Tim Duncan VS Bill Walton

[jongib369]

http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/9500/Tim-Duncan---9504.jpg





21pts/20rebs/10asts/8blks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nejQMtkyLgY





VS




http://oi43.tinypic.com/rkxah0.jpg


1977 Finals: 20pts & 23rebs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmxRIEyBiXo


Both healthy/prime who was the better player? What did the one player you rank lower do better than the other? What are similarities you notice etc etc

[jongib369]

also does your answer change depending on the era you place them in?(Rule differences)

[1987_Lakers]

Both top 5 big men all time in terms of peak play. Both elite defenders, Walton was a slightly better rebounder and a better passer, while Duncan was a better scorer in the low post.

In terms of basketball IQ, Duncan and Walton are top 3 all time along with Bill Russell (Among big men).

If I was developing a team of superstars I would take Walton for his unselfishness and insane passing, if I had a team full of role players I would probably take Duncan. I have said that my all-time starting 5 would be...

'77 Walton
'86 Bird
'13 LeBron
'91 Jordan
'87 Magic

[D-Wade316]

Duncan. No contest.

[ThaRegul8r]

Both top 5 big men all time in terms of peak play. Both elite defenders, Walton was a slightly better rebounder and a better passer, while Duncan was a better scorer in the low post.

In terms of basketball IQ, Duncan and Walton are top 3 all time along with Bill Russell (Among big men).

If I was developing a team of superstars I would take Walton for his unselfishness and insane passing, if I had a team full of role players I would probably take Duncan. I have said that my all-time starting 5 would be...

'77 Walton
'86 Bird
'13 LeBron
'91 Jordan
'87 Magic

I have Walton and Magic together on the same team as well. I like that pairing.

[jongib369]

I have Walton and Magic together on the same team as well. I like that pairing.
C-Wilt
PF-Walton
SF-Bird
SG-Robertson
PG-Magic

Dat passing O_O

(Idk how well Oscar and Magic would work together though)

[Breezy]

So I was listening to a Bill simmons podcast a few months ago and he had Bob Ryan on. a sports writer from Boston who had been covering the league for 40 years. Listening to him talk about other players I didn't get the impression that he had generational or regional bias based on several comments, one of which was telling simmons that Bryant was one of the very few people who he felt had mastered the game after Simmons tried to argue the opposite. This guy said something stunning to me. He said that if he was assembling a team and his life depended on the outcome, and he could cherry pick any player out of the history. He would take a prime Bill Walton 1st overall.

This kind of shocked me because while I knew he was good I have never heard anyone say something like that. I'm only 30 so I wasn't alive when Walton was doing his thing with the Blazers so I went and dug up all the stats, footage, articles and commentary I could.

This is all a long roundabout way to say: Walton by a mile. Which is not to say Timmy isn't great. (I'd take him over kobe or shaq) But Bill Walton was on another level.

[get these NETS]

I think TD led Spurs in scoring, rebounding,assists, and blocks on the road to the ring against the NETS

not sure if that's been done before and it was a team with 3 future HOFers

[JMT]

Peak? Though it was painfully short, Walton was the most dominant player in the league at his peak. I don't know that that's ever been the consensus regarding Duncan.

He controlled games at both ends of the floor due to the all-round skills he possessed. At his best, one of the more remarkable players you could ever hope to see.

And while Duncan...who is incredible...played with HOFers throughout his career, Walton won a title (and was on the way to a second) with a team whose next best player was either Maurice Lucas or Lionel Hollins.

Walton.

[stanlove1111]

So I was listening to a Bill simmons podcast a few months ago and he had Bob Ryan on. a sports writer from Boston who had been covering the league for 40 years. Listening to him talk about other players I didn't get the impression that he had generational or regional bias based on several comments, one of which was telling simmons that Bryant was one of the very few people who he felt had mastered the game after Simmons tried to argue the opposite. This guy said something stunning to me. He said that if he was assembling a team and his life depended on the outcome, and he could cherry pick any player out of the history. He would take a prime Bill Walton 1st overall.

This kind of shocked me because while I knew he was good I have never heard anyone say something like that. I'm only 30 so I wasn't alive when Walton was doing his thing with the Blazers so I went and dug up all the stats, footage, articles and commentary I could.

This is all a long roundabout way to say: Walton by a mile. Which is not to say Timmy isn't great. (I'd take him over kobe or shaq) But Bill Walton was on another level.


Walton was that good..When he was at his best he was the best rebounder,passer, and defender in the league. His weak Portland team dominated the league when he was in the lineup and were awful without him. Maybe the most valuabl player ever.


A also saw Chick Hearns pick him over Wilt,Jabbar, and Russel..

[ThaRegul8r]

So I was listening to a Bill simmons podcast a few months ago and he had Bob Ryan on. a sports writer from Boston who had been covering the league for 40 years. Listening to him talk about other players I didn't get the impression that he had generational or regional bias based on several comments, one of which was telling simmons that Bryant was one of the very few people who he felt had mastered the game after Simmons tried to argue the opposite. This guy said something stunning to me. He said that if he was assembling a team and his life depended on the outcome, and he could cherry pick any player out of the history. He would take a prime Bill Walton 1st overall.

This kind of shocked me because while I knew he was good I have never heard anyone say something like that. I'm only 30 so I wasn't alive when Walton was doing his thing with the Blazers so I went and dug up all the stats, footage, articles and commentary I could.

Bob Ryan's said that for some time now.

Bob Ryan: [I]If Earth were faced with a one-game, winner-take-all basketball game against an alien invader, the loser going into servitude for eternity, my first pick for our squad would be a healthy -- I said healthy -- Bill Walton, the ultimate control tower at both ends of the floor. Frankly, it

[DCL]

never saw prime walton when he looked like werewolf

[Shade8780]

That Walton picture has to be the gayest pics I've ever seen.

[get these NETS]

hyperbole about walton


very skilled big man, but hyperbole


any great white player somehow someway gets the "best ever" tag attached to his name


how would walton defend tim duncan?

[cuad]

If health ain't a thing, it's Bill Walton, but it's close. Otherwise, it's Duncan.

[stanlove1111]

hyperbole about walton


very skilled big man, but hyperbole


any great white player somehow someway gets the "best ever" tag attached to his name


how would walton defend tim duncan?

Good point..I guess from 76-78 Portland went something like 109-35 with Walton in the lineup and 17-35 without him because he was white...


He didn't dominate at UCLA either it was just that he was white..

[get these NETS]

Good point..I guess from 76-78 Portland went something like 109-35 with Walton in the lineup and 17-35 without him because he was white...


He didn't dominate at UCLA either it was just that he was white..
yeah

and Lew Alcindor dominated at UCLA and then as KAJ won 5 mvp in the 1970s and retired with multiple rings

and Dream had peak run where he won ringS, mvp and dpoy

but Walton is the "best"


and he would be able to guard Tim Duncan HOW?

[Odinn]

I'd say Bill Walton is overhyped. He wasn't better than Kareem in his title year. He wasn't better than 1994 Hakeem. He wasn't better than 2000 Shaq. He wasn't better 1967 Wilt. I highly doubt he was better than 1962 Russell or 1983 Moses.

I watched some of Walton in 1977 NBA Finals. Surely he was spectacular. But as for scroing-wise, he wasn't capable of scoring on sheer will.

The big men I'd choose over 1977 Walton is;
2000 Shaq
1994 Hakeem
1967 Wilt
1977 Kareem
2003 Duncan
1962 Russell
and probably 1983 Moses too.

[colts19]

I'd say Bill Walton is overhyped. He wasn't better than Kareem in his title year. He wasn't better than 1994 Hakeem. He wasn't better than 2000 Shaq. He wasn't better 1967 Wilt. I highly doubt he was better than 1962 Russell or 1983 Moses.

I watched some of Walton in 1977 NBA Finals. Surely he was spectacular. But as for scroing-wise, he wasn't capable of scoring on sheer will.

The big men I'd choose over 1977 Walton is;
2000 Shaq
1994 Hakeem
1967 Wilt
1977 Kareem
2003 Duncan
1962 Russell
and probably 1983 Moses too.

I don't think putting Walton in the conversation with the list of players you have makes him overhyped. I think it shows how great he was.

Watching Walton play in his time was a true joy to watch. If you love basketball in it's purest form, thats what it was.

[Odinn]

I don't think putting Walton in the conversation with the list of players you have makes him overhyped. I think it shows how great he was.

Watching Walton play in his time was a true joy to watch. If you love basketball in it's purest form, thats what it was.
What I meant by overhyped is claiming he was the best low-post player ever. Not being in the conversation with the listed players.

Also, I enjoyed his game of course. His fundamental is in the conversation of the g.o.a.t. fundamental.

[ThaRegul8r]

What I meant by overhyped is claiming he was the best low-post player ever.

I've never once seen anyone claim Walton was "the best low-post player" ever. Not one poster in this thread made that claim either (as a matter of fact, the only poster who even mentioned the low post at all said Duncan was better), so you just pulled that out of your rear end.

What I've seen is people saying he was the best all-around center (and since people like invoking what I call the "Jack of All Trades" criteria, one would think this would mean something), GOAT passing center, and that, as John Wooden said, if you graded all the centers on fundamentals, Walton would come out with the best score.

[kaiteng]

Walton could have been Duncan before Duncan.

[Bigsmoke]

it feels weird to compare a player that scored 6,000 career points to one that scored... 24,000?

[Breezy]

it feels weird to compare a player that scored 6,000 career points to one that scored... 24,000?

People can't seem to untangle career performance in their minds from peak play. But if Jordan had been shot dead after 91 would he have been a worse basketball player? Or just a diminished career retrospective?

[Anaximandro1]

hyperbole about walton


very skilled big man, but hyperbole
Advanced stats are heavily in Duncan's favor.

Playoffs Advanced (2003 Duncan vs 1977 Walton)


PER - Duncan 28.4 Walton 19.7

OWS - Duncan 3.3 Walton 0.8

DWS - Duncan 2.7 Walton 1.8

WS - Duncan 5.9 Walton 2.5

WS/48- Duncan 27.9 Walton 16.2

eFG% - Duncan 52.9 Walton 50.7

TS% - Duncan 57.7 Walton 52.7

AST% - Duncan 25.5 Walton 19.4

ORB% - Duncan 10.7 Walton 8.1

DRB% - Walton 31.8 Duncan 28.3

TRB%- Walton 20.3 Duncan 19.8

BLK% - Duncan 5.8 Walton 4.7

STL% - Walton 1.2 Duncan 0.8


and he would be able to guard Tim Duncan HOW?
Duncan would DESTROY Walton


2003 Playoffs - Duncan's last 15 games (Spurs won the title)

27.5 pt,16.1 rb,5.4 as,3.5 blk on 54.3% FG (Spurs averaged 95.7 pt)



G4 03 WCSF 36/9/5

G5 03 WCSF 27/14/5/1

G6 03 WCSF 37/16/4/2

G1 03 WCF 40/15/7/1

G2 03 WCF 32/15/5/3

G3 03 WCF 34/24/6/6

G4 03 WCF 21/20/7/4

G5 03 WCF 23/15/6/1

G6 03 WCF 18/11/4/3

G1 03 Finals 32/20/6/7

G2 03 Finals 19/12/3/3

G3 03 Finals 21/16/7/3

G4 03 Finals 23/17/2/7

G5 03 Finals 29/17/4/4

G6 03 Finals 21/20/10/8



And while Duncan...who is incredible...played with HOFers throughout his career, Walton won a title (and was on the way to a second) with a team whose next best player was either Maurice Lucas or Lionel Hollins.
:oldlol:

Playoffs - 1977 Blazers (scored 107.4 PPG)

Lucas 21.2/9.9/4.2/1.2 --FG 51.9% PER 19.0 WS 2.6

Walton 18.2/15.2/5.5/3.4 --FG 50.7% PER 19.7 WS 2.5

Hollins 17.3/2.7/4.5 --FG 41.7% PER 13.3 WS 0.6

Gross 14.1/5.9/4.2 --FG 59.7% PER 18.7 WS 2.5

Twardzik 10.9/1.7/2.8 --FG 59.1% PER 14.3 WS 1.1

Davis 10.5/2.1/3.3 --FG 48.9% PER 13.6 WS 1.0

Playoffs - 2003 Spurs (scored 94.8 PPG)

Duncan 24.7/15.4/5.3/3.3 --FG 52.9% PER 28.4 WS 5.9

Parker 14.7/2.8/3.5 --FG 40.3% PER 11.9 WS 1.1

Jackson 12.8/4.1/2.7 --FG 41.4% PER 12.0 WS 1.3

Ginobili 9.4/3.8/2.9 --FG 38.6% PER 15.0 WS 2.1

Robinson 7.8/6.6/0.9/1.3 --FG 54.2% PER 17.7 WS 2.3

Rose 9.3/5.8/1.0 FG 41.9% --PER 13.3 WS 1.2

[1987_Lakers]

I'd say Bill Walton is overhyped. He wasn't better than Kareem in his title year. He wasn't better than 1994 Hakeem. He wasn't better than 2000 Shaq. He wasn't better 1967 Wilt. I highly doubt he was better than 1962 Russell or 1983 Moses.

I watched some of Walton in 1977 NBA Finals. Surely he was spectacular. But as for scroing-wise, he wasn't capable of scoring on sheer will.

The big men I'd choose over 1977 Walton is;
2000 Shaq
1994 Hakeem
1967 Wilt
1977 Kareem
2003 Duncan
1962 Russell
and probably 1983 Moses too.

Taking '83 Malone over '77 Walton would be a huge mistake.:oldlol:

[Odinn]

Taking '83 Malone over '77 Walton would be a huge mistake.:oldlol:
When I mention '83 Moses, I know you will throw ignorant and idiotic something on it. You have met my expectations. Congrats.:applause:

[stanlove1111]

yeah

and Lew Alcindor dominated at UCLA and then as KAJ won 5 mvp in the 1970s and retired with multiple rings

and Dream had peak run where he won ringS, mvp and dpoy

but Walton is the "best"


and he would be able to guard Tim Duncan HOW?


I guess you missed Portland's record with Walton in the lineup and a title with Portland's record without him in the lineup.

Nobody has ever made that big a difference.

Calling Walton the best when healthy is a legit opinion. Others can have other opinions, but saying its just because he is white is idiotic.

[stanlove1111]

Advanced stats are heavily in Duncan's favor.

Playoffs Advanced (2003 Duncan vs 1977 Walton)



Duncan would DESTROY Walton


2003 Playoffs - Duncan's last 15 games (Spurs won the title)

27.5 pt,16.1 rb,5.4 as,3.5 blk on 54.3% FG (Spurs averaged 95.7 pt)





:oldlol:

Playoffs - 1977 Blazers (scored 107.4 PPG)


Playoffs - 2003 Spurs (scored 94.8 PPG)


Do you clowns ever get tired of stats like this..Walton like Magic and Bird was much more then stats.

When I see someone just spouting stats I think am talking to a 13 year ol who found a stats book but knows nothing at all about basketball. It really gets old.

[DatAsh]

Gotta go with Walton on this was one. Peak Walton was the better rebounder, passer, and defender. Duncan was perhaps a slightly better scorer.

[DatAsh]

and he would be able to guard Tim Duncan HOW?

What a silly question. How would Hakeem Olajuwon guard Tim Duncan? How would David Robinson? Nate Thurmond?

[lucky001]

It's walton by a hair. But you had to remove bill's biggest weakness to get there. If you replaced Duncan's middling athleticism with say, shaq's, or kg even, and did the comparison again, it would be a massacre.

[get these NETS]

What a silly question. How would Hakeem Olajuwon guard Tim Duncan? How would David Robinson? Nate Thurmond?


looks at thread TITLE


laughs


watches video clip of Duncan in finals...that Walton is calling


sees where TD catches the ball and operates...low blocks, high post...top of key

notes that WALTON says "how do you guard Tim Duncan?..a man so skilled , so versatile..so big?"

laughs again

[DatAsh]

looks at thread TITLE


laughs


watches video clip of Duncan in finals...that Walton is calling


sees where TD catches the ball and operates...low blocks, high post...top of key

notes that WALTON says "how do you guard Tim Duncan?..a man so skilled , so versatile..so big?"

laughs again

So basically what you've got is a false assumption and a meaningless one-off comment made by Walton, the likes of which have also been made by Pippen, Russell, Bowen, ect.. in reference to players they themselves were more than capable of guarding.

That's why you're laughing? Forgive me if I fail to see the humor.

Bottom line is, Walton would be the toughest defender Duncan's ever faced in his career, that much is obvious. There's maybe 2-4 guys in the history of the league that could do a better job, so you could essentially ask this with anyone.

You've essentially asked "one of the greatest defenders in NBA history would be able to guard Tim Duncan HOW?". You don't see how silly that is? He handled Kareem just fine, and would do the same with Duncan.

[allball]

I saw Walton take down my Sixers in the 77 finals and the man got my ultimate respect. Walton wasn't 100% healthy then. Most dominant college big man to ever play. Great passer, rebounder, defender. Super smart player.

[get these NETS]

So basically what you've got is a false assumption and a meaningless one-off comment made by Walton, the likes of which have also been made by Pippen, Russell, Bowen, ect.. in reference to players they themselves were more than capable of guarding.

That's why you're laughing? Forgive me if I fail to see the humor.

Bottom line is, Walton would be the toughest defender Duncan's ever faced in his career, that much is obvious. There's maybe 2-4 guys in the history of the league that could do a better job, so you could essentially ask this with anyone.

You've essentially asked "one of the greatest defenders in NBA history would be able to guard Tim Duncan HOW?". You don't see how silly that is? He handled Kareem just fine, and would do the same with Duncan.

this is what I dug up about lakers/blazers wcf series 1977
Walton vs. Kareem head to head stats in the playoff series:1977

KAJ - 30.3 ppg, 16 rpg, 3.8 apg, 3.8 bpg, 60.8 FG%
Walton - 19.3 ppg, 14.8 rpg, 5.8 apg, 2.3 bpg, 51 FG%.

[JMT]

this is what I dug up about lakers/blazers wcf series 1977
Walton vs. Kareem head to head stats in the playoff series:1977

KAJ - 30.3 ppg, 16 rpg, 3.8 apg, 3.8 bpg, 60.8 FG%
Walton - 19.3 ppg, 14.8 rpg, 5.8 apg, 2.3 bpg, 51 FG%.

And anyone that watched the series, as opposed to looking at 35 year old boxscores, will tell you that Walton's presence on both ends of the floor was the difference in the series.

Vs the 77 Lakers you let Kareem get his and picked on the other 4, especially their guards who were rendered invisible by the Blazers team defense, anchored by the Big Redhead.

[get these NETS]

And anyone that watched the series, as opposed to looking at 35 year old boxscores, will tell you that Walton's presence on both ends of the floor was the difference in the series.

Vs the 77 Lakers you let Kareem get his and picked on the other 4, especially their guards who were rendered invisible by the Blazers team defense, anchored by the Big Redhead.


objective person might mention that lakers had best record in league and lost 2 starters before or during the WCF


as a person who WATCHED the series...interesting that you don't bring this up

or that the injuries were to the ball handlers of the lakers.

hardly think that walton entered the games thinking "LET Kareem get his"...KAJ just took it to him, that's all...

ten more points, higher shooting %.. 2 more rebounds, more blocks, 2 fewer assists


kaj won the battle, but the team lost the war

[TheTenth]

And anyone that watched the series, as opposed to looking at 35 year old boxscores, will tell you that Walton's presence on both ends of the floor was the difference in the series.

Vs the 77 Lakers you let Kareem get his and picked on the other 4, especially their guards who were rendered invisible by the Blazers team defense, anchored by the Big Redhead.
I have no dog in this "fight" but I have to say your argument here is pretty weak. Personal testimonies are always subject to bias and can even be persuaded differently after the fact.

[JMT]

objective person might mention that lakers had best record in league and lost 2 starters before or during the WCF


as a person who WATCHED the series...interesting that you don't bring this up

or that the injuries were to the ball handlers of the lakers.



It's not germaine to the discussion. In those playoffs, the plan was simple and it worked beautifully.

[Odinn]

And anyone that watched the series, as opposed to looking at 35 year old boxscores, will tell you that Walton's presence on both ends of the floor was the difference in the series.

Vs the 77 Lakers you let Kareem get his and picked on the other 4, especially their guards who were rendered invisible by the Blazers team defense, anchored by the Big Redhead.
Kareem dominated Walton and Walton's supporting cast shitted on KAJ's supporting cast. End of story.

[JMT]

I have no dog in this "fight" but I have to say your argument here is pretty weak. Personal testimonies are always subject to bias and can even be persuaded differently after the fact.

There's also that school of thought that says figures lie and liars figure.

[Legends66NBA7]

Footage of Game 2 (highlights) of Abdul-Jabbar vs Walton:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coHMKlx7Was&feature=related

Game 4 (12 videos in total):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIDn1niGCag

Make of it what you will, especially Game 4.

[TheTenth]

There's also that school of thought that says figures lie and liars figure.
Very witty but incorrect in this case.

[LA Lakers]

Fact, when Bill Walton was healthy at UCLA and in Portland he was one of the 3 greatest centers to ever play the game. Only 2 or 3 other guys had his ability to dominate using size strength and skillset. Wilt, Kareem, Walton. My Dad remembers watching Kareem drop 50 on Walton and then later watching Walton drop 50 on Kareem. That's when you know you on another level of hoops.

[Legends66NBA7]

My Dad remembers watching Kareem drop 50 on Walton and then later watching Walton drop 50 on Kareem. That's when you know you on another level of hoops.

Which games were these ?

[TheTenth]

Fact, when Bill Walton was healthy at UCLA and in Portland he was one of the 3 greatest centers to ever play the game. Only 2 or 3 other guys had his ability to dominate using size strength and skillset. Wilt, Kareem, Walton. My Dad remembers watching Kareem drop 50 on Walton and then later watching Walton drop 50 on Kareem. That's when you know you on another level of hoops.
Any good documentaries of Walton? I have a DVD set with guards/forwards/centers of the NBA which had a Walton segment but it wasn't much of a source of knowledge.

[colts19]

In the Portland vs La series, the key was that Walton's defense in the middle allowed the Portland guards to go out and put great pressure on the LAs guards and that was the difference in the series. Kareem had the better stats, but Walton presence was the difference in the series.

Walton when healthy was better and a lot better than Duncan.

[Bigsmoke]

who's better? Just ask this guy
http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h372/pinchegato323/SOUTH%20PARK/timmy_w7cjzf1.gif (http://media.photobucket.com/user/pinchegato323/media/SOUTH%20PARK/timmy_w7cjzf1.gif.html)

[JMT]

Very witty but incorrect in this case.

So you were watching the NBA in 1977?

Listen, there's no question Duncan has had the superior career. Fan of both players. A shame more modern bigs haven't focused on learning and playing the game as these two have.

But for as long (or short) as it lasted, I'll take Walton in his prime over prime Duncan any day, any time. Twice on Sunday.

[DatAsh]

So you were watching the NBA in 1977?

Listen, there's no question Duncan has had the superior career. Fan of both players. A shame more modern bigs haven't focused on learning and playing the game as these two have.

But for as long (or short) as it lasted, I'll take Walton in his prime over prime Duncan any day, any time. Twice on Sunday.

Walton at his peak was better than Kareem at his(they peaked the same year), and I doubt you'd see many arguments for peak Duncan over peak Kareem.

Both of these guy's respective peaks were among the best ever, but Walton holds a clear edge in my opinion. He was the better rebounder, better defender, (much)better passer, and 90% the scorer that Duncan was.

[DatAsh]

this is what I dug up about lakers/blazers wcf series 1977
Walton vs. Kareem head to head stats in the playoff series:1977

KAJ - 30.3 ppg, 16 rpg, 3.8 apg, 3.8 bpg, 60.8 FG%
Walton - 19.3 ppg, 14.8 rpg, 5.8 apg, 2.3 bpg, 51 FG%.

For someone who's never watched a single game of that series, as they were with Hakeem and Shaq in 95, Wilt and Kareem in 72, Lebron and Durant 2 years ago, and Russell and Wilt in virtually any matchup, stats are a terrible measure of what actually happened on court.

Not that Walton absolutely outplayed Kareem, but by many accounts, it was a virtual draw. You wouldn't get that from looking at the stats.

[get these NETS]

It's not germaine to the discussion. In those playoffs, the plan was simple and it worked beautifully.

I'm sorry, thought we were having a basketball discussion.

Two starters being injured and not playing for the Lakers is not germaine to the discussion?

[TheTenth]

So you were watching the NBA in 1977?

Listen, there's no question Duncan has had the superior career. Fan of both players. A shame more modern bigs haven't focused on learning and playing the game as these two have.

But for as long (or short) as it lasted, I'll take Walton in his prime over prime Duncan any day, any time. Twice on Sunday.
Look in my personal (biased) opinion I think prime Walton is better than Duncan; but I try and remove myself from my own opinion. I just never understood why people put so much faith in their "eyewitness testimonies." It's the most flawed way to analyze a player and it is hardly evidence of Player A being better than Player B.


For someone who's never watched a single game of that series, as they were with Hakeem and Shaq in 95, Wilt and Kareem in 72, Lebron and Durant 2 years ago, and Russell and Wilt in virtually any matchup, stats are a terrible measure of what actually happened on court.

Not that Walton absolutely outplayed Kareem, but by many accounts, it was a virtual draw. You wouldn't get that from looking at the stats.
Or maybe the statistics drew a better picture than the "accounts" of what happened. In fact the statistics almost always back it up - Wilt's great statistics were reduced by Russell a great amount, Kareem's were reduced by Wilt likewise. Sometimes this "dethroning the giant" so to speak, or reducing the effectiveness of a great player can skew one's judgement to overrate the other player's performance. Sometimes it is devalued. The point is that statistics will paint a much better picture than any account - no matter the proximity to the event being witnessed. This is especially true when reading biographies of the athletes. ie: Player A thinks Player B is a lousy player because when he wrote the book, he hated him. Then when Player A likes Player B; that player is suddenly good again. These are probably really bad analogies :lol .

[LAZERUSS]

KAJ owned Walton in game one of the '77 WCF's. After that, it was basically a draw, but Walton made the key plays at the key moments.

A peak, motivated Kareem was better player at every aspect of the game than Walton, with the exception, and it is a big one, of blending with his teammates. Still, even in his '78 MVP season, he was injured late, and missed the last 1/4th of the season.

And by '79 Moses began to dominate the league. I don't think even a peak Walton was on his level, much less having a career even remotely close to him.

I loved Walton at UCLA. In fact, I rank his college career as the second greatest in history (behind Alcindor-KAJ.) And his '73 NCAA Final's game was the greatest ever played. But, no he was not on KAJ's level. I think Walton's peak is over-rated. He won a title in the weakest period of NBA champions ever ('75 thru '79), and even then it was on a 49-33 team. Granted, thy started out something like 50-10 the next year, but IMHO, '78 was the worst season, in terms of quality teams, in the decade of the 70's. A 44-38 team beat a 47-35 team in seven games for the title that year. I would argue that Washington's '75 team, which was swept by the 48-34 Warriors, were a far better team than their '78 championship team.

BTW, yes, KAJ had a 50 point game on Walton. But, no, Walton never approached anything close to that against KAJ.

[1987_Lakers]

A peak, motivated Kareem was better player at every aspect of the game than Walton.

This is simply false. In Kareem's 20 year career he never put up a higher TRB% than what Walton put up in 1977 and 1978, Walton was the better rebounder, even in his limited minutes off the bench with the Celtics in 1986 he averaged more rebounds than Kareem that year. Kareem was in no way in hell the passer Walton was and he was never the defensive anchor Walton was in 1977. Walton was a true defensive anchor, Kareem although he made a bunch of All-Defensive teams was often criticized for being a lazy defender, I don't think he should get a pass for that.


He won a title in the weakest period of NBA champions ever ('75 thru '79).

The NBA in 1977 in terms of competition was at its best since the early 70's considering the ABA and NBA merged that season.

[KG215]

This is simply false. In Kareem's 20 year career he never put up a higher TRB% than what Walton put up in 1977 and 1978, Walton was the better rebounder, even in his limited minutes off the bench with the Celtics in 1986 he averaged more rebounds than Kareem that year. Kareem was in no way in hell the passer Walton was and he was never the defensive anchor Walton was in 1977. Walton was a true defensive anchor, Kareem although he made a bunch of All-Defensive teams was often criticized for being a lazy defender, I don't think he should get a pass for that.



The NBA in 1977 in terms of competition was at its best since the early 70's considering the ABA and NBA merged that season.
Oh boy, you've done it now. Expect an incoming wave of walls of text.

Or, maybe not. Maybe he just saves those for anytime anyone remotely disparages Wilt.

[LAZERUSS]

This is simply false. In Kareem's 20 year career he never put up a higher TRB% than what Walton put up in 1977 and 1978, Walton was the better rebounder, even in his limited minutes off the bench with the Celtics in 1986 he average more rebounds than Kareem that year. Kareem was in no way in hell the passer Walton was and he was never the defensive anchor Walton was in 1977. Walton was a true defensive anchor, Kareem although he made a bunch of All-Defensive teams was often criticized for being a lazy defender, I don't think he should get a pass for that.



The NBA in 1977 in terms of competition was at its best since the early 70's considering the ABA and NBA merged that season.

I get so tired of that "TRB%" which basically rewards players like Walton and Rodman for playing 33 mpg, and punishes those that play 44+ mpg. Why? Because the reality is, a player's efficiency is bound to decline the more mpg he plays. There is a reason that most of the the best players today only play 40 mpg. Not only that, but multiply those 10 more mpg over the course of 82 games (of course, Walton never came close to 82 games in his short career...his high season was only 65 as a starter.) Once again, Walton's PEAK season was 34.8 mpg. Somehow Walton managed to play 39.7 mpg in that post-season. But, then again, his next best post-season of his career was at 24.5 mpg. Just ridiculous!

Sorry, but a peak Walton was a 34 mpg player, and then e had three more years around the 33 mpg mark. That was it.


KAJ was certainly not the greatest rebounder of his era, but he did win a rebound title. Furthermore, as you can read above, he outrebounded Walton in the '77 WCF's. And, in the '77 playoffs, KAJ led the post-season at 17.3 rpg, while your walton was at 15.2 rpg.

The ABA merger didn't make the league more competitive. They added more teams. Hell, the 75-76 season The year before the merger) was the most competitive in NBA history. With the exception of the Warriors, take a look at the ppg differentials on all the teams in the NBA. All within 3 ppg, and most within 2 ppg.


More teams does not make a more competitive NBA.

[Bigsmoke]

Why posters on ISH suck Bill Walton's dick so hard thinking that he had the greatest peak ever?

He won a title with a stacked team and then won some more as a backup. Good for him. Kareem, Shaq, Hakeem, and Wilt were all better in their primes than Bill. w

[ThaRegul8r]

Why posters on ISH suck Bill Walton's dick so hard thinking that he had the greatest peak ever?

I've never seen nor heard anyone claim Walton had the greatest peak ever.

Top 10 NBA Player Peaks of All-Time According to ISH (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=276556)


#1 Michael Jordan 90-93

#2 Shaquille O'Neal 99-02

#3 Wilt Chamberlain 65-68

#4 Hakeem Olajuwon 93-96

#5 Kobe Bryant 06-09

#6 LeBron James 09-12

#7 Larry Bird 84-87

#8 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 77-80

T9 Magic Johnson 87-90

T9 Bill Russell 62-65

T9 Bill Walton 77-78

And looks like ISH doesn't think he had the greatest peak ever.


Kareem, Shaq, Hakeem, and Wilt were all better in their primes than Bill.

Would you look at that! ISH thinks Kareem, Shaq, Hakeem and Wilt were better than Walton in their primes. That's why it always pays to actually look at the facts.

So what exactly was your point?

[1987_Lakers]

Kareem only averaged 2 more mpg than Walton in 1977, yet Walton averaged 1 more rpg than him. The next season in '78 Kareem played 3 more mpg than Walton and Walton still averaged more rebounds. This was Kareem at his peak BTW. Should Walton really be penalized for averaging more rebounds in less minutes?:oldlol:

And should we discredit Kareem's championship in 1971 as well considering the league added like 5 teams in a 3 year span by '71?

[LAZERUSS]

I realize that scoring, alone, is not always indicative of how the h2h went, but for the poster that claimed that Walton had a 50 point game on KAJ...sorry, not even close. His HIGH game against KAJ was 27 (and KAJ had 26 in that game.) Meawhile, KAJ had games, in which Walton played, in which he outscored him by marginsof 39-11, 48-12, and 50-7. I'm not sure how many minutes the two were on the court together, but I suspect that in the 50 and 48 point games, it was Walton who was taking the beating. KAJ had a history of "statement" games against his greatest rivals (excluding Moses, who generally shredded him.) In fact, KAJ was scoring about 25 ppg in the games against Walton's teams, when Walton did not play (which were many), but all of a sudden, when Walton was playing...pow, huge games.

Overall, I believe Walton outscored KAJ in five of their career h2h's, and none of those by a significant margin.

[LAZERUSS]

Kareem only averaged 2 more mpg than Walton in 1977, yet Walton averaged 1 more rpg than him. The next season in '78 Kareem played 3 more mpg than Walton and Walton still averaged more rebounds. This was Kareem at his peak BTW. Should Walton really be penalized for averaging more rebounds in less minutes?:oldlol:

And should we discredit Kareem's championship in 1971 as well considering the league added like 5 teams in a 3 year span by '71?

Kareem's peak rebounding season was in '76. He had a sharp decline after that, and was never at that level again.

So, no that was NOT a peak "rebounding" KAJ in '77 and '78. Furthermore, a PEAK Kareem was a better rebounder earlier in his career, albeit his "TRB%" didn't show it. The league had much better rebounders earlier in the 70's. Hell, guys like Paul Silas were among the rebounding leaders in the mid-70's.

If you want to know who UCLA's best rebounder in NBA history was, and usig your "TRB%"...it was probably Walton's backup with the Bruins, Swen Nater. Go ahead and look up his numbers.

And no, I don't discredit Milwaukee's unbelieveable title run in '71. They simply dominated the ENTIRE league. I don't see what your point was. The NBA "merged" with the ABA in '77, and added four more teams from a rapidly declining ABA, which more than made up for the influx of the ABA "stars." It was not like the league had "stacked" teams because of the merger. The league, as a whole, was just mediocre.

[fpliii]

Walton is very tough to evaluate. One of the strangest career shapes in NBA history. The following games seem to be out there:

77 Playoffs:

1977 BLAZERS VS BULLS G2
1977 BLAZERS VS BULLS G3
1977 BLAZERS VS NUGGETS G5
1977 BLAZERS VS LAKERS G2
1977 BLAZERS VS LAKERS G4

77 Finals:

1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G1
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G2
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G3
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G4
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G5
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G6

1977-1978 Regular Season:

1978.01.08 JAZZ VS BLAZERS
1978.02.12 BLAZERS VS NUGGETS
1978.02.26 BLAZERS VS BULLS

That's 14 games, by my count. There are some others, but his entire career really boils down to 76-77 and 77-78 before going down. I know nobody wants to hear about intangibles, things that don't show up in the box score, etc., but just watch as much of Walton as you can. He didn't make many mistakes, didn't take many unnecessary risks, and always seemed to make the right play. Great team player, very smart and active defender, incredible BBIQ.

I don't know how his peak stacks up (ISH had it fringe top 10, sportswriter Bob Ryan has it as GOAT among centers I believe), but I think if you put him against any great pivot, he'll mold his game and won't put you at a disadvantage. If he's healthy, you'll win a lot of games.

[ThaRegul8r]

I don't know how his peak stacks up (ISH had it fringe top 10, sportswriter Bob Ryan has it as GOAT among centers I believe), but I think if you put him against any great pivot, he'll mold his game and won't put you at a disadvantage.

You're correct. Ryan has Walton with the GOAT peak among centers, and would take Walton over anyone at the center position:

Bob Ryan: “If Earth were faced with a one-game, winner-take-all basketball game against an alien invader, the loser going into servitude for eternity, my first pick for our squad would be a healthy -- I said healthy -- Bill Walton, the ultimate control tower at both ends of the floor. Frankly, it’s a very easy call.” (Oct 30, 1996)



How I rank centers

Posted by Matt Pepin, Boston.com Staff June 3, 2011 01:14 PM

By Bob Ryan, Globe Columnist

Apropos my ranking of Shaquille O'Neal vying for the fourth spot on the all-time roster of NBA centers along with Moses Malone, and my assertion that no one could reasonably argue against Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain and Kareem Abdul-jabbar being the top three (in that order), a few people have asked about my well-known belief that Bill Walton was the greatest center we've ever had.

For those who don't know, here is my premise:

If Planet Earth were involved in a winner-take-all one-game basketball playoff against an alien invader, the loser to go into servitude for all eternity, my first pick of anyone who has ever played basketball in our known world would be a healthy Bill Walton. He was the most complete center ever, the perfect control tower through which to run both your offense and your defense.

But a career? Well, of course not. Injury prevented him from having the career he deserved. But for one game, I think he's the most important player who has ever laced up a sneaker.

So when I name the all-time centers I put him over on the side.

http://www.boston.com/sports/columnists/bob_ryan_blog/2011/06/how_i_rank_cent.html

[fpliii]

[QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]You're correct. Ryan has Walton with the GOAT peak among centers, and would take Walton over anyone at the center position:

Bob Ryan: [I]

[LAZERUSS]

Walton is very tough to evaluate. One of the strangest career shapes in NBA history. The following games seem to be out there:

77 Playoffs:

1977 BLAZERS VS BULLS G2
1977 BLAZERS VS BULLS G3
1977 BLAZERS VS NUGGETS G5
1977 BLAZERS VS LAKERS G2
1977 BLAZERS VS LAKERS G4

77 Finals:

1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G1
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G2
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G3
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G4
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G5
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G6

1977-1978 Regular Season:

1978.01.08 JAZZ VS BLAZERS
1978.02.12 BLAZERS VS NUGGETS
1978.02.26 BLAZERS VS BULLS

That's 14 games, by my count. There are some others, but his entire career really boils down to 76-77 and 77-78 before going down. I know nobody wants to hear about intangibles, things that don't show up in the box score, etc., but just watch as much of Walton as you can. He didn't make many mistakes, didn't take many unnecessary risks, and always seemed to make the right play. Great team player, very smart and active defender, incredible BBIQ.

I don't know how his peak stacks up (ISH had it fringe top 10, sportswriter Bob Ryan has it as GOAT among centers I believe), but I think if you put him against any great pivot, he'll mold his game and won't put you at a disadvantage. If he's healthy, you'll win a lot of games.

Here are highlights from his greatest college game...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAnC4cBXAuY

His passing was exceptional in that game, as well. Of course, Greg Lee's passing was pretty good, too.

[Warners0]

Advanced stats are heavily in Duncan's favor.

Playoffs Advanced (2003 Duncan vs 1977 Walton)



Duncan would DESTROY Walton


2003 Playoffs - Duncan's last 15 games (Spurs won the title)

27.5 pt,16.1 rb,5.4 as,3.5 blk on 54.3% FG (Spurs averaged 95.7 pt)





:oldlol:

Playoffs - 1977 Blazers (scored 107.4 PPG)


Playoffs - 2003 Spurs (scored 94.8 PPG)

Thank you I thought I was losing my mind for a second.

It really gets me upset how people overrate Parker and Ginobili. Tim Duncan has a great argument for being the best player ever.

[ThaRegul8r]

Tim Duncan has a great argument for being the best player ever.

No, he doesn't.

I like Duncan

[LAZERUSS]

This is simply false. In Kareem's 20 year career he never put up a higher TRB% than what Walton put up in 1977 and 1978, Walton was the better rebounder, even in his limited minutes off the bench with the Celtics in 1986 he averaged more rebounds than Kareem that year. Kareem was in no way in hell the passer Walton was and he was never the defensive anchor Walton was in 1977. Walton was a true defensive anchor, Kareem although he made a bunch of All-Defensive teams was often criticized for being a lazy defender, I don't think he should get a pass for that.



The NBA in 1977 in terms of competition was at its best since the early 70's considering the ABA and NBA merged that season.

The ABA "merger" has been highly over-rated. In the ABA's last season, 75-76, two of their nine teams folder early in the year, and another, Virginia, folded at the end of t.

And takng a closer look...just how many bona-fide star players switched to the NBA after that season? Dr. J, Dan Issel, Artis Gilmore, Davd Thompson, and to a lessor extent, Maurice Lucas, Bobby Jones, and Swen Nater. That was it.

Dr. J, and Caldwell Jones, joined a Sixer team that had gone 46-36 the year before, and they "jumped" to a 50-32 record. That this team made the Finals is overrated too. They faced a 49-33 Blazer team in the Finals, that had gone 37-45 the year before with Walton missing his usual 30 games. And even with a healthier Walton, and Maurice Lucas, they only improved to 49-33.

And yet we are supposed to believe that the "merger" brought about significant changes? Pure folly.

[Duncan21formvp]

Both top 5 big men all time in terms of peak play. Both elite defenders, Walton was a slightly better rebounder and a better passer, while Duncan was a better scorer in the low post.

In terms of basketball IQ, Duncan and Walton are top 3 all time along with Bill Russell (Among big men).

If I was developing a team of superstars I would take Walton for his unselfishness and insane passing, if I had a team full of role players I would probably take Duncan. I have said that my all-time starting 5 would be...

'77 Walton
'86 Bird
'13 LeBron
'91 Jordan
'87 Magic

1977 Walton wasn't anywhere near as good as 2003 Duncan.

[La Frescobaldi]

Why posters on ISH suck Bill Walton's dick so hard thinking that he had the greatest peak ever?

He won a title with a stacked team and then won some more as a backup. Good for him. Kareem, Shaq, Hakeem, and Wilt were all better in their primes than Bill. w
So out of all the centers to ever play in the NBA, I see you have Bill Walton ranked #5. That's impressive.

I'm not sure why you would call his NBA championship team stacked though:

Corky Calhoun
Johnny Davis
Herm Gilliam
Bob Gross
Lionel Hollins
Robin Jones
Maurice Lucas
Clyde Mayes
Lloyd Neal
Larry Steele
Dave Twardzik
Wally Walker
Bill Walton

Have you even heard of any of those guys?

But what about the Sixers squad they demolished in the Finals? Did you ever hear of any of these guys?
Jim Barnett
Henry Bibby
Joe Bryant
Fred Carter
Harvey Catchings
Doug Collins
Darryl Dawkins
Mike Dunleavy
Julius Erving
World B. Free
Terry Furlow
Caldwell Jones
George McGinnis
Steve Mix

Those were some names to contend with back in the day.

No, Walton had no stacked team, at all.

[La Frescobaldi]

1977 Walton wasn't anywhere near as good as 2003 Duncan.
It's very, very close actually.

[Round Mound]

[B]Duncan Was a Better Scorer, 1 on 1 Player, Post Scorer, Shooter etc Walton Was a Better Rebounder and Passer Though. Defensively? They

[cltcfn2924]

hyperbole about walton


very skilled big man, but hyperbole


any great white player somehow someway gets the "best ever" tag attached to his name


how would walton defend tim duncan?

Walton would turn Duncan into a bad outside shooter. Not even close.

[Harison]

For just one season, with absolute peak Walton vs Duncan, Walton was a bit better. Longer term, Timmy takes the cake.

I'm surprised though about some claims, how people would choose Walton as #1 if their lifes would depend on that... There are quite some players I would take first, who could elevate their game when it mattered the most to the level way beyond Walton ever could. Like Kareem, Jordan, Hakeem, maybe even Shaq with Bird. Or Russell - while he usually was scoring-inept, but in the Finals GM7 he exploded with 30 points 40 rebounds, and was super clutch as always.

[ThaRegul8r]

For just one season, with absolute peak Walton vs Duncan, Walton was a bit better. Longer term, Timmy takes the cake.

I'm surprised though about some claims, how people would choose Walton as #1 if their lifes would depend on that... There are quite some players I would take first, who could elevate their game when it mattered the most to the level way beyond Walton ever could. Like Kareem, Jordan, Hakeem, maybe even Shaq with Bird. Or Russell - while he usually was scoring-inept, but in the Finals GM7 he exploded with 30 points 40 rebounds, and was super clutch as always.

"People?"

There was exactly one name given of one man who had that opinion.

How does one man's lone opinion suddenly equate to "people" with "claims" of anything?

And if you wouldn't, that's your prerogative. I don't necessarily agree with it, but that's his choice and his opinion, and he can choose whomever he wants since it's his choice to make. Everyone else is free to choose differently for their own choice.

[Harison]

"People?"

There was exactly one name given of one man who had that opinion.

How does one man's lone opinion suddenly equate to "people" with "claims" of anything?

And if you wouldn't, that's your prerogative. I don't necessarily agree with it, but that's his choice and his opinion, and he can choose whomever he wants since it's his choice to make. Everyone else is free to choose differently for their own choice.

Whats wrong with neutrally mentioning it as some people's opinion in this context? :confusedshrug: I didnt imply everyone has such opinion, or should I specifically mention Holly, Molly and Dolly every time instead of "some people"? :durantunimpressed:

[stanlove1111]

KAJ owned Walton in game one of the '77 WCF's. After that, it was basically a draw, but Walton made the key plays at the key moments.




This alone shows you are talking crap. I watched game one. Walton easily outplayed Jabbar in that game..The announcers were speculating that Jabbar must have been tired from the tough series before it. And save your stats on his..

Plus your argument that Jabbar did everything better then Walton is laughable

[stanlove1111]

And anyone that watched the series, as opposed to looking at 35 year old boxscores, will tell you that Walton's presence on both ends of the floor was the difference in the series.

Vs the 77 Lakers you let Kareem get his and picked on the other 4, especially their guards who were rendered invisible by the Blazers team defense, anchored by the Big Redhead.


Exactly..Walton's passing was a huge problem for teams back then. Forget the stats on this.. You can watch game 2 I believe of that series when the announcers were talking about how the Lakers game plan was to stop Walton from passing them to death. His passing changed the lakers defensive strategy. They had to play off the other players so they couldn't cut to the basket and get layups. This result in easier jumpshots for Walton's teammates. Assist stats also don't count when Walton hits a cutter for an open layup and he has to be fouled of score a layup. Walton was far and awy a better passer then Jabbar or any other center who ever played fpr that matter. He is right there with Bird and Magic as a passer.

Jabbar himself said Walton and Thurmond were the best defenders he ever faced. He said Walton played ALOT of defense which is perfectly put. Walton at his peak challenged more players on defense then anyone I have ever seen. Watch the Philly series. he is all over the play harassing everyone.

[stanlove1111]

So out of all the centers to ever play in the NBA, I see you have Bill Walton ranked #5. That's impressive.

I'm not sure why you would call his NBA championship team stacked though:

Corky Calhoun
Johnny Davis
Herm Gilliam
Bob Gross
Lionel Hollins
Robin Jones
Maurice Lucas
Clyde Mayes
Lloyd Neal
Larry Steele
Dave Twardzik
Wally Walker
Bill Walton

Have you even heard of any of those guys?

But what about the Sixers squad they demolished in the Finals? Did you ever hear of any of these guys?
Jim Barnett
Henry Bibby
Joe Bryant
Fred Carter
Harvey Catchings
Doug Collins
Darryl Dawkins
Mike Dunleavy
Julius Erving
World B. Free
Terry Furlow
Caldwell Jones
George McGinnis
Steve Mix

Those were some names to contend with back in the day.

No, Walton had no stacked team, at all.


I can't believe that anyone tried to say the Blazers were stacked. With Walton in the lineup in those 2 year at Portland ( 76-77 and 77-78 ) the Blazers were 109-35, without him in lineup they were 17-35...Walton was probably the most valuable player ever when healthy.

[stanlove1111]

Walton is very tough to evaluate. One of the strangest career shapes in NBA history. The following games seem to be out there:

77 Playoffs:

1977 BLAZERS VS BULLS G2
1977 BLAZERS VS BULLS G3
1977 BLAZERS VS NUGGETS G5
1977 BLAZERS VS LAKERS G2
1977 BLAZERS VS LAKERS G4

77 Finals:

1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G1
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G2
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G3
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G4
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G5
1977 BLAZERS VS SIXERS G6

1977-1978 Regular Season:

1978.01.08 JAZZ VS BLAZERS
1978.02.12 BLAZERS VS NUGGETS
1978.02.26 BLAZERS VS BULLS

That's 14 games, by my count. There are some others, but his entire career really boils down to 76-77 and 77-78 before going down. I know nobody wants to hear about intangibles, things that don't show up in the box score, etc., but just watch as much of Walton as you can. He didn't make many mistakes, didn't take many unnecessary risks, and always seemed to make the right play. Great team player, very smart and active defender, incredible BBIQ.

I don't know how his peak stacks up (ISH had it fringe top 10, sportswriter Bob Ryan has it as GOAT among centers I believe), but I think if you put him against any great pivot, he'll mold his game and won't put you at a disadvantage. If he's healthy, you'll win a lot of games.



I also saw Chick Hearns say he would take a healthy Walton over Wilt,Kareem, or Russell...That's a close call to me but Walton was so good that its not ridiculous.

[JMT]

I'm sorry, thought we were having a basketball discussion.

Two starters being injured and not playing for the Lakers is not germaine to the discussion?

Not to the discussion of Portland's strategy for that series. It's backstory, but has nothing to do with what actually occurred.

[JMT]

Look in my personal (biased) opinion I think prime Walton is better than Duncan; but I try and remove myself from my own opinion. I just never understood why people put so much faith in their "eyewitness testimonies." It's the most flawed way to analyze a player and it is hardly evidence of Player A being better than Player B.


.

My point is that having watched the series AND knowing the stats puts someone in a far better position to evaluate the series than someone who only knows the stats.

[La Frescobaldi]

I also saw Chick Hearns say he would take a healthy Walton over Wilt,Kareem, or Russell...That's a close call to me but Walton was so good that its not ridiculous.

Yes he was. The dude rocked the planet like very, very few players ever have.

No knock on Duncan, or anybody else; but the downplaying of Bill Walton by ISH puppies who probably weren't even born before he retired.... is just insane.

This is a very close call, between Timmy & the Hippie; of course Walton was beyond injury-prone so it's a moot point. But in his day he tore up everyone who played in the League.

Havlicek is probably the most fearless player ever - at least, he's way, way up there - and even he occasionally shied away from Blazer paint.... not because Walton was brutal (although he could definitely bruise with some of the greats), but because you simply were making a mistake in basketball fundamentals by going in there.

[get these NETS]

Not to the discussion of Portland's strategy for that series. It's backstory, but has nothing to do with what actually occurred.

nah

you're making it up as you go along


2 Lakers starters were not there for the series and that's why the blazers won series


Kareem outplayed Walton


again...great white basketball players are always trumped up to be better than the actually were

[LAZERUSS]

nah

you're making it up as you go along


2 Lakers starters were not there for the series and that's why the blazers won series


Kareem outplayed Walton


again...great white basketball players are always trumped up to be better than the actually were

I don't agree with the last part, but yes, you are correct with the rest.

Jerry West on that series...


'As his team's marvelous season dwindled down to its tragic climax, West became touchy any time the Abdul-Jabbar/Walton comparison was brought up. "Excluding the big guys, would you want our 11 or their 11?" West demanded. "I have to feel sorry for Kareem. It's a terrible burden we put on him."



And this nonsense that it was Walton's defense which limited the Laker guards. The fact was, there were many times in that series in which the LA guards couldn't get the ball past half-court. That was not Walton's defense but rather Portland's HUGE edge at that position.

As for Walton's defense on KAJ...how about Colts18 take on games two and four of that series (both of which were on YouTube at one time)?


Does anyone have insight on this series? I rewatched game 4 of that series and it looked clear to me that Kareem dominated Walton. I tracked the stats in the game.

FG when kareem/Walton was guarding each other:
Walton: 6-20 FG, drew 1 shooting foul
Kareem: 8-14 FG, drew 2 shooting fouls (made 1 one of them), 4 of them doubled teamed (3-4 FG)

# of possessions where teammate passed the ball to them with both in game:
Walton: 35 (24 in post), 2 double teams
Kareem: 31 (28 of them in the post), 16 double teams (1 triple team)

Amazing thing is not once was Walton doubled in the post. There wasn't a time where even 1 one of the Lakers players made a move towards Walton in the post. They let Kareem handle him 1 on 1. The only doubles came late in the shot clock. While Kareem was doubled 15 times in the post in 28 post possessions. Most of the non double teams came because Kareem threw it back quickly. When he dribbled, more often than not, he was doubled.

In case you were wondering, Kareem was 6-9 in hook shots vs. Walton (made 2 of them with Walton out of the game too). Walton was 1 out of 6 in hook shots. Kareem's hook shot was unstoppable. I'm not sure how anyone can guard that shot if Kareem is within 10 feet of the basket.

+/-:
Walton: +5 in, -1 out
Kareem: +5 in, -9 out

As far as passing, Walton did beat out Kareem in that category. Most of his possessions came in a faceup where he could shoot or pass it. He threw a lot of passes to cutting teammates. Kareem mostly passed when he was doubled. He was surprisingly slow on those passes and made quite a few sloppy passes that were deflected/stolen.


Overall, Kareem was more dominant IMO. His scoring ability was marvelous. As far as defense goes, Kareem played quite well in help defense. He had about 6 blocks by my count with most of them in help defense. He also drew 1 charge where he didn't fall down and/or flop (that would never get called in today's NBA). Walton's passing was as good as advertised, but not good enough to overcome Kareem especially when you consider that Kareem was doubled about half the time while Walton was always being single covered.


UPDATE:

I just went over Game 2 of that series and here are the stats for that game.

FG when kareem/Walton was guarding each other:
Walton: 6-13 FG, 2 O Reb allowed, 1 blocked attempt
Kareem: 15-19 FG, 2 O reb allowed, 1 blocked attempt

# of possessions where teammate passed the ball to them with both in game:
Walton: 33 possessions, 1 double
Kareem: 37 possessions, 23 times doubled (2 triple teams)

Walton was doubled on the 1st possession, but then was never doubled after that. The Lakers had complete confidence in Kareem which is why

Hook shots:
Kareem 7-9 FG (1 made not vs Walton)
Walton 3-5 FG

+/-:
Kareem: in +0, -2 out
Walton: in +0, +2 out

Both of them came out the same time during the 1st quarters and 3rd and came back in the same time. In the time they were out, Walton's team outscored Kareem's by 15-13.


Combined stats for the 2 games I tracked:
Kareem: 23-33 (.697) FG
Walton: 12-33 (.364) FG

Possessions touching the ball when guarding each other:
Kareem: 68 possessions, 39 double teams (3 triple teams), 33 FGA
Walton: 68 possessions, 3 double teams (0 triple teams), 33 FGA

So they both touched the ball equally in the halfcourt, but Kareem got 13x more double teams. They both shot it in 48.5% of their possessions they touched the ball. Kareem got doubled on 57.4% of his possessions while Walton was doubled 4.4%.

+/-:
Kareem: +5 in, -11 out
Walton: +5 in, +1 out

Overall Kareem manhandled Walton in the post, especially when he got single coverage. For as good as Walton was, they had no answers for Kareem's hook shot (13-18 in hook shots). Walton's passing did beat out Kareem's. Walton was smooth and could make the pass to the cutting man. Kareem mostly passed when he got doubled.


I get a kick out of those whose only arguments in these types of discussions are...

"Well, you can't just look at the boxscores." Or, "Statistics don't tell the whole story." Or, "Stats don't show the "intangibles.""

The facts are...while there are obviously exceptions, in the vast majority of games, stats DO tell the story. When a player outscores another by a 40-14 margin, while shooting 17-23 (.739 FG%) in the process...there is simply NO reasonable argument that will counteract that domination. Basketball is still a game of getting the ball in the basket. And these "boxscore", "stat", and "intangibles" arguments are used by those that have no other ammo. Anyone can use that argument in these discussions. Using that type of analogy, you could argue that a bench player who scored four points on 2-10 shooting in a blowout loss was the better player than the star player on the winning team who put up a 40-20 game.

And this notion that Walton "let Kareem get his" is just ridiculous. Portland knew that Kareem had an inferior team, and did everything in their power to stop KAJ. That they didn't have to concern themselves with KAJ's teamates was not "letting KAJ get his." The fact was, Walton had no prayer in guarding KAJ, and the only way that his team could win that series was by his teammates just slaughtering KAJ's surrounding personnel.

And I also get tired of those that use quotes from players, coach's, and the sports media as if they are the Bible. Here again, I have read quotes from West, Barry, Jack Ramsey, Magic, and many others, who have made completely contradictory quotes on the same subjects. A "quote" doesn't make it a "fact."

KAJ blew out Walton in game two of the '77 WCF's, and the other three games of that series were reasonably close between the two. Still, Kareem was the more dominant player in two of those three. And the reality was, aside from game one, a 12 point Portland win, the other three games came down to the wire (margins of 2, 5, and 4 points.) True, Walton seemed to make the key plays especially down the stretch, but the reality was, Walton had a considerable better roster that thoroughly outplayed Kareem's injury-decimated, and inept, roster.

And once again, over the course of their career h2h's, KAJ had some huge games against Walton. The reverse was never the case. And that is what is so ridiculous in many of these discussions. Don't you think a prime Walton would have had at least a couple of games in which he outscored a prime KAJ by margins of 39-11, 40-14, 48-12, or 50-7, in their career h2h's, if he was indeed the equal of KAJ? Hell, in all of the h2h's, there are only a handful in which Walton outscored KAJ, and even in those, the margins were close.

I'm sorry, but outscoring Walton by a huge margin; outshooting Walton from the field, again by a huge margin; solidly outrebounding Walton; and even outblocking Walton by a considerable margin in that series, DOES tell the story. And even Walton's edge in apg in that series was deceptive. His teammates simply made a much higher percentage of their shots.

As great as a prime Walton was, it must be pointed out that, at his very short-lived peak, he still only played about 35 mpg, and still missed a ton of games. And he was not in the class of a mid-70's KAJ, either...much less the KAJ who absolutely dominated as basketball, as few other's have, from '71 thru '74. That KAJ was a better scorer, a better rebounder, and a considerably more mobile defender than KAJ in the mid-70's.

Instead of KAJ being burdened with that bumbling cast in '77, I suspect that a KAJ, and his teammates in '71 and '72, would have romped over Walton and his in '77 and '78.

[LAZERUSS]

Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZERUSS
KAJ owned Walton in game one of the '77 WCF's. After that, it was basically a draw, but Walton made the key plays at the key moments.





This alone shows you are talking crap. I watched game one. Walton easily outplayed Jabbar in that game..The announcers were speculating that Jabbar must have been tired from the tough series before it. And save your stats on his..

Plus your argument that Jabbar did everything better then Walton is laughable


My initial reponse was a typo. It should have read, KAJ owned Walton in one game of the '77 WCF's. After that it was a basically a draw.

That one game was game two. And KAJ just crushed a helpless Walton in it. And that came in a game in which Walton had double-team help throughout.

And the only area where Walton might have had an edge in that series, was in passing.

Having said that, though, a prime Walton was not on the level of a prime KAJ in that regard. KAJ was scoring a ton more, and with more apg, at his peak. Why is that important? Because a player's scoring affects his passing (numbers.) You want a great example? In Chamberlain's 65-66 season, he averaged 34 ppg and handed out 5 apg. In his 66-67 and 67-68 seasons, he averaged 24 ppg, and dished out 8 and 9 apg.

Once again, a prime Walton could not stop or even contain a near-peak KAJ. Surrendering (and that term is applicable here) 30 ppg on 60% shooting is clearly indicative of that fact. And those numbers were achieved against Walton, with Walton receiving a ton of help defending KAJ.

And, there were quite a few other examples of Kareem just blowing Walton to shreds in their career h2hs, as well.

[get these NETS]

Walton was a great player

When you are having RATIONAL sports discussion, and person dismisses the fact that 2 starters for a team missed series due to injury, you figure that person is not really a sports fan.

Anything that gets in the way of THEIR argument, just doesn't matter

including KAJ getting the better of Walton in almost every single category



Because of past experiences, only thing I can think of is that person relates to Walton on a personal level and would rather delude himself than accept reality.

I think Walton being a great white player in a sport dominated(then) by African American players has something to do with the reluctance(by some) to accept that KAJ outplayed him.

[TheTenth]

Those were some good posts Lazeruss/jlauber! Nice read.

[LAZERUSS]

I don't see a peak Walton having any case over a peak Duncan, Shaq, Russell, Moses, KAJ, Hakeem, and Chamberlain.

[colts19]

I don't see a peak Walton having any case over a peak Duncan, Shaq, Russell, Moses, KAJ, Hakeem, and Chamberlain.

I agree with Wilt, KAJ. The others to me did not make there teams as good as Walton made his. Its like all othe the great points you make about the stats of Kareem versus Walton in the Portland vs La series. What you posted makes it clear that KAJ dominated Walton. However, the thing Walton did was allow his guards to go out and put extreme pressure on the Laker guards and that was really the difference in the game.

There is no shame in getting out scored by the second greatest scoring center of all time. This is not about Walton vs KAJ or Wilt, its about Walton vs Duncan and having watched both I will always say Walton was by far the better player.
How do you think Duncan would fare against a prime KAJ.

[LAZERUSS]

I agree with Wilt, KAJ. The others to me did not make there teams as good as Walton made his. Its like all othe the great points you make about the stats of Kareem versus Walton in the Portland vs La series. What you posted makes it clear that KAJ dominated Walton. However, the thing Walton did was allow his guards to go out and put extreme pressure on the Laker guards and that was really the difference in the game.

There is no shame in getting out scored by the second greatest scoring center of all time. This is not about Walton vs KAJ or Wilt, its about Walton vs Duncan and having watched both I will always say Walton was by far the better player.
How do you think Duncan would fare against a prime KAJ.

First off all, I do need to back off a bit. I didn't mean to imply that superior stats are always indicative of how a player or players played. Most all of the intelligent posters here (like yourself BTW), know that a player can contribute in multiple ways that simply do not show up in a boxscore. I remember reading about Russell ignoring an open shooter, simply because another better scorer had a significant advantage over his defender. Or "cheating" to the side of a teammate that had a similar disadvantage.

And there are the "hustle plays" that also don't show up. Still, these "intangibles" aren't limited to just the unselfish. I have seen Lebron chase down an opposing player from behind, and block a sure layup. Or Chamberlain diving to the floor to pick up a loose ball in a critical playoff game.

And there is no doubt that a peak Walton was among the best players ever. It was a shame that most all of his career was mired with injuries. I still believe him to be the second greatest college player of all-time (behind Alcindor/Kareem), and just ahead of Russell and Oscar. And IMO, his '73 NCAA Finals was the greatest game ever played at the college level.

Duncan/Walton is an interesting comparison. IMO, Duncan, Magic, and of course, Russell, were the greatest "winners" in NBA history. A peak Walton probably has an argument, as well. Still, it is difficult to evaluate someone with less than two "peak" seasons.

As for Kareem-Duncan...a prime/peak Kareem would certainly have no problem scoring. An old KAJ just wiped the floor with a young Hakeem over the course of two straight seasons. And a peak Kareem was capable of hanging 50 on both an old Wilt, and a young Walton. And he averaged 45 ppg, over the course of five games, in his '71-72 h2h's with Cowens.

But I have said it many times...KAJ never maximized his talent, and for whatever reasons, he didn't blend well with his teammates. If Magic hadn't come along, I honestly believe that Kareem would have retired in the mid-80's, with only one ring, and with a career that would have been labled somewhat of a disappointment.

Whe motivated, KAJ was nearly as dominant as a prime Chamberlain. That was evidenced whenever he went up against a "great" (with the exception of the "Kareem-Killer", Moses Malone.) He was putting up 25 ppg games against Portland scrubs, and then, when Walton played...BOOM, 50 and 48 point outburst. He averaged 25 FGAs in his entire '72 regular season. Against Wilt in his 11 h2h games that season (five regular season and six in the WCF's)... 34 FGA per game. Interesting, though, that in KAJ's three 40+ ppg games against Chamberlain, his team lost all three (and in his 50 point game, his Bucks were blown out.)

On the other side of the coin, Duncan was a player who did seem to maximize his own talent, and the talent of those around him. I could see Timmy giving up 40+ to KAJ...but somehow putting his team in position to win.

On paper I would give a peak KAJ a solid edge, but as we all know, games are not played on paper. Russell, Duncan, and a peak Walton were examples of that.

In any case, in any of these 'all-time great" discussions, it is much more important to appreciate what all of these players accomplished. Clearly, they were great for a reason.

[La Frescobaldi]

Walton was a great player

When you are having RATIONAL sports discussion, and person dismisses the fact that 2 starters for a team missed series due to injury, you figure that person is not really a sports fan.

Anything that gets in the way of THEIR argument, just doesn't matter

including KAJ getting the better of Walton in almost every single category



Because of past experiences, only thing I can think of is that person relates to Walton on a personal level and would rather delude himself than accept reality.

I think Walton being a great white player in a sport dominated(then) by African American players has something to do with the reluctance(by some) to accept that KAJ outplayed him.

you haven't added anything at all; this post swerves close to puerility.

Don't you have anything basketball-related to say?

OK, I suppose the fillip about injured Lakers is a valid point; I just wish you'd left out the rant at the end. It adds no value and creates just a little more dissension in a world already full enough of that.

[colts19]

First off all, I do need to back off a bit. I didn't mean to imply that superior stats are always indicative of how a player or players played. Most all of the intelligent posters here (like yourself BTW), know that a player can contribute in multiple ways that simply do not show up in a boxscore. I remember reading about Russell ignoring an open shooter, simply because another better scorer had a significant advantage over his defender. Or "cheating" to the side of a teammate that had a similar disadvantage.

And there are the "hustle plays" that also don't show up. Still, these "intangibles" aren't limited to just the unselfish. I have seen Lebron chase down an opposing player from behind, and block a sure layup. Or Chamberlain diving to the floor to pick up a loose ball in a critical playoff game.

And there is no doubt that a peak Walton was among the best players ever. It was a shame that most all of his career was mired with injuries. I still believe him to be the second greatest college player of all-time (behind Alcindor/Kareem), and just ahead of Russell and Oscar. And IMO, his '73 NCAA Finals was the greatest game ever played at the college level.

Duncan/Walton is an interesting comparison. IMO, Duncan, Magic, and of course, Russell, were the greatest "winners" in NBA history. A peak Walton probably has an argument, as well. Still, it is difficult to evaluate someone with less than two "peak" seasons.

As for Kareem-Duncan...a prime/peak Kareem would certainly have no problem scoring. An old KAJ just wiped the floor with a young Hakeem over the course of two straight seasons. And a peak Kareem was capable of hanging 50 on both an old Wilt, and a young Walton. And he averaged 45 ppg, over the course of five games, in his '71-72 h2h's with Cowens.

But I have said it many times...KAJ never maximized his talent, and for whatever reasons, he didn't blend well with his teammates. If Magic hadn't come along, I honestly believe that Kareem would have retired in the mid-80's, with only one ring, and with a career that would have been labled somewhat of a disappointment.

Whe motivated, KAJ was nearly as dominant as a prime Chamberlain. That was evidenced whenever he went up against a "great" (with the exception of the "Kareem-Killer", Moses Malone.) He was putting up 25 ppg games against Portland scrubs, and then, when Walton played...BOOM, 50 and 48 point outburst. He averaged 25 FGAs in his entire '72 regular season. Against Wilt in his 11 h2h games that season (five regular season and six in the WCF's)... 34 FGA per game. Interesting, though, that in KAJ's three 40+ ppg games against Chamberlain, his team lost all three (and in his 50 point game, his Bucks were blown out.)

On the other side of the coin, Duncan was a player who did seem to maximize his own talent, and the talent of those around him. I could see Timmy giving up 40+ to KAJ...but somehow putting his team in position to win.

On paper I would give a peak KAJ a solid edge, but as we all know, games are not played on paper. Russell, Duncan, and a peak Walton were examples of that.

In any case, in any of these 'all-time great" discussions, it is much more important to appreciate what all of these players accomplished. Clearly, they were great for a reason.

Great Post, I tend to agree with everything your saying here. We all have things that we value more in the game. I value effort, and I agree with you that KAJ didn't always put out the effort he was capable of. He still reached a almost GOAT level despite that.

The reason Shaq is not in my top ten is I think he should have been the greatest player ever with his skills. He just never came close to having the killer instinct and will to reach that level.

Thanks for you reply.

[stanlove1111]

My initial reponse was a typo. It should have read, KAJ owned Walton in one game of the '77 WCF's. After that it was a basically a draw.

That one game was game two. And KAJ just crushed a helpless Walton in it. And that came in a game in which Walton had double-team help throughout.

And the only area where Walton might have had an edge in that series, was in passing.

Having said that, though, a prime Walton was not on the level of a prime KAJ in that regard. KAJ was scoring a ton more, and with more apg, at his peak. Why is that important? Because a player's scoring affects his passing (numbers.) You want a great example? In Chamberlain's 65-66 season, he averaged 34 ppg and handed out 5 apg. In his 66-67 and 67-68 seasons, he averaged 24 ppg, and dished out 8 and 9 apg.

Once again, a prime Walton could not stop or even contain a near-peak KAJ. Surrendering (and that term is applicable here) 30 ppg on 60% shooting is clearly indicative of that fact. And those numbers were achieved against Walton, with Walton receiving a ton of help defending KAJ.

And, there were quite a few other examples of Kareem just blowing Walton to shreds in their career h2hs, as well.


If you can't watch their games and be be sure that Walton was a better passer you really don't belong on a basketball site.

You are the type of guy who thinks blocked shot numners decides who is a better defender..Ridiculous..