The Last Shaq vs. Wilt Thread Ever

[MajaFiggaz_Early!]

Ok Yesterday playin ball me and my boys got to the conversation of Who is better of the Two. The 100 Game, the dominance, the Championchips and all, and I've come to a conclusion.

Shaq is better then Wilt Was.

Dont get me wrong Wilt was great...The BEST, for his time. But Shaq in his prime is just to much for Wilt to handle. I hate the Lakers and I'm not a Shaq fan but if you look at how Wilt played and who he played against I just thing if you thrust Shaq from the 2000-2001 season into those years he would be a T-Rex.

Throw Wilt in todays game and you have...Well The Second best Center in the league.

I need to heard some of your opinions on this. I will understand if you say Wilt is better but I just thing Shaq is just to talented for his size for Wilt to ever have handled.

[©hamp]

I think the players reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaallllly sucked back then in Wilt's day. So i think Shaq would kick his butt today. But i could be wrong, so who knows...

[Andrew]

Wilt had a clear size advantage of his opponents. But he was also talented. If he played in the 90s, chances are he would not have been so dominant, if only because the evolution of basketball has seen less teams have one dominant scorer. If Wilt and Shaq switched places in time, then Wilt would be playing in a system where he had another scorer on the team (firstly Penny, now Kobe) and where he would not get the opportunities to score 100 points. Likewise, Shaq would be a talented big man who had a huge size advantage over his fellow players to boot. I believe if you switched the players, history would be the same except for the names. We'd talk about Shaquille O'Neal as the only player to reach triple digits in scoring and Wilt Chamberlain would be the reigning Finals MVP of a Laker team that just three-peated.

Head to head, I don't think either player would be dominated by the other, and like any other matchup, there would be nights when Wilt would shine and nights where Shaq would stand tall. The difference is, Wilt never faced anyone like Shaq, where Shaq has faced players like Wilt - guys like David Robinson and Hakeem Olajuwon who were both tall, well-built and talented (and like Wilt, not as big as Shaq) - Wilt confessed to having trouble guarding Kareem Abdul-Jabbar when Kareem entered the league in 1969. Like Kareem, Shaq has a devastating weapon. It's not a graceful, skillful shot like the skyhook - it's his strength. And he knows how to put that strength to good use. I think Shaq's size and strength would give him an advantage - but Wilt could meet that challenge with superior talent.

[Clinton]

Enough said. That sums up the whole question. Pretty much what I was gonna say.

[Rens]

The 100 Game, the dominance, the Championchips and all, and I've come to a conclusion.

Shaq is better then Wilt Was.

Funny reasoning where you mention feats achieved by Wilt and then conclude Shaq is better

[Tyus Edney's Agent]

Wilt holds two records that will never be broken

the 100 point game and 20000 women he slept with

[:digerati:]

Prime Wilt Chamberlain. No contest. Quicker, faster, more athletic, more talented, can shoot from farther out than 5 feet, better shot blocker, better defender.

Of course, Prime Shaq would match Injured Aged Wilt.

If Wilt had someone like Kobe next to him. He'd still drop 100. Especially since in the game where he had 100 he had two teammates with 16 and one with 17pts (and then one with 11 and one with 9).

If Wilt and Shaq switched places, Wilt would be even more unstoppable and Shaq wouldn't be as good considering his softness and his lack of range and mobility.

[GloveGuy]

Both Wilt and Bill Russel would smoke Shaq's ass. So would Hakeem in his prime. ©hamp you say that Wilt's opponents sucked? Shaq today faces guys like Vlade Divac and aged David Robinson.

But too bad none of us are old enough to have seen Wilt play. We read the stats, we see some clips. So what? Barely any of you guys have seen vintage Hakeem who had like 100 moves oppose to Shaq's one or two moves.

[GloveGuy]

Both Wilt and Bill Russel would smoke Shaq's ass. So would Hakeem in his prime. ©hamp you say that Wilt's opponents sucked? Shaq today faces guys like Vlade Divac and aged David Robinson.

But too bad none of us are old enough to have seen Wilt play. We read the stats, we see some clips. So what? Barely any of you guys have seen vintage Hakeem who had like 100 moves oppose to Shaq's one or two moves.

[:digerati:]

Akeem had those moves 7 years ago (hardly "vintage") when he threw them all over The Admiral in his prime and a younger Shaq.

Akeem was the only reason the Rockets even competed against the Celtics back in the 80s.

Akeem may be the closest thing the last decade has had to Wilt. Only Akeem's a more selfish person. That, and he wasn't anywhere near as talented or athletic.

I think the players reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaallllly sucked back then in Wilt's day.

Players of his day did not have the luxury of regular National T.V. broadcasts to promote their talents to the public. Modern players have the luxuries of chartered jets, first class hotels, modern sports medicine, fewer games on back-to-back nights (never having to play on more than 2 consecutive nights), illegal defenses, looser rules governing assists, less contact required for fouls (no blood no foul?), the 3 point line and superstars getting preferential treatment from referees. Games from the days of Wilt Chamberlain are like track meets when compared to the current NBA. Back then teams scored 115 points on a regular basis.

[Rens]

Akeem had those moves 7 years ago

When he was already called Hakeem

[MAKAVELI THE DON]

i have to agree with my boy "maja figgaz is back"!

shaq is better than wilt or any other centers of the past. not to mention how the rules were back in those days and how easy it was to score. all 27 teams in the nba back in the days averaged a 100 points in a whole season compared to today's nba teams with on 3 or 4 avergaing 100+.

plus if feel that not only shaq, but the nba palyers of today are playing on a higher level than the older generation. with that said it doesn't mean their better than the older generation. no disrespesct to the great centers of the past, but i feel shaq would hold his own!

[:digerati:]

shaq is better than...centers of the past.

If you don't count the ones he's not better than. As for him being better than Wilt? Hardly.

not to mention how the rules were back in those days

You mean...changing the rules in a futile attempt to stop them? You mean...no blood no foul? You mean...no illegal defense or three point line to take away pressure?

and how easy it was to score. all 27 teams in the nba back in the days averaged a 100 points in a whole season compared to today's nba teams with on 3 or 4 avergaing 100+.

That's not because it was easy to score. But, because teams back then shot about the same as today, they just took 20-25 more shots per game. Also, back then there wasn't 27 teams. There were 8 teams in Wilt's rookie year, 12 in his last year in Philly. Infact, the year he retired there were 17 teams. Never 27.

plus if feel that not only shaq, but the nba palyers of today are playing on a higher level than the older generation.

If they are, it's because of the the luxuries of chartered jets, first class hotels, modern sports medicine, fewer games on back-to-back nights (never having to play on more than 2 consecutive nights), illegal defenses, looser rules governing assists, less contact required for fouls (no blood no foul?), the 3 point line and superstars getting preferential treatment from referees.

but i feel shaq would hold his own!

You can say that, but I can also say that you don't need oxygen to survive.

[MAKAVELI THE DON]

stop qoating my statements will you? i don't appreciate it.

the fact is: if you don't think shaq is better than the centers of the past, just say: "

Makaveli the don, i disagree with you. i don't think shaq is better than the past nba centers back in the day!"

then if you want to give your reasons as to why you don't think shaq is better, that's that! everyone has their own opinion so you people better stop qouating other people.

enough said.

let peace reign!

[:digerati:]

stop qoating my statements will you? i don't appreciate it.

I don't appereciate you being ignorant about the past, don't see me complaining do you?

the fact is: if you don't think shaq is better than the centers of the past, just say: "

Makaveli the don, i disagree with you. i don't think shaq is better than the past nba centers back in the day!"

Yeah, because explaining things is stupid.

then if you want to give your reasons as to why you don't think shaq is better, that's that!

But I did give reasons why Shaq isn't the best Center in NBA History?

everyone has their own opinion

Yes.

so you people better stop qouating other people.

Wait? What does that have to do with anything?

enough said.

So. Lemme get this straight. Rather than quoting someone to help prevent misunderstandings in what is being replied to. We should, just say stuff and not explain it?

let peace reign!

Peace is overrated and will never exist. But, that's against the point. The point being that by trying to discuss something by quoting to assist understanding, I've started a war?

How about if you actually replied to me on the topic (How Shaq isn't better than Wilt) and didn't ramble aimlessly about pointless stuff. Thanks, I'd appreciate it.

[MAKAVELI THE DON]

u just really know how to anoy people don't you? LOL!

[Rens]

At least he knows there weren't 27 teams in Wilt's time...

[f.t.w.]

wilt 7-1 275 lbs

shaq 7-1 335 lbs

now, the stilt was a BIG dude. freakin warren sapp is a REALLY big dude. Shaq would still kick both their asses at once. It seems like people take shaq for granted, and this frustrates me in a wierd way because i HATE shaq and i HATE the lakers, but for a man of such anomalous size shaq is fast , agile, and hes no dummy.
these comparing players from different eras thingies are as productive as discussing god. and speaking of the divine, i can't even make myself comprehend a 100 point game, but the bottom line is that shaq is an above average athelete in the most freakishly large body in the history of sports. Just imagine someone your height packing an extra 60 lbs. Shaq da man.

[:digerati:]

Shaq might be bigger, but he's no Wilt.

[TheBob]

Shaq would still kick both their asses at once.

I don't think this is relevant, this thread is about their ability to play the game of basketball not their ability to box or to be street fighters.

[DR. P]

I like Wilt here.

Best,

P

[BIG GREEN]

Shaq might be bigger, but he's no Wilt.

lol can't beat that logic. There you have it folks...that is the reason wilt is better

j/k ben

[:digerati:]

I already explained it, not my fault people don't or can't read.

[Rens]

Shaq may be an above average athlete but Wilt was an even better athlete due to his track and field history.. can you imagince Shaq doing those kind of stuff