Why Wilt Chamberlain is the top player of all time.

[Abraham Lincoln]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/130817-greatness-revisited-why-wilt-chamberlain-is-the-greatest-nba-player-ever

One of the most common types of articles on this site is a comparison between players and teams, which can certainly be a fun way to pass some time.

There have been numerous articles (generating thousands upon thousands of comments) contemplating who is the better player, Kobe Bryant or LeBron James.

There have been an even greater number of articles wondering whether Kobe deserves to be ranked with Jordan, which at times sparks so much controversy it makes you wonder whether those commenting on it all are even out of grade school.

Most of the questions on the “Short List” are comparisons just such as this—one of them asking “Jordan or Russell?” And there are even some articles questioning who is the greatest player of all time, with Michael Jordan being the de facto answer of a majority of those I see.

Other players are always mentioned when a list of the greatest players in NBA history are worked up, including Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Oscar Robertson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Hakeem Olajuwon, and more recent players such as Kevin Garnett, Allen Iverson, Paul Pierce, and Tim Duncan.

While there are valid arguments to be made that all of these players should be considered among the best players in NBA history, their accomplishments, one and all, pale in comparison to Wilt Chamberlain’s, who is, while mentioned among them, relegated far too often to second-string.

Even I myself have been guilty of not always giving The Big Dipper (and don’t call him Wilt “The Stilt”; he hated that nickname) his due, but I’ve begun to revisit some of the history of the game, and have found I can no longer condone such galling inaccuracy. Wilt Chamberlain was the greatest player in NBA history, bar none—no offense meant to Michael Jordan.

MANY REASONS WILT IS NEVER GIVEN HIS DUE



There is a constant stream of idiocy concerning Wilt Chamberlain and the era in which he played found on message boards and blogs throughout the internet, in articles and columns both online and in print, and through the television sports news media.




Myth One: Wilt Was Shut Down by Bill Russell



One misconception among some is that Bill Russell shut Wilt down. I think this myth can only be explained by the fact that Bill Russell’s Celtics were so often successful against Chamberlain’s teams. However, many of Wilt’s teammates during that era were anything but Hall of Famers, whereas Bill Russell shared the court with seven of them.

Certainly the Celtics won the battles against Wilt’s early Philadelphia-San Francisco Warriors, Philadelphia 76ers, and Los Angeles Lakers teams, but those battles were ferocious and hard fought, with four of the six series going the full seven games, and one of the others going to six games. Wilt, without a great supporting cast, nearly defeated some of the greatest “teams” in NBA history merely on the strength of his own ability.

And how did Wilt fare against his great nemesis, Bill Russell, throughout his career in head-to-head matchups? Was he shut down, as some claim? Hardly.

According to Philadelphia76ers stat man Harvey Pollack, Chamberlain and Russell played head-to-head a total of 142 times. In those matchups, Wilt averaged 28.7 PPG and 28.7 RPG. Russell, on the other hand, averaged 23.7 PPG, and 14.5 RPG.

What’s of note is that Chamberlain’s career rebounding average was 22.9 RPG, while Russell’s was 22.5 RPG. Appears Wilt destroyed Bill on the boards any time he faced him.

Also of note is the fact Wilt scored 62 points in a game against Russell on January 14, 1962 in Boston, and scored more than 50 points against him in six other games. The most points Russell ever scored against Wilt? 37. Also, Russell only scored more than 30 against Wilt two other times.

Of further note is the fact Wilt set an NBA record grabbing 55 rebounds against Russell in a game on November 24, 1960, and grabbed more than 40 rebounds against Bill in six other games.

His dominance of Russell was simply a fact and was profound. If it wasn’t for the fact Russell had Hall of Famers surrounding him his entire career, Wilt’s teams would have certainly won at least two or three of those titles Bill and the Celts have.


Myth Two: Wilt Played Against Midgets


One of the most common is the idea that Wilt Chamberlain’s incredible statistical dominance during his playing days was due to the “fact” he was a “giant among Lilliputians” who played against centers who were typically 6'6" or 6'7". Nothing could be further from the truth.

While Wilt Chamberlain ended his playing career at nearly 300 lbs., and played a good portion of his latter career at around 275 lbs. He entered as a rookie at only 250 lbs., and remained at that weight or thereabouts (260 lbs.) for at least his first seven or eight seasons.

And while some who are ignorant have listed him as 7'2" in height in articles or blogs or comments they’ve written on the subject, Wilt was never over 7'1" in his life, and was actually closer to 7'0" when he first entered the NBA (despite being listed at 7'1").


Besides Bill Russell, who was 6'10" and 220 lbs., and the few other centers who are constantly mentioned in order to back up this erroneous myth, such as Dave Cowens, who was 6'9" and 230 lbs., Willis Reed, who was 6'9" and 240 lbs., and Wes Unseld, who was 6'7" and 245 lbs., there were numerous other centers throughout Wilt’s career who he played against who were anything but Lilliputian.



Following is a list of some of them:

Walter Dukes (7'0", 220 lbs.)
Swede Halbrook (7'3, 235 lbs.)
Tom Boerwinkle (7'0", 265 lbs.)
Bob Lanier (6'11", 265 lbs.)
Darrall Imhoff (6'10", 220 lbs.)
Otto Moore (6'11", 210 lbs.)
Sam Lacey (6'10", 235 lbs.)
George Johnson (6'11", 245 lbs.)
Paul Ruffner (6'10", 230 lbs.)
Dick Cunningham (6'10", 245 lbs.)
Walt Bellamy (6'11", 225 lbs.)
Leroy Ellis (6'10", 210 lbs.)
Nate Thurmond (6'11", 235 lbs.)
Mel Counts (7'0", 235 lbs.)
Nate Bowman (6'10", 230 lbs.)
Clyde Lee (6'10", 210 lbs.)
Walt Wesley (6'11", 230 lbs.)
Henry Akin (6'10", 225 lbs.)
Hank Finkel (7'0", 240 lbs.)
Lew Alcindor aka Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (7'2", 225 lbs.)
Neal Walk (6'10", 220 lbs.)
Elmore Smith (7'0", 250 lbs.)
Jim McDaniels (6'11", 230 lbs.)
LaRue Martin (6'11", 215 lbs.)
Tom Riker (6'10", 225 lbs.)
Conrad Dierking (6'9", 225 lbs.)
Johnny “Red” Kerr (6'9", 230 lbs.)
Bob Pettit (6'9", 220 lbs.)
Spencer Haywood (6'9", 230 lbs.)
Rick Roberson (6'9", 230 lbs.)
Luke Jackson (6'9", 240 lbs.)
Duke Hogue (6'9," 240 lbs.)
Zelmo Beaty (6'9", 230 lbs.)
Len Chappell (6'9", 240 lbs.)
Elvin Hayes (6'9", 235 lbs.)
Hub Reed (6'9", 220 lbs.)


So why is it then, if there were all these very big guys playing in the NBA during Wilt’s illustrious career, that Chamberlain was able to dominate the game so completely? For instance, why didn’t the much taller Swede Halbrook dominate Wilt, rather than ride the bench behind Johnny “Red” Kerr?

The answer is very simple. Height doesn’t equate to dominance. There is far more to a player than his height. This is why Nate Robinson is able to dominate games at times, despite being a player who would look more comfortable playing in a midget basketball league than running around among the 'Redwood Trees' that are typical NBA players.

It’s why the Miami Heat’s All-Star guard, Dwyane Wade, at 6'4" is able to dominate most shooting guards in the NBA, despite the fact many of them are one, two, or even three inches taller than he is.

It’s why “giants” of the game such as George Muresan (7'7"), Shawn Bradley (7'5"), Manute Bol (7'6"), Chuck Nevitt (7'5"), Randy Breuer (7'3"), and even Mark Eaton (7'3") were never dominating scorers.


In fact, they weren’t even good scorers (Mark Eaton is slightly forgiven for this due to his defensive dominance—five-time first-team and second-team All-Defensive Team, and two-time Defensive Player of the Year), which is something that doesn’t seem possible considering some of them could dunk the ball without even jumping.

The simple fact is Wilt Chamberlain was great because he was great. He was an incredible specimen of height, strength, agility, and leaping ability. He could leap higher than many can imagine today, and was stronger than most would ever believe.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Myth Three: Wilt Couldn’t Dominate Today



Like many of the ignorant things that are said about Wilt Chamberlain by fans—of Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Shaquille O’Neal, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, etc.—center around the idea that he wouldn’t have dominated in the '80s, '90s, or even today. This is based on nothing but false assumptions and ignorance.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Wilt “The Big Dipper” Chamberlain would have feasted on centers today, and would have dominated thoroughly almost all of the centers through the '80s and '90s.



Wilt vs. Shaq?


As a Miami Heat fan who will be forever grateful to Shaq for helping to bring a title to M-Town, and who loves Shaq, I still have to say Wilt in a landslide—not even a contest.

While many think of Wilt as simply a skinny version of Shaq, this is absolute nonsense. Shaq certainly has the bulk to seem like Superman, but while photos of Wilt give the impression he was some “beanpole” with not much real power, Chamberlain would have beaten O’Neal in any feat of strength without even trying hard.

Many don’t know it, but Wilt used to lift weights with Arnold Schwarzenegger and got his bench press up to over 500 lbs. He has been credited by many as having been able to bench as much as 500 pounds even during his college days, but there are not very many credible sources for this. He was a world class track and field star during those days though, competing in the 440, shot put, broad jump, and high jump.

As K.C. Jones once put it in describing Wilt’s power, "He stopped me dead in my tracks with his arm, hugged me and lifted me off the floor with my feet dangling," Jones said. "It scared the hell out of me. When I went to the free-throw line, my legs were still shaking. Wilt was the strongest guy and best athlete ever to play the game. [Source: Goliath's Wonderful Life, Hoop Magazine; May 1999; Chris Ekstrand]


Paul Silas gave an even more impressive impression of Wilt’s strength and power when he once said, "One time, when I was with Boston and he was with the Lakers, Happy Hairston and I were about to get in a scrape. All of a sudden, I felt an enormous vise around me. I was 6'7", 235 lbs., and Wilt had picked me up and turned me around. He said, 'We're not going to have that stuff.' I said, 'Yes sir.'

Even long after his playing days, his strength was apparent, as is seen in the following story:

Several years after Wilt stopped playing; he toyed with the idea of a comeback. On the day he visited the Knicks' offices in Madison Square Garden; he talked to Red Holzman, and then strode out to the elevator.

When it opened, two deliverymen were struggling with a dolly piled high with boxes of office supplies, mostly letterheads and envelopes.

The load was so heavy, the elevator had stopped maybe four inches below the floor level and now the deliverymen were huffing and puffing, but they couldn't raise the dolly high enough to get it on the floor level.


After maybe two minutes of the deliverymen's huffing and puffing, Wilt, his biceps bulging in a tank top, peered down at them and intoned, "Gentlemen, maybe I can help."


They stepped back, he stepped into the elevator, grabbed each end of the rope slung under the dolly and without much exertion, quickly lifted the dolly onto the floor level. Looking up in awe, the deliverymen said, "Thank you." Wilt said, "You're welcome." Wilt stepped into the elevator and rode down to the street level as another witness followed the two deliverymen toward the Knick offices and asked, "How much does all this weigh?" They quickly surveyed the stack of big boxes of office supplies. "Close to 600 pounds," one said.


[Source: The Good Natured Giant Wasn't Belligerent, Sports of the Times; Oct 13, 1999; Dave Anderson]




Billy Cunningham tells of one incident during his playing days that truly sums up The Big Dipper’s awesome power:



"The greatest play I've ever seen was one of the last games of the 1966-67 season and were playing Baltimore. We [Philadelphia] were going for the best record in NBA history.

There was a play earlier in the game where Gus Johnson had dunked one over Wilt. Gus was a very strong player. I weighed 220 pounds, and with one hand Gus could push me out of the lane.

The man was a physical specimen [6-foot-6, 230 pounds], all muscle. He loved to dunk and was a very colorful player.

When he slammed it on Wilt, he really threw it down, and you could tell that Wilt didn't like it one bit.

Later in the game, Gus was out on the fast break, and the only man between him and the basket was Wilt. He was going to dunk on Wilt--again.

Gus cupped the ball and took off--he had a perfect angle for a slam.

Wilt went up and with one hand he grabbed the ball--cleanly! Then he took the ball and shoved it right back into Gus, drilling Gus into the floor with the basketball.

Gus was flattened and they carried him out. It turned out that Gus Johnson was the only player in NBA history to suffer a dislocated shoulder from a blocked shot."


[Source: Billy Cunningham, Tall Tales (by Terry Pluto) p. 236]




Another story comes from Wilt’s greatest rival, Bill Russell, who knew only too well how powerful Chamberlain was. As he puts it, “I still remember the time when one of our strongest men, Gene Conley, decided to fight Chamberlain for the ball. He [Conley] grabbed it and hung on and Chamberlain just lifted him and the ball right up towards the rim.” – Bill Russell, “Go Up for Glory” p. 126.

And Wilt wasn’t only a powerful player. Most think of Chamberlain as nothing but a dunking machine, scoring the vast majority of his points on thunderous dunks over smaller opponents. Again, nothing could be further from the truth.

Chamberlain came into the NBA with a very polished jumper, and his strongest signature moves were not dunks, but fadeaway jumpers and finger rolls. As Carl Braun put it, “Yes, Wilt hit on those jumpers…Wilt did come into the league with a good touch from the outside, which made his early scoring that much more significant. He wasn’t just dunking the ball then.” – Red Holzman, “A View from the Bench” p. 70.

Another thing many don’t realize is that Wilt was in far better shape than most NBA players today. Most would think that with the training regimens of today’s players, they would be able to run circles around The Big Dipper – Not so.

Wilt was a world-class athlete, who came out of college a 440 Champion track star as well as a basketball Phenom. Anyone who knows the history of the NBA knows that during the 60s the pace of basketball was frenetic, with players running up and down the court all game long (half-court basketball being almost anathema to the league at the time).

During this era, Wilt once averaged more than 48 minutes a game for an entire season. That in and of itself testifies to the incredible stamina Wilt possessed and what great shape he was in. Most of the centers through the '80s, '90s, and even today wouldn’t stand a chance trying to run with Chamberlain.

Alex Hannum illustrated Wilt’s athletic and running ability well when he said, "When I coached the San Francisco Warriors, I thought Al Attles was the fastest guy on our team--by far. We used to gamble a lot--which player could jump the highest and run the fastest. So I set up a series of races, baseline to baseline. In the finals, it was Wilt and Al Attles and Wilt just blew past him. I'm convinced that Wilt Chamberlain is one of the greatest all-around athletes the world has ever seen." – Alex Hannum, “Tall Tales” (by Terry Pluto) p. 327.

Another thing that should be remembered, but is all but forgotten whenever a discussion of Wilt Chamberlain vs “Anyone” is brought up is the fact Wilt faced much greater defensive pressure than centers do today. Opponents were literally allowed to mug Chamberlain at will without getting a foul called on them; yet Wilt still dominated.



As Al Attles, one of Wilt’s teammates once put it:


"I would talk to Wilt about all the players pounding on him. Sometimes, he said he didn't notice it--he was so strong. But I also believe that there were two sets of rules.

By that, I mean because Wilt was so strong, the officials let the man guarding him get away with more--almost trying to equalize the game. I also believe that Wilt just took it because he didn't want to get thrown out, and because it had always been like that with him.

But I'd watch it and I'd get mad. It takes me a while to get my temper going, but when it does--look out. I'd see what the other players were doing to Wilt and what the officials were allowing, and I'd get more upset than if it were happening to me.

So I jumped in there. It wasn't that Wilt couldn't defend himself. If he ever got really hot, he'd kill people, so he let things pass. But I didn't have to worry about that. I was strong for my size, but I was not about to do anything like the kind of damage Wilt would."

[Source: Al Attles, “Tall Tales” (by Terry Pluto) p. 242]



In fact, Chamberlain was so brutally treated by defenses that many feared he would retire after his first year, as he had hinted at just that after the year was over. He stated he feared that if he played another season he might be forced to retaliate, and that he didn’t want to do that.

Thankfully he was able to control his emotions, and gave fans throughout the years some of the greatest entertainment one could imagine. It would have been a true shame if he would have retired after only that inaugural season.

Most amazing about all this, is that in his great and lengthy 14-year career, he never once fouled out of a game. I mean, just imagine what that must have taken in terms of control. Despite all of the rough treatment by opposing defenses, he was able to control himself enough to never receive enough fouls to be tossed from a game.

I believe he’s the only player in NBA history with any significant playing time to ever accomplish that feat, which is one of his greatest.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Myth Four: Wilt Was One-Dimensional


The most telling thing about Chamberlain’s dominance was his passing ability. Wilt is the only center in NBA history to have led the league in assists.

Many fans of Michael Jordan, when discussions of Wilt vs. Michael are brought up, will quickly mention that Michael had a higher career scoring average than Chamberlain. This fact is supremely deceiving. If Wilt had wanted to, he could have ended his career with a scoring average ten points or more higher than it was.

However, he was the consummate team player who was more than willing to sacrifice personal numbers for the betterment of the team. Michael, in contrast, as great as he was, would never think of sacrificing his numbers for the sake of the team. Many stories abound about how Jordan complained when his numbers went down.

During the 1966-67 season, Philadelphia 76ers Coach Alex Hannum asked Wilt to pass the ball more. Chamberlain was more than willing, and for the first time in his career didn’t win the NBA scoring crown, averaging only 24.1 PPG.

However, he recorded the league’s, and his personal, best FG percentage (.683), still grabbed the rebounding title with a 24.2 RPG average, and most importantly, was third in the NBA in assists, averaging 7.8 APG.

Think about that. Most point guards today would dream of averaging 7.8 APG for a season. Wilt was a center and did it with ease. In fact, he did it so easily, that he followed that season up with an even better one, averaging an incredible 8.6 APG.

Again, can you imagine?

His sacrifice paid off, too, as the 1966-67 Philadelphia 76ers posted a then NBA-Record 68-13 win-loss record, and went on to win the title against the San Francisco Warriors, having nearly swept the defending NBA champion Boston Celtics in the Eastern Conference Finals (4-1).

The 1967-68 season was nearly impressive, with the 76ers posting a 62-20 win-loss record, and losing to the eventual NBA Champion Boston Celtics in a ferociously fought seven-game Eastern Conference Finals series (4-3).

His sacrifice of his personal scoring numbers throughout the rest of his career paid off even more dividends, as he led the Los Angeles Lakers, whom he was traded to before the 1968-69 season, to four NBA Finals in the five seasons he was with them, including a title (beating the Knicks 4-1 in the Finals) during the incredible 1971-72 season in which they broke the single-season win-loss record of his former Philadelphia team, going 69-13.

Despite Wilt only averaging 14.8 PPG, 19.2 RPG, and 4.0 APG while shooting 64.9 percent from the field that season, his team’s dominance was one of the greatest we’ve ever seen from a team in the NBA.

They averaged 121 PPG as a team, while only allowing their opponents 108.7 PPG. That is a margin of victory of 12.3 PPG, the greatest in NBA history.

That 1971-72 Lakers squad led by Wilt also posted the longest winning streak in NBA history that year, winning 33 games in a row between November 5, 1971 and January 7, 1972, which is 11 full games ahead of the second longest streak by the 2007-08 Houston Rockets who won 22 in a row between January 29, 2008 and March 18, 2008.

As Bill Russell tells it, when describing how much of a team player Wilt had become, "Wilt is playing better than I used to -- passing off, coming out to set up screens, picking up guys outside, and sacrificing himself for team play." – Bill Russell, “Great Moments in Pro Basketball” (by Sam Goldaper) p. 24



Myth Five: Wilt Didn’t Play Defense


Another myth about Wilt’s game that is constantly heard is the idea he didn’t play defense. Again, nothing could be further from the truth. While Bill Russell is universally considered the greatest defensive center of his era, in reality, Wilt was at least his equal when it came to defending.

One story that illustrates this poignantly is told about an incident that occurred between rising star center Walter Bellamy of the Chicago Packers (now the Washington Wizards). Bellamy was a 6-11 245 lbs behemoth who averaged 31.6 PPG and 19.0 RPG that season, second only to Wilt in scoring.

The first time they played against each other, Bellamy is said to have approached Wilt saying, “Hello, Mr. Chamberlain. I’m Walter Bellamy.” Wilt returned his greeting, shaking his hand and saying, “Hello, Walter. You won’t get a shot off in the first half.”

And Wilt was true to his word, going out and blocking Bellamy’s first nine shots.

When the second half started, Wilt is said to have told Bellamy, “Okay, Walter, now you can play.”

This sort of playfulness is something Wilt was famous for, being a truly gentle giant in many respects. He was never one to look for a fight, and quite often had to avoid them at all costs, since he would likely kill any player he ever really got into a fight with.


A rather funny tale about Wilt illustrates this as well:


In a game against the Seattle Supersonics, one of the Sonics players, a former teammate of Wilt’s named Tom Meschery, was in the lane trying to score.

He first committed four ball fakes, and then attempted a shot. Chamberlain blocked it easily. When Meschery got it back in the lane, he tried more ball fakes, and attempted another shot, which Wilt again blocked.

Meschery, angry and frustrated, ran at Chamberlain swinging, and in a hilarious scene straight out of a comedy film, Wilt placed his hand on the 6-6 forward’s head and let him swing. After a few swings, Wilt is said to have then looked down at Meschery and state, “That’s enough.” Meschery, of course, stopped.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Myth Six: Wilt Was Tall, But He Wasn’t Superman Like Dwight Howard :roll:


Wilt’s leaping ability was incomparable. His “Sergeant” or vertical leap was higher than Michael Jordan’s at 48”. Chamberlain had won the Big 7 High Jump championship in his junior year of college.

There are great leapers today, even among centers, including the self-proclaimed “Superman” Dwight Howard. However, while Dwight is a great leaper, his ability doesn’t equal The Big Dippers’.

Many tales have been told over the years of players leaping up and touching the top of the backboard, including tales of feats involving players grabbing money from atop the board.

However, as Chamberlain himself once said about all these claims, "I defy anyone to say they took change off the top of the backboard. I could. Someone would put a quarter up and I'd snatch it down. I've heard stories about Jackie Jackson doing it, but I've never seen anyone (but himself) come close."

Of note is the fact that there have been only three seven-footers in NBA history who have led the league in rebounding. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar did it one time in his career. David Robinson also did it once (although Hakeem Olajuwon missed qualifying for the title by five boards and claims himself he’s only 6'11"). Wilt? He did it an astounding 11 times.



In Summary

I could go on and on recounting the feats of The Big Dipper, but this article is already longer than I had originally intended it to be. However, I do believe posting some of his many accomplishments to end this piece would be in order. I believe they fully reveal what an amazing player he was, and illustrate why I believe he was the greatest player the NBA has ever seen, or ever will see.

Over the course of his career, Wilt Chamberlain averaged 30.1 PPG, 22.9 RPG, 4.4 APG, while shooting 54 percent. He almost certainly would have eclipsed by a mile the blocks per game average of today’s great centers if such statistics had been kept back then, as there are many historians who have stated he averaged double-digit blocks over the course of some seasons.

Chamberlain ended his career with a total of 31,419 total points, which at the time was an NBA record. He also ended his career with 23,924 total rebounds, which is still an NBA record. His 4,643 career assists are still the most for an NBA center, and many of his scoring records will simply never be touched.

Probably his greatest scoring feat, far more impressive even than his 100-point game against the Knicks, is the fact that he scored more than 60 points 32 times. That is more times than every other player who’s scored 60+ points in NBA history combined.

Wilt was a two-time NBA Champion, winning titles with the Philadelphia 76ers in 1967, and the Los Angeles Lakers in 1972, and led his teams to the NBA Finals six times. In five other campaigns he reached the Division (now known as the Conference) or Conference Finals, losing each time to the eventual NBA Champion—Boston four times and Milwaukee once.

In seven of the eleven Division (Conference) or NBA Finals appearances, his teams took the series to seven games five times, and another two to six games. His teams were never swept out of those Division (Conference) or NBA Finals.

And while some may see his only having two titles over his 14-year career as a short-coming of Wilt's, I can only say they need to remember that basketball, like any of the four major professional sports, is a team game, and no one player can win titles by himself (although Wilt came close).

The many teams he played on that failed to win the title were hardly comprised of Hall of Famers, as the teams they lost to, the Boston Celtics, and the 1970-71 Milwaukee Bucks were (Milwaukee had Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, then known as Lew Alcindor, as well as Oscar Robertson, John McGlocklin, Greg Smith, Bob Boozer, and Bob Dandridge).

Wilt was a four-time NBA Regular Season MVP Award Winner (1960, ’66, ’67, and ’68); including winning this illustrious award in his rookie season of 1959-60, in which he also won Rookie of the Year. Only Wes Unseld has ever done the same, winning both the Rookie of the Year and MVP honors for the 1968-69 season.

Wilt was a two-time First-Team All-Defensive Player in his career, making the team in 1972 and 1973.

His one NBA Finals MVP Award was won in his 13th season, as he led what is still considered by many to be the greatest team in NBA history, the 1971-72 Los Angeles Lakers, to their title of that year, averaging nearly 20 PPG and over 20 RPG in the Finals.

Although his Game Three performance in that NBA Finals was impressive, scoring 26 points and grabbing 20 boards, his most impressive performance during that 1971-72 NBA Finals came in Game Five, which no one thought he would even play in.

Chamberlain had broken his hand late in Game Four (although it was called a ‘sprain’ by the team), and it needed to be wrapped heavily for him to even take the court.

Take the court he did, and then proceeded to show exactly why he was considered such a force among his peers, scoring 24 points and grabbing 29 rebounds as the Lakers demolished the Knicks 114-100.

Also to be remembered from that years’ playoffs was the matchup Wilt’s Lakers had with the reigning NBA Champion Milwaukee Bucks led by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar in the Western Division Finals. The matchup had been hailed by “Life” magazine as the greatest matchup in all of sports.

Chamberlain is remembered most in that series for his performance in the decisive Game Six, which the Lakers won 106-100. Trailing by 10 points late in the fourth quarter, Wilt led them back to the victory, scoring 24 points and grabbing 22 rebounds. He played the entire 48 minutes of the game, not taking a single rest, and ran the 11-year younger Abdul-Jabbar into the ground, beating him on several Lakers fast breaks late in the game.

Jerry West said it was “the greatest ball-busting performance I have ever seen.” and “Time” magazine said of it, “In the NBA’s Western Division Title series with Milwaukee, he [Chamberlain] decisively outplayed basketball’s newest giant superstar…”

Throughout his 14-year career, Wilt was voted to the NBA All-Star Game thirteen times, winning the All-Star Game MVP in 1960 (his rookie season) after scoring 23 points and grabbing 25 rebounds. That, however, wasn’t even his most impressive All-Star Game performance.

In his third year in the league (1961-62), one in which he averaged an amazing 50.4 PPG for the season, and in which he had his 100-point game, he came into the All-Star Game and scored an incredible 42 points on 17-of-23 shooting while snatching 24 rebounds.





Other Notable Accomplishments


And finally, I’m just going to list some of the other amazing accomplishments Wilt had, without elaborating on them. I think they speak for themselves.

Only player in NBA history to score more than 4,000 (4029) points in a season (50.4 PPG in the 1961-62 season) while also averaging 25.7 RPG that year (2052 total rebounds)

Only player in NBA history to score more than 3,000 points twice in a season (3033 in 1960-61 season for a 38.4 PPG average, and the aforementioned 4029 points in 1961-62 season) and only player in NBA history to grab more than 2,000 rebounds in a season (2149 in 1960-61 season for an average of 27.2 RPG, and 2052 in 1961-62 as stated above)

Only player in NBA history to average more than 48 minutes per game over a season (48.5 minutes per game in the 1961-62 season).

Led the league in scoring seven years in a row. He was league’s top rebounder in 11 of his 14 seasons.

Most 60-point games (32). Most 50-point games (118). Most consecutive games with at least 40 points (14). Most consecutive games with at least 30 points (65). Most consecutive games with at least 20 points (126). Highest rookie scoring average (37.6 PPG). Highest filed-goal percentage in season (.727).

Averaged over 27 RPG his first two seasons, and more than 25 RPG his first three. Also averaged over 24 RPG six times, more than 22 RPG nine times and more than 21 RPG ten times.

Scored 1708 points and averaged 32.8 PPG over 52 playoff games in his first six playoff appearances. Grabbed 1372 rebounds and averaged 26.4 RPG over those same 52 games in first six playoff appearances.




First Six Playoff Appearances:


First appearance (nine games in 1959-60 season as rookie) averaged 33.2 PPG and 25.8 RPG in playoffs.

Second appearance (three games in 1960-61 season) averaged 37 PPG and 23 RPG in playoffs.

Third appearance (12 games in 1961-62 season) averaged 35 PPG and 26.6 RPG in playoffs.

Fourth appearance (12 games in 1963-64 season) averaged 34.7 PPG and 25.2 RPG in playoffs.

Fifth appearance (11 games in 1964-65 season) averaged 29.3 PPG and 27.2 RPG in playoffs.

Sixth appearance (five games in 1965-66 season) averaged 28.0 PPG.

[Abraham Lincoln]

http://z.hubpages.com/u/1213690_f520.jpg

[TryToBeUnbias]

WOW:eek:

You no your wilt :applause:

but theres no way im reading all of that lol

[NZ33]

Nice thread alot of work went into it man.

Wilt was a freak and I have no dobut he would dominat in the NBA today.

Tis be the wise man of the land. Repped.

[nbastatus]

i stopped reading after the first sentence.

[Quizno]

i stopped reading after the first sentence.
:applause:

[TheAnchorman]

I have him as the best center ever, however depending on my mood I also have Kareem as the best center ever haha. They are interchangeable in my opinion.

Although I do not agree with your opinion that he is the GOAT, I think he is at the most #2 on the all-time list.

[Killer_Instinct]

Shit's like a Harry Potter novel.

[rfm767]

i think a real GOAT would not have to deal with all these "myths" :pimp:

[rfm767]

I read the whole thing, i should get repped for that.

[Abraham Lincoln]

i think a real GOAT would not have to deal with all these "myths" :pimp:
Then who is the best?

For the lack of respect shown to Wilt Chamberlain as well as Bill Russell be heartbreaking. Consensus be a disease. The bigger the lie is, the more folks believe it.

[rfm767]

Then who is the best?

For the lack of respect shown to Wilt Chamberlain as well as Bill Russell be heartbreaking. Consensus be a disease. The bigger the lie is, the more folks believe it.


I think Michael Jordan would be a better GOAT case, as there is hardly any "myths" that can opaque his legacy. Wilt is top 3 though, right there with kareem.

[Abraham Lincoln]

I have him as the best center ever, however depending on my mood I also have Kareem as the best center ever haha. They are interchangeable in my opinion.

Although I do not agree with your opinion that he is the GOAT, I think he is at the most #2 on the all-time list.
Alas, Jabbar be the #3 center, for no disdain meant at all. He just be overvalued by certain Lakers fans, in particular the youngsters who attempt to relate to the Showtime Lakers era and spread the creedence that Jabbar is by far the greatest center ever. Tis no insult AT ALL to be below the likes of Chamberlain and Russell.

[Abraham Lincoln]

I think Michael Jordan would be a better GOAT case, as there is hardly any "myths" that can opaque his legacy. Wilt is top 3 though, right there with kareem.
Jordan be the top per the shooting guard role, for excluding the centers from basketball, this would be the Mount Rushmore.

Bird, Jordan, Robertson, Johnson.

Alas, the centers cannot just be excluded, so he be next to Jabbar in the top 3 or 4. But clearly behind the likes of Chamberlain and Russell, who have dominated as such the paint never seen before or since. Russell and Chamberlain could contend for championships with almost any collection of teammates. Instantly turn a lotto team into a championship team.

[rfm767]

Jordan be the top per the shooting guard role, for excluding the centers from basketball, this would be the Mount Rushmore.

Bird, Jordan, Robertson, Johnson.

Alas, the centers cannot just be excluded, so he be next to Jabbar in the top 3 or 4. But clearly behind the likes of Chamberlain and Russell, who have dominated as such the paint never seen before or since. Russell and Chamberlain could contend for championships with almost any collection of teammates. Instantly turn a lotto team into a championship team.

you make a good point there

[BrentISballin]

I read the whole thing, i should get repped for that.
You read that in 10-15 min? :wtf:

[rfm767]

You read that in 10-15 min? :wtf:

don-t ask, just rep me

[hayden695]

wow i read all of that.

Good read but he is not the goat, sorry to ruin your novel

[sbw19]

Statistically, he's the GOAT. Such an anomaly. Still, in a way he's the antithesis of legends like Magic and Russell, and proponents of team play might hold his outrageous scoring numbers against him irrespective of how justifiable that is.

[momo]

Are you Charles Barkley?

[madmax]

there's no denying - Wilt's numbers are mindblowing and no matter how much someone tries to downplay his opposition or accomplishments, they are still above everyone's else, including Jordan's:bowdown: To me he is clearly the most DOMINANT individual player of all time, and that is not arguable

[VeeCee15]

Just look at the videos of Wilt.

He looked like a stiff, moved like a stiff and will be a stiff in today's game and when compared to today's players.

[takeittothehoop]

Great read Abe, I'm glad someone on this forum thinks Wilt and Russell were Both the greatest and one of the greatest players of all time. Keep the good analysis coming.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Just look at the videos of Wilt.

He looked like a stiff, moved like a stiff and will be a stiff in today's game and when compared to today's players.
What be the meaning of such absurd words? Chamberlain not only be the strongest man to ever play professional basketball, but also the most athletic man to ever play the sport. Bill Russell's athleticism be not too far behind. Try to play in ankle low cut flat Converse shoes on creaky uneven hardwood. T'would be easier to play barefoot.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Great read Abe, I'm glad someone on this forum thinks Wilt and Russell were Both the greatest and one of the greatest players of all time. Keep the good analysis coming.
Tis appreciated and very well deserved, for these 2 wise legends have taken unjust criticism from the newer wave of basketball fans for decades now.

[rosonviyavong]

Wilt is the number one centre of all time

[Yung D-Will]

To long to read the whole things but what I did read you made some good points especially the one with Wilt not being shut down by Russel.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Wilt's selfishness ruined his chance to be the best of all time. In his first 7 seasons he was content with putting up a ridiculous amount of shot attempts and not winning much. As a result he had 7 scoring titles, but only 1 50 win season and 1 finals appearance. By the time he changed his style in 1968 he was over 30 years old, but the results speak for themselves. Wilt's 76ers won 68 games and a championship team. Wilt also showed that he was one of the best passing big men to ever play the game. They rightfully went down in history as one of the greatest teams in NBA history. But it made you wonder how good he could have been had he played unselfish his whole career. The next season while he didn't win a championship, he did lead his team to 62 wins again. But once again Wilt's selfishness came back into play. He passed up shots, even some that he shouldn't have to prove he could lead the league in assists.

That was Wilt's last season in Philly and then he went to Los Angeles where Wilt did continue to play unselfishly. He didn't score much, but he played like a bigger, stronger, version of Bill Russell who could score when he wanted. The result was another one of the all time great teams. The 1972 Lakers won 69 games, a record 33 games in a row and of course a championship The following year the Lakers won 60 games again, but lost in the finals.

So despite the numbers, Wilt wasn't playing up to his true potential as a basketball player early in his career. He always had the ability to make everyone else better, but he didn't realize it or didn't care until the last half of his career. If he always played like he did in the last half of his career then he may have challenged Bill Russell's Celtics for a lot more championships.

The greatest center ever is Kareem because his longevity is unmatched, his prime is comparable to Wilt's and Shaq's and his team success beats either of theirs. There's a reason why Kareem was one of only 4 players to win a scoring title and championship in the same season.

The second greatest center ever is none other than Shaquille O'Neal because he dominated the game like only Michael Jordan has in his prime, he has as many rings as Hakeem and Wilt combined, his finals performances are greater than any center and he's still going strong at 37. Not to mention he's also one of just 4 players to win a scoring title and championship in the same season(Jordan, Mikan and Kareem are the others).

Wilt is the 3rd greatest of all time.

[Butters]

Wilt,Kareem,Shaq=russell

[CB4GOATPF]

Wilt's selfishness ruined his chance to be the best of all time. In his first 7 seasons he was content with putting up a ridiculous amount of shot attempts and not winning much. As a result he had 7 scoring titles, but only 1 50 win season and 1 finals appearance. By the time he changed his style in 1968 he was over 30 years old, but the results speak for themselves. Wilt's 76ers won 68 games and a championship team. Wilt also showed that he was one of the best passing big men to ever play the game. They rightfully went down in history as one of the greatest teams in NBA history. But it made you wonder how good he could have been had he played unselfish his whole career. The next season while he didn't win a championship, he did lead his team to 62 wins again. But once again Wilt's selfishness came back into play. He passed up shots, even some that he shouldn't have to prove he could lead the league in assists.

That was Wilt's last season in Philly and then he went to Los Angeles where Wilt did continue to play unselfishly. He didn't score much, but he played like a bigger, stronger, version of Bill Russell who could score when he wanted. The result was another one of the all time great teams. The 1972 Lakers won 69 games, a record 33 games in a row and of course a championship The following year the Lakers won 60 games again, but lost in the finals.

So despite the numbers, Wilt wasn't playing up to his true potential as a basketball player early in his career. He always had the ability to make everyone else better, but he didn't realize it or didn't care until the last half of his career. If he always played like he did in the last half of his career then he may have challenged Bill Russell's Celtics for a lot more championships.

The greatest center ever is Kareem because his longevity is unmatched, his prime is comparable to Wilt's and Shaq's and his team success beats either of theirs. There's a reason why Kareem was one of only 4 players to win a scoring title and championship in the same season.

The second greatest center ever is none other than Shaquille O'Neal because he dominated the game like only Michael Jordan has in his prime, he has as many rings as Hakeem and Wilt combined, his finals performances are greater than any center and he's still going strong at 37. Not to mention he's also one of just 4 players to win a scoring title and championship in the same season(Jordan, Mikan and Kareem are the others).

Wilt is the 3rd greatest of all time.


:roll:

[ShaqAttack3234]

:roll:

Now what on earth are you laughing about, Sir Charles? Ranking Wilt as the 3rd greatest center makes sense. Kareem and Shaq both have better team success and longevity, plus they dominated in a similar way in their primes. Kareem is defintley the greatest center of all time.

[ZaaaaaH]

Wilt's selfishness ruined his chance to be the best of all time. In his first 7 seasons he was content with putting up a ridiculous amount of shot attempts and not winning much. As a result he had 7 scoring titles, but only 1 50 win season and 1 finals appearance. By the time he changed his style in 1968 he was over 30 years old, but the results speak for themselves. Wilt's 76ers won 68 games and a championship team. Wilt also showed that he was one of the best passing big men to ever play the game. They rightfully went down in history as one of the greatest teams in NBA history. But it made you wonder how good he could have been had he played unselfish his whole career. The next season while he didn't win a championship, he did lead his team to 62 wins again. But once again Wilt's selfishness came back into play. He passed up shots, even some that he shouldn't have to prove he could lead the league in assists.

That was Wilt's last season in Philly and then he went to Los Angeles where Wilt did continue to play unselfishly. He didn't score much, but he played like a bigger, stronger, version of Bill Russell who could score when he wanted. The result was another one of the all time great teams. The 1972 Lakers won 69 games, a record 33 games in a row and of course a championship The following year the Lakers won 60 games again, but lost in the finals.

So despite the numbers, Wilt wasn't playing up to his true potential as a basketball player early in his career. He always had the ability to make everyone else better, but he didn't realize it or didn't care until the last half of his career. If he always played like he did in the last half of his career then he may have challenged Bill Russell's Celtics for a lot more championships.

The greatest center ever is Kareem because his longevity is unmatched, his prime is comparable to Wilt's and Shaq's and his team success beats either of theirs. There's a reason why Kareem was one of only 4 players to win a scoring title and championship in the same season.

The second greatest center ever is none other than Shaquille O'Neal because he dominated the game like only Michael Jordan has in his prime, he has as many rings as Hakeem and Wilt combined, his finals performances are greater than any center and he's still going strong at 37. Not to mention he's also one of just 4 players to win a scoring title and championship in the same season(Jordan, Mikan and Kareem are the others).

Wilt is the 3rd greatest of all time.

Are you saying mike is 2nd?

[JJ81]

Calm down.

[chitownsfinest]

Anyone who thinks Wilt never played for stats needs to seek mental help asap.

[Fatal9]

Are you saying mike is 2nd?
If we look at overall basketball GOAT, it's Kareem without question. If we look at peak play, it's Wilt/Kareem. An NBA "GOAT" list is really flawed, as MJ is only # 1 because he got the breaks Wilt/Kareem didn't. Everyone knows this. It's not outrageous by any means to have MJ #2 (or even #3).

[magnax1]

Wilt isn't better than Jordan because he did have alot of negatives, but people anymore do seem to under rate him. Wilt is the most athletic person I've ever seen play BBall, but I'd take jordan over him, because he plays better D, Is more clutch and has more of...... I dont know wut u call it, I guess heart.
Edit:If there is a player with similar strength in the NBA in the past couple decades, its Karl Malone. He was freak of nature type strong. Shaq was bigger, but for his size Karl Malone was stronger.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Are you saying mike is 2nd?

No, I was talking about centers only.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Anyone who thinks Wilt never played for stats needs to seek mental help asap.

Yeah, look at his reaction when Glen Rice breaks his record most points in an all-star game half.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSxLVQi0jfM&feature=channel_page

At 0:26, he looks miserable.

[Fatal9]

Wilt averaged 59 ppg/25 rpg over a 12 game stretch in the '62 season. 62 ppg if you take the best 11 of those 12 games. That's almost a month of basketball!

Anyone saying that Jordan or anyone else in history had a more dominant prime is kidding themselves.


Yeah, look at his reaction when Glen Rice breaks his record most points in an all-star game half.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSxLVQi0jfM&feature=channel_page

At 0:26, he looks miserable.
He liked records...so what? Should he hide behind a fake smile? I like players that are this competitive. It probably hurt a little bit more than usual because it was someone like Glen Rice too :oldlol:

[ShaqAttack3234]

Wilt averaged 59 ppg/25 rpg over a 12 game stretch in the '62 season. 62 ppg if you take the best 11 of those 12 games. That's almost a month of basketball!

Anyone saying that Jordan or anyone else in history had a more dominant prime is kidding themselves.

Look at the pace in 1962, those 25 rebounds per game wouldn't even be near 20 in todays' game with the pace. You have to put those things into perspective. There's no way he'd be allowed to play anywhere near 48.5 mpg either. With how teams rest star players, particularly big men I'd be surprised if Wilt played anything over 40 mpg. Factoring in those things, Wilt's 25 rpg isn't really anymore impressive to me than 14 rpg today. Especially considering 20 rpg in Wilt's era wasn't that uncommon.

And when he averaged 50 ppg he needed 39.5 shots per game to do that. Perimeter players known for shooting and sometimes chucking like Jordan, Kobe and Iverson never even averaged a full 28 shots per game. I highly doubt Wilt would even get 25 shots per game today and I have my doubts he'd even average 30 ppg.

I'll take 2000 Shaq or 1990 Jordan over prime Wilt anyday.


He liked records...so what? It probably hurt a little bit more than usual because it was someone like Glen Rice :oldlol:

It shows how important stats were to him that he was upset about such a small record being broken. Most points in an all-star game half? Come on, Wilt only gets a pass for his selfishness because he played so long ago.

[Fatal9]

Look at the pace in 1962, those 25 rebounds per game wouldn't even be near 20 in todays' game with the pace. You have to put those things into perspective. There's no way he'd be allowed to play anywhere near 48.5 mpg either. With how teams rest star players, particularly big men I'd be surprised if Wilt played anything over 40 mpg. Factoring in those things, Wilt's 25 rpg isn't really anymore impressive to me than 14 rpg today. Especially considering 20 rpg in Wilt's era wasn't that uncommon.
There were around 26 more rebounds in 1991 NBA than in 1962 NBA. It clearly does make a difference and if you adjusted it proportionately with pace, Wilt's 25 rebounds would STILL be about 15 boards a game, which considering how much he was scoring (which isn't so heavily dependent on pace), is still incredible. It's just wrong to make this linear adjustment though, because there are several other factors. For one thing, I'd also like to know what percentage of rebounds there were where Wilt didn't even make it down to the other end of the court and get set (due to the fast pace). Because there are tons of those type of rebounds from the footage I've seen. It wasn't like this was Wilt's fault, the game was just that fast...

Putting up 60/25 over a month of basketball is insane. And if you must, even pace adjusted that'd be something like 45/15...good enough to still be the most dominant month in basketball history. Same with his '62 season.

The 90s game (before the illegal defense rules were waived) are much much more center friendly than the era Wilt played in. I was watching a Celtics vs. Warriors game (1964 I think?) and Wilt had Russell behind him, a guard fronting him, and a forward and another guard on either side if he somehow got the ball and decided to turn to the middle of the floor or baseline. There is a reason Wilt would have his best rebounding nights against the Celtics (set a rebounding record in 1964 for most rebounds in 5 games) because that was the only way he was getting the ball due to the ball denial, which would not have been possible in the 90s. He had Guy Rodgers as his point guard, and he (like most guards at that time) had NO jumpshot, which meant the Celtics could play this type of defense on him spacing wise, and not hurt themselves. Kareem was victim to the same thing in the 1974 finals game 7. Give him the spacing he'd get in the 90s and also the more post-up game friendly rules, and he's still wreaking havoc on the league.

[CB4GOATPF]

Now what on earth are you laughing about, Sir Charles? Ranking Wilt as the 3rd greatest center makes sense. Kareem and Shaq both have better team success and longevity, plus they dominated in a similar way in their primes. Kareem is defintley the greatest center of all time.

Longevity does not Equal = Play or Better Player

It = Longevity...

Shaq: Offensively was Better

Was he a Better Defender? Not even close
Was he a Better Shot Blocker? No even close
Was he a Better Rebounder? No even close
Was he a Better Passer? No

Kareem: was More Skilled and "almost as Good Game Creating Wise"

Was he a Better Defender? Not even close
Was he a Better Shot Blocker? Not even close
Was he a Better Rebounder? Not even close

Was he a Better Passer or Game Creator? as Good but Most Probably Not! "Wilt`s constant attention and double teaming created more assits"

Wilt is bar none the

"Most Complete Offensive-Defensive-Game Creating & Physically Complete (Wingspam, Speed, Agility, Potence, Strength, Stamina) Center Ever"

Wilt was Howard with a Post Game...but Stronger, Faster, Taller, Longer Wingspam and could Pass...

Wilt`s Prime was from 59-70 was by far the Most Dominant in NBA History

Can you imagine how much points more per game he would have had and how much higher is FG% would have been if Wilt was allowed to use his real brutal strength and dunk?

Wilt was careful not to hurt anyone and he pretty much invetend the Fadeway Back Shot, had a Great Spin and Used Finger Roles Most of the Time..if he would have wanted he would have just charged and slammed like Shaq did

So just imagine...what his BPG Avg would be if it was counted. He was the Best Shot Blocker even when Kareem was playing

[poido123]

This thread needs some balance...GOAT does not correlate with most dominant player of all time...Most dominant is an aspect of GOAT, Wilt would be on par with Shaq I reckon, Kareem had a combination of finesse and dominance which I am happy for him to be compared to Jordan as greatest of all time, Wilt failed in two key areas, he didnt do enough on the team aspect ie winning 2 championships and he wasnt considered particularly clutch either...If you were looking purely at stats, well you could fall in love with Chamberlain, but we dont judge a GOAT on only stats, we could continue to drum up all these different players to assume the GOAT status, but no-one has exceeded Jordan yet, no-one...:pimp:

[ShaqAttack3234]

There were around 26 more rebounds in 1991 NBA than in 1962 NBA. It clearly does make a difference and if you adjusted it proportionately with pace, Wilt's 25 rebounds would STILL be about 15 boards a game, which considering how much he was scoring (which isn't so heavily dependent on pace), is still incredible. It's just wrong to make this linear adjustment though, because there are several other factors. For one thing, I'd also like to know what percentage of rebounds there were where Wilt didn't even make it down to the other end of the court and get set (due to the fast pace). Because there are tons of those type of rebounds from the footage I've seen. It wasn't like this was Wilt's fault, the game was just that fast...

I'm not saying it was Wilt's "fault" about rebounds, but the numbers have to be viewed in proper perspective. 15 rpg is probably close enough. 14-15 per game, but when people act like getting 25 then was the same as 25 then they need to look at the pace as well as all of the other guys back then getting 20 rpg or close to it.


Putting up 60/25 over a month of basketball is insane. And if you must, even pace adjusted that'd be something like 45/15...good enough to still be the most dominant month in basketball history.

Yeah and then consider that he was playing over 48 mpg. You think he's allowed to play near that much in today's game, not to mention the added foul trouble. I don't know if it was because the game was called different or if it's because their were far less halfcourt sets, but Wilt never fouled out of a game in his career. Based on how basketball is called now, particularly against big men, I have a hard time believeing he wouldn't foul out several times per season. Give him a more realistic 40-42 mpg for that month and his numbers drop even further.




Same with his '62 season.

His 1962 season wasn't even Wilt's best season, 1967 was. He won 19 more games, averaged nearly as many rebounds(and more per minute) and his assist numbers and FG% blow away his 1962 season. All that season really had over his 1967 season was points. And unlike his 1962 season he actually played team basketball.

Wilt had 2 all-stars on his 1962 Warriors team including hall of famer and 10-time all-star Paul Arizin who was playing in his 8th all-star game in a row. Tom Gola was another all-star that season and a hall of famer. Tom Meschery was also a season away from making an all-star team(1963 when he got more minutes). Guy Rodgers was also a season away from making an all-star team and leading the league in assists(when he also got more minutes). Wilt had a deep and talented team, but he couldn't even win 50 games and you're saying he had the most dominant season?

Get past his smoke and mirrors scoring numbers and his 1962 season wasn't as impressive as some other stars seasons. Shaq's 2000 season was far better. He led his team to 67 wins and a championship, but still led the league in scoring and FG%, finished 2nd in rebounds and 3 in blocks.

He averaged 30/14/4/3 on 57% shooting in a much slower paced, more physical league, playing 8.5 less mpg. Unlike Wilt he raised his game in the playoffs to average 31/15 and 38/17/3 on 61% shooting in the finals.

In the 1962 playoffs, Wilt's scoring average dropped 15 ppg and his FG% dropped from 50.6% to 46.7%.


The 90s game (before the illegal defense rules were waived) are much much more center friendly than the era Wilt played in. I was watching a Celtics vs. Warriors game (1964 I think?) and Wilt had Russell behind him, a guard fronting him, and a forward and another guard on either side if he somehow got the ball and decided to turn to the middle of the floor or baseline. There is a reason Wilt would have his best rebounding nights against the Celtics (set a rebounding record in 1964 for most rebounds in 5 games) because that was the only way he was getting the ball due to the ball denial, which would not have been possible in the 90s. He had Guy Rodgers as his point guard, and he (like most guards at that time) had NO jumpshot, which meant the Celtics could play this type of defense on him spacing wise, and not hurt themselves. Kareem was victim to the same thing in the 1974 finals game 7. Give him the spacing he'd get in the 90s and also the more post-up game friendly rules, and he's still wreaking havoc on the league.

I never said he wouldn't be wreaking havoc on the league, I just meant I doubt his numbers wouldn't stand out from guys like Shaq, D-Rob, and that's hardly an insult. In fact when people say Wilt couldn't play in today's league I always post a video of him from 1971 of Wilt at 34 that I feel shows he could play in any league.

[inclinerator]

god damn wilt was the strongest, fastest, smartest, sexiest, most powerful man to ever live.
A story

Once we were working night shift in our jobs moping floors of the old arena
we were tired as hell, suddenly the door opened and a towering man came in. He says nothing but keep up the good work. All of a sudden we felt rejuvenated by his words and finished our jobs twice as fast.

[Fatal9]

Yeah and then consider that he was playing over 48 mpg. You think he's allowed to play near that much in today's game, not to mention the added foul trouble. I don't know if it was because the game was called different or if it's because their were far less halfcourt sets, but Wilt never fouled out of a game in his career. Based on how basketball is called now, particularly against big men, I have a hard time believeing he wouldn't foul out several times per season. Give him a more realistic 40-42 mpg for that month and his numbers drop even further.
This would also raise his per minute production (less fatigue) which raises stats like PER and all those other ones, and might actually make him a better player for the lesser time he spends on the floor. Would it reduce his statistics? Yea, but he is playing like 42 minutes a game, he'd make up a good chunk of it by just being more efficient in less minutes. Still, he might play 40 minutes in this era, he might play 45 (Wilt's competitiveness leads me to believe he'd play as much as he could), fact of the matter is he played 48 minutes, which still no one else in history has done.


His 1962 season wasn't even Wilt's best season, 1967 was. He won 19 more games, averaged nearly as many rebounds(and more per minute) and his assist numbers and FG% blow away his 1962 season. All that season really had over his 1967 season was points. And unlike his 1962 season he actually played team basketball.

Wilt had 2 all-stars on his 1962 Warriors team including hall of famer and 10-time all-star Paul Arizin who was playing in his 8th all-star game in a row. Tom Gola was another all-star that season and a hall of famer. Tom Meschery was also a season away from making an all-star team(1963 when he got more minutes). Guy Rodgers was also a season away from making an all-star team and leading the league in assists(when he also got more minutes). Wilt had a deep and talented team, but he couldn't even win 50 games and you're saying he had the most dominant season?

Get past his smoke and mirrors scoring numbers and his 1962 season wasn't as impressive as some other stars seasons. Shaq's 2000 season was far better. He led his team to 67 wins and a championship, but still led the league in scoring and FG%, finished 2nd in rebounds and 3 in blocks.

He averaged 30/14/4/3 on 57% shooting in a much slower paced, more physical league, playing 8.5 less mpg. Unlike Wilt he raised his game in the playoffs to average 31/15 and 38/17/3 on 61% shooting in the finals.

In the 1962 playoffs, Wilt's scoring average dropped 15 ppg and his FG% dropped from 50.6% to 46.7%.
It's nice you mention hall of fame caliber teammates but forget to add that one of those played his last season before retirement and the other was a career 11/8/4 player. And no need to tell me what Guy Rodgers was doing, what stats he was putting up. He was horrible. Good at dribbling, had a big run on his own in this one game vs. Celtics (the 1964 series), but he is anything but complimentary for a post player like Wilt. Can't shoot a jumper, can't create in the lane, can't throw a decent post pass, could set up teammates on the perimeter though. This is the most impressive thing about Wilt's numbers to me. He did it in an era when all these factors were going against big men playing in the post. Impossible for him to get one on one matchup in the playoffs, no point in kicking it out because the guards can't shoot which in turn results in poor spacing on the floor making it easier for the team to guard Wilt.

As for scoring being "inflated" in the 60s. A little bit maybe but not to the degree people think. Who else in the 60s had multiple 30 ppg seasons other than Wilt? Oscar, Baylor and Jerry West. That's it. In 00s? Kobe, Lebron, Iverson...almost just as many. Individual scoring (especially for bigs) is just not related to pace that much. Rebounding? Yea, I'll give you that. But even then, think about the case I presented where a good percentage of rebounds were before big men (like Kareem, Wilt etc) could even get back to the defensive end. Same thing with scoring, because big men usually didn't even cross the half court line by the time someone on their team already jacked a shot.

His drop off in scoring is for the exact reason I mentioned earlier. Much harder for a dominant post scorer like him to score (and Kareem in early 70s when teams played him this way), when you have a guy fronting you, two guys on either side and the best post defender in the league on your back. There is no way in hell he is being allowed to defend like that in the 90s.

[ShaqAttack3234]

This would also raise his per minute production (less fatigue) which raises stats like PER and all those other ones, and might actually make him a better player for the lesser time he spends on the floor. Would it reduce his statistics? Yea, but he is playing like 42 minutes a game, he'd make up a good chunk of it by just being more efficient in less minutes. Still, he might play 40 minutes in this era, he might play 45 (Wilt's competitiveness leads me to believe he'd play as much as he could), fact of the matter is he played 48 minutes, which still no one else in history has done.

Jordan was as competitive as anyone and he never played more than 40.4 mpg and he only played more than 40 mpg 3 times. And he was 200 pounds and a relatively normal size man, he wasn't carrying 275 pounds on a 7-foot-1 frame. Teams try to rest their stars, particularly big men as much as possible. Considering Wilt's free throw shooting he'd also spend time on the bench sometimes in the 4th quarter which has happened to Shaq(who shoots about the same % as Wilt did). Look at how many shots centers have taken in recent years. Shaq, Hakeem, D-Rob, Ewing ect. rarely took over 20 shots per game and never much more than that. Wilt's not getting enough shots in the modern NBA to average near 40 ppg, much less 50.



It's nice you mention hall of fame caliber teammates but forget to add that one of those played his last season before retirement and the other was a career 11/8/4 player. And no need to tell me what Guy Rodgers was doing, what stats he was putting up. He was horrible. Good at dribbling, had a big run on his own in this one game vs. Celtics (the 1964 series), but he is anything but complimentary for a post player like Wilt. Can't shoot a jumper, can't create in the lane, can't throw a decent post pass, could set up teammates on the perimeter though. This is the most impressive thing about Wilt's numbers to me. He did it in an era when all these factors were going against big men playing in the post. Impossible for him to get one on one matchup in the playoffs, no point in kicking it out because the guards can't shoot which in turn results in poor spacing on the floor making it easier for the team to guard Wilt.

Regardless of what you think about Wilt's teammates they were all-stars that season or within a season and all-stars multiple seasons. You can't suck and become a hall of famer. They must have been good relative to that era= which is all that matters.


As for scoring being "inflated" in the 60s. A little bit maybe but not to the degree people think. Who else in the 60s had multiple 30 ppg seasons other than Wilt? Oscar, Baylor and Jerry West. That's it. In 00s? Kobe, Lebron, Iverson...almost just as many. Scoring is not related to pace as much as people like to think. Rebounding? Yea, I'll give you that. But even then, think about the case I presented where a good chunk of rebounds were before big men (like Kareem, Wilt etc) could even get back to the defensive end. This holds true for scoring as well, because big men usually didn't even cross the half court line by the time someone on their team already jacked a shot.

I'm talking about rebounding more than scoring. But Wilt was allowed to take 39.5 shots per game in 1962. Nobody has taken 30 shots per game since the 1960's if I'm not mistaken. The way the game has been played for decades now I'm confident that those scoring numbers wouldn't be even close with the amount of shots he'd get today. Give Shaq, Jordan, Kobe, Kareem ect. 40 shots per game and I'll bet they put up comparable scoring numbers. Just think about that number...40 shots per game.


His drop off in scoring is for the exact reason I mentioned earlier. Much harder for a dominant post scorer like him to score (and Kareem in early 70s when teams played him this way), when you have a guy fronting you, two guys on either side and the best post defender in the league on your back. There is no way in hell he is being allowed to defend like that in the 90s.

What about the FG% dropoff? It'd be one thing if he was getting less shots and his FG% rised as a result which happened to Shaq in the zone era, but his FG% dropped as well. Playoff defense is tougher in general, but most superstars find a way to match or increase their usual production. There's a reason why Wilt was called a loser throughout the first half of his career. he cared about stats more and he played in an era where he was allowed to get as many shots as he wanted. But that didn't help his team.

[TheAnchorman]

Regardless of what you think about Wilt's teammates they were all-stars that season or within a season and all-stars multiple seasons. You can't suck and become a hall of famer. They must have been good relative to that era= which is all that matters.

Yes, you can't suck and become a hall of famer. But in my opinion the players Fatal mentioend weren't playing like all-stars regardless of how well they played later... that's like telling me that because Devin Harris became an All-Star this year that during 2007 he should be great #2 or 3 option behind Dirk. Guy Rodgers became an all-star later on, but he was turnover prone from what I've read, and couldn't throw a post pass inside if his life dependedo n it. Meschery's FG was terrible and he was inconsistent, and Arizin was past his prime. You can also probably ask Frank McGuire to give his players other shot opportunities, because a big reason why Wilt's PPG shot up drastically was because McGuire wanted to win using that philosophy that year: Feed Wilt the Ball. Now you can probably figure out why Rodgers didn't get that many minutes in '62/'63.

IMO Wilt's teammates early in his career (around 59 to 66) aren't as good as some people might like to think, regardless of their future. Nate Thurmond is a particularly good example of this prevalent misconception, but I'm sure you saw what I posted about him a while back.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Yes, you can't suck and become a hall of famer. But in my opinion the players Fatal mentioend weren't playing like all-stars regardless of how well they played later... that's like telling me that because Devin Harris became an All-Star this year that during 2007 he should be great #2 or 3 option behind Dirk. Guy Rodgers became an all-star later on, but he was turnover prone from what I've read, and couldn't throw a post pass inside if his life dependedo n it. Meschery's FG was terrible and he was inconsistent, and Arizin was past his prime. You can also probably ask Frank McGuire to give his players other shot opportunities, because a big reason why Wilt's PPG shot up drastically was because McGuire wanted to win using that philosophy that year: Feed Wilt the Ball. Now you can probably figure out why Rodgers didn't get that many minutes in '62/'63.

IMO Wilt's teammates early in his career (around 59 to 66) aren't as good as some people might like to think, regardless of their future. Nate Thurmond is a particularly good example of this prevalent misconception, but I'm sure you saw what I posted about him a while back.

My point was that the players he was playing with were obviously talented if they made an all-star team the next year when they got more minutes. That leads me to believe that they were already talented players who showed flashes of that talented and Tom Meschery(one of those 2 players) had better production per 36 in '62 than he did in '63 when he made the all-star team. Guy Rodgers assist and rebound totals were also pretty much identical in '62 per 36 minutes. And on top of that he did have 2 teammates who actually made the all-star team(both of whom did make the hall of fame.

Shaq in 2000 led his team to 67 wins(12-3 without Kobe) in 2000. Aside from Kobe, who was already a damn good player, but not near the player he is today, Shaq had Glen Rice who averaged 16 ppg on 43% shooting, but wasn't the best fit and he was certainly what you'd call a one-dimensional player. Then after that 36 year old Ron Harper and 36 year old AC Green were the other too starters. They combined for 12 ppg and Harper shot under 40%. The player who made the most starts aside from them was Derek Fisher who shot under 35%. Brian Shaw who also played a lot shot just 38%.

[TheAnchorman]

My point was that the players he was playing with were obviously talented if they made an all-star team the next year when they got more minutes. That leads me to believe that they were already talented players who showed flashes of that talented and Tom Meschery(one of those 2 players) had better production per 36 in '62 than he did in '63 when he made the all-star team. Guy Rodgers assist and rebound totals were also pretty much identical in '62 per 36 minutes. And on top of that he did have 2 teammates who actually made the all-star team(both of whom did make the hall of fame.

Shaq in 2000 led his team to 67 wins(12-3 without Kobe) in 2000. Aside from Kobe, who was already a damn good player, but not near the player he is today, Shaq had Glen Rice who averaged 16 ppg on 43% shooting, but wasn't the best fit and he was certainly what you'd call a one-dimensional player. Then after that 36 year old Ron Harper and 36 year old AC Green were the other too starters. They combined for 12 ppg and Harper shot under 40%. The player who made the most starts aside from them was Derek Fisher who shot under 35%. Brian Shaw who also played a lot shot just 38%.
I wasn't trying to downplay Shaq at all, I just pointed out that Wilt's teammates weren't as good as people think and that although Wilt was selfish the burden he carried was more of necessity than of greed. You can tell me that Guy Rodgers showed flashes of talent. Sure, I'll take that. I can also tell you that Travis Outlaw and Tyrus Thomas has showed flashes of talent this past season. I can then also show you Zach Randolph's per 36 minutes production for the 08-09 season and pretend to be baffled that he didn't make the All-Star team but Mo Williams did. Stats do not show everything.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I wasn't trying to downplay Shaq at all, I just pointed out that Wilt's teammates weren't as good as people think and that although Wilt was selfish the burden he carried was more of necessity than of greed. You can tell me that Guy Rodgers showed flashes of talent. Sure, I'll take that. I can also tell you that Travis Outlaw and Tyrus Thomas has showed flashes of talent this past season. I can then also show you Zach Randolph's per 36 minutes production for the 08-09 season and pretend to be baffled that he didn't make the All-Star team but Mo Williams did. Stats do not show everything.

Yeah, I know I'm just saying that if 2 players made the all-star team a year later when they got more minutes and had very similar per 36 numbers, chances are they were probably still good players the year before. I mean it's not like they played 10-20 mpg the season before. A sample size that small is pointless, but that's not the case.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Wilt's selfishness ruined his chance to be the best of all time. In his first 7 seasons he was content with putting up a ridiculous amount of shot attempts and not winning much. As a result he had 7 scoring titles, but only 1 50 win season and 1 finals appearance. By the time he changed his style in 1968 he was over 30 years old, but the results speak for themselves. Wilt's 76ers won 68 games and a championship team. Wilt also showed that he was one of the best passing big men to ever play the game. They rightfully went down in history as one of the greatest teams in NBA history. But it made you wonder how good he could have been had he played unselfish his whole career. The next season while he didn't win a championship, he did lead his team to 62 wins again. But once again Wilt's selfishness came back into play. He passed up shots, even some that he shouldn't have to prove he could lead the league in assists.


Regular season play shan't be the dictation of what be the postseason play. For the 76ers had choked away a 3-1 lead in 1968. There be no excuse there. But the myth of this selfishness being the direct and sole cause behind the Boston losses be a dispicably shameful false creedence.

1960:


G1: Philadelphia 105 at Boston 111
G2: Boston 110 at Philadelphia 115
G3: Philadelphia 90 at Boston 120
G4: Boston 112 at Philadelphia 104
G5: Philadelphia 128 at Boston 107
G6: Boston 119 at Philadelphia 117

A close tough fought 6 game series against the 2 time champion Celtics and Russell.



1962:

G1: Philadelphia 89 at Boston 117
G2: Boston 106 at Philadelphia 113
G3: Philadelphia 114 at Boston 129
G4: Boston 106 at Philadelphia 110
G5: Philadelphia 104 at Boston 119
G6: Boston 99 at Philadelphia 109
G7: Philadelphia 107 at Boston 109

Another very close and tough fought series, lost on the simple fact of a bullcrap goaltending violation against Chamberlain.



1965:

G1: Philadelphia 98 at Boston 108
G2: Boston 103 at Philadelphia 109
G3: Philadelphia 94 at Boston 112
G4: Boston 131 at Philadelphia *134
G5: Philadelphia 108 at Boston 114
G6: Boston 106 at Philadelphia 112
G7: Philadelphia 109 at Boston 110

This be the infamous John Havlicek steal call series, for this one was definitley the toughest to swallow. An even closer series than prior ones.



That was Wilt's last season in Philly and then he went to Los Angeles where Wilt did continue to play unselfishly. He didn't score much, but he played like a bigger, stronger, version of Bill Russell who could score when he wanted. Yet they still lost in 1969, logically in such a horrid instance of creedence primarily due to Chamberlain. Is that right? This be your true beliefs? Yet another Game 7 loss to Celtics for Chamberlain, by 1 point.


The result was another one of the all time great teams. The 1972 Lakers won 69 games, a record 33 games in a row and of course a championship The following year the Lakers won 60 games again, but lost in the finals.
Tis also much easier when Russell be retired.


So despite the numbers, Wilt wasn't playing up to his true potential as a basketball player early in his career. He always had the ability to make everyone else better, but he didn't realize it or didn't care until the last half of his career. If he always played like he did in the last half of his career then he may have challenged Bill Russell's Celtics for a lot more championships.Tis true, but he primarily be doing what the coaches asked of him. Like early Jordan, he was convinced the only way to stay competitive be th shoulder the whole load. In some way this be truth and in some way this be false bravado. For he almost fist fought with the likes of coach Alex Hannum with the Warriors.


The greatest center ever is Kareem

:roll:


because his longevity is unmatched
http://khandorssportsblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/moses-malone2.jpg

http://www.rotoevil.com/images/kevin_willis_short.jpg

http://nbcsportsmedia2.msnbc.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/040418/040418_shaq_vmed_7a.widec.jpg

http://angrycelticsfans.com/Robert_Parish_2.27.94.jpg

http://assets.espn.go.com/photo/2009/0513/nba_g_ejohnsonts_576.jpg

http://youngtraveler.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/t1_jordan-pippen1.jpg

http://www.sillonball.es/wp-content/uploads/malone_stockton.jpg



his prime is comparable to Wilt's

:eek: :roll:

[Abraham Lincoln]

If we look at peak play, it's Wilt/Kareem.
Sorry. Jabbar is not at the level of Chamberlain. Not even close to arguable.

[Abraham Lincoln]

If you were looking purely at stats, well you could fall in love with Chamberlain
Not only stats, but rather the incredible dominance and ability of Wilt Chamberlain never seen before or since. He was bar none the best offensive player of all time, the best rebounder of all time, and the best defensive anchor of all time next to the likes of Bill Russell.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Longevity does not Equal = Play or Better Player

It = Longevity...

Shaq: Offensively was Better

Was he a Better Defender? Not even close
Was he a Better Shot Blocker? No even close
Was he a Better Rebounder? No even close
Was he a Better Passer? No

Kareem: was More Skilled and "almost as Good Game Creating Wise"

Was he a Better Defender? Not even close
Was he a Better Shot Blocker? Not even close
Was he a Better Rebounder? Not even close

Was he a Better Passer or Game Creator? as Good but Most Probably Not! "Wilt`s constant attention and double teaming created more assits"

Wilt is bar none the

"Most Complete Offensive-Defensive-Game Creating & Physically Complete (Wingspam, Speed, Agility, Potence, Strength, Stamina) Center Ever"

Wilt was Howard with a Post Game...but Stronger, Faster, Taller, Longer Wingspam and could Pass...

Wilt`s Prime was from 59-70 was by far the Most Dominant in NBA History

Can you imagine how much points more per game he would have had and how much higher is FG% would have been if Wilt was allowed to use his real brutal strength and dunk?

Wilt was careful not to hurt anyone and he pretty much invetend the Fadeway Back Shot, had a Great Spin and Used Finger Roles Most of the Time..if he would have wanted he would have just charged and slammed like Shaq did

So just imagine...what his BPG Avg would be if it was counted. He was the Best Shot Blocker even when Kareem was playing
:cheers:

[ShaqAttack3234]

Robert Parish wasn't a finals MVP at age 38, he wasn't averaging over 20 ppg at 39. His longevity is not comparable to Kareem's if we're considering how long they played at a high level. Same goes for Kevin Willis. Karl Malone and Jordan played comparably well, if not better at late ages, but Jordan played just 15 seasons because of the retirements and I was talking about centers. Moses Malone's last 20 ppg season was when he was 33 and his last double double season was when he was 34. His longevity also isn't comparable to Kareem's.

Shaq was an all-star in his 17th season, so he's close, but Kareem still has a bit of an advantage as far as longevity.

[Fatal9]

Jordan was as competitive as anyone and he never played more than 40.4 mpg and he only played more than 40 mpg 3 times. And he was 200 pounds and a relatively normal size man, he wasn't carrying 275 pounds on a 7-foot-1 frame. Teams try to rest their stars, particularly big men as much as possible. Considering Wilt's free throw shooting he'd also spend time on the bench sometimes in the 4th quarter which has happened to Shaq(who shoots about the same % as Wilt did). Look at how many shots centers have taken in recent years. Shaq, Hakeem, D-Rob, Ewing ect. rarely took over 20 shots per game and never much more than that. Wilt's not getting enough shots in the modern NBA to average near 40 ppg, much less 50.
He still put up 34 ppg on 25 shot attempts, which is right in line with my expectations of him being a 34-35 ppg/ 14-15 rbg / 4 blks type of player at his absolute prime in the 90s. However, I'd expect his scoring efficiency to rise for reasons I already mentioned. If he scores less, and shifts his focus to rebounding, I see no reason why he cant grab more than Dennis Rodman did. Even if you want to make all these adjustments to Wilt's stats, he is STILL the most dominant ever.



Regardless of what you think about Wilt's teammates they were all-stars that season or within a season and all-stars multiple seasons. You can't suck and become a hall of famer. They must have been good relative to that era= which is all that matters.
You can't suck and become a hall of famer...but 11/8/4 sure is close :oldlol:. He got into the hall of fame because of college accomplishments not for some sort of a spectacular NBA career. The other hall of famer played his last season in the NBA in that season. Guy Rodgers, I've already mentioned, is a terrible fit for a player like Wilt. Was he talented? Sure, he was probably one of the top 2 or 3 ball handlers in the league at his peak. But are you really going to sit here and pretend a guard who can't shoot (ie. can't stretch the floor), create easy baskets in the lane for bigs, throw a proper post pass is a good fit for a player like Wilt?


Give Shaq, Jordan, Kobe, Kareem ect. 40 shots per game and I'll bet they put up comparable scoring numbers. Just think about that number...40 shots per game.
None of those players are shooting 51% if they are taking 40 shots a game. Get real :oldlol:


What about the FG% dropoff? It'd be one thing if he was getting less shots and his FG% rised as a result which happened to Shaq in the zone era, but his FG% dropped as well. Playoff defense is tougher in general, but most superstars find a way to match or increase their usual production. There's a reason why Wilt was called a loser throughout the first half of his career. he cared about stats more and he played in an era where he was allowed to get as many shots as he wanted. But that didn't help his team.
I talked about the Celtics defense earlier and why it could limit Wilt's scoring, and also why it wouldn't be possible today. And it is true he didn't have a particularly well series against them offensively. They were really the only team to play him like this. But it's not like he struggled against the Nationals that year. He put up 56/35 in the do or die game 5. Against the Celtics I think he averaged less than 30 FGA for the series and only took 15 shots in the final game. You think it's because he wanted to shoot less, or the fact that Celtics had a bunch of players fronting him, which wouldn't be allowed if he played in the 90s :confusedshrug:


Sorry. Jabbar is not at the level of Chamberlain. Not even close to arguable.
Alas, it be closer than you think. Kareem be dropping 35/17/5/5 on a 60+ win team in his prime with only a 10-15% difference in pace from the early 90s Bulls. He also packs the most unstoppable and reliable offensive move in the history of the game. As I have said before, Wilt has the edge (I've always put him above Kareem in peak play) but to compare Jordan's impact to that of prime Wilt and Kareem be a joke. For the Bucks be on pace for 15 wins when Kareem broke his hand and were the worst team in the league during that timespan, but when the wise man returned, they be on pace to 50+ wins. Yet to see that type of impact out of a Michael Jordan.

[gts]

Sorry. Jabbar is not at the level of Chamberlain. Not even close to arguable.baloney

[ShaqAttack3234]

He still put up 34 ppg on 25 shot attempts, which is right in line with my expectations of him being a 34-35 ppg/ 14-15 rbg / 4 blks type of player at his absolute prime in the 90s. However, I'd expect his scoring efficiency to rise for reasons I already mentioned. If he scores less, and shifts his focus to rebounding, I see no reason why he cant grab more than Dennis Rodman did. Even if you want to make all these adjustments to Wilt's stats, he is STILL the most dominant ever.

34-35 ppg, 14-15 rpg, 4 bpg in the 90's? :oldlol: If he's doing all of that as far as blocking shots and rebound then there's no way he gets enough shots to average 34-35 per game, especially playing against bigger, stronger, more athletic players.



You can't suck and become a hall of famer...but 11/8/4 sure is close :oldlol:. He got into the hall of fame because of college accomplishments not for some sort of a spectacular NBA career.

You don't make 5 all-star teams because of college accomplishments.


The other hall of famer played his last season in the NBA in that season.

And yet he still made the all-star team and averaged 22/7/3.


Guy Rodgers, I've already mentioned, is a terrible fit for a player like Wilt. Was he talented? Sure, he was probably one of the top 2 or 3 ball handlers in the league at his peak. But are you really going to sit here and pretend a guard who can't shoot (ie. can't stretch the floor), create easy baskets in the lane for bigs, throw a proper post pass is a good fit for a player like Wilt?

Him being a bad fit doesn't mean he couldn't contribute in positive ways. Most of the key contributors on Shaq's 2000 Laker team didn't shoot well at all. Derek Fisher shot under 35%, Brian Shawn shot 38% and Ron Harper shot under 40% and all of them shot 31% on 3's while combining for less than a 3 per game. Glen Rice could shoot, but was a bad fit in the triangle offense and had an usually poor shooting season(his 4th lowest FG% and 3P% of his career). Rice barely made 1 3 per game and he was the Lakers best shooter!

Even Kobe back then was more of a mid-range player and he made just 0.7 3's per game while shooting 31.9%. Kobe really didn't become a proficient 3 point shooter until 2003. But that lack of spacing didn't bother Shaq who in his prime was as good or better than anyone.



None of those players are shooting 51% if they are taking 40 shots a game. Get real :oldlol:

First of all Jordan and Kobe are perimeter players so how is their FG% relevant to Wilt's? And do you know what Shaq or Kareem would shoot if they got that many shots?

And regarding that 1 month you posted from Wilt's season. Check out what Shaq did for March 2000 and April 2000(not including the last game when he rested for the playoffs).

22 games 34.9 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 4.0 apg, 59.0 FG%

By the way as Shaq's shots rose to 23.3 shots per game so did his FG%.


I talked about the Celtics defense earlier and why it could limit Wilt's scoring, and also why it wouldn't be possible today. And it is true he didn't have a particularly well series against them offensively. They were really the only team to play him like this. But it's not like he struggled against the Nationals that year. He put up 56/35 in the do or die game 5. Against the Celtics I think he averaged less than 30 FGA for the series and only took 15 shots in the final game. You think it's because he wanted to shoot less, or the fact that Celtics had a bunch of players fronting him, which wouldn't be allowed if he played in the 90s :confusedshrug:


Once again it gets tougher in the playoffs and great players are expected to make adjustments. Shaq did it with no help in the 2000 finals. He won the series by himself by averaging 38/17/3 on 61% shooting. Because he had no help that series he was double and tripled even more than usual and he rasied his game. Shaq faced the DPOY in 2001 Dikembe Mutombo and rather than playing below his standards he raised his game by averaging 33/16/5 including a 40/20 game and a near quadruple double.

[catch24]

All of you are posting great points and making awesome cases for each Center being the overall GREATEST.

Personally i'd go with Hakeem, but I have no problem with others saying Chamberlain. Both my two favorite centers ever followed by Shaq, then Jabbar.

I don't get the whole "Wilt was selfish" thing when Shaq was as well. Granted Kobe had much to do with their feuds, Shaq was older and could of been a bit more mature - would of led to more championships, that's for sure. Hell he's still a lil kid at times. i.e: his twitter comments on howard.

[ShaqAttack3234]

All of you are posting great points and making awesome cases for each Center being the overall GREATEST.

Personally i'd go with Hakeem, but I have no problem with others saying Chamberlain. Both my two favorite centers ever followed by Shaq, then Jabbar.

I don't get the whole "Wilt was selfish" thing when Shaq was as well. Granted Kobe had much to do with their feuds, Shaq was older and could of been a bit more mature - would of led to more championships, that's for sure. Hell he's still a lil kid at times. i.e: his twitter comments on howard.

Shaq was selfishness off the court, not on the court.

[catch24]

Shaq was selfishness off the court, not on the court.

Exactly, but in this case the "Off Court" issues spilled into the actual game and screwed the teams chemistry. Kobe and Shaq had a huge feud in 2004, look what happened in the finals...

[ShaqAttack3234]

Exactly, but in this case the "Off Court" issues spilled into the actual game and screwed the teams chemistry. Kobe and Shaq had a huge feud in 2004, look what happened in the finals...

The 2004 finals was Kobe's fault. 22.5 ppg on 22.5 FGA and 38 FG% while Shaq was dominating inside(27 ppg, 63% shooting, 16.8 FGA). The Lakers losing in 2003 can be blamed on Shaq. Shaq sitting out games cost them homecourt. But when Shaq was on the court he was thinking about one thing, winning and not stats.

[stejay]

Only one player will ever be #1....
Michael Jordan


end of discussion

[Fatal9]

Rather than continue and keep repeating the same argument over and over again, I think it's clear Shaqattack is just not going to agree with me :D

Only one player will ever be #1....
Michael Jordan


end of discussion
In what? Hype? :roll:

[Godfather]

When Wilt wins 6 finals mvps come back to me.

[stejay]

Rather than continue and keep repeating the same argument over and over again, I think it's clear Shaqattack is just not going to agree with me :D

In what? Hype? :roll:

Man, please tell me your joking....Don't make me get the stats out dogg.

[Disaprine]

I didn't read any of it, but i know you put great points in there :applause:
wilt is the best people except it :pimp:

[magnax1]

Rather than continue and keep repeating the same argument over and over again, I think it's clear Shaqattack is just not going to agree with me :D

In what? Hype? :roll:
Have you even seen Jordan? I mean he hit buzzer beaters, won rings, carried his team on his back, is at minimum the second most statistically dominant player ever, caused just as many double teams and triple teams as wilt in his prime. Jordan was sometimes doubled without the ball and tripled with the ball. If you consider pace jordan would have scored nearly as many points as wilt, and probably average a triple double one season like robertson did. Jordan is the goat plain and simple, and the only player close is kareem.

[plowking]

Your ignorance is amazing Abraham.

You compare Wilt to Shaq in terms of strength? You are kidding yourself if you think Wilt could compete with Shaq in terms of strength during his playing days. He earned his nickname "The Stilt" for a reason, because he was slim and athletic, not muscle bound.
His weight lifting strength came at the end of his career and after.

Furthermore I'm tired of your obvious bias against Kobe Bryant. You make the claim that he's selfish, etc, yet you idolize a player like Wilt, who was known to ask for his stats at halftime and during gameplay. Not to mention all he looked after was his stats. It seemed that all the guy cared about were numbers, and that's the reason he only has 2 championships, and I say "only" because he is a player put in these talks of greatest ever, when he is no where near worthy of the title.

Shaq, Kareem and Hakeem are all better than Wilt. If they took on the "numbers" attitude that Wilt had his near whole career, they too could be the ones with incredible statistical feats, not that there statistical accomplishments are not already incredible.

[catch24]

The 2004 finals was Kobe's fault. 22.5 ppg on 22.5 FGA and 38 FG% while Shaq was dominating inside(27 ppg, 63% shooting, 16.8 FGA). The Lakers losing in 2003 can be blamed on Shaq. Shaq sitting out games cost them homecourt. But when Shaq was on the court he was thinking about one thing, winning and not stats.

I agree with everything. I just think it's hypocritical to say he doesn't cares about his stats or "share". Don't kid yourself, 99.9% of the superstars CARE, lol.

watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qQPBt7QW5Q

[Fatal9]

Have you even seen Jordan? I mean he hit buzzer beaters, won rings, carried his team on his back, is at minimum the second most statistically dominant player ever, caused just as many double teams and triple teams as wilt in his prime. Jordan was sometimes doubled without the ball and tripled with the ball. If you consider pace jordan would have scored nearly as many points as wilt, and probably average a triple double one season like robertson did. Jordan is the goat plain and simple, and the only player close is kareem.
:oldlol: at "have I ever seen Jordan". :oldlol: at Jordan scoring 50 ppg on 51% (like Wilt). You realize only 3 other players in the 60s had multiple 30+ ppg seasons, which is the same as in the 00s? Pace isn't related to scoring as much as you think. Team scoring yes, but not individual scoring (especially for bigs). Classic ignorance by a Jordan fan, acting like the inception date of NBA was in 1991.

[stejay]

:oldlol: at "have I ever seen Jordan". :oldlol: at Jordan scoring 50 ppg on 51% (like Wilt). You realize only 3 other players in the 60s had multiple 30+ ppg seasons, which is the same as in the 00s? Pace isn't related to scoring as much as you think. Team scoring yes, but not individual scoring (especially for bigs). Classic ignorance by a Jordan fan, acting like the inception date of NBA was in 1991.

Man, Jordan would have hit 90 in a game if he was around in Wilts day.Man, this guy had half the competition that Jordan did, and it's ignorant that you see Jordan a this over-hyped guy. What is your beef with MJ?

[Abraham Lincoln]

You compare Wilt to Shaq in terms of strength? You are kidding yourself if you think Wilt could compete with Shaq in terms of strength during his playing days. He earned his nickname "The Stilt" for a reason, because he was slim and athletic, not muscle bound.
His weight lifting strength came at the end of his career and after.

Alas, bulk and strength be not directly proportional. Just look at Dwight Howard. Much weaker than his physical appearance would make it seem. Alas 1967 Chamberlain would have no trouble against any professional basketball player ever physically. After his career the bulk grew, for no more running up and down the court at the blistering pace of the 1960's.


Furthermore I'm tired of your obvious bias against Kobe Bryant.

Not really a Wade fan eh?


You make the claim that he's selfish

Where?


etc,

What else?


yet you idolize a player like Wilt, who was known to ask for his stats at halftime and during gameplay. Not to mention all he looked after was his stats.

Every great scorer has been selfish. Bryant, Jordan, Iverson, Jabbar, you name it.


It seemed that all the guy cared about were numbers, and that's the reason he only has 2 championships

He be a man whom without a such killer mentality, set goals for himself. And the implication that his play be a hinderance to his team be nothing short of shameful, for I have documented the numerous close losses to the Celtics earlier in the thread.


and I say "only" because he is a player put in these talks of greatest ever, when he is no where near worthy of the title.The who is? :roll:


Shaq, Kareem and Hakeem are all better than Wilt.

My God.. :roll: :roll:


If they took on the "numbers" attitude that Wilt had his near whole career, they too could be the ones with incredible statistical feats, not that there statistical accomplishments are not already incredible.

If is my most despised word. For such reason any common man can guess.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Only one player will ever be #1....
Michael Jordan


end of discussion
Yes, if basketball did not exist prior to 1990.

[Abraham Lincoln]

When Wilt wins 6 finals mvps come back to me.
The Finals MVP Award did not exist prior to 1969.

[magnax1]

:oldlol: at "have I ever seen Jordan". :oldlol: at Jordan scoring 50 ppg on 51% (like Wilt). You realize only 3 other players in the 60s had multiple 30+ ppg seasons, which is the same as in the 00s? Pace isn't related to scoring as much as you think. Team scoring yes, but not individual scoring (especially for bigs). Classic ignorance by a Jordan fan, acting like the inception date of NBA was in 1991.
I think you have no idea what you are talking about. It doesn't affect scoring as much as rebounding, but the average pace of wilts team with 50 points, was 120, where as the biggest fast break type team of the deacade only had a 96 pace. Plus the FG% for teams was lower, which meant more missed shots, wich meant more rebounds. To think Jordan wouldn't have average around 45 points 10 rebounds and 6 assists in 87 is crazy, and he'd most likely average 40-15-10 in 89. Both of those years would be way better than Wilts seasons, especially if you factor in how clutch Jordan was he was way way better than wilt.

[beau_boy04]

If Wilt was playing today he will averaged 30+ ppg and 14+rpg with 3+ bpg

Right about 32-35ppg, 15-17rpg, 4.5bpg, 55-58%FG in 40mpg

If D Howard could grab 13-15rpg, I don't see why Wilt can't pull down 15-17rpg.

[ShaqAttack3234]

If D Howard could grab 13-15rpg, I don't see why Wilt can't pull down 15-17rpg.

Well, Howard has a 40 inch vertical and Howard can concentrate on rebounding more because he only takes 12 shots per game instead of 20+.

[jasonb682]

I never saw a full game with Wilt in his prime, but his stats are mindblowing.
IMHO his stats were inflated due to playing in a era where he was bigger, stronger and faster than everyone. His only peer is bill russell.

[supersmashbros]

http://community.foxsports.com/dustylaker/blog/2006/12/09/THE_TRUTH_ABOUT_WILT_CHAMBERLAIN_AND_IT_AINT_GOOD

According to this site, Wilt could dunk from the freethrow line which I find entirely believable for him...instead of shooting his freethrows like everyone else he dunked them. Afterwards, they made it a rule that players can only stand behind the stripe for FT, and Wilt's FT % plummeted as a result. His 100 point game where he made 28 out of 32 FT's was before that rule (otherwise he probably couldn't have made so many FT's in a row :D)

[CB4GOATPF]

If Wilt was playing today he will averaged 30+ ppg and 14+rpg with 3+ bpg

Right about 32-35ppg, 15-17rpg, 4.5bpg, 55-58%FG in 40mpg

If D Howard could grab 13-15rpg, I don't see why Wilt can't pull down 15-17rpg.

[B]More like

Peek Ages 22-32:

32-38 PPG (52-57% FG); 16-19 RPG, 5-6 APG and 5 BPG on 42-44 MPG

Last Days and Early Days ages 33-36 + or 18-21 on

24-18 PPG (60% FG), 11-13 RPG, 2 APG, 2.5-3 BPG on 35-30 MPG

Total Career: 33 PPG (54%G), 15 RRPG, 4 APG ad 3.5 BPG on 38 MPG

Just imagine how many dunks and bull charges he would have been able to do....like Shaq did in his days...in todays games: 70s, 80s and 90s in his prime dunking allowed and bull chargin allowed.

Wilt was afraid to hurt people...many players have said this...

Wilt was capable of dunking from the freethrow line in his early 20s without many steps taken

He was a mix of Howard at 7`1 1/2 and with Karl Malone`s Arm Strength + Stamina!

Wilt`had stamina that would also make him be able to run the court to catch passes ala Karl Malone-Kevin Garnett-Charles Barkley but more dominant physically

His BPG Avg would be insane...

You are talking about a dude that was 275 lbs drafted...reached to about 300 lbs later...with todays weight lifting programs + sport vitamins he`d be a 320-330 lbs 7`1 monster with Howards athletic capacity, much stronger, superior stamina, superior defender, superior rebounder, better passer and yes

Wilt was the Inventor of the Bank Shot
Wilt was the Inventor of the Fadeway Shot
Wilt was was the precusor of all Spin Moves

Wilt would be a larger, better, smater, stronger, faster, more potent version of Howard with Great Post Game and Superior Running Abilities to Catch Passes on Breakways for ala Karl Malone James Worthy Breaks...

D

[supersmashbros]

Here's a vid of Chamberlain shooting a FT. If only he was still allowed to dunk them...:D:no:

[sbw19]

http://community.foxsports.com/dustylaker/blog/2006/12/09/THE_TRUTH_ABOUT_WILT_CHAMBERLAIN_AND_IT_AINT_GOOD

According to this site, Wilt could dunk from the freethrow line which I find entirely believable for him...instead of shooting his freethrows like everyone else he dunked them. Afterwards, they made it a rule that players can only stand behind the stripe for FT, and Wilt's FT % plummeted as a result. His 100 point game where he made 28 out of 32 FT's was before that rule (otherwise he probably couldn't have made so many FT's in a row :D)

As one of the few bloggers to have actually seen Wilt Chamberlain play during his prime years when he set all the records I am here to tell you I am sick to death of stat hounds and moronic idiots who see highlight film games and worship at the Altar of The Wilt Chamberlain big lie.
First off under the rules of today Wilt Chamberlain would foul out of every single game he played in. With the exception of the games in which he would be ejected for unsportmanlike play and flagrant fouls.
I don't even know where to start with this, I am so fed up with the bull**** sucking up to Chamberlain.
Let me say this and then try to break it down for you.
WILT CHAMBERLAIN WAS THE DIRTIEST PLAYER IN THE HISTORY OF THE NBA.
1.) He was allowed to block shots by hitting people not just on the head but damn near just ball up his fist and cold **** people. I would assume that not only Shaq but almost every good center in between could block shots like Wilt if they were allowed to do this. How many times do we hear "the block was clean but he got him with the hip/body below the shoulder. Bull****. Wilt got people with his shoulder, his body, his arms, his legs and seldom called for fouls. Wilts idea of defense was "I'm bigger than you, nastier than you and I'm gonna mug your ass and nobody is gonna say **** about it". And he was right.
2.) Wilt rebounded by simply going up, and again, no "over the top" in those days. He was simply taller than anyone else and once he got his hands on the ball he started swinging razor sharp elbows. Deke Mutumbo has been called hundreds of times for his elbows and he does nothing compared to what Wilt did. And Chamberlain didn't just clear out. He put people on the floor. People bleeding. Again he intentionally tried to hurt people. That was his personality. Anyone big man today allowed to do what he did could average 20 rebounds a game.
3.) He used his elbows on offense as well. Imagine I were 5-7 inches taller than you and 50-100 lbs heavier than you and back in on you on the post and suddenly and intentionally ripped my arm around and drove my elbow into your face. You'd go down and if you didn't you'd backpedal out of bounds and be temporaily blinded. Then he'd just dunk or if he was being double teamed he'd simply then back into the other defender and hand the ball off to a teammate strolling unguarded into the lane. This is why he got double digit assists in his glory years. Never has anyone ever gotten credit for so many cheap assists.
4.) As for his scoring what a joke. He took balls off the rim, he intercepted fellow players shots, all for dunks. For you stat hounds compare this one.
Chamberlain 48 minutes 36 of 63 field goals, 28 of 32 free throws.(that season Chamberlain was allowed to leap from the free throw line and dunk free throws.The rule ws changed the following season and he quickly became one of the worst free throwers in history)
Kobe Bryant 42 minutes 28 of 46 field goals, 18 of 20 free throws.
In 6 minutes less bryant took 17 shots less and 12 free throws less than Chamberlain and finished 19 points less. Based on %'s had Bryant shot as much and had as many FT's as Wilt, Bryant would have scored about 115 pts. And Wilt was never double teamed without the ball, played with a foot narrower lane and all the aforementioned other advantages.
The facts are that Wilt Chamberlain won one championship during his prime years with all the possible advantages that he could have. He was selfish far beyond any other player in NBA history, he was Arrogant beyond any other player in NBA history and if he played to day with the same rules that everyone has to play with today he'd be nothing more than a larger version of Danny Fortsen with the same ejections and fouls.
You can hate on me till the cows come home but the reality is Wilt Chamberlain is the most overrated player in the History of the NBA. And I was there to see it. Were you?

Interesting article.

[plowking]

Alas, bulk and strength be not directly proportional. Just look at Dwight Howard. Much weaker than his physical appearance would make it seem. Alas 1967 Chamberlain would have no trouble against any professional basketball player ever physically. After his career the bulk grew, for no more running up and down the court at the blistering pace of the 1960's.



Not really a Wade fan eh?



Where?



What else?



Every great scorer has been selfish. Bryant, Jordan, Iverson, Jabbar, you name it.


He be a man whom without a such killer mentality, set goals for himself. And the implication that his play be a hinderance to his team be nothing short of shameful, for I have documented the numerous close losses to the Celtics earlier in the thread.

The who is? :roll:



My God.. :roll: :roll:



If is my most despised word. For such reason any common man can guess.


Once again. Comparing a 285lbs center in Dwight to Chamberlain, who wasn't even at that point in his peak playing years. Wilt was not as strong as you seem to think he was during his playing years. Wilt "The Stilt" speaks for itself. You don't earn that being a tank or imposing physical player. I have no doubt he was a solid 280+lbs at the end of his career though.

And yeah, I'm a Kobe fan man, masking it by pretending to be a Heat fan... That's why I was joyous and celebrating when the Lakers won the championship right... :rolleyes:

[indiefan23]

It has nothing to do with that sillyness. Wilt was great but his competition stunk. You're listing career nothings as his competition. Darryl Imhoff? He lasted 20 minutes vs Wilt in his 100 point game and could not actually run fast enough to the other end of the floor to defend Wilt. That just does not happen today. Watch the video's of how things changed and the analysis here. There is nothing idiotic about stating the league is better. At all.

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05/nba-fan-evolution-part-1-fan-eras.html

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05/nba-fan-evolution-part-2-fan-evolves.html

[indiefan23]

It has nothing to do with that sillyness. Wilt was great but his competition stunk. You're listing career nothings as his competition. Darryl Imhoff? He lasted 20 minutes vs Wilt in his 100 point game and could not actually run fast enough to the other end of the floor to defend Wilt. That just does not happen today. Watch the video's of how things changed and the analysis here. There is nothing idiotic about stating the league is better. At all.

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05/nba-fan-evolution-part-1-fan-eras.html

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05/nba-fan-evolution-part-2-fan-evolves.html

And check this video of Elgin Baylor destroying the same Celtics team that Wilt could not beat. This is a finals game. He scored 61 points hitting mostly uncontested jumpers and dribbling with one hand. People trying to claim the era was not weak are just clearly on crack. Wilt probably could have been a decent player vs the big boys in the 90's but the guys he played against could not. They didn't even know how to box out properly.

I mean, seriously, how is it people claim the era was just as strong when people could dribble with both hands and/or box out. We were benched in Jr. High for not boxing out and it was common place in Wilt era hoops. People here are claiming that Wilt 'invented' the bank shot years after George Mikan, just retarded.

anyway, yea, check this 'competition'. ;0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaHEJUXRc_k&t=30s

[Pharcyde]

Yes, if basketball did not exist prior to 1990.
MJ was a better player and is the GOAT, it has nothing to do with when they
played.

[MaxFly]

Nice thread alot of work went into it man.

Wilt was a freak and I have no dobut he would dominat in the NBA today.

Tis be the wise man of the land. Repped.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=138823

[Godfather]

Well, Howard has a 40 inch vertical and Howard can concentrate on rebounding more because he only takes 12 shots per game instead of 20+.

Exactly...

Wilt would go 22/12/2 and make the all NBA team...nothing more nothing less.

People need to look up his game tape. He played against 6'8'' nonathletic centers who were as skinny as Kevin Durant.

He also didn't have the assortment of post moves a la Hakeem, KAJ...

He dominated players by backing them down and pulling off fingerrolls on them...not much different than what Dwight does today.

[Abraham Lincoln]

It has nothing to do with that sillyness. Wilt was great but his competition stunk. You're listing career nothings as his competition. Darryl Imhoff? He lasted 20 minutes vs Wilt in his 100 point game and could not actually run fast enough to the other end of the floor to defend Wilt. That just does not happen today. Watch the video's of how things changed and the analysis here. There is nothing idiotic about stating the league is better. At all.

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05/nba-fan-evolution-part-1-fan-eras.html

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05/nba-fan-evolution-part-2-fan-evolves.html
Chamberlain was a once in an eon player. Competition degrading be meaningless in such cases.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Once again. Comparing a 285lbs center in Dwight to Chamberlain, who wasn't even at that point in his peak playing years. Wilt was not as strong as you seem to think he was during his playing years. Wilt "The Stilt" speaks for itself. You don't earn that being a tank or imposing physical player. I have no doubt he was a solid 280+lbs at the end of his career though.

1967 Wilt was 300. Lean. For the lack of updated college weights be the reason here. And again, he be a track athlete as well. Size and strength not directly in proportion.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Exactly...

Wilt would go 22/12/2 and make the all NBA team...nothing more nothing less.

People need to look up his game tape. He played against 6'8'' nonathletic centers who were as skinny as Kevin Durant.

He also didn't have the assortment of post moves a la Hakeem, KAJ...

He dominated players by backing them down and pulling off fingerrolls on them...not much different than what Dwight does today.
What might this be implying? :lol

[Abraham Lincoln]

MJ was a better player and is the GOAT, it has nothing to do with when they
played.
Judging instant impact on any team, Chamberlain was superior.

[The_Yearning]

hop off the sack please. and bill russell sucks the overhype of that guy is astonishing...

[Rasheed1]

[quote]
Myth Three: Wilt Couldn

[supersmashbros]

Interesting article.
It argues that Chamberlain wasn't as good as every thought he was. Do you agree with that controversial article has to say? It's pretty good for this topic at hand :D. I haven't seen enough clips (or read enough literature) on Wilt the Silt, so I can't say, but some of you guys can elaborate on the legitimacy of that article :D

[magnax1]

Judging instant impact on any team, Chamberlain was superior.
Jordan had just as much impact especially career wise. He brought some absoulutely horrific teams into the playoffs, and won six rings in a decade, the only other player who has accomplished this sort of thing is Bill Russell. Though he wasn't as offensively dominant he did what Jordan did, but on the defensive side. Wilt would average 35-15 today, on 48% shooting, (just guessing) and Jordan would most likely average 40-15-11 in his prime when wilt played, so who would you rather have?

[Gotterdammerung]

I've read Tall Tales by Terry Pluto, Wilt, 1962, and Golaith, and Season of the 76ers, and The Pivotal Season (1972 Lakers) and The Rivalry, including Wilt's own books, so I'm familiar with the literature, on top of having relatives who saw Wilt play. None of them mentioned anything of the dirty play in that article, so I call it a steaming pile of horse-dung.

For one thing, Wilt was strangely a passive player on offense- unlike Shaq. He would attempt to score without using his height to his advantage (fallaway jumpers).

For another, free throw dunking was disallowed before Wilt entered the NBA. That's why I think the blogger is disingenuous.

Good opening posts, Abraham Lincoln.

[Gotterdammerung]

The myth that Wilt was dominant because he played against stiff is easily refuted by the fact that other athletic bigmen of the era did not post insane stats at a prolific rate. Did Bill Russell ever crack 20 points per game, even tho he had hall of famers on the court and off the bench? Where's Walt Bellamy or Nate Thurmond in the record books, for instance? I mean, in a weak league, the talented big man will dunk the opposition senseless, like in high school and put up WTF stats. But this isn't the case in the NBA - excepting several limelights like Baylor. Bob McAdoo scored over 30 plus in the supposedly weak era of the 70s, but he was only 6' 9." What gives?

Like Abraham Lincoln pointed out, Wilt scored 60 plus points a game 32 times. MJ? Merely 5 times. Kobe? Merely 5 times. Wilt's total of 32 is more than the total of the rest of all the players in the NBA! where are those others that dominated the weak era of the 60s?

That's why I give such shortsighted arguments absolutely no credibility.

[sbw19]

It argues that Chamberlain wasn't as good as every thought he was. Do you agree with that controversial article has to say? It's pretty good for this topic at hand :D. I haven't seen enough clips (or read enough literature) on Wilt the Silt, so I can't say, but some of you guys can elaborate on the legitimacy of that article :D
The article obviously isn't without bias, but it does give a different perspective on Wilt's game. I don't necessarily agree with it, but it's an interesting read nonetheless.

I think Wilt is a more natural rebounder than he is a scorer. And as dominant as he was on offense, his playoff scoring average and shooting % aren't better than those of the likes of Shaq and Hakeem despite the faster pace/weaker competition.

[Maniak]

I read pretty much all of it.

Wilt is the 2nd best ever, alongside Jordan.

Thats a great post, Abe.

[supersmashbros]

I read pretty much all of it.

Wilt is the 2nd best ever, alongside Jordan.

Thats a great post, Abe.
Read what? His post or a link he posted?

[indiefan23]

Exactly...

Wilt would go 22/12/2 and make the all NBA team...nothing more nothing less.

People need to look up his game tape. He played against 6'8'' nonathletic centers who were as skinny as Kevin Durant.

He also didn't have the assortment of post moves a la Hakeem, KAJ...

He dominated players by backing them down and pulling off fingerrolls on them...not much different than what Dwight does today.

Or... Wilt would ride the pine because not knowing how to box out on foul shots and with no experience playing players of his own size/quickness he becomes a foul machine.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Or... Wilt would ride the pine because not knowing how to box out on foul shots and with no experience playing players of his own size/quickness he becomes a foul machine.
There are current players with the size/quickness of Wilt? :oldlol:
Wilt did not know how to box out?
You assume they would play any modern team without at least viewing several modern games and scouting, as EVERY team does?

[Abraham Lincoln]

Jordan had just as much impact especially career wise. He brought some absoulutely horrific teams into the playoffs, and won six rings in a decade, the only other player who has accomplished this sort of thing is Bill Russell. Though he wasn't as offensively dominant he did what Jordan did, but on the defensive side. Wilt would average 35-15 today, on 48% shooting, (just guessing) and Jordan would most likely average 40-15-11 in his prime when wilt played, so who would you rather have?
Part of this is luck & franchise stability. Starting a stable franchise with Wilt psychologically on board and coach Alex Hannum, Wilt would be the proper choice over anybody in league history. Otherwise, Wilt would still be the choice over Jordan as a player to build around. Tis much easier to build around Chamberlain than is Jordan. Despite his spectacular play, a team built around the guard position is not preferable over the center position. A center has to be the most important player or co-MVP of every game, due to so much depending on him. Jordan was superior in the clutch aspect, but there have been certain games, series, and even stretches of games where Grant, Cartwright, Rodman, & Pippen have been as important or even moreso to the team's winning due to various matchups, mismatches, roles filled on said team, and defensive play making as well as offensive play making. The great center like Russell, Chamberlain, Jabbar, or O'Neal within his role and area in the paint is a matchup nightmare in every way imaginable, as being the conventional method of ball. Johnson's Lakers, Bird's Celtics, or Jordan's Bulls indeed were supremely balanced powerful teams with players that knew and executed their proper roles to perfection. However, the Big O was no worse than any of those three at his peak, yet did not win in the era dominated by the big man.

[Dresta]

Boring... If Wilt was so great and held back by his teams, then why did he lose to the Celtics in 69, when he had the superior team by far.

[PistonsFan#21]

Anyone who actually believes that Wilt has a 48 inch vertical is dumb. Abe do you even realise what 48 inch vertical is? No one in NBA history had such a high vert.

[Duncan21formvp]

Wilt averaged 11.7 ppg in the finals one year and never in his career averaged 30 ppg in the finals despite doing so for his career. I would never want to build my team around a loser like that who also quit in game 7 of the NBA finals in 1969 when down by 9 points in the 4th quarter.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

wilt is not the best player of all time but him and kareem are 1a 1b. it can go either way.

[madmax]

Nope, Wilt probably was the most dominant individual player, but as far as winning goes, Kareem and Russell are unmatched here...For me Kareem is the GOAT and Russell comes close second.

[HBKMGa]

#2

[globarticles]

too many myths, wilts like chuck norris and bruce lee.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Boring... If Wilt was so great and held back by his teams, then why did he lose to the Celtics in 69, when he had the superior team by far.
Coach intentionally kept him out of the game for much of the 4th quarter, despite Russell playing with 5 fouls and sagging off Wilt. Personal grudges going between the two back and forth all year long, in the end only benefitting Russell & the Celtics. Not to neglect the arrogance of the Lakers owner Jack Kent Cooke already planning a celebration prior to Game 7, deeply angering Jerry West & motivating Russell & Sam Jones to win the last game of their careers.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Wilt averaged 11.7 ppg in the finals one year and never in his career averaged 30 ppg in the finals despite doing so for his career. I would never want to build my team around a loser like that who also quit in game 7 of the NBA finals in 1969 when down by 9 points in the 4th quarter.
Is this JordansBulls? :lol The 1969 Game 7 debacle has been explained above, & despite being the top scorer in the history of professional basketball, that was not the strongest point of Chamberlain's game. Rebounding and interior defense was, as evidenced by his play under Alex Hannum.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Nope, Wilt probably was the most dominant individual player, but as far as winning goes, Kareem and Russell are unmatched here...For me Kareem is the GOAT and Russell comes close second.
Why Jabbar over Russell?

[madmax]

Why Jabbar over Russell?

because he was superior indivudual player, as evidenced by many NBA records. He was a winner on every level in basketball, had the best longevity and played in stronger era of basketball as well.

[gotbacon23]

read bill simmons book- the chapter on why bill russell >>> wilt chamberlian. he prevents a pretty compelling arguement.

[1987_Lakers]

Is this JordansBulls? :lol The 1969 Game 7 debacle has been explained above, & despite being the top scorer in the history of professional basketball, that was not the strongest point of Chamberlain's game. Rebounding and interior defense was, as evidenced by his play under Alex Hannum.

Do you post on realgm?

[indiefan23]

Why he's not

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05/nba-fan-evolution-part-1-fan-eras.html

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05/nba-fan-evolution-part-2-fan-evolves.html

players who don't box out sit on the bench today. ;)

Seriously though, Wilt padded his stats and it cost his team games. Never fouling out, once? What a crap record. Wilt was legendary for totally backing off defensively once he got 5 fouls.

Like is said in the article, most people who make ludicrous claims like Abe's here formed their opinions over decades where they only saw the games they remember and talk about once... when they happened. The 20 years between 1965 and 1985 is a pretty freaking huge gap to be evaluating Wilt vs Hakeem and with 0 basis but those memories, the past gets elevated. Gradual evolution is hard to notice, thats why it's called evolution. Watch the videos and see how ridiculous the gap between play is. At the end of the first video, Cousey even agrees. Anyway...

[G.O.A.T]

Why he's not

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05/nba-fan-evolution-part-1-fan-eras.html

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05/nba-fan-evolution-part-2-fan-evolves.html

players who don't box out sit on the bench today. ;)

Seriously though, Wilt padded his stats and it cost his team games. Never fouling out, once? What a crap record. Wilt was legendary for totally backing off defensively once he got 5 fouls.

Like is said in the article, most people who make ludicrous claims like Abe's here formed their opinions over decades where they only saw the games they remember and talk about once... when they happened. The 20 years between 1965 and 1985 is a pretty freaking huge gap to be evaluating Wilt vs Hakeem and with 0 basis but those memories, the past gets elevated. Gradual evolution is hard to notice, thats why it's called evolution. Watch the videos and see how ridiculous the gap between play is. At the end of the first video, Cousey even agrees. Anyway...

Your holding players to a standard that didn't exist yet.

Also very few players box out in the NBA, (and there is no "e" in Cousy) the but players and the game have evolved. Players are faster, stronger and bigger because of advancement's in nutrition and training. Players drill more and are evaluated more thoroughly from a young age, play more games against better competition; that doesn't mean it's better, that part is subjective and it's all irrelevant when determining an individuals greatness and place in history.

Napoleon's armies would be wiped out by any modern nation's most rag tag platoon, but that's not the point is it?

[indiefan23]

Your holding players to a standard that didn't exist yet.

I'm not, the nature of an 'all time' list holds players against 'all time' standards. The person who's doing that is the OP in stating that Wilt was the top player against 'all' standards. I'm not knocking Wilt, but more pointing out this total delusion.


Also very few players box out in the NBA

Uh, there's very few players who don't, you mean. You don't box out on free throws my friend, and you're going to sit on the bench. If you're a big, you're going to suck, because you won't get any rebounds. Its that simple.


(and there is no "e" in Cousy)

Hmm... Cousey... yep, there is when I spell it. :)


the but players and the game have evolved. Players are faster, stronger and bigger because of advancement's in nutrition and training. Players drill more and are evaluated more thoroughly from a young age, play more games against better competition; that doesn't mean it's better, that part is subjective and it's all irrelevant when determining an individuals greatness and place in history.

Why? I played basketball too... Michael Jordan was better then me because he excelled at every single thing you listed which resulted in him being a better player and athlete. If we remove all the subjective factors that separate athletes from each other, then whats the point of comparison about? Its makes your discussion meaningless because the only thing separating Wilt from other players in the 60's are all those things too. Why is the same thing that separates Wilt from the 60's bench guys not valid when comparing to a modern player?

And you said their place in 'history'... that's key isn't it? No one doubts Wilt's place in history as one of the best ballers of the 60's and early 70's, it's rock solid. But when you apply the 'all time' modifier, its no longer about their place in history. All Time removes history from the equation. The conversation you seem to be having is "Which player in history was the most fortunate", not who was the best athlete.


Napoleon's armies would be wiped out by any modern nation's most rag tag platoon, but that's not the point is it?

Yes, it is the point. What is the top army of all time. What do armies do? They kill stuff. So the top army easily would be the one's who could kill the best, thus, Napolean's armies are no where near the top armies of all time, because they weren't as good at killing stuff as the crappiest armies of today. They were the top armies of 'their' time. The obviousness of all this literally drips from the words being typed.

Likewise, 1920's ballers are not the best of all time because they dominated their time. Do you realize how much of an oxymoron that is? To be the all time best, you have to do whatever it is you do better then everyone before, and after you, otherwise, u just ain't it.

[Abraham Lincoln]

Do you post on realgm?
Browse, however it does speak volumes about the order on this site when members from other boards use this one exclusively as a troll haven.

[juju151111]

Why he's not

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05/nba-fan-evolution-part-1-fan-eras.html

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05/nba-fan-evolution-part-2-fan-evolves.html

players who don't box out sit on the bench today. ;)

Seriously though, Wilt padded his stats and it cost his team games. Never fouling out, once? What a crap record. Wilt was legendary for totally backing off defensively once he got 5 fouls.

Like is said in the article, most people who make ludicrous claims like Abe's here formed their opinions over decades where they only saw the games they remember and talk about once... when they happened. The 20 years between 1965 and 1985 is a pretty freaking huge gap to be evaluating Wilt vs Hakeem and with 0 basis but those memories, the past gets elevated. Gradual evolution is hard to notice, thats why it's called evolution. Watch the videos and see how ridiculous the gap between play is. At the end of the first video, Cousey even agrees. Anyway...
Good post, I respect players for wat they did, but i have nba tv and when they show the gms i go WTH?? These guys are moving in slow motion. Just look at Baylors 61 pt gm in the nba finals. he moving like he is shaq at the SF position.

[Duncan21formvp]

Is this JordansBulls? :lol The 1969 Game 7 debacle has been explained above, & despite being the top scorer in the history of professional basketball, that was not the strongest point of Chamberlain's game. Rebounding and interior defense was, as evidenced by his play under Alex Hannum.


http://webuns.chez-alice.fr/finals/1969.htm

The Lakers were heavily favored to win the 1969 NBA Finals against the old, battered Celtics, but then Chamberlain became the victim of one of the most controversial coaching decisions in NBA history. In Game 7, Wilt hurt his leg with six minutes left to play, with the Lakers trailing by nine points. The Celtics won, 108-106. When Chamberlain had asked out of the game, the Lakers had been trailing by nine points, but then mounted a comeback to pull within one by the time he asked back in; this caused some to assume that Chamberlain had not really been injured, but instead had given up and "copped out" of the game when it looked as though the Lakers would lose. Because of this, some branded him a scapegoat and a quitter. Even Bill Russell ridiculed him, which almost caused Chamberlain to end their friendship..


In 1970, the acquisition of the sharpshooting guard Gail Goodrich helped with the Lakers' offensive firepower with the loss of Baylor. In the NBA Finals, the Lakers were matched up against the New York Knicks, one of the best defensive teams of the post-Russell-Celtics era. Both teams fought a hard, grueling series, but in Game 5, Chamberlain's opposing center Willis Reed suffered a serious thigh injury. The Knicks won that game, but they were demolished in Game 6 with Chamberlain's strong offense, and they looked doomed in Game 7 without their starting center. However, Reed limped onto the court, won the opening tip-off against Chamberlain, and scored the first four points, inspiring his team to one of the most famous playoff upsets of all time. Although Reed was able to play only a fraction of the game, and could hardly move when he did play, Chamberlain still scored only 21 points (his season average had been 27.3) on only 16 shots, quite few in a Game 7. Further, he shot an abysmal 1-of-11 from the foul line, making the game perhaps his greatest on-court failure.

1-11 from the foul in Game 7 of the NBA Finals and this is supposed to be the GOAT?

[robertshaw_1]

Wilt's selfishness ruined his chance to be the best of all time. In his first 7 seasons he was content with putting up a ridiculous amount of shot attempts and not winning much. As a result he had 7 scoring titles, but only 1 50 win season and 1 finals appearance. By the time he changed his style in 1968 he was over 30 years old, but the results speak for themselves. Wilt's 76ers won 68 games and a championship team. Wilt also showed that he was one of the best passing big men to ever play the game. They rightfully went down in history as one of the greatest teams in NBA history. But it made you wonder how good he could have been had he played unselfish his whole career. The next season while he didn't win a championship, he did lead his team to 62 wins again. But once again Wilt's selfishness came back into play. He passed up shots, even some that he shouldn't have to prove he could lead the league in assists.

That was Wilt's last season in Philly and then he went to Los Angeles where Wilt did continue to play unselfishly. He didn't score much, but he played like a bigger, stronger, version of Bill Russell who could score when he wanted. The result was another one of the all time great teams. The 1972 Lakers won 69 games, a record 33 games in a row and of course a championship The following year the Lakers won 60 games again, but lost in the finals.

So despite the numbers, Wilt wasn't playing up to his true potential as a basketball player early in his career. He always had the ability to make everyone else better, but he didn't realize it or didn't care until the last half of his career. If he always played like he did in the last half of his career then he may have challenged Bill Russell's Celtics for a lot more championships.

The greatest center ever is Kareem because his longevity is unmatched, his prime is comparable to Wilt's and Shaq's and his team success beats either of theirs. There's a reason why Kareem was one of only 4 players to win a scoring title and championship in the same season.

The second greatest center ever is none other than Shaquille O'Neal because he dominated the game like only Michael Jordan has in his prime, he has as many rings as Hakeem and Wilt combined, his finals performances are greater than any center and he's still going strong at 37. Not to mention he's also one of just 4 players to win a scoring title and championship in the same season(Jordan, Mikan and Kareem are the others).

Wilt is the 3rd greatest of all time.

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

[dnyk1337]

GOAT? Nobody is bigger than the game.

[Chitownkiddd33]

http://webuns.chez-alice.fr/finals/1969.htm

The Lakers were heavily favored to win the 1969 NBA Finals against the old, battered Celtics, but then Chamberlain became the victim of one of the most controversial coaching decisions in NBA history. In Game 7, Wilt hurt his leg with six minutes left to play, with the Lakers trailing by nine points. The Celtics won, 108-106. When Chamberlain had asked out of the game, the Lakers had been trailing by nine points, but then mounted a comeback to pull within one by the time he asked back in; this caused some to assume that Chamberlain had not really been injured, but instead had given up and "copped out" of the game when it looked as though the Lakers would lose. Because of this, some branded him a scapegoat and a quitter. Even Bill Russell ridiculed him, which almost caused Chamberlain to end their friendship..


In 1970, the acquisition of the sharpshooting guard Gail Goodrich helped with the Lakers' offensive firepower with the loss of Baylor. In the NBA Finals, the Lakers were matched up against the New York Knicks, one of the best defensive teams of the post-Russell-Celtics era. Both teams fought a hard, grueling series, but in Game 5, Chamberlain's opposing center Willis Reed suffered a serious thigh injury. The Knicks won that game, but they were demolished in Game 6 with Chamberlain's strong offense, and they looked doomed in Game 7 without their starting center. However, Reed limped onto the court, won the opening tip-off against Chamberlain, and scored the first four points, inspiring his team to one of the most famous playoff upsets of all time. Although Reed was able to play only a fraction of the game, and could hardly move when he did play, Chamberlain still scored only 21 points (his season average had been 27.3) on only 16 shots, quite few in a Game 7. Further, he shot an abysmal 1-of-11 from the foul line, making the game perhaps his greatest on-court failure.

1-11 from the foul in Game 7 of the NBA Finals and this is supposed to be the GOAT?


:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[magnax1]

The reason Wilt isn't the greatest ever is because he never stepped up his game, and winning wasn't really a huge priority to him. If he wanted to win as much as most superstars, he would've easily been the greatest ever, if he didn't fall apart in the clutch, he would've easily been the greatest ever, but both Jordan and Kareem did the opposite, and are significantly better than Wilt.

[indiefan23]

Originally Posted by indiefan23
Why he's not

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05...-fan-eras.html

http://www.fullcourtpest.com/2009/05...n-evolves.html

players who don't box out sit on the bench today. ;)

Seriously though, Wilt padded his stats and it cost his team games. Never fouling out, once? What a crap record. Wilt was legendary for totally backing off defensively once he got 5 fouls.

Like is said in the article, most people who make ludicrous claims like Abe's here formed their opinions over decades where they only saw the games they remember and talk about once... when they happened. The 20 years between 1965 and 1985 is a pretty freaking huge gap to be evaluating Wilt vs Hakeem and with 0 basis but those memories, the past gets elevated. Gradual evolution is hard to notice, thats why it's called evolution. Watch the videos and see how ridiculous the gap between play is. At the end of the first video, Cousey even agrees. Anyway...


Good post, I respect players for wat they did, but i have nba tv and when they show the gms i go WTH?? These guys are moving in slow motion. Just look at Baylors 61 pt gm in the nba finals. he moving like he is shaq at the SF position.

Hey, thanks! :) That 61 point game is really the most striking and damning video I can think of. Its legendary, but the D he was facing, in the nba finals... there are plenty of high school teams that defend with more tenacity then the 60's Celtics, I'm sorry to say, and there are plenty of HS players who, fresh out of modern HS, would have become the GOAT had they went back and played vs those teams and those defenses.

Again, the CousEy quote at the end of the Baylor video sums it all up:

"Elgin Baylor was really the first guy who couldn't be stopped, no matter the defensive pressure, he was going to get his points. Now there are a lot of guys like that because the offensive skills over the last 20 years have gone through the ceiling in basketball."

So 20 years, Bob was saying that in the very early 80's, before Jordan and before Magic/Bird peaked. So since CousEy said this, skills have gone through the ceiling all over again, many times over. There's really no leg to stand on in this argument. Skill has gone through the roof in every regard and its not even close. Its difficult to even make a case players from this era could start (almost no one), much mess make an NBA roster today, let alone be the best players of all time.

[SkyR#1fanCapCou]

He's not. His stats and results plummet when the playoffs begin. He "Wilts" in the bigger games. Guys like Jordan and Kareem won much more.

[OneMoreSucka]

read bill simmons book- the chapter on why bill russell >>> wilt chamberlian. he prevents a pretty compelling arguement.
This. /thread

[Abraham Lincoln]

because he was superior indivudual player, as evidenced by many NBA records. He was a winner on every level in basketball, had the best longevity and played in stronger era of basketball as well.
Russell also led USF to 2 consecutive world champsionships, winning 55 consecutive in the process all shilst being a subjective victim of racism off the court. He, like Chamberlain, was also a multisport athlete in college running track & field as well. Longevity means so much when one is pacing himself, for Wilt Chamberlain played the equivalent of 18 NBA seasons when his minutes per game are converted to Jabbar's. And he was inarguably played more physically by opponents, in the words of Tom Heinsohn,"People now talk about hard fouls, half the fouls against him were hard fouls."

Jabbar no doubt has the top overall basketball resume, but not to believe he was any better than a peaked Russell, Chamberlain, or O'Neal. And the 1960's was not weaker than the dilluted 1970's NBA.

[Abraham Lincoln]

read bill simmons book- the chapter on why bill russell >>> wilt chamberlian. he prevents a pretty compelling arguement.
Nothing stated there by that biased writer that cannot be easily disputed. He has taken advantage of the lack of knowledge amidst the modern fan & used their misguided creedence to direct them in line with his own creedence.

[Abraham Lincoln]

http://webuns.chez-alice.fr/finals/1969.htm

The Lakers were heavily favored to win the 1969 NBA Finals against the old, battered Celtics, but then Chamberlain became the victim of one of the most controversial coaching decisions in NBA history. In Game 7, Wilt hurt his leg with six minutes left to play, with the Lakers trailing by nine points. The Celtics won, 108-106. When Chamberlain had asked out of the game, the Lakers had been trailing by nine points, but then mounted a comeback to pull within one by the time he asked back in; this caused some to assume that Chamberlain had not really been injured, but instead had given up and "copped out" of the game when it looked as though the Lakers would lose. Because of this, some branded him a scapegoat and a quitter. Even Bill Russell ridiculed him, which almost caused Chamberlain to end their friendship..


In 1970, the acquisition of the sharpshooting guard Gail Goodrich helped with the Lakers' offensive firepower with the loss of Baylor. In the NBA Finals, the Lakers were matched up against the New York Knicks, one of the best defensive teams of the post-Russell-Celtics era. Both teams fought a hard, grueling series, but in Game 5, Chamberlain's opposing center Willis Reed suffered a serious thigh injury. The Knicks won that game, but they were demolished in Game 6 with Chamberlain's strong offense, and they looked doomed in Game 7 without their starting center. However, Reed limped onto the court, won the opening tip-off against Chamberlain, and scored the first four points, inspiring his team to one of the most famous playoff upsets of all time. Although Reed was able to play only a fraction of the game, and could hardly move when he did play, Chamberlain still scored only 21 points (his season average had been 27.3) on only 16 shots, quite few in a Game 7. Further, he shot an abysmal 1-of-11 from the foul line, making the game perhaps his greatest on-court failure.

1-11 from the foul in Game 7 of the NBA Finals and this is supposed to be the GOAT?
You won't mention Elgin Baylor's horrifc series as well? Plus the fact that Chamberlain had come off a torn knee tendon injury. And as for 1969, it has been explained earlier in the thread. He asked back in, and the coach refused soley due to personal feelings.

[Quizno]

do you ever get tired of arguing the same exact thing to the same exact people every single day?

[Abraham Lincoln]

The reason Wilt isn't the greatest ever is because he never stepped up his game, and winning wasn't really a huge priority to him. If he wanted to win as much as most superstars, he would've easily been the greatest ever, if he didn't fall apart in the clutch, he would've easily been the greatest ever, but both Jordan and Kareem did the opposite, and are significantly better than Wilt.
:roll:

Wilt's ppg may have gone down, but that only increased his overall performance and contributions. As said earlier, he was a better rebounder and interior defender than he was a scorer. When Wilt did it he was "choking", but Kareem "didn't have the teammates."



"They gave me a chance to run a lot, and I really liked running. I came into the NBA as a defensive player. I used to like to go up and grab balls in the air. Everyone was afraid of my defensive game more so than my scoring game. Like it is today, and always will be... whomever can hit the most home runs, has the highest batting average, or can score the most points gets the headlines. Defense was secondary in the minds of the press. Many of the people came out to watch the score. I really enjoyed playing defense more. Scoring was a secondary thing, but it was also very natural to me.

I look back at my career...and there were five 7th games in playoff series. Five times I lost, four of them by a total of nine points. Now think about that. Nine points going the other way, and I might have had four or five more championship rings. So I sometimes get a little frustrated when I hear people talk about, "Yeah, well you only won two." I could have won seven, but I've been the same player. When (John) Paxson goes out and shoots a 3-point shot that wins the game for Chicago (in 1993), no one takes anything away from Jordan because he just won the championship. But if Paxson missed that shot, they would have lost that championship. Well, that has happened to me five times... and that's frustrating. You know you're playing as well as those guys who won. I remember one series exactly: I scored the last ten points, we were behind, within one, with a few seconds to go. And one of the other guys on my team threw the ball inbounds and its the famous, "Havlicek stole the ball!" It was just one of those things that happened. Ball slips out of his hand, he throws it right to Havlicek, and we lose a game that we could have won. It was the seventh game so you know that you had the ability, but the end result was that we lost. And that's the way it goes.

The worst was in 1968 when I was playing with the 76ers and we lost to the Celtics in the famous 7th game and they blamed me for not shooting the ball because I only took two shots in the second half. Well, during those years, I was passing off a lot. I won the assist title. The Celtics were smart, they put all four guys on me and let the rest of the guys shoot. Billy Cunningham, Hal Greer, Chet Walker and Wali Jones -- all fantastic shots -- had a bad, bad day. 8-for-24, 8-for-25 and 8-for-22 and I'm giving them the ball. So when the game is over people say, "Why didn't you shoot, Wilt?" Well, I got four guys on me and here are four of the best shooters in NBA history -- we had just won 62 games that year -- but they were missing that night. I was accused of not doing my job, not putting the ball in the basket, even though I had 38 rebounds, 15 blocked shots and had scored twenty-something points in the first half. But because I only took two shots in the second half, I get blamed. I think that sometimes that's a little bit unfair."


Wilt was no more selfish than Kareem or Jordan have ever been, but he was rather misguided. Jordan & Kareem had numerous losing seasons in the playoffs. What I am saying is that relative to perception and talent, he was inarguably the biggest underachiever the sport has ever seen. At the same time he is still arguably the top player to ever play the game at his absolute peak in the spring of 1967.

[Abraham Lincoln]

do you ever get tired of arguing the same exact thing to the same exact people every single day?
I dare you respond to your fellow Kobe fans spewing nonsense in the Kareem thread. Just one time.

[Quizno]

I dare you respond to your fellow Kobe fans spewing nonsense in the Kareem thread. Just one time.
what Kareem thread?

[Quizno]

i personally think anybody who spends such a great deal of time arguing over anything related to basketball, be it that kobe is the best shooting guard of all time or that wilt is the best basketball player of all time is simply wasting time that could be spent differently. you've been arguing the same point for at least 6 months now, and surely you've realized that you're not going to change anybody's opinion, right?

i guess if you like arguing, then by all means, feel free to continue. it doesn't really bother me, i can just ignore the thread if i want to. i'm not entirely sure why i even posted in this one or am responding right now, but i do wonder if you're ever going to realize that you're never going to change anybody's opinions considering the majority of the posters on the NBA forum already have preconceived ideas that they have no intention on ever changing.

anyway, you are, of course, entitled to your opinion. continue if you're entertained :cheers:

[AND1CROSSED]

very nice article thx

[Duncan21formvp]

You won't mention Elgin Baylor's horrifc series as well? Plus the fact that Chamberlain had come off a torn knee tendon injury. And as for 1969, it has been explained earlier in the thread. He asked back in, and the coach refused soley due to personal feelings.


http://webuns.chez-alice.fr/finals/1969.htm

The Lakers were heavily favored to win the 1969 NBA Finals against the old, battered Celtics, but then Chamberlain became the victim of one of the most controversial coaching decisions in NBA history. In Game 7, Wilt hurt his leg with six minutes left to play, with the Lakers trailing by nine points. The Celtics won, 108-106. When Chamberlain had asked out of the game, the Lakers had been trailing by nine points, but then mounted a comeback to pull within one by the time he asked back in; this caused some to assume that Chamberlain had not really been injured, but instead had given up and "copped out" of the game when it looked as though the Lakers would lose. Because of this, some branded him a scapegoat and a quitter. Even Bill Russell ridiculed him, which almost caused Chamberlain to end their friendship..

He quit.

[indiefan23]

Nothing stated there by that biased writer that cannot be easily disputed. He has taken advantage of the lack of knowledge amidst the modern fan & used their misguided creedence to direct them in line with his own creedence.

Heh, tell me, exactly what part of 'memories' of listening to games on the radio from 40 years ago count as 'knowledge'? ;0 An older fan does not know more about hoop simply because they fondly remember their dad taking them to the game a few times when they were 10 years old. The reality is that older fans have the exact same material to base opinions on that modern fans do except in many cases it's influenced by emotions carried over from the time.

You remind me of someone who's favorite movie of all time is an 80's blockbuster, but only saw it in the theater and hasn't realized how dated it is yet.

[G.O.A.T]

Heh, tell me, exactly what part of 'memories' of listening to games on the radio from 40 years ago count as 'knowledge'? ;0 An older fan does not know more about hoop simply because they fondly remember their dad taking them to the game a few times when they were 10 years old. The reality is that older fans have the exact same material to base opinions on that modern fans do except in many cases it's influenced by emotions carried over from the time.


Older or younger any open minded fan knows more than you.

And of course first hand accounts and actual memories of the moment in time are more significant than subjective evaluations based on stats.

[Roundball_Rock]

Wilt's selfishness ruined his chance to be the best of all time. In his first 7 seasons he was content with putting up a ridiculous amount of shot attempts and not winning much. As a result he had 7 scoring titles, but only 1 50 win season and 1 finals appearance. By the time he changed his style in 1968 he was over 30 years old, but the results speak for themselves. Wilt's 76ers won 68 games and a championship team. Wilt also showed that he was one of the best passing big men to ever play the game. They rightfully went down in history as one of the greatest teams in NBA history. But it made you wonder how good he could have been had he played unselfish his whole career. The next season while he didn't win a championship, he did lead his team to 62 wins again. But once again Wilt's selfishness came back into play. He passed up shots, even some that he shouldn't have to prove he could lead the league in assists.

That was Wilt's last season in Philly and then he went to Los Angeles where Wilt did continue to play unselfishly. He didn't score much, but he played like a bigger, stronger, version of Bill Russell who could score when he wanted. The result was another one of the all time great teams. The 1972 Lakers won 69 games, a record 33 games in a row and of course a championship The following year the Lakers won 60 games again, but lost in the finals.

So despite the numbers, Wilt wasn't playing up to his true potential as a basketball player early in his career. He always had the ability to make everyone else better, but he didn't realize it or didn't care until the last half of his career. If he always played like he did in the last half of his career then he may have challenged Bill Russell's Celtics for a lot more championships.

The greatest center ever is Kareem because his longevity is unmatched, his prime is comparable to Wilt's and Shaq's and his team success beats either of theirs. There's a reason why Kareem was one of only 4 players to win a scoring title and championship in the same season.

The second greatest center ever is none other than Shaquille O'Neal because he dominated the game like only Michael Jordan has in his prime, he has as many rings as Hakeem and Wilt combined, his finals performances are greater than any center and he's still going strong at 37. Not to mention he's also one of just 4 players to win a scoring title and championship in the same season(Jordan, Mikan and Kareem are the others).

Wilt is the 3rd greatest of all time.

:applause:

I am glad this thread was revived. There needs to be a discussion of the GOAT instead of people just accepting MJ as the GOAT without any questions. Every sport has a GOAT discussion--except basketball and hockey. In hockey that is because Gretzky is a hockey combination of Wilt's stats, Russell's winning, Kareem's longevity, and Jordan's popular appeal. Every criteria points to Gretzky as the GOAT. Basketball, though, is like every other sport where the GOAT title is very debatable. It is odd that basketball discussion forums discuss everything other than who the greatest basketball player ever was. One may still believe MJ is the GOAT but the notion that no one else has a case over him is ridiculous.

[Abraham Lincoln]

:applause:

I am glad this thread was revived. There needs to be a discussion of the GOAT instead of people just accepting MJ as the GOAT without any questions. Every sport has a GOAT discussion--except basketball and hockey. In hockey that is because Gretzky is a hockey combination of Wilt's stats, Russell's winning, Kareem's longevity, and Jordan's popular appeal. Every criteria points to Gretzky as the GOAT. Basketball, though, is like every other sport where the GOAT title is very debatable. It is odd that basketball discussion forums discuss everything other than who the greatest basketball player ever was. One may still believe MJ is the GOAT but the notion that no one else has a case over him is ridiculous.


Alas, tis more to Chamberlain than mere "stats" as one can conclude his profund effect on the greatest team in the history of professional basketball, the 1966-67 Philadelphia 76ers.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpiRo8-aKJc

[Big#50]

Was wilt gay?

[Roundball_Rock]

True, but his case for GOAT is heavily stats based for that is where he has no peer (unless you adjust for pace). 67' in some ways hurts him. If he played unselfishly like he did that year for his entire career he would have won far more championships.

[Abraham Lincoln]

True, but his case for GOAT is heavily stats based for that is where he has no peer (unless you adjust for pace). 67' in some ways hurts him. If he played unselfishly like he did that year for his entire career he would have won far more championships.
In accordance to the wise man's creedence, a peaked '67 Chamberlain was the top player in the history of the sport. No other legend peak indisputably can be declared superior. Longevity & accolades can be overvalued for the same reason they are undervalued. Best be to rank the top players as they were in peak form, not to neglect proper due to misfortunes such as Walton & Sabonis.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpiRo8-aKJc

And folk who spread the creedence that he was single coverage all time time, one shall see K.C. attempting a sneak from the blindslide at the 1:20 mark above as well as the sagging & cheating defender at 4:36, easily picked off by Chamberlain with a gorgeous pass to a well cutting Jackson.

Also to note the marvelous shot by Chet Walker at the 1:42 mark, over two of the top defensive men to play the sport being Havlicek & Russell. And the quick release of Hal Greer on the jumpshot at the 2:13 mark.