Wilt Chamberlain new 12 minutes of unseen footage

[PHILA]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVXOROFtrM4

[ImmortalD24]

"At that time.. to see a guy dunk was amazing" - 9:27


"[Wilt] came into a league where nboody ever averaged 30pts a game" - 11:27


:roll: Thanks for the vid.

[eliteballer]

What was Wilt's wingspan?

Story I heard. Kareem took a ball and held it as high as he could. Palm on the bottom of the ball. Russell came next to him and reached up and put his palm on TOP of the ball.

[Kblaze8855]

Ive read that wiltd standing reach was 9'6'' but that he and West had the same sleeve length.

[PHILA]

What was Wilt's wingspan?92 inches = 7'8"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYEbga0XueA#t=5m50s

[Legends66NBA7]

92 inches = 7'8"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYEbga0XueA#t=5m50s

Was just about to post that. Beat me to it :P...

[9erEmpire]

that video shows that Wilt would get owned in this era.

As great as an athlete that he was, nobody has seen anyone that tall play basketball.

Today's game, 7 footers are the norm.

[Pointguard]

"[Wilt] came into a league where nboody ever averaged 30pts a game" - 11:27

:roll: Thanks for the vid.

Last year the league wanted more offense and nobody got 28ppg. And Durant is likely to be highest scorer ever.

[Cangri]

Something I noticed from the video is that goal tending didn't exist or maybe it was called differently. I saw like 3 or 4 "blocks" by Wilt that would've been called a goal tending in this era, not to mention that most of those "blocks" came from weak a/ss attempts by some small shtty guards of that era.

[Friday]

12 minutes of Wilt dominating a bunch of 5'5 white dudes, what else is new?

[Cangri]

12 minutes of Wilt dominating a bunch of 5'5 white dudes, what else is new?
Exactly:confusedshrug:

[WillyJakk]

Something I noticed from the video is that goal tending didn't exist or maybe it was called differently. I saw like 3 or 4 "blocks" by Wilt that would've been called a goal tending in this era, not to mention that most of those "blocks" came from weak a/ss attempts by some small shtty guards of that era.

So glad I'm not the only one who sees things this way.

The legend of Wilt Chamberlain is absolutely ridiculous to me.

"Wilt could dunk from the three point line from a stand still position..."(even though there were no 3's back then)
"Wilt could jump over a school bus... I seen him!"

Etc. etc. and yeah I know I exaggerated a bit but really he is way overrated.

He'd be good but not as dominant in late 80's, 90's or now as he was back then.

[ImmortalD24]

So glad I'm not the only one who sees things this way.

The legend of Wilt Chamberlain is absolutely ridiculous to me.

"Wilt could dunk from the three point line from a stand still position..."(even though there were no 3's back then)
"Wilt could jump over a school bus... I seen him!"

Etc. etc. and yeah I know I exaggerated a bit but really he is way overrated.

He'd be good but not as dominant in late 80's, 90's or now as he was back then.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc3lDEUw2ik

[PHILA]

Something I noticed from the video is that goal tending didn't exist or maybe it was called differently. I saw like 3 or 4 "blocks" by Wilt that would've been called a goal tending in this era, not to mention that most of those "blocks" came from weak a/ss attempts by some small shtty guards of that era.

The only shot you saw him block in the video against NBA players is at 0:58 mark vs. Rick Barry, who would be one of the top players in the league today. That specified rejection (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8SDVEHspFs#t=4m59s) was indeed called as goaltending. Below we can see Barry swishing a contested outside shot, a play that today always drives many fans into joyful ecstasy. :banana:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ghbAYFouJA#t=1m55s

[9erEmpire]

The only shot you saw him block in the video against NBA players is at 0:58 mark vs. Rick Barry, who would be one of the top players in the league today. That specified rejection (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8SDVEHspFs#t=4m59s) was indeed called as goaltending. Below we can see Barry swishing a contested outside shot, a play that today always drives many fans into joyful ecstasy. :banana:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ghbAYFouJA#t=1m55s

I, like many on here, wasn't very impressed by Wilt.

This is including highlights too and his highlights wasn't very impressive. Watching him play may have been a snooze fest.

[senelcoolidge]

Cool video. Thanks. The greatest or the greats will always get hate from people..that's why he is the greatest or a great, however you want to look at it.

[IGOTGAME]

If people can sit here and watch the footage of Wilt and come to the conclusion he wouldn't dominate today then they don't understand the Center position.

Wilt would dominate every Center on the earth right now. There just isn't one player with the physical profile to stop him on the planet. Not one player. Add that to the fact that he had a good feel for the post and solid fundamentals down there and you have a Center who would have MULTIPLES seasons over 30 ppg and prob multiple seasons at or above 15 rbg. The guy was a monster and if you watch the footage it is obvious.

[Dragonyeuw]

If you transported Wilt from that era as he was then into this era, there isn't a center in the NBA who could do anything with him, including Dwight Howard. He'd be overall the most physically gifted center today, even if you don't take into account him having access to today's training advances.

[WillyJakk]

False.

Don't give me that crap about "if Wilt had access to today's training techniques etc".

Either guys are athletic or they're not, era has nothing to do w/ it.

Wilt was big, he was fairly quick (for his size) BUT Wilt was a lumberer and you can see it in any footage you watch of him whether he was younger or older.

Today he'd be the equal of a Roy Hibbert which ain't bad but really, he wouldn't be legendary.

He had an odd game w/ those twisted backhanded layup shots and would be effective w/ that and also dunking but seriously the guy offensively DID NOT attack the basket like a Shaq per se while defensively I think he'd be the equal of Andrew Bogut maybe.

He'd be a VERY GOOD player but not legendary, no shame in that.

[Dragonyeuw]

False.

Don't give me that crap about "if Wilt had access to today's training techniques etc".

Either guys are athletic or they're not, era has nothing to do w/ it.





False. If we assume that the best players are born with a certain amount of god given athletic ability, that ability can only be enhanced through greater nutrition and advances in medical science and technology. How else would you explain why players are simply bigger, faster, jump higher, stronger than 50 years ago? Did humans evolve in a mere half century from Wilt's era, or are changes in diet, nutrition, and training designed to maximize one's athletic capabilities the culprit? If that's the case, then 'era' very much comes into the equation. Wilt 50 years ago was an athletic freak. Put him in today's game as he is, he's stronger and bigger than every current center in the league.

The reverse is also true, put today's freak athletes back in the 60's, and you'd see an athletic de-evolution. Lebron James wouldn't be the Lebron James we know, if he came along in Wilt's era. His athletic ability at best would be at the level of guys considered 'athletic' then, he certainly wouldn't be the freak we see today.

[Pointguard]

False.

Don't give me that crap about "if Wilt had access to today's training techniques etc".

Either guys are athletic or they're not, era has nothing to do w/ it.
You don't think he's athletic? Regardless of era, nobody in the league is going to triple jump 50 feet which is five feet beyond the half court line if he starts out of bounds. I doubt anybody can high jump 6 feet. Or broadjump 17 feet? And he did all of this before his athletic peak without proper training.


Wilt was big, he was fairly quick (for his size) BUT Wilt was a lumberer and you can see it in any footage you watch of him whether he was younger or older.
Really. They played a pace faster than the Nash's Pheonix Suns before '1967. So you haven't even been reading these boards. In two clips below he outruns the fast break.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MC3gTMJ5DIc



He had an odd game w/ those twisted backhanded layup shots and would be effective w/ that and also dunking but seriously the guy offensively DID NOT attack the basket like a Shaq per se while defensively I think he'd be the equal of Andrew Bogut maybe.

You think a seven footer could average 40ppg over seven years without attacking the basket?

[NBAller]

Like I said in another thread (somebody negged me for this, will probably happen again) todays era of players>then. If you compare how they dribble, shoot,etc you would probably agree with me.

As you can see by this vid, Wilt was easily taller than everyone on the court. It's not hard to score, rebound, or block as the tallest man. I'm not taking away Wilts coordination, or athletic ability by saying this. Just saying, he'd have trouble with somebody like Yao, Shaq, Dwight, Ewing. He's also as skinny as Durant is in this video, and we all know what we want to see Durant do (hit the weights).

And as somebody already pointed out, rules have changed from then to now. some of those blocks in todays era would be goal tending.
To me, he's not the best center that has played the game.

I can imagine at that time, seeing somebody so 'different' in terms of height and skill would be lead to believe he's the greatest guy to touch a basketball though. edit: "At that time, to see a guy dunk was amazing"........

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

12 minutes of Wilt dominating a bunch of 5'5 white dudes, what else is new?

this

[ClutchBucketz]

Wilt dominated what was potentially lesser competition sure but isn't that the reason why he isn't the undisputed GOAT? He's a big man with the talent/skill/athleticism that would have him amongst the best big men in the game currently.

Unbelievable specimen regardless of the time and competition.

[WillyJakk]

Great...you post videos of Wilt in college playing against even sh*ttier competition than the stiffs he went onto face in the NBA.

Though unfortunately that's the way things were back then, you do realize how few men of color he faced during those days right?

Not knocking any of the OG's accomplishments but seriously dude, those guys dribbled hunched-backed w/ one hand and would literally spin in a circle to continue going to their strong hand due to the lack of skill.

There were only a few exceptions at that time at any position skill-wise and I acknowledge Wilt as being one of them but my stance is still the same.

Very good player who actually didn't win anything until he got w/ Goodrich, Baylor, and West who would be a very good player today but not the same impact as back then.

BTW training only enhances what you are born w/ you don't become "uncoordinated" just by lifting weights/ training, you either are born well balanced and amplify those traits as you grow or either you're not.

Simple as that.

[NBAller]

Wilt dominated what was potentially lesser competition sure but isn't that the reason why he isn't the undisputed GOAT? He's a big man with the talent/skill/athleticism that would have him amongst the best big men in the game currently.

Unbelievable specimen regardless of the time and competition.

Using that logic, wouldn't you think somebody just as tall and skilled that dominated better competition is better than Wilt?

edit: and even a more skilled bigman with skills for example like olajuwon.

[IGOTGAME]

BUT Wilt was a lumberer a[/B]nd you can see it in any footage you watch of him whether he was younger or older.
.


a "LUMBERER." He is lumbering now lol. Please watch this and get back to me.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kB43A-ODuLc&feature=related

at 1:07 - watch that sprint and tell me that is lumbering. Sorry but they just don't make many 7 footers capable of that.


BTW training only enhances what you are born w/ you don't become "uncoordinated" just by lifting weights/ training, you either are born well balanced and amplify those traits as you grow or either you're not.

are you implying that Wilt wasn't coordinated?


He's a big man with the talent/skill/athleticism that would have him amongst the best big men in the game currently.

Unbelievable specimen regardless of the time and competition.

this...people are acting like guys as athletic as Wilt are the norm. There are now 6"10 players in the world messin with Wilt athletically. Look at the big men today....lets be real

[winwin]

thank you OP
5 starred

[Fazotronic]

http://images4.fanpop.com/image/user_images/2963000/AlphaWolf-2963314_1611_930.jpg
...

[Dragonyeuw]

BTW training only enhances what you are born w/ you don't become "uncoordinated" just by lifting weights/ training, you either are born well balanced and amplify those traits as you grow or either you're not.

Simple as that.

Thank you for agreeing with my point. Training and enhancement....the greater the training methods and advancements, nutritional supplements, diet.... logically the greater the enhancement. Wilt is obviously born with god given physical gifts. If we agree that training does in fact ENHANCE what you already have naturally, then imagine a prime Wilt with 2011 training. This is why players today are more athletic than 50 years ago.

[WillyJakk]

No, my "uncoordinated" statement was in response to a path I thought you were going down when you referenced "today's training" methods.

Not saying Wilt was uncoordinated, just saying he stood out athletically due to his competition which was full of unathletic uncoordinated players.

When Wilt played against more athletic coordinated players (though he was older) he doesn't look quite as legendary as he did against players (mostly white) in the 60's:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fQDipb-uSI

His only athletic opponent in the 60's was 11 rings Russell.

[Legends66NBA7]

In before jlauber comes to Wilt's rescue, busting down his knowledge.

[PTB Fan]

Quite amazing video. Wilt's physical gifts were truly remarkable.

[millwad]

Quite amazing video. Wilt's physical gifts were truly remarkable.

So was his competition.
Best era of basketball ever!

http://www.kshs.org/people/graphics/chamberlain_wilt.jpg

[Dragonyeuw]

No, my "uncoordinated" statement was in response to a path I thought you were going down when you referenced "today's training" methods.

Not saying Wilt was uncoordinated, just saying he stood out athletically due to his competition which was full of unathletic uncoordinated players.

When Wilt played against more athletic coordinated players (though he was older) he doesn't look quite as legendary as he did against players (mostly white) in the 60's:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fQDipb-uSI

His only athletic opponent in the 60's was 11 rings Russell.

I never mentioned 'uncoordinated' in any previous post, so not sure what that's all about.

Wilt was a legit 7"1 and close to 300 in his heyday, a high jumper, and reportedly benchpressed in the region of 550 pounds. Hell he was benching 400+ at 60. Regardless of his competition then, those physical attributes just taken on their own merits still put him above just about anyone playing today.

[jlip]

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6231938&postcount=6

[Dbrog]

Not knocking any of the OG's accomplishments but seriously dude, those guys dribbled hunched-backed w/ one hand and would literally spin in a circle to continue going to their strong hand due to the lack of skill.

There were only a few exceptions at that time at any position skill-wise and I acknowledge Wilt as being one of them but my stance is still the same.

Very good player who actually didn't win anything until he got w/ Goodrich, Baylor, and West who would be a very good player today but not the same impact as back then.

BTW training only enhances what you are born w/ you don't become "uncoordinated" just by lifting weights/ training, you either are born well balanced and amplify those traits as you grow or either you're not.

Simple as that.

:facepalm You might want to look into the 1967 76ers.

As for Wilt being mediocre in this era (like Hibbert), just know that you're also saying Hibbert would be able to do well against Kareem and even occasionally do better than him...oh yes, and that would be after he's 38 yrs old and has a surgically repaired knee. Not sure many people would agree with that.

[PistonsFan#21]

None of those highligts makes me feel like he was as powerful, strong or high jumper as many claim him to be. I seen more impressive dunks by guys like Jermaine Oneal, Kenyon Martin, Stromile Swift, etc. LOL at anyone who thinks he has a vert in the 40+ inches

[DonDadda59]

Was that Isaac Hayes doing the commentary? FANTASTIC :oldlol:

[PTB Fan]

So was his competition.
Best era of basketball ever!

http://www.kshs.org/people/graphics/chamberlain_wilt.jpg

In the video, mostly in the beginning, he had no competition but in the NBA, he did.

[Psileas]

The more footage of Wilt's exploits is revealed, the more you'll hear some (the usual "some") talk about the competition or with secondary things, like quality of dunks (obviously with extreme doses of exaggeration - btw, yeah, unlike Wilt, we all remember how great competition LeBron had to face in HS, blowing and dunking on midget kids you'll never hear about and most of them wonn't ever again seriously deal with basketball in their lives, as well as the "monsters" Lew Alcindor faced when he was a high schooler). Which makes it clear that it's becoming increasingly harder for them to focus on Wilt himself. Typical example:


None of those highligts makes me feel like he was as powerful, strong or high jumper as many claim him to be. I seen more impressive dunks by guys like Jermaine Oneal, Kenyon Martin, Stromile Swift, etc. LOL at anyone who thinks he has a vert in the 40+ inches

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVXOROFtrM4#t=50s

Any sane person with no problems with his vision who doesn't call this a very good jump is just trolling. But, wait, this doesn't count, he only blocked a 5'5 guy (he has to be 5'5)! According to the math and logic of ISH, when you block whiter or shorter guys than you, everything about you will have to be negatively adjusted, including your vertical. 35 inches against whites = 25 inches against blacks! Or maybe it's the angle, I'm pretty sure if we actually counted the leap, Wilt's hand barely was above rim level!

On a more serious note, give me a break about the "more impressive dunks" being such an important evidence of athleticism. The impressiveness of a dunk is largely depending on the available footage you have available to boost your own imagination. Many of today's dunks in today's dunk competitions are more impressive than the ones Dr.J, Wilkins and Jordan were pulling off 20-30 years ago. Does this make all of these dunkers better athletes than Dr.J, Wilkins and Jordan? "OMG, look at Kenyon Martin, how viciously he dunks, Wilt would NEVER be able to do this"! MMMkay, now call me back when Martin has an 82-game season. Or a season averaging a double-double. But if the great KMart coudn't do it, neither could Wilt, correct?

[Scoooter]

I liked the Wilt and Kareem TWA commercial in Psileas' link.

[WillyJakk]

:facepalm You might want to look into the 1967 76ers.

As for Wilt being mediocre in this era (like Hibbert), just know that you're also saying Hibbert would be able to do well against Kareem and even occasionally do better than him...oh yes, and that would be after he's 38 yrs old and has a surgically repaired knee. Not sure many people would agree with that.

Well....Hibbert ate Dwight Howard up ONE game so who's to say it's out of the question.

Also, why in the hell would Hibbert have to have the stipulation of having to be 38 w/ a surgically repaired knee? That was Wilt's burden to carry not Roy.

Btw you seem to be helping my case/ stance against Wilt by bringing up Kareem, a guy who Wilt said:

"For the 1st time in my life, I played against a guy that felt I needed to help to guard."

In other words he needed help guarding a tall athletic offensive-minded big, something he didn't face too much of early in his career when he was smashin' on midgets.

And LOL @ high jumping into a thin layer of hay (in Pslieas link)....wtf is that bullsh*t?

Oh btw props to the OP for the footage in the link.

[Psileas]

Btw you seem to be helping my case/ stance against Wilt by bringing up Kareem, a guy who Wilt said:

"For the 1st time in my life, I played against a guy that felt I needed to help to guard."

In other words he needed help guarding a tall athletic offensive-minded big, something he didn't face too much of early in his career when he was smashin' on midgets.

No, in other words, he was sufficiently good not to need help when guarding Walt Bellamy, Willis Reed, Elvin Hayes, Nate Thurmond and Clyde Lovellette, none of who were anything close to midgets and all of who had offensive potential.

[Psileas]

And LOL @ high jumping into a thin layer of hay (in Pslieas link)....wtf is that bullsh*t?

Hmm, seems like we have a new adjustment standard now: A 35 inch vertical when jumping into a thin layer of hay = A 25 inch vertical when jumping into modern layers!

BTW, it's obvious that you didn't even see the original video, which is the same with the video I posted. However, I gave a link to the 0:50 mark of the video which shows Wilt jumping. A typical unimpressive jump again, right?

[PHILA]

You might want to look into the 1967 76ers.

Now there's a club that would humiliate any modern team (past 20 years) with tremendous ease. :applause:

[WillyJakk]

Now there's a club that would humiliate any modern team (past 20 years) with tremendous ease. :applause:

Really?

Other than Wilt I don't think they'd even get a shot off.

If you stand on their strong side (usually right hand) and make them go the opposite way, they'd just hunchback dribble in a circle the entire game.

They'd get EXPOSED!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB0iuk0AgG4

"Whoa uh oh what you gonna do now-ow-oww!"

[PHILA]

:lol

[PistonsFan#21]

The more footage of Wilt's exploits is revealed, the more you'll hear some (the usual "some") talk about the competition or with secondary things, like quality of dunks (obviously with extreme doses of exaggeration - btw, yeah, unlike Wilt, we all remember how great competition LeBron had to face in HS, blowing and dunking on midget kids you'll never hear about and most of them wonn't ever again seriously deal with basketball in their lives, as well as the "monsters" Lew Alcindor faced when he was a high schooler). Which makes it clear that it's becoming increasingly harder for them to focus on Wilt himself. Typical example:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVXOROFtrM4#t=50s

Any sane person with no problems with his vision who doesn't call this a very good jump is just trolling. But, wait, this doesn't count, he only blocked a 5'5 guy (he has to be 5'5)! According to the math and logic of ISH, when you block whiter or shorter guys than you, everything about you will have to be negatively adjusted, including your vertical. 35 inches against whites = 25 inches against blacks! Or maybe it's the angle, I'm pretty sure if we actually counted the leap, Wilt's hand barely was above rim level!

On a more serious note, give me a break about the "more impressive dunks" being such an important evidence of athleticism. The impressiveness of a dunk is largely depending on the available footage you have available to boost your own imagination. Many of today's dunks in today's dunk competitions are more impressive than the ones Dr.J, Wilkins and Jordan were pulling off 20-30 years ago. Does this make all of these dunkers better athletes than Dr.J, Wilkins and Jordan? "OMG, look at Kenyon Martin, how viciously he dunks, Wilt would NEVER be able to do this"! MMMkay, now call me back when Martin has an 82-game season. Or a season averaging a double-double. But if the great KMart coudn't do it, neither could Wilt, correct?

I didnt say Kmart or any of the guys above are better players or athletes than Wilt. I just said their dunks feel more powerful and they seem to get higher than Wilt on them. And no im not talking about dunk contests and flashy dunks. Im talking about elevation and power finishes. No wing player in the NBA today dunks as hard as Dominique Wilkins other than maybe Lebron and Josh Smith.

Also the picture you posted was misleading because of the angle it was taken from. Here's a picture of Dwight Howard who was measured at about 36 inch vert:

http://blacksportsonline.com/index/2009/01/28/DwightHowardSupermanDunk.jpg

yet some claim that Wilt could jump 50 inches :facepalm Stop being delusional

[Psileas]

I didnt say Kmart or any of the guys above are better players or athletes than Wilt. I just said their dunks feel more powerful and they seem to get higher than Wilt on them. And no im not talking about dunk contests and flashy dunks. Im talking about elevation and power finishes. No wing player in the NBA today dunks as hard as Dominique Wilkins other than maybe Lebron and Josh Smith.

Also the picture you posted was misleading because of the angle it was taken from. Here's a picture of Dwight Howard who was measured at about 36 inch vert:

http://blacksportsonline.com/index/2009/01/28/DwightHowardSupermanDunk.jpg

yet some claim that Wilt could jump 50 inches :facepalm Stop being delusionnal

First we have people talking about weak competition and "midgets" guarding Wilt, then others will blame Wilt for not dunking hard enough and not trying to jump as high as possible. Of course, the average Wilt-hater will gladly accept both types of blames and add them to his (definitely poorer than Wilt's offensive) "arsenal" for future use without caring to notice the obvious contradiction born here. Now, if you want power, Wilt was actually among the first NBA players to damage a basket during a game, and no, that's not among the "tall tales" that he or some of his fanatics claimed, it's coming from a newspaper report (and I'm more than 80% sure it came from the 1967 season). The game had stopped for quite some time. I would go and search the Google Archives to find and show you this report, but they don't exist anymore, so I base my hopes to PHILA's or maybe even Regul8r's saved archives.
The camera angle may not be at 0 degrees, but it's not at 30 degrees, either. You don't need a zero distortion factor to realize that it's a high jump. Just look at the bottom of the photo. Hardwood nowhere to be seen, neither on the left of the photo nor on the right. Furthermore, if you freeze it around 2'' later, at the very beginning of the 0:52 mark, the photo gets even closer to 0 degrees, with Wilt's shoulders being at the same height with the bottom of the backboard. Now, what remains is the depth. Note here that the object closest to the camera is the backboard itself or, at worst, the backboard + Wilt (so sense in Wilt jumping from behind the backboard, I hope you get this). Which means that in every other case, the depth distortion here works against Wilt. It doesn't look as if Wilt is seriously bending his feet, either.

50 inches? I'm not the one talking about 50 inches. He'd still got among the highest verticals ever among all 7 footers in history. Ιf we are to discredit Wilt's actual jumping abilities because of his exaggerated calculations and claims, let's at least be consistent and do the same with anyone who goes beyond logic. Jordan, for example, made a claim along with the lines of scoring 100 points against the Raptors, since Kobe had scored 81 and (not) surprisingly, he was believed by a lot of fans, despite him having actually faced weak defenses himself in lots of games and still never coming close to 100, even in close, competitive situations. If Wilt was alive and told the exact same thing, people would be like "oh, the old fart started his fairy tales again". By the way, I do think that 100 in a today's normal game by a single player is almost a fairy tale. I don't think Wilt would have such a game, but neither would Jordan.

[Asukal]

By the way, I do think that 100 in a today's normal game by a single player is almost a fairy tale. I don't think Wilt would have such a game, but neither would Jordan.

No player in NBA history will be able to get 100 in today's game. But if given the opportunity to take 50 FGA's, Jordan will more likely get 100 points than Wilt if they played today in their prime.

[PHILA]

Wilt was actually among the first NBA players to damage a basket during a game, and no, that's not among the "tall tales" that he or some of his fanatics claimed, it's coming from a newspaper report (and I'm more than 80% sure it came from the 1967 season). The game had stopped for quite some time. I would go and search the Google Archives to find and show you this report, but they don't exist anymore, so I base my hopes to PHILA's or maybe even Regul8r's saved archives.


I don't recall. I know Luke Jackson smashed the backboard though. As for elevation, in Wilt's case it was tremendous extension as well. Note this play at Overbrook below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpufnh4fmRk#t=2m20s



KAJ also could get up high. :applause:


http://i.imgur.com/HL5z9.jpg

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

[millwad]

Really?

Other than Wilt I don't think they'd even get a shot off.

If you stand on their strong side (usually right hand) and make them go the opposite way, they'd just hunchback dribble in a circle the entire game.

They'd get EXPOSED!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB0iuk0AgG4

"Whoa uh oh what you gonna do now-ow-oww!"

Actually, Wilt was only the 5th best scorer of his team in the '67 finals. Greer, Walker, Jones and Cunningham averaged more points per game during that year's finals and Wilt was only the leading scorer in one out of 6 games during that series.

In game 1 of that series Wilt scored 16 points out of 141 points. Jones had 30 points in that game, Greer had 32, Cunningham had 26 points and Walker had 23 points in that game 1.

In game 2 when Wilt put up 10 points on 4-10 shooting and missed 15 FT's (2-17 FT's) he had Greer who scored 30 points, Cunningham who scored 28 points, Walker who scored 18 points and Jones who scored 16 points.

In game 3 he lead his team in scoring but he still had 4 guys who scored more than 18 points in that game.

In game 4 Wilt again scored 10 points. Greer in that game had 38 points, Walker had 33 points, Cunningham put up 15 and Jones 14.

In game 5 Wilt scored 20 points but he only made 2-12 FT's. Walker in that game had 25 points, Greer scored 20, Jones scored 16 and Cunningham 13.

In the last game of the series Wilt scored 20 points while Jones put up 27, Walker 20, Cunningham 17, Greer 15 and Jackson 13 and 21 rebounds.


Greer in that year's finals averaged 26 points per game, Walker averaged 23.3 points per game, Jones averaged 20.1 points per game and Cunningham averaged 19.6 points per game. Wilt was the 5th leading scorer with an average of 17.7 points per game during the 1967 finals.

It's pretty odd when you think about it, prime Wilt Chamberlain had to have 4 guys who scored more than him in the finals to finally be able to win. The guy had freaking 4 guys who averaged more than 19 points per game during that year's finals...

[jlauber]

Chamberlain was BY FAR, Philly's BEST player in the '67 Finals.

He absolutely destroyed 6-11 HOFer Nate Thurmond in that series. Wilt outscored Thurmond in FIVE of the six games, and he outrebounded Nate in FIVE of the six games.

Not only that, but NO ONE ELSE ever outshot Thurmond by a .560 to .343 margin in the playoffs. In fact, aside from Wilt, who did it THREE times, I doubt you could find ANY other center who ever shot better than 49% against Nate. And, in their three post-season H2H's, Wilt CRUSHED Thurmond on the glass, too. In those three playoff series, Wilt outshot Thurmond, .560 to .343; .500 to .398; and .550 to .392. He also outrebounded Nate in those three series, 28.5 rpg to 26.7 rpg; 23.5 rpg to 19.5 rpg; and in his LAST post-season, Wilt murdered Thurmond, 23.6 rpg to 17.2 rpg.

And as he was ALL season, in Philly's BIGGEST games, it was Chamberlain leading the way. In that clinching game six win, Wilt outscored Thurmond, 24-12; outshot Nate; 8-13 to 4-13; and outrebounded Thurmond, 23-22.

Wilt also LED the Sixers (and BOTH teams), and by a considerable margin in assists, at 6.8 apg (which was his playoff LOW BTW.)

And how about FG%'s? Once again, Wilt was MILES ahead of BOTH teams. In fact, aside from Wilt's .560, teammate Matt Guokas, who was their seventh man, was the ONLY other player, by BOTH teams, to shoot over 50% (.519.) Jones shot .455; Walker shot .451; Cunningham shot .449; Greer shot .398; and Jackson shot .368.

For the Warriors, once again, Thurmond was held to a miniscule .343 mark by Wilt's dominating defense. Jimmy King actually led SF at .464. Attles shot .440; Barry, who averaged 40.8 ppg in that series, only shot .400. Mullins shot .398; Hetzel shot .375; Meschery shot .372; Lee shot .341; and Neumann shot .231.

And, as ALWAYS, and BECAUSE of WILT, the Sixers held a HUGE margin in FTAs, with a 281-190 differential; and a 173-133 margin in FTs MADE. A direct result of Wilt's IMPACT at the line. So, forget those idiots that merely point out Wilt's poor shooting. BECAUSE of WILT, the Sixers enjoyed a MASSIVE edge at the line.

Chamberlain easily led BOTH teams in rebounds, at 28.5 rpg, too. So, as ANYONE can plainly see, it was WILT who easily LED the Sixers to that dominating title.

[Legends66NBA7]

Well, ISH wouldn't be ISH without the best rivalry in the board.

[millwad]

Chamberlain was BY FAR, Philly's BEST player in the '67 Finals.

He absolutely destroyed 6-11 HOFer Nate Thurmond in that series. Wilt outscored Thurmond in FIVE of the six games, and he outrebounded Nate in FIVE of the six games.

Not only that, but NO ONE ELSE ever outshot Thurmond by a .560 to .343 margin in the playoffs. In fact, aside from Wilt, who did it THREE times, I doubt you could find ANY other center who ever shot better than 49% against Nate. And, in their three post-season H2H's, Wilt CRUSHED Thurmond on the glass, too. In those three playoff series, Wilt outshot Thurmond, .560 to .343; .500 to .398; and .550 to .392. He also outrebounded Nate in those three series, 28.5 rpg to 26.7 rpg; 23.5 rpg to 19.5 rpg; and in his LAST post-season, Wilt murdered Thurmond, 23.6 rpg to 17.2 rpg.

And as he was ALL season, in Philly's BIGGEST games, it was Chamberlain leading the way. In that clinching game six win, Wilt outscored Thurmond, 24-12; outshot Nate; 8-13 to 4-13; and outrebounded Thurmond, 23-22.

Wilt also LED the Sixers (and BOTH teams), and by a considerable margin in assists, at 6.8 apg (which was his playoff LOW BTW.)

And how about FG%'s? Once again, Wilt was MILES ahead of BOTH teams. In fact, aside from Wilt's .560, teammate Matt Guokas, who was their seventh man, was the ONLY other player, by BOTH teams, to shoot over 50% (.519.) Jones shot .455; Walker shot .451; Cunningham shot .449; Greer shot .398; and Jackson shot .368.

For the Warriors, once again, Thurmond was held to a miniscule .343 mark by Wilt's dominating defense. Jimmy King actually led SF at .464. Attles shot .440; Barry, who averaged 40.8 ppg in that series, only shot .400. Mullins shot .398; Hetzel shot .375; Meschery shot .372; Lee shot .341; and Neumann shot .231.

And, as ALWAYS, and BECAUSE of WILT, the Sixers held a HUGE margin in FTAs, with a 281-190 differential; and a 173-133 margin in FTs MADE. A direct result of Wilt's IMPACT at the line. So, forget those idiots that merely point out Wilt's poor shooting. BECAUSE of WILT, the Sixers enjoyed a MASSIVE edge at the line.

Chamberlain easily led BOTH teams in rebounds, at 28.5 rpg, too. So, as ANYONE can plainly see, it was WILT who easily LED the Sixers to that dominating title.

Wow, grow up, seriously..
You don't have to dedicate your life to defending Wilt Chamberlain on the net..

I wrote the comment because the guy obviously thought Chamberlain's teammate were pure garbage in '67 when it came to scoring but in fact Wilt was only 5th in scoring in the finals. And still, Jlauber, a center is supposed to have better FG% than his team's guards.. And yes, Wilt was ahead of his peers when it came to FG% so you don't have to spam about it.. AGAIN.

And Wilt grabbbed tons of rebounds, no question about that but lets not forget the crazy amount of missed shots that series showcased. As an average over 6 games, the Warriors missed an average of 75 shots per game while the 76ers as an average missed 58 shots per game. That gives a total of 160 rebound opportunities PER GAME which is just unbelievably much and the difference in rebounding average per game was less than two between Chamberlain and Thurmond. Still, I am not taking anything away from Chamberlain but those numbers should never be compared with other centers rebounding numbers in the modern era.

And I almost find Thurmond's rebounding average in that series more impressive, as a defender it's easier to grab a defensive rebound compared to an offensive rebound. Thurmond grabbed 26.6 rebounds per game which is 1.9 rebounds less than what Chamberlain grabbed as an average in that series. But the difference is that Thurmond's team missed 17 more shots per game as an average which gave Wilt 17 more defensive rebounding opportunities than what Thurmond had. Anyway, both still did an amazing job during that series when it came to rebounding.

And regarding his own team and their FG%, it wasn't great but for that era the high scorers of Wilt's team beside Greer shot better than standard.

And I would be too cocky about Thurmond's crappy FG% average, he always shot with a terrible FG%, the guy has a career average of pathetic 42 FG% so even though Wilt did a good job, Thurmond ALWAYS shot with low FG%..

And haha, seriously, Wilt gave the 76ers an advantage in free throw attempts, not FT's made. Wilt only made 22 free throws out of freaking 72 attempts, no one in NBA history has missed more FT's in the finals than Wilt in one series. Wilt made 30% of his FT's duing that series which is just S-A-D.

And in fact, Wilt during that series tied the fourth most MADE FT's in his own team. Walker made more than twice as many FT's as Wilt during that series and Greer made more and so did Jones. He tied FT's made with Cunningham, but the difference was that Cunningham needed 32 less tries.. :facepalm

[millwad]

Well, ISH wouldn't be ISH without the best rivalry in the board.

Jlauber's favourite song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBR2G-iI3-I

[32Dayz]

Just curious Mr. Lauber.

Why does Wilt taking a large amount of FT's give his team the edge at the FT Line. If he consistently was making a large amount of FT's (not attempting) in the playoffs then I would understand your point but in the games where he only made a handful how was that giving his team the edge at the FT Line.

I mean drawing fouls also benefits your team by getting the opposing team in foul trouble but I dont think that was the point you were trying to make.

Because outside of that ^ drawing fouls doesn't really overly benefit your team if you dont convert at the line.

[Legends66NBA7]

Jlauber's favourite song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBR2G-iI3-I

:oldlol:

Jlauber when he sees millwad and vice versa :cheers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8ekz_CSBVg&ob=av3e

[jlauber]

Wow, grow up, seriously..
You don't have to dedicate your life to defending Wilt Chamberlain on the net..

I wrote the comment because the guy obviously thought Chamberlain's teammate were pure garbage in '67 when it came to scoring but in fact Wilt was only 5th in scoring in the finals. And still, Jlauber, a center is supposed to have better FG% than his team's guards.. And yes, Wilt was ahead of his peers when it came to FG% so you don't have to spam about it.. AGAIN.


I will continue to "defend" Wilt (not that he REALLY needs it) from those with an obvious anti-Chamberlain agenda....such as yourself.

Chamberlain's teammates were very good. The ENTIRE league was FILLED with great rosters. I have pointed that out before, but the Hawks, Royals, Warriors, Knicks, Lakers, and especially the Celtics (with TEN exceptional players) were LOADED with talent. Virtually every one of those rosters had at least two superstars, and most had players who would be 20+ ppg scorers within a year, or so. An example... the 36-45 Lakers. HOFer Gail Goodrich. Abdul-Rahman (Walt Hazzard), who would average 24 ppg the very next season in Seattle. Archie Clark, who would be an all-star guard the very next season. Rudy LaRusso, who would average 21.8 ppg the very next season in SF. TWO seven-footers (Mel Counts and Henry Finkel. Journeyman center Darrell Imhoff. Tom Hawkins who was a decent player in his career. Oh, and how about HOFers West and Baylor. And with all of that talent... a 36-45 record.


And Wilt grabbbed tons of rebounds, no question about that but lets not forget the crazy amount of missed shots that series showcased. As an average over 6 games, the Warriors missed an average of 75 shots per game while the 76ers as an average missed 58 shots per game. That gives a total of 160 rebound opportunities PER GAME which is just unbelievably much and the difference in rebounding average per game was less than two between Chamberlain and Thurmond. Still, I am not taking anything away from Chamberlain but those numbers should never be compared with other centers rebounding numbers in the modern era.



In the previous round against Russell and the Celtics...

Game one, Wilt outrebounded Russell 32-15, and those 32 rebounds came in a game that had 120 TOTAL rebounds.

Game five (the clinching game of the series), Wilt outrebounded Russell, 36-21, and with a TOTAL of 128 rebounds available.

Game three. Russell pulled down 29 rebounds, which was fantastic...except that Wilt grabbed a playoff record of 41. How many rebounds were available in that game? 134. So Wilt was yanking down about 30% of the available rebounds in those games.

BTW, one can only wonder how many "available rebounds" there were in the game in which Wilt outrebounded Russell, 55-19?

Once again, though, it wasn't just about the numbers. It was the fact that Wilt was routinely pounding his opposing centers. 7-0 Tom Boerwinkle had a couple of seasons in the early 70's when he exceeded 20% in "rebound rate." In their three H2H playoff series, Wilt just murdered Boerwinkle, including one series 172-9. Wilt was outrebounding Thurmond by margins of 23.5 rpg to 19.5 rpg in the '69 playoffs, and then he devoured Nate in the '73 playoffs, 23.6 rpg to 17.2 rpg.

Quite simply, Wilt was the most dominant rebounder...EVER. He was NEVER outrebounded in ANY of his 29 post-seasons...even in his LAST post-season (when he mowed down Boerwinkle, Thurmond, and Reed) with a 22.5 rpg average in 17 playoff games.


And regarding his own team and their FG%, it wasn't great but for that era the high scorers of Wilt's team beside Greer shot better than standard.

And I would be too cocky about Thurmond's crappy FG% average, he always shot with a terrible FG%, the guy has a career average of pathetic 42 FG% so even though Wilt did a good job, Thurmond ALWAYS shot with low FG%..



You always bring up Greer and the fact that he led Philly in scoring in that post-season. Greer shot .429 for the entire playoffs, and only .398 in the Finals. Meanwhile Wilt shot .579 in the entire playoffs, and .560 against Thurmond. Once again, find me ANY other center who shot .560 against Thurmond in the playoffs. We certainly know that Kareem couldn't even come close to 50%, with series' of .486, .428, and even .405 against Nate.

And I always find it fascinating that those that attempt to disparage Wilt's post-season numbers...such as yourself...NEVER bring up the fact that Wilt was ROUTINELY holding HIS opposing center's to WAY BELOW their regular season numbers. In that '67 post-season alone, he held Thurmond, who had shot .437 during the regular season, to that microscopic .343 in the Finals. He held Russell, who had shot .454 in that regular season, to .358 shooting (while shooting .556 himself.)

In the '62 ECF's Wilt held Russell, who had shot .457 in the regular season, to .420 shooting. In the '64 Finals, Wilt averaged 29 ppg on .517 shooting against Russell. Russell only averaged 11 ppg against Wilt, and I wonder what Russell shot against Wilt, since he only shot .356 in his ten playoff games, five of which were against Wilt.

In the 67-68 playoffs, Wilt held 6-11 HOFer Walt Bellamy to .421 shooting...which was MILES below his regular season mark of .541.

Of course, Wilt also held Kareem to .481 shooting in the '71 WCF's, in a year in which Kareem shot .577. And then in the '72 WCF's, Wilt held Kareem to .457 shooting (including .414 in the last four games of that series), in a season in which Kareem shot .574.



And haha, seriously, Wilt gave the 76ers an advantage in free throw attempts, not FT's made. Wilt only made 22 free throws out of freaking 72 attempts, no one in NBA history has missed more FT's in the finals than Wilt in one series. Wilt made 30% of his FT's duing that series which is just S-A-D.

And in fact, Wilt during that series tied the fourth most MADE FT's in his own team. Walker made more than twice as many FT's as Wilt during that series and Greer made more and so did Jones. He tied FT's made with Cunningham, but the difference was that Cunningham needed 32 less tries

You just don't get it do you???

BECAUSE of Wilt drawing so many fouls, his TEAM's benefitted IMMENSELY. Once again, just in the '67 Finals alone, Wilt being constantly fouled led his teammates to a procession at the FT line. His Sixers went to the line a staggering 91 more times than the Warriors, and made 40 more FTs.

In fact, in that entire '67 season, Wilt's Sixers ran away with the most FTAs in the league, and yes, they also MADE the most, as well.

And a couple more interesting facts about Wilt's IMPACT at the line. His '67-68 76ers once again LED the league in FTAs.

He was traded to the Lakers before the start of the '69 season, and the result? The Lakers LED the NBA in FTAs. And, in the playoffs, his Lakers shot 109 more FTs than the next best team (Boston.)

In the 69-70 season, Wilt was injured early in the year, and missed 70 games. The result? The Lakers went from FIRST in the league in FTAs, all the way down to 12th...in a league with 14 teams. BUT, then Wilt returned for the playoffs. The result? The Lakers LED the team's in the post-season, and by a HUGE margin. They shot 655 FTs in the playoffs, and the next best team, the Knicks, shot 455. And those two team's met in the Finals...where LA held a whopping 256-160 margin in FTAs, and a dominating 176-122 differential in FTs MADE.

So, while Wilt certainly wasn't shooting his FTs well, he was getting his teammates to the line. That is IMPACT.