Most dominant center ever??

[Gerald3Wallace]

shaq? russell? Wilt?

who do you think

[LiquidFire]

shaq

bye

[Gerald3Wallace]

just wanted your guys opinion..i was called an idiot on youtube cause i said "shaq is the most dominant center"

[farzi]

Shaq is the most dominant. The others are in the running for best ever, but Shaq deff. dominated his competition like no other.

[writerman]

just more ignorant babble from kiddies who never saw Wilt--or Kareem either.

I keep hearing what a great athlete Shaq was when he was younger. That must not have lasted long, because I never saw it. Shaq's a big strong guy who combined that with some modest skills and sthleticism to dominate an era pathetically weak at the center position--nothing more.

Both of the guys above were better athletes and more skilled than Shaq. Shaq had it on Kareem for strength--nothing else. And he doesn't even have that ona prime Wilt, and gets blown away by Wilt as an athlete.

Here's what someone who actually knows something says about the subject:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_n6189410

[OmniDEN]

just more ignorant babble from kiddies who never saw Wilt--or Kareem either.

I keep hearing what a great athlete Shaq was when he was younger. That must not have lasted long, because I never saw it. Shaq's a big strong guy who combined that with some modest skills and sthleticism to dominate an era pathetically weak at the center position--nothing more.

Both of the guys above were better athletes and more skilled than Shaq. Shaq had it on Kareem for strength--nothing else. And he doesn't even have that ona prime Wilt, and gets blown away by Wilt as an athlete.

Here's what someone who actually knows something says about the subject:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_n6189410

Old guys stick to theirs, new guys stick to ours. It won't change, but saying we have no idea what we're talking about isn't the best thing to do.

[Point forward]

Wilt and Shaq come to mind. Kareem is a close 3rd, AND he could hit FTs.

[tkb]

writerman. Shaq's career average against Patrick Ewing, Hakeem Olajuwon, Ben Wallace, David Robinson, Dikembe Mutombo and Alonzo Mourning (about 125 games) is around 27 points and 12 rebounds on 55+% fg%. That's pretty dominant in en era with a much slower pace than the 60s, and those are all pretty good defensive players.

Shaq at least has to be up there as one of the most dominant. Wilt and Kareem also have excellent cases themselves, but Shaq is right there in the mix.

[G35]

Shaq, Wilt or Kareem. Cases have been and will be made and you really can't be mad at anyone if you are objective......

[hermes]

Shaq is the most dominant. The others are in the running for best ever, but Shaq deff. dominated his competition like no other.

[gswhoops]

Wilt definitely dominated his competition like no other...

[Wizenheimer]

the word in the title says "dominant"

easily, that's Wilt. One season he averaged 50 points and 26 rebounds. And he played a lot of games against Bill Russel, Nate Thurmond, Walt Bellamy and Willis Reed.

and who can forget Mel Counts!

[TrueLAfan]

Can't agree about Shaq. Adjusted for pace and period, he scored less (about even in Kareem's case), rebounded less, got fewer assists, and was a considerably worse defender than Wilt or Kareem. Putting everyone on an equal playing field of 97 points and 44 rebounds a game, the three best years of Wilt, Kareem, and Shaq look like this:

Wilt:
1961--41.5 ppg, 18.0 rpg, 2.4 apg
1962--38.3 ppg, 18.2 rpg, 3.4 apg
1963--32.3 ppg, 16.9 rpg, 5.0 apg

Kareem:
1972--30.0 ppg, 13.7 rpg, 4.6 apg
1973--27.2 ppg, 14.0 rpg, 5.0 apg
1975--28.4 ppg, 13.1 rpg, 4.1 apg

Shaq:
2000--29.6 ppg, 13.9 rpg, 3.8 apg
2001--29.4 ppg, 12.9 rpg, 3.7 apg
2003--28.0 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 3.1 apg

Competition? Here are the top one third Cs in each league...the players these guys would go against 25-30 times per year

Wilt (3 Cs on 7/8 remaining rteams)
1961--Russell, Kerr, Embry
1962--Russell, Bellamy, Kerr
1963--Russell, Bellamy, Kerr

Kareem (5 Cs on 16/17 remaining teams)
1972--Wilt, Thurmond, Lanier, Cowens, Hayes
1973--Wilt, Thurmond, Lanier, Cowens, Hayes
1975--Walton, McAdoo, Lanier, Cowens, Unseld

Shaq (9 Cs on 28 remaining teams)
2000--Mutombo, Mourning, Robinson, Ewing, Divac, Sabonis, Ratliff, Brown, D. Davis
2001--Mutombo, Wallace, Robinson, Camby, Ratliff, A. Davis, Brown, Divac, LaFrentz,
2003--Wallace, Yao, Magloire, Ilgauskas, Amare, Robinson, Thomas, Grant, Brown

2000 is the only year that is even remotely close in competition...and that's largely an illusion. Robinson was sliding downhill; Ewing was farther down the slope. Sabonis was a part time player. I mean, I like P.J. Brown and think he's a quality PF/C...but he's not nearly as good as Red Kerr was, let alone Elvin Hayes or Wes Unseld. So Shaq also put up lesser numbers against notably weaker competition at his position.

And, of course, defense extends the difference. Wilt wasn't as good of a defender in the early 60s as he would be later--but he was still outstanding, better than Shaq. Kareem was better than either in the early and mid 1970s. Durability? Shaq missed more games in his peak seasons than Wilt or Kareem. Length of peak? Wilt has a couple more high scoring years, as well as 2-3 years where, adjusted for pace, he basically was a 20-20-7.5 player shooting over 60% and was the best defensive player in the league. Kareem has many, many years that are equivalent to his third best year. Shaq is already dropping off after his second big season, and the slide continues.

It's not that Shaq wasn't a great player-- he was, especially in 2000 and 2001. But, no, he was not as dominant as Wilt or Kareem.

[CBS7]

just more ignorant babble from kiddies who never saw Wilt--or Kareem either.

I keep hearing what a great athlete Shaq was when he was younger. That must not have lasted long, because I never saw it. Shaq's a big strong guy who combined that with some modest skills and sthleticism to dominate an era pathetically weak at the center position--nothing more.

Both of the guys above were better athletes and more skilled than Shaq. Shaq had it on Kareem for strength--nothing else. And he doesn't even have that ona prime Wilt, and gets blown away by Wilt as an athlete.

Here's what someone who actually knows something says about the subject:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_n6189410

This post would have been fine without the first statement. You really need to stop starting off posts like this.

[Gerald3Wallace]

im talking about who dominated their competition..

honestly..who could stop shaq in his prime?

[Red Robot]

No love for Mikan? He may not have been as talented as some of the centers who followed, but he was nothing if not dominant. His era may be difficult to compare with that of a more mature league, but seven championships speak for themselves.

[TrueLAfan]

im talking about who dominated their competition..

honestly..who could stop shaq in his prime?

Well, I tried to point out that Shaq dominated lesser competition to a lesser extent than Kareem and Wilt. Shaq was a terrific player in his two peak years, but he was a terrific player against a lousy group of 5s. Had he played in a time period like the mid 60s to the late 70s, when the C position had much greater depth, I'd be more respectful of his third place finish compared to Kareem and Wilt.

As to who could stop Shaq in 01 and 02...well, first I'd take Wilt. Thurmond and Russell would be good choices; mobility, intelligence, fundamentals. In terms of affecting Shaq, though, I think a C that had more range and was good at position D would give Shaq problems...someone like Sikma (who outplayed Moses in a playoff series in one of Moses MVP) or maybe Lanier. Not sure that someone like that would put up better numbers than Shaq, but they'd throw him off his game by pulling him outside on D and getting good rebounding and defensive positions.

[semi-sentient]

Wilt.

[writerman]

No love for Mikan? He may not have been as talented as some of the centers who followed, but he was nothing if not dominant. His era may be difficult to compare with that of a more mature league, but seven championships speak for themselves.

Never saw him play, which is why I never comment on him--a rule I hold fast to is that I never comment on a player I never saw play. preferably live. I have to at least have seen a number of videos that experts/peers agree are reasonably representative of that player before I'll comment. Others might do well to follow the same rule.

I never knock the younger posters here that have done their homework and know the history of the game and have researched the players. I might disagree.,,but I respect them. Tsherkin is an example. But there are also plenty of pretenders, though, who blow smoke but haven't a clue.

Never saw Mikan play live, and the few old clips I've seen are inconclusive; therefore I won't comment on him further than to quote what peers and people who really know the game say about him. I simply haven't enough data to base a valid personal evaluation of him on.

[Patterns]

It is Shaq.