Better Offensive Player - Oscar or Wilt

[dankok8]

Offense only. Please don't mention defense.

[Nuff Said]

iono bout offensively but defensively gotta go with my mans Wilt.

[feyki]

Oscar for sure .

[LAZERUSS]

A prime Chamberlain was unstoppable.

But, I'll play... Wilt had 32 60+ point games in his career...Oscar...zero.

In terms of overall efficiency, Oscar had a slight edge. But then again, he didn't have entire teams geared up to stop him, either.

[feyki]

A prime Chamberlain was unstoppable.

But, I'll play... Wilt had 32 60+ point games in his career...Oscar...zero.

Oscar was goat level shooter and passer . Wilt was better scorer than Oscar in his early career . But that Wilt was one trick pony as a offensive player .

[LAZERUSS]

Oscar was goat level shooter and passer . Wilt was better scorer than Oscar in his early career . But that Wilt was one trick pony as a offensive player .

No question that Oscar was a better shooter. Same could be said of Kobe and Shaq. But in terms of offensive production, sorry, but Wilt was in a league of his own.

And NO, Wilt was NOT a "one trick pony." He was the greatest passing center, and by a huge margin, in NBA history...especially if you include outlet passing (see the '72 Lakers.) That is not even debatable.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Oscar by far. Wilts inflated PPGs were conductive to elite offenses.
Oscar was an alltime pickandroll player, had a great midrange shot and pullup, GOAT level playmaker/passer and still a great scorer

[Uncle Drew]

Both have stats that shouldn't be mentioned due to pace and skinny white guys, that's all I know.

[Stringer Bell]

Oscar was goat level shooter and passer . Wilt was better scorer than Oscar in his early career . But that Wilt was one trick pony as a offensive player .

Wilt had good variety on offense. Overpowering opponents with dunks, the finger roll, the fadeaway (particularly off the glass), and was an excellent passer.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Wilt had good variety on offense. Overpowering opponents with dunks, the finger roll, the fadeaway (particularly off the glass), and was an excellent passer.
His fadeaway was sht. He didnt overpower ppl enough and his finger roll was dusty. Hes not an excellent passer either, just good

theres footage of his post game and its embarrassing, doesnt pass the eye test

[LAZERUSS]

His fadeaway was sht. He didnt overpower ppl enough and his finger roll was dusty. Hes not an excellent passer either, just good

theres footage of his post game and its embarrassing, doesnt pass the eye test

Keep in mind that all of the existing footage of Wilt comprises less than 2% of his career...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWrGWuU2Ak

[feyki]

Wilt had good variety on offense. Overpowering opponents with dunks, the finger roll, the fadeaway (particularly off the glass), and was an excellent passer.


No question that Oscar was a better shooter. Same could be said of Kobe and Shaq. But in terms of offensive production, sorry, but Wilt was in a league of his own.

And NO, Wilt was NOT a "one trick pony." He was the greatest passing center, and by a huge margin, in NBA history...especially if you include outlet passing (see the '72 Lakers.) That is not even debatable.

You guys misses one point , i said Wilt's early career .

His passing and more efficient days more close to Oscar than his scoring minded days . But i do take Prime Oscar over two different Chamberlain .

I was talking about be effective as " shooter " , not longer ranges .

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Keep in mind that all of the existing footage of Wilt comprises less than 2% of his career...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWrGWuU2Ak

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oemQKScZ7MQ

lol someone like Dirk looks like hes 100 years into the future in post skills compared to Ilt

[LAZERUSS]

You guys misses one point , i said Wilt's early career .

His passing and more efficient days more close to Oscar than his scoring minded days . But i do take Prime Oscar over two different Chamberlain .

I was talking about be effective as " shooter " , not longer ranges .

The point remains...Chamberlain was battling entire teams at his offensive end...including Russell's Celtics. Russell had no chance of defending Chamberlain one-on-one.

http://www.nba.com/history/players/chamberlain_bio.html


In Chamberlain's first year, and for several years afterward, opposing teams simply didn't know how to handle him. Tom Heinsohn, the great Celtics forward who later became a coach and broadcaster, said Boston was one of the first clubs to apply a team-defense concept to stop Chamberlain. "We went for his weakness," Heinsohn told the Philadelphia Daily News in 1991, "tried to send him to the foul line, and in doing that he took the most brutal pounding of any player ever.. I hear people today talk about hard fouls. Half the fouls against him were hard fouls."

[LAZERUSS]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oemQKScZ7MQ

lol someone like Dirk looks like hes 100 years into the future in post skills compared to Ilt

Same with Shaq then...who had even less range, and less mobility than Wilt.

Of course, the NBA would NEVER have allowed Chamberlain to play like this...

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

Shaq would have fouled in that sequence alone.

And had Wilt been allowed to play like that, they would have been carrying seven-footers out in body-bags.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Same with Shaq then...who had even less range, and less mobility than Wilt.

Of course, the NBA would NEVER have allowed Chamberlain to play like this...

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

Shaq would have fouled in that sequence alone.

And had Wilt been allowed to play like that, they would have been carrying seven-footers out in body-bags.

Shaq had much better ballhandling and Shaq had some of the best footwork of alltime:biggums: :biggums:

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/y%20NBA%20etc/Shaquille%20Oneal/VS/shaqvstd.gif~original

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/VS/Comparision%20n%20Similarity/SHAQ/7849f651.gif

Shaq from early orlando already was a much better post player than _ilt ever was
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVxZs7dwCO8

[LAZERUSS]

Shaq had much better ballhandling and Shaq had some of the best footwork of alltime:biggums: :biggums:

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/y%20NBA%20etc/Shaquille%20Oneal/VS/shaqvstd.gif~original

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/VS/Comparision%20n%20Similarity/SHAQ/7849f651.gif

Shaq from early orlando already was a much better post player than _ilt ever was
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVxZs7dwCO8



ZERO range, carrying the ball on every possession, and bowling over defenders.

Thanks for proving my point.

Next...

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

ZERO range, carrying the ball on every possession, and bowling over defenders.

Thanks for proving my point.

Next...
watch the video old man

[LAZERUSS]

watch the video old man

Shaq was shorter, slower, less athletic, weaker, and less skilled than Wilt.

It's all in the videos...

Next...

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Shaq was shorter, slower, less athletic, weaker, and less skilled than Wilt.

It's all in the videos...

Next...

Shaq was faster, more explosive, more skilled

Ilt had better endurance and was stronger but Shaq knew how to use his strength better

[Uncle Drew]

Shaq was shorter, slower, less athletic, weaker, and less skilled than Wilt.
Yet he has more championships, while playing with fewer hall of famers than Wilt.

Lazeruss stay losing.

[LAZERUSS]

Yet he has more championships, while playing with fewer hall of famers than Wilt.

Lazeruss stay losing.

Give me a list of the HOFers he faced in his title runs...and compare that with what Wilt faced nearly EVERY season in his career. Even in Chamberlain's last season, he went up against a Knick team with SIX HOFers. Shaq never came close to playing ANY team with half as much talent. And when he did, like the '96 Bulls...well, he was swept.

Of course, the biggest black-eye for Shaq...going 1-8 against...drum roll please... Greg Ostertag.

Next...

[jlip]

From an old thread:




There is one stat relevant to Oscar's game that is rarely discussed but really impressed me and showed that he was a master floor general. His teams led the league in fg% in 9 of the 14 seasons of his career. A pg's job is to run the offense and to get quality shots for his teammates. It's obvious that he did that as well as anyone ever has.

[feyki]

From an old thread:

Also , his team were generally first of the league on offensive ratings .

[jlip]

Also , his team were generally first of the league on offensive ratings .


Yep. His offensive impact was far greater than his individual production.

[DatAsh]

Yep. His offensive impact was far greater than his individual production.

Agreed. I see a decent case for Oscar as a top 5 offensive player ever.

[feyki]

Agreed. I see a decent case for Oscar as a top 5 offensive player ever.

He's goat offensive player in my mind , with Magic . If Curry will play about 5-6 years with his current level , he would as good as Magic and Oscar .

[dankok8]

It's easy to just say Wilt but honestly Oscar was the most impactful OFFENSIVE player of the 60's. Here are his Cincinnati Royals' offensive metrics and W/L records without him.

1961: 1st in ORtg -- 1-7 without
1962: 1st in ORtg -- 0-1 without
1963: 1st in ORtg -- N/A
1964: 1st in ORtg -- 1-0 without
1965: 1st in ORtg -- 1-4 without
1966: 3rd in ORtg -- 1-3 without
1967: 2nd in ORtg -- 0-2 without
1968: 2nd in ORtg -- 4-13 without
1969: 1st in ORtg -- 0-3 without
1970: 10th in ORtg -- 4-9 without

In his 10 years at Cinci, his team was a woeful 12-42 when he didn't play (18 win pace!) and with him they were usually a strong playoff team and even contending from 1963-1965. They were always subpar on defense but he made them the best offensive team in the game.

In terms of raw stats, in his best season in 1963-1964 Oscar put up 31.4 ppg on 57.6 %TS and 11.0 apg which means he gave his team 53.4 ppg each game! By comparison 1961-1962 Wilt was at 55.2 ppg but on noticeably worse efficiency at 53.6 %TS.

[LAZERUSS]

It's easy to just say Wilt but honestly Oscar was the most impactful OFFENSIVE player of the 60's. Here are his Cincinnati Royals' offensive metrics and W/L records without him.

1961: 1st in ORtg -- 1-7 without
1962: 1st in ORtg -- 0-1 without
1963: 1st in ORtg -- N/A
1964: 1st in ORtg -- 1-0 without
1965: 1st in ORtg -- 1-4 without
1966: 3rd in ORtg -- 1-3 without
1967: 2nd in ORtg -- 0-2 without
1968: 2nd in ORtg -- 4-13 without
1969: 1st in ORtg -- 0-3 without
1970: 10th in ORtg -- 4-9 without

In his 10 years at Cinci, his team was a woeful 12-42 when he didn't play (18 win pace!) and with him they were usually a strong playoff team and even contending from 1963-1965. They were always subpar on defense but he made them the best offensive team in the game.

In terms of raw stats, in his best season in 1963-1964 Oscar put up 31.4 ppg on 57.6 %TS and 11.0 apg which means he gave his team 53.4 ppg each game! By comparison 1961-1962 Wilt was at 55.2 ppg but on noticeably worse efficiency at 53.6 %TS.

Give us all here Oscar's W-L records in the 60's.

And how about Wilt's offensive efficiency in his '67 season...24 ppg on a .637 TS%...to go along with 7.8 apg. And runaway highest Team ORtg of 101.5 in a league that averaged 96.1...all on a 68-13 team.

The reality was, Chamberlain was EXPECTED to SCORE, and he had entire TEAMS defending him...including the best defensive team of his era, the Boston Celtics.

BTW, we all know that Wilt's TS% is flawed by around a full 2%. So any TS% you have with him, just add an additional 2%. And yes, the TS% affected Chamberlain more than any other player in his era.

[Stringer Bell]

Nice info and data.

Didn't know Cincinnati was so awful in those years without Oscar the Grouch.


It's easy to just say Wilt but honestly Oscar was the most impactful OFFENSIVE player of the 60's. Here are his Cincinnati Royals' offensive metrics and W/L records without him.

1961: 1st in ORtg -- 1-7 without
1962: 1st in ORtg -- 0-1 without
1963: 1st in ORtg -- N/A
1964: 1st in ORtg -- 1-0 without
1965: 1st in ORtg -- 1-4 without
1966: 3rd in ORtg -- 1-3 without
1967: 2nd in ORtg -- 0-2 without
1968: 2nd in ORtg -- 4-13 without
1969: 1st in ORtg -- 0-3 without
1970: 10th in ORtg -- 4-9 without

In his 10 years at Cinci, his team was a woeful 12-42 when he didn't play (18 win pace!) and with him they were usually a strong playoff team and even contending from 1963-1965. They were always subpar on defense but he made them the best offensive team in the game.

In terms of raw stats, in his best season in 1963-1964 Oscar put up 31.4 ppg on 57.6 %TS and 11.0 apg which means he gave his team 53.4 ppg each game! By comparison 1961-1962 Wilt was at 55.2 ppg but on noticeably worse efficiency at 53.6 %TS.

[dankok8]

Give us all here Oscar's W-L records in the 60's.

And how about Wilt's offensive efficiency in his '67 season...24 ppg on a .637 TS%...to go along with 7.8 apg. And runaway highest Team ORtg of 101.5 in a league that averaged 96.1...all on a 68-13 team.

The reality was, Chamberlain was EXPECTED to SCORE, and he had entire TEAMS defending him...including the best defensive team of his era, the Boston Celtics.

BTW, we all know that Wilt's TS% is flawed by around a full 2%. So any TS% you have with him, just add an additional 2%. And yes, the TS% affected Chamberlain more than any other player in his era.

Wilt scored just under 24 ppg in 1966-1967 and under 8 apg. Peak Oscar was putting up 31 ppg and 11 apg.

Oscar also had entire teams trying to stop him and was matched up with KC Jones, Jerry West, Hal Greer etc. It's not like he had it easy.

We went over true TS% before and fpliii's data showed that it is 0.5-1% lower than it should be and it's not just Wilt who was hurt by it even if he was hurt more. It's not an argument worth having because it's so minor.

Anyways I'm not saying the answer is clearly Oscar but it's not clearly Wilt either. I think it's a good comparison.

[pudman13]

He was the greatest passing center, and by a huge margin, in NBA history...especially if you include outlet passing (see the '72 Lakers.) That is not even debatable.

I'd say it's completely debatable that Walton could have been better.