So I guess we can never discuss a head to head matchup between two players because we can't create a vacuum for them to play basketball in so they won't be limited by the opposing teams strategies. Analysts discuss key head to head matchups before games all the time. Coaches will take advantage of their strengths and opposing teams weaknesses (ie-hackashaq). Does that mean at the end of a game we can't say which one came out on top? Of course not. As such, great players get double teamed all the time. If they never get double teamed then they just aren't that great. Both Dream and Shaq got double teamed in their careers. It doesn't mean you can't evaluate a matchup between them.
So according to you Shaq is the first player ever to be 2nd in the MVP-voting, 2nd in total rebounds, 2nd in FG% while not being in his prime. Do you understand how stupid that sounds? Shaq has only been 2nd or higher in the MVP-voting 3 times, it's pretty stupid of you to say that he wasn't in his prime when he really was... I'm tired of people claiming that Shaq wasn't in his prime when Hakeem and the Rockets swept his ass, it's a pure lie, it's not like Shaq has developed his game big-time like Olajuwon, there's not much different between the 95-Shaq and the 1999-2002 Shaq...
Did somebody pee in your soup? Welcome to the forum (I guess). I hope your not always such a bitter lemon. Shaq had great stats from the start of his career. Few players have hit the NBA by storm like him. But he was a better, smarter, heavier and stronger player in LA than in Orlando. So indeed, his peak years were the Lakers 3 championship seasons and the year after (99/00 to 02/03). He was a better player during this time frame than in 94/95, which was his 3rd season. If you think this is "stupid", so be it. Nice talking to you.
Shaq of LA was stronger and heavier, but the one on Magic was quicker. While Shaq was definately better overall player in LA compared to when he was with Magic, the difference wasn't as great as you are making it out to be. His overall impact was not vastly different than when he was in Magic. I would imagine Kobe Bryant had some say in the 3 rings too. While both Hakeem and Shaq would have just about equal impact on offense, Shaq's handicap would always stay with him. His inability to hit free throws makes him a poor closer. I had always wondered why more teams hadnt used the hack a Shaq more than they had in previous years like the way Popovich used last year. If we start talking about defense, the margin gets wider. Shaq's inability to defend pick and roll has been often exploited and Hakeem was simply the smarter and better defender.
Oh, know when I read my post I can clearly see that my way of writing wasn't very nice and I'm sorry for that, wasn't my intent at all. But seriously, I don't believe that at all. I've seen Shaq for a long time and I can't understand the talk about him not being in his prime in 95, statswise he was just as good as in his prime vs better opponents at the centerposition and seeing him play you can barely see any difference between the 95-Shaq and the 2000-Shaq. True that he got a little bit smarter but that's not enough to take that 95-year from him. And if heavier and stronger is the only things you can come up with I think we both can agree that he was in his prime in 95. You gotta consider the fact that he even faced better opponents on the centerposition in 95 then in his so-called prime so some of his crazy scoringaverages wouldn't be the same if he would have faced some of the dominant centers from 95. Again, if Shaq would have improved his FT-shooting or his defense during the titleruns I would have agreed with you but if the difference between prime and non-prime is smarter, heavier and stronger then I don't know what to say, I wouldn't even say that heavier is a good thing and stronger, I don't know about that. Oh, and I like pee in my soup! Don't be a hater.
I didn't mean to imply that Shaq radically transformed himself from his early years like Hakeem did. I re-watch the 94/95 Finals about once/year (no joke). The Shaq in that series was a great player and did quite well against Hakeem. He wasn't "schooled" (a word someone else used) at all. Believe me, the Magic did not lose that series because of Hakeem vs Shaq. Check out these stat lines: Both played 45 mins/game Code: Stat: Pts/Rebs/Ast/Stl/Blk Hakeem: 32.8/11.5/5.5/2.0/2.0 Shaq: 28.0/12.5/6.3/0.3/2.5 Hakeem had the advantage of being a veteran player on a well-coached, well-oiled veteran team. He also put up 42 more FG attempts to get his points than did Shaq (116 to 74). Even though he put up great stats and was a great player, this Shaq wasn't quite the same nasty ogre of a punishing player he became in LA. If the 93/94 or 94/95 Rockets had played the 99/00 Lakers in a playoff series, I would bet money Shaq's stats would have been noticeably better than Hakeems. This is just my opinion and I think most non-Lakers, non-Rockets fans old enough to remember would agree. I'm turning off my pro-Rockets bias here.
Either way, the only empirical evidence we have between a matchup of the two are the 95' finals series...and Dream came out on top. And its probably for Shaqs own good that he wasn't as heavy in that series. One thing I will say in Shaqs defense is that the longevity of his productive years are pretty damn good but still I would take the best of Hakeem over the best of Shaq.
Yeah I think we're all trying to do the same but we agree to disagree. Oh and I believe Zboy is the biggest troll on this board so when his view favors a current/former Rocket its DEFINITELY an objective opinion. hah JK Zboy
