Wilt vs Shaq

[jaypo]

Drink again. Fusheng whining about the MDE title.

Shaq scored 28 ppg (which is 1 whole point less than the RS average!) on 57% from the field against the best defensive center since Russell. So no, Akeem couldn't stop him. Shaq scored more efficiently, pulled down more boards, blocked more shots, and had more assists than Akeem. It took Akeem tons more shots to score the points he did. Now, you're saying it was because of Ho Grant's defense? Okay- you've also said that the Rockets didn't double Shaq. So Shaq dropped 28 and 12 on 57% on Akeem. That's imposing your will!

But I know. If MJ or KAJ did the same thing, it would be praised by you. But since Shaq did it, it was nothing special since it was less than his RS average (by 1 point!) A

Wasn't it Nick Anderson who only scored 4 points in the final game the one that got torched?? Akeem took 8 more shots per game to average 4 more points per game than Shaq did. Akeem was shooting 26.5 shots per game, adn Shaq was shooting 18.5 per game. I guess our definitions of torched are different.

So since what Shaq did wasn't up to your standard of "imposing his will", who do you give credit to for "holding" Shaq to 28 on 57% and more rebounds, blocks, and assists? I mean, Akeem WAS the best defensive center since Russell. Do you call that a good job on a 3rd year 23 year old?

[Darain]

Drink again. Fusheng whining about the MDE title.

Shaq scored 28 ppg (which is 1 whole point less than the RS average!) on 57% from the field against the best defensive center since Russell. So no, Akeem couldn't stop him. Shaq scored more efficiently, pulled down more boards, blocked more shots, and had more assists than Akeem. It took Akeem tons more shots to score the points he did. Now, you're saying it was because of Ho Grant's defense? Okay- you've also said that the Rockets didn't double Shaq. So Shaq dropped 28 and 12 on 57% on Akeem. That's imposing your will!

But I know. If MJ or KAJ did the same thing, it would be praised by you. But since Shaq did it, it was nothing special since it was less than his RS average (by 1 point!) A

Wasn't it Nick Anderson who only scored 4 points in the final game the one that got torched?? Akeem took 8 more shots per game to average 4 more points per game than Shaq did. Akeem was shooting 26.5 shots per game, adn Shaq was shooting 18.5 per game. I guess our definitions of torched are different.

So since what Shaq did wasn't up to your standard of "imposing his will", who do you give credit to for "holding" Shaq to 28 on 57% and more rebounds, blocks, and assists? I mean, Akeem WAS the best defensive center since Russell. Do you call that a good job on a 3rd year 23 year old?

Hakeem wasn't at his peak defensively

[jaypo]

He was 1 year removed from back to back DPOY awards. Did he suddenly decline in the summer of 1994? The only reason he didn't win in 95 was because Mutombo ONLY played defense and didn't have to carry the offensive load that Akeem did. And before that, he had ZERO DPOY's. As a matter of fact, DRob, a player clearly beneath Akeem's level defensively, was winning them over Akeem previously. So are you saying that in Akeem's defensive prime, Drob was better? Or are you saying that Akeem was in his defensive prime after he won his DPOY's?

Why do you people have to constantly find ways to downplay Shaq's accomplishments? Does it hurt you guys so bad to see what he accomplished?? Does he owe you guys money?

[jaypo]

Hey Fusheng:

Shaq was the MOST. DOMINANT. EVER!!!

[FuShengTHEGreat]

Drink again. Fusheng whining about the MDE title.

Shaq scored 28 ppg (which is 1 whole point less than the RS average!) on 57% from the field against the best defensive center since Russell. So no, Akeem couldn't stop him. Shaq scored more efficiently, pulled down more boards, blocked more shots, and had more assists than Akeem. It took Akeem tons more shots to score the points he did. Now, you're saying it was because of Ho Grant's defense? Okay- you've also said that the Rockets didn't double Shaq. So Shaq dropped 28 and 12 on 57% on Akeem. That's imposing your will!

But I know. If MJ or KAJ did the same thing, it would be praised by you. But since Shaq did it, it was nothing special since it was less than his RS average (by 1 point!) A

Wasn't it Nick Anderson who only scored 4 points in the final game the one that got torched?? Akeem took 8 more shots per game to average 4 more points per game than Shaq did. Akeem was shooting 26.5 shots per game, adn Shaq was shooting 18.5 per game. I guess our definitions of torched are different.

So since what Shaq did wasn't up to your standard of "imposing his will", who do you give credit to for "holding" Shaq to 28 on 57% and more rebounds, blocks, and assists? I mean, Akeem WAS the best defensive center since Russell. Do you call that a good job on a 3rd year 23 year old?

Sorry Jaypo Shaq didn't impose his will on Hakeem in the '95 Finals.

[34Dayz]

Clearly Shaq imposed his will on Hakeem in the 95 Finals, he basically did whatever he wanted on the offensive end and out rebounded/blocked assisted and was better in every other category.

However Hakeem also imposed his will on Shaq/Grant because although his efficiency wasn't very good 47% he did score 33ppg which is impressive.

I still think the difference in the series was that Hakeems supporting cast outside of Penny/Drexler was better (and played better) then Shaqs did and with Penny unable to even outplay Drexler it was clear the Magic weren't gonna win that series. Do I think it could have gone to 6 or maybe 7 if Anderson doesn't have that Epic chokejob? Yes, but I don't think the Magic win unless Penny outplays the Drex man.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

I guess our ideas of "imposing your will" are two different views.

"Imposing your will" imo doesn't mean putting up great stats in and walking off the court a loser like Shaq did in '95. Wilt did a lot of that in the 60s vs. Boston and didn't win jack a lot of the time, nobody's praised him for instilling his will on anyone until '67. MJ did that a lot to the Pistons in the 80s and was losing and crying at the end of series, so no up until '91 he didn't impose his will on them either.

TD did that to the Lakers in '99 and '03, MJ did that to Clyde in '92, Hakeem did it to Robinson.

[jaypo]

Drink again. Fusheng whining about the MDE title.

Shaq scored 28 ppg (which is 1 whole point less than the RS average!) on 57% from the field against the best defensive center since Russell. So no, Akeem couldn't stop him. Shaq scored more efficiently, pulled down more boards, blocked more shots, and had more assists than Akeem. It took Akeem tons more shots to score the points he did. Now, you're saying it was because of Ho Grant's defense? Okay- you've also said that the Rockets didn't double Shaq. So Shaq dropped 28 and 12 on 57% on Akeem. That's imposing your will!

But I know. If MJ or KAJ did the same thing, it would be praised by you. But since Shaq did it, it was nothing special since it was less than his RS average (by 1 point!) A

Wasn't it Nick Anderson who only scored 4 points in the final game the one that got torched?? Akeem took 8 more shots per game to average 4 more points per game than Shaq did. Akeem was shooting 26.5 shots per game, adn Shaq was shooting 18.5 per game. I guess our definitions of torched are different.

So since what Shaq did wasn't up to your standard of "imposing his will", who do you give credit to for "holding" Shaq to 28 on 57% and more rebounds, blocks, and assists? I mean, Akeem WAS the best defensive center since Russell. Do you call that a good job on a 3rd year 23 year old?

Sorry Jaypo Shaq didn't impose his will on Hakeem in the '95 Finals.

Imposing your will means doing whatever you want without the other person stopping you. Shaq put up 28 points on a FG% equal to 2nd best ever. He outrebounded, blocked, and assisted his opponent. So Akeem "stopped" him from shooting 60% from the field!

That's why Shaq is the MOST DOMINANT EVER..

[jaypo]

Oh, yeah. Did I mention that Shaq was the MOST DOMINANT EVER!?!?!?!?

[FuShengTHEGreat]

Imposing your will means doing whatever you want without the other person stopping you. Shaq put up 28 points on a FG% equal to 2nd best ever. He outrebounded, blocked, and assisted his opponent. So Akeem "stopped" him from shooting 60% from the field!

That's why Shaq is the MOST DOMINANT EVER..

I don't know how someone that states afterward to the media "he dusted my butt" (not that I necessarily agree with this!) by their nearest foe can claim they imposed their will on anyone, but you sure know better than I do.

[34Dayz]

Pretty much anyone "knows better then you do" since your a Troll.

Imposing your will doesn't mean getting outplayed by your counterpart and needing your supporting cast to outplay their counterparts so you can win a series, it also doesn't mean relying on Nick Anderson to miss 4 freethrows so you can win G1 it also doesn't mean being outplayed on the offensive end by your counterpart and being out rebounded / blocked / assisted by him also.

The only thing Hakeem had over Shaq in 95 was a better supporting cast.

Neither of them "dominated' eachoher it was pretty much a wash overall but Shaq did impose his Will better then Hakeem did by being better on the offensive end, and being better in pretty much every other catergory and leading all players in that series in 4th quarter scoring.

So Hakeem is better because his team won? The team with the best player always wins the series?

By that Logic
Jordan and 4 DLeagers would beat DHoward, KG, Pippen, Vince Carter, Nash?

And again by your Logic Vince Carter would be better then Jordan.

Listen, if Shaq hadnt outplayed or played Hakeem to a wash but instead played poorly I'd be the first one to say Hakeem was better.

If Anderson hadnt blatantly choked and Penny outplayed Drexler I'd be the first to say Hakeem was better. But Shaq did play up to Hakeems level and Drexler did Cancel out penny and Anderson did choke on an epic level so no I cant say Hakeem was better then Shaq in that series.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

^^
Hey I'm not the one making baseless claims that Hakeem imposed his will on Shaq....you're the ones claiming Shaq imposed his will on Hakeem.

Don't get mad at me for seeing the flaws in what you claim happened.

[34Dayz]

I said Hakeem imposed his will on Shaq by averaging 33ppg the same way Shaq imposed his will by averaged 28ppg on high efficiency. Neither of them were significantly better then the other it was basically a wash.

But for Shaq in his 3rd season to be able to play on par with arguably the 2nd best Center of this generation is pretty amazing.

[Ol Roy]

Interesting perspective from Nate Thurmond in 2001: https://www.toledoblade.com/Opinion/2001/05/20/BGSU-great-Thurmond-likes-Shaq-over-Wilt.html

“Wilt was a giant. But 60 percent of his points came on fadeaways. He was a powerful man who didn't always play that way,” said Thurmond, who does community-relations work for the Warriors and owns a barbecue restaurant in San Francisco.

“Shaquille O'Neal, he's a different player. He presents a problem none of us had to face.

“He's more than 300 pounds, with speed, power and quickness. Most of the big guys I played against were lumbering types, nothing like Shaquille. I just feel that at my 6-11, 235, I would have had a problem with him. He moves people out of the way, dislodges them. Wilt was more finesse.

“How could I have had a solution for Shaquille? He's 100 pounds heavier than me.”

Thurmond was the best defender of Wilt and Kareem, but thinks he'd have some trouble against Shaq. Although maybe he is underselling himself.

An interesting question is, what classic player would do the best job defending Shaq?

Wilt, Artis Gilmore, and Wes Unseld seem like some good candidates.

[migya]

Interesting perspective from Nate Thurmond in 2001: https://www.toledoblade.com/Opinion/2001/05/20/BGSU-great-Thurmond-likes-Shaq-over-Wilt.html

“Wilt was a giant. But 60 percent of his points came on fadeaways. He was a powerful man who didn't always play that way,” said Thurmond, who does community-relations work for the Warriors and owns a barbecue restaurant in San Francisco.

“Shaquille O'Neal, he's a different player. He presents a problem none of us had to face.

“He's more than 300 pounds, with speed, power and quickness. Most of the big guys I played against were lumbering types, nothing like Shaquille. I just feel that at my 6-11, 235, I would have had a problem with him. He moves people out of the way, dislodges them. Wilt was more finesse.

“How could I have had a solution for Shaquille? He's 100 pounds heavier than me.”

Thurmond was the best defender of Wilt and Kareem, but thinks he'd have some trouble against Shaq. Although maybe he is underselling himself.

An interesting question is, what classic player would do the best job defending Shaq?

Wilt, Artis Gilmore, and Wes Unseld seem like some good candidates.

Strength for holding position, as Shaq was allowed to barge through players, is significant in defending Shaq, as it would have been if Chamberlain was allowed to play that way. That would make Wilt the best option to defend Shaq, but Thurmond would be good also.

[One_and_Done]

Very clearly Shaq. Wilt was ahead of his time, but he would never have dominated the modern era the way Shaq did. For all the bad things you might say about Shaq as a team mate etc, Wilt is even worse.

[70sFan]

Interesting perspective from Nate Thurmond in 2001: https://www.toledoblade.com/Opinion/2001/05/20/BGSU-great-Thurmond-likes-Shaq-over-Wilt.html

“Wilt was a giant. But 60 percent of his points came on fadeaways. He was a powerful man who didn't always play that way,” said Thurmond, who does community-relations work for the Warriors and owns a barbecue restaurant in San Francisco.

“Shaquille O'Neal, he's a different player. He presents a problem none of us had to face.

“He's more than 300 pounds, with speed, power and quickness. Most of the big guys I played against were lumbering types, nothing like Shaquille. I just feel that at my 6-11, 235, I would have had a problem with him. He moves people out of the way, dislodges them. Wilt was more finesse.

“How could I have had a solution for Shaquille? He's 100 pounds heavier than me.”

Thurmond was the best defender of Wilt and Kareem, but thinks he'd have some trouble against Shaq. Although maybe he is underselling himself.

An interesting question is, what classic player would do the best job defending Shaq?

Wilt, Artis Gilmore, and Wes Unseld seem like some good candidates.

Keep in mind that Nate said the same thing about Yao Ming and I don't think anyone here believes he'd be unable to defend Yao.

Nate would definitely struggle with Shaq size, but I'd bet on him doing as well as anybody. He was bigger and longer than Hakeem for example, after all.

About the three you mentioned - Unseld doesn't have enough length to bother Shaq, Wilt and Gilmore are excellent options though.

[70sFan]

Very clearly Shaq. Wilt was ahead of his time, but he would never have dominated the modern era the way Shaq did. For all the bad things you might say about Shaq as a team mate etc, Wilt is even worse.

I haven't heard any stories about Wilt putting his teammate mouthguard into toilet etc. I don't know about any Wilt dramas that would be comparable to Kobe-Shaq drama either.

I don't know what your criteria are, but it would be very hard to say Shaq was a better teammate than Wilt. Chamberlain had plenty of flaws (didn't like practicing, lived in different city, didn't respect all coaches) but they look nothing like what Shaq caused to me.

[f4p]

Damn, an older player saying they'd have trouble with a newer player. Respect to Thurmond for the rare respectful take.

[One_and_Done]

Very clearly Shaq. Wilt was ahead of his time, but he would never have dominated the modern era the way Shaq did. For all the bad things you might say about Shaq as a team mate etc, Wilt is even worse.

I haven't heard any stories about Wilt putting his teammate mouthguard into toilet etc. I don't know about any Wilt dramas that would be comparable to Kobe-Shaq drama either.

I don't know what your criteria are, but it would be very hard to say Shaq was a better teammate than Wilt. Chamberlain had plenty of flaws (didn't like practicing, lived in different city, didn't respect all coaches) but they look nothing like what Shaq caused to me.

It's not about which one is a bigger douchebag. Shaq wins that hands down. It's about whose behaviours are more detrimental to the teams prospect of success.

I hate to focus on character at all. As far as I'm concerned if you have a rep as a piece of crap, but it doesn't really affect your team on the court (e.g. Mailman, Jordan, etc), then whatever. Leadership etc is tough for us to read from the outside.

Shaq was, and still is, like a kid. He plays gross pranks like a teenage bully, and can come off as loveable the next minute. He has grudges and pouts, but will then be the life of the party. That can be a headache, but it's manageable. Clearly the success of his teams speak to that, and alot of guys on Shaq's teams liked him as well.

On the other hand, I'm sure I'd rather hang out with Wilt on a personal level. The guy seemed more like a man rather than the child like persona Shaq has adopted. But some of the stuff he does is harder to work around. The first thing that came to mind was 'how is a modern team supposed to function if their star refuses to live in the same city as the practise facility?' There's no way that could work. For all Shaq's pouting he would mostly do what the coach was asking. Wilt wouldn't alot of the time. He also insisted on going out and trying to 'get stats' early in his career, because he thought that was how he got paid. The unwillingness to practise is also pretty problematic. Sign me up for Shaq turning up to practise, even if he's going to do 5 dumb things to try and get laughs and approval during each one.