<font color="Red">Before posting in this thread, please respect everyone's opinions. Also, this thread is <u>not</u> a Shaq vs. Kobe thread...it mostly deals with the roles each had on the Laker squad, and how the Miami Heat and the Los Angeles Lakers will fare this season, not how good these two will do against each other. When responding, all I ask is to please respect everyone's opinion and try and keep from personal attacks, harsh flaming, etc. Thanks.</font> First and foremost, I have a lot of respect for the Heat organization, whether it has anything to do with Shaq or not. Last year, I was cheering for the Heat to win the Eastern Conference title. I've always wanted the Heat to do well. I just felt like I should at least establish this before I continue with this thread. Now, onto the Heat of this season. I'll begin with a couple of guys off your roster... Dwyane Wade...I see tons of potential in him. He plays really good defense and really turned a LeBron-dominated season into a Wade Show in the playoffs. I respected what he did for the Heat last season. Eddie Jones...the man is a threat from nearly everywhere on the court. I see him handing the team to Shaq, yet I don't see this as an easy decision for Jones, considering him and Shaq have proven a patched relationship yet. These are two of the five guys that really made a difference last year on the Heat (not counting Caron, since he was injured and it affected his play). Rafer Alston is now in Toronto. Lamar Odom, Brian Grant, and Caron have all moved on to Los Angeles. Okay, for the rest of this post, there will be negatives and positives, but this is the situation for every team in the league, not just the Heat...so please feel free to dispute my opinions, but please debate these in a mature manner, and you'll get the same amount of respect back from me. That's my promise. Shaq's role in the championships were just about the same value as anyone elses. Prove it? In 1995-1996, the Lakers (this is without Shaq and Kobe) won 53 games that season. The next season, with the signing of Shaq and getting Kobe's draft rights, the Lakers won 56 games (3 more than the previous year). So...did Shaq really make that big of a difference? The next year, the Lakers went 61-21 (very impressive, huh?), yet they also sent <u>four</u> players to the All-Star game in Shaq, Van Exel, Jones, and the youngest to appear in an AS Game in history, Kobe Bryant (who scored a team-high 18 points and 6 rebounds, by the way). Next season was the lockout season, and the Lakers finished at 31-19. Once again, they lost in the playoffs. So, when was Shaq ever going to take over as the sole contributor? I think everyone overrated Shaq just a little, because he averaged incredible stats in the NBA Finals (yet he was matched up with Todd MacCulloch and Rik Smits in two of those three Finals). Once Jackson came into the organization, Kobe was just starting to show signs of great improvement, scoring over 22 PPG and averaging 6 boards and 5 assists that championship year. The next year? Over 28 PPG, and similar stats in everything else. Shaq isn't single-handedly responsible for those championships like everyone believes. No Shaq, no championships. No Kobe...no championships. No Phil Jackson? Possibly no championships, also. How well did Michael Jordan do without Pippen? He did nothing as far as rings go...and it took Jordan/Pippen 4 years to get it done...just like Kobe/Shaq. Well, it took them until 1990 (the same year Phil took over as head coach...similar to the Lakers' situation) and the Bulls won the rings that year. When Phil took over the Lakers in 1999, Kobe/Shaq won their first title. Similar? About Miami...the Heat came off of a 42-win season last year (if I'm not mistaken, I'm going off the top of my head here). Lamar Odom did well as the team's main go-to guy, Eddie Jones provided great leadership, and Dwyane Wade surprised everyone by putting up decent numbers that were impressive for a rookie NOT named LeBron or Carmelo. Brian Grant did exceptional at the five, yet his natural position is power forward (keep this in mind). Rafer did well, and hit clutch shots and 4th quarter shots when needed. However, even though this team looked to be a contender on paper, they didn't get it done against the Pacers. Same goes for the Lakers, who had Shaq and Kobe...but had acquired Gary Payton and Karl Malone in the offseason. Although the Lakers did great and ended up with the West championship, they were dismantled by a Detroit Pistons team that wanted it more. Why? The fingers point more at the other players, not Kobe and Shaq. Kobe's attempts to pass it to Shaq (even if he tried every possession) were blinded by a swarming Pistons' defense...where Rip and Prince doubled Kobe, while Rasheed Wallace dropped away from the PF (who was not Malone) just slightly enough to intercept passes (from Kobe to Shaq) in the lane. The Pistons knew the following would work because of these two factors: Kobe could not drive the lane with two defenders like Rip and Prince on him, and Shaq could not move too far away from the hoop to get a closer pass because he can't play that far away from the hoop (with the Wallaces just anticipating the pass). So, in reality, the Pistons beat Kobe and Shaq, not the Lakers. The rest of the team couldn't shoot worth a lick, and Larry Brown saw this all throughout the playoffs. It's called lack of a Laker bench and a great Pistons defense...and it gave the Pistons a championship. Now for the trade. Shaq goes to the Heat for Odom, Butler, Grant and a draft pick. Everyone was shocked...but not me. The reason this trade happened was not because Kobe wanted him out...not because Shaq wanted out...but because Buss and Kupchak realized that it was time to separate them. Shaq and Kobe's debating began at the end of the third championship, when Kobe walked out on the MVP presentation to Shaq. Ever since then, the two have been at each other's throats...from arguing in the locker room to speaking to the media about each other. It was a Hollywood story? Not exactly. Buss, Kupchak and the organization realized that the great duo weren't going to win anymore titles...so they parted ways with Shaq, who would only be with the Lakers for a few more years before a possible retirement. It was a great decision for both teams. Let's talk about the upcoming season now. The Miami Heat have lost Odom, Butler, and Grant...but gained Shaq. The Lakers have lost Shaq and Gary Payton (Fox doesn't even count), and have gained Odom, Butler, Grant, Divac, Mihm, Atkins, and Jones. This is huge for the Lakers...depth has always been a problem. Don't think so? Well, who was Shaq's backup? Medvedenko, a guy who has NO defense and isn't even a true center. When Shaq was down and out, the Lakers had no center whatsoever. The Heat are now in that situation, but with a better player in Doleac...but come on guys, don't give Doleac too much credit. Things for the Heat to think about would be...<font color="Red">how long will it take for Wade and Shaq to develop chemistry?</font> It took Kobe and Shaq 4 years...one of the best duos of the 90's next to Jordan and Pippen (can't dispute this for sure). <font color="Red">How well will Shaq and Jones get along, after their problems in Los Angeles?</font> Although this is said to be resolved, that doesn't mean it is. <font color="Red">How well will the bench play for the Heat?</font> You're talking Doleac, Allen, Wright, Butler...these guys will really have to bring with them a mindset that they will have to play a lot of minutes, although they may not. Finally...<font color="Red">what if Shaq and Wade suffer injuries, like they both did last year?</font> Shaq can't do it by himself...and Wade can't either...so if one is out for 15 games, and then the other for 15 games more, they may lose about 20 of those altogether. It could be a better idea for them to both miss 15 at the same time, rather than separately. The Lakers are also faced with problems, such as a weak point guard and no true dominant big man in the West. However, the Lakers don't exactly need a center who scores...they need one that passes, and they have that in Vlade Divac. Adding Odom and putting Brian Grant back to his natural position (where he plays best)...with a hopefully healthy Caron Butler will be an improvement (believe it or not) for the Lakers in those areas. If we get Malone back and a decent PG (or if Vujacic develops, or Kobe runs the point), we may do much better than everyone expects. Me? I am optimistic, much like the Heat fans (and they should be), and I will predict a 56-win season and a 3rd seed in the playoffs (the Kings and Suns won't beat the Lakers out for the division, with all of their problems). Why the huge prediction? Well, the Lakers will need to pass the ball much more, and they have Odom, Kobe, and Divac (all great passers...remember the Kobe debating about passing earlier) that will have to really get each other involved to improve everyone's game...and this is the key for the Lakers. Defense is set...Butler and Kobe are great defenders, and we all know how Vlade flops so it's not a problem. For Miami, I see them going into the second round of the playoffs and meeting up with either the Pacers or the Pistons. If it's the Pistons...guys...you have to admit that you may be in trouble. The Pacers could be beat, depending on how bad Wade takes over...because Jermaine won't let Shaq punk him under the basket. Artest will play a huge factor in that series, however, and may cause a lot of trouble for Wade when he attacks the basket. Getting the ball into Shaq will be beneficial, but he can't do it all either...so Jones will have to step up and pull open jumpers, while Udonis uses his role as more of a strong rebounder than a scoring option. The reason I made this thread was to clear up a huge amount of controversy (and a lot of confusion) between the Lakers, the Heat, and myself and the fans. I don't care much for Shaq...I never really did have respect for him and I've stated my reasons why in another thread in the Heat forum (a personal problem that I encountered with him earlier in the year didn't help), so when I say that I hope for the worst for the Heat, it's because I don't want to see Shaq achieve anything anymore. However, I can't stop an NBA team's achievements or downfalls, so I'm just stating the facts. I didn't join this site just to talk about the Lakers...I did it for the purpose to discuss all teams and the upcoming season. Hopefully I've touched base with everyone, and I've explained everything to the best of my knowledge. Good luck to both the Heat and the Lakers (and all teams) in the 2004-2005 NBA season. :thumbsup: -Brandon
One thing I'll disagree with is that I DO think Shaq can carry this team in the East even if Wade gets injured. In the West, it might be harder, but in the East Shaq will be so dominant that he could carry the team by himself. Can he win a championship all by himself? No. But he can make a team a title contender all by himself. In fact, I'd say there's only two players in the league who you can say that about: Duncan and Shaq. Also, you said that Shaq didn't make a big difference with the team until Kobe developed and Phil Jackson came on board. This simply isn't true. You have to look at more than simply regular season record. In 1995-1996 season, the Lakers at a very good year. When Magic Johnson returned, that's when the Lakers really started to pick it up and by the end of the year they had 53 wins. That earned them a matchup with the defending champs Houston Rockets in the first round, and they lost in 4 games. Next season, enter Shaq. Yeah, they won ONLY 3 more games, but the team was different and no Magic. But look at their postseason. They got to the second round for the first time in several years. In the 3 years Shaq played with the Lakers before the three-peat, the Lakers always got past the first-round, and the teams they lost to were two VERY good Utah teams which went to the Finals, and a Spurs team which eventually won the championship. The fact is, the Lakers became a SIGNIFICANTLY better team with Shaq on board. They were finally legitimate contenders. You keep saying that Shaq couldn't have won those championships without Kobe, and vice versa. Ok, maybe that's true. But how about the fact that Shaq won Finals MVP each time? Do you really think that was undeserved? To me, it was absolutely clear that Shaq was THE MAN on those championship teams and Kobe was the sidekick. Just as Drexler was the sidekick to Olajuwon in 1995.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post">One thing I'll disagree with is that I DO think Shaq can carry this team in the East even if Wade gets injured. In the West, it might be harder, but in the East Shaq will be so dominant that he could carry the team by himself. Can he win a championship all by himself? No. But he can make a team a title contender all by himself. In fact, I'd say there's only two players in the league who you can say that about: Duncan and Shaq.</div> It still has yet to be proven, with both players...actually, with any player. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post">Also, you said that Shaq didn't make a big difference with the team until Kobe developed and Phil Jackson came on board. This simply isn't true. You have to look at more than simply regular season record. In 1995-1996 season, the Lakers at a very good year. When Magic Johnson returned, that's when the Lakers really started to pick it up and by the end of the year they had 53 wins. That earned them a matchup with the defending champs Houston Rockets in the first round, and they lost in 4 games. Next season, enter Shaq. Yeah, they won ONLY 3 more games, but the team was different and no Magic. But look at their postseason. They got to the second round for the first time in several years. In the 3 years Shaq played with the Lakers before the three-peat, the Lakers always got past the first-round, and the teams they lost to were two VERY good Utah teams which went to the Finals, and a Spurs team which eventually won the championship. The fact is, the Lakers became a SIGNIFICANTLY better team with Shaq on board. They were finally legitimate contenders.</div> Actually...in 1994-1995 (without Magic), the Lakers won 48 games and went to the second round in the playoffs before getting eliminated by the Spurs. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post">But how about the fact that Shaq won Finals MVP each time? Do you really think that was undeserved? To me, it was absolutely clear that Shaq was THE MAN on those championship teams and Kobe was the sidekick. Just as Drexler was the sidekick to Olajuwon in 1995.</div> Okay, I tried to explain this...but I'll do better. You have...Michael Jordan, and his defender is a guy who has NO defense or offense whatsoever...how well will Jordan do? He'll post 69 points and make that guy look bad. Same with Shaq. Shaq's three matchups in those three Finals were Todd MacCulloch, Rik Smits and Dikembe Mutombo. We all know that MacCulloch and Smits aren't even close to being good centers...and even though Dikembe was the DPOY, he was way too skinny to hold Shaq. Take these three guys and replace them with Duncan, Ming and Ben Wallace. Would Shaq score or rebound as much? No chance.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Actually...in 1994-1995 (without Magic), the Lakers won 48 games and went to the second round in the playoffs before getting eliminated by the Spurs. </div> Damn, I really thought I was on to something with that. Oh well. Still, consider that with Shaq the only teams the Lakers have lost to are the Utah Jazz (who would be champions if Michael Jordan stayed retired), the Spurs and Pistons who of course became champions. And the Lakers were always legitimate contenders with Shaq. That really wasn't the case before. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Okay, I tried to explain this...but I'll do better. You have...Michael Jordan, and his defender is a guy who has NO defense or offense whatsoever...how well will Jordan do? He'll post 69 points and make that guy look bad. Same with Shaq. Shaq's three matchups in those three Finals were Todd MacCulloch, Rik Smits and Dikembe Mutombo. We all know that MacCulloch and Smits aren't even close to being good centers...and even though Dikembe was the DPOY, he was way too skinny to hold Shaq. Take these three guys and replace them with Duncan, Ming and Ben Wallace. Would Shaq score or rebound as much? No chance.</div> I disagree. Shaq would have manhandled any of them. Shaq was far and away more dominant than any other player at his position. In fact, I'd say that no player was as dominant at his position since Kareem in the early 70s. And that includes the great Michael Jordan. (I just love big sweeping pronouncements. ) Now, I'll stress that this doesn't mean that Shaq is a better player than Kobe, necessarily. Only that he dominates over other players at his position to a much greater degree than Kobe, thus making him particularly valuable to his team. If you think Kobe is a better player, fine. I'm not going to argue that point, because that depends really on the criteria we use. But I do think its fair to say that Shaq was the more valuable player overall during the Laker's championship years. Yeah, his size gives him an undeniable advantage. Doesn't matter.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post"> Still, consider that with Shaq the only teams the Lakers have lost to are the Utah Jazz (who would be champions if Michael Jordan stayed retired), the Spurs and Pistons who of course became champions. And the Lakers were always legitimate contenders with Shaq. That really wasn't the case before.</div> Well, you could say the same about Kobe, also, who arrived in Los Angeles a few days before Shaq signed with the Lakers. And before, two years before, they were contenders...but that was because they picked up a good handful of players to become a better team. Also, Del Harris was Coach of the Year in 1994-1995, with a lineup of Van Exel, Jones, and Ceballos...the Lakers lost to the Spurs in 6 games. In 1995-1996, the Lakers lost to the Rockets 3-1 in the first round...funny though, because the Rockets went on to face Shaq and the Magic, who were swept in the Finals by the Rockets a few weeks later, 4-0. Also, Shaq had Penny, who was actually matching his point total at times. Some say that Shaq was too young to win it...but that's not true either, since everyone was already comparing him to Wilt, and since his second and third seasons, he was averaging nearly 30 points and double figures in boards. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post">Shaq would have manhandled any of them. Shaq was far and away more dominant than any other player at his position. In fact, I'd say that no player was as dominant at his position since Kareem in the early 70s. And that includes the great Michael Jordan.</div> Yes, Shaq may have done well against them...but would he have averaged the same stats against those centers (guys like Duncan, Ming, Robinson, Big Ben) compared to MacCulloch and Rik Smits? Also, just for the record, Shaq could never be compared to Jordan, even in relation to how well they dominated their position...because Karl Malone was holding Shaq to 6 points in Laker scrimmages all of last summer, and there are very few centers in the league that are like Wilt and Shaq anyways. If Jordan was the only SG that played good, he would've been the guy having 40+ point seasons, and everyone would've been going <div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post">Now, I'll stress that this doesn't mean that Shaq is a better player than Kobe, necessarily. Only that he dominates over other players at his position to a much greater degree than Kobe, thus making him particularly valuable to his team. If you think Kobe is a better player, fine. I'm not going to argue that point, because that depends really on the criteria we use. But I do think its fair to say that Shaq was the more valuable player overall during the Laker's championship years. Yeah, his size gives him an undeniable advantage. Doesn't matter.</div> Shaq can dominate a player better than Kobe. Kobe can dominate the court better than Shaq. This can't be argued...because Shaq only plays within a box, while Kobe runs around and can hurt you from anywhere. However, this is exactly what a center is for, so there's really no point in asking who's more dangerous or who is better, because Kobe has yet to hit his prime, whereas Shaq's prime <u>may have</u> already left the building...but who knows...we'll see if that's true or not this season.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting realdealbneal:</div><div class="quote_post">Well, you could say the same about Kobe, also, who arrived in Los Angeles a few days before Shaq signed with the Lakers. And before, two years before, they were contenders...but that was because they picked up a good handful of players to become a better team. Also, Del Harris was Coach of the Year in 1994-1995, with a lineup of Van Exel, Jones, and Ceballos...the Lakers lost to the Spurs in 6 games.</div> True, but no one can seriously say that in Kobe's first three years in the league the Lakers were contenders because of him. He was an important part of the team, but no where near the commanding player he is today. The Lakers were contenders predominantly for ONE reason: they had Shaq. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">In 1995-1996, the Lakers lost to the Rockets 3-1 in the first round...funny though, because the Rockets went on to face Shaq and the Magic, who were swept in the Finals by the Rockets a few weeks later, 4-0. Also, Shaq had Penny, who was actually matching his point total at times.</div> You have your years mixed up there. Shaq got swept by the Rockets in 1994-1995. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Some say that Shaq was too young to win it...but that's not true either, since everyone was already comparing him to Wilt, and since his second and third seasons, he was averaging nearly 30 points and double figures in boards.</div> That Shaq was so dominant so early is a testament to his greatness. But the fact is you can't win championships with a young, inexperienced team. I don't care how good the star player is. In Shaq's third year with a very young team, he reached the NBA finals. And he lost to a superior team, plain and simple. No shame in that. There aren't many players who could have achieved that. After that year, every team Shaq has lost to in the playoffs won the championship or were the Utah Jazz just didn't have enough to overcome the Bulls. Again, no shame in that. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Yes, Shaq may have done well against them...but would he have averaged the same stats against those centers (guys like Duncan, Ming, Robinson, Big Ben) compared to MacCulloch and Rik Smits?</div> Maybe not. But it wouldn't be much different. In those championship years, Shaq was unstoppable. I don't care who you put on them. And he would dominate over his defender MUCH, MUCH more than Kobe could over his. Doesn't matter if it was Duncan or Wallace. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Also, just for the record, Shaq could never be compared to Jordan, even in relation to how well they dominated their position...because Karl Malone was holding Shaq to 6 points in Laker scrimmages all of last summer, and there are very few centers in the league that are like Wilt and Shaq anyways.</div> Shaq isn't going to be dunking on Karl Malone in a freaking scrimmage. Come on. Firstly, it's practice. Shaq isn't going to expend the energy just to embarass his teammate. Secondly, he might hurt the guy. I don't think that really proves anything. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">If Jordan was the only SG that played good, he would've been the guy having 40+ point seasons, and everyone would've been going </div> Maybe I went to far with the Jordan thing. I think its close, though. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Shaq can dominate a player better than Kobe. Kobe can dominate the court better than Shaq. This can't be argued...because Shaq only plays within a box, while Kobe runs around and can hurt you from anywhere. However, this is exactly what a center is for, so there's really no point in asking who's more dangerous or who is better, because Kobe has yet to hit his prime, whereas Shaq's prime <u>may have</u> already left the building...but who knows...we'll see if that's true or not this season.</div> Yep. It should be fun.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post">True, but no one can seriously say that in Kobe's first three years in the league the Lakers were contenders because of him. He was an important part of the team, but no where near the commanding player he is today. The Lakers were contenders predominantly for ONE reason: they had Shaq.</div> The Lakers were favorites to win the West a year before Shaq came to the team...so you have to give credit to Del Harris, Van Exel, Jones, Ceballos, and the others for this. By the time the Lakers did win the title, Kobe was in the lineup. Before that, Kobe barely broke 10-15 minutes on the court (first two seasons, anyways). About the rest, I'm not going to quote it...but Shaq would hurt Malone? Nah...Malone has one of the best bodies in the league, even at his age. The injury he suffered was more of a freak accident really...not because he was slamming around the hoop for a rebound or whatever. Also, yeah...I mixed up the years, but it was pretty much the same Rockets team...considering they won championships for both years. The Magic relied on more than just Shaq, also. Penny was no punk...and Dennis Scott/Nick Anderson's threes were keeping them in the game, not necessarily winning it since they didn't win once though which shocked me. Either way, pro-Shaq, pro-Kobe...I'll agree that we both have put up a good debate, but now I'm wondering if anyone else would like to respond to this thread
I didn't read the arguments throught because I gotta run in a minute... However, I saw the mention of the 95-96 laker team, and I wanna clear up a misconception (even tho it probably has little to do with the arguments, lol). That team was very good coming into the year, but when playoff time rolled around, they were in the mist of turmoil. Recall that was the year NVE shoved the ref, and Magic bumped the other ref. In addition, while Magic put up good numbers, (I hate to say this about him cuz I love the guy) but he messed up the team's chemistry that year. Everything was out of whack that season, and u could see them coming apart going into the playoffs..I truely believe if Magic didn't come back, the Lakers would've made it further than they had....(of course, then the team wouldn't have been dismantled, the Lakers wouldn't have drafted Kobe, and sign Shaq, etc... so no regrets) sorry, that was OT, i know ...
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting notMuchgame:</div><div class="quote_post">I didn't read the arguments throught because I gotta run in a minute... However, I saw the mention of the 95-96 laker team, and I wanna clear up a misconception (even tho it probably has little to do with the arguments, lol). That team was very good coming into the year, but when playoff time rolled around, they were in the mist of turmoil. Recall that was the year NVE shoved the ref, and Magic bumped the other ref. In addition, while Magic put up good numbers, (I hate to say this about him cuz I love the guy) but he messed up the team's chemistry that year. Everything was out of whack that season, and u could see them coming apart going into the playoffs..I truely believe if Magic didn't come back, the Lakers would've made it further than they had....(of course, then the team wouldn't have been dismantled, the Lakers wouldn't have drafted Kobe, and sign Shaq, etc... so no regrets) sorry, that was OT, i know ...</div> You could be right. I thought I remember that with Magic they had a better winning percentage. Perhaps that wasn't the case. Edit: I just checked the game log from that year: http://www.lakerstats.com/schedulereg.php?season=9596r Magic returned on Jan 30th against Golden State. Before that, the Lakers had a 24-18 record. After Magic's return, the Lakers went 29-11 including winning 7 of their last 8 games going into the playoffs. Is the turmoil you're talking about something that's not reflected in the actual wins and losses?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post">You could be right. I thought I remember that with Magic they had a better winning percentage. Perhaps that wasn't the case. Edit: I just checked the game log from that year: http://www.lakerstats.com/schedulereg.php?season=9596r Magic returned on Jan 30th against Golden State. Before that, the Lakers had a 24-18 record. After Magic's return, the Lakers went 29-11 including winning 7 of their last 8 games going into the playoffs. Is the turmoil you're talking about something that's not reflected in the actual wins and losses?</div> No, they got a boost when magic came back, but you could see the team breaking apart near the end of that year. It might not reflect in their record (because the schedule was soft at the end), but it happened and you could see it. When situations got tough, they had no clear leader. NVE was their leader, but Magic was the most respected.
