Is Shaq really on a sharp decline?

Yao's last few games have been exciting, I think. Shaq took the mantle as best center in the NBA at age 25 from the 34 year old Hakeem, and I think we are now seeing Yao do the same.

 

He's declining, but I don't know if it's a steep decline. He's recovering from an injury so cut him a little slack. As the Heat were rolling to the playoffs last year, Shaq was starting to look totally dominant again, until Jermaine O'neal's knee took him down. Because of that, I'm willing to believe we haven't seen the best of Shaq yet this season. He has 35+ games left to round into shape.

 

Round is a shape!

-- Charles Barkley

 

Olajuwons decline was sharp too. 2 years after destroying David Robinson and Shaq in the playoffs there was a noticeable decline in his ability to dominate. The year after that he went from like 24ppg to 16 after suffering injuries. He never bounced back and was always an above average center after. Same type of argument can be made for Robinson and Mutombo who fell off after significant injury. Trend seems to be that big men find it difficult to rebound after serious injuries late in their career. Could be a similar scenario for Shaq although the he is still not in very good shape and he is no longer the best player on his team.

 

shaq's pretty close to following hakeem's decline. really good for 12 seasons, best in his 8th to 11th seasons (hakeem 9-12). last year was his 13th season and he was still pretty good (though down to 22/10 i believe) and his team was good, just like hakeem in his 13th year (96-97), when he fell a little to 23/9 and we made it to the conference finals. then hakeem and shaq fell off even more in their next season (hakeem slightly more than shaq) but hakeem bounced back the next season for a strong 19/9.5 year and even made 3rd team all-nba. shaq probably won't do that so they'll probably kind of switch their 14th and 15th seasons. then hakeem fell off a cliff in season 16 and that was it. i can't see shaq making it too much further either.

 

hakeems last good year was 97 when we made it to the wcf.

we were suppose to play the bulls, and we would have killed the bulls.


Hakeem>all three of those centers
Chuck>Rodman only because Chuck could score also.
Clyde=MJ, slight nod to MJ
Elie<Pippen, please dont shoot me. Think rationally people. I like Mario Elie.
Maloney<Harper. slight nod to Harper.

 

the F'n 2nd best center is Dampier. I don't know where you get off saying Yao is took the mantle. That's absurd.

 

Yes he is on a decline. The Lakers made the right decision to keep Kobe and let Shaq go. However, they should have gotten more in the trade.

 

How long ago was Shaq's injury anyways? I don't know if you can really keep going to that excuse for him. You only need to look at his conditioning history and his age for the reasons why he's on decline. That contract is gonna be an albatross for the Heat sooner than they think.

 

I sense a Mark Cuban plot to destroy the Jedi.

 

how many years was his contract?

 

I don't think it was ever about Shaq vs Kobe or any type of trade. It was strictly modern day NBA economics..

The Lakrs never "traded" Shaq. They simply toook the best oprion after deciding not to agree to his contract extension demands. Shaq demanded a five year deal at max bucks (in fact more than max as it was an extension of a grandfathered contract). I think if Shaq would have taken a one to three year contract he would still be a Laker at any price. But Buss felt the last two to three years of that five year contract would be a cap killer. Lot of dollars tied up in a declining player who has already been injured virtually every year already.

As bad as that deal looked last year, unless Shaq turns into an ageless Nolan Ryan or Roger Clemens type, it will probably be a good business decision over the five year period.

 

I agree. But keep in mind, anything the Kobe haters can fabricate to make him look bad, they will. Kobe didn't force Shaq out of LA, NBA economics did.

 

answer: YES

 

It was quite a bit more than that. Shaq and Kobe couldn't stand each other. Kobe was an UFA who made it clear he wanted to be the top dog and didn't want Shaq to return. The Lakers had a choice: Keep Shaq and lose Kobe or trade Shaq and probably re-sign Kobe. Economics played a part in it because of Shaq's crazy contract demands but it most certainly was not strictly economics. If economics was the only issue Shaq probably would have played out the remaining year in his contract as a Laker and they would have made one last championship run.

You, or anyone else, can call me a Kobe hater, but the guy has had serious problems getting along with teammates beginning in his rookie season. I don't deny his greatness and have complimented him a lot recently (UUUUGGH!), especially on his 81 point game. But let's be real. Not only was Shaq traded because of Kobe, PJ didn't come back because of Kobe. BOTH guys left because of Bean. It's too bad for Laker fans Kobe cared more about his position in the pecking order instead of competing for championships.

 

I think he's on the down as well, all those seasons of battling vlade divac, brad miller and theo ratliff took their toll on the big fella.

 

Saying Yao is now the best center in the league is kind of like saying Chris Byrd is the best Heavyweight boxer in the world. The talent pool for both has never been so thin.

 

Unfortunately true. Maybe if duncan want to man up and play his real position there might be a battle.

This is what makes Hakeem so great considering the players he battled through his career like kareem, moses, robinson, ewing, shaq, parish, deke (we all know the man could D up),zo hell there was even smits, k willis, cartwright,.... He owned alot of these players and held more than his own when he was younger

i think shaq falls under the same category as ming. As he hit his prime there was no real competition for him.

 

Miami has to pay him 20 Millions until 2009/10.

It will be a big question whether he can stand on the court or not at that time.