Congratulations Shaq

[ManUp]

I very much like Shaq.

That being said ---- he's no Wilt Chamberlain. 

Well if Shaq played when Wilt played he would of averaged 100 a night lol.

I totally disagree.  Not to say that that Shaq wouldn't have done well, but Wilt dominated everything. 

1)
The best rebounds per year that Shaq has had is 13.85 in the 92/93 season (143rd on the list of best rebounding seasons, with 5 active players ahead of him). 

Chamberlain had 10 seasons averaging 20+ rebounds per game (with no one ahead of him)
 
2)
Shaq currently has an 11.3 rebound per game average, putting him 21st on the all time career average list. (only active player ahead of him is Tim Duncan, with KG slightly behind him).

Chamberlain has 10 of the top 20 seasons. (no one ahead of him)

3)
As for scoring, Shaq's best season rates 70th on the all time list (behind 8 current players).

Chamberlain has 5 of the top 6 seasons, 7 of the top 20. (behind no one)


Conclusion)
Shaq is a top 10 center, Chamberlain is the greatest center ever and if not the greatest player ever, he's in the top 3 with Jordan and Oscar Robertson.

I don't believe that Wilt could put up those numbers playing the same era Shaq did.

I don't either, it would be foolish to think so.  However, he dominated his era and Shaq has not dominated his (he dominated a few years, but not an era).

Yes he was statistically dominant, but in my opinion that has a lot do with the era. I doubt any players will ever be able to reproduce the type of statistical dominance displayed by Chamberlain. In the same way I don't think it's possible for another franchise to be as dominant as the Celtics in the late 50/60's or win like Russell. You can't dismiss the numbers, but you can't just take them at face value either. He loses a bit of credibility with me because if he was the player the numbers suggest I'd expect him to win more than 2 rings. Shaq has been dominant statistically, and with his teams I think he should gets a lot of points for that.

[SShorefan 4.0]

I very much like Shaq.

That being said ---- he's no Wilt Chamberlain. 

Well if Shaq played when Wilt played he would of averaged 100 a night lol.

I totally disagree.  Not to say that that Shaq wouldn't have done well, but Wilt dominated everything. 

1)
The best rebounds per year that Shaq has had is 13.85 in the 92/93 season (143rd on the list of best rebounding seasons, with 5 active players ahead of him). 

Chamberlain had 10 seasons averaging 20+ rebounds per game (with no one ahead of him)
 
2)
Shaq currently has an 11.3 rebound per game average, putting him 21st on the all time career average list. (only active player ahead of him is Tim Duncan, with KG slightly behind him).

Chamberlain has 10 of the top 20 seasons. (no one ahead of him)

3)
As for scoring, Shaq's best season rates 70th on the all time list (behind 8 current players).

Chamberlain has 5 of the top 6 seasons, 7 of the top 20. (behind no one)


Conclusion)
Shaq is a top 10 center, Chamberlain is the greatest center ever and if not the greatest player ever, he's in the top 3 with Jordan and Oscar Robertson.

I don't believe that Wilt could put up those numbers playing the same era Shaq did.

I don't either, it would be foolish to think so.  However, he dominated his era and Shaq has not dominated his (he dominated a few years, but not an era).

Yes he was statistically dominant, but in my opinion that has a lot do with the era. I doubt any players will ever be able to reproduce the type of statistical dominance displayed by Chamberlain. In the same way I don't think it's possible for another franchise to be as dominant as the Celtics in the late 50/60's or win like Russell. You can't dismiss the numbers, but you can't just take them at face value either. He loses a bit of credibility with me because if he was the player the numbers suggest I'd expect him to win more than 2 rings. Shaq has been dominant statistically, and with his teams I think he should gets a lot of points for that.

Ok, we'll agree to disagree. 

The two rings he has are more than many other of the greats and considering he won those against the Celtic Juggernauts in many ways makes them even more impressive.

[ManUp]

I very much like Shaq.

That being said ---- he's no Wilt Chamberlain. 

Well if Shaq played when Wilt played he would of averaged 100 a night lol.

I totally disagree.  Not to say that that Shaq wouldn't have done well, but Wilt dominated everything. 

1)
The best rebounds per year that Shaq has had is 13.85 in the 92/93 season (143rd on the list of best rebounding seasons, with 5 active players ahead of him). 

Chamberlain had 10 seasons averaging 20+ rebounds per game (with no one ahead of him)
 
2)
Shaq currently has an 11.3 rebound per game average, putting him 21st on the all time career average list. (only active player ahead of him is Tim Duncan, with KG slightly behind him).

Chamberlain has 10 of the top 20 seasons. (no one ahead of him)

3)
As for scoring, Shaq's best season rates 70th on the all time list (behind 8 current players).

Chamberlain has 5 of the top 6 seasons, 7 of the top 20. (behind no one)


Conclusion)
Shaq is a top 10 center, Chamberlain is the greatest center ever and if not the greatest player ever, he's in the top 3 with Jordan and Oscar Robertson.

I don't believe that Wilt could put up those numbers playing the same era Shaq did.

I don't either, it would be foolish to think so.  However, he dominated his era and Shaq has not dominated his (he dominated a few years, but not an era).

Yes he was statistically dominant, but in my opinion that has a lot do with the era. I doubt any players will ever be able to reproduce the type of statistical dominance displayed by Chamberlain. In the same way I don't think it's possible for another franchise to be as dominant as the Celtics in the late 50/60's or win like Russell. You can't dismiss the numbers, but you can't just take them at face value either. He loses a bit of credibility with me because if he was the player the numbers suggest I'd expect him to win more than 2 rings. Shaq has been dominant statistically, and with his teams I think he should gets a lot of points for that.

Ok, we'll agree to disagree. 

The two rings he has are more than many other of the greats and considering he won those against the Celtic Juggernauts in many ways makes them even more impressive.

He never beat those Juggernaut Celtics.

Russell was his daddy. 

Anyways I'll agree on agreeing to disagree, TP.

[SShorefan 4.0]

I very much like Shaq.

That being said ---- he's no Wilt Chamberlain. 

Well if Shaq played when Wilt played he would of averaged 100 a night lol.

I totally disagree.  Not to say that that Shaq wouldn't have done well, but Wilt dominated everything. 

1)
The best rebounds per year that Shaq has had is 13.85 in the 92/93 season (143rd on the list of best rebounding seasons, with 5 active players ahead of him). 

Chamberlain had 10 seasons averaging 20+ rebounds per game (with no one ahead of him)
 
2)
Shaq currently has an 11.3 rebound per game average, putting him 21st on the all time career average list. (only active player ahead of him is Tim Duncan, with KG slightly behind him).

Chamberlain has 10 of the top 20 seasons. (no one ahead of him)

3)
As for scoring, Shaq's best season rates 70th on the all time list (behind 8 current players).

Chamberlain has 5 of the top 6 seasons, 7 of the top 20. (behind no one)


Conclusion)
Shaq is a top 10 center, Chamberlain is the greatest center ever and if not the greatest player ever, he's in the top 3 with Jordan and Oscar Robertson.

I don't believe that Wilt could put up those numbers playing the same era Shaq did.

I don't either, it would be foolish to think so.  However, he dominated his era and Shaq has not dominated his (he dominated a few years, but not an era).

Yes he was statistically dominant, but in my opinion that has a lot do with the era. I doubt any players will ever be able to reproduce the type of statistical dominance displayed by Chamberlain. In the same way I don't think it's possible for another franchise to be as dominant as the Celtics in the late 50/60's or win like Russell. You can't dismiss the numbers, but you can't just take them at face value either. He loses a bit of credibility with me because if he was the player the numbers suggest I'd expect him to win more than 2 rings. Shaq has been dominant statistically, and with his teams I think he should gets a lot of points for that.

Ok, we'll agree to disagree. 

The two rings he has are more than many other of the greats and considering he won those against the Celtic Juggernauts in many ways makes them even more impressive.

He never beat those Juggernaut Celtics.

Russell was his daddy. 

Anyways I'll agree on agreeing to disagree, TP.

Ditto on the TP

Chamberlain was 58-84 against the Celts, not quite a never, but obviously not stellar either.

Here's a good article on Hoopsvibe.com

http://www.hoopsvibe.com/nba/nba-articles/wilt-chamberlain-and-bill-russell-new-perspectives-ar45961.html

[KCattheStripe]

I very much like Shaq.

That being said ---- he's no Wilt Chamberlain. 

Well if Shaq played when Wilt played he would of averaged 100 a night lol.

I totally disagree.  Not to say that that Shaq wouldn't have done well, but Wilt dominated everything. 

1)
The best rebounds per year that Shaq has had is 13.85 in the 92/93 season (143rd on the list of best rebounding seasons, with 5 active players ahead of him). 

Chamberlain had 10 seasons averaging 20+ rebounds per game (with no one ahead of him)
 
2)
Shaq currently has an 11.3 rebound per game average, putting him 21st on the all time career average list. (only active player ahead of him is Tim Duncan, with KG slightly behind him).

Chamberlain has 10 of the top 20 seasons. (no one ahead of him)

3)
As for scoring, Shaq's best season rates 70th on the all time list (behind 8 current players).

Chamberlain has 5 of the top 6 seasons, 7 of the top 20. (behind no one)


Conclusion)
Shaq is a top 10 center, Chamberlain is the greatest center ever and if not the greatest player ever, he's in the top 3 with Jordan and Oscar Robertson.

Shaq is a top 5 center.

[LB3533]

What defense did they play back in Wilt's era?

Could Wilt average those numbers with a 3 point line?

How many big men were there in Wilt's era?

I imagine if the ball went to Shaq every time down he'd average 60-70 points in today's NBA, never mind back in 60's when there weren't many tall players or big time athletes.

[SShorefan 4.0]

I very much like Shaq.

That being said ---- he's no Wilt Chamberlain. 

Well if Shaq played when Wilt played he would of averaged 100 a night lol.

I totally disagree.  Not to say that that Shaq wouldn't have done well, but Wilt dominated everything. 

1)
The best rebounds per year that Shaq has had is 13.85 in the 92/93 season (143rd on the list of best rebounding seasons, with 5 active players ahead of him). 

Chamberlain had 10 seasons averaging 20+ rebounds per game (with no one ahead of him)
 
2)
Shaq currently has an 11.3 rebound per game average, putting him 21st on the all time career average list. (only active player ahead of him is Tim Duncan, with KG slightly behind him).

Chamberlain has 10 of the top 20 seasons. (no one ahead of him)

3)
As for scoring, Shaq's best season rates 70th on the all time list (behind 8 current players).

Chamberlain has 5 of the top 6 seasons, 7 of the top 20. (behind no one)


Conclusion)
Shaq is a top 10 center, Chamberlain is the greatest center ever and if not the greatest player ever, he's in the top 3 with Jordan and Oscar Robertson.

Shaq is a top 5 center.

I would agree, maybe even #4.  Wilt, Kareem, Russell, Shaq and Hakeem at 4 & 5.

[KCattheStripe]

I very much like Shaq.

That being said ---- he's no Wilt Chamberlain. 

Well if Shaq played when Wilt played he would of averaged 100 a night lol.

I totally disagree.  Not to say that that Shaq wouldn't have done well, but Wilt dominated everything. 

1)
The best rebounds per year that Shaq has had is 13.85 in the 92/93 season (143rd on the list of best rebounding seasons, with 5 active players ahead of him). 

Chamberlain had 10 seasons averaging 20+ rebounds per game (with no one ahead of him)
 
2)
Shaq currently has an 11.3 rebound per game average, putting him 21st on the all time career average list. (only active player ahead of him is Tim Duncan, with KG slightly behind him).

Chamberlain has 10 of the top 20 seasons. (no one ahead of him)

3)
As for scoring, Shaq's best season rates 70th on the all time list (behind 8 current players).

Chamberlain has 5 of the top 6 seasons, 7 of the top 20. (behind no one)


Conclusion)
Shaq is a top 10 center, Chamberlain is the greatest center ever and if not the greatest player ever, he's in the top 3 with Jordan and Oscar Robertson.

Shaq is a top 5 center.

I would agree, maybe even #4.  Wilt, Kareem, Russell, Shaq and Hakeem at 4 & 5.

Agreed.

[wiltchamberneazy]

I like Shaq a lot too, though I rooted against him the entire time he was on the Lakers.  I've defended Shaq in many debates throughout his career.  It's amazing how many people think Shaq is good only because of his size.  That's ridiculous.  If that is true, then Mark Eaton would be an alltime great.

only if they would have allowed him to get away with murder.  Lets see, his only move is to use his weight to push the defender under the basket and then dunk or throw a little baby hook from 2ft. Guy never cared enough about FT to be good at them,  and the 3 second rule never applied to him. Never mind the fact that he was crowned by stern as the next superstar before he played his forst season. Im just wondering what celtic fans would think of a guy who calls out Tommy for not voting for him while getting his rookie of the year award, becasue thats exactly what that cocky sob did.

Shaq has a great soft touch around the rim, nowadays he mainly dunks but in his early years he used to demonstrate this skill more. I don't blame him, if I were that big and strong, why not to take advantage of it? Why should one shoot a hookshot when you can get under the rim and dunk? It's not his fault that other centers are weaker than him. That's his first move but not the only one, but you've got to take that away from him to force him do anything else. Until nobody does that he will continue to dunk in your face.

Btw for old times' sake
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EefJHAWigvY

[ManUp]

I like Shaq a lot too, though I rooted against him the entire time he was on the Lakers.  I've defended Shaq in many debates throughout his career.  It's amazing how many people think Shaq is good only because of his size.  That's ridiculous.  If that is true, then Mark Eaton would be an alltime great.

only if they would have allowed him to get away with murder.  Lets see, his only move is to use his weight to push the defender under the basket and then dunk or throw a little baby hook from 2ft. Guy never cared enough about FT to be good at them,  and the 3 second rule never applied to him. Never mind the fact that he was crowned by stern as the next superstar before he played his forst season. Im just wondering what celtic fans would think of a guy who calls out Tommy for not voting for him while getting his rookie of the year award, becasue thats exactly what that cocky sob did.

Shaq has a great soft touch around the rim, nowadays he mainly dunks but in his early years he used to demonstrate this skill more. I don't blame him, if I were that big and strong, why not to take advantage of it? Why should one shoot a hookshot when you can get under the rim and dunk? It's not his fault that other centers are weaker than him. That's his first move but not the only one, but you've got to take that away from him to force him do anything else. Until nobody does that he will continue to dunk in your face.

Btw for old times' sake
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EefJHAWigvY

Thanks, I'm going to bring up this video anytime someone tries to compare Dwights offense to Shaqs. Dwight just doesn't have that type of touch, and I'm not sure he ever will.

[moiso]

Athough Dwight and Shaq are similar athletically, Shaq is/was a true basketball player with touch, great footwork, and as that video shows, even the ability to dribble and pass.  Dwight is a great player but he's still very mechanical.  I don't think he'll ever be quite as good as Shaq on the offensive end.

[Edgar]

Athough Dwight and Shaq are similar athletically, Shaq is/was a true basketball player with touch, great footwork, and as that video shows, even the ability to dribble and pass.  Dwight is a great player but he's still very mechanical.  I don't think he'll ever be quite as good as Shaq on the offensive end.

nor big, so no dominant.