Greatest players of all time (Number 6)

[Geaux Tigers]

1 MVP for Shaq really doesn't sound dominant like we all saw on the court. Bird had 3 MVPs during the same years that Magic, Jordan, Moses Malone, Isaiah Thomas, etc were all playing. The quality of the Center position declined after the mid 90s and Shaq still couldn't pick up another MVP? Debate this before I cast a vote.

Did he deserve it over Iverson and Duncan during the first three peat? Despite Shaq winning a title that year it is hard for me to take away Iverson's or Duncan's.

[Wilt_The_Stilt]

Shaq was a better player than Iverson and Duncan those years. Best player doesn't always win it. Malone won it over Jordan twice in a three year span. Was he really better than Mike?

[Dee-Zy]

MVP is not an argument strong enough for me to give it to bird over Shaq.

What makes Shaq better than Hakeem though? Sure, he had less title, but he also had much heavier competition. The title argument is not valid IMO. Shaq only really won 3 with the lakers. He wasn't the man of the team in 06. He was a big part but he was not batman.

MJ even said it himself that had he met Hakeem in the finals, he wouldn't think that he could win against him.

If we break down the competitors, Hakeem had MJ, Malone, Barkley, Robinson, piston bad boys, Ewing.
Shaq had a competition of AI, Kidd, Duncan, Dirk, the superstar less pistons, stojakovic, webber, nash, you can sort of add lebron, wade and Kobe on that list but Shaq was on the decline and played with all three of them too.

Hakeem had the dream shake and was much more skilled with the ball than Shaq. You out Hakeem vs Shaq, both in their prime and I think that Hakeem schools Shaq.

So both in terms of competition and skills, Hakeem has the upper hand for me. The only thing that Shaq has more is titles and I don't think they are fair measure sticks.

[Wilt_The_Stilt]

It's not necessarily about being more skilled though. KG is more skilled than Shaq but I don't think anyone would rather have him.

[Geaux Tigers]

Hakeem in 1994 vs Shaq in 2000...I think Shaq wins that head to head.

[Dee-Zy]

How so?

I don't think he would.

Shaq is pretty much about powering his way into the paint and dunking the ball either by using his strength or his speed and agility to spin around his opponent. Hakeem has the length and strength to cover Shaq defensively. Offensively, Hakeem has way more tricks in his pockets to toy with Shaq. I think Shaq would get in foul trouble before Hakeem. If I remember correctly, Hakeem did own Shaq when they went against each other.

I am talking about skills as a second argument because I don't think that shaq's accolades are actually that much better than Hakeem when you take the level of competition in context.

[Wilt_The_Stilt]

Since I'm sure someone will reference it. Here are the numbers from their Finals matchup.

Hakeem

32.8 ppg
11.5 rpg
5.5 apg
2.0 spg
2.0 bpg
48.3% fg

Shaq

28.0ppg
12.5rpg
6.3apg
0.3spg
2.5bpg
59.5% fg

This was with Shaq being 22 years old

[Luke]

Hakeem didn't play tougher competition than Shaquille did, that's a retarded argument. The only two titles Hakeem won were when the league's alpha male was playing baseball.

And trying to pretend like Shaquille didn't deserve more than one MVP is ridiculous. He absolutely deserved to win it over Iverson in '01 and Nash in '05. You could literally make a strong case for him any year from '98-'05. The fact that he only has one is a travesty, just like Kobe.

[Dee-Zy]

I'm with you with the MVP. But please elaborate how Shaq did not play against tougher competition.

[R-Star]

Shaq played against weaker centers in his prime. There's no argument against that.

[R-Star]

Originally Posted by Luke

Hakeem didn't play tougher competition than Shaquille did, that's a retarded argument. The only two titles Hakeem won were when the league's alpha male was playing baseball.

And trying to pretend like Shaquille didn't deserve more than one MVP is ridiculous. He absolutely deserved to win it over Iverson in '01 and Nash in '05. You could literally make a strong case for him any year from '98-'05. The fact that he only has one is a travesty, just like Kobe.

You asked me in the past for examples. This is one of a few I've seen since this list started.


No need to get into a debate about it though. Just pointing out what you asked for.

[KG-Kid21]

I dunno how you can say Shaq played in worse competition when he was drafted before Hakeem, Ewing, and D-Rob hit their primes...he faced 'em all

While you can say that the center position was watered down when Shaq won his rings...you could say the overall talent pool was just as watered down when Hakeem won his two rings...

And while Hakeem did school Shaq...I could probably school some fifth graders right now...12 beers deep...Shaq was a pup and that's totally unfair...Hakeem wishes he could prevent '00 Shaq from dropping 30 a night...

Maybe the opposite is true too...I'm not saying it's a blowout...but I'm taking Shaq for my money..Surrounding Talent of the NBA was just as bad in '94 as it was in '99-'01

[Luke]

Did Hakeem play tougher positional talent when he won his rings, sure. But he didn't win against better overall talent.

[PauloCatarino]

Originally Posted by Luke

Greatest small forward ever? Sure. But does that make him better than Shaq? I don't know.

The uncertainty about Larry Bird's plave in history cames because of his career being cut short by injuries.
Till the 1988-1989 season, his game and in-court prodution were simply amazing.
We all know about his MVPs and championships. But, for a guy consistently criticized about his defense (or lack of), what about him 4 times leading the league in DWS (coming second a couple of other times)?
Also, an absolute team player.

Most people talk abot Shaq's peak of play when defending the (rightfull) claim that Snaq O'Meal was one of the most dominant players ever.
But Larry's 1984-85, 1986-87 and 1987-88 seasons are up there (the last couple of seasons he shot at least .500FG%, .4003P% and .900FT%, who are ludricous statistics).

[Luke]

Originally Posted by PauloCatarino

The uncertainty about Larry Bird's plave in history cames because of his career being cut short by injuries.
Till the 1988-1989 season, his game and in-court prodution were simply amazing.
We all know about his MVPs and championships. But, for a guy consistently criticized about his defense (or lack of), what about him 4 times leading the league in DWS (coming second a couple of other times)?
Also, an absolute team player.

Most people talk abot Shaq's peak of play when defending the (rightfull) claim that Snaq O'Meal was one of the most dominant players ever.
But Larry's 1984-85, 1986-87 and 1987-88 seasons are up there (the last couple of seasons he shot at least .500FG%, .4003P% and .900FT%, who are ludricous statistics).

I fully agree that Larry would have been remembered more fondly if it wasn't for his back. That's a completely fair statement. But he was cut short by injuries and that has to be taken into account. No worries though, he was in the group of players I didn't feel right arguing against so I'm happy that he got in sooner rather than later.