Who is the GOAT: Kareem or MJ?

[BigBoss]

Kobe

[G0ATbe]

Kobe. Kareem is 2nd though.

[fiddy]

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

[LAZERUSS]

Neither.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Wilt > Kareem, so Kareem is immediately out of the discussion.

[SexSymbol]

Bill Russell and it's not even close.
He's the greatest leader, defender and winner of all time.

[Dragic4Life]

Kareem doesn't even deserve to be in the top 5 let alone GOAT.:facepalm

[LAZERUSS]

Kareem doesn't even deserve to be in the top 5 let alone GOAT.:facepalm

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Yeah...the list of players with 6 MVPs and 6 rings is a long one.

[LAZERUSS]

Bill Russell and it's not even close.
He's the greatest leader, defender and winner of all time.

Russell has a case...but think about this:

In their 10 years in the league together, Chamberlain held a 7-2 margin in First-Team All-NBA selections over Russell.

[SexSymbol]

Kareem doesn't even deserve to be in the top 5 let alone GOAT.:facepalm
Why do mods let this piece of shit get back to the forum?
Just ban him forever, ban his IP, don't let him or his alts post more. I don't think he even garners any attention anymore, he just says plain stupid shit that nobody gives a shit about and litters the forum whichever thread he's in.

[MP.Trey]

1. MJ
2. Russell
3. Kareem/Wilt (Hard to choose)

[SexSymbol]

Russell has a case...but think about this:

In their 10 years in the league together, Chamberlain held a 7-2 margin in First-Team All-NBA selections over Russell.
Irrelevant.
I don't give a shit about MVPs, all-nba selections, all-start selections or anything else except for rings as it is all that matters because every team, every player plays for that thing.
And when a player gets 11 rings which is unheard of from anybody else, there is no argument, he is the best player of all time, all others are just pretenders.
I do love Wilt, aside from all the times I trashed your opinion because of the way it was presented, and I think he's somewhere in the top 10, but when you have to grasp at all-nba selections, you know you're not gonna win the argument

[Uncle Drew]

Russell has a case...but think about this:

In their 10 years in the league together, Chamberlain held a 7-2 margin in First-Team All-NBA selections over Russell.
Thats nice. How many rings though?

[colts19]

It's pretty simple really.

Russell, the greatest winner of all time.
Wilt the greatest player of all time. As Larry Legend once said. Prople make me and Magic and Jordan the greatest of all time, they need to check the record book.

[LAZERUSS]

Thats nice. How many rings though?

RINGS are a TEAM accomplishment.

How come MJ's '86 Bulls were SWEPT by Bird's Celtics in the first round? I guess MJ hurt his team with that 44 ppg series, right?

And if MJ gets a pass because his 30-52 team was blown out by Bird's 67-15 team...then how about Wilt's teams throughout the 60's? Chamberlain took inept squads to nearly beating Russell's HOF-laden teams in '62 and '65 and had they had equal rosters, that were healthy, like '67...well, all you need to know is that Wilt and his TEAM just annihilated Russell and his eight-time defending champion Celtics.

Again...RINGS are a TEAM accomplishment.

[Uncle Drew]

RINGS are a TEAM accomplishment.

How come MJ's '86 Bulls were SWEPT by Bird's Celtics in the first round? I guess MJ hurt his team with that 44 ppg series, right?

And if MJ gets a pass because his 30-52 team was blown out by Bird's 67-15 team...then how about Wilt's teams throughout the 60's? Chamberlain took inept squads to nearly beating Russell's HOF-laden teams in '62 and '65 and had they had equal rosters, that were healthy, like '67...well, all you need to know is that Wilt and his TEAM just annihilated Russell and his eight-time defending champion Celtics.

Again...RINGS are a TEAM accomplishment.
Please answer my question.

[LAZERUSS]

Please answer my question.

I did.

TEAM game. Russell and MJ never even won one ring. Their TEAMs did.

Next...

[Uncle Drew]

I did.

TEAM game. Russell and MJ never even won one ring. Their TEAMs did.

Next...
They haven't won one indeed, they respectively won eleven and six rings. How many did Wilt win though? And don't give me more of that team accomplishment bs please.

http://scalabrinealert.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/MJ-Celebrating-Six-Titles.gif

[LAZERUSS]

They haven't won one indeed, they respectively won eleven and six rings. How many did Wilt win though? And don't give me more of that team accomplishment bs please.

http://scalabrinealert.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/MJ-Celebrating-Six-Titles.gif

I could argue that PIPPEN won those six rings. He certainly had a better "winning" career than MJ did. And I could argue that Sam Jones won 10 rings and that Russell was along for the ride in those ten years.

Oh, and I guess Bird was easily the greater player than MJ, right? A 6-0 playoff record. Hell, Dumars held a 3-1 post-season series record over MJ (whose numbers declined considerably against the "Bad Boys")

[Uncle Drew]

I could argue that PIPPEN won those six rings.
Go ahead. :)

[LAZERUSS]

Go ahead. :)


MJ's career withOUT Pippen..not ONE season with a winning record, and a combined playoff record of 1-9. Pippen took a Jordan-less Chicago team to a 55-27 record in '94, and his team lost a close seven game series to a 56-26 Knicks team that would outplay, and lose a close seven game series to the 58-24 Rockets in the Finals. In fact, a completely refreshed MJ returned the very next season, and with his ball-hogging, they were wiped out in the semi's,

Pippen would go on to play for TEAMs with records of 31-19, 59-23, 50-32, 49-33, 50-32.

How come? How come Pippen was FAR more successful withOUT MJ, than MJ was withOUT Pippen?

[Uncle Drew]

MJ's career withOUT Pippen..not ONE season with a winning record, and a combined playoff record of 1-9. Pippen took a Jordan-less Chicago team to a 55-27 record in '94, and his team lost a close seven game series to a 56-26 Knicks team that would outplay, and lose a close seven game series to the 58-24 Rockets in the Finals. In fact, a completely refreshed MJ returned the very next season, and with his ball-hogging, they were wiped out in the semi's,

Pippen would go on to play for TEAMs with records of 31-19, 59-23, 50-32, 49-33, 50-32.
That's cool, but, I'm sorry, nothing of this is even close to being relevant. You said you could argue that Pippen won those rings, but you're bringing up meaningless records from years the Bulls didn't win a ring. :lol

[ArbitraryWater]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Yeah...the list of players with 6 MVPs and 6 rings is a long one.

What are you laughing at?

You've always criminally underrated Kareem and had him just 5th on your last all-time list if I remember correct...

Kareem > Wilt, Russell

[LAZERUSS]

That's cool, but, I'm sorry, nothing of this is even close to being relevant. You said you could argue that Pippen won those rings, but you're bringing up meaningless records from years the Bulls didn't win a ring. :lol

And you are being idiotic. MJ never won one ring by himself. In fact, without Pippen, he was a career loser.

Russell? He played alongside FOUR to EIGHT HOF teammates EVERY season in his career. BTW, how about this Russell quote regarding SAM JONES?

http://www.celtic-nation.com/interviews/sam_jones/sam_jones_page1.htm


“In the years that I played with the Celtics,” says Russell, “in terms of total basketball skills, Sam Jones was the most skillful player that I ever played with. At one point, we won a total of eight consecutive NBA championships, and six times during that run we asked Sam to take the shot that meant the season. If he didn’t hit the shot we were finished – we were going home empty-handed. He never missed.”

Now, you tell me how many rings Russell winds up without Jones?

[Uncle Drew]

Now, you tell me how many rings Russell winds up without Jones?
More than Wilt.

[LAZERUSS]

What are you laughing at?

You've always criminally underrated Kareem and had him just 5th on your last all-time list if I remember correct...

Kareem > Wilt, Russell

I moved him past Russell to 4th.

And no, Kareem was not greater than Wilt. At his peak, he was close to a prime Wilt, but never as dominant, ...even against the same centers that both would face in their primes.

You couldn't blame either KAJ, or Wilt, for only winning a couple of rings in their primes. Had they been blessed with quality teammates for the majority of their careers, (as KAJ was in the last 10 years of his career), they would certainly have won more rings.

[Elosha]

Why does ISH constantly fight about these type of GOAT rankings.? I admit it can be entertaining and even informative if the question is debated intelligently. But seriously we could present a two dozen lengthy threads where the same questions have already been endlessly analyzed.

Why would anyone disparage any of these greats when expressing their opinions and/or criticisms? It's inaccurate to label Wilt a "choker" for his scoring average drop in the playoffs when Laz has demonstrated that during his scoring prime he maintained very dominant scoring, and scored at an elite level in elimination games, and maintained dominant rebounding/blocks and excellent passing. Now certainly one could reasonably argue that Wilt was not the most clutch performer and that other GOAT candidates were better under pressure and greater winners, but to label him a choker is silly and disregards established facts. There are valid criticisms of Wilt or any other player but any argument can be taken overboard. Calling Wilt a chocker is certainly one of them.

Similarly, why would anyone discount Jordan's championships or try to drag him down because he started "1-9" That's truly idiotic. Anyone who saw the Bulls play in Jordan's first few years would know they were an absolute mess, one of the league bottom dwellers. Jordan individually was very dominant for the most part in his first ten playoff games, and we all know that from 1988 on, he was very arguably the greatest and most clutch playoff performer of all time, bar none. Was Jordan perfect? Of course not. He wasn't the team player he needed to be early on, and one could plausibly argue he should have learned team chemistry and complete leadership even earlier in his career. But to hold his early lack of playoff success against him in GOAT arguments - in light of what he accomplished individually and as a team - is mind numbing.

Finally, while I don't have him as GOAT, KAJ's longevity, personal dominance, team success, and skill should never be questioned. One might make a good case that he wasn't truly the leader or best player on most of the Laker's championships with Magic orchestrating, but could Magic really have won as much without Kareem?

Bottom line, there are 5-7 players that could, in some sense, be argued as the GOAT. We all have our preferences, but the first thing out of our mouths should be lauding their skill, dedication, and our privilege for getting to watch some of best athletes in history do what they do best. It should not be some knee jerk, BS "burn" on any of these wondrous players.

[LAZERUSS]

More than Wilt.

Not really. Wilt wins a ring in '62, likely in '65, and certainly another in '69 without Jones. That is five...which is the same number that Russell, himself, claimed that he would have won without Sam.

Furthermore, none other than John Wooden claimed that had Wilt had Russell's rosters, and Auerbach as a coach, and it would have been Chamberlain holding all those rings.

[ImKobe]

Kobe, and it's not even close.

[Uncle Drew]

Furthermore, none other than John Wooden claimed that had Wilt had Russell's rosters, and Auerbach as a coach, and it would have been Chamberlain holding all those rings.
That's alright, every human being has the right to have his or her opinion. For me, I'd rather look at the facts.

11 > 2

[LAZERUSS]

That's alright, every human being has the right to have his or her opinion. For me, I'd rather look at the facts.

11 > 2

TEAM game.

FACTS... 0 = 0.

[ImKobe]

TEAM game.

FACTS... 0 = 0.

Kobe: 5

Wilt: 2

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NOI2pZlj0Mc/UAP4tRdz-iI/AAAAAAAAB6Q/0xfGklM2jRE/s1600/shawn-michaels.gif

[Uncle Drew]

TEAM game.

FACTS... 0 = 0.
0 equals 0. That is a fact indeed. Such intelligence. :applause:

http://i.imgur.com/36G14Bk.gif

Russell has more rings than Wilt had fingers.

[LAZERUSS]

Why does ISH constantly fight about these type of GOAT rankings.? I admit it can be entertaining and even informative if the question is debated intelligently. But seriously we could present a two dozen lengthy threads where the same questions have already been endlessly analyzed.

Why would anyone disparage any of these greats when expressing their opinions and/or criticisms? It's inaccurate to label Wilt a "choker" for his scoring average drop in the playoffs when Laz has demonstrated that during his scoring prime he maintained very dominant scoring, and scored at an elite level in elimination games, and maintained dominant rebounding/blocks and excellent passing. Now certainly one could reasonably argue that Wilt was not the most clutch performer and that other GOAT candidates were better under pressure and greater winners, but to label him a choker is silly and disregards established facts. There are valid criticisms of Wilt or any other player but any argument can be taken overboard. Calling Wilt a chocker is certainly one of them.

Similarly, why would anyone discount Jordan's championships or try to drag him down because he started "1-9" That's truly idiotic. Anyone who saw the Bulls play in Jordan's first few years would know they were an absolute mess, one of the league bottom dwellers. Jordan individually was very dominant for the most part in his first ten playoff games, and we all know that from 1988 on, he was very arguably the greatest and most clutch playoff performer of all time, bar none. Was Jordan perfect? Of course not. He wasn't the team player he needed to be early on, and one could plausibly argue he should have learned team chemistry and complete leadership even earlier in his career. But to hold his early lack of playoff success against him in GOAT arguments - in light of what he accomplished individually and as a team - is mind numbing.

Finally, while I don't have him as GOAT, KAJ's longevity, personal dominance, team success, and skill should never be questioned. One might make a good case that he wasn't truly the leader or best player on most of the Laker's championships with Magic orchestrating, but could Magic really have won as much without Kareem?

Bottom line, there are 5-7 players that could, in some sense, be argued as the GOAT. We all have our preferences, but the first thing out of our mouths should be lauding their skill, dedication, and our privilege for getting to watch some of best athletes in history do what they do best. It should not be some knee jerk, BS "burn" on any of these wondrous players.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

BTW, and as I'm sure you know...I was being facetious on my MJ-Pippen take. But, the fact remains that MJ didn't win any titles by himself, nor did anyone else, including Russell.

[Height Freak]

Kobe: 5

Wilt: 2

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NOI2pZlj0Mc/UAP4tRdz-iI/AAAAAAAAB6Q/0xfGklM2jRE/s1600/shawn-michaels.gif

Horry: 7

[Uncle Drew]

Horry: 7
Conclusion: Horry > Wilt

[LAZERUSS]

Conclusion: Horry > Wilt

Greater than MJ too.

[Uncle Drew]

Greater than MJ too.
Please stop trolling.

[Height Freak]

Conclusion: Horry > Wilt

Yes! ;)

[LAZERUSS]

Please stop trolling.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[Elosha]

:applause: :applause: :applause:

BTW, and as I'm sure you know...I was being facetious on my MJ-Pippen take. But, the fact remains that MJ didn't win any titles by himself, nor did anyone else, including Russell.


Oh, I know that Laz. I know you play devil's advocate in some of your arguments and I completely understand why. Sometimes you have to do that to demonstrate the illogic in the other's sides arguments. I don't know if I've ever heard "1-9" from you, it's other, presumably younger posters who say that. Same thing with Pippen, he's a great player and certainly MJ wouldn't have been as successful without him. Of course, it's a team game and you can probably point to great teammates for any all-time great.

So I understand your point about it being team game completely. It's not to discount Russell's 11 or MJ's 6, or Magic's 5. It's to their credit that they won with their teams, and it certainly helps their case for all-time rankings. But I understand your point that other greats like Wilt may very well have won much more had they been teamed up with more talented rosters, and the converse may be true of a player like Russell. Some might argue that Russell was better at team chemistry and facilitating winning basketball than Wilt, but we'll never know for sure, since Wilt never played for Boston. But your point is certainly worth making. (As is any point raised by the late great John Wooden).

[La Frescobaldi]

Please stop trolling.


That's alright, every human being has the right to have his or her opinion. For me, I'd rather look at the facts.

11 > 2

lulz

chamberlain / russell rivalry is something you know not of.

[Marchesk]

Why isn't Sam Jones 2nd all-time?

10 rings / 12 seasons

MJ 6 rings / 15 seasons

10/12 = 83.3% winner
6/15 = 40% winner

Sam Jones twice as GOAT as MJ

1 Russell
2 Jones
3 Horry

[SouBeachTalents]

RINGS are a TEAM accomplishment.

How come MJ's '86 Bulls were SWEPT by Bird's Celtics in the first round? I guess MJ hurt his team with that 44 ppg series, right?

And if MJ gets a pass because his 30-52 team was blown out by Bird's 67-15 team...then how about Wilt's teams throughout the 60's? Chamberlain took inept squads to nearly beating Russell's HOF-laden teams in '62 and '65 and had they had equal rosters, that were healthy, like '67...well, all you need to know is that Wilt and his TEAM just annihilated Russell and his eight-time defending champion Celtics.

Again...RINGS are a TEAM accomplishment.

Laz, I'm in full agreement with you, rings are a team accomplishment, which is something a lot of people on this forum don't understand. My issue with Wilt is his postseason scoring drop off. He was a career 30 ppg scorer in the regular season, dropped off to a 23 ppg scorer in the playoffs, then dropped off to a 19 ppg scorer in the Finals.

If he maintained his regular season scoring average in the playoffs while winning just two rings, there really wouldn't be much to criticize him for, like Jordan in the '80's. However, Wilt basically had a LeBron 2011 Finals scoring drop off for his ENTIRE postseason career, and that's something he simply has to take criticism for

[Psileas]

Laz, I'm in full agreement with you, rings are a team accomplishment, which is something a lot of people on this forum don't understand. My issue with Wilt is his postseason scoring drop off. He was a career 30 ppg scorer in the regular season, dropped off to a 23 ppg scorer in the playoffs, then dropped off to a 19 ppg scorer in the Finals.

If he maintained his regular season scoring average in the playoffs while winning just two rings, there really wouldn't be much to criticize him for, like Jordan in the '80's. However, Wilt basically had a LeBron 2011 Finals scoring drop off for his ENTIRE postseason career, and that's something he simply has to take criticism for

This is simply not true. Dropping from 36.9 to 29.2 against a GOAT level defender, from 24.1 to 17.7 against a GOAT level defender, producing 23.3 ppg coming off surgery vs an All-NBA 1st D Teamer, upping from 14.8 to 19.2, dropping from 13.2 to 11.6, none of these cases is 2011 LeBron-like, who dropped his productivity against a team and players that, in theory, had no job containing him. Same goes for comparisons of playoff Wilt to playoff Karl Malone of David Robinson. Wilt's drops are the kind of drops that are expected for even GOAT players when facing all-time great defenders. Only his 1969 drop-off looks ugly, and even this came vs Russell.

[LAZERUSS]

Laz, I'm in full agreement with you, rings are a team accomplishment, which is something a lot of people on this forum don't understand. My issue with Wilt is his postseason scoring drop off. He was a career 30 ppg scorer in the regular season, dropped off to a 23 ppg scorer in the playoffs, then dropped off to a 19 ppg scorer in the Finals.

If he maintained his regular season scoring average in the playoffs while winning just two rings, there really wouldn't be much to criticize him for, like Jordan in the '80's. However, Wilt basically had a LeBron 2011 Finals scoring drop off for his ENTIRE postseason career, and that's something he simply has to take criticism for

It's all about context.

I have posted a ton of info on the topic of Wilt's supposed "decline" in his post-season play, and the reality was, it was SLIGHT (and that was in his "scoring"...his rebounding went up, and generally his FG% went up, as well, especially in his Finals.)

There were SEVERAL factors involved. One, his "scoring" prime came during his first seven years, six of which were in the post-season (and he missed the post-season in a season in which he averaged 45 ppg.) So, in his "scoring" years, he played in a total of 52 games, out of his career total of 160...or roughly ONE-THIRD. Furthermore, in those 52 games, he either faced Russell in his first, or second round, in five of those six years (his team was so horrid in the other one, that they were beaten in the first round before they could meet Russell's team in the next round.) So, he wound up facing Russell's Celtics in 30 of his first 52 playoff games.

Let's examine that a little more shall, we?

In his rookie season, he averaged 39.7 ppg on a .465 FG% against Russell in the regular season. In the EDF's, he averaged 30.5 ppg on a .500 FG% against Russell. Furthermore, Chamberlain badly injured his hand in a melee at the end of game two, and was a shell in game three (he played 35 minutes, scored 12 points, and grabbed 15 rebounds, in a 120-90 loss.) He wasn't even at a 100% in game four, either.

In his historic 61-62 season, Chamberlain averaged 50.4 ppg on a .506 FG%. However, against Russell in that regular season, he averaged 39.7 ppg on a .468 FG%. In the EDF's... 33.6 ppg on a .468 FG%. BTW, in that seven game series, his teammates collectively shot .345 from the floor. Just how in the hell did Wilt carry that cast of clowns to a game seven, two point loss?

In the 63-64 season, Wilt averaged 29.1 ppg on a .530 FG%. In the Finals against Russell, 29.2 ppg on a .517 FG%.

In his regular season H2H's with Russell in the 64-65 season, he averaged 25.3 ppg on a .473 FG%. In the seven game EDF's he averaged 30.1 ppg (31.4 rpg) and on a .555 FG%.

And in his last "scoring" season, Wilt averaged 28.3 ppg on a .473 FG% against Russell in the regular season, and then 28.0 ppg (30.2 rpg), and on a .509 FG% in the EDF's.

Carry it into his 66-67 season, as well. In his regular season H2H's with Russell, 20.3 ppg on a .549 FG%. In the EDF's,... 21.6 ppg on a .558 FG%.


Overall, Chamberlain faced Russell EIGHT times in the post-season, in his first ten seasons. Or 49 of his 98 playoff games in that span. And then, he also faced Thurmond in 12 more, or 61 out of his first 98 playoff games.

I won't take the time to look up the exact numbers, but I can safely tell you that MJ's scoring and efficiency took a considerable decline in his four straight playoff series against the "Bad Boys"...and especially in the first three (before the Pistons started a sharp decline.)

Same with Shaq against the Robinson-Spurs from '99 thru '03 (and especially before '03, when Robinson was just along for the ride.)

And how about this? A PEAK Kareem, in his regular seasons from 70-71 thru '72-73, averaged 32.5 ppg on a .563 FG% against the NBA. In his five playoff series against Thurmond and Wilt in those three years... 26 ppg on a .456 FG%. A HUGE drop-off.


The reality was, Chamberlain was facing Russell 49 times, Thurmond 17 times, Reed 17 times, Bellamy 10 times, and even Lucas in five. Overall, he battled either a HOFer, or a multiple All-Star, in 126 of his 160 post-season games.

And h not only battled the Dynastic Celtics in EIGHT post-seasons, he battled the '68, '70, '72, and '73 Knicks (and their FOUR to SIX HOFers in every one of them.) And he also battled a PEAK Kareem and his '71 and '72 Bucks. In fact, he not led his team past the eight-time defending champion, and 60-21 Celtics in '67, en route to a title, he also led his Lakers past the defending champion and 63-19 Bucks in '72. In ten of his other 11 post-seasons, his team lost to the eventual champions, including FIVE game sevens, FOUR of which were decided by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points.

BTW, his "scoring" declined in the years in which he went to the Finals, from his regular season averages of 23 ppg all the way down to 19 ppg. And he absolutely dominated in his '67 Finals, when he averaged 18 ppg, and his '72 Finals, when he averaged 19 ppg.


Furthermore, Chamberlain was not only outscoring his opposing HOF centers in the vast majority of his 160 playoff games, he was just crushing them on the glass, and outshooting them from the field by enormous margins. Think about this...a PEAK Kareem shot .577 and .574 from the field in his '71 and '72 regular seasons. Against Wilt in those post-seasons... .481 and .457 (and only .414 in the last four games of the '72 WCF's.) And most observers claimed that Wilt outplayed Kareem in the '71 WCF's. Statistically it was a draw between a PEAK Kareem, and an old Wilt, who was a year removed from major knee surgery. And most observers also claimed that Wilt outplayed KAJ in the '72 WCF's, despite being heavily outscored.

You can go right down the list. He outshot Thurmond from the field in their three post-seasons, by margins of .500 to .392, .560 to .343, and .611 to .373. He outshot Reed in their two Finals H2H's by margins of .625 to .483, and .525 to .493. He outshot Bellamy, who had shot .541 against the regular season NBA, by a .584 to .421 margin in their '68 playoff matchup. He outshot Russell in every one of their eight post-season series, and some by margins of ... .517 to .386, .556 to .358, and .555 to .447.

And, finally, Chamberlain played in 29 post-season series. He was the leading rebounder in 28 of them, and was never outrebounded by his opposing center in any of them. And in the one series in which he was outrebounded, it was by PF Jerry Lucas, 21.0 rpg to 20.0 rpg. BUT, when the two battled as centers in the '72 Finals... a 35 year old Wilt, playing 47 mpg, outrebounded the 31 year old Lucas, who played 46 mpg, by a 23.2 to 9.8 rpg margin. Clearly, Wilt was the GOAT post-season rebounder.

I could go on, but Chamberlain's "decline" in the post-season is greatly exaggerated.

[PsychoBe]

how do u have the time to type so much :facepalm

[LAZERUSS]

Psileas has brought this up before, but a PRIME "scoring" Wilt faced ONE playoff team from the Western Conference from between '60 thru his '66 seasons. And in that ONE playoff series... a 38.6 ppg, 23.0 rpg, and a .559 FG% (in a post-season that shot an eFG% of .420.)

Had Wilt had the good fortune to have faced the Lakers FIVE times, like Russell did in his post-season play (the 6th being against Wilt, when he did absolutely nothing offensively)...


had Wilt been fortunate enough to have faced the Lakers in the post-season, from '60 thru '68, and he likely would own many playoff (or perhaps Finals) scoring records. And we are not talking about one or two "small samples" either, but rather, his entire H2H play against LA (and Minny) from '60 thru '68...and in seasons of between 7 to 12 H2H games.

Keep in mind that Russell WAS fortunate enough to have faced the Lakers FIVE times in the post-season in that span (actually six, but in the last one, he faced Wilt, and as expected, did absolutely nothing offensively), and it was against LA in which he elevated his playoff scoring and FG%. In fact, remove the Lakers from his post-seasons, and his offensive production would have dropped considerably.

Here were Russell's numbers against LA in those five series:

'62:

Russell averaged 18.9 ppg on a .457 FG% in his regular season against the NBA.

Against LA in the Finals: 22.9 ppg on a .543 FG%. Which included a game seven of 30 points and 40 rebounds.

BTW, against Wilt in the '62 EDF's: 22.0 ppg on a .399 FG%


'63:

Russell averaged 16.8 ppg on a .432 FG% in his regular season.

Against LA in the Finals: 20 ppg on a .467 FG%


'65:

Russell averaged 14.1 ppg on a .438 FG% against the NBA.

Against LA in the Finals: 17.8 ppg on a .702 FG% (yes, .702.)

BTW, against Wilt in the EDF's: 15.6 ppg on a .447 FG%


'66:

Russell averaged 12.9 ppg on a .415 FG% against the NBA.

Against LA in the Finals: 23.6 ppg on a .538 FG%

BTW, against Wilt in the EDF's: 14.0 ppg on a .423 FG%


'68:

Russell averaged 12.5 ppg on a .425 FG% against the NBA

Against LA in the Finals: 17.3 ppg on a .430 FG%

BTW, against Wilt in the EDF's: 13.7 ppg on a .440 FG%


Oh, and here were Russell's stats in the '69 Finals against Wilt:

Regular season against the NBA: 9.9 ppg on a .433 FG%

Against Wilt in the Finals: 9.0 ppg on a .397 FG%



And once again, in Wilt's regular seasons, he was facing LA between 7 to 12 games in each season, with an average of about 10.

Also keep in mind that the Lakers were in the Western Conference, and Wilt only had two seasons in the Western Conference from '60 thru '68, and in one of those, his team was so bad, that he didn't make the playoffs, despite a 44.8 ppg season on .528 shooting.


Ok, here we go:

'59-60:

Against the entire NBA that season: 37.6 ppg on a .461 FG%

Against the Lakers in 9 H2H's: 36.8 ppg on a .430 FG%

High games of 41, 41, 41, 45, and 52.


'60-61:

Against the entire NBA: 38.4 ppg on a .509 FG%

Against the Lakers in 10 H2H's: 40.1 ppg on a .506 FG%

High games were 41, 41, 43, 44, 46, and 56 points.


'61-62:

Against the entire NBA: 50.4 ppg on a .506 FG%

Against LA in 9 H2H games: 51.6 ppg on a .503 FG%

High games of 48, 56, 57, 60, 60, and 78 (with 43 rebounds.)


'62-63: Against the entire NBA: 44.8 ppg on a .528 FG%

Against LA in 12 H2Hs: 48.6 ppg on a .541 FG%

High games of 40, 40, 42, 53, 63, and 72 points.


'63-64: Against the entire NBA: 36.9 ppg on a .524 FG%

Against LA in 12 H2Hs: 44.3 ppg on a .484 FG%

High games of 40, 41, 47, 49, 50, 55, and 59 points.


'64-65: Against the entire NBA: 34.7 ppg on a .510 FG%

Against LA in 8 H2Hs: 29.9 ppg on a .476 FG%

High games of 40, 40, and 41 points.


'65-66: Against the entire NBA: 33.5 ppg on a .540 FG%

Against LA in 10 H2Hs: 40.8 ppg on a .559 FG%

High games of 42, 49, 53, and 65 points.


'66-67: Against the entire NBA: 24.1 ppg on a .683 FG%

Against LA in 9 H2Hs: 26.4 ppg on a .759 FG%

High games of 32, 37, and 39 points.


'67-68: Against the entire NBA: 24.3 ppg on a .595 FG%

Against LA in 7 H2Hs: 28.1 ppg on a .638 FG%

High games of 31, 32, 35, and 53 points.


Overall, in those 86 games:

40 Point Games: 42

50 Point Games: 19

60 Point Games: 7

70 Point Games: 2

High game of 78 points.

What would the playoff and Finals scoring and efficiency records look like had Wilt had the opportunity to have played the Lakers in that span?

[bizil]

I think each has a case as the GOAT. In Russell's case, rings REALLY PROPPED up his GOAT status. He wasn't an alpha dog center and ONLY shot 44% from the field for his career. For a center's that's very subpar in comparison to Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, Moses, Hakeem, etc.

In MJ's case, for him to will the Bulls to six rings with that roster was EPIC! When looking at the top 10 GOAT guys, I think MJ had likely the WEAKEST supporting casts in his total title runs. As a 6'6 perimeter player, I think it was more impressive than Kareem. Kareem played with the two GOAT PG's and loaded rosters.

On the flip side, Kareem's dominance as a great player and being the all time leading scorer is EPIC! That on top of redefining the center position and his accolades on the court is EASILY enough to be the GOAT. So for me, I will still go with MJ, but it's not by a lot.

[Micku]

I think you could argue the case for MJ the most, but honestly a few players have case for GOAT. There's not really a GOAT imo. There's tiers of the GOATs to ever to play the game.

It's just more fun to talk an individual ranking when there are about 4 or 5 players are just all time greats that stand around the same level that's just better than everybody else.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Using different criteria for GOAT means that you'll get different answers depending on where your focus lies.

Russell was the greatest winner of all time with 11 rings, Wilt may have exerted the greatest level of statistical dominance (as far as raw numbers go, a 50 ppg season is insane), and Jordan was a monster who combined offensive and defensive prowess with the ability to win dynastic championships.

Now, how they stack up against one another in a more general appraisal that tries to bring in different criteria is a matter of opinion, as each has a strong case for the overall title. At the end of the day there is no real way to definitively argue that player X should be ranked above player Y when comparing all-time greats like Jordan, Wilt, and Russell, as there is a case to be made for each. That and because it's unlikely that someone entrenched in their opinion regarding the GOAT will alter it.

[bizil]

I think you could argue the case for MJ the most, but honestly a few players have case for GOAT. There's not really a GOAT imo. There's tiers of the GOATs to ever to play the game.

It's just more fun to talk an individual ranking when there are about 4 or 5 players are just all time greats that stand around the same level that's just better than everybody else.

Well said! Ultimately, its an opinion. Even being an MVP, All Star, All NBA, etc. is based on votes and opinion. But they are opinions based facts. The only things that are CONCRETE facts from the jump are win-losses, winning rings, and statistical numbers. It think being in the argument for the GOAT is a great feat in itself.

[houston]

kareem

[La Frescobaldi]

I think you could argue the case for MJ the most, but honestly a few players have case for GOAT. There's not really a GOAT imo. There's tiers of the GOATs to ever to play the game.

It's just more fun to talk an individual ranking when there are about 4 or 5 players are just all time greats that stand around the same level that's just better than everybody else.

yeah, tiers is how I see it, too. You got Chamberlain, Jabbar, and Jordan standing alone like on the moon.... then everybody else is 2nd Tier, or 3rd, 4th or whatever.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

yeah, tiers is how I see it, too. You got Chamberlain, Jabbar, and Jordan standing alone like on the moon.... then everybody else is 2nd Tier, or 3rd, 4th or whatever.

Word. Russell is right there with them, though, if you value winning.

[La Frescobaldi]

Word. Russell is right there with them, though, if you value winning.

wished i saw him in his days. my older friends say in the 50s and early 60s he was just incredible.
I'm biased for certain by not seeing him back then, because he was ancient by the time I was watching ball... I know it has to be like... watching this version of Timmy Duncan compared to Timmy Duncan of like 10 or 12 years ago.

[Hey Yo]

Kareem.

3 straight NCAA championships and named tourney MVP all 3x. Would have won 4 titles if Freshman were eligible/allowed to play.

6 pro titles, 2 FMVP, 6 league MVP's, 2 scoring titles.

10

[OnFire]

Irrelevant.
I don't give a shit about MVPs, all-nba selections, all-start selections or anything else except for rings as it is all that matters because every team, every player plays for that thing.
And when a player gets 11 rings which is unheard of from anybody else, there is no argument, he is the best player of all time, all others are just pretenders.
I do love Wilt, aside from all the times I trashed your opinion because of the way it was presented, and I think he's somewhere in the top 10, but when you have to grasp at all-nba selections, you know you're not gonna win the argument

Horry > KAJ and MJ guess.

[OnFire]

Word. Russell is right there with them, though, if you value winning.

So you mean to tell me if you took Russell off those celtics teams and relpaced him with KAJ they couldn't win titles?

[La Frescobaldi]

So you mean to tell me if you took Russell off those celtics teams and relpaced him with KAJ they couldn't win titles?

he just got through agreeing Jabbar was first tier

[andgar923]

Im taking the player that can get the ball at the top of the key and create an offensive opportunity from any position on the court the best. Along with be able to cause havoc defensively in any area of the floor.

MJ's last Bulls play is the epitome of what Mj can give you and what Kareem, Bill and Wilt can't.

Their legacies and stats are etched in stone, we can argue about what criteria comes out on top. Put them on the court and MJ will give you more opportunities at any given moment.

[BigBoss]

How did this go 5 pages :roll:

[dankok8]

Whoever thinks MJ is easily the GOAT and there is no argument is either:

1) too young and/or seriously brainwashed by the media

2) uninformed about players of past eras

3) just a stan

I don't think there is an outright GOAT in basketball. Depending on your criteria and there are many there could be many possible answers. But you know what if there is a GOAT the single greatest player of all time it's neither Jordan or Kareem. It's Bill Russell. 11 titles and 5 MVP's. The purpose of basketball is to have your team win and nobody else LED their team to more championships. It's funny how most GOAT threads involving Russell always involve proving how Russell is not GOAT and belittling his accomplishments. Which proves he's the default answer...

Then again there is no GOAT. It's a failed exercise. Because of different eras we'll never know for sure how it would have played out.

[DatAsh]

Jordan, Russell, Wilt, and Kareem all have legitimate cases imo. Comparing them to each other

Jordan: Best offensive player by far. Ridiculously competitive nature, which rubs off on teammates, making them play/practice harder. Great on court leader. Third best defensive player.

Russell: Best defensive player by far. Also Ridiculously competitive nature, which rubs off on teammates, making them play/practice harder. Best on court leader. Sacrificed stats for the good of the team.

Wilt: Second best offensive player, second best defensive player. Easily the best combination of offense and defense. Practically wrote the record book. Also sacrificed stats for the good of the team.

Kareem: Third best offensive player, fourth best defensive player. Best longevity by far - he played almost twice as long as some of the other guys.

Nothing to do with accolades or anything, just what they brought to a basketball team.

[julizaver]

Jordan, Russell, Wilt, and Kareem all have legitimate cases imo. Comparing them to each other

Jordan: Best offensive player by far. Ridiculously competitive nature, which rubs off on teammates, making them play/practice harder. Great on court leader. Third best defensive player.

Russell: Best defensive player by far. Also Ridiculously competitive nature, which rubs off on teammates, making them play/practice harder. Best on court leader. Sacrificed stats for the good of the team.

Wilt: Second best offensive player, second best defensive player. Easily the best combination of offense and defense. Practically wrote the record book. Also sacrificed stats for the good of the team.

Kareem: Third best offensive player, fourth best defensive player. Best longevity by far - he played almost twice as long as some of the other guys.

Nothing to do with accolades or anything, just what they brought to a basketball team.

In my list it is reduced to between Wilt and Jordan - Wilt is better than Russell, and prime Kareem was not able to outplay clearly an old Wilt, although he played extra hard against him (according to Kareem himself).
No need to enter in discussion here as there a lot of threads in that forum about it.
Jordan was clearly the best player of his generation as Wilt was and had a strong case of bein the GOAT.

[Nevaeh]

I could argue that PIPPEN won those six rings. He certainly had a better "winning" career than MJ did. And I could argue that Sam Jones won 10 rings and that Russell was along for the ride in those ten years.

Oh, and I guess Bird was easily the greater player than MJ, right? A 6-0 playoff record. Hell, Dumars held a 3-1 post-season series record over MJ (whose numbers declined considerably against the "Bad Boys")


And you would look like a straight retard while doing it, based on Jordan's level of play in the Playoffs, especially in the finals, when compared to Pippen's.

As far as the thread title's question at hand, I'm giving it to Jordan all the way. No matter what team he played on, you never questioned his motivation, nor the fact that he was the best player on every one of his teams either.

MJ took the NBA to a level of excitement not rivaled before or since (check out the ratings at the time). He won a scoring title in all 6 of his title runs all while being the team's focal point on defense. Add to this the 6 FMVPs that he won while doing this, and it makes the choice even easier, when compared to the other players in contention.

The popularity of his Jordan kicks for the past 25 plus years and videogame tributes the last few years are just icing on the cake.

[riseagainst]

you know you already lost the argument when you mention Horry in ring counts in a GOAT list comparison. Yeah cus Horry is in the same stratosphere as a player as MJ and Kareem.

So many kids on ISH.

:oldlol:

[swagga]

kareem underrated as usual.

he outplayed wilt h2h stats wise (win wise too).
he could play with other stars
he had longevity
he went against some goat teams (80s celtics, 80s philly, early 70s lakers, etc) too

this AND rings and MVPs and FMVPs and 1st teams AND dpoy level impact at center spot. media hated his ass for not monkeying around , else we'd all call him goat today.

only argument against him is not winning more in the random 70s where after the merger the league had alot of entropy and balance, plus kareem had sucky teams. argument that is weaker imo than inferior competition against mj.

imo kareem > magic=mj > rest career wise.

I don't count 60s accomplishments because imo that wasn't basketball

[OldSchoolBBall]

imo kareem > magic=mj > rest career wise.


Magic has no case as being Jordan's equal.

[mehyaM24]

Magic has no case as being Jordan's equal.
considering what we know in RAPM (measuring impact) - he definitely has a case in-terms of impacting the ACTUAL game. i mean, a year or so removed from his physical prime, magic had a higher RAPM in 1991 than jordan, which was jordan's peak. its suffice to assume magic probably had equal to/and or greater RAPM averages than jordan in former seasons, thus impacting the game at a similar and/or greater level. its speculation - but i presume magic was RIGHT THERE with bird every year prior to 1991.

one less championship (longevity cut short), but arguably the lakers' best and most important player during their titles runs. so yeah, there could be a case made if you value impact and successfully leading teams to championships.

[AirFederer]

Im taking the player that can get the ball at the top of the key and create an offensive opportunity from any position on the court the best. Along with be able to cause havoc defensively in any area of the floor.

MJ's last Bulls play is the epitome of what Mj can give you and what Kareem, Bill and Wilt can't.

Their legacies and stats are etched in stone, we can argue about what criteria comes out on top. Put them on the court and MJ will give you more opportunities at any given moment.
This. Close it is not.

[La Frescobaldi]

This. Close it is not.

It's very close indeed between those guys.

Jabbar & Chamberlain can defend anywhere on the court. Mike, while great, could never defend an elite center or PF. Sure he'd get a strip or even a block here or there but there's no way.
Kareem and Wilt stopped everybody.

Russell's offense is quite underrated by all these guys who never saw him play - and I only saw him in his last couple years when he was real real old. Dude could score in the paint make no mistake about it.

But an enormous difference is in not just individual defense, but in team defense, and in rebounding. People say "those guys are just tall, it's not fair to compare" as if height is suddenly a bad thing in a basketball player. That's so feeble that's merely an excuse because their guy can't get that done.

Chamberlain didn't just score at a Jordan level - he STOPPED SCORING 1/2 way through his career. His rebounding numbers are insanely greater than anything Jordan ever did except score.
Jordan matched Wilt's 30 points a game but the only reason Mike is even close is because Chamberlain stopped shooting and just let his career ppg plunge...... but Wilt's ALSO the leader in every rebounding category.

Oh yes, there's a lot more to it than "close it is not" particularly if you watched the big fella during his career

[andgar923]

It's very close indeed between those guys.

Jabbar & Chamberlain can defend anywhere on the court. Mike, while great, could never defend an elite center or PF. Sure he'd get a strip or even a block here or there but there's no way.
Kareem and Wilt stopped everybody.

Russell's offense is quite underrated by all these guys who never saw him play - and I only saw him in his last couple years when he was real real old. Dude could score in the paint make no mistake about it.

But an enormous difference is in not just individual defense, but in team defense, and in rebounding. People say "those guys are just tall, it's not fair to compare" as if height is suddenly a bad thing in a basketball player. That's so feeble that's merely an excuse because their guy can't get that done.

Chamberlain didn't just score at a Jordan level - he STOPPED SCORING 1/2 way through his career. His rebounding numbers are insanely greater than anything Jordan ever did except score.
Jordan matched Wilt's 30 points a game but the only reason Mike is even close is because Chamberlain stopped shooting and just let his career ppg plunge...... but Wilt's ALSO the leader in every rebounding category.

Oh yes, there's a lot more to it than "close it is not" particularly if you watched the big fella during his career

Bs

So the other players could defend an elite perimeter player? wait.. I'll take that back.

Im confident that they won't be any more successful defending a decent perimeter player than MJ would be at defending an elite post player. The only big man I've seen do a decent job was KG and even he had some issues. Im sure they can go out and defend adequately for a possession or two. But to stop a perimeter player? :facepalm

I have seen MJ stop All Star power forwards in the paint.

I've seen him deny possessions and grab rebounds over the tallest best rebounders (rebounding is part of defense). While I have yet to see a center or power forward come close to defending MJ. MJ blows by them at will if given an inch of space.

We've seen MJ beat a double team in the perimeter to score, then run back on defense and get a block or a steal. We've seen him get the big basket on one end and then make a big defensive play on a big the next. Shit, there's even been plays in which MJ would hound the perimeter player on one side, switch on another man prevent that attack and as soon as the ball is fed to the big block him or strip him, grab the ball and score or dish on the other end. This or any assortment/combination of plays has happened multiple times.

On top of that, the bigs need somebody to feed them the ball.

MJ can get the ball and create for himself in ways that they could only dream of, in areas of the court and situations that they're limited too or have a lower efficiency. MJ on the other hand is dangerous not just from the perimeter but from the post as well. At times even called the best post player in the league in an era with great post players.

MJ simply gives you a little more or at times a lot more (depending on situation).

[Real14]

Jordan. I could of been the GOAT tho.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Jabbar & Chamberlain can defend anywhere on the court. Mike, while great, could never defend an elite center or PF. Sure he'd get a strip or even a block here or there but there's no way.
Kareem and Wilt stopped everybody.


Err, what nonsense is this? Jordan can't defend an elite PF/C, just like Wilt and Kareem have zero chance of defending an elite PG/SG/SF.

[Moonbeam]

I've got MJ and Kareem as numbers 1 and 2 on my list. It's close though, and I could end up changing my mind. I think Kareem's career is amazing, and what prevents me from including him at #1 currently is that a lot of his best years came when the league competes for talent with the ABA.

[PsychoBe]

by acclimation, jordan is the greatest basketball player of all time.

[La Frescobaldi]

Err, what nonsense is this? Jordan can't defend an elite PF/C, just like Wilt and Kareem have zero chance of defending an elite PG/SG/SF.
they did it for decades, closed the paint down and made guys shoot low percentage shots; and both of them drove guys right out into the corner and made them pick up their dribble.

Today? Of course 3 pointers makes it a different game because of the extra point, even much more so than in Jordan's day. But who ever guarded the entire court? You guard your man, provide help D, and handle switch-offs. Mike can't smother guys like an athletic guy that is 7'2 can, even at his best. They had 2 feet more just in wingspan lolol

Mike was an elite defender from day one, but y'all seriously believe Jordan was closing down entire areas of the court like big men do????? :lol

This is what I'm talking about in jordan fans making it into a myth :roll: :roll: :roll:

[smoovegittar]

Why do mods let this piece of shit get back to the forum?
Just ban him forever, ban his IP, don't let him or his alts post more. I don't think he even garners any attention anymore, he just says plain stupid shit that nobody gives a shit about and litters the forum whichever thread he's in.
He got YOUR attention. Rent free! :roll:

[La Frescobaldi]

Bs

So the other players could defend an elite perimeter player? wait.. I'll take that back.

Im confident that they won't be any more successful defending a decent perimeter player than MJ would be at defending an elite post player. The only big man I've seen do a decent job was KG and even he had some issues. Im sure they can go out and defend adequately for a possession or two. But to stop a perimeter player? :facepalm

I have seen MJ stop All Star power forwards in the paint.

I've seen him deny possessions and grab rebounds over the tallest best rebounders (rebounding is part of defense). While I have yet to see a center or power forward come close to defending MJ. MJ blows by them at will if given an inch of space.

We've seen MJ beat a double team in the perimeter to score, then run back on defense and get a block or a steal. We've seen him get the big basket on one end and then make a big defensive play on a big the next. Shit, there's even been plays in which MJ would hound the perimeter player on one side, switch on another man prevent that attack and as soon as the ball is fed to the big block him or strip him, grab the ball and score or dish on the other end. This or any assortment/combination of plays has happened multiple times.

On top of that, the bigs need somebody to feed them the ball.

MJ can get the ball and create for himself in ways that they could only dream of, in areas of the court and situations that they're limited too or have a lower efficiency. MJ on the other hand is dangerous not just from the perimeter but from the post as well. At times even called the best post player in the league in an era with great post players.

MJ simply gives you a little more or at times a lot more (depending on situation).
see the other post.

I notice you leave out an mention of those 24 rebounds a game for 14 years or in Kareem's case 15.........................

[andgar923]

they did it for decades, closed the paint down and made guys shoot low percentage shots; and both of them drove guys right out into the corner and made them pick up their dribble.

Today? Of course 3 pointers makes it a different game because of the extra point, even much more so than in Jordan's day. But who ever guarded the entire court? You guard your man, provide help D, and handle switch-offs. Mike can't smother guys like an athletic guy that is 7'2 can, even at his best. They had 2 feet more just in wingspan lolol

Mike was an elite defender from day one, but y'all seriously believe Jordan was closing down entire areas of the court like big men do????? :lol

This is what I'm talking about in jordan fans making it into a myth :roll: :roll: :roll:

Myth?

MJ DID control entire areas of the court, we've seen it happen time and time again. Players, coaches, officials have stated that MJ was everywhere and would control entire areas of the court.

I think maybe 'you're' the one spewing myths here.

[La Frescobaldi]

Myth?

MJ DID control entire areas of the court, we've seen it happen time and time again. Players, coaches, officials have stated that MJ was everywhere and would control entire areas of the court.

I think maybe 'you're' the one spewing myths here.

sure man I ain't knocking Mike. But he didn't lock down teams like Kareem on defense in his MVP seasons. It never happened.

And still nothing about rebounds.

[PsychoBe]

they did it for decades, closed the paint down and made guys shoot low percentage shots; and both of them drove guys right out into the corner and made them pick up their dribble.

Today? Of course 3 pointers makes it a different game because of the extra point, even much more so than in Jordan's day. But who ever guarded the entire court? You guard your man, provide help D, and handle switch-offs. Mike can't smother guys like an athletic guy that is 7'2 can, even at his best. They had 2 feet more just in wingspan lolol

Mike was an elite defender from day one, but y'all seriously believe Jordan was closing down entire areas of the court like big men do????? :lol

This is what I'm talking about in jordan fans making it into a myth :roll: :roll: :roll:

kenny called mj the "dion sanders of basketball" and said on open court that coaches wouldn't call plays on mj's side of the court :facepalm

[La Frescobaldi]

kenny called mj the "dion sanders of basketball" and said on open court that coaches wouldn't call plays on mj's side of the court :facepalm
:lol y'all act like I never saw the Bulls dude I watched Jordan's entire career from college through Wizards. Saw him from the bleachers lots and lots of times. He was beyond great. But he ain't a myth.

[andgar923]

sure man I ain't knocking Mike. But he didn't lock down teams like Kareem on defense in his MVP seasons. It never happened.

And still nothing about rebounds.

I missed the post about rebounds, but that wasn't MJ's job.

If Mj wanted to get rebounds, he'd get them, he was more than capable of getting them when needed.

As I mentioned, MJ has at times out rebounded All Star power forwards, boxed them out, out hustled them etc.etc.

From the Knicks, Pacers, Heat, etc.etc. he's beaten their bigs in the past. Sure maybe not averaged 10 per season, but that wasn't his job.

[La Frescobaldi]

I missed the post about rebounds, but that wasn't MJ's job.

If Mj wanted to get rebounds, he'd get them, he was more than capable of getting them when needed.

As I mentioned, MJ has at times out rebounded All Star power forwards, boxed them out, out hustled them etc.etc.

From the Knicks, Pacers, Heat, etc.etc. he's beaten their bigs in the past. Sure maybe not averaged 10 per season, but that wasn't his job.

not his job is right, because anybody knows he couldn't do that

[andgar923]

not his job is right, because anybody knows he couldn't do that

Or because he was guarding perimeter players?

Or playing in the perimeter?

Or having to get back on defense?

Or because he had to run the offense?

[La Frescobaldi]

Or because he was guarding perimeter players?

Or playing in the perimeter?

Or having to get back on defense?

Or because he had to run the offense?

sorry man it don't wash.

You want this guy to be the GOAT, explain his lack of rebounding, and his lack of defense compared to Chamberlain, Russell, and Jabbar.

Again, I ain't bashing Mike, I'm bashing a myth. He was an elite defender but he wasn't like THOSE GUYS. And his rebounding doesn't help his case any either.

{guys will usually go off into a rant about rings right about here.....}

[andgar923]

sorry man it don't wash.

You want this guy to be the GOAT, explain his lack of rebounding, and his lack of defense compared to Chamberlain, Russell, and Jabbar.

Again, I ain't bashing Mike, I'm bashing a myth. He was an elite defender but he wasn't like THOSE GUYS. And his rebounding doesn't help his case any either.

{guys will usually go off into a rant about rings right about here.....}

Oh shit... you're serious!

:roll: :roll:

[La Frescobaldi]

Oh shit... you're serious!

:roll: :roll:

of course I am. We're talkin' hoops man, not politics or some sh!t that don't matter:roll:

dude it's one thing to say Mike is the goat 'and it ain't even close.'

But it is close; so close that I've never been able to decide between those guys, and I watched them all.
I saw Lew's coming out party to the NBA after winning titles at UCLA; saw Wilt send Russell to the bench with a towel over his head in the EDF. I saw Chamberlain & Kareem shut down entire teams, man, for several minutes at a time.

I never bought all the myth in the '90s my friend, because I saw all the myths come out about Chamberlain and Russell... watched every bit of that Bob Ryan sh!t just roll out like diarrhea and people lappin' it up like cream........ which I watched some and I know better.

:cheers:

[LAZERUSS]

Magic has no case as being Jordan's equal.

He most certainly does.

How about this resume?

13 seasons (and that includes his 95-96 season, when he was four years removed from his prime)

10 Conference Finals

9 Finals

5 Titles

Career Regular season W-L% of .740 (and again, that includes 95-96), which is the highest ever by a GOAT Candidate (and BTW, his career W-L% withOUT Kareem... .743.)

Career Post-Season W-L% of .670, which is higher than MJ (.665), Russell (.646), and Bird (.596.)

3 FMVPs, but should have been 4

3 MVPs

The team he inherited his rookie season had gone 47-35 the year before. The teams he had after KAJ went 62-17 and 57-22 and made it to the Finals. The year after he retired... 43-39, and then 39-43 after that. Made KAJ considerably better, as he did Nixon (look at Nixon after he was traded), Wilkes, Worthy, Scott, and even Divac. ALL considerably better with Magic (Kareem jumped up in 79-80 and won the MVP.)

He accomplished the bulk of that in the decade of the 80's, which arguably had the strongest champions in NBA history.

Magic has a strong case as the GOAT "winner" in NBA history. And yes...a case for GOAT, as well.

[La Frescobaldi]

He most certainly does.

How about this resume?

13 seasons (and that includes his 95-96 season, when he was four years removed from his prime)

10 Conference Finals

9 Finals

5 Titles

Career Regular season W-L% of .740 (and again, that includes 95-96), which is the highest ever by a GOAT Candidate (and BTW, his career W-L% withOUT Kareem... .743.)

Career Post-Season W-L% of .670, which is higher than MJ (.665), Russell (.646), and Bird (.596.)

3 FMVPs, but should have been 4

3 MVPs

The team he inherited his rookie season had gone 47-35 the year before. The teams he had after KAJ went 62-17 and 57-22 and made it to the Finals. The year after he retired... 43-39, and then 39-43 after that. Made KAJ considerably better, as he did Nixon (look at Nixon after he was traded), Wilkes, Worthy, Scott, and even Divac. ALL considerably better with Magic (Kareem jumped up in 79-80 and won the MVP.)

He accomplished the bulk of that in the decade of the 80's, which arguably had the strongest champions in NBA history.

Magic has a strong case as the GOAT "winner" in NBA history. And yes...a case for GOAT, as well.

That man was the Gold & Forum Blue for soooo long.

Still is, to me, the Greatest Laker

[LAZERUSS]

That man was the Gold & Forum Blue for soooo long.

Still is, to me, the Greatest Laker

He MADE Showtime.

And yes, THE Greatest Laker.

[LAZERUSS]

Legitimate GOAT Candidates...

Wilt, MJ, Magic, KAJ, and Russell.

ALL have arguments.

[SouBeachTalents]

He most certainly does.

How about this resume?

13 seasons (and that includes his 95-96 season, when he was four years removed from his prime)

10 Conference Finals

9 Finals

5 Titles

Career Regular season W-L% of .740 (and again, that includes 95-96), which is the highest ever by a GOAT Candidate (and BTW, his career W-L% withOUT Kareem... .743.)

Career Post-Season W-L% of .670, which is higher than MJ (.665), Russell (.646), and Bird (.596.)

3 FMVPs, but should have been 4

3 MVPs

The team he inherited his rookie season had gone 47-35 the year before. The teams he had after KAJ went 62-17 and 57-22 and made it to the Finals. The year after he retired... 43-39, and then 39-43 after that. Made KAJ considerably better, as he did Nixon (look at Nixon after he was traded), Wilkes, Worthy, Scott, and even Divac. ALL considerably better with Magic (Kareem jumped up in 79-80 and won the MVP.)

He accomplished the bulk of that in the decade of the 80's, which arguably had the strongest champions in NBA history.

Magic has a strong case as the GOAT "winner" in NBA history. And yes...a case for GOAT, as well.

You can't bring all that up without mentioning he played in arguably the weakest conference in NBA history, a definite factor for why his winning % is so high. People rip on the 2000's East, the 80's West wasn't much better, if not just as bad

[LAZERUSS]

You can't bring all that up without mentioning he played in arguably the weakest conference in NBA history, a definite factor for why his winning % is so high. People rip on the 2000's East, the 80's West wasn't much better, if not just as bad

blah blah blah

His Lakers easily smacked the Sixers in '80 and '82 (hell, they won a title-clinching game, on the road, and in a rout, in a game in which KAJ didn't play.)

They SHOULD have SWEPT Boston in '84. They easily beat Boston in '85, and dominated them in '87. And they managed to beat the Pistons in '88 with virtually no help from KAJ. Oh, and in Magic's last season, he led an upset of the 63-19 Blazers in the WCF's, as well..en route to the Finals, where their crippled team lost to the Bulls.

[OldSchoolBBall]

blah blah blah

His Lakers easily smacked the Sixers in '80 and '82 (hell, they won a title-clinching game, on the road, and in a rout, in a game in which KAJ didn't play.)

They SHOULD have SWEPT Boston in '84. They easily beat Boston in '85, and dominated them in '87. And they managed to beat the Pistons in '88 with virtually no help from KAJ. Oh, and in Magic's last season, he led an upset of the 63-19 Blazers in the WCF's, as well..en route to the Finals, where their crippled team lost to the Bulls.

Easier to do that when you're fresh because you beat up on 38-45 win teams en route to the finals and play in the no defense West rather than the grind it out, physical East.

[LAZERUSS]

Easier to do that when you're fresh because you beat up on 38-45 win teams en route to the finals and play in the no defense West rather than the grind it out, physical East.

They also beat FIVE 50+ win teams and another 60+ win team en route to those Finals, including the defending champion and 56-26 Sonics in '80. And again, just pounded the East champions in '80, '82, '85, and '87, as well as beating a "mini-dynasty" Piston team in '88. And again, they should have SWEPT the '84 Celtics.

So, Magic's Lakers beat SIX 50+ win teams (including one 60+ win), while Bird's Celtics beat EIGHT 50+ win teams (including ONE 60+ win team) before getting to the Finals.

In the Finals, Boston beat ONE 50+ win team (the '84 Lakers, who should have swept them). Meanwhile, Magic's Lakers beat FIVE 50+ win teams, including Boston's 63 win team in '85 (easily.) And the other's went 54-28, 58-24, 59-23, and 59-23.

[Wade's Rings]

blah blah blah

His Lakers easily smacked the Sixers in '80 and '82 (hell, they won a title-clinching game, on the road, and in a rout, in a game in which KAJ didn't play.)

They SHOULD have SWEPT Boston in '84. They easily beat Boston in '85, and dominated them in '87. And they managed to beat the Pistons in '88 with virtually no help from KAJ. Oh, and in Magic's last season, he led an upset of the 63-19 Blazers in the WCF's, as well..en route to the Finals, where their crippled team lost to the Bulls.

You say Magic deserved 4 FMVP but Kareem has a Case for the 1980 FMVP and was going to win it until a last minute change also weren't the Celtics dealing with injuries in 85 & 87? Or at least 87? They only beat the Pistons in 88 because of the Thomas Ankle Injury, we don't know who wins in 89 with the Lakers healthy.

[LAZERUSS]

You say Magic deserved 4 FMVP but Kareem has a Case for the 1980 FMVP and was going to win it until a last minute change also weren't the Celtics dealing with injuries in 85 & 87? Or at least 87? They only beat the Pistons in 88 because of the Thomas Ankle Injury, we don't know who wins in 89 with the Lakers healthy.

My problem with those who argue KAJ winning the FMVP in '80 was that he MISSED the CLINCHING game. A game in which Magic just DOMINATED (and the Lakers routed Philly BTW.) And we simply don't know how much more Magic would have given them in the first five games, either, had KAJ missed any of those. We do know that Magic put up a 22-11-9 .573 FG%, .635 TS% series...over the course of the ENTIRE series.

And the difference between '80 and the '88 FMVP? While Worthy won the FMVP based solely on his game seven performance, in a series in which Magic was CLEARLY the best player...Magic at least put up a clinching performance of 19-5-14 on a 6-9 FG/FGA, 7-8 FT/FTA game.

Thomas's injury is as much speculation as a healthy Laker team in '89 (who were 11-0 coming into that Finals.)

[Wade's Rings]

My problem with those who argue KAJ winning the FMVP in '80 was that he MISSED the CLINCHING game. A game in which Magic just DOMINATED (and the Lakers routed Philly BTW.) And we simply don't know how much more Magic would have given them in the first five games, either, had KAJ missed any of those. We do know that Magic put up a 22-11-9 .573 FG%, .635 TS% series...over the course of the ENTIRE series.

And the difference between '80 and the '88 FMVP? While Worthy won the FMVP based solely on his game seven performance, in a series in which Magic was CLEARLY the best player...Magic at least put up a clinching performance of 19-5-14 on a 6-9 FG/FGA, 7-8 FT/FTA game.

Thomas's injury is as much speculation as a healthy Laker team in '89 (who were 11-0 coming into that Finals.)

From what I read Kareem was making the big shots down the stretch. We don't know what Magic would have done without Kareem but Kareem was the biggest reason they were up 3-2 anyway. There's an article out there where they state that Kareem was going to be Finals MVP but because he wasn't in attendance for he last game they couldn't give it to him and Magic got the award.

[LAZERUSS]

From what I read Kareem was making the big shots down the stretch. We don't know what Magic would have done without Kareem but Kareem was the biggest reason they were up 3-2 anyway. There's an article out there where they state that Kareem was going to be Finals MVP but because he wasn't in attendance for he last game they couldn't give it to him and Magic got the award.

Just watch the footage that is on YouTube in that game six. The Lakers, behind Magic, played their best game of that series...all withOUT Kareem. They RAN the Sixers into the ground, and blew them out. I don't think it was an aberration, either.

In any case, Magic was not only putting up 42 points, on 14-23 FG/FGA and 14/14 FT/FTA, he grabbed 15 rebounds in that game six...which was FIVE more than anyone else that played that night. Oh, and he managed to hand out seven assists, too. And on top of all of that, he set the PACE for that game...and Philly simply couldn't keep up.

[k0kakw0rld]

Go ahead. :)
He is coming at you with heavy punches and a haymaker. You look like the idiot who doesn't know anything about basketball. :confusedshrug:

[SamuraiSWISH]

He is coming at you with heavy punches and a haymaker. You look like the idiot who doesn't know anything about basketball. :confusedshrug:
Do you agree both Kareem, and MJ were at one time players in the league?

[k0kakw0rld]

I believe they are both "once in a lifetime" players.

Me personally I don't have MJ as the GOAT. (He has a solid case tho)

Wilt or Kareem at this point

Wilt, well look at the record books. It speaks for itself.

[Wade's Rings]

Just watch the footage that is on YouTube in that game six. The Lakers, behind Magic, played their best game of that series...all withOUT Kareem. They RAN the Sixers into the ground, and blew them out. I don't think it was an aberration, either.

In any case, Magic was not only putting up 42 points, on 14-23 FG/FGA and 14/14 FT/FTA, he grabbed 15 rebounds in that game six...which was FIVE more than anyone else that played that night. Oh, and he managed to hand out seven assists, too. And on top of all of that, he set the PACE for that game...and Philly simply couldn't keep up.

What I meant was for the WHOLE SERIES. Would the Lakers even be up? Magic wouldn't have kept those numbers for the whole series and the Confidence Boost and sense of Urgency to end the series there could have added to why Players played so well.

[Dragic4Life]

Carrried by Magic for majority of his rings.:facepalm

2 FMVPs out of 5 rings.:facepalm

Give me a fkin' break KAJ is not GOAT material, he's lucky to even be in the top 10.

[LAZERUSS]

Carrried by Magic for majority of his rings.:facepalm

2 FMVPs out of 5 rings.:facepalm

Give me a fkin' break KAJ is not GOAT material, he's lucky to even be in the top 10.

SIX rings, SIX MVPs, and at his peak, only a peak Chamberlain would have a case as being more dominant.

[Dragic4Life]

SIX rings, SIX MVPs, and at his peak, only a peak Chamberlain would have a case as being more dominant.
Carried to his SIX rings.:oldlol:

Won ONLY 2 measly FMVPs.:lol

[Helix]

Carrried by Magic for majority of his rings.:facepalm

2 FMVPs out of 5 rings.:facepalm

Give me a fkin' break KAJ is not GOAT material, he's lucky to even be in the top 10.


Good Grief!!! Does this site breed morons?

I don't bother with this GOAT stuff much, but here's my two cents. I've followed the NBA since 1963 and in that time two players stand above the rest as the greatest I've seen. They are Wilt Chamberlain and Michael Jordan. Chamberlain is the greatest big man to ever play the game and Jordan the greatest "little" man. Case closed!!! A notch below those two are Jabbar, Russel, Bird, and Magic in no particular order, but probably headed by Jabbar. Those six make up the so called legendary six, and rightfully so.

[Dragic4Life]

Good Grief!!! Does this site breed morons?

I don't bother with this GOAT stuff much, but here's my two cents. I've followed the NBA since 1963 and in that time two players stand above the rest as the greatest I've seen. They are Wilt Chamberlain and Michael Jordan. Chamberlain is the greatest big man to ever play the game and Jordan the greatest "little" man. Case closed!!! A notch below those two are Jabbar, Russel, Bird, and Magic in no particular order, but probably headed by Jabbar. Those six make up the so called legendary six, and rightfully so.
I am really curious what your top 10 list looks like.

Here's mine:

1) MJ
2) Russell
3) Magic
4) Bird
5) Lebron
6) Duncan
7) Shaq
8) Wilt
9) Hakeem
10) Kareem

With 9) and 10) being interchangeable. Pretty solid list if you ask me.

[dunksby]

Carried to his SIX rings.:oldlol:

Won ONLY 2 measly FMVPs.:lol
Kareem won 5 with the Lakers and a title with the Bucks, at least get your facts straight and every body with a right head on their shoulders knows he has 3 FMVPs in truth, ****ing CBS robbed him of one.

[LAZERUSS]

I am really curious what your top 10 list looks like.

Here's mine:

1) MJ
2) Russell
3) Magic
4) Bird
5) Lebron
6) Duncan
7) Shaq
8) Wilt
9) Hakeem
10) Kareem

With 9) and 10) being interchangeable. Pretty solid list if you ask me.

I could shred this list til the cows come home...but let's start here...

what does Bird have on his resume that even comes close to what Kareem has on his?

[swagga]

Carried to his SIX rings.:oldlol:

Won ONLY 2 measly FMVPs.:lol

go suck a dick sonny, you're too young to write here. Better yet find a kobe or lebron thread, you'd fit right in with your dubeta/lebeta/kobeta comprehensive understanding of ball.
--

That being said I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with lazareus on the magic debate, as a big as a wilt stan he is, he knows some ball and magic's impact was monstrous.

Whoever said they were preying on easy teams should look at their record against the top teams in the east. Both in the finals and in the regular season, to end the debate about being fresh.

If there is one thing jordan has that none of the other candidates exhibit, it's the GOAT media behind him. Making the nba a streamlined experience to milk the casual fan of their money for nike / mcdonalds/ etc.

I won't mention rule changes tailored for MJ, or how he was by far the most babied dude in the league history, if you give lebron the same treatment he'd have by now seasons with 15 fta per game. Just saying.

[Dragic4Life]

what does Bird have on his resume that even comes close to what Kareem has on his?
Not being Magic's b1tch.

[swagga]

I am really curious what your top 10 list looks like.

Here's mine:

1) MJ
2) Russell
3) Magic
4) Bird
5) Lebron
6) Duncan
7) Shaq
8) Wilt
9) Hakeem
10) Kareem

With 9) and 10) being interchangeable. Pretty solid list if you ask me.

Lebron over duncan or shaq ? :lol
bird over kareem? :roll:
kareem not in top 3? dude was an elite player for 2 decades.

surprised goran dragic not top 3 tho :oldlol:

[riseagainst]

I am really curious what your top 10 list looks like.

Here's mine:

1) MJ
2) Russell
3) Magic
4) Bird
5) Lebron
6) Duncan
7) Shaq
8) Wilt
9) Hakeem
10) Kareem

With 9) and 10) being interchangeable. Pretty solid list if you ask me.


just log on to your other alt and never come back as dragic4life again, you are retarded as fuq.


:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:

[Dragic4Life]

just log on to your other alt and never come back as dragic4life again, you are retarded as fuq.
I think my list is actually pretty good.

You're blinded by your Lebron hate. Simmer down.:oldlol:

[swagga]

Myth?

MJ DID control entire areas of the court, we've seen it happen time and time again. Players, coaches, officials have stated that MJ was everywhere and would control entire areas of the court.

I think maybe 'you're' the one spewing myths here.

I clearly remember he controlled the living shit out the ft line area.

[dunksby]

I am really curious what your top 10 list looks like.

Here's mine:

1) Kareem
2) MJ
3) Wilt
4) Russell
5) Magic
6) Shaq
7) Bird
8) Duncan
9) Kobe
10) Hakeem

With 9) and 10) being interchangeable. Pretty solid list if you ask me.
Not a bad list at all :applause:

[Dragic4Life]

Not a bad list at all :applause:
Don't bring Lebron into this.

He's locked in the top 5.

Shithead.

[Psileas]

SIX rings, SIX MVPs, and at his peak, only a peak Chamberlain would have a case as being more dominant.

Add to this that he normally would have had 3 (and not 2) F.MVP's, had the voters not being pressed to change their votes (though Magic should have the other 3, and Worthy, as great as he was, none). I know you love Magic's 1980 performances (as I do, as well), but for me, this result was clear fixing, which is why I consider Kareem a 3-time F.MVP, despite what the official result is. Also, add that he was by far the best player of the 1974 Finals, and I won't even mention his also impressive 1984 Finals performance.

[dunksby]

LeBron is an all-time great but he needs to do more to crack the top 10
:applause:

[riseagainst]

LeBron is an all-time great but he needs to do more to crack the top 10.


:applause:

[LAZERUSS]

Add to this that he normally would have had 3 (and not 2) F.MVP's, had the voters not being pressed to change their votes (though Magic should have the other 3, and Worthy, as great as he was, none). I know you love Magic's 1980 performances (as I do, as well), but for me, this result was clear fixing, which is why I consider Kareem a 3-time F.MVP, despite what the official result is. Also, add that he was by far the best player of the 1974 Finals, and I won't even mention his also impressive 1984 Finals performance.

The difference between the '80 and the '88 FMVP voting, an again, IMO, was that in the clinching game seven of the '88, while Worthy had a great game, Magic had at the very least, a very good game. In the '80 clinching game six, Magic had a great game...and KAJ...no game at all.

BTW, here is my take on the '70 Finals...

West and Wilt were the two best players in that series. West early on, and Wilt later. Reed won the FMVP with only TWO great games, two merely good games, and virtually nothing in three. Chamberlain outplayed him in games two and four, and was light years better in games five thru seven. And for those that argue that Frazier deserved the FMVP, while he had a great game seven, West outplayed him in the other six.

[Helix]

I am really curious what your top 10 list looks like.

Here's mine:

1) MJ
2) Russell
3) Magic
4) Bird
5) Lebron
6) Duncan
7) Shaq
8) Wilt
9) Hakeem
10) Kareem

With 9) and 10) being interchangeable. Pretty solid list if you ask me.


Sorry, can't agree. You have Wilt and Kareem WAY too low, Lebron too high, and Hakeem has no business on any top ten list.

My list? Ok...........well, I already gave you my top six. Next would be Duncan and Oscar. Yea, I know.....OK for Duncan but how can you have Oscar that high? Truth is, the only reason Oscar is not on most lists is because of ignorance for the most part, and also a little bit of bias. I followed Oscar's career as a Royal from '63 on pretty close and, in my view, seventh or eighth is right where he belongs. Next, at nine, is Shaq. I haven't settled on number ten.....it's a toss-up between Lebron, Dr. J, Baylor, and West. My guess is that Lebron will take this spot by the time he retires, and possibly move even higher. Bryant is next at fourteen, and fifteen through twenty, in no particular order are Pettit, Barry, Moses, Hakeem, Havlicek, and probably Sir Charles.

[Dragic4Life]

Sorry, can't agree. You have Wilt and Kareem WAY too low, Lebron too high, and Hakeem has no business on any top ten list.

My list? Ok...........well, I already gave you my top six. Next would be Duncan and Oscar. Yea, I know.....OK for Duncan but how can you have Oscar that high? Truth is, the only reason Oscar is not on most lists is because of ignorance for the most part, and also a little bit of bias. I followed Oscar's career as a Royal from '63 on pretty close and, in my view, seventh or eighth is right where he belongs. Next, at nine, is Shaq. I haven't settled on number ten.....it's a toss-up between Lebron, Dr. J, Baylor, and West. My guess is that Lebron will take this spot by the time he retires, and possibly move even higher. Bryant is next at fourteen, and fifteen through twenty, in no particular order are Pettit, Barry, Moses, Hakeem, Havlicek, and probably Sir Charles.
I have to say your list is pretty solid too. And the reasoning is sound.

[stanlove1111]

The difference between the '80 and the '88 FMVP voting, an again, IMO, was that in the clinching game seven of the '88, while Worthy had a great game, Magic had at the very least, a very good game. In the '80 clinching game six, Magic had a great game...and KAJ...no game at all.

BTW, here is my take on the '70 Finals...

West and Wilt were the two best players in that series. West early on, and Wilt later. Reed won the FMVP with only TWO great games, two merely good games, and virtually nothing in three. Chamberlain outplayed him in games two and four, and was light years better in games five thru seven. And for those that argue that Frazier deserved the FMVP, while he had a great game seven, West outplayed him in the other six.


Do you have all the numbers for Frazier and West game by game for that series?

[LAZERUSS]

Do you have all the numbers for Frazier and West game by game for that series?

http://webuns.chez-alice.fr/finals/1970.htm

Game 1:

West: 33 points, 3 rebs, 4 assts, 9-23 FG/FGA, 15-17 FT/FTA
Frazier: 6 points, 5 rebs, 6 assts, 3-5 FG/FGA, 0-1 FT/FTA

Game 2:

West: 34-1-1, 12-28, 10-15
Frazier: 11-12-11, 5-9, 1-3

Game 3:

West: 34-1-9, 11-28, 12-16
Frazier: 19-11-7, 8-17, 3-4

Game 4:

West: 37-5-18, 13-26, 11-12
Frazier: 16-6-11, 3-11, 10-13

Game 5:

West: 20-2-4, 6-14, 8-9
Frazier: 21-7-12, 9-14, 3-3

Game 6:

West: 33-6-13, 12-22, 9-9
Frazier: 14-6-7, 6-12, 2-4

Game 7:

West: 28-6-5, 9-19, 10-12
Frazier: 36-7-19, 12-17, 12-12

[La Frescobaldi]

Don't bring Lebron into this.

He's locked out of the top 5.

Shithead.

fixed that for you, chumpie.

[stanlove1111]

http://webuns.chez-alice.fr/finals/1970.htm

Game 1:

West: 33 points, 3 rebs, 4 assts, 9-23 FG/FGA, 15-17 FT/FTA
Frazier: 6 points, 5 rebs, 6 assts, 3-5 FG/FGA, 0-1 FT/FTA

Game 2:

West: 34-1-1, 12-28, 10-15
Frazier: 11-12-11, 5-9, 1-3

Game 3:

West: 34-1-9, 11-28, 12-16
Frazier: 19-11-7, 8-17, 3-4

Game 4:

West: 37-5-18, 13-26, 11-12
Frazier: 16-6-11, 3-11, 10-13

Game 5:

West: 20-2-4, 6-14, 8-9
Frazier: 21-7-12, 9-14, 3-3

Game 6:

West: 33-6-13, 12-22, 9-9
Frazier: 14-6-7, 6-12, 2-4

Game 7:

West: 28-6-5, 9-19, 10-12
Frazier: 36-7-19, 12-17, 12-12


Thanks..

[MARK HENSON]

Jordan is a silly negro

kareem invented the shy hook!:coleman:

[dankok8]

At a certain point it has to be about level of play and not just blindly comparing Finals MVP's or titles. Again if achievements are the only thing that matters then Russell is the CONSENSUS GOAT... led his team to at least 8-9 of those 11 titles. Would be 7-8 time Finals MVP, 9-10 DPOY, 9-10 All-Defensive 1st Team at the very minimum on top of his 5 MVP's. It's not his fault some of those awards weren't given out then. He would have won them there is no doubt about it! Even in context of his play it's extremely hard to disparage Russell's case even though Jordan stans try their best. Why can't a GOAT defender in NBA history, a top 3 rebounding center for sure (arguably GOAT), a top 3 passing center (again arguably GOAT), and maybe the best leader and psychological master of all time be the GOAT. Because he never scored 20+ ppg. That's an awfully one-dimensional way of looking at things. Take a look at the kind of defensive impact Russell had... it's out of this world. I've made threads on it before. Take a look at some of his scoring in the playoff particularly finals... Tim Duncan like or better numbers in many of them!

People love to rip on Kareem's 2 Finals MVP's but let's consider the facts. He was robbed in 1980 as is explained here (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=301909). Voters actually admitted to being persuaded to change their votes because they couldn't hand out the award to a guy not in attendance! :oldlol: I wonder how many other times in history this kind of shit happened. I hope never. Truth is Kareem had 5 finals performances that were amazing... 1971, 1974, 1980, 1984, and 1985. Also like LAZERUSS said who else has 6 MVP's, 44k points (including playoffs), and 19 all-star appearances. And that his dominance is second only to Wilt (actually probably ahead of Wilt considering playoffs) and his longevity is the greatest ever. He definitely has a strong argument for GOAT. It's stupid to say otherwise.

[SouBeachTalents]

At a certain point it has to be about level of play and not just blindly comparing Finals MVP's or titles. Again if achievements are the only thing that matters then Russell is the CONSENSUS GOAT... led his team to at least 8-9 of those 11 titles. Would be 7-8 time Finals MVP, 9-10 DPOY, 9-10 All-Defensive 1st Team at the very minimum on top of his 5 MVP's. It's not his fault some of those awards weren't given out then. He would have won them there is no doubt about it! Even in context of his play it's extremely hard to disparage Russell's case even though Jordan stans try their best. Why can't a GOAT defender in NBA history, a top 3 rebounding center for sure (arguably GOAT), a top 3 passing center (again arguably GOAT), and maybe the best leader and psychological master of all time be the GOAT. Because he never scored 20+ ppg. That's an awfully one-dimensional way of looking at things. Take a look at the kind of defensive impact Russell had... it's out of this world. I've made threads on it before. Take a look at some of his scoring in the playoff particularly finals... Tim Duncan like or better numbers in many of them!

People love to rip on Kareem's 2 Finals MVP's but let's consider the facts. He was robbed in 1980 as is explained here (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=301909). Voters actually admitted to being persuaded to change their votes because they couldn't hand out the award to a guy not in attendance! :oldlol: I wonder how many other times in history this kind of shit happened. I hope never. Truth is Kareem had 5 finals performances that were amazing... 1971, 1974, 1980, 1984, and 1985. Also like LAZERUSS said who else has 6 MVP's, 44k points (including playoffs), and 19 all-star appearances. And that his dominance is second only to Wilt (actually probably ahead of Wilt considering playoffs) and his longevity is the greatest ever. He definitely has a strong argument for GOAT. It's stupid to say otherwise.

Nice post :cheers: Always thought Russell got screwed historically by not having Finals MVP's and DPOY's back then. Like you said he'd have something like 5 MVP's, 7 Finals MVP's, and 11 DPOY, a resume of accolades unmatched by anyone.

While I do think Jordan is the GOAT, I certainly don't think it's indisputable. Russell, Kareem, and Wilt definitely all have an argument, Russell for championships and accolades, Kareem for longevity, and Wilt for statistical dominance

[La Frescobaldi]

Nice post :cheers: Always thought Russell got screwed historically by not having Finals MVP's and DPOY's back then. Like you said he'd have something like 5 MVP's, 7 Finals MVP's, and 11 DPOY, a resume of accolades unmatched by anyone.

While I do think Jordan is the GOAT, I certainly don't think it's indisputable. Russell, Kareem, and Wilt definitely all have an argument, Russell for championships and accolades, Kareem for longevity, and Wilt for statistical dominance

yes indeed (except Jordan doesn't stand alone) and all of them for just regularly smashing up the other teams right on the court night after night.

[LAZERUSS]

At a certain point it has to be about level of play and not just blindly comparing Finals MVP's or titles. Again if achievements are the only thing that matters then Russell is the CONSENSUS GOAT... led his team to at least 8-9 of those 11 titles. Would be 7-8 time Finals MVP, 9-10 DPOY, 9-10 All-Defensive 1st Team at the very minimum on top of his 5 MVP's. It's not his fault some of those awards weren't given out then. He would have won them there is no doubt about it! Even in context of his play it's extremely hard to disparage Russell's case even though Jordan stans try their best. Why can't a GOAT defender in NBA history, a top 3 rebounding center for sure (arguably GOAT), a top 3 passing center (again arguably GOAT), and maybe the best leader and psychological master of all time be the GOAT. Because he never scored 20+ ppg. That's an awfully one-dimensional way of looking at things. Take a look at the kind of defensive impact Russell had... it's out of this world. I've made threads on it before. Take a look at some of his scoring in the playoff particularly finals... Tim Duncan like or better numbers in many of them!

People love to rip on Kareem's 2 Finals MVP's but let's consider the facts. He was robbed in 1980 as is explained here (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=301909). Voters actually admitted to being persuaded to change their votes because they couldn't hand out the award to a guy not in attendance! :oldlol: I wonder how many other times in history this kind of shit happened. I hope never. Truth is Kareem had 5 finals performances that were amazing... 1971, 1974, 1980, 1984, and 1985. Also like LAZERUSS said who else has 6 MVP's, 44k points (including playoffs), and 19 all-star appearances. And that his dominance is second only to Wilt (actually probably ahead of Wilt considering playoffs) and his longevity is the greatest ever. He definitely has a strong argument for GOAT. It's stupid to say otherwise.

I agree with much of this. However, TEAM success is just that...MULTIPLE players.

If every GOAT candidate somehow started out each season with the same exact roster as every other GOAT candidate, with the same coaching, and with the same level of injuries...it would be relatively simple to determine who the real GOAT was. Which ever player had the most wins would be considered the player who had the most IMPACT...regardless of statistical accomplishments.

Unfortunately for many...that of course...is not the case. Russell is generally regarded as the greatest "winner" (albeit Magic had a higher career W-L% even in the post-season)...but the reality was, he was the SECOND player taken by a 39-33 Boston team in the '56 draft...behind HOFer Tommy Heinsohn. How good was that 56-57 Celtic team? They went 28-20 with Russell, and 16-8 without him. The next year they added HOFer Sam Jones, and while they didn't win a title in '58, they actually played better withOUT Russell in a close series loss. And each year after that they added more-and-more pieces to an already HOF-laden roster. By their 62-63 season, they had added HOFer Clyde Lovellette, who just the year before had averaged 20 ppg. Guess what...on the 62-63 Celts...Clyde was their 7th-8th best player. By the mid-60's they were picking up players like Bailey Howell, who was a career 20 ppg scorer long before he landed in Boston. Hell, in Russell's last Finals, and in a game SEVEN of the Finals...Em Bryant was scoring 20 points.

Meanwhile, it was just the complete opposite for Wilt. He was drafted, while in High School, and by the time he was a rookie (4 years later), he was playing for an aging team that had finished in LAST PLACE. And while Russell's rosters would continue to grow every year, Wilt's just got older and worse (particularly in the playoffs.) Not only that, but the majority of Wilt's coaches were either lazy, incompetent, or both. In his early years, his coaches took a look at the cast of clowns that he had for teammates and decided, hell, let's just give the ball to Wilt.

It got so bad that by Chamberlain's 62-63 season, he had a supporting roster that couldn't have beaten a YMCA team. And I am not kidding, either. Wilt's new coach in 63-64, Alex Hannum, conducted a pre-season scrimmage, sans Wilt, between the veterans, and a group of rookies and cast-offs...and guess which team won? Hannum was horrified to find out that the veterans had become so dependent on Wilt, that they had completely forgotten how to play the game! And yet, Wilt was able to take that cast of mis-fits to a 48-32 record, and a trip to the Finals, where he crushed Russell, but as expected, his teammates wer overwhelmed by Russell's, in a 4-1 series loss (albeit, the last two losses came in the waning seconds.)

Chamberlain was eventually "traded" to another bottom-dweller, the 76ers...a team that had gone 34-46 the year before, and missed the playoffs. Wilt led them to a 40-40 record, and in perhaps the most remarkable post-season ever, he single-handedly took that crappy roster past Oscar's stacked 48-32 Royals in a first round romp...and then with an unfathomable 30-31 .555 FG% seven game series against Russell and his 62-18 Celtics, his Sixers lost that game seven by one point.

From Chamberlain's 65-66 season thru his 67-68 season, he played with rosters that were, for the most part, the equal of Russell's (albeit never as deep.) However, his teammates who had played so well against the Celtics in their '66 regular season H2H's, completely puked all over the floor in the EDF's (while Wilt put up a 28-30 .509 FG% series...his teammates collectively shot .352 from the field), in a 4-1 series loss.

His 66-67 Sixers opened up the season with an early 138-96 blowout of Boston, and never looked back. By mid-season they were 45-4, and coasted home to a then NBA record of 68-13. The Celtics had one of their greatest seasons in the Russell-era, going 60-21, but still finished a distant second to Chamberlain's Sixers. And in the EDF's, with Wilt's teammates finally neutralizing Russell's, and with Chamberlain, as usual, just annihilating Russell...the results were as expected...a Sixer blowout 4-1 series win (and they narrowly missed a sweep in game four.)

And the 67-68 season was well on the way to a repeat. Philly ran away with the best record in the league, and even without HOFer Billy Cunningham in the EDF's, they forged a 3-1 series lead. Even Auerbach had given up. However, the Sixer injuries just piled up, and eventually Boston hung on a for a game seven, four point win. Clearly, with over HALF of the Sixer roster injured, or missing games, had they been healthy, it would have been a repeat of '67.

In any case, '67 proved that with an equal supporting cast, that was healthy, and Wilt's dominance over Russell, that Wilt would have won far more rings.


And KAJ is another example. At his peak, in the early 70's, and playing with good rosters, his team's were going 66-16, 63-19, 60-22, and 59-23 ...albeit, for a variety of reasons, most of which weren't his fault...they only won one title. The rest of the decade of the 70's, a prime KAJ languished on mostly average rosters that were poorly coached. Despite his own individual brilliance, he wound up the decade of the 70's with two trips to the Finals, and ONE ring.

What happened next? MAGIC arrived. Over the course of his next 10 seasons... EIGHT trips to the Finals, and FIVE more rings. And no doubt, and early 80's KAJ was either a co-team MVP, or at the very least, the key offensive component to their success.

All of which proves that, give the greatest players quality supporting casts, that are healthy, and they will generally win.

However, as in the case of Wilt...he seldom had the best supporting casts, even later in his career ('70, '71, and '73...it was NY, Milwaukee, and NY again), and with those supporting casts playing either injured, or just puking altogether (as in '69, '70, '71, and '73), and he had no chance (albeit, two game seven defeats.)

Same with Kareem. He played brilliantly in defeat in '70, '74, '77, and well enough in '78 and '79...and exactly ZERO rings.

And, as in the case with Wilt, his teammates were generally outgunned, as well as choking in the post-season, and invariably, Chamberlain's TEAMs were losing to some of the greatest and most loaded TEAMs of all-time. And horribly outgunned, he STILL narrowly missed rings in 4-5 post-seasons (all game seven losses to the eventual champions...four of which were by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points.)

[LAZERUSS]

BTW...swap rosters in '77, and Kareem sweeps Walton, en route to what would have been his 7th ring...

[dankok8]

All great players had great teams when they won titles.

Still Russell's so called "stacked teams" weren't so stacked relative to their era. KC Jones, Frank Ramsey, and Tom Sanders would never ever be HOF without Russell. And Clyde Lovellette didn't play like a HOF in his short stint in Boston.

Except in a few years like 1959 (where a great St. Louis team choked before the finals) and 1961, Boston was pushed to the brink in all their other runs.

People forget that even in series where Russell's teams didn't have homecourt advantage and were at least by some definition degree underdogs in all of them... 1966 vs. Philly, 1967 vs. Philly, 1968 vs. Philly, 1969 vs. Philly, 1969 vs. New York, and 1969 vs. LA. Boston still went 5-1. That's unprecedented. Also a healthy Russell never lost a playoff series with homecourt advantage. In 1968 and 1969 Russell won two championships in years in which his team was NOT the favorite by any stretch of imagination.

[LAZERUSS]

All great players had great teams when they won titles.

Still Russell's so called "stacked teams" weren't so stacked relative to their era. KC Jones, Frank Ramsey, and Tom Sanders would never ever be HOF without Russell. And Clyde Lovellette didn't play like a HOF in his short stint in Boston.

Except in a few years like 1959 (where a great St. Louis team choked before the finals) and 1961, Boston was pushed to the brink in all their other runs.

People forget that even in series where Russell's teams didn't have homecourt advantage and were at least by some definition degree underdogs in all of them... 1966 vs. Philly, 1967 vs. Philly, 1968 vs. Philly, 1969 vs. Philly, 1969 vs. New York, and 1969 vs. LA. Boston still went 5-1. That's unprecedented. Also a healthy Russell never lost a playoff series with homecourt advantage. In 1968 and 1969 Russell won two championships in years in which his team was NOT the favorite by any stretch of imagination.

Russell's teams went 10-0 in game seven's, with seven of them decided by four points or less, including two in OT.

Still, I would argue that his '66 team, which finished a game behind the Sixers were a considerably better team. They had a TON of missed games by key players during the regular season. And while Philly had a better team in '68, they were just decimated by injuries. A healthy Sixer squad would have repeated their '67 blowout of Boston. And '69 was similar to '66. They rested their players...ala San Antonio...during the regular season, and in fact, their expected W-L was 55-27 (they had an actual 48-34 record.) And they were still the deepest team in the league that year.

I would say that they actually went 1-1 in the series in which they were not favored (if you accept the fact that the '68 Sixers were just a shell of a team that STILL nearly beat them.)

As for Russell's '58 Finals...somewhat fascinating...

The series with St. Louis was tied 1-1, and Russell injured his ankle in the 3rd period. Without Russell, Boston outscored the Hawks in the 4th quarter, but lost the game by a 111-108 margin.

Russell missed all of game four...a solid Celtic road win.

Russell missed all of game five...a 102-100 Hawk win.

Russell played 20 minutes in the first half of game six, but had to pull himself out. Boston outscored the Hawks in the second half, sans Russell, but ultimately lost the game by a 110-109 margin.

I have no doubt that with a healthy Russell, Boston would have won that series, but those results clearly indicate that the Celtics were a near championship team without him.

[Wade's Rings]

Lazeruss how do you get all this info on the 50s & 60s when it wasn't as documented as it is today and you didn't watch it?

[LAZERUSS]

Lazeruss how do you get all this info on the 50s & 60s when it wasn't as documented as it is today and you didn't watch it?

I did watch much of it in the 60's. And the info is out there if you want to take the time to find it.

[Wade's Rings]

I did watch much of it in the 60's. And the info is out there if you want to take the time to find it.

How old are you? Or did you just watch old film?

[LAZERUSS]

How old are you? Or did you just watch old film?

I was watching the Russell-Wilt battles live on TV in the early to mid-60's on...

[La Frescobaldi]

How old are you? Or did you just watch old film?
There are a few of us on ISH that watched guys like Willis Reed, Lew Alcinder, Lou Hudson and Bells and Maravitch and Chet the Jet Walker.

Sam Jones is the most clutch guy I ever saw and that includes a lot of players. He was a weird dude. Silent, awkward looking, shot off the wrong foot a lot, but fast, man he was fast, and could get a great shot off against ANYBODY.

Walt Frazier is the most flawless player I ever saw, even including Jordan, and still to this day my favorite player.

Did you know Jerry Sloan, the great coach of the Stockton/Malone Jazz..... was the Original Bull? Sloan was the first guy Chicago ever drafted!! He was a thief, if they had been counting steals in those days he would rank real high. Brutal player, hard shouldered, mean.

Watching Jerry West run on the court at the beginning was one of the most thrilling experiences in all of sports.
I saw Jerry Lucas come down with a rebound, both arms wrapped around that ball, and Wilt Chamberlain reached out a giant hand and pulled Lucas across the court until the ball came out. Oscar Robertson was kinda bug-eyed at all times but there was a picture in the paper that showed his face, his eyes looked just like saucers!! Wilt was the strongest man I ever saw.
Great times, in those days you could go along the baseline sometimes. Shook a lot of hands, got a lot of autographs. We used to keep our scorecards, some of my friends still have them, showing stuff like Wilt Chamberlain throwing down the most monstrous games you can imagine.... 30 points, 24 rebounds, 15 assists....... and a dozen blocked shots . Numbers like that wouldn't hardly get him mentioned in the papers but he was really something.
The Knicks were my favorite team in those days, every single guy on the starting 5 was a Hall of Famer, and 4 of them are in the Top 50. With P Jax himself off the bench.

[LAZERUSS]

Kareem's (Alcindor's) career, as great as it was, was also a "what could have been"...

His High School teams went 79-2, which included a 71 game winning streak.

He went to UCLA, in an era when freshmen were not allowed to play on the varsity. His freshmen team beat the then #1 ranked varsity in an early season scrimmage, in a game in which he just crushed them. That varsity team, which had won two straight national titles, would "only" go 18-8, and miss the NCAA tourney.

In Alcindor's soph season, the Bruins started four sophs, and went 30-0 and won a dominant NCAA title.

In his junior season, he suffered a scratched eye in the game before his unbeaten and #1 ranked Bruins would play Elvin Hayes and his unbeaten and #2 ranked Houston Cougars in the Astrodome game. In his 90 college games, Alcindor failed to shoot 50% twice...and one of them came in that game (he shot a miserable 4-18.) His Bruins were stunned, 71-69...in a game in which Hayes was fantastic (39 points and 15 rebounds.)

The two would meet again in the NCAA semi's, and this time it was the #1 and unbeaten Cougars (31-0) , against the #2 and 27-1 Bruins. In perhaps the most dominating game ever by a #2 team against a #1 team...the Bruins annihilated Houston, 101-69. And as lopsided as the score was, it was nowhere close to indicative as to just how overwhelming UCLA was in that game. The Bruins led by 44 points early in the second half, and waltzed to that win. Alcindor thoroughly dominated Hayes, outscoring him, 19-10; outrebounding him, 18-5; and outshooting him from the field, 7-14 to 3-10.

Wooden's Bruins suffered a slight let-down following that game, and "sleep-walked" their way to a 78-55 win over North Carolina in the title game. Alcindor hung a 34-16 game on 15-21 shooting in that win.

In his senior season, his team lost one more game, to cross-town rival USC, 46-44. But then, they went on to win the NCAA tournament, and in the Final, they walloped Purdue, 92-72, behind Alcindor's 37 points, on 15-20 shooting, and 20 rebounds.

Overall, there is no question that Alcindor was the greatest college player of all-time. Two-time POY, three-time Tourney MVP, three straight titles, and a career 88-2 mark (marred only by two losses by a combined four points.) And had freshmen been allowed to play, he most certainly would have won four straight titles, and likely four straight Tourney MVPs.


He was drafted by a poor Bucks team, and along with rookie Bobby Dandridge, he turned around a 27-55 team, leading them to a 56-26 record, and then all the way to the Eastern Finals, where they lost to the 60-22 Knicks. From the mid-way point in his rookie season, thru the playoffs, he became the best player in the game. Think about this...in his rookie season, and in the playoffs, he would put up the highest post-season scoring average of his entire 20 year career (35.2 ppg on a .567 FG%.)

His 70-71 Bucks acquired veteran Oscar Robertson, and the results were staggering. Milwaukee was standing at 65-11 late in the season, and had a scoring differential of +13.6 at the time. They coasted in the final five games, and finished 66-16, with a then-record scoring differential of +12.2 ppg (which would be broken the very next year by Wilt's Lakers.) Furthermore, the Bucks set a still record FG% differential of .085... outshooting their opponents by a .509 to .424 margin.

In the playoffs Milwaukee was every bit as dominant. They would go 12-2, with a record _14.5 ppg differential, and a record FG% margin of .497 to .395. They swept the Bullets in the Finals, as well, with Alcindor putting up a 27-19 .605 Finals. As expected, Alcindor also won the FMVP.

Alcindor also won the regular season MVP, with a stat-line of 40 mpg, 31.7 ppg, 16.0 rpg, 3.8 apg, and on a .577 FG%. BTW, that FG% came in a league that shot .449 overall, and his .128 differential would be the highest of his entire career.

The only dent in that entire season, was Alcindor's H2H's with an aging Chamberlain, who was 34 and only a year removed from major knee surgery. Wilt outplayed Alcindor in the majority of their 10 H2H meetings, five of which came in the WCF's. Still, Milwaukee buried Wilt's Lakers (who were without both West and Baylor), and it was just considered a small blip.

The Bucks opened the 71-72 season as UNANIMOUS favorites to win their second straight title. In fact, aside from Oscar, this was a very young team, and not only were the Bucks huge favorites to repeat, most observers felt that they would have a dynasty that would rival Russell's Celtics.

And with Kareem (he changed his name in the off-season) becoming even more dominant, the Bucks stormed out to a 16-1 record. They were 17-2 when they met the surprising 16-3 Lakers. Virtually no one had given LA a second thought before the season started, and the Lakers were basically an old team. Incredibly, their new coach, Bill Sharman, somehow built them into a fast-breaking team, that would go on to terrorize the league. And in that first meeting with Milwaukee, the Lakers squeezed out a close win.

Still, no one really took that game, or the Lakers, seriously at the time. However, the two would meet a couple of months later...and it would arguably be the greatest regular season game of all-time. Milwaukee, playing at home, and in a nationally televised game, came into that game with a 35-8 record, while the Lakers were riding a record 33 game winning streak, and with a 39-3 record. The game was close until mid-way in the 4th quarter. Chamberlain had been in foul trouble, and Milwaukee slowly pulled away to a 120-104 win. Most observers felt that all was now right with the world, and that the Bucks would go on to run away with the rest of the season.

But the Lakers quickly recovered, and went on to have a then-record won-loss mark of 69-13. Included were three straight wins against the Bucks, who would finish at 63-19.

Still, most observers felt that Milwaukee had the better team, and expected the Bucks to win yet another title. However, for the second straight post-season, Kareem was outplayed in a playoff series. This time by veteran Nate Thurmond, who outscored KAJ, 25 ppg to 22.8 ppg, and outshot him from the field by a .437 to .405 margin (that is not a misprint.) But, even so, Milwaukee had way too much firepower for the Warriors, and they won that series easily, 4-1. Meanwhile, LA swept the 57-25 Bulls in the first round, setting up perhaps the most epic playoff series of all-time. The 63-19 and defending champion Bucks, against the 69-13 and overwhelmingly dominant Lakers.

If the Bucks were slight favorites going into that series, they immediately became prohibitive favorites after a game one waxing of LA, in Los Angeles, 93-72.

Kareem had another solid game in game two, but the Lakers miraculously pulled out a 135-132 win. But, with the series moving to Milwaukee, very few expected the Bucks to lose the series.

However, from that point on, with a few exceptions, Chamberlain took over the rest of the series. Kareem scored, but on horrible shooting. He would shoot .414 over the course of the last four games, and the Lakers took control of the series. In game five, the Lakers crushed the Bucks, 115-90, and went back to Milwaukee with a chance to close it out.

But the Bucks would not go quietly. In fact, they had a 10 point 4th quarter lead with about 10 minutes remaining, when Wilt took over the game. Kareem went 2-8 from the field, while Chamberlain scored 9 4th quarter points. Wilt was not only over-powering a rapidly weakening Kareem, he was even running him into the ground. The Lakers came all the way back to win the game, and the series.

Continued...

[LAZERUSS]

Continuing...

I have long maintained that Kareem was never the same again. He had another huge regular season in 72-73, but he took his 60-22 Bucks down in flames in the first round of the playoffs against Thurmond's 47-35 Warriors. Once again, Thurmond held Kareem to just awful shooting (.428) and the Warriors shocked the Bucks in six games.

Chamberlain "retired" after that season, and 72-73 was Thurmond's last quality full-time season. With his two biggest nemesis' either gone, or declining, the door was open for Kareem to completely dominate the league. However, his 59-23 Bucks were blown out in a game seven of the Finals on their home floor, in a game in which the 6-9 red-head Dave Cowens outplayed Kareem.

Oscar retired after the Finals, and his loss was immediate. With Kareem breaking his hand early on, and missing 16 games, the Bucks staggered home with a 38-44 record (only 35-31 with Kareem BTW)...and missed the playoffs.

Kareem was traded to a poor Laker team the very next season, and at the supposed peak of his career, he was on a team in which he could really prove his dominance. In his 71-72 season, he averaged 44 mpg, 34.8 ppg, and shot .577 from the field...for a team that had gone 63-19 and had a +11.1 ppg differential. Now, with a mediocre surrounding roster, the expectations loomed that perhaps Kareem could put up a 40 ppg season. Instead, he played 41 mpg, scored 27.7 ppg, and shot .529 from the field. His Lakers went 40-42 and missed the playoffs.

LA added a little more talent in the 76-77 season, and with a solid season from Kareem, they had the best record in the league, going 53-29. But, mid-way in the season, they lost their starting PF, and his replacement never came close. And in the playoffs, the Lakers were missing their starting PG for two games in the WCF's, and were swept by Walton's 49-33 Blazers...albeit, in arguably the greatest post-season series of Kareem's career. He averaged 30 ppg, 14 rpg, and shot .607 from the field.

The Lakers rally went out and got Kareem a solid supporting cast in the 77-78 season, adding Adrian Dantley (who was averaging 27 ppg when they got him), to go along with Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon, and Lou Hudson. But the chemistry was bad, and Kareem again broke his hand, and with him missing 20 games, they limped home at 45-37. Furthermore, they were eliminated in the first round by the 47-35 Sonics.

With essentially the same roster, but with a healthy Kareem, they still underachieved in 78-79...and finished 47-35. And they were routed in the second round by the eventual champion, and 50-32 Sonics.

So, in the first ten years of his career, while he was clearly the best player in the game for much of them...his teams went to two Finals, and won one ring. They were also eliminated in the first round twice, and missed the playoffs twice.

Magic would arrive the very next season, and the rest in history. Kareem was still a great player for the first half of the decade of the 80's, but it was Magic who was leading those teams to multiple titles.

In any case, ...I still contend that a Kareem, from mid-way thru his rookie season, thru the playoffs, and then thru the 70-71 regular season, and playoffs, and then thru the '71-72 regular season...had a case as having the greatest peak in NBA history, with only Wilt's '65-66 thru '67-68 run as possibly being more dominant.

But after that peak, Kareem seemed to lose motivation, and never really played to his potential. True, he could still go out and hang a 50 point game on Walton, or even later in his career, he could carpet-bomb Hakeem with multiple 40+ point games. But, the drive seemed to diminish each passing season. And, again, he could still put up impressive playoff series ('74 Finals, '77 WCF's, '80 Finals, and '85 Finals), but, there were also the less-than-stellar performances in playoff series in '73, '78, '79, '81, '82, '83, and '84. Again, he had some excellent numbers in several of those series, but he never dominated in them, like a '70 thru '72 Kareem had.

Still, even with some disappointments, his resume still has a case for GOAT. But I have always maintained that he could have been even greater.

[julizaver]

Still, most observers felt that Milwaukee had the better team, and expected the Bucks to win yet another title. However, for the second straight post-season, Kareem was outplayed in a playoff series. This time by veteran Nate Thurmond, who outscored KAJ, 25 ppg to 22.8 ppg, and outshot him from the field by a .437 to .405 margin (that is not a misprint.) But, even so, Milwaukee had way too much firepower for the Warriors, and they won that series easily, 4-1.


Kareem was missing last deciding game of '80 Finals and his team won.

Could someone think of the 76ers defeating the Warriors in Game 6 of '67 Finals if Wilt was missing ? Or could you imagine Lakers defeating NY Knicks in Game 5 in '72 if Wilt was missing ?

Could imagine Wilt bein outplayed by his opposing center or playing poorly and his team still won. And in before someone point to Kareem better stats in '72 WCF (where he played great btw) it was widely considered that Wilt was the key for defeating the Bucks.

A lot of posters here claimed the Kareem peak was with the Lakers (1976-1978) because he start weight lifting and became stronger, more mature.
But forgot that Kareem was dominating with the combination of his height, quickneess and skills, not with his power. A little more stronger and muscled, but a little less quicker Kareem would be less vulnerable to Wilt's and Nate's defense. The younger, quicker and with spring in his legs Kareem was by default a bad match for aging players (Wilt played 27 of the 28 games of his H2Hs with Kareem after turning 34) or injury prone players (like Thurmond), but it only shows how good those two players were, since they limited the efficiency of the most skillfull and offensively versatile center of all time where he was in his prime years.

Therefore we could easily sugest that Wilt's version in 1967 would beat any version of prime Kareem. And that's why I put him ahead of Kareem in the GOAT list. And to put things in perspective I have rated Kareem higher than Russell in the GOAT list. By slight margin of course.

[Wade's Rings]

There are a few of us on ISH that watched guys like Willis Reed, Lew Alcinder, Lou Hudson and Bells and Maravitch and Chet the Jet Walker.

Sam Jones is the most clutch guy I ever saw and that includes a lot of players. He was a weird dude. Silent, awkward looking, shot off the wrong foot a lot, but fast, man he was fast, and could get a great shot off against ANYBODY.

Walt Frazier is the most flawless player I ever saw, even including Jordan, and still to this day my favorite player.

Did you know Jerry Sloan, the great coach of the Stockton/Malone Jazz..... was the Original Bull? Sloan was the first guy Chicago ever drafted!! He was a thief, if they had been counting steals in those days he would rank real high. Brutal player, hard shouldered, mean.

Watching Jerry West run on the court at the beginning was one of the most thrilling experiences in all of sports.
I saw Jerry Lucas come down with a rebound, both arms wrapped around that ball, and Wilt Chamberlain reached out a giant hand and pulled Lucas across the court until the ball came out. Oscar Robertson was kinda bug-eyed at all times but there was a picture in the paper that showed his face, his eyes looked just like saucers!! Wilt was the strongest man I ever saw.
Great times, in those days you could go along the baseline sometimes. Shook a lot of hands, got a lot of autographs. We used to keep our scorecards, some of my friends still have them, showing stuff like Wilt Chamberlain throwing down the most monstrous games you can imagine.... 30 points, 24 rebounds, 15 assists....... and a dozen blocked shots . Numbers like that wouldn't hardly get him mentioned in the papers but he was really something.
The Knicks were my favorite team in those days, every single guy on the starting 5 was a Hall of Famer, and 4 of them are in the Top 50. With P Jax himself off the bench.

That's Dope didn't think anybody on ISH watched them just looked at old game film and stats.

[La Frescobaldi]

That's Dope didn't think anybody on ISH watched them just looked at old game film and stats.

naw man there are a few old geezers still hangin around trying to see who will be the next Magic Johnson or David Thompson or Bob Lanier..... :lol

check out Helix, Colts19, stanlove, Laz, there's quite a few really... old man Jasper is a real good dude too, watched Kareem and Wilt duke it out in the playoffs... home courtin' it Minneapolis

I have two old old friends, now got white hair, that saw NBA in the Fifties but they don't remember much of it. I got old buddies in PA that have many tales to tell of the old days but hard as I try they won't get a user on ISH and post on here. I have used their words and stories on here several times too, trying to get them to join. No dice. They love ish tho for being such a off-kilter place

To me though, the early '70s was the best era, because the competition was so crazy great where I love basketball the best - in the paint. Bucks & Kareem, Lakers & Wilt, Detroit had Lanier, Cowens in Boston, Thurmond and Bob Rule and Connie Hawkins and Elvin Hayes lololol..... also tho I did love those Knicks ring teams they were fierce but Willis Reed man.........

[Wade's Rings]

naw man there are a few old geezers still hangin around trying to see who will be the next Magic Johnson or David Thompson or Bob Lanier..... :lol

check out Helix, Colts19, stanlove, Laz, there's quite a few really... old man Jasper is a real good dude too, watched Kareem and Wilt duke it out in the playoffs... home courtin' it Minneapolis

I have two old old friends, now got white hair, that saw NBA in the Fifties but they don't remember much of it. I got old buddies in PA that have many tales to tell of the old days but hard as I try they won't get a user on ISH and post on here. I have used their words and stories on here several times too, trying to get them to join. No dice. They love ish tho for being such a off-kilter place

To me though, the early '70s was the best era, because the competition was so crazy great where I love basketball the best - in the paint. Bucks & Kareem, Lakers & Wilt, Detroit had Lanier, Cowens in Boston, Thurmond and Bob Rule and Connie Hawkins and Elvin Hayes lololol..... also tho I did love those Knicks ring teams they were fierce but Willis Reed man.........

Nice to get some insight from people who watched Those Eras. I always wondered where Lazeruss got his info from.

[knicksman]

kareem before magic is 21 ppg scorer. And since hes past his prime, its expected that hes going to be done in 2 years. NOw tell me if hes a player worth building around.

If theres a player that should be in the same sentence as jordan-its magic. Kareem should be in the wilt category. 5 MVPS for 1 ring as the man.

[dankok8]

Good posts LAZ!

However let's add some more facts into the Wilt-Russell battles.

1 - Wilt cared about individually outplaying Russell, Russell never cared as long as his team won. Even Wilt himself attested to this.

2 - Russell played considerably better defense especially from 1960-1966. A lot of his impact on that end is not reflected in stats.

3 - Wilt's and Russell's primes didn't completely overlap. Russell after 1964 started his decline while Wilt was entering his peak. Through their first 18 playoff games (1960, 1962, 1964) the rebounding battle was 9-8-1. In their last 31 games (1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969) the rebounding battle was 21-10. Why is it always ignored that Wilt was 3 years younger than Russell? In 1967 a peak Wilt was trashing a past his prime Russell far removed from his peak days in 1962. After 1965 Russell was no longer in his prime.

4 - Russell is GOAT when it comes to having a knack for making the right play. He knew how to get the most of his teammates, how to motivate them, how to recognize and capitalize on his opponents' weaknesses better than any other player that ever played. It's not a knock on Wilt even Kareem or Jordan or whoever would have a lot of trouble beating Russell. My point ... Russell was THAT GOOD. GOAT intangibles mean something.

Here are their career stats:

Regular Season

Wilt: 30.1 ppg, 22.9 rpg, 4.4 apg on 54.0 %FG/51.1 %FT in 45.8 mpg
Russell: 15.1 ppg, 22.5 rpg, 4.3 apg on 44.0 %FG/56.1 %FT in 42.3 mpg

Playoffs

Wilt: 22.5 ppg, 24.5 rpg, 4.2 apg on 52.2 %FG/46.5 %FT in 47.2 mpg
Russell: 16.2 ppg, 24.9 rpg, 4.7 apg on 43.0 %FG/60.3 %FT in 45.4 mpg

Finals

Wilt: 18.6 ppg, 24.6 rpg, 3.8 apg on 55.9 %FG/37.5 %FT in 47.3 mpg
Russell: 16.4 ppg, 24.6 rpg, 4.5 apg* on 40.3 %FG/61.4 %FT in 45.5 mpg

* missing Russell's assists from 1959 finals

And then of course:

Awards

Wilt: 4 MVP's, 2 titles, 2 FMVP's, 2-3 DPOY, 7x 1st Team, 3x 2nd Team
Russell: 5 MVP's, 11 titles, 7-8 FMVP's, 9-10 DPOY, 3x 1st Team, 7x 2nd Team


Wilt played many of his playoffs and finals way out of his prime but so did Russell. Russell had four or five finals series with prime Tim Duncan or better numbers and then a few averaging single digits that hurt his averages a lot.

While Wilt played very good defense on average Russell played GOAT defense. To say Wilt is way better than Russell is crazy. It is debatable and will always be debatable.

What Wooden said about Wilt with Russell's rosters... hell we don't know. He might be right or not.

[La Frescobaldi]

Good posts LAZ!

However let's add some more facts into the Wilt-Russell battles.

1 - Wilt cared about individually outplaying Russell, Russell never cared as long as his team won. Even Wilt himself attested to this.

2 - Russell played considerably better defense especially from 1960-1966. A lot of his impact on that end is not reflected in stats.

3 - Wilt's and Russell's primes didn't completely overlap. Russell after 1964 started his decline while Wilt was entering his peak. Through their first 18 playoff games (1960, 1962, 1964) the rebounding battle was 9-8-1. In their last 31 games (1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969) the rebounding battle was 21-10. Why is it always ignored that Wilt was 3 years younger than Russell? In 1967 a peak Wilt was trashing a past his prime Russell far removed from his peak days in 1962. After 1965 Russell was no longer in his prime.

4 - Russell is GOAT when it comes to having a knack for making the right play. He knew how to get the most of his teammates, how to motivate them, how to recognize and capitalize on his opponents' weaknesses better than any other player that ever played. It's not a knock on Wilt even Kareem or Jordan or whoever would have a lot of trouble beating Russell. My point ... Russell was THAT GOOD. GOAT intangibles mean something.

Here are their career stats:

Regular Season

Wilt: 30.1 ppg, 22.9 rpg, 4.4 apg on 54.0 %FG/51.1 %FT in 45.8 mpg
Russell: 15.1 ppg, 22.5 rpg, 4.3 apg on 44.0 %FG/56.1 %FT in 42.3 mpg

Playoffs

Wilt: 22.5 ppg, 24.5 rpg, 4.2 apg on 52.2 %FG/46.5 %FT in 47.2 mpg
Russell: 16.2 ppg, 24.9 rpg, 4.7 apg on 43.0 %FG/60.3 %FT in 45.4 mpg

Finals

Wilt: 18.6 ppg, 24.6 rpg, 3.8 apg on 55.9 %FG/37.5 %FT in 47.3 mpg
Russell: 16.4 ppg, 24.6 rpg, 4.5 apg* on 40.3 %FG/61.4 %FT in 45.5 mpg

* missing Russell's assists from 1959 finals

And then of course:

Awards

Wilt: 4 MVP's, 2 titles, 2 FMVP's, 2-3 DPOY, 7x 1st Team, 3x 2nd Team
Russell: 5 MVP's, 11 titles, 7-8 FMVP's, 9-10 DPOY, 3x 1st Team, 7x 2nd Team


Wilt played many of his playoffs and finals way out of his prime but so did Russell. Russell had four or five finals series with prime Tim Duncan or better numbers and then a few averaging single digits that hurt his averages a lot.

While Wilt played very good defense on average Russell played GOAT defense. To say Wilt is way better than Russell is crazy. It is debatable and will always be debatable.

What Wooden said about Wilt with Russell's rosters... hell we don't know. He might be right or not.

It's a myth that Wilt didn't help his teammates. Writers have done a horrific hatchet job on Chamberlain over the years, so that even knowledgeable guys are swayed by the rhetoric.
If you study Chamberlain's teammates, you'll be surprised to find that the vast majority of them actually had the best years of their careers when he was on their team. This is plain to see because he moved around some.

Of course the old guys at the tail end of their careers when Hundred joined the Warriors.... have their own story to tell.... but even some of them actually got better as well.
Almost the only exception to that is Billy Cunningham, who was very very young and got much better as he went along.

Interesting to note the pace of the league increased enormously the day that Wilt Chamberlain stepped on the court. If you subtract the figures that Chamberlain himself put into each season, the early '60s look very very different.... pretty much like any other season except they were going at a terrific pace... trying desperately to keep up with him.....

[LAZERUSS]

It's a myth that Wilt didn't help his teammates. Writers have done a horrific hatchet job on Chamberlain over the years, so that even knowledgeable guys are swayed by the rhetoric.
If you study Chamberlain's teammates, you'll be surprised to find that the vast majority of them actually had the best years of their careers when he was on their team. This is plain to see because he moved around some.

Of course the old guys at the tail end of their careers when Hundred joined the Warriors.... have their own story to tell.... but even some of them actually got better as well.
Almost the only exception to that is Billy Cunningham, who was very very young and got much better as he went along.

Interesting to note the pace of the league increased enormously the day that Wilt Chamberlain stepped on the court. If you subtract the figures that Chamberlain himself put into each season, the early '60s look very very different.... pretty much like any other season except they were going at a terrific pace... trying desperately to keep up with him.....

Off the top of my head, Wilt and Russell played with two of the same teammates in their careers...Willie Naulls and Mel Counts. BOTH played BETTER (Counts was CONSIDERABLY better) with WILT.

As for the rest of Wilt's main teammates in his career...

Paul Arizin, Jerry West, and Elgin Baylor had better career seasons without Chamberlain, but you have to take context into account, as well.

Arizin played with Wilt at the end of his career. However, the year before Wilt arrived, in 58-59, Arizin had his career high ppg season of 26.4 ppg. In his three years with Wilt, he averaged 22.3 ppg, 23.2 ppg, and 21.9 ppg. And, his highest post-season, which came before Wilt, was at 28.9 ppg. His highest with Wilt was 26.3 ppg. So, even with a PEAK "scoring" Wilt (who averaged well over 40 ppg in those three seasons with Paul)...Arizin's ppg didn't drop much at all.

West's career high ppg seasons were well before Chamberlain joined the Lakers. He had seasons of 31.3 ppg and 31.0 in the mid-60's. However, the season before Chamberlain arrived, he averaged 26.3 ppg. In his first with Wilt... 25.9 ppg. Furthermore, in that same post-season, West averaged 30.9 ppg, and had a career high in his Finals, at 37.9 ppg. Oh, and how about this interesting fact? In Wilt's 69-70 season, he was averaging 32.2 ppg in the first nine games of the season, before he blew out his knee. In that same span, West was averaging 30.8 ppg. Without Wilt, West went on to lead the league in scoring, at 31.2 ppg...but as you can see, his ppg production was hardly impacted at all.

Baylor? He was well past his prime when Chamberlain arrived in 68-69. But, in the season before Chamberlain joined him, Baylor averaged 26.0 ppg. In his first season with Wilt... 24.8 ppg. True, he went to hell in that post-season, but you could hardly blame a Wilt who averaged 10 FGAs in the playoffs that year.

Four other players deserve a mention. Billy Cunningham, Chet Walker, Luke Jackson, and Guy Rodgers. All of them were playing with Wilt early in their careers, and would go on to have their career best years after Wilt. But Cunningham was a "sixth" man with Chamberlain, while Walker was a "3rd-4th wheel" in his years with Wilt, and he would become more of "the man" with the Bulls later on (he and Butterbean Love.) Oh, and the year before Wilt arrived...Walker averaged 13.2 ppg. In his first full season with Wilt, he averaged 15.3 ppg, and the next year he would average 19.3 ppg. His career high with the Bulls was 22.0 ppg. Rodgers scored at a higher clip after Wilt, albeit, he continued to be the worst shooter of his era. Jackson's numbers went up slightly after Wilt was "traded" following his '67-68 season. However, he only played 25 games that year (he had played all 82 the year before with Wilt.)

Oh, and you can't count Nate Thurmond, who played with Wilt for one full season, and who was a rookie, playing part-time, and out of position.

The rest of Wilt's teammates all played BETTER WITH Chamberlain. Tom Gola, Tom Meschery, Hal Greer, Happy Hairston, Gail Goodrich, and Jimmy McMillian..all had their career bests seasons WITH Wilt.

So, the MYTH that Wilt "hurt" his teammates was just that... a MYTH.

[dankok8]

^ You guys should read my post more carefully. I never asserted that Wilt hurt (or even that he didn't help) his teammates. I just said that Russell is the intangibles GOAT. Even other greats like Kareem, Jordan etc. couldn't elevate their teammates, provide the kind of leadership (Kareem was never a vocal leader, Jordan trashed his teammates and didn't trust them enough), or were as cerebral as Bill Russell.

It's not a knock on Wilt. Everyone loses as far as intangibles in comparison to Bill Russell IMO. The evidence is overwhelming.

[LAZERUSS]

^ You guys should read my post more carefully. I never asserted that Wilt hurt (or even that he didn't help) his teammates. I just said that Russell is the intangibles GOAT. Even other greats like Kareem, Jordan etc. couldn't elevate their teammates, provide the kind of leadership (Kareem was never a vocal leader, Jordan trashed his teammates and didn't trust them enough), or were as cerebral as Bill Russell.

It's not a knock on Wilt. Everyone loses as far as intangibles in comparison to Bill Russell IMO. The evidence is overwhelming.

I wasn't directing my response at you. More at the clowns like Simmons who claim that Chamberlain was selfish and limited the play of his teammates.

Of course, Simmons was basically wrong about every single assertion in his chapter on the Russell-Wilt "debates."

[Heilige]

I agree with much of this. However, TEAM success is just that...MULTIPLE players.

If every GOAT candidate somehow started out each season with the same exact roster as every other GOAT candidate, with the same coaching, and with the same level of injuries...it would be relatively simple to determine who the real GOAT was. Which ever player had the most wins would be considered the player who had the most IMPACT...regardless of statistical accomplishments.

Unfortunately for many...that of course...is not the case. Russell is generally regarded as the greatest "winner" (albeit Magic had a higher career W-L% even in the post-season)...but the reality was, he was the SECOND player taken by a 39-33 Boston team in the '56 draft...behind HOFer Tommy Heinsohn. How good was that 56-57 Celtic team? They went 28-20 with Russell, and 16-8 without him. The next year they added HOFer Sam Jones, and while they didn't win a title in '58, they actually played better withOUT Russell in a close series loss. And each year after that they added more-and-more pieces to an already HOF-laden roster. By their 62-63 season, they had added HOFer Clyde Lovellette, who just the year before had averaged 20 ppg. Guess what...on the 62-63 Celts...Clyde was their 7th-8th best player. By the mid-60's they were picking up players like Bailey Howell, who was a career 20 ppg scorer long before he landed in Boston. Hell, in Russell's last Finals, and in a game SEVEN of the Finals...Em Bryant was scoring 20 points.

Meanwhile, it was just the complete opposite for Wilt. He was drafted, while in High School, and by the time he was a rookie (4 years later), he was playing for an aging team that had finished in LAST PLACE. And while Russell's rosters would continue to grow every year, Wilt's just got older and worse (particularly in the playoffs.) Not only that, but the majority of Wilt's coaches were either lazy, incompetent, or both. In his early years, his coaches took a look at the cast of clowns that he had for teammates and decided, hell, let's just give the ball to Wilt.

It got so bad that by Chamberlain's 62-63 season, he had a supporting roster that couldn't have beaten a YMCA team. And I am not kidding, either. Wilt's new coach in 63-64, Alex Hannum, conducted a pre-season scrimmage, sans Wilt, between the veterans, and a group of rookies and cast-offs...and guess which team won? Hannum was horrified to find out that the veterans had become so dependent on Wilt, that they had completely forgotten how to play the game! And yet, Wilt was able to take that cast of mis-fits to a 48-32 record, and a trip to the Finals, where he crushed Russell, but as expected, his teammates wer overwhelmed by Russell's, in a 4-1 series loss (albeit, the last two losses came in the waning seconds.)

Chamberlain was eventually "traded" to another bottom-dweller, the 76ers...a team that had gone 34-46 the year before, and missed the playoffs. Wilt led them to a 40-40 record, and in perhaps the most remarkable post-season ever, he single-handedly took that crappy roster past Oscar's stacked 48-32 Royals in a first round romp...and then with an unfathomable 30-31 .555 FG% seven game series against Russell and his 62-18 Celtics, his Sixers lost that game seven by one point.

From Chamberlain's 65-66 season thru his 67-68 season, he played with rosters that were, for the most part, the equal of Russell's (albeit never as deep.) However, his teammates who had played so well against the Celtics in their '66 regular season H2H's, completely puked all over the floor in the EDF's (while Wilt put up a 28-30 .509 FG% series...his teammates collectively shot .352 from the field), in a 4-1 series loss.

His 66-67 Sixers opened up the season with an early 138-96 blowout of Boston, and never looked back. By mid-season they were 45-4, and coasted home to a then NBA record of 68-13. The Celtics had one of their greatest seasons in the Russell-era, going 60-21, but still finished a distant second to Chamberlain's Sixers. And in the EDF's, with Wilt's teammates finally neutralizing Russell's, and with Chamberlain, as usual, just annihilating Russell...the results were as expected...a Sixer blowout 4-1 series win (and they narrowly missed a sweep in game four.)

And the 67-68 season was well on the way to a repeat. Philly ran away with the best record in the league, and even without HOFer Billy Cunningham in the EDF's, they forged a 3-1 series lead. Even Auerbach had given up. However, the Sixer injuries just piled up, and eventually Boston hung on a for a game seven, four point win. Clearly, with over HALF of the Sixer roster injured, or missing games, had they been healthy, it would have been a repeat of '67.

In any case, '67 proved that with an equal supporting cast, that was healthy, and Wilt's dominance over Russell, that Wilt would have won far more rings.


And KAJ is another example. At his peak, in the early 70's, and playing with good rosters, his team's were going 66-16, 63-19, 60-22, and 59-23 ...albeit, for a variety of reasons, most of which weren't his fault...they only won one title. The rest of the decade of the 70's, a prime KAJ languished on mostly average rosters that were poorly coached. Despite his own individual brilliance, he wound up the decade of the 70's with two trips to the Finals, and ONE ring.

What happened next? MAGIC arrived. Over the course of his next 10 seasons... EIGHT trips to the Finals, and FIVE more rings. And no doubt, and early 80's KAJ was either a co-team MVP, or at the very least, the key offensive component to their success.

All of which proves that, give the greatest players quality supporting casts, that are healthy, and they will generally win.

However, as in the case of Wilt...he seldom had the best supporting casts, even later in his career ('70, '71, and '73...it was NY, Milwaukee, and NY again), and with those supporting casts playing either injured, or just puking altogether (as in '69, '70, '71, and '73), and he had no chance (albeit, two game seven defeats.)

Same with Kareem. He played brilliantly in defeat in '70, '74, '77, and well enough in '78 and '79...and exactly ZERO rings.

And, as in the case with Wilt, his teammates were generally outgunned, as well as choking in the post-season, and invariably, Chamberlain's TEAMs were losing to some of the greatest and most loaded TEAMs of all-time. And horribly outgunned, he STILL narrowly missed rings in 4-5 post-seasons (all game seven losses to the eventual champions...four of which were by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points.)



Great post!!! :cheers:

LAZERUSS, I think you have made great posts and analysis in this thread. Don't mean to derail the thread but who do you feel are the top 10 GOAT NFL quarterbacks and why? Would be very interested to hear your thoughts regarding that.

[La Frescobaldi]

^ You guys should read my post more carefully. I never asserted that Wilt hurt (or even that he didn't help) his teammates. I just said that Russell is the intangibles GOAT. Even other greats like Kareem, Jordan etc. couldn't elevate their teammates, provide the kind of leadership (Kareem was never a vocal leader, Jordan trashed his teammates and didn't trust them enough), or were as cerebral as Bill Russell.

It's not a knock on Wilt. Everyone loses as far as intangibles in comparison to Bill Russell IMO. The evidence is overwhelming.

The evidence of Hall of Famers on those totally stacked Celtics squads says otherwise. Severely.
Lots of guys I know didn't even bother watching the NBA because the Celtics were so loaded.

There was no free agency in those days, and Boston got whoever they wanted; the Celtics stayed together for years and years. You can't put a number on that intangible.

[LAZERUSS]

Great post!!! :cheers:

LAZERUSS, I think you have made great posts and analysis in this thread. Don't mean to derail the thread but who do you feel are the top 10 GOAT NFL quarterbacks and why? Would be very interested to hear your thoughts regarding that.

I can tell you this much...

IMHO, Bart Starr was the best QB of all-time. FIVE championships, 9-1 playoff record (and in that loss, his team had the ball on the Eagle 8 yard line when time expired... in a 17-13 loss.) And the highest post-season passer rating of all-time.

BTW, Starr repeatedly outplayed Johnny Unitas. Furthermore, Unitas, despite his reputation, was one of the biggest big game "chokers" in NFL history (including must-win regular season, and post-season games.) His career post-season passer rating was just awful, too.

Same with John Elway. A HUGE "choker" in his career. In fact, before he finally won SB's in his last two seasons, he was a laughingstock. Even "the Simpson's" ran a Super Bowl special in which they mocked him. Furthermore, he was simply horrific in his first Super Bowl WIN. Had it not been for Terrell Davis and the O-Line, and Elway would have finished with a career Super Bowl mark of 1-4. And, as we know, his first three SB losses were by staggering margins.

I could even diminish Joe Montana's post-season success, too. He lost SEVEN games in his post-season career, including some blowouts, and in fact, he was even BENCHED in one of them.

[Heilige]

I can tell you this much...

IMHO, Bart Starr was the best QB of all-time. FIVE championships, 9-1 playoff record (and in that loss, his team had the ball on the Eagle 8 yard line when time expired... in a 17-13 loss.) And the highest post-season passer rating of all-time.

BTW, Starr repeatedly outplayed Johnny Unitas. Furthermore, Unitas, despite his reputation, was one of the biggest big game "chokers" in NFL history (including must-win regular season, and post-season games.) His career post-season passer rating was just awful, too.

Same with John Elway. A HUGE "choker" in his career. In fact, before he finally won SB's in his last two seasons, he was a laughingstock. Even "the Simpson's" ran a Super Bowl special in which they mocked him. Furthermore, he was simply horrific in his first Super Bowl WIN. Had it not been for Terrell Davis and the O-Line, and Elway would have finished with a career Super Bowl mark of 1-4. And, as we know, his first three SB losses were by staggering margins.

I could even diminish Joe Montana's post-season success, too. He lost SEVEN games in his post-season career, including some blowouts, and in fact, he was even BENCHED in one of them.



What are your thoughts on Tom Brady and Peyton Manning?

[LAZERUSS]

What are your thoughts on Tom Brady and Peyton Manning?

Brady > Manning. But very close. Manning gets trashed because of his post-season decline, but those Colt teams were average, at best, without him (hell, they went 2-14 when he was injured in his last season there.)

A peak Brady, with players like Moss around him, put up "Manning-like" stats. But for most of his career, he has had very limited offensive personnel, and STILL went to FIVE SBs, and won THREE of them. Oh, and now a SIXTH.

[La Frescobaldi]

Brady > Manning. But very close. Manning gets trashed because of his post-season decline, but those Colt teams were average, at best, without him (hell, they went 2-14 when he was injured in his last season there.)

A peak Brady, with players like Moss around him, put up "Manning-like" stats. But for most of his career, he has had very limited offensive personnel, and STILL went to FIVE SBs, and won THREE of them. Oh, and now a SIXTH.
six, in a couple weeks lol you caught it with the edit Laz.

but what about Troy Aikman and Otto Graham?

[LAZERUSS]

six, in a couple weeks lol you caught it with the edit Laz.

but what about Troy Aikman and Otto Graham?

Graham was before my time, but his career resume easily puts him in the Top-10, and probably top-5.

Aikman...not so sure. Those were super-stacked Cowboy teams, and on both sides of the ball. Still, he won titles with them. And he even played reasonably well in his only SB loss.

[dankok8]

The evidence of Hall of Famers on those totally stacked Celtics squads says otherwise. Severely.
Lots of guys I know didn't even bother watching the NBA because the Celtics were so loaded.

There was no free agency in those days, and Boston got whoever they wanted; the Celtics stayed together for years and years. You can't put a number on that intangible.

KC Jones, Frank Ramsey, and Tom Sanders shouldn't be HOF. Their selections are a joke. Clyde Lovelette also played nothing like a HOF in Boston. Subtract those guys and Russell's teams' HOF count is like their opponents.

Hawks from 1957-1961, Lakers in 1962, Royals from 1963-1966, Sixers from 1966-1968, and Knicks and Lakers in 1969 either had as much or more talent than Boston. Sure Russell had a very talented team but in my opinion Jordan's Bulls in the 1990's for example had a more stacked team relative to their competition than Bill Russell. In the 1960's a few teams actually had 2nd and 3rd guys as good as Cousy, Havlicek, Sam Jones etc.

[La Frescobaldi]

KC Jones, Frank Ramsey, and Tom Sanders shouldn't be HOF. Their selections are a joke. Clyde Lovelette also played nothing like a HOF in Boston. Subtract those guys and Russell's teams' HOF count is like their opponents.

Hawks from 1957-1961, Lakers in 1962, Royals from 1963-1966, Sixers from 1966-1968, and Knicks and Lakers in 1969 either had as much or more talent than Boston. Sure Russell had a very talented team but in my opinion Jordan's Bulls in the 1990's for example had a more stacked team relative to their competition than Bill Russell. In the 1960's a few teams actually had 2nd and 3rd guys as good as Cousy, Havlicek, Sam Jones etc.

how do you know they were a joke? you watched em play? The only one I saw was Sanders but that dude was all-defense, all the time. Lovelette did his only job, which was get Wilt Chamberlain into fights.

yes the Bulls were stacked but not like that.

lol at saying there was a small forward in '60s NBA as good as John Havlicek.:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
Name a 6th man in the '60s better than Sam Jones. Shoot, name a guard, any guard, other than West or Robertson. :roll: :roll: :roll:

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

[dankok8]

how do you know they were a joke? you watched em play? The only one I saw was Sanders but that dude was all-defense, all the time. Lovelette did his only job, which was get Wilt Chamberlain into fights.

yes the Bulls were stacked but not like that.

lol at saying there was a small forward in '60s NBA as good as John Havlicek.:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
Name a 6th man in the '60s better than Sam Jones. Shoot, name a guard, any guard, other than West or Robertson. :roll: :roll: :roll:

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

They were effective role players but HOF? They made a combined zero all-star appearances.

Baylor > Havlicek until 1967. Havlicek didn't become better until 1969.

After 1966, Hal Greer > Sam Jones.

[La Frescobaldi]

They were effective role players but HOF? They made a combined zero all-star appearances.

Baylor > Havlicek until 1967. Havlicek didn't become better until 1969.

After 1966, Hal Greer > Sam Jones.

Baylor broke his kneecap in 1965, and never played anything like a full season again. His last 3 or 4 seasons totalled like 80 games or some sh!t. Not only that but he was a Kobe Bryant type by the late '60s, living on a dusty, long-past legend that had no bearing on anything except some scoring and a gabbly-legged attempt at defense every now and then. Havlicek routinely shut him down like nothing whenever the Celtics needed a stop. He cost the Lakers a title in '69 by his joke defense and clanking shots. The Celtics just ignored him altogether.

Hal Greer was better than Sam Jones because Jones got old... around '68. He was never clutch like Sam and didn't have the defense either.

Sorry man, you'll have to try harder. Or don't, since your position is flat wrong.

[dankok8]

Baylor broke his kneecap in 1965, and never played anything like a full season again. His last 3 or 4 seasons totalled like 80 games or some sh!t. Not only that but he was a Kobe Bryant type by the late '60s, living on a dusty, long-past legend that had no bearing on anything except some scoring and a gabbly-legged attempt at defense every now and then. He cost the Lakers a title in '69 by his joke defense and clanking shots. The Celtics just ignored him altogether.

Hal Greer was better than Sam Jones because Jones got old... around '68. He was never clutch like Sam and didn't have the defense either.

Sorry man, you'll have to try harder. Or don't, since your position is flat wrong.

Yea Jones got old... Greer from 1966-1967 season onwards was better. And Sam Jones was never a notable defender.

Baylor declined after his kneecap injury but was still great from 1965-1968. In fact his 1968 playoffs were dominant!

[DatAsh]

Yea Jones got old... Greer from 1966-1967 season onwards was better. And Sam Jones was never a notable defender.

Baylor declined after his kneecap injury but was still great from 1965-1968. In fact his 1968 playoffs were dominant!

Usually I agree with La Frescobaldi, but I'm with you on this one.

How many true HOFs would you say those Celtics teams produced?

[La Frescobaldi]

Yea Jones got old... Greer from 1966-1967 season onwards was better. And Sam Jones was never a notable defender.

Baylor declined after his kneecap injury but was still great from 1965-1968. In fact his 1968 playoffs were dominant!
Baylor did fine, I dunno about dominant. He wasn't better than Havlicek though. Hondo did a lot of carrying the Celtics about the last 18 months of Russell's career and on both sides of the ball. On defense there is no comparison at all and the vaunted Celtics non-stop transition and speed was pure Havlicek.

Sam wasn't an elite defender but he was miles past Greer, who had guys blow by him pretty regular. The big difference maker for Greer was Jackson & Chamberlain were behind him and they could stop the guy that sprinted past Greer. Before Wilt's knee blew out he had amazing lateral movement.

[DMV2]

MJ: 6 rings and 5 MVPs in span of 10 years but only 8 full seasons, which includes 5 seasons of 5 rings/5MVPs/5FMVP and 6 rings/6 scoring titles in same season. 10 straight scoring titles when playing more than 17 games in a season. Was always the best player on his team, was the best player in the league during that 10 year span.

KAJ: 6 rings, 6 MVPs in a span of 18 years, which only included 1 season of a ring/MVP/FMVP(1971), 1 season of ring/MVP(1980) and 1 season of ring/FMVP(1985).

So KAJ has the all-time total stats and longevity but MJ was more dominant, crushed his peers, had a better prime, a better Finals performer, bigger impact as the #1 option. MJ also doesn't have another Top 10 player as a teammate. Pippen is a HOFer, one of the best but he ain't no Magic Johnson.

It seems like an open and shut case to me.

#1. Jordan
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
#2 Abdul-Jabbar
then the rest of the Top 10 GOATs

[Prometheus]

MJ: 6 rings and 5 MVPs in span of 10 years but only 8 full seasons, which includes 5 seasons of 5 rings/5MVPs/5FMVP and 6 rings/6 scoring titles in same season. 10 straight scoring titles when playing more than 17 games in a season. Was always the best player on his team, was the best player in the league during that 10 year span.

KAJ: 6 rings, 6 MVPs in a span of 18 years, which only included 1 season of a ring/MVP/FMVP(1971), 1 season of ring/MVP(1980) and 1 season of ring/FMVP(1985).

So KAJ has the all-time total stats and longevity but MJ was more dominant, crushed his peers, had a better prime, a better Finals performer, bigger impact as the #1 option. MJ also doesn't have another Top 10 player as a teammate. Pippen is a HOFer, one of the best but he ain't no Magic Johnson.

It seems like an open and shut case to me.

#1. Jordan
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
#2 Abdul-Jabbar
then the rest of the Top 10 GOATs

Well put.

[dunksby]

MJ: 6 rings and 5 MVPs in span of 10 years but only 8 full seasons, which includes 5 seasons of 5 rings/5MVPs/5FMVP and 6 rings/6 scoring titles in same season. 10 straight scoring titles when playing more than 17 games in a season. Was always the best player on his team, was the best player in the league during that 10 year span.

KAJ: 6 rings, 6 MVPs in a span of 18 years, which only included 1 season of a ring/MVP/FMVP(1971), 1 season of ring/MVP(1980) and 1 season of ring/FMVP(1985).

So KAJ has the all-time total stats and longevity but MJ was more dominant, crushed his peers, had a better prime, a better Finals performer, bigger impact as the #1 option. MJ also doesn't have another Top 10 player as a teammate. Pippen is a HOFer, one of the best but he ain't no Magic Johnson.

It seems like an open and shut case to me.

#1. Jordan
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
#2 Abdul-Jabbar
then the rest of the Top 10 GOATs
Kareem was so ready to win he won a ring in his second year in an utterly dominant fashion. sweeping the finals and putting up 27/19/3/5, if that's not crushing your opponent I don't know what that is. Kareem like all other greats won rings when he had good teammates. KAJ also has the case for the greatest basketball player ever given how dominant he was in HS and college. Dunking got banned because of Kareem while rules were bent to facilitate Jordan ball. Kareem went toe to toe with numerous all-time greats at his own position, he lost some but won most of those battles. Kareem never quit to play a sport he loved more because he simply loved basketball.

[dankok8]

MJ: 6 rings and 5 MVPs in span of 10 years but only 8 full seasons, which includes 5 seasons of 5 rings/5MVPs/5FMVP and 6 rings/6 scoring titles in same season. 10 straight scoring titles when playing more than 17 games in a season. Was always the best player on his team, was the best player in the league during that 10 year span.

KAJ: 6 rings, 6 MVPs in a span of 18 years, which only included 1 season of a ring/MVP/FMVP(1971), 1 season of ring/MVP(1980) and 1 season of ring/FMVP(1985).

So KAJ has the all-time total stats and longevity but MJ was more dominant, crushed his peers, had a better prime, a better Finals performer, bigger impact as the #1 option. MJ also doesn't have another Top 10 player as a teammate. Pippen is a HOFer, one of the best but he ain't no Magic Johnson.

It seems like an open and shut case to me.

#1. Jordan
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
#2 Abdul-Jabbar
then the rest of the Top 10 GOATs

Jordan was NOT more dominant than Kareem. Kareem played in a league of 17 teams with 11-12 quality centers and put up 35/17/5 on 57% shooting while obliterating all of his opponents for a season.

Bigger impact? On top of scoring 30+ ppg on better efficiency, Kareem also grabbed 15+ boards a game and shut opposing teams down on D.

Better prime? Kareem won 1st Team All-NBA 15 years apart, FMVP 14 years apart.

Better Finals performer? Look at Kareem in the finals in 1971, 1974 and 1980 and then get back to me.

I think if Jordan was playing the 1970 Knicks, 1972 Lakers, 1974 Celtics, 1977 Blazers, 1983 Sixers, 1984 Celtics, and 1989 Pistons he'd have a lot more playoff losses.

And even birds on a tree branch know Kareem deserved a FMVP in 1980.

Context.

Also the Russell hate on these boards is insane.

[La Frescobaldi]

Jordan was NOT more dominant than Kareem. Kareem played in a league of 17 teams with 11-12 quality centers and put up 35/17/5 on 57% shooting while obliterating all of his opponents for a season.

Bigger impact? On top of scoring 30+ ppg on better efficiency, Kareem also grabbed 15+ boards a game and shut opposing teams down on D.

Better prime? Kareem won 1st Team All-NBA 15 years apart, FMVP 14 years apart.

Better Finals performer? Look at Kareem in the finals in 1971, 1974 and 1980 and then get back to me.

I think if Jordan was playing the 1970 Knicks, 1972 Lakers, 1974 Celtics, 1977 Blazers, 1983 Sixers, 1984 Celtics, and 1989 Pistons he'd have a lot more playoff losses.

And even birds on a tree branch know Kareem deserved a FMVP in 1980.

Context.

Also the Russell hate on these boards is insane.

awwww whatsamatta dankok ? Truth hurting you bad?

It's never easy when your nice comfortable world view gets shattered by guys that actually saw those seasons.

[smoovegittar]

This geezer gives Mike the nod. The brother's hang time alone should get the vote.

[Phantom84]

Both have similar accolades, but Magic or Oscar > Pippen. Therefore MJ is Goat.

[eeeeeebro]

the goat is who ever you THINK is goat. cause nobody can alter your opinion of GOAT... to me goat is MJ

[dankok8]

awwww whatsamatta dankok ? Truth hurting you bad?

It's never easy when your nice comfortable world view gets shattered by guys that actually saw those seasons.

Shattered?!? I greatly respect your opinion but your opinion is just that of one man. Mind you I'm not that young myself. I've watched NBA with my own eyes since the mid-90's and seen basically all 60's and 70's footage that exists out there and probably read more printed resources than 99% of historical aficionados too.

What is your top 10 list all time?

[DatAsh]

Also the Russell hate on these boards is insane.

???

Outside of Lazerous, who else would you consider a Russell hater? I hardly ever see him brought up.

[La Frescobaldi]

Shattered?!? I greatly respect your opinion but your opinion is just that of one man. Mind you I'm not that young myself. I've watched NBA with my own eyes since the mid-90's and seen basically all 60's and 70's footage that exists out there and probably read more printed resources than 99% of historical aficionados too.

What is your top 10 list all time?
I don't do lists, man. Don't believe in them.

There are 3 guys that stand above the rest of the players I've ever seen; Chamberlain, Jabbar, and Jordan.

All others played on some lower plane.

[dankok8]

I don't do lists, man. Don't believe in them.

There are 3 guys that stand above the rest of the players I've ever seen; Chamberlain, Jabbar, and Jordan.

All others played on some lower plane.

I don't strongly disagree with that. A very very reasonable top 3.

Still you don't think peak Shaq was on that plane? Lebron? Bird? Why not?

[La Frescobaldi]

I don't strongly disagree with that. A very very reasonable top 3.

Still you don't think peak Shaq was on that plane? Lebron? Bird? Why not?
:roll: been a long time since I had to write a college bluebook essay

To me it comes down to..... you have to consider the overall ability to take over games - utterly dominate the entire court - every aspect of the game, not just scoring 50 or whatever but forcing your opponent - the other guy yeah, but more, your side of the court, front or back, yeah.... but still more....forcing the entire other team to play your game, bending them back, breaking their spirit.
Jordan would make the other coach sit down with his shoulders slumped over, see? We saw the Spurs do that to Spoelstra last year.... but Chamberlain and Jabbar would do that by their own bad@ss self. Wilt Chamberlain doing a 40/30/10 triple and 8 or 9 blocks was a fearsome sight my friend.

Shaq, LeBron, Larry, Magic, Tim Duncan, probly some others such as Walton or Isiah Thomas yeah they could do those kinds of things, absolutely. We are talking ATGs right here.
But they didn't do it like those 3 guys did.
None of them covered the entire court like Chamberlain in 67, 68... up until his knee gave out. Shaq in his days, sure he would get bigger than the other guy.... he would kinda grow like a genie :lol
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/38/Kazaam_poster.jpg

But seeing Kareem do that..... his shadow would loom over the entire court, his greatness was like an aura at times and for guys who watched as much basketball as anybody... my friends and I would be mesmerized by the completeness... the zen of it... you see? Jabbar in '74, '75 was just.... better.

Shaq in the offensive paint was at that level...... but not anywhere else on the court. That paint was his domain, and no question about it... but the rest of the court belonged to somebody else. In '67 & '68 Wilt Chamberlain was getting steals in the free throw circle and destroying shooters taking an 18 foot money shot.... he would make an outlet pass from under the basket and beat everybody down the court to catch the open lob at the other end.

Sure Shaq could do a coast to coast, and he was pretty speedy in his earlier days but :lol if there was a foot race I doubt he'd make the far end free throw circle before Chamberlain was at the baseline, already turned around.
Guys who didn't see it will guffaw Danko, but I'm telling you, that man was FAST, a trained track athlete who won Big 8 meets and seriously worked not just on running, but on sprinting. Not the quickest guy.... but the fastest. At a full sprint, he would cover mid-court to free-throw line in 3 gigantic, impossible steps. Just blowing past guys like a gazelle in motion.
The old Laker we see clips of..... is not the guy on the Sixers.
But when you talk about scoring, those 3 are the most unstoppable guys I've ever seen. Their ability to score in the face of outstanding defense is unparalleled. Maybe Bird or Bob McAdoo could do those kinds of things. Durant in the current don't-touch league is still stoppable by a nice defensive team {notice I do not say shut down, but stopped}.

Defensively none of those guys make the grade except Duncan and Walton... but neither of them had the torrid offensive skills of Jordan, or the utterly unstoppable skyhook. Not even Wilt Chamberlain could stop Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Whether he could have done it 5 years earlier? I don't know.... I think no. I think nobody, ever, could shut down early- to mid-70s KAJ.
Chamberlain had the flaw of execrable free throw shooting.... just about the only flaw among the 3 guys; but he more than compensated for it by fouling out a whole lot of guys.... and by being the best passing center not named Bill Walton (some say even better)... and by being the best rebounder in history. Dennis Rodman level rebounding but with a vastly better vertical, a hugely longer wingspan, great trig skills, and immense core strength.

All-round excellence, you see? So those other guys we are talking about are in a 2nd Tier to me.... still a very, very tiny number of players.... but not in that little Circle of Three.

{I myself can't speak to Bill Russell because he was old when I watched, just his last few seasons, knees worn and overwhelmed by Chamberlain. My older friends invariably say he oughta be there. Even the old man version was quite amazing. :basketball}