Prime Wilt vs Prime Shaq

[TrueLAfan]

For God's sake, just look at the two guys. They're both incredibly, immensely strong. In totally different ways.

Wilt's got massive upper body strength to go with huge wingspan. Players with a low C of gravity--Wayne Embry, Zelmo Beaty, Wes Unseld--were the type of player that gave Wilt the most trouble when he was younger. As Wilt got older, he packed weight on below the belt. When he was rehabbing his torn knee ligament(s) in 1970, he realized that he had lost some of his quickness and speed. But he compensated for it by adding lower body muscle--lots of sand volleyball and combination strength/stretching exercises that people thought were crazy at the time. Now, we'd say he increased core strength. In the 3-4 years before his knee injury Wilt played at around 265-280. Afterwards, he was 290-315. All the extra weight was lower body muscle.

And here's the thing...I still don't think he was ever as strong as Shaq in lower body strength. Or ever could be. Shaq's weight and strength was/is low. He would have really given the young (pre-1965 or so) Wilt problems. And even when he was fat (which was often) Shaq had good quickness, even if he had a lot less explosiveness. It would have been great to see both the 1966-1969 Wilt and the post injury Wilt go up against the peak version of Shaq. 1966-69 Wilt had good lower body strength and elite/unique quickness and agility for a guy of that size. 1970 and later Wilt was almost--but not quite--as strong as Shaq down low, and was about the same level in agility and quickness. But Wilt always had an advantage in upper body strength and explosiveness. So, different types of strength.

As to the smarts/skills/etc., you have to go with Wilt. It's a no-brainer. Put it this way. In 1961, Wilt's coach told him, "I want you to score like no other center--or player--has done before." So Wilt scored more than any player in history, and his team set a franchise record for wins and missed out on the finals because of a controversial call in Game 7 of the conference finals (thank you, Mendy Rudolph!). Five years later, Wilt's coach told him, "I want you to do what no C has done before--become the focal point of the offense, and be a premier passer; a point center." So Wilt was a top 3 assist man in the league, and the team set a league record for victories and won a title. Five years after that, Wilt's coach told him, on a high octane running team, "Only take high percentage shots, make sharp outlet passes, and be the best defensive player in the league." Wilt did all that, the team set a league record for victories and won a title. And in all of the years, and years in between, Wilt led the league in rebounding and minutes played virtually every season.

I don't know of any other great player who has been asked to change his game so completely for his team. I do know that Wilt did it, and it was always successful. That says something about his broad skillset, basketball IQ, and ability to do what is necessary...you didn't need to build a team around Wilt. Wilt was multi-skilled enough to build his skillset around the team and coaching plan. Other great players may have been able to do this...but Wilt was the only one who definitively did, and was a top 3-5 player every time.

[Guy986]

I would also like to add that Wilt Chamberlain could dunk from the free throw line without a running start. Its well documented. With a little bit of momentum, he could dunk from the 3 point line. (He never actually did it in public. You see, he was a humble young man)

[kooldude]

TLAF,

Who do you think was better: Wilt or Kareem?

[TrueLAfan]

Guy986 ...I'm not sure why you make those types of posts. Is anyone making some sort of wild claim that you're rebutting? Or do you just think that you're, um, "funny"?

TLAF,

Who do you think was better: Wilt or Kareem?

Kareem. Tough call...I go back and forth. I think Wilt in 1967 was better than Kareem; I think Wilt was better than any player in history in 1967, and by quite a bit. And his 1966 and 1968 were probably as good (or close to it) as Kareem's best years.

But Kareem had the royal flush. He had

Super high peak
Didn't miss games
Played forever
No weaknesses in his game to exploit

A lot of the negatives things occasionally mentioned about Kareem--that he didn't perform well in the playoffs, that he couldn't win a title without a peak Magic or Oscar, that Walton at his peak dominated a peak Kareem, that Kareem was a poor rebounder--are flat out wrong.

I will say this--and this relates directly to both Kareem and Wilt. Wilt Chamberlain did something that is next to impossible to do. He made one of the greatest players of all time disappear. It wasn't for long--about 10 minutes of court time--but it was enough. It was in game 3 of the 1972 Conference finals. Wilt blocked five skyhooks and shut Kareem out in the fourth--no points--and the Lakers came back and won 108-105. It was the turning point of the series. At 35, with a broken hand, and having played more minutes than Hakeem Olajuwon played in his entire career, Wilt was still able to step on the gas against one of the best players of all time at his peak. It's not like that was a singular event either...he averaged 19.4 points and 23.6 rebounds a game in the finals that year.

[Blademaster]

What does that even mean? Kareem could drop 39 on Shaq as well, it's definitely not inconceivable.

Little known fact: Yao Ming holds the record for the most points any opposing center outscored Shaq by.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/box ... 20MIA.html

So old Shaq got owned by Yao Ming, while old Wilt got owned by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, I think the advantage still goes to Wilt there.

[NO-KG-AI]

I was agreeing with you, I was saying that SilverBullet's point was (Please Use More Appropriate Word), having the all time scoring leader put 39 on you at any point in your career, much less the downside, is nothing to be ashamed of, and means absolutely nothing in this discussion.

[kooldude]

TLAF,

It's only fitting that I ask you: Kareem or Jordan?

On that note, who is your GOAT and why?

[DaRkJaWs42]

I still laugh when people say that the 66-68 chamberlain was the GOAT Chamberlain.

Let me put it this way: Chamberlain carried his team in the first 5 years in the league. He lost by 2 points in game 7 vs. boston in eastern conf finals in his 50 ppg season, all because of a lousy goaltending call against Wilt that both Wilt and his coach disputed heavily at the time. This game seems to never be spoken about, but it's true: for those of you that like to criticize Wilt based on his high scoring output are simply wrong. In his first season in the league he lost a close game in game 6 vs. boston. In 1963 his team was so lousy he didn't make to the playoffs, and that is funny because that is the only year not even his critics criticized him. In 1964 he took his lousy team to the finals(this despite what was secretly known only to a few as a severe heart attack, but was labeled as something else...doctors said he wouldn't last 1 year, like, HIS LIFE). In 1965 he again took his team to the conf finals, this time losing in game 7 AGAIN BOSTON on a lousy play called by Dolph Schayes and an even lousier pass that caused havlicek to "STOLE THE BALL! HAVLICEK STOLE THE BALL!". It was a 1 point game. The pass didn't go to Wilt because Schayes was afraid they'd just foul him and send him to the line.

For all this Wilt was only called a loser. Now do you think this is deserving of someone that willed his team all the way to a conference finals to vs. Boston time after time after time?

[SedaleThreatt37]

Edited by Mod--no personal attacks, please

[DaRkJaWs42]

This is Shaq easily. And I know I will be the only one saying this.

Somebody will post fake ass bench press numbers. Which is all fine and dandy.
Then another guy will post the heights argument - i.e. players were not measured in shoes, blah blah blah, Wilt is taller than Shaq.

When all you need really is this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbcdliLtkEs

Yeah, too bad game 6 of the conference finals in that same year wasn't kept, otherwise you'd see how badly Chamberlain outplayed Jabbar, someone 10-11 years younger than him. It's written on paper, but we'll never get to see the game.

[TrueLAfan]

TLAF,

It's only fitting that I ask you: Kareem or Jordan?

On that note, who is your GOAT and why?

I always think of it as a three way tie between Jordan, Kareem, and Wilt. In general, going big over small, I go with Kareem. Kareem won lots of titles. It took him longer...but, in a way, I respect the character and play he showed when his teams weren't good. The Lakers of 1976 and 1977 were really awful--they would have struggled to win 25 games without Kareem. I saw one of the playoff games in 1977 when Kareem went up against Walton. There was no way the Lakers could have won that series...first, the Blazers were just a juggernaut that year. Second, the Lakers had no interior defense (other than Kareem), little perimeter play, and a bunch of injuries. They were the worst 50 win team of all time playing a team on a mission. And Kareem was just terrifying. I have heard people talk again and again about how "Walton outplayed Kareem," which is beyond stupid. Kareem was double and triple teamed the whole time, and he owned Walton anyway. In the previous post, I talked about how Wilt stopped Kareem for a quarter and slowed him down in the series. Walton--one of the great defensive Cs of all time--was helpless against Kareem. Even with Mo Lucas (a great player) helping him on double teams, Kareem had 40 points and 17 rebounds in the game I saw, to go with 6 blocks. For the series, Kareem averaged 30.3 ppg, 16 rpg, 3.8 apg, and 3.8 bpg, on 61% shooting. Winning is wonderful, and Kareem did a lot of winning. But there are times when you learn more about character and respect from watching how someone performs a task that is clearly futile. How do they carry themselves when they're down 3-0, with a markedly inferior team? What is their effort like? How do their opponents view them at those times? After the Portland series, Mo Lucas said this about Kareem.

Jabbar would never give up. He's the most respected player in the league because he never bows his head. Such great inner strength! You may beat his team but you never beat him.

So, for today, I'll go with Kareem. Tomorrow, it could be MJ or Wilt.

[DaRkJaWs42]

There are many games like that concerning Wilt. Game 6, 1960, game 7 1962, game 7, 1965, game 5, 1966, and from thereon out he never tried to carry the load. And those are just games facing elimination. 1964 I don't think he performed that well in the finals, but that's because he never shot all that much and his team was just horrible.

[Silver Bullet]

I was agreeing with you, I was saying that SilverBullet's point was (Please Use More Appropriate Word), having the all time scoring leader put 39 on you at any point in your career, much less the downside, is nothing to be ashamed of, and means absolutely nothing in this discussion.

The point wasn't that Kareem scored 39 points on Wilt.

The two main points were:

1. He is nowhere near as strong as people claim he is. Not even close.

2. He is shorter than Kareem. So he's not 7`3 in shoes (not even close) like people in the past have tried to claim.

[Silver Bullet]

This is Shaq easily. And I know I will be the only one saying this.

Somebody will post fake ass bench press numbers. Which is all fine and dandy.
Then another guy will post the heights argument - i.e. players were not measured in shoes, blah blah blah, Wilt is taller than Shaq.

When all you need really is this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbcdliLtkEs

Yeah, too bad game 6 of the conference finals in that same year wasn't kept, otherwise you'd see how badly Chamberlain outplayed Jabbar, someone 10-11 years younger than him. It's written on paper, but we'll never get to see the game.

Get with the program. I don't care about who outscores who.

I just posted that clip to show that Wilt was not superman, as people who don't know jack ussually claim.
He could not dunk from the free throw line without taking a step.
He did not bench 700 pounds.
He certainly could not make change of the top of a backboard.

We've already seen young Kareem go up against Wilt.
We've seen Old Kareem go up against young Ewing, young Akeem.
We've seen prime Akeem and Ewing go up against young Shaq.

I think this is a fairly easy question to answer if you're unbiased.

[writerman]

Wilt prime was a significantly better pure athlete than Shaq prime--hops, quickness, speed, almost any measure of athleticism you want to mention. Even adjusted for pace, he was a much better rebounder (Shaq has never been an outstanding rebounder for a guy of his size and strength) and I don't know anyone who would reasonably argue that Wilt wasn't a better shotblocker. Considering Wilt had a mid-range game that Shaq has never possessed, their career FG% are comparable, Wilt's high being much higher than Shaq's but lower when he depended more on the mid-range game. Shaq is a good passer, Wilt was one of the elite passing bigs of all time.

Wilt was much more reliable than Shaq in terms of being injury-free, despite playing many more minutes per game. One poster made much of Wilt's supposed lack of killer instinct--a claim that has a germ of truth--but few players ever dogged it more often and more consistently than Shaq has over his career. Wilt seldom missed a game during his career, something Shaq has done often for questionable reasons.

Shaq has also benefitted from playing with premiere smalls in his prime--Hardaway, Kobe, Wade--a luxury that Wilt prime had only once with the '67 Philadelphia 76ers. When he played with the Lakers (West) he was, although still a force, in his decline. Shaq also never had to face a dynasty of the caliber Wilt faced for years. In a smaller league, Wilt faced and often dominated top-tier competition at his position much more often than Shaq ever has--Thurmond, Bellamy, Reed, Russell, and late in his career, Kareem. Shaq never faced such competition as frequently as Wilt did.

Strength? You can only plausibly dismiss a percentage of the stories about Wilt's legendary strength, many of the stories (including Wilt's breaking Kerr's toe with a dunk) being well attested to by peers. Shaq is a big strong guy, and might have a slight edge on Wilt in terms of lower body strength. But in terms of upper body strength--pure muscle--I think Wilt had a significant edge. Anyone who thinks a prime Shaq would push around a prime Wilt is just delusional.

I think this one goes to Wilt by a good margin for the reasons I cited above. Jerry West and Rick Barry, who know a bit about the game and have seen both, would agree.

[DaRkJaWs42]

Get with the program. I don't care about who outscores who.

I just posted that clip to show that Wilt was not superman, as people who don't know jack ussually claim.
He could not dunk from the free throw line without taking a step.
He did not bench 700 pounds.
He certainly could not make change of the top of a backboard.

We've already seen young Kareem go up against Wilt.
We've seen Old Kareem go up against young Ewing, young Akeem.
We've seen prime Akeem and Ewing go up against young Shaq.

I think this is a fairly easy question to answer if you're unbiased.

Ok, let's clear up one thing : Wilt was not trying to be a heavy scorer. The fact that he rarely shoots at that point in his career doesn't mean jack. The first way most of judge players is based on their offensive game, because it's the most visible of all of the factors in a game. Wilt WAS superman in his first 5 years in the league, but because we don't have video of even one of his 282 50+ point games, people like you can't bring yourself to say it was anything special and dismiss it in your mind as him just facing a bunch of 6'0 white guys. You won't admit it for yourself so it's best everyone else know what you're really thinking.

As for that ONE GAME against Kareem, it actually showed how often Wilt tried to block Kareem's shot but had difficulty doing so. You tell me one other person who would have even TRIED to jump that high and block it? Face it...there is no person in the history of the league that has blocked Kareem's sky hook except for Wilt, and Wilt did it numerous times. In one game he blocked it twice on the same possession by the Bucks.

Actually the claim was that he only had to take a few steps from the top of the key and then could jump from the free throw line. Many people saw him do this, and the NBA obviously believed it to the point that they banned it before he entered the league.

His bench claims are probably false. If you read my other thread, you'd see that I actually made a call to someone that worked out with him in the 90s, and they said his bench wasn't as special as is claimed, but that his bicep and wrist curls were unbelievable.

As far as making change off the top of the backboard...there are so many different sources out there that have made this claim, including his teammates, that I can only laugh at your comment. Go ask Jerry West, or one of his friends for a long time, Sonny Hill. He could do it even after he had major knee surgery.

Prime Hakeem dominated young shaq. I don't see where you're going with that one. Ewing, for as many that will give him praise for being a great player, was really not all special when he was in the NBA. His defense was good, but his offense was nothing to gaze at. Shaq was great in 2000, but they did almost lose to Portland in game 7. If they had lost, as would have been quite feasible, you wouldn't be talking about the Shaq of 2000, period. Even though Wilt lost in his game 7 in 1962, he was far better than Shaq, and the numbers he put up were no accident. Back then it was just as rare for someone to get a 40, 50 or 60 point game. For as many times as people managed to get a 50 point game by 1965, it had only matched all of the times Wilt did it.

[DaRkJaWs42]

I was agreeing with you, I was saying that SilverBullet's point was (Please Use More Appropriate Word), having the all time scoring leader put 39 on you at any point in your career, much less the downside, is nothing to be ashamed of, and means absolutely nothing in this discussion.

The point wasn't that Kareem scored 39 points on Wilt.

The two main points were:

1. He is nowhere near as strong as people claim he is. Not even close.

2. He is shorter than Kareem. So he's not 7`3 in shoes (not even close) like people in the past have tried to claim.

Kareem is 7'2, Wilt is 7'1. In shoes, yes, both of them add inches, so you're wrong.

In terms of his strength, that's just laughable. When he was on the Sixers there was no doubt by anyone in the league that he was the strongest. Luke Jackson, who was a newly acquired Power forward in 1965 and was quite strong himself, was billed the second strongest in the league. According to Billy Cunningham, Wilt would let Luke get him halfway down in an arm wrestle, then Wilt would say "Are you ready?" And Wilt would immediately beat him at it, which left Cunningham thinking "You've got to be kidding me".

[Silver Bullet]

I was agreeing with you, I was saying that SilverBullet's point was (Please Use More Appropriate Word), having the all time scoring leader put 39 on you at any point in your career, much less the downside, is nothing to be ashamed of, and means absolutely nothing in this discussion.

The point wasn't that Kareem scored 39 points on Wilt.

The two main points were:

1. He is nowhere near as strong as people claim he is. Not even close.

2. He is shorter than Kareem. So he's not 7`3 in shoes (not even close) like people in the past have tried to claim.

Kareem is 7'2, Wilt is 7'1. In shoes, yes, both of them add inches, so you're wrong.

In terms of his strength, that's just laughable. When he was on the Sixers there was no doubt by anyone in the league that he was the strongest. Luke Jackson, who was a newly acquired Power forward in 1965 and was quite strong himself, was billed the second strongest in the league. According to Billy Cunningham, Wilt would let Luke get him halfway down in an arm wrestle, then Wilt would say "Are you ready?" And Wilt would immediately beat him at it, which left Cunningham thinking "You've got to be kidding me".

Your post always begins and ends with "According to". Please get your dad to buy you a subscription to ESPN Classic and watch some games. According to Jack Ramsey, Bill Walton is the greatest center to ever play the game.

[Silver Bullet]

Get with the program. I don't care about who outscores who.

I just posted that clip to show that Wilt was not superman, as people who don't know jack ussually claim.
He could not dunk from the free throw line without taking a step.
He did not bench 700 pounds.
He certainly could not make change of the top of a backboard.

We've already seen young Kareem go up against Wilt.
We've seen Old Kareem go up against young Ewing, young Akeem.
We've seen prime Akeem and Ewing go up against young Shaq.

I think this is a fairly easy question to answer if you're unbiased.

Ok, let's clear up one thing : Wilt was not trying to be a heavy scorer. The fact that he rarely shoots at that point in his career doesn't mean jack. The first way most of judge players is based on their offensive game, because it's the most visible of all of the factors in a game. Wilt WAS superman in his first 5 years in the league, but because we don't have video of even one of his 282 50+ point games, people like you can't bring yourself to say it was anything special and dismiss it in your mind as him just facing a bunch of 6'0 white guys. You won't admit it for yourself so it's best everyone else know what you're really thinking.

As for that ONE GAME against Kareem, it actually showed how often Wilt tried to block Kareem's shot but had difficulty doing so. You tell me one other person who would have even TRIED to jump that high and block it? Face it...there is no person in the history of the league that has blocked Kareem's sky hook except for Wilt, and Wilt did it numerous times. In one game he blocked it twice on the same possession by the Bucks.

Actually the claim was that he only had to take a few steps from the top of the key and then could jump from the free throw line. Many people saw him do this, and the NBA obviously believed it to the point that they banned it before he entered the league.

His bench claims are probably false. If you read my other thread, you'd see that I actually made a call to someone that worked out with him in the 90s, and they said his bench wasn't as special as is claimed, but that his bicep and wrist curls were unbelievable.

As far as making change off the top of the backboard...there are so many different sources out there that have made this claim, including his teammates, that I can only laugh at your comment. Go ask Jerry West, or one of his friends for a long time, Sonny Hill. He could do it even after he had major knee surgery.

Prime Hakeem dominated young shaq. I don't see where you're going with that one. Ewing, for as many that will give him praise for being a great player, was really not all special when he was in the NBA. His defense was good, but his offense was nothing to gaze at. Shaq was great in 2000, but they did almost lose to Portland in game 7. If they had lost, as would have been quite feasible, you wouldn't be talking about the Shaq of 2000, period. Even though Wilt lost in his game 7 in 1962, he was far better than Shaq, and the numbers he put up were no accident. Back then it was just as rare for someone to get a 40, 50 or 60 point game. For as many times as people managed to get a 50 point game by 1965, it had only matched all of the times Wilt did it.

find me proof that anyone ever (not just Wilt) any human being ever has made change off the back of a backboard. OR fine. Find me proof that anyone has ever even touched the top of the backboard.

[Shaqsquatch]

I read an interesting article about this, "Classic Confrontation: Wilt Versus Shaq"

Excerpt:

Hall of Famer Dolph Schayes earned selection to the NBA’s 50 Greatest Players List and played against Wilt Chamberlain for several years before coaching him with the Philadelphia 76ers. Who would he take first in a hypothetical draft—Wilt Chamberlain at his best or Shaquille O’Neal at his best? Schayes replies, "The Wilt Chamberlain of the latter years is who I would pick, merely because he was an unstoppable inside player—a much better rebounder than Shaq, a better shot blocker than Shaq and I think he was a better team guy with the guys on the team than Shaq. It was the Wilt who was the all-around player, the passing Wilt. They are both haunted by their poor foul shooting. In Shaq’s case—if he and Wilt had to play against each other—one of Wilt’s great records would have been broken and that record is never having fouled out of a game. I think that if Wilt had to play Shaq--the physical Shaq going to the basket and all that and Wilt accepting the challenge of trying to stop him—Wilt would have fouled out of games. Wilt never fouled out against the Celtics because Russell was not the offensive threat that Shaq is. As far as Shaq is concerned, there is a good Shaq and a bad Shaq. There is a Shaq that I think sometimes doesn’t compete 100% as he should—that’s the bad Shaq. The good Shaq that competes 100% would have given Wilt a lot of trouble offensively. Shaq, when he wants to be an offensive weapon, is one of the greatest in the history of the game and would dominate and would force even Wilt into foul trouble. So who’s the better of the two? In my opinion I would say Wilt."

Schayes adds, "The early Wilt I would not take (over Shaq). He took a lot of fadeaway jump shots, which was a very poor selection. I think he did that because Wilt, being a very proud person, a very egotistical person--nobody becomes great unless they have a big ego—felt that he wasn’t a complete basketball player unless he had more of a game than just dunking and being around the basket. He was constantly criticized for not being a complete player—'All you do is dunk.' So he said to himself, 'I’m going to prove that I can shoot as well as anybody.' That’s why he took those stupid, foolish, idiotic fadeaway jump shots—to prove to somebody, mostly himself, that he could play besides just being a big guy. When he took that shot I would tear my hair out (as his coach) and say, 'Oh my God,' because it put him off balance, he couldn’t rebound his own shot and his man was able to take off and get layups because he was off balance."

Schayes' fellow Hall of Famer and Top 50 selection Oscar Robertson also prefers Wilt to Shaq: "You have to take Wilt. He once averaged 50 points a game and he averaged 24-plus rebounds per game and he (had seasons in which he) averaged 5-7 assists. As dominant as Shaq is with the players he is playing against, Wilt was just awesome. Shaq is an aggressive player who uses his weight and strength to overpower people. Wilt had power but he also had the finger roll and the bank shot--Wilt had a more complete game in the pivot."

Dr. Jack Ramsay was the General Manager of Chamberlain’s 1967 Philadelphia 76ers team that set an NBA record for wins in a season and ended Boston’s eight year stranglehold on the NBA title. So he would choose Wilt, right? As Lee Corso would say, not so fast my friend. Ramsay offers this scouting report: "Wilt was an amazing player. I would say it's hard to predict how they would fare against each other. Wilt was a little taller, rangier, a great shot blocker--much more of a shot blocker than Shaq." Why was Wilt a better shot blocker? Ramsay explains, "His length. Longer than Shaq, long arms. Great timing for the ball. They didn't keep stats at that time for blocked shots. I was writing a piece about defense in general and I wanted to find out how many shots Chamberlain and Russell blocked--Russell was even better. So I called Boston and they said they didn't have any clips and they didn't keep any stats of that. I called Harvey (Pollack) and Harvey said, 'We don't have anything for a whole season, but every so often I would have one of our stat guys keep blocks. I know for a fact that there were a couple games when Wilt had 25 blocks." Keep in mind that the NBA has only officially recorded blocked shots since 1973-74 and the official NBA record is 17, set by Elmore Smith.

Ramsay notes that Chamberlain was ahead of his time with his emphasis on strength training. Was Chamberlain stronger than Shaq in terms of basketball, not necessarily bench press strength, but in terms of holding his position, backing somebody down, using the strength in a basketball sense? Ramsay said, "I think probably Shaq (is stronger), because of his body mass. He is so wide and thick--and very quick footed, has great command of his feet. You'll see every so often, some of his spin moves--they're lightning quick. I don't think Wilt had that. Wilt was more methodical, worked the ball and the finger roll, back into the basket. It's hard to say how it would've come out, but it would've been a great matchup."

I asked Ramsay point blank who he would take between 'young Wilt' or 'young Shaq' if he were building a team around one guy rather than trying to fit him in with the personnel on a given team. Ramsay says, "Very difficult. I really think that Shaq is more of a team player. Wilt was a stats collector. He would decide before the season in what stats he wanted to lead the league. He led the league in assists one year."

What about Wilt’s performance for the 1967 76ers? Ramsay says, "That was his best year. That might have been his best year ever, that one season. We had a new coach, Alex Hannum. He put in a game plan where the ball went through Wilt consistently. He only averaged 24 points a game, which is not chopped liver, but here is a guy who averaged 50. He didn't shoot. He really was patient. He looked for cutters. He made himself a good passer. That was his best season. That year Philly beat Boston four out of five in the Eastern Finals and then beat the Warriors in six games. Wilt was terrific. I thought that if he had played his career like that he'd have been regarded as a different player."

Ramsay acknowledges that Wilt played for several different teams and coaches, and that this instability surrounding Wilt is part of the reason that Wilt did not play that way for his entire career but still insists, “I think Shaq is much more dedicated to the team winning and less concerned about his stats."

Warren Jabali was an ABA All-Star as Wilt’s NBA career wound down. He says, "There's no comparison. Chamberlain is head and shoulders above Shaquille O'Neal. Who I like to compare Shaquille O'Neal with is Darryl Dawkins. What happens with Shaquille O'Neal is he is able to push people out of the way, step on them and dunk the ball. If Darryl Dawkins had been able to do what Shaquille O'Neal is able to do on the low post, Darryl Dawkins would have been unstoppable. Not only could he dunk as hard and forcefully as Shaquille O'Neal can, he had a 15 foot jump shot to go with all of that. He probably fouled out more than anybody in the history of the NBA. They did not allow Darryl Dawkins to play basketball. They controlled his game so much that when he went out on the court it was like he was walking on egg shells. In order for us to even include Shaquille O'Neal in the conversation (about Wilt), you would have to imagine Shaquille O'Neal not being able to just knock people down and dunk the basketball. That means that he would have to have the ability to consistently make a five or ten foot jump shot or hook. If that was what he had to do, then he would not be as dominant as he has been by playing the other way. So he could not compare to Chamberlain because Chamberlain had the strength to play that way but he didn't do it that way. He had a little fadeaway 10 foot jump shot, finger rolls and all that kind of stuff."

Spencer Haywood played against Chamberlain but he tosses a curveball when asked who he would take between Wilt and Shaq: "I'd take Kareem.” Haywood explains, “He could do more. He could score, he had that skyhook. You've got to have a dominant weapon that doesn't interfere with the whole flow of the game. So, with Wilt, in his latter years he changed over and had all that stuff going on (a complete game), but in his earlier years the ball had to go through him. You could play around Kareem and then at the last second drop it in to him and he'd shoot a skyhook. He just had a lot of stuff going on--he ran the floor very well… I think that guys are doing Shaq a disservice by putting him in that category until it's all over with. Everybody says that it's Shaq and Wilt, but I don't see it like that. Shaq's career is not complete, but he's no Wilt Chamberlain. Chamberlain changed his game and made adjustments. Shaq doesn't seem to want to do that. His game is always based on running you over.” Pressed to select either Wilt or Shaq, Haywood chooses Wilt and adds that Shaq would not be his next choice after Wilt.

Here is the statistical tale of the tape for Wilt versus Shaq:

Wilt, regular season: 30.1 ppg, 22.9 rpg, .540 FG%, .511 FT%, 4.4 apg , Rookie of the Year, 4 MVPs, 7 All-NBA First Team selections. Led the league in scoring seven times, in rebounding 11 times, in field goal percentage nine times; blocked shots not officially recorded during his career.

Shaq, regular season: 26.3 ppg, 11.8 rpg, .580 FG%, .528 FT%, 2.8 apg, Rookie of the Year, 1 MVP, 7 All-NBA First Team selections. Led the league in scoring two times, in field goal percentage nine times; has never led the league in blocked shots.

Wilt, playoffs: 22.5 ppg, 24.5 rpg, .522 FG%, .465 FT%, 4.2 apg, 1 Finals MVP, two championships.

Shaq, playoffs: 26.3 ppg, 12.4 rpg, .562 FG%, .512 FT%, 3.0 apg, 3 Finals MVPs, three championships.

As I pointed out in a Basketball Digest article a few years ago, the most accurate way to look at Wilt’s scoring is to divide his career in two: after the 1965-66 season (his seventh in a 14 year career), Wilt was averaging 39.6 ppg in the regular season (21,486 points in 543 games) and 32.8 ppg in the playoffs; in the remaining six years of Wilt’s career he averaged 19.8 ppg in the regular season (9933 points in 502 games) and 17.6 ppg in the playoffs (1899 points in 108 games). So, in the first part of Wilt’s career he scored at a very high rate in the regular season and in the playoffs; in the second part of his career he averaged less than 20 ppg but won two championships with two of the most dominant single season squads in NBA history. In general, most players average fewer points in the playoffs than in the regular season because of tougher competition and a slower paced game.

Shooting percentages were lower in Wilt’s era and shot attempts were higher; this explains some of the disparity in their numbers in rebounding and field goal percentage. Wilt and Shaq are tied for the league record by winning nine field goal percentage titles. As for rebounding, while Wilt was probably not literally twice the rebounder that Shaq is, it is telling that Wilt won 11 rebounding titles while playing at the same time as Bill Russell and Shaq has never won even one rebounding title. It should also be noted that the NBA did not select a Finals MVP until 1969, two years after Wilt won his first NBA championship.

Wow those guys don't have any bias at all do they? This is like asking Kobe Bryant, Motumbo and Rick Smits whos better Shaq or Wilt. So Shaq is just another Darryl Dawkins, huh?- only with more help from the refs?
I'll say this...Shaq is the strongest player in terms of basketball effectiveness ever. He was the most powerfully explosive ( powerful in terms of mass x strength x speed) player ever.. Too big , too strong, too explosive even for Wilt. Better footwork than Wilt. Better game awareness than WIlt. A better big game turn on switch than WIlt. Quicker on the low block than Wilt.