When people ask Coach Nick (bballbreakdown) about Wilt Chamberlain:

[CavaliersFTW]

He knows what's up:

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-FjRAFFkWQik/VMr3SaKU4LI/AAAAAAAAFp8/_fUYS1OzaTE/s800/Wilt%2520coach%2520knick.jpg

:applause:

[navy]

He also said that Isaiah Thomas > Kyrie Irving

[RightTwoCensor]

Why would a team let a player shoot a jumper if he can't make 40% of his FTs?

[RoundMoundOfReb]

If you actually believe Wilt Chamberlain would average 50 points today - you are a certified moron.

Also Shaq > Wilt. Shaq played more like a man. No f fadeaways just sheer physical domination.

[CavaliersFTW]

Why would a team let a player shoot a jumper if he can't make 40% of his FTs?
Shaq shot jumpers too. Nobody told him to stop.

[CavaliersFTW]

If you actually believe Wilt Chamberlain would average 50 points today - you are a certified moron.

Also Shaq > Wilt. Shaq played more like a man. No f fadeaways just sheer physical domination.
Those fadeaways were effective scoring route three. In order of priority:
Baseline
Middle
Fall-away


Shaq only had 2 effective scoring routes.
Baseline
Middle

3 options > 2 options. It just added another dimension to Wilt's game. That's why Wilt averaged 50 at his best, and Shaq only managed 29. Guarantee that other 21 points is those fall aways Shaq didn't have to fall back on.

[LoneyROY7]

Those fadeaways were effective scoring route three. In order of priority:
Baseline
Middle
Fall-away


Shaq only had 2 effective scoring routes.
Baseline
Middle

3 options > 2 options. It just added another dimension to Wilt's game. That's why Wilt averaged 50 at his best, and Shaq only managed 29. Guarantee that other 21 points is those fall aways Shaq didn't have.

Yeah, I'm sure that 21 ppg difference is due to Shaq lacking fall aways.

:coleman:

C'mon dude.

[CavaliersFTW]

Yeah, I'm sure that 21 ppg difference is due to Shaq lacking fall aways.

:coleman:

C'mon dude.
You're right - it's also due to him lacking stamina and some offensive rebounding prowess.

[LoneyROY7]

You're right - it's also due to him lacking stamina and some offensive rebounding prowess.

Getcha head out of the history books and back into reality, bruh.

[RightTwoCensor]

Shaq shot jumpers too. Nobody told him to stop.
http://i.gyazo.com/b84d4117a918b6d1ccdc41a6d3280c0f.png

When 6.9% of your career shots are beyond 10ft you aren't considered a jump shooter, or even a frequent shooter. Duh **** you talkin bout?

[RightTwoCensor]

Hold this L for me, gramps.

[CavaliersFTW]

http://i.gyazo.com/b84d4117a918b6d1ccdc41a6d3280c0f.png

When 6.9% of your career shots are beyond 10ft you aren't considered a jump shooter, or even a frequent shooter. Duh **** you talkin bout?
Most of Wilt's shots are within 10 feet... so is Wilt a jump shooter or not? A jump shot is a type of shot, shouldn't matter how close it is. Guys need to get your arguments straight and come back with some consistency.

[DatAsh]

Those fadeaways were effective scoring route three. In order of priority:
Baseline
Middle
Fall-away


Shaq only had 2 effective scoring routes.
Baseline
Middle

3 options > 2 options. It just added another dimension to Wilt's game. That's why Wilt averaged 50 at his best, and Shaq only managed 29. Guarantee that other 21 points is those fall aways Shaq didn't have to fall back on.

I actually disagree with this. Shaq was the more skilled lost post scorer(and overall scorer) imo. Better footwork in the post, and a wider array of fakes and counter-moves to get in close for dunks. He's also a bit quicker and generally more fluid in those movements. Although, much of that is probably a direct result of having come later.

What separated Wilt from Shaq was everything else: defense, rebounding, passing, stamina. Wilt Was near goat in all of those things. Most complete player ever.

[RightTwoCensor]

Most of Wilt's shots are within 10 feet... so is Wilt a jump shooter or not? A jump shot is a type of shot, shouldn't matter how close it is. Guys need to get your arguments straight and come back with some consistency.
http://i.gyazo.com/89ae5ccab998778a91b358913d4a5499.png

10 feet for a center of Wilt's size is an easy floater/hook shot. You actin like he played with some elite physical specimen on a nightly bases.

Hold one more L, homie.

[Trollsmasher]

you defeat your own argument by using Coach Nick as an appeal to authority:lol

[LoneyROY7]

http://i.gyazo.com/89ae5ccab998778a91b358913d4a5499.png

10 feet for a center of Wilt's size is an easy floater/hook shot. You actin like he played with some elite physical specimen on a nightly bases.

Hold one more L, homie.

I f*ck with this cat. :lol

[CavaliersFTW]

I actually disagree with this. Shaq was the more skilled lost post scorer(and overall scorer) imo. Better footwork in the post, and a wider array of fakes and counter-moves to get in close for dunks. He's also a bit quicker and generally more fluid in those movements. Although, much of that is probably a direct result of having come later.

What separated Wilt from Shaq was everything else: defense, rebounding, passing, stamina. Wilt Was near goat in all of those things. Most complete player ever.
I didn't even comment on skill as in variety of moves or w/e. I'm talking paths to the basket. I think Wilt was no less effective at getting there, even if he used less methods to do so. Shaq might mix up the bag of tricks more (and we really don't know if this is even true as only 2.4% of Wilt's career FGM exist) but it wouldn't matter because as far as effectiveness goes I think the only real thing that seperates Wilt and Shaq going to the middle or baseline are rules from what I can see.

Shaq was allowed to run people over, Wilt wasn't. I think Wilt was stronger than Shaq but he wasn't allowed to use it in all the ways Shaq was later entitled to do so in his era, if they played with the same rules, either Shaq's era or Wilt's, I think Wilt would have the advantage even in low post scoring. You can disagree because that's of course just speculation. But when I see Wilt and Alcindor both try baseline spins and the defender is only slightly in the way and the offensive foul gets called on Wilt or Alcindor yet Shaq was literally allowed to get low and lift Dikembe Mutumbo off the ground with his shoulder I know the games rules aren't being called the same way anymore. Shaq was given some freedoms of movement that was once not allowed.

[Euroleague]

Coach Nick is the same clown that said the two best teams in the Euroleague could not beat average mid major college basketball teams.........

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

[CavaliersFTW]

This is the same clown that said the two best teams in the Euroleague could not beat average mid major college basketball teams.........

:biggums: :biggums: :biggums: :biggums:
Yes I'm well aware :lol

[Genaro]

Wilt would dominate today and probably be the player in the league but he wouldn't average 50/30. He would average something like 28/15/5 and 4 blocks witch is pretty damn good.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

You know what's sort of funny/ironic? CavsFTW and Euroleague hate each other, yet they're both very similar posters. Only difference is that in Euroleague's delusions Euroleague is better than the modern NBA and in CavsFTW's delusionals 60s era basketball is better than the modern NBA.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Wilt would dominate today and probably be the player in the league but he wouldn't average 50/30. He would average something like 28/15/5 and 4 blocks witch is pretty damn good.

This is a reasonable opinion. Wilt would be good today. Probably like a worse version of Shaq. Which of course is still a great player.

[DatAsh]

Shaq was allowed to run people over, Wilt wasn't. Shaq was given some freedoms of movement that was once not allowed.

That's true. Shaq also had the benefit of being able to copy Wilt.

[scandisk_]

Wilt would dominate today and probably be the player in the league but he wouldn't average 50/30. He would average something like 28/15/5 and 4 blocks witch is pretty damn good.

might peak at 31-32/18/4 @ 54%FG

[DaRkJaWs]

Wilt would dominate today and probably be the player in the league but he wouldn't average 50/30. He would average something like 28/15/5 and 4 blocks witch is pretty damn good.
50 ppg pace adjusted is 42-43 ppg. Even if we allow that the coach won't let h average that much, he will still get ~35 ppg. Don't even try to bring the minutes argument into this: stars today are fed the ball for the minutes that they do play, and the same would especially count for wilt today. And thinking he would only average 4 bpg is lunacy on your part...that or you're simply an uneducated idiot. Wilt would average at least 6 bpg and you can quote me on that, son. He'd also average 18 rpg. And since we're talking about young chamberlain, he'd only average 3-4 apg max.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

50 ppg pace adjusted is 42-43 ppg. Even if we allow that the coach won't let h average that much, he will still get ~35 ppg. Don't even try to bring the minutes argument into this: stars today are fed the ball for the minutes that they do play, and the same would especially count for wilt today. And thinking he would only average 4 bpg is lunacy on your part...that or you're simply an uneducated idiot. Wilt would average at least 6 bpg and you can quote me on that, son. He'd also average 18 rpg. And since we're talking about young chamberlain, he'd only average 3-4 apg max.

**** no. With the number of 3s being shot today he doesn't get near either of those 2 stats (blocks or rebounds). As far as "quoting you on that" we're talking a total hypothetical.

And yeah stars are fed the ball when they're on the court - just not that much. Best players today don't even take 20 FGAs a game. Wilt was way over that. Also - 5 second back to the basket.

And frankly, if he couldn't shoot over 50% from the line - he'd just be a liability on offense period.

[DaRkJaWs]

**** no. With the number of 3s being shot today he doesn't get near either of those 2 stats (blocks or rebounds). As far as "quoting you on that" we're talking a total hypothetical.

And yeah stars are fed the ball when they're on the court - just not that much. Best players today don't even take 20 FGAs a game. Wilt was way over that. Also - 5 second back to the basket.

And frankly, if he couldn't shoot over 50% from the line - he'd just be a liability on offense period.
Bro nice once again not knowing your history. He shot 63% from the line in 1962. Wilt would average 35/18/6 bpg get over it.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Bro nice once again not knowing your history. He shot 63% from the line in 1962. Wilt would average 35/18/6 bpg get over it.
No he wouldn't. For the reasons i pointed out.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Wilt with a jumper? :oldlol:

[DaRkJaWs]

Another fun history fact: coaches knew he had a good outside jumper, and in 1963 his coach Alex hannum suggested he take those jump shots from the free throw line because he shot it so well. Wilt declined, noting that he didn't want to draw even more attention to his free throw shooting.

Get over it, kids. We know you don't want to admit how dominant wilt would be today, but that's not my problem, and I'm not going to discuss hypotheticals with someone who will first not agree with basic historical facts.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Actually ... Damn:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bibFELnW6HM

Puts Shaq's skill level to shame. :eek:

[RightTwoCensor]

Actually ... Damn:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bibFELnW6HM

Puts Shaq's skill level to shame. :eek:
Now find me 200 more clips of him making jumpers from one season and you could consider him a jump shooter.

Don't worry, I'll wait. No really, I will.

[deja vu]

Wilt would average 25-28 ppg along with 13-15 rpg.

Anyone who says 35 ppg or more is stupid. The past 25 years only Kobe reached that mark and he was chucking and taking tons of 3s. Forget about a big man doing that.

Plus teams would hack him and send him to the FT line where he would struggle.

[CavaliersFTW]

You know what's sort of funny/ironic? CavsFTW and Euroleague hate each other, yet they're both very similar posters. Only difference is that in Euroleague's delusions Euroleague is better than the modern NBA and in CavsFTW's delusionals 60s era basketball is better than the modern NBA.
Nah I don't believe that.

The rules are different. The talent is different. The game is still played as elite as can possibly be played with the given talent out there... it's just a slightly different version of it with different talent running the show.

I think Wilt's time was also just as interesting a time. Just a slightly different brand of game, as I said. I do believe Wilt is more talented than any center playing today. That much should be clear.

[DaRkJaWs]

Wilt would average 25-28 ppg along with 13-15 rpg.

Anyone who says 35 ppg or more is stupid. The past 25 years only Kobe reached that mark and he was chucking and taking tons of 3s. Forget about a big man doing that.

Plus teams would hack him and send him to the FT line where he would struggle.
63%. And guess what? He had the record for both free throws attempted and made that year. So tell me how today would be different, again?

[Overdrive]

Shaq shot jumpers too. Nobody told him to stop.

Shaq mostly put up jump hooks, but he was deadly on them to 15 ft out. Real jump shots weren't his thing.

[pauk]

To bad he couldnt explain what he means exactly....

Wilt was great & would be great in any era..... everybody knows that, but everybody also knows he would NOT drop those numbers.... he would be dominant but not THAT dominant.... you take his numbers from an era where every single team averaged league & franchise high poss. per game to an era today that averages league low poss. per game (around 40-45% less poss. per game today) it would drop his best statistical year/season down dramatically to something like 25-30 ppg, 10-15 rpg, which is still great, but not 60s Wilt great...... there is a reason his PER is the way it is despite averaging 50-30-10-10-10-10-10-50-2304-023203.......

There is just nowhere enough possessions allowed for him by ANY team in the NBA today for him to get that kindof amount of FG & rebound opportunities he had in the 60s....

[La Frescobaldi]

Shaq mostly put up jump hooks, but he was deadly on them to 15 ft out. Real jump shots weren't his thing.

15 feet out? Is that a typo?

I can remember O'Neal taking a very, very few last second shot clock jumpers from that range but... jump hook?

[La Frescobaldi]

To bad he couldnt explain what he means exactly....

Wilt was great & would be great in any era..... everybody knows that, but everybody also knows he would NOT drop those numbers.... he would be dominant but not THAT dominant.... you take his numbers from an era where every single team averaged league & franchise high poss. per game to an era today that averages league low poss. per game (around 40-45% less poss. per game today) it would drop his best statistical year/season down dramatically to something like 25-30 ppg, 10-15 rpg, which is still great, but not 60s Wilt great...... there is a reason his PER is the way it is despite averaging 50-30-10-10-10-10-10-50-2304-023203.......

There is just nowhere enough possessions allowed for him by ANY team in the NBA today for him to get that kindof amount of FG & rebound opportunities he had in the 60s....

lolol I notice you are still making up numbers. Now you're trying to say the pace was double... again.
Do you have to get destroyed on this every other week?

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=343655

Quit doing this Pauk.


Explain how.... go ahead, lets see how stupid it is... there is wanting something to be stupid due to being butthurt/due to agenda and there is PROVING something is stupid....

Just one attempt, go ahead... waiting... until then you are just another delusional hater, one of very many here....

"Originally Posted by pauk
if you are curious, here is the factual estimations of league history possessions per game:

2000s & current poss. per game = 90-100
1990s poss. per game = 90-100
1980s poss. per game = 100-110
1970s poss. per game = 110-130
1960s poss. per game = 140-160"

Based on no fact nor is there any way to make an estimate.
Then:

Wow, did Wilt and them have close to 200 possessions in a game??? His numbers were reduced nearly in half.
Then:


1. Not buying the 150 possessions thing about the 60's, sorry. Especially 1966. Generally, look at the differences in the numbers of shots taken, FT's taken, etc. Compare 1966 to 1972. How the heck did you get to a difference of 30 possessions?

2. If it was anywhere near accurate to take a league with supposedly 150 possessions and project stats in a league of 100 or vice-versa without accounting for severe changes in efficiency (and therefore, other stats linked with it, like rebounds and assists), modern teams would be foolish NOT to try and get 150 possessions themselves nowadays.

3. Linked with #2. Why don't you also post the adjusted numbers for their whole teams, so that we really see who's more impactful statistically for his team? Also, how about posting their FGAs?

4. Linked with #3. Since you are a PER fan, if Wilt's stats are "mortal", how come he still has the most impressive individual season PERs of all time, which comes AFTER accounting for possessions? Why does Wilt's PER blow Magic's out of the water if Magic supposedly almost matches Wilt's scoring (LOL!), probably exceeds his efficiency (due to FT's) and Magic's assists advantage is wider than Wilt's rebounding advantage? Something doesn't add up here...

Then:
Originally Posted by pauk
For 1960s i have been reading/finding different results, anything from specific teams averaging 126 to 145 (a book i have here at home, saying it was 145 poss. p/g in 1967) 130 to 156 and to a whooping 165 poss. per game and the best teams (Russell/Wilt/Oscar teams) averaged the most.... not being sure what to go with i went with something in the in the middle, 150

If you're not sure how to come up with a reasonable estimate, then the logical thing to do would be to not venture any figure on the subject whatsoever.

You were never able to rebut a single one of those and never even tried. Because you can't.
And now you're sourcing it like it's some kind of a valid reference, which it never was.

[La Frescobaldi]

Wilt would average 25-28 ppg along with 13-15 rpg.

Anyone who says 35 ppg or more is stupid. The past 25 years only Kobe reached that mark and he was chucking and taking tons of 3s. Forget about a big man doing that.

Plus teams would hack him and send him to the FT line where he would struggle.

Wilt Chamberlain would have Kevin Love numbers? That's all he could do is be like a Jerry Lucas level? :lol :lol

[Dresta]

"much longer"?

What a ****ing clown.

[senelcoolidge]

Now find me 200 more clips of him making jumpers from one season and you could consider him a jump shooter.

Don't worry, I'll wait. No really, I will.

The jump shot was a part of Wit's arsenal, but he went away from it in his latter years. Unfortunately there isn't a lot of footage of 60's games. He was a stone scorer, jump shots, post moves, baselines..etc. Much more skilled than Shaq.

[julizaver]

Shaq mostly put up jump hooks, but he was deadly on them to 15 ft out. Real jump shots weren't his thing.

They called it "baby hooks" or something like that. But he took it close to the basket, it is like the modern equivalent of Wilt's finger rolls. Although Shaq was training real hook shots as a young boy he did not used it in college or NBA for reasons of bein "old-fashioned".

Shaquille O

[Dr.J4ever]

Why is Wilt's ability to shoot jumpers or fade aways taken against him? Some of Cavs clips definitely show this, Wilt's shooting touch . I mean, in comparison, Shaq had no shooting touch almost, except maybe very close to the rim.

Surprisingly, despite his reputation for strength, Wilt seemed to have more of a finesse game as compared to Shaq. But shooting jumpers just make makes him even more potentially acclimated to today's game.

[Elosha]

These Shaq/Wilt comparisons are kind of like Jordan v. Lebron. We need to be fair to both and acknowledge each had some advantages/skillset that the other didn't. Now I will never argue that Lebron is better than Jordan because it's pretty clear to be that he's not, and never was. Doesn't have the mentality or complete skillset necessary. But the question of Shaq v. Wilt is much closer in my mind.

Now when I review the footage of Wilt's career, (and even though it's only 2+%, it's enough to give us a general idea of how he played), I see a player who has significantly more moves and a broader range of offensive weaponry than Shaq. However, I don't know how effective things like Wilt's finger roll and fadeaway bankshots actually were. We only see his makes on the highlight films, but I've also seen a few where he misses badly. Was he shooting the bankshot from the left post at a high percentage or was it well below his closer range shots? It unquestionably helps to have a diverse scoring skillset, so unless Wilt was far less "efficient" on his jumpshots and/or finger rolls, than his dunks, hooks, and other closer range shots, it still is a point in his favor.

Moreover, Cavs point that the game was called more closely and lots more ticky tack calls were made against guys like Wilt might be true, although I note that Wilt never fouled out of a game, which might call into question just how easy it was draw cheap fouls as well as Wilt's physicality on offense.

However... Shaq was also a very gifted scorer and had an adequate amount of moves and countermoves. Plus, I've never seen any center, including Wilt, with the sheer amount of aggressiveness and power around the rim. Shaq in his prime was simply a bigger and more physical player than Wilt ever was. And by judging the footage, I'd say that Shaq played against a lot more double and triple teams close to the basket than Wilt did. Again, acknowledging the limited footage that we have, the defense against Wilt on the footage we have is often underwhelming. Quite often, just one defender, greatly undersized, just passively waits for Wilt to receive an entry pass and receives little to no help from his teammates, leaving Wilt free for an easy dunk or layup. In contrast, Shaq was often double and triple teamed, and as physical as he was, he received an enormous amount of hard fouls, many of which he still finished with the three point play.

I will note, however, that Shaq tended to fade and diminish often in the fourth quarter and this was not just because of poor free throw shooting. Often, even during the Lakers' championship years, it looked like Shaq was much less aggressive and confident with a game on the line, particularly in the playoffs. This is a plight that has affected lots of big men, and I'm not sure if Wilt falls into that category or not.

The bottom line is that both Wilt and Shaq had advantages over the other. Along with KAJ, they are the three greatest centers in my mind, and you can put them in any order you want, with Russell a close fourth due to how much he won. But you can put the first three on any team and in any era, and they'd dominate. I don't believe that would be the case with Russell.

[La Frescobaldi]

These Shaq/Wilt comparisons are kind of like Jordan v. Lebron. We need to be fair to both and acknowledge each had some advantages/skillset that the other didn't. Now I will never argue that Lebron is better than Jordan because it's pretty clear to be that he's not, and never was. Doesn't have the mentality or complete skillset necessary. But the question of Shaq v. Wilt is much closer in my mind.

Now when I review the footage of Wilt's career, (and even though it's only 2+%, it's enough to give us a general idea of how he played), I see a player who has significantly more moves and a broader range of offensive weaponry than Shaq. However, I don't know how effective things like Wilt's finger roll and fadeaway bankshots actually were. We only see his makes on the highlight films, but I've also seen a few where he misses badly. Was he shooting the bankshot from the left post at a high percentage or was it well below his closer range shots? It unquestionably helps to have a diverse scoring skillset, so unless Wilt was far less "efficient" on his jumpshots and/or finger rolls, than his dunks, hooks, and other closer range shots, it still is a point in his favor.

Moreover, Cavs point that the game was called more closely and lots more ticky tack calls were made against guys like Wilt might be true, although I note that Wilt never fouled out of a game, which might call into question just how easy it was draw cheap fouls as well as Wilt's physicality on offense.

However... Shaq was also a very gifted scorer and had an adequate amount of moves and countermoves. Plus, I've never seen any center, including Wilt, with the sheer amount of aggressiveness and power around the rim. Shaq in his prime was simply a bigger and more physical player than Wilt ever was. And by judging the footage, I'd say that Shaq played against a lot more double and triple teams close to the basket than Wilt did. Again, acknowledging the limited footage that we have, the defense against Wilt on the footage we have is often underwhelming. Quite often, just one defender, greatly undersized, just passively waits for Wilt to receive an entry pass and receives little to no help from his teammates, leaving Wilt free for an easy dunk or layup. In contrast, Shaq was often double and triple teamed, and as physical as he was, he received an enormous amount of hard fouls, many of which he still finished with the three point play.

I will note, however, that Shaq tended to fade and diminish often in the fourth quarter and this was not just because of poor free throw shooting. Often, even during the Lakers' championship years, it looked like Shaq was much less aggressive and confident with a game on the line, particularly in the playoffs. This is a plight that has affected lots of big men, and I'm not sure if Wilt falls into that category or not.

The bottom line is that both Wilt and Shaq had advantages over the other. Along with KAJ, they are the three greatest centers in my mind, and you can put them in any order you want, with Russell a close fourth due to how much he won. But you can put the first three on any team and in any era, and they'd dominate. I don't believe that would be the case with Russell.
Russell would dominate in any era. Duncan has done just fine at the same size, and so would Russell. Bill Russell's offense is severely underrated; I suspect because it was so ugly.

[Overdrive]

15 feet out? Is that a typo?

I can remember O'Neal taking a very, very few last second shot clock jumpers from that range but... jump hook?

I knew I typed something stupid today..

...yeah mistook 3 meters, which is 10 feet, for 15 while typing, don't know why...brain fart I guess, but jump hooks were his thing. Maybe we mean a different move, I mean this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzJEe66_ACw