Reply With Quote
dam I didn't know that he was copying Pop in getting a tongue ring and tramp stamp
You can't take the salary situation away... the Spurs were already semi-stacked up front with DRob, Tim was a great addition, and the "rookie scale" type of contract allowed them to surround them with serviceable guys on the perimeter to win...
dam I didn't know that he was copying Pop in getting a tongue ring and tramp stamp
No. Duncan is younger, more versatile, more of a complete player, regardless of Shaq's physical dominance.
Do you care to add something of substance to my thread? If not, then GTFO.
Lkrfan great thread topic..I would take Shaq because he was a more dominant big man. I'd even take Shaq to start a franchise over Kobe and MJ as well...only given that MJ and Kobe to start were not very polished players...whereas Shaq's girth alone could cover over a lot of his inexperience.
Plus I would be rather devastated after a loss if after getting out of the showers my star player had tramp stamp...and was laughing while flashing a tongue ring...that would with my head...
but overall I'd take Magic over any player to start a Franchise
Magic was the best Rookie player in the history of the game...
In the summer of 1999, Shaq was 27 years old. In 2005-06, Shaq averaged 20 points and 9 rebounds. That's 7 more seasons of elite play. Re-signing him is an issue, but I don't think you know that for sure. And with Duncan, even coming off a championship season and a great first two years in the league, 10+ years of elite play isn't guaranteed either. Easier to say that now after we've witnessed it. In 1999, we didn't know that.
Age difference and re-signability would certainly be factors to consider. But to me, the bigger issue would have been the financial implications, considering how much both Robinson and Shaq were making at the time. I think at the time, Shaq was the most dominant player in the league. And it's a very rare situation where a team wouldn't trade for the most dominant player in the league.
dude you're not getting paid for this ...stop trying to sound all intellectual and and just answer the ing question.... finances who would you take...you act like female at times...real talk
also thanks Lkrfan for taking me back to 1999 even though 96 was the best year of my life to date
No..
Ignoring the financial implications for a moment, even as early as 1999, Shaq already had a reputation for being a headcase, along with questionable conditioning and dedication to the game..
Shaq was unquestionably better than Duncan, but it doesn't offset the negative aspects of the swap IMO..Duncan is the better fit with Robinson, he's younger and he's arguably the most coachable star in NBA history..
Amen to that my brother....that honor should be exclusively reserved for any dude with a tongue ring and a tramp stamp....
In the summer of 1999, Shaquille O'Neal's legacy was becoming that of an underachieving, injury prone primadonna who regularly got swept out of the Playoffs. It took Phil Jackson to turn him into the beast he became for the next six seasons, and Phil Jackson could make that happen because he had 6 rings.
I'm not sure Pop would have been able to work the same magic from Shaq because I don't know if Shaq would have had the same amount of respect for Pop that he had for Phil.
Nope. Shaq would be a horrible fit on the '99 Spurs. Too much congestion with him and the Admiral on the inside. They would contend, but would probably lose to the Duncan-led Lakers which would be a much more balanced team.
2000-2002- Take Shaq
2003-2011- Take Duncan
The answer is Duncan
Yimmy was too chicken to tell is college room-mate after graduation that he would not have to find his own place to live...he allowed this man to live with him for what like 4 or 5 yrs after graduation and you would have us beleive that he would have actually had the balls to stand up to Kobe....
yeah right...Yimmy is no Shaq he would have taken a back seat to the mamba would have been too chicken to stand up to Kobe...look at this does this look like a man that can stand up to Kobe:
Lkrfan great thread topic..I would take Shaq because he was a more dominant big man. I'd even take Shaq to start a franchise over Kobe and MJ as well...only given that MJ and Kobe to start were not very polished players...whereas Shaq's girth alone could cover over a lot of his inexperience.
Plus I would be rather devastated after a loss if after getting out of the showers my star player had tramp stamp...and was laughing while flashing a tongue ring...that would with my head...
No one questioned Shaq's conditioning in 1999. Quit making up.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
