Why do people insenuate that Shaquille O'Neal was the sole reason the Lakers won the Championship? Basketball is a team sport and it was obviously the triangle offense that won the Lakers dynasty those rings. It was Shaq AND Kobe, a combined effort, and neither were more responsible than the other, regardless of what either of them or you crazy fans might think.
Kobe Bryant is carrying the Lakers on his back right now, and has them in the playoffs, but it's obvious they won't win. What does that mean? It means one man can win games, but only teams can win championships. Shaq didn't win the Heat a Championship, either. Just like in LA, it was a combination of Shaq and a supreme gaurd in Dwayne Wade. It's disrespectful to Wade to say that the Heat won because of Shaq. So anyone who argues "look what's happened to Shaq as compared to Kobe" to prove that Shaq is a better player is obviously false. W/O Wade, Shaq isn't winning a title this year either.
What is your take and why?
2007-03-28 05:54:33 · 9 answers · asked by Adam C 4 in Sports ➔ Basketball
Kster was right about one thing: your point is valid. The BOTTOM LINE is that if you put Shaq in the far tougher Western Conference and take away Wade, he doesn't get past the first round either! This is beyond obvious. Two superstars are going to be better than one. If you gave Kobe Duncan, Lebron, Nash, or Nowitski (i.e. players of Wade's caliber) and he still couldn't win a title you would have an arguement, but right now you do not. Shaq had Wade, Kode had Odom. That's the bottom line. And Big K...
Somehow you seek to justify the assumption that Kobe can't be a "megastar" without Shaq. Shaq's been gone for 3 years now and, guess what! He's still a megastar! In fact he's even more of a star, in terms of statistics, than he was then. There goes that theory.
And to all who point to the Heat being in first place right now, this is so ignorant I don't even know where to begin. The Lakers are 38-33 and 15.5 games behind first place Phoenix. The Heat are all of one half game better at 38-32 and are in first place. The only thing this proves is how much the Eastern Conference Sucks! There is one team in the East that has an even a remote chance of beating any one of three Western teams in the finals and that team ain't the Heat. If the Piston starting five all got the flu for two weeks and Lebron James broke his leg, the Heat could get to the finals without Wade because the rest of the east is so bad, but once there, do you honestly think he would have a snowball's chance without Wade???? He would do what he did in Orlando - lose 4 straight to a far superior western team.
Sorry to be longwinded, but apparently some people seem not to be able to grasp this obvious point: Shaq without a dominant guard equals futility. Kobe without a superstar wingman equals futility. They needed each other and neither can do it alone.
2007-03-28 08:59:16 · answer #1 · answered by space boy 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is funny you should ask this question cause I was really thinking about it a week ago about the triangle between Shaq and Kobe. Shaq could not win a championship with a superstar guard on his side ( Kobe, and Wade). Remember his time in Orlando. Penny Hardway had some great seasons there with Shaq but they could never win a title. SHaq could not get them there( if you want to call it an individual achievement). When Shaq played with Kobe he could win, same with Wade. Now Kobe has not been able to win championships without a great center( besides the Bulls legecy can you rememeber any team that won a title without a very good Center). Most teams need a duo to get to the playoffs, they need an awesome duo to get through the finals. The Pistons in 2004 had a starting five instead of a duo but all other champs in history has duos. Not to mention the bench always plays a role in championships. L.A. needs a duo to get to the finals. Odom is a posiblity but L.A. neesd a Center with the ability to dominate. I hope Bynum will develop into that guy. But you are right, most people think that winning is an individual achieve, BUT THEY WERE FOOLED, CAUSE IT TAKES FIVE BABY.
2007-03-28 06:22:37 · answer #2 · answered by r_lodermeier 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Finally somebody that understands about basketball!. I've been waiting for this question to come up for so long!. Your statement is totally true Shaq was their main player, but it was the one and two punch that Shaq and Kobe established plus the addition of great role players what made them win 3 championships in a row. The triangle offense fitted perfectly cuz' when Shaq got double team he could pass to perimeters players such as Kobe, Fisher and Horry. Kobe has always been able to create his own shot what made other defenses call their attention and with his passing abilities and good vision on the court create more open looks for Shaq.Michael and Kobe among others are the living proof that one man can't win championships by themselves.
In the Heat case is a similar scenario with other offensive strategies, but yet team basketball. They have former All Stars and future Hall of famers become in role players. The main difference is that offense runs more trough Wade than Shaq since Shaq isn't in his prime anymore. I consider it's even more disrespectful to say that the Heat won the championship when Wade won the finals MVP and obviously is the best player in the Heat.
It's true that there's always a best player in a championship team, but championships are win by a whole team, not by a single player.
2007-03-28 06:18:27 · answer #3 · answered by I-rod 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It sounds good but that is alot of BS. As good as wade is when shaq was down at the begining of the season the heat were below 500 and had a worse record than the knicks. Now wade is gone and shaq is back with out Wade and the team is now in first Place. no disrespct to Wade but with out shaq they can't win. All that talk about "team" is all well and good but horry and fisher and antoine walker can all easily be replaced with other players around SHAQ not kobe or WADE. You bring Shaq to any team and somebody else will start to shine. If you put Shaq in Milwaukee , they will win and REDD would become a megstar. If you put Shaq in portland watch how fast jarett jack and randolph become house hold names. You can't put kobe or wade on just any team and think it might be better. You can do that with SHAQ. Thats what makes him different than the rest. Like i said i have no disrespect for Wade or Kobe, they are great players, but they ain't Shaq.
2007-03-28 06:27:35 · answer #4 · answered by Big K 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You are right about the fact that it takes a team to win champioships. There is no arguing that. I think the argument should be who has been the better team mate. If we use your thinking, which is fine Shaq has been to the finals with three different teams. He has found a way to mesh with three different guards to achieve this. Kobe has not learned this yet. He seems to appear as though he feels the only way the Lakers can win is through them. But its early, it took MJ many years to relize exactly how to be the right kind of team mate and still dominate and win championships. Kobe just hasn't figured that out yet.
I think that Shaq is the smarter player of the two. Maybe not the most talented but he is very basketball smart.
2007-03-28 06:16:38 · answer #5 · answered by dogma06281 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Shaq and Kobe needed each other to win just like Shaq and Wade.
Unfortunately Wade and Kobe could not have won without Shaq. A really good center is hard to find and even at the age of 35 Shaq is still dominant,
2007-03-28 06:00:54 · answer #6 · answered by deniseholton 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your point is valid, but the BOTTOMLINE is this: Shaq has won a championship without Kobe, while Kobe hasn't gotten past the first round without Shaq.
2007-03-28 05:59:41 · answer #7 · answered by kster 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Shaq, because he is more powerful.
2007-03-28 12:12:58 · answer #8 · answered by Drive PZEV! 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
good call dog.
2007-03-28 05:57:41 · answer #9 · answered by $p-i-m-p$ 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋