The great debate: Was Wilt Chamberlain or Bill Russell better?

This story was originally published on Feb. 21, 2017 as part of the 50th anniversary of the 1966-67 Sixers championship team.

There’s a dramatic photo of Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell during a 1967 game at Boston Garden that perfectly captures their historic competition.

The two basketball giants are in sharp focus at the center, alone at the top of their leaps, the top of their games. Dwarfed by sports’ greatest rivals, everything else in the photo — the other players, the fans, the hazy old arena — fades into insignificance.

Chamberlain or Russell? Russell or Chamberlain?

Fifty years after that photo was shot, 48 years after their last matchup, 18 years after Chamberlain's death, the debate continues about the respective worth of the Hall of Fame centers who dominated the 1960s.

» READ MORE: Ranking the 50 greatest Sixers players of all-time

Neither Russell nor anyone else, of course, can match Chamberlain's individual statistics. But Wilt's two NBA championships don't come close to the 11 his rival won in 13 seasons.

And how should the teams they played on be weighed in any comparison? Except for the 1966-67 Sixers, Russell always was surrounded by more talent than Chamberlain.

It's no easier to resolve the dispute in 2017 than it was a half-century ago, when Chamberlain's 1966-67 Sixers ended the Celtics' eight-year run of championships. But that doesn't keep basketball fans from trying.

In his 2009 Book of Basketball, Bill Simmons — a Bostonian, it must be added — addressed the arguments in detail and awarded the decision to the Celtics legend.

But in 2016 ratings of the greatest NBA players by ESPN, Sports Illustrated, and CBS Sports, Chamberlain outranked Russell in all of them.

The remarkable statistics he compiled make the arguments in favor of Chamberlain easier to buttress.

He once averaged 50 points for a season, scored 100 points in one game, got 55 rebounds in another. And head-to-head, the 6-foot-10 Russell didn't have any more success stopping the 7-2 Chamberlain than the rest of the NBA.

“There was no comparison in their offensive abilities... But the teams Wilt played on weren’t as good.”

In 142 matchups, from 1959 to 1969, Chamberlain averaged 28.7 points and 28.7 rebounds. That's 14 points and five rebounds better than Russell.

His NBA-record 55 rebounds came against Boston, as did a 44-point, 43-rebound performance.

"There was no comparison in their offensive abilities," said Bill Melchionni, Chamberlain's 76ers teammate. "Wilt was also a better rebounder and could have been as good a defensive player. But the teams Wilt played on weren't as good. And until Alex Hannum came along, he didn't have a strong coaching presence like [Boston's Red] Auerbach to say, 'No, this is not the way were going to do it.' "

Russell supporters counter with his 11 rings and a string of intangibles - his unparalleled defense, his leadership qualities, and his ability to grasp the team concept in ways Chamberlain seemingly could not.

Their teams met seven times in the postseason. Only once, in the 1966-67 Eastern Division finals, did Chamberlain's prevail.

"Russell didn't beat Wilt," the late Paul Arizin, a fellow Warriors star and Chamberlain defender, said in 1999. "Boston beat Philadelphia."

» READ MORE: The Grateful Dead, JFK Stadium and the road that kept the Sixers in South Philly

Russell understood his role. Auerbach asked him to block shots, rebound, and score a little. Chamberlain's teams sometimes struggled to accommodate his talents. And, especially in his first five years with the Warriors, they needed him to do much more.

"I would love to have seen what Wilt would have done if he's played his entire career with the Celtics," said Melchionni. "Are you going to tell me the Celtics wouldn't have been as good with Wilt doing the same things Russell did?"

One of the things that makes the rivalry so intriguing was the stark contrast, not just in their styles of play but in the men themselves.

Russell was quiet, intensely focused, socially conscious. Chamberlain could be outspoken, had countless interests, and, except for his support of Republican Richard Nixon in 1968, rarely ventured into politics.

"At some point, people started to view Russell as more sensitive, more humane, more intellectual," said Tom Meschery, Chamberlain's Warriors teammate. "That wasn't fair. Wilt was just as good a person as Bill. When he was perceived not to be, it hurt him deeply."

“Wilt or Russell? I know how I feel. But for most fans, I think, it depends on if you’re from Philly or Boston.”

One of those hurts came when Russell was part of a group of powerful black athletes urging a boycott of the 1968 Summer Olympics. Chamberlain remained silent, and many, including the well-known African American sociologist Harry Edwards, criticized him for it .

"When it comes to those types of things, [Chamberlain] drops off the chart in terms of relevance," said Edwards.

Curiously, when they played, the two men were close. Russell often ate at Chamberlain's house when the Celtics visited Philadelphia.

But there was a rupture in 1969 after an injured Wilt took himself out of Game 7 of an NBA Finals his Lakers lost, and Russell criticized him for it.

They patched things up later in life and each admitted that the other had been his most challenging opponent.

“Wilt or Russell?,” said former 76er Wali Jones. “I know how I feel. But for most fans, I think, it depends on if you’re from Philly or Boston.”