who would win in a one on one game between 99' Shaq and 63' Wilt?

Question

i mean the year wilt averaged 50ppg and 48mpg

i think wilt was a better all around athele and the size is a lot closer than most think wilt was about 315 to Shag's 340

Answer 1

Wilt is stronger, more athletic, more skilled, and better conditioned. Let's compare: (oh and the year he averaged 50 ppg was in 1962)

Strength - Wilt was so strong that when people grabbed the ball to try to force a jump ball, Wilt could still lift the ball over to try to dunk it WHILE THE OPPOSING PLAYER WAS HANGING ON TO THE BALL for dear life. Wilt had done this to John Havlicek.

More athletic - Wilt was a BROAD JUMPER in college. He often played complete 48 minute games. In 1962, he averaged more minutes per game (48.5) than there are minutes per game. According to his coaches, they thought that former warriors guard Al Attles was the fastest player on the team, but Wilt beat him in a dash.

More skilled - O'Neal did get more skilled as he went on, but his repertoire of moves was still limited. Wilt would devastate opponents with his finger roll and fadeaway jumper. Wilt was not just a dunker. He was also a better defender (just watch Shaq try to defend - he never actually defends players one on one) and passer (wilt once led the league in assists! 8 assists per game!)

Conditioning - Shaq is known for cruising through the regular season and being sidelined due to injuries. As I said before, Wilt could play all night.

62 Wilt and 71 Kareem would have been a better one-on-one matchup

Answer 2

I believe Shaq would win, the reason being is that Shaq is straight up power and is dominating players the most athletic players that have ever stepped foot on the basketball court. Wilt was waaaaay before his time..... I would say he would be the equivalent of time Duncan now, still an amazing player and would score a lot but would get nowhere near the numbers he averaged when he played in the past.

Answer 3

eclecticdoctor, you said it all.

Wilt was stronger than Shaq, a far better leaper, had far more stamina (on and off the court), and was much more schooled in the fundamentals.

In the 60s, most teams had centers that were around 6'10.. Russell, at 6'9 was one of the shorter centers around... Jerry Lucas was about 6'8 but guys like Bellamy and Thurmond, Zelmo Beaty etc were as tall or taller than Russell.

Shaq was a dominant player in the Lakers' 3 peat in the early part of this century... but jeez, look at the "centers" he was going against.... Rik Smits, an already-over-the-hill Dikembe Mutumbo and Todd MacCulloch !! Not a lot of quality there.

In 1962, Wilt had to go against Russell 12 times in the regular season, plus another 7 games in the playoffs... Talk about no nights off! Shaq doesn't play against a good center 19 times in his career, let alone during a single season.

Answer 4

I think Wilt would win, the only advantage Shaq has over him is size.

Wilt was also strong and more skilled and agile than Shaq ever was.

Just don't make it a free throw shooting contest or they'll both end up losing. ha ha ha.

Answer 5

Ooooooooooooo depends if there was a 3 point line if so Wilt if not tough choice gotta go with Shaq

Answer 6

I have'nt seen any video of wilt during the 60's so im not really very sure but I'll take shaq on this.

Answer 7

I never saw Wilt play, but I don't think anyone was near his size except for Russell. I say Shaq because nobody could play defense on him, he was just a beast.

Answer 8

Wilt can never stop Shaq!

Answer 9

I think Wilt.

Answer 10

wilt