Why do people criticize Wilt Chamberlain for "only" winning two championships?

[Audio One]

All the time here, people refer to him as a stat-padder, that should've won more. Well, how many championships should he have won, and why?

During what year(s) specifically?

And during said year(s), what should he have did differently? What was he supposed to do to win?


When he failed, how much was it due to him "choking", and how much credit does Russell and his squad deserve? He is (arguably at the very least) the GOAT defender, is he not? And he did apparently have "stacked" teams, no?

I'm honestly just curious and would like to address these "concerns". Outside of this website, Chamberlain's routinely ranked in the top 3 GOAT, yet ppl here don't even rank him in the top 5. I know people are entitled to their opinions, well, I'd like to hear yours

[navy]

Bill Russel has 11.

[CavaliersFTW]

All the time here, people refer to him as a stat-padder, that should've won more. Well, how many championships should he have won, and why?

During what year(s) specifically?

And during said year(s), what should he have did differently? What was he supposed to do to win?


When he failed, how much was it due to him "choking", and how much credit does Russell and his squad deserve? He is (arguably at the very least) the GOAT defender, is he not? And he did apparently have "stacked" teams, no?

I'm honestly just curious and would like to address these "concerns". Outside of this website, Chamberlain's routinely ranked in the top 3 GOAT, yet ppl here don't even rank him in the top 5. I know people are entitled to their opinions, well, I'd like to hear yours

Actually you may have it backwards, Wilt is treated very well here on ISH, a few of us consider him THE GOAT or a player who by all means is in the discussion with a strong case for what he could do and accomplished. ISH probably has one of the best Wilt fanbases of any basketball discussion board, it is OUTSIDE of ISH that I notice he doesn't get his due. Most of the people on ISH who speak ill of him don't really have legitimate criticisms, or they are exaggerating, and as such they get called out immediately. The anti-Wilt crowd doesn't steal show about Wilt on ISH, where as I notice on other sites they do.

[trueDS]

All the time here, people refer to him as a stat-padder, that should've won more. Well, how many championships should he have won, and why?

During what year(s) specifically?

And during said year(s), what should he have did differently? What was he supposed to do to win?

He should shot less in his early years, he should led his team to better offensive results, he should have more overall impact (and from occurrences when he changed teams we know, that his impact wasn't so great as his box score suggest) and finally after Bill Russell (the ultimate excuse for Wilt) retired he should won more than once... especially in 1970, when Reed played on one leg and Wilt was unable to dominate him in G7 (what's even more strange when we consider that he scored like 40 in G6).

Overall though, the most important is his global impact, which was lower than box score numbers suggest.

[CavaliersFTW]

He should shot less in his early years, he should led his team to better offensive results, he should have more overall impact (and from occurrences when he changed teams we know, that his impact wasn't so great as his box score suggest) and finally after Bill Russell (the ultimate excuse for Wilt) retired he should won more than once... especially in 1970, when Reed played on one leg and Wilt was unable to dominate him in G7 (what's even more strange when we consider that he scored like 40 in G6).

Overall though, the most important is his global impact, which was lower than box score numbers suggest.

I love how you never saw Wilt but you presume to know how he 'should' have played.

You'll learn much more about him by receiving input, not producing output.

[trueDS]

I love how you never saw Wilt but you presume to know how he 'should' have played.

You'll learn much more about him by receiving input, not producing output.

I'm smarter than you and know more about basketball. Accept that and life would be easier for you :)

[ArbitraryWater]

I think its pretty obvious he should have won all from 1968-1970.. choked those away thoroughly

[Ancient Legend]

Switch Russell and Wilt's teams, how many chips does Bill Russell win? I'm thinking at most 1, while the Celtcis already stacked and with Wilt would be unbeatable.

[CavaliersFTW]

I'm smarter than you and know more about basketball. Accept that and life would be easier for you :)

Who says things like this?

[reppy]

Who says things like this?

Richard Sherman?

[iamgine]

Why do people criticize Wilt Chamberlain for "only" winning two championships?

The answer to this is because Bill Russel has 11.

[CavaliersFTW]

Richard Sherman?

oh shit

trueDickSherman

[Audio One]

He should shot less in his early years

How much less?

he should led his team to better offensive results

How else besides shooting less?

he should have more overall impact (and from occurrences when he changed teams we know, that his impact wasn't so great as his box score suggest)

What does this even mean, and how do you know this?

and finally after Bill Russell (the ultimate excuse for Wilt) retired he should won more than once... especially in 1970, when Reed played on one leg and Wilt was unable to dominate him in G7 (what's even more strange when we consider that he scored like 40 in G6)

So what kind of defense was being played on Chamberlain? How was he scoring his points, and what should he have done differently?

What kind of sets on offense was the Ramsay running?

Were his teammates providing adequate floor spacing?

How many doubles was Wilt seeing?

How much can be attributed to Willis' strong play?

And what other years should he have won, and why?

Overall though, the most important is his global impact, which was lower than box score numbers suggest.

Subjectively speaking

[TylerOO]

who cares? dudes dead

[Audio One]

Actually you may have it backwards, Wilt is treated very well here on ISH, a few of us consider him THE GOAT or a player who by all means is in the discussion with a strong case for what he could do and accomplished. ISH probably has one of the best Wilt fanbases of any basketball discussion board, it is OUTSIDE of ISH that I notice he doesn't get his due. Most of the people on ISH who speak ill of him don't really have legitimate criticisms, or they are exaggerating, and as such they get called out immediately. The anti-Wilt crowd doesn't steal show about Wilt on ISH, where as I notice on other sites they do.

Actually, thinking about it, I may have it wrong altogether. Wilt's just disrespected period by the masses, generally. As far as here especially, this fanbase you speak of, that hold him in a high light, is relatively low, in comparison to those that bash him, or rank him outside the top 3. Directly, or indirectly, it doesn't seem that he gets his due. I can't think of another player that's held to such ethereal standards, and has their flaws magnified, and focused upon more than their positives.

All the average fan here seems to think, generally, is that:

a) he played at a super face pace that generated 1000 extra possessions
b) players back then were only 5'4
c) only 3 teams
d) he goaltended and padded his misses, a la Kevin Love

And then people have the nerve to scapegoat ppl like @LAZERUSS for their hatred for Wilt, when in actuality they already have had their own preconceived notions built and minds made up. I could be wrong, but I don't even think Wilt made the top 3 all-time here for this site's rankings