What matters? The fact that Duncan was all about winning while Shaq was always a prima donna? Or the fact that Duncan always kept in shape and earned his keep while Shaq would use company time to heal injuries? Or maybe the fact that Duncan plays great defense while the big Shaqtus can't defend a PNR to save his life? Or the fact that Duncan helped Pops set up a no-nonsense locker room while SHaq created controversy and conflict wherever he went? There's more to being a big man and a franchise player than slam dunks. At their very peak Shaq is much better than Duncan but when you look at their career teams who own shaq always end up getting shafted or trading him.
Kareem, Chamberlain, Russell, Hakeem. Those guys are probably all still ahead of Shaq on the all-time list, which would put him at #5.
The problem is that everyone keeps thinking Shaq and Duncan are the same age. Shaq had already played one season for the Lakers before Duncan even came into the league. He led a team to the Finals two years before TD was even drafted.
Duncan was far better defensively, there is no question about that. Duncan is just about the perfect defensive big man. Shaq could always be exploited with the pick and roll, even in his prime.
Shaq's decline began as soon as he left for LA? The guy peaked in the championship years 2000-02. He was the league MVP in 2000, four years after he left Orlando.
If they switched teams throughout their careers (and were in there respective primes), I am much more confident that the the Lakers and Heat would still win the same number of championships, than I am the a Shaq-lead Spurs team would have won the last two.
Given that one of Shaq's major weaknesses was his motivation (even during the regular seasons of the Lakers championship years), I wonder if Shaq would have been better if his prime years had coincided with the prime years of one or more other great centers. Would Shaq have found the motivation to become the undisputed greatest center ever if he had played his prime years against prime Hakeem and David Robinson?
When TD led the Spurs to their second championship in 2003, Manu was a rookie averaging about 7 points per game in 20 minutes. That's also the same summer the Spurs tried getting Jason Kidd to replace Tony Parker, who was nowhere near a top 5 pg at the time.
So-called decline? When I said subtle but steady decline, this is what I was referring to: First 3 years in Orlando, the guy was a terrifying force that no one could contain: 80 games per season (81, 81, 79) 58% FG, 27.3 ppg, 2.94 bpg, 12.8 rpg (4.4 offensive) No opposing player scared the wits out of me like he did. Then Nick Anderson, the Olajuwon tip in, and the sweep happened. The next season had the Magic pulled down by infighting and Shaq dealt with his first bout of nagging injuries. He was on bad terms with Penny, Hill, and more focused on making money as a rapper-actor than he was on improving himself as a player - I can't think of a single season where Shaq came to camp in better shape than the season prior. He kept showing up heavier - to the point where Phil Jackson publicly called him out on it and sparked a mini-feud. Only once more in his career did Shaq cross the 75 game mark. Only 4 times he crossed the 68 game mark. 7 times he managed 60 games or fewer. Almost every time, it's either been an indirect result of his poor conditioning (arthritic toe) or it lengthened the amount of time he needed to return. His agility and quickness dropped a small notch every year. Phil Jackson helped balance out a good amount of this decline by upping his game IQ considerably. His assists nearly doubled, and he had his absolute peak season in '99-00: 79 games, 29.7 ppg on 57.4% FG, 13.7 rpg (4.3 offensive), 3 bpg, 3.8 apg. This was the only season post-Orlando in which he: played 79 games, scored 29+ ppg, grabbed over 13 boards per game, had over 4 offensive boards per game, or had 3 blocks per game. He never again approached any of those milestones. There was a small drop off the next 3 years, then a big one his final LA season as he let the infighting affect his effort level. But by this point there was also a decent physical difference between the player that came to LA and the player leaving. He was overweight, he wasn't anywhere near as quick, and he relied far more on his mass than his pivot step. After leaving LA, he never crossed 24 ppg again. By the time he left Miami, he wasn't even an 18-9 guy anymore. Shaq in his first 3 years was legendary. Shaq in LA was elite for 7 years. Shaq then went to being great, then good, then okay, then average in a year-to-year plummet. Shaq had a great career. Duncan had a great career. I give Duncan the edge in this particular debate because he's been incredibly consistent every single year: his first 3 seasons, his peak 3 seasons, and his past three twilight seasons are only slightly off from one another. If the question was which one was more dominant, obviously it's Shaq. Shaq at his best was crushing anyone in his way.
I call David Robinson 1/4. That is, he only won one title (the first in the Duncan era). TD won the next three without a top ten player, like another poster said. Granted, Shaq is / was dominant, but he had Kobe for 3, and Wade for his fourth.
Parker was the playoff MVP the last one. The 2nd to last could have easily been given to Manu. The 1st team (DR, Eliott, Elie) was just much better than their opponents--though TD was the best player on the team. TD's 2nd ring was all about him, I'll give you that (Parker was benched at times he was so undisciplined). But that is really only 1/4 where he had to be particularly dominant for his club to win.
Also, it is better to get to the finals than lose in the 1st or 2nd round of the playoffs, no? Thus Shaq's two extra Conference championships are hardly a knock against him, but add value. Particularly when you consider he was clearly the best player on the court in the 05 losing effort to Detroit.
Don't forget Big Shot Rob's finest hour in the critical game 5 of the Spurs/Pistons finals. It was a 2/2 series and his performance probably tipped the balance of the series. Teams that win game 5 of a finals after having been tied go on to win the series about 76% of the time. <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BZdik09RGJI&hl=en_US&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BZdik09RGJI&hl=en_US&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object> Horry put that team on his back.
I do remember Sheed for some unthinking reason (what a surprise for such a player noted for his mental focus) left Cheap Shot Bob wide open & yes that shot won game 5. If I recall FloppaNoseili was the big difference maker in the 4th quarter of game 7, and had as strong case for the MVP as Duncan did.
If Shaq doesn't retire soon, his career will be remembered less and less favorable to Duncan's. Here is a good article from Kelly Dwyer: Shaq O'Neal a Celtic? showing the pitiful state of the Shaq of recent years.
Didn’t Hakeem’s career sputter to an end in Toronto and Patrick Ewing’s in Orlando. Moses Malone played for 9 teams if you count ABA and no one remembers those players as any lesser for it.
Hakeem's Toronto stint was short. Nobody really counted that as part of his career. Ewing played for 2 teams in 2 seasons after his NY career before he retired. I'd say those seasons were similar to Shaq's Phoenix and Cleveland seasons. He should retire like Ewing did. And Ewing is seldom considered anywhere close to be one of the all-time greats at his position like Shaq and Duncan are. As for Moses, he did play for a few teams after his championship year. But those were strong years. IIRC, he did play a few poor seasons at the end. But people remember him as a great player everywhere he went.
Lol how? It is pretty dead on. Dream/KAJ/Wilt/Russell all better and I don't think there is any argument for Shaq. Maybe part of it is due to how weak the 00s were for centers (who was the second best center when Shaq was dominating? Old David Robinson? Come on now).
Those are some good points. Shaq's career has gone on long enough. But if you can still play why not? Most stats have Shaq as good enough to be a starter in the league even after last year. He can at least replace Perkins until his injury is healed and the Celtics looked like they could have used him against the Lakers in the finals.
IMHO this is the biggest reason why Duncan is much better than Shaq. Shaq's "I HULK!!! I SMASH!!!!" period was great, but how long did that absolute dominance last? IMHO it was it was just 2-3 years tops. Other than that, Shaq was just a very good offensive center, who was bad at defense and destroyed chemistry wherever he went. Sure Shaq was the main man in the three-peat, however if they had exchanged how many titles would a Duncan-Kobe duo win? IMHO at least 4 rings and 6 finals appearances. I'm sure rockforever and goodbug would agree with me that Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan on the same team would be a lot like MJ and Hakeem playing together in terms of absolute dominance on the court, especially during the shaq-kobe era when the only real threat were the Sacramento Kings. Duncan's offensive efficiency is no where near Shaq, but in exchange for that slight dropoff you get off-the-charts intangibles, amazing defense, great passing, and most of all no locker room drama. All the people who pick Shaq over Duncan don't really have winning games on their mind. Really? LMAO you'd take the extremely talented slacker who just a b**** to work with over the talented hard worker who got along with everybody? Its not like Duncan is a no-stats all star like Battier, he's pretty much been an ALL NBA first teamer from day one. In terms of career, Duncan and Shaq have the same amount of rings and all star appearances, however if you factor in the all NBA first teams and all NBA defensive teams Duncan wins out. Duncan has a higher winning % than Shaq, has a much better rep than Shaq and will be regarded his entire career as a Spur, unlike Shaq who's like that hot girl who's been around the block so much nobody wants to touch her anymore. Duncan's also smarter than Shaq, he positioned himself as a PF from day 1, and will be regarded as the GOAT PF. GOAT PF sounds so much better than 5th best center of all time, every "dream team" will have duncan as the pf while practically no one will mention Shaq when his career is done. I bet if you ask guys who know what they're doing like DM, PJ, Pops, Buford and Presti, they'd all say that if there was a draft they'd pick Duncan over Shaq any day.
