Slam's 500 Greatest NBA Players.

[manchild24]

Shaq should not be over Kareem. IMO, Shaq shouldn't be in the top 10 because he was so one-dimensional. Baylor & West over Erving and Malone are also questionable.

My point exactly on Shaq,

[FedEx227]

He was one-dimensional yes, but he was fucking phenomenal being one-dimensional. Not sure I get why he should be docked for that?

[bucky]

The way I see the Shaq vs Olajuwon debate is that Olajuwon was the more complete all around player, but Shaq was just so dominant. Shaq's defense wasn't great (not bad though), but his offense made up for it in a big way.

When I think of Shaq, I think of a guy that just bulled through people and dunked. In the NBA, as much as Refs help create Super Starts with how they call the game, Shaq actually benefited the most of any player. I kept waiting for Shaq to actually learn the game the way Olajuwon did.

I really don't know how, talent wise, anyone could rank Shaq over Olajuwon. I kind of laugh at Shaq as #5.

[Senser81]

He was one-dimensional yes, but he was fucking phenomenal being one-dimensional. Not sure I get why he should be docked for that?

I guess the other guys in the top 10 weren't phenomenal, either. Just Shaq.

I'm not comparing Shaq to Danny Schayes. I'm comparing Shaq to guys like Kareem, Magic, Bird, etc. Shaq was definitely a great player, but would anyone really want Shaq on their team over an all-around guy like Larry Bird or Magic Johnson?

This comparison might not be exact because Shaq played longer than Bird, but their per-game averages are telling:


Regular season

Shaq - 23.7 ppg, 10.9 rpg, 2.5 ast, 0.4 stl, 1.1 blk
Bird - 24.3 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 6.3 ast, 1.7 stl, 0.9 blk


Postseason

Shaq - 24.4 ppg, 11.7 rpg, 2.7 ast
Bird - 23.8 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 6.5 ast

[ralaw]

When I think of Shaq, I think of a guy that just bulled through people and dunked. In the NBA, as much as Refs help create Super Starts with how they call the game, Shaq actually benefited the most of any player. I kept waiting for Shaq to actually learn the game the way Olajuwon did.

I really don't know how, talent wise, anyone could rank Shaq over Olajuwon. I kind of laugh at Shaq as #5.

Olajuwon was a much more beautiful player to watch, but that doesn't equate to him being better or more dominant. Shaq's numbers, rings, and influence on the game don't lie. Shaq used what he had and dominated with it........I don't know what more you want. Downgrading him because he didn't develop the all around game like Olajuwon doesn't make much sense to me. Also, I've never understood the argument that he simply backed people down and dunked.......Shaq's game wasn't that simple...I understand that is the image of him, but his game was far more skilled then that.

[manchild24]

I guess the other guys in the top 10 weren't phenomenal, either. Just Shaq.

I'm not comparing Shaq to Danny Schayes. I'm comparing Shaq to guys like Kareem, Magic, Bird, etc. Shaq was definitely a great player, but would anyone really want Shaq on their team over an all-around guy like Larry Bird or Magic Johnson?

This comparison might not be exact because Shaq played longer than Bird, but their per-game averages are telling:


Regular season

Shaq - 23.7 ppg, 10.9 rpg, 2.5 ast, 0.4 stl, 1.1 blk
Bird - 24.3 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 6.3 ast, 1.7 stl, 0.9 blk


Postseason

Shaq - 24.4 ppg, 11.7 rpg, 2.7 ast
Bird - 23.8 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 6.5 ast

Im comparing Shaq to other big men, which is why he should be lower. I think the dream is better then him, I think Ewing, Duncan, Wilt, Kareem, Robinson were are all better then Shaq

And i agree, refs tuen players into SuperStars. Lamar Odem was suppose to the be the next coming of Christ and I think he was a bust for all the hype they surrounded him with.

[bucky]

Olajuwon was a much more beautiful player to watch, but that doesn't equate to him being better or more dominant. Shaq's numbers, rings, and influence on the game don't lie. Shaq used what he had and dominated with it........I don't know what more you want. Downgrading him because he didn't develop the all around game like Olajuwon doesn't make much sense to me. Also, I've never understood the argument that he simply backed people down and dunked.......Shaq's game wasn't that simple...I understand that is the image of him, but his game was far more skilled then that.

I'm not looking at the numbers. And it's just my opinion. But watching him play, he had ONE move for much of his career. Offensive foul, dunk. He just never got called for it. That's why I had the comment that he, more than any other player, benefited from the Refs helping make Super Stars.

If you go by just stats, w/o having watched him play, then it's a no brainier. But, watching him play, I was never overly impressed with his skills. My opinion, and I don't pretend to follow Basketball like you do and some others, so it's just my opinion, Olajuwon was much better.
.

[ralaw]

I'm not looking at the numbers. And it's just my opinion. But watching him play, he had ONE move for much of his career. Offensive foul, dunk. He just never got called for it. That's why I had the comment that he, more than any other player, benefited from the Refs helping make Super Stars.

If you go by just stats, w/o having watched him play, then it's a no brainier. But, watching him play, I was never overly impressed with his skills. My opinion, and I don't pretend to follow Basketball like you do and some others, so it's just my opinion, Olajuwon was much better.
.

I just remember watching some of Shaq's dominant performaces in the playoffs. Regardless of how he produced that fact is that he produced and that it what I look at. IMO because of his size, athleticism and pure power people tend to look at Shaq as a Goliath to the rest of the leagues' David and they downgrade him and I don't agree with that, because as I said he has the stats, big performances and championships to back up his ability and in the end that is what is supposed to be what matters.

[Primetime]

Shaq > Kobe. That's all that matters.

[FirstTimer]

Shaq's game wasn't that simple...I understand that is the image of him, but his game was far more skilled then that.

Agreed.

Shaq was a bully but when he was younger he had great feet for a big man. He didn't have the all around moves that some other guys did but he was ridiculously athletic in the block for a guy his size. And somewhat in defense of Shaq he never really had to leave the 5-8 foot area around the basket because he was so effective down there due to his size. He never fully developed his game because he never had to. That being said, I don't think he could have done it if he had wanted to/been forced to, but that's obviously speculation.

Im comparing Shaq to other big men, which is why he should be lower. I think the dream is better then him, I think Ewing, Duncan, Wilt, Kareem, Robinson were are all better then Shaq

.

On that list you have I would only put Hakeem, Wilt, and Kareem over him. IMO Shaq was better than Ewing and D. Robinson.

[ralaw]

I'm not comparing Shaq to Danny Schayes. I'm comparing Shaq to guys like Kareem, Magic, Bird, etc. Shaq was definitely a great player, but would anyone really want Shaq on their team over an all-around guy like Larry Bird or Magic Johnson?

I'd take a prime Shaq over any player to ever play in the league outside of maybe Jordan and I'd have to really consider that. IMO there is no stopping him, so I don’t understand why a person would want to add some well rounded perimeter players who didn’t play defense. Magic and Bird were gifted on the offensive end though, but I’d take the dominant big over them. Well roundedness on offense is great and makes for enjoyable basketball and I enjoy guys like Magic, Bird, LeBron, etc, but as I said, I’d rather take a dominant big over a well rounded offensive perimeter player, because I feel the game of basketball is built for that (Jordan being the exception).

[Senser81]

I'd take a prime Shaq over any player to ever play in the league outside of maybe Jordan and I'd have to really consider that. IMO there is no stopping him, so I don’t understand why a person would want to add some well rounded perimeter players who didn’t play defense. Magic and Bird were gifted on the offensive end though, but I’d take the dominant big over them. Well roundedness on offense is great and makes for enjoyable basketball and I enjoy guys like Magic, Bird, LeBron, etc, but as I said, I’d rather take a dominant big over a well rounded offensive perimeter player, because I feel the game of basketball is built for that.

I think we are eventually going to agree to disagree on this win. I don't think Shaq was all that dominant of a rebounder or a defender, he was "just" a great scorer. Maybe I downgrade Shaq because he is so hard to compare to. The only person that comes to mind is a young Moses Malone. Shaq's best rebounding year, unsurprisingly, was his rookie year with 13.9 rpg. His best scoring year was with the Lakers mid-career, averaging 29.7 ppg. Moses Malone's last year with the Rockets he averaged 31.1 ppg and 14.7 rpg.

'Nuff said (?)

[FedEx227]

I guess the other guys in the top 10 weren't phenomenal, either. Just Shaq.

I'm not comparing Shaq to Danny Schayes. I'm comparing Shaq to guys like Kareem, Magic, Bird, etc. Shaq was definitely a great player, but would anyone really want Shaq on their team over an all-around guy like Larry Bird or Magic Johnson?

This comparison might not be exact because Shaq played longer than Bird, but their per-game averages are telling:


Regular season

Shaq - 23.7 ppg, 10.9 rpg, 2.5 ast, 0.4 stl, 1.1 blk
Bird - 24.3 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 6.3 ast, 1.7 stl, 0.9 blk


Postseason

Shaq - 24.4 ppg, 11.7 rpg, 2.7 ast
Bird - 23.8 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 6.5 ast

Definitely, I see what you're saying and I hate doing the whole "take out his last few years" thing... but if you eliminate Shaq's last 3-4 years and 3-4 playoff runs where he's an injured late 30s fat ass his overall numbers do look a lot less dominant.

From 97 to 2003, he was averaging 26+ every single playoff year (including 3 years with 30+) as well as two seasons with 15 rebounds and the rest with 10+.

[FedEx227]

I think we are eventually going to agree to disagree on this win. I don't think Shaq was all that dominant of a rebounder or a defender, he was "just" a great scorer. Maybe I downgrade Shaq because he is so hard to compare to. The only person that comes to mind is a young Moses Malone. Shaq's best rebounding year, unsurprisingly, was his rookie year with 13.9 rpg. His best scoring year was with the Lakers mid-career, averaging 29.7 ppg. Moses Malone's last year with the Rockets he averaged 31.1 ppg and 14.7 rpg.

'Nuff said (?)

That is true, he was very much a mediocre rebounder outside of some early 2000 playoff series where he led the playoffs in rebounding.

[ralaw]

I think we are eventually going to agree to disagree on this win. I don't think Shaq was all that dominant of a rebounder or a defender, he was "just" a great scorer. Maybe I downgrade Shaq because he is so hard to compare to. The only person that comes to mind is a young Moses Malone. Shaq's best rebounding year, unsurprisingly, was his rookie year with 13.9 rpg. His best scoring year was with the Lakers mid-career, averaging 29.7 ppg. Moses Malone's last year with the Rockets he averaged 31.1 ppg and 14.7 rpg.

'Nuff said (?)

Yeah, in the end (especially with Shaq) it comes down to preference.

I will admit that I do think Shaq got progressively lazy as his career went along. Had he taken the time to develop his skills futher, take better care of his body and focus on basketball he probably would be in an argument for the GOAT with Jordan and Wilt. However, IMO even with his negatives its impressive that he could be in the argument for top 10 all-time.

I still get chuckles watching a prime Olajuwon abuse a young Shaq in the finals though. I sort of wish Shaq would have had the dominant big to go against, because I think it would have made him work harder. After the loss to the Rockets I remember Shaq saying that Olajuwon dominanting him made him want to work harder.