Where does Shaq rank all time for centers?

[Predicto]

Excellent Point the league sucked in 50-69, only Kareem was in the league in 69 and still lost to russel in that sucky leage. And how many championships did Kareem win his first 10-11 years in that sucky league... ONE!!!! That's your best center of all time? Risse; won 11 championships in 12 years in the leage and the year he lost was the the 76ers team which is considered one of the greatest teams in the history of the game.

Kareem didn't lose to Russell, the Bucks lost to the Celtics. And Kareem entered the league the year after Russell retired.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Excellent Point the league sucked in 50-69, only Kareem was in the league in 69 and still lost to russel in that sucky leage. And how many championships did Kareem win his first 10-11 years in that sucky league... ONE!!!! That's your best center of all time? Risse; won 11 championships in 12 years in the leage and the year he lost was the the 76ers team which is considered one of the greatest teams in the history of the game.

A. Kareem and Russell did not overlap. Russell's last year was '68/'69. Kareem's first year was '69/'70.

B. The league was in a really really weird place in the '70s.

Kareem won a title in '71 in his second year.

Lost in the Western Finals in '72 to probably the greatest team ever.

Lost in the Finals in '74 to Cowens and the Celtics. (Cowens apparently was his kryptonite).

Then Milwaukee basically fell apart and Kareem wanted out. So he got traded to LA who gave up everything to get him and then went through some front office chaos involving a law suit with Jerry West and the sale to Dr. Buss. Also, Kareem got hurt and then the Kermit Washington debacle happened.

Once he got a top ten player in Magic to be his running mate (like he had with Oscar), that team was unstoppable.

It's pretty much a fact that all centers need a good perimeter player to win a title. Hakeem is pretty much the only exception to that rule. Kareem spent five years with his best teammate being Norm Nixon and the Lakers strangely enough utterly failed to benefit from the ABA merger.

[Chachie]

But his arm strength-skill when he played was not what it was when he was born. He developed it to the point to where he could become a great QB. If he left it the way it in the condition he was born, he would not have been nearly the same QB, and perhaps not made it in the NFL at all, because pure arm strength does not make an NFL QB. Patrick Ramsey had a rocket arm, but he never even lasted as a starter.

Yes but Shaq did last as a starter. He developed into a great center. One could even say he had talent despite his size. He could have been slow, uncoordinated, and non-athletic like Muresan. He wasn't. He's top 5 all time.

[JMS]

Wilt has Russell beat in every possible statistical category. And when they went head to head over their careers, Wilt averaged 29 points and 29 rebounds per game.

But Russell's teams were superior.

Championships, head to head MVP's, and All star apperances are all statitics aren't they..

Rebounding they are nearly equal... 22.5 to 22.9 for Wilt.

Bill Russel was the captain, coach and heart of his teams....

• 11× NBA Champion (1957, 1959–1966, 1968–1969)
  
• 5× NBA Most Valuable Player (1958, 1961–1963, 1965)
  
• 12× NBA All-Star (1958–1969)
  
• 3× All-NBA First Team (1959, 1963, 1965)
  
• 8× All-NBA Second Team (1958, 1960–1962, 1964, 1966–1968)
  
• NBA All-Defensive First Team (1969)
  
• NBA All-Star Game MVP (1963)
  
• NBA's 50th Anniversary All-Time Team
  
• NBA 35th Anniversary Team
  
• NBA 25th Anniversary Team
  
• #6 Retired by Boston Celtics
  

Wilt Chamberlan

• 2× NBA Champion (1967, 1972)
  
• 4× NBA Most Valuable Player (1960, 1966–1968)
  
• NBA Finals MVP (1972)
  
• 7× All-NBA First Team (1960–1962, 1964, 1965–1968)
  
• 2× All-NBA Second Team (1963, 1966, 1972)
  
• 2× NBA All-Defensive First Team (1972–1973)
  
• NBA All-Star Game MVP (1960)
  
• 13× NBA All-Star (1960–1969, 1971–1973)
  
• 7× NBA scoring champion (1960–1966)
  
• 11× NBA rebounding champion (1960–1963, 1966–1969, 1971–1973)
  
• NBA Rookie of the Year (1960)
  
• 50 Greatest Players in NBA History
  
• NBA 35th Anniversary Team
  

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Just about everyone who have posted have Hakeem in the top 5. If anyone's not getting any love it's Moses Malone.

That's a great point.

I think what hurts Moses is how much of a nomad he was and how odd his career was. Two awful ABA teams. The Buffalo Braves. He finally goes to Houston and gets a fairly terrible Rockets team to the Finals. Houston then inexplicably trades the MVP to Philly. Where he wins a title. Then he suddenly becomes ancient at age 30 and wanders around the NBA for another ten years.

[Predicto]

I put Russell second on my list' date=' because part of me is 72-year-old sportswriter. But I agree with this. Except for the fact that I would draft Kareem first.

All anyone needs to know about Kareem is that he was the best player on championship teams 15 years apart.

---------- Post added June-2nd-2011 at 02:01 PM ----------

But Wilt had the basketball IQ of a grapefruit.

Wilt was the most awesome physical force in the league for something like a 50-year-period. But his teams always underachieved in part because

a) no one really wanted to play with him, and

it was somewhat impossible to play with him.

The only time he ever passed was the season he wanted to prove he was unselfish by winning the assists title. That's insane.

I think that is the 72 year old sportswriter in you talking there. Wilt averaged 4 and a half assists a game for his career, more than Kareem, Russell, Akeem or Shaq.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

JMS is locked in and ready for battle, isn't he?

The issue I have with Russell is he was a 6'9 center with absolutely no offensive game. I put him second on my list basically out of fear of being struck by lightning, but I don't know how his game translates beyond his era. I think Wilt could have played at age 50 and scored 15 a game. And I hate Wilt. Kareem could have played in any era. Same with Shaq and Hakeem and Moses. When I think about Russell, I always end up thinking, "Would he be a better Marcus Camby today?"

[BeachSkin]

At his very best, Shaq was absolutely unstoppable. Part of that was his athleticism and skill, part an unwillingness by refs to correctly call his "knock defender out of the way, then dunk" offensive moves the fouls they should have been. But at his very best, that stuff wasn't even needed. He had incredibly quickness, amazing size and strength and could run. If he'd ever bothered to learn to shoot free throws (yes, I know he practiced and that his super-large hands made it really difficult to shoot them) or developed a 12-foot jumper, man, what he could have done.

I've always liked Shaq. The guy is funny, he stayed out of trouble, and he's great with kids.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Excellent Point the league sucked in 50-69, only Kareem was in the league in 69 and still lost to russel in that sucky leage. And how many championships did Kareem win his first 10-11 years in that sucky league... ONE!!!! That's your best center of all time? Risse; won 11 championships in 12 years in the leage and the year he lost was the the 76ers team which is considered one of the greatest teams in the history of the game.

Bill Russell's playing career ended in the 68-69 seasons. Kareem's playing career started in the 69-70 season. They didn't play each other so far as I know.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I think that is the 72 year old sportswriter in you talking there. Wilt averaged 4 and a half assists a game for his career, more than Kareem, Russell, Akeem or Shaq.

One thing I've learned is that you cannot compare raw stats like that across eras in the NBA. The shots per game numbers in the 60s were off the charts. Part of the reason that Russell and Wilt could put up 20 rebounding games was because teams were taking a ton of shots and hitting a lower percentage of them. The shots per game in Shaq's era were much lower and teams made more.

[JMS]

PS

I never ceases to amaze me how little Kareem is respected. It seems like he is on everyone's list out of pure obligation even though he was probably the greatest high school player ever' date=' was the greatest college player ever, and might have been the greatest NBA player ever depending on how you feel about Jordan and Russell.

I kind of hate Kareem but feel like I've become an apologist for him.

Note to players: If you want to be loved by historians, do not be a moody ********.[/quote']

I agree with you that Kareem was a top all time player... Maybe top 6 all time.... I don't think I would pick him as a top center of all time though. That's not a slight on the guy he was the ultimate professional and he was on some great teams.

I just don't see a guy who spent 10 years in the leage with 1 championship as being the best ever given what Russel did. Likewise Wilt statistically did. I don't think that's a slight on Kareem so much though. I got him 3rd. ahead of Shaq.

[Predicto]

JMS is locked in and ready for battle' date=' isn't he?

The issue I have with Russell is he was a 6'9 center with absolutely no offensive game. I put him second on my list basically out of fear of being struck by lightning, but I don't know how his game translates beyond his era. I think Wilt could have played at age 50 and scored 15 a game. And I hate Wilt. Kareem could have played in any era. Same with Shaq and Hakeem and Moses. When I think about Russell, I always end up thinking, "Would he be a better Marcus Camby today?"[/quote']

More like a better Ben Wallace.

And don't forget, while Russell was "only" a 6-9 center, that made him maybe the tallest player in the NBA at the beginning of his career. I seem to recall that when Wilt was drafted there were only 3 or 4 players in the NBA who were taller than 6-8, and Russell and Wilt were two of them.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Excellent Point the league sucked in 50-69, only Kareem was in the league in 69 and still lost to russel in that sucky leage. And how many championships did Kareem win his first 10-11 years in that sucky league... ONE!!!! That's your best center of all time? Risse; won 11 championships in 12 years in the leage and the year he lost was the the 76ers team which is considered one of the greatest teams in the history of the game.

Kareem has more MVP's than Russell

Kareem has more career points than Russell

Kareem has more career rebounds than Russell

Kareem has more career blocked shots than Russell

Kareem has a higher career FG% than Russell

Kareem has more career ASSISTS than Russell

Kareem has more All-Star appearances than Russell

Kareem has more All-NBA teams than Russell

Kareem has more scoring title than Russell

[Predicto]

One thing I've learned is that you cannot compare raw stats like that across eras in the NBA. The shots per game numbers in the 60s were off the charts. Part of the reason that Russell and Wilt could put up 20 rebounding games was because teams were taking a ton of shots and hitting a lower percentage of them. The shots per game in Shaq's era were much lower and teams made more.

Of course. But you were criticizing Wilt for his lack of passing while not making that criticism for Russell, who played in the same era. :whoknows:

[JMS]

JMS is locked in and ready for battle' date=' isn't he?

The issue I have with Russell is he was a 6'9 center with absolutely no offensive game. [/quote']

Russel had an offensive game. He was a 15.1 career pts per game.... and at 6'10' rebounded 22.5 rebounds per game.... Russel dominated games through defense. That was the secret of the celtics teams of his era. they were defensive powerhouses lead by russel. It's very dificult to argue with the results too.

J

I put him second on my list basically out of fear of being struck by lightning' date=' but I don't know how his game translates beyond his era. I think Wilt could have played at age 50 and scored 15 a game. And I hate Wilt. Kareem could have played in any era. Same with Shaq and Hakeem and Moses. When I think about Russell, I always end up thinking, "Would he be a better Marcus Camby today?"[/quote']

[Predicto]

At his very best, Shaq was absolutely unstoppable. Part of that was his athleticism and skill, part an unwillingness by refs to correctly call his "knock defender out of the way, then dunk" offensive moves the fouls they should have been. But at his very best, that stuff wasn't even needed.

Well, they also let defenders foul Shaq all night without being called, I suspect because if they didn't, no one could resist him at all. It cut both ways.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Just about everyone who have posted have Hakeem in the top 5. If anyone's not getting any love it's Moses Malone.

Hardest working player I ever saw. Worked harder then Michael and Kobe but together.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

More like a better Ben Wallace.

And don't forget, while Russell was "only" a 6-9 center, that made him maybe the tallest player in the NBA at the beginning of his career. I seem to recall that when Wilt was drafted there were only 3 or 4 players in the NBA who were taller than 6-8, and Russell and Wilt were two of them.

What made Russell different was how athletic he was. He came into the league when dudes were still using set shots and sweeping hook shots. For guys like Harry Galatin and Dolph Schayes, having this tall guy who could not only jump out of the gym but who could jump out of the gym twice in succession had to be like playing against a werewolf.

[JMS]

Kareem has more MVP's than Russell

Kareem has more career points than Russell

Kareem has more career rebounds than Russell

Kareem has more career blocked shots than Russell

Kareem has a higher career FG% than Russell

Kareem has more career ASSISTS than Russell

Kareem has more All-Star appearances than Russell

Kareem has more All-NBA teams than Russell

Kareem has more scoring title than Russell

Kareem was in the leage for 20 years 69-80... Russel was in the league for 12 years.

I think one state stands out in Russel's career... 11 championships in 12 years... He wasn't the offensive player Kareem, or Wilt Were, But he found a way to win, which is what the game was all about....

Are you seriously going to tell me the Lakers of the 80's didn't have the same talent as the celtics of the 60's? I don't think so.

[Predicto]

Russel had an offensive game. He was a 15.1 career pts per game....

That wasn't diddle when teams were averaging 120 points per game. That would be like 11 points per game today. His offensive game was limited at best.

and at 6'10' rebounded 22.5 rebounds per game....

Again, that was the era. Elgin Baylor averaged almost 20 rebounds a game in 1959, and he was 6-4.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Of course. But you were criticizing Wilt for his lack of passing while not making that criticism for Russell, who played in the same era. :whoknows:

My criticism about Wilt is not so much his lack of passing as his inability to understand basketball. His assist numbers are inflated because he had two seasons where he inexplicably decided to average 10 assists per game. There is no reason on earth why the most dominant offensive center in basketball should average 10 assists per game. But Wilt made the conscious decision to lead the league in assists - and goddamnit - that's what he was going to do.

The one thing I learned from Bill Simmons' book that was really fascinating was that Wilt never fouled out of a game. And he knew this and made an effort not to foul out. That meant that when he got one foul away from fouling out, he pretty much stopped playing defense.

Frank Deford wrote about Wilt's 20,000 woman claim as just another example of his weird fascination with numbers.

It just seems like Wilt would be an awful guy to have to play 82 games with. His teammates had to be constantly thinking, "Is this the night he decides to get 50 rebounds and just stands under the opponent's basket the whole game?"

[Backpack3r]

Take away his Height and 300+ poind weight, and how does he rank purely talent-wise ??

Not very good.

Are you new to sports or something? The man was physically gifted you cant fault him for that, just like every other freak athlete out there, they were blessed.

[Predicto]

I think one state stands out in Russel's career... 11 championships in 12 years... He wasn't the offensive player Kareem, or Wilt Were, But he found a way to win, which is what the game was all about....

Are you seriously going to tell me the Lakers of the 80's didn't have the same talent as the celtics of the 60's? I don't think so.

Are you seriously going to tell me it was as hard to win an NBA championship in the late 50s and early 60s as it was in the 80s? There were 8 teams in the league when Russell's Celtics won their first championship and only 9 teams in the NBA 1965 when they won the 8th championship. The Celtics were the only complete team in the NBA during that time.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Kareem was in the leage for 20 years 69-80... Russel was in the league for 12 years.

I think one state stands out in Russel's career... 11 championships in 12 years... He wasn't the offensive player Kareem, or Wilt Were, But he found a way to win, which is what the game was all about....

Are you seriously going to tell me the Lakers of the 80's didn't have the same talent as the celtics of the 60's? I don't think so.

Do the math on Kareem's statistics in his 1st 12 seasons and see how much this changes. The results are only going to get worse because all of Kareem's averages are going to improve. Look, I get that you like Russell. For what it's worth, Kareem has a ton of respect for him too. However, there is no way you slice this grape and come out with a better career for Russell. Kareem was simply better. Even the fact that Kareem could play for 20 years is a testament to that. As for the rest of this stuff, well, lets just say that I understand exactly how many Hall Of Fame players Russell played with in his 12 seasons and I understand how many Kareem played with. Kareem was just better.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Kareem was in the leage for 20 years 69-80... Russel was in the league for 12 years.

I think one state stands out in Russel's career... 11 championships in 12 years... He wasn't the offensive player Kareem, or Wilt Were, But he found a way to win, which is what the game was all about....

Are you seriously going to tell me the Lakers of the 80's didn't have the same talent as the celtics of the 60's? I don't think so.

I honestly don't know how to judge the Celtics of the 60s. It seems like every player on those teams made the Hall of Fame whether they deserved it or not.

The 80s Lakers were not as deep in talent as people seem to think. They had Kareem and Magic who are top ten all-timers and Worthy who has always an all-star level player without being a real "superstar." The rest of the team was good specialists like Rambis, Cooper, Scott, Nixon, etc. The year they got scary good was '87 when Mychael Thompson showed up. Dropping another All-Star level center on that team was unfair.

I think the Celtics actually had more talent across the board in the early to mid 80s. Bird was better than Worthy. Parish was an all-star. McHale was much better than anyone that LA ever trotted out at the 4 as was Maxwell. Tiny was actually near Magic's level in the early years before he got really really really good. DJ was not as good as Magic but was a better defender and shooter. The 2 guards were always about the same.

I would say the big problem the Celtics had with the Lakers was that until '86 or '87, Kareem was dramatically better than Parish. Which is amazing because Parish was really really good.