DEEP down in your heart

[jax98]

can you REALLY look at yourself in the mirror and say you would take MJ over the ABSOLUTE UNTAMED MONSTER that was prime Shaq?

Yes.

Quite easily in fact.

[JordansBulls]

First of all, I don't think Jordan was the greatest--I rank Wilt and Magic as better, and Russell, Bird, and Oscar at the same level. Jordan dominated a relatively weak era in NBA history. In the 80s he and his best Bulls teams would have been as frustrated by the Bird Celtics and Showtime Lakers as Wilt's teams habitually were trying to beat the Celtics in his era.

And second of all, I don't think Shaq even rates in the discussion when the word "greatest" is used...he was the most dominant in an era where prime opposition at the five went from over the hill in his early career to just plain pathetic today.

Yeah and Wilt lost to the Syracuse Nationals with homecourt advantage and they were .500. If Wilt was so good, then his playoff averages in ppg would not have dropped over 7 ppg.
You say MJ dominated a weak era, but what about the 80's? Who did Magic have to beat out west? They lost to a team under .500 in Houston and lost to a 2nd year rookie Hakeem in the middle of their titles. If they lose to them, they surely would have stood a chance to lose to the 90's bulls who were always near the top in both defensive and offensive efficiency.

[G35]

However, Jordan played on infinitely less talented teams (overall) than those Lakers and Celtics.

Give Jordan a similar squad and I am sure he'd compete just fine.

Isn't this the same criticisms we say about the current era? That they can't compete with the previous generations because they are not as talented?

The Bulls did dominate in an era that wasn't the strongest. I mean if Hakeem and the Rockets were able to repeat right in the middle of the Bulls run what does that say about the level of comp......

[writerman]

He rides Wilt for not winning with homecourt advantage while not even addressing the fact that Jordan never won **** until the Kareem Lakers, Bird Celtics, and Thomas Pistons were well over the hill.

Weak era + unarguably great player = easy dominance less impressive than it might look on the face of it

[JordansBulls]

He rides Wilt for not winning with homecourt advantage while not even addressing the fact that Jordan never won **** until the Kareem Lakers, Bird Celtics, and Thomas Pistons were well over the hill.

Weak era + unarguably great player = easy dominance less impressive than it might look on the face of it

Wilt lost with HC to a team below under .500. Jordan beat the Lakers and ended the Pistons as they were back to back champions. Wilt lost a 3-1 series lead with HC Advantage as well.

You talk about what Wilt did in the regular season, which is fine and all, but when talking about the best, what they did in the playoffs and finals is what matters. Wilt getting 55 rebounds against Russell in a meaningless regular season game doesn't matter much does it? Especially when in the finals he averages 11.7 ppg against him one year.

Wilt lost 5 series with Homecourt Advantage, 5 of them. Did you know that?

Here were the years.

Wilt Chamberlain (lost in

[Celtsfan1980]

-= original quote snipped =-

He's faced some of the better teams the league has seen in the late 80's/early 90's.

If you noticed, it wasn't until the great teams started to get old when Jordan finally won a Championship. Anyways, Shaq may be a top 10, but there's no way I would take him over Russell, Jordan, Bird, Magic, or Jabaar in their primes.

[Reks]

I would take Wilt and Russel over both.

But I'd take MJ over Shaq

[Nebroc]

Shaq is the guy whose teams got swept out of the playoffs 6 different times.

I'd take M.J. and not think twice.