Why Wilt Chamberlain's scoring stats shrinked that much in the playoffs?

Unless we have someone here who seen the dynamics in the earlier part of the 60's we can't say for sure. It could be the kitchen sink syndrome or everybody crowding that side of the floor, or the game being called differently in the playoffs but we don't know. Coaching at that time, outside of Aurabach, wasn't very resourceful. Adjustments like reposting/cutting/knocking down the 18 footer seemingly weren't working (horrific shooting percentage of teammates). The team has to work out an over-stacking of the floor or too hard doubling or tripling. The team has to be very disciplined in handling that as we do know Wilt had superb judgement on the court.

Does anybody know if the pace slowed during the playoffs? The assisted shots decreased? More jumpshots were taken? Or any other indications that the style of play reflected a strong response to post play.

Wilt is the ultimate stat paddler

[QUOTE=Pointguard]Unless we have someone here who seen the dynamics in the earlier part of the 60's we can't say for sure. It could be the kitchen sink syndrome or everybody crowding that side of the floor, or the game being called differently in the playoffs but we don't know. Coaching at that time, outside of Aurabach, wasn't very resourceful. Adjustments like reposting/cutting/knocking down the 18 footer seemingly weren't working (horrific shooting percentage of teammates). The team has to work out an over-stacking of the floor or too hard doubling or tripling. The team has to be very disciplined in handling that as we do know Wilt had superb judgement on the court.

Does anybody know if the pace slowed during the playoffs? The assisted shots decreased? More jumpshots were taken? Or any other indications that the style of play reflected a strong response to post play.[/QUOTE]
My hunch is pressing defenses against his backcourts were reducing Wilt's touches. The one achilles heel of all big men is that you don't bring the ball up the court, so when appropriate pressure is applied to the backcourt it can not only effect the guards play but also the big mans. Press defense is exhausting but in the playoffs maybe the opponents were more up for it, just speculating I'm not sure if it applies to this specific scenario or not, just one possible theory.

[QUOTE]And while Psileas's post shows 13-13 even situation do note that in several years he declined 7-10 ppg from the regular season to the postseason while the reverse never happened. So his performance did definitely go down even by that analysis. Not to mention his FG% and FT% often plummeted as well. [/QUOTE]

I guess you missed this part:

[QUOTE]Falls by 5+ ppg: 5
Raises by 5+ ppg: 4[/QUOTE]

2 of the 5 big declines came in the 1962 playoffs, when his team played at a slower pace and they reverted to more team ball, although he was still by far their leading and more efficient scorer. Which is why, despite the massive 15 ppg decline, his PER only fell by 2 points, instead of a much more expected 8-10.
And a 3rd one came in the 1960 series vs the Celtics, when he played 2 of the 6 games with a banged hand, which greatly reduced his efficiency.

[QUOTE=Psileas]Falls by 5+ ppg: 5
Raises by 5+ ppg: 4[/QUOTE]
So basically, he choked in over half of his playoff series. GOAT!! :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

MJ:

'85 - +1.1
'86 - +21
'87 - -1.4
'88 - +1.3
'89 - +2.4
'90 - +3.1
'91 - -0.4
'92 - +4.4
'93 - +2.5
'95 - +4.6
'96 - +0.3
'97 - +1.5
'98 - +3.7

Deuce trolling the hell out of Wilt fans :applause:

Only person who sees the irony in his post.

[QUOTE=Mr Feeny]Again, you're going down the same path as Lazeruss. 45 points in a finals fame is terrific and deserves ample credit. We are talking about Wilt's finals career as a whole. There weew several other game 7's in which Phili lost by a few points and Wilt missed double digit free throws. Nobody is bringing those up because focusing on a sinfle game whether Wilt dominated in oe struggled in, isnt our focus here.
For a wreckinf machine who scored at will in the regular season, he just wasnt able to replicate that in the playoffs for some reason. ain the finals, his scoring dropped to 18ppg. Dwyane Wade averaged more than that during the kast three finals for Miami and yet his impact is denigrated by Lebron fans. Lets put that in perspective. Wilt wasnt able to contrivure as much as this shell of his former self Wade. That's mindboggling.[/QUOTE]

He's mocking Lazeruss lolololol:pimp:

[QUOTE=mr.big35]Wilt is the ultimate stat paddler[/QUOTE]


Yep.

He admits to doing so in his autobiography, "Wilt." After winning the title in Philly, he deliberately tried to win the assists title the next season... even if it detracted from his and the team's overall play.

Typical Wilt move. He got that title. The team lost. And he blamed them for the loss... despite him putting his stat-padding glory above everything else all season.

Wilt is simply not as good as his stans say he is. We've all played basketball before. If someone is really [B]that[/B] ****ing good, and said person is your >7' bigman (!), you are going to win.

Just look at Ewing. Was he good? Yes. Was he damn good? Yes. Was he the ****ing BEST (like Wilt stans say about Wilt)? No. Or he would have won.

[QUOTE=oarabbus]Wilt is simply not as good as his stans say he is. We've all played basketball before. If someone is really [B]that[/B] ****ing good, and said person is your >7' bigman (!), you are going to win.

Just look at Ewing. Was he good? Yes. Was he damn good? Yes. Was he the ****ing BEST (like Wilt stans say about Wilt)? No. Or he would have won.[/QUOTE]
Basketball is 5 ON 5 not 1 on 1.

Chamberlain in '65 led his 40-40 squad to a Game 7 vs the Boston Celtics which they lost by only ONE point. Here was Chamberlain taking garbage to within an eyelash away from beating the Boston Celtics.

[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]Basketball is 5 ON 5 not 1 on 1.

Chamberlain in '65 led his 40-40 squad to a Game 7 vs the Boston Celtics which they lost by only ONE point. Here was Chamberlain taking garbage to within an eyelash away from beating the Boston Celtics.[/QUOTE]

:cheers:

I made that post with MJ in mind because he was just THAT good and made what needed to happen, happen (and yes I am aware of his teammates but he just had legendary game-ending moments). No excuses. But fair enough, bball is certainly 5 on 5. You're a good poster so I will take your word for it.

[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]Basketball is 5 ON 5 not 1 on 1.

Chamberlain in '65 led his 40-40 squad to a Game 7 vs the Boston Celtics which they lost by only ONE point. Here was Chamberlain taking garbage to within an eyelash away from beating the Boston Celtics.[/QUOTE]


To be fair, Wilt was traded to Philadelphia that season.

And, Philadelphia only gave up three (2) role/rotation players in return. As was the case when Wilt was traded, his former team was willing to take less back in return just to unload The Big Dipper.

So, the 40 - 40 record is slightly misleading. That Philly team was much better at the end of the year with Wilt, Greer, Jackson, Walker et al.

[QUOTE=AbeVigodaLive]To be fair, Wilt was traded to Philadelphia that season.

And, Philadelphia only gave up three (2) role/rotation players in return. As was the case when Wilt was traded, his former team was willing to take less back in return just to unload The Big Dipper.

So, the 40 - 40 record is slightly misleading. That Philly team was much better at the end of the year with Wilt, Greer, Jackson, Walker et al.[/QUOTE]
Wilt was traded for 'less' because he was suffering from severe stomache and health problems from the start of the season. Checking in and out of hospitals it was revealed he'd had heart problems and a possible heart attack. Warriors assumed he was on borrowed time in the league and traded him quickly before word got out about his potentialy declining health. That turned out to be a mistake on their part, as Wilt lead the Sixers to a title over, you guessed it, the Warriors. Nice try pretending it was because Wilt wasn't any good or w/e nonsense you were trying to push though :oldlol:

[QUOTE=aj1987]So basically, he choked in over half of his playoff series. GOAT!! :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

MJ:

'85 - +1.1
'86 - +21
'87 - -1.4
'88 - +1.3
'89 - +2.4
'90 - +3.1
'91 - -0.4
'92 - +4.4
'93 - +2.5
'95 - +4.6
'96 - +0.3
'97 - +1.5
'98 - +3.7[/QUOTE]

Yeah, genius, the list I posted definitely means he choked in half his playoff career...
:facepalm
But thanks for letting us know that MJ choked in 1991. And people call this the GOAT season, lol!

[QUOTE=oarabbus]Wilt is simply not as good as his stans say he is. We've all played basketball before. If someone is really [B]that[/B] ****ing good, and said person is your >7' bigman (!), you are going to win.

Just look at Ewing. Was he good? Yes. Was he damn good? Yes. Was he the ****ing BEST (like Wilt stans say about Wilt)? No. Or he would have won.[/QUOTE]

Much like 70's Kareem and 80's Jordan, right? Not that ****ing good, since they won combined 1 title in 15 seasons.