Why Wilt Chamberlain would dominate in today's game ! Bruce Blitz

[QUOTE=abuC]Since when was Wilt "over 300lbs" in his playing career?

[img]http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1321/806074491_b7a703dfd4.jpg[/img]

According to that, 327lbs was the heaviest he had ever been, he was noticeably bigger and that was long after he was retired and weight lifting for a movie.

When he was on the Lakers he didn't look heavier than Bynum, who isn't even 300lbs.[/QUOTE]

this is a trip

[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]a 50+ man spreading his man juice about how "strong" Wilt is, is a little odd[/QUOTE]

I'm sure that's not what he's implying, so enough of the smart ass comments and close this thread if you feel uncomfortable about whatever it is you are viewing and assuming.

[QUOTE=305Baller]this is a trip[/QUOTE]

Amazingly, Wilt was NOT 327 lbs during the filming of that movie, but was at only 255 lbs.

I won't take the time to look up that source, but I am reasonably certain that it was around 255.

[QUOTE=305Baller]He is spreading the legend.
You have sex thoughts. hahaa

[IMG]http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000983729/simpsons_haha_xlarge.jpeg[/IMG][/QUOTE]

I think people just assume that we are all born at the same time and go through the same saying and definitions. Well it's not to be.

We are seeing the difference of a 50+ year old and another solid poster who, say they are homers or obsessed I don't care, trying to show something about legends I believe 99% of this board did not even see or were even born.

Then another poster, who must not even be an adult yet, who's posting some childish non-sense that is not only idiotic, brings up nothing to discussion about this thread. Weak, predictable, and very lame attempt at trolling.

Let's stick to the thread and if you don't want to contribute, please do us a favor and leave.

[QUOTE=Legends66NBA7]I think people just assume that we are all born at the same time and go through the same saying and definitions. Well it's not to be.

We are seeing the difference of a 50+ year old and another solid poster who, say they are homers or obsessed I don't care, trying to show something about legends I believe 99% of this board did not even see or were even born.

Then another poster, who must not even be an adult yet, who's posting some childish non-sense that is not only idiotic, brings up nothing to discussion about this thread. Weak, predictable, and very lame attempt at trolling.

Let's stick to the thread and if you don't want to contribute, please do us a favor and leave.[/QUOTE]

well yeah, thats why he got the HAHAA

[QUOTE=305Baller]well yeah, thats why he got the HAHAA[/QUOTE]

I concur:

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo[/url]

[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]^
Are you getting wet?[/QUOTE]
Where's the rebuttal?

[QUOTE=Legends66NBA7]I think people just assume that we are all born at the same time and go through the same saying and definitions. Well it's not to be.

We are seeing the difference of a 50+ year old and another solid poster who, say they are homers or obsessed I don't care, trying to show something about legends I believe 99% of this board did not even see or were even born.

[B]Then another poster, who must not even be an adult yet, who's posting some childish non-sense that is not only idiotic, brings up nothing to discussion about this thread. Weak, predictable, and very lame attempt at trolling.[/B]

Let's stick to the thread and if you don't want to contribute, please do us a favor and leave.[/QUOTE]

And when he attempts to contribute something related to basketball, it is something along the lines that when Chamberlain went 1-11 in game seven of the '70 Finals (which was over at halftime BTW, when NY led 69-42), that it cost him 3-4 rings.

Not sure what they are teaching in 3rd grade math anymore, but if he is any indication, the next generation is in even more trouble.

I think he'd be like David Robinson, a bit stronger, a bit less dexterious.

ShaqAttack makes a good point about defensive systems not being as refined as now. I wonder if Chamberlain could learn to adapt and use more of his strength then.

[QUOTE=jlauber]Amazingly, Wilt was NOT 327 lbs during the filming of that movie, but was at only 255 lbs.

I won't take the time to look up that source, but I am reasonably certain that it was around 255.[/QUOTE]

He was doing those 50 mile marathons at the time... but 255 might be bit low. Isn't that less than his college days?

[QUOTE=RobertdeMeijer]I think he'd be like David Robinson, a bit stronger, a bit less dexterious.

ShaqAttack makes a good point about defensive systems not being as refined as now. I wonder if Chamberlain could learn to adapt and use more of his strength then.[/QUOTE]

I won't take the time to repost my reply to these assertions, except to say that Wilt was not only SWARMED in his career, he was BRUTALIZED for much of it.

Only the uneducated would tell you otherwise.

[QUOTE=Pointguard]He was doing those 50 mile marathons at the time... but 255 might be bit low. Isn't that less than his college days?[/QUOTE]

I can't recall where I pulled that info from. Maybe from one of Wilt's own books? In any case, he bulked up again. I won't take the time to pull up his and Russell's interview with Costas in the late 80's I believe, but in it, he was a MASSIVE man, and made Russell look extremely frail in comparison. I suspect that even in his 50's he was around 300 lbs. Once again, there is an eyewitness interview in which he was seen benching 465 lbs., and at age 59.

[QUOTE=abuC]
[img]http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1321/806074491_b7a703dfd4.jpg[/img]
[/QUOTE]

Imagine having to fight all 3 of those guys at once.

:eek:

[QUOTE=RobertdeMeijer]I think he'd be like David Robinson, a bit stronger, a bit less dexterious.

ShaqAttack makes a good point about defensive systems not being as refined as now. I wonder if Chamberlain could learn to adapt and use more of his strength then.[/QUOTE]
Wilt was a natural scorer, he would have adapted. I use the Adrian Dantley/Charles Barkley comparison. Dantley was a natural scorer. In his prime he would have outscored Barkley eight times out of ten despite being smaller, slower, less athletic, less handle, less range, less explosion, less power, less quickness. He was just natural at scoring. Wilt was the same way.

And you have to factor in they didn't have the same practice facilities and rarely had practice time. Wilt also would have benefited from a lot of modern technology as well. We would have been a quicker and higher leaper as well. He would also have more moves.

He had a touch like Duncan and power like few others. The refs worked against him then, it would be different now. He would be allowed to hop, skip, plow over players, take extra steps with his long legs?

[QUOTE=32Dayz]Imagine having to fight all 3 of those guys at once.

:eek:[/QUOTE]
I would change my imagination!