Peak Project: #2

[Clyde Frazier]

Just a question for the 2009 Lebron people. Is it because of his playoff stats? I'm not sure how it would be put over 2010 or 2013 other than that.

Not only that. 2009 was his best RS from a boxscore standpoint (just slightly ahead of '10 and '13), the Cavs probably overachieved more than any other team in history because of one player (at least I think they did), his on/off court net is at its all-time highest in '09 (and clearly so), single year RAPM is the second or third highest (fairly close after '10, and IIRC also behind '13, by a small margin, but I'm not sure about the latter).

I know you're one of the most knowledgeable people on this board when it comes to LeBron, but I'll beg to differ that there was a clear difference in favor of '10 LBJ compared to '09. I don't think so. '09 looks marginally better based on boxscore, his jumper was damn near the same - raw stats look a bit more impressive in '10 because he averaged 1.3 more minutes per game.

I really don't see a significant difference either way (I'd say '09 was slightly better because of the tiny edge in terms of boxscore metrics and better on/off court splits), but the '09 postseason is just the icing on the cake for me. Some people like to say - "but he didn't face the Celtics defense in the '09 playoffs" - well, I think it doesn't really matter, because the '09 Magic were slightly better defensively than the '10 Celtics, and his '09 ECF series was easily better than '10 ECSF, IMO.

I'm only saying this as an argument for 09 lebron over 2010 lebron, but anyone who watched that series against BOS (with having watched previous years of lebron in the playoffs) could tell that something wasn't right.

Series: http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2010-nba-eastern-conference-semifinals-celtics-vs-cavaliers.html

Game 6: http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201005130BOS.html

Just looking statistically, he has the gaudy raw averages, but the efficiency was so so for his standards. In game 6 specifically, he really fell apart posting a 92 ORTG shooting 8-21 with 9 TOs. Who knows if he had made up his mind about leaving cleveland, but it had to at least be in the back of his mind. That wasn't the lebron we were used to seeing. Yes, it's only 1 series, but if we're just comparing those 2 seasons, i'd point to that as the difference.

[Clyde Frazier]

I cant really vote right now, since Im in school
But I have a question, Why do people seem to never mention Wilts 50ppg season as his peak?
He brought the celtics to 7 games.

Also, what happened to the 63-64 team compared (48 wins) compared to the 64-65 team? (17 wins)
They didnt seem to have any roster changes, nothing substantial at least.

I did.... I have trouble understanding how the greatest scoring and greatest rebounding year isn't high around here.

Main arguments against it are extremely fast pace and small size / relative strength of the league at that time. The 62 warriors had an average pace of 131.1 possessions per game. If we convert his #s to correlate with the average pace last season (93.9 possessions per game), it comes out to 36.1 PPG and 18.4 RPG. Still very impressive, but not crazy staggering like the original #s. Also, wilt was playing 48.5 MPG that season. If we drop it to say, 38 MPG, those #s become 28.3 PPG and 14.4 RPG.

[thizznation]

I don't think Shaq's game 7 in the 2000 WCF is as bad as it seems. Obviously, the statline is poor and had the Lakers lost, he most certainly would've been ripped for it. However, by only taking 9 shots, it means that the defense spent a lot of effort denying him position and often double/triple teaming him. Again, this corresponds with the narrative that 00' Shaq warped defenses to an extent that is unmatched in NBA history. Also, in the fourth quarter, Shaq's impact and production lead his team back from 15 down. Here's his statline in the 4th quarter: 9 pts, 5 reb, 1 ast, 1 blk, 3/3 FG, 3/4 FT, 94.5 TS%. He also drew 5 fouls in the quarter which lead to Sabonis fouling out with about 2:40 left in the game. So overall, not that bad of a game considering Shaq stepped it up in the 4th when his team was reeling.

What I got from Quotatious' post is that there was a gameplan against '00 Shaq which was heavy ball denial. You can't deny '09 LeBron the ball because he is going to be taking it up the court nearly every possession.

As dominant as the big man is, I think the GOAT hyper-athletic wings are more dominant/impactful. They put pressure on a larger part of the floor than the big man. In clutch situations I think there is more impact with LeBron ball hawking on the perimeter then there is Shaq patrolling the paint. In offensive clutch situations LeBron '09 is the better choice as well. I don't have them off hand but '09 LeBron had fantastic "clutch" scoring numbers if I remember correctly. As I said before Shaq's FT problems are a huge problem when the game winds down and this type of problem shouldn't be overlooked. With Shaq as your center you aren't getting an elite defending center, with LeBron as your SF you are getting an elite defending SF.

As for '67 Wilt vs '00 Shaq

(Wilt's stats are estimated adjustments)

Wilt: 18 to 20 ppg / 15 to 17 rebounds / 6 assists / 3.5 blocks / ? steal / .630 TS

Shaq: 30 ppg / 13.5 rebounds / 4 assists / 3 blocks / .5 steal / .580 TS

Shaq has much better scoring than Wilt but Wilt has him beat out in every other aspect. The stats may be a tad misleading however considering Wilt reduced his FGA from the previous year by half! I think that Wilt still had the ability to "turn it on" in the scoring aspect if it was called for. His drop in scoring was more of a conscious decision on his part rather than drop in ability. His decision to shoot less wasn't detrimental as well since the result was his team winning. I'm speculating here but I would say that if his team needed it, '67 Wilt could of put up a bit of more scoring. His efficiency wouldn't be the same but it would be still great in my opinion.

My vote as of now

1. LeBron James '09
2. Wilt Chamberlain '67
3. Shaquille Oneal '00

[Dr Positivity]

Ballot 1 - Lebron James 2013

In my opinion Lebron at PF is the most valuable offensive skillset ever from his combination of penetration, playmaking and spacing, while also providing quality defense. When it came time to either take over or lose the title he came up big in G6. I prefer 2013 to 2009 not only because of playing PF but by being a more skilled, experienced player with the go-to option in the post.

Ballot 2 - Hakeem Olajuwon 1994

Ballot 3 - Tim Duncan 2003

These two seasons are both monsters giving you the defensive and rebounding anchor play and strong mid 20s per game scoring and passing ability. I find Hakeem's post game to be a bit more dynamic. I voted 1994 over 1995 because Houston's team success weirdly falls off for no apparent reason in 95 which makes me wonder if Hakeem wasn't having the same impact on defense that year

[giordunk]

Not a voter, but I think Jordan and LeBron are 1a and 1b. I'm still torn on the best version of LeBron debate, I'm that guy who said it's impossible for 09 LeBron to be peak LeBron.

If I was a voter I'd put Shaq after Jordan/LeBron... But can we really have zero mention of Magic/Bird? To me those are two guys that just played perfect basketball. Jordan, LeBron, and Shaq are all physical specimen. Yes Magic is tall for a point guard, but didn't have freakish athleticism.

But Magic and Larry... They are poetry in basketball form. They won with stacked teams but so did everyone else in the peaks project.

And I agree that there's no right or wrong, but here are two guys that put up outstanding numbers without caring about numbers, or efficiency, or any of the new analytics stuff.

[PCProductions]

Just a question for the 2009 Lebron people. Is it because of his playoff stats? I'm not sure how it would be put over 2010 or 2013 other than that.

Not only that. 2009 was his best RS from a boxscore standpoint (just slightly ahead of '10 and '13), the Cavs probably overachieved more than any other team in history because of one player (at least I think they did), his on/off court net is at its all-time highest in '09 (and clearly so), single year RAPM is the second or third highest (fairly close after '10, and IIRC also behind '13, by a small margin, but I'm not sure about the latter).

I know you're one of the most knowledgeable people on this board when it comes to LeBron, but I'll beg to differ that there was a clear difference in favor of '10 LBJ compared to '09. I don't think so. '09 looks marginally better based on boxscore, his jumper was damn near the same - raw stats look a bit more impressive in '10 because he averaged 1.3 more minutes per game.

I really don't see a significant difference either way (I'd say '09 was slightly better because of the tiny edge in terms of boxscore metrics and better on/off court splits), but the '09 postseason is just the icing on the cake for me. Some people like to say - "but he didn't face the Celtics defense in the '09 playoffs" - well, I think it doesn't really matter, because the '09 Magic were slightly better defensively than the '10 Celtics, and his '09 ECF series was easily better than '10 ECSF, IMO.

Well what about 2013? I can buy what you're selling for the 2010 argument.

[Moonbeam]

For now, I'm going to post this link to Playoff Score+, which contains data for individual series and entire postseasons from 1985-2014 (still have to add 2015). Included are Score+ (extra points per 100 possessions relative to the TS% allowed by the defense) and O+ (net ORating relative to opponent DRating).

I'm reading through thread #1 and this has come up, so I thought it might be a useful tool for those interested.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14Cmhy7jDzT6qBgahLMRBNtE_mUibNUAmQQDhblwwFAk/edit#gid=589060813

[penbeast0]

For people who, like me (not a voter here), have Russell at or near the top of the GOAT list, what is his top season and why isn't it in contention here?

[Gregoire]

...

Some issues here.

1. You sort of admire Shaq in your posts, but if objectively: if Shaq was really "unstoppable" like it seems? And was he more so than MJ and Lebron?
Some time ago Dipper done some work about Shaqs 98-01 playoffs scoring stats and same with Jordan 90-92. Here we go:
viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1291923#start_here
viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1286698#start_here

Was Shaq really so much the thread in ISO ball and post-up? Post-up stats Shaq - 0,98 PPP (48%) - even without FT.
MJ - 1,19 ppp (52,5 %) - post-up and 1,23 ppp (53,7) - ISO.
Not to mention FTs seriously hurt Shaqs effiency, his overall numbers (compared to MJ) looks unimpressive. Maybe he just was so aestetically pleasing and do the same thing over and over and it give us impression of "dominance", but what about impact and real capacity comparing to MJ and Lebron? Maybe he was more finisher than we used to believe (Dipper's stats tell it)

2. Why Shaq and not kareem and Hakeem peaks? For me their peaks are pretty close (and lower than MJ and Lebron). Hakeem was clearly better defender and comparable peak offensive playoffs forse IMO. Kareem was Shaqs equal in terms of offense and his defense... equal too at least. Maybe impressions of Shaq just more fresh because of time?

3. Glaring weaknesses. PnR D and FT. With all other equal, give me player with 2 very strong sides and not player with 1 stronger side than it and one weakness. What about Shaqs playoffs defense? In 2000 it wasnt so good by same evidence his supporters use to prove his great D in RS (Drtg).

4. Intangibles and clutch factor. You could argue here, but maybe its tie-braker at these level. MJs (Lebrons too?) clutchness (mentality, momentum sense ect) are at another level.

[Moonbeam]

Going to take a long look at Shaq (probably my number 1 pick here), LeBron, Kareem, Hakeem, and Russell. Would love to see some stuff on D-Rob (still reading through the first thread), Bird, Magic, Oscar, West (I am a believer), and Mikan (if anyone is willing to go there).

[Gregoire]

My take about it. I speak about "playoffs version of player in vacuum", so Its not about resume, but about capacity and ability.



1) 1st ballot selection: Lebron James 2013

Positives:

- Great playmaker, very intelligent, good floor spacing
- Great passer and willing one
- Versatile defender (Pippen –like)
- Maybe best ever transition offense , maybe best ever transition defender, great finishing at the rim
- Most versatile overall offensive player ever (maybe)
- Along with Jordan best stamina and durability

Negatives:

- His jumper and overall scoring tend to be worse under pressure
- Questionable mentality of alpha-dog
- Less dominant scorer than MJ and Shaq
- FT % for wing player is not so good
- Post play can be better (but its not weakness even now)

2) 2nd ballot selection: Shaquille O'Neal 2000

Positives:

- Biggest mismatch 1-on -1 of the four in the post, huge physical presence
- Very efficient scorer (most efficient from the field) and good passer with few TO
- Draw most doubles maybe ever, create a lot of opportunities with it for teammates
- Great offensive rebounder
- Great intimidator as a defender in the lane and big body to protect the paint
- Very good man defender in the post

Negatives:

- Obviously FT% (awful percentage) and because of it clutch factor and issues, hack-a-shaq factor sometimes
- PnR defense and mobility in defense overall (even without health and laziness issues), can be exploded in some matchups.
- Questionable stamina , motor and durability
- Very predictable and have very small range, so very easy to double and triple, dependence of good passing
- Intangibles and mentality in some sense were issues.

3) 3rd ballot selection Hakeem Olajuwon 1993

Positives:

- Best defensive impact of the three with big margin
- Best at splitting doubles (along with Jordan)
- Better playmaker from the center position than Shaq, great IQ
- Excellent transition O and D from the center
- Great motor
- Huge intangibles and unfearness
- One of the most versatiles centers ever, great footwork, face-up game, jumper

Negatives:

- INot so good rebounder
- Sometimes TO prone
- Not big frame for a center, so can be exploited with big fellas matchups (like Shaq )
- Not very good FG% for a center, not so efficient

[Dr Spaceman]

1. You sort of admire Shaq in your posts, but if objectively: if Shaq was really "unstoppable" like it seems? And was he more so than MJ and Lebron?
Some time ago Dipper done some work about Shaqs 98-01 playoffs scoring stats and same with Jordan 90-92. Here we go:
viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1291923#start_here
viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1286698#start_here

Was Shaq really so much the thread in ISO ball and post-up? Post-up stats Shaq - 0,98 PPP (48%) - even without FT.
MJ - 1,19 ppp (52,5 %) - post-up and 1,23 ppp (53,7) - ISO.
Not to mention FTs seriously hurt Shaqs effiency, his overall numbers (compared to MJ) looks unimpressive. Maybe he just was so aestetically pleasing and do the same thing over and over and it give us impression of "dominance", but what about impact and real capacity comparing to MJ and Lebron? Maybe he was more finisher than we used to believe (Dipper's stats tell it)

Well first, there's nothing wrong with being a finisher, in fact it's one of the strongest points of my argument- if you'll remember I used that to reinforce his portability, that he sucks up so mach attention around the rim that perimeter slashers like Kobe and especially Wade (whose jumper is hit or miss) can work in the paint very effectively.

Thanks for bringing up those numbers, especially Jordan's (holy crap ). And yeah Shaq's post up numbers don't look "unstoppable" here, per se. 0.98 is still best-in-league level, especially in the playoffs, and we should keep in mind his limited range and that a huge number of his post ups are starting at a range greater than what I would call "deep post". That's a weakness in his game, but my argument has been that defenses were really setting out to stop him from getting down on the block, where he truly was unstoppable.

This is a good avenue for discussion, though, and I'd love to hear more on the subject. And one more note: Shaq's offensive rebounding is even better than I thought.

2. Why Shaq and not kareem and Hakeem peaks? For me their peaks are pretty close (and lower than MJ and Lebron). Hakeem was clearly better defender and comparable peak offensive playoffs forse IMO. Kareem was Shaqs equal in terms of offense and his defense... equal too at least. Maybe impressions of Shaq just more fresh because of time?

I went over this before, but primarily when I'm talking about Shaq's dominance it's his threat at the rim, where IMO no one has ever been a better finisher. He's got a substantial lead there on Kareem especially, and it's that difference that leads me to believe Shaq the superior offensive player.

3. Glaring weaknesses. PnR D and FT. With all other equal, give me player with 2 very strong sides and not player with 1 stronger side than it and one weakness. What about Shaqs playoffs defense? In 2000 it wasnt so good by same evidence his supporters use to prove his great D in RS (Drtg).

Shaw had issues defensively, and the most glaring one hasn't yet been mentioned; how he tended to drift and leave great shooting big men wide open pretty consistently. PNR defense in his peak season was just fine in my personal opinion, his later Laker years is when he's far more held back by that. The Lakers actually ran a pretty effective PNR scheme that doesn't look much different from all the ICEing we see today.

[Dr Spaceman]

Spoiler:

Just like Spaceman, I had someone else rather than Jordan as my #1 pick, so I'll stick to LeBron here.

Both Shaq and LeBron played in the era of "databall", and LeBron generally had better metrics. He beats Shaq in all of the boxscore metrics (both in the regular season and playoffs), and also in RAPM (both one year and multi year).

Shaq is a terrific choice here. I really can't say those who vote for him are making a mistake. He was just incredible, plain and simple. However, I think the same could be said about LeBron.

Spaceman had a good post in the previous thread, about the fact that we tend to view the gaps in terms of production as much more important than they really are, but...We are going to split hairs no matter what kind of approach we decide to use. Like, I mean - Shaq's ability to warp defenses, his gravity, was arguably the best ever. That being said, you can easily counter that, saying - "Shaq was a center, so he's naturally going to face more double and triple teams that perimeter players of the same caliber".

For me, the fact that LeBron could attack from a lot more spots on the court, as well as shoot from a far greater distance than Shaq, more than makes up for O'Neal's interior dominance.

One thing about them - Shaq attempted only 9 shots from the field in 47 minutes he played in game 7 of the 2000 WCF against Portland - as much as LeBron was criticized for supposedly "quitting" on his team (in game 5 of the 2010 playoffs against Boston), imagine what kind of criticism Shaq would've gotten - it would've been even worse. There was a very real possibility of the Lakers losing that game - they were down 13 going into the 4th quarter, and it seemed like Portland had at least a 75-80% chance of winning that game). It was an elimination game, LeBron's game 5 in 2010 was not - that series was tied at 2, so the Cavs still would've had a chance of winning even if they lost that game, and LeBron still attempted more shots (14, compared to only 9 for Shaq) in less minutes (41:40, compared to 47:00 for O'Neal, and both attempted 12 free throws).

So, what I'm trying to say is - there's no chance of denying LeBron the ball like the Blazers did against Shaq in that game 7. He can get the ball in the backcourt (or even bring it up the court), and if you deny him the paint, he can shoot from outside (he's never been the most reliable of shooters, but still good enough that you had to respect his jumper - when he got hot from mid-range/outside, you were at his mercy, because he still had that insane athleticism and ability to beat any defender 1 on 1 on the perimeter, during his first tenure with the Cavs).

Defensively, I think it's a wash. Shaq would seem like the more intimidating/valuable defender just because he played center, but stats (and even defensive accolades) indicate they were extremely close. Shaq had a bit higher DWS (7.0 to 6.5 in RS, 8.1 to 7.6 overall - what's interesting is that LeBron matched Shaq's 1.1 DWS in the playoffs, despite the fact that he played only 14 games, compared to 23 for O'Neal - if he played 23 games, like Shaq did, LBJ's playoff DWS could've been high enough that he would make up for Shaq's edge in RS).
LeBron had slightly higher DBPM (3.6 to 3.5), higher single year RAPM (+2.7 according to shutupandjam, Shaq had +1.27 according to aacrossthecourt), and in prior informed, Shaq had +2.31 (also data from acrossthecourt), LeBron had +2.8 (sites.google.com) or +2.16 (GotBuckets). At any rate, their prior informed score is extremely comparable.

LeBron made the All-Defensive 1st team, Shaq made the second team (I hate All-Defensive teams, I don't put any emphasis on it, but I just mentioned it because some of you guys care about it), both finished as a pretty distant #2 in DPOY voting (Shaq after Zo, LeBron after Dwight). I think it was well-deserved.

LeBron was a top 3-5 perimeter defender of all-time that year, in my opinion. Shaq was DPOY worthy, but he was still just on the second tier among the best defensive centers. Not as good as Russell, Olajuwon, Robinson, Mutombo or Ben Wallace. This really isn't a knock on Shaq - there are more super-high impact centers than wings. He was absolutely great defensively that year.

They are similar in the sense that both were bigger, stronger and more athletic than basically any other player who ever their respective positions (well, Wilt is the only one who can be argued over Shaq at his position - Dr. J is the closest to LeBron as an athlete as the SF position, but obviously he's way smaller and weaker). Both also had underrated skills. Neither was a great shooter for their respective positions, but they were great ballhandlers and passers for their position.

Ballot #1 - LeBron James 2009

Ballot #2 - Shaquille O'Neal 2000

Ballot #3 - Wilt Chamberlain 1964 or 1967 (will decide which year later on, but leaning towards '67).

This is an incredible post, Q. I've always been higher on MIA LBJ's defense, but you make a pretty compelling case here that perhaps I have incomplete knowledge of that LeBron season.

I will say that 2009 is probably the GOAT individual playoff run.

[Dr Spaceman]

With that in mind would someone mind making a case for Shaq having as much positive influence on an offense as some of the truly elite ball-handlers (Nash/Magic).

He doesn't. The trick is that Jordan/LeBron don't really either. They're massively dominant on offense due to their scoring, but IMO a step behind Nash/Magic. The difference is that all 3 guys play DPOY-level defense, which obviously leaves Nash/Magic behind, and the offensive gap is far too small to negate that.

[eminence]

With that in mind would someone mind making a case for Shaq having as much positive influence on an offense as some of the truly elite ball-handlers (Nash/Magic).

He doesn't. The trick is that Jordan/LeBron don't really either. They're massively dominant on offense due to their scoring, but IMO a step behind Nash/Magic. The difference is that all 3 guys play DPOY-level defense, which obviously leaves Nash/Magic behind, and the offensive gap is far too small to negate that.

To me MJ/Lebron at least seem to have offensive impact that is arguably as high those guys (if I had to pick one I'd go with Magic). While Shaq I see being a clear tier below all these guys. Comparing to Lebron (cause that seems to be the main debate this round): Lebron seems to be a slightly higher volume scorer at slightly higher efficiency along with creating offense for others at a far higher level (positional talk here is an attempt at distraction, just like Shaq is by far the superior rebounder and the slightly more valuable defender there are no need for qualifiers, Lebron creates far more offense for his team than Shaq ever did).

To me there seems to be a small defensive edge in favor of Shaq, but a fair sized offensive edge to Lebron, so I'm currently strongly leaning 'Bron for my #1 spot.

[E-Balla]

With that in mind would someone mind making a case for Shaq having as much positive influence on an offense as some of the truly elite ball-handlers (Nash/Magic).

He doesn't. The trick is that Jordan/LeBron don't really either. They're massively dominant on offense due to their scoring, but IMO a step behind Nash/Magic. The difference is that all 3 guys play DPOY-level defense, which obviously leaves Nash/Magic behind, and the offensive gap is far too small to negate that.

Someone gets it (well I don't agree than MJ or Bron ever deserved DPOY or was ever really close to deserving but w/e). I mean Magic and Nash's average prime offenses are better than any offense Lebron has ever been on. Also Shaq has somehow led better offenses than Lebron as a big man that's not supposed to be all that impactful.

Not voting yet (not sure if I'll have the time) but I'd personally put it:
00 Shaq
67 Wilt
Tie: 09 Bron/03 Duncan

Right now. Shaq gets top billing for being a C with the impact of an ATG wing on offense and a second tier big on defense. Combine that with great consistency, his ability to step up and win without Kobe or Glen Rice, and his dominant postseason (where only Sabonis and the rest of that giant Blazers team halted him even just a little) and he's an easy choice.

Wilt vs Duncan and Lebron is tough but looking at it objectively I wonder what Duncan really did better than Wilt. Wilt was easily the better offensive option and defensively he was second only to Russell in 67. Now he had a good supporting cast but the 67 6ers are the best team prior to the ABA's founding in 67-68 and Wilt didn't have the best supporting cast. As someone that had Russell in his top 10 that's a major boost for Wilt knowing that he trumped the impact of a guy I have top 10 this season.

As far as TD and Bron go I've argued both ways with these guys so I'll be looking forward to anyone's arguments for these guys.

[E-Balla]

My take about it. I speak about "playoffs version of player in vacuum", so Its not about resume, but about capacity and ability.



1) 1st ballot selection: Lebron James 2013

Positives:

- Great playmaker, very intelligent, good floor spacing
- Great passer and willing one
- Versatile defender (Pippen –like)
- Maybe best ever transition offense , maybe best ever transition defender, great finishing at the rim
- Most versatile overall offensive player ever (maybe)
- Along with Jordan best stamina and durability

Negatives:

- His jumper and overall scoring tend to be worse under pressure
- Questionable mentality of alpha-dog
- Less dominant scorer than MJ and Shaq
- FT % for wing player is not so good
- Post play can be better (but its not weakness even now)

Why 13 over 12 and 09? When it comes to 12 vs 13 I just remember how in both postseasons Lebron lost his jumper and in 13 it led to him stinking it up while in 12 it led to Lebron dominating in the post. Plus in the regular season (if you want to talk ability and not resume) he wasn't having a hot shooting year and he still had a comparable performance.

2) 2nd ballot selection: Shaquille O'Neal 2000

Positives:

- Biggest mismatch 1-on -1 of the four in the post, huge physical presence
- Very efficient scorer (most efficient from the field) and good passer with few TO
- Draw most doubles maybe ever, create a lot of opportunities with it for teammates
- Great offensive rebounder
- Great intimidator as a defender in the lane and big body to protect the paint
- Very good man defender in the post

Negatives:

- Obviously FT% (awful percentage) and because of it clutch factor and issues, hack-a-shaq factor sometimes
- PnR defense and mobility in defense overall (even without health and laziness issues), can be exploded in some matchups.
- Questionable stamina , motor and durability
- Very predictable and have very small range, so very easy to double and triple, dependence of good passing
- Intangibles and mentality in some sense were issues.

How were his intangibles and mentality an issue? That season saw Shaq at his most focused and keyed in and it led to his best season and 66 wins. You also mention his stamina but once Shaq caught his second wind he was all good. He played more MPG than Lebron who also started having stamina issues back in 2013 (I remember all the talk about Spo playing him less).

3) 3rd ballot selection Hakeem Olajuwon 1993

Positives:

- Best defensive impact of the three with big margin
- Best at splitting doubles (along with Jordan)
- Better playmaker from the center position than Shaq, great IQ
- Excellent transition O and D from the center
- Great motor
- Huge intangibles and unfearness
- One of the most versatiles centers ever, great footwork, face-up game, jumper

Negatives:

- INot so good rebounder
- Sometimes TO prone
- Not big frame for a center, so can be exploited with big fellas matchups (like Shaq )
- Not very good FG% for a center, not so efficient

How in the world is Hakeem and better playmaker than Shaq? Shaq was a natural post passer and Hakeem was just good enough to supplement his scoring but nothing special at all. Plus Hakeem didn't have a big frame but he guarded other Cs extremely well including Shaq so IDK how that's an issue when in actual games it wasn't. Frame doesn't have much to do with his defense on other Cs (ask Bill Russell about the issues with his frame on Wilt). Lastly Hakeem was 53% from the field with a 58 TS% in 94 (53% from the field in 95 too) and 52% in the playoffs (53% in the 95 playoffs and 53% in his postseason career) and IDK how that's "not very good" for a C. Its actually above average.

[Quotatious]

Also Shaq has somehow led better offenses than Lebron as a big man that's not supposed to be all that impactful.

I'm not a big fan of equating team offense with individual contributions of the best player on that team. It's pretty much the same thing as equating overall team success with individual performance.

I am not sure how one can differentiate between peak Shaq and Lebron using statistics. I would just use a different argument altogether.

1. If I already have a stacked team, I want Shaq.
2. If I already have a good team, I want Shaq.
3. If I already have an average team, it is pick em.
4. If I already have a below average team, I want Lebron.
5. If I already have a really bad team, I want Lebron.

In general, I think Lebron (unlike any other player in the history) adds the most value when his teammates are crappy. This is where his versatility comes in (can play multiple positions, can score, can distribute, can defend, great on fast break, etc.). However, when stars (particularly guards) fill out some of these roles, then his value reduces by quite a bit. Thus, I don't think peak Shaq could have done better agains the 14-15 Warriors with similar level supporting casts (probably would have been swept or at most 1 games won) while peak Shaq would have three-peated with stars the calliber of Wade and Bosh as sidekicks.

So along this line of analysis, I just feel like peak Shaq would provide my team with more championships. You never ever win a championship when you have a crappy team. A herculean effort can take the team to 60-65 win (see Lebron 09) but you run out of ammo. So if the most valuable aspect of Lebron won't net me a championship, I would rather focus on possible scenarios in which I can maximize my team of winning a championship when I have an average to stacked teams (scenario 1-3 above). And I feel more confident that peak Shaq won't **** the bed and deliver.

I can understand why you feel this way, but Shaq had several supporting casts that fit better around him (and were also comparable in terms of talent) to any team LeBron had. Let's take a look at the '95 Magic, one of the top two offensive teams Shaq had even been on - they had a great perimeter creator who could score as well as deliver the ball (Penny), two great shooters (Anderson and Scott) to space the floor, which is very important when you have Shaq on your team, and one of them was also capable of creating shots for himself (Anderson), plus he had a pretty good mid-range shooting and passing bigman alongside him - Grant.

That's a supporting cast which was a perfect fit around Shaq.

Also, the best offensive team Shaq played on - the '98 Lakers - they had three very talented offensive players on the perimeter, all of them could create shots and shoot from outside - Eddie Jones, Kobe and Van Exel. Also, Horry was a perfect fit next to Shaq with him outside shooting and ability to stretch the floor.

The truth is, Shaq never played with other all-star/superstar low post scorer, like LeBron played with Wade, and now with Kyrie. I mean - the LeBron/Wade fit was far from ideal in the beginning. Two guys with pretty similar strengths and style of play. Shaq never had to deal with that kind of skillset overlap between him and another player. If you put Shaq and Barkley together, or Shaq and Duncan - it could be a less-than-ideal fit, too, as all of them liked to attack from similar spots on the court.

I'm saying this in response to E-Balla, as well.

Shaq made the finals with three elite (at least All-NBA 2nd team level) perimeter players - Penny, Kobe and Wade. Those guys could anchor pretty good offenses as lead dogs, too. 2009 LeBron didn't have anyone even remotely close to that level. 1995 Magic were an example how to build a picture-perfect offense around Shaq, playing exactly to his strengths. To build a perfect offense around LeBron, I think you would have to go with someone like Kevin Love or Chris Bosh, especially Love (but - a very important point - NO OTHER STAR PERIMETER PLAYER, like Wade or Kyrie, because they would take away too many touches from Love/Bosh, and ideally, Love/Bosh should be #2 options, not #3), or maybe prime Ray Allen/Reggie Miller as a perfect second option for LBJ, give them a defensive center who can finish on offense (or even a great passer from the post, like Andrew Bogut/Marc Gasol), and then surround them with shooters.

Something like:

Andrew Bogut or Marc Gasol
Channing Frye or Ryan Anderson
LeBron
Ray Allen or Reggie Miller
Derek Fisher/Mario Chalmers/Patrick Beverley, or someone similar - a role player spot up shooting PG with good defense

Or:

Tyson Chandler
Kevin Love/Chris Bosh
LeBron
Wes Matthews (or someone worse, if you think that Matthews is too good - maybe Raja Bell)
Derek Fisher/Mario Chalmers/Patrick Beverley etc.


Would be the perfect offensive team around LeBron. Good second option (something he didn't have in Cleveland during his first tenure), great shooting and spacing, very good defense. Those are championship level teams, but still pretty realistic, talent-wise. Unfortunately, he never had anything like that.

I don't want to talk too much about hypotheticals here, but I just want to make a point that Shaq had supporting casts with a lot of talent AND great fit around him. More so than LeBron.

[drza]

For people who, like me (not a voter here), have Russell at or near the top of the GOAT list, what is his top season and why isn't it in contention here?

In the #1 thread I threw out Russell's '64 or '65 seasons as worthy of discussion, but got crickets. I certainly think he should be mentioned. Those mid-60s Celtics were just showing off on defense, while in the midst of the greatest dynasty the sport has ever known. And Russell should get a huge amount of individual credit for that team defense.

The criticisms I often see for Russell are that a) he was all defense and/or b) his impact was too era specific. But to a) I say that, unlike offense, a huge defensive impact is almost entirely portable. There's almost no team that Russell couldn't make a step-function impact upon without disturbing anyone else's production...in fact, his presence likely improves the production of others because they would be more able to concentrate on their areas of strength. And to b) I note that Wilt 64/67 is starting to get major traction, and peak Russell was right in that same time period.

I think his peak should be further into the discussion than it has been.

[mtron929]

Also Shaq has somehow led better offenses than Lebron as a big man that's not supposed to be all that impactful.

I'm not a big fan of equating team offense with individual contributions of the best player on that team. It's pretty much the same thing as equating overall team success with individual performance.

I am not sure how one can differentiate between peak Shaq and Lebron using statistics. I would just use a different argument altogether.

1. If I already have a stacked team, I want Shaq.
2. If I already have a good team, I want Shaq.
3. If I already have an average team, it is pick em.
4. If I already have a below average team, I want Lebron.
5. If I already have a really bad team, I want Lebron.

In general, I think Lebron (unlike any other player in the history) adds the most value when his teammates are crappy. This is where his versatility comes in (can play multiple positions, can score, can distribute, can defend, great on fast break, etc.). However, when stars (particularly guards) fill out some of these roles, then his value reduces by quite a bit. Thus, I don't think peak Shaq could have done better agains the 14-15 Warriors with similar level supporting casts (probably would have been swept or at most 1 games won) while peak Shaq would have three-peated with stars the calliber of Wade and Bosh as sidekicks.

So along this line of analysis, I just feel like peak Shaq would provide my team with more championships. You never ever win a championship when you have a crappy team. A herculean effort can take the team to 60-65 win (see Lebron 09) but you run out of ammo. So if the most valuable aspect of Lebron won't net me a championship, I would rather focus on possible scenarios in which I can maximize my team of winning a championship when I have an average to stacked teams (scenario 1-3 above). And I feel more confident that peak Shaq won't **** the bed and deliver.

I can understand why you feel this way, but Shaq had several supporting casts that fit better around him (and were also comparable in terms of talent) to any team LeBron had. Let's take a look at the '95 Magic, one of the top two offensive teams Shaq had even been on - they had a great perimeter creator who could score as well as deliver the ball (Penny), two great shooters (Anderson and Scott) to space the floor, which is very important when you have Shaq on your team, and one of them was also capable of creating shots for himself (Anderson), plus he had a pretty good mid-range shooting and passing bigman alongside him - Grant.

That's a supporting cast which was a perfect fit around Shaq.

Also, the best offensive team Shaq played on - the '98 Lakers - they had three very talented offensive players on the perimeter, all of them could create shots and shoot from outside - Eddie Jones, Kobe and Van Exel. Also, Horry was a perfect fit next to Shaq with him outside shooting and ability to stretch the floor.

The truth is, Shaq never played with other all-star/superstar low post scorer, like LeBron played with Wade, and now with Kyrie. I mean - the LeBron/Wade fit was far from ideal in the beginning. Two guys with pretty similar strengths and style of play. Shaq never had to deal with that kind of skillset overlap between him and another player. If you put Shaq and Barkley together, or Shaq and Duncan - it could be a less-than-ideal fit, too, as all of them liked to attack from similar spots on the court.

I'm saying this in response to E-Balla, as well.

Shaq made the finals with three elite (at least All-NBA 2nd team level) perimeter players - Penny, Kobe and Wade. Those guys could anchor pretty good offenses as lead dogs, too. 2009 LeBron didn't have anyone even remotely close to that level. 1995 Magic were an example how to build a picture-perfect offense around Shaq, playing exactly to his strengths. To build a perfect offense around LeBron, I think you would have to go with someone like Kevin Love or Chris Bosh, especially Love (but - a very important point - NO OTHER STAR PERIMETER PLAYER, like Wade or Kyrie, because they would take away too many touches from Love/Bosh, and ideally, Love/Bosh should be #2 options, not #3), or maybe prime Ray Allen/Reggie Miller as a perfect second option for LBJ, give them a defensive center who can finish on offense (or even a great passer from the post, like Andrew Bogut/Marc Gasol), and then surround them with shooters.

Something like:

Andrew Bogut or Marc Gasol
Channing Frye or Ryan Anderson
LeBron
Ray Allen or Reggie Miller
Derek Fisher/Mario Chalmers/Patrick Beverley, or someone similar - a role player spot up shooting PG with good defense

Or:

Tyson Chandler
Kevin Love/Chris Bosh
LeBron
Wes Matthews (or someone worse, if you think that Matthews is too good - maybe Raja Bell)
Derek Fisher/Mario Chalmers/Patrick Beverley etc.


Would be the perfect offensive team around LeBron. Good second option (something he didn't have in Cleveland during his first tenure), great shooting and spacing, very good defense. Those are championship level teams, but still pretty realistic, talent-wise. Unfortunately, he never had anything like that.

I don't want to talk too much about hypotheticals here, but I just want to make a point that Shaq had supporting casts with a lot of talent AND great fit around him. More so than LeBron.

Well, I knew that some people would mention the Orlando Magic Shaq. I would counter with this. I really think that the 00-01 Shaq was on another level compared to the Orlando Magic Shaq. He was so much more dominant and caused problems for the opposing defense compared to his younger years when he was still damn good yet seemed mortal. Now, I would make an argument that comparatively speaking, from 09 to 13, Lebron was playing at a similar level. A very high level, obviously. Most like a top 3 level of all time. But I would still choose Shaq over him as I just feel like if I can get one more high level player (e.g. Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, Mcgrady, Vince Carter) with Shaq 00, I am pretty much guaranteed a championship. I am not sure I can say that about Lebron 09 with any other comparable players to the guys I listed.

Obviously, again, if the team is really bad and I want to maximize the number of wins, I would take Lebron over Shaq.