Wilt most dominant ever, Russell greatest winner ever.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Shaq and MJ

[Asukal]

You Wilt fan boys keep on going on about his dominance and all that sh!t he did. Stop making excuses, Wilt only won twice. You stat nerds know it, stats don't lie. Wilt playing hero ball or Wilt playing a different role still only resulted to 2. Think about that for a moment. You think if Jordan scored only 15 ppg in the playoffs, he would still be considered the GOAT? Let's face it, Wilt was a beta who loved being told what to do. That is why he couldn't win against Russell because he never took it upon himself to beat his opponents his own way. 30>22>18

[STATUTORY]

Kobe most interesting and polarizing

[Kblaze8855]

As ive said before:

Anyone who puts an "Only" before any number of titles won as a star....

I really have to question that persons respect for the NBA and how hard it is to even contend much less win rings. Plural. Rings.

Guys get hated on around here for not having enough rings.


Really makes me wonder how much these people know and respect the sport when multiple title winners get clowned over not having more.

[LAZERUSS]

Wilt had a dominant game 5, which by the way, [COLOR="DarkRed"]ruins your injury excuse[/COLOR]

Game 6 (L 106-114)
20 points 6-21 FG
8-23 FT

Game 7 (L 96-100)
14 points 4-9 FG
6-15 FT

STRONG letdown... STRONG choke.

@kblaze: No, to win the title.

I like how you always say "internet 40 years later" because he didn't have detractors back then...

Try doing some actual RESEARCH before you spew your nonsense!

Neither Wilt, nor his '68 Sixers had a "strong letdown."

How about these articles (thanks to PHILA BTW)?

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...1&postcount=14

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...6&postcount=13

Newspaper recaps had Chamberlain NOTICEABLY LIMPING throughout that series.

You want some context?

Willis Reed was hailed as hero for his play in the '70 Finals with a SIMILAR injury. What were Reed's numbers in the last THREE games of the '70 Finals?
How about a TOTAL of 11 points, 3 rebounds, and 4-10 shooting from the field...COMBINED. BTW, Chamberlain himself was playing despite only being four months removed from major knee surgery, and NOWHERE near 100% in that Finals. How about Chamberlain's stat line in those last three games (and again, basically on one leg)... 88 points, 71 rebounds, and 39-55 from the field. In a must-win game six, all Chamberlain "the choker" could do, was hang a 45-27, 20-27 shooting game.

Back to the '68 EDF's. The Sixers had built a 3-1 series lead in that series, without HOFer Billy Cunningham playing a single minute, and with Chamberlain hobbled by MULTIPLE injuries. In game five, and despite these MULTIPLE injuries, Chamberlain pounded Russell with a massive 28-30 game. However, TWO more STARTERS, Luke Jackson and Wali Jones were injured. The Sixers had SEVEN of their nine key players either playing with injuries, or not playing at all. Despite all that, they lost a game seven by FOUR points (and Wilt's teammates collectively shot .333 from the field in that game.)

Now, go back to the previous year's EDF's, when Chamberlain and his teammates were healthy...and what happened? They absolutely DEMOLISHED Russell and his eight-time defending champions. Had the '68 Sixers been reasonably healthy in the post-season, and there can be no question that they would have duplicated their '67 blowout of the Celtics.

Oh, and after the '68 EDF's, RUSSELL stated, "A lessor man would not have played." Meaning, of course, NO ONE else would have played that series with those injuries.

Next...

[LAZERUSS]

wilt was not the level of winner relative to the others on the goat list. simple as that. and how could he be the "most dominant ever" if the consensus and statistically most dominant player in the post-season is michael jordan?

Hmmm...why didn't MJ win a title EVERY season? And how about this... in his highest scoring season, MJ's Bulls went 40-42. True, MJ averaged 36 ppg in the first round against Bird's Celtics, but guess what...he shot .417 from the field, and his Bulls were SWEPT. Just the year before, MJ averaged 43 ppg in the playoffs...except his team only played THREE games, and were again SWEPT by Bird's Celtics. In the clinching game three defeat...the "cluctch" MJ was a shot-jacking brick-layer... shooting an unfathomable 9-30 from the field.

MJ's scoring and efficiency took a DRAMATIC fall from his regular season numbers, when he faced the "Bad Boys" in their prime and in the post-season from '88 thru '90. How come? Why couldn't MJ elevate his game and carry his team against those guys?

And I don't want ANY excuses, either. Why? Because Wilt doesn't get any. If Wilt was a "choker" despite putting up HUGE numbers in '60, '62, '64, and '65, and single-handedly carrying two of those four cast-of-clown rosters, to within 2 and 1 point of knocking off the greatest dynasty in NBA history...well, MJ choked in his first six years of his career, as well.

And how come a completely HEALTHY MJ, after playing 17 regular season games, couldn't lead a Bulls team to a title in '95? I have heard "rusty" as an excuse. The reality was, MJ was probably the only player in the playoffs that was playing completely FRESH. And 17 games was more than the equivalent of an exhibition season, so he had NO excuses (except, maybe the loss of Horace Grant was too much to overcome.)

MJ didn't start winning anything until he had the best supporting cast in the league. How good were those rosters. His '93 team went 57-25 and won a tough six game series in the Finals. WithOUT Jordan in '94, a Pippen-led Bulls team went 55-27, and subsequently lost a close (and controversial) seven game series to the 56-26 Knicks. A Knicks team that would go on to lose a close seven game series against the 58-24 Rockets (and BTW, New York outscored Houston in that series.) As you CLEARLY see, those Bulls teams were title-contenders withOUT Jordan.

And how about MJ in his last three Finals, and again with, by far-and-away the best roster in the league? FG%'s of .455, .427, and get this... .415. Sorry, but MJ needed a TON of help to win his last three rings.

Again, how come the legendary MJ couldn't win a title in SEVEN prime years (and nine overall)? If anything, he was a selfish, shot-jacking, "choking loser" in those years, right?

[RoundMoundOfReb]

As ive said before:

Wilt played in a league with few teams. Doing the rough math an average player with a 14 year career should win 1.33 rings... so winning 2 rings as the "most dominant ever" isn't really impressive.

[chazzy]

Wilt played in a league with few teams. Doing the rough math an average player with a 14 year career should win 1.33 rings... so winning 2 rings as the "most dominant ever" isn't really impressive.

[LAZERUSS]

BTW, Chamberlain was 2, 1, 4, and 2 points away from holding a 5-3 H2H edge over "the greatest winner" of all-time. And in those eight series H2H's, he either outplayed, or downright dominated Russell, as well.

[DatAsh]

[I]

[DatAsh]

Come playoff time:

MJ, Kareem, LeBron, Shaq, Magic are infinitely more dominant than Wilt.

Those guys were more dominant offensively than Wilt in the post season, and with Kareem and Shaq, I'm even hesitant to give them that. Wilt was one of the best distributors ever at his position.

Then there's defense. Let me just say that to judge Wilt solely on his offensive output would be to completely ignore the most significant aspect of his game. The difference between Wilt and Lebron's impact on defense is like the difference between Lebron and Nash's.

[LAZERUSS]

Those guys were more dominant offensively than Wilt in the post season, and with Kareem and Shaq, I'm even hesitant to give them that. Wilt was one of the best distributors ever at his position.

Then there's defense. Let me just say that to judge Wilt solely on his offensive output would be to completely ignore the most significant aspect of his game. The difference between Wilt and Lebron's impact on defense is like the difference between Lebron and Nash's.

The "bashers" NEVER ackowledge the FACT that Chamberlain ELEVATED his rebounding in his post-season career. And, think about this...in his 13 post-seasons, Wilt LED the NBA in rebounding in EIGHT of them (including his LAST two seasons.) Not only that, but while he didn't lead the post-season in rebounding in '60 and '64, he outrebounded the guy who did, in both of them.

Nor do the "Custerites" ever acknowledge Wilt's DEFENSE in his post-season career. He was holding a peak Russell to post-season shooting of .399 and .386 (and later, .358 and .397.) He faced Thurmond in three playoff series, and held Nate to .392, .373, and .343 shooting (a PEAK Thurmond BTW.) In the '68 playoffs, he held Bellamy, who had shot .541 against the NBA in the course of the regular season, to a .421 FG% (oh, and Chamberlain shot .584 against him, all while outscoring, outrebounding, and outassisting ALL Knick players.) And in '71 and '72, and against a PEAK Kareem...in '71, KAJ shot .577 against the NBA...in the WCF's against Wilt... .481. In '72, Kareem shot .574 against the NBA...against Wilt in the WCF's... .457 (oh, and BTW, he held Kareem to a .414 FG% in the last four pivotal games of that series.)

Not only that, but in the research that we have, Chamberlain was easily the GOAT post-season shot-blocker of all-time. And, as Psileas has pointed out...blocking 8+ shots pr game, and likely going after another 8 per game, DETRACTED from his rebounding...which was already the best ever in the post-season.

Passing? How many other GOAT centers ever had a 6.5 apg post-season, much less a 9.0 ... like Chamberlain did in '68 and '67.

Scoring? A PRIME scoring Chamberlain had post-seasons of 28.0 ppg, 29.3 ppg, 33.2 ppg, 34.7 ppg, 35.0 ppg, and 37.0 ppg. And during those "scoring" seasons, he had playoff series of 37.0 ppg, 37.0 ppg, 38.6 ppg, and 38.7 ppg. Oh, and against Russell in that same span... 28.0 ppg, 29.2 ppg, 30.1 ppg, 30.5 ppg, and 33.6 ppg. Included were 10 40+ point games (in 52 playoff games...30 of which were against Russell.) On top of that, Chamberlain had FOUR 50+ point games (only MJ had more), and THREE of those came in "must-win" games (which is three more than MJ, or any other GOAT candidate ever had in their post-seasons.)

Wilt also had "must-win" games of 46, and 45 points (in a Finals game BTW.)

Chamberlain put up a 22-32-9 .579 post-season, which included TWO straight playoff series' of 28-27-11 .617 and 22-32-10 .556 (the latter against RUSSELL.)

He also hung the ONLY 20-20 .600 Finals in NBA history... 23 ppg, 24 rpg, and a .625 FG% (in a seven game series, and only four months removed from major knee surgery.)

And the Wilt-detractors like to claim that his post-season scoring dropped, but they never acknowledge that his FGAs also dropped. For instance, in his 50 ppg season, he averaged 40 FGAs per game in the regular season. In that post-season, he averaged 35 ppg on 29 FGAs (and seven of his 12 post-season games were against RUSSELL.) So, it wasn't as if Wilt were still taking anywhere near the same number of shots.

And finally, thanks for posting this...

“In the playoffs McGuire asked for more balanced team scoring, and Chamberlain responded agreeably, going over 40 points in only three of 12 playoff games to help bring the Philadelphia team to within a bounce of the ball of beating the Celtics.” - Alex Hannum

"All season long Russell has known just which way Wilt was going to turn," Frank McGuire complained to an acquaintance as the playoffs began. But under McGuire's direction, Chamberlain was now playing out of the pivot at the top of the key. As a result, reporters were writing about a "new" Wilt Chamberlain - "Warriors' Wilt to Display New Style Against Celtics" was a headline in The Philadelphia Inquirer before the series began" - John Taylor

Boston went 8-2 in the regular season against Philly with Chamberlain averaging 50 ppg on the season. I mean even with Wilt's historic regular season ppg, they still lost the series 8-2. Boston won with an average margin of victory of +16 in their 8 wins, while Philly won by a combined 3 points in their 2. Surely with Wilt's 16.5 ppg drop off in the post season series they didn't stand a chance. With Wilt declining that badly from the RS(evidenced by the ppg), I imagine it was an easy sweep for Boston.

[-23-]

Hmmm...why didn't MJ win a title EVERY season? And how about this... in his highest scoring season, MJ's Bulls went 40-42. True, MJ averaged 36 ppg in the first round against Bird's Celtics, but guess what...he shot .417 from the field, and his Bulls were SWEPT. Just the year before, MJ averaged 43 ppg in the playoffs...except his team only played THREE games, and were again SWEPT by Bird's Celtics. In the clinching game three defeat...the "cluctch" MJ was a shot-jacking brick-layer... shooting an unfathomable 9-30 from the field.

MJ's scoring and efficiency took a DRAMATIC fall from his regular season numbers, when he faced the "Bad Boys" in their prime and in the post-season from '88 thru '90. How come? Why couldn't MJ elevate his game and carry his team against those guys?

And I don't want ANY excuses, either. Why? Because Wilt doesn't get any. If Wilt was a "choker" despite putting up HUGE numbers in '60, '62, '64, and '65, and single-handedly carrying two of those four cast-of-clown rosters, to within 2 and 1 point of knocking off the greatest dynasty in NBA history...well, MJ choked in his first six years of his career, as well.

And how come a completely HEALTHY MJ, after playing 17 regular season games, couldn't lead a Bulls team to a title in '95? I have heard "rusty" as an excuse. The reality was, MJ was probably the only player in the playoffs that was playing completely FRESH. And 17 games was more than the equivalent of an exhibition season, so he had NO excuses (except, maybe the loss of Horace Grant was too much to overcome.)

MJ didn't start winning anything until he had the best supporting cast in the league. How good were those rosters. His '93 team went 57-25 and won a tough six game series in the Finals. WithOUT Jordan in '94, a Pippen-led Bulls team went 55-27, and subsequently lost a close (and controversial) seven game series to the 56-26 Knicks. A Knicks team that would go on to lose a close seven game series against the 58-24 Rockets (and BTW, New York outscored Houston in that series.) As you CLEARLY see, those Bulls teams were title-contenders withOUT Jordan.

And how about MJ in his last three Finals, and again with, by far-and-away the best roster in the league? FG%'s of .455, .427, and get this... .415. Sorry, but MJ needed a TON of help to win his last three rings.

Again, how come the legendary MJ couldn't win a title in SEVEN prime years (and nine overall)? If anything, he was a selfish, shot-jacking, "choking loser" in those years, right?

Why don't you post MJ's first 3 peat instead of cherry picking a bad series? 6 Rings > 2 Rings. Dipshit

[LAZERUSS]

Name these 8 postseasons

I'll give you 1967 and 1964

Factoring in scoring, rebounding, passing, blocked shots, and rebounding:

Easily '60, '61, '62, '64, '65, '66, '67, '68. And a strong case could be made for '70. And he outplayed the best player in the '71 post-season, as well. Furthermore, his '72 run, while statistically not his best, was certainly a more efficient "Russell-like" run.

And before you bring up nonsense like West in '65...think about this. Chamberlain averaged 30.1 ppg, 31.4 rpg, and shot .555 from the floor against Boston in a seven game series. A series in which he single-handedly carried his 40-40 team to a game seven, one point loss against the HOF-laden 62-18 Celtics. West, without Baylor in that Finals against Boston, averaged 33.8 ppg, but on a .424 FG%...in a series in which Russell destroyed LA (an 18-25 .702 FG% series), in a 4-1 rout.

Baylor in '62? Sorry, but while Wilt was basically being guarded by Russell and the entire Celtic team, Baylor had West. And Chamberlain did as much, overall, against that Celtic team, as Baylor and West, combined did. Both teams lost close game seven's. But Baylor's DEFENSIVE impact, and REBOUNDING were NOWHERE near Chamberlain's. Oh, and while Russell shot .399 against Wilt, he crushed LA with a .543 FG%. BTW, in game seven, while Baylor scored 41 points, he did so on...get this... 13-40 shooting from the floor.

Again, TOTAL IMPACT in the post-season, a PRIME Chamberlain was EASILY the best player in the post-season, and likely in at least a couple more after his prime, as well.

[Asukal]

As ive said before:

Of course winning even just one is a great accomplishment. What irks me are Wilt fanboys shoving his stats up everybody's asses. For someone who is supposedly the most dominant NBA player in history, it surely didn't amount to much as he could only lead his team to 2 titles. 30>22>18