Shaq or B. Wallace?

[Blasphemy]

if you could have anyone of these players at the moment on your team, who would you pick?


I would actually pick Wallace because of 2 Things. His defensive ability, and him not getting injured alot. Unlike Shaq, he usually gets injured every season.


Who would you pick for your team?

[Its_asdf]

Ben's defence is great, but Shaq's defence and intimidation that he brings in the paint is almost just as effective. Plus, Shaq changes the entire mindset of opposing teams and focus their game plan to stop him. Shaq is simply known for his inside dominance, but thats not all. His career blocks per game is similar to Wallace's, which means that he isn't a slouch in that department either, but defence is Wallace's biggest strength and he doesn't have an amazing edge over Shaq in his prime.

Take into a consideration that Shaq is also 50 times better on the offensive end and for once in my life, I can say Shaq is a better free throw shooter.

[R.J.]

I am a Bulls fan and love the signing of Wallace, but I must say that Shaq has the edge on him. Shaq is better at offence, however, Wallace is much better on defense. Shaq is not a slouch, but blocks do not mean you are a good defensive player. The true defense is 1 on 1 and help side.

[-Young Buck-]

Shaq duh!

[cyanide]

for once in my life, I can say Shaq is a better free throw shooter.

Oh man, that's so sad.

Anyway, I'd give it to Shaq. Sure, his role has diminished behind Wade and a group of talents, but there's no doubt his presence would change the game. Not to mention he can still play some offense and D.

[Its_asdf]

Blocks aren't what make a good defensive player, but blocks/intimidation in the paint are probably the only thing Ben Wallace is good for. His defence is good don't get me wrong, but he does get overrated defensively at times.

[maes]

Going into next season Ben Wallace...Ben is just coming off the high point of his career...Shaq's high points are so far behind him it's not even in the rear view mirror. The most athletic Shaq was the Shaq running like Shawn Marion in Orlando.

I'm a Shaq lover not a hater...but he's too far past his prime. You all saw the playoffs...how many of Shaq's points were from alley oops from Wade, Payton, Williams, and even Walker?

But the biggest factor has nothing to do with Shaq vs Wallace, it's the nature of the game. The rules have changed and this the NBA is turning into a run & gun, 3 point shooting, transition game. Shaq did what he's done his entire life, and now the refs are calling fouls on him.

Shaq said it himself: the future of the big man in the NBA is Dirk Nowitzki, a guy who can handle the ball and shoot from the outside.

Neither Shaq or Ben can do that, and frankly Ben is a better shotblocker, defender, rebounder and rarely injured. Shaq is a better passer. You can't run your offense through a post-up center anymore...he'll get called for offensives, and have fewer left to try & defend slashers who penetrate at will because of handchecking rules. Miami runs through Wade...if Wade had Ben Wallace holding down the middle, he would have won the trophy anyway.

[hammertime23]

shaq

[Jackal]

Shaq said it himself: the future of the big man in the NBA is Dirk Nowitzki, a guy who can handle the ball and shoot from the outside.

I find that quite sad though. The rough toughness seems to be diminishing. Now the guards are posting up smaller defenders and your bigmen are shooting three's.

Oh well, here's looking forward to Amare & Howard.

Oh, I'd take Shaq.

[Mayerhendrix]

At this point, whoever has the smaller contract.

Both aren't going to have much of a consistent level of effectiveness anymore, and Shaq's only getting worse.

[Axel]

Shaq obviously. Ben is a liability on the offensive end, and really a one sided player. I think he's overrated, and all the DPYO's he has are also a bit misleading...

[Jay-Peso]

Even though Shaq is getting old and doesn't play as consistent as years in the past, he'd still be my choice because there is still no other player in the NBA who has the presence that Shaq does.

[jerry]

i will give it to shaq... even though i like big ben more than shaq i still give it to him because he is a way better ft shooter(so far i havent seen him get an air ball) and he can be a big threat both offensive and defensive.

[air gordon]

only blocks and intimidation? you're talking about Shaq, asdf. maybe if we're talking fantasy stats, Shaq is on par with Wallace. but we're not. in reality Shaq is pretty overrated on defense- he's terrible against the pick and roll and is even slower now with his defensive rotations.

But the biggest factor has nothing to do with Shaq vs Wallace, it's the nature of the game. The rules have changed and this the NBA is turning into a run & gun, 3 point shooting, transition game. Shaq did what he's done his entire life, and now the refs are calling fouls on him.

Shaq said it himself: the future of the big man in the NBA is Dirk Nowitzki, a guy who can handle the ball and shoot from the outside.

Neither Shaq or Ben can do that, and frankly Ben is a better shotblocker, defender, rebounder and rarely injured. Shaq is a better passer. You can't run your offense through a post-up center anymore...he'll get called for offensives, and have fewer left to try & defend slashers who penetrate at will because of handchecking rules. Miami runs through Wade...if Wade had Ben Wallace holding down the middle, he would have won the trophy anyway.

this is an interesting take

i think with someone like Shaq, you can still run the offense through him. now obviously if you have a supreme talent in Wade, you'll run some more plays for Wade

even if the game has been made more condusive for the guards/easier to defend true post players, Shaq will always be effective. a few things that don't go away with age is his height, offensive awareness, and great passing ability. He'll always be able to see, read, and pass over the double team. true he'll get offensive fouls drawn on him, but he still can put the oppositions frontcourt rotation in foul trouble/draw consistent double teams

Wallace's durability + consistency/effort are a big plus in this argument.. and is the reason, as silly/biased as it may seem, why i pick Wallace.

With exception of Miami, no other team in the league had 2 superstars. So no other team could survive the amount of games he misses and his dwindling minutes. Sure he'll be back for the playoffs (assuming the team makes it) but you don't know how much he has in the tank then and exactly how healthy he is

[Silas]

shaq is way better on the offensive end, and he passes, and he defends almost as well. Plus, he draws Free Agents.

[Gedas]

Are you kidding me, they're on a different level

[BlueHornet]

not even comparable, Shaq is a monster and has won many more chips than wallace, wallace is like 30 and doesnt have a chance to catch up to shaq and shaq is more dominant.

[R.J.]

not even comparable, Shaq is a monster and has won many more chips than wallace, wallace is like 30 and doesnt have a chance to catch up to shaq and shaq is more dominant.

First of all, this is a terrible argument. Shaq is a monster? Maybe, but I don't know what you mean by that.

Has won many more chips than Wallace? I don't know what you mean by that. If you mean championships, Shaq had arguably the best player in the NBA on his team for all of the championships that he has won.

"wallace is like 30", well, Shaq is 34 and is a huge injury concern. His knees aren't getting any younger, and he's missed at least 15 games due to injury in the past four out of five years. I don't know what you mean by "doesn't have a chance to catch up to shaq." Wallace played all 82 games last year, and over the last five years he has only missed 20 games. That shows that he is considerably more durable, averaing over 35 minutes per game, while Shaq only averaged 30.

Finally, "shaq is more dominant" isn't completely true, Wallace has a huge advantage on Shaquille in terms of defense. If you actually look at statistics, he averaged less than ten rebounds per game, had .39 steals and 1.76 blocks. When you look at Wallace, 11.3 rebounds per game, 1.78 steals, 2.20 blocks.

[Andrew]

I'd take Shaq for two more years but for the four years Wallace has signed for, he's probably the better investment. So I guess at the moment I'd still be inclined to pick Shaq but I'll definitely settle for Wallace.

[Jackal]

Shaq had arguably the best player in the NBA on his team for all of the championships that he has won.

You make it sound like Shaq played second fiddle during the Lakers run. You're funny. Funny funny man.

[nets4life]

Shaq of course you cannot put a price on his presence in the paint

[Matt]

i guess we are talking currently. Depends on what the team needs really. People can talk about Shaq's deterioration and say how he can't dominate a game anymore, but the man still get's double teamed down low....and only dominant players get double teamed.

[Fitzy]

it would be hard choice but id take ben wallace, shaq is getting slower and less dominant but, at least on defense, i think wallace has more of a presence

[KIG1]

I would take Shaq, just because of his ability to score in the post. If D-Wade wouldn't have dominated the post-season, Shaq would have came through. Plus Ben Wallace can't put up 19 ppg.

[kinokong]

Neither Shaq or Ben can do that, and frankly Ben is a better shotblocker, defender, rebounder and rarely injured. Shaq is a better passer. You can't run your offense through a post-up center anymore...he'll get called for offensives, and have fewer left to try & defend slashers who penetrate at will because of handchecking rules. Miami runs through Wade...if Wade had Ben Wallace holding down the middle, he would have won the trophy anyway.

oh please.... you had miami double teaming shaq down low which opened things up for wade to just explode... also neither shaq or ben can handle the ball but i like shaq better just because he has more in his offense.... also i believe that shaq can be better just by shedding another 30-40 pounds