RealGM

Just information I've collected over the years that exists from both athletes that can work as side by side comparisons on paper - and also an image I found from a similar perspective/zoom of Shaq shooting a jump hook that just very conveniently seemed to match a shot of Jabbar shooting a skyhook over Wilt. So with some photoshop magic I've cropped Shaq, erased Jabbar, but not before I scaled the ball in Shaq's hand (and Shaq himself) to be scaled in such a way that the ball in his hands was identical in size to the ball that was being shot from Jabbar's hands.

So on top of the data which is great to look at, in theory an image of Shaq attempting a jump hook over Wilt would look something like that. The scaling should be pretty darn close based on the basketballs and plane that they are being shot from being made to match. As pictured in that exact image, Shaq is probably about 350lbs I'm guessing, and Wilt about 310lbs at that time.

Wilt Chamberlain
7’ 1” without shoes
7’ 8” armspan
9’ 6” standing reach (1956 footwear)
9.5“ hand length
11.5” hand spread
258-320lbs playing weight range
290-310lbs in peak form
12‘ 6“ max reach (1956)
13’ max reach (1960)
12’ 9” max reach (1968)
4.6 hand timed 40 yard: 1966

Shaquille O’Neal
7’ 0” without shoes
7’ 7” armspan
9’ 5” standing reach (1992 footwear)
11“ hand length
9” hand spread
301-370lbs playing weight range
315-335lbs in peak form
12’ 5” max reach (1992)
5.8 hand timed 40 yard: 2009 (note, 37 years old, about 340-350lbs)

Great, great insight. Thanks!

Great information and photoshop skills dude, thank you for making the graphic.

These dudes were amazing athletes. As a fan of basketball, I'm glad they chose this game, but I can't help but wonder what would have happened if they chose other sports to focus on. Pro strongman and powerlifting? Wilt with volleyball? Would have been crazy.

In my opinion, Shaq should never have added all that mass for basketball. I get he wanted extra weight, protection, and power vs. the huge bodies teams were arming themselves with to deal with him, but It's impractical to tax your neuromuscular system with extra weight in a game predicated on movement and balance. He was always going to be stronger than everybody else anyway.

I would pay good money to watch Shaq vs. Wilt at their peaks. I think Shaq would get the better of him overall, but it'd be a legendary matchup.

ronnymac2 wrote:Pro strongman and powerlifting?

Certainly too tall and too much wingspan for powerlifting. And for strongman... I'd say he is too tall too. The top strongmen hover around the 1.90 (except for Brian Shaw and the GOT guy), and to be honest, Shaq seems light (!) compared to those guys.

Cool stuff, thanks for sharing.

I wonder how fast Shaq could run a 40yd dash nearer to his physical prime (like somewhere in the 1994-2000 range); I suspect there wouldn't be anywhere near that degree of disparity in the category.

Anyway, this helps to illustrate that Wilt was absolutely in the same league as Shaq as a pure athlete (and Shaq is widely regarded as one of the most phenomenal physical specimens the NBA has ever seen). I would hope this helps legitimize Wilt to old-era nay-sayers/doubters (and, by proxy, helps legitimize his era-same peers).

Jaivl wrote:

ronnymac2 wrote:Pro strongman and powerlifting?

Certainly too tall and too much wingspan for powerlifting. And for strongman... I'd say he is too tall too. The top strongmen hover around the 1.90 (except for Brian Shaw and the GOT guy), and to be honest, Shaq seems light (!) compared to those guys.

Look up worlds strongest man competitor Ted van der Parre

Yet posters will come on here and say that Wilt couldn't make an NBA team today. No doubt in my mind that any player with similar measurements as these 2 will be the #1 pick/max player FA/MVP candidate.

Warspite wrote:Yet posters will come on here and say that Wilt couldn't make an NBA team today.

I actually haven't seen anyone ever claim this on these boards. Most people acknowledge that he had the tools to be incredible in any era. There's some conversation about how he'd look statistically in the contemporary age, but that's still in context of discussions around DPOY, MVP and so forth.

People say MIKAN couldn't make an NBA team today, not really so much Wilt.

tsherkin wrote:

Warspite wrote:Yet posters will come on here and say that Wilt couldn't make an NBA team today.

I actually haven't seen anyone ever claim this on these boards.

That's another board that did that.

Though I believe much of it was done simply to troll a particular poster.

ThaRegul8r wrote:That's another board that did that.

Though I believe much of it was done simply to troll a particular poster.

For my part, I've seen some nonsense for sure, so I understand the base sentiment... but Wilt? 7'1, visibly athletic even with all the wild BS around him.. clearly had basic skills we see from effective players in the 90s, the 00s and now. Coachable, mostly. Certainly no less so than other guys who've done well to great in later eras.

To me, the biggest thing is that his volume would die off dramatically... and I think that in the process, he'd actually be a much better player. Wilt projects in today's game to something like 38 mpg, and probably something like 17 FGA/g and 9 FTA/g on around 55-56% TS, leading to something like 23/16/3, pile of blocks and All-D-worthy contributions on the other end, with some play in the specific averages. That's a really nasty player, really, and I'm suppressing the volume of the scoring and passing a shade to be conservative... but it could easily be 25/16/4. Either way, you're talking about a phenomenally useful player in today's game... the more so because of how we understand the value of post passing and off-ball action while spacing with the three.


I mean.... Wilt was a really adaptable player. His greatest sins were the need to feel adulation and a total lack of competence at the line... which isn't much different than another dominant post player we watched much more recently. More than one, in fact. I mean we're in an era where we see DeAndre Jordan and Roy Hibbert and so forth as significant players... and they are, defensively, and/or on the glass. What if they were far more competent offensively?


Shaq had more basketball power than Wilt IMO, more lower base power coupled with superior and more consistent aggression, but while it's quite likely that Diesel would remain better than Wilt offensively in this era, the rebounding, defense and durability you get out of Wilt make any comparison between the two very, very interesting and close.

tsherkin wrote:Shaq had more basketball power than Wilt IMO, more lower base power coupled with superior and more consistent aggression

Yeah, several contemporaries have gone on record saying that as well:

Rod Thorn, who played nine seasons in the NBA from 1963-64 to 1970-71, said, “For the time (Chamberlain) played, Wilt was bigger, stronger and quicker than every player who was near his size. Shaq is bigger and stronger than Wilt” (May 10, 2001).

Bill Bertka, who was assistant coach for the Los Angeles Lakers in 1971-72, when Wilt Chamberlain led the Lakers to a 69-13 record and 33-game winning streak, said, “Shaq’s the biggest, strongest, quickest center ever to play the game” (Jun 16, 2001).

In his 2011 autobiography West by West, Jerry West, in describing his Dream All-Star Game, wrote, “when Shaquille and Wilt are out there, power againt power, I wonder how Shaquille will stop Wilt’s fadeaway jump shot. With all the lobs and plays designed just for Wilt, how will Shaquille stop him? And yet, I remind myself that while Wilt was the strongest player in the league when he played, that he just intimidated and scared the hell out of people, Shaquille was in another category altogether; he was so powerful it was ridiculous. He would absolutely destroy other teams, mentally destroy them so that they were beat before the game even started” (Jerry West and Jonathan Coleman, West by West, p. 283).

Nate Thurmond, who played a season and a half with Chamberlain with the San Francisco Warriors in 1963-64 and ’64-65, and played against him for eight seasons until Chamberlain’s retirement in 1972-73, said, “Shaq is the most powerful person to ever play the position. He comes to the basket; Wilt faded” (Jun 4, 2011).

And Wilt himself conceded the latter:

Roy Firestone: Shaq. They are saying he’s the new Wilt. That he may be, before it’s over, greater than Wilt.

Wilt Chamberlain: He is worthy of all the accolades.

Firestone: Okay.

Chamberlain: And he sh—

Firestone (interrupting): So you think he’s going to be another Wilt—maybe better than you.

Chamberlain: Maybe, yeah. I think, I think—

Firestone (interrupting): You do?

Chamberlain: Yeah, ’cause he’s already doin’ some things that I’ve never done. First of all—

Firestone: Wait a minute!

Chamberlain: Yeah.

Firestone: Wait a minute, I, I gotta stop you here, Wilt, hold the phone here. You’re tellin’ me—Wilt Chamberlain is tellin’ me—that he thinks someone is gonna be better than he is.

Chamberlain: Mmm. (nods)

Firestone: Right now you think that he’s got all the potential to be better than you.

Chamberlain: Yeah.

Firestone: You’re saying that?

Chamberlain: Yeah. I’m sayin’ that because he already has a drive in an area that I didn’t have.

Firestone: Which is?

Chamberlain: Goin’ to the basket. Uh, durin’ my career—and mainly in my early days when I was scorin’ all those points—I-I had this thing in my head that I wanted to show people I was a complete basketball player. Y’ understand? And by doing that I developed the fadeaway jump shot, and the fingerroll and the hook shot, and all the tools that on offense basketball players had. When maybe... Wilt Chamberlain should’ve been goin’ to the basket and breaking guys’ hands off, y’ understand? And that would’ve made me... even more devastating. He’s doin’ that already.

tsherkin wrote:but while it's quite likely that Diesel would remain better than Wilt offensively in this era, the rebounding, defense and durability you get out of Wilt make any comparison between the two very, very interesting and close.

Wilt certainly took better care of himself than Shaq did, and had teams interested in him long after his retirement. He only had the one year he missed a significant amount of time his whole career despite playing all those minutes.

CavaliersFTW wrote:

Just information I've collected over the years that exists from both athletes that can work as side by side comparisons on paper - and also an image I found from a similar perspective/zoom of Shaq shooting a jump hook that just very conveniently seemed to match a shot of Jabbar shooting a skyhook over Wilt. So with some photoshop magic I've cropped Shaq, erased Jabbar, but not before I scaled the ball in Shaq's hand (and Shaq himself) to be scaled in such a way that the ball in his hands was identical in size to the ball that was being shot from Jabbar's hands.

So on top of the data which is great to look at, in theory an image of Shaq attempting a jump hook over Wilt would look something like that. The scaling should be pretty darn close based on the basketballs and plane that they are being shot from being made to match. As pictured in that exact image, Shaq is probably about 350lbs I'm guessing, and Wilt about 310lbs at that time.

Wilt Chamberlain
7’ 1” without shoes
7’ 8” armspan
9’ 6” standing reach (1956 footwear)
9.5“ hand length
11.5” hand spread
258-320lbs playing weight range
290-310lbs in peak form
12‘ 6“ max reach (1956)
13’ max reach (1960)
12’ 9” max reach (1968)
4.6 hand timed 40 yard: 1966

Shaquille O’Neal
7’ 0” without shoes
7’ 7” armspan
9’ 5” standing reach (1992 footwear)
11“ hand length
9” hand spread
301-370lbs playing weight range
315-335lbs in peak form
12’ 5” max reach (1992)
5.8 hand timed 40 yard: 2009 (note, 37 years old, about 340-350lbs)

If you could provide sources for this data, that would be great.

Doctor MJ wrote:

CavaliersFTW wrote:

Just information I've collected over the years that exists from both athletes that can work as side by side comparisons on paper - and also an image I found from a similar perspective/zoom of Shaq shooting a jump hook that just very conveniently seemed to match a shot of Jabbar shooting a skyhook over Wilt. So with some photoshop magic I've cropped Shaq, erased Jabbar, but not before I scaled the ball in Shaq's hand (and Shaq himself) to be scaled in such a way that the ball in his hands was identical in size to the ball that was being shot from Jabbar's hands.

So on top of the data which is great to look at, in theory an image of Shaq attempting a jump hook over Wilt would look something like that. The scaling should be pretty darn close based on the basketballs and plane that they are being shot from being made to match. As pictured in that exact image, Shaq is probably about 350lbs I'm guessing, and Wilt about 310lbs at that time.

Wilt Chamberlain
7’ 1” without shoes
7’ 8” armspan
9’ 6” standing reach (1956 footwear)
9.5“ hand length
11.5” hand spread
258-320lbs playing weight range
290-310lbs in peak form
12‘ 6“ max reach (1956)
13’ max reach (1960)
12’ 9” max reach (1968)
4.6 hand timed 40 yard: 1966

Shaquille O’Neal
7’ 0” without shoes
7’ 7” armspan
9’ 5” standing reach (1992 footwear)
11“ hand length
9” hand spread
301-370lbs playing weight range
315-335lbs in peak form
12’ 5” max reach (1992)
5.8 hand timed 40 yard: 2009 (note, 37 years old, about 340-350lbs)

If you could provide sources for this data, that would be great.

Could you be more specific which number/s you'd like a source for? Theres a lot of sources behind all of that data, easier to answer one at a time

Someone please photoshop a properly-scaled Spud Webb into this picture!

In response to Trex, I recall seeing a time (hand timed) of 4.9 for Shaq in the 40, which is amazing for a man his size. If he played football and learned Reggie White-type techniques, he would have terrorized QB's for as long as he stayed in shape as a pass-rushing DE. The only problem Shaq would probably have had was going up against massive tackles his weight but with a much lower center of gravity...a guy like Jason Peters, 6'4", 335-340, with very quick feet and muscle mass would give Shaq some long afternoons.

I think this photo shows just how massive these guys truly were. Ben Wallace is thought as by most people as a big intimidating guy but next to Shaq.





Also I'm surprised shoe size wasn't included in the physical data? Both were pretty unique in that regards Shaq had massive size 22 feet while Wilt had proportionally smaller size 15's.

D.Brasco wrote:I think this photo shows just how massive these guys truly were. Ben Wallace is thought as by most people as a big intimidating guy but next to Shaq.





Also I'm surprised shoe size wasn't included in the physical data? Both were pretty unique in that regards Shaq had massive size 22 feet while Wilt had proportionally smaller size 15's.

What's interesting is that Bob Lanier has at least as big, if not slightly bigger, foot than Shaq, despite being a much smaller guy.

As far as Wilt vs Shaq - both were absolute freaks, athletically. I think Wilt was a bit better athlete, mainly because of his clearly superior stamina and durability, but both are clearly top 5 all-time athletically, maybe both top 3 (personally, I would have Wilt and LeBron at 1 and 2 in terms of athleticism, then Jordan, Shaq, Dr J and D-Rob, in some order).

Quotatious wrote:

D.Brasco wrote:I think this photo shows just how massive these guys truly were. Ben Wallace is thought as by most people as a big intimidating guy but next to Shaq.





Also I'm surprised shoe size wasn't included in the physical data? Both were pretty unique in that regards Shaq had massive size 22 feet while Wilt had proportionally smaller size 15's.

What's interesting is that Bob Lanier has at least as big, if not slightly bigger, foot than Shaq, despite being a much smaller guy.

As far as Wilt vs Shaq - both were absolute freaks, athletically. I think Wilt was a bit better athlete, mainly because of his clearly superior stamina and durability, but both are clearly top 5 all-time athletically, maybe both top 3 (personally, I would have Wilt and LeBron at 1 and 2 in terms of athleticism, then Jordan, Shaq, Dr J and D-Rob, in some order).

From what I've seen of Dr. J, I am always perplexed when I see him on lists like this. He is obviously an elite athlete by any measure, but I guess I see him more of a groundbreaking athlete than a generational type athlete. He is definitely (maybe along with Baylor) the prototype for the modern athletic/slashing wing, but when watching him I don't really see anything that separates him from the many similar type players that followed in his footsteps. I know this sounds dismissive of Erving, and I don't mean it that way, I just don't see him as an outlier like the others. For instance, what makes Erving more athletic than someone like Kobe Bryant?

Im Your Father wrote:From what I've seen of Dr. J, I am always perplexed when I see him on lists like this. He is obviously an elite athlete by any measure, but I guess I see him more of a groundbreaking athlete than a generational type athlete. He is definitely (maybe along with Baylor) the prototype for the modern athletic/slashing wing, but when watching him I don't really see anything that separates him from the many similar type players that followed in his footsteps. I know this sounds dismissive of Erving, and I don't mean it that way, I just don't see him as an outlier like the others. For instance, what makes Erving more athletic than someone like Kobe Bryant?

Dr J's first step, coordination, vertical and hangtime were matched only by Jordan, based on what I've seen of Erving. I would have a tough time choosing between Jordan and Erving in terms of athleticism. Jordan was clearly better in terms of skills, but was he also a better athlete than Doc? I'm really not sure.

Quotatious wrote:

Im Your Father wrote:From what I've seen of Dr. J, I am always perplexed when I see him on lists like this. He is obviously an elite athlete by any measure, but I guess I see him more of a groundbreaking athlete than a generational type athlete. He is definitely (maybe along with Baylor) the prototype for the modern athletic/slashing wing, but when watching him I don't really see anything that separates him from the many similar type players that followed in his footsteps. I know this sounds dismissive of Erving, and I don't mean it that way, I just don't see him as an outlier like the others. For instance, what makes Erving more athletic than someone like Kobe Bryant?

Dr J's first step, coordination, vertical and hangtime were matched only by Jordan, based on what I've seen of Erving. I would have a tough time choosing between Jordan and Erving in terms of athleticism. Jordan was clearly better in terms of skills, but was he also a better athlete than Doc? I'm really not sure.

Well, considering Gerald Green's vertical and hangtime are much higher than J's, and first step is up there...

Quotatious wrote:

Im Your Father wrote:From what I've seen of Dr. J, I am always perplexed when I see him on lists like this. He is obviously an elite athlete by any measure, but I guess I see him more of a groundbreaking athlete than a generational type athlete. He is definitely (maybe along with Baylor) the prototype for the modern athletic/slashing wing, but when watching him I don't really see anything that separates him from the many similar type players that followed in his footsteps. I know this sounds dismissive of Erving, and I don't mean it that way, I just don't see him as an outlier like the others. For instance, what makes Erving more athletic than someone like Kobe Bryant?

Dr J's first step, coordination, vertical and hangtime were matched only by Jordan, based on what I've seen of Erving. I would have a tough time choosing between Jordan and Erving in terms of athleticism. Jordan was clearly better in terms of skills, but was he also a better athlete than Doc? I'm really not sure.

I suppose to a certain extent its subjective, but I guess I just don't reach the same conclusion when watching him and comparing him to modern elite wings. For instance, I think it's probably fair to say that Erving was a better leaper than a young Bryant or T-Mac, but I've seen nothing to suggest that he was quicker. In fact I'd say both look like marginally better half-court athletes to me, although granted some of that can be attributed to superior ballhandling.

It guess it could also be I just hold athletes like McGrady and Bryant and Carter in higher esteem than you do.

On that note, I feel like Kobe's athleticism sometimes gets underrated on realgm. I think a lot of it comes from comparisons to Jordan, who is a noticeably superior athlete, but Kobe was a borderline freak in his own right. It's also unfortunate that he spent his athletic prime in the era where it was probably the hardest ever to get to the rim in the halfcourt. I was thinking about that the other day when people were comparing Iverson and Westbrook and I was noticing how much more often Westy is able to get all the way to the rim. Now I'm not suggesting that 00-03 Kobe would be slicing to the rim quite as often as Westbrook, but I do think he would have a much easier time of it.

Edit: Also, I'm pretty sure "hangtime" isn't a real thing