Anyone else surprised that we haven't seen another Shaq like player

[pickIBL]

Clarence and the round mound. Jordan and Miner. Wilt... Shaq

Lol

[pickIBL]

who was the fat guy dubbed Baby Shaq?

Big Tractor Baby Sofo Jr. I believe.

[hippesthippo]

I feel like a lot a y'all are forgetting just how great of a passer Shaq was. Double teaming him was pointless; he would find the open man out of the double team every time. That is, if he hasn't already split it and dunked through it. The Pistons beat the Lakers by playing Shaq straight up for a reason.

[hippesthippo]

who was the fat guy dubbed Baby Shaq?

Big Tractor Baby Sofo Jr. I believe.

There have been multiple "Baby Shaq's," over the last two decades. Not one has lived up to the moniker. Glen Davis, Tractor Traylor, that Greek Guy, and I think even one of Valenciunus or Motiejonas considered themselves "Euro Shaq," around draft time.

[queridiculo]

About 1 in 22 million US citizens is as tall or taller than Shaq.

Now try to find somebody that's as nimble, mobile, coordinated and powerful as him.

Not exactly a surprise that we haven't seen anybody on his level.

[dhsilv2]

You guys are crazy if you don't acknowledge most of his success was purely from his size strength and athletic ability. It's obvious and even his post "moves" usually derived from putting his big ass into someone or some form of leaning/ elbowing them out of the way first because he had them by 80 or 100lbs or simply jumping higher. There was nothing finesse or shooting about most of his game. He couldn't make a jump shot or anyshot more than 5 feet way. Being bigger and overpowering or jumping higher than them isn't skill.

I don't know what you have against shaq. was he uber big and powerful? Yes. But he had an awesome array of post moves. These post moves are what players like dwight needed.

Shaq was skillful.

Fam. Dwight was so bad that he helped end the Kobe/Shaq beef. Kobe saw first hand the difference between a Shaq and a Big man with Athleticism.

When? Kobe saw a big man who spent a year struggling with serious back issues and didn't look like a shadow of himself. Who was this athletic big man Kobe saw?

[dhsilv2]

Giannis is the closest to Shaq

Giannis is nothing like Shaq. Giannis got physically held by Kawhi. As good a defender as Kawhi is and has been, Shaq would average 45 and 18 if he was guarded by Kawhi.

Giannis was guard by 4 guys at once....he'd have put up 35-40 a game if he was just guarded by kawhi. Gasol was the key to actually stopping giannis at the rim, not leonard. Leonard's only job was make Giannis make a second or 3rd move while driving to give help time to get there.

[dhsilv2]

He is probably the only guy in the history of the world with that kind of size, athleticism, agility, and speed. Skills-wise, he was a very good ball handler for that size, great passer, great touch/hands, excellent footwork. His physical attributes contributed a lot to his success, but he wasnt unskilled or anything.

But yea, will we ever see a 7 foot guy built like a brick wall who is the strongest player, but who is also the most athletic/agile big man in the nba? Probably not, let alone one with skills.

I agree with most of what you said, but young David Robinson was more athletic and more agile then Shaq (as a basketball player).

Shaq was stronger, more powerful and meaner.

———-

One of Shaq’s greatest attributes was that he embraced being and playing big. He had no qualms about being mean and nasty about it. That is a hard quality to find in really big guys.

Most really big guys spend so much time trying to appear non threatening (in their every day life) that they develop this jolly, doofus like demeanor on and off the basketball court.

...

Note: I absolutely loathe jolly, doofus bigs.

Robinson looked better with his shirt off and was a faster runner than shaq. He wasn't more athletic. he didn't have the strength. He wasn't more agile relative to size. He just flat out wasn't the better athlete.

[Greyhound]

He is probably the only guy in the history of the world with that kind of size, athleticism, agility, and speed. Skills-wise, he was a very good ball handler for that size, great passer, great touch/hands, excellent footwork. His physical attributes contributed a lot to his success, but he wasnt unskilled or anything.

But yea, will we ever see a 7 foot guy built like a brick wall who is the strongest player, but who is also the most athletic/agile big man in the nba? Probably not, let alone one with skills.

I agree with most of what you said, but young David Robinson was more athletic and more agile then Shaq (as a basketball player).

Shaq was stronger, more powerful and meaner.

———-

One of Shaq’s greatest attributes was that he embraced being and playing big. He had no qualms about being mean and nasty about it. That is a hard quality to find in really big guys.

Most really big guys spend so much time trying to appear non threatening (in their every day life) that they develop this jolly, doofus like demeanor on and off the basketball court.

...

Note: I absolutely loathe jolly, doofus bigs.

Robinson looked better with his shirt off and was a faster runner than shaq. He wasn't more athletic. he didn't have the strength. He wasn't more agile relative to size. He just flat out wasn't the better athlete.

Nice qualifiers there, guy.

David Robinson was more athletic then Shaq as a run jump athlete. Shaq was stronger and more powerful (I stated as much). Comparing two seven footers is an odd time to toss out a relative to size qualifier. David Robinson was just as fluid and flat out more agile then Shaq (relative to 7 footers).

[dhsilv2]

I agree with most of what you said, but young David Robinson was more athletic and more agile then Shaq (as a basketball player).

Shaq was stronger, more powerful and meaner.

———-

One of Shaq’s greatest attributes was that he embraced being and playing big. He had no qualms about being mean and nasty about it. That is a hard quality to find in really big guys.

Most really big guys spend so much time trying to appear non threatening (in their every day life) that they develop this jolly, doofus like demeanor on and off the basketball court.

...

Note: I absolutely loathe jolly, doofus bigs.

Robinson looked better with his shirt off and was a faster runner than shaq. He wasn't more athletic. he didn't have the strength. He wasn't more agile relative to size. He just flat out wasn't the better athlete.

Nice qualifiers there, guy.

David Robinson was more athletic then Shaq as a run jump athlete. Shaq was stronger and more powerful (I stated as much). Comparing two seven footers is an odd time to toss out a relative to size qualifier. David Robinson was just as fluid and flat out more agile then Shaq (relative to 7 footers).

Agility relative to height AND weight is always critical. Disconnecting them would make no sense. There's no "relative to height". Who cares if a stick figure is mobile if he can't also exert force on others? or in another way, speed, strength, agility, etc all work together to make someone athletic. The gap in shaq's strength vs robinsons is greater any advantage robinso had.

[12footrim]

About 1 in 22 million US citizens is as tall or taller than Shaq.

Now try to find somebody that's as nimble, mobile, coordinated and powerful as him.

Not exactly a surprise that we haven't seen anybody on his level.

Except it's a world wide game now where 25+% of the NBA is international players including MVP Giannis. 1 in 22 million would go into billions in the talent pool out there the last 2 decades.....

[hippesthippo]

What about Danny Fortson? He was a mini Shaq.. I remember he had one good season before he fell apart mentally or something.

[SF_Warriors]

I agree with most of what you said, but young David Robinson was more athletic and more agile then Shaq (as a basketball player).

Shaq was stronger, more powerful and meaner.

———-

One of Shaq’s greatest attributes was that he embraced being and playing big. He had no qualms about being mean and nasty about it. That is a hard quality to find in really big guys.

Most really big guys spend so much time trying to appear non threatening (in their every day life) that they develop this jolly, doofus like demeanor on and off the basketball court.

...

Note: I absolutely loathe jolly, doofus bigs.

Robinson looked better with his shirt off and was a faster runner than shaq. He wasn't more athletic. he didn't have the strength. He wasn't more agile relative to size. He just flat out wasn't the better athlete.

Nice qualifiers there, guy.

David Robinson was more athletic then Shaq as a run jump athlete. Shaq was stronger and more powerful (I stated as much). Comparing two seven footers is an odd time to toss out a relative to size qualifier. David Robinson was just as fluid and flat out more agile then Shaq (relative to 7 footers).

I definitely agree that shaq's mentality to be an unstoppable force was a factor as well.

The admiral was a physical specimen in his own right..shaq I would say was just as athletic if not very slightly less.. but about 100 lbs bigger. Is it more likely we see a 7 foot 240-250 lb elite athlete versus a 330-350 lb elite athlete? The question was why we havent seen a player like shaq ever aqgain? The answer is the likelihood of seeing a person that size be an elite athlete, alone one with skills is very small.

Regardless of whether one think DR was a better athlete or not, shaq was an elite level athlete as a big man..shaq could get as high as DR no problem. Agility-wise, it would make sense for a leaner guy to be better in that category, but shaq for his size, never looked uncoordinated in the least bit. Shaq went through people a lot, but he also went around people quite a bit.. I do not see a discernible difference between DR and shaq in agility or speed, and I am actually pretty sure shaq was faster end to end..

Shaq in his prime was every bit as athletic, agile, and fast as a DR..even if DR was slightly better in those categories, the mass difference erases any advantages he had there. If one's argument is DR was significantly better in any of those areas, well that would be a flat out lie.

[Greyhound]

Robinson looked better with his shirt off and was a faster runner than shaq. He wasn't more athletic. he didn't have the strength. He wasn't more agile relative to size. He just flat out wasn't the better athlete.

Nice qualifiers there, guy.

David Robinson was more athletic then Shaq as a run jump athlete. Shaq was stronger and more powerful (I stated as much). Comparing two seven footers is an odd time to toss out a relative to size qualifier. David Robinson was just as fluid and flat out more agile then Shaq (relative to 7 footers).

Agility relative to height AND weight is always critical. Disconnecting them would make no sense. There's no "relative to height". Who cares if a stick figure is mobile if he can't also exert force on others? or in another way, speed, strength, agility, etc all work together to make someone athletic. The gap in shaq's strength vs robinsons is greater any advantage robinso had.

This is nonsense.

Athleticism is a set quantifiable thing. How fast can you run? How high can you jump? How quick can you move and change direction? How strong are you? How long can you maintain that strength under strain? How long can you run/ exert maximum energy? How much power can you generate from a set neutral position?

The quantified data produced is the bottom line. Be it for a small man, a tall man, a man without arms, etc.

Those things add context and they help you establish the rarity of an athletic trait, relative to the package producing the output.

But...

Make no mistake about it, the output is the output.

I will go out on a limb and state that if a 26 year old David Robinson and a 26 year old Shaq were run through a gamut of Olympic/ NFL/ NBA combine style athletic drills, David Robinson would win on points (rather comfortably).

Shaq’s combination of immense size, fluidity and athleticism make him a far more rare specimen then David Robinson, but he was not a better athlete.

David Robinson was one of the fastest players in the NBA from baseline to baseline (regardless of size). He could walk the entire length of a basketball court in hand stand position.

Relative to 7 footers, David Robinson was an incredible athlete.

...

All that being said, I could not stand him as a player. He was a jolly, doofus big of the highest order.

[dhsilv2]

Nice qualifiers there, guy.

David Robinson was more athletic then Shaq as a run jump athlete. Shaq was stronger and more powerful (I stated as much). Comparing two seven footers is an odd time to toss out a relative to size qualifier. David Robinson was just as fluid and flat out more agile then Shaq (relative to 7 footers).

Agility relative to height AND weight is always critical. Disconnecting them would make no sense. There's no "relative to height". Who cares if a stick figure is mobile if he can't also exert force on others? or in another way, speed, strength, agility, etc all work together to make someone athletic. The gap in shaq's strength vs robinsons is greater any advantage robinso had.

This is nonsense.

Athleticism is a set quantifiable thing. How fast can you run? How high can you jump? How quick can you move and change direction? How strong are you? How long can you maintain that strength under strain? How long can you run/ exert maximum energy? How much power can you generate from a set neutral position?

The quantified data produced is the bottom line. Be it for a small man, a tall man, a man without arms, etc.

Those things add context and they help you establish the rarity of an athletic trait, relative to the package producing the output.

But...

Make no mistake about it, the output is the output.

I will go out on a limb and state that if a 26 year old David Robinson and a 26 year old Shaq were run through a gamut of Olympic/ NFL/ NBA combine style athletic drills, David Robinson would win on points (rather comfortably).

Shaq’s combination of immense size, fluidity and athleticism make him a far more rare specimen then David Robinson, but he was not a better athlete.

David Robinson was one of the fastest players in the NBA from baseline to baseline (regardless of size). He could walk the entire length of a basketball court in hand stand position.

Relative to 7 footers, David Robinson was an incredible athlete.

...

All that being said, I could not stand him as a player. He was a jolly, doofus big of the highest order.

The NLF and NBA almost complete ignore strength in their combine. I'm not even sure what the Olympics in this contexts means. Are we seeing who's better at bow and arrow and curling?

But you're leaving off things like ability to resist force. You're leaving off things like stability under contact. All of these things are part of being athletic. If you want to argue that Robinson would win at track and field events, then sure he would.

All else equal weighing more is a massive MASSIVE athletic advantage in contact sports. I'll leave the technicalities to others.

Though to your last point, I'm the opposite. I hated shaq as a player and rather liked Robinson.

[Greyhound]

Agility relative to height AND weight is always critical. Disconnecting them would make no sense. There's no "relative to height". Who cares if a stick figure is mobile if he can't also exert force on others? or in another way, speed, strength, agility, etc all work together to make someone athletic. The gap in shaq's strength vs robinsons is greater any advantage robinso had.

This is nonsense.

Athleticism is a set quantifiable thing. How fast can you run? How high can you jump? How quick can you move and change direction? How strong are you? How long can you maintain that strength under strain? How long can you run/ exert maximum energy? How much power can you generate from a set neutral position?

The quantified data produced is the bottom line. Be it for a small man, a tall man, a man without arms, etc.

Those things add context and they help you establish the rarity of an athletic trait, relative to the package producing the output.

But...

Make no mistake about it, the output is the output.

I will go out on a limb and state that if a 26 year old David Robinson and a 26 year old Shaq were run through a gamut of Olympic/ NFL/ NBA combine style athletic drills, David Robinson would win on points (rather comfortably).

Shaq’s combination of immense size, fluidity and athleticism make him a far more rare specimen then David Robinson, but he was not a better athlete.

David Robinson was one of the fastest players in the NBA from baseline to baseline (regardless of size). He could walk the entire length of a basketball court in hand stand position.

Relative to 7 footers, David Robinson was an incredible athlete.

...

All that being said, I could not stand him as a player. He was a jolly, doofus big of the highest order.

The NLF and NBA almost complete ignore strength in their combine. I'm not even sure what the Olympics in this contexts means. Are we seeing who's better at bow and arrow and curling?

But you're leaving off things like ability to resist force. You're leaving off things like stability under contact. All of these things are part of being athletic. If you want to argue that Robinson would win at track and field events, then sure he would.

All else equal weighing more is a massive MASSIVE athletic advantage in contact sports. I'll leave the technicalities to others.

Though to your last point, I'm the opposite. I hated shaq as a player and rather liked Robinson.

Shaq himself would have been a better player had he managed his weight and played lighter.

A lean and strong 285 lbs (career) Shaq would be the GOAT of the sport. Shaq was athletic in spite of his size, not because of it. That is what made him so rare. He moved like a man much smaller.

When one references athleticism we are typically referring to run, jump athleticism and fast twitch explosive power.

Stop getting cute with your force resistance, (all wheel) stability under contact, tea cup balancing, and the like. Your typical sumo wrestler is excellent at those things you outlined. Nobody in their right mind would consider them more athletic then a Bruce Lee (who weighed hundreds of pounds less).

Run, jump athleticism is what we are speaking about here. Not the ability to climb three flights of stairs in high heels or deadlift a Prius.

[Orin]

Wasn't Eddy Curry like that guy? Another one coming to mind is Jahlil Okafor.

Well, since the change of the 10-seconds, zone and hand checking rules and implementation of all kinds of analytical data I don't even know if Shaq would be the same Shaq today.

I actually think if Shaq played today he would be forced to stay in better shape and look more like Rookie Shaq. I think he would still be dominate, but more as a rim runner like DeAndre Jordan or JaVale on steroids. Most coaches would now days limited his post ups simply because they are much poorer shots in the aggregate. He wouldn't have averaged 30 but he might have turned that focus on rebounds and defense which I think he could have a lot more dominate at than he showed in his career.

Have you seen Zion play this year? He is 6-6 and bullying centers in the post. Go look at the effeciency of those post ups, and you will be (not) surprised to see that it is one of the most effecient shot in the league right now. Jokic is also destroying teams in the post.

A Shaq post play would be one of the most effecient play in the whole league, especially these days since teams don't have players to deal with post up bullies anymore.

[dhsilv2]

This is nonsense.

Athleticism is a set quantifiable thing. How fast can you run? How high can you jump? How quick can you move and change direction? How strong are you? How long can you maintain that strength under strain? How long can you run/ exert maximum energy? How much power can you generate from a set neutral position?

The quantified data produced is the bottom line. Be it for a small man, a tall man, a man without arms, etc.

Those things add context and they help you establish the rarity of an athletic trait, relative to the package producing the output.

But...

Make no mistake about it, the output is the output.

I will go out on a limb and state that if a 26 year old David Robinson and a 26 year old Shaq were run through a gamut of Olympic/ NFL/ NBA combine style athletic drills, David Robinson would win on points (rather comfortably).

Shaq’s combination of immense size, fluidity and athleticism make him a far more rare specimen then David Robinson, but he was not a better athlete.

David Robinson was one of the fastest players in the NBA from baseline to baseline (regardless of size). He could walk the entire length of a basketball court in hand stand position.

Relative to 7 footers, David Robinson was an incredible athlete.

...

All that being said, I could not stand him as a player. He was a jolly, doofus big of the highest order.

The NLF and NBA almost complete ignore strength in their combine. I'm not even sure what the Olympics in this contexts means. Are we seeing who's better at bow and arrow and curling?

But you're leaving off things like ability to resist force. You're leaving off things like stability under contact. All of these things are part of being athletic. If you want to argue that Robinson would win at track and field events, then sure he would.

All else equal weighing more is a massive MASSIVE athletic advantage in contact sports. I'll leave the technicalities to others.

Though to your last point, I'm the opposite. I hated shaq as a player and rather liked Robinson.

Shaq himself would have been a better player had he managed his weight and played lighter.

A lean and strong 285 lbs (career) Shaq would be the GOAT of the sport. Shaq was athletic in spite of his size, not because of it. That is what made him so rare. He moved like a man much smaller.

When one references athleticism we are typically referring to run, jump athleticism and fast twitch explosive power.

Stop getting cute with your force resistance, (all wheel) stability under contact, tea cup balancing, and the like. Your typical sumo wrestler is excellent at those things you outlined. Nobody in their right mind would consider them more athletic then a Bruce Lee (who weighed hundreds of pounds less).

Run, jump athleticism is what we are speaking about here. Not the ability to climb three flights of stairs in high heels or deadlift a Prius.

I don't know who this "we" is, but anyone who doesn't rank a deadlift near the top of atheism doesn't know what it is. And I'll just laugh at the 285 comment. Shaq intentionally added the weight to protect himself and give him more power against the goons that teams were adding to stop him. He didn't just get lazy and become fat (well until his later years where he stopped keeping up with his conditioning). The push to the 330's was both smart and effective for his game.

[Mazter]

I actually think if Shaq played today he would be forced to stay in better shape and look more like Rookie Shaq. I think he would still be dominate, but more as a rim runner like DeAndre Jordan or JaVale on steroids. Most coaches would now days limited his post ups simply because they are much poorer shots in the aggregate. He wouldn't have averaged 30 but he might have turned that focus on rebounds and defense which I think he could have a lot more dominate at than he showed in his career.

Have you seen Zion play this year? He is 6-6 and bullying centers in the post. Go look at the effeciency of those post ups, and you will be (not) surprised to see that it is one of the most effecient shot in the league right now. Jokic is also destroying teams in the post.

A Shaq post play would be one of the most effecient play in the whole league, especially these days since teams don't have players to deal with post up bullies anymore.

Not really (surprised nor effective), Zion has 7.6 postups in which he has a 52.2 pts% (3.9ppg) and 8.1ast% (0.6apg). That ranks him like only 5th in post ups at best and there are at least 24 players better in both volume, scoring and assisting on drives. Heck, there are even 2 doing better from the elbow. Not to mention there are about 200+ players hitting a better efficiency on the catch and shoot, 89 of them scoring more than Zion's 3.9 from the post. I hate to break it to you, but there is a reason why all those teams stacked with video and data analysts are stepping more and more away from the inefficient post.

[jefe]

Oden was hyped to sort of be the next guy of that level, but, of course, we never got to see if it panned out.