Holy Shit. Shaq was a beast.

[Caleb Cattivera]

It's a boring night here in Atlanta, so I'm looking up old basketball game logs. Shaq had some CRAZY games.

24 points, 28 rebounds and 15 blocks in 94 against the nets.

i need fantasy stats like that.

[Jason Tate]

http://www.musicweb-international.com/film/Dec99/Kazam.jpg

[Drew Beringer]

http://www.musicweb-international.com/film/Dec99/Kazam.jpg

Now those were the glory days for Shaq.

[Caleb Cattivera]

http://www.musicweb-international.com/film/Dec99/Kazam.jpg

hahaha please tell me you played shaq fu.

[mat1419]

i remember being in grade school trading for his cards...shaq rookies were like cigs in jail

[Caleb Cattivera]

i remember being in grade school trading for his cards...shaq rookies were like cigs in jail

hahahahahaha so fucking true!!!! that upper deck with like the three pics of him!!! dammmmmn!

[Spicoli hey bud]

The Admiral once had 34 10 10 and 10 (pts, boards, asts, bks) in a game
hakeem had 18, 16, 10 and 11 once
natre thurmond 22, 14, 13 and 12
alvin robertson had 20,11, 10 and 10 steals

but even crazier... Wilt 55 boards in a game
Scott Skiles 30 assists in a game

[Clarett'sGreyGoose]

http://exotica.fix.no/gallery/games/images/s/ShaqFu.jpg

[FondestMemory]

his biological never bothered.

[Caleb Cattivera]

The Admiral once had 34 10 10 and 10 (pts, boards, asts, bks) in a game
hakeem had 18, 16, 10 and 11 once
natre thurmond 22, 14, 13 and 12
alvin robertson had 20,11, 10 and 10 steals

but even crazier... Wilt 55 boards in a game
Scott Skiles 30 assists in a game

any stat line before the late 70s or early 80s is irrelevant to me.

totally different then.

sure hakeem and d rob had those games...but in the end shaq>hakeem>david robinson

[Clarett'sGreyGoose]

any stat line before the late 70s or early 80s is irrelevant to me.

totally different then.

sure hakeem and d rob had those games...but in the end shaq>hakeem>david robinson
totally different and some are inaccurate. i've actually read some things that discredit Wilt scoring 100 in a game because of pisspoor statkeeping back in the day.

[Spicoli hey bud]

any stat line before the late 70s or early 80s is irrelevant to me.

totally different then.

sure hakeem and d rob had those games...but in the end shaq>hakeem>david robinson
Shaq is the best center ever to play the game. period.

[Caleb Cattivera]

Shaq is the best center ever to play the game. period.

i like you.

[mat1419]

i like you.
top two. it's just ridiculous to even try and put him or wilt over one another because of the times.

[Caleb Cattivera]

top two. it's just ridiculous to even try and put him or wilt over one another because of the times.

i think shaq would dominate wilt...he was a fucking stick. shaq would eat him for breakfast...if shaq played back in the day he'd average 80 ppg, 40 rpg, and 22 bpg.

[BuriedAlive]

totally different and some are inaccurate. i've actually read some things that discredit Wilt scoring 100 in a game because of pisspoor statkeeping back in the day.
Yeah, but they also stopped the game once Wilt scored 100 points. Game never really ended.

[BuriedAlive]

i think shaq would dominate wilt...he was a fucking stick. shaq would eat him for breakfast...if shaq played back in the day he'd average 80 ppg, 40 rpg, and 22 bpg.
I honestly don't think he would have made a team "back then" only because of the make up of the sport then.

[Caleb Cattivera]

I honestly don't think he would have made a team "back then" only because of the make up of the sport then.

huh?

[BuriedAlive]

huh?
I mean, no team would have signed him. He would be considered out of shape... blah blah. So I wouldn't see him being able to play with Wilt and all them.

[Caleb Cattivera]

I mean, no team would have signed him. He would be considered out of shape... blah blah. So I wouldn't see him being able to play with Wilt and all them.

naw. i think he'd make a team...he's a talented mother fucker. plus shaq didnt have as much fat on him when he came into the league. he was a lean 7'2 300 pounds.

[BuriedAlive]

naw. i think he'd make a team...he's a talented mother fucker. plus shaq didnt have as much fat on him when he came into the league. he was a lean 7'2 300 pounds.
Don't get me wrong I love the dude. Well, when he played for Orlando and now that he plays for the Heat... but I just don't see him fitting the style. If he did play then he would have reinvented the way they play. I still don't think there is a player that can guard him. Maybe Alonzo, Wallace (Ben) has seemed capable at slowing him down, but not shutting him down. He pretty much shuts himself out with stupid fouls alot. He will retire the best Center ever. With a few more rings if the Heat can get their shit together.

[BuriedAlive]

Andrei Kirilenko will be the next person you see with crazy stats like that though. that boy is AMAZING. IF, which seems to be quite a large if, he can stay healthy he could easily become one of the best players in the game and maybe ever.

[weezer182]

I honestly don't think he would have made a team "back then" only because of the make up of the sport then.he would of made a team based on height alone

[Emopunkthrice]

Andrew Bynum pwned him tonight on that one move

[BuriedAlive]

Andrew Bynum pwned him tonight on that one move
Haha, I saw it, was a nice spin I have to say, but he got owned just before that (bynum did). But had nice form and composure (so far) for a 17 year old rookie.

[bigmike]

any stat line before the late 70s or early 80s is irrelevant to me.

totally different then.

sure hakeem and d rob had those games...but in the end shaq>hakeem>david robinson

david robinson was a punk. the most overrated center, i think.

[Jason Tate]

Shaq is the best center ever to play the game. period.
Bullshit.

[ThriftWhore]

Bullshit.
agreed, ten fold. shaq's barely top 5 of all time.

[ActorInThisPlay]

Bullshit.
yeah I agree with Jason on this one. Shaq is good, but he has no shot whatsoever.

[bigmike]

Shaq is the best center ever to play the game. period.

you are correct.
But people will look at other center's stats (i.e. Wilt) and say that they were better than shaq.

[itsjdiggity]

Jerome James is the best center ever to play the game. period.

i can agree with that

[ThriftWhore]

i can agree with that
hahahaha.

[Caleb Cattivera]

agreed, ten fold. shaq's barely top 5 of all time.

wow someone over dosed on the idiot pills. name five centers better than shaq. do it...you can't...he is the most dominant player in history.

[somethingyellow]

wow someone over dosed on the idiot pills. name five centers better than shaq. do it...you can't...he is the most dominant player in history. i would like to hear who he has to say are the 4 better centers

[Caleb Cattivera]

i would like to hear who he has to say are the 4 better centers

no shit. if i just had to say it...just to end arguments, i'd say wilt and shaq tie...they're the most dominant of their times.

[bigmike]

wow someone over dosed on the idiot pills. name five centers better than shaq. do it...you can't...he is the most dominant player in history.

Shawn Bradley, for sure.

[Caleb Cattivera]

Shawn Bradley, for sure.

i dunno, greg ostertag is almost there.

[somethingyellow]

no shit. if i just had to say it...just to end arguments, i'd say wilt and shaq tie...they're the most dominant of their times. yup

[somethingyellow]

i dunno, greg ostertag is almost there.the best center in the nba right now has to be dampier

[bigmike]

i dunno, greg ostertag is almost there.

Man, what a dominant front line those two would have formed.

[somethingyellow]

"I know one day, I'm going to wake up and it's (the soreness) not going to be there. When that
day comes, whoever we're playing, they're going to be in trouble. I've been playing like Erick
Dampier." - shaq, i love that quote

[bigmike]

"I know one day, I'm going to wake up and it's (the soreness) not going to be there. When that
day comes, whoever we're playing, they're going to be in trouble. I've been playing like Erick
Dampier." - shaq, i love that quote


haha, that's a good one.

[bigmike]

Shaq wasn't even in space jam, how could he be better than Shawn Bradley?

http://www.thedallasmavericks.com/web_images/bradley_space-jam.jpg

[Emopunkthrice]

Shaq wasn't even in space jam, how could he be better than Shawn Bradley?

http://www.thedallasmavericks.com/web_images/bradley_space-jam.jpg
its Patrick Ewing!

[radiofriendly]

the best center in the nba right now has to be dampier

Erick Dampier makes more money then tom brady. he's got to be the best center in the NBA...what were we thinking...

[radiofriendly]

oh,

and Shaq is the best center to ever play the game. no shit.

[Scott Weber]

No center dominated like Shaq did in his prime.

[DroppedUrPocket]

:looks at avatar:

Damn right.

[SuperJoe]

you're all nuts. here's 5 centers from the last 20 years that i would gladly take over shaq:

Hakeem Olajuwon
David Robinson
Patrick Ewing
Dikembe Mutombo
Bill Laimbeer

Shaq *dominates* because of his size. I assure you that if everyone in the NBA was Shaq's size, he would be playing less than Ron Artest this year. He is a horrible shooter, and he's not terribly aggressive. Laimbeer was more aggressive. Robinson was a better shooter. Mutombo was a better shot blocker. Even, Dennis Rodman was a better rebounder and he wasn't even a center. Hell, Sir Charles was a better rebounder. You can't build a team around a center. Shaq is always great to have on defense, but the fact of the matter is that shooting and free throws will carry you through the playoffs. All you have to do is play Hack-A-Shaq and you can cripple the opposition's offense.

I'm sorry, I can see an argument for him being a great center, but to say he's the best center of all team is beyond absurd.

[Caleb Cattivera]

you're all nuts. here's 5 centers from the last 20 years that i would gladly take over shaq:

Hakeem Olajuwon
David Robinson
Patrick Ewing
Dikembe Mutombo
Bill Laimbeer

Shaq *dominates* because of his size. I assure you that if everyone in the NBA was Shaq's size, he would be playing less than Ron Artest this year. He is a horrible shooter, and he's not terribly aggressive. Laimbeer was more aggressive. Robinson was a better shooter. Mutombo was a better shot blocker. Even, Dennis Rodman was a better rebounder and he wasn't even a center. Hell, Sir Charles was a better rebounder. You can't build a team around a center. Shaq is always great to have on defense, but the fact of the matter is that shooting and free throws will carry you through the playoffs. All you have to do is play Hack-A-Shaq and you can cripple the opposition's offense.

I'm sorry, I can see an argument for him being a great center, but to say he's the best center of all team is beyond absurd.

hey scott...where are you? i think this kid is believe, or is idiot brother!

man i just wake up...and i get to pwn someone already! damn this is going to be a good day!!! let's look at some numbers...shall we?

shaq - 27 ppg, 12 rpg 3 bpg, 3 apg, and a 58% shooter from the field for his career.

hakeem - 22 ppg, 11 rpg, 3 bpg, 3 apg, and a 51% shooter from the field.

cream puff(david robinson) - 21 ppg, 10 rpg, 3 apg, 3 bpg, and a 52% shooter from the field.

patrick ewing - 21 ppg, 10 rpg, 2 apg, 2 bpg, and a 50% shooter from the field.

dikembe mutombo - 11 ppg, 11 rpg, 1 apg, 3 bpg and a 52% shooter from the field

bill laimbeer - 13 ppg, 10 rpg, 1 bpg, 2 apg, and a 50% shooter from the field

after looking at these stats, shaq is higher in the two most important catergories, than everyone...points and rebounds...and also...HA, look at that nearly a career 60% shooter...and you said the man cant shoot! so i dont think robinson was a better shooter! i dont think laimbeer was more agressive(i honestly cant believe you said him!), and to even throoow dikembe in there, proves to me that you dont know anything about basketball!! yes, shaq is a horrible free throw shooter and you said that carries you through the playoffs right? how many rings does hakeem have? two. how many rings does the marshmallow man have? two. ewing? ZERO. dikembe? ZERO. laimbeer? two. and finally...how many does shaq have? oh that's right three.

yes rodman was a better rebounder, but he's one of, if not the most dominant rebounders of our time. barkley...a better rebounder...no. he averaged the exact same for his career as shaq. why even say if the nba was shaq's size?! it's not! that's why shaq is so dominant dude. he's 330 pounds and he knows how to use it! who cares if he's putting his ass into people to get to the rim, that's using what you have...to become dominant! and you said you cant build a team around a center? in 1997 the los angeles lakes did exactly that...signed shaquille o'neal to build around, in hopes of winning a championship...good thing they did! it got em three!

in no way, shape form, or fashion...are any of the centers that you listed more dominant...or a better center than shaquille o'neal.

to end this ill list his hardware...12 all star teams(every year since his rookie year), 3 finals mvps, 2 all star mvp's, rookie of the year, 1 regular season mvp, 12 time all nba, seven first all team, 3 nba all defensive...and most important 3 championship rings.

[SuperJoe]

hey scott...where are you? i think this kid is believe, or is idiot brother!

man i just wake up...and i get to pwn someone already! damn this is going to be a good day!!! let's look at some numbers...shall we?

shaq - 27 ppg, 12 rpg 3 bpg, 3 apg, and a 58% shooter from the field for his career.

hakeem - 22 ppg, 11 rpg, 3 bpg, 3 apg, and a 51% shooter from the field.

cream puff(david robinson) - 21 ppg, 10 rpg, 3 apg, 3 bpg, and a 52% shooter from the field.

patrick ewing - 21 ppg, 10 rpg, 2 apg, 2 bpg, and a 50% shooter from the field.

dikembe mutombo - 11 ppg, 11 rpg, 1 apg, 3 bpg and a 52% shooter from the field

bill laimbeer - 13 ppg, 10 rpg, 1 bpg, 2 apg, and a 50% shooter from the field

after looking at these stats, shaq is higher in the two most important catergories, than everyone...points and rebounds...and also...HA, look at that nearly a career 60% shooter...and you said the man cant shoot! so i dont think robinson was a better shooter! i dont think laimbeer was more agressive(i honestly cant believe you said him!), and to even throoow dikembe in there, proves to me that you dont know anything about basketball!! yes, shaq is a horrible free throw shooter and you said that carries you through the playoffs right? how many rings does hakeem have? two. how many rings does the marshmallow man have? two. ewing? ZERO. dikembe? ZERO. laimbeer? two. and finally...how many does shaq have? oh that's right three.

yes rodman was a better rebounder, but he's one of, if not the most dominant rebounders of our time. barkley...a better rebounder...no. he averaged the exact same for his career as shaq. why even say if the nba was shaq's size?! it's not! that's why shaq is so dominant dude. he's 330 pounds and he knows how to use it! who cares if he's putting his ass into people to get to the rim, that's using what you have...to become dominant! and you said you cant build a team around a center? in 1997 the los angeles lakes did exactly that...signed shaquille o'neal to build around, in hopes of winning a championship...good thing they did! it got em three!

in no way, shape form, or fashion...are any of the centers that you listed more dominant...or a better center than shaquille o'neal.

to end this ill list his hardware...12 all star teams(every year since his rookie year), 3 finals mvps, 2 all star mvp's, rookie of the year, 1 regular season mvp, 12 time all nba, seven first all team, 3 nba all defensive...and most important 3 championship rings.

okay, well how about this. all of your stats are skewed. with orlando, la, and the heat, shaq is the focus of the offense. the only other center on that list that team's offense focused on them that much was perhaps the admiral. as for your hardware, that is skewed as well because that's all in the offense again, or the teammates. patrick ewing never won an nba title, and i don't believe mutombo did either. that's not their fault. and your comment on barkley not being a better rebounder, think about this... sir charles averaged the same amount of boards per game in his career as shaq, and barkley wasn't even the big man! that means he was busting his ass more than shaq does. dude, i'm not saying shaq is bad, but i'm going by overall skill and talent. just cause you're a big guy doesn't mean that you have talent.

the best player in the nba right now is iverson. nobody has more skill and plays with more intensity than that man. i am not an iverson fan by any stretch of the imagination, but christ can that dude play. somebody like iverson epitomizes a professional basketball player much more than shaq.

[Caleb Cattivera]

okay, well how about this. all of your stats are skewed. with orlando, la, and the heat, shaq is the focus of the offense. the only other center on that list that team's offense focused on them that much was perhaps the admiral. as for your hardware, that is skewed as well because that's all in the offense again, or the teammates. patrick ewing never won an nba title, and i don't believe mutombo did either. that's not their fault. and your comment on barkley not being a better rebounder, think about this... sir charles averaged the same amount of boards per game in his career as shaq, and barkley wasn't even the big man! that means he was busting his ass more than shaq does. dude, i'm not saying shaq is bad, but i'm going by overall skill and talent. just cause you're a big guy doesn't mean that you have talent.

the best player in the nba right now is iverson. nobody has more skill and plays with more intensity than that man. i am not an iverson fan by any stretch of the imagination, but christ can that dude play. somebody like iverson epitomizes a professional basketball player much more than shaq.

haha. you're hilarious joe! you're providing me with TONS of entertainment on such a rainy day!

first off...i'm not even counting mutombo or laimbeer...and im still laughing my ass you picked those two. that's the best part of this whole thing!! who cares if barkley wasn't a big man? it's not all about being tall captain, it's about where you position yourself on the floor after a missed shot. barkley and rodman were MUCH quicker than shaq, and were able to get to looseballs faster.

as for shaq being the focus of the offense, so were ewing, robinson(for awhile), and hakeem.

while shaq was in orlando, other players were big offensive contributors, nick anderson averaged 20 a game shaq's rookie season, dennis scott and scott skiles put in 15 a game as well. his second year penny was putting in 16 and anderson 15. third, penny was putting in 20 ppg. and in his finaly year with the magic penny was putting in 22 and anderson 16. shaq did score higher than all of them...but he wasnt always the go to go in certain games.

with the lakers his first few season, he was the offensive focus...but that switched to kobe bryant in 2001 when he averaged the same ppg as shaq, in 02 just two points shy of shaq, in 03 he averaged 3 ppg more than shaq, and in 04 3 more ppg than shaq...kobe was the offensive focus during their three championships...shaq wouldnt have won them without kobe, and kobe without shaq.

and finally in miami...wade is the offensive focus BY FAR. shaq is there to add that presence in the middle.

not including hakeems later years, when he was in his late 30's...but during his prime...hakeem led the rockets in scoring 12 times from 1985 to 1998. he was the FOCUS of their offense.

only twice in 15 years with the knicks...was patrick ewing NOT the leading scorer for his team...making him the FOCUS of the offense.

in his first nine years with the spurs...david robinson was the leading scorer for them...making him the FOCUS of the offense. duncan, then did come in and take-over...but he was also able to do something that the admiral wasnt...lead them to a championship...so you may as well replace robinson with duncan.

in 13 years...shaq has led his team in scoring 10 times...also making him a primary offensive focus.

but with you saying my stats are skewed...youre wrong! all of the centers you listed(the credibile ones) were the focus of their offense.

mutombo and laimbeer arent even top ten centers of all time...so to throw them in here is still hilarious.

patrick ewing was given two chances to win an nba title. he nearly won one in 1994 eventually losing to the rockets 4 to 3. but he had the pieces he needed. starks, oakley, harper. then again in 1999 he had his chance but lost out to the spurs 4 to 1. and arguably he had much more to work with in allan houston, larry johnson and latrell spreewell.

and how is the hardware skewed again? refer back to my offensive focus part please. thank you, have a nice day.

[Drew Beringer]

you're all nuts. here's 5 centers from the last 20 years that i would gladly take over shaq:

Hakeem Olajuwon
David Robinson
Patrick Ewing
Dikembe Mutombo
Bill Laimbeer

Shaq *dominates* because of his size. I assure you that if everyone in the NBA was Shaq's size, he would be playing less than Ron Artest this year. He is a horrible shooter, and he's not terribly aggressive. Laimbeer was more aggressive. Robinson was a better shooter. Mutombo was a better shot blocker. Even, Dennis Rodman was a better rebounder and he wasn't even a center. Hell, Sir Charles was a better rebounder. You can't build a team around a center. Shaq is always great to have on defense, but the fact of the matter is that shooting and free throws will carry you through the playoffs. All you have to do is play Hack-A-Shaq and you can cripple the opposition's offense.

I'm sorry, I can see an argument for him being a great center, but to say he's the best center of all team is beyond absurd.

Rik Smits >> Mutombo

[SuperJoe]

haha. you're hilarious joe! you're providing me with TONS of entertainment on such a rainy day!

first off...i'm not even counting mutombo or laimbeer...and im still laughing my ass you picked those two. that's the best part of this whole thing!! who cares if barkley wasn't a big man? it's not all about being tall captain, it's about where you position yourself on the floor after a missed shot. barkley and rodman were MUCH quicker than shaq, and were able to get to looseballs faster.

as for shaq being the focus of the offense, so were ewing, robinson(for awhile), and hakeem.

while shaq was in orlando, other players were big offensive contributors, nick anderson averaged 20 a game shaq's rookie season, dennis scott and scott skiles put in 15 a game as well. his second year penny was putting in 16 and anderson 15. third, penny was putting in 20 ppg. and in his finaly year with the magic penny was putting in 22 and anderson 16. shaq did score higher than all of them...but he wasnt always the go to go in certain games.

with the lakers his first few season, he was the offensive focus...but that switched to kobe bryant in 2001 when he averaged the same ppg as shaq, in 02 just two points shy of shaq, in 03 he averaged 3 ppg more than shaq, and in 04 3 more ppg than shaq...kobe was the offensive focus during their three championships...shaq wouldnt have won them without kobe, and kobe without shaq.

and finally in miami...wade is the offensive focus BY FAR. shaq is there to add that presence in the middle.

not including hakeems later years, when he was in his late 30's...but during his prime...hakeem led the rockets in scoring 12 times from 1985 to 1998. he was the FOCUS of their offense.

only twice in 15 years with the knicks...was patrick ewing NOT the leading scorer for his team...making him the FOCUS of the offense.

in his first nine years with the spurs...david robinson was the leading scorer for them...making him the FOCUS of the offense. duncan, then did come in and take-over...but he was also able to do something that the admiral wasnt...lead them to a championship...so you may as well replace robinson with duncan.

in 13 years...shaq has led his team in scoring 10 times...also making him a primary offensive focus.

but with you saying my stats are skewed...youre wrong! all of the centers you listed(the credibile ones) were the focus of their offense.

mutombo and laimbeer arent even top ten centers of all time...so to throw them in here is still hilarious.

patrick ewing was given two chances to win an nba title. he nearly won one in 1994 eventually losing to the rockets 4 to 3. but he had the pieces he needed. starks, oakley, harper. then again in 1999 he had his chance but lost out to the spurs 4 to 1. and arguably he had much more to work with in allan houston, larry johnson and latrell spreewell.

and how is the hardware skewed again? refer back to my offensive focus part please. thank you, have a nice day.

i guess this goes by what you consider to be better. as a pistons fan, i have always appreciated a well rounded team. the bad boys of the late 80s are quite similar to the modern day pistons in the fact that the super-star status is kind of shared by all, yet kind of nonexistant. sure, isiah was an all star, joe dumars was a great shooter, but players like the microwave, rodman, and laimbeer all added their equally effective part to the team. if dumars was having a bad shooting night, that was okay, because vinnie was there to hit the shots. much like the modern day pistons, on any given night, any one of their starters could end up as high scorer. and there is no dominant force in the middle, well not by shaq standards. when i say those teams focused their offense on shaq, i meant he was essentially the prime contributor. the only real exception was perhaps kobe on the lakers. he was a legit second player to run the offense around.

and back to your hardware being skewed. look, if you have a shitty team or shitty support, you won't win titles. it's that simple. so saying "hey, shaq has 3 rings, ewing has none" doesn't really mean a lot. the knicks were pretty good then, but they were competing against an untouchable chicago team and a very good indiana team as well back then. christ, brad johnson won a super bowl ring with tampa bay, but that doesn't mean that he's better than dan marino by any stretch of the imagination.

you know, you do know your shit, i will give you that. but the fact that you happen to think you're right makes you a fucking idiot. we all have our own personal opinions. being a pistons fan, of course i'm going to be biased and throw somebody like laimbeer in there. and if you weren't so hellbent on your opinion, you'd see that maybe i have somewhat of a point. laimbeer was 50x's more aggressive than shaq and never cried and sat out a few games when he broke a toe. i think given shaq's circumstances, it would be near impossible for him not to thrive. all i'm talking about is overall skill, and face it, shaq doesn't have it. if i was that big i could be taking in that many points, boards, blocks, etc per game. that doesn't mean i have skill.

[SuperJoe]

who cares if barkley wasn't a big man? it's not all about being tall captain, it's about where you position yourself on the floor after a missed shot. barkley and rodman were MUCH quicker than shaq, and were able to get to looseballs faster.

yeah that was basically the point i was making. you were saying that barkley wasnt better because he averaged the same amount of boards as shaq. so way to prove what you were trying to disprove.

[SuperJoe]

Rik Smits >> Mutombo

the dutchboy? oh my.

[itsjdiggity]

Rik Smits >> Mutombo

Dunkin' Dutchman > Shaq

[DroppedUrPocket]

Johnny Unitas.

[Caleb Cattivera]

i guess this goes by what you consider to be better. as a pistons fan, i have always appreciated a well rounded team. the bad boys of the late 80s are quite similar to the modern day pistons in the fact that the super-star status is kind of shared by all, yet kind of nonexistant. sure, isiah was an all star, joe dumars was a great shooter, but players like the microwave, rodman, and laimbeer all added their equally effective part to the team. if dumars was having a bad shooting night, that was okay, because vinnie was there to hit the shots. much like the modern day pistons, on any given night, any one of their starters could end up as high scorer. and there is no dominant force in the middle, well not by shaq standards. when i say those teams focused their offense on shaq, i meant he was essentially the prime contributor. the only real exception was perhaps kobe on the lakers. he was a legit second player to run the offense around.

and back to your hardware being skewed. look, if you have a shitty team or shitty support, you won't win titles. it's that simple. so saying "hey, shaq has 3 rings, ewing has none" doesn't really mean a lot. the knicks were pretty good then, but they were competing against an untouchable chicago team and a very good indiana team as well back then. christ, brad johnson won a super bowl ring with tampa bay, but that doesn't mean that he's better than dan marino by any stretch of the imagination.

you know, you do know your shit, i will give you that. but the fact that you happen to think you're right makes you a fucking idiot. we all have our own personal opinions. being a pistons fan, of course i'm going to be biased and throw somebody like laimbeer in there. and if you weren't so hellbent on your opinion, you'd see that maybe i have somewhat of a point. laimbeer was 50x's more aggressive than shaq and never cried and sat out a few games when he broke a toe. i think given shaq's circumstances, it would be near impossible for him not to thrive. all i'm talking about is overall skill, and face it, shaq doesn't have it. if i was that big i could be taking in that many points, boards, blocks, etc per game. that doesn't mean i have skill.

what about the other players you mentioned? robinson, hakeem, ewing...they were the focus of their offenses as well.

i will say good point about the pistons...very few teams throughout history(winning teams), have been able to have balanced scoring as evenly as that. rarely does it work, but in their case it has.

ewing had plenty of offensive help. pat cummings, gerald wilkins, bernard king, bill cartwright, mark jackson, kenny walker, johnny newman, charles oakley, kiki vandeweghe, john starks, anthony mason, derek harper, allan houston, larry johnson, latrell sprewell and marcus camby through his career. if that's shitty team support, i'll take it!

another false statement. he DOES have skill...and alot of it...or he wouldnt be as dominant as he has been...there have been plenty of guys over 7 foot tall in the nba...your yinka dare's, your manute bol's, shawn bradley's, muresan, and with modern times eddy curry...you dont see them putting up shaq like numbers...do you? there's plenty of skill in shaq's game.

[SuperJoe]

ewing had plenty of offensive help. pat cummings, gerald wilkins, bernard king, bill cartwright, mark jackson, kenny walker, johnny newman, charles oakley, kiki vandeweghe, john starks, anthony mason, derek harper, allan houston, larry johnson, latrell sprewell and marcus camby through his career. if that's shitty team support, i'll take it!

like i said, that knicks team was playing in a very strong and difficult eastern conference. the pippen/jordan/armstrong/grant bulls teams of the early-mid 90s were damn near unstoppabull. (oh i couldnt resist that) then you had indiana who was very good as well. even the hornets had a strong team back then with lj, zo, and muggsy. i can't remember all of the talent in the east back then, but it was much more competitive than the east and the west both are now. i was just saying you can't compare the ewing's lack of rings to shaq's rings. shit happens in the playoffs, and the circumstances were different.

another false statement. he DOES have skill...and alot of it...or he wouldnt be as dominant as he has been...there have been plenty of guys over 7 foot tall in the nba...your yinka dare's, your manute bol's, shawn bradley's, muresan, and with modern times eddy curry...you dont see them putting up shaq like numbers...do you? there's plenty of skill in shaq's game.

okay, now compare shaq to a 7 foot guy in the nba who weighed more than 150 pounds.

[Spicoli hey bud]

you're all nuts. here's 5 centers from the last 20 years that i would gladly take over shaq:

Hakeem Olajuwon
David Robinson
Patrick Ewing
Dikembe Mutombo
Bill Laimbeer

Shaq *dominates* because of his size. I assure you that if everyone in the NBA was Shaq's size, he would be playing less than Ron Artest this year. He is a horrible shooter, and he's not terribly aggressive. Laimbeer was more aggressive. Robinson was a better shooter. Mutombo was a better shot blocker. Even, Dennis Rodman was a better rebounder and he wasn't even a center. Hell, Sir Charles was a better rebounder. You can't build a team around a center. Shaq is always great to have on defense, but the fact of the matter is that shooting and free throws will carry you through the playoffs. All you have to do is play Hack-A-Shaq and you can cripple the opposition's offense.

I'm sorry, I can see an argument for him being a great center, but to say he's the best center of all team is beyond absurd.
good morning. Absurdity can be found in your statements, not ours because Shaq is, IN FACT, the best center of our generation. He is arguably the best center of all time. Your argument is full of hypotheticals. To say if everyone were Shaq's size they would be better if pure bullshit because...1) if they were Shaq's size, most likely they wouldn't have the athletic ability that Shaq possesses...2) They're not shaq's size so it DOESN'T matter. Shaq flat out dominates other centers because of his ability to be a big man in the NBA. Everything else is irrelevant. I don't care if he can shoot a 10 footer like David Robinson, because Shaq finds it easier to drop the ball in the basket, which he does. You can't build a team around a center is also pointless of you to say because we're arguing about whether or not Shaq is the best center, not whether or not you would prefer a guard on your team. Please try again. If you combine all of the players attributes that you speak of (rodman's rebounding, Mutombo's blocking, etc.) you still don't have what makes Shaq, Shaq.

[Caleb Cattivera]

like i said, that knicks team was playing in a very strong and difficult eastern conference. the pippen/jordan/armstrong/grant bulls teams of the early-mid 90s were damn near unstoppabull. (oh i couldnt resist that) then you had indiana who was very good as well. even the hornets had a strong team back then with lj, zo, and muggsy. i can't remember all of the talent in the east back then, but it was much more competitive than the east and the west both are now. i was just saying you can't compare the ewing's lack of rings to shaq's rings. shit happens in the playoffs, and the circumstances were different.



okay, now compare shaq to a 7 foot guy in the nba who weighed more than 150 pounds.

shaq weighed 300 pounds when he came into the league...he was lean and dominant then too. eddy curry was considered to be 'baby shaq' when he came into the leauge...right now i'd call curry baby jerome james.

explain to me how shaq doesnt have any skill?

[Caleb Cattivera]

good morning. Absurdity can be found in your statements, not ours because Shaq is, IN FACT, the best center of our generation. He is arguably the best center of all time. Your argument is full of hypotheticals. To say if everyone were Shaq's size they would be better if pure bullshit because...1) if they were Shaq's size, most likely they wouldn't have the athletic ability that Shaq possesses...2) They're not shaq's size so it DOESN'T matter. Shaq flat out dominates other centers because of his ability to be a big man in the NBA. Everything else is irrelevant. I don't care if he can shoot a 10 footer like David Robinson, because Shaq finds it easier to drop the ball in the basket, which he does. You can't build a team around a center is also pointless of you to say because we're arguing about whether or not Shaq is the best center, not whether or not you would prefer a guard on your team. Please try again. If you combine all of the players attributes that you speak of (rodman's rebounding, Mutombo's blocking, etc.) you still don't have what makes Shaq, Shaq.

oh spicoli. :boobies:

[SuperJoe]

good morning. Absurdity can be found in your statements, not ours because Shaq is, IN FACT, the best center of our generation. He is arguably the best center of all time. Your argument is full of hypotheticals. To say if everyone were Shaq's size they would be better if pure bullshit because...1) if they were Shaq's size, most likely they wouldn't have the athletic ability that Shaq possesses...2) They're not shaq's size so it DOESN'T matter. Shaq flat out dominates other centers because of his ability to be a big man in the NBA. Everything else is irrelevant. I don't care if he can shoot a 10 footer like David Robinson, because Shaq finds it easier to drop the ball in the basket, which he does. You can't build a team around a center is also pointless of you to say because we're arguing about whether or not Shaq is the best center, not whether or not you would prefer a guard on your team. Please try again. If you combine all of the players attributes that you speak of (rodman's rebounding, Mutombo's blocking, etc.) you still don't have what makes Shaq, Shaq.


shaq weighed 300 pounds when he came into the league...he was lean and dominant then too. eddy curry was considered to be 'baby shaq' when he came into the leauge...right now i'd call curry baby jerome james.

explain to me how shaq doesnt have any skill?

you want to compare shaq's rookie size to manute bol? to shawn bradley? to george muresan? are you serious? sure he put on some weight, but he was still a pretty big boy when he came in.

and to both of you, i don't think shaq is that skilled, and here is why. most of his points come from dunks/within layup range. which doesn't say a lot for his depth and shooting abilities. if shaq was shooting free throw range shots constantly, both his shot % and ppg would go way down. (this can be proven by his free throw %) okay, his rebounding. when you're that tall and big, it is very easy to throw guys and around clear room to grab that board. that says nothing for skill. going back to rodman/barkley, those were players that were able to read shots very well. they knew where to position themselves and when to go after the ball. THAT is skill. not just throwing your weight around. his shot blocking ability? once again, size plays a huge factor, but those shot blocking skills and stats can be applied to mutombo or any other respectable big man.

bottom line is that i don't feel that shaq is very aggresive. i see him as lethargic and increasingly lazy. what happened to the old o-magic shaq that was running down the court and diving for out of bounds balls? can you imagine putting the intensity or aggressive nature of somebody like iverson in shaq? now THAT would be an amazing center.

[Spicoli hey bud]

you want to compare shaq's rookie size to manute bol? to shawn bradley? to george muresan? are you serious? sure he put on some weight, but he was still a pretty big boy when he came in.

and to both of you, i don't think shaq is that skilled, and here is why. most of his points come from dunks/within layup range. which doesn't say a lot for his depth and shooting abilities. if shaq was shooting free throw range shots constantly, both his shot % and ppg would go way down. (this can be proven by his free throw %) okay, his rebounding. when you're that tall and big, it is very easy to throw guys and around clear room to grab that board. that says nothing for skill. going back to rodman/barkley, those were players that were able to read shots very well. they knew where to position themselves and when to go after the ball. THAT is skill. not just throwing your weight around. his shot blocking ability? once again, size plays a huge factor, but those shot blocking skills and stats can be applied to mutombo or any other respectable big man.

bottom line is that i don't feel that shaq is very aggresive. i see him as lethargic and increasingly lazy. what happened to the old o-magic shaq that was running down the court and diving for out of bounds balls? can you imagine putting the intensity or aggressive nature of somebody like iverson in shaq? now THAT would be an amazing center.
Here's a question that my 5 year old cousin can answer. Which would you rather do? Take a shot that you know you will make (aka: right above the rim), or take a shot from a few feet out? I don't understand how you can criticize Shaq for making high percentage shots. My point is this: if everyone could create those shots for themselves, they would. Most players can't, so they don't.

[Spicoli hey bud]

oh spicoli. :boobies:
boobies!

did I mention again that I hate shaq? haha

[SuperJoe]

Here's a question that my 5 year old cousin can answer. Which would you rather do? Take a shot that you know you will make (aka: right above the rim), or take a shot from a few feet out? I don't understand how you can criticize Shaq for making high percentage shots. My point is this: if everyone could create those shots for themselves, they would. Most players can't, so they don't.

okay, so then his shooting percentage isn't really an accurate depiction of his shooting skills. correct? if i stand right next to the rim and shoot 100 layups, i will probably make at least 95. if reggie miller stands out in 3 point range and shoots 100 3-pointers, i can assure you he won't make 95. if i went out to 3 point range, i would probably make 15-20. who's more skilled?

being that close to the basket greatly increases your chances of a basket. once again, this is not an accurate depiction of shooting skills. that just means you're really close to the basket and it is much easier to shoot.

sure i'd agree with your cousin and take the definite shot over the maybe shot, but we're talking about shaq's shooting skills, not his shot selection. you put him 10 feet away from the basket and he's a mess.

so once again, how is he a *skilled* shooter?

[Caleb Cattivera]

you want to compare shaq's rookie size to manute bol? to shawn bradley? to george muresan? are you serious? sure he put on some weight, but he was still a pretty big boy when he came in.

and to both of you, i don't think shaq is that skilled, and here is why. most of his points come from dunks/within layup range. which doesn't say a lot for his depth and shooting abilities. if shaq was shooting free throw range shots constantly, both his shot % and ppg would go way down. (this can be proven by his free throw %) okay, his rebounding. when you're that tall and big, it is very easy to throw guys and around clear room to grab that board. that says nothing for skill. going back to rodman/barkley, those were players that were able to read shots very well. they knew where to position themselves and when to go after the ball. THAT is skill. not just throwing your weight around. his shot blocking ability? once again, size plays a huge factor, but those shot blocking skills and stats can be applied to mutombo or any other respectable big man.

bottom line is that i don't feel that shaq is very aggresive. i see him as lethargic and increasingly lazy. what happened to the old o-magic shaq that was running down the court and diving for out of bounds balls? can you imagine putting the intensity or aggressive nature of somebody like iverson in shaq? now THAT would be an amazing center.

haha damn joe, when is your next stand up act at the funny bone? i want front row tix!!! all of your arguments are so pointless. you use the word IF way to much, if shaq does this, if shaq does that...the fact is...shaq does what he does. and thats using his weight to his advantage....and dominating people with his size...and his skill. you must've had a dream where shaq touched you in your bathing suit area, because you're not giving him any credit...he's the most dominant center of our time...and maybe of all time.

[Spicoli hey bud]

okay, so then his shooting percentage isn't really an accurate depiction of his shooting skills. correct? if i stand right next to the rim and shoot 100 layups, i will probably make at least 95. if reggie miller stands out in 3 point range and shoots 100 3-pointers, i can assure you he won't make 95. if i went out to 3 point range, i would probably make 15-20. who's more skilled?

being that close to the basket greatly increases your chances of a basket. once again, this is not an accurate depiction of shooting skills. that just means you're really close to the basket and it is much easier to shoot.

sure i'd agree with your cousin and take the definite shot over the maybe shot, but we're talking about shaq's shooting skills, not his shot selection. you put him 10 feet away from the basket and he's a mess.

so once again, how is he a *skilled* shooter?
obviously Shaq isn't taking all of his shots from point zero range. If this were the case, he's be shooting 100% from the floor. once again you are bringing in a guard as comparison. Before I continue, point out where I make the claim that Shaq is a "skilled shooter," as opposed to skilled at his position.

[somethingyellow]

okay, so then his shooting percentage isn't really an accurate depiction of his shooting skills. correct? if i stand right next to the rim and shoot 100 layups, i will probably make at least 95. if reggie miller stands out in 3 point range and shoots 100 3-pointers, i can assure you he won't make 95. if i went out to 3 point range, i would probably make 15-20. who's more skilled?

being that close to the basket greatly increases your chances of a basket. once again, this is not an accurate depiction of shooting skills. that just means you're really close to the basket and it is much easier to shoot.

sure i'd agree with your cousin and take the definite shot over the maybe shot, but we're talking about shaq's shooting skills, not his shot selection. you put him 10 feet away from the basket and he's a mess.

so once again, how is he a *skilled* shooter? he makes the shots he has to. You may not think it is skill but how many other people his size are as athletic as him? He is a center, he isn't expected to make 15 foot shots. Shaq just doesn't rely on his physical strength, he makes some pretty good athletic moves and shots, not to mention he is an extremely good passing center

[SuperJoe]

haha damn joe, when is your next stand up act at the funny bone? i want front row tix!!! all of your arguments are so pointless. you use the word IF way to much, if shaq does this, if shaq does that...the fact is...shaq does what he does. and thats using his weight to his advantage....and dominating people with his size...and his skill. you must've had a dream where shaq touched you in your bathing suit area, because you're not giving him any credit...he's the most dominant center of our time...and maybe of all time.

i didn't say "if" one time in that entire post. i was not speaking in hypotheticals there. i layed it out. i gave my justification for why i don't think he's that amazing. so please go back and find something clever/credible to debate my shooting, rebounding, and blocking comments because you really did nothing for yourself there.

and i don't think he's bad. i think he's quite good. i just don't think he's this amazing basketball godsend that you're making him out to be. there's more to being a player than size, you need to have skill. i addressed that.

[somethingyellow]

i didn't say "if" one time in that entire post. i was not speaking in hypotheticals there. i layed it out. i gave my justification for why i don't think he's that amazing. so please go back and find something clever/credible to debate my shooting, rebounding, and blocking comments because you really did nothing for yourself there.

and i don't think he's bad. i think he's quite good. i just don't think he's this amazing basketball godsend that you're making him out to be. there's more to being a player than size, you need to have skill. i addressed that.what about all his championships which he LEAD his team?

[Caleb Cattivera]

you want to compare shaq's rookie size to manute bol? to shawn bradley? to george muresan? are you serious? sure he put on some weight, but he was still a pretty big boy when he came in.

and to both of you, i don't think shaq is that skilled, and here is why. most of his points come from dunks/within layup range. which doesn't say a lot for his depth and shooting abilities. if shaq was shooting free throw range shots constantly, both his shot % and ppg would go way down. (this can be proven by his free throw %) okay, his rebounding. when you're that tall and big, it is very easy to throw guys and around clear room to grab that board. that says nothing for skill. going back to rodman/barkley, those were players that were able to read shots very well. they knew where to position themselves and when to go after the ball. THAT is skill. not just throwing your weight around. his shot blocking ability? once again, size plays a huge factor, but those shot blocking skills and stats can be applied to mutombo or any other respectable big man.

bottom line is that i don't feel that shaq is very aggresive. i see him as lethargic and increasingly lazy. what happened to the old o-magic shaq that was running down the court and diving for out of bounds balls? can you imagine putting the intensity or aggressive nature of somebody like iverson in shaq? now THAT would be an amazing center.

you didnt use the word if...once?!

[SuperJoe]

obviously Shaq isn't taking all of his shots from point zero range. If this were the case, he's be shooting 100% from the floor. once again you are bringing in a guard as comparison. Before I continue, point out where I make the claim that Shaq is a "skilled shooter," as opposed to skilled at his position.

i don't believe i compared shaq to a guard once. i said that i didn't think shaq was a skilled shooter, as both of you were trying to point out. but even at his position, his ppg stats aren't that much higher than other great nba centers. at that size, and weighing twice as much as the other anorexic centers that caleb compared him to, he should be dishing in many more points and perhaps have an even higher shooting %.

[SuperJoe]

you didnt use the word if...once?!

okay okay, once. but i had a valid point in that statement. find something else. you have to pwn me, remember?

[SuperJoe]

what about all his championships which he LEAD his team?

i already debated that, i'm not going to do it again. he was the focus of that lakers' offense. of course he "lead" his team. only he didn't lead his team in the way that a chauncey billups or tony parker does. he lead the team by having everybody dishing him the ball and him turning around and taking a high % shot.

[Spicoli hey bud]

i don't believe i compared shaq to a guard once. i said that i didn't think shaq was a skilled shooter, as both of you were trying to point out. but even at his position, his ppg stats aren't that much higher than other great nba centers. at that size, and weighing twice as much as the other anorexic centers that caleb compared him to, he should be dishing in many more points and perhaps have an even higher shooting %.

Joe, I understand that it's hard to argue something when you're wrong, but at least finish reading what I write before responding.

obviously Shaq isn't taking all of his shots from point zero range. If this were the case, he's be shooting 100% from the floor. once again you are bringing in a guard as comparison. Before I continue, point out where I make the claim that Shaq is a "skilled shooter," as opposed to skilled at his position.
how can you follow this by saying, "i said that i didn't think shaq was a skilled shooter, as both of you were trying to point out?"

[Caleb Cattivera]

i didn't say "if" one time in that entire post. i was not speaking in hypotheticals there. i layed it out. i gave my justification for why i don't think he's that amazing. so please go back and find something clever/credible to debate my shooting, rebounding, and blocking comments because you really did nothing for yourself there.

and i don't think he's bad. i think he's quite good. i just don't think he's this amazing basketball godsend that you're making him out to be. there's more to being a player than size, you need to have skill. i addressed that.

shooting career 58%. that's third ALL TIME for someones career, active or retired. only artis gilmore and mark west had higher. and among active players it's the highest for a career. itg doesnt matter where he shoots from! it goes in! you said IF he shot from the free throw line! guess what...he doesnt. he shoots right around the rim...and it goes in...skill.

among active nba players he's #2 in rebounds per game. barkley and rodman were quicker...but i dont think they were more agressive. shaq is 7'2 330 pounds...you try build up some speed at that weight and height. being agressive doesn't have anything to do with speed...mark madsen is one slow mother fucker...but fuck is he agressive. he's up and down the court, hustling for loose balls in the 10 mpg he plays.

he's also #4 on the active list in blocks per game. you said that has to do with size...of course it does! if he was earl boykins or someone short he wouldnt be blocking 2 shots per game.

[SuperJoe]

Joe, I understand that it's hard to argue something when you're wrong, but at least finish reading what I write before responding.


how can you follow this by saying, "i said that i didn't think shaq was a skilled shooter, as both of you were trying to point out?"

i did read that. and i was aware of the comment when i typed "skilled shooter." but both of you were referring to shaq's apparent *skills* and i was stating otherwise. and then i addressed it by following up with "but even at his position, his ppg stats aren't that much higher than other great nba centers"

apparently you didn't notice that?

and it's an opinion ass. but honestly it doesn't really matter, you can take your 1-man offense and rave about the greatness of the center. i'll take my pistons. let's see who does better this year, shall we?

[Caleb Cattivera]

okay okay, once. but i had a valid point in that statement. find something else. you have to pwn me, remember?

we've already pwned you a billion times. you're just another kid who's never gonna fit in here in the sports forum with in-valid arguments.

[SuperJoe]

he shoots right around the rim...and it goes in...skill.

are you serious? i could shoot 95% from around the rim. christ, i should have been in the nba top 50 players.

among active nba players he's #2 in rebounds per game. barkley and rodman were quicker...but i dont think they were more agressive.

how do you figure? when rodman played against shaq's teams, rodman was still pulling down more boards than shaq. you compare rodman's size to shaq's and tell me that rodman wasn't more aggressive.

[Caleb Cattivera]

i did read that. and i was aware of the comment when i typed "skilled shooter." but both of you were referring to shaq's apparent *skills* and i was stating otherwise. and then i addressed it by following up with "but even at his position, his ppg stats aren't that much higher than other great nba centers"

apparently you didn't notice that?

and it's an opinion ass. but honestly it doesn't really matter, you can take your 1-man offense and rave about the greatness of the center. i'll take my pistons. let's see who does better this year, shall we?

proven wrong...and turns into a totally different argument. another way to prove you've been owned.

i dont think the pistons have any competition this year. i think they'll win it all...shaq's aging and in his decling but still averaging 18 and 10...the heat is d wade's team.

[Spicoli hey bud]

i did read that. and i was aware of the comment when i typed "skilled shooter." but both of you were referring to shaq's apparent *skills* and i was stating otherwise. and then i addressed it by following up with "but even at his position, his ppg stats aren't that much higher than other great nba centers"

apparently you didn't notice that?

and it's an opinion ass. but honestly it doesn't really matter, you can take your 1-man offense and rave about the greatness of the center. i'll take my pistons. let's see who does better this year, shall we?
So...you're saying that Ben Wallace is better than Shaq? Nobody said that Shaq wins Championships alone. We think that he is the best center in the league.

[Caleb Cattivera]

are you serious? i could shoot 95% from around the rim. christ, i should have been in the nba top 50 players.



how do you figure? when rodman played against shaq's teams, rodman was still pulling down more boards than shaq. you compare rodman's size to shaq's and tell me that rodman wasn't more aggressive.

once again...agressiveness has nothing to do with speed. anyone can be agressive big or small...that last part of your argument was pointless...joe, it's ok...we're all family here...admit to being owned...i've been owned by mr scott weber a few times...its ok...we dont care...your backs to the wall.

[SuperJoe]

we've already pwned you a billion times. you're just another kid who's never gonna fit in here in the sports forum with in-valid arguments.

okay, well first of all, son, i am older than you. so lick my nuts. second of all, you've yet to "pwn" me once. as a matter of fact, i refuse to consider the fact that someone over the age of 18 who uses leetspeak could actually possess any credible advantage over me. third, it's an opinion, and i just happen to disagree. and finally, if for one moment you think i care even the slightest about fitting in to the "ap.net" sports forum, you got more ego problems than ron artest.

[Caleb Cattivera]

okay, well first of all, son, i am older than you. so lick my nuts. second of all, you've yet to "pwn" me once. as a matter of fact, i refuse to consider the fact that someone over the age of 18 who uses leetspeak could actually possess any credible advantage over me. third, it's an opinion, and i just happen to disagree. and finally, if for one moment you think i care even the slightest about fitting in to the "ap.net" sports forum, you got more ego problems than ron artest.

haha wow! dude calm the fuck down!!! you're taking everything wayyyy too seriously. shit.

once again going away from the argument at hand...you go into other things that have nothing to do with shaq. pwned.

what is age anyways? knowledge>age.

[SuperJoe]

So...you're saying that Ben Wallace is better than Shaq? Nobody said that Shaq wins Championships alone. We think that he is the best center in the league.

not at all. i said i'd take a well-balanced team over a dominant big man. and you are allowed to think he is, but i am allowed to think otherwise. when you make a bold statement about the greatness of any player in any sport, expect for it to be debated.

except al kaline. he was the best baseball player ever. period.

[Caleb Cattivera]

i have to go to work kiddies.

somethingyellow, spicoli...show super joe the door. it's obvious he cant argue a valid statement.

[Spicoli hey bud]

not at all. i said i'd take a well-balanced team over a dominant big man. and you are allowed to think he is, but i am allowed to think otherwise. when you make a bold statement about the greatness of any player in any sport, expect for it to be debated.

except al kaline. he was the best baseball player ever. period.
fact: shaq is a dominant big man
fact: A well balanced team is better to have than 1 dominant player
fact: I didn't say I'd take Shaq over a well balanced team

[SuperJoe]

haha wow! dude calm the fuck down!!! you're taking everything wayyyy too seriously. shit.

once again going away from the argument at hand...you go into other things that have nothing to do with shaq. pwned.

what is age anyways? knowledge>age.

i wasn't going away from anything. i made my final points on why i don't think shaq is that talented. you apparently think size has something to do with talent. somehow you think a smaller player like dennis rodman who pulls down more boards is less talented. or something like that, in your twisted logic.

and i wasn't going into other things to avoid the debate at hand. you said i was "pwned", and i said otherwise.

basically this is your logic: if you're big, you're talented. shaq is big, therefore he's talented. well of course he should be getting those stats at that size. christ, you could put a 400 pound dude in front of a hockey net and he'd probably be the best goalie ever. that doesn't mean he's skilled or talented.

[SuperJoe]

fact: shaq is a dominant big man
fact: A well balanced team is better to have than 1 dominant player
fact: I didn't say I'd take Shaq over a well balanced team

i agree with all of this. but i still don't think that shaq is the best center of all time.

[Spicoli hey bud]

i wasn't going away from anything. i made my final points on why i don't think shaq is that talented. you apparently think size has something to do with talent. somehow you think a smaller player like dennis rodman who pulls down more boards is less talented. or something like that, in your twisted logic.

and i wasn't going into other things to avoid the debate at hand. you said i was "pwned", and i said otherwise.

basically this is your logic: if you're big, you're talented. shaq is big, therefore he's talented. well of course he should be getting those stats at that size. christ, you could put a 400 pound dude in front of a hockey net and he'd probably be the best goalie ever. that doesn't mean he's skilled or talented.
no the point is this: any man who possesses the size of shaq LACKS the ability to do what Shaq does on the court.

[SuperJoe]

i have to go to work kiddies.

somethingyellow, spicoli...show super joe the door. it's obvious he cant argue a valid statement.

by "valid" i guess you mean size equals greatness.

you've yet to give me anything to disprove that when you consistently take high % shots, you are bound to have a higher shooting %. that's obvious, not skill.

[Spicoli hey bud]

by "valid" i guess you mean size equals greatness.

you've yet to give me anything to disprove that when you consistently take high % shots, you are bound to have a higher shooting %. that's obvious, not skill.
his skill is being able to create these situations in which he can take these shots.

d-o-m-i-n-a-t-i-o-n.

[SuperJoe]

no the point is this: any man who possesses the size of shaq LACKS the ability to do what Shaq does on the court.

that is speaking in "ifs" again, which i was told i was not allowed to do. very rarely is anybody his size. with his size, he should be doing much more than a david robinson or a patrick ewing. but he doesn't.

and i know i'm not allowed to compare to guards, but look at AI. the man can do everything, including penetrate against big guys like shaq and still have great success. THAT is what i consider talent and greatness. nothing about shaq, except his size, happens to stand out to me as a dominant presence.

[Spicoli hey bud]

that is speaking in "ifs" again, which i was told i was not allowed to do. very rarely is anybody his size. with his size, he should be doing much more than a david robinson or a patrick ewing. but he doesn't.

and i know i'm not allowed to compare to guards, but look at AI. the man can do everything, including penetrate against big guys like shaq and still have great success. THAT is what i consider talent and greatness. nothing about shaq, except his size, happens to stand out to me as a dominant presence.
Here's an IF for you.

IF anyone with the size of Shaq were able to dominate in the NBA, it would have happened already. Shaq is a rarity. That's the point. Nobody has ever combined so much ability with so much size. There are a lot of guys out there that have the size of Shaq, but if they could play basketball, it would make Shaq less of a scarcity. The fact remains that as of yet, nobody has proven that what Shaq does can be done by anyone else.

[somethingyellow]

Here's an IF for you.

IF anyone with the size of Shaq were able to dominate in the NBA, it would have happened already. Shaq is a rarity. That's the point. Nobody has ever combined so much ability with so much size. There are a lot of guys out there that have the size of Shaq, but if they could play basketball, it would make Shaq less of a scarcity. The fact remains that as of yet, nobody has proven that what Shaq does can be done by anyone else.you pretty much said what i was just about to say

[SuperJoe]

you pretty much said what i was just about to say

you've been insightful in this debate. thank you.

Here's an IF for you.

IF anyone with the size of Shaq were able to dominate in the NBA, it would have happened already. Shaq is a rarity. That's the point. Nobody has ever combined so much ability with so much size. There are a lot of guys out there that have the size of Shaq, but if they could play basketball, it would make Shaq less of a scarcity. The fact remains that as of yet, nobody has proven that what Shaq does can be done by anyone else.

well that was certainly well versed and provides a good rationale for why you think shaq is so great. i just happen to disagree. i would expect more from him, or at least to play with more intensity and be more aggresive. i fail to see that from him. but to each their own.

i have to actually do work now, seeing as i've dicked away my entire afternoon debating this. i will close with this prediction: jack bauer will "pwn" all next monday night.

peace

[somethingyellow]

you've been insightful in this debate. thank you.
i didnt have to you already looked bad enough, and your last statment was the best thing u have said all day

[Scott Weber]

that is speaking in "ifs" again, which i was told i was not allowed to do. very rarely is anybody his size. with his size, he should be doing much more than a david robinson or a patrick ewing. but he doesn't.

and i know i'm not allowed to compare to guards, but look at AI. the man can do everything, including penetrate against big guys like shaq and still have great success. THAT is what i consider talent and greatness. nothing about shaq, except his size, happens to stand out to me as a dominant presence.
shaq did a whole lot more than Ewing or Robinson did in his prime.

[YouMadeTheScene]

I still take Hakeem in the modern NBA over Shaq see the 94-95 Championship game. Overall Moses Malone was scarily good and dominant. The thing is guys like Malone and Hakeems stats get watered down when they were downhill or injured and continued to play.


Of the modern era Shaq is the most dominant center
Of the modern era Hakeem is the best overal Center
Of all time the most dominant Center is Chamberlain obviously
Best Center of all time? I'm not sure. I think if you took them all in their primes in some fantasy world I think Hakeem would be the best. His quickness and shot selection and defense and just overall ability is so much better then most centers. Hakeem showed in the 94-95 playoffs that ability could outplay size. Right now Shaq is so dominant because no center is as skill as Hakeem and no center who has any size comparable to Shaq has talent in the least.

[YouMadeTheScene]

Posted this in the best center of last 20 years thought I'd throw it in here

Thought I'd compare Hakeem and Shaqs first 13 seasons in the league. Take into mind Shaq started 2 years younger.

Hakeem- 75 Games A Year 24.2 PPG 12 RPG 2.7 APG 1.9 SPG 3.4 BPG
Shaq-68 Games a Year 26.7 PPG 11.3 RPG 2.8 APG .7 SPG 2.6 BPG

Pretty similar stats. Shaq is a tad bit better Offensively but Hakeem is better defensively. I'd like to add between 97-98 and 02-03 Shaq dominated the league. And that is when Hakeem really fell off. Shaq didn't have any actual competition and just owned.

[bigmike]

I'm kind of disappointed i got here way to late.

shaq=best center of all time.
and someone was calling caleb's other center examples anorexic? You know, shawn bradley was about 290. so that's only 10 lbs. lighter than shaq was as a rookie. Just because they don't look as thick as shaq does, doesn't mean they don't weight alot. Yao Ming looks about 6 pounds, but he's closing in on 300. and is he dominant? no.

[bigmike]

Posted this in the best center of last 20 years thought I'd throw it in here

Thought I'd compare Hakeem and Shaqs first 13 seasons in the league. Take into mind Shaq started 2 years younger.

Hakeem- 75 Games A Year 24.2 PPG 12 RPG 2.7 APG 1.9 SPG 3.4 BPG
Shaq-68 Games a Year 26.7 PPG 11.3 RPG 2.8 APG .7 SPG 2.6 BPG

Pretty similar stats. Shaq is a tad bit better Offensively but Hakeem is better defensively. I'd like to add between 97-98 and 02-03 Shaq dominated the league. And that is when Hakeem really fell off. Shaq didn't have any actual competition and just owned.

which is what shaq was supposed to do. it's not his fault that the majority of the other centers in the league suck. you can't take away from what shaq has done because other guys his height cannot handle him. If they're worse players than him, he's supposed to dominate them. which is what he's done.

[YouMadeTheScene]

which is what shaq was supposed to do. it's not his fault that the majority of the other centers in the league suck. you can't take away from what shaq has done because other guys his height cannot handle him. If they're worse players than him, he's supposed to dominate them. which is what he's done.

I agree. All I'm saying is stats wise that inflates how much he dominated. Think of it this way Hakeem had competition of guys in their prime like David Robinson, Patrick Ewing, Derrick Coleman, Charles Barkley, Rik Smits, Horace Grant, Karl Malone, Alonzo, Shawn Kemp, Moses Malone for a bit, Dikembe Mutombo, and so on.

When Shaq was in LA he had no one who could stop him, literally no one. Hakeem had no knees left. He was playing with no kneecap I think. The competition was much easier which led to him being able to dominate much easier.

[bigmike]

I agree. All I'm saying is stats wise that inflates how much he dominated. Think of it this way Hakeem had competition of guys in their prime like David Robinson, Patrick Ewing, Derrick Coleman, Charles Barkley, Rik Smits, Horace Grant, Karl Malone, Alonzo, Shawn Kemp, Moses Malone for a bit, Dikembe Mutombo, and so on.

When Shaq was in LA he had no one who could stop him, literally no one. Hakeem had no knees left. He was playing with no kneecap I think. The competition was much easier which led to him being able to dominate much easier.

but when shaq was in orlando he played against these guys.
why focus on just when he was in LA?

Besides, David Robinson was a soft center and is the most overrated center of all time.

[YouMadeTheScene]

but when shaq was in orlando he played against these guys.
why focus on just when he was in LA?

Besides, David Robinson was a soft center and is the most overrated center of all time.

Because the majority of his big numbers came in LA.

[YouMadeTheScene]

http://u.univision.com/contentroot/uol/art/images/deportes/mas/2004/10/101904ap_shaq_miami3.jpg

I'd say he's probably 340.

[bigmike]

do you actually believe that Shaq only weighs 300 pounds?
not now, but when he entered the league.

now he's like 460 or some shit.

[Scott Weber]

not now, but when he entered the league.

now he's like 460 or some shit.
yeah I saw that, i deleted my post. You put a period after lbs. and I thought it was the end of the sentence, haha

[bigmike]

yeah I saw that, i deleted my post. You put a period after lbs. and I thought it was the end of the sentence, haha

haha. that's because lbs. is an abbreviation.

[Scott Weber]

haha. that's because lbs. is an abbreviation.
haha, i know, it just came at the end of the first line. I'm aware of how the english language works.

[bigmike]

haha, i know, it just came at the end of the first line. I'm aware of how the english language works.

yeah, i figured that much.

Neil Diamond needs more love on ap.

[Scott Weber]

yeah, i figured that much.

Neil Diamond needs more love on ap.
hey don't blame me, i reviewed his cd!

[bigmike]

hey don't blame me, i reviewed his cd!

I know, we need more Scott Weber's on ap then.

[Caleb Cattivera]

I know, we need more Scott Weber's on ap then.

reason #746783 that scott weber is my favorite staff member.

[Scott Weber]

haha.