Wilt Chamberlain discussion

[QUOTE=Younggrease]and he would be correct.[/QUOTE]

That's funny. He's going to score 25% more then his best season playing 30% fewer possessions and fewer minutes? Logic is a ***** huh.

List of bigmen I would take over wilt:
Shaq
Hakeem
Kareem
Mose Malone
Karl Malone
Barkley
Tim Duncan

[QUOTE=Niquesports]Voters for the 50 Greatest Players in NBA History

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (player), Marv Albert (media), Al Attles (team), Red Auerbach (team), Elgin Baylor (team), Dave Bing (player), Larry Bird (team), Marty Blake (team), Fran Blinebury (media), Bill Bradley (player), Hubie Brown (team), Wilt Chamberlain (player), Mitch Chortkoff (media), Bob Cousy (player), Billy Cunningham (team), Chuck Daly (team), David DuPree (media), Wayne Embry (team), Julius Erving (player), Joe Gilmartin (media), Sam Goldaper (media), Alex Hannum (team), Lester Harrison (team), John Havlicek (player), Chick Hearn (media), Red Holzman (team), Phil Jasner (media), Earvin Johnson (player), John Kerr (player), Leonard Koppet (media), Bob Lanier (player), Frank Layden (team), Leonard Lewin (media), Jack McCallum (media), Dick McGuire (team), George Mikan (player), Bob Pettit (player), Harvey Pollack (team), Jack Ramsay (team), Willis Reed (team), Oscar Robertson (player), Bill Russell (player), Bob Ryan (media), Dolph Schayes (player), Bill Sharman (player), Gene Shue (team), Isiah Thomas (team), Wes Unseld (team), Peter Vecsey (media), Jerry West (team)


Kareem
Moses
Wilt
Russ
Pettit
Cowens
Reed
DeBusschere
Thurmond
Unseld
Hayes
Walton
Lucas

These players from the 60's and 70's were pick by the above I guess they dont agree with you that the NBA was full of "scurbs" in the 60's and 70's but Im sure you know more about basketball than these nobodies[/QUOTE]

Um, being a 'great' player is done by being great compared to your peers. You have no point. Find me Greg Ostertag riding the pine in the 60's. If someone of Ostertag's caliber was in the 60's you'd have just listed him for me. Next.

[QUOTE=zay_24]List of bigmen I would take over wilt:
Shaq
Hakeem
Kareem
Mose Malone
Karl Malone
Barkley
Tim Duncan[/QUOTE]

I think I would add Howard/Robinson/prime Webber too.

[QUOTE=indiefan23]I think I would add Howard/Robinson/prime Webber too.[/QUOTE]
Good Idea, I forgot about Robinson, But wilt fanboys would start crying if somone would take Webber over Wilt.

[QUOTE=Simple Jack]That's not how you make a point dude. If I find a single ex-nba player, preferably a great, saying something outlandish and stupid, I can claim it as truth because he played in the NBA and none of us did?

Regardless, these players' greatness should be examined not how they would do across eras, but how they played within their own.[/QUOTE]

I totally agree. Does Jerry West deserve to be in the hall of fame even though he couldn't hang with some of today's players? Absolutely: the guy was great and the reason so many players today are great.

I just think its silly how some people get carried away and think the talent of the guy they watched 50 years ago is comparable to today when the game has grown so much. If you were to insert West into last year's draft I wonder what round he goes in. The longer this thread goes on the list of things you have to ignore to maintain that belief gets.

[QUOTE=zay_24]Good Idea, I forgot about Robinson, But wilt fanboys would start crying if somone would take Webber over Wilt.[/QUOTE]

Webber in his prime was an absolute monster. His game was so polished and he was so athletic/mobile. He'd kill Wilt. I mean, they seem to have this notion that Wilt's athleticism is comparable to today and list all these stats from when Wilt trained specifically for track and weighed nothing soaking wet. If Webber didn't hurt his knee he would be considered an all time super great.

A big part of the issue people don't mention either is the lack of stats to base comparisons on. As a fan its way too easy to look at film of your favorite player myopically and happen to not see their poor lateral movement of small vertical. Today all that stuff is measured but when you go back its all anecdotal. Wilt is more then he was. He arm wrestled strong men. Benched 600 pounds. Had a 50+ inch vertical and slept with 20,000 women. Today he would score 70 points a game.

Another part of this is look at those injuries. Wilt/Kareem/Russell really didn't have a serious injury when they played for the vast majority of their careers. Wilt hurt his knee but the league's more forgiving margin of error didn't really punish him for it much. Russel and Kareem didn't get hurt in a combined 36 years of play. I just don't see careers like that anymore cuz the demands put on your body and what you have to put out to win is so much greater.

[QUOTE=Psileas]19 of the 257 actually that he played between the seasons 1969-72, when he faced solely Hayes. And another 4 of 82 in '73, when he faced the combined duo of Hayes-Unseld.[/QUOTE]

I thought I was being nice. So you want to include more seasons when the comp was even weaker?

[QUOTE=indiefan23]I thought I was being nice. So you want to include more seasons when the comp was even weaker?[/QUOTE]

Are you a retard? You told me the 60's were better than the 70's due to the ABA?

Now the 60's are inferior to the 70's ?Make your point:confusedshrug: .I can quote you.

[QUOTE=indiefan23]
- Most of that era's players actually played with soccer balls

[/QUOTE]

Wut?

This is when they are playing soccer for kicks between basketball games? Or ... what? Huffing paint? Did players do that back then? Please help me understand, because I am pretty much sure you hyperspaced right then.

[QUOTE=indiefan23]...

You're a serious poster? Explain to me how in the 40's when that era started playing basketball (with soccer balls) the world populat...[/QUOTE]


You're a serious poster? Explain WTF you are talking about with this soccer ball silliness.

40's ball.
[url]http://www.antiqueathlete.com/vintage-basketball-memorabilia.shtml[/url]
[IMG]http://www.antiqueathlete.com/antique-basketball/leather-basketball-laceless.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=indiefan23]Um, being a 'great' player is done by being great compared to your peers. You have no point. Find me Greg Ostertag riding the pine in the 60's. If someone of Ostertag's caliber was in the 60's you'd have just listed him for me. Next.[/QUOTE]


Too bad others dont agree IF Greg played today he be the second best Center behind Howard.

Chamberlame was an unathletic stiff who would get merked the f*ck out by today's centers. Yao, Howard, Shaq and even Bogut, Okafor etc would be way too much for him to handle due to their superior size, strength and skills.

I only read about half of this thread, but all I saw was the Wilt supporters posting list after list of statistics trying to prove that he'd be a star in today's league while ignoring every video of him actually playing.

Watch the videos. Basketball today isn't even comparable to basketball from the 60s and 70s. The game has improved so much that they look like different sports.

[QUOTE=32jazz]Are you a retard? You told me the 60's were better than the 70's due to the ABA?

Now the 60's are inferior to the 70's ?Make your point:confusedshrug: .I can quote you.[/QUOTE]

Sure quote me.

He pointed out that the talent was weakerwas that it was waeker. I think the ABA made the 70's weaker but the ABA was around for 3 years of the 60's as well and that overlaps that time. Did the ABA's success in the late 60's .5 of the 70's offset the development in player's skills? I'm not sure 100% which weakness was greater to be honest. In the 60's people had no athleticism but in the 70's half the good players/teams in the world never played eachother cuz they were in two separate watered down leagues. I think both eras are a crap shoot of competition for various reasons.

Maybe instead of nit picking, nay saying and making excuses you should actually acknowledge that I've made a wack, and I mean a whole bunch, of absolutely solid points. Focusing only on nit picks only shows how little you have to stand on. This is a forum, not a thesis dissertation.