You don't know jack.

Section XIII Page 37 of the 2010-2011 NBA Rulebook says you get 2 steps upon completion of a dribble. I didn't see anyone talking about steps while you're still dribbling.

"older centers that get little respect today like jack sikma, willis reed, dave cowens and arvydas sabonis were far more skilled than shaq. ewing was better too. shaq just ran over everybody until about 5 years ago when he ran out of gas"

this is my least favorite argument in basketball. who cares if you have more overall and different skills if those skills don't add up to more than 1 guy's dominant skill? why on earth should shaq have ever learned to shoot 18 footers with a lower percentage of success than dunking on everyone? not one of the guy's you mentioned (with possibly the exception of USSR-era Sabonis) was anywhere near shaq's level. if that's due exclusively to the fact that shaq was clearly more physically gifted than they were (and given cowen's appalingly low TSP% for anyone, much less a big), so be it. But then, to take the argument to its most extreme conclusion, doesn't it hold that the reason that main reason Sikma, Reed, Cowens and Sabonis were successful at all to start with basketball is that they had a combination of height and agility that 99.9999% of the population will never approach? Just because Shaq represented some level beyond them is a ridiculous reason to have scorn for how he played.

Stop, you have no case.

You can take 3 steps, people don't even know the rules. The NBA allows you to finish your dribble with a step, then take two more strides. It looks like traveling to a lot of uneducated people.

Yes, there are other examples. To ME, they are of a significantly LESS extreme level. The sharp elbows and push offs are not equal to Shaq's 'dribble/ slam' approach. Someone intimated that SHAQ was a victim of the rough stuff---and that's partly TRUE, as opponents fouled him HARD... but the Hack-a-Shaq defense came about AFTER the officials made it clear to opponents that Shaq was going to be permitted to slam into them with no repercussion until he was close enough to dunk on them. The NBA did a TERRIBLE (in your best Barkley)job officiating Shaq. The cop out by the apologists was: 'he's so hard to officiate because he's so big and strong'----which was bull----once Shaq was no longer needed as a torchbearer for the NBA, he stopped being 'allowed' to play that way. Her would refer to it as 'not being allowed to play his power game'--------of course it was just him being officiated properly. Wilt and Yao never acted like mentally deficient rhinos even though they were big-----and no official complained that they couldn't officiate them----those players never bowled people over illegally, so there was never the problem that Shaq presented. JMO.

With traveling, YES, the Ewing bunny hop is documented. The Iverson 'carry' spread like wildfire throughout the league. The NBA has looked the other way before as well as shamelessly tried to 'create more offense' by allowing rules violations (or changing things like moving the 3 point line IN)-----I also remember Parish taking shuffling little baby steps that nobody called. But IMO, LeBron's transgressions are far and away ther most obvious, ridiculous, 'advantageous to the transgressor' traveling violations I have seen REPEATEDLY ignored. He is the new torchbearer---and they're allowing him to mock the rules. He literally RUNS through the lane with the ball in both hands---when he's not hopping and mixing in horsey-gallop steps. It looks awful and the league office would probably be smart to stop it. You can't have your NBA's present day icon and challenger to the imaginary GOAT title be so obviously bogus. Everyone sees it. More and more people comment on it. Even Dr. Jack Ramsay last night with Mike Tirico. They all know he's traveling.