1st and 10: How would Wilt do in today's NBA (Anyone catch this today?)

[guy]

Anyone watch 1st and 10 on ESPN today? Well since it was the 47th anniversary of Wilt's 100 point game, Skip Bayless and the 2 Live Stews were arguing about how Wilt would do in today's NBA. I didn't really agree with either one of them, but I definitely leaned more towards Skip's argument. Skip said he'd average about 35ppg/15rpg, while the one of the Live Stews said he wouldn't do anything in this league and Shaq and Dwight would destroy him, while the other one said he'd be an above average Tyson Chandler. The most ridiculous statement was the first Stew said that Wilt dominated midgets and today's players are specimens compared to them, and Wilt WAS NOT a specimen. And when Skip started talking about his track and field numbers, they still didn't change their opinion. I do think today's players are specimens compared to most of the players from the 60s but DEFINITELY not compared to Wilt who would be a freak of an athlete even in today's game. Now I definitely don't think Wilt would average 35/15, but probably Shaq's prime numbers + more rebounds instead and one of the best players in the league if not the best. I think most players from back then probably wouldn't have the same success, but I think Wilt is one and maybe the only one who would still have relatively the same, as far as where his place in the league is but not the inflated numbers. Anyway, anyone see this and what was your reaction? And remember the context of the topic was if Wilt AS HE WAS, and not if he had the advanced workout and coaching techniques to follow, was in the NBA today.

[OneMoreSucka]

He would get DOMINATED, straight up.

[Godfather]

He would get DOMINATED, straight up.

With today's conditioning I doubt it.

He would be a defensive stalwart for sure.

But I doubt he was skilled enough offensively to outplay todays elite centers (edit: For clarification by elite I mean Duncan, Yao, and Dwight. I also believe Prime Shaq, Hakeem, and Robinson would have eaten his heart out).

He just didn't have to have a repertoire of moves to dominate the competition he played against.

[Godfather]

^^nobody at that time had that either.

some of u idiots dont seem to understand that he wouldve evolved with the time if he played today(as in hed be even more of a freak of nature, more skillz thx to todays technology/trainning etc.). like u guys actually think that if kobe was born in the 50's, hed play exactly like hes playing in this. no, hed be playing with 50's style of playing except hed be better than the average of course, and thats what define the great ones.

How do you know that?

[Dasher]

Wilt had a hook, and the hook shot has worked for 50 years. Combine that with his marvelous finger roll, foot work, and athletic ability and you have a player that could play in any era.

[YoungRich]

Anyone watch 1st and 10 on ESPN today? Well since it was the 47th anniversary of Wilt's 100 point game, Skip Bayless and the 2 Live Stews were arguing about how Wilt would do in today's NBA. I didn't really agree with either one of them, but I definitely leaned more towards Skip's argument. Skip said he'd average about 35ppg/15rpg, while the one of the Live Stews said he wouldn't do anything in this league and Shaq and Dwight would destroy him, while the other one said he'd be an above average Tyson Chandler. The most ridiculous statement was the first Stew said that Wilt dominated midgets and today's players are specimens compared to them, and Wilt WAS NOT a specimen. And when Skip started talking about his track and field numbers, they still didn't change their opinion. I do think today's players are specimens compared to most of the players from the 60s but DEFINITELY not compared to Wilt who would be a freak of an athlete even in today's game. Now I definitely don't think Wilt would average 35/15, but probably Shaq's prime numbers + more rebounds instead and one of the best players in the league if not the best. I think most players from back then probably wouldn't have the same success, but I think Wilt is one and maybe the only one who would still have relatively the same, as far as where his place in the league is but not the inflated numbers. Anyway, anyone see this and what was your reaction? And remember the context of the topic was if Wilt AS HE WAS, and not if he had the advanced workout and coaching techniques to follow, was in the NBA today.


thanks guy

[lakers_forever]

An old Wilt held his own against Kareem Abdull Jabbar. It's pretty easy to assume that he would dominate against , perhaps, the weakest era of centers of the last 40 years

[guy]

An old Wilt held his own against Kareem Abdull Jabbar. It's pretty easy to assume that he would dominate against , perhaps, the weakest era of centers of the last 40 years

Yea thats true. I think he'd easily be the best center in the league today. It would be different if he was in the 90s going up against Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, Ewing, Mourning, etc. He'd still dominate just not as much as today.

I forgot to add that although Skip said Wilt would have the stats and still the domination, he also said Wilt would not have any titles cause of his personality that just wasn't aggressive enough and didn't seem to care enough. I think thats a fair assessment because that was his biggest criticism. He also said Dwight Howard seems to have that same problem.

[HisJoeness]

Skip said he'd average 35/15 though? I don't think anyone has done that since Kareem. Maybe Moses came close to it. But all things being equal I don't think he quite gets to that clip.

[Kblaze8855]

One thing I wonder about this situaiton. Put in in reverse. Put Dwight Howard in 1960. Know what would happen?

Insane numbers resulting in people today saying he couldnt dominate the modern league because all he did was dunk and get rebounds over skinny white centers. All we would see of him is layups and dunks(no impressive lobs...they didnt throw them back then) and blocks that didnt count.

And the same people saying Wilt would get owned today would be saying it about Howard. If they dont care Wilt was a near olympic level high jumper and long jumped 21 feet at his size they wouldnt care that Dwight could say...dunk on a 12 foot rim(As wilt did in an experimental thing in Kansas in the 50s).

Nobody back then could really show their full athletic potential because for one....little was recorded...and two...you didnt have people trying to do it. Wilt is a 7'1'' or 2 high jump champ who could hold a basketball with 2 fingers. Think he couldint windmill? He long jumped 21 feet. Think he couldnt take off from the FT line and dunk when he had a 9'6'' standing reach? Nobody threw him lobs to go get. He never had to jump much to dunk.

Whats the motivation to make crazy plays? If hes not blocking a shot he has little reason to go high. And even then its rare.

Dwight Howard, or Amare, or most any athletic bigman these days playing back then puts up numbers and has people making dumb claims about them likely being garbage today.

And something else...if nobody would throw him a lob and he couldnt do something fancy on the break without being benched for showing off...how would you know say...Iguodala was a great athlete? Driving by guys quickly and laying it up? Cant even really bang on people too much. Was considered disrespect.

How would you know exactly?

How would you know Jrich was athletic without the dunk contest, lobs, showing off on the break, and dunking on people(last one he rarely does).

How would you go about looking athletic in a 60s situation?

[Jacks3]

Prime Wilt would be around 30/14/4/3 on 60% from the field today.

[Jacks3]

Wilt played against a very large number of great and dominant centers in his 14 year career, here is the list:

* Bill Russel
* Kareem Abdul Jabbar
* Willis Reed
* Wes Unseld
* Elvin Hayes
* Dolph Schayes
* Nate Thurmond
* Bob Lanier

Any one of the above centers in their prime would at WORST be the second best center in today's NBA. All of them except Bob Lanier (20ppg, 9rpg career) appeared on the 50 greatest players list put out by the NBA in 1996.Wilt dominated them all but he wouldn't be abl to do so today? It is interesting to note that except for Russel & Schayes all of the above players were young or in their prime during the 1971-72 season when Wilt's Lakers won 33 consecutive games, went 69-13 & won the NBA Championship.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Pre-zone (say, if he played from 1993-2004), he'd put up 31-34 pts/15-16 reb/5 ast/3.5-4.5 blk/54-56% FG imo.

Post-zone, he'd average 27-30 pts/15-16 reb/5 ast/4+ blk/54-55% FG imo.

[lakers_forever]

Wilt played against a very large number of great and dominant centers in his 14 year career, here is the list:

* Bill Russel
* Kareem Abdul Jabbar
* Willis Reed
* Wes Unseld
* Elvin Hayes
* Dolph Schayes
* Nate Thurmond
* Bob Lanier

Any one of the above centers in their prime would at WORST be the second best center in today's NBA. All of them except Bob Lanier (20ppg, 9rpg career) appeared on the 50 greatest players list put out by the NBA in 1996.Wilt dominated them all but he wouldn't be abl to do so today? It is interesting to note that except for Russel & Schayes all of the above players were young or in their prime during the 1971-72 season when Wilt's Lakers won 33 consecutive games, went 69-13 & won the NBA Championship.


:applause:

[Papaya Petee]

I give him career averages of about 21 ppg 10 rpg 3 bpg on 55% FG

Prime about 24 12 and 4 on 58%

[abuC]

35 and 15 is silly, I dont think any big man can do that today, especially with the zone. But, I could see Wilt averaging a solid 25, 13 and 3, he was skilled offensively, some of the things he did on offense wouldnt work out as well today, but he wouldnt turn into Diekembe Mutumbo either.

He would be an elite center, I dont think he'd be better than the 99-03 Shaq though.

[2LeTTeRS]

There is no way Dwight would be better than Wilt. No way in hell.

[Dasher]

Wilt's passing ability must be also thrown into the equation. His all-around game was special. Outside of Shaq and maybe Yao there is not really anyone in the Association that would be able to work him in the post.

[dyna]

One thing I wonder about this situaiton. Put in in reverse. Put Dwight Howard in 1960. Know what would happen?

Insane numbers resulting in people today saying he couldnt dominate the modern league because all he did was dunk and get rebounds over skinny white centers. All we would see of him is layups and dunks(no impressive lobs...they didnt throw them back then) and blocks that didnt count.

And the same people saying Wilt would get owned today would be saying it about Howard. If they dont care Wilt was a near olympic level high jumper and long jumped 21 feet at his size they wouldnt care that Dwight could say...dunk on a 12 foot rim(As wilt did in an experimental thing in Kansas in the 50s).

Nobody back then could really show their full athletic potential because for one....little was recorded...and two...you didnt have people trying to do it. Wilt is a 7'1'' or 2 high jump champ who could hold a basketball with 2 fingers. Think he couldint windmill? He long jumped 21 feet. Think he couldnt take off from the FT line and dunk when he had a 9'6'' standing reach? Nobody threw him lobs to go get. He never had to jump much to dunk.

Whats the motivation to make crazy plays? If hes not blocking a shot he has little reason to go high. And even then its rare.

Dwight Howard, or Amare, or most any athletic bigman these days playing back then puts up numbers and has people making dumb claims about them likely being garbage today.

And something else...if nobody would throw him a lob and he couldnt do something fancy on the break without being benched for showing off...how would you know say...Iguodala was a great athlete? Driving by guys quickly and laying it up? Cant even really bang on people too much. Was considered disrespect.

How would you know exactly?

How would you know Jrich was athletic without the dunk contest, lobs, showing off on the break, and dunking on people(last one he rarely does).

How would you go about looking athletic in a 60s situation?
:bowdown: :cheers:

[Psileas]

I googled "2 Live Stews", since I have no idea who the hell they are and I found out that, fortunately, they are former NFL players. When you think that the 60's and 70's centers were "midgets" and that Wilt wasn't a physical specimen, you shouldn't be qualified to talk about basketball.

I'm not going to elaborate, kblaze already did a good job. I'll just have one more laughter at the idea of Dwight "destroying" Wilt, the very same Dwight who can't even destroy an above average center, like Gasol and the same Dwight who, at this very moment, is being outplayed by 37 year-old Shaq.

Btw, after the 0:50 mark of the following video, there's some new footage from college Wilt. Dwight would only wish he could make shots like Wilt's last one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUdDoxjmZdQ

[stephanieg]

LOL @ the thought of Wilt ****ing Chamberlain going up against:

Rasho
Biedrins
Bosh/Bargz
Gasol
Lee

Or half the "C's" in the league who are actually PFs playing out of position. I mean really now. 35/10 or something might not be too far off the mark for right now. Zone? Whatever. Old Shaq doesn't care, he's just old so he can't go all out, plus he's lost his touch around the basket a little and his moves are slower than they used to be. Wilt had more range and was quicker. He would badly embarrass current big men. Look at his arms. Look at film. Dude just runs to the paint, lob him the ball, he jumps up and grabs it, and then flicks it home. Easy. Plus he runs the floor like a gazelle.

[Lakers13]

Wilt would continue to dominate in this era playing in his prime, as others said, he was a freak of nature. With today's technology, it wouldnt be far off to say he may have been even more athletic then he was already.

[clayton]

He will get man handled by both Shaq and Duncan.

[gts]

Kblaze8855 excellent post. i'll add wilt was an accomplised volleyball player and would often play volleyball during the day and play a laker game at night and after retiring from the lakers was on a pro volleyball team

this is also from his wiki page

Even far beyond his playing days, Chamberlain was a very fit person. In his mid-forties, he was able to humble a young Los Angeles Lakers rookie called Magic Johnson in practice,[95] and even in the 1980s, he flirted with making a comeback in the NBA. In the 1980-81 NBA season, coach Larry Brown recalled that the 45-year old Chamberlain had received an offer by the Cleveland Cavaliers. When Chamberlain was 50, the New Jersey Nets had the same idea, and Chamberlain declined again.[95] Chamberlain however participated in several marathons instead.[4] He would stay an epitome of physical fitness for years to come, until his health rapidly worsened in 1999.[32]


Of all his memories of Wilt Chamberlain, the one that stood out for Larry Brown happened long after Chamberlain's professional career was over.


On a summer day in the early 1980s at the Men's Gym on the UCLA campus, Chamberlain showed up to take part in one of the high-octane pickup games that the arena constantly attracted. Brown was the coach of the Bruins back then, and Chamberlain often drove to UCLA from his home in Bel Air, Calif.


"Magic Johnson used to run the games," Brown recalled Tuesday after hearing that Chamberlain, his friend, had died at the age of 63, "and he called a couple of chintzy fouls and a goaltending on Wilt.


"So Wilt said: 'There will be no more layups in this gym,' and he blocked every shot after that. That's the truth, I saw it. He didn't let one (of Johnson's) shots get to the rim."


Chamberlain would have been in his mid-40s at the time, a decade removed from one of the greatest careers any basketball player ever produced. But the advancing years meant little to Chamberlain in terms of physical conditioning.


Into his 50s and his 60s, Chamberlain remained an incredible specimen -- a mountain of a man who was as coordinated and talented athletically as he was imposing physically.


The Cleveland Cavaliers called him in the early '80s and asked him if he'd still be interested in playing. Five or six years later, when Chamberlain was 50, the New Jersey Nets had the same idea.


Neither of those potential comebacks ever came to pass, but the very idea of signing a player so old shows just how well Chamberlain kept himself in shape -- and how shocked people were when they heard he had died.
http://static.espn.go.com/nba/news/1999/1012/110842.html

[Quata]

Everyone keeps saying that he get dominated because everyone today is bigger etc. hint: it because they are modern day professionals that put 24/7 into there body and sport. Imagine if Wilt had the same **** available to him, he would be bigger and stronger and be able to bump bodies with big guys like dwight and dominate him.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Holy cow, I just watched kblaze's video in the OP, and take a look at Wilt's speed from 51-53 seconds. Dude just put on the jets and covers huge distance incredibly quickly at 7'1"+. Amazing speed for anyone, much less a big guy like him. Check it out.

[highwhey]

How do you know that?
Ummm if Wilt played in Today's he'd be as conditioned as well as Today's NBA players, correct?

[momo]

1st and 10/cold pizza are the worsto... anything with Skip Bayless is suspect right out the box.

Wilt might have actually wound up with a better legacy in a way if he played today IMHO. He would not have his 100 point game but he also would not have so many sports writers assuming he posted #'s JUST due to being a giant. To my eye he has everything needed and then some to dominate today.

[db23]

He scored 100 points on a stiff team and ball hogging/being fed the ball for the record, come the playoffs he averaged 22ppg and only won 2 chips, 1 of them as nowhere near the best player on his team.Much like Kobe could do it against the stiffs but cracked up when it really mattered.End of the day regular season is a warmup, playoffs are where it matters.James white can jump longer than anyone ive seen yet he sucks in the nba.

[gts]

Holy cow, I just watched kblaze's video in the OP, and take a look at Wilt's speed from 51-53 seconds. Dude just put on the jets and covers huge distance incredibly quickly at 7'1"+. Amazing speed for anyone, much less a big guy like him. Check it out.welcome to the the real world...lol

[Sir Charles]

You people are insane...Wilt would dominate in today`s game with ease. His arm strength was like Karl Malone but just add to that to a man that was around 7`2 and add a little more. He would probably weight around 320-330 lbs with todays vitamins and his natural shoulder/arm strength would inrease more likes of Malone do to that fact. His stamina we don`t have to talk about :confusedshrug: He would lead the league in Blocks, Rebounds, Scoring over the years and would be second to Shaq in FG% efficiency inside over the years. His numbers would look like this: 25-36 PPG (50-57% FG), 12-20 RPG (no way any one today can out rebound Wilt!), 3-6 AGP, 2-4 BPG...over the years. He would be the most fouled player like a larger version of Karl Malone I say again. His fadeaway would be perfected and he would be able to knock and drunk as hard as he could which he wasn`t allowed before do to pitty and rules.

Look Wilt outrebounded Kareem by miles, shot at a higher FG% and held his own from 1969-1972 and this is what Kareem achieved vs Hakeem in their 29 meetings from 1984-85 to 1989-90:

Remember this...

Kareem: 37-41 Years Old (atleast 4-5 years passed his prime and Yes! no where near his physical prime)

Hakeem: 22-27 (total physical prime and practically prime)

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=abdulka01&p2=olajuha01

Kareem: 15.2 PPG on 56.7% FG Shooting (Far from Stoping Him!:rolleyes: :confusedshrug: ), 5.8 RPG, 1.4 BPG, 1.4 APG and 0.5 SPG but in ONLY 28.4 MPG

Hakeem: 21.8 PPG on 47.5% FG Shooting (Kareem lowered his FG!:confusedshrug: ), 11.9 RPG, 3.0 APG, 2.5 SPG and 2.6 BPG but IN 37.8 MPG

Kareem held his own agains the Dream while playing lesser minutes, making more FGs, Taking Less FGAs PG , Shooting 9% FG Superior to Hakeem and playing 9.4 MPG Lesser (a quarter pretty much):rolleyes: :banghead:

[OldSchoolBBall]

welcome to the the real world...lol

Huh? I don't get it. You see many 7'1"+ guys in the league accelerate that fast in a burst like that?

[bdreason]

He could be a 26/12 big man.

Remember, the rules are different now.

[gts]

Huh? I don't get it. You see many 7'1"+ guys in the league accelerate that fast in a burst like that?
yeah wilt!
for someone that follows the game like you do i'm just surprised you realized it now...lol

i'm at the office tonight and my computer is doing double duty so i can't really search... but on youtube there was at one time a great call by chick hearn where wilt blocks a shot, controls the block makes an outlet pass, runs the fast break and scores off a baylor assist... one of the best calls by chick hearn ever and a great play by wilt and elgin... hearn must have said the name "wilt" 8 times in the call lol

[OldSchoolBBall]

He could be a 26/12 big man.

Remember, the rules are different now.

He's a better scorer than Yao and a better rebounder than Dwight. I'd say 27/14+ at the minimum. Especially the rebounds.

[OldSchoolBBall]

yeah wilt!
for someone that follows the game like you do i'm just surprised you realized it now...lol

No, I knew he was a freak and a track athlete, that was just a very stark video example of his speed. Given the scarcity of Wilt footage, it's not often you see such a clear example of his acceleration.

[plowking]

I think David Robinson's game resemble's Wilts the most. Strength, speed and great all round game. Thus I don't really think he'd do any better then Robinson in todays league.

Maybe 27 and 12 as his max.

[Lebron23]

Prime Wilt was a beast during his time, but he's no better than Prime Shaq and Hakeem Olajuwon.

Slower Pace Era = Less Points, and Less Rebounds.

Teams in the 1960's averaged more than 110 ppg.

[VCMVP1551]

If you compare his 1961-1962 season to Shaq's 1999-2000 season using league averages and give him 40 mpg.

33.0 ppg, 14.7 rpg, 1.8 apg, 53.3 FG%, 61.3 FT%, 24.8 FGA

Yes I did factor in the team rebounds stat when adjusting that. Now that is simply by adjusting pace and minutes, so it's highly doubtful that he gets 2 more ppg against today's slightly bigger, more athletic players.

I gave him less minutes because there's no way in hell he'd play near 48.5 in today's league. Team's value stars too much and nobody has come close. I gave him 40 because that's what Shaq played in 2000 and Jordan's career high in mpg was 40.4 so that's fair.

I also highly doubt any big man could get 24.8 FGA in the modern era, if you give him the 21.1 FGA Shaq averaged in 2000 then Wilt's adjusted ppg becomes 28.1 ppg. That seems a bit low, but more realistic than 35.

In reality I think Wilt's best scoring seasons would have been in the 29-30 ppg range. Shaq did that 3-4 times and David Robinson did that once so I could imagine Wilt doing that a few times as well.

For rebounds I'd say he'd drop from closer to 15(adjusted) down to about 14.

If you want me to give an estimate for early to mid 60's Wilt I'll say 29.5 ppg, 14 rpg, 3 apg, 3 bpg, 56 FG%. So pretty much prime Shaq type numbers.

If you mean Wilt in the late 60's when he was focusing more on team basketball, defense and rebounding then I'll say more like 18 ppg, 15.5 rpg, 5 apg, 4 bpg.

His skills are well documented on film. At 7'1", the only player at that height that rivaled Wilt's athleticism in NBA history is Shaq. Aside from Shaq I can't think of a stronger player either. He was an elite passer and IMO talking about Wilt's later career the only big men in NBA history who compare as passers are Walton, Kareem, Webber, Sabonis and maybe guys like KG, Daugherty and Divac.

He had an assortment of moves that would still be effective today such as that finger roll, hook shot fadeaway, turnaround, bank shot ect.

[DahLollipop]

Anyone watch 1st and 10 on ESPN today? Well since it was the 47th anniversary of Wilt's 100 point game, Skip Bayless and the 2 Live Stews were arguing about how Wilt would do in today's NBA. I didn't really agree with either one of them, but I definitely leaned more towards Skip's argument. Skip said he'd average about 35ppg/15rpg, while the one of the Live Stews said he wouldn't do anything in this league and Shaq and Dwight would destroy him, while the other one said he'd be an above average Tyson Chandler. The most ridiculous statement was the first Stew said that Wilt dominated midgets and today's players are specimens compared to them, and Wilt WAS NOT a specimen. And when Skip started talking about his track and field numbers, they still didn't change their opinion. I do think today's players are specimens compared to most of the players from the 60s but DEFINITELY not compared to Wilt who would be a freak of an athlete even in today's game. Now I definitely don't think Wilt would average 35/15, but probably Shaq's prime numbers + more rebounds instead and one of the best players in the league if not the best. I think most players from back then probably wouldn't have the same success, but I think Wilt is one and maybe the only one who would still have relatively the same, as far as where his place in the league is but not the inflated numbers. Anyway, anyone see this and what was your reaction? And remember the context of the topic was if Wilt AS HE WAS, and not if he had the advanced workout and coaching techniques to follow, was in the NBA today.

Skip Bayless analyzed in a weak era.

[Lebron23]

If you compare his 1961-1962 season to Shaq's 1999-2000 season using league averages and give him 40 mpg.

33.0 ppg, 14.7 rpg, 1.8 apg, 53.3 FG%, 61.3 FT%, 24.8 FGA

Yes I did factor in the team rebounds stat when adjusting that. Now that is simply by adjusting pace and minutes, so it's highly doubtful that he gets 2 more ppg against today's slightly bigger, more athletic players.

I gave him less minutes because there's no way in hell he'd play near 48.5 in today's league. Team's value stars too much and nobody has come close. I gave him 40 because that's what Shaq played in 2000 and Jordan's career high in mpg was 40.4 so that's fair.

I also highly doubt any big man could get 24.8 FGA in the modern era, if you give him the 21.1 FGA Shaq averaged in 2000 then Wilt's adjusted ppg becomes 28.1 ppg. That seems a bit low, but more realistic than 35.

In reality I think Wilt's best scoring seasons would have been in the 29-30 ppg range. Shaq did that 3-4 times and David Robinson did that once so I could imagine Wilt doing that a few times as well.

For rebounds I'd say he'd drop from closer to 15(adjusted) down to about 14.

If you want me to give an estimate for early to mid 60's Wilt I'll say 29.5 ppg, 14 rpg, 3 apg, 3 bpg, 56 FG%. So pretty much prime Shaq type numbers.

If you mean Wilt in the late 60's when he was focusing more on team basketball, defense and rebounding then I'll say more like 18 ppg, 15.5 rpg, 5 apg, 4 bpg.

His skills are well documented on film. At 7'1", the only player at that height that rivaled Wilt's athleticism in NBA history is Shaq. Aside from Shaq I can't think of a stronger player either. He was an elite passer and IMO talking about Wilt's later career the only big men in NBA history who compare as passers are Walton, Kareem, Webber, Sabonis and maybe guys like KG, Daugherty and Divac.

He had an assortment of moves that would still be effective today such as that finger roll, hook shot fadeaway, turnaround, bank shot ect.

Unbelievable posts from VCMVP1551. Jeff should appoint him as one of the Forum Moderators in the NBA Forum.

Repped :cheers:


This is like the Oscar and LeBron comparison on Basketball Reference.


But that was all conjecture, as it turns out, nothing more, nothing less. What’s fact, however, is something that never occurred to me until I discovered APBRmetrics much later. Bear with me for a moment while I explain: Okay, so you’ve all seen Wilt and Oscar’s numbers from 1962… but have you ever sat down and looked at the league averages that year? In ‘62, the average team took 107.7 shots per game. By comparison, this year the average team takes 80.2 FGA/G.

If we use a regression to estimate turnovers & offensive rebounds, the league pace factor for 1962 was 125.5 possessions/48 minutes, whereas this year it’s 91.7. Oscar’s Royals averaged 124.7 poss/48, while Wilt’s Warriors put up a staggering 129.7 (the highest mark in the league). On the other hand, the 2009 Cavs are averaging a mere 89.2 poss/48. It turns out that the simplest explanation for the crazy statistical feats of 1961-62 (and the early sixties in general) is just that the league was playing at a much faster tempo in those days, with more possessions affording players more opportunities to amass gaudy counting statistics.

Let’s say LeBron ‘09 could switch paces (note that I didn’t say “places”, which is another argument entirely) with Oscar ‘62… That means we would have to scale down the Big O’s per-game numbers by multiplying them by .715, giving Robertson a far more reasonable line of 22.0 PPG, 8.9 RPG, & 8.1 APG — which are still really good numbers, to be sure, but not as crazy as they looked at the breakneck pace of ‘62. By contrast, we have to multiply LBJ’s stats by a factor of 1.4 if we want to see what they would look like if he played at a 1962-style pace. The results: 40.1 PPG, 10.3 RPG, & 10.0 APG!! As you can see, those 35.5 extra possessions per game really make a huge difference when comparing the two players’ stats.

So, no, LeBron probably will never average an Oscar-esque triple-double in today’s NBA… but it’s more a consequence of the league’s pace than any failing on his part. Just like we wouldn’t say a .400 hitter in the 1894 NL (league BA: .309) was as impressive as Ted Williams hitting .406 in the 1941 AL (league BA: .266), basketball fans should keep in mind that the league’s pace factor has gone down steadily since its inception, and with those fewer possessions come fewer chances to put up monster stat totals. This isn’t meant to denigrate Oscar and Wilt in any way, but it does mean that their eye-popping stats from back then are, in reality, not quite as impressive as they appear at first glance.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=1423

[YoungRich]

if wilt was still alive and they could just make him go back to his 20s body he would **** on ppl, how hard would he go out and dominate afer hearing all these fools say tht he would do ****, or tht we would just be 20/10, i wouldnt put it passed him to just play 1 year and be 40ppg + then retire and tell every 1 to suck it

[Micku]

I'll say Wilt will be similar to Hakeem. He'll probably average 20+ points a game with great rebound numbers.

[VCMVP1551]

Unbelievable posts from VCMVP1551. Jeff should appoint him as one of the Forum Moderators in the NBA Forum.

Repped :cheers:

Thanks. :rockon:

[momo]

Skip Bay-less blathered in a weak era.

Fixed. Good job VC mathing it for us.

[Dbrog]

Put him on Phoenix and Prime numbers looks like they do back in the 60s. 50ppg/20rpg I think could still be possible in that offense (maybe bring the pts down to 40 or something).

[Simple Jack]

Put him on Phoenix and Prime numbers looks like they do back in the 60s. 50ppg/20rpg I think could still be possible in that offense (maybe bring the pts down to 40 or something).

Almost every team back then was averaging over 114 points per game. The pace of the game was so much faster and had on average over 20+ more possessions per game.

The fact of the matter is, a few rule changes, defensive schemes, average athleticism would lead to a HUGE decrease in Wilt's performance and numbers.

Now let me start off by saying that if Wilt, Russell, Oscar, etc. grew up today, they would most definitely be amazing with their natural talent, modern medicine, technology; but if we take them straight out of their primes and plug them into today's league or even the 90's they'd have some serious trouble getting the stats they did.

Wilt wasn't worrying about a 6'10 help defender coming to snatch the ball out. He wasn't worrying about a 7 footer who can shoot 3's and spread the floor out more than most shooting guards. You don't think they'd keep him out of the paint or double him as soon as he got the ball from 12+ feet out? He wouldn't be able to stand around all day in the paint with the 3-second rule.

The league as a whole today is more athletic, bigger stronger, more conditioned. Coaches have seen and played against almost every defensive or offensive scheme you can imagine. Do you think Cousy would be able to body up someone like Baron Davis or Allen Iverson? It's the evolution of sports. It happens in every sport and will continue to happen. It makes sense, just think about it. You now have people competing from around the world to play in the NBA. The talent pool is so immense compared to back then, it's ridiculous.

[andgar923]

Ignore this post if some other posters mentioned the same thing.

But....

In today's weak era, filled with soft big men, and no interior threat, I do see Wilt averaging close to 35 and 15.

Why?

Because he was skilled!!!

He had a turnaround, he had a mid range, fallaway jumper, running hook, hookshot from just about anywhere, he could jump outta the gym, he was 7 ft tall with long wingspan.

If Dwight Howard can dominate like he can, with a tenth of the talent that Wilt had, of course Wilt would embarrass all 3 centers of today. And he weighed more than Howard as well ( Howard is currently listed as 265, Wilt is listed as 275). Howard's dominance comes from his athletic abilities, now.... add Howard's athletic abilities (even tho Wilt was more athletic, but that's another argument) with an actual skilled game. A player that can pass, shoot, has multiple post up moves in and away from the paint, 35 and 15 is very reasonable.

[Sir Charles]

Look Wilt outrebounded Kareem by miles, shot at a higher FG% and held his own from: 1969-70 to 1971-72 and this is what Kareem achieved vs Hakeem in their 29 meetings from 1984-85 to 1989-90:

Remember this...

Kareem: 37-41 Years Old (atleast 4-5 years passed his prime and Yes! no where near his physical prime)

Hakeem: 22-27 (total physical prime and practically prime)

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=abdulka01&p2=olajuha01

Kareem: 15.2 PPG on 56.7% FG Shooting (Far from Stoping Him!:rolleyes: :confusedshrug: ), 5.8 RPG, 1.4 BPG, 1.4 APG and 0.5 SPG but in ONLY 28.4 MPG

Hakeem: 21.8 PPG on 47.5% FG Shooting (Kareem lowered his FG!:confusedshrug: ), 11.9 RPG, 3.0 APG, 2.5 SPG and 2.6 BPG but IN 37.8 MPG

Kareem held his own agains the Dream while playing lesser minutes, making more FGs, Taking Less FGAs PG , Shooting 9% FG Superior to Hakeem and playing 9.4 MPG Lesser (a quarter pretty much):rolleyes: :banghead:

Wilt would not dominate today? :roll:

[stephanieg]

Everyone keeps saying that he get dominated because everyone today is bigger etc.

Who's saying that? They're retarded. Most of the C's in the league right now are PFs playing out of position. Wilt is friggin' huge anyway. Hint: guys like Hakeem and Ewing aren't really seven feet tall. Neither is Dwight.


Ummm if Wilt played in Today's he'd be as conditioned as well as Today's NBA players, correct?

He's probably the most conditioned seven footer ever considering his track and field experience plus the fact the NBA was played at a 110+ pace when he played and he played for 48 minutes a game (more, sometimes). :D


When he was younger he was a pogo stick (emphasis on stick):

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3408/3327461787_73514a37f0_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3612/3328303186_ed10f76b52_o.jpg

As he entered the latter years he bulked up into a huge beast:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3272/2922081462_2cf6c2e553_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3375/3327461777_f015aa349f_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3377/3328295886_5d9928ca10_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3185/2922176610_34b9fce9e4.jpg

[Cavs2007Champs]

One amazing thing I noticed about Wilt's defense from a few videos, was the way he blocked or altered shots.

When he made a block he kept the ball inbounds every time (except in 1 play) and then that block led to a fastbreak, and a few of those fastbreaks I noticed Wilt finishing it also.

I don't get why so many big men today don't try to keep the ball inbounds, I know it's more highlight worthy to swat it into the stands, but if you can keep it inbounds or even just snatch the damn thing, then your team can start a fast break.

Wilt would be very dominant in today's game, the physique he had in the latter years of his career would have fared very well, due to the weight and size he gained.

Wilt was an FREAK of nature, and he'd excel in modern times.

[Psileas]

He scored 100 points on a stiff team and ball hogging/being fed the ball for the record, come the playoffs he averaged 22ppg and only won 2 chips, 1 of them as nowhere near the best player on his team.Much like Kobe could do it against the stiffs but cracked up when it really mattered.End of the day regular season is a warmup, playoffs are where it matters.James white can jump longer than anyone ive seen yet he sucks in the nba.

A lot of the things you posted make zero sense. First of all, come the playoffs, Wilt averaged 35 ppg that season, not 22. 22.5 is his career average, so the 22 number is a wrong generalization. Second, Wilt never in his career was "nowhere near the best player on his team", except if we're talking only about scoring, which he reduced to his own will. There were times when people would say that a 20 ppg Wilt could score no more, then he'd go in the next game and drop 60.
You mentioned Kobe? Kobe was a non factor in lots of crucial playoff games, with the Lakers getting blown out in some of them. Check the last game in 2003 vs San Antonio, 2004 vs Detroit, 2006 vs Phoenix, 2007 vs Phoenix, 2008 vs Boston. At least, even when Wilt lost series:

1) His team didn't get blown out nearly as often.
2) During crucial games he didn't have that many underperformances.
3) Even when he didn't score as much as he was expected to, he still did a lot of other things. For example, Wilt only twice grabbed less than 20 rebounds in the last game of any playoff series he played, won or lost.
4) Wilt, apart from one case, always lost to the eventual champions (and usually to the team with the best defense in the league). Phoenix, for Kobe's case, never had anything resembling the best defense in the league.

And what does James White have to do with Wilt? Wilt has plenty of basketball talent and proved so. White, except from dunking, proved nothing.


If you compare his 1961-1962 season to Shaq's 1999-2000 season using league averages and give him 40 mpg.

33.0 ppg, 14.7 rpg, 1.8 apg, 53.3 FG%, 61.3 FT%, 24.8 FGA

Yes I did factor in the team rebounds stat when adjusting that. Now that is simply by adjusting pace and minutes, so it's highly doubtful that he gets 2 more ppg against today's slightly bigger, more athletic players.

I gave him less minutes because there's no way in hell he'd play near 48.5 in today's league. Team's value stars too much and nobody has come close. I gave him 40 because that's what Shaq played in 2000 and Jordan's career high in mpg was 40.4 so that's fair.

I also highly doubt any big man could get 24.8 FGA in the modern era, if you give him the 21.1 FGA Shaq averaged in 2000 then Wilt's adjusted ppg becomes 28.1 ppg. That seems a bit low, but more realistic than 35.

In reality I think Wilt's best scoring seasons would have been in the 29-30 ppg range. Shaq did that 3-4 times and David Robinson did that once so I could imagine Wilt doing that a few times as well.

For rebounds I'd say he'd drop from closer to 15(adjusted) down to about 14.

If you want me to give an estimate for early to mid 60's Wilt I'll say 29.5 ppg, 14 rpg, 3 apg, 3 bpg, 56 FG%. So pretty much prime Shaq type numbers.

There's more to it than just adjusting for pace, when it comes to faster vs slower eras:

1) Faster paced eras generally favor non-star players, since there are generally less passes and there's a better chance that the player who has the ball will shoot. This hurts centers the most, although Wilt was the fastest center in the league.

2) As a consequence of this, a slower paced league, will most often have a higher scoring efficiency. Players with low scoring talent would shoot less, ill-adviced shots would be less, etc. Now, I did notice that you scaled his percentages up, but in this case, overall scoring will go up, as well. I don't know if you did this, but you certainly didn't do so when adjusting 24.8 fga to Shaq's ones.

3) The per minute efficiency of someone resting for 8 minutes per game can't be the same with the per minute efficiency of someone not resting at all in the same way that if a player can produce 20 ppg in 30 minutes, it's not exactly fair to claim that if he played 40 he would produce 26.7. If he could play 40 minutes and retain the same efficiency, he would do so.

4) There's another reason pace has gone down considerably. It's not just the need for higher efficiency. Tougher defenses play a role to this, as well. When you adjust 60's pace to 00's pace, this means that you also adjust 60's to 00's defenses, therefore it's not really fair to scale down the numbers even more (from 33 ppg to 29.5 in our case), because the adjustment already means that all the 60's centers of our adjusted league actually grow up in today's era and play similarly to today's players. In other words, there's no reason to adjust the pace of a 60's league to a pace of a 00's league and assume that 60's players still play like they used to. Having said that, I'd easily rank the "modern equivalent" of the average center of Wilt's NBA over the average center of today and would actually scale the final stats up.

5) Even after adjusting, the 3 bpg estimation is low. A player like Ewing blocked more than 3 shots per game in his prime during even slower eras.

(There's a 6th point I'd like to add, but forgot it while writing #4...)

BTW, I've started creating some archives, adjusting all-time legends' (and modern stars') stats into a unique league. The outcome should be interesting.

[YoungRich]

A lot of the things you posted make zero sense. First of all, come the playoffs, Wilt averaged 35 ppg that season, not 22. 22.5 is his career average, so the 22 number is a wrong generalization. Second, Wilt never in his career was "nowhere near the best player on his team", except if we're talking only about scoring, which he reduced to his own will. There were times when people would say that a 20 ppg Wilt could score no more, then he'd go in the next game and drop 60.
You mentioned Kobe? Kobe was a non factor in lots of crucial playoff games, with the Lakers getting blown out in some of them. Check the last game in 2003 vs San Antonio, 2004 vs Detroit, 2006 vs Phoenix, 2007 vs Phoenix, 2008 vs Boston. At least, even when Wilt lost series:

1) His team didn't get blown out nearly as often.
2) During crucial games he didn't have that many underperformances.
3) Even when he didn't score as much as he was expected to, he still did a lot of other things. For example, Wilt only twice grabbed less than 20 rebounds in the last game of any playoff series he played, won or lost.
4) Wilt, apart from one case, always lost to the eventual champions (and usually to the team with the best defense in the league). Phoenix, for Kobe's case, never had anything resembling the best defense in the league.

And what does James White have to do with Wilt? Wilt has plenty of basketball talent and proved so. White, except from dunking, proved nothing.



There's more to it than just adjusting for pace, when it comes to faster vs slower eras:

1) Faster paced eras generally favor non-star players, since there are generally less passes and there's a better chance that the player who has the ball will shoot. This hurts centers the most, although Wilt was the fastest center in the league.

2) As a consequence of this, a slower paced league, will most often have a higher scoring efficiency. Players with low scoring talent would shoot less, ill-adviced shots would be less, etc. Now, I did notice that you scaled his percentages up, but in this case, overall scoring will go up, as well. I don't know if you did this, but you certainly didn't do so when adjusting 24.8 fga to Shaq's ones.

3) The per minute efficiency of someone resting for 8 minutes per game can't be the same with the per minute efficiency of someone not resting at all in the same way that if a player can produce 20 ppg in 30 minutes, it's not exactly fair to claim that if he played 40 he would produce 26.7. If he could play 40 minutes and retain the same efficiency, he would do so.

4) There's another reason pace has gone down considerably. It's not just the need for higher efficiency. Tougher defenses play a role to this, as well. When you adjust 60's pace to 00's pace, this means that you also adjust 60's to 00's defenses, therefore it's not really fair to scale down the numbers even more (from 33 ppg to 29.5 in our case), because the adjustment already means that all the 60's centers of our adjusted league actually grow up in today's era and play similarly to today's players. In other words, there's no reason to adjust the pace of a 60's league to a pace of a 00's league and assume that 60's players still play like they used to. Having said that, I'd easily rank the "modern equivalent" of the average center of Wilt's NBA over the average center of today and would actually scale the final stats up.

5) Even after adjusting, the 3 bpg estimation is low. A player like Ewing blocked more than 3 shots per game in his prime during even slower eras.

(There's a 6th point I'd like to add, but forgot it while writing #4...)

BTW, I've started creating some archives, adjusting all-time legends' (and modern stars') stats into a unique league. The outcome should be interesting.

keep me posted

[postmupndunkit]

"THE NEW 2009" Wilt would have access to trainers, state of the art exercise equipment, and dietary supplements. In addition to all the technology and human specialists available now that weren't avail back them.

He'd band with the best of them and his body type would be different. Wilt would average 50/25/10 in 2009

[Mdog1]

"THE NEW 2009" Wilt would have access to trainers, state of the art exercise equipment, and dietary supplements. In addition to all the technology and human specialists available now that weren't avail back them.

He'd band with the best of them and his body type would be different. Wilt would average 50/25/10 in 2009
No that is not true because the pace back then has changed to now so he would not be getting 50 PPG and to say so is retarded.

[VCMVP1551]

1) Faster paced eras generally favor non-star players, since there are generally less passes and there's a better chance that the player who has the ball will shoot. This hurts centers the most, although Wilt was the fastest center in the league.

Yeah, but regardless there's no doubt his FGA would drop a lot. Especially with scouting what it is today. It's hard to imagine Wilt getting much more than 21-22 FGA on a good team(which the 1962 Warriors were). It's harder to get a lot of FGA when you're playing with your back to basket. Wilt's game from everything I saw was mostly with his back to the basket. Even high scoring centers who played facing the basket more and took a lot of jumpshots like Ewing and Robinson never got to 21 FGA per game. Olajuwon did twice, but then again Hakeem was on a team with no stars most of that time and he also played facing the basket more than Wilt as far as I can tell.


2) As a consequence of this, a slower paced league, will most often have a higher scoring efficiency. Players with low scoring talent would shoot less, ill-adviced shots would be less, etc. Now, I did notice that you scaled his percentages up, but in this case, overall scoring will go up, as well. I don't know if you did this, but you certainly didn't do so when adjusting 24.8 fga to Shaq's ones.

In my final estimate I gave Wilt 29.5 ppg up from the 28.1 when adjusted to Shaq's FGA and I gave him 56 FG% up from the 53.3% he initially got when his numbers were adjusted. That wasn't based on any particular math. I just knew that Wilt's FG% would jump up even higher and as a result his ppg would. 56 FG% on 21.1 FGA and 61.3% on 9.1 FTA would give him 29.2 ppg. I gave him the same FGA to FTA ratio as he had in 1962.


3) The per minute efficiency of someone resting for 8 minutes per game can't be the same with the per minute efficiency of someone not resting at all in the same way that if a player can produce 20 ppg in 30 minutes, it's not exactly fair to claim that if he played 40 he would produce 26.7. If he could play 40 minutes and retain the same efficiency, he would do so.

That's fair, but while Wilt would be getting the extra rest other players would get in a rythym at times and it's not like they'd just stop shooting the instant Wilt came in. Plus the players today are atleast a bit bigger and more athletic so that would tire him out as well. In 48 minutes you can also keep shooting even when you're cold and even Wilt would go through cold stretchs because his game wasn't just 5 feet around the basket. In 40 minutes he wouldn't always have the luxary to shoot himself out of those cold stretches. So I think there are a lot of points either way.


4) There's another reason pace has gone down considerably. It's not just the need for higher efficiency. Tougher defenses play a role to this, as well. When you adjust 60's pace to 00's pace, this means that you also adjust 60's to 00's defenses, therefore it's not really fair to scale down the numbers even more (from 33 ppg to 29.5 in our case), because the adjustment already means that all the 60's centers of our adjusted league actually grow up in today's era and play similarly to today's players. In other words, there's no reason to adjust the pace of a 60's league to a pace of a 00's league and assume that 60's players still play like they used to. Having said that, I'd easily rank the "modern equivalent" of the average center of Wilt's NBA over the average center of today and would actually scale the final stats up.

I scaled down the numbers even more because I didn't think Wilt would get 25 FGA in today's game. If he did then I believe he could have approached 33 ppg, but I don't see any center coming near that. Olajuwon, Ewing and Robinson weren't anywhere near that and they faced the basket a lot.


5) Even after adjusting, the 3 bpg estimation is low. A player like Ewing blocked more than 3 shots per game in his prime during even slower eras.

I meant in a season when Wilt was already scoring 29-30 ppg and grabbing 14 rpg. I gave Wilt in the late 60's 4 blocks, 15.5 rebounds and 5 assists per game because he focused on that more. Maybe he'd be around 4 bpgs in his best seasons too, that I do not know because blocked shots stats weren't kept.


BTW, I've started creating some archives, adjusting all-time legends' (and modern stars') stats into a unique league. The outcome should be interesting.

That should be interesting, I've always been interested in that myself.

[YoungRich]

i can talk about wilt all day. can any find the possesions per game for the 72-73 lakers? dude still racked up 18.6 rpg, and 22.5 in the playoffs wowza

[YoungRich]

i assume the pace slowed down at least a lil in the playoffs back then too, can any oldies confirm this :confusedshrug:

[gts]

i can talk about wilt all day. can any find the possesions per game for the 72-73 lakers? dude still racked up 18.6 rpg, and 22.5 in the playoffs wowzapace wasnt kept back then and it's hard to figure out because they didn't keep track of offensive rebounds (a key factor in determing posessions/pace)

[YoungRich]

pace wasnt kept back then and it's hard to figure out because they didn't keep track of offensive rebounds (a key factor in determing posessions/pace)


i meant pos/game

[Psileas]

Yeah, but regardless there's no doubt his FGA would drop a lot. Especially with scouting what it is today. It's hard to imagine Wilt getting much more than 21-22 FGA on a good team(which the 1962 Warriors were). It's harder to get a lot of FGA when you're playing with your back to basket. Wilt's game from everything I saw was mostly with his back to the basket. Even high scoring centers who played facing the basket more and took a lot of jumpshots like Ewing and Robinson never got to 21 FGA per game. Olajuwon did twice, but then again Hakeem was on a team with no stars most of that time and he also played facing the basket more than Wilt as far as I can tell.
In my final estimate I gave Wilt 29.5 ppg up from the 28.1 when adjusted to Shaq's FGA and I gave him 56 FG% up from the 53.3% he initially got when his numbers were adjusted. That wasn't based on any particular math. I just knew that Wilt's FG% would jump up even higher and as a result his ppg would. 56 FG% on 21.1 FGA and 61.3% on 9.1 FTA would give him 29.2 ppg. I gave him the same FGA to FTA ratio as he had in 1962.
I scaled down the numbers even more because I didn't think Wilt would get 25 FGA in today's game. If he did then I believe he could have approached 33 ppg, but I don't see any center coming near that. Olajuwon, Ewing and Robinson weren't anywhere near that and they faced the basket a lot.

I think that both Hakeem and Robinson would be able to take more than their "ceiling" of 20-21 FGA if their teams decided to go for them at the expence of their %'s (which happened with Wilt and the '62 Warriors). Even Shaq was able to have a 21 fga season in his prime (on high accuracy). I bet all these could average 3 fga's more and pad their stats if they wanted to (sometimes, even if they managed to make only 1/3 of these additional shots, they'd still exceed 50% FG shooting). Centers didn't take 30+ shots per game in the 60's, either. Guards and forwards were mostly the ones who did the higher scoring. Even Wilt didn't do it all the time. Take '64, for example: Wilt averaged 28.7 shots per game, which is roughly the adjusted equivalent of the number of shots Hakeem or David took at their primes, and that's only 2 seasons after '62 and 1 season after '63 (when Wilt averaged more than 35 fga's for a good part of the season). Similarly, I bet that he could go for more than 28.7 fga's in '64, but there was no need to.


That's fair, but while Wilt would be getting the extra rest other players would get in a rythym at times and it's not like they'd just stop shooting the instant Wilt came in. Plus the players today are atleast a bit bigger and more athletic so that would tire him out as well. In 48 minutes you can also keep shooting even when you're cold and even Wilt would go through cold stretchs because his game wasn't just 5 feet around the basket. In 40 minutes he wouldn't always have the luxary to shoot himself out of those cold stretches. So I think there are a lot of points either way.

The first argument, though it makes sense, describes mostly the European style of play or the style of teams like the Spurs. From all I've seen during all these years, as long as a team's mega-scorer (in the order of LeBron, Kobe, etc) gets in, it seems like their teammates do shoot less than when they were sitting.
Superstar substitutions nowadays (whenever there's no foul/injury trouble) occur in the stretches when

1) they need some rest and the coach decides that using the bench player will provide more help at that moment

or

2) there's some part of the game when they generally tend to be less productive in general. Most superstars tend to be at their least productive period during the 2nd quarters of games (though that's not a rule that always applies). Like you also mentioned the scouting department, a well-organized team should figure this out. Probably some did back then as well (I'm almost sure the Celtics did), but I doubt they payed as much attention as teams do nowadays.