Beat this starting five.

[FfldCntyFan]

I don’t think you have the foggiest idea of what Shaq was physically under say the age of 32-33.

I seem to remember him not being able to do enough against Luc Longley to help the Magic win one game against the Bull in the 96 eastern finals.

I know that you don't have a clue about anyone who played in the NBA before 1980.

 

[superjohn]

Rodman not being a center is even more reason to question why he, not Shaq was leading the league in rebounds nearly every year.

Shaq in a lot of ways was basically an out of shape Bob Lanier, playing in a league with a few players with (near) center's bodies who wanted to face the basket all the time. Ben Wallace, at 6'9" 245 pushed Shaq around almost at will in the 2004 finals.

I would love to see Shaq at (pick an age: 22, 25, 28) play a few games against the likes of Thurmond, Lanier or Gilmore (great players who few of today's fan have a clue about) at a similar age. Things would turn out a bit differently than what many younger fans would have expected.

This is a brutally bad take.

It's so awful it must be trolling.

 

[superjohn]

I seem to remember him not being able to do enough against Luc Longley to help the Magic win one game against the Bull in the 96 eastern finals.

I know that you don't have a clue about anyone who played in the NBA before 1980.

Shaq averaged 27, 11, and 4 on 64% shooting that series. Longley averaged 7.5, 5.3, and 1 on 42% shooting that series. The Bulls had the much better team, the best record ever at the time and the best player ever.

 

[controlfade]

Bill Russell is listed as 6'10. 215.
Wilt is listed as 7'1", 275.
Shaq is listed as 7'1", 325.

Oh, and by the way, in their head to head matchups Wilt averaged 30.1 pts and 22.9 rebounds a game. Russell averaged 14.9 pts and 24.7 rebounds. In 1960, Chamberlain dropped 50 pts and 35 rebounds against him.

I'll take Shaq and his 110 pt weight advantage.

In this NBA all 3 would get hacked everytime they got the ball. They were all awful at the line.
It would be very interesting to see them now. I would prolly take Jokic or Hakeem. If Embid could ever be healthy he might be the best of all of them.

Shaq 52.7% career ft
Wilt 51.1 %
Russel 56.1%

 

[FfldCntyFan]

This is a brutally bad take.

It's so awful it must be trolling.

Shaq averaged 27, 11, and 4 on 64% shooting that series. Longley averaged 7.5, 5.3, and 1 on 42% shooting that series. The Bulls had the much better team, the best record ever at the time and the best player ever.

Another board member who believes nothing that happened before 1980 in the NBA was of any value.

Shaq was a Hall of fame player, no question there. The thing is there were a few players a quarter century earlier (who weren't even the best in the game at that position) who would have matched up with Shaq far more favorably than most realize.

 

[Deepster]

Another board member who believes nothing that happened before 1980 in the NBA was of any value.

Shaq was a Hall of fame player, no question there. The thing is there were a few players a quarter century earlier (who weren't even the best in the game at that position) who would have matched up with Shaq far more favorably than most realize.

Right. Because we don’t agree with you that Shaq would be huffing and puffing trying to chase Artis Gilmore.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Right. Because we don’t agree with you that Shaq would be huffing and puffing trying to chase Artis Gilmore.

The A Train, Thurmond and Tree Rollins are three guys I'd like to see what they could defensively against Shaq.

I think Shaq treats Russell like Wilt did.

As a kid growing up in the 80's Russell was universally considered a top 3 player all-time. He's now hanging on to top 10 status.

 

[superjohn]

The A Train, Thurmond and Tree Rollins are three guys I'd like to see what they could defensively against Shaq.

I think Shaq treats Russell like Wilt did.

As a kid growing up in the 80's Russell was universally considered a top 3 player all-time. He's now hanging on to top 10 status.

Tree Rollins couldn't even handle Danny Ainge.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Duncan
Kemp
Malone
Barkley
Oakley
Rodman
Nowitzki
KG
Rasheed Wallace
Webber
Moses Mallone
Otis Thorpe

Just take name a few that I would rather play before McHale.

McHale was a good power forward, definitely top 20, but if you're building the best line up, IMO, not many people would have him on the list

Agree most wouldn't have McHale as their starter.

Out of all the players you listed, the KG is the only other player I'd take over McHale for the specific task of guarding Duncan and being able to make Duncan work on defense.

 

[Lafayette]

If we keep to team-based, yes McHale would be PF on an all-Celtics squad, but not by everyone.

If it were all-time, any NBA but kept to position:

1. PG - Magic Johnson - pretty easily consensus best PG ever
2. SG - Michael Jordan - pretty easily consensus best SG ever
3. C - Wilt Chaimberlain - if this is for a one game matchup, then definitely - for a season: Kareem
4. PF - Tim Duncan - yes, he is nominally the best PF of all time
5. SF - Lebron James - c'mon

Bench would be Bird, Shaq, Karl Malone, Kobe, and AI.

 

[B1GEast]

Agree most wouldn't have McHale as their starter.

Out of all the players you listed, the KG is the only other player I'd take over McHale for the specific task of guarding Duncan and being able to make Duncan work on defense.

Absurd

 

[Huskyforlife]

Can we also appreciate he said he would put Russell at the 4? Brother thinks it’s still 1947.

 

[cwh20]

Can I have my starting 5 wearing flubber sneakers or were those kicks outlawed?

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Right. Because we don’t agree with you that Shaq would be huffing and puffing trying to chase Artis Gilmore.

The huffing and puffing would have been against Wilt, but Gilmore would have been able to run up and down the court a whole lot longer than Shaq.

Gilmore also would have had Shaq in foul trouble quite often. It would have been a nice matchup to watch. Different strengths but equally goid players.

Nice try however.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Can we also appreciate he said he would put Russell at the 4? Brother thinks it’s still 1947.

As opposed to the modern methodology that placed Duncan at the four in the post that we were challenged to beat.

Wow, just wow.

 

[superjohn]

The huffing and puffing would have been against Wilt, but Gilmore would have been able to run up and down the court a whole lot longer than Shaq.

Gilmore also would have had Shaq in foul trouble quite often. It would have been a nice matchup to watch. Different strengths but equally goid players.

Nice try however.

Shaq and Artis Gilmore are equally good players. Lolz

 

[Chin Diesel]

Shaq and Artis Gilmore are equally good players. Lolz

Nah, but 1970's Artis Gilmore would be fun to match up against Shaq. Them quadriceps indicate he wouldn't get backed down easily.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Shaq and Artis Gilmore are equally good players. Lolz

Artis was quite a bit better than you realize.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Artis was quite a bit better than you realize.

Artis was an easy choice to he an HoF. A notch below Shaq, but somewhere towards the back end of Top 10 centers and definitely a top-15.

Shaq is in the group after Wilt, Jabbar, Russell and Olajuwon. He's closer to top-5 all-time centers than #10.

 

[Huskyforlife]

As opposed to the modern methodology that placed Duncan at the four in the post that we were challenged to beat.

Wow, just wow.

Duncan is 50x the offensive player that Russell was.

 

[Lafayette]

Duncan is 50x the offensive player that Russell was.

Duncan was...

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Duncan is 50x the offensive player that Russell was.

I don't believe that is true. Putting aside that Russell was an immensely superior defensive player than Duncan, if the need was for Russell to score (that did happen on rare occasions), he could score (scored 25 points in game seven against the Lakers in 1966; averaged~23pts per game for the entire playoffs in either 62 or 63).

Can I take it that you're withdrawing your insult on my placing Russell to face off with Duncan on my hypothetical team?

 

[superjohn]

I don't believe that is true. Putting aside that Russell was an immensely superior defensive player than Duncan, if the need was for Russell to score (that did happen on rare occasions), he could score (scored 25 points in game seven against the Lakers in 1966; averaged~23pts per game for the entire playoffs in either 62 or 63).

Can I take it that you're withdrawing your insult on my placing Russell to face off with Duncan on my hypothetical team?

Russell could score, every player in the NBA can score he just wasn't very good at it and was way worse than Duncan at it. He didn't just choose to average 12.8 ppg per 36 minutes on 44% fg and 56% ft's for the hell of it.

 

[borninansonia]

Russell could score, every player in the NBA can score he just wasn't very good at it and was way worse than Duncan at it. He didn't just choose to average 12.8 ppg per 36 minutes on 44% fg and 56% ft's for the hell of it.

Russell chose to win, not score. He won 11 championships! He is the greatest winner in NBA history

 

[Deepster]

Russell chose to win, not score. He won 11 championships! He is the greatest winner in NBA history

Ehhhhh, he also had no range and limited post moves on offense. More than made up for it with defense and rebounding but it’s not like he chose to not score.