Most dominant basketball player you've been able to fully enjoy in their prime?

I wished I agreed but I simply don't. Shaq was the benefit of the officials not calling offensive fouls because he made so many of them he would have fouled out in two quarters if they had called them. Shaq's signature move was to hook his defender with his left arm, spin and dunk. Big whoop. If he had played in the 70's, he'd never made it in the league because he was not skilled enough. He never could shoot his FTs. His entire game was predicated on being bigger and stronger than everybody else. He couldn't shoot anything outside of 5 feet from the goal. And he had to bump and foul even then to get his shot off.

He was the most physically domineering player ever. But to say he was the most dominant player ever. I can't even put him in my top 10. Hakeem was ten times as talented as Shaq. Shaq even still confesses he could not touch Hakeem. Overrated. Overrated. Overrated.

 

I think Wilt should have the honor to be called the most physically domineering player ever.

 

Doesn't matter if he was a Bull or a Gazelle, he could not be stopped. I didn't see Wilt play, but I did see Shaq play and he was a beast.

 

so basically he shut down rose, whom shumpert shut down as well, but lebrick can't shut down durant, who is his size

 

Then you should have seen Hakeem tear him a new one in the Finals. And don't think for a minute that a prime Shaq could get to a prime Hakeem. Hakeem, in his prime, was the most dominant force in the paint that has EVER been. That includes Kareem, Wilt, and my man Russell, and Shaq. I'm not saying Shaq was trash. I am saying if he played in the era of skilled basketball, the 70's and 80's, instead of what I call the Brute Basketball era ushered in by the Bruise Brothers Piston teams and put over the top by Shaq and finally climaxing with the bruiser Knicks and Heat playoff teams where they battled to score 75 points in 4 quarters, then Shaq would have had a very difficult time staying on the court. He was dominant because he was the biggest, strongest brute during the era of brutes. He was not dominant due to basketball skill.

 

Hasheem Thabeet.

 

Tracy McGrady

 

As a kid, I watched the Rockets only. No national games, no other playoff games, not even the Bulls. I didn't start paying attention to the rest of the league until Stevie Franchise took over. As much as I hate the Lakers, Kobe was just something else. No matter how awkward the shot was, no matter how many people tried to slow him down, every time he took a shot, I expected it to go in.

But the player I got to "enjoy" was Lebron. He's up there with Shaq in the athletic freak department. I don't agree with the dancing or how he handled free agency, but he took a discount to win, he chose where he wanted to go without demanding a trade, and he's finally developing a post game. Damn.

 

Hence, the most dominant player in his prime. And don't Act like Hakeem undressed him in the finals. That was FAR from the truth. Shaq played him nearly even as a sophomore.

It's difficult to say because I'm an Hakeem fan, but Shaq was the most dominant force this league has ever seen.

 

For me it was Shaq, but he got away with a lot of offensive foul because he was a Laker.

 

A part of me wants to say Shaq because he is more recent and another part of me wants to say Hakeem because he is not only one of the greatest but he played for Houston.

But really, it has to go to Jordan. I say that because no matter what the situation, if it was within striking distance of a win, you KNEW Jordan was going to get it done defensively or offensively.

I can say all three of them did it on a NIGHTLY basis, but there was just something unstoppable about Jordan.

 

fixed :grin:

 

I always thought Shaq got as much as he dished out on the offensive end.

 

lmao!

 

Duncan, Kobe, LeBron, Dirk, Garnett, Kidd, Nash.

 

Shaq also.

 

Shaq averaged near 28 points in that series which was his second year in the league. He also beat the Jordan led bulls. Yes dream did get the better of him but not by much.