Would this team win it all today

[KG Living Legend]

 Its the all Athletic Dunk team. Power players, somewhat limited shooting.

Shaq
Kemp
Dominique
Vince Carter
Baron Davis

All players are 25 years old and they have the Lakers bench. So very weak bench. Could this team win the title this year in the three point shooting leauge we have today.

[Birdman]

Its the all Athletic Dunk team. Power players, somewhat limited shooting.

Shaq
Kemp
Dominique
Vince Carter
Baron Davis

All players are 25 years old and they have the Lakers bench. So very weak bench. Could this team win the title this year in the three point shooting leauge we have today.

Yes..Shaq & Wilkins are top 25 players

[Kernewek]

There's an argument. They're a bit defensively limited in the sense that most of them don't care about defense (plus Shaq and Kemp feel bad on the court together using 2022 rules and spacing), but on offense... guys couldn't guard Shaq back then and they're definitely not going to be able to guard him now.

Vinsanity & Shaq together would have been amazing though, and Davis/Kemp would be a better version of the Davis/Griffin Clippers duo we saw in Blake's rookie season. Wilkins is 'just' icing on the cake.

So you have what is easily the most exciting team in transition to ever grace the NBA, that probably doesn't have the defensive-mindedness to avoid some losses due to being outshot. I think they would certainly have the potential for a deep run.

[Roy H.]

I think that if they were given time to adjust to the modern era, Dominique and Kemp would become good outside shooters, and Vince already was.

[Moranis]

Yes.  Shaq would be unstoppable.  A Shaq shot around the basket is a better shot than a Curry 3 point attempt.  It will lead to more points over the course of a game and that doesn't even account for extra shots Shaq will get from being fouled (which happens at a much greater frequency then they do on a Curry 3). 

[KG Living Legend]

 If Shaq was shooting 60% is that better than Curry if he's shooting 48% from three.

[Moranis]

 If Shaq was shooting 60% is that better than Curry if he's shooting 48% from three.

In 2001 i.e. Shaq's prime, he shot 79.2% from 0-3 feet and took 45.2% of his attempts from that range.  His FTr was 68.4% that season and he took 13.1 FT's a game.  Even if he drew fouls at the same percentage from all points on the floor (which is clearly underestimating his 0-3 foot shots), that means he took 5.92 foul shots and 8.6784 FG's every game from 0-3 feet.  Working the math at 79.2%, that means he generated 13.75 points from FG's and 3.04 points from FT's or 16.787 points for every 8.6784 FG attempts from 0-3 feet or right about 1.93 points for every shot and with a more appropriate FTr, it was likely over 2 points per shot.

Curry has never shot better than 45.5% from 3 (his 3rd season), but for this exercise I will use 2016 when he shot 45.4% though with over twice as many 3's as his 3rd season (so his best shooting season).   So at 11.2 3PTA, that means he makes 5.0848 and scores 15.25 points on his 11.2 shots.  Now that doesn't account for FT's, which Curry obviously gets on occasion from his 3 pointers (his FTr that season was .250).  So even assuming he gets fouled at that same rate from 3 as everywhere else, that means Curry would add 2.5484 extra points.  So on Curry's 11.2 3 pointers he scores 17.7984 points or 1.589 points per shot.


So in sum, a Shaq shot right at the basket is worth significantly more points than a Curry 3 point attempt.  Now obviously not every shot Shaq takes is right at the rim, but in 01 Shaq scored 28.7 ppg on 19.2 shots or 1.495 points per shot, which is still better than a Curry 3 pointer.  And to keep the math fair, that season overall Curry scored 30.1 ppg on 20.2 shots, or 1.49 points per shot.  So Shaq still slightly better.

I think people just forget how dominant a true big man is even though we currently have a guy like Shaq in the game.  His name is Giannis and he is best player in the world.  His FG% at the rim is actually better than Shaq ever had over the last few seasons and Giannis, just like Shaq, shoots over 40% of his attempts from 0-3 feet.  Giannis obviously plays more on the outside than Shaq ever did, but what makes Giannis so great is that he is arguably the best interior scorer since Wilt, in a time when people seem to be going away from the interior.  But that is still far and away the best shot a guy can take. 

[LilRip]

I think so. Shaq is an all time great and so if you put a cast of allstars around him (if they buy into their roles, no drama) , they can win it all.

Also , in todays rules, you can’t guard Shaq. He’s like Embiid who didn’t play around with jump shots or threes and always wanted to hurt you. And Embiid already gets a ton of FTs

[Kernewek]

 If Shaq was shooting 60% is that better than Curry if he's shooting 48% from three.

In 2001 i.e. Shaq's prime, he shot 79.2% from 0-3 feet and took 45.2% of his attempts from that range.  His FTr was 68.4% that season and he took 13.1 FT's a game.  Even if he drew fouls at the same percentage from all points on the floor (which is clearly underestimating his 0-3 foot shots), that means he took 5.92 foul shots and 8.6784 FG's every game from 0-3 feet.  Working the math at 79.2%, that means he generated 13.75 points from FG's and 3.04 points from FT's or 16.787 points for every 8.6784 FG attempts from 0-3 feet or right about 1.93 points for every shot and with a more appropriate FTr, it was likely over 2 points per shot.

Curry has never shot better than 45.5% from 3 (his 3rd season), but for this exercise I will use 2016 when he shot 45.4% though with over twice as many 3's as his 3rd season (so his best shooting season).   So at 11.2 3PTA, that means he makes 5.0848 and scores 15.25 points on his 11.2 shots.  Now that doesn't account for FT's, which Curry obviously gets on occasion from his 3 pointers (his FTr that season was .250).  So even assuming he gets fouled at that same rate from 3 as everywhere else, that means Curry would add 2.5484 extra points.  So on Curry's 11.2 3 pointers he scores 17.7984 points or 1.589 points per shot.


So in sum, a Shaq shot right at the basket is worth significantly more points than a Curry 3 point attempt.  Now obviously not every shot Shaq takes is right at the rim, but in 01 Shaq scored 28.7 ppg on 19.2 shots or 1.495 points per shot, which is still better than a Curry 3 pointer.  And to keep the math fair, that season overall Curry scored 30.1 ppg on 20.2 shots, or 1.49 points per shot.  So Shaq still slightly better.

I think people just forget how dominant a true big man is even though we currently have a guy like Shaq in the game.  His name is Giannis and he is best player in the world.  His FG% at the rim is actually better than Shaq ever had over the last few seasons and Giannis, just like Shaq, shoots over 40% of his attempts from 0-3 feet.  Giannis obviously plays more on the outside than Shaq ever did, but what makes Giannis so great is that he is arguably the best interior scorer since Wilt, in a time when people seem to be going away from the interior.  But that is still far and away the best shot a guy can take.

We're not taking 2001 Shaq though, we're taking 1997 Shaq. Not that your point isn't valid, but using his MVP season is a bit of a detour even for this hypothetical - you'd want his first season with the Lakers.

[Csfan1984]

Yes
Davis and Shaq were very good early on in their careers. Wilkens and Carter were also good at 25. Kemp was a defender and rebounder early years. So yes they have enough. They would kill at pick and roll as well as on the break. Defense would be elite and near impossible to score on in a playoff atmosphere. As for bench just keeping two starters in at a time and they would make any bench work.

[Moranis]

 If Shaq was shooting 60% is that better than Curry if he's shooting 48% from three.

In 2001 i.e. Shaq's prime, he shot 79.2% from 0-3 feet and took 45.2% of his attempts from that range.  His FTr was 68.4% that season and he took 13.1 FT's a game.  Even if he drew fouls at the same percentage from all points on the floor (which is clearly underestimating his 0-3 foot shots), that means he took 5.92 foul shots and 8.6784 FG's every game from 0-3 feet.  Working the math at 79.2%, that means he generated 13.75 points from FG's and 3.04 points from FT's or 16.787 points for every 8.6784 FG attempts from 0-3 feet or right about 1.93 points for every shot and with a more appropriate FTr, it was likely over 2 points per shot.

Curry has never shot better than 45.5% from 3 (his 3rd season), but for this exercise I will use 2016 when he shot 45.4% though with over twice as many 3's as his 3rd season (so his best shooting season).   So at 11.2 3PTA, that means he makes 5.0848 and scores 15.25 points on his 11.2 shots.  Now that doesn't account for FT's, which Curry obviously gets on occasion from his 3 pointers (his FTr that season was .250).  So even assuming he gets fouled at that same rate from 3 as everywhere else, that means Curry would add 2.5484 extra points.  So on Curry's 11.2 3 pointers he scores 17.7984 points or 1.589 points per shot.


So in sum, a Shaq shot right at the basket is worth significantly more points than a Curry 3 point attempt.  Now obviously not every shot Shaq takes is right at the rim, but in 01 Shaq scored 28.7 ppg on 19.2 shots or 1.495 points per shot, which is still better than a Curry 3 pointer.  And to keep the math fair, that season overall Curry scored 30.1 ppg on 20.2 shots, or 1.49 points per shot.  So Shaq still slightly better.

I think people just forget how dominant a true big man is even though we currently have a guy like Shaq in the game.  His name is Giannis and he is best player in the world.  His FG% at the rim is actually better than Shaq ever had over the last few seasons and Giannis, just like Shaq, shoots over 40% of his attempts from 0-3 feet.  Giannis obviously plays more on the outside than Shaq ever did, but what makes Giannis so great is that he is arguably the best interior scorer since Wilt, in a time when people seem to be going away from the interior.  But that is still far and away the best shot a guy can take.

We're not taking 2001 Shaq though, we're taking 1997 Shaq. Not that your point isn't valid, but using his MVP season is a bit of a detour even for this hypothetical - you'd want his first season with the Lakers.

Might actually yield more points per shot because in 97-98 (when he was 25) while Shaq hit at a lesser percentage of 74.1%, he attempted 50.1% of his FGA's from 0-3 feet, and was a bit better from the line at 52.7% (instead of 51.3%).  His overall pps on all attempts was only slightly worse as well as he attempted 0.1 less shots and scored 0.4 more points in 01 as opposed to 98 (so only a small amount lesser).

Curry at 25 would have been much lower as he "only" attempted 7.9 3's a game and shot "just" 42.4%.  That is the problem with the premise of just picking some random year, you end up with strange results.  Better off just taking their pure prime for this sort of exercise, especially when you pick someone like Baron Davis who when he was 25 got traded midseason and only played in a total of 46 of 82 games or Vince Carter who only played in 60 of 82 games. 

[Kernewek]

For sure - we're also looking at a frontcourt that's absolutely going to destroy several backboards per season.

[slamtheking]

 If Shaq was shooting 60% is that better than Curry if he's shooting 48% from three.

In 2001 i.e. Shaq's prime, he shot 79.2% from 0-3 feet and took 45.2% of his attempts from that range.  His FTr was 68.4% that season and he took 13.1 FT's a game.  Even if he drew fouls at the same percentage from all points on the floor (which is clearly underestimating his 0-3 foot shots), that means he took 5.92 foul shots and 8.6784 FG's every game from 0-3 feet.  Working the math at 79.2%, that means he generated 13.75 points from FG's and 3.04 points from FT's or 16.787 points for every 8.6784 FG attempts from 0-3 feet or right about 1.93 points for every shot and with a more appropriate FTr, it was likely over 2 points per shot.

Curry has never shot better than 45.5% from 3 (his 3rd season), but for this exercise I will use 2016 when he shot 45.4% though with over twice as many 3's as his 3rd season (so his best shooting season).   So at 11.2 3PTA, that means he makes 5.0848 and scores 15.25 points on his 11.2 shots.  Now that doesn't account for FT's, which Curry obviously gets on occasion from his 3 pointers (his FTr that season was .250).  So even assuming he gets fouled at that same rate from 3 as everywhere else, that means Curry would add 2.5484 extra points.  So on Curry's 11.2 3 pointers he scores 17.7984 points or 1.589 points per shot.


So in sum, a Shaq shot right at the basket is worth significantly more points than a Curry 3 point attempt.  Now obviously not every shot Shaq takes is right at the rim, but in 01 Shaq scored 28.7 ppg on 19.2 shots or 1.495 points per shot, which is still better than a Curry 3 pointer.  And to keep the math fair, that season overall Curry scored 30.1 ppg on 20.2 shots, or 1.49 points per shot.  So Shaq still slightly better.

I think people just forget how dominant a true big man is even though we currently have a guy like Shaq in the game.  His name is Giannis and he is best player in the world.  His FG% at the rim is actually better than Shaq ever had over the last few seasons and Giannis, just like Shaq, shoots over 40% of his attempts from 0-3 feet.  Giannis obviously plays more on the outside than Shaq ever did, but what makes Giannis so great is that he is arguably the best interior scorer since Wilt, in a time when people seem to be going away from the interior.  But that is still far and away the best shot a guy can take.

a losing argument but sure, you go with that.  not minimizing his numbers in close but let's be honest, he's not starting his play in the post where the defense is set up and he's not being guarded by a center with the size and bulk to contest him in the post.

to the point about Shaq, despite his uncalled travels and offensive fouls where he just bulldozed over the defender, he was in the post with the defense typically set and being guarded by someone of similar height (no one was really his same size)

[BASS_THUMPER]

*sippin*

[Moranis]

 If Shaq was shooting 60% is that better than Curry if he's shooting 48% from three.

In 2001 i.e. Shaq's prime, he shot 79.2% from 0-3 feet and took 45.2% of his attempts from that range.  His FTr was 68.4% that season and he took 13.1 FT's a game.  Even if he drew fouls at the same percentage from all points on the floor (which is clearly underestimating his 0-3 foot shots), that means he took 5.92 foul shots and 8.6784 FG's every game from 0-3 feet.  Working the math at 79.2%, that means he generated 13.75 points from FG's and 3.04 points from FT's or 16.787 points for every 8.6784 FG attempts from 0-3 feet or right about 1.93 points for every shot and with a more appropriate FTr, it was likely over 2 points per shot.

Curry has never shot better than 45.5% from 3 (his 3rd season), but for this exercise I will use 2016 when he shot 45.4% though with over twice as many 3's as his 3rd season (so his best shooting season).   So at 11.2 3PTA, that means he makes 5.0848 and scores 15.25 points on his 11.2 shots.  Now that doesn't account for FT's, which Curry obviously gets on occasion from his 3 pointers (his FTr that season was .250).  So even assuming he gets fouled at that same rate from 3 as everywhere else, that means Curry would add 2.5484 extra points.  So on Curry's 11.2 3 pointers he scores 17.7984 points or 1.589 points per shot.


So in sum, a Shaq shot right at the basket is worth significantly more points than a Curry 3 point attempt.  Now obviously not every shot Shaq takes is right at the rim, but in 01 Shaq scored 28.7 ppg on 19.2 shots or 1.495 points per shot, which is still better than a Curry 3 pointer.  And to keep the math fair, that season overall Curry scored 30.1 ppg on 20.2 shots, or 1.49 points per shot.  So Shaq still slightly better.

I think people just forget how dominant a true big man is even though we currently have a guy like Shaq in the game.  His name is Giannis and he is best player in the world.  His FG% at the rim is actually better than Shaq ever had over the last few seasons and Giannis, just like Shaq, shoots over 40% of his attempts from 0-3 feet.  Giannis obviously plays more on the outside than Shaq ever did, but what makes Giannis so great is that he is arguably the best interior scorer since Wilt, in a time when people seem to be going away from the interior.  But that is still far and away the best shot a guy can take.

a losing argument but sure, you go with that.  not minimizing his numbers in close but let's be honest, he's not starting his play in the post where the defense is set up and he's not being guarded by a center with the size and bulk to contest him in the post.

to the point about Shaq, despite his uncalled travels and offensive fouls where he just bulldozed over the defender, he was in the post with the defense typically set and being guarded by someone of similar height (no one was really his same size)

well sure he gets there differently and doesn't start out there by setting up there, but he takes a very high number of his shots from 0-3 feet and hits them at a rate basically unseen for his volume since Wilt.