In the fast-paced, perimeter-focused world of modern NBA basketball, it’s easy to credit Stephen Curry, Mike D’Antoni, or even the analytics movement for the three-point revolution. But in a surprising twist, former head coach and offensive mastermind Mike D’Antoni has pointed to an unlikely figure as a catalyst for the rise of the three-point shot: Shaquille O’Neal.
Yes, that Shaquille O’Neal—the 7’1”, 325-pound force of nature who dominated the paint like no one before or since, who made his living dunking on centers and bullying defenders into submission. On the surface, Shaq seems like the antithesis of the three-ball era. He attempted just 22 three-pointers in his 19-year career, making a single one. But according to D’Antoni, it’s precisely Shaq’s overwhelming dominance in the post that forced the NBA to evolve in a different direction—one that would eventually lead to the three-point-heavy style we see today.
D’Antoni’s Unlikely Perspective
D’Antoni, known for his “Seven Seconds or Less” offense with the Phoenix Suns and his innovative use of the three-point shot with the Houston Rockets, has never hidden his belief in playing fast, spreading the floor, and maximizing efficiency. He was ahead of the curve, often criticized for systems that, in hindsight, shaped the future of the league.
But during an interview reflecting on the evolution of NBA offenses, D’Antoni surprised many by crediting O’Neal’s post-era dominance as the very reason the league had to move away from that style of play.
“Shaq was so dominant that teams had no choice but to change,” D’Antoni said. “You couldn’t beat him playing the same game. If you tried to go big and bang in the post, you were going to lose. So, teams started spreading the floor, shooting threes, and trying to win with quickness and spacing. It was the only way to compete.”
In other words, the league didn’t evolve away from the post because it wasn’t effective—it evolved because Shaq made it impossible to win that way unless you had Shaq.
The Era of Shaq: Dominance in the Paint
To understand D’Antoni’s logic, we have to go back to the early 2000s when Shaquille O’Neal was the most unstoppable force in basketball. During his prime with the Los Angeles Lakers, Shaq averaged over 27 points and 11 rebounds per game, led the league in field goal percentage multiple times, and captured three consecutive NBA championships from 2000 to 2002.
There was simply no answer for him in the post. Teams tried double teams, zone defenses, hack-a-Shaq—all to little effect. If you played a traditional big man against him, you lost. If you tried to go small, he punished you. Shaq wasn’t just good—he was historically unguardable.
So what do teams do when they can’t fight fire with fire? They change the game.
The Strategic Shift: Fighting Giants with Speed and Spacing
Faced with an unwinnable battle inside, many coaches and front offices began to explore alternative strategies. What if, instead of trying to match Shaq’s size, you simply made him work harder defensively? What if you spaced the floor, pulled the big man out of the paint, and prioritized pace over power?
Mike D’Antoni took this idea and ran with it in Phoenix. With Steve Nash running point, Amar’e Stoudemire as a dynamic pick-and-roll threat, and a roster full of shooters, D’Antoni’s Suns pushed the tempo and launched threes at a rate rarely seen in the league at the time. They weren’t built to stop Shaq—they were built to outrun and outscore him.
“We weren’t going to outmuscle the Lakers or Spurs,” D’Antoni recalled. “But we could try to beat them in a different game. And it almost worked.”
D’Antoni’s Suns never made the Finals, but they laid the groundwork for a new style of play. Other teams took note. Then came Golden State, Stephen Curry, and a full-blown three-point revolution.
The Analytics Era Confirms the Shift
While Shaq may have been the cause of the shift, the justification came later in the form of analytics. As teams began to better understand the value of the three-point shot and the inefficiency of long twos, the perimeter game took over.
But the analytics didn’t invent the shift—they simply validated a new way to survive. The three-point shot, it turned out, wasn’t just a gimmick. It was a strategic necessity born out of an era where traditional interior scoring could only go so far—especially when Shaq was anchoring the paint.
And as D’Antoni points out, once the genie was out of the bottle, there was no going back.
“Once teams saw they could win by shooting threes, they never looked back. And it all started because we had to find a way around Shaq.”
Shaq’s Indirect Legacy in the Modern Game
Ironically, Shaquille O’Neal may be the biggest reason why big men today are expected to stretch the floor. While Shaq proved the power of size, he also exposed its limitations in a changing league. After him, the post-centric big man all but disappeared. Today’s centers—Nikola Joki?, Joel Embiid, Karl-Anthony Towns—are as comfortable shooting from beyond the arc as they are posting up.
And it’s not just centers. Teams now build around spacing and pace. The corner three is sacred. Floor spacing is non-negotiable. It’s a different game entirely, and it all stems from a moment when the old way of doing things hit a wall named Shaquille.
The Irony of Influence
There’s a beautiful irony in D’Antoni’s argument. Shaq, a player who mocked the three-point shot and dominated in a way few could replicate, may have single-handedly pushed the league toward embracing the very style he dismissed. Without Shaq, the post game might have remained the dominant strategy. Instead, the need to compete with him created an environment where innovation thrived.
And Mike D’Antoni, who often found himself on the wrong side of Shaq-led playoff losses, ended up being one of the architects of that innovation.
“Shaq made us evolve,” D’Antoni said. “And once we did, the game changed forever.”
Lessons in Evolution and Adaptation
The story of Shaquille O’Neal’s indirect role in the three-point revolution is a perfect example of how evolution works—not just in basketball, but in life. Dominance in one area often forces others to innovate or perish. Shaq’s sheer dominance closed one strategic door but opened another.
In trying to solve the “Shaq problem,” coaches like D’Antoni unlocked entirely new ways to play the game. It wasn’t about being better at what already worked—it was about doing something different. And in doing so, they laid the groundwork for a revolution.
Today, teams routinely take 40 or 50 three-pointers in a game. Guards pull up from 30 feet. Big men are expected to shoot from range. And while Shaq himself never played that way, his influence is felt in every possession that starts five-out, every pick-and-pop three, and every lineup that trades size for speed.
Final Thoughts
Mike D’Antoni’s credit to Shaquille O’Neal may sound strange on first hearing, but it makes perfect sense when viewed through the lens of basketball evolution. Shaq didn’t just dominate his era—he defined it so thoroughly that he unintentionally forced the next one to begin. In trying to beat him, the league discovered a new path—one paved with three-pointers, spacing, and pace.
It’s a reminder that sometimes, the biggest innovators are not the ones who change—but the ones who force change by being so good that the status quo becomes obsolete.
So the next time you watch a three-point barrage, remember: somewhere in that flurry of shots lies the legacy of a 7-foot giant who never cared for the three-point line, but whose presence made it the most important shot in the game.
