Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

[QUOTE=dankok8]Kareem "dominated" Nate just as much as Wilt.

[U]Wilt vs Nate[/U]

64-65: 26.7 ppg on 50.0% shooting
65-66: 28.6 ppg on ? shooting (46.3% in 2 available games)
66-67: 20.8 ppg on 63.3% shooting

[U]Kareem vs Nate[/U]

70-71: 26.6 ppg on 48.4% shooting
71-72: 24.0 ppg on 44.1% shooting
72-73: 25.8 ppg on 48.8% shooting
73-74: 24.2 ppg on 57.1% shooting

That's right in the same ballpark... And in '71 playoffs Kareem outplayed Nate by a much bigger margin than Wilt ever did in the postseason.

Kareem: 27.8 ppg, 15.4 rpg on 48.6 %FG/52.8 %TS
Nate: 17.6 ppg, 10.2 rpg on 37.1 %FG/41.6 %TS[/QUOTE]

Maybe it is better to include post season data also - Wilt played against Nate in '67 finals and Kareem played in 11 post season games vs Nate. It will be more representative.

[QUOTE=dankok8]Kareem "dominated" Nate just as much as Wilt.

[U]Wilt vs Nate[/U]

64-65: 26.7 ppg on 50.0% shooting
65-66: 28.6 ppg on ? shooting (46.3% in 2 available games)
66-67: 20.8 ppg on 63.3% shooting

[U]Kareem vs Nate[/U]

70-71: 26.6 ppg on 48.4% shooting
71-72: 24.0 ppg on 44.1% shooting
72-73: 25.8 ppg on 48.8% shooting
73-74: 24.2 ppg on 57.1% shooting

That's right in the same ballpark... And in '71 playoffs Kareem outplayed Nate by a much bigger margin than Wilt ever did in the postseason.

Kareem: 27.8 ppg, 15.4 rpg on 48.6 %FG/52.8 %TS
Nate: 17.6 ppg, 10.2 rpg on 37.1 %FG/41.6 %TS[/QUOTE]

First of all, you simply can't conclude that Wilt shot .463 against Nate in his NINE H2H games in 65-66, based on two games (one of which Wilt shot 17-32 and scored 45 points.) You also claimed that he shot .518 in the known three H2H's against Nate in 66-67. And you were right, but we now KNOW (at least if ALL of the data on nbastats.net is correct) that Chamberlain shot .794 in the three games in which we didn't have his FG%'s.

Wilt POUNDED Thurmond with games of 33-10, 33-17, 38-15 and 45-13 in that 65-66 season. Find me a season in which KAJ did that too Nate.

Furthermore, Nate was on a severe decline in 73-74. WAY down from his 72-73 season (his last quality season.) He missed 20 games, and was never the same. His numbers dropped dramatically from 72-73. And then, in 74-75 he was just a shell.

And, as Julizaver posted, you failed to include the 71-72 and 72-73 playoff games in your above totals, when KAJ shot .428 and .405 in those two series, which covered 11 games.

Nope, KAJ never approached the domination that a prime Wilt just leveled Thurmond with, including a Nate in his peak season.

So, no more of that nonsense.

[QUOTE=julizaver]Maybe you haven't seen my earlier post. Taken into consideration your 66-67 calculation I could repost:

How Nate shot vs Russell, Kareem and Wilt ?

vs Russell - 19,6 ppg on 0.409
vs Kareem - 18.6 ppg on 0.413
vs Wilt - 16.3 ppg on [B]0.382[/B]

And how the others shot against him ?

Kareem vs Nate - 24.76 ppg on 0.447
Wilt vs Nate - 14.84 ppg on [B]0.548[/B]
Russell vs Nate - 11.59 ppg on 4.34

The data covers the 1965-1973 period. The data for Wilt vs Nate and Russell vs Nate is still incomplete (but I have the majority of the games data).[/QUOTE]

Do you have the book "the Season of the 76ers" by Wayne Lynch, by any chance? I would like someone here who does, confirm the numbers that he posted on page 259. As I stated, if the stats that nbastats.net have are correct for the known six games H2H's, then Chamberlain went 50-79 in the other three H2H's with Nate. I wish we had those three H2H's. As I posted earlier, the WORST he could have shot in their first meeting that season, was 13-20 (which would have meant that he shot 4-4 and 10-10 in the two other missing games) to go along with 26 rebounds, 13 assists, and the "dozen" blocked shots that Lynch mentioned.

Anyway, if you haven't found them by now, I doubt they exist, but it would nice to have more full stat-lines from Wilt and Nate's H2H's in the 65-66 season (when Chamberlain just annihilated Nate.) Here again, nbastats.net only has two of their nine H2H's, and one of them was an 8-22 game, which seems to be on the extreme side. IMHO, and considering his other high scoring games, I suspect that he easily shot over 50% against Nate that season.

And perhaps some other's here, like PHILA, CavsFan, Fpliii, or Psileas may have a copy of that book. It would be nice to have verification from someone other than myself.

[QUOTE]That's right in the same ballpark... And in '71 playoffs Kareem outplayed Nate by a much bigger margin than Wilt ever did in the postseason.

Kareem: 27.8 ppg, 15.4 rpg on 48.6 %FG/52.8 %TS
Nate: 17.6 ppg, 10.2 rpg on 37.1 %FG/41.6 %TS[/QUOTE]

Here were KAJ's and Nate's stats in their FIVE game series.

KAJ outscored Nate by margins of 25-19, 26-18, 33-23, 32-17, and 23-11 in those five games.

Now, I know you mentioned post-season, but we never got to see a "scoring" Wilt against Nate in the post-season (of course, Wilt was even more dominant against Nate in the '67 Finals, if you factor in assists, blocks, and...FG%, in which he ousthot Nate by a .560 to .343 margin.)

But, lets' use their NINE H2H's in the 65-66 regular season, shall we?

Nate outscored Wilt in their very first encounter, by an unbelieveable margin of 30-15 (as we will see, it had to have been an anomaly)...

then in their next eight H2H games, Wilt outscored Nate by margins of:

22-13, 26-9, 25-20, 38-15, 23-18, 45-13, 33-17, and 30-10.

Kareem's highest margin over Nate in the '71 playoffs was +15 (32-17.) In their 65-66 H2H's, Wilt had margins of +16, +17, +20, +23, and get this... +32.

I didn't include the rebounding numbers, because all we have for Nate is five of their nine games. Nor did I include any FG% because all we have are two of Wilt's (games of 8-22 and 17-32), and none of Nate's.

Again, a peak KAJ was nowhere near as dominant as a prime Chamberlain was against Nate.

I do have the book, and the numbers you posted at [url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=321988[/url] are what it mentions.
So, 73-130 vs SF. Total numbers: 186 pts, 233 rebs, 79 asts in 411 minutes (9 games).

PS. Irrelevant, but noteworthy: That season, he was averaging a triple-double vs Detroit (20.1-22.4-10.4), although he was only playing 37.7 mpg against the Pistons.

[QUOTE=Psileas]I do have the book, and the numbers you posted at [url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=321988[/url] are what it mentions.
So, 73-130 vs SF. Total numbers: 186 pts, 233 rebs, 79 asts in 411 minutes (9 games).[/QUOTE]

Thanks!

And if the stats are correct at nbastats.net (and I have no reason to doubt them), he shot 23-51 in the three games in which Nate missed. So, that means he shot 50-79 against Thurmond, or .633!

Thanks again.

[QUOTE=Psileas]PS. Irrelevant, but noteworthy: That season, he was averaging a triple-double vs Detroit (20.1-22.4-10.4), although he was only playing 37.7 mpg against the Pistons.[/QUOTE]

The Wilt-bashers would claim that Detroit had his number that season.

As a sidenote, of which you are aware, but maybe some other's are not...Chamberlain had a 20-20-20 game against Detroit the very next season (22 points, 25 rebounds, and 21 assists...and nbastats has an estimated 14 blocks.)

It's just too bad we don't have more full stat-lines from the Wilt-Nate H2H's in the 65-66 season. From what we do have, it was already brutal.

Oh, and another side-note, and this one I got from you...

In that 65-66 season, he had three straight games in the middle of the season, in which he faced Nate twice, and then Russell...

In the first one against Nate, he outscored Thurmond 45-13 (Nate did outrebound him, 26-21); then he put up a 33-30 game against Nate's 17-19 game; and then he pounded Russell with a 31-40 game to Russell's 11-17. Just an incredible three-game run.

[QUOTE=julizaver]Maybe you haven't seen my earlier post. Taken into consideration your 66-67 calculation I could repost:

How Nate shot vs Russell, Kareem and Wilt ?

vs Russell - 19,6 ppg on 0.409
vs Kareem - 18.6 ppg on 0.413
vs Wilt - 16.3 ppg on [B]0.382[/B]

And how the others shot against him ?

Kareem vs Nate - 24.76 ppg on 0.447
Wilt vs Nate - 14.84 ppg on [B]0.548[/B]
Russell vs Nate - 11.59 ppg on 4.34

[B]The data covers the 1965-1973 period. The data for Wilt vs Nate and Russell vs Nate is still incomplete (but I have the majority of the games data[/B]).[/QUOTE]

If you have time, you should create a new topic with those H2H's...

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]If you have time, you should create a new topic with those H2H's...[/QUOTE]

I could think about it. First I want to obtain some additional data, because it is incomplete at the moment.
I am making some researches, but will see how it goes.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]Here were KAJ's and Nate's stats in their FIVE game series.

KAJ outscored Nate by margins of 25-19, 26-18, 33-23, 32-17, and 23-11 in those five games.

Now, I know you mentioned post-season, but we never got to see a "scoring" Wilt against Nate in the post-season (of course, Wilt was even more dominant against Nate in the '67 Finals, if you factor in assists, blocks, and...FG%, in which he ousthot Nate by a .560 to .343 margin.)

But, lets' use their NINE H2H's in the 65-66 regular season, shall we?

Nate outscored Wilt in their very first encounter, by an unbelieveable margin of 30-15 (as we will see, it had to have been an anomaly)...

then in their next eight H2H games, Wilt outscored Nate by margins of:

22-13, 26-9, 25-20, 38-15, 23-18, 45-13, 33-17, and 30-10.

Kareem's highest margin over Nate in the '71 playoffs was +15 (32-17.) In their 65-66 H2H's, Wilt had margins of +16, +17, +20, +23, and get this... +32.

I didn't include the rebounding numbers, because all we have for Nate is five of their nine games. Nor did I include any FG% because all we have are two of Wilt's (games of 8-22 and 17-32), and none of Nate's.

Again, a peak KAJ was nowhere near as dominant as a prime Chamberlain was against Nate.[/QUOTE]

Except 65-66 Nate in his first full year starting at C wasn't as good as 70-71 Nate.

[B]Wilt vs Nate:[/B]

[U]Season Average[/U]

26.7 ppg on 50.0%
28.6 ppg
20.8 ppg on 63.3%

[U]Playoff Average[/U]

17.7 ppg on 56.0%

[B]Kareem vs Nate:[/B]

[U]Season Average[/U]

26.6 ppg on 48.4%
24.0 ppg on 44.1%
25.8 ppg on 48.8%
24.2 ppg on 57.1%

[U]Playoff Average[/U]

27.8 ppg on 48.6%
22.8 ppg on 40.5% (injured)
22.8 ppg on 42.8%

That's pretty much a wash. Remember Kareem took a lot more shots in the playoffs against Nate than Wilt ever did. You can't blindly compare raw FG% when one player is taking way more shots than the other.

[QUOTE=dankok8]Except 65-66 Nate in his first full year starting at C wasn't as good as 70-71 Nate.

[B]Wilt vs Nate:[/B]

[U]Season Average[/U]

26.7 ppg on 50.0%
28.6 ppg
20.8 ppg on 63.3%

[U]Playoff Average[/U]

17.7 ppg on 56.0%

[B]Kareem vs Nate:[/B]

[U]Season Average[/U]

26.6 ppg on 48.4%
24.0 ppg on 44.1%
25.8 ppg on 48.8%
24.2 ppg on 57.1%

[U]Playoff Average[/U]

27.8 ppg on 48.6%
22.8 ppg on 40.5% (injured)
22.8 ppg on 42.8%

That's pretty much a wash. Remember Kareem took a lot more shots in the playoffs against Nate than Wilt ever did. You can't blindly compare raw FG% when one player is taking way more shots than the other.[/QUOTE]

And of course, KAJ's ONLY decent shooting season against Nate came in that 73-74 season, when Nate was fighting injuries, missed 20 games, and was already in a severe state of decline from his last quality season of 72-73. And in his very next season, 74-75, he was basically a shell.

Overall, KAJ only shot .447 against Nate in anything close to his norm. His 24.2 ppg .571 season was against that rapidly declining (and injury-plagued) Nate. You can throw that one out. Nate was a considerably better, in his 65-66 season. And that season came just before his greatest season, 66-67 (when he finished a distant second to Wilt in the MVP voting.) And, of course, the numbers clearly show a prime Chamberlain just slaughtering a prime Nate in that season beyond recognition.

And again, in Wilt's 65-66 season, he pounded Nate with scoring margins of 33-17, 26-9, 30-10, 38-15 and a staggering 45-13. KAJ never approached that domination against Thurmond.

Oh, and this "Nate who was not as good as the 70-71 Nate"...

Here were his 10 H2H's against RUSSELL in 65-66:

[QUOTE]Game 1:
Nate: 18 pts, 27 rebs
Russell: 17 pts, 22 rebs, 7-13 FG/FGA

Game 2:
Nate: 19 pts, 12 rebs
Russell: 8 pts, 20 rebs, 4-9 FG/FGA

Game 3:
Nate: 20 pts
Russell: 8 pts, 28 rebs

Game 4:
Nate: 21 pts, 31 rebs
Russell: 13 pts, 24 rebs, 4-11 FG/FGA

Game 5:
Nate: 19 pts
Russell: 16 pts, 24 rebs

Game 6:
Nate: 25 pts, 27 rebs
Russell: 15 pts, 11 rebs, 6-12 FG/FGA

Game 7:
Nate: 24 pts, 24 rebs
Russell: 10 pts, 28 rebs

Game 8:
Nate: 34 pts, 19 rebs
Russell: 8 pts, 24 rebs, 2-8 FG/FGA

Game 9:
Nate: 23 pts, 23 rebs
Russell: 12 pts, 19 rebs

Game 10:
Nate: 11 pts, 14 rebs
Russell: 11 pts, 23 rebs, 5-13 FG/FGA

Known season averages:

Nate: 20.2 ppg, 22.2 rpg
Russell: 11.8 ppg, 22.3 rpg, .429 FG%

Without knowing all of their FG% numbers, I would think that Thurmond easily outplayed Russell.


[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]And of course, KAJ's ONLY decent shooting season against Nate came in that 73-74 season, when Nate was fighting injuries, missed 20 games, and was already in a severe state of decline from his last quality season of 72-73. And in his very next season, 74-75, he was basically a shell.

Overall, KAJ only shot .447 against Nate in anything close to his norm. His 24.2 ppg .571 season was against that rapidly declining (and injury-plagued) Nate. You can throw that one out. Nate was a considerably better, in his 65-66 season. And that season came just before his greatest season, 66-67 (when he finished a distant second to Wilt in the MVP voting.) And, of course, the numbers clearly show a prime Chamberlain just slaughtering a prime Nate in that season beyond recognition.

And again, in Wilt's 65-66 season, he pounded Nate with scoring margins of 33-17, 26-9, 30-10, 38-15 and a staggering 45-13. KAJ never approached that domination against Thurmond.

Oh, and this "Nate who was not as good as the 70-71 Nate"...

Here were his 10 H2H's against RUSSELL in 65-66:[/QUOTE]

Nate was a much better scorer in the early 70's then in 65-66 though... averaged 4-5 ppg more on 3-4% better efficiency.

And Nate ALWAYS missed a ton of games to injury including in 66-67.

The truth is Nate at his peak shot pretty terribly against Kareem in many games... In 70-71 we have two season games where Nate shot 4-17 and 10-22. In 71-72 we have two season games where he shot 1-9 and 4-11.

In '71, '72, and '73 playoffs Nate shot 37.1%, 43.4%, and 39.7% from the field against Jabbar.

[B]And in the '71 and '73 playoffs Kareem outplayed Nate by a bigger margin than Chamberlain ever did in the postseason. Kareem outscored Nate by 10+ ppg, outrebounded him by 6+ rpg and outshot him by a ton as well in both series. [/B]

Overall Kareem and Wilt both struggled against Nate and both "dominated" him to about the same degree.

[QUOTE=dankok8]Nate was a much better scorer in the early 70's then in 65-66 though... averaged 4-5 ppg more on 3-4% better efficiency.

And Nate ALWAYS missed a ton of games to injury including in 66-67.

The truth is Nate at his peak shot pretty terribly against Kareem in many games... In 70-71 we have two season games where Nate shot 4-17 and 10-22. In 71-72 we have two season games where he shot 1-9 and 4-11.

In '71, '72, and '73 playoffs Nate shot 37.1%, 43.4%, and 39.7% from the field against Jabbar.

[B]And in the '71 and '73 playoffs Kareem outplayed Nate by a bigger margin than Chamberlain ever did in the postseason. Kareem outscored Nate by 10+ ppg, outrebounded him by 6+ rpg and outshot him by a ton as well in both series. [/B]

[B]Overall Kareem and Wilt both struggled against Nate and both "dominated" him to about the same degree[/B].[/QUOTE]

A PRIME Chamberlain was FAR more dominant, even in the post-season (when you factor in every statistical category) against a prime Nate, than KAJ EVER was. Not even close.

Again, a PRIME Chamberlain just slaughtered a near peak Nate by FAR greater scoring margins that a PRIME KAJ did against a fading Nate. Where were KAJ's 38-15 and 45-13 obliterations? Where were the seasons (not including an rapidly declining, injury-plagued Nate in the twilight of his career, in 73-74) where he was outscoring Nate by 29-16 ppg margins. Where were his regular seasons when he was outscoring a PEAK Nate by a 21-13 ppg margin, and outshooting him by a .633 to .327 margin. Or post-seasons where he was outshooting a PEAK Thurmond by a .560 to .343 margin?

Come on...get over it. A PRIME Chamberlain was FAR more dominant against ALL of his peers, than KAJ ever was.

I might take the time later to post a peak/prime Wilt's numbers against a peak/prime Bellamy, and then compare them with the aging Bellamy/prime KAJ H2H's, too.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]A PRIME Chamberlain was FAR more dominant, even in the post-season (when you factor in every statistical category) against a prime Nate, than KAJ EVER was. Not even close.

Again, a PRIME Chamberlain just slaughtered a near peak Nate by FAR greater scoring margins that a PRIME KAJ did against a fading Nate. Where were KAJ's 38-15 and 45-13 obliterations? Where were the seasons (not including an rapidly declining, injury-plagued Nate in the twilight of his career, in 73-74) where he was outscoring Nate by 29-16 ppg margins. Where were his regular seasons when he was outscoring a PEAK Nate by a 21-13 ppg margin, and outshooting him by a .633 to .327 margin. Or post-seasons where he was outshooting a PEAK Thurmond by a .560 to .343 margin?

Come on...get over it. A PRIME Chamberlain was FAR more dominant against ALL of his peers, than KAJ ever was.

I might take the time later to post a peak/prime Wilt's numbers against a peak/prime Bellamy, and then compare them with the aging Bellamy/prime KAJ H2H's, too.[/QUOTE]

In 70-71 and 71-72 we don't have enough FG% data but in the 4 games we do have Nate shot 19/59 or 32.2%.

In 73-74 Kareem outscored Nate 24.2 ppg to 8.4 ppg and outshot him 57.1% to 40.7% (we only have Nate's FG% for 2 out of 5 games).

Kareem never outshot Nate by .560 to .343 margin in the postseason but he outscored him by 27.8 ppg to 17.3 ppg and outshot him by 48.6% to 37.1% margin in the same series! And also outrebounded him 15.6 to 10.2 by the way. Scoring volume also matters not just efficiency.

For example Wilt outshooting Nate in '69 and '73 is almost meaningless considering how many fewer shots he took!

[QUOTE=dankok8]In 70-71 and 71-72 we don't have enough FG% data but in the 4 games we do have Nate shot 19/59 or 32.2%.

[B]In 73-74 Kareem outscored Nate 24.2 ppg to 8.4 ppg and outshot him 57.1% to 40.7% (we only have Nate's FG% for 2 out of 5 games[/B]).

Kareem never outshot Nate by .560 to .343 margin in the postseason but he outscored him by 27.8 ppg to 17.3 ppg and outshot him by 48.6% to 37.1% margin in the same series! And also outrebounded him 15.6 to 10.2 by the way. Scoring volume also matters not just efficiency.

For example Wilt outshooting Nate in '69 and '73 is almost meaningless considering how many fewer shots he took![/QUOTE]\

Again, this was a rapidly declining and injury-plagued Nate (who was far worse that season than he was in his rookie season for cryingoutloud), and who would be just a shell in his very next season. Sorry, this doesn't count.

If we are using that season, then KAJ's 87-88 season was a true indication of his career, as well.

BTW, and including the post-season (as well as mpg), KAJ had his greatest statistical season (and probably his greatest season, period), in his SECOND season. Furthermore, take a look at Kareem's Bucks team defense in his second and third seasons. He was probably at his defensive peak by then, as well. So, to suggest that Nate in his second season was nowhere close to his prime, and when his PEAK season came in only his THIRD, is a bit ridiculous, don't you think?

[QUOTE=dankok8]In 70-71 and [B]71-72[/B] we don't have enough FG% data but in the 4 games we do have Nate shot 19/59 or 32.2%.

In 73-74 Kareem outscored Nate 24.2 ppg to 8.4 ppg and outshot him 57.1% to 40.7% (we only have Nate's FG% for 2 out of 5 games).

Kareem never outshot Nate by .560 to .343 margin in the postseason but he outscored him by 27.8 ppg to 17.3 ppg and outshot him by 48.6% to 37.1% margin in the same series! And also outrebounded him 15.6 to 10.2 by the way. Scoring volume also matters not just efficiency.

For example Wilt outshooting Nate in '69 and '73 is almost meaningless considering how many fewer shots he took![/QUOTE]

In the 71-72 playoffs, Nate outscored KAJ, 25.4 ppg to 22.8 ppg, and outshot him from the field, by a .437 to .405 margin. Thurmond CLEARLY outplayed Kareem in that post-season series. Despite barely outscoring Wilt in two of their post-season H2H's, he was outshot by staggering margins (.500 to .392, and then .611 to .373), and was shelled on the glass by Wilt 23.5 rpg to 19.5 rpg, and then 23.6 to 17.2 rpg. NO ONE would have EVER claimed that Nate outplayed Wilt in ANY of their playoff series H2H's. And of course, a PRIME Chamberlain only faced him in one other one, and absolutely annihilated him in five of the six games (and just killed him in the clinching game six win.)

[QUOTE=dankok8][B]In 70-71 and 71-72 we don't have enough FG% data [/B]but in the 4 games we do have Nate shot 19/59 or 32.2%.

In 73-74 Kareem outscored Nate 24.2 ppg to 8.4 ppg and outshot him 57.1% to 40.7% (we only have Nate's FG% for 2 out of 5 games).

Kareem never outshot Nate by .560 to .343 margin in the postseason but he outscored him by 27.8 ppg to 17.3 ppg and outshot him by 48.6% to 37.1% margin in the same series! And also outrebounded him 15.6 to 10.2 by the way. Scoring volume also matters not just efficiency.

For example Wilt outshooting Nate in '69 and '73 is almost meaningless considering how many fewer shots he took![/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=291462[/url]

[QUOTE][B]1969 - 1970 (Kareem's rookie season) 3 games - reg.season

Kareem - 42.0 mpg 21.67 ppg, 12.0 rpg, 4.0 apg, [COLOR="DarkRed"]0.348 FG/FGA[/COLOR]

Nate ---- 46.7 mpg 20.67 ppg, 17.0 rpg, 3.3 apg, [COLOR="DarkRed"]0.490 FG/FGA[/COLOR][/B]

[B]1970 - 1971 6 games - reg.season

Kareem - 26.67 ppg, 14.7 rpg,[COLOR="DarkRed"] 0.484 FG/FGA [/COLOR]

Nate ---- 23.83 ppg, 11.0 rpg,[COLOR="DarkRed"] 0.477 FG/FGA[/COLOR][/B]

1970 - 1971 5 games - playoffs

Kareem - 39.2 mpg 27.8 ppg, 15.6 rpg, 0.6 apg, 0.486 FG/FGA

Nate ---- 38.4 mpg 17.60 ppg, 10.2 rpg, 3.0 apg, 0.371 FG/FGA

1971 - 1972 3 games - reg.season

Kareem - 24.00 ppg, 16.3 rpg, 0.441 FG/FGA

Nate ---- 16.33 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 0.260 FG/FGA

[B]1971 - 1972 5 games - playoffs

Kareem - 47.0 mpg 22.8 ppg, 19.0 rpg, 5.4 apg, [COLOR="DarkRed"]0.405 FG/FGA[/COLOR]

Nate ---- 46.0 mpg 25.40 ppg, 17.8 rpg, 5.2 apg, [COLOR="DarkRed"]0.434 FG/FGA[/COLOR][/B]

1972 - 1973 6 games - reg.season

Kareem - 25.83 ppg, 13.7 rpg, 0.488 FG/FGA

Nate ---- 13.67 ppg, 15.0 rpg, 0.367 FG/FGA

[B]1972 - 1973 6 games - playoffs

Kareem - 46.0 mpg 22.83 ppg, 16.2 rpg, 2.8 apg,[COLOR="DarkRed"] 0.428 FG/FGA[/COLOR]

Nate ---- 42.5 mpg 13.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 3.2 apg, [COLOR="DarkRed"]0.423 FG/FGA[/COLOR][/B][/QUOTE]

Again, thanks to Julizaver.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]\

Again, this was a rapidly declining and injury-plagued Nate (who was far worse that season than he was in his rookie season for cryingoutloud), and who would be just a shell in his very next season. Sorry, this doesn't count.

If we are using that season, then KAJ's 87-88 season was a true indication of his career, as well.

BTW, and including the post-season (as well as mpg), KAJ had his greatest statistical season (and probably his greatest season, period), in his SECOND season. Furthermore, take a look at Kareem's Bucks team defense in his second and third seasons. He was probably at his defensive peak by then, as well. So, to suggest that Nate in his second season was nowhere close to his prime, and when his PEAK season came in only his THIRD, is a bit ridiculous, don't you think?[/QUOTE]

LOL Nate was was way better in 73-74 than his rookie season. In the games he played that year he was 5th in rebounding, 6th in blocks, and made 2nd team all-defense. He played 40 mpg too so it was surely still his prime...

[QUOTE]In the 71-72 playoffs, Nate outscored KAJ, 25.4 ppg to 22.8 ppg, and outshot him from the field, by a .437 to .405 margin. Thurmond CLEARLY outplayed Kareem in that post-season series. Despite barely outscoring Wilt in two of their post-season H2H's, he was outshot by staggering margins (.500 to .392, and then .611 to .373), and was shelled on the glass by Wilt 23.5 rpg to 19.5 rpg, and then 23.6 to 17.2 rpg. NO ONE would have EVER claimed that Nate outplayed Wilt in ANY of their playoff series H2H's. And of course, a PRIME Chamberlain only faced him in one other one, and absolutely annihilated him in five of the six games (and just killed him in the clinching game six win.)[/QUOTE]

Kareem's left knee was injured in the '72 playoffs...

And as your stats show Kareem individually obliterated Nate in the '71 and the '73 series by a much bigger margin than Wilt ever did in the playoffs.

[QUOTE=dankok8]LOL Nate was was way better in 73-74 than his rookie season. In the games he played that year he was 5th in rebounding, 6th in blocks, and made 2nd team all-defense. He played 40 mpg too so it was surely still his prime...



Kareem's left knee was injured in the '72 playoffs...

And as your stats show Kareem individually obliterated Nate in the '71 and the '73 series by a much bigger margin than Wilt ever did in the playoffs.[/QUOTE]

In 65-66 Nate averaged 16.3 ppg, 18.0 rpg, and while he just shot .406 from the field, it came in an NBA that shot .433. The very next season he came in second in the MVP voting with an 18.7 ppg, 21.3 rpg, .437 season (league shot .441.)

In 73-74, and missing 20 games, he averaged 13.0 ppg, 14.2 rpg, and shot .444 (in a league that shot .459.) Just the previous season, in 72-73, he averaged 17.1 ppg, 17.1 rpg, and shot .446. And, following his 73-74 season, Nate averaged 7.9 ppg, 11.3 rpg, and shot .364 from the field.

Clearly, he was a MUCH better player in 65-66 than he was in 73-74.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]In 65-66 Nate averaged 16.3 ppg, 18.0 rpg, and while he just shot .406 from the field, it came in an NBA that shot .433. The very next season he came in second in the MVP voting with an 18.7 ppg, 21.3 rpg, .437 season (league shot .441.)

In 73-74, and missing 20 games, he averaged 13.0 ppg, 14.2 rpg, and shot .444 (in a league that shot .459.) Just the previous season, in 72-73, he averaged 17.1 ppg, 17.1 rpg, and shot .446. And, following his 73-74 season, Nate averaged 7.9 ppg, 11.3 rpg, and shot .364 from the field.

Clearly, he was a MUCH better player in 65-66 than he was in 73-74.[/QUOTE]

The league was much faster paced in 65-66 than 73-74 so rebounds are pretty even. Nate also averaged more assists in 73-74, shot much better (even compared to league average) and was much more experienced.

In 74-75 he was washed up and I agree it seems ridiculous to give numbers against him much merit from that point on but in 73-74 he was still a force.

[QUOTE=dankok8]The league was much faster paced in 65-66 than 73-74 so rebounds are pretty even. Nate also averaged more assists in 73-74, shot much better (even compared to league average) and was much more experienced.

In 74-75 he was washed up and I agree it seems ridiculous to give numbers against him much merit from that point on but in 73-74 he was still a force.[/QUOTE]

Once again, if you claiming that Nate was near his peak in 73-74, then evidently KAJ was near his 87-88.

They'd be poor mans JaVale McGees in this era who cares. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=GOATbe]They'd be poor mans JaVale McGees in this era who cares. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

Evidently YOU did. You not only took the time to read the topic, you even wasted more of it by taking the time to comment on it.

[QUOTE=GOATbe]They'd be poor mans JaVale McGees in this era who cares. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
:facepalm

[QUOTE=julizaver]Maybe you haven't seen my earlier post. Taken into consideration your 66-67 calculation I could repost:

How Nate shot vs Russell, Kareem and Wilt ?

vs Russell - 19,6 ppg on 0.409
vs Kareem - 18.6 ppg on 0.413
vs Wilt - 16.3 ppg on [B]0.382[/B]

And how the others shot against him ?

Kareem vs Nate - 24.76 ppg on 0.447
Wilt vs Nate - 14.84 ppg on [B]0.548[/B]
Russell vs Nate - 11.59 ppg on 4.34

The data covers the 1965-1973 period. The data for Wilt vs Nate and Russell vs Nate is still incomplete (but I have the majority of the games data).[/QUOTE]

Thanks again, Julizaver.

Dankok8 keeps mentioning Wilt and Nate's 67-68 H2H's, as if Thurmond were just waxing Chamberlain. So, I looked up their FOUR H2H games:

1.
Nate: 11 pts, 33 rebs
Wilt: 1 pt., 18 rebs, 13 ast, and get this 0-0 FG/FGA

2.
Nate: 18 pts, 26 rebs
Wilt: 20 pts, 27 rebs, 4 ast, 8-18 FG/FGA

3.
Nate: 13 pts, 25 rebs
Wilt: 12 pts, 23 rebs, 4 ast, 3-11 FG/FGA

4.
Nate: 18 pts, 23 rebs
Wilt: 20 pts, 27 rebs, 7 ast, 8/? FG/FGA


So, this was supposed to be some kind of major beatdown from Nate? First of all, we don't have any of Thurmond's FG%'s, and historically, he shot way less than 40% against Wilt. And just the season before in 12 H2H's with Wilt he shot about .335. So, there was a very good chance that he was shooting horribly against him in 67-68, too.

Then, as always, he uses a very small sampling as some kind of examples. Here again, we only have two of their NINE H2H's from 65-66, and in those two Wilt shot 8-22 and 17-32, or a total of .463. So, he assumes that Chamberlain, in a season in which he was routinely dumping 30+ points on Nate, would have only shot .463 in those NINE games.

For instance, in their 3 H2H's in the 64-65 season, Chamberlain had games of 22 points, on 9-17 shooting; 24 points, on 7-21 shooting; and then 34 on 13-20 shooting...or a combined 26.7 ppg on .500 shooting. Now, how many times in their MANY H2H games did Wilt shoot something 7-21 against Nate? Obviously that was an aberration.

Then, in the 66-67 season, we now know that in six regular season H2H's, Chamberlain averaged 20.8 ppg on an unfathomable .633 FG% (while holding Nate to 13.0 ppg on a .327 FG%.) And again, in the Finals, covering six H2H's, Chamberlain outscored Nate, per game, 17.5 ppg to 14.3 ppg, and outshot Thurmond by a .560 to .343 margin. (BTW, the Wilt-bashers would use this as an example of Wilt's decline in the post-season.)

So, all we have to go by in that 67-68 season were one game in which Chamberlain didn't even attempt a shot, and another, in which he scored 20 points, we don't have any FG% data. So, he uses the two examples, in which Wilt collectively shot 11-29, and claims that Thurmond held him a .379 FG%.

In any case, Wilt had the two highest scoring games in those H2H's, and went 2-2 in their rebounding battles (albeit Nate outrebounded in total by a 107-86 margin.)

All of which got me thinking. Just how bad did Wilt shoot over the course of the rest of their H2H's?

Here we go:

68-69 regular season: 6 games
Chamberlain averaged 13.8 ppg on a .547 FG%.

68-69 playoffs: 6 games
Wilt averaged 12.0 ppg on a .500 FG%
(Nate averaged 16.7 ppg on a .392 FG% BTW)

70-71 regular season: 6 games
Wilt averaged 10.2 ppg on a .553 FG%

71-72 regular season: 6 games
Wilt averaged 6.8 ppg on a .731 FG%

72-73 regular season: 6 games
Wilt averaged 6.0 ppg on a .722 FG%

72-73 playoffs: 5 games:
Wilt averaged 7.0 ppg on a .611 FG%
(Nate averaged 15.8 ppg on a .373 FG%.)

I just hold out a glimmer of hope that more info will turn up regarding their missing seven games from their 65-66 H2H's. Oh, and it would great if we had more of Nate's FG%'s, as well (and thanks for posting Nate's three known H2H's from that 65-66 season, as well.)

LAZERUSS please don't misquote me.

I did say Nate outplayed Wilt during entirety of the 67-68 season and that's a fact.

For 65-66 I didn't say Wilt shot 46.3% for all 9 games. I simply said if we reasonably assume he took 20 shots per game in the remaining 7 games that would put him at 47.9%. And therefore I have doubts that he shot a great % in 65-66. Of course I can't be sure but I think so.

And when Wilt shot very high %'s against Nate from '69 onwards it was always on very small numbers of shots.

You persistently compare Wilt's FG% when he takes 5 shots a game to Kareem's FG% when he takes 25 shots a game. You consistently cherry-pick stats that suit you and ignore games where Wilt struggles. It's also clear that you're not willing to admit that Wilt ever did anything wrong.

I on the other hand SHARE ALL NUMBERS and then simply post my view. That allows other people to take a look and form their own conclusions. And I try to be as unbiased as possible. Kareem (who isn't even my fave player or anything like that by the way...) has had plenty of crappy games and even entire series.

[QUOTE=dankok8]LAZERUSS please don't misquote me.

I did say Nate outplayed Wilt during entirety of the 67-68 season and that's a fact.

For 65-66 I didn't say Wilt shot 46.3% for all 9 games. I simply said if we reasonably assume he took 20 shots per game in the remaining 7 games that would put him at 47.9%. And therefore I have doubts that he shot a great % in 65-66. Of course I can't be sure but I think so.

And when Wilt shot very high %'s against Nate from '69 onwards it was always on very small numbers of shots.

You persistently compare Wilt's FG% when he takes 5 shots a game to Kareem's FG% when he takes 25 shots a game. You consistently cherry-pick stats that suit you and ignore games where Wilt struggles. It's also clear that you're not willing to admit that Wilt ever did anything wrong.

I on the other hand SHARE ALL NUMBERS and then simply post my view. That allows other people to take a look and form their own conclusions. And I try to be as unbiased as possible. Kareem (who isn't even my fave player or anything like that by the way...) has had plenty of crappy games and even entire series.[/QUOTE]

Sorry. I apologize.

You are certainly one of the more knowledgeable posters here, and you do a great job of researching your your opinions.

Look, I have KAJ very high on my all-time list (#5...and I can see him even being considered a GOAT.) In fact, I have long maintained that his 69-70 post-season; his entire 70-71 season, including playoffs ; and his entire 71-72 regular season, were one of the greatest PEAKS in NBA history.

My problem with Kareem was that, after that, for whatever reasons, he slowly lost the will to get better. Once again, when motivated, he could hang 48-50 point games on Walton (hell, he hung a 50 point game on Wilt), or put up a huge playoff run like his 76-77 post-season; or put up five great games in the '80 Finals, or win a FMVP at age 37. But overall, he SHOULD have been more dominant.

And my other problem with KAJ is that so many here place him on this pedalstal, and ignore his share of flops and failures. But, many of those same posters will continuously trash Chamberlain's career, despite the fact that he seldom had a poor playoff game, much less a series.

And again, I honestly have not seen any research which would put any other center over Wilt's run in the mid-60's. There were very few games in those years, hell, from '60 thru '67 even, in which he was, at least statistically, outplayed. And he was just annihilating his HOF centers beyond recognition. ALL of them. Including the playoffs.

In any case, you and I will just have to agree to disagree.

:cheers:

[QUOTE=Miller for 3]:roll:

Wilt average 7ppg playing 45 minutes, who cares what % he shot? That's Kendrick Perkins type production, but against shorter, less athletic competition and with LA market hype making the refs gift him FTs and foul benefits[/QUOTE]

Nate the goat Thurmond making Ilt his female dog:roll: