Shaquille O’Neal always comes up when people talk about the greatest NBA players ever. He powered a three-peat for the Los Angeles Lakers and is still talked about as the most dominant player to ever lace ’em up.
Yet for one of his rivals from the 2000s, one version of O’Neal stands above the rest. Even with an MVP, a scoring title, and four Finals trips in six seasons on O’Neal’s side of the ledger, that rival has still questioned how valuable the big man would be in the modern NBA.
How Do Shaquille O’Neal and Al Harrington View the Modern NBA?
On television, O’Neal has stayed a permanent part of league coverage, keeping his voice in the basketball world long after his retirement. At the same time, he is known for going after modern players, especially when he questions their toughness.
Unfortunately, during the latest episode of “Run It Back,” the tables were turned on him.[web:10] Indiana Pacers legend Al Harrington, who spent eight of his 16 seasons with the franchise, questioned how good the 15-time All-Star would have been in the league today.
“Orlando Shaq could’ve played in this era. Lakers’ Shaq? Maybe not as much, you know, been as effective.” However, rather than firing shots at him, Harrington meant the comments as a sign of respect.
Calling him the most dominant player among all big men in league history, he explained his rationale for the distinction between the two versions of the same player. “When Shaq was young, man, he was just as good as anybody. He had all the skills. He would handle the ball, turn around, jump shots, stuff like that.”
MORE: Shaquille O’Neal Hilariously Clowns Charles Barkley After Massive Weight Loss
As he grew older, O’Neal shifted into a more traditional back-to-the-basket game, and his two-man action with Kobe Bryant helped drive the Lakers’ success in the early 2000s. The difference, though, really shows up in the numbers. In his time with the Magic, O’Neal reached as high as 29.3 points per game in a season. In Los Angeles, where he spent eight seasons, that mark was nearly identical at 29.7.
However, what set the two versions apart was the efficiency. Playing markedly closer to the basket, he led the league in field goal percentage on six separate occasions, whereas that happened just once in Orlando. While that higher efficiency would have surely been a benefit, the versatility that a younger “Diesel” offered could be more valuable on a modern NBA roster, especially with positionless basketball being pushed to the forefront.