Smartest posters when it comes to the NBA?

[1987_Lakers]

A positive thread. Which posters would you say are the smartest when talking NBA?

[Meticode]

If only there was such a thing?

[RRR3]

Most of them left. A handful remain

[highwhey]

idk, but the fattest is definitely patrickchewing.

[Spurs m8]

Definitely not OP

[ArbitraryWater]

Of all in the thread, it's OP so far.

[Full Court]

kblaze is the obvious choice.

Also 3ball is a very astute analyst of the game. Definitely one of the smartest posters on here.

[RRR3]

kblaze is the obvious choice.

Also 3ball is a very astute analyst of the game. Definitely one of the smartest posters on here.
:facepalm

[mr4speed]

Of all in the thread, it's OP so far.
I would agree, Years ago I likes reading posts from Lazerus = a huge Wilt fan but a great poster and researcher.

[1987_Lakers]

I would agree, Years ago I likes reading posts from Lazerus = a huge Wilt fan but a great poster and researcher.

I have a suspicion Lazerus = coastalmarker99. Seems to post insanely long topics about Wilt.

[ArbitraryWater]

I have a suspicion Lazerus = coastalmarker99. Seems to post insanely long topics about Wilt.


much different poster and opinions lol

lazerus was an extremist.

he had hate in his takes.

[1987_Lakers]

much different poster and opinions lol

lazerus was an extremist.

he had hate in his takes.

Yea, I remember Lazerus being a big Kobe stan as well, coastalmaker doesn't really like Kobe. Both love Wilt though, lol.

[Axe]

Not the casual fools who thought that ja morant was gonna win the league mvp last season, that's for sure.

[MrFonzworth]

Gonna have to throw PeroAntic into the conversation here. His takes rarely ever miss.

[Spurs m8]

3ball.

Bronnies never have a comeback

[1987_Lakers]

I find it funny that the 2 posters who have mentioned 3ball were on the dumb list, one of them won the poll. :lol

[1987_Lakers]

Of all in the thread, it's OP so far.

:cheers:

I think Soubeach, NBAGOAT, HoopsNY & ShawkFactory deserve some love.

[Proctor]

Probably the original 3ball. The current impersonation (Wheels) is kinda funny but that isn't the same as smart

[Full Court]

I find it funny that the 2 posters who have mentioned 3ball were on the dumb list, one of them won the poll. :lol

Not surprising though. Both of those posters REAAAALLY trigger Bronies. :lol

[LeGoat4Life]

Blaze is obvious

But 3ball and full court posts always filled with too much fact and truth

Spurs m8 is another good poster that literally has the whole Lebron Stans on a leash

[HoopsNY]

Can you edit it to make it a poll? coastal would probably get my vote. He's a historian of the game and offers up great knowledge. I don't agree with everything he posts but he definitely offers a different perspective.

If you can't offer analysis that will make another person rethink their position or at least force them to dig deeper and view things from a different lens, then you're not really in it for the analysis; you're just there to make your point and are probably seeking confirmation bias.

Kblaze does a good job of forcing you to think, so I'd probably have him second. I haven't been around that long but those two would get my vote. I'd also give a shout out to 1987, kuniva, and dankok. Smart guys who offer a lot of value on this forum.

[HoopsNY]

:cheers:

I think Soubeach, NBAGOAT, HoopsNY & ShawkFactory deserve some love.

Appreciate the respect but I'm a nobody. I learn from the other guys you've mentioned.

[Full Court]

Blaze is obvious

But 3ball and full court posts always filled with too much fact and truth

Spurs m8 is another good poster that literally has the whole Lebron Stans on a leash

:cheers:

Truth. We've got these Bronies leashed and heeled.

[hateraid]

Wanna see how to derail a thread?

Full Court is my bitch

Lolol

[Full Court]

Got my little puppy bitch following me around. :roll:

My pet litter of Bronies.

:lebronamazed:

[Mask the Embiid]

Blaze is obvious

But 3ball and full court posts always filled with too much fact and truth

Spurs m8 is another good poster that literally has the whole Lebron Stans on a leash

No he is not :oldlol:. The man has never said anything insightful his whole time here on ish. Like seriously… get it together…don’t become a shit poster just to give an “edgy” answer… spurs m8 is shit….don’t be like him


That’s like someone asking who is the best scorer of all time and I say earl boykins or some shit just to try to stand out. “Ya know earl was only 5’3, technically he’s the best scorer”



Don’t be that guy!

[Mask the Embiid]

Spurs m8 is literally = to a turd lying in the street…

When you see a turd do you complement it? “Oh well that’s a nice looking little turd. Look how neatly it’s packed together” NO!!!!!!WHEN YOU SEE A PIECE OF SHIT YOU FLUSH IT AND DONT GIVE A SECOND THOUGHT. That’s what we all do when we see a spurs m8 thread. We don’t stop and look at the dog crap laying in the grass we just step around it and keep on going about our day


The only person he has on a leash is his husband

[AlternativeAcc.]

How have I not been mentioned?

I dont get any fukking respect around here.

[coastalmarker99]

How have I not been mentioned?

I dont get any fukking respect around here.


That's because you don't deserve any.

[MrFonzworth]

How have I not been mentioned?

I dont get any fukking respect around here.

You're one of the dumbest people to ever register on insidehoops

[Round Mound]

3-ball is a very good poster i just don't agree with him regarding Pippen and that Jordan was a 1 man team. My job in the site is done regarding how underrated Barkley was.

[Wally450]

SouBeach, Kblaze, 1987 Lakers, Round Mound.

I always appreciate reading their posts.

[RRR3]

3-ball is a very good poster i just don't agree with him regarding Pippen and that Jordan was a 1 man team. My job in the site is done regarding how underrated Barkley was.
:biggums:

[SATAN]

I would assume most people here and smarter than they seem. The shit talking factor is insane on this message board.

[hateraid]

Last post

[Proctor]

Spurs m8 is literally = to a turd lying in the street…

When you see a turd do you complement it? “Oh well that’s a nice looking little turd. Look how neatly it’s packed together” NO!!!!!!WHEN YOU SEE A PIECE OF SHIT YOU FLUSH IT AND DONT GIVE A SECOND THOUGHT. That’s what we all do when we see a spurs m8 thread. We don’t stop and look at the dog crap laying in the grass we just step around it and keep on going about our day


The only person he has on a leash is his husband
Back to back posts and paragraphs...are you okay?

[SATAN]

Spurs m8 is literally = to a turd lying in the street…

When you see a turd do you complement it? “Oh well that’s a nice looking little turd. Look how neatly it’s packed together” NO!!!!!!WHEN YOU SEE A PIECE OF SHIT YOU FLUSH IT AND DONT GIVE A SECOND THOUGHT. That’s what we all do when we see a spurs m8 thread. We don’t stop and look at the dog crap laying in the grass we just step around it and keep on going about our day


The only person he has on a leash is his husband

:roll::roll::roll:

[Spurs m8]

Back to back posts and paragraphs...are you okay?

Hes fuming because I call out his racism

Double post...the rage :roll:

[bison]

Kblaze
Round mound
3ball
Spurs m8
Blade
Warriorsfan
Realf@gsweargreen
GOBB
Xiao

[jstern]

FultzNationRISE is probably a top three smartest poster, just not when it comes to the NBA.

I don't come to the main forum often, but 3ball seems pretty smart when it comes to the NBA.

[2much_knowledge]

Dankok and myself

[Full Court]

Bronie up there yapping on a leash. :lol

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia1.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2F3oKIPp pJDEGFYAMNvW%2F200.gif%3Fcid%3D790b7611qwgpae53mic t5ibc303mrprwoytjjcgevipkvcqv%26rid%3D200.gif&f=1&nofb=1

[hateraid]

Last post!

[Full Court]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP. iBdpcteRPvjetubquLEaRAHaCO%26pid%3DApi&f=1

[hateraid]

Still didn't get the last post!!

[LeGoat4Life]

No he is not :oldlol:. The man has never said anything insightful his whole time here on ish. Like seriously… get it together…don’t become a shit poster just to give an “edgy” answer… spurs m8 is shit….don’t be like him


That’s like someone asking who is the best scorer of all time and I say earl boykins or some shit just to try to stand out. “Ya know earl was only 5’3, technically he’s the best scorer”



Don’t be that guy!

If you talk strictly about basketball. Spurs m8 knows his stuff

Most of his posts turns to spam as a result because of dumb Lebron Stans shit posting

It’s basically a cause and effect thing

He is definitely a better than all the Lebron trolls poster here

[SATAN]

He resorts to the worst parts of his personality with the alts. Very odd.

[97 bulls]

Just about all the posters on Insidehoops.com are agenda driven trolls.

[8Ball]

I would have to go with me, 8ball.

Nobody here actually analyzes basketball on a PPP basis which is a very low standard that every single NBA team uses as advanced metrics to guide strategy.



In terms of NBA history, I would go with 1987_Lakers.

[8Ball]

Most of them left. A handful remain

Forums are mostly dead. Twitter and reddit took over.

[Full Court]

Still didn't get the last post!!

Bark, bitch.

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia1.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2F3oKIPp pJDEGFYAMNvW%2F200.gif%3Fcid%3D790b7611qwgpae53mic t5ibc303mrprwoytjjcgevipkvcqv%26rid%3D200.gif&f=1&nofb=1

[hateraid]

Last post!!

[1987_Lakers]

I would have to go with me, 8ball.

Nobody here actually analyzes basketball on a PPP basis which is a very low standard that every single NBA team uses as advanced metrics to guide strategy.



In terms of NBA history, I would go with 1987_Lakers.

Thanks brother, I try. I've educated alot of guys here, especially full court, who said Wilt had "empty stats" after I showed him some data, but for some odd reason, he still has Wilt top 3 because of "stats". :lol

[Full Court]

Thanks brother, I try. I've educated alot of guys here, especially full court, who said Wilt had "empty stats" after I showed him some data, but for some odd reason, he still has Wilt top 3 because of "stats". :lol

His lack of winning is what keeps him from being #1. As hard as that is for you to understand, you'd think it was rocket science. :lol

[Full Court]

I would have to go with me, 8ball.



:roll: :roll:

That's the first thing you've ever said that was actually funny.

[hateraid]

Last post!

[Full Court]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia1.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2F3oKIPp pJDEGFYAMNvW%2F200.gif%3Fcid%3D790b7611qwgpae53mic t5ibc303mrprwoytjjcgevipkvcqv%26rid%3D200.gif&f=1&nofb=1

[Spurs m8]

If you talk strictly about basketball. Spurs m8 knows his stuff

Most of his posts turns to spam as a result because of dumb Lebron Stans shit posting

It’s basically a cause and effect thing

He is definitely a better than all the Lebron trolls poster here

Fantastic post

On point :applause:

[NBAGOAT]

:cheers:

I think Soubeach, NBAGOAT, HoopsNY & ShawkFactory deserve some love.

shouldnt be mentioned lol. plenty of people know way more than me. I guess it's not that hard to be up there on this forum tbf

[Full Court]

3ball and spurs m8 have already been mentioned, and both are good choices.

Another one that should be mentioned is warriorfan. The dude brings more traffic to this site than everyone else combined.

[1987_Lakers]

shouldnt be mentioned lol. plenty of people know way more than me. I guess it's not that hard to be up there on this forum tbf

That's the thing, this site doesn't have alot of decent posters. I remember when posters like fatal & Shaqattack posted here, they were way more knowledgeable than me, you don't see posters like that here anymore.

[1987_Lakers]

3ball and spurs m8 have already been mentioned, and both are good choices.

Another one that should be mentioned is warriorfan. The dude brings more traffic to this site than everyone else combined.

Is it possible to be voted the dumbest in another thread, but also get votes here? lol.

[Full Court]

Is it possible to be voted the dumbest in another thread, but also get votes here? lol.

Well, he got votes in the dumbest thread because he triggers Bronies. You know how it works. But he clearly understands the game better than a lot of the posters on here.

[1987_Lakers]

Well, he got votes in the dumbest thread because he triggers Bronies. You know how it works. But he clearly understands the game better than a lot of the posters on here.

Show me one post where he provided any insightful discussion.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/member.php?321093-Spurs-m8

Just look at that post history. :oldlol:

[Full Court]

Show me one post where he provided any insightful discussion.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/member.php?321093-Spurs-m8

Just look at that post history. :oldlol:

Well, for one of his last three posts I see, "I dunno man...I reckon 1987 gets actual upset. Dude is always following me around, despite me ignoring and never responding to anything the dumb cvnt says."

I'm guessing that due to personal animosity, you have a biased view.

To be fair though, I haven't really seen you getting upset. I don't mind disagreeing with you, because you generally don't get triggered like a lot of the other Bronies.

[1987_Lakers]

Well, for one of his last three posts I see, "I dunno man...I reckon 1987 gets actual upset. Dude is always following me around, despite me ignoring and never responding to anything the dumb cvnt says."

I'm guessing that due to personal animosity, you have a biased view.

To be fair though, I haven't really seen you getting upset. I don't mind disagreeing with you, because you generally don't get triggered like a lot of the other Bronies.


What did that post have to do with basketball though? Which is the discussion. Like I said, he doesn't provide anything insightful. All he provides are one sentence posts, mostly about LeBron and when he gets called out for this, he says "u guys are triggered", that to me is a total cop out.

[RRR3]

Full Retard is proving that he got overlooked for stupidest poster ITT

[Full Court]

What did that post have to do with basketball though? Which is the discussion. Like I said, he doesn't provide anything insightful. All he provides are one sentence posts, mostly about LeBron and when he gets called out for this, he says "u guys are triggered", that to me is a total cop out.

I don't know why you're asking me this, since you can read for yourself. But here's a great post in his post history that is all about basketball:

"Hey did that work out? What's his finals record? Who has the most missed shots in playoff history? And the most turnovers? Guys?"

He completely obliterated a poster with merely a series of rhetorical questions. That's just masterful.

[1987_Lakers]

I don't know why you're asking me this, since you can read for yourself. But here's a great post in his post history that is all about basketball:

"Hey did that work out? What's his finals record? Who has the most missed shots in playoff history? And the most turnovers? Guys?"

He completely obliterated a poster with merely a series of rhetorical questions. That's just masterful.

You call that a smart post?

A guy who has probably played the most postseason games in NBA history has the most missed shots and turnovers because he has a high usage? What a shocker.

He's one of the most efficient players in terms of fg%, someone pointing out he has the most missed shots to dispute that fact is flat out retarded. It completely disregards other factors, like how many games he has played compared to others.

[RRR3]

You call that a smart post?

A guy who has probably played the most postseason games in NBA history has the most missed shots and turnovers because he has a high usage? What a shocker.

He's one of the most efficient players in terms of fg%, someone pointing out he has the most missed shots to dispute that fact is flat out retarded. It completely disregards other factors, like how many games he has played compared to others.
This recent exchange is making me think full court is actually the dumbest.

[Full Court]

This recent exchange is making me think full court is actually the dumbest.

You cry a lot, don't you? :lol

:lebroncry:

[Full Court]

You call that a smart post?

A guy who has probably played the most postseason games in NBA history has the most missed shots and turnovers because he has a high usage? What a shocker.

He's one of the most efficient players in terms of fg%, someone pointing out he has the most missed shots to dispute that fact is flat out retarded. It completely disregards other factors, like how many games he has played compared to others.

Well the OP was touting cumulative points as proof of GOAT. So you're going cherry pick one longevity stat, but ignore any negative longevity stats? That's either being intellectually dishonest with yourself or being intentionally misleading.

Spurs m8 rightly pointed out the cognitive dissonance.

[1987_Lakers]

Well the OP was touting cumulative points as proof of GOAT. So you're going cherry pick one longevity stat, but ignore any negative longevity stats? That's either being intellectually dishonest with yourself or being intentionally misleading.

Spurs m8 rightly pointed out the cognitive dissonance.

How is having the most missed shots a negative longevity stat when he is a career 49-50 fg% in the postseason?

I just showed you why that logic is retarded and you ignored it

[Full Court]

How is having the most missed shots a negative longevity stat when he is a career 49-50 fg% in the postseason?

I just showed you why that logic is retarded and you ignored it

You're trying to skew the argument again in order to circle around the actual point. If cumulative points is a key factor in rankings (field goal % was never in the discussion), then explain why cumulative turnovers should be ignored as a factor?

It's silliness, and you know it.

[RRR3]

Full Retard's pea brain is rattling around in his head rn.

[Full Court]

Full Retard's pea brain is rattling around in his head rn.

^Yep, a low-IQ moron who can't put forward an actual argument. Par for the course. :lol

[1987_Lakers]

You're trying to skew the argument again in order to circle around the actual point. If cumulative points is a key factor in rankings (field goal % was never in the discussion), then explain why cumulative turnovers should be ignored as a factor?

It's silliness, and you know it.

The OP who made that thread is a known troll and Spurs m8 responded to his post by trolling as well and you are here calling it a good post. :lol

Shitting on LeBron for having the most playoff missed shots in NBA history is far more retarded than praising him for having the most points, although claiming Bron is GOAT simply for having the most playoff points is obviously flawed.

Nonetheless, it was a shit response by Spurs m8, far from a great post for reasons I already pointed out.

[coastalmarker99]

Lebron's cumulative stats will probably win him the Goat debate.


If he retires in 2027 or 2028 with 42k 12k 12k to go along with owning a boatload of records and let's say 5 to 6 rings I can see most people giving him the edge over Jordan.



As a Wilt fan, I do wish that he had played another 10 years in the NBA as he was easily capable of it.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxChvQHVLS4&t=2914s


If you watch the video at the 48-minute mark you will see a 42-year-old Wilt who looks to be in elite shape.

[Full Court]

The OP who made that thread is a known troll and Spurs m8 responded to his post by trolling as well and you are here calling it a good post. :lol

Shitting on LeBron for having the most playoff missed shots in NBA history is far more retarded than praising him for having the most points, although claiming Bron is GOAT simply for having the most playoff points is obviously flawed.

Nonetheless, it was a shit response by Spurs m8, far from a great post for reasons I already pointed out.

As I already pointed out, you're clearly biased for personal reasons.

[Full Court]

Another poster who should be mentioned in this thread is GimmeThat. I don't know what happened to him, but his intellect ran DEEP.

[1987_Lakers]

As I already pointed out, you're clearly biased for personal reasons.

Lol. You can't dispute what I said.

[Full Court]

Lol. You can't dispute what I said.

I already did.

You should go back and read.

[1987_Lakers]

Lebron's cumulative stats will probably win him the Goat debate.


If he retires in 2027 or 2028 with 42k 12k 12k to go along with owning a boatload of records and let's say 5 to 6 rings I can see most people giving him the edge over Jordan.



As a Wilt fan, I do wish that he had played another 10 years in the NBA as he was easily capable of it.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxChvQHVLS4&t=2914s


If you watch the video at the 48-minute mark you will see a 42-year-old Wilt who looks to be in elite shape.

Damn, Full Court will not like this.

[Full Court]

Damn, Full Court will not like this.

:lol

I don't get bothered by opinions like most of you do.

[Spurs m8]

Another 2 pages of 1987 getting upset

[Axe]

"I don't get bothered by opinions like most of you do."

Yet gets triggered by other posters who disagree with it. :oldlol:


The OP who made that thread is a known troll and Spurs m8 responded to his post by trolling as well and you are here calling it a good post. :lol

Shitting on LeBron for having the most playoff missed shots in NBA history is far more retarded than praising him for having the most points, although claiming Bron is GOAT simply for having the most playoff points is obviously flawed.

Nonetheless, it was a shit response by Spurs m8, far from a great post for reasons I already pointed out.
Lol

*Can't even listen to others.

*Refuses to be disciplined.

*Would move the goalposts many times.

*Completely lacks self-awareness.

*Willing to lie to other people.

*Its words contradict its actions.

*Keeps on whining and quoting people who don't talk to it directly whenever it's feeling mocked at.

*Continues to get bodybagged by other posters in its childish battles on a daily basis.

*Only one capable of recognizing/praising itself.

*Mental obsession with having the last word.

Damn, being braindead and highly stubborn must be a true recipe for being a fully autistic retard. :bowdown:

While at the same time, utterly pathetic for someone who can't murder or dispose lebron and all the bronies itb. :roll:

[Spurs m8]

"I don't get bothered by opinions like most of you do."

Yet gets triggered by other posters who disagree with it. :oldlol:


Lol

*Can't even listen to others.

*Refuses to be disciplined.

*Would move the goalposts many times.

*Completely lacks self-awareness.

*Willing to lie to other people.

*Its words contradict its actions.

*Keeps on whining and quoting people who don't talk to it directly whenever it's feeling mocked at.

*Continues to get bodybagged by other posters in its childish battles on a daily basis.

*Only one capable of recognizing/praising itself.

*Mental obsession with having the last word.

Damn, being braindead and highly stubborn must be a true recipe for being a fully autistic retard. :bowdown:

While at the same time, utterly pathetic for someone who can't murder or dispose lebron and all the bronies itb. :roll:

Fuming, as usual

Honestly....you really need a life...you spend all day, every day here....

Your posting proves you are really lonely...you let full court shit on you just for company

[Axe]

Also, we get to see fellatio m8 deepthroating his sex buddy here as well. Nice life, bub.

[Lakers Legend#32]

idk, but the fattest is definitely patrickchewing.

Little less butter on the mash potatoes, Poopsie.

[NBAGOAT]

You're trying to skew the argument again in order to circle around the actual point. If cumulative points is a key factor in rankings (field goal % was never in the discussion), then explain why cumulative turnovers should be ignored as a factor?

It's silliness, and you know it.

because scoring points contribute to winning much more than turnovers do to losing. there's not going be some huge correlation between low turnovers and leading a winning team. Many stars have have a high average of turnovers. It's a lazy gotcha post that can be easily debunked

[Full Court]

Also, we get to see fellatio m8 deepthroating his sex buddy here as well. Nice life, bub.

Autistic dingus.

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fgiffiles.alphacoders.com%2F118%2F 118865.gif&f=1&nofb=1

[hateraid]

Also, we get to see fellatio m8 deepthroating his sex buddy here as well. Nice life, bub.

Precisely. While continuously seeking the last post

[1987_Lakers]

because scoring points contribute to winning much more than turnovers do to losing. there's not going be some huge correlation between low turnovers and leading a winning team. Many stars have have a high average of turnovers. It's a lazy gotcha post that can be easily debunked

Yea, LeBron has the same postseason turnovers per game as Magic, when do people use turnovers to derail Magic's career? High usage players usually have more turnovers.

It's a lazy gotcha post for sure.

[Full Court]

Yea, LeBron has the same postseason turnovers per game as Magic, when do people use turnovers to derail Magic's career? High usage players usually have more turnovers.

It's a lazy gotcha post for sure.

Ahhhhhhh, so you're saying stats mean more in the context of per game or per season than in a simple cumulative sense....

I agree with you. :lol

[1987_Lakers]

Ahhhhhhh, so you're saying stats mean more in the context of per game or per season than in a simple cumulative sense....

I agree with you. :lol

Yes, of course. Which is why spurs m8 had a retarded post while you called it "great". :lol

But you also have to keep in mind longevity DOES matter, Bill Walton would probably be a top 15 player ever if we just looked at the short peak he had and ignored he only played 468 total games in his career. Charles Barkley had a better prime/peak than Karl Malone, yet most people rank Karl Malone higher on their all-time list because of his superior longevity, this stuff matters.

[Full Court]

Yes, of course. Which is why spurs m8 had a retarded post while you called it "great". :lol

But you also have to keep in mind longevity DOES matter, Bill Walton would probably be a top 15 player ever if we just looked at the short peak he had and ignored he only played 468 total games in his career. Charles Barkley had a better prime/peak than Karl Malone, yet most people rank Karl Malone higher on their all-time list because of his superior longevity, this stuff matters.

Lol. You play dumb to get a rise out of people.

You know very well that spurs m8 was using absurdity to demonstrate the absurdity of the OP in that thread. You should just appreciate the brilliance of it.

Also, regarding Malone/Barkley, I too have Malone ranked above Barkley. Sure, longevity is a factor, but it's way far down on the hierarchy of criteria. When all else is equal, longevity is the deciding factor.

[1987_Lakers]

Lol. You play dumb to get a rise out of people.

You know very well that spurs m8 was using absurdity to demonstrate the absurdity of the OP in that thread. You should just appreciate the brilliance of it.

Also, regarding Malone/Barkley, I too have Malone ranked above Barkley. Sure, longevity is a factor, but it's way far down on the hierarchy of criteria. When all else is equal, longevity is the deciding factor.

So posting an "absurdity" is now considered a "great" post around here? :oldlol:

[Full Court]

So posting an "absurdity" is now considered a "great" post around here? :oldlol:

When it brilliantly destroys a flawed argument, then sure.

[1987_Lakers]

When it brilliantly destroys a flawed argument, then sure.

:oldlol:

[NBAGOAT]

Ahhhhhhh, so you're saying stats mean more in the context of per game or per season than in a simple cumulative sense....

I agree with you. :lol

yes and no. If you score a lot you're much more likely than not help their team win though context would differentiate how much you're helping compared to another player. Even guys who are considered complete empty stat ballhog type guys help their teams if they're scoring. Ofc almost any reasonable context says lebron is the furthest thing away from an empty stats player but somehow that's disputed on this forum

[Full Court]

yes and no. If you score a lot you're much more likely than not help their team win though context would differentiate how much you're helping compared to another player. Even guys who are considered complete empty stat ballhog type guys help their teams if they're scoring. Ofc almost any reasonable context says lebron is the furthest thing away from an empty stats player but somehow that's disputed on this forum

No, he wasn't an empty stats player for his entire career, but you can't tell me he hasn't been for the last year or two. Scoring 30ppg and putting ZERO energy into defense...if that's not stat padding, then nothing is.

[TheMan]

No, he wasn't an empty stats player for his entire career, but you can't tell me he hasn't been for the last year or two. Scoring 30ppg and putting ZERO energy into defense...if that's not stat padding, then nothing is.

:applause:

No AD, no playoffs.

If LeStans argue MJ was just stat padding in the 80s without leading to wins, then that same standard has to be applied to Bran, especially when he was surround by HOF talent whereas MJ had coked out teammates his first few seasons.

Dat double standard...

[1987_Lakers]

yes and no. If you score a lot you're much more likely than not help their team win though context would differentiate how much you're helping compared to another player. Even guys who are considered complete empty stat ballhog type guys help their teams if they're scoring. Ofc almost any reasonable context says lebron is the furthest thing away from an empty stats player but somehow that's disputed on this forum

LeBron is the greatest floor raiser ever, dude led a bunch of bums to the Finals in 2018, that to me is the greatest carry job ever.

[TheMan]

LeBron is the greatest floor raiser ever, dude led a bunch of bums to the Finals in 2018, that to me is the greatest carry job ever.

He didn't exactly go through the 86 Celtics in the EC though.

Y'all wanna denigrate MJ's comp during his era but the EC was dreadful during Bran's 8 year Finals streak...

[Axe]

Precisely. While continuously seeking the last post
Lol

[1987_Lakers]

He didn't exactly face the 86 Celtics in the EC though.

Y'all wanna denigrate MJ's comp during his era but the EC was dreadful during Bran's 8 year Finals streak...

He beat a young talented Celtics team that won 55 games and as a team were better without Kyrie. It was a talented team for sure.

That Cavs team without LeBron is lucky enough to win 20 games that season, hell they won 19 games the next season without LeBron.

It's a hell of an achievement no matter how hard you try to discredit.

[TheMan]

He beat a young talented Celtics team that won 55 games and as a team were better without Kyrie. It was a talented team for sure.

That Cavs team without LeBron is lucky enough to win 20 games that season, hell they won 19 games the next season without LeBron.

It's a hell of an achievement no matter how hard you try to discredit.

I'm not trying to discredit it, I'm just laying out facts. LeBron was easily the best player in any of those series, no one on that Celtics squad was even close to LeBron's level. Sure LeBron didn't have a star studded cast but I'll put it this way, if MJ didn't have to go through all time great squads (Larry's Celtics and Isiah's Pistons) earlier in his career, he might've got to the Finals earlier. LeBron benefitted by not having to face great teams in the East, once he did in the Finals, well you seen the results...

[1987_Lakers]

I'm not trying to discredit it, I'm just laying out facts. LeBron was easily the best player in any of those series, no one on that Celtics squad was even close to being close to LeBron's level. Sure LeBron didn't have a star studded cast but I'll put it this way, if MJ didn't have to go through all time great squads (Larry's Celtics and Isiah's Pistons) earlier in his career, he might've got to the Finals earlier. LeBron benefitted by not having to face great teams in the East, once he did in the Finals, well you seen the results...

Nobody was close to MJ's level in those Detroit series' and he still lost to them like 3 years in a row.

Every team MJ played in the Finals doesn't compare to the Finals teams LeBron went up against. MJ would get curb stomped by those KD-Curry Warriors teams.

[TheMan]

Nobody was close to MJ's level in those Detroit series' and he still lost to them like 3 years in a row.

Every team MJ played in the Finals doesn't compare to the Finals teams LeBron went up against. MJ would get curb stomped by those KD-Curry Warriors teams.
Detroit Bad Boys Pistons >>> 18 Celtics

Bolded, maybe or maybe not. We'll never know for sure, too many variables to come to a 100% conclusion. We would have to take into account which rules we're talking about, 90s rules where defense was allowed to impede the offense or today's wide open soft era with minimal defenses...

[1987_Lakers]

Detroit Bad Boys Pistons >>> 18 Celtics

Bolded, maybe or maybe not. We'll never know for sure, too many variables to come to a 100% conclusion. We would have to take into account which rules we're talking about, 90s rules where defense was allowed to impede the offense or today's wide open soft era with minimal defenses...

We ain't playing no diluted 90's rules that didn't even allow a zone defense and had a WNBA 3 point line.

Real men play in this era. :pimp:

[TheMan]

We ain't playing no diluted 90's rules that didn't even allow a zone defense and had a WNBA 3 point line.

Real men play in this era. :pimp:

Lol, real SOFT men that is. Everyone agrees today's NBA is the softest ever, no real rivalries, only super friends hooking up with one another :lol Also, zone defenses are for college boys, real men play man to man defense.

[SATAN]

:oldlol:

:facepalm

[TheMan]

:oldlol:

:facepalm

You don't say, SATAN. I don't agree but what an intelligent retort you make...said no one ever.

FOH

[SATAN]

Just admit your stuck in the past.

People who complain all the time about the modern NBA should simply stop watching it and leave us to discuss basketball.

[TheMan]

Just admit your stuck in the past.

People who complain all the time about the modern NBA should simply stop watching it and leave us to discuss basketball.

I do watch it but today's game resembles a glorified 3 pt shooting contest. It does get boring and I'm not the only one thinks this.

https://youtu.be/6S9gVjmrmCg

[Round Mound]

I do watch it but today's game resembles a glorified 3 pt shooting contest. It does get boring and I'm not the only one thinks this.

Agree

[SATAN]

I do watch it but today's game resembles a glorified 3 pt shooting contest.

You mean like this?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsjukb2NttM

:milton

[SATAN]

Seriously though, this game might have been the most ridiculous example of what you mentioned:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jox6ggZpxnI

It was hard not to laugh at the sheer volume of chucking.

[TheMan]

Seriously though, this game might have been the most ridiculous example of what you mentioned:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jox6ggZpxnI

It was hard not to laugh at the sheer volume of chucking.

Exactly. You can't imagine how many times I see 2 on 1s, 3 on 2 fastbreaks end up in 3 point chucking :facepalm

Incredibly, 3 point FG percentage is basically the same since decades ago, contrary to popular belief, modern players don't hit them as a whole at a better percentage than previous eras, what's changed is that they are being shot at a muuuuch higher rate.

[NBAGOAT]

Exactly. You can't imagine how many times I see 2 on 1s, 3 on 2 fastbreaks end up in 3 point chucking :facepalm

Incredibly, 3 point FG percentage is basically the same since decades ago, contrary to popular belief, modern players don't hit them as a whole at a better percentage than previous eras, what's changed is that they are being shot at a muuuuch higher rate.

The point of 3 point shooting is two pointers get more efficient. Basically less floaters and midrange not less layups. Also teams take tougher 3s such as ones off the dribble contested one’s etc. When volume goes up you should expect fg% to go down for that reason so 3pt% staying the same is evidence shooters are better now.

The 3s in the fastbreak look really bad to me too but some analytics guy likely figured out layups are not easy to get as they seem to our eyes. I agree about boring too but it’s just what most of the league thinks is optimal to win. How many NFL teams run the ball more than passing now?

[PerkinsFor3]

Having watched the NBA since 1992, I have to say I like both eras. Cant fairly compare players from eras, and any notion of a objective GOAT is nonsense and a discussion about it is wasted energy.

[Full Court]

Having watched the NBA since 1992, I have to say I like both eras. Cant fairly compare players from eras, and any notion of a objective GOAT is nonsense and a discussion about it is wasted energy.

Agree. GOAT is purely opinion, although discussion of it can be fun. What amuses me is how upset people get if you don't recognize their "GOAT" though.

[SATAN]

Having watched the NBA since 1992, I have to say I like both eras. Cant fairly compare players from eras, and any notion of a objective GOAT is nonsense and a discussion about it is wasted energy.

This. I don't have Michael there, but Jordan stans will argue about it if I say it to them. Mind you, they have never even played basketball beyond chucking a few shots up and seeing how high they could jump a few times. It's like talking to people about music that have never even played it. They just need that rapper to get through their day and feed their basic ego. Meanwhile, there's a whole other level of senses and dimensions going on that they will never even fathom. Yet they are always right in their minds. Always.

You really gotta just laugh at these people. They are very awkward and stubborn about being ABSOLUTELY WRONG ALL THE TIME. So strange.

[PerkinsFor3]

This. I don't have Michael there, but Jordan stans will argue about it if I say it to them. Mind you, they have never even played basketball beyond chucking a few shots up and seeing how high they could jump a few times. It's like talking to people about music that have never even played it. They just need that rapper to get through their day and feed their basic ego. Meanwhile, there's a whole other level of senses and dimensions going on that they will never even fathom. Yet they are always right in their minds. Always.

You really gotta just laugh at these people. They are very awkward and stubborn about being ABSOLUTELY WRONG ALL THE TIME. So strange.

The **** you talking about... rapper?

[Johnny32]

I'd say it's more a group of fans, lebron fans. They bring stats and facts to every discussion.

[TheMan]

I'd say it's more a group of fans, lebron fans. They bring stats and facts to every discussion.

:roll:

[LeGoat4Life]

9 pages of 1987 fuming

Full Court literally destroying everyone in this thread lol :applause:

[Phoenix]

Having watched the NBA since 1992, I have to say I like both eras. Cant fairly compare players from eras, and any notion of a objective GOAT is nonsense and a discussion about it is wasted energy.

https://static.wixstatic.com/media/dab099_a259ca77b7c64971a891858bfae294e6~mv2.gif

[Spurs m8]

I'd say it's more a group of fans, lebron fans. They bring stats and facts to every discussion.

Yeah, longevity stats

Like most turnovers ever

Most missed playoff shots ever

Most turnovers ever in the playoffs.

GOAT

[Full Court]

9 pages of 1987 fuming

Full Court literally destroying everyone in this thread lol :applause:

:cheers:

[LeGoat4Life]

Yeah, longevity stats

Like most turnovers ever

Most missed playoff shots ever

Most turnovers ever in the playoffs.

GOAT

Another post with too much fact and truth for bronnies to handle

[NBAGOAT]

No, he wasn't an empty stats player for his entire career, but you can't tell me he hasn't been for the last year or two. Scoring 30ppg and putting ZERO energy into defense...if that's not stat padding, then nothing is.

A top 10 player isnt an empty stats guy and his stats are not as good as his peak anyway, assists are down 30ppg is less impressive in 2022 than 2012. He’s not as good as he used to be but that doesn’t make him an empty stats guy. The lakers didn’t make the playoffs because their team was trash and they were injury prone lebron himself included and lebron and Ad also aren’t nearly as good as they were in 2020. Defensive effort sure but lebron is still smart enough and athletic enough not to be considered a very bad defender. It’s like someone who doesn’t study but can still does average on an exam. You can criticize his effort but you can’t say he has bad grades. Impact stuff mostly says lebron isn’t even a bottom 25% defender.

You guys need to think your arguments through. Empty stats guys apply to 6th man scorers off the bench who don’t do anything else, guys who would be role players on any other team but have to put up 15-20 shots on a bad team, chuckers who are very inefficient.

Back to spurs really stupid point. Another simple counter is lebron having most turnovers ever doesn’t mean anything because longevity is a positive not a negative. A bad player isn’t good enough to last many years in the league and play many minutes.

I already mentioned individual turnovers doesn’t even necessarily correlate to winning but to illustrate my previous point. Top 10 TO’s all time are lebron, Karl malone, Moses, Stockton, westbrook, kobe, Kidd, dr. j, artis, isiah Thomas. That is a list of all hof greats

[1987_Lakers]

A top 10 player isnt an empty stats guy and his stats are not as good as his peak anyway, assists are down 30ppg is less impressive in 2022 than 2012. He’s not as good as he used to be but that doesn’t make him an empty stats guy. The lakers didn’t make the playoffs because their team was trash and they were injury prone lebron himself included and lebron and Ad also aren’t nearly as good as they were in 2020. Defensive effort sure but lebron is still smart enough and athletic enough not to be considered a very bad defender. It’s like someone who doesn’t study but can still does average on an exam. You can criticize his effort but you can’t say he has bad grades. Impact stuff mostly says lebron isn’t even a bottom 25% defender.

You guys need to think your arguments through. Empty stats guys apply to 6th man scorers off the bench who don’t do anything else, guys who would be role players on any other team but have to put up 15-20 shots on a bad team, chuckers who are very inefficient.

Back to spurs really stupid point. Another simple counter is lebron having most turnovers ever doesn’t mean anything because longevity is a positive not a negative. A bad player isn’t good enough to last many years in the league and play many minutes.

I already mentioned individual turnovers doesn’t even necessarily correlate to winning but to illustrate my previous point. Top 10 TO’s all time are lebron, Karl malone, Moses, Stockton, westbrook, kobe, Kidd, dr. j, artis, isiah Thomas. That is a list of all hof greats

There's a reason why he was voted dumbest.

[MadDogg]

From my time here. HoopsNY, dankok, Roundball_Rock & NBAGOAT. Slim pickings lol. Would vote myself if I could.

[Full Court]

A top 10 player isnt an empty stats guy and his stats are not as good as his peak anyway, assists are down 30ppg is less impressive in 2022 than 2012. He’s not as good as he used to be but that doesn’t make him an empty stats guy. The lakers didn’t make the playoffs because their team was trash and they were injury prone lebron himself included and lebron and Ad also aren’t nearly as good as they were in 2020. Defensive effort sure but lebron is still smart enough and athletic enough not to be considered a very bad defender. It’s like someone who doesn’t study but can still does average on an exam. You can criticize his effort but you can’t say he has bad grades. Impact stuff mostly says lebron isn’t even a bottom 25% defender.

You guys need to think your arguments through. Empty stats guys apply to 6th man scorers off the bench who don’t do anything else, guys who would be role players on any other team but have to put up 15-20 shots on a bad team, chuckers who are very inefficient.

Back to spurs really stupid point. Another simple counter is lebron having most turnovers ever doesn’t mean anything because longevity is a positive not a negative. A bad player isn’t good enough to last many years in the league and play many minutes.

I already mentioned individual turnovers doesn’t even necessarily correlate to winning but to illustrate my previous point. Top 10 TO’s all time are lebron, Karl malone, Moses, Stockton, westbrook, kobe, Kidd, dr. j, artis, isiah Thomas. That is a list of all hof greats

I watched a ton of the Lakers games last year. Lebron's defense was absolutely terrible. He wasn't the only one, as the Lakers defense in general was pretty bad, but no one is going to convince me I didn't see what I saw.

[RRR3]

From my time here. HoopsNY, dankok, Roundball_Rock & NBAGOAT. Slim pickings lol. Would vote myself if I could.
No one even knows who you are, alt.

[MadDogg]

No one even knows who you are, alt.

Righttt. You spent months stalking my posts. Claimed I was 3ball & then some guy named "Coach" lol. You know EXACTLY who I am, dweeb.

[RRR3]

Righttt. You spent months stalking my posts. Claimed I was 3ball & then some guy named "Coach" lol. You know EXACTLY who I am, dweeb.
Oh so you're "MadDog", the guy who isn't even banned? Made a new alt for no reason? :lol

[1987_Lakers]

No one even knows who you are, alt.

I think I know who he is, dude has said Durant > LeBron career wise and that in the future Bron would be forgotten because has has no "skill". :oldlol:

[RRR3]

I think I know who he is, dude has said Durant > LeBron career wise and that in the future Bron would be forgotten because has has no "skill". :oldlol:
:biggums: WHAT?

[Baller789]

The real question is, who is the smartest Bronie poster who doesnt have a gigantic ego?

[MadDogg]

Oh so you're "MadDog", the guy who isn't even banned? Made a new alt for no reason? :lol

Wow! Good catch! Did the extra g give me away? Lol not that I owe you an explantion, but I lost my email & pw to that account. Glad to be back :cheers:


I think I know who he is, dude has said Durant > LeBron career wise and that in the future Bron would be forgotten because has has no "skill". :oldlol:

:biggums:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?497310-Lowest-reasonable-rank-for-LeBron

I have LeBron top 5ish.

[1987_Lakers]

My mistake, this is what you said.


Right. He set the superteam precedent and a healthy Brooklyn team still likely win a ring or two. Which will give KD 3-4 ring. Right there with LeBron. Overall LeBron's a thing of the past though. Believe me when I tell you that 5 years from now, he'll be falling down the ranks. And fast too. Hoopers don't go to youtube to watch or learn from his game. Instead they watch guys like KD, Steph, Booker, Kawhi etc.

Media will hitch their "Next MJ" wagon soon enough.


I am. He's not respected like KAJ, MJ or even Kobe. He'll have a Karl Malone longevity award, but nobody will care. Great athletic phenom, but historically LeBron has little skill. When it comes to ATGs and their reverence, all that matters.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?494893-3ball-has-sure-been-quiet-since-KD-got-eliminated/page2

lol

[RRR3]

My mistake, this is what you said.





http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?494893-3ball-has-sure-been-quiet-since-KD-got-eliminated/page2

lol
Yikes. And he considers himself one of the smartest posters :yaohappy:

[MadDogg]

My mistake, this is what you said.





http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?494893-3ball-has-sure-been-quiet-since-KD-got-eliminated/page2

lol

Yeah you were way off. :oldlol: Reverence and all-time rank are two different things. Years from now long after LeBron is retired, I don't think he'll get the love other guys who are more skilled will. I have Duncan ranked over guys like Curry and Kobe, but Duncan doesn't get the love they do either. Not even close.

Of course this is all subjective. What's important is a players impact. And I have LeBron top 5 :confusedshrug:

[2much_knowledge]

The real question is, who is the smartest Bronie poster who doesnt have a gigantic ego?

Im having a hard time thinking of just one. And im dead serious

[2much_knowledge]

That's the thing, this site doesn't have alot of decent posters. I remember when posters like fatal & Shaqattack posted here, they were way more knowledgeable than me, you don't see posters like that here anymore.

Thats not a great feat lol. Lets put the daily goat talk aside... you would be surprised

[Baller789]

Im having a hard time thinking of just one. And im dead serious

It seems that the word Bronie and huge ego go hand in hand.

[HoopsNY]

From my time here. HoopsNY, dankok, Roundball_Rock & NBAGOAT. Slim pickings lol. Would vote myself if I could.

I appreciate it, however the other guys you mentioned are way better posters. I'm a simpleton, really. Roundball, despite my disagreements with him, was a far better poster and offered much more value than someone like myself. Def agree with NBAGOAT and dankok. There are so many others. Hard for me to choose, really. I can't recall all of their names but we've had several great posters here.

[SATAN]

I appreciate it, however the other guys you mentioned are way better posters. I'm a simpleton, really. Roundball, despite my disagreements with him, was a far better poster and offered much more value than someone like myself. Def agree with NBAGOAT and dankok.

The guy that made a poll and refused to acknowledge many people who don't prefer MJ over LeBron? :lol

He has some good things to say but he kinda ruined his credibility for me with that one.

[Full Court]

My mistake, this is what you said.





http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?494893-3ball-has-sure-been-quiet-since-KD-got-eliminated/page2

lol

5 years is probably too quick of a timeline. Other than that, he's spot in. Once Bronie retires and hype and recency bias fade, you'll see him dropping in in rankings to the 8-10ish spot where he reasonably belongs.

[1987_Lakers]

The guy that made a poll and refused to acknowledge many people who don't prefer MJ over LeBron? :lol

He has some good things to say but he kinda ruined his credibility for me with that one.

dankok is a pretty knowledgeable dude, but he for sure ruined some of his credibility when he counted some troll votes for KD in his playoff MVP thread like kawhileonard, he actually went as far and said that he was a legit poster at times and not a troll, it kinda boggled my mind when he said that because it was obvious he's just a troll.

[1987_Lakers]

5 years is probably too quick of a timeline. Other than that, he's spot in. Once Bronie retires and hype and recency bias fade, you'll see him dropping in in rankings to the 8-10ish spot where he reasonably belongs.

Name 7 players ahead of LeBron.

[SouBeachTalents]

Name 7 players ahead of LeBron.
He acts like being out of the league will change the fact he’ll be a 4x MVP/4x FMVP/20x All-NBA/have GOAT tier production & metrics/be the all time scoring leader regular season and playoffs.

But nah, he’s gonna be barely top 10 :lol It’s obv either trolling or wishful, frankly delusional thinking. Unless another GOAT tier player comes along, LeBron’s going to be top 2-3 for a very long time.

[HoopsNY]

The guy that made a poll and refused to acknowledge many people who don't prefer MJ over LeBron? :lol

He has some good things to say but he kinda ruined his credibility for me with that one.

Yea, but that shouldn't disqualify him. I recall the post you're talking about but he viewed some posters as bigger trolls than others. I understand where you're coming from but on a consistent basis, he's been a valuable poster.

[Full Court]

Name 7 players ahead of LeBron.

Jordan
Russell
Wilt
Kareem
Bird
Magic
Duncan

To me, it's a toss-up between Lebron and Shaq. Either one could be next.

[RRR3]

Full Retard

[1987_Lakers]

Jordan
Russell
Wilt
Kareem
Bird
Magic
Duncan

To me, it's a toss-up between Lebron and Shaq. Either one could be next.

Bird ahead of LeBron? lol

[1987_Lakers]

LeBron
4x MVP
4x NBA Champion
4x NBA FMVP
18x All-NBA Selection
13x All-NBA First Team
5x All-NBA Defensive 1st Team
37,062 career points


Larry Bird
3x NBA MVP
3x NBA Champion
2x NBA FMVP
10x All-NBA selection
9x All-NBA First Team
3x All-NBA Defensive 2nd Team
21,791 career points

You sure Bird will be ranked higher than Bird once "recency bias" fades? :lol

[Full Court]

Full Retard

Resident crybaby.

:lebroncry:

[Full Court]

LeBron
4x MVP
4x NBA Champion
4x NBA FMVP
18x All-NBA Selection
13x All-NBA First Team
5x All-NBA Defensive 1st Team
37,062 career points


Larry Bird
3x NBA MVP
3x NBA Champion
2x NBA FMVP
10x All-NBA selection
9x All-NBA First Team
3x All-NBA Defensive 2nd Team
21,791 career points

You sure Bird will be ranked higher than Bird once "recency bias" fades? :lol

Yep, pretty confident.

Much as you'd like to, you can't erase Lebron's epic choke jobs.

Or jumping over to stacked teams to take the easy road. Those things negatively affect rankings.

[MadDogg]

5 years is probably too quick of a timeline. Other than that, he's spot in. Once Bronie retires and hype and recency bias fade, you'll see him dropping in in rankings to the 8-10ish spot where he reasonably belongs.

Exactly. That post was also made right after LeBron was knocked out in the first round. Fast forward to 2022 and he wins a scoring title. Did it really move the needle though? Lakers missed the playoffs and LeBron more or less was absent, defensively. Most fans don't have even him top 5 currently.

He's top 5 ALLTIME imo, but even I admit there's some immediacy to it. Rankings are fluid and LeBron's game isn't very graceful. When the dust settles, he'll no longer have the advantage of a cult following.

[LeGoat4Life]

Jordan
Russell
Wilt
Kareem
Bird
Magic
Duncan

To me, it's a toss-up between Lebron and Shaq. Either one could be next.

Shaq is easily above Lebron

[MadDogg]

Yea, but that shouldn't disqualify him. I recall the post you're talking about but he viewed some posters as bigger trolls than others. I understand where you're coming from but on a consistent basis, he's been a valuable poster.

dankok triggered a lot of LeBron's obsessed following. Incredibly pathetic, but not all that surprising lol.

[RRR3]

MadFraud reduced to agreeing with full court. Yikes.

[1987_Lakers]

Yep, pretty confident.

Much as you'd like to, you can't erase Lebron's epic choke jobs.

Or jumping over to stacked teams to take the easy road. Those things negatively affect rankings.

I didn't even mention postseason play, where LeBron was superior than Bird in terms of overall performance. :lol

[SATAN]

MadFraud reduced to agreeing with full court. Yikes.

Yikes indeed :facepalm

[MadDogg]

MadFraud reduced to agreeing with full court. Yikes.

lol what's wrong with fullcourt? Overly critical of your man crush?

[hateraid]

MadFraud reduced to agreeing with full court. Yikes.

Easy to agree when he's talking to himself.

[SATAN]

Easy to agree when he's talking to himself.

I agree with this.

[RRR3]

lol what's wrong with fullcourt? Overly critical of your man crush?
:biggums:


This guy claims to be objective :lol

[SouBeachTalents]

I didn't even mention postseason play, where LeBron was superior than Bird in terms of overall performance. :lol
If LeBron had Bird’s playoff resume he would get absolutely obliterated by some of the posters on here :lol

Imagine if LeBron averaged 15 ppg on 41% in the Finals, against a 40 win team, and had a guy who never even made an all-star game outscore him and win FMVP over him. That title would get trashed forever.

[Full Court]

Exactly. That post was also made right after LeBron was knocked out in the first round. Fast forward to 2022 and he wins a scoring title. Did it really move the needle though? Lakers missed the playoffs and LeBron more or less was absent, defensively. Most fans don't have even him top 5 currently.

He's top 5 ALLTIME imo, but even I admit there's some immediacy to it. Rankings are fluid and LeBron's game isn't very graceful. When the dust settles, he'll no longer have the advantage of a cult following.

Except he didnn't even win the scoring title. He was shamelessly gunning for it at the expense of all defensive effort, but he still fell short. :confusedshrug:

[Full Court]

lol what's wrong with fullcourt? Overly critical of your man crush?

I have that effect on Bronies. :lol

[MadDogg]

Except he didnn't even win the scoring title. He was shamelessly gunning for it at the expense of all defensive effort, but he still fell short. :confusedshrug:

Unreal. You'd assume LeBron won it based on everything mentioned. But you're right, he was 0.3 off. So no playoffs or scoring title! :oldlol: Will LeBron even be a top 10 player this season?


I have that effect on Bronies.

Lol you hear the latest conspiracy? Months back I was 3ball and "Coach" but now I'm YOU. :yaohappy:

[Full Court]

Unreal. You'd assume LeBron won it based on everything mentioned. But you're right, he was 0.3 off. So no playoffs or scoring title! :oldlol: Will LeBron even be a top 10 player this season?



Lol you hear the latest conspiracy? Months back I was 3ball and "Coach" but now I'm YOU. :yaohappy:

:roll:

Which is funny, because you're like the sixth poster that someone has accused of being me.

Lebron wasn't a top 10 player last season, and I don't expect him to be this season. That's really not a crack at him though, because he is 37 years old. And in fairness, he is the second best 37-year old in the entire league (behind Chris Paul).

[Baller789]

The real question is, who is the smartest Bronie poster who doesnt have a gigantic ego?

Anyone?

[MadDogg]

:roll:

Which is funny, because you're like the sixth poster that someone has accused of being me.

Lebron wasn't a top 10 player last season, and I don't expect him to be this season. That's really not a crack at him though, because he is 37 years old. And in fairness, he is the second best 37-year old in the entire league (behind Chris Paul).

Fair point. A little ironic though because the way LeBron fans speak about him, you would think he was still in BITW talks. "What player at 37 could score like LeBron?" "Where was MJ at 37?!?" :oldlol: When you critique his defense (or lack thereof) and inability to carry teams, you're met with excuses. LeBron fans basically want all the glory but none of the blame. Much like their hero.

I probably don't have CP3 over him, but its close enough where I wouldn't argue it.

[Spurs m8]

Yep, pretty confident.

Much as you'd like to, you can't erase Lebron's epic choke jobs.

Or jumping over to stacked teams to take the easy road. Those things negatively affect rankings.

Put it this way.

He never won anything until he teamed up with multiple 1st options on other teams...

Wade and Bosh

Kyrie and Love

Can't make the playoffs out West without teaming up with ANOTHER first option from another team, AD.

So basically its clear now.....

2 first options = some success

1 first option = playoffs(scrimmage awards don't count)

[1987_Lakers]

If LeBron had Bird’s playoff resume he would get absolutely obliterated by some of the posters on here :lol

Imagine if LeBron averaged 15 ppg on 41% in the Finals, against a 40 win team, and had a guy who never even made an all-star game outscore him and win FMVP over him. That title would get trashed forever.

You would have to be brain dead to rank Bird ahead of LeBron. I've said this before, it's like ranking Hakeem ahead of Kareem, something you never see. One guy just shits on the other guy in terms of individual accomplishments.

Postseason LeBron: 29|9|7 on 58 TS%
Postseason Bird: 24|10|7 on 56 TS%

Even if you only include the postseason runs where Bird was in his prime, Bird put up 25|11|6 on 57 TS% which is still below what LeBron produced for his entire postseason career. And that doesn't even include how much better/valuable LeBron was compared to Bird on the defensive end for most of those runs.

[SouBeachTalents]

You would have to be brain dead to rank Bird ahead of LeBron. I've said this before, it's like ranking Hakeem ahead of Kareem, something you never see. One guy just shits on the other guy in terms of individual accomplishments.

Postseason LeBron: 29|9|7 on 58 TS%
Postseason Bird: 24|10|7 on 56 TS%

Even if you only include the postseason runs where Bird was in his prime, Bird put up 25|11|6 on 57 TS% which is still below what LeBron produced for his entire postseason career. And that doesn't even include how much better/valuable LeBron was compared to Bird on the defensive end for most of those runs.
I mean seriously, look at some of these playoff series/performances

1980 ECF: Lost in 5 with HCA, 18/16/4 on 44%TS over the final 3 games, including 12 points on 5/19 with 6 turnovers in the elimination Game 5
1981 Finals: As mentioned, 15/15/7 on 46%TS, was outscored and lost out on FMVP to Cedric Maxwell
1982 ECF: Lost in 7 with HCA, 18/14/7 on 45%TS
1983 ECSF: Swept with HCA (he did miss one game) 19/12/6 on 45%TS
1988 ECF: Lost in 6 with HCA, 20/12/6 on 45%TS, including 16 points on 5/17 in the elimination Game 6

Even in his peak seasons, he had some pretty pedestrian/underwhelming stretches in the two Finals losses to L.A.

1985 Finals Games 2-6: 24/9/5 on 50%TS
1987 Finals Games 4-6: 20/10/6 on 49%TS

And this encapsulates half his prime years. So like you said, worse accolades, worse prime performances, worse production, worse advanced metrics, worse defense, and significantly worse longevity. But yeah, Bird's ranked higher :lol

[8Ball]

Thanks brother, I try. I've educated alot of guys here, especially full court, who said Wilt had "empty stats" after I showed him some data, but for some odd reason, he still has Wilt top 3 because of "stats". :lol

I don't bother arguing against you since you have made everyone you argued with look foolish. You remember every single NBA historical fact, it's actually quite insane how you remember small benign facts from decades ago.

Kinda like the Lakers version of Bill Simmons.

[8Ball]

You would have to be brain dead to rank Bird ahead of LeBron. I've said this before, it's like ranking Hakeem ahead of Kareem, something you never see. One guy just shits on the other guy in terms of individual accomplishments.

Postseason LeBron: 29|9|7 on 58 TS%
Postseason Bird: 24|10|7 on 56 TS%

Even if you only include the postseason runs where Bird was in his prime, Bird put up 25|11|6 on 57 TS% which is still below what LeBron produced for his entire postseason career. And that doesn't even include how much better/valuable LeBron was compared to Bird on the defensive end for most of those runs.

Bird's career was legendary but it was just too short. Only about 9 great years meanwhile Bron has about 17 great years.

[Shooter]

Besides me, OP, and 8ball?

SouBeach, Im NBA'd Out, and TheCorporation

[Jasper]

When your on this forum , you have to evolve to be better than others... prejudice over teams and players are an example , where eventually the poster , disregards that crap.
Here is my list in no order :
RRR3
Theman
Kblaze
NBA Goat
Full Court
Hateraid
87_Lakers
L-legend#32
8-Ball
Hateraid
Round mound
Mask of Embiid
Elite Baller
----------------
There is about ten guys boarder line that in a year or so , will become very good as well.
Problem is we get young guys 'kids' that think thru their prejudice of players and current game that they know it all , and really disrupt arguments.
If that could ever stay clear of some of these threads we could really have a great forum.

[red1]

kblaze
pauk
silktheshocker
dubeta
wheels
lebron23
87_lakers
the fam™



100% unbiased posters like these.

[hateraid]

When your on this forum , you have to evolve to be better than others... prejudice over teams and players are an example , where eventually the poster , disregards that crap.
Here is my list in no order :
RRR3
Theman
Kblaze
NBA Goat
Full Court
Hateraid
87_Lakers
L-legend#32
8-Ball
Hateraid
Round mound
Mask of Embiid
Elite Baller
----------------
There is about ten guys boarder line that in a year or so , will become very good as well.
Problem is we get young guys 'kids' that think thru their prejudice of players and current game that they know it all , and really disrupt arguments.
If that could ever stay clear of some of these threads we could really have a great forum.

So good I got named twice lol

[Spurs m8]

kblaze
pauk
silktheshocker
dubeta
wheels
lebron23
87_lakers
the fam™



100% unbiased posters like these.

Umm 87 lakers does nothing but suck off bron and get upset when someone tells the truth about him

Though you're the same, so makes sense

[coastalmarker99]

Larry Bird usually declined in the postseason and he was incredibly lucky to win 3 rings during his career.


As If Worthy didn't turn the ball over late in game two of the 1984 finals he would have only won two rings despite playing with an incredible team.


With Bird, you get a nice 4-year run that had 4 straight finals appearances but outside of that, you get 4 years of .50.5 TS% (80-83) and a .525 TS% span (88-92).

In 12 years, you get 7 losses with HCA.

Basically, out of Bird's 13-year career, you have 1 injury season and 3 non-descript postseasons at the end of his plus some playoff disappointments early in his career.

Bird played in an NBA that shot about .48.5 in his career.

Yet, in the post-season, he only shot .47.2.

Which is bad enough, but, wait...it gets worse.

He shot a career .45.5 in his five finals.

In fact, he shot under .39.9 in his 31 Finals games as often as he shot over .49.9...eleven times (including two games of under .29.9!)

His high Finals series was only .48.8, and his low was .41.9.

And how did the great "Game Seven" Bird fare in his lone game seven finals game? 6-18...or 33%.

Furthermore, in his five Finals, he was only the best player in two of them, and in fact, lost out to a teammate in the '81 Finals for the FMVP (Cedric Maxwell.)

[red1]

Umm 87 lakers does nothing but suck off bron and get upset when someone tells the truth about him

Though you're the same, so makes sense

he's a loyal laker fan with the GOAT on his team


that's why he's a smart poster.

[1987_Lakers]

Umm 87 lakers does nothing but suck off bron and get upset when someone tells the truth about him

Though you're the same, so makes sense

I've talked about multiple topics that don't involve LeBron, problem is you only click on the threads that has his name mentioned.

[Jasper]

So good I got named twice lol

lmfao

Some of these turkeys never even read my posts... :facepalm

[Full Court]

I've talked about multiple topics that don't involve LeBron, problem is you only click on the threads that has his name mentioned.

That's true. You also like to talk about Wilt a lot. :lol

[TheMan]

he's a loyal laker fan with the GOAT on his team


that's why he's a smart poster.

While simultaneously shitting on Kobe, some Laker "fan"...but then again, he's a fat balding dude in his 40s from Boston :lol

[red1]

While simultaneously shitting on Kobe, some Laker "fan"...but then again, he's a fat balding dude in his 40s from Boston :lol

unbiased posters. aka the fam™ only.


we're fam™ily friendly

[1987_Lakers]

That's true. You also like to talk about Wilt a lot. :lol

Yes, along with every all-time great player. My knowledge in NBA history is the reason why I own most of you guys in debates. I made TheMan completely ignore my post about Wilt in another thread because he had no comeback, you still can't name a good reason why Bird should he ranked ahead of LeBron, despite me and others showing you LeBron shits on Bird in postseason play as well as having more individual achievements.

You guys just don't have the knowledge to debate me. Accept it.

You had TheMan saying saying Wilt had discussion for GOAT and not LeBron because he was 4/10, not realizing Wilt had a worse Finals record. Talk about a lack of knowledge.

[1987_Lakers]

I don't bother arguing against you since you have made everyone you argued with look foolish. You remember every single NBA historical fact, it's actually quite insane how you remember small benign facts from decades ago.

Kinda like the Lakers version of Bill Simmons.

:pimp:

[Full Court]

Yes, along with every all-time great player. My knowledge in NBA history is the reason why I own most of you guys in debates. I made TheMan completely ignore my post about Wilt in another thread because he had no comeback, you still can't name a good reason why Bird should he ranked ahead of LeBron, despite me and others showing you LeBron shits on Bird in postseason play as well as having more individual achievements.

You guys just don't have the knowledge to debate me. Accept it.

You had TheMan saying saying Wilt had discussion for GOAT and not LeBron because he was 4/10, not realizing Wilt had a worse Finals record. Talk about a lack of knowledge.

That's really only in your own mind. Sometimes you put together highly flawed arguments, which I've pointed out in numerous threads. Don't let 8ball's praise get to your head. He's not the sharpest. :lol

[1987_Lakers]

Sometimes you put together highly flawed arguments

Look in the mirror. :lol

[Full Court]

Look in the mirror. :lol

I generally try not to argue with myself. :lol

[hateraid]

lmfao

Some of these turkeys never even read my posts... :facepalm

I feel the same sentiment, lol. Especially these clown who accuse me of being a Lebron fan

[Full Court]

If I were a Lebron fan, I definitely wouldn't want people to know. I mean, the man led a SUPERTEAM to the LOTTERY.

:lebronamazed:

[TheMan]

Yes, along with every all-time great player. My knowledge in NBA history is the reason why I own most of you guys in debates. I made TheMan completely ignore my post about Wilt in another thread because he had no comeback, you still can't name a good reason why Bird should he ranked ahead of LeBron, despite me and others showing you LeBron shits on Bird in postseason play as well as having more individual achievements.

You guys just don't have the knowledge to debate me. Accept it.

You had TheMan saying saying Wilt had discussion for GOAT and not LeBron because he was 4/10, not realizing Wilt had a worse Finals record. Talk about a lack of knowledge.

I already answered your question, liar. GOAT talks are subjective, everyone has their criteria, I mentioned that if you strictly value championships, then obviously Bill Russell is your GOAT, he was the leader of the greatest dynasty in NBA history. The argument against him is that he's not the GOAT two way big man and I agree, but that Celtics dynasty started with him and ended with him.

If NBA records are your thing, and this is up your alley as a Bronie, Wilt holds easily the most, and frankly they're unbreakable, then he's your guy. Argument against him, that he didn't win enough going 2/5.

If longevity is your flavor, you have LeBron obviously and KAJ, except KAJ has more rings and MVPs and currently holds the most career points record. Argument against KAJ, he wasn't the best player in a few of his chips. Argument against LeBron, left his team to collude with two other elite franchise players, something unprecedented at that time, then proceeded to have the worst NBA Finals performance for a GOAT tier player.

If you like the best of all worlds, MJ is your dude. Highest PPG career avg., highest playoffs PPG avg, DPOY, 5 MVPs, 6 FMVPs (in the modern era), 2 threepeats (in the modern era), 10 scoring titles and a bunch more records, you get the picture. He dominated his era, like Bill Russell before him and Shaq since.

I frankly don't give a shit LeBron is your GOAT, he's a great player but he never dominated his era, FFS, TDuncan and Curry have winning records against him, for all the trolling about Bird and Thomas over MJ...

[Full Court]

I already answered your question, liar. GOAT talks are subjective, everyone has their criteria, I mentioned that if you strictly value championships, then obviously Bill Russell is your GOAT, he was the leader of the greatest dynasty in NBA history. The argument against him is that he's not the GOAT two way big man and I agree, but that Celtics dynasty started with him and ended with him.

If NBA records are your thing, and this is up your alley as a Bronie, Wilt holds easily the most, and frankly they're unbreakable, then he's your guy. Argument against him, that he didn't win enough going 2/5.

If longevity is your flavor, you have LeBron obviously and KAJ, except KAJ has more rings and MVPs and currently holds the most career points record. Argument against KAJ, he wasn't the best player in a few of his chips. Argument against LeBron, left his team to collude with two other elite franchise players, something unprecedented at that time, then proceeded to have the worst NBA Finals performance for a GOAT tier player.

If you like the best of all worlds, MJ is your dude. Highest PPG career avg., highest playoffs PPG avg, DPOY, 5 MVPs, 6 FMVPs (in the modern era), 2 threepeats (in the modern era), 10 scoring titles and a bunch more records, you get the picture. He dominated his era, like Bill Russell before him and Shaq since.

I frankly don't give a shit LeBron is your GOAT, he's a great player but he never dominated his era, FFS, TDuncan and Curry have winning records against him, for all the trolling about Bird and Thomas over MJ...

This is an excellent post. It succinctly captures all the important points in the GOAT debate.

[1987_Lakers]

I already answered your question,

This was your exact quote..


I've said it before, I have no problem if someone has Russell as GOAT :confusedshrug: I've said the same about Wilt and KAJ too.

Just not 4/10 loser Bran :lol

Pretty much implying Bron can't be GOAT because of his Finals record. My response...


Thats not what you said though. You called LeBron a loser and cant be GOAT for being 4/10 while not realizing Wilt was 2/6, which is worse, but somehow he has a discussion for GOAT with that Finals record according to you. :oldlol:



He has a bunch of records cause he played in an era where stats were inflated, anyone who studies history knows this. And Russell did have better teams the first half of their careers, but by 1965 or 1966 they had similar teams and Russell still beat him for the most part, even in 1969 when Wilt obviously had a better team than Russell.

Nonetheless, I find it funny how you cry about Russell having better teams but ignore the fact that LeBron obviously had worse teams than his Finals opponent in 2007, 2015, and 2018. If you are going to make fun of Bron going 4/10 while ignoring this fact than Wilt going 2/6 needs to get roasted as well.

And even if you think Wilt has consideration for GOAT because of stats you are leaving out he got his stats where players were putting up stats like crazy, the numbers were way more inflated back then they were today, this is something you have to take into consideration. How do those numbers look like if he played today, with a slower pace, and playing less minutes? I guarantee you he won't have all those records if he played today.

This isn't baseball, you can't compare stats from different eras, you should know better.

[Full Court]

Pretty much implying Bron can't be GOAT because of his Finals record.



It's not JUST his finals record. TheMan put it pretty well when he said that Lebron "then proceeded to have the worst NBA Finals performance for a GOAT tier player." That right there in most peoples' eyes is a dagger in the heart of Bronie's quest for GOATness.





And even if you think Wilt has consideration for GOAT because of stats you are leaving out he got his stats where players were putting up stats like crazy, the numbers were way more inflated back then they were today, this is something you have to take into consideration. How do those numbers look like if he played today, with a slower pace, and playing less minutes? I guarantee you he won't have all those records if he played today.

If it was so easy back then, how come nobody else was coming EVEN CLOSE to putting up the numbers Wilt put up? He was so far ahead of his competition to a level nobody has been before or since. We can speculate about cross-era all we want, but the only thing we can look at objectively is how someone performed against the best competition at the time.

I'm sure it's MUCH harder to put up big stats today though. Like in 2020 when Jamal Murray and Donovan Mitchell put up a combined 100 points in a playoff game...

[1987_Lakers]

If it was so easy back then, how come nobody else was coming EVEN CLOSE to putting up the numbers Wilt put up? He was so far ahead of his competition to a level nobody has been before or since. We can speculate about cross-era all we want, but the only thing we can look at objectively is how someone performed against the best competition at the time.

I'm sure it's MUCH harder to put up big stats today though. Like in 2020 when Jamal Murray and Donovan Mitchell put up a combined 100 points in a playoff game...
So far ahead of the competition that he went 31-49 while averaging 45 ppg in 1963, gtfo. :oldlol:

Wilt was obviously the biggest athletic freak for his time, but the stats and data show his team did better when he took a lesser role on offense, in his early years he was a huge black hole and his team nearly ranked near the bottom on the offensive end. I have already covered this. If he was so ahead of the competition then Russell wouldn't have been crowned GOAT by NBA writers in 1980.

Not to mention Wilt's '69 Finals rivals what LeBron did in 2011, only difference is LeBron responded by winning back to back chips, Wilt responded by losing again the next year to a Knicks team that was missing their best player.

[Full Court]

So far ahead of the competition that he went 31-49 while averaging 45 ppg in 1963, gtfo. :oldlol:




Yep, there's a reason why Wilt isn't consensus GOAT.




but the stats and data show his team did better when he took a lesser role on offense,



You could say the same thing for Jordan. It takes more than the best player in the world to win a championship. Turns out it's a team sport.

But we've been over this a few dozen times. :lol

[1987_Lakers]

You could say the same thing for Jordan. It takes more than the best player in the world to win a championship. Turns out it's a team sport.

But we've been over this a few dozen times. :lol

Not really, his scoring dipped a little, but he was still averaging over 31 ppg in his 1st 3 peat and close to 30 ppg in his 2nd 3 peat, he led the league in scoring every year he won a title.

Now compare that to Wilt... averaged 23 ppg from '66-'72 in the years he saw more team success, that is a HUGE drop off from the 40 ppg he was averaging in his first 6 seasons in the NBA while he didn't see much team success. I've said this before, but the crazy part is that while he was averaging an insane amount of points, his teams usually ranked near the bottom on offense.

1960 Warriors - Ranked 7th out of 8 on offense
1961 Warriors - Ranked 6th out of 8 on offense
1962 Warriors - Ranked 4th out of 9 on offense
1963 Warriors - Ranked 5th out of 9 on offense
1964 Warriors - Ranked 7th out of 9 on offense
1965 Warriors - Ranked last in offense before he got traded

You can blame the team he had around him in those years, but I have also mentioned how the Sixers offense didn't miss a beat when Wilt left them in 1968, Sixers won 55 games without Wilt and had a top 4 offense (out of 14 teams) in 1969 which was the same ranking they had in 1968 with Wilt. And the Lakers offense got WORSE when they added Wilt for the '69 season, their offense had better numbers in 1968 without him. How the hell do you get worse on offense by adding the most "dominant offensive player ever?" :lol

MJ on the other hand was a different story, The Bulls won 55 games without him in 1994, but as a team they dropped from having the #2 offense with MJ in '93 to being ranked #14 without him in 1994, significant drop, unlike Wilt who's teams didn't usually miss his offensive presence once he left, (ala Sixers). MJ had significantly had more offensive impact than Wilt if we go by the data. I've always said Wilt to me is the most overrated offensive player ever, when looking at the data his impact falls short.

[Spurs m8]

Jeez can someone give 87 a bodybag already....he is mutilated

[RRR3]

D-duh-uhhh-uhhh
Be quiet. The people with functioning frontal lobes are talking.

[1987_Lakers]

I got voted dumbest, lololololol

Your 21,690th post and it's still as uneventful, insightless, and unfunny as all of your other posts. Do you ever say anything funny or smart on here? You got destroyed by NBAGOAT and me when you tried to be "smart" earlier in this thread. The post I just provided above about MJ & Wilt at least has some good info in it and can be educational. You provide absolutely nothing to this forum. Rest in Piss.

[RRR3]

Your 21,690th post and it's still as uneventful, insightless, and unfunny as all of your other posts. Do you ever say anything funny or smart on here? You got destroyed by NBAGOAT and me when you tried to be "smart" earlier in this thread. The post I just provided above about MJ & Wilt at least has some good info in it and can be educational. You provide absolutely nothing to this forum. Rest in Piss.
He's too stupid to actually discuss basketball. Hence why he just resorts to one liners and insults. Seriously try to have a real NBA conversation with him-he can't do it.

[Full Court]

Not really, his scoring dipped a little, but he was still averaging over 31 ppg in his 1st 3 peat and close to 30 ppg in his 2nd 3 peat, he led the league in scoring every year he won a title.

Now compare that to Wilt... averaged 23 ppg from '66-'72 in the years he saw more team success, that is a HUGE drop off from the 40 ppg he was averaging in his first 6 seasons in the NBA while he didn't see much team success. I've said this before, but the crazy part is that while he was averaging an insane amount of points, his teams usually ranked near the bottom on offense.

1960 Warriors - Ranked 7th out of 8 on offense
1961 Warriors - Ranked 6th out of 8 on offense
1962 Warriors - Ranked 4th out of 9 on offense
1963 Warriors - Ranked 5th out of 9 on offense
1964 Warriors - Ranked 7th out of 9 on offense
1965 Warriors - Ranked last in offense before he got traded

You can blame the team he had around him in those years, but I have also mentioned how the Sixers offense didn't miss a beat when Wilt left them in 1968, Sixers won 55 games without Wilt and had a top 4 offense (out of 14 teams) in 1969 which was the same ranking they had in 1968 with Wilt. And the Lakers offense got WORSE when they added Wilt for the '69 season, their offense had better numbers in 1968 without him. How the hell do you get worse on offense by adding the most "dominant offensive player ever?" :lol

MJ on the other hand was a different story, The Bulls won 55 games without him in 1994, but as a team they dropped from having the #2 offense with MJ in '93 to being ranked #14 without him in 1994, significant drop, unlike Wilt who's teams didn't usually miss his offensive presence once he left, (ala Sixers). MJ had significantly had more offensive impact than Wilt if we go by the data. I've always said Wilt to me is the most overrated offensive player ever, when looking at the data his impact falls short.

This is another example of how you rely too much on raw stats. It is impossible to get a complete picture from stats. I recommend you read Sam Smith's book The Jordan Rules. In it, you'll find details about how Phil Jackson was able to get Jordan to get his teammates a lot more involved in the offense, which led to winning a lot more. Jordan still won scoring titles because he was the best scorer in the league and rightfully carried the most weight in the Bulls offense. Going from 36ppg a game down to 30 ppg may not seem like much from the raw numbers, but it made a significant impact to the way the Bulls played.

[Full Court]

Be quiet. The people with functioning frontal lobes are talking.

I'm curious. What hurts more, existence or the truth?

[1987_Lakers]

This is another example of how you rely too much on raw stats. It is impossible to get a complete picture from stats. I recommend you read Sam Smith's book The Jordan Rules. In it, you'll find details about how Phil Jackson was able to get Jordan to get his teammates a lot more involved in the offense, which led to winning a lot more. Jordan still won scoring titles because he was the best scorer in the league and rightfully carried the most weight in the Bulls offense. Going from 36ppg a game down to 30 ppg may not seem like much from the raw numbers, but it made a significant impact to the way the Bulls played.

i read Jordan Rules over a decade ago, one of the few things I remember about that book is how the Bulls were trying to add Danny Ainge in the offseason because he was one of the few players who would tell Jordan to piss off if he demanded the ball. Pippen, Grant, & MJ all measured their kids private parts to see which kid had the biggest diickk (sick stuff, lol).

But my point remains, going from 35 ppg in '88 to 31.5 ppg in '91 when the Bulls won their first chip isn't some significant drop, they tweaked things here and there, but Jordan was still the main scorer on that team. His drop in points isn't even close to the drop Wilt had when he started winning.

[Full Court]

i read Jordan Rules over a decade ago, one of the few things I remember about that book is how the Bulls were trying to add Danny Ainge in the offseason because he was one of the few players who would tell Jordan to piss off if he demanded the ball. Pippen, Grant, & MJ all measured their kids private parts to see which kid had the biggest diickk (sick stuff, lol).

But my point remains, going from 35 ppg in '88 to 31.5 ppg in '91 when the Bulls won their first chip isn't some significant drop, they tweaked things here and there, but Jordan was still the main scorer on that team. His drop in points isn't even close to the drop Wilt had when he started winning.

Yes, Wilt's drop was more drastic. But in both cases it's the same principle. Getting more of the team involved in the offense led to better success.

[1987_Lakers]

Yes, Wilt's drop was more drastic. But in both cases it's the same principle. Getting more of the team involved in the offense led to better success.

Which is exactly why I don't value Wilt's scoring seasons like some do. This is what Sports Illustrated said about Wilt during the 60's.

“But the tactical demands of using [Wilt] to his best advantage severely diminish his own team’s versatility and generally create morale problems among those who want the ball as much as he does.” - SI

If I relied too much on "raw stats" like you say I do, I would be drooling all over Wilt's amazing scoring seasons, sort of like you do. I just dig a little deeper about info than you do, all due respect.

[SATAN]

Which is exactly why I don't value Wilt's scoring seasons like some do. This is what Sports Illustrated said about Wilt during the 60's.

“But the tactical demands of using [Wilt] to his best advantage severely diminish his own team’s versatility and generally create morale problems among those who want the ball as much as he does.” - SI

If I relied too much on "raw stats" like you say I do, I would be drooling all over Wilt's amazing scoring seasons, sort of like you do. I just dig a little deeper about info than you do, all due respect.

He's obviously a casual, bro. Probably never even watched a game. He has two alts (Balless789 and cvck sucker m8). Just put them on ignore.

[Full Court]

He's obviously a casual, bro. Probably never even watched a game. He has two alts (Balless789 and cvck sucker m8). Just put them on ignore.

:lol

Keep showing off your low IQ there, Beezleblubber.

Your insight into ISH is right on par with your insight into basketball.

:lebroncry:

[Full Court]

Which is exactly why I don't value Wilt's scoring seasons like some do. This is what Sports Illustrated said about Wilt during the 60's.

“But the tactical demands of using [Wilt] to his best advantage severely diminish his own team’s versatility and generally create morale problems among those who want the ball as much as he does.” - SI

If I relied too much on "raw stats" like you say I do, I would be drooling all over Wilt's amazing scoring seasons, sort of like you do. I just dig a little deeper about info than you do, all due respect.

I do understand why you come to the conclusions you do, I just see it differently. Any "ball hog" is going to create morale problems. People playing basketball want participate, not watch someone else shoot over and over. However, 99.999% of players in NBA history could not have been as dominant as Wilt no matter how hard they tried. He's a unicorn, which is why he holds so many records. There have been plenty other ball hogs, and nobody's come CLOSE to doing what Wilt did.

[RRR3]

I do understand why you come to the conclusions you do, I just see it differently. Any "ball hog" is going to create morale problems. People playing basketball want participate, not watch someone else shoot over and over. However, 99.999% of players in NBA history could not have been as dominant as Wilt no matter how hard they tried. He's a unicorn, which is why he holds so many records. There have been plenty other ball hogs, and nobody's come CLOSE to doing what Wilt did.
Most coaches aren’t dumb enough to let someone hurt the offense like Wilt’s coach was. He literally gave you evidence of this.

[Full Court]

Most coaches aren’t dumb enough to let someone hurt the offense like Wilt’s coach was. He literally gave you evidence of this.

Sometimes coaches don't get listened to by stars. All they can do is bench said star if they have the balls to do so. I can't think of a single case where the star got benched. Usually the coach ends up getting fired.

[Spurs m8]

Sometimes coaches don't get listened to by stars. All they can do is bench said star if they have the balls to do so. I can't think of a single case where the star got benched. Usually the coach ends up getting fired.

LeBarry has never had a coach fired...

Oh wait

[Full Court]

LeBarry has never had a coach fired...

Oh wait

:lol

Has he fired more coaches than won rings?

[coastalmarker99]

Unlike the NBA MVP, the Sam Davis Award (an NBA MVP handed out by NY press) was awarded from the beginning of the NBA.


They also gave the 1962 MVP to Wilt, unlike the official award.


https://twitter.com/SportInfo247/status/1573789929536163841


The facts are that had the media been voting for the MVP award in the 1960s


That Wilt would have won at least three of them in his first five seasons.






1963-64 NBA MVP Writers Voting; Wilt Chamberlain Places First

Wilt - 253 points
Oscar - 225 points
Russell - 186 points
Pettit - 109 points
West - 108 points

(May 1, 1964)

[coastalmarker99]

Not really, his scoring dipped a little, but he was still averaging over 31 ppg in his 1st 3 peat and close to 30 ppg in his 2nd 3 peat, he led the league in scoring every year he won a title.

Now compare that to Wilt... averaged 23 ppg from '66-'72 in the years he saw more team success, that is a HUGE drop off from the 40 ppg he was averaging in his first 6 seasons in the NBA while he didn't see much team success. I've said this before, but the crazy part is that while he was averaging an insane amount of points, his teams usually ranked near the bottom on offense.

1960 Warriors - Ranked 7th out of 8 on offense
1961 Warriors - Ranked 6th out of 8 on offense
1962 Warriors - Ranked 4th out of 9 on offense
1963 Warriors - Ranked 5th out of 9 on offense
1964 Warriors - Ranked 7th out of 9 on offense
1965 Warriors - Ranked last in offense before he got traded

You can blame the team he had around him in those years, but I have also mentioned how the Sixers offense didn't miss a beat when Wilt left them in 1968, Sixers won 55 games without Wilt and had a top 4 offense (out of 14 teams) in 1969 which was the same ranking they had in 1968 with Wilt. And the Lakers offense got WORSE when they added Wilt for the '69 season, their offense had better numbers in 1968 without him. How the hell do you get worse on offense by adding the most "dominant offensive player ever?" :lol

MJ on the other hand was a different story, The Bulls won 55 games without him in 1994, but as a team they dropped from having the #2 offense with MJ in '93 to being ranked #14 without him in 1994, significant drop, unlike Wilt who's teams didn't usually miss his offensive presence once he left, (ala Sixers). MJ had significantly had more offensive impact than Wilt if we go by the data. I've always said Wilt to me is the most overrated offensive player ever, when looking at the data his impact falls short.


In 1964, Alex Hannum joins the team and convinces Wilt to implement a passing-based game which goes in the opposite direction of the way he had been coached up until this point. He listens to his coach, drops his FGA by 6 and begins converting those into assists. Yet, the offense under Hannum actually gets 2.2 points worse than in '63.

Yes, the 31-win 1963 Warriors had a higher ORtg than the '64 Hannum-lead team. So, Wilt increased his assists, began passing more and... the team performed worse offensively. Why is that? Because his teammates were worse. It had nothing to do with Wilt passing or scoring more, because either way was going to contribute. Looking over the roster, it becomes obvious that starting Nate Thurmond at PF as a rookie killed spacing and hurt their offense. One might also point out Wayne Hightower (-85.4 TS Add) getting more minutes and Gary Phillips (-105.1) getting worse.



If anything, Wilt posting a lower TS Added from passing out more was probably the biggest cause, he dropped his FGA and was giving more shots to bad offensive players (Rodgers, Thurmond, Hightower, Phillips, etc.) and it made their offense worse. Hannum arguably made a team with essentially the same roster worse by having Wilt shoot less.

1966
Lets move on to 1966--this year, Wilt averaged 5.2 assists, at the time a career high. It was good for 7th in the league and 20th per 36 (behind only Red Kerr for a C.) Wilt posted a 26 USG% (pre-78) and lead a 76er team that liked to share the ball in shots. He finished 8th in FGA per 36.


This Wilt isn't volume scoring Wilt. He is leading the team in shots, yes, but the team as a whole is sharing the shooting load and Wilt is leading the entire team in assists.

He is blending scoring and passing at this point.

Also, I just want to point out that this team had a total of 3 players that were positive in TS Added (Wilt, Chet Walker and Hal Greer--yes, that's it.)

[coastalmarker99]

How much did the 1963-64 San Francisco Warriors run offense through Wilt?

2nd half of Game 4 ‘64 NBA Finals:
Warriors - 47 possessions
Wilt - 15 post touches

Part of Game 5 ‘64 NBA Finals:
Warriors - 53 possessions
Wilt - 8 post touches!!!

Comparison:

2nd half of Game 1 ‘00 NBA Finals:
Lakers - 36 possessions
Shaq - 34 post touches

2nd half of Game 3 ‘80 NBA Finals:
Lakers - 41 possessions
Kareem - 23 post touches


It should give people some perspective about the myth of Wilt dominating the ball and making Warriors players stand and watch.

Wilt wasn't a ball-dominant player in his scoring days and if anything, I wonder whether he wasn't underutilized in playoffs.



In game 5 Guy Rodgers had 24 FGA to Wilt's 28, factor in the putbacks that Wilt was getting and it becomes clear why the numbers look the way they do. The team is getting out on the break after rebounds and basically ignoring using Wilt in the post--which is why Rodgers takes so many shots.


This essentially means that for game 5 (and 4) Rodgers was getting more usage in the halfcourt, considering a chunk of Wilt's shots were off his teammates misses.

It's also worth noting that in those 8 post touches Wilt had (I've tracked it myself):
8 points
4/5 FGA
3 pass outs for open shots that led to 4 points (2/3 shooting from teammates)

Even if Wilt was getting the ball more than what the film shows, it clearly wasn't enough for a player of his caliber, as both Shaq and Kareem were getting much higher touches in their samples.

The 53 possessions showing just 8 halfcourt post touches is kind of ridiculous and shouldn't have been that low with proper spacing and offensive structure.

[1987_Lakers]

In 1964, Alex Hannum joins the team and convinces Wilt to implement a passing-based game which goes in the opposite direction of the way he had been coached up until this point. He listens to his coach, drops his FGA by 6 and begins converting those into assists. Yet, the offense under Hannum actually gets 2.2 points worse than in '63.

5 apg in 1964 while playing 46 mpg translates to around 3 apg in today's league with someone playing around 36 mpg, which means '64 Wilt was dishing assists at the same rate as Joel Embiid, someone who isn't known as a playmaker for most of his career. If anything, his lower assist numbers from 1960-1963 should give you insight on just how much of a black hole he was early in his career.

In any event, in the 2 seasons Wilt averaged over 7.5 apg, his team's offense ranked #1 and #4 in 1967 and 1968, you completely ignore this fact.

But what I find fascinating is how the Sixers & Lakers didn't feel much loss/gain when Wilt left or joined their teams, in terms of offense. The '69 Sixers offense stayed the same in terms of efficiency when Wilt left them. The Lakers offense got WORSE when they added him for the '69 season. This is a point you didn't address.

[warriorfan]

If LeBron had Bird’s playoff resume he would get absolutely obliterated by some of the posters on here :lol

Imagine if LeBron averaged 15 ppg on 41% in the Finals, against a 40 win team, and had a guy who never even made an all-star game outscore him and win FMVP over him. That title would get trashed forever.

2011

[warriorfan]

5 apg in 1964 while playing 46 mpg translates to around 3 apg in today's league with someone playing around 36 mpg, which means '64 Wilt was dishing assists at the same rate as Joel Embiid, someone who isn't known as a playmaker for most of his career. If anything, his lower assist numbers from 1960-1963 should give you insight on just how much of a black hole he was early in his career.

In any event, in the 2 seasons Wilt averaged over 7.5 apg, his team's offense ranked #1 and #4 in 1967 and 1968, you completely ignore this fact.

But what I find fascinating is how the Sixers & Lakers didn't feel much loss/gain when Wilt left or joined their teams, in terms of offense. The '69 Sixers offense stayed the same in terms of efficiency when Wilt left them. The Lakers offense got WORSE when they added him for the '69 season. This is a point you didn't address.

you need to factor in that they are much more lenient with what is considered an assist today when compared to back then

[1987_Lakers]

2011

2016

[warriorfan]

2016

asterisk ring

[1987_Lakers]

you need to factor in that they are much more lenient with what is considered an assist today when compared to back then

That's a fair point, but averaging only 2.5 apg in your first 5 seasons with that amount of usage is still black hole level and you also have to keep in mind that by 1968, Wilt was a total assist chaser, typically having "Rondo" assists, so he could lead the NBA in assists, he was routinely passing up open shots just so he could get an assist, or just dumping it down to open cutters without putting pressure on the defense himself.

[warriorfan]

That's a fair point, but averaging only 2.5 apg in your first 5 seasons with that amount of usage is still black hole level and you also have to keep in mind that by 1968, Wilt was a total assist chaser, typically having "Rondo" assists, so he could lead the NBA in assists, he was routinely passing up open shots just so he could get an assist, or just dumping it down to open cutters without putting pressure on the defense himself.

He was just doing as he was coached to do, besides who should have he been dishing it too on that team instead of taking it to the hole himself?

Your narrative of wilt being a detrimental assist chaser….in 1968 they scored the most points in the league and had an SRS just under 8.0….

the data doesn’t align with your narrative

[1987_Lakers]

He was just doing as he was coached to do, besides who should have he been dishing it too on that team instead of taking it to the hole himself?

Your narrative of wilt being a detrimental assist chaser….in 1968 they scored the most points in the league and had an SRS just under 8.0….

the data doesn’t align with your narrative

And they scored the most points in 1969 WITHOUT him, why is that? It's a point that still hasn't been addressed.

This is a good example of Wilt's passing.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEj1OjjynPY

That's a weird way to get an assist, most players pressure the defense, drawing help defenders, then dish it out.

All I'm pointing out is that, while his teams usually did better when he took a lesser role as a scorer, he was never an elite passer despite what the assist numbers say in 1967 and 1968.

[1987_Lakers]

1968 Lakers without Wilt: 101.7 ORTG (#1 in the NBA)
1969 Lakers with Wilt: 98.5 ORTG (#2 in the NBA)

Again, still a very good offense with Wilt, but they regressed on that end despite adding the "most dominant offensive player ever". Stuff like that is why I don't hold Wilt in high regard compared to others. He was still an all-time great defender and an overall amazing talent, but the data suggests that his offensive numbers didn't always translate to great levels of overall impact.

[1987_Lakers]

Now look at this highlight of someone who never averaged more than 5 apg. Like Wilt, he didn't put tons of pressure as a scorer, but look how more fluid, less robotic, actually faces up at times to act as a scorer, and the superior court vision he has compared to him, yet Wilt averaged more assists with the Sixers, but I've never heard anyone say Wilt was a better passer, this shows even in the 60's when rules were more strict on what they counted as assists.... the numbers can still be misleading.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj2f96Zdv8A

[warriorfan]

And they scored the most points in 1969 WITHOUT him, why is that? It's a point that still hasn't been addressed.

This is a good example of Wilt's passing.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEj1OjjynPY

That's a weird way to get an assist, most players pressure the defense, drawing help defenders, then dish it out.

All I'm pointing out is that, while his teams usually did better when he took a lesser role as a scorer, he was never an elite passer despite what the assist numbers say in 1967 and 1968.

They gained offensive players and stopped playing defense, their SRS dropped from 8 to 5. You can find one or two highlights and claim he’s not an elite passer but the facts are he lead the league in assists with an elite offense.

[1987_Lakers]

They gained offensive players and stopped playing defense, their SRS dropped from 8 to 5. You can find one or two highlights and claim he’s not an elite passer but the facts are he lead the league in assists with an elite offense.

They gained offensive players? 5 of the 6 leading scorers on the Sixers in 1969 played with the Sixers in 1968. Of the 6 players, the guy who wasn't on the team in 1968 was Clark who averaged 13.5 ppg and he was their 5th leading scorer.

Their SRS dropped because of Wilt's great impact on the defensive end, which isn't the topic, we are strictly discussing offense and the Sixers so no drop off in that department when Wilt left.

Best thing to do is to stop replying, because your arguments are obviously flawed.

[HoopsNY]

1968 Lakers without Wilt: 101.7 ORTG (#1 in the NBA)
1969 Lakers with Wilt: 98.5 ORTG (#2 in the NBA)

Again, still a very good offense with Wilt, but they regressed on that end despite adding the "most dominant offensive player ever". Stuff like that is why I don't hold Wilt in high regard compared to others. He was still an all-time great defender and an overall amazing talent, but the data suggests that his offensive numbers didn't always translate to great levels of overall impact.

How about 1969 and 1970 as a comparison? Wilt missed almost all of the 1970 season and there was a considerable dropoff.

LAL '69: 2nd in ORTG
LAL '70: 8th in ORTG

I couldn't source the Warriors' ORTG with and without Wilt in 1965. But look at their first 38 games with him vs. their last 38 games without him, just as a sample:

w/Wilt: 108.5 PPG | 21.6 APG | 41.5% FG%

w/o Wilt: 102.8 PPG | 19.9 APG | 38.9 FG%

There seems to be quite a drop off without Wilt. One could also look at the 1966 season and see a slight overall improvement of the team, but then we'd have to remember that they drafted Rick Barry who put up 26 PPG in his rookie year.

[1987_Lakers]

How about 1969 and 1970 as a comparison? Wilt missed almost all of the 1970 season and there was a considerable dropoff.

LAL '69: 2nd in ORTG
LAL '70: 8th in ORTG


That's an interesting point, but you also have to keep in mind Elgin Baylor only played 54 games for them that year as well.

[1987_Lakers]

What's interesting to me is how bad they were on offense during the '69 postseason with Wilt, West, & Baylor all healthy. Only 104 ppg on 43 fg%. Out of the 8 postseason teams, they were in the middle of the pact offensively even though they had Wilt, West, & Baylor. An aging Celtics team was better offensively than the Lakers in the postseason.

From what I've read, Wilt & Baylor never really fit together.

[HoopsNY]

That's an interesting point, but you also have to keep in mind Elgin Baylor only played 54 games for them that year as well.

Yea that's the first thing that came to my mind but the numbers, at least PPG and FG% wise, were almost identical.

w/ Baylor '70: 113.8 PPG | 46.4% FG%

w/o Baylor '70: 113.6 PPG | 45.7% FG%

In addition, they had Happy Hairston for 55 games who filled in for Baylor. Take a look at what he did when Baylor wasn't playing:

Hairston '70 w/LAL: 22 games | 23/14/2 on 50%

He was almost an identical Baylor. The obvious common denominator here is Wilt. So I'm not sure how much of this really boils down to Wilt being an overrated playmaker and overall contributor towards an offense. The data seems to indicate otherwise, at least on more than one occasion.

[HoopsNY]

What's interesting to me is how bad they were on offense during the '69 postseason with Wilt, West, & Baylor all healthy. Only 104 ppg on 43 fg%. Out of the 8 postseason teams, they were in the middle of the pact offensively even though they had Wilt, West, & Baylor. An aging Celtics team was better offensively than the Lakers in the postseason.

From what I've read, Wilt & Baylor never really fit together.

Yet they won a title with Wilt and without Baylor. I think that says something, lol.

[1987_Lakers]

He was almost an identical Baylor. The obvious common denominator here is Wilt. So I'm not sure how much of this really boils down to Wilt being an overrated playmaker and overall contributor towards an offense. The data seems to indicate otherwise, at least on more than one occasion.

Along with my '69 Lakers & Sixers examples, when Wilt first joined the Warriors in his rookie year and dropped 38 ppg, he only improved their offense by 1 point per 100 possessions according to Ben Taylor. For constantly being labeled as the greatest or top 3 offensive GOAT, there is tons of data that says his offensive impact wasn't as great as people think.

We see teams fall apart offensively when MJ & LeBron leave, MJ for '94 and LeBron when he left the Cavs & Miami, the same can't be said about Wilt.

You also saw a huge improvement in the Bulls offense during MJ's rookie year, went from #22 in 1984 to #11 in 1985, Wilt joins the Warriors and they still rank near the bottom on the offensive end, and only see a tiny improvement. I'm not saying Wilt was a negative on the offensive end, because there is some data that says he was a plus, like the example you posted, but I expect much more from a player that is constantly labeled the offensive GOAT for big man.

[coastalmarker99]

The 76ers were incredibly successful with Wilt being a playmaker.

76er's record when Wilt has 7+ assists:

1965: 2-0

1966: 19-3

Total: 21-3

1967: 46-2

Total: 67-5

1968: 40-11

Total: 107-16

Playoffs: 15-5


The narrative of Wilt being a detrimental assist chaser is dumb as the 76ers would have easily won back-to-back titles if not for injuries

[coastalmarker99]

The 1970 Lakers made a 33-year-old Chamberlain the number 1 option until he tore his patella tendon.


In those 9 Games that Wilt went back to his Scoring days.

Wilt
32 PPG 21 RPG 3 APG
56.5 TS (+5.4 rTS)

Jerry West:
31 PPG 7 APG 3 RPG
64.3 TS (+13.2 rTS)

People forget that Van Breda Kolff was vehemently against the trade that brought Chamberlain to the Lakers, to begin with and that from day one he hated Wilt.

Now, when a team brings in the GOAT low-post center of all-time, you would want them to utilize him in that fashion, wouldn't you?



Chamberlain: "Butch wanted me to play the high post so Elgin could drive to the basket, but they got me for rebounding.

Why pull a guy away from the basket when you want him to rebound?"

And here is one of my personal all-time favourites from Van Breda Kolff...

Butch Van Breda Kolff: "Not having enough basketballs wasn't the problem at all for us.

The trade changed our chemistry. Elgin's favourite move was the drive from the left-wing and into the middle.

Now, when he did that, he ran into Wilt, and Wilt's man.

Wilt took that move away from Elgin.

Imhoff loved to pick-and-roll with Elgin, but that wasn't something Wilt did very well.

So we were able to throw the ball down low to Wilt and he'd score but it was an awful offence to watch.

When the ball stops moving, then guys don't rebound or play defense as well as they normally would."

So, VBK decided that instead of getting the ball down low and into Chamberlain, where he would score that he preferred Baylor to roam the baseline and get his offence.

So therefore in the playoffs, Wilt was basically just setting screens for Baylor...who would be the worst shooter on the entire team in the post-season (.38.5.)

Not only that, but in three of the Lakers' Finals losses, by margins of 6,1, and 2 points...

Baylor shot 4-18, 2-14, and 8-22 from the field.

[coastalmarker99]

There's a reason why Baylor is 0 and 8 in the NBA finals as he usually played terrible in those game sevens against the Celtics which were very winnable games had he played better.

In 1962 he shot 13 out of 40 from the field in an overtime game seven loss while West was 14 out of 30.

In 1966 he shot 6 out of 22 from the field in a two-point loss while West was 12 out of 27.

in 1969 he shot 8 out of 22 from the field in a two-point loss while West was 14 out of 29 and Wilt was 7 out of 8.

It's funny that the more I read and watch footage about him the more selfish of a player he seems.

Down below is a game in which Baylor's selfish nature as a player shines through most to me.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/196811220LAL.html


3/27 is insane at that point just stop passing him the ball.


Meanwhile, Wilt was seven out of ten from the field in that game.

[1987_Lakers]

The narrative of Wilt being a detrimental assist chaser is dumb as the 76ers would have easily won back-to-back titles if not for injuries

You should know better than anyone that Wilt was a stat whore, I know you are a big Wilt fan so I can see you having trouble being unbiased with this subject, but come on bro.

This is what Bill Libby wrote on this topic in his 1977 biography on Wilt called ‘Goliath’:

“A couple of times, he went to a teammate with a hot hand and told him he was going to give him the ball exclusively because the other guys were wasting his passes and he wouldn’t win the assists title that way.”

https://thesportsrush.com/nba-news-wilt-chamberlain-wouldnt-pass-to-players-who-wasted-his-time-goliath-writer-claimed-warriors-legend-would-only-pass-to-players-with-a-hot-hand-for-assist/