Peak Wilt vs Peak Shaq, who do you have if they went against each other?

[picko]

Playoff scoring per 36 minutes:

Shaquille O'Neal: 23.3 PP36
Dwight Howard: 17.9 PP36
Wilt Chamberlain: 17.2 PP36

Wilt averaged 16.3 PP36 and 11.3 PP36 in his only two successful playoff runs. He never won a single championship as the teams best offensive player. Why are we comparing this guy to Shaq, a player who obliterated the NBA playoffs on three separate occasions on the way to the title?

Shaq had bulk but Wilt had strength. When he worked out with Arnold in 1980 Arnold was in awe of how strong he was. There's tons of other stories about how strong Wilt was though. He started lifting weights seriously while in college and never really stopped on top of having a freakish body.

It doesn't really matter what Wilt was doing in 1980 with Arnold.

Peak Wilt vs Peak Shaq is presumably a comparison between Shaq and young Wilt (since older Wilt was a defensive specialist who was irrelevant on offense). Young Wilt didn't have anywhere near the bulk to contend with someone of Shaq's size and strength. Those long skinny legs wouldn't stop Shaq from getting wherever he wanted on offense.

Old Wilt might have been able to hold his ground but that comparison too ends in Shaq's favour since Old Wilt was irrelevant offensively.

All too often in these comparison people take the scoring of young Wilt and combine it with the size and strength of old Wilt into one single player. That guy never existed.

[Pg81]

Playoff scoring per 36 minutes:

Shaquille O'Neal: 23.3 PP36
Dwight Howard: 17.9 PP36
Wilt Chamberlain: 17.2 PP36

Wilt averaged 16.3 PP36 and 11.3 PP36 in his only two successful playoff runs. He never won a single championship as the teams best offensive player. Why are we comparing this guy to Shaq, a player who obliterated the NBA playoffs on three separate occasions on the way to the title?

Shaq had bulk but Wilt had strength. When he worked out with Arnold in 1980 Arnold was in awe of how strong he was. There's tons of other stories about how strong Wilt was though. He started lifting weights seriously while in college and never really stopped on top of having a freakish body.

It doesn't really matter what Wilt was doing in 1980 with Arnold.

Peak Wilt vs Peak Shaq is presumably a comparison between Shaq and young Wilt (since older Wilt was a defensive specialist who was irrelevant on offense). Young Wilt didn't have anywhere near the bulk to contend with someone of Shaq's size and strength. Those long skinny legs wouldn't stop Shaq from getting wherever he wanted on offense.

Old Wilt might have been able to hold his ground but that comparison too ends in Shaq's favour since Old Wilt was irrelevant offensively.

All too often in these comparison people take the scoring of young Wilt and combine it with the size and strength of old Wilt into one single player. That guy never existed.

[NY 567]

Wilt. Him and Kareem are on another level than Shaq.

Maybe overall but peak vs peak? Absolutely not

[Marty_Budda]

https://youtu.be/bU43dTuMuig

If old man Wilt can do this to young Shaq...prime wilt would eat him alive.

[Gant]

Wilt was faster, longer, could jump higher, played better defense, passed way better, blocked shots way better, had a more varied offense, was a far better rebounder, was in better physical shape, and was even stronger.

Shaq was heavier.

[Raps in 4]

Zion

[LakersLegacy]

If either of those guys were coming into the league today with the way we train and obsessed about the game for 20 years - either would be the GOAT.

It’s such a shame they didn’t get to play each other. Definitely the 2 best athletic centers of all time. Such rare human specimens.

[old skool]

Chamberlain was the fastest player base line to base line on every team he ever played for.

Could you imagine Shaq competing in the broad jump? The high jump? High hurdles?

Sent from my SM-N960U using RealGM mobile app

[KrAzY3]

2000 Shaq was bigger and stronger, maybe not faster but quicker for sure. I'd go with him

I'd agree with bigger, but I think you might be misunderstanding the type of athlete Wilt was. There were plenty of stories about how strong Wilt was, and to back that up he did shot-putt in college. That's a strong man's event, and there's a lot of stories about feats of strength from Wilt, even if you don't believe Wilt could bench what he claimed to be able to.

On top of that, the guy was a 3 time conference champ in high jump, and also competed in the triple jump. This is at Kansas, so not some tiny college or anything. To top that off, he was a sprinter in college to. So, the idea that Shaq was quicker is kind of funny, Shaq was quicker than a track and field athlete? A collegiate sprinter? Really?

Shaq was special and we can discuss their skills, but Wilt was a total freak athlete. The most physically gifted big man ever.

[Doug_12]

I'd go with Shaq.

Prime Wilt had a lot of weaknesses: I remember Phil discussing how Wilt's aggressiveness could have been limited by taking charges against him. Also, recalling the backpicks goat article which shows how "unaware" Wilt was on the flow of the game itself: He was either in passing mode or scoring mode and it took him a significant time to change between the two. This allowed defenses to prepare and keep him away from taking high efficency shots or make easy passes (making him quite turnover prone).

He was also not really paying attention to take the right position, he just tried to get into the post and overpower his opponent - while Shaq was cleverly playing the inside-out to get to the best possible position (possibly right under the rim) to start the execution from there or simply force the defense to double him and make someone open.

Also he was "feeling the game" more than Wilt: if he left alone he found the lanes to get to the rim to finish an alley oop or just use the space to speed up and become an unstoppable tank that receives the ball only a few steps before reaching the rim. While Wilt was more reactive, like "waiting the game to happen": waiting for the ball to get or let the teammate find an open spot so that he can pass to him.

Wilt's only advantage is his defense, where he was clearly superior. This is not irrelevant and a very important aspect of the game, but the factors above outmatch this single aspect. The matchup would be dependent on what teammates each other have, but if peak Shaq gets a team where he can play an effective inside out it would really hard to find someone who can beat him. (Maybe only peak Kareem or Olajuwon)

[Fencer reregistered]

I'd go with Shaq.

Prime Wilt had a lot of weaknesses: I remember Phil discussing how Wilt's aggressiveness could have been limited by taking charges against him. Also, recalling the backpicks goat article which shows how "unaware" Wilt was on the flow of the game itself: He was either in passing mode or scoring mode and it took him a significant time to change between the two. This allowed defenses to prepare and keep him away from taking high efficency shots or make easy passes (making him quite turnover prone).

He was also not really paying attention to take the right position, he just tried to get into the post and overpower his opponent - while Shaq was cleverly playing the inside-out to get to the best possible position (possibly right under the rim) to start the execution from there or simply force the defense to double him and make someone open.

Also he was "feeling the game" more than Wilt: if he left alone he found the lanes to get to the rim to finish an alley oop or just use the space to speed up and become an unstoppable tank that receives the ball only a few steps before reaching the rim. While Wilt was more reactive, like "waiting the game to happen": waiting for the ball to get or let the teammate find an open spot so that he can pass to him.

Wilt's only advantage is his defense, where he was clearly superior. This is not irrelevant and a very important aspect of the game, but the factors above outmatch this single aspect. The matchup would be dependent on what teammates each other have, but if peak Shaq gets a team where he can play an effective inside out it would really hard to find someone who can beat him. (Maybe only peak Kareem or Olajuwon)

You had to fight for post position as late as the 1980s (Kareem vs. McHale and so on). Now, when he didn't start with great position Shaq was also amazing at using his strength to back his man down, but how much of that bumping would or wouldn't be legal before an offensive foul gets called is a bit era-dependent.

[CallMeKahn]

Wilt. No disrespect to shaq, but Wilt was a physical freak who was a bit more skilled I believe.

[kazyv]

I'd go with Shaq.

Prime Wilt had a lot of weaknesses: I remember Phil discussing how Wilt's aggressiveness could have been limited by taking charges against him. Also, recalling the backpicks goat article which shows how "unaware" Wilt was on the flow of the game itself: He was either in passing mode or scoring mode and it took him a significant time to change between the two. This allowed defenses to prepare and keep him away from taking high efficency shots or make easy passes (making him quite turnover prone).

He was also not really paying attention to take the right position, he just tried to get into the post and overpower his opponent - while Shaq was cleverly playing the inside-out to get to the best possible position (possibly right under the rim) to start the execution from there or simply force the defense to double him and make someone open.

Also he was "feeling the game" more than Wilt: if he left alone he found the lanes to get to the rim to finish an alley oop or just use the space to speed up and become an unstoppable tank that receives the ball only a few steps before reaching the rim. While Wilt was more reactive, like "waiting the game to happen": waiting for the ball to get or let the teammate find an open spot so that he can pass to him.

Wilt's only advantage is his defense, where he was clearly superior. This is not irrelevant and a very important aspect of the game, but the factors above outmatch this single aspect. The matchup would be dependent on what teammates each other have, but if peak Shaq gets a team where he can play an effective inside out it would really hard to find someone who can beat him. (Maybe only peak Kareem or Olajuwon)

they were playing under different rules. everything shaq was doing would have been a foul in the 60s. if wilt was allowed to play the way shaq did, it wouldn't have been pretty.

[Pg81]

Wilt by a clear margin for me. As unstoppable on offense with more range, but a far superior rebounder, shotblocker, defender and passer. Both sucked at free throws so that is equal.

[Doug_12]

Wilt by a clear margin for me. As unstoppable on offense with more range, but a far superior rebounder, shotblocker, defender and passer. Both sucked at free throws so that is equal.

I agree w/ the defensive part, the rebounding is something I can't decide, but Shaq was clearly the better passer. Don't be fooled by his number of assists...

[druggas]

Wilt by a clear margin for me. As unstoppable on offense with more range, but a far superior rebounder, shotblocker, defender and passer. Both sucked at free throws so that is equal.

I agree w/ the defensive part, the rebounding is something I can't decide, but Shaq was clearly the better passer. Don't be fooled by his number of assists...

He led the league in assists one year. That's nothing to be fooled by.

[Doug_12]

Wilt by a clear margin for me. As unstoppable on offense with more range, but a far superior rebounder, shotblocker, defender and passer. Both sucked at free throws so that is equal.

I agree w/ the defensive part, the rebounding is something I can't decide, but Shaq was clearly the better passer. Don't be fooled by his number of assists...

He led the league in assists one year. That's nothing to be fooled by.

Westbrook did it a few times while for example Rubio not, and Rubio is clearly the better passer. Or for us "passing" means different things: For me it's playmaking and creation for others - and not just throwing the ball precisely from A to B (in which Wilt was also not exceptional) or just a huge number of assists.

There are a few centers in the history of the league who were better passers than Wilt although they didn't have the comparable number of assists. A few examples include: Kareem, Walton, Sabonis, Pau, Jokic etc...

[Pg81]

I agree w/ the defensive part, the rebounding is something I can't decide, but Shaq was clearly the better passer. Don't be fooled by his number of assists...

He led the league in assists one year. That's nothing to be fooled by.

Westbrook did it a few times while for example Rubio not, and Rubio is clearly the better passer. Or for us "passing" means different things: For me it's playmaking and creation for others - and not just throwing the ball precisely from A to B (in which Wilt was also not exceptional) or just a huge number of assists.

There are a few centers in the history of the league who were better passers than Wilt although they didn't have the comparable number of assists. A few examples include: Kareem, Walton, Sabonis, Pau, Jokic etc...

Yeah but we are comparing Shaq with Wilt, not comparing Sabonis or Jokic with him. Shaq is not even close to Jokic or Sabonis those two together with Walton are probably the GOAT passers at the center position. Likewise I have seen nothing that Shaq was a better passer than Wilt. From what we can gather Wilt was an elite passer if he wanted to. Shaq was a fine passer, but nothing special.

[Side beard]

Shaq.

Wilt was a mental midget. And Shaq has a petty beef with him.

Oh that is why Shaq rotated around the leagues top teams at the time to chase rings?

[Drygon]

Shaq.

Wilt was a mental midget. And Shaq has a petty beef with him.

Oh that is why Shaq rotated around the leagues top teams at the time to chase rings?

Shaq was completely washed up by the time he chased rings.

It's not like we're talking about KD & LeBron who actually were ring chasers in their prime.