You're gonna try to tell me Wilt killled this thing with his bare hands?

[Heavincent]

http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/006/cache/mountain-lion_637_600x450.jpg

Look at that physique. A mountain lion would ****ing maul any unarmed human.

****ing Wilt mythology :facepalm

[kennethgriffin]

its probably just like killing a dog thats attacking you

you grab both its front legs and pull them as far apart as you can.

it causes their chest to cave in on itself

my friends mom went to jail for doing it to a police dog

[RRR3]

Using this thread as an excuse to post pics of Mountain Lion kittens

http://www.nps.gov/grca/naturescience/images/070921-1043-57.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vweDKCEEVTk/Tzrd16nAqnI/AAAAAAAAAHI/74oQJOS4SW4/s1600/Mountain_lion_kittens.jpg



So cute :D

[G-train]

No one claims Wilt killed a mountain lion.

A team mate claims Wilt told him a small puma jumped on his back while he walked to the bushes after pulling over on his annual drive across USA. Wilt claimed he was able to knock it off him and it ran away. Then Wilt showed said team mate huge scratches on his back.

That is the claim I believe.

[Heavincent]

its probably just like killing a dog thats attacking you

you grab both its front legs and pull them as far apart as you can.

it causes their chest to cave in on itself

my friends mom went to jail for doing it to a police dog

No the myth is that Wilt took it by the tale and threw it or something. That's just ludicrous.

[iamgine]

Mountain lion weigh like 60 kg. That's just one fifth of Wilt's bench press regiment.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Also:

dunked in his freehthrows in HS
40-50"+ vertical
4.3 40 yards
Dunked freethrows so hard it crushed opponents toes
500 pound bench press
picked up 100 pound dumbells like "we pick up our telephone"

There's old men that believe this all

[IGotACoolStory]

No one claims Wilt killed a mountain lion.

A team mate claims Wilt told him a small puma jumped on his back while he walked to the bushes after pulling over on his annual drive across USA. Wilt claimed he was able to knock it off him and it ran away. Then Wilt showed said team mate huge scratches on his back.

That is the claim I believe.

Me too. Wilt's top end speed was somewhere between 40-45 mph in his peak, for as long as half a mile. Usain Bolt got nothing on Wilt.

[CavaliersFTW]

http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/006/cache/mountain-lion_637_600x450.jpg

Look at that physique. A mountain lion would ****ing maul any unarmed human.

****ing Wilt mythology :facepalm
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-ON-mmC6g0IY/T2lLsZ3f7HI/AAAAAAAADRU/Hp7QMyoa5CI/s800/Wilt%2520Lion.jpg

[G-train]

Also:

dunked in his freehthrows in HS
40-50"+ vertical
4.3 40 yards
Dunked freethrows so hard it crushed opponents toes
500 pound bench press
picked up 100 pound dumbells like "we pick up our telephone"

There's old men that believe this all

It's written history the college FT rules were changed as Wilt was jumping from foul line and throwing the ball in. Tex Winter was on that rules committee and he talks about it on a video in youtube.

[Cali Syndicate]

its probably just like killing a dog thats attacking you

you grab both its front legs and pull them as far apart as you can.

it causes their chest to cave in on itself

my friends mom went to jail for doing it to a police dog

And when you're in the process of trying to pull apart a mountain lion's front arms, their hind legs will shred your torso and arms to shreds. Comparing a German Shepard to a mountain lion :facepalm

[jstern]

The only time that I've heard of Wilt talking about this, it sounded more like a joke kind of thing where someone asked him about a scar, and he didn't say it was a mountain lion, but kind of eluted to it, but not in a serious way. So if anyone is going to get worked up about this. Dumb.

[Cali Syndicate]

No one claims Wilt killed a mountain lion.

A team mate claims Wilt told him a small puma jumped on his back while he walked to the bushes after pulling over on his annual drive across USA. Wilt claimed he was able to knock it off him and it ran away. Then Wilt showed said team mate huge scratches on his back.

That is the claim I believe.

I can believe that.

[Bandito]

Using this thread as an excuse to post pics of Mountain Lion kittens

http://www.nps.gov/grca/naturescience/images/070921-1043-57.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vweDKCEEVTk/Tzrd16nAqnI/AAAAAAAAAHI/74oQJOS4SW4/s1600/Mountain_lion_kittens.jpg



So cute :D
So adorable.:kobe:

[KG215]

jlauber should be in shortly to prove why all of these myths are actually true. Can't wait.

[rhythmic]

Mountain lion weigh like 60 kg. That's just one fifth of Wilt's bench press regiment.

So?
A honey badger weights less then that is considered the most ruthless predator in the world.

[TheBigVeto]

No the myth is that Wilt took it by the tale and threw it or something. That's just ludicrous.

Weak era dude. Weak era.

[kennethgriffin]

And when you're in the process of trying to pull apart a mountain lion's front arms, their hind legs will shred your torso and arms to shreds. Comparing a German Shepard to a mountain lion :facepalm

to wilt... a cougar is like a small dog in comparrison to someone thats 7-2, 300 pounds of raw muscle

[fpliii]

to wilt... a cougar is like a small dog in comparrison to someone thats 7-2, 300 pounds of raw muscle

lol griff since when are you a Wilt guy?

[CavaliersFTW]

According to Deuce the myth is "dunking his free throws in High School" (nobody ever says that). According to reality Wilt was witnessed byTex Winters (HOF coach) dunking a shot but taking off from behind the free throw (note, singular) - as a freshman in college (note, not in High School).
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-fe4Ni9coRas/T0noVgi85OI/AAAAAAAADBM/_1tkKlTPhDI/s0/November%252028%252C%25201956%2520-%2520Wilt%2520Dunks%2520his%2520free%2520throws.jp g


According to Deuce the myth is "4.3 40" (nobody has ever said that)... according to reality it is a 4.6 40 in his barefeet timed by (HOF football coach) Hank Stram of the Kansas City Chiefs
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-tDn7lBlbaC8/T1BIb5WnVRI/AAAAAAAADIM/n46efDf56To/s0/Wilt%2520Chamberlain%2520football.jpg

[kennethgriffin]

lol griff since when are you a Wilt guy?

since always. just cause i say his 100 pt game was suspect and kobes higher all time doesnt mean i dont like the guy.

[fpliii]

since always. just cause i say his 100 pt game was suspect and kobes higher all time doesnt mean i dont like the guy.

what do you think he puts up in today's game?

[Psileas]

1) The only ones who claimed that Wilt talked about killing a mountain lion are anti-Wilt conspiracists. Not Wilt, not his hardcore fans, not his female conquests.

2) Nobody knows whether the lion was fully grown, was male or female, was healthy or not, was too old, etc. Anti-Wilt conspiracists depict in their minds Wilt mentioning that he grabbed a fully grown, healthy, hungry, male mountain lion, grabbed it by its tale, threw it like 15-20 feet away and, somehow, killed it.

[Deuce Bigalow]

jlauber should be in shortly to prove why all of these myths are actually true. Can't wait.
It's all completely true, he's read it in an artbook (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01GWCMGEsUw&feature=player_detailpage#t=10s)

[Deuce Bigalow]

According to Deuce the myth is "dunking his free throws in High School" (nobody ever says that). According to reality Wilt was witnessed byTex Winters (HOF coach) dunking a shot but taking off from behind the free throw (note, singular) - as a freshman in college (note, not in High School).
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-fe4Ni9coRas/T0noVgi85OI/AAAAAAAADBM/_1tkKlTPhDI/s0/November%252028%252C%25201956%2520-%2520Wilt%2520Dunks%2520his%2520free%2520throws.jp g

Hey look guys, Wilt dunked in his freethrows, newspaper told me.

[SuperPippen]

http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/006/cache/mountain-lion_637_600x450.jpg

Look at that physique. A mountain lion would ****ing maul any unarmed human.

****ing Wilt mythology :facepalm

You're gonna try to tell me that a puny creature like that stood a chance in hell against Wilt mother****ing Chamberlain? Wilt, who exuded so much sheer masculinity that he was able to sexually satisfy over 20,000 women across the span of his life?

You're gonna try to tell me that?

[CavaliersFTW]

Hey look guys, Wilt dunked in his freethrows, newspaper told me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyz-FhP2ONk&t=3m38s

Hey look guys Tex Winters confirms that the newspaper story wasn't fabricated

[lilgodfather1]

Realistically if the throwing the animal off his back part is the real story here then I fully believe it is possible. Wilt was a big stong dude, and i'm sure he could throw something that weighed almost 200 pounds less than him off of his back, especially when you consider that adrenaline would kick in therefore activating his fight or flight response, and giving his body unnaturaly sustainable ability for a brief period. If you could work out with the fight or flight response you would literally be able to go from bench pressing 250 once to bench pressing 250 three to four times easily.

To my first thought's when I read this was who in the hell cares any ways.

[Cali Syndicate]

to wilt... a cougar is like a small dog in comparrison to someone thats 7-2, 300 pounds of raw muscle

A 150 lb guy against a 50 pound German Shepard has a much better chance than a 300 lb guy against a 100 pound cougar.

A 50 pound cougar would destroy a 50 pound German Shepard.
A 40 pound cougar would destroy a 50 pound German shepard.
A 30 pound cougar would destroy a 50 pound German Shepard.

Like a small dog....?

[RRR3]

A 150 lb guy against a 50 pound German Shepard has a much better chance than a 300 lb guy against a 100 pound cougar.

A 50 pound cougar would destroy a 50 pound German Shepard.
A 40 pound cougar would destroy a 50 pound German shepard.
A 30 pound cougar would destroy a 50 pound German Shepard.

Like a small dog....?
German Shepherds weight 100 pounds, cougars weigh about 225.

[CavaliersFTW]

German Shepherds weight 100 pounds, cougars weigh about 225.
No, they weigh like 100, maybe 150 for a male. 225 would be like a f*cking world record

[RRR3]

No, they weigh like 100, maybe 150 for a male. 225 would be like a f*cking world record
There have been wolves that weighed close to 225 :confusedshrug:
Males can weigh up to 220 according to wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_lion#Physical_characteristics


So I exaggerated maybe but still

[Cali Syndicate]

German Shepherds weight 100 pounds, cougars weigh about 225.

I was making a point and using weight to weight ratio. My boy has a 90lb German Shepard. Even if his dog was a trained force dog, I'd still put money on a 50 lb cougar.

[Cali Syndicate]

There have been wolves that weighed close to 225 :confusedshrug:
Males can weigh up to 220 according to wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_lion#Physical_characteristics


So I exaggerated maybe but still

A wolf is not even a cat?

[maybeshewill13]

I've seen a mountian lion IRL. They are ****ing huge and muscular. There's no chance a human wrestled one of those, unless is was a tiny cub. Wilt myths are pathetic.

[Heavincent]

I don't think German Shepherds are 100 pounds. At least not the ones I have seen. My neighbor has one and she isn't that much bigger than my 35 pound husky (definitely bigger, but it's not like she dwarfed my husky). I thought they were more around 60 or maybe 70 pounds.

[RRR3]

I don't think German Shepherds are 100 pounds. At least not the ones I have seen. My neighbor has one and she isn't that much bigger than my 35 pound husky (definitely bigger, but it's not like she dwarfed my husky). I thought they were more around 60 or maybe 70 pounds.
You have a husky? <3 them, my favorite dog. Pic?

[Deuce Bigalow]

blab
rrr3, why so butthurt?

[RRR3]

rrr3, why so butthurt?
:biggums: :wtf: u talking bout

[Heavincent]

You have a husky? <3 them, my favorite dog. Pic?

Yeah. I don't think I have any pictures of her on this computer though. I have some on my phone though. I might post them tomorrow if I remember.

[Cali Syndicate]

I don't think German Shepherds are 100 pounds. At least not the ones I have seen. My neighbor has one and she isn't that much bigger than my 35 pound husky (definitely bigger, but it's not like she dwarfed my husky). I thought they were more around 60 or maybe 70 pounds.

Not sure about 100lbs but my boy has a 90 pounder. On his hind legs stands like 5'8" - 5'9" . Never measured his height but my boy is 5'10" and stand almost as tall as he is. Probably the biggest German Shepard I've seen.

[Deuce Bigalow]

:biggums: :wtf: u talking bout
You've negged me 3 times this past week :oldlol:

[IGotACoolStory]

Why the **** are people guessing when you are on the internet? Open a new tab and use google :facepalm


Size

Length: head and body, 5-6 ft.

Weight: 80-230 lb.

Height: To shoulder, 24-28 in.

Tail length: 26-30 in.
http://www.wonderclub.com/Wildlife/mammals/mountainlion.html



German Shepherd Dog Height and Weight Standard

Males:
Height at the wither 60 cm to 65 cm (23.62 inches - 25.59 inches)
Weight 30 kg to 40 kg. (66.14 pounds - 88.18 pounds; Midrange = 77 pounds)

Females:
Height at the wither 55 cm to 60 cm (21.65 inches - 23.62 inches)
Weight 22 kg - 32 kg (48.5 pounds - 70.55 pounds; Midrange = 59.5 pounds)
http://www.nwk9.com/weight_height.htm

[Cali Syndicate]

You have a husky? <3 them, my favorite dog. Pic?

I like husky's too but after my friend's husky ate two of her pups, I don't want one anymore.

[RRR3]

Yeah. I don't think I have any pictures of her on this computer though. I have some on my phone though. I might post them tomorrow if I remember.
Cool. Huskies are adorable :).
This site says German Shepherds weigh 77-85 pounds
http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/germanshepherd.htm

I remember reading up to 100 somewhere IIRC

[RRR3]

I like husky's too but after my friend's husky ate two of her pups, I don't want one anymore.
did not need to know that. gross.
dont base your opinion off one crazy dog tho

[RRR3]

You've negged me 3 times this past week :oldlol:
No I haven't. Once yes, but then it says I have to "spread rep around". I'd neg you ten times a day if I could, though, you're a horrible poster. Now shoo.

[Cali Syndicate]

Why the **** are people guessing when you are on the internet? Open a new tab and use google :facepalm

No one has time for all that jazz jack.

[Freedom Kid7]

Goes from a WIlt/get Jlauber thread to a dog thread.

Oh ISH

[Cali Syndicate]

did not need to know that. gross.
dont base your opinion off one crazy dog tho

I can not unsee what I saw.

I still like them though.

[jbot]

this whole puma incident is bs.

[RRR3]

this whole puma incident is bs.
u were "future nba dad" a little while ago. already lowering expectations?

[CavaliersFTW]

Not that i'll have footage of any mountain lions but eventually I'll have a video completed about Wilt's extraordinary size and athleticism and it will feature newspaper clips, videos, and interviews about his size (measurements) and all his athletic feats for example:

http://youtu.be/H8eLfh_ZURo

[AlphaWolf24]

bunch of people thaton't really understand physics..

- maybe an average man might have trouble with a mountanlion....most likely from a bite severing a major artery...

- but Wilt Chamberlain?....350 lbs of pure testo Muscle!!

at 7' 1" ( or 7' 3" depending on who you ask or what shoes he's wearing)..if the Cougar jumped onto hs back / shoulder...Wilt could easily slam the cat into he ground wth enough force to Knock it out...

without question...

- anyone thinking that the greatest pure athlete of man kin couldn't KO a cat is cray...

- even a full grown Lion would have a hard time getting past Wilt.



(shakes head)



next

[CavaliersFTW]

bunch of people thaton't really understand physics..

- maybe an average man might have trouble with a mountanlion....most likely from a bite severing a major artery...

- but Wilt Chamberlain?....350 lbs of pure testo Muscle!!

at 7' 1" ( or 7' 3" depending on who you ask or what shoes he's wearing)..if the Cougar jumped onto hs back / shoulder...Wilt could easily slam the cat into he ground wth enough force to Knock it out...

without question...

- anyone thinking that the greatest pure athlete of man kin couldn't KO a cat is cray...

- even a full grown Lion would have a hard time getting past Wilt.



(shakes head)



next
Of course Wilt could destroy a skinny @ss mountain lion (100lbs!? :oldlol: ) Suggesting a mtlion is superior to Wilt is like suggesting a house cat is superior to the avg size man.

[Brick Rick]

this mythology is at least more believable than the 20,000 women phucked claim who no one takes seriously. :lol

[DuMa]

Wilt fought along side Conan the Barbarian. i believe it.

[OhNoTimNoSho]

Could Wilt have potentially took a mountain Lion and thrown it by its tail? Yes. Yes he could have. Its a 100 lbs. Why not. Did it actually happen? Probably not. But the circle jerk you guys got going on about speculating what could have happened when you know theres absolutely no way to prove either account is great.

[Overdrive]

Of course Wilt could destroy a skinny @ss mountain lion (100lbs!? :oldlol: ) Suggesting a mtlion is superior to Wilt is like suggesting a house cat is superior to the avg size man.

Puma's got claws. Imagine a guy with 10 knives attacking. It doesn't matter how huge Wilt was, if a mountainlion really attacked him, would have had to have severe injuries. Especially since cats of any kind always go for the neck.

[dunksby]

its probably just like killing a dog thats attacking you

you grab both its front legs and pull them as far apart as you can.

it causes their chest to cave in on itself

my friends mom went to jail for doing it to a police dog
:roll: :roll: :roll:

[jbryan1984]

I never thought anyone over 10 believed the story. In the documentary, his buddy sure didn't sound he believed it but he said something like "why would he lie"?

[CavaliersFTW]

https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSLal7jlA51HGZeadeRUFEwDqtQPOn2Y 7q-U9NpL2ZpgN2rY1uk

http://www.travelblog.org/Photos/3468156

Wilt is 3 times that big he could prob crush a mountain lion skull with his bare hands :lol

http://www.dermestidbeetlecolonies.com/sitebuilder/images/picture121-284x383.jpg

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-I3l7sTXDwhU/T3FlUEHiEtI/AAAAAAAADVU/HYX_jxrwmgM/s800/wilt%2520hands%25201.jpg

[CavaliersFTW]

Puma's got claws. Imagine a guy with 10 knives attacking. It doesn't matter how huge Wilt was, if a mountainlion really attacked him, would have had to have severe injuries. Especially since cats of any kind always go for the neck.
Cat claws are shaped like stubby hooks not sharp knives, and Wilt's friend said he had scratches as proof. Next.

P.S. I don't actually believe the story

[Sarcastic]

Wilt fought along side Conan the Barbarian. i believe it.


At that point, he was no longer the Barbarian. He was the Destroyer.

[Overdrive]

Cat claws are shaped like stubby hooks not sharp knives, and Wilt's friend said he had scratches as proof. Next.

P.S. I don't actually believe the story

Ever been scratched by a common cat? They can tear open arteries? Back in the day my dad had to have his artery tucked, because my cat scratched him in the wrong place.

What about the cat going for his neck? Why didn't it do it if it supposedly attacked from behind? That's the first thing those cats do.

edit: Just saw the white text.

[Calabis]

Some funny stuff in this thread.....but in all honestly, this puma could have been young and still learning its craft, it could have been suffering from malnutrition which is why it attacked a human(hungry as hell)...him killing it with his barehands...lmao I highly doubt it..... him knocking it off, because it missed biting his throat or crushing his skull.... I can believe it, hell a 63 year old man did this shit

http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/marin-man-survives-mountain-lion-attack-sierra-foo/nPkkg/

With that said Wilt was a confident man in his abilities, he seriously tried to fight Ali....Jim Brown confirms it and Ali if not in the middle of taking on real fighters, really considered it. Ali trainers felt it wasn't worth it, due to Wilt's size, they didn't think Ali could reach Wilts jaw...I beg to differ, one shot to Wilts head and he would have crumbled

[skaterbasist]

its probably just like killing a dog thats attacking you

you grab both its front legs and pull them as far apart as you can.

it causes their chest to cave in on itself

my friends mom went to jail for doing it to a police dog

Except a Mountain Lion isn't a Dog. Good luck grabbing the legs of a big creature with some pretty damn sharp claws and at the same time trying to avoid being bit. :facepalm

[CavaliersFTW]

Except a Mountain Lion isn't a Dog. Good luck grabbing the legs of a big creature with some pretty damn sharp claws and at the same time trying to avoid being bit. :facepalm
http://www.rexano.org/GelleryImages/cats/cougar_walk.JPG

Wilt could rip this thing in two pieces that guy is prob like 5-10 170 and he Dwarfs it. If one was dumb enough to jump on Wilt (7-1, 320) than god have mercy on it's soul.

[Dictator]

Mountain lion weigh like 60 kg. That's just one fifth of Wilt's bench press regiment.

I lol'ed :lol

[skaterbasist]

I'm going to assume 50% of the posts are sarcastic, and the other 50% are complete morons.

[swi7ch]

It's Wilt, man. NOTHING is impossible! :bowdown:

100s of women, Olympic running and high jump records, mountain lions, you name it

[IamSofaKing]

Reminds me of the Silverback Gorillas vs LeBron and Ben Wallace thread.

Classic.

[AAckley1]

Mountain Lion scratches? Or an angry fat woman that Wilt didn't want to own up to banging?

[NumberSix]

http://www.rexano.org/GelleryImages/cats/cougar_walk.JPG

Wilt could rip this thing in two pieces that guy is prob like 5-10 170 and he Dwarfs it. If one was dumb enough to jump on Wilt (7-1, 320) than god have mercy on it's soul.
That's a baby. Fully grown cougars are bigger than an average human man.

http://www.tonyrogers.com/humor/images/mountain_lion.jpg

[LAZERUSS]

That's a baby. Fully grown cougars are bigger than an average human man.

http://www.tonyrogers.com/humor/images/mountain_lion.jpg

And yet, that guy is throwing that cat around like a rag doll.

[NumberSix]

And yet, that guy is throwing that cat around like a rag doll.
It's dead.

[LAZERUSS]

It's dead.

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumblarge_613/1308743257eIAbJj.jpg

[LAZERUSS]

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-ON-mmC6g0IY/T2lLsZ3f7HI/AAAAAAAADRU/Hp7QMyoa5CI/s800/Wilt%2520Lion.jpg

Finally...conclusive evidence.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The myth that is Wilt. Instead of story telling, he should have been working on his game....IN the postseason.

How he lost in the '69 Finals w/ West averaging 38 ppg is beyond me. Still...not as bad as losing to Russell on literally his last legs. SMH. :oldlol:

[LAZERUSS]

The myth that is Wilt. Instead of story telling, he should have been working on his game....IN the postseason.

How he lost in the '69 Finals w/ West averaging 38 ppg is beyond me. Still...not as bad as losing to Russell on literally his last legs. SMH. :oldlol:

Just goes to show you how much horrible coaching can affect a series...

[CavaliersFTW]

That's a baby. Fully grown cougars are bigger than an average human man.

http://www.tonyrogers.com/humor/images/mountain_lion.jpg
It was never specified whether the cougar that jumped on Wilt was full grown

That man is probably 5-8 - and that is the broad side of the cougar, cougars, like all cats, are very narrow in profile so seeing it from broad side is deceptive

If that man was holding Wilt like that, Wilt would literally be so big he'd be half way out of frame. Here's an accurately scaled model of Wilt as if he were being held teh same way. I used the air compressor in the background for scale
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-hf18fteeiWg/UZcD8ObXBAI/AAAAAAAAEW8/qO7D_EB9ZVY/s800/mountain_lion2.jpg

As you can see, even the full grown mountain lion seen from broadside virtually disappears behind Wilt. Wilt would crush that f*cking thing in half :mad:

[Deuce Bigalow]

Just goes to show you how much horrible coaching can affect a series...
You still denying that Wilt choked?

Game 4
Lakers lose by 1 point
Wilt: 2-11 FT :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm :roll:

Game 7
Lakers lose by 2 points
Wilt: 4-13 FT :facepalm :oldlol:

24-66 FT for the series :facepalm :lol

[LAZERUSS]

You still denying that Wilt choked?

Game 4
Lakers lose by 1 point
Wilt: 2-11 FT :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm :roll:

Game 7
Lakers lose by 2 points
Wilt: 4-13 FT :facepalm :oldlol:

24-66 FT for the series :facepalm :lol

Wilt, shackled by an incompetent coach, who preferred Baylor's offense...

And how about Elgin and even West?

In game three, the two combined to shoot 1-14 from the field in the 4th quarter, in a 6 point loss.

Or Baylor's efforts in the aforementioned game four, when he shot 2-14 from the floor, and even a 1-6 from the LINE in a one point loss.

And while Chamberlain was going 7-8 from the FIELD in that game seven, two-point loss (and was basically benched in the last few minutes, while his replacement, the great Mel Counts would stumble around and finish 4-13), Baylor shot 8-22 from the field...all in a two point loss. And BTW, how about Russell in that game? 6 points, on 2-7 shooting, (and only 2-4 from the line) with 21 rebounds (and did absolutely nothing in the 4th quarter), while Chamberlain put up 18 points (again, on 7-8 shooting), and with 27 rebounds, and in only 43 minutes (BTW, in the last period, Wilt, playing seven minutes to Russell's 12, outrebounded Russell, 7-2.)

Interesting too, that Chamberlain only averaged 20.5 ppg in the regular season that year...and yet, his new coach the very next season, asked Wilt to become the focal point of the offense, and he was leading the league in scoring at 32.2 ppg (on .579 shooting) when he shredded his knee in the ninth game of the season (incidently, the same leg that he injured in game seven of the '69 Finals.)

Once again, just amazing how much an incompetent coach can affect a series...

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Just goes to show you how much horrible coaching can affect a series...

Right...

So why is it when Stilt went out of the game, 5 or so minutes left to go w/ "his team" down 103-94, the Lakers suddenly outscored Boston 12 to 5?

Coaching doesn't explain Wilt's 8 points in game 6 (keep in mind, the Lakers were up 3-2 in that series :oldlol:)

[Heavincent]

It was never specified whether the cougar that jumped on Wilt was full grown


Who cares if Wilt took down a little baby cougar?

There's no way he could take down a full grown mountain lion. Not only are they massive, they're also some of the most agile animals on the planet. The Cheetah is the only animal that I would consider more agile.

An unarmed human wouldn't stand a chance against this beast

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ORJ8fDjgt3c/T_24DCAzWNI/AAAAAAAAFdo/YIsUnvI1iFA/s1600/2789_53_Yellowstone_Mountain_Lions_md.jpg

[LAZERUSS]

Right...

So why is it when Stilt went out of the game, 5 or so minutes left to go w/ "his team" down 103-94, the Lakers suddenly outscored Boston 12 to 5?

Coaching doesn't explain Wilt's 8 points in game 6 (keep in mind, the Lakers were up 3-2 in that series :oldlol:)

Wilt played poorly in game six, no doubt. The only game in which Russell outplayed him.

As for game seven, West was fouled on an outlet from Wilt, and hit two FTs after play resumed, so it was a seven point deficit...which was down from a 17 point deficit only four minutes prior. Clearly, the aged Celtics were running on fumes in that 4th quarter. And how about having Counts miss a key shot, and commit a horrible turnover down the stretch, too?

Not only that, but LA was leading the series, 2-1, and leading 88-87 in game four, and with the ball, with 15 secs left. So, the brilliant Van Breda Kolf put the ball in the hands of West, right? Nope, he let Johnny Egan handle it...and guess what...he was stripped, and Sam Jones, falling down, hit the game winning shot at the buzzer. Had Egan not lost the ball, the Laker would have won game four...and given their resounding win in game five...in a game in which Wilt clearly outplayed Russell, ...the Lakers would have romped to a 4-1 series win.

Once again...incompetent coaching trumps pure talent.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Wilt, shackled by an incompetent coach, who preferred Baylor's offense...

And how about Elgin and even West?

In game three, the two combined to shoot 1-14 from the field in a 6 point loss.

Or Baylor's efforts in the aforementioned game four, when he shot 2-14 from the floor, and even a 1-6 from the LINE in a one point loss.

And while Chamberlain was going 7-8 from the FIELD in that game seven, two-point loss (and was basically benched in the last few minutes, while his replacement, the great Mel Counts would stumble around and finish 4-13), Baylor shot 8-22 from the field...all in a two point loss. And BTW, how about Russell in that game? 6 points, on 2-7 shooting, (and only 2-4 from the line) with 21 rebounds (and did absolutely nothing in the 4th quarter), while Chamberlain put up 18 points (again, on 7-8 shooting), and with 27 rebounds, and in only 43 minutes (BTW, in the last period, Wilt, playing seven minutes to Russell's 12, outrebounded Russell, 7-2.)

Interesting too, that Chamberlain only averaged 20.5 ppg in the regular season that year...and yet, his new coach the very next season, asked Wilt to become the focal point of the offense, and he was leading the league in scoring at 32.2 ppg (on .579 shooting) when he shredded his knee in the ninth game of the season (incidently, the same leg that he injured in game seven of the '69 Finals.)

Once again, just amazing how much an incompetent coach can affect a series...
Baylor was old and past his prime. It was West and Wilt's team. So why are you talking about Baylor?

[Deuce Bigalow]

Wilt played poorly in game six, no doubt. The only game in which Russell outplayed him.

As for game seven, West was fouled on an outlet from Wilt, and hit two FTs after play resumed, so it was a seven point deficit...which was down from a 17 point deficit only four minutes prior. Clearly, the aged Celtics were running on fumes in that 4th quarter. And how about having Counts miss a key shot, and commit a horrible turnover down the stretch, too?

Not only that, but LA was leading the series, 2-1, and leading 88-87 in game four, and with the ball, with 15 secs left. So, the brilliant Van Breda Kolf put the ball in the hands of West, right? Nope, he let Johnny Egan handle it...and guess what...he was stripped, and Sam Jones, falling down, hit the game winning shot at the buzzer. Had Egan not lost the ball, the Laker would have won game four...and given their resounding win in game five...in a game in which Wilt clearly outplayed Russell, ...the Lakers would have romped to a 4-1 series win.

Once again...incompetent coaching trumps pure talent.
That one point lead would be different if Wilt didn't shoot two for eleven from the line.

[JimmyMcAdocious]

It's dead.

It's not dead. He put that cougar in the sleeper hold.

[CavaliersFTW]

Who cares if Wilt took down a little baby cougar?

There's no way he could take down a full grown mountain lion. Not only are they massive, they're also some of the most agile animals on the planet. The Cheetah is the only animal that I would consider more agile.

An unarmed human wouldn't stand a chance against this beast

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ORJ8fDjgt3c/T_24DCAzWNI/AAAAAAAAFdo/YIsUnvI1iFA/s1600/2789_53_Yellowstone_Mountain_Lions_md.jpg
http://www.skullsunlimited.com/record_species.php?id=1484
http://www.skullsunlimited.com/userfiles/image/variants_large_3207.jpg

Skull Length: 8.3" :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: how pathetic!


Wilt's hands are 9.5 inches in length by 11.5" in span, Wilt would CRUSH THE HEAD OF A MOUNTAIN LION WITH ONE HAND!
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-I3l7sTXDwhU/T3FlUEHiEtI/AAAAAAAADVU/HYX_jxrwmgM/s800/wilt%2520hands%25201.jpg

And are we going to just ignore Wilt's inhuman skill and coordination?

[LAZERUSS]

Baylor was old and past his prime. It was West and Wilt's team. So why are you talking about Baylor?

Ask Van Breda Kolf, who had Baylor taking considerably more shots than Wilt. A Baylor who shot a team low .385 from the field in the post-season (while Wilt was at a team high .545.)

BTW, there is footage of the 4th quarter of that game seven on YouTube, and one of the most defining moments occurs early in the 4th quarter. Russell had just picked up his 5th personal foul, and in the next sequence, the Lakers go into Chamberlain, who goes right around the matador defense of Russell for an easy basket. Guess what? It would be the last time Chamberlain would get the ball down low in the period. Instead, Baylor, and West continued to take all the shots.

Any other coach, down to 6th grade girls level, would have demanded his team to keep feeding the ball into Chamberlain. Not Van Breda Kolf, though. Nope, in fact, he let the great Mel Counts stay on the floor in Wilt's place, down the stretch.

[Heavincent]

Skull Length: 8.3" :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: how pathetic!

Wilt's hands are 9.5 inches in length by 11.5" in span, Wilt would CRUSH THE HEAD OF A MOUNTAIN LION WITH ONE HAND!
And are we going to just ignore Wilt's inhuman skill and coordination?

How would Wilt even get the chance? The lion would be wrapped around his neck scratching and clawing the shit out of him (Wilt's height would be rendered useless by the lion's leaping ability). The mountain lion is so agile that Wilt wouldn't even get a shot in.

[CavaliersFTW]

How would Wilt even get the chance? The lion would be wrapped around his neck scratching and clawing the shit out of him (Wilt's height would be rendered useless by the lion's leaping ability). The mountain lion is so agile that Wilt wouldn't even get a shot in.
:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm more like the LIONS leaping ability would be rendered useless by WILT'S leaping ability.

[Heavincent]

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm more like the LIONS leaping ability would be rendered useless by WILT'S leaping ability.

How?

[LAZERUSS]

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-ON-mmC6g0IY/T2lLsZ3f7HI/AAAAAAAADRU/Hp7QMyoa5CI/s800/Wilt%2520Lion.jpg

Once again, indisputable proof...

[Deuce Bigalow]

Ask Van Breda Kolf, who had Baylor taking considerably more shots than Wilt. A Baylor who shot a team low .385 from the field in the post-season (while Wilt was at a team high .545.)

BTW, there is footage of the 4th quarter of that game seven on YouTube, and one of the most defining moments occurs early in the 4th quarter. Russell had just picked up his 5th personal foul, and in the next sequence, the Lakers go into Chamberlain, who goes right around the matador defense of Russell for an easy basket. Guess what? It would be the last time Chamberlain would get the ball down low in the period. Instead, Baylor, and West continued to take all the shots.

Any other coach, down to 6th grade girls level, would have demanded his team to keep feeding the ball into Chamberlain. Not Van Breda Kolf, though. Nope, in fact, he let the great Mel Counts stay on the floor in Wilt's place, down the stretch.
You really want a guy that is 2-11 from the FT line and 24-66 FT for the series to have the ball? Story of Wilt's career though. Dominant in the regular season, but when it really matters he wilts. Even his coach wouldn't put him in the game in the final 5 minutes of game 7, tells you a lot.

[LAZERUSS]

You really want a guy that is 2-11 from the FT line and 24-66 FT for the series to have the ball? Story of Wilt's career though. Dominant in the regular season, but when it really matters he wilts. Even his coach wouldn't put him in the game in the final 5 minutes of game 7, tells you a lot.

BTW, whatever happened to Van Breda Kolf's career after that loss? Oh, and how about Wilt leading the '72 Lakers to a still-record 69-13 mark, and taking them to a title, and winning the FMVP in the process?

[Deuce Bigalow]

BTW, whatever happened to Van Breda Kolf's career after that loss? Oh, and how about Wilt leading the '72 Lakers to a still-record 69-13 mark, and taking them to a title, and winning the FMVP in the process?
Places Wilt top 15 all-time.

8. Duncan
9. Hakeem
10. West
11. Wilt (Lebron surpasses him with a ring)
12. Lebron

[KG215]

BTW, whatever happened to Van Breda Kolf's career after that loss? Oh, and how about Wilt leading the '72 Lakers to a still-record 69-13 mark, and taking them to a title, and winning the FMVP in the process?
Still record? Do you mean something else by that? I'm by no means even good at math, but I'm 100% certain 72-10 is better than 69-13. Maybe you meant their 33 game win streak?

[LAZERUSS]

You really want a guy that is 2-11 from the FT line and 24-66 FT for the series to have the ball? Story of Wilt's career though. Dominant in the regular season, but when it really matters he wilts. Even his coach wouldn't put him in the game in the final 5 minutes of game 7, tells you a lot.

Oh, and find me a Finals in which Chamberlain single-handedly lost a series by shooting .387 from the field, like your boy Kobe. In fact, let's compare Wilt's Finals FIELD GOAL PERCENTAGES with those of Kobe's, shall we? And give me all the playoff-clinching blowout losses that Chamberlain led his team's too, that Kobe's post-season career is filled with.

[LAZERUSS]

Still record? Do you mean something else by that? I'm by no means even good at math, but I'm 100% certain 72-10 is better than 69-13. Maybe you meant their 33 game win streak?

TEAM record.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Oh, and find me a Finals in which Chamberlain single-handedly lost a series by shooting .387 from the field, like your boy Kobe. In fact, let's compare Wilt's Finals FIELD GOAL PERCENTAGES with those of Kobe's, shall we? And give me all the playoff-clinching blowout losses that Chamberlain led his team's too, that Kobe's post-season career is filled with.
Let's compare their wins and freethrows percentage too.

Kobe 5
Wilt 2

Kobe 80-85%
Wilt 38%

[LAZERUSS]

Places Wilt top 15 all-time.

8. Duncan
9. Hakeem
10. West
11. Wilt (Lebron surpasses him with a ring)
12. Lebron

So Duncan won more MVP's, had more statistical records (still holding some 90 of them), had teams that went 68-13 and 69-13?

Hakeem, who won the same number of titles; played on team's that routinely performed far worse (eight first round playoff exits in 15 post-seasons); won three less MVP's; won seven less scoring titles, nine less FG% titles, and nine less rebounding titles (and never sniffed an assist title);

West, whose only ring came in a post-season in which Chamberlain carried his ass (West shot .376 in that post-season, and .325 in the Finals.) A West who never won an MVP,who would have one less FMVP had the award existed in '67. A West who won one scoring title (and in that same season, it was Wilt who was leading the league in scoring until he shredded his knee.)

Yep. What a well-thought list. I would like to see your criteria for that.

[Big#50]

Arnold said Wilt was curling these dumbbells that nobody in the gym could curl once. Wilt was doing reps like it was nothing. He said Wilt was far stronger than him. And this was early 80's Wilt.

[LAZERUSS]

Let's compare their wins and freethrows percentage too.

Kobe 2, Shaq 3

Wilt 2 and nearly 4-5 more

Kobe 80-85%
Wilt 38%

Wilt's Finals FG% .560
Kobe's something lik .419.




Corrected.

[Deuce Bigalow]

So Duncan won more MVP's, had more statistical records (still holding some 90 of them), had teams that went 68-13 and 69-13?

Hakeem, who won the same number of titles; played on team's that routinely performed far worse (eight first round playoff exits in 15 post-seasons); won three less MVP's; won seven less scoring titles, nine less FG% titles, and nine less rebounding titles (and never sniffed an assist title);

West, whose only ring came in a post-season in which Chamberlain carried his ass (West shot .376 in that post-season, and .325 in the Finals.) A West who never won an MVP,who would have one less FMVP had the award existed in '67. A West who won one scoring title (and in that same season, it was Wilt who was leading the league in scoring until he shredded his knee.)

Yep. What a well-thought list. I would like to see your criteria for that.
Duncan has 2x more rings than Wilt and is a perfect 4-0 in the Finals. He actually shows up in the playoffs and Finals.

Hakeem has 2 rings with weak supporting casts and never choked like Wilt.

West was two Wilt chokes away from having 3 rings. West averaged a then NBA Finals record 37.9 ppg in the 69 finals and 42/13/12 game 7 performance. West also has scored the most points in NBA Finals history and has the most 30 and 40 point games in the Finals.

Wilt is 2-4 in the finals and has lost with HCA 5 times. He has the lowest win percentage in the finals and with HCA than the rest if the top 10 ahead of him.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Corrected.
Kobe has 5 rings, Shaq has 4. Both have 2x more rings than Wilt.

[Deuce Bigalow]

On a second thought, I think I would place Mr. Basketball in front of Wilt too. The legend brought 5 titles to the Lakers.

[LAZERUSS]

Duncan has 2x more rings than Wilt and is a perfect 4-0 in the Finals. He actually shows up in the playoffs and Finals.

Hakeem has 2 rings with weak supporting casts and never choked like Wilt.

West was two Wilt chokes away from having 3 rings. West averaged a then NBA Finals record 37.9 ppg in the 69 finals and 42/13/12 game 7 performance. West also has scored the most points in NBA Finals history and has the most 30 and 40 point games in the Finals.

Wilt is 2-4 in the finals and has lost with HCA 5 times. He has the lowest win percentage in the finals and with HCA than the rest if the top 10 ahead of him.

How many 35+ ppg, or 25+ rpg, or .600 FG% playoff series did Duncan have him his post-season career? And how many .412 FG% Finals did Chamberlain have? And did Duncan ever put up a 30-31 .555 FG% series against the likes of a Russell? How about averaging 30-27-5 .515 over the course of his first 80 playoff games? And how many 50-35, 53-22, 56-35 "must-win" "elimination" games did Duncan have in the post-season (as well as a 45-27, 20-27 FG-FGA game on one leg?)

Had Wilt's team's been eliminated in the first round eight times, like Hakeem, his numbers would have been even more staggering. Unfortunately, he ran up against the greatest team dynasty in professional sports history. And he still routinely carried putrid rosters to within an eyelash of beating that dynasty several times. And find me six entire post-seasons in which Hakeem's teammates collectively .383, or worse.

The same West who blew chunks against the Frazier and the Knicks in game seven of the '70 Finals (while a one-legged Wilt put up a 21-24 game?)

The same West who shot .443 in the '73 Finals, including 5-17 in the clinching game five defeat? Not to mention Wilt carrying him to his only title in the '72 post-season.

The same West, who paired up with Baylor, lost as often to Russell's dynasty, as did Wilt by himself. And who never beat them, unlike Wilt, who routed them in '67.

[LAZERUSS]

The myth that is Wilt. Instead of story telling, he should have been working on his game....IN the postseason.

How he lost in the '69 Finals w/ West averaging 38 ppg is beyond me. Still...not as bad as losing to Russell on literally his last legs. SMH. :oldlol:

How about this...



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

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

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

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

And finally, in the known FG% games in which we have, Chamberlain not only shot an eye-popping .582 in those "do-or-die" games, but he held his opposing centers to a combined .413 FG%. BTW, he played against Kareem in two "clinching" games, and held Abdul-Jabbar to a combined .383 shooting (23-60) in those two games, while he, himself, shot .545 (18-33.)

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

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


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

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

[LAZERUSS]

And this...



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

19. Game six of the first round of the 68-69 playoffs, against San Francisco, in a 118-78 win. Wilt with 11 points on 5/9 FG, 25 rebounds and 1 assist. Thurmond had 8 points in the loss.

20. Game four of the 68-69 WCF's, against Atlanta, in a 133-114 sweeping win. Chamberlain with 16 points on 5/11 FG, 29 rebounds and 10 blocks. His opposing center, Zelmo Beaty had 30 points in the loss.

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

22. Game five of a best-of-seven series (the Lakers were down 3-1 going into the game) in the first round of the 69-70 playoffs, and against Phoenix, a 138-121 win. Wilt with 36 points on 12/20 FG 14 rebounds and 3 assists. His opposing center, Neal Walk, had 18 points in the loss.

23. Game six of the first round of the 69-70 playoffs, against Phoenix, in a 104-93 win. Wilt with 12 points on 4/11 FG, 26 rebounds, 11 assists and 12 blocks (unofficial quad). Jim Fox started that game for Phoenix, and had 13 points in the loss.

24. Game seven of the first round of the 69-70 playoffs, against Phoenix, and in a 129-94 win, which capped a 4-3 series win after falling behind 3-1 in the series. Wilt with 30 points on 11/18 FG, 27 rebounds, 6 assists and 11 blocks. Fox had 7 points in the loss.

25. Game four of the 69-70 WCF's, against Atlanta, in a 133-114 sweeping win. Wilt with 11 points on 5/10 FG, 21 rebounds and 10 blocks. Bellamy had 19 points in the loss.

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

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

28. Game seven of the first round of the 70-71 playoffs, against Chicago, in a 109-98 win. Wilt with 25 points on 7/12 FG,18 rebounds and 9 assists. 7-0 Tom Boerwinkle had 4 points for the Bulls in the loss.

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

30. Game four of the 71-72 first round of the playoffs, against Chicago, in a 108-97 sweeping win. Wilt had 8 points on 4/6, 31 rebounds and 8 assists. Clifford Ray had 20 points in the loss.

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

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

33. Game seven of the first round of the 72-73 playoffs, against Chicago, in a 95-92 win. Wilt with 21 points on 10/17 FG, 28 rebounds, 4 asissts and 8 blocks. His opposing center, Clifford Ray, had 4 points.

The article about this series sad that Wilt blocked Chicago from playoffs after blocking 49 shots in 7 games.

34. Game five of the 72-73 WCF's, and against Golden St., in a 128-118 win. Wilt with 5 points on 2/2 FG, 22 rebounds, 7 assists. Thurmond had 9 points on 2/9 FG, 18 or 15 rebounds and 5 assists in 32 minutes in the loss.

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

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

[Deuce Bigalow]

Essay
Essay
Essay
Spam

I want to bash my head against a wall after I read one of them.

I don't care about inflated stats! For the last time jlauber. No one cares about x rebound amount of games. Championships and playoff dominance is what matters.

[LAZERUSS]

Essay
Essay
Essay
Spam

I want to bash my head against a wall after I read one of them.

I don't care about inflated stats! For the last time jlauber. No one cares about x rebound amount of games. Championships and playoff dominance is what matters.

jlauber? I thought he died sometime ago.

[LAZERUSS]

Essay
Essay
Essay
Spam

I want to bash my head against a wall after I read one of them.

I don't care about inflated stats! For the last time jlauber. No one cares about x rebound amount of games. Championships and playoff dominance is what matters.

And, if you had read the research above, you would then be fully informed that, indeed, Chamberlain was dominant in his post-seasons.

[Deuce Bigalow]

How many 35+ ppg, or 25+ rpg, or .600 FG% playoff series did Duncan have him his post-season career? And how many .412 FG% Finals did Chamberlain have? And did Duncan ever put up a 30-31 .555 FG% series against the likes of a Russell? How about averaging 30-27-5 .515 over the course of his first 80 playoff games? And how many 50-35, 53-22, 56-35 "must-win" "elimination" games did Duncan have in the post-season (as well as a 45-27, 20-27 FG-FGA game on one leg?)

Had Wilt's team's been eliminated in the first round eight times, like Hakeem, his numbers would have been even more staggering. Unfortunately, he ran up against the greatest team dynasty in professional sports history. And he still routinely carried putrid rosters to within an eyelash of beating that dynasty several times. And find me six entire post-seasons in which Hakeem's teammates collectively .383, or worse.

The same West who blew chunks against the Frazier and the Knicks in game seven of the '70 Finals (while a one-legged Wilt put up a 21-24 game?)

The same West who shot .443 in the '73 Finals, including 5-17 in the clinching game five defeat? Not to mention Wilt carrying him to his only title in the '72 post-season.

The same West, who paired up with Baylor, lost as often to Russell's dynasty, as did Wilt by himself. And who never beat them, unlike Wilt, who routed them in '67.
Unbelievable. The same Jerry West that averaged 37.9 ppg in the NBA Finals and with 53 points in game 1 and 42/13/12 in Game 7. But it went to waste because Wilt shot 2-11 FT and scored 8 points in a 1 point loss in game 4 and 4-13 FT in a 2 point loss in Game 7. West carried the Lakers as much as you can but it was Wilt who kept on choking. Can you stop talking about 72 like its relevant at all and admit that Wilt choked in 69.

[Deuce Bigalow]

And, if you had read the research above, you would then be fully informed that, indeed, Chamberlain was dominant in his post-seasons.
If you read my Wilt's choking resume thread then you would know that Wilt was not dominant in big games. I even missed game 4 of the 69 Finals: 2-11 FT in a 1 point loss.


1973 NBA Finals
Lakers had HCA but lost the series in 5 games. Lakers lost by 4 points in Game 2 in which Wilt shot 1-9 from the freethrow line. Wilt put up 5 points in Game 3 which the Lakers lost by 4 points again. In the Game 5, Wilt shot 5-14 from the freethrow line. This capped off Wilt's 5th series loss with HCA to end his career.

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 14-38 (36.8%)

1970 NBA Finals
Another Game 7 loss for the Lakers. Wilt shot 1-10 from the freethrow in a Game 1 loss. In Game 7, Wilt shot 11 freethrow attempts, only making 1.

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 23-67 (34.3%)
Wilt's FT shooting in Game 7: 1-11 (9.1%)

1969 NBA Finals
Lakers had HCA and were up 2-0 in the series and also 3-2 after Game 5. Lakers managed to lose the next 2 games including a 2 point loss in Game 7 in which Wilt missed 9 freethrows (4-13) while Jerry West put up 42-13-12 and won Finals MVP. Wilt shot 1-5 from the filed and missed 8 freethrows in a Game 6 loss and 1-5 from the field in game 2. Boston Celtic Sam Jones outscored Wilt Chamberlain in all 4 Game 7s.

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 24-66 (36.4%)
Wilt's FT shooting in Game 7: 4-13 (30.8%)

1968 Divisional Finals
Another HCA series loss for Wilt. Wilt shot 6-21 from the field and missed 15 freethrows in a Game 6 loss. In Game 7, Wilt made 4 field goals and missed 9 freethrows in a 4 point loss. Wilt was the 9th leading scorer and the 5th leading scorer on his own team in that game 7 with 14 points

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 39-91 (42.9%)
Wilt FT shooting in Game 7: 6-15 (40.0%)

1966 Divisional Finals
His Sixers lost to Boston in 5 games. In the elimination Game 5, Wilt missed 17 freethrows (8-25) in a 8 point loss.

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 22-68 (41.2%)

1965 Divisional Finals
Wilt shot 7-21 from the field in a Game 3 loss. The Sixers lost by 1 point in Game 7, Wilt missed 7 freethrows (6-13) in that game. Wilt was once again outscored by Sam Jones in a Game 7.

1964 NBA Finals
His team lost the series in 5 games. Wilt shot 4-12 from the freethrow line in a Game 1 loss.

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 22-48 (45.8%)

1962 Divisional Finals
Coming off his 50.4 ppg season, his PPG in the Playoffs dropped down by 15 points. In Game 7, Wilt was the 4th leading scorer with 22 points in a loss.

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 22-48 (45.8%)

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

What's more, Wilt ASKED to come in but Van Breda Kolff said they were doing better without him (which was true).

Like I said, LA went on a 12-5 run after Wilt went out. Maybe he should have gotten injured sooner, you know, to give the Lakers a chance? :oldlol:

[LAZERUSS]

Originally Posted by Deuce Bigalow
1973 NBA Finals
Lakers had HCA but lost the series in 5 games. Lakers lost by 4 points in Game 2 in which Wilt shot 1-9 from the freethrow line. Wilt put up 5 points in Game 3 which the Lakers lost by 4 points again. In the Game 5, Wilt shot 5-14 from the freethrow line. This capped off Wilt's 5th series loss with HCA to end his career.

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 14-38 (36.8%)

Chamberlain outrebounds Reed, per game, 19-10, and outshoots him from the field, .525 to .493. In the game clinching game five loss, Wilt is the only Laker to play well, scoring 23 points, on 9-16 shooting from the field, to o along with his game-high 23 rebounds. And, as always, he outscores his opposing center in a game seven.

1970 NBA Finals
Another Game 7 loss for the Lakers. Wilt shot 1-10 from the freethrow in a Game 1 loss. In Game 7, Wilt shot 11 freethrow attempts, only making 1.

In the clinching game seven defeat, once again, it is only Wilt who plays well for his Lakers. 21 points, on 10-16 shooting, with 24 rebounds.

Oh, and in a "must-win" game six, Chamberlain puts up a 45-27 game, on 20-27 shooting.

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 23-67 (34.3%)
Wilt's FT shooting in Game 7: 1-11 (9.1%)

For the series, all Wilt did was have the only 20-20 .600 Finals in NBA history (23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, and a .625 FG%.) All accomplished just four months after major knee surgery, and basically playing on one leg.


1969 NBA Finals
Lakers had HCA and were up 2-0 in the series and also 3-2 after Game 5. Lakers managed to lose the next 2 games including a 2 point loss in Game 7 in which Wilt missed 9 freethrows (4-13) while Jerry West put up 42-13-12 and won Finals MVP. Wilt shot 1-5 from the filed and missed 8 freethrows in a Game 6 loss and 1-5 from the field in game 2. Boston Celtic Sam Jones outscored Wilt Chamberlain in all 4 Game 7s.

West missed 4 FTs in that game seven, himself, and shot less than 50% from the field. In game three, West and Baylor combined to shoot 1-14 from the field in the 4th quarter, in a six point loss. Of course, Baylor followed that up with a 2-14 FG-FGA, 1-6 FT-FTA game, in game four, in a one point loss.

And in game seven, Wilt outscores Russell, 18-6; outshoots Russell from the floor, 7-8 to 2-7; and outrebounds Russell, 27-21. Oh, and while Chamberlain shot .875 from the field in that game seven, his teammates collectively shot .360

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 24-66 (36.4%)
Wilt's FT shooting in Game 7: 4-13 (30.8%)

Wilt outscores, outrebounds, and badly outshoots Russell from the field (.534 to .397) in that series. Just one of his eight post-season series in which he does that to Russell.

Oh, and for the record, Chamberlain outscored Sam Jones in their '60, '62, '64, '65, '66, '67, and '68 playoff matchups.

1968 Divisional Finals
Another HCA series loss for Wilt. Wilt shot 6-21 from the field and missed 15 freethrows in a Game 6 loss. In Game 7, Wilt made 4 field goals and missed 9 freethrows in a 4 point loss. Wilt was the 9th leading scorer and the 5th leading scorer on his own team in that game 7 with 14 points

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 39-91 (42.9%)
Wilt FT shooting in Game 7: 6-15 (40.0%)

A hobbled Wilt, noticeably limping from game three on, still averaged a 22 ppg, 25 rpg, .487 series against Russell. In that game seven loss, Wilt shot 4-9, while his teammates collectively shot .333.

1966 Divisional Finals
His Sixers lost to Boston in 5 games. In the elimination Game 5, Wilt missed 17 freethrows (8-25) in a 8 point loss.

Wilt also scored 46 points, on 19-34 shooting, and with 34 rebounds in that loss

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 22-68 (41.2%)

For the ECF's, all Wilt could do was put up a 28 ppg, 30 rpg, .509 series. Meanwhile, his teammates collectively shot .352 from the field in the entire series.

1965 Divisional Finals
Wilt shot 7-21 from the field in a Game 3 loss. The Sixers lost by 1 point in Game 7, Wilt missed 7 freethrows (6-13) in that game. Wilt was once again outscored by Sam Jones in a Game 7.

Yep. Blame Wilt. All he did was average 30 ppg, 31 rpg, shoot .555, while holding Russell to a 16 ppg, 26 rpg, .447 series. And, BTW, Chamberlain outshot Russell from the line, .583 to .472 (and outscored him from the line by a 49-17 margin.) And in the game seven loss, all Chamberlain could do was score 30 points, on 12-15 shooting from the field, with 32 rebounds.

1964 NBA Finals
His team lost the series in 5 games. Wilt shot 4-12 from the freethrow line in a Game 1 loss.

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 22-48 (45.8%)

In the game four loss, Wilt otscored Russell, 27-8, and outrebounded him, 38-19. And for the series, Wilt outscored Russell, per game, 29 ppg to 11 ppg; outrebounded Russell, per game, 28 rpg to 25 rpg; and outshot Russell from the floor, .517 to .386.

1962 Divisional Finals
Coming off his 50.4 ppg season, his PPG in the Playoffs dropped down by 15 points. In Game 7, Wilt was the 4th leading scorer with 22 points in a loss.

Wilt's FT shooting for the series: 22-48 (45.8%)

In that series, Chamberlain averaged 34 ppg, 26 rpg, and shot .468. Oh, and he held Russell to .399 shooting.

And in the game seven loss...Chamberlain was 8-9 from the line.

And for the entire post-season...Wilt's teammates collective shot .354.

Somehow, Chamberlain took that roster, which played even worse in the post-season, to a game seven, two point loss against a HOF-laden 60-20 Celtic team.



Corrected.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Anyone think Wilt was gay, and the 2,000+ women story, and all the overly masculine tales of wresting lions and bears with his bare hands are all DUCK TALES used to overcompensate for the fact that he might have secretly been kind of feminine and possibly gay?

[LAZERUSS]

What's more, Wilt ASKED to come in but Van Breda Kolff said they were doing better without him (which was true).

Like I said, LA went on a 12-5 run after Wilt went out. Maybe he should have gotten injured sooner, you know, to give the Lakers a chance? :oldlol:

So, with Wilt on the floor, and with the Lakers roaring back from a 17 point deficit, down to seven, or cutting 10 points from that deficit, in four minutes...they were better off without him on the floor in the last five minutes?

[SamuraiSWISH]

http://warroomsports.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/chamberlain_clicks.jpg I dont think he had a problem:confusedshrug: :lol
Because posing with women in pictures automatically means he boned all of them, and couldn't possibly have an alternative life style in secret.

It's not like women or people in general wouldn't want to take pictures with a celebrity, or transcendent athlete / NBA mega star ... or just a freakish 7'2 black man in the 60's and 70's.

:facepalm

If Wilt legit boned 2,000+ women, he surely would've contracted some kind of disease. That's just an ABSURD amount of women to have claimed to have slept with ...

And I haven't had near that personally, who would? Even as a guy that's DISGUSTING ... I've had more than my fair share, especially while in college. But who actually keeps count? I never did, and I'm just a normal joe. It sounds contrived, and made up.

[gyu]

Its possible, before game, after game, hotel rooms, club scenes, tha plane, tha train, tha bus, tha car, after photoshots, partys, it's possible.
So literally anytime he is not on the basketball court he is having sex. Every single day, multiple times a day.

[BlazersDozen]

Watch the Jake The Snake documentary & you'll believe Wilt banged 2,000 women. Jake The Snake has said he would have so much sex that he would go home to his wife and couldn't get hard off what she gave him because he was used to multiple women nightly...now imagine someone in Wilt's place of stardom in the 70s.

[Poochymama]

You really want a guy that is 2-11 from the FT line and 24-66 FT for the series to have the ball? Story of Wilt's career though. Dominant in the regular season, but when it really matters he wilts. Even his coach wouldn't put him in the game in the final 5 minutes of game 7, tells you a lot.

That's the problem with someone like Wilt. If you're going 2-11, 1-13, or 38% from the line, you're basically just a walking target saying "foul me for free possessions". A lot of times your team ends up being better if without you in the final few minutes of games. It's unfortunate because thats when you need your superstar the most.

[Psileas]

Right...

So why is it when Stilt went out of the game, 5 or so minutes left to go w/ "his team" down 103-94, the Lakers suddenly outscored Boston 12 to 5?

Coaching doesn't explain Wilt's 8 points in game 6 (keep in mind, the Lakers were up 3-2 in that series :oldlol:)


What's more, Wilt ASKED to come in but Van Breda Kolff said they were doing better without him (which was true).

Like I said, LA went on a 12-5 run after Wilt went out. Maybe he should have gotten injured sooner, you know, to give the Lakers a chance?
Read more at http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=276097&page=8#1oDM8UmUoIUFRuFt.99

Wrong. They were already outscoring the Celtics, since they were at -18 a little before. They had started their comeback with Wilt playing. Then again, you are the one who mentioned first the 1969 Finals in a thread irrelevant to this, so I wouldn't expect anything better.

Btw, Wilt sucked so bad, it was arguably the first playoff series of his career when he was outplayed by a single teammate - some scrub named Jerry West who I'm not sure he has any playoff stories to boot.

[ILLsmak]

its probably just like killing a dog thats attacking you

you grab both its front legs and pull them as far apart as you can.

it causes their chest to cave in on itself

my friends mom went to jail for doing it to a police dog

wow, if that's true... must try.

I've always wondered what I'd do if a dog attacked me. I only thought I'd gouge out their eyes. This sounds easier.

-Smak

[ILLsmak]

Because posing with women in pictures automatically means he boned all of them, and couldn't possibly have an alternative life style in secret.

It's not like women or people in general wouldn't want to take pictures with a celebrity, or transcendent athlete / NBA mega star ... or just a freakish 7'2 black man in the 60's and 70's.

:facepalm

If Wilt legit boned 2,000+ women, he surely would've contracted some kind of disease. That's just an ABSURD amount of women to have claimed to have slept with ...

And I haven't had near that personally, who would? Even as a guy that's DISGUSTING ... I've had more than my fair share, especially while in college. But who actually keeps count? I never did, and I'm just a normal joe. It sounds contrived, and made up.

double post: not to brag, but I'm pretty sure I could bone 2000+ women if all I wanted to do was **** women. And I'm not even famous, if you were famous, it'd be even more GG because you could skip over that initial stage.

That being said, I don't think he did. It IS possible. however, more likely than him contracting an STD would be having women saying he raped them.

But there are plenty of women that wanna **** out there. I dunno if you can count a huge orgy as ****ing all of those women, either.

-Smak

[bmd]

Because posing with women in pictures automatically means he boned all of them, and couldn't possibly have an alternative life style in secret.

It's not like women or people in general wouldn't want to take pictures with a celebrity, or transcendent athlete / NBA mega star ... or just a freakish 7'2 black man in the 60's and 70's.

:facepalm

If Wilt legit boned 2,000+ women, he surely would've contracted some kind of disease. That's just an ABSURD amount of women to have claimed to have slept with ...

And I haven't had near that personally, who would? Even as a guy that's DISGUSTING ... I've had more than my fair share, especially while in college. But who actually keeps count? I never did, and I'm just a normal joe. It sounds contrived, and made up.I thought the number was 20,000?

[deja vu]

So that's why Wilt can't hit his free throws, because his knees were weakened after f*cking so many chicks. :roll:

[KG215]

TEAM record.
Then put the word team in there, f**knuts. How the hell was I supposed to know what you were talking about?

[kshutts1]

Why do people mention "inflated stats" when discussing Wilt? Wilt played in the (relatively) same era as Russell, Baylor, West, Unseld... other stars. Yet those other stars never have their numbers discounted due to "inflated stats".

To claim "inflated stats" when comparing Wilt to Shaq... sure, I can see that. Not saying one is better than the other, but in that scenario, stats aren't very helpful.

What is helpful, however, is looking at comparative stats, or relative stats. Wilt's stats, relative/compared to his competition, were pretty astronomical; similar to Lebron today. Everyone and their mother is claiming that Lebron is currently the best player in the league, and most of those people cite his ridiculous stats. Why, then, is the same argument not used for Wilt?

Short of comparing one era to another (quite difficult), I believe that it is fair to say that Wilt was head and shoulders above all players in his era. Just as Shaq was for a time. And Lebron is now. And Wilt should be ranked accordingly.

... Inflated stats... :facepalm

[MetsPackers]

Places Wilt top 15 all-time.

8. Duncan
9. Hakeem
10. West
11. Wilt (Lebron surpasses him with a ring)
12. Lebron


LOLOLOLOLOL this guy becomes more of an obvious troll by the day. I suppose you have Kobe in your top 5 too :roll: I love when Kobe lapriders try to disguise themselves as good posters only to reveal their true colors once a debate starts. Good job getting owned in the argument about Wilt's finals in this thread too :applause:

[K Xerxes]

I thought the number was 20,000?

Shamelessly copied from wikipedia:

According to Rod Roddewig, a contemporary of Wilt's, the 20,000 number was created when he and Chamberlain were staying in Chamberlain's penthouse in Honolulu during the mid-eighties. He and Chamberlain stayed at the penthouse for 10 days, over the course of which he recorded everything on his Daytimer.[clarification needed] For every time Chamberlain went to bed with a different girl he put a check in his daytimer. After those 10 days there were 23 checks in the book, which would be rate of 2.3 women per day. He divided that number in half, to be conservative and correcting for degrees of variation. He then multiplied that number by the number of days he had been alive at the time minus 15 years. That was how the 20,000 number came into existence.

In a 1999 interview shortly before his death, Chamberlain regretted not having explained the sexual climate at the time of his escapades, and warned other men who admired him for it, closing with the words: "With all of you men out there who think that having a thousand different ladies is pretty cool, I have learned in my life I've found out that having one woman a thousand different times is much more satisfying." Chamberlain also acknowledged he never came close to marrying, and had no intention of raising any children

[PrettyCool]

Anyone think Wilt was gay, and the 2,000+ women story, and all the overly masculine tales of wresting lions and bears with his bare hands are all DUCK TALES used to overcompensate for the fact that he might have secretly been kind of feminine and possibly gay?

He was also a hardcore republican who endorsed Nixon.

Definitely an undercover homo.

[LAZERUSS]

Why do people mention "inflated stats" when discussing Wilt? Wilt played in the (relatively) same era as Russell, Baylor, West, Unseld... other stars. Yet those other stars never have their numbers discounted due to "inflated stats".

To claim "inflated stats" when comparing Wilt to Shaq... sure, I can see that. Not saying one is better than the other, but in that scenario, stats aren't very helpful.

What is helpful, however, is looking at comparative stats, or relative stats. Wilt's stats, relative/compared to his competition, were pretty astronomical; similar to Lebron today. Everyone and their mother is claiming that Lebron is currently the best player in the league, and most of those people cite his ridiculous stats. Why, then, is the same argument not used for Wilt?

Short of comparing one era to another (quite difficult), I believe that it is fair to say that Wilt was head and shoulders above all players in his era. Just as Shaq was for a time. And Lebron is now. And Wilt should be ranked accordingly.

... Inflated stats... :facepalm

This.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

I have always found it fascinating that Wilt is routinely labeled a "stats-padding" "loser" who "choked" in his biggest games.

Every so often someone here will start a "Top-10 GOAT" list discussion, and invariably, Wilt is usually well behind Kareem. Now, I personally have Kareem in my top-five, and obvioulsy he was one of the most dominant players to have ever played the game. But, the reality was, he was not the scorer, the rebounder, the efficient shooter, the passer, the shot-blocker, nor the defensive player that Wilt was. And, I wouldn't even claim he was as skilled as Wilt. At least not a prime Chamberlain. The only area where Kareem had any kind of an edge was in FT's. But even in that category, it must be pointed out that Chamberlain averaged 432 made FTAs per season, to Kareem's 335.

Think about these facts. KAJ played four years in the Wilt-era. Now, Kareem's high point game of his career, in a career which spanned 20 seasons, was 55 points. To put that into some kind of perspective, Wilt had 122 50+ point games (including four in the post-season, three of which were in "must win" games.) My god, Wilt had stretches in his career in which he averaged 55 ppg. In fact, Chamberlain had two separate runs of 14 straight games of 40+ point games, and in them, he averaged 53 and 54 ppg. He also had another separate streak of five straight games in which he averaged 70 ppg.

And how about this? In Wilt's 68-69 season, or just one season before Kareem's rookie season, Chamberlain hung two games of 60+ (in fact his very last 60 point game, was a 66 point game on a record efficiecy for 60+ point games, of 29-35 shooting. BTW, Kareem would face both of the centers in multiple games in his career, and his high against both was 41. But it gets even better. In Kareem's rookie season, 69-70, Wilt's new coach, Joe Mullaney asked Chamberlain to become the focal point of the offense. And in Wilt's first nine games of that season, he was leading the league in scoring at 32.2 ppg (and on .579 shooting.) Included was one game against Kareem in which Wilt pounded him in every aspect of the game. Unfortunately, Wilt shredded his knee in that ninth game, and was never the same offensive player again.

And KAJ would face several of the same centers that a prime Chamberlain had destroyed, and never came close to Wilt's overwhelming dominance against them. Where were Kareem's 58 and 52 point games against Reed (or an entire season, covering nine h2h games, of 40 ppg)? Where were KAJ's 38 and 45 point games against Thurmond? BTW, KAJ battled Nate in three straight post-seasons, and shot .486, .428, and even .405 against Nate. Chamberlain faced Nate in three post-seasons, and shot .500, .550, and even .560 against him.

And how about Walt Bellamy? KAJ faced a declining Bells some 15 games in his career, and his high game against Bellamy was 39 points. Then think about this: Wilt had two straight seasons, covering ten h2h games each, of averaging 43.7 and 52.7 ppg against Bellamy. Included were four games of 60+, and a high game of 73 (on 29-48 shooting, to go along with 36 rebounds.) Where was KAJ's 100 point game against Imhoff (or even the very next game that Imhoff played against Wilt, in which Chamberlain scored 58)?

Rebounding? Chamberlain not only routinely outrebounded KAJ, h2h (and in both of their h2h playoff series), but was miles ahead of him all four years in the league together. And, that was not nearly a prime Wilt, either. There isn't an area in terms of rebounding that KAJ was even remotely close to Wilt, but I always found this stat fascinating: In Wilt's very last post-season, at age 36, and covering 17 games, Chamberlain averaged 22.5 rpg. That was the last time any player would ever average as much as 17.3 rpg....(KAJ in 76-77.) And while you can find many post-season in which KAJ was outrebounded (and even by teammates), ...in his 29 post-season series, Chamberlain was never outrebounded in any of them.

FG% Efficiency? Wilt's best seasons were light years ahead of KAJ's, and in their four seasons in the league together, Wilt had high FG%'s in three of them. KAJ won one FG% title. Chamberlain? Nine. And before someone points out that KAJ had a career FG% edge of .559 to Wilt's .540, it must be mentioned that Chamberlain played in leagues that shot as low as .410, and never high than .456. KAJ played in the decade of the 80's, when entire leagues were shooting nearly 50%.

Passing? Kareem was a very gifted passer. Easily a top-10 passing center, and perhaps as high as top-5. In fact, KAJ had three seasons of 5.0+ apg in his career, with a high of 5.4. How about Chamberlain? He also had three seasons of 5.0+, at 5.2 apg, 7.8, and a year in which he led the league in assists, and at 8.6 apg. Kareem's high post-season mark? 5.1 apg. How about Chamberlain? 6.5 and 9.2 apg.

Defense? All anyone needs to know here, is that in Chamberlain's last two seasons, (year's three and four in KAJ's career), Wilt was voted first team all-defense at the center position. And how about this? KAJ shot .559 over the course of his career. In 28 h2h games, and against an old Wilt with a surgically repaired knee, KAJ shot .464. In fact, in their last ten h2h games, Kareem shot .450 against Chamberlain (and in the last four pivotal games of the '72 WCF's, Wilt held Kareem to .414 shooting.

Shot-blocking? Here again, KAJ played four seasons in the Wilt-era. And while we don't have KAJ's numbers in those four years, we do know that the very next season after Wilt retired, the NBA started officially recording blocked shots. And in that season, KAJ was at 3.5 bpg. His high season in his long career, would be at 4.1 bpg. Now, thaks to the research of ThaRegul8r, we now know that in Wilt's very last season, he averaged 5.4 bpg (keep in mind that Kareem would average 3.5 bpg the very next season.) And the estimates that I have read, have Wilt at between 6-7 bpg just the year before (including a post-season of 7 bpg.) Clearly, a prime Chamberlain was blocking considerably more shots than that.

And how about "winning?" While they both won a title in the four years that they played in the league together, Wilt carried three teams to the Finals, while KAJ only made one appearance. And for the rest of the decade of the 70's, KAJ's dominance slowly declined, as did his team success. Had he not had the unbelievable good fortune to have played with Magic in his last 10 seasons, he likely would have retired with that one ring (in a post-season in which an old Wilt battled him to a statistical draw BTW.)

How about "clutch?" While Wilt is blindingly blasted as a "choker" in his post-season career, I have provided a ton of evidence earlier in this topic, in which he absolutely slaughtered his post-season peers...many of them HOFers. You will find very few games in which Wilt was substantially outplayed in his 160 post-season career.

Meanwhile, KAJ had post-season series of .405, .428, .457, and .462 shooting. In fact, he had five entire post-seasons of shooting less than the league average. He had big games in which he melted. He was outplayed in a game seven, and at home, by the 6-9 Dave Cowens. He had a playoff against Thurmond, in which he shot his heavily favored Bucks right out of the series. He was outplayed by Moses and his 40-42 Rockets in '81, and was destroyed by Moses in the '83 Finals. He couldn't carry talented rosters anywhere in the late 70's. And he was simply awful in his last two post-seasons (one in which his team won a title despite his pathetic play.)

Given all of that, it just amazes me at how there is this perception that KAJ was the better player than Chamberlain.

[Poochymama]

This.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

I have always found it fascinating that Wilt is routinely labeled a "stats-padding" "loser" who "choked" in his biggest games.

Every so often someone here will start a "Top-10 GOAT" list discussion, and invariably, Wilt is usually well behind Kareem. Now, I personally have Kareem in my top-five, and obvioulsy he was one of the most dominant players to have ever played the game. But, the reality was, he was not the scorer, the rebounder, the efficient shooter, the passer, the shot-blocker, nor the defensive player that Wilt was. And, I wouldn't even claim he was as skilled as Wilt. At least not a prime Chamberlain. The only area where Kareem had any kind of an edge was in FT's. But even in that category, it must be pointed out that Chamberlain averaged 432 made FTAs per season, to Kareem's 335.

Think about these facts. KAJ played four years in the Wilt-era. Now, Kareem's high point game of his career, in a career which spanned 20 seasons, was 55 points. To put that into some kind of perspective, Wilt had 122 50+ point games (including four in the post-season, three of which were in "must win" games.) My god, Wilt had stretches in his career in which he averaged 55 ppg. In fact, Chamberlain had two separate runs of 14 straight games of 40+ point games, and in them, he averaged 53 and 54 ppg. He also had another separate streak of five straight games in which he averaged 70 ppg.

And how about this? In Wilt's 68-69 season, or just one season before Kareem's rookie season, Chamberlain hung two games of 60+ (in fact his very last 60 point game, was a 66 point game on a record efficiecy for 60+ point games, of 29-35 shooting. BTW, Kareem would face both of the centers in multiple games in his career, and his high against both was 41. But it gets even better. In Kareem's rookie season, 69-70, Wilt's new coach, Joe Mullaney asked Chamberlain to become the focal point of the offense. And in Wilt's first nine games of that season, he was leading the league in scoring at 32.2 ppg (and on .579 shooting.) Included was one game against Kareem in which Wilt pounded him in every aspect of the game. Unfortunately, Wilt shredded his knee in that ninth game, and was never the same offensive player again.

And KAJ would face several of the same centers that a prime Chamberlain had destroyed, and never came close to Wilt's overwhelming dominance against them. Where were Kareem's 58 and 52 point games against Reed (or an entire season, covering nine h2h games, of 40 ppg)? Where were KAJ's 38 and 45 point games against Thurmond? BTW, KAJ battled Nate in three straight post-seasons, and shot .486, .428, and even .405 against Nate. Chamberlain faced Nate in three post-seasons, and shot .500, .550, and even .560 against him.

And how about Walt Bellamy? KAJ faced a declining Bells some 15 games in his career, and his high game against Bellamy was 39 points. Then think about this: Wilt had two straight seasons, covering ten h2h games each, of averaging 43.7 and 52.7 ppg against Bellamy. Included were four games of 60+, and a high game of 73 (on 29-48 shooting, to go along with 36 rebounds.) Where was KAJ's 100 point game against Imhoff (or even the very next game that Imhoff played against Wilt, in which Chamberlain scored 58)?

Rebounding? Chamberlain not only routinely outrebounded KAJ, h2h (and in both of their h2h playoff series), but was miles ahead of him all four years in the league together. And, that was not nearly a prime Wilt, either. There isn't an area in terms of rebounding that KAJ was even remotely close to Wilt, but I always found this stat fascinating: In Wilt's very last post-season, at age 36, and covering 17 games, Chamberlain averaged 22.5 rpg. That was the last time any player would ever average as much as 17.3 rpg....(KAJ in 76-77.) And while you can find many post-season in which KAJ was outrebounded (and even by teammates), ...in his 29 post-season series, Chamberlain was never outrebounded in any of them.

FG% Efficiency? Wilt's best seasons were light years ahead of KAJ's, and in their four seasons in the league together, Wilt had high FG%'s in three of them. KAJ won one FG% title. Chamberlain? Nine. And before someone points out that KAJ had a career FG% edge of .559 to Wilt's .540, it must be mentioned that Chamberlain played in leagues that shot as low as .410, and never high than .456. KAJ played in the decade of the 80's, when entire leagues were shooting nearly 50%.

Passing? Kareem was a very gifted passer. Easily a top-10 passing center, and perhaps as high as top-5. In fact, KAJ had three seasons of 5.0+ apg in his career, with a high of 5.4. How about Chamberlain? He also had three seasons of 5.0+, at 5.2 apg, 7.8, and a year in which he led the league in assists, and at 8.6 apg. Kareem's high post-season mark? 5.1 apg. How about Chamberlain? 6.5 and 9.2 apg.

Defense? All anyone needs to know here, is that in Chamberlain's last two seasons, (year's three and four in KAJ's career), Wilt was voted first team all-defense at the center position. And how about this? KAJ shot .559 over the course of his career. In 28 h2h games, and against an old Wilt with a surgically repaired knee, KAJ shot .464. In fact, in their last ten h2h games, Kareem shot .450 against Chamberlain (and in the last four pivotal games of the '72 WCF's, Wilt held Kareem to .414 shooting.

Shot-blocking? Here again, KAJ played four seasons in the Wilt-era. And while we don't have KAJ's numbers in those four years, we do know that the very next season after Wilt retired, the NBA started officially recording blocked shots. And in that season, KAJ was at 3.5 bpg. His high season in his long career, would be at 4.1 bpg. Now, thaks to the research of ThaRegul8r, we now know that in Wilt's very last season, he averaged 5.4 bpg (keep in mind that Kareem would average 3.5 bpg the very next season.) And the estimates that I have read, have Wilt at between 6-7 bpg just the year before (including a post-season of 7 bpg.) Clearly, a prime Chamberlain was blocking considerably more shots than that.

And how about "winning?" While they both won a title in the four years that they played in the league together, Wilt carried three teams to the Finals, while KAJ only made one appearance. And for the rest of the decade of the 70's, KAJ's dominance slowly declined, as did his team success. Had he not had the unbelievable good fortune to have played with Magic in his last 10 seasons, he likely would have retired with that one ring (in a post-season in which an old Wilt battled him to a statistical draw BTW.)

How about "clutch?" While Wilt is blindingly blasted as a "choker" in his post-season career, I have provided a ton of evidence earlier in this topic, in which he absolutely slaughtered his post-season peers...many of them HOFers. You will find very few games in which Wilt was substantially outplayed in his 160 post-season career.

Meanwhile, KAJ had post-season series of .405, .428, .457, and .462 shooting. In fact, he had five entire post-seasons of shooting less than the league average. He had big games in which he melted. He was outplayed in a game seven, and at home, by the 6-9 Dave Cowens. He had a playoff against Thurmond, in which he shot his heavily favored Bucks right out of the series. He was outplayed by Moses and his 40-42 Rockets in '81, and was destroyed by Moses in the '83 Finals. He couldn't carry talented rosters anywhere in the late 70's. And he was simply awful in his last two post-seasons (one in which his team won a title despite his pathetic play.)

Given all of that, it just amazes me at how there is this perception that KAJ was the better player than Chamberlain.

It's not really fair, but by the standards current superstars are held to, Wilt definitely was somewhat of a choker. He had the best the best overall supporting cast from 65-73 and yet he only walked away with 2 rings.

[Deuce Bigalow]

LOLOLOLOLOL this guy becomes more of an obvious troll by the day. I suppose you have Kobe in your top 5 too :roll: I love when Kobe lapriders try to disguise themselves as good posters only to reveal their true colors once a debate starts. Good job getting owned in the argument about Wilt's finals in this thread too :applause:
Where did I get owned? Jlauber is blaming Elgin Baylor's old ass for Wilt laying bricks at the FT line. He blames everybody but Wilt on here. How can you blame someone else when a guy shot 2-11 from the FT line in a 1 point Finals loss? Jlauber can.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Why do people mention "inflated stats" when discussing Wilt? Wilt played in the (relatively) same era as Russell, Baylor, West, Unseld... other stars. Yet those other stars never have their numbers discounted due to "inflated stats".

To claim "inflated stats" when comparing Wilt to Shaq... sure, I can see that. Not saying one is better than the other, but in that scenario, stats aren't very helpful.

What is helpful, however, is looking at comparative stats, or relative stats. Wilt's stats, relative/compared to his competition, were pretty astronomical; similar to Lebron today. Everyone and their mother is claiming that Lebron is currently the best player in the league, and most of those people cite his ridiculous stats. Why, then, is the same argument not used for Wilt?

Short of comparing one era to another (quite difficult), I believe that it is fair to say that Wilt was head and shoulders above all players in his era. Just as Shaq was for a time. And Lebron is now. And Wilt should be ranked accordingly.

... Inflated stats... :facepalm
Because you got an old man saying "How many 27 rebound games did x have?" Like players today have a chance at grabbing 27 rebounds :facepalm The league average is around 42 rpg in today's era, while in the 60's the league average was over 65 rpg. The FGA average is around 80 today, while in the 60's it was around 100-105 FGA, and the FG% was lower back then meaning even more missed shots. So when you got someone saying "How many 30 rebound games did blank have compared to Wilt?", it's plain retardation because it's a different era. I have tried explaining this to his Alzheimer's brain, but to no avail.

[LAZERUSS]

Where did I get owned? Jlauber is blaming Elgin Baylor's old ass for Wilt laying bricks at the FT line. He blames everybody but Wilt on here. How can you blame someone else when a guy shot 2-11 from the FT line in a 1 point Finals loss? Jlauber can.

Your FT shooting arguments have been destroyed many times before. No one disputes the fact that Chamberlain, who was actually a very good shooter, was a poor FT shooter (although, early in his career he was at least somewhat respectable for a center in that regard.) But for the benefit of those that may not have read them, let's rehash Wilt's true impact from the line again.

First of all, Chamberlain MADE a TON of FT's in his career. He is currently 16th all-time (19th if you include ABA numbers) in FTs MADE. Think about that. Shaq, played 19 seasons, and is behind him. Hakeem, who played 18 seasons, is over 500 behind him. Hell, Bird, who played 13 seasons to Wilt's 14, is 2000 behind him. And while Kareem is slightly ahead of him, it must be mentioned that KAJ averaged 335 made per season in his career, to Chamberlain's 432.

And how about this? The single season record holder for FTs made in a season, is Jerry West, with 840. Who has the second highest season? Wilt...with 835 in '62. And Wilt also had some huge games from the line as well, capped off by a 28-32 game, which came in his 100 point performance.

Secondly, it's not like Wilt was the only poor FT shooter among the all-time greats. Shaq was only a slightly better shooter in both the regular season, and post-season. As was Russell. And players ike KAJ and Hakeem, while average for the center position, were below average overall.

But what the Chamberlain-bashers never bring up, was the fact that Wilt's IMPACT at the line went well beyond his own scoring. In every season in whic he played, his TEAMs were among the league leaders in FTs MADE. Why? Because Wilt was fouled so freqently. His team's either led, or were near the top every season. His '67 68-13 76ers ran away with that stat.

And how about this? In Wilt's 68-69 season, his Lakers led the league in FTAs. And in the post-season, they were miles ahead of every team. In the Finals, they took nearly a 100 more FTAs than Boston.

Ok, so in the 69-70 season, Wilt went down with a horrific knee injury early in season, and missed 70 games. His Lakers, who had led the legue in FTAs just the year before, dropped all the way down to 12th in FTAs. However, Chamberlain came back from that inury way ahead of even the most optomistic medical opinions, and played in the post-season. Guess what? Not only did the Lakers lead all teams in FTAs, they just blew every team away. Here again, they took nealy a 100 more FTAs in the Finals, than their opponents, the Knicks had.

In Wilt's '67 Finals, he shot 22-72 from the line, including 2-17 in the clinching game six win. How much did that hurt his team? His teammates took 39 FTAs in that game, as well, while the entire Warrior team had 29.

Furthermore, Wilt, along with Shaq, were the two most prolific "and-one" scorers in NBA history. They scored more from the line, in those situations, than anyone else. How many "extra" FTAs, and FTM's did those to generate over the course of their careers?

Not only that, but here again, their teammates benefitted by being in the bonus much earlier. An what is never acknowledged by the anti-Wilt posters, was the fact that Wilt often had his opposing centers sitting on the bench in foul trouble, as well as their teammates.

And anyone can use the "what if" argument in these FT missed discussions. Hell, MJ missed two FTs in regulation in his 63 point game against Boston, that, had he made them, would have won the game, instead of losing in OT. True, he went 20-22 overall, but that is an extreme example to the contrary.

And why do the Wilt-detractors bash his FT%, and not bring up his FG% efficiency? I have read those that ripped Wilt for shooting 6-13 from the line in game seven of the '65 ECF's, in a one point loss. The anti-Wilt clan will never bring up the fact that Chamberlain shot 12-15 from the field in that game. I could argue that in a typical Kobe Finals, he would have shot 11-13 from the line in that game, but only 6-15 from the field. So instead of losing by one point, they would have lost by eight.

And how often do you read about a player like Bird costing his team a game from the field? Most everyone here knows by now that Magic's baby hook won game four of the '87 Finals. But, while Bird went a perfect 5-5 from the line, he not onl missed the potential game-winner at the buzzer, he shot a miserable 7-19 from the field. It could be argued that had he made just one more shot from the floor, and that might hav completely changed that series.

And how about this... in game seven's of the NBA Finals, Kareem shot an overall 24-50 from the field, or 48%. Hakeem was 10-25, or 40%. Bird was 6-18, or 33%. And Kobe went 6-24, or 25%. How about Wilt? 17-24, or .708 (and BTW, his opposing starting centers shot a combined 4-12 in those two games, or 33%.)

So, while Wilt was a poor FT shooter by any standards, his IMPACT went well beyond the pure numbers.

[LAZERUSS]

Where did I get owned? Jlauber is blaming Elgin Baylor's old ass for Wilt laying bricks at the FT line. He blames everybody but Wilt on here. How can you blame someone else when a guy shot 2-11 from the FT line in a 1 point Finals loss? Jlauber can.

And how can you not blame Baylor? I brought it up earlier, but he and West combined to shoot 1-14 from the field in the 4th quarter of game three, a six point loss (and Baylor shot 2-12 from the field overall.) And in that one point loss you eluded to, while Wilt went 2-11 from the line, how about Baylor, who only shot 1-6 from the stripe (as well as 2-14 from the floor)? And in game seven, while Chamberlain was shooting .875 from the field (7-8), his teammates collectively shot .360, including Baylor, who went 8-22...all in a two point loss. Hell, using your ridiculous FT shooting analogies, West was just as much at fault, as he missed four FTs in that game, including a couple in the 4th quarter (as well as shooting 14-29 from the floor.)

And even beyond Baylor's ineptitude in that series, has there ever been a coach who so completely blew a series by his decisions? He not only continued to let Baylor fire blanks all series long, but in that game four, one point loss, his Lakers were leading late, 88-87, and had the ball. But, instead of putting the ball in West's hands, he had Johnny Egan handling it. The inevitable result? Egan was stripped, and a few seconds later Sam Jones, while falling down, hit the game winner. Had that one single play not occured, the Lakers, with their solid win game five, would have romped to a 4-1 series win. And only a complete idiot, whch obviously Van Breda Kolf was, would have benched Wilt in the last few minutes in a game seven...two point loss. BTW, his replacement, Mel Counts, missed a key shot late, and committed what amounted to a game-losing turnover in the waning seconds (in addition to shooting 4-13 from the floor overall.)

The fact was, Van Breda Kolf's incompetence not only basically cost him his career, it surely ruined what should have been the Lakers first-ever title in the city of Los Angeles (which did come a couple of seasons later, and under the great coaching of Bill Sharman.)

[K Xerxes]

This.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

I have always found it fascinating that Wilt is routinely labeled a "stats-padding" "loser" who "choked" in his biggest games.

Every so often someone here will start a "Top-10 GOAT" list discussion, and invariably, Wilt is usually well behind Kareem. Now, I personally have Kareem in my top-five, and obvioulsy he was one of the most dominant players to have ever played the game. But, the reality was, he was not the scorer, the rebounder, the efficient shooter, the passer, the shot-blocker, nor the defensive player that Wilt was. And, I wouldn't even claim he was as skilled as Wilt. At least not a prime Chamberlain. The only area where Kareem had any kind of an edge was in FT's. But even in that category, it must be pointed out that Chamberlain averaged 432 made FTAs per season, to Kareem's 335.

Think about these facts. KAJ played four years in the Wilt-era. Now, Kareem's high point game of his career, in a career which spanned 20 seasons, was 55 points. To put that into some kind of perspective, Wilt had 122 50+ point games (including four in the post-season, three of which were in "must win" games.) My god, Wilt had stretches in his career in which he averaged 55 ppg. In fact, Chamberlain had two separate runs of 14 straight games of 40+ point games, and in them, he averaged 53 and 54 ppg. He also had another separate streak of five straight games in which he averaged 70 ppg.

And how about this? In Wilt's 68-69 season, or just one season before Kareem's rookie season, Chamberlain hung two games of 60+ (in fact his very last 60 point game, was a 66 point game on a record efficiecy for 60+ point games, of 29-35 shooting. BTW, Kareem would face both of the centers in multiple games in his career, and his high against both was 41. But it gets even better. In Kareem's rookie season, 69-70, Wilt's new coach, Joe Mullaney asked Chamberlain to become the focal point of the offense. And in Wilt's first nine games of that season, he was leading the league in scoring at 32.2 ppg (and on .579 shooting.) Included was one game against Kareem in which Wilt pounded him in every aspect of the game. Unfortunately, Wilt shredded his knee in that ninth game, and was never the same offensive player again.

And KAJ would face several of the same centers that a prime Chamberlain had destroyed, and never came close to Wilt's overwhelming dominance against them. Where were Kareem's 58 and 52 point games against Reed (or an entire season, covering nine h2h games, of 40 ppg)? Where were KAJ's 38 and 45 point games against Thurmond? BTW, KAJ battled Nate in three straight post-seasons, and shot .486, .428, and even .405 against Nate. Chamberlain faced Nate in three post-seasons, and shot .500, .550, and even .560 against him.

And how about Walt Bellamy? KAJ faced a declining Bells some 15 games in his career, and his high game against Bellamy was 39 points. Then think about this: Wilt had two straight seasons, covering ten h2h games each, of averaging 43.7 and 52.7 ppg against Bellamy. Included were four games of 60+, and a high game of 73 (on 29-48 shooting, to go along with 36 rebounds.) Where was KAJ's 100 point game against Imhoff (or even the very next game that Imhoff played against Wilt, in which Chamberlain scored 58)?

Rebounding? Chamberlain not only routinely outrebounded KAJ, h2h (and in both of their h2h playoff series), but was miles ahead of him all four years in the league together. And, that was not nearly a prime Wilt, either. There isn't an area in terms of rebounding that KAJ was even remotely close to Wilt, but I always found this stat fascinating: In Wilt's very last post-season, at age 36, and covering 17 games, Chamberlain averaged 22.5 rpg. That was the last time any player would ever average as much as 17.3 rpg....(KAJ in 76-77.) And while you can find many post-season in which KAJ was outrebounded (and even by teammates), ...in his 29 post-season series, Chamberlain was never outrebounded in any of them.

FG% Efficiency? Wilt's best seasons were light years ahead of KAJ's, and in their four seasons in the league together, Wilt had high FG%'s in three of them. KAJ won one FG% title. Chamberlain? Nine. And before someone points out that KAJ had a career FG% edge of .559 to Wilt's .540, it must be mentioned that Chamberlain played in leagues that shot as low as .410, and never high than .456. KAJ played in the decade of the 80's, when entire leagues were shooting nearly 50%.

Passing? Kareem was a very gifted passer. Easily a top-10 passing center, and perhaps as high as top-5. In fact, KAJ had three seasons of 5.0+ apg in his career, with a high of 5.4. How about Chamberlain? He also had three seasons of 5.0+, at 5.2 apg, 7.8, and a year in which he led the league in assists, and at 8.6 apg. Kareem's high post-season mark? 5.1 apg. How about Chamberlain? 6.5 and 9.2 apg.

Defense? All anyone needs to know here, is that in Chamberlain's last two seasons, (year's three and four in KAJ's career), Wilt was voted first team all-defense at the center position. And how about this? KAJ shot .559 over the course of his career. In 28 h2h games, and against an old Wilt with a surgically repaired knee, KAJ shot .464. In fact, in their last ten h2h games, Kareem shot .450 against Chamberlain (and in the last four pivotal games of the '72 WCF's, Wilt held Kareem to .414 shooting.

Shot-blocking? Here again, KAJ played four seasons in the Wilt-era. And while we don't have KAJ's numbers in those four years, we do know that the very next season after Wilt retired, the NBA started officially recording blocked shots. And in that season, KAJ was at 3.5 bpg. His high season in his long career, would be at 4.1 bpg. Now, thaks to the research of ThaRegul8r, we now know that in Wilt's very last season, he averaged 5.4 bpg (keep in mind that Kareem would average 3.5 bpg the very next season.) And the estimates that I have read, have Wilt at between 6-7 bpg just the year before (including a post-season of 7 bpg.) Clearly, a prime Chamberlain was blocking considerably more shots than that.

And how about "winning?" While they both won a title in the four years that they played in the league together, Wilt carried three teams to the Finals, while KAJ only made one appearance. And for the rest of the decade of the 70's, KAJ's dominance slowly declined, as did his team success. Had he not had the unbelievable good fortune to have played with Magic in his last 10 seasons, he likely would have retired with that one ring (in a post-season in which an old Wilt battled him to a statistical draw BTW.)

How about "clutch?" While Wilt is blindingly blasted as a "choker" in his post-season career, I have provided a ton of evidence earlier in this topic, in which he absolutely slaughtered his post-season peers...many of them HOFers. You will find very few games in which Wilt was substantially outplayed in his 160 post-season career.

Meanwhile, KAJ had post-season series of .405, .428, .457, and .462 shooting. In fact, he had five entire post-seasons of shooting less than the league average. He had big games in which he melted. He was outplayed in a game seven, and at home, by the 6-9 Dave Cowens. He had a playoff against Thurmond, in which he shot his heavily favored Bucks right out of the series. He was outplayed by Moses and his 40-42 Rockets in '81, and was destroyed by Moses in the '83 Finals. He couldn't carry talented rosters anywhere in the late 70's. And he was simply awful in his last two post-seasons (one in which his team won a title despite his pathetic play.)

Given all of that, it just amazes me at how there is this perception that KAJ was the better player than Chamberlain.

Your Wilt worshipping is quite amusing, but I have to admit this is a very enlightening post. :applause:

[LAZERUSS]

Why do people mention "inflated stats" when discussing Wilt? Wilt played in the (relatively) same era as Russell, Baylor, West, Unseld... other stars. Yet those other stars never have their numbers discounted due to "inflated stats".

To claim "inflated stats" when comparing Wilt to Shaq... sure, I can see that. Not saying one is better than the other, but in that scenario, stats aren't very helpful.

What is helpful, however, is looking at comparative stats, or relative stats. Wilt's stats, relative/compared to his competition, were pretty astronomical; similar to Lebron today. Everyone and their mother is claiming that Lebron is currently the best player in the league, and most of those people cite his ridiculous stats. Why, then, is the same argument not used for Wilt?

Short of comparing one era to another (quite difficult), I believe that it is fair to say that Wilt was head and shoulders above all players in his era. Just as Shaq was for a time. And Lebron is now. And Wilt should be ranked accordingly.

... Inflated stats... :facepalm

It's been mentioned before, but take Wilt, and his 14 seasons out of the equation, and much of the numbers of that era become ordinary. Rick Barry's 66-67 season scoring average of 35.6 would have been the record until MJ's -87 season, in which he averaged 37.1 ppg. And for those that claim that the 60's were prolific for scoring, aside from Wilt's 32, there were a total of five 60+ point games in those 14 seasons.

And before Chamberlain arrived, the NBA single season mark for FG% efficiency was .490. Had Chamberlain not played, the record would have been Johnny Green's .587...which of course, would have been eclipsed by the players who played in the defenseless 80's (and BTW, what kind of efficency records would Chamberlain have set in that decade?)

And even as inflated as the rebounding numbers were in the Wilt-era (BTW, by the time he retired the league averages had declined significantly...all the way down to about 50 per team per season), if you were to remove both Wilt, and Russell, there would have been a total of four 20+ full-time rebounding seasons in that period, with the record being Thurmond's 21.1 season.

Here again, though, and as you claimed...Chamberlain was just light-years ahead of his peers. He won scoring titles by margins of 11 and 19 ppg. He won rebounding titles by 5 per game. And he won FG% titles by margins of .157 and .162.

And before someone jumps in and claims that Wilt accomplished those numbers against inferior competition, think about this...he had entire seasons, covering 10+ games, against Russell, of averaging 38-40 ppg. He had an 11 game stretch against Thurmond, in which he averaged 30 ppg. He had an entire season, covering nine games, in which he averaged 40 ppg against Reed. And he had multiple seasons of 30+ ppg against Bellamy, including two (and 10 h2h games in each) of 43 and 53 ppg.

I have covered his 65-66 season before, so I won't go into details now, but suffice to say, there has probably never been a season, by any other center, in which a player so thoroughly dominated their peers. He waxed the floor with Bellamy (10 h2h's), Thurmond (9 h2h's), and Russell (14 h2h's, including five in the post-season.) And while his scoring declined in his '67 season, once again, he was hanging 20+ ppg, .550+ seasons on Russell, Thurmond, and Bellamy (his numbers against the Knicks that season were something like 23 ppg on .720 shooting.)

Even late in his career, he faced the 6-11 HOFer Bob Lanier in 11 straight games, covering Wilt's last two seasons, and a well-past his prime Chamberlain averaged 24 ppg on a staggering .784 FG% in those 11 games (including a 31-31 game.) And in his last season, and covering six h2h games, he outshot Kareem by a .737 to .450 margin (which included one game in which he outscored KAJ, 24-21, while outshooting him, 10-14 to 10-27.)

[LAZERUSS]

It's not really fair, but by the standards current superstars are held to, Wilt definitely was somewhat of a choker. He had the best the best overall supporting cast from 65-73 and yet he only walked away with 2 rings.

Of those seasons, from 65-66 thru 72-73, I would argue that Wilt had equally as good supporting casts, as Russell in '66, '68, and '69. Not better (nor nearly as deep.)

Furthemore, I would also argue that they were probably not as good in '66. While they edged Boston in the regular season, 55-25 to 54-26, they had to win their final 11 games to accomplish that. Not only that, but the Celtics were plagued by injuries in the regular season, but were healthy by the time the playoffs came. In addition, they were the seven-time defending champs, while the Sixers were just coming into their own.

In any case, the Sixers went 6-3 against Boston in the that 65-66 regular season, and in those nine games, Chamberlain averaged 28.3 ppg, 30.7 rpg, and I believe he shot somewhere around .525 from the floor. In the ECF's, the Celtics routed the Sixers, 4-1. But was it Wilt's fault? He averaged 28 ppg, 30.2 rpg, and shot .509 from the field. Meanwhile, his teammates collectively shot .352 from the field.

As for the '67-68 season, the Sixers were clearly the better team. They romped to a runaway best record during the regular season. But then the injuries piled up. They lost Billy Cunningham for the remainder of the playoffs in the first round of the playoffs. Still, even without him, they forged a 3-1 series lead against Boston in the ECF's. But, in game five, both Luke Jackson and Wali Jones sustained leg injuries, and were worthless the rest of the series. And this was not a deep team Sixer team, either. On top of all of that, Wilt, himself, was nursing an assortment on injuries, and was noticeably limping from game three, on. With all of that, and including a game seven in which Chamberlain's teammates collectively shot .333 from the field, that Sixer team lost that game seven by a 100-96 margin. I think it is safe to say that a healthy Sixer team would have repeated their 4-1 blowout series win against Boston in the previous ECF's of '67.

The 68-69 season is questionable, as well. It is alomost never mentioned, but the Lakers not only traded three players (two of which would be starters) to Philly to get Chamberlain, but they also lost Gail Goodrich in the expansion draft. Not only that, but Baylor was on the decline (and it really showed in the post-season.) So, this was not a deep team. It was basically a prime West, a shackled Wilt (Van Breda Kolf preferred West and Baylor taking the shots), once again, a declining Baylor...and a cast of misfits.

And, you simply can't ignore the impact of the losses of Archie Clark and Goodrich, either. The '68 Lakers had the strongest backcourt in the game, what with West, Clark, and Goodrich. However, their '69 backcourt was West, and a well-below average Johnny Egan. In fact, Egan's gaffe late in game four probably cost LA the title.

On top of all of that, there was no question that the '69 Lakers had an incompetent coach. How about this comment that he made during the season? "When we pass the ball into Wilt, he will score. But it is an ugly offense to watch." So, instead, he preferred to let Baylor shoot the Lakers right out of the Finals.

The 69-70 Lakers might have been a great team. Except for the small issue of Wilt shredding his knee early in the season, and missing nearly all of it. And even though he returned for the post-season, he was nowhere near 100%. Meanwhile, the Knicks, and their four HOFers were hitting their peak. They went 60-22 and were a solid favorite over the 46-36 Lakers in the Finals. Still, they had to win a game seven, at home, to win that series.

How about the 70-71 Lakers? Baylor played two regular season games, and that was it. And, he missed the entire post-season. Meanwhile, West missed the last 4th of the season, and all of the playoffs due to injuries. And while Chamberlain played brilliantly against Alcindor (Kareem) in the WCF's, LA was thoroughly outmatched, and were dispatched in five games.

Finally, a healthy '73 Laker team might have won the title. But, West was nursing two injured knees, and was nowhere near 100%. And his play was simply mediocre because of them. Still, the Lakers were in every loss, losing all of them in the last minute (and by margins of 4, 4, 5, and 9 points.)

Chamberlain's two healthy teams...the '67 Sixers, and the '72 Lakers, went 68-13 and 69-13 respectively, and won overwhelming titles.

[stanlove1111]

This.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

I have always found it fascinating that Wilt is routinely labeled a "stats-padding" "loser" who "choked" in his biggest games.

Every so often someone here will start a "Top-10 GOAT" list discussion, and invariably, Wilt is usually well behind Kareem. Now, I personally have Kareem in my top-five, and obvioulsy he was one of the most dominant players to have ever played the game. But, the reality was, he was not the scorer, the rebounder, the efficient shooter, the passer, the shot-blocker, nor the defensive player that Wilt was. And, I wouldn't even claim he was as skilled as Wilt. At least not a prime Chamberlain. The only area where Kareem had any kind of an edge was in FT's. But even in that category, it must be pointed out that Chamberlain averaged 432 made FTAs per season, to Kareem's 335.

Think about these facts. KAJ played four years in the Wilt-era. Now, Kareem's high point game of his career, in a career which spanned 20 seasons, was 55 points. To put that into some kind of perspective, Wilt had 122 50+ point games (including four in the post-season, three of which were in "must win" games.) My god, Wilt had stretches in his career in which he averaged 55 ppg. In fact, Chamberlain had two separate runs of 14 straight games of 40+ point games, and in them, he averaged 53 and 54 ppg. He also had another separate streak of five straight games in which he averaged 70 ppg.

And how about this? In Wilt's 68-69 season, or just one season before Kareem's rookie season, Chamberlain hung two games of 60+ (in fact his very last 60 point game, was a 66 point game on a record efficiecy for 60+ point games, of 29-35 shooting. BTW, Kareem would face both of the centers in multiple games in his career, and his high against both was 41. But it gets even better. In Kareem's rookie season, 69-70, Wilt's new coach, Joe Mullaney asked Chamberlain to become the focal point of the offense. And in Wilt's first nine games of that season, he was leading the league in scoring at 32.2 ppg (and on .579 shooting.) Included was one game against Kareem in which Wilt pounded him in every aspect of the game. Unfortunately, Wilt shredded his knee in that ninth game, and was never the same offensive player again.

And KAJ would face several of the same centers that a prime Chamberlain had destroyed, and never came close to Wilt's overwhelming dominance against them. Where were Kareem's 58 and 52 point games against Reed (or an entire season, covering nine h2h games, of 40 ppg)? Where were KAJ's 38 and 45 point games against Thurmond? BTW, KAJ battled Nate in three straight post-seasons, and shot .486, .428, and even .405 against Nate. Chamberlain faced Nate in three post-seasons, and shot .500, .550, and even .560 against him.

And how about Walt Bellamy? KAJ faced a declining Bells some 15 games in his career, and his high game against Bellamy was 39 points. Then think about this: Wilt had two straight seasons, covering ten h2h games each, of averaging 43.7 and 52.7 ppg against Bellamy. Included were four games of 60+, and a high game of 73 (on 29-48 shooting, to go along with 36 rebounds.) Where was KAJ's 100 point game against Imhoff (or even the very next game that Imhoff played against Wilt, in which Chamberlain scored 58)?

Rebounding? Chamberlain not only routinely outrebounded KAJ, h2h (and in both of their h2h playoff series), but was miles ahead of him all four years in the league together. And, that was not nearly a prime Wilt, either. There isn't an area in terms of rebounding that KAJ was even remotely close to Wilt, but I always found this stat fascinating: In Wilt's very last post-season, at age 36, and covering 17 games, Chamberlain averaged 22.5 rpg. That was the last time any player would ever average as much as 17.3 rpg....(KAJ in 76-77.) And while you can find many post-season in which KAJ was outrebounded (and even by teammates), ...in his 29 post-season series, Chamberlain was never outrebounded in any of them.

FG% Efficiency? Wilt's best seasons were light years ahead of KAJ's, and in their four seasons in the league together, Wilt had high FG%'s in three of them. KAJ won one FG% title. Chamberlain? Nine. And before someone points out that KAJ had a career FG% edge of .559 to Wilt's .540, it must be mentioned that Chamberlain played in leagues that shot as low as .410, and never high than .456. KAJ played in the decade of the 80's, when entire leagues were shooting nearly 50%.

Passing? Kareem was a very gifted passer. Easily a top-10 passing center, and perhaps as high as top-5. In fact, KAJ had three seasons of 5.0+ apg in his career, with a high of 5.4. How about Chamberlain? He also had three seasons of 5.0+, at 5.2 apg, 7.8, and a year in which he led the league in assists, and at 8.6 apg. Kareem's high post-season mark? 5.1 apg. How about Chamberlain? 6.5 and 9.2 apg.

Defense? All anyone needs to know here, is that in Chamberlain's last two seasons, (year's three and four in KAJ's career), Wilt was voted first team all-defense at the center position. And how about this? KAJ shot .559 over the course of his career. In 28 h2h games, and against an old Wilt with a surgically repaired knee, KAJ shot .464. In fact, in their last ten h2h games, Kareem shot .450 against Chamberlain (and in the last four pivotal games of the '72 WCF's, Wilt held Kareem to .414 shooting.

Shot-blocking? Here again, KAJ played four seasons in the Wilt-era. And while we don't have KAJ's numbers in those four years, we do know that the very next season after Wilt retired, the NBA started officially recording blocked shots. And in that season, KAJ was at 3.5 bpg. His high season in his long career, would be at 4.1 bpg. Now, thaks to the research of ThaRegul8r, we now know that in Wilt's very last season, he averaged 5.4 bpg (keep in mind that Kareem would average 3.5 bpg the very next season.) And the estimates that I have read, have Wilt at between 6-7 bpg just the year before (including a post-season of 7 bpg.) Clearly, a prime Chamberlain was blocking considerably more shots than that.

And how about "winning?" While they both won a title in the four years that they played in the league together, Wilt carried three teams to the Finals, while KAJ only made one appearance. And for the rest of the decade of the 70's, KAJ's dominance slowly declined, as did his team success. Had he not had the unbelievable good fortune to have played with Magic in his last 10 seasons, he likely would have retired with that one ring (in a post-season in which an old Wilt battled him to a statistical draw BTW.)

How about "clutch?" While Wilt is blindingly blasted as a "choker" in his post-season career, I have provided a ton of evidence earlier in this topic, in which he absolutely slaughtered his post-season peers...many of them HOFers. You will find very few games in which Wilt was substantially outplayed in his 160 post-season career.

Meanwhile, KAJ had post-season series of .405, .428, .457, and .462 shooting. In fact, he had five entire post-seasons of shooting less than the league average. He had big games in which he melted. He was outplayed in a game seven, and at home, by the 6-9 Dave Cowens. He had a playoff against Thurmond, in which he shot his heavily favored Bucks right out of the series. He was outplayed by Moses and his 40-42 Rockets in '81, and was destroyed by Moses in the '83 Finals. He couldn't carry talented rosters anywhere in the late 70's. And he was simply awful in his last two post-seasons (one in which his team won a title despite his pathetic play.)

Given all of that, it just amazes me at how there is this perception that KAJ was the better player than Chamberlain.


When I look at a long post I scan through to se right off the bat of its just someone cherry picking everything he can or making silly arguments to try and win an argument. When I see this I basically just chaulk it up as crap. This is where your posts landed..

YOu actually are making a point of Wilt having better FG % in three of the 4 years they were both in the league? Really...It could be because Wilt barely shot in his last 2 years could it. It couldn't be that in his last 2 years Wilt was then obsessed with basically only shooting when he was sure to make a shot? That couldn't be why could it.


Jabbar was a more unstoppable scorer then Wilt. That was obvious to people who watched both. And stop bringing up Wilt's huge scoring games as proof of anything..Jabbar played team ball his entire career, Wilt chucked for much of it..

I consider Jabbar and Wilt about even.. Wilt did more things well, but Jabbar played with a team better and was the most unstoppable weapon ever in aa set up offense.

[stanlove1111]

It's not really fair, but by the standards current superstars are held to, Wilt definitely was somewhat of a choker. He had the best the best overall supporting cast from 65-73 and yet he only walked away with 2 rings.


Exactly..Thats bottom line. That's why there is no way in hell Wilt should be rated over Russell. I knoe the Wilt backer will make every cherry picked excuse under the sun but Wilt didn't get it done and didn't add the value to a team that Russell did.

I am not one of those clowns that only looks at numbers of titles when judging a player, you have to look at the circumstances and put things into context..If with their career supporting castes Russell ended up with 8 titles while Wilt had 6 I would consider Wilt the greater player..But 11 to 2 shows Wilt didn't get it done..

[LAZERUSS]

When I look at a long post I scan through to se right off the bat of its just someone cherry picking everything he can or making silly arguments to try and win an argument. When I see this I basically just chaulk it up as crap. This is where your posts landed..

YOu actually are making a point of Wilt having better FG % in three of the 4 years they were both in the league? Really...It could be because Wilt barely shot in his last 2 years could it. It couldn't be that in his last 2 years Wilt was then obsessed with basically only shooting when he was sure to make a shot? That couldn't be why could it.


Jabbar was a more unstoppable scorer then Wilt. That was obvious to people who watched both. And stop bringing up Wilt's huge scoring games as proof of anything..Jabbar played team ball his entire career, Wilt chucked for much of it..

I consider Jabbar and Wilt about even.. Wilt did more things well, but Jabbar played with a team better and was the most unstoppable weapon ever in aa set up offense.

KAJ was a more unstoppable scorer than a post-surgery Chamberlain. He was nowhere near the scorer that a prime Chamberlain was. That is indisputable. Even against the same centers, a prime Chamberlain was a significantly greater scorer.

And I have always found this fascinating...

For those that claim that Wilt was a "stats-padder" in his career, how about this? In Kareem's 71-72 season, he played a league high, 44.2 mpg, for a team that went 63-19, and had a +11.1 ppg differential. And in that season, he averaged 34.8 ppg on .574 shooting.

Now, he was traded to the Lakers in the 75-76 season...a team with very little talent. Now, here was a chance for KAJ to really prove just how dominant he could be. What happened? He played 41.2 mpg, scored 27.7 ppg, and shot .529 from the field. How come he couldn't put up a 35 ppg season, when it was obvious that his team needed him too?

As for "team player", you do realize that his team's generally dramatically under-achieved for much of the decade of the 70's? How come Rick Barry, with his second nest player being rookie Keith (Jamaal) Wilkes, lead a 48-34 team to a sweeping title, while KAJ, paired with a more seasoned Wilkes, and along with players like Nixon, Hudons, and Dantley, win 45 and 47 games, and get blown up in the playoffs by a Sonics team with considerably less talent?

The fact was, from the '74 season on, the NBA was littered with mediocre champions, and yet, KAJ, even with stacked rosters, either missed the playoffs entirely, or were early round playoff cannon-fodder.

Before Magic arrived, the Lakers were a talented, but severely under-achieving team. From the moment Magic stepped on the floor, the Lakers became a dominating championship team. It was no coincidence that even after Kareem retired, the Lakers didn't miss a beat (they actually improved from a 57-25 record, to a 63-19.) Even in Magic's last season, he carried an injury-riddled and declining team to a 58-24 record, and a trip to the Finals. But, when Magic retired, the Lakers plummetted to records of 43-39 and 39-43...or very close to what they were before he arrived.

Don't get me wrong. Kareem was a great player. But clearly, he should have been greater. Instead, he often went thru the motions, and his team's suffered because of it. And had he not had the good fortune to have played with Magic for ten seasons, his career would probably have been considered a disappointment.

[stanlove1111]

KAJ was a more unstoppable scorer than a post-surgery Chamberlain. He was nowhere near the scorer that a prime Chamberlain was. That is indisputable. Even against the same centers, a prime Chamberlain was a significantly greater scorer.

And I have always found this fascinating...

For those that claim that Wilt was a "stats-padder" in his career, how about this? In Kareem's 71-72 season, he played a league high, 44.2 mpg, for a team that went 63-19, and had a +11.1 ppg differential. And in that season, he averaged 34.8 ppg on .574 shooting.

Now, he was traded to the Lakers in the 75-76 season...a team with very little talent. Now, here was a chance for KAJ to really prove just how dominant he could be. What happened? He played 41.2 mpg, scored 27.7 ppg, and shot .529 from the field. How come he couldn't put up a 35 ppg season, when it was obvious that his team needed him too?

As for "team player", you do realize that his team's generally dramatically under-achieved for much of the decade of the 70's? How come Rick Barry, with his second nest player being rookie Keith (Jamaal) Wilkes, lead a 48-34 team to a sweeping title, while KAJ, paired with a more seasoned Wilkes, and along with players like Nixon, Hudons, and Dantley, win 45 and 47 games, and get blown up in the playoffs by a Sonics team with considerably less talent?

The fact was, from the '74 season on, the NBA was littered with mediocre champions, and yet, KAJ, even with stacked rosters, either missed the playoffs entirely, or were early round playoff cannon-fodder.

Before Magic arrived, the Lakers were a talented, but severely under-achieving team. From the moment Magic stepped on the floor, the Lakers became a dominating championship team. It was no coincidence that even after Kareem retired, the Lakers didn't miss a beat (they actually improved from a 57-25 record, to a 63-19.) Even in Magic's last season, he carried an injury-riddled and declining team to a 58-24 record, and a trip to the Finals. But, when Magic retired, the Lakers plummetted to records of 43-39 and 39-43...or very close to what they were before he arrived.

Don't get me wrong. Kareem was a great player. But clearly, he should have been greater. Instead, he often went thru the motions, and his team's suffered because of it. And had he not had the good fortune to have played with Magic for ten seasons, his career would probably have been considered a disappointment.


You can say Kareem was only ore unstoppable then a post surgery Wilt til you are blue in the face but its still not true..And stop trying to make a huge deal out of the surgery..The knee was repaired and Wilt didn't even wear a knee brace for the rest of his career and was running marathons into his late 40s early 50s. The Wilt was never the same after the operation was something that Wilt backs started pushing when the silly Wilt propaganda started about the time Shaq was dominating and Wilt fans couldn't take it. Same with the Wilt was almost as big as Shaq nonsense.

I agree with some of what you say..Wilt was a better player when surrounded by a weak supporting cast. He was more individual dominating. Although what Jabbar did as a rookie was amazing and h did have some success with weak casts during his career.

Jabbar was better when he had good players around him because he fit into a team better. Wasn't stats obsessed.

I consider them about tied on my all time list..

[LAZERUSS]

Exactly..Thats bottom line. That's why there is no way in hell Wilt should be rated over Russell. I knoe the Wilt backer will make every cherry picked excuse under the sun but Wilt didn't get it done and didn't add the value to a team that Russell did.

I am not one of those clowns that only looks at numbers of titles when judging a player, you have to look at the circumstances and put things into context..If with their career supporting castes Russell ended up with 8 titles while Wilt had 6 I would consider Wilt the greater player..But 11 to 2 shows Wilt didn't get it done..

Well, let's begin with Wilt's first six seasons, then, when Russell enjoyed an overwhelming edge in surrounding talent. Including Russell and Wilt, how about margins of 8-3, 7-3, 7-3, 9-1, 8-2, and 6-3 in HOFers? No one in their right mind would have expected anything less than Russell having a 6-0 edge in rings in those years. What was remarkable, though, was that Wilt could those poor rosters (and here again, they were a last-place team before he arrived) and that generally played considerably worse in the post-season, to competitive series against Russell's HOF-laden teams in '60 and '64, and to near shocking upsets in '62 and '65 (losing game seven's by margins of two and one point.)

Swap rosters in those six years, and given the fact that Wilt pretty much did whatever his coaches asked, and I suspect that he would have won six rings in that period, as well.

And I have already covered their last four h2h seasons. You could argue that Wilt's TEAM should have won in '69, but given the fact that his incompetent coach cost him the series, even that was questionable. Russell's teammates dramatically outplayed Wilt's in the '66 ECF's, and in the '68 ECF's, Wilt's team was just decimated by injuries (and still lost a game seven by four points.) His healthy '67 team just annihilated Russell's Celtics (and were within four points of a sweep in game four.)

[stanlove1111]

Well, let's begin with Wilt's first six seasons, then, when Russell enjoyed an overwhelming edge in surrounding talent. Including Russell and Wilt, how about margins of 8-3, 7-3, 7-3, 9-1, 8-2, and 6-3 in HOFers? No one in their right mind would have expected anything less than Russell having a 6-0 edge in rings in those years. What was remarkable, though, was that Wilt could those poor rosters (and here again, they were a last-place team before he arrived) and that generally played considerably worse in the post-season, to competitive series against Russell's HOF-laden teams in '60 and '64, and to near shocking upsets in '62 and '65 (losing game seven's by margins of two and one point.)

Swap rosters in those six years, and given the fact that Wilt pretty much did whatever his coaches asked, and I suspect that he would have won six rings in that period, as well.

And I have already covered their last four h2h seasons. You could argue that Wilt's TEAM should have won in '69, but given the fact that his incompetent coach cost him the series, even that was questionable. Russell's teammates dramatically outplayed Wilt's in the '66 ECF's, and in the '68 ECF's, Wilt's team was just decimated by injuries (and still lost a game seven by four points.) His healthy '67 team just annihilated Russell's Celtics (and were within four points of a sweep in game four.)

Here comes the excuses, coaches, other players and so on..
I already said if Russell had 8 titles and Wilt had 6, everything considered I would rank Wilt the greater player..But Wilt had great supporting castes from 65-73 and only won 2 titles..

The Celtic players don't agree that they would have won 6 with Wilt...Russel obviously added more value to a basketball team then Wilt did. Individual stats don't add to wins.

And the whole how many HOF Russell played with vs how many Wilt played with is ridiculous. Of course Russell's teammates are going to have better careers. They played with Russell not Wilt....The ultimate team player who did nothing but make his teams better vs an individual dominating ball stopper.

[LAZERUSS]

You can say Kareem was only ore unstoppable then a post surgery Wilt til you are blue in the face but its still not true..And stop trying to make a huge deal out of the surgery..The knee was repaired and Wilt didn't even wear a knee brace for the rest of his career and was running marathons into his late 40s early 50s. The Wilt was never the same after the operation was something that Wilt backs started pushing when the silly Wilt propaganda started about the time Shaq was dominating and Wilt fans couldn't take it. Same with the Wilt was almost as big as Shaq nonsense.

I agree with some of what you say..Wilt was a better player when surrounded by a weak supporting cast. He was more individual dominating. Although what Jabbar did as a rookie was amazing and h did have some success with weak casts during his career.

Jabbar was better when he had good players around him because he fit into a team better. Wasn't stats obsessed.

I consider them about tied on my all time list..

Several points. Even the most optimistic medical opinion claimed that Wilt would miss an entire season whne he blew out his knee early in '69. It was a similar injury to what Baylor had sustained in the '65 post-season, and while Baylor came back and played six months later, he had the worst season of his career (up unitl his last one), and by a huge margin. It was not until the following year that Elgin returned to even close to where he had been before the injury.

And what is often forgotten, was that in that 69-70 season, Wilt's coach had asked that Chamberlain become a scorer again. From '66-67 thru 68-69, Chamberlain's scoring had dropped from 33.5 ppg down to 24.1, 24.3 and then a Van-Breda Kolf-induced 20.5 ppg. But, he came out swinging in that 69-70 campaign, and was leading the league in scoring at 32.2 ppg (and here again, on .579 shooting), when he went down.

And you can watch Wilt's play in the '70 Finals, and then again in the '72 Finals, on YouTube...and you will see a much more athletic and mobile Chamberlain in the '72 Finals.

And, the reality was, Wilt had the worst season of his career in his 70-71 season (the year after his surgery.) He averaged 20.5 ppg on a realtively poor (for him) .545 FG%, and he "only" grabbed a career-low 18.2 rpg. And his post-season numbers were the worst of his career, as well, and by a huge margin (18.3 ppg, 20.2 rpg, and .455...the latter two being by far his worst.) But, even then, in that season, he arguably outplayed KAJ, in perhaps Kareem's greatest season, in their ten h2h games (five in the regular season, and five in th playoffs.) Kareem slightly outscored Wilt in those ten games, 26-23 ppg, but Wilt outrebounded Kareem by a 17.6 to 15.6 rpg margin, and outshot him by a .481 to .454 differential.

And when Wilt had talented teammates, his teams won. You can't argue with records of 60-22, 62-20, 68-13, and 69-13. And, as I have already posted, there were logical reasons why those 60-22 and 62-20 teams did not win titles.

And, it was true that Wilt played with a prime West, too. But the reality was, he only had him for two post-seasons (68-69, and 69-70.) West missed the '71 playoffs completely, and was awful in the '72 playoffs (and even worse in the Finals), and was injured and just a shell in the '73 playoffs.

Meanwhile, Kareem played with loaded rosters in the decade of the 80's. He had Magic for ten seasons, and Worthy for another seven (albeit, Worthy missed the '83 Finals.) However, in the first ten years of his career, he played on one title team, and went to two Finals. And when Oscar retired, his Bucks team plummetted. He was traded a year later, and couldn't lead even good rosters to even a Finals in years in which team's with records of 52-30, 49-33, 48-34, and 44-38 were winning titles.

As for Wilt, every team that he joined became markedly better, and every team he left, became worse to much worse, especially in the post-season. And, even years after he was traded his former team's struggled.

Here is an interesting take. Wilt's 62-63 Warriors, with arguably the worst roster a star player has ever played with, only went 31-49. But, even that was deceptive. They were only involved in eight 20+ point games (going 4-4 in those.) And they lost 35 games by single digits. In fact, they had a -2.2 ppg differential. And how did the "stats-padder" perform that season? He played 47.6 mpg, and led the league in 15 of their 22 statistical categories. Not only that, but he the league in FG%, at .528. How about the shooting of his teammates? They collectively shot .412. Simply put, the "stats-padder" was single-handedly keeping his team in nearly every game.

Now, the Warriors brought in Alex Hannum before the start of the 63-64 season, and the first thing he did, was to conduct a pre-season scrimmage, sans Wilt, with the veterans going up against rookies and cast-offs. He was shocked when the misfits beat the veterans.

In any case, with the same basic core of the team that had gone 31-49 the year before, with the only significant addition being rookie Nate Thurmond (who would play part-time, out of position, and only shoot .395 in his limited minutes), Chamberlain somehow carried that team to a 48-32 mark, and then a seven game series win against the loaded Hawks (who had better players from 2-6), with a 39 ppg, 23 rpg, .559 series. In the Finals, they lost to Boston, 4-1, but the last two losses were decided in the waning seconds. And in that series, all Chamberlain did was average 29 ppg, 28 rpg, and shoot .517.

What was particularly interesting, however was this. In Wilt's 63-64 season, the second best player on the team was arguably Tom Meschery, who was second in scoring, at 13.5 ppg.

Chamberlain was traded in mid-season in the 64-65 season, to a Sixer team that had gone 34-46 the year before. He would take that team to a 40-40 record, and then a first round romp over the 48-32 Royals, before losing a game seven, by one point, to the 62-18 Celtics, and in a series in which he averaged 30 ppg, 31 rpg, and shot .555.

His Sixers them went on to have the best record in the league over the course of the next three seasons, and won a dominating title in '67.

Back to the Warriors, though. Once again, Wilt was traded in mid-year. The next season, and with Thurmond, who would go on to have a HOF career, replacing Chamberlain, and with the addition of rookie Rick Barry, as well as Meschery, the Warriors could still only go 35-45.

Then, in the 66-67 season, the Warriors added players like Jeff Mullins, Fred Hetzel, and Clyde Lee. Meschery averaged 11 ppg in that '67 season, but instead of being the second best player on the team, he was now their seventh best player. With all of that talent, and with Barry leading the league in scoring at 35.6 ppg...the Warriors could only go 44-37, and were beaten by Wilt's 68-13 Sixers in the Finals.

Think about that...a Wilt-led team, with Meschery as his best surrounding player, went 48-32. A couple of years later, a Warrior team with Thurmond, Barry, Mullins, Lee, Hetzel, Neumann (who was part of the Wilt trade, and who averaged 13 ppg that season), and then Meschery...could only go 44-37.

Hopefully that gives the Wilt-bashers a better indication of just how dominant Chamberlain was.

[LAZERUSS]

Here comes the excuses, coaches, other players and so on..
I already said if Russell had 8 titles and Wilt had 6, everything considered I would rank Wilt the greater player..But Wilt had great supporting castes from 65-73 and only won 2 titles..

The Celtic players don't agree that they would have won 6 with Wilt...Russel obviously added more value to a basketball team then Wilt did. Individual stats don't add to wins.

And the whole how many HOF Russell played with vs how many Wilt played with is ridiculous. Of course Russell's teammates are going to have better careers. They played with Russell not Wilt....The ultimate team player who did nothing but make his teams better vs an individual dominating ball stopper.

I could go on for hours about the above, but no need. Up to the fist half of the 64-65 season, and taking Arizin and his three seasons playing with Wilt (and his scoring did not drop much from his previous seasons before Wilt), and Thurmond, who backed Wilt up for a season, and Wilt did not play with a single player who would ever average 20 ppg after that. In other words, these players were no better before, during, or after Wilt. Hell, some players had their best scoring seasons with Wilt (Gola, later Greer, and much later Goodrich.)

Meanwhile, Russell not only played with 20 ppg scorers, they each had multiple seasons of 20+ ppg. Players like Cousy, Heinsohn, Sharman, Sam Jones, and Havlicek, and later on Bailey Howell, who had mutliple 20 ppg seasons before playing with Russell. And Jones had some very high scoring post-seasons, as well. Not only that, but a post-Russell Havlicek had seasons of as high 28 and 29 ppg. Russell was clearly surrounded by some exceptional offensive players, who proved that they scould score with, and without him.

And it seems like you are blaming Chamberlain for being a "ball-stopper." First of all, even in his 44.5 ppg season, he averaged 3.4 apg (with a pathetic cast of shooters), and later, in his 33.5 ppg season, he averaged 5.2 apg. Secondly, it was Wilt's COACH, who took one look at the cast of clowns that he had, who asked Wilt to score 50 ppg. It was not Chamberlain's idea.

And of course the Celtic players are going to make the claim that they would have played worse with Wilt. Perhaps, but we will never know for sure. What we do know, however, was that Wilt pretty much did whatever his coach's asked of him. Do you think MJ would have cut his shooting nearly in half from one to the next, like Wilt did from '66 to his '67?

[DatAsh]

I

Meanwhile, Russell not only played with 20 ppg scorers, they each had multiple seasons of 20+ ppg. Players like Cousy, Heinsohn, Sharman, Sam Jones, and Havlicek. And Jones had some very high scoring post-seasons, as well.



Coming from you, it's pretty disingenuous to compare Russell's teammates' ppg to Wilt's. If there were equal opportunity there, that would be one thing, but there wasn't.

[LAZERUSS]

Coming from you, it's pretty disingenuous to compare Russell's teammates' ppg to Wilt's. If there were equal opportunity there, that would be one thing, but there wasn't.

You obviously didn't read my entire post.

Wilt played with exactly ONE player who ever averaged 20+ ppg, either before, during, or after Chamberlain, from his rookie season, up until mid-season in the 64-65 season. That excludes Thurmond, who was a part-timer mainly backing up Wilt for a season, and Willie Naulls, who, BTW, played even worse with Russell, than he did with Wilt. And even Arizin's ppg did not drop much when he was paired with Wilt, compared to pre-Chamberlain.

Players like Guy Rodgers, Tom Meschery, Al Attles, and Tom Gola...none of them were significant scorers with, or without Chamberlain. And yet, that is what Wilt was paired up with for nearly the first half of his career.

So it was not like Wilt was holding those guys back. And once again, players like Gola, Meschery, Greer, and Goodrich, had their best scoring seasons with Wilt, while players like West and Baylor did not drop dramatically when Wilt arrived.

Take a look at Wilt's 62-63 roster. Take away a washed up Naulls, and the only player to ever average even 18 ppg in their entire career, was Guy Rodgers, who was arguably the worst shooter of all-time. Most of them enevr averaged even 12 ppg. I would argue that Wilt's coach should have asked Chamberlain to shoot MORE in 62-63. He shot .528 from the field, while his teammates collectively shot .412. And BTW, do you honestly believe that Russell could have gotten more from that cast of clowns?

[DatAsh]

You obviously didn't read my entire post.

Wilt played with exactly ONE player who ever averaged 20+ ppg, either before, during, or after Chamberlain, from his rookie season, up until mid-season in the 64-65 season. That excludes Thurmond, who was a part-timer mainly backing up Wilt for a season, and Willie Naulls, who, BTW, played even worse with Russell, than he did with Wilt. And even Arizin's ppg did not drop much when he was paired with Wilt, compared to pre-Chamberlain.

Players like Guy Rodgers, Tom Meschery, Al Attles, and Tom Gola...none of them were significant scorers with, or without Chamberlain. And yet, that is what Wilt was paired up with for nearly the first half of his career.

So it was not like Wilt was holding those guys back. And once again, players like Gola, Greer, and Goodrich, had their best scoring seasons with Wilt, while players like West and Baylor did not drop dramatically when Wilt arrived.

I read your entire post. The point is still disingenuous. Many of those guys very well may have been 20+ ppg scorers playing for the Celtics.

The problem is that you continually spin, leave out, and-or distort any information that doesn't fit your agenda. Most people don't pick up on this stuff because they don't know anybetter. So while you may come off as incredibly knowledgeable to the ignorant, you come off as knowledgeable yet extremely biased to the more informed.

[LAZERUSS]

I read your entire post. The point is still disingenuous. Many of those guys very well may have been 20+ ppg scorers playing for the Celtics.

The problem is that you continually spin, leave out, and-or distort any information that doesn't fit your agenda. Most people don't pick up on this stuff because they don't know anybetter. So while you may come off as incredibly knowledgeable to the ignorant, you come off as knowledgeable yet extremely biased to the more informed.

They may have scored 20+ ppg playing alongside Russell, but we will never know. What we do know, however, is that they never came close to it, with, or without Wilt.

As for being biased...we all are to some extent. In any case, those that claim that Russell somehow "owned" Chamberlain (and I am not directing that at you BTW), simply because he held a 9-1 edge in h2h seasonal rings, ignore the reality that Russell played with significantly better rosters in six of those ten seasons. And overall, Chamberlain's team's came within game seven margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points, from having a 5-3 edge in their playoff h2h's. And you would be hard-pressed to find any evidence which conclusively proved that Russell was outplaying Wilt in any of their eight post-season h2h series. In fact, it was quite the contrary. There were instances in which Wilt was just wiping the floor with Russell.

I will agree, though, that Russell's teammates almost always outplayed Wilt's...and in many cases, by huge margins. Russell deserves some of the credit, and perhaps Wilt deserves some of the blame. Still, judging by the considerable differences in surrounding talent in their first six h2h seasons, I can't see Russell doing any more with what Chamberlain had to work with.

And here again, for those that claim that Russell "owned" Chamberlain, how do they explain this? Going into game five of the '66 ECF's, Wilt's Sixers were faced a 3-1 deficit, and a "must-win" game. Wilt responded with a 46-34 game, but it was still not enough.

A year later, it was now Russell who was faced with the same exact scenerio. His Celtics were down 3-1 (and had narrowly avoided a sweep in game four.) How did he respond under the same situation? He scored four points, on 2-5 shooting, with 21 rebounds (while Chamberlain hung a 29 point, 10-16 shooting, 13 assist, 36 rebound, 7 block game on him), in a blowout loss.

Where were Russell's dominating games against Chamberlain? I could list a ton of games, both regular season, and post-season, in which Wilt completely outplayed Russell. And aside from game four of the '60 ECF's, when Wilt was playing with wat was thought to be a broken hand, you probably won't find any other games in which Russell had any sizeable margin against Wilt.

[MARLO]

Back on topic..

http://www.scenicreflections.com/files/Mountain_Lion_Kittens_Wallpaper__yvt2.jpg

[KG215]

He kind of eased into, but jlauber is officially back. Maybe that'll pull GOAT out of retirement to keep his extremely biased and manipulative posting in check. If not, DatAsh, it's all on you, because I don't know nearly enough about that era and I can't wade through his walls of text.

[stanlove1111]

I read your entire post. The point is still disingenuous. Many of those guys very well may have been 20+ ppg scorers playing for the Celtics.

The problem is that you continually spin, leave out, and-or distort any information that doesn't fit your agenda. Most people don't pick up on this stuff because they don't know anybetter. So while you may come off as incredibly knowledgeable to the ignorant, you come off as knowledgeable yet extremely biased to the more informed.

Like when he talks about Baylor being on his last legs in 68-69 ( nba first team that year ) as a reason that Wilt didn't lead them to a title, but doesn't mention that Jones and Russell were on their last legs and about to retire..IS this the type of thing you were talking about?

[KG215]

Like when he talks about Baylor being on his last legs in 68-69 ( nba first team that year ) as a reason that Wilt didn't lead them to a title, but doesn't mention that Jones and Russell were on their last legs and about to retire..IS this the type of thing you were talking about?
Again, I don't know as much about that era as Ash and jlauber, but that sounds like him. Ignores context and perspective from the Russell/Celtics side, and constantly downplays Wilt's teammates. Kind of similar to how Kobe stans try to downplay Shaq and Pau.

[kshutts1]

Because you got an old man saying "How many 27 rebound games did x have?" Like players today have a chance at grabbing 27 rebounds :facepalm The league average is around 42 rpg in today's era, while in the 60's the league average was over 65 rpg. The FGA average is around 80 today, while in the 60's it was around 100-105 FGA, and the FG% was lower back then meaning even more missed shots. So when you got someone saying "How many 30 rebound games did blank have compared to Wilt?", it's plain retardation because it's a different era. I have tried explaining this to his Alzheimer's brain, but to no avail.

Clearly didn't read my post in full. I mentioned "relative" stats being important (Wilt vs same-era players is eye-opening) while comparing across eras (Wilt vs Shaq) is incredibly difficult because of many of the reasons you mentioned.

If someone wants to say Wilt is better than Dirk, fine (I agree). But don't use just numbers, Wilt vs Dirk, to back it up. Use Wilt-above-league-average vs Dirk-above-league-average, or some other league-relative reference.

[stanlove1111]

They may have scored 20+ ppg playing alongside Russell, but we will never know. What we do know, however, is that they never came close to it, with, or without Wilt.

As for being biased...we all are to some extent. In any case, those that claim that Russell somehow "owned" Chamberlain (and I am not directing that at you BTW), simply because he held a 9-1 edge in h2h seasonal rings, ignore the reality that Russell played with significantly better rosters in six of those ten seasons. And overall, Chamberlain's team's came within game seven margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points, from having a 5-3 edge in their playoff h2h's. And you would be hard-pressed to find any evidence which conclusively proved that Russell was outplaying Wilt in any of their eight post-season h2h series. In fact, it was quite the contrary. There were instances in which Wilt was just wiping the floor with Russell.

I will agree, though, that Russell's teammates almost always outplayed Wilt's...and in many cases, by huge margins. Russell deserves some of the credit, and perhaps Wilt deserves some of the blame. Still, judging by the considerable differences in surrounding talent in their first six h2h seasons, I can't see Russell doing any more with what Chamberlain had to work with.

And here again, for those that claim that Russell "owned" Chamberlain, how do they explain this? Going into game five of the '66 ECF's, Wilt's Sixers were faced a 3-1 deficit, and a "must-win" game. Wilt responded with a 46-34 game, but it was still not enough.

A year later, it was now Russell who was faced with the same exact scenerio. His Celtics were down 3-1 (and had narrowly avoided a sweep in game four.) How did he respond under the same situation? He scored four points, on 2-5 shooting, with 21 rebounds (while Chamberlain hung a 29 point, 10-16 shooting, 13 assist, 36 rebound, 7 block game on him), in a blowout loss.

Where were Russell's dominating games against Chamberlain? I could list a ton of games, both regular season, and post-season, in which Wilt completely outplayed Russell. And aside from game four of the '60 ECF's, when Wilt was playing with wat was thought to be a broken hand, you probably won't find any other games in which Russell had any sizeable margin against Wilt.


Where are the stats for defense? Russell was the greatest ever at that and there really is no stat for it..So sitting here listing stats means nothing.

Obviously if you look at their careers Russell's game was more valuable to a team that Wilts. I don't care about individual stats, that's only part of the story. IF this wasn't the case Russell wouldn't have won 13 titles in his last 15 years of basketball ( lost once when hurt ) and Wilt would have won more then 2 titles in 14 years withall that talent he played with.


When a see someone stats obsessed like you and there are way too many on this board I have to wonder if you have ever played basketball or rally know anything about it..The goal is not to get the best individual stats that you can, the goal is to go out there and do what you have to do for your team to win..Thats the difference between the two for most of their careers. Russell knew what to do to bring home a title, Wilt went out to put up great individual stats.

[Scholar]

No, OP, I'm gonna tell you that Wilt killed that thing with his bear hands.

[305Baller]

Also Wilt had sex with 10 million women.
He jumped over mount everest and dunked.
He had a blue cadillac that was the first hover car.

Look it up.

[LAZERUSS]

Where are the stats for defense? Russell was the greatest ever at that and there really is no stat for it..So sitting here listing stats means nothing.

Obviously if you look at their careers Russell's game was more valuable to a team that Wilts. I don't care about individual stats, that's only part of the story. IF this wasn't the case Russell wouldn't have won 13 titles in his last 15 years of basketball ( lost once when hurt ) and Wilt would have won more then 2 titles in 14 years withall that talent he played with.


When a see someone stats obsessed like you and there are way too many on this board I have to wonder if you have ever played basketball or rally know anything about it..The goal is not to get the best individual stats that you can, the goal is to go out there and do what you have to do for your team to win..Thats the difference between the two for most of their careers. Russell knew what to do to bring home a title, Wilt went out to put up great individual stats.

Russell more valuable to his team than Wilt was to his? Nobody is arguing Russell's success, but the fact was, Chamberlain was drafted (in high school BTW), to what was a last-place team, that was on the decline. Russell was drafted/traded to a Celtic team that was a playoff team. Not only that, but in the same draft Boston picked up Heinsohn. How good was that Celtic team? They went 28-20 with Russell, and 16-8 without him.

The next season they snagged Sam Jones and improved to 49-23. You mentioned that they lost a title without him. Russell was injured in game three, and Boston lost 111-108, to fall behind in the series, 2-1. They won game four, without him, 109-98. They lost game five, without him, 102-100. And they lost game six, with him doing little and only playing about half of the game, 110-109. So, yes, they surely would have won that series with a healthy Russell, but let's not act like they were still not a very good team without him.

And the Celtics would continue to improve and replace. Russell was paired up with his HOF teammates for 71 full seasons. Let's compare that with Wilt... 27 full seasons. Granted, not all of Russell's teammates were legitimate HOFers. KC Jones was never even an all-star, nor was Satch Sanders deserving, either. But both were widely acknowledged as among the best defensive players of their era. Frank Ramsey shouldn't be in the Hall, either, but he was still a very good "6th man." And while I don't believe that Bailey Howell should be in the HOF, he was a very good scorer long before Boston picked him up, and he was a solid 20 ppg scorer, on very good efficiency, with the Celtics.

The rest...Cousy, Sharman, Heinsohn, Sam Jones, and Havlicek...all exceptional players. As posted earlier, all were legitimate 20+ scorers, and all probably would have scored considerably more on another team. In fact, Havlicek was a near 30 ppg scorer after Russell retired.

And don't forget the role players, either. They would add pieces like Lovellette, who was a 20 ppg scorer just the eyar before. Or an Em Bryant, or a Wayne Embry, or a Larry Siegfried, or a Don Nelson. All valuable contributors, on deep rosters.

And while the Celtics were getting older each year in the decade of the 60's, they were still formidable into Russell's last season. Clearly, they were no longer interested in battling for the best record, and they paced themselves. But that was still a solid and deep roster into Russell's last season.

And when Russell surprised the Celtics with retirement, they had no plan in place to replace him. They immediately plummetted in the 69-70. Why? Because they had Henry Finkle playing the center position. But they drafted Dave Cowens the very next year, and became competitive again, going 44-38. The very next season they had the best record in the East, at 56-26. And in the 72-73 season, and only four years after Russell's retirement, they set a still-record team mark of 68-14. And then they would go onto win two titles in three years.

As for Wilt, once again, drafted by a last-place team. And, unlike the Celtics, their roster became older and worse. And if we are to say that some of Russell's teammates were not legitimate HOFers, then the same can be said for Tom Gola. Not only was Gola a slightly above average player, at best, he was arguably the worst post-season "HOF" player of all-time. And that was before, and during the Wilt-era. And even the one legitimate HOF player that Chamberlain had early in his career, Arizin, also flopped in two of his three post-seasons with Wilt.

And I have pointed out what Chamberlain accomplished with those Warrior teams earlier. Basically this...taking a last-place roster, that would get older, and worse, to competitive playoff series against Russell in '60 and '64. And in the '62 post-season, and with his teammates collectively shooting .354 over the course of the playoffs, Chamberlain single-handedly carried them thru the first round, and then took them to a game seven, two-point (controversial) loss, against the 60-20 HOF-laden Celtics.

And once again, the 63-64 Warrior team was basically Chamberlain...and a cast of misfits.Yes, Nate Thurmond was on that team, and he contributed some, but he was a rookie, playing part-time, mostly out of position (he very sldom backed up Wilt), and shooting .395. And yet, Wilt took that horrible roster to a 48-32 record, and then, with one of the greatest playoff series of all-time, he single-handedly carried them past a 46-36 Hawk team that was better from 2-6...(a 39 ppg, 23 rpg, .559 series.) And while Boston, with their 8-2 edge in HOFers, won the Finals, 4-1, the last two wins were in the waning seconds. All Chamberlin did in that series, and being swarmed for much of it, was average 29 ppg, 28 rpg, and shoot .517, while holding Russell to 11 ppg, 25 rpg, and.386 shooting.

Once again, what was interesting about the 63-64 Warriors, who again, went 48-32, was that their second best player was Tom Meschery. As posted earlier, the Warriors traded Chamberlain to the Sixers for three players (one of them Paul Neumann.) Nate Thurmond moved to the pivot to replace Chamberlain, and would go on to have a HOF career. The next season, 65-66, the Warriors drafted HOFer Rick Barry, and even with Nate, Rick, Neumann, and Meschery, they still only went 35-45. Then the very next season they added Jeff Mullins, Clyde Lee, and Fred Hetzel. Here was a team with Meschery now being nearly as effective, but only their seventh best player...and still only going 44-37 (and losing to Wilt's 68-13 Sixers in the Finals.)

And I have covered the Celtics-Sixers battles from 65-66 thru 68-69 ad nauseum. Boston was a better team in 65-66, despite their record, and Russell's teammates wiped out Wilt's.

Chambelain's 66-67 Sixers destroyed Boston early in the season, 138-96, and never looked back. They rolled to a 45-4 record, and coasted to a 68-13 mark, which blew away the NBA record at the time. And in the ECF's, and with Chamberlain dominating Russell in every facet of the game, they bombed the Celtics, 4-1.

And the 67-68 season was much the same. Philly ran away with the best record in the league, beating Boston by eight games. And even without HOFer Billy Cunningham, they were still leading Boston in the ECF's 3-1. In fact, even Red Auerbach all but gave up, making the comment following their game four loss, "It's too bad, because people will forget just how great he [Russell] was." However, the Sixers had two more key starters go down in game five, and with even Chamberlain fighting an assortment of injuries (and as Russell would claim, "A lessor man would not have played"), Boston eked out a 100-96 game seven to win the series. Clearly, a healthy Sixer team wins easily, and probably duplicates their '67 effort (4-1.)

The 68-69 Lakers were basically a prime West, a shackled Wilt, a declining Baylor, and a cast of misfits. And to make matters worse, they were coached by a man who made it clear that he despised Wilt...to the point that he was benching him during the season (and keep in mind that Chamberlain had a 20.5 ppg, 21.1, 4.5 apg, .583 season), and then, at the absolute worst time, benched him again...all in a two point game seven loss. How incompetent was Van Breda Kolf? He made this comment during the season, "When we pass the ball into Wilt, we will score. But it is an ugly offense to watch." So, instead he chose to ride the shot-jacking Baylor, whose offensive ineptitude was so bad that he had the worst FG% (.385) on the team in the post-season.

It has been said that Russell did everything he could to win. True, but he didn't have to do nearly as much as Chamberlain had to. Nor did he have to deal with incompetent and stubborn coach's, or choking teammates. in fact, while Chamberlain's routinely puked all over themselves in the post-season, Russell's were elevating their play. Even Russell admitted that Sam Jones won several series for Boston, and he and Nelson killed Wilt's team's at cirtical times in a couple of series. As did Havlicek, including the famous, "Havlicek stole the ball!"

And once again, given the fact that Russell's teams won four game seven's against Chamberlain's, and by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points, he certainly wasn't dominating Wilt.

FWIW, John Wooden made the comment that had Wilt and Russell swapped rosters in their careers, that Wilt probably would have won as many rings. Maybe, maybe not, and we will never know, but I suspect that it would have at the very minimum, been much closer.

[Heavincent]

You guys ruined my thread.

[CavaliersFTW]

Russell more valuable to his team than Wilt was to his? Nobody is arguing Russell's success, but the fact was, Chamberlain was drafted (in high school BTW), to what was a last-place team, that was on the decline. Russell was drafted/traded to a Celtic team that was a playoff team. Not only that, but in the same draft Boston picked up Heinsohn. How good was that Celtic team? They went 28-20 with Russell, and 16-8 without him.

The next season they snagged Sam Jones and improved to 49-23. You mentioned that they lost a title without him. Russell was injured in game three, and Boston lost 111-108, to fall behind in the series, 2-1. They won game four, without him, 109-98. They lost game five, without him, 102-100. And they lost game six, with him doing little and only playing about half of the game, 110-109. So, yes, they surely would have won that series with a healthy Russell, but let's not act like they were still not a very good team without him.

And the Celtics would continue to improve and replace. Russell was paired up with his HOF teammates for 71 full seasons. Let's compare that with Wilt... 27 full seasons. Granted, not all of Russell's teammates were legitimate HOFers. KC Jones was never even an all-star, nor was Satch Sanders deserving, either. But both were widely acknowledged as among the best defensive players of their era. Frank Ramsey shouldn't be in the Hall, either, but he was still a very good "6th man." And while I don't believe that Bailey Howell should be in the HOF, he was a very good scorer long before Boston picked him up, and he was a solid 20 ppg scorer, on very good efficiency, with the Celtics.

The rest...Cousy, Sharman, Heinsohn, Sam Jones, and Havlicek...all exceptional players. As posted earlier, all were legitimate 20+ scorers, and all probably would have scored considerably more on another team. In fact, Havlicek was a near 30 ppg scorer after Russell retired.

And don't forget the role players, either. They would add pieces like Lovellette, who was a 20 ppg scorer just the eyar before. Or an Em Bryant, or a Wayne Embry, or a Larry Siegfried, or a Don Nelson. All valuable contributors, on deep rosters.

And while the Celtics were getting older each year in the decade of the 60's, they were still formidable into Russell's last season. Clearly, they were no longer interested in battling for the best record, and they paced themselves. But that was still a solid and deep roster into Russell's last season.

And when Russell surprised the Celtics with retirement, they had no plan in place to replace him. They immediately plummetted in the 69-70. Why? Because they had Henry Finkle playing the center position. But they drafted Dave Cowens the very next year, and became competitive again, going 44-38. The very next season they had the best record in the East, at 56-26. And in the 72-73 season, and only four years after Russell's retirement, they set a still-record team mark of 68-14. And then they would go onto win two titles in three years.

As for Wilt, once again, drafted by a last-place team. And, unlike the Celtics, their roster became older and worse. And if we are to say that some of Russell's teammates were not legitimate HOFers, then the same can be said for Tom Gola. Not only was Gola a slightly above average player, at best, he was arguably the worst post-season "HOF" player of all-time. And that was before, and during the Wilt-era. And even the one legitimate HOF player that Chamberlain had early in his career, Arizin, also flopped in two of his three post-seasons with Wilt.

And I have pointed out what Chamberlain accomplished with those Warrior teams earlier. Basically this...taking a last-place roster, that would get older, and worse, to competitive playoff series against Russell in '60 and '64. And in the '62 post-season, and with his teammates collectively shooting .354 over the course of the playoffs, Chamberlain single-handedly carried them thru the first round, and then took them to a game seven, two-point (controversial) loss, against the 60-20 HOF-laden Celtics.

And once again, the 63-64 Warrior team was basically Chamberlain...and a cast of misfits.Yes, Nate Thurmond was on that team, and he contributed some, but he was a rookie, playing part-time, mostly out of position (he very sldom backed up Wilt), and shooting .395. And yet, Wilt took that horrible roster to a 48-32 record, and then, with one of the greatest playoff series of all-time, he single-handedly carried them past a 46-36 Hawk team that was better from 2-6...(a 39 ppg, 23 rpg, .559 series.) And while Boston, with their 8-2 edge in HOFers, won the Finals, 4-1, the last two wins were in the waning seconds. All Chamberlin did in that series, and being swarmed for much of it, was average 29 ppg, 28 rpg, and shoot .517, while holding Russell to 11 ppg, 25 rpg, and.386 shooting.

Once again, what was interesting about the 63-64 Warriors, who again, went 48-32, was that their second best player was Tom Meschery. As posted earlier, the Warriors traded Chamberlain to the Sixers for three players (one of them Paul Neumann.) Nate Thurmond moved to the pivot to replace Chamberlain, and would go on to have a HOF career. The next season, 65-66, the Warriors drafted HOFer Rick Barry, and even with Nate, Rick, Neumann, and Meschery, they still only went 35-45. Then the very next season they added Jeff Mullins, Clyde Lee, and Fred Hetzel. Here was a team with Meschery now being nearly as effective, but only their seventh best player...and still only going 44-37 (and losing to Wilt's 68-13 Sixers in the Finals.)

And I have covered the Celtics-Sixers battles from 65-66 thru 68-69 ad nauseum. Boston was a better team in 65-66, despite their record, and Russell's teammates wiped out Wilt's.

Chambelain's 66-67 Sixers destroyed Boston early in the season, 138-96, and never looked back. They rolled to a 45-4 record, and coasted to a 68-13 mark, which blew away the NBA record at the time. And in the ECF's, and with Chamberlain dominating Russell in every facet of the game, they bombed the Celtics, 4-1.

And the 67-68 season was much the same. Philly ran away with the best record in the league, beating Boston by eight games. And even without HOFer Billy Cunningham, they were still leading Boston in the ECF's 3-1. In fact, even Red Auerbach all but gave up, making the comment following their game four loss, "It's too bad, because people will forget just how great he [Russell] was." However, the Sixers had two more key starters go down in game five, and with even Chamberlain fighting an assortment of injuries (and as Russell would claim, "A lessor man would not have played"), Boston eked out a 100-96 game seven to win the series. Clearly, a healthy Sixer team wins easily, and probably duplicates their '67 effort (4-1.)

The 68-69 Lakers were basically a prime West, a shackled Wilt, a declining Baylor, and a cast of misfits. And to make matters worse, they were coached by a man who made it clear that he despised Wilt...to the point that he was benching him during the season (and keep in mind that Chamberlain had a 20.5 ppg, 21.1, 4.5 apg, .583 season), and then, at the absolute worst time, benched him again...all in a two point game seven loss. How incompetent was Van Breda Kolf? He made this comment during the season, "When we pass the ball into Wilt, we will score. But it is an ugly offense to watch." So, instead he chose to ride the shot-jacking Baylor, whose offensive ineptitude was so bad that he had the worst FG% (.385) on the team in the post-season.

It has been said that Russell did everything he could to win. True, but he didn't have to do nearly as much as Chamberlain had to. Nor did he have to deal with incompetent and stubborn coach's, or choking teammates. in fact, while Chamberlain's routinely puked all over themselves in the post-season, Russell's were elevating their play. Even Russell admitted that Sam Jones won several series for Boston, and he and Nelson killed Wilt's team's at cirtical times in a couple of series. As did Havlicek, including the famous, "Havlicek stole the ball!"

And once again, given the fact that Russell's teams won four game seven's against Chamberlain's, and by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points, he certainly wasn't dominating Wilt.

FWIW, John Wooden made the comment that had Wilt and Russell swapped rosters in their careers, that Wilt probably would have won as many rings. Maybe, maybe not, and we will never know, but I suspect that it would have at the very minimum, been much closer.
http://1-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/wsg/image/1355/37/1355371356032.gif

Let this be a lesson to you all! You all did this to yourselves! Leave Wilt alone or LAZERUSS (formerly Jlauber) will rain down on us with an ungodly wall of fire in the form of lengthy responses!

[LAZERUSS]

Like when he talks about Baylor being on his last legs in 68-69 ( nba first team that year ) as a reason that Wilt didn't lead them to a title, but doesn't mention that Jones and Russell were on their last legs and about to retire..IS this the type of thing you were talking about?

Baylor's career was over a little more than a year later. And, there was no denying his horrible play in the Finals that year. In games three thru five, and two of the close losses, he scored a total of 24 points (including games of 2-12 and 2-14 from the field in those two losses.) And in game seven, in a two point loss, he shot 8-22 from the floor.

And while the '69 Lakers had a prime West, and a Wilt who was held back by his coach, the rest of their roster, to a man, was inferior. Boston had Russell and Jones, both still effective players, but how about a prime Hondo, as well as Bailey Howell, Em Bryant, Larry Siegfried, and Don Nelson? Even Satch Sanders was capable of giving them a few quality minutes per game.

I'm sorry, but West and Chamberlain couldn't do it alone. Given everything that transpired in that series... Boston getting TWO miraculous game-winning shots; Egan's gaffe costing LA a game four win; Baylor's awful shooting throughout the entire series; and Van Breda Kolf's incompetent coaching, particularly in a game seven two-point loss, as well as limiting Chamberlain's offense, and it was actually amazing that the Lakers were able to make it a last second series.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Wilt wasn't injured in the '70 playoffs. Far from it - and he got his ass handed to him by Willis Reed. Again, your excuses have NOTHING to do with Wilt scoring 8 pts in a pivotal game 6...IN THE FINALS!

I'm also sick of hearing how great Wilt was defensively. Complete myth.

How about Wilt vs Cowens H2H?

1973:
Wilt: 14/14
Cowens:31/20 -- Celts swept the season series 4-0. :oldlol: The guy got completely wrecked by Dave f'ing Cowens!

[LAZERUSS]

Wilt wasn't injured in the '70 playoffs. Far from it - and he got his ass handed to him by Willis Reed. Again, your excuses have NOTHING to do with Wilt scoring 8 pts in a pivotal game 6...IN THE FINALS!

I'm also sick of hearing how great Wilt was defensively. Complete myth.

How about Wilt vs Cowens H2H?

1973:
Wilt: 14/14
Cowens:31/20 -- Celts swept the season series 4-0. :oldlol: The guy got completely wrecked by Dave f'ing Cowens!

You keep alluding to Wilt's poor play in game six of the '69 Finals. Yep, believe it, or not, Chamberlan actaully had some relatively poor games in his 160 post-season career. Of course, I could cite a ton of them by players like Bird, Kareem, and Kobe, too. And, there were many post-season games in which Chamberlain buried Russell, as well.

Chamberlain was only four months removed from major knee surgery in '70. BTW, just as the other Wilt-bashers do, they go out of their way to somehow find fault with Chamberlain. So what if he had major knee surgery...a similar surgery that basically took Baylor over a year (as was the expectation for Chamberlain, as well) , and in which he never completely recovered? Meanwhile, let's use the '70 Finals, as an example. Guess who was cast the hero of that Finals? Yep. Willis Reed, who missed the bulk of the last three pivotal games, and contributed practically nothing in any of them. Think about this...Chamberlain suffered a similar injury to what shelved Reed in the '68 ECF's. Unlike Reed, he played every minute of that series, and in fact, put up a 22-25 series. And again, unlike Reed, no one cut Wilt any slack (except Russell, who claimed that "a lessor man would not have played.") Wilt was not only expected to play with injuries, nothing less than a normal Wilt-like performance would suffice, either. Had that been any other player in NBA history, playing just four months after major knee surgery, they would still be replaying his efforts today (much like the "heroic Reed.") And, furthermore, if that guy would have put up a 23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, .625 FG% series...well, you likely be reading about the greatest Finals performance of all-time, despite his team losing. But, since it was Wilt...well, that "loser" "choked" again.

In the first four games of that series, I would give the MVP Reed a split. He outplayed Wilt in games one and three, while Chamberlain outplayed in him in games two and four...all on basically one leg. And don't tell me that Wilt was the reason they lost two of the last three games. He was LA's best player in those three games, particularly their game six "must-win."

BTW, how about a prime Chamberlain against Reed in their 64-65 season? In their nine h2h games, Wilt averaged 40.1 ppg, including games in which he outscored Reed by margins of 41-9, 52-23, and 58-28.

Cowens was a great player (and MVP that season BTW), playing on a great team. He also outplayed a prime KAJ in game seven of the '74 Finals, and on Milwaukee's home floor...and particularly dominated him in the 4th quarter. In any case, comparing a 36 year old Wilt, in his last season, to any other great is not really very compelling evidence. The fact that a 36 year old Chamberlain finished 4th in the MVP balloting, was voted first team all-defense at the center spot, led the league in rebounding, and set a FG% mark of .727 that will never be challenged is, though. And, as a sidenote, just the year before, in the 71-72 season, Wilt hung two 30+ rebound games on Cowens (and the Lakers went 4-1 against Boston that season.)

[StephHamann]

Russell more valuable to his team than Wilt was to his? Nobody is arguing Russell's success, but the fact was, Chamberlain was drafted (in high school BTW), to what was a last-place team, that was on the decline. Russell was drafted/traded to a Celtic team that was a playoff team. Not only that, but in the same draft Boston picked up Heinsohn. How good was that Celtic team? They went 28-20 with Russell, and 16-8 without him.

The next season they snagged Sam Jones and improved to 49-23. You mentioned that they lost a title without him. Russell was injured in game three, and Boston lost 111-108, to fall behind in the series, 2-1. They won game four, without him, 109-98. They lost game five, without him, 102-100. And they lost game six, with him doing little and only playing about half of the game, 110-109. So, yes, they surely would have won that series with a healthy Russell, but let's not act like they were still not a very good team without him.

And the Celtics would continue to improve and replace. Russell was paired up with his HOF teammates for 71 full seasons. Let's compare that with Wilt... 27 full seasons. Granted, not all of Russell's teammates were legitimate HOFers. KC Jones was never even an all-star, nor was Satch Sanders deserving, either. But both were widely acknowledged as among the best defensive players of their era. Frank Ramsey shouldn't be in the Hall, either, but he was still a very good "6th man." And while I don't believe that Bailey Howell should be in the HOF, he was a very good scorer long before Boston picked him up, and he was a solid 20 ppg scorer, on very good efficiency, with the Celtics.

The rest...Cousy, Sharman, Heinsohn, Sam Jones, and Havlicek...all exceptional players. As posted earlier, all were legitimate 20+ scorers, and all probably would have scored considerably more on another team. In fact, Havlicek was a near 30 ppg scorer after Russell retired.

And don't forget the role players, either. They would add pieces like Lovellette, who was a 20 ppg scorer just the eyar before. Or an Em Bryant, or a Wayne Embry, or a Larry Siegfried, or a Don Nelson. All valuable contributors, on deep rosters.

And while the Celtics were getting older each year in the decade of the 60's, they were still formidable into Russell's last season. Clearly, they were no longer interested in battling for the best record, and they paced themselves. But that was still a solid and deep roster into Russell's last season.

And when Russell surprised the Celtics with retirement, they had no plan in place to replace him. They immediately plummetted in the 69-70. Why? Because they had Henry Finkle playing the center position. But they drafted Dave Cowens the very next year, and became competitive again, going 44-38. The very next season they had the best record in the East, at 56-26. And in the 72-73 season, and only four years after Russell's retirement, they set a still-record team mark of 68-14. And then they would go onto win two titles in three years.

As for Wilt, once again, drafted by a last-place team. And, unlike the Celtics, their roster became older and worse. And if we are to say that some of Russell's teammates were not legitimate HOFers, then the same can be said for Tom Gola. Not only was Gola a slightly above average player, at best, he was arguably the worst post-season "HOF" player of all-time. And that was before, and during the Wilt-era. And even the one legitimate HOF player that Chamberlain had early in his career, Arizin, also flopped in two of his three post-seasons with Wilt.

And I have pointed out what Chamberlain accomplished with those Warrior teams earlier. Basically this...taking a last-place roster, that would get older, and worse, to competitive playoff series against Russell in '60 and '64. And in the '62 post-season, and with his teammates collectively shooting .354 over the course of the playoffs, Chamberlain single-handedly carried them thru the first round, and then took them to a game seven, two-point (controversial) loss, against the 60-20 HOF-laden Celtics.

And once again, the 63-64 Warrior team was basically Chamberlain...and a cast of misfits.Yes, Nate Thurmond was on that team, and he contributed some, but he was a rookie, playing part-time, mostly out of position (he very sldom backed up Wilt), and shooting .395. And yet, Wilt took that horrible roster to a 48-32 record, and then, with one of the greatest playoff series of all-time, he single-handedly carried them past a 46-36 Hawk team that was better from 2-6...(a 39 ppg, 23 rpg, .559 series.) And while Boston, with their 8-2 edge in HOFers, won the Finals, 4-1, the last two wins were in the waning seconds. All Chamberlin did in that series, and being swarmed for much of it, was average 29 ppg, 28 rpg, and shoot .517, while holding Russell to 11 ppg, 25 rpg, and.386 shooting.

Once again, what was interesting about the 63-64 Warriors, who again, went 48-32, was that their second best player was Tom Meschery. As posted earlier, the Warriors traded Chamberlain to the Sixers for three players (one of them Paul Neumann.) Nate Thurmond moved to the pivot to replace Chamberlain, and would go on to have a HOF career. The next season, 65-66, the Warriors drafted HOFer Rick Barry, and even with Nate, Rick, Neumann, and Meschery, they still only went 35-45. Then the very next season they added Jeff Mullins, Clyde Lee, and Fred Hetzel. Here was a team with Meschery now being nearly as effective, but only their seventh best player...and still only going 44-37 (and losing to Wilt's 68-13 Sixers in the Finals.)

And I have covered the Celtics-Sixers battles from 65-66 thru 68-69 ad nauseum. Boston was a better team in 65-66, despite their record, and Russell's teammates wiped out Wilt's.

Chambelain's 66-67 Sixers destroyed Boston early in the season, 138-96, and never looked back. They rolled to a 45-4 record, and coasted to a 68-13 mark, which blew away the NBA record at the time. And in the ECF's, and with Chamberlain dominating Russell in every facet of the game, they bombed the Celtics, 4-1.

And the 67-68 season was much the same. Philly ran away with the best record in the league, beating Boston by eight games. And even without HOFer Billy Cunningham, they were still leading Boston in the ECF's 3-1. In fact, even Red Auerbach all but gave up, making the comment following their game four loss, "It's too bad, because people will forget just how great he [Russell] was." However, the Sixers had two more key starters go down in game five, and with even Chamberlain fighting an assortment of injuries (and as Russell would claim, "A lessor man would not have played"), Boston eked out a 100-96 game seven to win the series. Clearly, a healthy Sixer team wins easily, and probably duplicates their '67 effort (4-1.)

The 68-69 Lakers were basically a prime West, a shackled Wilt, a declining Baylor, and a cast of misfits. And to make matters worse, they were coached by a man who made it clear that he despised Wilt...to the point that he was benching him during the season (and keep in mind that Chamberlain had a 20.5 ppg, 21.1, 4.5 apg, .583 season), and then, at the absolute worst time, benched him again...all in a two point game seven loss. How incompetent was Van Breda Kolf? He made this comment during the season, "When we pass the ball into Wilt, we will score. But it is an ugly offense to watch." So, instead he chose to ride the shot-jacking Baylor, whose offensive ineptitude was so bad that he had the worst FG% (.385) on the team in the post-season.

It has been said that Russell did everything he could to win. True, but he didn't have to do nearly as much as Chamberlain had to. Nor did he have to deal with incompetent and stubborn coach's, or choking teammates. in fact, while Chamberlain's routinely puked all over themselves in the post-season, Russell's were elevating their play. Even Russell admitted that Sam Jones won several series for Boston, and he and Nelson killed Wilt's team's at cirtical times in a couple of series. As did Havlicek, including the famous, "Havlicek stole the ball!"

And once again, given the fact that Russell's teams won four game seven's against Chamberlain's, and by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points, he certainly wasn't dominating Wilt.

FWIW, John Wooden made the comment that had Wilt and Russell swapped rosters in their careers, that Wilt probably would have won as many rings. Maybe, maybe not, and we will never know, but I suspect that it would have at the very minimum, been much closer.

meltdown

[MMM]

these wilt stories reminds me of always hearing about my uncle being able to fend off a lion

[!@#$%Vectors!@#]

these wilt stories reminds me of always hearing about my uncle being able to fend off a lion
Or how my parents tell me they walked 10 miles to school and back in Serbia.
:lol :lol :lol :lol

[Stringer Bell]

No one claims Wilt killed a mountain lion.

A team mate claims Wilt told him a small puma jumped on his back while he walked to the bushes after pulling over on his annual drive across USA. Wilt claimed he was able to knock it off him and it ran away. Then Wilt showed said team mate huge scratches on his back.

That is the claim I believe.

Thanks, I wondered why people would always talk about Wilt and mountain lions.



If Wilt legit boned 2,000+ women, he surely would've contracted some kind of disease. That's just an ABSURD amount of women to have claimed to have slept with ...

And I haven't had near that personally, who would? Even as a guy that's DISGUSTING ... I've had more than my fair share, especially while in college. But who actually keeps count? I never did, and I'm just a normal joe. It sounds contrived, and made up.

He could have caught something and then gotten penicilin or whatever treatment.

Wilt more or less admitted in a Sports Illustrated Article that he exaggerated the 20,000 number to sell books.