Many say their resumes are on par, very good resumes for these men I see countless people comparing them both. Extreme power, unforgettable entrances, balance issues at times but never knocked out ever, great boxing They even look alike in their primes. People who say they aren't alike don't really know too much about boxing or have a boxing iq of a gnat. Even Ray Charles can pinpoint their similarities. http://www.boxingnewsonline.net/exclusive-deontay-wilder-is-a-heavyweight-naseem-hamed/ http://tss.ib.tv/featured-articles/48533-three-punch-combo-wilder-gutsy
Currently, Naseem Hamed has a much better resume & legacy. If Deontay Wilder can step up and fight nothing but top contenders and obviously AJ then he can massively increase his own resume & legacy. These next 3 years for him are of vital importance. He is 32 years old already, and after 35 years of age he will be far enough over the hill to not be physically able to get top draw wins most likely.
A heavyweight Naz would have been more of a problem for AJ than Wilder will be, he came through the Kelly fight despite looking really sloppy, Kelly was rated as the No.1 feather at one point none of Wilder`s opponents have ever been rated No.1 by the ring magazine at heavyweight, Wilder is still an unknown wild card vs AJ.
The difference is Wilder gets by on his huge power whilst not conforming to orthodox technique (a polite way to say he looks like an amateur at times). Naz was a good, if unorthodox, technician with good defense, who had more to his game than a big windmill right. I do see the similarities you mention though, especially the off-balance punching and the outrageous egos.