Originally Posted by BWillie:
I don't know how you can mention Jeter in the same vein as Kobe.
Kobe was a legit superstar. Top 5-7 minimum NBA player of all time and has the stats and championships to prove it. He probably took a little too many threes and did a little too much hero ball, but he had the talent and drive to be one of the best. He did it with two different supporting cases. Two completely different dynasties.
Kobe was overrated because of the franchise he played for just like Jeter. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Hakeem was an amazing defender - no question.
By dWAR he was the 4th best of all time. That said, Shaq was 21st. He was by no means a slouch and was absolutely an impact 2-way player.
I simply don't agree that those Magic teams are obviously better without Shaq than the Rockets would've been without Olajuwon. And while you want to cite one year where Olajuwon carried his team to a title (a year I've spoken to), I think you're also overstating his teammates SIGNIFICANTLY in 99-00.
I mean sure, he had Kobe, but Kobe was 21 and nothing resembling the monster he eventually became. He was a volume scorer with no real outside shot to speak of. And his #3 option was fat Glen Rice who was washed. And the cast only gets worse from there. Beyond those 2, that team's worse than TODAY'S Lakers. It's damn ugly.
The 99/00 Lakers weren't any better without Shaq than that 93-94 team is without Olajuwon. And with that squad the Lakers won 67 games. And his playoff performances that year (and the following season) were absolutely epic. 30+ PPG and 15+ RPG. Shaq was absolutely the guy who fueled that 99-00 run and largely 00-01 as well.
And you want to note that Olajuwon had inferior teammates when he won his rings (even if I don't entirely agree), is it not worth pointing out that Shaq won twice as many of them? Or that while you cite all of Olajuwon's All-Defensive accolades in comparison to Shaqs, how about the fact that Shaq has more All-NBA nods than Olajuwon? You want to talk about 2-way players, that would seem to support O'Neal being the better one, no?
I just don't think you're holding the two guys to the same standard. I don't think Olajuwon was a better two-way player - simply a different one. He was an elite defender and very good scorer. Shaq was a very good defender and an elite offensive weapon.
And I think when you look at their combined totals, it bears that out.
Shaq: 1207 career games, 181.7 WS, 75.5 VORP
Dream: 1238 career games, 162.8 WS, 74.2 VORP
If you want to compare the respective 'peak' periods we're talking about above, it's the same story:
99-01 Shaq: 33.5 WAR, VORP of 16.1
92-94 Dream: 31.1 WAR, VORP of 15.1
Hakeem is a great player, both players came about their greatness in different ways, but in the end I think Shaq was just a LITTLE better. And yeah, a lot of that came not through hard work or skill, but by winning the genetic lottery. But that's basketball, man. Hell, that sports writ large.
If I could have either guy on any team I build for the duration of their careers, I'm going to take Shaq.
You make some good points. However, in regards to All-NBA teams, Hakeem had Ewing and Robinson for competition. Shaq really had no competition by the late 1990's and 2000's for All-NBA teams. The other league centers were JAGs compared to their predecessors.
Also, Shaq having twice as many rings doesn't move the needle for me. The Lakers dynasty had two of the best offensive players in the league. Plus a stronger supporting cast than the Rockets in the mid 90's. Guys like Fisher, Fox, Horry, Harper were great defenders. Phil Jackson as coach. Also, Shaq's title in Miami was him playing second fiddle to Wade, who went off in those Finals. None of those teams win without Shaq of course. Point is, he SHOULD have won more titles than Hakeem. The Rockets were not set up for a dynasty. Drexler arrived when he was past his prime. Barkley/Pippen were older superstars by the late 90's.
In the end, it's close. As stated, I rank them both around 11-15. Not much difference there. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Can anyone talk me out of adopting the Memphis Grizzlies as my life raft team until James and Westbrook are gone?
Because **** this Lakers squad.
Meanwhile the Griz are fun as hell.
YES! Can't wait until LeFrontRunner is gone!!! Then I can enjoy my Laekrs again. One lucky ass mickey mouse ass bubble ring don't mean shit. Outside of the bubble, going through the real Western Conference gauntlet, he ain't done shit. We had 16 real ones before he got there. Wish we could trade him yesterday. And no, HE AIN'T NOWHERE NEAR KOBE, MAGIC, KAREEM, MIKE and others.. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
Until James is gone? LeBron James isn't the problem. Hes been playing great.
Bizarre he would be getting criticized at all (unless it is his about his alleged GM/team building skills). He's having a great year, at least when he's been healthy enough to play. The guy's absurdly averaging 29-8-6 as a 37 year old while shooting better than his career averages.
His teammates around him sadly are the biggest collection of garbage I've ever seen, though. Westbrook in particular is one of the worst players in the league (and was when they traded for him).
Their record is entirely predictable and I fully anticipate they won't finish at .500. They may make the play-in game or they may not but it hardly matters. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
Bizarre he would be getting criticized at all (unless it is his about his alleged GM/team building skills). He's having a great year, at least when he's been healthy enough to play. The guy's absurdly averaging 29-8-6 as a 37 year old while shooting better than his career averages.
His teammates around him sadly are the biggest collection of garbage I've ever seen, though. Westbrook in particular is one of the worst players in the league (and was when they traded for him).
Their record is entirely predictable and I fully anticipate they won't finish at .500. They may make the play-in game or they may not but it hardly matters.
It's EXACTLY his GM/Team build skills.
Well that and the personality in general.
But this is what you get when you get in bed with James. You get a guy who has no idea how to build a winning basketball team who insists on building said team.
Then he speaks and just makes things worse.
Deal him for some picks and start the rebuild. You're not winning anything this year or next so just pull the chute and start over. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
It's EXACTLY his GM/Team build skills.
Well that and the personality in general.
But this is what you get when you get in bed with James. You get a guy who has no idea how to build a winning basketball team who insists on building said team.
Then he speaks and just makes things worse.
Deal him for some picks and start the rebuild. You're not winning anything this year or next so just pull the chute and start over.
I'm sure LeBron would gladly take a trade at this point to get out from the disaster that he helped create, but the Lakers are never going to do that and go back to the irrelevant organization they were between Kobe's retirement (although it was really even before that because he played on some awful, awful teams in his last few years) and LeBron's signing that led to the championship.
They're effectively stuck with him for now and he's stuck with them for now. The best thing they can do at the moment is try to make it work again with LeBron. I just have no idea how they're going to do that next year, though, given that Westbrook (who is one of the worst players in the league) and AD (who can't apparently play more than 40 games a season and who doesn't seem to give a shit any longer even when he does) are getting paid nearly 90M combined.
Could you trade one of them? Both? I can't see any team being willing to take Westbrook in particular, but it has to be attempted. Even putting LeBron around a bunch of mediocre shooter/defender types like in Cleveland would be better team construction than what they've got right now. [Reply]
You could get Westbrook traded but it would be an all-in for a single season move.
He's expiring next year so if you went to a team that had a couple of bad contracts w/ additional term on them, you could get them to take Westbrooks 1 lousy year if you'll take 2 lousy years from the players you're getting in return.
Like, could you include another bad enough contract w/ the bad contract of Tobias Harris? From the 76ers standpoint it gets a 2 year liability off the books in exchange for a 1-year liability. Would you even need to? I think Harris at $37 million next year would be close enough to Westbrook's $47 to make it work. I don't remember the exact percentages by my memory is that it would work.
But all that does is make a 1 year problem into a 2-year problem when you take on $39 million for 23/24.
Then again, that's kinda what they may have to do if they hope to get Westbrook moved.
It was just such a completely inexplicable decision. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
It's EXACTLY his GM/Team build skills.
Well that and the personality in general.
But this is what you get when you get in bed with James. You get a guy who has no idea how to build a winning basketball team who insists on building said team.
Then he speaks and just makes things worse.
Deal him for some picks and start the rebuild. You're not winning anything this year or next so just pull the chute and start over.
Yep Lebron is mostly responsible for this roster and if they trade anybody they should trade AD along with Russ. Though I was surprised to learn Lebron doesn't have a no trade clause definitely would be interesting to see what they could get in return for him. [Reply]
Perfect screen, pass and individual effort. And we're supposed to pretend like some 6'1'' white dude running with his arms up in a Big 10 game would've totally prevented this sort of thing... [Reply]
