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.
this but you should be quoting KOBE143 the retard who thinks he knows everything about basketball AT AGE 14