Wilt vs Shaq

[JerkyWay]

It may be a little bit surprising for some people, but I've seen knowledgeable posters (like ElGee), who rank Shaq over Wilt. It's still commonly accepted than Wilt was better than Shaq. What do you think?

[Kobe 24 Revis]

Shaq.... people are quick to say Shaq faced weak competition, but look at Wilt's

[LALegend]

Shaq is better IMO. No way is Wilt averaging 50 and pulling down 20 rebounds per game in today's era. Overall, Wilt played in a weaker era that inflated his stats and if you don't think that Shaq would have similar dominance in that era, you are fooling yourself.

[NYK 455]

Shaq is clearly better. Better offensive player, and he'd lock down every player Wilt played against on the other end. Not to metion, he has more rings in a more competitive era.

Ranking Wilt ahead of Shaq doesn't make much sense unless you value inflated volume stats.

[MacGill]

Shaq

Both were so dominant but the biggest seperator to me was Shaq's 'Killer instinct'. He did it his way and not the way that he wanted his peers to perceive him as in the game of basketball.

[doctorfunk]

Shaq is better IMO. No way is Wilt averaging 50 and pulling down 20 rebounds per game in today's era. Overall, Wilt played in a weaker era that inflated his stats and if you don't think that Shaq would have similar dominance in that era, you are fooling yourself.

Also no way Wilt was quicker, faster, stronger or more skilled than Shaq, if you watch the tapes Wilt was pretty raw. Shaq was way craftier in the post.

[ahonui06]

Shaq has more titles and was considered the most dominant player in his era.

Wilt has less titles and wasn't the most dominant player in his era. That was Russell.

[Kobe 24 Revis]

Shaq has more titles and was considered the most dominant player in his era.

Wilt has less titles and wasn't the most dominant player in his era. That was Russell.

except he dominated Russell head 2 head every time they played

[jaypo]

Shaq has more titles and was considered the most dominant player in his era.

Wilt has less titles and wasn't the most dominant player in his era. That was Russell.

except he dominated Russell head 2 head every time they played

I'm pretty sure Russell didn't care about head to head stats when he raised up his 11 Obrien trophies!

[Die93]

Wilt was definitely better then russell, he could actually score

But Shaq>wilt hes actually clutch unlike Wilt

[jaypo]

If you talk "skill", well, Wilt may be the better player here. Hell, he averaged 50 a game for a season! He had a better range. He put up 40 and 20. He scored 100 in a game! With that being said, I don't think that someone that could do all those things should only have 2 rings! Especially playing in that time frame. I don't care what dynasty you're facing, and shame on management for not putting more help around him if that was what was needed (because nobody does it alone). But the thing Shaq had over Wilt was the desire to obliterate his opponent. Wilt seemed to not want to be thought of as the "bad guy". Shaq didn't care. He wanted to break your arms if you blocked him. Shaq didn't care if people said "he can't shoot outside of 10 feet". Wilt did. Shaq would rather shoot 60% from the field and not hit a shot over 12 feet out if it translated into wins. Wilt wanted to prove the critics wrong and shoot from 17 ft just to say he could.

Shaq was bigger, more explosive, and stronger where it pertains to basketball. And he had the killer instinct that Wilt lacked. I'd take him.

[semi-sentient]

Shaq dominated in the post-season where Wilt typically underachieved.

There's really nothing else that needs to be said. I think it's crazy that Wilt continually gets ranked so high, especially above guys who consistently brought it in the regular season and the playoffs. Wilt has perhaps the best single season in league history (66-67), but Shaq kicked the league in the nuts 3 consecutive seasons and somehow he's not mentioned in the same breath?

I personally have Shaq ranked higher than Wilt, although that wasn't always the case. Before I knew all the details behind Wilt's short-comings I blindly ranked him in the top 3 or 4, but after that RPOY project I now know better.

[jaypo]

Don't let Writerman hear you say that!

[LascelleL]

Shaq

Both were so dominant but the biggest seperator to me was Shaq's 'Killer instinct'. He did it his way and not the way that he wanted his peers to perceive him as in the game of basketball.

THIS! People always criticized Shaq for not approaching the game like Kobe or Mike but they seem to completely overlook Wilt's lack of mental strength. No other player in the GOAT list sees their stats drop as much as Wilts...in most cases they actually jump up during the playoffs

[jaypo]

Shaq

Both were so dominant but the biggest seperator to me was Shaq's 'Killer instinct'. He did it his way and not the way that he wanted his peers to perceive him as in the game of basketball.

THIS! People always criticized Shaq for not approaching the game like Kobe or Mike but they seem to completely overlook Wilt's lack of mental strength. No other player in the GOAT list sees their stats drop as much as Wilts...in most cases they actually jump up during the playoffs

Agree. I constantly hear about Shaq's work ethic, his lack of motivation, his horrible free throw shooting. But I never hear Wilt knocked for those things! All I hear about is that "Shaq could have been the GOAT if......". Yet someone that was soooo much better than everyone on the planet coudn't muster more than 2 rings. But he's #3 all time!

[ThaRegul8r]

Charlie Rosen, author of The Pivotal Season: How the 1971-72 Los Angeles Lakers Changed the NBA (2005), weighed in in 2009:

Who's better, Shaq or Wilt? This question has been raised by several readers — the latest being Brad from Thousand Oaks, Calif. But the answer is more complex than it might appear. That's because, during his early career, Shaq weighed less than 300 pounds, and later on was so huge that only a cattle scale could adequately record his mass. Also, over the course of Chamberlain's 14-year career, his on-court role went through several alterations: In his early seasons, he was a gargantuan scorer and rebounder, then he decided to become the league's leading assist-maker and finally he became a defensive ace.

However, despite these wide disparities, certain meaningful comparisons can be made between the two most physically dominant big men in NBA history.

For starters, their physical dimensions are comparable. Although both are listed as being 7-1, Wilt was actually 1/16 of an inch taller than this. Plus, Wilt was also at least 30 pounds heavier than his listed 275 pounds — which still would give Shaq the bulk advantage.

Both of these guys were so incredibly off-the-charts strong that it's almost impossible to rank them in this category -- although Shaq would probably rate a slight edge simply because of his extra weight.

It's certain, however, that Wilt had much bigger and stronger hands. On several noteworthy occasions he rose for a dunk with a helpless defender clinging to the ball — and lifted both the ball and his opponent with ease. No surprise, then, that Chamberlain was therefore more adept at controlling the ball with one hand than was Shaq.

Moreover, there's likewise no doubt that Wilt was much faster -- from baseline to baseline -- and much quicker -- in a circle of influence with perhaps a 10-foot diameter -- than O'Neal.

So, too, was Chamberlain a much superior rebounder — averaging 22.9 for his career, to Shaq's 11.3. Because of his lateral and vertical quickness and his powerful hands, Wilt was at least a four-space rebounder, while Shaq is at best a two-space rebounder. In addition, Shaq's inability to jump quickly allows smaller, bouncier players to beat him to too many rebounds — a flaw that has become more acute as he ages.

Wilt was determined to become the best passer in the NBA and accordingly led the league in assists with 702 (8.8 per game) in 1967-68, frequently passing up easy shots to kick the ball out to a teammate and possibly record an assist instead of a sure basket. Still, Wilt was a much better all-around passer (4.4 career assists) than Shaq (2.6).

These career assist numbers are even more revelatory considering the current rules permit Shaq to be double-teamed whenever he receives an entry pass, whereas the only extra aid Wilt's opponents could provide was weak-side help. The point being that Shaq was forced to execute many more passes than Wilt — and Chamberlain still out-assisted him by a relatively wide margin.

Plus, even though turnovers were not registered when Wilt played, it's doubtful that, like Shaq (2.8 TOs per game), he averaged more turnovers than assists.

For sure, Wilt had an easier time scoring since he mostly went one-on-one and since team defenses are vastly more complicated and sophisticated these days. But to claim Shaq faced better competition is to ignore the defensive prowess of guys like Bill Russell, Nate Thurmond, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Wes Unseld, Willis Reed, Walter Dukes, Zelmo Beaty, Darrall Imhoff, Elmore Smith, Dave Cowens, Bob Lanier and Clifford Ray.

Although it seems Shaq scores his points primarily because of his brute strength, he actually has better footwork that did Chamberlain. Unlike Wilt, Shaq has a somewhat dependable left hand, which he chooses to display perhaps once or twice every season but will sometimes unleash in intrasquad scrimmages. Shaq's baseline spins are also quicker and tighter than the Dipper's.

But Chamberlain had one weapon in his arsenal that Shaq lacks — a fadeaway jumper. Wilt only used this from the left box, and the bank was always open. The shot was both deadly and absolutely unstoppable. In truth, Wilt developed this shot early in his career to demonstrate that he was indeed an athlete and could score points without having to overpower his opponents.

Compare this shot with the bricks that Shaq casts up when he turns baseline from the left box.

Wilt had a dangerous traditional hook shot, but Shaq's modern-day jump hooks are more accurate.

Field-goal percentages were much lower during Wilt's tenure in the NBA, but each led the league in field-goal percentage eight times. Shaq's lifetime edge in shooting (58.2 percent to 54.0) is explained by his being more aggressive in the low post and therefore coming up with many more easy shots.

Neither was a passable free-throw shooter — 51.1 percent for Wilt vs. 52.8 for Shaq. But it does say something about Wilt's fragile psyche under pressure when observers swore he shot at least 80 percent in practice sessions.

Wilt set more effective screens, but mainly because the rules were looser and the refs allowed him to push, grab and elbow the screenees.

On defense, Wilt has a huge edge. Whereas Shaq averages 2.4 blocks, this statistic was not recorded back in Wilt's day. However, in examining newspaper stories from the 1971-72 season (which I did while researching "That Pivotal Season"), it's clear Chamberlain averaged about seven to 10 swats per game.

While it appears that Wilt has a considerable advantage in nearly every measurable category, there's one critical aspect of the game in which Shaq excels — competitiveness.

Wilt could play with ruthless ferocity upon occasions, but he was also liable to loaf through games — especially against opponents he didn't respect. Also, Wilt was infamously intimidated by Willis Reed's extraordinary show of courage in Game 7 of the 1970 Finals. But what about Game 5 of that series, when Wilt failed to dominate and the Reedless Knicks beat the Lakers, 107-100?

Wilt was also routinely psyched out by Bill Russell's head games. Sometimes they had dinner together and were buddy-buddy, but whenever Russell ignored him, Chamberlain went into a funk and played with a noticeable lack of self-confidence.

Although Shaq is himself guilty of taking a game off here and there, he never does so in the playoffs — and certainly not in a championship series.

So who's better?

That still remains to be seen.

In Wilt's penultimate season (1971-72 when he was 36), he radically changed his game, forgoing his scoring to concentrate on other areas. He made this accommodation to suit the explosive scoring capabilities of Jerry West and Gail Goodrich and also because coach Bill Sharman preached a fast-paced offense that often put up shots before Wilt could catch up with the ball.

In his prime, Wilt averaged 30 to 39 shots, but in 1971-72, he cast up a mere 9.3 field-goal attempts. Compare his 14.8 points per game that season to his lifetime mark of 30.1. As the Lakers rolled to a championship, Chamberlain's playoff numbers were virtually identical.

Instead of being his team's fail-safe scorer, Wilt concentrated on rebounding, defending, passing (especially executing outlet passes to initiate the Lakers running game) and setting devastating screens.

It remains to be seen how/if Shaq will similarly accommodate his game to his new teammates — and especially to LeBron's particular genius.

If, indeed, Shaq can reprise the same kind of flexibility — and success — that Wilt demonstrated in his declining years, then the laurels will go to him.

If not, then Chamberlain will stand alone as the best power center ever to play in the NBA.

[MacGill]

^^^ Posting a Charlie Rosen article about Shaq is like posting a Skip Bayless article about LeBron.

[ahonui06]

Shaq has more titles and was considered the most dominant player in his era.

Wilt has less titles and wasn't the most dominant player in his era. That was Russell.

except he dominated Russell head 2 head every time they played

Except he didn't because Russell held him below his career averages and Russell won.

[ThaRegul8r]

^^^ Posting a Charlie Rosen article about Shaq is like posting a Skip Bayless article about LeBron.

The point with everything is to take the useful and discard the rest, rather than simply throwing the baby out with the bath water.

[MacGill]

What history showed us in Wilt was that for all of his era dominance, mentally he could not put it together to win like most of us felt he should of. Hell, for how massive his individual accomplishments are, the tall tales of past teamates, one just learning the game would probably get 11 rings & Russell mixed up with Wilt, when in fact the RPOY & Top 100 have made me respect Russell and what he did for the game so much more than Wilt.

But the truth is, for all his glory & accomplishments, when compared to the rest of the immortal 6, Wilt should be at the bottom and now should be replaced by Shaq. For a man, who didn't have weight problems as even Mr. Charlie Rosen would quickly point out, he never figured out how to be a winner to match that dominance his was given.

For a man who was so much faster than Shaq, he certainly couldn't truly utilize this distinct advantage consistently over his career when it mattered most and when his team needed him to do so most. And good old Charlie propping up his favorite era of basketball, as he himself is a 6'9 big, but I must admit I am not impressed.

Plain and simple, from an offensive dominance perspective when compared to O'Neal, Wilt's offensive game was not as powerful and I dare use the word 'softer' than what we witnessed from Diesel. That is not to say his offence wasn't effective or dominate during his time because it certainly was but seeing as we really only have the two of them to really compare (as top gladiators), since the inception of the nba, only against O'Neal do I dare say this.

From a skill perspective Wilt wasn't offensively skilled like Hakeem at any point in his career and defensively as other have pointed out Russell's impact was greater. Shaq wasn't as offensively skilled as Hakeem either but his style of play didn't need him to be and in fact would have taken more away from his game than added to it and we know Shaq wasn't a defensive anchor like Russell.

Here's what we know, Russell defeated Wilt many many times. Why? Russell could rattle Wilt and make him feel that for all his great gifts, dominance, it wouldn't matter against Bill and he would show no signs of it. This is Wilt's flaw and why he needs to now be removed from the top 6 and put somewhere in the top 10.

You watched a 3rd year Shaq go toe to toe with a prime Hakeem who one could argue with his offensive skill was just as deadly as Russell himself as a balanced player. Shaq showed no fear and played him back and forth till the end. Now replace Russell with O'Neal, and Shaq just waiting to steam roll over Wilt as he wants to prove who is most dominant. Changing many aspects of Wilt's game as Wilt needs to adjust to someone of equal to larger size. Mentally getting weaker as he is like 'damn' I can't hold position on him etc.

Where I am going here, Shaq has never lacked confidence and the instinct to want to murder anyone within 5 feet of the basket and had the offensive & defensive tools to dominate anyone anytime he wanted. Shaq's offensive game was better suited for Wilt's era anyway and I would really love to see who would forearm Shaq to the ground for dunking and breaking all the basket's in the gym

If Russell, defensively, could slow Wilt down just enough that mentally Wilt already lost than Wilt facing someone who could go toe to toe point for point, size for size, block for block may have caused him to reconsider track & field Like Shaq, Wilt really had no one to truly challenge him or his ability to where Wilt would admit. We already know Wilt thinks Russell when compared to himself was a peasant.

Shaq wouldn't need 22.9 rebounds per game or lead the league in blocks or assists because Shaq's game causes the 'Russell Effect' if you will on most everyone that plays him. I only wished Russell was a little bigger and had a more offensive post game consistently against Wilt. I could only imagine what that would have done to bring out his insecurities even more.

At some point in our lives, all of us have come up against someone who was intimidating, could answer our best play or move and we all know how we felt. Maybe some of us were mentally stronger, although you couldn't always say that even with that the outcome was positive. Now picture that same scenario without the mental toughness.......