Nate Thurmond: "Shaq is Better than Wilt"

[eliteballer]

BGSU great Thurmond likes Shaq over Wilt

The league is growing younger, taller and more athletic. Thurmond understands how difficult it would be for him to compete as a slender center in this era.

What's wrong with today's NBA?

Nothing, as far as Thurmond can see.

“I think the talent of the players today is more advanced. The Tracy McGradys and Kevin Garnetts - tall players who can dribble and pass like guards. David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal. These players are quicker and stronger than the ones I had to face,” said Thurmond, remarkably well-kept for 59.


Wilt Chamberlain or Shaquille O'Neal? The two most powerful centers of all time. I hung on Thurmond's every word.

Thurmond was Chamberlain's teammate his first 11/2 years in the pros. They were the first official “Twin Towers.”

“What a great learning experience,” said Thurmond. “Five days after leaving Bowling Green, I'm getting off the plane and practicing against Wilt.”

All of which makes Thurmond's admission even more revealing. Nate's a Shaq fan.

“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.”

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

[Marlo_Stanfield]

Wilt>Shaq its not really that close

[jstern]

His older age could be influencing him though.

One thing that I always notice about myself is how less capable I feel when I see athleticism this day in age, vs 10 years ago. Hard to explain, I'm more amazed by things that wouldn't have amazed me 10 years ago. And I could myself in the players shoes ten years ago, yet feel so incapable this day in age.

(When it comes to athleticism, I'm less amazed and care less by things like dunks and game winners, which drive younger kids crazy.)

[navy]

No shame in that.

[LAZERUSS]

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

Not once in that interview does he claim that Shaq was better than Wilt.

He said that Shaq would have presented him with a problem "that none of us had to face."

So what?

"Wilt was more finesse."

[eliteballer]

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]Not once in that interview does he claim that Shaq was better than Wilt.

He said that Shaq would have presented him with a problem "that none of us had to face."

So what?

"Wilt was more finesse."

[sd3035]

Puts to rest the laughable argument a few idiots made about Wilt being as strong as Shaq :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[Springsteen]

Imagine how many points Shaq would score in that era if Wilt scored 100 in a game.

[sd3035]

Imagine how many points Shaq would score in that era if Wilt scored 100 in a game.

probably 200 if he wanted to

[Rocketswin2013]

LOL I LOVE THIS.


"BUT, BUT, WILT WAS THE STRONGEST ATHLETE EVER!"


:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[aj1987]

Why the **** is this a thread?!



Shaq>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wilt and it's not even close.

[Jameerthefear]

Lazerus's heart has been ripped apart :roll: :roll:

[LAZERUSS]

Puts to rest the laughable argument a few idiots made about Wilt being as strong as Shaq :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

Prove it.

I can produce articles in which Wilt was benching 465 lbs, and many with over 500.

I have seen articles that claimed that Shaq could bench 455, YET, only a couple of years ago, on national TV, he couldn't budge 405 (which BTW, an SI article in 1964 basically credited Wilt with.)

[Rocketswin2013]

Only delusional people really thought Wilt was stronger......


I still think peak Wilt was at least as good...But the little myths and shit stop here.

[BasedTom]

Well Wilt's been dead for the past 15 years. I do expect Shaq to be better than him.

[LAZERUSS]

Only delusional people really thought Wilt was stronger......


I still think peak Wilt was at least as good...But the little myths and shit stop here.

Again, the internet is PLASTERED with first-hand accounts of Wilt's ENORMOUS strength (including Arnold Schwartzenegger BTW...who was STUNNED by Wilt's amazing strength.)

Shaq? Not so much.

[Marchesk]

probably 200 if he wanted to

Is Shaq growing up in that era? More importantly, are they calling charges?

[Marchesk]

Why the **** is this a thread?!

Shaq>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> Wilt and it's not even close.

Then why does the consensus list have Wilt in the top 4, and Shaq in the top 10?

[LAZERUSS]

Is Shaq growing up in that era? More importantly, are they calling charges?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ3FXLyNFew

The NBA would NEVER have allowed Wilt to play like that...

[eliteballer]

Prove it.

I can produce articles in which Wilt was benching 465 lbs, and many with over 500.

I have seen articles that claimed that Shaq could bench 455, YET, only a couple of years ago, on national TV, he couldn't budge 405 (which BTW, an SI article in 1964 basically credited Wilt with.)

Shaq threw around physical beasts like Robinson, Ben Wallace, Alonzo Mourning like they were ragdolls his entire career. I'm pretty sure it's mentioned Wallace benched 450.

[LAZERUSS]

Shaq threw around physical beasts like Robinson, Ben Wallace, Alonzo Mourning like they were ragdolls his entire career. I'm pretty sure it's mentioned Wallace benched 450.

And yet Shaq coluldn't budge 405, and likely not even 375.

And we have footage of Barkley throwing Shaq around like a rag doll too...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0vCaZkULds

[aj1987]

So, basically Wilt is the strongest player in the history of the NBA, the best athlete ever for a 7 footer, and the most dominant ever to play basketball.

Bitch ass dude won two rings! Got owned by a dude who was much smaller tham him. GOAT stat padder! The only reason he never fouled out was because he quit when he had fouls. That's the definition of being a stat padder.

Nothing more than a glorified version of Javale in todays NBA.


Then why does the consensus list have Wilt in the top 4, and Shaq in the top 10?
You mean the idiot hipster NBA fans?

Shaq would literally make Wilt quit the NBA.

[Calabis]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ3FXLyNFew

The NBA would NEVER have allowed Wilt to play like that...

I was going to say the NBA just ignored charges on Shaq because his size....those plays are ridiculous

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

So, basically Wilt is the strongest player in the history of the NBA, the best athlete ever for a 7 footer, and the most dominant ever to play basketball.

Bitch ass dude won two rings! Got owned by a dude who was much smaller tham him. GOAT stat padder! The only reason he never fouled out was because he quit when he had fouls. That's the definition of being a stat padder.

Nothing more than a glorified version of Javale in todays NBA.

"Bitch ass dude"?

Wilt's dead corpse would make you squeal like a pig. :oldlol:

[Calabis]

Shaq threw around physical beasts like Robinson, Ben Wallace, Alonzo Mourning like they were ragdolls his entire career. I'm pretty sure it's mentioned Wallace benched 450.

I don't think anyone is saying Shaq was not a physical beast. I think his point is, back in Wilt's era, he could not get away with what Shaq did.

[ArbitraryWater]

Lazerus's heart has been ripped apart :roll: :roll:


:roll: :roll: :roll:

[aj1987]

"Bitch ass dude"?

Wilt's dead corpse would make you squeal like a pig. :oldlol:
I'm not a 7' NBA player though. :confusedshrug:

I'm a 6' engineer. :facepalm

[Calabis]

I really wish they'd let Dwight play like that.

No other post man was allowed to play this way, just Shaq.....elbows to face then rams shoulder into their chest, dunk over them....not exactly post moves lol.....but the downside was no other post player was fouled like Shaq.

[navy]

I dont think it's unreasonable to say Wilt could out bench Shaq, but Shaq's overwhelming strength was from his mass not necessarily his arms/chest. Which is why people like Thurmond would say Shaq was "stronger" than Wilt.

[Calabis]

I'm not a 7' NBA player though. :confusedshrug:

I'm a 6' engineer. :facepalm

:roll:

:applause:

[aj1987]

No other post man was allowed to play this way, just Shaq.....elbows to face then rams shoulder into their chest, dunk over them....not exactly post moves lol.....but the downside was no other post player was fouled like Shaq.
Give and take.

Shaq did have a pretty jump hook at the rim though.

[Calabis]

Give and take.

Shaq did have a pretty jump hook at the rim though.

He had some great post moves, especially in Orlando. I didn't mean to imply that he didn't. Just during his Lakers run, he seemed to just rely on being a battering ram. Maybe this was due to him always not being in tip top shape.

[eliteballer]

No other post man was allowed to play this way, just Shaq.....elbows to face then rams shoulder into their chest, dunk over them....not exactly post moves lol.....but the downside was no other post player was fouled like Shaq.

Spoken like someone who never saw Shaq play. He got hammered a lot but he rarely "threw elbows" because his size, power, speed were more than enough to get around/over defenders.

[Marchesk]

You mean the idiot hipster NBA fans?

Wilt and Shaq didn't grow up in the same era, and they didn't play against each other. What we do know is that Wilt's impact on the game is ultimately greater than Shaq's, even though Shaq has more championships. And Shaq has that dominant 3-peat finals performance. Which is why he's top 10, in addition to his regular season performance.

But in most lists, be they "hipster" or not, Wilt is ahead of Shaq. Wilt did more relative to his competition than Shaq did. That's just a fact. We can't put them on the court in their primes and have them go at it, unfortunately. Wilt also was great in multiple categories, not just scoring. We're talking rebounding, block shots, and passing for a big man.


Shaq would literally make Wilt quit the NBA.

Wilt would give Shaq as much problems as Shaq gave him, particularly if we're talking about both of them in their primes. It would be a glorius thing to watch. Just make sure Kobe remembers to feed the big dog.

[BasedTom]

Really though, Shaq was a bit of a diva bitch.

He got Stan Van Gundy fired and left Orlando for the Lakers before it became the cool thing to do.

[MavsSuperFan]

shaq>>>>>wilt

its not close

[MavsSuperFan]

Again, the internet is PLASTERED with first-hand accounts of Wilt's ENORMOUS strength (including Arnold Schwartzenegger BTW...who was STUNNED by Wilt's amazing strength.)

Shaq? Not so much.
:lol is wilt your dad or something?
I mean :wtf:

[aj1987]

He had some great post moves, especially in Orlando. I didn't mean to imply that he didn't. Just during his Lakers run, he seemed to just rely on being a battering ram. Maybe this was due to him always not being in tip top shape.
True. Dude had GOAT potential. Just squandered it because of his ego. Shaq with MJ's mentality would've easily won 7 chips.

[Marchesk]

shaq>>>>>wilt

its not close

Wilt was a superior rebounder and shot blocker, though. He was more dominant relative to his era than Shaq was. The exception was Shaq in those 3 finals, when he played at a Wilt level of dominance. Blame that on Shaq not being motivated in the offseason or what have you.

[Marchesk]

Here's a question, who would you take out of college to build your franchise around today, Kareem or Shaq?

[La Frescobaldi]

There's nothing in that article about who's better.
Shaq did get free calls, for years. Those kinds of things weren't allowed in any other timeframe of the NBA; certainly not when Chamberlain was playing, nor all of Kareem's career either. Shaq in the '80s is not getting away with that

Shaq got star calls as much if not more, than MJ did - and that's pretty much incredible right there

[aj1987]

Wilt and Shaq didn't grow up in the same era, and they didn't play against each other. What we do know is that Wilt's impact on the game is ultimately greater than Shaq's, even though Shaq has more championships. And Shaq has that dominant 3-peat finals performance. Which is why he's top 10, in addition to his regular season performance.

But in most lists, be they "hipster" or not, Wilt is ahead of Shaq. Wilt did more relative to his competition than Shaq did. That's just a fact. We can't put them on the court in their primes and have them go at it, unfortunately. Wilt also was great in multiple categories, not just scoring. We're talking rebounding, block shots, and passing for a big man.
Dude, don't get me wrong. Wilt was an incredible talent. Never denied it. Never even said that that era was weak (ouside of guard play). We're never gonna see another Wilt. The game has just evolved (not the players). Still, for a dude who is considered to be the GOAT scorer and the GOAT defender, dude hasn't won shit to be in the top 5.

LeBron had 4 MVP's with a career average of 28/7/7 on 50%, with 2 rings and 2 FMVP's and most people don't even have him in their top 10.




Wilt would give Shaq as much problems as Shaq gave him, particularly if we're talking about both of them in their primes. It would be a glorius thing to watch. Just make sure Kobe remembers to feed the big dog.
True. I would LOVE to see Wilt vs Shaq. That would just be EPIC! Two of the most dominant players EVER!

Ignoring the last sentence.

[TheMagicMan]

According to Lazeruss, Wilt is the greatest physical specimen to have ever graced this earth, and yet he only managed to win 2 rings against this type of competition :rolleyes::

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/2010/writers/joe_posnanski/03/02/wilt.chamberlain/wilt-poz2.jpg

[eliteballer]

There's nothing in that article about who's better.
Shaq did get free calls, for years. Those kinds of things weren't allowed in any other timeframe of the NBA; certainly not when Chamberlain was playing, nor all of Kareem's career either. Shaq in the '80s is not getting away with that

Shaq got star calls as much if not more, than MJ did - and that's pretty much incredible right there

Read the title, the guy had a conversation with Nate he doesn't need to spell it out word for word since he said it in the title.

[Asukal]

And there you have it, a guy who played a lot against Wilt confirms that Shaq would be a harder challenge. Of course, his pathetic Wilt stans will never admit to it. :oldlol:

Shaq who had terrible work ethic won 4 rings, that's how dominant the guy was. Wilt? Only 2.... :roll:

[aj1987]

And there you have it, a guy who played a lot against Wilt confirms that Shaq would be a harder challenge. Of course, his pathetic Wilt stans will never admit to it. :oldlol:

Shaq who had terrible work ethic won 4 rings, that's how dominant the guy was. Wilt? Only 2.... :roll:
It's just the hipsters though. Everytings that's 60's >>>>
Then, we've got other idiots who say everything that's '90 >>>>>>

[HomieWeMajor]

JLauber's grandchildren ain't getting no supper tonight.

[Imtheman]

Wait, people actually put wilt ahead of Shaq:biggums:

[Marchesk]

According to Lazeruss, Wilt is the greatest physical specimen to have ever graced this earth, and yet he only managed to win 2 rings against this type of competition :rolleyes::

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/2010/writers/joe_posnanski/03/02/wilt.chamberlain/wilt-poz2.jpg

http://img.spokeo.com/public/900-600/wilt_chamberlain_1962_11_01.jpg

[aj1987]

Still worse than Shaq. "GOAT defender and GOAT Scorer" - only two rings.

Reduce the size, BTW.

[deja vu]

It's just the hipsters though. Everytings that's 60's >>>>
Then, we've got other idiots who say everything that's '90 >>>>>>
90s are actually better because that's the Golden Age of basketball.

Nowadays we have a watered down, no defense era where you get called a foul for just breathing on a player. :lol

But I agree that the 60s are trash.

[Dr.J4ever]

90s are actually better because that's the Golden Age of basketball.

Nowadays we have a watered down, no defense era where you get called a foul for just breathing on a player. :lol

But I agree that the 60s are trash.
Golden age of basketball? The 90s? Not even close. One great team the entire decade in a league that was expanding with new trash franchises with the Raptors, Heat, Hornets diluted the talent. Jordan and the Bulls were the one gem in that mediocre decade, and the watching quality of the game declined too.

As for the article, this is an indictment on the 60s. Sorry to say. What Thurmond was saying is something most knew all along---that today's athletes are better OVERALL. Basketball is better, or maybe just different. Thurmond was clearly impressed with the versatility of the modern game, and the article was in 2001.

With a vantage point none of us can ever have, Thurmond revealed many things that are of interest to this board.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Mikan is better than them both

[fpliii]

It's always strange when Lakers fans disparage Wilt. Some do it to counter the big Wilt fans or are just trolling, but the guy brought the franchise its first championship in LA. Much respect.

One thing that was very interesting to me:


“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.

I don't know if this is a throwaway comment, or if it's credible. If this is the case, then the fadeaway must've been a legitimate weapon (at the very least a real counter) as opposed to just a shot you'd want him to take.

60 percent is an awful lot.

[LAZERUSS]

Just for the record...

A Shaq in the '99 playoffs hung his career high game on a fading Hakeem, with 37 points. And Hakeem was no more physically gifted than Thurmond.

A 39 year old Kareem hung three games of 40, 43, and 46 points (in only 37 minutes, and on 70% shooiting) on a 23 year old Hakeem.

A PEAK Kareem, ages 22-25, played against a fulltime Thurmond in some 35 games. Kareem had five games of 30+ against Thurmond, with a high of 34 points. Oh, and he shot .447 against Thurmond in those H2H's.

A 23-25 year old Thurmond, including his peak season in '67 faced Chamberlain in a span of 13 straight games, and up to a total of 24 if you include their Finals that year. In that span of 13 games, Wilt hung SIX of 30+ on Thurmond, including games of 38 and 45. In his '67 season, Wilt averaged 21 ppg on a .633 FG% against a peak Thurmond.

So, maybe a 59 year old Nate's memory wasn't so good.

BTW, Walt Frazier, who also faced Wilt had this to say...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMvmsCqRAiI&feature=related


And listen to Rick Barry, who again, faced a peak Wilt, and his take on Shaq (and Kareem and Hakeem) and Wilt...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSTt_TxoFVo

[5 rings fan]

It's always strange when Lakers fans disparage Wilt. Some do it to counter the big Wilt fans or are just trolling, but the guy brought the franchise its first championship in LA. Much respect.

One thing that was very interesting to me:



I don't know if this is a throwaway comment, or if it's credible. If this is the case, then the fadeaway must've been a legitimate weapon (at the very least a real counter) as opposed to just a shot you'd want him to take.

60 percent is an awful lot.


Having been here as long as everyone I realized that too, every lakers fans seem to hate Wilt immensely , while other just do that to troll Jlauber.
I haven't found out the reason yet though.

[plowking]

And yet Shaq coluldn't budge 405, and likely not even 375.



Are you actually using video footage of a comedic TV show as evidence? :oldlol:

You're an idiot. Remember that when you want to post anything. You're an idiot.

[Calabis]

Spoken like someone who never saw Shaq play. He got hammered a lot but he rarely "threw elbows" because his size, power, speed were more than enough to get around/over defenders.

:roll: Dude was putting his bows in peoples chest all day, wth are you talking about...here is just a small video of that shit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCOOVLTCtII

[LAZERUSS]

QUOTE=plowking]Are you actually using video footage of a comedic TV show as evidence? :oldlol:

You're an idiot. Remember that when you want to post anything. You're an idiot.[/QUOTE]

Barkley's weight was fake, Shaq's was not. He couldn't BUDGE 405. A 370 lb Shaq could not BUDGE 405.

We have a recorded interview with an eye-witness account, in which Wilt, in his late 50's, was "throwing up 465."

We know that Schwartzenegger worked out with a 327 lb Wilt (and not an ounce of fat on Wilt BTW), and in which he was just shocked by Wilt's incredible strength.

I could list page-after-page of articles and first-hand accounts of Wilt's staggering feats of strength. Can you do the same for Shaq?

[LAZERUSS]

And who would have guessed...

Eddy Curry..."The Shaq Stopper"...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=curryed01&p2=onealsh01

BTW, take a close look at those H2H's...and guess who had the high game between the two?

[Calabis]

QUOTE=plowking]Are you actually using video footage of a comedic TV show as evidence? :oldlol:

You're an idiot. Remember that when you want to post anything. You're an idiot.

Barkley's weight was fake, Shaq's was not. He couldn't BUDGE 405. A 370 lb Shaq could not BUDGE 405.

We have a recorded interview with an eye-witness account, in which Wilt, in his late 50's, was "throwing up 465."

We know that Schwartzenegger worked out with a 327 lb Wilt (and not an ounce of fat on Wilt BTW), and in which he was just shocked by Wilt's incredible strength.

I could list page-after-page of articles and first-hand accounts of Wilt's staggering feats of strength. Can you do the same for Shaq?[/QUOTE]

Shaq probably could throw up 405 back in his prime, I'm sure prior to that skit he hadn't probably touched a weight in years. Unfair to use that against a Wilt who took up body building after basketball.

[jlip]

Why is "Shaq is Better than Wilt" in quotation marks when those words never appear in the article anywhere?

[LAZERUSS]

Barkley's weight was fake, Shaq's was not. He couldn't BUDGE 405. A 370 lb Shaq could not BUDGE 405.

We have a recorded interview with an eye-witness account, in which Wilt, in his late 50's, was "throwing up 465."

We know that Schwartzenegger worked out with a 327 lb Wilt (and not an ounce of fat on Wilt BTW), and in which he was just shocked by Wilt's incredible strength.

I could list page-after-page of articles and first-hand accounts of Wilt's staggering feats of strength. Can you do the same for Shaq?

Shaq probably could throw up 405 back in his prime, I'm sure prior to that skit he hadn't probably touched a weight in years. Unfair to use that against a Wilt who took up body building after basketball.[/QUOTE]

Maybe, maybe not. But one thing is for sure, there are FAR more articles on Wilt's overwhelming strength, than there are on Shaq's.

Incidently, maybe CavsFW can post his video footage of Wilt shoving Thurmond completely off the court (and it wasn't even intentional BTW.)...

[inclinerator]

Shaq probably could throw up 405 back in his prime, I'm sure prior to that skit he hadn't probably touched a weight in years. Unfair to use that against a Wilt who took up body building after basketball.
Maybe, maybe not. But one thing is for sure, there are FAR more articles on Wilt's overwhelming strength, than there are on Shaq's.

Incidently, maybe CavsFW can post his video footage of Wilt shoving Thurmond completely off the court (and it wasn't even intentional BTW.)...

who cares about what someone claims, kevin love could throw a 100 yard chest pass

[LAZERUSS]

Why is "Shaq is Better than Wilt" in quotation marks when those words never appear in the article anywhere?

Nor is it even implied, either. Wilt, used finesse, and Shaq used brute power. But make no mistake about it, Chamberlain could have destroyed the NBA had he played like Shaq.

[Asukal]

Nor is it even implied, either. Wilt, used finesse, and Shaq used brute power. But make no mistake about it, Chamberlain could have destroyed the NBA had he played like Shaq.

"Could" the only argument you ever use. Why didn't he? I'm sure Wilt "could" have won more than 2 rings right? :oldlol:

[LAZERUSS]

"Could" the only argument you ever use. Why didn't he? I'm sure Wilt "could" have won more than 2 rings right? :oldlol:

Oh of course. Had he swapped rosters with Russell, and had Auerbach as his coach, and it would have been WILT holding all those rings. BTW, that comment was not mine...but rather John Wooden's.

[Deuce Bigalow]

He never said Shaq was better. Shaq never even led the league in rebounding once :oldlol: Wilt did 11 times.

[AceManIII]

Nate is right; Wilt is more finesse. Didn't Wilt admit he liked the way Shaq used to dunk/play with power...?

[Asukal]

Oh of course. Had he swapped rosters with Russell, and had Auerbach as his coach, and it would have been WILT holding all those rings. BTW, that comment was not mine...but rather John Wooden's.

Yeah you are right. Too bad that isn't reality. :rolleyes:

[LAZERUSS]

Nate is right; Wilt is more finesse. Didn't Wilt admit he liked the way Shaq used to dunk/play with power...?

The NBA was constantly putting in "anti-Wilt" RULES. Do you honestly believe that they would have allowed Wilt to just physically overwhelm the entire league?

[LAZERUSS]

This should be required viewing (as well as listening to the background commentary) before being allowed to post here on ISH...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOBX9ikNzEk

[BlazerRed]

Lets be honest, 90% of people here aren't old enough to have seen Shaq play, let alone Wilt :oldlol:

[Asukal]

This should be required viewing (as well as listening to the background commentary) before being allowed to post here on ISH...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOBX9ikNzEk

More like become a Wilt stan or you can't post in ish. :facepalm

[stalkerforlife]

Shaq would eat any center ever alive during his prime, especially the old ones that are routinely placed in the top 5 all time but people never saw them play.

[La Frescobaldi]

Read the title, the guy had a conversation with Nate he doesn't need to spell it out word for word since he said it in the title.
Lol he's twistin it no mistaking it

[Kvnzhangyay]

Shaq would eat any center ever alive during his prime, especially the old ones that are routinely placed in the top 5 all time but people never saw them play.

This. Most of the Wilt lovers didn't even watch Wilt :lol

[iamgine]

Nate was pretty much on point. Gotta like his humbleness on what most of the old guys can't admit.

[Marlo_Stanfield]

Only delusional people really thought Wilt was stronger......


I still think peak Wilt was at least as good...But the little myths and shit stop here.
if you think wilt wasnt stronger than Shaq i feel really,REALLY sorry for you.:coleman:

[mr4speed]

Just for the record...

A Shaq in the '99 playoffs hung his career high game on a fading Hakeem, with 37 points. And Hakeem was no more physically gifted than Thurmond.

A 39 year old Kareem hung three games of 40, 43, and 46 points (in only 37 minutes, and on 70% shooiting) on a 23 year old Hakeem.

A PEAK Kareem, ages 22-25, played against a fulltime Thurmond in some 35 games. Kareem had five games of 30+ against Thurmond, with a high of 34 points. Oh, and he shot .447 against Thurmond in those H2H's.

A 23-25 year old Thurmond, including his peak season in '67 faced Chamberlain in a span of 13 straight games, and up to a total of 24 if you include their Finals that year. In that span of 13 games, Wilt hung SIX of 30+ on Thurmond, including games of 38 and 45. In his '67 season, Wilt averaged 21 ppg on a .633 FG% against a peak Thurmond.

So, maybe a 59 year old Nate's memory wasn't so good.

BTW, Walt Frazier, who also faced Wilt had this to say...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMvmsCqRAiI&feature=related


And listen to Rick Barry, who again, faced a peak Wilt, and his take on Shaq (and Kareem and Hakeem) and Wilt...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSTt_TxoFVo
Rick Barry is dead on correct in this interview! Could not have been said better - this is a great find - Thank you for posting this - nice work!!

[inclinerator]

rick barry didnt face shaq so he opinion means sht! the only way to find out who's better is to wait 20 years and run a simulation

[sd3035]

Bill Russell, a guy the size of Kevin Durant dominated Wilt. Just imagine what Shaq would do

[LAZERUSS]

Bill Russell, a guy the size of Kevin Durant dominated Wilt. Just imagine what Shaq would do

How big was Dennis Rodman?...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg3BiOw4TWo

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1350&dat=19930103&id=nmNPAAAAIBAJ&sjid=TQMEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5891,727422


http://www.chicagonow.com/daily-chicago-sports-tab/2011/08/dennis-rodman-the-greatest-defensive-forward-ever/#image/1


Rodman was the greatest pest in the history of professional sports. He consistently gave the best offensive centers on opposing teams a hard time, despite giving up as much as six inches and 110 pounds when guarding a player like Shaquille O'Neal. O'Neal wasn't the only Hall of Famer that had issues when trying to score on Rodman. Karl Malone, Charles Barkley and Rodman's one-time teammate Robinson all had trouble with him.

And none of them rebounded as well as Rodman did, even in their prime.

[Phantom84]

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

Not suprising at all, prime/peak Shaq is the best NBA player. No one can stop that monster.

[Marlo_Stanfield]

Bill Russell, a guy the size of Kevin Durant dominated Wilt. Just imagine what Shaq would do
you are by leaps and bounds the most retarded person i ever read from on the internet:biggums:
Wilt DESTROYED and totally MURDERED Rusel in nearly all their head2heads:biggums: :biggums:

[deja vu]

I'd take Thurmond's word over some forum poster who copy/pastes excerpts from newspapers saying that Wilt was one of the strongest men alive. :oldlol:

[sd3035]

you are by leaps and bounds the most retarded person i ever read from on the internet:biggums:
Wilt DESTROYED and totally MURDERED Rusel in nearly all their head2heads:biggums: :biggums:
:roll:


You should learn English before you attempt to troll

[secund2nun]

Shaq was way better than Wilt "Beast on short fat white CPAs" Chamberlain.

[dr.hee]

:roll:


You should learn English before you attempt to troll

English isn't his first language. Not an excuse though, he's still a moron.

[sd3035]

English isn't his first language. Not an excuse though, he's still a moron.

Where is that idiot from?

[Asukal]

Here we are only a few hours left till miami vs indiana and the forum is spammed by wilt threads.... :facepalm

[dr.hee]

Where is that idiot from?

Germany

[sd3035]

Germany

Thanks, anything he speaks on outside of bratwurst and sauerkraut will now be invalid

[dr.hee]

Thanks, anything he speaks on outside of bratwurst and sauerkraut will now be invalid

I'm German as well and approve this message.

[stanlove1111]

Just for the record...

A Shaq in the '99 playoffs hung his career high game on a fading Hakeem, with 37 points. And Hakeem was no more physically gifted than Thurmond.

A 39 year old Kareem hung three games of 40, 43, and 46 points (in only 37 minutes, and on 70% shooiting) on a 23 year old Hakeem.

A PEAK Kareem, ages 22-25, played against a fulltime Thurmond in some 35 games. Kareem had five games of 30+ against Thurmond, with a high of 34 points. Oh, and he shot .447 against Thurmond in those H2H's.

A 23-25 year old Thurmond, including his peak season in '67 faced Chamberlain in a span of 13 straight games, and up to a total of 24 if you include their Finals that year. In that span of 13 games, Wilt hung SIX of 30+ on Thurmond, including games of 38 and 45. In his '67 season, Wilt averaged 21 ppg on a .633 FG% against a peak Thurmond.

So, maybe a 59 year old Nate's memory wasn't so good.

BTW, Walt Frazier, who also faced Wilt had this to say...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMvmsCqRAiI&feature=related


And listen to Rick Barry, who again, faced a peak Wilt, and his take on Shaq (and Kareem and Hakeem) and Wilt...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSTt_TxoFVo

And yet Thurmond said that Kareem was harder to guard then Wilt. I know that Lazeruss knows this. He will challenge me to find the quote which I can't at this time but Thurmond said it and it has made the rounds on boards like this before and I would bet anything Lazeruss knows this. Reed also said it. Anyone who is good at research its out there.

I would bet Lazeruss also knew that Thurmond said Shaq would be a lot harder to stop then Wilt but didn't bother to post it because he didn't help is case. That's the problem with posters like him they cherry pick, and when someone does that you can't take them seriously anymore.

I am sure he had nights when he was lying awake at 3:00am staring at the ceiling worrying about if this thread was going to break,

[Dr.J4ever]

I'm German as well and approve this message.

You serious? How do you know he's from Germany?

Anyway, on the article itself, what's most interesting is this quote from Thurmond: "

[dr.hee]

You serious? How do you know he's from Germany?

Wrote in German a while ago in the soccer thread. He's from the Dortmund area if I recall correctly.

I'm from the Nowitzki stan generation, and we were used to crappy national teams and the Mavs falling short over and over again. Makes you somewhat reasonable talking about bball. Nowadays posters from here are apparently the same generic trolls like everywhere else. I'm getting old, lol.

[ILLsmak]

Just for the record...

A Shaq in the '99 playoffs hung his career high game on a fading Hakeem, with 37 points. And Hakeem was no more physically gifted than Thurmond.

A 39 year old Kareem hung three games of 40, 43, and 46 points (in only 37 minutes, and on 70% shooiting) on a 23 year old Hakeem.

A PEAK Kareem, ages 22-25, played against a fulltime Thurmond in some 35 games. Kareem had five games of 30+ against Thurmond, with a high of 34 points. Oh, and he shot .447 against Thurmond in those H2H's.

A 23-25 year old Thurmond, including his peak season in '67 faced Chamberlain in a span of 13 straight games, and up to a total of 24 if you include their Finals that year. In that span of 13 games, Wilt hung SIX of 30+ on Thurmond, including games of 38 and 45. In his '67 season, Wilt averaged 21 ppg on a .633 FG% against a peak Thurmond.

So, maybe a 59 year old Nate's memory wasn't so good.

BTW, Walt Frazier, who also faced Wilt had this to say...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMvmsCqRAiI&feature=related


And listen to Rick Barry, who again, faced a peak Wilt, and his take on Shaq (and Kareem and Hakeem) and Wilt...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSTt_TxoFVo

haha, been waiting for you to post this again. Because 7 8 9.

-Smak

[La Frescobaldi]

[QUOTE=Dr.J4ever]You serious? How do you know he's from Germany?

Anyway, on the article itself, what's most interesting is this quote from Thurmond: "

[La Frescobaldi]

And yet Thurmond said that Kareem was harder to guard then Wilt. I know that Lazeruss knows this. He will challenge me to find the quote which I can't at this time but Thurmond said it and it has made the rounds on boards like this before and I would bet anything Lazeruss knows this. Reed also said it. Anyone who is good at research its out there.

I would bet Lazeruss also knew that Thurmond said Shaq would be a lot harder to stop then Wilt but didn't bother to post it because he didn't help is case. That's the problem with posters like him they cherry pick, and when someone does that you can't take them seriously anymore.

I am sure he had nights when he was lying awake at 3:00am staring at the ceiling worrying about if this thread was going to break,
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=309521
It was an interview in Slam.
Of course, Nate practiced with Chamberlain on the Warriors so he was with him 24x7 for his first couple years

[LAZERUSS]

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=309521
It was an interview in Slam.
Of course, Nate practiced with Chamberlain on the Warriors so he was with him 24x7 for his first couple years

And in that interview he claimed that Wilt was the greatest offensive force, Russell the greatest defensive force, and Kareem the greatest all-around center.

Of course, he was also delusional, since prime Chamberlain smoked him far more than a prime Kareem did. And Wilt's defense on Nate was far greater, as well. In fact, it was better than Russell's, too.

[La Frescobaldi]

And in that interview he claimed that Wilt was the greatest offensive force, Russell the greatest defensive force, and Kareem the greatest all-around center.

Of course, he was also delusional, since prime Chamberlain smoked him far more than a prime Kareem did. And Wilt's defense on Nate was far greater, as well. In fact, it was better than Russell's, too.
True.

[played0ut]

Lol OP with the misleading title. He never says shaq is better, he just says no ones played like Shaq (with shaqs size)


Nate is right and he's said it before; wilt fades away from the net while Shaw bulls in.


Wilt didn't fully utilize his strength/size advantages (he wanted to be seen as a well rounded basketball player, not like someone like, well shaqq)

[sd3035]

Wilt was bullied around by scrawny wimps and forced to take fadeaways in his era :lol


Point guards from today would be ragdolling him :oldlol:

[dankok8]

From the Nate Thurmond interview on SLAM:

[QUOTE]SLAM: Who was the toughest center for you to guard?

NT: Kareem had more of a repertoire and was harder to stop. He had a little more versatility when he set up on the floor. Wilt liked the left side, but Jabbar set up on either side. Wilt would rely on the fade-away 70 percent of time; Kareem

[stanlove1111]

From the Nate Thurmond interview on SLAM:



Thanks..Lets all remember this the next time he throws out the stats of Wilt and Jabbar against Thurmond..Just looking at stats are way overrated..



<NT: Kareem had more of a repertoire and was harder to stop
I just happen to think that all the way around, Kareem was the best

[LAZERUSS]

Thanks..Lets all remember this the next time he throws out the stats of Wilt and Jabbar against Thurmond..Just looking at stats are way overrated..



<NT: Kareem had more of a repertoire and was harder to stop
I just happen to think that all the way around, Kareem was the best

First of all, Stan "I can't read" Love...


Wilt would rely on the fade-away 70 percent of time; Kareem’s hook was in the same range. I couldn’t stop him from shooting the hook; I could make him take awkward hooks or baseline jumpers. You really couldn’t keep Wilt from taking the fade-away, but you could try to him shoot it a step further out. He was a great fade-away shooter.

So, while Nate says that Kareem was "harder to stop", he then pretty much explains, that WILT was more difficult to stop.

Secondly, the REALITY was, a prime Chamberlain HAMMERED a helpless Nate.
But, Kareem STRUGGLED against Nate. That was REALITY.

So, when someone claims that Wilt was FAR more productive against Nate, they can CLEARLY PROVE it. In a span of 13 consecutive games, a PRIME Chamberlain put up SIX 30+ games on Nate, including beatdowns by margins of 30-13, 30-10, 33-17, 38-15, and a staggering 45-13 massacre.

Oh, and we have ALL of Wilt's FG%'s in both his regular season, and post-season against Thurmond in 66-67. Guess what, he just crushed Nate. 21 ppg on a .633 FG%, and then 18 ppg on a .560. As for Nate, in those regular season matchups, he averaged a known 13.3 ppg, and in the FG%'s we have, he shot... .320 from the field. His Finals weren't any better, either. 14.3 ppg on a .343 FG%. This from a Nate in his greatest season. Just CARPET-BOMBED by a prime Wilt (and who would hold a 21-2-1 scoring margin their first 24 games.)

A PEAK Kareem faced a fulltime Nate in nearly 40 career H2H's, and he had FIVE games of 30+, with a HIGH of 34. And overall, he shot...get this... .447 from the field against Thurmond.

NO ONE, and certainly not Nate or Russell, EVER stopped a prime Chamberlain. I will say that Thurmond was clearly a better all-around center from the mid-60's on than your boy Russell, though. Nate's only weakness was his frailty. He had more than his share of injuries (and curiously developed "Wilt-itis" on more than one occasion, as well.)

A prime Chamberlain slaughtered Reed, Bellamy, Russell, and Nate. And the evidence is OVERWHELMING.

If he would have had Russell's rosters (and Auerbach), the only question would have been, would all of those teams have gone undefeated en route to easy titles? Conversely, had Russell toiled with the inept, injury-prone, and choking rosters that Wilt had nearly every season, the question would not have been how many titles would Russell have won, but instead, how many losing seasons and playoff appearances would he have had.

[LAZERUSS]

And of course, what is really laughable, is that when someone even hints that Wilt might not have been the greatest they ever faced...the "bashers" immediately jump in and will quote that guy until the cows come home...OR...
until that same guy later on comes back out and says, "you know what, I was wrong...Wilt WAS the greatest ever." Players like Jerry West and Rick Barry. Years ago, mostly out of frustration, they didn't think Wilt was the GOAT. Years later, and with much time to reflect on it...and guess what, he was the GOAT. Then the "bashers" suddenly won't use their quotes any more.

And, as LaFrescobaldi pointed out...how about RUSSELL, who claimed he was the GOAT? Or KAREEM just last year pretty much claiming that Wilt was greater than Jordan?

Nope, ...just what in the hell would Russell or Kareem know anyway?

:facepalm :facepalm

[-23-]

And in that interview he claimed that Wilt was the greatest offensive force, Russell the greatest defensive force, and Kareem the greatest all-around center.

Of course, he was also delusional, since prime Chamberlain smoked him far more than a prime Kareem did. And Wilt's defense on Nate was far greater, as well. In fact, it was better than Russell's, too.

So wait a second, Thurmond, who played against Kareem and Wilt is called delusional by a stan who never saw Wilt play?

LOL You smoking too many rocks you fking coon. :biggums:

[ImKobe]

And who would have guessed...

Eddy Curry..."The Shaq Stopper"...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=curryed01&p2=onealsh01

BTW, take a close look at those H2H's...and guess who had the high game between the two?

look at the dates...this was mostly post-prime Shaq, who was fat.

[bdreason]

They're both top 10 players of all-time so let's stop pretending it's ridiculous to rank either of them over the other. Personally I have Wilt at #4 and Shaq at #7.

[sd3035]

Nate could you be any more obvious? :lol

[AirFederer]

http://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc7p7nbTkY1qcmnsoo1_500.gif

[Psileas]

Garbage thread. Nowhere did Thurmond claim that "Shaq is better", just that he plays in a harder to deal way, which wouldn't be quite the case in Wilt's time, when physical offense was punished. This "Shaq is Better than Wilt" conclusion is as valid as seeing someone praise Ginobili's team play over 2006 Kobe's selfishness and getting to the conclusion that this person considers Ginobili the better player.

But, since people love quotes, it's interesting to see that Thurmond estimates that Wilt's 60% of his FGA (in another interview, he claims 70%) are fade-aways, yet Wilt shoots at a career 54% FG percentage. Both the 60-70% estimations and his 54% FG are enormous, when considered as a combination. I thought it was an established fact that Wilt was a bad shooter...

It's also interesting that Thurmond calls Wilt the GOAT scorer in his second interview. I thought it was an established fact that Wilt isn't even a serious candidate, because...22.5.

[LAZERUSS]

Garbage thread. Nowhere did Thurmond claim that "Shaq is better", just that he plays in a harder to deal way, which wouldn't be quite the case in Wilt's time, when physical offense was punished. This "Shaq is Better than Wilt" conclusion is as valid as seeing someone praise Ginobili's team play over 2006 Kobe's selfishness and getting to the conclusion that this person considers Ginobili the better player.

But, since people love quotes, it's interesting to see that Thurmond estimates that Wilt's 60% of his FGA (in another interview, he claims 70%) are fade-aways, yet Wilt shoots at a career 54% FG percentage. Both the 60-70% estimations and his 54% FG are enormous, when considered as a combination. I thought it was an established fact that Wilt was a bad shooter...

It's also interesting that Thurmond calls Wilt the GOAT scorer in his second interview. I thought it was an established fact that Wilt isn't even a serious candidate, because...22.5.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[La Frescobaldi]

Thanks..Lets all remember this the next time he throws out the stats of Wilt and Jabbar against Thurmond..Just looking at stats are way overrated..



<NT: Kareem had more of a repertoire and was harder to stop
I just happen to think that all the way around, Kareem was the best
You're welcome.

[La Frescobaldi]

http://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc7p7nbTkY1qcmnsoo1_500.gif

lol hey that's a cool sub, D12 for Bob Lanier!!

[sd3035]

http://img683.imageshack.us/img683/2641/jajasivengavalechao.gif

[Psileas]

lol hey that's a cool sub, D12 for Bob Lanier!!

I think he's actually Sidney Wicks.

[eliteballer]

First of all, Stan "I can't read" Love...



So, while Nate says that Kareem was "harder to stop", he then pretty much explains, that WILT was more difficult to stop.

Secondly, the REALITY was, a prime Chamberlain HAMMERED a helpless Nate.
But, Kareem STRUGGLED against Nate. That was REALITY.

So, when someone claims that Wilt was FAR more productive against Nate, they can CLEARLY PROVE it. In a span of 13 consecutive games, a PRIME Chamberlain put up SIX 30+ games on Nate, including beatdowns by margins of 30-13, 30-10, 33-17, 38-15, and a staggering 45-13 massacre.

Oh, and we have ALL of Wilt's FG%'s in both his regular season, and post-season against Thurmond in 66-67. Guess what, he just crushed Nate. 21 ppg on a .633 FG%, and then 18 ppg on a .560. As for Nate, in those regular season matchups, he averaged a known 13.3 ppg, and in the FG%'s we have, he shot... .320 from the field. His Finals weren't any better, either. 14.3 ppg on a .343 FG%. This from a Nate in his greatest season. Just CARPET-BOMBED by a prime Wilt (and who would hold a 21-2-1 scoring margin their first 24 games.)

A PEAK Kareem faced a fulltime Nate in nearly 40 career H2H's, and he had FIVE games of 30+, with a HIGH of 34. And overall, he shot...get this... .447 from the field against Thurmond.

NO ONE, and certainly not Nate or Russell, EVER stopped a prime Chamberlain. I will say that Thurmond was clearly a better all-around center from the mid-60's on than your boy Russell, though. Nate's only weakness was his frailty. He had more than his share of injuries (and curiously developed "Wilt-itis" on more than one occasion, as well.)

A prime Chamberlain slaughtered Reed, Bellamy, Russell, and Nate. And the evidence is OVERWHELMING.

If he would have had Russell's rosters (and Auerbach), the only question would have been, would all of those teams have gone undefeated en route to easy titles? Conversely, had Russell toiled with the inept, injury-prone, and choking rosters that Wilt had nearly every season, the question would not have been how many titles would Russell have won, but instead, how many losing seasons and playoff appearances would he have had.

When Wilt was having regular seasons of 40+ ppg I wouldn't call doing well below his averages "owning" or "hammering".

[ThePhantomCreep]

Prove it.

I can produce articles in which Wilt was benching 465 lbs, and many with over 500.

I have seen articles that claimed that Shaq could bench 455, YET, only a couple of years ago, on national TV, he couldn't budge 405 (which BTW, an SI article in 1964 basically credited Wilt with.)

I find it extremely had to believe that Wilt, with his narrow frame and ridiculously long arms, could bench that much. Only bodybuilders and powerlifters push that kind of weight around and they're usually juiced to the gills.

[MiseryCityTexas]

Nate is probably mad and jealous of Wilt because he never won anything in the pros.

[MiseryCityTexas]

I find it extremely had to believe that Wilt, with his narrow frame and ridiculously long arms, could bench that much. Only bodybuilders and powerlifters push that kind of weight around and they're usually juiced to the gills.

Size don't mean shit. I've seen skinny dudes bench press just as much as bigger body builders plenty of times at the gym.

[sd3035]

Wilt could probably bench about 225

[Straight_Ballin]

Wilt could bench as much as Shaq, but probably not squat as much. What Thurmond is saying is that chest and tri strength isn't then end all be all of "giving someone problems". Shaqs overall strength and ability to move players with his body was better than wilt's.

[LAZERUSS]

Wilt could probably bench about 225 TODAY

I agree...

[305Baller]

Okok. What about vs AbdulJabbar?


Shaq goat C? Def most domimant.

[LAZERUSS]

When Wilt was having regular seasons of 40+ ppg I wouldn't call doing well below his averages "owning" or "hammering".

You mean the Wilt who averaged 33.5 ppg in 65-66, and 28.8 ppg against Thurmond (including 38 and 45 point games...something Kareem never approached against Nate?) And the same Wilt who averaged 28.3 ppg and shot .510 against Russell in the regular season, and then averaged 28.0 ppg on a .509 FG% in the EDF's against Russell?

Or the Wilt who averaged 30.1 ppg on .528 with the Sixers in '65, and then 30.1 ppg on a .555 FG% against Russell in the EDF's?


Or the Wilt who averaged 24.1 ppg on a .683 FG% against the NBA in '67, and 20.8 ppg on a .633 FG% against Nate (all while holding Nate to a .320 FG%?)


Give me a list of YOUR GOATs who AVERAGED 30.4 ppg, 27.0 rpg, 4.5 apg, and shot an eFG% of .515 (in leagues that shot about .420 in the same span), over the course of their first 67 playoff games, 35 of which were against Russell, and 6 more against Nate? Go ahead. In fact, give me your GOAT who had even ONE SERIES with those numbers. In fact, I suspect that you couldn't find YOUR GOAT with even ONE playoff GAME with that stat-line.

Oh, and give me YOUR GOAT who averaged 31.1 ppg, 26.4 rpg, and shot an eFG% of .540 in their (23) career "must win" post-season games. And be careful here...MJ barely edged Wilt at 31.3 ppg and on a far worse FG%, as did Lebron, who is at 31.9 and again, a far worse FG%...and with nowhere near the rebounding or defensive domination of Chamberlain in any of them, either.

[LAZERUSS]

When Wilt was having regular seasons of 40+ ppg I wouldn't call doing well below his averages "owning" or "hammering".

BTW, where do you rank Kareem?

And while you are at it...

If you consider Wilt a choker...

answer me these questions on Kareem, then...



BTW, how do rank Kareem's post-seasons from '72 thru '79? How about his performance in the clinching game six win in the '80 Finals? Or how about his post-season H2H's against Moses in '81 and '83? And how about his play in his '88 and '89 post-seasons? And what was Kareem's FG% in the '84 Finals again? And how come Kareem only won ONE FMVP in the MAGIC era? And how come MAGIC outvoted Kareem in their last EIGHT regular seasons together in the MVP balloting?




And how about Colts18 take on Bird?


1980- Averaged a .511 TS% in the postseason. In game 5 vs. the Sixers, he shot poorly, 5-19 with just 12 points, as the Celtics lost the game. His man (Dr. J) averaged 25 PPG in this series. His team loses in 5 games despite having HCA and winning 61 games. Had a 18.3 PER in the postseason

1981- Has a .532 TS% in the postseason. He had a bad finals where he averaged just 15 PPG on .419 shooting and .460 TS%.

1982- PPG average dropped from 22.9 PPG to 17.8 PPG. He has an embarrassing .474 TS% in the playoffs. He averaged a pedestrian 18.3 PPG against the Sixers. Averages 17 PPG in the final 2 games of the series. The Celtics lose again with HCA. The Celtics won 63 games and had the #1 SRS in the league. Has a 17.9 PER in the postseason.

1983- The Celtics get swept by the Bucks. The Celtics win 56 games and had the #2 SRS in the league and lose again with HCA. Bird plays awful again. .478 TS%. His PPG average drops 2 PPG in the playoffs. Bird missed a game in the series but that game happened to be the closest one (Celtics lose by 4). In the 3 other games, the Celtics lose by 14.3 PPG with Bird on the court.

1984- Great playoffs. Averaged 27-14-4 in the Finals and had a .607 TS% in the playoffs. First great playoff of his career. Celtics win the title over the Lakers.

1985- Celtics make the finals, but Bird's numbers drop in the playoffs. His PPG drops by 2.8 PPG, Reb by 1.2 Reb, and AST by 0.7 AST. Had an average .536 TS% in the postseason. Bird plays even worse in the finals. His PPG dropped 4.9 PPG, his Reb 1.7 Reb, and AST by 1.6 AST in the finals compared to his regular season average. His Finals TS% is just .527. Not only that, but Celtics finish with 63 wins and lose once again with HCA a constant theme in Bird's career. This is the first time in Celtics history they lost in the finals with HCA.

1986- Great year. His best year ever. Wins the title. .615 TS% in the postseason and amazing finals.

1987- I think this is his most admirable playoffs up until the finals. The Celtics were quite banged up this year. Averaged 27-10-7 in the postseason with .577 TS%. Though his numbers in the finals dropped off once again. His PPG was 3.9 PPG down from the regular season, AST down by 2.1 AST and his TS% was just .534. In game 6, Bird scored just 16 points on 6-16 (.375) shooting. In the final 3 games of this series, Bird averaged just 20 PPG on .377 shooting and .492 TS% with 3.7 TOV. This is the first time Bird has played without HCA in the playoffs and his team loses.

1988- Bird's PPG drops by 5.4 PPG, Reb by 0.5 Reb. Bird shoots an awful 40-114 (.351) against the Pistons. Has a mediocre .538 TS% and 20.2 PER in the playoffs. The Celtics had HCA and the #1 SRS in the league and you probably guessed what happened next, Larry Bird loses with HCA once again.

1989- Injured doesn't play in the postseason.

1990- Bird shoots .539 TS% and has 3.6 TOV as the Celtics once again you guessed it, lose with HCA.

1991- In the first round, his team needs to go 5 vs. the 41 win Pacers. His PPG drop by 2.3 PPG and his Rebounds and Assists also drop quite a bit. Has a .490 TS% 15.8 PER in the playoffs. Against the Pistons Bird averages 13.4 PPG on .446 TS%. His 56 win team played with you guessed it HCA and loses with it.

1992- Doesn't play in the first round as the Celtics sweep the Pacers. In round 2, his team goes 7 against the Cavs, but Bird plays in 4 games and his team was 1-3 in those games. Averages a pathetic 11.3 PPG and 4.5 Reb which are 8.4 PPG and 5.2 Reb down from his regular season average. He has a .514 TS% and 16.4 PER in the postseason.


So out of 12 years, you get 9 years under .540 TS%, 5 under .520 TS%, and 3 under .500 TS%. From 80-83, he had a 19.9 playoff PER. In that span, Johnny Moore, Franklin Edwards, Gus Williams, and Bob Lanier all had better playoff PER and WS/48. Teammates Parish, McHale, Tiny Archibald, and Cedric Maxwell had better TS% in that span. From 88-92, he had a 18.8 PER which is 25th among players with 10 playoff games played. Players who had better playoff PER's in that span include Fat Lever, Terry Cummings, Roy Tarpley, Cedric Ceballos, and Sarunas Marciulionis. His teammates Reggie Lewis and Kevin McHale had better playoff PER's in that span.

With Bird you get a nice 4 year run that had 4 straight finals appearances but outside of that you get a 4 year span of .505 TS% (80-83) and a .525 TS% span (88-92). In 12 years, you get 7 losses with HCA. Basically out of Bird's 13 year career, you have 1 injury season and 3 non-descript postseasons at the end of his plus some playoff disappointments early in his career.

Of course, being the Laker fan that you are, you will no doubt agree with Colts18 , right?

I'll be waiting...