Wow Dave Cowens was screwed out of the MVP in 76 by Kareem

[Smoke117]

I can't believe they awarded Kareem the MVP in 76 when the Lakers were 40-42 and didn't even make the playoffs. Dave Cowens clearly should have been the MVP that year. Was he as dominate as Kareem? No, but there are a lot of players who dominate on losing teams but don't receive the MVP. Either way it was probably Cowens best season and he actually led the Celtics to 54-28 record and then eventual champions. Dave Cowens is easily the most underrated Center there has been. Nobody talks about him.

[L.Kizzle]

I can't believe they awarded Kareem the MVP in 76 when the Lakers were 40-42 and didn't even make the playoffs. Dave Cowens clearly should have been the MVP that year. Was he as dominate as Kareem? No, but there are a lot of players who dominate on losing teams but don't receive the MVP. Either way it was probably Cowens best season and he actually led the Celtics to 54-28 record and then eventual champions. Dave Cowens is easily the most underrated Center there has been. Nobody talks about him.
The players voted for the MVP back then, so blame the players not the media.

[jlip]

Cowens actually finished 3rd behind McAdoo.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/awards_1976.html#mvp

[Psileas]

Cowens actually finished 3rd behind McAdoo.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/awards_1976.html#mvp

Not only did he finish 3rd, but it was a very close race. A few second thoughts could have given him the 1st place. He wasn't convincingly dominant though to make a stronger case and, like already mentioned, players were voting back then, making results more biased (come on, Jamaal Wilkes and Jim Chones getting 1st place votes... :oldlol: ). Kareem was individually easily the best player in the game and McAdoo a probable 2nd (with Dr.J in the ABA).

[TylerOO]

No one cares about NBA pre 1980

[Psileas]

No one cares about NBA pre 1980

Good to learn your name.

[Pushxx]

Havlicek and Cowens are two of the most underrated players of all-time.

[Whoah10115]

Good to learn your name.



Oh shit :roll:

[SilkkTheShocker]

Havlicek and Cowens are two of the most underrated players of all-time.


Says the Boston homer.

Stfu

[allball]

Doesn't matter because the best player in the world in 76 was Julius Erving.

[allball]

Havlicek and Cowens are two of the most underrated players of all-time.

What about Jo Jo White? He was arguably as important to that 76 team as either of them were and he lead them in scoring in the playoffs.

[Pushxx]

Says the Boston homer.

Stfu

Yes. They can only be underrated if I'm not a homer. You figured it out.


What about Jo Jo White? He was arguably as important to that 76 team as either of them were and he lead them in scoring in the playoffs.

Also an underrated player, but not an all-time great like Hondo and Big Red who had farther reaching impacts and accomplishments.

All three get forgotten too often, though.

[dunksby]

Doesn't matter because the best player in the world in 76 was Julius Erving.
:roll: :roll:

[fpliii]

Doesn't matter because the best player in the world in 76 was Julius Erving.

This very well might be true...

[ShaqAttack3234]

Eh, Cowens got the '73 MVP that should have gone to Kareem. McAdoo was the best choice, imo. Kareem was most likely the best player, but I'm not entirely comfortable with a player getting MVP on a 40-42 team, no matter how bad the team is. Regardless, they should have made the playoffs, the only reason they didn't was an idiotic format. The 38-44 Bucks and 36-46 Pistons got to play in the playoffs, but the Lakers didn't.

[TheCorporation]

Cray

[Lebron23]

Dave Cowens is the most underrated player in NBA History. I think he's a top 20-25 player of all time. He's a very skilled, great rebounder, and good defensive big men for a 6'9" Center.

[dankok8]

First of all the team record was poor but as someone mentioned Lakers missed the playoffs in favor of two worse teams. They had the 4th best record and 3rd best SRS in the conference without anyone other than Kareem to rebound, defend, and no quality PG.

I don't think most people realize how insanely good he was this season...

27.7 ppg => 2nd in scoring
16.9 rpg => 1st in rebounding - including NBA record for defensive rebounds in a season and in a single game
4.1 bpg => 1st in blocks
52.9% shooting => 5th in FG%
5.0 apg => 2nd in assists among bigs

His team's DRtg was 98 but his own was 90. That's unprecedented. With him on the floor they were by far the best defensive team in the league (best team had 94.5 DRtg...), without him certainly the worst.

He also crushed the league in all advanced stats including PER, WS, BPM, and VORP. Just ANNIHILATED everybody else... His impact was so huge he was by far the best player in the league. That doesn't necessarily justify his MVP but the disrespect in this thread is almost painful. :banghead:

[LAZERUSS]

First of all the team record was poor but as someone mentioned Lakers missed the playoffs in favor of two worse teams. They had the 4th best record and 3rd best SRS in the conference without anyone other than Kareem to rebound, defend, and no quality PG.

I don't think most people realize how insanely good he was this season...

27.7 ppg => 2nd in scoring
16.9 rpg => 1st in rebounding - including NBA record for defensive rebounds in a season and in a single game
4.1 bpg => 1st in blocks
52.9% shooting => 5th in FG%
5.0 apg => 2nd in assists among bigs

His team's DRtg was 98 but his own was 90. That's unprecedented. With him on the floor they were by far the best defensive team in the league (best team had 94.5 DRtg...), without him certainly the worst.

He also crushed the league in all advanced stats including PER, WS, BPM, and VORP. Just ANNIHILATED everybody else... His impact was so huge he was by far the best player in the league. That doesn't necessarily justify his MVP but the disrespect in this thread is almost painful. :banghead:

So you agree with me then, that Chamberlain should have won the MVP EVERY season in the decade of the 60's?

[Marchesk]

27.7 ppg => 2nd in scoring
16.9 rpg => 1st in rebounding - including NBA record for defensive rebounds in a season and in a single game
4.1 bpg => 1st in blocks
52.9% shooting => 5th in FG%
5.0 apg => 2nd in assists among bigs

Yeah, that's MVP numbers in most seasons. Wow.

[LAZERUSS]

Yeah, that's MVP numbers in most seasons. Wow.

And Wilt was running away with those numbers virtually every season in the 60's.

[Smoke117]

Wtf? Random bump.

[LAZERUSS]

Yeah, that's MVP numbers in most seasons. Wow.

And, as you know, Chamberlain blew those numbers away in the 60's.

Not only was he winning scoring titles, he was winning them by nearly 20 ppg. Not only was he winning virtually every rebounding title, he was winning them by five per game, and crushing the second best rebounder H2H. Not only was he among the best passing centers, he was the best passer in the league at times. And while we don't have his bpg, we pretty KNOW that he was easily the greatest shot-blocker in NBA history, and in fact, wiped out Russell in that category in their known H2H's. He not only won virtually every FG% title, he won FG% titles by margins of .162, and outshot the league average by .242.

Defensively, he held his opposing centers to just HORRIFIC shooting in their H2H's, and in fact, just MURDERED all of them in virtually every category H2H.

Advanced Stats? How about 8 PER titles in 10 years in the 60's, with three 30+ in a row, including the all-time record of 31.8? Win Shares? How about EIGHT times in 10 seasons, including leading the league by a huge margin while playing for a pathetic team that won 31 games? Of course, he also led the league in Win Shares a few years for a team that went 68-13, as well.

In his worst season in the 60's, he was CLEARLY the best player in the league.

[dankok8]

So you agree with me then, that Chamberlain should have won the MVP EVERY season in the decade of the 60's?

Not quite.

Wilt's league had a guy by the name of Bill Russell. Wilt crushed the offensive categories by an even bigger margin than Kareem but there was no doubt who was the best defender in the league... Bill was by far the most impactful defender in the league as evidenced by DWS, testimonies, team impact etc. On the other hand in 1976 there was no doubt Kareem as an offensive AND defensive presence was far superior to Cowens.

If Kareem faced Russell he'd lose a few MVP's to him too.

Besides in 1963 Wilt won very few games (low 30's IIRC which is too little) and in 1965 he only played in Philly for half a season so those years he really had no case.

[LAZERUSS]

Not quite.

Wilt's league had a guy by the name of Bill Russell. Wilt crushed the offensive categories by an even bigger margin than Kareem but there was no doubt who was the best defender in the league... Bill was by far the most impactful defender in the league as evidenced by DWS, testimonies, team impact etc. On the other hand in 1976 there was no doubt Kareem that as an offensive AND defensive presence was far superior Cowens.

If Kareem faced Russell he'd lose a few MVP's to him too.

Besides in 1963 Wilt won very few games (low 30's IIRC which is too little) and in 1965 he only played in Philly for half a season so those years he really had no case.

Chamberlain led the league in FIFTEEN statistical categories in 1962-63, including WIN SHARES.,..and by a HUGE margin.

And no, Russell was NOT "by far" the most impactful defensive player in the league. And you can't use TEAM stats to prove it, either. He played with as many as FIVE other players in the Top-10 in defensive win shares. And the reality was, Havlicek, KC Jones, and Satch Sanders were regarded as the best defensive players at their positions in the 60's.

Wilt DESTROYED Russell H2H, including DEFENSE. There were seasons in which he held Russell to FG%'s as low as as .281 and .303. He was outshooting Russell by as much as 20% higher in their H2Hs.

Slaughtered him in scoring, and rebounding, as well. And, when he cut back his scoring, he killed him in apg, as well.

Russell couldn't hold a candle to Wilt in ANY season in the 60's.

BTW, swap rosters in '63, and Wilt likely has a 70 win team, while Russell likely plays on a 20 win team.

And we saw what happened in '65, when Chamberlain led a team that didn't make the playoffs the year before, to a first round romp over Oscar's stacked Royals, and then to a game seven, one point loss, against a 62-18 HOF-laden Celtics team at the peak of their dynasty...and in a series in which Chamberlain just ANNIHILATED a helpless Russell in every facet of the game (even in FT shooting.)

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Doesn't matter because the best player in the world in 76 was Julius Erving.

:applause:

[jlip]

Now this is a thread about Wilt. :facepalm :banghead: :banghead:

[LAZERUSS]

Now this is a thread about Wilt. :facepalm :banghead: :banghead:

Nope...just an interesting twist on the take from a "Wilt-basher" (and closet "Magic-basher.")

If Kareem deserved the MVP in '76, then Chamberlain should have been the runaway winner every season in the 60's.


BTW...McAdoo was robbed in '76 (not Cowens.)

[dunksby]

Robbed by the players? They say players didn't like Kareem and still voted him for 6 MVPs now that's as close as you can get to be deserving of something.

[cltcfn2924]

So you agree with me then, that Chamberlain should have won the MVP EVERY season in the decade of the 60's?


Seems like he said the exact opposite. You need to read more than just the parts you want to twist.

[ArbitraryWater]

And what about the year where Kareem obliterated him across the boards and this was the other way around?! Evens out. Mention both sides, OP.

[FlashDwyaneWade3]

The players voted for the MVP back then, so blame the players not the media.
Let the players vote for the NBA awards again instead of the media.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

And what about the year where Kareem obliterated him across the boards and this was the other way around?! Evens out. Mention both sides, OP.

I think his point was that team record/making the play offs should be taken into consideration when voting for the MVP. In his mind you shouldn't be in the convo if you have a losing record/don't make play offs.

[La Frescobaldi]

Not quite.

Wilt's league had a guy by the name of Bill Russell. Wilt crushed the offensive categories by an even bigger margin than Kareem but there was no doubt who was the best defender in the league... Bill was by far the most impactful defender in the league as evidenced by DWS, testimonies, team impact etc. On the other hand in 1976 there was no doubt Kareem as an offensive AND defensive presence was far superior to Cowens.

If Kareem faced Russell he'd lose a few MVP's to him too.

Besides in 1963 Wilt won very few games (low 30's IIRC which is too little) and in 1965 he only played in Philly for half a season so those years he really had no case.

you're crawfishing bad. +1 to Laz on this one.

[La Frescobaldi]

Let the players vote for the NBA awards again instead of the media.
Although I kind of agree, it's a different situation.

The players back then were college graduates, many had advanced degrees, most of them had worked for a living. Their perspective was much wider.

Some of these guys literally can't speak a complete sentence.

But... you would STILL get a truer vote than the media!!! :lol

[LAZERUSS]

Let the players vote for the NBA awards again instead of the media.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Yep...let the players vote. After all, they get to see opposing teams 2-4 times a year. After all, they are unbiased and have no friends (or enemies.)

Year-after-year the player voting was ridiculous. That is not to say that legitimate MVPs were not awarded, but take a look a the voting each year. Psileas mentioned it in the '76 voting. Jamaal Wilkes and even Jim Chones received FIRST PLACE votes.

AW mentioned the '73 voting. There were a ton of players (12 to be exact) getting FIRST PLACE votes. And there were even many more who received votes. Lucius Allen received a vote for cryingoutloud.

I don't have a problem with the BEST player winning the award. Again, if KAJ deserved the award in '76, on a 40-42 team, then Chamberlain should have been a landslide winner in '63, when his team went 31-49 (albeit he was easily the best player in the game.) But how ridiculous was the voting in '63? Terry Dischinger, playing on a 25-55 team (and not even the best player on his own team) received more FIRST PLACE votes than Wilt.

First of all, there needs to be a consistent criteria. Using Wilt again, he easily won the MVP award over Russell in his rookie season. Two years later, and with his and Russell's teams playing exactly the same, and with Russell playing exactly the same way as he did in '60, BUT, with Chamberlain having a FAR greater season than what he had in '60...and yet Russell won the award. Just pure nonsense. There was no question that Wilt was deeply resented for his complete humilaition of his fellow players on (and off) the court.

And I mentioned Wilt's '63 season. Despite having one of the greatest individual seasons in NBA history, he had a pathetic supporting cast (arguably the worst roster in NBA history), and he finished SEVENTH in the voting, and behind even Red Kerr, whom he annihilated in their H2H's (hell, he had games against Kerr in which he outscored him by 60-21 and even 70-14.) Does anyone in their right mind believe that a GM would have taken Kerr over Wilt in some kind of a draft?

And then how about '64? Wilt essentially took that same exact roster to a 48-32 record, and again, with season in which he statistically miles better than anyone else...and he finished behind Oscar, who had a MUCH better supporting cast.

And the '69 voting was even more "suspicious."

I'll save myself some time here...


Wes Unseld won the '69 MVP award, along with winning the ROY(he and Wilt are the only two players in NBA history to accomplish that feat BTW.)

Unseld's play went beyond his statistics, of course, which were very good. He averaged 13.8 ppg, 18.2 rpg, 2.6 apg, and shot .476 from the field. But his biggest strength in the MVP voting came because his Bullets went from a last place 36-46, to a best record in the league, 57-25.

Still, as I mentioned earlier, those Bullet teams before he arrived were actually quit good in terms of talent, but they were always under-achieving. In the 68-69 season, Earl Monroe averaged 26 ppg, Kevin Loughery averaged 23 ppg, and Gus Johnson averaged 18 ppg and 12 rpg. Those were three excellent players, as was Jack Marin, who averaged 16.

BTW, Unseld would get to four finals in his NBA career, and went 1-3 in them, winning the FMVP in '78. Generally he played on successful teams, albeit "only" one that won 60 games (and that team was swept by the 48-34 Warriors in the Finals.)

In any case, the only real criteria in which Unseld had over Wilt in '69, was the fact that his team finished with a slightly better record (57-25 to 55-27.) In their six H2H games, the two teams split the season series, 3-3. In those six contests, and to Unseld's credit, he outrebounded Wilt in four of them. However, Chamberlain wiped the floor with him in one game, outscoring him, 25-4, and outrebounding him by a staggering 38-9 margin. Overall, in those six H2H's, Unseld averaged 11.0 ppg and 20.7 rpg, while Chamberlain averaged 21.5 ppg, 22.2 rpg, and shot a spectacular .626 from the field against him. And, of course, Wilt held a solid edge in their overall seasonal numbers, (20.5 ppg to 13.8 ppg; 21.1 rpg to 18.2 rpg; 4.5 apg to 2.6 apg; and a .583 FG% to Unseld's .476 mark.)


Reed came in second in the MVP voting in '69. His Knicks went 54-28 (just behind Wilt's Lakers, who went 55-27.) However, the Knicks conducted a mid-season trade in which they shipped out Bellamy in return for DeBusschere, and the results were a 36-11 record after the deal.

Reed's numbers were excellent all season (21.1 ppg, 14.5 rpg, 2.3 apg, and on a .521 FG%.) He was also second team all-defense. But after the trade, Reed averaged 24.3 ppg and 15.6 rpg.

However, Wilt's Lakers enjoyed a 5-1 W-L record against those Knicks, including a 2-0 mark when Reed was their center. In their entire seasonal H2H's, covering all six games (again, with Bellamy at center in four of them), Reed averaged 15.0 ppg and 12 rpg, while Wilt averaged 23.7 ppg, 22.3 rpg, and shot an amazing .712 from the field. In their two H2H's when it was Reed vs. Wilt, Reed averaged 20.0 ppg and 9.5 rpg, while Wilt averaged 28.0 ppg, 22.0 rpg, and shot an eye-popping .688 from the floor. Clearly, Wilt dominated Reed in their career H2H's before his knee surgery, and this was yet another example.


And that brings us to Russell. Just how Russell finished ahead of Wilt in the MVP voting that year was a complete mystery. There was virtually no criteria in which he had any edge over Wilt. Russell's Celtics went 48-34 (and 2-3 without him) to Wilt's Lakers' 55-27. In their six regular season H2H's, Wilt's Lakers enjoyed a 4-2 edge, which included that nationally televised beatdown in Boston late in the season by a 108-73 margin. In their six H2H's, Chamberlain easily outplayed Russell. He outscored Russell, 6-0, which included one game by a 35-5 margin. And he outrebounded Russell, 5-0-1, which included staggering margins of 21-8 and 42-18. Overall, in those six H2H's, Chamberlain outscored Russell by a 16.0 ppg to 6.7 ppg; outrebounded Russell by a 24.0 rpg to 17.0 rpg margin; and Wilt outshot Russell from the field by a .493 to .340 margin. Russell did hold a slim 35-29 assist edge, though.


There you have it. His teams went 3-3, 5-1 (2-0), and 4-2 Unseld's, Reed's, and Russell's. Only Unseld enjoyed an overall better team record (57-25 to Wilt's 55-27,...while Wilt held a 55-27 to 54-28 edge over Reed's, and a 55-27 to 48-34 margin over Russell's.) And Wilt basically clobbered Unseld, Reed, and Russell in their H2H's.

BTW, and again, West missed 21 games for LA, and the Lakers went 12-9 without him. And also again, Baylor missed six games for the Lakers, and they went 5-1 without him.

And yet... Unseld finished first, Reed finished 2nd, Russell finished 4th...and Wilt? Nowhere to be found in the MVP voting.

So, there needs to be a solid CRITERIA for the voters.

And next, they need to have an impartial panel select a Top-5. And then who does the voting? Well, we know that the players seldom play against each other. And we also know that they are extremely biased. But how about a panel of coaches, retired players, and then sports media like broadcasters and writers?

It wouldn't be perfect, but it has to be better than what it has been.


As for Kareem in '76. Best player in the league, but based on historical voting, one of the worst MVPs in NBA history. In fact, the ONLY MVP to have played on a losing team.

[DatAsh]

Chamberlain led the league in FIFTEEN statistical categories in 1962-63, including WIN SHARES.,..and by a HUGE margin.

And no, Russell was NOT "by far" the most impactful defensive player in the league. And you can't use TEAM stats to prove it, either. He played with as many as FIVE other players in the Top-10 in defensive win shares. And the reality was, Havlicek, KC Jones, and Satch Sanders were regarded as the best defensive players at their positions in the 60's.

Wilt DESTROYED Russell H2H, including DEFENSE. There were seasons in which he held Russell to FG%'s as low as as .281 and .303. He was outshooting Russell by as much as 20% higher in their H2Hs.

Slaughtered him in scoring, and rebounding, as well. And, when he cut back his scoring, he killed him in apg, as well.

Russell couldn't hold a candle to Wilt in ANY season in the 60's.

BTW, swap rosters in '63, and Wilt likely has a 70 win team, while Russell likely plays on a 20 win team.

And we saw what happened in '65, when Chamberlain led a team that didn't make the playoffs the year before, to a first round romp over Oscar's stacked Royals, and then to a game seven, one point loss, against a 62-18 HOF-laden Celtics team at the peak of their dynasty...and in a series in which Chamberlain just ANNIHILATED a helpless Russell in every facet of the game (even in FT shooting.)

Why do you always bring Wilt into this?

[LAZERUSS]

Why do you always bring Wilt into this?

For two reasons.

One, Kareem won an MVP on a LOSING team. The ONLY player to do so. Yet, his contributions to that team were FAR less than Wilt's in '63. Not even remotely close.

And two, Dankok8 is a closet "Wilt-basher" who diminishes his accomplishments at every opportunity.

But, in this argument for KAJ in '76...


I don't think most people realize how insanely good he was this season...

27.7 ppg => 2nd in scoring
16.9 rpg => 1st in rebounding - including NBA record for defensive rebounds in a season and in a single game
4.1 bpg => 1st in blocks
52.9% shooting => 5th in FG%
5.0 apg => 2nd in assists among bigs

His team's DRtg was 98 but his own was 90. That's unprecedented. With him on the floor they were by far the best defensive team in the league (best team had 94.5 DRtg...), without him certainly the worst.

He also crushed the league in all advanced stats including PER, WS, BPM, and VORP. Just ANNIHILATED everybody else... His impact was so huge he was by far the best player in the league. That doesn't necessarily justify his MVP but the disrespect in this thread is almost painful

Guess what...those numbers were an ordinary season for Chamberlain in the 60's.

And Wilt's DEFENSE was vastly under-rated by even those in his own era (who were not privy to the wealth of information that now exists.) By the mid-60's Chamberlain was, at the very least, Russell's equal in defensive impact. And to be honest, he was probably superior.

And in terms of individual defense, Chamberlain probably reduced opposing centers, in terms of efficiency, for than any other center in NBA history.

And from what information we now have, Wilt was easily the greatest "rim protector" in NBA history. He was clearly a greater shot-blocker than Russell, and even in their H2H's he wiped the floor with Russell.


Again, if the argument is that Kareem was the best player in the league in '76, I would say yes, but it was very close between him and McAdoo. But, if Kareem was the best player in the league in '76, well, Chamberlain was the best player EVERY season in the 60's. And if KAJ "deserved" the MVP in '76, then Wilt certainly deserved it in '63.


BTW, Dankok8 is a very knowledgable poster, but his "bias'" are pretty obvious (he is anti-Wilt and anti-Magic.) I do respect him as a poster, though, which is more than I can say for about 90% of the posters on this forum.

[Helix]

For two reasons.

One, Kareem won an MVP on a LOSING team. The ONLY player to do so. Yet, his contributions to that team were FAR less than Wilt's in '63. Not even remotely close.

And two, Dankok8 is a closet "Wilt-basher" who diminishes his accomplishments at every opportunity.

But, in this argument for KAJ in '76...



Guess what...those numbers were an ordinary season for Chamberlain in the 60's.

And Wilt's DEFENSE was vastly under-rated by even those in his own era (who were not privy to the wealth of information that now exists.) By the mid-60's Chamberlain was, at the very least, Russell's equal in defensive impact. And to be honest, he was probably superior.

And in terms of individual defense, Chamberlain probably reduced opposing centers, in terms of efficiency, for than any other center in NBA history.

And from what information we now have, Wilt was easily the greatest "rim protector" in NBA history. He was clearly a greater shot-blocker than Russell, and even in their H2H's he wiped the floor with Russell.


Again, if the argument is that Kareem was the best player in the league in '76, I would say yes, but it was very close between him and McAdoo. But, if Kareem was the best player in the league in '76, well, Chamberlain was the best player EVERY season in the 60's. And if KAJ "deserved" the MVP in '76, then Wilt certainly deserved it in '63.


BTW, Dankok8 is a very knowledgable poster, but his "bias'" are pretty obvious (he is anti-Wilt and anti-Magic.) I do respect him as a poster, though, which is more than I can say for about 90% of the posters on this forum.


With the possible exception of the 68/69 season when he was shackled by VBK, Wilt Chamberlain was the best player in the NBA from the moment he first stepped onto an NBA court in 1959 until he tore up his knee in Nov 1969. And it wasn't by any slight little margin either.

[LAZERUSS]

With the possible exception of the 68/69 season when he was shackled by VBK, Wilt Chamberlain was the best player in the NBA from the moment he first stepped onto an NBA court in 1959 until he tore up his knee in Nov 1969. And it wasn't by any slight little margin either.

Agreed.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

And even in his 68-69 season, he was clearly better than Unseld, Reed, and Russell, all of whom somehow were voted ahead of him in the MVP race.

BTW, excellent point about his knee injury...which occurred in the ninth game of the '69-70 season. He was leading the league in ppg, at 32.2 ppg (and on a .579%), to go along with 20.0 rpg. Oh, and in the game in which he blew out his knee...he had scored 33 points, on 13-14 shooting, and in 28 minutes. He was likely on his way to a 40 point game, and perhaps even another 50 pointer.

[DatAsh]

For two reasons.

One, Kareem won an MVP on a LOSING team. The ONLY player to do so. Yet, his contributions to that team were FAR less than Wilt's in '63. Not even remotely close.


So? The thread is about whether Kareem deserved his MVP, whether or not there's a double standard with Wilt/Kareem is a different topic. Maybe if you could discuss Wilt in a reasonable manner - without taking over a thread - it would be worthwhile, but unfortunately that's not the case.



And Wilt's DEFENSE was vastly under-rated by even those in his own era (who were not privy to the wealth of information that now exists.)


I agree with that.

You're a smart guy, but by making everything always about Wilt and always being 100% biased in favor of Wilt, you lose the ability to change anyone's mind on the matter.

I find myself skipping over your posts more often than not, which sucks, as I could learn a thing or two. The only other semi-knowledgeable guy I do that with is 3ball.

[allball]

Dave Cowens is the most underrated player in NBA History. I think he's a top 20-25 player of all time. He's a very skilled, great rebounder, and good defensive big men for a 6'9" Center.

whoa

[LAZERUSS]

So? The thread is about whether Kareem deserved his MVP, whether or not there's a double standard with Wilt/Kareem is a different topic. Maybe if you could discuss Wilt in a reasonable manner - without taking over a thread - it would be worthwhile, but unfortunately that's not the case.



I agree with that.

You're a smart guy, but by making everything always about Wilt and always being 100% biased in favor of Wilt, you lose the ability to change anyone's mind on the matter.

I find myself skipping over your posts more often than not, which sucks, as I could learn a thing or two. The only other semi-knowledgeable guy I do that with is 3ball.

The KAJ-Wilt MVPs were interesting.

I have already mentioned that Chamberlain was absolutely robbed of the MVP in '62. Again, what changed in the voting CRITERIA, from '60 to '62?

But then it gets more interesting ten years later. KAJ won the MVP in '72, but Chamberlain led his team to the best record, and basically played like a more efficient, more dominant, Russell in the process. Again, what changed in the CRITERIA from '62 to '72?

Look, I don't have a problem with anyone claiming that Kareem was the best player nearly every year in the 70's (maybe only Moses in 78-79.) But, if the MVP awards were based solely on that, then Wilt should have swept the 60's.

It's the CRITERIA that has irritated me. If a player has to lead a team to the best record, or at least a winning record, then let's stipulate that up front, and eliminate over half the field right away. Sorry, KAJ, hand your trophy over to McAdoo.

And if individual domination takes a back seat to TEAM success, then let's remove three-fourths of the remaining players, as well. Sorry McAdoo, but the MVP award that KAJ just handed to you...hand it over to Cowens. Same with MJ's '88 MVP...hand it over to Magic.

IMHO, they should hand out an MVP to whomever led his team to the best record in the league, and then hand out an award to the BEST player in the league, as well. In some cases the same guy will get both. In any case, it will put an end to this "criteria" nonsense.

[DatAsh]

IMHO, they should hand out an MVP to whomever led his team to the best record in the league, and then hand out an award to the BEST player in the league, as well. In some cases the same guy will get both. In any case, it will put an end to this "criteria" nonsense.

I'd rather they just try to give it to the best player.

[dankok8]

@LAZERUSS

You are missing the point by mentioning their head-to-head games... Nobody ever said that Russell was a better individual player than Wilt just that he was very very valuable. In terms of value to his team one can argue Russell added more than Wilt (and Kareem).

Defensively from 1960 to 1966 Russell was considerably more impactful than Wilt. 86.2 to 50.1 cumulative lead over those seven seasons in DWS. You can't tell me that KC Jones who is a guard and Tom Sanders who was playing mid-20's in minutes (remember Havlicek only entered the league in 1963...) made Boston into a juggernaut. Besides Wilt had a few very talented defenders on his team like Guy Rodgers, Al Attles, and Tom Gola too.

Wilt may have blocked more shots but Russell had the impact. It would be like calling Serge Ibaka the best defender in the league over prime Ben Wallace because he blocked more shots. It's stupid.

Find me one article from those years that calls Wilt a better or equal defender to Russell.

Anyways I never said Kareem was the MVP in 1976. I just said he was clearly the best player in the league. And besides Kareem in 1976 was better than Cowens ON BOTH ENDS of the floor. Unlike Wilt and Russell. Like I said Kareem himself would lose some MVP's to Russell. Bill Russell was that good!

And again calling me anti-Wilt and anti-Magic is crazy... I just try to be objective. I've criticized Kareem for 1973 plenty of times too.

[LAZERUSS]

@LAZERUSS

You are missing the point by mentioning their head-to-head games... Nobody ever said that Russell was a better individual player than Wilt just that he was very very valuable. In terms of value to his team one can argue Russell added more than Wilt (and Kareem).

Defensively from 1960 to 1966 Russell was considerably more impactful than Wilt. 86.2 to 50.1 cumulative lead over those seven seasons in DWS. You can't tell me that KC Jones who is a guard and Tom Sanders who was playing mid-20's in minutes (remember Havlicek only entered the league in 1963...) made Boston into a juggernaut. Besides Wilt had a few very talented defenders on his team like Guy Rodgers, Al Attles, and Tom Gola too.

Wilt may have blocked more shots but Russell had the impact. It would be like calling Serge Ibaka the best defender in the league over prime Ben Wallace because he blocked more shots. It's stupid.

Find me one article from those years that calls Wilt a better or equal defender to Russell.

Anyways I never said Kareem was the MVP in 1976. I just said he was clearly the best player in the league. And besides Kareem in 1976 was better than Cowens ON BOTH ENDS of the floor. Unlike Wilt and Russell. Like I said Kareem himself would lose some MVP's to Russell. Bill Russell was that good!

And again calling me anti-Wilt and anti-Magic is crazy... I just try to be objective. I've criticized Kareem for 1973 plenty of times too.

First of all, I apologize for being too harsh on your assessments. Again, you are one of the few posters here that I truly respect (even if we don't often agree.)

:cheers:

As for defensive impact, the problem is, there is/was, no real way of quantifying it.

I would agree with you, that based on what we know, that Russell was a better team defender, at least from '59-60 thru 62-63. And perhaps even a slightly better individual defender in that period, albeit, Chamberlain was swarmed by Russell's Celtics, and yet his efficiency declined little. Meanwhile, Chamberlain played Russell one-on-one, AND, defended the entire Celtics team (as evidenced by Sam Jones hitting two critical shots over Wilt in the waning seconds of game seven of the '62 EDF's...and later, Wilt altering Heinsohn's potential game-winner in game four of the '64 Finals.) And, as you know, Wilt dramatically lowered Russell's efficiency in their career H2H's. For instance, in Russell's '60 season, he shot a career-high .467 against the NBA. In their 11 regular season H2H's... .393 against Wilt. And then in the '62 regular season, Russell shot .457 against the NBA. Against Wilt in the EDF's... .399. And there were regular seasons in which held Russell to FG%'s of as low as .283 and .301.

I don't put much stock in team DRtg. Just as I didn't in the ORtg. I have blown that ORtg to bits in the topic of Wilt's true impact in the 60's. But even if I were to acknowledge that it had some value...Wilt's TEAM's finished a close second behind Russell's in Chamberlain's ROOKIE season (and Wilt, himself, finished a close second behind Russell in DW shares.) And same in '64, '66, '67, and '68. In fact, in '68, Wilt's team finished ahead of Russell's. And clearly, there is something wrong with the DWS when Wilt's '67 DWS was "only" 7.0.

And regarding DWS's...Wilt has the two highest "non-Russell" seasons in NBA history, and five of the Top-30. And again, that stat is pure nonsense if Wilt's '67 season is not his greatest.

As for TEAM defensive impact...Russell held this edge in teammates in the Top-10 in DWS's...

'60: 3-3
'61: 4-1
'62: 6-0
'63: 6-0
'64: 5-1
'65: 6-1
'66: 4-1
'67: 3-0
'68: 2-2
'69: 3-0

Collectively, a 42-9 margin!

And yet, there were seasons in which Wilt's TEAMs were right behind, or even ahead of Russell's in DRtg.

Clearly Wilt's defensive IMPACT was VERY under-rated.

And in terms of one-on-one defense...Chamberlain had MORE impact. He reduced Bellamy, Thurmond, Reed, AND Russell, more than Russell did to Bellamy, Reed, Thurmond, and Wilt.

And your claim that Wilt's shot-blocking didn't have the IMPACT that Russell's did? Prove it. Hell, an old Wilt INTIMIDATED a PEAK Kareem BECAUSE of his shot-blocking, and yes, there are articles which validate that claim. But not only was Wilt knocking Kareem's skyhook all over the court, he was blocking the entire Bucks TEAM shots all over the gym, and often in rapid-fire succession.

Wilt was THE greatest RIM-PROTECTOR in NBA history, and that is not disputed. He was capable of blocking shots at 12+ feet, and EVERYONE knew it. Hell, even his "goal-tends" were often questionable (as in the waning seconds of game seven of the '62 EDF's, and against Sam Jones.)


All of which gets us back to the BEST player. Even if I were to concede that Russell was the better defensive player, and I wouldn't after '64...Wilt was LIGHT YEARS ahead of Russell at the offensive end. There was not a single season in their ten years in the league in which Russell was really the better player. And in the two years, out of the 10, in which Russell was voted ahead of Wilt on the First Team...Wilt played on a losing team in '63, (and he battered Russell in their nine H2H's), and was traded mid-season in '65 (and then destroyed Russell H2H in the EDF's.)

I'll concede that Kareem was the best player in the league for much of the 70's (not in '75, nor in '79), but then you would have to concede that Chamberlain was the best player in the entire decade of the 60's. And as Helix commented...I would argue that Wilt was on his way to being the best player in the league in '70, as well, when he shredded his knee.

One more time, though...

:cheers:

[La Frescobaldi]

whoa

yeah.

that is probably a little low.

[dankok8]

@LAZERUSS

Good post!

I don't disagree that Wilt is a superior individual player. Nor do I disagree that the offensive gap in favor of Wilt is larger than a defensive one in favor of Russell. I'm just saying that Russell's superior team records and intangibles gave him a solid case against Wilt. And it would give him a solid case against any great player that ever played the game IMHO.

As far as defense... Wilt was a truly great defensive center and like you mentioned he did excel at rim protection and man defense. Against any other all time great C like Hakeem, Kareem etc. he's definitely as good as they are on D and has a case for #2 greatest defender ever. Russell though was a whole different animal.

Bill Russell has the top 6 seasons as far as DWS with 16.0, 14.4, 12.6, 11.6, 11.4, and 11.3!! That's insanity. Boston's average team DRtg during Russell's career is 86.4. That's incredible because NO TEAM IN HISTORY ever had a DRtg in any single year as low as Boston's average. Celtics' three best results of 83.6, 83.7, and 84.2 just make no sense. Wilt's DWS best is 10.6 and Thurmond's best in the 60's is 6.1 so Russell is literally miles ahead of even the other greatest defensive centers of the era. Even when Wilt focused on defense and put in maximum energy on that end he couldn't match Russell's best.

Again Russell had some great defensive teammates but both on his and Wilt's teams it was he and Wilt who had the LION'S SHARE of the defensive impact. Especially in an era with far fewer outside shooting, a center had enormous impact on the defensive end. And here is the Celtics defense without Bill Russell... not including his rookie year when he joined halfway through the season.

In 28 regular season games Russell missed from 57-58 to 68-69, Boston went 10-18 (29 win pace...) and allowed 123.2 points a game which would have been dead last in the league in any season! In the games in which Russell played they allowed a league best 108.6. That's a differential of 14.6 points a game! Best with him, worst without him.

As for best player in the league...

Wilt was not the best in 1969.

Kareem was the best in 1975 (injuries aside...). Kareem was a better rebounder, passer, and defender than Bob McAdoo and surely his equal in scoring. While Kareem put up less points he could do so at higher efficiency. In their head to head Kareem completely outplayed McAdoo.

1974 (3 games)

Kareem: 35.0 ppg, 16.0 rpg, 4.0 apg, 2.7 bpg on 58.0 %FG
McAdoo: 30.3 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 2.7 apg, 2.7 bpg on 56.2 %FG

1975 (4 games)

Kareem: 32.0 ppg, 16.5 rpg, 4.5 apg, 4.3 bpg on 57.3 %FG*
McAdoo: 34.3 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 2.5 apg, 2.3 bpg on 41.8 %FG*

* missing FG% for one game

1976 (4 games)

Kareem: 25.8 ppg, 18.5 rpg, 7.5 apg, 4.3 bpg* on 57.6 %FG
McAdoo: 32.0 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 2.3 apg, 0.8 bpg on 39.1 %FG

* missing blocks for one game

In 1979 Kareem was a better scorer, passer, and defender than Moses. Crushed him in all advanced stats, was a more experienced player, and had a far better postseason. Even their head to heads were a draw.

1979 (3 games)

Kareem: 30.7 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 6.7 apg on 60.9 %FG
Moses: 31.0 ppg, 23.0 rpg, 1.7 apg on 66.7 %FG

The 1981 postseason and 81-82 regular season signaled the end of the "Kareem era".

[LAZERUSS]

@LAZERUSS

Good post!

I don't disagree that Wilt is a superior individual player. Nor do I disagree that the offensive gap in favor of Wilt is larger than a defensive one in favor of Russell. I'm just saying that Russell's superior team records and intangibles gave him a solid case against Wilt. And it would give him a solid case against any great player that ever played the game IMHO.

As far as defense... Wilt was a truly great defensive center and like you mentioned he did excel at rim protection and man defense. Against any other all time great C like Hakeem, Kareem etc. he's definitely as good as they are on D and has a case for #2 greatest defender ever. Russell though was a whole different animal.

Bill Russell has the top 6 seasons as far as DWS with 16.0, 14.4, 12.6, 11.6, 11.4, and 11.3!! That's insanity. Boston's average team DRtg during Russell's career is 86.4. That's incredible because NO TEAM IN HISTORY ever had a DRtg in any single year as low as Boston's average. Celtics' three best results of 83.6, 83.7, and 84.2 just make no sense. Wilt's DWS best is 10.6 and Thurmond's best in the 60's is 6.1 so Russell is literally miles ahead of even the other greatest defensive centers of the era. Even when Wilt focused on defense and put in maximum energy on that end he couldn't match Russell's best.

Again Russell had some great defensive teammates but both on his and Wilt's teams it was he and Wilt who had the LION'S SHARE of the defensive impact. Especially in an era with far fewer outside shooting, a center had enormous impact on the defensive end. And here is the Celtics defense without Bill Russell... not including his rookie year when he joined halfway through the season.

In 28 regular season games Russell missed from 57-58 to 68-69, Boston went 10-18 (29 win pace...) and allowed 123.2 points a game which would have been dead last in the league in any season! In the games in which Russell played they allowed a league best 108.6. That's a differential of 14.6 points a game! Best with him, worst without him.

As for best player in the league...

Wilt was not the best in 1969.

Kareem was the best in 1975 (injuries aside...). Kareem was a better rebounder, passer, and defender than Bob McAdoo and surely his equal in scoring. While Kareem put up less points he could do so at higher efficiency. In their head to head Kareem completely outplayed McAdoo.

1974 (3 games)

Kareem: 35.0 ppg, 16.0 rpg, 4.0 apg, 2.7 bpg on 58.0 %FG
McAdoo: 30.3 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 2.7 apg, 2.7 bpg on 56.2 %FG

1975 (4 games)

Kareem: 32.0 ppg, 16.5 rpg, 4.5 apg, 4.3 bpg on 57.3 %FG*
McAdoo: 34.3 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 2.5 apg, 2.3 bpg on 41.8 %FG*

* missing FG% for one game

1976 (4 games)

Kareem: 25.8 ppg, 18.5 rpg, 7.5 apg, 4.3 bpg* on 57.6 %FG
McAdoo: 32.0 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 2.3 apg, 0.8 bpg on 39.1 %FG

* missing blocks for one game

In 1979 Kareem was a better scorer, passer, and defender than Moses. Crushed him in all advanced stats, was a more experienced player, and had a far better postseason. Even their head to heads were a draw.

1979 (3 games)

Kareem: 30.7 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 6.7 apg on 60.9 %FG
Moses: 31.0 ppg, 23.0 rpg, 1.7 apg on 66.7 %FG

:cheers:

Wilt and Kareem were the two greatest "peak" players in NBA history. BTW, and as you know, Kareem anchored the best defenses of his era from '71 thru '74. IMO, at his peak, he was among the greatest defensive players in NBA history.

[DatAsh]

First of all, I apologize for being too harsh on your assessments. Again, you are one of the few posters here that I truly respect (even if we don't often agree.)

:cheers:

As for defensive impact, the problem is, there is/was, no real way of quantifying it.

I would agree with you, that based on what we know, that Russell was a better team defender, at least from '59-60 thru 62-63. And perhaps even a slightly better individual defender in that period, albeit, Chamberlain was swarmed by Russell's Celtics, and yet his efficiency declined little. Meanwhile, Chamberlain played Russell one-on-one, AND, defended the entire Celtics team (as evidenced by Sam Jones hitting two critical shots over Wilt in the waning seconds of game seven of the '62 EDF's...and later, Wilt altering Heinsohn's potential game-winner in game four of the '64 Finals.) And, as you know, Wilt dramatically lowered Russell's efficiency in their career H2H's. For instance, in Russell's '60 season, he shot a career-high .467 against the NBA. In their 11 regular season H2H's... .393 against Wilt. And then in the '62 regular season, Russell shot .457 against the NBA. Against Wilt in the EDF's... .399. And there were regular seasons in which held Russell to FG%'s of as low as .283 and .301.

I don't put much stock in team DRtg. Just as I didn't in the ORtg. I have blown that ORtg to bits in the topic of Wilt's true impact in the 60's. But even if I were to acknowledge that it had some value...Wilt's TEAM's finished a close second behind Russell's in Chamberlain's ROOKIE season (and Wilt, himself, finished a close second behind Russell in DW shares.) And same in '64, '66, '67, and '68. In fact, in '68, Wilt's team finished ahead of Russell's. And clearly, there is something wrong with the DWS when Wilt's '67 DWS was "only" 7.0.

And regarding DWS's...Wilt has the two highest "non-Russell" seasons in NBA history, and five of the Top-30. And again, that stat is pure nonsense if Wilt's '67 season is not his greatest.

As for TEAM defensive impact...Russell held this edge in teammates in the Top-10 in DWS's...

'60: 3-3
'61: 4-1
'62: 6-0
'63: 6-0
'64: 5-1
'65: 6-1
'66: 4-1
'67: 3-0
'68: 2-2
'69: 3-0

Collectively, a 42-9 margin!

And yet, there were seasons in which Wilt's TEAMs were right behind, or even ahead of Russell's in DRtg.

Clearly Wilt's defensive IMPACT was VERY under-rated.

And in terms of one-on-one defense...Chamberlain had MORE impact. He reduced Bellamy, Thurmond, Reed, AND Russell, more than Russell did to Bellamy, Reed, Thurmond, and Wilt.

And your claim that Wilt's shot-blocking didn't have the IMPACT that Russell's did? Prove it. Hell, an old Wilt INTIMIDATED a PEAK Kareem BECAUSE of his shot-blocking, and yes, there are articles which validate that claim. But not only was Wilt knocking Kareem's skyhook all over the court, he was blocking the entire Bucks TEAM shots all over the gym, and often in rapid-fire succession.

Wilt was THE greatest RIM-PROTECTOR in NBA history, and that is not disputed. He was capable of blocking shots at 12+ feet, and EVERYONE knew it. Hell, even his "goal-tends" were often questionable (as in the waning seconds of game seven of the '62 EDF's, and against Sam Jones.)


All of which gets us back to the BEST player. Even if I were to concede that Russell was the better defensive player, and I wouldn't after '64...Wilt was LIGHT YEARS ahead of Russell at the offensive end. There was not a single season in their ten years in the league in which Russell was really the better player. And in the two years, out of the 10, in which Russell was voted ahead of Wilt on the First Team...Wilt played on a losing team in '63, (and he battered Russell in their nine H2H's), and was traded mid-season in '65 (and then destroyed Russell H2H in the EDF's.)

I'll concede that Kareem was the best player in the league for much of the 70's (not in '75, nor in '79), but then you would have to concede that Chamberlain was the best player in the entire decade of the 60's.

One more time, though...

:cheers:

Individual defensive win shares are worthless, if anything they're less than worthless. Unfortunately the best we can do for perimeter defenders of that era is to just read about what was being said of them at the time. Guys like Sanders, Hondo, Sharman and K.C. were all great defenders, but so were guys like Thurmond, West, Wally, Attles, and Greer.

The question is, how much better is the first group defensively? Does that difference account for the difference in team defensive rating from one guy to the other.

Looking at Wilt first (negative is good)

Warriors


Year Rank Diff from Mean
59 3/8 -0.5
--------------------------------------Wilt joins
60 2/8 -3.3
61 3/8 -0.7
62 3/9 -0.6
63 5/9 +1.1
64 2/9 -5.6
65 3/9 -0.2 (38 games)
--------------------------------------Wilt leaves
66 3/9 +0.4


76ers


Year Rank Diff from Mean
64 7/9 -0.4
--------------------------------------Wilt joins
65 5/9 +1.1
66 2/9 -2.9
67 3/10 -1.8
68 1/12 -5.4
--------------------------------------Wilt leaves
69 6/14 -1.3


Lakers


Year Rank Diff from Mean
68 7/9 +0.4
--------------------------------------Wilt joins
69 8/14 -0.3
70 4/14 -0.5
71 8/17 -1.3
72 2/17 -8.76
73 3/17 -8.58
--------------------------------------Wilt leaves
74 7/17 -3.03


And then Russell

Celtics


Year Rank Diff from Mean
56 6/8 +1.5
--------------------------------------Russell joins
57 1/8 -4.8
58 1/8 -5.2
59 1/8 -5.8
60 1/8 -6.2
61 1/8 -8.2
62 1/9 -8.7
63 1/9 -9.1
64 1/9 -11.5
65 1/9 -9.9
66 1/9 -7.1
67 1/10 -4.9
68 2/12 -4.6
69 1/14 -6.8
--------------------------------------Russell leaves
70 7/16 +0.6


Looking at that, it's clear that both guys were having incredible impact on the defensive end. Wilt's best defensive years were 68, 72, 73, 67, 64. I'd say he was a better defender than 67-69 Russell in those years.

It seems weird that recently you've been trying to convince people that Wilt was every bit the defender Russell was (you're stance on the matter has grown increasingly aggressive). The important thing to realize is that Wilt doesn't have to be a better defender - or as good - in order to be a better player. Wilt was considerably better on offense, and it's the combination of offense and defense that counts. I think most people would agree that if you factor in offense and defense, Wilt > Russell.

[LAZERUSS]

Individual defensive win shares are worthless, if anything they're less than worthless. Unfortunately the best we can do for perimeter defenders of that era is to just read about what was being said of them at the time. Guys like Sanders, Hondo, Sharman and K.C. were all great defenders, but so were guys like Thurmond, West, Wally, Attles, and Greer.

The question is, how much better is the first group defensively? Does that difference account for the difference in team defensive rating from one guy to the other.

Looking at Wilt first (negative is good)

Warriors


Year Rank Diff from Mean
59 3/8 -0.5
--------------------------------------Wilt joins
60 2/8 -3.3
61 3/8 -0.7
62 3/9 -0.6
63 5/9 +1.1
64 2/9 -5.6
65 3/9 -0.2 (38 games)
--------------------------------------Wilt leaves
66 3/9 +0.4


76ers


Year Rank Diff from Mean
64 7/9 -0.4
--------------------------------------Wilt joins
65 5/9 +1.1
66 2/9 -2.9
67 3/10 -1.8
68 1/12 -5.4
--------------------------------------Wilt leaves
69 6/14 -1.3


Lakers


Year Rank Diff from Mean
68 7/9 +0.4
--------------------------------------Wilt joins
69 8/14 -0.3
70 4/14 -0.5
71 8/17 -1.3
72 2/17 -8.76
73 3/17 -8.58
--------------------------------------Wilt leaves
74 7/17 -3.03


And then Russell

Celtics


Year Rank Diff from Mean
56 6/8 +1.5
--------------------------------------Russell joins
57 1/8 -4.8
58 1/8 -5.2
59 1/8 -5.8
60 1/8 -6.2
61 1/8 -8.2
62 1/9 -8.7
63 1/9 -9.1
64 1/9 -11.5
65 1/9 -9.9
66 1/9 -7.1
67 1/10 -4.9
68 2/12 -4.6
69 1/14 -6.8
--------------------------------------Russell leaves
70 7/16 +0.6


Looking at that, it's clear that both guys were having incredible impact on the defensive end. Wilt's best defensive years were 68, 72, 73, 67, 64. I'd say he was a better defender than 67-69 Russell in those years.

It seems weird that recently you've been trying to convince people that Wilt was every bit the defender Russell was (you're stance on the matter has grown increasingly aggressive). The important thing to realize is that Wilt doesn't have to be a better defender - or as good - in order to be a better player. Wilt was considerably better on offense, and it's the combination of offense and defense that counts. I think most people would agree that if you factor in offense and defense, Wilt > Russell.

I wouldn't argue with Russell as the GOAT defensive player. And you pretty much summed up my take as well. Chamberlain had more impact from '67 thru '69.

There was no question that Russell covered the entire floor much more than Wilt (or anyone else for that matter.)

Still, those numbers are TEAM numbers, and the fact was, Hondo, KC Jones, and especially Satch Sanders were considered the best defensive players at their respective positions for the majority of the decade of the 60's.

And you really can't Boston's '70 team, since Russell left after the draft, and they didn't have a replacement center. It didn't take long for Cowens to lead Boston back to glory, though. By his 72-73 season, the Celtics had an all-time best 68-14 record, and then would win two titles in the next three years.

BTW, I have Russell winning the MVP in '61, '63, and '65. Was he the best player in the league in those years? Nope. And Wilt should have won the MVP in '62 and '64, and really, he was the best player in the league in '69, as well.

Nor do I have a problem with KAJ winning it in '72. He was the best player in the league, and deserved it, ...but if Russell were to easily beat out Wilt in '62, then what changed in the voting from '62 to '72?

Same with KAJ's '76 MVP. If he deserved the award in '76, what changed in '63 and then in '76?


In any case, Russell has a case for GOAT, and is #5 on my all-time list. But to be honest, any of those would be interchangeable (Wilt, MJ, Magic, Kareem, and Russell.)


Oh, and not that you probably care, but you are also on my short list for respected posters here.

:cheers:

[dankok8]

I agree there are inconsistencies in voting... I mean it doesn't make sense for 1960 Wilt to win MVP but for 1962 Wilt not to. He did play better defense in his rookie year but still his offensive production was much much worse. I would have given Russell the MVP in 1960 and Wilt in 1962. 1964 is a toss up between Wilt and Oscar but I might lean to the Big O because Cince won 7 more games.

Anyways though Russell was the GOAT on defense and better than Wilt on that end. Cowens was worse than Kareem on defense. Also the gap in wins in favor of Russell (58-31) was much greater than the gap in favor of Cowens (54-40). I don't really see much of a parallel between 1963 and 1976 to be honest. 1976 Kareem had a much better case for MVP than 1963 Wilt.

The data posted by DatAsh is incredible... Wilt had four elite defensive years in 1964, 1968, 1972, and 1973. Russell was elite in all thirteen of his really. 1964 he was just bonkers. :bowdown:

If you compare them year by year defensively I'd only give Wilt a slight edge over Russell in 1968. Russell has a slight edge in 1967 and a very clear edge for the entire span from 1960-1966 and 1969.

[feyki]

That was close race . Doesn't matter . Cowens was as good as Kareem and Erving at that year.

Btw , Cowens was most underrated defensive player with Ewing in nba history . And he had great playmaking and solid rebounding .

[jongib369]

I can't believe they awarded Kareem the MVP in 76 when the Lakers were 40-42 and didn't even make the playoffs. Dave Cowens clearly should have been the MVP that year. Was he as dominate as Kareem? No, but there are a lot of players who dominate on losing teams but don't receive the MVP. Either way it was probably Cowens best season and he actually led the Celtics to 54-28 record and then eventual champions. Dave Cowens is easily the most underrated Center there has been. Nobody talks about him.
Random note, from games Ive seen of him Cowens is surprisingly Quick... IDT he'd have trouble "adjusting" at all

[jongib369]

Cowens has said he actually enjoyed playing against Wilt. Like Shaq, Wilt didn't like to go outside of the paint to guard him. Not that he couldn't, anyone who's spent 10 minutes watching Wilt would know he did.

[Lebron23]

I can't believe they awarded Kareem the MVP in 76 when the Lakers were 40-42 and didn't even make the playoffs. Dave Cowens clearly should have been the MVP that year. Was he as dominate as Kareem? No, but there are a lot of players who dominate on losing teams but don't receive the MVP. Either way it was probably Cowens best season and he actually led the Celtics to 54-28 record and then eventual champions. Dave Cowens is easily the most underrated Center there has been. Nobody talks about him.

In todays NBA MVP Voting Dave Cowens would definitely be the league's MVP because Kareem missed the playoffs.

[Roundball_Rock]

Cowens had 4 HOF on his team. Kareem was traded to a 30 win team that gave up an all-star, a 16/11 center, the #2 and #8 picks to acquire him. So you are looking at a 20-25 win caliber roster that he inherited. He clearly was the best player in the league. Put Cowens on the Lakers and what happens?

Kareem did not miss the playoffs. The Los Angeles Lakers did. This isn't boxing.

[Whoah10115]

Cowens had 4 HOF on his team. Kareem was traded to a 30 win team that gave up an all-star, a 16/11 center, the #2 and #8 picks to acquire him. So you are looking at a 20-25 win caliber roster that he inherited. He clearly was the best player in the league. Put Cowens on the Lakers and what happens?

Kareem did not miss the playoffs. The Los Angeles Lakers did. This isn't boxing.

No one is saying he missed it like he didn't get it done. It's being said in the context of his winning MVP and people evaluating the details and the criteria.

[Roundball_Rock]

No one is saying he missed it like he didn't get it done. It's being said in the context of his winning MVP and people evaluating the details and the criteria.

There is no criteria.

[Whoah10115]

There is no criteria.

How is there no criteria?

[Roundball_Rock]

How is there no criteria?

The NBA never set forth a criteria nor did the media. So it varies from voter to voter, from year to year and leads to the incessant debates each year (probably the way the NBA and media want it--NBA MVP is debated more than MVP in any other sport). If it was a best player award, which is what it should be IMO, then we know Giannis would win it this year.

The voters were even different. When KAJ won players voted, not the media. This led to some inconsistencies between Wilt/Russell in MVP and all-NBA 1st team, for example.

[Whoah10115]

The NBA never set forth a criteria nor did the media. So it varies from voter to voter, from year to year and leads to the incessant debates each year (probably the way the NBA and media want it--NBA MVP is debated more than MVP in any other sport). If it was a best player award, which is what it should be IMO, then we know Giannis would win it this year.

The voters were even different. When KAJ won players voted, not the media. This led to some inconsistencies between Wilt/Russell in MVP and all-NBA 1st team, for example.

I'm not saying official criteria. I'm talking about the individual's take. That's something people always take into consideration.