Wilt Chamberlain discussion

[QUOTE=Kebab Stall]There's a couple of goaltendings in there, but overall a very fun mix to watch.[/QUOTE]


Goaltending rules did seem to be a bit more liberal(if we go by these clips only) during that time, didn't they? I don't know if these 'goaltends'(by todays standards) on the video were exceptions or the rule?

Although Wilt was also exceptional at cherry picking the ball at it's peak some were definitely descending at the time he blocked them.

No matter he was obviously(from most accounts) the most intimidating shot blocker in history & would no doubt own most Blocked shot records had they been kept.

[QUOTE=32jazz]Where in this thread was he called GOAT B***ch? :confusedshrug:

There are other threads if you wish not to speak of Wilt's 'shot blocking abilities' which is what this thread is about.

You've been a good troll.:applause: Now Go away.[/QUOTE]

Dont get upset,namecalling in a debate is a sign of Low IQ.He isnt in GOAT discussions, thats all.

[QUOTE=indiefan23]Hmm... what do you base that on? Which bigger centers did Wilt ever play against?

Heh, if Kareem had to put as much strain on his body as Yao did, and Kareem had 3 serious injuries because of that in his first 6 years playing, are you making this point now? Yep, I thought so. I mean, come on. You guys don't even try to make sane analogizes.[/QUOTE]


Why the excuses Yao has yet to play at the level that kareem has and this is against weak peers. You cant look at some tape and say hey this guy is bigger faster stronger than that guy so he must be better. How many players were bigger faster and stronger could jump higher than Bird,Magic,Barkley,isiah Thomas yet these players with IQ heart skill and will were able to out perform there opponent.This is the point with Russ and Wilt against today sCenters.

My own favorite is the one at 0:35-0:36. It happened during the 1957 NCAA final and it was the block that kept the score tied and sent the game into one of the 2 overtimes. The shooter seems to be at least 8 feet away from Wilt when the ball left his handsm and he wasn't even his personal opponent.

I agree to an extend with Manute that all the Wilt topics made by the same person and have the same reason should be merged, else they get tired. The same though should happen about similar topics about every retired legend.

db23, you're simply trolling and trying to piss people off with your 1-liners. Although I have you on ignore, you're still annoying because a lot of others don't and when it comes to topics like these you have absolutely nothing to offer but vandalize them with the same off-topic, tired crap all over again. I (and others) hate certain things like hip-hop, but we don't enter topics devoted to hip-hop just to say "yeah, you guys talk about hip-hop, too bad hip-hop sucks". You don't think Wilt is in the discussion for GOAT? We don't care. We've read/heard opinions of people who actually have a reason to talk and they are diametrically opposite to yours. After all, there are also people who think that the earth is flat, that the cosmos is 6,000 years old, etc, so extreme ignorance exists everywhere, and it only manages to convert simpletons and piss off normal people.

BTW, a few of them really are goaltending violations. However, we can't know from the video whether they were whistled or now. For example, from the games I've watched, I remember the plays at 0:44 and 1:08 having been whistled, though it doesn't show here. Defensive goaltending was banned way before Wilt.

[QUOTE=32jazz]Winning two finals MVP's?:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

He has one.

[QUOTE=Manute for Ever!]Indiefan23,

Are you just trying to increase your post count by posting 10 straight posts in the one thread? Just put it all in one post. :banghead:[/QUOTE]

I dunno, I just click reply and reply to people. Sorry if that hurts you somehow.

[QUOTE=Psileas]My own favorite is the one at 0:35-0:36. It happened during the 1957 NCAA final and it was the block that kept the score tied and sent the game into one of the 2 overtimes. The shooter seems to be at least 8 feet away from Wilt when the ball left his handsm and he wasn't even his personal opponent.

I agree to an extend with Manute that all the Wilt topics made by the same person and have the same reason should be merged, else they get tired. The same though should happen about similar topics about every retired legend.

db23, you're simply trolling and trying to piss people off with your 1-liners. Although I have you on ignore, you're still annoying because a lot of others don't and when it comes to topics like these you have absolutely nothing to offer but vandalize them with the same off-topic, tired crap all over again. I (and others) hate certain things like hip-hop, but we don't enter topics devoted to hip-hop just to say "yeah, you guys talk about hip-hop, too bad hip-hop sucks". You don't think Wilt is in the discussion for GOAT? We don't care. We've read/heard opinions of people who actually have a reason to talk and they are diametrically opposite to yours. After all, there are also people who think that the earth is flat, that the cosmos is 6,000 years old, etc, so extreme ignorance exists everywhere, and it only manages to convert simpletons and piss off normal people.[/QUOTE]


Im sorry you feel that way but all the evidence points to Wilt being a choker in the playoffs.Since we are currently in the playoffs its a fair time to reflect on past players weaknesses.Wilt was a great regular season player for his era, Im not denying that.

[QUOTE=Mikaiel]Have you seen how ridiculously in shape Wilt was ? The man ran in a marathon and a 50-mile race when he was 60 years old ...[/quote]

Yea, but running is an endurance sport. Basketball is an explosive agility sport. You don't really lose things like a slow heart rate as you age. Thats why soccer players last into their 40's: cuz its all running, where ball players are done in their early 30's.

[quote]I've never said I thought Wilt was a better rebounder than Rodman. I think Rodman is the best rebounder of all time, and also one of the most underrated player ever.[/quote]

We agree there big time. I'm not saying you said it though: I'm saying that there was no Rodman's in Wilt's era to grab those boards from him. Its not even that: rebounding was so non-physicial then.

[quote]So if size mattered that much, how come Baylor was a good rebounder back then ? By your logic, taller guys should have come up with the ball more often than not ...[/quote]

Cuz Elgin could jump and get up there. My logic is not restricted to size. If you're athletic its going to help. If you're big its going to help. If you're smart its going to help. Nate Robinson is smaller then me but I know he's out board me cuz his vertical is 48"'s. In that era having one of those 3 things would get you lots of boards. At the NBA's peak in the 90's with so much competition there were/are plenty of big players who were smart and were also athletic. As for today's players: I'm not really sure what I think of centers today. Its in a low period for sure but I think we need a few more years to figure out what the league is exactly.

I know I don't agree that slower older centers would be able to dominate. Today's center needs agility more then ever because relative to a pre-2004 center they constantly play out of position. For a guy like Wilt that might make it easier for him... like I said I'm not sure. I'll have to think about it more.

[quote]WTF ? :wtf: What kind of an argument is that ? You do know Wilt outrebounded Kareem when they played together right ? They played against the same competition, and he was pulling down more rebounds. While clearly out of his prime. And Kareem was in physical prime too. The "he only played against him twice a year" argument doesn't make any sense. Shaq only faced Hakeem twice a year when he was in the East. Dwight only plays Duncan or Yao twice a year. Dwight actually has more games against Jeff Foster, Zaza Pachulia, Kendrick Perkins, Andrew Bogut or Brendan Haywood than against Shaq, Duncan or Yao. So what ?[/quote]

Well, its relevant. Only 3 players from the top 10 in Wilt's last season played in his conference. Positions 1, 2 and 10. If one conference has all the good rebounders its easier for you. I admit I didn't put a whole lot of thought into it, but Kareem didn't play against the same competition but played against stronger comp.

Either way, the point I'm making is not that there was no one else good. Its just that most everyone else was not good and it inflated those few good guy's stats. The league evolved and rosters filled out so that a few guys wern't dominating everyone else. Ie: just like I've been saying: competition is much better. Theres more parity. Look at this list for 1961.

and compare it to 1991, 30 years later.

1961
1. Wilt Chamberlain*-PHW 27.2
2. Bill Russell*-BOS 23.9
3. Bob Pettit*-STL 20.3
4. Elgin Baylor*-LAL 19.8
5. Bailey Howell*-DET 14.4
6. Walter Dukes-DET 14.1
7. Willie Naulls-NYK 13.4
8. Dolph Schayes*-SYR 12.2
9. Red Kerr-SYR 12.0
10. Wayne Embry-CIN 10.9
11. Johnny Green-NYK 10.7
12. Clyde Lovellette*-STL 10.1
13. Oscar Robertson*-CIN 10.1
14. Tom Heinsohn*-BOS 9.9
15. Rudy LaRusso-LAL 9.9
16. Tom Gola*-PHW 9.4
17. Cliff Hagan*-STL 9.3
18. Paul Arizin*-PHW 8.6
19. Phil Jordon-TOT 8.5
20. Jack Twyman*-CIN 8.5

1991
1. David Robinson*-SAS 13.0
2. Dennis Rodman-DET 12.5
3. Charles Oakley-NYK 12.1
4. Karl Malone-UTA 11.8
5. Patrick Ewing*-NYK 11.2
6. Brad Daugherty-CLE 10.9
7. Robert Parish*-BOS 10.6
8. Benoit Benjamin-TOT 10.3
9. Otis Thorpe-HOU 10.3
10. Derrick Coleman-NJN 10.3
11. Blair Rasmussen-DEN 9.7
12. Buck Williams-POR 9.4
13. Dominique Wilkins*-ATL 9.0
14. Bill Laimbeer-DET 9.0
15. James Donaldson-DAL 8.9
16. Lionel Simmons-SAC 8.8
17. Kevin Willis-ATL 8.8
18. Larry Smith-HOU 8.8
19. Larry Nance-CLE 8.6
20. Horace Grant-CHI 8.4

In 1961 there were a few people grabbing lots of boards. Wilt led the first five places by (2) 3 (3) 7 (4) 8 (5) 13 boards. The 7'th place guy was getting less then half of Wilt's boards and the 20'th place guy was getting a less then a third.

In 1991 Robinson led the top five players by (2) 0.5 (3) 0.9 (4) 1.2 (5) 1.8 boards. The 20'th place guy is getting well over half of the leader, Robinson, and the 7'th place guy is grabbing about 82% of Robinson's total.

I mean, you don't reach a player who got half of Robinson's until you hit about player 50-75. You hit that guy at player # 7 in 1961. Alvin Attles who's around 50 in 61 got 2.8 BPG which translates to I'm not sure how that's competitive. For competition to exist you need players who are able to compete on your level and clearly almost no one was on Wilt's level and there were plenty on everyone's level in the 90's. Parity. One thing that I know from playing with people in Asia: playing with lots of people who are not on your level sure makes you look better then you are.

So you're asking why does Wilt get higher percentages? I say its because his compeititon is not as good as he is. They're also not as good as TD in his prime by a long shot. TD also played PF in his prime with Robinson focusing on getting boards and defense all which very significantly deflated his numbers. TD in his prime would have been an absolute terrifying monster in the 60's. Again, there's no way to prove these things, but with his ridiculous footwork I'd imagine upwards of 30 boards at least.

[quote]That stat doesn't rely on pace or minutes played.

1. Shaq didn't have anything close to Dream's polish, but Shaq was arguably the better player. No one can come close today to Kobe's polish, but LeBron is considered just as good as him or even better by a lot of people. Same thing with Wade.[/quote]

Hmm... not if your arguing with me. Dream was much better then Shaq. Shaq was lazy and didn't commit to D. If all you consider is scoring average, which is not that important a center stat anyway and which Dream was better at in either case, you can make that argument. Young Shaq in his first two years was awesome. Had he kept developing instead of got lazy he could have been the best ever.

Note on Kobe. I don't think his game is that polished. Its not really complete. I can think of other guards who are better then him at most everything. His post up game (Kobe's real weakness) is nothing compared to Jordan's. His jumper is inferior to Ray Allen's. His mid-range game is inferior to Dwayne Wade's. His team play/defense is inferior to Bron's and Wade's. His penetration is inferior to a lot of players. He does a great job of putting it all in one package, but his all around game is still not as good as Lebron's/Jordan's/Wade's.

Kobe can hit the three pretty well. But hitting 3's is not really that important for a 2 guards (PG's/shooters should care about that) which is why players like MJ/Wade don't really focus on it. I credit Kobe with improving every year. Even this year he's a much better player then last year. He's really taken a leap this year I think. But he's still not very good at understanding how to let a team's offense flow through him and defers to Gasol the same way he used to defer to Shaq. Which makes sense anyway since Pau Gasol might be the best player ever aside from Sabonis to run the triangle through. The lake show looks strong this year man and again to Kobe's credit, I think its because he has accepted the most effective role he can play on the team.

[quote]2. I don't really like to talk about athleticsm. There are so many variables. So many different ways you can be considered athletic. How are you supposed to compare Jordan's athleticsm to Shaq's for example ? Or Jordan's and LeBron's ? What matters is that they all could do dominate the game physically, and Wilt could do it too. There's never been a guy like Wilt in this league. He was strong as hell, could run like crazy, had incredible stamina, could jump out of the gym. What more do you want ?

3. Not more athletic than prime that ? WTF ?[/QUOTE]

Well, yea, but like I pointed out before there was no one else his size who could do anything like that. Camby if you forget was an athletic monster in his prime. A MONSTER. Teams in the east were retooling their rosters specifically because they had absolutely no answer for him.

Check this awesome game out...

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sn3eiVcPF60[/url]

Anyway, whether you dislike or love Camby, I don't think you should take it as such an insult that he's my comparison point for Wilt. Cuz I know for an absolute, undebateable fact that I LOVE MARCUS CAMBY. I loved him in college. I loved him in Toronto. i loved him in NYC. I loved him in Denver. I loved him even this year on that crappy Clippers team. I've watched Wilt play lots and if he played today I think that's how they'd use him. Big athletic guy with speed can be a key contributor on a serious team.

I just disagree that he would dominate. I don't see it. Every concieveable aspect of his game has been improved on and the league has gotten much, much more physicial and bigger. Maybe if you used the 'if he were trained today' argument but I don't think its really valid. Training and natural ability make athletes who the players they are. Yea, if Wilt was trained better, he would be a better athlete and a better player and he would do better in the more competitive league. But he wasn't and that player I see on ESPN classic would be a shell of who he was in the 60's which was a player bigger then the game itself. To the point where he didn't really win but was considered far and away the best anyway. That's really my point.

And I'd just like to add that you seem pretty rationale. The Wilt Garbage That Has To Stop is not that. Its people who claim he would show all these young 'whipper snappers' a thing or two about how to play the game. He could play. He'd probably be decent. But he wouldn't come in and school Shaq in his prime based on the merit of schooling vastly inferior player in his own prime. It just doesn't cut it.

[QUOTE=Niquesports]Why the excuses Yao has yet to play at the level that kareem has and this is against weak peers. You cant look at some tape and say hey this guy is bigger faster stronger than that guy so he must be better. How many players were bigger faster and stronger could jump higher than Bird,Magic,Barkley,isiah Thomas yet these players with IQ heart skill and will were able to out perform there opponent.This is the point with Russ and Wilt against today sCenters.[/QUOTE]

I'm not convinced at all that Kareems peers were stronger then Yao's. Although I'm not sure. I don't think we have enough information yet after the rule changes that affected the center position so much and that Yao plays under. Its a much bigger change to the game then like, widening the lane or whatever and allows your opponent to much more easily deal with a traditionally dominant center.

And where does this notion that Magic/Bird/Thomas/Barkley wern't great athletes come from? Man, they were incredible athletes. Bird/Barkley were not strong? Magic wasn't big? Thomas was slow? ;0

Barkley could still jump 40"'s despite his weight. Magic used his speed/coordination/strength at his size to routinely overpower opposing points and guarded 4 positions. Thomas was fast as **** and coordinated as hell. Bird was strong as an ox and for his size could run fast forever. He was also 100% ambidextrous and could shoot 3's with both hands. I think this notion exists because MJ came in an athletically dominated everyone in every way but come on already... they were smart players but they were elite gifted athletes as well.

[QUOTE=Raindrops]Dennis Rodman averaged 16.1 boards a game at the age of 35, and he was listed at 6'7 and 210 pounds. Charles Barkley put up a 19 and 14 at the age of 33 and he was listed at 6'6 (and that was far from his best season). Corrected for pace those are very similar rates to Baylors, so was the late 90's a weak era?[/QUOTE]

No, they were just way freaking better then Elgin Baylor.

[QUOTE=indiefan23]I'm not convinced at all that Kareems peers were stronger then Yao's. Although I'm not sure. I don't think we have enough information yet after the rule changes that affected the center position so much and that Yao plays under. Its a much bigger change to the game then like, widening the lane or whatever and allows your opponent to much more easily deal with a traditionally dominant center.

And where does this notion that Magic/Bird/Thomas/Barkley wern't great athletes come from? Man, they were incredible athletes. Bird/Barkley were not strong? Magic wasn't big? Thomas was slow? ;0

Barkley could still jump 40"'s despite his weight. Magic used his speed/coordination/strength at his size to routinely overpower opposing points and guarded 4 positions. Thomas was fast as **** and coordinated as hell. Bird was strong as an ox and for his size could run fast forever. He was also 100% ambidextrous and could shoot 3's with both hands. I think this notion exists because MJ came in an athletically dominated everyone in every way but come on already... they were smart players but they were elite gifted athletes as well.[/QUOTE]

I think all would agree they were gifted basketball players but against there peers I would not rank either very high athletically. Would you rank Bird as great an athelet as Dominique Barkley as gifted an athlet as Larry lance Michael Cooper was a better athlet than Magic and they were on the same team. I would agree that Barkley might be the best ahtelt of the players I named if he was only as determined as MJ to be at top shape.

[QUOTE=indiefan23]Yea, but running is an endurance sport. Basketball is an explosive agility sport. You don't really lose things like a slow heart rate as you age. Thats why soccer players last into their 40's: cuz its all running, where ball players are done in their early 30's.[/QUOTE]

Well, just call me when another NBA 7 footer runs a marathon when they're 60. Obviously you're not impressed so it must be pretty common.



[QUOTE]Well, its relevant. Only 3 players from the top 10 in Wilt's last season played in his conference. Positions 1, 2 and 10.[/QUOTE]

Only 3 guys but that includes the top 2. In the end it even things out. And an extra 2 games isn't a big deal. Let's say it is. Then you can make the argument those other guys in the top 10 are there just because Wilt was in the other conference so he couldn't take rebounds away from them. Just like the No.2 and No.3 guy.

[QUOTE]So you're asking why does Wilt get higher percentages? I say its because his compeititon is not as good as he is. They're also not as good as TD in his prime by a long shot. TD also played PF in his prime with Robinson focusing on getting boards and defense all which very significantly deflated his numbers. TD in his prime would have been an absolute terrifying monster in the 60's. Again, there's no way to prove these things, but with his ridiculous footwork I'd imagine upwards of 30 boards at least.[/QUOTE]

And if Duncan played in the 60's and got that many boards, we'd be arguing right now because you'd think there would be no way he would dominate in the 90's.


[QUOTE]Hmm... not if your arguing with me. Dream was much better then Shaq. Shaq was lazy and didn't commit to D. If all you consider is scoring average, which is not that important a center stat anyway and which Dream was better at in either case, you can make that argument. Young Shaq in his first two years was awesome. Had he kept developing instead of got lazy he could have been the best ever.[/QUOTE]

Hakeem was a better player overall, but I think a prime Shaq was more dominant than a prime Hakeem. But that's another debate.

[QUOTE]Note on Kobe. I don't think his game is that polished. Its not really complete. I can think of other guards who are better then him at most everything. His post up game (Kobe's real weakness) is nothing compared to Jordan's. His jumper is inferior to Ray Allen's. His mid-range game is inferior to Dwayne Wade's. His team play/defense is inferior to Bron's and Wade's. His penetration is inferior to a lot of players. He does a great job of putting it all in one package, but his all around game is still not as good as Lebron's/Jordan's/Wade's.[/QUOTE]

All I wanted to say was LeBron or Wade had holes in their games, sometimes pretty big ones. Kobe doesn't. He's not elite in every aspect of his game, but he's got no real weaknesses. His post game is not as good as Jordan's ? Well that's like saying he can't rebound like Rodman ... His post game is good enough.


[QUOTE]I just disagree that he would dominate.[/QUOTE]

I'm not saying he could play a game against prime Shaq and humiliate him. But I just don't see how he could be anything less than a Dwight Howard if he played today. He would still dominate physically. He'd be in the top 2 most athletic players today. Or even in the 90's. Any era. He would be a 7'1 Dwight Howard. I don't care if you think the 60's and 70's were a weak era, the fact is Kareem played against the exact same competition, and he couldn't do some of the things Wilt did. Even though Wilt was in his 30's. So maybe Kareem was not that good then ? Then I guess Hakeem wasn't good either, because Kareem played extremely well against him. But then that means Robinson, Shaq, Zo and Mutombo are all crappy players.

[QUOTE=Mikaiel]
WTF ? :wtf: What kind of an argument is that ? You do know Wilt outrebounded Kareem when they played together right ? They played against the same competition, and he was pulling down more rebounds. While clearly out of his prime. And Kareem was in physical prime too. The "he only played against him twice a year" argument doesn't make any sense. Shaq only faced Hakeem twice a year when he was in the East. Dwight only plays Duncan or Yao twice a year. Dwight actually has more games against Jeff Foster, Zaza Pachulia, Kendrick Perkins, Andrew Bogut or Brendan Haywood than against Shaq, Duncan or Yao. So what ?[/QUOTE]

You don't even have to go there, because, once again, the stats he's posted are blatantly wrong. Because Wilt faced Kareem a total of [B]17 [/B]times in the regular season (plus 11 in the playoffs), not 4 or 6 or whatever he wrote. Hayes and Unseld come 1 season before Kareem and, knowing that in this era, Eastern and Western teams faced each other in a much more balanced number of times compared to nowadays, it's a safe bet that he faced Hayes and Unseld even more times in the reg.season.

[QUOTE=Psileas]BTW, a few of them really are goaltending violations. However, we can't know from the video whether they were whistled or now. For example, from the games I've watched, I remember the plays at 0:44 and 1:08 having been whistled, though it doesn't show here. Defensive goaltending was banned way before Wilt.[/QUOTE]

I was wondering whether or not that was the case. Happens on these compilations routinely when a great play is highlighted ,but it was actually an illegal shot,dunk,block,etc,......

I still like the agression while the ball is in the air as it gave opponents something to think about as they entered the paint. Altered many opponent shots I am certain.

To me he is perhaps unofficially the NBA's all time shot blocker just as he was unofficially the 1967 finals MVP.(Although I'm not too excited over awards)