BuzzerBeater Forums

Non-BB Global (English) > Shaq: I'm done

Shaq: I'm done

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
186343.22 in reply to 186343.21
Date: 6/7/2011 12:51:33 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
Well, if you dont think there is any difference between when zones were illegal and when they became legal, I guess there is no difference.

This Post:
00
186343.23 in reply to 186343.22
Date: 6/7/2011 5:42:23 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
532532
Well, if you dont think there is any difference between when zones were illegal and when they became legal, I guess there is no difference.

Well... without having read the article, it's a lil' difficult to comment. But wouldn't the fact that zone D's limit them - and are now legal, be one reason why the 'very-big-power-center' is disappearing?

http://with-malice.com/ - The half-crazed ramblings of a Lakers fanatic in Japan
This Post:
00
186343.24 in reply to 186343.23
Date: 6/7/2011 8:50:11 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
Well, if you dont think there is any difference between when zones were illegal and when they became legal, I guess there is no difference.

Well... without having read the article, it's a lil' difficult to comment. But wouldn't the fact that zone D's limit them - and are now legal, be one reason why the 'very-big-power-center' is disappearing?



exactly my point

This Post:
00
186343.25 in reply to 186343.24
Date: 6/8/2011 12:37:16 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
532532
Well, if you dont think there is any difference between when zones were illegal and when they became legal, I guess there is no difference.

Well... without having read the article, it's a lil' difficult to comment. But wouldn't the fact that zone D's limit them - and are now legal, be one reason why the 'very-big-power-center' is disappearing?



exactly my point

I'm confused then. Yes, the rule changes have impacted "dinosaur" centers - perhaps more than any other position. But that doesn't mean there aren't great anchors - just that they have a (largely) different skillset now. As Shaq himself said: there are far more "finesse" centers now.
Additionally, I think it goes to the point of perspective: we're looking back at a very large timespan, and saying that there were heaps of talented giants "way back when", when in fact they were spread out over several generations.

http://with-malice.com/ - The half-crazed ramblings of a Lakers fanatic in Japan
This Post:
00
186343.26 in reply to 186343.25
Date: 6/8/2011 12:47:39 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
If you say so

This Post:
11
186343.27 in reply to 186343.26
Date: 6/8/2011 12:49:52 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
532532
If you say so

Ouch. Not exactly furthering the discussion, didn't mean to upset/annoy you. You disagree with my premise of a time-frame?

http://with-malice.com/ - The half-crazed ramblings of a Lakers fanatic in Japan
This Post:
00
186343.28 in reply to 186343.27
Date: 6/8/2011 2:36:37 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
As I said before, I am not just talking about the Shaqs, Howards, Wilts, and Kareems. The center position isnt what it used to be, with the zone defenses particularly useful against inside players. This negatively impacts center stats from star to scrub. It is my belief and my point that even such inside dominant players like Howard would put up better stats in the absence of zones. If we compare stats from Wilt or Kareem or even Shaq to the inside dominant players of today or the future, no matter how rare they are, the old timers will have the benefit of 'no-zone' stats.

This Post:
00
186343.29 in reply to 186343.28
Date: 6/8/2011 5:28:25 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
532532
Aaaaah.
But the "old timers" also don't have the advantage of the 3pt line that current centers do. There's no where near as much collapsing in on the basket as there was in times gone by. Also, the game clock. It ensures that shots HAVE to be made, and the game just doesn't devolve into a game of "keepings-off".
Both these things favor the modern center, and significantly so.

http://with-malice.com/ - The half-crazed ramblings of a Lakers fanatic in Japan
This Post:
00
186343.30 in reply to 186343.29
Date: 6/9/2011 3:33:09 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
345345
What does zone have anything to do with it. In his first ten years Shaq would have dominated any type of inside defense Or did you see another 7 foot 1, 325 lbs. monster not be able to dominate the paint?:D

My point is, zone defense doesn't have anything to do with it. There still are some powerful centers out there. The single difference is that modern centers have developed a jump shot. And there aren't that many teams that play successful zone either... (IMO)

This Post:
00
186343.31 in reply to 186343.30
Date: 6/9/2011 3:53:57 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
This is hilarious stuff.

This Post:
00
186343.32 in reply to 186343.30
Date: 6/11/2011 7:05:07 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
532532
What does zone have anything to do with it. In his first ten years Shaq would have dominated any type of inside defense Or did you see another 7 foot 1, 325 lbs. monster not be able to dominate the paint?:D

My point is, zone defense doesn't have anything to do with it. There still are some powerful centers out there. The single difference is that modern centers have developed a jump shot. And there aren't that many teams that play successful zone either... (IMO)

Not the point being discussed. Yes, Shaq would have dominated any defense. So would have Kareem, Wilt, Russell.
My point is that I think - as you suggest - that the position's evolved somewhat. And that to look back over a 50 year span, pull out half a dozen great centers then bemoan the lack of them today is a little incorrect.

http://with-malice.com/ - The half-crazed ramblings of a Lakers fanatic in Japan
Advertisement