today

[sep]

Apr 18, 2008 18:32:12 GMT -5 LjSnUo said:

Apr 17, 2008 14:21:22 GMT -5 dkgojackets said:

Wilt Chamberlain averaged 38 and 27 as a rookie.

Shaq is no doubt one of the all time greats, but most dominant ever is a stretch.

Against 6'8'' white guys...

And that has what to do with the argument of who dominated the NBA more?

[LjSnUo]

Apr 18, 2008 18:37:54 GMT -5 sep said:

Apr 18, 2008 18:32:12 GMT -5 LjSnUo said:

Against 6'8'' white guys...

And that has what to do with the argument of who dominated the NBA more?

A dominant player in the SEC is different than a dominant player in the MAC....

[Claytons Crew]

Apr 18, 2008 18:44:57 GMT -5 LjSnUo said:

Apr 18, 2008 18:37:54 GMT -5 sep said:

And that has what to do with the argument of who dominated the NBA more?

A dominant player in the SEC is different than a dominant player in the MAC....

Aren't you guys talking about the most dominant player in the NBA? What does colleges have to do with how they do in the NBA?

[dkgojackets]

Apr 18, 2008 19:12:12 GMT -5 Claytons Crew said:

Apr 18, 2008 18:44:57 GMT -5 LjSnUo said:

A dominant player in the SEC is different than a dominant player in the MAC....

Aren't you guys talking about the most dominant player in the NBA? What does colleges have to do with how they do in the NBA?

he only cares about shaq because he went to LSU

And doesn't the word "dominant" by definition refer to how much greater a player is than his competition? The "most dominant" player would be the player with the furthest gap between himself and the rest of the league. Since shaq only has 1 mvp I dont think that he was that much better than his competition.

[JackTheRipper]

Um Jeff...you forgetting about a guy named Jordan?

[JacktheRipper]

Apr 18, 2008 19:25:46 GMT -5 dkgojackets said:

Apr 18, 2008 19:12:12 GMT -5 Claytons Crew said:

Aren't you guys talking about the most dominant player in the NBA? What does colleges have to do with how they do in the NBA?

he only cares about shaq because he went to LSU

And doesn't the word "dominant" by definition refer to how much greater a player is than his competition? The "most dominant" player would be the player with the furthest gap between himself and the rest of the league. Since shaq only has 1 mvp I dont think that he was that much better than his competition.

MVPs are not a measure of how great a player is. Shaq was the most dominate center I have ever seen. Most dominate all time? Probably not, but I don't think the statement that Shaq was the most dominate center of all time is not that much of a reach.

[sep]

Wilt wasn't a center?

[dkgojackets]

People are losing all respect for the history of the game. Wilt revolutionized basketball and the center position. He was unstoppable. One season he averaged 50 points and 27 rebounds a game, just sick numbers. That is dominance.

[dkgojackets]

Apr 18, 2008 20:03:44 GMT -5 JacktheRipper said:

MVPs are not a measure of how great a player is. Shaq was the most dominate center I have ever seen. Most dominate all time? Probably not, but I don't think the statement that Shaq was the most dominate center of all time is not that much of a reach.

Awards and accolades are generally a good measure of how you stack up to your peers. Shaq never led the league in rebounds or blocks. That doesn't scream "most dominant big man of all time" to me.

[JacktheRipper]

Apr 18, 2008 21:14:37 GMT -5 dkgojackets said:

Apr 18, 2008 20:03:44 GMT -5 JacktheRipper said:

MVPs are not a measure of how great a player is. Shaq was the most dominate center I have ever seen. Most dominate all time? Probably not, but I don't think the statement that Shaq was the most dominate center of all time is not that much of a reach.

Awards and accolades are generally a good measure of how you stack up to your peers. Shaq never led the league in rebounds or blocks. That doesn't scream "most dominant big man of all time" to me.

Stats paint the better picture. Oh and Wilt was better than Shaq, but I never got to see much of Wilt seeing as I was born in 1988.

[sep]

Wilt averaged at least 20/20 his first 10 years in the league.

Never gonna see that again.

[dkgojackets]

wilt did a lot of things that we will never see again

[sep]

I dont have the time to point them all out however.

[JackTheRipper]

I don't know a helluva a lot about basketball, but I think MJ is the greatest for a few reasons: he was one of the five greatest offensive players ever, he was a ferocious defender and he was the most clutch player in history. 6-for-6 in finals + 6 finals MVP's? 'Nuff said.

[dkgojackets]

i dont think were talking "greatest", but rather "most dominant"

[JackTheRipper]

Apr 19, 2008 0:53:55 GMT -5 dkgojackets said:

i dont think were talking "greatest", but rather "most dominant"

MJ pretty much did what he wanted throughout his career. How is that not dominant?

[Freak93]

I don't think Jordan was dominant in the sense that he could physically outpower any player that came up the lane.

[Loki]

I personally think there are a number of things that you can argue for Jordan vs. Wilt.

Wilt vs. Shaq. Quit being your typical homerself Jeff, seriously. It's like a Babe/Hank debate, the statistics, and in comparison to others during their time too, says it all. Wilt did things no one will ever do again when it wasn't normal to drop 50. He was pulling down boards like it was nothing and no one could even touch him. Shaq was slightly better than his competition for much of his career and his statistics were far from superior for the most part in comparison to Wilt. And like someone said, for a big man like Shaq to never lead the league in blocks or rebounds, I think it speaks volumes as to how he most definitely was not the most dominant big man of all-time..last I checked those two stats are pretty key for a big man.

[Keeper]

I think Wilt is the better center, perhaps the best player ever. That being said, I think there's an argument for Shaq. When Wilt came in to the NBA, the things he was doing just simply changed what people expected from a center. Wilt was playing on a different level, and was doing things that other big men simply hadn't even thought about. As the NBA has progressed to what it is today though, I would really be interested in seeing how Wilt would've performed. I think he'd still be one of the best, but put up no where near the numbers he did.

[LjSnUo]

Apr 20, 2008 7:47:26 GMT -5 Loki said:

Wilt vs. Shaq. Quit being your typical homerself Jeff, seriously. It's like a Babe/Hank debate, the statistics, and in comparison to others during their time too, says it all. Wilt did things no one will ever do again when it wasn't normal to drop 50. He was pulling down boards like it was nothing and no one could even touch him. Shaq was slightly better than his competition for much of his career and his statistics were far from superior for the most part in comparison to Wilt. And like someone said, for a big man like Shaq to never lead the league in blocks or rebounds, I think it speaks volumes as to how he most definitely was not the most dominant big man of all-time..last I checked those two stats are pretty key for a big man.

I'm not being a homer, I'm stating facts unlike you. The baseball comparison you made is laughable, doesn't even make sense. Wilt played against a bunch of guys who weren't on the same level as he was and his numbers show that. Shaq played against a bunch of guys who were in their primes and specialized to do things like rebound and block shots (Dennis rodman ect...). Shaq scored, rebounded, blocks shots, passes from the post better than any big man... He is the most dominant player the league has seen. Stop arguing because you are making yourselves look like fools.