Seems like this is the debate of the day around the sports world so who you got? I think the majority of people that would actually say Wilt just don't like Kobe or are assuming Wilt's game was more impressive just because 100 points is more than 81. I think when comparing basketball then to basketball now honestly, negativity towards Kobe personally aside, I have to side with Kobe on this one. Wilt played the entire 48 minutes, and the game became all about trying to get Wilt 100. Kobe played 6 less minutes, took 17 less shots, 12 less free throws (while shooting a better % on both) and scored 81 in the flow of the game. Remember the Lakers that night were down at the half until Kobe's 55 in the 2nd half got them the W. Kobe also had 81 of 122 points. 81 and 122 in an era where that is ridiculously above average. Besides the Suns being an outlier at 108 points per game only 4 other teams averaged over a 100. The Lakers averaged 99 Wilt had 100 of 169. The entire league averaged 118, the lowest being 110 and Wilt's own Philly team highest at 125. Kobe also has Wilt on the NBA being more competitive now than then. Kobe also has Wilt on the variety of his dominance the night of his 81 point game as opposed to Wilt's just more one dimensional dominance at the center position. I think if you look at it deep enough it's hard to side with Wilt. Sure, he has the iconic nature of the nice round 100. The historical sentiment. The awe and mystery around the game. 100 being more than 81 is not enough to be more impressive to me. The game has changed.