Prime Wilt vs Prime Shaq

[NetsForce]

^ Wilt Chamberlain was also notorious for breaking the rules and getting away with it. ^

[Lakers05]

^ Wilt Chamberlain was also notorious for breaking the rules and getting away with it. ^

Like what?

[DaRkJaWs42]

^ Wilt Chamberlain was also notorious for breaking the rules and getting away with it. ^

Uh no he wasn't. I have never, ever heard that, and I've read up almost everything there is to read about him.

Now, he DID like to cheat at many games that he played, but basketball was not one of those games.

[Dr Positivity]

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 more like 7'4 in shoes. He's one of the few post 1970ish players who listed themselves in socks, thus he's "officially" tallied in at 7'2, but he's 7'2 like Bill Russell is 6'9

In the picture of Wilt and Kareem in the early 80s it's clear Kareem is about 1 inch taller than Wilt. So Kareem is 7'4 with shoes and 7'2 without them. Wilt is 7'3 with shoes and 7'1 without, which is what he was listed at in his time

[jaypo]

The Lakers Shaq may have a variety of moves, but one of his moves is a clear travel. Last time I checked, you cannot dribble, pick up the ball, jump to the middle, stop and then shoot. That's a clear travel and gives the offensive player a huge unfair advantage and should be called.

Quite frankly, the Lakers Shaq was the biggest disgrace to the game that I've ever seen. The Orlando Shaq at least tried to beat you with his athleticism. The Lakers Shaq, on the other hand, was too fat and out of shape that he had to find cheap ways to score, to remain a "superstar."

Were you whining like this while he was gift wrapping 3 titles to your city? Were you whining that the moves that you call illegal (but weren't when MJ or Barkley did them) led your team to the finals 4 times in 5 years while he was sporting the purple and gold? MJ is considered by most to be the GOAT, but he was star that benefitted from the refs the most IN HISTORY. Does that make him a disgrace to the game? Because the officials favored him? Well, let me tell you something. About 90% of those "illegal" moves are null and void because before Shaq performed any of them, he was usually held or hacked. So if the game was called straight, Shaq probably would never have had to complete a post move because he would be at the line about 100 times a night.

And I'll say it again to show you how ridiculous you Lakers/Kobe fans are. Do you remember that Shaq never did any kind of weight training before arriving in LA? The Lakers staff (PJ mainly) advised Shaq to start lifting weights and put on weight to counter the larger, stronger Western Conference bigs. So he did. I am a certified personal trainer, but anyone with a small amount of knowledge should know that muscle is more dense and weighs more than fat. So Shaq put on weight. And I will quote PJ and Riley- Shaq's body fat never exceeded 15%. Does anyone know the averaged body afat % of a college athlete? 12%. So for a 7'1, 300lb plus man to maintain that weight and not exceed 15% body fat is outstanding. And you also fail to realize that he had a 36" vertical leap. Steve Francis, while in the dunk contest, had a 40" leap to give you a little perspective. So to those who "KNOW" how out of shape Shaq was, why don't you post your measurements and show me some of your knowledge and prove your theory to be correct. I just proved it wrong!

Next, your statement about that move being a travel is incorrect. If the dribble and the hop are simultaneous, then it's not a travel. You put the ball on the floor, hop, and jump back up again, and you have never moved your pivot foot or picked up your dribble. It is not a travel.

I really hope your post was sarcasm, Lakers05. Because if not, you pretty much made yourself look very uneducated. But I'm pretty sure your name shows your bias and probably the year you started watching basketball. If you believe anything you posted, then you discredit the likes of Billups, Barkley, and MJ. Because while backing down their opponents in the post, they all did the exact same things that Shaq does. If it's not a foul when they do it, then it isn't a foul when a bigger player does it.

Next, holding yourself at 45 degrees on a pole is not that big of a deal. I do far more difficult things in Yoga. And I seriously doubt he held it for a full minute. Close your eyes and count to 60. A minute is a lot longer than it seems.

[JordansBulls]

^ Wilt Chamberlain was also notorious for breaking the rules and getting away with it. ^

Especially considering he never fouled out one single game in his life.

[Wade3Iverson]

Prime Shaq, clearly.

Wlit was a great, great player...... in the 60's. He would still be very good nowadays but not nearly as good as some think. Let's face it, the 60's was simply a weaker era......

-MUCH weaker guard play
-much less physical (I don't care how many time West broke his nose, just watch some tape)
-bigs didn't box out
-offensive schemes were worse
-defensive schemes were worse
-way smaller talent pool
-etc,etc,etc

So overall WIlt probably could've been as good or better than Shaq had he grown up during this era and faced stiffer competition, but he didn't. And that likely hurt him overall as a player. You don't become the best unless you face the best.

[Guy986]

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 more like 7'4 in shoes. He's one of the few post 1970ish players who listed themselves in socks, thus he's "officially" tallied in at 7'2, but he's 7'2 like Bill Russell is 6'9

In the picture of Wilt and Kareem in the early 80s it's clear Kareem is about 1 inch taller than Wilt. So Kareem is 7'4 with shoes and 7'2 without them. Wilt is 7'3 with shoes and 7'1 without, which is what he was listed at in his time

Who the **** wears two ince shoes? So Yao Ming is really 7'7 with shoes?

[DaRkJaWs42]

^ Wilt Chamberlain was also notorious for breaking the rules and getting away with it. ^

Especially considering he never fouled out one single game in his life.

Yeah, that is complete bull dumbass. Wilt Chamberlain was NOT known for anything like that. You find me one, ONE source out there that said he was notorious for breaking rules. The only thing he was notorious for was getting fouled hard by every player in sight and not getting any foul calls against the players fouling him to even the matchup.

Then, suggesting that's the reason he never fouled out? No, he never fouled out because he was a smart player. If you watch his style of play, he didn't always body the guy he was guarding, and this was done on purpose. He never cared if a guy was going to go to him, he was always sure that if they tried to go to the rim that he would block it every time. The fact that he never fouled out is only a testament to him being a smart player, not that he got away with ****. that is ridiculous.

[DaRkJaWs42]

Prime Shaq, clearly.

Wlit was a great, great player...... in the 60's. He would still be very good nowadays but not nearly as good as some think. Let's face it, the 60's was simply a weaker era......

-MUCH weaker guard play
-much less physical (I don't care how many time West broke his nose, just watch some tape)
-bigs didn't box out
-offensive schemes were worse
-defensive schemes were worse
-way smaller talent pool
-etc,etc,etc

So overall WIlt probably could've been as good or better than Shaq had he grown up during this era and faced stiffer competition, but he didn't. And that likely hurt him overall as a player. You don't become the best unless you face the best.

Hey buddy: you're wrong, and you're not worth the discussion to prove you wrong.

[Silver Bullet]

^ Wilt Chamberlain was also notorious for breaking the rules and getting away with it. ^

Especially considering he never fouled out one single game in his life.

Yeah, that is complete bull dumbass. Wilt Chamberlain was NOT known for anything like that. You find me one, ONE source out there that said he was notorious for breaking rules. The only thing he was notorious for was getting fouled hard by every player in sight and not getting any foul calls against the players fouling him to even the matchup.

Then, suggesting that's the reason he never fouled out? No, he never fouled out because he was a smart player. If you watch his style of play, he didn't always body the guy he was guarding, and this was done on purpose. He never cared if a guy was going to go to him, he was always sure that if they tried to go to the rim that he would block it every time. The fact that he never fouled out is only a testament to him being a smart player, not that he got away with ****. that is ridiculous.

when did you start watching basketball ?

[NetsForce]

^ Wilt Chamberlain was also notorious for breaking the rules and getting away with it. ^

Especially considering he never fouled out one single game in his life.

Exactly.

[DaRkJaWs42]

when did you start watching basketball ?

1993-4

How about you?

[writerman]

Prime Shaq, clearly.

Wlit was a great, great player...... in the 60's. He would still be very good nowadays but not nearly as good as some think. Let's face it, the 60's was simply a weaker era......

-MUCH weaker guard play
-much less physical (I don't care how many time West broke his nose, just watch some tape)
-bigs didn't box out
-offensive schemes were worse
-defensive schemes were worse
-way smaller talent pool
-etc,etc,etc

So overall WIlt probably could've been as good or better than Shaq had he grown up during this era and faced stiffer competition, but he didn't. And that likely hurt him overall as a player. You don't become the best unless you face the best.

Jerry West--who I'd say knows a bit more about the game than you or anyone here, including me--said that if Wilt were playing in his prime in the league today, he'd lead the league in scoring, rebounding, and blocked shots. If you don't believe me, I'll post the vid with the quote.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBXgvdVvFL0&NR=1

Your comment about the bigs in Wilt's era not boxing out is hilarious. There's not a big in the game today that bothers to box out, and you're saying they were worse in Wilt's day? lol...

The talent pool in relation to the number of teams was NOT smaller.

As for the guard play, I'd agree that in general perimeter defenses were weaker then...in a running game, that's to be expected. But offensively, there are few guards in the league today who could play consistently at the pace they played in the sixties and maintain their shooting percentages at the same level they post them today.

As for the physical play in the paint, having seen maybe 30 games in person during that era (most at the old Cincinnati Royals home court) and many more on TV, you're just plain flat wrong. The play in the paint today is just plain dainty compared to the out-and-out thuggery that often went on in the sixties. Things that would get flagrants today often didn't even get a whistle then. Things that would get a long suspension today often were good for no more than an ejection, if that.

And if you think Shaq ever consistently faced competition at a level like Russell, Thurmond, Bellamy, Pettit, Reed, not to even mention Kareem, you're frikkin' crazy. In a smaller league, Wilt saw those guys--and other slightly lesser lights like Wayne Embry, Wesley Unseld, and Zelmo Beatty--on a much more regular basis than Shaq ever saw anything like comparable competition.

It makes my ass tired seeing kids who never saw Wilt play other than in a few grainy old clips making solemn pronouncements like saying Shaq, who is and never was within lightyears of Wilt's ability as an athlete, is better than Wilt was.

[jaypo]

Well, I got about 16 years on ya. And I'm pretty sure neither of us watched Wilt play. So why do you think you know so much about him? Because you read some books? Hell, he played in an era where one of the best players in the world couldn't even dribble with both hands! I'm pretty sure if you put Shaq in the era Wilt played in, he'd have similar results with a different style. Hell, players with all the modern advances in strenght, conditioning, etc. couldn't stop Shaq. Imagine a bunch of 6'5" white guys! Put Wilt in this era, and he is still a great player. But he wouldn't be able to use his strength any more than Shaq does, because he wasn't as powerful as Shaq. Sure, he could bench press a lot. But bench pressing does exactly nothing when you're trying to back down a 280lb defender. He'd have to rely on his mid range game. Do you think that he could put up 50 ppg like that?

I'm not taking anything away from Wilt. Mainly because I haven't seen him play, and because his numbers speak for themselves. But I find it hard to believe that with everything he brought to the table, he only has 2 rings to show for it. I don't care that he played against Russell's Celts. If he was superhuman, it shouldn't matter!

[writerman]

[quote="jaypo"]Well, I got about 16 years on ya. And I'm pretty sure neither of us watched Wilt play. So why do you think you know so much about him? Because you read some books? Hell, he played in an era where one of the best players in the world couldn't even dribble with both hands! I'm pretty sure if you put Shaq in the era Wilt played in, he'd have similar results with a different style. Hell, players with all the modern advances in strenght, conditioning, etc. couldn't stop Shaq. Imagine a bunch of 6'5" white guys! Put Wilt in this era, and he is still a great player. But he wouldn't be able to use his strength any more than Shaq does, because he wasn't as powerful as Shaq. Sure, he could bench press a lot. But bench pressing does exactly nothing when you're trying to back down a 280lb defender. He'd have to rely on his mid range game. Do you think that he could put up 50 ppg like that?

I'm not taking anything away from Wilt. Mainly because I haven't seen him play, and because his numbers speak for themselves. But I find it hard to believe that with everything he brought to the table, he only has 2 rings to show for it. I don't care that he played against Russell's Celts. If he was superhuman, it shouldn't matter![/q

Oh lord--the "6'5" white guys" bull again...and you don't even have a clue as to how ignorant that is...

I highlighted the only really undeniably true statement you made in that post...

[Silver Bullet]

Well, I got about 16 years on ya. And I'm pretty sure neither of us watched Wilt play. So why do you think you know so much about him? Because you read some books? Hell, he played in an era where one of the best players in the world couldn't even dribble with both hands! I'm pretty sure if you put Shaq in the era Wilt played in, he'd have similar results with a different style. Hell, players with all the modern advances in strenght, conditioning, etc. couldn't stop Shaq. Imagine a bunch of 6'5" white guys! Put Wilt in this era, and he is still a great player. But he wouldn't be able to use his strength any more than Shaq does, because he wasn't as powerful as Shaq. Sure, he could bench press a lot. But bench pressing does exactly nothing when you're trying to back down a 280lb defender. He'd have to rely on his mid range game. Do you think that he could put up 50 ppg like that?

I'm not taking anything away from Wilt. Mainly because I haven't seen him play, and because his numbers speak for themselves. But I find it hard to believe that with everything he brought to the table, he only has 2 rings to show for it. I don't care that he played against Russell's Celts. If he was superhuman, it shouldn't matter![/q

Oh lord--the "6'5" white guys" bull again...and you don't even have a clue as to how ignorant that is...

I highlighted the only really undeniably true statement you made in that post...

It's not like you saw him play day in and day out either.

How many times have you seen the guy play live ? If ever.

[Warspite]

Well, I got about 16 years on ya. And I'm pretty sure neither of us watched Wilt play. So why do you think you know so much about him? Because you read some books? Hell, he played in an era where one of the best players in the world couldn't even dribble with both hands! I'm pretty sure if you put Shaq in the era Wilt played in, he'd have similar results with a different style. Hell, players with all the modern advances in strenght, conditioning, etc. couldn't stop Shaq. Imagine a bunch of 6'5" white guys! Put Wilt in this era, and he is still a great player. But he wouldn't be able to use his strength any more than Shaq does, because he wasn't as powerful as Shaq. Sure, he could bench press a lot. But bench pressing does exactly nothing when you're trying to back down a 280lb defender. He'd have to rely on his mid range game. Do you think that he could put up 50 ppg like that?

I'm not taking anything away from Wilt. Mainly because I haven't seen him play, and because his numbers speak for themselves. But I find it hard to believe that with everything he brought to the table, he only has 2 rings to show for it. I don't care that he played against Russell's Celts. If he was superhuman, it shouldn't matter![/q

Oh lord--the "6'5" white guys" bull again...and you don't even have a clue as to how ignorant that is...

I highlighted the only really undeniably true statement you made in that post...

It's not like you saw him play day in and day out either.

How many times have you seen the guy play live ? If ever.

When you cant debate a person then use ridicule and attack the person if you cant attack the argument.

In the words of mark Jackson: Your better than that....

Silver Bullet makes great points and begins to sway me to his side and then pulls a Saul Alinsky.

[Silver Bullet]

Oh lord--the "6'5" white guys" bull again...and you don't even have a clue as to how ignorant that is...

I highlighted the only really undeniably true statement you made in that post...

It's not like you saw him play day in and day out either.

How many times have you seen the guy play live ? If ever.

When you cant debate a person then use ridicule and attack the person if you cant attack the argument.

In the words of mark Jackson: Your better than that....

Silver Bullet makes great points and begins to sway me to his side and then pulls a Saul Alinsky.[/quote]

No, I haven't participated in this thread for the past 4 pages, so I wasn't using it as a crutch. Nor was I attacking his character. My only point is, unless you were an NBA insider or a hot dog vendor, even people who were young in the 60's did not get to see Wilt a whole lot, because there was no national live coverage. So for anybody not residing in Philidelphia or LA, you probably at best could only watch the guy play a maximum of 4-5 times a year.

The NBA was virtually unknown in the early 60's. When the Lakers moved from Minneapolis to LA in 1960, the move was not even covered in most newspapers including Sports Illustrated - the premier sports publication of the time. The demand for and the recognition of the NBA was so low that NBC dropped NBA off it's roster in 1962. I believe there was one national game a week on Saturday evenings, and even the best teams did not appear on national TV more than 5-6 times a year. So if you were not living in Wilt's home town, you did not watch him play day in and day out.

Basketball was such an infant sport in the early 60's that TV-timeouts were devised, so that announcers could explain the game to it's viewership during breaks in play. In the 1978 top 730 television programs list published by Variety, the deciding game of the NBA Finals comes in at 472. The nest highest playoff game comes in at 694. As late as 1980, NBA Finals were being broadcast on tape delay at midnight, well past most school going children's bedtime.

All this is a very long way of saying, that the average person in the 60's was not an NBA fan, so most who became fans later claim to have seen games in the 60's, when the reality is that not a lot of people followed the NBA on a regular basis. But, even if you were a fan, there were not enough opportunities to watch your favourite player or team enough times.

There is a caveat though. I am not old enough to have seen all this firsthand. So what I know is from books and second hand information, so it is quite possible that you guys know something I don't. It is also possible that writerman lived right next to the arena and watched Wilt night in and night out, so I guess I shouldn't have worded my post so harshly. Lastly, I am not saying that writerman is lying. When I was growing up, there was this really popular soccer player named Maradona. When I think of it, I remember it as if I saw this guy play every night. I remember a few of his goals distinctly. But If I'm being honest, the truth is, I didn't watch the guy play more than a few times in my life. There is a natural tendency to see our youth as exaggeratedly good and most people remember them fondly. That is why the youth of the 90's think of Jordan and Hakeem as better than they actually were. People who were young in the 80's, think nobody could match up with Magic, Bird and Isiah. 20 years from now, today's kids will be writing articles about how Kobe and Lebron were the greatest players to ever walk the Earth. The point is that, If I had grown up in the 60's, and seen Wilt play 5-6 times, it would seem to me today that I had watched him play all the time, when infact I really hadn't.

I know this post is all over the place, but I hope that made some sense.

[Silver Bullet]

btw I totally missed that Saul Alkinsky reference. Before my time.