Nuvendil said:
If you think Wilt was incompetent, sub-par, or even just pretty good at defense, you clearly haven't done research beyond the usual simplified history people buy into. Wilt was an insanely dominant force at both ends and could shut down anyone. He was also simultaneously probably the cleanest defender of his day, never fouling out once. Honestly, he is probably the most remarkable physical specimen in basketball history. His lack of championships though can be explained by being drafted onto the worst team in the league and spending most of his career playing against the most dominant dynasty in the history of team sports, against a player who lead his team to 11 out of 13 championships and has a perfect 11 out of 11 record for deciding games inthe finals (he was injured for most of the playoffs his second year and they didn't make the finals one time). Wilt Chamberlain is the only player to ever beat Bill Russell in a straight, fair matchup. The reality is that if he had played in any other era, his dominance would have been greater. He just happened to play against the 56 to 69 Celtics, the greatest dynasty ever. And Shaq never had a shot at best ever. Not only is Wilt better than him, I would put Jerry West and Elgin Baylor over him too. Along with Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Oscar Robinson, Lebron James, Magic Johnson. He's an excellent center with impressive physicality. He's top 10 probably and yeah, he could have been maybe top 5, but at best he would still be behind Wilt, Kareem, and Jordan. |
Woulda, coulda, shoulda, for Wilt. His two titles (only one as the no.1 option) are what he has and that's what he's judged on.
Lets be honest too. Shaq would fucking murder the 1960s NBA, they'd have to institute some kind of rule to stop him from dunking on people after a certain point.
Magic has mystique but if I'm honest, I think Kobe is better than him (and Bird too).







