What would 2000 Shaq Average in the 1960s?

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Title.

[J Shuttlesworth]

Yes, in the 60s

every stat

60 pts
60 reb
60 blocks
60 jlauber tears a night

[LAZERUSS]

Title.

Six offensive PFs in about 20 minutes, and probably 5-10 traveling or palming violations...

[Rake2204]

I think O'Neal would be dominant, but he'd have to alter his style a little bit, no? Would bulldozing and dropstep elbows to the face pass as legal back then? To be clear, I do not say that as a criticism to O'Neal. That is a truthful wonder. Would he have to more frequently rely upon a finesse game? I mean, still mixing it up, but perhaps not to the level allowed during his era.

[juju151111]

55ppg ,17-19 rebs,6ats

[RoundMoundOfReb]

I'm thinking something like 68/32 on 60% FG.

[Rake2204]

Six offensive PFs in about 20 minutes, and probably 5-10 traveling or palming violations...How different were post interaction rules back then? At what point would a player like O'Neal be whistled for an offensive foul?

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Six offensive PFs in about 20 minutes, and probably 5-10 traveling or palming violations...

So the 60s were a softer era than 2000?

[Akrazotile]

I'm thinking something like 68/32 on 60% FG.


What about in the second half?

[RoundMoundOfReb]

What about in the second half?
:roll:

[LAZERUSS]

How different were post interaction rules back then? At what point would a player like O'Neal be whistled for an offensive foul?


Shaq commits SEVERAL offensive fouls in this ONE sequence alone...

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

[Psileas]

Since he averaged 25.5 ppg against the great Bryant Reeves, around 16 ppg against the vastly better 60's competition sounds realistic, except if the refs whistle him according to 60's rules, like Lazeruss claims, so he's definitely going to struggle a lot more.

[LAZERUSS]

55ppg ,17-19 rebs,6ats

:roll: :roll: :roll:

The "Shaq-Stopper"...

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

who would have thunk it?

[RoundMoundOfReb]

People actually think Shaq wouldn't dominate? 2000 Shaq is the greatest player the NBA has ever seen. Put him in a weaker era and it would be rape.

[Sarcastic]

He would foul out in the first quarter.

[Mr. Jabbar]

850 ppg / 420 rebounds / 0 assists

[LAZERUSS]

People actually think Shaq wouldn't dominate? 2000 Shaq is the greatest player the NBA has ever seen. Put him in a weaker era and it would be rape.

Hmmm...how about this?

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

So I am supposed to believe that a Shaq who couldn't do s**t against Rodman, would abuse a taller, longer, and much more athletic Russell?

[-23-]

Hmmm...how about this?

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

So I am supposed to believe that a Shaq who couldn't do s**t against Rodman, would abuse a taller, longer, and much more athletic Russell?

Comparing apples and oranges. He's talking about 2000 Shaq aka MDE. Not a young raw shaq.

To answer OP, I think Shaq would be neck-to-neck with Wilt in the 60's in terms of PPG/RPG etc. The stats will pull away for Shaq though in the playoffs, where he SHINES.

[Poetry]

It depends. How many minutes would he play?

From 1993-2003, Shaq averaged 37.8 MPG.

Or would he be playing 46.6 minutes per game like Wilt did from 1960-1970?

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Hmmm...how about this?

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

So I am supposed to believe that a Shaq who couldn't do s**t against Rodman, would abuse a taller, longer, and much more athletic Russell?
1996 was before Shaq peaked. Shaq averaged 27/11 on 64% that series....and this is supposedly a bad series?!

[LAZERUSS]

Comparing apples and oranges. He's talking about 2000 Shaq aka MDE. Not a young raw shaq.

In that 94-95 season, and playing 37 mpg, Shaq averaged 29.3 ppg, 11.4 rpg, and shot .583 from the field.

In his 99-00 season, Shaq played 40 mpg, and averaged 29.7 ppg, 13.6 rpg, and shot .574 from the field.

BTW, who did Shaq face in that post-season? And how did he do against the Robinson's Spurs from '99 thru '02?

[SouBeachTalents]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

The "Shaq-Stopper"...

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

who would have thunk it?

Granted, Shaq did shoot poorly in some of those games, but check out the minutes he was playing. He played over 35 minutes in only 3 games, and in 7 of those matchups he played less than 30 minutes. So 3 poor shooting nights out of 13 games, not the biggest "stoppage" of a player I've seen

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Best thing about Shaq was that he played like a man. No bullshit fade-aways like you see Wilt taking. Pure physical dominance.

[Psileas]

What would 2000 Shaq average in 1985, against a young Hakeem, old Kareem, Moses, etc? Now, what would these guys average in the 60's, against centers who may, you know, actually have faced them?

[LAZERUSS]

Best thing about Shaq was that he played like a man. No bullshit fade-aways like you see Wilt taking. Pure physical dominance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MppYGkD8EVI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyN-duR6KcM

[MMM]

he would put up similar numbers too Wilt but would probably be ringless

[RoundMoundOfReb]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MppYGkD8EVI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyN-duR6KcM
You seriously just post clips from cleveland Shaq and an all-star game? :oldlol:

[Bless Mathews]

60/30 on 70%

[LAZERUSS]

What would 2000 Shaq average in 1985, against a young Hakeem, old Kareem, Moses, etc? Now, what would these guys average in the 60's, against centers who may, you know, actually have faced them?

A 38-39 year old KAJ, in 10 straight games, averaged 32 ppg on a .630 FG% against Hakeem, which included THREE games of 40, 43, and 46 points (on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes.)

A prime Shaq, circa '99, scored his career high against an aging Hakeem, of 37 points.

A PEAK KAJ faced a full-time Thurmond in some 40 career H2H games, and his HIGH game was 34 points. And overall, in those 40 H2H's, he shot .447 from the field against Nate.

[Bless Mathews]

Best thing about Shaq was that he played like a man. No bullshit fade-aways like you see Wilt taking. Pure physical dominance.


Word.


Shaq would literally stomp.

It would literally be like 2000 Shaq playing against any junior college.

[Rake2204]

I'm really thinking O'Neal would have to drastically alter his playing style. I cannot imagine his lowering of the shoulder and bulldozing being fully acceptable. He'd be fine enough without that stuff, but I don't think it'd be as simple as letting him loose to play exactly as he did in the current era, where he spent a lot of time displacing defenders through shear force. I trust he'd have to rely upon a little more finesse, which he had.

[LAZERUSS]

I'm really thinking O'Neal would have to drastically alter his playing style. I cannot imagine his lowering of the shoulder and bulldozing being fully acceptable. He'd be fine enough without that stuff, but I don't think it'd be as simple as letting him loose to play exactly as he did in the current era, where he spent a lot of time displacing defenders through shear force. I trust he'd have to rely upon a little more finesse, which he had.

Pretty much this.

I have no doubt that a YOUNGER Shaq, circa thru '95, or so, would have been capable of 40 ppg in the 60's (at his peak of course.) He would have to have stayed in great shape, and he would have faced even more clogged lanes, and probably shot a considerably worse FG% in that era, with more rebounds (no way he would have been anywhere near the rebounder that Chamberlain was, though.)

The real question would have been...would he have had the stamina to play 43-44 mpg, and also the ability to play with nagging injuries.

[STATUTORY]

the only thing I question would be his ability to stay on the floor and out of jail, white boys didnt' take too kindly to big surly n99as with attitudes like shaq back in the day

shaq aint bout that shucking and jiving life, he wouldn't have put up with no back of the bus nonsense

[Bless Mathews]

the only thing I question would be his ability to stay on the floor and out of jail, white boys didnt' take too kindly to big surly n99as with attitudes like shaq back in the day

shaq aint bout that shucking and jiving life, he wouldn't have put up with no back of the bus nonsense

Poast of the month nominee.


Fuccin gold.


:applause:

[stanlove1111]

I'm really thinking O'Neal would have to drastically alter his playing style. I cannot imagine his lowering of the shoulder and bulldozing being fully acceptable. He'd be fine enough without that stuff, but I don't think it'd be as simple as letting him loose to play exactly as he did in the current era, where he spent a lot of time displacing defenders through shear force. I trust he'd have to rely upon a little more finesse, which he had.


It would go both ways. In the 2000s defenders would muscle Shaq like nobody ever has been. If anyone tried that in the 60s it would be a foul everytime..

In the 60s you couldn/t play anyone tough, every tick tack fouled was called..

[LAZERUSS]

It would go both ways. In the 2000s defenders would muscle Shaq like nobody ever has been. If anyone tried that in the 60s it would be a foul everytime..

In the 60s you couldn/t play anyone tough, every tick tack fouled was called..

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8646980&postcount=20

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8647051&postcount=21

And I particularly liked this one...


Wilt’s coach and teammates encouraged Chamberlain to fight back, but unwisely the Big Dipper declined. A week after his first game against Bill Russell and the Celtics, Philadelphia played the St. Louis Hawks. The Hawks center, Clyde Lovellette, was one of the dirtiest players in the league, almost as tall as Wilt, and much thicker. At one point in the game, as Wilt and Clyde ran past each other, Clyde hit Wilt in the jaw with a vicious elbow that drove two of Wilt’s lower front teeth up and into the roof of his mouth. Wilt shook it off and continued playing.

Because Philadelphia was scheduled to travel immediately after the game, Wilt did not even have time to see a doctor. His whole face swelled, an infection set in, yet the following night Wilt played the entire game wearing a large mask on his face. He played the next night, as well, despite a swollen mouth and an aching head, and being unable to eat solid food.

In that third game in as many nights, Wilt again was hit in the mouth, and, was finally examined by a doctor. The infection in his mouth was so severe he had blood poisoning and was rushed to the hospital for emergency dental surgery. He lost four teeth and missed three games.

As soon as he returned, the rough play and hard fouling continued. Midway through the season, in a game against St. Louis, Wilt got so angry at Bob Pettit’s pushing and shoving that he elbowed Pettit in the face, knocking him out of the game. Unlike Bill’s knockout of Ray Felix, it wasn’t enough. It didn’t change the way Wilt was treated because, for every team but the Celtics, the only way to slow him down was to foul him

BTW, Chamberlain ended Lovelette's career in the '64 Finals with one punch.

[The Macho Man]

Damn

Dude just posted proving wilt was soft (and borderline retarded?) I thought he was a wilt fan...

[RoundMoundOfReb]

So were the 60s more physical or less? Which agenda do you want to push? You can't have it both ways.

[LAZERUSS]

So were the 60s more physical or less? Which agenda do you want to push? You can't have it both ways.

At least as physical, but offensive charging was routinely called for even budging the defender. And traveling (and palming) were also routinely called.

But as you read above...the NBA had a separate set of rules for officiating Chamberlain.

[LAZERUSS]

Damn

Dude just posted proving wilt was soft (and borderline retarded?) I thought he was a wilt fan...

You obviously didn't read my last line...


BTW, Chamberlain ended Lovelette's career in the '64 Finals with one punch.

[Mr Feeny]

At least as physical, but offensive charging was routinely called for even budging the defender. And traveling (and palming) were also routinely called.

But as you read above...the NBA had a separate set of rules for officiating Chamberlain.

Shaq would annahilate Wilt tbf

[La Frescobaldi]

So were the 60s more physical or less? Which agenda do you want to push? You can't have it both ways.
NBA had skills rules in those days. It was real physical but they enforced skills very strictly.
As far as numbers? He'd be doing 28 or 30/12 or 15/ & 3 or 4, same as he did in 2000. The pace would be real real hard on him. He'd put up better numbers in the mid 70s than he would in the 60s - slower game, much less transition, a more sedate half-court game like he'd be used to.

edit ~ out of all the greats, O'Neil would have the hardest time adjusting to other eras. His footwork will always be stunning, but no jump shot, can't bull over defenders, inability to sprint transition for very long... all weaknesses he can't overcome except in a very specific rule set.

[LAZERUSS]

Shaq would annahilate Wilt tbf

:roll: :roll: :roll:


Yeah right.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ_Dx2KWmnM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6WNmujoM3Y

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

[Mr Feeny]

NBA had skills rules in those days. It was real physical but they enforced skills very strictly.
As far as numbers? He'd be doing 28 or 30/12 or 15/ & 3 or 4, same as he did in 2000. The pace would be real real hard on him. He'd put up better numbers in the mid 70s than he would in the 60s - slower game, much less transition, a more sedate half-court game like he'd be used to.

Are you on drugs? These fanboys have officially gone mad. Do you even know what you're talking about?

Shaq would average the same numbers that he did in 140 possessions that he does in 100 possessions (and against smaller centres)??!!

Fml with this stupidity, you utter waste of space.

[Mr Feeny]

:roll: :roll: :roll:


Yeah right.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ_Dx2KWmnM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6WNmujoM3Y

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

Exactly right:cheers:

[LAZERUSS]

Are you on drugs? These fanboys have officially gone mad. Do you even know what you're talking about?

Shaq would average the same numbers that he did in 140 possessions that he does in 100 possessions (and against smaller centres)??!!

Fml with this stupidity, you utter waste of space.

NEVER happened in NBA history. Not even close.

[stanlove1111]

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8646980&postcount=20

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8647051&postcount=21

And I particularly liked this one...



BTW, Chamberlain ended Lovelette's career in the '64 Finals with one punch.


You act like there is no video of the games. I don't care how rough someone claimed it was at the time ( its all relative )..I have seen the films and its a fact that the 60s were very soft compared to when Shaq played..You basically couldn't touch someone without a foul being called in the 60s.

[La Frescobaldi]

Are you on drugs? These fanboys have officially gone mad. Do you even know what you're talking about?

Shaq would average the same numbers that he did in 140 possessions that he does in 100 possessions (and against smaller centres)??!!

Fml with this stupidity, you utter waste of space.

He would run out of gas real fast,bro. Simple fact he had far too much bulk to haul around. He'd be like a bulldog trying to keep up with greyhounds.

[Mr Feeny]

NEVER happened in NBA history. Not even close.

Really? So what was the pace when Wilt got 50 ppg?

[LAZERUSS]

Shaq would annahilate Wilt tbf

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

[Mr Feeny]

He would run out of gas real fast,bro. Simple fact he had far too much bulk to haul around. He'd be like a bulldog trying to keep up with greyhounds.

Very convincing argument:applause:

[LAZERUSS]

Really? So what was the pace when Wilt got 50 ppg?

126.

[Mr Feeny]

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

What are we watching?

[LAZERUSS]

You act like there is no video of the games. I don't care how rough someone claimed it was at the time ( its all relative )..I have seen the films and its a fact that the 60s were very soft compared to when Shaq played..You basically couldn't touch someone without a foul being called in the 60s.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6bi2y0m8Y4

[LAZERUSS]

What are we watching?

Shaq not budging a 6-8 230 lb. man.

[La Frescobaldi]

Very convincing argument:applause:
He'd be much better off in mid-70s

[Mr Feeny]

Shaq not budging a 6-8 230 lb. man.

All I see is Shaq overpowering him and Romania having to resort to grabbing and putting elbows to Shaqs back?:(

I'll tell you what though. This 6-8 man would turn Wilt into a s##sy:cheers:

[RoundMoundOfReb]

LOL at people saying he'd run out of gas. This is the 60s we're talking about. He would barely break a sweat. And since when did prime Shaq have stamina issues. This was a 300+ lb man 79 games at 40.0 mpg and then 23 more in the playoffs at 43.5 mpg...and he only seemed to get stronger as the finals came around.

[AirFederer]

Wilt + 20%, if given green light.

Lower than Wilt (scoring) if he wanted to win.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Dennis Rodman in 60s would win like 10 championships...oh wait the dennis rodman of the 60s DID win like 10 championships

[Marchesk]

Dennis Rodman in 60s would win like 10 championships...oh wait the dennis rodman of the 60s DID win like 10 championships

Comparing Russell to Rodman is an insult. Not that Rodman wasn't a great rebounder and defender, but Russell was a lot more than that.

[iznogood]

I think Shaq would have to adapt his game a bit because he would get whistled for lowering his shoulders, but I do think it would be far easier for him to get the position close to the basket in the 60s as it was in the late 90s, se he wouldn't necessarily have to lower his shoulder that much to get to the basket. He could get to his sweet spots much easier. Shaq was amazing at establishing the position, he had very quick feet and low center of gravity. It's hard to deny a position to a player like that even if you are allowed to body him up and if you're not, than just hope he has a bad shooting night. Also Shaq had a decent set of reliable finishes and he was a terrific passer from the double team.

I think this is one of the reasons big men dominated so hard statistically in that era, especially for those, who were not very physical. It's very hard to guard a taller player 1:1 if you're not allowed to make body contact.

[La Frescobaldi]

LOL at people saying he'd run out of gas. This is the 60s we're talking about. He would barely break a sweat. And since when did prime Shaq have stamina issues. This was a 300+ lb man 79 games at 40.0 mpg and then 23 more in the playoffs at 43.5 mpg...and he only seemed to get stronger as the finals came around.
lol at people who weren't even alive in the 80s yet think they know anything at all about hoops 25 years before that let alone how non-stop they ran.

[Psileas]

I love how some ignored my question. Here we go again:

What would 2000 Shaq average in 1985, against a young Hakeem, old Kareem, Moses, etc? Now, what would these guys average in the 60's, against centers who may, you know, actually have faced them?

If people really think Shaq would be displaying better than Wilt dominance, why didn't he usually display it when facing vastly worse competition in the 2000's?

-Shaq would be "averaging 60 ppg", yet, he almost never scored even 50 in an actual game, regardless of the garbage he was often facing. He couldn't even average 30 ppg in the worst era for centers of all time.
-Shaq would be "grabbing 30 rpg", yet, he never did the equivalent of it in his era and led the league in rebounding 0 times.
-Shaq would be "dominating defensively", yet, he's barely made any all-D teams in the slowest pace era ever - aka, the pace in which his defense should be at its most effective.
-Shaq would have no stamina issues, yet, he could never even hit 35 mpg after the age of 31, 23 ppg after the age of 30 and 18 ppg after the age of 33 (while Wilt was actually leading the league in scoring at the same age before getting injured - not saying he would necessarily have done so, but Shaq had only like 1 short stretch of games after the age of 33 when he displayed any similar scoring dominance).
-Shaq would win "10 rings", yet, he has repeatedly been called out for indifference, laziness and being overweight - the polar opposite of what was the case with the only superstar who has ever won 10+ rings.

[Rake2204]

I think Shaq would have to adapt his game a bit because he would get whistled for lowering his shoulders, but I do think it would be far easier for him to get the position close to the basket in the 60s as it was in the late 90s, se he wouldn't necessarily have to lower his shoulder that much to get to the basket. He could get to his sweet spots much easier. Shaq was amazing at establishing the position, he had very quick feet and low center of gravity. It's hard to deny a position to a player like that even if you are allowed to body him up and if you're not, than just hope he has a bad shooting night. Also Shaq had a decent set of reliable finishes and he was a terrific passer from the double team.

I think this is one of the reasons big men dominated so hard statistically in that era, especially for those, who were not very physical. It's very hard to guard a taller player 1:1 if you're not allowed to make body contact.I think that's a good take too. I was thinking about that last night as well. I think a lot of Shaq's live-dribble steamrolling would have to be chilled out. But on the flip side, I can picture him possibly establishing position well before he receives the ball.

The stamina angle is an interesting one to consider. O'Neal seemed to take a big hit in that regard by the time he hit 30. It looked like he could have dropped 60 on the Pistons in the '04 Finals but Detroit seemed to bank on him wearing down quickly - and he did.

[SugarHill]

I love how some ignored my question. Here we go again:

What would 2000 Shaq average in 1985, against a young Hakeem, old Kareem, Moses, etc? Now, what would these guys average in the 60's, against centers who may, you know, actually have faced them?

If people really think Shaq would be displaying better than Wilt dominance, why didn't he usually display it when facing vastly worse competition in the 2000's?

-Shaq would be "averaging 60 ppg", yet, he almost never scored even 50 in an actual game, regardless of the garbage he was often facing. He couldn't even average 30 ppg in the worst era for centers of all time.
-Shaq would be "grabbing 30 rpg", yet, he never did the equivalent of it in his era and led the league in rebounding 0 times.
-Shaq would be "dominating defensively", yet, he's barely made any all-D teams in the slowest pace era ever - aka, the pace in which his defense should be at its most effective.
-Shaq would have no stamina issues, yet, he could never even hit 35 mpg after the age of 31, 23 ppg after the age of 30 and 18 ppg after the age of 33 (while Wilt was actually leading the league in scoring at the same age before getting injured - not saying he would necessarily have done so, but Shaq had only like 1 short stretch of games after the age of 33 when he displayed any similar scoring dominance).
-Shaq would win "10 rings", yet, he has repeatedly been called out for indifference, laziness and being overweight - the polar opposite of what was the case with the only superstar who has ever won 10+ rings.

So on one hand, you're penalizing his lack of dominating defense in light of the slow pace but at the same time wondering why his stats aren't like the 60s? :lol

[Psileas]

So on one hand, you're penalizing his lack of dominating defense in light of the slow pace but at the same time wondering why his stats aren't like the 60s? :lol

No, reading comprehension: I'm wondering why his dominance isn't as high as people purport it would be. Notice, e.g, that I'm not talking about 30 rpg, but its equivalent, which Shaq was never able to sniff in real life, even in the weakest of eras for center competition.

[ImKobe]

16 points/10 rebounds/2 blocks

[Genaro]

What are we talking about here? Are we talking about putting Shaq in a time machine when he was younger and travel him back to the 60s or we're talking about Shaq born circa 1940, raising without all the physical advantages of the future and then decided to play basketball?

[Psileas]

What are we talking about here? Are we talking about putting Shaq in a time machine when he was younger and travel him back to the 60s or we're talking about Shaq born circa 1940, raising without all the physical advantages of the future and then decided to play basketball?

Didn't you know players in the ISH universe only time travel...? Too bad this trick can only be done by NBA players, though, because I'm sure I would be much more influential than any of the great ancient thinkers if I time traveled in their "weak era".

[CelticBaller]

16 points/10 rebounds/2 blocks
Per quarter :applause:

[aj1987]

All I see is Shaq overpowering him and Romania having to resort to grabbing and putting elbows to Shaqs back?:(

I'll tell you what though. This 6-8 man would turn Wilt into a s##sy:cheers:
Nah, you just this logo to turn him into Casper.

http://i.imgur.com/M5dqX5u.jpg


Shaq would murder Wilt, BTW.

40/25/5/10 on over 70%.

[Mr Feeny]

Nah, you just this logo to turn him into Casper.

http://i.imgur.com/M5dqX5u.jpg


Shaq would murder Wilt, BTW.

40/25/5/10 on over 70%.

:eek: :eek:

[colts19]

I think with the lifestyle back then and lack of trainers and emphasis on diet. He would have ate his way out of the league in 5 years.

[SugarHill]

No, reading comprehension: I'm wondering why his dominance isn't as high as people purport it would be. Notice, e.g, that I'm not talking about 30 rpg, but its equivalent, which Shaq was never able to sniff in real life, even in the weakest of eras for center competition.

Their entire point is that the 60s are in fact the weakest :oldlol:

[CelticBaller]

can any one name centers from 60s? post pics 2

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Let's just adjust Shaq's 2000 stats for Wilt's 50 PPG season's pace:

Shaq: 41.7 PPG/19.1 RPG

Now let's adjust for MPG:

Shaq: 50.6 PPG/ 23.2 RPG

Now for weak era:

Shaq: 78.7 PPG/ 35.3 RPG

[CelticBaller]

Let's just adjust Shaq's 2000 stat's for Wilt's 50 PPG season's pace:

Shaq: 41.7 PPG/19.1 RPG

Now let's adjust for MPG:

Shaq: 50.6 PPG/ 23.2 RPG

Now for weak era:

Shaq: 78.7 PPG/ 35.3 RPG
Now adjust wilt's stats to current era...
























































http://www.gannett-cdn.com/media/SMG/sports_headshots/nba/player/2013/LAC/ryan-hollins.jpg

[KobesFinger]

If you want to put a 2000s player in the 60s, move the decimal point in their stat one place to the right and divide by 5. For field goal percentage, divide their 3pt% by 3 and add it to their FG%. If they don't shoot 3s, divide their FG% by 10 and add it.

29.7/13.6/3.8/0.5/3.0 on .574 and .524 becomes

59.4/27.2/7.6/ on .631 and .524.

[Psileas]

Their entire point is that the 60s are in fact the weakest :oldlol:

So? I saw absolutely no point made, including the posters whose posts I care to read. Their "arguments", whenever they even exist, usually belong to the "slow, unathletic Bird would be destroyed if he played today" category. No ounce of insight to make me care to comment on each one.

[AlphaWolf24]

funny that we talk about the 50's - 60's - 70's....as subpar

but not the 80's and 90's??

[iznogood]

The stamina angle is an interesting one to consider. O'Neal seemed to take a big hit in that regard by the time he hit 30. It looked like he could have dropped 60 on the Pistons in the '04 Finals but Detroit seemed to bank on him wearing down quickly - and he did.
I think Shaq would be forced to lose a lot of weight or just not gain that much if he played in the 60s. It just wouldn't make sense, the players were not allowed to use their strength like they are today. That being said, Shaq was lazy and overweight for a big part of his career.

On the other hand, I do believe that it's more physically demanding to bang and battle for the position as it is to play an uptempo running game. Myself, I've never had a problem when there was a lot of running in a basketball game and not much contact. What really wore me down was boxing out, posting up and fighting through screens. So I don't think running would really be an issue for Shaq when there's far less contact he would need to battle through.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

funny that we talk about the 50's - 60's - 70's....as subpar

but not the 80's and 90's??
Eye test
3 point line

[Psileas]

I think Shaq would be forced to lose a lot of weight or just not gain that much if he played in the 60s. It just wouldn't make sense, the players were not allowed to use their strength like they are today. That being said, Shaq was lazy and overweight for a big part of his career.

On the other hand, I do believe that it's more physically demanding to bang and battle for the position as it is to play an uptempo running game. Myself, I've never had a problem when there was a lot of running in a basketball game and not much contact. What really wore me down was boxing out, posting up and fighting through screens. So I don't think running would really be an issue for Shaq when there's far less contact he would need to battle through.

People weren't fools and the rules were always trying to contain bigs. So, if Shaq could really be such a game changer, the refs would be very willing to accept very physical defensive plays against him and coaches would know this and force their players to play this way against him. There's no way he'd just leave the league in ruins without the opponent and the league itself putting up a fight. This was the case with Wilt himself, after all.

[Akhenaten]

Now adjust wilt's stats to current era...
























































http://www.gannett-cdn.com/media/SMG/sports_headshots/nba/player/2013/LAC/ryan-hollins.jpg

http://www.gifbin.com/bin/032012/1332783608_sarkozy_laugh.gif

[G0ATbe]

He'd be an above average center at best but not even close to Wilt level. As overrated as Wilt was, Shaq is even more overrated.

[iznogood]

People weren't fools and the rules were always trying to contain bigs. So, if Shaq could really be such a game changer, the refs would be very willing to accept very physical defensive plays against him and coaches would know this and force their players to play this way against him. There's no way he'd just leave the league in ruins without the opponent and the league itself putting up a fight. This was the case with Wilt himself, after all.
I don't understand what you are trying to say.

[Psileas]

I don't understand what you are trying to say.

My point is, he would tire more than what he would by just running up and down the court in a typical high pace, no-touches type of game.

[iznogood]

My point is, he would tire more than what he would by just running up and down the court in a typical high pace, no-touches type of game.
I'm afraid I'll have to disagree on that. I believe dealing with greater amount of physical contact is much harder on your body and conditioning. Not to mention longer defensive sequences are much more physically demanding. Also building strength takes years, but getting in decent running shape is a matter of weeks - unless you're overweight (which Shaq was, but as I said, he'd never play as heavy in the 60s as he did in the 90s since it would be ineffective). If players could smoke during half time and still play in that kind of pace, I'm pretty sure Shaq could as well.

Also I believe the intensity in a slower paced game is actually higher since there's less possessions and you simply can't afford to take possessions off (not saying some players don't). Just look at some of the games from the old days, there's tons of 2:1 and 3:1 situations where the transition defense simply does not happen because players feel they are too far behind when when the breakaway starts and they opt to wait for a next offensive possessions instead of hustle back. I'm not saying this is something that is not happening today, but I feel there was much more of it in the early basketball.

[OnFire]

Whatever Shaq would do Prime Hakeem would do double.

[Psileas]

I'm afraid I'll have to disagree on that. I believe dealing with greater amount of physical contact is much harder on your body and conditioning. Not to mention longer defensive sequences are much more physically demanding. Also building strength takes years, but getting in decent running shape is a matter of weeks - unless you're overweight (which Shaq was, but as I said, he'd never play as heavy in the 60s as he did in the 90s since it would be ineffective). If players could smoke during half time and still play in that kind of pace, I'm pretty sure Shaq could as well.

Also I believe the intensity in a slower paced game is actually higher since there's less possessions and you simply can't afford to take possessions off (not saying some players don't). Just look at some of the games from the old days, there's tons of 2:1 and 3:1 situations where the transition defense simply does not happen because players feel they are too far behind when when the breakaway starts and they opt to wait for a next offensive possessions instead of hustle back. I'm not saying this is something that is not happening today, but I feel there was much more of it in the early basketball.

You probably misunderstood what I wrote - maybe I should have been clearer. What I meant is that, Shaq, assuming he'd be a player who affects the game like nobody else, would have to face a more physical game than the norm was. So, even in a fast tempo league, teams against Shaq would probably try to play slower and more physically, which would tire him more than just by running up and down the court.

[iznogood]

You probably misunderstood what I wrote - maybe I should have been clearer. What I meant is that, Shaq, assuming he'd be a player who affects the game like nobody else, would have to face a more physical game than the norm was. So, even in a fast tempo league, teams against Shaq would probably try to play slower and more physically, which would tire him more than just by running up and down the court.
This I will agree with, however I'm not really assuming Shaq with his body, skillset and athltic abilities would've affect the game like nobody else in the 60s. I also don't think neither Wilt or any of the other 60s HoF centers would dominate the league today the way they did back then or even more as sone claim. The game changed so much. All of these athletes would be great in any era for sure since I believe the talent level of athletes who dominate at some point is comparable. It just takes a different skill set/playing style.

When it comes to your question of wearing Shaq out, I believe this is not a question of style of play. It's a question of team's depth and whether you can afford to rest a player as long as he needs to play as intense as you want him to. Shaq's Lakers were deep enough for him to rest as much as he needed to so this was not too much of an issue.

[kurple]

oh its this thread again...


ISH is so weak. fvcking bald fvckers

[Soundwave]

If was completely focused on getting the best numbers? 55 ppg, 25 rpg for one season in the early 60s.

[HomieWeMajor]

Shaq would make Wilt quit the NBA and play volleyball full time like he intended to in 1966.

[HomieWeMajor]

Also Shaq wouldn't have to play 40 + minutes per night to pad his stats because his dominance would result in the game being over in the second quarter.

[julizaver]

Title.

In his career year Shaq was behind Mutombo and Mourning in rebounding and shot-blocking. But he scored with great efficiency and was scoring champion - so I sugest something like 35-37 ppg and 18-19 rebounds. But against '66-67 Wilt he would be like 25-27 ppg on 45 % at best. And when someone claim that the '60 and '70s were weaker eras should consider also that modern athletes had far better equipment, medicine and conditions than athletes from the past. Not to mention the schedule. And not that I am saying the game did not evolve or athletes from the past are better. Just elite athletes and players like Wilt could excel in any era of basketball.

[jzek]

25
15
5


...at halftime