ESPN's Top 10 C's of All-Time

[aj1987]

1. KAJ
2. Wilt
3. Russell
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem
6. Moses
7. D-Rob
8. Ewing
9. Mikan
10. Walton

I personally would swap Shaq and Wilt.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

KAJ
Shaq
Hakeem
Russell
Robinson
Wilt
Ewing
Moses
Gilmore
Walton

Peakwise, Walton would be much higher but his career was too short

[FKAri]

A pretty good list actually. ESPN's other lists were a complete mess.

[Gileraracer]

1. KAJ
2. Hakeem
3. Shaq
4. Russell
5. Wilt
6. Moses
7. D-Rob
8. Ewing
9. Mikan
10. Walton

[ArbitraryWater]

Can't say I vehemently disagree with one thing on that list, of course the Mikan and Walton picks always seem a bit random, since they're kind of hard to rank.

They made some really good lists.

[feyki]

Eh , not bad .

Mikan always gets underrated cause people judge players with their tv display quality and skin . I'm not surprised .

Willis Reed should be on the list .

Hakeem also gets underrated cause his team were pathetic in half of his prime . He's clearly better than Shaq to me .

Bill Russell is/was best player of the game history for me . So , i think he's best center .

Rest of the list are good .

[Smoke117]

If Walton had been able to stay healthy I think he would have ended up top 10 all time.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Artis Gilmore is underrated

[ClipperRevival]

1. KAJ
2. Wilt
3. Russell
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem
6. Moses
7. D-Rob
8. Ewing
9. Mikan
10. Walton

I personally would swap Shaq and Wilt.

The late 80's and early 90's was truly a special time for GOAT level C. Not only did you have the four guys on the list, but also Mourning, Dikembe, Parish, Vlade and Daugherty along with a few others I can't recall right now.

[feyki]

If Walton had been able to stay healthy I think he would have ended up top 10 all time.

++++

Absolutely . He did battle with prime Kareem individually . He would better than Moses if he stayed healthy .

[FKAri]

The late 80's and early 90's was truly a special time for GOAT level C. Not only did you have the four guys on the list, but also Mourning, Dikembe, Parish, Vlade and Daugherty along with a few others I can't recall right now.

Marc Gasol > Vlade

[Dr Hawk]

My list:

1. Kareem
2. Shaq
3. Wilt
4. Olajuwon
5. Moses
6. Robinson
7. Ewing
8. Russell
9. Gilmore
10. Walton

[ClipperRevival]

Artis Gilmore is underrated

Yes he was. 8 year stretch from 1972 - 1979:

22.1 PPG, 15.5 RPG, 3.0 BPG, 56% FG, 23.2 PER

Yeah, five of those years were in the ABA but still nice numbers.

[JimmyMcAdocious]

What's the basis for Walton? You can't go peak for one guy and then career for the others. Or is it all peak?

Interestingly they did this 9 years ago and had Walton above DRob.

Such a stacked position, too. Lanier? Cowens? Reed? McAdoo?

[ClipperRevival]

Marc Gasol > Vlade

Vlade gets seriously underrated. The Vlade people saw with the Kings was the aging version. The guy was one of the better passing big men ever, very fluid athlete for a C, solid outside jumper, could run the floor and had a very good post up game.

[LAZERUSS]

1. KAJ
2. Wilt
3. Russell
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem
6. Moses
7. D-Rob
8. Ewing
9. Mikan
10. Walton

I personally would swap Shaq and Wilt.

I personally would swap KAJ and Wilt.
Also Hakeem and Moses.
Finally, Duncan probably deserves a spot on this list, as well, and around the Moses-Hakeem level.

[feyki]

What's the basis for Walton? You can't go peak for one guy and then career for the others. Or is it all peak?

Interestingly they did this 9 years ago and had Walton above DRob.

Such a stacked position, too. Lanier? Cowens? Reed? McAdoo?

Yes , clearly best position in nba legends .

Here's my list ;

Bill
Kareem
Wilt
Mikan
Hakeem
Shaq
Moses
Admiral
Ewing
Reed

[ClipperRevival]

I would also put Duncan on this list. Heck, i would put him 6th behind the 5 Goliaths of this position.

[pastis]

top3 imo:

1. KAJ
2. Shaq
3. Hakeem

[Odinn]

I was hoping to see McAdoo making top 10 in the Cs list.
I'd put Russell to 2nd place, Shaq to 3rd and Wilt to 4th. But the list's not bad.

But TBH, ESPN didn't need to put much effort on these list besides PG list. (which was a hype attempt for Steph) These rankings are soo many times discussed and there are well-established tiers, if not certain ranks.

I'd like to see them ranking top 15, or even 20, rather than just 10. 10 is simple. After that 10, things getting hazy and complicated.

[ClipperRevival]

Where would you guys rank Howard? I think he gets pretty underrated. His best 6 year run (2008 - 2013) is on par with the 2nd tier centers.

20.0 PPG, 13.7 RPG, 2.5 BPG, 59% FG, 23.7 PER

Not to mention, 3 DPOY, 5 rebounding titles, 5 All-NBA 1st team and 4 All-NBA Defensive 1st team during this time.

Also, he put up the following playoff numbers when his team made the finals in 2009:

20.3 PPG, 15.3 RPG, 2.6 BPG, 60% FG, 25.5 PER

[WayOfWade]

I have Russel at #1 for being so dominant in his era. I understand people putting Wilt and KAJ ahead of him, but Russel was the greatest winner the game has seen. Yeah he played in a smaller, watered down league but he dominated Wilt, the MDE, and won even when he and his team was old and his coach was gone. Judging from the list though, I'd say a good 5-6 of the top 10 all-time are centers, shame we don't get to see more of that nowadays

[LAZERUSS]

I have Russel at #1 for being so dominant in his era. I understand people putting Wilt and KAJ ahead of him, but Russel was the greatest winner the game has seen. Yeah he played in a smaller, watered down league but he dominated Wilt, the MDE, and won even when he and his team was old and his coach was gone. Judging from the list though, I'd say a good 5-6 of the top 10 all-time are centers, shame we don't get to see more of that nowadays

What is your definition of "dominated?"
If in TEAM WINNING...then do you have Marvin Webster over KAJ?
Oliver Miller over Hakeem?
Greg Ostertag over Shaq?

[pastis]

I have Russel at #1 for being so dominant in his era. I understand people putting Wilt and KAJ ahead of him, but Russel was the greatest winner the game has seen. Yeah he played in a smaller, watered down league but he dominated Wilt, the MDE, and won even when he and his team was old and his coach was gone. Judging from the list though, I'd say a good 5-6 of the top 10 all-time are centers, shame we don't get to see more of that nowadays

while i respect your point of view, im not with you. like you said, bill dominated in a very weak league and had some HOF around him. What would Howard did if you swap him with Bill?

Its a commong thing to "never touch the legends". Like in football. I mean, Zidane, Messi, Ronaldo etc. pp. (i could enumerate like 30 guys) are 3-5 times the player Pele ever was. But still Pele remains on top or at least top 3.

[scm5]

top3 imo:

1. KAJ
2. Shaq
3. Hakeem

Hell yes. Wilt and Russell are great, but taking eras into consideration, these three are just flat out better.

[aj1987]

What is your definition of "dominated?"
If in TEAM WINNING...then do you have Marvin Webster over KAJ?
Oliver Miller over Hakeem?
Greg Ostertag over Shaq?
What the **** are you babbling about, troll? None of those guys won as many as the others and they weren't the best players on their teams. Russell was the best player during most of the championships.

[WayOfWade]

What is your definition of "dominated?"
Dominated as in whenever the 2 faced off in the playoffs, Russell almost always left with the W. I believe the only year Chamberlain actually beat Russell was 1967 when he actually played like a team player. Put simply, Wilt almost could never defeat Russell, in spite of the fact that Wilt was an incredible player/physical specimen, even in 1969 when Russell was old and his team was on its last legs.


while i respect your point of view, im not with you. like you said, bill dominated in a very weak league and had some HOF around him. What would Howard did if you swap him with Bill?

Its a commong thing to "never touch the legends". Like in football. I mean, Zidane, Messi, Ronaldo etc. pp. (i could enumerate like 30 guys) are 3-5 times the player Pele ever was. But still Pele remains on top or at least top 3.
I can understand your disagreeing, looking at it objectively, I'm just a 20-year old who is fascinated by the "11 rings." When I first got into the NBA, I was just in awe of how Russell was able to do that. And as for your question, I bet if modern-day Dwight suddenly was transported into the 60's, I bet you we'd probably have another Wilt Chamberlain on our hands. That, or he'd completely dominated. However I don't judge people for dominating in their respective eras, it's not their fault for being born when they were.

[senelcoolidge]

If Wilt is not #1 or #2 at least than your list is not legitimate. But it's a person's opinion. Someone can think Brook Lopez is #1 all time, but if you're talking seriously than Wilt is #1.

[WayOfWade]

What is your definition of "dominated?"
If in TEAM WINNING...then do you have Marvin Webster over KAJ?
Oliver Miller over Hakeem?
Greg Ostertag over Shaq?
Try to think objectively, this isn't some "Horry > Kobe" crap, this is Bill Russel, a man who won more MVP's than Wilt Chamberlain himself and was the best player on most of his title teams as well as beat Wilt multiple times in the playoffs and also on basketball's biggest stage. That's the main reason why I cannot rank Wilt higher than Russell (my rankings aren't perfect), but Wilt SHOULD HAVE won much more than he did. In my eyes he was beat by a player that should've been inferior. And don't go around doing dumb head2head comparisons, these both are top 5 players all-time on most lists, so these comparisons are much more suited for just this thread.

[WayOfWade]

If Wilt is not #1 or #2 at least than your list is not legitimate. But it's a person's opinion. Someone can think Brook Lopez is #1 all time, but if you're talking seriously than Wilt is #1.
Not saying this is my opinion, but if I have Russel at #1 and KAJ at #2, then my list isn't legitimate? For me those three are pretty interchangeable

[scm5]

If Wilt is not #1 or #2 at least than your list is not legitimate. But it's a person's opinion. Someone can think Brook Lopez is #1 all time, but if you're talking seriously than Wilt is #1.

Beasley just put up Wilt level numbers in a weak ass league. Tell me Wilt's numbers aren't inflated af.

[TripleA]

Where would you guys rank Howard? I think he gets pretty underrated. His best 6 year run (2008 - 2013) is on par with the 2nd tier centers.

20.0 PPG, 13.7 RPG, 2.5 BPG, 59% FG, 23.7 PER

Not to mention, 3 DPOY, 5 rebounding titles, 5 All-NBA 1st team and 4 All-NBA Defensive 1st team during this time.

Also, he put up the following playoff numbers when his team made the finals in 2009:

20.3 PPG, 15.3 RPG, 2.6 BPG, 60% FG, 25.5 PER


Probably top 15 around Alonzo Mourning or little higher or lower. The center position is by far the most stacked if you look at overall nba history.

[Dr Hawk]

Try to think objectively, this isn't some "Horry > Kobe" crap, this is Bill Russel, a man who won more MVP's than Wilt Chamberlain himself and was the best player on most of his title teams as well as beat Wilt multiple times in the playoffs and also on basketball's biggest stage. That's the main reason why I cannot rank Wilt higher than Russell (my rankings aren't perfect), but Wilt SHOULD HAVE won much more than he did. In my eyes he was beat by a player that should've been inferior. And don't go around doing dumb head2head comparisons, these both are top 5 players all-time on most lists, so these comparisons are much more suited for just this thread.

You call "dumb" the head2head comparisons, but consider ok to compare team success, which highly depends on teammates


beat Wilt multiple times in the playoffs and also on basketball's biggest stage.

You are doing a comparison here like if it was head2head but with the teams instead.

[feyki]

11 to 20 center in my mind ;

Cowens
Wes
Howard
Lanier
Thurmond
Artis
Mcadoo
Alonzo
Ben
Mutombo

[Helix]

I can understand your disagreeing, looking at it objectively, I'm just a 20-year old who is fascinated by the "11 rings." When I first got into the NBA, I was just in awe of how Russell was able to do that.


Sometime go look and read up on Red Auerbach and you'll find out how "Russell" was able to do that.

[SexSymbol]

1. Russell
2. Kareem
3. Shaq
4. Hakeem
5. Mikan
6. Wilt
7. Moses
8. D-Rob
9. Reed
10. Walton

[G-train]

11 to 20 center in my mind ;

Cowens
Wes
Howard
Lanier
Thurmond
Artis
Mcadoo
Alonzo
Ben
Mutombo

Howard is joke and a pu$sy that couldn't carry Zo's jockstrap into the arena. I don't really care about a couple of elite statistical seasons when he had no competition at the centre position.
Mourning is a significantly better player in my eyes.
Who would you rather behind you at the 5 going into battle?

[Marchesk]

McAdoo over 17 seasons put up 22.1/9.4/2.3/1.0/1.5 on 50.3%

[JohnFreeman]

No Cousins?

What a joke

[feyki]

Howard is joke and a pu$sy that couldn't carry Zo's jockstrap into the arena. I don't really care about a couple of elite statistical seasons when he had no competition at the centre position.
Mourning is a significantly better player in my eyes.
Who would you rather behind you at the 5 going into battle?

I would choose Dwight . Better defender and better rebounder . Both are Bill Russell level offensive player without playmaking .

He wasn't faced great competition for his position . But put Alonzo on 08-12 Magic , They would worse with Alonzo , that's clear in my mind .

[LAZERUSS]

What the **** are you babbling about, troll? None of those guys won as many as the others and they weren't the best players on their teams. Russell was the best player during most of the championships.

So, Shaq, leading his 61-21 Lakers to a sweeping loss against Ostertag's 62-20 Jazz...is more impressive than Chamberlain just shelling Russell, in a series in which Wilt's 40-40 Sixers lost a game seven to Russell's 62-18 Celtics by one point.

Makes perfect sense.

[LAZERUSS]

Try to think objectively, this isn't some "Horry > Kobe" crap, this is Bill Russel, a man who won more MVP's than Wilt Chamberlain himself and was the best player on most of his title teams as well as beat Wilt multiple times in the playoffs and also on basketball's biggest stage. That's the main reason why I cannot rank Wilt higher than Russell (my rankings aren't perfect), but Wilt SHOULD HAVE won much more than he did. In my eyes he was beat by a player that should've been inferior. And don't go around doing dumb head2head comparisons, these both are top 5 players all-time on most lists, so these comparisons are much more suited for just this thread.

Russell won the same amount of MVPs while the two were in the league, and clearly Wilt was robbed in '62.

BUT, it gets even better. In their ten years in the league together, Chamberlain held a 7-2 margin over Russell in First Team All-NBA selections.

As for WILT should have won more against Russell (whom even you consider should have been inferior), care to give us all those examples? And even if I were to give you '69, which I won't, Chamberlain outplayed Russell in that series, and was easily the better player in game seven.

But, go ahead and give us the other examples...

[Genaro]

Russell's placed too high. Yeah, he had the most team success but he was in a perfect situation. Playing along great players, with a great coach in a small league. One of the greatest defenders in the history but not greater than KAJ, Wilt, Shaq or Hakeem.
Wilt played in the same league (and I think we could argue that his numbers were inflated because of it) but I see him as a transcendent player. He would be a superstar/best player on the league in any era (although with smaller numbers)

[bizil]

Pretty good list by ESPN. My only qualm is the inclusion of Walton. Peak wise, he FOR SURE is a top ten center. But GOAT wise, I can't have him in my top ten. U have McAdoo (who was deserving at PF or C) with 18,787 career points, two rings, ROY, MVP, and three scoring titles. PLUS he revolutionized the PF and C positions withi his scoring skillset. GOAT wise, I gotta have Big Mac over Walton. U also have guys like Reed, Cowens, Thurmond, and Gilmore who I would take GOAT wise over Walton.

[sportjames23]

1. KAJ
2. Wilt
3. Russell
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem
6. Moses
7. D-Rob
8. Ewing
9. Mikan
10. Walton

I personally would swap Shaq and Wilt.


Good list by ESPN. Nice to see Ewing get recognized.

[WayOfWade]

Russell won the same amount of MVPs while the two were in the league, and clearly Wilt was robbed in '62.

BUT, it gets even better. In their ten years in the league together, Chamberlain held a 7-2 margin over Russell in First Team All-NBA selections.

As for WILT should have won more against Russell (whom even you consider should have been inferior), care to give us all those examples? And even if I were to give you '69, which I won't, Chamberlain outplayed Russell in that series, and was easily the better player in game seven.

But, go ahead and give us the other examples...
Nice post, and just FYI in case I made it seem like it was clearly Russell, I hope I didn't make it seem that way, it's pretty close.
As for your post, from everything I've read about Wilt (50 ppg, 100 pts, killing a lion, etc...) my natural logic would think that he should have won much more. However looking back, the celtics had a much better team due to Red Auerbach and the league rules regarding trades, drafting, and free agency back then. Is it Wilt's fault for not being drafted to the better team? No, but that's just how the league is, some players are put into better situations than others, and it hampers their all-time rankings. Take KG for example, the dude played out of his mind, MVP/DPOY caliber player, yet he wasted almost all of his prime on a franchise that never allowed him to get to the finals. Does that hurt his ranking? Sadly (for me) it does, that's just how the dice fall.
As for 1969, while Russell didn't outplay Wilt that series, I still don't like how Wilt and co. were unable to get it done despite having home court and being the heavy favorites coming in. TBH, I'm really not well versed on the stats and all that stuff of the day, I'm just trying to do is justify my opinion (which you guys are making extremely hard to do!)

[LAZERUSS]

Nice post, and just FYI in case I made it seem like it was clearly Russell, I hope I didn't make it seem that way, it's pretty close.
As for your post, from everything I've read about Wilt (50 ppg, 100 pts, killing a lion, etc...) my natural logic would think that he should have won much more. However looking back, the celtics had a much better team due to Red Auerbach and the league rules regarding trades, drafting, and free agency back then. Is it Wilt's fault for not being drafted to the better team? No, but that's just how the league is, some players are put into better situations than others, and it hampers their all-time rankings. Take KG for example, the dude played out of his mind, MVP/DPOY caliber player, yet he wasted almost all of his prime on a franchise that never allowed him to get to the finals. Does that hurt his ranking? Sadly (for me) it does, that's just how the dice fall.
As for 1969, while Russell didn't outplay Wilt that series, I still don't like how Wilt and co. were unable to get it done despite having home court and being the heavy favorites coming in. TBH, I'm really not well versed on the stats and all that stuff of the day, I'm just trying to do is justify my opinion (which you guys are making extremely hard to do!)

Sorry for terse response. I am used to dealing with the same anti-Wilt clan here, and my assumption was that you were one of them.

BTW, I have used KG as a great example of a player who was victimized by poor teammates thru his prime. When he was finally given a good supporting cast...well, a 66-16 record, and a dominating title.

As for the Russell-Wilt debates...yes, the two are very close. I personally have Wilt at #1, and Russell at #5, but all five of my Top-5 have cases for GOAT. So, your opinion is justified.


Here are a couple of links, though, if you are interested, which may shed a little more light on their rivalry.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1I9jddU8eNWrI8MMOPs_0l58WnjFNADvF4iIcu0Sfz7A/edit?pli=1#gid=0

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=348991

[sd3035]

If Ilt is on the list, one could easily make a case for JaVale Mcgee

[houston]

lolol @ bill walton

[WayOfWade]

Sorry for terse response. I am used to dealing with the same anti-Wilt clan here, and my assumption was that you were one of them.

BTW, I have used KG as a great example of a player who was victimized by poor teammates thru his prime. When he was finally given a good supporting cast...well, a 66-16 record, and a dominating title.

As for the Russell-Wilt debates...yes, the two are very close. I personally have Wilt at #1, and Russell at #5, but all five of my Top-5 have cases for GOAT. So, your opinion is justified.


Here are a couple of links, though, if you are interested, which may shed a little more light on their rivalry.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1I9jddU8eNWrI8MMOPs_0l58WnjFNADvF4iIcu0Sfz7A/edit?pli=1#gid=0

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=348991
Thanks for the links dude, I'll check them out! :cheers: Bear in mind I was born over 20 years after Wilt retired so my opinion might not be all that accurate.
I have no problem with people saying Wilt was better though, I just hate when they aren't open minded to the idea that Russel could've been better. You however seem pretty objective about everything, thanks for responding.

[ClipperRevival]

Wilt peaked higher than anyone in history if we are going strictly by the numbers. But the claim that he's the GOAT holds little weight when you consider 1968 and 1969 and the teams he had, what was expected and what happened. 1967 was Wilt's best overall season and in 1968, Wilt wasn't THAT far off from his 1967 play. He was in the midst of 3 straight MVP seasons.

Is he top 5? Yes. But GOAT? Hell no. Not after his 1968 and 1969 seasons. You can't supposedly be the best in the world, an unstoppable force and shrink when the team needs you most and give excuses why you lost. You play to win. Anything else is secondary. Those two playoff failures HAVE TO downgrade him from GOAT. Now, if we are talking best PEAK? You can obviously argue him. It's like Bron in 2011. Everyone knew he choked and that has to count against him. It's not a matter of not having enough help. It was just a case him choking when he had the superior team. And Wilt clearly had the superior team in both 1968 and 1969. How can anyone NOT count that against him? He was up 3-1 and let his team choke it away in 1968. And his Lakers were supposed to destroy the old Celtics in 1969. And in both years, he let his team lose game 7s AT HOME! I am sorry but that ain't GOAT material. That's a bad look for any GOAT level player.

Now I await the same excuses from that guy. Right, his teammates didn't get him the ball in the 2nd half of game 7 in 1968. Or the injury excuses. Or the individual numbers angle. It's always an excuse. Why not just man up and admit the guy came up short when it mattered most, rank him properly in the top 5 and move on instead of forcing Wilt's numbers down our throats as if that's the end all, be all?

I tell you what matters. 11 rings in 13 seasons. 10-0 in game 7s while putting up 19 ppg and 29 rpg. Winning 7 of 8 playoff series against Wilt teams and 4-0 in game 7s.

[ClipperRevival]

Seriously, if Wilt beats Russell's Celtics as was clearly EXPECTED in 1968 and 1969, he has a strong case for GOAT. But he didn't. And the way he lost is even more incriminating, just disappearing in games 6 and 7 of both years when all they needed was one freaken win to close out. Up 3-1 in 1968 and up 3-2 in 1969. You have to count that against him if we are discussing GOAT.

And that's one thing you can never count against MJ. That he lost when he had the superior team. He even beat 7 teams without HCA, including twice in the finals (1993 Suns and 1998 Jazz). He lost against vastly superior teams when he first came into the league but once he had the proper supporting cast, he never lost. 24-0 in playoff series in his last 6 years with the Bulls. Now THAT'S GOAT stuff, not choking away 3-1 leads and losing game 7s at home and laying eggs in the process.

[ClipperRevival]

If MJ had lost the 1997 finals, his "excuse" would've been that he was suffering from flu like symptoms heading into game 5. The series was tied 2-2 and the Jazz had beaten them 2 straight. But what does MJ do? Come up HUGE by scoring 38 points.

And in 1998 in game 6, the Jazz were up 3 points with less than 1 minute left. They are THIS close to a game 7, where it would be at Utah. What does MJ do? Score 6 points, 1 steal and the game winner in that minute. He single handedly closes out the finals in the last minute.

This is what GOAT does. Come up big when the team needs you most. Not lay eggs.

[ClipperRevival]

People don't realize how competitive the two Utah series were. MJ needed to pull out Herculean performances time and time again for his team to win. 3ball has the stats. No one carried more of an offensive burden than MJ in the finals. EVER. And this is 34 and 35 year old MJ we are talking about. Not peak MJ.

And MJ needed to be incredibly efficient in 1993 and average 41 ppg to dethrone the Suns. They NEEDED those points.

People just assume that because MJ was 6/6, things were handed to him. Nothing could be further from the truth. MJ imposed his will on the outcome of games.

[WayOfWade]

Dude Chill out, you're turning into 3-ball. Talk about centers and leave MJ out if it, the dude was a SG

[zoom17]

Not a bad list unlike the others Shaq is top three.

[aj1987]

So, Shaq, leading his 61-21 Lakers to a sweeping loss against Ostertag's 62-20 Jazz...is more impressive than Chamberlain just shelling Russell, in a series in which Wilt's 40-40 Sixers lost a game seven to Russell's 62-18 Celtics by one point.

Makes perfect sense.
Ostertag's Jazz? :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

Yeah, this is why you shouldn't be allowed to post about basketball.

Anyways, nope. That's not impressive, but Shaq winning 3 rings while averaging 35/15/4/3 over the Finals and 30/15/3/2 over the PO runs is damn impressive. Something which Chokerlain could never accomplish. Wasn't the G7 in which Chokerlain missed 7 FT's? 4 in the 4th in a 1pt loss?

[Odinn]

Wonder why people taking jlauber's posts seriously and bothering to respond them...

[LAZERUSS]

Ostertag's Jazz? :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

Yeah, this is why you shouldn't be allowed to post about basketball.

Anyways, nope. That's not impressive, but Shaq winning 3 rings while averaging 35/15/4/3 over the Finals and 30/15/3/2 over the PO runs is damn impressive. Something which Chokerlain could never accomplish. Wasn't the G7 in which Chokerlain missed 7 FT's? 4 in the 4th in a 1pt loss?

Chamberlain AVERAGED a 30-27-5 with likely 7+ bpg in his first 67 playoff games. Which included playoff series of 37 ppg, 37 ppg, 39 ppg ,and 39 ppg, and with series against Russell of 30 ppg, 31 ppg, and 34 ppg.

And in his ONE Finals in that span, he averaged a 29-28 on a .517 eFG% in a post-season that shot .420...and against RUSSELL.

Now, had he faced stumble-bums like a Smits in his last season, or a McCulloch who was a career 6 ppg scorer in his brief NBA career...well, 39 ppg Finals would have been the norm.

Oh, and I will give Shaq credit against a 35 year old Mutombo, but Wilt routinely hung those numbers on Russell.

BTW, find me footage where Wilt was allowed to do this...

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

Shaq basically fouled out in that ONE sequence.


As for FT shooting. No worse than your boy Shaq, who WON rings with Finals of .387 and .292 from the line.

[Psileas]

If Wilt is not #1 or #2 at least than your list is not legitimate. But it's a person's opinion. Someone can think Brook Lopez is #1 all time, but if you're talking seriously than Wilt is #1.

Agreed. Wilt-Kareem-Russell is usually my order. However, their competition is so stiff that even the "worst" out of these 3 is still a legit GOAT player candidate.

Btw, I hope nobody claims any longer that Kareem is "underrated". Maybe among specific fans or in Europe, where most fans have zero knowledge on pre-Hakeem centers, but not on most American boards/channels.

[LAZERUSS]

Agreed. Wilt-Kareem-Russell is usually my order. However, their competition is so stiff that even the "worst" out of these 3 is still a legit GOAT player candidate.

Btw, I hope nobody claims any longer that Kareem is "underrated". Maybe among specific fans or in Europe, where most fans have zero knowledge on pre-Hakeem centers, but not on most American boards/channels.

Exactly. He has gone from the #4 basketball player (behind MJ, Wilt, and Russell) on ESPN's Sports Century list (in 1999) to #2 or even #1 on many lists. BTW, that list was a joke, but it goes to show you how much has changed in the last 15 years or so.

[Psileas]

Exactly. He has gone from the #4 basketball player (behind MJ, Wilt, and Russell) on ESPN's Sports Century list (in 1999) to #2 or even #1 on many lists. BTW, that list was a joke, but it goes to show you how much has changed in the last 15 years or so.

It's all trends. Much like in cinema, movies that weren't even winning a single Oscar are now considered GOAT material and others who were destroying competition are now almost forgotten...and even this situation may be re-reversed in the future. What is a casual fan supposed to believe?

[feyki]

People don't realize how competitive the two Utah series were. MJ needed to pull out Herculean performances time and time again for his team to win. 3ball has the stats. No one carried more of an offensive burden than MJ in the finals. EVER. And this is 34 and 35 year old MJ we are talking about. Not peak MJ.

And MJ needed to be incredibly efficient in 1993 and average 41 ppg to dethrone the Suns. They NEEDED those points.

People just assume that because MJ was 6/6, things were handed to him. Nothing could be further from the truth. MJ imposed his will on the outcome of games.

1998 ? Correct . But 1997 Bulls had 10+ SRS in that season .

And 1995-2001 era hadn't great competition . Swap Jordan and Karl , and Bulls would 3peat again .

[Odinn]

1998 ? Correct . But 1997 Bulls had 10+ SRS in that season .

And 1995-2001 era hadn't great competition . Swap Jordan and Karl , and Bulls would 3peat again .
God damn. That ignorance.

[ClipperRevival]

1998 ? Correct . But 1997 Bulls had 10+ SRS in that season .

And 1995-2001 era hadn't great competition . Swap Jordan and Karl , and Bulls would 3peat again .

Damn man, I hope you are joking. If not, :facepalm

Malone had choking tendencies.

[ClipperRevival]

Consider Wilt's numbers from the 1968 and 1969 playoffs, more specifically games 6 and 7, when his teams were up 3-1 (1968) and 3-2 (1969) and only needed 1 win to advance or win it all. And look at the numbers he put up. Laz always throws these impressive individual stats but where was that dominance when it was needed MOST? The fact that Wilt was able to put up such impressive numbers in other situations just makes Wilt look that much worse because it simply proves that he was capable of much more but didn't show up when it was needed most. And that's always been my criticism of Wilt. And to make it worse, both loses in game 7 were at home.

1968: 17.0 PPG, 38% FT.
1969: 13.0 PPG, 44% FT.

[LAZERUSS]

Consider Wilt's numbers from the 1968 and 1969 playoffs, more specifically games 6 and 7, when his teams were up 3-1 (1968) and 3-2 (1969) and only needed 1 win to advance or win it all. And look at the numbers he put up. Laz always throws these impressive individual stats but where was that dominance when it was needed MOST? The fact that Wilt was able to put up such impressive numbers in other situations just makes Wilt look that much worse because it simply proves that he was capable of much more but didn't show up when it was needed most. And that's always been my criticism of Wilt. And to make it worse, both loses in game 7 were at home.

1968: 17.0 PPG, 38% FT.
1969: 13.0 PPG, 44% FT.


Wilt was injured in the '68 playoffs. His team wasn't even favored in the FIRST ROUND because the entire roster had been decimated by injuries. How did Wilt do in that first round? A 25-24-6 .584 series against the Reed-Bellamy-Frazier trio, which, BTW, led BOTH teams in EVERY category.

How did a LIMPING Chamberlain perform in the EDF's? A 22-25-7 series, which BTW, included a 34 rebound game in game 7. All NOTICEABLY LIMPING. Even Russell commented that "a lessor man would not have played." Meaning...NO ONE ELSE would have played under those circumstances.

Game 7 of the '69 Finals. An 18-27 game on an .875 FG%, and a .621 TS%, which just CRUSHED Russell in EVERY category.

And, of course, being the basher that you are, you never bring up Chamberlain carrying far inferior rosters to game seven razor-thin margins, in series in which he just annihilated Russell.

None other than John Wooden claimed that had Wilt and Russell swapped rosters (and coaches), and it would have been WILT holding all those rings.

[feyki]

Damn man, I hope you are joking. If not, :facepalm

Malone had choking tendencies.

Put Jordan to Jazz and put Karl to Bulls in between 96-98 and see what happens ?

Choking is your excuse . Chicago were far better team without Karl and Jordan .

[LAZERUSS]

1998 ? Correct . But 1997 Bulls had 10+ SRS in that season .

And 1995-2001 era hadn't great competition . Swap Jordan and Karl , and Bulls would 3peat again .

MJ had to have rosters that could win 55+ games without him, to win his six rings. That was a FACT.

And how about this...

In the '93 playoffs, WITH Jordan, they went six games to beat the Knicks.
In the '94 ECSF's, without Jordan, and with MYERS, they were ONE PLAY away from beating the Knicks in six games.

Think about that.

Oh, and then MJ came back to that SAME EXACT roster in '95, except he was now replacing GRANT, and they were dumped in the second round, 4-2, by a team that would get swept in the Finals.

So, without ANY hope of winning another ring without an ELITE PF (aka GRANT), they went out and grabbed HOFer Rodman. So, with Rodman replacing Grant on a 55+ win roster, and now with MJ, they romped to three more titles.

Hell, MJ could shoot 5-19 in a clinching game six...and his TEAM would WIN that game by 12 points. THAT is how much help MJ had in his six title runs.

All achieved in a watered-down era where most teams had no more than TWO good players.

CONTEXT my friend. Try using it.

[feyki]

Lazerus ;

Yes , MJ's team accomplishments make him overrated . Jordan was goat level player and clearly goat perimeter player but people thinks he's like god and untouchable .

[kshutts1]

Back on the topic of centers...

As many have said, Walton is an odd inclusion. I'd rather have Reed at 10 than Walton.

And, as for Mikan, I'd just as soon not rank him. Respect what he did, both on the court and off, and what he meant, and still means, to the game. But the pre-shot clock era is just too different.

I'd asterisk-rank him, almost. Just mention that he's one of the game's greats, and that every year he was healthy, his team won the title. But it was a different, barely-comparable game back then.

[ClipperRevival]

Wilt was injured in the '68 playoffs. His team wasn't even favored in the FIRST ROUND because the entire roster had been decimated by injuries. How did Wilt do in that first round? A 25-24-6 .584 series against the Reed-Bellamy-Frazier trio, which, BTW, led BOTH teams in EVERY category.

How did a LIMPING Chamberlain perform in the EDF's? A 22-25-7 series, which BTW, included a 34 rebound game in game 7. All NOTICEABLY LIMPING. Even Russell commented that "a lessor man would not have played." Meaning...NO ONE ELSE would have played under those circumstances.

Game 7 of the '69 Finals. An 18-27 game on an .875 FG%, and a .621 TS%, which just CRUSHED Russell in EVERY category.

And, of course, being the basher that you are, you never bring up Chamberlain carrying far inferior rosters to game seven razor-thin margins, in series in which he just annihilated Russell.

None other than John Wooden claimed that had Wilt and Russell swapped rosters (and coaches), and it would have been WILT holding all those rings.

You even admitted that 1969 was a terrible finals for Wilt in previous exchanges but here you are again, being a Wilt fan, trying to pump him up with his stats.

Like I said, Wilt is top 5 with arguably the best peak ever. But he ain't no GOAT. He can't be. Not with what happened in 1968 and 1969. The GOAT can't let something like that happen to his team, especially when he has the superior team, HCA, is up in the series with a possibility to close out AND lays eggs in games 6 and 7.

[Odinn]

Put Jordan to Jazz and put Karl to Bulls in between 96-98 and see what happens ?

Choking is your excuse . Chicago were far better team without Karl and Jordan .
Swap Jordan and Malone, Jazz will win at least 2 rings, you ignorant piece of s...

[feyki]

Swap Jordan and Malone, Jazz will win at least 2 rings, you ignorant piece of s...

No , they would 3 . Believe whatever you want , i can't force you .

[LAZERUSS]

You even admitted that 1969 was a terrible finals for Wilt in previous exchanges but here you are again, being a Wilt fan, trying to pump him up with his stats.

Like I said, Wilt is top 5 with arguably the best peak ever. But he ain't no GOAT. He can't be. Not with what happened in 1968 and 1969. The GOAT can't let something like that happen to his team, especially when he has the superior team, HCA, is up in the series with a possibility to close out AND lays eggs in games 6 and 7.

So you are basically holding THREE GAMES against Wilt for his entire career (you can't use game seven of the '69 Finals against him, since he was superb in that game)?

And, the reality was, Chamberlain should not have even been playing in games six and seven of the '68 EDF's. And YOU know it, too. Hell, he shouldn't have been playing in any of them...much less playing EVERY MINUTE of that series, and then putting up a 22-25-7 series in the process (BTW, give me your list of players who accomplished a 22-25-7 seven game playoff series.)

Do you think he was a choker? Because if you do, I can provide a staggering list of his 37 playoff games in which it was either a "must win" game, or a "closeout" game. If he wasn't the GOAT "must win" player in NBA history, he was/is, right near the top.

How many rings do you think Wilt would have won had he and Russell swapped rosters (and coaches) in the decade of the 60's?

[ArbitraryWater]

No , they would 3 . Believe whatever you want , i can't force you .

thats not what he meant dummie

[kshutts1]

Ugh I hate Jordan. Mostly because of exchanges like those seen in this thread. Jordan's myth is so great that it causes delusion among nearly everyone.

Someone actually said that if Karl and Jordan switched places, that the Jazz would have at least two titles? WTF?
Dennis Rodman played better D on Malone than almost anyone else. Now they're on the same team. Who the hell stops Malone?

Pippen is probably the best-equipped player, ever, to guard Jordan, and now he would be.

So to recap, no one can stop Malone, and the player with arguably the best chance of all time to slow Jordan is suddenly playing against Jordan. So why would the Jazz suddenly win? Oh, that's right. Because it's Michael Jordan. :facepalm idiots.

Now if you want to say that swapping Jordan and Rodman for Karl and Hornacek, then maybe I'd get behind that.

[dankok8]

So you are basically holding THREE GAMES against Wilt for his entire career (you can't use game seven of the '69 Finals against him, since he was superb in that game)?

And, the reality was, Chamberlain should not have even been playing in games six and seven of the '68 EDF's. And YOU know it, too. Hell, he shouldn't have been playing in any of them...much less playing EVERY MINUTE of that series, and then putting up a 22-25-7 series in the process (BTW, give me your list of players who accomplished a 22-25-7 seven game playoff series.)

Do you think he was a choker? Because if you do, I can provide a staggering list of his 37 playoff games in which it was either a "must win" game, or a "closeout" game. If he wasn't the GOAT "must win" player in NBA history, he was/is, right near the top.

How many rings do you think Wilt would have won had he and Russell swapped rosters (and coaches) in the decade of the 60's?

Wilt wasn't a choker for his entire career. If anything, he played well in most of the big games he was part in. In his early career, he took his teams as far as they could go. You'll never see me rip Wilt for those years.

In 1968, 1969, and 1970 he did underperform though...

EDF Game 6 1968
EDF Game 7 1968
Finals Game 6 1969
Finals Game 7 1969
Finals Game 7 1970

All subpar performances...

Either he was injured or he choked. Either way he should be blamed for costing his teams titles.

[LAZERUSS]

Wilt wasn't a choker for his entire career. If anything, he played well in most of the big games he was part in. In his early career, he took his teams as far as they could go. You'll never see me rip Wilt for those years.

In 1968, 1969, and 1970 he did underperform though...

EDF Game 6 1968
EDF Game 7 1968
Finals Game 6 1969
Finals Game 7 1969
Finals Game 7 1970

All subpar performances...

Either he was injured or he choked. Either way he should be blamed for costing his teams titles.

First of all, Wilt PLAYED in all those games (and damned near every minute of them.)

Secondly, he was NOTICEABLY LIMPING the ENTIRE '68 EDF's. In a series in which he averaged a 22-25-7. And, in what was a closeout game five, he dominated Russell.

Third. I'll give you game six in the '69 Finals. Virtually every Wilt fan would acknowledge that he played poorly in what could have been a close out game. But, his COACH clearly blew that series in game four, when he had Johnny Egan handling the ball late, instead of West. That ONE PLAY cost them a 4-1 series win.

Fourth. Game 7 of the '69 Finals. Chamberlain played well the entire game. His TEAMMATES (who would collectively be outshot by Russell's teammates by a .477 to .360 margin), were, aside from West...just awful. And even West missed more shots than he made, and also missed two FTAs in the last period. Furthermore, prior to Wilt coming up lame, the Lakers were mounting a serious comeback. Without him, it ultimately fizzled.

Fifth. Game 7 of the '70 Finals. Again, and as you know, Wilt was playing that series only four months after major knee surgery. And just watch footage of that game seven, and game five of the '72 Finals. A HUGE difference. In any case, it was WEST who choked away that game seven. Hell, he couldn't even the ball past half court against Frazier. TBH, Wilt was the ONLY Laker who played well (a 21-24 game on 10-16 shooting.)

So, we have an injured Wilt hanging a seven game series of 22-25-7, and a Wilt who was nowhere near 100% hanging another seven game series of 23-24 .625. You and I both know that you won't find a very long list with players putting up seven game series with those numbers (and against a GOAT defender as well.)

So, it was a mere THREE GAMES, out of his biggest post-season games in his entire post-season career, in which he under-performed, and in two of those, he was was severely hobbled, and probably should not have even been playing.

Again, both you and I could find a list of poor "critical" games in which other "GOATs" played just as bad, or even worse (Wilt ALWAYS rebounded and usually played exceptional defense.)

[DirkNowitzki41]

No Cousins? lol espn.

shaq should be #1. real talk

[ArbitraryWater]

No Cousins? lol espn.

shaq should be #1. real talk

okay I saw the Cousins joke before but now that I'm seing it again I'm kinda worried you're serious

[LAZERUSS]

Wilt wasn't a choker for his entire career. If anything, he played well in most of the big games he was part in. In his early career, he took his teams as far as they could go. You'll never see me rip Wilt for those years.

In 1968, 1969, and 1970 he did underperform though...

EDF Game 6 1968
EDF Game 7 1968
Finals Game 6 1969
Finals Game 7 1969
Finals Game 7 1970

All subpar performances...

Either he was injured or he choked. Either way he should be blamed for costing his teams titles.

Again...Bird was seemingly injured in every post-season except the two that he played well in ('84 and '86.) All I ever hear from the Bird-fans was that he was injured in the '83 sweeping loss, or the '85 Finals, or the '87 Finals, or the '88 ECF's...even when he played well, or spectacularly the series before.

But, we KNOW that Chamberlain was either injured, or nowhere near 100% in his '68 and '70 Finals...and STILL hung 22-25-7 and 23-24 .625 series'.

There are Bird-fans here who excuse Bird for his awful play...and then come back and rip Wilt for a poor game, or two. I have read those claiming that since Wilt had a 45-27 game six in the '70 Finals, why didn't he repeat in game seven? Yeah...just like why didn't KAJ have the same game seven in the his '74 Finals, that he had in game six? Same with his clinching game five performance in his '70 EDF's?

But that is what it is...the WILT DOUBLE STANDARD. Others could play poorly when hurt, or not play at all...and they were excused. Wilt? He was always blamed, no matter how injured, and no matter how well he played.

[dankok8]

First of all, Wilt PLAYED in all those games (and damned near every minute of them.)

Secondly, he was NOTICEABLY LIMPING the ENTIRE '68 EDF's. In a series in which he averaged a 22-25-7. And, in what was a closeout game five, he dominated Russell.

Third. I'll give you game six in the '69 Finals. Virtually every Wilt fan would acknowledge that he played poorly in what could have been a close out game. But, his COACH clearly blew that series in game four, when he had Johnny Egan handling the ball late, instead of West. That ONE PLAY cost them a 4-1 series win.

Fourth. Game 7 of the '69 Finals. Chamberlain played well the entire game. His TEAMMATES (who would collectively be outshot by Russell's teammates by a .477 to .360 margin), were, aside from West...just awful. And even West missed more shots than he made, and also missed two FTAs in the last period. Furthermore, prior to Wilt coming up lame, the Lakers were mounting a serious comeback. Without him, it ultimately fizzled.

Fifth. Game 7 of the '70 Finals. Again, and as you know, Wilt was playing that series only four months after major knee surgery. And just watch footage of that game seven, and game five of the '72 Finals. A HUGE difference. In any case, it was WEST who choked away that game seven. Hell, he couldn't even the ball past half court against Frazier. TBH, Wilt was the ONLY Laker who played well (a 21-24 game on 10-16 shooting.)

So, we have an injured Wilt hanging a seven game series of 22-25-7, and a Wilt who was nowhere near 100% hanging another seven game series of 23-24 .625. You and I both know that you won't find a very long list with players putting up seven game series with those numbers (and against a GOAT defender as well.)

So, it was a mere THREE GAMES, out of his biggest post-season games in his entire post-season career, in which he under-performed, and in two of those, he was was severely hobbled, and probably should not have even been playing.

Again, both you and I could find a list of poor "critical" games in which other "GOATs" played just as bad, or even worse (Wilt ALWAYS rebounded and usually played exceptional defense.)

I know all that. You are not reading my posts!!!

At some point, injuries are not an excuse anymore.


I never understood why guys get praised for playing heroically through injury when their team loses... Isiah Thomas for instance had an amazing performance in the 1988 Finals in Game 6 but then sucked in Game 7. His injury probably cost his team the title but nobody looks at it that way. Guys should be blamed if they get hurt and cost their team the title. Not praised for gutting it out... Obviously playing through it is better but it's still much worse than being healthy.


Bird should be blamed too. That's why I for one would take Lebron over Bird any day of the week. Bird may have been just as good if not better but he wasn't healthy. I can count on Lebron and I can't count on Bird.

[LAZERUSS]

I know all that. You are not reading my posts!!!

At some point, injuries are not an excuse anymore.


I never understood why guys get praised for playing heroically through injury when their team loses... Isiah Thomas for instance had an amazing performance in the 1988 Finals in Game 6 but then sucked in Game 7. His injury probably cost his team the title but nobody looks at it that way. Guys should be blamed if they get hurt and cost their team the title. Not praised for gutting it out... Obviously playing through it is better but it's still much worse than being healthy.


Bird should be blamed too. That's why I for one would take Lebron over Bird any day of the week. Bird may have been just as good if not better but he wasn't healthy. I can count on Lebron and I can't count on Bird.

The thing is...in Wilt's game seven of the '68 EDF's...he STILL grabbed 34 rebounds. Furthermore, his "backup" Luke Jackson, was also playing hurt, and was no better in that game seven.

And we saw what Mel Counts brought to the table in game seven of the '69 Finals...a miserable 4-13 shooting game (to go along with Baylor's 8-22 and even West's 14-29.) Would LA have been better off without Chamberlain's 18-27?

And Willis Reed won a FMVP, in a series in which he did absolutely nothing in the last three pivotal games of the '70 Finals. And Wilt was, BY FAR, the Lakers best player in those last three games. Not to mention a 23-24 .625 series.

Wilt played WELL in the entire '68 EDF's. In fact, in the first five games he was a 24-23-6 .539 player. He was basically wiping the floor with Russell in those five games.

And in the '70 Finals, a one-legged Wilt battled a much healthier Reed to a draw in the first four games of that series. And again, just dominated the Knicks in the last three, when Reed was now playing on a level playing field.


The bottom line...Wilt didn't have the luxury of a Magic to carry his teams to titles in his absence. In fact, they had ZERO chance of winning without him. They damn near won with a hobbled Wilt.

[ClipperRevival]

So you are basically holding THREE GAMES against Wilt for his entire career (you can't use game seven of the '69 Finals against him, since he was superb in that game)?

And, the reality was, Chamberlain should not have even been playing in games six and seven of the '68 EDF's. And YOU know it, too. Hell, he shouldn't have been playing in any of them...much less playing EVERY MINUTE of that series, and then putting up a 22-25-7 series in the process (BTW, give me your list of players who accomplished a 22-25-7 seven game playoff series.)

Do you think he was a choker? Because if you do, I can provide a staggering list of his 37 playoff games in which it was either a "must win" game, or a "closeout" game. If he wasn't the GOAT "must win" player in NBA history, he was/is, right near the top.

How many rings do you think Wilt would have won had he and Russell swapped rosters (and coaches) in the decade of the 60's?

Like I said, you claim he's the GOAT. That means the "Greatest of All Time." Sure he's top 5 in my book. But GOAT?

1968 and 1969 is real and it happened. And you have to call him for it. He had the far superior teams over Russell's Celtics in both seasons, had HCA, was expected to win, was up 3-1 in 1968 and 3-2 in 1969 and lost both series by laying eggs in both game 6s and 7s in both years and to top it off, lost both game 7s at home. I didn't make this up. It happened and you have to OBJECTIVELY criticize him for it.

If he's the legit GOAT, where was the dominance? WHERE? If he's the GOAT and such a transcendent talent, shouldn't he have shown up when it matters MOST? At what point do you just stop making excuses for ALL OF HIS FAILURES? You start to lose credibility when you do that. It's like a Bron fan saying he didn't choke in 2011.

My problem with you is that you think Wilt had no flaws. That all of his failures are due to circumstances outside of himself. Injuries, teammates not getting him the ball, inferior roster, etc. He's one of the best ever. Accept that he had some bad moments in the playoffs and move on.

[ClipperRevival]

The thing is...in Wilt's game seven of the '68 EDF's...he STILL grabbed 34 rebounds. Furthermore, his "backup" Luke Jackson, was also playing hurt, and was no better in that game seven.

And we saw what Mel Counts brought to the table in game seven of the '69 Finals...a miserable 4-13 shooting game (to go along with Baylor's 8-22 and even West's 14-29.) Would LA have been better off without Chamberlain's 18-27?

And Willis Reed won a FMVP, in a series in which he did absolutely nothing in the last three pivotal games of the '70 Finals. And Wilt was, BY FAR, the Lakers best player in those last three games. Not to mention a 23-24 .625 series.

Wilt played WELL in the entire '68 EDF's. In fact, in the first five games he was a 24-23-6 .539 player. He was basically wiping the floor with Russell in those five games.

And in the '70 Finals, a one-legged Wilt battled a much healthier Reed to a draw in the first four games of that series. And again, just dominated the Knicks in the last three, when Reed was now playing on a level playing field.


The bottom line...Wilt didn't have the luxury of a Magic to carry his teams to titles in his absence. In fact, they had ZERO chance of winning without him. They damn near won with a hobbled Wilt.

Yeah, too bad he laid eggs in games 6 and 7 huh?

[LAZERUSS]

Yeah, too bad he laid eggs in games 6 and 7 huh?

NOTICEABLY LIMPING.

BTW, give me a list of game seven playoff games in which KAJ, Hakeem, Duncan, or Shaq grabbed 34 rebounds.

Yep...laid an egg alright.

[LAZERUSS]

Like I said, you claim he's the GOAT. That means the "Greatest of All Time." Sure he's top 5 in my book. But GOAT?

1968 and 1969 is real and it happened. And you have to call him for it. He had the far superior teams over Russell's Celtics in both seasons, had HCA, was expected to win, was up 3-1 in 1968 and 3-2 in 1969 and lost both series by laying eggs in both game 6s and 7s in both years and to top it off, lost both game 7s at home. I didn't make this up. It happened and you have to OBJECTIVELY criticize him for it.

If he's the legit GOAT, where was the dominance? WHERE? If he's the GOAT and such a transcendent talent, shouldn't he have shown up when it matters MOST? At what point do you just stop making excuses for ALL OF HIS FAILURES? You start to lose credibility when you do that. It's like a Bron fan saying he didn't choke in 2011.

My problem with you is that you think Wilt had no flaws. That all of his failures are due to circumstances outside of himself. Injuries, teammates not getting him the ball, inferior roster, etc. He's one of the best ever. Accept that he had some bad moments in the playoffs and move on.

The bolded was absolutely FALSE.

They were not even expected to make the '68 EDF's, much less win them.

And being up 3-1 was a MIRACLE. Not only that, but Chamberlain dominated in a game five loss.

If Wilt were expected to carry that decimated squad to a title, then MJ surely should have won titles with much healthier supporting casts in '90 and '95. Those were 55 and basically 55 win teams. Do you blame MJ for shooting 8-19 from the field (and only 7-10 from the line) in the clinching game six loss of the '95 ECSF's?

And if Wilt's legacy was supposed tarnished by his "failures" in '68, and '69, then surely Jordan's took a massive hit in '95, when he couldn't take the SAME exact roster as far in the ECSF's, as Grant had done the year before. In fact, it was GRANT who dominated his Bulls in that series. A 55+ win roster!

And who can forget Jordan QUITTING on his team in a pivotal game five of the '89 ECF's? Yep...just QUIT. Took a feeble 8 shots and mailed it in.

[aj1987]

Chamberlain AVERAGED a 30-27-5 with likely 7+ bpg in his first 67 playoff games. Which included playoff series of 37 ppg, 37 ppg, 39 ppg ,and 39 ppg, and with series against Russell of 30 ppg, 31 ppg, and 34 ppg.

And in his ONE Finals in that span, he averaged a 29-28 on a .517 eFG% in a post-season that shot .420...and against RUSSELL.

Now, had he faced stumble-bums like a Smits in his last season, or a McCulloch who was a career 6 ppg scorer in his brief NBA career...well, 39 ppg Finals would have been the norm.

Oh, and I will give Shaq credit against a 35 year old Mutombo, but Wilt routinely hung those numbers on Russell.

BTW, find me footage where Wilt was allowed to do this...

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

Shaq basically fouled out in that ONE sequence.


As for FT shooting. No worse than your boy Shaq, who WON rings with Finals of .387 and .292 from the line.

Again, babbling like a complete and utter moron.

Shaq is a flat out better player than Chokerlain. It's a FACT. Dude actually made his FT's when it counted, unlike Chokerlain who pissed away G7's because of his HORRENDOUS FT shooting. Lets also not forget that Shaq almost always elevated his game in the PO's and Finals. Chokerlain? 30 PPG in the RS, 22 in the PO's and 18 in the Finals. Shaq has Finals averages of ~32/14/3/3 on near 60%. 35/14/4/3 during the 3peat. I mean, Chokerlain played in the garbage ass '60's. Quite literally one of the worst era's of basketball.

Putting Shaq and ilt in the same sentence is just an insult to the Big Diesel.

BTW, Mutombo was DPOY that season and made the All-Def team the next season as well.

[MMM]

feel like KAJ is a bit overrated here. In terms of eras i would rate the 60's ahead of the 70's and comparing KAJ failings through most of the 70's than i don't understand how he is ahead of Wilt and Bill.

[LAZERUSS]

Again, babbling like a complete and utter moron.

Shaq is a flat out better player than Chokerlain. It's a FACT. Dude actually made his FT's when it counted, unlike Chokerlain who pissed away G7's because of his HORRENDOUS FT shooting. Lets also not forget that Shaq almost always elevated his game in the PO's and Finals. Chokerlain? 30 PPG in the RS, 22 in the PO's and 18 in the Finals. Shaq has Finals averages of ~32/14/3/3 on near 60%. 35/14/4/3 during the 3peat. I mean, Chokerlain played in the garbage ass '60's. Quite literally one of the worst era's of basketball.

Putting Shaq and ilt in the same sentence is just an insult to the Big Diesel.

BTW, Mutombo was DPOY that season and made the All-Def team the next season as well.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Shaq elevated his game against pansies in the post-season. Plain-and-simple. His numbers dropped dramatically across the board against the Robinson-Spurs from '99-'03.

True, Shaq would crush a stumble bum like Smits in his last season in a Finals. Or a 6-11 clod like Todd McCulloch (a career 6 ppg scorer in his 4 year career) in another.

And I credited Shaq with overpowering a 35 year old Mutimbo in another Finals (albeit, he Mutombo scored 16 ppg on a .600 FG% against him.)

Oh, and he won a ring in '06 with a 13.7 ppg, 10.2 rpg, .607 (and .292 FT%) series against the great Erick Dampier...who replied back with a 5.7 ppg, 8.2 rpg, .722 FG% series.

Furthermore, I already mentioned Shaq taking his 61-21 Lakers down the toilet in a sweeping loss to Ostertag's 62-20 Jazz in one series. But just the year before that, Shaq put up a 22.0 ppg, 11.6 rpg, .494 (and .565 FT%) series against OSTERTAG...in a 4-1 series flop job loss.

So, in his "Three-Peat" Finals, he took his heavily-favored Lakers to routs of far inferior teams, and with only one legitimate center, who was 35 at the time.

And again, Wilt was hanging the same offensive numbers on the GOAT Dynasty, the GOAT defensive center, and on GOAT defensive teams (that routinely were light years ahead of the rest of the league in DRtg.)

Oh, and once again, there is simply NO WAY that Shaq would have gotten away with this in the 60's...

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

He would have fouled out just in that one sequence.

Conversely, had Wilt been allowed to do that, and they would have been carrying out his peers in body-bags.

And how did Shaq fare against the legendary Eddy Curry...

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

With half of those games in his prime (and still struggling in those.)


I will concede that Shaq was dominating guys like Hakeem, Ewing, and Robinson. But, no more than Chamberlain was dominating guys like Thurmond, Russell, Reed, and Bellamy. In fact, no where near as dominant.


BTW, Shaq wasn't even as dominant as a 38-39 year old Kareem, either. An old KAJ hung games of 40, 43, and 46 on a 22-24 year old Hakeem (and as a 40 year old, badly outplayed a 25 year old Hakeem)...while Shaq's high game, and at Shaq's peak, and against a fading Hakeem... 37 points.

And we know that a PEAK KAJ played four years in the Wilt-era, and never approached any of Chamberlain's records. Nor was he nearly as dominant as a prime Wilt had been against the SAME centers.


Rebounding?

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Chamberlain was DESTROYING his peers, including the post-season. In 29 post-season series, he outrebounded his opposing centers in EVERY one of them, and usually by massive margins. Shaq? A prime Shaq was getting pounded by the 6-7 Rodman, and the 6-7 Ben Wallace.

Of course, Shaq never came close to a rebounding crown. Nor was he ever considered more than above average (at his peak) in his defensive production. Wilt blocked far more shots in his last season, as well.

Passing? How many seasons did Shaq average 5.2+? Wilt was capable of that in a season in which he averaged 33.5 ppg and 24.6 rpg. Oh, and then he had seasons of 7.8 and even led the league in assists, with an 8.6 apg average.

Scoring? Shaq with two scoring titles, and didn't hit 30 in either. Wilt? Not only did he win SEVEN scoring titles, he did so with a 40 ppg average in that same span.

How about prime playoff scoring? Shaq had three playoff runs of 27.0 ppg, 28.5 ppg, 30.4 ppg, 30.5 ppg, and 30.7 ppg. Chamberlain had playoff runs of 28.0 ppg, 29.3 ppg, 33.2 ppg, 34.7 ppg, 35.0 ppg, and 37.0 ppg. Oh, and in those 52 playoff games in that span...he faced RUSSELL in 30 of them.

How about must win games in the post-season? Can you find Shaq with a 50+ point game? How about THREE (and FOUR total.) And here is an interesting one...find me a 45-27 "must win" Finals game (BTW, that game came against a McCulloch-type center...in one of the very few post-season games in which Chamberlain would face a clown like Shaq routinely built his numbers against.)

The reality was...Wilt was a better scorer; a better rebounder; a better passer; a better defender...both one-on-one, and team; a better shot-blocker; and a peak Wilt was a more efficient shooter, as well.

[Moonbeam]

Pretty good list. You can always quibble over the order of these things. I think Gilmore has a case.

[aj1987]

Loozerus, you can choose to ignore all context when it comes to ilt, but FACT is he was a choker. A big time choker. Shaq almost always elevated his game in the PO's and the Big Dipper always dipped. Numbers don't lie.

Year - RS PPG - Playoffs PPG - RS FT% - Playoffs FT%
1960 - 37.6 - 33.2 - 46.1% - 44.5%
1961 - 38.4 - 37.0 - 50.9% - 55.3%
1962 - 50.4 - 35.0 - 61.3% - 63.6%
1963 - 44.8 - Missed Playoffs (:oldlol: ) Imagine if Kobe or LeBron missed while averaging 44.8.
1964 - 36.9 - 34.7 - 53.1% - 47.5%
1965 - 34.7 - 29.3 - 46.4% - 55.9%
1966 - 33.5 - 28.0 - 51.3% - 41.2%
1967 - 24.1 - 21.7 - 44.1% - 38.8%
1968 - 24.3 - 23.7 - 38.0% - 38.0%
1969 - 20.5 - 13.9 - 44.6% - 39.2%
1970 - 27.3 - 22.1 - 44.6% - 40.6%


Regular season to Finals comparison

1964: 36.9 -- 29.2 (-7.7)
1967: 24.7 -- 17.7 (-7.0)
1969: 20.5 -- 11.7 (-8.8)
1970: 27.3 -- 23.3 (-4.0)
1972: 14.8 -- 19.4 (+4.6)
1973: 13.2 -- 11.6 (-1.6)

.511 FT% shooter in the regular season
.465 in the playoffs
.375 in the finals


Chamberlains ppg in regular season: 30.1
Chamberlains ppg in playoffs: 22.5
Chamberlain's ppg in the Finals: 18

This is also in the weakest in the history of basketball. DeAndre would be a averaging 30/30 with his putrid offensive game.

[dhsilv]

Eh , not bad .

Mikan always gets underrated cause people judge players with their tv display quality and skin . I'm not surprised .

Willis Reed should be on the list .

Hakeem also gets underrated cause his team were pathetic in half of his prime . He's clearly better than Shaq to me .

Bill Russell is/was best player of the game history for me . So , i think he's best center .

Rest of the list are good .

The whole playing before the shot clock thing is kinda a factor too....it's like comparing dead ball era. And you're blaming people for not ranking a guy with virtually no footage of him and what we have being horrible quality? Is anyone who still talks sports old enough to have seen him even play live?

[dhsilv]

Vlade gets seriously underrated. The Vlade people saw with the Kings was the aging version. The guy was one of the better passing big men ever, very fluid athlete for a C, solid outside jumper, could run the floor and had a very good post up game.

You think people didn't see him on the lakers, in the finals, vs Jordan?

[feyki]

The whole playing before the shot clock thing is kinda a factor too....it's like comparing dead ball era. And you're blaming people for not ranking a guy with virtually no footage of him and what we have being horrible quality? Is anyone who still talks sports old enough to have seen him even play live?

But we can't ignore him , right ?