The Wilt Double Standard

[jlauber]

I have long maintained that Chamberlain had to deal with the most impossible EXPECTATIONS of any all-time great basketball player. I call it the "Wilt Double Standard."

The "anti-Wilt" clan has repeatedly bombarded this board with absolute nonsense, like Chamberlain was a lumbering "Frankenstein" that dunked on 6-6 helpless white centers. Or that Wilt was a "stats-padder", who could put up huge games against far inferior competition, but when he had to face a HOF center, he went into hiding. Or that Wilt was a perpetual "loser." Or that Wilt "choked" in his biggest games. He wasn't even cut any slack with injuries. Even Bill Russell ripped Wilt for pulling himself out of a game seven, even though it was for only a matter of a couple of minutes.

Yet, when other "greats" have done FAR worse, they are forgiven.

"Stats-padder?" In Wilt's 50.4 ppg season, he was asked by his COACH to score. Why? Because his COACH looked at that putrid roster, much of it the older remains of the same LAST PLACE roster that Wilt joined in his rookie season two years earlier, and realized that the ONLY chance they had, was for Wilt to SHOOT. And how much did Wilt's "stats-padding" hurt that team? They went 49-31, and lost a game seven against the 60-20 Celtics, and their SEVEN HOFers, by two points. And Wilt shot .506 that season, while his teammates collectively shot .402. Oh, and his teammates collectively shot .354 in their 12 post-season games, too. Just how in the hell did that "stats-padding" Wilt get that cast of clowns that far?

But, the pundits claim, Wilt was playiong every minute of every game, even in blowouts. Clearly, that is "stats-padding." How about his 62-63 season, then, with arguably the worst roster in NBA history, Chamberlain played 47.6 mpg. True, that team was so awful, that not even a dominany Wilt could get them past a 31-49 record. Still, they lost 35 games by single digits, and were only involved in eight 20+ point games (going 4-4.) Hell, they went 1-8 against the Celtics, and their NINE HOFers, and SIX of them were decided by single digits. And all Wilt could do was put up FIVE 40+ point games against Russell that season, including a 50 point game, en route to averaging 38.1 ppg against him. All in a season in which Wilt LED the NBA in FIFTEEN of their 22 statistical categories, including ppg (by a margin of +10.8 ppg), rebounding, and setting a then FG% record of .528. He even led the NBA in Win Shares, and by a huge margin. And his PER rating of 31.84 is the all-time NBA record.

And, just how bad was that roster? The very next season, Wilt's new coach, Alex Hannum, conducted a pre-season scrimmage involving the roster, sans Wilt, and playing against draft picks and scrubs...and guess which team won the game? Hannum was shocked at how little those veteran players knew how to play the game. They had become so dependant on Wilt, that they had basically become worthless NBA players. Futhermore, Wilt then took that cast of clowns to a 48-32 record, and a trip to the Finals, where they lost to Russell's Celtics, and their EIGHT HOFers, 4-1. And two of those losses were in the waning seconds.

And even clowns like Dickwad try to point out that Wilt's scoring didn't lead to success. Yep...like his 65-66 season, when Wilt agains led the NBA in scoring at 33.5 ppg, rebounding at 24.6 rpg, and yes, set another FG% mark of .540...and in the process, he led his TEAM to the BEST RECORD in the league. Oh, and in his regular season H2H's against Russell, he averaged 28.3 ppg and 30.7 rpg. Then, in the ECF's, and again against Russell, Wilt averaged 28 ppg and 30.2 rpg (on .509 shooting), but his teammates collectively shot .352 in that series. Who gets the blame, though?

The FACT was, in Wilt's "scoring" seasons, covering six post-season series, he took that last place roster to a game six, two point loss against the Celtics in the '60 ECF's. He took essentially that same roster to a game seven, two point loss against the Celtics in '62. He took what was essentially the same team that had gone 31-49 in '63, to a 48-32 record, and a trip to the Finals in '64. And he then took a 40-40 Philly team (which had gone 34-46 the year before he arrived) to a game seven, one point loss against the 62-18 Celtics, and in a series in which he averaged 30 ppg and 31 rpg.

And even Wilt's 100 point game gets ripped by the "Chamberlain-bashers." It came against a lousy Knick team, and with only centers like Phil Jordan and Darrell Imhoff (two average centers in that era, but neither were awful.)


Ok, how come Hakeem gets praised here for winning two rings (and no one ever says, "only two" either), despite playing 18 seasons to Wilt's 14? Or that he only played on four teams that even won 50+ games (and a high of 58), while Chamberlain played on FOUR that won 60+, including two that went 68-13 and 69-13. Or that Wilt took TWELVE teams, in 14 seasons, to at least the Conference Finals. Meanwhile, Hakeem took FOUR teams as far as the Conference Finals, and only three to the Finals (Wilt went to SIX Finals.) Not only that, but Hakeem took his team's down in flames in EIGHT FIRST ROUND SERIES, and none of even those were close.

Or Bird only winning three rings, despite playing on stacked rosters his entire career. Here again, no one ever mentions "only three" either. Or that Bird took teams with HCA edge down in SEVEN post-season series, including one in which they were swept.

Or Kareem, playing with talented rosters throughout the 70's, and in the weakest decade of NBA champions in NBA history, and only going to TWO Finals, and only winning ONE ring.

Continued...

[Andrei89]

did not read.

[Batz]

did not read.

[millwad]

Did not read.

[B]

We get it OK. If Wilt were still alive you'd gladly bend over to be number 20,001

[jlauber]

CANNOT read.

Corrected.

[millwad]

Corrected.

Naw, great "punch line".. :facepalm

Stop hurting my feelings!

[sipitri]

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y296/matt3989/20jjnycjpg.gif

[Rose]

Ok, how come Hakeem gets praised here for winning two rings (and no one ever says, "only two" either), despite playing 18 seasons to Wilt's 14? Or that he only played on four teams that even won 50+ games (and a high of 58), while Chamberlain played on FOUR that won 60+, including two that went 68-13 and 69-13. Or that Wilt took TWELVE teams, in 14 seasons, to at least the Conference Finals. Meanwhile, Hakeem took FOUR teams as far as the Conference Finals, and only three to the Finals (Wilt went to SIX Finals.) Not only that, but Hakeem took his team's down in flames in EIGHT FIRST ROUND SERIES, and none of even those were close.

Or Bird only winning three rings, despite playing on stacked rosters his entire career. Here again, no one ever mentions "only three" either. Or that Bird took teams with HCA edge down in SEVEN post-season series, including one in which they were swept.

Or Kareem, playing with talented rosters throughout the 70's, and in the weakest decade of NBA champions in NBA history, and only going to TWO Finals, and only winning ONE ring.

Continued...
The problem with this is that Wilt only went up against one top ten player in the finals. And only one other one who was in the top 20 or so in Big O.

Whereas Hakeem went up against Shaq(a young Shaq I'll give you that) Barkley, Stockton/Malone, Payton, Ewing.

Bird and Magic went up against each other, plus Bird won against Hakeem(although I'll say it was a young Hakeem) too. I think McHale is a top 25 guy so that kind of balances each other out given Kareem's age and by that time diminishing skill. I mean the Celtics/Lakers were in the Finals pretty much every year of the 80s competing against each other. So it's not like Bird lost to Isiah that often. until the end of the decade.

[jlauber]

In Wilt's 100 point game, he chewed up the THREE Knick centers. Furthemore, as he came closer to the 100 point mark, the Knicks were SWARMING Chamberlain, or deliberating fouling his teammates, and were slowing the ball to a crawl...all in a desperate attempt to prevent him getting to the century mark.

In any case, many dismiss Wilt's 100 as a blatant "stats-padding" effort.

Ok, how about Shaq's 61 point game on his birthday in 2000? He faced the awesome threesome of Olowokandi (14 minutes), Chilcutt (19 minutes), and even Piatkowski in the remainder. And just watching footage of it, the 12-48 Clippers did not even attempt to guard Shaq for much of the game. And, those 61 points came in 45 minutes in a game in which the 50-11 Lakers won 123-103.

And how about the accounts of Bird's lone 60 point game? The OPPOSING players were CHEERING him on.

"Stats-padding?" Wilt gets accused of "stats-padding" in his scoring seasons because he was playing nearly every minute of every game. BUT, Wilt did that his ENTIRE career. Even in his LAST season, and when he had long since was interested in scoring titles, he played 43.2 mpg (and he then played 47.1 mpg in the post-season.)

How often have you ever read a post in which Kareem was labeled a "stats-padder?" Then, think about this. In his 71-72 season, Kareem averaged a career high 44.2 mpg, and scored 34.8 ppg on .574 shooting. His Bucks went 63-19, and had a scoring differential of +11.1 ppg.

Ok, so what happened in Kareem's 75-76 season, when he played for a 40-42 Laker team? He "only" played 41.2 mpg, and could only average 27.7 ppg on .529 shooting, on a team that desperately needed him to elevate his game.

Here again, Wilt was a "stats-padder" on a 31-49 team, in which he played 47.6 mpg (and in very few "blowouts"), on a team that lost 35 games by single digits. Obviously, he must have declined right? Hell no, Wilt stepped up with a 44.8 ppg, 24.3 rpg, .528 (at the time an NBA record) season. He could easily have just folded his tent, much like Kareem probably did in his 75-76 season. Instead, he played out of the world, despite getting absolutely no help.

And does anyone rip MJ for scoring 37.1 ppg on a 40-42 team? Or Kobe for scoring 35.4 ppg on a 45-37 team? Nope, but Wilt scoring 50.4 ppg on a 49-31 team (that he would carry to a game seven, two point loss against the 60-20 Celtics) was a "stats-padder."

Continued...

[BlackJoker23]

op is a queer ******. oh ya and he swallows

[bwink23]

op is a queer ******. oh ya and he swallows


TROLLING MUCH??

[millwad]

TROLLING MUCH??

Licking Jlauber's butt alot?

[BlackJoker23]

TROLLING MUCH??
nutriding much?

[bwink23]

Licking Jlauber's butt alot?


The facts that are presented speak for themselves. Jlauber is not the only guy in the entire world that thinks Chamberlain was on another level. Kareem himself stated that Chamberlain was a great leaper and was the most dominant scorer ever....quit acting like Jlauber is going out on some kind of limb with his claims and evidence.

:no:

[LeFraud James]

Still living in the past I see.

[FireDavidKahn]

What's funny is that very little of Wilt's tall tales can actually be verified but are spoken as if it's fact. You can't treat something that is unsubstantiated as fact.:oldlol:

[jlauber]

What's funny is that very little of Wilt's tall tales can actually be verified but are spoken as if it's fact. You can't treat something that is unsubstantiated as fact.:oldlol:

Which has nothing to do with the topic.

[FireDavidKahn]

Which has nothing to do with the topic.
Why don't you go fight a mountain lion about it.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Can you move on. It's 2012. Wilt's last game was 39 years ago.

[jlauber]

The problem with this is that Wilt only went up against one top ten player in the finals. And only one other one who was in the top 20 or so in Big O.

Whereas Hakeem went up against Shaq(a young Shaq I'll give you that) Barkley, Stockton/Malone, Payton, Ewing.

Bird and Magic went up against each other, plus Bird won against Hakeem(although I'll say it was a young Hakeem) too. I think McHale is a top 25 guy so that kind of balances each other out given Kareem's age and by that time diminishing skill. I mean the Celtics/Lakers were in the Finals pretty much every year of the 80s competing against each other. So it's not like Bird lost to Isiah that often. until the end of the decade.

First of all, how many top-10 players did Hakeem face in the Finals. Bird in one, and a young Shaq in another (and allowing 28 ppg on a staggering .595 shooting against him, all while being outrebounded, outassisted, outblocked, and shooting .483 in the process.) Ewing was nowhere near a top-10 player.

Secondly, you mention HOF players that Hakeem's teams went thru. Here again, this is another example of a "double-standard." The "Simmonsites" like to claim that Wilt played alongside HOF players, nearly as many as Russell. Except that, Russell played along side his HOF teammates in a total of 71 seasons, while Wilt had a total of 23 full-time seasons from his. Not only that, but Thurmond was a rookie, playing part-time, out of position, and shooting a miserable .395 in the one season he and Wilt were paired together.

The Bayor examples are really ridiculous. The two played together for ONE FULL season, in their four years in the league together. And in that one season, Baylor blew chunks in the playoffs, particularly in the Finals. The next year Wilt shredded his knee in the ninth game, and had major knee surgery. He did come back way ahead of schedule for the playoffs, and while he was nowhere near a 100%, he still played brilliantly, while a declining Baylor quietly took "third banana." And Wilt still got that old 46-36 team to a game seven loss in the Finals against the 60-22 Knicks, with all four of their HOFers in the primes of their careers. In fact, Wilt put up a 23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, .625 Finals.

Baylor played in two games in the 70-71 season, and he and West both missed the post-season. And he was asked to retire after the ninth game of the 71-72 season (and not coincidently, LA immediately ran off a 33 game winning streak.)

NOR do the "Wilt-bashers" EVER acknowledge the fact that Wilt's teams faced HOF-laden rosters EVERY season in his 14 seasons in the league. In his first TEN seasons, he had to battle the greatest dynasty in major professional team sports history. Those Celtic teams had between FIVE to as many as NINE HOFers on their rosters. And virtually of those Celtic teams were DEEP as well. Granted, not all of those HOFers were true HOF players, but even those that weren't, like Sanders and KC Jones, were regarded as the best defenders at their positions for much of their careers. And Bailey Howell was putting up 20 ppg seasons on .500 shooting with Russell.

And Russell had a cast of good, to great, scorers on his teams. Many of those HOF teammates were putting up MULTIPLE 20 ppg seasons. Sam Jones had a season of 25.9 ppg (and a post-season of 26.1 ppg) among his many 20+ ppg seasons, and Havlicek put up seasons of 27.5 ppg and 28.9 ppg after Russell retired. Clearly, players like Jones, Havlicek, Heinsohn, and Sharman could have scored more had they played in offensive systems which tailored to their games.

And once again, in those ten seasons in the Celtic Dynasty-era, Wilt had FOUR teams lose to the Celtics, in FOUR game seven's, by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points. AND, he also BEAT them, (and badly BTW, with a near sweep) in the '67 season.

As an example, how many HOFers did Hakeem beat in his two title runs's? Wilt had to go thru TEN (and in only three series) in '67, and EIGHT (again, in only three series) in '72.

After Russell retired, Wilt played four more seasons. In those four years he faced that '70 Knick team, with their FOUR HOFers (and a HOF coach.) Then, in the 70-71 WCF's, he faced the 66-16 Bucks, with Alcindor and Oscar, and without BOTH West and Baylor (and he battled a prime Kareem to a statistical draw in the process.)

In his 71-72 season, Wilt led his 69-13 Lakers to 4-2 beatdown of Kareem's 63-19 Bucks (winning four of the last five games), and then a 4-1 rout of the Knicks, and their FIVE HOFers, in the Finals.

And in Wilt's last season, he took an injury-riddled 60-22 Laker team to the Finals, where they lost four games in the final minute, and against a NY team that had SIX HOFers.

So, for those that claim that Wilt had HOF teammates, yes, he did (although not really in his first six seasons), BUT, his team's were generally OUTGUNNED by HOFers in every post-season.

[jlauber]

How about injuries?

Has there ever been a "great" player who was more ridiculed for an injury, than Wilt in game seven of the '69 Finals? Charley Rosen completed blew the REAL occurances of that game seven, in his book on the '71-72 Lakers, claiming that Wilt pulled himself out of the game, when he picked up his fifth foul in the third quarter, and with his Lakers AHEAD by a big margin.

Other's claimed that Wilt could see the end coming, in the 4th quarter, and "feigned" his injury to perhaps minimize the imminent bashing he would take after the game.

Even Bill Russell ripped Chamberlain, claiming that nothing short of a broken leg would have kept him out the game. (To his credit, Russell later apologized, albiet, some 20 years later.)

In any case, here were the FACTS surrounding that injury. One, LA was BEHIND, and big, early in the 4th period (17 points down with a little over 10 minutes remaining.)

Two, the Lakers began a furious rally from that ten minute mark, and with a little over six minutes remaining, Wilt grabbed a defensive rebound, and his outlet led to a fastbreak basket, which cut the deficit to nine points. However, he landed awkwardly on that leg, (incidently, it would be the SAME leg that he would shred in game nine of the very next season.) He still stayed in the game, though, and pulled down yet another defensive rebound, and the subsequent pass led to two FTs by West, which then cut the margin down to seven points. BUT, he HAD to come out. He could barely stand.

Three, why would Wilt "fake" an injury at that juncture of the game? The old, but proud Celtics, were on their last fumes, and in a manner of about four minutes, LA had cut the deficit from 17 to 7 points, and with a little over 5 minutes remaining. If anything, that could have been among Wilt's finest hours, had he been able to engineer a comeback from that big deficit, and in a game seven.

Four, Wilt sat for about TWO MINUTES, and then asked to go back in. The Lakers had continued to cut into Boston's lead, too. His incompetent COACH, who absolutely hated Wilt from day one, declined. Instead, he put his faith in Mel f***king Counts. Counts subsequently missed a wild shot late, and then had committed a disasterous turnover in the last minute. Oh, and BTW, while Chamberlain had shot 7-8 from the floor in that game, Counts finished 4-13 from the field.

Five. Where was the "clutch" Russell in that period? He went 1-3 from the floor, and had two rebounds. Meanwhile, Chamberlain, missing the last five minutes, went 1-1 (on an easy basket over Russell, who had five fouls..and WHY didn't the Lakers take advantage of that the rest of the game?), and also grabbed seven rebounds. So, Wilt, in his seven minutes, matched Russell's scoring in his 12, and outrebounded him, 7-2.

And six. I found it insteresting that Russell would blast Wilt after that game. Why? Because how about Russell in his '58 Finals, in a series in which his team lost to the Hawks, 4-2? Russell sustained a chip fracture in the third game, and missed games four and five of that series. And, BTW, no one ever mentions this, but Boston WON BOTH games withOUT Russell. In any case, he tried to make a go of it in game six, but could only play 20 minutes. I am not questioning the severity of Russell's injury, but he also had no right to question the most durable player of all-time either.

Why is Chamberlain ripped, for taking himself out of a game for TWO minutes, and then asking to go back in, and being denied? In a game in which his team would lose by TWO points?

Continued...

[jlauber]

Continuing...

Of course, I already mentioned Wilt tearing that same knee up in game nine of the very next season. He subsequently underwent major knee surgery, and even the most optomistic medical opinion had him done for at least the rest of the season. Keep in mind, too, that Baylor had a similar injury, in the '65 playoffs, and was basically a shell for a year-and-a-half. In fact, he was never the same after it.

However, does anyone ever mention that Wilt CAME BACK in time for the playoffs? And he did so, solely because he wanted to help his teammates win a title. And not only did Chamberlain play, at well below 100%, he played EXCEPTIONALLY well.

Hell, he even brought his team back from the brink of elimination in the first round of the playoffs, (down 3-1 to the Suns), with a marvelous three straight games, including two 30+ point games, and in the clinching game seven, he put up a 30 point, 27 rebound, 11 block game.

Still, compare footage of Wilt in the '70 Finals, and then again two years later in the '72 Finals. He is clearly more mobile, more agile, and more athletic in the '72 Finals.

In any case, after sweeping the Hawks in the WCF's, Chamberlain took his 46-36 Lakers into the Finals, and against a deep Knick team that had gone 60-22 during the regular season, and then wiped out Kareem's 56-26 Bucks, 4-1 in the ECF's (more on that series later.)

And in the first four games of the Finals, a Chamberlain, who was nowhere near 100%, and facing a much more mobile Willis Reed, battled Reed to a statistical draw, and the series was tied 2-2 (here again, a healthy Kareem was wiped out by Reed's Knicks in five games.)

In the 5th game, Wilt was pounding Reed, when Reed sustained a tear in his quad (and his Knicks were down by TEN points when it happened.) Reed would miss the rest of that game, all of game six, and then stumble out for a game seven. In the meantime, in that fifth game, even the NY TIMES writer covering the series, claimed that officials aided the home team Knicks (West and Wilt combined for FIVE shots in the entire second half, and were mauled for much of it.) NY came back to win game five, 107-100.

In game six, virtually no one recalls Chamberlain destroying the Knicks with a 45 point, 20-27 shooting, 27 rebound game. True, Reed did not play, but why do so few acknowledge that Wilt played HUGE in a "must-win" game?

And virtually everyone knows what transpired in that game seven. Reed hobbled out, and hit his first two shots (one of them a miracle), and his teammates just exploded. NY hit 15 of their first 21 shots, and were never challenged. As for Wilt, he was the ONLY Laker to play well in the first half (he had 11 points, on 5-10 shooting, albeit 1-8 from the line, and with 12 rebounds.) His teammates collectively shot 33%, and even the usual clutch West (albeit nursing injuries himself) was butchered by Walt Frazier.

Reed is still hailed for his performance in that Finals to this very day. I believe there is an article (I won't look it up now), which claims that it was a top-10 Finals GAME in NBA history.

Yep...a Reed, who played like a statue, and would received help from a swarming defense, and who scored four points, on 2-5 shooting, and with three rebounds, was hailed as "heroic." Meanwhile, a Chamberlain, only four months removed from major knee surgery, and nowhere near 100%, took the brunt of the blame for the loss. And all Wilt did in the last three games of that Finals, was outscore the Finals MVP Reed, 88-11, outrebound Reed, 71-3, and outshoot Reed, .710 to .400.

Oh, and BTW, Chamberlain put up the ONLY 20-20 .600 Finals in NBA history (23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, and on .625 shooting.)

Continued...

[HighFlyer23]

still not reading

[millwad]

Oh, the essays are back, lets watch the video about Jlauber's essays;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01GWCMGEsUw

Write us another essay, please, Jlauber! I promise that I will read it.

[Figlo]

Wilt is the best player ever. Why doesn't Jordan get discredited for playing in a weak SG era?
#troll
Jordan was stat-padding as much as wilt, dude played in a soft era and was bigger stronger and faster than his competition just like wilt was.

Wilt - Best center ever easily

Put Wilt on Russell's teams and he'd have just as many rings but with much better stats than that "defensive anchor" who shot 40% FG(LMFAO)

[jlauber]

Continuing on the injury aspect of the Wilt "Double Standard."

We know that Reed was a shell in the '70 Finals, after he sustained a muscle tear in his quad. He missed one half of one game, three quarters of another, and even an entire third game.

And with all of that, he goes on to win the FMVP, with a game seven of four points, 2-5 shooting, and 3 rebounds.

Ok, how about Chamberlain in the '68 ECF's? It is well documented that he played with an assortment of injuries in that series. Cherry wrote that in game three of the '68 ECF's, Wilt was being treated for numerous aliments, including a strained hamstring behind his knee, arthritis in his other knee, a bum toe, and, a partial tear in his right calf...or a similar injury to what Reed had sustained in the '70 Finals. And, Cherry continued..."all of which had him NOTICEABLY LIMPING."

Then, think about this...Chamberlain not only played from game three thru the seventh game with those injuries, he played EVERY MINUTE of them. Some posters here ridiculed Wilt's game six, in which he shot 6-21 from the floor, and 8-23 from the line, BUT, Wilt PLAYED (and he grabbed 27 rebounds, too.) In game seven, Chamberlain's teammates ignored him completely in the second half, and the injury-decimated Sixers lost to Boston, 100-96. Even in that game, Wilt out up a 14-34 game (Russell had a 12-26 game.) For the entire series, and against the great Russell (who played his best series against Wilt IMHO), Chamberlain averaged 22.1 ppg and 25.2 rpg. To his credit, Russell did comment after that series, that "a lessor man would not have played."

Now, we know that Reed was reduced to a virtual spectator in his last three games of the '70 Finals, with his muscle tear, and was STILL hailed as a hero. Yet, Wilt with a similar injury, and several more, and not only playing, but playing well, gets ripped for his TEAM "choking" away a 3-1 series lead. Of course, those that actually followed that series, KNOW that Philly was just decimated by injuries. BUT, it was WILT who took the blame.

Continued...

[millwad]

Continuing on the injury aspect of the Wilt "Double Standard."

We know that Reed was a shell in the '70 Finals, after he sustained a muscle tear in his quad. He missed one half of one game, three quarters of another, and even an entire third game.

And with all of that, he goes on to win the FMVP, with a game seven of four points, 2-5 shooting, and 3 rebounds.

Ok, how about Chamberlain in the '68 ECF's? It is well documented that he played with an assortment of injuries in that series. Cherry wrote that in game three of the '68 ECF's, Wilt was being treated for numerous aliments, including a strained hamstring behind his knee, arthritis in his other knee, a bum toe, and, a partial tear in his right calf...or a similar injury to what Reed had sustained in the '70 Finals. And, Cherry continued..."all of which had him NOTICEABLY LIMPING."

Then, think about this...Chamberlain not only played from game three thru the seventh game with those injuries, he played EVERY MINUTE of them. Some posters here ridiculed Wilt's game six, in which he shot 6-21 from the floor, and 8-23 from the line, BUT, Wilt PLAYED (and he grabbed 27 rebounds, too.) In game seven, Chamberlain's teammates ignored him completely in the second half, and the injury-decimated Sixers lost to Boston, 100-96. Even in that game, Wilt out up a 14-34 game (Russell had a 12-26 game.) For the entire series, and against the great Russell (who played his best series against Wilt IMHO), Chamberlain averaged 22.1 ppg and 25.2 rpg. To his credit, Russell did comment after that series, that "a lessor man would not have played."

Now, we know that Reed was reduced to a virtual spectator in his last three games of the '70 Finals, with his muscle tear, and was STILL hailed as a hero. Yet, Wilt with a similar injury, and several more, and not only playing, but playing well, gets ripped for his TEAM "choking" away a 3-1 series lead. Of course, those that actually followed that series, KNOW that Philly was just decimated by injuries. BUT, it was WILT who took the blame.

Continued...

Do you actually spend time writing all your essays or do you copy and paste? I feel sorry for you if you actually write every letter of your essays.

Must be a good feeling for your family and wife knowing that their father/husband spend all this time on the net defending Wilt Chamberlain..:facepalm

[bwink23]

Do you actually spend time writing all your essays or do you copy and paste? I feel sorry for you if you actually write every letter of your essays.

Must be a good feeling for your family and wife knowing that their father/husband spend all this time on the net defending Wilt Chamberlain..:facepalm


Why do you even respond at all......:facepalm

[millwad]

Why do you even respond at all......:facepalm

How come that you're Jlauber's personal buttboy? You're defending a 56 year old man on the internet, how lame can someone be..:oldlol:

[bwink23]

How come that you're Jlauber's personal buttboy? You're defending a 56 year old man on the internet, how lame can someone be..:oldlol:


I find it funny that he posts a wealth of factual information that you choose to ignore simply cuz it breaks down those barriers you've had with your impression of Wilt Chamberlain for so many years....why else would you have so much hatred and not even try to refute any of it???

HATERS GONNA HATE :violin:

[millwad]

I find it funny that he posts a wealth of factual information that you choose to ignore simply cuz it breaks down those barriers you've had with your impression of Wilt Chamberlain for so many years....why else would you have so much hatred and not even try to refute any of it???

HATERS GONNA HATE :violin:

The only "info" I ignore is the quotes, since when did quotes become actual facts?

50 inch vertical, broke a guy's toe, dunking from the ft-line without a running start etc..:facepalm

Ron Artest said that Brandon Roy is the best player he ever faced, that must mean that Roy is better than Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, LeBron etc..

Brandon Roy must be a top 10 player, Ron Artest said so..:facepalm

[bwink23]

The only "info" I ignore is the quotes, since when did quotes become actual facts?

50 inch vertical, broke a guy's toe, dunking from the ft-line without a running start etc..:facepalm

Ron Artest said that Brandon Roy is the best player he ever faced, that must mean that Roy is better than Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, LeBron etc..

Brandon Roy must be a top 10 player, Ron Artest said so..:facepalm


He's already stated his case around the 50-inch, mountain lions and such....your just being silly.


The facts and visual evidence remains, as does the first-hand accounts from actual coaches, players of his day. You choose to look at the "tall tales" and dismiss all the real hard core evidence...HOW STUPID CAN YOU BE?? you put all your attention toward the "myths" and nothing towards the facts...

Can you refute his claims or not?? Can you refute that there ISN'T footage or pics of Wilt's head at the rim?? Can you refute that Kareem called Wilt the greatest scorer ever? Can you refute ANYTHING at all besides the "tall tales"....Your focus is not in the right place.

[millwad]

He's already stated his case around the 50-inch, mountain lions and such....your just being silly.


The facts and visual evidence remains, as does the first-hand accounts from actual coaches, players of his day. You choose to look at the "tall tales" and dismiss all the real core evidence...HOW STUPID CAN YOU BE?? you put all your attention toward the "myths" and nothing towards the facts...

Can you refute his claims or not?? Can you refute that there ISN'T footage or pics of Wilt's head at the rim?? Can you refute that Kareem called Wilt the greatest scorer ever? Can you refute ANYTHING at all besides the "tall tales"....Your focus is not in the right place.

Head at the rim is not a big deal, there are a plenty of NBA player who's done that. I am sure he could he could do so.

First-hand accounts are just as worth as the crap I mentioned about Ron saying that Brandon Roy was the GOAT of his own era. So first hand accounts like Frazier saying that Wilt would average 70+ today or that Wilt could dunk from the free-throw line without a running start or that he could change coints on the top of the backboard must be the "truth"..:facepalm

Kareem saying that Wilt is the greatest scoring center is like Jordan saying that Hakeem was the best center. People have different opinions, you idiot..

Nonsense like that is never going to be accepted, can you actually mention something of the "hard core facts" I've not agreed with?

[bwink23]

Head at the rim is not a big deal, there are a plenty of NBA player who's done that. I am sure he could he could do so.

First-hand accounts are just as worth as the crap I mentioned about Ron saying that Brandon Roy was the GOAT of his own era. So first hand accounts like Frazier saying that Wilt would average 70+ today or that Wilt could dunk from the free-throw line without a running start or that he could change coints on the top of the backboard must be the "truth"..:facepalm

Kareem saying that Wilt is the greatest scoring center is like Jordan saying that Hakeem was the best center. People have different opinions, you idiot..

Nonsense like that is never going to be accepted, can you actually mention something of the "hard core facts" I've not agreed with?


So what is your stance on Wilt Chamberlain based on what you know??

[Deuce Bigalow]

lol @ "hardcore facts"

[millwad]

So what is your stance on Wilt Chamberlain based on what you know??

Answer my question, what are the "hard core facts" I am disputing?

[bwink23]

Answer my question, what are the "hard core facts" I am disputing?


I asked you a question.....what is your stance on Wilt Chamberlain?? That to me is the big enigma with you. I haven't heard your opinion on him once...just keep hearing crap about "tall tales"

[millwad]

I asked you a question.....what is your stance on Wilt Chamberlain?? That to me is the big enigma with you. I haven't heard your opinion on him once...just keep hearing crap about "tall tales"

I am done with you, you called me a hater for not agreeing with them "hard core" facts but still you can't even mention one..:facepalm

I have Wilt in my top 10 but behind Kareem (GOAT center), Shaq and Hakeem.

[bwink23]

I am done with you, you called me a hater for not agreeing with them "hard core" facts but still you can't even mention one..:facepalm

I have Wilt in my top 10 but behind Kareem (GOAT center), Shaq and Hakeem.


I'm not talking top 10's...i'm talking about how you feel about Wilt Chamberlain as an athlete and as a player....it's not a hard question to answer....

[bwink23]

I am done with you, you called me a hater for not agreeing with them "hard core" facts but still you can't even mention one..:facepalm

I have Wilt in my top 10 but behind Kareem (GOAT center), Shaq and Hakeem.


Maybe someday you'll grow up and decide to look at things more objectively and with an open mind, instead of taking the juvenile approach your doing now.

Facts of the matter are, you are not a CREDIBLE source by any stretch. You were not old enough to have a CREDIBLE opinion...all you have are the FIRST-HAND accounts of the players of his day, the limited video footage, and photos and newspaper articles that have already been posted by Jlauber and Cavs.

Now what exactly do YOU KNOW, that refutes anything that's been posted to date?? "tall tales"?? Is that all your here for, to troll and talk about "tall tales" all day??

I'd like to know what information shapes your opinion....:hammerhead:

[millwad]

I'm not talking top 10's...i'm talking about how you feel about Wilt Chamberlain as an athlete and as a player....it's not a hard question to answer....

Still you can't reply to my question which only proves that you're just following your buttyboy Jlauber and actually have no idea about my basketball thoughts.

Answer my question, what are the "hard core facts" I am disputing?

And regarding Wilt as a player and athtlete, he was an amazing athlete in many aspects of the game and his skillset as a shotblocker and rebounding was GOAT-like, his scoring was also an amazing aspect of his game a la shooting with high %. I have some doubts regarding his scoring though and how effective it really was considering that he only won as a tied 2nd option and 4th option on offense.Although I feel like his scoring would be nothing alike if he played in the modern era due the pace and the amount of shots he took. he was still something we'll never see again and an amazing offensive talen. Wilt as a passer gets overrated due the pace and the defense of that era but he was a great passer as well.

He was one of the worst FT-shooters of all-time, he was nothing but sh*t from the FT-line but he made it up with other offensive skillsets and AND 1's.

[millwad]

Maybe someday you'll grow up and decide to look at things more objectively and with an open mind, instead of taking the juvenile approach your doing now.

Facts of the matter are, you are not a CREDIBLE source by any stretch. You were not old enough to have a CREDIBLE opinion...all you have are the FIRST-HAND accounts of the players of his day, the limited video footage, and photos and newspaper articles that have already been posted by Jlauber and Cavs.

Now what exactly do YOU KNOW, that refutes anything that's been posted to date?? "tall tales"?? Is that all your here for, to troll and talk about "tall tales" all day??

I'd like to know what information shapes your opinion....:hammerhead:

I don't trust anything Jlauber posts because he didn't see him play and he changed his mind about Wilt over youtube and google.

And what refutes the tall tales are the physical abilities of human beings, that one is obvious.

And still, what are the hardcore facts I'm disputing? Just reply, buttyboy.

[bwink23]

I don't trust anything Jlauber posts because he didn't see him play and he changed his mind about Wilt over youtube and google.

And what refutes the tall tales are the physical abilities of human beings, that one is obvious.

And still, what are the hardcore facts I'm disputing? Just reply, buttyboy.


Now i know your stance on Wilt...so your here to just give Jlauber a hard time then???

[millwad]

Now i know your stance on Wilt...so your here to just give Jlauber a hard time then???

I dispute nonsense, it doesn't matter if it's you or Jlauber or anyone else. I used to write alot in threads about Hakeem Olajuwon and every time Jlauber came in and spammed the living crap out of everyone about Wilt and how much Hakeem sucked and when someone didn't agree with him he started with the name calling.

I respect some of the Wilt posters on ISH, although I had some clashes with CavsFTW I feel him now and he knows it. And after a while Psileas became one of few posters I really trust in.

[bwink23]

I dispute nonsense, it doesn't matter if it you or Jlauber or anyone else. I used to write alot in threads about Hakeem Olajuwon and every time Jlauber came in and spammed the living crap out of everyone about Wilt and how much Hakeem sucked and when someone didn't agree with him he started with the name calling.

I respect some of the Wilt posters on ISH, although I had some clashes with CavsFTW I feel him now and he knows it. And after a while Psileas became one of few posters I really trust in.


Now i know you a bit better...i have no beef with Jlauber, i find his posts interesting...cuz like you, i grew up not knowing anything about Wilt, only the few select stories...there are guys here who post more info that i could ever find on my own or would want to, and Jlauber is one of them. Your personal beef with him is not mine.

[millwad]

Now i know you a bit better...i have no beef with Jlauber, i find his posts interesting...cuz like you, i grew up not knowing anything about Wilt, only the few select stories...there are guys here who post more info that i could ever find on my own or would want to, and Jlauber is one of them. Your personal beef with him is not mine.

I don't say you should beef with him, I only think that you should know take his stories with a grain of salt because he changed his mind about Wilt just a few years ago. And he changed his mind over youtube videos and quotes..

Proof; http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5029077&postcount=53

And the name of this thread is "double standard", what is Jlauber's change of heart regarding Wilt and his era more than 40 years later then?

And he puts up some pathetic proof out here, like he claimed that Wilt blocked 20+ skyhooks in the '72 series against Kareem, his proof was him own memory and some random poster who barely knew any english who even coudn't confirm his nonsense. He's doing crap like that alot, he "remembers" full games of Wilt's era but still he couldn't remember how good Wilt was 'til 40 years later.. over youtube and google.

[bwink23]

I don't say you should beef with him, I only think that you should know take his stories with a grain of salt because he changed his mind about Wilt just a few years ago. And he changed his mind over youtube videos and quotes..

Proof; http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5029077&postcount=53

And the name of this thread is "double standard", what is Jlauber's change of heart regarding Wilt and his era more than 40 years later then?

And he puts up some pathetic proof out here, like he claimed that Wilt blocked 20+ skyhooks in the '72 series against Kareem, his proof was him own memory and some random poster who barely knew any english who even coudn't confirm his nonsense. He's doing crap like that alot, he "remembers" full games of Wilt's era but still he couldn't remember how good Wilt was 'til 40 years later.. over youtube and google.


I understand where your coming from....but he isn't the only poster here of some great Wilt information...i changed my stance on Wilt just from the information and visual evidence posted from guys here on this forum....is that a BAD thing?? :confusedshrug:

Your opinion is only as good as the experience and knowledge that shapes it. My opinion before was BROKE from assumptions.

I don't see what's wrong with that.

[Owl]

Still you can't reply to my question which only proves that you're just following your buttyboy Jlauber and actually have no idea about my basketball thoughts.

Answer my question, what are the "hard core facts" I am disputing?

And regarding Wilt as a player and athtlete, he was an amazing athlete in many aspects of the game and his skillset as a shotblocker and rebounding was GOAT-like, his scoring was also an amazing aspect of his game a la shooting with high %. I have some doubts regarding his scoring though and how effective it really was considering that he only won as a tied 2nd option and 4th option on offense.Although I feel like his scoring would be nothing alike if he played in the modern era due the pace and the amount of shots he took. he was still something we'll never see again and an amazing offensive talen. Wilt as a passer gets overrated due the pace and the defense of that era but he was a great passer as well.

He was one of the worst FT-shooters of all-time, he was nothing but sh*t from the FT-line but he made it up with other offensive skillsets and AND 1's.
I feel like these threads become way too unnecessarily hostile.

This seems a fair enough analysis I mean I wouldn't have Olajuwon over Chamberalin at all, and would argue that he absolutely could win as a first option if his 2nd options weren't as bad as the Warriors were, but pace and coaching encouragement (and the racist quotas) did artificially boost his early career numbers.

No one buys the 50 inch vertical and 20,000 women, I don't know where the lion bs came from (I've read all Wilt's books and he once mentions being afraid of a lion that got out of it's cage in an arena). I think his later comments and 90's books have damaged his legacy because he comes across as a bitter old man and a liar (and if you read his last book a quite odd fellow who believes himself to be poet).

I believe he did dunk from the free throw line but don't think I can honestly be certain as to exactly how he did it (I don't think the little details really matter to his playing career). I don't think breaking a guys toe with a dunk is tremendously relevant but in any case it wasn't something he claimed, it seems possible to me given canvas shoes, the weight of an inflated basketball and a powerful dunker.

Oh and the forum would be a lot better if no one:
said everyone they disagreed with was "butt hurt"
called anyone else "son"
posted "Didn't read lol"s

I do think JLaubers epic posts are poorly suited to messageboard conversation and his case(s) could be more coherantly put by articles or webpages. I'm also not entirely persuaded by his bridging theory, relying as it does on small samples and being based on stats outside the context of the games.

[bdreason]

The hardest part about ranking Wilt all-time, is the level of competition he faced in the 60's. I have no doubt Wilt is a GREAT player, I have him 4th all-time, but I'm watching footage of him right now when he averaged 50ppg and nobody on the court is even close to his size or athletic ability. There is literally one or two other black guys on either team, and not a single guy on the court that can contest or rebound against Wilt. It looks like he's playing against High School kids.


Now, Wilt did play against better competition in the 70's, and more than held his own, so obviously he was a GREAT player... but when people point at his statistics and claim him the GOAT? I can't buy that. If he was really as dominant as his stats suggest, he would have more than 2 rings, with only 1 as 'the man'.

[bwink23]

The hardest part about ranking Wilt all-time, is the level of competition he faced in the 60's. I have no doubt Wilt is a GREAT player, I have him 4th all-time, but I'm watching footage of him right now when he averaged 50ppg and nobody on the court is even close to his size or athletic ability. There is literally one or two other black guys on either team, and not a single guy on the court that can contest or rebound against Wilt. It looks like he's playing against High School kids.


Now, Wilt did play against better competition in the 70's, and more than held his own, so obviously he was a GREAT player... but when people point at his statistics and claim him the GOAT? I can't buy that. If he was really as dominant as his stats suggest, he would have more than 2 rings, with only 1 as 'the man'.


Then again, maybe the competition of the 60's wasn't as weak as you would suggest....Wilt did average over 41 points a game on 49%FG against Bill Russell and his champion Celtics in 1962?? :confusedshrug:

[Helix]

The hardest part about ranking Wilt all-time, is the level of competition he faced in the 60's. I have no doubt Wilt is a GREAT player, I have him 4th all-time, but I'm watching footage of him right now when he averaged 50ppg and nobody on the court is even close to his size or athletic ability. There is literally one or two other black guys on either team, and not a single guy on the court that can contest or rebound against Wilt. It looks like he's playing against High School kids.


Now, Wilt did play against better competition in the 70's, and more than held his own, so obviously he was a GREAT player... but when people point at his statistics and claim him the GOAT? I can't buy that. If he was really as dominant as his stats suggest, he would have more than 2 rings, with only 1 as 'the man'.


You seem to be forgetting Bill Russell and Walt Bellamy in the early 60's, then Thurmond and Reed by the mid 60's. After that Wilt no longer focused on scoring, although many times he did score big, showing he still could if necessary.

Might I ask you this....if he faced weak competition in the 60's, what about now? The only center playing today with any chance at all of stopping Wilt would be Howard, and I really don't think he'd be much of a problem for Wilt at all. Seems to me he faced far better competition back then than he would now. I think he'd easily be more dominant now than what he was then, but due to pace he wouldn't average 50 ppg.

As for only two rings.....Lauber has covered that many times.

[PTB Fan]

Proof; http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5029077&postcount=53.


:eek:

[Deuce Bigalow]

The hardest part about ranking Wilt all-time, is the level of competition he faced in the 60's. I have no doubt Wilt is a GREAT player, I have him 4th all-time, but I'm watching footage of him right now when he averaged 50ppg and nobody on the court is even close to his size or athletic ability. There is literally one or two other black guys on either team, and not a single guy on the court that can contest or rebound against Wilt. It looks like he's playing against High School kids.


Now, Wilt did play against better competition in the 70's, and more than held his own, so obviously he was a GREAT player... but when people point at his statistics and claim him the GOAT? I can't buy that. If he was really as dominant as his stats suggest, he would have more than 2 rings, with only 1 as 'the man'.
QFT

So true. I've been saying this for the past month.
That era was weak. It's not hating it's just a fact.
I just watched the Wilt 100 documentary and it just proves my point that I am right. That defense is so pathetic and the players are small.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Proof; http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5029077&postcount=53

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[CavaliersFTW]

The only "info" I ignore is the quotes, since when did quotes become actual facts?

50 inch vertical, broke a guy's toe, dunking from the ft-line without a running start etc..:facepalm

Ron Artest said that Brandon Roy is the best player he ever faced, that must mean that Roy is better than Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, LeBron etc..

Brandon Roy must be a top 10 player, Ron Artest said so..:facepalm

I haven't read half the stuff on this thread but - "Ignore" is a strong word Millwad don't you think? I mean, if it isn't on video or film than why wouldn't u take a stance more a long the lines of "okay well I'll take that with a grain of salt". Why flat out ignore it!? It's like you don't use any discretion you just have an lights on or a lights off switch and that's kinda... ridiculous especially depending on who says the quote.

As if Tex Winters and his entirely independent recollection of Wilt free throw dunking is no more trustworthy than Wilt's independently quoted embellished version? Which one of these guys likes attention and exaggeration? Which one of those guys has never been known as a liar, or a comedian, or someone who give's a f_ck about attention and exaggeration? You just going to "Ignore" him as quickly as you ignore Wilt?

Wilt saying he has a 50 inch vertical, and Johnny Redd Kerr describing an event where Wilt allegedly broke his toe are also two different people with two very different types of quotes. One guy who likes to embellish himself says it in passing... the other guy is a respected former NBA player, coach, and NBA broadcaster known for a lot of things that have nothing to do with lying. He isn't some big joke who doesn't have a clue. And Wilt has never even once said he broke a guys toe so he isn't even a source at all in this "Tall Tale". Kerr alone said Wilt broke his toe.

And your ignore-the-quotes logic would make no sense to a judge in a court of law, because what your really saying is that you ignore testimony. Which is basically how judges solve cases starved of evidence and it's actually how the NBA knows Wilt had a 100 point game that was never filmed... unless... maybe that never happened either... after all we're all depending on the testimony of the few people that were there - PLUS Wilt claims it happend so throw up that red flag. Everyone lies about Wilt left and right I bet 100 points didn't even happen since ultimately we're depending on one guys testimony (the scorekeeper) right?

You didn't say that - but that's still your same logic in a nutshell.

There is footage of Wilt throwing a dunk down with one hand and it bounces back up over top of the backboard - something I've never seen any other player come close to doing - and remember they wore thin fabric Chuck Taylors back then. Basically a sock with laces. The chunky thick foam padded shoes today look like an M1A1 Abrhams battle tanks comparison. And hardly anyone in NBA history outside of Shaq would have the strength and leverage of Wilt to throw dunks down that hard except Shaq didn't like to throw the ball cleanly through the hoop - Shaq liked to break the goose neck and hang on the rim (which wasn't possible on the rims of Wilt's era) and that actually slows the ball down before it hits the ground... so of course that situation of alleged toe-breaking is never likely to even happen again. Neither is 100 points.. Maybe everything about Wilt has always been a lie... Then again, maybe you could give a little more effort to research who said what and why and act like a judge has to act in lieu of little-evidence - rather than just ignoring everyone's quotes.

[jlauber]

Back to the OP, and continuing with the injury "double standard"...

Reed's game seven in the '70 Finals, in which he was a statue, who did nothing than foul Chamberlain, and watch as his teammates completely shelled Chamberlain's (even the usually clutch West was awful), is somehow regarded as one of the greatest games in Finals history.

Now, fast forward to the '72 Finals. In a pivotal game four, in NY, and with LA leading the series, 2-1, Wilt not only came up HUGE in OT (and playing all 53 minutes...even with five fouls for much of the last portion), he FRACTURED his wrist in a fall late in that game. Of course, he continued to play, and his clutch play in the OT, saved the game for the Lakers.

If the fractured wrist wasn't bad enough, he also badly sprained his other wrist in a playoff game against the Bulls earlier. And with BOTH wrists swollen, there was some doubt if Wilt could even go in game five.

Ok, fast forward to Kareem in TWO separate seasons in the 70's. Kareem suffered a broken wrist in two separate years, and missed CHUNKS of games in each (16 in one.)

Back to game five. Chamberlain not only played (and with both wrists heavily wrapped), he DOMINATED the game. Unlike Reed, who was nothing more than a casual observer in his part-time effort in that game seven, Wilt overwhelmed the Knicks. He scored 24 points, on 10-14 shooting, with nine blocks, and grabbed 29 rebounds (out of a TOTAL of 106...and with the entire Knick team having 39!)

Where does that game rank in these "all-time" lists. I believe I read in one of them,, that had Reed's game near the top, Wilt's dominating game five was somewhere in the top-50 range.


It amazes me that Kareem misses a critical game six of the '80 Finals, with an ankle sprain, BUT, Magic steps up and leads the Lakers to a win on the road with one of the greatest Finals games in NBA history (a 42-15-7 game), and virtually no one ever criticizes Kareem.

Or that Reed could miss nearly half of a Finals, and be nowhere near as dominant as a Wilt, who was, himself, only four months removed from a major knee surgery (a similar one to the one that shelved Baylor for six months, and then limited him to a shell for a full season afterwards), and yet, Reed is labled as the "hero", and Chamberlain is once again, branded as a "choking loser."

Or that Russell would rip Chamberlain, for taking himself out of a game seven for TWO MINUTES, and yet, he himself missed TWO FULL GAMES and half of a clinching game six loss, in the '58 Finals, with a chipped bone in his ankle.

Wilt comes back WAY AHEAD of schedule after a horrific knee injury and major operation, and plays brilliantly (even thoroughly outplaying Reed in the last three games of a seven game series), and yet, he was the "failure."

Or Wilt PLAYING in roughly FIVE straight games, and in EVERY minute of them, in the '68 ECF's, with multiple injuries, including a similar one to the one that left Reed a statue in the '70 Finals (in the portions of the games in which he did play), and guess what, it was WILT who supposedly "choked" away a 3-1 Sixer lead.

Next...the Wilt who "wilted" in his post-seasons..

.

[CavaliersFTW]

The hardest part about ranking Wilt all-time, is the level of competition he faced in the 60's. I have no doubt Wilt is a GREAT player, I have him 4th all-time, but I'm watching footage of him right now when he averaged 50ppg and nobody on the court is even close to his size or athletic ability. There is literally one or two other black guys on either team, and not a single guy on the court that can contest or rebound against Wilt. It looks like he's playing against High School kids.


Now, Wilt did play against better competition in the 70's, and more than held his own, so obviously he was a GREAT player... but when people point at his statistics and claim him the GOAT? I can't buy that. If he was really as dominant as his stats suggest, he would have more than 2 rings, with only 1 as 'the man'.


Who was even close to Shaq's size or athletic ability in Shaq's era? Shaq is close to Wilt's size but does Shaq even have Wilt's athletic ability!? Wilt is actually a fraction of an inch taller than Shaq and has a ~ 1" longer wing span and 2" higher standing reach than Shaq - and though Shaq was 327lbs in his prime while Wilt was a "pewny" 292lbs in his prime.... Shaq was fat as all hell, and slower, and Wilt had a 31 inch waist.... As a veteran Wilt was eventually playing at over 300lbs anyways and he STILL did it with a 31 inch waist so honestly - who in NBA HISTORY has ever played that is going to look big+athletic next to Wilt? Is there anybody that could not named Shaq? Yao is big (still lacks Wilt's reach and wingspan) But Yao would look like an arthritic Frankenstein next to Wilt it wouldn't even be fair....

Are you watching the 1962 All-star game? You must be... that's the only footage of Wilt from that season - so you probably have no clue who which player is on the floor nor how big they are. But since they all look so small next to Wilt they must all be dwarfs right? Well - I'll help you out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cyBo7RhkJk

Note the opposing center of Wilt the entire game... Walt Bellamy...
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-8glrL8sTDc0/T1HYGSd_7hI/AAAAAAAADJM/10xrlkq-140/s400/Walt%2520Bellamy%2520Rookie.jpg

He is LITERALLY The exact same height and weight as this guy was measured in the draft:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Spencer-Hawes-483/

Bellamy is listed 6'11 but in the real world he was ~6'10.5"... Hawes is 6'10.5 too... but the NBA today list's him as 7'1... Both are 245lbs. So you see Hawes on TV your thinking "hey that guy's 7'1" --- but did you think the same thing when you saw Bellamy? He's identical in size you know? I'm guessing no you probably thought he was short. Point is plain and simple, if you don't know who the people are against Wilt your never going to be able to tell how athletic big or strong they were you simply can't tell by looking at a grainy footage with no reference of scale other than the gargantuan freak Wilt - who would dwarf pretty much anyone from any era. And BTW Hawes has a short wing span, and is a poor athlete... Bellamy on the other hand is a stand-out athlete who came into the league with an explosive vertical.

Wilt was being doubled periodically in the all-star game by this power forward: Bob Pettit
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-FiQ73IHuGXI/T1LA7CDYBxI/AAAAAAAADJk/ma2KnppMP9I/s400/Veteran%2520Bob%2520Pettit.jpg
Just some 6'0 white guy right? :lol - oh wait duh! :hammerhead:
I forgot, looking at grainy black and white pictures and footage to judge player size is ridiculous because in reality Bob Pettit is identical in height and, at this point in his career, weight - to Dwight Howard's rookie season measurements. And he isn't even a center - he's a forward.
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Dwight-Howard-2888/
Now, of course this is not to imply Pettit is the athlete Howard is and I'm certain Pettit's wingspan won't be as long but Pettit was merely playing the role of weak-side muscle and to help Bellamy on box-outs for rebounds and such (BTW Pettit and Bell's are the #3 and #4 rebounders that year behind Wilt and Russell - Bells leads the league in fg% and he's #2 in scoring). Neither one of these two powerful "7 footers" were able to prevent Wilt from dropping 42 points in that all-star game on .739fg%. Neither one of them boxed him out of his 24 rebounds. You wanna tell me in that game he was up against weak competition? I don't care if the NY knick's played white centers against him in his 100 point game - he dominated everyone including the superstar players of his era that are every bit as big athletic and strong as any modern superstars in the league today.









And never forget it:

6'7.75, un-athletic, this man lead league in rebounds:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Kevin-Love-1062/
(Note he's a virtual clone in play-style and rebound hunger yet he's over an inch shorter than Bob Pettit)
http://rumorsandrants.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Kevin-Love.jpg

6'11, un-athletic, this man is a finals MVP:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Dirk-Nowitzki-3780/
http://www.nba.com/media/act_dirk_nowitzki.jpg

6'11, un-athletic, this man lead the league in blocked shots:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Andrew-Bogut-70/
http://utahproathletes.com/assets/basketball/andrew%20bogut%20n.jpg

...and that was last year

[jlauber]

Who was even close to Shaq's size or athletic ability in Shaq's era? Shaq is close to Wilt's size but does Shaq even have Wilt's athletic ability!? Wilt is actually a fraction of an inch taller than Shaq and has a ~ 1" longer wing span and 2" higher standing reach than Shaq - and though Shaq was 327lbs in his prime while Wilt was a "pewny" 292lbs in his prime.... Shaq was fat as all hell, and slower, and Wilt had a 31 inch waist.... As a veteran Wilt was eventually playing at over 300lbs anyways and he STILL did it with a 31 inch waist so honestly - who in NBA HISTORY has ever played that is going to look big+athletic next to Wilt? Is there anybody that could not named Shaq? Yao is big (still lacks Wilt's reach and wingspan) But Yao would look like an arthritic Frankenstein next to Wilt it wouldn't even be fair....

Are you watching the 1962 All-star game? You must be... that's the only footage of Wilt from that season - so you probably have no clue who which player is on the floor nor how big they are. But since they all look so small next to Wilt they must all be dwarfs right? Well - I'll help you out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cyBo7RhkJk

Note the opposing center of Wilt the entire game... Walt Bellamy...
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-GoSB_as1p0g/T1HYFjdzaNI/AAAAAAAADJE/OjMQbDhytBQ/s400/Walt%2520Bellamy%2520Rookie2.jpg

He is LITERALLY The exact same height and weight as this guy was measured in the draft:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Spencer-Hawes-483/

Bellamy is listed 6'11 but in the real world he was ~6'10.5"... Hawes is 6'10.5 too... but the NBA today list's him as 7'1... Both are 245lbs. So you see Hawes on TV your thinking "hey that guy's 7'1" --- but did you think the same thing when you saw Bellamy? He's identical in size you know? I'm guessing no you probably thought he was short. Point is plain and simple, if you don't know who the people are against Wilt your never going to be able to tell how athletic big or strong they were you simply can't tell by looking at a photograph or footage with no reference of scale - Wilt makes EVERYBODY look small he's longer yet just as heavy as Yao Ming. And BTW Hawes has a short wing span, and is a poor athlete... Bellamy on the other hand is a stand-out athlete who came into the league with an explosive vertical.

Wilt was being doubled periodically in the all-star game by this power forward: Bob Pettit
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mXGgYF0tzTI/T1K3nRoDfSI/AAAAAAAADJc/gA7FlohnoC0/s400/Veteran%2520Bob%2520Pettit.jpg
Just some 6'0 white guy right? :lol - oh wait duh! :hammerhead:
I forgot, looking at grainy black and white pictures and footage to judge player size is ridiculous because Bob Pettit is identical in height and weight Dwight Howard's rookie season measurements. And he isn't even a center - he's a forward.
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Dwight-Howard-2888/
Now, of course this is not to imply Pettit is the athlete Howard is and I'm certain Pettit's wingspan won't be as long but Pettit was weak-side muscle to help Bellamy on box-outs for rebounds and such (BTW Pettit and Bell's are the #3 and #4 rebounders that year behind Wilt and Russell). Neither one of these two were able to prevent Wilt from dropping 42 points in that all-star game on .727fg%. Neither one of them boxed him out of his 24 rebounds. You wanna tell me he faced weak competition?









And never forget it:

6'7.75, un-athletic, this man lead league in rebounds:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Kevin-Love-1062/
(Note he's over an inch shorter than Bob Pettit)
http://rumorsandrants.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Kevin-Love.jpg

6'11, un-athletic, this man is a finals MVP:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Dirk-Nowitzki-3780/
http://www.nba.com/media/act_dirk_nowitzki.jpg

6'11, un-athletic, this man lead league in blocked shots:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Andrew-Bogut-70/
http://utahproathletes.com/assets/basketball/andrew%20bogut%20n.jpg

...and that was last year

I was going to address THIS "double standard", as well, but you have pretty much covered it.

Quickly, though, in Wilt's 65-66 season, he just MURDERED all of the NBA, including the next three best centers in the league (Thurmond, Bellamy, and yes, even Russell.) And, back then, they faced each other in 9-10 games per year.

In his ten games against Bellamy, he not only outscored Bellamy 8-1-1 in those ten games, he did so by a margin of 33.0 ppg to 24.6 ppg. And in some, he humiliated him (margins of 37-22, 38-23, and even 50-26.)

In his nine games against Nate, Wilt not only outscored Thurmond by an 8-1 margin (only being outscored in their first meeting that season, by a 30-15 margin), he SHELLED him in SEVERAL. He had margins of 26-9, 33-17, 33-10, 38-15, and even an overwhelming 45-13 battering. Overall, Wilt outscored Thurmond by an average margin of 28.9 ppg to 16.1 ppg.

Wilt and Russell went H2H 14 times in the 65-66 season...nine in the regular season, and five more in the playoffs. Overall, Chamberlain outscored Russell, per game, in those 14 games, by a 28.2 ppg to 12.5 ppg. AND, Wilt outrebounded Russell in those 14 games, per game, by a whopping 30.5 rpg to 24.0 rpg. Included in those 14 games, were games in which Wilt outscored Russell by margins of 27-6, 30-5, 28-13 (and 30-10 on the glass), 31-11 (and outrebounded Russell by a 40-17 margin), 37-14 (and a 42-25 margin on the boards), 29-3, 32-8 (and 30-20 on the glass), 31-11, and in the clinching game five of the ECF's, Wilt outscored Russell, 46-18 (while outrebounding him, 34-31.) He outscored Russell 13-1, and outrebounded him, 10-4.

Of course, just the season before, in the 64-65 season, and when Reed was a center, Wilt and Willis went at it in nine H2H games. Reed did well, averaging 24.8 ppg against Wilt. BUT, Chamberlain leveled Reed with a 40.1 ppg average that season. Included in those games, were lopsided margins of 37-22, 37-24, 41-8, 52-23, and 58-28.

As for Bellamy, the two met in 10 games in the '62-63 season, and another ten in the 61-62 season. In the 62-63 season, Wilt averaged 43.7 ppg against Bellamy. In the 61-62 season, Chamberlain averaged 52.7 ppg (yes 52.7 ppg in ten games that season), including three of 60, and a high game of 73 (and Wilt also grabbed 36 rebounds in that game.)

Chamberlain also outscored Russell, per game in their 62-63 H2H's, covering nine games, 38.1 ppg to 14.6 ppg. And in his historic 61-62 season, Wilt averaged 39.7 ppg on .470 shooting against Russell.

As for Thurmond, the two only went at in a dozen games in Wilt's "scoring" seasons. And how about this...from their last matchup in the 64-65 season, thru their nine H2H's in 65-66, and then in their first meeting in 66-67 (in a season in which Wilt dramatically cut back his shooting), Wilt averaged 29.9 ppg against Thurmond in those 11 games. Included in those 11 games were games of 30, 33, 34, 34, 38, and 45.

[bwink23]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Your opinion is worth about as much as a lump of coal, no one cares what you think.....:rolleyes:

[bdreason]

Then again, maybe the competition of the 60's wasn't as weak as you would suggest....Wilt did average over 41 points a game on 49%FG against Bill Russell and his champion Celtics in 1962?? :confusedshrug:


Any era that only allows 1 or 2 black players per team is both weak and diluted. A couple of guys throughout the league that are able to check Wilt isn't considered strong competition. You can try to bring up Shaq, but he faced both superior competition at his position, and far superior defense overall, as perimeter defenders (on average) have also increased is speed and skills since the 60's (I guess that's what happens when you let more than a couple black guys join the team).

As I said earlier, Wilt was a GREAT player ,and I have no doubt he would be a GREAT player in todays league. I only stated that I'm not going to rank him as GOAT because he averaged 50ppg in the weak era of the sport, which many (even in this thread) attempt to do.



And I don't have Russell as the GOAT either (I have at #3), even though he managed to compile 11 rings in the same era as Wilt.



One more thing, after watching the recent Wilt special (twice), I have to say I'm even less impressed with his 100 point game. In fact, if a team or player attempted to score 100 points in the manner that Wilt did (up big, team force feeding him the ball when the game is already decided), it would be an embarrassment to the sport. Of course, with todays rules, scoring 100 from the box/post would simply be impossible.

[bdreason]

And you guys who cherry pick players from the 60's and act like the game is at the same level today come off as completley delusional. Great players will be great players, but the depth of the league today is far superior to what it was in the 60's. So, keep wasting your time cherry picking players from the 60's and talking about how competitive it was, but you're not fooling anyone.


Once again, I have no doubt Wilt would be a great player today, but he wouldn't post half the numbers he did in the 60's, regardless of pace.

[Asukal]

You guys still arguing with old man lauber? Just let it go, best to just ignore him. That old *** is delusional. :hammerhead:

[CavaliersFTW]

Any era that only allows 1 or 2 black players per team is both weak and diluted. A couple of guys throughout the league that are able to check Wilt isn't considered strong competition. You can try to bring up Shaq, but he faced both superior competition at his position, and far superior defense overall, as perimeter defenders (on average) have also increased is speed and skills since the 60's (I guess that's what happens when you let more than a couple black guys join the team).

As I said earlier, Wilt was a GREAT player ,and I have no doubt he would be a GREAT player in todays league. I only stated that I'm not going to rank him as GOAT because he averaged 50ppg in the weak era of the sport, which many (even in this thread) attempt to do.



And I don't have Russell as the GOAT either (I have at #3), even though he managed to compile 11 rings in the same era as Wilt.



One more thing, after watching the recent Wilt special (twice), I have to say I'm even less impressed with his 100 point game. In fact, if a team or player attempted to score 100 points in the manner that Wilt did (up big, team force feeding him the ball when the game is already decided), it would be an embarrassment to the sport. Of course, with todays rules, scoring 100 from the box/post would simply be impossible.

1 or 2? :facepalm

Wow. It's the 1960's not the 1950's. By this time 1962 the two highest payed players in the league are Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain, and most of the teams had ~4 black players. Restricting the amount of black players per team is bad enough but don't exaggerate it.

And by 1966-67 the first game was played that had 2 teams starting an all black line up against each other in one arena. Lot's of progress was made in the 1960's and by the late 60's/early 70's I'm pretty sure that racial quota crap was entirely gone. And.. the league was 9, then 12 teams during Wilt's prime - your literally retarded if you think it was a watered down league throughout the 60's - that's the argument an intelligent person would use against TODAY'S 30 team league :facepalm good work fllip-flopping it.

Let's "cherry pick" Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, and Walt Bellamy from '61-'62

3 black HOF superstar centers of = or greater caliber to Dwight Howard

They represented 33% of the entire league's starting centers....




Dwight Howard represents what percentage of today's starting centers? Did he even lead the league in rebounding last year? Did he even lead the league in blocked shots? Was he finals MVP? No. 3 unathletic white guys were. So STFU and stop complaining about Cherry picking because in a 9 team league one HOF superstar is worth over 3 HOF superstars in today's league. Because they played each other A LOT - over 3x as many times per season as superstars will face each other in the modern 30 team league. Dwight will face Andrew Bynum less times over a period of 3 years than than Wilt would face Bill Russell in 1 season.

In between facing the 1 or 2 mediocre "star" centers in the modern league (Bynum... Bogut... everyone else is shit), the majority of his career Dwight has faced awful centers like Zydrunas Ilgauskus, Joel Anthony:lol , JaFail McGee, the Lopez Twins, Anderson Varejao, Joakim Noah :roll: .... the 60's, especially the late 60's - early 70's with Willis Reed, Nate Thurmond, KAJ, Dave Cowens, Zelmo Beaty, Wes Unseld etc was the golden age of talented big men. That "watered down" league was the only size league the NBA was ever able to keep filled to the gills with talented bigs. After expansions the league had to start changing rules to enable more readily available small guards and forwards to become dominant because big men were becoming spread thin creating a wide rift in the balance of power throughout the league. Try learning some NBA history outside of a 100 point game documentary. That's like trying to learn about the NBA of the '00's 50 years from now based entirely on analyzing Kobe's 81 point game against that useless Raptor team he played against. Obviously any freakish score like 81 or 100 is going to be against a bad team retard. You won't learn jack about the league or the era based on such a lopsided game.

[bdreason]

When Wilt entered the NBA barely anyone in the league could even dunk, and black players (the few who were even allowed to play) were restricted to hustle players as to not to upset the other white players and predominately white fanbase. This is all taken from Wilt's mouth, and the mouth's of experts and people who actually played during the era.

Honestly, the fact that you would even attempt to argue that 60's NBA > present day NBA is laughable. I'm all for respecting the pioneers of the game, but I also recognize the transitional era of the sport, and the fact that Wilt benefited greatly from it.

All of that said, and I still have him ranked #4 all-time. If you want to believe Wilt is the GOAT, more power to you.

[CavaliersFTW]

When Wilt entered the NBA barely anyone in the league could even dunk, and black players (the few who were even allowed to play) were restricted to hustle players as to not to upset the other white players and predominately white fanbase. This is all taken from Wilt's mouth, and the mouth's of experts and people who actually played during the era.

Honestly, the fact that you would even attempt to argue that 60's NBA > present day NBA is laughable. I'm all for respecting the pioneers of the game, but I also recognize the transitional era of the sport, and the fact that Wilt benefited greatly from it.

All of that said, and I still have him ranked #4 all-time. If you want to believe Wilt is the GOAT, more power to you.

I don't care where you rank Wilt - that isn't the point, the point is you really have a skewed view of the 60's and his competition. 1959-1962 is a pretty brief window to be judging his entire career and labeling it as a weak era... He outplayed the league's leading scorer and MVP Kareem in the 1971 playoffs for Christ's sake. As an old man after knee surgery. He dominated prime Kareem so well Milwaukee fans gave Wilt a 5 minute standing ovation after the series and the next morning the Milwaukee Journal printed a massive image of him towering over and rejecting a shot attempt by their very own MVP Kareem. Wilt was somethin else, he wasn't just Mr. 100 points against white dudes. Wilt's league from the mid-60's til retirement was the most stacked league of HOF centers in NBA history. But go ahead, keep thinking the 100 point game documentary gave you a window into the NBA Wilt played in :facepalm

[jlauber]

Any era that only allows 1 or 2 black players per team is both weak and diluted. A couple of guys throughout the league that are able to check Wilt isn't considered strong competition. You can try to bring up Shaq, but he faced both superior competition at his position, and far superior defense overall, as perimeter defenders (on average) have also increased is speed and skills since the 60's (I guess that's what happens when you let more than a couple black guys join the team).

As I said earlier, Wilt was a GREAT player ,and I have no doubt he would be a GREAT player in todays league. I only stated that I'm not going to rank him as GOAT because he averaged 50ppg in the weak era of the sport, which many (even in this thread) attempt to do.



And I don't have Russell as the GOAT either (I have at #3), even though he managed to compile 11 rings in the same era as Wilt.



One more thing, after watching the recent Wilt special (twice), I have to say I'm even less impressed with his 100 point game. In fact, if a team or player attempted to score 100 points in the manner that Wilt did (up big, team force feeding him the ball when the game is already decided), it would be an embarrassment to the sport. Of course, with todays rules, scoring 100 from the box/post would simply be impossible.


CavsFan already addressed this, but bdreason, as much as I respect your opinions, you are clearly wrong here. And I'm sure it is not your fault, either. BUT, there were no "quotas" by the 60's. Perhaps the black players had less opportunities, but believe me, if they were good enough, they were playing. You have to remember that the NBA was growing by this point. And good businessman would want to put the best players he could on the floor.

The Celtics have long had this perception of being more "white" than the rest of the NBA. The Bird-led Celtics had several white players...all of whom were exxeptional players. Bird, McHale, Walton, Ainge, Wedman, et. al.

Then go back to 1963. That Celtic team rolled out what would become NINE HOF players. Four the, were black...KC Jones, Sam Jones, Satch Sanders, and Bill Russell.

Here again, if anything, you could probably blame the colleges, who were fielding predominantly white players. Still, if the players were good enough, they generally made it to the NBA.

Of course, there were probably some exceptions. Connie Hawkins was a unique case, but the player that always had me puzzled was Raymond Lewis. If you were to believe all the hype, he should have been a star in the league. Still, that was early 70's, so I just can't believe it was racially motivated.

[jlauber]

Any era that only allows 1 or 2 black players per team is both weak and diluted. A couple of guys throughout the league that are able to check Wilt isn't considered strong competition. You can try to bring up Shaq, but he faced both superior competition at his position, and far superior defense overall, as perimeter defenders (on average) have also increased is speed and skills since the 60's (I guess that's what happens when you let more than a couple black guys join the team).

As I said earlier, Wilt was a GREAT player ,and I have no doubt he would be a GREAT player in todays league. I only stated that I'm not going to rank him as GOAT because he averaged 50ppg in the weak era of the sport, which many (even in this thread) attempt to do.



And I don't have Russell as the GOAT either (I have at #3), even though he managed to compile 11 rings in the same era as Wilt.



One more thing, after watching the recent Wilt special (twice), I have to say I'm even less impressed with his 100 point game. In fact, if a team or player attempted to score 100 points in the manner that Wilt did (up big, team force feeding him the ball when the game is already decided), it would be an embarrassment to the sport. Of course, with todays rules, scoring 100 from the box/post would simply be impossible.


Again, I already addressed this as well, and in this topic. Take a look at Shaq's stat line on his birthday game in 2000. He played 45 minutes in a 123-103 blowout win over the 12-48 Clippers. In that game, he was guarded for 14 minutes by one of the biggest busts of all-time, Michael Olowokandi, and then 19 minutes by the legendary Pete Chilcutt, and then finally Eric Piatkowski. And if you watch the footage, the Clipper aren't even trying to guard him. The result... a 61 point game.

Then, read some of the comments on Larry Bird's only 60 point game. The OPPOSING players were CHEERING for him.

While Wilt, himself, has never claimed the 100 point game as his greatest statistical achievement, those that attempt to disparage it need to realize that, as bad as the Knicks were, they did EVERYTHING in their power to PREVENT Chamberlain from getting to 100. They held the ball. They fouled Wilt's teammates. They exclusively swarmed Wilt when he got the ball, and left everyone else open. It was a circus.

And let's be honest here. There were MANY great players playing in the Wilt-era ('60 thru '73), and then think about this... the next highest scoring game in that era, non-Wilt (who also had a 78 point game...along with 43 rebounds) was Baylor's 73 (Chamberlain also had two 73 point games, as well a 72 and 70 point game.)

And for those that believe EVERYONE was scoring back then...in the Wilt-era, again, '60 thru '73, aside from Chamberlain's 32, there were a TOTAL of FIVE 60+ point games. Four by Baylor, and one by West.

A few years after Wilt retired, Barry had a 64 point game, and Pistol had a 68 point game. And before Wilt, Mikan and Fulks each had 60+ point games. That was it.

Players like Kareem, Lanier, Archibald, McAdoo, Oscar, Bing, Bellamy, and many other's, who played in the Wilt-era, NOT ONE 60+ point game. So, if it were so easy to score back then, where are the OTHER players putting up 60+ point games back then, much less 70?

[bwink23]

Any era that only allows 1 or 2 black players per team is both weak and diluted. A couple of guys throughout the league that are able to check Wilt isn't considered strong competition. You can try to bring up Shaq, but he faced both superior competition at his position, and far superior defense overall, as perimeter defenders (on average) have also increased is speed and skills since the 60's (I guess that's what happens when you let more than a couple black guys join the team).

As I said earlier, Wilt was a GREAT player ,and I have no doubt he would be a GREAT player in todays league. I only stated that I'm not going to rank him as GOAT because he averaged 50ppg in the weak era of the sport, which many (even in this thread) attempt to do.



And I don't have Russell as the GOAT either (I have at #3), even though he managed to compile 11 rings in the same era as Wilt.



One more thing, after watching the recent Wilt special (twice), I have to say I'm even less impressed with his 100 point game. In fact, if a team or player attempted to score 100 points in the manner that Wilt did (up big, team force feeding him the ball when the game is already decided), it would be an embarrassment to the sport. Of course, with todays rules, scoring 100 from the box/post would simply be impossible.


How many black guys were on those 80's Celtics teams again??? :confusedshrug:

[bwink23]

Any era that only allows 1 or 2 black players per team is both weak and diluted. A couple of guys throughout the league that are able to check Wilt isn't considered strong competition. You can try to bring up Shaq, but he faced both superior competition at his position, and far superior defense overall, as perimeter defenders (on average) have also increased is speed and skills since the 60's (I guess that's what happens when you let more than a couple black guys join the team).

As I said earlier, Wilt was a GREAT player ,and I have no doubt he would be a GREAT player in todays league. I only stated that I'm not going to rank him as GOAT because he averaged 50ppg in the weak era of the sport, which many (even in this thread) attempt to do.



And I don't have Russell as the GOAT either (I have at #3), even though he managed to compile 11 rings in the same era as Wilt.



One more thing, after watching the recent Wilt special (twice), I have to say I'm even less impressed with his 100 point game. In fact, if a team or player attempted to score 100 points in the manner that Wilt did (up big, team force feeding him the ball when the game is already decided), it would be an embarrassment to the sport. Of course, with todays rules, scoring 100 from the box/post would simply be impossible.

And when Kobe scored 81....there were up 15 with 3 and half minutes left...that didn't stop him from shooting and collecting 9 more points....you didn't have to force feed Kobe the ball, he always had it :lol

[jlauber]

Back to the Wilt "Double Standard"...

If you were to poll the posters on this site, as to who were more "big game" players in their careers, I suspect that the majority would claim that Larry Bird, or Kareem, were considerably more "clutch." And I'm not talking about taking the last shot, but in terms of overall play in a BIG GAME.

I have already covered Wilt's post-season play many times, but here we go again. First of all, let's quickly dispense with this crap that Wilt "wilted" in his post-season play.

The "Simmonites" always point to Wilt's scoring drop in the post-season as the "evidence" that Wilt did indeed "flop" in his post-season play. You can look the numbers up for yourself, but Wilt's regular season scoring average was 30.1 ppg, and his post-season scoring was at 22.5 ppg.

BUT, there were many factors at play here. One, and it is seldom mentioned, is that Wilt basically had his "scoring" seasons in the first half of his career. Look it up for yourself, but in his career, he averaged 39 ppg in his first seven seasons, and then 20 ppg in his last seven seasons. Not only that, but in Wilt's 62-63 season, he averaged 44.8 ppg on .528 shooting...BUT, his teammates were so awful, that his team didn't make the playoffs. That was his second greatest scoring season of his career.

The result? In his first seven seasons, and covering six post-seasons, he played in 52 of his 160 post-season games. And the main reason for that? The Celtic Dynasty. He met the Celtics in the second round of the playoffs in '60, '62, '64 (the Finals, but he only had one playoff series before that), '65, '66 (it was the second round, but they had a first round bye), '67, and '68.

Then, let's give credit where credit is due. Bill Russell. For instance, everyone here knows that Wilt averaged 50.4 ppg on .506 shooting in the '62 regular season. Then, they look at his playoff scoring... 35.0 ppg on .467 shooting, and immediately jump up and say "see!" But, here were the facts. Wilt faced Russell 10 times in the regular season (Russell missed two other games, so I won't post Wilt's average in those two games), and in them, Chamberlain averaged 39.7 ppg on .471 shooting. In the ECF's, Wilt averaged 33.6 ppg on .468 shooting. A drop to be sure, but not a HUGE drop. And, BTW, in the playoffs, scoring and shooting dropped across the board.

In any case, in Wilt's "scoring" seasons, his team played 52 playoff games...and 30 of them were against the Celtics.

STILL, here were Wilt's numbers in his first six post-seasons (covering his first seven seasons...again, he didn't get an opportunity to play in the playoffs in '63):

32.8 ppg, 26.3 rpg, .505 shooting (in league's that shot .426 in that time frame.)

In those six post-seasons, Wilt had entire post-seasons of 28.0 ppg, 29.3 ppg, 33.2 ppg, 34.7 ppg, 35.0 ppg, and 37.0 ppg. He also had playoff series of 37.0 ppg, 37.0 ppg, 38.6 ppg (on .559 shooting BTW), and 38.7 ppg. He also had FOUR 30+ ppg playoff series just against Russell, including a seven game series of 30 ppg and 31 rpg.

He had FOUR 50+ point games in those six post-seasons, too, including THREE in "must-win" elimination games (and one of them, a 50-35 game against Russell.) He also had FOUR 40-30 games just against Russell.

If you include Wilt's '67 playoff run, in which his team won the title, and went 11-4 in the process, here are Wilt's numbers in his first seven post-seasons:

67 games. 30.4 ppg. 27.0 rpg. .515 FG% (in league's that shot .428). 4.5 apg.

Think about that...he AVERAGED 30-27-5 .515 COMBINED, in his first 67 post-season games.

Go thru Wilt's '68 playoff's, and the numbers look like this:

80 games. 29.3 ppg. 26.6 rpg. 4.8 apg. .518 FG% (again, in league's that shot .430.)

In HALF of his post-season career, he AVERAGED a 29-27-5 .518 game. Now, give me a list of the NBA players who averaged that in ONE series. In fact, you would be hard-pressed to find very many single GAMES, in all of the NBA's playoff HISTORY which would match what Wilt put up in HALF of his 160 post-season games....COMBINED.

Now, the pundits will jump in, and say, "OK, we know he could put up stats, but how did he play in the game's that REALLY MATTERED? Surely you will find that Wilt "choked" in the BIG GAMES in the playoffs, right?"

Wilt played in 35 post-season games in which his team either faced elimination (must win games), or it was a clinching game.


The idiotic Bill Simmons claims that Wilt "shrunk" in the post-season, particularly in BIG games.

Had he actually done any real research into Wilt's post-season career, he would have found that Wilt averaged 27.0 ppg in his 35 "must-win" and/or clinching games. Meanwhile, his starting opposing centers averaged 14.5 ppg in those 35 games. He also outscored his opposing starting center in 29 of those 35 games, including a 19-0 edge in his first 19 games of those 35. Furthermore, in his 13 games which came in his "scoring" seasons (from 59-60 thru 65-66), Chamberlain averaged 37.3 ppg in those "do-or-die" or clinching games. And there were MANY games in which he just CRUSHED his opposing centers in those games (e.g. he outscored Kerr in one them, 53-7.)

Wilt had THREE of his four 50+ point post-season games, in these "elimination games", including two in "at the limit" games, and another against Russell in a "must-win" game. He also had games of 46-34 and 45-27 (and only 4 months removed from major knee surgery) in these types of games. In addition he had games of 39 and 38 in clinching wins.

In the known 19 games in which we have both Wilt's, and his starting opposing center's rebounding numbers, Chamberlain outrebounded them in 15 of them, and by an average margin of 26.1 rpg to 18.9 rpg. And, had we had all 35 of the totals, it would have been by a considerably larger margin. A conservative estimate would put Wilt with at least a 30-5 overall edge in those 35 games. He also had games, even against the likes of Russell, and in "must-win" situations, where he just MURDERED his opposing centers (e.g. he had one clinching game, against Russell, in which he outrebounded him by a 36-21 margin.)

And finally, in the known FG% games in which we have, Chamberlain not only shot an eye-popping .582 in those "do-or-die" games, but he held his opposing centers to a combined .413 FG%. BTW, he played against Kareem in two "clinching" games, and held Abdul-Jabbar to a combined .383 shooting in those two games.

The bottom line, in the known games of the 35 that Wilt played in that involved a "must-win" or clincher, Wilt averaged 27 ppg, 26.1 rpg, and shot .582 (and the 27 ppg figure was known for all 35 of those games.)

And once again, Chamberlain played in 11 games which went to the series limit (nine game seven's, one game five of a best-of-five series, and one game three of a best-of-three series), and all he did was average 29.9 ppg (outscoring his opposing center by a 29.9 ppg to 9.8 ppg margin in the process), with 26.7 rpg, and on .581 shooting. Or he was an eye-lash away from averaging a 30-27 game, and on nearly .600 shooting, in those 11 "at the limit" games.


Oh, and BTW, Chamberlain's TEAMs went 24-11 in those 35 games, too.

That was the same player that Simmons basically labeled a "loser", and a "choker", and who "shrunk" in his BIG games.

[jlauber]

Continuing...

Here they are...all 35 of Wilt's "must-win" or "series clinching" games in his post-season career...


Ok, here are the known numbers in Wilt's "must-win" playoff games (elimination games), and clinching game performances (either deciding winning or losing games), of BOTH Chamberlain, and his starting opposing centers in those games.

1. Game three of a best-of-three series in the first round of the 59-60 playoffs against Syracuse, a 132-112 win. Wilt with 53 points, on 24-42 shooting, with 22 rebounds. His opposing center, Red Kerr, who was a multiple all-star in his career, had 7 points.

2. Game five of the 59-60 ECF's against Boston, a 128-107 win. Chamberlain had 50 points, on 22-42 shooting, with 35 rebounds. His opposing center, Russell, had 22 points and 27 rebounds.

3. Game six of the 59-60 ECF's against Boston, in a 119-117 loss. Wilt had a 26-24 game, while Russell had a 25-25 game.

4. Game three of a best-of-five series in the first round of the 60-61 playoffs , and against Syracuse, in a 106-103 loss. Chamberlain with 33 points, while his opposing center, the 7-3 Swede Halbrook, scored 6 points.

5. Game five of a best-of-five series in the first round of the 61-62 playoffs, against Syracuse, in a 121-104 win. Chamberlain had 56 points, on 22-48 shooting, with 35 rebounds. Kerr had 20 points in the loss.

6. Game six of the 61-62 ECF's, and against Boston, in a 109-99 win. Wilt with 32 points and 21 rebounds. Russell had 19 points and 22 rebounds in the loss.

7. Game seven of the 61-62 ECF's, against Boston, in a 109-107 loss. Wilt with 22 points, on 7-15 shooting, with 21 rebounds. Russell had 19 points, on 7-14 shooting, with 22 rebounds in the win.

8. Game seven of the 63-64 WCF's, and against St. Louis, in a 105-95 win. Wilt with 39 points, 26 rebounds, and 10 blocks. His opposing center, Zelmo Beaty, who would go on to become a multiple all-star, had 10 points in the loss.

9. Game five of the 63-64 Finals, and against Boston, in a 105-99 loss. Chamberlain with 30 points and 27 rebounds. Russell had 14 points and 26 points in the win.

10. Game four of a best-of-five series in the 64-65 first round of the playoffs against Cincinnati, a 119-112 win. Chamberlain with 38 points. His opposing center, multiple all-star (and HOFer) Wayne Embry had 7 points in the loss.

11. Game six of the 64-65 ECF's, against Boston, a 112-106 win. Chamberlain with a 30-26 game. Russell with a 22-21 game in the loss.

12. Game seven of the 64-65 ECF's, and against Boston, a 110-109 loss. Wilt with 30 points, on 12-15 shooting, with 32 rebounds. Russell had 15 points, on 7-16 shooting, with 29 rebounds in the win.

13. Game five of a best-of-seven series, in the 65-66 ECF's, and against Boston, in a 120-112 loss. Wilt had 46 points, on 19-34 shooting, with 34 rebounds. Russell had 18 points and 31 rebounds in the win.

14. Game four of a best-of-five series, in the first round of the 66-67 playoffs, and against Cincinnati, a 112-94 win. Wilt with 18 points, on 7-14 shooting, with 27 rebounds and 9 assists. His opposing center, Connie Dierking, had 8 points, on 4-14 shooting, with 4 rebounds in the loss.

15. Game five of the 66-67 ECF's, and against Boston, in a 140-116 win. Chamberlain with 29 points, on 10-16 shooting, with 36 rebounds, 13 assists, and 7 blocks. Russell had 4 points, on 2-5 shooting, with 21 rebounds, and 7 assists in the loss.

16. Game six of the 66-67 Finals, and against San Francisco, in a 125-122 win. Chamberlain with 24 points, on 8-13 shooting, with 23 rebounds. His oppsoing center, HOFer Nate Thurmond, had 12 points, on 4-13 shooting, with 22 rebounds in the loss.

17. Game six of the first round of the 67-68 playoffs, against NY, in a 113-97 win. Wilt had 25 points, and 27 rebounds. His opposing center, HOFer Walt Bellamy, had 19 points in the loss.

18. Game seven of the 67-68 ECF's, against Boston, in a 100-96 loss. Wilt with 14 points, on 4-9 shooting, with 34 rebounds. Russell had 12 points and 26 rebounds in the win.

19. Game six of the first round of the 68-69 playoffs, against San Francisco, in a 118-78 win. Wilt with 11 points. Thurmond had 8 points in the loss.

20. Game four of the 68-69 WCF's, against Atlanta, in a 133-114 sweeping win. Chamberlain with 16 points. His opposing center, Zelmo Beaty had 30 points in the loss.

21. Game seven of the 68-69 Finals, against Boston, in a 108-106 loss. Chamberlain had 18 points, on 7-8 shooting, with 27 rebounds. Russell had 6 points, on 2-7 shooting, with 21 rebounds in the win.

22. Game five of a best-of-seven series (the Lakers were down 3-1 going into the game) in the first round of the 69-70 playoffs, and against Phoenix, a 138-121 win. Wilt with 36 points and 14 rebounds. His opposing center, Neal Walk, had 18 points in the loss.

23. Game six of the first round of the 69-70 playoffs, against Phoenix, in a 104-93 win. Wilt with 12 points. Jim Fox started that game for Phoenix, and had 13 points in the loss.

24. Game seven of the first round of the 69-70 playoffs, against Phoenix, and in a 129-94 win, which capped a 4-3 series win after falling behind 3-1 in the series. Wilt with 30 points, 27 rebounds, and 11 blocks. Fox had 7 points in the loss.

25. Game four of the 69-70 WCF's, against Atlanta, in a 133-114 sweeping win. Wilt with 11 points. Bellamy had 19 points in the loss.

26. Game six of the 69-70 Finals, against NY, in a 135-113 win. Wilt with 45 points, on 20-27 shooting, with 27 rebounds. Nate Bowman had 18 points, on 9-15 shooting, with 8 rebounds in the loss.

27. Game seven of the 69-70 Finals, against NY, in a 113-99 loss. Wilt with 21 points, on 10-16 shooting, with 24 rebounds. HOFer Willis Reed had 4 points, on 2-5 shooting, with 3 rebounds in the win.

28. Game seven of the first round of the 70-71 playoffs, against Chicago, in a 109-98 win. Wilt with 25 points and 18 rebounds. 7-0 Tom Boerwinkle had 4 points for the Bulls in the loss.

29. Game five of the 70-71 WCF's, against Milwaukee, in a 116-94 loss. Wilt had 23 points, on 10-21 shooting, with 12 rebounds, 6 blocks (5 of them on Alcindor/Kareem.) Kareem had 20 points, on 7-23 shooting, with 15 rebounds, and 3 blocks in the win. Incidently, Wilt received a standing ovation when he left the game late...and the game was played in Milwaukee.

30. Game four of the 71-72 first round of the playoffs, against Chicago, in a 108-97 sweeping win. Wilt had 8 points and 31 rebounds. Clifford Ray had 20 points in the loss.

31. Game six of the 71-72 WCF's, against Milwaukee, in a 104-100 win. Chamberlain with 20 points, on 8-12 shooting, with 24 rebounds, and 9 blocks (six against Kareem.) Kareem had 37 points, on 16-37 shooting, with 25 rebounds in the loss.

32. Game five of the 71-72 Finals, against NY, in a 114-100 win. Chamberlain with 24 points, on 10-14 shooting, with 29 rebounds, and 9 blocks. HOFer Jerry Lucas had 14 points, on 5-14 shooting, with 9 rebounds in the loss.

33. Game seven of the first round of the 72-73 playoffs, against Chicago, in a 95-92 win. Wilt with 21 points and 28 rebounds. His opposing center, Clifford Ray, had 4 points.

34. Game five of the 72-73 WCF's, and against Golden St., in a 128-118 win. Wilt with 5 points. Thurmond had 9 points in the loss.

35. Game five of the 72-73 Finals, against NY, in a 102-93 loss. Wilt with 23 points, on 9-16 shooting, with 21 rebounds. Willis Reed had 18 points, on 9-16 shooting, with 12 rebounds.

That was it. 35 "must-win" elimination and/or clinching post-season games.


Continued...

[Horatio33]

Jlauber, get a bloody life! If you are 56, you must be a virgin who lives alone, no family. You copy and paste all the time. 56 year olds have better things to do. Also it's funny that you've been 56 for about 5 years.

[millwad]

Jlauber, get a bloody life! If you are 56, you must be a virgin who lives alone, no family. You copy and paste all the time. 56 year olds have better things to do. Also it's funny that you've been 56 for about 5 years.

HAHAHA! :applause:

[Asukal]

Jlauber, get a bloody life! If you are 56, you must be a virgin who lives alone, no family. You copy and paste all the time. 56 year olds have better things to do. Also it's funny that you've been 56 for about 5 years.

That guy loves wilt so much he forgot to age hahahaha! :roll:

[Psileas]

How many black guys were on those 80's Celtics teams again??? :confusedshrug:

And not only this, but the '86 Celtics are actually considered the GOAT teams by many, including lots of the people making these kind of debates.

Heck, the late 60's Celtics were blacker than their 80's counterparts:
http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nba/boston/celticschamps.html

I'd see the point in arguing white vs black opponents of Wilt, if the black ones did a significantly better job vs him. But the only ones that did were Russell and Thurmond, who were all-time GOAT level defenders, and even they had their shares of getting burned.
Walt Bellamy was burned for 50 like it was going out of style. Willis Reed got burned lots of times in the 60's (these are the unknown Wilt vs Reed matchups that people pretend never existed). Zelmo Beaty, though a tough opponent, had Wilt almost average 40 ppg against him in the 1964 playoffs (thank FT shooting for not surpassing this figure). Wayne Embry had a career highlight of playing great defense against Wilt in the '68 playoffs (not full-time, of course, since he was Russell's replacement), but Wilt generally feasted on him, the Lakers' and Pistons' black big guys (Ellis, Harding, Wiley, Dukes) were made dead meat...All of these players were black. Most of them were reasonably athletic, as well, except Embry, who, however, was 250+ lbs and strong (athleticism isn't just speed, quickness and jumping) and Dukes, who was a legit 7-footer (would be listed at 7'1-7'2 nowadays).

[dunksby]

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/this_is_the_funniest.gif

[jlauber]

Jlauber, get a bloody life! If you are 56, you must be a virgin who lives alone, no family. You copy and paste all the time. 56 year olds have better things to do. Also it's funny that you've been 56 for about 5 years.

How often do you see ME post my age. Dickwad is the idiot who is INFATUATED with me. He sends me PM's. He sings songs to ME on the internet. He even has a YouTube topic directed at ME.

As far as my age, I am now 57.

Now, YOU get a life and find better things to do than jump into a thread without adding anything to it. Obviously, though, you do READ my topics, or you would not take the time to post in them.

And don't give me this "did not read" crap either, because there are actually times you will challenge MY takes in them.

[Batz]

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/this_is_the_funniest.gif

:roll: :roll: :roll:

What video is this from!?

[jlauber]

And not only this, but the '86 Celtics are actually considered the GOAT teams by many, including lots of the people making these kind of debates.

Heck, the late 60's Celtics were blacker than their 80's counterparts:
http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nba/boston/celticschamps.html

I'd see the point in arguing white vs black opponents of Wilt, if the black ones did a significantly better job vs him. But the only ones that did were Russell and Thurmond, who were all-time GOAT level defenders, and even they had their shares of getting burned.
Walt Bellamy was burned for 50 like it was going out of style. Willis Reed got burned lots of times in the 60's (these are the unknown Wilt vs Reed matchups that people pretend never existed). Zelmo Beaty, though a tough opponent, had Wilt almost average 40 ppg against him in the 1964 playoffs (thank FT shooting for not surpassing this figure). Wayne Embry had a career highlight of playing great defense against Wilt in the '68 playoffs (not full-time, of course, since he was Russell's replacement), but Wilt generally feasted on him, the Lakers' and Pistons' black big guys (Ellis, Harding, Wiley, Dukes) were made dead meat...All of these players were black. Most of them were reasonably athletic, as well, except Embry, who, however, was 250+ lbs and strong (athleticism isn't just speed, quickness and jumping) and Dukes, who was a legit 7-footer (would be listed at 7'1-7'2 nowadays).

I addressed some of this earlier in this topic, but both you and CavsFan hit on one my "double standard" points.

There are so many uneducated fans, and not just on this forum, who actually believe that Wilt was a lumbering giant who just threw down dunks on helpless 6-6 white nerds.

You and CavsFan have PROVEN that to be completely FALSE. CavsFan even posted the MEASURED heights of players in the early 60's and compared them with the LEGITIMATE heights of the CURRENT NBA...and they were EXACTLY the same.

And, as you just pointed out, Wilt was BASHING players like Bellamy, Thurmond, Reed, and Russell in his peak "scoring" seasons.

One of these days I will take the time to look up all of Wilt's H2H's with Bellamy, but in the few that I have, around 30 of them (covering 61-62, 62-63, and 65-66 H2H's) he just DESTROYED him. Entire SEASONS (and covering 10 H2H's in each) of 33.0 ppg, 43.7 ppg, and even a staggering 52.7 ppg. MULITPLE 60+ point games against him, including a 73-36 game. CavsFan even posted one of Wilt's LOWEST scoring games against Bellamy, in the 61-62 season, in which Wilt scored 34 points, with 33 rebounds, and 20 blocked shots!

Same with Reed. Many here look at Reed's '70 Finals as some kind of example that Reed outplayed Wilt (which, even then, he clearly did NOT...and this was a Wilt only four months removed from major knee surgery, and well past his prime.) BUT, in the 64-65 season alone, covering nine games, Chamberlain just MURDERED Reed. He AVERAGED 40.1 ppg against him, including games in which he outscored him by 41-9, 52-23, and 58-28!

And, I have posted the fact that Thurmond battled Kareem in some 50 H2H games in their careers, and that Kareem's HIGH game against Nate was only 34 points. In fact, he seldom even scored 30 points on Nate. However, a PRIME "scoring" Wilt put up 11 straight games against Thurmond in which he averaged 30 ppg, and had games of 30, 33, 34, 34, 38, and even 45 (outscoring Nate 45-13 in that one.)

So, Wilt was not only facing players just as tall, and just as skilled as those that play today, he was just CRUSHING them in his prime.

[BlackJoker23]

this fukking phaget is still stuck on 56? shut the fukk up

[jlauber]

Continuing...

I have trashed the MYTH that Wilt's play declined in the post-season. He was DOMINATING his peers in nearly every one of his 29 post-season series. He was seldom outscored. He was only outshot in ONE series that I could find (Kareem in '72 WCF's, .457 to .452), BUT, Wilt only missed 20 shots in that series, while Kareem bricked 107. Not only that, but in the last four games of that six game series, Kareem shot .414. And in the clinching game six win, Wilt dramatically outshot Kareem, 8-12 to 16-37.

And, once again, Wilt was NEVER outrebounded in ANY of his 29 post-season series (EIGHT against Russell, THREE against Reed, THREE against Thurmond, TWO against Kareem, and TWO against Bellamy.) In fact, he was seldom outrebounded in SINGLE GAMES in his 160 post-season games. And in MANY, he just SHELLED his opposing centers.

And how about his DEFENSE in the post-season?

Red Kerr shot .392 in the '60 season. Against Wilt in the '60 playoffs? .296.

Kerr shot .443 in the '62 season. Against Wilt in the '62 playoffs... .376.

Embry in the '65 regular season... .456. Against Wilt in the playoffs? .438.

Russell in the '62 regular season... .457. Against Wilt in the ECF's... .420 (educated estimate...he shot .500 in seven games of the Finals, and shot .458 overall, including the seven games he faced Wilt.)

Russell in the '67 regular season... .454. Against Wilt in the ECF's... .358.

And, we don't know what Russell shot in the '64 Finals against Wilt, but overall, in his 10 playoff games, he shot .356...and half of them were against Chamberlain.

Bellamy in the '68 regular season... .541. Against Wilt in the playoffs... .421.

Thurmond in the '69 regular season... .410. Against Wilt in the playoffs... .398

Thurmond in the '73 regular season... .446. Against Wilt in the playoffs... .392

Thurmond in the '67 regular season... .437. Against Wilt in the Finals... .343.

Kareem in the '71 regular season... .577. Against Wilt in the WCF's... .481.

Kareem in the '72 regular seson... .574. Against Wilt in the WCF's... .457.


In fact, I could only find TWO entire playoff series, out of Wilt's 29, in which he surrendered a .500 FG%. One was against Zelmo Beaty in the '64 playoffs, in which Beaty shot .521 and scored 14.3 ppg (Wilt was at 38.6 ppg on .559 shooting BTW.)

And the other was Jerry Lucas in the '72 Finals. Lucas shot an even .500 (Wilt shot .600 BTW.) And even that was deceptive. Lucas was a great long range shooter, and he nailed 9 of his first 11 shots in that series. After that, he went 37-81, or .457.

Time-and-again, Wilt REDUCED his opposing centers to WAY below their normal shooting percentages. How come Simmons never mentions that FACT?

[millwad]

Haha, these threads are hilarious..

Give us another essay, bro!

WE WANT MORE! WE WANT MORE! WE WANT MORE!

[jlauber]

Concluding the topic...

Why is Wilt considered a "stats-padding" "loser" who "choked" in his post-season play?

Once again, go back a few posts. Chamberlain played in 35 "must-win" or "series clinchers" in his post-season career. You won't find any in which he was more than slightly outplayed, and then, in those few, it was less than a handful. BUT, you will find a TON in which he just WIPED OUT his opposing center. And no one mentions the fact that Wilt faced a HOF starting center in 105 of his 160 post-season games, and a multiple all-star in another 26. Or 131 of his 160 post-season games against a very good, to GREAT, opposing center.

In fact, aside perhaps his '69 Finals, in which his coach shackled him, Wilt did not have ONE poor series. And even in the '69 Finals, he still outplayed Russell (particularly in that game seven, despite playing 5 minutes less.) His WORST post-season rebounding series was 20.2 rpg. He routinely put up 20-20 post-seasons...NINE in his 13 post-seasons. He even had FOUR 30-20 post-seasons! And his DEFENSE was ALWAYS a constant in EVERY series.

Ok, how about MJ? His TEAM's went 1-9 in his first ten playoff games. He didn't get to the Finals until his sixth season. He only won a title when he had the loaded rosters (see his 92-93 team record, when he played, and his 93-94 team record when he did.) He even shot .455, .427, and .415 in his last three Finals.

Hakeem? The man hardly ever made it out the FIRST ROUND. And in those EIGHT, his team's were never even close in those series. He had a series of 18.5 ppg, 11.5 rpg, and on .443 shooting in a 3-1 loss. He was POUNDED by Shaq in the '99 playoffs (I mean just CRUSHED.) He also played with Barkley and Drexler for two seasons, and did not win a title.

And before someone claims that Hakeem's teammates were generally average, at best...yes, they were. BUT, how come that is NEVER considered in Wilt's behalf? Chamberlain not only played with HORRIBLE rosters in the first half of his career, they collectively shot .383, .380, .354, .352, .352, and .332 in his first six post-seasons. How many post-seasons did Hakeem's teammates shoot that poorly?

BTW, Hakeem shot .488 in his 17 Finals games (and was horribly outshot in one series, by Shaq, .595 to .483.) Meanwhile, Wilt shot .560 overall in his 35 Finals games, with a LOW series of .517 (against Russell in the '64 Finals, and in a series in which he outscored Russell, 29.2 ppg to 11.2 ppg.) And, Wilt outshot Thurmond in another Finals, .560 to .343. Wilt's also had Finals of .600 (on 19 ppg), and .625 (with 23.2 ppg.)

And again, BTW, Bird played in FIVE Finals, covering 31 games, and he shot collectively shot .455. His BEST Finals was .488, and his worst was .419.

So, let's go to Bird next. The man LOST with HCA in SEVEN playoff series. In one of them, his team was SWEPT 4-0. And back to his shooting... he shot .472 in his 164 post-season games, and in league's that shot about .485 on average. And once again, he shot .455 on his five Finals. He had as many games shooting .399 or worse, as he did .500 or better (ELEVEN), in his 31 Finals games. He had entire playoff seasons of .450, .444, .427, .422 and even .408. And in his greatest statistical season, 87-88, he shot .351 against the Pistons in the playoffs (BTW, Magic averaged 21.6 ppg on .550 shooting against the Pistons in the Finals that year.)

Kareem? Where to begin. Let's start with what some here claim was his BEST post-season, in 76-77. Yes, he and his 53-29 Lakers dominated the 46-36 Lakers in a tough seven game series. BUT, in the WCF's, and aside from ONE game, in which he poured in 40 points against Walton, the rest of those three games (a 4-0 SWEEP by the 49-33 Blazers), Walton battled him to s statistical draw, and played better in the clutch and 4th periods. And that was Kareem's best post-season, and only covering 11 games.

How about the fact that Kareem played with Nixon, Hudson, Wilkes (who won a title earlier in his career with Barry and a bunch of no-names), and a Dantley who came to LA after averaging 26.5 ppg, ...for TWO seasons. With all of that talent, they were wiped out by 47-35 and 50-32 Sonics teams that had ONE borderline HOF player in two straight post-seasons.

Kareem had a fantastic playoff series against Reed in the '70 ECF's. HOWEVER, in the deciding game five (of a 4-1 series loss), Reed outscored Kareem, 32-27, and in a 132-96 win.

The very next season, 70-71, when Kareem not only won the MVP, he also deserved won the FMVP. STILL, he was battled to a statistical draw by a 34 year old Wilt, and only a year removed from major knee surgery, and won kept LA in those games, despite not having BOTH West and Baylor. Inthe deciding game win, Kareem was completely outplayed by Wilt (Chamberlain outscored him 23-20, and outshot him, 10-21 to 7-23.)

Then, in the 71-72 post-season, a Kareem who again won the MVP, and who led the NBA in scoring at 34.8 ppg and shot .577 in the process, was OUTSCORED and OUTSHOT by Nate Thurmond. In the deciding win, Thurmond outscored Kareem, 26-23. In the series, Kareem shot an unbelieveable .405!

Kareem then took his defending champion and 63-19 Bucks up against Wilt's 69-13 Lakers, and after a blowout win in game one, the Lakers then won four of the next five, including a 25 point wipeout in game five, and a come-from-behind win in Milwaukee in the clinching game six. Overall, Kareem shot .457, which was way below his .574 seasonal FG%. Not only that, but over the course of the last four games, Kareem could only shoot .414. And he was badly outplayed by Wilt in the series clincher.

In his 72-73 playoffs, Kareem took his 60-22 team down in flames against the 47-35 Warriors in the first round, and in a season in which he averaged 30.0 ppg on .554 shooting, all he could do was average 22.8 ppg on ,428 shooting against Thurmond. BTW, Wilt then crushed Thurmond in the very next round, en route to leading HIS 60-22 Lakers to a 4-1 romp over that Warrior team.

Continued...

[jlauber]

Haha, these threads are hilarious..

Give us another essay, bro!

WE WANT MORE! WE WANT MORE! WE WANT MORE!

Keep reading them...I appreciate it. And yes, more to come...

[jlauber]

Continuing...

Kareem played well in the '74 Finals, no question. BUT, in the deciding seventh game, and on his HOME FLOOR, he was outscored, outshot, and outrebounded by the 6-9 Dave Cowens, in yet ANOTHER blow-out loss.

Kareem was traded to the Lakers after a disappointing 74-75 season in which he broke his hand and missed 16 games (remember the "choker" Wilt PLAYING with a BROKEN hand, and DOMINATING, in game five of the Finals?)

His 75-76 season is interesting. Remember, in his 71-72 season, Kareem played 44.2 mpg, and scored 34.8 ppg on .574 shooting, for a 63-19 Bucks team that had a +11.1 scoring differential. How come, in his 75-76 season, and with an average, at best, roster, he only played 41.2 mpg, and only scored 27.7 ppg on .529 shooting? BTW, Bob McAdoo averaged 31.1 ppg that season.

I covered the rest of the decade already. In any case, Kareem, playing with mostly STACKED rosters, and in perhaps the weakest decade for champions in NBA history (the '75 Warriors, with Barry and Wilkes and a bunch of no-names, going 48-34; the 49-33 Blazers; the 44-38 Bullets; and the 52-30 Sonics), went to TWO Finals, and won ONE ring. And, in that one ring season, his 66-16 Bucks beat a 41-41 Warrior team in the first round; a 48-34 Lakers team without BOTH West and Baylor in the WCF's; and a 42-40 Bullets team in the Finals.

After MAGIC arrived we all know what happened next. Kareem won FIVE rings, and was an integral part of four of them. BUT, in their first title together, while Kareem played brilliantly in the first five games of the Finals, he SAT OUT the clincher, and in a game in which MAGIC carried LA to a title. Here again, Kareem SAT OUT with a sprained ankle, and yet Wilt was ripped for sitting down for TWO MINUTES in a game seven. Just more of the Wilt "double standard."

And, Kareem was outplayed by Moses and his 40-42 '81 Rockets (Moses outscored him, and held him to .462 shooting) in a stunning loss. And in the '83 Finals, Moses just POUNDED Kareem. In the '84 Finals, Kareem shot .481 overall (in a league that shot .485), and in a pivotal game five, he went 7-25 from the floor.

In Kareem's 85-86 regular season, he averaged 33.0 ppg on .634 shooting against the Hakeem's Rockets in their five H2H's (going 4-1 against them.) Then, in the playoffs, he is outscored, outrebounded, and outshot by Hakeem...albeit by a slim margin (and Kareem was 39.)

In the '88 post-season, Kareem wins a ring, DESPITE his AWFUL play. He averaged 14.1 ppg, 5.5 rpg, and shot .464. It was even WORSE in the Finals, in which he averaged 13.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg, and shot .414 in his seven games. And, in the game seven win, and in 29 minutes, he scored 4 points, on 2-7 shooting, with 3 rebounds, and 5 PFs.

And, in his last season, albeit at the age of 42, he was basically worthless, and his team, without both Magic and Scott, were SWEPT by the Pistons.


OK, I know what is coming next...

Bird, Kareem, and certainly MJ, all played brilliantly too. And yes, they all had legitimate excuses for at least some of their post-season losses. For instance, in MJ's '86 playoffs, he averaged 43.7 ppg, but his 30-52 Bulls were swept by the 67-15 Celtics and their FIVE HOFers.

Kareem was a dominant player, even in losses, in many of his post-season games. And yes, Bird did other things well, even when he was shooting poorly.


BUT, why the DOUBLE STANDARD? Why does Wilt get no slack, when he was DOMINATING in nearly ALL of his post-seasons, and doing so with pathedtic teammates who generally played even WORSE in the post-season...and playing against HOF-LADEN teams year-after-year?????!!!!!

[millwad]

Continuing...

Kareem played well in the '74 Finals, no question. BUT, in the deciding seventh game, and on his HOME FLOOR, he was outscored, outshot, and outrebounded by the 6-9 Dave Cowens, in yet ANOTHER blow-out loss.

Kareem was traded to the Lakers after a disappointing 74-75 season in which he broke his hand and missed 16 games (remember the "choker" Wilt PLAYING with a BROKEN hand, and DOMINATING, in game five of the Finals?)

His 75-76 season is interesting. Remember, in his 71-72 season, Kareem played 44.2 mpg, and scored 34.8 ppg on .574 shooting, for a 63-19 Bucks team that had a +11.1 scoring differential. How come, in his 75-76 season, and with an average, at best, roster, he only played 41.2 mpg, and only scored 27.7 ppg on .529 shooting? BTW, Bob McAdoo averaged 31.1 ppg that season.

I covered the rest of the decade already. In any case, Kareem, playing with mostly STACKED rosters, and in perhaps the weakest decade for champions in NBA history (the '75 Warriors, with Barry and Wilkes and a bunch of no-names, going 48-34; the 49-33 Blazers; the 44-38 Bullets; and the 52-30 Sonics), went to TWO Finals, and won ONE ring. And, in that one ring season, his 66-16 Bucks beat a 41-41 Warrior team in the first round; a 48-34 Lakers team without BOTH West and Baylor in the WCF's; and a 42-40 Bullets team in the Finals.

After MAGIC arrived we all know what happened next. Kareem won FIVE rings, and was an integral part of four of them. BUT, in their first title together, while Kareem played brilliantly in the first five games of the Finals, he SAT OUT the clincher, and in a game in which MAGIC carried LA to a title. Here again, Kareem SAT OUT with a sprained ankle, and yet Wilt was ripped for sitting down for TWO MINUTES in a game seven. Just more of the Wilt "double standard."

And, Kareem was outplayed by Moses and his 40-42 '81 Rockets (Moses outscored him, and held him to .462 shooting) in a stunning loss. And in the '83 Finals, Moses just POUNDED Kareem. In the '84 Finals, Kareem shot .481 overall (in a league that shot .485), and in a pivotal game five, he went 7-25 from the floor.

In Kareem's 85-86 regular season, he averaged 33.0 ppg on .634 shooting against the Hakeem's Rockets in their five H2H's (going 4-1 against them.) Then, in the playoffs, he is outscored, outrebounded, and outshot by Hakeem...albeit by a slim margin (and Kareem was 39.)

In the '88 post-season, Kareem wins a ring, DESPITE his AWFUL play. He averaged 14.1 ppg, 5.5 rpg, and shot .464. It was even WORSE in the Finals, in which he averaged 13.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg, and shot .414 in his seven games. And, in the game seven win, and in 29 minutes, he scored 4 points, on 2-7 shooting, with 3 rebounds, and 5 PFs.

And, in his last season, albeit at the age of 42, he was basically worthless, and his team, without both Magic and Scott, were SWEPT by the Pistons.


OK, I know what is coming next...

Bird, Kareem, and certainly MJ, all played brilliantly too. And yes, they all had legitimate excuses for at least some of their post-season losses. For instance, in MJ's '86 playoffs, he averaged 43.7 ppg, but his 30-52 Bulls were swept by the 67-15 Celtics and their FIVE HOFers.

Kareem was a dominant player, even in losses, in many of his post-season games. And yes, Bird did other things well, even when he was shooting poorly.


BUT, why the DOUBLE STANDARD? Why does Wilt get no slack, when he was DOMINATING in nearly ALL of his post-seasons, and doing so with pathedtic teammates who generally played even WORSE in the post-season...and playing against HOF-LADEN teams year-after-year?????!!!!!

http://www.goodbadgirl.se/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/osama-bin-laden.jpg

[jlauber]

There you have it...

Wilt was a "stats-padder" despite leading his 49-31 team to a game seven, two point loss in the '62 ECF's, and against a 60-20 Celtics team with SEVEN HOFers, and the greatest defensive center in NBA history...in a season in which he averaged 50.4 ppg, 25.7 rpg, and shot .506 (in a league that shot .426.)

BUT, where is the criticism of MJ in his 86-87 season, when he averaged 37.1 ppg on a 40-42 team. Or Kobe's 05-06 season, when he averaged 35.4 ppg on a 45-37 team?


Wilt was a "loser" because he only won two rings in his 14 seasons, despite losing FOUR game seven's, by a combined NINE points (margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points), and in series in which he generally played brilliantly. And no one mentions that Wilt went to TWELVE Conference Finals in his 13 post-seasons (Bird went eight in his 12, and Hakeem went to 4 in his 18.) Or that Wilt played on SIX teams that were Conference champs. Or that Wilt went to SIX Finals, and was great in nearly all of them. Or that Wilt played on FOUR teams that had the best record in the league (Hakeem NEVER did.) Or that Wilt played on FOUR teams that won 60+ games (Russell played on THREE.) Or that Wilt played on TWO teams that went 68-13 and 69-13 (including a 33 game winning streak), that won dominating world titles.

Or that Wilt was a "choker" when I have CONCLUSIVELY proven that he was certainly among the GREATEST BIG GAME PLAYERS in NBA HISTORY (only MJ has a case over him.) A Wilt who not only played HUGE in nearly all of his 29 post-seasons, BUT, a Wilt who was generally the BEST player on the floor in the majority of them, and who played even GREATER in his 35 "must-win" and "series clinching" games.

[FireDavidKahn]

That guy loves wilt so much he forgot to age hahahaha! :roll:
Another positive of Wilt! He prevents aging:bowdown:

[millwad]

Haha, Jlauber's threads always backlashes..:facepalm

[jlauber]

Haha, Jlauber's threads always backlashes..:facepalm

Just by the uneducated and unintelligent.:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[millwad]

Just by the uneducated and unintelligent.:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

Yeah, especially considering how educated and intelligent, Jlauber... After all those essays you still haven't understood that no one cares about them and that you're wasting your time.

You are a 57 yeard old lonely troll sitting on ISH beefing with people younger then your children, it takes a retard to do so.

And your obsession is just pathetic, Wilt played 40+ years ago and it's already confirmed that you didn't see him play and that you changed your mind over youtube and google.

We dom't give a sh*t about your essays, go f*ck yourself.

[La Frescobaldi]

Who was even close to Shaq's size or athletic ability in Shaq's era? Shaq is close to Wilt's size but does Shaq even have Wilt's athletic ability!? Wilt is actually a fraction of an inch taller than Shaq and has a ~ 1" longer wing span and 2" higher standing reach than Shaq - and though Shaq was 327lbs in his prime while Wilt was a "pewny" 292lbs in his prime.... Shaq was fat as all hell, and slower, and Wilt had a 31 inch waist.... As a veteran Wilt was eventually playing at over 300lbs anyways and he STILL did it with a 31 inch waist so honestly - who in NBA HISTORY has ever played that is going to look big+athletic next to Wilt? Is there anybody that could not named Shaq? Yao is big (still lacks Wilt's reach and wingspan) But Yao would look like an arthritic Frankenstein next to Wilt it wouldn't even be fair....

Are you watching the 1962 All-star game? You must be... that's the only footage of Wilt from that season - so you probably have no clue who which player is on the floor nor how big they are. But since they all look so small next to Wilt they must all be dwarfs right? Well - I'll help you out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cyBo7RhkJk

Note the opposing center of Wilt the entire game... Walt Bellamy...
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-8glrL8sTDc0/T1HYGSd_7hI/AAAAAAAADJM/10xrlkq-140/s400/Walt%2520Bellamy%2520Rookie.jpg

He is LITERALLY The exact same height and weight as this guy was measured in the draft:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Spencer-Hawes-483/

Bellamy is listed 6'11 but in the real world he was ~6'10.5"... Hawes is 6'10.5 too... but the NBA today list's him as 7'1... Both are 245lbs. So you see Hawes on TV your thinking "hey that guy's 7'1" --- but did you think the same thing when you saw Bellamy? He's identical in size you know? I'm guessing no you probably thought he was short. Point is plain and simple, if you don't know who the people are against Wilt your never going to be able to tell how athletic big or strong they were you simply can't tell by looking at a grainy footage with no reference of scale other than the gargantuan freak Wilt - who would dwarf pretty much anyone from any era. And BTW Hawes has a short wing span, and is a poor athlete... Bellamy on the other hand is a stand-out athlete who came into the league with an explosive vertical.

Wilt was being doubled periodically in the all-star game by this power forward: Bob Pettit
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-FiQ73IHuGXI/T1LA7CDYBxI/AAAAAAAADJk/ma2KnppMP9I/s400/Veteran%2520Bob%2520Pettit.jpg
Just some 6'0 white guy right? :lol - oh wait duh! :hammerhead:
I forgot, looking at grainy black and white pictures and footage to judge player size is ridiculous because in reality Bob Pettit is identical in height and, at this point in his career, weight - to Dwight Howard's rookie season measurements. And he isn't even a center - he's a forward.
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Dwight-Howard-2888/
Now, of course this is not to imply Pettit is the athlete Howard is and I'm certain Pettit's wingspan won't be as long but Pettit was merely playing the role of weak-side muscle and to help Bellamy on box-outs for rebounds and such (BTW Pettit and Bell's are the #3 and #4 rebounders that year behind Wilt and Russell - Bells leads the league in fg% and he's #2 in scoring). Neither one of these two powerful "7 footers" were able to prevent Wilt from dropping 42 points in that all-star game on .739fg%. Neither one of them boxed him out of his 24 rebounds. You wanna tell me in that game he was up against weak competition? I don't care if the NY knick's played white centers against him in his 100 point game - he dominated everyone including the superstar players of his era that are every bit as big athletic and strong as any modern superstars in the league today.









And never forget it:

6'7.75, un-athletic, this man lead league in rebounds:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Kevin-Love-1062/
(Note he's a virtual clone in play-style and rebound hunger yet he's over an inch shorter than Bob Pettit)
http://rumorsandrants.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Kevin-Love.jpg

6'11, un-athletic, this man is a finals MVP:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Dirk-Nowitzki-3780/
http://www.nba.com/media/act_dirk_nowitzki.jpg

6'11, un-athletic, this man lead the league in blocked shots:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Andrew-Bogut-70/
http://utahproathletes.com/assets/basketball/andrew%20bogut%20n.jpg

...and that was last year

You forgot this guy, who led the league in assists:

http://www.thesportsbank.net/core/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/steve-nash.jpg

[Kobe 4 The Win]

DNFR = Did Not F**king Read

Wilt was a beast though. I'll take Kareem's word for how good Wilt was. He gets penalized for the era he played in. His numbers were so absurd that it's hard to put them into the proper perspective of the current game.

[La Frescobaldi]

DNFR = Did Not F**king Read

Wilt was a beast though. I'll take Kareem's word for how good Wilt was. He gets penalized for the era he played in. His numbers were so absurd that it's hard to put them into the proper perspective of the current game.

His numbers were so absurd that it's hard to put them into the proper perspective of THAT game.

"His era" isn't especially spectacular as far as numbers. The biggest reason that scoring was higher was the pace of the game. And a great deal of that was because Chamberlain was in the league.

Teams were desperately shooting astronomical numbers just trying to keep up with the guy, and he kept going faster, and faster, and faster.

In the 1958-59 season, the league averaged 108.2 points per game.
In Wilt's rookie season, the league averaged 115.3 points per game.

The entire league averaged 7 points a game more.

And as Chamberlain grew into the game, it got even faster - up to 118 points per game for the entire NBA.

But yet when you look at the league's leaders, they are putting up the same numbers as any other season, in any other decade, in any other era.

I don't think it's coincidence.

Also if you notice, after Chamberlain was diagnosed with a heart condition... the entire league's numbers went down. I don't think that was coincidence either; I think he literally had that much impact on basketball.

I can tell you this; in the late 60s & early 70s, Wilt Chamberlain could take over a game like nobody else I've ever seen.

[Punpun]

Oh my OP opened my eyes. Bird, Hakeen, Kareem etc. are below Kobe. Thank you OP. So the top list would be

1. MJ
2. Kobe
3. Wilt
4. Magic
5. Kareem
6. Russel

etc.

Oh my. Thank you OP. :bowdown:

[CavaliersFTW]

DNFR = Did Not F**king Read

Wilt was a beast though. I'll take Kareem's word for how good Wilt was. He gets penalized for the era he played in. His numbers were so absurd that it's hard to put them into the proper perspective of the current game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDzzxVE34k&t=3m57s

Have a looksie :cheers:

[bwink23]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDzzxVE34k&t=3m57s

Have a looksie :cheers:


You got to wonder "What those dudes were thinking?" taking it in the paint with Wilt standing there...:lol

[Kobe 4 The Win]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDzzxVE34k&t=3m57s

Have a looksie :cheers:

Awesome!

[CavaliersFTW]

Awesome!
Crazy shit to see a battle like that. Wilt held Bucks fans in awe with some of his performances, for one, he was the only center in the league who was guarding the MVP Kareem one on one. Wilt got a several minute long standing ovation at the Milwaukee Bucks arena by the Bucks fans after he virtually erased their home-town MVP "King Lew" in the Laker vs Bucks 1971 playoff series. Headlines of "Bucks oust Lakers, Wilt bests Lew" were in every paper around the country, including Milwaukee. People forget Wilt's career intersected Kareem's - and that they battled each other in the post season for several years on absolutely epic teams - each of them ousting the other to win a chip only a season apart from each other on record breaking GOAT candidate teams. '71 Bucks, still hold the record of widest point margin disparity in NBA history - '72 Lakers still hold the record of longest winning streak in NBA history. If Wilt being dominant even in the face of a prime Jabbar can't validate that he was a legitimate force than I don't know what can lol. Stats are hard to analyze but Kareem's word + the eye test + looking at stats certainly backs his reputation

[PistolPete44]

That guy loves wilt so much he forgot to age hahahaha! :roll:
Your mom died of cancer hahahaha :applause:

[Asukal]

Your mom died of cancer hahahaha :applause:

Oh hi there gaylauber alt. :cheers:

[LosBulls]

You have the same ****ing argument in every single thread, and every time you seem to add more and more. Nobody cares.

Go ask yours kids to transfer you to a retirement home without old farts like you who would love to discuss how big and strong Wilt Chamberlain is.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

You have the same ****ing argument in every single thread, and every time you seem to add more and more. Nobody cares.

Go ask yours kids to transfer you to a retirement home without old farts like you who would love to discuss how big and strong Wilt Chamberlain is.

It's probably really hard to read all the nonsense about Wilt when you understand and actually saw how great he was. Wilt was a monster and I have no doubt that if he was playing right now that he's be the best center in the league. Jlauber might annoy people with his Wilt agenda but the truth is the truth.

[dunksby]

Fun fact: jlauber grew up suckin on Wilt's dick instead of his mom's nipples.

[millwad]

Jlauber doesn't know crap, he didn't actually see Wilt play to start with. He changed his mind about Wilt and his era more than 40 years after those games were played..

He has no knowledge about basketball either...:facepalm

Just watch his thread about Olajuwon vs Gilmore and check how clowned he got;

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=259815

[La Frescobaldi]

It's probably really hard to read all the nonsense about Wilt when you understand and actually saw how great he was. Wilt was a monster and I have no doubt that if he was playing right now that he's be the best center in the league. Jlauber might annoy people with his Wilt agenda but the truth is the truth.

this is 100% pure D factualness

[jstern]

I like jlauber.

Too much to read, so I opened up a computer voice reader to read his OP. Half way through I remembered that there's a video that one of jlauber rivals uploaded to youtube that has jlauber talking with this voice. Nice coincidence for me.

Edit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=01GWCMGEsUw

Different voice

[La Frescobaldi]

1968, Sixers vs. Pistons.

No, this wasn't the day Chamberlain marked the only double triple double in history (I believe at any level in basketball... not just the NBA) with a stat line of 22 points, 25 rebounds, and 21 assists - and 12 blocks for the most monstrous game in all of history.

No, this was just a regular old game.

Dave Debusschere - who would have been one of the premier forwards in any era, able to score at will against anyone, terrific rebounder, hardnosed defender and - top 50 all-time..... guy goes up for an uncontested layup, nobody around at all. A day at the office.

From above and behind, his shot is thrown against the backboard for a block.

WHILE STILL IN THE AIR, THIS GUY CATCHES THE BLOCKED REBOUND..... SPINS...... AND HURLS THE BALL PAST MIDCOURT TO HAL GREER ALMOST AT THE OPPOSITE FREE THROW LINE - WHILE NEVER TOUCHING THE GROUND.

Just another day at work for Wilt Chamberlain.

[ralph_i_el]

You are licking his nuts DECADES late. How about talking about something relevant for once?

[millwad]

Rest in peace, Jlauber.

Even though you were annoying as hell we all miss your freakish obsession and essays!

http://image1.findagrave.com/photos250/photos/2009/225/6572168_125031279312.jpg

[CavaliersFTW]

bumping a classic :cheers:

[millwad]

bumping a classic :cheers:

This thread is hilarious, Jlauber is easily the most retarded person of all-time.

[millwad]

"Greatest scorer of all-time" my ass..

http://gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs1/3427465_o.gif

[Jameerthefear]

This thread is hilarious, Jlauber is easily the most retarded person of all-time.
You're a clown :facepalm

[millwad]

You're a clown :facepalm

You're a 14 year old virgin, I'm inside your mom on daily basis.

[Jameerthefear]

You're a 14 year old virgin, I'm inside your mom on daily basis.
15*. how can you be inside anyone if you don't leave your house?

[millwad]

15*. how can you be inside anyone if you don't leave your house?

Kid, you average more posts per day so if someone's not leaving the house it would be you.

Go and spread your mom's legs now.

[CavaliersFTW]

According to the "Wilt Bashers" Wilt was basically a skinnier more malnourished version of this guy (minus the shooting touch) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvknOlKuBjw

...right?

[millwad]

According to the "Wilt Bashers" Wilt was basically a skinnier more malnourished version of this guy (minus the shooting touch) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvknOlKuBjw

...right?

Wilt was the least clutch player ever;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=oemQKScZ7MQ#t=128s

[Mr Exlax]

Those numbers against Russell are undeniable. The guy could only do so much. This is why I think he was a better player than Russ. I don't see how somebody would or could deny this man's greatness smh

[LosScandalous]

Those numbers against Russell are undeniable. The guy could only do so much. This is why I think he was a better player than Russ. I don't see how somebody would or could deny this man's greatness smh

He outrebounded and outscored every single playoff series vs Russell, bottom line.

I just cannot fathom either know how people can look at Wilt's teams pre 1970 and look at all of Russel's teams and say "yup, Russell was the better player."

[Deuce Bigalow]

"Greatest scorer of all-time" my ass..

http://gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs1/3427465_o.gif
http://i.imgur.com/JQpldPU.gif

[LAZERUSS]

Wilt was the least clutch player ever;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=oemQKScZ7MQ#t=128s

Looks like you actually agreed with jlauber...

http://207.58.151.151/forum/showthread.php?t=276333

[millwad]

Looks like you actually agreed with jlauber...

http://207.58.151.151/forum/showthread.php?t=276333

Don't talk about yourself in third person, you bastard.

And no, I didn't agree with you, I mocked you but you are too stupid to understand that.