RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #8 (Shaquille O'Neal)

[DQuinn1575]

I think Bird and Dirk are pretty comparable. .

I think Bird was a much better passer.

[DQuinn1575]

Why shouldn't Bird be ranked this high? Was he better than the likes of West, Kobe and Dirk? I think it's not really a question whether it's peak or prime that I'd take Bird over any of them. Taking a worse player over him, simply because that player played for a bit longer feels pedantic to me.

I already touched this in my post - was Bird really better than West? If he was, was he consistent enough to say he was better player in their primes? If so, then is the gap big enough to overcome the fact that West had much more productive career despite not being any longer?

At the time Bird was considered the best player in the game.
West in his prime was considered 4th/5th best player, behind Russell, Wilt, Oscar, (and at times Baylor)

[Owly]

...

Other than Luka Doncic, Nikola Jokic and Kristaps Porzingis, how many other true high impact international guys are there?

Compare that to 89-90. You had Hakeem, Ewing, Sarunas Marčiulionis, Drazen Petrovic, Detlef Schrempf, Vlade Divac, Dominique Wilkins, Rik Smits, et. for international players.

You are using Rik Smits and ignoring Gobert and Joel Embiid? Heck, Sabonis, Horford, Vucevic, and maybe even Marc Gasol, Clint Capela, and Steven Adams are playing at or above the level Smits did during 1990. I didn't even bother to compare other positions or look things up.

Well they're using ...
a year several years from the prime of their favored candidate
3 players fully trained abroad - none of whom playing so much as 24mpg (all rookies just entering the league)
1 player with substantial skill developed abroad who chose to use the US college system (Schrempf)
1 player with phenomenal raw tools plucked to be trained in the US college system (Hakeem)
... Smits is similar to the last two, Ewing came as a child (12), Wilkins just happened to born in France because his father was serving there at the time.

Unless you had a combination of luck, means, connections and early visible talent/physical tools to get to the US at least by college you weren't getting to the NBA in the 80s and you would be an exception in the 90s.

And that "et" seems to mean Manute Bol, Seikaly, maybe some more US citizens raised in the US, perhaps those who happened to be born abroad or have a non-US parent (Vandeweghe, Donaldson etc) and nobody else of any real significance.

But in any case apart from perhaps 4 of the top 8 players this year (full health or health factored in - per ElGee/Ben Taylor)
https://youtu.be/6PT3_dkUGDA?t=1078
3 of whom were trained outside the US prior to the NBA (Embiid came across at 16) plus one arguably knocking at that 10 (Gobert - trained outside US) how many high impact international guys are there?

But apart from that, apart from your two-time reigning MVP, who is there now who can match up to a young Rik Smits.

[DQuinn1575]

Vote:
1) Kevin Garnett (biggest impact of generation; one of (if not the) most portable, scaleable and scarce skillsets in NBA history)
2) Shaquille O'Neal (Dominant peak and prime, by every eye test and analytics approach there is)
3)Olajuwon or Bird is tough, but for now I'll go Olajuwon. One of the elite defenders & post scorers in NBA history, magical 93-96 peak

help me with Garnett a little, I dont have him as high as others - so I "think" (and I want to listen) that
Garnett is rated real high on plus/minus - Isn't David Robinson also real high - shouldn't Robinson be real high?

[limbo]

Kareem was definitely siphoning lots of votes away from Magic during the first half of the 80's, because he was still (rightfully) considered the better player.

Bird didn't have anyone that was considered a Top 3 player in the league on his team from the jump, that's why more of the MVP votes for Boston's success funneled to him, despite not necessarily being better than Magic in his first three seasons. Bird's seperation from Magic happened from 1984 to 1988, where you can indeed argue he played more consistently on a higher level during the RS than Magic. But after that, Bird is donezo, while Magic still put up 3 MVP level seasons...

Also, a big stake in Magic > Bird actually comes from Magic more consistently delivering in the Playoffs, which is irrelevant to how the MVP voting is done. So even if someone thought Magic was better than Bird by the end of 1988, Bird gets to be the MVP because he had the better RS.

It's kind of like somebody from 2050 looked back in history and saw Giannis winning MVPS in 2019 and 2020 and concluding that the thought of that time was that Giannis was the best player in the league, when we know Playoffs is a different landscape.

[Dutchball97]

Kareem was definitely siphoning lots of votes away from Magic during the first half of the 80's, because he was still (rightfully) considered the better player.

Bird didn't have anyone that was considered a Top 3 player in the league on his team from the jump, that's why more of the MVP votes for Boston's success funneled to him, despite not necessarily being better than Magic in his first three seasons. Bird's seperation from Magic happened from 1984 to 1988, where you can indeed argue he played more consistently on a higher level during the RS than Magic. But after that, Bird is donezo, while Magic still put up 3 MVP level seasons...

Also, a big stake in Magic > Bird actually comes from Magic more consistently delivering in the Playoffs, which is irrelevant to how the MVP voting is done. So even if someone thought Magic was better than Bird by the end of 1988, Bird gets to be the MVP because he had the better RS.

It's kind of like somebody from 2050 looked back in history and saw Giannis winning MVPS in 2019 and 2020 and concluding that the thought of that time was that Giannis was the best player in the league, when we know Playoffs is a different landscape.

Comparing Giannis with D-Rob makes sense as they are both regular season monsters that were a bit more limited in the play-offs. In his 3 MVP seasons, Bird won 2 titles and made another final in those years. His 84 and 86 runs are some of the best play-off runs ever. It's misleading to say that since Bird won the MVP 3 times in a row he was somehow a regular season hero who couldn't get it done in the post-season.

[Owly]

Why shouldn't Bird be ranked this high? Was he better than the likes of West, Kobe and Dirk? I think it's not really a question whether it's peak or prime that I'd take Bird over any of them. Taking a worse player over him, simply because that player played for a bit longer feels pedantic to me.

I already touched this in my post - was Bird really better than West? If he was, was he consistent enough to say he was better player in their primes? If so, then is the gap big enough to overcome the fact that West had much more productive career despite not being any longer?

At the time Bird was considered the best player in the game.
West in his prime was considered 4th/5th best player, behind Russell, Wilt, Oscar, (and at times Baylor)

Once West was at his best, he certainly wasn't behind Baylor (both him emerging and Baylor declining).
You seem to be thinking the first half of the 60s where West's prime might be say 64-73.
And in seasons he plays something close to a full slate of games he comes second in the MVP ballot 4 times and third an additional time. So a touch mean to say he was considered 4th in his prime.

And pertinently even accepting the premise those above him are for the most part in. Baylor wasn't above him in prime. Only Robertson is a legitimate block (others will argue even this). Bird has MVPs. But against an arguably pre-prime and certainly pre-primacy, pre-high productivity Magic; then next in MVP shares for the span is age 36-38 Kareem; then King - a scorer only healthy 1 2/3 of the 3 seasons; next Dominique; post-prime Moses; Isiah ...

[limbo]

I think Bird and Dirk are pretty comparable. .

I think Bird was a much better passer.

They are comparable in All-Time rankings, not necessarily in skill sets/styles.

Bird was a better passer, but i think Dirk had bigger and more consistent impact as a scorer.

The fact that Dirk was essentially a Big man that could shoot or drive from the perimeter with ease presented teams with one of the biggest matchup nightmares we've ever seen. This guy was just way too good in way too many scenarios, against way to many defenders. He compromised opposing teams rim protection by forcing an extra defender to cover him on the perimeter and then he blew by him or shook him for jumpers all day. If they put a small dude on Dirk, he just posted him. Bird was very good on offense, but he never presented these type of matchup puzzles and gravity to other defenses, which is why has more poor offensive series than Dirk in his career, despite playing with arguably more offensive talent.

[ZeppelinPage]

1. Shaquille O'Neal - Greatest finals performer, rarely bad in a playoffs, incredibly dominant offensively.
2. Oscar Robertson - Insane regular season and playoff numbers, rarely performed bad in playoffs and has pretty fantastic impact numbers as well.
3. Hakeem Olajuwon - Lower overall peak than the two above, took it up a notch in playoffs but wasn't quite at the level of Shaq or Oscar.

[DQuinn1575]

Kareem was definitely siphoning lots of votes away from Magic during the first half of the 80's, because he was still (rightfully) considered the better player.

Bird didn't have anyone that was considered a Top 3 player in the league on his team from the jump, that's why more of the MVP votes for Boston's success funneled to him, despite not necessarily being better than Magic in his first three seasons. Bird's seperation from Magic happened from 1984 to 1988, where you can indeed argue he played more consistently on a higher level during the RS than Magic. But after that, Bird is donezo, while Magic still put up 3 MVP level seasons...

Also, a big stake in Magic > Bird actually comes from Magic more consistently delivering in the Playoffs, which is irrelevant to how the MVP voting is done. So even if someone thought Magic was better than Bird by the end of 1988, Bird gets to be the MVP because he had the better RS.

It's kind of like somebody from 2050 looked back in history and saw Giannis winning MVPS in 2019 and 2020 and concluding that the thought of that time was that Giannis was the best player in the league, when we know Playoffs is a different landscape.

'
No, it's like someone in 2050 telling you that everyone thought LeBron was the better player at the time, because that is what people thought. I can tell you what people thought in 1986 - trying to use MVP voting to show it, rather than just tell you what the thought was of people who followed the league then.
I can point to all-league voting, where Bird got more than Magic every single year through 1986. I'm trying to tell you what people thought at the time. At the time Bird had 3 rings, as did Magic, but Magic's first 2 were with Jabbar as the best player. Remember (or learn) Magic wasn't first team all-NBA for his first 3 years.

Talking 1986, at the time Bird has 3, Magic and Kareem have 3 - Magic was definitely considered 2nd best player on his team in 80 and 82. And the Lakers have a bad playoff loss in 81 - the 86 loss by the Lakers is about the same as the Celtics losing to the Bucks.

[Dutchball97]

So now the mid 80s is suddenly a weak era? Looks like we can discount half of Kareem and MJ's MVPs because they came in the weak late 70s and late 90s respectively.

[limbo]

the best player in the league, when we know Playoffs is a different landscape.

Comparing Giannis with D-Rob makes sense as they are both regular season monsters that were a bit more limited in the play-offs. In his 3 MVP seasons, Bird won 2 titles and made another final in those years. His 84 and 86 runs are some of the best play-off runs ever. It's misleading to say that since Bird won the MVP 3 times in a row he was somehow a regular season hero who couldn't get it done in the post-season.

Well, i wasn't trying to compare Giannis to Bird, i was just giving an example on how MVP votes don't necessarily reflect the general public consensus about who the best players were. It's just an accolade that awards regular season performance/success.

Bird definitely sealed the deal in the Playoffs twice in his MVP years, making his claim as the best player in the league a formality. His 1986 run was great, but he also had lots of help in that one. His 1984 was a much bigger carry job, imo. Especially vs. the Knicks and in the Finals against the Lakers. Bird basically single handedly won those series.

[limbo]

So now the mid 80s is suddenly a weak era? Looks like we can discount half of Kareem and MJ's MVPs because they came in the weak late 70s and late 90s respectively.

Suddenly?

Man... look at the competition the Lakers had from 1981 to 1988 in the Playoffs... And even then they managed to lose to a massive underdog Rockets team twice somehow.

Look at 1987...

1st round: Denver Nuggets: -1.14 SRS (15/23)
2nd round: Golden State Warriors: -2.54 SRS (16/23)
3rd round: Seattle Supersonics: 0.08 SRS (11/23)

...how are these teams even in the Playoffs. Two teams that were below league average during the RS.

Contrast that to Bird:

1st round: Chicago Bulls: 1.26 SRS (8/23)
2nd round: Milwaukee Bucks: 4.04 SRS (5/23)
3rd round: Detroit Pistons: 3.51 SRS (6/23)

From 1980 to 1988, the only time you could argue the Celtics had an easier path to the Finals than the Lakers was in 1980.

[Dutchball97]

So now the mid 80s is suddenly a weak era? Looks like we can discount half of Kareem and MJ's MVPs because they came in the weak late 70s and late 90s respectively.

Suddenly?

Man... look at the competition the Lakers had from 1981 to 1988 in the Playoffs... And even then they managed to lose to a massive underdog Rockets team twice somehow.

Look at 1987...

1st round: Denver Nuggets: -1.14 SRS (15/23)
2nd round: Golden State Warriors: -2.54 SRS (16/23)
3rd round: Seattle Supersonics: 0.08 SRS (11/23)

...how are these teams even in the Playoffs. Two teams that were below league average during the RS.

Contrast that to Bird:

1st round: Chicago Bulls: 1.26 SRS (8/23)
2nd round: Milwaukee Bucks: 4.04 SRS (5/23)
3rd round: Detroit Pistons: 3.51 SRS (6/23)

From 1980 to 1988, the only time you could argue the Celtics had an easier path to the Finals than the Lakers was in 1980.

So the east was strong and the west was weak. That doesn't make it a weak era overall. Bird's MVPs weren't weak at all.

[ReaLiez]

Shaq - Rings + peak dominance
Hakeem - less rings but similar peak - GOAT 2 way player
Bird

[trex_8063]

People on this board dont seem to understand population it's not the total population, but those of basketball playing age- the population of people 20-34 (roughly NBA age) went from 63.0 million in 1986 to 57.1 million in 1997 (Census Report 1960-1997) - the baby boomers were a real thing - about a 9% drop.

A good point, thank you.

Although to get closer to the year sets in question, the census data I'm looking at puts the "NBA age" group in 1984 at ~60.0 million [estimated] vs 58.8 million for 2000: a 2% drop. Fairly negligible, and easily off-set [and then some] by the other popularity factors mentioned. The growth in player pool is still there.....just not near as large as I'd previously suggested.

I get 310 total players in NBA of 1984 and 439 in 2000, From the 439 I deduct 14 players who were not born in US and did not attend college -as there were none in 1984 (and as a side note 65 in 2020) , and get 425 players. but additionally there were only 10 non US born players who had played in college in 1984 and 39 in 2020 - deduct 29 more to be fair to get to 396- so a 28% increase in the number of non foreign players, while the population went down 2% - So you added 86 players in this time period, with a real slight population decline. The increase in popularity didn't come up with 86 players. They are guys who didn't make the league in 1984. EDITED- some are guys who left school early, i can check on that later/but the increase there is not all of the 86.
So it was tougher to make the league in the mid 80s.


source - Basketball Reference

I'm not sure this is going about it in the right way to split it up and draw the main conclusion from that, especially in looking at only ONE aspect of the domestic player pool (population size), which we've established strictly from the 20-34 yr old demographic when there are, in fact, players from outside that age-range [and perhaps especially so in '00, when coming out of highschool was more likely/common].
And I also note the population of individuals age 35-44 was larger in 2000 than in 1984.
Certainly the 20-34 age-range is the BULK of NBA players, and the most relevant group, but I'm just saying it's not the ONLY group.

Further, there's the popularity aspect to factor in. This is harder to accurately quantify. One poster posted itt that highschool participation in basketball declined from 1978-90, though he did not cite a source.
If it's true, I'm honestly a little surprised it declined all the way to 1990, though if told it declined from 1978 to 1985 or so, I'd certainly believe that.

Bottom line: you're trying to say DEFINITIVELY that the domestic player pool declined in that time period, when it's not at all a sure thing.


And by how many millions did the effective international pool increase? I don't know exactly, though the participation by international players is actually MUCH larger than the 10 to 39 difference in foreign births you cited (which I concur with, btw, having looked on bbref myself).
Because we're not actually looking for place of birth, are we? What we're trying to isolate is if they were a product of the "American basketball system" or not......

Of those 10 non-US born players in '84, only ~2 of them were actually NOT products of the American basketball system/pool: Leo Rautins (raised and played highschool ball in Canada) is the only "fully foreign" in that respect.
Stewart Granger was raised and played [I think] some highschool ball in Canada, but at the very least finished his highschool career in New York; so maybe we can count him as "half" the product of a foreign basketball program??
And similarly can maybe sort of halfway include Mychal Thompson (was born in the Bahamas, but immigrated to U.S. "as a teenager"). Can't find anything more specific about EXACTLY when Thompson immigrated; "as a teenager" was all I could find. So he could, in fact, be more a product of the U.S. pool as well; he certainly isn't ENTIRELY of a foreign market.

Otherwise, ALL of the other non-U.S. born players actually grew up in the United States:
*Ernie Grunfeld--->born in Romania, but immigrated at age 8.
**Dominique Wilkins---->born in Paris because his father was stationed there at the time (U.S. Air Force); moved back to United States when very young.
**Wallace Bryant, Jr.--->born in Spain to at least one American parent (Wallace Bryant, not exactly Latin sounding), but grew up in Indiana.
****Rolando Blackman--->born in Panama, but moved to U.S. (Brooklyn, NY) at age 8.
*****Kiki Vandeweghe--->born in West Germany to American parents (his father was an U.S. Air Force physician [who grew up in California] stationed in Germany at the time; his mother was actually Miss America of 1952). Kiki grew up primary in the U.S.
******Swen Nater--->born in the Netherlands to Dutch parents, but came to the U.S. at age 9.
*******James Donaldson---->born in England, but grew up and went to highschool in California.

So as you can see there's not a one of these^^^ seven players who could actually be called a product of foreign player programs or markets.


Compare that to 2000.....
As you noted, there were 39 non-US born players. Of them, about 29.5 of them (using halves, as I did for Mychal Thompson and Stewart Granger, where it's unclear how much they could be said to be a product of foreign systems) are truly from foreign player markets/programs.
The only ones who are NOT are:
*Patrick Ewing--->born in Jamaica, but immigrated to US at age 12 (and apparently took up basketball AFTER that).
**Jason Miskiri--->born in Guyana, but moved to US at age 5.
***Michael Stewart--->born in France, but grew up in the US.
****Olden Polynice--->born in Haiti, but grew up in the US.
*****Shawn Bradley---->born in West Germany (father [US military] stationed there), but was raised in Utah.
******Felipe Lopez--->born in Dominican Republic, immigrated at age 14 [at that age, could almost partially count him as a true foreign prospect, but I'm categorizing him as "American" as to which basketball system he's a product of].

There are a handful of others I'm only counting as "HALF" of a foreign market/system, such as:
*Tim Duncan--->born and raised (and took up basketball [late, at like age 15] there too) in the U.S. Virgin Islands, BUT it's the U.S. Virgin Islands, so...
**Detlef Schrempf--->born in Germany, though grew up (and played basketball) in BOTH Germany and the U.S.
***Rick Fox---->born in Canada, though grew up mostly in the Bahamas and the U.S. (playing basketball both places)
****Wally Szczerbiak--->born in Spain and spent much of his childhood in Europe, though did go to highschool in the U.S.
*****Steve Kerr--->born in Lebanon, grew up and was schooled in a variety of places: Egypt, Lebanon, and the U.S.

But the MAJORITY of those 39 are actual legit foreign prospects, and products of foreign basketball programs.
In raw figures, the number of true foreign players in 2000 is ~14-15x that which was present in 1984.
In terms of *proportion of players in the league: about 0.6% of the league was truly foreign in 1984, while 6.7% was foreign in 2000 (~10.5x larger).
*Although, fwiw, I'm not sure comparing the respective league size in terms of # of players is totally fair. # of TEAMS seems more fair, imo. # of teams increased by 26.1%, while number of players [who played at least 1 minute] increased by 41.6%, mostly because teams began stocking larger rosters [having more "injured reserved" extras], as well as utilizing things like temporary contracts to a larger degree.
But many of these "extras" weren't playing enough to influence the average quality in the league. Note, for example, that the # of guys who played <150 total minutes in '00 was 59 (13.43% of all players in the league [almost 1 of every 7 players]); the # in '84 was just 25 (8.06% of the league [barely 1 in 12]).

Looking at the # of "true" foreign players slightly differently [rather than proportion of total players], I'll note the avg number of "true" foreign players PER ROSTER....
'00 - 1.02 players
'84 - 0.09 players

Once again looks like a close to 12-fold increase [about 11.7x, to be more precise] looking at it in ^^this way.


And it's not entirely a list of nobodies, either. That 2000 foreign pool includes guys like:
Steve Nash
Dirk Nowitzki
Dikembe Mutombo
Vlade Divac
Toni Kukoc
Rik Smits
Arvydas Sabonis
Peja Stojakovic
...as well as a number of role players who had decent/serviceable [sometimes lengthy] NBA careers.


What one has to ask himself is just how big of an effective player pool does this group of foreign players represent [relative to the 1984 group]? VERY difficult to quantify how big the change is......but we can rest assured it was NOT a small change.

[Owly]

Vote:
1) Kevin Garnett (biggest impact of generation; one of (if not the) most portable, scaleable and scarce skillsets in NBA history)
2) Shaquille O'Neal (Dominant peak and prime, by every eye test and analytics approach there is)
3)Olajuwon or Bird is tough, but for now I'll go Olajuwon. One of the elite defenders & post scorers in NBA history, magical 93-96 peak

help me with Garnett a little, I dont have him as high as others - so I "think" (and I want to listen) that
Garnett is rated real high on plus/minus - Isn't David Robinson also real high - shouldn't Robinson be real high?

Arguably, yes.

Big impact on arrival (significant other turnover too). Big evidence of impact during '92 injury. 1st, 1st, 2nd (to Penny in on-off, to MJ in faux-RAPM) in both on-off and faux-RAPM in 94-96 seasons. Team falls apart during '97 injury season (some others injured/rested). 6th in 97-14 RAPM in what some consider "post-prime" years - https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/97-14-rapm-2, including very healthy playoff on-off for the same span (of course some collinearity possible though "on" and "on-off" considerably better than Duncan's in '98 and '99 albeit in lesser minutes, no Duncan in 2000 - as ever playoffs are small samples, on-off is noisy, moreso in small samples).

Mind you, one doesn't have to be using impact stuff. Robinson is above Olajuwon in (RS) Win Shares and VORP.

Of course that last bit is RS only which comes to the nub of it. He falls off (from a high baseline) in terms of playoff production 90-96.
If you heavily weigh playoffs and/or think playoffs 90-96 are an indictment of Robinson - exposing fatal flaws - he drops. If you think his teams are badly constructed, playoffs are noisy, evidence of high impact overall and in later playoffs outweigh playoff production concerns for that spell (and perhaps that samples are insufficient for conclusions regarding specific types of team) and that numbers whilst low-er aren't exactly low (24.1 PER, .189 WS/48 and fwiw 6.5 BPM)n maybe you aren't as concerned. You can probably tell that I lean the latter: someone else might more eloquently and better put the concerns on him.

That he doesn't have a title with the narrative of best player (though, otoh, I'd be inclined to argue that in '99 he was - but this is a tangent) arguably hurts him, especially in terms of the mainstream view.

[Clyde Frazier]

Vote 1 - Shaquille O'Neal
Vote 2 - Larry Bird
Vote 3 - Hakeem Olajuwon

As we round out the top 10 you could certainly make a case for my 3 candidates in any order. They're all incredibly talented players with a few black marks on their careers in different areas, be it either durability issues or playoff shortcomings.

As I mentioned in an earlier thread, shaq's longevity probably gets overlooked because usually durability coincides with it, but in his case not so much. 17 seasons as a productive player including his resurgent season in 09 is nothing to scoff at. However, Shaq failed to crack 70 games played (or equivalent) in 9 of those 17 seasons.

It's his dominance at his best that really stands out. In his 3 straight title runs he put up 29.9 PPG, 14.5 RPG, 3 APG, .5 SPG, 2.4 BPG on 56.2% TS and a 113 ORtg. This includes monster finals performances. His dominance in the paint specifically was nuts hitting 76.2% from 0-3 feet. This was nearly identical to his regular season mark of 76.8% over those 3 years.

All you could really to do try to stop him was send him to the line, which yes was one of his shortcomings. That with the addition of his questionable commitment to his body throughout his career is why we're talking about him now instead of the top 5.

[trex_8063]

...

Other than Luka Doncic, Nikola Jokic and Kristaps Porzingis, how many other true high impact international guys are there?

Compare that to 89-90. You had Hakeem, Ewing, Sarunas Marčiulionis, Drazen Petrovic, Detlef Schrempf, Vlade Divac, Dominique Wilkins, Rik Smits, et. for international players.

You are using Rik Smits and ignoring Gobert and Joel Embiid? Heck, Sabonis, Horford, Vucevic, and maybe even Marc Gasol, Clint Capela, and Steven Adams are playing at or above the level Smits did during 1990. I didn't even bother to compare other positions or look things up.

I don't know about Al Horford and Joel Embiid; were they actually raised [and coached] abroad, or merely born abroad?
That distinction needs to be made, because if someone were born in a foreign country, but then immigrates to U.S. at age 6 or something......he's a product of American basketball programs, period.

I've addressed some of the older names above wrt this point in my last post, and it'd frankly be disingenuous to label guys like Patrick Ewing and Dominique Wilkins as "foreign players": both were products of American basketball programs.
Detlef was partially raised/coached in the U.S., too.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #159:

Shaquille O’Neal - 12 (Ainosterhaspie, Ambrose, Baski, Clyde Frazier, Hornet Mania, DQuinn1575, Joao Saraiva, O_6, Odinn21, penbeast0, trex_8063, ZeppelinPage)
Kevin Garnett - 7 (Doctor MJ, drza, Dr Positivity, eminence, Jaivl, limbo, Whopper_Sr)
Larry Bird - 3 (2klegend, Dutchball97, Hal14)
Hakeem Olauwon - 3 (90sAllDecade, mailmp, TrueLAfan)


Plus one other vote for Shaq disregarded due to inadequate arguments.
So we have 25 total counted votes, requiring 13 for a majority. We don't have that, so Bird and Hakeem will be eliminated. This transfers 4 votes to Shaq, 1 to Garnett, and one is "ghosted", bringing new totals to:

Shaq - 16
Garnett - 8

So Shaq's got the clear majority. Will have the next thread up in a moment.

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.