Question to members ranking Russell or/and Wilt in their top 5

[nba_55]

How many full games of them have you watched and at what time of their career were those games?

[nba_55]

No answer? It is a genuine question.

[Dbrog]

Full games, probably 7-10 on NBA classic (some were allstar-games). In truth, there aren't many more out there. It's true with both that the more you read about them and the more you hear from people actually in the era, the more impressive both of these men become. My question would be for people who have them in their top 10 but not top5. Under what criteria are you judging your GOATs? If its numbers, Wilt is the best, if it's winning, Bill is the best. If you are going to say, well they just dominated because "it wasn't modern basketball," then how is it that they are on your list at all?

[nba_55]

Full games, probably 7-10 on NBA classic (some were allstar-games). In truth, there aren't many more out there. It's true with both that the more you read about them and the more you hear from people actually in the era, the more impressive both of these men become. My question would be for people who have them in their top 10 but not top5. Under what criteria are you judging your GOATs? If its numbers, Wilt is the best, if it's winning, Bill is the best. If you are going to say, well they just dominated because "it wasn't modern basketball," then how is it that they are on your list at all?

That's another great question, I actually don't rank them, so they are not in my top10.

[kshutts1]

That's another great question, I actually don't rank them, so they are not in my top10.

What is your top 10?

And I have never watched a single game of theirs, or Oscar's. But I rank all 3 in my first tier. I do so based on eye-witness accounts, stats and accolades and, most importantly, performance relative to peers. There have been very, very few individuals that performed as well, relative to their peers, as those 3 have.

[kshutts1]

Full games, probably 7-10 on NBA classic (some were allstar-games). In truth, there aren't many more out there. It's true with both that the more you read about them and the more you hear from people actually in the era, the more impressive both of these men become. My question would be for people who have them in their top 10 but not top5. Under what criteria are you judging your GOATs? If its numbers, Wilt is the best, if it's winning, Bill is the best. If you are going to say, well they just dominated because "it wasn't modern basketball," then how is it that they are on your list at all?

I don't know a single person that ranks players based on just one factor.

[Dbrog]

That's another great question, I actually don't rank them, so they are not in my top10.

This is much more sound logic than some people on this board. The biggest problem that I see with all the top10 lists is the inconsistent logic.

[Marchesk]

How many full games of them have you watched and at what time of their career were those games?

I wasn't alive then, so I've only seen highlights and parts of games online. Doesn't matter. Their accomplishments speak for themselves. One can legitimately ask why Mikan doesn't get the same respect, and maybe he is getting the shaft, but that was pre shot clock and pre integration era. The league fully integrated during Wilt and Russell's careers. Also, there were other HOF bigs in the 60s, and Wilt got to play against Kareem for 4 years.

I don't think you can do GOAT lists based on the eye test, or whether you think a certain era is stronger or weaker. It should be based solely on a player's accomplishments. You can't time travel guys, and you can't have them raised in other eras. Maybe Lebron and Kobe put up ridiculous numbers in the 60s, but then again if they grew up back then, they wouldn't have the same advantages that players have today. More likely, they would have been in the category of West, Oscar, Baylor. But who knows how Lebron plays in the 60s. Is he still a point forward?

I think we can say that certain players transcend eras and would be great no matter what.

[AirFederer]

ATG, but his stats cannot be looked at w/o denoting the fact that the L was a "bush league" then (Wilt's own words)
Great i the RS, known PO choker.
Larger than life character, to say the least.
Great athlete. Even greater in self promoting, myth production

I have him around 18 in my top 20.

[choppermagic]

I don't know a single person that ranks players based on just one factor.

Im pretty sure EPSN only ranks Lebron according to PER LOL

As for the implication of OP's question, you dont always need to see the game for yourself to know something happened. How many of us personally saw Hitler kill someone, but we all pretty much agree the guy was a bad dude...

[nba_55]

What is your top 10?

And I have never watched a single game of theirs, or Oscar's. But I rank all 3 in my first tier. I do so based on eye-witness accounts, stats and accolades and, most importantly, performance relative to peers. There have been very, very few individuals that performed as well, relative to their peers, as those 3 have.

I am not sure of my actual top 10 right now, I still have to see more games of some of the older guys like Kareem, Magic, Bird. But i guess we all have different ways of doing our list. I personally can't rank players I have never seen play a full game. Since it's my own top 10 list, I have to judge them from my own perspective, my own eyes.

[Dbrog]

I don't know a single person that ranks players based on just one factor.

Of course. However, people CERTAINLY value numbers or winning in higher %s in their GOAT formulas. For instance, I take winning as significantly more valuable than numbers, but of course numbers still play a part.

[DonDadda59]

Here's a full game of Wilt vs Russell in the finals (1964) both in their primes:

Part I

Part II

Part III

Russell in '66 ECSF Game 4

Wilt in '71 on the Lakers WCSF Game 6

Just for fun- '62 All Star Game

[Dbrog]

Repped don. People need to see these games (I haven't seen the 1966 one before).

[Marchesk]

Of course. However, people CERTAINLY value numbers or winning in higher %s in their GOAT formulas. For instance, I take winning as significantly more valuable than numbers, but of course numbers still play a part.

Does that mean you rate Hondo over West or Oscar? Winning matters, but so does having the right team around you.

For example, I wonder where Kareem would be ranked if Magic hadn't demanded to play for the Lakers.