# Shaq Vs Scottie



## kbdullah (Jul 8, 2010)

> Shaquille O'Neal randomly took to Instagram on Sunday evening to let everyone know the collection of Lakers greats Magic Johnson, Kobe Bryant, Elgin Baylor, himself, and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar could beat a Bulls squad featuring Derrick Rose, Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Dennis Rodman, and Horace Grant. And not only beat them outright, but win by 50 points!


http://www.sbnation.com/lookit/2015/7/20/9007091/shaq-scottie-pippen-fight-all-time-bulls-lakers-instagram


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

kbdullah said:


> http://www.sbnation.com/lookit/2015/7/20/9007091/shaq-scottie-pippen-fight-all-time-bulls-lakers-instagram


I disagree with Shaq. It wouldn't be more than 40 points.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Artis Gilmore should be at the 5 for the Bulls, if we're doing it right.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

and you'd probably be better off with prime Horace Grant instead of the older version of Rodman at the 4

and I don't know about 50 but the laundry list of Lakers all time greats dwarfs the Bulls list


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dornado said:


> Artis Gilmore should be at the 5 for the Bulls, if we're doing it right.


Sure. You still get blown out. 

Btw funny how Scottie talks crap but he's 0-3 against lakers shaq in the playoffs without Jordan. 3 years in a row on top of that.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Lakers don't win by 50, but we give them a 30 piece easily.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

I think I'd start Silk over Baylor


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

e-monk said:


> and you'd probably be better off with prime Horace Grant instead of the older version of Rodman at the 4
> 
> *and I don't know about 50 but the laundry list of Lakers all time greats dwarfs the Bulls lis*t


Hmmm... What about Logo/Goodrich/Worthy/Gasol/Wilt?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

e-monk said:


> I think I'd start Silk over Baylor


I might start west and have Magic guard Scottie.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Wilt playing stretch 4 and taking the corner 3?






that's Savoir-faire


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> Sure. You still get blown out.
> 
> Btw funny how Scottie talks crap but he's 0-3 against lakers shaq in the playoffs without Jordan. 3 years in a row on top of that.


I disagree... but I know what forum I'm in, so I'll save it. The Lakers can undoubtedly assemble the best "all-time" team, particularly when you start expanding beyond the starting 5.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dornado said:


> I disagree... but I know what forum I'm in, so I'll save it. The Lakers can undoubtedly assemble the best "all-time" team, particularly when you start expanding beyond the starting 5.


You disagree but then seemingly agree in the next sentence?


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

Anything can happen with MJ...


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

I don't even know why Shaq is bothering with this. Of course our all-time team would defeat Chicago's. He should've done this with Boston (our all-time team is better than theirs as well but at least it would be a better argument to have).


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Mark Jackson
Reggie Miller
Paul George
Antonio Davis
Jermaine O'Neal


Boom.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

R-Star said:


> Mark Jackson
> Reggie Miller
> Paul George
> Antonio Davis
> ...


Scary.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Basel said:


> Scary.


Fictional versions of Jamal Tinsley and Jon Bender come off the bench for that team as well.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

R-Star said:


> Fictional versions of Jamal Tinsley and Jon Bender come off the bench for that team as well.


Where's Ron Artest?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Basel said:


> Where's Ron Artest?


On the bench with Dale Davis and Rik Smits, mother ****er.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Fictional versions of Jamal Tinsley and Jon Bender come off the bench for that team as well.


We would need to have R. Kelly to matchup with Bender.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Mel Daniels - Rik Smits
George McGinnis - Antonio Davis
Roger Brown - Chuck Person
Reggie Miller - Captain Jack
Vern Fleming - Don Buse

(a little more respectable)


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> You disagree but then seemingly agree in the next sentence?


I disagree that the Bulls would be "blown out"... that's not inconsistent with what I wrote.


----------



## Uncle Drew (Dec 16, 2013)

How many teams would beat our second team?

I'll let the old timers argue about who that team would include.


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

Philly would be alright

Iverson
Dr J
Barkley
Moses
Wilt

Was struggling to cut those 5. But I guess Mo Cheeks or Greer should be in the side.


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

Olajuwon
Malone
McGrady
Harden
Smith

lol looking at this team Denver might have given us our greatest PG for nothing. PS I refuse to choose Murphy. He makes my skin crawl.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

So our second team would be 

West
Goodrich 
Worthy
Pau
Wilt


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Uncle Drew said:


> How many teams would beat our second team?
> 
> I'll let the old timers argue about who that team would include.


Kids these days don't want to read about history.


----------



## Uncle Drew (Dec 16, 2013)

Jamel Irief said:


> Kids these days don't want to read about history.


Ha, Calm your tits old man. 

Know my history, I just know some in here have much stronger opinions on players they actually watched play. Paulo, for example, would pick Wilt over anyone in NBA history, I assume. 

Anyway, Logo, Worthy and Wilt are no-brainers. Not sure who challanges Pau for that 4 spot. Goodrich is the obvious guard choice, but could we go big with Wilkes? Not quite the stature of others, but maybe Norm Nixon at point to free up prime Logo to play 2? How about Coop to round out the D?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Goodrich over? Byron? Eddie?
Pau over? Happy? Horry? AC? Lakers are thin at PF
who is the 3rd team's PG? Van Exel? Coop needs love somehow, where does Big Smooth or Lamar fit in?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

e-monk said:


> Mel Daniels - Rik Smits
> George McGinnis - Antonio Davis
> Roger Brown - Chuck Person
> Reggie Miller - Captain Jack
> ...


JO would dunk on Mel Daniels so hard his entire worthless decade of basketball he played in would explode.

And Roger Brown over P Gangster and Metta World Gangster? No f'ing way brah.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

e-monk said:


> Goodrich over? Byron? Eddie?
> Pau over? Happy? Horry? AC? Lakers are thin at PF
> who is the 3rd team's PG? Van Exel? Coop needs love somehow, where does Big Smooth or Lamar fit in?


Very, very thin at PF.

I'd think the depth chart goes something like this (without giving it much thought):

PG- Magic - West - Nixon - Van Exel
SG- Kobe - Goodrich - Scott - Eddie Jones
SF- Baylor - Worthy - Wilkes - LARusso/Pollard?
PF- Gasol - Mikkelsen? - AC Green - Odom
C- Kareem/Shaq - Shaq/Kareem - Wilt - Mikan


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

R-Star said:


> JO would dunk on Mel Daniels so hard his entire worthless decade of basketball he played in would explode.
> 
> And Roger Brown over P Gangster and Metta World Gangster? No f'ing way brah.


yeah, I know more about your own team's history than you do so suck it


----------



## arasu (Jan 18, 2013)

If it's top 5 vs top 5:

Magic
Kobe
Baylor
Wilt
Kareem

I know this is all Shaq's idea, but even the older version of Wilt was better 
defensively than Shaq. If we're going to put in an out-of-position center at 
power forward, Wilt is the guy. I almost would consider Magic at SF and 
West at PG with either Baylor or Wilt at PF.

Rose
MJ
Pippen
Grant
A-Train

Lakers would win, but maybe not by as much as we think.

*****

Some all-time teams 15 deep:

Lakers

Magic/West/Nixon
Kobe/Goodrich/Scott
Baylor/Worthy/Wilkes
Wilt/Gasol/Hairston
Kareem/Shaq/Mikan

*****

Bulls

DRose/Van Lier/Theus
Jordan/Sloan/Butler
Pippen/Walker/Deng
Grant/Rodman/BLove
Gilmore/Noah/Brand

*****

Pacers

Buse/Jackson/Fleming 
Miller/Knight/JRose
George/Brown/Person
McGinnis/Schrempf/West
O'neal/Daniels/Smits

*****

Rockets

Francis/Murphy/Smith
Harden/Drexler/Maxwell
T-Mac/Tomjanovich/Horry
Malone/Hayes/Sampson
Hakeem/Yao/Howard


*****

76ers

Ivy/Cheeks/Holiday
Dr. J/Greer/Toney
Barkley/Walker/Iguodala
Malone/Cunningham/McGinnis
Wilt/Ratliff/Mutombo

*****

Celtics

Cousy/White/Sharman
Havlicek/S.Jones/Allen
Bird/Pierce/Maxwell
McHale/KG/Heinsohn
Russell/Cowens/Parish

*****

Some position changes were needed to maintain 1st and 2nd team ranking. 
I think they were still plausible at those positions. It felt odd putting Julius at SG though.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

Geaux Tigers said:


> Anything can happen with MJ...


the Kobe factor cancels that out and then some


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

JT said:


> the Kobe factor cancels that out and then some


What? No.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

Porn Player said:


> What? No.


yes. the presence of MJ has no bearing on who wins or loses, since there is an equivalent player right across from him.


----------



## arasu (Jan 18, 2013)

e-monk said:


> yeah, I know more about your own team's history than you do so suck it


Stats from the early ABA were somewhat inflated. Even though George hasn't played for very long, his defense has been outstanding and his stats are solid. I'd rank him higher than Brown.


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

JT said:


> yes. the presence of MJ has no bearing on who wins or loses, since there is an equivalent player right across from him.


Kobe is the equivalent of Jordan? No. Just, no.


----------



## arasu (Jan 18, 2013)

Porn Player said:


> Kobe is the equivalent of Jordan? No. Just, no.


Kobe matches up well enough against Jordan to cancel most of the advantage. The rest of the lineup is easily in the Lakers favor.


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

arasu said:


> Kobe matches up well enough against Jordan to cancel most of the advantage. The rest of the lineup is easily in the Lakers favor.


That's a different thing to saying he is his equal. 

The difference isn't tiny, Jordan is the best player to have ever played the game. Kobe is just about Top 10.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

Porn Player said:


> That's a different thing to saying he is his equal.
> 
> The difference isn't tiny, Jordan is the best player to have ever played the game. Kobe is just about Top 10.


Wilt is the best to have played the game, not Jordan.


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

JT said:


> Wilt is the best to have played the game, not Jordan.


Why because Wilt played for the Lakers? Your homerism is hard. I respect that.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

Porn Player said:


> Why because Wilt played for the Lakers? Your homerism is hard. I respect that.


no. 50/25 is the reason


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

JT said:


> no. 50/25 is the reason


6 plays 2.


----------



## arasu (Jan 18, 2013)

JT said:


> no. 50/25 is the reason


One does have to take the pace of the game into account with those stats. The entire league played chucker-style back then. With tons of bad shots going up at a ridiculous pace, Wilt had many more chances at rebounds and many more shot opportunities than he would have had in later eras. For similar reasons I somewhat discount Elgin's and Oscar's crazy stats from that era. 

For slightly different reasons we can also put an asterisk next to Jordan's and Kobe's best scoring seasons. Jordan's highest scoring came in an era with rampant transition opportunities, playing on an uptempo team with few scoring options. Kobe's best scoring season came when he was the only decent scorer on a mediocre team, when the league had made new rules to make it more difficult to defend perimeter players one-on-one, and before teams began to adjust with better zone defenses.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

arasu said:


> One does have to take the pace of the game into account with those stats. The entire league played chucker-style back then. With tons of bad shots going up at a ridiculous pace, Wilt had many more chances at rebounds and many more shot opportunities than he would have had in later eras. For similar reasons I somewhat discount Elgin's and Oscar's crazy stats from that era.
> 
> For slightly different reasons we can also put an asterisk next to Jordan's and Kobe's best scoring seasons. Jordan's highest scoring came in an era with rampant transition opportunities, playing on an uptempo team with few scoring options. Kobe's best scoring season came when he was the only decent scorer on a mediocre team, when the league had made new rules to make it more difficult to defend perimeter players one-on-one, and before teams began to adjust with better zone defenses.


As i see it, one can really only compare players' STATS against their actual competition.
Like you've said, the pace of the games varied relevantly. Minutes played, also. 
And Wilt played in a faster pace and many more minutes per game.
That being said, so did their contemporanies (sp?). And we're not talking about slouches, here; we're talking about guys as great as Russell, Oscar, Jerry West and Elgin Baylor. They all played within the same pace and logged major minutes per game.

And Wilt was head and shoulders above everybody else. Not only in points and rebounds, but also in FG% (led the league many times). And this is a factor to take into great consideration: even when Wilt was scoring like crazy (his 50ppg season) he was still scoring at a better clip (.528FG%) than the second best scorer (Bellamy, .519FG%) and a much better clip than the third best scorer (Petitt, .450FG%).
And when his scoring went down, he still was the best rebounder in the game and even a top assist man (for a Center!).
Not to mention the fact that Wilt was so dominant the NBA changed rules because of him.

IMHO, Wilt was the guy that almost transcended the game itself: when he had to score, he was much better than the others at it; when he had to rebound, he was the best at it; when he had to pass, he even lead the league in total assists, one season - and came close another).
Magic Johnson was almost the same transcendental player. He was the only dude who could and DID play all positions on court at a tremendous level.

Just some thoughts...


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

arasu said:


> One does have to take the pace of the game into account with those stats. The entire league played chucker-style back then. With tons of bad shots going up at a ridiculous pace, Wilt had many more chances at rebounds and many more shot opportunities than he would have had in later eras. For similar reasons I somewhat discount Elgin's and Oscar's crazy stats from that era.


http://chasing23.com/wilt-chamberlain-stats-debate/

adjusted to 2011 #s , he would be a 42/15 player


----------



## arasu (Jan 18, 2013)

JT said:


> http://chasing23.com/wilt-chamberlain-stats-debate/
> 
> adjusted to 2011 #s , he would be a 42/15 player


There is no way to accurately predict how he'd play against players of other eras. Obviously he dominated his own era, especially early on. I could see him getting 15 rebounds per game in today's era, but defenses are different and there are more players who can score, which could cost him scoring opportunities. And with perimeter oriented offenses, it is likely that less of the offense would flow through him, so less scoring wouldn't necessarily lead to more assists. Usage rate among other factors affects stats tremendously. Even in today's NBA, if a player has his role change significantly it can dramatically change his stats. Dr. J's stats with the Squires were pretty impressive, but I won't try to use a pace adjusted stat as definitive proof of his ability. After joining the NBA, it took him a few years to adjust and get his stats back up. I love stats, but I like trying to see how they might look adjusted to different contexts rather than a singular formula. There are too many factors and too few stats from past eras to get any kind of accurate read. I'm not trying to diminish Wilt's greatness, but I feel sometimes his numbers are used to prove an exaggerated point when comparing across eras.


----------



## arasu (Jan 18, 2013)

PauloCatarino said:


> And Wilt was head and shoulders above everybody else. Not only in points and rebounds, but also in FG% (led the league many times). And this is a factor to take into great consideration: even when Wilt was scoring like crazy (his 50ppg season) he was still scoring at a better clip (.528FG%) than the second best scorer (Bellamy, .519FG%) and a much better clip than the third best scorer (Petitt, .450FG%)...


Bill Russell had a tendency to reduce Wilt's impact. On the defensive end of the floor, Russell was head and shoulders above everyone else of his era.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Kareem is the GOAT


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

King Sancho Fantastic said:


> Kareem is the GOAT


What's your criteria/reasoning?


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

I take everything into account including college. Kareem had the stats, championships (college and NBA), longevity. Only thing Jordan trumps him on is globalizing the game.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

King Sancho Fantastic said:


> I take everything into account including college.


Fair enough. Taking College into account, KAJ is in the conversation, sure.



> Kareem had the stats, championships (college and NBA), longevity. Only thing Jordan trumps him on is globalizing the game.


Jordan also trumps KAJ in championships being The Main Player. Don't forget that it's arguable half the championships KAJ won he was playing the Jordan-to-Worthy-in-College role.

Eventhough i love KAJ, i just can't rank him over Wilt, Magic, Jordan or Russell. But i see an argument there,


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

JT said:


> http://chasing23.com/wilt-chamberlain-stats-debate/
> 
> adjusted to 2011 #s , he would be a 42/15 player


How about adjusted to todays competition? 

The ridiculous numbers from the past don't translate 1 to 1 to current day basketball.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

King Sancho Fantastic said:


> I take everything into account including college. Kareem had the stats, championships (college and NBA), longevity. Only thing Jordan trumps him on is globalizing the game.


I think Kareem's peak was more dominant than Jordan's as well.

They changed rules to slow down Kareem (outlawing the dunk?) meanwhile they bended rules to aid Jordan (traveling? carrying? palming?).


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

arasu said:


> Stats from the early ABA were somewhat inflated. Even though George hasn't played for very long, his defense has been outstanding and his stats are solid. I'd rank him higher than Brown.


if the Pacers ever won anything meaningful (and it's the only thing meaningful they've ever won) it's because of players like Brown and McGinnis and Daniels - Brown was a baller and McGinnis was even better (as good as just about anyone who ever played) 

as for the ABA having inflated stats - check the first post merger season and you'll see that almost half the NBA All Star team was comprised of ABA dudes, (as were 4 of the 10 "All NBA" squad recognized players), the Nuggets won their division in their first season in the NBA (and the Spurs made the play-offs) and 3 of the 4 best players in the finals (Doc, McGinnis and the Enforcer) were ABA guys in their first year in the association -* and that's with folding just 6 teams worth of guys into a league that already had 16 teams in it *- don't go shitting on the ABA


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

R-Star said:


> How about adjusted to todays competition?
> 
> The ridiculous numbers from the past don't translate 1 to 1 to current day basketball.


yeah the Center position is totally deeper today than it was when he was playing Russell, Bellamy, Thurmond, Reed etc 8 times a season each back in the day

you don't know shit r-star


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

e-monk said:


> yeah the Center position is totally deeper today than it was when he was playing Russell, Bellamy, Thurmond, Reed etc 8 times a season each back in the day
> 
> you don't know shit r-star


You're right. A guy like Wilt would probably average more than his 50/25 season in todays NBA....


----------



## arasu (Jan 18, 2013)

e-monk said:


> ...as for the ABA having inflated stats - check the first post merger season and you'll see that almost half the NBA All Star team was comprised of ABA dudes, (as were 4 of the 10 "All NBA" squad recognized players), the Nuggets won their division in their first season in the NBA (and the Spurs made the play-offs) and 3 of the 4 best players in the finals (Doc, McGinnis and the Enforcer) were ABA guys in their first year in the association -* and that's with folding just 6 teams worth of guys into a league that already had 16 teams in it *- don't go shitting on the ABA


There's a reason I wrote "early" ABA. As the ABA progressed it gradually got better players and several teams folded, concentrating the talent into fewer teams, going from 11 teams to just 7. By the end of its last season, 6 of the remaining teams were on par with the NBA, with the 7th team, the Squires, as the joke of the league, having sold off all of its talent to pay the bills. Imagine if today's NBA closed down 13+ franchises and their players were distributed to the other teams. Clearly the remaining teams would be much tougher, and it would inevitably deflate some players' stats.

Both Brown and Daniels dipped statistically as the ABA became more competitive. Since they were both already past their respective primes by the time of the merger, it's difficult to say how they would have fared against NBA competition. During the Pacers last championship season Brown managed just 12.6 PPG, not exactly stellar. McGinnis was a true superstar, but if we look at his stats from the year he entered the NBA and the year before in the ABA, when there were still 10 ABA teams, he had a big drop off statistically, even though he was young and still improving.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

R-Star said:


> You're right. A guy like Wilt would probably average more than his 50/25 season in todays NBA....


It's undisputed that, considering today's pace and minutes a player is on the court Wilt's numbers would go down. 

It's also undisputed that today's crop of Centers are of inferior quality than the ones Wilt had to face. 
Unless, that is, you are willing to defend that the Gasols, Jordan, Noah, Dwight and Jefferson (last two seasons All-NBAers) = Bill Russell, Walt Bellamy, Nate Thurmond and Willis Reed.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

PauloCatarino said:


> It's undisputed that, considering today's pace and minutes a player is on the court Wilt's numbers would go down.
> 
> It's also undisputed that today's crop of Centers are of inferior quality than the ones Wilt had to face.
> Unless, that is, you are willing to defend that the Gasols, Jordan, Noah, Dwight and Jefferson (last two seasons All-NBAers) = Bill Russell, Walt Bellamy, Nate Thurmond and Willis Reed.


There are plenty of power forwards now that would have been considered or would have been played as centers then, so that is a bit misleading.

Also, the year Wilt went for 50 and 25 he primarily faced Bill Russell (6'9"), Red Kerr (6'9"), Phil Jordon/Darral Imhoff (6'10"), Jim Krebs (6'8"), Walter Dukes (7'0"), Bob Pettit (6'9"), and Walt Bellamy (6'11").

That's not exactly a murderer's row of defenders... Russell is obviously a legend... Pettit wasn't an interior defender, and Walt Bellamy was a 22 year old rookie (who, incidentally, came in as a rookie that season and put up 31 and 19 (numbers he never duplicated). 

I think Wilt would still be a dominant force today, don't get me wrong, I just think the numbers from the 50 and 25 season are misleading without context... that was a high paced year in the NBA and Wilt didn't face a lot of competent big men defenders. It was the same year Big O averaged a triple double. I loved Johnny Red Kerr... but can you imagine him playing against guys with size and athleticism like DeAndre Jordan or Dwight Howard? The difference in eras and the depth and quality of basketball players available is pretty significant. I have no idea what kind of numbers Marc Gasol would have put up in '61-'62... I do know that there weren't a lot of players his size with his skill set in the league. I guess that's what makes these conversations interesting.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Dornado said:


> There are plenty of power forwards now that would have been considered or would have been played as centers then, so that is a bit misleading.
> 
> Also, the year Wilt went for 50 and 25 he primarily faced Bill Russell (6'9"), Red Kerr (6'9"), Phil Jordon/Darral Imhoff (6'10"), Jim Krebs (6'8"), Walter Dukes (7'0"), Bob Pettit (6'9"), and Walt Bellamy (6'11").
> 
> ...


I easily concede the "difference in eras" argument. No contest here. Pace and minutes played have varied.
I just don't think it should be used as a knock against Wilt. Dude dominated. 

I don't like the arguments seldom used against Wilt, for i think they are a bit desingenuous.

"Wilt played against short white dudes who he dunked upon". 
No, not really. There were other (granted, not too many) big players in his era. And not one of them came close to what Wilt did. Walter Dukes was as big as Wilt. Why wasn't he able to score more than 15ppg in atrocious percentages? Shouldn't it be easy?

"Wilt scored that much because he shot the ball always". 
No, not really. Wilt was scoring in the 30's and having 5apg seasons (same as Russell, who is talked about as being a good passer for a Center). And why wouldn't Wilt shoot it when he was the player who shot the ball more efficiently in the entire league? 

"Wilt only had those stats because of his era". Sure. There's no one that can put up a 50/25 season anymore. But Wilt was the ONLY player in his era to do it. Russell didn't do it. West never came close to scoring 40ppg, let alone 50. Bayor came close to 40ppg, but he shot it horribly. Oscar, Petitt, you name it. 
Wilt was the only one.

My reasoning has always been this: if we are going to take eras into account, there really can't be a Greatest Of All Time debate. 
Not only the pace and minutes have changed, the rules have changed. The league implemented the 3 point shot. Players can't defend anymore. Etc., etc..


----------

