or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › Slam Magazine's 50 Best NBA Players
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Slam Magazine's 50 Best NBA Players - Page 7

post #91 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFX45 View Post
He has more ability than Shaq but I think Shaq (in his prime) would punish Wilt in the paint. It would be a great match up to see but NBA players today are more athletic than being fundamentally sound and that plays a role, especially in the defensive end. I can' see him playing 48 minutes of offense and defense against Shaq or Dwight. No doubt he was a great player, but in his prime, I do not think he would dominate or even be the best player in the league today with Lebron, Kobe, CP3, Garnett, Howard, etc...

Why would Shaq dominate him? Wilt was the same height, weighed twenty pounds less (but was all muscle and eventually played at 300), had better hops (won the Big 12 high jump championship), and as his passing shows, had a much better all around game.
post #92 of 124
Anyone saying Shaq is in the same stratosphere as Wilt is Whitney'ed.
post #93 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLMountainMan View Post
Why would Shaq dominate him? Wilt was the same height, weighed twenty pounds less (but was all muscle and eventually played at 300), had better hops (won the Big 12 high jump championship), and as his passing shows, had a much better all around game.

Shaq was also a great passer, and I bet he weighs more than his listed weight. They're both great players. I believe Shaq did a better job at using his size to dominate his opponents. Wilt admitted that himself. He said he wished he had played like Shaq did - just overpowering guys and going to the hoop. Instead he relied a lot on fall away jumpers, which he says was because he was trying to prove that he wasn't one dimensional. They played in very different eras, but Shaq was an unstoppable post player, great passer, great defender. Shaq winning 4 rings in this era is way more impressive than Wilt winning 2 in his.
post #94 of 124
Remember when Shaq won those titles without a first team all NBA teammate? Yeah, me neither.
post #95 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLMountainMan View Post
Why would Shaq dominate him? Wilt was the same height, weighed twenty pounds less (but was all muscle and eventually played at 300), had better hops (won the Big 12 high jump championship), and as his passing shows, had a much better all around game.

For the simple fact that Shaq is stronger and I just don't think Wilt ever encountered anyone like him in his whole career. Even with Shaqs horrible ft%, put him in Wilts era and he will probably be averaging 50/30 a game as well. Wilt is more refined in all aspects of the game as Shaq but if you really compare how much stronger players are today compared to Wilt's era, it is no question Shaq battled against stronger players like Duncan, Olajuwon, Robinson, Ewing, Howard (I guess this one is a stretch but it counts) etc.. Shaq is probably top 5 center of all time and even if Wilt is first, even that is debatable, Shaq isn't too far away. I even doubt Wilt had to work as hard to score or even got tired as much (even playing 48 minutes a game) as he would if he played in the past decades NBA.

Again, Wilt is great, top 3 between him, Bill Russell and Jabbar and Shaq cannot match his stats but Shaq can take him. Think about it this way, Wilt changed the game so centers won't have the advantage, so he had time to play in a less restrictive rules while Shaq has played in the restrictive version his whole career and broke boundaries.
post #96 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron View Post
I think people forget that the object of the game is to win, not to compile gaudy statistics. Wilt is an all time great for sure, but he still only managed to win two titles despite playing in a league in which he physically outmatched his opponents to a greater degree than perhaps any player in the history of the league. I'm not old enough to have seen him play, but I have to assume from his record that he was less of a player than Russell, Kareem or Shaq.

In Wilt's defense, his peak years were with the Philly/SF Warriors, surrounded by respectable teammates (Greer, Cunningham etc.), but doesn't compare well at all with the absolutely stacked Celtics dynasty, which future HoFers include: Russell, Cousy, Tom Heinsohn, Havlicek, Sharman, Frank Ramsey, KC Jones, Sam Jones, and of course, Auerbach.
post #97 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenHero View Post
Who was better? Joe Louis or Tyson. Those are the only two I could honestly say were close.

Ali considered Sugar Ray Robinson the best boxer of all time regardless of weight divisions.
post #98 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLMountainMan View Post
Do you see how you prove my point here? He had one great season.
He has had one all-time great season and the third-highest career PER of any player in NBA or ABA history, behind MJ and Shaq and ahead of David Robinson and Wilt. He could retire right now and he's still been more valuable than almost any player in pro basketball history.
post #99 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwiteaboy View Post
He has had one all-time great season and the third-highest career PER of any player in NBA or ABA history, behind MJ and Shaq and ahead of David Robinson and Wilt. He could retire right now and he's still been more valuable than almost any player in pro basketball history.

LOL. PER fanboyness at display again. Tell me one more time: do people play basketball so that their team can win or do they play solely to rack up gaudy stats?

Any of the Celtics dynasty HoFers I listed above could have put up more impressive numbers had they played elsewhere and been the #1 option. But they didn't, and became part of history for it.
post #100 of 124
They play to win with 10 other players of varying ability. There's a reason Robert Horry isn't part of this discussion.
post #101 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by whacked View Post
LOL. PER fanboyness at display again. Tell me one more time: do people play basketball so that their team can win or do they play solely to rack up gaudy stats?

"Winning" is a nebulous goal for an individual player in a team game. Each player contributes value so that a team can win - if you want to call adding value "racking up gaudy stats", I don't know what to tell you.
post #102 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenHero View Post
They play to win with 10 other players of varying ability. There's a reason Robert Horry isn't part of this discussion.

Reading is hard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kwiteaboy View Post
"Winning" is a nebulous goal for an individual player in a team game. Each player contributes value so that a team can win - if you want to call adding value "racking up gaudy stats", I don't know what to tell you.

Metrics are most meaningful when all else are equal, so in order to consider individual stats as the be-all-end-all criteria, you'd need to have all subjects under consideration playing under the same system, with the same teammates, against the same level of competition, over and over again. Alas, that's not the world we live in.
post #103 of 124
Wilt played on some good teams that didn't win it all - 1970 for one with Baylor and West. I also have a hard time believing that all of those Celtics would have had HOF careers if they hadn't played with Russell.
post #104 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by whacked View Post
Metrics are most meaningful when all else are equal, so in order to consider individual stats as the be-all-end-all criteria, you'd need to have all subjects under consideration playing under the same system, with the same teammates, against the same level of competition, over and over again. Alas, that's not the world we live in.

Of course we don't - that's why PER is normalized. Look, I know that PER isn't a perfect stat and leaves some things out (leadership ability, most defensive abilities) but it is the best measure thus far of the things that are actually predictive of win value added, so it's not a throwaway, either. And what it says is that LeBron is already a top 5 player in NBA history; any titles, more MVPS, etc. will just build that case.
post #105 of 124
Quote:
i think more than any other sport, mj is the most clearly defined #1. list should go from 1 to 3
lets quote this again with kobe has 6 rings
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › Slam Magazine's 50 Best NBA Players