Reply With Quote
^ oscar robertson disagrees imho, he's still the all-time record holder of triple doubles and i don't think he should be strictly defined as a PG, SG or SF.
West was the prototype for the combo guard, a guy who could score AND set up.
him, Baylor, and Wilt were the first big 3.
^ oscar robertson disagrees imho, he's still the all-time record holder of triple doubles and i don't think he should be strictly defined as a PG, SG or SF.
The Big O was the prototype for big PGs such as Magic and LeBron, actually.
West is a honkey. No way could he have beat Kome in a one on one game.
I want to say West is overrated, but West was the only obstacle between the Celtics and theand he sure as gave it a fight.
The logo however is overrated as a GM/VP though. How'd that stint with Mem & GS go?
I want to say West is overrated, but West was the only obstacle between the Celtics and the
The logo however is overrated as a GM/VP though. How'd that stint with Mem & GS go?
Grats.
With the Lakers marketability, even an average GM can pull off blockbuster trades. That's what happens when you have celebs waiting in line to buy season tickets and floor seats for 3 grand.
I'll agree that the Lakers have always spent money wisely.
F Shack,if the dude had been fairly called for 3 second violations and offensive fouls(especially in the low post,where he just basically ran over people for years) he'd be just another player
Dude had no footwork and no shot to speak of.
Basically he was a genetic freak of nature that was allowed to run riot over the NBA.
Glad him and his immature comedy act have hit the road,worst of the NBA in my book!
Shaq has always been a jealous, petty, immature asshole, complete with a cartoon mind. As a matter of fact, he's still that way today. Yet no one can knock his skills or his accomplishments in a Fakers jersey. Despite his bitter departure from the Fakers, this honor is well-deserved.
good he deserves it. dude damn near single handedly brought three NBA les to them. without him they never would have won any of those three. well deserved.
Wow so they wait for him to die and then they retired his jersey?
Classy lakers
Shaq's Lakers were one of the rare le teams since the late 80's/early 90's that were average defensively, and the sole reason is because of how dominant it was on offense. For this alone, Shaq deserves to have his jersey retired no matter how many bridges he burned with the Lakers franchise.
The offense was based on the mid 90's Rockets of surrounding a dominant big man (Hakeem/Shaq) with a bunch of 3 pt shooters (Smith, Cassell, Horry/ Fox, Horry, Fisher), and a slasher (Drexler, Kobe), but the Shaq offense was more dominant than the Hakeem offense due to a few reasons:
1) Shaq draws the defense in deeper into the paint, because his game was 5 feet in, whereas Hakeem's game was more 12 feet in. This allows more room and time for the three point shooters to launch their shots.
2) The defensive rules have changed so much, especially those around perimeter defense. It is much easier to drive into the lane in the early 00s than the mid 90s, making the slasher's job much easier
3) There are simply more 3 pt shooter in the 00s than the mid 90s. After the Hakeem Rockets, teams look to have more three point shooters, and teams/players concentrate on that aspect. More/higher accuracy three point shooters lead to higher yield on an inside out offense, and make double/tripling the dominant big man much harder
4) Longer 3 pt line. The shorter three point line in the mid 90s was a disaster, as it killed any spacing on offense. It favours quick shooting three point shooters (Smith, Cassell) and tall shooting big men who can shoot over the top of others (Horry, Chilchutt), but significantly reduces the effectiveness of the 3 overall. Having a long three point line just allows even three point shooters with a slower release to be effective as well.
In other words, did Shaq single-handedly won those three les? No, not really, because teams win les, not individuals. That said, all of those Lakers could have been reasonably replaced by other players in that era, and the Lakers would still be as dominant, except Shaq. Replace Shaq with any other person in that era, and the Lakers will not be as dominant (No, Duncan could not have led the Lakers to 15-1, the Lakers may still have won 3 in a row with Duncan instead of Shaq, but the Lakers will not be as dominant imo). The only players who I felt could have replaced Shaq in those early 00 teams, and the Lakers would have been just as dominant, would have been a prime Wilt, and that is only a maybe.
Cheers to the uncontested 2000, 2001, and 2002 Finals MVP!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
