in the 50's and 60's where your power forward could very easily be 6'4 uh yea he could.
ill acknowledge that maybe shaq wouldnt be the rebounder that wilt was but as far as scoring, oh yea shaq could easily drop 50 a game back in those times.
i still stand by my statement, guys like russel, wilt, moses, are best debatable, but def not clearly better than shaq. only clearly better than shaq imo hakeem and kareem
Based upon what? He didn't even top 30 in his times. T-Mac, AI, Kobe, Lebron, D. Wade, Dominique, Jerry Stackhouse

all have higher career high ppg for a season than Shaq. We not just talking about droppin 50 we talking about droppin more than 50 because Wilt did that and you asserted Shaq would be more dominant. As far as Russell goes he won 11 rings in 13 years with stacked squads. Shaq won 4 rings in 19 years with stacked squads.
The problem I have when people talk about Shaq is that they focus on potential rather than actual production. He had all the tools physically to be a modern day Wilt and didn't get it done AND he had all the teammates to be a modern day Russell and didn't get it done. Great player, all-time great, probably top 5 at his position but I am not about to just assume he would dominate era's gone by when he had to wait for Mike to retire and the other great C's to get old and had to get a duplicate of Mike in the backcourt to dominate his.