NBA: You are the GM of a terrible team. You get 1 of these players in their prime.
 

Last night I was at a bar and having a conversation with some of my friends. We got into an NBA discussion. For the first time, I had people that agreed with me on this. At Webmaster Access LA, I was the laughing stock of breakfast one morning.

You are the GM of a terrible team. You have virtually no one. You HAVE to win. Not exactly the title, but you need to make the playoffs. And you need to make noise in the playoffs.

You get one of the following two players in their prime.

Jordan or Shaq.

I take Shaq. Shaq has taken 3 different teams to the finals. I am a Kobe fan. I was always a Jordan fan. But you can shut either of the two down if you can dedicate your resources to doing it.

You can't shut a guy like Shaq down. He is the most dominant player of all time. Nothing against Jordan, it is more of a position thing. The center can change the game the most.

Ok, start the shredding.... :1orglaugh

You only need the "mailman" because he is the only one that can deliver :pimp

http://www.porngreen.com/gfyshit/shaq.jpg

He's magical.

http://www.petcaretips.net/spacejam.jpg

But Jordan can beat monsters

True, tough call.

I'd take Jordan.
I can't remember anybody "shutting him down" in his prime.

Shaq is only good in the paint, Jordan could score from anywhere AND make the free throws if you fouled him.

Shaq has gone to the title game with 3 different teams, but each time he had an All Star guard with him. (Hardaway, Kobe, and Wade)
Jordan didn't win any titles until he got some help, but you said "win now, not necessarily the title", in which case I'll take Jordan.

Hardaway? Wade?

Where is Miami this year?

What did Penny do without Shaq?

Shaq was only good in the paint? That is kind of a big deal. Also, remember, his defense was dominant. Great players were unable to drive to the basket against him.

Shaq in his prime would win many more basketball games than Jordan in his prime.
That being said Michael Jordan is the BEST PLAYER to ever play basketball and probably ever will.

The comparison is silly tho its like asking if you want to take Jerry Rice or Dan Marino. Hands down you would take Dan Marino because he is going to single handedly win you more games, but Jerry Rice is by the best football player ever to play the game at any position.

:thumbsup

Exactly....

You would take

The greatest player to ever play in the game, i think you know who that is.

Compare Michaels championships to how many Shaq won.

End of story.

jordan all the way baby

And if he didn't retire he would have won a few more.

Cory, love ya man, but you have to take Jordan. You need a outside game to drain 3's; Jordan will do that. Fast break to dunk it or lay it up; Jordan will do that. Close game in the playoffs and you need a player to hit key free throws; Jordan will do that.

Too many positives in Jordan's favor.

Defense wins championships

Yep, and Jordan can play defense and generate steals and play defense to stop guys from making 3's

Cory's right - a dominant center always takes precedence - do this - name the truly dominant centers to have played in the NBA, ALL led their teams to a championship - there are many dominant guards who never did.

but really in this argument it's a flat out tie because Jordan is so transcendent amongst guards that he would win championships with any team as would Shaq.

That is the part that nobody gets.

It isn't about who sells shoes.

Any GM in the NBA would take the dominant center. Why do you think the Lakers declined a trade involving Andrew Bynum for Kidd?

You think they would trade Bynum for Lebron?

They wouldn't.

It is about the position. The history of the position says everything.

Jordan was better. Period. But that doesn't matter in this argument.

I'd take Jordan everytime.

Shaq is useless in the playoffs when other teams do the "hack a Shaq". He is the ONLY NBA all star who CANNOT do a simple jumpshot outside of 4 feet. (Have you ever see him do this?) He cannot shoot worth a shit. His only thing is he's a big meatball and can dunk and move others out of the way. He cannot hit a free throw to save his life, (due to the fact that he cannot hit a shot outside of 4 feet, due to the fact that he has never taken an actual jump shot in his life). He only does one handed "tosses" at the rim.

Jordan on the other hand was pure skill on offense and defense. Plus he had the attitude that NO ONE was going to stop him or beat his team.

Shaq is just a big fat ass who can dunk. Jordan is the best player ever.

and this is why there is NO contest in this year's NBA Draft about who goes number one - people are debating between Greg Oden, Kevin Durant and Yoakim Noah - there is no debate, or shouldn't be, you take Oden who is going to be a dominant NBA center for 15 years and win championships. the other two 'might' also lead teams to championships but Oden if healthy is a guarantee to.

i still can't believe he's 18 - he looks 40.

Several reasons.
1. Lakers don't need a true P.G
2. Kidd doesnt know the Triangle Offense
3. Bynum is 19, Kidd has a few more years left, and the Nets wanted more than just Bynum.

LOL

Has that method ever worked? It failed.

Useless in the playoffs?

2001 NBA Finals MVP
2002 NBA Finals MVP


Season TEAM G MIN FG FGA FG% FG3 FG3A FG3% FT FTA FT% PTS AVG
2000-01 L.A. Lakers 16 676 191 344 55.5 0 0 0.0 105 200 52.5 487 30.4
2001-02 L.A. Lakers 19 776 203 384 52.9 0 0 0.0 135 208 64.9 541 28.5
2002-03 L.A. Lakers 12 481 121 226 53.5 0 0 0.0 82 132 62.1 324 27.0
2003-04 L.A. Lakers 22 917 182 307 59.3 0 0 0.0 109 254 42.9 473 21.5
2004-05 Miami 13 431 101 181 55.8 0 0 0.0 50 106 47.2 252 19.4

It troubles me that the writing is on the wall yet no one can see it : )

Like I said, any GM takes Shaq in his prime over Jordan in his prime. Not even a debate.

Would the Lakers pull the trigger on a straight trade: Lebron for Bynum?

Age isn't a factor in this one : )

Clearly you're a huge Shaq fan, so it won't matter what anybody says.

How about his jump shot though?

All it takes to stop Shaq is another fat ass of equal fatass-icity to move his lard butt out of the paint, rendering him useless. No one has done it yet, because no one can move 450 lbs of lard.

I am not a Shaq fan. I think he is lazy, runs his mouth too much and can at times, slow down the flow of the offense.

It is what it is. Any GM in their right mind takes Shaq.

I think Kobe is the best player in the NBA right now, by far.

I still take Shaq in his prime. Just the way it is.

Allowing that Kwame and Mihm are healthy and we have a Center. THen yes.

Nooooooooo way!

I don't really like Kwame man...

I like Bynum better than the two of them, but we need a center right now.

In their prime their effectiveness was similar, however Shaq never had the ability to take a game over. You've got to go with Jordan.

Had Jordan not retired the first and second time, we wouldn't even be having this argument. They would have beat the Houston Rockets in 94 and 95 for sure. That's 8 straight championships.

Then if the Bulls hadn't broken the team up at the end we can only guess how many more they would have won. 1999 was a shortened season because of the strike. I'm pretty sure that Bulls team would have beaten the Spurs for 9 in a row.

The shot at 10 would have been against the Lakers in 2000. That may have been where it came to an end.

See though, I am taking this as individuals on terrible teams. You can't use the Bulls or Lakers in this.

I am telling you that the Guard position can be shut down. The center position can't be. I am taking into account that you have an "out of the universe" talent in both positions.

as a fan though i would rather have my franchise player be a guard or small forward - for me it's not all about championships, i want one, but if i'm going to watch my team play 81(?) games a year i want to enjoy what I'm watching - Jordan, Kobe, Wade etc make your jaw drop a few times a game, i want that.

There is something else to consider here. What Jordan era would you take him at in today's NBA?

Are we talking the young scoring MJ of 1987 that averaged nearly 40ppg, or the all around player later on?

If you are going with the young Jordan, you've got to believe he could average 10ppg higher in today's NBA. That for me clinches the deal over Shaq.

Cory, am I wrong in any of my points?

Greg Oden is going to be the fucking MAN in the NBA.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

No one ever got killed over Shaq's shoes, so I take Jordan.

Are we missing something?

by the time he is 25 he is going to be ridiculous - if i was any NBA team that didn't have a shot at winning the championship this year I'd tank this season to get a shot in the lottery.

heh - last time the Celtics tanked a season to get Tim Duncan they got hosed by the ping pong balls.

You don't remember when Air Jordans came out and people were shooting people and stealing their shoes?

Has anyone ever shut down Jordan for more then a minute in any game at any time?

NOPE.

I agree with you on this Cory. Definitely because of the position...getting a center that can dominate like Shaq is a sure ticket to the finals.

I am glad you understand!

Swoop, the reason you are wrong is because you are forgetting to account for him being on a poor team.

This isn't anti-Jordan, this is me saying that the position is not as strong overall.

Like Mutt said earlier....the center position historically is the way to go. Like the other guy that made the point about Rice being the best in the NFL, but you would still take Marino.

Jordan was never on the worst team in the NBA. Look at what happens to guards in this league when they get sent to terrible teams....

In the NBA, a dominant center means more than a dominant guard. In all cases. I am willing to bet the farm that every GM in the league would make the same decision.

Shaq ain't pretty. He isn't the cut throat guy that Jordan was, Kobe is, whatever....but he is more dominant overall.

Im curious to see what happens to Wade if he has surgery or not, reports say, itll come out this week if he'll go under the knife or not

Dikembe Mutumbo.

Yao Ming.

I'm no NBA expert but I'm sure there are a few more.
The thing is that we define a "dominant player" because he's on a dominant team. If Mutumbo had won 6 championships and Shaq none, you'd be saying Shaq wasn't a dominant center, just someone who was freakishly tall.
Even if his scoring and blocking numbers were exactly the same for his entire career.

Jordan.. he can single handily win games on his own, not to mention hes the big ticket when it comes to merchandise sales and tickets

Jordan Rules!

I got your point cory...I too will also choose Shaq over Jordan only because I want to have an instant result without even changing the roster, but if this would be for a long term plans I will choose Jordan and change the roster of the team to compliment Jordan's style of play.

Your question is somewhat vague and basically impossible to answer without knowing more about the team. Since you say the team is "terrible", I'm going to deduce that it has trouble scoring, most likely a poor point guard and no depth. I agree with you on the rarity of a dominant center, especially these days. However, Shaq needs to receive the ball in position, he has to rely on his teammates to get him the ball in the flow of the game. Jordan on the other hand was able to create his own shot without his teammates assistance much like Kobe is able to do.

I completely disagree with you that you can't shut Shaq down. When Shaq was in his prime, he often was triple teamed and forced to pass out of the block to his teammates who had open shots. Many times the Lakers would kill a team even though Shaq had a sub par game, because the other team took him out of the game and hoped that his teammates couldn't hit open shots. Jordan however always had the ball in his hands on the perimeter and was extremely difficult to take out of a game.

So basically, if the team is "terrible" as you say, then they probably have a lack of scorers, which would mean that other teams could double/triple team Shaq knowing that his teammates would have trouble hitting open shots. Dominant centers have thrived on teams that had good outside shooting, because teams couldn't always double team in the paint for fear that their good shooters would get open shots. As you phrased your question, Jordan is a much better fit for a "terrible team". If you had phrased the question, "If a GM had the first pick in the draft or had to choose one player to start a team", I'd most likely have answered Shaq.

Yep....agreed.