Maybe Rudy shrunk. But he was a 6'10 player. People do shrink when they get old. But anyways, I'd put money on Ben Wallace being 6'7. Standing next to Rasheed and the pic they posted on nba.com that i can't find now really made me believe that. Oh and standing next to Antonio Mcdyess too. I guess cause I heard that he said he was 6'7 himself made me look at other players listed at his height closely. But dag, just totally got off Yao and Shaq. Isn't he down to 315lbs now? I read that at the wire.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 30 standing ver:</div><div class="quote_post">Maybe Rudy shrunk. But he was a 6'10 player. People do shrink when they get old. But anyways, I'd put money on Ben Wallace being 6'7. Standing next to Rasheed and the pic they posted on nba.com that i can't find now really made me believe that. Oh and standing next to Antonio Mcdyess too. I guess cause I heard that he said he was 6'7 himself made me look at other players listed at his height closely. But dag, just totally got off Yao and Shaq. Isn't he down to 315lbs now? I read that at the wire.</div> Are you talking about the cover of the Piston's championship DVD? It's this: Rasheed definitely looks much taller than Wallace there. Though their feet are obscured, so I can't be 100% from that pic. And its hard to believe that a 6'7 guy can block over 3 shots a game. That has to be some kind of record. But maybe Wallace just shrunk a couple of inches since his rookie season. And according to basketballreference.com, Rudy T is 6'8 (218 lbs) and Hakeem is 6'10 (250 lbs). And if Shaq's is really down to 315, that's pretty amazing. But let's see if he can keep the wait off during the season. Hopefully, he'll be injury free this time.
Damn, I was actually wrong about Rudy's height. Ish that sucks. But anyways that pic of Sheed and Wallace standing next to eachother. That's how it always looks when they stand next to eachother. I remember they interviewed both of them side by side and that is the actual difference in height between them. And yeah I heard he lost another 26lbs just recently to get down to 315. It's kinda hard to believe he lost that much weight in 2 or 3 weeks it seems. Shaq definately has to stay injury free to keep the weight off. He has no metabolism what so ever.
doesnt matter if he lost weight. with mutumbo here to teach defense and agression, yao will dominate shaq......mark my words
That's what I like to hear..but I'll believe it whenit happens..I hope shaq will gets distracted by some miami mama so he wont be too FOCUSED on the ball game
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting clutchcityrelic:</div><div class="quote_post">doesnt matter if he lost weight. with mutumbo here to teach defense and agression, yao will dominate shaq......mark my words</div> I just think they'll just both be unable to stop eachother. Unless Mutombo could give Yao his arms then he'll be able to swat Shaq 15 to 20 times and set a single game record in blocks. Seriously though, I think it will be a draw.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 30 standing ver:</div><div class="quote_post">I just think they'll just both be unable to stop eachother. Unless Mutombo could give Yao his arms then he'll be able to swat Shaq 15 to 20 times and set a single game record in blocks. Seriously though, I think it will be a draw.</div> But, the Rockets have Mutombo at backup center while the Heat have Michael Doleac. So as long as the duo of Yao and Deke can contain Shaq, just count on T-Mac to settle the rest in the two matchups between the Heat and the Rockets this season.
Well hopefully for the Rockets Yao can tire Shaq down when Mutombo subs in. I like the fact the Houston got Dikembe, but the man is old and moves like a turtle. But he can still get some shots. But definately not like how he use too for about the past 3 years now.
Last year, Mutombo still blocked 10 shots in one game with the Knicks. I don't know about his age, but he seriously still has some gas left in his tank.
I just read that up. He did that against the Nets on 1/4/04. Ranked 14th in bpg in 23 mpg. But he does get dunked on a bit more. Haven't you noticed with the exception of that one game that he's late alot of times. I mean he still is a threat to block shots away. Offensively you gotta admit he has some of the slowest moves in history for somebody rather slim. He even dunks in slow motion. But as long as he scores. Just don't understand how the defensive couldn't catch up to it. I mean even Kevin Harland was talking about that had to one of the slowest hook shots I've ever seen.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 30 standing ver:</div><div class="quote_post">I just read that up. He did that against the Nets on 1/4/04. Ranked 14th in bpg in 23 mpg. But he does get dunked on a bit more. Haven't you noticed with the exception of that one game that he's late alot of times. I mean he still is a threat to block shots away. Offensively you gotta admit he has some of the slowest moves in history for somebody rather slim. He even dunks in slow motion. But as long as he scores. Just don't understand how the defensive couldn't catch up to it. I mean even Kevin Harland was talking about that had to one of the slowest hook shots I've ever seen.</div> Maybe he's so slow that it puts the defense out of rhythm. Like a change up.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting realdealbneal:</div><div class="quote_post">Very uncalled for.</div> I wouldnt say that was uncalled for... but it was wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy out of left field.... realdealbneal: have you done the math on the entire run of the bryant/o'neal era to break down the win loss without each player? or just last year? reason I am asking is because I have to agree that the stats you provided dont mean much...sure bryant may have a better percentage, but I can just as easily say that o'neal won more games and to completely make the point either way, you are going to have to include every season they were together.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting harbingerofdoom:</div><div class="quote_post">I wouldnt say that was uncalled for... but it was wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy out of left field.... realdealbneal: have you done the math on the entire run of the bryant/o'neal era to break down the win loss without each player? or just last year? reason I am asking is because I have to agree that the stats you provided dont mean much...sure bryant may have a better percentage, but I can just as easily say that o'neal won more games and to completely make the point either way, you are going to have to include every season they were together.</div> Well, I've discussed this in about 400 other threads but the main reason why I brought up those statistics is because guys would sit and say that without Shaq, Kobe and the Lakers did terrible...which is not true. Also, guys say that Kobe only amounted to about 5% of the reason why the Lakers won three championships, which is also untrue. Without Shaq, there would be no championship...but without Kobe, there wouldn't be any either. In previous years...well, pretty much since Shaq has been a Laker, the team has struggled without him only because they have no other legitimate center to replace him. Rush does an exceptional job when Kobe is hurt...but guys like Slava and...umm...whoever else can play the paint, they are just terrible. If we had any other decent backup center, someone like Okur, the Lakers would've done much better when Shaq was hurt. On the topic at hand... Yao Ming will still have trouble with Shaq...nobody can really defend him, and yes...he's lost 25 lbs so far, but the man is still big. He'll be more agile, just a little less able to finish after a hard foul. So, the key to stopping Shaq this time around is to foul hard...Yao needs to use his weight and hang over Shaq to stop him if a foul is needed. I think the Rockets will fare better now against Shaq...Wade isn't going to be familiar with an offense that runs through the big man, so McGrady can really shut down anything coming from the backcourt (whether it's Wade at SG or at the point). Playing against teams with good, talented centers will give Shaq more reason to stay in the game...which means he'll get tired quicker, so it comes down to two things: fouls, and stamina. I think Yao has the edge, but not by much.
Well, the Rockets have two 7-footers to handle Shaq, while Doleac has to take Yao when Shaq is out. Ouch.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Trip:</div><div class="quote_post">Well, the Rockets have two 7-footers to handle Shaq, while Doleac has to take Yao when Shaq is out. Ouch.</div> Yeah, that's where the Lakers had trouble last year. When Shaq would sit with 3 fouls in the 2nd quarter, or 5 fouls in the 4th...the Lakers had nobody to put on Yao, or any center for that matter. Zhi Zhi and Doleac are going to have a tough time filling Shaq's shoes when he's out...especially if he's out for another injury. IF that happens, the Heat will lose almost every game until he's back, and that is exactly why I thought the Lakers got the better end of the deal in the first place. Yao is no punk...he's developing fast, and he's getting tougher, also. That spells trouble for Shaq, but much more trouble for any other center (or backups that try to be centers) for the rest of the teams.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Trip:</div><div class="quote_post">Well, the Rockets have two 7-footers to handle Shaq, while Doleac has to take Yao when Shaq is out. Ouch.</div>Dikembe's bones are practically dust. And btw the Heat have two 7-footers if its a size thang. Shaq is an old lady I see everyone running him over this year even the best centers in the game weren't effective after the age of 30
Dikembe might be old, but he can definitely still contribute. He is still a top-5 shot blocker in ability, not stats, and can probably handle someone like Shaq at least better than half the centers in the league. And it's not a size thing. For Yao, he has the size and skills, while Mutombo has the shotblocking and the experience.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting realdealbneal:</div><div class="quote_post">Well, I've discussed this in about 400 other threads but the main reason why I brought up those statistics is because guys would sit and say that without Shaq, Kobe and the Lakers did terrible...which is not true. Also, guys say that Kobe only amounted to about 5% of the reason why the Lakers won three championships, which is also untrue. Without Shaq, there would be no championship...but without Kobe, there wouldn't be any either. In previous years...well, pretty much since Shaq has been a Laker, the team has struggled without him only because they have no other legitimate center to replace him. Rush does an exceptional job when Kobe is hurt...but guys like Slava and...umm...whoever else can play the paint, they are just terrible. If we had any other decent backup center, someone like Okur, the Lakers would've done much better when Shaq was hurt. </div> There's a metric which purports to measure a player's value to a particular team. It's called a "Roland Rating." It takes the team's point differential while the player is on the court per minute played and subtracts the point differential while the player is off the court per minute played. It basically measure how well the team performs while the player is on the court versus when the player is sitting on the bench. Check out this link for Roland Rating Rankings last year. It shows Shaq at #5 with a +12.3 rating, and Kobe is at #41 with a +5 rating. Now, what does this tells us? In the games that Shaq plays in, his presence on the court is more valuable to the Lakers relative to the value of Kobe's presence on the court in the games he plays in. I agree with what you say above: Kobe was a vital piece in the puzzle in those Laker championships. But are the Lakers better with only Kobe on the floor, versus with only Shaq on the floor? No, I don't think so. Even last year, I would say they were not.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting heatfan83:</div><div class="quote_post">Dikembe's bones are practically dust. And btw the Heat have two 7-footers if its a size thang. Shaq is an old lady I see everyone running him over this year even the best centers in the game weren't effective after the age of 30 </div> Olajuwon's best years were in his 9th, 10th, and 11th seasons, when he was 29-32 years old. If Shaq can really get his weight down to about 315-325 next year, he'll be amazing. In fact, I'd predict he'll win an MVP by a wide margin.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post">There's a metric which purports to measure a player's value to a particular team. It's called a "Roland Rating." It takes the team's point differential while the player is on the court per minute played and subtracts the point differential while the player is off the court per minute played. It basically measure how well the team performs while the player is on the court versus when the player is sitting on the bench. Check out this link for Roland Rating Rankings last year. It shows Shaq at #5 with a +12.3 rating, and Kobe is at #41 with a +5 rating. Now, what does this tells us? In the games that Shaq plays in, his presence on the court is more valuable to the Lakers relative to the value of Kobe's presence on the court in the games he plays in. I agree with what you say above: Kobe was a vital piece in the puzzle in those Laker championships. But are the Lakers better with only Kobe on the floor, versus with only Shaq on the floor? No, I don't think so. Even last year, I would say they were not.</div> Well...going by that, how can Kevin Garnett be considered the MVP last season, when Sam Cassell was #2 on the Roland Ratings? Those are BS...while Kobe is off the court, Shaq may have the other three starters still playing alongside him and the team does fairly well that way. On the other hand, what about the times that Shaq, Payton and Malone were all benched, and Kobe was on the court with Medvedenko (worst excuse for a center ever), Cook, Walton and Fisher? The Lakers would be getting destroyed. The reason why Kobe's "Roland Rating" would be so low is because when Shaq was out, the Lakers had NO OTHER CENTER to put in the game, and they had problems. However, when Kobe was out...Rush was a decent SG and the Lakers did an OK job. That's like saying that McGrady is nothing compared to Steve Francis, which is untrue. Just because Francis plays with Ming and Mobley doesn't mean he's better than McGrady, who plays with nobody. Kobe has no center when Shaq is out. If the Lakers had invested in another decent center during the years they had Shaq and Kobe, it would be different...but they never did. EDIT: Haha...Roland Ratings are trash. They "claim" that Jermaine O'Neal isn't worth as much as Tinsley, Foster and Miller?
