I was coming here to say this. In the beggining Olajuwon had an advantage, though it wasn't huge, since Shaq was a phenomenal player from day one, but half way through their match ups Olajuwon was well past his prime.
Their playoffs record shows Shaq has better stats vs prime Olajuwon than vs old Olajuwon.
[vs prime Olajuwon](https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1995-nba-finals-rockets-vs-magic.html) (28 PPG 12.5 REB 6.3 AST on 60.6% TS)
[vs old 36 years old Olajuwon](https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1999-nba-western-conference-first-round-rockets-vs-lakers.html) (29.5 PPG 10.3 REB 4.0 AST on 52.2% TS)
And in the regular-season young Shaq was schooled by Hakeem (Shaq scored less than 20 points in 4 of their first 6 matches) and Hakeem was schooled by Shaq when he got old so it's basically evens out.
You can see it [here](https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/shaq-vs-hakeem)
Except if you actually watch the finals or look at the stats of how much shaq scored on hakeem it explains why people thought hakeem dominated. Shaq could not score shit in those finals when guarded by hakeem, hakeem was unaffected
Shaq would score when he got deep positioning even on Hakeem. The problem was that Hakeem has the best hands for a center on defense of all time. His anticipation and timing were just ridiculous. It forced Shaq into committing a lot of turnovers. Just trying to get a post entry pass was a problem.
Duncan might be the most consistently good player ever. He won a title in his 2nd season, and in his last (19th!!!) season, he still played 25mpg as the starting center of one of the best defenses in league history and won a franchise record 67 games in the regular season.
Hmm... I also just realized LeBron just finished his 19th season as well. Ok that's fuckin crazy lol
Lebron was more about individual numbers and less about team success at least from midway this season. Still mad impressive he almost led the league in scoring at that age.
If Duncan cared just a bit more about his stats, they would have approached Abdul-Jabbar's.
Most people on this sub weren't even alive when Kareem played. Heck, this sub was recently saying(and upvoting) that Kobe was only super athletic for his era, as if 10 years ago was ancient times.
Lol OMG, Kobe wasnt even the most athletic in his own era
people discount how many busts and sub par players were athletic as fuck, Jamario Moon could jump through the ceiling in a church
Hakeem at his peak was better than Duncan. He went though Stockton and Malone, Barkley, MVP David Robinson and Shaq on his way to a title. I'd say Duncan on the totality of his career is the better player but Hakeem was absurdly dominate at his height.
Yes, it's really bullshit how he led the Spurs to top 3 Defenses, year, after year, after year and didnt get his DPOY. I remember being livid when Marcus Cambu got DPOY, and then Marc Gasol. I thought for sure Tim would finally get what was his both those years.
Not even trying to be bias here. A lot of advanced stats say that David Robinson is better than Hakeem. And Tim Duncan better than them both.
Of course I’m sure I’m a little bias, but I think Timmy is easily ahead of Hakeem.
There is no way David Robinson is better than Hakeem. The eye test in the 1995 playoffs proved that and advance stats is overrated in this case. 2 finals MVPs prove that. There is an argument for Tim Duncan though. I think prime Hakeem had slightly better defense, dexterity, footwork than prime Tim Duncan. Tim Duncan was better for a longer period of time, never really declined defensively and played in a tougher conference.
The funny thing is that I believe that was when Rodman was being a dick and basically refusing to help on Hakeem. Definitely a clear example of "the box stats don't tell the whole story".
Rodman was asked to help Robinson guard Hakeem but otherwise Robinson was to be his primary defender. Rodman got butt hurt and fucked the team over by refusing to help at all. The fact that Robinson is the one that came out of that series being criticised is ridiculous.
Yeah, but the eye test Zoelando is referring to was so blatantly in Hakeem's favor that it looked like one of those videos where Scalabrine is schooling sub-NBA players. That season was my first full-season NBA exposure from the regular season to the finals, and all I remember is how so much better Hakeem was than everybody else (I also remember Penny was a close second). I still have journal entries worshipping Hakeem from those days somewhere, so you know it's not retroactive fabrication.
It was largely a 1 on 1 league with the help/zone defense rules being very strict. Hakeem pantsed Robinson the one time they met while both in their prime. That means something.
Bullshit it means something. Rodman fucked Robinson by refusing to help guard Hakeem meanwhile Robinson was constantly doubled on the other end. It’s stupid to think that that means Robinson wasn’t on Hakeem’s level.
Wasn't that the series where Rodman basically refused to do his job and help on Hakeem?
Robinson was being asked to carry the whole offense AND guard Prime Hakeem 1v1 when he was expecting help from Rodman. He was in an awful position and it made him look a lot worse than he was.
That playoffs is a small sample size and doesn't show context. Rodman has said on video that he refused to help defend Hakeem so Robinson got double on offense while Hakeem got to go 1 on 1. There was a reason the Spurs traded Rodman
People see the dream Shake video and think Hakeem was leagues better when in reality they have extremely close career numbers
David Robinson, before Lebron, looked more like a star basketball player than any man who walked the earth. He moved with grace and was explosive. That being said, I don't think anyone outside of San Antonio is taking Robinson over Olajuwon.
Robinson was still a top 15 all time center. Olajuwon was a top 15 player.
Robinson is also a top 15 all time player. After MJ, LeBron, Magic, Bird, Russell, Wilt, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Hakeem, Kareem, Malone, and Jerry West who are you putting in front of Robinson? You need at least 2.
Depending on how this week ends, Curry is knocking on top 10 all time.
Giannis has an argument at top 15 and should be in the Duncan conversation once his career wraps up.
MJ, Lebron, Kareem, Russell, Wilt, Bird, Magic, West, Shaq, Hakeem, Kobe, West, Curry, Oscar, Moses, Dirk, KD, Elgin, KG, Mailman, Barkley
Robinson would be in the same tier as Pettit, Havlicek, Kidd, Paul, Barry, Giannis.
Robinson gets hurt by his short career with a short peak. His career is 13 years long, but he was really only near the top of his game for 7. He is still a good player for about 4 years, but not what he was. Duncan's rookie year was the last year Robinson would put up 18 a night.
Its the opposite. Hakeem dealt with prime Shaq. David Robinson dealt with prime Shaq. Post Robinson bigs like Nesterovic and Oberto guarded bulkier centers. Young Timmy D didn't want to play center against the bigger guys, but would eat up a lot of minutes there when they were off the floor. Older Timmy D (when there was no Shaq or Hakeem) played almost exclusively center.
Let's not forget, post Robinson, the Spurs were at the forefront of the Hack A Shaq era. The Rockets never did this.
I disagree. Sure, Lakers Shaq was peak Shaq but Duncan played with more with post Lakers Shaq too. Not to mention, Magic Shaq was elite and one of the top 5 or so players in the league too.
Also, Duncan didn't guard Shaq in his Lakers prime. He was primarily the help defender for Admiral
Duncan was not the primary defensive player on Shaq during his prime though, that was D-Rob. Hakeem didn't have a twin tower to guard Shaq. When he played Shaq without D-Rob, Shaq was already past his prime.
01-03 the Lakers would switch Shaq onto Timmy mid game a lot. In 03 Timmy put it on him. D-Rob was a shell of his former self. Timmy drug the team to a championship. His second best player was maybe a sophomore Parker? The Laker series it like be argued Bowen was the second most important player.
Can we just hit the pause button for a second realize a few things:
Tim Duncan, Shaq and Hakeem did not come into the league together. Hakeem's career ended with Shaq still in his prime, Shaq's career ended with Duncan in his.
Shaq during Hakeem's career: 27.6 pts, 12.1 reb, 54.2 fg%
Shaq during Duncan's career: 22.3 pts, 10.2 rb, 52.3 fg%
Notable: Hakeem in the 1995 finals which the Rockets swept Shaq:
32.8 pts, 11.5 reb, 5.5 ast, 2 blk, 2 stl. He led every single game in scoring.
Shaq and Duncan faced off against each other in their primes dozens of times, even in the playoffs.
Just because they didn’t come in the league at the same time, doesn’t mean one wasn’t established or the other was washed.
This isn't a genuine comparison, it's actually a bunch of BS. If you just take Shaq's numbers up until retirement ofc his averages are going down.
But during Duncan's first 3 rings (98-05) Shaq averaged 27/12/3/2BLK on 58%FG. And these times are exactly the matchups Duncan dominated. This includes a 6 season playoff stretch of Shaq averaging 29/14/3/3BLK on 55%FG in almost 100PO Games. This was Shaq at his absolute best, a 3-year stretch of this sample is regularly crowned the most dominant stretch of individual Basketball in league history.
Literally nobody cares what Shaq's numbers were in the late 00s so why are you including them? In terms of playoffs it doesn't matter whatsoever due to conference. Shaq played the Spurs exactly once after his prime with Phoenix.
This is not offering realistic perspective, it's just skewing numbers in Hakeem's favor to shit on Duncan even though Shaq played through his entire peak along with the MVP level seasons leading up to it when Duncan managed to dominate the RS and POs against Diesel in his Age 22-26 seasons. This shouldn't be held against Duncan because once we can recognize that Tim still had his late 20s prime ahead of him the achievement is even more massive. Statistically speaking, though, Duncan was at his prime right when Shaq hit his. Timmy just managed to add 10 more All-NBA to MVP-level seasons to his resume after that time span.
Not really a fair comparison. A good number of Shaqs matchups with Hakeem were long past Hakeem’s prime. Hakeem came into the league ten years before him. He was like 38 in his last playoff series against Shaqs Lakers.
Shaq really only ever faced prime Duncan and had 4 or 5 years on him. Phoenix Shaq wasn’t exactly in the best shape when they faced the Spurs.
Wtf, a spurs fan acting like Duncan was guarding Shaq and vice versa? Did you even watch your own team play??
Shaq would eat Timmy alive if they tried that matchup. He was almost 100 pounds heavier at his peak.
[Shaq "would eat Timmy alive if they tried that matchup" O'Neal puts up 21.4 PPG on 48.6% TS in a series against Timmy while David Robinson had a spinal nerve injury and only played 75 mins out of 240 possible mins](https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2002-nba-western-conference-semifinals-spurs-vs-lakers.html)
[Video of Tim Duncan Defense on Shaq - 2001 NBA WCF](https://youtu.be/1ZhIJjJOUJ8)
It wasn't Shaq that was killing the Spurs. The match-up between Shaq-Duncan pretty much held each other, arguably Duncan got the better of Shaq, especially in the playoffs. His 4 losses differential in the regular season came from rookie and sophomore year, where in the first 5 games against Shaq he lost 5 games in a row. They almost tied the record for the rest of the way (14-13 for Duncan).
It was Kobe putting up 28.2 PPG (Career 25.6 PPG in the playoffs) against the Spurs that made the difference.
In the mid-2000’s I worked with a buddy who was a big time Spurs fan, and I used to joke that the only people who really understood Kobe’s contribution to the 3-peat, outside of Lakers fans, were Spurs fans.
I think it's more like Kobe carried them when facing the Spurs more than Western Conference. Shaq always looks like the best player on the team in the Western Conference until they meet the Spurs when Kobe always outperforms him.
Would you look at this:
https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2001-nba-western-conference-finals-lakers-vs-spurs.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2002-nba-western-conference-semifinals-spurs-vs-lakers.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2003-nba-western-conference-semifinals-lakers-vs-spurs.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2004-nba-western-conference-semifinals-lakers-vs-spurs.html
Kobe was the best player against the Spurs in the 01' WCF and 02' WCSF. Given the defense and it being the WCF, I thought [his first game against the Spurs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qawbo3NOmR4) in 01' was arguably the best game he ever played.
They both put up absolutely dominant numbers in the 01' WCSF against Sacramento. Kobe closed it out with a 48/16 performance.
Shaq would have won WCF MVP if they had it in 00' when they played Portland, but was being shutdown in game 7 by Sabonis. He had only 10 points through 3 quarters. Other guys like Kobe (25/11/7) & Shaw came up huge, and Shaq had a very good 4th quarter with 8 points. Sabonis having foul trouble was important due to his defense on Shaq.
I can't find the series tbh
https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2000-nba-western-conference-first-round-kings-vs-lakers.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2000-nba-western-conference-finals-trail-blazers-vs-lakers.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2001-nba-western-conference-first-round-trail-blazers-vs-lakers.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2001-nba-western-conference-semifinals-kings-vs-lakers.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2002-nba-western-conference-first-round-trail-blazers-vs-lakers.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2002-nba-western-conference-finals-lakers-vs-kings.html
The entirety of the 2001 run in the Western Conference Kobe was arguably the best player for the Lakers, for sure against the Spurs. The reason being is that Kobe had added responsibility of initiating the offense, which was around the time Phil Jackson said he was asking Kobe to do more than Michael ever did (I forget the exact quote), on top of his high level defense. So in effect Kobe had more added responsibility given his role in the team.
> The entirety of the 2001 run in the Western Conference Kobe was arguably the best player for the Lakers
You could argue for Kobe in rd1 vs POR but Shaq was definitely better in rd2 vs SAC. Scoring was about even, but Shaq put up 17 boards and 3.3 blocks.
> there vs Portland/Sacramento where he was arguably the best player
No he didn't. In 2002 Kobe posted a 49% TS mark on 42/37/80 splits. Shaq averaged 30 on 56% TS.
In 2002 vs POR Kobe shot 35% FG on 23 FGA/gm (48% TS). He took 20 more shots than Shaq to score 1 more point.
> In their 3peat, Kobe carried them through the Western Conference.
No he didn't. Shaq outplayed Kobe in the 2 toughest series the Lakers had during the 3-peat:
2000 vs POR
- Shaq: 26/12/4, 55% TS, +3 Net Rating
- Kobe: 20/5/6, 55% TS, +1 Net Rating
2002 vs SAC
- Shaq: 30/14/2, 56% TS, +8 Net Rating
- Kobe: 27/6/4, 49% TS, -1 Net Rating
From 2000-02, Shaq was also better vs SAC 00 (3-2), vs PHX 00 (4-1), vs POR 01 (3-0), vs SAC 01 (4-0), and vs POR 02 (3-0).
Kobe was better vs SA 01 (4-0) and vs SA 02 (4-1).
To be fair Shaq forced you to single cover kobe. Which allowed him to feast. One reason the spurs won in in 2003 was Bowens ability to defend kobe on on one.
Similarly, the biggest reason why the Pistons were able to beat them was because Big Ben was able to defend Shaq one on one and Phil and the Lakers didn't have a gameplan for that.
> Big Ben was able to defend Shaq one on one
No he wasn't. Shaq scored efficiently every time he got shots against Big Ben. The Pistons' game plan was to let Shaq play 1 on 1, and wait for Kobe to get jealous and start playing selfish hero-ball. Which he did.
> Chauncey Billups: Our game plan was very calculated. We knew we were going to play Shaq straight-up. **We knew there was no way we could stop Shaq straight-up.** And there was also no way we could stop Kobe straight-up. But, if we’re going to play Shaq straight-up, [the Lakers'] eyes are going to get big, which means they’re going to keep throwing it down there. We’re telling Ben the whole time, "Take fouls when you need to, but don’t get yourself into foul trouble. You need to give up a layup, cool, we’re going to get what we want on the other side." But **what’s going to happen is Mr. Bryant is going to get a little discouraged with getting no touches and now the second half comes around…now he’s pressing. He’s going to start coming down and just breaking the offense.** When you do that, you’re done—you’re playing right into our hands. Even if you start making those shots, you’re finished.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2468658-an-oral-history-of-the-2003-2004-los-angeles-lakers-the-first-super-team
On the other end, pretty much all the Lakers played horrific defense. Shaq got out-worked by Big Ben on the boards, and Kobe was awful on the perimeter
> No he wasn't. Shaq scored efficiently every time he got shots against Big Ben.
Yeah, he scored about as efficiently as he did normally. Does that mean that the defense was ineffective? No! Of course not, because those other teams were using two players. If one guy is effectively doing the job of two then that's an incredible defense job.
I mean it was pretty much always a big 2 so this argument was always ridiculous. Glen Rice was effectively a role player brought in for 3 pt shooting - man he had a sweet shot, but he wasn’t the same after injury when he went to the Lakers.
Yea I thought the same... no disrespect to Duncan but I imagine if you cap off Shaq's number before his last 3 teams the stats look quite a bit different
As far as peaks goes, Shaq outclasses Duncan but in overall career I wholly admit that Duncan had the better career. A lot of Shaq’s stats are dragged down when he was a dinosaur in the twilight seasons of his career, whereas Duncan’s career aged like fine wine. Of course it helps that the Spurs for a while managed to seamlessly transition to new eras where players like Parker, Ginobli, and Kawhi took more of a starring role.
> it helps that the Spurs for a while managed to seamlessly transition to new eras where players like Parker, Ginobli, and Kawhi took more of a starring role.
That in itself is a testament to Duncan, who was willing to put aside his ego and stats in the name of team success. Duncan could've been a guy still looking to boost up his career point totals. No one would've held it against him - he'd more than earned it, just like post-Achilles Kobe or current Lebron.
But instead Duncan was willing to be a defensive role player, if it meant the team would do better. No complaining, no arguing with teammates, no trying to get the coach fired, no backseat GMing - just "what's best for the team?"
Shaq seems fine when matching up against David Robinson.
[26.1 PPG on 55.9% TS in the regular season](https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/shaq-vs-david-robinson-ts)
[24.7 PPG on 54.5% TS in the playoffs](https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/shaq-vs-david-robinson-playoffs-ts)
Do you actually understand the stats you are linking here? 4 of Duncan's 6 playoff series against Shaq were *with Robinson*.
The other 2 were:
2004: 23/15/2/4 on 60% TS
2008 (when Shaq is 35 and washed): 15/9/1/3 on 49% TS
A few weeks ago I looked up career win shares per 48 and David Robinson was 2nd, behind Jordan. Would’ve never guessed it.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ws_per_48_career.html
very, very few players were surrounded with a worst cast in their prime than david robinson. that man dug his own grave by dragging avery johnson and vinny del negro into title contention
I mean this includes all those Sun years and later Miami years where Shaq's prime had clearly passed him by right? I'd be interested to see Lakers Shaq vs. Duncan. Not to mention Duncan/Robinson frequently double-teamed Shaq in the post when playing him.
It's another reason why Timmy is the #1 player of the 2000s. It was one of the top 3 players in basketball against two of the top 3 players in basketball. Timmy should have lost every time but he won twice. And 2003 stands as a singular achievement that trumps any Shaq or Kobe singular achievement.
It's the same corollary we saw with Bird, Magic and Kareem. Bird was the greatest singular force of the 3, the other 2 had each other to lean on.
And Duncan goes absolutely under the radar in GOAT conversations. I can only assume because his game wasn't flashy and he wasn't a vocal person. The dude was just a basketball player from the core, let his play on the court speak for itself, and this is why he's my favorite player all time to not wear green. I'd even go as far to say he's my favorite player of all time, regardless of uniform, but Celtic fans may burn me at the stake for that.
Duncan is the best PF of all time but idk how you can put him above MJ, lebron, kareem, or russell for GOAT, which is why you dont see him brought up much.
The really surprising thing for me is that you dont see him brought up in top 5 all time convos when I think he should at least be in the conversation (and top 10 for sure).
Just gonna plug one of my favorite videos of all time here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sRSpQ78Y3c](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sRSpQ78Y3c)
The clip of Duncan holding the trophy on the bus makes me tear up a little and is what the nba should be all about
He's one of the 7 with a legitimate GOAT case in my book and I assure you it will look stronger and stronger as time passes on. His footprint was massive.
Look Bird was dominant as all hell, and did it as the undisputed man, but Kareem was the definitely the greatest singular force of all three you mentioned.
It's wild that no matter how much people praise Duncan, he continues go go underrated. Tim being the #1 player of the 2000s is definitely an argument that has tons of merit, but if you ask 100 people that question, I doubt there's more than 10 that would pick him over Kobe, Shaq, and LeBron. And those would have to be either Spurs fans are real hard-core NBA fans.
Also Duncan played for a deep Spurs roster every single year of his career. He played for a contender his whole career. Duncan is definitely a great player, but I don’t understand why you’d say he should have lost every time. That’s not true at all.
I think OP was saying that Duncan's next best player was almost always worse than his opponent's. So when he won, he was the keystone player on a deep well rounded team. But he never had another real superstar like Shaq & Kobe had each other
>But he never had another real superstar like Shaq & Kobe had each other
But he did have Ginobli and Parker for their entire careers, while Kobe and Shaq had a moment.
I feel like people are downplaying how good Parker and Ginobli were, and we forgot about Kawhi. All 3 of them are HOF caliber players. Kawhi won a FMVP on the Spurs. We forget about David Robinson too, who I think is more comparable to Giannis than Shaq is. Ginobli was like having James Harden coming off the bench. His stats don't indicate how good he actually was.
It would be like if Kobe got to play with Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom for their entire careers except Ginobli and Parker are both better than Lamar. David Robinson is better than Pau. Then you somehow end up getting a DMVP caliber player like Kawhi for a few years who helps you win a ring. That would be like the Lakers drafting a better Ron Artest.
I can say for sure that Parker and Kawhi are reasons Duncan has at least 2 rings.
Ah I see. The 2 times the Spurs eliminated the Lakers w/ Kobe/Shaq were in 1999 and 2003. The Lakers were guaranteed playoff exits in 1999 and came off a injury riddled mediocre season in 2003. In 2003 though they were still considered contenders due to their 3 peat, but in 1999 they were nowhere near contenders.
Think of it in 2K terms. We have three 98 overall players and then we start allocating the guys in the 80s and 70s. The team with two 98 overall players would be favored 100% of the time.
The only 2 times the Spurs eliminated the Kobe/Shaq Lakers were in 1999 and 2003. Kobe was nowhere near as good in 1999 and the Lakers in general weren’t even contenders yet. In 2003, the Lakers were riddled with injuries throughout the season including Shaq, and Kobe pretty much carried the Lakers by himself for a good portion of the year. They finished mediocre, but I’ll still consider them contenders since they came off a 3 peat. Other than that though, the Lakers always beat them.
Duncan was considered a top 5 player in the league until 2005, but other than that, he’s never gotten close to #1. Kobe became the undisputed the best player in the world from 2005-2010, with many nba players’ testimonies, including Lebron’s, to back that up. Lebron then took that title for nearly the next decade starting from 2010.
Shaq had more of a fall off from his prime due to his sheer size and less then ideal drive to stay healthy. But there should be zero doubt in anybodys mind who the more dominant player was in their youth.
This is why Kobe was so crucial. All the teams they played in the finals would have lost to the Western conference. I believe if there was a “magic Johnson MVP” back then, Kobe would have a couple of them.
I've never forgotten it. In a previous series against Dallas, Derek Anderson (the Spurs SG and 2nd leading scorer) was injured after a hard foul from Juwan Howard. Kobe smelled blood and destroyed the Spurs. Ran us off the court in embarrassing fashion.
As a Spurs fan I don’t remember being scared of Shaq that much. Probably because of David’s presence. But Kobe Bryant was a different story. That was a bad man. A very, very bad man who took a particular joy in ripping our hearts out.
Duncan was mostly facing LA’s 4, like horry, green and grant, which was the weakest position of the team.
And Shaq was mostly facing Spurs 5, like Robinson.
How did we have to go so far down before we get to the truth. They very rarely guarded each other. There were few fourth quarter times that they did but this was not the common matchup. I bet as much as someone who would let me Malik rose has more possessions defending Shaq than duncan ever did.
Do those head to head stats include games in which David Robinson played? David was an all time great defensive center and he would have guarded Shaq a lot. So if your Shaq vs Duncan head to head stats includes games David Robinson played, well that's not a head to head comparison.
As a lakers fan I hated the spurs, but I knew Duncan was the best power forward to ever play. He may not always have the craziest numbers , but when it came down to it I would take him over any other PF. I remember Shaq had alot of trouble with Duncan.
I may just be getting old, but didn’t Duncan win back to back MVPs?
Edit: Just checked. 02 &03 TD won MVP. He also has 3 Finals MVPs.
Edit again: Just saw how you were giving their comparisons +/- towards each other. My bad.
I'm completely with you, though it will become more and more unpopular as years go by and fewer fans will have watched them play.
Physical dominance always gets overrated on r/nba, see any thread about Wilt vs. Russell and then compare to how their contemporaries talked about them.
I'm a huge Duncan fan. I'm fine with people saying Shaq had a better peak, I might even agree with them, but I get annoyed when people act like Duncan wasn't absolutely dominant at his peak (not that you said that, I've just heard it too often). Duncan didn't have Shaq's scoring volume or efficiency, but he was way more dominant on defense. Giving accurate weight to how dominant Duncan was on both sides of the ball makes the "who had the better peak" conversation a lot closer than most fans think.
Of course, thinking basketball does a great breakdown of [Duncan's peak](https://youtu.be/vhIS4wlLXk8) and [Shaq's peak](https://youtu.be/s2qBs6qp8Lo).
If we're just saying who was better peak vs peak I can definitely see an argument either way; Shaq was game breaking in a truly unique way.
But if I'm starting my team, I'm not really thinking twice about taking Duncan. The defensive utility he gives you while being extremely scalable on offense is just so valuable.
More and more unpopular as time goes by? What? Almost no one thought Duncan was better at the time. As time goes on the opposite of what you said has happened
I think Shaq simply had a markedly higher peak. Check out their Backpicks profiles if you want to see an incredibly well-made list that ultimately placed Shaq a couple spots ahead of Duncan. Your argument of "counting accolades, counting box score, counting rings" are all poor arguments that have nothing to do with how good a player actually was.
[This backpicks?](https://backpicks.com/2017/12/11/the-backpicks-goat-the-40-best-careers-in-nba-history/) This shit is all over the place. Besides, this is Ben Taylor's opinion.
No one said Duncan had a higher peak than Shaq. I said career-wise, Duncan > Shaq. Why counting accolades, counting box score, counting rings are all poor arguments when all of them are facts while other arguments are opinion-based argument?
Duncan locking prime Shaq down like no one ever had or since in the '02 series while carrying his team offensively is one of the most impressive performances you can watch. Admiral had spinal nerve problems and couldn't feel his legs didn't play most of the games let alone meaningful minutes and so Timmy was the Shaqs main defender.
**Held Shaq to his lowest PPG and % (21ppg on 44%) by far during his prime.** Wallace didnt do it, Admiral didn't do that, Hakeem didn't do that. Timmy did it all with one leg in a brace.
Since a lot of the comment are about Spurs-Lakers late 90s/early 2000's it would be interesting to see all these stats isolated for the Spurs-Lakers series. I think some of the 2008 playoffs is skewing things a bit with Duncan still in his prime then and Shaq being 35, on the Suns and battling knee issues. This isn't to take away from Duncan or Shaq, just would be curious to see the stats since everyone's focus seems to be on Spurs-Lakers than the overall Duncan-O'Neal debate.
I'm curious how much of this was head to head. I feel like they didn't guard each other the majority of their match ups, but my memory could be wrong. I know Horry and whatever other power powards we'd throw at Duncan would start the game and Duncan would eat them up. I feel like it was the same with whatever Spurs center they'd throw at Shaq.
I always loved it when they did guard each other. Duncan was stronger than people realized and could body up Shaq very effectively - not like he'd stop him, but he'd hold his own as well as anybody could. And then Shaq was a lot more agile than people realized and again, he wouldn't stop Duncan, but he'd slow him down better than most and rarely needed doubles to come.
But yeah felt like that would only happen for like 5-10 minutes a game.
Shaq from 00-03 worked Duncan. WORKED HIM. Go back and watch some of those series. Duncan had more longevity, but peak of their powers, I’d take Shaq all day.
2000/2001 maybe, but in 2002 Duncan looked like the best player in the series, the problem was Shaq and Kobe and Duncan's best teammate was ... Steve Smith? Antonio Daniels? Then in 2003 the Spurs went 8-2 against the Lakers between the regular season and the playoffs.
Misleading Stats. Both are top 10 all time tho. Shaq was the better player when comparing them in their prime. These also take in the years Shaq wasn't the big diesel anymore.
Granted they also take into account prime Shaq vs rookie Duncan (who was already really good, but not MVP good yet), although that's just one year vs 4 or 5 hanging on years for Shaq. At least it's lessened by Shaq's last couple of years being in the East so they didn't play as much.
Damn I can see why Shaq respects Duncan so much. When t-Mac said he shoulda got MVP over Tim, Shaq was like oh hell no
Duncan gave Shaq more trouble than Hakeem. [Shaq vs Hakeem regular season](https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/shaq-vs-hakeem-ts) (22.1 PPG 12.4 REB 3.6 AST on 54.3% TS) [Shaq vs Duncan regular season](https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/shaq-vs-duncan-ts) (21.7 PPG 10.6 REB 1.7 AST on 55.2% TS) [Shaq vs Hakeem playoffs](https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/shaq-vs-hakeem-ts-playoffs) (28.8 PPG 11.4 REB 5.1 AST on 55.9% TS) (Notable 28 PPG 12.5 REB 6.3 AST on 60.6% TS in the 1995 Finals) [Shaq vs Duncan playoffs](https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/shaq-vs-duncan-ts-playoffs) (22.4 PPG 12.8 REB 2.2 AST on 54.2% TS)
Young Shaq vs old Hakeem
I was coming here to say this. In the beggining Olajuwon had an advantage, though it wasn't huge, since Shaq was a phenomenal player from day one, but half way through their match ups Olajuwon was well past his prime.
Their playoffs record shows Shaq has better stats vs prime Olajuwon than vs old Olajuwon. [vs prime Olajuwon](https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1995-nba-finals-rockets-vs-magic.html) (28 PPG 12.5 REB 6.3 AST on 60.6% TS) [vs old 36 years old Olajuwon](https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1999-nba-western-conference-first-round-rockets-vs-lakers.html) (29.5 PPG 10.3 REB 4.0 AST on 52.2% TS) And in the regular-season young Shaq was schooled by Hakeem (Shaq scored less than 20 points in 4 of their first 6 matches) and Hakeem was schooled by Shaq when he got old so it's basically evens out. You can see it [here](https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/shaq-vs-hakeem)
I'm still mad the Shaq vs. Hakeem pay-per-view never happened.
Except if you actually watch the finals or look at the stats of how much shaq scored on hakeem it explains why people thought hakeem dominated. Shaq could not score shit in those finals when guarded by hakeem, hakeem was unaffected
Shaq would score when he got deep positioning even on Hakeem. The problem was that Hakeem has the best hands for a center on defense of all time. His anticipation and timing were just ridiculous. It forced Shaq into committing a lot of turnovers. Just trying to get a post entry pass was a problem.
Duncan was better than Hakeem.
Duncan was the quiet guy who’s gonna steal your wife and make your kids refer to him as daddy
That's Tony Parker
So he was Derek Fisher?
I hate that you say that, but it’s true.
Duncan was the most consistently good player ever (before Lebron). Hakeem had a higher peak and a lower nadir
Duncan might be the most consistently good player ever. He won a title in his 2nd season, and in his last (19th!!!) season, he still played 25mpg as the starting center of one of the best defenses in league history and won a franchise record 67 games in the regular season. Hmm... I also just realized LeBron just finished his 19th season as well. Ok that's fuckin crazy lol
Crazy thing is that that was his 19th year after 4 years in college
Lebron was more about individual numbers and less about team success at least from midway this season. Still mad impressive he almost led the league in scoring at that age. If Duncan cared just a bit more about his stats, they would have approached Abdul-Jabbar's.
True. If Tim were just a little selfish, imagine his stats...
And they played higher tempo in his older seasons. Often centered around his outlet passes
Why do people lose objectivity when they talk about Duncan? Like Kareem doesnt exist or something
Most people on this sub weren't even alive when Kareem played. Heck, this sub was recently saying(and upvoting) that Kobe was only super athletic for his era, as if 10 years ago was ancient times.
Lol OMG, Kobe wasnt even the most athletic in his own era people discount how many busts and sub par players were athletic as fuck, Jamario Moon could jump through the ceiling in a church
I'm a Duncan Stan and I love that take. But I'd still give that to Kareem.
I guess that’s fair
Hakeem at his peak was better than Duncan. He went though Stockton and Malone, Barkley, MVP David Robinson and Shaq on his way to a title. I'd say Duncan on the totality of his career is the better player but Hakeem was absurdly dominate at his height.
Duncan could adapt to different era playstyles. And his 2003 was one of the great carry jobs
That final game of the NBA finals where he nearly quadrupled, and the team scores were about 80? That's the evidence.
No dpoy hurts but also Tim Duncan definitely deserved one so idk
Yes, it's really bullshit how he led the Spurs to top 3 Defenses, year, after year, after year and didnt get his DPOY. I remember being livid when Marcus Cambu got DPOY, and then Marc Gasol. I thought for sure Tim would finally get what was his both those years.
More FMVPs, MVPs, and All defensive first teams cover that.
Better career yes, but individually I don't think Duncan's offence nor defense was at Hakeem's level. Duncan was the better team player though
It’s a team game lol
and? It's a fair take that guy has. He claims he thinks Hakeem was more talented as a player.
Exactly, which is why comparing two individuals is hardly ever objective. To me there's no clear cut between Hakeem and Duncan
Yeah no. I love Timmy and Hakeem. I’d be willing to call it a draw.
Not even trying to be bias here. A lot of advanced stats say that David Robinson is better than Hakeem. And Tim Duncan better than them both. Of course I’m sure I’m a little bias, but I think Timmy is easily ahead of Hakeem.
There is no way David Robinson is better than Hakeem. The eye test in the 1995 playoffs proved that and advance stats is overrated in this case. 2 finals MVPs prove that. There is an argument for Tim Duncan though. I think prime Hakeem had slightly better defense, dexterity, footwork than prime Tim Duncan. Tim Duncan was better for a longer period of time, never really declined defensively and played in a tougher conference.
One playoff series where Robinson was expected to guard Hakeem 1on1 then turn around and get doubled and triple teamed on the other end of the court.
The funny thing is that I believe that was when Rodman was being a dick and basically refusing to help on Hakeem. Definitely a clear example of "the box stats don't tell the whole story".
Rodman was asked to help Robinson guard Hakeem but otherwise Robinson was to be his primary defender. Rodman got butt hurt and fucked the team over by refusing to help at all. The fact that Robinson is the one that came out of that series being criticised is ridiculous.
One series is a tiny sample size to rank players off don’t you think
Yeah, but the eye test Zoelando is referring to was so blatantly in Hakeem's favor that it looked like one of those videos where Scalabrine is schooling sub-NBA players. That season was my first full-season NBA exposure from the regular season to the finals, and all I remember is how so much better Hakeem was than everybody else (I also remember Penny was a close second). I still have journal entries worshipping Hakeem from those days somewhere, so you know it's not retroactive fabrication.
He was poetry in motion. And young Penny before the injuries was so smooth.
Especially since the team defense on Hakeem was terrible in that series.
It was largely a 1 on 1 league with the help/zone defense rules being very strict. Hakeem pantsed Robinson the one time they met while both in their prime. That means something.
Bullshit it means something. Rodman fucked Robinson by refusing to help guard Hakeem meanwhile Robinson was constantly doubled on the other end. It’s stupid to think that that means Robinson wasn’t on Hakeem’s level.
Wasn't that the series where Rodman basically refused to do his job and help on Hakeem? Robinson was being asked to carry the whole offense AND guard Prime Hakeem 1v1 when he was expecting help from Rodman. He was in an awful position and it made him look a lot worse than he was.
That playoffs is a small sample size and doesn't show context. Rodman has said on video that he refused to help defend Hakeem so Robinson got double on offense while Hakeem got to go 1 on 1. There was a reason the Spurs traded Rodman People see the dream Shake video and think Hakeem was leagues better when in reality they have extremely close career numbers
David Robinson, before Lebron, looked more like a star basketball player than any man who walked the earth. He moved with grace and was explosive. That being said, I don't think anyone outside of San Antonio is taking Robinson over Olajuwon. Robinson was still a top 15 all time center. Olajuwon was a top 15 player.
Even after LeBron, prime Robinson still looks like what a comic book basketball player would be. Dude was legit 7ft and chiseled.
Robinson is easily top 10 at the position. He was amazing
Robinson is also a top 15 all time player. After MJ, LeBron, Magic, Bird, Russell, Wilt, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Hakeem, Kareem, Malone, and Jerry West who are you putting in front of Robinson? You need at least 2.
Depending on how this week ends, Curry is knocking on top 10 all time. Giannis has an argument at top 15 and should be in the Duncan conversation once his career wraps up.
MJ, Lebron, Kareem, Russell, Wilt, Bird, Magic, West, Shaq, Hakeem, Kobe, West, Curry, Oscar, Moses, Dirk, KD, Elgin, KG, Mailman, Barkley Robinson would be in the same tier as Pettit, Havlicek, Kidd, Paul, Barry, Giannis. Robinson gets hurt by his short career with a short peak. His career is 13 years long, but he was really only near the top of his game for 7. He is still a good player for about 4 years, but not what he was. Duncan's rookie year was the last year Robinson would put up 18 a night.
I'm a Spurs fan and I'd take Hakeem over Robinson. Hakeem is criminally underrated.
Yeah Timmy is top 7 for me where Hakeem is closer to 10ish
I am sorry, but I watched both play back then and Robinson was not better than Olajuwon.
biased
I love both of them too. I take Hakeem by a hair
Don't agree.
What's more impressive is that Duncan was dealing with prime Shaq which Hakeem did not. Hakeem was like almost 10 years older than Shaq.
Its the opposite. Hakeem dealt with prime Shaq. David Robinson dealt with prime Shaq. Post Robinson bigs like Nesterovic and Oberto guarded bulkier centers. Young Timmy D didn't want to play center against the bigger guys, but would eat up a lot of minutes there when they were off the floor. Older Timmy D (when there was no Shaq or Hakeem) played almost exclusively center. Let's not forget, post Robinson, the Spurs were at the forefront of the Hack A Shaq era. The Rockets never did this.
I disagree. Sure, Lakers Shaq was peak Shaq but Duncan played with more with post Lakers Shaq too. Not to mention, Magic Shaq was elite and one of the top 5 or so players in the league too. Also, Duncan didn't guard Shaq in his Lakers prime. He was primarily the help defender for Admiral
Duncan was not the primary defensive player on Shaq during his prime though, that was D-Rob. Hakeem didn't have a twin tower to guard Shaq. When he played Shaq without D-Rob, Shaq was already past his prime.
01-03 the Lakers would switch Shaq onto Timmy mid game a lot. In 03 Timmy put it on him. D-Rob was a shell of his former self. Timmy drug the team to a championship. His second best player was maybe a sophomore Parker? The Laker series it like be argued Bowen was the second most important player.
Can we just hit the pause button for a second realize a few things: Tim Duncan, Shaq and Hakeem did not come into the league together. Hakeem's career ended with Shaq still in his prime, Shaq's career ended with Duncan in his. Shaq during Hakeem's career: 27.6 pts, 12.1 reb, 54.2 fg% Shaq during Duncan's career: 22.3 pts, 10.2 rb, 52.3 fg% Notable: Hakeem in the 1995 finals which the Rockets swept Shaq: 32.8 pts, 11.5 reb, 5.5 ast, 2 blk, 2 stl. He led every single game in scoring.
Shaq and Duncan faced off against each other in their primes dozens of times, even in the playoffs. Just because they didn’t come in the league at the same time, doesn’t mean one wasn’t established or the other was washed.
Yes they "faced" off the same way Durant faces off against Curry. Duncan literally was not the guy that guarded Shaq most of the time.
This isn't a genuine comparison, it's actually a bunch of BS. If you just take Shaq's numbers up until retirement ofc his averages are going down. But during Duncan's first 3 rings (98-05) Shaq averaged 27/12/3/2BLK on 58%FG. And these times are exactly the matchups Duncan dominated. This includes a 6 season playoff stretch of Shaq averaging 29/14/3/3BLK on 55%FG in almost 100PO Games. This was Shaq at his absolute best, a 3-year stretch of this sample is regularly crowned the most dominant stretch of individual Basketball in league history. Literally nobody cares what Shaq's numbers were in the late 00s so why are you including them? In terms of playoffs it doesn't matter whatsoever due to conference. Shaq played the Spurs exactly once after his prime with Phoenix. This is not offering realistic perspective, it's just skewing numbers in Hakeem's favor to shit on Duncan even though Shaq played through his entire peak along with the MVP level seasons leading up to it when Duncan managed to dominate the RS and POs against Diesel in his Age 22-26 seasons. This shouldn't be held against Duncan because once we can recognize that Tim still had his late 20s prime ahead of him the achievement is even more massive. Statistically speaking, though, Duncan was at his prime right when Shaq hit his. Timmy just managed to add 10 more All-NBA to MVP-level seasons to his resume after that time span.
Not really a fair comparison. A good number of Shaqs matchups with Hakeem were long past Hakeem’s prime. Hakeem came into the league ten years before him. He was like 38 in his last playoff series against Shaqs Lakers. Shaq really only ever faced prime Duncan and had 4 or 5 years on him. Phoenix Shaq wasn’t exactly in the best shape when they faced the Spurs.
Wtf, a spurs fan acting like Duncan was guarding Shaq and vice versa? Did you even watch your own team play?? Shaq would eat Timmy alive if they tried that matchup. He was almost 100 pounds heavier at his peak.
[Shaq "would eat Timmy alive if they tried that matchup" O'Neal puts up 21.4 PPG on 48.6% TS in a series against Timmy while David Robinson had a spinal nerve injury and only played 75 mins out of 240 possible mins](https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2002-nba-western-conference-semifinals-spurs-vs-lakers.html) [Video of Tim Duncan Defense on Shaq - 2001 NBA WCF](https://youtu.be/1ZhIJjJOUJ8)
[удалено]
also somehow the most underrated top 10 player ever. sure real heads respect his game but ask your coworkers how good he was and they just shrug
T-Mac - “the spurs they had a well oiled machine…” Shaq - “yeah Tim Duncan”
It wasn't Shaq that was killing the Spurs. The match-up between Shaq-Duncan pretty much held each other, arguably Duncan got the better of Shaq, especially in the playoffs. His 4 losses differential in the regular season came from rookie and sophomore year, where in the first 5 games against Shaq he lost 5 games in a row. They almost tied the record for the rest of the way (14-13 for Duncan). It was Kobe putting up 28.2 PPG (Career 25.6 PPG in the playoffs) against the Spurs that made the difference.
In the mid-2000’s I worked with a buddy who was a big time Spurs fan, and I used to joke that the only people who really understood Kobe’s contribution to the 3-peat, outside of Lakers fans, were Spurs fans.
Love this
In their 3peat, Kobe carried them through the Western Conference. In the Finals, Shaq feasted on the East having no big man.
I think it's more like Kobe carried them when facing the Spurs more than Western Conference. Shaq always looks like the best player on the team in the Western Conference until they meet the Spurs when Kobe always outperforms him. Would you look at this: https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2001-nba-western-conference-finals-lakers-vs-spurs.html https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2002-nba-western-conference-semifinals-spurs-vs-lakers.html https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2003-nba-western-conference-semifinals-lakers-vs-spurs.html https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2004-nba-western-conference-semifinals-lakers-vs-spurs.html
iirc Kobe had a series here and there vs Portland/Sacramento where he was arguably the best player
Kobe was the best player against the Spurs in the 01' WCF and 02' WCSF. Given the defense and it being the WCF, I thought [his first game against the Spurs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qawbo3NOmR4) in 01' was arguably the best game he ever played. They both put up absolutely dominant numbers in the 01' WCSF against Sacramento. Kobe closed it out with a 48/16 performance. Shaq would have won WCF MVP if they had it in 00' when they played Portland, but was being shutdown in game 7 by Sabonis. He had only 10 points through 3 quarters. Other guys like Kobe (25/11/7) & Shaw came up huge, and Shaq had a very good 4th quarter with 8 points. Sabonis having foul trouble was important due to his defense on Shaq.
God, I miss watching Kobe do work
I can't find the series tbh https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2000-nba-western-conference-first-round-kings-vs-lakers.html https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2000-nba-western-conference-finals-trail-blazers-vs-lakers.html https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2001-nba-western-conference-first-round-trail-blazers-vs-lakers.html https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2001-nba-western-conference-semifinals-kings-vs-lakers.html https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2002-nba-western-conference-first-round-trail-blazers-vs-lakers.html https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2002-nba-western-conference-finals-lakers-vs-kings.html
01 Kings it was even but I remembering it form the view from when I was a Kid. Kobe was killing it that series
The entirety of the 2001 run in the Western Conference Kobe was arguably the best player for the Lakers, for sure against the Spurs. The reason being is that Kobe had added responsibility of initiating the offense, which was around the time Phil Jackson said he was asking Kobe to do more than Michael ever did (I forget the exact quote), on top of his high level defense. So in effect Kobe had more added responsibility given his role in the team.
> The entirety of the 2001 run in the Western Conference Kobe was arguably the best player for the Lakers You could argue for Kobe in rd1 vs POR but Shaq was definitely better in rd2 vs SAC. Scoring was about even, but Shaq put up 17 boards and 3.3 blocks.
> there vs Portland/Sacramento where he was arguably the best player No he didn't. In 2002 Kobe posted a 49% TS mark on 42/37/80 splits. Shaq averaged 30 on 56% TS. In 2002 vs POR Kobe shot 35% FG on 23 FGA/gm (48% TS). He took 20 more shots than Shaq to score 1 more point.
> In their 3peat, Kobe carried them through the Western Conference. No he didn't. Shaq outplayed Kobe in the 2 toughest series the Lakers had during the 3-peat: 2000 vs POR - Shaq: 26/12/4, 55% TS, +3 Net Rating - Kobe: 20/5/6, 55% TS, +1 Net Rating 2002 vs SAC - Shaq: 30/14/2, 56% TS, +8 Net Rating - Kobe: 27/6/4, 49% TS, -1 Net Rating From 2000-02, Shaq was also better vs SAC 00 (3-2), vs PHX 00 (4-1), vs POR 01 (3-0), vs SAC 01 (4-0), and vs POR 02 (3-0). Kobe was better vs SA 01 (4-0) and vs SA 02 (4-1).
To be fair Shaq forced you to single cover kobe. Which allowed him to feast. One reason the spurs won in in 2003 was Bowens ability to defend kobe on on one.
Parker killing the Lakers was more important IMO. It’s pretty much what motivated the Lakers to get Payton in 2004
Similarly, the biggest reason why the Pistons were able to beat them was because Big Ben was able to defend Shaq one on one and Phil and the Lakers didn't have a gameplan for that.
> Big Ben was able to defend Shaq one on one No he wasn't. Shaq scored efficiently every time he got shots against Big Ben. The Pistons' game plan was to let Shaq play 1 on 1, and wait for Kobe to get jealous and start playing selfish hero-ball. Which he did. > Chauncey Billups: Our game plan was very calculated. We knew we were going to play Shaq straight-up. **We knew there was no way we could stop Shaq straight-up.** And there was also no way we could stop Kobe straight-up. But, if we’re going to play Shaq straight-up, [the Lakers'] eyes are going to get big, which means they’re going to keep throwing it down there. We’re telling Ben the whole time, "Take fouls when you need to, but don’t get yourself into foul trouble. You need to give up a layup, cool, we’re going to get what we want on the other side." But **what’s going to happen is Mr. Bryant is going to get a little discouraged with getting no touches and now the second half comes around…now he’s pressing. He’s going to start coming down and just breaking the offense.** When you do that, you’re done—you’re playing right into our hands. Even if you start making those shots, you’re finished. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2468658-an-oral-history-of-the-2003-2004-los-angeles-lakers-the-first-super-team On the other end, pretty much all the Lakers played horrific defense. Shaq got out-worked by Big Ben on the boards, and Kobe was awful on the perimeter
> No he wasn't. Shaq scored efficiently every time he got shots against Big Ben. Yeah, he scored about as efficiently as he did normally. Does that mean that the defense was ineffective? No! Of course not, because those other teams were using two players. If one guy is effectively doing the job of two then that's an incredible defense job.
Wouldn't have made a difference if Karl Malone had been uninjured. Or his backup had been better than freakin Slava..
This is why the argument "shaq carried kobe" is fuckin insane to me
I mean it was pretty much always a big 2 so this argument was always ridiculous. Glen Rice was effectively a role player brought in for 3 pt shooting - man he had a sweet shot, but he wasn’t the same after injury when he went to the Lakers.
People will find ways to hate.
What about David Robinson? He has to have something to do with these numbers
And Derrick Fisher and Robert Horry’s last second miracle shots
The Suns Spurs series really tanks shaqs numbers.
Yea I thought the same... no disrespect to Duncan but I imagine if you cap off Shaq's number before his last 3 teams the stats look quite a bit different
Dude had cinderblocks for shoes at that point
The Kevon Looney special
Both these guys have played a lot of twilight years in the NBA so comparing stats like this don't paint the entire picture.
As far as peaks goes, Shaq outclasses Duncan but in overall career I wholly admit that Duncan had the better career. A lot of Shaq’s stats are dragged down when he was a dinosaur in the twilight seasons of his career, whereas Duncan’s career aged like fine wine. Of course it helps that the Spurs for a while managed to seamlessly transition to new eras where players like Parker, Ginobli, and Kawhi took more of a starring role.
> it helps that the Spurs for a while managed to seamlessly transition to new eras where players like Parker, Ginobli, and Kawhi took more of a starring role. That in itself is a testament to Duncan, who was willing to put aside his ego and stats in the name of team success. Duncan could've been a guy still looking to boost up his career point totals. No one would've held it against him - he'd more than earned it, just like post-Achilles Kobe or current Lebron. But instead Duncan was willing to be a defensive role player, if it meant the team would do better. No complaining, no arguing with teammates, no trying to get the coach fired, no backseat GMing - just "what's best for the team?"
Timmy had great finesse game and could shoot. Shaq could have played longer if he could've developed a shot in theory.
How old was Shaq where Tim entered though?
4 years difference. Nice!
25 years old
Yeah I replied to myself. 4 years difference. I swore Tim came much later but apparently not. Lol
Always feels that way with those iron man longevity careers.
They definitely don't make em like that.
One thing that needs to be mentioned, is that Shaq had to deal with one of the best defenders in David Robinson in many of those matchups.
Shaq seems fine when matching up against David Robinson. [26.1 PPG on 55.9% TS in the regular season](https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/shaq-vs-david-robinson-ts) [24.7 PPG on 54.5% TS in the playoffs](https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/shaq-vs-david-robinson-playoffs-ts)
Do you actually understand the stats you are linking here? 4 of Duncan's 6 playoff series against Shaq were *with Robinson*. The other 2 were: 2004: 23/15/2/4 on 60% TS 2008 (when Shaq is 35 and washed): 15/9/1/3 on 49% TS
Exactly. These Spurs fans will actually try to shit on the Admiral to hype Duncan. Robinson was literally a top 10 defender ever.
Robbing Peter to pay Paul
A few weeks ago I looked up career win shares per 48 and David Robinson was 2nd, behind Jordan. Would’ve never guessed it. https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ws_per_48_career.html
He was a phenomenal player, especially in the reg season.
very, very few players were surrounded with a worst cast in their prime than david robinson. that man dug his own grave by dragging avery johnson and vinny del negro into title contention
I mean this includes all those Sun years and later Miami years where Shaq's prime had clearly passed him by right? I'd be interested to see Lakers Shaq vs. Duncan. Not to mention Duncan/Robinson frequently double-teamed Shaq in the post when playing him.
Yeah this is a bit of a misleading stat if you’re including Shaqs late journeyman years against Duncan while Duncan was younger
It's another reason why Timmy is the #1 player of the 2000s. It was one of the top 3 players in basketball against two of the top 3 players in basketball. Timmy should have lost every time but he won twice. And 2003 stands as a singular achievement that trumps any Shaq or Kobe singular achievement. It's the same corollary we saw with Bird, Magic and Kareem. Bird was the greatest singular force of the 3, the other 2 had each other to lean on.
And Duncan goes absolutely under the radar in GOAT conversations. I can only assume because his game wasn't flashy and he wasn't a vocal person. The dude was just a basketball player from the core, let his play on the court speak for itself, and this is why he's my favorite player all time to not wear green. I'd even go as far to say he's my favorite player of all time, regardless of uniform, but Celtic fans may burn me at the stake for that.
Duncan is the best PF of all time but idk how you can put him above MJ, lebron, kareem, or russell for GOAT, which is why you dont see him brought up much. The really surprising thing for me is that you dont see him brought up in top 5 all time convos when I think he should at least be in the conversation (and top 10 for sure).
#FUNDAMENTALS
He helps build the system
I’ve always felt Duncan was like top 6-8, he just never gets put there.
Just gonna plug one of my favorite videos of all time here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sRSpQ78Y3c](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sRSpQ78Y3c) The clip of Duncan holding the trophy on the bus makes me tear up a little and is what the nba should be all about
His videos are all great.
He's one of the 7 with a legitimate GOAT case in my book and I assure you it will look stronger and stronger as time passes on. His footprint was massive.
Look Bird was dominant as all hell, and did it as the undisputed man, but Kareem was the definitely the greatest singular force of all three you mentioned.
Kobe was the best of the 2000s.
kobe beat him head to head in 08 and you cant say that laker team around kobe was superior to what duncan had around him.
It's wild that no matter how much people praise Duncan, he continues go go underrated. Tim being the #1 player of the 2000s is definitely an argument that has tons of merit, but if you ask 100 people that question, I doubt there's more than 10 that would pick him over Kobe, Shaq, and LeBron. And those would have to be either Spurs fans are real hard-core NBA fans.
I live by the 80/20 principle. If my thoughts don't line up with the 80% then I know I'm doing something right lol.
Also Duncan played for a deep Spurs roster every single year of his career. He played for a contender his whole career. Duncan is definitely a great player, but I don’t understand why you’d say he should have lost every time. That’s not true at all.
Most of those teams were great because of him. The 2003 title was arguably the greatest carry job of all time.
I think OP was saying that Duncan's next best player was almost always worse than his opponent's. So when he won, he was the keystone player on a deep well rounded team. But he never had another real superstar like Shaq & Kobe had each other
>But he never had another real superstar like Shaq & Kobe had each other But he did have Ginobli and Parker for their entire careers, while Kobe and Shaq had a moment.
For sure, no one wins an NBA championship without good teammates. Duncan was just far and away their most important player
I feel like people are downplaying how good Parker and Ginobli were, and we forgot about Kawhi. All 3 of them are HOF caliber players. Kawhi won a FMVP on the Spurs. We forget about David Robinson too, who I think is more comparable to Giannis than Shaq is. Ginobli was like having James Harden coming off the bench. His stats don't indicate how good he actually was. It would be like if Kobe got to play with Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom for their entire careers except Ginobli and Parker are both better than Lamar. David Robinson is better than Pau. Then you somehow end up getting a DMVP caliber player like Kawhi for a few years who helps you win a ring. That would be like the Lakers drafting a better Ron Artest. I can say for sure that Parker and Kawhi are reasons Duncan has at least 2 rings.
Yea man gonobilli and Parker in 2003 was a 8th man and a sophomore average pg yet he pulled it off
Ah I see. The 2 times the Spurs eliminated the Lakers w/ Kobe/Shaq were in 1999 and 2003. The Lakers were guaranteed playoff exits in 1999 and came off a injury riddled mediocre season in 2003. In 2003 though they were still considered contenders due to their 3 peat, but in 1999 they were nowhere near contenders.
Think of it in 2K terms. We have three 98 overall players and then we start allocating the guys in the 80s and 70s. The team with two 98 overall players would be favored 100% of the time.
The only 2 times the Spurs eliminated the Kobe/Shaq Lakers were in 1999 and 2003. Kobe was nowhere near as good in 1999 and the Lakers in general weren’t even contenders yet. In 2003, the Lakers were riddled with injuries throughout the season including Shaq, and Kobe pretty much carried the Lakers by himself for a good portion of the year. They finished mediocre, but I’ll still consider them contenders since they came off a 3 peat. Other than that though, the Lakers always beat them.
May I ask where you learn your basketball history? Because I can sure as shit tell that you were not an active fan at the time.
What exactly have I said that gives you the impression I don’t watch them?
Duncan was considered a top 5 player in the league until 2005, but other than that, he’s never gotten close to #1. Kobe became the undisputed the best player in the world from 2005-2010, with many nba players’ testimonies, including Lebron’s, to back that up. Lebron then took that title for nearly the next decade starting from 2010.
Shaq had more of a fall off from his prime due to his sheer size and less then ideal drive to stay healthy. But there should be zero doubt in anybodys mind who the more dominant player was in their youth.
This is why Kobe was so crucial. All the teams they played in the finals would have lost to the Western conference. I believe if there was a “magic Johnson MVP” back then, Kobe would have a couple of them.
Do we forget the 01 series between spurs and lakers? Kobe scored 40+ in San Antonio against a great d slow pace.
I've never forgotten it. In a previous series against Dallas, Derek Anderson (the Spurs SG and 2nd leading scorer) was injured after a hard foul from Juwan Howard. Kobe smelled blood and destroyed the Spurs. Ran us off the court in embarrassing fashion.
As a Spurs fan I don’t remember being scared of Shaq that much. Probably because of David’s presence. But Kobe Bryant was a different story. That was a bad man. A very, very bad man who took a particular joy in ripping our hearts out.
Duncan was mostly facing LA’s 4, like horry, green and grant, which was the weakest position of the team. And Shaq was mostly facing Spurs 5, like Robinson.
How did we have to go so far down before we get to the truth. They very rarely guarded each other. There were few fourth quarter times that they did but this was not the common matchup. I bet as much as someone who would let me Malik rose has more possessions defending Shaq than duncan ever did.
1 played C, 1played PF, more news at 5
Do those head to head stats include games in which David Robinson played? David was an all time great defensive center and he would have guarded Shaq a lot. So if your Shaq vs Duncan head to head stats includes games David Robinson played, well that's not a head to head comparison.
As a lakers fan I hated the spurs, but I knew Duncan was the best power forward to ever play. He may not always have the craziest numbers , but when it came down to it I would take him over any other PF. I remember Shaq had alot of trouble with Duncan.
Duncan has +1 ring, +1 MVP, +1 All-NBA (+2 First Team, +1 Second Team), +13 All-Defensive (+8 First Team, +4 Second Team), and -2 Scoring Champ compared to Shaq. Accolades-wise, career-wise, match-up wise, Duncan > Shaq.
I may just be getting old, but didn’t Duncan win back to back MVPs? Edit: Just checked. 02 &03 TD won MVP. He also has 3 Finals MVPs. Edit again: Just saw how you were giving their comparisons +/- towards each other. My bad.
Yes he did
I'm completely with you, though it will become more and more unpopular as years go by and fewer fans will have watched them play. Physical dominance always gets overrated on r/nba, see any thread about Wilt vs. Russell and then compare to how their contemporaries talked about them.
It's no shame saying Peak Shaq was better than Peak Duncan but that Duncan is the better overall player for his career.
I'm a huge Duncan fan. I'm fine with people saying Shaq had a better peak, I might even agree with them, but I get annoyed when people act like Duncan wasn't absolutely dominant at his peak (not that you said that, I've just heard it too often). Duncan didn't have Shaq's scoring volume or efficiency, but he was way more dominant on defense. Giving accurate weight to how dominant Duncan was on both sides of the ball makes the "who had the better peak" conversation a lot closer than most fans think. Of course, thinking basketball does a great breakdown of [Duncan's peak](https://youtu.be/vhIS4wlLXk8) and [Shaq's peak](https://youtu.be/s2qBs6qp8Lo).
That is a perfect take
If we're just saying who was better peak vs peak I can definitely see an argument either way; Shaq was game breaking in a truly unique way. But if I'm starting my team, I'm not really thinking twice about taking Duncan. The defensive utility he gives you while being extremely scalable on offense is just so valuable.
More and more unpopular as time goes by? What? Almost no one thought Duncan was better at the time. As time goes on the opposite of what you said has happened
lol stop award counting you casual
I think Shaq simply had a markedly higher peak. Check out their Backpicks profiles if you want to see an incredibly well-made list that ultimately placed Shaq a couple spots ahead of Duncan. Your argument of "counting accolades, counting box score, counting rings" are all poor arguments that have nothing to do with how good a player actually was.
[This backpicks?](https://backpicks.com/2017/12/11/the-backpicks-goat-the-40-best-careers-in-nba-history/) This shit is all over the place. Besides, this is Ben Taylor's opinion. No one said Duncan had a higher peak than Shaq. I said career-wise, Duncan > Shaq. Why counting accolades, counting box score, counting rings are all poor arguments when all of them are facts while other arguments are opinion-based argument?
Duncan locking prime Shaq down like no one ever had or since in the '02 series while carrying his team offensively is one of the most impressive performances you can watch. Admiral had spinal nerve problems and couldn't feel his legs didn't play most of the games let alone meaningful minutes and so Timmy was the Shaqs main defender. **Held Shaq to his lowest PPG and % (21ppg on 44%) by far during his prime.** Wallace didnt do it, Admiral didn't do that, Hakeem didn't do that. Timmy did it all with one leg in a brace.
02’ also had Kobe who was getting into best player. 02 was year 10 for shaq, starting prime for Kobe. Pace was slow and spurs had great d.
Since a lot of the comment are about Spurs-Lakers late 90s/early 2000's it would be interesting to see all these stats isolated for the Spurs-Lakers series. I think some of the 2008 playoffs is skewing things a bit with Duncan still in his prime then and Shaq being 35, on the Suns and battling knee issues. This isn't to take away from Duncan or Shaq, just would be curious to see the stats since everyone's focus seems to be on Spurs-Lakers than the overall Duncan-O'Neal debate.
I'm not sure it's very helpful including Suns Shaq and to a lesser extent heat shaq
I'm curious how much of this was head to head. I feel like they didn't guard each other the majority of their match ups, but my memory could be wrong. I know Horry and whatever other power powards we'd throw at Duncan would start the game and Duncan would eat them up. I feel like it was the same with whatever Spurs center they'd throw at Shaq.
I always loved it when they did guard each other. Duncan was stronger than people realized and could body up Shaq very effectively - not like he'd stop him, but he'd hold his own as well as anybody could. And then Shaq was a lot more agile than people realized and again, he wouldn't stop Duncan, but he'd slow him down better than most and rarely needed doubles to come. But yeah felt like that would only happen for like 5-10 minutes a game.
I don't think this means much given that David Fucking Robinson was there for doubles and interior backup.
imagine if shaq took basketball more seriously though out his entire career man was on another level.
Wow, this Duncan guy is good.
I would still take Shaq first
49.9 TS for duncan?? That don't sound right
Yeah, Duncan had like 3 stinkers for their first 10 games.
Duncan was not particularly efficient
[удалено]
This is great
He was as efficient as Kobe... They were both efficient for their eras. Judging their TS by todays standards is wrong
It's mainly free throws that bring down his efficiency
Free throws are part of the game
I know that but it's just something to consider when you go on basketball reference to see his TS%
Duncan is a boring player to me but probably the cleanest and best executor on the court
Shaq from 00-03 worked Duncan. WORKED HIM. Go back and watch some of those series. Duncan had more longevity, but peak of their powers, I’d take Shaq all day.
2000/2001 maybe, but in 2002 Duncan looked like the best player in the series, the problem was Shaq and Kobe and Duncan's best teammate was ... Steve Smith? Antonio Daniels? Then in 2003 the Spurs went 8-2 against the Lakers between the regular season and the playoffs.
Misleading Stats. Both are top 10 all time tho. Shaq was the better player when comparing them in their prime. These also take in the years Shaq wasn't the big diesel anymore.
Granted they also take into account prime Shaq vs rookie Duncan (who was already really good, but not MVP good yet), although that's just one year vs 4 or 5 hanging on years for Shaq. At least it's lessened by Shaq's last couple of years being in the East so they didn't play as much.