- 4,514
- 408
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2004
And it's not even close. Dwight is nothing compared to Shaq. He had a problem against Old Shaq this past season smh
Shaq's rookie highlights dayum.
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by everysingletime,
- Start date
And it's not even close. Dwight is nothing compared to Shaq. He had a problem against Old Shaq this past season smh
- 4,514
- 408
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2004
And it's not even close. Dwight is nothing compared to Shaq. He had a problem against Old Shaq this past season smh
- 5,288
- 467
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2007
@ :50 seconds
The footwork, the body movement, the hands, the finish.
Ultimate post up game, right there.
The footwork, the body movement, the hands, the finish.
Ultimate post up game, right there.
- 5,288
- 467
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2007
@ :50 seconds
The footwork, the body movement, the hands, the finish.
Ultimate post up game, right there.
The footwork, the body movement, the hands, the finish.
Ultimate post up game, right there.
Sonny Corinthos
formerly joeclear
- 18,391
- 9,946
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2008
Where's that Derrick Coleman dunk ?
Sonny Corinthos
formerly joeclear
- 18,391
- 9,946
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2008
Where's that Derrick Coleman dunk ?
- 425
- 10
- Joined
- May 23, 2010
- 425
- 10
- Joined
- May 23, 2010
- 5,111
- 60
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
NBA was fun to watch back in the 90's. Shaq was really something new to witness.
- 5,111
- 60
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
NBA was fun to watch back in the 90's. Shaq was really something new to witness.
- 155,891
- 135,304
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2001
Kind of late to the party but yes, we know how much of a beast Shaq was. But I am also of the belief that he never even reached his full potential. I don't think he was EVER in shape after 1997. Ever. Didn't take that part of the game seriously because he knew he could succeed on this athleticsm alone. Which he did for the most of his career.
His lack of maturity if also an issue that held him back during his career but people never call him out on his acts because he is/was "The GOdfather." But he was funny and always was a very good interview. Great career but could have done much more, but we can say that about a lot of players.
Just sad to see him go from city to city these days. Tarnishes his career IMO
His lack of maturity if also an issue that held him back during his career but people never call him out on his acts because he is/was "The GOdfather." But he was funny and always was a very good interview. Great career but could have done much more, but we can say that about a lot of players.
Just sad to see him go from city to city these days. Tarnishes his career IMO
- 155,891
- 135,304
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2001
Kind of late to the party but yes, we know how much of a beast Shaq was. But I am also of the belief that he never even reached his full potential. I don't think he was EVER in shape after 1997. Ever. Didn't take that part of the game seriously because he knew he could succeed on this athleticsm alone. Which he did for the most of his career.
His lack of maturity if also an issue that held him back during his career but people never call him out on his acts because he is/was "The GOdfather." But he was funny and always was a very good interview. Great career but could have done much more, but we can say that about a lot of players.
Just sad to see him go from city to city these days. Tarnishes his career IMO
His lack of maturity if also an issue that held him back during his career but people never call him out on his acts because he is/was "The GOdfather." But he was funny and always was a very good interview. Great career but could have done much more, but we can say that about a lot of players.
Just sad to see him go from city to city these days. Tarnishes his career IMO
- 5,771
- 2,895
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2001
Originally Posted by SNKR INDSTRY JOSHBASKIN
1:25
And why'd he have to do Robert Parrish like that always?
^I was about to post this. My God in heaven...
- 5,771
- 2,895
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2001
Originally Posted by SNKR INDSTRY JOSHBASKIN
1:25
And why'd he have to do Robert Parrish like that always?
^I was about to post this. My God in heaven...
- 11,458
- 15,589
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
brings back a lot of memories
- 11,458
- 15,589
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
brings back a lot of memories
- 24,717
- 436
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2006
I was making a joke because it is ABSURD to think that Duncan needed anyone to mentor him. I wasn't doubting The Admiral before, if you had been keeping up with the discussion, you would have known I was praising David a few pages back, but still, he isn't touching a ring if he doesn't have Duncan.Originally Posted by ElderWatsonDiggs
No for real, are you serious? Do you even remember David Robinson before Tim Duncan came into the league? He was voted in the the NBA TOP 50 in 1996. He was already HOF bound. Duncan came into the league in 1997. What s stupid statement. Makes me wonder if guys in S&T really watches sports or just looks at stats and make statements.Originally Posted by JapanAir21
Ehhhhhhhhh, more like Duncan took ADMIRAL under his wing,.
Duncan came to that team and put them on the top, immediately. There was no adjustment for Duncan, dude came into the league and averaged 21/12/2 blocks. Doing the same thing he was doing at Wake.
Admiral might not have any wings (probably not) if it weren't for Duncan coming to town. People were HYPING up Duncan to the Celtics, but that's what the lottery is for, and it happened to roll into the hands of San Antonio.
Try understand what people are talking about before you try to talk big, because you really don't know what you're talking about.
David Robinson was a great player, one of the best at his position, but he didn't have any team success until Duncan came on board.
What a stupid assumption, makes me wonder if guys really know how to read anymore.
- 24,717
- 436
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2006
I was making a joke because it is ABSURD to think that Duncan needed anyone to mentor him. I wasn't doubting The Admiral before, if you had been keeping up with the discussion, you would have known I was praising David a few pages back, but still, he isn't touching a ring if he doesn't have Duncan.Originally Posted by ElderWatsonDiggs
No for real, are you serious? Do you even remember David Robinson before Tim Duncan came into the league? He was voted in the the NBA TOP 50 in 1996. He was already HOF bound. Duncan came into the league in 1997. What s stupid statement. Makes me wonder if guys in S&T really watches sports or just looks at stats and make statements.Originally Posted by JapanAir21
Ehhhhhhhhh, more like Duncan took ADMIRAL under his wing,.
Duncan came to that team and put them on the top, immediately. There was no adjustment for Duncan, dude came into the league and averaged 21/12/2 blocks. Doing the same thing he was doing at Wake.
Admiral might not have any wings (probably not) if it weren't for Duncan coming to town. People were HYPING up Duncan to the Celtics, but that's what the lottery is for, and it happened to roll into the hands of San Antonio.
Try understand what people are talking about before you try to talk big, because you really don't know what you're talking about.
David Robinson was a great player, one of the best at his position, but he didn't have any team success until Duncan came on board.
What a stupid assumption, makes me wonder if guys really know how to read anymore.
- 4,162
- 6,973
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
man i dont know why yall are hating on robinson.
he was a better all around player than duncan.
better scorer
better defender
more versatile defender (used to guard people like charles barkley,or shaq)
better rebounder
wayyyy more athletic
stronger
better handles
only thing duncan had over him was the bank shot.
he had only been in the league like 7 years when the nba named him to the 50 greatest players
only reason he didnt win championships is because they surronded him wit trash players for most of the nineties
and he STILL lead them to great records in the west which was tough in the 90's (sonics,jazz,rockets,suns,blazers)
robinson in the 90's was the definition of carrying a team. he WAS the spurs.
he was a better all around player than duncan.
better scorer
better defender
more versatile defender (used to guard people like charles barkley,or shaq)
better rebounder
wayyyy more athletic
stronger
better handles
only thing duncan had over him was the bank shot.
he had only been in the league like 7 years when the nba named him to the 50 greatest players
only reason he didnt win championships is because they surronded him wit trash players for most of the nineties
and he STILL lead them to great records in the west which was tough in the 90's (sonics,jazz,rockets,suns,blazers)
robinson in the 90's was the definition of carrying a team. he WAS the spurs.
- 4,162
- 6,973
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
man i dont know why yall are hating on robinson.
he was a better all around player than duncan.
better scorer
better defender
more versatile defender (used to guard people like charles barkley,or shaq)
better rebounder
wayyyy more athletic
stronger
better handles
only thing duncan had over him was the bank shot.
he had only been in the league like 7 years when the nba named him to the 50 greatest players
only reason he didnt win championships is because they surronded him wit trash players for most of the nineties
and he STILL lead them to great records in the west which was tough in the 90's (sonics,jazz,rockets,suns,blazers)
robinson in the 90's was the definition of carrying a team. he WAS the spurs.
he was a better all around player than duncan.
better scorer
better defender
more versatile defender (used to guard people like charles barkley,or shaq)
better rebounder
wayyyy more athletic
stronger
better handles
only thing duncan had over him was the bank shot.
he had only been in the league like 7 years when the nba named him to the 50 greatest players
only reason he didnt win championships is because they surronded him wit trash players for most of the nineties
and he STILL lead them to great records in the west which was tough in the 90's (sonics,jazz,rockets,suns,blazers)
robinson in the 90's was the definition of carrying a team. he WAS the spurs.
- 4,162
- 6,973
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
double cup
- 4,162
- 6,973
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
double cup
- 1,288
- 65
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2005
its amazing how that magic squad did not win at least 1 title...even when jordan first retired.
- 1,288
- 65
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2005
its amazing how that magic squad did not win at least 1 title...even when jordan first retired.
- 24,717
- 436
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2006
