Red Ant
Hunter-Gatherer
More is needed in this thread.
Like I've always said, it just wouldn't FEEL right calling a player who didn't shoot 3's or FT's well, the greatest player of all time. It's really all about feelings....
In the same token, almost nobody finds it hard to sympathize with a defender trying to guard Shaq. Hence - MDE
I think "dominate" means two different things in sports. In SHAQs case I always believed it referred to his physical domination of whoever was guarding him
Like they would say,"Oneal is just dominating Dudley down low"
Meanwhile MJ being a dominant player referred to him winning all the time
Agreed. Jordan dominated the game in general. Shaq dominated the players.
I think "dominate" means two different things in sports. In SHAQs case I always believed it referred to his physical domination of whoever was guarding him
Like they would say,"Oneal is just dominating Dudley down low"
Meanwhile MJ being a dominant player referred to him winning all the time
But Shaq won all the time too.
Shaq and Kobe should have won at least 5 rings together. But Kobe was on some hoe shyt.
When should they have won but didnt?
2004, and yes I was born and raised in the D. I'm not saying they didn't get their asses kicked, but they "should" have won that series. I think if they won that series the team would've stayed intact and shifting to more of kobe with shaq in the role he played in miami and they could've won probably in 05 too.
that was like the shytstorm in LA and just everything started falling apart for them in the finals (injuries didn't help either)
I think "dominate" means two different things in sports. In SHAQs case I always believed it referred to his physical domination of whoever was guarding him
Like they would say,"Oneal is just dominating Dudley down low"
Meanwhile MJ being a dominant player referred to him winning all the time
Chris Dudley? Come on now.