Printable View
[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]So Wilt wasn't the best of his era because Oscar and Jerry West never went H2H with Russell - THE greatest defender - therefor scored better against the Celtics? Makes sense.[/QUOTE]
I showed playoff stats vs non Russell teams. West and Oscar were better scorers against these teams than Wilt. So stop using Russell as a excuse.
[QUOTE=Audio One]That ShaqAttack fellow's no different. Very knowledgeable poster, but has a HUGE bias aganist Russell and Wilt, as LAZERUSS can probably attest to that[/QUOTE]
You guys are hilarious. If very knowledgeable poster don't think Wilt was unstoppable scorer then he "have bias against Wilt". Guess what, maybe it's you who is Wilt's lover and doesn't see truth...
[QUOTE=MichaelCorleone]It's time we move on to a more competitive, more entertaining era of basketball.[/QUOTE]
dis niguh:facepalm
[QUOTE=trueDS]You guys are hilarious. If very knowledgeable poster don't think Wilt was unstoppable scorer then he "have bias against Wilt". Guess what, maybe it's you who is Wilt's lover and doesn't see truth...[/QUOTE]
By default if you think Wilt wasn't an unstoppable scorer (something every single one of his peers and contemporaries refer to him as being, and that record books confirm) than you are NOT a knowledgeable poster. You think forming a conclusion against the grain of every one who saw him play or played against him makes you special or something? No, it puts you in the same frame of mind as those people who think men didn't land on the moon, or government conspiracy theorists, or whatever other category of crackpot loonies. Wilt when his role was to score was the most prolific scorer the game has ever known, and the next best isn't close. Denying this it silly :oldlol:
[QUOTE=trueDS]I showed playoff stats vs non Russell teams. West and Oscar were better scorers against these teams than Wilt. So stop using Russell as a excuse.[/QUOTE]
A point guard and a shooting guard ...vs a center, yeah cause they guarded each other... :facepalm
God damn you are more retarded than I thought :biggums:
[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]And, can you imagine what WILT would have carpet-bombed those Laker teams with? Hell, in his '62 season alone, he hung THREE 60+ point games on them, including a 78-43 game. Oh, and then he followed that up with THREE MORE 60+ games in '63, including a 72 pointer. My god, he might have been outscoring Baylor and West combined in some of those games.
As for the rest of your post...again, you are giving Oscar's meager number of playoff games WAY TOO much credit. Only 39 total games in his scoring prime.
And one more time, Chamberlain was MILES ahead of West, Baylor, and Oscar, in eFG%'s in the post-seasons. He was even crushing the great RUSSELL for cryingoutloud (and Russell had his entire supporting cast backing him up, too.)
The only way to stop Wilt, was to foul him.
And finally...yes, let's just completely ignore full 80+ game seasons, and go with as little as five game playoff series...
:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm[/QUOTE]
Don't exaggerate buddy. Wilt faced some "scrubs" in his career too like vs. the Nats and Royals and he didn't put up ridiculous numbers. Better than against Russell but not by much.
Oscar played 39 games in his scoring prime, Wilt 52 games. Weak argument.
eFG% is nice and all but overall efficiency depends on free throws as well. Comparing FG% between a C and a bunch of backcourt players seems pretty flawed no? Let's compare assists while we're at it?
Wilt is the BEST regular season scorer of his generation there is no argument. But in the postseason he was the #3 or #4 scorer. The numbers don't lie.
[QUOTE=CavaliersFTW]By default if you think Wilt wasn't an unstoppable scorer (something every single one of his peers and contemporaries refer to him as being, and that record books confirm) than you are NOT a knowledgeable poster. You think forming a conclusion against the grain of every one who saw him play or played against him makes you special or something? No, it puts you in the same frame of mind as those people who think men didn't land on the moon, or government conspiracy theorists, or whatever other category of crackpot loonies. Wilt when his role was to score was the most prolific scorer the game has ever known, and the next best isn't close. Denying this it silly [/QUOTE]
If TrueDS made that post about Wilt not being a dominating scorer in a vacuum I'd agree with you but he was making his argument from the standpoint of postseason scoring. Wilt was NOT the best postseason scorer of his era. There may be reasons for that but it's still a fact.
[QUOTE=trueDS]I showed playoff stats vs non Russell teams. West and Oscar were better scorers against these teams than Wilt. So stop using Russell as a excuse.[/QUOTE]
Flat out lie...
[B]A prime Oscar (from 60-68) played in 22 playoff games against non-Boston teams, and averaged 28.4 ppg on .486 eFG%.[/B]
[B]A prime Baylor (from 60-63 and only 4 seasons BTW) played in 34 playoff games against non-Boston teams, and averaged 35.2 ppg on .457 eFG%[/B].
[B]A prime West (from 62-70) played in 62 non-Boston games and averaged 31.4 ppg on an eFG% of .491[/B].
[B]A prime Wilt played in 22 non-Boston games, and averaged 36.0 ppg on a .503 eFG%[/B].
Wilt was easily the best SCORER of the group.
Of course, the Wilt-bashers will never mention that Chamberlain's horrific 62-63 roster was so bad, that his team didn't make the playoffs, ... in a season in which Wilt averaged 44.8 ppg on a .528 eFG% (and averaged 38 ppg against Russell in nine H2H's.)
And before some idiot claims that Wilt was a "loser" in 62-63 (despite leading the league in 15 statistical categories, including running away with the scoring title, and setting a then FG% record), ...how about Oscar? A prime Oscar missed TWO playoff seasons ('61 and '68.)
And I get so sick-and-tired of the FLAWED TS%'s. In any case, we know that when was those four players were DEFENDED, Chamberlain was a considerably better, and more efficient shooter.
The reality was, Chamberlain's "scoring prime" only involved 52 playoff games, 30 of which came against Russell's Celtics. Had he been in the Western Conference in all of those seven seasons (and made the playoffs in '63), he likely would have been slaughtering the Lakers year-after-year (win or lose.) Hell, in the one season in which he was in the Western Conference, he averaged 38.6 ppg on an eFG% of .559 and in a seven game series.
[QUOTE=dankok8]Don't exaggerate buddy. Wilt faced some "scrubs" in his career too like vs. the Nats and Royals and he didn't put up ridiculous numbers. Better than against Russell but not by much.
Oscar played 39 games in his scoring prime, Wilt 52 games. Weak argument.
eFG% is nice and all but overall efficiency depends on free throws as well. Comparing FG% between a C and a bunch of backcourt players seems pretty flawed no? Let's compare assists while we're at it?
Wilt is the BEST regular season scorer of his generation there is no argument. But in the postseason he was the #3 or #4 scorer. The numbers don't lie.
If TrueDS made that post about Wilt not being a dominating scorer in a vacuum I'd agree with you but he was making his argument from the standpoint of postseason scoring. Wilt was NOT the best postseason scorer of his era. There may be reasons for that but it's still a fact.[/QUOTE]
Every bit of this is pure BS and and with an OBVIOUS anti-Wilt agenda.
How about this comment from trueDS:
[QUOTE]In other words - please, show that Wilt was unstoppable scorer, but use only playoffs. Forget about regular season, it's really not that much important[/QUOTE]
Yep, the 80-82 regular season games aren't important. That explains why Oscar missed TWO post-seasons, then, doesn't ...as well as Chamberlain not making the playoffs in a season in which he averaged 44.8 ppg on a .528 eFG%.
But, here we have Oscar with a total of 39 playoff games in his scoring prime, and never advancing to the Finals in any of those six playoff series, and in fact, not getting past the first round in FOUR of the six.
And how about this gem from that Wilt-basher?
[QUOTE]Learn to read. I'm not saying he had no impact. I'm saying his impact wasn't as good as should be if he really was unstoppable scorer.[B] I'm saying his volume scoring is overrated because it had slightly effect on offense. I'm saying he wasn't the best scorer ever, or even the best in his era, because Oscar and West were way better scorers in 60s and their scoring wasn't "empty" as they helped their teams offenses A LOT[/B].
Wilt offensively was 3rd best player during 60s. Better than 4th Baylor, worse than 1st Oscar and 2nd West.[/QUOTE]
Oh, so a prime scoring Chamberlain single-handedly carrying his teams to game seven losses, by margins of 2, and 1 point, against the greatest Dynasty in the history of the NBA, (and had he not been injured in games 3-4 of the '60 EDF's, and with his team losing a game six by two points, who knows?), as well as a competitive Finals against Boston in yet another season, in which his team was outgunned in HOFers by an 8-2 margin...is EMPTY scoring?
But a prime Oscar missing TWO playoff seasons in eight years, being knocked out in the FIRSTY ROUND of four of the six that he did make, and NEVER reaching the Finals...HELPED his offenses better than Wilt did his?
BTW, I am not blaming Oscar for those "failures", and more than I would have blamed Wilt for his. But it sure seems ridiculous to claim that Wilt's stats were "empty" and then turn around claim that Oscar's were somehow more "helpful."
Oh, and West and Baylor COMBINED never doing any more against Boston, than what Wilt did by HIMSELF. And, of course, a PRIME Chamberlain in '67, was THE reason that his Sixers just annihilated Boston (and with Wilt, as always, just castrating Russell in the series.)
And how many times did Oscar, or West, or Baylor, lead the NBA in scoring, and also take their teams to the best record in the league? Wilt accomplished that feat in his 65-66 season (leading the league in scoring, rebounding, and eFG%...all while taking the Sixers to the best record in the league.)
And again, had Wilt had the luxury of facing the Lakers in the post-season in his SCORING prime, I am absolutely convinced that he would now hold at least several post-season scoring and efficiency marks.
Gotta love the Wilt-bashers. they will do ANYTHING to disparage Chamberlain...
And one more damned time...the Wilt-bashers love to point out the post-season, and completely ignore the regular season.
Here again, these idiots will claim that Oscar was a better scorer in the post-season (as well as Hakeem), when those two guys were ROUTINELY crushed in their FIRST ROUNDS and in four-and-five playoff game series.
But, yes, let's completely ignore the 80+ regular season games. Doesn't it seem a little suspicious though, that it was ONLY WILT who was putting up staggering scoring, rebounding, and efficiency numbers in HIS era (the same era that had Baylor, West, and Oscar)?
Here was a prime scoring Chamberlain, with crappy rosters, and usually facing the Celtics in either his first or second round playoff series, and missing the playoffs altogether in his second greatest scoring season (yet MJ would make the playoffs years later in '86 with an even worse team record)...and ultimately only playing in a meager 52 games in that span...30 of which were against Russell and Boston.
The reality was... 52 playoff games was simply not a decent enough sample size, and especially considering that he was battling the greatest defensive center and the greatest dynasty the sport has known, in 30 of those games (and BTW, all he did was average 30.5 ppg on a .507 eFG% (in leagues that shot about .421 in that span.)
Still, in those 52 playoff games, he had FOUR games of 50, 50, 53, and 56 points, three of which were in "must-win" games (and one of those was against Russell), as well as 7 more of 40+ (and all told he had five games of 40+ against Russell.)
Now, if you were to ADD those playoff numbers, with his staggering regular season numbers in those first seven years, and Wilt would have averaged a combined 38 ppg in that span. Over the course of nearly 600 total games.
THAT was CLEARLY the game's greatest SCORER. No one else is even remotely CLOSE.
Wilt is by far the greatest player of the 1961-62 season
[QUOTE=Lord Bean]Wilt is by far the greatest player of the 1961-62 season[/QUOTE]
And yet, because of an obvious anti-Wilt agenda by the players in the league that season, Russell won the MVP.
Still, Wilt was voted first-team All-NBA ahead of Russell. And in their entire decade playing together, Chamberlain held a 7-2 margin in First-Team All-NBA's over Russell.
And Wilt not only won ROY in '60, he also won the MVP. And from the middle of the decade ('66 thru '68) he would run away with the MVP balloting. And he was not only robbed in '62, but '64, as well. (And no one has ever given anywhere near a decent explanation as to how Russell finished ahead of Wilt in the '69 voting.)
The reality was, he was already the best player in the game in '60, and was by far the best player in the game by the mid-to-late 60's. In fact, he was the best player in the league in the entire decade of the 60's.
LAZERUSS...
Nobody is ignoring the regular season. Wilt is the GREATEST REGULAR SEASON SCORER of all time. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Stop repeating points about Chamberlain's regular season!! We aren't discussing that here or disputing any of your points on that.
In the postseason it's a different story. Both Jerry West and Elgin Baylor (before knee injury) have put up much superior scoring averages (including volume and efficiency) in the playoffs. Oscar's numbers were right around Wilt's and he had more overall impact on his team's offense. Those are undeniable facts.
Ultimately your arguments for Wilt's worse numbers...
Wilt faced stronger defense was DISPELLED. West played 7 finals against Boston and averaged 32.7 ppg on 55.1 %TS combined! Baylor in his 2 Finals before injury had a monstrous cumulative average of 37.5 ppg on 52.0 %TS on Boston.
Wilt has never had single series on that level. That's a fact.
And don't bring up FG% when comparing bigs and guards. :no:
[QUOTE=dankok8]LAZERUSS...
Nobody is ignoring the regular season. Wilt is the GREATEST REGULAR SEASON SCORER of all time. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Stop repeating points about Chamberlain's regular season!! We aren't discussing that here or disputing any of your points on that.
In the postseason it's a different story. Both Jerry West and Elgin Baylor (before knee injury) have put up much superior scoring averages (including volume and efficiency) in the playoffs. Oscar's numbers were right around Wilt's and he had more overall impact on his team's offense. Those are undeniable facts.
Ultimately your arguments for Wilt's worse numbers...
Wilt faced stronger defense was DISPELLED. West played 7 finals against Boston and averaged 32.7 ppg on 55.1 %TS combined! Baylor in his 2 Finals before injury had a monstrous cumulative average of 37.5 ppg on 52.0 %TS on Boston.
Wilt has never had single series on that level. That's a fact.
[B]And don't bring up FG% when comparing bigs and guards.[/B] :no:[/QUOTE]
Why, should bigs be penalized for being more likely to make the shots they take? Accuracy isn't just a footnote. In fact, they are what make big men so valuable around the hoop. There is no reason not to bring up accuracy when assessing the offense of many of the great big men past or present.
[QUOTE=dankok8]LAZERUSS...
Nobody is ignoring the regular season. Wilt is the GREATEST REGULAR SEASON SCORER of all time. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Stop repeating points about Chamberlain's regular season!! We aren't discussing that here or disputing any of your points on that.
In the postseason it's a different story. Both Jerry West and Elgin Baylor (before knee injury) have put up much superior scoring averages (including volume and efficiency) in the playoffs. Oscar's numbers were right around Wilt's and he had more overall impact on his team's offense. Those are undeniable facts.
Ultimately your arguments for Wilt's worse numbers...
Wilt faced stronger defense was DISPELLED. West played 7 finals against Boston and averaged 32.7 ppg on 55.1 %TS combined! Baylor in his 2 Finals before injury had a monstrous cumulative average of 37.5 ppg on 52.0 %TS on Boston.
Wilt has never had single series on that level. That's a fact.
And don't bring up FG% when comparing bigs and guards. :no:[/QUOTE]
Here is what started this completely anti-Wilt agenda, from a tyical Wilt-basher ...
[QUOTE]We don't really need to dig it up, because Wilt's playoffs drop off in efficiency is pretty clear. In regular season he stat padded vs weak competition (he was GOAT offensive rebounder so scored a lot that way), but there's much less easy baskets in playoffs and that's why Wilt's scoring limitations were exposed in the playoffs.
[/QUOTE]
Now, here is the REALITY of this "exposed" Chamberlain...
Again, only 52 playoff games in his "scoring" prime, which BTW, is 13 more than all of Oscar's in his, and 5 more than Baylor had in his.
And in those 30, he was defended by RUSSELL, who is widely regarded as the greatest defensive center of all-time. Not only that, but I have provided a TON of quotes, from Russell's OWN TEAMMATES, claiming that they were SWARMING, and even BRUTALIZING Chamberlain in those games.
And how did this "exposed" Chamberlain play against RUSSELL and his swarming teammates in those 30 games? He averaged 30.5 ppg, on a .507 eFG% and in post-season NBA's that shot about .420 in that span.
Furthermore, if we carry the Russell-Wilt battles into Chamberlain's 66-67 season, which may have been the greatest season EVER, by ANYONE, Wilt again just castrated him. 21.6 ppg on a .556 eFG% (in a post-season NBA that shot .428), while holding Russell to 10.2 ppg on a .358 eFG%. Oh, and he outassisted Russell in that same series, 10.0 apg to 6.0 apg, and outrebounded Russell (the second greatest rebounder of all-time, and certainly the second greatest post-season rebounder of all-time) by a staggering 32 rpg to 23 rpg margin.
And in the rest of Wilt's 22 (TWENTY-TWO) post-season games, all he could do was "only" average 36.0 ppg on a .503 eFG% (again, in leagues that shot .420.) Or, in other words, he was the greatest scorer of his post-season era when he was not being defended by the greatest defensive player in the history of the game.
And again, I have provided the HUGE drop-offs that MJ, Shaq, and your boy Kareem had, when they battled their biggest defensive rivals in multiple series. My god, KAJ had a HUGE decline from his regular season numbers when he faced Thurmond and Chamberlain in his five post-season H2H's. During those three regular seasons, Kareem averaged 32 ppg on a .565 eFG%. In those FIVE playoff series against Nate and Wilt... 26 ppg on a .469 eFG%. Just a DRAMATIC decline.
And yet Chamberlain gets no credit for being a FAR greater scorer, and FAR more efficient shooter, in his FIVE post-season series in his scoring prime, against RUSSELL.
But I would not expect anything less from the Wilt-bashers...
I hope I have finally put an end to these complete MYTHS and even LIES regarding Chamberlain in his post-season play.
And to get back to the REAL topic here...
I can't wait for CavsFan video, which will completely stamp out the Fatal's of this world.
And this footage will CLEARLY depict a SKILLFUL Chamberlain, making a wide variety of remarkable shots, with exceptional foot-work and unequaled athleticism.
However, keep in mind that this footage is only about TWO-PERCENT of Chamberlain's NBA career. And there is absolutely ZERO footage of any of Chamberlain's 271 40+ point games (or 122 50+ point games, or 32 60+ point games.) None of his 132 40-30 games (or 32 50-30 games, or his 28 60-20 games, or his 8 40-40 games, or his 5 50-40 games.) None of his 15-15 FGA/FGA games, (or 16-16, or 18-18, or 18-19 games.) No footage from his 22-25-21 game (or his 53-32-14 game.)
The facts are...there is simply no footage available, of Wilt at his unfathomable best...