-
Utryin2getthepipe?
-
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
Originally Posted by fpliii
if you give me specific games to look up complete lines for, let me know (do you need game 5's as well for 5-game series?)
btw to outside observers (not that you'll necessarily care), I don't like/dislike Wilt, just wanted to try to complete the matchup table; I actually have Russ higher (one of three guys, with Magic and Jordan, who has an argument for GOAT), so if anything I'm a supporter of his ATM
Russell was the greater "winner" to be sure, but often overlooked was the fact that Russell's CELTICS beat Wilt's TEAMs in four game seven's, and by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points. It's not as if Russell's Celtics were just annihilating Chamberlain's teams (most of which were heavily outgunned, and with rosters that generally played poorly.)
As far as individual numbers go, as you KNOW, Chamberlain DOUBLED Russell in scoring, outrebounded him by FIVE per game, and outshot him from the field, on average, by about a .500 to .400 overall FG% in their 143 H2H games. And you would be hard-pressed to find a dozen games in which Russell clearly outplayed Wilt, but you could easily find some 40+ in which Chamberlain just buried Russell.
Last edited by jlauber; 07-31-2012 at 11:45 PM.
-
Kobe Apostle
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
Originally Posted by fpliii
if you give me specific games to look up complete lines for, let me know (do you need game 5's as well for 5-game series?)
btw to outside observers (not that you'll necessarily care), I don't like/dislike Wilt, just wanted to try to complete the matchup table; I actually have Russ higher (one of three guys, with Magic and Jordan, who has an argument for GOAT), so if anything I'm a supporter of his ATM
Just doing Game 7s.
1966 Eastern Div Finals - Lakers/Hawks
1964 Western Div Finals - Warriors/Hawks
1963 Eastern Div Finals - Celtics/Royals
1963 Western Div Finals - Lakers/Hawks
1961 Western Div Finals - Lakers/Hawks
1960 Western Div Finals - Lakers/Hawks
and even the older ones of any all-time great players if you have the stats
Last edited by Deuce Bigalow; 07-31-2012 at 11:49 PM.
-
Kobe Apostle
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
Originally Posted by SevereUpInHere
Ewing had quite a few game 7s (not all good mind you)
91 E semis v Chi
22/9/1
94 E Semis v Chi
17/20/4 3st
94 ECF v Indiana
24/22/7 5blk
94 Final v Houston
17/10/1
95 E Semis v Ind game losing missed layup
29/14/5 4blk
96 E Semi v Mia
37/17/4 2 blk
00 E Semis v Mia
18/12/1 3blk
I'm too lazy to get all the shooting percentages, let's say they're not all great, is there a better way to search for this stuff than playoff game logs on basketball reference? ('scuse any errors)
Wow, I totally forgot Patrick Ewing. I'm going to add him right now.
btw the first series you mentioned did not go to game 7.
Last edited by Deuce Bigalow; 07-31-2012 at 11:54 PM.
-
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
-
sahelanthropus
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
Originally Posted by jlauber
Russell was the greater "winner" to be sure, but often overlooked was the fact that Russell's CELTICS beat Wilt's TEAMs in four game seven's, and by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points. It's not as if Russell's Celtics were just annihilating Chamberlain's teams (most of which were heavily outgunned, and with rosters that generally played poorly.)
As far as individual numbers go, as you KNOW, Chamberlain DOUBLED Russell in scoring, outrebounded him by FIVE per game, and outshot him from the field, on average, by about a .500 to .400 overall FG% in their 143 H2H games. And you would be hard-pressed to find a dozen games in which Russell clearly outplayed Wilt, but you could easily find some 40+ in which Chamberlain just buried Russell.
greater player != better player in h2h matchups...I have Wilt at 4 right now not because he was a lesser player, but because I can't make a GOAT argument for Wilt, just as I can't for anyone other than those three players (including Kareem, who I have at 5 now, contrary to popular opinion)
that being said, GOAT lists don't mean much for me, I care a lot more about learning about players, doing research, and sharing with others...just felt the need to qualify the spreadsheet (since more often than not, a Wilt fan would present such findings) to note my objectivity
Originally Posted by Deuce Bigalow
Just doing Game 7s.
1966 Eastern Div Finals - Lakers/Hawks
1964 Western Div Finals - Warriors/Hawks
1963 Eastern Div Finals - Celtics/Royals
1963 Western Div Finals - Lakers/Hawks
1961 Western Div Finals - Lakers/Hawks
1960 Western Div Finals - Lakers/Hawks
and even the older ones of any all-time great players if you have the stats
I'll see what I can find on those and any other games for which you need holes filled in
hopefully this thread is still busy tomorrow, since the ProQuest archives are a little whack today
-
Kobe Apostle
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
Originally Posted by fpliii
greater player != better player in h2h matchups...I have Wilt at 4 right now not because he was a lesser player, but because I can't make a GOAT argument for Wilt, just as I can't for anyone other than those three players (including Kareem, who I have at 5 now, contrary to popular opinion)
that being said, GOAT lists don't mean much for me, I care a lot more about learning about players, doing research, and sharing with others...just felt the need to qualify the spreadsheet (since more often than not, a Wilt fan would present such findings) to note my objectivity
I'll see what I can find on those and any other games for which you need holes filled in
hopefully this thread is still busy tomorrow, since the ProQuest archives are a little whack today
There's actually many holes that need to be filled in in many of the games. As you can see on the list, Playoff games before 1984 that are not the Finals are missing reb, ast, FG-FGA.
But it's alright though. I want to atleast get the complete stats of the Top 10 GOATS Russell and Wilt.
-
Utryin2getthepipe?
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
Originally Posted by Deuce Bigalow
Wow, I totally forgot Patrick Ewing. I'm going to add him right now.
btw the first series you mentioned did not go to game 7.
My bad, I was going between wiki and bball reference at work. Look forward to seeing the full correct stats
-
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
Originally Posted by fpliii
greater player != better player in h2h matchups...I have Wilt at 4 right now not because he was a lesser player, but because I can't make a GOAT argument for Wilt, just as I can't for anyone other than those three players (including Kareem, who I have at 5 now, contrary to popular opinion)
that being said, GOAT lists don't mean much for me, I care a lot more about learning about players, doing research, and sharing with others...just felt the need to qualify the spreadsheet (since more often than not, a Wilt fan would present such findings) to note my objectivity
I'll see what I can find on those and any other games for which you need holes filled in
hopefully this thread is still busy tomorrow, since the ProQuest archives are a little whack today
I actually have Russell, MJ, Magic, and Chamberlain, and in any order, at 1-4. I have Kareem slightly below them. Then Shaq and Duncan in a near tie, just below Kareem. And then Bird, Kobe, Hakeem, and Moses, in any order, 8-11. I base that on several criteria, including the fact that Wilt, saddled with inept rosters for nearly half of his career, nearly knocked out Russell's Celtics in FOUR game seven's. Not only that, but it was generally not Russell vs. Wilt in those matchups, but rather a swarming Celtic TEAM vs Wilt. That is well documented. And, keep in mind that when Chamberlain had a comparable supporting cast, that was healthy, as was the case in '67, his TEAM just destroyed the 60-21 Celtics...in a series in which Wilt overwhelmed Russell in EVERY facet of the game.
Chamberlain was an eye-lash away from 6-7 rings (losing a game seven to the 60-22 Knicks in '70.) And in the majority of his H2H's, he was simply the more dominant player on the floor.
In Russell's defense...he led his team's to 11 titles in 13 seasons. Aside from goling 13-13, what more could he have accomplised? And, along the way, he did whatever was necessary to win those rings, too. He had a 30-40 game seven (and a Finals' clinching game six of 30-38.) He had post-seasons of 20+ ppg. He led Boston in scoring in the '66 Finals, at 23.6 ppg. And his '65 Finals of 18-27 .702 is one of the greatest (and most under-rated) Finals in NBA history. And none of that even comes close to his overall defensive impact.
Still, all things considered, IMHO, Russell and Chamberlain are on the same overall level. Russell got more from his teammates, while Chamberlain carried his. And I still agree with John Wooden, who claimed that had Russell and Wilt swapped rosters, and likely it would have been Wilt with 11 rings. In any case, Chamberlain would surely have had considerably more than the two he wound up with.
-
Kobe Apostle
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
Originally Posted by jlauber
I actually have Russell, MJ, Magic, and Chamberlain, and in any order, at 1-4. I have Kareem slightly below them. Then Shaq and Duncan in a near tie, just below Kareem. And then Bird, Kobe, Hakeem, and Moses, in any order, 8-11. I base that on several criteria, including the fact that Wilt, saddled with inept rosters for nearly half of his career, nearly knocked out Russell's Celtics in FOUR game seven's. Not only that, but it was generally not Russell vs. Wilt in those matchups, but rather a swarming Celtic TEAM vs Wilt. That is well documented. And, keep in mind that when Chamberlain had a comparable supporting cast, that was healthy, as was the case in '67, his TEAM just destroyed the 60-21 Celtics...in a series in which Wilt overwhelmed Russell in EVERY facet of the game.
Chamberlain was an eye-lash away from 6-7 rings (losing a game seven to the 60-22 Knicks in '70.) And in the majority of his H2H's, he was simply the more dominant player on the floor.
In Russell's defense...he led his team's to 11 titles in 13 seasons. Aside from goling 13-13, what more could he have accomplised? And, along the way, he did whatever was necessary to win those rings, too. He had a 30-40 game seven (and a Finals' clinching game six of 30-38.) He had post-seasons of 20+ ppg. He led Boston in scoring in the '66 Finals, at 23.6 ppg. And his '65 Finals of 18-27 .702 is one of the greatest (and most under-rated) Finals in NBA history. And none of that even comes close to his overall defensive impact.
Still, all things considered, IMHO, Russell and Chamberlain are on the same overall level. Russell got more from his teammates, while Chamberlain carried his. And I still agree with John Wooden, who claimed that had Russell and Wilt swapped rosters, and likely it would have been Wilt with 11 rings. In any case, Chamberlain would surely have had considerably more than the two he wound up with.
When you miss 7, 8, 9 FTs in close games of 1, 2, 3 point losses, that happens
-
Decent college freshman
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
1965 EDF Gm. 7
Bill Russell: 15 pts, 29 rebounds, 8 assists, 6 blocks
Wilt Chamberlain: 30 pts, 32 rebounds, 2 assists, 1 block (Took the game over late in the 3rd quarter into the 4th)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESDFppbQ2zM&t=2m31s
-
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
He was a few bricked free throws from winning more rings.
-
Big Booty Hoes!!
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
Originally Posted by Trumpin
33 shots to get 37 points isn't a bowdown performance.
Good job completely ignoring the 17 rebounds, 5 assists and 3 blocks. Once again proving.......
ISH, where scoring is the ONLY thing that matters.
-
Kobe Apostle
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
Originally Posted by NumberSix
Good job completely ignoring the 17 rebounds, 5 assists and 3 blocks. Once again proving.......
ISH, where scoring is the ONLY thing that matters.
Plus it was 18-33. Very efficient, especially on that kind of volume.
-
Re: Game 7 Performances by All-Time Greats
Originally Posted by Deuce Bigalow
When you miss 7, 8, 9 FTs in close games of 1, 2, 3 point losses, that happens
Chamberlain's TEAMs shot more FT's and MADE more FTs, in nearly EVERY one of his 35 Finals games. Why? BECAUSE of Chamberlain. I will take the time later, to break those down, but last I looked, his TEAM's shot more FTs and MADE more FTs, in 26 of those 35 games (26-6-3 to be exact), and some by HUGE margins.
Furthermore, Wilt's TEAMs either LED, or were among the very top, in FTAs in his almost every season of his career. And his '67 Sixers were LIGHT YEARS ahead of their opposition in that regard (BTW, Chamberlain shot 22-72 from the line in the '67 Finals...and his Sixers easily won the title. Oh, and BTW, he outshot Thurmond from the FLOOR in that series by a .560 to .343 margin. Think about this...in that series, Chamberlain's Sixers shot 173-282 from the line, to SF's 133-190. Even taking Wilt's FT-FTA out of the equation, his TEAM STILL outscored the Warriors.
You want a great example of Wilt's IMPACT at the line? How about this? In his 68-69 season, Wilt's Lakers LED the NBA in FTA's (and they would outscore and outshoot Boston in the Finals with a 182-286 to 159-203 margin.) In fact, they would outshoot Boston in ALL seven games in that series.
The next year, Chamberlain went down with an injury early in the season, and would only play in 12 games. Where did his Lakers finish in FTAs? TWELFTH is a 14 team league. BUT, then Chamberlain returned for the playoffs. Guess what? His Lakers shot 200 MORE FTAs than the next best team (NY), and outscored the Knicks from the line in the Finals by going 176-257 to NY's 122-176.) Once again, the outshot and OUTSCORED the Knicks from the line in EVERY game in that series.
The fact was, Chamberlain's IMPACT from the line was dramatic. His teammates BENEFITTED from getting to the line earlier, and in the bonus faster, and to the line more often, BECAUSE of Chamberlain. Not only that, but Wilt getting opposing players and entire TEAMS in foul trouble. How many easy baskets did his teammates receive because of either lax defense, or because the opposing starter was on the bench?
And Wilt OUTSCORED his opposing centers in nearly every game, as well. For instance in his '65 ECF's against Russell, he not only outshot Russell from the line by a .583 to .472 margin, he OUTSCORED Russell by a 49-17 margin.
And finally, Chamberlain was the king of "and-one's" too. Why is that significant? Because those FTAs were BONUS attempts. He not only made the FG, but he then took a FTA as well.
THAT was Wilt's true IMPACT at the line.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|