Quote:
Originally Posted by sike
I'd take Shaq or Hakeem over Magic or Bird to start my franchise...and wouldn't even blink.
I'll always take the stud post scorer/defender over a stud guard/forward.
As for all the "winning" Magic and Bird did...I don't mean at all to minimize their contribution (as their's was preeminent for their particular team), but I'm sure it was nice to play with all those fellow Hall of Famers for their ENTIRE careers.  |
In most instances I would agree with you on the talent disparity level, but not in the case of Shaq. He played with great talent for the vast majority of his prime career. No, he didn't have multiple HOF players on his team but when you compare his team talent to what he had to compete against, he had just as much help as anybody. Magic and Bird did play with tons of HOF players, but they also had to beat teams with tons of HOF players. It's not like either of those squads had a clear talent advantage over any team that they had to face in the Finals (Pistons, Sixers, Lakers, Celtics). The Celtics did twice with the Rockets, but they did have to bea he Sixers to get there in 81 and beat the original twin towers in 86. Now you compare that to some of the talent on squads that Shaq beat for titles, like the Pacers or Nets. I would argue that he faced bigger mismatches to get his rings than Magic and Bird did.
I agree with taking the stud big man over the wing, but not when the wing is a big man that can play small. Magic and Bird are both 20, 10, 7 players (and sometimes Bird gave you 29, 10, 6). That type of versatility is extremely rare. We have only seen it in 4 players (Bird, Magic, Oscar, Wilt since he did lead the league in assists once).