Very good list, some amazing centre's have played the game.

IMO I think that I would have put Wilt and Russel above Kareem - the top spot I would give to Russel, a true champion. Those 11 rings tell the story.

It IS a great list i just to nit pick though - i'd swap Hakeem and Shaq's positions. Great to see Moses and Bill Walton get their due...

Did you notice at the bottom of the article was the full list of vote getters.
One voter gave his 10th place vote to Dwight Howard. he's going to be a very good centre (I think anyway) but hell 10th best of all time after 2 1/2 seasons is a bit much

Without a doubt swap Hakeem for Shaq . The Fatdaddy would be nothing if not for his size and in a pure basketball sense it ain't even close .
Also Bill Russell will take being one of the greatest winners in sports history over no 1 all time center anyday IMO .

Dwight Howard gets a vote & Jack Sikma doesn't?
Sikma was the heart of the team that won the championship in 1978-79.
I believe that what hurts Jack is that he played in the same era as Kareem, Walton & Malone who are valid choices for top 5.
I'm not argiung that he should be top 10, but thought that he may have got a vote!

That great crybaby and soft as the proverbial Kareem in front of the greatest winner of all time Russell and the most dominant big man in history Wilt the Stilt??? What a joke.

Ewing with 0 titles suck it screw NY

If Sabonis had played his whole career in the NBA he would be in there

Manute??????
Surely if you ask him, he will say he should be in the top 5!

What's the average height between those ten?

The tallest ones (7ft atleast) are always the most successful. 6'10-11 doesn't really cut it.

I think you will find that Moses Malone was more of a PF vertically speaking but due to supreme strength and smarts made it as a C... I think he was 6-10 or 11... but he`s a rarity...

Ahh yes, rotate on this, but he DOES have the size. Why not use what you dont have. what a stupid thing to say.

p.s chamberlain for number 1. Why is the greatest player of all time not even the greatest centre of all time

Sorry to say it but Malone should be higher up the list

21 seasons......thats amazing to post those numbers over ur career

Ah yes ELG and you wouldn't be one to throw their ample weight around now would you .
No denying shaq uses what he has well it is just a pity he can't use his fat head to hit a free now is it .
and your phrase " why not use what you don't have " tells me you are either shaqlike and just confused me and everyone else or it was a poor excuse for a pisstake .
Either way button up , bojangles .

I wouldn't switch Shaq and Hakeem, for a start Shaq has 4 rings to Hakeem's 2, but more than that I think you're looking at Shaq now and comparing that against Hakeem at his peak. Have you forgotten how ridiculously dominant Shaq was in the late 90's / early 2000's with the Lakers?

I'm with ELG in saying you can't hold Shaq's size against him when measuring him as a player. Is Jordan any less of a player because he's naturally athletic?

Oh, and ELG, there's no way Jordan could ever be classified as a centre ;)

gee thanks billo for telling what i am or are not thinking .
I am comparing the two over there whole careers and yes shaq has 4 rings all of them with a superstar sidekick . I f...in hate kobe but shaq would not have any of those three laker rings without the petulant kobestar doin his thing .
Wade and the cuban hatin referees were the big difference in last years quest .
1995 ROCKETS 4 - 0 MAGIC , hakeem MVP playin the fatdaddy .
Look shaq is a dominant force in a physical sense . He can't shoot a lick of three throw and he is basically a moron .
;)

Hakeem playing in his prime against a young shaq. Houston with championship experience, Orlando with... nothing.

Oh yes, and "why not use what you don't have" was indeed a typo... it should read 'why not use what you have'

yeah and shaq playing most of his career without any opposing centers hence the ability to dominate completely inferior opposition .

It's hard to differ between Hakeem and Shaq, they play a completely different style and both dominated in their own way.

Hakeem - blocked every damn shot that went near the rim, used amazing footwork and agility to beat his player.

Shaq - not really a defensive monster (the Zen Master makes note of this in his books) like Hakeem, Shaq uses shear power on the offensive end and looks far more dominant than Hakeem did.

All in all I would probably rate Hakeem just above Shaq purely based on the fact he played both ends amazingly well. Shaq appeared far more dominant on the offensive end purely because of his power, Hakeem beat guys with finesse and agility.

BTW you are a clown to suggest Penny Hardaway in his prime , Nick Anderson , Dennis Scott , Horace Grant as a starting supporting cast with Brian Shaw , Darrell Armstrong and a decent defender in Donald Royal are nothing .
If shaq was not in his prime then the team around him must have contibuted something , got ya there gorillaboy .
This team went 55-27 and then 60-22 the year after so where is the argument to suit your own shaq loving agenda .

You all have to be kidding?? The Diesel was unSTOPPable!! They had to invent the hack a shaq to attempt to slow him down!
Rotate, why is he moron?? The big fella is the most entertaining player in the game today. Dont give me this Sh#t about him not playing against quality centres, he played against the best of his era, and dominated them!

Russell,Wilt,Kareem,Daddy,Hakeem.

Lloyd c'mon , hilarious . Hack a Shaq was " invented " by a smart coach who realised by fouling the buffoon you could walk away with 1 point or less per shaq possession as opposed to just letting him barrel thru ya for an easy two .
It was based on best outcome for the team and other coaches obviously endorsed this principle by the way it spread throughout the league .
I personally found it funny to see the frustration and strain on the dummy's face when down the stretch he would have to try and win the game from the line .

yeah real successfull the guys has four rings!! Y is he a moron/buffoon again??

So Rotate on this, you're telling me that you're comparing Shaq and Hakeem on their whole careers, then in the next breath you're throwing their 94-95 match up at me. A match up where Hakeem was at the top of his game with an experienced supporting cast against a Shaq still 5 years from fully ripening supported by a young Penny in just his second year in the league. And was a Penny really "in his prime" as a sophmore?

You're getting stuck into Shaq in one breath, then in the next breath quoting the quality win-loss record of the magic to try and prove another point. Magic were going nowhere fast but in a few short years Shaq (and Penny) turned the whole thing around, sure they got swept by the Rockets but to get them to that point was an amazing achievement. Once Shaq fully came into his own several years later that's when he started converting his dominance into rings.

So i think we're all in agreement that the list should go 1. Wilt 2. Shaq 3. Russell... how about those point guards/

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime-GreatestPointGuards

why isn't Steve nash higher.

Billo , yes i am saying over their whole careers i would go with Olajuwon .
And yes Penny was at his best in his 2 - 4 th years in the league

94-95 stats were 20.9 ppg , 4.4 reb , 7.2 ass , 1.7 stls at over 51% from the floor .
BTW he was named ALL-NBA first team that year , generally meaning he was the #1 or #2 guard in the competition so don't feed me s...

Nick Anderson was in his 6 th year in the league and averaged
15.8 ppg , 4.4 reb , 4.1 ass ,1.6 stls at 48% from the floor and 41% from long distance .

Dennis Scott was in his 5 th year and averaged around 13 ppg , 2.4 reb and 2.1 ass in 24 mins per game .

Horace Grant was a very inexperienced player who happened to have 3 rings and avreaged 13 ppg , 10 reb with a blk and stl per outing .

I would say this supporting cast had some experience and skill .

Plus Hakeem was 32 years of age and he dominated a 23 year old shaq who had his best season statistically .

Go figure ! i am sure you will twist an argument to favour you point of view .

You can't tell me Nash deserves to be ranked higher than any of those guys.

Big men don't reach their peak till later, and I would have thought Shaq had better season statistically in 99/00 when he had more points, rebounds, assists and blocks than he did in 94/95.

Each for their own though, I actually really like Hakeem's game (and have read his autobiography!) so let's agree to disagree.

Clarky, there's a whole thread devoted to why whether Nash is better number 7 on the list!!

The thing with Nash is that this is his third phenomenal year, but before that he was really only 'good' rather than 'great'.

Stockton is a freak, 19 seasons is ridiculous, he was an absolute machine.

billo , your right with 99-00 being his best year , slightly better than 94-95 and i would agree that centers take a little longer to peak than most .
I guess i jus't ain't a shaq lover I appreciate your banter and i will end it there .

That's right Billo, this is only Nash's third really good year, meaning IMO he doesn't deserve to be any higher than he is.

Im not saying he should be, but you could surely make an arguement for Nash to be ahead of some of those guys. A six foot, 2 time MVP, white guy is pretty impressive now days in the Nba.

I am SICK of people talking about how good someone is by how many rings they've won. This, essentially, has nothing to do with their playing ability. It is all about the team around them and the coach, aswell as the star player. So gary payon is a better player than steve nash because he won a ring. Tony Parker and Chauncy Billups are better aswell if your goin on that. Its just rediculous!

i do agree that shaq should be below hakeem. His numbers simply aren't that good for his massive size. And about hack-a-shaq thats just picking a weakness in someones game, you dont think coaches do that on every single players game. eg make this guy go left, make this guy shoot the J etc. If shaq was smart enough he'd work his ass off at FTs, but no he decides to sit back with his millions and cost his team games.

#123366- So do you think those teams would have won championships if the Daddy wasnt in the team?? The dude has career averages of 26ppg 11 boards. He's a proven winner. By your argument MJ wasnt that good a player he just had a really good coach and supporting cast??

Dr B , completely agree . I guess most people are satisfied with simple comparisons , judgments , as they don't have the capacity or simply chose not to investigate with depth or sound reason .
As stated SHAQ would have zero titles without Kobe and Phil and then Wade and Riley . On the flip side those guys wouldn't have the rings without the wackdaddy .
Does it make Shaq great , i guess so in achievement . Then the argument is if he can't shoot over 50% from the line a fundamental in hoops then no .
Then you could argue that he achieved all that even with this glaring weakness .
You could add that he may have more rings if he could shoot free throws and so on and on .

what a surprise you agree with doc bullshit..

"I guess most people are satisfied with simple comparisons , judgments , as they don't have the capacity or simply chose not to investigate with depth or sound reason ."

WTF?? Shaq has better stats, better winning record. Do I need to investigate that more??

Ohh he played with Kobe and Wade, The dream played with Drexler.

Shaq has better offensive stats .
Olajuwon has much better defensive stats and FT % .
Also Olajuwons playoff stats rise quite nicely where as O'neals dip in pretty much every category .
Stats are just that though , you have to take into account the style of game each team plays , dependance on particular players to score etc , etc :
Also had Drexler for only the second championship at 32 years of age .

So should Wilt also be dropped down the list due to poor free throw shooting? Just for the record Shaq shoots a better FT% over his career than Wilt did.

Dr Bullshit, you're true to your name with that talk about the number of rings someone has having nothing to do with their playing ability. Why do people play? To win. And if you've won a lot of rings then you clearly know what it takes to get it done. Obviously it's not as cut an dry as more rings = better player, but IMO it's a more valid comparison between 2 similar players than looking at their FG%.

Rotate on this, how can you say Shaq would have no titles without Kobe / Phil and Wade / Riley? Clearly a team that's winning the whole thing isn't ever going to be a 1 man show (no coincidence that Iverson's never won it all), but if Shaq played elsewhere and got rings you'd be attributing those to his supporting cast too. It's worth noting that Shaq was finals MVP in all 3 of his rings with the Lakers, not Kobe, so while it's obviously a team effort, Shaq was the main man when it came down to it.

Wilt had a 50 inch vertical and Russell a 48 inch one. Russell qualified for the U.S. Olympic team in the high jump by only going to several track meets and competing. He out jumped Charley Dumas in 1956 just three weeks before Dumas became the first person to ever jump 7 foot. He also once jumped and left chalk marks at the 14 foot level in a gym once. I am not sure about his arm length but think it must have been at least 7 ft. 8 inches to have ever out jumped Wilt on a center jump as Wilt was about 5 inches or more taller than Russell and actually could out vertical Russell by about 2 inches. Jack Ramsey stated that he thought Russell averaged double digits in blocked shots and it is well known that Russell never actually blocked all of the shots he could have simply because he wanted to sandbag people and not let them know exactly what he was going to do so many times. He played mind games on the other team and tried to get inside their heads so as to disrupt their efforts. He even went so far as to figure out along with Kacy Jones how to run down and block a break away lay in from behind without running into the guy and fouling him. I still remember feeling sorry for another person or team only two times in all of the years I have watched sports. One time was when I saw the great Whitey Ford going against Sandy Kofax knowing he didn't have a chance even with Mantle and Maris batting to support him and the other time was watching a 3 man fast break heading toward a basket guarded by Bill Russell alone. Russell stopped it by himself. I have never seen another person do that all though I once saw Michael Jordan stop a 2 man one by himself. I personally saw Russell do it at least half a dozen times or more. Russell said once that he was quite proud of the fact that he stopped at least 37 or more of these in his career. This happened in the early Celtic years with Russell because Arback would call for a four man fast break on the opposing teams shot with only Russell going for the rebound and at times the Celts would mess it up somewhat down the court and therefore only Russell would be down yet to stop it. I can also remember Russell starting these breaks being at least in the area of that basket when he made the outlet pass and when someone missed the lay in at the other end jumping and putting it in the hoop after outrunning the entire team down the floor. In other words, he ran the length of the court while the rest of the team had that huge lead on him and he caught them.

By my own personal rating system, I would only rate 4 people in it. This system says you must be a Babe Ruth in one sport and an Olympic caliber athlete in another. Russell was a Babe Ruth in basketball and made the U.S. Olympic team in the high jump. Wilt was certainly a Babe in basketball and was offered contracts to play NFL football and also to fight Ali for the heavy weight Championship. I would also include the Babe because he was, of course a Babe Ruth in baseball and also because he was such a great pitcher that he set the all time mark of scoreless innings in a world series of 29 1/3. This mark lasted longer than his home run record. At the rate he started, he would have finished a 22-year career with over 400 wins. I also would put another Babe, Babe Zaharous on it because of her record in track and golf.