So Why Didn't Wilt Win More? [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

LAZERUSS

08-02-2013, 12:19 PM

I have read Kobe-stans rip Wilt for his losing, and yet, in Kobe's greatest scoring season, his team blew a 3-1 lead in th first round of the playoffs, and lost a game seven by a 121-90 margin, in a game in which he scored 24 meaningless points.

I have read MJ fans blasting the "loser" Wilt, and yet in MJ's greatest scoring season, his team was swept in the first round, and in the clinching defeat, Jordan shot 9-30 from the floor.

I have read Lebron lovers trashing Wilt, too. But what about Lebron's Cavs being swept in the '07 Finals, and in the clinching one point loss, he shot 10-30 from the field (and .356 in the series)?

Kobe in '07, MJ in '87, and Lebron in '07 are all "excused" for "losing" because they were underdogs...

And yet, in Chamberlain's greatest scoring season, he single-handedly carried his Warriors past the Nats in the first round, including a "do-or-die" clinching game of 56-35. He then takes his roster, the core of which had been a last place roster before he arrived, to a game seven, two point loss against a 60-20 Celtics team with seven HOFers. Oh, and in the entire playoffs his teammates collectively shot .354 from the floor.

Shaq's teams were swept six times in the post-season. Bird's loaded Celtics only won three titles, and lost with HCA in seven times (including a 4-0 sweep in one of them.) The great Hakeem was knocked out of the first round of the playoffs in eight of his 15 seasons. Kareem won one title in the weakest era in NBA history, and lost with teams that won 53, 56, 59, 60, and 63 games in that period. And he was outplayed by Moses in '81, and his havily-favored Lakers lost to a 40-42 Rockets team in the first round. And Moses murdered him two years later, and Kareem's Lakers were swept.

No one seems to remember Chamberlain taking a 40-40 team thru the first round of the playoffs, and then to a game seven one point loss against a 62-18 Celtic team, in a series in which Wilt averaged 30 ppg, 31 rpg, and shot .555 from the floor.

Nor does Wilt get any pass when his teammates collectively shot .383, .354, .352, .352, and .332 from the floor in five of his first six post-seasons. And he gets the blame in his '68 and '69 game seven losses, despite the fact that his teammates were shooting .333 and .360 in both of them. And everyone hails Willis Reed's game seven performance in '70, and his 4 points and 3 rebounds, while the Wilt-pundits bash Wilt, despite his 21 points, on 10-16 shooting, with 24 rebounds...all while playing at nowhere near 100%, and only four months after major knee surgery.

The reality is, basketball is a TEAM sport. And if Wilt was considered a "loser" for only winning twice in 14 seasons, then here is another list of "losers:"

MJ "lost" nine times in 15 seasons, including five with losing records.

Bird lost 10 times in his 13 seasons, including multiple "choke jobs" along the way.

West lost 12 times.

Duncan has been "loser" in 12 seasons.

Kobe 12 times.

Oscar 13 times.

Baylor 14 times.

Kareem 14 times.

Shaq 15 times.

Moses 15 times.

Hakeem 16 times.

SamuraiSWISH

08-02-2013, 12:22 PM

Mr Exlax

08-02-2013, 12:22 PM

SamuraiSWISH

08-02-2013, 12:25 PM

Wilt lost to better teams. He was the best player on the court at all times though. Same thing with LeBron when he was in Cleveland. Same way with Kobe before he got Gasol. Same way with MJ before he got Pip and Grant. I don't get how people claim to love basketball, but have no understanding of it smh.
MJ was the best player on the court at all times with Pip and Grant. Don't get it twisted. Those two weren't rounding out into their more recognizable forms anyhow until the 1990 or 1991 seasons. It took them a few years to get traction, and for Pip needed a few seasons of MJ rubbing his game off onto him.

Mr Exlax

08-02-2013, 12:33 PM

MJ was the best player on the court at all times with Pip and Grant. Don't get it twisted. Those two weren't rounding out into their more recognizable forms anyhow until the 1990 or 1991 seasons. It took them a few years to get traction, and for Pip needed a few seasons of MJ rubbing his game off onto him.

My man, out of EVERYTHING i typed, you come up with that? How the hell did you get me saying MJ stopped being the best player on the court out of anything I typed? It was the reason why he kept losing in the playoffs. Not because he wasn't the best player on the court. He was getting beat by better teams. Same way Wilt did. Same way Kobe did. Same way LeBron did.

LAZERUSS

08-02-2013, 12:35 PM

He faced a Celtics team that was utterly stacked to the brim with beastly elite offensive talents and Bill Russell controlling the defensive side of the ball. Pretty much the long and short of it. Oh, he also was from a statistical review an underwhelming playoff performer compared to his regular season averages. So, he's not a great money on the table kind of player. His PPG drop off big time in the playoffs.

Just for the record...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continuing...

LAZERUSS

08-02-2013, 12:38 PM

Continuing...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

LAZERUSS

08-02-2013, 12:42 PM

Continuing...

Ad for those that claim that Wilt "declined" in his post-season play...

Here are Chamberlain's AND his opposing center's scoring games in Wilt's PRIME from 59-60 thru 67-68...all 80 of them. BTW, Wilt played in 160 playoff games, and these were exactly half of them.

Incidently, Wilt' "scoring" prime was from 59-60 thru 65-66.

* denotes games against Russell
** denotes games against Thurmond
*** denotes games against Bellamy

Some other sidenotes:

1. Wilt outshot Russell from the field in the '62 ECF's, .468 to .399

2. Chamberlain shot .559 in the '64 WCF's (while scoring 38.6 ppg)

3. Chamberlain shot .517 against Russell in the '64 Finals, and outscored him per game, 29.2 to 11.2 ppg, and outshot Russell, .517 to .386.

4. Russell shot .451 against Wilt in the '65 playoffs (and .702 against LA in the Finals.)

5. Wilt shot .509 against Russell in the '66 ECF's (while averaging 28 ppg and 30.2 rpg)

6. Wilt outshot Russell in the '67 ECF's by a .556 to .358 margin.

7. Wilt outshot Thurmond in the '67 Finals by a .560 to .343 margin.

8. Wilt held Bellamy to .421 shooting in the '68 playoffs (Bellamy shot .541 against the league that season.)

Quote:
Prime "Scoring" Wilt

1. 35-5
2. 28-25
3. 53-7
4. 42-19 *
5. 29-15 *
6. 12-26 *
7. 24-17 *
8. 50-22 *
9. 26-25 *
10. 46-15
11. 32-12
12. 33-7
13. 32-9
14. 28-18
15. 40-14
16. 29-27
17. 56-20
18. 33-16 *
19. 42-9 *
20. 35-31 *
21. 41-31 *
22. 30-29 *
23. 32-19 *
24. 22-19 *
25. 37-24
26. 28-4
27. 46-22
28. 36-14
29. 50-6
30. 34-20
31. 39-10
32. 22-9 *
33. 32-9 *
34. 35-16 *
35. 27-8 *
36. 30-14 *
37. 26-18
38. 30-10
39. 17-16
40. 38-7
41. 33-11 *
42. 30-12 *
43. 24-19 *
44. 34-18 *
45. 30-12 *
46. 30-22 *
47. 30-15 *
48. 25-13 *
49. 23-10 *
50. 31-11 *
51. 15-18 *
52. 46-18 *

Wilt from 66-67 thru 67-68

53. 41-29
54. 37-21
55. 16-12
56. 18-8
57. 24-20 *
58. 15-14 *
59. 20-10 *
60. 20-9 *
61. 29-4 *
62. 16-24 **
63. 10-7 **
64. 26-17 **
65. 10-8 **
66. 20-17 **
67. 24-12 **
68. 37-14 ***
69. 24-26 ***
70. 18-22 ***
71. 23-28 ***
72. 26-11 ***
73. 25-19 ***
74. 33-11 *
75. 15-11 *
76. 23-13 *
77. 22-24 *
78. 28-8 *
79. 20-17 *
80. 14-12 *

* denotes games against Russell
** denotes games against Thurmond
*** denotes games against Bellamy

Wilt outscored his opposing centers in 49 of his first 50 playoff games (and 50 of 52 in his "scoring" prime overall) MANY by HUGE margins.

Overall, in Wilt's first 80 playoff games, covering his PRIME years, he outscored his opposing starting center in 73 of them.

The Wilt who "declined" in the post-season...

OldSkoolball#52

08-02-2013, 12:47 PM

LAZERUSS

08-02-2013, 01:03 PM

Incidently, for those that claim that Wilt's play declined in the post-season...

how come no one brings up the fact that he DRAMATICALLY reduced the play of his OPPOSING centers in the post-season?

Kerr shot .392 in the '60 regular season, and .294 against Wilt in the playoffs.

Kerr shot .443 in the '62 regular season, and .376 against Wilt in the playoffs.

Russell shot .457 in the '62 regular season, and .399 against Chamberlain in the '62 EDF's.

Russell shot .433 in the '64 regular season, and .386 against Wilt in the Finals.

Russell shot .454 in the '67 regular season, and .358 against Wilt in the EDF's.

Thurmond shot .437 in the '67 regular season, and .343 against Chamberlain in the Finals.

Bellamy shot .541 in the '68 regular season, and .421 against Wilt in the playoffs.

Kareem shot .577 in the '71 regular season, and .481 against Wilt in the WCF's.

Kareem shot .574 in the '72 regular season, and .457 against Chamberlain in the WCF's.

Thurmond shot .446 in the '73 regular season, and .398 against Wilt in the WCF's.

And, of course, Chamberlain played in 29 post-season series, and outrebounded his opposing centers in EVERY one of them. Some by staggering margins.

TheMan

08-02-2013, 01:12 PM

Good stuff Lazerus

LAZERUSS

08-02-2013, 01:37 PM

Those that like to rip Wilt for his "decline" in the post-season seldom bring up the fact that he ran up against the Celtic Dynasty in eight of his nine post-seasons in the decade of the '60's. And he met them in his first round in one of them; the second round in six of them; and in the third round in his last one.

In fact, in his "scoring" prime (59-60 thru 65-66), he played in 52 playoff games, and 30 of those were against Russell.

Furthermore, just using his '62 season, when he averaged 50.4 ppg on .506 shooting, as an example...

True, Wilt "only" averaged 33.6 ppg on .468 shooting against Russell in the '62 EDF's, BUT, in their ten regular season h2h's, Chamberlain's average was also "only" 39.7 ppg, and on .471 shooting. And keep in mind that during the regular season, the NBA averaged 118.8 ppg on .426 shooting, while in the playoffs that year, the average was 112.6 ppg on .411 shooting.

Another example would have been Chamberlain's 63-64 playoff run of 12 games. He averaged 36.9 ppg on .524 shooting, in a regular season NBA that averaged 111.0 ppg on .433 shooting. In the playoffs that year, Chamberlain averaged 34.7 ppg on .543 shooting, in a post-season NBA that averagd 105.8 ppg on .420 shooting. BTW, Wilt averaged 29.2 ppg on .517 against Russell in the Finals.

Or Wilt's 64-65 post-season. During the regular season, he averaged 34.7 ppg on .510 shooting, in a league that averaged 110.6 ppg on .426 shooting. In his 11 playoff games, he averaged 29.3 ppg on .530 shooting, in a post-season that averaged 113.7 ppg on .429 shooting. BUT, against Russell in the seven game EDF's, Wilt averaged 30.1 ppg (and 31.4 rpg) on .555 shooting.

CavaliersFTW

08-02-2013, 04:02 PM

In 1969 Wilt was coming off arguably a top 10 individual season in NBA history and asked to go to the Lakers who had Baylor who while slowing down was a 26/12/5 all NBA first team player who just finished 3rd in MVP voting and West who had a 26/6/5 season shooting a career best 51%. Only reason he wasnt all NBA first team is missing too many games. He had already been first team 6 times and would be 4 more after that.

Can say they were not all in their primes. But Baylor was more highly regarded than 2010(or any) Bosh and West was pretty much his eras Kobe.

Baylor only had 1 more great year in him but....thats sure as hell joining 2 superstars.

That said....

Wilt won 2 rings, made 6 or 7 finals, and 68 and 69 win teams. Nobody in any sport has ever won that much and not been considered a winner.

He has nothing left to prove.
^- :applause:

CavaliersFTW

08-02-2013, 04:04 PM

And of course :applause: @ Lazeruss repping Wilt stans by dropping nukes of facts :D

Mr Exlax

08-02-2013, 04:05 PM

One of these does not belong.

After Shaq and before he got Gasol, Kobe was the best player on the court in his playoff losses.

LAZERUSS

08-02-2013, 06:44 PM

For good reason.

From 1960-1966, the NBA had 9 teams.

From 66-68 they had expanded to 14.

Basically in most of Russell and Wilt's prime, the league had about an average of 10 teams per season. The odds of winning the title at the beginning of the year for any given player were 1/10.

Today, there are 30 teams. Thus, the odds of any one player winning a title are 1/30.

However if you multiple those odds by three (which is oversimplifying, but I have a feeling that suits you)...

You get 1/10.

So you honestly believe the Kings, Raptors, Charlotte, Cavs, Washington, etc. all have the same chance of winning a title as the Heat, Spurs, and Thunder?

On the flip side, the '67 Lakers had reasonably healthy seasons from West and Baylor, who averaged 29 and 27 ppg, respectively. That team also had Rudy LaRusso at PF, a player who would average 22 ppg the very next season. Then, in the backcourt, alongside West, they had both Archie Clark, who would average 20 ppg the very next seaosn, and make the all-star team, as well as Gail Goodrich, who would go on to have a HOF career. And don't forget Walt Hazzard (Abdul-Rahman) who would average 24 ppg the very next season. The team also had 6-10 Darrell Imhoff, who averaged a double-double, as well as TWO seven-footers on the bench.

Surely a team that had the equivalent of that era's Wade and Lebron (West and Baylor), would have dominated the league, right? Guess what...they went 36-45. Yes, 36-45!

Take a look at the NBA that season. The Lakers, Hawks, Knicks, Royals, and Warriors, Celtics, and Sixers were LOADED with talent.

And you are comparing a 2012-13 NBA to the 1966-67 NBA?

LongLiveTheKing

08-02-2013, 07:15 PM

Lol Wilt only won 2 in a weak era. :lol

LAZERUSS

08-02-2013, 07:21 PM

Lol Wilt only won 2 in a weak era. :lol

Yep. In his era all he had to contend with were the Celtic Dynasty an their FIVE to NINE HOFers all ten seasons that Russell was in the league with Wilt. Then, Chamberlain had to face the '70 Knicks, with their 60-22 record, and their FOUR HOFers (and on a knee that had undergone major surgery just four months prior.) Then, without both West and Baylor, he had to battle the '71 Bucks, with a prime KAJ, and who had gone 66-16. Then he battled KAJ and the 63-19 Bucks the very next season (and won, on his way to a title, beating a Knick team with FIVE HOFers.) And in his last season, he faced a Knick team with SIX HOFers (and with West just a shell because of injuries.)

millwad

08-02-2013, 07:32 PM

He wasn't as good as his stats say, he never won as a leading scorer, as matter of fact he was never close..

He statpadded and lost, he got teamed up with HOF:ers and won while being way less statistical dominant.

millwad

08-02-2013, 07:35 PM

Yep. In his era all he had to contend with were the Celtic Dynasty an their FIVE to NINE HOFers all ten seasons that Russell was in the league with Wilt. Then, Chamberlain had to face the '70 Knicks, with their 60-22 record, and their FOUR HOFers (and on a knee that had undergone major surgery just four months prior.) Then, without both West and Baylor, he had to battle the '71 Bucks, with a prime KAJ, and who had gone 66-16. Then he battled KAJ and the 63-19 Bucks the very next season (and won, on his way to a title, beating a Knick team with FIVE HOFers.) And in his last season, he faced a Knick team with SIX HOFers (and with West just a shell because of injuries.)

Buhu, Wilt's teammates were sooooo bad.. :facepalm

After all, Wilt had only following guys in the playoffs who carried the team on the offensive end while Wilt went back to being a 4th option..

Wilt's teammates stats in the playoffs of '72;

Gail Goodrich - 23.8 points, 4.3 assists and 2.5 rebounds
Jerry West - 22.9 points, 8.9 assists and 4.9 rebounds
Jim McMillan - 19.1 points, 5.7 rebounds and 1.5 assists
Happy Hairston - 13.5 points, 13.1 rebounds and 2.1 assis

Poor Wilt, he only had HOF:ers and 3 guys who averaged 19 or more per game in the playoffs when he won his second ring..

millwad

08-02-2013, 07:38 PM

strike first

08-02-2013, 07:39 PM

Lebron>wilt

millwad

08-02-2013, 07:40 PM

Lebron>wilt

Easily.

KyrieTheFuture

08-02-2013, 07:52 PM

You guys can't say bull Russell played on a team that anyone could be on and win all those championships and then turn around and say Wilt should have won more

SilkkTheShocker

08-02-2013, 08:52 PM

Millwad :applause:

PHILA

08-02-2013, 10:46 PM

It could have easily been 5 or 6. The fact that the Sixers got Wilt basically for cash in a trade, and drafted Billy Cunningham later that year made this team one of the greatest of all time. Forget about doing that in this era, with the cap and the inflated salaries. They could have easily won 4 championships during Wilt's time there, but in 1965 Havlicek stole the ball, in 1966 they inexplicably tanked the series (which Wilt dominated the last 3 games), and in 1968 they were massacred by injuries.

The way I see it, those Eastern Division series between Philadelphia and Boston were basically deciding the NBA championship. Not to insult the Lakers, but I believe the Sixers would defeat them more easily than Boston did, as evidenced by their regular season results below. They only time they ever had a point margin in the positive was 1967-68, and against Boston.

1965-66 Lakers

vs. Boston (10 Games)
Record: 3-7
Point Margin: -1.9 ppg

vs. Philadelphia (10 Games)
Record: 2-8
Point Margin: -6.4 ppg

1966-67 Lakers

vs. Boston (9 Games)
Record: 4-5
Point Margin: -5.7 ppg

vs. Philadelphia (9 Games)
Record: 1-8
Point Margin: -7.4 ppg

1967-68 Lakers

vs. Boston (7 Games)
Record: 3-4
Point Margin: +3.9 ppg

vs. Philadelphia (7 Games)
Record: 2-5
Point Margin: -6.9 ppg

3LiftHeatCurse

08-02-2013, 11:01 PM

Because basketball is a team sport and counting championships is stupid.

PHILA

08-02-2013, 11:10 PM

Incidently, for those that claim that Wilt's play declined in the post-season...

There are many fans of the true shooting percentage, which also accounts for FT's. Below are all playoff runs where the player has averaged at least 20 ppg. We will look at the True Shooting stat shooting efficiency relative to league average. He basically looks identical to Shaq, who are both highly efficient despite their poor foul shooting. Jordan is clearly the top scorer, and Oscar (despite popular belief here) is incredibly dominant in both his scoring and efficiency. The only thing is Wilt from 1960-68 only played in 80 playoff games, so the detractors would have to presume that he could not maintain his scoring production and efficiency in the playoffs over 100+ games, which is baseless considering he didn't get to pad his stats like today's players and beat up on many of the bad teams in an extra 1st round series. If he stinks in the playoffs then what does that make players like Baylor, Kobe, Olajuwon, Shaq, Bird, Duncan, etc.

A few examples from another forum below:

Playoff runs when they averaged at least 20 PPG

Wilt Chamberlain: 29.3 PPG, 47.7 MPG, +4.2 TS%
Shaquille O'Neal: 27.2 PPG, 40.4 MPG, +4.3 TS%
Hakeem Olajuwon: 27.3 PPG, 40.7 MPG, +3.8 TS%
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: 27.3 PPG, 40.1 MPG, +5.4 TS%
Jerry West: 29.5 PPG, 41.8 MPG, +4.9 TS%
Elgin Baylor: 31.0 PPG, 43.3 MPG, +2.2 TS%
Kobe Bryant: 27.7 PPG, 41.5 MPG, +1.2 TS%
Michael Jordan: 33.5 PPG, 41.7 PPG, +3.1 TS%
Tim Duncan: 23.4 PPG, 40.0 MPG, +2.7 TS%
Larry Bird: 25.1 PPG, 42.7 MPG, +2.2 TS%
Charles Barkley: 25.5 PPG, 41.7 MPG, +5.5 TS%
LeBron James: 28.1 PPG, 43.1 MPG, +2.9 TS%
Oscar Robertson 28.6 PPG, 46.3 MPG, +8.0 TS%

KG215

08-02-2013, 11:19 PM

fpliii

08-02-2013, 11:26 PM

Marchesk

08-03-2013, 01:58 AM

Lebron>wilt

No, simply not true. You don't even needs walls of text showing you how wrong you are. Lebron is not greater than Wilt. Period.

What does Lebron do better than Wilt did? Assists? Except Lebron never has lead the league in assists, now has he? Steals, okay. But not scoring, rebounding, or blocked shots. Hell, Bird is Lebron's equal in blocked shots. LOL!!!

Wilt owns the record books. His name is all over them. He did things no one has every done in that era, or any era since. You can go on about pace and weak era all you like, but it doesn't change the fact that Wilt put up numbers and records that nobody else in the history of the game have even come close to.

If it was so easy to dominate back then, then why was the next leading single season scorer under 39 points in the 60s? If rebounding with those numbers was so easy, then why did only four players in the entire decade get over 20 per game? And then Wilt did it his entire career, including in the finals.

So please tell me, if Lebron is better than Wilt, how many times has he done the following:

Led the league in scoring, rebounding, assists, and FG%?

Wilt did it this many times: 7, 11, 1, and 8. Get back to us when Lebron comes close to doing anything like that.

All time, this is what you have in Wilt:

Tied with MJ for scoring average, all-time rebounding average, would be right there with Russell for all-time block average, led his era in FG%. And is the only player at his position to ever lead the league in assists.

Owl

08-03-2013, 09:12 AM

Yet, those Celtics teams, statistically, were the worst or one of the worst in the NBA. I need fpliii, because he has the actual information (it gets into advanced statistics and whatnot) but I'm pretty sure those teams were far from "beastly elite offensive" teams.
3 points

1) From early 60s on Russell's shooting was a drag on O rating by being amongst if not the worst 30mpg center in ts% (directly harming O rating) and in usage (indirectly by forcing additional usage on others).

2) Whether through defense or offense the Celtics leap in points differential (or Ortg-Drtg differential if you prefer) came in a year Russell missed close to a third of the season. The later Boston teams were known to feature a lot of very good defenders (Sanders, K.C., Havlicek being the most notable), given how effective Boston were sans Russell we either have to say other players were important in that (early dynasty) defense, or that Russell whilst providing incredible, remarkable defense, turned a strong offensive team into a poor one. Or some halfway combination of the two. Boston played well pre-Russell is the point.

3) We don

BigTicket

08-03-2013, 09:59 AM

because he didnt jump ship in his prime to play with 2 other superstars in their primes.

He left the Sixers to go play with Jerry West and Elgin Baylor in LA ....

And this was just after a season where all three of them were picked for All-NBA 1st or 2nd team.

Lebron23

08-03-2013, 01:00 PM

Terrible playoffs performer

30 ppg in the regular season >>>21 ppg in the post season.

KOBE143

08-03-2013, 01:12 PM

This is expected to a choker like him..

Wilt and LeBron are the greatest choker of all time.. :bowdown:

The Rock

08-03-2013, 01:26 PM

LAZERUS, THE ROCK CAN SMELL WHAT YOU ARE COOKING:applause:

WILT IS THE MOST DOMINANT PLAYER EVER. DOESN'T MEAN THE BEST, BUT MOST DOMINANT.

ALL TIME LIST

1. JORDAN
2.-KAREEM
3. WILT
4. KOBE
5. RUSSELL

WILT AND KOBE INTERCHANGABLE.

LAZERUSS

08-03-2013, 01:45 PM

Buhu, Wilt's teammates were sooooo bad.. :facepalm

After all, Wilt had only following guys in the playoffs who carried the team on the offensive end while Wilt went back to being a 4th option..

Wilt's teammates stats in the playoffs of '72;

Gail Goodrich - 23.8 points, 4.3 assists and 2.5 rebounds
Jerry West - 22.9 points, 8.9 assists and 4.9 rebounds
Jim McMillan - 19.1 points, 5.7 rebounds and 1.5 assists
Happy Hairston - 13.5 points, 13.1 rebounds and 2.1 assis

Poor Wilt, he only had HOF:ers and 3 guys who averaged 19 or more per game in the playoffs when he won his second ring..

Of course you don't provide us with ALL of their stats, do you? For instance, in that '72 playoff run, Chamberlain shot .563 from the field. How about his teammates? .414. Yep, collectively they shot .414 from the floor.

But it gets even better. Chamberlain, the FMVP, shot .600 in the Finals. How about his teammates? .390. Yep, collectively they shot .390 from the floor in the Finals. Furthermore, this Wilt whom you claim was only their 4th option, was their third leading scorer in the Finals, at 19.4 ppg, and just behind West, who averaged 19.8 ppg. HOWEVER, Chamberlain took 65 FGAs in that series, while West took 117, and guess what, this West who "carried " Chamberlain, shot .325 from the field in the Finals. So, let's re-examine that "who carried who nonsense."

Oh, and as ALWAYS, in the BIG games, it was WILT who dominated. And, he did so with one badly sprained wrist, and the other....FRACTURED. Keep in mind that Kareem had two broken wrists in his career...and missed CHUNKS of games each time. How about Wilt in the clinching game of the Finals? He was their SECOND leading scorer, with 24 points, and just behind Goodrich. And while Goodrich was shooting .333 from the field to get his 25 points, Chamberlain was shooting .714 to get his 24. Oh, and how about "Mr. Clutch" West? 23 points on... 10-28 shooting.

And don't forget that Wilt not only averaged 19.4 ppg in that Finals, and on a .600 FG%, he did so while grabbeding 23.2 rpg. In fact, in the clinching game five win, all Wilt did was pull down 29 rebounds (out of a total of 106 available rebounds BTW)...and the ENTIRE Knick team had 39. And to add icing to the cake, Chamberlain blocked eight shots in that game, and averaged 7.4 bpg for the series.

Wilt being "carried." :roll: :roll: :roll:

millwad

08-03-2013, 02:01 PM

There are many fans of the true shooting percentage, which also accounts for FT's. Below are all playoff runs where the player has averaged at least 20 ppg. We will look at the True Shooting stat shooting efficiency relative to league average. He basically looks identical to Shaq, who are both highly efficient despite their poor foul shooting. Jordan is clearly the top scorer, and Oscar (despite popular belief here) is incredibly dominant in both his scoring and efficiency. The only thing is Wilt from 1960-68 only played in 80 playoff games, so the detractors would have to presume that he could not maintain his scoring production and efficiency in the playoffs over 100+ games, which is baseless considering he didn't get to pad his stats like today's players and beat up on many of the bad teams in an extra 1st round series. If he stinks in the playoffs then what does that make players like Baylor, Kobe, Olajuwon, Shaq, Bird, Duncan, etc.

Such a stupid, ignorant and misleading post. Cherry picking at it's finest..

This is a post that sums it up pretty great when it comes to Wilt fans. As soon as Wilt in some way doesn't look as impressive as you guys like, then you change the way you like to compare that particular stat to modern era players.

So you are willing to use true shooting when Wilt is not crazy dominant in one statistical category but why do we never see you do the same when we are talking about Wilt stat-padding stats when they played at a crazy fast pace? You guys go on crazy long rants about how amazing he was compared to modern era centers in terms of stats but when it doesn't fit your agenda you cherry pick it to certain years and less relevant statistical categories.

A few examples from another forum below:

Playoff runs when they averaged at least 20 PPG

Wilt Chamberlain: 29.3 PPG, 47.7 MPG, +4.2 TS%
Shaquille O'Neal: 27.2 PPG, 40.4 MPG, +4.3 TS%
Hakeem Olajuwon: 27.3 PPG, 40.7 MPG, +3.8 TS%
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: 27.3 PPG, 40.1 MPG, +5.4 TS%
Jerry West: 29.5 PPG, 41.8 MPG, +4.9 TS%
Elgin Baylor: 31.0 PPG, 43.3 MPG, +2.2 TS%
Kobe Bryant: 27.7 PPG, 41.5 MPG, +1.2 TS%
Michael Jordan: 33.5 PPG, 41.7 PPG, +3.1 TS%
Tim Duncan: 23.4 PPG, 40.0 MPG, +2.7 TS%
Larry Bird: 25.1 PPG, 42.7 MPG, +2.2 TS%
Charles Barkley: 25.5 PPG, 41.7 MPG, +5.5 TS%
LeBron James: 28.1 PPG, 43.1 MPG, +2.9 TS%
Oscar Robertson 28.6 PPG, 46.3 MPG, +8.0 TS%

What?

Olajuwon has a higher TS% than Wilt...

millwad

08-03-2013, 02:21 PM

Of course you don't provide us with ALL of their stats, do you? For instance, in that '72 playoff run, Chamberlain shot .563 from the field. How about his teammates? .414. Yep, collectively they shot .414 from the floor.

He's a center, you moron.
Maybe you didn't know but centers shoots at higher FG %.. :facepalm

But it gets even better. Chamberlain, the FMVP, shot .600 in the Finals. How about his teammates? .390. Yep, collectively they shot .390 from the floor in the Finals. Furthermore, this Wilt whom you claim was only their 4th option, was their third leading scorer in the Finals, at 19.4 ppg, and just behind West, who averaged 19.8 ppg. HOWEVER, Chamberlain took 65 FGAs in that series, while West took 117, and guess what, this West who "carried " Chamberlain, shot .325 from the field in the Finals. So, let's re-examine that "who carried who nonsense."

Again you cherry pick which is your speciality.
And yeah, he was the fourth option in the playoffs and he happened to score the third most in the finals but you "forget" that the Knicks didn't have Reed and that they were midgets. They didn't have a decent player over 6'8.

And yeah, cute that you mention West but "forget" Goodrich's 25.6 points per game on 47% shooting..

Oh$, and as ALWAYS, in the BIG games, it was WILT who dominated. And, he did so with one badly sprained wrist, and the other....FRACTURED. Keep in mind that Kareem had two broken wrists in his career...and missed CHUNKS of games each time. How about Wilt in the clinching game of the Finals? He was their SECOND leading scorer, with 24 points, and just behind Goodrich. And while Goodrich was shooting .333 from the field to get his 25 points, Chamberlain was shooting .714 to get his 24. Oh, and how about "Mr. Clutch" West? 23 points on... 10-28 shooting.

As always you spam about Wilt's crazy injuries while playing. Stop it, no one believes it because it's nonsense. You've spammed about his crazy injuries for years while the guy played 45+ minutes per game.. :facepalm

And don't forget that Wilt not only averaged 19.4 ppg in that Finals, and on a .600 FG%, he did so while grabbeding 23.2 rpg. In fact, in the clinching game five win, all Wilt did was pull down 29 rebounds (out of a total of 106 available rebounds BTW)...and the ENTIRE Knick team had 39. And to add icing to the cake, Chamberlain blocked eight shots in that game, and averaged 7.4 bpg for the series.

Wilt being "carried." :roll: :roll: :roll:

Wow, it must have been so tough for Wilt to face the giant 6'8 big guys from NY.. :facepalm

LAZERUSS

08-03-2013, 02:48 PM

Wilt played with a total of 9 HOF:ers during his career and 9 All-Stars. Yes, not all of them played with Wilt during their prime but that's a very remarkable number of talented players. 18 HOF/All-stars.....

HOF:ers Wilt played with:

Jerry West
Hal Greer
Elgin Baylor
Gail Goodrich
Paul Arizin
Tom Gola
Nate Thurmond
Chet Walker
Billy Cunningham

All-stars Wilt played with:

Luke Jackson
Guy Rodgers
Woody Sauldsberry
Tom Meschery
Larry Costello
Red Kerr
Willie Naulls
Flynn Robinson
Bill Bridges

Let's cut to the chase shall we?

On that "HOF" list, you list Billy Cunningham. Certainly a HOFer. And he played with Wilt for three seasons. BUT, he missed the EDFs altogether in '68 (and Jackson and Jones were injured in game five and were worthless the rest of that series, as well), and in the '66 EDF's, he played four of the five games, averaged 5.3 ppg, and shot .161 from the field. So he only played well in the post-season in ONE of their three seasons together. BTW, he did play well in '67, which was one of the very few in which Wilt's teammates played even remotely well....and the result was an overwhelming title.

Baylor? Bill Simmons would have us believe that Baylor and Wilt were teamed together for FOUR seasons. The FACT was, they only played ONE full season together, and Baylor was just awful in that post-season. The reality was, Baylor was already on the decline by the time Wilt arrived, an in his last two seasons, Baylor played two and nine games (and did not play in either post-season.)

Thurmond? Only a complete idiot would put Thurmond on this list. Why? Because Nate was a HOF CENTER. The FACT was, Thurmond was a rookie in their only full season together, who played part-time, out of position, and couldn't shoot a lick because of it. Truly laughable that anyoe would include Nate.

Gola? You're kidding right? True, Gola is in the Basketball HOF. BUT, if there is ever an NBA HOF, he won't come close. His numbers, in the slightly inflated 60's, were no more than ordinary. Having said that, though, they were simply PUTRID in the post-season. In his three post-seasons with Wilt, he shot .412, .271, and .206 from the field. And before someone suggests that it was because of Wilt, the fact was, Gola was just as horrible in the post-season sans Wilt. In fact, while his seasonal numbers were never anything to write home about, he still had his best seasons WITH Chamberlain. As did qite a few on the above lists. Which begs the question, how come? How come so many players had their best seasons, even with a dominant scrig Wilt? Well the answer was simple. They were getting OPEN shots all game long (and even then, they missed the vast majority of them.)

That leaves Walker, Arizin, Greer, Goodrich, and West. BTW, Greer and Goodrich had their best seasons WITH Chamberlain. Still, while Greer played well in his three full seasons with Chamberlain, he had two horrible playoff runs, and even in his good one, he only shot .429 from the floor.

Goodrich played with Wilt for three seasons, and he had the best seasons of is career in doing so. Still, I am convinced that had LA not lost Goodrich in the '69 expansion draft, that they would have won a title in 68-69, too. In an case, Goodrich's play was pobably the best of any of Chamberlain's HOF teammates (I'll get to West in a moment.)

Arizin played with Wilt in his last three seasons, and retired. Here again, even playing with a 50 ppg scoring Chamberain, his scoring only dropped slightly. And, as was way too often the case, he shot poorly in his post-seasons with Chamberlain. In his last two post-seasons, he shot .375 and .325.

A young Walker was a good, but not great player at that stage of his career. He would go on to have a solid career. A "HOF" career? That is debatable. He was just vote in last year, so that should give you an idea.

That brings us to West. West an Chamberlain played together for five seasons, which was the longest of any of Wilt's "HOF" teammates. However, he missed the entire post-season in 70-71 (as did Baylor), so you can really only count four of them. And even then, Chamberlain shredded his knee in '69-70, missed 70 games, and was nowhere near 100% in the playoffs (and still had a great Finals, all on one leg.)

West ws absolutely brilliant in the 68-69 post-season. Unfortunately for Chamberlain, Wilt's incompetent coach shackled Wilt, and allowed Baylor to single-handedly shoot LA out of three games in the Finals (games of 2-12, 2-14, and a game seven of 8-22 from the filed.) West deservedly won the FMVP.

And West was brilliant again in the 69-70 post-season...except for game seven of the Finals, when he was just murdered by Frazier.

Once again, West missed all of the '71 playoffs.

And, in his 71-72 post-season, in which he finally won his only ring, he can thank Chamberlain. West had the worst shootig slump of his career, and in the '72 post-season, he shot .376 from the field. And he was even worse in the Finals, shooting an unfathomable .325.

And in his last post-season with Wilt, he was nursing two injured knees, an was just a shell. In the clinching game five loss in the Finals, West shot 5-17 from the floor. He would only play a few games the next year, and was basically done.

That brings us to Wilt's "All-Stars" on that ridiculous list.

Here again, let's cut to the chase. Sauldsberry, Kerr, Naulls, Robinson, and Bridges. NONE of them were "All-Stars" with Chamberlain. In fact, out of that group, only Robinson and Bridges were even remotely close to decent. And before someone tries to blame Wilt...the others were already washed up, and in fact, Naulls who played terribly with Wilt, played even worse in his next two seasons with Russell.

That leaves the ACTUAL list of "All-Star" teammates that Wilt had. Jackson, Rodgers, Meschey, and Costello. Of that group,we can eliminate Costello right away. His lone "all-star" level of play with Chamberlain occurred in the 64-65 season, in a year in which he averaged 13.5 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 4.3 apg, and shot .445. Oh, and he missed 16 games that year, as well.

Meschery? A ONE-TIME All-Star (and of course, it was with Wilt.) In his "All-Star" season, and just like Costello, he missed 16 games. He averaged 16.0 ppg, 9.8 rpg, and shot .425 from the field. BTW, he was Wilt's second best player on that team...and likely would have been about EIGHTH on the Celtic team that year (which field a total of NINE HOFers.)

Rodgers? True, he was a great passer, especially in his era. And for some reason Wilt liked him. But, the reality was, he was arguably the most inefficient shooter, in comparison to league average, in NBA HISTORY. But even worse than that, for some reason he still shot the ball. And, as poorly as he shot the ball with Wilt, he was even worse after Wilt. In fact, and post-Wilt, in his 67-68 season, in which he played 79 games, he shot .347 from the field, in an NBA that shot .446.

Jackson? Of the group of Wilt' "All-Stars", only Jackson was genuinely deserving. In fact, he was only a one-time All-Star, but probably should have been an All-Star for several seasons.

Hopefully all of the above sheds the REAL light on Wilt and his "HOF" and"All-Star" teammates.

Of course, the Wilt pundits never mention that fact that his team's were outgunned in nearly every one of his post-seasons...and some by HUGE margins. From '59-60 thru ''64-65, Russell's teams enjoyed margins of 7-3, 8-3, 7-3, 9-1, 8-2, and 6-3. In fact, in terms of "HOF" teammates, Russell enjoyed an edge in EVERY one of his ten seasons in the league together with Wilt.

And after Russell retired, the '70 Knicks had FOUR HOFers, the '72 Knicks had FIVE, and the '73 Knicks had SIX. And there was also Kareem's 70-71 Bucks, whom Wilt had to battle without both West and Baylor. And Wilt led his '72 Lakers to wins over both KAJ's Bucks, and that HOF-laden Knick roster.

Nor do the Wilt-bashers ever bring up the FACT that Wilt's teammates generally puked all over themselves in the post-season...despite Wilt essentilly playing the same way that he did in the regular season.

You want a great example? Chamberlain led his 65-66 Sixers to the best record in the league, and in doing so, he led the NBA in scoring, rebounding, and FG%. And his Sixers went 6-3 in their regular season h2h's with the Celtics, too. And in those regular season h2h's, Chamberlain averaged 28.3 ppg, 30.7 ppg, and shot a well-educated estimate of about .525 from the floor.

In their 65-66 EDF battle, the Celtics flattened Wilt's Sixers, 4-1. Surely it was Wilt's fault right? Well, Chamberlain averaged 28.0 ppg, 30.2 rpg, and shot .509 against Russell and the Celtics. How about Wilt's teammates? They colectively shot .352 from the field!

The fact was, in Wilt's first six post-seasons, his teammates collectively shot .383, .354, .352, .352, and .332. And yet, in '62 and '65, they nearly shocked the HOF-laden Celtics in two game seven's.

Wilt probably had the least amount of help from his teammates in is post-seasons, as any major GOAT candidate, and not only that, he did facing truly stacked teams in the process.

Lakers2877

08-03-2013, 02:56 PM

142 games vs Russell

Wilt 29ppg, 29rpg

Russ 15ppg, 24rpg

millwad

08-03-2013, 03:06 PM

Let's cut to the chase shall we?

On that "HOF" list, you list Billy Cunningham. Certainly a HOFer. And he played with Wilt for three seasons. BUT, he missed the EDFs altogether in '68 (and Jackson and Jones were injured in game five and were worthless the rest of that series, as well), and in the '66 EDF's, he played four of the five games, averaged 5.3 ppg, and shot .161 from the field. So he only played well in the post-season in ONE of their three seasons together. BTW, he did play well in '67, which was one of the very few in which Wilt's teammates played even remotely well....and the result was an overwhelming title.

Baylor? Bill Simmons would have us believe that Baylor and Wilt were teamed together for FOUR seasons. The FACT was, they only played ONE full season together, and Baylor was just awful in that post-season. The reality was, Baylor was already on the decline by the time Wilt arrived, an in his last two seasons, Baylor played two and nine games (and did not play in either post-season.)

Thurmond? Only a complete idiot would put Thurmond on this list. Why? Because Nate was a HOF CENTER. The FACT was, Thurmond was a rookie in their only full season together, who played part-time, out of position, and couldn't shoot a lick because of it. Truly laughable that anyoe would include Nate.

Gola? You're kidding right? True, Gola is in the Basketball HOF. BUT, if there is ever an NBA HOF, he won't come close. His numbers, in the slightly inflated 60's, were no more than ordinary. Having said that, though, they were simply PUTRID in the post-season. In his three post-seasons with Wilt, he shot .412, .271, and .206 from the field. And before someone suggests that it was because of Wilt, the fact was, Gola was just as horrible in the post-season sans Wilt. In fact, while his seasonal numbers were never anything to write home about, he still had his best seasons WITH Chamberlain. As did qite a few on the above lists. Which begs the question, how come? How come so many players had their best seasons, even with a dominant scrig Wilt? Well the answer was simple. They were getting OPEN shots all game long (and even then, they missed the vast majority of them.)

That leaves Walker, Arizin, Greer, Goodrich, and West. BTW, Greer and Goodrich had their best seasons WITH Chamberlain. Still, while Greer played well in his three full seasons with Chamberlain, he had two horrible playoff runs, and even in his good one, he only shot .429 from the floor.

Goodrich played with Wilt for three seasons, and he had the best seasons of is career in doing so. Still, I am convinced that had LA not lost Goodrich in the '69 expansion draft, that they would have won a title in 68-69, too. In an case, Goodrich's play was pobably the best of any of Chamberlain's HOF teammates (I'll get to West in a moment.)

Arizin played with Wilt in his last three seasons, and retired. Here again, even playing with a 50 ppg scoring Chamberain, his scoring only dropped slightly. And, as was way too often the case, he shot poorly in his post-seasons with Chamberlain. In his last two post-seasons, he shot .375 and .325.

A young Walker was a good, but not great player at that stage of his career. He would go on to have a solid career. A "HOF" career? That is debatable. He was just vote in last year, so that should give you an idea.

That brings us to West. West an Chamberlain played together for five seasons, which was the longest of any of Wilt's "HOF" teammates. However, he missed the entire post-season in 70-71 (as did Baylor), so you can really only count four of them. And even then, Chamberlain shredded his knee in '69-70, missed 70 games, and was nowhere near 100% in the playoffs (and still had a great Finals, all on one leg.)

West ws absolutely brilliant in the 68-69 post-season. Unfortunately for Chamberlain, Wilt's incompetent coach shackled Wilt, and allowed Baylor to single-handedly shoot LA out of three games in the Finals (games of 2-12, 2-14, and a game seven of 8-22 from the filed.) West deservedly won the FMVP.

And West was brilliant again in the 69-70 post-season...except for game seven of the Finals, when he was just murdered by Frazier.

Once again, West missed all of the '71 playoffs.

And, in his 71-72 post-season, in which he finally won his only ring, he can thank Chamberlain. West had the worst shootig slump of his career, and in the '72 post-season, he shot .376 from the field. And he was even worse in the Finals, shooting an unfathomable .325.

And in his last post-season with Wilt, he was nursing two injured knees, an was just a shell. In the clinching game five loss in the Finals, West shot 5-17 from the floor. He would only play a few games the next year, and was basically done.

That brings us to Wilt's "All-Stars" on that ridiculous list.

Here again, let's cut to the chase. Sauldsberry, Kerr, Naulls, Robinson, and Bridges. NONE of them were "All-Stars" with Chamberlain. In fact, out of that group, only Robinson and Bridges were even remotely close to decent. And before someone tries to blame Wilt...the others were already washed up, and in fact, Naulls who played terribly with Wilt, played even worse in his next two seasons with Russell.

That leaves the ACTUAL list of "All-Star" teammates that Wilt had. Jackson, Rodgers, Meschey, and Costello. Of that group,we can eliminate Costello right away. His lone "all-star" level of play with Chamberlain occurred in the 64-65 season, in a year in which he averaged 13.5 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 4.3 apg, and shot .445. Oh, and he missed 16 games that year, as well.

Meschery? A ONE-TIME All-Star (and of course, it was with Wilt.) In his "All-Star" season, and just like Costello, he missed 16 games. He averaged 16.0 ppg, 9.8 rpg, and shot .425 from the field. BTW, he was Wilt's second best player on that team...and likely would have been about EIGHTH on the Celtic team that year (which field a total of NINE HOFers.)

Rodgers? True, he was a great passer, especially in his era. And for some reason Wilt liked him. But, the reality was, he was arguably the most inefficient shooter, in comparison to league average, in NBA HISTORY. But even worse than that, for some reason he still shot the ball. And, as poorly as he shot the ball with Wilt, he was even worse after Wilt. In fact, and post-Wilt, in his 67-68 season, in which he played 79 games, he shot .347 from the field, in an NBA that shot .446.

Jackson? Of the group of Wilt' "All-Stars", only Jackson was genuinely deserving. In fact, he was only a one-time All-Star, but probably should have been an All-Star for several seasons.

Hopefully all of the above sheds the REAL light on Wilt and his "HOF" and"All-Star" teammates.

Of course, the Wilt pundits never mention that fact that his team's were outgunned in nearly every one of his post-seasons...and some by HUGE margins. From '59-60 thru ''64-65, Russell's teams enjoyed margins of 7-3, 8-3, 7-3, 9-1, 8-2, and 6-3. In fact, in terms of "HOF" teammates, Russell enjoyed an edge in EVERY one of his ten seasons in the league together with Wilt.

And after Russell retired, the '70 Knicks had FOUR HOFers, the '72 Knicks had FIVE, and the '73 Knicks had SIX. And there was also Kareem's 70-71 Bucks, whom Wilt had to battle without both West and Baylor. And Wilt led his '72 Lakers to wins over both KAJ's Bucks, and that HOF-laden Knick roster.

Nor do the Wilt-bashers ever bring up the FACT that Wilt's teammates generally puked all over themselves in the post-season...despite Wilt essentilly playing the same way that he did in the regular season.

You want a great example? Chamberlain led his 65-66 Sixers to the best record in the league, and in doing so, he led the NBA in scoring, rebounding, and FG%. And his Sixers went 6-3 in their regular season h2h's with the Celtics, too. And in those regular season h2h's, Chamberlain averaged 28.3 ppg, 30.7 ppg, and shot a well-educated estimate of about .525 from the floor.

In their 65-66 EDF battle, the Celtics flattened Wilt's Sixers, 4-1. Surely it was Wilt's fault right? Well, Chamberlain averaged 28.0 ppg, 30.2 rpg, and shot .509 against Russell and the Celtics. How about Wilt's teammates? They colectively shot .352 from the field!

The fact was, in Wilt's first six post-seasons, his teammates collectively shot .383, .354, .352, .352, and .332. And yet, in '62 and '65, they nearly shocked the HOF-laden Celtics in two game seven's.

Wilt probably had the least amount of help from his teammates in is post-seasons, as any major GOAT candidate, and not only that, he did facing truly stacked teams in the process.

This is joke post, just because you spam essays it doesn't make your terrible arguments more valid.

Don't be a retard and reply in a normal way and don't type essays that are basically impossible to reply to because you write so much irrelevant and stupid shit.

PHILA

08-03-2013, 04:14 PM

Such a stupid, ignorant and misleading post. Cherry picking at it's finest..

Please don't bring this filth in here. If you can't refute anything or make any kind of argument outside of spamming the same old stuff there is no need to continue this any further.

This is a post that sums it up pretty great when it comes to Wilt fans. As soon as Wilt in some way doesn't look as impressive as you guys like, then you change the way you like to compare that particular stat to modern era players.

You are the same poster who ranked him below Bynum. I don't know why the others post but I just hope he will stay ranked ahead of the likes of Bynum & Howard. I know that may be asking a lot of the trolls here though.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6171553&postcount=174

millwad wrote:

"The last thing I am is a troll, I just think it's absurd to say that Wilt is a better player than Bynum. Just watch Wilt freaking play, how hard can it be? I don't care about his stats, I talk about his skills.

So I'm a troll just because I don't agree with you? Then you're a troll as well since you don't agree with me.."

So you are willing to use true shooting when Wilt is not crazy dominant in one statistical category but why do we never see you do the same when we are talking about Wilt stat-padding stats when they played at a crazy fast pace? You guys go on crazy long rants about how amazing he was compared to modern era centers in terms of stats but when it doesn't fit your agenda you cherry pick it to certain years and less relevant statistical categories.

I chose the his entire pre-Lakers career, which is hardly cherry picking. He is "crazy dominant" in his rebounding totals. And his scoring totals. And in assists as well when he was "carried" by his teammates in 1965, 1966, 1967, and 1968.

From 1962-68 in the playoffs he averaged 5.3 assists, from the center position. He also averaged 28.4 points shooting 52.5% from the floor. Olajuwon during his peak from 1993-95 averaged 29.8 points, 4.4 assists, shooting 52.4% in the playoffs. I see no major difference here aside from minutes played, which if anything would help Wilt more in his rebounding totals.

What?

Olajuwon has a higher TS% than Wilt...

Not relative to the league average. Though I'm sure that sample includes a lot of Olajuwon's not so good runs, like 1990 or 1998, since that poster included all runs where the player averaged at least 20 ppg.

millwad

08-03-2013, 04:42 PM

Please don't bring this filth in here. If you can't refute anything or make any kind of argument outside of spamming the same old stuff there is no need to continue this any further.

Your posts and your agenda is filthy, not what I called you out for.
You are trying to make a case for Wilt and his sinking FG% in the playoffs with bogus. TS% and cherry picking certain seasons instead of using FG%.

Use your brain.

You are the same poster who ranked him below Bynum. I don't know why the others post but I just hope he will stay ranked ahead of the likes of Bynum & Howard. I know that may be asking a lot of the trolls here though.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6171553&postcount=174

millwad wrote:

"The last thing I am is a troll, I just think it's absurd to say that Wilt is a better player than Bynum. Just watch Wilt freaking play, how hard can it be? I don't care about his stats, I talk about his skills.

So I'm a troll just because I don't agree with you? Then you're a troll as well since you don't agree with me.."

That was only to provoke Jlauber, the whole thread was about that and we had a good laugh about it.

I chose the his entire pre-Lakers career, which is hardly cherry picking. He is "crazy dominant" in his rebounding totals. And his scoring totals. And in assists as well when he was "carried" by his teammates in 1965, 1966, 1967, and 1968.

Which is funny, you took away 1 title from him. And it's cherry picking when you want to use TS% instead of FG% when you are well aware of the fact that Wilt has a lower FG% compared to the likes of Olajuwon, KAJ and Shaq, in the playoffs. And you wanted to adjust his FG% compared to the league he played in and then compare it to the other players.

Why don't you ever do the same when you mention Wilt's crazy stats from a very fast paced era? Never have you adjusted Wilt's stats to modern era pace and playing time but now it suddenly is so fair because both Wilt's FG% and TS% is worse than you wish...

From 1962-68 in the playoffs he averaged 5.3 assists, from the center position. He also averaged 28.4 points shooting 52.5% from the floor. Olajuwon during his peak from 1993-95 averaged 29.8 points, 4.4 assists, shooting 52.4% in the playoffs. I see no major difference here aside from minutes played, which if anything would help Wilt more in his rebounding totals.

Oh, you see no difference?
Then you're blind and stupid, since you're such a fan of adjust Wilt's TS% to his league and then to the modern era. Why don't we do the same here? After all, Wilt played in a very fast paced era during his prime where teams shot the ball much more. Go and adjust Wilt's stats to modern era playing time and pace since it's so fair to adjust Wilt's TS% when it fits your agenda.

Not relative to the league average. Though I'm sure that sample includes a lot of Olajuwon's not so good runs, like 1990 or 1998, since that poster included all runs where the player averaged at least 20 ppg.
[/QUOTE]

Haha, this is exactly what I'm talking about.
Even when Wilt is behind a player in a certain category you find your way to change that. Since Olajuwon and others both shot the ball on a higher FG% and TS% you guys felt it was more fair to adjust it to that certain era.

Since you're so interested in adjusting everything for a "fair" comparison, adjust Wilt's stats to modern era pace and playing time.

TOLATE

08-03-2013, 05:03 PM

free throw

La Frescobaldi

08-03-2013, 05:31 PM

1. See every All-time Great's career.
LeBron James in Cleveland, Shaq in Florida, Jabbar before Magic, Magic after Jabbar, Jordan with the 80s Bulls... Chamberlain with the Warriors.
These are the greatest players we have seen in all of history and they ALL failed dismally to win championships until they got teammates to work with. Shoot, Shaquille O'Neal got swept SIX TIME IN THE PLAYOFFS. MJ won 1 playoff game in 4 years, got swept over and over. Kareem won the MVP in '77 but couldn't get out of the West... Lakers fell abysmally to Bill Walton's Blazers SWEEP

2. See casualty lists of 1968 Sixers, 1970-71 Lakers. How many season ending broken arms, ACLs, hamstrings, or Achilles tendon ruptures have you seen in the playoffs in the past.... even 10 years?
* Kobe wasn't actually in the playoffs last year but okay. That ruptured Achilles ended any possibility for the Lakers (if they had ANY)
* Kendrick Perkins knee was a devastating injury to the Celtics in that Game 6, and that Finals SHOULD go down as one of the great What If stories in history.
* Just an example of Chamberlain's luck - Look up Jerry West & Elgin Baylor in the '71 playoffs.
D.N.P.

Hamstrings are largely a thing of the past but you do still see guys missing a few games each season from pulls. That is a terrible injury, many players never do fully recover.... Once strained beyond it's limit, a hamstring can be just like a violin's bowstrings... springy, stretchy, useless. Chamberlain's teammates suffered them ubiquitously. Guys like Greer. Wali Jones. Chet Walker. Luke Jackson. Jerry West. Elgin Baylor. Larry Costello. Happy Hairston.
Now it's true that the Celtics (and all other teams) also suffered greatly from the dismal lack of knowledge about warmups, stretching, and so forth in those days.
But when a guy like Hal Greer was limping, the Sixers were going to struggle. When a Celtic like KC Jones got a pull...... he got replaced by another Hall of Famer like Havlicek, or Don Nelson, or Sam Jones or Tommy Heinsohn or bob Cousy or Frank Ramsay........ ok Nellie wasn't a Hall of Famer but he sure was one of the great basketball minds we have seen and how much is that worth on the court with guys like Hondo, Sanders & Russell? IT'S WORTH A LOT. KC himself was an incredible coach, so was Heinsohn.

3. See Coaches - or rather, lack of coaches.

4 See the continuity of the Boston Celtics teams. Russell and Sam Jones were on the same team for a decade with John Havlicek and Satch Sanders. The Celtics were stacked. Pure and Simple. If the Celtics were playing, you went to see a game to watch world class athletes, not because the outcome was in doubt. Because generally it wasn't.

Even guys who hated Chamberlain knew his greatness. The only people who say Chamberlain was a loser didn't watch hoops in those days, don't know what happened, and use Celtics apologists like Bob Ryan or Bill Simmons for their history.

Horatio33

08-03-2013, 05:57 PM

142 games vs Russell

Wilt 29ppg, 29rpg

Russ 15ppg, 24rpg

Nice cherry pick. Wilt's role was of primary scorer, Russell was 4th option. In Wilt's first few seasons he averaged well over 30ppg so that means his average dropped when he faced Russell.

Jlauber and his comparing Wilt to other centres made me laugh. Wilt was supposed to out score Red Kerr. Kerr wasn't a big time scorer like Wilt. Makes laugh how we are told Wilt was the STRONGEST player and maybe the GREATEST and MOST DOMINANT ATHELETE EVER and then compare him mere mortals like Wayne Embry and Johnny Kerr. He was supposed to dominate guys with average athletecism that just happened to be tall enough to be centres.

PHILA

08-03-2013, 06:33 PM

You are trying to make a case for Wilt and his sinking FG% in the playoffs with bogus. TS% and cherry picking certain seasons instead of using FG%.

It's obvious you have no intention of discussing this topic, so this post is directed towards anyone else who may be reading. Below I will compare their prime playoff years (or 5 year stretch). Also keep in mind that in just about every playoff series during this stretch, Wilt was playing against a HOF center, whether it was Russell, Thurmond, or the Reed/Bellamy combo in New York. The only time he wasn't was in 1965 and 1967 against the Cincinnati Royals, but even then the entire Sixers defense was geared towards stopping Oscar Robertson, the best all around player and the best pick & roll guard of all time. And in the 1965 series he was up against the bruising center Wayne Embry, who was undersized in height but had a very strong base defensively ala Anthony Mason. I'm sure millwad recalls Mason's defense on Hakeem in the '94 Finals, notably those first few games before he broke out in Game 4. Just so that he nor anyone else dismisses Wayne Embry as a "scrub" due to their own willful ignorance.

Palm Beach Post - Jun 15, 1994

The marquee matchup of All-Star centers has lost its luster through three games of the NBA Finals.

Instead of Patrick Ewing and Hakeem Olajuwon commanding the attention, the focus has shifted to Knicks muscleman Anthony Mason, who has guarded Olajuwon more than any Knick.

And Mason has had success. Olajuwon, the league's MVP, is averaging 24.7 points on 44.4 percent shooting, below his regular season averages of 27.3 and 52.8 percent. More importantly, Olajuwon has two field goals and 13 points in the three fourth quarters combined.

Wilt Chamberlain 1964-68 (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chambwi01.html#1964-1968-sum:playoffs_per_game)

27.0 ppg, 27.0 rbs, 5.8 ast, 54.3 FG%

Shaquille O'Neal 1998-2003 (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html#1998-2003-sum:playoffs_per_game)

29.3 ppg, 13.7 rbs, 3.0 ast, 55.4 FG%

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 1970-74 (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html#1970-1974-sum:playoffs_per_game)

29.7 ppg, 16.8 rbs, 4.0 ast, 51.0 FG%

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 1977-80 (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html#1977-1980-sum:playoffs_per_game)

*His efficiency skyrockets from 51% to 58% when he doesn't have to face Thurmond, Wilt, Reed, or Unseld. At least according to millwad logic.

31.6 ppg, 14.0 rbs, 3.8 ast, 57.9 FG%

Sharmer

08-03-2013, 06:35 PM

Wilt was GOAT, he smashed up more ***** than anyone in the league.

:applause:

millwad

08-03-2013, 08:13 PM

It's obvious you have no intention of discussing this topic, so this post is directed towards anyone else who may be reading.

Pure bogus, just calling you out for being too biased and stupid. You have a hard time discussing without getting upset as soon as someone's not on your side. It's a discussion and I have valid posts yet you try to belittle me by spamming about how I'm not serious.

Below I will compare their prime playoff years (or 5 year stretch). Also keep in mind that in just about every playoff series during this stretch, Wilt was playing against a HOF center, whether it was Russell, Thurmond, or the Reed/Bellamy combo in New York. The only time he wasn't was in 1965 and 1967 against the Cincinnati Royals, but even then the entire Sixers defense was geared towards stopping Oscar Robertson, the best all around player and the best pick & roll guard of all time. And in the 1965 series he was up against the bruising center Wayne Embry, who was undersized in height but had a very strong base defensively ala Anthony Mason. I'm sure millwad recalls Mason's defense on Hakeem in the '94 Finals, notably those first few games before he broke out in Game 4. Just so that he nor anyone else dismisses Wayne Embry as a "scrub" due to their own willful ignorance.

Now you're getting even more silly. I'm so freaking tired of hearing about Wilt's opponents because Wilt faced way less defensive pressure compared to modern era centers and big men. The modern defensive schemes, double and triple treams were basically non-existing. So while Wilt had to face great defensive centers like Russell and Thurmond, he did it while mostly having to face them one on one.

Palm Beach Post - Jun 15, 1994

The marquee matchup of All-Star centers has lost its luster through three games of the NBA Finals.

Instead of Patrick Ewing and Hakeem Olajuwon commanding the attention, the focus has shifted to Knicks muscleman Anthony Mason, who has guarded Olajuwon more than any Knick.

And Mason has had success. Olajuwon, the league's MVP, is averaging 24.7 points on 44.4 percent shooting, below his regular season averages of 27.3 and 52.8 percent. More importantly, Olajuwon has two field goals and 13 points in the three fourth quarters combined.

Mason did a great job on Olajuwon during that series but it was more so a combination of getting double and triple teamed all the time that was the main problem for Hakeem. Wilt never faced any defense like that.

Wilt Chamberlain 1964-68 (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chambwi01.html#1964-1968-sum:playoffs_per_game)

27.0 ppg, 27.0 rbs, 5.8 ast, 54.3 FG%

Shaquille O'Neal 1998-2003 (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html#1998-2003-sum:playoffs_per_game)

29.3 ppg, 13.7 rbs, 3.0 ast, 55.4 FG%

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 1970-74 (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html#1970-1974-sum:playoffs_per_game)

29.7 ppg, 16.8 rbs, 4.0 ast, 51.0 FG%

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 1977-80 (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html#1977-1980-sum:playoffs_per_game)

*His efficiency skyrockets from 51% to 58% when he doesn't have to face Thurmond, Wilt, Reed, or Unseld. At least according to millwad logic.

31.6 ppg, 14.0 rbs, 3.8 ast, 57.9 FG%

The links are directly leading to respective player's basketball-reference page and nothing else, please try again.

And don't try to twist what I'm about, you obsessed sucker.

PHILA

08-03-2013, 09:31 PM

You have a hard time discussing without getting upset as soon as someone's not on your side. It's a discussion and I have valid posts yet you try to belittle me by spamming about how I'm not serious.
And what is my side exactly? You have proven to be bigot in all the old school NBA related topics (primarily Wilt).

Now you're getting even more silly. I'm so freaking tired of hearing about Wilt's opponents because Wilt faced way less defensive pressure compared to modern era centers and big men. The modern defensive schemes, double and triple teams were basically non-existing. So while Wilt had to face great defensive centers like Russell and Thurmond, he did it while mostly having to face them one on one.
Wilt never faced any defense like that.

This just proves you don't read anything here or watch the game film. I have shown countless times how much attention he drew during the years when he was the offensive centerpiece (1960-68). This includes help defense and shading before the ball got into his hands with all the illegal zones. And without a 3 point line to space the floor.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8815007&postcount=211

The links are directly leading to respective player's basketball-reference page and nothing else, please try again.

And don't try to twist what I'm about, you obsessed sucker.
Scroll down the page.

http://i.imgur.com/jwEQeWn.png

http://i.imgur.com/V0SNTeM.png

http://i.imgur.com/RqPsx1R.png

http://i.imgur.com/4KaCVPH.png

http://i.imgur.com/II7HeRH.png

LAZERUSS

08-03-2013, 09:45 PM

It's obvious you have no intention of discussing this topic, so this post is directed towards anyone else who may be reading. Below I will compare their prime playoff years (or 5 year stretch). Also keep in mind that in just about every playoff series during this stretch, Wilt was playing against a HOF center, whether it was Russell, Thurmond, or the Reed/Bellamy combo in New York. The only time he wasn't was in 1965 and 1967 against the Cincinnati Royals, but even then the entire Sixers defense was geared towards stopping Oscar Robertson, the best all around player and the best pick & roll guard of all time. And in the 1965 series he was up against the bruising center Wayne Embry, who was undersized in height but had a very strong base defensively ala Anthony Mason. I'm sure millwad recalls Mason's defense on Hakeem in the '94 Finals, notably those first few games before he broke out in Game 4. Just so that he nor anyone else dismisses Wayne Embry as a "scrub" due to their own willful ignorance.

Palm Beach Post - Jun 15, 1994

The marquee matchup of All-Star centers has lost its luster through three games of the NBA Finals.

Instead of Patrick Ewing and Hakeem Olajuwon commanding the attention, the focus has shifted to Knicks muscleman Anthony Mason, who has guarded Olajuwon more than any Knick.

And Mason has had success. Olajuwon, the league's MVP, is averaging 24.7 points on 44.4 percent shooting, below his regular season averages of 27.3 and 52.8 percent. More importantly, Olajuwon has two field goals and 13 points in the three fourth quarters combined.

Wilt Chamberlain 1964-68 (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chambwi01.html#1964-1968-sum:playoffs_per_game)

27.0 ppg, 27.0 rbs, 5.8 ast, 54.3 FG%

Shaquille O'Neal 1998-2003 (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html#1998-2003-sum:playoffs_per_game)

29.3 ppg, 13.7 rbs, 3.0 ast, 55.4 FG%

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 1970-74 (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html#1970-1974-sum:playoffs_per_game)

29.7 ppg, 16.8 rbs, 4.0 ast, 51.0 FG%

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 1977-80 (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html#1977-1980-sum:playoffs_per_game)

*His efficiency skyrockets from 51% to 58% when he doesn't have to face Thurmond, Wilt, Reed, or Unseld. At least according to millwad logic.

31.6 ppg, 14.0 rbs, 3.8 ast, 57.9 FG%

Your logic and research just blows Millwad's feeble efforts and weak-minded retorts away. As always, he can't fight back with anything relevant, so he resorts to name-calling.

Fortunately, he is one the last of a dying breed here. He is one of the last remaining remnants of the "Wilt-bashers" left. Most all of the others high-tailed to the hills as more video footage came forth which completely shelled their blatant lies. As we have seen, though, their only argument is the same old "weak era" and "pace" of the 60's. Of course, Kareem played in that era, and was nowhere near as dominant as a prime Wilt. And not only that, but a near 40 year old KAJ, who could barely get off the floor, just brutally annihilated two of the better centers of the 80's, both of whom would go on to be the second and fourth best centers of the 90's.

We both should quit wasting our time with him.

The "Wilt-bashers"...better known as the "Battle of Little Bighorn" on ISH...

http://www.manataka.org/images/Little_Big_Horn_Battle.jpg

millwad

08-03-2013, 09:54 PM

Your logic and research just blows Millwad's feeble efforts and weak-minded retorts away. As always, he can't fight back with anything relevant, so he resorts to name-calling.

Haha, is this really coming from you?
You're the same old man who kept calling me "Dickwad" all the time because you were so butthurt. And of course you are sucking it up for anyone with a pro Wilt agenda. Since the both of you cherry pick like crazy it's no surprise that you are one the same lame side.

Fortunately, he is one the last of a dying breed here. He is one of the last remaining remnants of the "Wilt-bashers" left. Most all of the others high-tailed to the hills as more video footage came forth which completely shelled their blatant lies. As we have seen, though, their only argument is the same old "weak era" and "pace" of the 60's. Of course, Kareem played in that era, and was nowhere near as dominant as a prime Wilt. And not only that, but a near 40 year old KAJ, who could barely get off the floor, just brutally annihilated two of the better centers of the 80's, both of whom would go on to be the second and fourth best centers of the 90's.

Prime Kareem won as the main scorer and he was by far more dominant during his first title run compared to what Wilt ever was while winning. And as usual you spam about how Kareem "wiped" the floor with second year Olajuwon which is nothing but revisionist history, we all know that Olajuwon just slaughtered Kareem in the playoffs, as a freaking 2nd year pro who was no where close to his prime.

No, Jlauber, stop writing out of your ass. The footage is what it is, it shows that he played in a less developed era and although being an all-time great you overrated his skillset like crazy.

We both should quit wasting our time with him.

The "Wilt-bashers"...better known as the "Battle of Little Bighorn" on ISH...

http://www.manataka.org/images/Little_Big_Horn_Battle.jpg

The Wilt-lovers, better known as the buttlickers;

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4144/5090288682_34c76af342_z.jpg

PHILA

08-03-2013, 10:10 PM

Prime Kareem won as the main scorer and he was by far more dominant during his first title run compared to what Wilt ever was while winning.

Let us ignore the fact that Wilt at age 34 actually outplayed the younger KAJ in the 5 game playoff series that year. If we are just focusing on offense then lets focus on points produced in terms of scoring and distributing.

Playoff Averages

1971 KAJ: 26.6 ppg, 2.5 ast, 51.5 FG%

1967 Wilt: 21.7 ppg, 9.0 ast, 57.9 FG%

2000 Shaq: 30.7 ppg, 3.1 ast, 56.6 FG%

1995 Hakeem: 33.0 ppg, 4.5 ast, 53.1 FG%

Since every assist would have lead to 2 points (or possibly 3 in Hakeem and Shaq's case), let us add up how much they helped the offense, just by this raw simple measure. Just multiply the assists average by 2 and add that result to the player's scoring average.

KAJ (1971): 31.6

Wilt (1967): 39.7

Shaq (2000): 36.9

Hakeem (1995): 42.0

My point is that you can't separate pure scoring from passing or facilitating, since these are all great offensive centers who used the threat of their scoring ability to create for the other 4 players on the court. In KAJ's case in 1971, Oscar Robertson was the primary facilitator and creator on that team.

millwad

08-03-2013, 10:25 PM

Let us ignore the fact that Wilt at age 34 actually outplayed the younger KAJ in the 5 game playoff series that year. If we are just focusing on offense then lets focus on points produced in terms of scoring and distributing.

I guess that you're one of them who claims that Wilt outplayed KAJ in '72 as well so I won't bother.

Playoff Averages

1971 KAJ: 26.6 ppg, 2.5 ast, 51.5 FG%

1967 Wilt: 21.7 ppg, 9.0 ast, 57.9 FG%

2000 Shaq: 30.7 ppg, 3.1 ast, 56.6 FG%

1995 Hakeem: 33.0 ppg, 4.5 ast, 53.1 FG%

Since every assist would have lead to 2 points (or possibly 3 in Hakeem and Shaq's case), let us add up how much they helped the offense, just by this raw simple measure. Just multiply the assists average by 2 and add that result to the player's scoring average.

KAJ (1971): 31.6

Wilt (1967): 39.7

Shaq (2000): 36.9

Hakeem (1995): 42.0

My point is that you can't separate pure scoring from passing or facilitating, since these are all great offensive centers who used the threat of their scoring ability to create for the other 4 players on the court. In KAJ's case in 1971, Oscar Robertson was the primary facilitator and creator on that team.

I'm not saying that you can separate pure scoring from passing or facilitating, that has never been my point. My point is that you can't compare certain stats and cherry pick certain stats just because it fits your agenda. In an attempt to make Wilt's shooting look better you used the most stupid way of comparing and trying to adjust it just so he would look better compared to modern era competition.

Yet you guys don't ever use the same logic when it comes to adjusting Wilt's stats to modern era pace and playing time which would be a massive hit for his stats.

You are completely missing out on my point, my point is that Wilt's statistical dominance is not a dominance that is that big in reality when you actually compare the modern era players and adjust pace and playing time.

Marchesk

08-03-2013, 10:38 PM

You are completely missing out on my point, my point is that Wilt's statistical dominance is not a dominance that is that big in reality when you actually compare the modern era players and adjust pace and playing time.

Well then, somebody ought to do the calculations. Are we talking prime Wilt as the volume scorer? Keep in mind that during that time, FG% was considerably lower as it was the strategy to shoot more often. And Wilt was playing nearly every minute.

I'm guessing that given today's pace and minutes, his shooting percentage would go up, while his shots would go down (of course). I'm also guessing that resting a guy means that they will be a bit more efficient. I'll wager that stars back then who played the entire games would find spots in the game where they rested by not playing as hard.

Then you have to use his rebounding percentage, and it looks like rebounded about the same throughout his career, including the playoffs and finals. The shot blocking is going to be somewhat of a guess, although numbers from certain games and estimates across seasons based on unofficial records can be used.

I'm sure we can come up with the adjusted numbers. What we can't do is adjust for the 3pt line, rule changes, relative competition, team strategies and all that. Maybe we use prime Shaq or healthy Dwight as the standard for how many touches Wilt would get.

bdreason

08-04-2013, 12:54 AM

Malone and Barkley are considered 2 of the top 3 PF's of all-time... why didn't they win more?

Because it's a team sport.

LAZERUSS

08-04-2013, 02:04 AM

Well then, somebody ought to do the calculations. Are we talking prime Wilt as the volume scorer? Keep in mind that during that time, FG% was considerably lower as it was the strategy to shoot more often. And Wilt was playing nearly every minute.

I'm guessing that given today's pace and minutes, his shooting percentage would go up, while his shots would go down (of course). I'm also guessing that resting a guy means that they will be a bit more efficient. I'll wager that stars back then who played the entire games would find spots in the game where they rested by not playing as hard.

Then you have to use his rebounding percentage, and it looks like rebounded about the same throughout his career, including the playoffs and finals. The shot blocking is going to be somewhat of a guess, although numbers from certain games and estimates across seasons based on unofficial records can be used.

I'm sure we can come up with the adjusted numbers. What we can't do is adjust for the 3pt line, rule changes, relative competition, team strategies and all that. Maybe we use prime Shaq or healthy Dwight as the standard for how many touches Wilt would get.

There remains the fact that almost player-for-player, who either played at the beginning of the 60's, until the end of that decade, or even played beyond it, shot better as the year's went by.

I have given players like Johnny Green, Darrell Imhoff, Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, Willis Reed, Walt Bellamy, and Wilt. All had considerably higher FG%'s later in the decade. And I mean considerably. Go ahead...look them up.

And how about Havlicek? The man played eight seasons in the 60's, and eight seasons in the 70's. Guess what? He shot better in every season in the 70's, than in his best season in the 60's.

And then the same applies to those that played into the late 70's, and even into the 80's. Kareem had four seasons in the 70's, in which he shot .539, .529, .518, and .513. And that .513 came right in the middle of the decade. And yet, he just blew away those FG%s in the 80's.

But you want an even better example? Look up Artis Gilmore. The man just exploded in the 80's. How about this? A 27 year old Gilmore averaged 18.6 ppg on .522 shooting. A 35 year old Gilmore averaged 19.1 ppg on .623 shooting. And in-between he had seasons of .652 and even .670 in the 80's.

THEN, it goes the OTHER way in the 80's and into the 90's. Granted, I can see perimeter players having their FG%'s drop some based on 3pt attempts, BUT, how about CENTERS???

Hakeem...had his highest FG% season of his entire career...in his ROOKIE season. How about Ewing? In his 87-88 season he shot .555. In his 88-89 season he shot .567. In his 89-90 season he shot .551. Then he had a HUGE decline. By the mid-90's he was shooting as low as .466. Robinson? Well, D-Rob came into the league in 89-90, and in his first three seasons in the league he shot .531, .552, and .551. Then, all of a sudden, from 92-93 on, a STEEP decline.

Why? Did the players of the early 60's learn to shoot better (even though their FT%'s changed little)? And conversely, did the players of the late 80's slowly forget how to shoot?

And before some idiot claims the defense were better in the 90's than the 60's, how do they explain an old Thurmond reducing a prime Kareem to a .440 FG% in 40 career h2h games (and with a high game of 34 points)? And yet a 38-39 year old KAJ averaged 33 ppg on .630 shooting covering TEN STRAIGHT games against an 80's Hakeem. Hell, a 37-41 year old KAJ outshot a 23-27 year old Hakeem by a .607 to .512 margin in their 23 career h2h's, and only had three games under 50% (and a TON of over 60%), including three games of 40, 43, and 46 points (and in only 37 minutes.) An old Chamberlain held KAJ to .464 shooting over the course of 28 h2h games, with only 10 above 50%, and six below 40%. BTW, a prime Chamberlain just shelled a 60's Thurmond WAY beyond what a PRIME KAJ ever did...and Thurmond was at his peak in '67.

No, there were SEVERAL reasons why players in the early 60's shot so poorly. One, the lanes were congested. They finally widened them in the mid-60's (and BTW, it had no effect on Chamberlain whatsoever.) The BALL was not uniform until the late 60's. Now, I recall playing city league basketball in the 60's and 70's, and a rack of balls never had two the same. Some were lighter, some were heavier, some were lopsided, and some were even bald. And the venues were often cold, and even breezy. Most all of us have played basketball outdoors. Temperature and wind DRAMATICALLY affect shooting. And last (but there were other reasons), the SCHEDULE was BRUTAL. In Wilt's 61-62 season alone, (in a year in which he missed a total of eight minutes all season), Chamberlain played in a TON of b2b games. He also played in SIX "three-in-a-rows; separate stretches of THREE "four-in-a-rows"; and even yet another separate stretch of "five games in five nights" (and two of them were on the road right in the middle of it.)

Clearly fatigue was a HUGE factor. But you also can't discount the other conditions, which, when all added up, DRAMATICALLY affected FG%'s.

Incidently, how come in the 58-59 season, the NBA collectively shot .756 from the line, and just this past season (2012-13), it collectively shot .753 (and don't forget that in 73-74 the NBA even shot .771)?

These idiots that claim that the players of the early 60's were inept can just watch footage of Jerry West in the 61-62 all-star game. His jump shot was EXACTLY the same, in 61-62, as it would be into the 70's. Yet, West shot .419 and .445 in his first two seasons. What changed? Did they change the diameter of the rim?

The "paceologists" always diminish what Chamberlain accomplished (and really it was ONLY Wilt who was scoring FAR more than anyone else in his era), based on "pace." BUT, they will never mention that he was outshooting his peers by staggering margins. He had seasons of .506 in a league that shot .426; .540 in a league that shot .433; .595 in a league that shot .446; .727 in a league that shot .456; and .683 in a league that shot .441. And he was winning FG% titles by margins of .157 and .162 over the next best guy in the league.

Oh, and just to add to these "Wilt-bashings", think about this? In the 14 years that Chamberlain played in the league, and aside from Wilt's own 32 games, there were a TOTAL of FIVE games in which a player scored 60+ points. Where were all these other players who should have been benefitting from this "pace" nonsense?

The bottom line, there were a variety of reasons why players shot so much worse back in the 60's (particularly the early 60's), and to suggest that the modern players could just go back in a time machine, and shoot what there were in their eras is very unlikely.

So, I'm sorry, but you simply have to account for LEAGUE AVERAGE in these "cross-era" comparisons. A Chamberlain scoring 33.5 ppg on .540 shooting in 65-66, in a league that averaged 115.5 ppg and on an eFG% of .433, will see his scoring drop in 2012-13, in a league that averaged 98.1 ppg to about 28.5 ppg, BUT, his adjusted FG% will rise to about .618 in a league that had an eFG% of .496. If you don't adjust for eFG%'s, then Wilt's 65-66 NBA would drop to about 85 ppg in the current NBA.