Basketball (NBA, College, etc.)

bmwracer wrote:
Come on, get your monikers straight: The Big Fella has always been Kareem... Shaq is The Big Lunkhead.

Shaq actually has multiple monikers - Big Aristotle, The Diesel, and now the Big Cactus. "Big Fella" was only one of them ... but my favorite: "The Big Baryshnikov" :hehe:

Call me ungrateful, but I never considered him a center in the same caliber as Chamberlain, Russell, or Kareem.

Not sure who you've been talking to or watching, but I haven't heard anyone argue Shaq's better or at the level of those 3. However, he is the best center of this generation (past 2 decades), better than The Dream included.

You probably are a bit ungrateful, along with other Laker fans... cause after all, Shaq & Kobe brought you guys 3 championships and a mini-dynasty. :grumble:

adub2adub wrote:However, he is the best center of this generation (past 2 decades), better than The Dream included.

Past two decades?

No way.


Yeah, I am ungrateful, 'cause it could've been a true full-fledged dynasty had he been more dedicated to the sport rather than his ego and outside interests. :shakehead:

bmwracer wrote:
Past two decades?

No way.

From 1990 on, who did you think was better at Shaq's position? :headscratch:

Yeah, I am ungrateful, 'cause it could've been a true full-fledged dynasty had he been more dedicated to the sport rather than his ego and outside interests.

Well, the later half of your comment could apply to 90% of NBA superstars nowadays. For those same reasons, Kobe had as much to blame for Shaq leaving and the dynasty ending.

As for "outside interests", are you saying you didn't enjoy 'Shaq Fu' and 'Kazaam!' ??? :beaten: :hehe:

adub2adub wrote:From 1990 on, who did you think was better at Shaq's position? :headscratch:

Tim Duncan... Hakeem Olajuwon: his Rockets team dominated the Magic in Shaq's first Finals appearance.

For those same reasons, Kobe had as much to blame for Shaq leaving and the dynasty ending.

I don't see Kobe nearly as much to blame as Shaq... Kobe still had much to prove and was (and is) still driven, while Shaq got too self-absorbed with his celebrity and being in the glamor capital...

Like Michael Jordan, Kobe relentlessly trained in the off-season to assure himself that he'd be strong and injury-free when the season started... Meanwhile Shaq was slamming Whoppers and Nestle Crunch bars down his gullet and doing bad movies.

As for "outside interests", are you saying you didn't enjoy 'Shaq Fu' and 'Kazaam!' ??? :beaten: :hehe:

Had no interest in pissing away my cash to see him on film... :bleh:

bmwracer wrote:
Tim Duncan... Hakeem Olajuwon: his Rockets team dominated the Magic in Shaq's first Finals appearance.

Duncan has been a power forward his entire NBA career. IMO, Shaq in his prime, was more dominant offensively and feared defensively than Duncan. Hakeem only has 2 rings compared to Shaq's 4. Plus, Shaq was still only a (skinny!!) 23 years-old when they met in the 95' Finals.

I don't see Kobe nearly as much to blame as Shaq... Kobe still had much to prove and was (and is) still driven, while Shaq got too self-absorbed with his celebrity and being in the glamor capital...

That's the good & bad of Kobe.....driven, determined, but too egotistical and selfish. He whined his way to get Shaq to leave so he could prove he could be like Jordan, then whined to get traded when he realized he needed help (before Gasol arrived). :shakehead:

Had no interest in pissing away my cash to see him on film...

Yea ... neither would any reasonable person :grumble:

adub2adub wrote:IMO, Shaq in his prime, was more dominant offensively and feared defensively than Duncan.

He was only dominant after he got fat, er, big, so he could back people in at the post.

Feared defensively?

Nah... He wasn't that prolific a shot blocker nor a rebounder. He was just a big redwood that no one wanted to run into. Mourning and other centers of that time were better defensively, IMO.

And he was a free throw liability... His "I make 'em when I have to" comment is so typical of his lack of respect for the game.

Hakeem only has 2 rings compared to Shaq's 4.

But Hakeem won their only head-to-head battle... And it was a sweep, to boot. :P

Plus, Shaq was still only a (skinny!!) 23 years-old when they met in the 95' Finals.

That just furthers my argument that he didn't become "dominant" until he got fat, er, big.

Lakers beat the Suns in a big-time shootout, 130-124. :sweat:

Wow. :applaud:

Kobe, 41 points, Gasol, 29, Odom, 22.

Stoudemire, 33 points, Nash, 26, Shaq 15.


Next up: The Clippers on Saturday.

Okay, I can't wipe the smile off my face.

The Warriors, without Captin Jack, whip the Celtics.

Man, it's fun watching these guys play basketball.

bmwracer wrote:
He was only dominant after he got fat, er, big, so he could back people in at the post.

Feared defensively?

Nah... He wasn't that prolific a shot blocker nor a rebounder. He was just a big redwood that no one wanted to run into. Mourning and other centers of that time were better defensively, IMO.

And he was a free throw liability... His "I make 'em when I have to" comment is so typical of his lack of respect for the game.

I agree on most of your points...and I admit Shaq sometimes went into seasons with a few too many 'lbs'. However, you make it sound like getting big (a lot of which is muscle on Shaq) was the reason he was a great player. Anybody in the league could get big and fat... but it would kill their careers. Shaq combined his athleticism, post skills, and increased size to become the best offensively inside. Nobody else could do that.

As for "just a big redwood that no one wanted to run into" ... that intimidation and the fear of getting hammered by Shaq was all part of what made him great defensively.... if anything that's the point of D - forcing opponents to change their shots, avoid your area, and be a scary presence inside. :shocked:

Btw, I'm not a Shaq fan .... actually quite the opposite, despite the fact I'm defending him. Rooting against the Lakers, I despised him ... but I realized that part of why I disliked him so much .... was because he was so dominant. :sweat:

Sometimes, I think Laker fans (like Yankees fans) got spoiled, chose not to appreciate those 3 championships that Shaq brought ... when most teams and their fans haven't sniffed even 1 over the past 20+ years. :shakehead:

Geezer wrote:Okay, I can't wipe the smile off my face.

The Warriors, without Captin Jack, whip the Celtics.

Man, it's fun watching these guys play basketball.

The Celtics, who looked unbeatable early on, have sorta come back down to Earth... I think most teams have made whatever adjustments and are givijng the Celtics all they can handle now...

Geezer wrote:Okay, I can't wipe the smile off my face.

The Warriors, without Captin Jack, whip the Celtics.

Man, it's fun watching these guys play basketball.

Heck yeah... :thumbsup:

The Warriors are both exciting to watch as a fan... they actually have a shot to win every game, unlike years past.

The Western Conference is so freaking stacked this year, it's going to take everything the Warriors can muster to make the final slot on the playoff charts.

It's amazing... the Eastern Conference except for 3 teams is pathetic.



Cheers, :drink:
PCM

pcmodem wrote:It's amazing... the Eastern Conference except for 3 teams is pathetic.

Interestingly, in the NFL, the opposite is true. :victory:

pcmodem wrote:
The Western Conference is so freaking stacked this year, it's going to take everything the Warriors can muster to make the final slot on the playoff charts.

It's amazing... the Eastern Conference except for 3 teams is pathetic.

They can blame that 0-6 start if they don't make it. I hadn't really been paying attention, but I checked the standings today, and the Warriors are out of the playoffs in the West, but if they were in the East, they'd have the 3rd best record!!! :shocked: [/list:u]

adub2adub wrote:I agree on most of your points...and I admit Shaq sometimes went into seasons with a few too many 'lbs'. However, you make it sound like getting big (a lot of which is muscle on Shaq) was the reason he was a great player. Anybody in the league could get big and fat... but it would kill their careers. Shaq combined his athleticism, post skills, and increased size to become the best offensively inside. Nobody else could do that.

You just said the same thing in the next to last sentence: "his increased size"

The guy was a bull by the time he joined the Lakers... And no one to match up with that bulk.

And I never said he was a great player. ;)

Sometimes, I think Laker fans (like Yankees fans) got spoiled, chose not to appreciate those 3 championships that Shaq brought ... when most teams and their fans haven't sniffed even 1 over the past 20+ years. :shakehead:

We are spoiled down here... I admit it.

My analogy to Shaq was Mickey Mantle: a very very good player, but never completely asserted himself or dedicated himself to baseball and although he won many a championship with the Yankees, many people thought he could've/should've done more... Too many outside "interests" took their toll on him physically.

Just like Shaq.

bmwracer wrote:
You just said the same thing in the next to last sentence: "his increased size"

The guy was a bull by the time he joined the Lakers... And no one to match up with that bulk.

Just like Shaq.

Well, I didn't argue that "his increased size" never happened, but my point was: give Shaq some credit for making the most with it. Other NBA players naturally got bigger, but it became a hindrance ... if Shaq didn't have the super athleticism, post skills, and touch.... he would've just been the next Oliver Miller.

Btw, Shaq was already a top center even when he was skinny ... considering he took a young Magic team to the Finals.

And I never said he was a great player.

Um, I know we're dealing in semantics here but.... if Shaq wasn't a "great" player, then that's like claiming there were only 2 other "great" big men (assuming Duncan, Hakeem) in the past 20 years.

adub2adub wrote:Oliver Miller.

Oh wow, that's a name from the past... :beaten:

Somehow, I'm not surprised that he was a Clipper: talk about a perpetual rest stop for mediocre players... Michael Olowakandi comes to mind... :sweat:

if Shaq wasn't a "great" player, then that's like claiming there were only 2 other "great" big men (assuming Duncan, Hakeem) in the past 20 years.

There were. :beaten:

I have absolutely no love for Shaq-Fool... I don't think he treats the game with any amount of respect and he's an attention whore... He's the stereotypical athlete who, because he earns so much money, thinks he's above it all and can do everything and anything on his own terms.

bmwracer wrote:
talk about a perpetual rest stop for mediocre players... Michael Olowakandi comes to mind...

Forget Olowokandi, ... if you thought Shaq was fat, Oliver was paid millions to eat doughnuts and warm the bench. :grumble:

I have absolutely no love for Shaq-Fool... I don't think he treats the game with any amount of respect and he's an attention whore... He's the stereotypical athlete who, because he earns so much money, thinks he's above it all and can do everything and anything on his own terms.

I agree, but he isn't the only superstar athlete like that. :shakehead:

BMW

My analogy to Shaq was Mickey Mantle: a very very good player, but never completely asserted himself or dedicated himself to baseball and although he won many a championship with the Yankees, many people thought he could've/should've done more... Too many outside "interests" took their toll on him physically.

Bad analogy when there's an old Yankee fan lurking.

The people who wonder why Mickey didn't do more to assert himself forget, or never bothered to find out that Mickey developed osteomyelitis in High School. He was spiked on the bases, developed an infection, and went in to have his leg amputated when a doctor came in with a new miracle drug called penacillian.

It saved the leg, but he had osteomyelitis for the rest of his life. It opens you up to all sorts of injuries and infections.

In the series in 1951 he was called off a fly ball by Joe D., made a sharp cut and caught his other leg on a wooden drain cover, and tore out the tendons in his knee.

In those days they couldn't fix the knee with surgery. Then the osteomyelitis went to work and repeatedly damaged his legs and created infections. (It's what put him out of the 1961 HR race with Roger.)

Throughout his career he had to wrap both legs from the ankles to above the knees just to walk.

Did he drink? You bet.

These days, a player in that much pain would be doing a Rush Limbaugh immitation, popping oxycontin like they were M&Ms.

He could have or should have done more? Tell me another one.

Ah yes, Mantle's osteomyelitis.... And the Joey Di story... Very well documented...

As was his boozing and carousing with Whitey Ford and Billy Martin.

Celtics lose their third straight, 85-77, to the Suns.