Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's NBA Debut: 29pts, 12reb, 6a, 3stl, 3blks

[CavaliersFTW]

https://youtu.be/SEM6bgTQqec

:cheers:

[Gileraracer]

Skyhook was already developed and ready to :rockon: the Basketball world

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

3:52, that shot would be the most unstoppable in league history. :bowdown:

He was so mobile and agile here. At 6:58 despite the charge, dude makes that move like a 10 year vet - smooth as butter. I can see why many feel his years as "Lew Alcindor" were arguably better than the ones as KAJ, who we all know.

[Uncle Drew]

Lew Alcindor is the greatest of all time.

[Psileas]

Did I count 4 steals (and I'm not talking about the 1st one, for which, I guess you didn't credit Kareem)?

[CavaliersFTW]

Did I count 4 steals (and I'm not talking about the 1st one, for which, I guess you didn't credit Kareem)?
The potential 4th steal was too questionable IMO so I didn't count it, look closely and it bounced off an opposing players head who wasn't paying looking for the pass and Kareem in the right place/time caught it... I wasn't sure if I should count that as a steal, isn't that gaining possession off an unforced turnover? Is that a steal? What do you think?

[SHAQisGOAT]

Thanks for this :applause: Lew :bowdown:

You wouldn't tell that Bellamy's 6'11'' when standing next to Kareem :lol Jabbar just crazy tall/long, then just not fair with that type of mobility... Still pretty skinny there though, that's why imo he was at his very best around 1977, had put on some considerable anount mass, more polished game, skyhook even better with both hands...

Definitely one of the most NBA-ready rookies ever, one of the best rookie seasons ever too. Skill and IQ already great and pretty refined, combined with the tremendous height/athleticism.

Dude would've MURDERED today's league.

[senelcoolidge]

After Wilt, Kareem is the greatest center ever. Great great player. How did Bellamy do that night? I know he was in the latter days of his career. Otto Moore was a tall dude, quality back up but nothing more.

[CavaliersFTW]

After Wilt, Kareem is the greatest center ever. Great great player. How did Bellamy do that night? I know he was in the latter days of his career. Otto Moore was a tall dude, quality back up but nothing more.
Kareem's center matchup rotation:

Walt Bellamy: 25 points, 6 rebounds, 1 assist, 2 steals
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSYtYGYxBFk

Otto Moore: 5 points, 5 rebounds, 1 assist, 2 blocks, 1 steal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFt1GK8P50I

[Psileas]

The potential 4th steal was too questionable IMO so I didn't count it, look closely and it bounced off an opposing players head who wasn't paying looking for the pass and Kareem in the right place/time caught it... I wasn't sure if I should count that as a steal, isn't that gaining possession off an unforced turnover? Is that a steal? What do you think?

Without putting much thought into in, I think it should still count as a steal, since time didn't stop, so there has to be some statistical justification for that change of possession.

[CavaliersFTW]

I think it should still count as a steal, since time didn't stop, so there has to be some statistical justification for that change of possession.
Okay good point, thanks for pointing it out I will put that in the comments below the video and maybe make an annotation that it's 4 steals.

[swagga]

Goat

[sundizz]

Wow, that was super good quality and clean to watch.

He actually reminds me a lot of Anthony Davis. I wonder size wise how those two would look next to each other.

Also, jeez Derek Fisher, Shane Battier and Nick Collison would be superstars in that league for sure. The way they called offensive fouls is...i don't have the right words for it lol.

Shaq definitely would of had a more difficult time back then with scoring, but his rebounding and blocking would of been 2x as good it seems (from watching that). Though if he lived in that era he hopefully wouldn't of gotten so fat either.

That league was paper soft from what I can tell. That game seemed way way way more non contact than what we see today. People just barrel into each other all the time. Harden would foul out the other team/foul out himself almost every game. Dwight definitely would be awful.

[HighFlyer23]

Legend from high school to the pros

[NBAplayoffs2001]

Greatest high school player that NYC has ever seen :bowdown:. We need a reincarnation of you back in Manhattan

[TheBigVeto]

GOAT Laker.

[Round Mound]

Notice how easy they call walks, unlike 00s and now.:confusedshrug:

So Fluid, The Most Elegant and Skilled Offensive Center Ever!

:bowdown:

[LAZERUSS]

3:52, that shot would be the most unstoppable in league history. :bowdown:

He was so mobile and agile here. At 6:58 despite the charge, dude makes that move like a 10 year vet - smooth as butter. I can see why many feel his years as "Lew Alcindor" were arguably better than the ones as KAJ, who we all know.

I have long maintained that Kareem peaked early in his career. Of course, playing four years in college also changed the curve, as well. He was 22 in his rookie season (and 23 by the end of it.) And he was already a top-5 center in the world by his soph season at UCLA.

From the second half of his rookie season, thru the playoffs that year; thru the entire '71 regular season and post-season; and thru the '72 regular season; he was at his peak.

In his ROOKIE season in the playoffs, he put up a career high 35.2 ppg (on a .567 FG%) in his ten post-season games (five of which came against Willis Reed, and in which he averaged 34.2 ppg, 17.6 rpg, and shot .552.)

In his second season, he played 40.3 mpg, and led the league in scoring at 31.7 ppg, with 16.0 rpg, 3.3 apg, and on a .577 FG%. BTW, that .577 FG% came in a league which shot .449...and his .128 differential was the highest of his career. And in the post-season, he went up against HOFers Thurmond, Wilt, and Unseld, and averaged 26.6 ppg, 17.0 rpg, and shot .515 from the floor. In the Finals against Unseld, and in a sweeping series win, he averaged an effortless 27.0 ppg, 18.5 rpg, and on a .605 FG%. He would lead his team to a 66-16 record, and a 12-2 post-season record, en route to an MVP and a FMVP.

IMO, that second season was the best of his career.

In his third season, he just demolished the league in the regular season. He hung 19 games of 40+, including five of 50+, with a career high of 55. He would finish the regular season at a career high 34.8 ppg, with 16.6 rpg, 4.6 apg, and on a .574 FG%. He was virtually unstoppable all season long, and averaged 40 ppg against Chamberlain in their five regular season H2H's, as well as a staggering 44.8 ppg against Cowens in their five H2H's (on a .571 FG%.)


Up until the '72 playoffs, Kareem had been a huge winner everywhere he went. True, his '70 Bucks did not win a title, but he led them from a 27-55 record to a 56-26 record, and into the ECF's.

And after his '71 season, when the young Bucks (only Oscar was over 30 among their key players) waltzed to a dominating world title...the experts tabbed Milwaukee as the next great dynasty. And when they went 63-19 in the '72 regular season, with Kareem destroying the league, it appeared that they would not disappoint.

However, in the first round of the '72 playoffs, and for the first time in his entire basketball career, from high school, thru college, and in his third season of his NBA career, (alright, Elvin Hayes outplayed a partially blind Alcindor in the Astrodome game in his junior year at UCLA), he was significantly outplayed by an opposing center. True, Chamberlain had slightly outplayed Kareem in their five regular season, and five playoff H2H's in '71, but given that his Bucks wiped the floor with Wilt's Lakers, it was not considered significant.

Thurmond easily outplayed Kareem in their '72 playoff series H2H's, outscoring him 25.0 ppg to 22.8 ppg, and outshooting him from the floor by a .437 to .405 margin. However, the Bucks surrounding players were overwhelmingly better than Thurmond's, and Milwaukee romped to a 4-1 series win.

And after KAJ dominated Wilt in game one of the WCF's, leading his Bucks to a 93-72 road win, it looked like he and the Bucks were back on track to another title. And in game two, Kareem had arguably his greatest game against Wilt, outscoring him 40-11, and on 18-31 shooting. However, Jim McMillian went off for 42 points, and the Lakers eked out a close win to even the series, 1-1, and going back to Milwaukee.

From that point on, Chamberlain took control of the series. He pushed Kareem around, wore him out physically, and was even outrunning the much younger Kareem. In the last four pivotal games of that series, three of them Laker wins, he held Kareem to a brick-laying .414 FG%. And in game six, in Milwaukee, he badly outplayed Kareem, particularly in the 4th quarter, in which he engineered a comeback from a 10 point deficit, and in leading the Lakers to a 4-2 series win.

IMHO, Kareem never fully recovered. True, he would still be the best player in the league for the remainder of the decade, but his overwhelming dominance was gone.

And in the first round of the '73 playoffs, Thurmond once again turned Kareem into a miserable shooter, holding him to 22.8 ppg on a .428 FG%. This time, however, Nate's teammates on his 47-35 team, outplayed Kareem's teammates on his 60-22 team, and wiped out the heavily-favored Bucks in the first round, 4-2.

And in that '73 season, Kareem struggled mightily against a 36 year old Chamberlain in his last season. In their six H2H's, Kareem shot .450 from the field (Wilt shot .737 against him), and Wilt even found time to outscore Kareem in one game, 24-21 (while outshooting him from the floor, 10-14 to 10-27.)

In the course of their last ten straight games, a 35-36 year old Wilt held a peak Kareem to a .434 FG%.

Wilt retired after that season, and Thurmond fell apart physically. The door was now wide open for Kareem and his Bucks to dominate the rest of the decade.

And in the post-season, Kareem was once again crushing his peers. He would go on to take his 59-23 Bucks into the Finals against the 56-26 Celtics, and over the course of the playoffs, he would average 32.2 ppg, 15.8 rpg, and on a .557 FG%.

And in the first six games of the '74 Finals, he was wiping the floor with Cowens, with a 33.7 ppg, 12.0 rpg, 5.5 apg, .530 FG%. However, in game seven, Cowens badly outplayed him, and led his Celtics to a blowout win on Kareem's home floor.

And that was basically it for Kareem's "dynasty." It never occurred.

Oscar retired after that season, and it all went downhill. Kareem brok his hand in the '74-75 season, and missed 16 games. His Bucks went 35-31 with him, and 3-13 without, and missed the playoffs.

He was now mopping, and going thru the motions, and basically engineered a trade to the Lakers.

And this is where we saw the true difference between an early 70's Kareem, with a mid-70's Kareem.

In his '72 season, he averaged 44.3 mpg, 34.8 ppg, 16.6 rpg, and shot .574...all while playing for a 63-19 team that had a +11.1 ppg differential.

And now, with a below-average Laker team that had gone 30-52 the year before, here was Kareem's chance to REALLY show what he could do. If he ever had an opportunity to challenge some of Wilt's records, this was it.

Instead, Kareem played 41.2 mpg, averaged 27.7 ppg and on a .529 FG%. He did lead the league in rpg, at a career high 16.9 rpg, but even that was deceptive. Gone were the great rebounders of the early 70's like Wilt and Thurmond. Cowens would finish right behind at 16.0 rpg, followed by Unseld at 13.3 rpp, and then Paul Silas at 12.7 rpg.

Again, Kareem basically went thru the motions, and his Lakers could only go 40-42, and missed the playoffs.

The thing was, he was capable of absolutely crushing his peers. His H2H's with Walton were a good example, as he would hang games of 48 and 50 points on him. It seemed like anytime someone would come along to challenge him, he would destroy them.

Some folks claim that Kareem hit his peak in his '76-77 season. Aside from a mere 11 playoff games...no way. He averaged 26.2 ppg, 13.3 rpg, 3.9 apg, and shot .579 from the field in the regular season.

He did have arguably his greatest post-season run, albeit in just 11 games, averaging 34.6 ppg, 17.7 rpg, and on a .607 FG%. Furthermore, for anyone that claimed that Walton was the better player...he just annihilated Bill in their '77 WCF's. He hung a 30.3 ppg, 16.0 rpg, .608 series on Walton. The footage is out there, too. Walton and his swarming teammates were just helpless. However, KAJ lost his starting PF mid-way thru the season, and his two starting guards missed the first two games of that series. Walton's 49-33 Blazers swept Kareem's 53-29 Lakers.

The Lakers then went out and got Kareem a TON of help. They added Norm Nixon, Charley Scott, Jamaal Wilkes, and then Adrian Dantley, who was averaging 27 ppg when they acquired him. LA was clearly the most talented team in the league.

However, once again a short-fused Kareem broke his hand, and this time he missed 21 games (the Lakers went 8-13 without him.) He came back and led his team into the playoffs, but they were routed by a much less talented 47-35 Sonics team in the first round.

With essentially the core of that same roster, the Lakers were a strong pre-season choice to win the title in the '78-79 season. Especially since Walton was no longer a factor.

Instead, and despite KAJ playing 80 games, LA only went 47-35, and were once again routed by the 50-32 Sonics in the second round, 4-1.

Kareem's play had so regresses by that season, that in the movie "Airplane" he was the subject of being lazy.

And again, Kareem had went from just slaughtering his peers in the early 70's, ...guys like Hayes, Unseld, Lanier, and Cowens...to routinely being outplayed by them. From the mid-70's on, he was the best of the group of centers, but he was no longer blowing them up. Guys like Gilmore were holding their own against him, and McAdoo was routinely outscoring him in their H2H's (in one game, McAdoo scored 45 points on him, including 17 straight made FGAs.) And by the late 70's, Moses Malone was easily outplaying him. In fact, by the early to mid-80's, Moses was just crushing Kareem.

A PEAK Kareem, in the early 70's, was hanging 30-15-4 seasons, and anchoring the best defenses in the league. After that...not so much.

[ClipperRevival]

^^^^^

Laz,

Good insight. But a minor problem I have with you is that you take stats at face value too much (like your Wilt threads). As if that tells the entire story. It simply doesn't. A guy can shoot .45% from the field and still have a great game while a guy can shoot .55% from the field can have less of an impact. Context is everything.

For instance, by looking at the stats, one would say MJ was at his peak in the late 80's. He scored more, assisted more and rebounded more. But anyone who followed him knows that he peaked around 1991-1993, when he wasn't just an individual talent but a great superstar who knew when to take over offensively and when to get his teammates involved. He had found the right balance between the two.

Same with Kobe. Most would say he peaked around 2006-2007. I would say he was at his best as finding the right balance between scoring and getting his teammates involved (i.e. winning basketball) in 2009.

Same with Bron. His numbers dipped a bit when he went to Miami but he had figured out how to maximize the talent on his team by the time he went there (well, after 2011).

[LAZERUSS]

^^^^^

Laz,

Good insight. But a minor problem I have with you is that you take stats at face value too much (like your Wilt threads). As if that tells the entire story. It simply doesn't. A guy can shoot .45% from the field and still have a great game while a guy can shoot .55% from the field can have less of an impact. Context is everything.

For instance, by looking at the stats, one would say MJ was at his peak in the late 80's. He scored more, assisted more and rebounded more. But anyone who followed him knows that he peaked around 1991-1993, when he wasn't just an individual talent but a great superstar who knew when to take over offensively and when to get his teammates involved. He had found the right balance between the two.

Same with Kobe. Most would say he peaked around 2006-2007. I would say he was at his best as finding the right balance between scoring and getting his teammates involved (i.e. winning basketball) in 2009.

Same with Bron. His numbers dipped a bit when he went to Miami but he had figured out how to maximize the talent on his team by the time he went there (well, after 2011).

Of course stats don't always tell the whole story.

And the Russell supporters almost always make that claim. I have read opinions from his fellow Celtic teammates, and even newpaper recaps, which would claim that he either "allowed" Wilt to score for much of the game, and then shut him down in the key 4th quarters, or else he shut Chamberlain down for three quarters (or a half), and then "allowed" Wilt to score meaningless points late.

Of course, Russell himself, never made that claim, and in fact, he has been quoted along the lines as saying that he was holding on for dear life against Wilt in their many H2H's. And there is substantial evidence which shows Chamberlain dominating Russell in 4th quarters of close games, and in fact, even engineering comebacks from 20 point 4th period deficits, in games in which he hung 48 points.

BUT, that was clearly the case in the '72 WCF's. Kareem had a huge margin in scoring over Wilt, but he shot horrifically in much of those games, including the clinching game six. Virtually everyone who witnessed that series claimed that Chamberlain outplayed Kareem. And Time Magazine went so far as to say that Wilt DECISIVELY outplayed Kareem in that series.


I grew up a huge Kareem fan. I followed his college career, and I have long maintained that he was the greatest college player of all-time. In fact, had freshmen been allowed to play, he likely would have won four straight NCAA titles.

And early in his NBA career he was the closest player to Wilt's level of dominance as I have ever seen. Only Shaq from '00-'02 is in the same vicinity.

But, my problem with Kareem was, plain-and-simple, he just couldn't stay motivated. He was easily the best player in the world in the decade of the 70's. But, in what was arguably the weakest era of competition, from '75 thru '79, he didn't dominate nearly as much as he had in the early 70's. Rick Barry won a title with Jamaal Wilkes and a bunch of no-names. An aging Hondo and a Cowens that a peak Kareem just murdered, won a title in '76 (and faced a 40-42 team in the Finals.) The 49-33 Blazers won a title in '77, the 44-38 Bullets won a title in '78, and a team with a bunch of names, the '79 Sonics, won a title with a 50-32 record in '79.

An early 70's Kareem likely would have led teams to several titles, and he should have put up a huge scoring season in '76, with a mediocre supporting cast, and in a league in which Maravich averaged 31.1 ppg. And just the three years before that, McAdoo was running away with scoring titles, including a season of 34.5 ppg (in a league that averaged 102 ppg.)

Obviously, the lack of team success was not all Kareem's fault. I mentioned it in my previous post, but he had zero help in the '77 post-season. Had he and Walton swapped rosters, and KAJ would surely have won a ring.

But Kareem, pre-Magic, underachieved. He SHOULD have been far more dominant, but instead, he became complacent. And had Magic not arrived, I suspect that Kareem would have retired in the mid-80's with that one ring, and a career that would have been deemed an overall disappointment.

[ClipperRevival]

^^^^^

That's why the intangibles are important. You can't teach inner drive/motivation and work ethic. If KAJ didn't get motivated for one reason or another, he didn't maximize his talents. I can somewhat entertain the notion that KAJ underachieved a tad in the 70's. If you are a dominant, all time great big, you should win. If not win, make deep playoff runs.

But still, it is what it is. Magic came along and probably lit a fire under KAJ. Who can ever forget their first game together in 1980 when KAJ hit that game winner in the first game of the season and Magic celebrated like he had just won the championship? Magic was a true winner. It's in his DNA. He was the engine that made the Laker Dynasty go.

[LAZERUSS]

^^^^^

That's why the intangibles are important. You can't teach inner drive/motivation and work ethic. If KAJ didn't get motivated for one reason or another, he didn't maximize his talents. I can somewhat entertain the notion that KAJ underachieved a tad in the 70's. If you are a dominant, all time great big, you should win. If not win, make deep playoff runs.

But still, it is what it is. Magic came along and probably lit a fire under KAJ. Who can ever forget their first game together in 1980 when KAJ hit that game winner in the first game of the season and Magic celebrated like he had just won the championship? Magic was a true winner. It's in his DNA. He was the engine that made the Laker Dynasty go.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[dankok8]

@LAZERUSS

Your breakdown is factually correct but it omits certain important details...

In the 1972 postseason, Kareem suffered through severe tendinitis on his left knee. Especially in the first round series against Thurmond he was very limited. He was terrific in all other aspects of the game including rebounding and defense and the Bucks won 4-1. Why blame the guy when his team won?

In the WCF against Wilt and the Lakers he was much closer to 100% but you made it sound like the Bucks were favorites in that series. They were looking up at the 69-13 Lakers to begin with and their backcourt of Oscar, McGlocklin, and Jones was ravaged by injuries. I would go as far as to say that the Bucks were heavy underdogs considering their health. Honestly if Kareem was replaced by another center like Lanier or Cowens, Bucks probably get swept. The man averaged 33.7 ppg, 17.5 rpg, 4.6 apg, 4-5 bpg... yes on 45.7% shooting but it's still an insane series. You mention Wilt destroying Kareem in a Game 6 where Kareem had 37 points, 25 rebounds, 8 assists, and 10 blocks albeit on 16/36 shooting. Sorry I don't buy that Wilt destroyed him. Wilt defended him great but he didn't outplay him. Not even close.

The 1972-1973 regular season was just as dominant as the two prior ones. He absolutely outplayed every HOF center he went up against.

In 1974 you mention the Bucks "flaming out" against the Celtics. You forget to mention that Bucks starting SG Lucious Allen was out for the playoffs and that Oscar suffered an injury midway through the season and was never the same. Bucks won two more games than Boston but again their backcourt was severely weakened and this was the same Celtics team that won 68 games the year before. Bucks had the best player in Kareem but Boston had the next three best players and all-stars with Cowens, Havlicek, and JoJo White. Bucks never led all series long and it took a heroic effort in Boston Garden including a game-winner for Bucks to survive Game 6. In Game 7 you mention Kareem was badly outplayed...

Kareem: 26 points, 13 rebounds, 4 assists on 10/21 FG, 6/11 FT
Cowens: 28 points, 14 rebounds, 4 assists on 13/25 FG, 2/2 FT

Seems pretty even to me.

And it was actually Cowens who played the 4th quarter with 5 fouls and was hanging on for his dear life. Coach Heinsohn decided to double and triple Kareem all game and make others beat them. Oscar was the culprit with 6 points on 2-13 shooting (missing lots of wide open shots...) and plenty of turnovers against the press. This game is on YouTube for everyone to see and draw their conclusions.

I have already covered the 1978 and 1979 Lakers plenty of times. They had no second rebounder, Dantley was a team cancer, and they had no perimeter defense (Gus, DJ, and Freddie Brown obliterated their backcourt!!). This was a very deficient team. They had scorers but they had nothing else.

Both times in 1971 and 1980 Kareem's team was the best in the league and were healthy in the playoffs (they weren't in 1974 and 1977) they won championships.

[LAZERUSS]

@LAZERUSS

Your breakdown is factually correct but it omits certain important details...

In the 1972 postseason, Kareem suffered through severe tendinitis on his left knee. Especially in the first round series against Thurmond he was very limited. He was terrific in all other aspects of the game including rebounding and defense and the Bucks won 4-1. Why blame the guy when his team won?

In the WCF against Wilt and the Lakers he was much closer to 100% but you made it sound like the Bucks were favorites in that series. They were looking up at the 69-13 Lakers to begin with and their backcourt of Oscar, McGlocklin, and Jones was ravaged by injuries. I would go as far as to say that the Bucks were heavy underdogs considering their health. Honestly if Kareem was replaced by another center like Lanier or Cowens, Bucks probably get swept. The man averaged 33.7 ppg, 17.5 rpg, 4.6 apg, 4-5 bpg... yes on 45.7% shooting but it's still an insane series. You mention Wilt destroying Kareem in a Game 6 where Kareem had 37 points, 25 rebounds, 8 assists, and 10 blocks albeit on 16/36 shooting. Sorry I don't buy that Wilt destroyed him. Wilt defended him great but he didn't outplay him. Not even close.

The 1972-1973 regular season was just as dominant as the two prior ones. He absolutely outplayed every HOF center he went up against.

In 1974 you mention the Bucks "flaming out" against the Celtics. You forget to mention that Bucks starting SG Lucious Allen was out for the playoffs and that Oscar suffered an injury midway through the season and was never the same. Bucks won two more games than Boston but again their backcourt was severely weakened and this was the same Celtics team that won 68 games the year before. Bucks had the best player in Kareem but Boston had the next three best players and all-stars with Cowens, Havlicek, and JoJo White. Bucks never led all series long and it took a heroic effort in Boston Garden including a game-winner for Bucks to survive Game 6. In Game 7 you mention Kareem was badly outplayed...

Kareem: 26 points, 13 rebounds, 4 assists on 10/21 FG, 6/11 FT
Cowens: 28 points, 14 rebounds, 4 assists on 13/25 FG, 2/2 FT

Seems pretty even to me.

And it was actually Cowens who played the 4th quarter with 5 fouls and was hanging on for his dear life. Coach Heinsohn decided to double and triple Kareem all game and make others beat them. Oscar was the culprit with 6 points on 2-13 shooting (missing lots of wide open shots...) and plenty of turnovers against the press. This game is on YouTube for everyone to see and draw their conclusions.

I have already covered the 1978 and 1979 Lakers plenty of times. They had no second rebounder, Dantley was a team cancer, and they had no perimeter defense (Gus, DJ, and Freddie Brown obliterated their backcourt!!). This was a very deficient team. They had scorers but they had nothing else.

Both times in 1971 and 1980 Kareem's team was the best in the league and were healthy in the playoffs (they weren't in 1974 and 1977) they won championships.

In Rosen's book on the '72 Lakers, he stated that the Bucks were 11-10 favorites going into the WCF's against LA. And after the game one blow-out, I doubt anyone would have picked the Lakers to win that series.

Interesting too, was that Jerry West was basically worthless for most of that series (without looking it up, I believe he shot something like .380.)

Also, the Lakers were coming off of a 48-34 injury-riddled season in '71. West had missed the last quarter of the season, and all of the playoffs, and Baylor played two early season games, and missed the rest of the year.

Meanwhile, Milwaukee was coming off of a 66-16 season (and at one point they were 65-12), and a 12-2 playoff waltz. The Bucks were virtually a unanimous pre-season pick to repeat.

And no one predicted the Lakers, with four starters at 30+, and injury-prone, to win their division, much less a title.

I will admit, though, that they did have Milwaukee's number the entire season. They went 4-1 against them in their regular season H2H's, and then 4-2 against them in the WCF's. In fact, they not only came from behind in the 4th quarter to beat Milwaukee on their home floor in that clinching game six, they had routed the Bucks in game five by a 115-90 margin. And, as I alluded to, they went 3-1 against the Bucks in the last four games of that series...all with Kareem shooting a collective .414 from the field.

And while Kareem put up some big scoring games, he was clearly intimidated by Wilt's defense. Too bad the recaps don't show the number of blocked sky-hooks, (Kareem had 15 of his shots blocked by Wilt), but from what I recall (and I saw all six televised games), it was likely 10+.

Furthermore, in that clinching game six, Kareem shot 2-8 in the 4th quarter, while Chamberlain took over at both ends. In fact, recaps had Wilt running Kareem into the ground.


As for the '74 Finals, Kareem just crushed Cowens in the first six games. But, in the seventh game (which the 4th quarter is on Youtube I believe), Cowens shut him down, despite five fouls, and was hitting several key shots. The reality was, Kareem mailed it in in the 4th period, and the Celtics blew the game open. Still, you couldn't blame Kareem for that series loss, any more than you could blame Wilt for the vast majority of his post-season losses.

But, my main point still stands...a PEAK Kareem played in the early 70's. He was more athletic, much quicker and with more elevation on his sky-hook, and a far greater defensive force (hell, just watch the OP game...he was covering the entire defensive half court.)

And after he was carpet-bombing his peers in the '72 regular season, I honestly believe that he felt he was invincible. But that "invincibility" came crashing down against both Nate and Wilt in the '72 playoffs, and he never regained it. By the mid-to-late 70's, most all of the same HOF peers he was shelling in the early 70's, were routinely hanging with him, and his dominance was nowhere near where it had been.

[ClipperRevival]

In Rosen's book on the '72 Lakers, he stated that the Bucks were 11-10 favorites going into the WCF's against LA. And after the game one blow-out, I doubt anyone would have picked the Lakers to win that series.

Interesting too, was that Jerry West was basically worthless for most of that series (without looking it up, I believe he shot something like .380.)

Also, the Lakers were coming off of a 48-34 injury-riddled season in '71. West had missed the last quarter of the season, and all of the playoffs, and Baylor played two early season games, and missed the rest of the year.

Meanwhile, Milwaukee was coming off of a 66-16 season (and at one point they were 65-12), and a 12-2 playoff waltz. The Bucks were virtually a unanimous pre-season pick to repeat.

And no one predicted the Lakers, with four starters at 30+, and injury-prone, to win their division, much less a title.

I will admit, though, that they did have Milwaukee's number the entire season. They went 4-1 against them in their regular season H2H's, and then 4-2 against them in the WCF's. In fact, they not only came from behind in the 4th quarter to beat Milwaukee on their home floor in that clinching game six, they had routed the Bucks in game five by a 115-90 margin. And, as I alluded to, they went 3-1 against the Bucks in the last four games of that series...all with Kareem shooting a collective .414 from the field.

And while Kareem put up some big scoring games, he was clearly intimidated by Wilt's defense. Too bad the recaps don't show the number of blocked sky-hooks, (Kareem had 15 of his shots blocked by Wilt), but from what I recall (and I saw all six televised games), it was likely 10+.

Furthermore, in that clinching game six, Kareem shot 2-8 in the 4th quarter, while Chamberlain took over at both ends. In fact, recaps had Wilt running Kareem into the ground.


As for the '74 Finals, Kareem just crushed Cowens in the first six games. But, in the seventh game (which the 4th quarter is on Youtube I believe), Cowens shut him down, despite five fouls, and was hitting several key shots. The reality was, Kareem mailed it in in the 4th period, and the Celtics blew the game open. Still, you couldn't blame Kareem for that series loss, any more than you could blame Wilt for the vast majority of his post-season losses.

But, my main point still stands...a PEAK Kareem played in the early 70's. He was more athletic, much quicker and with more elevation on his sky-hook, and a far greater defensive force (hell, just watch the OP game...he was covering the entire defensive half court.)

And after he was carpet-bombing his peers in the '72 regular season, I honestly believe that he felt he was invincible. But that "invincibility" came crashing down against both Nate and Wilt in the '72 playoffs, and he never regained it. By the mid-to-late 70's, most all of the same HOF peers he was shelling in the early 70's, were routinely hanging with him, and his dominance was nowhere near where it had been.

I don't see how the Bucks would be favored in 1972 given the fact that the Lakers that year went 69-13 (a record that stood for 25 years) and the Bucks went 63-19.

Also, in their series, KAJ averaged 33.7 ppg while Oscar averaged just 9.0 ppg. Wilt was their 4th leading scorer at just 10.8 ppg on .443 FT shooting. I'm sure his rebounding numbers were impressive though.

[LAZERUSS]

I don't see how the Bucks would be favored in 1972 given the fact that the Lakers that year went 69-13 (a record that stood for 25 years) and the Bucks went 63-19.

Also, in their series, KAJ averaged 33.7 ppg while Oscar averaged just 9.0 ppg. Wilt was their 4th leading scorer at just 10.8 ppg on .443 FT shooting. I'm sure his rebounding numbers were impressive though.

Chamberlain's play in the '72 WCF's...

[QUOTE]

Kareem

[ClipperRevival]

^^^^

So in other words, when the stats don't suit your agenda to puff up Wilt, you go with a newspaper article.

Dude, Jabbar averaged 33.7 ppg to Wilt's 10.8. And Wilt barely outrebounded him. Oscar helped Jabbar with a whooping 9.0 ppg, which was 8.0 ppg below his season average.

The Lakers won 69 games that year. But whatever, I guess we are back to Laz being that biased Wilt fan.

[Rose'sACL]

Goat

[LAZERUSS]

^^^^

So in other words, when the stats don't suit your agenda to puff up Wilt, you go with a newspaper article.

Dude, Jabbar averaged 33.7 ppg to Wilt's 10.8. And Wilt barely outrebounded him. Oscar helped Jabbar with a whooping 9.0 ppg, which was 8.0 ppg below his season average.

The Lakers won 69 games that year. But whatever, I guess we are back to Laz being that biased Wilt fan.

Biased?

You do realize that Kareem shot .414 from the floor in the last four games of that series, right? He basically shot his team down the drain.

And CavsFTW has some more recaps, but in one of them, I recall the Bucks COACH, claiming that it was WILT who made the difference in that series.

Of course, this was not a typical Russell-Wilt series H2H, with Wilt's over-matched teammates being slaughtered by Russell's overwhelming edge in surrounding talent, either. The Bucks entered the '72 season as not only prohibitive favorites to repeat their title, but likely UNANIMOUS favorites. In fact, articles at the time were claiming them as the next great dynasty.

Chamberlain was carrying last place rosters to within an eyelash of beating Russell's HOF-laden teams. In the '72 season, the Bucks not only had a peak Kareem, they had a steady Oscar, a solid Dandridge, a great shooter in McGlocklin, a solid PG in Allen, and a stable of role players. True, they had their share of injuries, but in Wilt's case, his second best teammate, West, just puked all over the floor in the entire playoffs.

[ClipperRevival]

Biased?

You do realize that Kareem shot .414 from the floor in the last four games of that series, right? He basically shot his team down the drain.

And CavsFTW has some more recaps, but in one of them, I recall the Bucks COACH, claiming that it was WILT who made the difference in that series.

Of course, this was not a typical Russell-Wilt series H2H, with Wilt's over-matched teammates being slaughtered by Russell's overwhelming edge in surrounding talent, either. The Bucks entered the '72 season as not only prohibitive favorites to repeat their title, but likely UNANIMOUS favorites. In fact, articles at the time were claiming them as the next great dynasty.

Chamberlain was carrying last place rosters to within an eyelash of beating Russell's HOF-laden teams. In the '72 season, the Bucks not only had a peak Kareem, they had a steady Oscar, a solid Dandridge, a great shooter in McGlocklin, a solid PG in Allen, and a stable of role players. True, they had their share of injuries, but in Wilt's case, his second best teammate, West, just puked all over the floor in the entire playoffs.

I can concede that the Bucks might've been favored but everything else, it's good to have good ole' biased, Wilt fan back. It was actually nice talking constructively with you for a few posts but I guess expecting that to continue was too much. I mean your knowledge of the game goes back decades, which is something few can say and you would benefit the board greatly if you just tried to be more objective. But as it is, you are viewed as that biased Wilt fan.

[dankok8]

@LAZERUSS

Preseason predictions are one thing and what actually transpired through the regular season is another. I too before the season started could agree that the Bucks were favorites. But not after...

- Lakers won 6 more games
- Lakers were the more talented team
- Lakers won the season match-ups 4-1
- Lakers were in a much better state of health

No way could one say the Bucks were favored. It makes no sense.


I just rewatched Game 7 of the 1974 Finals to refresh my memory.

After the Jordan-Pippen Bulls those Celtics were the best I've ever seen in putting pressure on the ball. Their full court press completely flustered the Bucks. When they denied the inbounds pass from going to Oscar, the other Bucks players like Mickey Davis and Cornell Warner were losing the ball left, right, and centre. The Celtics had 13 steals and the Bucks as a team had somewhere between 25 and 30 turnovers! Which is insane for a game played at pretty much modern pace. The Celtics were everywhere.

Oscar Robertson finished the game shooting 2-13 missing lots of bunnies and had 8 turnovers in the game including two ridiculous ones off of inbounds passes and one 24 second violation. Chaney who was mostly on him on defense simply kicked his fanny. But Oscar was still by far the best ball handler for Milwaukee which I think paints the picture of just how bad it got.

As for Kareem I had him with 5 turnovers which is a lot as well. Three were tipped out of his hands when he posted up, one was a charge, and another a 5-second violation for failing to inbound the ball. But when he got the ball he did well with it. At one point in the game from late in the 1st quarter until midway through the 3rd quarter, Kareem never touched the ball on offense. It went from a tie game to like a 15-point Celtics lead.

As for Cowens, the Celtics used him brilliantly. He would grab a defensive rebound and throw a quick outlet. His guards would run out and put pressure on the Bucks who were running back in transition. Then the Celtics would feed the trailing Cowens for a wide open 15-18 foot jumper. He scored seven or eight baskets like that in the game while Jabbar was in the paint nowhere near him. Dave could really shoot...

[CavaliersFTW]

I can concede that the Bucks might've been favored but everything else, it's good to have good ole' biased, Wilt fan back. It was actually nice talking constructively with you for a few posts but I guess expecting that to continue was too much. I mean your knowledge of the game goes back decades, which is something few can say and you would benefit the board greatly if you just tried to be more objective. But as it is, you are viewed as that biased Wilt fan.
I'm just now jumping in on this but are you guys discussing the 1972 WCF of Wilt vs Jabbar?

That is definitely a series where fans, coaches, players, etc claim Wilt "outplayed" Jabbar. Despite whatever numbers you observe this is what is out there:

* Wilt outplaying Jabbar is mentioned by several players from both sides (Lakers/Bucks) interviewed in the 1972 Lakers documentary "touched by Gold" that was produced a few years ago. One of the quotes that sticks to my mind is "He just beat up Jabbar" pertaining to that series.

* It's mentioned by Bill Russell in a speech he makes at UCLA in 1972 several weeks after that series had ended when a fan asks him how he'd do against Jabbar. He brings up he thinks he'd do alright because he did alright against the guy that just outplayed him in the playoffs.

* It's mentioned in newspapers, and testified like Laz said by Bucks coach Larry Costello who said Chamberlain was the difference maker.

And I've actually never seen a single piece of testimony that suggested Jabbar outplayed Wilt that series. The reason Wilt's numbers are what they are is probably because he played that Bill Russell-like role (which is not just about rebounds) - in both 1972 and 1973. Plug all defensive holes, disrupt the inside be it in a match up against a player like Jabbar or anyone who dares drive inside, a do-whatever-it-takes to win mentality, but focused on defense rather than offense. It isn't necessarily reflected by numbers. I'm at work right now, but If you'd like I can gather all of these sources I mentioned and post them here. I didn't think Wilt outplayed Jabbar that series when I first saw the numbers either, in fact I didn't even want to look into that series until a few years ago a poster named Millwad insisted I do it to be "unbiased". And when I did it backfired on him, as all the testimony ended up crediting Wilt with a great series. From there on out, I've always taken the stance of reserving judgement of who outplayed who in series I've never seen regardless of the numbers. I need to see some consensus material, game recaps, and opinions from those who watched. So I won't just look at a statsheet of Russell vs Wilt and see Wilt dropping 30 and Russell dropping 17 and assume Wilt played better. I like to see what others who saw it were saying.

[LAZERUSS]

I can concede that the Bucks might've been favored but everything else, it's good to have good ole' biased, Wilt fan back. It was actually nice talking constructively with you for a few posts but I guess expecting that to continue was too much. I mean your knowledge of the game goes back decades, which is something few can say and you would benefit the board greatly if you just tried to be more objective. But as it is, you are viewed as that biased Wilt fan.

The thing is...

Chamberlain played exceptionally well, to all-worldly, in his entire post-season career. With the ONLY exception being his '69 Finals. It was, without question, the worst series of his post-season career. But, he was hardly the reason why his team wound up losing a game seven by two points. Boston hit TWO miraculous game-winning shots; Egan cost LA a win, and likely a series win, with his gaffe at the end of game four; Baylor was simply awful in three of their losses (by margins of 6, 2, and 1 point BTW); and their incompetent coach completely blew his team's chances, and ultimately his own career. Oh, and Chamberlain STILL outplayed Russell, and, as always, had a big "must-win" game in game seven (unless an 18-27-3 .875 FG% game, and in only 43 minutes is not a "big" game.)

THAT was it. He PLAYED every minute, of every game, in a seven game EDF's in '68, with an assortment of injuries, including an injury that rendered Reed as a useless statute in the last three games of the '70 Finals. And not only did he play, he averaged 22-25-7 in that series. True, he played poorly in game six, and was a non-factor on the offensive end in that game seven (but with 34 rebounds)...but overall, he was generally brilliant...even WITH the injuries. Even Bill Russell acknowledged following that series that, "a lessor man would not have played."

And some idiots blame Wilt for his team losing to the Knicks in the '70 Finals. Of course, Reed was hailed as a "hero" for stumbling out in game seven, and hitting his first two shots (and then did nothing else), but very few acknowledge that Chamberlain was playing only four months after major knee surgery (and was nowhere near 100%.) Oh, and all he did in that series was average 23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, and shoot .625 from the field.


Even the Wilt "bashers" can't blame Chamberlain for ANY series loss from his rookie season in '60, thru his '66 season. He was LIGHT YEARS better than any other player on the floor in those series.

And when he was finally given an equal roster to Russell's, that was well coached and healthy, he blew out Russell and his Celtics en route to a title.

He outplayed Kareem in the '71 WCF's, albeit, without his two best teammates, and in a series loss.

And he played well in his last post-season, taking his team to a 60-22 record, and dominating the same Warrior team in the WCF's that shocked Kareem's Bucks in the first round. And he was, at worst, the equal of FMVP Reed in the '73 Finals. Hell, in his very last game of his career, he hung a 23-21 game on 9-16 shooting.

[DonDadda59]

Cot damn, that combination of size, skill, and athleticism... closest thing we've seen since is Hakeem.

Alcindor =GOAT Center, #2 GOAT NBA player :bowdown:

[D-Wait]

Dat full-court pass doe :pimp:

[CavaliersFTW]

Sidenote: I've got three games of Jabbar vs Bellamy, this latest Jabbar highlight prompted me to do a quick mix of all the clips of them dueling. The clips in my opinion are entertaining as hell. They are both really good offensive players and athletes. And watching them go at it is like watching some sort of action packed chess match. Lots of variety in how they created ways to defeat each other. The last modern set of games I can think of where I saw some similarly high-usage interior dueling going on was when Aldridge's trailblazers and Howard's rockets went at it a few seasons ago in the playoffs.

[La Frescobaldi]

@LAZERUSS

Your breakdown is factually correct but it omits certain important details...

In the 1972 postseason, Kareem suffered through severe tendinitis on his left knee. Especially in the first round series against Thurmond he was very limited. He was terrific in all other aspects of the game including rebounding and defense and the Bucks won 4-1. Why blame the guy when his team won?

In the WCF against Wilt and the Lakers he was much closer to 100% but you made it sound like the Bucks were favorites in that series. They were looking up at the 69-13 Lakers to begin with and their backcourt of Oscar, McGlocklin, and Jones was ravaged by injuries. I would go as far as to say that the Bucks were heavy underdogs considering their health. Honestly if Kareem was replaced by another center like Lanier or Cowens, Bucks probably get swept. The man averaged 33.7 ppg, 17.5 rpg, 4.6 apg, 4-5 bpg... yes on 45.7% shooting but it's still an insane series. You mention Wilt destroying Kareem in a Game 6 where Kareem had 37 points, 25 rebounds, 8 assists, and 10 blocks albeit on 16/36 shooting. Sorry I don't buy that Wilt destroyed him. Wilt defended him great but he didn't outplay him. Not even close.

The 1972-1973 regular season was just as dominant as the two prior ones. He absolutely outplayed every HOF center he went up against.

In 1974 you mention the Bucks "flaming out" against the Celtics. You forget to mention that Bucks starting SG Lucious Allen was out for the playoffs and that Oscar suffered an injury midway through the season and was never the same. Bucks won two more games than Boston but again their backcourt was severely weakened and this was the same Celtics team that won 68 games the year before. Bucks had the best player in Kareem but Boston had the next three best players and all-stars with Cowens, Havlicek, and JoJo White. Bucks never led all series long and it took a heroic effort in Boston Garden including a game-winner for Bucks to survive Game 6. In Game 7 you mention Kareem was badly outplayed...

Kareem: 26 points, 13 rebounds, 4 assists on 10/21 FG, 6/11 FT
Cowens: 28 points, 14 rebounds, 4 assists on 13/25 FG, 2/2 FT

Seems pretty even to me.

And it was actually Cowens who played the 4th quarter with 5 fouls and was hanging on for his dear life. Coach Heinsohn decided to double and triple Kareem all game and make others beat them. Oscar was the culprit with 6 points on 2-13 shooting (missing lots of wide open shots...) and plenty of turnovers against the press. This game is on YouTube for everyone to see and draw their conclusions.

I have already covered the 1978 and 1979 Lakers plenty of times. They had no second rebounder, Dantley was a team cancer, and they had no perimeter defense (Gus, DJ, and Freddie Brown obliterated their backcourt!!). This was a very deficient team. They had scorers but they had nothing else.

Both times in 1971 and 1980 Kareem's team was the best in the league and were healthy in the playoffs (they weren't in 1974 and 1977) they won championships.
This is revisionism plain and simple.

Nearly everyone had the '72 Bucks over the Lakers before the games started. But after the series was over everyone knew Chamberlain was the greatest basketball player in the world. Nobody thought Jabbar outplayed Chamberlain - nobody.

In '74 Cowens virtually destroyed Jabbar in that game regardless of the stats. Cowens had the Celtics on fire and what I mean, that was just like pouring out gasoline when John Havlicek was on a court. That dude was ALWAYS ready to raise the stakes when he saw a teammate get rolling.

Laz says it was Chamberlain that burnt out Kareem so that he was never the same throughout the '70s... but Cowens did a lot of that same thing in '74.

You need to read up, and you should talk with older guys about those days because you've got it just exactly wrong.

[Elosha]

I'm just now jumping in on this but are you guys discussing the 1972 WCF of Wilt vs Jabbar?

That is definitely a series where fans, coaches, players, etc claim Wilt "outplayed" Jabbar. Despite whatever numbers you observe this is what is out there:

* Wilt outplaying Jabbar is mentioned by several players from both sides (Lakers/Bucks) interviewed in the 1972 Lakers documentary "touched by Gold" that was produced a few years ago. One of the quotes that sticks to my mind is "He just beat up Jabbar" pertaining to that series.

* It's mentioned by Bill Russell in a speech he makes at UCLA in 1972 several weeks after that series had ended when a fan asks him how he'd do against Jabbar. He brings up he thinks he'd do alright because he did alright against the guy that just outplayed him in the playoffs.

* It's mentioned in newspapers, and testified like Laz said by Bucks coach Larry Costello who said Chamberlain was the difference maker.

And I've actually never seen a single piece of testimony that suggested Jabbar outplayed Wilt that series. The reason Wilt's numbers are what they are is probably because he played that Bill Russell-like role (which is not just about rebounds) - in both 1972 and 1973. Plug all defensive holes, disrupt the inside be it in a match up against a player like Jabbar or anyone who dares drive inside, a do-whatever-it-takes to win mentality, but focused on defense rather than offense. It isn't necessarily reflected by numbers. I'm at work right now, but If you'd like I can gather all of these sources I mentioned and post them here. I didn't think Wilt outplayed Jabbar that series when I first saw the numbers either, in fact I didn't even want to look into that series until a few years ago a poster named Millwad insisted I do it to be "unbiased". And when I did it backfired on him, as all the testimony ended up crediting Wilt with a great series. From there on out, I've always taken the stance of reserving judgement of who outplayed who in series I've never seen regardless of the numbers. I need to see some consensus material, game recaps, and opinions from those who watched. So I won't just look at a statsheet of Russell vs Wilt and see Wilt dropping 30 and Russell dropping 17 and assume Wilt played better. I like to see what others who saw it were saying.

If you are just going "the numbers" it looks like KAJ plastered Wilt scoring wise. But as you state, lots of first hand observers thought Wilt outplayed his much less experienced counterparts in the big moments, rebounded and played tremendous defense and held KAJ to relatively inefficient shooting.

However.... Wilt supporters must be careful with this kind of analysis because this is quite similar to the reasons why lots of first hand observers thought Russell "outplayed" Wilt in many of their playoff battles, i.e. outplaying him/hitting big shots/getting blocks in crucial moments, playing strategic defense that "allowed" Wilt to score after the game was already out of reach, and basically dictating to Wilt how the game would be played, without Wilt really knowing it. Here's HOFer Lenny Wilkens saying this exact same thing about Russell v. Wilt, see his commentary after Russell's block on Wilt's attempted dunk.

https://youtu.be/OCX2bEBPABQ?t=285

Is this entirely true/accurate? Probably not, but it does have some kernel of truth to it, just as the idea that Wilt actually outplayed KAJ in this series, despite the overwhelming disparity in scoring.

[dankok8]

This is revisionism plain and simple.

Nearly everyone had the '72 Bucks over the Lakers before the games started. But after the series was over everyone knew Chamberlain was the greatest basketball player in the world. Nobody thought Jabbar outplayed Chamberlain - nobody.

In '74 Cowens virtually destroyed Jabbar in that game regardless of the stats. Cowens had the Celtics on fire and what I mean, that was just like pouring out gasoline when John Havlicek was on a court. That dude was ALWAYS ready to raise the stakes when he saw a teammate get rolling.

Laz says it was Chamberlain that burnt out Kareem so that he was never the same throughout the '70s... but Cowens did a lot of that same thing in '74.

You need to read up, and you should talk with older guys about those days because you've got it just exactly wrong.

I'm sorry to disappoint you my friend but I have read just about every book, newspaper article, and player testimony from the era so I know what I'm talking about.

In 1972 Wilt played great defense on Kareem and he outrebounded him. Wilt was instrumental in the Lakers victory. But you and a lot of others are using the word outplay very loosely. Kareem being utplayed implies that Wilt was a better player. That's just preposterous. By very virtue of being asked to score 30+ points a game as well as rebound and defend makes Kareem a better player than Wilt who was asked to just rebound and defend.

The only place you'll find the word "outplayed" used in the context of the 1972 WCF is that infamous TIME magazine article but it refers to Game 6 and more specifically the 4th quarter of it. The article doesn't say that Wilt was superior over the course of the entire series. Besides many contemporaries including Elliot Kalb, Robert Cherry, and Wilt himself stopped short of saying that Wilt outplayed Kareem.

I don't really want to discuss the 1974 Finals Game 7. It's on YouTube for everyone to see. Again Cowens didn't crush Kareem. He scored the majority of his points from 15-18 feet with Kareem not even within arm's length. And the Bucks lost the game because their guards couldn't handle the ball and they committed an insane number of turnovers. Oscar ended the game with 6 points and 11 assists but shot 2-13 from the field and committed 8 turnovers.

[LAZERUSS]

If you are just going "the numbers" it looks like KAJ plastered Wilt scoring wise. But as you state, lots of first hand observers thought Wilt outplayed his much less experienced counterparts in the big moments, rebounded and played tremendous defense and held KAJ to relatively inefficient shooting.

However.... Wilt supporters must be careful with this kind of analysis because this is quite similar to the reasons why lots of first hand observers thought Russell "outplayed" Wilt in many of their playoff battles, i.e. outplaying him/hitting big shots/getting blocks in crucial moments, playing strategic defense that "allowed" Wilt to score after the game was already out of reach, and basically dictating to Wilt how the game would be played, without Wilt really knowing it. Here's HOFer Lenny Wilkens saying this exact same thing about Russell v. Wilt, see his commentary after Russell's block on Wilt's attempted dunk.

https://youtu.be/OCX2bEBPABQ?t=285

Is this entirely true/accurate? Probably not, but it does have some kernel of truth to it, just as the idea that Wilt actually outplayed KAJ in this series, despite the overwhelming disparity in scoring.

There was a HUGE difference in the Russell-Wilt, Kareem-Wilt matchups.

Surrounding talent.

AND, Chamberlain outrebounded Kareem, and held him to a .457 FG%, which was deceptive, since in the last four games of that series, Kareem was mis-firing to the tune of a .414 FG%.

AND, that was the ONLY time in any seasonal breakdown, in which Kareem outshot Wilt from the field.

In their lone H2H in '69, Chamberlain outshot Kareem by a .643 to .429 margin (and outscored and outrebounded him.)

In their five regular season H2H's in '71, Chamberlain outshot Kareem by a .483 to .438 margin.

In their five post-season H2H's in '71, Chamberlain outshot Kareem by a .489 to .481 margin.

In their five regular season H2H's, Wilt outshot KAJ by a .537 to .500 margin.

KAJ outshot Wilt in that '72 WCF series, but only by a .457 to .452 margin, and more importantly, Wilt missed a total of 20 FGAs, while Kareem missed 107.

And in their six regular season H2H's in '73, Chamberlain outshot KAJ by a .737 to .450 margin.


Again, Kareem's '72 Bucks were coming off a 66-16 season, while Wilt's '71 Lakers had stumbled in at 48-34. Virtually no one predicted that LA would finish with a better record. And those Buck teams were as talented as Wilt's Lakers, albeit, their scoring was down because of KAJ's FGAs.

When a prime Wilt was battling Russell up from '60 thru '64, he was doing so with rosters that had either only ONE player with a season of 20+ ppg in their CAREER, or ZERO. Russell had MULTIPLE players with MULTIPLE 20+ ppg seasons.


And Wilt slaughtered Russell in EVERY facet of the game, including blocked shots. Kareem's only real edge over an old Wilt, was in scoring. And again, he was highly inefficient. Even Wilt's WORST post-season FG% against Russell was .468, and that came in a post-season NBA that shot .411 (and Russell only shot .399 BTW.) A prime Chamberlain also had post-seasons against Russell of .500, .509, .517, .555, and .556, and four of those were 28 ppg, 29 ppg, 30 ppg, 31 ppg, and all in post-seasons that shot between .403 to .440.


Furthermore, in most all of those H2H's, Chamberlain was dominant in the 4th quarters, and especially in the waning minutes of 4th quarters. Only an injured Wilt in games six and seven of '68, and a Wilt watching from the bench in the last five minutes of game seven in '69 was held down.


BTW, I find it fascinating that Dankok8 claims that Kareem's Bucks were injured in '72, and yet he ripped Wilt for his team losing a game seven by four points, with virtually EVERY key player on his team, including himself, was either playing hurt, missing games, or missing the entire series.

And I also find it fascinating that he uses KAJ's scoring against Wilt, and yet he has posted commentary claiming that Russell was outplaying Wilt in games of the '62 EDF's, when Chamberlain was outscoring Russell in every game, and most of them by huge margins. BTW, I shredded the article which claimed that Russell outplayed Wilt in game one of that series. It was a blatant lie.

[LAZERUSS]

I'm sorry to disappoint you my friend but I have read just about every book, newspaper article, and player testimony from the era so I know what I'm talking about.

In 1972 Wilt played great defense on Kareem and he outrebounded him. Wilt was instrumental in the Lakers victory. But you and a lot of others are using the word outplay very loosely. Kareem being utplayed implies that Wilt was a better player. That's just preposterous. By very virtue of being asked to score 30+ points a game as well as rebound and defend makes Kareem a better player than Wilt who was asked to just rebound and defend.

The only place you'll find the word "outplayed" used in the context of the 1972 WCF is that infamous TIME magazine article but it refers to Game 6 and more specifically the 4th quarter of it. The article doesn't say that Wilt was superior over the course of the entire series. Besides many contemporaries including Elliot Kalb, Robert Cherry, and Wilt himself stopped short of saying that Wilt outplayed Kareem.

I don't really want to discuss the 1974 Finals Game 7. It's on YouTube for everyone to see. Again Cowens didn't crush Kareem. He scored the majority of his points from 15-18 feet with Kareem not even within arm's length. And the Bucks lost the game because their guards couldn't handle the ball and they committed an insane number of turnovers. Oscar ended the game with 6 points and 11 assists but shot 2-13 from the field and committed 8 turnovers.

That is a blatant lie perpetuated at RealGM.

The TIME Magazine article claimed this...


Chamberlain performed so well in the series that TIME magazine stated, "In the N.B.A.'s western division title series with Milwaukee, he (Chamberlain) decisively outplayed basketball's newest giant superstar, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, eleven years his junior."

And virtually EVERY article at the time claimed that Wilt OUTPLAYED Kareem, including articles from the MILWAUKEE PRESS.

There were ZERO articles that I have found that claimed that Kareem outplayed Wilt in that series.


Furthermore, I can find at least one article which claimed that Wilt outplayed, and even dominated Kareem in their '71 series H2H's.

[CavaliersFTW]

If you are just going "the numbers" it looks like KAJ plastered Wilt scoring wise. But as you state, lots of first hand observers thought Wilt outplayed his much less experienced counterparts in the big moments, rebounded and played tremendous defense and held KAJ to relatively inefficient shooting.

However.... Wilt supporters must be careful with this kind of analysis because this is quite similar to the reasons why lots of first hand observers thought Russell "outplayed" Wilt in many of their playoff battles, i.e. outplaying him/hitting big shots/getting blocks in crucial moments, playing strategic defense that "allowed" Wilt to score after the game was already out of reach, and basically dictating to Wilt how the game would be played, without Wilt really knowing it. Here's HOFer Lenny Wilkens saying this exact same thing about Russell v. Wilt, see his commentary after Russell's block on Wilt's attempted dunk.

https://youtu.be/OCX2bEBPABQ?t=285

Is this entirely true/accurate? Probably not, but it does have some kernel of truth to it, just as the idea that Wilt actually outplayed KAJ in this series, despite the overwhelming disparity in scoring.
I already stated that it means I reserve judgement on series such as Wilt and Russell. I believe lenny wilkins quote is out of context there by the way. I think Lenny Wilkins was repeating the narrative. Not the way things really happened. That was from an episode of "top ten reasons you can't blame ____ (Wilt Chamberain) and that segment was talking about the narrative of Wilt vs Russell vs the truth as I believe immediately after Wali Jones retorts with "Russell didn't shut Wilt down ... NOBODY shut Wilt down." IE there would be no truth to it.

[LAZERUSS]

If you are just going "the numbers" it looks like KAJ plastered Wilt scoring wise. But as you state, lots of first hand observers thought Wilt outplayed his much less experienced counterparts in the big moments, rebounded and played tremendous defense and held KAJ to relatively inefficient shooting.

However.... Wilt supporters must be careful with this kind of analysis because this is quite similar to the reasons why lots of first hand observers thought Russell "outplayed" Wilt in many of their playoff battles, i.e. outplaying him/hitting big shots/getting blocks in crucial moments, playing strategic defense that "allowed" Wilt to score after the game was already out of reach, and basically dictating to Wilt how the game would be played, without Wilt really knowing it. Here's HOFer Lenny Wilkens saying this exact same thing about Russell v. Wilt, see his commentary after Russell's block on Wilt's attempted dunk.

https://youtu.be/OCX2bEBPABQ?t=285

Is this entirely true/accurate? Probably not, but it does have some kernel of truth to it, just as the idea that Wilt actually outplayed KAJ in this series, despite the overwhelming disparity in scoring.

NONE of the bolded EVER happened, nor did RUSSELL, himself, EVER make that claim.

In fact, those newspaper recaps would credit Russell with a H2H "win", when he held Chamberlain down for either a half, or a quarter.

Furthermore, in the vast majority of their key games, and key quarters in those series H2H's, Chamberlain was mopping the floor with Russell down the stretch.

The Russell supporters always use game seven of the '62 EDF's, as an example. He held Chamberlain to 22 points. BUT, the actual recap credited WILT with keeping his team in the game with his DEFENSE. Furthermore, Chamberlain scored Philly's last five points (including 1-1 from the line) to tie the game. Only a Sam Jones game-winning shot prevented Wilt from beating Russell that year.

Then, how about their '65 playoff series H2H? Chamberlain DESTROYED Russell in EVERY facet of the game. In fact, he single-handedly carried his 40-40 team, which had had gone 34-46 the year before, and traded three players to get him at mid-season, to game seven, one point loss. And how about that game seven? Wilt outscored Russell, 30-15; outrebounded him, 32-29; and outshot him from the field by a 12-15 to 7-16 margin. Oh, and Wilt scored the Sixers LAST EIGHT straight points, to pull within one point with five seconds remaining. Then...the CLUTCH Russell hit a guidewire with his inbounds pass, giving Philly the ball under their basket. Only yet another teammate, this time Hondo, saved Russell again...when "Havlicek stole the ball!"


I also have never received a response from the Russell supporters regarding this...

In the '66 EDF's, when Chamberlain's teammates were just puking all over the floor the entire series (they would collectively shoot .352 for the series), Wilt took it upon himself to try an win the series. Down 3-1, Chamberlain exploded for a 46 point, 19-34 shooting, 34 rebound game...albeit, in a 120-112 loss.

Ok, fast forward to the very next season. Now it was Russell who was looking down the barrell of a 3-1 series deficit. Did he overwhelm Chamberlain with a 46-34 game? Hell no...he quietly led his lambs to slaughter, with a feeble FOUR point game, on 2-5, with 21 rebounds, and seven assists. Meanwhile, Wilt poured in 29 points, 22 of which came in the first half, and with the game still close (obviously, he could have scored 40-50 if need be), on 10-16 shooting, with 13 assists, and 36 rebounds (and seven blocks), in a blowout win.