Who is the greatest offensive center to play the game?

[ThaSwagg3r]

Kareem? Wilt? Shaq? Olajuwon? Who you got? This is just a purely on an offensive standpoint. I think this is pretty tough question. Russell is pretty much out of the picture although he is a lot better offensively than most people give him credit for. He is still not in the level of Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, or Hakeem offensively though.

[1987_Lakers]

Tough question, but I give it to Kareem, he was more skilled than Wilt & Shaq and as good as Hakeem was with all of those moves, he wasn't better offensively than Wilt/Shaq/Kareem.

[DuMa]

Shaq. he had the most efficient, dominant unstoppable move.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I give Kareem the edge over Shaq because he didn't have the free throw shooting problem so he really had no holes in his offensive game. Though Shaq's physical dominance made teams change their gameplan more than any player I've seen, so it's close, but I'll stick with Kareem. Hakeem isn't far behind either, but a little more perimeter-oriented and his go to move was the fadeaway. I also think that he had to work harder for his points, but he was more skilled than any center I can think of, and unstoppable in his prime. Just a bit behind Kareem and Shaq in terms of effectiveness offensively.

[PHILA]

Who else? The main concern is whether his monstrous offensive rebounding edge over the other three C's listed in the OP is enough to compensate for his exceptionally poor foul shooting.



http://i.imgur.com/ybrtR.jpg



Russell & Walton also deserve mention in this thread.

[Scoooter]

Hard to go wrong with any of them, but I think Wilt takes it. He was just a points-scoring machine.

[with malice]

Kareem. He had the most indefensible offensive move.

[Odinn]

1. Kareem
2a. Shaq
2b. Wilt
4. Hakeem
5. DRob
6. Moses
7. Ewing

[Fatal9]

1. KAJ
2. Shaq
3. Hakeem
4. Walton
5. Wilt

[SFMF]

Kareem. I think his skyhook allowed him to score anywhere inside, and I think he was one of the greatest passing big man. I still get a headache understanding his 25.9 PPG .557 FG% 3.5 APG, the playoff numbers when he was 38 . He had a fantastic FT% as a big man as well. His only problem was rebounding, which isn't a big hole when we are talking about offensive game. Shaq was such a dominant monster post player, but his FT% is damaging when we are talking about the greatest offensive center, but you could still make a great case with him.

[D-Wade316]

Kareem. He had the most indefensible offensive move.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYq4CWeWaKg

[Big#50]

Kareem had the sky hook.
Shaq had the power.
Hakeem had the fade away and pump fakes/post moves. He could take most centers off the dribble as well. Had a great spin move. Good shot as well.
DROB had the speed and face up game. No center could keep him from driving. Had a good jumper.
Duncan had post moves, a good shot from behind the free throw line, the banker, and he was very quick off the dribble. He had that spin move.
Nobody can touch these five.

[Sakkreth]

Kareem had the sky hook.
Shaq had the power.
Hakeem had the fade away and pump fakes/post moves. He could take most centers off the dribble as well. Had a great spin move. Good shot as well.
DROB had the speed and face up game. No center could keep him from driving. Had a good jumper.
Duncan had post moves, a good shot from behind the free throw line, the banker, and he was very quick off the dribble. He had that spin move.
Nobody can touch these five.

Well thread title says to play the game, I might then say Sabonis, because he had everything, maybe spin moves not that much.

Hook shot ? Check
Power ? Not on Shaq level, but check.
Post moves and fadeaway ? Check
Face up game and speed ? Check
Shooting ? Better than most guards. Had best range than this whole list

Add passing, driving ability etc.

I just touched.

[millwad]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYq4CWeWaKg

Kareem had a whole season where he averaged 40 points on 52% shooting on Wilt. 2 blocks is not changing that..

[D-Wade316]

Kareem had a whole season where he averaged 40 points on 52% shooting on Wilt. 2 blocks is not changing that..
As if Wilt wasn't at the end of his career.:facepalm

[millwad]

As if Wilt wasn't at the end of his career.:facepalm

According to some posters on this site "Kareem got schooled" the same year he averaged 40 points on 52% shooting on Wilt..:facepalm

[SFMF]

As if Wilt wasn't at the end of his career.:facepalm

I'm not sure if the stat is legit, but that's still an embarrassing stat for Wilt.

[D-Wade316]

According to some posters on this site "Kareem got schooled" the same year he averaged 40 points on 52% shooting on Wilt..:facepalm
As if I take jlauber's words as gospel. No. I don't believe that Kareem got "schooled". Lets get the facts straight, okay? First, Wilt at 34 fought PRIME KAREEM to a standstill. He came from a knee surgery. In the next season, he was never the same offensive player. I don't have full information on Wilt. So that's why I'm leaving this thread to jlauber.

[millwad]

As if I take jlauber's words as gospel. No. I don't believe that Kareem got "schooled". Lets get the facts straight, okay? First, Wilt at 34 fought PRIME KAREEM to a standstill. He came from a knee surgery. In the next season, he was never the same offensive player. I don't have full information on Wilt. So that's why I'm leaving this thread to jlauber.

Well, you are his buttyboy, everyime there's a thread you act like Jlauber's dog who waits for his owner to say something and then you follow him.

I am well aware of Wilt's injury and his age but you posted footage of his later years which is pretty misleading considering that Kareem pretty much did whatever he'd like to do with Wilt at that time..

[millwad]

I'm not sure if the stat is legit, but that's still an embarrassing stat for Wilt.

Of course it's legit, the same year Wilt won his second ring Kareem averaged 40 points on 52% shooting on Wilt during the regular season.

And then when they faced each other in the playoffs Kareem outscored Wilt by 23 points PER GAME and he did it with better FG% as well. He also had more assists and he shot FT's twice as good compared to Wilt in the playoffs but still old farts like Jlauber spam about Wilt "schooling" Kareem that year..:facepalm

[ShaqAttack3234]

5. DRob


DROB had the speed and face up game. No center could keep him from driving. Had a good jumper.


I really don't think that Robinson should be mentioned that high. The biggest issue I've had with his offensive game is his back to the basket game.

While his quickness and jumper made his faceup game very good, and that declined with his ability to run the floor(maybe the best I've seen from a center in that area) and ability to get lobs have to be mentioned, and I'm sure some will point out his regular season numbers....but it's very simple to me. When I watched him, I didn't see a top 5 offensive center of all time, and while my opinion isn't any kind of authority, just look at what happened to those regular season numbers in the playoffs.


As if Wilt wasn't at the end of his career.:facepalm

Not that I feel like arguing about Kareem vs Wilt in '72 right now, but I'm just pointing out that '72 is regarded as one of, if not Wilt's best defensive seasons. So I wouldn't say Wilt was past his prime defensively by that point. That's probably due to him taking a much smaller scoring load and focusing on defense more.

[wally_world]

Mehmet Okur

[Psileas]

1. Wilt
2. Kareem
3. Shaq
4. Hakeem
5. Robinson

[Sarcastic]

Every time I look at the record books, this one name tends to keep popping up...

[PHILA]

First, Wilt at 34 fought PRIME KAREEM to a standstill. He came from a knee surgery. In the next season, he was never the same offensive player.

1971 Highlights:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWRmCBYymM0#t=14m3s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpufnh4fmRk#t=28m16s


1972 Highlights:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpufnh4fmRk#t=32m29s


Based on recaps of 1972 WCF, KAJ outplayed him in games 1, 2, & 4 while Wilt got the better of him in games 3, 5, & 6.


After Gm. 3, 1971:

St. Joseph Gazette - Apr 16, 1971

http://i.imgur.com/p3Ce1.png
http://i.imgur.com/K6VxJ.png



High Above Courtside: The Lost Memoirs of Johnny Most - Mike Carey, Jamie Most

http://i.imgur.com/aN813.png



The Milwaukee Sentinel - Apr 15, 1972

http://i.imgur.com/s4lRB.png


The Bryan Times - Feb 6, 1971

http://i.imgur.com/QSsFH.png





After the '72 WCF:


[I]The Milwaukee Journal - Apr. 24, 1972

Abdul-Jabbar failed to outplay either Nate Thurmond of the Golden State Warriors or Wilt Chamberlain of the Los Angeles Lakers in the playoffs, and his inability to contain Chamberlain finally made the difference in the Laker series that ended in disaster at the Arena Saturday

Matter of Muscle

In the first round series with the Warriors, Abdul-Jabbar outrebounded Thurmond 95-89, but was outscored, 127-114. The Bucks won the series, four games to one.

In the semifinal series with the Lakers, Abdul-Jabbar had a tremendous edge in scoring, 202-67, but was outrebounded, 116-105, and was outmuscled by a greater margin than that. He actually reached the point on occasion where he was intimidated by Chamberlain as he headed toward the basket, and who ever heard of the big Buck being intimidated?

The Lakers eliminated the Bucks in six games, and the turning point occurred, with the series tied 2-2, when Chamberlain took advantage of his tremendous advantage in weight and strength and began pushing Abdul-Jabbar around. Wilt is listed at 275 pounds but probably weighs 290, to Abdul-Jabbar

[with malice]

Every time I look at the record books, this one name tends to keep popping up...
You're quite possibly looking at the wrong records.

[Pointguard]

Wilt - Most resourceful and proven (Kareem barely averaged 10 ppg less than him over their best 7 years, and KAJ is the closest).
Kareem - Unstoppable, agile and complete
Shaq - The bigger unstoppable - Power
Hakeem - Had all the moves, skills and great quickness
Walton - In his prime had a great all around offensive game.

[jlip]

Every time I look at the record books, this one name tends to keep popping up...

This

[Pointguard]

1971 Highlights:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWRmCBYymM0#t=14m3s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpufnh4fmRk#t=28m16s


1972 Highlights:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpufnh4fmRk#t=32m29s


Based on recaps of 1972 WCF, KAJ outplayed him in games 1, 2, & 4 while Wilt got the better of him in games 3, 5, & 6.


After Gm. 3, 1971:

St. Joseph Gazette - Apr 16, 1971

http://i.imgur.com/p3Ce1.png
http://i.imgur.com/K6VxJ.png



High Above Courtside: The Lost Memoirs of Johnny Most - Mike Carey, Jamie Most

http://i.imgur.com/aN813.png



The Milwaukee Sentinel - Apr 15, 1972

http://i.imgur.com/s4lRB.png


The Bryan Times - Feb 6, 1971

http://i.imgur.com/QSsFH.png





After the '72 WCF:


[I]The Milwaukee Journal - Apr. 24, 1972

Abdul-Jabbar failed to outplay either Nate Thurmond of the Golden State Warriors or Wilt Chamberlain of the Los Angeles Lakers in the playoffs, and his inability to contain Chamberlain finally made the difference in the Laker series that ended in disaster at the Arena Saturday

Matter of Muscle


And Wilt was scoring at one/third of what he was at his peak at this time. Kareem was at his peak.

[chips93]

PLAGARISM!

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1132624

id take prime shaq

[Nick Young]

shaq by far

[PHILA]

And Wilt was scoring at one/third of what he was at his peak at this time. Kareem was at his peak.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STrKonJGP-U

I don't know, based on video footage '74 may have been his Bucks peak. What player peaks in their 2nd year? With the Lakers perhaps '76, '77, or '80. But Wilt after his knee injury was not as ideal a defensive man vs. KAJ mainly due his lost mobility. A mid-60's Wilt vs. mid 70's KAJ would be a dream matchup. :applause:

[PHILA]

Sports Illustrated - January 21, 1974 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1142521/index.htm)

The main reason for the Bucks' success has been, of course, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, who is nothing less than the best pro player. Never selfish in the past, Abdul-Jabbar has become even more generous this season, shooting less, scoring fewer points (25.5 ppg, down from 30.2 in 1972-73) and passing off more frequently to cutting teammates from his high vantage point in the low post. When he does fire, he has a wider array of shots at his command. The conventional defense against Abdul-Jabbar has been to block him from curling from the left side of the lane into the middle for his deadly sky hook, thereby forcing him to take turnaround jumpers or to abandon the left post for the right, from which he shoots the hook with less accuracy. In the game at Chicago, the obsolescence of that thinking was clear. Of his nine baskets, Abdul-Jabbar made only one from the left, and that a jumper. He also has added flexibility to his defensive game, wandering farther and more fervently afield to help the Bucks cut their defensive average by almost a point per game. That is no mean feat since Milwaukee was second in the league last season, allowing an average of 99 points.

[jlauber]

McAdoo should be somewhere on these lists.

The man had three straight seasons, in Kareem's prime, in which he finished ahead of him in the scoring race. He had 20+ ft. range and was basically unstoppable in his prime. How many other centers' had three straight 30+ ppg seasons, and in leagues' that averaged 105, 103, and 106 ppg?

[D.J.]

Wilt was the most dominant, but wasn't the most skilled. Kareem was the most skilled. He had a ton of moves in the paint, an unblockable hook shot, and still a good foul shooter. Hakeem was the smoothest and had the most moves in the paint, but he didn't dominate like the others.

[G-train]

I can't see how this is anyone but Wilt Chamberlain.

[Suckafree]

This is basically and A) B) C) or D) question in which nobody is ever going to come to an agreement.

Great question nontheless, personally I'd go with kareem

[ShaqAttack3234]

And Wilt was scoring at one/third of what he was at his peak at this time. Kareem was at his peak.

Kareem himself said that both 1976(at the time) and then 1977 were the best years of his career, and others were also saying that Kareem was better than ever in 1977. And I can see how Kareem was a more complete player in 1977 than the early 70's.

And Wilt not being at his peak offensively made him able to focus more on defense and defending Kareem, so I'm not sure that 60's Wilt would've done a better job than '72 Wilt did.



Sports Illustrated - January 21, 1974 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1142521/index.htm)

The main reason for the Bucks' success has been, of course, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, who is nothing less than the best pro player. Never selfish in the past, Abdul-Jabbar has become even more generous this season, shooting less, scoring fewer points (25.5 ppg, down from 30.2 in 1972-73) and passing off more frequently to cutting teammates from his high vantage point in the low post. When he does fire, he has a wider array of shots at his command. The conventional defense against Abdul-Jabbar has been to block him from curling from the left side of the lane into the middle for his deadly sky hook, thereby forcing him to take turnaround jumpers or to abandon the left post for the right, from which he shoots the hook with less accuracy. In the game at Chicago, the obsolescence of that thinking was clear. Of his nine baskets, Abdul-Jabbar made only one from the left, and that a jumper. He also has added flexibility to his defensive game, wandering farther and more fervently afield to help the Bucks cut their defensive average by almost a point per game. That is no mean feat since Milwaukee was second in the league last season, allowing an average of 99 points.

Great article. I'd agree that '74 was his best season with Milwaukee. It seems like he was still becoming a better player until peaking in '77.

[RRR3]

I can't see how this is anyone but Wilt Chamberlain.
ISH doesn't like Chamberlain very much.

[Round Mound]

Shaq

If only he Could Shoot FTs. Still the Most Efficient and Difficult to Stop

[G-train]

Wilt averaged 50ppg in one season and led the league in assists in another.
No further analysis required.

[RRR3]

Wilt averaged 50ppg in one season and led the league in assists in another.
No further analysis required.
But...but...but...he was a choking statpadder! Just like...LeBrick James!!!!

[D.J.]

Shaq

If only he Could Shoot FTs. Still the Most Efficient and Difficult to Stop


Kareem did everything Shaq did, plus he made his free throws.

[oolalaa]

Kareem had the sky hook and Shaq had the power.

Hakeem had the low post moves and Wilt was a tower.

Walton was so silky smooth and drob was a coward.

Ewing had his mid range J and Russell tried his best but said screw this i'm taking a shower.

[RRR3]

Kareem had the sky hook and Shaq had the power.

Hakeem had the low post moves and Wilt was a tower.

Walton was so silky smooth and drob was a coward.

Ewing had his mid range J and Russell tried his best but said screw this i'm taking a shower.
:roll: :roll: :roll:
David Robinson went to the Naval academy though, he's probably tougher than you think.

[MichaelCheazley]

Scott pollard was pretty offensive. "Hey kids, DO drugs."



just playing of course

[RRR3]

Scott pollard was pretty offensive. "Hey kids, DO drugs."



just playing of course
:roll:

[Pointguard]

Kareem himself said that both 1976(at the time) and then 1977 were the best years of his career, and others were also saying that Kareem was better than ever in 1977. And I can see how Kareem was a more complete player in 1977 than the early 70's.

And Wilt not being at his peak offensively made him able to focus more on defense and defending Kareem, so I'm not sure that 60's Wilt would've done a better job than '72 Wilt did.


Kareem scored 34.8 ppg 4.6 assist in 1972 vs 26.2 and 3.9 in 1977 (a true ten point disparity) while I believe his wisdom of the game was better and more at a pace where he seemed more in control of all things around him in '77 - the later Kareem would have been easier to guard as he slowed his game down. Chamberlain was way off of his offensive peak and definitely would have scored more in his peak as Kareem's defense in '71 didn't bother him much. In the playoffs he averaged more on Kareem than
he did overall in the regular season.

In '71 Wilt had average for seven years at twice that clip and he once was more than 3 times his clip in '72. Wilt managing to play him to his advantage at this time suggest a huge separation earlier.

[jlip]

Wilt averaged 50ppg in one season and led the league in assists in another.

No further analysis required.

@bolded part...Not mentioned enough in this discussion about offense.

[Round Mound]

Kareem did everything Shaq did, plus he made his free throws.

True but Shaq`s FG% is almost impossible to match also knowingly sor he was doubled and tripled like no player since Wilt.

On Game Flow Shaq is the Best Ever Offensively

Kareem was more Skilled but not more devastating

[with malice]

Shaq's FT%, also devastating.

[pauk]

i gota go with WILT

[Dwade305]

I'll go with YAO

[ShaqAttack3234]

McAdoo should be somewhere on these lists.

The man had three straight seasons, in Kareem's prime, in which he finished ahead of him in the scoring race. He had 20+ ft. range and was basically unstoppable in his prime. How many other centers' had three straight 30+ ppg seasons, and in leagues' that averaged 105, 103, and 106 ppg?

He's impressed me from what I've seen, and granted, more of what I've seen is from his time with the Lakers than his prime. But I did see the 50 point game he had in the '75 playoffs. He seemed to have better perimeter skills than any other big man I've seen from that era. Not just the jump shot(and ability to hit contested shots), but the ability to put the ball on the floor. Though I do think that he benefited more from all of the transition opportunities at the time compared to someone like Kareem.

And he's a player whose numbers dropped immediately after the merger averaging 24 ppg on 46% in 20 games with Buffalo before the trade and then 27 ppg on 53% shooting in 52 games with New York. Granted, it seems like he was in a situation similar to what we saw with Carmelo Anthony this year in that it was inevitable he'd be traded and that was probably a distraction, hence his scoring increase after the trade. And then he was at 26.5 ppg on 52% shooting in a full season with the Knicks in '78 and 27 again on 54% shooting in 40 games before they traded him in '79.

This covers McAdoo at ages 25-27.


Kareem scored 34.8 ppg 4.6 assist in 1972 vs 26.2 and 3.9 in 1977 (a true ten point disparity) while I believe his wisdom of the game was better and more at a pace where he seemed more in control of all things around him in '77 - the later Kareem would have been easier to guard as he slowed his game down.

I disagree 100% with 1977 Kareem being easier to guard. Kareem himself said that he was pretty much played 1 on 1 while in '77 he was constantly doubled and tripled.

That's just one of many factors, partially related to the league evolving as well as having less talent around him in '77 to prevent teams from doubling him compared to his '72 roster.

Kareem was also skinnier and weaker in the early 70's and it seemed like stronger defenders bothered him more than they did later.

There were also far more statistical seasons that would look unusual in todays game pre-merger.

And finally, he played over 44 mpg in '72, but just under 37 mpg in '72.

Just look at how his offensive numbers dropped in what looked like his statistical peak without context('71-'73) compared to '77 when he averaged 35/18/4 on 61% shooting in the '77 playoffs. No way do I believe he was easier to guard in '77 than '72.


Chamberlain was way off of his offensive peak and definitely would have scored more in his peak as Kareem's defense in '71 didn't bother him much. In the playoffs he averaged more on Kareem than
he did overall in the regular season.

I didn't say that Chamberlain wouldn't have played better vs Kareem or scored more in his prime than he did in '72, I was referring to how well he defended him.

[millwad]

True but Shaq`s FG% is almost impossible to match also knowingly sor he was doubled and tripled like no player since Wilt.

On Game Flow Shaq is the Best Ever Offensively

Kareem was more Skilled but not more devastating

Have you ever even seen Wilt play? Are you comparing the amount of times that Shaq got doubled and tripled to Wilt? Wilt barely got doubled team'd..:facepalm

[millwad]

Shaq's FT%, also devastating.

Wilt was even worse than Shaq from the FT-line..

Wilt shooting FT's:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITxDdnzpnU8

[with malice]

Wilt was even worse than Shaq from the FT-line..

Wilt shooting FT's:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITxDdnzpnU8
Ummm... there's a very good reason that Wilt was bad at FTs. And it's definitely not "laziness".

[PHILA]

Ummm... there's a very good reason that Wilt was bad at FTs. And it's definitely not "laziness".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8SDVEHspFs#t=20m53s



The Spokesman-Review - Feb 3, 1999

http://i.imgur.com/bHR0I.png



Daily News of Los Angeles - Nov 21, 1991

Wilt Chamberlain once visited a psychiatrist to help him with his poor foul shooting. "All that happened," said Chamberlain, ''was that after two months, that sucker, the psychiatrist, was a great foul shooter, and there I was, doing my same thing.



Sports Illustrated - October 07, 1974 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1089076/4/index.htm)

Free throws are something I'll always be sorry about. How can you make 80 or 90 of 100 in practice and not be able to make 45% in a game? Even though, I'll bet my clutch free-throw shooting percentage is as high as most. Ike Richman, a friend of mine with the 76er organization, paid for me to talk to a psychiatrist about foul shots. I don't think I'm a schizo. I think I'm fairly stable. But I'd go in there and see this analyst, and come out shooting worse. He talked to me about all the things you would talk about to a disturbed patient. I enjoyed it because I guess we all think we're a little bit of an amateur psychiatrist. I surely do. I wanted to see how the professionals did it. Unfortunately, and not to demean the guy, I don't think he found out a thing about me. I got to psychoanalyzing him. So after about 13 weeks I quit. And now I'm qualified in psychiatry—but still a lousy foul shooter.



http://i.imgur.com/NxYuO.jpg

[jlauber]

Kareem had a whole season where he averaged 40 points on 52% shooting on Wilt. 2 blocks is not changing that..

I was going to let this pure crap go, but I always have this fear that a new reader will come here, and honestly believe the nonsense that you consistently post...

First of all, Chamberlain, at age 35, and on a surgically repaired knee, reduced a statistically PRIME Kareem, who shot .574 in the regular season, to a .457 shooter in the '72 WCF's. AND, over the course of the last four pivotal games of that series (three of them Laker wins), Kareem couldn't hit the ocean from a life-boat, shooting a paltry .414 over that span.

As for those "2 block"...we KNOW that Wilt blocked FIFTEEN skyhooks in THREE games of the '72 WCF's alone. We don't know how many more he blocked in that series, but given the fact that Kareem took close to 100 more shots in the other three games, Wilt probably blocked considerably more.

Furthermore, given the fact that we KNOW that Wilt blocked 15 of Kareem's "unblockable" sky-hooks in THREE games...and given the fact that the two went H2H in 28 career games...well, Wilt probably blocked anywhere from 50 to perhaps a HUNDRED of Kareem's sky-hooks in those games.

We also KNOW that those that actually WATCHED that series, proclaimed Wilt as easily outplaying Kareem.

How about Time Magazine's take?

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,879093,00.html


After leading the Lakers to the best won-lost record (69-13) in N.B.A. history during the regular season, Chamberlain was nothing short of awesome in the playoffs. In the N.B.A.'s western division title series with Milwaukee, he decisively outplayed basketball's newest giant superstar, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, eleven years his junior.

Of course, we also know that Kareem was a career .559 shooter, and yet, in 28 H2H games against Wilt (and 27 of those AFTER Wilt's knee surgery), Kareem only shot .464 against Wilt. And the reality was, Kareem was at his statistical PEAK in the four years in which he played in the same league as Chamberlain. And yet he shot a HUNDRED points LESS than his career average.

Oh, and BTW, we KNOW that a 38 year old Kareem, who could barely jump enough to get six rpg, absolutely CRUSHED a 23 year old Hakeem in the '85-86 season. In FIVE games, Kareem averaged 33 ppg on...get this... .634 shooting. Included in those five games, were TWO in which Kareem POUNDED Hakeem with 40+ games. In fact, in one, Kareem scored 46 points, on 21-30 shooting, in only 37 minutes. The recap blasted the Rocket's coach for allowing a HELPLESS Hakeem, to TRY to guard the WAY-PAST HIS PRIME Kareem, one-on-one. We also KNOW that Kareem dumped ANOTHER 40 point game on Hakeem in the 84-85 season. Unfortunately, we don't have any other numbers from that season, but it is a pretty safe bet that Kareem absolutely torched Hakeem that season. In any case, a Kareem, ages 38 thru 41, and in 22 games against Hakeem, shot a STAGGERING .599 against him. Think about that. A PRIME Kareem, and facing a well-past his prime Wilt shot WAY BELOW his normal career FG%, and yet, a Kareem who was on his last legs, shot WAY OVER his career FG% against a young and healthy Hakeem who would be first team all-defense in '87. Why?

THEN, in Wilt's LAST season, and in six regular season games, he held Kareem to .450 shooting (all while shooting .737 against Kareem.) In fact, he even outscored Kareem in one game, 24-21, all while outshooting Kareem, 10-14 to 10-27. How?

AND, can you imagine what a PRIME Chamberlain, a player who was already the most powerful man in the NBA by the mid-60's, and who leap out of the buliding, and run down the fastest players in the league, AND, who could ROUTINELY throw up 50+ point games (and who had 60+ and 70+ point games against the many of the SAME centers that Kareem faced later on)...can you imagine what THAT Wilt would have bombed Kareem with?

Of course, a Wilt, in his 69-70 season, and BEFORE his knee injury, just murdered Kareem in their one H2H game before that injury. He outscored Kareem, 25-23; he outrebounded Kareem, 25-20; he outassisted Kareem, 5-2; he outblocked Kareem, 3-2; and he outshot Kareem, 9-14 (.643) to 9-21 (.429.)

So, hopefully that will give any new readers here the REAL perspective on the Kareem-Wilt battles.

[jlauber]

Have you ever even seen Wilt play? Are you comparing the amount of times that Shaq got doubled and tripled to Wilt? Wilt barely got doubled team'd..:facepalm

Wilt was SWARMED for much of his career. The CELTICS, with Russell, used a TEAM approach in an attempt to curtail Wilt's dominance. Only a complete idiot, who NEVER witnessed ONE full game in Wilt's career would ever utter that nonsense.

http://www.nba.com/history/legends/wilt-chamberlain/index.html


In Chamberlain's first year, and for several years afterward, opposing teams simply didn't know how to handle him. Tom Heinsohn, the great Celtics forward who later became a coach and broadcaster, said Boston was one of the first clubs to apply a team-defense concept to stop Chamberlain. "We went for his weakness," Heinsohn told the Philadelphia Daily News in 1991, "tried to send him to the foul line, and in doing that he took the most brutal pounding of any player ever. I hear people today talk about hard fouls. Half the fouls against him were hard fouls."



So, perhaps maybe next time you can do a little RESEARCH before you make a ridiculous post.

[with malice]

What is with the use of capitals jlauber?

[jlauber]

Wilt was even worse than Shaq from the FT-line..

Wilt shooting FT's:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITxDdnzpnU8

Hmmm...the SAME Chamberlain who MADE a TON of FT's? How about this...Chamberlain is ranked FOURTEENTH, ALL-TIME, in NBA HISTORY, ...in FTs MADE?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ft_career.html

That is an interesting list, too.

First of all, yes, Kareem made more FTs in his career. BUT, Chamberlain averaged 432 MADE PER SEASON, compared to Kareem's 335.

How about Hakeem? Hakeem played FOUR MORE years longer than Wilt...and yet, Wilt MADE 600 MORE FTs in his career. Hell, Larry Bird and Wilt played in roughly the same number of seasons, and yet, Wilt MADE 2000 (yes, 2000) MORE FTs in his career.

And only Shaq can rival Wilt for the "and-one's"...plays in which Wilt slammed home a hoop, and was awarded a FT on top of it. THEN, Wilt also played in an era of 3-to-make-2's, and 2-to-make-1's, so while Wilt may have shot 67% on a "3-to-make-2", he was in reality, shooting 100%. Same with making 1 of 2 in a penalty situation. So, CLEARLY, even Wilt's TRUE FG% numbers were distorted.

How about this FACT. Guess who holds the record for most FT's MADE on one game? Yes, it is Chamberlain, going 28-32 in the process. Or, how about this FACT? Chamberlain's 835 MADE FT's in the 61-62 season, is SECOND, ALL-TIME, to Jerry West's 840 in '66. No one else, including Jordan, ever had a season like that.

And Wilt POUNDED opposing teams, too. He not only got his opposing center in foul trouble, he got ENTIRE TEAMS in foul trouble. And because of Wilt, his TEAMMATES got to the line, sooner, and MADE more FTs. Wilt's TEAMS were always near the VERY TOP of the league, year-after-year, in FTAs. They led the league several times, and his '67 76ers just annihilated the NBA in that category. AND, how about this interesting stat? Chamberlain's 68-69 Lakers LED the NBA in FTAs. Then, Wilt was injured early in the 69-70 season, and missed 72 games. How did LA do in FTAs that season? They came in ELEVENTH...in a 14 team league.

So, Dickwad makes a fool of himself...yet again.

[with malice]

Calling someone names only detracts from what you have to say.

Made FTs is irrelevant, or at best only part of the story. How many times attempted and FT% is far more relevant, and a far better indicator of what was happening.

[jlauber]

Calling someone names only detracts from what you have to say.

Made FTs is irrelevant, or at best only part of the story. How many times attempted and FT% is far more relevant, and a far better indicator of what was happening.

I just BLEW that theory away in my previous post. Please...read it again.

[eliteballer]

Stop comparing 1960's stats to later eras...it doesnt work.

As for this whole "Old Wilt went toe to toe with young Kareem and old Kareem went toe to toe with young Hakeem" all that shows is battle hardened experienced vets being able to hold their own vs green 2nd and 3rd year players. It doesnt mean anything.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

Shaq, pure dominance force.

[with malice]

I just BLEW that theory away in my previous post. Please...read it again.
I thought that was more blowing smoke than theories.

Putting made FTs up as a stat that means something is simply duplicitous on your part. We all know you have a particular opinion to push, so failing to post the FG% and arguing that it doesn't mean anything is pretty obvious.
The reality of the situation is that there's a very good reason why teams would prefer Wilt to shoot FTs than FGs.
Tell me jlauber: why is that?

[jlauber]

Stop comparing 1960's stats to later eras...it doesnt work.

As for this whole "Old Wilt went toe to toe with young Kareem and old Kareem went toe to toe with young Hakeem" all that shows is battle hardened experienced vets being able to hold their own vs green 2nd and 3rd year players. It doesnt mean anything.

First of all, in Kareem's SECOND season, he LED the NBA in scoring, at 31.7 ppg, and on .577 shooting, and with 16.0 rpg, AND, he won the MVP award, and the FMVP award. And yet, Chamberlain, in arguably his WORST statistical season that year, and at age 34, and a year removed from major knee surgery...battled Kareem to a complete STATISTCAL DRAW,...point-for-point, shot-for-shot, and rebound-for-rebound, in TEN games ( 5 regular season, and 5 post-season...and equal in BOTH.)

Then in Kareem's THIRD season, he had his finest statistical season...averaging 34.8 ppg, shooting .574, grabbing 16.6 rpg, and even handing out 5 apg. And here again, Wilt reduced Kareem to a "dear-in-the-headlights" in the '72 WCF's. And in Kareem's 4th season, and Wilt's last, Kareem averaged 30 ppg on .554 shooting, and yet, he could only shoot .450 against Wilt in six regular season games (while Wilt shot .737 against him.)

Those three seasons are perhaps Kareem's finest statitical seasons.

BUT, what we never got to witness, was a PRIME, high-scoring Wilt against Kareem. Keep in mind that Wilt hung TWO 60+ point games, just in his 68-69 season, alone, and against centers that Kareem would face several times in his career, and yet Kareem never approached those numbers against them. Nor did Kareem ever have THREE 50+ point games on Willis Reed (with a HIGH game of 58) like Wilt did. Nor did Kareem ever have THREE 60+ point games against Walt Bellamy (and with a HIGH game of 73) like Wilt did. And how about this fact? Kareem faced Nate Thurmond some 50+ H2H games, and yet his HIGH game was only 34 points against him. And yet, a prime "scoring" Wilt, who only faced Thrumond in a handful of games, had one game in which he buried Thurmond by a 45-13 margin, and several more of 30+.

How come Chamberlain could score 60+ in TWO games in his 68-69 season, and in a year in which he averaged 14 FGAs per game...and yet, Kareem who would join the league the very next year, and who would face those same centers, never had even ONE 60+ game in his 20 year career?

How about this fact. In Wilt's 71-72 season, and at age 35 (and his second-to-last season), he had TWO of his 103 30-30 games (and one of them came against 6-11 HOFer Bob Lanier BTW)...and yet Kareem, who played 20 seasons, only had ONE his entire CAREER? Kareem played in the same leagues as Wilt for four seasons, and against the same centers that Wilt absolutely crushed in his career...and yet, he couldn't come close to the 130+ NBA records that Wilt owns.

[jlauber]

I thought that was more blowing smoke than theories.

Putting made FTs up as a stat that means something is simply duplicitous on your part. We all know you have a particular opinion to push, so failing to post the FG% and arguing that it doesn't mean anything is pretty obvious.
The reality of the situation is that there's a very good reason why teams would prefer Wilt to shoot FTs than FGs.
Tell me jlauber: why is that?

Well, Wilt did a TON of BOTH. And once again, his IMPACT went well beyond his actual FT%. He had opposing players either playing "matador" defense, or sitting on the bench, and he was also allowing his own teammates more FT opportunities. Was Wilt a poor FT shooter? No doubt, but once again, he made opposing team's PAY at the line. To the tune of over 6000 points in his career....which ranks 14th ALL-TIME.

[with malice]

Well, Wilt did a TON of BOTH. And once again, his IMPACT went well beyond his actual FT%. He had opposing players either playing "matador" defense, or sitting on the bench, and he was also allowing his own teammates more FT opportunities. Was Wilt a poor FT shooter? No doubt, but once again, he made opposing team's PAY at the line. To the tune of over 6000 points in his career....which ranks 14th ALL-TIME.
Career: 51.1%
He shot 23497, made 12681. And missed 10,816.
What would be better, let Wilt destroy you in the paint, or put him on the charity stripe?
As I said before, there's a very good reason Wilt shot so many FTs.

There's a helluva lot to love about Wilt's game. Anything to do with FTs can't be put in that category.

[jlauber]

Career: 51.1%
He shot 23497, made 12681. And missed 10,816.
What would be better, let Wilt destroy you in the paint, or put him on the charity stripe?
As I said before, there's a very good reason Wilt shot so many FTs.

There's a helluva lot to love about Wilt's game. Anything to do with FTs can't be put in that category.

Nobody is claiming that Wilt was a good FT shooter. BUT, he was no Ben Wallace, who was basically worthless at the line in his career. Chamberlain had a season in which he averaged more ppg, just from the line, than Wallace did in his best scoring season. Hell, he was no Steve Kerr, either. Kerr didn't even average 1 FTA per game in his entire career. Wilt had one season, alone, in which he outscored Kerr's CAREER FT points.

And, while everyone loves to rip Wilt's FT shooting, Russell only had a slightly higher career FT%...and, Wilt MADE nearly 3000 MORE FTs in his career.

Wilt, and Shaq, just pounded opposing teams from the line. They may not have been very efficient, but their IMPACT went well beyond their FT%'s.

[Big#50]

Early in KAJ's career he had trouble against strong, physical defenders. But Wilt shouldn't be in this conversation. He was a freaking robot.

[with malice]

Nobody is claiming that Wilt was a good FT shooter. BUT, he was no Ben Wallace, who was basically worthless at the line in his career. Chamberlain had a season in which he averaged more ppg, just from the line, than Wallace did in his best scoring season. Hell, he was no Steve Kerr, either. Kerr didn't even average 1 FTA per game in his entire career. Wilt had one season, alone, in which he outscored Kerr's CAREER FT points.

And, while everyone loves to rip Wilt's FT shooting, Russell only had a slightly higher career FT%...and, Wilt MADE nearly 3000 MORE FTs in his career.

Wilt, and Shaq, just pounded opposing teams from the line. They may not have been very efficient, but their IMPACT went well beyond their FT%'s.
Ummm... Wilt: 51.1% from the line. That is next-best-to-worthless. Amazing how to paint it as "not useless", you have to get one of the All Time worst FT shooters to hold him up to.

3000 more FTs made means that if they weren't FTs (ie. had someone not fouled him - because he was such a sucktastic FT shooter), or if he'd made... say 75% - then that's a veritable truckload of points missed. He makes 75% of FTs, that's almost an extra 6,000 points.
Worth considering.

You're a Wilt fan, show wisdom: stop discussing FTs.

Dude, you brought up the FT argument.

[Fatal9]

Hmmm...the SAME Chamberlain who MADE a TON of FT's? How about this...Chamberlain is ranked FOURTEENTH, ALL-TIME, in NBA HISTORY, ...in FTs MADE?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ft_career.html

That is an interesting list, too.

First of all, yes, Kareem made more FTs in his career. BUT, Chamberlain averaged 432 MADE PER SEASON, compared to Kareem's 335.

How about Hakeem? Hakeem played FOUR MORE years longer than Wilt...and yet, Wilt MADE 600 MORE FTs in his career. Hell, Larry Bird and Wilt played in roughly the same number of seasons, and yet, Wilt MADE 2000 (yes, 2000) MORE FTs in his career.

And only Shaq can rival Wilt for the "and-one's"...plays in which Wilt slammed home a hoop, and was awarded a FT on top of it. THEN, Wilt also played in an era of 3-to-make-2's, and 2-to-make-1's, so while Wilt may have shot 67% on a "3-to-make-2", he was in reality, shooting 100%. Same with making 1 of 2 in a penalty situation. So, CLEARLY, even Wilt's TRUE FG% numbers were distorted.

How about this FACT. Guess who holds the record for most FT's MADE on one game? Yes, it is Chamberlain, going 28-32 in the process. Or, how about this FACT? Chamberlain's 835 MADE FT's in the 61-62 season, is SECOND, ALL-TIME, to Jerry West's 840 in '66. No one else, including Jordan, ever had a season like that.

And Wilt POUNDED opposing teams, too. He not only got his opposing center in foul trouble, he got ENTIRE TEAMS in foul trouble. And because of Wilt, his TEAMMATES got to the line, sooner, and MADE more FTs. Wilt's TEAMS were always near the VERY TOP of the league, year-after-year, in FTAs. They led the league several times, and his '67 76ers just annihilated the NBA in that category. AND, how about this interesting stat? Chamberlain's 68-69 Lakers LED the NBA in FTAs. Then, Wilt was injured early in the 69-70 season, and missed 72 games. How did LA do in FTAs that season? They came in ELEVENTH...in a 14 team league.

So, Dickwad makes a fool of himself...yet again.

And this right here is why you're a ******* that no one takes seriously. You're swinging so hard on his nuts that you're somehow turning his FTs into a strength.

Opposing teams would PURPOSELY foul Wilt because he hurt the team from the line. All that fukking BS and the fact remains, a 51% career FT shooter in the regular season and 46% in the playoffs (lol @ the big drop off in playoffs...but "i made them when it counted")...that's not good...under any circumstances, it's a waste of possessions. Tons of big games where Wilt would shoot 7/22 from the line or 9/25 or 2/12 or 1/12 which cost his teams games.

Especially true down the stretch of games...

http://i51.tinypic.com/ogmkbn.jpg

[Pointguard]

And this right here is why you're a ******* that no one takes seriously. You're swinging so hard on his nuts that you're somehow turning his FTs into a strength.

Opposing teams would PURPOSELY foul Wilt because he hurt the team from the line. All that fukking BS and the fact remains, a 51% career FT shooter in the regular season and 46% in the playoffs (lol @ the big drop off in playoffs...but "i made them when it counted")...that's not good...under any circumstances, it's a waste of possessions. Tons of big games where Wilt would shoot 7/22 from the line or 9/25 or 2/12 or 1/12 which cost his teams games.

Especially true down the stretch of games...

http://i51.tinypic.com/ogmkbn.jpg

Hack a Shaq, but it was riskier and dumber back then as the penalty made 50% shooters 67% shooters. Well everybody a 33 percent better foul shooter and Wilt had some good foul shooting teammates. If Wilt was having one of the 2 for 12 nights then it was probably worth it. The counter move would be wait for the penalty and then take Wilt out and keep driving the ball. Risky, and the other team can't really D up. The majority of the rest of Wilt's teammates would be at the 95% FT ability with the penalty factored in.

Hacking Wilt could not have been that wide spread or popular as Shaq has the patent on the risky move. It was more of a risk to do it on Wilt than Shaq tho. Wilt also had more separation on FG% than Shaq did as well. Yet Shaq was unquestionable the offensive giant of the league/Era??? when this Hac a Shaq first started. This keeps coming up as if its the ultimate argument that knocks Wilt off of the greatest list. Every player has a weakness. Only one player was the greatest rebounders and scorers ever. And he more than likely had all the block records as well. Only one player had separation at margins that were unfathomable.

[PHILA]

Wilt was SWARMED for much of his career.

And he could make them pay for doubling with his passing game. :applause:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQgXfMUUivw#t=3m55s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpufnh4fmRk#t=16m57s

[Droid101]

LOL, Shaq and not close.

You have to remember, Wilt was playing about twice as many possessions as modern players.

Shaq is the only center on this list, and he's on it twice. It's the best scoring seasons adjusted for 75 possessions (about average for a game these days). Wilt and Kareem don't even make the cut (which the link gives explaination for if you want to read further).

http://www.backpicks.com/2011/01/28/top-scoring-rate-seasons-in-nba-history/

http://www.backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/top-scoring-rates-regular-season.jpg

[Droid101]

Ooh! Didn't notice that he added the playoffs one. Once again, Shaq moves UP the list, and even improves on his regular season scoring:

http://www.backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/top-playoff-scoring-rates1.jpg

Notice, another center finally makes an appearance. The Dream sneaks in!

Edit: Holy crap, don't let Pauk see this! He might cream his pants.

[Pointguard]

LOL, Shaq and not close.

You have to remember, Wilt was playing about twice as many possessions as modern players.

Shaq is the only center on this list, and he's on it twice. It's the best scoring seasons adjusted for 75 possessions (about average for a game these days). Wilt and Kareem don't even make the cut (which the link gives explaination for if you want to read further).

http://www.backpicks.com/2011/01/28/top-scoring-rate-seasons-in-nba-history/

http://www.backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/top-scoring-rates-regular-season.jpg

If a player is fast, and his team is fast, and they play a fast game should a player slow down to meet the per 75 possession stat catch up. Shouldn't be a strike against Wilt if he could play a faster game without rest. If he had more endurance then that's an advantage. Certain teams strategically play for quantity of shots as opposed to quality. Wilt might have been the only one really taking high quality shots.

Good stat gesture but it really doesn't apply here.

[millwad]

Hmmm...the SAME Chamberlain who MADE a TON of FT's? How about this...Chamberlain is ranked FOURTEENTH, ALL-TIME, in NBA HISTORY, ...in FTs MADE?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ft_career.html

That is an interesting list, too.

First of all, yes, Kareem made more FTs in his career. BUT, Chamberlain averaged 432 MADE PER SEASON, compared to Kareem's 335.


You're still not getting, the more FT's you take, the more you're supposed to make. Wilt was pathetic from the FT-line, he is one worst FT-shooters of all time. He made many because he shot extremely many FT's..:facepalm



How about Hakeem? Hakeem played FOUR MORE years longer than Wilt...and yet, Wilt MADE 600 MORE FTs in his career. Hell, Larry Bird and Wilt played in roughly the same number of seasons, and yet, Wilt MADE 2000 (yes, 2000) MORE FTs in his career.


Hakeem was a much greater FT-shooter than Wilt ever was, and haha, so was Bird. Just because you shot many of them doesn't mean you're good at it, Wilt is one worst FT-shooters in league history.



How about this FACT. Guess who holds the record for most FT's MADE on one game? Yes, it is Chamberlain, going 28-32 in the process. Or, how about this FACT? Chamberlain's 835 MADE FT's in the 61-62 season, is SECOND, ALL-TIME, to Jerry West's 840 in '66. No one else, including Jordan, ever had a season like that.


Guess who holds the record for most missed FT's of all-time with one of the worst FT% ever? WILT.

[Droid101]

If a player is fast, and his team is fast, and they play a fast game should a player slow down to meet the per 75 possession stat catch up. Shouldn't be a strike against Wilt if he could play a faster game without rest. If he had more endurance then that's an advantage. Certain teams strategically play for quantity of shots as opposed to quality. Wilt might have been the only one really taking high quality shots.

Good stat gesture but it really doesn't apply here.
Does apply here.

Shaq in those seasons could easily have played at a faster pace. What this shows, is he was far more likely to get you points on any given possession.

What you're saying is Monta Ellis is better than Brandon Roy. Brandon Roy's teams play at a really slow pace, but Brandon Roy is very efficient in those possessions. Monta Ellis has more chances to score, which is why he scores more.

[Psileas]

If a player is fast, and his team is fast, and they play a fast game should a player slow down to meet the per 75 possession stat catch up. Shouldn't be a strike against Wilt if he could play a faster game without rest. If he had more endurance then that's an advantage. Certain teams strategically play for quantity of shots as opposed to quality. Wilt might have been the only one really taking high quality shots.

Good stat gesture but it really doesn't apply here.

First this and second, if we're to play by the possession adjustment rules, how about also adjusting the points teams scored in general for pace and then apply Wilt's adjusted scoring to see its impact? "Practically double possessions" also means practically cutting the "adjusted scoring" of a team to half. Going by this, a player who averages 25 ppg in a 70 ppg league is more impactful than a player who averages 30 ppg in a 100 ppg league.

[jlip]

The problem with all of this "pace adjustment" stuff is that it's hypothetical. It's not real. Also, when these players are on the court, they are not competing against paces and fg%s that exist in eras 30-40 years removed from when they were/ are playing. They are competing against the players and teams that are right in front of their faces. Wilt wasn't saying in 1962, "Let me score more points tonight because in 2000 the league is going to play at a much slower pace, and according to my calculations I have to score X amount of points so that my offensive production can be as impacting as that new guy that isn't even born yet named Shaquille O'neal."

[Asukal]

I'll say its between these 4: Wilt, Shaq, Dream, Kareem. Take your pick. I'd personally pick the Dream. :cheers:

[Math2]

Kareem? Wilt? Shaq? Olajuwon? Who you got? This is just a purely on an offensive standpoint. I think this is pretty tough question. Russell is pretty much out of the picture although he is a lot better offensively than most people give him credit for. He is still not in the level of Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, or Hakeem offensively though.

Wilt
Kareem
Shaq
Hakeem

I don't get how people can rate Shaq over Kareem and Wilt...WIlt is the best, no question...

[NBAller]

Shaq imo, because in his prime he was nearly unstoppable.

[Pointguard]

Does apply here.

Shaq in those seasons could easily have played at a faster pace. What this shows, is he was far more likely to get you points on any given possession.


It doesn't transfer like that. Shaq should have kept running and beating slower centers down court. If he didn't we can't imagine that he did. You can't make adjustments that aren't in the game and make them real. Jordan was comfortable scoring at his pace. Nash was comfortable winning MVP's at a much quicker pace. You never adjust a scoring title based on a 75 per. A game is a game. What happens between 90 feet in 48 minutes is the only reality we can deal with. We can't suppose that Wilt might have had a three point touch like McAdoo did. Or what the zone, might have done? If it isn't in the game then it isn't real.

[jlauber]

Ooh! Didn't notice that he added the playoffs one. Once again, Shaq moves UP the list, and even improves on his regular season scoring:

http://www.backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/top-playoff-scoring-rates1.jpg

Notice, another center finally makes an appearance. The Dream sneaks in!

Edit: Holy crap, don't let Pauk see this! He might cream his pants.


I shredded this nonsense months ago. Let's use some BASIC MATH shall we?

In Wilt's '62 season, the league averaged 108 FGAs and 37 FTAs per game. And it resulted in 118.8 ppg on .426 shooting from the field.

How about MJ's '87 season? 89 FGAs and 31 FTAs per game, in a league that averaged 109.9 ppg and shot .480.

Now BEFORE I even adjust for league FG%, which was considerably lower in the '62 and for a VARIETY of reasons (the ball, the gyms, the scheduling, and the travelling conditions), let's just use the above numbers first.

Ok, let's reduce Wilt's 39.5 FGAs down to '87 levels. (82% of '62 levels.) Now he "only" takes 32.6 FGAs per game. Reduce his FTAs down to '87 levels (84% of '62 levels), and Wilt "only" takes 14 FTAs per game. Ok...Wilt shot .506 from the field, and .613 from the line in '62. 32.6 x .506 =16.5 FGs per game...or 33 ppg. Now, 14 x .613= 8.5 ppg. 33+ 8.5 = 41.5 ppg.

Just adjusting Wilt's numbers down to '87 levels, and Wilt would score 41.5 ppg in that season.

BUT, it gets better. Once again, if we are going to adjust Wilt's numbers based on "pace", then we also have to adjust them based on league average FG%. MJ's '87 shot .480, while Wilt's '62 NBA only shot .426. .480/.426=1.126. Now multiply Wilt's .506 x 1.126, and his FG% jumps to an even .570.

Now, that means that Wilt would have shot .570 in '87, and the result would have been 18.6 FGs made per game, instead of "only" 16.5. 18.6 x2= 37.2 ppg. 37.2+ 8.5 from the line= 45.7 ppg.

Of course, you do also just use SIMPLE MATH. Wilt's '62 NBA averaged 118.8 ppg, while MJ's '87 averaged 109.9 ppg. 109.9/118.8 = 92.5%. Multiply Wilt's 50.4 ppg times .925, and he would have averaged... 46.6 ppg.

That STUPID 75 possession crap is just ridiculous. And it punishes a player like Wilt who was able to play 48 mpg (for nearly his ENTIRE CAREER BTW), and rewards those that could barely play 40. Furthermore, Wilt was able to "push" his team's to faster paces in his own league, unlike MJ who slowed his own team's down.

Even "pace" is unrealistic. I have seen '62 listed at 129, and '87 at 101. So, that means that the average team in '62, which scored 118.8 ppg, would only be scoring 93 ppg in '87. Huh???? The league averaged 109.9 ppg in '87!

In any case, the above poster's chart is WAY OFF.

[kaiiu]

Wilt has no case

[RRR3]

Wilt has no case
http://media2011.buhfly.com/gifs/facepalm%202.gif

[jlauber]

LOL, Shaq and not close.

You have to remember, Wilt was playing about twice as many possessions as modern players.

Shaq is the only center on this list, and he's on it twice. It's the best scoring seasons adjusted for 75 possessions (about average for a game these days). Wilt and Kareem don't even make the cut (which the link gives explaination for if you want to read further).



TWICE as many possessions????? Where do these IDIOTS come up with this NONSENSE.

So teams in '62 were scoring 200 ppg?

[ShaqAttack3234]

Wilt's numbers are really skewed, imo. But numbers aren't only why I have several other centers over him offensively. Part of it is the footage I've seen of him, but it is really impossible to fairly compare stats across eras.

Scoring is probably impacted less by pace, at least individual scoring by a star than most other stats, but when the difference is that large, it's impossible to ignore. Wilt's '62 Warriors averaged about 129.7 possessions per 48 minutes, and while you could argue that his team could take advantage of his ability to run, not to the extent where his team even approaches that many possessions,or Wilt gets something like 40 FGA/17 FTA.

To put things into perspective, the league average was 92.1 possessions per 48 minutes last season, while in 1962, it was about 125.5. Minnesota was fastest at 96.5.

I've also mentioned the smaller lane and I believe that factored in to him being able to get as many FGA as he did in '62, or playing 48.5 mpg(which even JLauber admits he wouldn't today). And that included games where he was on the floor for every minute of 30, 40 and even a 50 point blowout.

Look at 1966 for example, the league still played at a much faster pace and Wilt still played over 47 mpg, yet he averaged 33.5 ppg and 25.2 FGA. If he was really holding back his scoring so much then you'd expect better efficiency than a TS% of 54.7%. And like all of his high scoring seasons, his scoring fell again in the playoffs.

Looking at playoff numbers, his scoring numbers start coming down to earth a lot and that's still without considering era or minutes.

And while I don't believe that no teams ever doubled, it seemed much more uncommon and defensive schemes in general seemed much more primitive. Even Kareem said that he was usually played 1 on 1 when he played with Milwaukee in the early 70's, and this was at a time when he was leading the league in scoring.

Also, the fact that Wilt's high scoring years didn't produce that much team success, and it seems that he made a bigger impact when he was scoring much less is a factor for me.

[Pointguard]

Wilt's numbers are really skewed, imo. But numbers aren't only why I have several other centers over him offensively. Part of it is the footage I've seen of him, but it is really impossible to fairly compare stats across eras.

Scoring is probably impacted less by pace, at least individual scoring by a star than most other stats, but when the difference is that large, it's impossible to ignore. Wilt's '62 Warriors averaged about 129.7 possessions per 48 minutes, and while you could argue that his team could take advantage of his ability to run, not to the extent where his team even approaches that many possessions,or Wilt gets something like 40 FGA/17 FTA.

To put things into perspective, the league average was 92.1 possessions per 48 minutes last season, while in 1962, it was about 125.5. Minnesota was fastest at 96.5.

I've also mentioned the smaller lane and I believe that factored in to him being able to get as many FGA as he did in '62, or playing 48.5 mpg(which even JLauber admits he wouldn't today). And that included games where he was on the floor for every minute of 30, 40 and even a 50 point blowout.

Look at 1966 for example, the league still played at a much faster pace and Wilt still played over 47 mpg, yet he averaged 33.5 ppg and 25.2 FGA. If he was really holding back his scoring so much then you'd expect better efficiency than a TS% of 54.7%. And like all of his high scoring seasons, his scoring fell again in the playoffs.

Looking at playoff numbers, his scoring numbers start coming down to earth a lot and that's still without considering era or minutes.

And while I don't believe that no teams ever doubled, it seemed much more uncommon and defensive schemes in general seemed much more primitive. Even Kareem said that he was usually played 1 on 1 when he played with Milwaukee in the early 70's, and this was at a time when he was leading the league in scoring.

Also, the fact that Wilt's high scoring years didn't produce that much team success, and it seems that he made a bigger impact when he was scoring much less is a factor for me.
So how do you explain Wilt Kareem in 1971 in the playoffs with Wilt having lost mobility and playing Kareem straight up? With Wilt nowhere near his top offensive ability? While Kareem wasn't as strong as he was later he was more active, more energetic and quicker. Just scoring more at will. Kareem in 77 was stronger but he was never as strong as Wilt anyway. His speed would be more of a factor in Kareem's favor because Wilt would have lost some mobility due to the injury.

Even if you go the route of the pace was crazy how do explain Wilt's crazy separation from other players in scoring and FG% when the other centers barely got much at all. FG% has nothing to do with pace or volume so I want to hear how that one is covered (Shaq was good tho). Wilt was at 40ppg for over 500 games. If anything he has to be a bit more resourceful than the guys who are at best around 10ppg below him. While Wilt could have played Shaq's power game he was so resourceful he still dominated playing a more finesse game.


Kareems high scoring years didn't produce much success either.

[jlauber]

Wilt's numbers are really skewed, imo. But numbers aren't only why I have several other centers over him offensively. Part of it is the footage I've seen of him, but it is really impossible to fairly compare stats across eras.

Scoring is probably impacted less by pace, at least individual scoring by a star than most other stats, but when the difference is that large, it's impossible to ignore. Wilt's '62 Warriors averaged about 129.7 possessions per 48 minutes, and while you could argue that his team could take advantage of his ability to run, not to the extent where his team even approaches that many possessions,or Wilt gets something like 40 FGA/17 FTA.

To put things into perspective, the league average was 92.1 possessions per 48 minutes last season, while in 1962, it was about 125.5. Minnesota was fastest at 96.5.

I've also mentioned the smaller lane and I believe that factored in to him being able to get as many FGA as he did in '62, or playing 48.5 mpg(which even JLauber admits he wouldn't today). And that included games where he was on the floor for every minute of 30, 40 and even a 50 point blowout.

Look at 1966 for example, the league still played at a much faster pace and Wilt still played over 47 mpg, yet he averaged 33.5 ppg and 25.2 FGA. If he was really holding back his scoring so much then you'd expect better efficiency than a TS% of 54.7%. And like all of his high scoring seasons, his scoring fell again in the playoffs.

Looking at playoff numbers, his scoring numbers start coming down to earth a lot and that's still without considering era or minutes.

And while I don't believe that no teams ever doubled, it seemed much more uncommon and defensive schemes in general seemed much more primitive. Even Kareem said that he was usually played 1 on 1 when he played with Milwaukee in the early 70's, and this was at a time when he was leading the league in scoring.

Also, the fact that Wilt's high scoring years didn't produce that much team success, and it seems that he made a bigger impact when he was scoring much less is a factor for me.

While I respect much of your opinions, I just can't believe the "pace" arguments. If the NBA averaged 125 possessions in '62 (which, BTW, was the highest scoring year in the decade of the 60's), and last year it was 92.1...how does that translate? Using simple math, teams that averaged 118.8 ppg in '62, would be reduced to 87 ppg in '11 (in a league that averaged 100 ppg.)

Secondly, Wilt's scoring "dropped" for a variety of reasons. His new coach in 63-64 Alex Hannum, had Wilt cut back his scoring (from scoring 44.8 ppg down to 36.9 ppg.) It was not that Wilt couldn't score, but Hannum slowed the offense down, and asked that Wilt allow his teammates to attempt to contribute offensively (and, as always, they collectively shot way worse than the league average.)

And we both know that the widening of the lane had virtually no effect on Wilt's scoring. A sickened Wilt was averaging 39 ppg in the first half of the 64-65 season, which was actually an INCREASE over his 36.9 ppg average in 63-64. He was traded to a somewhat better team in mid-season, and cut back his shooting in the last half of the season (finishing at 34.7 ppg.) Then, in the next season, he averaged 33.5 ppg, on a record .540 FG% (in a league that shot .433), along with 5.2 apg. BTW, his team also had the best record in the league.

Furthermore, after the NBA widened the lane, Wilt really only had those two seasons in which he was in his scoring runs. STILL, he had EIGHT 60+ point games after the widening of the lane...which is THREE more than either Kobe or MJ had in their entire careers. And he was still hanging TWO 60+ point games in the 68-69 season, and on phenomenal efficiency, as well, in a league that averaged 112.3 ppg, and in a year in which he hardly even shot the ball.

I have mentioned this fact before, as well... a PEAK Chamberlain absolutely murdered HOF players like Reed (three 50+ games...and a season of 40 ppg); Bellamy (three 60+ games...and a season of 55 ppg); and even Thurmond, in which he battered in one game, 45-13, and then hung several more 30+ games on him as well. And, once again, in Wilt's 68-69 season, which was just the year before Kareem joined the NBA, Wilt hung 60+ games on Jim Fox and Connie Dierking. Kareem faced ALL of those guys, and many times, and yet he never approached a PRIME Wilt's domination over them.

And, from '67 thru the '69, Wilt had no interest in leading the league in scoring, BUT, everyone KNEW that he could have. And, occasionally he would send a message to the league, that yes, he could score at will. Once again, Rick Barry averaged 35.6 ppg in '67, and even he acknowledged that had Wilt wanted the scoring title, he would have won it. And clearly, averaging 24.1 ppg on a mind-numbing .683 FG%, and with a high game of 58 points on 26-34 shooting (and another 43 point game on 18-18 shooting), I firmly believe that he could have been a 35-40 ppg scorer and on .600 efficiency.

Then, there was his '69-70 season, in which his new coach asked him to score more...and he responded with a 32.2 ppg average, and on about 60% efficiency, in his first nine games. We will never know if he could have sustained that rate, but it is certainly an indication.

As for his post-season "drop." I have posted PHILA (and my additions) to just some of his staggering post-season games. In fact, he was among the most CLUTCH post-season players in NBA history (and BTW, in his nine game seven's, he averaged 24.4 ppg, 26.3 rpg, and shot .638.) He had a TON of BIG games (and "must-win" games) in his post-season career.

The reason for his "decline" in post-season scoring? One, he only played 52 of his 160 post-season games in his "scoring seasons." AND, he missed the '62-63 playoffs because his teammates were possibly the worst cast of clowns in NBA history (the same inept teammates who lost a pre-season scrimmage to a group of scrubs the very next season)...in a year in which he averaged 44.8 ppg on .528 shooting (in a league that shot .441.) Think about this, though...in Wilt's 52 post-season games in his "scoring seasons" he still had FOUR 50+ point playoff games...or one every 13 games. He also averaged 33 ppg, 27 rpg, and shot .510 (in leagues that shot about .430) in those six post-seasons.

Of course, the main reason for his scoring drop? Bill Russell, whom Wilt faced a staggering 49 games in the post-season (or nearly ONE-THIRD of his post-season games.) I always get a kick out of those that claim that Wilt's scoring really dropped in the '62 post-season. He faced Russell in seven of those 12 games, and "only" averaged 34 ppg on .468 shooting against him. BUT, he "only" averaged 38 ppg on .470 in his regular season matchups with Russell.

Furthermore, the "pace" of the games dropped considerably in Wilt's post-seasons. As an example, in the '62 season, the league averaged 118.8 ppg on .426 shooting during the regular season, but only 112.6 ppg and .411 shooting in the post-season (and Wilt's teammates collectively shot .354 BTW.)

And, no one ever mentions that while Wilt's scoring declined slightly in the post-season, he SEVERELY limited his opposing centers, especially in both shooting efficiency, and in rebounding. Chamberlain was routinely holding those opposing centers, most of whom were HOFers, to around a 100 points under their regular season FG%'s...AND, he was KILLING them on the glass. He was NEVER outrebounded in any of his 29 post-season series (and there were some in which he just obliterated his opposing center.)

And, for those that disparage Wilt's numbers, for whatever reasons...why was it ONLY Chamberlain? In the year in which he averaged 50 ppg (and on a 49-31 team BTW), the next guy was at 31.6 ppg (and on an 18-62 team.) True, Baylor averaged 38.3 ppg, but it was in just over half the season. The actual highest "non-Wilt" scoring season, in the Wilt-era, was Barry's 35.6 ppg season in '67. The fact was, Wilt was LIGHT-YEARS ahead of his peers in scoring, rebounding, and FG%...way more than any other "greats" were over their peers. And, as we all know, he also won an ASSIST title (and came in third in another.)

[with malice]

I stopped arguing my point (Kareem) in this thread because there's no way on god's green earth are the proponents for Wilt gonna change their collective mind. Likewise, I'm not changing mine.
So...

[jlauber]

I stopped arguing my point (Kareem) in this thread because there's no way on god's green earth are the proponents for Wilt gonna change their collective mind. Likewise, I'm not changing mine.
So...

Kareem was one of the greatest scorers in NBA history, but I always found this point fascinating...

In his 71-72 season, he averaged a career-high 44.2 mpg; a career-high 34.8 ppg; he grabbed 16.6 rpg (which was just behind his career high of 16.9); and he shot .574. All accomplished on a team that went 63-19, and had an +11.1 scoring differential. Of course, as he did many times in the post-season, his numbers really dropped. In fact, he only shot .437 in the post-season (.405 against Nate, and .457 against Wilt...including .414 in the last four games of the '72 WCF's)

BUT, when Kareem played on an ordinary team, in 75-76 (the Lakers went 40-42) he could only play 41.2 mpg; he could only average 27.7 ppg; and he could only shoot .529 from the floor. Granted, he did have his career rebounding high season, at 16.9 rpg, but why couldn't he elevate his scoring on a team that desperately needed him to?

[ShaqAttack3234]

So how do you explain Wilt Kareem in 1971 in the playoffs with Wilt having lost mobility and playing Kareem straight up? With Wilt nowhere near his top offensive ability? While Kareem wasn't as strong as he was later he was more active, more energetic and quicker. Just scoring more at will. Kareem in 77 was stronger but he was never as strong as Wilt anyway. His speed would be more of a factor in Kareem's favor because Wilt would have lost some mobility due to the injury.

Individual match ups don't determine who the better offensive player was in general, especially when you're just speculating about how Wilt would've matched up with Kareem when he was younger. I know that Nate Thurmond put up similar or better offensive numbers than Kareem in a series, but nobody would claim that he was Kareem's equal(much less better) offensively because of that.

'71 playoffs
Kareem- 25 ppg, 4.2 apg, 48.1 FG%, 63.6 FT%, 51 TS%
Wilt- 22 ppg, 2 apg, 48.9 FG%, 42.9 FT%, 48.9 TS%

It was an impressive performance by Wilt for a variety of reasons, but Kareem's offensive numbers were still superior


Even if you go the route of the pace was crazy how do explain Wilt's crazy separation from other players in scoring and FG% when the other centers barely got much at all. FG% has nothing to do with pace or volume so I want to hear how that one is covered (Shaq was good tho). Wilt was at 40ppg for over 500 games. If anything he has to be a bit more resourceful than the guys who are at best around 10ppg below him. While Wilt could have played Shaq's power game he was so resourceful he still dominated playing a more finesse game.

How many centers aside from Wilt do you hear praised as great scorers in the 60's?

Hell, Walt Bellamy as a rookie averaged 31.6 ppg on a league leading 52% from the field in 1962 while also shooting a better FT% than Wilt. So I don't see the separation as far as efficiency. And the following season, Wilt finished just ahead of Bellamy in FG%(52.8 to 52.7), but Bellamy again shot a much better percentage from the line. In 1964, Wilt finished 2nd in FG%(52.4) while Lucas finished first at 52.7% and Bellamy was 3rd at 51.3%, but both shot much better percentages from the line.

In '65, Wilt again just edged out Bellamy(51% vs 50.9%), but Bellamy again shot a much better percentage at the line, as did Lucas, West and Bailey Howell who shot 49.8%, 49.7% and 49.5%, respectively.

And personally, I don't believe that Wilt had the lower body strength, footwork or ball handling skills to play Shaq's power game, though I do think he had the ability to overpower players more than he did, and by his own admission, this could have made him a more effective player. But he doesn't get points for what he could've done.


Kareems high scoring years didn't produce much success either.

Kareem won a title averaging 32 ppg for the playoffs. He's also won of only 3 players in the shot clock era to win a scoring title and title in the same year. I think it's been proven that you could win a title with Kareem carrying a big scoring load.


And we both know that the widening of the lane had virtually no effect on Wilt's scoring. A sickened Wilt was averaging 39 ppg in the first half of the 64-65 season, which was actually an INCREASE over his 36.9 ppg average in 63-64. He was traded to a somewhat better team in mid-season, and cut back his shooting in the last half of the season (finishing at 34.7 ppg.) Then, in the next season, he averaged 33.5 ppg, on a record .540 FG% (in a league that shot .433), along with 5.2 apg. BTW, his team also had the best record in the league.

I'm certainly not suggesting that Wilt couldn't score after the lane was widened, the fact that he led the league twice after that is proof. But I do think it allowed him to get up a higher volume of quality shots. I don't think 50 ppg or 40 FGA was plausible after the lane widened, nor do I think that 45 ppg or 35 FGA was.

Both Kareem and Willis Reed think that this had an impact on Wilt's game. And I'm not necessarily saying that it made him a less effective player, because I think that aside from maybe '64, his top 3 or 4 best seasons came after the lane widening. But I think that it boosted his scoring attempts.

You mention that he was averaging more with the Warriors in '65, and while he was averaging 33.6 FGA, how many of those were quality shots? He was shooting 49.9%(his lowest since his rookie year) and the team wasn't winning. They were 11-33(I believe 11-27 with him).


And, from '67 thru the '69, Wilt had no interest in leading the league in scoring, BUT, everyone KNEW that he could have. And, occasionally he would send a message to the league, that yes, he could score at will. Once again, Rick Barry averaged 35.6 ppg in '67, and even he acknowledged that had Wilt wanted the scoring title, he would have won it. And clearly, averaging 24.1 ppg on a mind-numbing .683 FG%, and with a high game of 58 points on 26-34 shooting (and another 43 point game on 18-18 shooting), I firmly believe that he could have been a 35-40 ppg scorer and on .600 efficiency.

I'm fully aware that Wilt could've scored more than he did from '67-'69, but I'm not convinced that he could've put up 35-40 ppg in '67 on 60% shooting. I know that his efficiency was remarkable, but it's tough to predict what he could've done if he increased his volume so much. For example, the season before, he averaged 25 FGA and 33.5 ppg on 54% shooting, while the season after, he averaged 17 FGA and 24 ppg while shooting 59.5%.


BUT, when Kareem played on an ordinary team, in 75-76 (the Lakers went 40-42) he could only play 41.2 mpg; he could only average 27.7 ppg; and he could only shoot .529 from the floor. Granted, he did have his career rebounding high season, at 16.9 rpg, but why couldn't he elevate his scoring on a team that desperately needed him to?

It could be that he was rebounding the ball better than ever and leading the league in that category while leading the league in blocks and averaging 5 apg.

And it's also worth noting again that Kareem said he was pretty much played 1 on 1 in Milwaukee, and he also had more talent around him, so it was probably easier to score on the '72 Bucks than the '76 Lakers.

The Lakers defense seemed to be their biggest problem that season, both from articles I've read(where Kareem criticized his teammates defense) and from their defensive rating.

[jlauber]

Individual match ups don't determine who the better offensive player was in general, especially when you're just speculating about how Wilt would've matched up with Kareem when he was younger. I know that Nate Thurmond put up similar or better offensive numbers than Kareem in a series, but nobody would claim that he was Kareem's equal(much less better) offensively because of that.

'71 playoffs
Kareem- 25 ppg, 4.2 apg, 48.1 FG%, 63.6 FT%, 51 TS%
Wilt- 22 ppg, 2 apg, 48.9 FG%, 42.9 FT%, 48.9 TS%

It was an impressive performance by Wilt for a variety of reasons, but Kareem's offensive numbers were still superior



How many centers aside from Wilt do you hear praised as great scorers in the 60's?

Hell, Walt Bellamy as a rookie averaged 31.6 ppg on a league leading 52% from the field in 1962 while also shooting a better FT% than Wilt. So I don't see the separation as far as efficiency. And the following season, Wilt finished just ahead of Bellamy in FG%(52.8 to 52.7), but Bellamy again shot a much better percentage from the line. In 1964, Wilt finished 2nd in FG%(52.4) while Lucas finished first at 52.7% and Bellamy was 3rd at 51.3%, but both shot much better percentages from the line.

In '65, Wilt again just edged out Bellamy(51% vs 50.9%), but Bellamy again shot a much better percentage at the line, as did Lucas, West and Bailey Howell who shot 49.8%, 49.7% and 49.5%, respectively.

And personally, I don't believe that Wilt had the lower body strength, footwork or ball handling skills to play Shaq's power game, though I do think he had the ability to overpower players more than he did, and by his own admission, this could have made him a more effective player. But he doesn't get points for what he could've done.



Kareem won a title averaging 32 ppg for the playoffs. He's also won of only 3 players in the shot clock era to win a scoring title and title in the same year. I think it's been proven that you could win a title with Kareem carrying a big scoring load.



I'm certainly not suggesting that Wilt couldn't score after the lane was widened, the fact that he led the league twice after that is proof. But I do think it allowed him to get up a higher volume of quality shots. I don't think 50 ppg or 40 FGA was plausible after the lane widened, nor do I think that 45 ppg or 35 FGA was.

Both Kareem and Willis Reed think that this had an impact on Wilt's game. And I'm not necessarily saying that it made him a less effective player, because I think that aside from maybe '64, his top 3 or 4 best seasons came after the lane widening. But I think that it boosted his scoring attempts.

You mention that he was averaging more with the Warriors in '65, and while he was averaging 33.6 FGA, how many of those were quality shots? He was shooting 49.9%(his lowest since his rookie year) and the team wasn't winning. They were 11-33(I believe 11-27 with him).



I'm fully aware that Wilt could've scored more than he did from '67-'69, but I'm not convinced that he could've put up 35-40 ppg in '67 on 60% shooting. I know that his efficiency was remarkable, but it's tough to predict what he could've done if he increased his volume so much. For example, the season before, he averaged 25 FGA and 33.5 ppg on 54% shooting, while the season after, he averaged 17 FGA and 24 ppg while shooting 59.5%.



It could be that he was rebounding the ball better than ever and leading the league in that category while leading the league in blocks and averaging 5 apg.

And it's also worth noting again that Kareem said he was pretty much played 1 on 1 in Milwaukee, and he also had more talent around him, so it was probably easier to score on the '72 Bucks than the '76 Lakers.

The Lakers defense seemed to be their biggest problem that season, both from articles I've read(where Kareem criticized his teammates defense) and from their defensive rating.

As always, very good points. I think we could both argue many of these points ad nauseum, too. And I have always admired Kareem's game. IMHO, he could have been even more dominant, though. When motivated, he proved he could score against anyone, and even into late in his career.

As for Droid101's chart, which I believe was actually the work of someone else (and very flawed), there was no mention of McAdoo. He averaged 34.5 ppg, in 42.7 mpg, on .512 shooting (and .805 from the line), in a league that averaged 102.6 ppg on .457 shooting.

IMHO, McAdoo's three straight seasons, from '74 thru '76, and including the playoffs were among the greatest, offensively (and he also rebounded well), in NBA history. Yet, very few folks mention him in these discussions.

[millwad]

Kareem was one of the greatest scorers in NBA history, but I always found this point fascinating...

In his 71-72 season, he averaged a career-high 44.2 mpg; a career-high 34.8 ppg; he grabbed 16.6 rpg (which was just behind his career high of 16.9); and he shot .574. All accomplished on a team that went 63-19, and had an +11.1 scoring differential. Of course, as he did many times in the post-season, his numbers really dropped. In fact, he only shot .437 in the post-season (.405 against Nate, and .457 against Wilt...including .414 in the last four games of the '72 WCF's)


So we're gonna act like Wilt's stats didn't drop in the playoffs? The same year he had his career high in scoring, he scored 50 points per game (50% shooting), grabbed 25.7 rebounds and averaged 2.4 assists per game.

The same year in the playoffs he dropped big time in scoring, like always when it came to scoring, he dropped with 15 points and only made 46% of his shots.

And if you wanna compare his all-time regular season scoring average with his playoff-average he dropped with almost 8 points to a 22.5 point per game average with a 52% shooting average. Based on offense Kareem did better in the playoffs even though he played to the age of 41..

[Pointguard]

Individual match ups don't determine who the better offensive player was in general, especially when you're just speculating about how Wilt would've matched up with Kareem when he was younger. I know that Nate Thurmond put up similar or better offensive numbers than Kareem in a series, but nobody would claim that he was Kareem's equal(much less better) offensively because of that.

In this case I am addressing Kareem leading the league and saying he was played one on one. Kareem said things to downplay Wilt on a couple of ocassions - so I don't put much stock in his quotes. Most of the time teams played Kareem one on one except in the playoffs. I believe that was the same with Wilt.

You were saying his numbers were skewed, but here he is obviously older slower and somewhat hobbled Wilt, playing a quicker more energetic young Kareem at the top of his career in offensive output, manu a manu. Same pace, minutes similar. That should unskew a lot of questions. Wilt was more active with blocks, rebounds and defense as well.



'71 playoffs
Kareem- 25 ppg, 4.2 apg, 48.1 FG%, 63.6 FT%, 51 TS%
Wilt- 22 ppg, 2 apg, 48.9 FG%, 42.9 FT%, 48.9 TS%

It was an impressive performance by Wilt for a variety of reasons, but Kareem's offensive numbers were still superior
Barely, with Wilt at a half of his production in his top seven years offensively. All of your skewed arguments can not apply here. Wilt's production is the second lowest of his career. Kareem's highest.



How many centers aside from Wilt do you hear praised as great scorers in the 60's?

Shaq wasn't great in the 00's? That doesn't have much to do with anything tho.


Hell, Walt Bellamy as a rookie averaged 31.6 ppg on a league leading 52% from the field in 1962 while also shooting a better FT% than Wilt. So I don't see the separation as far as efficiency. And the following season, Wilt finished just ahead of Bellamy in FG%(52.8 to 52.7), but Bellamy again shot a much better percentage from the line. In 1964, Wilt finished 2nd in FG%(52.4) while Lucas finished first at 52.7% and Bellamy was 3rd at 51.3%, but both shot much better percentages from the line.

In '65, Wilt again just edged out Bellamy(51% vs 50.9%), but Bellamy again shot a much better percentage at the line, as did Lucas, West and Bailey Howell who shot 49.8%, 49.7% and 49.5%, respectively.
I'm talking from '66 - 69, and his last two years (Kareem years). When Wilt was leading the league he was still the best bet with the ball percentage wise and Wilt did this 4 times. I doubt anybody else did it more than once.



And personally, I don't believe that Wilt had the lower body strength, footwork or ball handling skills to play Shaq's power game, though I do think he had the ability to overpower players more than he did, and by his own admission, this could have made him a more effective player. But he doesn't get points for what he could've done.
I never suggested that. Wilt did more than anybody else so him getting points for things he didn't do isn't even warranted. Fact was he was versatile enough to resort to a different type of game and be very efficient and prolific that way.

Why was Wilt so good on the boards (and much better than Shaq) if he didn't have lower body strength? Fatal 9 produced a video in which it showed the tight restriction they kept Wilt's foot movements to on offense. No extra half step no extra, hop, none of that. But I don't understand why you think he didn't have the foot movement? And Wilt, on ocassaions did go to a very similar power move. I will post it later as Flash Player is disabled where I'm at. Wilt did it with one giant step as opposed to Shaq who did small foot movements (which I'm sure would be called a walk on Wilt) get the defender at a disadvantage. But it is still very much a power dunk utilized by Wilt. It was moreso, seemingly, an anger option than go to move.

The league went against Wilt. Wilt had become quite skilled because of imposed limitations: no Shaq baby steps, no Ewing hops, no prestep on Kareem's Sky Hook, no Hakeem late pivot. He did quite well without the extra footing allowed later on that opens up a whole other dimension of moves.


Kareem won a title averaging 32 ppg for the playoffs. He's also won of only 3 players in the shot clock era to win a scoring title and title in the same year. I think it's been proven that you could win a title with Kareem carrying a big scoring load.

True. He did it once. But it definitely isn't like it's a rule. I'm sure without the Celtic dynasty on hand Wilt does it a couple of times. Also a lot of whether or not a scoring player works optimally in the playoffs is more about how a coach coaches or how a team is constructed for the playoffs. Still none of this should affect an answer on greatest offensive player.

[Pointguard]

As for Droid101's chart, which I believe was actually the work of someone else (and very flawed), there was no mention of McAdoo. He averaged 34.5 ppg, in 42.7 mpg, on .512 shooting (and .805 from the line), in a league that averaged 102.6 ppg on .457 shooting.

IMHO, McAdoo's three straight seasons, from '74 thru '76, and including the playoffs were among the greatest, offensively (and he also rebounded well), in NBA history. Yet, very few folks mention him in these discussions.

This is so true. I didn't think of him right off. Mc gets my fifth spot. Without question the best jump shot among centers and he could do it in your face. He was ver agile and super active.

You have
For having a top offensive game you haveto have:
a scoring mentality, you must have the energy to execute it, skills to fulfill it and keep inspired to maintain it.

Wilt and Shaq for their longevity and high level.
Mac and Kareem could do it all over the court with agility and versatility.
Hakeem with the great skils and techno know how.

[Droid101]

As for Droid101's chart, which I believe was actually the work of someone else (and very flawed), there was no mention of McAdoo. He averaged 34.5 ppg, in 42.7 mpg, on .512 shooting (and .805 from the line), in a league that averaged 102.6 ppg on .457 shooting.

Tut tut good sir, but you didn't click the link methinks. Here are players that didn't quite make the cut to be on the list presented (and the Wilt explaination to hopefully help explain better).

[quote]I normalize most of my stats to an estimated 75 possessions played, which for points produces a

[jlauber]

We simply have no way of knowing what kind of numbers a prime Wilt would put up in today's NBA. What we do know is that he dominated his peers far more than anyone else did their's...including Kareem...who played four years with Chamberlain, and another 16 years into the '89 season. And, of course, Kareem is the "bridge" which gives us some idea of just how great players like Thurmond, Lanier, Gilmore, Cowens, Hayes, McAdoo, and Wilt really were. Kareem scored just easily against the great centers in the 80's (many of whom would be great into the 90's), and in fact, Kareem shot far more efficiently against those in the 80's. Furthermore, Kareem was past his physical peak from about '82 on.

And even if Wilt were capable of being just as dominant today, as he was in the 60's, I seriously doubt that he would have approached 50 ppg, and probably not even 40 ppg. Still, Kobe was averaging 35.4 ppg in a league that only scored 97 ppg as recently as '06. Furthermore, his second best scorer was at 14.8 ppg. And Kobe accomplished all of that in 41 mpg. So, IF Wilt were capable of playing near his peak scoring seasons, 40 ppg would not seem to be out of the question.

In any case, a prime Chamberlain, playing near his actual capabilities, would probably be somewhere around a 30 ppg, and at a considerably higher efficiency. Why? One, the entire NBA shoots much more efficiently today (especially if you factor in eFG%...which includes the plethora of 3 pt shooting.) Two, Wilt would probably play between 40-42 mpg. Those that diminish his scoring because of playing 48 mpg, also need to concede that a Chamberlain playing 40-42 mpg per night, instead of 47-48, would be considerably better rested and would be able to play at a higher energy level, as well. And those 6-8 mpg of rest per game, would really be beneficial over the course of an 82 game season. And , the scheduling would not be nearly as brutal today. He was playing a TON of B2B games, as well as many 3-in-a-rows, and even as many as 5-in-a-row's. He would routinely have a day off in between games. His FG%'s would reasonably climb by at least 50 points...to somehwere around 60%.

His rebounding numbers would drop, of course. Still, it must be remembered that Wilt really elevated his rebounding, not only in the post-season, but against the premier rebounders in the league. He had post-seasons of 29 rpg against Thurmond, and as high as 32 against Russell. And, he also was grabbing 19 rpg in the regular season, in his LAST season, in a league that averaged 51 rpg...and then once again elevated it to 23 rpg in the post-season. Furthermore, there is simply no way that players like Howard or Love would outrebound Wilt. Wilt was much taller, much bigger, much stronger, faster, as athletic, and had an enormous 7-8 wingspan. So, IMHO, Wilt would probably be around a 17-18 rpg player at his peak.

Now, the assists would be interesting. Wilt was a spectacular passer. The man even even averaged 3.4 apg in his 44.8 ppg season...and with teammates that shot horribly (.412.) And, in his 65-66 season, Wilt not only averaged 33.5 ppg, but 5.2 apg (on a team that had the best record in the league.) Of course, Wilt LED the league in '68 (and on a team that ran away with the best record in the league), and came in THIRD in '67 (on a team that just overwhelmed the league, en route to a title.)

So, depending on the caliber of his teammates, and the coaching system, Wilt would be capable of 7-8 rpg (assists are actually much easier to get in today's NBA), but his numbers would depend on how many shots he was taking. I would suspect that if he were scoring 30 ppg, and on 60% shooting, that he would easily average 5 apg. (especially since he actually averaged 5.2 apg in a year in which he scored 34 ppg.)

His defense would easily be the best in the league. 7-2, (and 7-3 in shoes), with a 7-8 wingspan, and his incredible leaping ability, along with his massive strength...and he would reduce the best centers in todays NBA to well below their normal numbers. Of course, the best centers in today's NBA are just few and far between, so he would just feast on the Hayes', Turiaff's, and Dampier's. And his defense went well beyond one-and-one play in his career. He would completely shut down the lane, and block shots at a considerably better amount than say a Howard.

All-in-all...IF Wilt were capable of playing at his peak in today's NBA...I would think 30 ppg, 17 rpg, 5 apg, .600, with 4-5 bpg, and first-team all-defense, would be reasonable.

In any case, while we will never know just how Wilt would have played today...I get so tired of those that attempt to disparage Wilt's numbers, and then attempt to come up with complex formulas that make no sense. Wilt's numbers were LIGHT YEARS ahead of his peers. Furthermore, BEFORE Wilt arrived, the NBA scoring record was 29.2 ppg, and the FG% record was .490. The rebounding record was held by Russell, at 23.0 (and before Russell, it was 16 rpg.) In Wilt's 14 seasons, he completely shattered all of those records, and in some cases, several times over. And then, since he retired, no one has come close to challenging any of them. My god, take Wilt out of the Wilt-era, and Rick Barry's 35.6 ppg would have been the highest (yes, Baylor averaged 38.3 in about half of a season...but his best full season was at 34.8 ppg.) And really, there were no more 30 ppg seasons than what we have seen since.

So, why ONLY Wilt? Why could ONLY Wilt score 40-50 ppg? Why could ONLY Wilt get 25-27 rpg? Why could ONLY Wilt shoot .683 and .727...and in leagues that shot .441 and .456? Why was it ONLY Wilt, that not only was the only center to ever lead the NBA in assists, but his second best season, at 7.8 apg, even blows away any other center whoever played the game? Why was it ONLY Wilt that could block 23 and 25 shots in a game?

How about 30-30 games? Wilt has 103...the rest of the NBA has 28...COMBINED. How about 40-30 games? Chamberlain had 55...the rest of the entire NBA, in it's history...had six. 50-40 games? Wilt has the only four in NBA history. "Perfect games?" Chamberlain has the THREE highest (15-15, 16-16, and 18-18.) Double-Triple-Double's? Yep, ONLY Wilt...with a 22-25-21 game. Triple-Double's? Well, Wilt "only" had a recorded 88...BUT, had blocked shots been an official stat in his era, and that would have risen dramatically. Hell, he would have hung a slew of Quad-doubles! And speaking of quad-doubles, how about Wilt's 24-32-13-12 game against Russell in game one of the '67 ECF's? And how about this triple-double? 53-32-14 (on 24-29 shooting) against the Lakers in '68.

60 point games? Wilt had 32...the rest of the entire NBA in it's history? 30. Not only that, but Wilt had four of the only .700 shooting 60+ point games in NBA history, including the highest FG% in one, at .829 (29-35.) 70+ point games? Wilt had SIX...the rest of the NBA, combined...four. 40+ rebound games? Wilt had 15...the rest of the NBA combined? 13 (and Russell has 11 of those.)

If Wilt's era truly had a considerably higher pace...where were the rest of the players? How come ONLY Wilt?

And if we dramatically reduce Wilt's numbers, based on some fabricated formulas, then just what would have the rest of the NBA players numbers looked like? Would Oscar and West have only been a 15 ppg scorers? A peak Kareem at 18 ppg? Russell getting 10 rpg? Thurmond getting 9 rpg?

Once again...why ONLY Wilt?

[ShaqAttack3234]

In this case I am addressing Kareem leading the league and saying he was played one on one. Kareem said things to downplay Wilt on a couple of ocassions - so I don't put much stock in his quotes. Most of the time teams played Kareem one on one except in the playoffs. I believe that was the same with Wilt.

yeah, that was one of my points when comparing Kareem's '71-'73 numbers to his '77 numbers, as well as the ABA merger.


You were saying his numbers were skewed, but here he is obviously older slower and somewhat hobbled Wilt, playing a quicker more energetic young Kareem at the top of his career in offensive output, manu a manu. Same pace, minutes similar.

But again, this doesn't tell us what 60's Wilt would've done vs Bucks Kareem because it wasn't 60's Wilt. Could he have put up numbers better than 22 ppg/49 FG%(49 TS%) when he was younger? I wouldn't doubt it, but it doesn't mean we can put a number on what Wilt would've done before the knee injury because old Wilt put up those numbers, it doesn't work that way.


That should unskew a lot of questions. Wilt was more active with blocks, rebounds and defense as well.

I've never claimed that Kareem was as good or better than Wilt defensively or on the boards.


Barely, with Wilt at a half of his production in his top seven years offensively. All of your skewed arguments can not apply here. Wilt's production is the second lowest of his career. Kareem's highest.

Except I don't agree that 21 ppg was the '71 equivalent of half his production.


Shaq wasn't great in the 00's? That doesn't have much to do with anything tho.

You were talking about the other offensive centers numbers. I wasn't saying that was a reason why Wilt wasn't great. I think Wilt was a great player, just not as good as you and JLauber do, particularly offensively.


I'm talking from '66 - 69, and his last two years (Kareem years). When Wilt was leading the league he was still the best bet with the ball percentage wise and Wilt did this 4 times. I doubt anybody else did it more than once.

Yeah, but most of those years weren't big scoring years, at least not when there was that separation. For example, he was taking 9 shots per game in '72 and 7 shots per game in '73.


I never suggested that. Wilt did more than anybody else so him getting points for things he didn't do isn't even warranted. Fact was he was versatile enough to resort to a different type of game and be very efficient and prolific that way.

Well, there is a reason that myself and many others feel that he could've done more in the playoffs, and ultimately, despite playing vs the Celtics dynasty. Only 2 rings is a letdown.


Why was Wilt so good on the boards (and much better than Shaq) if he didn't have lower body strength? Fatal 9 produced a video in which it showed the tight restriction they kept Wilt's foot movements to on offense. No extra half step no extra, hop, none of that. But I don't understand why you think he didn't have the foot movement? And Wilt, on ocassaions did go to a very similar power move. I will post it later as Flash Player is disabled where I'm at. Wilt did it with one giant step as opposed to Shaq who did small foot movements (which I'm sure would be called a walk on Wilt) get the defender at a disadvantage. But it is still very much a power dunk utilized by Wilt. It was moreso, seemingly, an anger option than go to move.

The league went against Wilt. Wilt had become quite skilled because of imposed limitations: no Shaq baby steps, no Ewing hops, no prestep on Kareem's Sky Hook, no Hakeem late pivot. He did quite well without the extra footing allowed later on that opens up a whole other dimension of moves.

We're clearly not viewing a lot of things the same ways and this is a case. I don't think the primary reason for Wilt's footwork looking worse was restrictions(that's an assumption either way), I think that his footwork simply wasn't as good.


True. He did it once. But it definitely isn't like it's a rule. I'm sure without the Celtic dynasty on hand Wilt does it a couple of times. Also a lot of whether or not a scoring player works optimally in the playoffs is more about how a coach coaches or how a team is constructed for the playoffs. Still none of this should affect an answer on greatest offensive player.

Well, the only player to do it multiple times in the shot clock era was Jordan, both Kareem and Shaq did it once. But the point was that Kareem's teams proved they could win with him scoring a ton such as '71 or '80, hell, even 74 when he got to game 7 of the finals while carrying the scoring load at 32 ppg that run.

I just don't think that Wilt taking that kind of scoring role was as effective for his team as Kareem, Shaq or Hakeem. Which isn't to say that he didn't do other things better.

[Pointguard]

But again, this doesn't tell us what 60's Wilt would've done vs Bucks Kareem because it wasn't 60's Wilt. Could he have put up numbers better than 22 ppg/49 FG%(49 TS%) when he was younger? I wouldn't doubt it, but it doesn't mean we can put a number on what Wilt would've done before the knee injury because old Wilt put up those numbers, it doesn't work that way.

No we can't put a number on it, true. At a time when Wilt realized that he's at less than half his offensive peak and you play somebody to a very close offensive draw. That chances are that he would have had a pretty big advantage in his prime. Very high chance: Not upper medium, not a super high medium chance.

But I brought this up to eliminate this ideal that Wilt's numbers are "so skewed," that its hard to find a measuring stick. Well here is one: When Wilt was way off of his top offensive game (a bigger fall off than Jordan in his last year or Kareem in his second to last year) and significantly slowed down, it is clear that he could play Kareem very close to equal offensively in the playoffs. Minutes very close and pace exactly the same when Kareem was quicker, more energetic and scoring significantly more than ever. Obviously one can make educated guesses on a younger prime Wilt and a more average Kareem.



Except I don't agree that 21 ppg was the '71 equivalent of half his production.

Seriously, small time semantics. Wilt's '71 scoring was less than half the 462 games, six years in Wilt's prime and very close to being half his seven year average.


Yeah, but most of those years weren't big scoring years, at least not when there was that separation. For example, he was taking 9 shots per game in '72 and 7 shots per game in '73.
Still, Wilt is the only player to lead the league in scoring and FG% more than once (shot clock era) and he did it four times. And he was very close in two other years.

Well, there is a reason that myself and many others feel that he could've done more in the playoffs, and ultimately, despite playing vs the Celtics dynasty. Only 2 rings is a letdown.

Kareem winning once in the 70's is more of a let down as there were no dynasties or franchises. The one time when the league had this characteristic - a literal free for all, year after year. To me that's the environment that that its easiest to assert yourself.



We're clearly not viewing a lot of things the same ways and this is a case. I don't think the primary reason for Wilt's footwork looking worse was restrictions(that's an assumption either way), I think that his footwork simply wasn't as good.

My point here is that his footwork was better than you give him credit for. What Wilt was doing, he was able to do without the tremendous benefit of an extra step. Shaq was allowed to do a steep back step and power over people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWrGWuU2Ak&feature=related. @ 3:34, 4:04, 4:42 and 4:53 are examples of power moves by Wilt. Wilt dribbles to the last step, which is way more demanding on skills than being allowed an extra half step nevermind the one and half extra that Shaq takes routinely when he gathers himself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDv4p0p0sZY Shaq walks at least three times in this video of unbelievable dunks.


Well, the only player to do it multiple times in the shot clock era was Jordan, both Kareem and Shaq did it once. But the point was that Kareem's teams proved they could win with him scoring a ton such as '71 or '80, hell, even 74 when he got to game 7 of the finals while carrying the scoring load at 32 ppg that run.

I just don't think that Wilt taking that kind of scoring role was as effective for his team as Kareem, Shaq or Hakeem. Which isn't to say that he didn't do other things better.
If you are going to count '80 for Kareem as a scoring a lot and winning then you have to count '67 for Wilt. Wilt was 5th in scoring that year and had an unheard of 150 percentage point lead on the next guy. I don't know what number Kareem was in '80 as far as scoring was concerned but he wasn't top 5.

Its all relative when its Kareem but you always got different standards when its the guy you are arguing against. It doesn't matter, its just another smoke screen from answering the question straight up. The question was simple - it has no conditions on it.

[ShaqAttack3234]

No we can't put a number on it, true. At a time when Wilt realized that he's at less than half his offensive peak and you play somebody to a very close offensive draw. That chances are that he would have had a pretty big advantage in his prime. Very high chance: Not upper medium, not a super high medium chance.

In an individual match up, who knows? Again, that would also depend on their defense and the other defenders on their team as well as their team's defensive schemes(though probably less in the early 70's, though even then there were double teams). But even so, 25 ppg/4.2 apg, 51 TS% vs 22 ppg/2 apg, 49 TS% is still a clear edge to Kareem statistically.

You could also argue that says more about Wilt's post defense at that point in his career and how he matched up with early 70's Kareem physically.

We'll never know what '77 Kareem and '67 Wilt would have done against each other, or what they would have done in the league at the same time, so to some extent I get what you're trying to say, but I don't think it really is an accurate measuring stick.


But I brought this up to eliminate this ideal that Wilt's numbers are "so skewed," that its hard to find a measuring stick. Well here is one: When Wilt was way off of his top offensive game (a bigger fall off than Jordan in his last year or Kareem in his second to last year) and significantly slowed down, it is clear that he could play Kareem very close to equal offensively in the playoffs. Minutes very close and pace exactly the same when Kareem was quicker, more energetic and scoring significantly more than ever. Obviously one can make educated guesses on a younger prime Wilt and a more average Kareem.

I disagree for the reasons stated right above this.


Seriously, small time semantics. Wilt's '71 scoring was less than half the 462 games, six years in Wilt's prime and very close to being half his seven year average.

My point was that the league changing much more in it's early years, the league wasn't even 25 years old by that point and the shot clock was about 16 years old, pace of the game also changed more dramatically from the early 60's on, it makes it really hard to compare Wilt's later numbers to his earlier numbers.


Still, Wilt is the only player to lead the league in scoring and FG% more than once (shot clock era) and he did it four times. And he was very close in two other years.

And that's impressive, I'm not saying that none of his records are impressive.


Kareem winning once in the 70's is more of a let down as there were no dynasties or franchises. The one time when the league had this characteristic - a literal free for all, year after year. To me that's the environment that that its easiest to assert yourself.

Well, that's a matter of opinion and I disagree considering the dominant fashion in which the 1971 Bucks won as well as the limited amount of chances he had to compete for a title the rest of the decade.


My point here is that his footwork was better than you give him credit for. What Wilt was doing, he was able to do without the tremendous benefit of an extra step. Shaq was allowed to do a steep back step and power over people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWrGWuU2Ak&feature=related. @ 3:34, 4:04, 4:42 and 4:53 are examples of power moves by Wilt. Wilt dribbles to the last step, which is way more demanding on skills than being allowed an extra half step nevermind the one and half extra that Shaq takes routinely when he gathers himself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDv4p0p0sZY Shaq walks at least three times in this video of unbelievable dunks.

Those are nice moves(except 4:42, I don't really see the skill there), but even on the better moves, he looks awkward dribbling and look at the defense at 3:34 for example.

Here's a sequence I posted of Shaq in a thread not long ago.


this is a great sequence, imo. 3 consecutive trips down the floor.

Kidd doubles him, they repost, Kidd goes to help out again, but he eliminates that with the baseline spin and short jumper.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFpljMcxhJ4&NR=1#t=6m30s

More of the same, repost, goes baseline, and a good contest by Longley, but he this a tougher turnaround from farther out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFpljMcxhJ4&NR=1#t=7m12s

This time throws in a bit of a hesitation and a sublte fake, goes baseline again, but because of that, he makes Luc look stupid. Great footwork.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFpljMcxhJ4&NR=1#t=7m46s

Not a highlight reel, but 3 consecutive trips down the floor and Shaq had a lot more in his game than that, those are routine moves for him and he's just going baseline and still beating Phoenix going away from the double. He was more unstoppable going to the middle.


If you are going to count '80 for Kareem as a scoring a lot and winning then you have to count '67 for Wilt. Wilt was 5th in scoring that year and had an unheard of 150 percentage point lead on the next guy. I don't know what number Kareem was in '80 as far as scoring was concerned but he wasn't top 5.

Wilt averaged 22 ppg in the '67 playoffs and 6 ppg less than Philly's leading scorer during that run. He was tied for 3rd on the team.

Kareem averaged 32 ppg in the '80 playoffs, easily leading his team in scoring.

You see why I separated those runs as far as scoring.


Its all relative when its Kareem but you always got different standards when its the guy you are arguing against. It doesn't matter, its just another smoke screen from answering the question straight up. The question was simple - it has no conditions on it.

I've answered everything, no smoke screens. And simple answers aren't enough in these type of debates if you want to debate them seriously. Stats can be very dependent on eras and circumstances and if stats without context is the main case you and other Wilt fans want to make, well then I'm wasting my time.

[jlauber]

Both ShaqAttack and Pointguard make some very good points. I tend to agree more with Pointguard on this subject, but I respect ShaqAttack's opinions, as well.

A couple of points, though. IMHO, Wilt's '71 season was the WORST of his career. He was 34, and a year removed from major knee surgery. 20.7 ppg on .545 shooting, and a career low 18.2 rpg. Those numbers were dwarfed by a prime Chamberlain. He did play admirably in the playoffs, 18.3 ppg, 20.2 rpg, 4.4 apg, but on, by far, his worst post-season shooting of his career, at .455.

I also believe that, if you include the post-season, that Kareem's '71 season was his finest. 31.7 ppg, 16.0 rpg, and on .577 shooting (in a league that shot .449.) His post-season numbers were not career-high playoff numbers (26 ppg, 17 rpg, and .515), but they were still very good, especially considering that he faced Thurmond, Wilt, and then Unseld in the post-season.

And Wilt had virtually no help in the playoffs in '71. Both West and Baylor missed them that post-season. And again, Wilt's playoff numbers that year, while good for most any other player (esepcially his rebounding...which at 20.2 rpp was a career playoff LOW)...were just pathetic compared to his prime years (and to ANY other Chamberlain season.) A prime Wilt was known to have taken a poor playoff roster like he had in '71, and easily hung a 35-25 .540 (and in leagues that shot around .430 .)

And, while Kareem may not have been in his physical prime, statistically, he was near his peak. You could argue that his greatest single regular season came in his very next year, but his numbers dropped considerably in that post-season, especially his FG%, which was an awful .437.

So, here was a Wilt, at an age when most NBA players are nearly done, and only a year removed from major knee surgery, and playing the worst basketball of his career, ...and a Kareem whose regular season and playoff numbers combined for probably his greatest season. And yet, Kareem could only slightly outscore Wilt in the five game playoff series, 25-22 per game, while Wilt, in his worst shooting post-season of his career, slightly outshot Kareem (in a season in which Kareem had his second highest FG% in the decade of the '70's, and his highest margin over the league average of his career), .489 to .481. And Chamberlain slightly outrebounded Kareem, as well, 18.8 rpg to 17.2 rpg.

In fact, over the course of that entire season, covering 10 games, their numbers were very close. Kareem averaged 26.4 ppg, 15.2 rpg, and shot .457. Meanwhile Wilt averaged 22.6 ppg, 16.9 rpg, and shot .486 against Kareem.

I just have to believe that a prime Wilt would have put up far bigger numbers.


As for Wilt's '67 post-season. I know that ShaqAttack also considers that season one of the greatest ever, by anyone. But, I have read another poster who also claimed that Wilt was considerably behind Greer in post-season scoring, and tied for second in scoring. BUT, Wilt hung Philly's highest scoring game in those playoffs, at 41 points (and on 19-30 shooting.) He also had a 37 point game in that Royals series (and on 16-24 shooting.) And how about comparing his scoring to Greer's in the pivotal games? In the clinching game five win over Boston, Greer scored 32 points, on 12-28 shooting, while Wilt had 29 on 10-16 shooting (and he also had a team high 22 at the half, when the game was still close.) Then, in the clinching game six over the Warriors, Greer scored 15 points on 5-16 shooting, while Wilt scored 24 on 8-13 shooting.

And, along with that, Chamberlain had TWO triple-double SERIES in that post-season. Against the Royals, he averaged 28 ppg (and again, if he had to have scored more, he proved that he could easily hang a 40 point game), 26.5 rpg, and 11 apg...all accomplished on a staggering .612 FG%. Then he completely dominated Russell in the next series, averaging 21.6 ppg, 32.0 rpg, 10.0 apg, and shooting .556. And while his scoring dropped slightly against Thurmond, down to 17.5 ppg, his shooting was spectacular against Nate, at .560 (while holding Thurmond to .343 shooting), and he outrebounded Thurmond in five of those six games, en route to a 28.5 rpg average.

The bottom line was that Greer averaged 27.7 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.3 apg and on .429 shooting, while Wilt averaged 21.7 ppg, 29.1 rpg, 9.2 apg, and shot .579 in that playoff run. And virtually everyone would have acknowledged that Wilt COULD have scored much more.