Wilt is a better scorer than MJ. stay maddd:applause:
Printable View
Wilt is a better scorer than MJ. stay maddd:applause:
[QUOTE=millwad]
I got a PM about Jlauber (Lazeruss) and [B]everything besides him being dead was right[/B], the guy even gave me his address and the name of his wife, something I didn't spread though.
[/QUOTE]
:oldlol:
[QUOTE=millwad]
And no one said that Wilt wasn't the best player in the '67 finals, what I said was that had massive help. He had 4 teammates who scored more than him that year in the finals and 4 teammates who averaged more than 19 points per game during the finals. [/QUOTE]
I got it. Wilt was the best player during the series and had massive help. The same could be true for every FMVP in NBA history.
[QUOTE=millwad]
And if your english wouldn't be equal with a pile of crap you'd understand that my point was that Wilt in fact didn't have little help like Jlauber always try to claim.[/QUOTE]
Finally I understood. Thanks God my brain is not like my English. :banana:
If you want to talk basketball - since your point is that [B]Wilt in fact didn't have little help [/B], we shall measure it somehow. To begin with - who in your opinion had a greater supporting cast Wilt or Russell ?
[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]FIVE 50-40 games, and a total of EIGHT 40-40 games (including one against Russell.) And CavsFan was right... a 78-43 game, as well.[/QUOTE]
:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:
[QUOTE=dankok8]Who's punishing Wilt? I'm just saying despite his huge stats his teams were middle of the pack offensively. Clearly his impact wasn't so great.
If you would have read my post above I said ORtg and DRtg are great for comparing teams [U]in the same league[/U]. Of course if you compare a 60's team to a modern team things get out of whack. The style of play, pace, skill level, coaching, level of physicality... all different then and today. You're making trivial statements in an attempt to expose me... it's not working. :lol
If you did the same breakdown for Kareem and Russell you'd find they faced as many HOFers and as often as Wilt did... yet their numbers WENT UP in the playoffs! Please explain to me why.[/QUOTE]
Actually, neither faced anywhere near the percenatge of HOF centers in their post-season careers, including Russell, who played IN the Wilt era for 10 seasons.
Regarding Russell, he put up some huge Finals, against the Lakers, including three Final series' of 23 ppg on an eFG% of .543; 18 ppg on an eFG% of .702 (yes .702); and 24 ppg on an eFG% of .538. Against Wilt in the EDF's in those three seasons: 22 ppg on an eFG% of .399; 16 ppg on an eFG% of .447; and 14 ppg on an eFG% of .451. And all of those were his BEST series against Chamberlain.
KAJ? His overall post-season numbers declined across the board. Scoring, rebounding, and eFG%. And again, his career post-season eFG% of .533 is just slightly ahead of Wilt's (.522.) BUT, (and again) he played in 158 of his 237 playoff games in the 80's (2/3's) and in post-season NBA's that shot between .473 and .497, and averaged an eFG% of .485. Contrast that with Chamberlain's nine post-seasons in the 60's, and in post-seasons which shot between .402 and .440 in that span, and averaged .421. So, Wilt actually had a MUCH HIGHER eFG% compared to the post-season league average, than KAJ did against his peers.
AND, we also know that in his four seasons IN the WILT-era, that Kareem had an eFG% of .491 in that span in his playoffs. BUT, in gets even worse. He battled an aging Thurmond and an aging Wilt in FIVE H2H playoff series in those four post-seasons, and his scoring dropped by over six ppg, and his eFG% declined from a regular season average of .568 in those four seasons...down to .450 (yes .450) against Thurmond and Wilt.
I have said it before, but had a prime KAJ battled the greatest defensive center of his era, in 60% of his playoff games, his post-season numbers would have looked FAR WORSE.
When MJ scored 37 a game his team was 12th of 23 offensively and failed to even crack .500 in the W's and L's
Overrated scorer because of his teams offense and success being mediocre? :confusedshrug: According to dankok logic, yes.
Now that we know peak MJ and Wilt are to be written off as overrated scorers, we need to figure out who ARE the legit all-time scorers.
lol
[QUOTE=julizaver]:oldlol:
I got it. Wilt was the best player during the series and had massive help. The same could be true for every FMVP in NBA history.
Finally I understood. Thanks God my brain is not like my English. :banana:
If you want to talk basketball - since your point is that [B]Wilt in fact didn't have little help [/B], we shall measure it somehow. To begin with - who in your opinion had a greater supporting cast Wilt or Russell ?[/QUOTE]
Julizaver,
You don't have to ever apologize to that clown. First of all, your research regarding the KAJ-Wilt H2H's was the first that I ever saw on the internet, and in fact, was routinely being used as THE source by many others.
Secondly, I know that English is, at the very least, your second language. I suspect that there are many here, who only speak English, and yet their written English is far worse than your's.
And finally, you don't really expect Millwad to get into any discussion with you that involves facts, or data, or logic, or any kind of real research, do you? He would have his a$$ handed to him on his own toilet seat.
[QUOTE=CavaliersFTW]When MJ scored 37 a game his team was 12th of 23 offensively and failed to even crack .500 in the W's and L's
Overrated scorer because of his teams offense and success being mediocre? :confusedshrug: According to dankok logic, yes.[/QUOTE]
Gotta love dankok's logic. He says that Wilt didn't improve his team's with his volume shooting, and then uses some abstract formula that no one can understand, and is based on ESTIMATES...
but then he claims that MY data is off. Yep, when Wilt came to the last place Warriors, they had averaged 103.3 ppg in a league that averaged 108.2, and in his first season, they averaged 118.6 ppg in a league that averaged 115.3.
By his third season, his team LED the league in SCORING, at 125.4 ppg, in a league that averaged 118.8 ppg...or nearly SEVEN ppg HIGHER than the league average.
And, of course, I trashed the rest of his argument with his 62-63 season, and then his 63-64 season. And, of course, he didn't bother to respond to just how come his 65-66 Sixers went 6-3 against Boston in the regular, and then went 1-4 in their post-season H2H's...and Wilt's numbers against Boston in both the regular season, AND post-season that year...were IDENTICAL. Yep...it HAD to be Chamberlain's fault, though. He should have known that because of his identical play in both, that his teammates would collectively shoot .416 in the '66 regular season, and then .352 against Boston in the playoffs.
[QUOTE=SHAQisGOAT][B]Why this no-life, ignorant asshole lazeruss hasn't been banned yet? What a disgraceful poster, managed to ruin for everyone a thread with a great video of his favorite player :facepalm [/B][/QUOTE]
Yep...I come into this thread and DEFEND Wilt against nothing but pure crap, even from [B]YOU[/B], and [B]I[/B] ruined this thread??????!!!!!!
GTFOutta here.
[QUOTE=CavaliersFTW]When MJ scored 37 a game his team was 12th of 23 offensively and failed to even crack .500 in the W's and L's
Overrated scorer because of his teams offense and success being mediocre? :confusedshrug: According to dankok logic, yes.
Now that we know peak MJ and Wilt are to be written off as overrated scorers, we need to figure out who ARE the legit all-time scorers.
lol[/QUOTE]
Well we KNOW that KAJ certainly wasn't among them. He couldn't hit the ocean from a lifeboat against an aging Thurmond, and an old Wilt in five straight playoff series' H2H's. His offensive decline against those two was just unfathomable. His scoring dropped from his regular season average in that span, of 32.2 ppg, down to 25.8 ppg (and he was shooting even MORE.) And, as bad as that huge drop-off was, how about his eFG%??? It looked like the von Hindenburg... from [B].568[/B] in that regular season span.....
crashing down to an eFG% of [B][COLOR="DarkRed"].450[/COLOR][/B].
[IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Hindenburg_disaster,_1937.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=CavaliersFTW]When MJ scored 37 a game his team was 12th of 23 offensively and failed to even crack .500 in the W's and L's
Overrated scorer because of his teams offense and success being mediocre? :confusedshrug: According to dankok logic, yes.
Now that we know peak MJ and Wilt are to be written off as overrated scorers, we need to figure out who ARE the legit all-time scorers. [/QUOTE]
Yes Jordan's impact in the 86-87 season was mighty overrated. His team won 40 games and like you pointed out they were average offensively despite his monster numbers. Of course the Bulls' talent that year was much worse than Wilt's at any points in his career. Oak and Paxson were his 2nd and 3rd options. OUCH!
But Jordan wasn't so overrated later on. As years went by and he became a better player his Bulls were getting increasingly dominant offensively. MJ learned to trust his teammates and focused on making the best basketball play. Just like Wilt was a better player (or at least played the right way) in 66-67 as opposed to 61-62.
It's actually possible for the most efficient scorer on a team to take more shots but for the team's collective offense to get worse. Ever heard of the Braess Paradox?
[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]Gotta love dankok's logic. He says that Wilt didn't improve his team's with his volume shooting, and then uses some abstract formula that no one can understand, and is based on ESTIMATES...
but then he claims that MY data is off. Yep, when Wilt came to the last place Warriors, they had averaged 103.3 ppg in a league that averaged 108.2, and in his first season, they averaged 118.6 ppg in a league that averaged 115.3.
By his third season, his team LED the league in SCORING, at 125.4 ppg, in a league that averaged 118.8 ppg...or nearly SEVEN ppg HIGHER than the league average.
And, of course, I trashed the rest of his argument with his 62-63 season, and then his 63-64 season. And, of course, he didn't bother to respond to just how come his 65-66 Sixers went 6-3 against Boston in the regular, and then went 1-4 in their post-season H2H's...and Wilt's numbers against Boston in both the regular season, AND post-season that year...were IDENTICAL. Yep...it HAD to be Chamberlain's fault, though. He should have known that because of his identical play in both, that his teammates would collectively shoot .416 in the '66 regular season, and then .352 against Boston in the playoffs.
[/QUOTE]
ORtg is an abstract formula? :roll:
Points/Pace * 100 ... It looks at points scored per 100 possessions. Wilt's team scored the most PPG but they were also the fastest paced team in 61-62. ORtg corrects for pace.
Wilt in the '66 playoffs didn't play nearly as well as in the regular season. His cumulative stats held up (although assists still plummeted from 5.2 to 3.0 and efficiency dropped from 52.2 %TS to 50.0 %TS...) but look at it game by game. Wilt in games 1 through 4 averaged 23.5 ppg on 48.7 %FG and well under 50 %TS. He really didn't have a good series. He had 3 subpar games on the offensive end.
G1: 25/32 (9/17, 7/15)
G2: 23/25 (9/23, 5/7)
G4: 31/27/4 (12/22, 7/17)
G4: 15/33/3/6 (7/14, 1/4)
G5: 46/34 (19/34, 8/25)
Series Average: 28.0 ppg, 30.2 rpg, 3.0 apg on 50.9% FG/41.2% FT/50.0% TS
And again you dismiss the possibility that Wilt was at least partly responsible for his teammates underperforming.
[QUOTE=dankok8]Yes Jordan's impact in the 86-87 season was mighty overrated. His team won 40 games and like you pointed out they were average offensively despite his monster numbers. Of course the Bulls' talent that year was much worse than Wilt's at any points in his career. Oak and Paxson were his 2nd and 3rd options. OUCH!
But Jordan wasn't so overrated later on. As years went by and he became a better player his Bulls were getting increasingly dominant offensively. MJ learned to trust his teammates and focused on making the best basketball play. Just like Wilt was a better player (or at least played the right way) in 66-67 as opposed to 61-62.
It's actually possible for the most efficient scorer on a team to take more shots but for the team's collective offense to get worse. Ever heard of the Braess Paradox?
ORtg is an abstract formula? :roll:
Points/Pace * 100 ... It looks at points scored per 100 possessions. Wilt's team scored the most PPG but they were also the fastest paced team in 61-62. ORtg corrects for pace.
Wilt in the '66 playoffs didn't play nearly as well as in the regular season. His cumulative stats held up (although assists still plummeted from 5.2 to 3.0 and efficiency dropped from 52.2 %TS to 50.0 %TS...) but look at it game by game. Wilt in games 1 through 4 averaged 23.5 ppg on 48.7 %FG and well under 50 %TS. He really didn't have a good series. He had 3 subpar games on the offensive end.
G1: 25/32 (9/17, 7/15)
G2: 23/25 (9/23, 5/7)
G4: 31/27/4 (12/22, 7/17)
G4: 15/33/3/6 (7/14, 1/4)
G5: 46/34 (19/34, 8/25)
Series Average: 28.0 ppg, 30.2 rpg, 3.0 apg on 50.9% FG/41.2% FT/50.0% TS
And again you dismiss the possibility that Wilt was at least partly responsible for his teammates underperforming.[/QUOTE]
Regarding Wilt's '66 playoff series, you and I both know that PHILA posted a recap of Chamberlain's worst game in that series (game four), and his play was described as nearly single-handedly beating Boston in that game.
And, yes, I suppose that Wilt might have had some blame in losing that series, but from what I have read, and then from what the blatantly obvious numbers show, his teammates were mostly certainly just crushed by Russell's.
IMHO, Wilt's post-season career is often judged solely by his two rings. However, it was not as if his team's were just blown away in the first round of the playoffs, and in series in which he was just awful. He played on five other teams that lost to the eventual champions, in game seven's, and in four of those, the losses were by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points.
Not only that, but aside from the Celtic Dynasty, in which he suffered series losses in seven of the eight times his team's played them, his team's would also go on to lose to the '70 Knicks, and the '71 Bucks...two teams which often show up as among the greatest ever. And in his last season, his Lakers lost 4-1 to a Knick team that had six HOFers, and all four losses came in the last minute (by margins of 4, 4, 5, and 9 points.)
And if you take the eight series against Boston away from his post-season averages, he often played better, overall, than he did in his regular seasons. I have mentioned it before, but had his team's been locked in the Western Conference in the first half of his career, his playoff numbers likely would have shot thru the roof. I am not claiming that he would have had any more rings because of it, because ultimately he would have had to face Boston in every year of them, but he would have probably had at least one more series, each year, and in most of them, he would have faced a Laker team that he was routinely scoring 50+ points on in his regular season H2H's (and with six games of 60+ in that span, including a 78 point game.) And we both agree that Russell went on to generally demolish those Laker teams himself. Here again, maybe his teaqm's don't even beat those Laker squads, but I am convinced that his overall offensive production would have likely, at the very least, mirrored what he did against the Hawks in his lone season in the West (39 ppg on a .556 FG%, in a post-season NBA that averaged 105.8 ppg on a .420 eFG%.)
Look, I don't want to keep arguing with you on Wilt's career. At this point you have your opinions, and I have mine, and all we are doing is just recycling the same arguments. And, like some other posters here, I may not always agree with your opinions, but I do respect them. So, I will politely just end this by saying that, maybe we should just agree to disagree.
[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]Julizaver,
You don't have to ever apologize to that clown. First of all, your research regarding the KAJ-Wilt H2H's was the first that I ever saw on the internet, and in fact, was routinely being used as THE source by many others.
Secondly, I know that English is, at the very least, your second language. I suspect that there are many here, who only speak English, and yet their written English is far worse than your's.
And finally, you don't really expect Millwad to get into any discussion with you that involves facts, or data, or logic, or any kind of real research, do you? He would have his a$$ handed to him on his own toilet seat.[/QUOTE]
Yes, I am European and English is not my native language.
I have started the research about KAJ and Wilt two years before I published it here. The break came when I found the Milwaukee newspapers in the googlenews archives. Only when I have all the complete data I published it,otherwise I have most of the data for most of the time.
[QUOTE=julizaver]Yes, I am European and English is not my native language.
I have started the research about KAJ and Wilt two years before I published it here. The break came when I found the Milwaukee newspapers in the googlenews archives. Only when I have all the complete data I published it,otherwise I have most of the data for most of the time.[/QUOTE]
You do a great job always and keep it up!! The extra advantage you will find in your newspaper work, imo, is by going [I]away[/I] from the NBA cities in your research. Generally the newspapers were infinitely less biased than today's corporate media - which is absolutely scandalous..... but not in the sports pages!!
Some city newspapers that might give you a different viewpoint about the NBA of those days would be Dallas, Ft. Worth, Kansas City, Minneapolis, Pittsburgh. For the regular season they might have 3 or 4 articles about teams in a season, but often the sportswriters from those cities would travel to the playoff games. All of those guys liked to hit the bars after the games!!
The very dregs of reporting in those days came from Boston, where they even [I]lied[/I] about stats in the sports pages. Some of those writers sat by cops when they showed up in the other cities because the cops were the only guys that wouldn't beat them down.