Printable View
Here's a graph showing how Wilts team offenses improved the less he scored
[IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/vTcfHjBf/Wilts-Correlation-PPG-and-Team-ORtg.png[/IMG]
He didn't create for others at all, his fga to assist ratio is the worst of any player ever and he didn't start winning championships until he settled into a lesser role and focused on being the defensive anchor for the team
[QUOTE=dankok8;14191133]^ Guy Rodgers is a HOFer.
Good posts otherwise! :cheers:
I've debated this with Wilt fans so many times. It's just not interesting to me. All I can say is that I would draft Russell over Wilt right now if I had them in the same draft and I don't think anyone can post anything to convince me otherwise. Not to be disrespectful but I am very well versed in NBA history when it comes to those two. I've watched most of the available footage and observed/participated in POTY projects, analyzed their stats in every imaginable way and read loads of articles from that time.[/QUOTE]
Same as I and the data about the two and the private footage that I have seen from Nba collectors and the Nba archive has allowed me to see about Wilt has me convinced that Wilt was the better player out of the two he just didn't have the teammates to back him up against Russell and the data supports me in that which is great.
Funny fact about Guy Rodgers with 10 seconds left in the 1960 ecf game 6 and with the scores tied 107 107 each he had the chance to shoot two free throws to put the 76ers up by one or two points instead he missed both and then Tommy Heinsohn tipped the ball in the very next possession to give the Celtics the series victory.
It would have been very interesting to see a game 7 between the two in 1960 if he hadn't had missed those clutch free throws as Russell would have been trying not to blow a 3 1 series lead to a rookie Chamberlain and his team who before the series had even started were 3 and 1 underdogs to win. Therefore you have to wonder that if Wilt wins that year maybe with some of that Celtics mystique gone that he would have won in other years like 1962 1965 1968 and 1969.
[QUOTE=Manny98;14191145]Here's a graph showing how Wilts team offenses improved the less he scored
[IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/vTcfHjBf/Wilts-Correlation-PPG-and-Team-ORtg.png[/IMG]
He didn't create for others at all, his fga to assist ratio is the worst of any player ever and he didn't start winning championships until he settled into a lesser role and focused on being the defensive anchor for the team[/QUOTE]
He did create for others when one player is flat out getting double and triple-teamed that frees the rest of his teammates to take wide-open shots it is not Wilt's fault that all of his teammates as a warrior would usually puke all over themselves in the playoffs and let Wilt down.
Hell, I for one think Wilt should have been more selfish offensively as a player as if he had kept up that scoring mindest in the last seven years of his career he most likely wins rings in 1968,1969 and 1973 giving him 5 rings and a far better legacy, as a result of that.
Wilt, unfortunately, sacrificed way too much for his teams past 1966 and he knows it too as in interviews and books he regrets that he lost that scoring mindset on the back end of his career as if he hadn't have done so he more then likely would have ended up with more then 2 rings and as a result of that he would have also silenced most of his critics forever.
[QUOTE=coastalmarker99;14191150]Same as I and the data about the two and the private footage that I have seen from Nba collectors and the Nba archive has allowed me to see about Wilt has me convinced that Wilt was the better player out of the two he just didn't have the teammates to back him up against Russell and the data supports me in that which is great.
Funny fact about Guy Rodgers with 10 seconds left in the 1960 ecf game 6 and with the scores tied 107 107 each he had the chance to shoot two free throws to put the 76ers up by one or two points instead he missed both and then Tommy Heinsohn tipped the ball in the very next possession to give the Celtics the series victory.
It would have been very interesting to see a game 7 between the two in 1960 if he hadn't had missed those clutch free throws as Russell would have been trying not to blow a 3 1 series lead to a rookie Chamberlain and his team who before the series had even started were 3 and 1 underdogs to win. Therefore you have to wonder that if Wilt wins that year maybe with some of that Celtics mystique gone that he would have won in other years like 1962 1965 1968 and 1969.[/QUOTE]
Well Wilt from 1960-1965 undoubtedly had worse casts. How much worse is debatable. The problem at looking at HOFers and even All-Star appearances is that there is outcome bias. Players on title teams are way more likely to get accolades and obviously HOF nods than ones that aren't.
1960... isn't that the year Wilt broke his hand in the playoffs?
[QUOTE=dankok8;14191298]Well Wilt from 1960-1965 undoubtedly had worse casts. How much worse is debatable. The problem at looking at HOFers and even All-Star appearances is that there is outcome bias. Players on title teams are way more likely to get accolades and obviously HOF nods than ones that aren't.
1960... isn't that the year Wilt broke his hand in the playoffs?[/QUOTE]
Yes it was the year he broke his hand in the playoffs and yet he still put 50 on Russell's head on the road during game 5 of that series which is very impressive
[QUOTE=coastalmarker99;14191307]Yes it was the year he broke his hand in the playoffs and yet he still put 50 on Russell's head on the road during game 5 of that series which is very impressive[/QUOTE]
Yes but breaking his hand was his own doing. He lost his cool and punched Heinsohn and injured his hand.
The thing with Wilt is that he didn't care about winning as much as Russell. The intangibles weren't there... But I will concede this. Maybe if Wilt had a different coach early in his career (like say Auerbach) that his mentality would have been different and that he would have grown into a winner and been more "Russell-like". It is possible...
What is up with all these Jordan hypotheticals that weren't even close to happening? :oldlol:At some point these hypotheticals are so far from reality it basically only exists if Jordan was a lesser player. So whats the point of them?
[QUOTE=guy;14191517]What is up with all these Jordan hypotheticals that weren't even close to happening? :oldlol:At some point these hypotheticals are so far from reality it basically only exists if Jordan was a lesser player. So whats the point of them?[/QUOTE]
The point is at some point winning matters. Wilt didn’t win enough
[QUOTE=dankok8;14191426]Yes but breaking his hand was his own doing. He lost his cool and punched Heinsohn and injured his hand.
The thing with Wilt is that he didn't care about winning as much as Russell. The intangibles weren't there... But I will concede this. Maybe if Wilt had a different coach early in his career (like say Auerbach) that his mentality would have been different and that he would have grown into a winner and been more "Russell-like". It is possible...[/QUOTE]
Red funny enough did want Wilt very badly and he desperately tried convincing a very young Chamberlain to go to Harvard so he could draft him under the rules of the time.
And if Wilt had accepted his offer I think Red would have straight-up used him as Alex did in 1967 and 1968 and if Red wants him to do the Russell role then Wilt could do that as well maybe even better then Russell ever did.
And also Red and Wilt liked each other as people Red said he actually liked Wilt a lot as a person through Wilt did hate his guts and nearly beat the crap out of him during one game before the entire Celtics team stopped Wilt from doing so. but I think that was more because Red used incredibly dirty tactics to get under Wilt's skin.
And it worked as if Wilt hadn't taken the bait in the 1960 playoffs and injured his hand as result it is more then likely that the Warriors win that series and then the title which could have completely changed the course of the 1960s for both Wilt and Russell.
If Wilt has more titles then he most likely with his stats and records to back him up he is viewed by fans nowadays at the very least as being top 3 all-time. Through the Kareem vs Wilt argument would be very tough but you would have to give it to Wilt most likely as he would have been the alpha dog for all his championship, unlike Kareem.