I agree to a point however the numbers/accomplishments do speak for themselves. It's not all opinion.
Shaq is barely a top 5 center?
- Thread starter Yung Yogurt
- Start date
I agree to a point however the numbers/accomplishments do speak for themselves. It's not all opinion.
cornercommission2k12
so this were u dudes went
yea but flipside you cant assume wilt or russel would come into the 90's and dominate eitherBased upon what? He didn't even top 30 in his times. T-Mac, AI, Kobe, Lebron, D. Wade, Dominique, Jerry Stackhouseall have higher career high ppg for a season than Shaq. We not just talking about droppin 50 we talking about droppin more than 50 because Wilt did that and you asserted Shaq would be more dominant. As far as Russell goes he won 11 rings in 13 years with stacked squads. Shaq won 4 rings in 19 years with stacked squads.
The problem I have when people talk about Shaq is that they focus on potential rather than actual production. He had all the tools physically to be a modern day Wilt and didn't get it done AND he had all the teammates to be a modern day Russell and didn't get it done. Great player, all-time great, probably top 5 at his position but I am not about to just assume he would dominate era's gone by when he had to wait for Mike to retire and the other great C's to get old and had to get a duplicate of Mike in the backcourt to dominate his.
you mean to tell me wilt is avg 50 a game playing against ewing, robinson, hakeem, shaq, and zo? hell when you consider the power forwards like malone, barkley and rodman who were great rebounders and would guarantee wilt would not grab 25 boards a game. you think russel comes into the 90's and wins 9 titles in that decade with mj and scottie sitting in they face?
the opinion comes in to play when you say who you like more.
No denying that LeBron is the best player on Earth. His numbers speak for him. But I like Kobe more. He's my favorite player.
I'm comparing the players based on what they did in their respective eras. Of course Wilt wouldn't be avg. 50 in the 90's and Russell wouldn't be winning championships every year that wasn't my point. You suggested that Shaq was better and would be more dominant than them in their time. I ask what Shaq did in his time that makes you think that way?
Last edited:
the opinion comes in to play when you say who you like more.
No denying that LeBron is the best player on Earth. His numbers speak for him. But I like Kobe more. He's my favorite player.
But we aren't talking about who you like more we are talking about who's the best.
Of course opinion comes in to play with who you like more. That's what opinion means.
Goatpoacher
Superstar
Prime Shaq was the best Center ever. Compared to the other great Centers his peak was the highest but did not extend for more than a few years.
But we aren't talking about who you like more we are talking about who's the best.
Of course opinion comes in to play with who you like more. That's what opinion means.
I think when you make any list like that a person's opinion comes into play. hell some people have Shaq as the best ever. some have him as number five on that list. that's a matter of opinion.
and there opinion would have everything AND nothing to do with his numbers.
Goatpoacher
Superstar
By what measure?
nikkas got gassed watching this dude dominate Todd McCullah.
He faced those great 80's/90's Centers and held up just fine. He was basically a kid when he did. What player in NBA history was capable of stopping '99 Shaq?
Goatpoacher
Superstar
oops
Opinion must have basis though. You can't just say something because you feel that way or like someone more. It must have basis. Otherwise anyone could say anything and the discussion could get pretty silly.
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2012
- Messages
- 36,634
- Reputation
- 3,851
- Daps
- 54,861
- Reppin
- #Targset,#Heatgang,#Byrdgang
Them thin ass Manute Bol nikkas would be nothing short of BARBECUE CHICKEN to Shaq.
Goatpoacher
Superstar
me
I have no idea what you meant by this. If you are going to be obtuse, I will summon the Art Barr and this thread will be shut down in a maelstrom of commas and misapplied palaver.
ok... well my basis could be that I like the finesse aspect of the game more than I do the physical.
now whether you agree with it or not could fuse or diffuse a debate. it's really not that serious to me. to see some people work themselves up in a frenzy over these dudes that wouldn't piss on them if they were set ablaze is hilarious to me.