Hall of fame centers in the 60's vs team defenses in the early 00's

[QUOTE]"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."[/QUOTE]

Below at the 0:57 mark we can see Wilt circa '65 spin baseline from Russell [B]immediately[/B] off the catch ala Hakeem Olajuwon, before K.C. takes the intentional foul and a frustrated Wilt hits the stanchion.

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Xp2slHI9sI[/url]

[QUOTE=jlauber]IMHO, had Jackson utilized Shaq's power, withOUT the ball (just moving into the lane like Wilt did against Nate), and waiting for passes at the rim...Shaq would have been damn near unstoppable. As it was, Shaq would get about five baskets per game, or more, doing exactly that. There was simply no one, or two players, who could keep him out of the lane.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, but would his teammates have been involved as much? I'm not sure Shaq scoring more would have helped the team more, as it is, he was one of only 3 players to lead the league in scoring and win a championship in the same season during the shot clock era. By drawing all of those double and triple teams he got his teammates a lot of easier shots as you can see in those clips.

Actually, though it's off topic, this is a perfect example of why his 1995 Magic cast was a lot better than his 2000. They complemented him better due to their 3 point shooting and had more scoring options. The 2000 Lakers on the other hand weren't as deep and talented and they were a weak outside shooting team. They shot 32.9% on 3s which was significantly below the league average of 35.3% and the 5th worst percentage in the league, plus they only ranked 18th in a 29 team league in 3s made.

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Yeah, but would his teammates have been involved as much? I'm not sure Shaq scoring more would have helped the team more, as it is, he was one of only 3 players to lead the league in scoring and win a championship in the same season during the shot clock era. By drawing all of those double and triple teams he got his teammates a lot of easier shots as you can see in those clips.

Actually, though it's off topic, this is a perfect example of why his 1995 Magic cast was a lot better than his 2000. They complemented him better due to their 3 point shooting and had more scoring options. The 2000 Lakers on the other hand weren't as deep and talented and they were a weak outside shooting team. They shot 32.9% on 3s which was significantly below the league average of 35.3% and the 5th worst percentage in the league, plus they only ranked 18th in a 29 team league in 3s made.[/QUOTE]

Damn! He was just a beast!

Shaq, at his peak, at least offensively, was a great as anyone who has ever played the game. And, IMHO, his defense and rebounding were very under-rated, as well. He easily outrebounded Motumbo in '01, as well as pounding the DPOY. He even outblocked "Mt. Motumbo."

Great clips BTW.

I just wish we had much more of Wilt's career to compare them to. I will agree, though, that I seldom saw Chamberlain play as powerfully. Maybe had Shaq played in the Chamberlain era, we might have seen Wilt go all-out. However, in Wilt's era, there was just no one that could come close to his amazing size, athleticism, and power. He was so much stronger than anyone else he ever faced, that he developed his "goliath complex." Of course, Shaq has also been overwhelming in his career, as well, but at least he relished it. Chamberlain reluctantly used his massive edge in power.

BTW, I will rep you when I can. This was an outstanding post.

[QUOTE=jlauber]Damn! He was just a beast!

Shaq, at his peak, at least offensively, was a great as anyone who has ever played the game. And, IMHO, his defense and rebounding were very under-rated, as well. He easily outrebounded Motumbo in '01, as well as pounding the DPOY. He even outblocked "Mt. Motumbo."

Great clips BTW.

I just wish we had much more of Wilt's career to compare them to. I will agree, though, that I seldom saw Chamberlain play as powerfully. Maybe had Shaq played in the Chamberlain era, we might have seen Wilt go all-out. However, in Wilt's era, there was just no one that could come close to his amazing size, athleticism, and power. He was so much stronger than anyone else he ever faced, that he developed his "goliath complex." Of course, Shaq has also been overwhelming in his career, as well, but at least he relished it. Chamberlain reluctantly used his massive edge in power.

BTW, I will rep you when I can. This was an outstanding post.[/QUOTE]

Thanks, I actually love watching clips from the era where there isn't much footage(60's and early 70's), I am watching the second half of game 4 of the '71 finals again at the moment.

The player I am appreciating more and more is Bill Russell, I just watched part of the '62 all-star game recently and his quickness and overall defense impress me in just about every game I see, whether it's that, the '66 EDF game vs the Royals, the '67 EDF ect.

Compared to his peers, I'd definitely call Russell the greatest overall defensive player ever in terms of impact, and due to his quickness, athleticism, IQ and shot blocking ability, I'd bet he could anchor a great defense in any game. I'm still not that impressed with his offense game, but I reserve the right to change my mind on that one.

I think that Thurmond was a better 1 on 1 post defender than Russell, but as far as anchoring a defense and changing shots around the rim(and keep the ball in play) I doubt anyone did more to help their team win at that end.

In fact, that's a lot more important than 1 on 1 post defense. Look at Dwight Howard now, he's not a great post defender, but his overall defensive impact has been huge for the last few years.

When I have time, I want to go through all of the actual game footage of Bill Russell available and point out the things that I was alluding to about his defense.

Speaking of defense, check out Scottie Pippen's help defense throughout those clips. His defensive impact in that series was huge and that was Pippen at 34/35 years old after a good amount of injuries.

Back to Wilt, while I prefer the later version of who was more of a defensive player and facilitator in the post, his offensive game looks better in the earlier footage. His fadeaway looked better and judging by his FT% it seems like his shooting touch was in general. In some of the early footage, you can see his speed running the court as well, so while I think the '67 version was the best, I suspect there may have been things that he did better when he was younger such as scoring.

And to give some credit where credit is due, there is a monster defensive sequence at one point in this '67 game where Russell and Wilt completely shut off the paint. [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K9RJXAdZYw&NR=1#t=5m24s"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K9RJXAdZYw&NR=1#t=5m24s[/URL]

Great block by Russell, but check out the 2 blocks in a row by Wilt at the other end.

You should cue up tape of Wilt's Kansas days, where he practically faced triple and quadruple teams everytime he touched the ball, even if he was in the backcourt. They both got doubled and tripled a lot, but Wilt forced opposing coaches to come up with that tactic.

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Thanks, I actually love watching clips from the era where there isn't much footage(60's and early 70's), I am watching the second half of game 4 of the '71 finals again at the moment.

The player I am appreciating more and more is Bill Russell, I just watched part of the '62 all-star game recently and his quickness and overall defense impress me in just about every game I see, whether it's that, the '66 EDF game vs the Royals, the '67 EDF ect.

Compared to his peers, I'd definitely call Russell the greatest overall defensive player ever in terms of impact, and due to his quickness, athleticism, IQ and shot blocking ability, I'd bet he could anchor a great defense in any game. I'm still not that impressed with his offense game, but I reserve the right to change my mind on that one.

I think that Thurmond was a better 1 on 1 post defender than Russell, but as far as anchoring a defense and changing shots around the rim(and keep the ball in play) I doubt anyone did more to help their team win at that end.

In fact, that's a lot more important than 1 on 1 post defense. Look at Dwight Howard now, he's not a great post defender, but his overall defensive impact has been huge for the last few years.

When I have time, I want to go through all of the actual game footage of Bill Russell available and point out the things that I was alluding to about his defense.

Speaking of defense, check out Scottie Pippen's help defense throughout those clips. His defensive impact in that series was huge and that was Pippen at 34/35 years old after a good amount of injuries.

Back to Wilt, while I prefer the later version of who was more of a defensive player and facilitator in the post, his offensive game looks better in the earlier footage. His fadeaway looked better and judging by his FT% it seems like his shooting touch was in general. In some of the early footage, you can see his speed running the court as well, so while I think the '67 version was the best, I suspect there may have been things that he did better when he was younger such as scoring.

And to give some credit where credit is due, there is a monster defensive sequence at one point in this '67 game where Russell and Wilt completely shut off the paint. [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K9RJXAdZYw&NR=1#t=5m24s"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K9RJXAdZYw&NR=1#t=5m24s[/URL]

[B]Great block by Russell, but check out the 2 blocks in a row by Wilt at the other end[/B].[/QUOTE]

I think counted four blocks by Wilt in about a quarter in that game. And, as great as Russell was defensively, you will notice that Wilt "cheats" off of Russell in quite a few instances. In the second half of game four of the '64 Finals, Wilt is often jumping out at the Boston shooter. In fact, Russell tips in the game winner primarily because Wilt had to go at the shooter. And, in game seven of the '62 Finals, Sam Jones just gets off the game winner against Wilt.

And, to be honest, I think Wilt's early career defense is very under-rated. Walt Bellamy tells the story of facing Wilt the very first time. He came into the game scoring 30 ppg, and at the center tip, Chamberlain told him that he would not score a point against him. Unbelieveably, Wilt held him without a FG in the first half, and blocked several of his shots. However, the "gentle giant" came out in the second half, and told Bellamy that he had proven his point, and played normally the rest of the game.

NYCelt84 also posted the H2H games between Russell and Wilt in Chamberlain's rookie season. They met 11 times, and the info did not include the 11th game, but in those first ten games that year, Wilt outscored Russell, per game, 38-20, but even more importantly, Wilt outshot Russell, .465 to .398. Furthermore, Wilt actually scored higher and shot better against Russell, than the rest of the league (37.6 ppg on .461 shooting against the entire NBA), while Russell shot a career high .467 that season, but, as noted, far worse against Wilt.

Of course, in the mod-60's, Wilt really elevated his defense. Almost everyone here knows by now how Wilt completely shut down both Russell and Thurmond in the '67 post-season (.358 and .343 shooting respectively...both nearly 100 points less than their regular season average.) Not only that, but in the '68 playoffs against the Knicks, Wilt held Bellamy, who had shot .541 during the regular season, to .421 shooting. In the '69 playoffs, he once again held Thurmond to under 40% shooting. And we can probably safely assume that he held Russell to less than 40% shooting in '64 (Russell shot .356 in his 10 post-season games...five of which were against Wilt.) In '65, Russell shot an astonishing .702 against the Lakers in the Finals, but only .451 against Wilt in the ECF's. And, in the '69 Finals, the only known game with their FG%, was game seven, and Wilt outshot Russell, 7-8 to 2-7.

There is also a recorded game in the '65 season, in which Wilt held Russell to an 0-14 game.

[url]http://www.brainyhistory.com/topics/c/chamberlain.html[/url]

Then, there was the post-surgery Wilt, who battled Kareem to a statistical draw in the '71 playoffs, (Kareem outscored him 25-22 per game, while Wilt outshot Kareem, .489 to .481, and outrebounded Kareem, 18.8 to 17.2.) In any case, Kareem scored and shot considerably less than he did in the regular season (31.7 ppg and .577 shooting.) And, then, in the '72 WCF's, Kareem heavily outscored Wilt, 33-12 per game, but Wilt held him to .457 shooting, outrebounded him by out 2 per game, and blocked some 15 skyhooks, with several more blocks, as well. And in their final six regular season games in the 72-73 season, Wilt outshot Kareem, .637 to .450.

[QUOTE=jlauber]I think counted four blocks by Wilt in about a quarter in that game. And, as great as Russell was defensively, you will notice that Wilt "cheats" off of Russell in quite a few instances. In the second half of game four of the '64 Finals, Wilt is often jumping out at the Boston shooter. In fact, Russell tips in the game winner primarily because Wilt had to go at the shooter. And, in game seven of the '62 Finals, Sam Jones just gets off the game winner against Wilt.

And, to be honest, I think Wilt's early career defense is very under-rated. Walt Bellamy tells the story of facing Wilt the very first time. He came into the game scoring 30 ppg, and at the center tip, Chamberlain told him that he would not score a point against him. Unbelieveably, Wilt held him without a FG in the first half, and blocked several of his shots. However, the "gentle giant" came out in the second half, and told Bellamy that he had proven his point, and played normally the rest of the game.

NYCelt84 also posted the H2H games between Russell and Wilt in Chamberlain's rookie season. They met 11 times, and the info did not include the 11th game, but in those first ten games that year, Wilt outscored Russell, per game, 38-20, but even more importantly, Wilt outshot Russell, .465 to .398. Furthermore, Wilt actually scored higher and shot better against Russell, than the rest of the league (37.6 ppg on .461 shooting against the entire NBA), while Russell shot a career high .467 that season, but, as noted, far worse against Wilt.

Of course, in the mod-60's, Wilt really elevated his defense. Almost everyone here knows by now how Wilt completely shut down both Russell and Thurmond in the '67 post-season (.358 and .343 shooting respectively...both nearly 100 points less than their regular season average.) Not only that, but in the '68 playoffs against the Knicks, Wilt held Bellamy, who had shot .541 during the regular season, to .421 shooting. In the '69 playoffs, he once again held Thurmond to under 40% shooting. And we can probably safely assume that he held Russell to less than 40% shooting in '64 (Russell shot .356 in his 10 post-season games...five of which were against Wilt.) In '65, Russell shot an astonishing .702 against the Lakers in the Finals, but only .451 against Wilt in the ECF's. And, in the '69 Finals, the only known game with their FG%, was game seven, and Wilt outshot Russell, 7-8 to 2-7.

There is also a recorded game in the '65 season, in which Wilt held Russell to an 0-14 game.

[url]http://www.brainyhistory.com/topics/c/chamberlain.html[/url]

Then, there was the post-surgery Wilt, who battled Kareem to a statistical draw in the '71 playoffs, (Kareem outscored him 25-22 per game, while Wilt outshot Kareem, .489 to .481, and outrebounded Kareem, 18.8 to 17.2.) In any case, Kareem scored and shot considerably less than he did in the regular season (31.7 ppg and .577 shooting.) And, then, in the '72 WCF's, Kareem heavily outscored Wilt, 33-12 per game, but Wilt held him to .457 shooting, outrebounded him by out 2 per game, and blocked some 15 skyhooks, with several more blocks, as well. And in their final six regular season games in the 72-73 season, Wilt outshot Kareem, .637 to .450.[/QUOTE]

Well, I'm not sure about Wilt's defense early.

Lets take 1962 for example, we know that in the recap of game 7, Wilt's defense was praised, but that Russell's offense numbers rose past his season averages from 18.9 ppg to 22 ppg in the series. Then there's the Bellamy game you mentioned, but Tom Meschery said Wilt was a poor defender when he first got to Philadelphia(1961-1962).

[QUOTE]Well, he could have played better in defence. When I got in the

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]

Actually, though it's off topic, this is a perfect example of why his 1995 Magic cast was a lot better than his 2000. They complemented him better due to their 3 point shooting and had more scoring options. The 2000 Lakers on the other hand weren't as deep and talented and they were a weak outside shooting team. They shot 32.9% on 3s which was significantly below the league average of 35.3% and the 5th worst percentage in the league, plus they only ranked 18th in a 29 team league in 3s made.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, but the Magic shooters choked in the Finals... sometimes it's better to have broke shooters with experience than good shooters without experience. Glen and Fish were WET for the Finals. And really I remember them being wet all playoffs.

-Smak

[QUOTE=ILLsmak]Yeah, but the Magic shooters choked in the Finals... sometimes it's better to have broke shooters with experience than good shooters without experience. Glen and Fish were WET for the Finals. And really I remember them being wet all playoffs.

-Smak[/QUOTE]

Glen was wet in the finals? He shot 40% in the series and got benched in crunch time due to his horrible defense and his unwillingness to move without the ball. Glen played pretty poorly in the playoffs, particularly after the first round. Fish on the other hand shot the ball pretty well, but he wasn't a big factor in the playoffs. He ended up the Lakers 4th guard in the playoffs after a a horrible regular season in which he shot under 35% from the field.

Glen could've been so much more of an asset had he accepted his role as a spot much shooter more.

And yeah, Orlando's shooters choked in the finals, but you have to wonder how well that team would've played with Phil Jackson coaching them instead of Brian Hill, or if you threw in a more mature 28 year old Shaq instead of 23 year old Shaq.

That 1995 Magic team also had a legit power forward, and a good one in Grant while that position was weakness on the 2000 Lakers.

OP, Give me your top 10 players of all-time. You seem to know a thing or two about the history of hoops.

[QUOTE=EleganceD]OP, Give me your top 10 players of all-time. You seem to know a thing or two about the history of hoops.[/QUOTE]

Right now I can't really decide on an all-time list because I haven't decided the best criteria. For example, how much to value peak play vs longevity and how much to factor in how timeless your game is and how well it'd factor into other eras vs how good you were vs your peers.

In no order, my top 10 is Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Bird, Magic, Jordan, Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan and Kobe and I don't see anyone with a valid case over any of those players currently. The active player who I think could push one of them out and make my list is Lebron, but not anyone else that I see in the NBA at the moment. And I don't see any past player with a good enough case over any of those players to push one of them out of my top 10.

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Right now I can't really decide on an all-time list because I haven't decided the best criteria. For example, how much to value peak play vs longevity and how much to factor in how timeless your game is and how well it'd factor into other eras vs how good you were vs your peers.

In no order, my top 10 is Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Bird, Magic, Jordan, Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan and Kobe and I don't see anyone with a valid case over any of those players currently. The active player who I think could push one of them out and make my list is Lebron, but not anyone else that I see in the NBA at the moment. And I don't see any past player with a good enough case over any of those players to push one of them out of my top 10.[/QUOTE]

If you take Mikan out of the equation due to the pre-integration/pre-shot clock era then you have the indisputable top ten. The only ten players in NBA history to win multiple titles as the best player on their team and multiple Finals MVP's (or would have in the case of Wilt/Russell).

You're on to something in the OP as well. But it is a two-sided story...

[U]Advantages beyond Shaq's Control[/U]
Physicality of Era - Wilt took way more abuse than Shaq, and Shaq took more abuse than any player of his era by far.

Quality of opposing centers - Shaq faced far more below average centers than Wilt who played over half his games the likes of Russell, Thurmond, Reed, Lovellette, Cowens, Unseld, Kareem etc. all Hall of Famers.

Weight/dietary/nutrition training - Shaq could recover from injuries and play through them with much better care than Wilt and the players of his era.

The three-point line - It forced players to be more cautious in their double teaming of O'Neal as the risk was greater with the 50% more valuable basket an option.

[U]Advantages beyond Wilt's Control[/U]
Defensive sophistication of Era - Teams had no idea how to handle Wilt, he was the first of his kind. By the time Shaq got there teams could say, here's what worked vs. Wilt, vs. Kareem, vs. Moses, vs. Hakeem etc.

Athletic depth of league - Even with 37-30 teams, the NBA Shaq played in was far more athletic than the one Wilt played in.

Rules early in his career - The lane was not as wide, that's a big advantage, the changed it because of Wilt primarily.

Pace of the game - Wilt played in an era with 30 more possessions per game, his remarkable endurance allowed him to play every minute, but still he could not have created that pace on his own.

[QUOTE=G.O.A.T]If you take Mikan out of the equation due to the pre-integration/pre-shot clock era then you have the indisputable top ten. The only ten players in NBA history to win multiple titles as the best player on their team and multiple Finals MVP's (or would have in the case of Wilt/Russell).[/QUOTE]

Yeah, Mikan is hard for me to rank, and I'd probably have to leave him out of the top 10 due to the fact that unlike the players I listed in the top 10, I don't think he could have competed in other eras, but because he was so essential to the development of the sport and because of his dominance vs his peers and combination of team success/individual success, I could rank him 11th.

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]
I've said a million times in response to those that talk about the centers Wilt faced compared to Shaq that the team defenses Shaq faced were 100 times tougher. No doubt in my mind that Shaq was harder to stop. As you can see, Wilt could let you off the hook in single coverage because he wouldn't use his size to his advantage as much as Shaq, which by Wilt's admission was a mistake, nor did he have the footwork or ball handling skills to make the same quick moves.

Credit goes to Russell for being an excellent defensive player, but anyone who thinks Shaq isn't scoring easily with single coverage, the luxury of being able to put the ball on the floor several times and a 4 inch, 100 pound size advantage is crazy. The difference between the 2 is that Shaq didn't apologize for his size and used it to make him great. He didn't really care if his ame was pretty or people thought he was skilled, though the other difference was his vastly superior low post game.[/QUOTE]

Great post Shaqattack and thanks for the work as it is of the highest level you can catch on the internet. Its outstanding scholarship. You and Jlauder are like the beginning of multi-media education on the net. Humorous tho, is the hate that some people have for the simple mention of the 60's is amusing - like a 60's monster or Hippies consistently ruined their Christmas or something.

I do think that defenses have progressively gotten better over the years. A couple of messed up things make it hard to really assess Wilt's impact. One is the blackout on his mega years and two being that nobody has really assessed the coaches of that time in handling mega talent at that time. I think it gets overlooked a lot but I think you are familiar with my stands about coaching and great big men. Shaq is crazy dominant and with more energy before Phil Jackson but it all comes together under Jackson. Kareem and Riley, Duncan and Pop. I really believe each of these players has a maximum of half of the championships they have without those coaches and then we look at them all very differently. What is Wilt maximized???

Doing criss crosses over generations is always going to be very hard and futile in the end. The biggest differences between big men of different eras is the league response to their dominance as an organization. They made rules to stop Wilt. Not once do you see a rule to help Wilt out, its an definitive trend with Wilt. So I don't agree with your assessment that they would have allowed him to go crazy and barrell over people like they allowed Shaq to do. And I don't agree with the idea that Wilt shyed from being big. Shaq wasn't really close to playing an all around big man game to Wilt. Wilt protected the rim far better and Shaq could have lead the league in rebounding more than once. I do think Wilt had some Goliath issues and a gentle heart. While the league has adopted Shaq as a giant teddy bear there was a whole different reality that Wilt faced. If Shaq played in the 60's they would have slowed him down as well and it would have easier because he wasn't as versatile or skilled. But that is a criss cross thing I don't want to get into.

The great things about Wilt are timeless and lend to his greatness in all the succeeding generations. He was active as any big man since. He took on all of the center responsibilities at a level which would be on par with anybody since. He went at rebounds, blocks and manning the paint unlike any other center. His timing seems would be elite today. His reach, speed, strength and jumping would be elite today. His skill level would be elite among centers. He naturally had a knack for scoring with a touch that would still be a joy to watch now. The guy was versatile and covered everything a person could do from that position at extremely high levels. In his physical prime with the right coach he could have been a 45ppg 25rebounds, 5 assist, 10 block guy over the course of 7 years. Just crazy prolific and super active numbers. And his superior motor is rarely talked about. Cause I think the biggest thing against players today averaging that against lesser players that had integrity is the activity level, endurance, and desire to maintain that level for 650 games.

Wilt seemingly was a stronger Daivd Robinson in his prime with a stronger post presence. Your criticism of Wilt not being crazy aggressive at the rim is legit because he didn't try to push that issue. But in the same breath you are conceding Wilt's superioty in rebounding and blocking shots to everybody since he played. Wilt wins out because he still was a greatly skilled scorer which is more adaptable to rule changes and diffrent defenses. If Wilt had Aurabach as his coach, Red compliments Wilt's psychological battles, and the GOAT question is a joke.

[QUOTE=G.O.A.T]If you take Mikan out of the equation due to the pre-integration/pre-shot clock era then you have the indisputable top ten. The only ten players in NBA history to win multiple titles as the best player on their team and multiple Finals MVP's (or would have in the case of Wilt/Russell).

You're on to something in the OP as well. But it is a two-sided story...

[U]Advantages beyond Shaq's Control[/U]
Physicality of Era - Wilt took way more abuse than Shaq, and Shaq took more abuse than any player of his era by far.

Quality of opposing centers - Shaq faced far more below average centers than Wilt who played over half his games the likes of Russell, Thurmond, Reed, Lovellette, Cowens, Unseld, Kareem etc. all Hall of Famers.

Weight/dietary/nutrition training - Shaq could recover from injuries and play through them with much better care than Wilt and the players of his era.

The three-point line - It forced players to be more cautious in their double teaming of O'Neal as the risk was greater with the 50% more valuable basket an option.

[U]Advantages beyond Wilt's Control[/U]
Defensive sophistication of Era - Teams had no idea how to handle Wilt, he was the first of his kind. By the time Shaq got there teams could say, here's what worked vs. Wilt, vs. Kareem, vs. Moses, vs. Hakeem etc.

Athletic depth of league - Even with 37-30 teams, the NBA Shaq played in was far more athletic than the one Wilt played in.

Rules early in his career - The lane was not as wide, that's a big advantage, the changed it because of Wilt primarily.

Pace of the game - Wilt played in an era with 30 more possessions per game, his remarkable endurance allowed him to play every minute, but still he could not have created that pace on his own.[/QUOTE]
Excuse my delinquency, GOAT in omtting your scholarship as well. Shout out to Phila, Psilas and a guy I rarely see much Gottenberg?