Hall of fame centers in the 60's vs team defenses in the early 00's

[QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]Didn't click the link (unlike the majority of people here, I don't need to go on youtube), but I notice you conspicuously didn't address the words that Wilt himself uttered.[/QUOTE]

"Instead of having two or three people and Russell all on me at the same time..."

And Russell was sitting right next to Wilt when he uttered those words.

[QUOTE=jlauber][QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]
Didn't click the link (unlike the majority of people here, I don't need to go on youtube), but I notice you conspicuously didn't address the words that Wilt himself uttered.[/QUOTE]

"Instead of having two or three people and Russell all on me at the same time..."

And Russell was sitting right next to Wilt when he uttered those words.[/QUOTE]

Okay, I'm done with you on this topic. I more than anyone else on this board know that some things are pointless to discuss with you, and unlike some people, I will not waste my time. Continue to believe what you want to believe, like most of the people around here.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]Really..

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5jV7WImytM[/url]

Celtics vs warriors. Wilt not being doubled.

go to 3 minutes when Wilt starts getting theb all.

You seeing some swarm of guys on him?

5:50. Wilt gets it...nobody comes. he dribbles with Russell then fades away.

Next time down....6.30. Wilt gets it. One on one. passes it. but no help comes.

At 7 Wilt rebounds it and goes right back up....nobody runs to help Russell. Russell actually kinda blocked it but it goes in.

7.20...Wilts gets it. Total one on one. travels.

Just looking at what is there..

We can prove some of those statements untrue.

This:



Is just factually....wrong. It is not the truth.[/QUOTE]


Same game...

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uOGY0fftVA&feature=related[/url]

Doubled, WITHOUT the ball, at around 1:10

Doubled at 1:50

TRIPLED in the lane at around 2:15.

Doubled at 4:10.

Doubled at 5:30.

Doubled at 7:00,

Doubled at 8:20 withOUT the ball.

Doubled at 8:30.

Tripled at 9:30.

ALL of that in just ONE-FOURTH of ONE-HALF of ONE of the 142 H2H games that Russell and Wilt played in!

I jsut went t othe first one you said was a triple team to confirm my accumption that you wouldcall anything with anyone near him double/triple coverage...and yes.

2 of the 3 people you claim are on Wilt were there before he got there. And one of them was actually touching the man he was defending.

He just turns and tries to poke at the ball when wilt had it low.

And its a triple team?

As I said...the mere fact that many times in this one game russell guards wilt straight up makes this:

"But for Russ, it was always one or two other guys helping him. He never guarded me straight up.""


Flat out not true.

And its the same in every game and every set of highlights.

Wilt played one on one...a LOT. Everyone does.

People blow the double and triple team stuff up too much. Its rare anyone gets the kinda coverage fans of people claim they do when they try to make them look good.

Wilt is no exception. Ive seen a LOT of wilt footage.

He played one on one plenty. And it is not my opinion. its recorded video fact.

Im surem any games he was doubled arent recorded and shown. But the mere fact that so much that is...shows him single covered? That alone destroys the idea he was always doubled/tripled.

Its just a myth. If not an outright lie. And nobody needs to do anything more to prove it than google his name and check the videos. The man was scoring one on one...a LOT.

Wilt's numbers look at lot more in line with the rest of the era once they widened the lane from 12 to 16 feet in 64.

[QUOTE=eliteballer]Wilt's numbers look at lot more in line with the rest of the era once they widened the lane from 12 to 16 feet in 64.[/QUOTE]

Wilt averaged 36.9 ppg on .524 shooting in the 63-64 season. The NBA widened the lane before the start of the 64-65 season. In the first half of the 64-65 season, an AILING Wilt averaged 38.9 ppg on .499 shooting. He was traded at mid-season, to a somewhat better team, and cut back his shooting in the second half of the season. His average for the season? 34.7 ppg on .510 shooting. BTW, in the very next season (65-66), Wilt averaged 33.5 ppg on a then record .540 FG% (in a league that shot .433.)

Wilt also recorded a TON of 50 and 60 point games AFTER the widening of the lane. Even as late as the 68-69 season, in a league which averaged 112.3 ppg, Wilt, in a year in which he only averaged 14 FGAs per game, hung TWO 60+ games ...one of them a 66 point game on 29-35 shooting, which is the most efficient 60+ point game in NBA history. In fact, Wilt DRAMATICALLY cut back his shooting from the 66-67 season on, BUT, in the 66-67, 67-68, and 68-69 seasons, Wilt put up games of 52, 52, 53, 58, 60, 66, and 68 points...all in years in which he averaged about 14 FGAs per game.

The first season or two after a rule change are always a little odd because players and teams are still adjusting to the change. He wasn't averaging 50 and 44 ppg seasons after the rule change.

Where is there verification the first season of the expanded lane was 65? I've always read it was done in 64, whether that refers to the portion of 1964 after the 63-64 season concluded or to the season itself I dont know.

BTW, it was illegal to double a man WITHOUT the ball in the Wilt era, and yet, we have LIMITED footage, in which he was CLEARLY doubled withOUT the ball.

[QUOTE=jlauber]Wilt averaged 36.9 ppg on .524 shooting in the 63-64 season. The NBA widened the lane before the start of the 64-65 season. In the first half of the 64-65 season, an AILING Wilt averaged 38.9 ppg on .499 shooting. He was traded at mid-season, to a somewhat better team, and cut back his shooting in the second half of the season. His average for the season? 34.7 ppg on .510 shooting. BTW, in the very next season (65-66), Wilt averaged 33.5 ppg on a then record .540 FG% (in a league that shot .433.)

Wilt also recorded a TON of 50 and 60 point games AFTER the widening of the lane. Even as late as the 68-69 season, in a league which averaged 112.3 ppg, Wilt, in a year in which he only averaged 14 FGAs per game, hung TWO 60+ games ...one of them a 66 point game on 29-35 shooting, which is the most efficient 60+ point game in NBA history. In fact, Wilt DRAMATICALLY cut back his shooting from the 66-67 season on, BUT, in the 66-67, 67-68, and 68-69 seasons, Wilt put up games of 52, 52, 53, 58, 60, 66, and 68 points...all in
years in which he averaged about 14 FGAs per game.[/QUOTE]

All those numbers and only one ring on your prime, you gotta do better than that. Everyone knows Wilt got the greatest stat ever but not everyone knows the choke jobs he did on game 7s. Maybe if he was focus more on winning than self absorbed about his number, then maybe no one will question him being the GOAT. But the end justify the means, when Wilt was less concern about his numbers and became a team player he won another ring. That to me is more significant that his unfreakingbeliavable numbers in not so great era of big man.

NVM I found it [url]http://www.nba.com/history/seasonreviews/1964-65/index.html[/url]

[QUOTE=eliteballer]The first season or two after a rule change are always a little odd because players and teams are still adjusting to the change. He wasn't averaging 50 and 44 ppg seasons after the rule change.

Where is there verification the first season of the expanded lane was 65? I've always read it was done in 64, whether that refers to the portion of 1964 after the 63-64 season concluded or to the season itself I dont know.[/QUOTE]

[url]http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FIH/is_9_75/ai_n17212592/[/url]

[QUOTE]The NBA went to the current 16-foot wide lane in 1964-65.[/QUOTE]

The widening of the lane had NO affect on Wilt.

[QUOTE=Rooster]All those numbers and only one ring on your prime, you gotta do better than that. Everyone knows Wilt got the greatest stat ever but not everyone knows the choke jobs he did on game 7s. Maybe if he was focus more on winning than self absorbed about his number, then maybe no one will question him being the GOAT. But the end justify the means, when Wilt was less concern about his numbers and became a team player he won another ring. That to me is more significant that his unfreakingbeliavable numbers in not so great era of big man.[/QUOTE]

Wilt's numbers in his NINE game seven's...

24.4 ppg, 26.3 rpg, and on .626 shooting (which is the highest game seven FG% by a "great" in NBA HISTORY.)

And I won't take the time to look up all of his opposing centers, but you can be sure they were WAY below their normal numbers.

[QUOTE=eliteballer]NVM I found it [url]http://www.nba.com/history/seasonreviews/1964-65/index.html[/url][/QUOTE]

BTW, in Wilt's 11 post-season games in that 64-65 season, he averaged 29.3 ppg on .530 shooting, in a league that shot .426. And, in his seven games against Russell, he averaged 30 ppg and 31 rpg. I have never seen his FG% in that series against Russell, but in the game seven, one point loss, Chamberlain put up a 30 point game, on 12-15 shooting from the floor, with 32 rebounds. Of course, the "anti-Wilt clan" will point to Wilt's 6-13 from the line and blame WILT for that loss. Oh, and BTW, in the last 36 secs, Wilt went 2-2 from the line, as well as a thunderous dunk over Russell with five seconds left.

[QUOTE=jlauber]Wilt's numbers in his NINE game seven's...

24.4 ppg, 26.3 rpg, and on .626 shooting (which is the highest game seven FG% by a "great" in NBA HISTORY.)

And I won't take the time to look up all of his opposing centers, but you can be sure they were WAY below their normal numbers.[/QUOTE]

What about taking only one shot in the 2nd half. What about taking himself out of the game. What about not taking advantage of Reed not playing. Well Wilt all that too. Wilt won
all the matchup. Numbers favor him but the luck favor more of the courageous ones, great players with heart which can
never be measured but you can count them on their fingers.

[QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]Okay, I'm done with you on this topic. I more than anyone else on this board know that some things are pointless to discuss with you, and unlike some people, I will not waste my time. Continue to believe what you want to believe, like most of the people around here.[/QUOTE]

Look, I consider you one of the most knowledgeable posters on this site (if not THE most.) But, you get almost as defensive with Russell, as I do with Wilt.

I have actually come to appreciate Russell's greatness in the last two years on this forum...because of posters like you and G.O.A.T. And I have acknowledged that Russell got more out of his teammates than Wilt did out of his. In fact, Russell's teammates almost always outplayed Chamberlain's, even when Wilt had comparable rosters. And I have conceded that Russell was a major reason why, and also that Wilt probably deserved some of the blame.

BTW, and as you well know, even Wilt admitted that Russell blended better with his teammates, than he (Wilt) would have.

My problem is with these myths...that Russell "owned" Wilt. Or that Wilt "choked" against Russell. Or that he "always" beat Wilt (and of course, it was Russell's TEAMs that were beating Wilt's TEAMs.)

And we both know that Russell played Wilt better than just about everybody (with the possible exception of Thurmond.) But we also know that he certainly didn't dominate Chamberlain. If anything, one-on-one, it was not even close. Having said that, it is/was a TEAM game. And Russell made his TEAMs the best in NBA history.

And that is the other problem I have here. There are the "Wilt-haters" who claim that he flopped in the post-season...and yet, they seldom mention that it was Russell and his vaunted Dynasty teams that were edging Wilt and his team's, year-after-year. Where is the praise for Russell. The majority of those posters rank Russell near the bottom of their Top-10's (if at all.)

So, if you want an apology, I will be more than glad to give you one. You are one of the few posters here that I truly respect. And I also appreciate the information that you bring to us, as well.