[QUOTE=Samurai Swoosh]
You think if that were the case though, he'd have Pippen way higher too.[/QUOTE]
You consider Pipp a stat buffer?
Printable View
[QUOTE=Samurai Swoosh]
You think if that were the case though, he'd have Pippen way higher too.[/QUOTE]
You consider Pipp a stat buffer?
[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Somewhere in the top 11-15 range. Probably 12. I might put Mikan 11 ignoring the fact that I doubt he could compete in later eras and just including him because his play vs his peers would make him top 10 and how much he changed the game.[/QUOTE]
Well I just wondered because everything I've read said Oscar was pretty consistently better in their best years, and statistically it's true too. So I don't really get why you think it's so terrible to have Oscar borderline top 10.
Of course I've only watched like 3 games of oscar, so it's not really a fair assessment.
[QUOTE=catch24]You consider Pipp a stat buffer?[/QUOTE]
No, but he filled a lot of stat columns. I legit believe LeBron is a fluffer of his stats. Oscar probably was too. He wasn't a winner, either.
[QUOTE=magnax1]Well I just wondered because everything I've read said Oscar was pretty consistently better in their best years, and statistically it's true too. So I don't really get why you think it's so terrible to have Oscar borderline top 10.
Of course I've only watched like 3 games of oscar, so it's not really a fair assessment.[/QUOTE]
Because he never won till he piggy backed Lou Alcindor
[QUOTE=magnax1]Well I just wondered because everything I've read said Oscar was pretty consistently better in their best years, and statistically it's true too. So I don't really get why you think it's so terrible to have Oscar borderline top 10.
Of course I've only watched like 3 games of oscar, so it's not really a fair assessment.[/QUOTE]
Oscar won a total of 2 playoff series when he was the man, I believe and thats around a decade...with just 2 playoff series wins.
West was at least contending every year, won a title as arguably the best player(or certainly closer to Wilt than Oscar was to Kareem), would have won in '69 had Wilt and Baylor showed up at all, and this is legit considering West won finals MVP on the losing team in a close 7 game series.
[QUOTE=Samurai Swoosh]No, but he filled a lot of stat columns. I legit believe LeBron is a fluffer of his stats. Oscar probably was too. He wasn't a winner, either.[/QUOTE]
Pretty much the way I look at it too. While I believe James' is a beast and one of the greatest players in the world, watching his games, especially in those Finals, was like watching a role player going through the motions... After the game you look at the statsheet/boxscores and see the guy actually had a triple double :oldlol:
The guy had no f'ing impact when it mattered most.
You can definitely make the case of Dream over Shaq. Lmao at how Oscar, K. Malone, Petit, DROB, Barkley, and Dr. are all ranked over Kobe.
[QUOTE=catch24]Pretty much the way I look at it too. While I believe James' is a beast and one of the greatest players in the world, watching his games, especially in those Finals, was like watching a role player going through the motions... After the game you look at the statsheet/boxscores and see the guy had actually had a triple double :oldlol:
The guy had no f'ing impact when it mattered most.[/QUOTE]
Exactly.
And his stans will run and tell you "OMG ... zoiks ... he had a triple dub in the Finals !!!"
Really?
Because I didn't read the box score, I watched the game ... and he had LITTLE to NO impact on the game.
[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Oscar won a total of 2 playoff series when he was the man, I believe and thats around a decade...with just 2 playoff series wins.
West was at least contending every year, won a title as arguably the best player(or certainly closer to Wilt than Oscar was to Kareem), would have won in '69 had Wilt and Baylor showed up at all, and this is legit considering West won finals MVP on the losing team in a close 7 game series.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but West had Elgin Baylor who was better then him for quite a bit of their careers so it's not exactly fair to compare them like that.
And winning 2 playoff series doesn't mean much, especially when there were only 2 or three rounds in the playoffs for most of his career.
[QUOTE=catch24]Pretty much the way I look at it too. While I believe James' is a beast and one of the greatest players in the world, watching his games, especially in those Finals, was like watching a role player going through the motions... After the game you look at the statsheet/boxscores and see the guy actually had a triple double :oldlol:
The guy had no f'ing impact when it mattered most.[/QUOTE]
Actually, it's funny because he had what you'd think was a monster triple double in game 6 vs Boston last year(27/19/10), but when I was watching that game, I never thought he was having a good game. I've seen people cite that statline since then as Lebron showing up, but to me when they do that, it's clear that they didn't watch the game. And it's funny that they'll cite the stats that make it look positive, but overlook the 9 turnovers or 8/21 shooting.
[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234][B]Oscar won a total of 2 playoff series when he was the man[/B], I believe and thats around a decade...with just 2 playoff series wins.
West was at least contending every year, won a title as arguably the best player(or certainly closer to Wilt than Oscar was to Kareem), [B]would have won in '69 had Wilt[/B] and Baylor [B]showed up at all[/B], and this is legit considering West won finals MVP on the losing team in a close 7 game series.[/QUOTE]
:oldlol: :bowdown:
That 2010 series still baffles me to the day. You just recover the homecourt advantageby shredding the Celtics D with a dominant 38 point game 3; then, you just stop playing and dish out 3 lackluster efforts in a row. He had 9 turnovers in game 6, but people tend to forge that he turned the ball over 7 times in game 4. I also believe that four of them came in the critical fourth quarter where the game and the 3-1 series lead was for the taking...just head-scratching
ShaqAttack are you positive Wilt didn't actually DOMINATE Russell on the boards 83-16 in the first half, while OUTSCORING him 22-6?
[QUOTE=Bring-Your-Js]ShaqAttack are you positive Wilt didn't actually DOMINATE Russell on the [B]boards 83-16 in the first half, [/B]while OUTSCORING him 22-6?[/QUOTE]
I'm hoping you typo'd
Or Wilt is the GOAT.
[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Actually, it's funny because he had what you'd think was a monster triple double in game 6 vs Boston last year(27/19/10), but when I was watching that game, I never thought he was having a good game. I've seen people cite that statline since then as Lebron showing up, but to me when they do that, it's clear that they didn't watch the game. And it's funny that they'll cite the stats that make it look positive, but overlook the 9 turnovers or 8/21 shooting.[/QUOTE]
27/19/10? Damn.. I knew he had a TD, but not almost a 20/20 game :oldlol:
But yeah, thought the same thing last year as well. Crazy thing about it is, LeBron is the only player I feel that way about. Like his stats don't necessarily match whats happening.
You're watching, but your eyes just don't see it.
[QUOTE=catch24]
You're watching, but your eyes just don't see it.[/QUOTE]
It's always been about context, dude
[QUOTE=Samurai Swoosh]It's always been about context, dude[/QUOTE]
True, good point. I don't know guys, maybe its just me though? I'm probably not watching the aspects of the game I should be.
[QUOTE=catch24]True, good point. I don't know guys, maybe its just me though? I'm probably not watching the aspects of the game I should be.[/QUOTE]
No ... you are ... that's why you feel its awkward when you see the fluffed up stats at the end.
He's like the kid who writes a 1/2 page paper, but the minimum requirement is 2 pages at least.
So he "fluffs" it up ... says the same thing over and over in different ways with no new legitimate and strong information added to the paper.
And at the end, it's two pages.
:oldlol:
That's a very biased list right there.
No one should take that clown seriously.
Kobe is a legit top 10 right now. Wade can go ahead of LeBron. Dirk just one spot behind Kobe? Ok. Bill Russell and Wilt should swap spots. Tim Shaq and Kobe all have legit cases over Oscar.
........
[COLOR="Black"]Just a really F[/COLOR]ucked up list in general.
[QUOTE=catch24]Like his stats don't necessarily match whats happening.
You're watching, but your eyes just don't see it.[/QUOTE]
Kevin Love in a nutshell :lol
[QUOTE=Samurai Swoosh]No ... you are ... that's why you feel its awkward when you see the fluffed up stats at the end.
He's like the kid who writes a 1/2 page paper, but the minimum requirement is 2 pages at least.
So he "fluffs" it up ... says the same thing over and over in different ways with no new legitimate and strong information added to the paper.
And at the end, it's two pages.
:oldlol:[/QUOTE]
Well, at least I'm not the only one :lol :applause:
I think that's his list from last year, he said that he would move Kobe up, I forgot at what position, but significantly I think, if he had won the Finals this year. But considering Kobe's getting sweepead, Bruceblitz probably dropped him a few spots.
Who the fukk is Bruce Blitz
[QUOTE=Samurai Swoosh]You don't take exception with Oscar being in the top ten?[/QUOTE]
The underrating of Oscar Robertson here is flat out nonsense, as NOBODY here with the exception of like one or two people here ever SAW him actualy play. I never saw him either, or Wilt, Russell, etc., so I can only go by what older folks say and they swear by Oscar.
Sure all the ISH stathounds will say, "He only has one title as a sidekick, never as the man, empty stats, blah, blah, blah..."
But, Ill take these guys words who played against/coached against, etc. (Havlichek, Auerbach, Chuck Daly, Satch Sanders, Jerry West; pretty great basketball minds...)
Watch below from 1:15-2:00.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4piRZ8_7GY[/url]
And West adds a "Period."
As far as Blitz's list, I would switch Hakeem and Shaq, and also Kobe and The Mailman...but other than that, it's not bad at all really...everybody's will always be slightly different...
[QUOTE=BIZARRO]The underrating of Oscar Robertson here is flat out nonsense, as NOBODY here with the exception of like one or two people here ever SAW him actualy play. I never saw him either, or Wilt, Russell, etc., so I can only go by what older folks say and they swear by Oscar.
Sure all the ISH stathounds will say, "He only has one title as a sidekick, never as the man, empty stats, blah, blah, blah..."
But, Ill take these guys words who played against/coached against, etc. (Havlichek, Auerbach, Chuck Daly, Satch Sanders, Jerry West; pretty great basketball minds...)
Watch below from 1:15-2:00.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4piRZ8_7GY[/url]
And West adds a "Period."
As far as Blitz's list, I would switch Hakeem and Shaq, and also Kobe and The Mailman...but other than that, it's not bad at all really...everybody's will always be slightly different...[/QUOTE]
**** outta here, please. John Wooden said Kobe is the GOAT; he's seen more basketball than anybody else on here combined and probably knows it better than anyone else too. You agree with that opinion? How about Jerry West saying LeBron surpassed Kobe in 09 and then going on to say Kobe is better (as well as being the GOAT Laker). Players/coaches say lots of stuff in the heat of the moment, for a reaction (looking at Shaq and Barkley) and end up contradicting themselves. Their opinions don't mean much since there's so many biases involved.
[QUOTE=NugzHeat3]**** outta here, please. John Wooden said Kobe is the GOAT; he's seen more basketball than anybody else on here combined and probably knows it better than anyone else too. You agree with that opinion? How about Jerry West saying LeBron surpassed Kobe in 09 and then going on to say Kobe is better (as well as being the GOAT Laker). Players/coaches say lots of stuff in the heat of the moment, for a reaction (looking at Shaq and Barkley) and end up contradicting themselves. Their opinions don't mean much since there's so many biases involved.[/QUOTE]
Sorry man, when West says "He's the greatest player I ever played against, period." It means something.
I'm not saying he is THE greatest. Neither of us know that. I'm just saying to take exception to Oscar being in the top ten is just off. He may not even be in the top ten for all we know. But to take exception to someone saying it is nonsense, considering no one here saw him play, and because so many of these older guys speak EXTRAORDINARILY highly of him as THE best from back then.
Chuck Daly's comments in particular mean something as that guy is nails.
Why not just place kobe at #38 or somethign like that. Not like your agenda isn't already blantaly obvious.
Bruce Blitz Fails (Once again)
[QUOTE=BIZARRO]Sorry man, when West says "He's the greatest player I ever played against, period." It means something.
I'm not saying he is THE greatest. Neither of us know that. I'm just saying to take exception to Oscar being in the top ten is just off. He may not even be in the top ten for all we know. But to take exception to someone saying it is nonsense, considering no one here saw him play, and because so many of these older guys speak EXTRAORDINARILY highly of him as THE best from back then.
Chuck Daly's comments in particular mean something as that guy is nails.[/QUOTE]
Jerry West has also said Wilt is the greatest player ever.
[QUOTE]"You just don't think things like this are going to happen to people of his stature," echoed Jerry West, the Lakers executive who played against Chamberlain for many years, then with him on the great '72 Lakers squad.
"He was the most unbelievable center to ever play the game in terms of domination and intimidation. [b]There's no one that's ever played the game better than Wilt Chamberlain. This was a man for all ages." [/b]
[/QUOTE]
So, which quote do you believe? Does that not nullify the statement he made about Robertson? Not the only time West has contradicted himself. See his statements about LeBron and Kobe.
Point being everything these coaches, players ect say is probably meant to be taken with a grain of salt. You want to say Oscar is great, use something else to back it up. I really don't care where Oscar is ranked to be honest. I think it's stupid to use the quote game. Players within Oscar's era are naturally going to prop him up since they're still stuck back in the day and can't give credit to future generations.
:roll: :roll: at Oscar over Shaq and TD. And another:oldlol: for Wilt over Magic and Bird.
How were these rankings done?
Why is Neil Johnston at #35?
[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]How were these rankings done?
Why is Neil Johnston at #35?[/QUOTE]
here is the explanation
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxPOVVX9j4M&list=PL4D8A54BB645AA946[/url]
[QUOTE=brownmamba00]:roll: :roll: at Oscar over Shaq and TD. And another:oldlol: for Wilt over Magic and Bird.[/QUOTE]
Larry Bird wasn't afraid to fight folks.
[QUOTE=Samurai Swoosh]No ... you are ... that's why you feel its awkward when you see the fluffed up stats at the end.
He's like the kid who writes a 1/2 page paper, but the minimum requirement is 2 pages at least.
So he "fluffs" it up ... says the same thing over and over in different ways with no new legitimate and strong information added to the paper.
And at the end, it's two pages.[/QUOTE]
His rebounding average has always been overrated. He's the king of cleaning up easy rebounds on the defensive glass. His offensive rebound numbers (the rebounds you actually have to fight for) have always been pathetic. Rose had more offensive rebounds than him this season, same with Westbrook, Rondo etc etc...fukk Steve Nash in his prime was almost getting as many as LeBron does. Took the dude over two freaking weeks to grab his first offensive rebound this season.
[QUOTE=Fatal9]His rebounding average has always been overrated. He's the king of cleaning up easy rebounds on the defensive glass. His offensive rebound numbers (the rebounds you actually have to fight for) have always been pathetic. Rose had more offensive rebounds than him this season, same with Westbrook, Rondo etc etc...fukk Steve Nash in his prime was almost getting as many as LeBron does. Took the dude over two freaking weeks to grab his first offensive rebound this season.[/QUOTE]
Actually, I remember thinking he was padding his rebounding numbers during game 6 vs Boston in 2010 in particular. Haven't seen the game since, but I'll have to keep more of an eye on that next time I watch that game.
Lebron isn't as good at rebounding as the stats suggest but saying you don't have to fight for defensive rebounds is kind of stupid.
For a significant number of defensive rebounds, there are multiple defensive players present for the rebound (could get the rebound), while the offense has already cleared out to cut off the fast break. These rebounds do not show value or skill to the player who gets them, but are rather a random/confounding variable. For some teams, their center will grab such "garbage" rebounds. For other teams, maybe the PG will grab them himself (I see OKC and Russel Westbrook do this, or Kidd with the Nets).
[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Oscar won a total of 2 playoff series when he was the man, I believe and thats around a decade...with just 2 playoff series wins.
West was at least contending every year, won a title as arguably the best player(or certainly closer to Wilt than Oscar was to Kareem), [B]would have won in '69 had Wilt and Baylor showed up at all, and this is legit considering West won finals MVP on the losing team in a close 7 game series[/B].[/QUOTE]
Let's examine this a little closer, shall we? First of all, the Lakers were ONE PLAY away from running away with that series, 4 games to 1. Johnny Egan's gaffe at the end of game four prevented LA from winning that game, and then after Wilt CRUSHED Russell in game five (outscoring him and outrebounding him by a 31-13 margin), the Lakers would have won that series, 4-1. Of course the REAL REASON why the Lakers lost that Finals was because of INCOMPETENT coaching. Why was Wilt on the bench in the last five minutes of that game seven? And why was Mel f*****g Counts playing in those last five minutes ( he would miss a couple of shots down the stretch, and wound up 4-13 from the floor)? BTW, it was WEST with a couple of turnovers in those final five minutes, too. Of course, Baylor was nowhere to be found in games three thru five (a COMBINED 24 points), two of the losses. And another example of idiotic coaching...how about early in the 4th quarter of that game seven...when the Lakers passed the ball into Chamberlain, and he went right around a defenseless Russell, who was saddled with five fouls, for an easy finger-roll. Guess what, ...Wilt did not get another pass near the rim the rest of the game. Even a below-average coach would have force-fed the ball into Wilt's hands the rest of the game. Not the truly bumbling Van Breda Kolf, who did everything in his power to PREVENT Wilt from dominating in the Finals. In any case, Wilt outscored and outrebounded Russell in that series (as he always did), and he most certainly outshot him, (although we don't have the numbers...Wilt shot .545 in the playoffs, while Russell shot .423.) And how about that game seven again? Russell, in 48 minutes, scored SIX points, on 2-7 shooting, with 21 rebounds. In his 43 minutes, Chamberlain scored 18 points, on 7-8 shooting, with 27 rebounds. Oh, and BTW...ANOTHER example of truly horrid COACHING? While Van Breda Kolf schackled Wilt on offense, he gave Baylor the green light. How did that work out? Baylor shot .385 in the post-season, while Chamberlain shot .545.
And while West deserves a ranking in the top-15, he should be FAR behind Wilt. Why? Ok, ShaqAttack blames WILT for losing the '69 Finals. How about West in the '70 Finals? In game seven, Wilt was the ONLY Laker who showed up. Meanwhile West was murdered by Frazier, and the game was over by halftime.
BTW, Wilt PLAYED in the '70 Finals, despite being four months removed from major knee surgery. Why is that important? Because West MISSED the '71 playoffs (as did Baylor), while a well-past his prime Wilt battled a prime Kareem to a draw in the '71 WCF's.
Of course, how about the '72 post-season? While West was mired in the worst shooting slump of his career (.376 in the playoffs), Wilt outplayed a prime Kareem, and then dominated the Knicks in the Finals (including a clinching game five performance with one badly sprained wrist, and the other FRACTURED), in which Chamberlain won the FINALS MVP.
And in Wilt's last Finals, in 72-73, West was again awful, while Wilt did all he could, including his very last game of his career, in which he scored 23 points with 21 rebounds.
In Wilt's five seasons in LA, the Lakers went to the Finals in FOUR of them, and had West (and Baylor) not missed the '71 post-season, it probably would have been 5-5. BEFORE Wilt, the Lakers best record in LA was 52-30. With Wilt, they went 55-27, then he missed nearly all of '70, and they only went 46-36. Meanwhile Baylor missed all but two games in '71, and West missed the entire last third of the season, and LA still went 48-34 with Chamberlain. In '72 they went 69-13 (with an overwhelming title), and in Wilt's last season in LA, they went 60-22 (and yet another Finals.) AFTER Wilt, they fell to 47-35, and a first round playoff sweeping loss.)
So, yes, West is a top-15 player, but he is WAY behind Chamberlain.
[QUOTE=SAKOTXA]Hakeem being greater than Shaq is also laughable.
Oscar greater than Shaq and Duncan? :facepalm[/QUOTE]
All of these things are at least debatable. Shaq was slightly more dominant offensively, but Hakeem was much more impactful defensively and he also never played on near the caliber of teams Shaq did. Even once he got Drexler past prime(though still a stud), his teams were pretty average. Similar to the Lebron Cavs teams, the Iverson Philly teams or the Tim Duncan Spurs for title #2. They were even worse in the first few years of his career. So you can't really use rings against him. He took worse teams to multiple rings.
[QUOTE]Of course the REAL REASON why the Lakers lost that Finals was because of INCOMPETENT coaching. [/QUOTE]
Besides G5 of the Finals when Butch inexplicably left West in at the end of a decided game to badly injure a hamstring (could not effectively guard Sam Jones anymore, who went wild), there was the infamous G7.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/5ehUt.jpg[/img]
[i]'After Van Breda Kolff was gone, Chamberlain criticized his heavy drinking, his penchant for conducting farting contests, and his failure to prepare for games.'[/i]
[B]Tall Tales: The Glory Years of the NBA[/B] - Terry Pluto
[b]Earl Strom[/b]: [i]In a sense, I respect Butch for making one of the dumbest moves any coach has ever made. [/i]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/Jv97n.png[/IMG]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilt_Chamberlain[/url]
[i]Game 7 featured a surreal scene: in anticipation of a Lakers win, Lakers owner Jack Kent Cooke had put up thousands of balloons in the rafters of the Forum in Los Angeles. This display of arrogance motivated the Celtics and angered Jerry West.[75] In that match, Chamberlain experienced his second Game 7 debacle. The Lakers trailed by 76
[QUOTE=jlauber]Let's examine this a little closer, shall we? First of all, the Lakers were ONE PLAY away from running away with that series, 4 games to 1. Johnny Egan's gaffe at the end of game four prevented LA from winning that game, and then after Wilt CRUSHED Russell in game five (outscoring him and outrebounding him by a 31-13 margin), the Lakers would have won that series, 4-1. Of course the REAL REASON why the Lakers lost that Finals was because of INCOMPETENT coaching. Why was Wilt on the bench in the last five minutes of that game seven? And why was Mel f*****g Counts playing in those last five minutes ( he would miss a couple of shots down the stretch, and wound up 4-13 from the floor)? BTW, it was WEST with a couple of turnovers in those final five minutes, too. Of course, Baylor was nowhere to be found in games three thru five (a COMBINED 24 points), two of the losses. And another example of idiotic coaching...how about early in the 4th quarter of that game seven...when the Lakers passed the ball into Chamberlain, and he went right around a defenseless Russell, who was saddled with five fouls, for an easy finger-roll. Guess what, ...Wilt did not get another pass near the rim the rest of the game. Even a below-average coach would have force-fed the ball into Wilt's hands the rest of the game. Not the truly bumbling Van Breda Kolf, who did everything in his power to PREVENT Wilt from dominating in the Finals. In any case, Wilt outscored and outrebounded Russell in that series (as he always did), and he most certainly outshot him, (although we don't have the numbers...Wilt shot .545 in the playoffs, while Russell shot .423.) And how about that game seven again? Russell, in 48 minutes, scored SIX points, on 2-7 shooting, with 21 rebounds. In his 43 minutes, Chamberlain scored 18 points, on 7-8 shooting, with 27 rebounds. Oh, and BTW...ANOTHER example of truly horrid COACHING? While Van Breda Kolf schackled Wilt on offense, he gave Baylor the green light. How did that work out? Baylor shot .385 in the post-season, while Chamberlain shot .545.
And while West deserves a ranking in the top-15, he should be FAR behind Wilt. Why? Ok, ShaqAttack blames WILT for losing the '69 Finals. How about West in the '70 Finals? In game seven, Wilt was the ONLY Laker who showed up. Meanwhile West was murdered by Frazier, and the game was over by halftime.
BTW, Wilt PLAYED in the '70 Finals, despite being four months removed from major knee surgery. Why is that important? Because West MISSED the '71 playoffs (as did Baylor), while a well-past his prime Wilt battled a prime Kareem to a draw in the '71 WCF's.
Of course, how about the '72 post-season? While West was mired in the worst shooting slump of his career (.376 in the playoffs), Wilt outplayed a prime Kareem, and then dominated the Knicks in the Finals (including a clinching game five performance with one badly sprained wrist, and the other FRACTURED), in which Chamberlain won the FINALS MVP.
And in Wilt's last Finals, in 72-73, West was again awful, while Wilt did all he could, including his very last game of his career, in which he scored 23 points with 21 rebounds.
In Wilt's five seasons in LA, the Lakers went to the Finals in FOUR of them, and had West (and Baylor) not missed the '71 post-season, it probably would have been 5-5. BEFORE Wilt, the Lakers best record in LA was 52-30. With Wilt, they went 55-27, then he missed nearly all of '70, and they only went 46-36. Meanwhile Baylor missed all but two games in '71, and West missed the entire last third of the season, and LA still went 48-34 with Chamberlain. In '72 they went 69-13 (with an overwhelming title), and in Wilt's last season in LA, they went 60-22 (and yet another Finals.) AFTER Wilt, they fell to 47-35, and a first round playoff sweeping loss.)
So, yes, West is a top-15 player, but he is WAY behind Chamberlain.[/QUOTE]
:facepalm Didn't Wilt average 11.7 ****ing ppg in the '69 finals after averaging over 20 during the '69 season?
Wow, Wilt improved the Lakers from a 52-30 team that lost in the finals to a 55-27 team that lost in the finals....what an impact! :bowdown:
And that 3 game improvement came with West playing 10 more games in '69 than '68. That improvement is STAGGERING.
I've said this many times, but it's funny how you keep bringing up the Lakers falling from 60-22 to 47-35 after Wilt retired [B]without mentioning that West went from playing 69 games in '73 to 31 in '74. [/B]