Why Do People Put MJ ahead of Wilt

[jlauber]

Once again, there are those that neglect Russell's greatness in these discussions, as well. Granted, he played with HOF-laden rosters, but, he also WON with those rosters. It's not as if he won a couple of rings with loaded rosters in his 13 seasons. He won ELEVEN times in those 13 seasons (and had he not been injured in one of them, it might very well have been 12 out of 13.) And, yes, he had those HOFers...BUT, without Russell, how many of them are truly HOF players? True, they were very good players, but players like Sanders, Embry, Howell, KC Jones, and Frank Ramsey were not GREAT players. Not only that, but before Russell came to Boston, they didn't sniff a title. AND, after he retired, they immediately fell to a 34-48 mark.

And one more time...those that diminish Russell's rings, because of his talented supporting casts, have no business then disparaging Chamberlain's "lack" of rings....when the reality was, Wilt was battling those teams in TEN of his 14 seasons (not to mention the '70 Knicks and the '71 Bucks...two of the greatest teams of all-time.)

[RRR3]

Why do people put MJ ahead of Wilt, but put Wilt ahead of Magic, Bird, Kobe?


I say if you want wilt in your top 10 then you have to put him at number 1 and russell at 2.


You cant put MJ ahead of Wilt if Magic, bird,and Kareem arn't ahead of him.

Bill Russell is not even top 10 all time.

[colts19]

Are you talking about pre 90s jordan? Or the jorddan that lost in the 80s? Cuz 90s jordan was just as good a jumpshooter as bird. Rebounding bird might have him statistically, but when you consider that jordan as a guard avg 6-7 rebounds to birds 7-9 as a SF, I think they similar.

The notion that larry bird took a sub 500 team to to championsip contention isn't totally true either. They aquired about 3 more players too.

In my post I was talking about larry's first year. The Boston roster from the year before was the same except for the addition of Pete Maravich who was past his prime, ML Carr and rookie Gerald Henderson. They lost Jo Jo White, Billy knight and Bob Mcadoo. So I would say the talent was less on Bird's turnaround team.

You also say Bird's 7 to 9 rebounds his career rebound avg was 10.0 Jordan's was 6.2. try to get your numbers right.

[97 bulls]

[/B]
In my post I was talking about larry's first year. The Boston roster from the year before was the same except for the addition of Pete Maravich who was past his prime, ML Carr and rookie Gerald Henderson. They lost Jo Jo White, Billy knight and Bob Mcadoo. So I would say the talent was less on Bird's turnaround team.

You also say Bird's 7 to 9 rebounds his career rebound avg was 10.0 Jordan's was 6.2. try to get your numbers right.

Tiny archibald played in 11 more games and his minutes jumped from 25 to 36. Maxwell playing another year in the league probably helped as well as the guys you mentioned. Bird was definately the main reason for the drastic improvement. But don't act like it was all him. Cuz it wasn't.

And you need to get your facts straight. I stated as a small forward. Bird started his career as a pf. And don't think that the torrid pace of the late 70s and 80s didn't have something to do with the rebounding difference either.

[colts19]

Tiny archibald played in 11 more games and his minutes jumped from 25 to 36. Maxwell playing another year in the league probably helped as well as the guys you mentioned. Bird was definately the main reason for the drastic improvement. But don't act like it was all him. Cuz it wasn't.

And you need to get your facts straight. I stated as a small forward. Bird started his career as a pf. And don't think that the torrid pace of the late 70s and 80s didn't have something to do with the rebounding difference either.

It is never just one person, thats what you Jordan fans can see in everyone else, but you never see it with Jordan. As far as the rebound disscussion, I don't really care but when your the one that tried to make it look like they were really close Jordan 6 to 7 Bird 7 to 9. Then when I point out the real numbers you start bringing in pace and bird was a power forward and all this other stuff to move the line.

To all Jordan fans, I'm sorry that i don't think Jordan was the Perfect player, I only think he was darn close to the Perfect player. Now if all of you would quit trying to tear down all the Great players that came before him, I would really be happy. Russell - 11 Rings, Wilt - check the record book, Magic and Bird saved the league. Big O set the standard for all around play. Give them their due.

[catch24]

Because Jordan was better all-around and significantly the better playoff performer.

[D-Wade316]

Once again, there are those that neglect Russell's greatness in these discussions, as well. Granted, he played with HOF-laden rosters, but, he also WON with those rosters. It's not as if he won a couple of rings with loaded rosters in his 13 seasons. He won ELEVEN times in those 13 seasons (and had he not been injured in one of them, it might very well have been 12 out of 13.) And, yes, he had those HOFers...BUT, without Russell, how many of them are truly HOF players? True, they were very good players, but players like Sanders, Embry, Howell, KC Jones, and Frank Ramsey were not GREAT players. Not only that, but before Russell came to Boston, they didn't sniff a title. AND, after he retired, they immediately fell to a 34-48 mark.

And one more time...those that diminish Russell's rings, because of his talented supporting casts, have no business then disparaging Chamberlain's "lack" of rings....when the reality was, Wilt was battling those teams in TEN of his 14 seasons (not to mention the '70 Knicks and the '71 Bucks...two of the greatest teams of all-time.)

[colts19]

Because Jordan was better all-around and significantly the better playoff performer.

1986 50% fgp 43.7 pts per game
1987 41% fgp 35.7 pts per game

W/L record against Bird in Playoffs 0 for 6
W/L record against Bird overall 16Wins 24Losses

Just saying.

[colts19]

Because Jordan was better all-around and significantly the better playoff performer.

1986 50% fgp 43.7 pts per game
1987 41% fgp 35.7 pts per game

W/L record against Bird in Playoffs 0 for 6
W/L record against Bird overall 16Wins 24Losses

Just saying.

[jlauber]

Because Jordan was better all-around and significantly the better playoff performer.

Jordan was a better scorer and a marginally better passer in the post-season. Chamberlain was more efficient, a FAR greater rebounder, and, as great a defender as MJ was, he was not the defensive presence that Wilt was. And even MJ's scoring edge has to be put in perspective. Chamberlain only played 52 games, out of his 160, in his "scoring" years. He was a 33 ppg scorer in those games. Not only that, but Wilt faced a HOF center in about two-thirds of his 160 post-season games, AND, was outgunned by HOFers in all but one post-season.

As for ENTIRE resumes...let's get real here. Jordan was a better FT shooter, had more range, and was a marginally better passer. But even in passing, how many times did MJ finish third in assists? Or FIRST? And, I'll give MJ an edge in 3 pt shooting...except that he was below average in that area. Take away MJ's seasons when the NBA moved in the 3pt line, and he was a career .288 shooter from the arc.

MJ won more scoring crowns, to be sure, but he was never the overwhelming scorer that Wilt was. Even using "pace" MJ was not close. And that is BEFORE bringing league shooting percentages into the discussion. MJ played almost half of his career in the "defenseless" 80's, where entire LEAGUES were shooting nearly 50%. Even into the 90's, the FG%'s were STILL considerably higher than even the highest seasons in which Chamberlain played...and WAY higher than the lowest of Wilt's era. So, using basic math, and transfer Wilt's '62 season into MJ's '87 era, and not only does Wilt average 41 ppg...BUT, when adjusting his FG% up to '87 levels (.480 from his actual league average of .426), and Chamberlain's ppg jump to over 45 ppg.

Wilt AVERAGED nearly 40 ppg over the course of his first seven seasons...COMBINED. And virtually everyone who followed the sport at the time would acknowledge that Wilt could have continued to have been the top scorer in the NBA thru the rest of the decade of the 60's. Rick Barry, himself, who won the scoring title in '67, at 35.6 ppg, claimed that he (Barry) won it, only because Wilt didn't want it. Wilt's scoring dropped dramatically from '66, at 33.5 ppg, to 24.1 ppg in '67, BUT, he shot an unworldly .683 from the floor, and as in EVERY season in the 60's, Wilt had the HIGH game of 58 points (on his usual unbelieveable shooting of 26-34.) In the '68 season Wilt "only" averaged 24.3 ppg, but here again, he had the FOUR highest scoring games of the season (games of 52, 53, 53, and 68.)

In his '69 season, Wilt's new coach, Van Breda Kolf, had Wilt cut back shooting even more, and at one point in the season, he was averaging 17-18 ppg. It got so bad that SI was going to run an article claiming that Wilt could no longer score. The night before that story hit the newstands, Wilt exploded with a 60 point game. And a few nights later he poured in yet another 66 point game (on 29-35 shooting BTW.) Over the course of 17 straight games, Wilt averaged 31.1 (including a 35 point game on Russell), and finished the season at 20.5 ppg. Of course the idiotic Van Breda Kolf had Wilt return back to his earlier non-shooting form, and Wilt only averaged 13.9 ppg in the post-season.

For more proof of "what could have been", Wilt's NEXT NEW coach in the following season (69-70), Joe Mullaney, asked Wilt to become the focal point of the offense, and Chamberlain responded with a 32.2 ppg average in his first nine games (with games of 33, 35, 37, 38, 42, and 43 points...and a 25 point game against rookie Kareem, in which he outplayed Jabbar in every facet of the game.) Unfortunately, Wilt shredded his knee in that ninth game, and he was never the same again (although to his credit, he hung a 23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, .625 Finals in a seven game series against the 60-22 Knicks.)

Of course, Wilt's detractors NEVER bring up the fact that Wilt was, quite simply, the greatest rebounder in the history of the game. And while the "anti-Wilt" clan will always point to Wilt's post-season drop in scoring, they quietly skirt around the fact that Wilt ELEVATED his rebounding in the post-season. Or the fact that in Wilt's 29 post-season series, he was NEVER outrebounded in ANY of them.

Jordan won ten scoring titles to Wilt's seven. Both could probably have won more. In any case, MJ was not nearly as dominant as a PRIME Wilt was. Wilt holds a 1-0 edge in 100 point games. A 6-0 edge in 70+ point games. A 32-5 edge in 60+ point games. A 118-39 margin in 50+ point games. And a 271-173 edge in 40 point games.

How about 30-30 games? MJ had ZERO in his career. Wilt had 103 of the ENTIRE in NBA history, of 131. 40-30 games? Obviously MJ didn't have ANY. Wilt has 55 of the 61 that have been accomplished in NBA HISTORY. Wilt is also the ONLY player to have 40-40 games, and he even had FOUR 50-40 games.

How about the post-season? How many 30-25 post-seasons did MJ have? Wilt had FOUR. How about 25-25 post-season? Chamberlain had SIX. How about 20-20 post-seasons? Wilt had EIGHT. Wilt had a TON of 30-30 post-season games, as well. In fact, he had FOUR 40-30 games, just against Russsell alone. And how many 56-35 games, or 50-35 games, or 46-34 games, or 45-27 post-season games did MJ have?

How about the regular season? How many 50-25 seasons did MJ have? How about 40-20 seasons? Wilt had TWO. How about 30-25 seasons? Wilt had THREE. How about 30-20 seasons? Chamberlain had SEVEN. How about 20-20 seasons? Wilt had TEN.

How many FG% titles did MJ win? Chamberlain won NINE. In fact, Wilt has the TWO highest seasons in NBA HISTORY, and THREE of the top-five. How many rebound titles did MJ win? Wilt won ELEVEN. And, Wilt has the THREE highest seasons in NBA history. I already mentioned assist titles. Chamberlain, a CENTER, won ONE assist title, and came in THIRD in another season. Let when know when you find MJ's best finish in assists. And while MJ was a good shot-blocker for a guard, Wilt was probably the game's greatest shot-blocker of all-time.

So, NO, Jordan was NOT a better "all-around" player than Chamberlain. And his post-season career was NOT "significantly" better in the post-season.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Bird doesn't take a backseat to Jordan in terms of impact, anyway. Jordan was a better scorer and man defender. Larry was a superior shooter, rebounder, passer/playmaker and no less clutch. His fundamentals, court vision, leadership qualities and basketball iq don't take a backseat either.

Bird's impact was definitely less than Jordan's. Jordan was not just a better "man defender," he was a significantly better defender overall. Jordan is also a significantly better scorer, far better penetrator/finisher, and an equal/better shooter inside 21 feet from age 26 onward. It's not a large gap in impact by any stretch (maybe 5%), but it's there.

[IGOTGAME]

Because Jordan was better all-around and significantly the better playoff performer.

I wouldnt say Jordan skill wise was better. I would say that he stepped up more than Wilt did. But MJ never had to face the competition that Wilt did.

It wasn't like MJ was winning with less talent then the other superstars. He won with the most talented supporting cast by a good margin every time he won a title.

[OldSchoolBBall]

MJ won more scoring crowns, to be sure, but he was never the overwhelming scorer that Wilt was. Even using "pace" MJ was not close.

Completely false:

[quote]Listed below are the top scoring rate seasons in NBA history, measured in points scored per 75 possessions.

[catch24]

1986 50% fgp 43.7 pts per game
1987 41% fgp 35.7 pts per game

W/L record against Bird in Playoffs 0 for 6
W/L record against Bird overall 16Wins 24Losses

Just saying.

6 Finals MVPs and 6 championships > 1 Finals MVP and 2 Championships

33ppg on 49% shooting and 29 PER > 22ppg 52% shooting and 23 PER

Significantly a better playoff performer.

Oh, and Wilt's W/L against Russell in the playoffs 1-7

Try again.

[catch24]

I wouldnt say Jordan skill wise was better. I would say that he stepped up more than Wilt did. But MJ never had to face the competition that Wilt did.

It wasn't like MJ was winning with less talent then the other superstars. He won with the most talented supporting cast by a good margin every time he won a title.

Nah, MJ was easily more skilled. Not even close really.