old man Shaq would have won the title.

Shaq in 2011 was in his 19th season. Duncan will likely be retired by before his 19th season.

In 2010 the Cavs had the best record in the NBA and desperately needed more consistent help for Lebron, whose 2nd best player was Mo Williams. Put all-nba 1st teamer Duncan from 2013 onto that Cavs team and they win the title. Not even close IMO.

Shaq's 18th season. Duncan this coming year will be in his 18th season.
No one can know how good he will be or if he will be good enough to turn that Cavs team into a title winner.

I have a hard time believing Duncan wouldn't have won at least 4 more, between playing with an all-nba to prime Kobe for 6 years, through to being Wade's robin for several years, and so on.

Shaq in 2000 was in his 8th season. 05 Duncan was very good but not good enough to replace 00 Shaq.
07 Duncan isn't gonna get LAL past the Kings in 02.
08 Duncan isn't gonna get LAL past the real Spurs in 03.
09 Duncan isn't gonna replace 04 Shaq and lead the Lakers anywhere.
10 Duncan is worse then 05 Shaq
11 Duncan is worse then 06 Shaq
12-13 Duncan isn't winning with an injured Wade.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Where does the myth that Shaq didn't play defense come from? The stats certainly don't bear that.

RAPM stats for Shaq:

93: +4.1 def (8th overall in xRAPM)
94: 4.0 def (2nd overall)
95: 2.5 def (2nd overall)
96: 2.2 def (2nd overall) (93-96 stats are from xRAPM)
97: 2.1 def (18th overall)
98: 2.50 def (1st overall)
99: 1.70 def (2nd overall)
00: 2.31 def (1st overall)
01: 0.7 def (2nd overall)
02: 3.4 def (1st overall) (better defensive RAPM stats than Duncan, Robinson, and KG)
03: 0.7 def (3rd overall)
04: 1.8 def (1st overall)
05: 1.4 def (3rd overall)
06: 1.5 def (5th overall)

That's really elite production. In overall RAPM he finished in the top 3 every year from 98-05 (8 straight years) and had a top 5 finish in 12 out of 14 years. His defense was positive in every single one of those years.

This speaks more about how flawed RAPM is. Shaq was a poor defender in the late 90's, and after 2002 with the Lakers.

[ceiling raiser]

For Hakeem advocates (he's one of the players I'm considering), or guys who watched a ton of him in general, I'm hoping you can help me out with something...

I didn't start watching until 92-93, which was the first season of the three-year period often considered his peak. I feel like I have a pretty good idea of how I value his defense those years. For earlier seasons though, I'm limited to watching available playoff games, and the handful of regular season matchups that I've seen after the fact.

I'm wondering though, how would you guys rate his defense over the course of his career? Was it constant through the end of his prime? Were their any noticeable improvements/declines?

Later on he was more disciplined, bit less on fakes so didn't get in foul trouble as much and his post defense was also a lot better (as he was stronger, savvier and again, more disciplined).

Thanks for the response.

Was his mobility a constant over his career? From watching the 86 run, he seemed incredibly active, and seemingly more so than at his peak (though I could be wrong on this). Though maybe it's more so that he was more disciplined later on, as you noted he was.

[fatal9]

For Hakeem advocates (he's one of the players I'm considering), or guys who watched a ton of him in general, I'm hoping you can help me out with something...

I didn't start watching until 92-93, which was the first season of the three-year period often considered his peak. I feel like I have a pretty good idea of how I value his defense those years. For earlier seasons though, I'm limited to watching available playoff games, and the handful of regular season matchups that I've seen after the fact.

I'm wondering though, how would you guys rate his defense over the course of his career? Was it constant through the end of his prime? Were their any noticeable improvements/declines?

Later on he was more disciplined, bit less on fakes so didn't get in foul trouble as much and his post defense was also a lot better (as he was stronger, savvier and again, more disciplined).

Thanks for the response.

Was his mobility a constant over his career? From watching the 86 run, he seemed incredibly active. Though maybe it's more so that he was more disciplined later on, as you noted he was.

Yes, his quick feet, quick hands, quick reflexes and insane motor were inherent traits that were there his entire career until he began to slow down physically in mid 90s.

[ThaRegul8r]

A post by ElGee on Hakeem from last Top 100 Project for balance, and because prior issues raised are still relevant now:

While we're here, I want to echo something Doc MJ said. It's plausible to me Hakeem Olajuwon is the greatest player in NBA history (depending on criteria). He also may very well be outside the top-10. Why the uncertainty?

First of all, he was a foreign Muslim dude playing in Houston. Not exactly Air Jordan in Chi-Town or Magic in the Wood. And I wonder, as we are wont to do, if much of his impact was muted early on because of this. There's only so much re-examining one can do here without firing up every Rockets game from the 80s and hand-tracking on/off and everything else.

Then again, some of the other evidence suggests Hakeem wasn't as valuable as the eye test would indicate. That Houston wasn't as lost without him and that distributing what he did across the team wasn't impossible. (Same can be said of Duncan.) We have such a tendency to de-emphasize teammates and coaching as years go on and only remember co-stars...of which, Hakeem basically had none.

I do know that in 1986, in his 2nd year, Olajuwon missed 14 games. Houston was -0.8 per contest in that time, which was 7.3 points per game worse than in the 68 games Hakeem played (+6.5 in those games), improving both on offense and defense.

I know that in 1991 -- a notable down year for Dream -- in the 26 games he missed Houston outscored it's opponents by 2.4 ppg (16-10 record). They were only slightly better with him (+4.0 overall) but while the defense improved about 3 points the offense regressed slightly.

I know that in 1992 -- another "bumpy" season -- in the 12 games he missed Houston was outscored by 10.8 points per. The DRtg was a dubious 117.2. With Dream, they were -0.2 (+10.6 difference).

I know that in 1995 when Hakeem missed 10 games, Houston was -4.3 without Olajuwon and +3.0 with him. Again, the offense was better, but the defense fell apart in his absence. (The DRtg was 116.8 without Hakeem.)

Those are big numbers. For those who didn't follow RPOY, I ran a bunch on older players. For some comparisons (the first number is net difference in lineup, the second is what that brought the team point differential to, or roughly SRS):
Walton 1978 +13.3 to 10.0
Walton 1977 +12.6 to 8.4
LeBron 08+10 +12.5 to 4.1 (average of 08 and 10)
Magic 1988 +10.9 to 7.2
West 1971 +10.9 to 4.5
Hakeem 1992 +10.6 to -0.2
Magic 1989 +10.4 to 7.8
King 1985 + 8.0 to -2.1
Shaq 00-01 +7.7 to 6.5
Kareem 1975 +7.7 to 1.7
Shaq 03 +7.6 to 3.7
Hakeem 1986 +7.3 to 6.5
Hakeem 1995 +7.3 to 3.0
West 1968 +6.4 to 7.8
Nash 2009 +6.3 to 2.5
Kareem 1978 +5.8 to
Garnett 2009 +5.4 to 9.2
Shaq 02 +5.1 to 8.1
West 1969 +4.9 to 5.4
Shaq 1996 +4.4 to 7.1
Pippen 1994 +4.2 to 3.6
Shaq 1998 +3.5 to 8.7
Pippen 1998 +3.1 to 8.6
Shaq 1997 +2.9 to 5.4
Hakeem 1991 +1.7 to 4.0
Shaq 04 +1.4 to 4.2

So in 1992, Hakeem's team was really not good, despite not many notable changes. Well, other than team turmoil and a coaching change, which is often brought back to Hakeem.

The next two bits of evidence offer equal confusion on Olajuwon, suggesting he could be GOAT-level or he could be a tier off the all-timers we're discussing.

Team Quality/Role

When Olajuwon shot well in the playoffs, his team actually fared worse. That suggests a team not reliant on his efficient scoring to win, often the mark of a good or balanced team. When he shot poorly, their record barely changed (.500).

Then again, when he shot the ball a lot (25+ FGAs), something he did frequently in the 90s, Houston fared very well (.727%). This suggests Iverson's Law of unipolar offense, where a player carrying massive offensive load is helping an otherwise flawed team, regardless of his shooting percentage. Interesting to note, then, that in Hakeem's legendary 95 run (only +0.9 TS%) the Rockets exploded for 115.2 points/100. They didn't win that title with defense, they won it with offense around Hakeem.

So, how "good" is Hakeem in a vacuum if we simply surround him with good shooters? (Drexler played very well in that run, I don't want to understand his role as a slasher who could create his own.) Personally, I find that to be a difficult question to answer. History shows us two things:

(1) The best offenses are run by fairly ball-dominant guards/great creators for others
(2) The best post offenses are run from the high-post, again to create for others

It gets back to Wilt, where scoring 40 or 45 points in a game isn't really something lifting a team much if the wealth can fairly easily be redistributed with him out of the game. There's some of that in theory with Olajuwon over his career -- he can't just build great offenses even with good shooting pieces like Smith, Maxwell and Floyd -- but in 1995 what he was doing seems fairly awesome (on top of the obvious eye-candy). Although Houston did shoot 39.1% from 3, so some luck might be involved there. Even so, reverting to RS averages only lops off about 1.5 pts of efficiency per 100.

Raising his Offensive Game

Rightfully, this is what Hakeem is known for, and stands out fairly well among peers. First of all, by game score, he had a bad playoff game in the BR available data (91-97) about as infrequently as Michael Jordan. http://www.backpicks.com/2011/05/21/hig ... n-part-ii/ (Shaq, btw, almost never) He had good games second only to Jordan (although well behind -- volume scoring for the Hollinger win).

In 15 elimination games from 1991 to 1997 Olajuwon averaged 27/12/4 3 blocks 3 TOV on 57% TS. Outside the box score, I'd say he was one of the better elimination game players ever.

Now, he was in the Western Conference in the late 80s/early 90s, so the defensive quality he faced wasn't that good, at least by DRtg. It's almost 4 points worse than Shaq, for comparison in prime years. But then again, Olajuwon totally cranks his game up in the playoffs in his best seasons.

Of the other modern all-timers, he increases his scoring, shooting, ORtg and WS/48 the most of anyone come playoff time. His numbers in those years are 27.6 ppg/57.7 TS% (Shaq's, btw, are 26.6/56.7 TS% -- although if we normalize by DRtg Shaq has the better efficiency at the same volume).

So where does that leave us? Well, with a guy who could be Iversoning (in the good way) an offense and is an amazing defender. Or, it could leave us with a guy who's offensive contributions can be replaced to a certain degree. I have to say, I find Houston's 1995 ORtg in the 22 game sample fascinating, since Hakeem's efficiency was barely above average.

Personally, I settle in the middle on Olajuwon, with his career ups and downs. But I do question if that's wrong. My instincts tell me if he had a better situation (eg San Antonio, 1998!!!) that we might regard Dream as a serious, serious GOAT candidate. Yes, even challenging Jordan.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Duncan v.s Shaq
Shaq obviously peaked higher, for the 1-2 years it lasted anyway. Overall though I prefer Duncan. For one thing, Duncan’s D and effort is consistent, while Shaq started to take plays on D off a lot more as his career went on (and as his niggling injuries mounted), constantly failing to box out, jogging up the court, getting lazy on switches and such. I also think Duncan’s prime is probably better than Shaq’s, and his longevity significantly better, with no external negatives like Shaq. Shaq had years where he legitimately underachieved, and a lot of his career falls under the “what if” category. I can only imagine how good he could have been if he’d always been as focused and determined (and healthy) as he was in 00, but he wasn’t, and it goes a long way to explaining the Lakers constantly coming up short from 97-99, and Shaq’s teams sometimes underachieving.

Duncan and Shaq played each other in 5 playoff series, and surprisingly enough Duncan mostly was the better player. In 01 Shaq was obviously the best player on the court. In 02, 03 and 99 it was Duncan (and Duncan actually matched up with Shaq most of the time in 02, since D.Rob was hurt, the video is on youtube). In 04 it’s arguable either way. Shaq’s raw numbers are a little better, but his D wasn’t as consistent or impactful that series, and there are other factors I alluded to already (Malone and Shaq doubling him, no help inside, shooters couldn’t hit anything).

Question, what's your take on Duncan vs Kobe vs Shaq? They met 6 times in the playoffs, with the Lakers winning 4 of them. I have all 3 pretty close together.

Kobe: 28.2 ppg, 47.2% FG, 54.3% TS, 5.9 rpg, 4.7 apg, 1.4 spg, 3.3 tpg

Duncan: 25.2 ppg, 47.3% FG, 53.7%, 13.6 rpg, 4.2 apg, 2.3 bpg, 3.7 tpg

Shaq in the first 5 playoffs: 23.9 ppg, 53.6% FG, 55% TS, 13.5 rpg, 2.5 apg, 2.8 bpg, 3 tpg

[ceiling raiser]

Later on he was more disciplined, bit less on fakes so didn't get in foul trouble as much and his post defense was also a lot better (as he was stronger, savvier and again, more disciplined).

Thanks for the response.

Was his mobility a constant over his career? From watching the 86 run, he seemed incredibly active. Though maybe it's more so that he was more disciplined later on, as you noted he was.

Yes, his quick feet, quick hands, quick reflexes and insane motor were inherent traits that were there his entire career until he began to slow down physically in mid 90s.

Great stuff, thanks. One more question:

Which year was the final season of his offensive prime in your opinion? His defensive prime?

[Warspite]

Wilt Chamberlain

He is without question the best scoring and rebounding player available. He also has more MVPs than anyone left and playoff success really is much more impressive than anyone left. He only lost twice to a team that wasnt the Celtics.

1967 Wilt is the single season GOAT player. Its the best season any player ever had.

Unlike others Im actually more impressed with Wilts ability to adjust his game to his team after being traded. Yet he still dominates. No other player changed his game for the good of the team as much as Wilt did.

You can add Wilt Chamberlain to any Eastern Conference team and they would have a 50% chance of reaching the Finals. You could add Wilt to the Big 10 Champ and they could reach the playoffs.

The biggest difference between Wilt and Shaq/Duncan is defense and availability.