A shame Wilt didn't come back to play in 1985

[julizaver]

Boxers like George Foreman proved beyond shadow of a doubt, that some athletes you just can't put a number on. Wilt is like, one of a kind... even if a Doctor could put some arbitrary number on a general pool of athletes, I don't think any blanket can be applied to the best of the best at any professional sport. Some guys can just keep on going, well beyond their peers. Due to physical tools, or w/e. Some the opposite happens.

Of course it is different with different people and there is also exceptions as the one Lazeruss posted. And I am not saying that Wilt could not do it beyond his 40 or at 50. But he wouldn't be the player he was 15 years prior.

About George Foreman since I am a boxing fan also. Foreman who won the tittle 19 years after lose it to Ali in 1975 was not the same boxer he used to be. Prior to Ali match young Foreman was considered the strong favourite and because of his dismantling of Frazier most people believe that Foreman would just crushed Ali.
Although an old Foreman beated Moorer for the title he never boxed vs prime Tyson or Lennox Lewis and was defeated by Holyfield. I do not want to underestimate Foreman achievement - he was among the best heavyweghts in his 40s but not the best. He do not dominate opponents the way he dominate them prior to Ali match.
I am not saying that 40 is a "death sentence" age, it was estimation of sport doctors who was speaking strictly about physical abilities not about the skills or leadership. We all know that full-court pro-basketball is physically dimanding sport and most athletes start their physical decline after turning 30. Jordan in his last season with the Bulls (35) was not the Jordan in 1993 (30). Wilt was feeling extreemely tired after '73 Finals according to his own words and was already showing the age effects (that according to the press). The fact that he was able to play almost all the minutes in the postseason at 36 is more than prove for his durability and physical abilities, but it is not possible to imagine that he would average 30-35 minutes 15 years later.

[LAZERUSS]

Of course it is different with different people and there is also exceptions as the one Lazeruss posted. And I am not saying that Wilt could not do it beyond his 40 or at 50. But he wouldn't be the player he was 15 years prior.

About George Foreman since I am a boxing fan also. Foreman who won the tittle 19 years after lose it to Ali in 1975 was not the same boxer he used to be. Prior to Ali match young Foreman was considered the strong favourite and because of his dismantling of Frazier most people believe that Foreman would just crushed Ali.
Although an old Foreman beated Moorer for the title he never boxed vs prime Tyson or Lennox Lewis and was defeated by Holyfield. I do not want to underestimate Foreman achievement - he was among the best heavyweghts in his 40s but not the best. He do not dominate opponents the way he dominate them prior to Ali match.
I am not saying that 40 is a "death sentence" age, it was estimation of sport doctors who was speaking strictly about physical abilities not about the skills or leadership. We all know that full-court pro-basketball is physically dimanding sport and most athletes start their physical decline after turning 30. Jordan in his last season with the Bulls (35) was not the Jordan in 1993 (30). Wilt was feeling extreemely tired after '73 Finals according to his own words and was already showing the age effects (that according to the press). The fact that he was able to play almost all the minutes in the postseason at 36 is more than prove for his durability and physical abilities, but it is not possible to imagine that he would average 30-35 minutes 15 years later.

100% correct. And that is the real reason why Chamberlain didn't entertain offers after retired. He knew that he not be anywhere near the player he had been. Obviously, he would have still been a force to be reckoned with, but he would not have been the Wilt that dominated in his entire career.

[SpanishACB]

Using that analogy...

MJ, ZERO rings without Pippen, Grant, and Rodman. And Kobe ZERO rings without Shaq, Gasol, and even Horry and Artest.

TEAM game.

team game?

i thought h2h stats were your favorite thing to prove points?

you realize that if A scores a bunch on B and B sucked balls it might because because A's team found him in position, played good plays for A, and helped defense on B?

Or is it a team game only when it suits your internet super arguments?

[AirFederer]

As are many of his HUNDREDS of NBA RECORDS, both regular season, and post-season.

By FAR, the most dominant player in NBA history.

GOAT.

Too bad he played a team sport.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Using that analogy...

MJ, ZERO rings without Pippen, Grant, and Rodman. And Kobe ZERO rings without Shaq, Gasol, and even Horry and Artest.

TEAM game.

How many HOFers did the Stilt play with again?

[sportjames23]

mountain lion timed

[Asukal]

Using that analogy...

MJ, ZERO rings without Pippen, Grant, and Rodman. And Kobe ZERO rings without Shaq, Gasol, and even Horry and Artest.

TEAM game.

Let us disregard all of Wilt's records then. !

[LAZERUSS]

team game?

i thought h2h stats were your favorite thing to prove points?

you realize that if A scores a bunch on B and B sucked balls it might because because A's team found him in position, played good plays for A, and helped defense on B?

Or is it a team game only when it suits your internet super arguments?

As always...a POS post.

MJ didn't win shit without the best supporting cast in the league. How come? Did his teammates carry him to those titles?

A peak KAJ averaged a 35-17-5 on a team that went 63-19. A prime KAJ averaged 28-17-5 on a team that went 40-42. Obviously it must have been because of his decline in scoring, right?

Chamberlain led the league in scoring, rebounding, and set a then FG% record in his 62-63 season, and his team went 31-49. Three years later he led the league in scoring, rebounding, and set a then FG% record, and his team had the best record in the league. What changed?

Hakeem never had a team that won more than 58 games, and not many that even won 50. Furthermore, his teams either didn't make the playoffs, or were wiped out in the first round, in ELEVEN of his 18 seasons. What changed in '94 and '95?

Even with a prime KAJ, and stacked rosters, his teams of the 70's never sniffed a title. How come a past-his-prime Kareem would win FIVE?

Being the BEST player in the league does not guarantee titles. Chamberlain was overwhelmingly the best player in the league in the 60's, and yet only won one title. How come?

He took last place rosters to within an eyelash of beating stacked Celtic teams TWICE. And in '67, his team just crushed the eight-time defending, and 60-21 Celtics. What happened? How come Wilt's '65 40-40 Sixers team lost to the Russell's 62-18 Celtics by one point in a game seven, and in a series in which Chamberlain annihilated Russell H2H, ...and then two year's later, Wilt's '67 68-13 Sixers just crushed Russell's 60-21 Celtics, 4-1, in a series in which Chamberlain just annihilated Russell H2H?

The Bulls went 57-25 in '93 with MJ. They went 55-27 the next year without him. Was he only worth two wins?

Kobe played on a team that went 34-48. He also anchored a title team that went 65-17. Did he play that much worse in '05? And do the '09 Lakers win a title withOUT Kobe?

And what happened to Bird in TEN of his 13 seasons? And how come he STILL won a ring in one Finals, in which he averaged 15 ppg on a .419 FG%? And how come a Bird in his greatest statistical season, in 87-88, and healthy in the post-season, had the worst post-season of his career, and he led his team down the drain in the ECF's?

The list is endless. TEAMs win games, and the best TEAMs usually win them. BUT, the BEST player(s) generally make them the best TEAM. Not always, of course, but certainly in majority of them.

[andremiller07]

mountain lion timed

[LAZERUSS]

How many HOFers did the Stilt play with again?

Other than Greer in '67, and West in '69, very few that actually played well in the post-season. Still, the majority of Wilt's "HOF" teammates, played better WITH Chamberlain, than withOUT him.

[Smoke117]

Truly a shame...I mean...we all want to watch a 50 year old play 11-15 mpg through an 82 game season and get injured barely half way through it...right?...or are we carrying over this nonsense that Wilt was some higher form of human being and could actually play an 82 game season, with signficant mins, and stay healthy? He did after all school NBA players in pick up games...

[dunksby]

Only clowns would find it would be a good idea to return at 50 years of age and Wilt was no clown.

[LAZERUSS]

Let us disregard all of Wilt's records then. !

Yes, a player who single-handedly carried last place rosters to near titles, and who went on to win two dominating titles with team's that went 68-13 and 69-13.

And how about Chamberlain's historic '62 season, in which he averaged 50 ppg? He took a roster, the core of which was the same last place roster that Wilt inherited in his rookie season, only older and worse, thru the first round of the playoffs, and then to a game seven, two point loss against the HOF-laden 60-20 Celtics. Oh, and in that post-season, his teammates collectively shot .354 from the field, and as bad as that was, they collectively shot .345 in the Finals. Should we just completely ignore that season, and the total IMPACT he had?

Again, who would you rather have? MJ in '89, or MJ in '98? One won a ring, while the other did not. Was Jordan in '98 a better player than Jordan in '89?

How about KAJ in '77, or KAJ in '88? One was swept in the post-season with HCA, and in a series in which he hung a 30-15 .608 series on Walton, ...and the other won a ring with arguably the worst Finals performance by a "GOAT" candidate in NBA history.

[Asukal]

In jlauber's words, "Wilt was hobbled by injuries" in his thirties yet his stans believe he could dominate the league at age 50.

When it comes to Wilt, there's always an excuse. But go on, tell us more of his h2h stats that resulted in 2 titles.

[Marchesk]

In jlauber's words, "Wilt was hobbled by injuries" in his thirties yet his stans believe he could dominate the league at age 50.

The claim is that Wilt could still play in the league at age 50, not that he would be the same player. Maybe he plays an effective 15 minutes a game and still has an impact.