wow, same as me, right down to the bird/kg dilemma. i guess at this point i'd have to take bird for the rings and mvp's (though i think garnett should be up to 2). of course, kg is just getting his great supporting cast that bird had and even then, kg's best teammate (sam) got injured during the most important series of the playoffs. magic has to be the point guard, jordan has to be the sg, and i think duncan has to be above barkley and malone for the 2 titles and ability to win w/o other superior players. hakeem, maybe i'm just being a homer, but wilt in this era, could he have been any better than hakeem? i don't think so. shaq is pretty much a tie so i'll go with hakeem's defensive edge versus shaq's offensive edge. russell? call me when he becomes a dominant offensive player and deserves to be ranked with kareem/hakeem/shaq/wilt. well i wouldn't mind if barry bonds hit 3 homers off me and my team won. but that wouldn't change the fact that i tried to stop bonds and he kicked my ass. unless russell was purposely letting wilt score, which doesn't sound like a good idea.
Hall of Famers on Wilt's Team rookie year - 1962 Paul Arizin, Tim Gola 1963 None(missed playoff) 1963 - 1965 Nate Thurmond 1965 - 1968 Hal Greer, Billy Cunningham 1968 - 1973 Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, Gail Goodrich(after 1970) Wilt's shot attempts 1959 32 46.1% FG 1960 31 50.9% FG 1961 39.5 50.6% FG 1962 34.6 52.8% FG
so you think if Wilt play in Hakeem/Shaq's era he could average 50 and 25? like I said, don't look in the numbers. different era, different way of game played. I'm pretty sure if Wilt play in 90's he won't be as dominate as he did in 60s'; if 29.7pt/13.6reb/3blk are Shaq's best numbers, Wilt won't do any better than that in 99-00. and I'd still take what Hakeem did in 89-90: 24pt/14reb/3asi/2.1stl/4.6blk on .508% shooting. or 94's 27.3pt/11.9reb/3.6asi/1.6stl/3.7blk on .528% shooting. I think everyone would agree that Hakeem's the best defender among the three; and 27.3pt/3.6asi on .528% shooting with the Dream shake was unstopptable offensive force. plus Hakeem's the only one proved who can singlehandly carry his team to the championship. Hakeem is the best center in history period.
Basketball and baseball are different, for example Larry Brown didn't mind seeing Shaq score so much because he thinks he can't beat a team by scoring, Russell thought the same of Wilt.
Wilt Chamberlain today would average INSANE numbers! Think about it, the man was as strong as Shaq, had the indurance to play 48 minutes a game for a WHOLE season, I think he did that more than once, he competed in high jump and sprint races for his college track and field teams, nobody will EVER be able to do those things, and to top it all off he had sex with 20,000 women!
If Wilt had sex with 20,000 women in today's era he would've been dead A LONG TIME AGO with all the STD's he would've contracted. No AID's / HIV back when he played (on and off the court )
Many things that Wilt boasted in his autobiography were not true, like his vertical, women, ... But now people uses them to prove the greatness of Wilt. I don't think Wilt would have the endurance to average 48 min today. The defense against him in the 60s is a joke compared to that against Shaq in 99-02. Shaq used to dunk with players hanging on him. Also, it's true Wilt was more atheletic than Shaq, but he didn't have Shaq's size, a rare breed in NBA and sports history.
I don't think he had a 44" verticle, however he did compete in his college track and field team and was one of the best high jumpers in the country, that's a fact. He also won a few 400+ meter races, without even training for them, he might of lied about training but not about winning them. He was over 7' tall and over 250 pounds in college, will you ever see anyone that big compete in track in field ever again? Hell, no! How would you know about the defense in the 60s? Most people I've talked to that have seen both Shaq and Wilt play say that the competition back then was tougher, and they always laugh at people who compare the two. Shaq hasn't had to play against anyone but Yao for a few years now, Wilt for most of his career had plenty of young HoF centers to deal with. And size? Well, do you think Shaq would of been that big without the technology of today? Do you think Wilt ever lifted weights as heavily as Shaq says he does?
ESPN Classics. And Number games Take the 61-62 PHI for example score: 125.4 /game FGA: 109 FG%: 43.9% Rbs: 74.2 Now take a look at 99-00 Lakers Score: 100.8/game FGA: 83.4 FG%: 45.9% Rbs: 47 Do you see how Wilt's number was inflated by the era? Wilt averaged 50/26 in 61-62. Adjusted by total scores and rebs: 40/16 in 99-00 He might still get 16 rbs., but would be surrounded by triple-teams like shaq faced in 99-00. Those guys would hack him like crazy and foul him hard. He wouldnt average 48 min and stay under the basket all the time with the 3 secs call. So a realistic number is 30/15, only slightly better than Shaq's.
Wilt's numbers are inflated and Shaq's aren't? Wilt would of been tearing up record books right now, who would challenge him? Shaq? Maybe trying to defend Shaq a little but I bet he would be capable enough against him to have a 50-25 game on Shaq. The last time Shaq had to play against a quality center before Yao was David Robinson, Rik Smits too I guess. Now Wilt had to play against Russell, Bellamy, Thurmund, Embry, 4 guys but since the NBA had like 10 teams back then he played them around 40 times a year. If Shaq had to play against Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing, and a healthy Mourning 40 times a year would he dominate like he does now? Wouldn't his numbers suffer a hit? Who cares about the 3 seconds, unlike Shaq Wilt could be a finese player and he could score from almost anywhere, a lot of his points came off fade aways and finger rolls from close to the free throw line. Could Shaq ever lead the league in assists like he did for a couple of seasons? In today's NBA with today's technology I think Wilt would be 7'1" around 350 pounds still leading the league in minutes played and average around 40 points and 18 rebounds, easily. Those averages might go down a little against Shaq and Yao, but he'll more than make up for it against everyone else. The only beef anyone could possibly have against Wilt is championships, but since there is no Russell or anyone close to him in today's NBA, he would take care of that easily too.
Have you checked the boxscore of great centers against each other? Both of them got their number because they could't guard each other. They dominated scrubs because scrubs' couldn't match their production. For example, Shaq's sophomore number is 29.3 pts 13.2 rbs 60% FG. That was in the best era of centers. 7'1 350 lbs and 48 min 40 pts 18 rbs easily? well, I have no comment.
Where can I check that? If great centers didn't get great numbers against other great centers than they wouldn't really be great now, would they? I don't understand how you can say they dominated scrubs back then when the center position was really strong and not say the same thing now when the center position has never been worse. I never said 48 minutes, I said he'd lead the league in minutes so maybe 42-43, 40 points should be easy for him because no one would be able to stop him AND he wouldn't have to really guard anyone outside of Yao and Shaq, 18 rebounds should be easy as well since that was his career LOW. Oh, maybe 350 is a little too much, but back then he was a good 320 without the strength training and nutrition available to today's athletes, so maybe 340?
Throw two big bodies into Wilt and don't let him touch the ball. Wear him down with constant hacking and hugging. That's today's defense. Have you watched Wilt's games on ESPN classics? No one defended Wilt like that. That was the era of a bunch of white stiffs who wouldn't make the injury list in today's league(their FG% were crappy too). The competition looked like a high school game. Just like Dajuan Wagner dropped 100+ pts in high school, Wilt's records are greatly overrated.
I think you could make a very good argument that Oscar Robertson should be your point guard. You just can't look past his stats. Averaging a triple double one year. He averaged over 30 points and over 10 assists in the same season 5 times You can always argue that stats back then mean something different than stats today - but at the end, dominant is dominant. Those players dominance back then is the direct cause of increased popularity and athleticism in the sport. There's no telling how good a Wilt Chamberlein or Oscar Robertson could be growing up in today's world.
Best era? So, Shaq, Hakeem, Robinson and Ewing were better than Wilt, Russell, Thurmund, and Bellamy? That was the 64 season, how about the 69 season, with Wilt, Russell, Thurmund, Bellamy, Reed, Cunningham? Wilt was ONLY a 20/20 player in 69 though, and in 64 he was around 35/25. That era with Hakeem and company was the last great era of centers, but not the best at least not clearly the best.
No one defended him like that because no one could, although he did get to the line about as much or more than Shaq does. Right, they were Hall of Famers back then but couldn't beat out today's crap at the center position. Dude, Wilt played against the best players in the world, not high school players, all he could do was play against who was there, just like Shaq does right now, so to me he shouldn't be penalized for that just like Shaq isn't.
Let me do the numbers game, 1968 - 1969 Wilt 20/21 Nate Thurmond 21.5/19.7 Bill Russell 10/19 43.3% FG Bellamy 24.8/12.8 rbs Reed 21.7/13.9 Cunningham 26.1/13.6 1993 - 1994 Numbers adjusted by total scores and rbs. 1968 - 1969 team average appox. 115 pts/60rbs 1993 - 1994 team average approx. 105 pts/45 rbs adjustment factor: score: 115/105 = 1.09 rbs: 60/45 = 1.33 Robinson 32.5/14.5 Shaq 32/17.5 Hakeem 29.7/16 Ewing 26.7/14.9 Kevin Willis 20.8/16 Rodman 5/23 Mutombo 13/16 Divac 15.5/14.4 Olden Polynice 12.5/16
in the future, you may wanna lay off the crack pipe before posting one thing, fast, agile, track athlete wilt is not 320 pound wilt from the 70's. fast, agile wilt was more hakeem-sized than shaq sized. shaq-sized wilt was not as mobile as shaq. therein seems to lie your overrating of wilt (even if he may be the best center ever he can still be overrated). you can't combine the best of his two different body-types. So, Shaq, Hakeem, Robinson and Ewing were better than Wilt, Russell, Thurmund, and Bellamy? yes. hakeem and shaq are better than all but wilt (and maybe him) and honestly robinson and ewing are either better than russell (because they had offensive games) or just behind. 40 points should be easy for him because no one would be able to stop him AND he wouldn't have to really guard anyone outside of Yao and Shaq no one can stop shaq and he doesn't have to guard anyone. what makes you think wilts gonna add 10 points on to shaq who already can't be stopped? wilt made little finger rolls out to about 5 or 6 feet, shaq does that little step across the paint shotput thing from 5 or 6 feet. from the few clips i've seen (including one where he tries about an 8 foot flip shot that completely misses the rim but he just goes and grabs the rebound and lays it in) and based on his atrocious free throw %, wilt didn't have much more than shaq on offense. he would've relied on physical brutality as much as shaq and he would've faced hack a shaq. and he would've faced double and triple teams, things you almost never see in old nba games. The last time Shaq had to play against a quality center before Yao was David Robinson, Rik Smits too I guess. Now Wilt had to play against Russell, Bellamy, Thurmund, Embry but when shaq did play against those guys in his younger years, he faired extremely well. Most people I've talked to that have seen both Shaq and Wilt play say that the competition back then was tougher people are nostalgic and like to think what they saw in their day was the best. but comparing the defense of yesteryear to that of today is laughable. i'm sure all those 135-130 games were the result of rugged, double-teaming defense. Basketball and baseball are different, for example Larry Brown didn't mind seeing Shaq score so much because he thinks he can't beat a team by scoring, Russell thought the same of Wilt so russell purposely gave wilt easy baskets to fool him into scoring a lot or something? just because letting a guy dominate works because his teammates can't pick up the slack doesn't mean the guy didn't dominate. again, if i "let" barry bonds hit 3 homers but i beat the giants, am i brilliant for letting him tee off on me or did he just tee off on me and luckily his teammates couldn't pull their weight?
