Stephen A. Smith knows exactly what he’s doing when he dives into all-time debates, and this one hit a nerve for a reason. Basketball fans love arguing greatness, but when Smith narrowed the conversation specifically to dominance, it immediately changed the tone.
This was not about who had the best career or the most championships. It was about who made the game feel unfair. In that context, Smith didn’t hesitate. Wilt Chamberlain sits alone at the top in his mind, with Shaquille O'Neal right behind him. It is a take less about nostalgia and more about what those players actually did to the league when they were at their peak.
For younger fans, this matters. Names like LeBron James and Michael Jordan dominate modern GOAT conversations because of their complete resumes. But Smith’s argument lives in a different lane. He is talking about physical control, the kind that forces rule changes, defensive schemes, and sometimes even roster construction just to deal with one player.
That is where Chamberlain and O’Neal separate themselves.
The Moment Stephen A. Smith Made His Case
Smith’s most compelling point came when he pivoted the conversation to the Los Angeles Lakers and what dominance actually looks like when you try to build an all-time list.
“I love Elgin Baylor, but Shaq Daddy, how do you leave Shaq Daddy out of the list. If Jerry West is the logo, I got to take Elgin Baylor out. I can't have Elgin Baylor and Kobe in there at the expense of Shaq. What about the first three titles? Shaq? The most dominant force the league has seen outside of Wilt Chamberlain.”
It was not just what he said, it was how he said it. There was a sense of disbelief, almost frustration, at the idea that Shaquille O'Neal could ever be excluded from a top-tier Lakers conversation.
And to be fair, the argument is probably correct. During the Lakers’ three-peat from 2000 to 2002, O’Neal was not just great. He was overwhelming. Defenses collapsed before he even caught the ball. Opponents stocked their rosters with extra big men simply to absorb fouls. That is not normal greatness. That is dominance.
Why Wilt Chamberlain Still Sits Alone
There is a reason Smith still gives the edge to Wilt Chamberlain, and it goes well beyond the famous 100-point game. Chamberlain’s dominance almost reads like mythology now. A 50.4 points per game season. Games where he grabbed 30 or 40 rebounds like it was routine. The league literally adjusted rules around him, from widening the lane to changes in how offensive players could operate physically.
What separates Wilt is that his dominance existed without a modern blueprint. There was no comparison point at the time. He was the comparison point. That is a key difference when stacking him against O’Neal. Shaq redefined power basketball for his era, but Wilt redefined what was even possible.
Stephen A. Smith’s Lakers List And The Toughest Omission
Smith’s comments also peeled back another layer of this debate by forcing a difficult question. Who do you leave out when you are talking about Lakers greatness?
Based on his logic, the core group looks something like this:
- Magic Johnson
- Kobe Bryant
- Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
- Shaquille O'Neal
- Jerry West
And that leaves out Elgin Baylor, which is where things get interesting.
Baylor was ahead of his time in almost every way. His athleticism, scoring ability, and creativity helped shape the modern wing position. But he never won a title, and that is where Smith draws the line when compared to Shaq’s overwhelming impact during championship runs.
It is not about disrespect. It is about prioritizing moments that defined eras.
What Dominance Actually Looks Like In Real Time
This is where the conversation gets interesting, because dominance is something you feel as much as you measure. With Chamberlain, it showed up in numbers that still seem impossible decades later.
With O’Neal, it showed up in the way games were played. Entire defensive strategies were built around trying to slow him down, and even then it rarely worked. Teams resorted to intentional fouling not as a last option, but as a primary tactic.
Compare that to players like Jordan or LeBron. They controlled games through skill, precision, and decision-making. Chamberlain and O’Neal controlled games through force.
That is what Smith is getting at. It is not better or worse. It is different.
My Top Five Lakers Players Of All Time
If you take a step back and try to balance dominance with legacy, championships, and overall impact, the Lakers' list becomes a puzzle with no perfect answer. Here is how it stacks up:
- Magic Johnson
- Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
- Kobe Bryant
- Shaquille O'Neal
- Jerry West
Magic sits at the top because he defined an era and elevated everyone around him. Kareem’s consistency and unmatched scoring resume keep him right there. Kobe’s longevity and five championships speak for themselves.
Shaq is the most fascinating case. At his peak, he might be the most unstoppable player in franchise history, but his Lakers run, while dominant, was shorter than the others above him.
Jerry West rounds it out as the bridge between generations, a player whose influence still shapes the identity of the franchise today.
And yes, leaving Baylor off still feels wrong. That is how deep this history runs.
Why This Conversation Keeps Coming Back
The reason Smith’s comments hit for fans is simple. They tap into something that numbers alone cannot settle. Dominance is not just about what shows up in the box score. It is about fear, inevitability, and how much of the game revolves around stopping one player.
Wilt Chamberlain and Shaquille O'Neal forced the league to react to them in ways very few players ever have. That is why they sit at the center of this conversation. And as long as fans keep arguing about what matters most, peak or longevity, force or finesse, this debate is not going anywhere.
