ESPN Got Shaq In His Feelings...Throws Shots at DunGawd After Being Ranked Below Him

[murksiderock]

In real time it was easier to say Shaq because he was more physically imposing, more popular and marketable, had the 3peat as the best player in The League...

When you start looking at their careers next to each other in retrospect, doesn't hold up for Shaq unless you place a heavy significance on the 3peat. Which apparently, alot if you do. The 3peat run is really the only strong argument he has on Tim...

More skilled? No. Better defender? No. Better offensive creator? No. More successful? No. Better leader? No...

 

[Miggs]

No I pit him in the proper perspective. I got Shaq top 10 but nikkas say he better than Kobe or TD when there’s no argument for it. Less titles than both, had better running mates than TD and 24 era Kobe.

Shaq has a 3 peat for a unique reason and I already stated why. TD wins 6+ titles if he plays with Kobe and dominates the same way Shaq did. Y’all still don’t wanna address why Shaq winning 60 games in his mid 20s with all star teammates and getting swept multiple times? Timmay never repeated which hurts him but he won a title at 22 years old and at 26 (same age Shaq was choking in the 2nd/3rd round) TD won a title with a weak cast. TD made due with what he had. Shaq ain’t break through until Kobe came of age, TD just broke through on his own from the jump

What ifs dont matter in these arguments only what actually happened.What player X would have won with player Y doesnt count breh.

Ur right Shaq didnt win til Kobe became a full fledged superstar but we cant simply deny Shaq won all 3 finals MVPs on those teams and for that reason him winning it all 3 times on a 3 peat is why id prolly put him over Duncan who didnt have a single b2b at the height of his dominance.

 

[Miggs]

In real time it was easier to say Shaq because he was more physically imposing, more popular and marketable, had the 3peat as the best player in The League...

When you start looking at their careers next to each other in retrospect, doesn't hold up for Shaq unless you place a heavy significance on the 3peat. Which apparently, alot if you do. The 3peat run is really the only strong argument he has on Tim...

More skilled? No. Better defender? No. Better offensive creator? No. More successful? No. Better leader? No...

The main reason i do place a signifigance on the 3 peat is because he was MVP for all 3....If he only did it in 1 of the 3 championships i would view it different in an argument for him over TD.

 

[10bandz]

Lakers didnt lose that series because of Shaq tho...

yeah Shaq had nothing to do with it


This is what I’m talking about. Let’s hold 2004 against Kobe. Let’s hold never repeating against TD. But 97,98,99, 2004, nope no one has EVER considerably held those years against Shaq. Ever.

 

[Marc Spector]

No I pit him in the proper perspective. I got Shaq top 10 but nikkas say he better than Kobe or TD when there’s no argument for it. Less titles than both, had better running mates than TD and 24 era Kobe.

Shaq has a 3 peat for a unique reason and I already stated why. TD wins 6+ titles if he plays with Kobe and dominates the same way Shaq did. Y’all still don’t wanna address why Shaq winning 60 games in his mid 20s with all star teammates and getting swept multiple times? Why even during the 3 peat he wasnt the one coming up big when the team was at its most vulnerable? Timmay never repeated which hurts him but he won a title at 22 years old and at 26 (same age Shaq was choking in the 2nd/3rd round) TD won a title with a weak cast. TD made due with what he had. Shaq ain’t break through until Kobe came of age, TD just broke through on his own from the jump

its almost like teams spent all of their energy and game planning to neutralize Shaq/ stop the Lakers from shooting 3's, which gave an extremely gifted scorer like Kobe opportunities to work...

 

[murksiderock]

No I pit him in the proper perspective. I got Shaq top 10 but nikkas say he better than Kobe or TD when there’s no argument for it. Less titles than both, had better running mates than TD and 24 era Kobe.

Shaq has a 3 peat for a unique reason and I already stated why. TD wins 6+ titles if he plays with Kobe and dominates the same way Shaq did. Y’all still don’t wanna address why Shaq winning 60 games in his mid 20s with all star teammates and getting swept multiple times? Why even during the 3 peat he wasnt the one coming up big when the team was at its most vulnerable? Timmay never repeated which hurts him but he won a title at 22 years old and at 26 (same age Shaq was choking in the 2nd/3rd round) TD won a title with a weak cast. TD made due with what he had. Shaq ain’t break through until Kobe came of age, TD just broke through on his own from the jump

To be fair, while I have Tim over him, Tim also won all his chips with who is widely considered a Top 20 GOAT (Admiral), and a guy who really should be considered a GOAT-level point guard. He wasn't exactly winning without strong support either and his last ring came with that underrated point being the best player on the team...

 

[Miggs]

yeah Shaq had nothing to do with it


This is what I’m talking about. Let’s hold 2004 against Kobe. Let’s hold never repeating against TD. But 97,98,99, 2004, nope no one has EVER considerably held those years against Shaq. Ever.

Actually i dont hold it against Kobe over the fact the team was just overrated and not good outside of there 2 best players when you go back and look at the roster.

But that being said Kobe didnt have a great series.This isnt a Shaq v Kobe debate and i do hold TD no b2b against him in this debate,its the first point i made in this argument....

 

[Miggs]

To be fair, while I have Tim over him, Tim also won all his chips with who is widely considered a Top 20 GOAT (Admiral), and a guy who really should be considered a GOAT-level point guard. He wasn't exactly winning without strong support either and his last ring came with that underrated point being the best player on the team...

TD also won against a ring against a really weak East in 2007...

 

[10bandz]

What ifs dont matter in these arguments only what actually happened.What player X would have won with player Y doesnt count breh.

Ur right Shaq didnt win til Kobe became a full fledged superstar but we cant simply deny Shaq won all 3 finals MVPs on those teams and for that reason him winning it all 3 times on a 3 peat is why id prolly put him over Duncan who didnt have a single b2b at the height of his dominance.

Exactly you simplifying it to finals MVPs instead of what actually happened on the court during those titles runs. That’s why it’s pointless arguing with some y’all just pure on the surface generic talking point. Omg Finals MVP! Cool and where was that finals MVP during the Lakers most vulnerable moment of the 2000 finals....nowhere to be found...but he still got the W that game....TD never had that luxury. 2001 west run kobe was the better player....TD never had the luxury to get out the West with someone else carrying heavy weight while he waits for the Finals to flex

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Only knock on Duncan i have is he doesnt have a b2b title run...most of the all time greats have at least 1...i think that establishes true dominance.

That's one of the lamest attacks I've seen. NO ONE was attacked for "not having a back-to-back title run" until Duncan.

* After he won in 1999, he got hurt in 2000.

* After he won in 2003, the Lakers created a super-team in 2004 and still needed a lucky shot from Fish to turn the tide in the series. Duncan went 21-21-2 with 4 blocks and the game-winner in the game that would have put the Spurs up 3-2 only to have the refs let Fish do a full turnaround with just 0.4 seconds on the clock.

* After he won in 2005, he had a crazy 41-15-6 with 3 blocks in Game 7 in 2006 only to lose because the Dallas bench outscored the Spurs 29 to 2. (And still probably wins if Manu doesn't foul Dirk on the and-1 that put it in overtime)

* After he won in 2007, Ginobli got hurt in 2008. Duncan went for 29-17-3 with 3 steals and 3 blocks in the game that would have tied it up 2-2, but a useless Manu with an ankle the size of a grapefruit was 2-8 and couldn't check anyone....and the Spurs still would have won if Bowen hit that three.

* If Ray doesn't make that shot (after those two rebounds with Duncan not in there) or Manu/Kawhi could hit their free throws then he wins back-to-back in 13-14. Duncan of course went for 30 and 17 in that game and could have had his 4th Finals MVP.


Saying that he "didn't establish dominance" is a terrible narrative. He was DOMINANT in every critical game each of those years. If it weren't for injuries and mistakes by his teammates in critical moments, Duncan would have multiple back-to-back championships. Instead, they lost each year by the slimmest of margins - 2 lucky shots, 1 bad foul, and a 2-point loss. But you can't control that shyt. Every time bad luck kept him from repeating, he came back and won again.

 

[Stick Up Kid]

Let's be real Shaq was better than Duncan.

Duncan is not in my Top 10.. although he was a great, his peak wasnt up there with Shaq.

 

[Miggs]

Exactly you simplifying it to finals MVPs instead of what actually happened on the court during those titles runs. That’s why it’s pointless arguing with some y’all just pure on the surface generic talking point. Omg Finals MVP! Cool and where was that finals MVP during the Lakers most vulnerable moment of the 2000 finals....nowhere to be found...but he still got the W that game....TD never had that luxury. 2001 west run kobe was the better player....TD never had the luxury to get out the West with someone else carrying heavy weight while he waits for the Finals to flex

Why you keep bringing Kobe into this,picking Shaq over Duncan isnt a knock on Kobe lol.....But you keep making pro Duncan arguments to throw shots at Shaq.

 

[murksiderock]

The main reason i do place a signifigance on the 3 peat is because he was MVP for all 3....If he only did it in 1 of the 3 championships i would view it different in an argument for him over TD.

Nah I get it, bruh...

It means alot to me too, he was in a rare form those years that few have ever been. My thing is outside of that, what did he do? Obviously still had some great years, but the comprehensive body of work outside the 3peat just isn't strong enough to allow the 3peat to carry him over Duncan. Over most players, for sure. Not over Duncan, though ...

yeah Shaq had nothing to do with it


This is what I’m talking about. Let’s hold 2004 against Kobe. Let’s hold never repeating against TD. But 97,98,99, 2004, nope no one has EVER considerably held those years against Shaq. Ever.

Same energy, never hear Dwyane "Mr. Clutch" Wade getting an ounce if accountability for the '11 and '14 Finals. Sometimes, heavy is the head that wears it, gotta know that guy is taking most of the criticism...

 

[Swagnificent]

Wide Margin

Btw Shaq was more dominate than Duncan but Duncan was more skilled. If dominance makes you the better player then Wilt would be considered better than your favorite player

Duncan wasn't really that skilled. KG was significantly more skilled. Duncan is very much the Tom Brady of basketball. He's the beneficiary of a great coach and supporting cast his entire career which has allowed him to coast to lots of rings and accolades. Now that's not to say Duncan and Brady aren't great players. Its just that you could put a lot of other players in their place who people don't think are as good and they would have just as much success if not more. For example, put KG in Duncan's spot on the Spurs and he's sitting at 5 rings while Duncan at Minnesota/Boston maybe gets the 1 ring KG got.

I watched Duncan's entire career and there was never a moment I thought he was the best player in the game. There was never a moment I thought he was as good as Shaq. There were many moments I thought KG was better. Duncan is a great player but he's not as great as his accolades.

 

[Miggs]

That's one of the lamest attacks I've seen. NO ONE was attacked for "not having a back-to-back title run" until Duncan.

* After he won in 1999, he got hurt in 2000.

* After he won in 2003, the Lakers created a super-team in 2004 and still needed a lucky shot from Fish to turn the tide in the series. Duncan went 21-21-2 with 4 blocks and the game-winner only to have

* After he won in 2005, he had a crazy 41-15-6 with 3 blocks in Game 7 only to lose because the Dallas bench outscored the Spurs 29 to 2. (And still probably wins if Manu doesn't foul Dirk on the and-1)

* After he won in 2007, Ginobli got hurt in 2008

* If Ray doesn't make that shot (after those two rebounds with Duncan not in there) or Manu/Kawhi could hit their free throws then he wins back-to-back in 13-14


Saying that he "didn't establish dominance" while going 41-15-6 in a Game 7 is a terrible narrative. If it weren't for injuries and mistakes by his teammates in critical moments, Duncan would have multiple back-to-back championships. But you can't control that shyt. Every time bad luck kept him from repeating, he came back and won again.

Lakers were not a super team in 2004...super teams dont score 65 points in a finals game...We can play the what if game for every guy in the top 10 list who had a stupid teammate...He didnt win a b2b and it factors into his ranking...bad luck and injuries are apart of the game but dont change whats in the record books.