Wilt Chamberlain's 100-Point Game

[Full Court]

This happened a while ago, but a lot of people have forgotten some of the context around that game.

Not only did Wilt score a record-breaking 100, a record that remains today, but he grabbed 25 rebounds and had a 57% field goal percentage. Most importantly, he led his team to a win that game.

I'm sure the usual suspects will be in here to hate on Wilt, but this was the single greatest regular season performance in the history of the sport.

[8Ball]

Wilt was an elite player in a very very awful era of basketball.

I put Wilt in the top 7. But he played against this level of competition:

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FatalAbandonedIlladopsis-max-1mb.gif

A lot of these players would not make the NBA draft today.


If Jordan played in the NBA in 1962 Jordan would average 50 ppg too.

[Hey Yo]

MJ fans praise him for his 63pt game, yet seem to most importantly overlook that he lost the game....

[SouBeachTalents]

100 points is 100 points, but the ending to that game turned into such a shit show the accomplishment loses some legitimacy.


With six minutes remaining, the Knicks began intentionally fouling any Warrior except Chamberlain, keeping the ball out of the center's hands. New York also began moving the ball slowly and using as much of the shot clock as possible to leave fewer opportunities for Chamberlain to score. Effectively, they played the opposite of what a normal club would do if they faced a deficit, willingly giving up many easy points instead of making attempts to rally back. Meschery said the Warriors lobbed the ball in from the sideline across the floor directly to Chamberlain, who would use his size and strength to get the ball. Chamberlain was the only Warrior to make a field goal in almost four minutes before Meschery made a jump shot at 4:15. Philadelphia began quickly fouling New York with around four minutes left, reciprocating the intentional foul strategy. Warriors coach Frank McGuire at one point pulled out his entire starting five, save Chamberlain, and replaced them with bench players. The intention was to foul the Knicks, get the ball back after free throws and give Chamberlain the ball. Thus each team spent the last minutes fouling each other. The Warriors ended with 25 personal fouls, and the Knicks with 32.

[Kblaze8855]

Wilt was an elite player in a very very awful era of basketball.

I put Wilt in the top 7. But he played against this level of competition:

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FatalAbandonedIlladopsis-max-1mb.gif

A lot of these players would not make the NBA draft today.


If Jordan played in the NBA in 1962 Jordan would average 50 ppg too.


If I remember correctly(and maybe I don’t) that isn’t the nba Cousy is playing in there.

[1987_Lakers]

50 ppg is less impressive once you realize he played 48+ mpg, his competition besides Russell was mediocre, he played in a faster era which inflated stats

OP sounds like a teenager making this thread.

[ArbitraryWater]

did you really just proudly say he had a 57% FG%?


That sounds ****ing terrible for a 100 pt game.

[L.Kizzle]

did you really just proudly say he had a 57% FG%?


That sounds ****ing terrible for a 100 pt game.
He was getting hacked everytime he touched the ball. As evidence by his 32 free throws shot (and he made 28 of them.)

[L.Kizzle]

Wilt was the only one in his era to put up crazy scoring games. Elgin Baylor was a notch below with his scoring burst.

[Real Men Wear Green]

did you really just proudly say he had a 57% FG%?


That sounds ****ing terrible for a 100 pt game.

And what is a good field goal percentage for a 100 point game? The other guys that scored 100, what was their FG? TS? Let us know the standard please.

[ArbitraryWater]

And what is a good field goal percentage for a 100 point game? The other guys that scored 100, what was their FG? TS? Let us know the standard please.

Calm down.

I'm just saying.

For how rare a 100 pt game is, you'd think the player shot like 80-90%.

57% without 3's sounds pretty terrible for a 100 pt game.

Thats a lot of misses right there.

Its obviously a historically good game still, but if you werent such a nitpick son of a bitch, you'd get the point.

[Xiao Yao You]

since it was most of the teams offense the % sounds fine

[L.Kizzle]

Calm down.

I'm just saying.

For how rare a 100 pt game is, you'd think the player shot like 80-90%.

57% without 3's sounds pretty terrible for a 100 pt game.

Thats a lot of misses right there.

Its obviously a historically good game still, but if you werent such a nitpick son of a bitch, you'd get the point.
57% FG is good for anyone. I guess besides an 100 point game, than it's just so-so.

[Axe]

This guy never won a ring until he was 30 years old.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Calm down.

I'm just saying.

For how rare a 100 pt game is, you'd think the player shot like 80-90%.

57% without 3's sounds pretty terrible for a 100 pt game.

Thats a lot of misses right there.

Its obviously a historically good game still, but if you werent such a nitpick son of a bitch, you'd get the point.

You call me a "son of a bitch" in the same post you tell me to calm down... in reply to a post where I didn't even insult you.

Of course I thought what you had to say was stupid. And it is. But note that on top of being stupid with the original post you are also being stupid with your reaction.

[Full Court]

50 ppg is less impressive once you realize he played 48+ mpg, his competition besides Russell was mediocre, he played in a faster era which inflated stats

OP sounds like a teenager making this thread.

Predictable. You sound like such a loser lol.

[Full Court]

Calm down.

I'm just saying.

For how rare a 100 pt game is, you'd think the player shot like 80-90%.

57% without 3's sounds pretty terrible for a 100 pt game.

Thats a lot of misses right there.

Its obviously a historically good game still, but if you werent such a nitpick son of a bitch, you'd get the point.

If a TEAM scored 100 points on 57% shooting, it would be a great offensive game. One dude did it....the most dominant performance ever, and you're going to poo-poo it because he didn't shoot 80-90%. :lol

:biggums:

How strange that the only people in this thread trying to downplay what Wilt did are Bronie fans. Imagine that.

[1987_Lakers]

Predictable. You sound like such a loser lol.

You still haven't responded to this post...


His individual scoring accomplishments while his team suffered in the process?

1960 - Warriors (2nd to worst offense)
1961 - Warriors (3rd worst offense in the NBA)
1962 - Warriors (Average offense)
1963 - Warriors (Below average offense, finished 31-49)
1964 - Warriors (3rd worst offense in the NBA)
1965 - Warriors (Worst offense in the NBA right before he got traded midseason)

This is basically my point...He had these "incredible individual accomplishments" while his team's overall offense wasn't good. You make these "No LeBron, no difference" threads and say his stats are empty etc.

Yet, you have Wilt #3 all time while there is evidence that his crazy stats never transformed his offenses. I find it funny how you can have a guy like Wilt ranked so high when you shit on what LeBron for his team sucking when in reality, Wilt put up all those "unparalleled" accomplishments while his team sucked.

And I don't have a problem with people ranking Wilt in the top 5, it's just hilarious to see you have him top 3 because it makes you look like a hypocrite.

Why do you give LeBron such shit for putting up "empty stats and losing" then go around and put Wilt top 3?

[Full Court]

You still haven't responded to this post...



Why do you give LeBron such shit for putting up "empty stats and losing" then go around and put Wilt top 3?

And you haven't put up even a meager argument that the game I made a thread about wasn't the greatest performance of all time.

I wonder why you get so triggered any time someone gives Wilt props. I wonder why....

[1987_Lakers]

And you haven't put up even a meager argument that the game I made a thread about wasn't the greatest performance of all time.

I wonder why you get so triggered any time someone gives Wilt props. I wonder why....

It might have been the greatest single game performance, idk. To me Kobe's 81 points is more impressive. If you look at the 100 point performance closely, the Warriors were fouling the Knicks players so they can get the ball back right away and feed Wilt, doesn't that seem like stat padding? Don't you shit on LeBron for stat padding?? gtfo.

And you are still dodging my initial question.

[coastalmarker99]

Statistics about Wilt's team's offences should be used with context, so I will dive a little deeper here:

It's important to not just look at Wilt but the teammates around him, especially in an era like the 60s where usage was shared more among the starters.

Besides Wilt joining the team in 1960, let's take a look at who else was on this roster in '60:

Woody Sauldsberry regressed from a 83 TS+ to a 75 TS+. He played fewer minutes but was significantly worse.


This season was the 3rd worst NBA history by TS Added (unsurprisingly, Woody also holds the worst in history for his '61 season.)

Now, why can we not attribute his awful play to Wilt?

Well, he was awful before Wilt got there and was awful after him. He was a poor scorer being given quite a bit of shots in an antiquated era for offense.

Guy Rodgers received 1000 more minutes and became a starter. I know some might claim Guy Rodgers was a plus--but he was a massive negative.

Rodgers has the worst career TS Added in NBA history, he was a very poor offensive player that took way too many shots.

Regardless of his passing ability, Guy Rodgers was so far below the rest of the league in TS Added that he was no doubt hurting the spacing and offensive ability of the team.

Paul Arizin was older this season and on the downturn of his career, he regressed from his '59 season which hurt the offensive capabilities of the team.

The next year he improved but was never back at his prime levels.

Secondly, this leads me to believe Wilt's usage isn't as high as people seem to believe as 1960's offences were primarily not being run through bigs but rather guards.

In fact, A good chunk of Wilt's shots were coming off missed shots from his teammates, rather than getting the ball in the halfcourt and the offence functioning around him as we might see in later eras.

The '64 Finals Warriors film is a good example of this, where players are passing the ball around and jacking up shots rather than running it through Wilt in the post like the Lakers did with Shaq.

Also - for all this talk about how bad volume shooting Wilt was for his team's offences it's quite ironic that the best Warriors offence Wilt played in was when he took the most shots and averaged 50 points a game.

The 1962 Warriors were a good offensive team, despite not having that good offensive roster - outside of old Arizin and rookie Meschery, they were bad period.

And for the record, nobody questions MJ offensive impact when he led mediocre team offences in 1987 and 1988.

He gets excuses because of a weak team and poor team structure.

Why can't we use the same criteria for Wilt?

To me, personally, The Warriors being good offensively despite having a terrible offensive system and an incredibly weak offensive roster is a big plus for Wilt, not a minus.

Also, you have to remember that an ORTG of +0.9 above average in 1962 for a team was actually good.


People keep calling their offence this season when Wilt averaged 50 points a game "about average"

but in reality, they were only 0.5 below the Lakers for 3rd and 0.7 below the Hawks for 2nd.

Both the Lakers and Hawks had "above average" offences that season yet were top 3.

It was harder to score efficiently in this era due to the rules limiting offence and the strong defensive presence of the Celtics.

I would also like to point out that the Warriors offence was probably even better than what their ORTG says because 1. Tom Gola missed 20 games and 2. They had to play the Celtics three more times than Western teams such as the Lakers and Hawks.

Michael Jordan had above average offensive teams early on in his career, and it's no surprise--his teammates were quite poor. Wilt's were even worse. And he played in an era that didn't fully utilize superstars and instead spread the shots around more.

[Full Court]

It might have been the greatest single game performance, idk. To me Kobe's 81 points is more impressive. If you look at the 100 point performance closely, the Warriors were fouling the Knicks players so they can get the ball back right away and feed Wilt, doesn't that seem like stat padding? Don't you shit on LeBron for stat padding?? gtfo.

And you are still dodging my initial question.

Not every dumb attempt at derailing a discussion requires a response.

You Bronies are an insecure bunch.

[1987_Lakers]

Not every dumb attempt at derailing a discussion requires a response.

You Bronies are an insecure bunch.

You have nothing.

:roll:

[La Frescobaldi]

50 ppg is less impressive once you realize he played 48+ mpg, his competition besides Russell was mediocre, he played in a faster era which inflated stats

OP sounds like a teenager making this thread.

Nobody else, in any league, anywhere, at any time, at any level, ever, got 50ppg for a season.

[coastalmarker99]

Nobody else, in any league, anywhere, at any time, at any level, ever, got 50ppg for a season.

Wilt's endurance is the most special thing about him along with his versatility.


The fact that we got to see Wilt in different roles throughout his career (dominant scorer, play-maker/distributor and offensive anchor, lower usage defensive anchor) and still be utterly dominant in every single facet is a testament to how great he truly was.



To me, no other player in NBA history has so seamlessly transitioned between such varying roles on his teams and excelled to the extent that Wilt did.

[coastalmarker99]

Nobody else, in any league, anywhere, at any time, at any level, ever, got 50ppg for a season.

Everyone knows the stat that Wilt averaged 48.5 mpg during that season - incredibly, more time than there is in a game.


I want to express it in terms of total, for the wow factor:

The 61 - 62 season saw the expansion of the regular season to 80 games. 48 x 80 = 3840.

The Philadelphia Warriors played 5 games that went into OT, 1 game that went into 2OT, and 1 that went into 3OT.


That's 50 minutes of overtime = 3890 total minutes for the Warriors that season.


Wilt is recorded as having played 3882 minutes.

(He then went on to play every minute of every playoff game that year)


Just counting back-to-backs:

There were 13 back-to-backs

There were 07 back-to-back-to-backs

There were 02 back-to-back-to-backs-to-backs

There was even a back-to-back-to-back-to-back-to-back (5 ****ing games in a row.
The next game was 3 days later.)

A not-insignificant amount of these games Wilt played during that season only had a single day break between them, and even chains of 2btb and 3btb occasionally only had a single day of rest between them.


The stamina that he had to stay on the court minute after minute night after night for him was ridiculous.



Meanwhile today nobody even averages 40 minutes a game anymore and we have reduced the number of B2Bs.

[L.Kizzle]

It might have been the greatest single game performance, idk. To me Kobe's 81 points is more impressive. If you look at the 100 point performance closely, the Warriors were fouling the Knicks players so they can get the ball back right away and feed Wilt, doesn't that seem like stat padding? Don't you shit on LeBron for stat padding?? gtfo.

And you are still dodging my initial question.
When they realized 100 was in reach, not the entire game.
The most points scored up until that time was Wilt and Baylor who scored 71 and Wilt 78 and 73.

[Baller789]

Wilt's endurance is the most special thing about him along with his versatility.


The fact that we got to see Wilt in different roles throughout his career (dominant scorer, play-maker/distributor and offensive anchor, lower usage defensive anchor) and still be utterly dominant in every single facet is a testament to how great he truly was.



To me, no other player in NBA history has so seamlessly transitioned between such varying roles on his teams and excelled to the extent that Wilt did.

Considering Wilt is actually taller than Shaq and the fast pace of the game, Wilt's stamina is godly. Even if you $h!t on that era.

[iamgine]

Playing a lot of minutes seems like it's common for that era. Oscar averaged like 45+ minutes. Russ averaged 44+ minutes. West, Baylor, Thurmond averaged 41-44+ minutes. Even a nobody like Gene Shue played 43+ minutes.

[L.Kizzle]

Statistics about Wilt's team's offences should be used with context, so I will dive a little deeper here:

It's important to not just look at Wilt but the teammates around him, especially in an era like the 60s where usage was shared more among the starters.

Besides Wilt joining the team in 1960, let's take a look at who else was on this roster in '60:

Woody Sauldsberry regressed from a 83 TS+ to a 75 TS+. He played fewer minutes but was significantly worse.


This season was the 3rd worst NBA history by TS Added (unsurprisingly, Woody also holds the worst in history for his '61 season.)

Now, why can we not attribute his awful play to Wilt?

Well, he was awful before Wilt got there and was awful after him. He was a poor scorer being given quite a bit of shots in an antiquated era for offense.

Guy Rodgers received 1000 more minutes and became a starter. I know some might claim Guy Rodgers was a plus--but he was a massive negative.

Rodgers has the worst career TS Added in NBA history, he was a very poor offensive player that took way too many shots.

Regardless of his passing ability, Guy Rodgers was so far below the rest of the league in TS Added that he was no doubt hurting the spacing and offensive ability of the team.

Paul Arizin was older this season and on the downturn of his career, he regressed from his '59 season which hurt the offensive capabilities of the team.

The next year he improved but was never back at his prime levels.

Secondly, this leads me to believe Wilt's usage isn't as high as people seem to believe as 1960's offences were primarily not being run through bigs but rather guards.

In fact, A good chunk of Wilt's shots were coming off missed shots from his teammates, rather than getting the ball in the halfcourt and the offence functioning around him as we might see in later eras.

The '64 Finals Warriors film is a good example of this, where players are passing the ball around and jacking up shots rather than running it through Wilt in the post like the Lakers did with Shaq.

Also - for all this talk about how bad volume shooting Wilt was for his team's offences it's quite ironic that the best Warriors offence Wilt played in was when he took the most shots and averaged 50 points a game.

The 1962 Warriors were a good offensive team, despite not having that good offensive roster - outside of old Arizin and rookie Meschery, they were bad period.

And for the record, nobody questions MJ offensive impact when he led mediocre team offences in 1987 and 1988.

He gets excuses because of a weak team and poor team structure.

Why can't we use the same criteria for Wilt?

To me, personally, The Warriors being good offensively despite having a terrible offensive system and an incredibly weak offensive roster is a big plus for Wilt, not a minus.

Also, you have to remember that an ORTG of +0.9 above average in 1962 for a team was actually good.


People keep calling their offence this season when Wilt averaged 50 points a game "about average"

but in reality, they were only 0.5 below the Lakers for 3rd and 0.7 below the Hawks for 2nd.

Both the Lakers and Hawks had "above average" offences that season yet were top 3.

It was harder to score efficiently in this era due to the rules limiting offence and the strong defensive presence of the Celtics.

I would also like to point out that the Warriors offence was probably even better than what their ORTG says because 1. Tom Gola missed 20 games and 2. They had to play the Celtics three more times than Western teams such as the Lakers and Hawks.

Michael Jordan had above average offensive teams early on in his career, and it's no surprise--his teammates were quite poor. Wilt's were even worse. And he played in an era that didn't fully utilize superstars and instead spread the shots around more.
Don't forget travel was terrible. Some travel by train. Courts were terrible. There were dead spots on some courts. They sometimes played double headers away from home for a home game, meaning maybe the Warriors play the Pistons for a home game. But not in Pennsylvania but at Madison Square Garden.

[Baller789]

Don't forget the bricks they call shoes. We have it better.

[coastalmarker99]

Considering Wilt is actually taller than Shaq and the fast pace of the game, Wilt's stamina is godly. Even if you $h!t on that era.

This award-winning photo shows Wilt Chamberlain demonstrating his vertical leap in Brussels, Belgium. Wilt is 85 inches tall and the bar height is 80–82 inches. Chamberlain looks to have jumped over half his own height. Estimates at the time placed the height he jumped at 54 inches

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-afa777750d1e271083633c3bd72005e2


it's also important to note that Wilt replies on the bottom of the photo saying, "Figure for yourself how high this sergeant jump is as I casually look down on a bar that is almost 7 feet high.

This award winning shot from the Brussells, Belgium World's Fair shows me over 4 feet off the ground. But was I going up or coming down? Think about it."


Also, you can see Wilt Chamberlain jumping off of just one step perhaps higher than any other NBA player has in very slow motion.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JC6ahiLDL4

[coastalmarker99]

50 ppg is less impressive once you realize he played 48+ mpg, his competition besides Russell was mediocre, he played in a faster era which inflated stats

OP sounds like a teenager making this thread.

It should be noted that if you take Wilt out of the equation there have only been 30 to 45 games of 60+ points in Nba history as (Wilt had 32 by himself.) Or only 28 30-30 games (Chamberlain had 103 on his own.) Or only six 40-30 games (Chamberlain had 55.)

And If you take Wilt and his four highest-scoring seasons out from Nba history then MJ's 37.1 ppg would be the all-time record, and James Harden who plays today would be next at 36.1 ppg along with Rick Barry at 35.6 ppg then Kobe at 35.4 ppg.

BTW, Kareem's 34.8 ppg in '72 (also in the Chamberlain-era), is 10th all-time, and Baylor's 60-61 season of 34.8 ppg is 11th.


So, strike Chamberlain from the record book, and the numbers are far more normal across all eras.

So it must be asked...why was it Chamberlain who was the only player in Nba history putting up those staggering scoring, rebounding, FG%'s, seasons.

Maybe it's because he really was that much better than his contemporaries as an individual player.

[Full Court]

You have nothing.

:roll:

And you seem to have a problem with grasping simple concepts.

When Wilt's empty stats are nearly DOUBLE that of Bronie's empty stats, I wonder which one should get a higher ranking. Anyone with about a third grade level of math proficiency should be able to figure that out.

[RogueBorg]

50 ppg is less impressive once you realize he played 48+ mpg, his competition besides Russell was mediocre, he played in a faster era which inflated stats

OP sounds like a teenager making this thread.

6'-5" Elgin Baylor averaged 38 ppg and 18 ppg the same year Wilt averaged 50 ppg, 25 rpg and Oscar averaged a triple-double.

[RogueBorg]

Nobody else, in any league, anywhere, at any time, at any level, ever, got 50ppg for a season.

I'd like to know what Cheryl Miller averaged in high school. She once scored 105 points in one game.

[1987_Lakers]

And you seem to have a problem with grasping simple concepts.

When Wilt's empty stats are nearly DOUBLE that of Bronie's empty stats, I wonder which one should get a higher ranking. Anyone with about a third grade level of math proficiency should be able to figure that out.

So you are saying Wilt's stats are empty? :oldlol:

[La Frescobaldi]

I'd like to know what Cheryl Miller averaged in high school. She once scored 105 points in one game.

Cheryl Miller Bio [2022 Update]: Early Life, Family, Wife ...
Search domain playersbio.comhttps://playersbio.com › cheryl-miller
In her 90 matches at Riverside Polytechnic High School, Cheryl Miller scored 3,026 points, an average of 32.8 per game, grabbed 1,353 rebounds and had 368 assists.

https://playersbio.com/cheryl-miller/


Wikipedia also shows 32 & 15.

but she had a one season high of 37ppg

[1987_Lakers]

6'-5" Elgin Baylor averaged 38 ppg and 18 ppg the same year Wilt averaged 50 ppg, 25 rpg and Oscar averaged a triple-double.

Averaging 50 is impressive, but it's not even close to averaging 50 ppg in the NBA from 1990-present.

People just hear "50 points" while ignoring the context behind it. You had people put up monster numbers in Wilt's era. Full court needs to do better.

[La Frescobaldi]

Averaging 50 is impressive, but it's not even close to averaging 50 ppg in the NBA from 1990-present.

People just hear "50 points" while ignoring the context behind it. You had people put up monster number's in Wilt's era. Full court needs to do better.
OP: “ I'm sure the usual suspects will be in here to hate on Wilt”
How can full court be more accurate and correct than to know you’d show up doing your best 3ball imitation?

Only difference is he hates on pippen to protect jordan while guys that hate on chamberlain do it to protect….. everybody else who ever played basketball.

[1987_Lakers]

OP: “ I'm sure the usual suspects will be in here to hate on Wilt”
How can full court be more accurate and correct than to know you’d show up doing your best 3ball imitation?

Only difference is he hates on pippen to protect jordan while guys that hate on chamberlain do it to protect….. everybody else who ever played basketball.

I don't mind people having Wilt top 5, the only reason I give him shit about Wilt is because all the things he criticizes LeBron for, can easily apply to Wilt as well. I've brought up examples to this point and he just runs.

[Full Court]

Averaging 50 is impressive, but it's not even close to averaging 50 ppg in the NBA from 1990-present.

People just hear "50 points" while ignoring the context behind it. You had people put up monster numbers in Wilt's era. Full court needs to do better.

Ok, so who else put up numbers anywhere close to Wilt's numbers in his era? Yep, NOBODY. Did he have empty stats? Sure he did, and that's why he's #3 instead of #1. He gets penalized for not winning. But he still almost doubled Bronie's empty stats. You can get upset about it all you want, but I have Wilt ranked comfortably ahead of Bronie. You haven't put forth a single good point that would convince me otherwise.

[1987_Lakers]

Ok, so who else put up numbers anywhere close to Wilt's numbers in his era? Yep, NOBODY. Did he have empty stats? Sure he did, and that's why he's #3 instead of #1. He gets penalized for not winning. But he still almost doubled Bronie's empty stats. You can get upset about it all you want, but I have Wilt ranked comfortably ahead of Bronie. You haven't put forth a single good point that would convince me otherwise.

I don't understand this logic. You said Wilt had "empty stats" but still have him top 3 ever because of his stats?

My goodness. :oldlol:

[coastalmarker99]

I don't understand this logic. You said Wilt had "empty stats" but still have him top 3 ever because of his stats?

My goodness. :oldlol:

Wilt played on 12 winning teams in his 14 seasons, and in the two that he did not, he had a monumental season in 62-63, and that 64-65 playoff run.

where he carried a 40-40 team to within one point, in a game seven, of beating the 62-18 Celtics who featured 7 hall of fame players plus the GOAT coach in Red.

He went to 12 Conference Finals (by contrast, Bird went to eight.)

He played on six teams that went to the Finals.

He played on six teams that were Conference champions.

He played on four teams that had the best record in the league.

He played on four teams that won 60+ games, including two that went 68-13 and 69-13 (and won 33 straight games.)

And he anchored two of the two top 5 teams in NBA history in the 67 76ers and 72 Lakers.

Not only that, but he single-handedly carried inept rosters to within an eyelash of beating Russell's "dynasty", and in fact, he did beat that Dynasty (with a 4-1 blowout rout too.)

For someone who was considered to have a minimum overall positive impact.

he was pretty bad at it.

[Full Court]

I don't understand this logic. You said Wilt had "empty stats" but still have him top 3 ever because of his stats?

My goodness. :oldlol:

This shouldn't be hard to comprehend. I've explained it multiple times. You must just like arguing with yourself lol.

Even you said you have no problem with him being in the top 5.

[HoopsNY]

Averaging 50 is impressive, but it's not even close to averaging 50 ppg in the NBA from 1990-present.

People just hear "50 points" while ignoring the context behind it. You had people put up monster numbers in Wilt's era. Full court needs to do better.

I too hold a similar sentiment, but then I think about it this way. If Wilt was able to dominate at an older age during a time when Kareem was in his peak, then why wouldn't he have done similar in the 80s given Kareem's longevity? And if Kareem was able to dominate a young Hakeem, and Hakeem dominated the 90s, then surely Wilt would have too.

And if Hakeem was able to dominate Robinson, Ewing, Shaq, Mutombo, Mourning, etc, then Wilt would have as well, so that ultimately means he would have been able to dominate in the 2000s quite easily with the demise of the center.

This doesn't mean he would have dropped 50 PPG, but dominance is dominance and superstars can adapt to any era, ultimately.

[8Ball]

Thread fail :lol

[1987_Lakers]

This shouldn't be hard to comprehend. I've explained it multiple times. You must just like arguing with yourself lol.

Even you said you have no problem with him being in the top 5.

Let me get this straight....

You just said Wilt had "empty stats", but the reason why you rank him #3 is because of stats????

https://c.tenor.com/E6aL4cqEdmwAAAAM/michael-jordan-lol.gif

Now it makes sense why you dodged my question for so many days.

[Full Court]

Thread fail :lol

Yep, great argument about how it wasn't the greatest performance of all time. Lol. Moron.

Another shook Bronie. Water is wet.

[8Ball]

Let me get this straight....

You just said Wilt had "empty stats", but the reason why you rank him #3 is because of stats????

https://c.tenor.com/E6aL4cqEdmwAAAAM/michael-jordan-lol.gif


Wilt top 3 has got to be one of the dumbest takes this forum ever produced.

[Full Court]

Let me get this straight....

You just said Wilt had "empty stats", but the reason why you rank him #3 is because of stats????

https://c.tenor.com/E6aL4cqEdmwAAAAM/michael-jordan-lol.gif

Now you're just trolling. You got my point - not even you are that dumb. Or maybe I'm giving you too much credit. You of all people should appreciate empty stats considering how much you love Bronie.

[1987_Lakers]

Now you're just trolling. You got my point - not even you are that dumb. Or maybe I'm giving you too much credit. You of all people should appreciate empty stats considering how much you love Bronie.

I'm really not, I just can't believe the best reason you gave to why you have Wilt ranked so high is because of stats after you just said he had "empty stats". I don't think you know how dumb that statement was.

But thanks for the good laugh.

[La Frescobaldi]

Wilt top 3 has got to be one of the dumbest takes this forum ever produced.

The top 3 players are better than all others that ever played. They are their own circle, separate from everybody. There isn’t one goat. There are three.

Chamberlain, Jabbar, Jordan.

That’s just how it is.

[8Ball]

Ok, so who else put up numbers anywhere close to Wilt's numbers in his era? Yep, NOBODY. Did he have empty stats? Sure he did, and that's why he's #3 instead of #1. He gets penalized for not winning. But he still almost doubled Bronie's empty stats. You can get upset about it all you want, but I have Wilt ranked comfortably ahead of Bronie. You haven't put forth a single good point that would convince me otherwise.

Empty stats = top 3 all time.

https://c.tenor.com/yMoGbkuQHsUAAAAM/shaq-laughing.gif

[coastalmarker99]

Wilt top 3 has got to be one of the dumbest takes this forum ever produced.

How So

Did you know in 1999, ESPN's "panel of experts" came out with their 100 greatest athletes of the 20th Century.

It is interesting, though in the NBA department, that Wilt came in second behind MJ (no surprise, since MJ had just come off a title run and retired.)

With Magic 3rd, Russell 4th, and Kareem 5th.

So, what has taken place in the last 23 years?

Did Russell come back and win some more rings? Hell no.

What this means, of course, is several things.

One,... the narrative about Wilt has changed completely since his death.



Everybody I can remember was debating Wilt vs Jordan for goat in the 1990s as there is a reason why Jordan and Wilt argued with each other as to who is the goat at the NBA's 50 all-time event.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCCrpLZfpH4




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJ4Tw0tm-Jk


“Over in the corner, is Wilt and Michael Jordan. They’re sitting at a table, arguing vociferously as to who the greatest of all time was. Intense as could be.

David Stern comes in the room and says, ‘Okay it’s time to go.’ Everyone is lining up to go and Michael and Wilt are still going at it.”

“They finally stand up, the conversation ends. Wilt, who always has the last word in everything, looks down at Michael and says, ‘Just remember, when you played, they changed all the rules to make it easier for you to dominate. When I played, they changed all the rules to make it harder for me to dominate.’”

Bill Walton

[8Ball]

The top 3 players are better than all others that ever played. They are their own circle, separate from everybody. There isn’t one goat. There are three.

Chamberlain, Jabbar, Jordan.

That’s just how it is.

The players voted for the MVP back in those days and didn't give it to Wilt in the early 60s when he was averaging 50 ppg.


Wilt's best statistical seasons:

1960–61 38.4
1961–62 50.4
1962–63 44.8
1963–64 36.9
1964–65 38.9

He didn't win he MVP these years.

[Full Court]

How So

Did you know in 1999, ESPN's "panel of experts" came out with their 100 greatest athletes of the 20th Century.

It is interesting, though in the NBA department, that Wilt came in second behind MJ (no surprise, since MJ had just come off a title run and retired.)

With Magic 3rd, Russell 4th, and Kareem 5th.

So, what has taken place in the last 23 years?

Did Russell come back and win some more rings? Hell no.

What this means, of course, is several things.

One,... the narrative about Wilt has changed completely since his death.



Everybody I can remember was debating Wilt vs Jordan for goat in the 1990s as there is a reason why Jordan and Wilt argued with each other as to who is the goat at the NBA's 50 all-time event.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCCrpLZfpH4




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJ4Tw0tm-Jk


“Over in the corner, is Wilt and Michael Jordan. They’re sitting at a table, arguing vociferously as to who the greatest of all time was. Intense as could be.

David Stern comes in the room and says, ‘Okay it’s time to go.’ Everyone is lining up to go and Michael and Wilt are still going at it.”

“They finally stand up, the conversation ends. Wilt, who always has the last word in everything, looks down at Michael and says, ‘Just remember, when you played, they changed all the rules to make it easier for you to dominate. When I played, they changed all the rules to make it harder for me to dominate.’”

Bill Walton

8ball over here getting ethered yet again. :lol

[La Frescobaldi]

The players voted for the MVP back in those days and didn't even vote Wilt.

He has four MVPs.

[1987_Lakers]

Empty stats = top 3 all time.

https://c.tenor.com/yMoGbkuQHsUAAAAM/shaq-laughing.gif

:roll:

I've already stated I have no problem with people ranking Wilt #5 or so, which is very high. But full court's explanation to why he ranks him so high is ridiculous.

[coastalmarker99]

The players voted for the MVP back in those days and didn't give it to Wilt in the early 60s when he was averaging 50 ppg.


Wilt's best statistical seasons:

1960–61 38.4
1961–62 50.4
1962–63 44.8
1963–64 36.9
1964–65 38.9

He didn't win he MVP these years.

I don't like the guy personally said one New York player about Wilt I wouldn't vote for him for anything.

Bill Russell king of the court page 113.

Bill Russell was voted MVP in years such as 1962 in which Wilt averaged over 50 PPG because he was a more likeable character and won more games due to having a stacked team.


Wilt also didn't think too highly of his NBA colleagues which made them resent him.

I don't blame Wilt for thinking he was above everyone since he dropped 50 points per game on their heads one season.

The league was also highly racist back then and the notion of a loud successful Black Man with a huge ego having sex with white girls and putting up monster numbers rubs them the wrong way.

[8Ball]

He has four MVPs.

Wilt's best statistical seasons:

1960–61 38.4
1961–62 50.4
1962–63 44.8
1963–64 36.9
1964–65 38.9

He didn't win the MVP these years.


He is the only player in the top 10 that has a drastic statistical dropoff between regular season and playoffs.

Wilt racked up stats against players that would not make the NBA today.

If you held a draft every year in Wilt's career and could choose between today's average players or 1960s average players, you would never pick 1960s players.

Racking up stats and dominating weak competition is why neither Bill Russell or Wilt is in the top 5.

[Johnny32]

The top 3 players are better than all others that ever played. They are their own circle, separate from everybody. There isn’t one goat. There are three.

Chamberlain, Jabbar, Jordan.

That’s just how it is.

in your little fantasy world safe space maybe. in reality #2 is still playing and coming like a freight train for numero uno.

[Full Court]

:roll:

I've already stated I have no problem with people ranking Wilt #5 or so, which is very high. But full court's explanation to why he ranks him so high is ridiculous.

Do I need to list the unprecedented number of records he's set? Again? Since apparently you ignored it last time I posted it? Can can you tell me anyone who's come remotely close to his set of individual accomplishments? Hmmmmmmmm?

[1987_Lakers]

Do I need to list the unprecedented number of records he's set? Again? Since apparently you ignored it last time I posted it? Can can you tell me anyone who's come remotely close to his set of individual accomplishments? Hmmmmmmmm?

What's the point of posting those records when you just said they were "empty stats".

:roll:

[8Ball]

I don't like the guy personally said one New York player about Wilt I wouldn't vote for him for anything.

Bill Russell king of the court page 113.

Bill Russell was voted MVP in years such as 1962 in which Wilt averaged over 50 PPG because he was a more likeable character and won more games due to having a stacked team.


Wilt also didn't think too highly of his NBA colleagues which made them resent him.

I don't blame Wilt for thinking he was above everyone since he dropped 50 points per game on their heads one season.

The league was also highly racist back then and the notion of a loud successful Black Man with a huge ego having sex with white girls and putting up monster numbers rubs them the wrong way.

MVP winners in the 60s

1959–60 Wilt Chamberlain
1960–61 Bill Russell
1961–62 Bill Russell
1962–63 Bill Russell
1963–64 Oscar Robertson
1964–65 Bill Russell
1965–66 Wilt Chamberlain
1966–67 Wilt Chamberlain
1967–68 Wilt Chamberlain
1968–69 Wes Unseld

All black guys.

Wilt boning white girls is why he didn't win MVP in his most dominant statistical years?

[Full Court]

What's the point of posting those records when you just said they were "empty stats".

:roll:

So you're cherry picking which stats you want to count and which ones you don't. Of course.

MJ #1
Russell #2
Wilt #3





Bronie fringe top 10.

[coastalmarker99]

If we took rings out of the goat debate and only focused on individual greatness as a player then Wilt would be the goat.


Because if all stats were all tracked during his career he would own over 250 records.

He would have the record for the most triple-doubles of all time.

He would have the record for the most quadruple doubles of all time.

He would have the record for the most double triple-doubles of all time.

He would have the record for the most quintuple doubles of all time.

He would have the record for the most 60 and 70 point triple-doubles of all time.

He would have the record for the most blocks of all time

He would have the record for the most shots blocked in a game of all time both in the regular season and playoffs.

He would have the record for the most offensive rebounds of all time.

He would have the record for the most offensive rebounds grabbed in a single game both in the regular season and playoffs.


I mean all is that needs to be said is that Wilt for example had a total of 38 50 point games with an FG% of 50+, during the 1961-1962 NBA Season alone.


To put that into perspective Wilt has more 50 point games with an FG% of 50+, during the 1961-1962 NBA Season alone than every other player has 50 point games in their career.


Hell if we only use Wilt's 1961-1962 season for his career.

Then he would still have the most 50 point games and 60 point games in NBA history by a large margin if that is not dominance then what is.

[coastalmarker99]

MVP winners in the 60s

1959–60 Wilt Chamberlain
1960–61 Bill Russell
1961–62 Bill Russell
1962–63 Bill Russell
1963–64 Oscar Robertson
1964–65 Bill Russell
1965–66 Wilt Chamberlain
1966–67 Wilt Chamberlain
1967–68 Wilt Chamberlain
1968–69 Wes Unseld

All black guys.

Wilt boning white girls is why he didn't win MVP in his most dominant statistical years?

It is clear that the 1962 MVP was the biggest award robbery in the history of sports.

How else can you explain Wilt being voted first-team all NBA over Russell yet not being voted the MVP.

In these Russell-Wilt discussions, it is fascinating that the players tended to be more favourable to Russell, while the sportswriters, who voted for the All-NBA teams, were definitely pro-Wilt.

In their 10 seasons in the league together, Russell and Wilt each won four MVPs, with Russell coming in 2nd once, 3rd twice, 4th twice, and not in the voting in 67-68.

Meanwhile, Wilt came in 2nd twice, 4th once, 5th once, 7th once, and not at all in the 68-69 balloting.

In the All-NBA voting in their ten years in the league together, Chamberlain waxed Russell by a 7-2 margin, with the other always coming in second, except in the 68-69 season.

As you can see, the voting discrepancies were considerable between the players and the writers.

So then, who was more "right?"

Wilt himself brought it up before in his books and I wholeheartedly agree with him...

That there was a strong resentment towards Wilt and his crushing domination of his peers in his 14 seasons in the league.

How else do you explain these oddities?

In Wilt's rookie season, he carried what had been a last-place roster, to a 49-26 record.

In the process, he just obliterated many records.

He averaged 37.6 ppg, 27.0 RPG, and shot .46.1 from the field (which would be the only time in his career in which he would fail to shoot at least .50.6 from the floor.

Meanwhile, Russell led his Celtics to a 59-16 record, which was a solid improvement over their '59 record of 52-20.

And in that '60 season, Russell averaged 18.0 ppg, 24.0 RPG, and shot a career-high .46.7 from the floor.

In the MVP voting, Chamberlain won by a huge margin.

Two years later, in 61-62, Wilt had a historic season.

He took that same basic roster, but which was now older and worse, to a 49-31 record, or a similar record as to what they had had in his rookie season.

He averaged a staggering 50.4 ppg, 25.7 rpg, and shot 50.6 from the floor.

Russell's Celtics went 60-20, which was actually a slight decrease from their 59-60 record, and in the process, he put up nearly identical numbers as he did in '60, averaging 18.9 ppg, 23.6 rpg, and shooting .45.7 from the field.

How did the MVP voting go? Now it was Russell winning by a huge margin, and Wilt coming in a distant second

(in fact, Oscar had more first-place votes than Wilt did.) Again, though, take a close look at both seasons ('60 and '62.) Russell's Celtics put up almost identical records, and his stats in both were nearly the same.

Wilt's Warriors had almost identical records, but, Wilt had a far more dominating season.

Just what changed in the voting, then? And, as I alluded to earlier, Wilt was voted first-team All-NBA over Russell by the writers.

[1987_Lakers]

So you're cherry picking which stats you want to count and which ones you don't. Of course.

MJ #1
Russell #2
Wilt #3





Bronie fringe top 10.

I'm not cherry picking anything, you yourself just said his stats were "empty". So what's the point of posting those stats if you yourself said they don't mean anything.

You played yourself.

[Full Court]

If we took rings out of the goat debate and only focused on individual greatness as a player then Wilt would be the goat.


Because if all stats were all tracked during his career he would own 250 record


Yeah, I said this multiple times, but 1987_Lakers is pretending he's too dumb to read it.

This is actually funny. I found someone who triggers the Bronies more than MJ. :lol

[8Ball]

If we took rings out of the goat debate and only focused on individual greatness as a player then Wilt would be the goat.


Because if all stats were all tracked during his career he would own over 250 records.

He would have the record for the most triple-doubles of all time.

He would have the record for the most quadruple doubles of all time.

He would have the record for the most double triple-doubles of all time.

He would have the record for the most quintuple doubles of all time.

He would have the record for the most 60 and 70 point triple-doubles of all time.

He would have the record for the most blocks of all time

He would have the record for the most shots blocked in a game of all time both in the regular season and playoffs.

He would have the record for the most offensive rebounds of all time.

He would have the record for the most offensive rebounds grabbed in a single game both in the regular season and playoffs.


I mean all is that needs to be said is that Wilt for example had a total of 38 50 point games with an FG% of 50+, during the 1961-1962 NBA Season alone.


To put that into perspective Wilt has more 50 point games with an FG% of 50+, during the 1961-1962 NBA Season alone than every other player has 50 point games in their career.


Hell if we only use Wilt's 1961-1962 season for his career.

Then he would still have the most 50 point games and 60 point games in NBA history by a large margin if that is not dominance then what is.


If Jordan, LeBron, Shaq played in the 60s they would all crush and dominate the competition as much or even more than Wilt did. It was so damn weak back then.

[Full Court]

I'm not cherry picking anything, you yourself just said his stats were "empty". So what's the point of posting those stats if you yourself said they don't mean anything.

You played yourself.

I have yet to hear you even make an attempt an a cogent argument that Wilt's 100-point game wasn't the greatest regular season performance in the history of the sport.

So do you agree that it was? And if not, which performance was better? Man up and stop beating around the bush.

[Full Court]

If Jordan, LeBron, Shaq played in the 60s they would all crush and dominate the competition as much or even more than Wilt did. It was so damn weak back then.

But they didn't, so it's pure speculation.

And Lebum's whining, flopping *** wouldn't have lasted a whole season back in that era.

[1987_Lakers]

I have yet to hear you even make an attempt an a cogent argument that Wilt's 100-point game wasn't the greatest regular season performance in the history of the sport.

So do you agree that it was? And if not, which performance was better? Man up and stop beating around the bush.

I answered this way back in page 2....


It might have been the greatest single game performance, idk. To me Kobe's 81 points is more impressive. If you look at the 100 point performance closely, the Warriors were fouling the Knicks players so they can get the ball back right away and feed Wilt, doesn't that seem like stat padding? Don't you shit on LeBron for stat padding?? gtfo.

[Full Court]

It might have been the greatest single game performance, idk.

Lol. Like I said, I guess you enjoy arguing with yourself then.

[8Ball]

But they didn't, so it's pure speculation.

And Lebum's whining, flopping *** wouldn't have lasted a whole season back in that era.

https://c.tenor.com/H0foamBzrn4AAAAC/bob-cousy-crossover.gif

[coastalmarker99]

If Jordan, LeBron, Shaq played in the 60s they would all crush and dominate the competition as much or even more than Wilt did. It was so damn weak back then.

For the record, Chamberlain faced Lovellette, Cowens, Hayes, Unseld, Reed, Bellamy, McAdoo, Lanier, Thurmond, Russell, Gilmore (yep, and badly outplayed him in the 71-72 ABA-NBA ASG), and Kareem.


all in the HOF. And please keep in mind that Chamberlain played in leagues between eight to 17 teams.

He was facing these guys on a nightly basis.

And he either outplayed or downright dominated them all (only a peak Kareem would have an argument...and again, in their two playoff series H2H's, a way-past-peak Wilt was considered the "winner.")

Ok, ...how about some quick comparisons between what a prime Chamberlain did against the same centers that a peak Kareem would face a few years later.

Willis Reed. A prime Chamberlain only faced a Reed, at center, in 12 games early in their career, and two more in the '68-69 season...and battered him.

Kareem's high game against Reed...41 points.

Wilt averaged 38.6 ppg against Reed in their 12 H2H's in the '65 season...which included beatdowns by margins of 46-25, 41-9, 52-23, and even 58-28.

In their two H2H's in the '69 season (and before Wilt shredded his knee early on in the 69-70 season),

Wilt outscored Reed by a 28 ppg to 20 ppg margin, outrebounded him by a 22.0 to 9.5 rpg margin, and outshot him from the field by a .68.8 to .45.9 margin.

Incidentally, I always get a kick out of those that use Reed's two Finals ('70 and '73) against Wilt (and even though Wilt still outplayed him in both).

Those two series came after Wilt's major knee surgery.


Connie Dierking. Dierking is interesting.

A Chamberlain, at the beginning of his '69-70 season, and just before he blew out his knee, put up a 43 point game on Dierking.

And just the season before, in a season in which Wilt averaged about 10 FGAs, he hung a 60 point game on Dierking.

A peak Kareem faced Dierking over the span of several seasons...and his high game was 41 points.

Now, how about a prime Chamberlain against Dierking? Many 40+ point games including a 63 point game, and another game in which he outscored Dierking by a 59-4 margin.

Jim Fox. This isn't really fair to Wilt. A prime Chamberlain never faced Fox.

Now, a peak Kareem faced him on many occasions, and his high game...again... 41 points.

Wilt faced Fox in his 68-69 season, and in one game, he hung a 66 point game on him (on 29-35 shooting.)

Oh, and in the game in which Wilt shredded his knee in '69? He had scored 33 points, in 28 minutes, and on 13-14 shooting. He was well on his way to a 40+ point game, and perhaps his last 50 point game.

Darrell Imhoff. Kareem's high game against Imhoff? 46 points.

How about Wilt's high game against Imhoff. Yep... 100 points (granted, not all of the scoring came against Imhoff.)

Wilt had many huge games against Imhoff in his career, but how about Imhoff's favourite game against Wilt? After Chamberlain had hung the 100, the two met a couple of days later. Imhoff tells the story that he busted his ass the entire game.

Fronted, backed, hacked, you name it. Played his heart out. And as he was leaving the floor in the last minute, he received a standing ovation (the only time in his career BTW.) Why? Because he had "held" Wilt to 58 points!


As for Thurmond.

A peak Kareem, in the 35 H2H's against a full-time Thurmond, had a total of five 30+ point games against him, with a high game of 34 points.

In their first 13 H2H games, Chamberlain had six 30+ games against Nate, including games of 38 and 45.

Finally...Walt Bellamy. First of all, "Bells" was listed at 6-11, but Marty Blake measured him at 7-0 barefoot.

Kareem battled fading Bellamy in 25 H2H's.

His high game against Bellamy... 40 points. His next highest... 39 points. His next highest... 35 points.

Now, how about Wilt? In their very first H2H game, Bellamy came into the game averaging 30 ppg.


Chamberlain proceeded to block his first NINE shots and wound up outscoring Bellamy by a 53-14 margin.


In their first 10 H2H games, all in the 61-62 season... Wilt averaged 52.7 ppg against Bellamy. .

In his next 10 H2H's, in the 62-63 season, Chamberlain averaged 43.7 ppg.

So, in their first 20 straight games, Wilt averaged 48.2 ppg. Which included three games of 60+, and a high game of 73 (with 36 rebounds BTW.)

Chamberlain continued to pound Bellamy their entire career (for instance, in his '67 season, Wilt averaged 22.7 ppg on...get this... a .70.9 FG%, which included a 35 point game on 15-18 shooting.)

[8Ball]

I have yet to hear you even make an attempt an a cogent argument that Wilt's 100-point game wasn't the greatest regular season performance in the history of the sport.

So do you agree that it was? And if not, which performance was better? Man up and stop beating around the bush.

If you brought a bunch of highschool players together and made LeBron play them I wouldn't be impressed if he racked up 100 points in that game.

[coastalmarker99]

https://c.tenor.com/H0foamBzrn4AAAAC/bob-cousy-crossover.gif

That is from the early 1950s which was years before Wilt came into the NBA.

[Full Court]

If you brought a bunch of highschool players together and made LeBron play them I wouldn't be impressed if he racked up 100 points in that game.

You Bronies sure are insecure. :lol

Any way you try to damage control it, Wilt blows your hero Bronie out of the water.

[8Ball]

You Bronies sure are insecure. :lol

Any way you try to damage control it, Wilt blows your hero Bronie out of the water.

Wilt:

2× NBA champion (1967, 1972)
NBA Finals MVP (1972)
4× NBA Most Valuable Player (1960, 1966–1968)
13× NBA All-Star (1960–1969, 1971–1973)
NBA All-Star Game MVP (1960)
7× All-NBA First Team (1960–1962, 1964, 1966–1968)
3× All-NBA Second Team (1963, 1965, 1972)
2× NBA All-Defensive First Team (1972, 1973)
NBA Rookie of the Year (1960)

Bron:

4× NBA champion (2012, 2013, 2016, 2020)
4× NBA Finals MVP (2012, 2013, 2016, 2020)
4× NBA Most Valuable Player (2009, 2010, 2012, 2013)
18× NBA All-Star (2005–2022)
3× NBA All-Star Game MVP (2006, 2008, 2018)
13× All-NBA First Team (2006, 2008–2018, 2020)
3× All-NBA Second Team (2005, 2007, 2021)
All-NBA Third Team (2019)
5× NBA All-Defensive First Team (2009–2013)
NBA All-Defensive Second Team (2014)
NBA Rookie of the Year (2004)


Nope.

[Full Court]

Wilt:

2× NBA champion (1967, 1972)
NBA Finals MVP (1972)
4× NBA Most Valuable Player (1960, 1966–1968)
13× NBA All-Star (1960–1969, 1971–1973)
NBA All-Star Game MVP (1960)
7× All-NBA First Team (1960–1962, 1964, 1966–1968)
3× All-NBA Second Team (1963, 1965, 1972)
2× NBA All-Defensive First Team (1972, 1973)
NBA Rookie of the Year (1960)

Bron:

4× NBA champion (2012, 2013, 2016, 2020)
4× NBA Finals MVP (2012, 2013, 2016, 2020)
4× NBA Most Valuable Player (2009, 2010, 2012, 2013)
18× NBA All-Star (2005–2022)
3× NBA All-Star Game MVP (2006, 2008, 2018)
13× All-NBA First Team (2006, 2008–2018, 2020)
3× All-NBA Second Team (2005, 2007, 2021)
All-NBA Third Team (2019)
5× NBA All-Defensive First Team (2009–2013)
NBA All-Defensive Second Team (2014)
NBA Rookie of the Year (2004)


Nope.

Nice cherry picking. Of course you left out the numerous ones where Wilt destroys Bronie.

[8Ball]

Nice cherry picking. Of course you left out the numerous ones where Wilt destroys Bronie.

Wilt:

2× NBA champion (1967, 1972)
NBA Finals MVP (1972)
4× NBA Most Valuable Player (1960, 1966–1968)
13× NBA All-Star (1960–1969, 1971–1973)
NBA All-Star Game MVP (1960)
7× All-NBA First Team (1960–1962, 1964, 1966–1968)
3× All-NBA Second Team (1963, 1965, 1972)
2× NBA All-Defensive First Team (1972, 1973)
NBA Rookie of the Year (1960)

Bron:

4× NBA champion (2012, 2013, 2016, 2020)
4× NBA Finals MVP (2012, 2013, 2016, 2020)
4× NBA Most Valuable Player (2009, 2010, 2012, 2013)
18× NBA All-Star (2005–2022)
3× NBA All-Star Game MVP (2006, 2008, 2018)
13× All-NBA First Team (2006, 2008–2018, 2020)
3× All-NBA Second Team (2005, 2007, 2021)
All-NBA Third Team (2019)
5× NBA All-Defensive First Team (2009–2013)
NBA All-Defensive Second Team (2014)
NBA Rookie of the Year (2004)


Bron in a landslide. This topic is over.

[Full Court]

Wilt:

2× NBA champion (1967, 1972)
NBA Finals MVP (1972)
4× NBA Most Valuable Player (1960, 1966–1968)
13× NBA All-Star (1960–1969, 1971–1973)
NBA All-Star Game MVP (1960)
7× All-NBA First Team (1960–1962, 1964, 1966–1968)
3× All-NBA Second Team (1963, 1965, 1972)
2× NBA All-Defensive First Team (1972, 1973)
NBA Rookie of the Year (1960)

Bron:

4× NBA champion (2012, 2013, 2016, 2020)
4× NBA Finals MVP (2012, 2013, 2016, 2020)
4× NBA Most Valuable Player (2009, 2010, 2012, 2013)
18× NBA All-Star (2005–2022)
3× NBA All-Star Game MVP (2006, 2008, 2018)
13× All-NBA First Team (2006, 2008–2018, 2020)
3× All-NBA Second Team (2005, 2007, 2021)
All-NBA Third Team (2019)
5× NBA All-Defensive First Team (2009–2013)
NBA All-Defensive Second Team (2014)
NBA Rookie of the Year (2004)


Bron in a landslide. This topic is over.

You should copy and paste that a few more times. It doesn't change the fact that Wilt blows Bronie out of the water.

For example, Wilt won 7 scoring titles to Bronie's 1. And just just started another thread to try to minimize scoring titles. Lol. That's how insecure you are.

Scoring - Wilt by a mile.

Rebounds - Wilt by a mile.

Assists - Bronie gets that one. But Wilt was a center, and not in a role that would make sense to get a lot of assists.

Keep trying, Leslie.

[Full Court]

Oh, and also blocks - Wilt by a mile.

[La Frescobaldi]

in your little fantasy world safe space maybe. in reality #2 is still playing and coming like a freight train for numero uno.

It’s based on watching a lot of nba games, sonny. I was probably sitting bleachers before your dad was born

[La Frescobaldi]

I answered this way back in page 2....

Quote Originally Posted by 1987_Lakers View Post
It might have been the greatest single game performance, idk. To me Kobe's 81 points is more impressive. If you look at the 100 point performance closely, the Warriors were fouling the Knicks players so they can get the ball back right away and feed Wilt, doesn't that seem like stat padding? Don't you shit on LeBron for stat padding?? gtfo.

You could even just read the Wikipedia entry first. It’s pretty accurate compared to Cherry’s book.

The Knicks didn’t start just fouling everyone until six minutes left in 4q. He was already at 80points

Any 100 point game is stat padding why do you waste time with that?

[1987_Lakers]

You should copy and paste that a few more times. It doesn't change the fact that Wilt blows Bronie out of the water.

For example, Wilt won 7 scoring titles to Bronie's 1. And just just started another thread to try to minimize scoring titles. Lol. That's how insecure you are.

Scoring - Wilt by a mile.

Rebounds - Wilt by a mile.

Assists - Bronie gets that one. But Wilt was a center, and not in a role that would make sense to get a lot of assists.

Keep trying, Leslie.

But you just said his stats were empty.

[Baller789]

https://c.tenor.com/H0foamBzrn4AAAAC/bob-cousy-crossover.gif


That is from the early 1950s which was years before Wilt came into the NBA.

Any response to this 8ball?

[Full Court]

But you just said his stats were empty.

Which is the only reason he's not a clear cut #1.

Just like Bronie's stats were empty for most of his career. He's still top 10. There is a level at which you get credit for statistical accomplishments, even if they don't translate into wins.

If you disagree, that's fine. If you're having trouble understanding this, I can try to type slower for you.

[AussieSteve]

In that game, there were:
- 233 field goal attempts
- 93 free throw attempts.

In a regulation 48 min game

That's 4.9 fga and 1.9 fta for every minute of game time.

[iamgine]

Wilt is indeed the most dominant player against his peers of all time.

I think the problem was his peers wasn't that good. Not to the extent of Mikan's time but still.

[8Ball]

Any response to this 8ball?

That's bob cousy that played into the early 60s.

Its as if nothing changed.

[Baller789]

That's bob cousy that played into the early 60s.

Its as if nothing changed.
Do know what constitutes a legal dribble back in the day?

[Baller789]

That's bob cousy that played into the early 60s.

Its as if nothing changed.


Do know what constitutes a legal dribble back in the day?

Another dead end for Gayball.

[Full Court]

Do know what constitutes a legal dribble back in the day?

:roll:

He doesn't know much of anything.