[Hoot Gibson]

Wilt was before my time, so all I can go by is limited video and what I have read. What I did not read you say was that Wilt was the greatest, but the most dominate. That I can agree with. During Wilt's era, there was only one player who could compete with Wilt and that was a man who was 4" shorter than the Big Dipper. Wilt played against such inferior big men, he did whatever he wanted, which was definitely the most dominate era that any individual ever had. Wilt was not challenged by anyone until the end of his career. At the end of Wilts days was the very beginning of the "Big Men" era. Wilt, though hampered by injuries, had difficulty with guys like Willis Reed, Wes Unseld (at 6-7) and Bob Lanier all came into the league and had great battles with Wilt in his final days with the Lakers. But there was one big fella that I feel would have matched, possibly surpassed Wilt if he had played during the same era, and that is Kareem. Kareem was not the physical player that Wilt was, but he did not have to be. If you would have put Kareem and his ability to hit a mid-range jumper as well as dominate at the basket during the 60's, Kareem would have been just as good.

Since Kareem played in an era was he was challenged by good big men in at least 3/4's of all of his games, and to be the most prolific scorer of all-time sure makes it hard to argue that Kareem was not more dominate than Wilt when you compare what the two players had to compete against. Like I said, Wilts stats cannot be argued for most dominate, but when you can dominate better competition like Kareem did playing against arguably the greatest era of Centers of all-time, I'd go with Kareem over Wilt.

IMO, Kareem was not even close to Wilt because, as you said, he was not a physical player. The sky hook was an unstoppable shot when it was falling because of Kareem's height but in his prime, Chamberlain would have physically dominated Kareem in every way possible. Wilt was the first recipient of the hack-a-Shaq defense because, like Shaq, he was a horrible free throw shooter. Kareem was a scorer but even in that area, he would have been no match for Wilt.

People who insist that Chamberlain put up big numbers because centers were less talented in his day ignore the big games that Chamberlain had against Boston and Russell, including the following 30/30 games:

12-13-61 Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia vs Boston 30 rebounds-52 points
02-10-62 Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia vs Boston 31 rebounds-38 points
12-26-62 Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia vs Boston 32 rebounds-43 points
01-08-63 Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia vs Boston 31 rebounds-45 points
02-21-63 Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia vs Boston 38 rebounds-40 points
02-26-63 Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia vs Boston 30 rebounds-34 points
01-07-64 Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia vs Boston 32 rebounds-35 points
01-19-64 Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia vs Boston 30 rebounds-31 points
11-25-64 Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia vs Boston 32 rebounds-37 points
12-28-65 Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia vs Boston 40 rebounds-31 points
01-14-66 Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia vs Boston 42 rebounds-37 points
03-06-66 Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia vs Boston 30 rebounds-32 points

In other words, against one of the best defensive centers ever to play the game, Chamberlain had some of the best games of his career. Bill Russell, like Kareem, had a much better supporting cast than Chamberlain had during most of his career. That is the only reason that Chamberlain did not die with more championship rings than he did. He was a fierce competitor and he does not get enough credit for it. People who assume that Chamberlain would not have been a dominant center in today's game are just fooling themselves.