Wilt's 65-66 H2H's

[LAZERUSS]

Since there is considerable research available regarding H2H games, and continuing on the theme of Chamberlain's 66-67 H2H's, I am going back a year, to what I believe was Wilt's greatest season, his 65-66 campaign.

Here is a link to recap his 66-67 domination of his HOF peers:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=321988


And before I start his 65-66 matchups, I thought I would include his 64-65 H2H's with Willis Reed. Why? Because the Knicks brought in Walt Bellamy before the start of the start of the 65-66 season, and subsequently moved Reed to the PF position. And while I am reasonably certain that Reed at least occasionally defended Wilt in the Bellamy years, their 64-65 seasonal H2H's were much more representative of how the two played against each other.

Unfortunately, just as was the case in 65-66, some stat-lines were very incomplete. In the case of Reed's 64-65, there were only two games, out of his 12 H2H's with Wilt (yes, 12 H2H games) in which I could gather rebounding numbers, and zero with his FG%. As for Chamberlain, the scoring and rebounding are complete, but FG% data was missing for two of those 12 games. Still, 10 games out of 12 should give a solid indication of just how efficient he was in those games.

Again, these H2H's are from their 64-65 season:

1.
Reed: 23 pts, 16 rebs.
Wilt: 52 pts, 21 rebs, 3 ast, 21-43 FG/FGA

2.
Reed: 38 pts.
Wilt: 41 pts, 21 rebs, 6 ast, 17-33 FG/FGA

3.
Reed: 25 pts.
Wilt: 36 pts., 22 rebs, 6 ast, 16-? FG/FGA

4.
Reed: 28 pts.
Wilt: 58 pts, 22 rebs, 5 ast, 25-45 FG/FGA

5.
Reed: 25 pts.
Wilt: 46 pts, 18 rebs, 19-39 FG/FGA

6.
Reed: 8 pts.
Wilt: 41 pts, 32 rebs, 17-35 FG/FGA

7.
Reed: 12 pts, 18 rebs
Wilt: 29 pts, 17 rebs, 14-? FG/FGA

8.
Reed: 35 pts
Wilt: 29 pts, 13 rebs, 0 ast, 14-25 FG/FGA

9.
Reed: 24 pts
Wilt: 37 pts, 32 rebs, 2 ast, 14-22 FG/FGA

10.
Reed: 20 pts
Wilt: 30 pts, 18 rebs, 1 ast, 9-15 FG/FGA

11.
Reed: 22 pts
Wilt: 37 pts, 28 rebs, 3 ast, 18-30 FG/FGA

12.
Reed: 14 pts
Wilt: 27 pts, 11 rebs, 6 ast, 12-25 FG/FGA


Known averages:

Reed averaged 22.8 ppg and in his two known games, 17.0 rpg
Wilt averaged 38.6 ppg, 21.2 rpg, 3.6 apg, .532 FG% (league shot .426 BTW.)

Wilt outscored Reed in 11 of the 12 games. Reed did manage to go 1-1 in their known rebounding H2H's. as a sidenote, Wilt had games of 13 and 11 rebounds, which were unusually low for him.

As you can see, Chamberlain also had five games of 40+, which included two of 50+. And he held some eye-popping scoring margins, as well. Margins of 46-25, 52-23, 58-28, and 41-8 among them.

Next...on to the 65-66 H2H's, including the post-season, with Bellamy, Thurmond, and Russell...

[andremiller07]

Reggie Evans vs Chuck Hayes head to head stats career

And while I am reasonably certain that Hayes at least occasionally defended Evans in their 2006-2014 seasonal H2H's were much more representative of how the two played against each other.

Played 17
Evans won 10
Hayes won 7

Evans 2.8ppg 4.9rpg 0.7apg 0.4spg 0.0bpg
Hayes 1.5ppg 3.3rpg 1.1apg 0.5spg 0.4bpg

Notable Meetings
2006-02-03
Reggie: 0 points 0 boards 0 assists 0 steals 0 blocks
Hayes 4 points 5 boards 1 steal 0 blocks 0 assists

2006-03-03
Reggie 0, 7, 0, 0,0
Hayes 0, 1, 0, 1,0

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=hayesch01&p2=evansre01

If you want to see the rest of there match ups

[Psileas]

He had 29/13 as his worst output, and that's the only game when Reed seems to outplay him...Although it will be hard to find verification as to who guarded him, as people in these places claim, GOAT gonna GOAT. :applause:

[LAZERUSS]

Wilt vs. Nate Thurmond:

Game 1:
Nate: 30 pts
Wilt: 15 pts, 21 rebs

Game 2:
Nate: 13 pts.
Wilt: 22 pts, 21 rebs

Game 3:
Nate: 9 pts
Wilt: 26 pts, 28 rebs

Game 4:
Nate: 20 pts, 32 rebs
Wilt: 25 pts, 21 rebs, 9 ast, 8-22 FG/FGA

Game 5:
Nate: 15 pts, 23 rebs
Wilt: 38 pts, 31 rebs

Game 6:
Nate: 18 pts, 25 rebs
Wilt: 23 pts, 27 rebs

Game 7:
Nate: 13 pts, 26 rebs
Wilt: 45 pts, 21 rebs, 2 ast, 17-32 FG/FGA

Game 8:
Nate: 17 pts, 19 rebs
Wilt: 33 pts, 30 rebs, 8 ast

Game 9:
Nate: 10 pts, 10 rebs
Wilt: 30 pts, 29 rebs


Total averages in their known games:

Nate: 16.1 ppg, 22.8 rpg
Wilt: 28.6 ppg, 25.4 rpg, 6.3 apg, .463 FG%

Of course, Chamberlain's .463% is based on only two known H2H's, out of their nine games. Given the fact that Wilt averaged 26.7 ppg on .500 shooting in their three H2H's from the 64-65 season, and then 20.8 ppg on .633 shooting in their six regular season H2H's, and then 17.5 ppg on .560 shooting in their six H2H's in the Finals in the 66-67 season, I strongly suspect that Chamberlain's FG% against Thurmond in the 65-66 season was probably over 50%.

Also, we don't have any of Thurmond's FG%'s, either. However, in the known FG%s of games that do exist, there were very few in which Nate shot 50%, and in the vast majority, he shot well below 40%. Julizaver's research had Nate shooting a .382 mark against Chamberlain in their known H2H's FG% games in their career matchups. We also know that Nate shot .327 from the field in their six regular season H2H's in their 66-67 season, and then .343 in their six H2H's in the Finals in that 66-67 season.

In any case, clearly Chamberlain crushed Nate like no one else would in Thurmond's career, including a peak/prime Kareem. Just look at some of those scoring margins: 33-17, 26-9, 30-10, 38-15, and 45-13. And overall, Chamberlain held an 8-1 scoring edge, and a 4-2 edge in known rebounding H2H's.

[LAZERUSS]

He had 29/13 as his worst output, and that's the only game when Reed seems to outplay him...Although it will be hard to find verification as to who guarded him, as people in these places claim, GOAT gonna GOAT. :applause:

I have read a quote from Reed himself who claimed that Wilt dropped 56 points against him in their first encounter (actually it was "only" 52), so we know he was (trying) to defend him in that match-up. In any case, Reed was the Knicks starting center in all 80 games that season, so I am very confident that he was on the receiving end of the vast majority of Chamberlain's 463 points that season.

[LAZERUSS]

Wilt vs Walt Bellamy:

Game 1:
Bellamy: 21 pts, 10 rebs
Wilt: 33 pts, 25 rebs, 16-29 FG/FGA

Game 2:
Bellamy: 24 pts, 12 rebs
Wilt: 34 pts, 17 rebs

Game 3:
Bellamy: 36 pts, 16 rebs
Wilt: 50 pts, 23 rebs, 22-38 FG/FGA

Game 4:
Bellamy: 27 pts, 22 rebs
Wilt: 27 pts, 20 rebs

Game 5:
Bellamy: 17 pts
Wilt: 27 pts, 12 rebs, 4 ast, 10-22 FG/FGA

Game 6:
Bellamy: 19 pts, 16 rebs
Wilt: 34 pts, 17 rebs, 3 ast, 14-23 FG/FGA

Game 7:
Bellamy: 23 pts, 10 rebs
Wilt: 38 pts, 13 rebs, 1 ast, 18-27 FG/FGA

Game 8:
Bellamy: 27 pts, 24 rebs
Wilt: 35 pts, 26 rebs, 7 ast, 14-34 FG/FGA

Game 9:
Bellamy: 39 pts, 18 rebs
Wilt: 23 pts, 23 rebs, 12 ast

Game 10:
Bellamy: 22 pts, 16 rebs
Wilt: 25 pts, 19 rebs, 10 ast


Total averages in their known H2H's:

Bellamy averaged 25.2 ppg, 16.0 rpg
Wilt averaged 32.6 ppg, 19.5 rpg, 6.1 apg, .543 FG% (the entire league shot .433 that season.)

Chamberlain outscored Bellamy in those 10 H2H's, 8-1-1. And he held an 8-1 margin in their known nine H2H rebounding games.

[julizaver]

Wilt vs. Nate Thurmond:

Also, we don't have any of Thurmond's FG%'s, either.

Game 4:
Nate: 20 pts, 32 rebs, 3 ast, 8-17 FG/FGA
Wilt: 25 pts, 21 rebs, 9 ast, 8-22 FG/FGA

Game 7:
Nate: 13 pts, 26 rebs, 1 ast, 6-16 FG/FGA
Wilt: 45 pts, 21 rebs, 2 ast, 17-32 FG/FGA

Game 8:
Nate: 17 pts, 19 rebs
Wilt: 33 pts, 30 rebs, 8 ast, 16 blks

[STATUTORY]

in this thread, boomers reminiscing bout the past

http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbview_approve/15879164/2/stock-photo-15879164-four-old-people-shocked-by-image-on-computer-monitor.jpg

[dankok8]

Nice post! I put up these numbers before too and they are quite nice.

However you're giving too much weight to Wilt's numbers vs. rookie Reed.

And in 64-65 and 65-66 Thurmond was still young and not in his prime. Presuming that Wilt took about 20 shots per game in their H2H, Wilt probably shot below 50% against Nate in the 65-66 season overall. Here... 140 shots (20 per) in the other 7 games where we're missing FG% and that would have put Wilt at 93/194 or 47.9% shooting...

Bellamy did great against Wilt in 65-66 especially considering he also shared the frontcourt with Reed who was taking a lot of his rebounds and offensive touches.

[LAZERUSS]

Game 4:
Nate: 20 pts, 32 rebs, 3 ast, 8-17 FG/FGA
Wilt: 25 pts, 21 rebs, 9 ast, 8-22 FG/FGA

Game 7:
Nate: 13 pts, 26 rebs, 1 ast, 6-16 FG/FGA
Wilt: 45 pts, 21 rebs, 2 ast, 17-32 FG/FGA

Game 8:
Nate: 17 pts, 19 rebs
Wilt: 33 pts, 30 rebs, 8 ast, 16 blks


Thanks again!

BTW, (and I believe it was Psileas who pointed this out first) all three of those games were in a row (although not on consecutive days.) His very next game came against Russell, and he outscored Russell in that game, 31-11, and outrebounded him, 40-17. Then, a few days later he faced Bellamy, and outscored Bellamy, 50-36, and outrebounded him, 23-16. (Although, sandwiched in between the Russell and Bellamy games, Chamberlain had two other games of 34-23 and 23-14.)

In any case, that was a remarkable five game run against three of the greatest centers of all-time.

Although the H2H data is still very incomplete, I will update it now...

Nate averaged 16.1 ppg, 22.8 rpg, 2 apg, and shot .451 (two of nine H2H games)
Wilt averaged 28.6 ppg, 25.4 rpg, 6.3 apg, shot .463 (only two of nine H2H games), and in the one game in which we have blocks, he blocked 16 shots.

Once again though, I suspect Wilt's FG% was extremely low, Nate's was probably high, and of course, I seriously doubt Wilt averaged 16 bpg.

Overall, though, it was a truly massive beatdown of Thurmond, in every aspect of the game.

[LAZERUSS]

Nice post! I put up these numbers before too and they are quite nice.

However you're giving too much weight to Wilt's numbers vs. rookie Reed.

And in 64-65 and 65-66 Thurmond was still young and not in his prime. Presuming that Wilt took about 20 shots per game in their H2H, Wilt probably shot below 50% against Nate in the 65-66 season overall. Here... 140 shots (20 per) in the other 7 games where we're missing FG% and that would have put Wilt at 93/194 or 47.9% shooting...

Bellamy did great against Wilt in 65-66 especially considering he also shared the frontcourt with Reed who was taking a lot of his rebounds and offensive touches.

Here were Nate's 10 H2H games against Russell in that 65-66 season:

Game 1:
Nate: 18 pts, 27 rebs
Russell: 17 pts, 22 rebs, 7-13 FG/FGA

Game 2:
Nate: 19 pts, 12 rebs
Russell: 8 pts, 20 rebs, 4-9 FG/FGA

Game 3:
Nate: 20 pts
Russell: 8 pts, 28 rebs

Game 4:
Nate: 21 pts, 31 rebs
Russell: 13 pts, 24 rebs, 4-11 FG/FGA

Game 5:
Nate: 19 pts
Russell: 16 pts, 24 rebs

Game 6:
Nate: 25 pts, 27 rebs
Russell: 15 pts, 11 rebs, 6-12 FG/FGA

Game 7:
Nate: 24 pts, 24 rebs
Russell: 10 pts, 28 rebs

Game 8:
Nate: 34 pts, 19 rebs
Russell: 8 pts, 24 rebs, 2-8 FG/FGA

Game 9:
Nate: 23 pts, 23 rebs
Russell: 12 pts, 19 rebs

Game 10:
Nate: 11 pts, 14 rebs
Russell: 11 pts, 23 rebs, 5-13 FG/FGA

Known season averages:

Nate: 20.2 ppg, 22.2 rpg
Russell: 11.8 ppg, 22.3 rpg, .429 FG%

Without knowing all of their FG% numbers, I would think that Thurmond easily outplayed Russell.


Not bad for a "non-prime" Nate, don't you think?

[LAZERUSS]

Nice post! I put up these numbers before too and they are quite nice.

However you're giving too much weight to Wilt's numbers vs. rookie Reed.

And in 64-65 and 65-66 Thurmond was still young and not in his prime. Presuming that Wilt took about 20 shots per game in their H2H, Wilt probably shot below 50% against Nate in the 65-66 season overall. Here... 140 shots (20 per) in the other 7 games where we're missing FG% and that would have put Wilt at 93/194 or 47.9% shooting...

Bellamy did great against Wilt in 65-66 especially considering he also shared the frontcourt with Reed who was taking a lot of his rebounds and offensive touches.

In 10 H2H games with Russell in his rookie season, he averaged 19.1 ppg and 18.6 rpg, compared to Russell's 15.8 ppg and 24.8 rpg.

[LAZERUSS]

Russell-Bellamy H2H's in 65-66:

Game 1:
Walt: 11 pts, 10 rebs
Russell: 17 pts, 29 rebs, 5 ast, 7-14 FG/FGA

Game 2:
Walt: 28 pts.
Russell: 16 pts, 25 rebs

Game 3:
Walt: 17 pts, 18 rebs
Russell: 18 pts, 21 rebs, 10 ast, 8-15 FG/FGA

Game 4:
Walt: 29 pts, 19 rebs
Russell: 21 pts, 25 rebs, 6 ast, 9-13 FG/FGA

Game 5:
Walt: 19 pts,
Russell: 12 pts, 19 rebs

Game 6:
Walt: 32 pts, 23 rebs
Russell: 12 pts, 27 rebs, 12 ast

Game 7:
Walt: 26 pts, 19 rebs
Russell: 22 pts, 27 rebs, 2 ast, 10-21

Game 8:
Walt: 28 pts, 16 rebs
Russell: 20 pts, 29 rebs, 2 ast, 8-14 FG/FGA

Game 9:
Walt: 31 pts, 25 rebs
Russell: 16 pts, 27 rebs

Game 10:
Walt: 27 pts, 12 rebs
Russell: 11 pts, 21 rebs, 5 ast, 4-6 FG/FGA

Game 11:
Walt: 16 pts
Russell: 10 pts, 27 rebs, 10 blks


Known total averages:

Bellamy: 24.0 ppg, 17.8 rpg
Russell: 15.9 ppg, 25.2 rpg, 6.0 apg, .554 FG%, and one game with 10 blks

[LAZERUSS]

Thurmond-Bellamy H2H's in 65-66

1.
Walt: 10 pts
Nate: 6 pts

2.
Walt: 28 pts
Nate: 17 pts

3.
Walt: 31 pts.
Nate: 13 pts

4.
Walt: 10 pts.
Nate: 13 pts

5.
Walt: 11 pts, 13 rebs
Nate: 19 pts, 23 rebs

6.
Walt: 18 pts, 14 rebs
Nate: 10 pts, 18 rebs

7.
Walt: 22 pts, 18 rebs
Nate: 2 pts, 2 rebs


These are their known averages, but it appears that Nate was probably injured in their seventh game, or perhaps was ejected.

Walt: 18.6 ppg, 15.0 rpg
Nate: 11.6 ppg, 14.3 rpg

[dankok8]

Russell's Celtics were 10-0 vs. Bellamy's Knicks and 8-2 vs. Nate's Warriors in 65-66. When I see such one-sided team records I take the stats with a grain of salt. Undoubtedly lot of Bellamy/Thurmond numbers were accumulated in garbage time. Much like Wilt's numbers against Russell in many years.

And Thurmond wasn't in his prime in 65-66... averaged 16.3/18.0/1.5 on 40.6% shooting. His best numbers were around 20 ppg and 4 apg on 45% shooting and his defense got better as well based on team impact and DWS.

Everyone knows Russell in 65-66 was a monster. Averaged 19.1/25.2/5.0 on 47.5% shooting in the playoffs on the way to a dominant title. Boston dispatched Oscar's Royals, then Wilt's Sixers (who won 1 more game), and then West/Baylor Lakers in the Finals where Russ averaged 23.6/24.3/3.6 on 53.8% shooting along with masterful defense. We have his games of 6 blocks/3 steals and 11 blocks in the series.

[LAZERUSS]

And finally, the Russell-Wilt H2H's in 65-66, including playoffs.

1.
Russell: 5 pts, 29 rebs, 5 ast, 2-11 FG/FGA
Wilt: 30 pts, 24 rebs

2.
Russell: 6 pts, 22 rebs, 5 ast, 2-8 FG/FGA
Wilt: 27 pts, 32 rebs

3.
Russell: 13 pts, 10 rebs, 9 ast, 6-18 FG/FGA
Wilt: 28 pts, 30 rebs, 2 ast, 12-19 FG/FGA

4.
Russell: 11 pts, 17 rebs, 2 ast, 4-14 FG/FGA
Wilt: 31 pts, 40 rebs

5.
Russell: 14 pts, 25 rebs, 6 ast, 5-15 FG/FGA
Wilt: 37 pts, 42 rebs

6.
Russell: 13 pts, 21 rebs, 3 ast, 5-11 FG/FGA
Wilt: 14 pts, 16 rebs, 2 ast, 6-12 FG/FGA

7.
Russell: 3 pts, 27 rebs
Wilt: 29 pts, 26 rebs, 4 ast, 11-21 FG/FGA

8.
Russell: 13 pts, 20 rebs, 3 ast, 6-20 FG/FGA
Wilt: 27 pts, 36 rebs, 4 ast, 11-25 FG/FGA

9.
Russell: 8 pts, 20 rebs, 3 ast, 3-9 FG/FGA
Wilt: 32 pts, 30 rebs, 5 ast, 10-19 FG/FGA

Known regular season averages:

Russell: 9.6 ppg, 21.2 rpg, 5.0 apg, .321 FG%

Wilt: 28.3 ppg, 30.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, .521 FG%

BTW, Russell's FG% is based on eight known games, out of their nine H2H, and in the one we don't have his FG%, he only made 1 shot. It is likely that he shot even less than .321 against Wilt that season.


Playoffs:

Game 1:
Russell: 13 pts, 18 rebs
Wilt: 25 pts, 32 rebs

Game 2:
Russell: 10 pts, 29 rebs, 9 ast
Wilt: 23 pts, 25 rebs

Game 3:
Russell: 11 pts, 23 rebs, 3 ast, 4-11 FG/FGA
Wilt: 31 pts, 27 rebs, 4 ast, 12-22 FG/FGA

Game 4:
Russell: 18 pts, 30 rebs, 7 ast, 7-15 FG/FGA
Wilt: 15 pts, 33 rebs, 3 ast, 7-14 FG/FGA and 6 blocks

Game 5:
Russell: 18 pts, 31 rebs
Wilt: 46 pts, 34 rebs, 19-34 FG/FGA

While we don't have all of Wilt's FG%'s in that series, we know he shot .509 from the field.

BTW, in that game four, in which it LOOKS like Russell MAY have outplayed Wilt (for the ONLY time in that series), newspaper recaps claimed that Chamberlain almost single-handedly won the game by himself.

Overall known averages:

Russell: 14 ppg, 26.2 rpg, 6.3 apg, .423 FG%
Wilt: 28.0 ppg, 30.2 rpg, 3.5 apg, .509 FG%, with 1 game of 6 blks


Total known averages for their 14 H2H games that season:

Russell: 11.1 ppg, 23.0 rpg, 5.4 apg, .341 FG%
Wilt: 28.2 ppg, 30.5 rpg, 3.4 apg, .515 FG%


Wilt outscored Russell by a 13-1 margin, including staggering margins of 31-11, 31-11, 27-6, 37-14, 32-8, 30-5, 29-3, and 46-18.

Chamberlain outrebounded Russell 10-4, including margins of 30-20, 32-22, 32-18, 36-20, 42-25, 30-10, and 40-17.

He also outshot Russell in all known H2H games in which we have both of their FG/FGAs.

Just a complete demolition of Russell in the entire season.

[fpliii]

Lazeruss - How would you rate each of Wilt's seasons, from 1-10, in terms of offense/defense?

[LAZERUSS]

Russell's Celtics were 10-0 vs. Bellamy's Knicks and 8-2 vs. Nate's Warriors in 65-66. When I see such one-sided team records I take the stats with a grain of salt. Undoubtedly lot of Bellamy/Thurmond numbers were accumulated in garbage time. Much like Wilt's numbers against Russell in many years.

And Thurmond wasn't in his prime in 65-66... averaged 16.3/18.0/1.5 on 40.6% shooting. His best numbers were around 20 ppg and 4 apg on 45% shooting and his defense got better as well based on team impact and DWS.

Everyone knows Russell in 65-66 was a monster. Averaged 19.1/25.2/5.0 on 47.5% shooting in the playoffs on the way to a dominant title. Boston dispatched Oscar's Royals, then Wilt's Sixers (who won 1 more game), and then West/Baylor Lakers in the Finals where Russ averaged 23.6/24.3/3.6 on 53.8% shooting along with masterful defense. We have his games of 6 blocks/3 steals and 11 blocks in the series.


And Chamberlain absolutely CRUSHED him (as he ALWAYS did.) Just read above.

Thurmond may not have been in his prime in 65-66, but he was at his PEAK the very NEXT season.

And I get so sick and tired of these so-called "garbage time" stats. Just take a look at the Wilt-Russell H2H's in 62-63. It looks one-sided when you see Russell's Celtics with an 8-1 series edge (of course, he had an 8-0 edge in HOF teammates that year, too.) BUT, four of the games were decided by single digits, one of them that was not, was a double digit OT loss, and in another, Wilt's team won. And all of them were relatively close going into the 4th quarters. And I suspect that they both played nearly the same minutes, as they almost always did.

Again, Wilt annihilated Russell that season, just as he did in EVERY season from in their careers. And the only post-season in which Russell was even in the same ballpark, 68-69, and in Wilt's worst post-season of his career (thanks to an incompetent coach), and even then, Wilt had an edge.

[LAZERUSS]

Lazeruss - How would you rate each of Wilt's seasons, from 1-10, in terms of offense/defense?

A mid-60's Chamberlain, from 63-64 to 68-69, was probably nearly the equal of Russell, and in fact, I believe he was an even greater defensive force from 66-67 thru 67-68.

He blew out his knee early in 69-70, and that hobbled him into the 70-71 season. Still, in his five regular season H2H's, and then five playoff H2H's with KAJ, he held Kareem to .438 shooting in the regular season, and .481 in the post-season, in perhaps KAJ's greatest overall season.

He was voted first team all-defense in both of his last two seasons (71-72 and 72-73), as well, and by most every account, would have won DPOY of the year in '71-72 had the award existed.

So, as best as I can answer it...

1. 66-67 (I know, it doesn't show up as his best DWS season, but just look at what he did to his HOF teammates that season.)

2. 67-68.

3. 65-66. (Again, he just slaughtered his HOF peers.)

4. 63-64. (Take a look at his TEAM's defensive improvement that season.

5. 71-72. (Held KAJ to .457 in the WCF's, and .414 in the last four games of that series.)

6. 72-73. (Held KAJ to .450 shooting in six regular season H2H's, while shooting .737 himself.) Also outshot Nate in the WCF's, .611 to .373.

7. 68-69. (Still a defensive force, and in fact had a nationally televised game with a recorded 23 blocked shots, which, of course, would be the REAL record.)

8. 70-71. Only a year after major knee surgery, and again, held a peak KAJ to WAY below his normal FG%s over the course of 10 straight games.

9. 69-70. We will never know. He shredded his knee in game nine, and missed 73 games. He was well below 100% in the post-season. However, early on in that season, and before he blew out his knee, he crushed rookie KAJ, outscoring him, 25-23, and outshooting him from the floor, 9-14 to 9-21.

As a side note, he was sick for much of the first half of the 64-65 season, and was subsequently traded, but he was brilliant in the post-season. He single-handedly carried an average roster to a game seven, one-point loss, against a HOF-laden 62-18 Celtic team that was at the peak of it's dynasty.

Those would be my best guesses...

[dankok8]

And Chamberlain absolutely CRUSHED him (as he ALWAYS did.) Just read above.

Thurmond may not have been in his prime in 65-66, but he was at his PEAK the very NEXT season.

He wasn't. Not by numbers, not by impact, not by experience.


And I get so sick and tired of these so-called "garbage time" stats. Just take a look at the Wilt-Russell H2H's in 62-63. It looks one-sided when you see Russell's Celtics with an 8-1 series edge (of course, he had an 8-0 edge in HOF teammates that year, too.) BUT, four of the games were decided by single digits, one of them that was not, was a double digit OT loss, and in another, Wilt's team won. And all of them were relatively close going into the 4th quarters. And I suspect that they both played nearly the same minutes, as they almost always did.

Say Wilt has 10/10 at the half and Russell has 20/15 and Boston has a 25-point half-time lead. The game ends as a 15-point Celtics win so Wilt's team was never close but the final boxscore stats are 35/30 Wilt vs. 25/25 Russell. In the second half with his team up big Russell of course doesn't bother to exert much energy to defend Wilt and lets him have his "meaningless" numbers.

Who outplayed who in such a scenario?

Such situations like I described above were very common in Wilt-Russell H2H's...


Again, Wilt annihilated Russell that season, just as he did in EVERY season from in their careers. And the only post-season in which Russell was even in the same ballpark, 68-69, and in Wilt's worst post-season of his career (thanks to an incompetent coach), and even then, Wilt had an edge.

He didn't annihilate him... Russell outplayed Wilt even statistically in Game 2 and Game 4 of the '66 EDF. Apart from Game 5 Wilt had a very subpar series through the first four games averaging 23.5 ppg on 48.7% shooting including getting blown out in the first two games.

[julizaver]

Here were Nate's 10 H2H games against Russell in that 65-66 season:

Game 1:
Nate: 18 pts, 27 rebs
Russell: 17 pts, 22 rebs, 7-13 FG/FGA

Game 2:
Nate: 19 pts, 12 rebs
Russell: 8 pts, 20 rebs, 4-9 FG/FGA

Game 3:
Nate: 20 pts
Russell: 8 pts, 28 rebs

Game 4:
Nate: 21 pts, 31 rebs
Russell: 13 pts, 24 rebs, 4-11 FG/FGA

Game 5:
Nate: 19 pts
Russell: 16 pts, 24 rebs

Game 6:
Nate: 25 pts, 27 rebs
Russell: 15 pts, 11 rebs, 6-12 FG/FGA

Game 7:
Nate: 24 pts, 24 rebs
Russell: 10 pts, 28 rebs

Game 8:
Nate: 34 pts, 19 rebs
Russell: 8 pts, 24 rebs, 2-8 FG/FGA

Game 9:
Nate: 23 pts, 23 rebs
Russell: 12 pts, 19 rebs

Game 10:
Nate: 11 pts, 14 rebs
Russell: 11 pts, 23 rebs, 5-13 FG/FGA

Known season averages:

Nate: 20.2 ppg, 22.2 rpg
Russell: 11.8 ppg, 22.3 rpg, .429 FG%

Without knowing all of their FG% numbers, I would think that Thurmond easily outplayed Russell.


Not bad for a "non-prime" Nate, don't you think?

I have FG/FGA data for seven games of Thurmond and it is 0.415. Russell had clear edge in the assists department probably 5-6 to 2-3.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Since there is considerable research available regarding H2H games, and continuing on the theme of Chamberlain's 66-67 H2H's, I am going back a year, to what I believe was Wilt's greatest season, his 65-66 campaign.

Here is a link to recap his 66-67 domination of his HOF peers:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=321988


And before I start his 65-66 matchups, I thought I would include his 64-65 H2H's with Willis Reed. Why? Because the Knicks brought in Walt Bellamy before the start of the start of the 65-66 season, and subsequently moved Reed to the PF position. And while I am reasonably certain that Reed at least occasionally defended Wilt in the Bellamy years, their 64-65 seasonal H2H's were much more representative of how the two played against each other.

Unfortunately, just as was the case in 65-66, some stat-lines were very incomplete. In the case of Reed's 64-65, there were only two games, out of his 12 H2H's with Wilt (yes, 12 H2H games) in which I could gather rebounding numbers, and zero with his FG%. As for Chamberlain, the scoring and rebounding are complete, but FG% data was missing for two of those 12 games. Still, 10 games out of 12 should give a solid indication of just how efficient he was in those games.

Again, these H2H's are from their 64-65 season:

1.
Reed: 23 pts, 16 rebs.
Wilt: 52 pts, 21 rebs, 3 ast, 21-43 FG/FGA

2.
Reed: 38 pts.
Wilt: 41 pts, 21 rebs, 6 ast, 17-33 FG/FGA

3.
Reed: 25 pts.
Wilt: 36 pts., 22 rebs, 6 ast, 16-? FG/FGA

4.
Reed: 28 pts.
Wilt: 58 pts, 22 rebs, 5 ast, 25-45 FG/FGA

5.
Reed: 25 pts.
Wilt: 46 pts, 18 rebs, 19-39 FG/FGA

6.
Reed: 8 pts.
Wilt: 41 pts, 32 rebs, 17-35 FG/FGA

7.
Reed: 12 pts, 18 rebs
Wilt: 29 pts, 17 rebs, 14-? FG/FGA

8.
Reed: 35 pts
Wilt: 29 pts, 13 rebs, 0 ast, 14-25 FG/FGA

9.
Reed: 24 pts
Wilt: 37 pts, 32 rebs, 2 ast, 14-22 FG/FGA

10.
Reed: 20 pts
Wilt: 30 pts, 18 rebs, 1 ast, 9-15 FG/FGA

11.
Reed: 22 pts
Wilt: 37 pts, 28 rebs, 3 ast, 18-30 FG/FGA

12.
Reed: 14 pts
Wilt: 27 pts, 11 rebs, 6 ast, 12-25 FG/FGA


Known averages:

Reed averaged 22.8 ppg and in his two known games, 17.0 rpg
Wilt averaged 38.6 ppg, 21.2 rpg, 3.6 apg, .532 FG% (league shot .426 BTW.)

Wilt outscored Reed in 11 of the 12 games. Reed did manage to go 1-1 in their known rebounding H2H's. as a sidenote, Wilt had games of 13 and 11 rebounds, which were unusually low for him.

As you can see, Chamberlain also had five games of 40+, which included two of 50+. And he held some eye-popping scoring margins, as well. Margins of 46-25, 52-23, 58-28, and 41-8 among them.

Next...on to the 65-66 H2H's, including the post-season, with Bellamy, Thurmond, and Russell...
Then when it really mattered in the 1970 and 1973 NBA Finals, Willis Reed led his team to 2 NBA Championship victories and winning Finals MVP twice over Wilt Chamberlain.

[LAZERUSS]

He wasn't. Not by numbers, not by impact, not by experience.



Say Wilt has 10/10 at the half and Russell has 20/15 and Boston has a 25-point half-time lead. The game ends as a 15-point Celtics win so Wilt's team was never close but the final boxscore stats are 35/30 Wilt vs. 25/25 Russell. In the second half with his team up big Russell of course doesn't bother to exert much energy to defend Wilt and lets him have his "meaningless" numbers.

Who outplayed who in such a scenario?

Such situations like I described above were very common in Wilt-Russell H2H's...



He didn't annihilate him... Russell outplayed Wilt even statistically in Game 2 and Game 4 of the '66 EDF. Apart from Game 5 Wilt had a very subpar series through the first four games averaging 23.5 ppg on 48.7% shooting including getting blown out in the first two games.

Prove it. And I don't want 3 or 4 recaps, either, but the full 143 H2H's, including all 49 playoff games, most all of which were VERY CLOSE.

I wish I had Celts84 recap of one game between Russell and Wilt early in their careers, when the Celtics had a 20+ point second half lead. Wilt's Warriors came back to win that game, and Chamberlain hung 47 points on him in the process.

Looking at how many close playoff games the two played, and with Chamberlain just overwhelming Russell in so many of them, there is no question as to who the real best player was.

As for the 65-66 EDF's, Russell didn't outplay Wilt in ONE game. But his TEAMMATES just crushed Wilt's. And please, don't give me this ridiculous nonsense that it was Wilt's fault. He played EXACTLY the same way as he did against Russell in the regular season, when his team held a 6-3 edge. And don't giv me the assists as some kind of example. Chamberlain's teammates shot .352 in that series. I suspect that Wilt lost several assists a game because of it.

Oh, and in that clinching game five loss, Chamberlain destroyed Russell with a 46-34 game.

Now, answer me this...

Russell was in the same exact situation a year later. His team had narrowly avoided an embarrassing sweep in a close game four win. So, now it was RUSSELL who was facing elimination in that game five. Did he come out and smoke Wilt with a 46-34 game? Hell no. He quitely went like a lamb to slaughter. In a game in which his teammates were finally neutralized by Wilt's, he put up a meager FOUR points, on 2-5 shooting, with 21 rebounds, and seven assists. Oh, and how did Wilt "the choker" do in that game? He poured in 29 points, 22 of which came in the first half when the game was still in doubt (and proved, of course, that he could have hung 40+ on him had he needed to), on 10-16 shooting, with 36 rebounds, 13 assists, and at least seven blocks.

What happened? How could the great Russell have allowed such a thing to happen? The reality was, Russell's TEAMMATES almost always outplayed Wilt's. In fact, Wilt's teammates usually puked all over the floor in the playoffs, particularly their biggest ones.

Had they had equal rosters, and likely it would have been Wilt with 9 or 10 rings in the 60's.

[LAZERUSS]

I have FG/FGA data for seven games of Thurmond and it is 0.415. Russell had clear edge in the assists department probably 5-6 to 2-3.

So, this "non-prime" Nate averaged 20.2 ppg, 22.2 rpg, and shot somewhere around .416 in his seasonal H2H's with a prime Russell, who averaged 11.8 ppg, 22.3 rpg, and shot .429 against him...in 10 H2H games.

Yep...a "non-prime" Nate alright...

[LAZERUSS]

Then when it really mattered in the 1970 and 1973 NBA Finals, Willis Reed led his team to 2 NBA Championship victories and winning Finals MVP twice over Wilt Chamberlain.

And was outplayed by Wilt in both. Oh, and both were by a well-past his prime Chamberlain, as well.

Of course, I could also add that in the 67-68 playoffs, although Wilt didn't defend Reed (instead he held Bellamy to .421 shooting), Chamberlain led BOTH teams in scoring (25 ppg), rebounding (24 rpg), assists (6.0 apg), and FG% (.584), in a 4-2 series win.

[LAZERUSS]

Such situations like I described above were very common in Wilt-Russell H2H's..

BTW, I won't take the time to look up the MANY CLOSE games playoff games between the two, but just off the top of my head...

In game two of the '62 EDF's, Chamberlain outscored Russell, 42-9, and outrebounded him, 37-20, in a seven point WIN.

In game four of the '64 Finals, Chamberlain outscored Russell, 27-8, and outrebounded him, 38-19, in a game that was decided in the last few seconds.

In game seven of the '65 EDF's, Chamberlain outscored Russell, 30-15, outshot Russell from the field, 12-15, outrebounded Russell, 32-29, and scored six of Philly's last eight points, including a thunderous dunk over Russell in the last five seconds, of a 110-109 loss. BTW, following that dunk, Russell hit a guidewire on the inbounds pass, giving Philly the ball, and a chance to win the game. Of course, it was a Russell TEAMMATE who saved him, when "Havlickek steals the ball!" But I guess Russell was exceptional at gauging these things, that he knew if he could "hold" Wilt to a 30 ppg, 31 rpg, .555 FG% series, that his team would win the seventh game by one point.

Again, those were just off the top of my head. I'm sure I could fine MANY more like them. And, if we include the regular season, I'm sure it would approach well over 50, and perhaps exceed a 100.

[Deuce Bigalow]

And was outplayed by Wilt in both. Oh, and both were by a well-past his prime Chamberlain, as well.

Of course, I could also add that in the 67-68 playoffs, although Wilt didn't defend Reed (instead he held Bellamy to .421 shooting), Chamberlain led BOTH teams in scoring (25 ppg), rebounding (24 rpg), assists (6.0 apg), and FG% (.584), in a 4-2 series win.
Who won the championships and who won the Finals MVPs?
And Reed through the first 4 games of the '70 finals before he got injured torched Wilt.

[LAZERUSS]

Who won the championships and who won the Finals MVPs?
And Reed through the first 4 games of the '70 finals before he got injured torched Wilt.

The were basically a statistical draw, at 2-2. And, Wilt was pounding Reed in game five before he went down with his injury.

Of course, let's not bring up the fact that Wilt was playing only four months after major knee surgery, and was nowhere near 100%, either.

And here were their two H2H games in the 68-69 season, after Bellamy was traded, and Reed moved center:

1.
Reed: 14 pts, 7 rebs
Wilt: 31 pts, 23 rebs, 11-17 FG/FGA

2.
Reed: 26 pts, 12 rebs
Wilt: 25 pts, 21 rebs, 11-15 FG/FGA

[Deuce Bigalow]

The were basically a statistical draw, at 2-2. And, Wilt was pounding Reed in game five before he went down with his injury.

Of course, let's not bring up the fact that Wilt was playing only four months after major knee surgery, and was nowhere near 100%, either.

And here were their two H2H games in the 68-69 season, after Bellamy was traded, and Reed moved center:

1.
Reed: 14 pts, 7 rebs
Wilt: 31 pts, 23 rebs, 11-17 FG/FGA

2.
Reed: 26 pts, 12 rebs
Wilt: 25 pts, 21 rebs, 11-15 FG/FGA
Eveybody already knows Wilt was a regular season God, I'm talking about the NBA Finals.

Reed- 2x champion, 2x Finals MVP, outplayed Wilt in the '70 Finals before injury, 2-1 Finals series H2H

[ArbitraryWater]

Great finder of stats!

[fpliii]

A mid-60's Chamberlain, from 63-64 to 68-69, was probably nearly the equal of Russell, and in fact, I believe he was an even greater defensive force from 66-67 thru 67-68.

He blew out his knee early in 69-70, and that hobbled him into the 70-71 season. Still, in his five regular season H2H's, and then five playoff H2H's with KAJ, he held Kareem to .438 shooting in the regular season, and .481 in the post-season, in perhaps KAJ's greatest overall season.

He was voted first team all-defense in both of his last two seasons (71-72 and 72-73), as well, and by most every account, would have won DPOY of the year in '71-72 had the award existed.

So, as best as I can answer it...

1. 66-67 (I know, it doesn't show up as his best DWS season, but just look at what he did to his HOF teammates that season.)

2. 67-68.

3. 65-66. (Again, he just slaughtered his HOF peers.)

4. 63-64. (Take a look at his TEAM's defensive improvement that season.

5. 71-72. (Held KAJ to .457 in the WCF's, and .414 in the last four games of that series.)

6. 72-73. (Held KAJ to .450 shooting in six regular season H2H's, while shooting .737 himself.) Also outshot Nate in the WCF's, .611 to .373.

7. 68-69. (Still a defensive force, and in fact had a nationally televised game with a recorded 23 blocked shots, which, of course, would be the REAL record.)

8. 70-71. Only a year after major knee surgery, and again, held a peak KAJ to WAY below his normal FG%s over the course of 10 straight games.

9. 69-70. We will never know. He shredded his knee in game nine, and missed 73 games. He was well below 100% in the post-season. However, early on in that season, and before he blew out his knee, he crushed rookie KAJ, outscoring him, 25-23, and outshooting him from the floor, 9-14 to 9-21.

As a side note, he was sick for much of the first half of the 64-65 season, and was subsequently traded, but he was brilliant in the post-season. He single-handedly carried an average roster to a game seven, one-point loss, against a HOF-laden 62-18 Celtic team that was at the peak of it's dynasty.

Those would be my best guesses...

I actually am considering 66-67 as his best defensive year, if we include the postseason. Here are the team trends for the playoffs:


Team pO pD
60 PHW 4% 8%
61 PHW -6% 3%
62 PHW 0% 6%
63 SFW -- --
64 SFW 4% -3%
65 SFW -- --
65 PHI 10% 2%
66 PHI -2% -9%
67 PHI -4% 10%
68 PHI -0% -0%
69 LAL -4% -3%
70 LAL 6% 12%
71 LAL -4% 13%
72 LAL -5% 12%
73 LAL 1% 5%

These two metrics aren't perfect (and there's some dependency on playoff format and number of teams in the league, as one can tell by higher values as more teams are added), but it does tell us a bit about why teams won/lost in a given postseason.

Looking first at the four Sixers years (I don't feel comfortable with the Warriors seasons, since those weren't very good teams, but it seems Wilt definitely rose his level of play on the defensive end in the playoffs; ironically 64 was the worst playoff defense of his Warriors seasons), it's interesting. In 65 they were an all-time great offensive team, and above average defensively (with Wilt as the offensive anchor: http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/1965.html). In 66 they were below average offensively, and atrocious defensively (the scorers all shot poorly). In 67 they were bad offensively in the playoffs, but part of this is because Boston and SF rose their play defensively. 68 they were nothing special on either end. What's interesting here is that 66 and 68 were better defensive years during the regular season, but during the playoffs that didn't hold.

Regarding the Lakers years, the first year was a bit of a weird run, so it comes as no surprise that they were below average on either end. In 70 they were great on offense, and amazing on defense (perhaps that was his best LA team?). In 71 and 72, both teams were poor offensively and won with their defense. In 73, they were above-average offensively, but weren't world-beaters on the defensive end.

Taking into account the regular season and playoffs, I'm not so sure about his offense, but I think Wilt had a few great defensive years. I'd say (relatively speaking):

Great:
64 - worse in playoffs
66 - worse in playoffs
67 - better in playoffs
68 - worse in playoffs

Good:
60 - underrated
72
73

Average:
61
62 - better in playoffs
69 - worse in playoffs
71 - better in playoffs

Poor:
63

Incomplete:
65 (stomach) - though I'd say poor with SFW, average with PHI
70 (knee) - but he was great in the playoffs

[dankok8]

Prove it. And I don't want 3 or 4 recaps, either, but the full 143 H2H's, including all 49 playoff games, most all of which were VERY CLOSE.

I wish I had Celts84 recap of one game between Russell and Wilt early in their careers, when the Celtics had a 20+ point second half lead. Wilt's Warriors came back to win that game, and Chamberlain hung 47 points on him in the process.

Looking at how many close playoff games the two played, and with Chamberlain just overwhelming Russell in so many of them, there is no question as to who the real best player was.

As for the 65-66 EDF's, Russell didn't outplay Wilt in ONE game. But his TEAMMATES just crushed Wilt's. And please, don't give me this ridiculous nonsense that it was Wilt's fault. He played EXACTLY the same way as he did against Russell in the regular season, when his team held a 6-3 edge. And don't giv me the assists as some kind of example. Chamberlain's teammates shot .352 in that series. I suspect that Wilt lost several assists a game because of it.

Oh, and in that clinching game five loss, Chamberlain destroyed Russell with a 46-34 game.

Now, answer me this...

Russell was in the same exact situation a year later. His team had narrowly avoided an embarrassing sweep in a close game four win. So, now it was RUSSELL who was facing elimination in that game five. Did he come out and smoke Wilt with a 46-34 game? Hell no. He quitely went like a lamb to slaughter. In a game in which his teammates were finally neutralized by Wilt's, he put up a meager FOUR points, on 2-5 shooting, with 21 rebounds, and seven assists. Oh, and how did Wilt "the choker" do in that game? He poured in 29 points, 22 of which came in the first half when the game was still in doubt (and proved, of course, that he could have hung 40+ on him had he needed to), on 10-16 shooting, with 36 rebounds, 13 assists, and at least seven blocks.

What happened? How could the great Russell have allowed such a thing to happen? The reality was, Russell's TEAMMATES almost always outplayed Wilt's. In fact, Wilt's teammates usually puked all over the floor in the playoffs, particularly their biggest ones.

Had they had equal rosters, and likely it would have been Wilt with 9 or 10 rings in the 60's.

I can find 18-20 playoff H2H's (out of 49 total) in which Russell outplayed Wilt based on newspaper recaps.

The only 2 playoff series in which Wilt clearly outplayed Russell are the '67 EDF (where he destroyed him...) and '65 EDF (where he was clutch and rarely had impact behind his stats especially in Game 7). Other than those two in all other playoff series an argument could be made for Russell over Wilt.


BTW, I won't take the time to look up the MANY CLOSE games playoff games between the two, but just off the top of my head...

In game two of the '62 EDF's, Chamberlain outscored Russell, 42-9, and outrebounded him, 37-20, in a seven point WIN.

In game four of the '64 Finals, Chamberlain outscored Russell, 27-8, and outrebounded him, 38-19, in a game that was decided in the last few seconds.

In game seven of the '65 EDF's, Chamberlain outscored Russell, 30-15, outshot Russell from the field, 12-15, outrebounded Russell, 32-29, and scored six of Philly's last eight points, including a thunderous dunk over Russell in the last five seconds, of a 110-109 loss. BTW, following that dunk, Russell hit a guidewire on the inbounds pass, giving Philly the ball, and a chance to win the game. Of course, it was a Russell TEAMMATE who saved him, when "Havlickek steals the ball!" But I guess Russell was exceptional at gauging these things, that he knew if he could "hold" Wilt to a 30 ppg, 31 rpg, .555 FG% series, that his team would win the seventh game by one point.

Again, those were just off the top of my head. I'm sure I could fine MANY more like them. And, if we include the regular season, I'm sure it would approach well over 50, and perhaps exceed a 100.


Two can play at that game. How about...

'60 EDF Game 3:

Russell with 26/39/5 vs Wilt with 12/15/6

'62 EDF Game 5:

Russell with 29/26/7 vs Wilt with 30/14/0

If you look at the entire '62 EDF game-by-game you'll see that Wilt obliterated Russell in Game 2 but other games it was either Russell who won out or close to a wash. And in that series Wilt padded his stats in a couple of blowout losses.


The were basically a statistical draw, at 2-2. And, Wilt was pounding Reed in game five before he went down with his injury.

Of course, let's not bring up the fact that Wilt was playing only four months after major knee surgery, and was nowhere near 100%, either.

And here were their two H2H games in the 68-69 season, after Bellamy was traded, and Reed moved center:

1.
Reed: 14 pts, 7 rebs
Wilt: 31 pts, 23 rebs, 11-17 FG/FGA

2.
Reed: 26 pts, 12 rebs
Wilt: 25 pts, 21 rebs, 11-15 FG/FGA

Come on now be real. Through the first four games of the '70 Finals Reed was laying waste on the Lakers and was easily the MVP of the series averaging 31.8 ppg, 15.0 rpg, and 3.5 apg on 49.1% shooting.

[LAZERUSS]

I can find 18-20 playoff H2H's (out of 49 total) in which Russell outplayed Wilt based on newspaper recaps.

The only 2 playoff series in which Wilt clearly outplayed Russell are the '67 EDF (where he destroyed him...) and '65 EDF (where he was clutch and rarely had impact behind his stats especially in Game 7). Other than those two in all other playoff series an argument could be made for Russell over Wilt.



Two can play at that game. How about...

'60 EDF Game 3:

Russell with 26/39/5 vs Wilt with 12/15/6

'62 EDF Game 5:

Russell with 29/26/7 vs Wilt with 30/14/0

If you look at the entire '62 EDF game-by-game you'll see that Wilt obliterated Russell in Game 2 but other games it was either Russell who won out or close to a wash. And in that series Wilt padded his stats in a couple of blowout losses.



Come on now be real. Through the first four games of the '70 Finals Reed was laying waste on the Lakers and was easily the MVP of the series averaging 31.8 ppg, 15.0 rpg, and 3.5 apg on 49.1% shooting.

Of course, had you done your research on the '60 EDF's, you would realize that Wilt badly injured his hand near the end of game two in retaliation for the mugging that the Celtics were giving him in that game (in fact, there, it was thought to be broken), and was worthless in that game, and was nowhere near 100% in either that game (which was obvious), or the next game. He was finally back to his normal self in game five, which was a must-win, of course, and he shelled Russell with a 50 point, 35 rebound game, in a big win.

Of course, we know that your boy Kareem wouldn't have even played in those games. He missed chunks of two different seasons with a broken hand. And, we also know that Chamberlain had a badly sprained wrist on one hand, and the other hand was FRACTURED, going into game five of the '72 Finals. Of course, he not only PLAYED, he DOMINATED, with a 24 point, 10-14 FG/FGA, 29 rebound (The Knicks collectively had 39 BTW), 8 block game, which clinched the title, and led to his FMVP.

[dankok8]

Of course, had you done your research on the '60 EDF's, you would realize that Wilt badly injured his hand near the end of game two in retaliation for the mugging that the Celtics were giving him in that game (in fact, there, it was thought to be broken), and was worthless in that game, and was nowhere near 100% in either that game (which was obvious), or the next game. He was finally back to his normal self in game five, which was a must-win, of course, and he shelled Russell with a 50 point, 35 rebound game, in a big win.

Of course, we know that your boy Kareem wouldn't have even played in those games. He missed chunks of two different seasons with a broken hand. And, we also know that Chamberlain had a badly sprained wrist on one hand, and the other hand was FRACTURED, going into game five of the '72 Finals. Of course, he not only PLAYED, he DOMINATED, with a 24 point, 10-14 FG/FGA, 29 rebound (The Knicks collectively had 39 BTW), 8 block game, which clinched the title, and led to his FMVP.

I know Wilt was injured (by his own fault for punching Tom Heinsohn) but it's still a fact that Russell killed him in that game. In the '60 EDF Russell got the better of Wilt in Game 3, 4, and 6.

My boy Kareem? You really are a funny fella! :oldlol:

[Deuce Bigalow]

Come on now be real. Through the first four games of the '70 Finals Reed was laying waste on the Lakers and was easily the MVP of the series averaging 31.8 ppg, 15.0 rpg, and 3.5 apg on 49.1% shooting.
http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/masonry/000/527/283/70f.gif

And he beat Wilt in the '73 Finals too getting FMVP again.

[LAZERUSS]

Come on now be real. Through the first four games of the '70 Finals Reed was laying waste on the Lakers and was easily the MVP of the series averaging 31.8 ppg, 15.0 rpg, and 3.5 apg on 49.1% shooting.

Really???

Game 1: NY wins 124-112
Reed: 37 pts, 16 rebs, 16-30 FG/FGA
Wilt: 17 pts, 24 rebs. 8-14 FG/FGA

Game 2: LA wins 105-103
Reed: 29 pts, 15 rebs, 12-29 FG/FGA
Wilt: 19 pts, 24 rebs, 9-20 FG/FGA

Game 3: NY wins 111-108
Reed: 38 pts, 17 rebs, 17-30 FG/FGA
Wilt: 21 pts, 26 rebs, 7-10 FG/FGA

Game 4: LA wins 121-115
Reed: 23 pts, 12 rebs, 10-23 FG/FGA
Wilt: 18 pts, 25 rebs, 7-13 FG/FGA

Again, this was basically a one-legged Wilt.

Go ahead and watch game seven of the '70 Finals, and then game five of the '72 Finals, on YouTube. Chamberlain had virtually no elevation, and very little lateral movement in the '70 Finals. In the '72 Finals, he looked like he was 25 and not 35. He was blocking shots well above the rim (in fact there was a very questionable goal-tend in that game in which his hand apexed at over 12 feet.)

[dankok8]

Really???

Game 1: NY wins 124-112
Reed: 37 pts, 16 rebs, 16-30 FG/FGA
Wilt: 17 pts, 24 rebs. 8-14 FG/FGA

Game 2: LA wins 105-103
Reed: 29 pts, 15 rebs, 12-29 FG/FGA
Wilt: 19 pts, 24 rebs, 9-20 FG/FGA

Game 3: NY wins 111-108
Reed: 38 pts, 17 rebs, 17-30 FG/FGA
Wilt: 21 pts, 26 rebs, 7-10 FG/FGA

Game 4: LA wins 121-115
Reed: 23 pts, 12 rebs, 10-23 FG/FGA
Wilt: 18 pts, 25 rebs, 7-13 FG/FGA

Again, this was basically a one-legged Wilt.

Go ahead and watch game seven of the '70 Finals, and then game five of the '72 Finals, on YouTube. Chamberlain had virtually no elevation, and very little lateral movement in the '70 Finals. In the '72 Finals, he looked like he was 25 and not 35. He was blocking shots well above the rim (in fact there was a very questionable goal-tend in that game in which his hand apexed at over 12 feet.)

I'm not denying Wilt was not 100% but Reed still outplayed him.

[Psileas]

I'm not denying Wilt was not 100% but Reed still outplayed him.

You're also not denying in another thread that Thurmond outplayed Kareem in the '72 playoffs (or are you?), but you also mention Kareem wasn't 100% in the series. So, are you going to penalize one and excuse the other?

[LAZERUSS]

I'm not denying Wilt was not 100% but Reed still outplayed him.

He was NOWHERE near 100%.

I have always found it fascinating that Wilt was labeled a "goat" in that series, while Reed was considered "heroic."

In that last three games of that series, Reed, with HIS leg injury (BTW, Chamberlain played EVERY minute of the 67-68 EDF's with a similar injury...and put up a 22 ppg, 25 rpg, 7 apg, .487 series against Russell)...Reed scored a TOTAL of 11 points, had a TOTAL of THREE rebounds, and shot a combined 4-10 from the field. In those same three games, Chamberlain scored 88 points, had 70 rebounds, and shot 39-55 from the field.

And in game seven, Chamberlain was the ONLY Laker to play well.

For the series, a one-legged Chamberlain averaged 23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, and shot .625 from the field...which is the ONLY time in NBA Finals history where a player put up a 20-20 .600 Finals.

Wilt, the "choking loser."

[LAZERUSS]

You're also not denying in another thread that Thurmond outplayed Kareem in the '72 playoffs (or are you?), but you also mention Kareem wasn't 100% in the series. So, are you going to penalize one and excuse the other?

That's the Wilt DOUBLE STANDARD.

Chamberlain was EXPECTED to dominate games, even with injuries that would have shelved virtually every other great player who has played the game, while everyone else gets a free pass with their's.

[LAZERUSS]

I actually am considering 66-67 as his best defensive year, if we include the postseason. Here are the team trends for the playoffs:


Team pO pD
60 PHW 4% 8%
61 PHW -6% 3%
62 PHW 0% 6%
63 SFW -- --
64 SFW 4% -3%
65 SFW -- --
65 PHI 10% 2%
66 PHI -2% -9%
67 PHI -4% 10%
68 PHI -0% -0%
69 LAL -4% -3%
70 LAL 6% 12%
71 LAL -4% 13%
72 LAL -5% 12%
73 LAL 1% 5%

These two metrics aren't perfect (and there's some dependency on playoff format and number of teams in the league, as one can tell by higher values as more teams are added), but it does tell us a bit about why teams won/lost in a given postseason.

Looking first at the four Sixers years (I don't feel comfortable with the Warriors seasons, since those weren't very good teams, but it seems Wilt definitely rose his level of play on the defensive end in the playoffs; ironically 64 was the worst playoff defense of his Warriors seasons), it's interesting. In 65 they were an all-time great offensive team, and above average defensively (with Wilt as the offensive anchor: http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/1965.html). In 66 they were below average offensively, and atrocious defensively (the scorers all shot poorly). In 67 they were bad offensively in the playoffs, but part of this is because Boston and SF rose their play defensively. 68 they were nothing special on either end. What's interesting here is that 66 and 68 were better defensive years during the regular season, but during the playoffs that didn't hold.

Regarding the Lakers years, the first year was a bit of a weird run, so it comes as no surprise that they were below average on either end. In 70 they were great on offense, and amazing on defense (perhaps that was his best LA team?). In 71 and 72, both teams were poor offensively and won with their defense. In 73, they were above-average offensively, but weren't world-beaters on the defensive end.

Taking into account the regular season and playoffs, I'm not so sure about his offense, but I think Wilt had a few great defensive years. I'd say (relatively speaking):

Great:
64 - worse in playoffs
66 - worse in playoffs
67 - better in playoffs
68 - worse in playoffs

Good:
60 - underrated
72
73

Average:
61
62 - better in playoffs
69 - worse in playoffs
71 - better in playoffs

Poor:
63

Incomplete:
65 (stomach) - though I'd say poor with SFW, average with PHI
70 (knee) - but he was great in the playoffs

Again, exceptional research.

Oh, and as you were probably already aware, Chamberlain was hobbled by numerous injuries in the '68 post-season (as was the entire team.)

[dankok8]

You're also not denying in another thread that Thurmond outplayed Kareem in the '72 playoffs (or are you?), but you also mention Kareem wasn't 100% in the series. So, are you going to penalize one and excuse the other?

Injury should not be an excuse. Nate outplayed Kareem in '72.

Tell me this though... based on all H2H stats we have did Wilt individually dominate Thurmond by a greater margin than Kareem?

I'm not saying Kareem dominated him MORE I'm just saying Wilt didn't either like LAZERUSS is claiming. He cherry-picks stats that suit him and ignores games where Wilt struggled mightily against Nate like some of the games in the 65-66 season and all of the 67-68 season. And of course he didn't even shoot much in the '69 and '73 playoffs.

[dankok8]

For the series, a one-legged Chamberlain averaged 23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, and shot .625 from the field...which is the ONLY time in NBA Finals history where a player put up a 20-20 .600 Finals.

Wilt, the "choking loser."

Those stats are also boosted by a monster Game 6. I've watched Game 7 and he was terrible I don't care what the stats say. Then again all the Lakers were... the Knicks just buried them.

[LAZERUSS]

Injury should not be an excuse. Nate outplayed Kareem in '72.

Tell me this though... based on all H2H stats we have did Wilt individually dominate Thurmond by a greater margin than Kareem?

I'm not saying Kareem dominated him MORE I'm just saying Wilt didn't either like LAZERUSS is claiming. He cherry-picks stats that suit him and ignores games where Wilt struggled mightily against Nate like some of the games in the 65-66 season and all of the 67-68 season. And of course he didn't even shoot much in the '69 and '73 playoffs.

First of all, I have claimed that a PRIME Chamberlain dominated Nate, FAR more than a prime KAJ ever did.

As for the rest of their H2H's, Wilt usually outplayed him, even without scoring. We do knwo, he almost always outshot him, and usually by huge margins.

And I wish we had all of their FG%'s, including 67-68, but especially 65-66, when he just crushed Nate in the majority of their nine H2H's.

[Deuce Bigalow]

And he beat Wilt in the '73 Finals too getting FMVP again.
Speaking of the '73 Finals

Game 1
DeBusschere- 25-16-3 (11/19, 3/4) 44 min win
Reed- 10-4-2 (4/9, 2/2) - 25 min win
Wilt- 12-20-6 (5/11, 2/4) - 48 min

Game 2
DeBusschere- 9-9-0 (4/12, 1/2) - 27 min in win
Reed- 11-9-1 (5/13, 1/2) - 29 min win
Wilt- 5-20-0 (2/4, 1/9) - 48 min

Game 3
Reed- 22-10-3 (10/21, 2/2) - 22 min win
DeBusschere- 9-11-1 (4/14, 1/1) - 33 min
Wilt- 5-13-5 (2/3, 1/4) - 48 min

Game 4
DeBusschere- 33-14-2 (13/21, 7/8) - 44 min win
Reed- 21-11-0 (9/16, 3/3) - 32 min win
Wilt- 13-19-5 (4/8, 5/7) - 48 min

Game 5
DeBusschere- 2-8-4 (1/9, 0/0) - 32 min win
Reed- 18-12-7 (9/16, 0/0) - 31 min win
Wilt- 23-21-3 (9/16, 5/14) - 48 min

Knicks win title
Reed FMVP

Series averages
DeBusschere- 15.6-11.6-2.0 (44%, 80%) in 35.4 mpg
Reed- 16.4-9.4-2.6 (49.3%, 88.9%) in 30 mpg
Wilt- 11.6-18.6-3.8 (52.4%, 36.8%) in 48 mpg

BTW Wilt shot 72.7 FG% and 51.0 FT% in the regular season.

Also Wilt had 3 teammates average at least 19.6 ppg for the series, 2 teammates with over 21 ppg.

Lakers without Wilt: 90/124 FT (72.6%)
Wilt: 14/38 FT (38.6%)

[LAZERUSS]

Those stats are also boosted by a monster Game 6. I've watched Game 7 and he was terrible I don't care what the stats say. Then again all the Lakers were... the Knicks just buried them.

And in that game seven, Chamberlain was SWARMED by the Knicks. In the very few instances where Reed was defending him one-on-one, Wilt easily scored, or was fouled (Reed had four first half fouls.)

And, so what if Wilt had a monster game six (a MUST WIN game of 45 points, 27 rebounds, and on 20-27 shooting)? How many other greats have faced lessor competition in their post season games, and have put up must win games of 45-27? Did Kareem, Russell, Shaq, and Hakeem always face HOF centers in their post-season games? Hell, in Hakeem's '93-94 run, he didn't face a quality center until the Finals (and in fact, he didn't face a true CENTER in two of those three series.)

And one more time...this was a Chamberlain who was only four months removed from major knee surgery.

[Deuce Bigalow]

In the NBA Finals Wilt gets outplayed.

'64- Russell
'69- Russell, Havlicek, West, Sam Jones, Baylor
'70- Reed, West
'73- Reed, DeBusschere, Bradley, Goodrich, West

[LAZERUSS]

In the NBA Finals Wilt gets outplayed.

'64- Russell
'69- Russell, Havlicek, West, Sam Jones, Baylor
'70- Reed, West
'73- Reed, DeBusschere, Bradley, Goodrich, West

I won't bother with the other's for now, but Chamberlain outscored Russell in the '64 Finals, 29.2 ppg to 11.2 ppg; outrebounded Russell, 27.8 rpg to 25.2 rpg; and outshot Russell from the field by a .517 to .386 margin.

Oh, and Russell had seven other HOF teammates, while Wilt's lone HOF teammate was rookie Thurmond, who was playing part-time, and out of his natural position.

Again, NO ONE outplayed a mid-60's Wilt. In fact, he DESTROYED ALL of his HOF peers in that span.

[Ed Wachter]

I can appreciate Wilt, but it's not like he revolutionized the game by inventing the bounce pass.

[Deuce Bigalow]

I won't bother with the other's for now, but Chamberlain outscored Russell in the '64 Finals, 29.2 ppg to 11.2 ppg; outrebounded Russell, 27.8 rpg to 25.2 rpg; and outshot Russell from the field by a .517 to .386 margin.

Oh, and Russell had seven other HOF teammates, while Wilt's lone HOF teammate was rookie Thurmond, who was playing part-time, and out of his natural position.

Again, NO ONE outplayed a mid-60's Wilt. In fact, he DESTROYED ALL of his HOF peers in that span.
Russell beat Wilt in '60, '62, '64, '65, '66, 68, '69 :applause:

[Ed Wachter]

Russell beat Wilt in '60, '62, '64, '65, '68, '69 :applause:

Because Bill was a better player.

[LAZERUSS]

Russell beat Wilt in '60, '62, '64, '65, '66, 68, '69 :applause:

We could that same analogy many times then...

Reed beat KAJ in '70.
Wilt beat KAJ in '72.
Thurmond beat KAJ in '73.
Cowens beat KAJ in '74.
Walton beat KAJ in '77.
Webster beat KAJ in '78.
Sikma beat KAJ in '79.
Dr. J beat Bird in '80.
Moses beat KAJ in '81 (and with a 40-42 team behind him)
Dr. J beat Bird in '82.
Marques Johnson beat Bird in '83.
Parish beat KAJ in '84.
Eaton beat Hakeem in '85.
Worthy beat Bird in '85.
Sampson beat KAJ in '86.
Parish beat Hakeem in '86.
Ainge beat Jordan in '86.
Worthy beat Bird in '87.
Ainge beat Jordan in '87.
Dantley beat Bird in '88.
Donaldson beat Hakeem in '88.
Thompson beat Hakeem in '89.
Laimbeer beat KAJ in '89.
Dumars beat MJ in '90.
Divac beat Hakeem in '90.

Elie beat Kobe in '99.
Jackson beat Kobe in '04.
Hamilton beat Kobe in '04.
Bell beat Kobe in '06.
Bell beat Kobe in '07.
Allen beat Kobe in '08.
Terry beat Kobe in '11.
Harden beat Kobe in '12.

And there are those that contend that these losers are among the best players ever. What a joke. Using the Duece method, these guys were getting killed by scrubs in many of their post-seasons. At least Wilt lost to Russell in the vast majority of his.

[millwad]

And in that game seven, Chamberlain was SWARMED by the Knicks. In the very few instances where Reed was defending him one-on-one, Wilt easily scored, or was fouled (Reed had four first half fouls.)




Again pure fiction from your side, we have yet to this date not seen any footage Wilt getting swarmed or tripled like you always claim.

Please, show us some footage of the so called swarming defense Wilt faced.. :faceapalm

[Deuce Bigalow]

We could that same analogy many times then...

Reed beat KAJ in '70.
Wilt beat KAJ in '72.
Thurmond beat KAJ in '73.
Cowens beat KAJ in '74.
Walton beat KAJ in '77.
Webster beat KAJ in '78.
Sikma beat KAJ in '79.
Dr. J beat Bird in '80.
Moses beat KAJ in '81 (and with a 40-42 team behind him)
Dr. J beat Bird in '82.
Marques Johnson beat Bird in '83.
Parish beat KAJ in '84.
Eaton beat Hakeem in '85.
Worthy beat Bird in '85.
Sampson beat KAJ in '86.
Parish beat Hakeem in '86.
Ainge beat Jordan in '86.
Worthy beat Bird in '87.
Ainge beat Jordan in '87.
Dantley beat Bird in '88.
Donaldson beat Hakeem in '88.
Thompson beat Hakeem in '89.
Laimbeer beat KAJ in '89.
Dumars beat MJ in '90.
Divac beat Hakeem in '90.

Elie beat Kobe in '99.
Jackson beat Kobe in '04.
Hamilton beat Kobe in '04.
Bell beat Kobe in '06.
Bell beat Kobe in '07.
Allen beat Kobe in '08.
Terry beat Kobe in '11.
Harden beat Kobe in '12.

And there are those that contend that these losers are among the best players ever. What a joke. Using the Duece method, these guys were getting killed by scrubs in many of their post-seasons. At least Wilt lost to Russell in the vast majority of his.
Did they beat him 7 times though like Russell did Wilt?

[LAZERUSS]

Again pure fiction from your side, we have yet to this date not seen any footage Wilt getting swarmed or tripled like you always claim.

Please, show us some footage of the so called swarming defense Wilt faced.. :faceapalm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wEzEHPZi3w

And, it was illegal to double-team a man withOUT the ball back then. Once he had the ball, you could throw five guys on him. And yet, there are instances in this game, in which he is doubled withOUT the ball.

Furthermore, this is the great Russell...and he needed help!


Of course, Chamberlain played in 1060 regular season games, and 160 post-season games. Now, I ask you, just how many FULL games of his are available on YouTube?

And I won't waste my time copying-and-pasting. Instead, here is the link ... just scroll down and read the WALLS of text about what kind of defenses Chamberlain faced.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=301794&page=2


Of course, you already knew that, ...

Thanks for playing though...

[SHAQisGOAT]

Of course, had you done your research on the '60 EDF's, you would realize that Wilt badly injured his hand


You keep on posting some bullshit quote about Bird's playoffs "fails", every now and then, and never say a single word about Bird's hand and shoulder injury in 1985 (nor his injury in 1983 or after 1988) but when it's your boy Wilt you sure don't forget even the "slightest" injury, and that's not just from that post.

"Had you done your research" :oldlol: Talk about double standards huh? :rolleyes:

I've always been a fan of Wilt, at least top7 all-time and a top5 peak imho but it's funny watching you always getting mad writting some big-ass essays then getting owned time and time again. :cheers:

[LAZERUSS]

You keep on posting some bullshit quote about Bird's playoffs "fails", every now and then, and never say a single word about Bird's hand and shoulder injury in 1985 (nor his injury in 1983 or after 1988) but when it's your boy Wilt you sure don't forget even the "slightest" injury, and that's not just from that post.

"Had you done your research" :oldlol: Talk about double standards huh? :rolleyes:

I've always been a fan of Wilt, at least top7 all-time and a top5 peak imho but it's funny watching you always getting mad writting some big-ass essays then getting owned time and time again. :cheers:


I sure hate that. I have been losing sleep over being "owned time-and-again." I might have to start therapy.

[julizaver]

Really???

Game 1: NY wins 124-112
Reed: 37 pts, 16 rebs, 16-30 FG/FGA
Wilt: 17 pts, 24 rebs. 8-14 FG/FGA

Game 2: LA wins 105-103
Reed: 29 pts, 15 rebs, 12-29 FG/FGA
Wilt: 19 pts, 24 rebs, 9-20 FG/FGA

Game 3: NY wins 111-108
Reed: 38 pts, 17 rebs, 17-30 FG/FGA
Wilt: 21 pts, 26 rebs, 7-10 FG/FGA

Game 4: LA wins 121-115
Reed: 23 pts, 12 rebs, 10-23 FG/FGA
Wilt: 18 pts, 25 rebs, 7-13 FG/FGA

Again, this was basically a one-legged Wilt.


Game by game and based on recaps it is draw. Both players played well. W.Reed have also some issues and played in pain during that 4 game stretch.
It is good for Wilt (at that stage given his knee injury and limited movements) that he didn't met Jabbar in '70 playoffs. Young Jabbar had 34.2 ppg, 17.8 apg, 5 apg on 0.552 shooting against Reed and the Knicks.

[ArbitraryWater]

You keep on posting some bullshit quote about Bird's playoffs "fails", every now and then, and never say a single word about Bird's hand and shoulder injury in 1985 (nor his injury in 1983 or after 1988) but when it's your boy Wilt you sure don't forget even the "slightest" injury, and that's not just from that post.

"Had you done your research" :oldlol: Talk about double standards huh? :rolleyes:

I've always been a fan of Wilt, at least top7 all-time and a top5 peak imho but it's funny watching you always getting mad writting some big-ass essays then getting owned time and time again. :cheers:


backhanded compliment :no:

[Boarder Patrol]

I've seen in my lurking days that it's been discussed a lot so I won't start a new thread but IMO prime Wilt in 2014:

26 PPG, 14 RPG, 5 APG on 60% w/ very good, not elite defense.

[LAZERUSS]

Game by game and based on recaps it is draw. Both players played well. W.Reed have also some issues and played in pain during that 4 game stretch.
It is good for Wilt (at that stage given his knee injury and limited movements) that he didn't met Jabbar in '70 playoffs. Young Jabbar had 34.2 ppg, 17.8 apg, 5 apg on 0.552 shooting against Reed and the Knicks.

I have long maintained that KAJ's peak came very early in his career, IMO, it all began in the second half of the '70 season. By the playoffs he had become almost unstoppable. And it carried over into the 70-71 regular season, and even post-season. His numbers, per minute played that season, were spectacular, and with his play in that post-season, against three HOFers, I believe this to be his greatest full season. And his domination continued into the 71-72 regular season, as well.

CavsFan has posted videos of Kareem (Alcindor) in High School, and he was clearly ready for the pros, even then. And had freshman been allowed to play in college, and I suspect that he would have won four titles and four Tourney MVPs. In fact, I would say that Kareem was a top-5 NBA center, in his soph season at UCLA.

It took him very little time to become a force in the NBA, and by the second half of his rookie season, he was probably already the best player in the game. And, as you posted above, he just shelled a near-peak Reed in the ECF's.

And after the Bucks traded for Oscar before the start of the 70-71 season, Milwaukee just blew the NBA away. With Kareem (Alcindor) leading the league in scoring, among the leaders in rebounding, having his highest FG%/League Average of his entire career, and anchoring the best defense in the league, the 70-71 Bucks were clearly the best team in the league, and a case could be made that they were, at the very least, a top-5 team of all-time. Near the end of the season they were standing at 65-12, but coasted in their last few games, and finished at 66-16. Not only that, but that Milwaukee team still holds the largest FG% differential margin in NBA history (they outshot their opposition by a .509 to .424 margin.) They also had a +12.2 ppg differential, which is just slightly behind the '72 Lakers and '96 Bulls, both of whom were at +12.3 ppg.

Then, in the post-season, they went 12-2, and outscored their opposition by a record margin of +14.5 ppg, and outshot them by what I am certain is a record differential of .497 to .395.

And aside from Oscar, this was a very young team, too. After they had swept the Bullets in the Finals, they were being hailed as the next great dynasty. KAJ won the MVP, and the FMVP, and he left little doubt that he was the best player in the game.

However, as dominant as they were, there were some tiny cracks forming. KAJ battled a well-past-his-prime Wilt in 10 H2H's that season (five regular season, and five post-season), and it was a statistical draw. In fact, most observers gave Chamberlain the edge in both. Still, Kareem had easily outplayed Nate in the first round of the playoffs, and then torched Unseld in the Finals.

But, some of that domination was a mirage, as well. His Bucks beat a 41-41 Warrior team in the first round of the playoffs, 4-1. They then easily dispatched Wilt's 48-34 Lakers in the WCF's. However, that Laker team was without both West and Baylor (and suffered other injuries, as well.) And, as I already mentioned, Wilt outplayed KAJ in that series. And that sweep in the Finals, came against a 42-40 Bullets team.

Before the start of the 71-72 season, the Bucks were unanimous picks to repeat. Not only that, but with their youth, many were predicting a dynasty to rival Russell's Celtics. And as for KAJ...three straight dominating national championships at UCLA (and an overall 88-2 record, with both losses by two points.) And by his second season in the NBA he had led yet another team to a dominating world title.

Meanwhile, down in Los Angeles, the Lakers brought in Bill Sharman as their new head coach. Still, this was an old Laker team. Goodrich was 28, Hairston was 29, West was 33, Wilt was 35, and Baylor was 37. And West had missed the last fourth of the 70-71 season, and all of the playoffs, while Baylor had essentially missed the entire season. And, Wilt was well past his prime, and only a little over a year removed from major knee surgery. In fact, aside from his 10 H2H's with KAJ, his 70-71 regular season and even his post-season, were the worst of his career. And yet Sharman came into that season with a game plan of running.

No one gave the Lakers a second thought. Many pre-season publications had them tabbed as only third in their own division. And after Sharman "convinced" Baylor to retire early in the season, it looked even worse. But, Baylor was the one weakness in his master plan.. a plan to have LA run. His strategy coming into the season was for Wilt to anchor the defensive end, dominate the defensive glass, and to start the fastbreak with his outlets.

And after Baylor retired, and young Jim McMillian took his spot, it paid immediate dividends. LA went on a record 33 game winning streak, and never looked back. And they weren't just winning, they were annihilating teams. During that streak they only played a couple of close games, had 23 double-digit wins, and outscored their opponents by a a +15.6 ppg margin. In fact, the Lakers would run away with the team scoring title, averaging 121 ppg in a league that averaged 110 (and the second best team was at 116 ppg.)

Still, LA was 16-3 when they met KAJ's 17-2 Bucks in their first meeting that season. And while KAJ scored a ton in that game, the Lakers eked out a win. And by the time the two teams met again in January, the Lakers had a 39-3 record, while the Bucks were at 35-8. With Wilt in foul trouble, the Bucks slowly pulled away in the 2nd half, and won going away.

With that solid win, most experts were once again proclaiming the Bucks as on their way to a repeat. And even though LA beat Milwaukee in their last three H2H games, including a blowout win (in which KAJ scored 50 points but was outrebounded by Wilt, 25-8), they were still solid favorites going into the playoffs (despite LA having a 69-13 record to their 63-19 mark.)

KAJ had been an even more prolific scorer in that 71-72 season. He was just putting up huge games, even against Chamberlain (he averaged 40 ppg on a .500 FG% in their five H2H's), and poor Dave Cowens was allowing him nearly 45 ppg (including a career high 55 point game.) He ran away with the scoring title, at 34.8 ppg (Archibald was next at 28.2 ppg), and had he been inclined, he might have chased 40 ppg.

However, in the first round of the playoffs, and aside from his games early in his rookie season, he was outplayed by an opposing center. Nate Thurmond outscored him in that series, 25.4 ppg to 22.8 ppg, and outshot him, .437 to .405. Still, Milwaukee had a huge edge at every other position, and they steam-rolled the Warriors, 4-1.

Going into the 71-72 WCF's, most experts were picking the Bucks to finally derail the Lakers (who had swept Chicago in the first round.) And when they blew out the Lakers in game one, and in LA, it was no longer a question if they would win, but how long it would take them.

Jim McMillian saved the Lakers in game two, and LA eked out a close win. However, KAJ was just torching Chamberlain, and now the series was heading back to Milwaukee.

From that point on...IMHO, ...KAJ was never the same. Chamberlain battled him on every shot, and began knocking the skyhook all over the gym. Over the course of their last four H2H's, Wilt held Kareem to a collective .414 FG% (and KAJ was never close to 50% shooting in any of them), and with a stunned (and intimidated) KAJ, the series took a big turn. LA would win three of those last four games (and four of the last five), including a 25 pt blowout in LA, and two road wins, one of which was a spectacular come-from-behind clinching win. And amazingly, in the 4th quarter of that win, Chamberlain was just pummelling Kareem at both ends of the floor. He was pounding him, and even OUTRUNNING him.

Despite KAJ's one-sided edge in scoring, most accounts tabbed the 35 year old Chamberlain as the "winner" in their H2H's.

LA, behind Wilt, would go on to win a dominating Finals. Milwaukee's "dynasty" would have to wait for one more season. It would never materialize. KAJ was still the best player in the game, but his numbers started a slow decline. And in his six regular season H2H's with Wilt, he only shot .450 (in a season in which he would shoot .554 against the league.) In fact, in his last ten straight games against Chamberlain, he shot a combined .434.

Still, the Bucks had an outstanding season in 72-73 (Wilt's last), going 60-22, and were the West's #1 seed. However, Thurmond once again completely shut Abdul Jabbar down, holding him to 22.8 ppg on a .428 FG%, and the 47-35 Warriors shocked the Bucks in six games.

Continued...

[LAZERUSS]

With Wilt "retiring" before the start of the 73-74 season, and with several of the star centers on their last legs, including Reed and Thurmond, the path looked very bright for KAJ and the Bucks. And they rolled to a league-best 59-23 record. And they were 8-1 in the post-season going into the Finals against the 56-26 Celtics. Kareem was brilliant in the first six games, but his teammates were outplayed by Boston's. Then, in the seventh game, on their home floor, the 6-9 red-head Dave Cowens outplayed Kareem (and badly in the 4th quarter), and the Celtics stunned the favored Bucks with a blowout win.

Oscar would retire after that season, and along with some other injuries, including Kareem, himself, the Bucks fell to 38-44, and missed the playoffs. And even with KAJ, they only went 35-31.

The Bucks and Kareem became mutually disenchanted, and he was traded to a Laker team that had gone 30-52 in 74-75. If ever KAJ was going to challenge some of Wilt's records, this was the perfect opportunity. In his 71-72 season, playing 44.2 mpg on a team that went 63-19 and had a +11.1 ppg differential, he had scored 34.8 ppg on .574 shooting.

Alas, with the 75-76 Lakers, KAJ "only" played 41.2 mpg, scoring 27.7 ppg on a .529 FG%. This was obviously not a good roster, and he did get them to a 40-42 record, but he missed the playoffs for his second straight season.

And in the mid-70's, the rest of the centers started to slowly catch up to him. Bob McAdoo was running away with scoring titles (and again, KAJ could only score 27.7 ppg on a bad team...in a season in which McAdoo averaged 31.1 ppg, and a year after McAdoo had averaged 34.5 ppg.) In fact, McAdoo finished 2-1-2 in the MVP balloting from '74 thru '76, and was robbed of it in '76.

KAJ led an average Laker roster to a league best 53-29 in 76-77, but with the ABA merger, the league was void of any great teams. In fact, after Chamberlain retired, there would no longer be any dominating champions, until Magic arrived in 79-80. Still, the one team that might have been great, the 76-77 Blazers, despite going 49-33 in the regular season, swept KAJ's Lakers in the WCF's. However, it was probably KAJ's greatest post-season series. He absolutely wiped the floor with Walton in that series, but Walton's teammates badly outplayed his.

The Lakers surrounded Kareem with a TON of talent before the start of the 77-78 season. Early in the season they acquired Adrian Dantley, who was averaging 27 ppg when they got him. He joined Norm Nixon, Lou Hudson, Charlie Scott, and Jamaal Wilkes. The Lakers had the most stacked roster in the league.

And when Walton went down late in that season, the door was now open for a title run. It never materialized. LA was beaten by a 47-35 Sonics team in the first round. And the reality was, KAJ did not play well in that series, despite scoring 27 ppg. As a sidenote, a 44-38 Bullets team would win the title that year.

With a full season under their belts, the 78-79 Lakers were expected to make a run for the title. Again, with KAJ going thru the motions for parts of the season, LA badly underachieved. They would only finish at 47-35, and were blown out in the second round by a 50-32 Sonics team with one borderline HOF player.

In 79-80 MAGIC arrived, and the rest is history. With a rejuvented KAJ, and Magic the catalyst, the Lakers went 60-22 during the regular season. They wiped out the Sonics in the playoffs, and behind KAJ's brilliant first five games, and Magic's dominating game six (and great series overall BTW), the Lakers won their first of five title in the 80's.

In any case, had there been no Magic, and it is likely that KAJ would have retired as an underachiever. And while he was the best player in the decade of the 70's, he only won one ring, despite playing on several teams that should have won a title. Obviously it was not his fault for many of those failures, but the potential dynasty, which looked like a certainty in '71, never came to fruition. And KAJ, after hitting his peak early on, slowly declined, for whatever reasons, and while still a great player for most of the rest of his career, was never as dominant as he had been in his first three seasons.

[dankok8]

Here is my view on Kareem's career from '71 to '79 before Magic arrived. This is a response to LAZERUSS's posts above.

Let's begin with 71-72...

That season it is absolutely true that the Bucks were dominant and could be considered favorites over the Lakers... BUT WITH A HEALTHY OSCAR! In fact a couple of months ago I compiled some data on the Bucks play with and without the Big O in the regular season.

Bucks With Oscar (62 games)

50-12 record (66-win pace)
MOV of 12.87 (NBA Record pace by far :bowdown:)

Bucks Without Oscar (20 games)

*this includes 18 games he completely missed, the one he got injured in on Feb. 4 vs LA and the game on Feb 18 against Philly where he tried playing but was a complete shell and then took off two more weeks after

13-7 record (53-win pace)
MOV of 3.75

Quite a dramatic difference don't you think. The only reason the Bucks could stay afloat and still be a very good team without Oscar is Kareem's insane level of play. In those aforementioned 20 games without the Big O Kareem averaged:

39.5 ppg, 16.8 rpg, 5.6 apg on 58.7 %FG/73.7 %FT

We are missing rebounds, assists, and FG% in 2 or 3 games but that's insane!

You won't find many if any 20-game stretches more dominant than that in NBA history. Included there was a 50-pointer on Wilt and two 50-pointers on Dave Cowens.

Oscar of course was a complete shell in the playoffs because of his abdominal strain including the WCF against the Lakers.


Veteran guard Oscar Robertson has been bothered by pulled and inflamed abdominal muscles since early February. He returned to nearly fulltime action in the Bucks 4-1 victory over the Golden State Warriors in the first playoff round, but said afterward he was below par. "I couldn't go out and run, and couldn't start and drive," he said "I could just position and maneuver."


Oscar vs Lakers 1972 WCF:

Game 1: 9/4/10 (4/16, 1/2)
Game 2: 10/8/7 (4/6, 2/3) - 1 point Bucks loss
Game 3: 18/7/5 (7/16, 4/6)
Game 4: 6/7/10 (3/12, 0/0)
Game 5: 9/5/2 (3/7, 3/3)
Game 6: 2/1/0 (1/4, 0/0) - 4 point Bucks loss

Series Average: 9.0 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 5.7 apg on 36.1 %FG/40.2 %TS

To make matters worse two key back-up guards John McGlocklin (4th best player) and Wali Jones were completely useless because of injuries with Jon missing a few games in the WCF as well.


The two top reserve guards, Jon McGlocklin and Wally Jones, are both ailing. McGlocklin missed the Golden State series with strained back muscles and may miss the first week—four games—of the Laker series. Jones sat out Thursday night’s game with pulled ligaments in his left foot, and it isn’t known how much he’ll play Sunday.

Here is an article link that highlights the Bucks' injuries:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=AV80AAAAIBAJ&sjid=M5wEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6971,1413423

Realistically speaking, Kareem (while himself fighting a leg injury) put together a heroic performance in the '72 WCF. 33.7 ppg, 17.5 rpg, 4.8 apg, and probably 4-5 bpg as well. He did shoot 45.7% (major credit to Wilt's defense...) but he did so on over 30 field goal attempts! He had to shoot a lot because of so many injuries. And with so many shots and such a brutal defensive series that's a solid FG% regardless...

The Bucks should have been obliterated by the Lakers considering their state of injuries. They had a hobbled Oscar and Lucious Allen going up against West and Goodrich. McMillian was shooting the lights out and Hairston was outplaying Curtis Perry... The only reason the series was close was Kareem's play.

[dankok8]

On to 72-73...

I'm not going to sugarcoat it. Even though Dandridge was injured and played subpar Kareem should have played better against the Warriors. He did easily outplay Nate individually but he could have done more.


In 73-74 however... Oscar again had a back injury 34 games into the season and was never the same. Let's compare:

First 34 Games with a Healthy Oscar

Oscar: 15.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 6.9 apg on 45.0 %FG/84.4 %FT
Bucks Record: 27-7 (65 win pace)
Bucks MOV: 12.21 (WOW!)

Next 48 Games

Oscar: 10.1 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 5.8 apg on 42.6 %FG/82.4 %FT
Bucks Record: 32-16 (55 win pace)
Bucks MOV: 5.08

In the playoffs Oscar averaged a resurgent 14.0 ppg and 9.3 apg on 45.0% shooting through injury but in the Finals against a tough-nosed Celtics backcourt of White and Chaney the going was much tougher.

Bucks also missed starting SG Lucious Allen to injury. He was DNP for the entire playoffs.

Kareem was a beast in the '74 Finals averaging 32.6 ppg, 12.1 rpg, and 5.4 apg on 52.4% shooting for the series . He won 2 games by blocking a Cowens shot in Game 2 and then swishing a skyhook in Game 6. Coach Tom Heinsohn decided to change strategy and double and triple Kareem in Game 7 instead of going man-to-man with Cowens as he had for the first 6 games.

Poor Oscar averaged just 12.1 ppg, 3.7 rpg, and 8.1 apg on 43.2% shooting in the Finals including a 6 points Game 7 on 2-13 shooting.

Don't forget those Celtics were coming off of a dominant 68-win season the year before. There is no way anyone could consider the Bucks without Lucious Allen and a declining Oscar better than those Celtics.

Again without Kareem's dominant play and winning 2 games with clutch plays the series probably ends in 4-5 games in favor of Boston. Positions 1 through 4 the Celtics just outclassed the Bucks.

JoJo > Oscar
Chaney > McGlocklin
Hondo >> Dandridge
Silas > Perry


In 74-75 Oscar was retired, Lucious Allen missed 72 games, and yet Kareem kept the Bucks afloat. In the games he played healthy the Bucks were 35-30 (44 win pace). In the game he missed (plus the game he got injured in) Bucks were 3-14 (14 win pace). He was worth 30 extra wins to his team. I don't know what else to say.

[dankok8]

In 75-76 Kareem was on his new team. It was a terrible roster of aging players and just scoring guards. Funny thing is despite going 40-42 the Lakers missed the playoffs to a 38-win and 36-win teams because of dumb seeding. LA had a 4th best record and 3rd best SRS in the conference but they were only 3rd in their own division.

Also Kareem that year led the league in rebounding, blocks, and his defensive impact was off the charts. He had a DRtg of 90 compared to team DRtg of 98.8 (13th of 18 teams). With him on the floor LA had the best defensive team in the league (DRtg of 90 would be #1 in the league...) and without him on the floor they were probably close to last.


In 76-77 you correctly stated that Kareem outplayed Walton while his own teammates were outplay by Portland's. There is no need to add anything here. There is Game 2 and Game 4 of that series on YT for everyone to see.


In 77-78 Kareem can be blamed for stupidly losing his cool and punching Kent Benson. However we see a same old familiar trend with his team. When Kareem was playing healthy the Lakers were 37-24 (50 win pace) and without him they were 8-13 (31 win pace).

That look like a good team but honestly they were NOT. There was no one who defended or rebounded well other than Kareem. 21 year old Dantley "the cancer", rookie 22 year old Nixon, and super old declining Lou Hudson who was no longer a good player. Wilkes was solid but he played PF out of position as he did the next year.

In the playoffs against the Sonics Kareem had a fairly good series. In a Game 2 win he had 20 points in the 2nd half including 5 blocks in the 4th quarter. In the decisive Game 3 he had a 33/11 game but it was never close.


In 78-79 the Lakers like in 77-78 were simply atrocious as far as perimeter defense and team rebounding. Take a look at these numbers containing the rebounding numbers of the 78-79 and 79-80. Note that Kareem actually rebounded better in 78-79 so it's obvious the difference is from his teammates.



78-79 Lakers

Regular Season

-3.27 rebounds per game (21st of 22)
ORB% of 27.6% (22nd of 22)
DRB% of 66.5% (14th of 22)

Kareem averaged 12.8 rebounds per game (T-2nd) and 17.6 TRB% (11th) in the league.

Playoffs

Overall

ORB% of 21.4% (12th of 12 and by far the worst in the league)
DRB% of 62.9% (8th of 12)

vs. Nuggets

-7.33 rebounds per game

vs. Sonics

-13.2 rebounds per game

Kareem averaged 12.6 rebounds per game (4th) and 15.5 TRB% (top 15) in the league.
Against the Sonics Kareem averaged 12.2 rebounds per game.

79-80 Lakers

Regular Season

+2.24 rebounds per game (5th of 22)
ORB% of 23.6% (14th out of 22)
DRB% of 66.9% (10th of 22)

Kareem averaged 10.8 rebounds per game (8th) and 15.4 TRB% (T-20th) in the league.

Playoffs

Overall

ORB% of 38.2% (1st of 12)
DRB% of 72.1% (1st of 12)

vs. Suns

+10.4 rebounds per game

vs. Sonics

+3.8 rebounds per game

vs. Sixers

+14.2 rebounds per game

Kareem averaged 12.1 rebounds per game (2nd) and 15.7 TRB% (8th) in the league.
Against the Sonics Kareem averaged 11.6 rebounds per game.


With such terrible rebounding margins it's a miracle the Lakers could win as much as they did. The Nuggets outrebounded them by 7.3 boards a game but Kareem was a monster in that series averaging 28.0 ppg, 13.3 rpg, 5.0 apg, 5.0 bpg on 61.5 %FG and hit a game-winning shot in Game 3.

Against the Sonics they were outrebounded by 13.2 a game!! Kareem had another great series with 28.8 ppg, 12.2 rpg, 4.6 apg, 3.6 bpg on 56.0 %FG. Despite the 4-1 result it was pretty close. 2 games were decided in OT and another came down to Nixon missing a game-winning shot.

Another problem apart form rebounding is the Sonics' 3-headed dragon of Gus Williams, Dennis Johnson, and Fred Brown averaged about 60 ppg in that series. They completely and totally obliterated Laker guards Norm Nixon, Ron Boone (scrub) and Don Ford (scrub) beyond any recognition.

In 79-80 Kareem didn't play any better against Seattle. He was just as dominant in both years but LA easily beat them in '80. Difference is now they outrebounded Seattle by 3.8 a game. Dantley was replaced by Chones/Haywood who rebounded and Cooper was worked into the rotation which helped defend the Seattle guards.

The LA offense (and defense of course) changed remarkably little with Magic's arrival. If anything he helped them most on the boards.

[LAZERUSS]

Great post dankok8. But even your research pretty much confirmed what I claimed...that a 70-72 KAJ was at his peak.

And this was awe-inspiring too...


39.5 ppg, 16.8 rpg, 5.6 apg on 58.7 %FG/73.7 %FT

We are missing rebounds, assists, and FG% in 2 or 3 games but that's insane!

You won't find many if any 20-game stretches more dominant than that in NBA history. Included there was a 50-pointer on Wilt and two 50-pointers on Dave Cowens.

But, just for the hell of it, I looked up Wilt's first 20 games of his 62-63 season (not his fabled 61-62 season)...and here were his numbers in those 20 straight games...(and we are missing two of his rebound games, 5 of his FG% games, and 11 of his assist games)...

50.8 ppg, 26.4 rpg, 3.0 apg, .546 FG%, .647 FT%.

Included were FOUR games against Bellamy in which he scored 46, 54, 57, and 37 points (and in the two known rebounding games, he had 28 and 27.) He also hung a 45-27 game on Russell. And he pounded the 7-0 Walter Dukes in two of those games by margins of 50-10, and 49-5. Oh, and BTW, he also had games of 61, 72, and 73 points.

And how about a 50-41 game? Or a 59-35 game? Or a 53-34 game?

Here again, I won't take the time to sort through the many possible combination of games in his career, but his start to his 62-63 season has to rank among the best-ever 20 game stretches in NBA history.


But kudos to the rest of your info on Kareem.

:cheers:

[SHAQisGOAT]

In 75-76 Kareem was on his new team. It was a terrible roster of aging players and just scoring guards. Funny thing is despite going 40-42 the Lakers missed the playoffs to a 38-win and 36-win teams because of dumb seeding. LA had a 4th best record and 3rd best SRS in the conference but they were only 3rd in their own division.

Also Kareem that year led the league in rebounding, blocks, and his defensive impact was off the charts. He had a DRtg of 90 compared to team DRtg of 98.8 (13th of 18 teams). With him on the floor LA had the best defensive team in the league (DRtg of 90 would be #1 in the league...) and without him on the floor they were probably close to last.


In 76-77 you correctly stated that Kareem outplayed Walton while his own teammates were outplay by Portland's. There is no need to add anything here. There is Game 2 and Game 4 of that series on YT for everyone to see.


In 77-78 Kareem can be blamed for stupidly losing his cool and punching Kent Benson. However we see a same old familiar trend with his team. When Kareem was playing healthy the Lakers were 37-24 (50 win pace) and without him they were 8-13 (31 win pace).

That look like a good team but honestly they were NOT. There was no one who defended or rebounded well other than Kareem. 21 year old Dantley "the cancer", rookie 22 year old Nixon, and super old declining Lou Hudson who was no longer a good player. Wilkes was solid but he played PF out of position as he did the next year.

In the playoffs against the Sonics Kareem had a fairly good series. In a Game 2 win he had 20 points in the 2nd half including 5 blocks in the 4th quarter. In the decisive Game 3 he had a 33/11 game but it was never close.


In 78-79 the Lakers like in 77-78 were simply atrocious as far as perimeter defense and team rebounding. Take a look at these numbers containing the rebounding numbers of the 78-79 and 79-80. Note that Kareem actually rebounded better in 78-79 so it's obvious the difference is from his teammates.



With such terrible rebounding margins it's a miracle the Lakers could win as much as they did. The Nuggets outrebounded them by 7.3 boards a game but Kareem was a monster in that series averaging 28.0 ppg, 13.3 rpg, 5.0 apg, 5.0 bpg on 61.5 %FG and hit a game-winning shot in Game 3.

Against the Sonics they were outrebounded by 13.2 a game!! Kareem had another great series with 28.8 ppg, 12.2 rpg, 4.6 apg, 3.6 bpg on 56.0 %FG. Despite the 4-1 result it was pretty close. 2 games were decided in OT and another came down to Nixon missing a game-winning shot.

Another problem apart form rebounding is the Sonics' 3-headed dragon of Gus Williams, Dennis Johnson, and Fred Brown averaged about 60 ppg in that series. They completely and totally obliterated Laker guards Norm Nixon, Ron Boone (scrub) and Don Ford (scrub) beyond any recognition.

In 79-80 Kareem didn't play any better against Seattle. He was just as dominant in both years but LA easily beat them in '80. Difference is now they outrebounded Seattle by 3.8 a game. Dantley was replaced by Chones/Haywood who rebounded and Cooper was worked into the rotation which helped defend the Seattle guards.

The LA offense (and defense of course) changed remarkably little with Magic's arrival. If anything he helped them most on the boards.


Great posts :applause:

Let me ask you, when do you say Kareem peaked?

[LAZERUSS]

As a sidenote...Chamberlain had a 20 game streak in this 65-66 season, beginning on 1-18-66 thru 2-21-66, in which he averaged:
34.0 ppg, 21.9 rpg, 5.1 apg, and shot .612 from the floor. There is FG% data missing from two of those 20 games, and four of his assist games.

Included were games of 53-31 and 65-29. He also had a 30-29 game against Nate, and a 29-26 game against Russell in that streak. And in another, a remarkable 30-15-13 triple double on 12-12 shooting from the floor.

Oh, and a few days later,on 3/3/66, (and outside of this 20 game window), he put up a 62 point, 37 rebound, 26-39 FG/FGA game.

[LAZERUSS]

And I just had to add the extra game in this streak...

In 21 straight games, from 1-19-67 thru 2-28-67, Chamberlain averaged:

27.0 ppg, 25.6 rpg, 8.7 apg, and shot... .733 from the field!

Data is missing from five of his FG% games out of those 21, but all the other numbers are for 21 straight games.

[fpliii]

Great posts :applause:

Let me ask you, when do you say Kareem peaked?

I'd say either 73-74 or 76-77 personally. I have a lot to learn about Hakeem, though.

Typically it seems all-time greats don't peak offensively and defensively at the exact same time. Kobe peaked defensively early during the threepeat, but had his best offensive years in the first 4-5 seasons after Shaq left. Part of that was by design since he had to focus on scoring, but there was still some disconnect. Wilt also seemed to peak offensively (61-62 through 65-66) slightly earlier than he did defensively (63-64 through 67-68). Kareem is a very tough call.

[LAZERUSS]

I'd say either 73-74 or 76-77 personally. I have a lot to learn about Hakeem, though.

Typically it seems all-time greats don't peak offensively and defensively at the exact same time. Kobe peaked defensively early during the threepeat, but had his best offensive years in the first 4-5 seasons after Shaq left. Part of that was by design since he had to focus on scoring, but there was still some disconnect. Wilt also seemed to peak offensively (61-62 through 65-66) slightly earlier than he did defensively (63-64 through 67-68). Kareem is a very tough call.

I would argue that KAJ's offensive AND defensive peaks were from 70-72 (defensively, even up to '74.) Take a look at where Milwaukee's defense ranked in those years.

And many of the greats have had their best scoring seasons very early in their careers, and usually their best rebounding seasons, as well.

IMHO, Chamberlain's offensive and defensive peak were about the same, too. From '63-64 thru 67-68. And his rebounding and passing peaked then, as well.

[fpliii]

I would argue that KAJ's offensive AND defensive peaks were from 70-72 (defensively, even up to '74.) Take a look at where Milwaukee's defense ranked in those years.

And many of the greats have had their best scoring seasons very early in their careers, and usually their best rebounding seasons, as well.

IMHO, Chamberlain's offensive and defensive peak were about the same, too. From '63-64 thru 67-68. And his rebounding and passing peaked then, as well.
Working in your favor would certainly be Kareem's mobility. In his first autobiography, he cited it as perhaps his biggest advantage when coming into the league against other bigs he matched up against.

PHILA recently reviewed the tape available of Kareem in his prime (through 79-80), and said the following to me:


With the Lakers he seemed to have a stronger base and was more on "cruise control", in terms of the game coming so easy to him at that point. With the Bucks he was quicker off the dribble and didn't rely on the hook shot as much as his later years, like 1980. Game 5 of the Finals that year is one of the all time underrated performances.

I don't know how much his skill improved to be honest, with the Lakers. What was different? Was it mostly shot selection?

[dankok8]

Kareem circa '77 was at his best. He had the skyhook down with both hands, he had a money mid-range J up to 15 feet, and he was at least 20 lbs heavier which helped him bang with the stronger centers. He was definitely still slim and had the agility he had as a young 'un.

By '80 his athleticism dropped ever so slightly as did his stamina. Still until '81 Kareem was just about as good as he was in his rookie year. He had an insanely long prime of pretty consistent performances. A drop in regular season numbers was accompanied by a steady postseason production so I wouldn't say he declined.

Anyways when I look at Kareem's 70's career the biggest reasons for his "underachieving" is lack of talent (no all-star or all-defensive teammate from '74 to '79), major injuries, and the terrible chemistry problems/team flaws in the late 70's.

A distant fourth reason is his own (lack of) performance. He could have played better in '73 and he didn't play at a GOAT level in '78 (though still very good) but in all other years he really brought it as hard as when he was winning if not harder.

[julizaver]

At Dankok8.

If you have two players A and B going for let say 6 games series and averaged H2H the following numbers:

Player А. 47 min, 16 ppg on 0.480 FG, 0.550 FTs, 21 rpg, 5 apg
Player B. 42 min, 24 ppg on 0.510 FG, 0.80 FTs, 14 rpg, 2.5 apg.

Who outplayed who or who would you take ? Player A better rebounder and defensive player and poor FT shooter, player B far better ofensively. If end result have matters for you when there is individual match up you could take both options Player A team won 4:2 and vice versa.

[dankok8]

At Dankok8.

If you have two players A and B going for let say 6 games series and averaged H2H the following numbers:

Player А. 47 min, 16 ppg on 0.480 FG, 0.550 FTs, 21 rpg, 5 apg
Player B. 42 min, 24 ppg on 0.510 FG, 0.80 FTs, 14 rpg, 2.5 apg.

Who outplayed who or who would you take ? Player A better rebounder and defensive player and poor FT shooter, player B far better ofensively. If end result have matters for you when there is individual match up you could take both options Player A team won 4:2 and vice versa.

I can't answer that question with any confidence without watching the games or at least reading about the impact of each player through recaps. The result would obviously matter as well. The numbers are definitely too close that we can say there is an obvious winner.

I will go out on a limb and say that neither player dominated the other and that it was close.

Cumulative stats over say 6 games can be extremely misleading too. For example, maybe one of the players above had a single game where they obliterated the other (helped by injury or foul trouble) while they were slightly outplayed in all the other five games.

I would also like to know the turnovers, field goals made and attempted, and free throws made and attempted.

[Roundball_Rock]

dankok8:

http://i.imgur.com/dhMeAzK.gif