Hail the No Drama superstar

[tlance]

I don't think the traditional center is making a comeback, but I do think that we are seeing big men making a comeback. It's just that most of the big men who are playing a bigger role in the NBA right now are the ones who have the skills traditionally associated with guards. There will always be a place for traditional centers who are dominant (who doesn't love a guy who will pull down 15 boards per game?), but I think the traditional bigs will continue to be few and far between. And it's hard to see them coming back to play as big a role as they used to in playoff basketball.

The exception might be if a modern Hakeem or David Robinson comes around.

To be a true superstar though, they have to be able to defend the perimeter. I think those 2 specifically would not have missed a beat playing today and they might have even been better.

 

[trojanfan12]

The exception might be if a modern Hakeem or David Robinson comes around.

To be a true superstar though, they have to be able to defend the perimeter. I think those 2 specifically would not have missed a beat playing today and they might have even been better.

Yeah, those are more the kind of "traditional centers" that I was referring to.

Shaq would still be dominant and a superstar because he's a monster, but his inability to guard the perimeter would hurt him more than it did when he was playing.

 

[shopson67]

even that fucking bastard i hate James Harden

 

[tlance]

Yeah, those are more the kind of "traditional centers" that I was referring to.

Shaq would still be dominant and a superstar because he's a monster, but his inability to guard the perimeter would hurt him more than it did when he was playing.

I am honestly not sure Shaq would be a superstar today. Not going to go so far as to say he wouldn't be, but it is far from a guarantee.

So many changes to the game in the last 15 years.

No more illegal defense makes it easier to double the post, hack a Shaq strategy makes it hard to play Shaq in late game situations. Pick and roll place pace and space expose his defensive weakness areas.

The best version of Shaq is still dominant, but there are some serious hurdles here. His window would have been a lot shorter at least.

 

[dtgold88]

I am honestly not sure Shaq would be a superstar today. Not going to go so far as to say he wouldn't be, but it is far from a guarantee.

So many changes to the game in the last 15 years.

No more illegal defense makes it easier to double the post, hack a Shaq strategy makes it hard to play Shaq in late game situations. Pick and roll place pace and space expose his defensive weakness areas.

The best version of Shaq is still dominant, but there are some serious hurdles here. His window would have been a lot shorter at least.

Could be wrong, but he was not nearly as big at LSU as he became in the NBA, right? Possible, I guess, he does not add so much weight if he came into league today.

Problem is could he develop any kind of shot outside 5 feet.

 

[tlance]

Could be wrong, but he was not nearly as big at LSU as he became in the NBA, right? Possible, I guess, he does not add so much weight if he came into league today.

Problem is could he develop any kind of shot outside 5 feet.

Defintely true.

His Orlando days also.

His physique was chiseled during his early career and he was pretty explosive. I think someone here said that he intentionally added weight to respond to the way defenders physically beat him up. That probably doesn't happen if he were playing today.

 

[dtgold88]

Defintely true.

His Orlando days also.

His physique was chiseled during his early career and he was pretty explosive. I think someone here said that he intentionally added weight to respond to the way defenders physically beat him up. That probably doesn't happen if he were playing today.

I think in addition to what you have already said his lack of a shot outside the paint could be a killer in today's NBA. Even stud centers today like Embid and AD can take and make 3s.

 

[PickleRick]

Seriously, who doesn't belong on the list? Note I'm not saying those are the five 'best' players ever, but they are the five most influential in terms of how they bent the game around themselves. They changed the games they played in. They were the most electric, watchable players of their eras.

And they are of course among the best ever. At their level there's no scientific way to rank them, they are just all time greats

@thunderc

Bird?

 

[thunderc]

I think in addition to what you have already said his lack of a shot outside the paint could be a killer in today's NBA. Even stud centers today like Embid and AD can take and make 3s.

Sure they can, the question is do they really have to? Just a totally different game but Shaq is Shaq in any era.

 

[thunderc]

Bird?

Blasphemy

 

[CitySushi]

Sure they can, the question is do they really have to? Just a totally different game but Shaq is Shaq in any era.

Sometimes the threat is just as good as actual production. Even when Klay Thompson is going 2/13 from the field, the defenders can't sag of him. If you have a Center who has shown he can hit 3's, it opens up the entire court. You can operate an offense differently.

Unless a dominant center is shooting 40% from 3, I don't think there's a scenario where they should be taking more than a 2 a game. Like Embiid and even Towns to an extent, I want them posting up and dominating on the inside. There's an equally viable situation in that if they're that dominant, it opens up the floor for the rest of the shooters because they'll require a double team.

I guess value is relative to your actual skill set. Shaq's contribution to the 3 point line has always been his ability to command a double team. Another center's contribution might be their ability to hit them and help space the floor for teammates. I don't think there's a right or wrong way.

 

[trojanfan12]

Sometimes the threat is just as good as actual production. Even when Klay Thompson is going 2/13 from the field, the defenders can't sag of him. If you have a Center who has shown he can hit 3's, it opens up the entire court. You can operate an offense differently.

Unless a dominant center is shooting 40% from 3, I don't think there's a scenario where they should be taking more than a 2 a game. Like Embiid and even Towns to an extent, I want them posting up and dominating on the inside. There's an equally viable situation in that if they're that dominant, it opens up the floor for the rest of the shooters because they'll require a double team.

I guess value is relative to your actual skill set. Shaq's contribution to the 3 point line has always been his ability to command a double team. Another center's contribution might be their ability to hit them and help space the floor for teammates. I don't think there's a right or wrong way.

Also, if you have a Shaq level center and surround him with athletes who can switch up on the perimeter...it diminishes the negative effect of him not being able to guard the perimeter.

 

[Win TWINS!!!]

Next to the Cavs and Thunder, he has done more harm to the Clippers than most

Kevin Love says "hi."

 

[tlance]

Also, if you have a Shaq level center and surround him with athletes who can switch up on the perimeter...it diminishes the negative effect of him not being able to guard the perimeter.

Not really.

Because it is the big who has to switch onto the guard in those pick and roll situations. The big has to be able to defend in space.

If a team has 4 great perimeter defenders and 1 terrible one, you use pick and roll to force that player into a bad matchup. Switching is only a viable alternative when both players involved in the screen action can defend the perimeter.

 

[trojanfan12]

If a team has 4 great perimeter defenders and 1 terrible one, you use pick and roll to force that player into a bad matchup. Switching is only a viable alternative when both players involved in the screen action can defend the perimeter.

Teams pick and rolled Shaq all the time. Didn't seem to make much difference.

The thing you're forgetting about Shaq is how athletic he was for his size, especially in his prime. His biggest problem defending the pick and roll was the same problem that caused him to decline as fast as he did. He was lazy. He wasn't good at defending it because he didn't like defending it.

 

[tlance]

Teams pick and rolled Shaq all the time. Didn't seem to make much difference.

The thing you're forgetting about Shaq is how athletic he was for his size, especially in his prime. His biggest problem defending the pick and roll was the same problem that caused him to decline as fast as he did. He was lazy. He wasn't good at defending it because he didn't like defending it.

Your original point is still completely invalid though. 4 good perimeter defenders capable of switching don't really do all that much to help the 5th who can't guard a ball screen because that is precisely who the offense is going to attack.

And teams in Shaq's day didn't use it nearly enough because most centers posted.

Pick and roll used way more often today. And if he were too lazy to guard it for 5 possessions a game in his prime, how would he feel guarding it 40 times a game today?

The reason teams use it so much now is because it doesn't allow the opposite team to "hide" weak defenders. Get the matchup you want and exploit it.

The 2 best ways to slow Shaq and minimize his impact is to:

1- wear him out defending pick and roll on defense
2- put him on the FT line

If teams are simultaneously going hack a Shaq while going at him in pick and roll, I question whether he would even be playable in end of quarter situations.

 

[Shrinkucci]

The thing is, every superstar in this league comes with drama, or baggage, or both. They all got haters, and they earned them.

But read this, and think about how he plays, and tell me there's any way you could say a bad word about this guy? Almost no one does, and those that do are morons. And I would feel this way no matter what team he was on. For example, Giannis is kinda this way too.

So, tell me where I'm wrong:

Steph Curry’s Game Is More Than Just His Shot

You are not wrong. This guy is one of the least entitled players in the game. He is confident and has a swagger but that is fine. He rarely whines, he is generous on the court, he's a humble and positive interview, he is a fierce competitor and has a great work ethic. He was raised well. Thanks for posting the article--it's a good read.