Wilt Chamberlain scoring highlights 1960-1968

[CavaliersFTW]

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

I should note, these come from such a small sample pool that even if he only shows a move once here, he repeats and/or displays several more moves or variations of the move in Lakers footage despite him scoring less during those years. Because those later Laker years have more coverage. There are several moves of his repertoire that he shows in Laker footage missing from this reel because of the window of time I used and the limited footage from that time. So this isn't 'everything' we are missing some of his less often used moves. But it is a great compilation no doubt of his core/primary moves. (fade aways, turnaround Js, bank shots, finger rolls, reverse Layups, spin moves, transition baskets, tip ins, alley oops etc). Hope you guys enjoy. :cheers:

[fpliii]

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

I should note, these come from such a small sample pool that even if he only shows a move once here, he repeats and/or displays several more moves or variations of the move in Lakers footage despite him scoring less during those years. Because those later Laker years have more coverage. There are several moves of his repertoire that he shows in Laker footage missing from this reel because of the window of time I used and the limited footage from that time. So this isn't 'everything' we are missing some of his less often used moves. But it is a great compilation no doubt of his core/primary moves. (fade aways, turnaround Js, bank shots, finger rolls, reverse Layups, spin moves, transition baskets, tip ins, alley oops etc). Hope you guys enjoy. :cheers:
:applause:

Is this ready for sharing?

[CavaliersFTW]

:applause:

Is this ready for sharing?
yeah its public

[fpliii]

yeah its public
Nice, I'll send it out after I've had a chance to watch. Thanks again for your hard work!

[Vienceslav]

Did that guys hand really disappear when Wilt shook it?

[mehyaM24]

sped up and edited footage....lmaooo!! this video further proves shaq, since day 1, was more skilled than wilt ever was. checkout "shaqs gangsta move on michael jordan"..check it out on youtube... also "planet shaq part 4"..check out the moves he puts on..HAKEEM!..shaq has up and unders,spin moves...great footwork...that move on jordan?...id like to see wilt do that by himself in an empty gym...its about skill,not size fools.

[mehyaM24]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgqoFTh2lZg
the REAL unstoppable scorer

[PHILA]

That is an Hakeem/Dirk-esque fadeaway at 2:18

[fpliii]

sped up and edited footage....lmaooo!! this video further proves shaq, since day 1, was more skilled than wilt ever was. checkout "shaqs gangsta move on michael jordan"..check it out on youtube... also "planet shaq part 4"..check out the moves he puts on..HAKEEM!..shaq has up and unders,spin moves...great footwork...that move on jordan?...id like to see wilt do that by himself in an empty gym...its about skill,not size fools.
Watch the ball physics.

:facepalm

I'm not a Wilt guy, but that ******ry should be a bannable offense.

[fpliii]

That is an Hakeem/Dirk-esque fadeaway at 2:18
Do you want to start a thread about this on the PC board? Now that this video is out with so much footage, I think we can get some decent breakdowns.

BTW CavsFTW/PHILA and whoever else, when would you guys say Wilt's prime ended? With the injury in 69-70 (from all accounts he was still in his prime in 68-69, but fitting with Baylor/vBK presented problems)?

[Bush4Ever]

sped up and edited footage....lmaooo!! this video further proves shaq, since day 1, was more skilled than wilt ever was. checkout "shaqs gangsta move on michael jordan"..check it out on youtube... also "planet shaq part 4"..check out the moves he puts on..HAKEEM!..shaq has up and unders,spin moves...great footwork...that move on jordan?...id like to see wilt do that by himself in an empty gym...its about skill,not size fools.

Shaq DID have amazingly underrated footwork.

That said, you are being dumb.

[fpliii]

Shaq DID have amazingly underrated footwork.

That said, you are being dumb.
Hi Bush.

[Bush4Ever]

Hi Bush.

Do I know you?

[mehyaM24]

Watch the ball physics.

:facepalm

I'm not a Wilt guy, but that ******ry should be a bannable offense.

:oldlol: 5:47. that is NOT natural. keep deluding yourselves though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87DxcV3IB9E
nobody was more skilled than shaq and the footage doesnt lie....

[PHILA]

Do you want to start a thread about this on the PC board? Now that this video is out with so much footage, I think we can get some decent breakdowns.

No, I believe it's a waste of time. If anything it should be posted in the game footage thread.

[fpliii]

Do I know you?
Aren't you Bush4Ever from ESPN/Anger?


:oldlol: 5:47. that is NOT natural. keep deluding yourselves though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87DxcV3IB9E
nobody was more skilled than shaq and the footage doesnt lie....
Shaq's my favorite player all-time, though I'm not making any comparisons here anyway. You have serious problems, all you do is come here to troll this guy's mixes.

Whatever.

[Bush4Ever]

Aren't you Bush4Ever from ESPN/Anger?



lol

[fpliii]

lol
Sorry, long day so far, don't mind me.

No, I believe it's a waste of time. If anything it should be posted in the game footage thread.
I think it depends on the title of the thread and what we ask. Though perhaps the footage thread is the best call.

[r0drig0lac]

the most dominant ever :applause: :applause:

[mehyaM24]

how does one watch this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUE_0LRxtpU) and come out thinking wilt was "more dominant" than shaq? :facepalm


Aren't you Bush4Ever from ESPN/Anger?


Shaq's my favorite player all-time, though I'm not making any comparisons here anyway. You have serious problems, all you do is come here to troll this guy's mixes.

Whatever.

stop being a ****ing baby. i am simply giving my opinion.

the mix is well done. music is nice. but waaaaay over-edited.

[Psileas]

Around 167 baskets shown here, around 1.5% of his non-Laker career. :applause:

[jongib369]

Do you want to start a thread about this on the PC board? Now that this video is out with so much footage, I think we can get some decent breakdowns.

BTW CavsFTW/PHILA and whoever else, when would you guys say Wilt's prime ended? With the injury in 69-70 (from all accounts he was still in his prime in 68-69, but fitting with Baylor/vBK presented problems)?
Which are you speaking of?

[fpliii]

Which are you speaking of?
http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewforum.php?f=64

[CavaliersFTW]

how does one watch this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUE_0LRxtpU) and come out thinking wilt was "more dominant" than shaq? :facepalm



stop being a ****ing baby. i am simply giving my opinion.

the mix is well done. music is nice. but waaaaay over-edited.
Hello shaqpopcorn34

[CavaliersFTW]

Around 167 baskets shown here, around 1.5% of his non-Laker career. :applause:
Thank you for the insight Psileas, I've done a similar thing with Baylor (but for his entire career) and figured I had about 2.5% of his entire career (*EDIT* fg's made) (both college and NBA/NBA playoffs combined) on film :applause:

Btw, did you add up both playoffs and regular season? You have to combine the two, the footage contains clips from both! Also, a few baskets are shown mutliple times from different angles in case you didn't know, so there's probably closer to 160 baskets shown.

[fpliii]

Thank you for the insight Psileas, I've done a similar thing with Baylor (but for his entire career) and figured I had about 2.5% of his entire career fg's (both college and NBA/NBA playoffs combined) on film :applause:

Btw, did you add up both playoffs and regular season? You have to combine the two, the footage contains clips from both! Also, a few baskets are shown mutliple times from different angles in case you didn't know, so there's probably closer to 160 baskets shown.
160/11263 is around 1.4%, still a good number. :applause:

[CavaliersFTW]

160/11263 is around 1.4%, still a good number. :applause:
Add all star games into the mix too, I forgot a relevant portion of these are ASG clips because All Star Games got a disproportionatly large amount of coverage back then compared to say, reg/season games

[fpliii]

Add all star games into the mix too, I forgot a relevant portion of these are ASG clips because All Star Games got a disproportionatly large amount of coverage back then compared to say, reg/season games
Ah okay, 160/11328 then, still ~1.4%. Tremendous work either way.

[Psileas]

Add all star games into the mix too, I forgot a relevant portion of these are ASG clips because All Star Games got a disproportionatly large amount of coverage back then compared to say, reg/season games

I did actually add his ASG FG's in his pre-69 career total, because I noticed these ASG plays, as well.


Btw, did you add up both playoffs and regular season? You have to combine the two, the footage contains clips from both! Also, a few baskets are shown mutliple times from different angles in case you didn't know, so there's probably closer to 160 baskets shown.

I did add playoffs. Not sure about the double angled plays, although I counted that dunk over the lazy Pistons' #19 once.

[Pointguard]

That is an Hakeem/Dirk-esque fadeaway at 2:18
At the 6:22 point for about ten seconds you see a whole series of the same shot.

[Pointguard]

Great work as always CavFTW!!! I think the full repertoire is captured here. All we need to experience now is the persistence to the hoop and game continuity.

[CavaliersFTW]

19 players not named Wilt Chamberlain have scored 60 or more points in NBA history, a combined 30 times.

Wilt Chamberlain scored 60 or more points 32 times. More than anyone else, combined.

:biggums:

[Illuminati]

That move at 2:58 was nice. :applause:

[CavaliersFTW]

Bump for Laz

[LAZERUSS]

Bump for Laz

:applause: :applause: :applause:

I'm sure this is the most extensive collection of Wilt's scoring skills available. As always, just a brilliant video.


Having said that,...Psileas hit the nail on the head. 1.5% of his baskets made in his NBA career. And aside from the '62 ASG footage (when Chamberlain scored 42 points, grabbed 24 rebounds, and shot 17-23 from the field), there is probably little footage, if any, from his monumental games. I just can't imagine what spectacular footage is missing.

In your Wilt collection, you have Chamberlain blocking shots with his fingertips just narrowly below the top of the backboard. Even late in his career, you have a block in which he is again close to the top. I just have to believe that Wilt was probably making even more spectacular blocks, dunks, passes, and shots, in the other 98% of footage that is missing in his career.

And while this video is just sensational...the real shame is that it is only a tip of the iceberg...

[CavaliersFTW]

:applause: :applause: :applause:

I'm sure this is the most extensive collection of Wilt's scoring skills available. As always, just a brilliant video.


Having said that,...Psileas hit the nail on the head. 1.5% of his baskets made in his NBA career. And aside from the '62 ASG footage (when Chamberlain scored 42 points, grabbed 24 rebounds, and shot 17-23 from the field), there is probably little footage, if any, from his monumental games. I just can't imagine what spectacular footage is missing.

In your Wilt collection, you have Chamberlain blocking shots with his fingertips just narrowly below the top of the backboard. Even late in his career, you have a block in which he is again close to the top. I just have to believe that Wilt was probably making even more spectacular blocks, dunks, passes, and shots, in the other 98% of footage that is missing in his career.

And while this video is just sensational...the real shame is that it is only a tip of the iceberg...
I will do a 'scoring skills' video at some point, incorporating moves captured on film from his entire career not just what is shown in this video.

There are moves that he did that are missing in the 60-68 window being that it is such a small sample size.

[Psileas]

:applause: :applause: :applause:

I'm sure this is the most extensive collection of Wilt's scoring skills available. As always, just a brilliant video.


Having said that,...Psileas hit the nail on the head. 1.5% of his baskets made in his NBA career. And aside from the '62 ASG footage (when Chamberlain scored 42 points, grabbed 24 rebounds, and shot 17-23 from the field), there is probably little footage, if any, from his monumental games. I just can't imagine what spectacular footage is missing.

In your Wilt collection, you have Chamberlain blocking shots with his fingertips just narrowly below the top of the backboard. Even late in his career, you have a block in which he is again close to the top. I just have to believe that Wilt was probably making even more spectacular blocks, dunks, passes, and shots, in the other 98% of footage that is missing in his career.

And while this video is just sensational...the real shame is that it is only a tip of the iceberg...

This covered 1.5% that I mentioned, though an impressive percentage for a scorer of Wilt's level, still doesn't do him justice, since we can see that lots of his plays are essentially too short to fully evaluate (e.g, some flashes of plays that only last like 1 second each) and there is a good number of ASG (=basically meaningless) baskets as well (although they still show glimpses of his skill). If Cavs had the luxury (and time) to have a more detailed version of the afore mentioned plays, then this "1.5%" would be more meaningful.
And this would still leave out his other highlights (assists, defense/blocks, even some rebounds), which may be literally at least as many as his baskets.

[LAZERUSS]

This covered 1.5% that I mentioned, though an impressive percentage for a scorer of Wilt's level, still doesn't do him justice, since we can see that lots of his plays are essentially too short to fully evaluate (e.g, some flashes of plays that only last like 1 second each) and there is a good number of ASG (=basically meaningless) baskets as well (although they still show glimpses of his skill). If Cavs had the luxury (and time) to have a more detailed version of the afore mentioned plays, then this "1.5%" would be more meaningful.
And this would still leave out his other highlights (assists, defense/blocks, even some rebounds), which may be literally at least as many as his baskets.

It's a downright shame that, other than the '62 ASG (and even that is not in it's entirety), that we have no full game footage of even one of his 271 40+ point games.

[CavaliersFTW]

Do you want to start a thread about this on the PC board? Now that this video is out with so much footage, I think we can get some decent breakdowns.

BTW CavsFTW/PHILA and whoever else, when would you guys say Wilt's prime ended? With the injury in 69-70 (from all accounts he was still in his prime in 68-69, but fitting with Baylor/vBK presented problems)?
His prime ended with his knee injury IMO, you are right 68-69 would/should still be it but he had problems in vBK's system. That was the season a writer said he "couldn't" score any more and he put up back to back 60 point games just to show he still could. He was leading the league in scoring in 1970 AGAIN just prior to his knee injury. From there on out due to age, coaching, maybe lateral quickness after the knee repair, also conscious choice on what to focus on and a myriad of whatever other reasons he wasn't the same dominant scorer. I also think after 67 when he 'retired' that fade-away that season he lost some of his touch with it through attrition. But he was still very very dominant, like MVP caliber dominant it just wasn't being reflected with "points per game" anymore. He left the game way earlier than he would have needed too after the ABA lawsuit.

[LAZERUSS]

His prime ended with his knee injury IMO, you are right 68-69 would/should still be it but he had problems in vBK's system. That was the season a writer said he "couldn't" score any more and he put up back to back 60 point games just to show he still could. He was leading the league in scoring in 1970 AGAIN just prior to his knee injury. From there on out due to age, coaching, maybe lateral quickness after the knee repair, also conscious choice on what to focus on and a myriad of whatever other reasons he wasn't the same dominant scorer. I also think after 67 when he 'retired' that fade-away that season he lost some of his touch with it through attrition. But he was still very very dominant, like MVP caliber dominant it just wasn't being reflected with "points per game" anymore. He left the game way earlier than he would have needed too after the ABA lawsuit.

What is interesting, is that Chamberlain had arguably the worst season of his career, following the season in which he blew out his knee, in 70-71. And his post-season that year was also arguably the worst of his career (although you could make an argument for 68-69.) His rebounding and FG%'s were exceptionally low for him, in both the regular season, and the playoffs.

Still, he battled a PEAK Kareem in five regular season, and five post-season H2H's, and statistically outplayed him. In the WORST season of his career.

Oh, and here were his numbers that year...

20.7 ppg, 18.2 rpg, 4.3 apg, and on a .545 FG%.

[CavaliersFTW]

Watch the ball physics.

:facepalm

I'm not a Wilt guy, but that ******ry should be a bannable offense.
He used to go by the alias of Shaqpopcorn34 on Youtube, most Youtube channels have banned him. He was a basketcase for Shaq vs Wilt arguments there trying to bait damn near everyone into an endless argument. Don't try to show him footage, or examples of Wilt doing things Shaq cannot do as he won't watch them, just like he didn't really acknowledge any of the things Wilt was dong that Shaq never did in the video in the OP. All he does is use his recycled clips of Shaq dunking on someone or spinning or going coast to coast or w/e and says 'Wilt can't do that!'. Even if you show him an example of Wilt doing that, or doing something similar or just as if not more impressive. He's a troll. And it looks like he's taken his talents to ISH.

[CavaliersFTW]

Fpliii and Phila, you guys are on realgm

Explain what you know about "Fatal9" and his agenda against Wilt to me.

[SHAQisGOAT]

:applause: Always coming through with the rare highlights. A bit too sped up though, I prefer to watch on "normal" speed.

Wilt was such a monster :bowdown: Freak athlete with lots of skill (and preferred to use it).

[PHILA]

Fpliii and Phila, you guys are on realgm

Explain what you know about "Fatal9" and his agenda against Wilt to me.

I don't know. Actually it began on this forum, he has even stated that Bynum>Wilt as a scorer.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6122175&postcount=37

[-23-]

:applause:

[CavaliersFTW]

I don't know. Actually it began on this forum, he has even stated that Bynum>Wilt as a scorer.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6122175&postcount=37
Holy shit... I think I used to like that guy because I appreciated the Hakeem scoring skills video and whatnot that he made and that's about all I knew about him... now that I've done more research on him I see he's a total a clown. I googled some more of his posts about Wilt, and I see he's the source of what many people recite. He's like THE source of all the long paragraphs trash and slanderous quotes about Wilt. Accuses Wilt fans of 'cherry picking' only to cherry pick himself. He's perpetuated the 6-6 white unskilled centers BS and the Wilt having a 24 inch vertical and 'unathletic/not special by today's standards' nonsense.

Someone posted me a link to Rick Barry comment recently that made me upload the Rick Barry's opinion of Wilt video just to expose that quote as a cherry picked outdated piece of information... turns out Fatal9 was that guys source of using that outdated quote in his anti-Wilt arguments. Really that guy sounds like a dick. Now I'm definitely going to make a Wilt offensive skills highlight, and it isn't just gonna be scoring moves it's gonna include passing, and all the types of plays he did that Hakeem didn't even do in the post let alone Bynum. Because **** that guy. He is straight wrong about his assumptions about Wilt and his era. You dont' need Hakeem's traveling I mean uhhh, footwork, or fluidity to be a dominant force in the paint when you're basically a taller version of Shaq minus the gut.

[Psileas]

Holy shit... I think I used to like that guy because I appreciated the Hakeem scoring skills video and whatnot that he made and that's about all I knew about him... now that I've done more research on him I see he's a total a clown. I googled some more of his posts about Wilt, and I see he's the source of what many people recite. He's like THE source of all the long paragraphs trash and slanderous quotes about Wilt. Accuses Wilt fans of 'cherry picking' only to cherry pick himself. He's perpetuated the 6-6 white unskilled centers BS and the Wilt having a 24 inch vertical and 'unathletic/not special by today's standards' nonsense.

Someone posted me a link to Rick Barry comment recently that made me upload the Rick Barry's opinion of Wilt video just to expose that quote as a cherry picked outdated piece of information... turns out Fatal9 was that guys source of using that outdated quote in his anti-Wilt arguments. Really that guy sounds like a dick. Now I'm definitely going to make a Wilt offensive skills highlight, and it isn't just gonna be scoring moves it's gonna include passing, and all the types of plays he did that Hakeem didn't even do in the post let alone Bynum. Because **** that guy. He is straight wrong about his assumptions about Wilt and his era. You dont' need Hakeem's traveling I mean uhhh, footwork, or fluidity to be a dominant force in the paint when you're basically a taller version of Shaq minus the gut.

As far as I remember, Fatal9, who had been here, mostly tried to bear a "mythbuster" and "protector of the underrated" name. Started by posting stuff against Jordan's hype while not caring much about Wilt (sometimes even wrote positive things about him), but gradually moved to trying to bust similar stories about Wilt and became increasingly hostile towards him, while always being much keener on Kareem/Hakeem, who had been considered the "underrated" big men.
I'm not a RealGM poster, but a few ones are even worse. They, for example, have fallen so pathologically in love with the season-by-season WS margins, SRS margins, etc, that they'll get to conclusions like Wilt being a bad defender in 1969, Wilt having little offensive impact in some of his highest scoring seasons and so on.
What's comical in such situations is that, in case Wilt's teams seem to underperform, Wilt's game is the only one which is scrutinized as consistently changing and is considered mostly responsible for the negative turn, while the other players' value and impact somehow remain unchanged. If Wilt's teams play great, then it becomes a different story...
Oh, and try to disagree. Best case, you'll be called out as ignorant. Worst case, I guess, you may even get banned if you don't shut up after a while.

And on Wilt having 24 inches of vert, here's a 2008 topic here:
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=98884

[Psileas]

And on Wilt having 24 inches of vert, here's a 2008 topic here:
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=98884

Now I'm viewing the last pages and it seems like you already know about this.

[LAZERUSS]

As far as I remember, Fatal9, who had been here, mostly tried to bear a "mythbuster" and "protector of the underrated" name. Started by posting stuff against Jordan's hype while not caring much about Wilt (sometimes even wrote positive things about him), but gradually moved to trying to bust similar stories about Wilt and became increasingly hostile towards him, while always being much keener on Kareem/Hakeem, who had been considered the "underrated" big men.
I'm not a RealGM poster, but a few ones are even worse. They, for example, have fallen so pathologically in love with the season-by-season WS margins, SRS margins, etc, that they'll get to conclusions like Wilt being a bad defender in 1969, Wilt having little offensive impact in some of his highest scoring seasons and so on.
What's comical in such situations is that, in case Wilt's teams seem to underperform, Wilt's game is the only one which is scrutinized as consistently changing and is considered mostly responsible for the negative turn, while the other players' value and impact somehow remain unchanged. If Wilt's teams play great, then it becomes a different story...
Oh, and try to disagree. Best case, you'll be called out as ignorant. Worst case, I guess, you may even get banned if you don't shut up after a while.

And on Wilt having 24 inches of vert, here's a 2008 topic here:
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=98884

At one time he was actually a knowledgeable poster...

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=165643

[QUOTE]Is the perception of Wilt being a perenial choker overblown? I looked at all his do or die games (ie. Game 7s, though sometimes those could be game 3s or Game 5s depending on what round the series was in).

1960 G3 vs. Nationals: 53 points, ? rebounds (playoff record at the time for pts)
1962 G5 vs. Nationals: 56 pts, 35 rebs (breaks his own playoff record)
1962 G7 vs Celtics : 22 pts, 21 rebs (7/14 shooting - Warriors were on the verge of pulling off this upset but Sam James hit a clutch shot. Wilt was undoubtedly fronted by the entire Celtics frontline, as was the case for most of his games vs. Celtics in mid-60s, a defensive strategy which would have been illegal in 80s/90s mind you)
1964 G7 vs. Hawks: 39 pts, 26 rebs, 12 blocks (many of which led to 14-0 run

[Pointguard]

At one time he was actually a knowledgeable poster...

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=165643
Yeah, he could really be impressive some times and debate very well. Then the next day totally miss the boat and not be capable of defending himself.

[jongib369]

"The point isn't whether he made or missed the shots, those things vary game to game. But it's things like his awful footwork, how many dribbles he uses to make his move (this wouldn't fly in today's game where double teaming and trapping is waaay more common), his dribbles aren't fluid or in rhythm, his touch outside of 5+ feet away looks really awkward but it's pretty soft on his bank shot (though he is soo slow in getting into that move), has a bad habit of exposing the ball and he clearly doesn't have a lower base and center of gravity (long skinny legs) of a guy like Shaq to play the power game like him. These are things that are consistent on a game to game basis. But you guys can believe that a guy who was as horrible as Wilt at FTs had awesome midrange game. I just think it's a big leap of faith.


TL;DR: Wilt was an awesome finisher and awesome on the offensive boards but his post offense is very overrated. That combined with his historically bad FT shooting (and likely high propensity for turnovers) doesn't make him an efficient option in the post like his numbers would suggest.


Defensively, I've heard his fans compare his impact to Russell. Even at his best when he was motivated, I disagree with that strongly. He was a dominant shot blocker, a good man to man defender in the post in his later years and that's it. I've heard commentators point out how Wilt doesn't leave the paint and cover screen and rolls. Clearly doesn't have Russell's (or KG's or Hakeem's or Walton's) "horizontal" game. His defensive impact is inconsistent throughout his years. I see him defensively like I do Shaq. Great when he wants to be (though can be exploited by some weaknesses) but inconsistent effort wise. I'm pretty sure we have some data too of Wilt not improving offenses and defenses as much as you'd expect from someone with his boxscore numbers.


His year by year impact from team to team definitely doesn't say much in his favor either:"

:facepalm

[CavaliersFTW]

"The point isn't whether he made or missed the shots, those things vary game to game. But it's things like his awful footwork, how many dribbles he uses to make his move (this wouldn't fly in today's game where double teaming and trapping is waaay more common), his dribbles aren't fluid or in rhythm, his touch outside of 5+ feet away looks really awkward but it's pretty soft on his bank shot (though he is soo slow in getting into that move), has a bad habit of exposing the ball and he clearly doesn't have a lower base and center of gravity (long skinny legs) of a guy like Shaq to play the power game like him. These are things that are consistent on a game to game basis. But you guys can believe that a guy who was as horrible as Wilt at FTs had awesome midrange game. I just think it's a big leap of faith.


TL;DR: Wilt was an awesome finisher and awesome on the offensive boards but his post offense is very overrated. That combined with his historically bad FT shooting (and likely high propensity for turnovers) doesn't make him an efficient option in the post like his numbers would suggest.


Defensively, I've heard his fans compare his impact to Russell. Even at his best when he was motivated, I disagree with that strongly. He was a dominant shot blocker, a good man to man defender in the post in his later years and that's it. I've heard commentators point out how Wilt doesn't leave the paint and cover screen and rolls. Clearly doesn't have Russell's (or KG's or Hakeem's or Walton's) "horizontal" game. His defensive impact is inconsistent throughout his years. I see him defensively like I do Shaq. Great when he wants to be (though can be exploited by some weaknesses) but inconsistent effort wise. I'm pretty sure we have some data too of Wilt not improving offenses and defenses as much as you'd expect from someone with his boxscore numbers.


His year by year impact from team to team definitely doesn't say much in his favor either:"

:facepalm
Exactly, what a f*cking idiot. How about this number:


I would say Shaq had a better touch outside the paint than Wilt...

:biggums: :biggums: :biggums: :biggums:

Based on what!?, his imagination!? :roll: :roll: :roll:

[CavaliersFTW]

I think Fatal9 genuinely bought into the idea that Wilt did nothing but dunk on 6-6 white centers, and that he was merely an 'average' (heck, maybe even subpar) athlete by today's standards. That his 7-1 height was equivilent to say, Tyson Chandler... he also thinks Wilt's weight ranged only about 225lbs to about 275lbs, he also thinks Wilt had a 24 inch vertical and a 7 foot 2 inch armspan... His only two sourcese of game footage he liked to use to 'judge wilt's talent' was the 2nd halves of the 1964 Finals and the 2nd half of the 1967 Finals where Wilt had 2 inflamed knees and shinsplints that crippled his mobility, a fact Fatal9 never seemed aware of because he fails to acknowledge it when he posts his "Wilt post moves" video intended to ridicule Wilt. He's happy with that video, and those descriptions encompassing Wilt's abilities. Seems pretty set in his ways about it too. Wonder if he's ever seen any of my posts or my YT channel, because I've about shredded most of that nonsense with the more in depth research I've done.

[La Frescobaldi]

I think Fatal9 genuinely bought into the idea that Wilt did nothing but dunk on 6-6 white centers, and that he was merely an 'average' (heck, maybe even subpar) athlete by today's standards. That his 7-1 height was equivilent to say, Tyson Chandler... he also thinks Wilt's weight ranged only about 225lbs to about 275lbs, he also thinks Wilt had a 24 inch vertical and a 7 foot 2 inch armspan... His only two sourcese of game footage he liked to use to 'judge wilt's talent' was the 2nd halves of the 1964 Finals and the 2nd half of the 1967 Finals where Wilt had 2 inflamed knees and shinsplints that crippled his mobility, a fact Fatal9 never seemed aware of because he fails to acknowledge it when he posts his "Wilt post moves" video intended to ridicule Wilt. He's happy with that video, and those descriptions encompassing Wilt's abilities. Seems pretty set in his ways about it too. Wonder if he's ever seen any of my posts or my YT channel, because I've about shredded most of that nonsense with the more in depth research I've done.

If I'm not mistaken fatal9 and the majority of his type disappeared almost instantly after they saw your clip of Wilt Chamberlain going to the top of the backboard to block a shot in a game. vanished into thin air

except the ubiquitous molldywad - he's still around here somewhere. Look in the basement corners.
Bring this along:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JjlSqNTK8sA/TsRn6TphFsI/AAAAAAAAuWo/ftOpcjHyNu4/s400/raid%2Bslogan.jpg

[LAZERUSS]

"The point isn't whether he made or missed the shots, those things vary game to game. But it's things like his awful footwork, how many dribbles he uses to make his move (this wouldn't fly in today's game where double teaming and trapping is waaay more common), his dribbles aren't fluid or in rhythm, his touch outside of 5+ feet away looks really awkward but it's pretty soft on his bank shot (though he is soo slow in getting into that move), has a bad habit of exposing the ball and he clearly doesn't have a lower base and center of gravity (long skinny legs) of a guy like Shaq to play the power game like him. These are things that are consistent on a game to game basis. But you guys can believe that a guy who was as horrible as Wilt at FTs had awesome midrange game. I just think it's a big leap of faith.


TL;DR: Wilt was an awesome finisher and awesome on the offensive boards but his post offense is very overrated. That combined with his historically bad FT shooting (and likely high propensity for turnovers) doesn't make him an efficient option in the post like his numbers would suggest.


Defensively, I've heard his fans compare his impact to Russell. Even at his best when he was motivated, I disagree with that strongly. He was a dominant shot blocker, a good man to man defender in the post in his later years and that's it. I've heard commentators point out how Wilt doesn't leave the paint and cover screen and rolls. Clearly doesn't have Russell's (or KG's or Hakeem's or Walton's) "horizontal" game. His defensive impact is inconsistent throughout his years. I see him defensively like I do Shaq. Great when he wants to be (though can be exploited by some weaknesses) but inconsistent effort wise. I'm pretty sure we have some data too of Wilt not improving offenses and defenses as much as you'd expect from someone with his boxscore numbers.


His year by year impact from team to team definitely doesn't say much in his favor either:"

:facepalm

Yep...Chamberlain had very little impact on his teams.

In his rookie season, he took what had been a last-place team to a 49-26 record, to a game six, two point loss, against a heavily-favored Celtic team, in a series in which he badly injured his hand, and because of it, his team lost the next game, 120-90.

In his 61-62 season, he took that same last-place roster, which was now older and worse, to a game seven, two point loss against an even more dominant Celtic team...in a post-season in which his teammates collectively shot .354 from the field.

HE was blamed for his 62-63 Warrior team going 31-49, in a season in which SF lost 35 games by single digits. Included was a 1-8 record against the Celtics, which fielded a roster of NINE HOFers, and Wilt kept his roster in almost all of those games (and outscored Russell, per game, 38-14 ppg in the process.)

How bad was that roster? The very next season his new coach, Alex Hannum, conducted a pre-season scrimmage, sans Wilt, with the veterans playing against draft picks and scrubs...and guess which team won? Hannum was absolutely horrified. In his own words, those Warrior players had totally forgotten how to play basketball. Oh, and then Wilt single-handedly took that same pathetic cast of clowns roster to a 48-32 record, and a trip to the Finals. And I mean single-handedly. It took his 39 ppg, 23 rpg, .559 WDF's series to beat a Hawks team that was better, from players 2-6, in seven games. Then, while they lost to the overwhelmingly favored Celtics (and their EIGHT HOFers) in the Finals, 4-1, the last two games came down to the wire, in a series in which Chamberlain trashed Russell.

Wilt was sick for much of the first half of the 64-65 season, and his team's doctor mis-diagnosed his condition as a heart problem. With Chamberlain at less than 100%, and virtually no surrounding talent, they fell to 10-27. The warriors panicked and traded Wilt to Philly at the mid-way point in the season, for three players.

Wilt took a team that had gone 34-46 the year before, and missed the playoffs (and minus three players now) to a 40-40 record. Not bad. BUT, in the post-season, he single-handedly carried them past a 48-32 Royals team in the first round, and then to a game seven, one point defeat to a 62-18 Celtics team that was at the peak of their dynasty. And in that series, he administered the most one-sided beatdown of a another GOAT candidate in NBA history.

He would then lead the Sixers to the best record in the league in his next three years in Philly, including a dominating title in '67, on a team that smashed all kinds of records at the time.

Meanwhile, the 64-65 Warriors, went 7-36 without Wilt. They moved Thurmond to center, where he would become a HOFer. They then drafted Rick Barry, who would become a HOFer. The result? 35-45. Think about that. TWO HOFers replacing Wilt, and they could only go 35-45.

But it gets better. In the Warriors' 66-67 season, they added Jeff Mullins, Fred Hetzel, and Clyde Lee. Thurmond had his greatest season ever, and Rick Barry led the NBA in scoring at 35.6 ppg. The result? A 44-37 record, and were blown out by Wilt's Sixers in the Finals. Think about this. In Wilt's 63-64 season, his second best player was Tom Meschery, who averaged 13 ppg. That team went 48-32. On the 66-67 Warriors, Meschery averaged 11 ppg, and was SF's SEVENTH best player...and they only went 44-37, and couldn't even equal Wilt's 63-64 season.

Chamberlain basically forced a trade before the start of the 68-69 season. His 67-68 Sixers had gone 62-20, but were decimated by injuries in the post-season, and lost a close game seven to Boston in the EDF's. He was "traded" to LA, for three players, who collectively had averaged 29 ppg and 15 rpg in '67-68. In fact, Clark and Imhoff would go on to combine for a 36-20 .510 series in the first round against a 48-34 Celtic team...and they were demolished, 4-1. Contrary to popular myth, that was a HUGE drop. Oh, and the Sixers would continue to slide, and by Wilt's last season in the league, they went 9-73.

Meanwhile, Chamberlain's 68-69 Lakers "only" improved from a 52-30 record, to a 55-27 record (their best ever record in LA at the time BTW.) However, Chamberlain had to not only replace Imhoff and Clark's 29-15 per game averages, but the Lakers also lost Gail Goodrich and his 14 ppg from 67-68 in the expansion draft. So, Wilt basically replaced 42 ppg and 18 rpg. And even with an incompetent coach, they were one play away from easily beating Boston in the Finals, 4-1. They lost game seven, by two points, with Chamberlain relegated to the bench in the last five minutes by the stubborn and witless Van Breda Kolf, who was basically fired right after the game.

In his five seasons in LA, the Lakers went to FOUR Finals, losing two in game seven's. They won a dominating title in 71-72, on a team that smashed all kinds of records (at the time...including a 33 game winning streak.) They won 69 and 60 games in his last two seasons, and went to the Finals in both (winning their first-ever title in LA in 71-72.) Oh, and along the way, they destroyed his old Warrior team twice in the post-season.

Chamberlain "retired" after his 72-73 season, and the Lakers immediately plummetted to a 47-35 record, and were blown away in the first round of the playoffs. In their next season, the fell to 30-52. They then traded for KAJ, and could only go 40-42. They were nothing but early round playoff cannon-fodder the rest of the decade. It wasn't until MAGIC arrived in 79-80, that they returned to where Chamberlain had left them.

But, yes, Wilt had no impact on his teams...

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[LAZERUSS]

If I'm not mistaken fatal9 and the majority of his type disappeared almost instantly after they saw your clip of Wilt Chamberlain going to the top of the backboard to block a shot in a game. vanished into thin air

except the ubiquitous molldywad - he's still around here somewhere. Look in the basement corners.
Bring this along:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JjlSqNTK8sA/TsRn6TphFsI/AAAAAAAAuWo/ftOpcjHyNu4/s400/raid%2Bslogan.jpg

The remnants are now aptly named ... the "Custerites"...

http://cms2.westport.k12.ct.us/cmslmc/Grade7/resources/custer2.jpg

[CavaliersFTW]

If I'm not mistaken fatal9 and the majority of his type disappeared almost instantly after they saw your clip of Wilt Chamberlain going to the top of the backboard to block a shot in a game. vanished into thin air

except the ubiquitous molldywad - he's still around here somewhere. Look in the basement corners.
Bring this along:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JjlSqNTK8sA/TsRn6TphFsI/AAAAAAAAuWo/ftOpcjHyNu4/s400/raid%2Bslogan.jpg
I don't know about Fatal9 personally, but many of his disciples are still active on other boards where I don't post, or only post rarely. I'm realizing now, that I'm constantly catching wind of the ridiculous things he's said in the past by other posters. Literally people on other boards say "thanks to the research of Fatal9 (insert BS about Wilt)"

Also now I'm wondering, what came first, Bill Simmons' book or Fatal9's posts? One of those guys obviously drew inspiration from the other.

[fpliii]

I don't know about Fatal9 personally, but many of his disciples are still active on other boards where I don't post, or only post rarely. I'm realizing now, that I'm constantly catching wind of the ridiculous things he's said in the past by other posters. Literally people on other boards say "thanks to the research of Fatal9 (insert BS about Wilt)"

Also now I'm wondering, what came first, Bill Simmons' book or Fatal9's posts? One of those guys obviously drew inspiration from the other.
There are a few on the RealGM PC board, where PHILA and I post regularly (ThaRegul8r, ShaqAttack, and a few others are there sometimes too). I think a lot of them are waiting for a video like the scoring skills mix you'd mentioned. I posted your new work there:

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1299207

and while I got some genuine responses, others want more complete footage. Aside from bastillion (guy at the bottom of the first page who quoted fatal9), these are all good posters. There are some others (like Doctor MJ, a global mod there) who are smart guys, and would be open to reevaluating if the tape is out there.

Clutchfans is a lost cause. Those are dedicated fans, but some aren't willing to listen to reason. bmd from here also seems to post there, and pushes the "doctored/sped up" footage schtick to plant seeds of doubt.

As I've said before, I don't have a dog in this fight, I just think Wilt (as any other player) deserves a fair shake.

[CavaliersFTW]

There are a few on the RealGM PC board, where PHILA and I post regularly (ThaRegul8r, ShaqAttack, and a few others are there sometimes too). I think a lot of them are waiting for a video like the scoring skills mix you'd mentioned. I posted your new work there:

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1299207

and while I got some genuine responses, others want more complete footage. Aside from bastillion (guy at the bottom of the first page who quoted fatal9), these are all good posters. There are some others (like Doctor MJ, a global mod there) who are smart guys, and would be open to reevaluating if the tape is out there.

Clutchfans is a lost cause. Those are dedicated fans, but some aren't willing to listen to reason. bmd from here also seems to post there, and pushes the "doctored/sped up" footage schtick to plant seeds of doubt.

As I've said before, I don't have a dog in this fight, I just think Wilt (as any other player) deserves a fair shake.
Getting pretty difficult to push the docotored/sped up schtick when I'm using shot clocks to calibrate footage - if you watch that latest Wilt mix everything looks damn near perfect because I was able to calibrate virtually every single clip based on shotclocks either directly within the clip, or indirectly by using the same percentage I used for sister clips (clips from the same stock as another clip that had a shot clock visible). There's really nothing about any of those clips that doesn't look completely natural.

Also I'm on clutchfans right now. Getting some resistence after posting the video, but it's really futile, I find it easy to address most of these guys arguments because they seem to base their assumptions on the research of others (...Fatal9) rather than doing it themselves.

[fpliii]

Getting pretty difficult to push the docotored/sped up schtick when I'm using shot clocks to calibrate footage - if you watch that latest Wilt mix everything looks damn near perfect because I was able to calibrate virtually every single clip based on shotclocks either directly within the clip, or indirectly by using the same percentage I used for sister clips (clips from the same stock as another clip that had a shot clock visible). There's really nothing about any of those clips that doesn't look completely natural.

Also I'm on clutchfans right now. Getting some resistence after posting the video, but it's really futile, I find it easy to address most of these guys arguments because they seem to base their assumptions on the research of others (...Fatal9) rather than doing it themselves.

I think clutchfans is probably not worth it though. If you can put the scoring skills video out there for the RealGM PC Board guys (and that's really probably the place for highest quality basketball analysis on the net, outside of APBRmetrics perhaps, which though I read/participate occasionally, is more of a niche community).

(BTW I feel bad that you feel like doing this so soon after completing the incredible trio of Wilt mixes. Don't feel obligated if you don't want to do so, and don't feel rushed if you do indeed want to put together the scoring skills tape. :cheers: )

[LAZERUSS]

There are a few on the RealGM PC board, where PHILA and I post regularly (ThaRegul8r, ShaqAttack, and a few others are there sometimes too). I think a lot of them are waiting for a video like the scoring skills mix you'd mentioned. I posted your new work there:

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1299207

and while I got some genuine responses, others want more complete footage. Aside from bastillion (guy at the bottom of the first page who quoted fatal9), these are all good posters. There are some others (like Doctor MJ, a global mod there) who are smart guys, and would be open to reevaluating if the tape is out there.

Clutchfans is a lost cause. Those are dedicated fans, but some aren't willing to listen to reason. bmd from here also seems to post there, and pushes the "doctored/sped up" footage schtick to plant seeds of doubt.

As I've said before, I don't have a dog in this fight, I just think Wilt (as any other player) deserves a fair shake.

I don't post there at all, but I have read some "anti-Wilt" topics there many times, and they all are the same. He was a "loser", "stats-padder", and "choker." And talk about "cherry-picking", they will use his FG%'s and TS%'s against him in arguments with KAJ and Shaq (and other's), but never mention ERA averages. NOR will then EVER bring up the fact that Chamberlain DRAMATICALLY reduced the efficiencies of his OPPOSING centers in their conversations, either.

And the bulk of them that were trashing Chamberlain here, scoffed at the eye-witness accounts of Chamberlain's athleticism, strength, and skills. Where is the VIDEO FOOTAGE, they asked.

Then, when CavsFan came aboard here, and presented very rare footage of Wilt's incredible leaping ability; and then Tex Winter's VIDEO interview in which he claimed to have witnessed Chamberlain dunking from the FT line; and then Arnold's VIDEO interview in which he claimed to have been stunned by Chamberlain's staggering feats of strength; as well as college footage of Chamberlain routinely hitting 12-15 ft shots from all angles, and with a skillset that made Shaq look like Stanley Hudson,...well, most all of the "Wilt-bashers" have scattered for the hills in shame. Only a few completely senseless morons are left. And they are considered laughingstocks here now.

[CavaliersFTW]

I don't post there at all, but I have read some "anti-Wilt" topics there many times, and they all are the same. He was a "loser", "stats-padder", and "choker." And talk about "cherry-picking", they will use his FG%'s and TS%'s against him in arguments with KAJ and Shaq (and other's), but never mention ERA averages. NOR will then EVER bring up the fact that Chamberlain DRAMATICALLY reduced the efficiencies of his OPPOSING centers in their conversations, either.

And the bulk of them that were trashing Chamberlain here, scoffed at the eye-witness accounts of Chamberlain's athleticism, strength, and skills. Where is the VIDEO FOOTAGE, they asked.

Then, when CavsFan came aboard here, and presented very rare footage of Wilt's incredible leaping ability; and then Tex Winter's VIDEO interview in which he claimed to have witnessed Chamberlain dunking from the FT line; and then Arnold's VIDEO interview in which he claimed to have been stunned by Chamberlain's staggering feats of strength; as well as college footage of Chamberlain routinely hitting 12-15 ft shots from all angles, and with a skillset that made Shaq look like Stanley Hudson,...well, most all of the "Wilt-bashers" have scattered for the hills in shame. Only a few completely senseless morons are left. And they are considered laughingstocks here now.
:lol :applause:

[fpliii]

I don't post there at all, but I have read some "anti-Wilt" topics there many times, and they all are the same. He was a "loser", "stats-padder", and "choker." And talk about "cherry-picking", they will use his FG%'s and TS%'s against him in arguments with KAJ and Shaq (and other's), but never mention ERA averages. NOR will then EVER bring up the fact that Chamberlain DRAMATICALLY reduced the efficiencies of his OPPOSING centers in their conversations, either.

And the bulk of them that were trashing Chamberlain here, scoffed at the eye-witness accounts of Chamberlain's athleticism, strength, and skills. Where is the VIDEO FOOTAGE, they asked.

Then, when CavsFan came aboard here, and presented very rare footage of Wilt's incredible leaping ability; and then Tex Winter's VIDEO interview in which he claimed to have witnessed Chamberlain dunking from the FT line; and then Arnold's VIDEO interview in which he claimed to have been stunned by Chamberlain's staggering feats of strength; as well as college footage of Chamberlain routinely hitting 12-15 ft shots from all angles, and with a skillset that made Shaq look like Stanley Hudson,...well, most all of the "Wilt-bashers" have scattered for the hills in shame. Only a few completely senseless morons are left. And they are considered laughingstocks here now.
Well, there are two camps there. One is the impact camp (using team-based relative estimated ORtg/DRtg to gauge player value on offense/defense), the latter is the video analysis camp. Some do bring up the stuff you mentioned, but they're a very small minority of the regulars.

The impact camp I don't mind so much, but I think there's some difficulty in separating team results from the individual (not enough attention is paid to context). They do tell us that Wilt improved his teams offenses and defenses when he changed teams. I think I've shared some of the stats with you. I don't think they're awful, anyway (they conclude that his impact is overrated, and his scoring didn't help teams win games).

The latter is headed by guys using fatal9's video of Wilt's post possessions, and they break down some of the flaws in his low post ball-handling/footwork (and conclude that he doesn't possess the skills to be a volume scorer/offensive anchor on a championship team in any era, the modern era specifically). Now, I think this is where CavsFTW's scoring skills video could really help, because if you read the thread to which I linked, they're all very eager to analyze new footage.

[LAZERUSS]

As far as I remember, Fatal9, who had been here, mostly tried to bear a "mythbuster" and "protector of the underrated" name. Started by posting stuff against Jordan's hype while not caring much about Wilt (sometimes even wrote positive things about him), but gradually moved to trying to bust similar stories about Wilt and became increasingly hostile towards him, while always being much keener on Kareem/Hakeem, who had been considered the "underrated" big men.
I'm not a RealGM poster, but a few ones are even worse. They, for example, have fallen so pathologically in love with the season-by-season WS margins, SRS margins, etc, that they'll get to conclusions like Wilt being a bad defender in 1969, Wilt having little offensive impact in some of his highest scoring seasons and so on.
What's comical in such situations is that, in case Wilt's teams seem to underperform, Wilt's game is the only one which is scrutinized as consistently changing and is considered mostly responsible for the negative turn, while the other players' value and impact somehow remain unchanged. If Wilt's teams play great, then it becomes a different story...
Oh, and try to disagree. Best case, you'll be called out as ignorant. Worst case, I guess, you may even get banned if you don't shut up after a while.

And on Wilt having 24 inches of vert, here's a 2008 topic here:
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=98884

And yet, NOT ONE of these "Wilt-bashers" has ever explained how is it, that a PEAK Kareem played FOUR years IN the "Wilt-era", and faced several of the SAME centers that a prime Chamberlain had played against, and was NOWHERE NEAR as dominant against them, as Chamberlain had been. And most of them were closer to their primes when they faced Wilt, than when they battled Kareem.

To a man... Jim Fox, Connie Dierking, Darrall Imhoff, Willis Reed, Nate Thurmond, and Walt Bellamy...

A prime Chamberlain just ANNIHILATED those guys with FAR more domination that a prime Kareem did. Not even CLOSE. A prime Wilt's BAD games against those guys were usually better than what a prime Kareem could put on them, and again, most were on the decline by the time Kareem was facing them.

Oh, and KAJ couldn't touch the vast majority of Wilt's records, either. He was nowhere near the scorer, rebounder, passer, defender, or shot-blocker that Wilt was.



They have NO case...

[LAZERUSS]

Well, there are two camps there. One is the impact camp (using team-based relative estimated ORtg/DRtg to gauge player value on offense/defense), the latter is the video analysis camp. Some do bring up the stuff you mentioned, but they're a very small minority of the regulars.

The impact camp I don't mind so much, but I think there's some difficulty in separating team results from the individual (not enough attention is paid to context). They do tell us that Wilt improved his teams offenses and defenses when he changed teams. I think I've shared some of the stats with you. I don't think they're awful, anyway (they conclude that his impact is overrated, and his scoring didn't help teams win games).

The latter is headed by guys using fatal9's video of Wilt's post possessions, and they break down some of the flaws in his low post ball-handling/footwork (and conclude that he doesn't possess the skills to be a volume scorer/offensive anchor on a championship team in any era, the modern era specifically). Now, I think this is where CavsFTW's scoring skills video could really help, because if you read the thread to which I linked, they're all very eager to analyze new footage.

I watched that ridiculous video. First of all, he took the few near full games we have of Wilt (and none of those were anywhere near Wilt's best games), and in one, in which Chamberlain's knees were killing him...and edited them to just show his POOR shots. Hell, he even had the audacity to show Chamberlain taking a horrible shot from near the sidelines...but without context...the 24 second clock had expired!

He didn't show Wilt's best moves or shots in that footage, and even then, Chamberlain made the majority of those shots. Again...talk about "cherry-picking." He went off the deep end years ago...

[LAZERUSS]

Well, there are two camps there. One is the impact camp (using team-based relative estimated ORtg/DRtg to gauge player value on offense/defense), the latter is the video analysis camp. Some do bring up the stuff you mentioned, but they're a very small minority of the regulars.

The impact camp I don't mind so much, but I think there's some difficulty in separating team results from the individual (not enough attention is paid to context). They do tell us that Wilt improved his teams offenses and defenses when he changed teams. I think I've shared some of the stats with you. I don't think they're awful, anyway (they conclude that his impact is overrated, and his scoring didn't help teams win games).

The latter is headed by guys using fatal9's video of Wilt's post possessions, and they break down some of the flaws in his low post ball-handling/footwork (and conclude that he doesn't possess the skills to be a volume scorer/offensive anchor on a championship team in any era, the modern era specifically). Now, I think this is where CavsFTW's scoring skills video could really help, because if you read the thread to which I linked, they're all very eager to analyze new footage.

I trashed that theory a page ago...


Yep...Chamberlain had very little impact on his teams.

In his rookie season, he took what had been a last-place team to a 49-26 record, to a game six, two point loss, against a heavily-favored Celtic team, in a series in which he badly injured his hand, and because of it, his team lost the next game, 120-90.

In his 61-62 season, he took that same last-place roster, which was now older and worse, to a game seven, two point loss against an even more dominant Celtic team...in a post-season in which his teammates collectively shot .354 from the field.

HE was blamed for his 62-63 Warrior team going 31-49, in a season in which SF lost 35 games by single digits. Included was a 1-8 record against the Celtics, which fielded a roster of NINE HOFers, and Wilt kept his roster in almost all of those games (and outscored Russell, per game, 38-14 ppg in the process.)

How bad was that roster? The very next season his new coach, Alex Hannum, conducted a pre-season scrimmage, sans Wilt, with the veterans playing against draft picks and scrubs...and guess which team won? Hannum was absolutely horrified. In his own words, those Warrior players had totally forgotten how to play basketball. Oh, and then Wilt single-handedly took that same pathetic cast of clowns roster to a 48-32 record, and a trip to the Finals. And I mean single-handedly. It took his 39 ppg, 23 rpg, .559 WDF's series to beat a Hawks team that was better, from players 2-6, in seven games. Then, while they lost to the overwhelmingly favored Celtics (and their EIGHT HOFers) in the Finals, 4-1, the last two games came down to the wire, in a series in which Chamberlain trashed Russell.

Wilt was sick for much of the first half of the 64-65 season, and his team's doctor mis-diagnosed his condition as a heart problem. With Chamberlain at less than 100%, and virtually no surrounding talent, they fell to 10-27. The warriors panicked and traded Wilt to Philly at the mid-way point in the season, for three players.

Wilt took a team that had gone 34-46 the year before, and missed the playoffs (and minus three players now) to a 40-40 record. Not bad. BUT, in the post-season, he single-handedly carried them past a 48-32 Royals team in the first round, and then to a game seven, one point defeat to a 62-18 Celtics team that was at the peak of their dynasty. And in that series, he administered the most one-sided beatdown of a another GOAT candidate in NBA history.

He would then lead the Sixers to the best record in the league in his next three years in Philly, including a dominating title in '67, on a team that smashed all kinds of records at the time.

Meanwhile, the 64-65 Warriors, went 7-36 without Wilt. They moved Thurmond to center, where he would become a HOFer. They then drafted Rick Barry, who would become a HOFer. The result? 35-45. Think about that. TWO HOFers replacing Wilt, and they could only go 35-45.

But it gets better. In the Warriors' 66-67 season, they added Jeff Mullins, Fred Hetzel, and Clyde Lee. Thurmond had his greatest season ever, and Rick Barry led the NBA in scoring at 35.6 ppg. The result? A 44-37 record, and were blown out by Wilt's Sixers in the Finals. Think about this. In Wilt's 63-64 season, his second best player was Tom Meschery, who averaged 13 ppg. That team went 48-32. On the 66-67 Warriors, Meschery averaged 11 ppg, and was SF's SEVENTH best player...and they only went 44-37, and couldn't even equal Wilt's 63-64 season.

Chamberlain basically forced a trade before the start of the 68-69 season. His 67-68 Sixers had gone 62-20, but were decimated by injuries in the post-season, and lost a close game seven to Boston in the EDF's. He was "traded" to LA, for three players, who collectively had averaged 29 ppg and 15 rpg in '67-68. In fact, Clark and Imhoff would go on to combine for a 36-20 .510 series in the first round against a 48-34 Celtic team...and they were demolished, 4-1. Contrary to popular myth, that was a HUGE drop. Oh, and the Sixers would continue to slide, and by Wilt's last season in the league, they went 9-73.

Meanwhile, Chamberlain's 68-69 Lakers "only" improved from a 52-30 record, to a 55-27 record (their best ever record in LA at the time BTW.) However, Chamberlain had to not only replace Imhoff and Clark's 29-15 per game averages, but the Lakers also lost Gail Goodrich and his 14 ppg from 67-68 in the expansion draft. So, Wilt basically replaced 42 ppg and 18 rpg. And even with an incompetent coach, they were one play away from easily beating Boston in the Finals, 4-1. They lost game seven, by two points, with Chamberlain relegated to the bench in the last five minutes by the stubborn and witless Van Breda Kolf, who was basically fired right after the game.

In his five seasons in LA, the Lakers went to FOUR Finals, losing two in game seven's. They won a dominating title in 71-72, on a team that smashed all kinds of records (at the time...including a 33 game winning streak.) They won 69 and 60 games in his last two seasons, and went to the Finals in both (winning their first-ever title in LA in 71-72.) Oh, and along the way, they destroyed his old Warrior team twice in the post-season.

Chamberlain "retired" after his 72-73 season, and the Lakers immediately plummetted to a 47-35 record, and were blown away in the first round of the playoffs. In their next season, the fell to 30-52. They then traded for KAJ, and could only go 40-42. They were nothing but early round playoff cannon-fodder the rest of the decade. It wasn't until MAGIC arrived in 79-80, that they returned to where Chamberlain had left them.

But, yes, Wilt had no impact on his teams...

[mehyaM24]

If I'm not mistaken fatal9 and the majority of his type disappeared almost instantly after they saw your clip of Wilt Chamberlain going to the top of the backboard to block a shot in a game. vanished into thin air

except the ubiquitous molldywad - he's still around here somewhere. Look in the basement corners.

they were 100% on the money. like somebody said, you could create a kwame brown highlight mix making him look like an allstar. what a joke.

the bottom line is Wilt was a playoff choker who "dominated" the league in its infancy.

Shaq is waaaaaaay better than Wilt. hakeem as well.... CHECK THE WEAK AS he was in the NBA's HIGHEST SCORING ERA...... no defense..... AT ALL.... wilt could get 30.1 ppg vs nobodies in the reg. season..... but 22.5 ppg in the playoff when good teams are left? :oldlol: the guy's legend, no matter what heavily edited video OP posts, is a myth.

[LAZERUSS]

they were 100% on the money. like somebody said, you could create a kwame brown highlight mix making him look like an allstar. what a joke.

the bottom line is Wilt was a playoff choker who "dominated" the league in its infancy.

Shaq is waaaaaaay better than Wilt. hakeem as well.... CHECK THE WEAK AS he was in the NBA's HIGHEST SCORING ERA...... no defense..... AT ALL.... wilt could get 30.1 ppg vs nobodies in the reg. season..... but 22.5 ppg in the playoff when good teams are left? :oldlol: the guy's legend, no matter what heavily edited video OP posts, is a myth.

http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/unsolved-history-custer.jpg

[mehyaM24]

Great work as always CavFTW!!! I think the full repertoire is captured here. All we need to experience now is the persistence to the hoop and game continuity.

shaq is better than wilt..so is kareem...so was magic..these guys had more impact on the game. FYI, shaqs title teams were 23-26 without him in the 49 games he missed. 13-13 for lakers from 00-02 without shaq 10-13 for heat in 06 without shaq these are the facts.

MDE = shaq

[LAZERUSS]

shaq is better than wilt..so is kareem...so was magic..these guys had more impact on the game. FYI, shaqs title teams were 23-26 without him in the 49 games he missed. 13-13 for lakers from 00-02 without shaq 10-13 for heat in 06 without shaq these are the facts.

MDE = shaq

http://books.google.com/books/about/Basketball_For_Dummies.html?id=gL9TJK--5fgC

[LAZERUSS]

shaq is better than wilt..so is kareem...so was magic..these guys had more impact on the game. FYI, shaqs title teams were 23-26 without him in the 49 games he missed. 13-13 for lakers from 00-02 without shaq 10-13 for heat in 06 without shaq these are the facts.

MDE = shaq

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=curryed01&p2=onealsh01

[mehyaM24]

http://books.google.com/books/about/Basketball_For_Dummies.html?id=gL9TJK--5fgC

lmao!!... not gonna happen…..im a bball genius….im a stat genius….im a math genius…nuff said.

[LAZERUSS]

[QUOTE=mehyaM24]lmao!!... not gonna happen

[mehyaM24]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=curryed01&p2=onealsh01

wilt was a renowned playoff choker. an incontestable fact……documented historical fact…..a fact that will never change

[LAZERUSS]

[QUOTE=mehyaM24]wilt was a renowned playoff choker. and they are incontestable facts

[LAZERUSS]

[QUOTE=mehyaM24]lmao!!... not gonna happen

[mehyaM24]

that's right..."yep". even russell is a greater player than Wilt who had superior talent in 68 and 69(an old injured player coach Russell was). wilt won it in 67′, had near enough 100% copy in 68 .. went 3-1 in the conference finals .. BLEW IT. 69′ WEST PLAYING PHENOMENAL? .. BLEW IT. 70′ Game ? .. BLEW IT. I don’t know if la had superior talent in this one but anyway, in game 7, vs Reed, who Wilt should dominate goes off. Wilt is matched up with a scrub and puts up an average game? LMAO!!....wilt is the biggest choker in NBA History.

im a ****ing genius....and what i say goes.

[fpliii]

shaqpopcorn34 is a great poster.

[CavaliersFTW]

that's right..."yep". even russell is a greater player than Wilt who had superior talent in 68 and 69(an old injured player coach Russell was). wilt won it in 67′, had near enough 100% copy in 68 .. went 3-1 in the conference finals .. BLEW IT. 69′ WEST PLAYING PHENOMENAL? .. BLEW IT. 70′ Game ? .. BLEW IT. I don’t know if la had superior talent in this one but anyway, in game 7, vs Reed, who Wilt should dominate goes off. Wilt is matched up with a scrub and puts up an average game? LMAO!!....wilt is the biggest choker in NBA History.

im a ****ing genius....and what i say goes.
^-- Shaqpopcorn34

[Psileas]

Well, there are two camps there. One is the impact camp (using team-based relative estimated ORtg/DRtg to gauge player value on offense/defense), the latter is the video analysis camp. Some do bring up the stuff you mentioned, but they're a very small minority of the regulars.

The impact camp I don't mind so much, but I think there's some difficulty in separating team results from the individual (not enough attention is paid to context). They do tell us that Wilt improved his teams offenses and defenses when he changed teams. I think I've shared some of the stats with you. I don't think they're awful, anyway (they conclude that his impact is overrated, and his scoring didn't help teams win games).

The latter is headed by guys using fatal9's video of Wilt's post possessions, and they break down some of the flaws in his low post ball-handling/footwork (and conclude that he doesn't possess the skills to be a volume scorer/offensive anchor on a championship team in any era, the modern era specifically). Now, I think this is where CavsFTW's scoring skills video could really help, because if you read the thread to which I linked, they're all very eager to analyze new footage.

Hard to do so, when, for Wilt's case, the only types of comparisons someone can make is, necessarily, year vs year, which is not the best way of finding what different someone brought to the table. That's because Wilt was rarely missing any games. So, for example, the '69 Lakers not drastically improving was somehow considered a testament of Wilt's impact being low. But how sure can we be that the '69 Lakers would have been necessarily as good as the '68 Lakers had Wilt never been traded, so that we can get to some conclusion? Wilt rarely missing any game doesn't help such a kind of comparison.
Oscar and Russell did have some periods of injuries which brought about lots of struggles for their teams and this helped their case. Kareem, too. But note how thin their teams were at their specific positions. Sometimes, they had literally nobody else play at the same position. They simply trusted their health a lot. I suspect Wilt missing a good part of any of the 1960-63 seasons (without guys like Thurmond, Luke Jackson or Hairston around) would cause the same type of struggles for the Warriors, because he was their only real center and such a thing would have led some to re-evaluate his impact.

[mehyaM24]

shaqpopcorn34 is a great poster.

absolutely...they must not be aware of my legendary status here..

[fpliii]

Hard to do so, when, for Wilt's case, the only types of comparisons someone can make is, necessarily, year vs year, which is not the best way of finding what different someone brought to the table. That's because Wilt was rarely missing any games. So, for example, the '69 Lakers not drastically improving was somehow considered a testament of Wilt's impact being low. But how sure can we be that the '69 Lakers would have been necessarily as good as the '68 Lakers had Wilt never been traded, so that we can get to some conclusion? Wilt rarely missing any game doesn't help such a kind of comparison.
Oscar and Russell did have some periods of injuries which brought about lots of struggles for their teams and this helped their case. Kareem, too. But note how thin their teams were at their specific positions. Sometimes, they had literally nobody else play at the same position. They simply trusted their health a lot. I suspect Wilt missing a good part of any of the 1960-63 seasons (without guys like Thurmond, Luke Jackson or Hairston around) would cause the same type of struggles for the Warriors, because he was their only real center and such a thing would have led some to re-evaluate his impact.
Good points. I posted this in a recent thread with his impact in mind:

"I think volume scoring Wilt could have won championships in a different era. The main problem with his early teams (aside from running into Bill Russell) was the lack of shooters in his supporting cast. If there's no threat of an outside shot, and you have a big man posting up on the block every possession, there's no reason not to cheat on defense and help on Wilt. The reduced shot attempts also helped get non-shooters in a rhythm by giving them more opportunities to shoot during the season to prepare for the playoffs (when they'd be open, more often).

A big part of why Wilt (and his teams) succeeded later on is because Hannum decided to put him in the high post. With Wilt no longer clogging up the paint, his teammates were free to drive on offense (this was an issue again in his first year with the Lakers, but van Breda Kolff wasn't the best of coaches), so even if you don't have the best of shooters, you have a shot (almost worked in 64, but he went up against absolute peak Russell).

Fewer responsibilities on offense also frees up energy for defense. Wilt was actually a pretty good defender his first couple of years (he actually thought of himself as a defense-first guy early on) in the league (more so man D though, Russell seems to be the only guy who played true team-level defense as of the early 60s, taking away the dunk/layup), but in the 50 ppg season with McGuire as coach and the next year (early in 64-65 as well, but he had severe illness), he took forever to get back on D. He still blocked a lot of shots those seasons, but he wasn't the same defender. From 63-64 through 67-68 (excluding the first half of 64-65), he was an exceptional defensive player (and again under Sharman later on)."

[LAZERUSS]

absolutely...they must not be aware of my legendary status here..

My god...is this the typical poster at RealGM?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_RI7dARQ695s/S-bIjIdnKCI/AAAAAAAACzo/7xYAq8XWW4o/s1600/toothless.jpg

[fpliii]

My god...is this the typical poster at RealGM?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_RI7dARQ695s/S-bIjIdnKCI/AAAAAAAACzo/7xYAq8XWW4o/s1600/toothless.jpg
The RealGM PC board is actually not that bad. I think there's just a lot of skepticism in there in general, because they're a very data- and analysis-oriented community. I've been there for a while and can really appreciate the conversation on that forum. I really think a scoring skills video will give Wilt a fair shake there. If people, after watching that, draw their own conclusions, it's perfectly fine with me.

[mehyaM24]

My god...is this the typical poster at RealGM?

...you can call me bobby fischer, because that's a checkmate...lmao

[LAZERUSS]

The RealGM PC board is actually not that bad. I think there's just a lot of skepticism in there in general, because they're a very data- and analysis-oriented community. I've been there for a while and can really appreciate the conversation on that forum. I really think a scoring skills video will give Wilt a fair shake there. If people, after watching that, draw their own conclusions, it's perfectly fine with me.

I apologize...

That was uncalled for.

BTW, I consider you one of the most knowledgeable posters on this forum. If there are more like you at RealGM, we could use them here.

[fpliii]

I apologize...

That was uncalled for.

BTW, I consider you one of the most knowledgeable posters on this forum. If there are more like you at RealGM, we could use them here.
There are a few trolls there (bastillion, for one, if you've browsed) on the PC board, and the General Board is pure trash.

This nehyaM24 guy in particular doesn't post on RealGM as far as I can tell. He's shaqpopcorn34 from YouTube. I think CavsFTW can tell you more about him.

[jongib369]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oemQKScZ7MQ

As soon as I see this video I know I'm about to read some bullshit. I will admit, he sometimes did look a little sloppy, or slow gathering himself...But to think that's what he was like every time he posted up is just ridiculous when you see him fading away as quick as a freakin guard....For instance the clip of him in college shooting from near 15 feet....I'm sure you know which I'm talking about.

Like every great center was flawless every time he touched the ball

:facepalm


This is why I never care to go into detail about anything on here...I feel like my brains going to explode.

[CavaliersFTW]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oemQKScZ7MQ

As soon as I see this video I know I'm about to read some bullshit. I will admit, he sometimes did look a little sloppy, or slow gathering himself...But to think that's what he was like every time he posted up is just ridiculous when you see him fading away as quick as a freakin guard....For instance the clip of him in college shooting from near 15 feet....I'm sure you know which I'm talking about.

Like every great center was flawless every time he touched the ball

:facepalm


This is why I never care to go into detail about anything on here...I feel like my brains going to explode.
That's the '67 game where Wilt had two inflamed knees and bad shinsplints in both legs - could barely lift his legs to walk up a flight of stairs coming into that game. Fatal9 either did not know about that, or chose to ignore it and make the video anyways. That video does not even reflect Wilt's usual abilities, because he was basically immobile from the knees down that game.

[Psileas]

There are a few trolls there (bastillion, for one, if you've browsed) on the PC board, and the General Board is pure trash.

This nehyaM24 guy in particular doesn't post on RealGM as far as I can tell. He's shaqpopcorn34 from YouTube. I think CavsFTW can tell you more about him.

I don't know how, in a strictly moderated community like RealGM, such guys are allowed to post. Bastillion is not a troll in the ISH sense, but he's clearly an apex Wilt hater, who'll try to spin anything he can against him (cherry-picking, mixing facts with opinions and lies) and, seemingly, a pretty obnoxious person. I thought RGM didn't tolerate such stuff.

[fpliii]

I'm going to honest, I know the finger-roll is not a very fundamentally sound shot, and probably not the most efficient way to go about scoring in the post, especially when you're as strong as Wilt (and it looks brutal when it misses). He was right about one thing though, it's definitely aesthetically pleasing when pulled off correctly. So is the fadeaway.

:applause:

[JBrizzy]

54-year old highlights. Time to get on with your life.

[Psileas]

That's the '67 game where Wilt had two inflamed knees and bad shinsplints in both legs - could barely lift his legs to walk up a flight of stairs coming into that game. Fatal9 either did not know about that, or chose to ignore it and make the video anyways. That video does not even reflect Wilt's usual abilities, because he was basically immobile from the knees down that game.

I'll say he ignored that, but even if he hadn't, he probably wouldn't have mentioned it. His criticism on 1970 Wilt is evidence for this.

[LAZERUSS]

I'll say he ignored that, but even if he hadn't, he probably wouldn't have mentioned it. His criticism on 1970 Wilt is evidence for this.

I believe he ripped Chamberlain for being a "stats-padding" "loser" in his 62-63 season...and then in other topics, praised Kareem for his play in his 75-76 season.

Of course...no context.

In Wilt's "stats-padding" 62-63 season, he played 47.6 mpg, on a 31-49 team that lost 35 games by singles digits, and was only involved in eight games decided by 20+ points (and they went 4-4 in them)...and had a scoring differential of -2.1...with as bad a roster as any player has ever been saddled with. And all Wilt did that year was lead the league in FIFTEEN categories (and had TRB%, Off-Rebs, Def-Rebs, Blocked shots, et, al been kept, he would have surely led in most of those), including WIN-SHARES (20.9 on a team that won 31 games), and PER of 31.8 (which is the all-time record.)

But, how about Kareem in 75-76? In 71-72, he played 44.2 mpg, and scored 34.8 ppg on a .574 FG%..for team that went 63-19, and had a +11.1 ppg differential. Then, in 75-76, and playing for a poor roster, that actually needed him to score... 41.2 mpg, 27.7 ppg, and on a .529 FG%...for a team that went 40-42.

Here again...the WILT DOUBLE STANDARD.

BTW, and as you know, Chamberlain LED the league in scoring, rebounding, FG%, and overall, 13 categories in his 65-66 season...and did so for a team that had the best record in the league. He would tell you it was his teammates that carried him that season.

[LAZERUSS]

That's the '67 game where Wilt had two inflamed knees and bad shinsplints in both legs - could barely lift his legs to walk up a flight of stairs coming into that game. Fatal9 either did not know about that, or chose to ignore it and make the video anyways. That video does not even reflect Wilt's usual abilities, because he was basically immobile from the knees down that game.

And of course, it was those post moves and that shot selection, which allowed Wilt to lead the league in scoring seven seasons, and in FG% nine seasons.

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[jongib369]

That's the '67 game where Wilt had two inflamed knees and bad shinsplints in both legs - could barely lift his legs to walk up a flight of stairs coming into that game. Fatal9 either did not know about that, or chose to ignore it and make the video anyways. That video does not even reflect Wilt's usual abilities, because he was basically immobile from the knees down that game.
Could you show me where you read that?

[CavaliersFTW]

Could you show me where you read that?
The Rivalry (book documenting Wilt and Russell's Rivalry in the 1960's)

"More significantly, the pain in Chamberlain's knees had grown worse with each game. Now the slightest bend in either knee sent an excruciating jolt through the leg, and he was forced to go up and down stairs sideways, to avoid bending his knees. When he arrived for practice on Friday, he could barely walk. D. Lorber examined him and realized that Chamberlain's knee-joint capsules had become inflamed. Lorber instructed Chamberlain to spend the entire day receiving heat treatment on his knees. He thought that if Chamberlain remained inactive, and received heat treatement that day and the next, the inflammation might subside enough for him to at least start on Sunday. Chamberlain spent several hours each day with his knees under an infrared heat lamp, but by Saturday afternoon, when the team was leaving for Boston (IE the game from which those "highlights" are taken), he was still walking stiff-legged."

"Chamberlain's sore knees had hampered his running and jumping throughout the game"

[jongib369]

The Rivalry (book documenting Wilt and Russell's Rivalry in the 1960's)

"More significantly, the pain in Chamberlain's knees had grown worse with each game. Now the slightest bend in either knee sent an excruciating jolt through the leg, and he was forced to go up and down stairs sideways, to avoid bending his knees. When he arrived for practice on Friday, he could barely walk. D. Lorber examined him and realized that Chamberlain's knee-joint capsules had become inflamed. Lorber instructed Chamberlain to spend the entire day receiving heat treatment on his knees. He thought that if Chamberlain remained inactive, and received heat treatement that day and the next, the inflammation might subside enough for him to at least start on Sunday. Chamberlain spent several hours each day with his knees under an infrared heat lamp, but by Saturday afternoon, when the team was leaving for Boston (IE the game from which those "highlights" are taken), he was still walking stiff-legged."

"Chamberlain's sore knees had hampered his running and jumping throughout the game"
Thanks for the info, I'll put it in the comment section of the video but I doubt it'll be there long

[jongib369]

Anything about the second game shown in the video? 1:14 might be the slowest I've seen him ever release the fade away.

[Marchesk]

they were 100% on the money. like somebody said, you could create a kwame brown highlight mix making him look like an allstar. what a joke.

the bottom line is Wilt was a playoff choker who "dominated" the league in its infancy.

Sure, you can, but then we know what sort of numbers Wilt up. Would you make the same criticism of a Jordan highlight video? No, everyone already knows that Jordan was great. What this video does is give you a sense for how Wilt scored. Some in the past have claimed that Wilt was a stiff who scored by virture of his height on 6'6" white guys by just standing near the basket and dunking it. The videos Cavs has put out completely dispel that myth.

[oarabbus]

To fpliii, Marchesk, Lazeruss, Psileas, CavsFTW, Frescobaldi, and anyone I missed - you guys really add a lot to this board. Even if a lot of people post troll/bogus responses (I am occasionally guilty), just know that your guys' contributions and knowledge are not going unappreciated :cheers:

[Marchesk]

54-year old highlights. Time to get on with your life.

Some people like history. It's a nice break from the constant Lebron/Kobe (and now Durant) troll threads.

[SpanishACB]

Shaq would dominate Wilt on one very simple premise:

Shaq is used to dominating similarly imposing players and he has the mental advantage. I'm not sure Willt ever hand the kind of matchups Shaq had and this ain't a "Wilt played against weak white bois" kind of argument...
But young Shaq came into the league and started shoving it in the face of centers that are already comparable to Wilt and had years in the NBA... That's what he has done all his life and what he's best at. We have no evidence that Wilt would have an answer for this.
No contest.

[CavaliersFTW]

Shaq would dominate Wilt on one very simple premise:

Shaq is used to dominating similarly imposing players and he has the mental advantage. I'm not sure Willt ever hand the kind of matchups Shaq had and this ain't a "Wilt played against weak white bois" kind of argument...
But young Shaq came into the league and started shoving it in the face of centers that are already comparable to Wilt and had years in the NBA... That's what he has done all his life and what he's best at. We have no evidence that Wilt would have an answer for this.
No contest.
This is pretty easy to debunk at this point. We know Wilt's measurements beyond just his height and weight and we also have video footage of Shaq standing next to Wilt. Wilt made Shaq look like an average joe and nobody Shaq ever faced made Shaq look like that save for Yao. But unlike Yao, Wilt was not just taller but his upper body looked significantly bigger than Shaq and I'm not just talking muscle I'm just talking just the bone structure and width of his shoulders and the height of his shoulders - he just was naturally built bigger in the upper body. Shaq never faced anyone that imposing.

Watch Yao and Shaq's first matchup. Shaq was visibly stunned playing Yao, Shaq even commented that Yao's length bothered him. Yao was no where near as athletic as Wilt either. Wilt was just as large in stature as Yao, but had even more reach and a LOT more athleticism, his body was sculpted like a municipal statue in comparison to Yao. Wilt is perhaps the strongest player of all time in his upper body. There have never been other people comparable to him, the closest athlete there ever was to Wilt was Shaq. Thinking that Shaq would just handle Wilt is ridiculous, Wilt probably stunned every player he ever played against the first time they saw him, there's no shortage of Wilt stories about the first time his opponents saw him. Most just couldn't believe how big and athletic he was. It would be no different for Shaq, he'd be just as awestruck. That's not to say Wilt wouldn't be impressed by Shaq either. Not many athletes Wilt faced were close to Shaq's size. The biggest athletes Wilt faced were about 290lbs... which is actually about the biggest athletes Shaq faced too, outside of Yao.

[CavaliersFTW]

http://youtu.be/FJYRtWCutRA

Example of how I can present a Wilt offense scouting video. Passing, post moves, offensive rebounding, playmaking everything. From every part of his career so there are as few holes in the coverage/presentation of his offensive abilities as possible. My initial estimate is about a 30 minute video if I DON'T use high school and NCAA footage. Will extend any 'clip' (sequences not from the few broadcasts that exist) to as far in front of the play developing as possible, ideally before Wilt sets up and demands the entry pass (though not all clips will show the entire play, some simply begin after the ball is in his hands) That is what you are looking for no? I can try and loosely organize or cluster the clips too to group similar plays.

Will take a while but if you think it's necessary I'll put it on my to do list.

[fpliii]

http://youtu.be/FJYRtWCutRA

Example of how I can present a Wilt offense scouting video. Passing, post moves, offensive rebounding, playmaking everything. From every part of his career so there are as few holes in the coverage/presentation of his offensive abilities as possible. My initial estimate is about a 30 minute video if I DON'T use high school and NCAA footage. Will extend any 'clip' (sequences not from the few broadcasts that exist) to as far in front of the play developing as possible, ideally before Wilt sets up and demands the entry pass (though not all clips will show the entire play, some simply begin after the ball is in his hands) That is what you are looking for no? I can try and loosely organize or cluster the clips too to group similar plays.

Will take a while but if you think it's necessary I'll put it on my to do list.
I haven't had a chance to watch the video yet, but I've copy and pasted this post to that thread on the forum.

[fpliii]

Got this response:

"Sure, as fully possession as possible is good start, but not forget about missed shots! ;)"

[LAZERUSS]

Got this response:

"Sure, as fully possession as possible is good start, but not forget about missed shots! ;)"

I think showing highlights of missed shots is pointless. How many "highlights" have you watched with Shaq missing dunks, or Kareem clanking the sky-hook?

That would just give the Chamberlain-bashers more ammunition...

And we already have fatal9's "highlight" of Wilt's post moves anyway...(atlk about mis-leading...)

[fpliii]

I think showing highlights of missed shots is pointless. How many "highlights" have you watched with Shaq missing dunks, or Kareem clanking the sky-hook?

That would just give the Chamberlain-bashers more ammunition...

And we already have fatal9's "highlight" of Wilt's post moves anyway...(atlk about mis-leading...)
I think they just want to paint as complete a picture as possible. Not all misses are bad, and they can be useful for analysis. That particular poster is one of the best on the site, and doesn't have any agenda. He (and others) just want as complete video as possible on Wilt to analyze .

[Psileas]

I think they just want to paint as complete a picture as possible. Not all misses are bad, and they can be useful for analysis. That particular poster is one of the best on the site, and doesn't have any agenda. He (and others) just want as complete video as possible on Wilt to analyze .

Although I understand the "complete picture" motive, I still don't think that a mix which includes missed shots will lead them into making objective comparisons with other greats, since remembering greats bricking shots is unlikely. There are not "FGA" highlights of greats and it's not easy to compare a comprehensive shot compilation to whole games viewed over the years, the bad/"indifferent" moments of which may have been erased from most fans' minds.

[Psileas]

For example, how likely is one who has "peak Shaq" in his mind remember him struggle to even get shots against the Blazers in 2000? How likely is one who has the "Shaq vs Mutombo" battles in his mind to know/remember that, despite his 2001 heavy defeat, Mutombo usually guarded Shaq as fine as anyone?

[SpanishACB]

For example, how likely is one who has "peak Shaq" in his mind remember him struggle to even get shots against the Blazers in 2000? How likely is one who has the "Shaq vs Mutombo" battles in his mind to know/remember that, despite his 2001 heavy defeat, Mutombo usually guarded Shaq as fine as anyone?

Shaq owned every single center he faced in the playoffs, number wise, he dominated every single one of them there isn't even an exception to the rle.

[julizaver]

Shaq would dominate Wilt on one very simple premise:

Shaq is used to dominating similarly imposing players and he has the mental advantage. I'm not sure Willt ever hand the kind of matchups Shaq had and this ain't a "Wilt played against weak white bois" kind of argument...
But young Shaq came into the league and started shoving it in the face of centers that are already comparable to Wilt and had years in the NBA... That's what he has done all his life and what he's best at. We have no evidence that Wilt would have an answer for this.
No contest.

I checked it in basketball-reference, cause I don't remember young Shaq to dominate Ewing, Hakeem and Robinson in his rookey season and I was right.
Shaq was outplayed by them and Ewing outplayed him badly.

[jongib369]

I think they just want to paint as complete a picture as possible. Not all misses are bad, and they can be useful for analysis. That particular poster is one of the best on the site, and doesn't have any agenda. He (and others) just want as complete video as possible on Wilt to analyze .
Unfortunately he does have an agenda, at least that's what his recent actions point to. I posted this info Cavsfan gave me on his video to put the first part of his video into context, to make a "complete picture"....But he deleted it

"The Rivalry (book documenting Wilt and Russell's Rivalry in the 1960's)

"More significantly, the pain in Chamberlain's knees had grown worse with each game. Now the slightest bend in either knee sent an excruciating jolt through the leg, and he was forced to go up and down stairs sideways, to avoid bending his knees. When he arrived for practice on Friday, he could barely walk. D. Lorber examined him and realized that Chamberlain's knee-joint capsules had become inflamed. Lorber instructed Chamberlain to spend the entire day receiving heat treatment on his knees. He thought that if Chamberlain remained inactive, and received heat treatement that day and the next, the inflammation might subside enough for him to at least start on Sunday. Chamberlain spent several hours each day with his knees under an infrared heat lamp, but by Saturday afternoon, when the team was leaving for Boston (IE the game from which those "highlights" are taken), he was still walking stiff-legged."

"Chamberlain's sore knees had hampered his running and jumping throughout the game"

No reason to delete it unless it's not the picture you want to paint IMO

[fpliii]

Although I understand the "complete picture" motive, I still don't think that a mix which includes missed shots will lead them into making objective comparisons with other greats, since remembering greats bricking shots is unlikely. There are not "FGA" highlights of greats and it's not easy to compare a comprehensive shot compilation to whole games viewed over the years, the bad/"indifferent" moments of which may have been erased from most fans' minds.
I suppose. Maybe Cavs can produce 2 versions then? One with all post possessions, one without misses. It's all up to him, of course, but I think one including all possessions will satisfy everybody there.

Anyhow, I'm just trying to be as diplomatic as possible. I enjoy reading all of the mentioned posters on RealGM, and obviously appreciate the conversation with you guys here as well. I think CavsFTW can help us find a great middle ground.

:cheers:

I don't want to belabor this any further though, so I'll let him do his thing without any further interruption.

[fpliii]

Unfortunately he does have an agenda, at least that's what his recent actions point to. I posted this info Cavsfan gave me on his video to put the first part of his video into context, to make a "complete picture"....But he deleted it

"The Rivalry (book documenting Wilt and Russell's Rivalry in the 1960's)

"More significantly, the pain in Chamberlain's knees had grown worse with each game. Now the slightest bend in either knee sent an excruciating jolt through the leg, and he was forced to go up and down stairs sideways, to avoid bending his knees. When he arrived for practice on Friday, he could barely walk. D. Lorber examined him and realized that Chamberlain's knee-joint capsules had become inflamed. Lorber instructed Chamberlain to spend the entire day receiving heat treatment on his knees. He thought that if Chamberlain remained inactive, and received heat treatement that day and the next, the inflammation might subside enough for him to at least start on Sunday. Chamberlain spent several hours each day with his knees under an infrared heat lamp, but by Saturday afternoon, when the team was leaving for Boston (IE the game from which those "highlights" are taken), he was still walking stiff-legged."

"Chamberlain's sore knees had hampered his running and jumping throughout the game"

No reason to delete it unless it's not the picture you want to paint IMO
I don't want to speculate since I haven't spoken with fatal personally, but I think his posting is generally quite good. How long was the comment up for BTW?

[jongib369]

I don't want to speculate since I haven't spoken with fatal personally, but I think his posting is generally quite good. How long was the comment up for BTW?
Yeah I probably shouldn't either, haven't seen enough of his posts to actually tell...Not sure when it was, but I made the comment around 3:12 AM today and within 7 hours it got deleted

*edit
Maybe it had something to do with youtubes new system for comments?

:confusedshrug:

[dankok8]

A lot of animosity in this thread for Fatal9 who is dubbed "a Wilt hater". Truth you may not agree with what the man said but he backed up his opinions with facts and sound logic. I mean are Regul8r, ShaqAttack, PTB Fan etc. all bad posters because they don't think Wilt is the greatest scorer and player? Before you call out others for being biased consider your own personal biases.

As for the OP's video, it's very well done. I've seen most of the footage before since it comes from games that are available but it's well put together. Watching all the available games I've always praised Wilt's coordination, excellent hands, and athleticism. This video definitely sells those points.

I do think Chamberlain lags significantly behind Hakeem and Kareem as far as footwork, fluidity, and variety of moves/counter-moves. Then again it's isn't really a diss. Skills are only the means to an end! Wilt did pretty damn well scoring the ball. The results matter.

[Marlo_Stanfield]

Wilt Chamberlain is the GOAT. cant believe some people have MJ over him:facepalm :facepalm

[jongib369]

A lot of animosity in this thread for Fatal9 who is dubbed "a Wilt hater". Truth you may not agree with what the man said but he backed up his opinions with facts and sound logic. I mean are Regul8r, ShaqAttack, PTB Fan etc. all bad posters because they don't think Wilt is the greatest scorer and player? Before you call out others for being biased consider your own personal biases.

As for the OP's video, it's very well done. I've seen most of the footage before since it comes from games that are available but it's well put together. Watching all the available games I've always praised Wilt's coordination, excellent hands, and athleticism. This video definitely sells those points.

I do think Chamberlain lags significantly behind Hakeem and Kareem as far as footwork, fluidity, and variety of moves/counter-moves. Then again it's isn't really a diss. Skills are only the means to an end! Wilt did pretty damn well scoring the ball. The results matter.
He does seem like he knows a LOT, just don't see a reason to leave out information like this when he posts a highlight of Wilt posting up


"The Rivalry (book documenting Wilt and Russell's Rivalry in the 1960's)

"More significantly, the pain in Chamberlain's knees had grown worse with each game. Now the slightest bend in either knee sent an excruciating jolt through the leg, and he was forced to go up and down stairs sideways, to avoid bending his knees. When he arrived for practice on Friday, he could barely walk. D. Lorber examined him and realized that Chamberlain's knee-joint capsules had become inflamed. Lorber instructed Chamberlain to spend the entire day receiving heat treatment on his knees. He thought that if Chamberlain remained inactive, and received heat treatement that day and the next, the inflammation might subside enough for him to at least start on Sunday. Chamberlain spent several hours each day with his knees under an infrared heat lamp, but by Saturday afternoon, when the team was leaving for Boston (IE the game from which those "highlights" are taken), he was still walking stiff-legged."

"Chamberlain's sore knees had hampered his running and jumping throughout the game"


Let alone possibly delete it when someone is just trying to put things into context. But like I said to fpliii it might just of been youtubes new comment system

[aj1987]

Wilt Chamberlain is the GOAT. cant believe some people have MJ over him:facepalm :facepalm
:biggums:

[SHAQisGOAT]

http://youtu.be/FJYRtWCutRA

Example of how I can present a Wilt offense scouting video. Passing, post moves, offensive rebounding, playmaking everything. From every part of his career so there are as few holes in the coverage/presentation of his offensive abilities as possible. My initial estimate is about a 30 minute video if I DON'T use high school and NCAA footage. Will extend any 'clip' (sequences not from the few broadcasts that exist) to as far in front of the play developing as possible, ideally before Wilt sets up and demands the entry pass (though not all clips will show the entire play, some simply begin after the ball is in his hands) That is what you are looking for no? I can try and loosely organize or cluster the clips too to group similar plays.

Will take a while but if you think it's necessary I'll put it on my to do list.

That right there was great to watch, looking forward to it.

[fpliii]

That right there was great to watch, looking forward to it.
I just watched it as well, it's quite good. I like the original mix a lot (plenty of action) but this is really useful because it lets us see how the play develops.

Thanks again CavsFTW for everything. :applause:

[CavaliersFTW]

A lot of animosity in this thread for Fatal9 who is dubbed "a Wilt hater". Truth you may not agree with what the man said but he backed up his opinions with facts and sound logic. I mean are Regul8r, ShaqAttack, PTB Fan etc. all bad posters because they don't think Wilt is the greatest scorer and player? Before you call out others for being biased consider your own personal biases.

As for the OP's video, it's very well done. I've seen most of the footage before since it comes from games that are available but it's well put together. Watching all the available games I've always praised Wilt's coordination, excellent hands, and athleticism. This video definitely sells those points.

I do think Chamberlain lags significantly behind Hakeem and Kareem as far as footwork, fluidity, and variety of moves/counter-moves. Then again it's isn't really a diss. Skills are only the means to an end! Wilt did pretty damn well scoring the ball. The results matter.
Hakeem did what he did because he was 6-9 - 6-10, 235-255. Wilt does what he does because he's the 2nd biggest and perhaps the absolute strongest player in NBA history.

A fact Fatal9, and other people who try to jump on Wilt for 'not having Hakeem's ____" ignore entirely and do not wish to acknowledge. Remember, Fatal9 is a guy who thought Wilt had a 24 inch vertical, was Tyson Chandlers height, only 225-275lbs, and with a 7-2 wingspan. He basically thought Wilt was some average joe, physically. Joakim Noah sized who wouldn't impress a single soul in today's scouting world. Therefore his expectations of what Wilt should be doing skill wise are ...urealistic shall we say.

Nobody had Hakeem's footwork or moves, save for Hakeem, who NEEDED them to have the impact he had because he was just your average joe in size as far as centers go, he needed something to set him apart. David Robinson scored 73 points in the modern era not doing any of the shit Hakeem did, do you remember all his 'post moves?' ... are they 'Hakeem-like?'. No, he's 7 foot, 260, bigger longer and can get away with doing more with less. Wilt was bigger yet than Robinson. In Wilt's time the short offensively skilled center was Willis Reed. Willis is much quicker and more fluid and all around much more aesthetically pleasing on film with his shots than say, Wilt was. Does that make Willis a better scorer than Wilt? No. Small centers NEED moves that rely on quickness and deception, big ones like Wilt do not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqyEb-MgPAs

Ask yourself, why would Wilt waste time attempting to duplicate or execute compound moves of 'quickness', deception and incorporate all sorts of moves and counter moves when he's so big and strong all he needs to do is one simple turn in or drop step to get to the rim? If you understand how big and strong Wilt is, what you expect of him to move around like on the offensive end shouldn't be the same as what you demand to see from undersized 6-9 or 6-10 guys. Wasted energy for a guy of Wilt's size and strength to try and duplicate what small, quick centers needed to do. The great ones best know how to use what they've got to work with, not what others with different tools have needed. If Wilt's footwork or shooting was ever a problem for him he wouldn't have scored 100 points or shattered every scoring record imaginable on the same centers that beautiful fluid looking guys like Kareem or Willis Reed put up less impressive numbers on.

[SHAQisGOAT]

I just watched it as well, it's quite good. I like the original mix a lot (plenty of action) but this is really useful because it lets us see how the play develops.

Thanks again CavsFTW for everything. :applause:

YEs, I liked this (test-version) one better.

[CavaliersFTW]

Although I understand the "complete picture" motive, I still don't think that a mix which includes missed shots will lead them into making objective comparisons with other greats, since remembering greats bricking shots is unlikely. There are not "FGA" highlights of greats and it's not easy to compare a comprehensive shot compilation to whole games viewed over the years, the bad/"indifferent" moments of which may have been erased from most fans' minds.
I agree, totally pointless to show misses, Wilt takes the same shots regardless of whether he misses or makes them. Showing misses is pointless, you're not even going to get an accurate idea of how often he makes/misses, because there aren't that many clips of him missing in the non-game broadcast clips. You want to know how often he missed shooting the basketball look at his damn stats and study as many full game broadcasts as you can. He doesn't attempt stuff he can't make, it's not like we're gonna see him heaving up 30 foot shots if I suddenly show his 'misses'. I'm not wasting my time with it for this potential project that will take long enough as it is. And anybody ever seen or demanded highlights of other players 'misses' to assess them? :biggums:

BRB gonna go tell Balthus23Air to make a 4 hour mix of Jordan missing so I can better see/understand how he played? 4 hours of him making it is too ...erhm, misleading?. Am I doing it right? :lol :facepalm

[fpliii]

I agree, totally pointless to show misses, Wilt takes the same shots regardless of whether he misses or makes them. Showing misses is pointless, you're not even going to get an accurate idea of how often he makes/misses, because there aren't that many clips of him missing in the non-game broadcast clips. You want to know how often he missed shooting the basketball look at his damn stats and study as many full game broadcasts as you can. He doesn't attempt stuff he can't make, it's not like we're gonna see him heaving up 30 foot shots if I suddenly show his 'misses'. I'm not wasting my time with it for this potential project that will take long enough as it is. And anybody ever seen or demanded highlights of other players 'misses' to assess them? :biggums:

BRB gonna go tell Balthus23Air to make a 4 hour mix of Jordan missing so I can better see/understand how he played? 4 hours of him making it is too ...erhm, misleading?. Am I doing it right? :lol :facepalm

Ah okay, up to you. Thanks again for your work. :cheers:

[dankok8]

Hakeem did what he did because he was 6-9 - 6-10, 235-255. Wilt does what he does because he's the 2nd biggest and perhaps the absolute strongest player in NBA history.

A fact Fatal9, and other people who try to jump on Wilt for 'not having Hakeem's ____" ignore entirely and do not wish to acknowledge. Remember, Fatal9 is a guy who thought Wilt had a 24 inch vertical, was Tyson Chandlers height, only 225-275lbs, and with a 7-2 wingspan. He basically thought Wilt was some average joe, physically. Joakim Noah sized who wouldn't impress a single soul in today's scouting world. Therefore his expectations of what Wilt should be doing skill wise are ...urealistic shall we say.

Nobody had Hakeem's footwork or moves, save for Hakeem, who NEEDED them to have the impact he had because he was just your average joe in size as far as centers go, he needed something to set him apart. David Robinson scored 73 points in the modern era not doing any of the shit Hakeem did, do you remember all his 'post moves?' ... are they 'Hakeem-like?'. No, he's 7 foot, 260, bigger longer and can get away with doing more with less. Wilt was bigger yet than Robinson. In Wilt's time the short offensively skilled center was Willis Reed. Willis is much quicker and more fluid and all around much more aesthetically pleasing on film with his shots than say, Wilt was. Does that make Willis a better scorer than Wilt? No. Small centers NEED moves that rely on quickness and deception, big ones like Wilt do not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqyEb-MgPAs

Ask yourself, why would Wilt waste time attempting to duplicate or execute compound moves of 'quickness', deception and incorporate all sorts of moves and counter moves when he's so big and strong all he needs to do is one simple turn in or drop step to get to the rim? If you understand how big and strong Wilt is, what you expect of him to move around like on the offensive end shouldn't be the same as what you demand to see from undersized 6-9 or 6-10 guys. Wasted energy for a guy of Wilt's size and strength to try and duplicate what small, quick centers needed to do. The great ones best know how to use what they've got to work with, not what others with different tools have needed. If Wilt's footwork or shooting was ever a problem for him he wouldn't have scored 100 points or shattered every scoring record imaginable on the same centers that beautiful fluid looking guys like Kareem or Willis Reed put up less impressive numbers on.

I totally agree. The end result matters. If a guy puts up 73 points it doesn't really matter how he did it... whether it's flashy or not. He's a helluva scorer!

I like the comparison of young scoring Wilt to Robinson actually. Both have post games that are about equally skilled (or raw depending on how you look at it). Robinson never had a go to move with his back to the basket and when he couldn't blow by his guy he was screwed. Wilt had a bit more range and was even more physically imposing so he could power his way in more often. Definitely an even stronger upper body and could elevate higher than D Rob.

Wilt didn't need to be flashy like Hakeem. His game got the job done in his time and I think Robinson proves that it would get the job done in the modern era as well. Prime Wilt could average 30+/15+ today in his prime. I have little doubt.

Coincidentally I think Wilt's greatest weakness which is lack of killer instinct is also similar to that in Robinson.

[Marchesk]

Wilt Chamberlain is the GOAT. cant believe some people have MJ over him


:biggums:

There is a case to be made for Wilt as the GOAT. Same with Russell, Kareem and Magic. Most people won't be making it, but anyone in most people's top 5, which Wilt is, has a case.

[CavaliersFTW]

Barry:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSTt_TxoFVo

Kareem:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTzv-6z7ihk

what idiots :roll: ... right?. I mean, how dare anyone think Wilt deserves to be the GOAT or in the discussions for it he was a bum I heard who preyed on weak 6-6 white guys. Couldnt' even tie his shoes in the modern era. :lol

[aj1987]

There is a case to be made for Wilt as the GOAT. Same with Russell, Kareem and Magic. Most people won't be making it, but anyone in most people's top 5, which Wilt is, has a case.
I'd agree with you on Russell, but the rest? Nope.

Magic? Seriously? A lot of people actually have Bird over Magic. Magic has literally NO case for being the GOAT.

[Marchesk]

I'd agree with you on Russell, but the rest? Nope.

Magic? Seriously? A lot of people actually have Bird over Magic. Magic has literally NO case for being the GOAT.

Yes, a case can be made for Magic. It's quite similar to the case for Russell. Which is who helped their team win the most over their entire career. And if you say that Magic's team was stacked, then well same goes for Bird and Russell.

Kareem absolutely has a case. I don't know how you can say Russell and not Kareem.

As for Wilt, well, he's overall better than Russell taking into account all that Wilt could do. But he didn't have the same situation as Russell. So we can say that Russell was the GOAT winner. Okay, and then the next five are all Celtics too. The same team that had one of the GOAT coaches and nine HOFers. Wilt didn't get drafted by the Celtics. You think Russell would have won with those Warriors teams?

[senelcoolidge]

GOAT, doesn't that mean the best player ever. Not who won the most championships because he had more teams with better players. Not necessarily the best player on his own.

[CavaliersFTW]

I was thinking of grouping his baskets in two ways for sure, left side and right side. Show his passing and scoring moves from both sides. This should kill any 'no left hand' arguments, because the whole point of being ambidextrous is so that (and this mostly applies to a backcourt or forward anyways) players can't force you into being on your weak side, Wilt could score or make plays on both sides of the floor equally, and effectively, he really had no weak side of the floor despite only using his right hand. If I break it up to both sides what are people going to be able to say about using one hand when he's tearing up the other teams defense regardless of which side of the floor he's on you know?

But Wilt also scored right down the middle in transitions, alley-oops, offensive rebounds, pick and rolls, etc and even shot jumpers from the middle - so what should I call this 3rd category to sum up his middle of the lane plays? Just call it "in the middle" or "in the lane" is there a better term for it?

Also... should I include setting screens (where he doesn't necessarily score or pass) and fast break outlet passing (which technically starts from a defensive rebound)?

[fpliii]

I was thinking of grouping his baskets in two ways for sure, left side and right side. Show his passing and scoring moves from both sides. This should kill any 'no left hand' arguments too, because the whole point of being ambidextrous is so that (and this mostly applies to a backcourt or forward anyways) players can't force you into being on your weak side, Wilt could score or make plays on both sides of the floor equally, and effectively, he really had no weak side of the floor despite only using his right hand. If I break it up to both sides what are people going to be able to say about using one hand when he's tearing up the other teams defense regardless of which side of the floor he's on you know?

But Wilt also scored right down the middle in transitions, alley-oops, offensive rebounds, pick and rolls, etc and even shot jumpers from the middle - so what should I call this 3rd category to sum up his middle of the lane plays? Just call it "in the middle" or is there a better term for it?

Hm, well I'd break it down to left block, right block, high post, and then whatever else. You actually could do those sections, and maybe put an extra watermark (like the channel logo) in another corner saying which portion it is (maybe list the times when they start in the description, perhaps with a transition between segments)? :confusedshrug:

I guess you could do (just an idea):

• left block
• right block
• high post
• misc. half-court (off. rebounds, alley oops, PnRs)
• transition

BTW is there any good footage of him passing out to shooters (I know he wasn't blessed with many with the Warriors, but maybe there's some good stuff in the Sixers/Lakers footage), or is it mostly finding cutters?

EDIT: Just saw this:


Also... should I include setting screens (where he doesn't necessarily score or pass) and fast break outlet passing (which technically starts from a defensive rebound)?

Screens - Maybe, but I'm not sure where you could include them. The outlet passing would be great if you put it in the transition portion of the video.

[aj1987]

Yes, a case can be made for Magic. It's quite similar to the case for Russell. Which is who helped their team win the most over their entire career. And if you say that Magic's team was stacked, then well same goes for Bird and Russell.
Magic won 5 rings in 9 trips to the Finals. Russell won 11 rings. Sure, the Celtic's were stacked as f (I don't think anyone will dispute that), but according to most accounts, Russell was THE man for 8-9 rings.


Kareem absolutely has a case. I don't know how you can say Russell and not Kareem.
Simple. Russell won more.


As for Wilt, well, he's overall better than Russell taking into account all that Wilt could do. But he didn't have the same situation as Russell. So we can say that Russell was the GOAT winner. Okay, and then the next five are all Celtics too. The same team that had one of the GOAT coaches and nine HOFers. Wilt didn't get drafted by the Celtics. You think Russell would have won with those Warriors teams?
Hypotheticals. Wilt , considering the amount of hype he get nowadays, should've more than 2 rings. His postseason choking brings him down a couple of places.

MJ is usually regarded as the GOAT because he was flat out dominant on all stages. I don't think I've ever seen MJ choke away a series. He went all out whenever he was on the court. The guy won an MPV at 35 and led his team to the championship. How many others have done that.
Dude is considered to be the GOAT perimeter scorer and one of the GOAT perimeter defenders as well.

[ArbitraryWater]

lmao!!... not gonna happen…..im a bball genius….im a stat genius….im a math genius…nuff said.

Yep, that looks like shaqpopcorn :applause:

Dude is HILARIOUS, Yt community... (Not too long ago, maybe still, I was known as the biggest Kobe hater on yt :lol )

[CavaliersFTW]

GOAT, doesn't that mean the best player ever. Not who won the most championships because he had more teams with better players. Not necessarily the best player on his own.
Some people think Bill Russell's ability to win all those championships MAKES him the best player ever, despite not being able to do some of the things others could who played while he played or after. Bob Pettit and many other people such as Gary Payton think Bill Russell is the greatest of all time for this reason. And I don't blame them, Russell really was the reason behind all those Celtics championships, his teammates and peers all agree on this regardless of how many points he scored (btw, most don't give him enough credit there, only scored 6 less PPG than Kareem). I even have an interview where Wilt at that particular interview feels Russell was the greatest of all time (he then clarifies that's just how he feels that day, and he feels picking a GOAT is like picking you're favorite dessert... how can you decide? It could change depending on your mood.)

On the other hand some people think winning doesn't mean much at all and all around abilities and skills are the highest value. This is actually why in the 1980's before MJ even won any titles people were thinking of him as a GOAT caliber player. This is also why people think Oscar Robertson is a GOAT caliber player, as well as Lebron regardless of how many titles he would have ended up with. Oscar himself thinks Elgin Baylor is the GOAT, and if I'm not mistaken, Chick Hearn also said Elgin was the best player he ever saw (actually not sure if Chick believed that made him the 'greatest' though).

Then there are the people who think individual dominance makes you the greatest. Wilt leads everyone by a mile in that category, as guys like Kareem and Barry have explained.

Then finally there's the people that want an all around resume of MVP's, championships, etc and sometimes they want it at 'every level' in which case according to Dr. J, Kareem fits there best.

At the end of the day there are many GOAT candidates depending on your criteria. Any of the major front runners in that class of player has an 'edge' depending on how you favor what goes into making a player so great. I would agree with how Wilt put it, it's like picking you're favorite dessert.

[CavaliersFTW]

Hm, well I'd break it down to left block, right block, high post, and then whatever else. You actually could do those sections, and maybe put an extra watermark (like the channel logo) in another corner saying which portion it is (maybe list the times when they start in the description, perhaps with a transition between segments)? :confusedshrug:

I guess you could do (just an idea):

• left block
• right block
• high post
• misc. half-court (off. rebounds, alley oops, PnRs)
• transition

BTW is there any good footage of him passing out to shooters (I know he wasn't blessed with many with the Warriors, but maybe there's some good stuff in the Sixers/Lakers footage), or is it mostly finding cutters?

EDIT: Just saw this:



Screens - Maybe, but I'm not sure where you could include them. The outlet passing would be great if you put it in the transition portion of the video.
of course

Also should I separate high post to left and right?

Should outlet passing be lumped with his transition baskets of himself trailing/running the floor since technically an outlet/fastbreak pass is a transition offensive play?

[fpliii]

of course

Also should I separate high post to left and right?

Should outlet passing be lumped with his transition baskets of himself trailing/running the floor since technically an outlet/fastbreak pass is a transition offensive play?
Nice.

Hm I'm not sure. I'd lump the high post plays together but it's up to you.

I'm not sure. I think you could group the outlet passing in, but keep it separate from transition baskets (so maybe consecutive portions).

[LAZERUSS]

Here again, CavFan is going to post the most indepth video footage ever of Chamberlain's offensive skills...

but, the fact remains, that we only have a tiny particle of his 1200 NBA games, and a crumb of his 50 college games.

The real question has to be...

just what did Chamberlain's BEST performances look like? His 271 40+ point games? Or his 132 30-30 games? Or his 122 50+ point games? Or his 32 60+ point games? His 73 40-30 games? His 32 50-30 games? How about his 15-15 game from the field, or 16-16 game from the field, or his 18-19 game, or his 18-18 game? Maybe his 29-35 game from the field? How about a few of his 81 triple-doubles (and perhaps as many as 40 quad doubles?) And wouldn't it be nice to have footage of his 22-25-21 game? Or his 53-32-14 triple double game? Maybe his game with a RECORDED 23 blocked shots? Or perhaps a couple of his estimates 30+ block games? Perhaps the six H2H games in which he held KAJ to under .399 shooting? Maybe the game in which he held Russell to 0-14 shooting from the field? Maybe his just one of his several 60+ games against Bellamy, including one with 73 points and 36 rebounds? Or his 38-15 beatdown of Thurmond, or an even more incredible 45 point crushing of Thurmond (outscoring Nate by a 45-13 margin?) Or one of his 12 H2H games against Reed in their 64-65 H2H's, in which Chamberlain was shelling him by margins of 41-9, 52-23, and 58-28? Perhaps his 62 point game against Russell (on 27-45 shooting.) Or maybe his four other 50+ point games he shellacked Russell with. How about his 55-19 rebounding margin over Russell in one H2H?

The point is, there is simply no known footage available, of a truly GREAT Chamberlain. An unequaled Chamberlain. The unfathomable Chamberlain.

THAT is the footage that we really need...

[LAZERUSS]

A lot of animosity in this thread for Fatal9 who is dubbed "a Wilt hater". Truth you may not agree with what the man said but he backed up his opinions with facts and sound logic. I mean are Regul8r, ShaqAttack, PTB Fan etc. all bad posters because they don't think Wilt is the greatest scorer and player? Before you call out others for being biased consider your own personal biases.

As for the OP's video, it's very well done. I've seen most of the footage before since it comes from games that are available but it's well put together. Watching all the available games I've always praised Wilt's coordination, excellent hands, and athleticism. This video definitely sells those points.

I do think Chamberlain lags significantly behind Hakeem and Kareem as far as footwork, fluidity, and variety of moves/counter-moves. Then again it's isn't really a diss. Skills are only the means to an end! Wilt did pretty damn well scoring the ball. The results matter.

Read my post directly above this one...

[CavaliersFTW]

Fpliii how about for structuring the video:

Left block

Right block

Lobs and Offensive rebounds

Transition

High Post

2 man game (Give and go's and Pick and Rolls)

[fpliii]

Fpliii how about for structuring the video:

Left block

Right block

Lobs and Offensive rebounds

Transition

High Post

2 man game (Give and go's and Pick and Rolls)
Sounds good. Great way to mix it up. :cheers:

For the final video, can you include start times in the description for each section?

Thanks again for your hard work!

[CavaliersFTW]

Sounds good. Great way to mix it up. :cheers:

For the final video, can you include start times in the description for each section?

Thanks again for your hard work!
Yeah I can do that. Going to separate lobs and offensive rebounds I've decided after watching some lumped together, they don't look right together. Some great post moves that he initially missed but rebounded immediately himself I'm probably going to put into their appropriate block position section if move was more highlight worthy than the rebound.

Still not sure how I should tie in passing actually. Trying to wrap my head around how I would include passes if I separated give and go and pick and roll footage of him scoring... would that then mean I should put his give and go footage in that 2 man section if he's the assist man even if he's set up in the block or high post which has it's own sections? Just figuring out how to structure this video to present his offensive abilities takes a bit more critical thinking than I anticipated. I'm essentially trying to group and organize plays in a game that is very dynamic into a small number of categories but there always seems to be some grey area.

[fpliii]

Yeah I can do that. Going to separate lobs and offensive rebounds I've decided after watching some lumped together, they don't look right together. Some great post moves that he initially missed but rebounded immediately himself I'm probably going to put into their appropriate block position section if move was more highlight worthy than the rebound.

Still not sure how I should tie in passing actually. Trying to wrap my head around how I would include passes if I separated give and go and pick and roll footage of him scoring... would that then mean I should put his give and go footage in that 2 man section if he's the assist man even if he's set up in the block or high post which has it's own sections? Just figuring out how to structure this video to present his offensive abilities takes a bit more critical thinking than I anticipated. I'm essentially trying to group and organize plays in a game that is very dynamic into a small number of categories but there always seems to be some grey area.
Good question, I'm not sure. Maybe you could just structure by where Wilt is when the play begins? So if there's a five and go from the left block, include it in that section I think. You have a better creative mind than I do though, so I think you'll figure something out.

Here again, CavFan is going to post the most indepth video footage ever of Chamberlain's offensive skills...

but, the fact remains, that we only have a tiny particle of his 1200 NBA games, and a crumb of his 50 college games.

The real question has to be...

just what did Chamberlain's BEST performances look like? His 271 40+ point games? Or his 132 30-30 games? Or his 122 50+ point games? Or his 32 60+ point games? His 73 40-30 games? His 32 50-30 games? How about his 15-15 game from the field, or 16-16 game from the field, or his 18-19 game, or his 18-18 game? Maybe his 29-35 game from the field? How about a few of his 81 triple-doubles (and perhaps as many as 40 quad doubles?) And wouldn't it be nice to have footage of his 22-25-21 game? Or his 53-32-14 triple double game? Maybe his game with a RECORDED 23 blocked shots? Or perhaps a couple of his estimates 30+ block games? Perhaps the six H2H games in which he held KAJ to under .399 shooting? Maybe the game in which he held Russell to 0-14 shooting from the field? Maybe his just one of his several 60+ games against Bellamy, including one with 73 points and 36 rebounds? Or his 38-15 beatdown of Thurmond, or an even more incredible 45 point crushing of Thurmond (outscoring Nate by a 45-13 margin?) Or one of his 12 H2H games against Reed in their 64-65 H2H's, in which Chamberlain was shelling him by margins of 41-9, 52-23, and 58-28? Perhaps his 62 point game against Russell (on 27-45 shooting.) Or maybe his four other 50+ point games he shellacked Russell with. How about his 55-19 rebounding margin over Russell in one H2H?

The point is, there is simply no known footage available, of a truly GREAT Chamberlain. An unequaled Chamberlain. The unfathomable Chamberlain.

THAT is the footage that we really need...
I guess we don't have anything from his best games, but aren't clips from that game against Detroit, and the highlights of him with his facemask from pretty good games? I think they're at least from his absolutely prime, right?

[La Frescobaldi]

Good question, I'm not sure. Maybe you could just structure by where Wilt is when the play begins? So if there's a five and go from the left block, include it in that section I think. You have a better creative mind than I do though, so I think you'll figure something out.

I guess we don't have anything from his best games, but aren't clips from that game against Detroit, and the highlights of him with his facemask from pretty good games? I think they're at least from his absolutely prime, right?

No. Highlights of Chamberlain don't begin to do justice to him. Video clips of blocked shots or slam dunks or even these great studies that Cavs is doing just don't show what made 13 the greatest.
It was his ability to completely overshadow the game for several minutes at a time. As a 3rd quarter would go along, he would get more and more remorseless, until it was just brutal. Not just blocking shots, but stopping every shot inside of 15 feet. The snap passes that usually throw a defense into disarray would fail against the Sixers because he and Chet Walker could switch back and forth so quickly that there was just no shot to be had. After 3 or 4 minutes of that TOTAL denial of shots you could see the complete intimidation on the faces of the other team.

On the other end........ you know, people make a big deal about somebody like Mattie Guokas saying something like "Chamberlain always insisted they wait for him to get down the court on offense so he would get an assist."

Lemme tell you, if that was Wilt & not Hannum maiking that decision, well, Chamberlain was absolutely correct in doing that because Guokas was a true scrub, on the court purely to give somebody 2 minutes of deep breathing on the bench. NOBODY wanted Guokas running anything, least of all Alex Hannum. Whenever Coach put that guy in the game he'd start pacing and looking at the clock, wishing the time would go faster so he could get a real player back in the game. Chamberlain threw a lot of deep passes and ran a lot of transition off his rebounds... just not to somebody like Mattie Guokas.

In '68 Wilt had mastered the all round game to the point where his triple double threat was so dangerous that despair set in for other NBA teams. Mailing it in became a major pastime for teams that went to Philly.

Highlights don't begin to show those kinds of things.

[fpliii]

No. Highlights of Chamberlain don't begin to do justice to him. Video clips of blocked shots or slam dunks or even these great studies that Cavs is doing just don't show what made 13 the greatest.
It was his ability to completely overshadow the game for several minutes at a time. As a 3rd quarter would go along, he would get more and more remorseless, until it was just brutal. Not just blocking shots, but stopping every shot inside of 15 feet. The snap passes that usually throw a defense into disarray would fail against the Sixers because he and Chet Walker could switch back and forth so quickly that there was just no shot to be had. After 3 or 4 minutes of that TOTAL denial of shots you could see the complete intimidation on the faces of the other team.

On the other end........ you know, people make a big deal about somebody like Mattie Guokas saying something like "Chamberlain always insisted they wait for him to get down the court on offense so he would get an assist."

Lemme tell you, if that was Wilt & not Hannum maiking that decision, well, Chamberlain was absolutely correct in doing that because Guokas was a true scrub, on the court purely to give somebody 2 minutes of deep breathing on the bench. NOBODY wanted Guokas running anything, least of all Alex Hannum. Whenever Coach put that guy in the game he'd start pacing and looking at the clock, wishing the time would go faster so he could get a real player back in the game. Chamberlain threw a lot of deep passes and ran a lot of transition off his rebounds... just not to somebody like Mattie Guokas.

In '68 Wilt had mastered the all round game to the point where his triple double threat was so dangerous that despair set in for other NBA teams. Mailing it in became a major pastime for teams that went to Philly.

Highlights don't begin to show those kinds of things.
Cool, thanks for the response. :cheers:

[CavaliersFTW]

Guys, what is it called if the center/big never quite sets up in the post offensively and your guard runs up the floor with the ball and your center starts rolling to the hoop as the guard draws the defense running across the court then he kicks it out to the rolling big man for an easy dunk... it's not a pick and roll because no pick was set it's just like, the guard drew the defense and kicked it - what is that play called? Not sure whether to group that type of play into "transition" or "2 man (Pick & Rolls and Give and Go's)" sections. Wilt clearly rolled to the hoop while he and his guard played a 2 man game... but the guard seemed to be rolling up the court in transition (as the last man though, the entire rest of the team was already down the floor including Wilt) so... I don't know?

*EDIT* I'm gonna upload the clip... easier to show than to describe :lol

[fpliii]

Guys, what is it called if the center/big never quite sets up in the post offensively and your guard runs up the floor with the ball and your center starts rolling to the hoop as the guard draws the defense running across the court then he kicks it out to the rolling big man for an easy dunk... it's not a pick and roll because no pick was set it's just like, the guard drew the defense and kicked it - what is that play called? Not sure whether to group that type of play into "transition" or "2 man (Pick & Rolls and Give and Go's)" sections. Wilt clearly rolled to the hoop while he and his guard played a 2 man game... but the guard seemed to be rolling up the court in transition (as the last man though, the entire rest of the team was already down the floor including Wilt) so... I don't know?
How far out was he? Is it like a drive and kick?

[CavaliersFTW]

How far out was he? Is it like a drive and kick?
It might be the best term for it, looks like a pick and roll the way Wilt rolls except the guard does all the dirty work because no screen set or anything. I'm rendering the clip right now and gonna post the link - you tell me what you think because there are several clips similar and I'm kind of on the fence which category to put them in

[fpliii]

It might be the best term for it, the guard does all the dirty work Wilt just rolls in, no screen set or anything. I'm rendering the clip right now and gonna post the link - you tell me what you think because there are several clips similar and I'm kind of on the fence which category to put them in
Okay, sounds good. If they're anything like this:

http://www.nba.com/video/games/pelicans/2013/11/05/0021300055-phx-nop-play4.nba/

I'd go with drive and dish instead.

[CavaliersFTW]

Okay, sounds good. If they're anything like this:

http://www.nba.com/video/games/pelicans/2013/11/05/0021300055-phx-nop-play4.nba/

I'd go with drive and dish instead.
Drive and dish is what it is, best suited for the 2 man game section then?

http://youtu.be/-Cy2fcBcIyU

[fpliii]

Drive and dish is what it is, best suited for the 2 man game section then?

http://youtu.be/-Cy2fcBcIyU
I'd say so yeah. Cool play.

[LAZERUSS]

BTW Cavs, and maybe you are doing it, but I would include footage from his college days. The reason being that in the (limited) footage we have of Chamberlain in his college days, he had range of 15+ ft, including jump shots. I am certain that Wilt carried that skill-set into the NBA in his early seasons.

And, just as your college (and HS) footage of Kareem proved, these guys were ultra-skilled centers coming into the NBA. And, incidently, Carl Braun made the same comment in Wilt's early years, as well.


But here again, we are only going to have the "tip of the iceberg" in what Chamberlain actually displayed. There are just too many eye-witness accounts of all of the many amazing feats that he accomplished on a basketball court, to assume that the footage you have (which has proven to be a godsend) is truly indicative of just how dominant Wilt was.

As Fresco mentioned, I suspect that he was blocking shots with his fingertips at the top of the backboard, or grabbing rebounds from well above the basket, or taking lob passes at near top-of -the backboard levels and slamming them. And considering how many baskets he made in his NBA career, and using Braun's analogy, I suspect that he was routinely hitting 15+ foot shots early on, as well as hitting 12+ ft sweeping hooks.

But, you can only showcase what you have, and I guess we should all be thankful for that.

:cheers:

[fpliii]

BTW Cavs, and maybe you are doing it, but I would include footage from his college days. The reason being that in the (limited) footage we have of Chamberlain in his college days, he had range of 15+ ft, including jump shots. I am certain that Wilt carried that skill-set into the NBA in his early seasons.

And, just as your college (and HS) footage of Kareem proved, these guys were ultra-skilled centers coming into the NBA. And, incidently, Carl Braun made the same comment in Wilt's early years, as well.


But here again, we are only going to have the "tip of the iceberg" in what Chamberlain actually displayed. There are just too many eye-witness accounts of all of the many amazing feats that he accomplished on a basketball court, to assume that the footage you have (which has proven to be a godsend) is truly indicative of just how dominant Wilt was.

As Fresco mentioned, I suspect that he was blocking shots with his fingertips at the top of the backboard, or grabbing rebounds from well above the basket, or taking lob passes at near top-of -the backboard levels and slamming them. And considering how many baskets he made in his NBA career, and using Braun's analogy, I suspect that he was routinely hitting 15+ foot shots early on, as well as hitting 12+ ft sweeping hooks.

But, you can only showcase what you have, and I guess we should all be thankful for that.

:cheers:
It's up to CavsFTW obviously but I think it's probably better if he keeps the college footage separate (since the purpose of the video is to give an idea of how he played offensively in the NBA). He was dominant in college (and in the NBA obviously) but it's not the same.

[LAZERUSS]

It's up to CavsFTW obviously but I think it's probably better if he keeps the college footage separate (since the purpose of the video is to give an idea of how he played offensively in the NBA). He was dominant in college (and in the NBA obviously) but it's not the same.

Normally I would agree. However, there is practically zero footage of an early NBA Wilt. But, there are several near-full games of Wilt in college (and only in his soph season I believe.) And in those games, Chamberlain demonstrates a very developed range of 15+ feet. Hell, his FT form was significantly better than what he would have from the mid-60's on.

Again, I already knew what KAJ looked like in College (I saw a ton of his games on TV), but I was actually as impressed with Cavs HS footage of him. And I think it would be appropriate to showcase Wilt's college skillset as at least some kind of indication of what an early NBA Chamberlain must have been playing like.

And, yes, I am aware that the Wilt-bashers will scoff at Wilt's college competition, but that would not be the point. Virtually everyone knows that Chamberlain destroyed his NBA competition, so who cares if his skill set is displayed against inferior college competition? If a world class sprinter sets a world record running against a bunch of scrubs, does it negate the world record?

[fpliii]

Normally I would agree. However, there is practically zero footage of an early NBA Wilt. But, there are several near-full games of Wilt in college (and only in his soph season I believe.) And in those games, Chamberlain demonstrates a very developed range of 15+ feet. Hell, his FT form was significantly better than what he would have from the mid-60's on.

Again, I already knew what KAJ looked like in College (I saw a ton of his games on TV), but I was actually as impressed with Cavs HS footage of him. And I think it would be appropriate to showcase Wilt's college skillset as at least some kind of indication of what an early NBA Chamberlain must have been playing like.

And, yes, I am aware that the Wilt-bashers will scoff at Wilt's college competition, but that would not be the point. Virtually everyone knows that Chamberlain destroyed his NBA competition, so who cares if his skill set is displayed against inferior college competition? If a world class sprinter sets a world record running against a bunch of scrubs, does it negate the world record?
Hm, I'm not sure. I see where you're coming from, but I think it's dicey. Maybe he can make it an addendum at the end or a separate video? If it's mostly the jumper and FT shooting, Cavs wouldn't need to interweave the footage.

[LAZERUSS]

Hm, I'm not sure. I see where you're coming from, but I think it's dicey. Maybe he can make it an addendum at the end or a separate video? If it's mostly the jumper and FT shooting, Cavs wouldn't need to interweave the footage.

http://wiltfan.tripod.com/quotes.html

Carl Braun said "He [Wilt] disorganizes you under the basket the same way [as Bill Russell, on defense]. With Wilt, of course, there's that offense on top of it, which is better than Russell's. He hit on all those jumpers."
"Yes, Wilt hit on those jumpers...Wilt did come into the league with a good touch from the outside, which made his early scoring that much more significant. He wasn't just dunking the ball then."

--Red Holzman. A View from the Bench. P.70

[fpliii]

http://wiltfan.tripod.com/quotes.html

Carl Braun said "He [Wilt] disorganizes you under the basket the same way [as Bill Russell, on defense]. With Wilt, of course, there's that offense on top of it, which is better than Russell's. He hit on all those jumpers."
"Yes, Wilt hit on those jumpers...Wilt did come into the league with a good touch from the outside, which made his early scoring that much more significant. He wasn't just dunking the ball then."

--Red Holzman. A View from the Bench. P.70
Was it extra range on his fadeaway from the post, or was it a designed jumpshot?

[LAZERUSS]

Was it extra range on his fadeaway from the post, or was it a designed jumpshot?

There is college footage of a pure jump shot...

I apologize to cavsFan, but I have this saved and it is faster for me to pull up...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWrGWuU2Ak

take a look at around the 20-30 second marks...TWO jumpshots.

[fpliii]

There is college footage of a pure jump shot...

I apologize to cavsFan, but I have this saved and it is faster for me to pull up...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWrGWuU2Ak

take a look at around the 20-30 second marks...TWO jumpshots.
Thanks for the link. It's up to CavsFTW, obviously.

BTW when did he lose his range? I've heard 63-64 (when he bulked up) and 66-67 (when he stopped shooting the fadeaway).

[LAZERUSS]

BTW, did Fatal9 ever post something like that? Nope, he deliberately edited what little footage there was of two partial games in which Chamberlain played (and as CavsFan showed, Wilt was in bad shape in one), and tries to come off as claiming that THAT was Wilt's post moves...

[LAZERUSS]

Thanks for the link. It's up to CavsFTW, obviously.

BTW when did he lose his range? I've heard 63-64 (when he bulked up) and 66-67 (when he stopped shooting the fadeaway).

Let's just say he became more selective. Hell, there is footage of a 35 year old Wilt hitting 12 foot fadeaway bank shots in the Finals...

[fpliii]

BTW, did Fatal9 ever post something like that? Nope, he deliberately edited what little footage there was of two partial games in which Chamberlain played (and as CavsFan showed, Wilt was in bad shape in one), and tries to come off as claiming that THAT was Wilt's post moves...

OT - I actually wasn't originally aware of the injury in 67, so when I read the posts originally I though you guys were referencing him getting hurt in G4 of the 64 Finals (the other in the mix, evidently).

From the Oakland Tribune:


"We've beaten them in Boston Garden" added center Wilt Chamberlain, whose hand was badly bruised and swollen from a collision with the lower edge of the backboard in the second quarter.

[QUOTE]Despite his bruised hand, Wilt will be ready to go tomorrow

[CavaliersFTW]

The '67 season footage I have of him he takes it 2 maybe three times in total despite that season having more coverage than his first couple of seasons... yet nearly all other seasons prior to this he was filmed taking many many fade aways - in fact the overwhelming majority of his career fadeaways captured on film were captured during this time of the least amount of his career being covered. Also, after 67 he is seen taking them as Lazeruss states, but at that point they were still much less frequent than his early seasons - I mean a big percentage based on film. And his fade aways from the right block that he used to release near the high post seem to have all but disappeared.

[LAZERUSS]

OT - I actually wasn't originally aware of the injury in 67, so when I read the posts originally I though you guys were referencing him getting hurt in G4 of the 64 Finals (the other in the mix, evidently).

From the Oakland Tribune:





I'm not sure how much it impacted his play, though, so maybe it wasn't a huge deal. He also ripped the flesh off of his hand on some metal in G5, but that's unrelated.

Here are the articles from the Tribune and Globe on the Finals:

http://www61.zippyshare.com/v/91790456/file.html

Good stuff. If you really want to check something out...read up on Wilt's '60 EDF's. He was simply awful in game three.

I still think a healthy Wilt takes that rag-tag last place team to a title that season...

[CavaliersFTW]

I'm adding another category to the video - deep catches, where he's fighting or has fought for deeper position than just his usual left or right block spot

[mehyaM24]

I still think a healthy Wilt...

...let me finish that sentence for you....IS OVERRATED.

more proof you don’t understand bball….the guy was winless in game 7's against russell. yet since he can score 50ppg in the regular season, against scrubs, he gets a pass from you and other wilt fans. but again, you are too FAT to realize these things….you don’t have the mental depth that an epic genius such as myself has….

wilt, while great, was a choker in the playoffs. a documented historical fact which is not up for debate.

[LAZERUSS]

[QUOTE=mehyaM24]...let me finish that sentence for you....IS OVERRATED.

more proof you don

[SHAQisGOAT]

Lazeruss knows/mentions every single injury or minor "issue" that Wilt had, even a broken fingernail, yet "forgets" major injuries for a player like Bird. :oldlol:
Calling someone a post-season choker when your biggest idol is Wilt Chamberlain :lol

Seriously, this dude thinks he's doing something "right" yet just makes everyone hate (or hate more) Wilt. Stop it please.

Sorry to have to post this on this thread with a great video like that posted but just had to.

[LAZERUSS]

Lazeruss knows/mentions every single injury or minor "issue" that Wilt had, even a broken fingernail, yet "forgets" major injuries for a player like Bird. :oldlol:
Calling someone a post-season choker when your biggest idol is Wilt Chamberlain :lol

Seriously, this dude thinks he's doing something "right" yet just makes everyone hate (or hate more) Wilt. Stop it please.

Sorry to have to post this on this thread with a great video like that posted but just had to.

Please take your sorry a$$ elsewhere please. You have proven that you have absolutely no knowledge on the subject of basketball, yet you keep coming back and making a complete fool of yourself. Time to move on...

[CavaliersFTW]

Lazeruss knows/mentions every single injury or minor "issue" that Wilt had, even a broken fingernail, yet "forgets" major injuries for a player like Bird. :oldlol:
Calling someone a post-season choker when your biggest idol is Wilt Chamberlain :lol

Seriously, this dude thinks he's doing something "right" yet just makes everyone hate (or hate more) Wilt. Stop it please.

Sorry to have to post this on this thread with a great video like that posted but just had to.
what's with this ongoing feud you two have in regards to Larry Bird that I always catch wind of :oldlol:

[SHAQisGOAT]

what's with this ongoing feud you two have in regards to Larry Bird that I always catch wind of :oldlol:

Nothing really, just that he hates/underrates the hell out of some players in order to prop-up Wilt along the road.

I've always been a fan of Wilt and praised him here long before I had any "feud" with him, always said that he had a top5 peak and have no beef if you rate him top5 all-time but that dude goes to far while posting ignorant shit to underrate/hate on other players such as Bird or Kareem, in order to "prop-up" Wilt, when there's no need for that.

[LAZERUSS]

Nothing really, just that he hates/underrates the hell out of some players in order to prop-up Wilt along the road.

I've always been a fan of Wilt and praised him here long before I had any "feud" with him, always said that he had a top5 peak and have no beef if you rate him top5 all-time but that dude goes to far while posting ignorant shit to underrate/hate on other players such as Bird or Kareem, in order to "prop-up" Wilt, when there's no need for that.

HUH????

I have Kareem at #5 on my all-time list, and Bird at #10. About right where they belong.

[SHAQisGOAT]

HUH????

I have Kareem at #5 on my all-time list, and Bird at #10. About right where they belong.

Yea, where they belong in your ignorant/crazy/biased mind. (Wilt #1 right? please post his case, would love to read that ignorant but funny essay, like you always do, or not, most likely I wouldn't read it lol, I know how it goes, I know the "deal")

Again, most people, or at least knowledgeable people (not people like the writers at SLAM magazine lol), have KAreem in their top3, Bird in their top5 and Wilt out of their top5, plus Bird with a top5 peak/prime and better than Magic's prime/peak. That's how it goes and you know it, that's why you're mad and have 2500 posts all involving Wilt somehow, with your crazy agenda. :lol

[LAZERUSS]

Yea, where they belong in your ignorant/crazy/biased mind. (Wilt #1 right? please post his case, would love to read that ignorant but funny essay, like you always do, or not, most likely I wouldn't read it lol, I know how it goes, I know the "deal")

Again, most people, or at least knowledgeable people (not people like the writers at SLAM magazine lol), have KAreem in their top3, Bird in their top5 and Wilt out of their top5, plus Bird with a top5 peak/prime and better than Magic's prime/peak. That's how it goes and you know it, that's why you're mad and have 2500 posts all involving Wilt somehow, with your crazy agenda. :lol

No they don't and even YOU know it.

Get the hell outta here with that nonsense.

As for Bird-Magic, even the notorious (and idiotic) CELTIC HOMER Bill Simmons has Magic over Bird.

[CavaliersFTW]

Yea, where they belong in your ignorant/crazy/biased mind. (Wilt #1 right? please post his case, would love to read that ignorant but funny essay, like you always do, or not, most likely I wouldn't read it lol, I know how it goes, I know the "deal")

Again, most people, or at least knowledgeable people (not people like the writers at SLAM magazine lol), have KAreem in their top3, Bird in their top5 and Wilt out of their top5, plus Bird with a top5 peak/prime and better than Magic's prime/peak. That's how it goes and you know it, that's why you're mad and have 2500 posts all involving Wilt somehow, with your crazy agenda. :lol
Come on now whether you agree or not with the final conclusion Wilt does have a case for GOAT as do several players, Kareem himself wrote that open letter to Pippen stating Wilt's case (and Bill Russell's). Sonny Hill says in interviews almost the same words, both towards Wilt and Russell. Rick Barry thinks Wilt is the GOAT... I mean, these guys aren't exactly ignorant on the subject. Wilt does have a case for being GOAT. In short, because of his dominance... more specifically because of his nearly incomprehensible dominance. He's 1 guy who played over 40 years ago and he's still the #1 name in the NBA record book. He's got a case. Everyone's criteria is different.

[SHAQisGOAT]

No they don't and even YOU know it.

Get the hell outta here with that nonsense.

As for Bird-Magic, even the notorious (and idiotic) CELTIC HOMER Bill Simmons has Magic over Bird.

:oldlol: You're so mad because you know that's how it goes :oldlol:

Maybe as far as careers yea, on the all-time list, 1 spot higher, I always said I can easily "see it" although I got Bird higher on my list, by 1 spot. Even with a better team overall, on average, throughout the years for their careers (playing alongside a top3 goat, while only being the clear cut alpha in his 6th season, Bird was from the get-go), even with more healthy years, even on a weaker conference, even with 2 more rings... most people never rank Bird 2 spots, or more, lower than Magic. That's because Bird had a better peak as an overall player and for the most part was the better player when they were both healthy (considered in those days too)....

Anyways this thread should focus on that great video and Wilt's amazing talent, not this "silly" discussion so I won't post more, why bother....

[trueDS]

He does seem like he knows a LOT, just don't see a reason to leave out information like this when he posts a highlight of Wilt posting up


"The Rivalry (book documenting Wilt and Russell's Rivalry in the 1960's)

"More significantly, the pain in Chamberlain's knees had grown worse with each game. Now the slightest bend in either knee sent an excruciating jolt through the leg, and he was forced to go up and down stairs sideways, to avoid bending his knees. When he arrived for practice on Friday, he could barely walk. D. Lorber examined him and realized that Chamberlain's knee-joint capsules had become inflamed. Lorber instructed Chamberlain to spend the entire day receiving heat treatment on his knees. He thought that if Chamberlain remained inactive, and received heat treatement that day and the next, the inflammation might subside enough for him to at least start on Sunday. Chamberlain spent several hours each day with his knees under an infrared heat lamp, but by Saturday afternoon, when the team was leaving for Boston (IE the game from which those "highlights" are taken), he was still walking stiff-legged."

"Chamberlain's sore knees had hampered his running and jumping throughout the game"



1. fatal

[LAZERUSS]

[QUOTE=trueDS]1. fatal

[CavaliersFTW]

1. fatal’s video was made not from one game, but two: 1967 EDF# 4 and 1964 FINALS# 4. The only full (well, two full halves) games of prime Wilt’s available.

2. That quote from “The Rivalry” says Chamberlain felt pain in the knee, not that he was unable to play. And pain in the playoffs isn’t something unusual for most players. Besides, if he was seriously injured, we would see drop in his production in next game. But that’s not what happened as he scored 29 pts (10/16 FG), grabbed 36 rebounds, assisted 13 times and probably had around 15 blocks just two days after that game 4. So his relatively bad play (he still had triple double and probably 8 blocks) in game 4 wasn’t cause by injury, but was just worse game – what happens to everyone from time to time, even Wilt had several such games during 1967 run, obviously most of them vs defensively great Thurmond in the finals, but also one game vs Royals (very similar to game 4 vs Celtics).

In second game used by fatal Wilt had 27 pts (12/23 FG) and 38 rebounds, so scoring wise it was performance around his series averages and rebounding wise was the best game of that series, so he definitely was healthy and doesn't look much better than in 1967 game.

Bottom line is these two full halves are the only non-edited, full game material of prime Wilt in the playoffs so it’s the best what we have to analyze if we want to reasonably discuss about Chamberlain. It’s much better than edited highlights of only made shots.
Nah, it isn't, it's pretty much crap. Wilt wasn't attacking the basket in either game. I'm going through every basket he's made in his entire known career on film right now and I'm showing the entire extended play, setting up in the post, being fed, etc not just a highlight of his finish or move. The '64 and '67 games don't show but an inconsequentially small fraction of how Wilt not only scored, but knew how to play in the post.

How many pick and rolls do you see in those two games? How many lobs were thrown? How many fast breaks did Wilt start? How many fast breaks did Wilt finish? How many give and go plays were run? How much was Wilt in the high post? How many moves from the left side did he perform, how about right? How many baseline spins did he attempt?

I've got dozens upon dozens of clips of Wilt executing textbook examples of entirely different categories of plays than what he's seen attempting in those games.

Also, you can't dismiss that quote about G4 1967. Doing so just shows you wish to ignore evidence. There's no evidence that supports he was physically fine that game. He was productive statistically? Great. That's got nothing to do with how he moves around on the floor barely able to bend his knees. The video fatal made was to show, or rather, poke fun at Wilts movements around the floor. Because Fatal9 quite openly does not respect or like Wilt Chamberlain's game. He thinks he knows more than he actually does, he's seen probably 1/16th of the footage I've seen if he's lucky. He's uninformed about Wilt. Fatal probably thinks that's the way Wilt always moved, it isn't, that's how Wilt moved that game, with badly inflamed knees and shinsplints. That footage will not show you a glimpse of the Wilt you wish to see.

[trueDS]

Not sure if you are seriously defending Fatal's BLATANT mis-representation here, or not.

First of all, Wilt was badly hampered by injury in the one half of that game in '67.

He felt pain, but it's doubtfull he was seriously injured because two days later he played great game. No serious injury is healed in TWO DAYS.



And, BTW, it was his WORST in that series.

Bad games happens from time to time - doesn't mean it was caused by injury. Wilt had similar bad games that year vs Cinny (once) and in the finals vs Thurmond (many times).



Secondly, Fatal DELIBERATELY left out HALF of Chamberlain's MAKES in those games.

He focused only on POST UPS, so that's why he didn't include other types of shots.




As far as anything really meaningful, if you can dig up just one of Chamberlain's 271 40 point games, I suspect that we would have a far more meaningful representation of his scoring skills.

We don't really need to dig it up, because Wilt's playoffs drop off in efficiency is pretty clear. In regular season he stat padded vs weak competition (he was GOAT offensive rebounder so scored a lot that way), but there's much less easy baskets in playoffs and that's why Wilt's scoring limitations were exposed in the playoffs.




Incidently, we do have much of his 42 point All-Star game (17-23 from the field too), and he looked FAR better than in those edited clips by Fatal.

On postups he looked as bad as in fatal's video. Besides that ASG game was clearly above his normal efficiency that year: 73.9 FG% in ASG vs 50.6% in regular and 46.7% in playoffs. So Wilt looked much better in that game than usually.

[trueDS]

I've got dozens upon dozens of clips of Wilt executing textbook examples of entirely different categories of plays than what he's seen attempting in those games.

But you don't know how often he used that different play types and how efficient he was! Really, how many of his shots do you have? 1-2% (including misses) of his whole career? 5%? No more I think. And probably affected by "highlight bias", because it's more likely someone have kept Wilt's better, more unique plays, than bad or the ones he often used. (That's why it's so important to analyze game based on full games/halves/quarters, not some edited highlights.)



Also, you can't dismiss that quote about G4 1967. Doing so just shows you wish to ignore evidence. There's no evidence that supports he was physically fine that game. He was productive statistically? Great. That's got nothing to do with how he moves around on the floor barely able to bend his knees.

1. So explain why two days later he played so great game? No serious injury is healed in two days...

2. fatal's video has also other game and Wilt looks the same on post ups.

[LAZERUSS]

He felt pain, but it's doubtfull he was seriously injured because two days later he played great game. No serious injury is healed in TWO DAYS.



Bad games happens from time to time - doesn't mean it was caused by injury. Wilt had similar bad games that year vs Cinny (once) and in the finals vs Thurmond (many times).




He focused only on POST UPS, so that's why he didn't include other types of shots.





We don't really need to dig it up, because Wilt's playoffs drop off in efficiency is pretty clear. In regular season he stat padded vs weak competition (he was GOAT offensive rebounder so scored a lot that way), but there's much less easy baskets in playoffs and that's why Wilt's scoring limitations were exposed in the playoffs.




On postups he looked as bad as in fatal's video. Besides that ASG game was clearly above his normal efficiency that year: 73.9 FG% in ASG vs 50.6% in regular and 46.7% in playoffs. So Wilt looked much better in that game than usually.

Yep, there is probably a total of 2% of Wilt's NBA footage available, and in none of them, was he anywhere near at his best.

As for post-season domination...

In his "scoring" prime, covering 52 games, he averaged 32.8 ppg, 26.7 rpg, and shot .505, in post-seasons that shot about .425. And 30 of those games were against Russell and the greatest dynasty in NBA history.

Hell, in his first 67 playoff games, he averaged 30.4 ppg, 27.0 rpg, 4.5 apg, and shot .515 (in post-season in which the league shot about .428)...and 35 of those games were against Russell, and six more against Thurmond.

Give me a list of the players who have put up a 30-27-5 .515 (and outshooting the league average by 9%) series (with 8 bpg). In fact, give me the list of NBA players who had one playoff GAME with those numbers. Oh, and make sure that they were facing a HOFer too.

[CavaliersFTW]

He felt pain, but it's doubtfull he was seriously injured because two days later he played great game. No serious injury is healed in TWO DAYS.



Bad games happens from time to time - doesn't mean it was caused by injury. Wilt had similar bad games that year vs Cinny (once) and in the finals vs Thurmond (many times).




He focused only on POST UPS, so that's why he didn't include other types of shots.





We don't really need to dig it up, because Wilt's playoffs drop off in efficiency is pretty clear. In regular season he stat padded vs weak competition (he was GOAT offensive rebounder so scored a lot that way), but there's much less easy baskets in playoffs and that's why Wilt's scoring limitations were exposed in the playoffs.




On postups he looked as bad as in fatal's video. Besides that ASG game was clearly above his normal efficiency that year: 73.9 FG% in ASG vs 50.6% in regular and 46.7% in playoffs. So Wilt looked much better in that game than usually.
Yeah looks like you're going to get exposed for being one of fatals loyal Wilt jesters when my complete offensive game break down for Wilt is finished. Because currently it seems the only things you believe about Wilt is what Fatal9 showed you or told you, how cute :oldlol:

It is laughable how little can be determined from those two game halves let alone how misleading that 2nd one is due to Wilt having limited mobility in his legs.

Oh wait you dismissed that, for god knows why, maybe cause Fatal didn't tell you about it :oldlol:

[LAZERUSS]

Yeah looks like you're going to get exposed for being one of fatals loyal Wilt jesters when my complete offensive game break down for Wilt is finished. Because currently it seems the only things you believe about Wilt is what Fatal9 showed you or told you, how cute :oldlol:

It is laughable how little can be determined from those two game halves let alone how misleading that 2nd one is due to Wilt having limited mobility in his legs.

Oh wait you dismissed that, for god knows why, maybe cause Fatal didn't tell you about it :oldlol:

These RealGM posters are clowns.

Nothing but an anti-Wilt agenda.

[LAZERUSS]

We don't really need to dig it up, because Wilt's playoffs drop off in efficiency is pretty clear. In regular season he stat padded vs weak competition (he was GOAT offensive rebounder so scored a lot that way), but there's much less easy baskets in playoffs and that's why Wilt's scoring limitations were exposed in the playoffs.

Russell couldn't do anything with a prime Chamberlain in the post-season.

Wilt had post-season series against him of...

30.5 ppg on a .500 FG% (in a post-season NBA that shot an eFG% of .402.)

33.6 ppg on a .468 FG% (in a post-season NBA that shot an eFG% of .411.) Oh, and BTW, in Wilt's 10 regular season H2H's with Russell, he averaged 39.7 ppg on a .471 FG%. Not really much of a drop off...especially when post-season scoring and shooting dropped dramatically overall.

29.2 ppg on a .517 FG% (in a post-season NBA that shot an eFG% of .420.)

30.1 ppg on a .555 FG% (in a seven game series, in a post-season NBA that shot an eFG% of .429.) BTW, in his regular season H2H's with Russell that year, he averaged 25.3 ppg on a .473 FG%.

28.0 ppg on a .509% (in a post-season NBA that shot .440.) Oh, and in their nine regular season H2H's... 28.3 ppg on a .527 FG%.

[CavaliersFTW]

But you don't know how often he used that different play types and how efficient he was! Really, how many of his shots do you have? 1-2% (including misses) of his whole career? 5%? No more I think. And probably affected by "highlight bias", because it's more likely someone have kept Wilt's better, more unique plays, than bad or the ones he often used. (That's why it's so important to analyze game based on full games/halves/quarters, not some edited highlights.)



1. So explain why two days later he played so great game? No serious injury is healed in two days...

2. fatal's video has also other game and Wilt looks the same on post ups.
Negative, there are no Wilt highlights from his time. Winek made films on the LEAGUE, not on Wilt. The league back then was not about individualism it was about teams. There are short clips of his teams captured by Winek. This is no highlight bias towards him, most of his games were never filmed, Winek would capture maybe a few key sequences from some all star games, or the last game of the season, or perhaps a mid season game if the documentary is a half way point of the season, or a few playoff clips if it's a playoff documentary. None of the focus was on Wilt, so much as it was his teams and other teams around the league.

Irrelevant anyways - a great deal of my footage of Wilt comes from games. And guys like Phila have made shot charts of all of Wilt's games/game halves available. If you want to get into numbers, you see what he has to offer. I'm about showing what Wilt could do. And I'm telling you, the '64 and '67 clips Fatal9 presented of Wilt will lead you to nothing but a pure BS conclusion. His 'post up' videos of Wilt drawn from a pitiful 2 game halves (one being of Wilt greatly immobilized by leg injuries) are more misleading than any 'highlight' of Wilt ever could be.



And who says his injury was healed simply because he had a great game :biggums:

MJ dropped 40 with the flu, was he cured during the game? Wilt clinched 1972 Finals with a 24pt 29reb game... with a broken bone in his hand and a sprained wrist... must it have been totally healed all along? Perhaps just a myth? I didn't know you had to be totally healthy to have a great game I learned something new today :applause:

:hammerhead:

[trueDS]

In his "scoring" prime, covering 52 games, he averaged 32.8 ppg, 26.7 rpg, and shot .505, in post-seasons that shot about .425. And 30 of those games were against Russell and the greatest dynasty in NBA history.

Hell, in his first 67 playoff games, he averaged 30.4 ppg, 27.0 rpg, 4.5 apg, and shot .515 (in post-season in which the league shot about .428)...and 35 of those games were against Russell, and six more against Thurmond.

Give me a list of the players who have put up a 30-27-5 .515 (and outshooting the league average by 9%) series (with 8 bpg). In fact, give me the list of NBA players who had one playoff GAME with those numbers. Oh, and make sure that they were facing a HOFer too.

1. No need to bring rebounds (Wilt was arguably GOAT rebounder and no one is arguing with that) or assists, because we discuss only about SCORING ABILITIES.

2. I'm talking about his drop off in scoring efficiency in playoffs, so it really doesn't matter how many players averaged as much points as Wilt (besides his numbers are inflated by crazy 60s pace), but how different were his playoffs averages in comparison to his regular season PPG, FG% and TS%.

During, as you called is "his scoring prime", his playoffs and regular season scoring stats are:



60-66 PPG MPG FG% TS%
PO 32,8 47,5 50,5 52,0
RS 39,6 47,0 51,1 52,9


So he was slightly worse efficiency wise, but much worse volume wise.
BTW, not only pace affectes his numbers, but also minutes - he would not have played so many minutes in any other era, so if we want to compare him with stars from different eras, good thing to do is give per 36 numbers. And in this case his PPG in playoffs per 36 was 24.9 with around +2/+3 TS% above league average. Very good results, but definitely not "unstoppable scorer".

[trueDS]

And who says his injury was healed simply because he had a great game

It's basic logic: if he had serious injury in G4 and it affected his game, it would have been seen in results: as well in G4, as in game two days later. But nothing is seen, he played ok in one game and great in another, ergo no serious injury.


These RealGM posters are clowns.

Nothing but an anti-Wilt agenda.


Yeah looks like you're going to get exposed for being one of fatals loyal Wilt jesters when my complete offensive game break down for Wilt is finished. Because currently it seems the only things you believe about Wilt is what Fatal9 showed you or told you, how cute :oldlol:

It is laughable how little can be determined from those two game halves let alone how misleading that 2nd one is due to Wilt having limited mobility in his legs.

Oh wait you dismissed that, for god knows why, maybe cause Fatal didn't tell you about it :oldlol:


Good job guys, lack of reasonable arguments, so lets use personal attacks (only people who are wrong "discuss" that way). Learn how to discuss first, because with that attitude you do more harm to Wilt than good.

[CavaliersFTW]

It's basic logic: if he had serious injury in G4 and it affected his game, it would have been seen in results: as well in G4, as in game two days later. But nothing is seen, he played ok in one game and great in another, ergo no serious injury.






Good job guys, lack of reasonable arguments, so lets use personal attacks (only people who are wrong "discuss" that way). Learn how to discuss first, because with that attitude you do more harm to Wilt than good.
'Lack of reasonable arguments' says the guy who totally dismisses a detailed description of Wilt being crippled from the knees down the day before and the day of G4 of 1967 Finals :oldlol:

And this is ISH, not realgm if you're being a total idiot, you're going to get called out for being an idiot.

You're being an idiot right now. Know why? You are denying Wilt's injury and it's described effect on his mobility in regards to the aforementioned game due to him having... a good game 2 days later? And because you don't find it 'logical' his injury is not true or a non-factor?

I'm sorry but your logic in this case, should be re-titled as your IMAGINATION, because that's all it is. It is a fact that he was injured, and playing on greatly reduced mobility from the knees down because of it. If you're logic doesn't compute you need a new logic board. Because great players are capable of playing great games through injury, that doesn't mean their mobility isn't being greatly effected, how about Jerry West's dead leg in the 1969 finals, where he visibly hobbles around reduced to shooting and incapable of driving, or the same for Isiah Thomas' dominant game on 1 leg where he's limping all over the place... great games, by great players, playing through injury. Wilt played through inflamed knees and shinsplints. Deny it some more why don't you, you're going to build your reputation up real nice around here ignoring facts in place of you're own personal 'logic'.

[trueDS]

You're being an idiot right now. Know why? You are denying Wilt's injury and it's described effect on his mobility in regards to the aforementioned game due to him having... a good game 2 days later? And because you don't find it 'logical' his injury is not true or a non-factor?

You still don't understand, do you? Look, you guys criticize fatal's video, because he used game, during which Wilt was bothered by pain. Ok, lets leave question about how serious that injury really was. The point is - fatal used also other game (from 1964), when Wilt's was definitely healthy and his postups moves look exactly the same as in 1967 game or 1962 ASG or any other Wilt's game available for that matter. For instance check out first shot (1967 game) from fatal's video and compare it to shot from 1:45 mark (1964 game) - the same move, his mobility looks EXACTLY THE SAME in 1964 as in 1967.

[CavaliersFTW]

You still don't understand, do you? Look, you guys criticize fatal's video, because he used game, during which Wilt was bothered by pain. Ok, lets leave question about how serious that injury really was. The point is - fatal used also other game (from 1964), when Wilt's was definitely healthy and his postups moves look exactly the same as in 1967 game or 1962 ASG or any other Wilt's game available for that matter. For instance check out first shot (1967 game) from fatal's video and compare it to shot from 1:45 mark (1964 game) - the same move, his mobility looks EXACTLY THE SAME in 1964 as in 1967.
No, his drop step capability is greatly diminished in the '67 game. Why the hell do you think he's taking little baby steps with his fade away and finger roll? That is not his normal footwork by any means. He can't dig in and push off with his normal drop steps. The very first step in the '64 game is far larger and more deliberate than any of his attempted drop steps in the '67 game. If you don't see this you're blind. Also he showed 2 rushed shots as if those are somehow a reflection of Wilt's normal post moves in the '64 game. In a game half where Wilt only posted up like 5 or 6 times, showing 2 crummy rushed shots along with another game half where Wilt is completely immobilized from his normal range of motion is going to skew the perception quite a bit no?

Also let's take a second to realize... that's like 8-10 total post ups, in a 2 minute span.. half of which aren't an accurate representation of what Wilt was capable of to begin with?

And you're judging his post up skills on this?

Really? And you think Fatal9 was being an honest guy showing this?


:oldlol:

[trueDS]

The very first step in the '64 game is far larger and more deliberate than any of his attempted drop steps in the '67 game. If you don't see this you're blind.

You know I could tell the same: "if you don't see that mobility in first move (1967 game) and the one from 1:45 mark (1964 game) is the same, then you are blind"? Where such discussion will lead us? But anyway, thank you, I wasn't sure before, but now I'm that you are not interested in real discussion about Wilt, you just want to show that he was unstoppable scorer (or whatever you believe), no matter what reality really was. Good luck with that.

[CavaliersFTW]

You know I could tell the same: "if you don't see that mobility in first move (1967 game) and the one from 1:45 mark (1964 game) is the same, then you are blind"? Where such discussion will lead us? But anyway, thank you, I wasn't sure before, but now I'm that you are not interested in real discussion about Wilt, you just want to show that he was unstoppable scorer (or whatever you believe), no matter what reality really was. Good luck with that.
trueDS the expert on Wilt, thinks Wilt wasn't an unstoppable scorer thanks to Fatal9's 2 minute video of Wilt posting up on injured legs and rushed shots :applause: :roll:

This is classic, you actually tried to come here and try to stick up for that egregiously misleading video and dismiss facts about Wilt being injured for one of those games, boy aren't you quite the expert on Wilt's scoring capabilities from all that Wilt footage Fatal9 provided you with :oldlol:

[Marchesk]

You know I could tell the same: "if you don't see that mobility in first move (1967 game) and the one from 1:45 mark (1964 game) is the same, then you are blind"? Where such discussion will lead us? But anyway, thank you, I wasn't sure before, but now I'm that you are not interested in real discussion about Wilt, you just want to show that he was unstoppable scorer (or whatever you believe), no matter what reality really was. Good luck with that.

Just curious, have you seen the Kansas NCAA tournament highlights of Wilt Cavs put together? Wilt looks really good on there in all phases of the game for a center.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8JuK2dVky0

[trueDS]

Just curious, have you seen the Kansas NCAA tournament highlights of Wilt Cavs put together? Wilt looks really good on there in all phases of the game for a center.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8JuK2dVky0

Yes, I have seen it and it's perfect example of Wilt's skills: great athlete, rebounder, shot blocker, pretty good passer, nice movement off the ball, limited as scorer - no postup game, mostly finished in transition, after ORB or after quick catch and shot fadeaway. And keep in mind he played vs weak competition here, If I'm not mistaken he made 53 shots on that video and only 3 of them were against black defenders (but still weaker and shorter than Chamberlain).

Well, I as well might share more info from that video. He made 53 shots (so 19.3% of his all made shots during that season! That's pretty significant sample) - 50.9% of them were transition, cuts and after offensive rebounds; postups (most of them vs short North Carolina defenders), fadeaways and other plays (3 total): 49.1%

I don't know how many he missed, but we know what his totals were during that season and we could assume he made around 75% of his attempts around the basket (so transition, cut and ORB plays) - in fact it was probably even higher (for example in Dippers/Phila sample he made 82.4% of his at rim shots).

So assuming 50.9% of his attempts during season in NCAA were transition, cut and orb plays and he made 75% of them, that means he was 140/408 on postups and fadeaways, so only 34.3%... yeah, very bad, but that's what we would expect from so weak shooter (look at his FT%) and postup player. (and BTW, in Dippers/Phila sample he was 30% from midrange.) And probably in reality he was even worse from postups and fadeaways, because I think he was better at rim finisher than 75%, especially in NCAA, where back then almost no one could compete with him.

[TheGreatRaptor]

Weak era. Stop promoting your channel here.

[Rake2204]

Fun video. I appreciate the share.

[CavaliersFTW]

Yes, I have seen it and it's perfect example of Wilt's skills: great athlete, rebounder, shot blocker, pretty good passer, nice movement off the ball, limited as scorer - no postup game, mostly finished in transition, after ORB or after quick catch and shot fadeaway. And keep in mind he played vs weak competition here, If I'm not mistaken he made 53 shots on that video and only 3 of them were against black defenders (but still weaker and shorter than Chamberlain).
As a 1st year player in college, yes... that's about it :oldlol:


Well, I as well might share more info from that video. He made 53 shots (so 19.3% of his all made shots during that season! That's pretty significant sample) - 50.9% of them were transition, cuts and after offensive rebounds; postups (most of them vs short North Carolina defenders), fadeaways and other plays (3 total): 49.1%
That's great, we know how he scored in the NCAA tournament his first year playing in the NCAA, and if that NCAA tournament is any sort of coming together of how he played in pior games we probably get a somewhat decent picture how he scored throughout the rest of that season too. The problem here is, we (well... I guess I need to exclude you from this group) know that isn't how he played the game in the NBA. The low block was his bread and butter in the NBA, he was still learning how to play the game in the NCAA. Many of his trademark finishing moves aren't even in place yet in that NCAA footage (a-la his fingerrolls, or reverse layups) let alone the work he put in to get into position to release those shots (types of spins, fakes, drop steps). Wilt was primarily known for his defensive abilities in the NCAA, he wasn't realized as a truly dominant scorer until he hit the NBA. He was energetic and athletic, did in fact have a nice shooting touch unlike what you assert, but regardless was still raw as a sophomore in the NCAA knowing how he eventually played in the NBA. I pointed this out to people I shared the video with the day I uploaded that video because it is very obvious he still wasn't capable of doing the things he eventually did in the NBA.


I don't know how many he missed, but we know what his totals were during that season and we could assume he made around 75% of his attempts around the basket (so transition, cut and ORB plays) - in fact it was probably even higher (for example in Dippers/Phila sample he made 82.4% of his at rim shots).

So assuming 50.9% of his attempts during season in NCAA were transition, cut and orb plays and he made 75% of them, that means he was 140/408 on postups and fadeaways, so only 34.3%... yeah, very bad, but that's what we would expect from so weak shooter (look at his FT%) and postup player. (and BTW, in Dippers/Phila sample he was 30% from midrange.) And probably in reality he was even worse from postups and fadeaways, because I think he was better at rim finisher than 75%, especially in NCAA, where back then almost no one could compete with him.
Stop assuming, the time you spent wasting characters for you're worthless assumptions could have been spent looking up the actual data in the games and counting actual stats you lazy agenda driven f*ck.

And once more lettuce all remind ourselves: Footage of Wilt's first year in college is just that... footage of Wilts first year in college. It is not nor should ever be used as an umbrella of his scoring abilities several years later in the NBA. Unless of course, you've got an agenda on trying to diminish Wilt's offensive repertoire. Then by all means, try and use any handicap against him you can. First year NCAA footage, 2 minutes of less than a dozen post up clips where half the shots are comprised of rushed shots or injured legs, and so on. Use poor examples like these to draw conclusions about how Wilt scored 50 points per game in the NBA and became the most dominant scorer of all time. Write off everything else that might indicate he was a dominant scorer as 'edited' or w/e. :lol

[CavaliersFTW]

Weak era. Stop promoting your channel here.
OH NO a realgm mod! :lol

[LAZERUSS]

1. No need to bring rebounds (Wilt was arguably GOAT rebounder and no one is arguing with that) or assists, because we discuss only about SCORING ABILITIES.

2. I'm talking about his drop off in scoring efficiency in playoffs, so it really doesn't matter how many players averaged as much points as Wilt (besides his numbers are inflated by crazy 60s pace), but how different were his playoffs averages in comparison to his regular season PPG, FG% and TS%.

During, as you called is "his scoring prime", his playoffs and regular season scoring stats are:



60-66 PPG MPG FG% TS%
PO 32,8 47,5 50,5 52,0
RS 39,6 47,0 51,1 52,9


So he was slightly worse efficiency wise, but much worse volume wise.
BTW, not only pace affectes his numbers, but also minutes - he would not have played so many minutes in any other era, so if we want to compare him with stars from different eras, good thing to do is give per 36 numbers. And in this case his PPG in playoffs per 36 was 24.9 with around +2/+3 TS% above league average. Very good results, but definitely not "unstoppable scorer".

Again, Chamberlain's post-season scoring and FG%'s declined SLIGHTLY, from his regular season numbers (and keep in mind, his horrid roster, which Hannum found out couldn't beat a team of scrubs in a pre-season scrimmage the very next year without Wilt, didn't make the playoffs in the 62-63 season, and in a season in which Chamberlain did EVERYTHING for that team, and scored 45 ppg that season.) BUT, he was facing the Celtic Dynasty in either his first round, or second round of the playoffs every season until Russell's final season in 68-69 (when it was his third round.)

So, yes, Wilt's stats declined. But, take a look at MJ's post-season numbers against the Pistons in his four post-season H2H's. His scoring and efficiency declined across the board. In a couple, it was dramatic. Same with a prime Shaq, and his five post-season series against the Spurs. Dramatic declines. And how about a peak KAJ, going up against a declining Thurmond in his three playoff H2H series? WAY below his season norms (same with Chamberlain in their two BTW.) Why?

But, no, you won't cut Chamberlain any slack, despite the fact that his post-season numbers against Russell, were generally very close (and in two cases, even higher)...and he faced him and his swarming Celtics, EIGHT times. Wilt seldom had the luxury of facing patsies, and when he did, like Beaty in '64, and Dierking in '67, (both decent to good centers BTW), he just annihilated them. Had he had Hakeem's "good fortune" to have been blown out in the first round as many times as Hakeem did, Wilt' scoring and especially his efficiencies, would have been considerably higher.

Yep. ONLY Chamberlain gets ripped...

[LAZERUSS]

Yes, I have seen it and it's perfect example of Wilt's skills: great athlete, rebounder, shot blocker, pretty good passer, nice movement off the ball, limited as scorer - no postup game, mostly finished in transition, after ORB or after quick catch and shot fadeaway. And keep in mind he played vs weak competition here, If I'm not mistaken he made 53 shots on that video and only 3 of them were against black defenders (but still weaker and shorter than Chamberlain).

Well, I as well might share more info from that video. He made 53 shots (so 19.3% of his all made shots during that season! That's pretty significant sample) - 50.9% of them were transition, cuts and after offensive rebounds; postups (most of them vs short North Carolina defenders), fadeaways and other plays (3 total): 49.1%

I don't know how many he missed, but we know what his totals were during that season and we could assume he made around 75% of his attempts around the basket (so transition, cut and ORB plays) - in fact it was probably even higher (for example in Dippers/Phila sample he made 82.4% of his at rim shots).

So assuming 50.9% of his attempts during season in NCAA were transition, cut and orb plays and he made 75% of them, that means he was 140/408 on postups and fadeaways, so only 34.3%... yeah, very bad, but that's what we would expect from so weak shooter (look at his FT%) and postup player. (and BTW, in Dippers/Phila sample he was 30% from midrange.) And probably in reality he was even worse from postups and fadeaways, because I think he was better at rim finisher than 75%, especially in NCAA, where back then almost no one could compete with him.


Again....fascinating, and likely a MYTH.

In the very limited footage that exists of a college Chamberlain, he is consistently nailing 10-12 turn-around shots, and even TWO STRAIGHT jump shots from beyond the FT line.

Oh, and how about this comment...

http://wiltfan.tripod.com/quotes.html




Carl Braun said "He [Wilt] disorganizes you under the basket the same way [as Bill Russell, on defense]. With Wilt, of course, there's that offense on top of it, which is better than Russell's. He hit on all those jumpers."
"Yes, Wilt hit on those jumpers...Wilt did come into the league with a good touch from the outside, which made his early scoring that much more significant. He wasn't just dunking the ball then."

--Red Holzman. A View from the Bench. P.70


Hmmm, so who do we believe? Someone who actually SAW Chamberlain play, or someone who didn't?

BTW, Wilt's play in the '62 ASG was most certainly more indicative of his overall skills than a highly edited (and with an obvious agenda) two minute video from a known Wilt-basher (and in which half of his scoring was deleted, and in another a Wilt is seen throwing up a horrible shot,.,,but no mention of that fact that it as the shot-clock expiring...)

And a prime Chamberlain just shelled players like Thurmond, Reed, Bellamy, Dierking, and Imhoff, to a FAR greater extent than peak KAJ did. My god, Wilt had games in which he outscored Thurmond by 38-15 and even 45-13 margins, while KAJ never topped 34 against him in some 40 H2H's. And how about Wilt's 66-67 season against a PEAK Thurmond? 20.8 ppg on a now KNOWN .633 FG% (and a post-season of 17.5 ppg on a .560 FG%). KAJ never approached those FG%'s against Nate in his entire career (and only in 73-74, when Nate was injured and on his last legs, did he finally get over 50% against him.)

Reed? Chamberlain had an entire SEASON, covering 11 games, in which he just castrated Willis. 39 ppg and on a known .531 FG% (in a league that shot .426 overall), including games in which he outscore Reed by margins of 41-8, 46-25, 52-23, and 58-28. You won't find KAJ with anyhwere near those numbers against Reed.

Bellamy? This is really laughable. In some 25 H2H's with Bellamy, KAJ had a high game of 41 (and again, Bellamy was on the decline.) A prime Chamberlain was routinely putting up 30-40-50 SEASONS against Bellamy (hell, he had two seasons, covering 10 games each, in which he averaged 43.7 ppg and 52.7 against him), with THREE games of 60+, and a high of 73.

And how about this? Just the year before KAJ joined the NBA, in 68-69, Wilt hung a 60 point game on Dierking, and a 66 point game (on 29-35 shooting BTW) on Fox. Kareem played against those two on numerous occasions, and...not even close. My god, in Wilt's 69-70 season, in his first nine games he was averaging 32.2 ppg on a .579 FG% (including a shelling of KAJ in every facet of the game in their only H2H before Wilt blew out his knee.) Kareem would average 28.8 ppg that season, and only had one season, in his 20 year career, which exceeded it (and just barely.)

A prime Chamberlain was a FAR greater offensive force than KAJ ever was.

[dankok8]

A highlight video is not a very good representation of a player's ability because it compiles the best plays. I could probably make a 10-15 min footage of Javale McGee that makes him look like a GOAT center.

On the other hand, two halves of two random games are even a worse representation of a player IMO. With the highlights at least you know you're getting Wilt's best. With the latter you don't know what you're getting since these two games comprise the only unedited footage of a prime Chamberlain. And since we can't watch the other games we have little or no context to go by.

[CavaliersFTW]

A highlight video is not a very good representation of a player's ability because it compiles the best plays. I could probably make a 10-15 min footage of Javale McGee that makes him look like a GOAT center.

On the other hand, two halves of two random games are even a worse representation of a player IMO. With the highlights at least you know you're getting Wilt's best. With the latter you don't know what you're getting since these two games comprise the only unedited footage of a prime Chamberlain. And since we can't watch the other games we have little or no context to go by.
No you couldn't. You don't understand basketball if you think you could. Clearly you're not aware of what kind of plays you are witnessing on the floor at any given moment if you think Javale has 15 minutes of plays that would make him look like the GOAT center. And his entire career exists on film. Only a random 2-4% of Wilt's career exists on film by my estimation. And besides you're missing the point. A scouting report video of his abilities is not the same as a highlight film to begin with. Career highlights are like Kobe's lob to Shaq, you know, pivotal career moments. Practically none of Wilt's career pivotal moments exist, most of his footage is just a random assortment of games he's played, and random clips of plays he's made. I can only think of one or two pivotal plays of his career lucky enough to exist on film and only 1 incomplete game (his 72 Lakers finals clinching game). A scouting video just covers his repertoire. Similar to what you see from draftexpress, though I intend to be more thorough than they are. It isn't an "OOHHHH MY" video that will just highlight the finish - it will try to highlight the entire play that unfolded. His resume speaks for itself.

[LAZERUSS]

A highlight video is not a very good representation of a player's ability because it compiles the best plays. I could probably make a 10-15 min footage of Javale McGee that makes him look like a GOAT center.

On the other hand, two halves of two random games are even a worse representation of a player IMO. With the highlights at least you know you're getting Wilt's best. With the latter you don't know what you're getting since these two games comprise the only unedited footage of a prime Chamberlain. And since we can't watch the other games we have little or no context to go by.

Except that, by those who watched Chamberlain, he came into the league with decent range. And we simply don't have any footage, other than a near full ASG, and in which Chamberlain was spectacular (42 points on 17-23 shooting), of a an early NBA Wilt. In seasons in which he averaged over 40 ppg. You simply can't tell me that a 40 ppg scorer over the course of 3-4 seasons, is not going to have been an unstoppable force.

As for McGee. Maybe five minutes.

And again, in Fatal's blatant and disgraceful footage...two halves, of two games, and in one, he was suffering from severe leg problems...and on top of that, he EDITED out half of Wilt's other scoring...

Again...a true POS.

[dankok8]

A prime Chamberlain was a FAR greater offensive force than KAJ ever was.

Sure if you ignore the following. You have the numbers vs. rookie Reed, very young Thurmond who played less than 100 games as a starter, and you're ignoring the vast inflation of Wilt's numbers due to pace and minutes played.

I've always said Wilt's high scoring was a testament to his stamina more than to his dominance.

Who has a higher career FG%? Kareem.

Who has a higher career FT%? Kareem by a mile.

Who has a higher playoff ppg, FG%, and FT%. Kareem

I'm not really sure Wilt is a way better scorer. :no:

[LAZERUSS]

Sure if you ignore the following. You have the numbers vs. rookie Reed, very young Thurmond who played less than 100 games as a starter, and you're ignoring the vast inflation of Wilt's numbers due to pace and minutes played.

I've always said Wilt's high scoring was a testament to his stamina more than to his dominance.

Who has a higher career FG%? Kareem.

Who has a higher career FT%? Kareem by a mile.

Who has a higher playoff ppg, FG%, and FT%. Kareem

I'm not really sure Wilt is a way better scorer. :no:

Again, a PRIME "scoring" Chamberlain was FAR more dominant, and SKILLED, than KAJ ever hoped to be. Even his post-season scoring was higher. And please, don't compare eFG%'s, when Wilt's were attained in an era of much lower league averages. Oh, and completely ignore a 66-67 Wilt, who slaughtered a PEAK Thurmond, Russell, and Bellamy, as well as putting up a 24-24-8 .683 season. KAJ couldn't come within the other side of the Grand canyon of that efficiency.

Oh, and KAJ couldn't hit the ocean from a lifeboat against an aging Thurmond, either, while Chamberlain was trashing a PEAK Nate.

[dankok8]

Again, a PRIME "scoring" Chamberlain was FAR more dominant, and SKILLED, than KAJ ever hoped to be. Even his post-season scoring was higher. And please, don't compare eFG%'s, when Wilt's were attained in an era of much lower league averages. Oh, and completely ignore a 66-67 Wilt, who slaughtered a PEAK Thurmond, Russell, and Bellamy, as well as putting up a 24-24-8 .683 season. KAJ couldn't come within the other side of the Grand canyon of that efficiency.

Oh, and KAJ couldn't hit the ocean from a lifeboat against an aging Thurmond, either, while Chamberlain was trashing a PEAK Nate.

Kareem had a 35/17/5 .574 season against Wilt, Thurmond, Cowens, Lanier, Hayes, Unseld, Haywood, Bellamy, Wicks, Lucas etc. In years Wilt scored 33-37 ppg he was never near Kareem's efficiency in 71-72 especially when we take free throws into account.

Again I would definitely argue that '71 to '73 Thurmond was better than '65 to '67 Thurmond. Better statistically, looks stronger, and more experienced.

Anyways believe what you want but no informed mind will say Wilt is FAR BETTER than Kareem or vice versa. It's very close.

[CavaliersFTW]

Kareem had a 35/17/5 .574 season against Wilt, Thurmond, Cowens, Lanier, Hayes, Unseld, Haywood, Bellamy, Wicks, Lucas etc. In years Wilt scored 33-37 ppg he was never near Kareem's efficiency in 71-72 especially when we take free throws into account.

Again I would definitely argue that '71 to '73 Thurmond was better than '65 to '67 Thurmond. Better statistically, looks stronger, and more experienced.

Anyways believe what you want but no informed mind will say Wilt is FAR BETTER than Kareem or vice versa. It's very close.
http://youtu.be/MSTt_TxoFVo?t=3m18s

Rick Barry disagrees with you. Is Rick Barry not an informed mind?

"Wilt Chamberlain was the most dominant and the greatest center to ever play the game bar none, I mean I love ya know... you can talk about Kareem, and you can talk about Shaq, and you can talk about Hakeem Olajuwon and... there is no one, no one, that is close to what Wilt Chamberlain did in his career."

[LAZERUSS]

http://youtu.be/MSTt_TxoFVo?t=3m18s

Rick Barry disagrees with you. Is Rick Barry not an informed mind?

"Wilt Chamberlain was the most dominant and the greatest center to ever play the game bar none, I mean I love ya know... you can talk about Kareem, and you can talk about Shaq, and you can talk about Hakeem Olajuwon and... there is no one, no one, that is close to what Wilt Chamberlain did in his career."

The only time the Wilt-bashers quoted Barry, was when an early career Rick slammed Wilt. And, of course, Barry apologized many times over. But have you ever read Bill Simmons using your above quote?

[dankok8]

Here is Dr J saying Kareem is the GOAT...

http://youtu.be/oQ3nJ7ZfiF8

Then the Mountain Man, Bill Walton, offers his opinion.


"I lived to play against Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. He was the greatest player I ever played against, by far. Better than Jordan. Better than Magic. better than Bird. Better than Dr. J. Better than the best of the best that I played against. Better than Rick Barry. He was my source of motivation for everything I ever did. Everything I did was to try to beat this guy. I lived to play against him, and I played my best ball against him. No matter what I threw at him, though, it seemed like he'd score 50 against me. His left leg belongs in the Smithsonian. And it wasn't just offense. He was a great defender and rebounder, a great passer, a wonderful leader. He was phenomenal. "----Bill Walton


Honestly player opinions are always inherently biased and bit worthless. They seldom care to intellectually compare eras.

[LAZERUSS]

Here is Dr J saying Kareem is the GOAT...

http://youtu.be/oQ3nJ7ZfiF8

Then the Mountain Man, Bill Walton, offers his opinion.




Honestly player opinions are always inherently biased and bit worthless. They seldom care to intellectually compare eras.

Neither played against Wilt, either, much less a PRIME Chamberlain who dominated the NBA like no one since. Including KAJ, who played FOUR years IN the WILT-era, and never approached ANY of his scoring, rebounding, or efficiency records, was nowhere as close as dominant against the same centers, and in fact, struggled far more against an aging Nate, and in his biggest post-season games of that period.

And of course, KAJ, himself, has already conceded that fact...

[CavaliersFTW]

Here is Dr J saying Kareem is the GOAT...

http://youtu.be/oQ3nJ7ZfiF8

Then the Mountain Man, Bill Walton, offers his opinion.




Honestly player opinions are always inherently biased and bit worthless. They seldom care to intellectually compare eras.
Walton never played against Wilt. Dr. J never played against Wilt aside from an all star game. (Btw Dr. J still has Wilt as his starting center on his all-time starting 5 anyways).

Barry played against both Jabbar and Wilt. He's had more experience not only watching Wilt, but playing against him than either Walton or Dr. J had.

Here's also some words out of Kareem's own mouth:


“Dear Scottie, I have nothing but respect for you my friend as an athlete and knowledgeable basketball mind. But you are way off in your assessment of who is the greatest player of all time and the greatest scorer of all time. Your comments are off because of your limited perspective.

You obviously never saw Wilt Chamberlain play who undoubtedly was the greatest scorer this game has ever known. When did MJ ever average 50.4 points per game plus 25.7 rebounds? (Wilt in the 1962 season when blocked shot statistics were not kept). We will never accurately know how many shots Wilt blocked.

Oh by the way in 1967 and 68, Wilt was a league leader in assists. Did MJ ever score 100 points in a game? How many times did MJ score more than 60 points in a game? MJ led the league in scoring in consecutive seasons for 10 years but he did this in an NBA that eventually expanded into 30 teams vs. when Wilt played and there were only 8 teams. Every team had the opportunity to amass a solid nucleus. Only the cream of the basketball world got to play then. So MJ has to be appraised in perspective. His incredible athletic ability, charisma and leadership on the court helped to make basketball popular around the world — no question about that. But in terms of greatness MJ has to take a backseat to The Stilt.

In terms of winning, Michael excelled as both an emotional and scoring leader but Bill Russell’s Celtics won 8 consecutive NBA Championships. Bills rebounding average per game is over 22.5 lifetime, MJs best rebounding years was 8 per game (1989). But we will never know exactly how many shots Bill Russell blocked because again, they never kept that statistic while he played. However, if you ask anybody that played against Russell they will just roll their eyes and say he blocked all the shots he wanted to block in the crucial moments of a game.

Bill played on a total of 11 Championship teams and as you very well know, Scottie, the ring is the thing, and everything else is just statistics. So I would advise you to do a little homework before crowning Michael or Lebron with the title of best ever. As dominant as he is, Lebron has yet to win a championship. I must say that it looks like Miami has finally put the team together that will change that circumstance. Its my hope that today’s players get a better perspective on exactly what has been done in this league in the days of yore.

The change in style to the game is not any indication as to how many really talented players there are in the game. So the fact that skilled players come from all over the world does not change the quantity of outstanding talent. Simply put the number of players that could have stopped Wilt Chamberlain in his prime has not increased. Affectionately, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, NBA’s All-Time Leading Scorer.

Seems even Kareem hold's Wilt's scoring records and dominance in high esteem, no? :confusedshrug:

Player opinions aren't "worthless" that's a nice easy way out. Player opinions vary, and if you understand how much thought players have put into their lists (some have put much more thought into it that others), or how much certain players are students of the game/games history, and also very importantly, what criteria they are basing their opinions on, than their opinions are indeed quite valuable.

Doctor J's opinion is one that I respect a great deal. He put a lot of thought into his lists, and explains why he chooses who he chooses (his 'GOAT' is Kareem, due to his blend of career accomplishments HS to Pro), his all time starting 5 is Oscar, West, Baylor, Russell, and Chamberlain because they were his all time starting 5 growing up and I'm sure those guys are his basketball hero's. Rick Barry has thought about his opinion too for quite some time, as he once thought of Wilt as a loser, but then did a complete 180 and has called him the greatest of all time since the early 70's. Kareem also, is somebody who does not just mention great players on a whim, he is one of the most intellectual basketball historians of all the retired players. His opinion means a lot. As does Sonny Hill, who echo's Kareem's exact thoughts on who the 'greatest of all time is' (if by individual dominance, it's Wilt, if by winning, it's Russell, period - IE he also thinks it's not Jordan).

[LAZERUSS]

Walton never played against Wilt. Dr. J never played against Wilt aside from an all star game. (Btw Dr. J still has Wilt as his starting center on his all-time starting 5 anyways).

Barry played against both Jabbar and Wilt. He's had more experience not only watching Wilt, but playing against him than either Walton or Dr. J had.

Here's also some words out of Kareem's own mouth:



Seems even Kareem hold's Wilt's scoring records and dominance in high esteem, no? :confusedshrug:

Player opinions aren't "worthless" that's a nice easy way out. Player opinions vary, and if you understand how much thought players have put into their lists (some have put much more thought into it that others), or how much certain players are students of the game/games history, and also very importantly, what criteria they are basing their opinions on, than their opinions are indeed quite valuable.

Doctor J's opinion is one that I respect a great deal. He put a lot of thought into his lists, and explains why he chooses who he chooses (his 'GOAT' is Kareem, due to his blend of career accomplishments HS to Pro), his all time starting 5 is Oscar, West, Baylor, Russell, and Chamberlain because they were his all time starting 5 growing up and I'm sure those guys are his basketball hero's. Rick Barry has thought about his opinion too for quite some time, as he once thought of Wilt as a loser, but then did a complete 180 and has called him the greatest of all time since the early 70's. Kareem also, is somebody who does not just mention great players on a whim, he is one of the most intellectual basketball historians of all the retired players. His opinion means a lot. As does Sonny Hill, who echo's Kareem's exact thoughts on who the 'greatest of all time is' (if by individual dominance, it's Wilt, if by winning, it's Russell, period - IE he also thinks it's not Jordan).

Case closed.

[Dr.J4ever]

Walton never played against Wilt. Dr. J never played against Wilt aside from an all star game. (Btw Dr. J still has Wilt as his starting center on his all-time starting 5 anyways).

Barry played against both Jabbar and Wilt. He's had more experience not only watching Wilt, but playing against him than either Walton or Dr. J had.

Here's also some words out of Kareem's own mouth:



Seems even Kareem hold's Wilt's scoring records and dominance in high esteem, no? :confusedshrug:

Player opinions aren't "worthless" that's a nice easy way out. Player opinions vary, and if you understand how much thought players have put into their lists (some have put much more thought into it that others), or how much certain players are students of the game/games history, and also very importantly, what criteria they are basing their opinions on, than their opinions are indeed quite valuable.

Doctor J's opinion is one that I respect a great deal. He put a lot of thought into his lists, and explains why he chooses who he chooses (his 'GOAT' is Kareem, due to his blend of career accomplishments HS to Pro), his all time starting 5 is Oscar, West, Baylor, Russell, and Chamberlain because they were his all time starting 5 growing up and I'm sure those guys are his basketball hero's. Rick Barry has thought about his opinion too for quite some time, as he once thought of Wilt as a loser, but then did a complete 180 and has called him the greatest of all time since the early 70's. Kareem also, is somebody who does not just mention great players on a whim, he is one of the most intellectual basketball historians of all the retired players. His opinion means a lot. As does Sonny Hill, who echo's Kareem's exact thoughts on who the 'greatest of all time is' (if by individual dominance, it's Wilt, if by winning, it's Russell, period - IE he also thinks it's not Jordan).
Well, anything the Doc says is gospel truth to me:bowdown: Sonny Hill has been telling stories about Wilt since I was a young boy worshiping the early 80s Sixer teams. As a big Moses Malone fan back then, I could not believe Sonny Hill had the gall to say that Wilt from the 60s was better than Moses. WTF? Of course over time as I got to know more of the Sixers history, this became apparent.

I do know that while Doc was instrumental in convincing the Sixers franchise to finally retire Wilt's number, Doc holds Bill Russel, perhaps the biggest winner ever in pro sports, in the highest regard of all of them.

[CavaliersFTW]

Well, anything the Doc says is gospel truth to me:bowdown: Sonny Hill has been telling stories about Wilt since I was a young boy worshiping the early 80s Sixer teams. As a big Moses Malone fan back then, I could not believe Sonny Hill had the gall to say that Wilt from the 60s was better than Moses. WTF? Of course over time as I got to know more of the Sixers history, this became apparent.

I do know that while Doc was instrumental in convincing the Sixers franchise to finally retire Wilt's number, Doc holds Bill Russel, perhaps the biggest winner ever in pro sports, in the highest regard of all of them.
I should point out his 6th man - which I found to be brilliant - is Connie Hawkins who as the Doc puts it "can come off the bench and play at guard, forward, or center"

Being that I am also a fan of the 60's crop of players I think Dr. J picked one of the sickest lineups, def the 6 most talented players of the 60's decade IMO. Oscar Robertson's starting 5 is identical, but his 6th that he picked was Bob Pettit. Doctor J is a true student of the game though, if you ever hear him in interviews often times the interviewer be it some journalist or host from NBAtv or someone from ESPN asks a question pertaining to the Doc and his many fantastic moves, often the question is a leading question "how did it feel to be the first to _____" or something along those lines. He's one of the only players I know that will cordially correct the interviewer and mention the name of the guy who deserves to be mentioned that came before him and did the move. There's a couple players I've heard in interviews that do that, you can tell right away they have a lot more knowledge about the game's history than the average player. Sonny Hill is another guy that will often politely correct interviewers leading questions to give credit where credit is due to players of the past, his knowledge goes back even further to to the 40's, 50's, etc. He'll cite obscure Jewish players from the 40's and 50's as being innovative great basketball players and point to guys from the Harlem Rens. Have nothing but respect for people who can trace basketball knowledge back that far.

[dankok8]

Walton never played against Wilt. Dr. J never played against Wilt aside from an all star game. (Btw Dr. J still has Wilt as his starting center on his all-time starting 5 anyways).

Barry played against both Jabbar and Wilt. He's had more experience not only watching Wilt, but playing against him than either Walton or Dr. J had.

Here's also some words out of Kareem's own mouth:



Seems even Kareem hold's Wilt's scoring records and dominance in high esteem, no? :confusedshrug:

Player opinions aren't "worthless" that's a nice easy way out. Player opinions vary, and if you understand how much thought players have put into their lists (some have put much more thought into it that others), or how much certain players are students of the game/games history, and also very importantly, what criteria they are basing their opinions on, than their opinions are indeed quite valuable.

Doctor J's opinion is one that I respect a great deal. He put a lot of thought into his lists, and explains why he chooses who he chooses (his 'GOAT' is Kareem, due to his blend of career accomplishments HS to Pro), his all time starting 5 is Oscar, West, Baylor, Russell, and Chamberlain because they were his all time starting 5 growing up and I'm sure those guys are his basketball hero's. Rick Barry has thought about his opinion too for quite some time, as he once thought of Wilt as a loser, but then did a complete 180 and has called him the greatest of all time since the early 70's. Kareem also, is somebody who does not just mention great players on a whim, he is one of the most intellectual basketball historians of all the retired players. His opinion means a lot. As does Sonny Hill, who echo's Kareem's exact thoughts on who the 'greatest of all time is' (if by individual dominance, it's Wilt, if by winning, it's Russell, period - IE he also thinks it's not Jordan).

It's true Walton and Dr J never played against Wilt but they clearly think Kareem > Jordan. Honestly player opinions shift all the time... see like Rick Barry who used to shit on Wilt and how he was terrible in the clutch. And they always have an inherent bias. Most players praise their own eras in one way or another. I personally don't put much (didn't say none...) credibility into what those guys say.

And it's funny how in Kareem's letter to Pippen he spends the 1st part hyping up Wilt's statistical records and then in the 5th paragraph he says rings are what matters and everything else is just stats. He kind of contradicts himself. What is his criteria for greatness?

Wilt has the GOAT stats. Russell is the GOAT winner. Kareem has the GOAT career resume. Jordan has the GOAT impact on the game. Maybe if even NBA players can't agree on a GOAT maybe there isn't one? And I don't think there is a consensus GOAT player.

[CavaliersFTW]

It's true Walton and Dr J never played against Wilt but they clearly think Kareem > Jordan. Honestly player opinions shift all the time... see like Rick Barry who used to shit on Wilt and how he was terrible in the clutch. And they always have an inherent bias. Most players praise their own eras in one way or another. I personally don't put much (didn't say none...) credibility into what those guys say.

And it's funny how in Kareem's letter to Pippen he spends the 1st part hyping up Wilt's statistical records and then in the 5th paragraph he says rings are what matters and everything else is just stats. He kind of contradicts himself. What is his criteria for greatness?

Wilt has the GOAT stats. Russell is the GOAT winner. Kareem has the GOAT career resume. Jordan has the GOAT impact on the game. Maybe if even NBA players can't agree on a GOAT maybe there isn't one? And I don't think there is a consensus GOAT player.
Incorrect, Rick Barry's opinion shifted once, he apologized for negative things he said, and proceeded to call Wilt the greatest of all time for the past 35+ years. Tell me a player who isn't paid to be on tv that has an opinion that 'shifts all the time'?. Quit trying to dismiss such quotes, you said nobody in their right mind would think Wilt was better than Kareem and that it wasn't close and I provided an example of a former player who DID think just that and you're just trying to write it off so you aren't 'proven wrong' as it were. I provided examples of other players who also think very highly of Wilt including none other than Kareem himself. Stop trying to write these off as low value shifty opinions that mean little to nothing. The people I provided examples of I deliberately picked because they represent the antithesis of what you tried to write them off as, shifty and cheap. I didn't cite Magic ESPN Johnson did I? Those individuals I quoted are true students of the sport, who understand not only the game but also the game's history at a high level.

As for you not understanding Kareem's letter?
http://youtu.be/LfHI8BBIWTk?t=20m40s

Listen to it from the words of another man and maybe you'll 'get it'. Sonny Hill echo's Kareem's 'contradiction' almost exactly. It isn't a contradiction at all. Who's the greatest winner of all time? Why it's Bill Russell. Who's the most dominant of all time? Why that would be Wilt Chamberlain. You can talk about anyone else you want, but nobody dominated the sport so completely and emphatically as Wilt, and nobody won the game so consistently and for so many years as Bill Russell. As such, to both Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Sonny Hill, those two names appear to represent the pinnacle of basketball in their eyes. It just depends on what you favor on a given day. Make sense? As Sonny Hill puts it "I'm tellin you the story (about the greatest) the way it needs to be told".

[trueDS]

Again, Chamberlain's post-season scoring and FG%'s declined SLIGHTLY, from his regular season numbers
Slightly? Again:


60-66 PPG MPG FG% TS%
PO 32,8 47,5 50,5 52,0
RS 39,6 47,0 51,1 52,9

Drop off in scoring efficiency is in fact marginal (especially if we adjust for competition

[Stringer Bell]

Good footage.

I had heard about his fadeaway and seen a clip or 2 of it, but this one has a lot more.

[dankok8]

Incorrect, Rick Barry's opinion shifted once, he apologized for negative things he said, and proceeded to call Wilt the greatest of all time for the past 35+ years. Tell me a player who isn't paid to be on tv that has an opinion that 'shifts all the time'?. Quit trying to dismiss such quotes, you said nobody in their right mind would think Wilt was better than Kareem and that it wasn't close and I provided an example of a former player who DID think just that and you're just trying to write it off so you aren't 'proven wrong' as it were. I provided examples of other players who also think very highly of Wilt including none other than Kareem himself. Stop trying to write these off as low value shifty opinions that mean little to nothing. The people I provided examples of I deliberately picked because they represent the antithesis of what you tried to write them off as, shifty and cheap. I didn't cite Magic ESPN Johnson did I? Those individuals I quoted are true students of the sport, who understand not only the game but also the game's history at a high level.

As for you not understanding Kareem's letter?
http://youtu.be/LfHI8BBIWTk?t=20m40s

Listen to it from the words of another man and maybe you'll 'get it'. Sonny Hill echo's Kareem's 'contradiction' almost exactly. It isn't a contradiction at all. Who's the greatest winner of all time? Why it's Bill Russell. Who's the most dominant of all time? Why that would be Wilt Chamberlain. You can talk about anyone else you want, but nobody dominated the sport so completely and emphatically as Wilt, and nobody won the game so consistently and for so many years as Bill Russell. As such, to both Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Sonny Hill, those two names appear to represent the pinnacle of basketball in their eyes. It just depends on what you favor on a given day. Make sense? As Sonny Hill puts it "I'm tellin you the story (about the greatest) the way it needs to be told".

Please don't misquote me because that's not what I said. What I said is that whether you argue for Wilt and Kareem as the better player it's crazy to say it isn't close either way. It is very close and debatable and nobody in their right mind should say "Wilt easily" or "Kareem easily".

Jordan/Kareem aren't as statistically dominant as Wilt or as great winners as Russell. BUT they are greater winners than Wilt and more statistically dominant than Russell. Ultimately how you rank players depends on how you weigh the different categories. Wilt and Russell are the two extremes while Jordan and Kareem are high on both the winning and dominance scales but not at the top of either.

I personally weigh winning more than sheer numbers. I hugely believe in intangibles and it's a fact that stats can be greatly inflated and correlate poorly with impact. Thus I would have Jordan, Kareem and Russell over Wilt. Again that's just me.

[CavaliersFTW]

Please don't misquote me because that's not what I said. What I said is that whether you argue for Wilt and Kareem as the better player it's crazy to say it isn't close either way. It is very close and debatable and nobody in their right mind should say "Wilt easily" or "Kareem easily".

Jordan/Kareem aren't as statistically dominant as Wilt or as great winners as Russell. BUT they are greater winners than Wilt and more statistically dominant than Russell. Ultimately how you rank players depends on how you weigh the different categories. Wilt and Russell are the two extremes while Jordan and Kareem are high on both the winning and dominance scales but not at the top of either.

I personally weigh winning more than sheer numbers. I hugely believe in intangibles and it's a fact that stats can be greatly inflated and correlate poorly with impact. Thus I would have Jordan, Kareem and Russell over Wilt. Again that's just me.
Once again:

http://youtu.be/MSTt_TxoFVo?t=3m18s

Rick Barry thinks Wilt, and no one (including Kareem, who's name he mentions) is close. Therefore you're wrong. Say "okay, I was wrong", go ahead do it :cheers:

[dankok8]

Once again:

http://youtu.be/MSTt_TxoFVo?t=3m18s

Rick Barry thinks Wilt, and no one (including Kareem, who's name he mentions) is close. Therefore you're wrong. Say "okay, I was wrong", go ahead do it :cheers:

Again I give little credibility to Barry's quote:

1) He changed his mind and used to trash Wilt. How do you make such a radical 180 degree turn?

2) He wasn't exactly a well-liked player and used to piss off his teammates. The words intangibles and leadership have always eluded him.

3) He was never known as a particularly cerebral player or student of the game.

4) He played in the same era and actually lost a finals series to Wilt's Sixers. It's easy to see how it benefits his own legacy to prop up Wilt.

Basically Barry's opinion is likely to be biased and how informed he is... also very open to debate.


What do you think of Oscar's quote on YT when he says Lebron is better than Jordan and in a class of his own? And mind you this was before LBJ even won a title.

[CavaliersFTW]

Again I give little credibility to Barry's quote:

1) he changed his mind and used to trash Wilt. How do you make such a radical 180 degree turn?

2) He wasn't exactly a well-liked player and used to piss off his teammates. The words intangibles and leadership have always eluded him.

3) He was never known as a particularly cerebral player or student of the game.

4) He played in the same era and actually lost a finals series to Wilt's Sixers. It's easy to see how it benefits his own legacy to prop up Wilt.

Basically Barry's opinion is likely to be biased.


What do you think of Oscar's quote on YT when he says Lebron is better than Jordan and in a class of his own? And mind you this was before LBJ even won a title.
Incapable of admitting when you're wrong. You're not going to be taken very seriously when you can't admit you're wrong about something so abruptly and specifically countered.

Let's get some other peoples input on this, who here subscribed to this thread thinks dankok was just proven wrong about his statement of (paraphrasing) 'nobody in their right mind would think Wilt > Jabbar by significant or wide margin'?

Rick Barry thinks that. There is no other way to interpret it. You need to learn to own up to when somebody provides a very solid counter. Learn from it, adjust your thought process and move on. Yes, people in their right mind can and do think Wilt was significantly better than Jabbar. Not everyone will, but the simple fact that Rick Barry thinks exactly what you stated nobody in their right mind would, renders your statement to be proven wrong.

Also look up some examples of logical fallacies. You're leaning on them right now by resorting to attempting to slander his character in an effort to reduce value in his opinion.

[dankok8]

Incapable of admitting when you're wrong. You're not going to be taken very seriously when you can't admit you're wrong about something so abruptly and specifically countered.

Let's get some other peoples input on this, who here subscribed to this thread thinks dankok was just proven wrong about his statement of (paraphrasing) 'nobody in their right mind would think Wilt > Jabbar by significant or wide margin'?

Rick Barry thinks that. There is no other way to interpret it. You need to learn to own up to when somebody provides a very solid counter. Learn from it, adjust your thought process and move on. Yes, people in their right mind can and do think Wilt was significantly better than Jabbar. Not everyone will, but the simple fact that Rick Barry thinks exactly what you stated nobody in their right mind would, renders your statement to be proven wrong.

Also look up some examples of logical fallacies. You're leaning on them right now by resorting to attempting to slander his character in an effort to reduce value in his opinion.

One opinion by a very likely biased player is a solid counter? Please. We have no idea if Barry is informed either or just talking out of his ass. I mean when he ripped Wilt he was talking out of his ass right? And then we had Big O talking about of his ass about Lebron? Gary Payton, Magic Johnson, Charles Barkley... all very recently saying complete utter BS. I don't consider them informed or "right" minds sorry.

I've admitted I was wrong before but the "evidence" you've given I don't deem sufficient or anywhere close.

[CavaliersFTW]

One opinion by a very likely biased player is a solid counter? Please. We have no idea if Barry is informed either or just talking out of his ass. I mean when he ripped Wilt he was talking out of his ass right? And then we had Big O talking about of his ass about Lebron? Gary Payton, Magic Johnson, Charles Barkley... all very recently saying complete utter BS. I don't consider them informed or "right" minds sorry.

I've admitted I was wrong before but the "evidence" you've given I don't deem sufficient or anywhere close.
You spoke in absolutes, you said 'nobody' believes _____. Rick Barry believes _____ and he is somebody. This is an very straightforward example of someone (in this case you) being wrong.

You dug your own grave with this one. I'm sorry, but this is pretty cut and dry. Maybe try to not speak in absolutes next time.

[dankok8]

How about Nate Thurmond in his interview with SI?


SLAM: Who was the toughest center for you to guard?

NT: Kareem had more of a repertoire and was harder to stop. He had a little more versatility when he set up on the floor. Wilt liked the left side, but Jabbar set up on either side. Wilt would rely on the fade-away 70 percent of time; Kareem’s hook was in the same range. I couldn’t stop him from shooting the hook; I could make him take awkward hooks or baseline jumpers. You really couldn’t keep Wilt from taking the fade-away, but you could try to him shoot it a step further out. He was a great fade-away shooter. If you got in close, and he had you out of position, then you could foul him and save yourself one point.

SLAM: Can you rate Chamberlain, Russell and Abdul-Jabbar?

NT: I’m going to say that Kareem was the best all-around, and with Wilt and Russell, it depended on what team you needed them for. I just happen to think that all the way around, Kareem was the best. His height, his versatility, his desire and gracefulness. Those three were so close— how they dominated, how they won, how they scored. With Russell, throw in the defense. You could put them all in a bag and take your pick. Wilt was the best scorer ever and Russell the best defensive center. What made Russ the best was that he never blocked the ball out of bounds. I liked to block it in the third row to let the guy know that I didn’t just tip it! I was making a statement.

Even though I didn't say what you think I said CavsFTW I will admit fault k. I don't wanna argue with you. I just don't consider Barry an informed and unbiased source or in the "right mind". So I still stand by what I said.

[CavaliersFTW]

How about Nate Thurmond in his interview with SI?



Even though I didn't say what you think I said CavsFTW I will admit fault k. I don't wanna argue with you. I just don't consider Barry an informed and unbiased source or in the "right mind". So I still stand by what I said.
I know exactly what you said dankok. And hey, that's great, I've already read every quote under the sun about these past greats including that one. I respect Nate's opinion too FWIW (btw he thinks MJ is the GOAT and Oscar is #2, he values all around skill/abilities, he put Oscar at #2 because Jordan could shoot the 3 and with Oscar due to his era he 'never saw it') As long as you understand where every player is coming from and when they said what they said and why they said what they said (if such context is available), these player opinions can offer great insight.

Heck, Oscar Robertson doesn't think Russell, Wilt OR Jabbar are the greatest, let alone MJ. He states big men can't do all the things an all around player can do thus they aren't the greatest players, he thinks Elgin Baylor is the greatest player of all time because Elgin COULD do everything on the floor. He's in his right mind too, and I respect his opinion. You asked me what I thought of his opinion on Lebron, well, I respect that too. Understanding who someone's 'greatest' is is all about understanding their perspective. What you should learn here is that just because someone doesn't think like you doesn't mean they are wrong, or as you like to put it not 'in their right mind'... You basically thought 'nobody' could have a perspective that would put Wilt at the top with no one close, because that's not how you think. But that wasn't true, somebody (Rick Barry) does think that way. You can't just right them off as not being in their 'right mind' just because they don't form the same conclusion as you. Maybe they know things you don't. And for what it's worth, I've come accross quite a few others from my Youtube channel that have echoed such opinions. Whether you agree with them or not is irrelevant, the fact is, there are examples of people that can conclude what you asserted nobody could conclude.

[Psileas]

I didn't follow multiple pages in the end of this thread, but:


Again I give little credibility to Barry's quote:

1) He changed his mind and used to trash Wilt. How do you make such a radical 180 degree turn?

On the contrary, I would give more credibility to opinions of people who are willing to admit they were mistaken or at least taken out of context. Not ever being willing to change your opinion, even by 180 degrees, is not indicative of a correct opinion. Not to mention, the time during which Barry believed he's he GOAT has been significantly more than the time during which he'd been "trashing" him (probably an exaggerated word), and the first phase came after the second.


2) He wasn't exactly a well-liked player and used to piss off his teammates. The words intangibles and leadership have always eluded him.

Barry was the unquestioned leader of his team, even if he wasn't liked. Plus, it's irrelevant to his opinion. Whether he ignores intangibles, I've not seen serious evidence. What exactly did he criticize Wilt about?


3) He was never known as a particularly cerebral player or student of the game.

Someone who figured out an out-of-fashion method to shoot over 75-80% from the line was not a student of the game? Would someone who was not cerebral enough be willing to accept a new, passing-first, role in the end of his career? Non-cerebral players are not particularly fond of learning new tricks.


4) He played in the same era and actually lost a finals series to Wilt's Sixers. It's easy to see how it benefits his own legacy to prop up Wilt.

He's also played in the same era with Kareem, he's lost a series to peak playoff Kareem, he's also beaten Kareem (that's a reason to prop Kareem), plus, the same excuse could be used for pretty much any player who compliments some legend of his era.


Basically Barry's opinion is likely to be biased and how informed he is... also very open to debate.

What's wrong with this? Most good minds are open to debate. And, yes, most opinions are biased, including opinions of people who meet your own standards of "knowing basketball", most of whom would be very unwilling to accept they are wrong in something.

[dankok8]

I know exactly what you said dankok. And hey, that's great, I've already read every quote under the sun about these past greats including that one. I respect Nate's opinion too FWIW (btw he thinks MJ is the GOAT and Oscar is #2, he values all around skill/abilities, he put Oscar at #2 because Jordan could shoot the 3 and with Oscar due to his era he 'never saw it') As long as you understand where every player is coming from and when they said what they said and why they said what they said (if such context is available), these player opinions can offer great insight.

Heck, Oscar Robertson doesn't think Russell, Wilt OR Jabbar are the greatest, let alone MJ. He states big men can't do all the things an all around player can do thus they aren't the greatest players, he thinks Elgin Baylor is the greatest player of all time because Elgin COULD do everything on the floor. He's in his right mind too, and I respect his opinion. You asked me what I thought of his opinion on Lebron, well, I respect that too. Understanding who someone's 'greatest' is is all about understanding their perspective. What you should learn here is that just because someone doesn't think like you doesn't mean they are wrong, or as you like to put it not 'in their right mind'... You basically thought 'nobody' could have a perspective that would put Wilt at the top with no one close, because that's not how you think. But that wasn't true, somebody (Rick Barry) does think that way. You can't just right them off as not being in their 'right mind' just because they don't form the same conclusion as you. Maybe they know things you don't. And for what it's worth, I've come accross quite a few others from my Youtube channel that have echoed such opinions. Whether you agree with them or not is irrelevant, the fact is, there are examples of people that can conclude what you asserted nobody could conclude.

How am I doing that? I've been exactly arguing this entire time that the GOAT debate is in fact a debate and that there is no correct answer. Scroll up and read my previous posts. I value every opinion but do I consider it an end all be all that settles the debate? Of course not. I would also lie if I said I consider every player's opinion equally. I don't.


I didn't follow multiple pages in the end of this thread, but:

Quote:
Again I give little credibility to Barry's quote:

1) He changed his mind and used to trash Wilt. How do you make such a radical 180 degree turn?

On the contrary, I would give more credibility to opinions of people who are willing to admit they were mistaken or at least taken out of context. Not ever being willing to change your opinion, even by 180 degrees, is not indicative of a correct opinion. Not to mention, the time during which Barry believed he's he GOAT has been significantly more than the time during which he'd been "trashing" him (probably an exaggerated word), and the first phase came after the second.

Quote:
2) He wasn't exactly a well-liked player and used to piss off his teammates. The words intangibles and leadership have always eluded him.

Barry was the unquestioned leader of his team, even if he wasn't liked. Plus, it's irrelevant to his opinion. Whether he ignores intangibles, I've not seen serious evidence. What exactly did he criticize Wilt about?

Quote:
3) He was never known as a particularly cerebral player or student of the game.

Someone who figured out an out-of-fashion method to shoot over 75-80% from the line was not a student of the game? Would someone who was not cerebral enough be willing to accept a new, passing-first, role in the end of his career? Non-cerebral players are not particularly fond of learning new tricks.

Quote:
4) He played in the same era and actually lost a finals series to Wilt's Sixers. It's easy to see how it benefits his own legacy to prop up Wilt.

He's also played in the same era with Kareem, he's lost a series to peak playoff Kareem, he's also beaten Kareem (that's a reason to prop Kareem), plus, the same excuse could be used for pretty much any player who compliments some legend of his era.

Quote:
Basically Barry's opinion is likely to be biased and how informed he is... also very open to debate.


What's wrong with this? Most good minds are open to debate. And, yes, most opinions are biased, including opinions of people who meet your own standards of "knowing basketball", most of whom would be very unwilling to accept they are wrong in something.


My post wasn't meant to insult Barry. You make some solid points as always.

Of course most opinions are biased and whether someone is informed and to what degree is subject to debate. That's why I don't think that highly of any one player's opinion.

When opinions are more entrenched among the public then they are to be more respected. Of course media and popularity plays a big role in that (Hello Jordan!) but at least a large volume of people is more likely to think from all angles than a single inherently biased individual.

[Sharmer]

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

I should note, these come from such a small sample pool that even if he only shows a move once here, he repeats and/or displays several more moves or variations of the move in Lakers footage despite him scoring less during those years. Because those later Laker years have more coverage. There are several moves of his repertoire that he shows in Laker footage missing from this reel because of the window of time I used and the limited footage from that time. So this isn't 'everything' we are missing some of his less often used moves. But it is a great compilation no doubt of his core/primary moves. (fade aways, turnaround Js, bank shots, finger rolls, reverse Layups, spin moves, transition baskets, tip ins, alley oops etc). Hope you guys enjoy. :cheers:


Wilt > Russell.

[Dr.J4ever]

Please don't misquote me because that's not what I said. What I said is that whether you argue for Wilt and Kareem as the better player it's crazy to say it isn't close either way. It is very close and debatable and nobody in their right mind should say "Wilt easily" or "Kareem easily".

Jordan/Kareem aren't as statistically dominant as Wilt or as great winners as Russell. BUT they are greater winners than Wilt and more statistically dominant than Russell. Ultimately how you rank players depends on how you weigh the different categories. Wilt and Russell are the two extremes while Jordan and Kareem are high on both the winning and dominance scales but not at the top of either.

I personally weigh winning more than sheer numbers. I hugely believe in intangibles and it's a fact that stats can be greatly inflated and correlate poorly with impact. Thus I would have Jordan, Kareem and Russell over Wilt. Again that's just me.
Solid post.. I agree 100%..

[LAZERUSS]

Slightly? Again:


60-66 PPG MPG FG% TS%
PO 32,8 47,5 50,5 52,0
RS 39,6 47,0 51,1 52,9

Drop off in scoring efficiency is in fact marginal (especially if we adjust for competition – he played a lot of games vs Bill Russell), but in scoring volume is huge (and with lower volume we should expect better efficiency!). From 39.6 PPG to 32.8 PPG – it’s 17% drop off!




How overrated Jordan is – that’s different story, but we are talking about Wilt here, so don’t change the topic.

BTW, Jordan in playoffs and regular season from 1988 to 1991:


MPG PPG TS%
PO 41,8 34,5 59,8
RS 39,1 33,1 60,7


So in fact Jordan slightly increased his volume in playoffs and slightly decreased efficiency. Completely different story than Wilt (and MJ vs Bad Boys was still much better scorer than Wilt vs Russell).





Not true. During “Bill Russell era” (60-69) Wilt in first rounds averaged 30.8 PPG on 53.0 TS% in 47.9 MPG. Or 34.6 PPG, 51.5 TS% in 47.8 MPG during his “scoring prime” (60-66). On the other hand Olajuwon in his “scoring prime” (87-95) in first rounds: 29 PPG, 59.1 TS% in 41.1 MPG. So Hakeem was MUCH more efficient and scored on similar volume considering differences in pace and minutes (per 36 “scoring prime” Wilt 26.0 PPG, “scoring prime” Hakeem 25.4 PPG and of course Chamberlain played in much higher pace, so basically their volume is the same, but Olajuwon much more efficient).



And Antoine Walker was consistently making three pointers – but it doesn’t mean he was good three point shooter.

Really, I posted actual numbers – with which you disagree?
On that NCAA footage from 1957 Wilt made 53 shots (so 19.3% of his total FGM during that season)?
Postups, fadeaways and 3 other plays (non transition, cuts or ORB) were 50.9% of his all made shots on that footage?
You disagree with assumption that he made around 75% around the rim (so in transition, cuts or after ORB)? If so, then how efficient around the rim he was in your opinion? In Dippers/Phila NBA sample he made 83% of shots at rim! And in NCAA his competition was much worse (all but 3 of these 53 shots are against white short defenders).

So if he was making around 75% of his attempts at rim, and these attempts were around 50% of his all attempts, that means from postups and fadeaways he was around 34%. That’s in best case scenario, because only insane person would say that he was worse than around 75% at rim. (and in reality he was probably more close to 80% at rime, so around 30% from fadeaways and postups.)

So bottom line is – Wilt often used his fadeaway in earlier years (both NCAA and NBA) and that’s why his efficiency was worse than later, when he focused on at rim shots. But using something often doesn’t mean you are good at that (Antoine Walker’s case). Wilt simply was bad shooter. Even FT% confirms that (there’s high correlation between quality of FT shot and jump shot), as in NCAA he was bad, but not awfully bad shooter (like at the end of his career). Had even some around 60% years in the NBA at the beginning, but with time he was worse and worse, probably because of his mentality and weight training. Anyway, he never, even at his best as a shooter in NCAA, was ok shooter. He shot a lot of fadeaways, but made them at bad rate (around 34% in best case scenario), just like Antoine Walker and his three pointers.

If you disagree, please tell me which numbers are wrong.

I was going to go into an in-depth reply to this with all kinds of stats, but let's do this...

First of all, your college breakdown is pure speculation. It reminds me of Dankok8 claiming that Wilt only shot .518 against Thurmond in the '66-67 regular season, even though three of their H2H's were missing. Well, after I uncovered the fact that all three of the games in which Thurmond missed against Wilt that season (I call them..."Wilt-itis, since he played in games before and after)...had Wilt's totals. Using Lynch's book on the '76ers, which broke down Wilt's FG/FGA against every team in the league that season...we now KNOW that Chamberlain averaged 20.8 ppg, on get this, ...a .633 FG% against Thurmond!

So much for speculation.

Now, here is THE most important fact regarding your FG%'s (actually eFG%'s) and TS%'s: They do NOT account for ERA-adjustments.

Here is a brief breakdown...

Let's use Wilt's 63-64 Finals, and Hakeem's 94-95 Finals, as examples.

Now, before I begin, I don't have the time, nor the patience, to use the typical TS% method, which involves some ridiculous formula, which ultimately weights FTs at .44. Instead, MY TS% formula is simpler, (although it HURTS poorer FT shooters like Wilt somewhat.)

Every FGA, including 3PT FGA is worth 2 pts. Every FTA is worth 1 pt. And every 3PT FGM is worth 1.5 (x2).

Example:

Player A shoots 10-20 in TOTAL FG/FGA, but out of those 20 FGA, he goes 2-5 from the 3pt arc. And he also shoots 7-10 from the FT line.

Here we go:

10-20 FG/FGA, minus 3pt FG/FGA = 8-15 FG/FGA.
2-5 3PT FG/FGA = 6-10 in FGA/FGA
7-10 FT/FTA = 7-10 FT/FTA

His eFG% (which is completely accurate) would be 8-15 x2 , or 16-30, + 6-10, or 22-40 for a .550 eFG%.

His TS% (which varies slightly from the actual formula most often used)

16-30 + 6-10, + 7-10 = 29-50 or .580.


Wilt in the 63-64 Finals, averaged 29.2 ppg on 24 FGAs per game, and 10.6 FTAs per game.

Wilt shot an eFG% of .517, in a post-season NBA that had an eFG% of .420.

Using MY TS% formula (which, again, hurts players like Wilt)

62-120 FG/FGA and 22-53 FT/FTA
124-240 + 22-53 or 146/293, or .498

'64 Post-season NBA averaged 361-860 FG/FGA and 230-322 FT/FTA

361-860 x2 = 722-1720 or that actual .420 eFG%.

722-1720 + 230-322 = 952-2042 of a TS% of .466.

So Wilt shot a Finals TS% of .498, in a post-season NBA that had a TS% of .466.

Chamberlain's eFG% was 9% higher than the post-season league average. And his TS% was 3% higher than the post-season league average. (Incidently, Wilt actually had a career post-season TS% of a 4+% higher TS% than the post-season league league in that period.)

But, even that number is deceptive. In Wilt's era, the FT shooting rules were considerably different. The NBA had single shot fouls, 2-2, 2 to make 1, and 3 to make 2. While we know Wilt's ACTUAL FT% (every FTA was counted), we simply don't know what his EFFECTIVE FT% was. In any case, and using SPECULATION, it was probably higher, and using THAT percentage, and compiling it with his FG%, I suspect that his overall TS% was probably at least 1% higher, if not more.


Now, how about Hakeem's supposed great Finals in '95?

He averaged 32.8 ppg on, get this, 29 FGAs per game. BTW, the entire Rockets team averaged 86 FGAs per game in that series. So Hakeem was essentially taking an 30% of his team's shots. (I don't have the '64 Finals break downs, but I KNOW that there was just no way Wilt's 24 FGAs was anywhere near the huge shot-jacking numbers that Hakeem put up.)

In that series, Hakeem made a total of 56-116 FG/FGAs, and 18-26 FT/FTAs. Included was a 1-1 3pt FG/FGA.

Now, here were the entire Rockets team totals, including Hakeem's:

162-343 FG/FGA, 37-92 3PT FG/FGA, 95-123 FT/FTA

Subtract Hakeem's numbers and you get:

106-227 FG/FGA, 36-91 3PT FG/FGA, and 77-96 FTA


Hakeem's percentages:

55-115 FG/FGA, 1-1 3PT FG/FGA, and 18-26 FT/FTA

110/230 + 3/2 = 113/232 or a .487 eFG%
110/230 + 3/2 + 18/26 = 131/258 or a .508 TS%

Hakeem's teammates:

106/36 and 227-91 = 70/136 FG/FGA
36/91 3PT FG/FGA
78/96 FT/FTA

140/272 + 108/182 = 248/454 or an eFG% of .546
140/272 + 108/182 + 77/96 = 325/550 or an TS% of .591

Post-season NBA league cumulative league averages:

9 games : 324/704 FG/FGA, 61/162 3PT FG/FGA, 197/268 FT/FTA

324/704 - 61/162 = 263/542 FG/FGA, 61-162 3PT FG/FGA, 197/268 FT/FTA

526/1084 + 183/324 = 709/1408 or eFG% of .504 (which was dead on.)

526/1084 + 183/324 + 197/268 = 906/1676 or a TS% of .541.

So, in the '95 Finals, Hakeem had an eFG% of .487, his team had an eFG% of .546, and the post-season league average was .504

And in the '95 Finals, Hakeem had a TS% of .508, his team had an eFG% of .591, and the post-season league average was .541.

Hakeem shot nearly 2% WORSE than the post-season eFG%, and over 3% WORSE than the post-season TS%. And his teammates just wiped the floor's with Shaq's in that Finals, BTW.


As for Hakeem's '95 entire post-season: He had an eFG% of .533 and MY TS% of .544 (and an official .560), again, in a post-season NBA that had an eFG% of .504, and a TS% (MY TS%) of .541. So, he was BARELY above the league averages.

Chamberlain's numbers in his entire '64 post-season? A .543 eFG% in a post-season NBA that shot an eFG% of .420, and a TS% of .529 (again MINE...his actual was .543) in a post-season NBA that shot .466. So Wilt was 12% (!) higher against eFG%, and over 6% higher against league TS%.


You simply HAVE to account for LEAGUE AVERAGES.

And I won't get into "pace" in those series, since Hakeem shot-jacked at a FAR greater frequency than Wilt did.

Chamberlain's post-season eFG% of .522, came in post-season's that shot an eFG% of about .430 to .435, on average, in his 13 post-seasons...or probably about 9% HIGHER.

And his post-season TS%'s were about 4% HIGHER, on average, than the post-season league TS"s in that same span.

Furthermore, his teammates almost always shot worse, to considerably worse in those areas, than the league averages. AND, in the meantime, Chamberlain was DRAMATICALLY reducing the eFG%'s and TS%'s of his OPPOSING centers. And in the majority of his playoff series, he was facing a HOF center. In fact, he faced a HOF starting center in 105 of his 160 post-season games, and then a multiple All-star in 26 more of them. So he was either facing a good, to very great, center, in 131 of his 160 post-season games, and just SLAUGHTERING them in terms of scoring and efficiency.

[LAZERUSS]

And again, Chamberlain faced the Celtics EIGHT times in his 13 post-seasons. Yes, his numbers declined, just as MJ's did against the Bad Boys, and Shaq's did against the Spurs.

How about Wilt's numbers against the Celtics in his "scoring" seasons.

1960: 30.5 ppg on a .500 eFG% (BTW, the post-season NBA shot .402 that season.) During the regular season, Wilt averaged 39 ppg on a .463 FG% against Russell. Incidently, NYCelts84 posted an article in which those two were going H2H for the 11th time, and in it, it mentioned that Russell had shot .399 against Wilt in their first 10 H2H's, in a season in which Russell shot .467. Wilt actually shot higher against Russell in the regular season, than he did against the rest of the league, and then was much higher against him in the post-season.

1962: 33.6 ppg on a .468 eFG%. (BTW, during Wilt's 10 regular season H2H's with Russell, he averaged 39.7 ppg on a .471 FG%.) Oh, and the NBA averaged 118.8 ppg on a .426 eFG% in the regular season, and 112.6 ppg on a .411 eFG% in the playoffs. Russell? He had shot .457 against the NBA in the regular season. Against Wilt in the EDF's... .399.

1964: 29.2 ppg on a .517 eFG%. The NBA averaged 105.8 ppg on a .420 eFG% in that post-season. Oh, and Chamberlain held Russell, who had shot .433 during the regular season, to a .386 eFG% in that series.

1965: 30.1 ppg on a .555 eFG%, in a post-season NBA that had an eFG% of .429. Oh, and during their regular season H2H's, Wilt "only" averaged 25.3 ppg on a .473 eFG%. So, he was WAY ahead of his regular season numbers against Russell, and was considerably more efficient against him in the '65 EDF's, than he was against the entire league during the regular season.

1966. 28.0 ppg on a .509 eFG%, in a post-season NBA that had an eFG% of .441. In his nine regular season H2H's with Russell, Wilt averaged 28.3 ppg on an estimated .525 eFG%.

In those five post-seasons, covering 30 H2H games, Chamberlain collectively averaged 30.5 ppg on a .508 eFG% (in league's that averaged about a .421 eFG% in that span.



How about MJ in his four post-seasons against the Pistons?

1988: 27.4 ppg on an eFG% of .495. During the regular season against the NBA Jordan averaged 35.0 ppg on a .533 eFG%.

1989: 29.7 ppg on an eFG% of .476. During the regular season against the NBA, he averaged 32.5 ppg on a .546 eFG%.

1990: 32.1 ppg on a .485 eFG%. Regular season: 33.6 ppg on a .550 eFG%.

1991: 29.8 ppg on a .556 eFG%. Regular season: 31.5 ppg on a .547 eFG%.


Shaq against the Spurs in the post-season:

1999: 23.8 ppg on a .493 eFG%. Against the NBA during the regular season: 26.3 ppg on a .576 eFG%.

2001: 27.0 ppg on a .541 eFG%. Regular season: 28.7 ppg on a .572 eFG%.

2002: 21.4 ppg on a .447 eFG%. Regular season: 27.2 ppg on a .579 eFG%.

2003: 25.3 ppg on a .559 eFG%. Regular season: 27.5 ppg on a .574 eFG%.

2004: 22.5 ppg on a .635 eFG%. Regular season: 21.5 ppg on a .584 eFG%.

Both players generally declined across the board.



Oh, and how about a PEAK Kareem against Nate Thurmond in his three straight post-season H2H series from '71 thru '73?

In his 70-71 post-season against Thurmond, he averaged 27.8 ppg on an eFG% of .486. BTW, against an old Chamberlain... 25.0 ppg on a .481 eFG%. And in that regular season, KAJ averaged 31.7 ppg on an eFG% of .577. A HORRIBLE drop.

But it would get worse.

In his 71-72 playoff series against Thurmond, he averaged 22.8 ppg on, get this... an eFG% of .405!. BTW, Thurmond averaged 25.4 ppg on a .438 eFG% against Kareem in that series. Incidently, against an old Chamberlain...33.7 ppg on a .457 eFG% (and olnly .414 over the course of his last four games.) During the regular season: 34.8 ppg on an eFG% of .574.

And in his 72-73 playoff series against Thurmond... 22.8 ppg on an eFG% of .428. In a season in which he averaged 30.2 ppg on a .554 eFG%.

Hell, if Kareem would have had to battle Nate and Wilt for EIGHT post-seasons, his post-season numbers likely would have been just dreadful.


Yet Chamberlain was ripped for his "declines"?

[LAZERUSS]

I have mentioned this before, but will do again...

You simply HAVE to make adjustments for ERAs in these discussions.

I have never had anyone explain to me how players whose careers spanned the early to late 60's (and into the 70's)...generally shot better, to MUCH better in the late 60's. Or player-after-player whose career spanned the 60's and 70's...better, to much better in the 70's. Same with those that spanned the 70'as and 80's. BUT, then, even the CENTERS of the 80's, had their FG% efficiencies just plummet in the 90's.

Darrall Imhoff...three seasons in the early 60's of eFG%'s of .394, .386, and even .314. And by 69-70... a .540 FG%.

Johnny Green. Seasons of .430 and .436 in the early 60's. By the 70's, he was leading the league at .587 (BTW, that was the highest non-Wilt FG% of the Chamberlain-era), and .570.

John Havlicek. He played eight seasons in the 60's, and eight seasons in the 70's. Guess what? He shot better EVERY season in the 70's, than he did in his best season of the 60's. Hell, in the mid-60's he had a season of .399.

Rick Barry. Averaged 35.6 ppg on a .451 FG% in '67. In '75 he averaged 30.6 ppg on a .464 eFG%.

Elgin Baylor. Seasons as low as .401 in the early 60's, and as high as .486 in the late 60's.

Jerry West. Interesting. Watch footage of his shooting form in the '62 all-star game. EXACTLY the same form he would have his entire career. In that '62 season he shot .445, and the year before, he shot .419. By the late 60's he was shooting as high as .514.

Chamberlain. How do you explain Wilt shooting .461 in a season? You can't. By the mid-60's he was averaging 34 ppg on a .540 eFG% and in leagues that were shooting .433. The next year he averaged 24 ppg on a .683 eFG% and in a league that shot an eFG% of .441.


Kareem. In the 70's he had seasons of .539, .529, .518, and even .513 (in the middle of the decade.) In the first eight seasons of the 80's, he never shot lower than .564, and had his highest seasons of .604 and .599. BUT, a peak Kareem couldn't hit the Grand Canyon from the ledge against Thurmond in 40 H2H games (he shot .440 in those career H2H's.) And yet a 38-39 year old KAJ was scoring 33 pgg on a .621 FG% in the span of ten straight games against Hakeem. In fact, a 37-41 year old KAJ outscored Hakeem in their 23 H2H's, and outshot him by a .607 to .512 margin.

Gilmore. A prime 27 year old Gilmore averaged 18.6 ppg on a .522 FG% in the 70's. A 35 year old Gilmore averaged 19.1 ppg on a .623 FG%. And Gilmore's high FG% season in the 70's was .575. In the 80's he had seasons of .618, .623, .626, .631, .652, and .670.

Dantley. He shot .510, .512, and .520 in his three seasons in the 70's. In the 80's he put up four straight seasons of 30 ppg and on eFG%'s of .558, .559, .570, and .580.

Gervin. In the early 70's he was a 23 ppg scorer on about 50%. By the late 70's and into the 80's, he was scoring 30 ppg and shooting .540.

Did all these guys learn to shoot later in their careers?


And conversely, how about the best CENTERS of the 80's and 90's.

Hakeem. Highest FG% season came in his ROOKIE season, at .538. He followed that up with a .526 his very next season. He finally topped that .526 with seasons of .528 and .529 in the mid-90's, and then slowly declined.

Ewing. In the 80's, and in his 3rd, 4th, and fifth seasons, he shot .555, .567, and .551. He theen just crumbled and would be shooting as poorly as .496 at age 31, and then even worse after that.

Robinson. He didn't join the NBA until the 89-90 season, but in that rookie season he shot .531. In his next two years he would shoot .552 and .551. From that point on, a solid decline. A prime Admiral was only shooting .507 in his highest scoring season.

And keep in mind that the league eFG%'s of the 80's and 90's were generally in the .490 to even .500 range (94-95.)


And how about this... in the 58-59 season, the NBA shot .756 from the FT line. After Wilt retired in the 73-74 season, the NBA shot .771 from the line. Last year the NBA shot .753 from the line, and guess what, that is what the current NBA is shooting this year, as well.

[trueDS]

I was going to go into an in-depth reply to this with all kinds of stats, but let's do this...

First of all, your college breakdown is pure speculation. It reminds me of Dankok8 claiming that Wilt only shot .518 against Thurmond in the '66-67 regular season, even though three of their H2H's were missing. Well, after I uncovered the fact that all three of the games in which Thurmond missed against Wilt that season (I call them..."Wilt-itis, since he played in games before and after)...had Wilt's totals. Using Lynch's book on the '76ers, which broke down Wilt's FG/FGA against every team in the league that season...we now KNOW that Chamberlain averaged 20.8 ppg, on get this, ...a .633 FG% against Thurmond!

So much for speculation.

You still didn't answer to the point!
Which of my Wilt's NCAA numbers aren't true? Could you be specific and don't change topic to other things?

I will bold them to you:

[quote]
Really, I posted actual numbers

[CavaliersFTW]

You still didn't answer to the point!
Which of my Wilt's NCAA numbers aren't true? Could you be specific and don't change topic to other things?

I will bold them to you:
None of your numbers are anything beyond imaginary. Do actual research, you bring literally nothing to the table by speculating. Quit being such a lazy **** and watch those games and count his field goals and attempts. Get this speculative bullshit out of here there is no place for it when the actual games exist, you're just being incredibly lazy and unhelpful otherwise.

[trueDS]

You simply HAVE to account for LEAGUE AVERAGES.


So stop using some strange modifications and simply do it.

I will show several players in their all playoffs runs, when they averaged at least 20ppg and how their PPG and TS% relatively league average are:



MPG PPG TS% player
46,3 28,6 8,0 Oscar Robertson*
37,6 25,4 6,7 Adrian Dantley*
40,1 27,3 5,4 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar*
41,8 29,5 4,9 Jerry West*
40,7 27,3 3,8 Hakeem Olajuwon*
47,6 28,0 3,6 Wilt Chamberlain*


So Wilt is slightly worse than Hakeem, significantly worse than KAJ and much, much worse than Oscar.

Besides keep in mind you Wilt's lovers don't use his playoffs numbers to show his greatness. You use mostly regular season numbers, 50 ppg, 100 pts and so on. That's why it's important to look at Wilt's drop off from regular season to playoffs. Because no doubt he was good player in playoffs, but simply not dominant as his regular season numbers suggest.

In other words - please, show that Wilt was unstoppable scorer, but use only playoffs. Forget about regular season, it's really not that much important.

[trueDS]

One more table, all at least 18 ppg scorers in playoffs during Wilt's scoring prime (60-66). No need to adjust TS% to league average, because they all played in the same league:



G MP AST PTS TS% Player
35 47.0 9.2 30.3 .562 Oscar Robertson*
68 41.9 4.9 31.3 .553 Jerry West*
10 42.7 3.4 20.9 .527 Walt Bellamy*
52 47.5 3.2 32.8 .520 Wilt Chamberlain*
26 36.6 5.7 18.9 .518 Richie Guerin*
89 32.2 2.5 20.6 .513 Sam Jones*
67 43.2 4.1 32.5 .512 Elgin Baylor*
4 39.8 1.5 20.0 .510 Dave DeBusschere*
53 40.6 3.1 25.6 .508 Bob Pettit*
32 31.9 1.9 18.3 .507 Jack Twyman*
33 36.7 2.4 18.2 .502 Bailey Howell*
89 46.6 4.8 18.7 .498 Bill Russell*
38 38.9 4.1 19.4 .496 Hal Greer*
63 31.3 3.6 18.9 .495 Cliff Hagan*
10 31.5 1.6 18.7 .491 Joe Caldwell
24 38.0 2.2 18.5 .481 Tom Meschery
30 38.2 3.1 21.8 .481 Don Ohl
24 39.8 3.0 24.3 .478 Paul Arizin*
13 29.8 1.2 19.0 .465 Lee Shaffer
72 29.9 2.0 19.7 .456 Tom Heinsohn*
50 33.3 3.0 18.2 .449 John Havlicek*



Wilt is among the best, but no way he is the best scorer. That title belongs to Oscar or West and Wilt is a level below with Baylor.

[trueDS]

And one more thing: playoffs only vs Russell's Celtics:



vs BOS MPG PPG TS% APG
Wilt 47,4 25,7 51,7 4,1
West 44,2 33,0 55,2 4,9
Oscar 46,6 31,4 54,0 7,5
Wilt60-66 47,3 30,5 52,2 2,7


West and Oscar were clearly better scorers against Celtics defense. So Chambrlain wasn't even the best scorer of his era, not to mention all time...

[LAZERUSS]

One more table, all at least 18 ppg scorers in playoffs during Wilt's scoring prime (60-66). No need to adjust TS% to league average, because they all played in the same league:



G MP AST PTS TS% Player
35 47.0 9.2 30.3 .562 Oscar Robertson*
68 41.9 4.9 31.3 .553 Jerry West*
10 42.7 3.4 20.9 .527 Walt Bellamy*
52 47.5 3.2 32.8 .520 Wilt Chamberlain*
26 36.6 5.7 18.9 .518 Richie Guerin*
89 32.2 2.5 20.6 .513 Sam Jones*
67 43.2 4.1 32.5 .512 Elgin Baylor*
4 39.8 1.5 20.0 .510 Dave DeBusschere*
53 40.6 3.1 25.6 .508 Bob Pettit*
32 31.9 1.9 18.3 .507 Jack Twyman*
33 36.7 2.4 18.2 .502 Bailey Howell*
89 46.6 4.8 18.7 .498 Bill Russell*
38 38.9 4.1 19.4 .496 Hal Greer*
63 31.3 3.6 18.9 .495 Cliff Hagan*
10 31.5 1.6 18.7 .491 Joe Caldwell
24 38.0 2.2 18.5 .481 Tom Meschery
30 38.2 3.1 21.8 .481 Don Ohl
24 39.8 3.0 24.3 .478 Paul Arizin*
13 29.8 1.2 19.0 .465 Lee Shaffer
72 29.9 2.0 19.7 .456 Tom Heinsohn*
50 33.3 3.0 18.2 .449 John Havlicek*



Wilt is among the best, but no way he is the best scorer. That title belongs to Oscar or West and Wilt is a level below with Baylor.

Chamberlain played against RUSSELL and his SWARMING CELTICS in 30 of his 52 SCORING PRIME post-season games. You can ask your buddies at RealGM what they think about Russel and his Celtics defensively from 60-66. Oh, and Wilt, with a cast of clowns roster, gave Russell's Celtics all they could handle, and in fact, BEAT Russell's Celtics, while a PRIME Baylor and West combined couldn't. Much less Oscar, who had as much surrounding talent as Wilt in the 60's.

And YES, we HAVE to account for ERA LEAGUE AVERAGE in ANY of these CROSS ERA discussions.

Furthermore, Chamberlain's IMPACT at the FT LINE went WELL beyond his FT%. Take a look at his team's regular season FTAs, and post-season FTAs. Hell, they won entire playoff series BECAUSE of HIS impact at the line.

And again, this so-called efficient scoring Kareem couldn't hit an ocean from a lifeboat against Thurmond nor Wilt in the playoffs.

Had Wilt been going up the centers and NON-CENTERS that a prime Hakeem faced, and in the 80's and 90's, when EFFICIENCY was OFF THE CHARTS across the ENTIRE NBA, he would have been putting up astronomical numbers.

My god, there were 30-52 teams shooting .504 from the field in the mid-80's. The ENTIRE league was at nearly 50%. And in the 90's, and using eFG%, the leagues were shooting at 50%.

I'm sorry, but you are a sad case.

Another Wilt-basher who will use ANY NONSENSE to detract from what he accomplished.

Again, Wilt SINGLE-HANDEDLY, and I mean SINGLE-HANDEDLY was carry PUTRID rosters, that PLAYED WORSE, to near monumental upsets of the greatest Dynasty in NBA history.

[trueDS]

Chamberlain played against RUSSELL and his SWARMING CELTICS in 30 of his 52 SCORING PRIME post-season games.

I love how you guys ignore presented facts:


And one more thing: playoffs only vs Russell's Celtics:



vs BOS MPG PPG TS% APG
Wilt 47,4 25,7 51,7 4,1
West 44,2 33,0 55,2 4,9
Oscar 46,6 31,4 54,0 7,5
Wilt60-66 47,3 30,5 52,2 2,7


West and Oscar were clearly better scorers against Celtics defense. So Chambrlain wasn't even the best scorer of his era, not to mention all time...

[dankok8]

And one more thing: playoffs only vs Russell's Celtics:

Code:

vs BOS MPG PPG TS% APG Wilt 47,4 25,7 51,7 4,1 West 44,2 33,0 55,2 4,9 Oscar 46,6 31,4 54,0 7,5 Wilt60-66 47,3 30,5 52,2 2,7


West and Oscar were clearly better scorers against Celtics defense. So Chambrlain wasn't even the best scorer of his era, not to mention all time...

So true. And add a healthy Baylor and maybe Pettit to that list as well. Wilt struggled against Boston more than those other players. Of course much of that has to do with being defended directly by Russell. But we know Russ did spend significant time defending Pettit in the finals and he was even on Baylor for the last 3 games of the 1962 Finals.

How many players did better against the Bad Boy Pistons than MJ? How many players did better than Shaq vs the Spurs?

Also I don't like the idea of correcting the FG%... In 65-66 Wilt shot 54.0% and the very next season he shot 68.3%. What prevented him from shooting better in 65-66 or heck even 61-62? The league was basically the same and with such inflated rebounding totals you'd think he'd get a lot of easy baskets on putbacks. Of course he shot better in 66-67 because he took far fewer shots.

LAZERUSS likes to correct and compare PPG and FG% like they were completely unrelated without noticing the clear correlation between shot attempts and efficiency. 30 ppg on 55% shooting is far more impressive than 20 ppg on 60% shooting. PPG without FG% and vice versa is worthless.

And no I never speculated on Wilt's stats. Don't misquote me. When I talked about the 66-67 season I always specified when the FG% data was incomplete. But thanks for playing.

[LAZERUSS]

So true. And add a healthy Baylor and maybe Pettit to that list as well. Wilt struggled against Boston more than those other players. Of course much of that has to do with being defended directly by Russell. But we know Russ did spend significant time defending Pettit in the finals and he was even on Baylor for the last 3 games of the 1962 Finals.

How many players did better against the Bad Boy Pistons than MJ? How many players did better than Shaq vs the Spurs?

Also I don't like the idea of correcting the FG%... In 65-66 Wilt shot 54.0% and the very next season he shot 68.3%. What prevented him from shooting better in 65-66 or heck even 61-62? The league was basically the same and with such inflated rebounding totals you'd think he'd get a lot of easy baskets on putbacks. Of course he shot better in 66-67 because he took far fewer shots.

LAZERUSS likes to correct and compare PPG and FG% like they were completely unrelated without noticing the clear correlation between shot attempts and efficiency. 30 ppg on 55% shooting is far more impressive than 20 ppg on 60% shooting. PPG without FG% and vice versa is worthless.

And no I never speculated on Wilt's stats. Don't misquote me. When I talked about the 66-67 season I always specified when the FG% data was incomplete. But thanks for playing.

Let's start with this, shall we...


In Chamberlain's first year, and for several years afterward, opposing teams simply didn't know how to handle him. Tom Heinsohn, the great Celtics forward who later became a coach and broadcaster, said Boston was one of the first clubs to apply a team-defense concept to stop Chamberlain. "We went for his weakness," Heinsohn told the Philadelphia Daily News in 1991, "tried to send him to the foul line, and in doing that he took the most brutal pounding of any player ever.. I hear people today talk about hard fouls. Half the fouls against him were hard fouls."

http://samcelt.forumotion.net/t2803-wilt-meets-bill-and-tommy-4000-words


One distinct advantage which Bill had over Wilt was his coach, Red Auerbach. Red understood basketball and people inside out. Red took Wilt’s measure when Wilt was a teenager at Kutscher’s.

The strategy that Red and Bill worked out to contain Wilt was simple: tire Wilt out by making him run full speed on every play; deny him the ball on offense; deny him position; if the pass is lobbed inside, swarm him with Celtics; if he gets the ball, let Russell play him man to man; as a last resort, if he gets past Russell, have Heinsohn foul him.



That assignment was given to Tommy Heinsohn. When Wilt got the ball in the low post, Tommy was detailed to stop him - punch the ball, grab his arms, and, if nothing else worked, tackle the giant. Tommy’s courage was legendary, as he proved repeatedly over the course of his career, but putting him up against Wilt seemed a horrendous mismatch. Tommy was a full head shorter and fifty pounds lighter and wasn’t the only one who considered Wilt the strongest man in the world, once calling him “King Kong in sneakers”.


With Red urging him on, Tommy didn’t just settle for blocking Wilt’s path. When fighting for position, going for rebounds, they were pushing and shoving and clutching and grabbing.

In one of these encounters under the basket, Tommy jabbed Wilt with an elbow. Wilt lost his temper and shoved Tommy so hard he fell backwards and slid all the way to center court. Wilt charged after him with fists clenched and fury in his eyes. The crowd went wild. Players poured from both benches.

Tommy started to get up and Wilt swung a wild roundhouse right at Tommy’s chin just as Tom Gola jumped between the two. Wilt connected full force with the back of Gola’s head as the crowd noise reached a crescendo. Gola went down. Tommy started throwing punches that seemed to bounce right off the Big Dipper. Then, somehow, Wilt was on the floor with Tommy standing over him ready to eat his lunch.

Johnny Most gargled into the microphone: “Believe it or not, the Stilt’s punches are even less accurate than his free throw shooting! He just decked his own teammate!”

Wilt was lucky he didn’t break any bones in his hand, but his knuckle joints were severely bruised and, by halftime, his hand was badly swollen. He continued playing but had trouble handling the ball. It was a sloppily played game by both teams and the Warriors pulled out the win.

Wilt took the floor for Game Three with his hand wrapped in a bandage. It was so swollen and sore he could hardly move his fingers. He played poorly. At one point, he pulled down a rebound, turned to look up court, and Tommy was there. Tommy punched at the ball, missed, and hit Wilt hard on the injured hand. Wilt danced around in serious pain. Tommy was called for the foul.

Wilt stood at the foul line and sent a murderous glare Tommy’s way. Tommy didn’t grab a photographer’s stool for protection. He didn’t even run out of the stadium the way he did when Red chased him over the exploding cigar. Tommy stood his ground, or, in this case, parquet, and fearlessly stared back. In their glaring contest, Wilt turned away first.

By the time his coach, Neil Johnston, removed him in the third quarter of Game Three, Wilt had only scored twelve points, his hand was practically useless, and the Celtics were running away with the game. The hand bothered him again in Game Four, which the Celtics took for a 3-1 series lead.

In Game Five in the sold-out Garden, Wilt shrugged off the swollen hand and turned in the kind of performance that Bill Russell had feared: he scored fifty points and led his team to an easy 128-107 win. The result shocked the Celtics and gave the momentum back to Philadelphia


K.C. Jones, arguably the savviest team player in the history of the game, was also a rookie that year and had a front row seat for Bill and Wilt's encounters. "Bill didn't do it all. We just used TEAM. That's a word that's thrown out all over the place, but the total personification of team is what we used. We used everybody's ability, and everybody had a role out there that was natural for them. Whoever was guarding the ball had four guys back there helping his ass out. The whole is bigger than the sum of the parts; we wrote that without knowing the phrase. We knew how good we were. And we knew how to use one another because we knew one another. The most important part of it was the understanding that we had of each teammate - what this guy likes and what that guy doesn't like and who can't play defense and who shoots the ball well. We used all that. If a guy couldn't play defense, we were there, picking him up. Let each guy do what he does best."

Years later, Wilt proved that he never quite understood what K.C. was saying. "What people don't realize," he opined, "is that it was never Wilt versus Russell. I never got, or needed, any help guarding Russell. But for Russ, it was always one or two other guys helping him. He never guarded me straight up."

Now, we know that Russell was a proud man. Do you think he would sit next during an interview in which Chamberlain states this,


"Now when I get the ball, instead of having two and three people, and Russ at the same time..."

Listen at the five minute mark...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=173M7ApCNKw

Again...Wilt faced RUSSELL, arguably the greatest defensive center of ALL-TIME, EIGHT times in his post-season career, and FIVE times in his "scoring" seasons (in fact, 30 of his 52 post-season games in that span.) Not only that, but there are those here who have suggested that BOSTON's team defenses from 60-66 were among the greatest ever.

But, when I bring up MJ's considerable decline against the Bad Boys in his four post-seasons, or Shaq's considerable decline against the Spurs in five post-season series, or even KAJ's DRAMATIC declines against Thurmond and Wilt in five playoff series...they either ignore it, or give it a light pass.


Fpliii has suggested, and quite correctly, that Wilt's teammates were such poor shooters, that opposing teams just sagged on Wilt.

And yet the Wilt-bashers will say that Wilt was much less effective in the post-season???

As for using TS% against Chamberlain...

Again, because of the FT shooting rules at the time, Fpliii's research has indicated that Wilt's EFFECTIVE FT% shooting was somewhat higher than his ACTUAL FT%. In fact, I would claim it was CONSIDERABLY higher. Why? Because with rules that had shooting fouls with 3-to-make2, and 2-to-make 1 (on made FGAs.) Think about that. In virtually very 2-to-1 situation, (and Wilt, along with Shaq were obviously the two of the greatest "and one" players of all-time), even if he missed both, it had no more impact than if he missed one in the current NBA. BUT, if he he made the second one, it was essentially the same as going 1-1. Same with the many 3-to-make-2's that he had in his career. The extra foul shot could only have helped his EFFECTIVE FT%'s.

So, with speculation, which is of course, what the Wilt-bashers use ALL the time, I would argue that Wilt's TS%, in both regular seasons, AND especially his post-seasons, was actually CONSIDERABLY higher in terms of EFFECTIVE TS%.

And, of course, the Wilt-bashers always avoid eFG% against LEAGUE AVERAGE eFG%, in which Chamberlain was miles ahead of his peers, and likely had the greatest separation against his peers than any other NBA player had against their's.

[LAZERUSS]

The Wilt-bashers love to bring up Chamberlain's FT shooting in any discussions about Chamberlain. But they completely ignore his IMPACT from the line. His teammates BENEFITTED greatly from his propensity to draw fouls. They were in the bonus much quicker, and much more often. And the opposing players were foul trouble sooner, and more often, which resulted in either playing softer defensively, or heading to the bench.

How about this IMPACT? Wilt's teams were almost always among the leaders in FTAs, and often LED the NBA in FTAs. His 66-67 Sixers, which went 68-13 BTW, were MILES ahead of the next best team. And, in the Finals, the Warriors matched Philly's FGMs in that series. And yet, the Sixers won the series easily. Why? Because even though Chamberlain himself only shot 22-72 from the stripe, his team annihilated the Warriors from the line in MAKES.

And how about this? In the 68-69 season, Chamberlain's Lakers LED the NBA in FTAs in BOTH the regular season, AND post-season. And they outscored Boston by a good margin the Finals, despite shooting horribly from the field in that series. In fact, in game seven, if you subtract both Russell's and Wilt's FG/FGAs, Boston outshot LA by a .477 to .360 margin from the field in that game, and yet had to hang on for a two point win.

Again, the 68-69 Lakers led the NBA in FTAs in both the regular season AND post-season. In the 69-70 season, Wilt went down with an injury early in the season, and would miss 70 games. The result? The Lakers plummeted to 12th, in a 14 team league. BUT, Wilt returned for the playoffs, and LA shot 200 more FTAs than the next best team. And they lost a seven game series to the heavily-favored Knicks, but OUTSCORED them by over 50 points from the line.

And while Wilt was a poor FT shooter (although not nearly as bad early in his NBA career), he still MADE FTs. He currently ranks 16th all-time in FTs MADE, in NBA history. Which had him ahead of players like Robinson, Duncan, Olajuwon, Havlicek, Magic, and Bird. Hell, he MADE 2000 more FTs than Bird did in his career.

And even in the post-season, he was consistently OUTSCORING his opposing centers from the LINE. In fact, he OUTSCORED his opposing center from the line in EVERY one of his six Finals.

Again, Wilt's IMPACT from the line went way beyond his own poor shooting.

[trueDS]

Not only Wilt played vs Celtics and Oscar or West were much better against Boston dynasty.

Besides we could as well check how they looked in playoffs vs teams other than Celtics:



vs others MPG PPG TS% APG PPG per36
Oscar 47,0 28,4 59,0 11,0 21,8
West 40,5 30,0 56,1 5,8 26,7
Wilt 47,5 27,2 52,7 4,7 20,6
Baylor 41,4 28,7 50,2 4,2 25,0


So once again Wilt doesn't look as unstoppable scorer. In fact he is significantly worse scorer than West or Oscar and on the level of Baylor (better efficiency, but worse volume).

EDIT
Who cares about being 1st in FTA? Offensive impact matters and Wilt's teams usually weren't so good offensively. Just check ORTG.... so his enormous amounts of FTAs doesn't mean a lot, because he missed them.

[trueDS]

Wilt's teams ORTG rank:

1960 - 7th (in a 8 team league)
1961 - 6th (of 8)
1962 - 4th (of 9) first season when Wilt's team is above (slightly) average offensively
1963 - 5th (of 9)
1964 - 7th (of 9)
1965 SFW - 9th (of 9)
1965 PHI - 5th (of 9) second time his team is barely above average offensively, but he didn't play whole season
1966 - 6th (of 9) again barely above average
1967 - 1st (of 10) first really good offensive team with Wilt, but he wasn't volume scorer anymore and later he played with West, so Lakers teams were usually good on offense - but again Wilt wasn't volume scorer anymore. So where is his offensive impact as a "unstoppable scorer"?

Because there are really only two options: either Wilt's teammates were so bad offensively or Wilt's volume scoring is overrated and as a volume scorer he didn't have big impact on offense.

More likely the second one is true, because Arizin, Gola or Rodgers in no way were bad offensively. For instance Warriors with Arizin before Wilt ranked offensively:

1951 - 6th (of 11)
1952 - 3rd (of 10)
1955 - 6th (of 8)
1956 - 1st (of 8)
1957 - 1st (of 8)
1958 - 4th (of 8)
1959 - 8th (of 8)

Sure, they had Neil Johnston, but Wilt in his place didn't produced better offensive results.

[LAZERUSS]

And the Wilt-bashers will never acknowledge the fact that a PRIME Chamberlain, dominated his peers, both in regular season, AND post-season play, more than any other all-time "great."

This was the case every season from 60-68. If you factor in his absolute demolition of Reed in their 12 H2H's in the 64-65 season, with his castration of Bellamy, Thurmond, and Russell in both the 65-66 and 66-67 seasons and post-seasons, there has never been another center who just obliterated his HOF peers over the course of regular season, AND post-season play, as much as Wilt did in those years.

He was heavily outscoring, massively outshooting from the field, crushing them on the glass, outassisting them, outblocking them, and even outscoring them from the FT line. His separation was just staggering. And, as we know, he annihilated Thurmond in the 65-66 season in SCORING (and likely by a huge margin in efficiency), including margins of 33-17, 33-10, 38-15 and even 45-13. Then he destroyed a peak Thurmond in every facet in 66-67 including unfathomable FG%s. A peak KAJ, facing a fading Nate, never approached those numbers against Thurmond.

In fact, a peak/prime Kareem never came close to the carpet-bombing that a prime Wilt wrought, and against many of the same centers (and most were on the dec,ine when Kareem got them.) Chamberlain had entire H2H SEASONS, covering 9-12 games, in which he AVERAGED more than a KAJ's HIGH GAME against them.

And again, had Wilt not battled RUSSELL and the his Celtics in 30 of his first 52 playoff games in his scoring prime, there is no telling what kind of playoff scoring records he would hold today. Had his team been able to score three more points against the heavily-favored Celtics in the '62 EDF's, and he would have faced a Laker team that he had averaged 51.5 ppg in nine regular season H2H's. In fact, Russell, who shot .399 against Wilt in that series, would go on to average 23 ppg on a .543 FG% against LA in a seven game Finals, including a game seven of 30 points and 40 rebounds. Wilt, had THREE games of 60+ points against LA in his seasonal H2H's, including a 78-43 game.

And had Chamberlain's '65 Sixers scored two more points in game seven against Boston, and he would have again faced the Lakers in the Finals. Think about this...in the '65 EDF's, Wilt averaged 30.1 ppg, 31.4 rpg, shot .583 from the line, and shot a staggering .555 against Russell, while holding Russell to 15.6 ppg on a .447 eFG%. Russell would go on to average 18 ppg on a ...get this... .702 eFG% against the Lakers in the Finals. Just what would THAT Chamberlain have shelled LA with?

Yep. The "declining" Wilt. The Chamberlain who could "only" put up playoff series against Russell (and his swarming Celtics), of 30.5 ppg on a .500 eFG% (in a post-season NBA that shot .402); 33.6 ppg on a .468 eFG% (in a post-season NBA that shot .411); 29.2 ppg on a .517 eFG% (in a post-season NBA that shot .420); 30.1 ppg on a .555 eFG% (in a post-season NBA that shot .429); 28.0 ppg on a .509 eFG% (in a post-season NBA that had an eFG% of .441), 21.6 ppg on a .560 eFG% (in a post-season NBA that shot .428); and an injury-plagued 22.1 ppg on a .487 eFG% (in a post-season NBA that shot .446.) All while carrying pathetic rosters to near upsets, while crushing Russell on the glass, and dramatically reducing Russell's efficiencies FAR more than what Russell did to his.

What a "flop."