FACT: MJ never lost a series where his team had the HCA.

[QUOTE=ClipperRevival]For example, I don't hold 2007 and 2015 against LeBron. He really had no chance. If Bron had done the impossible in 2015, that would've been a huge feather in his cap but he came up short and that's no big deal. And I think most objective fans think the same way. 2011 is another story.

[B]So why can't some of you accept the fact that MJ really had no chance against the Celtics and Pistons until he got more help later in his career[/B]?[/QUOTE]

Because you don't cut Wilt the same slack.

And you forget that Wiklt's TEAMs were losing to STACKED teams.

TEN times in his post-season career, Wilt's TEAMs lost to GREAT teams.

SEVEN times to the greatest dynasty in NBA history (and four of those were GAME SEVEN losses by margins of 2, 1, 4 and 2 points.)

Then TWICE to Knick teams that had between 4-6 HOFers.

And to a 66-16 Milwaukee team that was considered the next great dynasty (and that Wilt would beat the very next year.)

Even when he had good teammates, Wilt's TEAMs were usually outgunned. Hell, his '64 Warriors were outgunned by an 8-3 margin HOFers (and his two other "HOF" teammates were Guy Rodgers, the worst shooter of his era, and rookie Nate Thurmond,w ho was playing part-time and out of position. BTW, those two shot .258 and .326 in that Finals series against Russell's Celtics.)

Bill Russell also never lost a series with HCA. And no we are not counting the 1958 Finals when he totally missed two games and played very little in two more.

But here is where it gets interesting and shows how insane his winning was. [B]Bill Russell is 4-1 (80%) in series where he didn't have HCA. [/B] Somehow people who say "Bill only won because of overwhelming talent" overlook that he won the 1966, 1968, 1969 titles as an underdog, especially the last two. They also skip right past the fact that KC Jones and Frank Ramsey (and Satch Sanders although he got in as a contributor) quite simply weren't HOF caliber players and only got in because of Russell. Neither ever even made an all-star game. Hawks from 1957-1961, Warriors in 1960 and 1962, Royals in 1963 and 1964, Knicks in 1969, Lakers in 1962 and 1968, and Sixers from 1965-1968 were definitely up there in talent with the Celtics.

For example the aforementioned 1964 Celtics had 8 HOFers as LAZERUSS said but let's break it down and look at it in context. People get caught up on names without actually looking at the level at which they played.

Bill Russell

Sam Jones - all-star who averaged 19/5/3

John Havlicek - all-star caliber but not a superstar yet; only in his second year playing as a 6th man and averaged 20/5/3

Tom Heinsohn - good role player who averaged 16/6/2

KC Jones - role player who averaged 8/5/5

Satch Sanders - role player who averaged 11/8/1

Frank Ramsey - role player who averaged 9/3/1

Clyde Lovellette - scrub who averaged 7/3/1 in his last season


We see that looking at Boston as a 8 HOFer team is erroneous!! They had 3 guys that were all-star caliber which is great but nothing out of the ordinary for a dynastic team.

[QUOTE=dankok8]Bill Russell also never lost a series with HCA. And no we are not counting the 1958 Finals when he totally missed two games and played very little in two more.

But here is where it gets interesting and shows how insane his winning was. [B]Bill Russell is 4-1 (80%) in series where he didn't have HCA. [/B] Somehow people who say "Bill only won because of overwhelming talent" overlook that he won the 1966, 1968, 1969 titles as an underdog, especially the last two. They also skip right past the fact that KC Jones and Frank Ramsey (and Satch Sanders although he got in as a contributor) quite simply weren't HOF caliber players and only got in because of Russell. Neither ever even made an all-star game. Hawks from 1957-1961, Warriors in 1960 and 1962, Royals in 1963 and 1964, Knicks in 1969, Lakers in 1962 and 1968, and Sixers from 1965-1968 were definitely up there in talent with the Celtics.

For example the aforementioned 1964 Celtics had 8 HOFers as LAZERUSS said but let's break it down and look at it in context. People get caught up on names without actually looking at the level at which they played.

Bill Russell

Sam Jones - all-star who averaged 19/5/3

John Havlicek - all-star caliber but not a superstar yet; only in his second year playing as a 6th man and averaged 20/5/3

Tom Heinsohn - good role player who averaged 16/6/2

KC Jones - role player who averaged 8/5/5

Satch Sanders - role player who averaged 11/8/1

Frank Ramsey - role player who averaged 9/3/1

Clyde Lovellette - scrub who averaged 7/3/1 in his last season


We see that looking at Boston as a 8 HOFer team is erroneous!! They had 3 guys that were all-star caliber which is great but nothing out of the ordinary for a dynastic team.[/QUOTE]

Sam Jones was already an established 23 ppg scorer by that time.
Havlicek was already a 20 ppg scorer that season.
KC Jones and Satch Sanders were considered the best defensive players at their positions at that time.
Lovelette was not a scrub, he had averaged 20 ppg just the season before. Just goes to show you how powerful those Celtics were when a 20 ppg scorer is their 7th best player.

Player-for-player, the '64 Celtics were FAR superior to Wilt's cast of retreads.

[QUOTE=dankok8]Bill Russell also never lost a series with HCA. And no we are not counting the 1958 Finals when he totally missed two games and played very little in two more.

But here is where it gets interesting and shows how insane his winning was. [B]Bill Russell is 4-1 (80%) in series where he didn't have HCA. [/B] Somehow people who say "Bill only won because of overwhelming talent" overlook that he won the 1966, 1968, 1969 titles as an underdog, especially the last two. They also skip right past the fact that KC Jones and Frank Ramsey (and Satch Sanders although he got in as a contributor) quite simply weren't HOF caliber players and only got in because of Russell. Neither ever even made an all-star game. Hawks from 1957-1961, Warriors in 1960 and 1962, Royals in 1963 and 1964, Knicks in 1969, Lakers in 1962 and 1968, and Sixers from 1965-1968 were definitely up there in talent with the Celtics.

For example the aforementioned 1964 Celtics had 8 HOFers as LAZERUSS said but let's break it down and look at it in context. People get caught up on names without actually looking at the level at which they played.

Bill Russell

Sam Jones - all-star who averaged 19/5/3

John Havlicek - all-star caliber but not a superstar yet; only in his second year playing as a 6th man and averaged 20/5/3

Tom Heinsohn - good role player who averaged 16/6/2

KC Jones - role player who averaged 8/5/5

Satch Sanders - role player who averaged 11/8/1

Frank Ramsey - role player who averaged 9/3/1

Clyde Lovellette - scrub who averaged 7/3/1 in his last season


We see that looking at Boston as a 8 HOFer team is erroneous!! They had 3 guys that were all-star caliber which is great but nothing out of the ordinary for a dynastic team.[/QUOTE]

Not surprised at all that Russell is also undefeated when he has HCA. Russell and MJ were cut from the same cloth. Both killers. Both masters of the mind game and tried to beat you at all costs. Never tried to show weakness on the court. The mental game was just as important to them as the physical game. The two GOAT winners ever.

And yeah, when you win THAT much, there are going to be a couple of guys that get inducted in the HOF that might not even get consideration had they not won all those rings. But Russell was the guy that made it all happen.

[QUOTE=dankok8]Bill Russell also never lost a series with HCA. And no we are not counting the 1958 Finals when he totally missed two games and played very little in two more.

But here is where it gets interesting and shows how insane his winning was. [B]Bill Russell is 4-1 (80%) in series where he didn't have HCA. [/B] Somehow people who say "Bill only won because of overwhelming talent" overlook that he won the 1966, 1968, 1969 titles as an underdog, especially the last two. They also skip right past the fact that KC Jones and Frank Ramsey (and Satch Sanders although he got in as a contributor) quite simply weren't HOF caliber players and only got in because of Russell. Neither ever even made an all-star game. Hawks from 1957-1961, Warriors in 1960 and 1962, Royals in 1963 and 1964, Knicks in 1969, Lakers in 1962 and 1968, and Sixers from 1965-1968 were definitely up there in talent with the Celtics.

For example the aforementioned 1964 Celtics had 8 HOFers as LAZERUSS said but let's break it down and look at it in context. People get caught up on names without actually looking at the level at which they played.

Bill Russell

Sam Jones - all-star who averaged 19/5/3

John Havlicek - all-star caliber but not a superstar yet; only in his second year playing as a 6th man and averaged 20/5/3

Tom Heinsohn - good role player who averaged 16/6/2

KC Jones - role player who averaged 8/5/5

Satch Sanders - role player who averaged 11/8/1

Frank Ramsey - role player who averaged 9/3/1

Clyde Lovellette - scrub who averaged 7/3/1 in his last season


We see that looking at Boston as a 8 HOFer team is erroneous!! They had 3 guys that were all-star caliber which is great but nothing out of the ordinary for a dynastic team.[/QUOTE]

How good was Wilt's supporting cast in that '63-64 season?

[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9854454&postcount=98[/url]

A last place roster that couldn't beat a team of rookies without Wilt.

BTW, his two "HOF" teammates, Rodgers and Thurmond shot .258 and .326 from the field in the '64 Finals.

[QUOTE=ClipperRevival]This is what's fun about being a fan of the GOAT, you have truth on your side. It's like having God on your side, you just can't lose. The deeper you dig, the clearer the truth is revealed. This is just stuff I do when I have time at work. I dig up MJ stuff and see what I can come up with. And viola, another truth revealed about MJ.
.[/QUOTE]

So basically cherry picking stats to back your argument. that is reverse scientific method. You can do that with basically any top 100 player and make them look like the GOAT.

However, I do agree on MJ being the GOAT, but ppl really just make themselves look silly selectively picking stats. If anything it just makes it more difficult to get your point across because you create haters.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]Sam Jones was already an established 23 ppg scorer by that time.
Havlicek was already a 20 ppg scorer that season.
KC Jones and Satch Sanders were considered the best defensive players at their positions at that time.
Lovelette was not a scrub, he had averaged 20 ppg just the season before. Just goes to show you how powerful those Celtics were when a 20 ppg scorer is their 7th best player.

Player-for-player, the '64 Celtics were FAR superior to Wilt's cast of retreads.

How good was Wilt's supporting cast in that '63-64 season?

[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...4&postcount=98[/url]

A last place roster that couldn't beat a team of rookies without Wilt.

BTW, his two "HOF" teammates, Rodgers and Thurmond shot .258 and .326 from the field in the '64 Finals.[/QUOTE]

Sam Jones averaged 19/5/3 not 23 ppg.

Havlicek made his first all-star game in 1966. He was already a very good player but not a star.

Lovellette was two years removed from a 20 ppg season and had declined heavily since then. Even playing on the Celtics he shot a woeful %.



Of course Wilt's cast was much worse that year. My point is that saying the Celtics had 8 HOFers is misleading. They had 3 stars and then 5-6 good role players. That's nothing unusual for a championship team.

LAZ, you are a brilliant poster, but you have to understand that in the end, this is all opinion, I mean, if someone is hating on wilt, I understand being upset, but if someone just says a statement you dont agree with on wilt, and is sincere, then like, Dont get pissed dude, just try to have a peaceful arguement.

Doesent apply to this, I know.


I swear whenever ClipperRevival and Lazarus make a thread it turns into this

Wilt sucked

Wilt was awesome

He was a choker

Prove it

Look at his killer instinct

What about it

Thats it you cant see it

His teammates sucked

He only has 2 rings

His teammates sucked

stop making excuses

Compare them to Russells HOF teammates

Russells teammates were overrated

What

They didnt deserve to go to the hall of fame

U saying Havlicek is a scrub?

Hell yeah

Are you dumb?

Are you dumb?

Look at Wilt choking against an injured Willis Reed

Wilt was INJURED as well

In 68 look at what happened

what HAPPENED was that wilt was INJURED

but russell had the most killer instinct ever

LOOK at HIS inbounds PLAY where HE hit THE backboard

look at his ringz

thats because of his team

tell me, how many rings does wilt have?

2.

Hah. choker

He scored 13 points straight, against Russell, in teh 4th quarter in teh playoffs.

How many rings bitch.

**** you

**** you too.

By the way LAZ, I know you hate advanced stats, but here are some on wilt in that 64-65. take it how you want it, a +9 rating on offense is superb (overall +9 I meant)
Wilt was sick this year, and was hardly his regular self. bane of the first few games was defense, which isnt suprising.

technically, offense was similar to teh year before, defense just dropped due to Wilts Illness. going through motions and stuff like that right? something like that. Cant remember what he said.

That being said, only reason defense got better without wilt, otehr than wilt being ill (I dont think this effected his offense too heavily) is that Thurmond got to play in his correct position.

Looking at it it looks like while offense was somewhat teh same (obviously a bit worse but still) it was teh defense that suffered, so it looks like a good enough indicator of his offense.

Despite Thurmond playing in teh right positon and Paul and Connie coming, there was a marked improvement. adding in his defense Id say that it proves that 64 wilt was better than Russell in any year, though granted, its kinda that way for alot of things. I have Russell higher (starting to change my m ind tbh, but im just saying this so I dont get executed, I put them at a tie right now, because lets be honest, Russell probably is teh best leader ever, and I think that his consistency puts him on teh same pedestal, and his peak was top 7 too)
but I think wilt peaked higher, and honestly, russell's best season is probably [B]worse than 3 or 4 of Wilts. [/B]


1964-65 Warriors Total
119.7 poss/48 min
9651 poss/3870 min


Wilt In
4153 Pts Scored
4342 Pts Allowed
1801 Min
4491 Poss
92.5 ORtg
96.7 DRtg


Wilt Out
4312 Pts Scored
4618 Pts Allowed
2069 Min
5160 Poss
83.6 ORtg
89.5 DRtg

Based on this Id put his impact at teh top 5 level in his peak.

that might sound blasphemous, but my "top 5 peaks" are interchangable, though generally I have Jordan on top. (shaq, even for him, had an outlier year in 2000, so while wilts 3 best seasons are>Shaqs 3 imo, at the same time, I think that Shaqs best is about the same)

Generally, I have Jordan on top, and I find That Lebron in 09, Shaq in 00, and Wilt in 67 are interchangable (I also consider taking jordan out of that top spot at times)

I see teh top 4 peaks to basically be a wash.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]How good was Wilt's supporting cast in that '63-64 season?

[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9854454&postcount=98[/url]

A last place roster that couldn't beat a team of rookies without Wilt.

BTW, his two "HOF" teammates, Rodgers and Thurmond shot .258 and .326 from the field in the '64 Finals.[/QUOTE]


not arguing one way or the other, but im preeeeetty sure he wasnt being literal

[QUOTE=ClipperRevival]This is what's fun about being a fan of the GOAT, you have truth on your side. It's like having God on your side, you just can't lose. [/QUOTE]

Hence the reason why I've never lost an argument on this site.

I think one of the points OP is making is that MJ never lost when his team was favored to win.

MJ's game allowed teammates to play to capacity, so the TEAM always played to capacity, and therefore never underachieved.

Otoh, it's a statistical fact that guys like Lebron lower the ppg [url=http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=385841]and apg[/url] of teammates - with teammates playing below capacity, it's no surprisee that his TEAMS play below-capacity, and underachieve (2009, 2011, 2014).

misinformation itt

[QUOTE=ClipperRevival]It's hard to be a legendary team when MJ's team beats everyone doesn't it? :oldlol: Say the Bulls lost to the Jazz twice, history would view the Jazz as a "legendary" team would they not? But again, MJ didn't let it get to that.[/QUOTE]
Not really. They'd be more like '93-'95 Rockets, which I don't think is considered legendary.

[QUOTE=ClipperRevival]It's hard to be a legendary team when MJ's team beats everyone doesn't it? :oldlol: Say the Bulls lost to the Jazz twice, history would view the Jazz as a "legendary" team would they not? But again, MJ didn't let it get to that.[/QUOTE]

Wow dude how delusional are you? :oldlol:

I don't mean to repeat myself, but damn get a grip. The Jazz were nowhere near "legendary" like some of the teams listed in your OP, and throughout this thread.

:rolleyes: