Scoring Wise:Kareem Abdul Jabbar vs Wilt Chamberlain?

[PTB Fan]

An interesting comparison.

Who's your choice?

[Kobe 4 The Win]

Kareem's game seemed to be finesse and refined skillfull post moves. Wilt just seemed to physically dominate guys and he never really looked all that polished. I'd take Kareem. He's the all-time leading scorer and the Skyhook if the most unstoppable weapon in NBA history. Both are among the greatest of all time though.

[Fatal9]

KAJ.

In context of the team, I don't find Wilt to be that great of a scorer. When your teams and offenses are best with you literally being the last option on the floor, it speaks to something (and Wilt literally was one of the last options on the floor of his best teams if you look at everyone's shot attempts per minute....and it's the opposite in Kareem's situation). I just get the feeling Wilt really really bogged down the offenses. It's not like I'm the only one who says this, when he got traded from the Warriors, his teammates were saying how happy they were that they finally had freedom on offense. For all his great scoring, his teams weren't even that great offensively year in year out, which is weird considering truly great volume scorers almost always elevate their team into a good offensive team. He might put up pretty numbers but makes everyone worse while doing it.

KAJ's playoff scoring runs are also much better. He scores in context of the team better (has a better balance), has a deadlier go to move, is more efficient when volume scoring (the difference is even larger than it appears due to FT shooting) and doesn't have a flaw like poor FT shooting hurting his teams. Much better player in the post as well, Wilt's advantage when it comes to scoring comes from offensive rebounding and being a better/stronger finisher down low...but in terms of scoring when it matters, scoring in a team setting, go to moves in the post...I don't think this is all that close.

[ShaqAttack3234]

KAJ.

In context of the team, I don't find Wilt to be that great of a scorer. When your teams and offenses are best with you literally being the last option on the floor, it speaks to something (and Wilt literally was one of the last options on the floor of his best teams if you look at everyone's shot attempts per minute....and it's the opposite in Kareem's situation). I just get the feeling Wilt really really bogged down the offenses. It's not like I'm the only one who says this, when he got traded from the Warriors, his teammates were saying how happy they were that they finally had freedom on offense. For all his great scoring, his teams weren't even that great offensively year in year out, which is weird considering truly great volume scorers almost always elevate their team into a good offensive team. He might put up pretty numbers but makes everyone worse while doing it.

KAJ's playoff scoring runs are also much better. He scores in context of the team better (has a better balance), has a deadlier go to move, is more efficient when volume scoring (the difference is even larger than it appears due to FT shooting) and doesn't have a flaw like poor FT shooting hurting his teams. Much better player in the post as well, Wilt's advantage when it comes to scoring comes from offensive rebounding and being a better/stronger finisher down low...but in terms of scoring when it matters, scoring in a team setting, go to moves in the post...I don't think this is all that close.

I agree 100%. Wilt's scoring numbers(particularly early 60's) were largely a product of their era. I don't know why the 39.5 FGA and 17 FTA aren't brought up every time the 50.4 ppg are. Not to mention the 48.5 mpg which included him playing every minute of 40, even 50 point blowouts. And then dropping to 35 ppg on Iverson-esque TS% in the playoffs.

Along with the pace of the game rapidly slowing, the lane widening and starting centers(rotation players getting bigger), his scoring numbers started coming down to earth, and they always did in the playoffs.

Not to mention that in his his 2 high scoring seasons(post lane-widening), he averaged 34.7 ppg on 51 FG%/51.3 TS% and 33.5 ppg on 54 FG%/54.7 TS%.

Kareem averaged 34.8 ppg on 57.4 FG%/60.3 TS% in 1972 and he said himself that he was better later which showed how deceiving stats are.

Another important point is how defensive strategies changed. Kareem mentioned in a '77 interview that he was pretty much played one on one during his first few years in Milwaukee, but that he was constantly doubled and tripled by the late 70's.

In most of the Wilt footage available, he seems to face far more single coverage than double teams, and I've heard many from that era mention that double teaming was rare.

By the time Kareem got stronger and improved his repertoire with the left hand sky hook and turnaround, he had no real weakness offensively, which makes him the greatest offensive center ever, imo.

His greater team success as a high scorer and Kareem's edge as far as go to moves and counters seals it for me.

From the footage I've seen, I don't see their footwork or touch as comparable, and Wilt's strength advantage isn't that big of a factor for me because he didn't seem to use it like a true power player. Part of that may have been that his lower body strength wasn't as great as people might think(just speculation, but it makes sense) and the fact that he looked awkward dribbling the ball while backing in. As well as Wilt's own claim that he didn't want to overpower people and wanted to prove he was skilled.

[millwad]

KAJ.

In context of the team, I don't find Wilt to be that great of a scorer. When your teams and offenses are best with you literally being the last option on the floor, it speaks to something (and Wilt literally was one of the last options on the floor of his best teams if you look at everyone's shot attempts per minute....and it's the opposite in Kareem's situation). I just get the feeling Wilt really really bogged down the offenses. It's not like I'm the only one who says this, when he got traded from the Warriors, his teammates were saying how happy they were that they finally had freedom on offense. For all his great scoring, his teams weren't even that great offensively year in year out, which is weird considering truly great volume scorers almost always elevate their team into a good offensive team. He might put up pretty numbers but makes everyone worse while doing it.

KAJ's playoff scoring runs are also much better. He scores in context of the team better (has a better balance), has a deadlier go to move, is more efficient when volume scoring (the difference is even larger than it appears due to FT shooting) and doesn't have a flaw like poor FT shooting hurting his teams. Much better player in the post as well, Wilt's advantage when it comes to scoring comes from offensive rebounding and being a better/stronger finisher down low...but in terms of scoring when it matters, scoring in a team setting, go to moves in the post...I don't think this is all that close.

This, totally agree.

And in terms of being effective as a scorer for your team's own good, Wilt won won his rings while being the 2nd and 4th option on offense. Kareem won 4 out of his 6 rings while putting up the highest scoring average for his team in the playoffs and in the playoffs Kareem both averaged more points per game and he did it on better FG% compared to Wilt.

And Kareem actually won around when he peaked in terms of scoring, while Wilt won one of his two averaging 14 points per game.

And based on offensive skillset this shouldn't be a debate.

[PTB Fan]

I agree 100%. Wilt's scoring numbers(particularly early 60's) were largely a product of their era. I don't know why the 39.5 FGA and 17 FTA aren't brought up every time the 50.4 ppg are. Not to mention the 48.5 mpg which included him playing every minute of 40, even 50 point blowouts. And then dropping to 35 ppg on Iverson-esque TS% in the playoffs.

Along with the pace of the game rapidly slowing, the lane widening and starting centers(rotation players getting bigger), his scoring numbers started coming down to earth, and they always did in the playoffs.

Not to mention that in his his 2 high scoring seasons(post lane-widening), he averaged 34.7 ppg on 51 FG%/51.3 TS% and 33.5 ppg on 54 FG%/54.7 TS%.

Kareem averaged 34.8 ppg on 57.4 FG%/60.3 TS% in 1972 and he said himself that he was better later which showed how deceiving stats are.

Another important point is how defensive strategies changed. Kareem mentioned in a '77 interview that he was pretty much played one on one during his first few years in Milwaukee, but that he was constantly doubled and tripled by the late 70's.

In most of the Wilt footage available, he seems to face far more single coverage than double teams, and I've heard many from that era mention that double teaming was rare.

By the time Kareem got stronger and improved his repertoire with the left hand sky hook and turnaround, he had no real weakness offensively, which makes him the greatest offensive center ever, imo.

His greater team success as a high scorer and Kareem's edge as far as go to moves and counters seals it for me.

From the footage I've seen, I don't see their footwork or touch as comparable, and Wilt's strength advantage isn't that big of a factor for me because he didn't seem to use it like a true power player. Part of that may have been that his lower body strength wasn't as great as people might think(just speculation, but it makes sense) and the fact that he looked awkward dribbling the ball while backing in. As well as Wilt's own claim that he didn't want to overpower people and wanted to prove he was skilled.

Nice post.

It's true that the NBA in the 60's didn't have double-teams in whole. I believe they played Wilt physically tough. But, i agree that defensively, what Kareem faced from team point (double teams, more great defenders, double-teams), was little more efficient and his scoring actually helped his team.

Wilt has an edge in versatility, scoring in bunches but these post really does a great job of eliminating that. Would you say that Kareem's 77 was his peak? It seems so.

He wasn't the skinny Lew that got little out matched physically when he played Nate and Wilt too (but not as much, as he scored 40 with 50% FG on him).

[ShaqAttack3234]

Would you say that Kareem's 77 was his peak? It seems so.

He wasn't the skinny Lew that got little out matched physically when he played Nate and Wilt too (but not as much, as he scored 40 with 50% FG on him).

Yes, here's a post I made about Kareem's '77 season. http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=231270

I do believe that to be his peak, most of the top 10 players peaked in a championship season, but Kareem was one of the clear exceptions, imo.

[PTB Fan]

Yes, here's a post I made about Kareem's '77 season. http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=231270

I do believe that to be his peak, most of the top 10 players peaked in a championship season, but Kareem was one of the clear exceptions, imo.

Yeah. Kareem had little bad luck with his team mates being injured when it mattered most, especially in the Bucks years as well.

[jlauber]

I'll address this later...but a hint...Kareem was NOT nearly the CLUTCH player that some here truly believe.

Meanwhile, Wilt took pathetic rosters to within an eyelash of beating HOF-laden Celtic squads,... as well as leading the league in SCORING, REBOUNDING, and FG%, in the SAME season...and in a season in which his TEAM had the BEST RECORD in the league.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

I'll address this later...but a hint...Kareem was NOT nearly the CLUTCH player that some here truly believe.

Meanwhile, Wilt took pathetic rosters to within an eyelash of beating HOF-laden Celtic squads,... as well as leading the league in SCORING, REBOUNDING, and FG%, in the SAME season...and in a season in which his TEAM had the BEST RECORD in the league.

Kareem must have been clutch enough because he won 6 Championships and most of those he was the Alpha Dog.

Wilt made some pathetic rosters good, but Wilt also lost when he had a stacked roster. Wilt, Jerry West, Elgin Baylor. There's no way they should have lost some of those. I'm not blaming him for the losses himself but when it comes to a players legacy that stuff weighs heavy. Wilt was great but regarding the question in the OP I think Kareem has him.

To me Lebron = Wilt in that they are both physically dominant players that didn't have to develop all their skills and because they we so much bigger, faster, stronger, and jumped higher than their competition. They both dominated the regular season but in the post season they fell short. Wilt won 2 so obviously he is better off than Lebron but he still underacheived by most peoples account.

[jlauber]

Kareem must have been clutch enough because he won 6 Championships and most of those he was the Alpha Dog.

Wilt made some pathetic rosters good, but Wilt also lost when he had a stacked roster. Wilt, Jerry West, Elgin Baylor. There's no way they should have lost some of those. I'm not blaming him for the losses himself but when it comes to a players legacy that stuff weighs heavy. Wilt was great but regarding the question in the OP I think Kareem has him.

To me Lebron = Wilt in that they are both physically dominant players that didn't have to develop all their skills and because they we so much bigger, faster, stronger, and jumped higher than their competition. They both dominated the regular season but in the post season they fell short. Wilt won 2 so obviously he is better off than Lebron but he still underacheived by most peoples account.

Wilt had West and Baylor for ONE near FULL season. They also were paired together in ONE other post-season. Now, let's examine those two post-seasons. One, Baylor was AWFUL...shooting .385. Not only that, but Wilt's COACH left Wilt on the bench in the last five minutes of a game seven, and i which Chamberlain had engineered a comeback from a 17 point deficit down to seven...all while scoring 18 points, on 7-8 shooting, and with 27 rebounds.

The second post-season? Well, Wilt was FOUR months removed from MAJOR KNEE surgery. Secondly, the Lakers had West, a Wilt at nowhere 100%, and an over-the-hill Baylor...and little else. Not only that, but they faced a heavily-favored Knick team that had wiped out Kareem's 56-26 Bucks in the ECF's, 4-1. Wilt, behind a 23-24-.625 Finals, and one ONE leg, got his 46-36 Lakers to a game seven. Yes, Reed injured his knee in game five, BUT, the series was tied 2-2 at the time...AND the Lakers were BEATING his Knicks by ten points in that game five when he went down. Had the officials not looked the other way in the second half of that game five, Wilt's 45-27 game six, on 20-27 shooting, would have been the clinching win.

Finally...had Chamberlain had the good fortune to have had a PRIME Magic for TEN seasons, and I suspect that he would have easily won six rings, too, if not more.

[jlauber]

Kareem a better scorer than Wilt? Just what in the hell is that based on? Wilt holds some 130 NBA records...MANY of them SCORING records. Furthermore, Kareem faced MANY of the SAME centers that a PRIME Chamberlain just DESTROYED. Where are Kareem's THREE 50+ point games against Reed? Where are Kareem's THREE 60+ point games against Bellamy? And find me the game in which Kareem outscored Thurmond by a 45-13 margin. THAT was what a PRIME Chamberlain was capable of. In fact, Wilt, in his 68-69 season, poured in TWO 60+ point games, and against Connie Dierking and Jim Fox. Kareem came into the league the very next season, and played againt both. Yet, he never came close to those types of games against them.

Kareem better in the post-season? Let's take a closer look. While Wilt was not only routinely facing a HOF center in the post-season, he was also battling HOF-laden rosters his ENTIRE career.

How about Kareem? In the decade of the 70's, which is arguably the WORST decade for CHAMPIONS in NBA HISTORY...Kareem won ONE title, and made it ONE other Finals. In fact, in their four seasons in the league together, Kareem and Wilt each won one ring, but Wilt had a 3-1 edge in Finals.

And let's take a closer look at that decade, too. In his rookie season, his 56-26 Bucks were blown out by the 60-22 Knicks, 4-1. And Kareem played brilliantly, too. BUT, Wilt had SEVERAL similar post-seasons in his career, and with teammates playing FAR worse...and yet, all we ever read is that Wilt was a "choker." How come Kareem doesn't get his share of the blame under the EXACT same circumstances?

And true, he won a ring in '71. However, has there ever been an easier road to a title than what his team, faced that season? They beat a 41-41 Warrior team in the first round. Then they beat Wilt's 48-34 Laker team, that was withOUT BOTH West and Baylor (and a 34 year old Wilt, only a year removed from major knee surgery, battled a PRIME Kareem to a statistical draw in that series, too.) Then, they swept a 42-40 Bullets team in the Finals.

How about Kareem's 71-72 season? Arguably his greatest REGULAR season. 34.8 ppg, 16.6 rpg, and .574 shooting. Then, in the playoffs...Kareem's 63-19 Bucks, with their overwhelming edge in talent, were able to overcome Kareem's 22.8 ppg .405 performance in the first round against the Warriors. BUT, then Kareem flops badly in the '72 WCF's against a 35 year-old Chamberlain that not only reduced Kareem to .457 shooting in the entire series, but a HORRIBLE .414 over the course of the last FOUR games...three of them Laker wins. And, Wilt really pounded Kareem in the clinching game six win, and in Milwaukee.

Kareem put up great numbers again in the 72-73 season (although he only shot .450 against Wilt in six regular season games...and Wilt shot .737 against him.) However, Kareem took his 60-22 team down in flames in the first round of the playoffs against Nate Thurmond's 47-35 Warriors (and in a series in which Oscar was brilliant.) Kareem averaged 22.8 ppg on .428 shooting. Of course, Wilt then took HIS 60-22 team to a blowout 4-1 romp over that SAME Warrior team...and in a series in which Wilt outrebounded Nate, 23.6 rpg to 17.2 rpg, and outshot Thurmond, .550 to .392.

Wilt retired after that...so the assumption was that Kareem would now FINALLY be able to get some titles. What happened? In game seven of the '74 Finals, and on Milwaukee's home floor, Dave Cowens outplayed Kareem in every aspect in leading Boston to a blowout win.

Oscar retired after that season...and guess what happened next? Kareem's Bucks went 38-44 (and only 35-31 with Kareem.) BTW, Kareem missed 16 games that season. How come? He broke his hand in throwing a punch. Why is that significant? For one, it cost Milwaukee any shot at the playoffs. But even more importantly, think about this: Wilt played a clinching game five of the '72 Finals with one badly sprained wrist...and the other FRACTURED. Not only that, Wilt DOMINATED that game, scoring 24 points, on 10-14 shooting, with 29 rebounds, and 9 blocks...en route to the Finals MVP. How come Wilt could play with TWO badly injured wrists (one broken), and yet Kareem missed 16 games with ONE injured wrist. AND, it would not be the last time Kareem would miss a chunk of season with a broken wrist, either. In any case, CLEARLY Wilt could play with a GREAR deal more pain.

As an interesting side note to that 74-75 season...Rick Barry, with rookie Jamaal Wilkes as his second best player, led a 48-34 Warrior team to a title. Here was Barry, with a ragtag roster winning a title. Oh, and more on Wilkes later.

The Bucks basically gave up on Kareem after that disappointing season. He was subsequently traded to the Lakers, along with Lucius Allen. While Kareem was able to help LA win a few more games (going from 30-52 to 40-42...and with HOFer Goodrich at his side), they didn't make the playoffs.

That 75-76 season also brings up another very interesting point about Kareem. In that season, he averaged 27.7 ppg, 16.9 rpg, and shot .529 from the field, in 41 mpg. Now, think about this... in Abdul Jabbar's 71-72 regular season, he played a career high 44 mpg, scored a career high 34.8 ppg, shot a much better .574, and grabbed nearly as many rebounds, at 16.6 rpg. So, here was the "front-running" Kareem, basically "stats-padding" on a team that went 63-19, and had a +11.1 scoring differential. And yet, when his 75-76 Laker team NEEDED him to ELEVATE his game...he shrunk considerably.

THAT is a critical point in these Wilt-Kareem discussions. Wilt could LEAD the league in SCORING, REBOUNDING, and FG%...at the SAME time, whether it be for an AWFUL team, as he did in '63 (44.8 ppg, 24.3 rpg, and a then-record .528 FG%)...or he could LEAD the league in SCORING, REBOUNDING, and FG% for a team with the BEST RECORD in the league...as he did in the 65-66 season (33.5 ppg, 24.6 rpg, and .540 FG%...along with 5.2 apg.) Yet, Kareem, when faced with ordinary rosters, could NOT elevate his game. In fact, he had one of the WORST seasons of his career...and in the middle of his prime.

Kareem's 76-77 Lakers had the best record in the league, going 53-29. Yet, despite Kareem's brilliant post-season, they were SWEPT by Walton's 49-33 Blazers. Here again, Wilt had a MONSTER '64 post-season (34.7 ppg, 25.8 rpg, and on .543 shooting), but his 48-32 Warriors lost a five game series to a Celtic team that had an 8-2 edge in HOFers. Yet...all we read is how Wilt "choked", BUT, where is the criticism of Kareem in '77 then?

IMHO, Kareem had the MOST STACKED teams in the league in '77-78 and '78-79. He had players like Lou Hudson, Norm Nixon, Adrian Dantley (who was averaging 27 ppg when LA acquired him), AND a Wilkes who was now nearing his prime....in BOTH seasons. The result? LA went 45-37 in '78, and were brutalized in the first round by a 47-35 Sonics team that had ONE border-line HOF player in Dennis Johnson. BTW, the 44-38 Bullets won the title that season. Then, in '79, and again with that same basic talent-laden roster, Kareem's Lakers went 47-35, and were blown out in the second round, 4-1, by that same Sonics team.

So, that was Kareem's career in the decade of the 70's. ONE ring, TWO Finals, and mostly early round playoff eliminations, as well as two team's not making the playoffs.

More to come...

[Miller for 3]

I agree 100%. Wilt's scoring numbers(particularly early 60's) were largely a product of their era. I don't know why the 39.5 FGA and 17 FTA aren't brought up every time the 50.4 ppg are. Not to mention the 48.5 mpg which included him playing every minute of 40, even 50 point blowouts. And then dropping to 35 ppg on Iverson-esque TS% in the playoffs.

Along with the pace of the game rapidly slowing, the lane widening and starting centers(rotation players getting bigger), his scoring numbers started coming down to earth, and they always did in the playoffs.

Not to mention that in his his 2 high scoring seasons(post lane-widening), he averaged 34.7 ppg on 51 FG%/51.3 TS% and 33.5 ppg on 54 FG%/54.7 TS%.

Kareem averaged 34.8 ppg on 57.4 FG%/60.3 TS% in 1972 and he said himself that he was better later which showed how deceiving stats are.

Another important point is how defensive strategies changed. Kareem mentioned in a '77 interview that he was pretty much played one on one during his first few years in Milwaukee, but that he was constantly doubled and tripled by the late 70's.

In most of the Wilt footage available, he seems to face far more single coverage than double teams, and I've heard many from that era mention that double teaming was rare.

By the time Kareem got stronger and improved his repertoire with the left hand sky hook and turnaround, he had no real weakness offensively, which makes him the greatest offensive center ever, imo.

His greater team success as a high scorer and Kareem's edge as far as go to moves and counters seals it for me.

From the footage I've seen, I don't see their footwork or touch as comparable, and Wilt's strength advantage isn't that big of a factor for me because he didn't seem to use it like a true power player. Part of that may have been that his lower body strength wasn't as great as people might think(just speculation, but it makes sense) and the fact that he looked awkward dribbling the ball while backing in. As well as Wilt's own claim that he didn't want to overpower people and wanted to prove he was skilled.

This is the post of someone who knows basketball.



Kareem a better scorer than Wilt? Just what in the hell is that based on? Wilt holds some 130 NBA records...MANY of them SCORING records. Furthermore, Kareem faced MANY of the SAME centers that a PRIME Chamberlain just DESTROYED. Where are Kareem's THREE 50+ point games against Reed? Where are Kareem's THREE 60+ point games against Bellamy? And find me the game in which Kareem outscored Thurmond by a 45-13 margin. THAT was what a PRIME Chamberlain was capable of. In fact, Wilt, in his 68-69 season, poured in TWO 60+ point games, and against Connie Dierking and Jim Fox. Kareem came into the league the very next season, and played againt both. Yet, he never came close to those types of games against them.

Kareem better in the post-season? Let's take a closer look. While Wilt was not only routinely facing a HOF center in the post-season, he was also battling HOF-laden rosters his ENTIRE career.

How about Kareem? In the decade of the 70's, which is arguably the WORST decade for CHAMPIONS in NBA HISTORY...Kareem won ONE title, and made it ONE other Finals. In fact, in their four seasons in the league together, Kareem and Wilt each won one ring, but Wilt had a 3-1 edge in Finals.

And let's take a closer look at that decade, too. In his rookie season, his 56-26 Bucks were blown out by the 60-22 Knicks, 4-1. And Kareem played brilliantly, too. BUT, Wilt had SEVERAL similar post-seasons in his career, and with teammates playing FAR worse...and yet, all we ever read is that Wilt was a "choker." How come Kareem doesn't get his share of the blame under the EXACT same circumstances?

And true, he won a ring in '71. However, has there ever been an easier road to a title than what his team, faced that season? They beat a 41-41 Warrior team in the first round. Then they beat Wilt's 48-34 Laker team, that was withOUT BOTH West and Baylor (and a 34 year old Wilt, only a year removed from major knee surgery, battled a PRIME Kareem to a statistical draw in that series, too.) Then, they swept a 42-40 Bullets team in the Finals.

How about Kareem's 71-72 season? Arguably his greatest REGULAR season. 34.8 ppg, 16.6 rpg, and .574 shooting. Then, in the playoffs...Kareem's 63-19 Bucks, with their overwhelming edge in talent, were able to overcome Kareem's 22.8 ppg .405 performance in the first round against the Warriors. BUT, then Kareem flops badly in the '72 WCF's against a 35 year-old Chamberlain that not only reduced Kareem to .457 shooting in the entire series, but a HORRIBLE .414 over the course of the last FOUR games...three of them Laker wins. And, Wilt really pounded Kareem in the clinching game six win, and in Milwaukee.

Kareem put up great numbers again in the 72-73 season (although he only shot .450 against Wilt in six regular season games...and Wilt shot .737 against him.) However, Kareem took his 60-22 team down in flames in the first round of the playoffs against Nate Thurmond's 47-35 Warriors (and in a series in which Oscar was brilliant.) Kareem averaged 22.8 ppg on .428 shooting. Of course, Wilt then took HIS 60-22 team to a blowout 4-1 romp over that SAME Warrior team...and in a series in which Wilt outrebounded Nate, 23.6 rpg to 17.2 rpg, and outshot Thurmond, .550 to .392.

Wilt retired after that...so the assumption was that Kareem would now FINALLY be able to get some titles. What happened? In game seven of the '74 Finals, and on Milwaukee's home floor, Dave Cowens outplayed Kareem in every aspect in leading Boston to a blowout win.

Oscar retired after that season...and guess what happened next? Kareem's Bucks went 38-44 (and only 35-31 with Kareem.) BTW, Kareem missed 16 games that season. How come? He broke his hand in throwing a punch. Why is that significant? For one, it cost Milwaukee any shot at the playoffs. But even more importantly, think about this: Wilt played a clinching game five of the '72 Finals with one badly sprained wrist...and the other FRACTURED. Not only that, Wilt DOMINATED that game, scoring 24 points, on 10-14 shooting, with 29 rebounds, and 9 blocks...en route to the Finals MVP. How come Wilt could play with TWO badly injured wrists (one broken), and yet Kareem missed 16 games with ONE injured wrist. AND, it would not be the last time Kareem would miss a chunk of season with a broken wrist, either. In any case, CLEARLY Wilt could play with a GREAR deal more pain.

As an interesting side note to that 74-75 season...Rick Barry, with rookie Jamaal Wilkes as his second best player, led a 48-34 Warrior team to a title. Here was Barry, with a ragtag roster winning a title. Oh, and more on Wilkes later.

The Bucks basically gave up on Kareem after that disappointing season. He was subsequently traded to the Lakers, along with Lucius Allen. While Kareem was able to help LA win a few more games (going from 30-52 to 40-42...and with HOFer Goodrich at his side), they didn't make the playoffs.

That 75-76 season also brings up another very interesting point about Kareem. In that season, he averaged 27.7 ppg, 16.9 rpg, and shot .529 from the field, in 41 mpg. Now, think about this... in Abdul Jabbar's 71-72 regular season, he played a career high 44 mpg, scored a career high 34.8 ppg, shot a much better .574, and grabbed nearly as many rebounds, at 16.6 rpg. So, here was the "front-running" Kareem, basically "stats-padding" on a team that went 63-19, and had a +11.1 scoring differential. And yet, when his 75-76 Laker team NEEDED him to ELEVATE his game...he shrunk considerably.

THAT is a critical point in these Wilt-Kareem discussions. Wilt could LEAD the league in SCORING, REBOUNDING, and FG%...at the SAME time, whether it be for an AWFUL team, as he did in '63 (44.8 ppg, 24.3 rpg, and a then-record .528 FG%)...or he could LEAD the league in SCORING, REBOUNDING, and FG% for a team with the BEST RECORD in the league...as he did in the 65-66 season (33.5 ppg, 24.6 rpg, and .540 FG%...along with 5.2 apg.) Yet, Kareem, when faced with ordinary rosters, could NOT elevate his game. In fact, he had one of the WORST seasons of his career...and in the middle of his prime.

Kareem's 76-77 Lakers had the best record in the league, going 53-29. Yet, despite Kareem's brilliant post-season, they were SWEPT by Walton's 49-33 Blazers. Here again, Wilt had a MONSTER '64 post-season (34.7 ppg, 25.8 rpg, and on .543 shooting), but his 48-32 Warriors lost a five game series to a Celtic team that had an 8-2 edge in HOFers. Yet...all we read is how Wilt "choked", BUT, where is the criticism of Kareem in '77 then?

IMHO, Kareem had the MOST STACKED teams in the league in '77-78 and '78-79. He had players like Lou Hudson, Norm Nixon, Adrian Dantley (who was averaging 27 ppg when LA acquired him), AND a Wilkes who was now nearing his prime....in BOTH seasons. The result? LA went 45-37 in '78, and were brutalized in the first round by a 47-35 Sonics team that had ONE border-line HOF player in Dennis Johnson. BTW, the 44-38 Bullets won the title that season. Then, in '79, and again with that same basic talent-laden roster, Kareem's Lakers went 47-35, and were blown out in the second round, 4-1, by that same Sonics team.

So, that was Kareem's career in the decade of the 70's. ONE ring, TWO Finals, and mostly early round playoff eliminations, as well as two team's not making the playoffs.

More to come...

This is the post of someone who doesn't know basketball.

[Kblaze8855]

Wilt would be a better scorer than Kareem if he decided to cut out the holding back due to hating the perception of him as just being a bully. Wilt being as good, athletic, and strong as he was...him shooting so many fadeaways is almost unacceptable regardless of the results. He would tell you himself that he didnt always take the easiest shots he could because he wanted to show he was skilled(Hes admitted as much many times....interview with Russell and costas being the best example on youtube).

Guy took too many garbage shots relative to his talent.

In so many ways he played less than his best its hard to look the other way.

Im sure that will result in someone(well..we know who it will be) pointing out a bunch of numbers showing him playing well...which isnt in dispute.

But I cant ignore his refusal to get the best shots so he could look skilled to idiots.

Lot of insecurity issues with him.

[jlauber]

Continuing...

Let's once again recap Kareem's career in the 70's. In the weakest decade in NBA history, and with 48-34, 49-33, 44-38, and 52-30 team's winning titles (and 40-42 and 42-40 team's making the Finals)...Kareem won ONE ring (and once again, with arguably the easiest road to a title in NBA history), and went to ONE other Finals. He had a 56-26 team blown out in one ECF's; he had a 63-19 team ripped apart in '72 (escaping into the WCF's after shooting .405 in the first round, and then shooting .457 in the WCF's...including a "choking" .414 over the last four game of that series); a 60-22 team shredded by a 47-35 team in the first round (and in a series win which Kareem shot .428); losing a game seven in the '74 Finals, and on his home floor, when he was outplayed by 6-9 Dave Cowens and the underdog Celtics); missing 16 games due to a broken wrist in '75, and then only leading that team to a 35-31 record when he played (and they subsequently missed the playoffs); having his worst season of the 70's, on a team with an average roster that desperately needed him to step up; watching his 76-77 team, with the best record in the league, being SWEPT by the 49-33 Blazers; and finally, playing with the two most stacked rosters in the league in '78 and '79, and being early round cannon-fodder.

When did Kareem win the BULK of his six rings? Of course it was no coincidence that it came during the MAGIC-era. MAGIC IMMEDIATELY led LA to a 60-22 record. En route, Magic easily led the Lakers past their tormentors from the previous two seasons, the Sonics, in a 4-1 romp. Then, while Kareem played brilliantly in the first five games of the '80 Finals, he missed game six with an ankle sprain. Here again, I have read posters ripping Wilt for his poor play in game six of the '68 ECF's...and yet, they NEVER acknowledge that Wilt played the last FIVE games of that series with THREE different leg and foot injuries, including a tear in his quad muscle. Where is the critcism of Kareem, who SAT OUT a critical game six of the Finals. Fortunately for Kareem, MAGIC stepped up with a HUGE game... 42 points, on 14-23 shooting (and 14-14 from the line), and with a game high 15 rebounds...en route to a title-clinching game six win on the ROAD.

In the 80-81 season, Magic was injured early, and missed much of the last half of the season. He was rusty and nowhere near 100%...and did Kareem step up his game to overcome Magic's injuries...as Magic did the previous season? No, he was battered by a Moses Malone, who took a 40-42 team to a shocking upset of the Lakers. BTW, Kareem shot .462 in that post-season, which would be the third time in his career in which he failed to shoot even the league average (and he would make it a 4th in '88 too.)

Magic came back with a near Triple-Double season in BOTH the regular season, AND the post-season, in 81-82. He was CLEARLY their best player, and he led LA to a dominating title. And in the process, he won his second FMVP in his first three seasons. Oh, and BTW, he finished ahead of Kareem in the MVP balloting, too. And he would finish ahead of Kareem in the MVP balloting in the last EIGHT seasons of the 80's.

Magic did not play well in the '83 Finals, and LA was missing Worthy, too. But, once again. Moses just abused Kareem, crushing him on the glass, and the Sixers romped over the Lakers.

Magic was blamed for the Finals loss in '84, in a series in which the Lakers should have SWEPT Boston (even Bird admitted as much.) BUT, all Magic did in that series, was average 18.1 ppg, LEAD LA in rebounding at 7.7 rpg, dish out 13.6 apg, and shoot an astonishing .560 from the field. How about Kareem. He shot .481 in that Finals. Where was the criticism of Kareem?

Kareem did have a great Finals in '85. And he deserved the FMVP...BUT, it was MAGIC who LED that team in the entire post-season. Magic engineered a Laker offense that averaged 126 ppg in the playoffs.

I have mentioned it many times before, but a 38 year old Kareem just SHELLED Hakeem in the '86 regular season. In five regular season games, Kareem poured in 33 ppg on, get this... .634 shooting against Hakeem. Included in those five games, were TWO of 40+, one of them a 46 point game, on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes.

BUT, in the '86 WCF's, Hakeem suddenly outplayed Kareem (to his credit, the old man still did average 27 ppg in that series.) However, it begs the question...why could Kareem so thoroughly dominate Hakeem in the regular season...and then collapse in the critical playoffs.

By the '87 post-season, Kareem was not even LA's second best player. Magic was CLEARLY the best player in the league, and now Worthy was his "second banana." And Magic was just sensational in the Finals, averaging 26 ppg, a team leading 8 rpg, handing out 13.0 apg, and shooting .541 from the floor. And behind Magic's play, the Lakers rolled to a title. I have long maintained that had Kareem retired before that season, that LA would still have probably won the title. Both AC Green and Mychael Thompson played exceptionally in that post-season, and both could easily have absorbed Kareem's minutes.

And by the '88 post-season, Kareem was now the FIFTH best player on the Lakers. In fact, they won the title DESPITE Kareem's AWFUL play. 13 ppg, 4 rpg, and a miserable .413 FG%.

Magic was injured in game two of the Finals in '89 (and Scott was already out for that series), and with Magic down, the Lakers were swept. Kareem, at age 41, was now worthless.

Kareem retired after that season...and MAGIC led the Lakers to a 63-19 record, which was their second best record of the decade of the 80's. So much for missing Kareem. Then, in the very next season, Magic took an injury-riddled Laker team to the Finals, where MJ and the Bulls romped, 4-1.

Magic "retired" after that season...and LA IMMEDIATELY fell to a 43-39 record. And the very next year after that, they were below .500, at 39-43.

Now, you tell me who had the most impact on the Showtime Lakers of the 80's?

[jlauber]

Wilt would be a better scorer than Kareem if he decided to cut out the holding back due to hating the perception of him as just being a bully. Wilt being as good, athletic, and strong as he was...him shooting so many fadeaways is almost unacceptable regardless of the results. He would tell you himself that he didnt always take the easiest shots he could because he wanted to show he was skilled(Hes admitted as much many times....interview with Russell and costas being the best example on youtube).

Guy took too many garbage shots relative to his talent.

In so many ways he played less than his best its hard to look the other way.

Im sure that will result in someone(well..we know who it will be) pointing out a bunch of numbers showing him playing well...which isnt in dispute.

But I cant ignore his refusal to get the best shots so he could look skilled to idiots.

Lot of insecurity issues with him.

I won't argue with some of this. Wilt COULD have just CRUSHED his peers. Instead, he was a "gentle giant." Still, I seriously doubt that the NBA would ever have allowed Wilt to play like Shaq did in his career. Keep in mind that the NBA was continually throwing up "anti-WILT" rules in his career, in an attempt to curtail his dominance. Most had little to no effect.

The other "issue' that Wilt had was that he was constantly saddled with inept coach's who had no clue how to use him. They either depended on him to do everything, while his usually pathetic teammates just watched (and then it was Wilt who took the blame when they failed)...or they handcuffed him (and again, it was Wilt who was blamed for not doing more). Only Hannum and Sharman knew how to best use him.

[Kblaze8855]

Wilt didnt need to knock people ever. Ive never once seen Wilt attempt to go around anyone guarding him from 10-12 feet and fail. And thats including old Wilt. He could have abused people and he just didnt feel like it. He produced too much to say he wasnt ding his job...but I have no doubt he wasnt doing the best he could far as getting himself easy shots. He isnt missing 50% of his shots making an effort to get an easy one every time. He isnt missing 40% either. not in the early 60s.

Part of that was the "**** it...." shot selection of the era that didnt stress good shots. But part of it is him just....not wanting to push people around or embarrass people.

Chapter in his A view from Above book on how it felt being so tall....when he admitted he would allow poor ball handling bigs to dribble and shoot when he could just take the ball...because he hated making other tall guys look like bumbling idiots?

It almost pisses me off.

Wilt with the will to win of a Bird or Jordan might literally have scored 50 a game on 65% shooting.

[oolalaa]

Meanwhile, Wilt took pathetic rosters to within an eyelash of beating HOF-laden Celtic squads,... as well as leading the league in SCORING, REBOUNDING, and FG%, in the SAME season...and in a season in which his TEAM had the BEST RECORD in the league.

I've said this to you once before, but since you ignored it last time i will put it in bold capitals for you:

COMPLETELY EXONERATING WILT FOR HIS EARLY TEAMMATES POOR SHOOTING IS FARCICAL. BASKETBALL IS A TEAM GAME. WILT WASN'T A TEAM PLAYER FOR HIS FIRST 7 YEARS.

Do you know how i know this?

In the 1965/66 postseason, with wilt playing selfishly and focusing exclusively on points, his teammates shot poorly and they crashed out to the celtics in round 1.

The very next season, with wilt playing unselfishly and with the exact same team, they shot much better and went on to win the championship, beating boston along the way. Is this a coincidence? Of course not.

[jlauber]

I've said this to you once before, but since you ignored it last time i will put it in bold capitals for you:

COMPLETELY EXONERATING WILT FOR HIS EARLY TEAMMATES POOR SHOOTING IS FARCICAL. BASKETBALL IS A TEAM GAME. WILT WASN'T A TEAM PLAYER FOR HIS FIRST 7 YEARS.

Do you know how i know this?

In the 1965/66 postseason, with wilt playing selfishly and focusing exclusively on points, his teammates shot poorly and they crashed out to the celtics in round 1.

The very next season, with wilt playing unselfishly and with the exact same team, they shot much better and went on to win the championship, beating boston along the way. Is this a coincidence? Of course not.

You know how I KNOW that you are wrong? In that 65-66 season, Wilt averaged 33.5 ppg, 24.6 rpg, shot .540, and handed out 5.2 apg. His teammates collectively shot .416.

In that playoffs, Wilt averaged 28 ppg, 30 rpg, shot .509, and handed out 3.0 apg. Now, you could argue that apg dropped...BUT, think about this...his teammates collectively shot .352 in that post-season. Don't you think that had they shot remotely close to their regular season FG%, that Wilt's apg would have been higher? The ONLY player who played anywhere near his regular season numbers....was WILT. His TEAMMATES were AWFUL.

[oolalaa]

Yes, here's a post I made about Kareem's '77 season. http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=231270

I do believe that to be his peak, most of the top 10 players peaked in a championship season, but Kareem was one of the clear exceptions, imo.

I disagree with this.

I find it hard to look past kareems 79/80 campaign when determining his 'peak' as it was certainly his greatest all round season...

reg season - 38.3 mpg, 24.8 ppg/16.9 fga on .604 fg%, 10.8 rpg, 4.5 apg, 1.0 spg, 3,4 bpg
playoffs - 41.2 mpg, 31.9 ppg/23.0 fga on .572 fg%, 12.1 rpg, 3.1 apg, 1.1 spg, 3.9 bpg
finals - 40.6 mpg, 33.4 ppg/22.2 fga on .549 fg%, 13.6 rpg, 3.2 apg, 0.6 spg, 4.6 bpg

mvp, all nba 1st, all def 1st, blocks champ, *robbed of finals mvp*

[jlauber]

Wilt didnt need to knock people ever. Ive never once seen Wilt attempt to go around anyone guarding him from 10-12 feet and fail. And thats including old Wilt. He could have abused people and he just didnt feel like it. He produced too much to say he wasnt ding his job...but I have no doubt he wasnt doing the best he could far as getting himself easy shots. He isnt missing 50% of his shots making an effort to get an easy one every time. He isnt missing 40% either. not in the early 60s.

Part of that was the "**** it...." shot selection of the era that didnt stress good shots. But part of it is him just....not wanting to push people around or embarrass people.

Chapter in his A view from Above book on how it felt being so tall....when he admitted he would allow poor ball handling bigs to dribble and shoot when he could just take the ball...because he hated making other tall guys look like bumbling idiots?

It almost pisses me off.

Wilt with the will to win of a Bird or Jordan might literally have scored 50 a game on 65% shooting.

Watch the YouTube footage of the game in which the Bucks ended LA's 33 game winning streak. Going on memory, at about the seven minute mark of that footage, Kareem "sucker punches" Happy Hairston. Wilt storms over to assist Hairston, and Kareem retreats to the corner. On the very next play, the Lakers inbound the ball to Wilt, who just blows right thru a helpless Kareem for an easy basket. CLEARLY, had Wilt played with THAT mentality,...well, the NBA probably would have folded. Who would want to watch ONE man OBLITERATING an entire league?

[PHILA]

I've said this to you once before, but since you ignored it last time i will put it in bold capitals for you:

COMPLETELY EXONERATING WILT FOR HIS EARLY TEAMMATES POOR SHOOTING IS FARCICAL. BASKETBALL IS A TEAM GAME. WILT WASN'T A TEAM PLAYER FOR HIS FIRST 7 YEARS.

Do you know how i know this?

In the 1965/66 postseason, with wilt playing selfishly and focusing exclusively on points, his teammates shot poorly and they crashed out to the celtics in round 1.

The very next season, with wilt playing unselfishly and with the exact same team, they shot much better and went on to win the championship, beating boston along the way. Is this a coincidence? Of course not. :facepalm




http://i51.tinypic.com/szgxvn.png
http://i51.tinypic.com/fx9lso.png



Jet Magazine - Apr 7, 1966 (http://books.google.com/books?id=aLkDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA43&dq=wilt+chamberlain+schayes&hl=en&ei=GUNQTdrHBIT68AaJtryCDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false)

http://i56.tinypic.com/s2eb68.png



Considering how few touches he received in the games due to the sagging defense, we must assume a number of his missed FG's were tip-in attempts in the congested paint. He averaged 30 boards for the series and a good chunk of them must have come on the offensive end.


Here is an example below (Chamberlain off. rebound + dunk) showing just how poor the Sixers shooting was. Wali barely hits the backboard on a 15 foot jumper.


18:33 mark

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


Also note another Chamberlain rebound & dunk at the 18:51 mark in the same video above from the '66 series. We can also note how the Celtics pressed full court to keep the ball out of his hands as much as possible and at the 17:20 mark off the opening jump ball how the defense was shifted to Wilt's (left) side of the floor, leaving Wali unguarded for a shot. We can also see a Bill Russell "intangible" quality off the inbounds.

"When I feel he is relaxed, I burst down on the break, and we murder him. But this works just once and two points do not win a ball game."


Some have stated that Wilt was the main reason for the loss in '66, that the Sixers would have won had he statistically performed up to par. In the 1st half of G5, Coach Schayes noted that Chamberlain was the only player to shoot 25% or better from the field on his way to a 46 point night.


Apr 13, 1966 (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=uYxDAAAAIBAJ&sjid=k64MAAAAIBAJ&pg=1086,830822&dq)

http://i52.tinypic.com/1yojrm.png



Game 1:

Sixers hit with the flu + 2 week layoff = 19 turnovers in a 19 point loss.

Wilt Chamberlain did his work under the boards, taking 32 rebounds for the 76ers. But his mates couldn't get the ball into him often and he made only nine field goals in scoring 25 points.

http://i53.tinypic.com/qnah3c.png


Game 2:

http://i53.tinypic.com/b6f3a9.png


Game 3:

Their defense was the barbed wire. Every time they needed a key basket, Wilt Chamberlain poured through the lane and got it for them. That was how the Philadelphia 76ers got back into contention in the Eastern Division playoffs with a 111-105 victory over the Boston Celtics Thursday night at Convention Hall.

http://i51.tinypic.com/23ifl1v.png


Game 4: Chamberlain with the block at the end of regulation to force OT.


http://i51.tinypic.com/24xfeh2.png

http://i52.tinypic.com/104hk3m.png


Game 5:

Christian Science Monitor - Apr 14, 1966

Wilt took 34 shots, hitting on 19. But he was only eight for 25 with his free throws. Chamberlain scored 46 points, no small since Russell played him tight and with a maximum amount of contact. But Wilt could have gone to 63 with Bill Sharman's touch at the foul line. Boston's cornermen excelled, not only, but also on offense. John Havlicek played the full 48 minutes and scored 32 points. Tom Sanders probably had his best game of the series with 11 points and 16 rebounds.

[PHILA]

Apr 18, 1966 (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=GEtQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=XFcDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6818,3280761)

http://i54.tinypic.com/29c9quh.png


Schenectady Gazette - Aug 24, 1966 (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=jmhGAAAAIBAJ&sjid=EekMAAAAIBAJ&pg=2385,4171263&dq)

http://i56.tinypic.com/2n7o36t.png


The Morning Record - Nov 3, 1966 (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=I7hIAAAAIBAJ&sjid=UQENAAAAIBAJ&pg=2872,281349&dq)

http://i54.tinypic.com/30vgmxh.png

[oolalaa]

You know how I KNOW that you are wrong? In that 65-66 season, Wilt averaged 33.5 ppg, 24.6 rpg, shot .540, and handed out 5.2 apg. His teammates collectively shot .416.

In that playoffs, Wilt averaged 28 ppg, 30 rpg, shot .509, and handed out 3.0 apg. Now, you could argue that apg dropped...BUT, think about this...his teammates collectively shot .352 in that post-season. Don't you think that had they shot remotely close to their regular season FG%, that Wilt's apg would have been higher? The ONLY player who played anywhere near his regular season numbers....was WILT. His TEAMMATES were AWFUL.


:roll:

Do you not understand? Being a one man team doesn't work in the playoffs!!

His teammates shot poorly because wilt was a selfish scorer!! Wilt didn't 'get it' in his first 7 years. He didn't have a clue how to make his teammates better and had no idea that playing unselfishly would actually help his team win.

He could get away with just pouring in the points in the reg season without his team suffering too much but it took him 8 years to realize that passing the ball and setting up teammates was the right strategy to overcome boston in the playoffs.

[oolalaa]

Watch the YouTube footage of the game in which the Bucks ended LA's 33 game winning streak. Going on memory, at about the seven minute mark of that footage, Kareem "sucker punches" Happy Hairston. Wilt storms over to assist Hairston, and Kareem retreats to the corner. On the very next play, the Lakers inbound the ball to Wilt, who just blows right thru a helpless Kareem for an easy basket. CLEARLY, had Wilt played with THAT mentality,...well, the NBA probably would have folded. Who would want to watch ONE many OBLITERATING an entire league?

That's the biggest problem with wilt. His mentality.

He wasn't a hyper competitive/cold blooded/winning is everything guy like jordan/magic/russell/bird were. He admits this and has criticised russell for being 'too obsessed with winning' :roll:

If he was, you may be right, the league probably would have folded :lol

[jlauber]

Wilt didnt need to knock people ever. Ive never once seen Wilt attempt to go around anyone guarding him from 10-12 feet and fail. And thats including old Wilt. He could have abused people and he just didnt feel like it. He produced too much to say he wasnt ding his job...but I have no doubt he wasnt doing the best he could far as getting himself easy shots. He isnt missing 50% of his shots making an effort to get an easy one every time. He isnt missing 40% either. not in the early 60s.

Part of that was the "**** it...." shot selection of the era that didnt stress good shots. But part of it is him just....not wanting to push people around or embarrass people.

Chapter in his A view from Above book on how it felt being so tall....when he admitted he would allow poor ball handling bigs to dribble and shoot when he could just take the ball...because he hated making other tall guys look like bumbling idiots?

It almost pisses me off.

Wilt with the will to win of a Bird or Jordan might literally have scored 50 a game on 65% shooting.

BTW, for all the criticism that Wilt received for supposedly not going "all out"...what about Kareem? My god, he folded SEVERAL times in his post-seasons. And, even the movie "Airplane" spoofed his lack of motivation. IMHO, Kareem "went thru the motions" far more than Wilt did.

[oolalaa]

.

I'm not sure why you facepalmed me :facepalm

Alex Hannum gets credit for kickstarting wilts unselfishness and rightly so. Do you think the 76ers would have won in 66/67 with wilt playing like he was the season before. Of course not.

It really is that simple.

[PHILA]

BTW, for all the criticism that Wilt received for supposedly not going "all out"...what about Kareem? My god, he folded SEVERAL times in his post-seasons. And, even the movie "Airplane" spoofed his lack of motivation. IMHO, Kareem "went thru the motions" far more than Wilt did.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d0WRHLcvMY#t=15m45s


Philadelphia Daily News - Jun 2, 1983

So, Billy Cunningham was asked, en route home from sweeping Los Angeles, what would he have said if President Reagan had called? "I would've told him, No. 1, that I voted for him," the 76ers' coach replied. "No. 2, I would've told him that this team, given what they've gone through and what they've accomplished, is a great example of what America is all about." Their last title had come in the spring of '67, in the Cow Palace in San Francisco. "I was there," said Dr. Stanley Lorber, one of the team physicians. "It was exciting, but it was nothing like this. That team, with Wilt, pretty much expected to win. They hadn't gone through the same tribulations. "I spent some time with Wilt this time, and I was startled by what he said to me on the phone after Game 1. He said, without hesitation, that the Lakers would not win a game, that they couldn't do it with a center who doesn't play at both ends consistently."

[jlauber]

I'm not sure why you facepalmed me :facepalm

Alex Hannum gets credit for kickstarting wilts unselfishness and rightly so. Do you think the 76ers would have won in 66/67 with wilt playing like he was the season before. Of course not.

It really is that simple.

Hannum was Wilt's coach in the '64 season, too. Take a look at Wilt's numbers, en route to leading that inept roster to the Finals. Even Hannum had to have Wilt dominate offensively.

[jlauber]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d0WRHLcvMY#t=15m45s


Philadelphia Daily News - Jun 2, 1983

So, Billy Cunningham was asked, en route home from sweeping Los Angeles, what would he have said if President Reagan had called? "I would've told him, No. 1, that I voted for him," the 76ers' coach replied. "No. 2, I would've told him that this team, given what they've gone through and what they've accomplished, is a great example of what America is all about." Their last title had come in the spring of '67, in the Cow Palace in San Francisco. "I was there," said Dr. Stanley Lorber, one of the team physicians. "It was exciting, but it was nothing like this. That team, with Wilt, pretty much expected to win. They hadn't gone through the same tribulations. "I spent some time with Wilt this time, and I was startled by what he said to me on the phone after Game 1. He said, without hesitation, that the Lakers would not win a game, that they couldn't do it with a center who doesn't play at both ends consistently."

You are simply amazing...

:applause: :applause:

BTW, how come we never read about the fact that Wilt played with SEVERAL injuries in the '68 ECF's, and that he was NOTICEABLY LIMPING from game two on? Nope, all we get is that Wilt had a terrible game six (20 points and 27 rebounds, even on horrible shooting.)

Then, when Kareem has a sprained ankle, he can't play in ONE damned game.

Or, how about Wilt playing in OT with a broken wrist in game four of the '72 Finals...and then dominating game five of that series (and also playing with a badly sprained wrist on his other hand.)?

BUT, Kareem misses CHUNKS of TWO seasons with a broken hand.

Or, what about Wilt in his 69-70 season...and coming back WAY ahead of schedule following maor knee surgery...so that his TEAM would have a chance to win a title. AND, then putting up a 23-24 .625 series, and basically on one leg?

[eliteballer]

Probably the best display of Wilt's scoring ability:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWrGWuU2Ak

[D-Wade316]

:facepalm




http://i51.tinypic.com/szgxvn.png
http://i51.tinypic.com/fx9lso.png



Jet Magazine - Apr 7, 1966 (http://books.google.com/books?id=aLkDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA43&dq=wilt+chamberlain+schayes&hl=en&ei=GUNQTdrHBIT68AaJtryCDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false)

http://i56.tinypic.com/s2eb68.png



Considering how few touches he received in the games due to the sagging defense, we must assume a number of his missed FG's were tip-in attempts in the congested paint. He averaged 30 boards for the series and a good chunk of them must have come on the offensive end.


Here is an example below (Chamberlain off. rebound + dunk) showing just how poor the Sixers shooting was. Wali barely hits the backboard on a 15 foot jumper.


18:33 mark

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


Also note another Chamberlain rebound & dunk at the 18:51 mark in the same video above from the '66 series. We can also note how the Celtics pressed full court to keep the ball out of his hands as much as possible and at the 17:20 mark off the opening jump ball how the defense was shifted to Wilt's (left) side of the floor, leaving Wali unguarded for a shot. We can also see a Bill Russell "intangible" quality off the inbounds.

"When I feel he is relaxed, I burst down on the break, and we murder him. But this works just once and two points do not win a ball game."


Some have stated that Wilt was the main reason for the loss in '66, that the Sixers would have won had he statistically performed up to par. In the 1st half of G5, Coach Schayes noted that Chamberlain was the only player to shoot 25% or better from the field on his way to a 46 point night.


Apr 13, 1966 (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=uYxDAAAAIBAJ&sjid=k64MAAAAIBAJ&pg=1086,830822&dq)

http://i52.tinypic.com/1yojrm.png



Game 1:

Sixers hit with the flu + 2 week layoff = 19 turnovers in a 19 point loss.

Wilt Chamberlain did his work under the boards, taking 32 rebounds for the 76ers. But his mates couldn't get the ball into him often and he made only nine field goals in scoring 25 points.

http://i53.tinypic.com/qnah3c.png


Game 2:

http://i53.tinypic.com/b6f3a9.png


Game 3:

Their defense was the barbed wire. Every time they needed a key basket, Wilt Chamberlain poured through the lane and got it for them. That was how the Philadelphia 76ers got back into contention in the Eastern Division playoffs with a 111-105 victory over the Boston Celtics Thursday night at Convention Hall.

http://i51.tinypic.com/23ifl1v.png


Game 4: Chamberlain with the block at the end of regulation to force OT.


http://i51.tinypic.com/24xfeh2.png

http://i52.tinypic.com/104hk3m.png


Game 5:

Christian Science Monitor - Apr 14, 1966

Wilt took 34 shots, hitting on 19. But he was only eight for 25 with his free throws. Chamberlain scored 46 points, no small since Russell played him tight and with a maximum amount of contact. But Wilt could have gone to 63 with Bill Sharman's touch at the foul line. Boston's cornermen excelled, not only, but also on offense. John Havlicek played the full 48 minutes and scored 32 points. Tom Sanders probably had his best game of the series with 11 points and 16 rebounds.
PHILA with a thread ending post.

[bdreason]

I feel like people ignore context when talking about Wilt. Don't compare Wilt's numbers to Kareems in a season where Kareem wins a ring with the Bucks, and Wilt wins nothing.

I mean, a bad team can force feed a player all they want and produce inflated stats... but you won't win a ring with that strategy. A recent example would be Kobe post Shaq or even LeBron in Cleveland. Crazy stats because of high usage... but little team success to show for it.


Now, I'm not saying we shouldn't respect Wilt's numbers, but I just feel like people use statistics completely out of context sometimes, and it can be misleading.

[jlauber]

I feel like people ignore context when talking about Wilt. Don't compare Wilt's numbers to Kareems in a season where Kareem wins a ring with the Bucks, and Wilt wins nothing.

I mean, a bad team can force feed a player all they want and produce inflated stats... but you won't win a ring with that strategy. A recent example would be Kobe post Shaq or even LeBron in Cleveland. Crazy stats because of high usage... but little team success to show for it.


Now, I'm not saying we shouldn't respect Wilt's numbers, but I just feel like people use statistics completely out of context sometimes, and it can be misleading.

I covered this earlier, but in any case...

First of all, I personally believe Kareem's 70-71 season, including the playoffs, as his greatest season. He led the NBA in scoring at 31.7 ppg, which was his second best season ever; he averaged 16.0 rpg, which was his third best season ever; and he shot .577 from the field. Now, he had several seasons in which he shot better than .577 (all but ONE in the defenseless 80's though), BUT, in relation to league average, his 70-71 season was his most efficient. That .577 came in a league that shot .449...or + .128 better than the rest of the league. His playoff numbers were not his best post-season numbers, but they were still exceptional. He averaged 26.6 ppg, 17.0 rpg, and shot .515...and all accomplsihed against Thurmond, Wilt, and Unseld. So, once again, he had a couple of better regular seasons, and he had a couple of better post-seasons, but when you combine the two, his 70-71 season was probably his best. And, of course, he not only won his only ring in the 60's that season, but he was MVP and FMVP, too.

Still, you would be hard-pressed to find another player who had an easier road to a ring than what Kareem's Bucks faced that season. They beat a 41-41 Warrior team in the first round. Then, they beat a 48-34 Laker team that was without BOTH West and Baylor (and a 34 year old Wilt, only a year removed from major knee surgery, battled Kareem to a statistical draw in that series.) And finally they swept a 42-40 Bullets team in the Finals.

That was it for Kareem in the 70's. He went to only one other Finals, and while he dominated for much of that series, he was outplayed by Cowens in the game seven on his home floor, and his Bucks were wiped out.

The rest of the decade, his team's under-achieved...plain-and-simple. And, while he generally played well, he had his share of flop jobs.

But, for anyone that wants to argue that Kareem was a actually a better scorer than Chamberlain, if ever he had an opportunity to display it, it would have come in his 75-76 season. That Laker team, even with Goodrich and Cazzie Russell, was the worst roster he had in his career. Now, keep in mind that in Kareem's 71-72 season, he averaged 44 mpg, with a career high 34.8 ppg, and on .574 shooting. All with a 63-19 team that had a scoring differential of +11.1 ppg. So now, playing with a more inferior team, you would have thought that Kareem would really have taken over. The exact OPPOSITE occurred. Kareem had one of his worst seasons of his career. He played 41 mpg, and averaged 27.7 ppg on .529 shooting. And this was from a 28 year old Kareem, and supposedly near his physical peak. Why? Why couldn't Kareem elevate his play, especially his scoring, when it was obvious that his 40-42 team needed him to? BTW, McAdoo averaged 31.1 ppg in that 75-76 season, and just the year before, in 74-75, he averaged 34.5 ppg. His team's were no more talented than Kareem's. How come he could do it, and Kareem couldn't?

Wilt proved that he could single-handedly carry inept rosters to within an eyelash of beating the greatest dynasty in major professional sports history, TWICE. And he carried as bad a roster as anyone was ever saddled with in his 63-64 season, to a Finals, as well.

But, Kareem, as great as he was, couldn't do it by himself. In fact, in the 70's, in the weakest decade in NBA history, Kareem couldn't even take exceptional rosters to titles, while even a Rick Barry could take a cast of "no names" to one.

[Pointguard]

As far as scoring is concerned there are definite qualities inherent in being an elite scorer. And there are definite areas where Kareem isn

[jlauber]

[QUOTE=Pointguard]As far as scoring is concerned there are definite qualities inherent in being an elite scorer. And there are definite areas where Kareem isn

[Pointguard]

Wilt

[Miller for 3]

Great post. In terms of pure and productive scoring, it was MJ and Wilt...and then a considerable drop-off.

Yes Wilt with his 22ppg and 46.5% FT% in the playoffs (you know, what actually matters) is the 2nd greatest scorer of alltime :rolleyes:

KAJ, Hakeem and Shaq > Wilt as a scorer. deal with it

[jlauber]

Yes Wilt with his 22ppg and 46.5% FT% in the playoffs (you know, what actually matters) is the 2nd greatest scorer of alltime :rolleyes:

KAJ, Hakeem and Shaq > Wilt as a scorer. deal with it

Wilt was a 33 ppg, 26 rpg, .510 (in leagues that shot about .430) SCORER in his first SEVEN seasons...covering his first SIX playoffs. Those were his "scoring seasons" you idiot.

He had FOUR post-seasons of 33.2, 34.7, 35.0, and 37.0

He had a post-season series of 38.6 ppg on .559 shooting.

He had FOUR 30+ ppg post-season series against RUSSELL, including a 30 ppg, 31 rpg seven game series in '65.

Even in his first NINE seasons, he was averaging 29.3 ppg, 26.6 rpg, 4.8 apg, and shooting .518 (in leagues that shot about .435.)

He also had FOUR 50+ point games in the playoffs, including a 56-35 game five, in a best-of-five series; and a 50-35 in a must-win game five against Russell in the '60 ECF's.

He also had a 46-34 game five in a must-win game in the '66 ECF's, and again, against Russell.

He had FOUR 40-30 games just against Russell alone. Find me ONE other player who scored 40 points, and with 30 rebounds in a post-season game...much less against the quality defender of Russell's caliber (and with the Celtics SWARMING Wilt.)

He had a 45 point, 20-27 shooting, 27 rebound game six in a "must-win" game in the '70 Finals...in a series in which he averaged 23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, and shot .625...and all while playing just FOUR MONTHS after major knee surgery.

Find me any other player who ever had ONE 29-27 post-season...and yet Wilt averaged that for EIGHT straight post-seasons.

[jlauber]

How CLUTCH was Chamberlain?

In his NINE game seven's... 24.4 ppg, 26.3 rpg, and a mind-numbing .626 from the field (which is the highest FG% in game seven's by an all-time great.)

Here are some other examples...



1960 Game 3 vs. Nationals (best of 3 series at the time): 53 points in a 20 point win.

1962 Game 5 vs. Nationals: 56 points, 35 rebounds in a 17 point win.

1962 Game 6 vs Celtics: 32 points in a 10 point win

1962 Game 7 vs Celtics: 22 points, 21 rebounds in a 2 point loss

1964 Game 5 vs. Hawks: 50 points in a 24 point win.

1964 Game 7 vs. Hawks: 39 points, 26 rebounds, 12 blocks in a 10 point win.

1965 Game 6 vs. Celtics: 30 points, 26 rebounds in a 6 point win

1965 Game 7 vs. Celtics: 30 points, 32 rebounds in a 1 point loss

1966 Game 5 vs. Celtics: 46 points, 34 rebounds in an 8 point loss

1967 Game 2 vs. Royals: 37 points, 27 rebounds, 11 assists in a 21 point win.

1967 Game 3 vs. Royals: 16 points, 30 rebounds, 19 assists in a 15 point win.

1967 Game 1 vs. Celtics: 24 points, 32 rebounds, 13 assists, 12 blocks in a 15 point win.

1967 Game 3 vs. Celtics: 20 points, 41 rebounds, 9 assists in an 11 point win.

1967 Game 5 vs. Celtics: 29 points, 36 rebounds, 13 assists in a 24 point win.

1968 Game 6 vs. Knicks: 25 points, 27 rebounds in an 18 point win. Little known fact is that Chamberlain led BOTH TEAMS in points, rebounds, and assists for the entire series, whilst nursing an assortment of injuries, including his annual shin splints. This against two Hall Of Fame centers Walt Bellamy & Willis Reed. Apparently Willis used to tremble at the mere sight of Luke Jackson in the MSG tunnel pre-game.

1968 Game 7 vs Celtics: 14 points, 34 rebounds in a 4 point loss (This despite two touches in the entire 4th quarter, the smartest move Russell has ever made in his career switching himself over to guard Chet).

1969 Game 7 vs. Celtics: 18 points, 27 rebounds in a 2 point loss (Head coach leaves him on the bench due to a personal grudge.)

1970 Game 5 vs. Suns: 36 points, 14 rebounds in a 17 point win

1970 Game 7 vs. Suns: 30 points, 27 rebounds, 11 blocks in a 35 point win (helped lead Lakers back from 1-3 deficit)

1970 Game 6 vs. Knicks: 45 points, 27 rebounds in a 22 point win

1970 Game 7 vs. Knicks: 21 points, 24 rebounds in a 14 point loss

(Understand that he should have not even been playing in the 1969-70 season after his injury, but was able to rehab his knee in time with his workouts in volleyball, a sport he would later become a Hall Of Famer in as well.)

1971 Game 7 vs. Bulls: 25 points, 18 rebounds in an 11 point win

1971 Game 5 vs. Bucks: 23 points, 12 rebounds, 6 blocks in an 18 point loss without Elgin Baylor or Jerry West. (Alcindor in this game had 20 points, 15 rebounds, and 3 blocks).

1973 Game 7 vs. Bulls: 21 points, 28 rebounds in a 3 point win (Bulls had the ball and a one point lead with 30 or so seconds left in the 4th. Norm Van Lier goes up for the shot only to have it rejected by the "big choker" Wilt Chamberlain. Chamberlain blocked Van Lier's shot right to Gail Goodrich down court for the go ahead basket. Is there any mention of this clutch defensive play from Chamberlain in Bill Simmons "Book Of Basketball"?

1973 Game 5 vs. Knicks: 23 points, 21 rebounds in a 9 point loss (a hobbled Jerry West finished with 12 points)


Yep...Wilt was a "choker" and a "failure."

Incidently, you can add game five of the '60 ECF's (Philadelphia was down 3-1, so it was a must-win game), and he responded with a 50-35 game against Russell in a 128-107 win. Keep in mind that game was in his rookie season, and he faced a Celtic team with SEVEN HOFers.

And, IMHO, his greatest effort came against Kareem in game six of the WCF's. He held Kareem to 16-37 shooting, while going 8-12 himself, and scoring 22 points with 24 rebounds. And, he absolutely took over the game in the 4th quarter, and led LA back from a 10 point deficit to a clinching four point win. He also blocked 11 shots in that game, and five of them were Kareem's sky-hooks.

Or Wilt, with two badly injured wrists dominating the clinching game five win the Finals, with a 24 point, 10-14 shooting, 29 rebound (the ENTIRE Knick team had 39 BTW), and 10 block game.

[Psileas]

I'll generally agree with kblaze's post the most. I believe Wilt would shoot better than 60% for his whole career had he decided to leave aside his finesse moves and get better team results, although Kareem would have the obvious advantage in FT shooting. Having said that:


And based on offensive skillset this shouldn't be a debate.

If you define skillset as the main "go to" move and maybe dribbling in traffic, then maybe. But going beyond this, sorry, but I just don't see why there's not a debate on offensive skillset. You are among the ones who state they are "unimpressed" by Wilt's skillset after viewing him making fade-aways, jump shots, generally tough shots that not many big men can make (speaking of this, here's a new clip of college footage, apart from the one I posted some time ago http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kB43A-ODuLc). Well, I ask you, what makes you (I suppose) impressed by Kareem's moves apart from his main one? It seems like every time some people (including most Wilt naysayers) see Kareem make some good finesse move, they act as if they saw some super rare acrobatic Jordan move or a super quick Dream Shake. Hell, it sometimes even makes news that Kareem took and made jump shots, since most people are too used on seeing him only taking sky-hooks. I've seen the same people claim that Wilt was bothered when double-teammed, but I don't remember Kareem not being at least equally bothered when he didn't have the space to launch a sky-hook, either. I remember having seen a couple of plays when he had to take a few tougher than average jump-shots and missed badly (airballing). Some times he'd make a few good moves that people view as incredible, and other times he'd just fail.

I've never argued against Kareem being among the most skilled big men ever (hell, he's among my own favorite players ever, and I've maintained that he had the GOAT overall basketball career ever - I know that people including my fellow Wilt fan Jlauber may disagree with this), but I find it weird that people going against Wilt's skills to take shots speak that highly of Kareem's own ones, as if he's on Dirk's or prime Hakeem's level at this field. I would agree if you compared Wilt to Dirk (then again, I'll obviously take Wilt overall), but Wilt to Kareem, sorry, if I'm not supposed to be that impressed with prime Wilt, I don't see why I should be with Kareem.

[OmniStrife]

I agree 100%. Wilt's scoring numbers(particularly early 60's) were largely a product of their era. I don't know why the 39.5 FGA and 17 FTA aren't brought up every time the 50.4 ppg are. Not to mention the 48.5 mpg which included him playing every minute of 40, even 50 point blowouts. And then dropping to 35 ppg on Iverson-esque TS% in the playoffs.

Along with the pace of the game rapidly slowing, the lane widening and starting centers(rotation players getting bigger), his scoring numbers started coming down to earth, and they always did in the playoffs.

Not to mention that in his his 2 high scoring seasons(post lane-widening), he averaged 34.7 ppg on 51 FG%/51.3 TS% and 33.5 ppg on 54 FG%/54.7 TS%.

Kareem averaged 34.8 ppg on 57.4 FG%/60.3 TS% in 1972 and he said himself that he was better later which showed how deceiving stats are.

Another important point is how defensive strategies changed. Kareem mentioned in a '77 interview that he was pretty much played one on one during his first few years in Milwaukee, but that he was constantly doubled and tripled by the late 70's.

In most of the Wilt footage available, he seems to face far more single coverage than double teams, and I've heard many from that era mention that double teaming was rare.

By the time Kareem got stronger and improved his repertoire with the left hand sky hook and turnaround, he had no real weakness offensively, which makes him the greatest offensive center ever, imo.

His greater team success as a high scorer and Kareem's edge as far as go to moves and counters seals it for me.

From the footage I've seen, I don't see their footwork or touch as comparable, and Wilt's strength advantage isn't that big of a factor for me because he didn't seem to use it like a true power player. Part of that may have been that his lower body strength wasn't as great as people might think(just speculation, but it makes sense) and the fact that he looked awkward dribbling the ball while backing in. As well as Wilt's own claim that he didn't want to overpower people and wanted to prove he was skilled.

I came here to post something... but-
whenever ShaqAttack posts,
he'd already summed up whatever it was I had to say, plus much much more.

My contribution therefore shall be in the form of some REP.

[jlauber]

I'll generally agree with kblaze's post the most. I believe Wilt would shoot better than 60% for his whole career had he decided to leave aside his finesse moves and get better team results, although Kareem would have the obvious advantage in FT shooting. Having said that:



If you define skillset as the main "go to" move and maybe dribbling in traffic, then maybe. But going beyond this, sorry, but I just don't see why there's not a debate on offensive skillset. You are among the ones who state they are "unimpressed" by Wilt's skillset after viewing him making fade-aways, jump shots, generally tough shots that not many big men can make (speaking of this, here's a new clip of college footage, apart from the one I posted some time ago http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kB43A-ODuLc). Well, I ask you, what makes you (I suppose) impressed by Kareem's moves apart from his main one? It seems like every time some people (including most Wilt naysayers) see Kareem make some good finesse move, they act as if they saw some super rare acrobatic Jordan move or a super quick Dream Shake. Hell, it sometimes even makes news that Kareem took and made jump shots, since most people are too used on seeing him only taking sky-hooks. I've seen the same people claim that Wilt was bothered when double-teammed, but I don't remember Kareem not being at least equally bothered when he didn't have the space to launch a sky-hook, either. I remember having seen a couple of plays when he had to take a few tougher than average jump-shots and missed badly (airballing). Some times he'd make a few good moves that people view as incredible, and other times he'd just fail.

I've never argued against Kareem being among the most skilled big men ever (hell, he's among my own favorite players ever, and I've maintained that he had the GOAT overall basketball career ever - I know that people including my fellow Wilt fan Jlauber may disagree with this), but I find it weird that people going against Wilt's skills to take shots speak that highly of Kareem's own ones, as if he's on Dirk's or prime Hakeem's level at this field. I would agree if you compared Wilt to Dirk (then again, I'll obviously take Wilt overall), but Wilt to Kareem, sorry, if I'm not supposed to be that impressed with prime Wilt, I don't see why I should be with Kareem.


First of all, that video footage of Chamberlain in the NCAA's is pure GOLD. He was easily the most skilled, fastest, athletic player on the floor. Your 9 block total might be right, but it sure seemed like more. And he challenged almost EVERY shot. Truly a ONE-MAN team. In the Finals that season he was QUAD-TEAMED, and, as usual, his pathetic teammates couldn't hit the garage door with a beach ball. Of course, we both know that Kansas didn't win any games when Wilt was out either.

And, as usual, he was hitting a variety of shots from up to 15 ft (as well as making two FT's in row....and looking very comfortable in doing so.) If only we had some of his truly monumental NBA games. Even one of his 271 40+ point games. And what I would give to see one of his 118 50+ point games, or one of his 32 60+ point games (especially the one in which he shot 29-35.)

As for the rest of your post. I have Kareem at #5 on my all-time list. And, I was a HUGE Alcindor fan when he was at UCLA (and he was easily the greatest college player of all-time BTW.) BUT, I just can't OVER-RATE the man, as so many other's do. Clearly though, is he is way ahead of Hakeem. A 38 year old Kareem dominated a 23 year old Hakeem. Can you imagine how bad it would have been had it been the other way around?

He won TWO scoring titles...in 20 seasons. He won ONE RPG title. And he won ONE FG% title...and HALF of his career was played in the weak 70's (AFTER Wilt "retired" in '73.) Wilt had THREE seasons in which he led the NBA in scoring, rebounding, and FG%...at the SAME TIME.

And, as I have said many times, if Kareem were truly a greater scorer than Chamberlain, how come he couldn't ELEVATE his scoring with average rosters in '75 and '76? And, as we know, McAdoo, with equal rosters, was way ahead of Kareem in scoring in both of those seasons.

That also applied to Hakeem, BTW. I have continually read the idiotic posts by Dickwad on just how poor Hakeem's rosters were. Ok, where were his 30-35 ppg seasons then? He simply couldn't do it. Nor could he get his team's out of the first round in over half of his post-season career. His best post-season scoring and rebounding series came in a four game FIRST ROUND blowout loss.

Secondly, Kareem faced Reed, Bellamy, Thurmond, and many of the same centers that a PRIME Wilt battled. Where were Kareem's HUGE games against those guys? Wilt had FAR greater higher scoring (and more efficient games) against those same guys. Hell, a Wilt in '69, when he was no longer interested in scoring, hung TWO 60+ point games on two centers that Kareem would face the very next year. Where were Kareem's 60+ point games?

Skillset? Those that argue that Kareem was more skilled are deluding themselves. Just looking at the more-and-more footage which is now showing up on YouTube, and Wilt had a FAR greater VARIETY of moves and shots.

And you can't argue the obvious, either. Wilt was much stronger, faster, and far more athletic (and in better shape...even at 11 years older...he was running Kareem into the ground in the 4th quarter of the clinching game six win in the '72 WCF's.)

So, no, Kareem was NOT in Wilt's class as either a scorer, or a shooter (despite his advantage at the line...and of course, Wilt MADE nearly 100 MORE FTs per season played.) Wilt was not only winning scoring titles, he was winning them by 19 ppg (and even 11 ppg.) He was not only winning FG% titles, he was winning them by margins as much as .162 (and .157), and outshooting leagues by as much as .271 (and .244.)

The real tragedy, of course, was that we never got to a PRIME Chamberlain go H2H against a PRIME Kareem. Judging by everything that is out there, Wilt would easily have outscored, and outshot Kareem (outshooting him would be a given BTW.) A PRIME Chamberlain could hang 40+ games on a PRIME Thurmond (and seasons of .562 shooting); 50+ games on Reed; 60+ games on a PRIME Bellamy. He could also pour in 66 on 29-35 shooting against Jim Fox, whom Kareem would face often, even at well past his peak. He even had a 31-32 game on 6-11 HOFer Lanier in his 71-72 season...in a league in which he hardly shot the ball. Where are ANY of those games by Kareem?

And CLUTCH? I have already provided MANY examples of Wilt's BIG-TIME games. He was arguably the greatest all-around game-seven player of all-time (24.4 ppg, 26.3 rpg, and on .626 shooting.) Kareem? SEVERAL post-season meltdowns, including FOUR in which he failed to even shoot the league average. He had series in which he was reduced to as low as .405 shooting and .428 shooting against Thurmond. He had a series in which he shot .457, and only .414 over the last four games (and his sky-hook being smacked all over the gym by a 35 year old Wilt.) He had two series in which Moses Malone just pounded him. He had a series in the '84 Finals in which he shot .481 (in a league that shot .492) and in which Magic was criticized (and all Magic did was average 18 ppg, 8 rpg ...leading LA, 13 apg, and shooting .560 from the field.) He had a game seven where 6-9 Dave Cowens outplayed him in EVERY facet of the game. He had a critical game five of 7-25 shooting in the '84 Finals. He had a Finals of 13 ppg, 4 rpg, and .414 shooting. He had a game seven of four points, 3 rebs, and on 2-7 shooting (along with 5 PF's.) I could go on...but, clearly, Kareem was not as clutch as so many make him out to be.

Not only that, but Kareem had loaded rosters in the late 70's, and in the weakest leagues in NBA history, that were blown out in the early rounds. He had TWO 60+ win teams go down in flames in that decade (one to a 47-35 team...in a series in which he shot .428.) He had another 59 win team lose to an underdog Celtic team in the Finals (and once again, in a game seven blowout loss on his HOME court, Kareem was easily outplayed by a Cowens who was saddled with five fouls going into the 4th quarter.) He had TWO teams that he couldn't even get into the playoffs. He had a team with the best record in the league get SWEPT.

So, Kareem over Wilt? I just don't see it.

[Pointguard]

I'll generally agree with kblaze's post the most. I believe Wilt would shoot better than 60% for his whole career had he decided to leave aside his finesse moves and get better team results, although Kareem would have the obvious advantage in FT shooting. Having said that:



If you define skillset as the main "go to" move and maybe dribbling in traffic, then maybe. But going beyond this, sorry, but I just don't see why there's not a debate on offensive skillset. You are among the ones who state they are "unimpressed" by Wilt's skillset after viewing him making fade-aways, jump shots, generally tough shots that not many big men can make (speaking of this, here's a new clip of college footage, apart from the one I posted some time ago http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kB43A-ODuLc). Well, I ask you, what makes you (I suppose) impressed by Kareem's moves apart from his main one? It seems like every time some people (including most Wilt naysayers) see Kareem make some good finesse move, they act as if they saw some super rare acrobatic Jordan move or a super quick Dream Shake. Hell, it sometimes even makes news that Kareem took and made jump shots, since most people are too used on seeing him only taking sky-hooks. I've seen the same people claim that Wilt was bothered when double-teammed, but I don't remember Kareem not being at least equally bothered when he didn't have the space to launch a sky-hook, either. I remember having seen a couple of plays when he had to take a few tougher than average jump-shots and missed badly (airballing). Some times he'd make a few good moves that people view as incredible, and other times he'd just fail.

I've never argued against Kareem being among the most skilled big men ever (hell, he's among my own favorite players ever, and I've maintained that he had the GOAT overall basketball career ever - I know that people including my fellow Wilt fan Jlauber may disagree with this), but I find it weird that people going against Wilt's skills to take shots speak that highly of Kareem's own ones, as if he's on Dirk's or prime Hakeem's level at this field. I would agree if you compared Wilt to Dirk (then again, I'll obviously take Wilt overall), but Wilt to Kareem, sorry, if I'm not supposed to be that impressed with prime Wilt, I don't see why I should be with Kareem.
That footage was the closest I seen to the film I saw when Wilt scored 50+ points. There are several films now that show Wilt outrun fast-breaks - it happens twice in that film (1:10 and 2:40). His speed and timing in a center you rarely ever see. That pass at 1:40 is sick!

There is an intentional shadow on Wilt. It's funny how there are only a couple of references to Wilt's bank shot and jump shot touch as it might be one of the most unstoppable shots ever. Far above any center's at that time.

[Pointguard]

Secondly, Kareem faced Reed, Bellamy, Thurmond, and many of the same centers that a PRIME Wilt battled. Where were Kareem's HUGE games against those guys? Wilt had FAR greater higher scoring (and more efficient games) against those same guys. Hell, a Wilt in '69, when he was no longer interested in scoring, hung TWO 60+ point games on two centers that Kareem would face the very next year. Where were Kareem's 60+ point games?
Kareem made that statement about '77 being his best year scoring year (when he averaged 8 points less per game) because he knew those guys shut him down when when he was a much more prolific scorer. Kareem was very sensitive to how he was compared to Wilt. He was very sensitive about the scoring thing in general. I remember he went to league office to campaign for shorter seasons to protect his scoring record.


Skillset? Those that argue that Kareem was more skilled are deluding themselves. Just looking at the more-and-more footage which is now showing up on YouTube, and Wilt had a FAR greater VARIETY of moves and shots.

And you can't argue the obvious, either. Wilt was much stronger, faster, and far more athletic (and in better shape...even at 11 years older...he was running Kareem into the ground in the 4th quarter of the clinching game six win in the '72 WCF's.)

So, no, Kareem was NOT in Wilt's class as either a scorer, or a shooter (despite his advantage at the line...and of course, Wilt MADE nearly 100 MORE FTs per season played.) Wilt was not only winning scoring titles, he was winning them by 19 ppg (and even 11 ppg.) He was not only winning FG% titles, he was winning them by margins as much as .162 (and .157), and outshooting leagues by as much as .271 (and .244.)

And CLUTCH? I have already provided MANY examples of Wilt's BIG-TIME games. He was arguably the greatest all-around game-seven player of all-time (24.4 ppg, 26.3 rpg, and on .626 shooting.) Kareem? SEVERAL post-season meltdowns, including FOUR in which he failed to even shoot the league average. He had series in which he was reduced to as low as .405 shooting and .428 shooting against Thurmond. He had a series in which he shot .457, and only .414 over the last four games (and his sky-hook being smacked all over the gym by a 35 year old Wilt.) He had two series in which Moses Malone just pounded him. He had a series in the '84 Finals in which he shot .481 (in a league that shot .492) and in which Magic was criticized (and all Magic did was average 18 ppg, 8 rpg ...leading LA, 13 apg, and shooting .560 from the field.) He had a game seven where 6-9 Dave Cowens outplayed him in EVERY facet of the game. He had a critical game five of 7-25 shooting in the '84 Finals. He had a Finals of 13 ppg, 4 rpg, and .414 shooting. He had a game seven of four points, 3 rebs, and on 2-7 shooting (along with 5 PF's.) I could go on...but, clearly, Kareem was not as clutch as so many make him out to be.

Not only that, but Kareem had loaded rosters in the late 70's, and in the weakest leagues in NBA history, that were blown out in the early rounds. He had TWO 60+ win teams go down in flames in that decade (one to a 47-35 team...in a series in which he shot .428.) He had another 59 win team lose to an underdog Celtic team in the Finals (and once again, in a game seven blowout loss on his HOME court, Kareem was easily outplayed by a Cowens who was saddled with five fouls going into the 4th quarter.) He had TWO teams that he couldn't even get into the playoffs. He had a team with the best record in the league get SWEPT.

So, Kareem over Wilt? I just don't see it.

Whoa, JL is on a role once again. My points were supplemented here and I don't think it possible to do it better than you did JL. I will add on the most basic level Kareem never had the energy to be at Wilt's level. At another basic level was mindset. KAJ just wasn't a guy that would lead the league in scoring for four or five years. Lastly, he didn't have the natural know how either. At the basic core (Mindset, Physicality, Knowhow and energy) KAJ's go to move isn't going to trump all of that.

[jlauber]

Kareem made that statement about '77 being his best year scoring year (when he averaged 8 points less per game) because he knew those guys shut him down when when he was a much more prolific scorer. Kareem was very sensitive to how he was compared to Wilt. He was very sensitive about the scoring thing in general. I remember he went to league office to campaign for shorter seasons to protect his scoring record.

Whoa, JL is on a role once again. My points were supplemented here and I don't think it possible to do it better than you did JL. I will add on the most basic level Kareem never had the energy to be at Wilt's level. At another basic level was mindset. KAJ just wasn't a guy that would lead the league in scoring for four or five years. Lastly, he didn't have the natural know how either. At the basic core (Mindset, Physicality, Knowhow and energy) KAJ's go to move isn't going to trump all of that.

I really think Kareem underachieved in the 70's, despite some huge seasons. And we both agree that had Magic not arrived in '80, that Kareem's career would have been viewed as very disappointing.

Still, it seemed like he could get up for some great individual battles. He ALWAYS took a HUGE number of shots against Wilt. In fact, in their 28 H2H meetings, he had 18 games of 30+ FGAs, with a high of 39. BTW, he only shot above 50% in six of them.

And going on memory, I believe he hung 46 on Elvin Hayes in his very first NBA matchup with him. And I think he had 40+ against Walton in their first encounter. We know that he torched Hakeem for three 40+ games, and his 46 point game against him was within a week, I believe, of his 40-9 battering of Ewing.

As for Hakeem...I will say this, he and Russell almost always played at near 100%. I tend to point out his flaws, only because one poster here constantly places him among the gods, but there was no question that he played with heart. And, yes, it was too bad that he was saddled with relatively poor rosters for much of his career.

In fact, IMHO, if Kareem would have played at the intensity level that Hakeem brought, he clearly could have been much more dominant. Even Wilt, for all that he did at BOTH ends of the floor, probably didn't play as hard as Hakeem did in his career. Still, both Kareem, and Wilt, along with Shaq (who I also believe could have been more dominant) were so naturally blessed, that they were greater players, despite playing at lower levels.

And I wonder how many rings that Wilt and Hakeem would have won had they been fortunate enough to have had a prime Magic for ten years, too.

[Pointguard]

In fact, IMHO, if Kareem would have played at the intensity level that Hakeem brought, he clearly could have been much more dominant. Even Wilt, for all that he did at BOTH ends of the floor, probably didn't play as hard as Hakeem did in his career. Still, both Kareem, and Wilt, along with Shaq (who I also believe could have been more dominant) were so naturally blessed, that they were greater players, despite playing at lower levels.

And I wonder how many rings that Wilt and Hakeem would have won had they been fortunate enough to have had a prime Magic for ten years, too.

Yeah Hakeem was hard work and highly developed skill. I think Kareem was one of the few players that could play disinterested and still be head and shoulders above the pack in the later 1970's - as he did a couple of years. If he had the work ethic or energy of Wilt or Hakeem he's GOAT without question. In that scenario we are talking about 9 scoring titles, 10 MVP's, 10 block titles, 7rebounding titles, 8 field goal percentage titles, and very close to Russel in Rings. Amazing when you think about it and it isn't an exaggeration at all. I don't know if that type of drop off, the comparison of potential to actual, exist in another top ten player.

The only knock on a motivated Kareem was that he isn't by nature a leader or people person, his impact on the game mysteriously wasn't gigantic until Magic knew how to feature him, and persistence in all around game. Which is small, perhaps, in comparison to everybody else, cept Jordan.

[millwad]

As for Hakeem...I will say this, he and Russell almost always played at near 100%. I tend to point out his flaws, only because one poster here constantly places him among the gods, but there was no question that he played with heart. And, yes, it was too bad that he was saddled with relatively poor rosters for much of his career.

It's funny that you always spam about Hakeem's "flaws" when Wilt and Russell both had more flaws. And we all know you haven't seen Hakeem play, and that's a fact, you only check basketball-reference and then you think you've seen it all. Even your stupid comments about Olajuwon's play in the WCF vs the Lakers and his match-up vs Shaq tells the whole story about how little you really know.



And I wonder how many rings that Wilt and Hakeem would have won had they been fortunate enough to have had a prime Magic for ten years, too.

Personally I wonder how many rings Hakeem would have won if he had been fortunate enough to have two 20 point scorers and two guys putting up more than 15 points per game while two of them being HOF:ers, like Wilt's teammates in '67 and the same about the Laker teams he was on...

[Duncan21formvp]

Kareem in the playoffs

[CavaliersFTW]

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: @ the bullshit Fatal9 used to spew on ISH

Anyways, you take Wilt. He can get you 50 if you need 50, he can get you 25 on a ridiculous 68% (with over 7 assists) if you've got other offensive players. Prime Wilt is a more dominant scorer than prime Jabbar, no refuting it really.

http://youtu.be/WdmYTdjCXpU?t=2m2s