*VIDEO* Oscar Robertson in his prime preview [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

CavaliersFTW

05-07-2012, 03:58 PM

BTW I have a serious question for old school fans. Why do these players like Big O keep ball dribbling with same hand until they score? I see very few crossovers or even simply switching hands. It's like they dribble with same hand from halfcourt all the way to the layup.

Well, crossover (especially double crossovers) seen in todays game are usually technically done by carrying the ball, which is something that was more strictly called back then before the league realized some dribbling leniency made the game flashier and more fluid to appeal to the the fans.

These guys do dribble left and drive right, they just only do it when they need too I guess because they don't look sloppy or incapable with their non-dominant hand from what I can see. I think part of it might be because they are allowed to back their defender in (weren't rules put in place in the 90's to stop this because of Barkley?). When your approaching the from the right side and your back is facing the basket technically you should be dribbling right handed to put the ball between yourself and the defender. Since those guys have that option and they are more comfortable with it, then why not use it? That's my best explanation. West, Baylor, Robertson - they all could attack from both sides, and most of the point guards by default also did.

There also weren't a lot of superstar point guards back then, so highlights you typically see are centers, forwards, and shooting guards. But point guards like Walt Hazard for example had absolutely zero bias going left or right. Watch Ray Allen and Reggie Miller highlights and pay attention to how much they dribble with their non-dominant hands... they're shooting guards and it's not really that different than a guy like Jerry West from what I can tell watching the footage I have.

Clippersfan86

05-07-2012, 04:01 PM

Pointguard

05-07-2012, 04:09 PM

Pretty interesting. I'm sure glad/grateful they allow crossovers (carries) now because game wouldn't be the same without them. Wonder when they decided to let it go?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ny2Sh2uFSSg

CavaliersFTW

05-07-2012, 04:10 PM

Pretty interesting. I'm sure glad/grateful they allow crossovers (carries) now because game wouldn't be the same without them. Wonder when they decided to let it go?

Pretty sure it was sometime in the 90s? Guys in the 80s don't look like they carry from what I can tell

Owl

05-07-2012, 04:10 PM

Well, crossover (especially double crossovers) seen in todays game are usually technically done by carrying the ball, which is something that was actually called back then. These guys do dribble left and drive right, they just only do it when they need too I guess because they don't look sloppy or incapable with their non-dominant hand from what I can see. I think part of it might be because they are allowed to back their defender in (weren't rules put in place in the 90's to stop this because of Barkley?). When your approaching the from the right side and your back is facing the basket technically you should be dribbling right handed to put the ball between yourself and the defender. Since those guys have that option and they are more comfortable with it, then why not use it? That's my best explanation. West, Baylor, Robertson - they all could attack from both sides, and most of the point guards by default also did.

There also weren't a lot of superstar point guards back then, so highlights you typically see are centers, forwards, and shooting guards. But point guards Walt Hazard for example had absolutely zero bias going left or right. Watch Ray Allen and Reggie Miller highlights and pay attention to how much they dribble with their non-dominant hands... it's not really any different than a guy like Jerry West from what I can tell watching the footage I have.
Do you have any footage of Baylor going to the hoop with his weaker (left iirc) hand. I remember watching the sports greatest legends on him (they have some of those shows on the youtubes but not his) and I swear he never used his left. I knew in that era it was more common to pivot back, rather than cross to your other hand but I was surprised that I didn't see him go left at all.

I remember reading comments about guys trying to read his twitches and that they might have indicating which way he was going so I guess he must have went with his weaker hand some times. You don't have to post footage or anything but as you mentioned it and you seem to have (or have access to) a decent library of old footage was just hoping you could confirm your suggestion that he did use his left.

P.S. None of this is to demain Elgin one of, if not THE, first guys to play above the rim (obviously bigs Wilt and Russell were doing so too, but in a different way).

senelcoolidge

05-07-2012, 04:11 PM

I always loved Oscar's mid range jumper. It's a little unorthodox, but hard to defend with the high arch. Players were not so fancy in those days. Oscar especially was not a fancy player at all. Plus on top of that officiating was much more strict on traveling or palming the ball. But guys used their non-dominate hands.

CavaliersFTW

05-07-2012, 04:13 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ny2Sh2uFSSg

He's still dribbling palms down though, Clips86 might be thinking of fast double-crossovers and some of the spinning drives we see in today's game - where the ball kinda needs to touch your palm while the palm is facing at a steeper angle to the side during the dribble to keep the ball in control. Earl the Pearl def has a great handle though

Clippersfan86

05-07-2012, 04:18 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ny2Sh2uFSSg

Thanks! Never really watched footage of Earl. Know who he was and a bit about him but never saw good footage.

Pointguard

05-07-2012, 04:19 PM

He's still dribbling palms down though, Clips86 might be thinking of fast double-crossovers and some of the spinning drives we see in today's game - where the ball kinda needs to touch your palm while the palm is facing at a steeper angle to the side during the dribble to keep the ball in control. Earl the Pearl def has a great handle though
I know what you are saying. I didn't see where Clip86 was getting specific.
Earl Monroe, Tiny and Calvin Murphy were predecessors to Tim Hardaway. Gervin also did a cross over, sobeit, not a hard one.

ShaqAttack3234

05-07-2012, 04:27 PM

Oscars video is taking a long time to edit, he's got a decent amount of footage in his prime, I made this little preview from a few of the clips in it though:

http://youtu.be/hwyXpVNopYE

Final vid prob gonna be between 10-12 minutes in total of highlights in his prime

Good job, the move I was talking about in the other thread about Oscar is at 0:05. He shows more quickness than I've usually seen in Oscar's games(mostly Milwaukee and 1 from '65 or '66 playoffs vs Boston), and most Oscar highlights.

BTW I have a serious question for old school fans. Why do these players like Big O keep ball dribbling with same hand until they score? I see very few crossovers or even simply switching hands. It's like they dribble with same hand from halfcourt all the way to the layup.

Check 0:05 in the video.

He could rebound with the best

Here are Oscar's TRB% numbers from his years with the Royals.

1961- 9.2%
1962- 11.1%
1963- 9.6%
1964- 9.1%
1965- 8.1%
1966- 6.7%
1967- 5.9%
1968- 6.2%
1969- 6.4%
1970- 6.8%

To put that into perspective, Lebron has matched or topped that 5 times peaking with a 12.6 TRB% this season. Magic topped that 4 times peaking with a TRB% of 13.7% in '82. Kidd topped that 4 consecutive seasons peaking with a TRB% of 13.2% in '07. Jordan also peaked higher with a TRB% of 11.6% in '89.

And obviously, Oscar's peak TRB% stands well above his other seasons, His other rebounding numbers from '60-'65 are similar to what Kobe has done, and his '66-'70 rebounding numbers are all below Chris Paul's career rebounding numbers, and well below his peak of 8.7% in '09.

He could defend with the best

Based on what?

He could be clutch with the best

Again, based on what?

I dont think you can say this about any other player in NBA history...

Of course you can, if you add things that they weren't regarded as the best at, such as defense, or even clutch ability. I don't hear or read those things about Oscar, which isn't to say he was bad at either, but if he was among the best, I'm sure it would be talked about.

I don't think he was more complete than Bird, Magic, or Jordan. Probably not Lebron either since Lebron has improved his jumper the past 4 seasons and become a very good defender.

chips93

05-07-2012, 04:29 PM

take it easy on pauk, hes had a rough couple days

Pointguard

05-07-2012, 04:31 PM

Thanks! Never really watched footage of Earl. Know who he was and a bit about him but never saw good footage.
Pearl was the first big time stylist on the court. Guys had moves before Pearl, as seen with Oscar in this great video, but Earl might have been the first to combine three or four together along with deceptive body movements - he was a before my time so I have to defer here to the older heads here. There was a lot of flow with Earl.

CavaliersFTW

05-07-2012, 04:38 PM

:confusedshrug:

many of the clips are clearly sped up, its irritating
You paying attention to any of the shot clocks? Or how the ball/players move? Well over half of the footage in this sequence was in-game or non-slowmo and therefore wasn't even touched... Some of the footage that was slow-mo had shotclocks in the background and ones that didn't I just eyeballed how physics of players/ball can move and it doesn't seem like it contrasts the other footage... Perhaps the way I edit (I cut right into the middle of the action) could be why you think everything is too fast? I don't know what to tell you beyond that, it looks normal speed on my youtube player and in my previews in Adobe Premiere

chips93

05-07-2012, 04:42 PM

You paying attention to any of the shot clocks? Or how the ball/players move? Well over half of the footage in this sequence was in-game or non-slowmo and therefore wasn't even touched... Some of the footage that was slow-mo had shotclocks in the background and ones that didn't I just eyeballed how physics of players/ball can move and it doesn't seem like it contrasts the other footage... Perhaps the way I edit (I cut right into the middle of the action) could be why you think everything is too fast? I don't know what to tell you beyond that, it looks normal speed on my youtube player and in my previews in Adobe Premiere

from 0:12 - 0:18 looks clearly sped up to me

inclinerator

05-07-2012, 04:42 PM

i liked how u sped up the video 2x

not srs

Pointguard

05-07-2012, 04:47 PM

Great Video. I noted how balanced, fundamental and text book he was. He used a solid right jab step, always positioning his body the right way and very conscious of keeping the defender on his hip. You constantly see him sizing up the defender. Great stuff.

CavaliersFTW

05-07-2012, 04:52 PM

well, he is better than Wilt. The 2nd greatest big man behind Russell. We should have some footage.
Mikan is too gawdlike, the world is not ready for him. But I suspect a slow motion Bob Cousy dribbling in-the-50s video would be right up your alley

Punpun

05-07-2012, 05:00 PM

CavaliersFTW

05-07-2012, 05:06 PM

from 0:12 - 0:18 looks clearly sped up to me

12 to 15 is real-time, was never slow motion to begin with - that's him in NCAA so he's just lighter and quicker on his feet. 15 to 18 is from a different set of footage and it was slow motion, and that one is legitimately wrong because I can see the shot clock is running down too quickly so thanks for pointing that out. Are there any others clips that stood out?

CavaliersFTW

05-07-2012, 05:13 PM

Dude in your quest to putting the speed at normal speed, it still is a little more sped up than the the norm. But way less than the last time you posted one. Oh there is only a lil problem at the beginning. THen it's perfect.

Great job.

:bowdown:

point out which ones you come across that look suspect and I can make adjustments, the more feedback the better

Punpun

05-07-2012, 06:27 PM

They have to be the one you already wrote about (0:15 etc)

bwink23

05-07-2012, 06:28 PM

Excellent work. I was very impressed. The way Oscar shields the ball from the defender is fundamental to the bone.

Punpun

05-07-2012, 06:36 PM

I found his dribbling a bit awkward at times personally.. Like he put himself in danger when there was no need to.

Deuce Bigalow

05-07-2012, 06:54 PM

over/under 40-10-15 average for Rajon Rondo in that era?

bwink23

05-07-2012, 07:12 PM

over/under 40-10-15 average for Rajon Rondo in that era?

Rondo can't even shoot a jumper....:facepalm

Deuce Bigalow

05-07-2012, 07:13 PM

Rondo can't even shoot a jumper....:facepalm
he wouldn't need too.

Asukal

05-07-2012, 07:19 PM

I didn't watch the whole footage but it seems to me Oscar can't jump very high. Great footage though... :cheers:

CavaliersFTW

05-07-2012, 07:35 PM

I didn't watch the whole footage but it seems to me Oscar can't jump very high. Great footage though... :cheers:

Why does it seem that way?

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-P8LviucBoZM/T1QIV4v2sjI/AAAAAAAADKw/AA_hy-Ukiu4/s800/1966%2520-%2520quickness%2520wins%2520rebounds%2520West%2520 Wingspan.jpg

http://youtu.be/V778zPB64cA

Clippersfan86

05-07-2012, 07:44 PM

Not quite top of square... but definitely had more hops than people are giving him credit for. Is it true that he made a conscious effort NOT to dunk despite easily being able to?

CavaliersFTW

05-07-2012, 08:11 PM

Not quite top of square... but definitely had more hops than people are giving him credit for. Is it true that he made a conscious effort NOT to dunk despite easily being able to?
Yah he's within inches of that square though, that's roughly where Dwade would be reaching based on his max-reach draft data.

Oscar sounds like he didn't like showboating he always gets defensive and irritated when people bring up his simple approach to the game (IE lack of flair) in the interviews i've watched. I have a clip of him in NCAA practice where he clearly could have dunked it but opts to set it in soft w/o making contact on the rim. Doubt he's jumping his highest either based on how high above the square he can reach on a shot block attempt. Here it is:

http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/128/2/5/oscar_robertson_dunk_by_dantheman9758-d4yzwko.gif

So I don't know if that's true that he deliberately never dunked in the NBA on purpose but it seems like it could be true because there is not one dunk in all the footage I have aside from this half dunk and there is footage of him getting up high on block or layup attempts

Gotterdammerung

05-07-2012, 08:19 PM

Maestro33

05-07-2012, 08:30 PM

Great video. Awful music. Nice to see more of the elusive triple double machine.

CavaliersFTW

05-07-2012, 08:34 PM

I forget, but when did the NBA stop including team rebounds to the season total rebounds? In the 70s? Anyone?

That could account for the inflated numbers in the 60's, which makes Robertson's rebound percentage even higher than it seems.

I'm not sure what you mean here, are you saying 60s players rebounding is inflated? That wouldn't make sense, if they counted team rebounds in the rebounding % that would only serve to reduce every players rebound % not increase it - I checked NBA.coms rule changes history and did not see anything pertaining to this team rebound thing so I don't even know if its true

Maestro33

05-07-2012, 08:34 PM

And was the speed change intentional? If not its likely due to the original film being well...film and converted afterwards.

gengiskhan

05-07-2012, 08:47 PM

According to me the most complete player of all time...

He could score with the best
He could rebound with the best
He could pass with the best
He could shoot with the best
He could defend with the best
He could be clutch with the best
etc..

I dont think you can say this about any other player in NBA history...

A reason why I consider Big O Top 10 GOATs ever at # 10 Position.

In an era of centers & centers big-men centric rules. MVPs were only given to front court players or Big Men.

Big O forced the NBA to give season MVP to back court player after 30 pts triple double season.

Big O forced the NBA to give season MVP to a leader on "scrubs" franchise like Cincinnati Royals.

Can you imagine anyone besides MJ, Bird winning season MVP on scrubs franchise like Royals.

Big O any day will mope the floor with Kobe easily, the most overrated player of today's era.

CavaliersFTW

05-07-2012, 08:56 PM

And was the speed change intentional? If not its likely due to the original film being well...film and converted afterwards.

:facepalm You can't be serious... So now even the live action is too fast? :lol come on man

pay attention:
http://youtu.be/QfWAPPaLXEs

See how fast the ball travels through the air? See how quick players move? (Old 205lb Kobe is ~ the size of the young version of NCAA to 1962 Oscar - their bodymass/length physics are similar).

Now, watch the footage of Oscar all over again. The only difference is that cameras back then seem almost handheld, they're much more shaky (therefore the footage looks more jarring) than the buttery smooth cameras of modern footage. Also, the footage I've edited is cut straight to the moments that are in the middle of action. The point? There is more movement going on in Oscars highlights. But there is NOT an increased speed. This is probably illusion due to what I mentioned above.

Show me where the ball fires through the air like a bullet with the gravity of jupiter. In the live footage all the players jump hang and fall, everything is the same physics as reality. Why the flippidy f*ck would anyone want to speed up sport highlights quicker than reality? Are you people completely unaware that sped up footage looks comical? The ball would crash into the basket like it was fired out of a canon and then drop like a rock. The players would look like flees jumping, and their running and footwork would look hilarious like 1920's film it would not look cool. Speeding up footage does NOT make the players look better... The footage I've tried to correct from slow motion is educated guesswork, and the live action footage does not in anyway shape or form look any different than modern footage in terms of how players are able to move about on the court with the basketball. All I can suggest is that some of you guys try speeding up some NBA highlights and see how much "better" the result looks - before assuming all this 60s footage was sped up. It backfires, it doesn't work that way

Gotterdammerung

05-07-2012, 09:07 PM

I'm not sure what you mean here, are you saying 60s players rebounding is inflated? That wouldn't make sense, if they counted team rebounds in the rebounding % that would only serve to reduce every players rebound % not increase it - I checked NBA.coms rule changes history and did not see anything pertaining to this team rebound thing so I don't even know if its true

I'm saying that the total numbers of rebounds attributed to teams include "team rebounds" that are counted when a shot hits the rim but nobody grabs the ball (during free throws or when rebounds fly over the board or out of bounds).

That changed sometime in the 70s, when the NBA dropped the team rebounds from the totals.

Hence the inflated total numbers in the 60s. Hence the incorrect rebound percentage, etc., etc.

I'm just not sure when the NBA dropped the team rebounds from the total rebounds.

jlip

05-08-2012, 12:51 AM

Not quite top of square... but definitely had more hops than people are giving him credit for. Is it true that he made a conscious effort NOT to dunk despite easily being able to?

"[I]The 6-5 Oscar Robertson, one of the game

CavaliersFTW

05-08-2012, 01:02 AM

"The 6-5 Oscar Robertson, one of the game’s greatest players and the only one to average a triple-double for an entire season, never dunked in an N.B.A. game.

Robertson’s high school coach, Ray Crowe, discouraged dunking, but that was not Robertson’s only deterrent. He once leapt for a dunk on an Indiana playground and was knocked into a pole by a defender."

Source (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/sports/basketball/12dunk.html)

"I don't want to sound like a dinosaur: "In my day we knew how to play, to dunk; we had to walk uphill both ways to get to the basketball court, and then when we dribbled, we the ball rolled down the hill." Dunking's been part of the game for a long time. Many players I knew when I used to play at the Dust Bowl could dunk a ball. Gus Johnson tore down rims more than 30 years ago. I could list guy after guy who was a great dunker. It never meant anything to me but two points. A lot of them never dunked because it embarrassed a defender, and he'd take it out on them the next play. I rarely dunked, but I did do it once in a while in practice, just to show people I could."

The Big O: My Life, My Times, My Game pp. 209-210

That might serve to explain Jerry West too. NBA.com bio that says he could touch 16" above rim as a rookie + old pic of him doing a 2-hand slam + footage of him in college dunking during a game + all the people in his biographies mentioning what a great leaper he was... Yet I've only seen him dunk one time as a pro when sifting through all his NBA footage and it was on a wide-open fast break

jlauber

05-10-2012, 01:35 AM

I forget, but when did the NBA stop including team rebounds to the season total rebounds? In the 70s? Anyone?

That could account for the inflated numbers in the 60's, which makes Robertson's rebound percentage even higher than it seems.

67-68 was the last season that the NBA recorded TEAM rebounds. TEAM rebounds generally accounted for 8-9 more rebounds per team in the 60's.

For example, Chamberlain's 62-63 Warriors show 5359 total rebounds at Basketball Reference...BUT, if you add up the individual player totals, they only come out to 4670...or a difference of 9 rpg. BTW, Wilt had 1946 that season, or 42% of his team's totals.

Then, move on to Wilt's LAST season, in 72-73. He led the league with 18.6 rpg, but, in that season, the NBA did not include TEAM rebounds, and the emtire league average was at 50.6 rpg.

Interesting too, in that 72-73 post-season, once again the NBA averaged 50.6 rpg...BUT, Chamberlain ran away with the best average in that year's playoffs. In his 17 post-season games, Chamberlain averaged 22.5 rpg.

Wilt retired after that 72-73 season, and not coincidently, that 22.5 rpg post-season was the LAST time any player ever averaged more than 17.3 rpg in the playoffs.

In any case, yes, there were more rebounds per game in the 60's. BUT, it was nowhere near DOUBLE, which is what some uneducated posters here have claimed. In fact, today's NBA would be at about 67% of what the NBA averaged at it's PEAK in that regard. By the late 60's it would have been around 75%. And, by Wilt's LAST season, it would have been around 83% (In2011-2012, the average NBA team had 42.2 rpg. In 72-73, the average NBA team had 50.6 rpg.)

A good example of Wilt's rebounding as it relates to the current NBA, would have been his 66-67 season. The average NBA team had around 59 rpg (here again, excluding TERAM rebounds.) Wilt's 76ers ran away with the best record in the league, and Chamberlain "only" played 45.5 mpg that season. He led the NBA in rebounding at 24.2 rpg. The current NBA averaged 42.2 rpg, or 72% of what the average team had in 66-67. Which means that Wilt's 24.2 rpg drops down to 17.6 rpg in 2011-2012. Here again, keep in mind that Chamberlain had one of his lowest mpg seasons of his career in 66-67, too (his 45.5 mpg was only his 8th best season in his 14 year career.)

Then, in the 66-67 post-season, Wilt played his usual 47.9 mpg (his CAREER post-season AVERAGE was an astounding 47.2 mpg.) In that post-season, Wilt averaged 29.1 rpg in his 15 playoff games. Included in those games, were games of 32 (out of a TOTAL of 120 available rebounds), 36 (out of a TOTAL of 128 available rebounds), and a staggering 41 (out of a TOTAL of 134 available rebounds.) As you can see, Chamberlain was pulling down nearly 30% of the TOTAL available rebounds in that post-season.

Also, keep in mind that Chamberlain probably averaged 8+ blocks per game in his career...which as Psileas and ThaRegul8r have pointed out, would have reduced his rebounding opportunities, as well.

CavaliersFTW

05-10-2012, 02:40 AM

67-68 was the last season that the NBA recorded TEAM rebounds. TEAM rebounds generally accounted for 8-9 more rebounds per team in the 60's.

For example, Chamberlain's 62-63 Warriors show 5359 total rebounds at Basketball Reference...BUT, if you add up the individual player totals, they only come out to 4670...or a difference of 9 rpg. BTW, Wilt had 1946 that season, or 42% of his team's totals.

Then, move on to Wilt's LAST season, in 72-73. He led the league with 18.6 rpg, but, in that season, the NBA did not include TEAM rebounds, and the emtire league average was at 50.6 rpg.

Interesting too, in that 72-73 post-season, once again the NBA averaged 50.6 rpg...BUT, Chamberlain ran away with the best average in that year's playoffs. In his 17 post-season games, Chamberlain averaged 22.5 rpg.

Wilt retired after that 72-73 season, and not coincidently, that 22.5 rpg post-season was the LAST time any player ever averaged more than 17.3 rpg in the playoffs.

In any case, yes, there were more rebounds per game in the 60's. BUT, it was nowhere near DOUBLE, which is what some uneducated posters here have claimed. In fact, today's NBA would be at about 67% of what the NBA averaged at it's PEAK in that regard. By the late 60's it would have been around 75%. And, by Wilt's LAST season, it would have been around 83% (In2011-2012, the average NBA team had 42.2 rpg. In 72-73, the average NBA team had 50.6 rpg.)

A good example of Wilt's rebounding as it relates to the current NBA, would have been his 66-67 season. The average NBA team had around 59 rpg (here again, excluding TERAM rebounds.) Wilt's 76ers ran away with the best record in the league, and Chamberlain "only" played 45.5 mpg that season. He led the NBA in rebounding at 24.2 rpg. The current NBA averaged 42.2 rpg, or 72% of what the average team had in 66-67. Which means that Wilt's 24.2 rpg drops down to 17.6 rpg in 2011-2012. Here again, keep in mind that Chamberlain had one of his lowest mpg seasons of his career in 66-67, too (his 45.5 mpg was only his 8th best season in his 14 year career.)

Then, in the 66-67 post-season, Wilt played his usual 47.9 mpg (his CAREER post-season AVERAGE was an astounding 47.2 mpg.) In that post-season, Wilt averaged 29.1 rpg in his 15 playoff games. Included in those games, were games of 32 (out of a TOTAL of 120 available rebounds), 36 (out of a TOTAL of 128 available rebounds), and a staggering 41 (out of a TOTAL of 134 available rebounds.) As you can see, Chamberlain was pulling down nearly 30% of the TOTAL available rebounds in that post-season.

Also, keep in mind that Chamberlain probably averaged 8+ blocks per game in his career...which as Psileas and ThaRegul8r have pointed out, would have reduced his rebounding opportunities, as well.

Thanks for clarifying the season JL

So applied to Oscar this means that he grabbed 20.1% of his teams actual (4900) rebounds and he dished 41.7% of his teams assists during the season of 1962 when he averaged a Triple-Double.

PTB Fan

05-10-2012, 04:17 AM

Once people argued Oscar as the greatest player of all time. He's lost a lot in the debate when people started to look and appreciate more team achievements in which he and the other great players of the 60's lack due to Russell.

Nonetheless, i wrote an article for him as the best of all time thanks to his excellence as player and individual play. I have never heard that Big O could get up that much. He was definitely a physically gifted player in terms of size, strength and all though. Oh, and he seems anything but to like showboating.

One more thing, video was brilliant.

ShaqAttack3234

05-10-2012, 04:50 AM

67-68 was the last season that the NBA recorded TEAM rebounds. TEAM rebounds generally accounted for 8-9 more rebounds per team in the 60's.

For example, Chamberlain's 62-63 Warriors show 5359 total rebounds at Basketball Reference...BUT, if you add up the individual player totals, they only come out to 4670...or a difference of 9 rpg. BTW, Wilt had 1946 that season, or 42% of his team's totals.

Then, move on to Wilt's LAST season, in 72-73. He led the league with 18.6 rpg, but, in that season, the NBA did not include TEAM rebounds, and the emtire league average was at 50.6 rpg.

Interesting too, in that 72-73 post-season, once again the NBA averaged 50.6 rpg...BUT, Chamberlain ran away with the best average in that year's playoffs. In his 17 post-season games, Chamberlain averaged 22.5 rpg.

Wilt retired after that 72-73 season, and not coincidently, that 22.5 rpg post-season was the LAST time any player ever averaged more than 17.3 rpg in the playoffs.

In any case, yes, there were more rebounds per game in the 60's. BUT, it was nowhere near DOUBLE, which is what some uneducated posters here have claimed. In fact, today's NBA would be at about 67% of what the NBA averaged at it's PEAK in that regard. By the late 60's it would have been around 75%. And, by Wilt's LAST season, it would have been around 83% (In2011-2012, the average NBA team had 42.2 rpg. In 72-73, the average NBA team had 50.6 rpg.)

A good example of Wilt's rebounding as it relates to the current NBA, would have been his 66-67 season. The average NBA team had around 59 rpg (here again, excluding TERAM rebounds.) Wilt's 76ers ran away with the best record in the league, and Chamberlain "only" played 45.5 mpg that season. He led the NBA in rebounding at 24.2 rpg. The current NBA averaged 42.2 rpg, or 72% of what the average team had in 66-67. Which means that Wilt's 24.2 rpg drops down to 17.6 rpg in 2011-2012. Here again, keep in mind that Chamberlain had one of his lowest mpg seasons of his career in 66-67, too (his 45.5 mpg was only his 8th best season in his 14 year career.)

Then, in the 66-67 post-season, Wilt played his usual 47.9 mpg (his CAREER post-season AVERAGE was an astounding 47.2 mpg.) In that post-season, Wilt averaged 29.1 rpg in his 15 playoff games. Included in those games, were games of 32 (out of a TOTAL of 120 available rebounds), 36 (out of a TOTAL of 128 available rebounds), and a staggering 41 (out of a TOTAL of 134 available rebounds.) As you can see, Chamberlain was pulling down nearly 30% of the TOTAL available rebounds in that post-season.

Also, keep in mind that Chamberlain probably averaged 8+ blocks per game in his career...which as Psileas and ThaRegul8r have pointed out, would have reduced his rebounding opportunities, as well.

Here's the thread I found that TRB% info for 60's players in. Hope that explains a lot.

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=344&t=955514

He accounted for team rebounds as you'll see in his post.

For example, Bill Russell's '62 TRB% was 18.9%, an excellent number, and 19.8% in '68.

Wilt in '68 had a TRB% of 20.1%. Jerry Lucas was also at 19% in '65.

To help put these numbers in perspective, Shaq played an even 40 mpg in 2000, and on a team that played at an average pace, but was the best defensive team(1st in defensive rating and opponents FG%) meaning more misses. He had a TRB% of 18.3% which was enough for him to average 13.6 rpg.Z

Hope that helps. As far as Wilt in '67, well, if he did stay at 45.5 mpg, the modern equivalent may very well be 17.6 rpg. Though I personally doubt he'd play 45.5 mpg on a current team that outscored opponents by 9.4 ppg.

But either way, posting the TRB% just helps put these numbers in perspective better, it's in no way any attempt to discredit 60's players. Russell, Wilt and Lucas for example were excellent rebounders, same with Nate Thurmond. Oscar on the otherhand, was an overrated rebounder, imo because of the triple double season. Which isn't to say he wasn't a good rebounder, but I think the TRB% is very helpful for putting those numbers into perspective.

jlauber

05-11-2012, 12:34 AM

D-Wade316

05-11-2012, 12:44 AM

But but but he was defended by 5ft unathletic white guys.

jlauber

05-11-2012, 01:06 AM

Here's the thread I found that TRB% info for 60's players in. Hope that explains a lot.

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=344&t=955514

He accounted for team rebounds as you'll see in his post.

For example, Bill Russell's '62 TRB% was 18.9%, an excellent number, and 19.8% in '68.

Wilt in '68 had a TRB% of 20.1%. Jerry Lucas was also at 19% in '65.

To help put these numbers in perspective, Shaq played an even 40 mpg in 2000, and on a team that played at an average pace, but was the best defensive team(1st in defensive rating and opponents FG%) meaning more misses. He had a TRB% of 18.3% which was enough for him to average 13.6 rpg.Z

Hope that helps. As far as Wilt in '67, well, if he did stay at 45.5 mpg, the modern equivalent may very well be 17.6 rpg. Though I personally doubt he'd play 45.5 mpg on a current team that outscored opponents by 9.4 ppg.

But either way, posting the TRB% just helps put these numbers in perspective better, it's in no way any attempt to discredit 60's players. Russell, Wilt and Lucas for example were excellent rebounders, same with Nate Thurmond. Oscar on the otherhand, was an overrated rebounder, imo because of the triple double season. Which isn't to say he wasn't a good rebounder, but I think the TRB% is very helpful for putting those numbers into perspective.

I have mentioned it many times, but Wilt's rebounding goes well beyond the pure numbers. He was, quite simply, the greatest rebounder in NBA history. He absolutely CRUSHED his peers.

Bill Russell is widely regarded as the second greatest rebounder of all-time (some will argue Rodman, but he was a part-timer for much of his career, and shrunk dramatically, even in his best seasons, in the post-season.) And yet, Chamberlain held a 92-42-8 margin over Russell in their 142 H2H games. In fact, Chamberlain outrebounded Russell by FIVE PER GAME over the course of their career H2H's.

And while Russell finished with a higher post-season mark (24.9 rpg to Chamberlain's 24.5 rpg), it must be remembered that when Russell retired following the 68-69 season, he was well behind Chamberlain's 26.3 rpg at the time.

And some here are probably not aware of the fact that Wilt ELEVATED his rebounding in the post-season, either. His WORST rebounding mark in his 13 post-season series was 20.2 rpg. And he had EIGHT of 24.7+,, including two of 29.1 rpg, and a mind-numbing 30.2 rpg. And against Russell he had THREE series of 30+ (30.2, 31.0, and 32.0 rpg!) So, no matter what silly math is used against Wilt, those 29 and 30 rpg post-seasons translate into the 20's in ANY era. BTW, Chamberlain averaged 22.5 rpg in 17 post-season games in his LAST season, and in a post-season in which the average team grabbed 50.6 rpg. That translates to 19 rpg in the CURRENT NBA!

Not only that, but Chamberlain outrebounded Russell in ALL EIGHT of their post-season H2H's. And some were by HUGE margins. He had margins of 5, 5, and even NINE per game in those H2H's. Incidently Wilt holds both the regular season, and the post-season single game rebounding highs...and yes, both came against Russell.

Russell managed one 40 rebound game against Wilt (an even 40.) Chamberlain had SEVEN against Russell, including a 55 rebound game (and in that game, Wilt outrebounded Russell by an eye-popping 55-19 margin.) And how about this...Chamberlain held a 23-4 margin in 35+ rebound H2H's against Russell.

Of course, Chamberlain was accomplishing that against EVERY opposing center. He battled Thurmond in three playoff series, and easily outrebounded him in all three. Even their closest series in that regard, in the 66-67 Finals, was deceptive. Wilt outrebounded Nate in that series, 28.5 rpg to 26.7 rpg...BUT, he outrebounded Thurmond in FIVE of those six games. Then, in the 68-69 playoffs, Wilt hammered Thurmond by a 23.5 rpg to 19.5 rpg margin. And then, in his LAST post-season, in 72-73, Chamberlain POUNDED Thurmond by a staggering 23.6 rpg to 17.2 rpg margin.

Chamberlain battled Reed in 12 Finals games, and outrebounded him in EVERY GAME. And again, some by HUGE margins (20-4) and more than DOUBLED him those 12 games.

A PRIME Kareem was able to hang somewhat with an aging Wilt, but Chamberlain still outrebounded him in the vast majority of their H2H's, and even in one by a 25-8 margin.

In the 66-67 playoffs, Wilt outrebounded Lucas by a 116-77 margin in their four H2H's. Then, in the 71-72 Finals, Chamberlain outrebounded Lucas by a 116-49 margin.

And, once again, Wilt was CRUSHING his peers...even into his LAST season. He not only led the NBA in rebounding that season (at 18.6 rpg), his next closest pursuer was Thurmond at 17.1 rpg. And, here again, in their post-season H2H series, Wilt just annihilated Thurmond.

How about the 7-0 270 Tom Boerwinkle? Keep in mind that Boerwinkle was even the leading Rebound Rate player in one season during the Wilt era. The two went at it in three straight playoff series. Wilt wiped Boerwinkle out in all three, including one seven game series by a 172-9 margin.

Also, players like Unseld, Hayes, Cowens, and Kareem were winning rebound titles in the 70's, and after Wilt retired. BUT, none of them were even close to Wilt in their rebounding H2H's. or seasonal totals. Unseld won the MVP in the 68-69 season, but in their known H2H's, Chamberlain just abused Wes, including one game by a 38-9 margin.

Once again, there are those that will try to minimize Wilt's staggering rebound records, based on "pace", but ultimately, no matter what Chamberlain's numbers would have looked like in any era...no player so thoroughly dominated his peers, including the post-season, to the extent that Wilt did.

chips93

05-11-2012, 01:14 AM

Oscar's 61-62 season translates to about a 25-9-12 season in the CURRENT NBA. However, he was putting up 30+ ppg seasons on 22-23 FGAs (and again, in his 62-63 season, he averaged 28.3 ppg on 19.9 FGAs.) There is no question that Oscar could have taken 23 FGAs in ANY era.

9 rebounds?

i thought that was debunked

jlauber

05-11-2012, 01:21 AM

9 rebounds?

i thought that was debunked

The current NBA rebounded at about 70% of Oscar's 61-62 NBA. Robertson averaged 12.5 rpg in 61-62...which would translate to about 8-9 rpg.

Rebounding is the ONE area where Oscar might struggle in an attempt to duplicate his 30-12-11 61-62 season.

As a sidenote...the 6-3 170 Fat Lever had TWO seasons of 9.3 rpg, and in leagues that averaged about 44 rpg (the current NBA just finished with a 42.2 rpg average.)

PHILA

05-11-2012, 01:27 AM

Wilt's rebounding goes well beyond the pure numbers.

The Miami News - Apr 17, 1967

http://i.imgur.com/0jXdT.png
http://i.imgur.com/lo0KK.png

bizil

05-11-2012, 05:04 AM

I think Big O was the template for the guy who was in the 6'5 to 6'9 range who could play PG, SG, and SF. Big O would have been great at any of those positions. He is the blueprint for the total package, three position, type perimeter player. I mean look at the family tree for this type of player:

Hondo
Magic
MJ
Pippen
G Hill
Penny
T Mac
Lebron
Kobe
Drexler (even though he dribbled with his head down, his pace in the open court and assist numbers sort of dictate him being included)

U even had these kind of guys who weren't on the level of the guys I named above, but were All Star level type players:

Steve Smith
Reggie Theus
Jalen Rose
Iggy

All of these guys were different type players, but have the Big O bloodline. If u look at the top 10 GOAT and the perimeter that are included generally, u got MJ, Magic, Kobe, and Big O. And most likely, Bron is gonna join that list as well. And that's not my mistake. These kind of guys are so unique and versatile that it puts them frankly on a whole other level. And the guys like Smith, Theus, Rose, and Iggy can help out teams in so many areas.

Pointguard

05-11-2012, 11:57 AM

Everyone knows about Oscar's 61-62 season. The only triple-double season in NBA history. BUT, how many here are aware that Oscar AVERAGED a 30-10-10 in his first FIVE seasons...COMBINED?

Or that he had SIX 30+ ppg seasons (and EIGHT of 28.3+)?

Or that he had THREE 10+ rpg seasons (and FIVE of 9.0+)?

Or that he had FIVE seasons of 10+ apg (and NINE of 9.5+)?

Or that he was among the most EFFICIENT shooters of his era? For instance, in his 62-63 season he shot .518 from the floor...and came in THIRD in FG% (and barely behind Wilt's .528...which was the record at the time.) And just how amazing was that .518? Transport that FG%, in a league that shot .441, to MJ's '87 season, and Oscar's FG% jumps to .570. Which would have been the highest ever recorded by a guard (Magic's .561 and .565 seasons in the mid-80's being the record.)

Oscar's 61-62 season translates to about a 25-9-12 season in the CURRENT NBA. However, he was putting up 30+ ppg seasons on 22-23 FGAs (and again, in his 62-63 season, he averaged 28.3 ppg on 19.9 FGAs.) There is no question that Oscar could have taken 23 FGAs in ANY era.

So, Oscar hanging a 30-8-10 season, in ANY era would have been a real possibility.
I'm learning Oscar here. Can someone tell me about his defense? He obviously had great instincts because his rebound numbers were always among the highest of guards, and this was while he was one of the greats at multitasking. You can tell he a guy that approached things from a very practical point and that he was very wise on the court. He was very aware of his surroundings on the court and has great instincts.

I am really amused at his fundamentals - he even spins in correct physical proportions - like a trained dancer or the way they tell running backs to spin as to avoid injury. His attention to placing people on his hip is also a very exact science. He has a great blend of intangibles and the physics of the game and defenders.

Defense?

-23-

05-11-2012, 12:03 PM

CavaliersFTW

05-11-2012, 01:09 PM

You can't translate FG% like that. You're making an assumption that skill level in the league has not advanced. I can clearly see your agenda here.

I know what your saying about fg% - it doesn't translate directly. I would like to mention though, that I as far as I can see the potential difference in skill level pertaining to a players ability to shoot the ball and put it in the basket overall isn't any different than today. There are some differences in specific shooting skills because obviously "perimeter" guys save for a few didn't practice the range guys today practice but on the same token the entire league of guys today save for a few exceptions seem equally untrained from mi-range as those 60s guys would be from long-range because the mid-range game died with the 3 point line. But give a 60s player an open look for a fraction of a second off a screen or after a fake and its clear to me with all the footage I have that their jumpers are no less clean or likely to miss than today's players.

I think style of play that the coaching/rules/refs developed has more to do with the fg% disparity - case in point: From an individual player and coaches standpoint Wilt could have shot either ~.500 or ~.650 his entire career had he just used his different playing styles he displayed throughout his career - his skill wasn't what was causing the wide differences of his season-to-season fg% it was simply how he and his coaches wanted him to play. Also from the coaches and rules angle, the style of game in the early 60's could be described as run and gun and the defense was alotted a bit more contact and favortism. Even though it is mostly man to man D there was still always a hand in the face and the subtle bumps and contact don't make shooting% go up when it's never called as a foul, it only goes down. A lot of those shots and drives I see West/Jones/Robertson/Baylor make would certainly have been much more effective tic tac fouls today and they'd be sent to the line - so if you miss on the attempt it never even gets counted against your fg%. Also inside the paint the defense was given much more benefit of the doubt with incidental contact as today as well because the superstars and style of team structures anchoring the league back then revolved around centers. So when players drove to the hole for "easy" baskets - especially in a congested 12 foot lane in the earliest years of the 60s... well, it was simply not as solid of an option to draw contact and/or dunk as can be seen today. I don't know if my observations tell the entire story or if they are correct but the point I'm trying to make is that it does not appear that a typical 1960s shooters "skill" is any lesser than a shooters skill today from both the eye test and from looking at things like ft%'s. Shooting the ball is a very basic skill practiced and sharpened no differently today than it was back then. I agree that era to era it's not something that can easily be translated as fg% but I just wanted to touch on some alternative reasons why.

Owl

05-11-2012, 01:41 PM

I'm learning Oscar here. Can someone tell me about his defense? He obviously had great instincts because his rebound numbers were always among the highest of guards, and this was while he was one of the greats at multitasking. You can tell he a guy that approached things from a very practical point and that he was very wise on the court. He was very aware of his surroundings on the court and has great instincts.

I am really amused at his fundamentals - he even spins in correct physical proportions - like a trained dancer or the way they tell running backs to spin as to avoid injury. His attention to placing people on his hip is also a very exact science. He has a great blend of intangibles and the physics of the game and defenders.

Defense?
Reviews tend to be less positive on his D. I remember Wilt killing him for it in his last book (though this in a section in which Wilt is offering methods of reviewing the great players whilst in an "elephant in the room" sort of way implying he is the GOAT, so it may not me impartial). I will look it up properly though and maybe post bits of comments on his D later (if I remember).

Pointguard

05-11-2012, 02:29 PM

You can't translate FG% like that. You're making an assumption that skill level in the league has not advanced. I can clearly see your agenda here.
But there are some other things to consider here. Look at 2012 year and notice how it affected team play and practice time. Back then Oscar didn't have a ton of time to refine his shooting skill like they have today. Kobe could get a gym after a game. Kobe and Dirk probably had more time in a warm regulated gym during one season than Oscar could get, during the season, in seven or eight seasons in his time without a shooting coach, trainer or even a guy passing the ball back to him.

Oscar played a year far more congested than the year just passed. If he did get a gym it was likely cold, damp and kind of busted. The balls probably weren't in game shape and more than likely had a different grip than the ball in the game. As CavFTW mentions above, the bump and grind was a lot more permissible. A guy that has access to official ball and up to date facilities on frequent off days, should be shooting better than guys who rarely get time during the season.

Pointguard

05-11-2012, 02:31 PM

Reviews tend to be less positive on his D. I remember Wilt killing him for it in his last book (though this in a section in which Wilt is offering methods of reviewing the great players whilst in an "elephant in the room" sort of way implying he is the GOAT, so it may not me impartial). I will look it up properly though and maybe post bits of comments on his D later (if I remember).
Thanks Owl!

ShaqAttack3234

05-11-2012, 02:35 PM

Or that he was among the most EFFICIENT shooters of his era? For instance, in his 62-63 season he shot .518 from the floor...and came in THIRD in FG% (and barely behind Wilt's .528...which was the record at the time.) And just how amazing was that .518? Transport that FG%, in a league that shot .441, to MJ's '87 season, and Oscar's FG% jumps to .570. Which would have been the highest ever recorded by a guard (Magic's .561 and .565 seasons in the mid-80's being the record.)

Oscar's 61-62 season translates to about a 25-9-12 season in the CURRENT NBA. However, he was putting up 30+ ppg seasons on 22-23 FGAs (and again, in his 62-63 season, he averaged 28.3 ppg on 19.9 FGAs.) There is no question that Oscar could have taken 23 FGAs in ANY era.

Sorry, but not everyone agrees with you on "adjusting" FG%. And 57% is just not realistic, imo. Not at all, especially not if you're expecting him to score 30 ppg.

In Oscar's '62 season, his team averaged about 124.7 possessions per 48 minutes, MJ's '87 Bulls averaged 95.8 possessions per 48 minutes.

That's nearly 30 more possessions per game! And when you run more, you get a lot more easy baskets in transition, which if anything, infaltes your FG%. In general, transition defenses aren't nearly as difficult to score against as set half court defenses.

I was reading about the '91 Nuggets, who were the only team from the 90's on to even come close to a 60's pace team. And at 113.7 possessions per 48 minutes, they were still 12 possessions short of the average 1962 team. Those players talked about how difficult it was to run offensively and try to score so quick, and then adjust immediately to defense.

Simply put, excessive running like the 60's gives you many more opportunities for easy baskets and leads to far less defense.

And to demonstrate how transition opportunities inflate a player's scoring and efficiency. Orlando Woolridge was right up there with Jordan, Barkley and Bernard King for the scoring title at 29 ppg on 52% shooting over his first 23 games before his detached retina in the '90-'91 season. To put this in perspective, Woolridge was a 10 year veteran who had never averaged more than 22.9 ppg, and that came back in '84-'85. He hadn't averaged more than 20 ppg since '86-'87 either.

Woolridge finished the season at "only" 25 ppg on 50% shooting in just 34 mpg, but that was with his teammate Michael Adams averaging 26.5 ppg and 10.5 apg in 35.5 mpg. Adams only shot 39%, partially because he attempted 8.5 threes per game, but he also got to the line 8 times per game and was an 88% free throw shooter.

By the way, Adams averaged 29 ppg and 11 apg with Woolridge out of the lineup excluding a game he played 11 minutes in. And that's a 28 game sample size.

To put this into perspective. Adams played 11 seasons, and his career highs outside of '91 were 18.5 ppg and 7.6 apg, and those were in separate seasons. His best season combining both categories outside of '91 was '92 when he averaged 18.1 ppg and 7.6 apg.

So this isn't an anything against 60's players, I'm using a 1991 example of an extreme pace greatly inflating players numbers, and backing it up with damn near irrefutable evidence.

So, Oscar hanging a 30-8-10 season, in ANY era would have been a real possibility.

I don't know, he'd need to be extremely ball-dominant to do so and use up a much greater percentage of his team's possessions than he was in the 60's. I will say that Oscar's '62 season was roughly the modern equivalent of a 7-8 rpg season because his TRB% of 11.1% was identical to Lebron's '08 and '10 seasons, when Lebron averaged 7.9 rpg in 40.4 mpg during the '08 season and 7.3 rpg in 39 mpg during the '10 season.

I have to believe that with 30-35 fewer possessions, much fewer transition opportunities, harder and more frequent double teams, and the average player being bigger and significantly more skilled and athletic that Oscar's numbers would fall off by more than 1 ppg and 1 apg.

Which isn't to say that Oscar wouldn't be a really good player today, though we don't know. Regardless, it doesn't take away from the fact that Oscar was widely regarded as a top 3 player of his era, and the only 2 who are considered better by the majority(Wilt and Russell) are in almost everyone's top 10 lists, and 1 or both find themselves in the majority of top 5 lists.

I have mentioned it many times, but Wilt's rebounding goes well beyond the pure numbers. He was, quite simply, the greatest rebounder in NBA history. He absolutely CRUSHED his peers.

I think you can make a case for Wilt as the greatest rebounder ever, but I'm firmly sticking with Rodman. In 1992, he averaged 18.7 rpg on the slowest paced team in the league, he had an unbelievable TRB% of 26.2%, and the following season, he averaged 18.3 rpg on the second slowest paced team in the league for a TRB% of 26%.

In 1995 with the Spurs, he averaged 16.8 rpg in just 32 mpg while playing alongside David Robinson who was a 12+ rpg guy when Rodman wasn't around. Rodman had a mindblowing TRB% of 29.7%.

In the last season Rodman qualified for the rebound lead, he was 36 and turned 37 in the playoffs, yet he led the league again.

Rodman was simply the best and most relentless rebounder I've ever seen. He was quicker the ball, had unbelievable instincts and just wanted it more than everyone else. If he couldn't get it initially, he'd just tip it several times until he'd get control. And he was stronger than some guys who were bigger than him so he could get good position and box out pretty much anyone.

Rodman regularly led the league in rebounding by 4+ rpg, Such a big gap in a major statistical category rarely happens in the modern NBA. The only comparisons I can make in the post-merger NBA is Jordan's scoring titles in '87 and '88, Moses Malone's rebounding in '79,

You disagree with me, which is cool, but I have to stick with Rodman when it comes to rebounding.

BTW, Chamberlain averaged 22.5 rpg in 17 post-season games in his LAST season, and in a post-season in which the average team grabbed 50.6 rpg. That translates to 19 rpg in the CURRENT NBA!

As remarkable as his rebounding was, it does not translate to 19 rpg in today's era. His TRB% for the '73 playoffs was 21.7%. An amazing number, but I'll use TRB% and some recent players.

Kevin Love had a TRB% of 23.6% last year and averaged 15.2 rpg in 36 mpg while playing on a fast-paced team. Dwight Howard has had TRB% of 21.8 and 21.9 the last 2 seasons, respectively, and has averaged 14.1 and 14.5 rpg these past 2 seasons playing about 38 mpg.

So Wilt's rebounding in the '78 postseason, translates to around 14-15 rpg, give or take depending on minutes. Most players play more minutes in the playoffs, so I could see him averaging as many as 16, if he was playing 40+ mpg, which is possible even for a 35 year old Wilt during a playoff run considering how durable he was. And coaches are less conservative with minutes in the playoffs.

Pointguard

05-11-2012, 04:48 PM

I think you can make a case for Wilt as the greatest rebounder ever, but I'm firmly sticking with Rodman. In 1992, he averaged 18.7 rpg on the slowest paced team in the league, he had an unbelievable TRB% of 26.2%, and the following season, he averaged 18.3 rpg on the second slowest paced team in the league for a TRB% of 26%.

In 1995 with the Spurs, he averaged 16.8 rpg in just 32 mpg while playing alongside David Robinson who was a 12+ rpg guy when Rodman wasn't around. Rodman had a mindblowing TRB% of 29.7%.

In the last season Rodman qualified for the rebound lead, he was 36 and turned 37 in the playoffs, yet he led the league again.

Rodman was simply the best and most relentless rebounder I've ever seen. He was quicker the ball, had unbelievable instincts and just wanted it more than everyone else. If he couldn't get it initially, he'd just tip it several times until he'd get control. And he was stronger than some guys who were bigger than him so he could get good position and box out pretty much anyone.

Rodman regularly led the league in rebounding by 4+ rpg, Such a big gap in a major statistical category rarely happens in the modern NBA. The only comparisons I can make in the post-merger NBA is Jordan's scoring titles in '87 and '88, Moses Malone's rebounding in '79,

You disagree with me, which is cool, but I have to stick with Rodman when it comes to rebounding.

As remarkable as his rebounding was, it does not translate to 19 rpg in today's era. His TRB% for the '73 playoffs was 21.7%. An amazing number, but I'll use TRB% and some recent players.

Kevin Love had a TRB% of 23.6% last year and averaged 15.2 rpg in 36 mpg while playing on a fast-paced team. Dwight Howard has had TRB% of 21.8 and 21.9 the last 2 seasons, respectively, and has averaged 14.1 and 14.5 rpg these past 2 seasons playing about 38 mpg.

So Wilt's rebounding in the '78 postseason, translates to around 14-15 rpg, give or take depending on minutes. Most players play more minutes in the playoffs, so I could see him averaging as many as 16, if he was playing 40+ mpg, which is possible even for a 35 year old Wilt during a playoff run considering how durable he was. And coaches are less conservative with minutes in the playoffs.
I'm under the impression you would take everything you could away from Wilt if you could.

Rodman was a specialist rebounder and didn't really average 10 rebounds per game in the playoffs, despite his last year being a high 11.8 rebounds per game. I remember when Magic Johnson - a point guard got tired of Rodman rebounding and said let me guard him and Rodman didn't get double digits in the rest of the series (I believe it was three games). Rodman only had three very good playoff rebounding years out of like 11 playoffs runs, where, not one other year stands out. That just should not be for a specialist.

Rodman's best playoff rebounding years run pretty close to half of Wilt's best playoff rpg, and Wilt was the greatest multitasking center them all. And Wilt's rebounding went way up in the playoffs despite the game being slowed downed and faced the second greatest rebounder more often. When focused on, Rodman was a different type of rebounder. In two of his great playoff rebounding years, teams had to contend with Robinson underneath and the other year, MJ and Pippen were causing distractions. In the playoffs, with distractions, Rodman is a great rebounder. In the other 79% of his playoff games!!!! you would be better off with Dirk, the 90's version - which isn't an insult by any means.

ShaqAttack3234

05-11-2012, 05:27 PM

I'm under the impression you would take everything you could away from Wilt if you could.

:oldlol: That's way off, I have absolutely nothing against the man at all, I just don't think he was as good as most do.

Rodman was a specialist rebounder and didn't really average 10 rebounds per game in the playoffs, despite his last year being a high 11.8 rebounds per game. I remember when Magic Johnson - a point guard got tired of Rodman rebounding and said let me guard him and Rodman didn't get double digits in the rest of the series (I believe it was three games). Rodman only had three very good playoff rebounding years out of like 11 playoffs runs, where, not one other year stands out. That just should not be for a specialist.

Well, Rodman was more of a defensive specialist than anything during his early years and usually guarded SF, but also guards. He also happened to be be a great rebounder, but his man to man defense was perhaps his greatest attribute at that time. He also didn't play many minutes back then because they'd alternate the SF position whether they needed a big scorer in Aguirre or a defender in Rodman, and it also depended on if Aguirre was hot.

And even later Rodman wasn't exclusively a rebounding specialist, he guarded big men by that point which had him closer to the basket, but he was an excellent post defender who guarded Shaq well in stretches, did an excellent job on Zo, and obviously on Malone.

Rodman's minutes have a lot to do wih his rebounding numbers in the playoffs. He averaged just 24 mpg in the '89 playoffs, but still averaged 10 rpg. '95 and '96 playoff numbers were also really impressive, though '95 came at the expense of his defense. But his defense in the '96 run was excellent, and his rebounding was incredibly important to their wins in the last 3 rounds, especially the Orlando and Seattle series.

Rodman's best playoff rebounding years run pretty close to half of Wilt's best playoff rpg,

Yeah, but he was also playing not much more than half of his minutes at times, or a good 15-20 fewer mpg almost always, and again, teams shot a significantly worse percentage in the 60's, plus Wilt's teams were getting somewhere around 30+ extra possessions compared to Rodman.

So I wouldn't say that comparing their total numbers is the best way of comparing them. But as I said, I'm fine with jlauber picking Wilt, and I'm fine with you picking him. But Rodman is the rebounding king to me.

Owl

05-11-2012, 06:08 PM

For context Wilt has a system of rating the greats on offense and defense, giving them ratings out of 50 possible points on each end, Oscar has just recieved a 50 on offense

As a defensive player, Oscar Robertson was not outstanding. He was, in fact, almost minus in that department. He was a very good rebounder and, because rebounding can be either defensive or offensive we have to give him some points there. His assists added to his offensive gam (one of the reasons why he got 50 points for offense), but not to his defensive game. He did make a few steals, which helps him a little bit on defense, but I cannot give him any more than 10 points -- 15 at the very most.
Oscar's 50 plus 15 comes to 65 points, a long way from Russell's total. As a matter of fact, I think there are a number of guys who would rate higher than the Big O -- even Jerry West, one of his contemporaries.
For comparison his defensive grades are as follows
Bill Russell 50
Jerry West 30
Larry Bird 30 (says 25 to 30, but as with Oscar uses the higher number to give his total score)
Michael Jordan 35 (says 35 to 40 but uses the lowernumber to calculate Jordan's total)
Scottie Pippen 35
Magic Johnson Zero / 15 / 20 (On defense he's "terrible -- a literal zero" but then gives him 15 for his rebounding and then says "maybe I'm being too hard on Magic" and suggests he's worth either 15 or 20 at that end)
Julius Erving 10 / 15

Great Athletes Basketball (A Dictionary/Encyclopedia of players mentions as ever his well roundedness but makes no mention of defense).

David L. Porter's Basketball: A Biographical Dictionary again has no mention of D but does mention 'Coaches "Phog" Allen of the University of Kansas and "Red" Auerbach of the Boston Celtics (NBA) rated him the best, most versatile player they had seen.'

Peter C. Bjarkman (Primarily a baseball historian I believe, but he published a couple of weighty tomes on basketball) suggests he provided "exception defense" on page 533 of "The Biographical History of Basketball" though this seems to be in refenence to his rookie year. It later goes on to state
His only weakness -- the one area besides pure flashiness, where Jordan was clearly superior -- was in the realm of defense. Oscar never ranked among the best defenders in the league. But then he didn't have to (and he also played in an era more jammed with defense stars than is the case in the current decade [poster's note: This book was written in the late 90's]). While Oscar may not have intercepted passes and stripped dribbles from his rival with the same frequency as MJ, he may not have been all that far behind (no accurate comparisons are possible since steals were not an "official" category before Oscar's final season); certainly Oscar far outdistanced Jordan as a defensive rebounder. He was a solid enough defender, nonetheless, to get the job done, and that was all that was ever demanded of him during his own sojourn on an NBA floor.
Oscar's greatest defensive weapons were, in the end, rebounding and his knack of keeping his opponents so off-balance while he had the ball at their end of the court, that their own stamina -- and thus their own offensive performance -- always suffered rather drastically. Robertson may not have blocked countless shots or logged numerous steals, but he did absolutely everything else -- and did it better than anyone else before or since.

jlauber

05-12-2012, 01:37 AM

You can't translate FG% like that. You're making an assumption that skill level in the league has not advanced. I can clearly see your agenda here.

Pointguard already mentioned it, but take a look at THIS season's EFFICIENCY. A DRAMATIC decline in both scoring and FG%. Why? Did the SKILL level suddenly decline?

Yet, in the early 60's (and throughout the 60's), teams played a MORE brutal schedule. Think about Wilt's 61-62 season for one moment. The man played EVERY minute of EVERY game...except for EIGHT MINUTES (and he was thrown out of that game.) Then, how about this? He played in a TON of B2B games. But not only that, he played in SEPARATE streaks of SIX "three-in-a-rows"; SEPARATE streaks of THREE "four-in-a-rows"; and even yet another SEPARATE streak of "FIVE-IN-A-ROW!"

And here again, this PAST season blows away the theory that "everyone was doing it, so it even's out." FATIGUE kills EFFICIENCY.

And I have mentioned it many times, but almost to a man, the players that spanned the early 60's to the late 60's, or into the 70's, shot either better, or DRAMATICALLY better. Same with those that crossed from the 60's into the 70's.

And if you REALLY wanted to see a QUANTUM leap, look at the players that spanned the decades of the 70's into the 80's.

Only a complete idiot would suggest that the average player SUDDENLY became a much better shooter.

But it gets even better, too. The CENTERS, who spanned the 70's into the 80's CONSIDERABLY upped their FG%'s...and then just as amazingly...the CENTERS who spanned the decade of the 80's into the 90's...DECLINED SIGNIFICANTLY. Why?

Why would a PRIME Gilmore average 18.6 ppg on .522 shooting in the 70's, and then at age 35, average 19.1 ppg on .623 shooting? (and in the decade of the 80's just BLOW AWAY his FG%'s of the 70's?)

And why would a Hakeem have his HIGHEST FG% in his ROOKIE season? I will tell you why. He shot .534 in the 84-85 season, in an NBA which shot it HIGHEST FG% in it's HISTORY. There were 31-51 TEAM's shooting .504. My god, the '85 Lakers TEAM shot .548!

The answers are obvious. Players shot MUCH more efficiently in the 80's than they did in the 70's AND the 90's.

And take a look at the existing footage of Jerry West in the '62 All-Star game. His jump shot looked no worse in that game, than it did later in his career. And yet, he shot .445 that season, and just the year before, he shot .419. By the late 60's he was posting .514 seasons.

John Havlicek is perhaps the best example. His career spanned BOTH decades of the 60's and the 70's. In fact, he played in EIGHT seasons in EACH decade. Guess what? He shot better in EVERY season in the 70's, than he did in his BEST season of the 60's. And he even had seasons as low as .399 in the early 60's.

Rick Barry averaged 35.6 ppg on .451 shooting in the 66-67 season. Nine years later, in 74-75, he averaged 30.6 ppg on .464 shooting.

Of course, one would have to look no further than Chamberlain. How in the hell did he only shoot .461 in his rookie season? That was the ONLY year in his career in which he failed to shoot at least .506. Not coinidently, Wilt's .461 came in a league that shot .410.

But you can go right down the list. Darrell Imhoff, whose career pretty much spanned the entire decade of the 60's, had three straight seasons, all from '61 thru '63, of .394, .386, and even a dreadful .314. How come he was shooting between .470 to even as high as .540 from '67 thru '70?

How about Johnny Green? His career spanned from '60 thru '73. Guess what? In his first three seasons... .447, .430, and .436. He averaged 10.2 ppg in that .430 season, and 15.9 ppg in that .436 season. By the end of his career? In his '70 season he averaged 15.6 ppg on .559 shooting, and in the following season he averaged 16.7 ppg on, get this, a league-leading .587.

There are MANY more, too. Willis Reed shot .432 in '65. In '69 he shot .521. Nate Thurmond shot as low as .395 in the 60's, and had his career high was .446 in the 70's (and his THREE highest seasons came in the 70's.) Walt Bellamy shot a career high .545 in the 70's (and on 18.6 ppg.)

Here again, we are not talking about a mild progression with these players, but generally an EXPLOSION.

And why would a PRIME Kareem absolutely struggle with Thurmond from '70 thru '75, and yet, just OBLITERATE Hakeem and Ewing at age 39? Thurmond probably held Kareem to considerably less than .450 shooting in their 43 H2H starts, and yet Kareem (and Gilmore) were shooting .634 and .680 against Hakeem. Same with Wilt, who held Kareem to some 100 points under his career FG% (.464 in 28 H2H games against a way past his prime Wilt, and shot .559 overall.)

I don't buy this "skill" crap for one second. As Cavsfan pointed out, FT%'s have reamined relatively stable since the 60's, and there were higher seasons in the 80's, than just last year. Bill Sharman shot .932 from the line in the 50's forcryingoutloud.

And the game has been around since the 1890's, too! With pretty much the same rules and dimensions. College's were playing it in the late 1890's, and there were PROFESSIONAL teams as far back as the 1920's.

No one here will convince me that anyone shot more accurately from up to 25 ft than Jerry Lucas...who was a POWER FORWARD. I personally witnessed a pre-game shoot-around in the early 70's, in which Lucas made some 20 straight shots from between the circles. And Jon McGlocklin nearly hit the rafters with his shots...and he still had a season of .535 shooting. And ask anyone who watched the 71-72 Lakers play as to who their best SHOOTER was. It was NOT Goodrich, NOR West. It was Flynn Robinson.

Of course, if you are going to argue that the "skill" level has increased...then you have to apply it to Bird and Magic, too. I seriously doubt you would find more than a handful of posters here who would claim that there are better shooters playing today than Bird. As for Magic...how about seasons of .561 and .565 shooting?

The players of the early 60's had to deal with that BRUTAL schedule, as well as balls that were not uniform, cold and breezy gyms, poor traveling conditions, and much worse medical technology. THAT is why the NBA was shooting .410 in the early 60's.

jlauber

05-12-2012, 01:53 AM

In Oscar's '62 season, his team averaged about 124.7 possessions per 48 minutes, MJ's '87 Bulls averaged 95.8 possessions per 48 minutes.

Do the math. If we are to believe these "paceologists", then the highest scoring teams of the 60's would only be scoring about 90 ppg in the '87 season...in a league that averaged 110 ppg.

And I don't want to hear about 'easy" baskets in the 60's, either. A PRIME Kareem, from '70 thru '75, and covering 43 H2H starts, couldn't hit the ocean from a lifeboat against Thurmond, and yet at age 39 was hanging games of 43 and 46 on Hakeem, and 40 on Ewing....and on just astounding FG%'s, too.

Once again, Oscar had a season of 28.3 ppg, on 19.9 FGAs, in 62-63 (in a league that shot .441.) Am I supposed to believe that Robertson would only be capable of 14 FGAs in '87? Here again, the ENTIRE NBA was shooting .480 (and eFG% of .490 in that '87 season.) Yet, I am supposed to believe that Oscar's .518 in '63 in a league that shot .441, wouldn't benefit from a league that shot .480?

How do explain EVERYONE shooting MUCH better in the 80's? Why did Kareem have seasons of .539, .529, .518, and even .513 in the 70's...and yet shoot .564+ (to as high as .604) in the first eight seasons of the 80's? Or a PRIME Gilmore averaging 18.6 ppg on .522 shooting in the 70's, and then posting MONSTROUS seasons in the 80's, including a 19.1 ppg, .623 season, at age 35?

jlauber

05-12-2012, 02:20 AM

As remarkable as his rebounding was, it does not translate to 19 rpg in today's era. His TRB% for the '73 playoffs was 21.7%. An amazing number, but I'll use TRB% and some recent players.

Kevin Love had a TRB% of 23.6% last year and averaged 15.2 rpg in 36 mpg while playing on a fast-paced team. Dwight Howard has had TRB% of 21.8 and 21.9 the last 2 seasons, respectively, and has averaged 14.1 and 14.5 rpg these past 2 seasons playing about 38 mpg.

So Wilt's rebounding in the '78 postseason, translates to around 14-15 rpg, give or take depending on minutes. Most players play more minutes in the playoffs, so I could see him averaging as many as 16, if he was playing 40+ mpg, which is possible even for a 35 year old Wilt during a playoff run considering how durable he was. And coaches are less conservative with minutes in the playoffs.

Wilt's '73 post-season, in which he averaged 22.5 rpg, in his 17 post-seaosn games, came in a post-season in which the NBA averaged 50.6 rpg. Kevin Love's 15.2 and on 36 mpg, came in an NBA that averaged 41.2 rpg.

So, you are assuming that Wilt would only play 36 mpg? C'mon, he was playing 43 mpg in 82 games, at age 36, and then followed that up with a 17 game post-season of 47.1 mpg (which was BELOW his CAREER post-season mpg of 47.2.)

The reality was, IF Kevin Love were playing 36 mpg in '73, he would have averaged 18.6 rpg. And IF Love were somehow able to play 47 mpg, which, of course he hasn't come close to doing in his entire youthful NBA career, he would have averaged 24 rpg in that post-season.

BUT, here again, that was OLD Wilt, at age 36, and playing on a surgically repaired knee. We KNOW that a PRIME Chamberlain, and playing against RUSSELL in the '67 ECF's, was putting up a near 30% TRB SERIES. He had games of 32 out of a TOTAL of 120; 36 out of a TOTAL of 128; and an amazing 41 out of 134.

And those are just the KNOWN games. I have often wondered how many rebounds were available in Wilt's record-setting 55 rebound game. Russell, who was usually far-and-away Boston's best rebounder, had 19. Even assuming an average game back then, of about 130 TOTAL...Wilt would have pulled down 42% of the available rebounds. And here again, given the fact that Russell only had 19, I seriously doubt that there were even 130 total available in that game.

And I mentioned Tom Boerwinkle earlier. He had seasons HIGHER in terms of Rebound Rate, than Wilt had in the 70's. Yet, H2H, Chamberlain just massacred him. In their '73 playoff H2H, Boerwinkle could only stay on the floor long enough to play 30 minutes. He grabbed 9 rebounds in that time...or about an average of 15 had he been able to play 48 minutes. Chamberlain ripped down 172 in that series...or 24.6 rpg.

If anything, Chamberlain's amazing endurance would give him an edge over the current NBA centers, most of whom can't stay on the floor for much more than 38 mpg. And, for those that use Chamberlain's ability to routinely play 48 mpg against him...wouldn't a Wilt, "only" playing about 40-42 mpg, and with a much more conducive schedule, be considerably more EFFICIENT, in terms of both shooting and rebounding...especially over the course of a long season?

And finally, and as both Psileas and ThaRegul8r pointed out...Chamberlain probably averaged 8+ bpg over the course of his entire career. And not only that, he probably went after another 8+ per game. How many rebounds did he lose by either blocking the shot, or being out of position after attempting to block the shot? Maybe 2-4 more PER GAME!

But once again, Wilt's rebounding went well beyond the numbers. As I have pointed out...he was CRUSHING his peers. ALL of them. And even morseo in the post-season. And doing so while scoring 30+ ppg, or 24+ ppg while handing out 8 apg. And completely shutting down his opposing center (and TEAM's) in the process.

-23-

05-12-2012, 02:30 AM

Do the math. If we are to believe these "paceologists", then the highest scoring teams of the 60's would only be scoring about 90 ppg in the '87 season...in a league that averaged 110 ppg.

And I don't want to hear about 'easy" baskets in the 60's, either. A PRIME Kareem, from '70 thru '75, and covering 43 H2H starts, couldn't hit the ocean from a lifeboat against Thurmond, and yet at age 39 was hanging games of 43 and 46 on Hakeem, and 40 on Ewing....and on just astounding FG%'s, too.

Once again, Oscar had a season of 28.3 ppg, on 19.9 FGAs, in 62-63 (in a league that shot .441.) Am I supposed to believe that Robertson would only be capable of 14 FGAs in '87? Here again, the ENTIRE NBA was shooting .480 (and eFG% of .490 in that '87 season.) Yet, I am supposed to believe that Oscar's .518 in '63 in a league that shot .441, wouldn't benefit from a league that shot .480?

How do explain EVERYONE shooting MUCH better in the 80's? Why did Kareem have seasons of .539, .529, .518, and even .513 in the 70's...and yet shoot .564+ (to as high as .604) in the first eight seasons of the 80's? Or a PRIME Gilmore averaging 18.6 ppg on .522 shooting in the 70's, and then posting MONSTROUS seasons in the 80's, including a 19.1 ppg, .623 season, at age 35?

Coaching schemes allowed players to take better shots. By definition, as a player shoots more, his FG% goes down, hence why Kareem's FG% increased. This has been the case throughout the history of the game. You can't honestly believe the game didn't evolve since conception.

Please, give me a reason why I should believe that a players FG% will benefit if he was suddenly transported to a different era. I would LOVE to see you explain this.

bwink23

05-12-2012, 07:58 AM

The current NBA rebounded at about 70% of Oscar's 61-62 NBA. Robertson averaged 12.5 rpg in 61-62...which would translate to about 8-9 rpg.

Rebounding is the ONE area where Oscar might struggle in an attempt to duplicate his 30-12-11 61-62 season.

As a sidenote...the 6-3 170 Fat Lever had TWO seasons of 9.3 rpg, and in leagues that averaged about 44 rpg (the current NBA just finished with a 42.2 rpg average.)

Oscar most DEFINITELY not average 8-9 rebounds a year. There were 5-6 guys a year who were averaging 10 rebounds a year back then, 6'6" or under.

bwink23

05-12-2012, 08:14 AM

Wilt's '73 post-season, in which he averaged 22.5 rpg, in his 17 post-seaosn games, came in a post-season in which the NBA averaged 50.6 rpg. Kevin Love's 15.2 and on 36 mpg, came in an NBA that averaged 41.2 rpg.

So, you are assuming that Wilt would only play 36 mpg? C'mon, he was playing 43 mpg in 82 games, at age 36, and then followed that up with a 17 game post-season of 47.1 mpg (which was BELOW his CAREER post-season mpg of 47.2.)

The reality was, IF Kevin Love were playing 36 mpg in '73, he would have averaged 18.6 rpg. And IF Love were somehow able to play 47 mpg, which, of course he hasn't come close to doing in his entire youthful NBA career, he would have averaged 24 rpg in that post-season.

BUT, here again, that was OLD Wilt, at age 36, and playing on a surgically repaired knee. We KNOW that a PRIME Chamberlain, and playing against RUSSELL in the '67 ECF's, was putting up a near 30% TRB SERIES. He had games of 32 out of a TOTAL of 120; 36 out of a TOTAL of 128; and an amazing 41 out of 134.

And those are just the KNOWN games. I have often wondered how many rebounds were available in Wilt's record-setting 55 rebound game. Russell, who was usually far-and-away Boston's best rebounder, had 19. Even assuming an average game back then, of about 130 TOTAL...Wilt would have pulled down 42% of the available rebounds. And here again, given the fact that Russell only had 19, I seriously doubt that there were even 130 total available in that game.

And I mentioned Tom Boerwinkle earlier. He had seasons HIGHER in terms of Rebound Rate, than Wilt had in the 70's. Yet, H2H, Chamberlain just massacred him. In their '73 playoff H2H, Boerwinkle could only stay on the floor long enough to play 30 minutes. He grabbed 9 rebounds in that time...or about an average of 15 had he been able to play 48 minutes. Chamberlain ripped down 172 in that series...or 24.6 rpg.

If anything, Chamberlain's amazing endurance would give him an edge over the current NBA centers, most of whom can't stay on the floor for much more than 38 mpg. And, for those that use Chamberlain's ability to routinely play 48 mpg against him...wouldn't a Wilt, "only" playing about 40-42 mpg, and with a much more conducive schedule, be considerably more EFFICIENT, in terms of both shooting and rebounding...especially over the course of a long season?

And finally, and as both Psileas and ThaRegul8r pointed out...Chamberlain probably averaged 8+ bpg over the course of his entire career. And not only that, he probably went after another 8+ per game. How many rebounds did he lose by either blocking the shot, or being out of position after attempting to block the shot? Maybe 2-4 more PER GAME!

But once again, Wilt's rebounding went well beyond the numbers. As I have pointed out...he was CRUSHING his peers. ALL of them. And even morseo in the post-season. And doing so while scoring 30+ ppg, or 24+ ppg while handing out 8 apg. And completely shutting down his opposing center (and TEAM's) in the process.

THINK ABOUT IT....LESS FG's made = more clanks = more rebounding opportunities in a league with an insane amount of possessions.

:coleman:

jlauber

05-12-2012, 12:13 PM

Coaching schemes allowed players to take better shots. By definition, as a player shoots more, his FG% goes down, hence why Kareem's FG% increased. This has been the case throughout the history of the game. You can't honestly believe the game didn't evolve since conception.

Please, give me a reason why I should believe that a players FG% will benefit if he was suddenly transported to a different era. I would LOVE to see you explain this.

Oscar most DEFINITELY not average 8-9 rebounds a year. There were 5-6 guys a year who were averaging 10 rebounds a year back then, 6'6" or under.

I don't have much time this morning, so I will address these quickly.

1. In his 71-72 season, Kareem shot .574 while taking 24.9 FGAs per game. In 72-73, he shot .554 while taking 23.3 FGAs per game. In 73-74, he shot .539 on 21.7 FGAs per game. And in 75-76, he shot .529 while taking 21.1 FGAs per game. So, in REALITY, he shot WORSE, the LESS he shot.

True, he shot better in the 80's (nearly EVERY season was better in the 80's than his 70's), BUT, the ENTIRE league also shot better. Artis Gilmore was LIGHT YEARS better in the 80's.

2. Here again, the majority of the better CENTERS, whose careers spanned both the decade of the 70's and into the 80's...shot better in the 80's. And, players like Gilmore shot DRAMATICAALY better. And, once again, the ENTIRE NBA shot better in the 80's than they did in the 70's.

3. BUT, whay happened to the best CENTERS whose careers spanned the decades of the 80's and 90's? Players like Hakeem, Ewing, and Robinson. ALL shot better early in their careers, and then declined..some considerably. Did they become LESS skilled?

And, by the late 90's, the ENTIRE NBA was down by a huge margin over the 80's...including eFG% (which addressed 3 pt shooting.) Why? If you argue that defenses must have been better, than what about the 60's and 70's? Why would Kareem score MUCH better, and on a MUCH higher FG% against Hakeem in the 85-86 season, than he did against the rest of the league? And yet, a PRIME Kareem was downright AWFUL against little known Nate Thurmond in many of their 43 career H2H starting matchups.

4. Regarding Oscar's rebounding. Yep, that is why players like 6-3 175 lb Fat Lever could never get 9.3 rpg in back-to-back seasons in the late 80's, and in league's that averaged 44 rpg per team. Or no way the 6-5 Barkley could LEAD the NBA at 14.6 rpg one season.

bwink23

05-12-2012, 12:21 PM

I don't have much time this morning, so I will address these quickly.

1. In his 71-72 season, Kareem shot .574 while taking 24.9 FGAs per game. In 72-73, he shot .554 while taking 23.3 FGAs per game. In 73-74, he shot .539 on 21.7 FGAs per game. And in 75-76, he shot .529 while taking 21.1 FGAs per game. So, in REALITY, he shot WORSE, the LESS he shot.

True, he shot better in the 80's (nearly EVERY season was better in the 80's than his 70's), BUT, the ENTIRE league also shot better. Artis Gilmore was LIGHT YEARS better in the 80's.

2. Here again, the majority of the better CENTERS, whose careers spanned both the decade of the 70's and into the 80's...shot better in the 80's. And, players like Gilmore shot DRAMATICAALY better. And, once again, the ENTIRE NBA shot better in the 80's than they did in the 70's.

3. BUT, whay happened to the best CENTERS whose careers spanned the decades of the 80's and 90's? Players like Hakeem, Ewing, and Robinson. ALL shot better early in their careers, and then declined..some considerably. Did they become LESS skilled?

And, by the late 90's, the ENTIRE NBA was down by a huge margin over the 80's...including eFG% (which addressed 3 pt shooting.) Why? If you argue that defenses must have been better, than what about the 60's and 70's? Why would Kareem score MUCH better, and on a MUCH higher FG% against Hakeem in the 85-86 season, than he did against the rest of the league? And yet, a PRIME Kareem was downright AWFUL against little known Nate Thurmond in many of their 43 career H2H starting matchups.

4. Regarding Oscar's rebounding. Yep, that is why players like 6-3 175 lb Fat Lever could never get 9.3 rpg in back-to-back seasons in the late 80's, and in league's that averaged 44 rpg per team. Or no way the 6-5 Barkley could LEAD the NBA at 14.6 rpg one season.

I don't know if you noticed, but 2 of the best rebounding guards of the time (Jerry West, Oscar Robertson), their rebounding dropped SIGNIFICANTLY around the 67-68 seasons, both guys in their physical primes of 27,28 years old...

EXPLAIN

jlauber

05-12-2012, 12:45 PM

I don't know if you noticed, but 2 of the best rebounding guards of the time (Jerry West, Oscar Robertson), their rebounding dropped SIGNIFICANTLY around the 67-68 seasons, both guys in their physical primes of 27,28 years old...

EXPLAIN

That scenario applies to almost EVERY player. Players like Rodman are the exception to the rule. Go ahead. Look up most of the players in NBA history. They tend to rebound better early in their careers.

Pointguard

05-12-2012, 01:50 PM

:oldlol: That's way off, I have absolutely nothing against the man at all, I just don't think he was as good as most do.

I'm ok with who you like, its still a matter of preference. I do think it gets a bit crazy at times... somebody linked a thread the other day of the top 5 offensive players ever and you didn't have Wilt in that either. And now you got Rodman, a guy who was an average rebounder in 79% of his playoff games (over a 135 of a total 169 playoff games played). Wilt was rarely out rebounded and never outrebounded in a series. Wilt averaged 14.5 more rebounds per game than Rodman in the playoffs - while pace is an argument... it would take Rodman 2 and a half games to surpass Wilt in terms of rebounds per game in the playoffs.

Rodman's minutes have a lot to do wih his rebounding numbers in the playoffs. He averaged just 24 mpg in the '89 playoffs, but still averaged 10 rpg. '95 and '96 playoff numbers were also really impressive, though '95 came at the expense of his defense. But his defense in the '96 run was excellent, and his rebounding was incredibly important to their wins in the last 3 rounds, especially the Orlando and Seattle series.

True Rodman was a defensive specialist first and that at times pulled him away from the basket but KG was always doing much more on the court than Rodman ever did and it didn't stop him from being a top rebounder in the playoffs. KG's offensive and defensive assignments always compromised him on the boards but he still was always a very good rebounder even when he exclusively guarded SF's. KG like Rodman played great defense with his feet and that compromises them as well. Wilt, more than likely, blocked more shots than anybody in the game, so he had his compromises as well.

If Rodman didn't play a lot of minutes that's on him. If he didn't earn his minutes then he can't be claimed as the best as a part-timer. I was very impressed with Rodman's endurance and tenacity. I think he belongs in the Hall of Fame, but when guys focused on him and in important games he wasn't as good as Malone or KG on the boards overall... much less Wilt in my opinion.

Pointguard

05-12-2012, 01:59 PM

I don't know if you noticed, but 2 of the best rebounding guards of the time (Jerry West, Oscar Robertson), their rebounding dropped SIGNIFICANTLY around the 67-68 seasons, both guys in their physical primes of 27,28 years old...

EXPLAIN
Back then you hit your prime at 24, lost your hustle prime at about 27 years of age. I realize now it has to do with the attrition of the schedule. Look at Elgin Baylor, Kareem, Cousy, Unseld, Bellamy, Reed, etc. That's just the way it was.

PTB Fan

05-12-2012, 02:11 PM

For context Wilt has a system of rating the greats on offense and defense, giving them ratings out of 50 possible points on each end, Oscar has just recieved a 50 on offense

For comparison his defensive grades are as follows
Bill Russell 50
Jerry West 30
Larry Bird 30 (says 25 to 30, but as with Oscar uses the higher number to give his total score)
Michael Jordan 35 (says 35 to 40 but uses the lowernumber to calculate Jordan's total)
Scottie Pippen 35
Magic Johnson Zero / 15 / 20 (On defense he's "terrible -- a literal zero" but then gives him 15 for his rebounding and then says "maybe I'm being too hard on Magic" and suggests he's worth either 15 or 20 at that end)
Julius Erving 10 / 15

Great Athletes Basketball (A Dictionary/Encyclopedia of players mentions as ever his well roundedness but makes no mention of defense).

David L. Porter's Basketball: A Biographical Dictionary again has no mention of D but does mention 'Coaches "Phog" Allen of the University of Kansas and "Red" Auerbach of the Boston Celtics (NBA) rated him the best, most versatile player they had seen.'

Peter C. Bjarkman (Primarily a baseball historian I believe, but he published a couple of weighty tomes on basketball) suggests he provided "exception defense" on page 533 of "The Biographical History of Basketball" though this seems to be in refenence to his rookie year. It later goes on to state

Very interesting.

I've never heard about Oscar being an outstanding defender, but i think I've read that he was excellent at getting steals (among the best of his time, up with the likes of West, Wilkens..) and was good on the ball. In particular, he was at his best defensively in Milwaukee where he wasn't required to score as much but nonetheless, he did all the other and that quite well.

bwink23

05-12-2012, 02:22 PM

That scenario applies to almost EVERY player. Players like Rodman are the exception to the rule. Go ahead. Look up most of the players in NBA history. They tend to rebound better early in their careers.

Rebounding of the Cincinnati Royals from 60-65.

5,581
5,665
5,561
5,400
5,387

Royals from 66-70:

5,559
5,198
5,129
4,525
4,163

EXPLAIN the WHOLE LEAGUE dropping off when more teams ere added:

Average rebounds per year with 9 teams (1962-66)

5,432

Average rebounds per year with 10 teams (1967)

5,454

Average rebounds per year with 12 teams (1968)

5,431

Average rebounds per year with 14 teams (1969-70)

4,501

Average rebounds per year with 17 teams (1971-74)

4,164

In today's game, the average over 30 teams is roughly 3,300-3,400 per year.

In the mid-80's, early 90's.....it was 3,550-3,601 in a 23-25 team league.

EXPLAIN how the increased number of teams (PARITY) has led to overall rebounding totals dropping.

CavaliersFTW

05-12-2012, 02:33 PM

Rebounding of the Cincinnati Royals from 60-65.

5,581
5,665
5,561
5,400
5,387

Royals from 66-70:

5,559
5,198
5,129
4,525
4,163

EXPLAIN the WHOLE LEAGUE dropping off when more teams ere added:

Average rebounds per year with 9 teams (1962-66)

5,432

Average rebounds per year with 10 teams (1967)

5,454

Average rebounds per year with 12 teams (1968)

5,431

Average rebounds per year with 14 teams (1969-70)

4,501

Average rebounds per year with 17 teams (1971-74)

4,164

In today's game, the average over 30 teams is roughly 3,300-3,400 per year.

In the mid-80's, early 90's.....it was 3,550-3,601 in a 23-25 team league.

EXPLAIN how the increased number of teams (PARITY) has led to overall rebounding totals dropping.

He already did. The drop from 5,000's range #'s to 4,000's is when they they suddenly stopped counting non-player team rebounds (they used to count rebounds for a team if the ball went out of bound, when no individual player actually rebounded the ball).

applied to Oscar this means that he grabbed 20.1% of his teams actual (4900) rebounds and he dished 41.7% of his teams assists during the season of 1962 when he averaged a Triple-Double.

1962, if you add up the player rebounds it only comes to 4900. Go ahead and add the numbers up yourself for the various seasons in the 60s - I'm sure you'll find that there was no real drop in actual players-on-the-team rebounding avgs. The team statistical change only occurs because the league suddenly dropped non-player team rebounds from the tally. Make sense?

PTB Fan

05-12-2012, 02:36 PM

bwink23

05-12-2012, 02:38 PM

Oscar was truly a beast. He's one of those players who even though lacks the team accomplishments (ring), was individually good enough to be ranked as the GOAT.

Why can't we appreciate that? :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Never said i don't appreciate it....i find his ability to shield the ball from the defender and still maintain excellent footwork in his dribble uncanny.

jlauber

05-12-2012, 02:40 PM

Rebounding of the Cincinnati Royals from 60-65.

5,581
5,665
5,561
5,400
5,387

Royals from 66-70:

5,559
5,198
5,129
4,525
4,163

EXPLAIN the WHOLE LEAGUE dropping off when more teams ere added:

Average rebounds per year with 9 teams (1962-66)

5,432

Average rebounds per year with 10 teams (1967)

5,454

Average rebounds per year with 12 teams (1968)

5,431

Average rebounds per year with 14 teams (1969-70)

4,501

Average rebounds per year with 17 teams (1971-74)

4,164

In today's game, the average over 30 teams is roughly 3,300-3,400 per year.

In the mid-80's, early 90's.....it was 3,550-3,601 in a 23-25 team league.

EXPLAIN how the increased number of teams (PARITY) has led to overall rebounding totals dropping.

First of all, you haven't been following this topic.

TEAM rebounds were DROPPED from thje totals AFTER the 67-68 season, which accounted for about 8-9 rpg per team before that. THAT explains the BIG drop from 67-68 to 68-69.

Secondly, I have acknowledged that there were more rebounds available in the early 60's. TODAY's NBA is at about 70% of what the PEAK rebounding seasons of the 60's were at (in 2011-2012 the NBA rebounded at 42.2 rpg. In the early 60's, it was at about 63 on average.)

BUT, YOU argued that Oscar wouldn't average NINE rpg! He was averaging 12.5 rpg in 61-62...which would be damn close to NINE rpg in TODAY's NBA. Furthermore, I gave you the example of 6-3 175 lb. Fat Lever averaging 9.3 rpg in the late 80's, in a league that averaged 44 rpg.

Now, do you HONESTLY believe that the athletic and FULL 6-5 Oscar (220 lbs) would NOT have been capable of NINE rpg in TODAY's NBA?????

CavaliersFTW

05-12-2012, 02:42 PM

Never said i don't appreciate it....i find his ability to shield the ball from the defender and still maintain excellent footwork in his dribble uncanny.
It's weird that you say that because most fans (I don't know if they're just trolling) on other message boards throughout the net trash his "ability to protect the ball"... To me it looked like he protected it well too, he dribbled with his right more often then left but he could still go left while dribbling with his right hand because he backed people in - putting his body between the defender and the ball. Do people not realize that this is very effective? It just isn't allowed today after Barkley dominated doing this. Oscar is built a lot like Barkley, he's same height and only weighs a little bit less and has similar tree-trunk legs. What he did looks like it'd be effective today if the rules permitted it but maybe I'm wrong I just find it funny how some people say literally polar opposite things about him when they watch him. :confusedshrug:

jlauber

05-12-2012, 02:43 PM

Oscar was truly a beast. He's one of those players who even though lacks the team accomplishments (ring), was individually good enough to be ranked as the GOAT.

Why can't we appreciate that? :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Oscar CARRIED a 60's team to a 55-25 record in an MVP year (one of only two in the 60's that didn't go to Russell or Wilt.)

Later, in the 70's, he IMMEDIATELY won a ring on a 66-16 Bucks team. In the course of the next three years, Milwaukee went 63-19, 60-22, and 59-23 (and a trip to the Finals, where they lost a seven game series.) He retired following that season, and it was no coincidence that the Bucks dropped to 38-44.

bwink23

05-12-2012, 02:45 PM

It's weird that you say that because most fans (I don't know if they're just trolling) on other message boards throughout the net trash his "ability to protect the ball"... To me it looked like he protected it well too, he dribbled with his right more often then left but he could still go left while dribbling with his right hand because he backed people in - putting his body between the defender and the ball. Do people not realize that this is very effective? It just isn't allowed today after Barkley dominated doing this. Oscar is built a lot like Barkley, he's same height and only weighs a little bit less and has similar tree-trunk legs. What he did looks like it'd be effective today if the rules permitted it but maybe I'm wrong I just find it funny how some people say literally polar opposite things about him when they watch him. :confusedshrug:

Yeah, i don't know what the hell some of these kids are seeing. As opposed to using their arms to shield the ball like in today's game, Oscar could literally maintain a speed dribble while damn near turning his whole back to the defender. I've never seen anyone ever do that effectively, have you?? Magic Johnson was pretty good at that as well, but he wasn't much of a threat to score from that position.

PTB Fan

05-12-2012, 02:46 PM

Never said i don't appreciate it....i find his ability to shield the ball from the defender and still maintain excellent footwork in his dribble uncanny.

Well, the rules back then for handling the ball were different. The crossover we do today is basically carrying in some situation. Given the very strict rules they had... he did excellent

-23-

05-12-2012, 02:48 PM

First of all, you haven't been following this topic.

TEAM rebounds were DROPPED from thje totals AFTER the 67-68 season, which accounted for about 8-9 rpg per team before that. THAT explains the BIG drop from 67-68 to 68-69.

Secondly, I have acknowledged that there were more rebounds available in the early 60's. TODAY's NBA is at about 70% of what the PEAK rebounding seasons of the 60's were at (in 2011-2012 the NBA rebounded at 42.2 rpg. In the early 60's, it was at about 63 on average.)

BUT, YOU argued that Oscar wouldn't average NINE rpg! He was averaging 12.5 rpg in 61-62...which would be damn close to NINE rpg in TODAY's NBA. Furthermore, I gave you the example of 6-3 175 lb. Fat Lever averaging 9.3 rpg in the late 80's, in a league that averaged 44 rpg.

Now, do you HONESTLY believe that the athletic and FULL 6-5 Oscar (220 lbs) would NOT have been capable of NINE rpg in TODAY's NBA?????

Why bring up Fat Lever when he played on one of the fastest paced teams in the league? That denver team was notorious for run-and-gun play. The pace they played it was HIGHER than that of the 70's.

inclinerator

05-12-2012, 02:51 PM

http://i.imgur.com/PKIy7.gif

jlauber

05-12-2012, 03:03 PM

Why bring up Fat Lever when he played on one of the fastest paced teams in the league? That denver team was notorious for run-and-gun play. The pace they played it was HIGHER than that of the 70's.

He averaged 9.3 rpg in 35.8 mpg, on a team that grabbed 3701 rebounds, in a league that averaged 3538.

Now, are YOU telling me that a PRIME 6-5 220 lb. Oscar, playing 44 mpg, as he did back then (and certainly 40 mpg would not be out of the question), would NOT be CAPABLE of NINE damn rebounds per game in TODAY's NBA????

What in the hell is wrong with you?!

PTB Fan

05-12-2012, 03:04 PM

Oscar CARRIED a 60's team to a 55-25 record in an MVP year (one of only two in the 60's that didn't go to Russell or Wilt.)

Later, in the 70's, he IMMEDIATELY won a ring on a 66-16 Bucks team. In the course of the next three years, Milwaukee went 63-19, 60-22, and 59-23 (and a trip to the Finals, where they lost a seven game series.) He retired following that season, and it was no coincidence that the Bucks dropped to 38-44.

Oscar was an individual superstar who made his team mates better and made nice impact on his teams.

jlauber

05-12-2012, 03:07 PM

Oscar was an individual superstar who made his team mates better and made nice impact on his teams.

I wasn't being critical of you BTW. But some here believe he was nothing but a loser. I was merely pointing out that he played on and LED some great teams.

PTB Fan

05-12-2012, 03:08 PM

I wasn't being critical of you BTW. But some here believe he was nothing but a loser. I was merely pointing out that he played on and LED some great teams.

Oh.. ok

-23-

05-12-2012, 04:02 PM

He averaged 9.3 rpg in 35.8 mpg, on a team that grabbed 2532 rebounds, in a league that averaged 2403.

Now, are YOU telling me that a PRIME 6-5 220 lb. Oscar, playing 44 mpg, as he did back then (and certainly 40 mpg would not be out of the question), would NOT be CAPABLE of NINE damn rebounds per game in TODAY's NBA????

What in the hell is wrong with you?!

He might be capable if he was playing for say... the GSW. But on any other given team, he would not come close to 9RPG. That would put him in Lebron territory, in which he isn't even close skill wise.

jlauber

05-12-2012, 04:04 PM

jlauber

05-12-2012, 04:07 PM

He might be capable if he was playing for say... the GSW. But on any other given team, he would not come close to 9RPG. That would put him in Lebron territory, in which he isn't even close skill wise.

Lebron's career FT% is .746. Oscar's was .838.
Lebron's career FG% is .483. Oscar, playing in lower shooting leagues had a career .485.

AND, assists were HARDER to come by in Oscar's era,. too, and yet, Robertson averaged 9.5 apg to Lebron's 6.9.

jlauber

05-12-2012, 04:33 PM

He might be capable if he was playing for say... the GSW. But on any other given team, he would not come close to 9RPG. That would put him in Lebron territory, in which he isn't even close skill wise.

No question lebron is a freak of nature...BUT, how come the 6-9 Kevin Love is a MUCH better rebounder, has MUCH more range, and is a better FT shooter than the 6-8 James?

-23-

05-12-2012, 05:27 PM

No question lebron is a freak of nature...BUT, how come the 6-9 Kevin Love is a MUCH better rebounder, has MUCH more range, and is a better FT shooter than the 6-8 James?

The nature of the positions they play? You can't directly compare PF/C to SF.

jlauber

05-12-2012, 07:49 PM

The nature of the positions they play? You can't directly compare PF/C to SF.

You made the comment, at least suggesting, that Oscar "wasn't in Lebron's territory" in terms of rebounding. I merely pointed out that there have been less athletically gifted players who were MUCH better rebounders than Lebron.

My god, Rodman was no taller, weighed 40 lbs less, couldn't come close to Lebron's leaping ability, and was probably considerably weaker...yet I would take Rodman, TODAY, at age 51, if I needed a rebounder, over Lebron.

Once again,why wouldn't Oscar, who grabbed 12.5 rpg in a season, and who was a full 6-5 (and would measure at 6-6 in today's NBA), and who weighed 220 lbs, be able to get nine rebounds per game...but Fat Lever, at 6-3 and 175 lbs, was able to get 9.3 rpg (twice in a row) in leagues that averaged 44 rpg?

colts19

05-12-2012, 10:18 PM

You made the comment, at least suggesting, that Oscar "wasn't in Lebron's territory" in terms of rebounding. I merely pointed out that there have been less athletically gifted players who were MUCH better rebounders than Lebron.

My god, Rodman was no taller, weighed 40 lbs less, couldn't come close to Lebron's leaping ability, and was probably considerably weaker...yet I would take Rodman, TODAY, at age 51, if I needed a rebounder, over Lebron.

Once again,why wouldn't Oscar, who grabbed 12.5 rpg in a season, and who was a full 6-5 (and would measure at 6-6 in today's NBA), and who weighed 220 lbs, be able to get nine rebounds per game...but Fat Lever, at 6-3 and 175 lbs, was able to get 9.3 rpg (twice in a row) in leagues that averaged 44 rpg?

Jlauber, I don't always agree with you (I think larry bird is much better than you do) but I also think you right about Oscar. The best all around player I ever saw along with MJ. People need to respect the Big O, Wilt and Russell. Basketball didn't start in the 90's.

ShaqAttack3234

05-13-2012, 01:21 AM

Do the math. If we are to believe these "paceologists", then the highest scoring teams of the 60's would only be scoring about 90 ppg in the '87 season...in a league that averaged 110 ppg.

Where did you come up with that? Who said anything about the highest scoring team of the 60's scoring 90 ppg in '87?

But they probably wouldn't be as effective since while the stars had skills, there were still older players on the rosters with set shots.

And I don't want to hear about 'easy" baskets in the 60's, either. A PRIME Kareem, from '70 thru '75, and covering 43 H2H starts, couldn't hit the ocean from a lifeboat against Thurmond, and yet at age 39 was hanging games of 43 and 46 on Hakeem, and 40 on Ewing....and on just astounding FG%'s, too.

Do you understand basketball at all? There are more easy baskets with more fast breaks, it's not debatable.

And why did you bring up Kareem as an example, why would Kareem benefit from fastbreaks? Kareem was known for not running.

All your example does is suggest that Thurmond matched up better with early 70's Kareem then a very young Ewing or very young Hakeem matched up with mid 80's Kareem.

Once again, Oscar had a season of 28.3 ppg, on 19.9 FGAs, in 62-63 (in a league that shot .441.) Am I supposed to believe that Robertson would only be capable of 14 FGAs in '87? Here again, the ENTIRE NBA was shooting .480 (and eFG% of .490 in that '87 season.) Yet, I am supposed to believe that Oscar's .518 in '63 in a league that shot .441, wouldn't benefit from a league that shot .480?

Nobody said completely adjust a player's FGA down. In reality, Oscar's FGA would probably be reduced the least, while the other players would lose more than the star. Still, I don't think he could use as many possessions in the 80's, 90's ect. as he did in 1962, and it's pretty obvious.

I don't agree with adjusting his FG% either. There is the argument about playing conditions, but we can't ignore more double teaming, better players on average, and yes, less lay ups in transition.

A big reason why the FG% was so much lower in the 60's was set shots, 15 foot hook shots ect. were still around. That along with playing conditions.

But look at what happened throughout the 60's, the FG% continued getting better. Is it because defense got worse? Of course not, the average player got more skilled, and the set shot and 15 foot hook shots were pretty extinct.

How do explain EVERYONE shooting MUCH better in the 80's? Why did Kareem have seasons of .539, .529, .518, and even .513 in the 70's...and yet shoot .564+ (to as high as .604) in the first eight seasons of the 80's? Or a PRIME Gilmore averaging 18.6 ppg on .522 shooting in the 70's, and then posting MONSTROUS seasons in the 80's, including a 19.1 ppg, .623 season, at age 35?

First of all, Kareem was still pretty much as good as he ever was in '80 when he shot 60.4%. Plus, he was shooting less, and had much more talent around him to take some pressure off.

Gilmore was attempting like 10 FGA in the 80's. He was taking as many as 16 in the 70's. When you take 10 FGA per game, most can be dunks/lay ups.

Wilt's '73 post-season, in which he averaged 22.5 rpg, in his 17 post-seaosn games, came in a post-season in which the NBA averaged 50.6 rpg. Kevin Love's 15.2 and on 36 mpg, came in an NBA that averaged 41.2 rpg.

I already covered the adjustment as well as you can with TRB%, which is the percentage of available rebounds you grab.

So, you are assuming that Wilt would only play 36 mpg? C'mon, he was playing 43 mpg in 82 games, at age 36, and then followed that up with a 17 game post-season of 47.1 mpg (which was BELOW his CAREER post-season mpg of 47.2.)

When did I say Wilt would play 36 mpg? Though it's not hard to imagine at 36 years old in the modern NBA. But he might play more in the playoffs, players always do. It has nothing to do with how Wilt's stamina was. It's just how coaches and teams operate these days.

And, for those that use Chamberlain's ability to routinely play 48 mpg against him...wouldn't a Wilt, "only" playing about 40-42 mpg, and with a much more conducive schedule, be considerably more EFFICIENT, in terms of both shooting and rebounding...especially over the course of a long season?

Maybe, but with superior team defenses, more double teaming and bigger players on average, especially more athletic help defenders with more length, those would be factors as well.

And I know you won't agree, but I suspect playing 48 mpg when the games were blowouts boosted his efficiency, I believe it may have given him more easy baskets when guys weren't trying as hard with the game over.

1. In his 71-72 season, Kareem shot .574 while taking 24.9 FGAs per game. In 72-73, he shot .554 while taking 23.3 FGAs per game. In 73-74, he shot .539 on 21.7 FGAs per game. And in 75-76, he shot .529 while taking 21.1 FGAs per game. So, in REALITY, he shot WORSE, the LESS he shot.

The first four or five years I was in the league, I was played basically one on one. There are 2 1/2 men on me all of the time now. One in back, one in front and a guard going for the ball. It's made it necessary for me to do other things."

Going from being played mostly 1 on 1 to constant double/triple teams is the answer, straight from Kareem's mouth.

4. Regarding Oscar's rebounding. Yep, that is why players like 6-3 175 lb Fat Lever could never get 9.3 rpg in back-to-back seasons in the late 80's, and in league's that averaged 44 rpg per team. Or no way the 6-5 Barkley could LEAD the NBA at 14.6 rpg one season.

The 80's Nuggets were the worst possible team to use as an example. They were an unusually fast-paced team even for the fast-paced 80's.

The Fat Lever example just proves that pace can make a big difference.

I'm ok with who you like, its still a matter of preference. I do think it gets a bit crazy at times... somebody linked a thread the other day of the top 5 offensive players ever and you didn't have Wilt in that either.

Yes, I do not think Wilt is one of the 5 best offensive players of all time. I just don't see it at all in the footage I've seen. But again I don't feel like getting into a Wilt debate.

And now you got Rodman, a guy who was an average rebounder in 79% of his playoff games (over a 135 of a total 169 playoff games played). Wilt was rarely out rebounded and never outrebounded in a series. Wilt averaged 14.5 more rebounds per game than Rodman in the playoffs - while pace is an argument... it would take Rodman 2 and a half games to surpass Wilt in terms of rebounds per game in the playoffs.

Quite a few people consider Rodman the greatest rebounder ever.

And Rodman was in no way an average rebounder in the playoffs. He's 3rd all-time in TRB% during the playoffs at 20.5%, behind only Dwight(22.3%) and Wilt(21.1%).

This stat only covers seasons back to '70-'71, but the point is that Rodman was well above average.

True Rodman was a defensive specialist first and that at times pulled him away from the basket but KG was always doing much more on the court than Rodman ever did and it didn't stop him from being a top rebounder in the playoffs. KG's offensive and defensive assignments always compromised him on the boards but he still was always a very good rebounder even when he exclusively guarded SF's. KG like Rodman played great defense with his feet and that compromises them as well. Wilt, more than likely, blocked more shots than anybody in the game, so he had his compromises as well.

KG played a lot more minutes than Rodman in the playoffs.

If Rodman didn't play a lot of minutes that's on him. If he didn't earn his minutes then he can't be claimed as the best as a part-timer. I was very impressed with Rodman's endurance and tenacity. I think he belongs in the Hall of Fame, but when guys focused on him and in important games he wasn't as good as Malone or KG on the boards overall... much less Wilt in my opinion.

When Rodman did get playing time, he proved to be an incredible rebounder. He averaged nearly 19 rpg per game when he played 40 mpg in '92 so it's not like his rebounding fell off when he got playing time.

Back then you hit your prime at 24, lost your hustle prime at about 27 years of age. I realize now it has to do with the attrition of the schedule. Look at Elgin Baylor, Kareem, Cousy, Unseld, Bellamy, Reed, etc. That's just the way it was.

Kareem played his best ball from what I've read/seen at '77 when he was 29/30. A normal prime/peak age.

Willis Reed had a ton of injuries in the early 70's, but he won MVP and his first title at 27/28.

He averaged 9.3 rpg in 35.8 mpg, on a team that grabbed 3701 rebounds, in a league that averaged 3538.

Now, are YOU telling me that a PRIME 6-5 220 lb. Oscar, playing 44 mpg, as he did back then (and certainly 40 mpg would not be out of the question), would NOT be CAPABLE of NINE damn rebounds per game in TODAY's NBA????

What in the hell is wrong with you?!

Fat Lever did not play in today's NBA.

If Oscar played 40 minutes per game and maintained his '62 rebound rate, he'd average 7-8 rpg. Though Oscar's TRB% in '62 was well above his normal average.

Pointguard

05-13-2012, 03:19 AM

Yes, I do not think Wilt is one of the 5 best offensive players of all time. I just don't see it at all in the footage I've seen. But again I don't feel like getting into a Wilt debate.

I mean couldn't you mention an honorary spot for him? I mean come on.

And Rodman was in no way an average rebounder in the playoffs. He's 3rd all-time in TRB% during the playoffs at 20.5%, behind only Dwight(22.3%) and Wilt(21.1%). Rodman had a great 3 years (35 games at 14 per) in the playoffs and 4 bad years (76 games around 7 rebounds per game). Wilt had a career from beginning to end 14 years of dominance in the post season (160 games at 24.5) and regular season. One screams great... the other schizophrenia. Rodman did have a great run in there but career wise, his postseason rebounding wasn't great.

Kareem played his best ball from what I've read/seen at '77 when he was 29/30. A normal prime/peak age.

I said 'hustle peak' and your use of normal isn't appropiate either.
Kareem at 24 took 2019 FGA or 24.9 per game had 16.6 rpg 4.6 apg 44mpg
Kareem in '77 took 1584 FGA or 18.7 per game had 13.3 rpg 3.9 apg 37mpg
'77 was his physical/mental peak which I said nothing about.

The context was centered around why West and Oscar stopped rebounding around that age. My response was that guys don't hustle as much after that age. Rebounding is a hustle stat.

Willis Reed had a ton of injuries in the early 70's, but he won MVP and his first title at 27/28.
Are you just not reading what I wrote??? I said "Back then you hit your prime at 24, lost your hustle prime at about 27 years of age." What is it that you are not getting??? Reed was 27 (not 28) when he won MVP and won the title - the next year he probably could have maintained that but I said about 27 anyway. At 28 the battle of attrition had claimed Reed.

ShaqAttack3234

05-13-2012, 03:52 AM

I mean couldn't you mention an honorary spot for him? I mean come on.

The problem is, you seem to get really annoyed when I don't think as highly of your favorite players as you do.

Rodman had a great 3 years (35 games at 14 per) in the playoffs and 4 bad years (76 games around 7 rebounds per game). Wilt had a career from beginning to end 14 years of dominance in the post season (160 games at 24.5) and regular season. One screams great... the other schizophrenia. Rodman did have a great run in there but career wise, his postseason rebounding wasn't great.

The only 2 years he grabbed 7 or less rebounds in the playoffs were his first 2 seasons when he averaged 16.3 and 20.6 mpg in the playoffs.

And yes, he was a great rebounder throughout his postseason career, when you're third all-time in how many available rebounds you grab on the floor, you're great at it.

I said 'hustle peak' and your use of normal isn't appropiate either.

I've never heard the term "hustle peak". So don't blame me for being an unfamiliar with a term you likely made up.

Kareem at 24 took 2019 FGA or 24.9 per game had 16.6 rpg 4.6 apg 44mpg
Kareem in '77 took 1584 FGA or 18.7 per game had 13.3 rpg 3.9 apg 37mpg

When did I say I was the least bit interested in numbers? I'm well are of these, though I'm also aware that 24 was pre-merger era, and that Kareem said he was played mostly 1 on 1 back then, but constantly doubled later.

The context was centered around why West and Oscar stopped rebounding around that age. My response was that guys don't hustle as much after that age. Rebounding is a hustle stat.

Not really, guys who play hard typically play hard regardless, and players rebounding usually falls off when the rest of their game starts to slip.

Are you just not reading what I wrote??? I said "Back then you hit your prime at 24, lost your hustle prime at about 27 years of age." What is it that you are not getting??? Reed was 27 (not 28) when he won MVP and won the title - the next year he probably could have maintained that but I said about 27 anyway. At 28 the battle of attrition had claimed Reed.

Once again, I've never once heard anyone claim there was such a thing as a "hustle prime".

Reed was a month away from his 28th birthday when he won his first title, that's why I gave both ages. Unfortunately, his career was cut short by injuries, if not, who knows if the Knicks win another title or 2 in that era.

jlauber

05-13-2012, 02:16 PM

Where did you come up with that? Who said anything about the highest scoring team of the 60's scoring 90 ppg in '87?

But they probably wouldn't be as effective since while the stars had skills, there were still older players on the rosters with set shots.

Here was your replay:

In Oscar's '62 season, his team averaged about 124.7 possessions per 48 minutes, MJ's '87 Bulls averaged 95.8 possessions per 48 minutes.

I said...do the math. Divide 95.8 by 124.7 (76.8%), and then multiply by the '62 league scoring average of 118.8 ppg. You get 91.2 ppg. That possesion NONSENSE is exactly that...NONSENSE. There is no way in hell that ANY team from ANY other era would not adapt to whatever conditions they were faced with. How do I know that...take any year, and then look at the previous year.

I have said it before, but I want someone here to point out the EXACT year in which the NBA became what we see today. If an idiot claims that it began in 1980...well, how come the first FOUR MVPs in the 80's were playing in the 70's? How come a 39 year old Kareem can wipe the floor with Hakeem and Ewing (or a 35 year old Gilmore clean Hakeem's clock), and yet, in 43 career H2H's against Thurmond (and covering all of the years from '70 thru '75) he had a TOTAL of SEVEN 30+ point games, with a HIGH of 34? And inm MANY he shot less than 40%? Yet he ROUTINELY hung games of 40 on Hakeem, and on just unfathomable FG%'s (and Gilmore approached nearly 70% in his CAREER meetings with Hakeem BTW.)

Futhermore, a YOUNG Moses, who played in the SEVENTIES, just WAXED a PRIME Kareem. And he would dominate him in the vast majority of their 40 career H2H games (and particularly in the post-season, where his team's went 6-1 against Kareem, and he just BURIED Kareem in every facet of the game.)

Do you understand basketball at all? There are more easy baskets with more fast breaks, it's not debatable.

And why did you bring up Kareem as an example, why would Kareem benefit from fastbreaks? Kareem was known for not running.

All your example does is suggest that Thurmond matched up better with early 70's Kareem then a very young Ewing or very young Hakeem matched up with mid 80's Kareem.

Kareem TORCHED Hakeem. I have said it before, but I seriously doubt that you will EVER find a streak of TEN STRAIGHT games, by ANY center, and against ANY other center (no matter how inept), in which that player would average 33 ppg on .633 shooting. BTW, Kareem scored and shot MUCH higher in those two years, against Hakeem, than he did against the rest of the league. And we KNOW that Hakeem defended him in those games.

And while I don't know know how often Hakeem attempted to guard Gilmore, in those same two season, (84-85 and 85-86) Gilmore averaged 23.7 ppg on .677 shooting against Hakeem's teams.

BTW, Kareem shot .610 against Hakeem in their FIVE seasons in the league together, and seldom shot under 50% (only three games.) He seldom shot over 50% against either Wilt or Thurmond, and we know that Moses just battered him in the majority of their H2H's. And in the quick research that I did in his H2H's with Gilmore, he slightly outscored Artis, while Gilmore considerably outshot him.

THAT speaks volumes about the quality of play of the centers of the 60's and 70's.

Nobody said completely adjust a player's FGA down. In reality, Oscar's FGA would probably be reduced the least, while the other players would lose more than the star. Still, I don't think he could use as many possessions in the 80's, 90's ect. as he did in 1962, and it's pretty obvious.

I don't agree with adjusting his FG% either. There is the argument about playing conditions, but we can't ignore more double teaming, better players on average, and yes, less lay ups in transition.

A big reason why the FG% was so much lower in the 60's was set shots, 15 foot hook shots ect. were still around. That along with playing conditions.

But look at what happened throughout the 60's, the FG% continued getting better. Is it because defense got worse? Of course not, the average player got more skilled, and the set shot and 15 foot hook shots were pretty extinct.

Chamberlain was THE most doubled and BRUTALIZED center in NBA history. I have posted LONG ARTICLES, including a BOSTON writer who interviewed CELTIC players. Chamberlan was SWARMED in his career.

True, Wilt defended his opposine centers one-on-one, but not even the great Russell could that against Chamberlain. And please, don't post a two-minute video of Wilt being single covered. Anotehr poster posted a few minutes of a Finals game in '64 and he deliberately left out the ACTUAL CONSTANT doubling that Wilt received in that game...which, I of course quickly posted.

And this FALLACY that Wilt did not face TALL or ATHLETIC centers has been DESTROYED here. He was facing centers AS TALL as those that play TODAY. And I would even argue that the one's he faced were FAR more SKILLED (players like Bellamy, Reed, Lanier, Cowens, Hayes, Kareem, and even Gilmore in a limited engagement.)

The FG%'s of the 60's continued to get MARGINALLY better. They did the same in the 70's, when all of a sudden, after the 77-78 season, they took a QUANTUM leap. Did the players all of a sudden become more skilled. And then, after that late 80's, they started trending downward...even the CENTERS, who did not take 3pt shots.

Of course, there will be those that argue that DEFENSES got better in the 90's. How come Thurmond, Wilt, Gilmore, and Moses DRAMATICALLY altered Kareem's shooting then?

The CONDITIONS in the early 60's were AWFUL. Once again, one only need to look at this PAST season to see just how dramatically a compressed schedule affected shooting. And the scheduling in the 60's was FAR worse than what it was this past season.

I will hold my position that you move any player, who played in the 60's, into the 80's, and their FG%'s would rise, just like the players who played in BOTH decades of the 70's and 80's.

Continued...

jlauber

05-13-2012, 02:17 PM

Continuing...

First of all, Kareem was still pretty much as good as he ever was in '80 when he shot 60.4%. Plus, he was shooting less, and had much more talent around him to take some pressure off.

Gilmore was attempting like 10 FGA in the 80's. He was taking as many as 16 in the 70's. When you take 10 FGA per game, most can be dunks/lay ups.

Kareem could barely rebound in the 80's. He was nowhere near as athletic as he was in the 70's. And, I have long maintained that his PEAK was in the early 70's...and not the mid-to-late 70's. His "sky-hook" was much quicker, with more elevation, and his post moves were much quicker. Granted, his range increased, but he just not as athletic.

Here again, take a look at his play in '72 and then again in '76. In a weaker league in '76 (no doubt about that), and with less dominant centers, his play fell off considerably. And per minute played, his '71 season was arguably his greatest.

I already covered the adjustment as well as you can with TRB%, which is the percentage of available rebounds you grab.

No you didn't. You claimed that Wilt, who averaged 22.5 rpg in the '73 post-season, would have only averaged 14-15 at the same rate in the modern playoffs.

Here was your quote...

So Wilt's rebounding in the '78 postseason, translates to around 14-15 rpg, give or take depending on minutes. Most players play more minutes in the playoffs, so I could see him averaging as many as 16, if he was playing 40+ mpg, which is possible even for a 35 year old Wilt during a playoff run considering how durable he was. And coaches are less conservative with minutes in the playoffs.

I used ACTUAL math. Wilt averaged 22.5 rpg in the '73 post-season, in a post-season (and regular season) that averaged 50.6 rpg. In 2011-2012, the NBA averaged 42.2 rpg. Here again, do the math. 42.2/50.6=.834. Multiply that by 22.5 and you get 18.8 rpg.

You might argue that he wouldn't play 47.1 mpg in the modern era, but keep in mind that he AVERAGED 47.2 mpg in his 160 CAREER playoff games. He would certainly play more than anyone else. I might accept 16 rpg, but that would be the absolute lowest, and here, ONLY Chamberlain was capable of playing 48 mpg. He PROVED that. As for Rodman...ONE season of 40 mpg.

And once again, Wilt blocked some 8+ shots per game, which clearly affected his rebounding numbers, as well. And when you factor in that he probably went after another 8+ every game...well, you tell me. How many rebounds did he lose in the course of each season by being the greatest shot blocker of all-time?

When did I say Wilt would play 36 mpg? Though it's not hard to imagine at 36 years old in the modern NBA. But he might play more in the playoffs, players always do. It has nothing to do with how Wilt's stamina was. It's just how coaches and teams operate these days.

You DID, and I just addressed it.

Maybe, but with superior team defenses, more double teaming and bigger players on average, especially more athletic help defenders with more length, those would be factors as well.

And I know you won't agree, but I suspect playing 48 mpg when the games were blowouts boosted his efficiency, I believe it may have given him more easy baskets when guys weren't trying as hard with the game over.

Typical anti-Wilt nonsense. Chamberlain played 45.2 mpg in his ENTIRE career. But, while you will point out his 61-62 season, how about his 62-63 season, then, when, he averaged 47.6 mpg, scored 44.8 ppg, shot .528 (a league record at the time), and only played in eight games of 20+ decisions (going 4-4.) In fact, his horrible team had a -2.1 scoring differential, and lost 35 games by single digits. BTW, his team faced the Celtics, and their NINE HOFers, in NINE games, and Chamberlain averaged 38.1 ppg in those games. His team won one blowout game, lost a couple of double-digit games, and played the other six into the waning moments. ALL of the games were within reach at the end of three quarters.

The "anti-Chamberlain-clan" just can't help but attempt to disparage ANYTHING about Wilt. Now he gets ripped because when he played 48 mpg, he was getting easy baskets at the end? PLEASE, pull that BS on someone else.

Chamberlain was playing 48 mpg in as many as FIVE GAMES IN FIVE NIGHTS. He did so, game-after-game, and season-after-season. Take a look at Shaq's play in the post-season, with two days rest, and then on only one (and keep in mind that in Wilt's '68 playoff series against the Knicks, he played THREE STRAIGHT GAMES IN THREE STRAIGHT DAYS.) Are you really going to debate this?

Going from being played mostly 1 on 1 to constant double/triple teams is the answer, straight from Kareem's mouth.

Yep...I CLEARLY proved that Kareem scored LESS efficiently over the course of FOUR seasons, with LESS attempts, and this is the response I get. BTW, how did Chamberlain manage to score 40 ppg and shooting 100 points over the league FG% average, in his prime, and when he was SWARMED????? And, while it was only a nine game sample, his play at the beginning of the 69-70 season (his 11th) was indicative of his potential that season. His new coach, Joe Mullaney, asked that Wilt become the focal point of the LA offense (what a novel concept BTW...one that his predecessor, the idiotic Butch Van Breda Kolf couldn't consider)...and the response? A league-leading 32.2 ppg and on 60% shooting. Including games of 33, 35, 37 (on 7-0 Tom Boerwinkle), 38 (on reigning MVP Wes Unseld), 42 (on star Bob Rule), and 43 points. He even posted a 25-25 9-14 game on Kareem (and ripped him in every facet.)

Gilmore was attempting like 10 FGA in the 80's. He was taking as many as 16 in the 70's. When you take 10 FGA per game, most can be dunks/lay ups

Here again...how come Gilmore was SCORING nearly as much, in the 80's, as he was in the 70's, despite shooting FAR less? And why could he average 23.7 ppg on .677 shooting against Hakeem-led teams in the 85 and 86 seasons? Was he dunking at will in those games?

The 80's Nuggets were the worst possible team to use as an example. They were an unusually fast-paced team even for the fast-paced 80's.

The Fat Lever example just proves that pace can make a big difference.

Lever averaged 9.3 rpg, in 35.8 mpg, on a team that averaged 45 rpg, in a league that averaged 44 rpg. Lever was 6-3 and weighed 175 lbs,. and he was outrebounding almost every 7-0 footer in the league at the time.

Yet, I am supposed to believe that a 6-5 220 lb Oscar, who PROVED he coluld get 12.5 rpg in a season, would not be capable of 9 rpg in ANY era? C'mon, Barkley was getting 14.6 rpg. 6-7 Ben Wallace was getting 15.4 rpg just a few years ago. Now, I would not claim that Oscar was on their level (although the 6-5 Baylor was), BUT, 9 rpg is certainly not out of the realm of possibility.

And Rodman was in no way an average rebounder in the playoffs. He's 3rd all-time in TRB% during the playoffs at 20.5%, behind only Dwight(22.3%) and Wilt(21.1%).

Where did you get Wilt's number from? His LAST THREE years? I have already provided you with a SERIES, and against RUSSELL, no less, in Wilt's PRIME, in which he was getting nearly 30% of the AVAILABLE rebounds.

And Rodman was a PART-TIME player. He SHRUNK DRAMATICALLY in the post-season for several reasons. One, he was an inept offensive liability. And two, against superior rebounders, his numbers dropped. Wilt ELEVATED his numbers as the competition got better, especially in the post-season. 29 playoff series, and no one approached Wilt in ANY of them. And he ROUTINELY crushed them.

And here is a great example. In Wilt's LAST season, he led the NBA in rebounding at 18.6 rpg. Thurmond came in a distant second at 17.1 rpg. The two met in the WCF's (after Nate completely shut down Kareem), and Wilt proceeded to outrebound Thurmond by a 23.6 rpg to 17.2 rpg margin. And you and I both know that Chamberlain had MULTIPLE SERIES against Russelll with a 5+ rpg margin, and as high as a NINE rpg differential.

And CONTRARY to YOUR take...and given the FACT that Dwight and Rodman SELDOM evenb played 40 mpg...I would argue that those two would fall apart trying to play 40+ mpg. They certainly NEVER did it with any regularity at any point in their careers. While, of course, Chamberlain SELDOM played LESS than 40. Wilt was a medical and physical marvel, and there is a reason why he was the ONLY player playing 48 mpg (and in MANY compressed seasons, and even compressed POST-SEASONS.)

Fat Lever did not play in today's NBA.

If Oscar played 40 minutes per game and maintained his '62 rebound rate, he'd average 7-8 rpg. Though Oscar's TRB% in '62 was well above his normal average.

Maybe. Maybe not. Given the fact that a "triple double" was not even mentioned in Oscar's era...I suspect that a motivated Oscar could take a normal 8-9 rpg campaign, and push it to 10.

Magic nearly did that feat in '82...but on far less scoring AND passing.

I will say that Oscar would easily have posted 30 ppg and 10 apg seasons in ANY era, and being within strking distance of a triple double season...I think he could have accomplished it.

ShaqAttack3234

05-13-2012, 03:03 PM

I said...do the math. Divide 95.8 by 124.7 (76.8%), and then multiply by the '62 league scoring average of 118.8 ppg. You get 91.2 ppg. That possesion NONSENSE is exactly that...NONSENSE. There is no way in hell that ANY team from ANY other era would not adapt to whatever conditions they were faced with. How do I know that...take any year, and then look at the previous year.

Who the hell told you to use that method?

Don't act like 30 possessions per game don't mean anything for statistics either. It's just ridiculous and makes you look incredibly biased.

And it's an exaggeration that any team would adapt. Not every team or every player can play in any era.

I have said it before, but I want someone here to point out the EXACT year in which the NBA became what we see today.

Nothing all happens in one year, it was a progression over time. The league wasn't the exact same in the 80's either, there were big differences. Hell, there were differences between the early 00's and now.

How come a 39 year old Kareem can wipe the floor with Hakeem and Ewing (or a 35 year old Gilmore clean Hakeem's clock),

If you're going to post Kareem and Gilmore's age, at least be consistent and mention Hakeem and Ewing were young.

Oh wait, I forgot, you have an enormous agenda.

And before stating Gilmore "cleaned" Hakeem's clock, you should at least try watching those games, and if you can't, at least find some recaps.

I'm astounded that anyone actually determines a player outplayed another player without even knowing if they guarded each other, not to mention that you can't determine a player was better simply from a box score.

and yet, in 43 career H2H's against Thurmond (and covering all of the years from '70 thru '75) he had a TOTAL of SEVEN 30+ point games, with a HIGH of 34? And inm MANY he shot less than 40%? Yet he ROUTINELY hung games of 40 on Hakeem, and on just unfathomable FG%'s (and Gilmore approached nearly 70% in his CAREER meetings with Hakeem BTW.)

I don't care. I'm well aware that Thurmond matched up well with Kareem back then, and I'm well aware that Hakeem had a lot of trouble guarding Kareem when he was young.

Futhermore, a YOUNG Moses, who played in the SEVENTIES, just WAXED a PRIME Kareem. And he would dominate him in the vast majority of their 40 career H2H games (and particularly in the post-season, where his team's went 6-1 against Kareem, and he just BURIED Kareem in every facet of the game.)

Did you watch these games? Because I know for a fact that they didn't always guard each other.

And again, why should I care about this? How's this relevant?

And while I don't know know how often Hakeem attempted to guard Gilmore

Exactly.

BTW, Kareem shot .610 against Hakeem in their FIVE seasons in the league together, and seldom shot under 50% (only three games.) He seldom shot over 50% against either Wilt or Thurmond, and we know that Moses just battered him in the majority of their H2H's. And in the quick research that I did in his H2H's with Gilmore, he slightly outscored Artis, while Gilmore considerably outshot him.

Let me known when you're done spamming the same redundant shit.

THAT speaks volumes about the quality of play of the centers of the 60's and 70's.

Well, the "bridge" thing makes me laugh, but I do agree that Thurmond was a great player.

Chamberlain was THE most doubled and BRUTALIZED center in NBA history.

:roll: :oldlol: :roll: Holy shit, I'm dying. The most doubled?! You've gone off the deep end, Jeffrey.

Brutalized? You mean what you did to his ass when he used to bend over?

I have posted LONG ARTICLES, including a BOSTON writer who interviewed CELTIC players. Chamberlan was SWARMED in his career.

And I've mentioned sources saying double-teaming wasn't really done or was rare back then. But of course in your world, evidence only counts when it backs up your agenda.

True, Wilt defended his opposine centers one-on-one, but not even the great Russell could that against Chamberlain. And please, don't post a two-minute video of Wilt being single covered.

It wasn't a 2 minute video, it was an entire half of a key playoff game. And he was guarded 1 on 1 throughout the entire video.

And this FALLACY that Wilt did not face TALL or ATHLETIC centers has been DESTROYED here. He was facing centers AS TALL as those that play TODAY. And I would even argue that the one's he faced were FAR more SKILLED (players like Bellamy, Reed, Lanier, Cowens, Hayes, Kareem, and even Gilmore in a limited engagement.)

In general, the center position had a few really good players in the 60's, I won't deny that, and some more good/really good players in the early 70's.

Even so, team defenses on average weren't much to write home about.

The FG%'s of the 60's continued to get MARGINALLY better. They did the same in the 70's, when all of a sudden, after the 77-78 season, they took a QUANTUM leap. Did the players all of a sudden become more skilled. And then, after that late 80's, they started trending downward...even the CENTERS, who did not take 3pt shots.

FG% went down after the late 80's because defense continued better and run and gun teams were becoming less frequent. Defense was emphasized more after Detroit won back to back, and the Knicks took it to another level.

Of course, there will be those that argue that DEFENSES got better in the 90's. How come Thurmond, Wilt, Gilmore, and Moses DRAMATICALLY altered Kareem's shooting then?

What does that have to do with the 90's? And a few individual defenders have nothing to do with the quality of the league defensively. Of course you have no concept of double teaming and team defense(not surprising since you're a Wilt fan that this would be an unfamiliar concept).

It's funny how you never bother to think how some players just match up better with others. And how you jump to conclusion based on a stat sheet, yet a stat sheet doesn't tell you how often players guarded each other.

I will hold my position that you move any player, who played in the 60's, into the 80's, and their FG%'s would rise, just like the players who played in BOTH decades of the 70's and 80's.

And I will continue laughing at you as you try to figure out the game of basketball.

Kareem could barely rebound in the 80's.

His rebounding didn't fall off much until '82. The difference in his rebounding from '79 to '80 was that his team went from a horrible rebounding team in '79 to a good one in '80.

He was nowhere near as athletic as he was in the 70's.

Go watch the '80 playoffs, he had barely lost anything. And his game was never based on athleticism either, even so, he was still an excellent athlete for a 7'2"-7'3" man, and he had one of his 3 best playoff runs in '80(along with '77 and '74), and '80 was his best championship playoff run, and one of the best playoff runs of all time. And that came after an MVP regular season.

And, I have long maintained that his PEAK was in the early 70's...and not the mid-to-late 70's. His "sky-hook" was much quicker, with more elevation, and his post moves were much quicker. Granted, his range increased, but he just not as athletic.

You maintain that his peak was in the early 70's because you're basketball knowledge consists of basketball-reference and nothing else.

I've posted articles where teammates, coaches and Kareem himself mention that he was at his best in '77. They talk about him adding to his arsenal with the turnaround jumper, left-handed hooks ect. Plus Kareem himself admitted that he was guarded 1 on 1 in the early 70's. He also got stronger by the mid/late 70's.

Here again, take a look at his play in '72 and then again in '76. In a weaker league in '76 (no doubt about that), and with less dominant centers, his play fell off considerably. And per minute played, his '71 season was arguably his greatest.

'77 was clearly better, sorry. I've researched Kareem's career and he was a better player in '77. Look at what he did in the playoffs(some games are available, so if you want to try watching one for a change, check them out), and look at the team he carried to the best record.

It wouldn't make any sense at all if Kareem didn't improve after his 3rd year.

I know exactly why you're doing this. You're too predictable. It's so you can say Wilt "outplayed" peak Kareem.

I'm not replying to any more of your essay either. I'm running out of characters and had to delete some of my post to fit it because you go on these long idiotic rants and repeat the same shit.

CavaliersFTW

05-13-2012, 03:23 PM

It wasn't a 2 minute video, it was an entire half of a key playoff game. And he was guarded 1 on 1 throughout the entire video.

I don't want to get between all what you and JL are going back and forth about but was that entire half of key playoff game a reference to the b/w '67 76ers vs Celtics game available on youtube? If so I'd like to address why you don't see them doubling Wilt.

PTB Fan

05-13-2012, 03:40 PM

I don't want to get between all what you and JL are going back and forth about but was that entire half of key playoff game a reference to the b/w '67 76ers vs Celtics game available on youtube? If so I'd like to address why you don't see them doubling Wilt.

Because of the available footage, there's no proof for that claim.

Until i see one, i won't buy that.

So i'll side with ShaqAttack on this one, even though i share identical views about the NBA History.

CavaliersFTW

05-13-2012, 03:55 PM

Because of the available footage, there's no proof for that claim.

Until i see one, i won't buy that.

So i'll side with ShaqAttack on this one, even though i share identical views about the NBA History.

You don't even know what I'm going to say or what evidence I may have all I asked was a question and your taking a side? C'mon :roll:

Is it the 67 76ers series? Yes or no? There are several Wilt 2nd halfs available on film and I know the backstories of a lot of the 1960's post seasons and have information pertaining to the 67 season and the post seasons prior and how they effected how Wilt was defended.

PTB Fan

05-13-2012, 04:07 PM

You don't even know what I'm going to say or what evidence I may have all I asked was a question and your taking a side? C'mon :roll:

Is it the 67 76ers series? Yes or no? There are several Wilt 2nd halfs available on film and I know the backstories of a lot of the 1960's post seasons and have information pertaining to the 67 season and the post seasons prior and how they effected how Wilt was defended.

I pretty much made a wild guess. :lol

Going to get exposed as Russell fan boy here.. :roll:

I've never seen Wilt double teamed.. then again, there isn't enough footage.

Maybe you can help in answering that Q

jlauber

05-13-2012, 09:13 PM

I pretty much made a wild guess. :lol

Going to get exposed as Russell fan boy here.. :roll:

I've never seen Wilt double teamed.. then again, there isn't enough footage.

Maybe you can help in answering that Q

I am going to put an crushing end to this RIDICULOUS theory that Wilt was somehow single-covered throughout his career. BTW, I have posted this before:

http://biography.jrank.org/pages/2336/Chamberlain-Wilt.html

Several of the rules of college basketball had to be changed as a result of Chamberlain's talents, which simply dwarfed those of previous players. Opposing players double-and triple-teamed him and played a slowed-down game rather than attempt to confront Chamberlain's offensive skills head-on. These techniques helped the University of North Carolina defeat Kansas 54-53 in triple overtime in the 1957 championship game.

Such tactics also frustrated the rapidly developing Chamberlain, who startled the basketball world by turning professional rather than returning to Kansas for his senior year. NBA rules forbade him from joining the league until the year in which he would have graduated from college, so Chamberlain played for the razzle-dazzle touring professional team the Harlem Globetrotters during the 1958-59 season. He joined the Philadelphia Warriors in 1959, having already collected a large bonus for signing.

Individual Triumphs in NBA
Chamberlain was an NBA star from the beginning, leading the league in scoring and rebounding, and taking home honors not only for Rookie of the Year but also for Most Valuable Player. Frustrated by defensive tactics similar to those he had faced in college, and by what he considered biased officiating, he threatened to leave the league and return to the Globetrotters in 1960. But he did not follow through on his threat, and soon learned to outmaneuver his tormentors through sheer size, speed, and skill.

http://www.nba.com/history/players/chamberlain_bio.html

(Keep in mind that this quote is from Celtic Tom Heinsohn BTW)

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

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,940232,00.html

[QUOTE]Most basketball stars have one great talent: Russell's is defense, Elgin Baylor's is shooting, Bob Cousy's is setting up plays and passing. Chamberlain does almost everything, better than anyone else. He is the pros' fiercest rebounder, and his shooting repertory includes such inimitable specialties as the "Dipper Dunk" (in which he simply stretches up and lays the ball in the basket), the "Stuff Shot" (in which he jumps up and rams the ball through the net from above), [B]and the "Fadeaway Jump"

jlauber

05-13-2012, 09:21 PM

Continuing...

http://samcelt.forumotion.net/t2803-wilt-meets-bill-and-tommy-4000-words

(This from a Celtic site BTW)

[QUOTE]At 7

jlauber

05-13-2012, 09:36 PM

Continuing...

Now, regarding the Russell-Wilt rivalry, and how often that Russell had help...how about a Costas interview with BOTH of them sitting side-by-side...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=173M7ApCNKw

Pay attention from about the 5 minute mark...

"Instead of having 2-3 people and then Russell arriving at the same time..."

And the video FOOTAGE while making that comment substantiates that FACT.

And the notorious Chamberlain-hater Fecal9 posted a complete farce of a video in which he EDITED it to show that Wilt was single covered during a 64 Finals game between the Celtics and Warriors.

That game (or more precisely the second HALF of that game) has been removed from YouTube, BUT, at the time that clown made that video, I IMMEDIATELY posted FOOTAGE from that SAME game, and on SEVEN CONSECUTIVE possessions, Chamberlain was either DOUBLED, TRIPLED, or SWARMED.

In any case, and as I have just pointed out...with OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE...Chamberlain was THE most DOUBLED and BRUTALIZED player in NBA HISTORY.

chips93

05-13-2012, 09:45 PM

am i remembering incorrectly, or once upon a time was jlauber actually tolerable?

jlauber

05-13-2012, 09:48 PM

BTW, I forgot to respond to ShaqAttack's take on Chamberlain playing 48 mpg...and getting easy baskets in blowout games.

How about the clinching game six of the '72 WCF's, when a 35 year old Wilt engineered a 4th quarter comeback from 10 points down...when by ALL ACCOUNTS, he took over that game. He was POUNDING and OUTRACING the 25 year old Kareem all over the floor, including scoring nine points, while holding Kareem to 2-8 shooting in thatr period. Kareem was NOTICEABLY tired...and was BADLY outplayed in that 4th quarter.

And that was a Kareem who played a CAREER high 44.2 mpg that season, too. And yet a 36 year old Chamberlain was BLOWING by him. Of course, and as I mentioned earlier...Wilt AVERAGED 47.2 MPG in his 160 CAREER post-season games. He was LIGHT YEARS ahead of even a PRIME Kareem in terms of conditioning.

Once again, ONLY Chamberlain could play 48 mpg. That was PROVEN. And for these knuckleheads top claim that someone like Rodman averaged more rebounds per minute played (or whatever garbage they spew)...NO ONE else could have withstood an onslaught from Chamberlain for 48 minutes. Least of all a PART-TIMER like Rodman.

jlauber

05-13-2012, 09:49 PM

am i remembering incorrectly, or once upon a time was jlauber actually tolerable?

Care to respond to anything in my posts...? I will be more than happy to engage you in an intelligent discourse...

Pointguard

05-13-2012, 11:10 PM

It wouldn't make any sense at all if Kareem didn't improve after his 3rd year.

I know exactly why you're doing this. You're too predictable. It's so you can say Wilt "outplayed" peak Kareem.

Old Wilt who was at 40% of his peak scoring - great players rarely stay in the league to that point - outplayed one of the most productive and active years Kareem ever had and that's for sure. And knee surgery back then was expected to end careers. Wilt had lost some mobility.

Older Wilt who was at 28% of his scoring peak (see above) had most saying he outplayed the most productive (by far) and active year Kareem had. Wilt was waaaay off peak - Wilt had at one point averaged 35.5 more points and 6 more rebounds per game (RS) more than when he outplayed Kareem in that series.

CavaliersFTW

05-13-2012, 11:23 PM

Old Wilt who was at 40% of his peak scoring - great players rarely stay in the league to that point - outplayed one of the most productive and active years Kareem ever had and that's for sure. And knee surgery back then was expected to end careers. Wilt had lost some mobility.

Older Wilt who was at 28% of his scoring peak (see above) had most saying he outplayed the most productive (by far) and active year Kareem had. Wilt was waaaay off peak - Wilt had at one point averaged 35.5 more points and 6 more rebounds per game more than when he outplayed Kareem in that series.

What your doing here is wrong. Wilt's scoring stats after he was traded to the 76ers - and especially his final 2 seasons with the Lakers - should never be treated as representations of his ability to score. He very deliberately was coached to win with new strategies and/or was self motivated to pursue records he had not yet broken by playing entirely different roles on those teams - none of which had anything to do with scoring. There is no way possible you can try to pin %'s on him whether your trying to support his case or not. His playing style was too much of a roller coaster.

For example, he dropped 2 60 point games in 1969 after a reporter suggested exactly what your erroneously assuming. That Wilt's scoring value had declined. Wilt did not decline in ability to to score with the %'s you tried to extrapolate based on stats. He scored 45 points in the 1970 NBA finals only a few months after his knee surgery - even knee surgery did not debilitate his scoring like stats suggest. I'm sure there was a decline, but it definitely isn't measurable because he never tried to stay the same player for more than a few seasons at a time throughout his entire career. I recommend you read the book "The Rivalry" it gives a lot of insight on when and why he made deliberate shifts in his style of play. I assure you "% of peak scoring" is extremely misleading the way your using it.

jlauber

05-13-2012, 11:54 PM

What your doing here is wrong. Wilt's scoring stats after he was traded to the 76ers - and especially his final 2 seasons with the Lakers - should never be treated as representations of his ability to score. He very deliberately was coached to win with new strategies and/or was self motivated to pursue records he had not yet broken by playing entirely different roles on those teams - none of which had anything to do with scoring. There is no way possible you can try to pin %'s on him whether your trying to support his case or not. His playing style was too much of a roller coaster.

For example, he dropped 2 60 point games in 1969 after a reporter suggested exactly what your erroneously assuming. That Wilt's scoring value had declined. Wilt did not decline in ability to to score with the %'s you tried to extrapolate based on stats. He scored 45 points in the 1970 NBA finals only a few months after his knee surgery - even knee surgery did not debilitate his scoring like stats suggest. I'm sure there was a decline, but it definitely isn't measurable because he never tried to stay the same player for more than a few seasons at a time throughout his entire career. I recommend you read the book "The Rivalry" it gives a lot of insight on when and why he made deliberate shifts in his style of play. I assure you "% of peak scoring" is extremely misleading the way your using it.

While Wilt lost very little of his amazing vertical after his knee surgery, he did lose some lateral mobility. You mentioned his two 60+ point games in the 68-69 season. That was the year before his devastating knee injury.

As for his play in the '70 Finals, and only four months removed from major knee surgery, he was nowhere near 100%. There is footage of game seven of the '70 Finals, and game five of the '72 Finals on YouTube. Wilt was in FAR better shape in that game five in '72. In '70 he was running stiff-legged, but in '72 he is all over the floor...which was amazing for a 36 year old.

Pointguard's take is actually right on. Kareem never faced a PRIME scoring Chamberlain. THAT Wilt TERRORIZED the NBA..including players like Reed, Bellamy, Russell, and Thurmond. A mid-60's Wilt, in a span of 11 straight games, averaged 30 ppg on Thurmond, with SIX games of 30, 33, 34, 34, 38, and even 45 points. Which is fascinating because Kareem faced a fading Thurmond in 43 starting matchups from Kareem's rookie year, thru the 74-75 season. And, Kareem had a TOTAL of SEVEN 30+ point games against Nate, with a high of 34 (and two of those 30+ came in that last season '75 season.)

I won't take the time to post their 43 H2H's here right now...but I do have them (and thanks to Alexanderaben I also have many of their H2H FG%'s...as well as their well-known three straight post-seasons, when Nate held Kareem to .486, .428, and even .405 shooting.)

The closest we got to a PRIME Wilt against Kareem, came in Kareem's rookie season. True, Kareem was a rookie, but that was a Chamberlain in his 11th season, and it was the only game they went H2H before Wilt shredded his knee. And in that one game, Chamberlain outscored Kareem, 25-23; outrebounded him, 25-20; outassisted him, 5-2; outblocked him, 3-2 (including a block of his skyhook); and outshot him by a 9-14 to 9-21 margin.

And most here know by now that a 34 year old Wilt, in arguably his WORST season, in 70-71, battled Kareem in TEN H2H games (five in the regular season, and five more in the playoffs), and while Kareem slightly outscored Wilt in those ten games, Wilt easily outrebounded him, and outshot him by a considerable margin. And I have long maintained that that 70-71 season was Kareem's FINEST. He "only" played 40.3 mpg, and yet averaged 31.7 ppg, 16.0 rpg, and shot .577 (which, BTW, came in a league that shot .449...and that .128 differential was the HIGHEST of Kareem's career.)

Wilt was widely acclaimed as haing outplayed Kareem in the '71 WCF's. And by virtually ALL accounts (and despite Kareem heavily outscoring Wilt), Wilt was universally acknowledged as having outplayed Kareem in the '72 WCF's. In part because he held Kareem to .414 shooting over the course of their last four games (three of them Laker wins, including a Laker blowout win in game five, and Wilt thoroughly outplaying Kareem in a come-from-behind clinching win in game six in Milwaukee.)

I won't argue that even an old Wilt was CAPABLE of scoring more. Hell, in five H2H's in the 71-72 season, and against 6-11 HOFer Bob Lanier, Chamberlain averaged 29 ppg, including a 32-31 game. BTW, Wilt had TWO 30-30 games in that 71-72 season alone (of his 103 in his career)...which is fascinating, since Kareem played IN the Wilt-era for four seasons, and another 16 afterwards, and only recorded ONE in his entire career.

Once again, it would have been far more interesting to have seen a PRIME Chamberlain, ala a mid-60's Wilt (who absolutely CRUSHED Russell, Thurmond, Reed, and Bellamy in their MANY H2H's)...a Wilt who routinely poured in 40+ points, and on staggering FG%'s.

IMHO, THAT Wilt would easily have outscored Kareem, dominated him on the glass, and probably held Kareem to 45% shooting or worse, and perhaps as low as 40%.

Pointguard

05-14-2012, 12:42 AM

CavaliersFTW

05-14-2012, 12:52 AM

Stop taking things so literal, guy.

Wilt was not his peak self and after the surgery he was going to explode on competition for a whole series like before. A game in 1970 is not a series in '71 or '72. Please show me the 60 point games in '71 or '72?

I could use the same leaps in logic that you use: You think Wilt retired because he ran out of reinventions? You think Wilt wasn't subjected to getting old? You think Wilt would sometimes walk funny because it was the style? You think attrition had no role in his game changes? Just slow down and see what I'm saying. If we are talking about peaks and primes we are obviously talking about maximums, full capabilities, strengths and the energy to fully execute what you are trying to do. If you were following the exchange I am very obviously pointing to that.

Attritition settles in. Wilt could not go into his repetoire in '72 to score much, or there is not much evidence to contradict that. He didn't reinvent himself to the point that he lost pride on the court. Sure some of it was to get the best shot percentage wise but you're crazy if you think that was going to be raised above his level of pride. He didn't retire because the enterprise ran out of new frontiers to explore. Wilt was human, his bad diet and poor sleeping patterns caught up to him - its ok. It happens.

Let me ask you something. Do you think 1967 Chamberlain would have said he felt he needed help to guard Kareem? Do you think Wilt in '71 and '72 could run the floor like he did in 1962? Do you think he could even pivot hard and spin on his knee consistently? Do you think he was down for the same run, gun, stop with heavier guys?
Not what I said at all - I said his ppg he produced as he aged is not something that you can peg as indication of his scoring ability because he did not keep trying to score - as is documented in the books, interviews, and documentaries made all throughout his career and post-career :confusedshrug:

You can't put a % on his ability to score. He didn't keep trying to score, he stopped chasing scoring statistics and stopped playing the role of scoring anchor before his prime was even over. I'm not making leaps in logic, I'm not suggesting he didn't decline, but I am suggesting any method for measuring his decline via scoring % isn't correct because there was never a constant effort on his behalf to maintain scoring production a-la modern superstars. Does this not make sense?

Pointguard

05-14-2012, 02:16 AM

Not what I said at all - I said his ppg he produced as he aged is not something that you can peg as indication of his scoring ability because he did not keep trying to score - as is documented in the books, interviews, and documentaries made all throughout his career and post-career :confusedshrug:

You can't put a % on his ability to score. He didn't keep trying to score, he stopped chasing scoring statistics and stopped playing the role of scoring anchor before his prime was even over. I'm not making leaps in logic, I'm not suggesting he didn't decline, but I am suggesting any method for measuring his decline via scoring % isn't correct because there was never a constant effort on his behalf to maintain scoring production a-la modern superstars. Does this not make sense?
It makes sense but so what. Its not about the point you are making... you are trying to make this about your point when I never concerned myself with it. You are trying to make something out of something from what I wrote. My premise.

1) Wilt had declined as a player due to attrition.
2) All players go thru scoring declines when attrition sets in.
3) He was nowhere near his peak.
4) It can be seen in his scoring averages.
5) Peaks and primes are good indicators of maximums while end of careers are good indicators of pits.

Now to you.

I am suggesting any method for measuring his decline via scoring % isn't correct because there was never a constant effort on his behalf to maintain scoring production a-la modern superstars.

His role changed but you are incorrect in to say "ANY" because all attrition wars are manifest. His scoring capability had definitely changed and attrition was definitely part of it. By nature this is a reality all athletes face no matter how great. In the middle of his career its a role change. At the end of the career and the player stops playing prematurely - attrition has played a role - the key role.

Your counter is going to be its not the right measure because the role was not to score more. But this true to an extent. Wilt had pride and Wilt could have played til he was 45 if his pride wasn't in his way. Wilt wasn't going to play and be the third or fourth best center. Wilt's decision to quit is indicative to what extent role vs pride plays out in his decision making. If you think that Wilt was playing to play some role you read the wrong books. Wilt was motivated by his pride and goals he could attain. It wasn't just motivation - it was a need.

Wilt's motivation was always some type of excellence or high achievement. If he could have maintained 30ppg career scoring average he would have played five more years - Wilt loved numbers. He wasn't playing to play more roles as you suggest. Wilt didn't like when other players out-rebounded him and wasn't down for several centers out scoring him either. If Wilt could have scored more, he would have played longer.

PTB Fan

05-14-2012, 04:21 AM

Guys keep the topic about Big O.

Let's discuss him! :cheers:

Owl

08-06-2012, 06:13 PM

I'm learning Oscar here. Can someone tell me about his defense? He obviously had great instincts because his rebound numbers were always among the highest of guards, and this was while he was one of the greats at multitasking. You can tell he a guy that approached things from a very practical point and that he was very wise on the court. He was very aware of his surroundings on the court and has great instincts.

I am really amused at his fundamentals - he even spins in correct physical proportions - like a trained dancer or the way they tell running backs to spin as to avoid injury. His attention to placing people on his hip is also a very exact science. He has a great blend of intangibles and the physics of the game and defenders.

Defense?
I just reviewed this thread after I some quotes I made here (in response to this post) came up as of interest elsewhere.
Anyway coincidentally I had recently read a quote about Oscar's D, so whilst it's a tad late I thought it might be of interest.

Oscar is without a doubt the all-time everything basketball player. His tremendous offensive ability has overshadowed his great defensive skills.

This is probably the most complimentary quote I've read about Oscar's D.

Owl

08-06-2012, 07:33 PM

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=4g-ozaJGPiQC&pg=PT75&lpg=PT75&dq=%22oscar+robertson%22+defense&source=bl&ots=1M_N2v6Rk4&sig=TuiQsfdyfmwnBzmI_hHVWApwMpE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=w1EgUNbYE-Wc0AWvgIHgBg&ved=0CFkQ6AEwCTgK#v=onepage&q=%22oscar%20robertson%22%20defense&f=false

Don't know if the link will work but I just dug up some more (positive) quotes on Oscar's D, one from his coach Larry Costello and one from Gene Shue

He plays even better than Walt Frazier of the New York Knicks. He's stronger than Frazier, and no one is going to take him inside and get six-foot shots ... If anyone scores against Robertson, it's going to be on 18 footers
Robertson should have been on the all-defensive team. He got my vote. He may have played better defense than any other guard this the league this year. When a man is a great offensive player and he's as smart as Oscar is, he knows what the offensive player is going to do, and that helps him tremendously on defense.

WillC

08-07-2012, 05:42 AM

Here are some other quotes about Oscar Robertson. I posted them in another thread but it makes sense for them to be posted in here too.

"Many began to refer to Oscar as the best basketball player the human race had yet produced. The argument: who would you rather have to start building a team, Wilt or Oscar, began to while away many an hour" ('24 Seconds to Shoot', by Leonard Koppett)

"Oscar Robertson may have been better than Michael Jordan, except Cincinnati was not Chicago and the 1960s were not the 1990s" ('Who's Better, Who's Best in Basketball?' by Elliot Kalb)

"Thirty years after his retirement, a strong case could be made for him to be called th best player in NBA history" ('Who's Better, Who's Best in Basketball?' by Elliot Kalb)

"Anything Jordan could do, Robertson could do better. He could shoot better, defend, pass better, and he was two inches shorter" (Leonard Koppett)

"Nobody could match the 'Big O' for pure artistic grace, for single-handed control of the playing floor he inhabited, or for all-around shooting, passing, and playmaking abilities. In brief, there was never a more complete package for a basketball player put together within a single human frame" ('The Biographical History of Basketball', by Peter Bjarkman)

"Oscar Robertson...performed at a higher level (and for a longer period) in more vital areas than any other player of any other epoch" ('The Biographical History of Basketball', by Peter Bjarkman)

"For those that still respect versatility, there seems to be little debate. Oscar Robertson indeed remains the greatest basketball player ever invented" ('The Biographical History of Basketball', by Peter Bjarkman)

"Oscar Robertson is without a doubt the all-time everything basketball player" (Dave Bing)

"Oscar was the best player I ever played against. The guy did not have a weakness" (John Havlicek)

"Oscar is without a doubt the greatest basketball player I have ever played against. To me he is the closest player I have ever seen to being perfect" (Jerry West)