Does Manute Bol have a case for the greatest shot blocker of all time?

[DatAsh]

I've always considered Russell and Wilt as the game's undisputed best shot blockers ever. Both of those guys probably averaged 7-8 blocks per game for most of the early 60s and 6-7 blocks a game in the late 60s and early 70s.Recently, and admittedly just for fun, I got to looking at Manute Bol's Basketball Reference page, and to be completely honest, I had no idea that Bol put up 5 bpg in just 26 mpg.

If you translate his minutes to Russell/Wilt minutes, you're looking at a couple seasons of over 9 bpg and a career average of ~8 bpg.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm well aware of the fact that Bol was completely incapable of playing Russell/Wilt minutes, so I guess I should really revise my question.

On a per minute basis, does Manute Bol have a legitimate argument for best shot blocker of all time? In other words, was Manute Bol the hardest player in history for another player to shoot over without getting his shot blocked?

I think he does.

[ProfessorMurder]

He's top ten. His block numbers are stupid, but he just couldn't play a lot of minutes. In pure blocking ability he's probably #6 behind

(In no order)
Eaton
Hakeem
Mutombo
Russell
Wilt

Then you have guys like Robinson, Ewing, Kareem, Ben Wallace, Zo, etc.

There are a bunch of guys I'd rather have that are more durable, but Bol had a great impact when he was on the court and produced blocks.

[The Iron Fist]

Mark Eaton.

[DatAsh]

He's top ten. His block numbers are stupid, but he just couldn't play a lot of minutes. In pure blocking ability he's probably #6 behind

(In no order)
Eaton
Hakeem
Mutombo
Russell
Wilt

Then you have guys like Robinson, Ewing, Kareem, Ben Wallace, Zo, etc.

There are a bunch of guys I'd rather have that are more durable, but Bol had a great impact when he was on the court and produced blocks.

Not sure if you read my whole post, but I did revise my question to a purely per minute basis. You're right that Bol wasn't durable enough to be considered one of the best shot blockers of all time(I even mentioned that in my original post), but for the time that he's actually on the court I think he has a case. He's easily better than Eaton, Hakeem, and Mutombo, but Russell and Wilt I'm still not quite sure of.

[DatAsh]

Mark Eaton.

Averaged less blocks per minute than Manute Bol.

[The Iron Fist]

Averaged less blocks per minute than Manute Bol.
So youd rather a chick give you dome for one great minute than one who can do it for twenty?

[Hank]

Remember this like yesterday

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaLCju0CQ3c

[ProfessorMurder]

Not sure if you read my whole post, but I did revise my question to a purely per minute basis. You're right that Bol wasn't durable enough to be considered one of the best shot blockers of all time(I even mentioned that in my original post), but for the time that he's actually on the court I think he has a case. He's easily better than Eaton, Hakeem, and Mutombo, but Russell and Wilt I'm still not quite sure of.

No I read your first post, but I can't in good conscience call a guy 'the greatest shot blocker' when he couldn't play consistent minutes. He's a top ten shot blocker for sure and his per minute stats are great... But I'd take overall stats and durability over a guy that plays 15 minutes a game. He's in the 5-10 range in my opinion and I'm a big time Bol fan.

[iamgine]

Bol was completely capable of playing 35+ minutes as he had done so plenty of times. He just couldn't average them for a season. For a 7 game series though, he's completely capable.

[DatAsh]

Mark Eaton.


Just for comparison, here are some of these guys' best 5 year stretch.

Per 36 min

Hakeem - 3.92
Eaton - 5.60
Bol - 6.78
Mutombo -3.78

Keep in mind I'm asking on a purely per minute basis.

[DatAsh]

So youd rather a chick give you dome for one great minute than one who can do it for twenty?

Absolutely not, and I consider Olajuwon to be a better blocker all time than Bol in an absolute sense, but that's not the question I was asking in the original post.

My original post is asking on a purely per minute basis. Number of minutes/games played plays ZERO bearing on the question I originally asked assuming the sample size is large enough to gather a reasonable data set.

[Legends66NBA7]

You could try using Block %. They calculate how much a player would block when he was on the floor (not sure if that answers your question).

It might give you good feel on way to rank those shot blockers too. Off course, we can't do that for guys like Russell and Wilt, because the stats weren't fully kept in track.

[ProfessorMurder]

Just for comparison, here are some of these guys' best 5 year stretch.

Per 36 min

Hakeem - 3.92
Eaton - 5.60
Bol - 6.78
Mutombo -3.78

Keep in mind I'm asking on a purely per minute basis.

That's like calling Alex English the greatest scorer of all time, because he was the highest scorer of the 80s.

He's ONE OF the greatest scorers, but not the greatest.

[DatAsh]

No I read your first post, but I can't in good conscience call a guy 'the greatest shot blocker' when he couldn't play consistent minutes. He's a top ten shot blocker for sure and his per minute stats are great... But I'd take overall stats and durability over a guy that plays 15 minutes a game. He's in the 5-10 range in my opinion and I'm a big time Bol fan.

You may have read the entire post but you're still answering the wrong question. I know Bol isn't "the greatest shot blocker" of all time, and I right with you on the reasoning for that (he couldn't play consistent minutes).

But how does does that affect the question in the original post. The question in the original post is


On a per minute basis, does Manute Bol have a legitimate argument for best shot blocker of all time?

Number of minutes played should have zero affect on that question assuming both players played enough minutes to get a reasonable sample size.

[DatAsh]

That's like calling Alex English the greatest scorer of all time, because he was the highest scorer of the 80s.

He's ONE OF the greatest scorers, but not the greatest.

Completely different. I'm not calling Bol the greatest blocker of all time. I'm not calling him anything.

I'm ASKING if he has a case for greatest blocker/min of all time. There is indeed a difference.

[DatAsh]

You could try using Block %. They calculate how much a player would block when he was on the floor (not sure if that answers your question).

It might give you good feel on way to rank those shot blockers too. Off course, we can't do that for guys like Russell and Wilt, because the stats weren't fully kept in track.


Unfortunately, like you already pointed out, there isn't that data available for his only real competitors. He's generally 2-3% higher than Eaton and 5-6% higher than Olajuwon. I wish we had data for Russell/Chamberlain :(

[Psileas]

That's like calling Alex English the greatest scorer of all time, because he was the highest scorer of the 80s.

He's ONE OF the greatest scorers, but not the greatest.

English is the leading scorer of the 80's, but he's not the highest. Both Jordan and Gervin have a better point per minute analogy in the 80's.

[ProfessorMurder]

English is the leading scorer of the 80's, but he's not the highest. Both Jordan and Gervin have a better point per minute analogy in the 80's.

Leading scorer = highest scorer in my post. Highest point total.

[Psileas]

To answer the question, yes, I do have the same feeling, that going per minute, Bol has a good argument to be the GOAT shot blocker. He's even among the GOAT overall regardless of minutes, but, like you said, in a stricter sense, we can't put in the same category a guy who averaged less than 20 mpg with 2 guys that averaged more than 40. It's difficult to find an equivalent in another caterogy, but Danny Fortson's rebounding is something somewhat close. He had some seasons posting crazy rebounding percentages, not far off from Rodman, but he never even got 30 mpg for a good part of a season (plus, he didn't play many years), so he's not really among the GOAT rebounders, although, going by rebounding rates, he is.

[ThaRegul8r]

I've always considered Russell and Wilt as the game's undisputed best shot blockers ever. Both of those guys probably averaged 7-8 blocks per game for most of the early 60s and 6-7 blocks a game in the late 60s and early 70s.Recently, and admittedly just for fun, I got to looking at Manute Bol's Basketball Reference page, and to be completely honest, I had no idea that Bol put up 5 bpg in just 26 mpg.

If you translate his minutes to Russell/Wilt minutes, you're looking at a couple seasons of over 9 bpg and a career average of ~8 bpg.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm well aware of the fact that Bol was completely incapable of playing Russell/Wilt minutes, so I guess I should really revise my question.

On a per minute basis, does Manute Bol have a legitimate argument for best shot blocker of all time? In other words, was Manute Bol the hardest player in history for another player to shoot over without getting his shot blocked?

I think he does.

Evidently some people are incapable of comprehending the question you're asking here. Having actually watched basketball and followed the NBA when Bol was actually playing, I remember much discussion about this going on at the time.

Don Nelson, for one, said, "there's never been a greater shot blocker to play this game. I played with Russell, I played against Wilt and I've coached against Mark Eaton, but nobody changes the game, in a short period of time, that I've seen in my 26 years, like Manute does." The key part is in bold. Bol wasn't capable of playing more than short periods of time, but for the short period of time he was in the game, one could answer in the affirmative to the question you posed.

[HardwoodLegend]

That's like calling Alex English the greatest scorer of all time, because he was the highest scorer of the 80s.

He's ONE OF the greatest scorers, but not the greatest.

That isn't the same thing at all, because your simply isolating one decade and treating it like it's the best decade. Other players who weren't a part of that decade yet have scored more total career points are automatically surpassed?

A minute-by-minute basis at least puts all players from various eras in a place where they're judged by relatively the same criteria, which is what OP is doing with Manute Bol.

[DatAsh]

At least some people understood the question :(

[DatAsh]

Evidently some people are incapable of comprehending the question you're asking here. Having actually watched basketball and followed the NBA when Bol was actually playing, I remember much discussion about this going on at the time.

Don Nelson, for one, said, "there's never been a greater shot blocker to play this game. I played with Russell, I played against Wilt and I've coached against Mark Eaton, but nobody changes the game, in a short period of time, that I've seen in my 26 years, like Manute does." The key part is in bold. Bol wasn't capable of playing more than short periods of time, but for the short period of time he was in the game, one could answer in the affirmative to the question you posed.


Wow, that quote is pretty incredible coming from Don Nelson. :eek:

[Round Mound]

Wilt and Russell in Their Times
Modern Basketball: Mark Eaton

[Rake2204]

Always looking for an excuse to post this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7rLoN0SHy8

[Dave_520]

Not that it matters, but if D-Rob had not sat out his first two years due to Navy obligations... based on averaging out his first two years in the league, he would have averaged around 300 blocks a season.., if you include those additional 600 hypothetical blocked shots, he would be solid number 2 all time... well ahead of Mutombo and only about 200 blocks or so behind Olajuwon for the number one spot...

And I dont consider Russell or Wilt to be nearly as effective shot blocks are their numbers might have stated playing in the primarily "white, below the rim" era, it just doesnt have the same quality...

[DatAsh]

And I dont consider Russell or Wilt to be nearly as effective shot blocks are their numbers might have stated playing in the primarily "white, below the rim" era, it just doesnt have the same quality...

:facepalm

[Dave_520]

:facepalm

whats so hard to understand the difference between the difficulty of blocking a 6'5 white guy who can hardly touch the rim, or say blocking Kobe bryant driving to the basket with his wrists and basketball already above the rim...


major difference

[DatAsh]

whats so hard to understand the difference between the difficulty of blocking a 6'5 white guy who can hardly touch the rim, or say blocking Kobe bryant driving to the basket with his wrists and basketball already above the rim...


major difference


For starters, you'd have to prove that players today are significantly larger than they were back then. By the way, when you go to make the comparisons, add 1.5-2 inches to the older guys to account for the different measuring standards.

[kentatm]

For starters, you'd have to prove that players today are significantly larger than they were back then. By the way, when you go to make the comparisons, add 1.5-2 inches to the older guys to account for the different measuring standards.


true

Shawn Bradley was once asked about Yao's height. He replied that if Yao was 7'6, he himself must be 7'8.

Bradley was listed at 7'6.

oh yea, the Mantis could block shots fairly well too.

too bad he was one of those guys that never cared about getting better. Dirk was constantly annoyed that Bradley would never even think about picking up a ball to workout in the off season. The guy was constantly coming into camp out of shape and in major need of offensive reps.

[Xiao Yao You]

Could Bol have played more minutes if given the opportunity though? Eaton probably doesn't play big minutes for any other team in the league. Jazz often played 4 on 5 with him standing near half court so he could get back to the other basket and put his arms up.

[jstern]

I wrote the following on another thread:


Pound for pound it's Manute Bol (200 pounds). I was checking out his stats, and I was seeing 5 per game, etc. Pretty good, and then I noticed that he only played like 20 minutes per game. So I decided to compare him to other great shot blockers, like Olajuwon, and he totally killed them per 36 minutes. Pound for pound it's Manute Bol, and that's because he weight 200 pounds which is less than the average guard, and yet had the highest average of everyone. Was actually the best not including pound for pound.

Bol 200 pounds = 6.4 Blocks per 36 minutes/31.25 Pounds per block
Wade 214 pounds = 1 Block per 36 minutes/214 pounds per block
Olajuwon 255 Pounds = 3.1 Blocks per 36 minutes/82 pounds per block
Mutombo 245 Pounds = 3.2 Blocks per 36 minutes/76 pounds per block

Totally not considering height, just weight :)


That was from this thread http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=245229

[ProfessorMurder]

That isn't the same thing at all, because your simply isolating one decade and treating it like it's the best decade. Other players who weren't a part of that decade yet have scored more total career points are automatically surpassed?

A minute-by-minute basis at least puts all players from various eras in a place where they're judged by relatively the same criteria, which is what OP is doing with Manute Bol.

You're treating blocks per minute like it's the best stat for choosing who the best shot blocker is... It's not. There's more to blocking shots than just stats. There are deflections, post defense, intimidation, rules at the time, athleticism vs. positioning, all time total, blocks per minute, blocks per foul, etc.

Per minute numbers are always skewed towards a guy who plays less minutes... Especially a specialist like Bol. He could come in for a 5 minute spell and spend all his time camping in the paint and going for blocks. He'll obviously average more per minute than a guy that has to do other stuff as well as play double the amount of time.

Last season Greg Stiemsma averaged .11 blocks per minute, and Serge Ibaka averaged .13 blocks per minute. Ibaka played more than double the minutes, 11 more games and had about 160 more blocked shots. But going purely on just per minute numbers Stiemsma is practically as good a shot blocker. Declaring anything purely on a per minute stat is not telling the whole story.


At least some people understood the question :(

Everyone understood the question. Some just don't 100% agree with you.




Mutombo averaged less fouls per blocked shot than Hakeem so does that make him a better shot blocker because he fouled less often?

[Xiao Yao You]

Per minute numbers are always skewed towards a guy who plays less minutes... Especially a specialist like Bol. He could come in for a 5 minute spell and spend all his time camping in the paint and going for blocks. He'll obviously average more per minute than a guy that has to do other stuff as well as play double the amount of time.



Apparently you never saw Bol play. He could sling shot 3's like no other!

[ProfessorMurder]

Apparently you never saw Bol play. He could sling shot 3's like no other!

Yeah at 21%.

[swi7ch]

Let me introduce you to a guy named Mt. Mutombo.

[Dave_520]

For starters, you'd have to prove that players today are significantly larger than they were back then. By the way, when you go to make the comparisons, add 1.5-2 inches to the older guys to account for the different measuring standards.


That is pretty easy to prove..look at every roster from 1960-1972 or so and you can see the major difference in average height... and height wasnt even my main point, I was talking about athleticism and how the game is played.

Around the late 70's the game started being played at a much more athletic level and much more above the rim because of these better athletes...before that, it was much more likely to be a slower, ground and pound type of game with not even half the athletes that play in today's game.

It is no comparison.

[Owl]

Bol was the most prolific shot blocker in the (modern) game by a considerable distance.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=per_game&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=&year_max=&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&is_as=&as_comp=gt&as_val=0&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=&c1stat=blk_pct&c1comp=gt&c1val=7&c2stat=blk_per_g&c2comp=gt&c2val=0.5&c3stat=blk_per_mp&c3comp=gt&c3val=0&c4stat=blk&c4comp=gt&c4val=40&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=blk_pct

I don't know whether physically he could have played full time minutes but he wasn't at some Danny Fortson type foul situation where it would be impossible to play that many. Eaton's block totals seem to have been boosted not only by starter minutes but also but the mid 80s pace. Yes his minute load may have limited him slightly (when he was playing big minutes) in terms foul management and energy, but not nearly enough for anyone to classify him as superior to Bol (plus foul management with these guys seems pretty pointless anyway, their only asset is shot blocking and you're going to tell them not to do the only thing they do (well) aggressively or take them out lest teams start attacking your elite shot blocker in an attempt to foul them out).

As for the comparisions with Russell (or Chamberlain or Thurmond) it's hard to know both because of the lack of stats and because they focused energies in other areas of the game including defensive rebounding, which might mean sacrificing potential blocks to maintain rebounding position.

One might legitimately argue that late 50s and early 60s block totals would be inflated by both pace and racial quotas, but the league talent level soon rose.


true

Shawn Bradley was once asked about Yao's height. He replied that if Yao was 7'6, he himself must be 7'8.

Bradley was listed at 7'6.

oh yea, the Mantis could block shots fairly well too.

too bad he was one of those guys that never cared about getting better. Dirk was constantly annoyed that Bradley would never even think about picking up a ball to workout in the off season. The guy was constantly coming into camp out of shape and in major need of offensive reps.
I don't think Bradley ever had the lower body heft required to get position in the post and be a good scorer that way. I've heard questions about his dedication about going to the weight-room (supposedly he didn't like working out in front of others) but not about his conditioning. I know Bradley had priorities other than basketball (his religion and family) but did Dirk have a problem with him? I believe that Dirk recruited him for German national team, so I wouldn't have thought they had any major issues.

I always liked Bradley but he had problems with consistent effort/focus, and problems with foul trouble and the refs which probably stemmed from:
a) His unique body type
b) His non-star status
c) The fact that he whined to refs a lot.

[pauk]

Remember this like yesterday

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaLCju0CQ3c

"other players' career high in blocks happened in just one possesion for Manute Bol"

lol

[millwad]

I don't think so, mainly because the art of shootblocking ain't just getting them blocks recorded in the statsheet.

Personally I may be too biased to make a fair judgement but I'd take Hakeem over Bol as a shotblocker, mainly because the fact that Hakeem had a perfect game and he did it all. Have Hakeem just focusing on defense and blocks and he'd have even greater shotblocking numbers.

Manute was a product of height rather than actual skillset and timing and there was a reason why he didn't play them 36 minutes per game, giving him an edge due the fact that he wasn't good enough to play those minutes is just wrong when you're comparing greatness to greatness.

Oh, I'm not mentioning Russell and Wilt due the fact that they played in an era were they played at a much higher pace. We've all hard about some games where they blocked alot of shot but at the same time we also know that they faced less athletic competition and that their numbers are inflated due the pace of the game.

[DatAsh]

You're treating blocks per minute like it's the best stat for choosing who the best shot blocker is... It's not.


No I'm not. I'm treating blocks per minute like it's the best stat for choosing who the best shot blocker per minute is.




Everyone understood the question. Some just don't 100% agree with you.


Obviously they didn't :facepalm




Mutombo averaged less fouls per blocked shot than Hakeem so does that make him a better shot blocker because he fouled less often?

Obviously not, but it does mean he was probably a better blocker per foul than Hakeem.

I think some people are still getting confused by the thread's title.

This is the question I'm asking.

Does Manute Bol have a case for the best shot blocker per minute?:confusedshrug: