Originally Posted by magictricked
I love this argument. Don't play that horses**t card
"Player X can't be as good as advertised because you didn't see him play."
Did it ever occur that maybe he was even better than advertised?
How can someone who didn't see him play say the reports from those who did are wrong? We do have stats that back up the stories of those reports, those refuting it have ... nothing.
You don't have to see Wilt's 100 point game to know he actually did score 100 points.
Basically if you didn't see him play, Don't use the "Did you even see him play one game or were you just persuaded by the media telling us of Wilt's "greatness" card.
like I said it's horses**t
Wilt's a top 5 all time, where he lands within that slot is arguable.
How was anyone even qualified to put Bill Russell 3rd on that same premise? He was arguably worse than advertised. Bill Russell did not shatter any individual records. What he's achieved he's done through his team.
Furthermore most posters here aren't even qualified to assess Michael Jordan for that matter yet rank him number one. You'd have to be in your late 20's to 30's to have "witnessed" Jordan play, let alone Magic, Kareem and Bird. On the most part these lists are primarily related to statistics.