PDA

View Full Version : Wilt's shot blocking



JasonJohnHorn
06-28-2016, 11:04 AM
Found this on Reddit. Some impressive stats. Several quadruple doubles.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-tTIVEWsAP14/VkFK-IE7GHI/AAAAAAAAHSo/n_u04_ScpoQ2U4lJQcDSLYYjXZ7eCRqiQCCo/s0/Wilt%2Bblocked%2Bshots.jpg

Here's a video highlights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJGCySdvlPo


Apparently averaged 8.8 blocks per game!

PurpleLynch
06-28-2016, 11:55 AM
My goodness,Wilt never ceases to amaze me.

Hawkeye15
06-28-2016, 12:16 PM
I know LeBron is one of the biggest freaks of nature we have seen, but Wilt was the OG when it came to athletic freaks. For his size, he was so strong, fast, and athletic. Just crazy.

DR_1
06-28-2016, 12:20 PM
Truly a legend

PowerHouse
06-28-2016, 01:20 PM
When you start talking about him getting double triple doubles (his was 30-30-20) thats when I just start to LMAO from the mind-boggle. I cant do that in any video game set on the easiest mode. Its staggering.

Hawkeye15
06-28-2016, 02:03 PM
When you start talking about him getting double triple doubles (his was 30-30-20) thats when I just start to LMAO from the mind-boggle. I cant do that in any video game set on the easiest mode. Its staggering.

I mean, on paper it's so easy to explain. They played 130+ possessions, and he played 47.6 mpg for his career. But then you think, what human can play that fast, that many minutes? The guy was a total freak of nature.

DboneG
06-28-2016, 02:03 PM
Should see him dribbling up the court. Some say he could touch the top of the backboard. Just amazing!

NBA's Mount Rushmore for sure.
Bill Russell
Wilt Chamberlain
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Michael Jordan






Oscar Robertson
Earvin “Magic” Johnson
Shaquille O'Neal
LeBron James




Tim Duncan
Karl Malone
Jerry West
Larry Bird

PowerHouse
06-28-2016, 02:11 PM
^The only change I would make there is pull out K Malone and get Hakeem in there.

PowerHouse
06-28-2016, 02:16 PM
I mean, on paper it's so easy to explain. They played 130+ possessions, and he played 47.6 mpg for his career. But then you think, what human can play that fast, that many minutes? The guy was a total freak of nature.

Whats hard to explain, even with the faster pace, is how does he get 20+ blocks and 30+ boards in the same game? When a guy goes after the blocked shot it usually means he surrendered the rebound chance but not in Wilt's case apparently.

Hawkeye15
06-28-2016, 02:22 PM
Whats hard to explain, even with the faster pace, is how does he get 20+ blocks and 30+ boards in the same game? When a guy goes after the blocked shot it usually means he surrendered the rebound chance but not in Wilt's case apparently.

I would guess a lot of offensive boards, and inflating of stats.

Scoots
06-28-2016, 08:10 PM
Wilt is amazing.

BUT. Worse shooting. Worse athletes (other than Wilt). Simpler offense. No 3 point line. No goaltending for a period of time.

Federal Reserve
06-28-2016, 08:18 PM
Wilt played against WWII veterans, yet he still managed to win only 1 ring as the leader of his team. Allow me to choose my opposition, and I will score 200 points per game.

TheMightyHumph
06-28-2016, 09:11 PM
Wilt is amazing.

BUT. Worse shooting. Worse athletes (other than Wilt). Simpler offense. No 3 point line. No goaltending for a period of time.

Defensive goaltending became a violation because of George Miken. It was already a rule when Wilt came into the league.

Offensive goaltending became a violation because of Wilt. He would simply catch his teammates outside shots and dunk them.

TheMightyHumph
06-28-2016, 09:40 PM
Whats hard to explain, even with the faster pace, is how does he get 20+ blocks and 30+ boards in the same game? When a guy goes after the blocked shot it usually means he surrendered the rebound chance but not in Wilt's case apparently.

If a player grabs the shot he blocked, it is counted as a rebound.

Julius once got credit for a BS, a rebound and an assist on one play.

FlashBolt
06-28-2016, 10:33 PM
I mean, on paper it's so easy to explain. They played 130+ possessions, and he played 47.6 mpg for his career. But then you think, what human can play that fast, that many minutes? The guy was a total freak of nature.

Easy. When you're playing against eight teams, average height for a center was what? around 6'6? Lots of rules that made playing a center really easy. Just a bunch of guys running around chucking as many shots as possible in seconds. Made D'Antoni look like a slowpoke on offense. Less blacks (sorry but it's true) due to segregation and various economic differences so it was just a very diluted era of basketball. It was only a few guys who truly were elite athletes.. and btw 47.6 mpg for his career? Jesus... either the dude was superhuman or it just wasn't as tough as people think it is.

PurpleLynch
06-29-2016, 04:54 AM
Wilt played against WWII veterans, yet he still managed to win only 1 ring as the leader of his team. Allow me to choose my opposition, and I will score 200 points per game.

With the style of defense and the lack of rules they played back then,you would be thankful just to exit the game without losing any part of your body.

thenaj17
06-29-2016, 10:55 AM
Easy. When you're playing against eight teams, average height for a center was what? around 6'6? Lots of rules that made playing a center really easy. Just a bunch of guys running around chucking as many shots as possible in seconds. Made D'Antoni look like a slowpoke on offense. Less blacks (sorry but it's true) due to segregation and various economic differences so it was just a very diluted era of basketball. It was only a few guys who truly were elite athletes.. and btw 47.6 mpg for his career? Jesus... either the dude was superhuman or it just wasn't as tough as people think it is.

It definitely would have been very easy for him. They were nowhere near the athletes the league has now and like you said, the size of the opposition was guard sized. Considering his most difficult opponent was Bill Russell, who was 6ft 10 max and averaged 15 per game over his career and never 1 season over 19 ppg.

Any individual achievements by either of these 2 in such an awful league, should be downplayed massively

Jewelz0376
06-29-2016, 11:33 AM
I hear what some of you are saying about how the league was when he played, but even his last season at 36 yrs old he was dropped about 15 & 20 a game playing 43mpg. Doing that at 36 in this era with all the advances we have in sports medicine is crazy let alone doing it back in early 70s.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 12:23 PM
Wilt played against players who had part time jobs outside of basketball to live comfortably... let that sink in.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 01:12 PM
Wilt played against players who had part time jobs outside of basketball to live comfortably... let that sink in.

now we are in a era where people worry about a certain brand to have and other endorsements/movie and etc, wouldn't that take away from working on your game? now players are just in it for the $$, so whats worse? sounds like the money is what makes this a part time job now don't it? players don't have the passion/love like the old school because its too much $$$/distractions nowadays

also its better athletes but why does so many say today its a weak era so often since the 90's era left? having 32 teams doesn't make the league stronger, it actually makes it weaker, see expansion drafts for proof

having 32 teams means more money stealing/revenue for the owners/league, that's all. it has nothing to do with competiton or making it stronger as you would think

how can slow non athletic WWII veterans play at a faster pace? the league has to suck to let that happen with all the tremendous superior athletes of today

of course the league was in a early stage but what The Big Dipper transcends any era, MDE(Shaq's quote) In any era, first pick in any draft/era, landslide he is MostDominantEver

this dude was putting up numbers that you cant do video game wise, 40/30/20/10

if any other player were to put that up in any era except in his you would be screaming GOAT

He is like a Lebron/Hakeem/Duncan/Russell/Kareem/Shaq all in one player, take each of what they do best and put it into 1 player and there you have it, Big Dipper

Dipper also got his teeth messed up with the 'Wack Wilt' rules back then and bite marks all over his arms and he basically retired after rookie yr or so for calling the nba bush league because of the dumb antics they installed to stop him, but you think the Hack a Shaq method is the original I bet

he could have literally killed players in any era, he could jerk damn near 400lbs and deadlift over 600lbs, he would destroy this era of players and the prior eras, they were trying to sign him at 50yrs of age because he kept himself in that type of shape and was such a dominant force before he retired

he was lifting the Terminator up with 1 arm like he was a fly, not my words but the Terminator himself, and he was at that time 250lbs all muscle

he was just a Giant playing back in that time, not his fault because had he avg only 15ppg for his career and 10rpg then you would all be screaming of what a waste of talent, at least he dominated like no other on a solo level, in any era

Jewelz0376
06-29-2016, 01:19 PM
Wilt played against players who had part time jobs outside of basketball to live comfortably... let that sink in.

Yea no doubt some of the guys he was racking up stats on were bum, but even when he went up against Russell he was still putting up historic numbers.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 01:20 PM
40pts/30boards/20blocks/10assists

Big Dipper average stat line for first 7years or so in the league, utter dominance in any era/timeline

Chronz
06-29-2016, 01:33 PM
Easy. When you're playing against eight teams,
That doesn't make it easier and it wasn't always 8 teams. Like put it this way, Hakeem used to say he really only had to get up to play against 4 guys in the league and he barely played them, whereas if he played in a smaller league, he would have to play them significantly more often.


average height for a center was what? around 6'6?
Really showcasing your ignorance here. You dont know jack about listed heights nor how players were measured, that much is obvious.


Lots of rules that made playing a center really easy.
Quality analysis.


Just a bunch of guys running around chucking as many shots as possible in seconds. Made D'Antoni look like a slowpoke on offense. Less blacks (sorry but it's true) due to segregation and various economic differences so it was just a very diluted era of basketball
And yet the players from those eras translated just fine as the game evolved and became easier for the perimeter guys. I agree it was more diluted overall if we focus on the not yet fully integrated NBA but Im not buying this "very" diluted era. The guy was a better rebounder than Kareem despite multiple injuries up to that point. The same Kareem that dominated bigmen of his era.

I have more faith in transitive value than the opinion of someone who lacks an understanding of the era and the statistics used to compare across eras. Put it this way, say we have Robert Parish who played against Artis Gilmore and Shaq. If he says Gilmore was easily stronger, would you doubt him? What if EVERYONE who ever played against Gilmore says they used to see Wilt brush him off and never found Gilmore to be quite that strong. Would you doubt them. So if we take the multiple players who agree with this and apply it across eras, why wouldnt I be able to claim that Wilt was stronger than Shaq, at least at certain points? It why I always ask people, just when do you think the league became incomparable where players from the past wouldn't adapt? Im sure there are lines we can draw but when it comes to Wilt, you're talking about a guy who could've dominated any era, there are aspect of the game that he thrived in that would've become a bigger part of his game as the changes necessitated.


It was only a few guys who truly were elite athletes.. and btw 47.6 mpg for his career? Jesus... either the dude was superhuman or it just wasn't as tough as people think it is.

He was superhuman and we have thousands of anecdotes to testify. Now obviously theres an advantage to playing in a free flowing up and down game, just like there are advantages to playing in better courts with better shoes with better travel patterns with better diets/sleep etc... but when we look at that eras minutes per game numbers, Wilt stands out regardless why wouldn't stand out now? His stamina was legendary, he wouldn't play as much today but you best believe he would be leading the league.

If you're willing to discount Wilt's performance given his era then you have to explain why other bigmen would be any better today despite the vast majority sporting inferior athletic ability/skillset.

Put it this way, an OLD/injured Wilt could hang with KAJ, before his injury he was schooling the youngster in their lone battle. Old Wilt was so heroic in defeat that KAJ's fans were applauding his playoff performance. Thats an old Wilt, now both Wilt and KAJ admit to Nate Thurmond and his Warriors being the toughest challenge they've ever encountered defensively(interesting that KAJ doesn't mention a more modern big like Ewing/Malone/Dream (the same Dream that Shaq admits "Schooled him")). Heres the difference, prime Wilt dominated Nate Thurmond to a degree that KAJ never could, so thats more of an apples to apples comparison.

KAJ dominated 2 decades so we know damn well he would hold up to the 90's considering he played most of their best centers anyways. If an OLD KAJ could hang tough with the best centers of the 80's, I have no doubt the same would've happened in any era. So if I dont doubt KAJ, why would I doubt the guy who was on his level?

Personally, I think if we put KAJ and Wilt in their primes at the same time, Wilt comes away the victor.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 01:35 PM
Wilt played against WWII veterans, yet he still managed to win only 1 ring as the leader of his team. Allow me to choose my opposition, and I will score 200 points per game.

Doubtful. And he won 2 chips as his teams best player, not really sure what you mean by leader. He was the team captain, defensive leader and the Lakers F.MVP. Thats not a good case for being the leader of your team?
I understand he was way past his peak by then but that goes to show you how much of a team game this is. Old Wilt and Old West finally won together.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 01:36 PM
That doesn't make it easier and it wasn't always 8 teams. Like put it this way, Hakeem used to say he really only had to get up to play against 4 guys in the league and he barely played them, whereas if he played in a smaller league, he would have to play them significantly more often.


Really showcasing your ignorance here. You dont know jack about listed heights nor how players were measured, that much is obvious.


Quality analysis.


And yet the players from those eras translated just fine as the game evolved and became easier for the perimeter guys. I agree it was more diluted overall if we focus on the not yet fully integrated NBA but Im not buying this "very" diluted era. The guy was a better rebounder than Kareem despite multiple injuries up to that point. The same Kareem that dominated bigmen of his era.

I have more faith in transitive value than the opinion of someone who lacks an understanding of the era and the statistics used to compare across eras. Put it this way, say we have Robert Parish who played against Artis Gilmore and Shaq. If he says Gilmore was easily stronger, would you doubt him? What if EVERYONE who ever played against Gilmore says they used to see Wilt brush him off and never found Gilmore to be quite that strong. Would you doubt them. So if we take the multiple players who agree with this and apply it across eras, why wouldnt I be able to claim that Wilt was stronger than Shaq, at least at certain points? It why I always ask people, just when do you think the league became incomparable where players from the past wouldn't adapt? Im sure there are lines we can draw but when it comes to Wilt, you're talking about a guy who could've dominated any era, there are aspect of the game that he thrived in that would've become a bigger part of his game as the changes necessitated.


He was superhuman and we have thousands of anecdotes to testify. Now obviously theres an advantage to playing in a free flowing up and down game, just like there are advantages to playing in better courts with better shoes with better travel patterns with better diets/sleep etc... but when we look at that eras minutes per game numbers, Wilt stands out regardless why wouldn't stand out now? His stamina was legendary, he wouldn't play as much today but you best believe he would be leading the league.

If you're willing to discount Wilt's performance given his era then you have to explain why other bigmen would be any better today despite the vast majority sporting inferior athletic ability/skillset.

Put it this way, an OLD/injured Wilt could hang with KAJ, before his injury he was schooling the youngster in their lone battle. Old Wilt was so heroic in defeat that KAJ's fans were applauding his playoff performance. Thats an old Wilt, now both Wilt and KAJ admit to Nate Thurmond and his Warriors being the toughest challenge they've ever encountered defensively(interesting that KAJ doesn't mention a more modern big like Ewing/Malone/Dream (the same Dream that Shaq admits "Schooled him")). Heres the difference, prime Wilt dominated Nate Thurmond to a degree that KAJ never could, so thats more of an apples to apples comparison.

KAJ dominated 2 decades so we know damn well he would hold up to the 90's considering he played most of their best centers anyways. If an OLD KAJ could hang tough with the best centers of the 80's, I have no doubt the same would've happened in any era. So if I dont doubt KAJ, why would I doubt the guy who was on his level?

Personally, I think if we put KAJ and Wilt in their primes at the same time, Wilt comes away the victor.

Even if they weren't 6'6, who was a good center outside of Wilt? Just a bunch of tall people with no basketball playing ability? What are we basing his dominance off of? Dwight Howard has played against better centers than Wilt. And also, when you're playing the same teams that are packed with bad players, you're not going to see much disparity at all. You can call it ignorance all you want but please don't act like there wasn't a huge talent disparity in that era... Wilt was special but you're pretty gullible if you think he was playing against elite talent.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 01:41 PM
It definitely would have been very easy for him. They were nowhere near the athletes the league has now and like you said, the size of the opposition was guard sized. Considering his most difficult opponent was Bill Russell, who was 6ft 10 max and averaged 15 per game over his career and never 1 season over 19 ppg.

Any individual achievements by either of these 2 in such an awful league, should be downplayed massively
Massively? LMFAO based on what, your misdguided beliefs?
Why stop with them? Why not discount KAJ? Why not discount Hakeem and Shaq? Lets only prop up the 1 dimensional bigs that thrive today?

Chronz
06-29-2016, 01:42 PM
It's actually documented that the average height for a center was around 6'6. And also, when you're playing the same teams that are packed with bad players, you're not going to see much disparity at all. You can call it ignorance all you want but please don't act like there wasn't a huge talent disparity in that era... Wilt was special but you're pretty gullible if you think he was playing against elite talent.

LMFAO, PROVE IT.

Lemme guess, you prolly gullible enough to think Russ was 6"9

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 01:43 PM
LMFAO, PROVE IT.

Ill be waiting and bumping

You're right but what does that prove? How many were GOOD centers? Bill? Bellamy? Who are we really talking about here... let's be honest.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 01:46 PM
Massively? LMFAO based on what, your misdguided beliefs?
Why stop with them? Why not discount KAJ? Why not discount Hakeem and Shaq? Lets only prop up the 1 dimensional bigs that thrive today?

Hard to discredit Hakeem and Shaq when they played against the best era of centers. KAJ also never got over the hump until Magic came. How many rings did he have? 1? And the remaining four were basically him way past his prime?

Chronz
06-29-2016, 01:56 PM
You kids man, you guys do realize he was offered a legitimate contract to play in the NBA in the 80's, when the dude was FIFTY YEARS OLD. Magic Johnson used to talk about games he would play with him where Wilt completely SHUT DOWN THE PAINT and prevented Magic's team from winning. I think its fair to say a Wilt half that age would have gotten an even bigger contract to play.

This guy would have dominated any era and its plausible he would be even more productive/efficient in todays era, similar to how we saw some guys from the 50's/60's improve in the 60's/70's under friendlier circumstances. I forgot which book it was but it had anecdotes from guys talking about how their games didn't really change despite the improvements.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 02:04 PM
You kids man, you guys do realize he was offered a legitimate contract to play in the NBA in the 80's, when the dude was FIFTY YEARS OLD. Magic Johnson used to talk about games he would play with him where Wilt completely SHUT DOWN THE PAINT and prevented Magic's team from winning. I think its fair to say a Wilt half that age would have gotten an even bigger contract to play.

This guy would have dominated any era and its plausible he would be even more productive/efficient in todays era, similar to how we saw some guys from the 50's/60's improve in the 60's/70's under friendlier circumstances. I forgot which book it was but it had anecdotes from guys talking about how their games didn't really change despite the improvements.

Maybe you want to read instead of sitting on your grandpa chair rocking back and forth with a snarkly grin. No one said Wilt wasn't great and couldn't play. What I'm saying is his numbers and impact is and will always be inflated because the competition just wasn't on par. Unless you can deny that, then just say it for what it is. He played against lesser talent, lesser competition, better rules suitable for centers, and was just far above any other player during that time. Okay, let's play this game.. Wilt can play in the 1980's/1990's, I agree. Can Shaq play in the 1950's and average 40/20?

Chronz
06-29-2016, 02:12 PM
You're right but what does that prove? How many were GOOD centers? Bill? Bellamy? Who are we really talking about here... let's be honest.
Depends on the year but it wouldn't prevent me from knowing Wilt would dominate any era. Even if we only looked at his performances vs the very best in KAJ, Russ, Nate you could see how his game would translate depending on the era. Less post ups and more dump offs as the guards who find it easier to penetrate would have the greatest or 2nd greatest finisher ever. I've seen some studies that suggest the lower the pace the more possessions get funneled to a teams best player, therefore increasing their usage%. Wilt wouldn't be allowed to play entire games anymore simply because we know too much about optimizing our players, but with that comes its own advantages in efficiency.

Wilt had the passing and range to combat zones, in his youth he had the agility to play face up. Players tend to adapt to the evolution of their own league, guys bulked up to the highest we ever saw in the 90's, today they are slimming back down. Wilt did what he did for his own league

thenaj17
06-29-2016, 02:13 PM
Massively? LMFAO based on what, your misdguided beliefs?
Why stop with them? Why not discount KAJ? Why not discount Hakeem and Shaq? Lets only prop up the 1 dimensional bigs that thrive today?

How are my beliefs misguided, the era was pathetic and not comparable with Hakeem and Shaq eras for either quality or depth

Chronz
06-29-2016, 02:14 PM
Maybe you want to read instead of sitting on your grandpa chair rocking back and forth with a snarkly grin. No one said Wilt wasn't great and couldn't play. What I'm saying is his numbers and impact is and will always be inflated because the competition just wasn't on par. Unless you can deny that, then just say it for what it is. He played against lesser talent, lesser competition, better rules suitable for centers, and was just far above any other player during that time. Okay, let's play this game.. Wilt can play in the 1980's/1990's, I agree. Can Shaq play in the 1950's and average 40/20?
Of course he could have, doesn't make the numbers inflated unless you know absolutely nothing about how statistics are translated.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 02:16 PM
For Christ's sake, why do you keep going on about Wilt's ability to play basketball? No one is downplaying any of that. That era WAS pathetic. That era WAS built for a player like Wilt to dominate. He was clearly the most athletic and skilled player of that time against a bunch of guys who weren't even close. Adjusted per pace/possessions and minutes, Wilt's numbers are around 31/16.. That's not even including the competition he played against. By contrast, Russell Westbrook's numbers adjusted to pace/possession and minutes that Wilt played in would be 36/13/17.. and that's numbers he would put up against the players of TODAY. Let's put Westbrook against those players of Wilt's time...

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 02:16 PM
Even if they weren't 6'6, who was a good center outside of Wilt? Just a bunch of tall people with no basketball playing ability? What are we basing his dominance off of? Dwight Howard has played against better centers than Wilt. And also, when you're playing the same teams that are packed with bad players, you're not going to see much disparity at all. You can call it ignorance all you want but please don't act like there wasn't a huge talent disparity in that era... Wilt was special but you're pretty gullible if you think he was playing against elite talent.

this is what you are not letting soak in, Dipper was way way way better/more dominant than Howard, his HS/ncaa version was way better than what Howard has showcased for 10yrs in nba, so if Howard dominated these so called better centers imagine what Dipper would do to these players? Dipper as a old man held his own against the supreme younger Jabbar, imagine they were the same youthful age of 22-23, Dipper would have caught/blocked his skyhook basically every single time, unless he wanted to send a message and throw it in the 10th row or so

he out finessed those smaller guys, he wasn't bulldoze Shaq Diesel styling those so called smaller(or big) guys, that's why had he played in later eras he would have been challenged and you would have seen more wrist/toe breaking dunks since he would have exerted his innate strength that no one could match

Shaq came in the league around 280lbs, Dipper would have moved him around like a pillow you sleep on at night, its a reason why Shaq was called a modern day version of The Dipper, and he wasn't on his level but the physical ability was flashed, Shaq didn't have the arsenal of offensive moves Dipper had, nor the power/innate strength, but he was dominant indeed, just not Dipper style

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 02:17 PM
Of course he could have, doesn't make the numbers inflated unless you know absolutely nothing about how statistics are translated.

So Shaq being able to average 40/20 in that era doesn't mean it's not inflated? Lol.. so the dollar being worth more back then doesn't make it inflated. You're right, Chronz. Keep up the good work here.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 02:18 PM
How are my beliefs misguided, the era was pathetic and not comparable with Hakeem and Shaq eras for either quality or depth

Because it lacked facts. Notice how the guy you agreed with already admitted to being wrong

If it was pathetic, then why does Kareem name Nate Thurmond the greatest obstacle defensively and not from the eras you deem not in the same realm?

Again, we saw KAJ and Hakeem play in the same era with both proving they belonged, we saw the same with Hakeem and Shaq. We saw the same with Wilt/Nate vs KAJ decades earlier, but for some reason Wilt wont translate across eras?

Again, why dont you discount Shaq and Hakeem with all this being true?

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 02:19 PM
this is what you are not letting soak in, Dipper was way way way better/more dominant than Howard, his HS/ncaa version was way better than what Howard has showcased for 10yrs in nba, so if Howard dominated these so called better centers imagine what Dipper would do to these players? Dipper as a old man held his own against the supreme younger Jabbar, imagine they were the same youthful age of 22-23, Dipper would have caught/blocked his skyhook basically every single time, unless he wanted to send a message and throw it in the 10th row or so

he out finessed those smaller guys, he wasn't bulldoze Shaq Diesel styling those so called smaller(or big) guys, that's why had he played in later eras he would have been challenged and you would have seen more wrist/toe breaking dunks since he would have exerted his innate strength that no one could match

Shaq came in the league around 280lbs, Dipper would have moved him around like a pillow you sleep on at night, its a reason why Shaq was called a modern day version of The Dipper, and he wasn't on his level but the physical ability was flashed, Shaq didn't have the arsenal of offensive moves Dipper had, nor the power/innate strength, but he was dominant indeed, just not Dipper style

And no one said he was. I truly think Wilt would still be the best center. My argument is that we need to look into what that era of basketball was like before we proclaim these "shot blocking" stats as authentic. Sure, they look great on paper but it's pure foolishness to think they are going to stay consistent in the modern era of basketball.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 02:21 PM
For Christ's sake, why do you keep going on about Wilt's ability to play basketball? No one is downplaying any of that. That era WAS pathetic. That era WAS built for a player like Wilt to dominate. He was clearly the most athletic and skilled player of that time against a bunch of guys who weren't even close. Adjusted per pace/possessions and minutes, Wilt's numbers are around 31/16.. That's not even including the competition he played against. By contrast, Russell Westbrook's numbers adjusted to pace/possession and minutes that Wilt played in would be 36/13/17.. and that's numbers he would put up against the players of TODAY. Let's put Westbrook against those players of Wilt's time...

but players couldn't shoot with the skill back then since its so early in development

Shaq probably couldn't last with all the bush league fouls back then and would foul out since he only relied on dunks for most part, Shaq would have gotten the same treatment back then but couldn't rely on an array of moves if we are putting this version of Shaq back into that time

Dipper was so far ahead of his time he was getting paid like the owners back then who literally owned a nba franchise

Magic nor Bird saved the nba, Dipper did with that 50ppg season

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 02:21 PM
Because it lacked facts.

If it was pathetic, then why does Kareem name Nate Thurmond the greatest obstacle defensively and not from the eras you deem not in the same realm?

Again, we saw KAJ and Hakeem play in the same era with both proving they belonged, we saw the same with Hakeem and Shaq. We saw the same with Wilt/Nate vs KAJ decades earlier, but for some reason Wilt wont translate across eras?

Again, why dont you discount Shaq and Hakeem with all this being true?

Did Wilt play against the greatest era of NBA centers? Or let alone, players? And KAJ also thought the Big O was better than LeBron and Jordan.. I guess you think that as well. And you know who thought was the greatest ever? Bill Russell said it was Jordan. But I guess you don't want to hear that.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 02:23 PM
but players couldn't shoot with the skill back then since its so early in development

Shaq probably couldn't last with all the bush league fouls back then and would foul out since he only relied on dunks for most part, Shaq would have gotten the same treatment back then but couldn't rely on an array of moves if we are putting this version of Shaq back into that time

Dipper was so far ahead of his time he was getting paid like the owners back then who literally owned a nba franchise

Magic nor Bird saved the nba, Dipper did with that 50ppg season

What saved the NBA was the shotclock. It was a total embarrassment of a product. Bird and Magic did save the NBA.. lack of interest in rivalry and the NBA blew it up with marketing the hell out of Bird and Magic. And Shaq could only dunk+would have fouled out? How many times do you think Wilt has fouled out in his career? ZERO TIMES.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 02:27 PM
Hard to discredit Hakeem and Shaq when they played against the best era of centers. KAJ also never got over the hump until Magic came. How many rings did he have? 1? And the remaining four were basically him way past his prime?

LMFAO

So winning a chip isn't getting over the hump? I guess Bron just finally got over the hump this year since he finally won without Wade. Or he only got over the hump very recently at best.

Way past his prime? Dude was the MVP of the league when Magic joined and the voters wanted him to be named FMVP but were pressured into voting for someone in the building.

I agree he was past his peak, but you fail to realize that only makes my argument stronger. That KAJ was able to dominate against the likes of Hakeem/Sampson and totally destroyed Ewing in the games they played. KAJ was able to dominate at the highest level in the 80's despite being past his prime. That only serves in highlighting why Wilt was so great. Dude was old as **** when the Nets came calling in 1988. Wake me up when Shaq gets a contract to play today.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 02:33 PM
And no one said he was. I truly think Wilt would still be the best center. My argument is that we need to look into what that era of basketball was like before we proclaim these "shot blocking" stats as authentic. Sure, they look great on paper but it's pure foolishness to think they are going to stay consistent in the modern era of basketball.

If a guy has 25 blocks in multiple games in his era its safe to say he would have those in any era, maybe not at the same high rate over and over but him getting 10 blocks a game in later eras wouldn't be a major shock since Whiteside/Ibaka and others can get 4 a game, he was 7'4'' with shoes on who could reach the top of the backboard, run as fast as Lebron/Westbrook and had strength to where he could literally sit Shaq on top of the rim and skill set to bank 15ft jumpers like Duncan and could fingeroll like Gervin

his stats would have been crazy in any era, he could have averaged back in his era 50-70ppg had it just been about scoring, so how could that not translate to 40ppg in todays era if he was set on doing just that?

everybody's stats look good on paper, just not on Dipper level of looking good

Jordan avg 37ppg, and that is like the 3/4th best ppg ever, behind Dipper who owns the top 2/3, if Jordan could avg that then Dipper could have gotten 10 more ppg in this or any earlier era, against anybody

its like putting Jordan back in early nba, he wouldn't be able to shoot like he did(every team shot in 40pct range) and would get beat up so bad by those slow non athletic guys driving to the hoop he would have retired by year 3, especially the skinny version of Jordan, or if not he for sure would have gotten suspended/locked up for fighting those non athletic players because of the harsh fouls handed out back then

Chronz
06-29-2016, 02:35 PM
For Christ's sake, why do you keep going on about Wilt's ability to play basketball? No one is downplaying any of that. That era WAS pathetic. That era WAS built for a player like Wilt to dominate. He was clearly the most athletic and skilled player of that time against a bunch of guys who weren't even close. Adjusted per pace/possessions and minutes, Wilt's numbers are around 31/16.. That's not even including the competition he played against. By contrast, Russell Westbrook's numbers adjusted to pace/possession and minutes that Wilt played in would be 36/13/17.. and that's numbers he would put up against the players of TODAY. Let's put Westbrook against those players of Wilt's time...
Nah, the 80's were built for a guy like Wilt. The 90's as well.

Dude get one thing straight, you've already proven that you will spout off about things you dont know **** about, things as rudimentary as actual listed heights, how would I expect you to know the nuances of the game back then? Even less about statistical studies, like the ones that suggest heightened usage with lessened pace for star players. Did you even account for the difference in how they quantified assists back then or did you just copy and paste that from somewhere so you dont even really know the methodology.

You saying it was pathetic doesn't mean anything when you fail at capturing something as simple as height estimates, much less accurately portraying their traits.

Go get someone older than you to make your argument for you

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 02:36 PM
LMFAO

So winning a chip isn't getting over the hump? I guess Bron just finally got over the hump this year since he finally won without Wade. Or he only got over the hump very recently at best.

Way past his prime? Dude was the MVP of the league when Magic joined and the voters wanted him to be named FMVP but were pressured into voting for someone in the building.

I agree he was past his peak, but you fail to realize that only makes my argument stronger. That KAJ was able to dominate against the likes of Hakeem/Sampson and totally destroyed Ewing in the games they played. KAJ was able to dominate at the highest level in the 80's despite being past his prime. That only serves in highlighting why Wilt was so great. Dude was old as **** when the Nets came calling in 1988. Wake me up when Shaq gets a contract to play today.

What does Shaq having the ability to play today have anything to do with this? That's a matter of how well they take care of their body and Shaq was never good at that. Not to mention the completely different style of basketball today wouldn't suit Shaq's game at all. And when did I say KAJ wasn't still one of the best players during those rings? I said he was way past his prime.. again, reading comprehension error and what do you call it? "Strawman" arguments? And sorry, bud, but KAJ won rings averaging 16 points and what? 6 rebounds? I don't even want to count those rings because it's just not fair to compare ring counts when a player was clearly not as impactful as another superstar. LeBron had to average 30/11/9 and lead his team in every statistical category to win a ring. If he ever won a ring averaging 16 points and 6 rebounds (like he did in Dallas, he actually put up better numbers but let's just call it 16/6), please let me know.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 02:39 PM
Nah, the 80's were built for a guy like Wilt. The 90's as well.

Dude get one thing straight, you've already proven that you will spout off about things you dont know **** about, things as rudimentary as actual listed heights, how would I expect you to know the nuances of the game back then? Even less about statistical studies, like the ones that suggest heightened usage with lessened pace for star players. Did you even account for the difference in how they quantified assists back then or did you just copy and paste that from somewhere so you dont even really know the methodology.

You saying it was pathetic doesn't mean anything when you fail at capturing something as simple as height estimates, much less accurately portraying their traits.

Go get someone older than you to make your argument for you

You don't have to be old as you to realize that era was weak... Lmao, you are just a special one.. You probably think televisions were better back then as well. I NEVER SAID WILT COULDN'T PLAY IN THE 80'S/90'S. I already said on many circumstances that his physique and skill is just extraordinary and impossible to ignore. What I am saying is that he would not be dominating the way he did. What the hell are you even bickering about? You really think Wilt would be MORE efficient and effective against Shaq/Hakeem/Robinson/Ewing? Lmao, you are truly a special one... Truly.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 02:39 PM
So Shaq being able to average 40/20 in that era doesn't mean it's not inflated? Lol.. so the dollar being worth more back then doesn't make it inflated. You're right, Chronz. Keep up the good work here.

LMFAO, of course it doesn't. You asked me a question and I answered it. Even you shouldn't be presumptuous enough to pretend I use the same simplistic barometers to measure productivity as you do. I keep trying to tell you, its only inflation if you're foolish enough to use an outdated methodology

Keep using your outdated methods, Ill keep using what actual statisticians look at.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 02:39 PM
What saved the NBA was the shotclock. It was a total embarrassment of a product. Bird and Magic did save the NBA.. lack of interest in rivalry and the NBA blew it up with marketing the hell out of Bird and Magic. And Shaq could only dunk+would have fouled out? How many times do you think Wilt has fouled out in his career? ZERO TIMES.

the nba was about to fold and Dipper was the big draw, it was a reason his savvy owner told him to score to keep the tickets selling

Dipper saved the nba but the media/nba would want you to think that and it wants you to think the nba started in 92', which is said behind the scenes by many former players

"Wilt Chamberlain saved the league when he came into the league (in 1959)," said Hall of Famer Oscar Robertson. "If he didn't come along at exactly the time that he did and do all of the things that he accomplished then, I'm not sure the league would have survived and we'd even be talking about pro basketball now.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 02:41 PM
If a guy has 25 blocks in multiple games in his era its safe to say he would have those in any era, maybe not at the same high rate over and over but him getting 10 blocks a game in later eras wouldn't be a major shock since Whiteside/Ibaka and others can get 4 a game, he was 7'4'' with shoes on who could reach the top of the backboard, run as fast as Lebron/Westbrook and had strength to where he could literally sit Shaq on top of the rim and skill set to bank 15ft jumpers like Duncan and could fingeroll like Gervin

his stats would have been crazy in any era, he could have averaged back in his era 50-70ppg had it just been about scoring, so how could that not translate to 40ppg in todays era if he was set on doing just that?

everybody's stats look good on paper, just not on Dipper level of looking good

Jordan avg 37ppg, and that is like the 3/4th best ppg ever, behind Dipper who owns the top 2/3, if Jordan could avg that then Dipper could have gotten 10 more ppg in this or any earlier era, against anybody

its like putting Jordan back in early nba, he wouldn't be able to shoot like he did(every team shot in 40pct range) and would get beat up so bad by those slow non athletic guys driving to the hoop he would have retired by year 3, especially the skinny version of Jordan, or if not he for sure would have gotten suspended/locked up for fighting those non athletic players because of the harsh fouls handed out back then

Lol @ Comparing the scoring average of a shooting guard to a center who clearly had an advantage over any other player... Not going to bother assessing this. Saying he could average 50-70 PPG in his era actually helps my argument. To say any player could do that doesn't even involve how great he is. It's a matter of how bad everyone else is.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 02:42 PM
LMFAO, of course it doesn't. You asked me a question and I answered it. Even you shouldn't be presumptuous enough to pretend I use the same simplistic barometers to measure productivity as you do. I keep trying to tell you, its only inflation if you're foolish enough to use an outdated methodology

Keep using your outdated methods, Ill keep using what actual statisticians look at.

Do you know what inflation means? It 100% backs up what I just said. You're a tough cookie, aren't ya? Stubborn as a rock.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 02:43 PM
the nba was about to fold and Dipper was the big draw, it was a reason his savvy owner told him to score to keep the tickets selling

Dipper saved the nba but the media/nba would want you to think that and it wants you to think the nba started in 92', which is said behind the scenes by many former players

"Wilt Chamberlain saved the league when he came into the league (in 1959)," said Hall of Famer Oscar Robertson. "If he didn't come along at exactly the time that he did and do all of the things that he accomplished then, I'm not sure the league would have survived and we'd even be talking about pro basketball now.

He saved the league because he was NBA's first superstar. It was bound to happen... That's like saying Ali saved boxing. Sooner or later, someone like Tyson would have came along.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 02:49 PM
You don't have to be old as you to realize that era was weak... Lmao, you are just a special one.. You probably think televisions were better back then as well. I NEVER SAID WILT COULDN'T PLAY IN THE 80'S/90'S. I already said on many circumstances that his physique and skill is just extraordinary and impossible to ignore. What I am saying is that he would not be dominating the way he did. What the hell are you even bickering about? You really think Wilt would be MORE efficient and effective against Shaq/Hakeem/Robinson/Ewing? Lmao, you are truly a special one... Truly.

he would embarrass those players you listed, Dipper was that special in any era

he would do them pretty much like this if they were 'primed' or young or same age:

"When challenged, Wilt could do almost anything he wanted. In 1961 a new star named Walt Bellamy came into the league. Bellamy was 6-foot-11, and was scoring 30 points a game. First time they played against each other, they met at half court. Bellamy said, 'Hello, Mr. Chamberlain. I'm Walter Bellamy.' Chamberlain reached for Bellamy's hand and said, 'Hello, Walter. You won't get a shot off in the first half.' Wilt then blocked Bellamy's first nine shots. At the start of the second half Wilt said to Bellamy, 'Okay, Walter. Now you can play.'

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 02:54 PM
Lol @ Comparing the scoring average of a shooting guard to a center who clearly had an advantage over any other player... Not going to bother assessing this. Saying he could average 50-70 PPG in his era actually helps my argument. To say any player could do that doesn't even involve how great he is. It's a matter of how bad everyone else is.

he could have avg 40ppg against any of the Centers you mentioned, that's why I put the 50-70ppg in his era, he couldn't have done 70ppg in todays era/80-90's but easily 40ppg in any after his, how does that help your argument? what is your argument when its clear as day he could dominate at highest level in any era? he would be the most dominant player regardless of position, that's the reason why I mention Jordan since his 37ppg are the highest avg in history after Dipper's 3 highest totals

Jordan couldn't avg. 50-70ppg back in Dippers day, his skinny 180lbs would have gotten Jordan rules massacred by those non athletic UFC hockey style players, he would have been scared to use his only strength, driving to the hoop for the fear of getting his teeth knocked out

Chronz
06-29-2016, 02:55 PM
What does Shaq having the ability to play today have anything to do with this? That's a matter of how well they take care of their body and Shaq was never good at that. Not to mention the completely different style of basketball today wouldn't suit Shaq's game at all.
As late as his Celtic days Shaq was posting All Star calibre rates before getting hurt, as early as his Suns days he was an All-Star and that was WAY past his peak. When you say things like it wouldn't suit his game at all, what kind of dropoff are you describing because I couldn't agree less. I think hes actually more dominant against the Centers of today, with the enhanced spacing and penatration. He would play differently but him getting more dump offs and finding open players from the overloads actually plays to his strengths. I still see a pantheon player today, so what exactly are you describing here? What kind of drop off?


And when did I say KAJ wasn't still one of the best players during those rings? I said he was way past his prime.. again, reading comprehension error and what do you call it? "Strawman" arguments?
When you suggest hes WAY past his prime despite still being the MVP, it only enhances my argument. So wherever you wish to rank him is secondary, tho a blanket statement like that makes absolutely no sense considering the many different stages hes won. He won 4 extra titles in vastly different roles, so expect this sort of misunderstanding when you're being this vague.


And sorry, bud, but KAJ won rings averaging 16 points and what? 6 rebounds? I don't even want to count those rings because it's just not fair to compare ring counts when a player was clearly not as impactful as another superstar. LeBron had to average 30/11/9 and lead his team in every statistical category to win a ring. If he ever won a ring averaging 16 points and 6 rebounds (like he did in Dallas, he actually put up better numbers but let's just call it 16/6), please let me know.

Newsflash, KAJ won titles in similarly dominant fashion, arguably moreso considering his defensive impact and he did it SOONER. So if him winning a title in dominant fashion before even meeting Magic isn't getting over the hump, again I ask you, did Bron just barely get over the hump? You can see why its a meaningless distinction if thats the case.

Kareem is the rightful Finals MVP of 3 championship teams, same as Bron. That you choose to focus on the titles he won as a clutch role player proves how little you understand the scope of my argument. Ill try to go slower.

CavaliersFTW
06-29-2016, 02:58 PM
Easy. When you're playing against eight teams, average height for a center was what? around 6'6? Lots of rules that made playing a center really easy. Just a bunch of guys running around chucking as many shots as possible in seconds. Made D'Antoni look like a slowpoke on offense. Less blacks (sorry but it's true) due to segregation and various economic differences so it was just a very diluted era of basketball. It was only a few guys who truly were elite athletes.. and btw 47.6 mpg for his career? Jesus... either the dude was superhuman or it just wasn't as tough as people think it is.
... no sorry but this is Wilts competition. There are NO 6'6 white guys he played against. In the Bill Russell and Wilt and Jabbar era, you HAD to field powerful, large athletic centers or you just couldn't even have an NBA team you might as well not have a franchise without one.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMXF9QOd1BE

Wilt blocked that guys first 8 shots - in a single game - when he entered the league. And dropped 53 points on him that same game. Held him to 14 points. Welcome to the league. He was big, athletic, and a great player in his own right. Didn't matter one bit, Wilt was superhuman. Accusations that it was his competition being inferior are just an ignorant insult to the history of the game.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 03:03 PM
Do you know what inflation means? It 100% backs up what I just said. You're a tough cookie, aren't ya? Stubborn as a rock.
LOL, really bro? Thats what you're stooping to, that I dont know what the word inflation means?

Again, its only inflation if you lack the intelligence to use proper barometers. Feel free to back up what you're trying to say, heres hoping it goes better than your first claim you whiffed on.

Put it this way, we can go back and look at how much a penny would be worth we can then translate those rates to give us a far better idea of gains. Like Star Wars was one of, if not the highest grossing film for a LONG time, they didn't literally mean it made the most money, they accounted for inflation because its obvious many blockbusters have made more money, thats what happens when you have to spend more of it to get the same value.

Why you insist on staying at stage1 when everyone else is at stage 3 and above is your own shortcoming, stop applying your ignorance to those of us who know better.

Its not inflation you rock

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 03:05 PM
He saved the league because he was NBA's first superstar. It was bound to happen... That's like saying Ali saved boxing. Sooner or later, someone like Tyson would have came along.

I thought Mikan was? you know the guy who won 5 titles in Minny only to have the team relocate and give those same titles to the LA Lakers

wasn't he the first dominant big/superstar? I don't know but like I said nobody impact/dominated like Dipper, Ali didn't save boxing, it was many top fighters of his era and prior with J Louis and others, it was just Ali had a character that was outspoken to lure in mainstream media but boxers had fights lined up without Ali that were worth watching during that era in abundance, Tyson brought boxing back to the forefront with his aggressive style but neither saved boxing like what Dipper did for nba



Dipper was going to get in the ring with Ali at one point, go look at the measurements and Ali looks like a little kid compared to Dipper, not saying he would have beat Ali but name any nba player who could even come close to doing something like that, there is none

didn't you read the quote from Big O? that has to mean something, you know hearing it from the horses mouth

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:07 PM
As late as his Celtic days Shaq was posting All Star calibre rates before getting hurt, as early as his Suns days he was an All-Star and that was WAY past his peak. When you say things like it wouldn't suit his game at all, what kind of dropoff are you describing because I couldn't agree less. I think hes actually more dominant against the Centers of today, with the enhanced spacing and penatration. He would play differently but him getting more dump offs and finding open players from the overloads actually plays to his strengths. I still see a pantheon player today, so what exactly are you describing here? What kind of drop off?


When you suggest hes WAY past his prime despite still being the MVP, it only enhances my argument. So wherever you wish to rank him is secondary, tho a blanket statement like that makes absolutely no sense considering the many different stages hes won. He won 4 extra titles in vastly different roles, so expect this sort of misunderstanding when you're being this vague.


Newsflash, KAJ won titles in similarly dominant fashion, arguably moreso considering his defensive impact and he did it SOONER. So if him winning a title in dominant fashion before even meeting Magic isn't getting over the hump, again I ask you, did Bron just barely get over the hump? You can see why its a meaningless distinction if thats the case.

Kareem is the rightful Finals MVP of 3 championship teams, same as Bron. That you choose to focus on the titles he won as a clutch role player proves how little you understand the scope of my argument. Ill try to go slower.

Probably my last post responding to you. You are just too stubborn. You won't admit that the centers of the 90's would have given Wilt a much more difficult era of basketball and instead, say Wilt would be even more productive and efficient.. You choose to ignore facts (using KAJ's statement with Nate Thurmond as "evidence" but then won't respond to the one where he also says the Big O was better than LeBron/Jordan). You just spew more nonsense that isn't tangible. Any logical individual could see that Wilt's era of basketball was fairly weak. The game was still developing and as a center, there is nothing better than playing in an era in which there was no three point shooting and players who you can topple over like pancakes. That's not a slight against Wilt. He's great. A top ten player who's physique and natural body would have given any player in any era issues. But his numbers and impact is INFLATED.

"He won 4 titles with different roles." Yes, he wasn't the same player... that's the role change. He won three rings averaging 18 points and 7 rebounds. Find me a top five player who won three rings averaging those numbers. He was vital in those rings but those three rings do not compare to the amount of effort LeBron/Jordan had to put in to win their own three rings. So to say "KAJ has six rings" should be taken with more context as well. NEWFLASH, I said he won four of those rings while being rather lackluster. His first two rings are legit. He won those.

But keep going on believing Wilt would be more productive against the greatest era of centers in Hakeem/Shaq/Ewing/Robinson/Mourning/Mutumbo.. Keep thinking his stats aren't inflated despite the word inflation literally meaning exactly what I said. Keep calling people "kid, child, strawman arguments" as if that helps you. You are just way too stubborn to accept reality.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:10 PM
... no sorry but this is Wilts competition. There are NO 6'6 white guys he played against. In the Bill Russell and Wilt and Jabbar era, you HAD to field powerful, large athletic centers or you just couldn't even have an NBA team you might as well not have a franchise without one.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMXF9QOd1BE

Wilt blocked that guys first 8 shots - in a single game - when he entered the league. And dropped 53 points on him that same game. Held him to 14 points. Welcome to the league. He was big, athletic, and a great player in his own right. Didn't matter one bit, Wilt was superhuman. Accusations that it was his competition being inferior are just an ignorant insult to the history of the game.

You needed large centers because the best players were centers in large part because the other positions were undeveloped. Heck, who was a great player outside of the center position? VERY few. Most of the players remembered during Wilt's time were centers and that was because it was the best position to dominate in. Easiest baskets/points came from the center position. Secondly, can you name three other centers besides Russell and Bellamy?

CavaliersFTW
06-29-2016, 03:11 PM
Even if they weren't 6'6, who was a good center outside of Wilt? Just a bunch of tall people with no basketball playing ability? What are we basing his dominance off of? Dwight Howard has played against better centers than Wilt. And also, when you're playing the same teams that are packed with bad players, you're not going to see much disparity at all. You can call it ignorance all you want but please don't act like there wasn't a huge talent disparity in that era... Wilt was special but you're pretty gullible if you think he was playing against elite talent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH8tpl04EDI

Before you say "whoopdey doo two guys big deal". Remember, 8 to 17 teams - most of the time between 9 to 12 teams during the "Wilt Chamberlain era. And in that era dispersed throughout that LIMITED number of teams were (just off the top of my head):

*Bill Russell
*Kareem Abdul Jabbar
*Nate Thurmond
*Walt Bellamy
*Zelmo Beaty
*Bob Lanier
*Willis Reed
*Dave Cowens
*Wes Unseld
*Elvin hayes
*Walter Dukes
*Darrell Imhoff
*Red Kerr
*Wayne Embry

A traditional center in the NBA today faces another legitimate traditional center for maybe 17 minutes a game every 2 or 3 games. A center back then faced a legitimate center for 35-45 minutes a game Every. Single. Game.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:13 PM
I thought Mikan was? you know the guy who won 5 titles in Minny only to have the team relocate and give those same titles to the LA Lakers

wasn't he the first dominant big/superstar? I don't know but like I said nobody impact/dominated like Dipper, Ali didn't save boxing, it was many top fighters of his era and prior with J Louis and others, it was just Ali had a character that was outspoken to lure in mainstream media but boxers had fights lined up without Ali that were worth watching during that era in abundance, Tyson brought boxing back to the forefront with his aggressive style but neither saved boxing like what Dipper did for nba



Dipper was going to get in the ring with Ali at one point, go look at the measurements and Ali looks like a little kid compared to Dipper, not saying he would have beat Ali but name any nba player who could even come close to doing something like that, there is none

didn't you read the quote from Big O? that has to mean something, you know hearing it from the horses mouth

yeah! And look at Andre the Giant next to Muhammad Ali! He would be a total beast in the NBA! He would average 50-70 PPG too! Done with you, don't want to talk about a guy averaging 50-70 ppg in the NBA. if you truly think someone could be that good in a competitive era of basketball, you are DELUSIONAL.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:15 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH8tpl04EDI

Before you say "whoopdey doo two guys big deal". Remember, 8 to 17 teams - most of the time between 9 to 12 teams during the "Wilt Chamberlain era. And in that era dispersed throughout that LIMITED number of teams were (just off the top of my head):

*Bill Russell
*Kareem Abdul Jabbar
*Nate Thurmond
*Walt Bellamy
*Zelmo Beaty
*Bob Lanier
*Willis Reed
*Dave Cowens
*Wes Unseld
*Elvin hayes
*Walter Dukes
*Darrell Imhoff
*Red Kerr
*Wayne Embry

A traditional center in the NBA today faces another legitimate traditional center for maybe 17 minutes a game every 2 or 3 games. A center back then faced a legitimate center for 35-45 minutes a game Every. Single. Game.
Outside of KAJ, those centers were not elite.

D-Rob
Ewing
Hakeem
Shaq
Mourning (maybe)

are all better centers by far.

CavaliersFTW
06-29-2016, 03:22 PM
You needed large centers because the best players were centers in large part because the other positions were undeveloped. Heck, who was a great player outside of the center position? VERY few. Most of the players remembered during Wilt's time were centers and that was because it was the best position to dominate in. Easiest baskets/points came from the center position. Secondly, can you name three other centers besides Russell and Bellamy?
I'm not even going to go into the obvious great players at all positions... do you even know who guys are like Gus Johnson?

You can't say "well I've never heard of them so they must not be great". That isn't a valid argument. Fans of the NBA back then knew who Ray Scott was, for example. And what position he played, and what he was capable of doing on the floor. And it wasn't under developed. You don't know anything about players like him? Okay, fine, but that doesn't mean he wasn't a very legit player back then.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAl7ghuSTqI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHcrG6gfJhI

https://youtu.be/iWNAKxZPpIA

https://youtu.be/zPDP1xGBdDw

https://youtu.be/6-WMynpJyU8

You've never heard of players like that. They didn't make the 50 greatest list. Green isn't even a HOFer. But they could all play. They weren't centers. They aren't remembered like Elgin Baylor and Jerry West. Yet they played NBA basketball, at an NBA basketball level. You think kids will care that you can mention the name Tristan Thompson in 50 years? There were plenty of "those" kinds of players back then. As with players like Tony Parker, or say, Manu Ginobli. You think they're going to be remembered outside of maybe San Antonio? You think think young adults and kids in 50 years will fail to know about them and potentially believe this era and all players from it (which will include names like those) all sucked because they can't put faces or names on anyone from this time period outside of maybe LeBron, Kobe, and a few other legendary names? You bet.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:23 PM
Just for clarity purposes and I won't debate with Chronz anymore because he's making arguments I never made. Claims I am trying to make Wilt seem as if he wouldn't be able to play in the modern era of basketball is laughable. Never have I ever made that argument. The only issue I ever had with Wilt is that his era of basketball was not even comparable in terms of a more balanced game with equally great players and talent. That's not even a question. Unless you are SERIOUSLY arguing that Wilt's era of basketball was greater, please try and make that argument. If you think Wilt's 100 point game was better than Kobe's 81 point game, please tell me how. I think you and I both know Wilt isn't averaging 50 points and 25 rebounds. If you think so, please don't bother making a comment. If you Wilt could play 48.6 minutes per game in a season, then please ask yourself why. Was he a great specimen of an athlete? Top ten 100% for sure. But there's a reason any man can do that.. and it's because they weren't dispersing as much energy due to a lack of COMPETITION.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:27 PM
I'm not even going to go into the obvious great players at all positions... do you even know who guys are like Gus Johnson?

You can't say "well I've never heard of them so they must not be great". That isn't a valid argument. Fans of the NBA back then knew who Ray Scott was, for example. And what position he played, and what he was capable of doing on the floor. And it wasn't under developed. You don't know anything about players like him? Okay, fine, but that doesn't mean he wasn't a very legit player back then.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAl7ghuSTqI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHcrG6gfJhI

https://youtu.be/iWNAKxZPpIA

https://youtu.be/zPDP1xGBdDw

https://youtu.be/6-WMynpJyU8

You've never heard of players like that. They didn't make the 50 greatest list. Green isn't even a HOFer. But they could all play. They weren't centers. They aren't remembered like Elgin Baylor and Jerry West. Yet they played NBA basketball, at an NBA basketball level. You think kids will care that you can mention the name Tristan Thompson in 50 years? There were plenty of "those" kinds of players back then. As with players like Tony Parker, or say, Manu Ginobli. You think they're going to be remembered outside of maybe San Antonio? You think think young adults and kids in 50 years will fail to know about them and potentially believe this era and all players from it (which will include names like those) all sucked because they can't put faces or names on anyone from this time period outside of maybe LeBron, Kobe, and a few other legendary names? You bet.

That's not my point. Centers by default were just the building stone just like PG's are now today. It's because rules and the way the game was played back then involved scoring as close to the basket as possible. Why do you think points and rebounding numbers were huge? It wasn't uncommon for players to average 30 points and grab 20 rebounds. Do you think that was a testament to how great they were? Do you think Nate Thurmond becomes half the player in the 90's? You're naming players who were good but they aren't historically great. I'm talking about the elites of the elites. Guys like Shaq played against them from Jordan, T-Mac, Hakeem, Allen Iverson, Robinson, Tim Duncan, KG, Dirk. Are you seriously comparing THOSE players to what Wilt played against? Are we being fair when we compare these players? Do you think Russell wins 11 rings in the 90's? Let's be FAIR here. BTW, Jerry West would have a much more difficult time playing in the modern era of basketball. He was way too small.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 03:31 PM
yeah! And look at Andre the Giant next to Muhammad Ali! He would be a total beast in the NBA! He would average 50-70 PPG too! Done with you, don't want to talk about a guy averaging 50-70 ppg in the NBA. if you truly think someone could be that good in a competitive era of basketball, you are DELUSIONAL.

Andre the Giant wasn't nowhere near the Olympic freak of nature that Dipper was, he didn't have the stamina/conditioning/dexterity and was a sloth at 500lbs, Dipper was 300lbs of pure athletic freak, came in around 260lbs, you are done with yourself since you cant fathom any player doing that, because they were not capable, if he could avg 50-70ppg back in his day its easy to say he would have put up 40ppg against any of those centers you named if he was challenged and he set his mind to do that, he was that dominant, point blank period with a exclamation mark

I am delusional yet he avg for a entire season of 50ppg back in his day, you are un educated on this topic at hand, or just in denial, Dipper said if it was all about scoring he would have put up the 50-70ppg, his peers said it also

Jordan almost avg 40ppg in a competitive era so its safe to say a more dominant solo act could top that easily, or was Jordan 37ppg done in a non competitive era?

who was the best SG after Jordan in his era? Drexler/Richmond, then who else was so damn tough, Miller? Ehlo? Hersey Hawkins/S Smith/D Majerle, what a joke? I mean you make no sense when speaking from your angle, based on that Jordan should have put up 50ppg per game based on his SG competition

Chronz
06-29-2016, 03:32 PM
Probably my last post responding to you.
Heres hoping its devoid of lies like your first posts.


You are just too stubborn.
Coming from the guy who sticks to his guns despite the evidence that points to the contrary, why would I care?


You won't admit that the centers of the 90's would have given Wilt a much more difficult era of basketball and instead, say Wilt would be even more productive and efficient..

The centers of the 90's would pose no greater a challenge than KAJ did or Bill/Nate did defensively. The league itself had evolved to the point where it wouldnt have required Wilt to score just to promote itself, there would be better coaching, better equipment, better travel, better nutrition etc..... Simply put, its not that Im stubborn, its that you are just that much of a novice when it comes to assessing productive worth and patterns throughout the eras.


You choose to ignore facts (using KAJ's statement with Nate Thurmond as "evidence" but then won't respond to the one where he also says the Big O was better than LeBron/Jordan).
I honestly missed it. To answer your question, he played against the bigmen up close and personal, this isn't a perception thing where you gauge players from different eras that didn't guard you and had different responsibilities. This is him comparing guys who have checked him throughout the time hes been in the league. Its much easier to be objective about things like that than ask him who he favors overall IMO. We can agree to disagree here tho, some guys rate legacies differently than talent.


You just spew more nonsense that isn't tangible. Any logical individual could see that Wilt's era of basketball was fairly weak. The game was still developing and as a center, there is nothing better than playing in an era in which there was no three point shooting and players who you can topple over like pancakes. That's not a slight against Wilt. He's great. A top ten player who's physique and natural body would have given any player in any era issues. But his numbers and impact is INFLATED.

Spewing nonsense is reserved for the likes of you, remember how you couldn't even get their heights right LMFAO. As a center, the 3pt line provides you more space. As a center, it can be conducive to play more of a half court game (depends on the roster overall and the skillset of the C) and anyone whos watched those games knows there were times when an older Wilt didn't get past half court and that you werent allowed to topple over players, Wilt actually developed his fadeaway in part because he couldn't just bulldoze his way to the rim.

You're really inconsistent in your degrading of the league, sometimes you'll say PATHETIC, other times youll say "Fairly weak". LMFAO, get it through your head, I dont care what you think when its clear you have no semblance of understanding of what you spew.


"He won 4 titles with different roles." Yes, he wasn't the same player... that's the role change. He won three rings averaging 18 points and 7 rebounds. Find me a top five player who won three rings averaging those numbers. He was vital in those rings but those three rings do not compare to the amount of effort LeBron/Jordan had to put in to win their own three rings. So to say "KAJ has six rings" should be taken with more context as well. NEWFLASH, I said he won four of those rings while being rather lackluster. His first two rings are legit. He won those.
Which is why saying he never got over the hump makes no sense when he won in dominant fashion before ever meeting Magic and was still his teams FINALS MVP in 2 more titles after meeting Magic. That you continue to focus on his role player titles proves you have nothing to stand on. AGAIN, you said he didn't get over the hump, but if thats true, then Bron is even worse for having taken so long to finally win.



But keep going on believing Wilt would be more productive against the greatest era of centers in Hakeem/Shaq/Ewing/Robinson/Mourning/Mutumbo.. Keep thinking his stats aren't inflated despite the word inflation literally meaning exactly what I said. Keep calling people "kid, child, strawman arguments" as if that helps you. You are just way too stubborn to accept reality.Of course I will, why would I trust a proven liar over the methods employed by actual statisticians?

Its only inflation if you lack the intelligence to use proper barometers. Notice how you've never proven anything you've ever said and the times you've actually tried to use objective listings, it turned out to be a lie.

LMFAO. Keep being hard headed, it wont stop me from correcting your lies.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 03:34 PM
they asked the legend W Frazier how much would Dipper avg per game in your so called best Center era/today and he said 70ppg

I guess Frazier is delusional as well

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:35 PM
Andre the Giant wasn't nowhere near the Olympic freak of nature that Dipper was, he didn't have the stamina/conditioning/dexterity and was a sloth at 500lbs, Dipper was 300lbs of pure athletic freak, came in around 260lbs, you are done with yourself since you cant fathom any player doing that, because they were not capable, if he could avg 50-70ppg back in his day its easy to say he would have put up 40ppg against any of those centers you named if he was challenged and he set his mind to do that, he was that dominant, point blank period with a exclamation mark

I am delusional yet he avg for a entire season of 50ppg back in his day, you are un educated on this topic at hand, or just in denial, Dipper said if it was all about scoring he would have put up the 50-70ppg, his peers said it also

Jordan almost avg 40ppg in a competitive era so its safe to say a more dominant solo act could top that easily, or was Jordan 37ppg done in a non competitive era?

who was the best SG after Jordan in his era? Drexler/Richmond, then who else was so damn tough, Miller? Ehlo? Hersey Hawkins/S Smith/D Majerle, what a joke? I mean you make no sense when speaking from your angle, based on that Jordan should have put up 50ppg per game based on his SG competition

You are comparing a shooting guard PPG to a center... In a completely different era of basketball... Go ahead, why don't you also compare Wilt's FT shooting to Curry's. Why stop there? Go ahead... The fact you are even arguing what Jordan had to play with compared to Wilt is mindboggling. Comparing a center to a SG in terms of PPG output is just entertaining and amusing. And yes, you actually believe Wilt could average 50-70 ppg... You know why Wilt said that? Because it was THAT easy for him against those scrubs. But let's say he could do that. Why didn't he do that against Russell to win the championship? Oh... I guess he didn't feel like it.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:36 PM
Chronz, you failed, dude. You really think Wilt would be a more productive player in the 90's. You are just in denial... I have no response for that type of nonsense.

Hawkeye15
06-29-2016, 03:40 PM
You kids man, you guys do realize he was offered a legitimate contract to play in the NBA in the 80's, when the dude was FIFTY YEARS OLD. Magic Johnson used to talk about games he would play with him where Wilt completely SHUT DOWN THE PAINT and prevented Magic's team from winning. I think its fair to say a Wilt half that age would have gotten an even bigger contract to play.

This guy would have dominated any era and its plausible he would be even more productive/efficient in todays era, similar to how we saw some guys from the 50's/60's improve in the 60's/70's under friendlier circumstances. I forgot which book it was but it had anecdotes from guys talking about how their games didn't really change despite the improvements.

I mean, a 7'1", track speed and jumping ability, strong as a body builder, will dominate in anything, anytime, anywhere.

Wilt was an absolute freak of nature. He would dominate any era he played in.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 03:41 PM
Outside of KAJ, those centers were not elite.

D-Rob
Ewing
Hakeem
Shaq
Mourning (maybe)

are all better centers by far.

and Dipper would dog walk/embarass those Centers you listed as all better by far because he was better by far

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:41 PM
they asked the legend W Frazier how much would Dipper avg per game in your so called best Center era/today and he said 70ppg

I guess Frazier is delusional as well

He is.. he thinks he can stop Curry.. What's more delusional than that? He also thought the Big O was better than Jordan. I guess everything he says is right. He's totally not biased at all... Reggie Miller is more of a legend than Frazier.. I guess him not including Wilt in his greatest center is delusional. Yup, everyone is delusional if they don't say something we agree with. You have a legit case of being a gullible individual.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:42 PM
and Dipper would dog walk/embarass those Centers you listed as all better by far because he was better by far

Wilt can score 50-70 ppg easily according to you. Why didn't he do it to beat the Celtics? :cricket:

JasonJohnHorn
06-29-2016, 03:43 PM
Easy. When you're playing against eight teams, average height for a center was what? around 6'6? Lots of rules that made playing a center really easy. Just a bunch of guys running around chucking as many shots as possible in seconds. Made D'Antoni look like a slowpoke on offense. Less blacks (sorry but it's true) due to segregation and various economic differences so it was just a very diluted era of basketball. It was only a few guys who truly were elite athletes.. and btw 47.6 mpg for his career? Jesus... either the dude was superhuman or it just wasn't as tough as people think it is.


I'll need some states on the average center being 6'6.

Russell: 6'10
Walt Bellamy: 6'11
Jim Caldwell: 6'10
Nate Bowman: 6'10
George Pattererson: 6'8
Joe Strawder: 6/10
Jim Fox: 6'10
Leroy Ellise: 6'10
Bob Ferry: 6'8
Jim Davis: 6'9
Zelmo Beaty: 6'9
Mel Count(power forward): 7'0
Daral Imhoff: 6'10
Erwin Mueller: 6'8
Clyde Lee: 6'10
Nate Thurmond: 6'11
Reggie HArding: 7'0
Craigh Spitzer: 6'10
Henry Akin: 6'10
Bob Rule: 6'9
Georgre Wilson: 6'8
John Block: 6'9
Hank Finkel


Can't seem to find anybody who was 6'6 and played C.

Flash forward to the 2000's: Ben Wallace is 6'7, multi-rebounding champion over Yao Ming at the time, who was 7'4. By your logic, if a 7 foot Wilt could dominate against 6'10 C because he's so much bigger, Yao should have been legend next to a guy like Wallace, who had had close to 10 inches on.


You just made up numbers, and then said dominating the league was easy. You must have a hate on this guy. He was a phenom who changed the game.

Nothing was easy about what he did. If it was, he would have had more rings than Russell.

Use your brain and have some respect for the legend.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 03:44 PM
You are comparing a shooting guard PPG to a center... In a completely different era of basketball... Go ahead, why don't you also compare Wilt's FT shooting to Curry's. Why stop there? Go ahead... The fact you are even arguing what Jordan had to play with compared to Wilt is mindboggling. Comparing a center to a SG in terms of PPG output is just entertaining and amusing. And yes, you actually believe Wilt could average 50-70 ppg... You know why Wilt said that? Because it was THAT easy for him against those scrubs. But let's say he could do that. Why didn't he do that against Russell to win the championship? Oh... I guess he didn't feel like it.

now I see why you have trouble digesting facts

I compared Jordan to SG's of his era

or do you just ignore that and blindly spew jibberish ish to make you feel good?
when did Drexler/Richmond etc become Centers? only in your bubble world I imagine

Its a reason why Russell said he had to score more when they played against Dipper's team, the Celtics won 8 in a row and then when Chamberlain finally had proper support they dethroned that dynasty

Dipper could play a team all by himself but we all know a team beats individual 99/100x
Put Dipper on that Lakers team rookie year and I bet you would be saying something diff., they would have mopped the floor with that Celtics team had he teamed with J West/Baylor off top

Chronz
06-29-2016, 03:44 PM
And dude, it wasn't just that you lied about the heights , its that you were so FAR OFF. Like god knows how long you've held this belief, you're certainly not the first to think this way but its sad that you're a part of that ignorant group. Its the equivalent of me thinking cars only began when I was born, ignoring all of recorded history in the process and just going by what younger kids were telling me.

Like how little of the NBA do you have to know to think the way you did in this thread.

Im almost scared to ask but just how tall/long do you think Jerry West was? If its a weight issue, why wouldn't he bulk up in todays league like everyone else did. If its a ball handling thing, know that todays lax rules with palming has changed what used to be the fundamentals.

Why would West not benefit from non-handchecks and a 3pt line? Dude would certainly be better than an MVP like Nash, so if by having it harder means he could potentially still be the MVP of the league, then sure. He could have played more PG and dominated with his length defensively and his shooting/passing offensively, if he played SG he would likely bulk up but hes basically Wade's height and has comparable if not superior length.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:45 PM
I'll need some states on the average center being 6'6.

Russell: 6'10
Walt Bellamy: 6'11
Jim Caldwell: 6'10
Nate Bowman: 6'10
George Pattererson: 6'8
Joe Strawder: 6/10
Jim Fox: 6'10
Leroy Ellise: 6'10
Bob Ferry: 6'8
Jim Davis: 6'9
Zelmo Beaty: 6'9
Mel Count(power forward): 7'0
Daral Imhoff: 6'10
Erwin Mueller: 6'8
Clyde Lee: 6'10
Nate Thurmond: 6'11
Reggie HArding: 7'0
Craigh Spitzer: 6'10
Henry Akin: 6'10
Bob Rule: 6'9
Georgre Wilson: 6'8
John Block: 6'9
Hank Finkel


Can't seem to find anybody who was 6'6 and played C.

Flash forward to the 2000's: Ben Wallace is 6'7, multi-rebounding champion over Yao Ming at the time, who was 7'4. By your logic, if a 7 foot Wilt could dominate against 6'10 C because he's so much bigger, Yao should have been legend next to a guy like Wallace, who had had close to 10 inches on.


You just made up numbers, and then said dominating the league was easy. You must have a hate on this guy. He was a phenom who changed the game.

Nothing was easy about what he did. If it was, he would have had more rings than Russell.

Use your brain and have some respect for the legend.

I already said that was inaccurate from my part. But how many of those centers were great? Lol. It is easy... when Wilt says he can score 50-70 points per game, then he really is a God or it was just too easy.

JasonJohnHorn
06-29-2016, 03:49 PM
Even if they weren't 6'6, who was a good center outside of Wilt? Just a bunch of tall people with no basketball playing ability? What are we basing his dominance off of? Dwight Howard has played against better centers than Wilt. And also, when you're playing the same teams that are packed with bad players, you're not going to see much disparity at all. You can call it ignorance all you want but please don't act like there wasn't a huge talent disparity in that era... Wilt was special but you're pretty gullible if you think he was playing against elite talent.

So you point is proven wrong and you make up a different argument that is just a flimsy.
I guess getting 20 boards against Russell, and 11-time champion who had the finals MVP named after him, and outrebounding Kareem and Nate Thurmond just makes him a chump, right?


Jesus... do you even like basketball?

Chronz
06-29-2016, 03:49 PM
I'll need some states on the average center being 6'6.

Russell: 6'10
Walt Bellamy: 6'11
Jim Caldwell: 6'10
Nate Bowman: 6'10
George Pattererson: 6'8
Joe Strawder: 6/10
Jim Fox: 6'10
Leroy Ellise: 6'10
Bob Ferry: 6'8
Jim Davis: 6'9
Zelmo Beaty: 6'9
Mel Count(power forward): 7'0
Daral Imhoff: 6'10
Erwin Mueller: 6'8
Clyde Lee: 6'10
Nate Thurmond: 6'11
Reggie HArding: 7'0
Craigh Spitzer: 6'10
Henry Akin: 6'10
Bob Rule: 6'9
Georgre Wilson: 6'8
John Block: 6'9
Hank Finkel


Can't seem to find anybody who was 6'6 and played C.

Flash forward to the 2000's: Ben Wallace is 6'7, multi-rebounding champion over Yao Ming at the time, who was 7'4. By your logic, if a 7 foot Wilt could dominate against 6'10 C because he's so much bigger, Yao should have been legend next to a guy like Wallace, who had had close to 10 inches on.


You just made up numbers, and then said dominating the league was easy. You must have a hate on this guy. He was a phenom who changed the game.

Nothing was easy about what he did. If it was, he would have had more rings than Russell.

Use your brain and have some respect for the legend.

Hes already admitted defeat on that one bro. He DOES hate them, its why he thinks only Lakers homers can rank West higher than a guy like Wade. What I dont understand is why he thinks anyone would care about his opinion on an era where he couldn't even get the basics right. I mean, ffs, this is something anyone could google and he spews the **** I've seen from kids in elementary school, and even then I was correcting those idiots.

Imagine if I told you I didn't see the era, didn't live through it, refused to research it, refused to understand the way statistics are used to compare across eras, would you still take my word for ANYTHING not related to the current NBA? Its ****ing hilarious that he thinks Im the one being hard headed, which I can be, but this is the easiest, most open and shut debate I've ever had on PSD. Like its truly sad watching him try to hold on to his evaporating beliefs.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:50 PM
Wilt would average 100 points per game against the 90's because why not? I think he would have been better in the 90's because look at how great he was in the greatest era of basketball in the 1950's? I mean, Jordan wouldn't have come close to being as great as Wilt.. the dude could block many shots in a non-goaltending era. Damn, and just look at how much bigger he is next to Muhammad Ali! That's crazy! And also, Walt Frazier said Wilt is the best player ever. That has to be true, right? The great Walt Frazier! But wait, there's more! Kareem Abdul Jabbar believes the Big O is better than Michael Jordan and LeBron James so we should obviously believe him. Why not?

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:53 PM
Chronz, you aren't debating. You are just spewing nonsense. If you truly think Wilt dominates the way he did in the 50's, then you are delusional. Secondly, yes, I admit it was incorrect about the height. Sorry, I like to admit when I'm wrong. What I will not do is say Bill Russell is better than Shaq/Hakeem/Robinson. Oh, they named the MVP trophy after Russell? They also have the logo after Jerry West. I guess Jerry West>Jordan? Nice, he outrebounded Nate Thurmond. Who PER36 numbers have him at 15 rebounds for his career. Must be really impressive. The great Nate Thurmond!

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:54 PM
How do I hate Wilt if I said he would be the best center regardless of era? You guys seem to have a difficult time understanding that Wilt's impact is overstated because of his competition. If you're willing to say Shaq would average 40/20 in that same era, why is it you're not willing to say that the era was weaker?

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 03:57 PM
BTW, Chronz, since you did watch Wilt during his time, I'll guess you are about 60 years old? If not, you were way too young to actually watch him to truly understand what you're watching. Suffering from a bit nostalgia or dementia, are we?

Chronz
06-29-2016, 03:58 PM
Just for clarity purposes and I won't debate with Chronz anymore because he's making arguments I never made. Claims I am trying to make Wilt seem as if he wouldn't be able to play in the modern era of basketball is laughable. Never have I ever made that argument. The only issue I ever had with Wilt is that his era of basketball was not even comparable in terms of a more balanced game with equally great players and talent. That's not even a question. Unless you are SERIOUSLY arguing that Wilt's era of basketball was greater, please try and make that argument. If you think Wilt's 100 point game was better than Kobe's 81 point game, please tell me how. I think you and I both know Wilt isn't averaging 50 points and 25 rebounds. If you think so, please don't bother making a comment. If you Wilt could play 48.6 minutes per game in a season, then please ask yourself why. Was he a great specimen of an athlete? Top ten 100% for sure. But there's a reason any man can do that.. and it's because they weren't dispersing as much energy due to a lack of COMPETITION.

Cool. At least I dont lie about things that only a grade school child would believe with such conviction. LOL, its recorded history yall... checks recorded history.... oh ****.

Gos from calling an era pathetic to fairly weak.

Continues to use outdated barometers in defense of his theory of inflated statistics when anyone with any semblance of statistical comprehension knows better than to compare eras with no effort to translation.


Dude, the sooner you stop typing about **** you clearly know nothing about, the smarter we will all be for it.


Keep your hard hat on tho

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 04:00 PM
I already said that was inaccurate from my part. But how many of those centers were great? Lol. It is easy... when Wilt says he can score 50-70 points per game, then he really is a God or it was just too easy.

he said it only based on just scoring he could avg that, but he was a team player who had a ego so he demonstrated he could do that and his team also needed it at that time, just like when he got better support his coach said we don't need the 50ppg and he went and got 24ppg and 24rpg with like 10blocks per and almost 9apg

he wasn't a GOD and it was a combination of easy/dominant with him being so supreme dominant and makes it easy

its like when he use to take off from the free throw line and dunk his free throws, he didn't have to run full sprint from the other side of the court, he just was basically at the 3pt line and took his few strides and would dunk it from there, effortlessly, too easy as you would say because he made it that way, him being in this era he would be like Yao Ming height with same super human strength/attributes to match, it would be scarier now then back in his actual era

that's the scary part you are missing

just like when you say put Shaq/Jordan back in his day, you cant put todays version because all the extra advanced stuff would not be available for that early era

Big O states this in his interviews, he is a big reason why you see the advanced stuff right now with trainers etc.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 04:00 PM
@Chronz, you don't even need any statistical analysis to see the difference in the game. Again, zero evidence from you regarding what you're saying. Yes, I made a mistake saying the height thing and that's the only thing you can count on. Just like you made a mistake quoting KAJ and then won't admit that it means nothing when you consider he also said ludicrous things as well.

JasonJohnHorn
06-29-2016, 04:01 PM
Wilt would average 100 points per game against the 90's because why not? I think he would have been better in the 90's because look at how great he was in the greatest era of basketball in the 1950's? I mean, Jordan wouldn't have come close to being as great as Wilt.. the dude could block many shots in a non-goaltending era. Damn, and just look at how much bigger he is next to Muhammad Ali! That's crazy! And also, Walt Frazier said Wilt is the best player ever. That has to be true, right? The great Walt Frazier! But wait, there's more! Kareem Abdul Jabbar believes the Big O is better than Michael Jordan and LeBron James so we should obviously believe him. Why not?

When Kareem was young and in his prime, and 37-year-old Wilt averaged more rebounds per game than Kareem did. Head-to-head against all time great who played in the league against Jordan and won titles in his late 30's, and in his PRIME he couldn't rebound as well as Wilt AGAINST Wilt.

Let that sink in kid.

Quit acting like the C's at the time had nothing going. Russell is an 11-time CHAMPION. Nate Thurmond was the first player to record a triple-double. He played against Kareem and dominated him on the glass. That's not enough to show you how dominant he would be in any era?

And yeah.. there were only 8 teams in some of the reasons, but that means that he had to play against guys like Russell 4 times as often, where as guys like Hakeem had to play against Robinson or Shaq with far less frequency.

I suppose Kareem would get his @$$ kicked today by Bogut and Al Jefferson, right?

SMH.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 04:07 PM
When Kareem was young and in his prime, and 37-year-old Wilt averaged more rebounds per game than Kareem did. Head-to-head against all time great who played in the league against Jordan and won titles in his late 30's, and in his PRIME he couldn't rebound as well as Wilt AGAINST Wilt.

Let that sink in kid.

Quit acting like the C's at the time had nothing going. Russell is an 11-time CHAMPION. Nate Thurmond was the first player to record a triple-double. He played against Kareem and dominated him on the glass. That's not enough to show you how dominant he would be in any era?

And yeah.. there were only 8 teams in some of the reasons, but that means that he had to play against guys like Russell 4 times as often, where as guys like Hakeem had to play against Robinson or Shaq with far less frequency.

I suppose Kareem would get his @$$ kicked today by Bogut and Al Jefferson, right?

SMH.

Hi grandpa. So because he outrebounded Kareem, that's evidence he could average 25 rebounds against Shaq/Hakeem/David Robinson? Okay, that makes sense. Dennis Rodman averaged 16 rebounds at age 35. I guess that makes him a better player than Karl Malone and Tim Duncan. Bill is an 11-time champion because?? Robert Horry is a 7-time champion. Have some respect for him! Nate Thurmond being the first to score a triple double is a testament to what? Jason Kidd has more triple doubles than Jordan. What are you proving with that stupid stat? Btw, why are you bringing up centers who are clearly playing in a different role than that of the past? Wilt wouldn't be getting 40 shot attempts per game.. he would be lucky to get half of that. Bogut's role isn't to score. The european style of center has found its way into NBA and it has changed the way of basketball. More long range shots = less rebounding opportunities. These things have to be accounted for. But you're using "Nate Thurmond was the first to score a triple double." What does that prove? Jason Kidd has more triple doubles than MJ, like I said. What does that prove? Jason Kidd has more triple doubles than Kobe, Tim Duncan, KG, Shaq, and T-Mac combined. Again, what does that signify?


he said it only based on just scoring he could avg that, but he was a team player who had a ego so he demonstrated he could do that and his team also needed it at that time, just like when he got better support his coach said we don't need the 50ppg and he went and got 24ppg and 24rpg with like 10blocks per and almost 9apg

he wasn't a GOD and it was a combination of easy/dominant with him being so supreme dominant and makes it easy

its like when he use to take off from the free throw line and dunk his free throws, he didn't have to run full sprint from the other side of the court, he just was basically at the 3pt line and took his few strides and would dunk it from there, effortlessly, too easy as you would say because he made it that way, him being in this era he would be like Yao Ming height with same super human strength/attributes to match, it would be scarier now then back in his actual era

that's the scary part you are missing

just like when you say put Shaq/Jordan back in his day, you cant put todays version because all the extra advanced stuff would not be available for that early era

Big O states this in his interviews, he is a big reason why you see the advanced stuff right now with trainers etc.

So he could average 50-70 PPG which would be default, have him win every Finals he has been in. But he didn't because he has an ego? A consistent enough ego to proclaim he could average 50-70 PPG? Lol, that's crazy. Wow, I think you're wrong there. Wilt could probably average 200 PPG. Man.. you're right.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 04:07 PM
Chronz, you aren't debating. You are just spewing nonsense. If you truly think Wilt dominates the way he did in the 50's, then you are delusional. Secondly, yes, I admit it was incorrect about the height. Sorry, I like to admit when I'm wrong. What I will not do is say Bill Russell is better than Shaq/Hakeem/Robinson. Oh, they named the MVP trophy after Russell? They also have the logo after Jerry West. I guess Jerry West>Jordan? Nice, he outrebounded Nate Thurmond. Who PER36 numbers have him at 15 rebounds for his career. Must be really impressive. The great Nate Thurmond!

he was drafted in 59' so there you go spewing non sense again saying the 50's, he played 1 year of the 50's

retired in like I think 73'

but i think you him confused with George Mikan who played in the early 50's

Chronz
06-29-2016, 04:13 PM
Chronz, you aren't debating. You are just spewing nonsense.
Says the guy who honestly believed the figures he gave were recorded history. LMFAO, you have nothing to stand on so drop the nonsense.


If you truly think Wilt dominates the way he did in the 50's, then you are delusional.
He played in the 60's/70's bro. And I think he dominates to a greater degree, notice I dont say his per game averages are higher, Im saying his productive worth would be higher. There is a key difference and one you will only understand once you stop being so stubborn and actually look into APBR.


Secondly, yes, I admit it was incorrect about the height. Sorry, I like to admit when I'm wrong. What I will not do is say Bill Russell is better than Shaq/Hakeem/Robinson. Oh, they named the MVP trophy after Russell? They also have the logo after Jerry West. I guess Jerry West>Jordan? Nice, he outrebounded Nate Thurmond. Who PER36 numbers have him at 15 rebounds for his career. Must be really impressive. The great Nate Thurmond!

Again, that you would be wrong on something so rudimentary discredits your opinion on the era. You really have to go out of your way to know so little about them, you took it a step further by pretending it was an actual record of the events.


How do I hate Wilt if I said he would be the best center regardless of era? You guys seem to have a difficult time understanding that Wilt's impact is overstated because of his competition. If you're willing to say Shaq would average 40/20 in that same era, why is it you're not willing to say that the era was weaker?
Because you underrate him and anyone of the era. I've already answered this question, its because Im not stupid enough to ignore the statistical trends/studies.


BTW, Chronz, since you did watch Wilt during his time, I'll guess you are about 60 years old? If not, you were way too young to actually watch him to truly understand what you're watching. Suffering from a bit nostalgia or dementia, are we?
Whatever man, still beats being wrong to an absurdly laughable degree. I'll let you guess how old I am but no I did not watch Wilt live, I just know how to research things I speak about and my family had alot of old tapes growing up so I appreciated those who came before me.

Do you even own a basketball book much less a libary of them? If not, the least you could do is go to the library and rent a few. I fully admit the league was relatively weaker, but I dont go to the depths of calling them pathetic or as if many of them wouldn't improve right along with the league.

There are numerous advantages to the modern game, he gets better in some areas and weaker in others, we both admit that he would be an elite player regardless, my only question is, how is this possible if the era was VASTLY weaker as you seemingly/inconsistently state.

I've asked you to quantify your statements before but Ill try yet again, what exactly do you see Wilt putting up. Feel free to ignore efficiency and just use your simplistic barometers, even just guessing would be a step up from you lying to defend your stance.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 04:13 PM
he was drafted in 59' so there you go spewing non sense again saying the 50's, he played 1 year of the 50's

retired in like I think 73'

but i think you him confused with George Mikan who played in the early 50's

Sure, I mentioned 50's/60's already in previous posts but I guess that wasn't clear enough for you. I'll take that as a mistake too. Anything to boost your argument, I'm here to help. I think Wilt might be able to dunk on both baskets at the opposite court at the same time. What are your thoughts? I know you said he could score 50-70 PPG if he wanted to score (really? as if scoring 50 PPG wasn't already an indication that Wilt was a scorer?), but why stop there? Wilt truly could score 100 PPG. If you can score 50-70 as easily as he did, what's stopping him from 70? I mean he couldn't do it against Bill and the Celtics because of his ego but man... I think his ego prevented him from saying he could score 100 PPG. Thoughts?

Chronz
06-29-2016, 04:14 PM
he was drafted in 59' so there you go spewing non sense again saying the 50's, he played 1 year of the 50's

retired in like I think 73'

but i think you him confused with George Mikan who played in the early 50's

Technically he played a few months in the 50's but the way the NBA records history, he was a rookie for the 1960 season, he was competing for the 1960 championships afterall.

Altho it would be funny if he confused Mikan and Wilt, wouldn't surprise me in the least

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 04:18 PM
Chronz, you have no evidence that Wilt would dominate the same as the 50-70's (don't want to miss that one, that's a huge no-no). Zero. You're just going by the inferiority complex such as "I am older than you, thus, by default, I must know more." You seem to be enamored with your PSD reputation here, which I will admit, is top notch. But please understand that underrating someone doesn't make me a hater. I can say you're overrating him is you being a homer. I never called you that. You resort to inferiority complex tactic and responses.. which is what everyone who is stubborn tries to do. Oh, you have a basketball book? Nice... well, we don't really use books anymore. You have a computer. You have Google. What book are you reading that isn't online for sources? I guess me admitting that Wilt would still be the best center in any era isn't enough. I gotta be like you and the rest and proclaim that Wilt could score 70 PPG if he wanted. I also have to use KAJ's statement as "evidence" despite him being a nostalgic man who is clearly biased. SHOCKER. Anyhow, you're right. Nate Thurmond>Shaq. You sure made that argument very convincing.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 04:19 PM
Yes, Chronz. Go quote the guy who truly thinks Wilt could have scored 70 PPG but didn't because he has an ego to protect. That sure boosts your argument. Nothing says "I'm right!" than quoting someone who thinks whatever Walt Frazier says is a fact.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 04:19 PM
Hi grandpa. So because he outrebounded Kareem, that's evidence he could average 25 rebounds against Shaq/Hakeem/David Robinson? Okay, that makes sense. Dennis Rodman averaged 16 rebounds at age 35. I guess that makes him a better player than Karl Malone and Tim Duncan. Bill is an 11-time champion because?? Robert Horry is a 7-time champion. Have some respect for him! Nate Thurmond being the first to score a triple double is a testament to what? Jason Kidd has more triple doubles than Jordan. What are you proving with that stupid stat? Btw, why are you bringing up centers who are clearly playing in a different role than that of the past? Wilt wouldn't be getting 40 shot attempts per game.. he would be lucky to get half of that. Bogut's role isn't to score. The european style of center has found its way into NBA and it has changed the way of basketball. More long range shots = less rebounding opportunities. These things have to be accounted for. But you're using "Nate Thurmond was the first to score a triple double." What does that prove? Jason Kidd has more triple doubles than MJ, like I said. What does that prove? Jason Kidd has more triple doubles than Kobe, Tim Duncan, KG, Shaq, and T-Mac combined. Again, what does that signify?



So he could average 50-70 PPG which would be default, have him win every Finals he has been in. But he didn't because he has an ego? A consistent enough ego to proclaim he could average 50-70 PPG? Lol, that's crazy. Wow, I think you're wrong there. Wilt could probably average 200 PPG. Man.. you're right.

Can you go anywhere you want to at this time moment? or do you choose to do so at your leisure? that's what i mean by if Dipper wanted to do that then he could have in his era

Celtics had 7-8 HOF'ers and he had none prior to that 68' team and then later with the Lakers so how could he win every Finals when the most dominant dynasty in professional sports took home 8 in a row, but they battled that team to 6/7 games each time, because of Dipper or some other player you can name me?

a ego means he wanted to prove he could put up 50ppg, a ego means he wanted to lead the league in assists and to a title and so on, that's what a ego/devil is right?

based on how you stated how weak the competition was back then and the man actually avg 50ppg why are you getting your thong in a bunch over him actually avg 55-70ppg had he wanted to? it was easy competition right?

i don't need to be right, what i posted happened during his time, or what was said by others which makes them right, not me

this is educational purposes only, you got a nice dose from PSD today, be happy

head to head he would put up whatever numbers he wanted to against any Center, that's what embarrassing someone means

Big O even said Wilt had more triple doubles than him but they didn't keep track of blocks, and that year Dipper led nba in total assists just imagine how many 20/20/10/10 games he had, more than all players combined in nba history

this keeps getting more comical the more you go one

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 04:21 PM
I just find it laughable you think someone could average 70 PPG but doesn't want to and would rather lose in the NBA Finals despite him knowing that 70 PPG would practically win every NBA Finals. It pains me to say this but I really hope your medication is working for you.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 04:28 PM
@Chronz, you don't even need any statistical analysis to see the difference in the game.
Heres the thing you dont get, I know the difference, we disagree on the importance of that difference. Hence the need for objective evidence, and given how little you understand even the most simplistic of statistics, what makes you think I would care about the more nuanced aspects?


Again, zero evidence from you regarding what you're saying.
I only put forth as much effort as required to refute the points being made. You've offered lies, straws and vague speculation. Try harder and you'll see me actually give a damn.


Yes, I made a mistake saying the height thing and that's the only thing you can count on.
Yes, and now you have to live with the consequences of being wrong. If you're wrong about something so simplistic, I have no reason to believe you know any more about the nuanced aspects, particularly when you're so inconsistent with your reasoning.


Just like you made a mistake quoting KAJ and then won't admit that it means nothing when you consider he also said ludicrous things as well.
I made no mistake, I even agreed to disagree with you. That you're trying to compare that with you outright not knowing recorded FACTS isn't the same as breaking down the motives to quotes. I've already explained my stance and I stand by them. You on the other hand cannot stand by lies. FFS bro, either keep your word and quit or at least try to debate, this is starting to get repetitive with how often you ignore my questions and how little you defend your theories.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 04:28 PM
I just find it laughable you think someone could average 70 PPG but doesn't want to and would rather lose in the NBA Finals despite him knowing that 70 PPG would practically win every NBA Finals. It pains me to say this but I really hope your medication is working for you.

not come playoff time, when they put the entire team on you, Celtics had the best interior defender/champion ever with help coming so that means a lot in a 7 game series, for the regular season i am sure he could have

prior to his 100pt game he was on a nice stretch of games putting up almost 70ppg, or close to it

i hope Dipper/Frazier medication working, they made the statement, don't shoot the messenger

i know he could have avg 60ppg just based on the fact he avg 50ppg for an entire season, that pains your mind i know, 50ppg, that don't even sound right to this day

in any era that doesn't sound right, that pains the mind, where is your medication when i need it

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 04:36 PM
Oh.. now it's not playoff time. Wow, let's just keep making excuses for him. Okay, during Wilt's 50 PPG season, they lost 31 games. They played the Celtics 11 times, Wilt won 4 of those games, so 7 losses to the Celtics. Math says that he lost 24 games to teams other than the Celtics. Why didn't he score 70 them? Stop with the ego ********... he had enough ego to say he would score 50-70 but when he doesn't do that, you're saying his ego prevented him from scoring what he said he could have scored? Right... let's see how that works for guys like LeBron when they say "I can score 50" and they end up not scoring even 30. Let's see how many people say "he didn't do it because he didn't want his ego to get in the way."

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 04:38 PM
Chronz says I am using theories but he claims he is using facts. Do you know the difference between theories and facts? Comparing eras is a THEORY. There is no simple way to put it. You're way too stubborn man. All you do is call people a kid, child, strawman, "you don't have a basketball book." Oh sorry, grandpa.. I have a smartphone... sorry grandpa, I'm sorry i'm not old and have crusty skin. Are those the type of responses you want from me?

CavaliersFTW
06-29-2016, 04:40 PM
That's not my point. Centers by default were just the building stone just like PG's are now today. It's because rules and the way the game was played back then involved scoring as close to the basket as possible. Why do you think points and rebounding numbers were huge? It wasn't uncommon for players to average 30 points and grab 20 rebounds. Do you think that was a testament to how great they were? Do you think Nate Thurmond becomes half the player in the 90's? You're naming players who were good but they aren't historically great. I'm talking about the elites of the elites. Guys like Shaq played against them from Jordan, T-Mac, Hakeem, Allen Iverson, Robinson, Tim Duncan, KG, Dirk. Are you seriously comparing THOSE players to what Wilt played against? Are we being fair when we compare these players? Do you think Russell wins 11 rings in the 90's? Let's be FAIR here. BTW, Jerry West would have a much more difficult time playing in the modern era of basketball. He was way too small.
No, I'm naming players who were historically great. Some of the best basketball players to have ever played and some very solid players across the board from the bench guys rounding out rosters who had stellar college careers to the superstars. Forgotten or unresearched by people who wish only to be disrespectful 50 years later does not negate what they accomplished.

Here I am talking to a person who doesn't even know how big Jerry West was. 6 foot 2 on basketball reference is how you form this opinion am I right? You see, in actuality he was 6 foot 4 and change barefoot with a 6 foot 9 armspan - which is far from undersized. There are smaller players playing guard in the NBA today. Steph Curry? Kyrie Irving? Both guys under 6-3 barefoot. West is closer to Wade and Kobe in size than he is to Curry, or Irving. Are Wade and Kobe too small to play in todays league too? Steve Nash listed 6-3 in the NBA, but he is 6-1 without shoes. According to bball reference he should be an inch taller than West. According to reality, West would tower over him. I'll give you a pass, as I'm sure it's plenty easier to dismiss the legends than to research an appreciate them. You don't have to think as much you can just live in the moment. But you'll never fully appreciate how great players are today unless you can actually understand and appreciate how great players have always been.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj9jbyUlsPU

http://i.imgur.com/Z8uzm.jpg

https://cbsla.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/96400401.jpg

We could mention Bill Russell here too. "6-9". "Ben Wallace size". Only, players listing 6-9 today are actually much shorter than 6-9. And Bill, like Jerry, at 6-9 and 5/8ths without shoes on with a 7-4 armspan was taller and much longer than his list height in his bare feet let alone in some shoes.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-dpMmXPjkiFo/Um3cP0DUTpI/AAAAAAAAExQ/U09aaZg_7mU/s640/Bill%2520and%2520Ben%25201.jpg

NBA talent throughout the history of the sport, which began in the late 1800's, not 1990, is far richer than most young fans attempt to recognize.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 04:43 PM
No, I'm naming players who were historically great. Some of the best basketball players to have ever played and some very solid players across the board from the bench guys rounding out rosters who had stellar college careers to the superstars. Forgotten or unresearched by people who wish only to be disrespectful 50 years later does not negate what they accomplished.

Here I am talking to a person who doesn't even know how big Jerry West was. 6 foot 2 on basketball reference is how you form this opinion am I right? You see, in actuality he was 6 foot 4 barefoot with a 6 foot 9 armspan - which is far from undersized. There are smaller players playing guard in the NBA today. Steph Curry? Kyrie Irving? Both guys under 6-3 barefoot. West is closer to Wade and Kobe in size than he is to Curry, or Irving. Are Wade and Kobe too small to play in todays league too? Steve Nash listed 6-3 in the NBA, but he is 6-1 without shoes. According to bball reference he should be an inch taller than West. According to reality, West would tower over him. I'll give you a pass, as I'm sure it's plenty easier to dismiss the legends than to research an appreciate them. You don't have to think as much you can just live in the moment. But you'll never fully appreciate how great players are today unless you can actually understand and appreciate how great players have always been.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj9jbyUlsPU

http://i.imgur.com/Z8uzm.jpg

https://cbsla.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/96400401.jpg

We could mention Bill Russell here too. "6-9". "Ben Wallace size". Only, players listing 6-9 today are actually much shorter than 6-9. And Bill, like Jerry, at 6-9 and 5/8ths without shoes on with a 7-4 armspan was taller and much longer than his list height in his bare feet let alone in some shoes.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-dpMmXPjkiFo/Um3cP0DUTpI/AAAAAAAAExQ/U09aaZg_7mU/s640/Bill%2520and%2520Ben%25201.jpg

NBA talent throughout the history of the sport, which began in the late 1800's, not 1990, is far richer than most young fans attempt to recognize.

You proved my point... West was around 190 lbs. If he's around Kobe's height, then that's SMALL. And plus, what does comparing Russell with Wallace prove? That they were both similar in height? Lol, give me a break. You see, let's use a more tangible sport that is measurable. Athletes today are better, fact or fiction? Usain Bolt would smash Owen's dash record quite easily. Actually many track sprinters would, too. By default, you have to admit that athletes today are better. Swimming as well. Every record was smashed by Michael Phelps. It's tough to see that in basketball because they aren't comparing measurable evidence but by nature, it's 100% fact.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 04:43 PM
Chronz, you have no evidence that Wilt would dominate the same as the 50-70's (don't want to miss that one, that's a huge no-no).
LOL, you're going to double down on that one huh. Quick tell me, did Wilt ever compete for the 1959 championship? Nope, he first competed for the 1960's title.


Zero. You're just going by the inferiority complex such as "I am older than you, thus, by default, I must know more."
No, I actually dont care how old you are, hence me ignoring you attempting to make it personal by mentioning the possibility of senility/dementia, which considering recent basketball events, comes in very poor taste. I would expect nothing less from a liar tho.


You seem to be enamored with your PSD reputation here, which I will admit, is top notch.
Enamored? More baseless theories, I've been hated, had my life threatened on here, its fair to say I dont care what people think. Its just the nature of the debate, even Hawkeye has felt like I had something against him and hes like my bff.


But please understand that underrating someone doesn't make me a hater. I can say you're overrating him is you being a homer. I never called you that. You resort to inferiority complex tactic and responses.. which is what everyone who is stubborn tries to do. Oh, you have a basketball book? Nice... well, we don't really use books anymore. You have a computer. You have Google. What book are you reading that isn't online for sources? I guess me admitting that Wilt would still be the best center in any era isn't enough. I gotta be like you and the rest and proclaim that Wilt could score 70 PPG if he wanted. I also have to use KAJ's statement as "evidence" despite him being a nostalgic man who is clearly biased. SHOCKER. Anyhow, you're right. Nate Thurmond>Shaq. You sure made that argument very convincing.
In terms of defensive ability, you damn right Thurmond>Shaq, at least throughout their careers, at his absolute apex, Shaq could defend as well as anyone. Its not just quotes here (its not just KAJ who considered him the toughest defender) we have facts/footage of their output and how it declined. Simply put, KAJ put up his worst numbers against Thurmond overall, you can only see this if you use methods in line with the APBR community. I implore you to do some research, it will save you from making laughable mistakes liked you've made in this thread.

Dont play the victim, its a bad look for anyone.

CavaliersFTW
06-29-2016, 04:47 PM
You proved my point... West was around 190 lbs. If he's around Kobe's height, then that's SMALL. And plus, what does comparing Russell with Wallace prove? That they were both similar in height? Lol, give me a break.

Kobe entered the league at 178lbs. MJ entered the league at 195lbs. If weightlifting wasn't a standard part of training today - that's how heavy they'd have stayed.

Weightlifting wasn't a standard part of training in West's day. So his weight only ever fluctuated by 5-10lbs based on how conditioned he was through non-strength training exercises like running.

Lifting weights mean MJ, Kobe, and many modern players gain 20-30lbs. In the Gym. West could do that, he's a capable athlete like anyone else. He's virtually the same size as MJ and Kobe, the OTHER TWO greatest shooting guards to have ever played. You made no point at all. West was and still is a great specimen to have played that position... as he PROVED.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 04:51 PM
Chronz says I am using theories but he claims he is using facts. Do you know the difference between theories and facts? Comparing eras is a THEORY. There is no simple way to put it. You're way too stubborn man. All you do is call people a kid, child, strawman, "you don't have a basketball book." Oh sorry, grandpa.. I have a smartphone... sorry grandpa, I'm sorry i'm not old and have crusty skin. Are those the type of responses you want from me?
LOL. Those ARE the type of responses I've gotten from you. Remember you trying to make fun of my age and me allowing you to pretend Im as old as whatever makes your argument work. Comparing eras is a theory, true, but we still use facts to make those theories. For example, we look at statistical trends and how rebound rates translate across eras. Its not an exact science but that doesn't mean we ignore them.

Ill put it as simply as I can, its possible to average less rebounds per game and STILL be the superior rebounder if the environment allows it. This doesn't make someones rebounds inflated, it makes the barometer you're using outdated.

Going back to my star wars example, when people compare how much it grossed across the eras, we dont look at raw dollars, we look at how the money translates across eras. Its alil harder for basketball, obviously, but thats why I cant take your theories seriously, you still rely on outdated methods and are dense enough to think having a smart phone allows you to make **** up about recorded history.

Newflash, I have a smart phone and a library. The library gives me as much insight because most of the old books aren't online.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 04:52 PM
Nate Thurmond>Hakeem defensively. Keep it up, Chronz!

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 04:52 PM
LOL. Those ARE the type of responses I've gotten from you. Remember you trying to make fun of my age and me allowing you to pretend Im as old as whatever makes your argument work. Comparing eras is a theory, true, but we still use facts to make those theories. For example, we look at statistical trends and how rebound rates translate across eras. Its not an exact science but that doesn't mean we ignore them.

Ill put it as simply as I can, its possible to average less rebounds per game and STILL be the superior rebounder if the environment allows it. This doesn't make someones rebounds inflated, it makes the barometer you're using outdated.

Going back to my star wars example, when people compare how much it grossed across the eras, we dont look at raw dollars, we look at how the money translates across eras. Its alil harder for basketball, obviously, but thats why I cant take your theories seriously, you still rely on outdated methods and are dense enough to think having a smart phone allows you to make **** up about recorded history.

Newflash, I have a smart phone and a library. The library gives me as much insight because most of the old books aren't online.

Newsflash, you're the one calling people kids. I'll call it like it is. If I'm the kid, you're the grandpa.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 04:55 PM
No, I'm naming players who were historically great. Some of the best basketball players to have ever played and some very solid players across the board from the bench guys rounding out rosters who had stellar college careers to the superstars. Forgotten or unresearched by people who wish only to be disrespectful 50 years later does not negate what they accomplished.

Here I am talking to a person who doesn't even know how big Jerry West was. 6 foot 2 on basketball reference is how you form this opinion am I right? You see, in actuality he was 6 foot 4 and change barefoot with a 6 foot 9 armspan - which is far from undersized. There are smaller players playing guard in the NBA today. Steph Curry? Kyrie Irving? Both guys under 6-3 barefoot. West is closer to Wade and Kobe in size than he is to Curry, or Irving. Are Wade and Kobe too small to play in todays league too? Steve Nash listed 6-3 in the NBA, but he is 6-1 without shoes. According to bball reference he should be an inch taller than West. According to reality, West would tower over him. I'll give you a pass, as I'm sure it's plenty easier to dismiss the legends than to research an appreciate them. You don't have to think as much you can just live in the moment. But you'll never fully appreciate how great players are today unless you can actually understand and appreciate how great players have always been.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj9jbyUlsPU

http://i.imgur.com/Z8uzm.jpg

https://cbsla.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/96400401.jpg

We could mention Bill Russell here too. "6-9". "Ben Wallace size". Only, players listing 6-9 today are actually much shorter than 6-9. And Bill, like Jerry, at 6-9 and 5/8ths without shoes on with a 7-4 armspan was taller and much longer than his list height in his bare feet let alone in some shoes.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-dpMmXPjkiFo/Um3cP0DUTpI/AAAAAAAAExQ/U09aaZg_7mU/s640/Bill%2520and%2520Ben%25201.jpg

NBA talent throughout the history of the sport, which began in the late 1800's, not 1990, is far richer than most young fans attempt to recognize.

Wasn't Russ measure to be 6"10 in the Olympics, only wanted to be listed at 6"9 to avoid the goon label? In todays NBA, he'd be listed at 6"11 to 7ft ala Dwight Howard

CavaliersFTW
06-29-2016, 04:56 PM
Nate Thurmond>Hakeem defensively. Keep it up, Chronz!
Yes, this is quite likely actually. Thurmonds greatest ability was defense. He did a hell of a lot better against Jabbar for example, than Hakeem did.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 04:57 PM
Nate Thurmond>Hakeem defensively. Keep it up, Chronz!

You keep typing **** and not explaining how you have a point.

Well when it comes to guarding 1 man, why not? We know that Nate defended KAJ better than Dream ever could, in fact, Dream wasn't even his teams best option against an old Kareem, imagine what peak Kareem would have done to him.

I know you hate quotes but what if I told you I have a quote where Hakeems own coach labels his man2man defense as overrated. Contrast that with guys like KAJ and Wilt saying Thurmond checked them the best and you can see the picture being painted.

FlashBolt
06-29-2016, 04:58 PM
Yes, this is quite likely actually. Thurmonds greatest ability was defense. He did a hell of a lot better against Jabbar for example, than Hakeem did.

Here's what Nate Thurmond said himself:

“I think the talent of the players today is more advanced. The Tracy McGradys and Kevin Garnetts - tall players who can dribble and pass like guards. David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal. These players are quicker and stronger than the ones I had to face,” said Thurmond, remarkably well-kept for 59.

"“Wilt was a giant. But 60 percent of his points came on fadeaways. He was a powerful man who didn't always play that way,” said Thurmond, who does community-relations work for the Warriors and owns a barbecue restaurant in San Francisco.

“Shaquille O'Neal, he's a different player. He presents a problem none of us had to face.

“He's more than 300 pounds, with speed, power and quickness. Most of the big guys I played against were lumbering types, nothing like Shaquille. I just feel that at my 6-11, 235, I would have had a problem with him. He moves people out of the way, dislodges them. Wilt was more finesse.

“How could I have had a solution for Shaquille? He's 100 pounds heavier than me.”"

Take it for what it is. I'm out.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 04:58 PM
Newsflash, you're the one calling people kids. I'll call it like it is. If I'm the kid, you're the grandpa.

touche

I mean it more from a mental capacity, you're clearly of age.

CavaliersFTW
06-29-2016, 05:03 PM
Interesting stat:

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's career high against Hakeem Olajuwon: 46 points

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's career high against Darrall Imhoff: 46 points

Wilt Chamberlain's career high against Darrall Imhoff: 100 points

Hakeem must have been wearing Chuck Taylors that day. Couldn't do any better defensively against Jabbar than the guy who had 100 points dropped on him by Wilt.

CavaliersFTW
06-29-2016, 05:07 PM
Here's what Nate Thurmond said himself:

“I think the talent of the players today is more advanced. The Tracy McGradys and Kevin Garnetts - tall players who can dribble and pass like guards. David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal. These players are quicker and stronger than the ones I had to face,” said Thurmond, remarkably well-kept for 59.

"“Wilt was a giant. But 60 percent of his points came on fadeaways. He was a powerful man who didn't always play that way,” said Thurmond, who does community-relations work for the Warriors and owns a barbecue restaurant in San Francisco.

“Shaquille O'Neal, he's a different player. He presents a problem none of us had to face.

“He's more than 300 pounds, with speed, power and quickness. Most of the big guys I played against were lumbering types, nothing like Shaquille. I just feel that at my 6-11, 235, I would have had a problem with him. He moves people out of the way, dislodges them. Wilt was more finesse.

“How could I have had a solution for Shaquille? He's 100 pounds heavier than me.”"

Take it for what it is. I'm out.
The problem he represented was running players over - and getting away with it. The game was called differently as he began to do that. He was a Dawkins type of player explosively, only bigger, except he used it to actually run you over not just jump over you.

Wilt was definitely not that type of player. Though he was that type of body and then some. Thurmond is entitled to his opinion. Do you acknowledge just his opinion, and not those of say, Jabbar? or Rick Barry? or Earl Monroe? Who say what Wilt did and what he could do makes him GOAT? Perhaps you will one day have a different perception, much like Barry.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSTt_TxoFVo

Chronz
06-29-2016, 05:07 PM
Here's what Nate Thurmond said himself:

“I think the talent of the players today is more advanced. The Tracy McGradys and Kevin Garnetts - tall players who can dribble and pass like guards. David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal. These players are quicker and stronger than the ones I had to face,” said Thurmond, remarkably well-kept for 59.

"“Wilt was a giant. But 60 percent of his points came on fadeaways. He was a powerful man who didn't always play that way,” said Thurmond, who does community-relations work for the Warriors and owns a barbecue restaurant in San Francisco.

“Shaquille O'Neal, he's a different player. He presents a problem none of us had to face.

“He's more than 300 pounds, with speed, power and quickness. Most of the big guys I played against were lumbering types, nothing like Shaquille. I just feel that at my 6-11, 235, I would have had a problem with him. He moves people out of the way, dislodges them. Wilt was more finesse.

“How could I have had a solution for Shaquille? He's 100 pounds heavier than me.”"

Take it for what it is. I'm out.

See why quotes are useful. It actually gives us something to debate.

I would point to Dennis Rodman successfully defending Shaq despite being immensely smaller in stature. Phil used to say Rodman was his best option simply because of his low center of gravity and innate strength that belied his physique.

Hes right, Wilt was more finesse, which goes directly against your claims that he was simply bulldozing these midgets, he would foul out every game if he played that way.

That said, Shaq is a beast, there were only a few years where Wilt was on Shaqs level offensively, Wilt had the range but Shaq had more moves in the post, Shaq has one of the softest touches around the rim of any power player. I have no doubt that Thurmond would have more trouble against him than any other center hes ever played but it really depends on which Shaq.

I feel based on what people have said, Wilt was stronger than Shaq but only once he bulked up and before Shaqs body transformed in LA.

3-PEET Shaq is the greatest stretch of dominance from a Center ever. Its not a diss to fall short of that.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 05:32 PM
Here's what Nate Thurmond said himself:

“I think the talent of the players today is more advanced. The Tracy McGradys and Kevin Garnetts - tall players who can dribble and pass like guards. David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal. These players are quicker and stronger than the ones I had to face,” said Thurmond, remarkably well-kept for 59.

"“Wilt was a giant. But 60 percent of his points came on fadeaways. He was a powerful man who didn't always play that way,” said Thurmond, who does community-relations work for the Warriors and owns a barbecue restaurant in San Francisco.

“Shaquille O'Neal, he's a different player. He presents a problem none of us had to face.

“He's more than 300 pounds, with speed, power and quickness. Most of the big guys I played against were lumbering types, nothing like Shaquille. I just feel that at my 6-11, 235, I would have had a problem with him. He moves people out of the way, dislodges them. Wilt was more finesse.

“How could I have had a solution for Shaquille? He's 100 pounds heavier than me.”"

Take it for what it is. I'm out.

Elvin Hayes

In 1982, when he was 45 and Philadelphia 76er owner Harold Katz was hot after him, the Houston Chronicle's George White asked Elvin Hayes if Chamberlain could still play. "Some things about Wilt, you never forgot," Hayes said. "He was such an awesome physical specimen. To go up under Wilt Chamberlain, to be down there and look up at him when he's towering up over you waiting to dunk, was a terrifying picture. To see him poised up there, knowing he was about to sweep down with that big jam . . . that must be the most frightening sight in sports. The ball goes shooting through the net and you better have your body covered up because he could really hurt someone. I was scared. Everyone was scared when he got that look in his eye, that don't-try-to-stop-this look that he got when he really wanted it. . . . "I think Russell realized there was no way he could have stopped Wilt if he had been fully intent on making it a two-man game. No one who ever put on a uniform could have done it. When I played him, I kept this foremost in my mind: Above all, don't make him mad. Don't embarrass him. You wanted to keep him quiet as long as possible."


Gus Johnson

The Los Angeles Times on Feb. 26, 1981, recalled that Wilt Chamberlain dislocated the shoulder of the powerful Gus Johnson when he blocked one of Gus' dunks. The Philadelphia Inquirer on Oct. 26, 1986, got the scoop from Billy Cunningham, who witnessed the event: "It was Gus against Wilt," Cunningham said. "Gus went in to dunk, and Wilt caught the ball, threw Gus to the floor, and they had to take Gus off the floor with a dislocated shoulder."

Pick-up vs Magic

When Wilt was in his mid-40's he played in a pick-up basketball game with a bunch of nobodies on his team vs Magic Johnson and Norm Nixon. During the course of the game Magic calls a foul on Wilt. Wilt then declared, "okay, if you're going to play that way, then I'm going to shut you down". From that point on, Wilt blocked EVERY shot that Magic or Nixon put up and easily won the pick-up game.


Arnold Schwarzenegger

"I remember he lifted me up with one arm like nothing. I remember Andre the Giant, professional wrestler he was a very good friend of mine, and Wilt Chamberlain and I both went out to dinner several times in Mexico City when we did the movie down there, the Conan Movie, and both of them would just pick me up over them, they were just joking about who could pick me up and make me look like lighter, like I was a fly, because they were so powerful"


Harlem Globetrotters in Russia

"On the trip to Russia with the Harlem Globetrotters, we were in Lenin Stadium, and they assigned a dressing room to the team. The players were getting dressed for one of their games. They were in rather close quarters. Remember, these were young kids-Wilt was 23. The others were his age. They were like kittens. You bump me, i'll bump you back. And before you know it, two of the guys set on Wilt. They started playfully pushing and shoving him. And finally one of his teammates hit Wilt a little too hard. He took these two guys, twisted each of their shirts, and lifted both of them off the ground. Each of these guys weighed over 200 pounds. It looked like he had two little crackers in his hands. I thought he was going to hit their heads together. It was an amazing demonstration of strength".


Paul Silas

"One time, when I was with Boston and he was with the Lakers, Happy Hairston and I were about to get in a scrape," said Charlotte Hornets coach Paul Silas, who was a rugged, no-nonsense enforcer. "All of a sudden, I felt an enormous vise around me. I was 6-7, 235, and Wilt had picked me up and turned me around. He said, 'We're not going to have that stuff.' I said, 'Yes sir.'"


Great Leaper

Legends abound of the truly great leapers who could touch the top of the board. Almost always the feat involves money-claims that the player could grab a dollar bill off the top of the board, or could pluck off a quarter and leave two dimes and a nickel change ... "I defy anyone to say they took change off the top of the backboard," Chamberlain said. "I could. Someone would put a quarter up and I'd snatch it down. I've heard stories about Jackie Jackson doing it, but I've never seen anyone (but himself) come close." Sonny Hill, a Philadelphia leaping legend of the '60s, backs Wilt, saying, "The only man that's been to the top, that's Wilt. I asked Kareem if he ever did, and he could jump a little bit. He told me, `Sonny, no.'"

One Punch

I do remember a story about Wilt getting in a fight with Clyde Lovellette, a huge hulking guy who was infamous as a hatchet man in the 1950s and 60s (he was like the Laimbeer of 30 years earlier). Lovellette was hacking Wilt, elbowing him in the back etc etc and finally Wilt? said ***** this and cold-cocked Lovellette (6-9 and about 300) with one punch.

From former athlete Linda Huey's (close friend of Wilt's) blog: "It was a long day of driving and boating and skiing, and when we got back to the house, Wilt totally took my breath away with an incredible feat of strength. Instead of going through the difficult maneuver of backing the boat trailer into the carport, Wilt simply unhitched the boat from his station wagon and single-handedly pushed that heavy boat and trailer into place.

NBA Public Relations Director Haskell Cohen tells a story about how his car tire needed changed when Wilt was a teenager working as a Bellhop at Kutshers and he didn't have a jack and the teenage Wilt Chamberlain proceeded to lift the back end of the car so the guy could change it.

HOFer and former teammate Bill Cunningham claims he saw Wilt (by that time he'd be about 28 years old) lift the back end of a Volkswagon with just one hand, and rotate/set it down facing a different direction.

In the early 1960's, Wilt Chamberlain said he was attacked by a mountain lion.

He told his good friend Cal Ramsey that he was alone in the country when the mountain lion leaped from rocks onto him.

Wilt said, "I killed him with my bare hands."

Ramsey expressed his doubts. To prove his point, Wilt pulled back his shirt to reveal several long scars on his shoulder, which Ramsey admitted looked like claw marks.



Also Lanier of Pistons who was around 280lbs said Dipper picked him up and moved him like he was a cup of coffee

had Dipper played bully ball like Shaq he would have literally killed some back in his day

TheMightyHumph
06-29-2016, 05:33 PM
See why quotes are useful. It actually gives us something to debate.

I would point to Dennis Rodman successfully defending Shaq despite being immensely smaller in stature. Phil used to say Rodman was his best option simply because of his low center of gravity and innate strength that belied his physique.

Hes right, Wilt was more finesse, which goes directly against your claims that he was simply bulldozing these midgets, he would foul out every game if he played that way.

That said, Shaq is a beast, there were only a few years where Wilt was on Shaqs level offensively, Wilt had the range but Shaq had more moves in the post, Shaq has one of the softest touches around the rim of any power player. I have no doubt that Thurmond would have more trouble against him than any other center hes ever played but it really depends on which Shaq.

I feel based on what people have said, Wilt was stronger than Shaq but only once he bulked up and before Shaqs body transformed in LA.

3-PEET Shaq is the greatest stretch of dominance from a Center ever. Its not a diss to fall short of that.

And with that being said, even during his 3-peet dominance, Shaq couldn't pass, rebound or block shots like Wilt.

And you know who gave Shaq trouble................Anthony Mason. If Shaq couldn't move a player, his offensive game diminished considerably.

TheMightyHumph
06-29-2016, 05:36 PM
Elvin Hayes

In 1982, when he was 45 and Philadelphia 76er owner Harold Katz was hot after him, the Houston Chronicle's George White asked Elvin Hayes if Chamberlain could still play. "Some things about Wilt, you never forgot," Hayes said. "He was such an awesome physical specimen. To go up under Wilt Chamberlain, to be down there and look up at him when he's towering up over you waiting to dunk, was a terrifying picture. To see him poised up there, knowing he was about to sweep down with that big jam . . . that must be the most frightening sight in sports. The ball goes shooting through the net and you better have your body covered up because he could really hurt someone. I was scared. Everyone was scared when he got that look in his eye, that don't-try-to-stop-this look that he got when he really wanted it. . . . "I think Russell realized there was no way he could have stopped Wilt if he had been fully intent on making it a two-man game. No one who ever put on a uniform could have done it. When I played him, I kept this foremost in my mind: Above all, don't make him mad. Don't embarrass him. You wanted to keep him quiet as long as possible."


Gus Johnson

The Los Angeles Times on Feb. 26, 1981, recalled that Wilt Chamberlain dislocated the shoulder of the powerful Gus Johnson when he blocked one of Gus' dunks. The Philadelphia Inquirer on Oct. 26, 1986, got the scoop from Billy Cunningham, who witnessed the event: "It was Gus against Wilt," Cunningham said. "Gus went in to dunk, and Wilt caught the ball, threw Gus to the floor, and they had to take Gus off the floor with a dislocated shoulder."

Pick-up vs Magic

When Wilt was in his mid-40's he played in a pick-up basketball game with a bunch of nobodies on his team vs Magic Johnson and Norm Nixon. During the course of the game Magic calls a foul on Wilt. Wilt then declared, "okay, if you're going to play that way, then I'm going to shut you down". From that point on, Wilt blocked EVERY shot that Magic or Nixon put up and easily won the pick-up game.


Arnold Schwarzenegger

"I remember he lifted me up with one arm like nothing. I remember Andre the Giant, professional wrestler he was a very good friend of mine, and Wilt Chamberlain and I both went out to dinner several times in Mexico City when we did the movie down there, the Conan Movie, and both of them would just pick me up over them, they were just joking about who could pick me up and make me look like lighter, like I was a fly, because they were so powerful"


Harlem Globetrotters in Russia

"On the trip to Russia with the Harlem Globetrotters, we were in Lenin Stadium, and they assigned a dressing room to the team. The players were getting dressed for one of their games. They were in rather close quarters. Remember, these were young kids-Wilt was 23. The others were his age. They were like kittens. You bump me, i'll bump you back. And before you know it, two of the guys set on Wilt. They started playfully pushing and shoving him. And finally one of his teammates hit Wilt a little too hard. He took these two guys, twisted each of their shirts, and lifted both of them off the ground. Each of these guys weighed over 200 pounds. It looked like he had two little crackers in his hands. I thought he was going to hit their heads together. It was an amazing demonstration of strength".


Paul Silas

"One time, when I was with Boston and he was with the Lakers, Happy Hairston and I were about to get in a scrape," said Charlotte Hornets coach Paul Silas, who was a rugged, no-nonsense enforcer. "All of a sudden, I felt an enormous vise around me. I was 6-7, 235, and Wilt had picked me up and turned me around. He said, 'We're not going to have that stuff.' I said, 'Yes sir.'"


Great Leaper

Legends abound of the truly great leapers who could touch the top of the board. Almost always the feat involves money-claims that the player could grab a dollar bill off the top of the board, or could pluck off a quarter and leave two dimes and a nickel change ... "I defy anyone to say they took change off the top of the backboard," Chamberlain said. "I could. Someone would put a quarter up and I'd snatch it down. I've heard stories about Jackie Jackson doing it, but I've never seen anyone (but himself) come close." Sonny Hill, a Philadelphia leaping legend of the '60s, backs Wilt, saying, "The only man that's been to the top, that's Wilt. I asked Kareem if he ever did, and he could jump a little bit. He told me, `Sonny, no.'"

One Punch

I do remember a story about Wilt getting in a fight with Clyde Lovellette, a huge hulking guy who was infamous as a hatchet man in the 1950s and 60s (he was like the Laimbeer of 30 years earlier). Lovellette was hacking Wilt, elbowing him in the back etc etc and finally Wilt? said ***** this and cold-cocked Lovellette (6-9 and about 300) with one punch.

From former athlete Linda Huey's (close friend of Wilt's) blog: "It was a long day of driving and boating and skiing, and when we got back to the house, Wilt totally took my breath away with an incredible feat of strength. Instead of going through the difficult maneuver of backing the boat trailer into the carport, Wilt simply unhitched the boat from his station wagon and single-handedly pushed that heavy boat and trailer into place.

NBA Public Relations Director Haskell Cohen tells a story about how his car tire needed changed when Wilt was a teenager working as a Bellhop at Kutshers and he didn't have a jack and the teenage Wilt Chamberlain proceeded to lift the back end of the car so the guy could change it.

HOFer and former teammate Bill Cunningham claims he saw Wilt (by that time he'd be about 28 years old) lift the back end of a Volkswagon with just one hand, and rotate/set it down facing a different direction.

In the early 1960's, Wilt Chamberlain said he was attacked by a mountain lion.

He told his good friend Cal Ramsey that he was alone in the country when the mountain lion leaped from rocks onto him.

Wilt said, "I killed him with my bare hands."

Ramsey expressed his doubts. To prove his point, Wilt pulled back his shirt to reveal several long scars on his shoulder, which Ramsey admitted looked like claw marks.



Also Lanier of Pistons who was around 280lbs said Dipper picked him up and moved him like he was a cup of coffee

had Dipper played bully ball like Shaq he would have literally killed some back in his day

Yes, Wilt lacked the 'killer instinct'. I don't believe he cared much about basketball.

CavaliersFTW
06-29-2016, 05:41 PM
Yes, Wilt lacked the 'killer instinct'. I don't believe he cared much about basketball.

Wilt lacked a desire to physically hurt people. He had ALL the competitive desire any player has ever had to "win" at basketball - and everything else he ever tried. He was fiercely competitive, to the point that he wanted to be the best at everything not just basketball. I think people confuse his peers and contemporaries criticism about his willingness to hurt people (he was a gentle giant - would soften up a dunk not to break a players arm, etc), with a willingness to go out on the floor and give it everything he's got (short of physically hurting people) to win a game. Because those same peers and contemporaries claim he's as competitive minded as anyone ever when it comes to wanting to win.

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 05:45 PM
"Once Wilt got upset with me and dunked the ball so hard that it went through the rim with such force that it broke my toe as it hit the floor"

Red Kerr

TheMightyHumph
06-29-2016, 05:54 PM
Wilt lacked a desire to physically hurt people. He had ALL the competitive desire any player has ever had to "win" at basketball - and everything else he ever tried. He was fiercely competitive, to the point that he wanted to be the best at everything not just basketball. I think people confuse his peers and contemporaries criticism about his willingness to hurt people (he was a gentle giant - would soften up a dunk not to break a players arm, etc), with a willingness to go out on the floor and give it everything he's got (short of physically hurting people) to win a game. Because those same peers and contemporaries claim he's as competitive minded as anyone ever when it comes to wanting to win.

I became an NBA fan in 1962 because Wilt. Was a fan of whichever team he played for. He was my favorite player right up until he walked away from the game while still having three to five very good years of basketball left in him. He signed with the ABA San Diego franchise, couldn't play for one year, so he coached the team, and sucked at it and got bored, and that was it for Wilt, he was done.

Watching Wilt all those years led me to the assumption that he did not have the killer instinct, and really didn't like basketball much. He REALLY liked volleyball.

CavaliersFTW
06-29-2016, 06:01 PM
I became an NBA fan in 1962 because Wilt. Was a fan of whichever team he played for. He was my favorite player right up until he walked away from the game while still having three to five very good years of basketball left in him. He signed with the ABA San Diego franchise, couldn't play for one year, so he coached the team, and sucked at it and got bored, and that was it for Wilt, he was done.

Watching Wilt all those years led me to the assumption that he did not have the killer instinct, and really didn't like basketball much. He REALLY liked volleyball.
I believe from the collection of testimony, and interviews I've collected over the years that he was sensitive to the media and critics. To the point that he probably did loathe at least that aspect of being involved with professional basketball towards the end of his career. During the years he played, I think in his interviews from both that time and later when he was being introspective during interviews he projects being a fiercely competitive person who hates losing and the branding of "loser" associated with it and hates it so much that he was extremely sensitive, perhaps to a fault, to criticism. Enough to walk away from the game prematurely (after that year of hiatus he could have returned - and played into his 40's). The testimony from others in my opinion affirms this. That he would play chess, marbles, anything against you and wouldn't let you leave whatever it was you decided to compete against him in until he'd thoroughly beaten you. I believe in the years he played NBA basketball he wanted to win at NBA basketball as much as anyone who's ever played. That doesn't mean I don't believe he may have been relieved to have finally left it. That's just my personal opinion on what I've gathered.

So, I don't think your observations are wrong, you could be more on the money than I am. And you quite fortunately have seen and lived through first hand much more of his career than I have. I only have what survives from the past. So your input is respected and appreciated, thank you.

Speaking of which you might like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pksKGvv_MZ4

Chronz
06-29-2016, 06:15 PM
And with that being said, even during his 3-peet dominance, Shaq couldn't pass, rebound or block shots like Wilt.

And you know who gave Shaq trouble................Anthony Mason. If Shaq couldn't move a player, his offensive game diminished considerably.

That Hayes quote was interesting, Hayes was the only guy whos team toppled KAJ Bruin squads, injured or not, the guy dropped 44 or whatever it was on Kareem.

As for Shaq, I guess every player has their kryptonite but at their best, I think Shaqs supreme efficiency and scoring ability trumps Wilt's advantages rebounding. You could never lock down either IMO, Wilt may be less susceptible due to his range but he would also never completely obliterate teams the way Shaq did.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 06:18 PM
I became an NBA fan in 1962 because Wilt. Was a fan of whichever team he played for. He was my favorite player right up until he walked away from the game while still having three to five very good years of basketball left in him. He signed with the ABA San Diego franchise, couldn't play for one year, so he coached the team, and sucked at it and got bored, and that was it for Wilt, he was done.

Watching Wilt all those years led me to the assumption that he did not have the killer instinct, and really didn't like basketball much. He REALLY liked volleyball.
Always wondered if that was the sport where his height really made him a man amongst boys. I know he credits training in the sand to him recovering at all from injury but was he historically elite at the sport?

europagnpilgrim
06-29-2016, 06:25 PM
Yes, Wilt lacked the 'killer instinct'. I don't believe he cared much about basketball.

i prefer to call it lack of killer stacked team, most compare his competitive nature only passed by Jordan as who wanted to win more

where does Jordan rank again on most people ranking as far as killer instinct?

how can Wilt get to more Finals as a old man if he lacked killer instinct? he played with more of a killer team, like i stated on here earlier if he had been drafted by the Lakers or Celtics then this killer instinct non sense would turn into well he had the most stacked team

its a team sport for a reason, not golf or singles tennis

Chronz
06-29-2016, 06:26 PM
Its hard to paint a picture of Wilt as the ultimate competitor when he played during Russells reign of terror and people have this picture of MJ's maniacal drive to win as the sign of an ultimate competitor. Someone who loathes losing so much he punches people or throws up in bathrooms before tip off.

When you hear things like Wilt believing he learned (or grew) more in defeat than Russell did in victory or that sometimes losing was a sweet release to the mounting pressure that comes with a winning streak, you just wonder if sometimes Wilt was alil too honest with his emotions, I dont doubt he wanted to win, its impossible not to when above all else, it would aid his legacy. Its just the man did more harm to himself with how open he was, "the interview" would have been crucified on the same level as "the decision" if it happened today, maybe worse.

JasonJohnHorn
06-29-2016, 07:08 PM
Its hard to paint a picture of Wilt as the ultimate competitor when he played during Russells reign of terror and people have this picture of MJ's maniacal drive to win as the sign of an ultimate competitor. Someone who loathes losing so much he punches people or throws up in bathrooms before tip off.

When you hear things like Wilt believing he learned (or grew) more in defeat than Russell did in victory or that sometimes losing was a sweet release to the mounting pressure that comes with a winning streak, you just wonder if sometimes Wilt was alil too honest with his emotions, I dont doubt he wanted to win, its impossible not to when above all else, it would aid his legacy. Its just the man did more harm to himself with how open he was, "the interview" would have been crucified on the same level as "the decision" if it happened today, maybe worse.

It sounds like a death wish. There is so much pressure, that the finality of something, whether good or bad, is a release. It is a feeling that I think most people are familiar with. Like with the Warriors winning streak... I doubt anybody will admit it on the team, but I bet they were all relieved when they finally lost. There would just be this heightened anxiety that continues every day. This playoff-level of basketball that must be maintained, but can't possibly be maintained for 100 games.

Then toward the end of the season it crept up again when it came to chasing the 73-win mark. I think it drained them. It's hard to keep that up.

I think when a player is looking back on something they know they can no longer change, there is a tendency to be more frank. I respect Wilt for that. I don't blame guys for not bringing it up, especially if it is during a playoff run (I think guys give up too much in post-game interviews--this is why I like Pop's approach).

But yeah... I don't hold that against Wilt. You got a link to that interview... I'd be curious to watch it. It's been a while.

TheMightyHumph
06-29-2016, 07:10 PM
i prefer to call it lack of killer stacked team, most compare his competitive nature only passed by Jordan as who wanted to win more

where does Jordan rank again on most people ranking as far as killer instinct?

how can Wilt get to more Finals as a old man if he lacked killer instinct? he played with more of a killer team, like i stated on here earlier if he had been drafted by the Lakers or Celtics then this killer instinct non sense would turn into well he had the most stacked team

its a team sport for a reason, not golf or singles tennis

Wilt was traded to a West/Baylor Lakers team that got to the Finals 5 times without him.

With him, Lakers got to the Finals 4 times, losing three of them.

Wilt beat Russell ONCE in the playoffs.

JasonJohnHorn
06-29-2016, 07:13 PM
Here's what Nate Thurmond said himself:

“I think the talent of the players today is more advanced. The Tracy McGradys and Kevin Garnetts - tall players who can dribble and pass like guards. David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal. These players are quicker and stronger than the ones I had to face,” said Thurmond, remarkably well-kept for 59.

"“Wilt was a giant. But 60 percent of his points came on fadeaways. He was a powerful man who didn't always play that way,” said Thurmond, who does community-relations work for the Warriors and owns a barbecue restaurant in San Francisco.

“Shaquille O'Neal, he's a different player. He presents a problem none of us had to face.

“He's more than 300 pounds, with speed, power and quickness. Most of the big guys I played against were lumbering types, nothing like Shaquille. I just feel that at my 6-11, 235, I would have had a problem with him. He moves people out of the way, dislodges them. Wilt was more finesse.

“How could I have had a solution for Shaquille? He's 100 pounds heavier than me.”"

Take it for what it is. I'm out.

Shaq was a 100 pounds heavier than guys in his OWN era.

And Thurmond notes that Wilt used the fade away a lot: how would Shaq be able to guard that? How would anybody be able to guard a 7-footer with a fadeaway? People had a hard time guard Jordan's fadeaway and he was 6 inches shorter.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 09:54 PM
Wilt was traded to a West/Baylor Lakers team that got to the Finals 5 times without him.

With him, Lakers got to the Finals 4 times, losing three of them.

Wilt beat Russell ONCE in the playoffs.

The team wasn´t the same tho, they dont make the Finals in those years without Wilt imo. Its not much of a reach either, Baylor had lost alot by the time Wilt showed up and he refused to reign himself in.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 10:04 PM
It sounds like a death wish. There is so much pressure, that the finality of something, whether good or bad, is a release. It is a feeling that I think most people are familiar with. Like with the Warriors winning streak... I doubt anybody will admit it on the team, but I bet they were all relieved when they finally lost. There would just be this heightened anxiety that continues every day. This playoff-level of basketball that must be maintained, but can't possibly be maintained for 100 games.

Then toward the end of the season it crept up again when it came to chasing the 73-win mark. I think it drained them. It's hard to keep that up.

I think when a player is looking back on something they know they can no longer change, there is a tendency to be more frank. I respect Wilt for that. I don't blame guys for not bringing it up, especially if it is during a playoff run (I think guys give up too much in post-game interviews--this is why I like Pop's approach).

But yeah... I don't hold that against Wilt. You got a link to that interview... I'd be curious to watch it. It's been a while.

I get him but he still put his foot in his mouth. Like I dont hold the 20,000 womens thing against him either, but there was alot of backlash for that when it came out. It seems he had a knack for bad timing or just bad luck.

Like ¨the interview¨I referred to was suppose to be printed AFTER the playoffs, but SI brought it out during the the playoff series against the Celtics IIRC. In it he sort of trashes the coach and it allegedly killed team morale but Wilt didn´t think it would have been a big deal had it come out when it was intended to. Ill see if I can find the interview or the specifics on the context but the guy needed a PR team before it was even a thing.

Chronz
06-29-2016, 10:11 PM
Shaq was a 100 pounds heavier than guys in his OWN era.

And Thurmond notes that Wilt used the fade away a lot: how would Shaq be able to guard that? How would anybody be able to guard a 7-footer with a fadeaway? People had a hard time guard Jordan's fadeaway and he was 6 inches shorter.

The difference was that defenses wanted Wilt to fadeaway, not only did it eliminate him rebounding his own miss, it was at best a .400-.450 proposition. So you´re talking about a .80-90 PPP type of skill, which is fine if its only a piece of the entree as opposed to the main dish it was in his youth. When he wasnt commanded to score at will, he was much more selective with it and he found the proper balance. Wilt wanted to prove he could do more than just dunk, but at his best he was taking mostly high% looks and leading his team in scoring sporadically. More bank shots, assists and dipper dunks off rebounds, less fadeaways and lane clogging. Wilts problem was he didn´t have the best of hands and he never developed a great hook shot like Shaq because of it. I feel he lacked the touch and its why he focused on banking shots off the back board, even when he was fading away. Dude was literally too strong to go up soft unless it was a finger roll above the rim. Those are the kind of shots that would be less effective today imo.

europagnpilgrim
06-30-2016, 01:12 AM
Its hard to paint a picture of Wilt as the ultimate competitor when he played during Russells reign of terror and people have this picture of MJ's maniacal drive to win as the sign of an ultimate competitor. Someone who loathes losing so much he punches people or throws up in bathrooms before tip off.

When you hear things like Wilt believing he learned (or grew) more in defeat than Russell did in victory or that sometimes losing was a sweet release to the mounting pressure that comes with a winning streak, you just wonder if sometimes Wilt was alil too honest with his emotions, I dont doubt he wanted to win, its impossible not to when above all else, it would aid his legacy. Its just the man did more harm to himself with how open he was, "the interview" would have been crucified on the same level as "the decision" if it happened today, maybe worse.

I see where you coming from but where was Jordan maniacal drive to win when he got swept by the 80's dynasty Bird led Celtics early as where Dipper went 6/7 games each time against that super dynasty back in Russell's day and Jordan against the Pistons before he broke through in 91'? I mean a stronger team will eventually beat the lesser team no matter how strong the drive of the lesser teams best player is

I am glad the Dipper went to a non contender just so people today wouldn't say his team was super stacked that's why he won all the rings, along with the weak era poppycock

they just didn't have the overall teams to win but both kept the games/series very interesting just off pure impact/drive to win, the Giant always gets more heat in defeat

I think learning comes from knowing what the team needs to get stronger as a whole in defeat, Owner/GM type stuff, nothing to be ashamed of from neither Jordan/Dipper because they both performed/competed at high level

Lebron is basically this era Dipper with one more ring to his resume, SF version that is

are you talking about 'the interview' where he called the league bush? if so then of course that hurt him on a high level since he was bashing the corp. league that was paying him

just my 2 cents

europagnpilgrim
06-30-2016, 01:24 AM
Wilt was traded to a West/Baylor Lakers team that got to the Finals 5 times without him.

With him, Lakers got to the Finals 4 times, losing three of them.

Wilt beat Russell ONCE in the playoffs.

that's why I said if Wilt had been drafted rookie year to those Lakers with Baylor/West with youth on they side, when he got to Lakers him and West were old and I think Baylor had to retire from the league because of injuries/old

now add those Finals up and they would have won those early Finals and probably would have lost later but he would have at least the number of rings that Magic has, 5

which would easily place him as the best/GOAT/most dominant ever with a Lakers jersey to hype it up even more, he would still put up monster games but would have been the ultimate winner doing so, on the ultimate franchise

he got to the team as a old man version compared to his early days, that does matter right?

Dipper also choked a 3-1 lead I think against Russell prior to joining Lakers, but a young and dangerous trio of Baylor/Dipper/West would have been too much for any team had it happened, but it didn't . I get that part

More-Than-Most
06-30-2016, 01:30 AM
But YO.... How many rings does he have?

europagnpilgrim
06-30-2016, 01:33 AM
The difference was that defenses wanted Wilt to fadeaway, not only did it eliminate him rebounding his own miss, it was at best a .400-.450 proposition. So you´re talking about a .80-90 PPP type of skill, which is fine if its only a piece of the entree as opposed to the main dish it was in his youth. When he wasnt commanded to score at will, he was much more selective with it and he found the proper balance. Wilt wanted to prove he could do more than just dunk, but at his best he was taking mostly high% looks and leading his team in scoring sporadically. More bank shots, assists and dipper dunks off rebounds, less fadeaways and lane clogging. Wilts problem was he didn´t have the best of hands and he never developed a great hook shot like Shaq because of it. I feel he lacked the touch and its why he focused on banking shots off the back board, even when he was fading away. Dude was literally too strong to go up soft unless it was a finger roll above the rim. Those are the kind of shots that would be less effective today imo.

I tend to think he showed an array of those type of moves to not seriously hurt nobody and wasn't challenged/talk **** to by those others and wanted to show that he wasn't just this Giant who relied on dunking but I could be wrong, just my 2 cents

like saying I can beat yall at your own game/style and still add in the Dipper dunk when necessary

now according to most on here he would be challenged by all these great Centers of 90's-present and they would get the Dipper dunk at a high rate where he gets to break arms/wrist in the process, he would exert his innate strength and try to destroy those who challenged him, so he would be far more efficient/effective/dominant by using his physical supreme prowess even more so in todays competition

he could get position on the block as low as he wanted easier than Shaq and we all know how beasty Diesel was day 1

that's downright scary

TheMightyHumph
06-30-2016, 12:29 PM
that's why I said if Wilt had been drafted rookie year to those Lakers with Baylor/West with youth on they side, when he got to Lakers him and West were old and I think Baylor had to retire from the league because of injuries/old

now add those Finals up and they would have won those early Finals and probably would have lost later but he would have at least the number of rings that Magic has, 5

which would easily place him as the best/GOAT/most dominant ever with a Lakers jersey to hype it up even more, he would still put up monster games but would have been the ultimate winner doing so, on the ultimate franchise

he got to the team as a old man version compared to his early days, that does matter right?

Dipper also choked a 3-1 lead I think against Russell prior to joining Lakers, but a young and dangerous trio of Baylor/Dipper/West would have been too much for any team had it happened, but it didn't . I get that part

I'll just add that Wilt couldn't beat Russell.

Wrigheyes4MVP
06-30-2016, 02:10 PM
You can only compare a player to what he did in his own era. Wilt dominated his era more than any player ever could. That puts him in the conversation with MJ for best player ever. No other player came close to Wilt's size, strength, and athleticism back then, but that is not Wilt's fault. A dominate athlete in today's NBA would be like 7'5", 320 pounds, and can run like a gazelle. That's what Wilt was. You can't take credit away from him for being an athletic anomaly in his time. That is all part of what made him great.

TheMightyHumph
06-30-2016, 03:15 PM
But YO.... How many rings does he have?

Two NBA Championship rings

Chronz
06-30-2016, 03:30 PM
You can only compare a player to what he did in his own era. Wilt dominated his era more than any player ever could. That puts him in the conversation with MJ for best player ever. No other player came close to Wilt's size, strength, and athleticism back then, but that is not Wilt's fault. A dominate athlete in today's NBA would be like 7'5", 320 pounds, and can run like a gazelle. That's what Wilt was. You can't take credit away from him for being an athletic anomaly in his time. That is all part of what made him great.

Comparing vs their own eras, Shaq dominated to a similar extent in his and was more dominant in his playoff wins IMO.

Chronz
06-30-2016, 04:09 PM
I'll just add that Wilt couldn't beat Russell.

But when he beat him, boy did he whoop his ***. There were times when Wilt took what would be a lottery team without him, to within a whisker of defeating the dynastic Celtics. Thats nothing to scoff at

Shlumpledink
06-30-2016, 04:42 PM
It is amazing how in basketball the athletic freaks of nature relative to the competition tend to be the most dominant. Wilt, Jordan, Lebron, Shaq. They've all had legs up on their competition athletically and totally cashed in. I guess the difference between them and other freaks of nature is they weren't complacent with their talent and worked on their games.

If Wilt didn't work on his game at all, I'm sure he'd still be a dominant force, but what makes him transcendent is he worked on his touch. Imagine if you were bigger and stronger than everyone else on the court, not only that but you were faster than most as well. Wouldn't you just dunk everything and dominate? Wilt could have done that and it'd be easy, but he didn't.

Shlumpledink
06-30-2016, 04:46 PM
I'll just add that Wilt couldn't beat Russell.

Russell played on some of the most stacked teams (relative to the rest of the league) that basketball has ever seen.

TheMightyHumph
06-30-2016, 05:40 PM
But when he beat him, boy did he whoop his ***. There were times when Wilt took what would be a lottery team without him, to within a whisker of defeating the dynastic Celtics. Thats nothing to scoff at

After watching Wilt for 11 years, I really do scoff at it.

TheMightyHumph
06-30-2016, 05:57 PM
Russell played on some of the most stacked teams (relative to the rest of the league) that basketball has ever seen.

Wilt's '68 Sixers and '69 Lakers were better than Russell's '68 and '69 Celtics. to no avail

Chronz
06-30-2016, 09:46 PM
After watching Wilt for 11 years, I really do scoff at it.

Why?

Why do you blame him for Butch in 69?


What of the injuries in 68?


Boston and LA were similar teams in 69, in fact, Boston had the superior SRS if it had existed at the time, I dont deny thats a failure in itself but it was entirely due to Elgin/Butch not adhering to Wilt's style of play despite he being the only one who knew what it took to slay the Celtics.

europagnpilgrim
06-30-2016, 10:29 PM
I'll just add that Wilt couldn't beat Russell.

Don't forget to add that Russell also said in his own words that Dipper was better/more dominant/better defender and whatever else you can think of

Dipper couldn't beat a dynasty Celtics team that won 8 in a row and 11 in 13 yrs until he got the proper support cast in a team sport, if this was 1 on 1 Dipper won all the rings, but they weren't playing golf nor tennis
Jordan couldn't beat a dynasty until they all got old/injured/expansion draft

add on but make sure you add all of it so you wont get ish confused

europagnpilgrim
06-30-2016, 10:35 PM
Comparing vs their own eras, Shaq dominated to a similar extent in his and was more dominant in his playoff wins IMO.

its a reason I labeled Diesel a modern day Dipper his Orlando/LSU days

dominant indeed its just the original authentic always trumps the replica

TheMightyHumph
06-30-2016, 10:41 PM
Why?

Why do you blame him for Butch in 69?


What of the injuries in 68?


Boston and LA were similar teams in 69, in fact, Boston had the superior SRS if it had existed at the time, I dont deny thats a failure in itself but it was entirely due to Elgin/Butch not adhering to Wilt's style of play despite he being the only one who knew what it took to slay the Celtics.

I blame Wilt because....

A) NBA basketball is a physical game, ane NO ONE knew this better than Wilt, but he would not get physical, even if it meant losing.

B) Russell was smarter than Wilt, and was in Wilt's head. Bill always had the psychological advantage.

And the one playoff series that Wilt beat Russell, it was Russell's first season as player/coach.

Turned out Russell was a better coach than Wilt too.

And speaking of 1968, Game 7 of ECF in Philly, why did Wilt only take one shot in the 2nd half of that crushing loss?

TheMightyHumph
06-30-2016, 10:51 PM
Don't forget to add that Russell also said in his own words that Dipper was better/more dominant/better defender and whatever else you can think of

Dipper couldn't beat a dynasty Celtics team that won 8 in a row and 11 in 13 yrs until he got the proper support cast in a team sport, if this was 1 on 1 Dipper won all the rings, but they weren't playing golf nor tennis
Jordan couldn't beat a dynasty until they all got old/injured/expansion draft

add on but make sure you add all of it so you wont get ish confused


First of all, Wilt said the same things about Russell, publicly.

Second, you say Wilt beat the team that won 8 Titles in a row until he got proper support, and that is true.

However, he didn't beat the team that won 11 of 13 Titles. The last two Titles of those of 11 of 13 were vs. Wilt, with an even older Bill Russell.

tyhgu
06-30-2016, 11:53 PM
My goodness,Wilt never ceases to amaze me.http://yeahonlinemarketing.com/apple/images/24.gifhttp://yeahonlinemarketing.com/apple/images/6.gif
http://yeahonlinemarketing.com/apple/images/4.gif

europagnpilgrim
07-01-2016, 12:46 AM
First of all, Wilt said the same things about Russell, publicly.

Second, you say Wilt beat the team that won 8 Titles in a row until he got proper support, and that is true.

However, he didn't beat the team that won 11 of 13 Titles. The last two Titles of those of 11 of 13 were vs. Wilt, with an even older Bill Russell.

"Wilt is playing better than I used to -- passing off, coming out to set up screens, picking up guys outside, and sacrificing himself for team play."

-- Bill Russell


Put Bob Cousy, Bill Sharman, Sam Jones, K.C. Jones, Tommy Heinsohn, Frank Ramsey and John Havlicek on my teams and let Russell have the guys I had to play with," Chamberlain often said. "Then I would have been the one sipping the champagne at the end of every season."

"He sent me through hell so many nights," Russell said of Chamberlain

Take the night he scored the 62. The Celtics won the game, 145-136. The Celtics led by 31 in the fourth quarter. Wilt scored 42 in the second half, but his team was never in the game. Russell fans say that was an all-too-familiar scenario when these two played, especially in the first five or six years of their duels. (Russell and his entire team was supremely better as a whole, Dipper made it competitive which is remarkable in itself)

"I haven't had any sleep all week," he(Russell) said. "Every time I went out on the court, that guy seemed to grow a little taller."

from the interviews I have read/watched he never claimed Russell to be all of those to him but he would mention how he had to go to Boston Garden and face that dynamic team with Russell leading the way which made it even tougher, nice try though

he gave Bill his props no doubt but not how Bill gave him on a individual scale

and though Bill had aged(as did Dipper)it was still a better cast as Dipper stated in the quote above, give him those players and Russell his and you would be saying Dipper should have won all those rings because of his support cast

europagnpilgrim
07-01-2016, 12:53 AM
Here's what Nate Thurmond said himself:

“I think the talent of the players today is more advanced. The Tracy McGradys and Kevin Garnetts - tall players who can dribble and pass like guards. David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal. These players are quicker and stronger than the ones I had to face,” said Thurmond, remarkably well-kept for 59.

"“Wilt was a giant. But 60 percent of his points came on fadeaways. He was a powerful man who didn't always play that way,” said Thurmond, who does community-relations work for the Warriors and owns a barbecue restaurant in San Francisco.

“Shaquille O'Neal, he's a different player. He presents a problem none of us had to face.

“He's more than 300 pounds, with speed, power and quickness. Most of the big guys I played against were lumbering types, nothing like Shaquille. I just feel that at my 6-11, 235, I would have had a problem with him. He moves people out of the way, dislodges them. Wilt was more finesse.

“How could I have had a solution for Shaquille? He's 100 pounds heavier than me.”"

Take it for what it is. I'm out.

Wilt can make it as easy or as tough on you as he wants," said Ray Scott, the Detroit Pistons' burly 6-10 center-forward. Sure, he expects guys playing against him to play as hard as he does, and he respects you for it.

Wayne Embry of the Cincinnati Royals has said of Wilt: "He has muscles he doesn't even know about."

Jim Brown, the great and powerful Cleveland Browns fullback, one of Chamberlain's close friends, calls Wilt "the strongest athlete in the world, bar none."

Wilt had very dense muscles. He was way stronger than he would appear just from looking at him. That was his genetics. Walt Bellamy, no weakling himself, says Chamberlain's physical strength is his greatest asset in basketball, not his height, which is 7-1, nor his reach, which is way up there.

Bellamy claims that on "pure physical strength," Chamberlainis in a class by himself in the NBA. "The gap between Wilt and the next strongest player is a big one."


"There are a few players who can jump with Wilt," Bellamy said. "There's no one, though, who can outmuscle him for the ball, or consistently out-position him under the boards, or impede his dunk shot and his driving for the basket."

PowerHouse
07-01-2016, 03:48 PM
that's why I said if Wilt had been drafted rookie year to those Lakers with Baylor/West with youth on they side, when he got to Lakers him and West were old and I think Baylor had to retire from the league because of injuries/old

now add those Finals up and they would have won those early Finals and probably would have lost later but he would have at least the number of rings that Magic has, 5




If young Wilt and Baylor were playing together in the 59-60 season I dont see them having the miserable 25-50 record that enabled them to have the #2 overall pick that turned into Jerry West.

Chronz
07-01-2016, 05:29 PM
I blame Wilt because....

A) NBA basketball is a physical game, ane NO ONE knew this better than Wilt, but he would not get physical, even if it meant losing.

B) Russell was smarter than Wilt, and was in Wilt's head. Bill always had the psychological advantage.

And the one playoff series that Wilt beat Russell, it was Russell's first season as player/coach.

Turned out Russell was a better coach than Wilt too.

And speaking of 1968, Game 7 of ECF in Philly, why did Wilt only take one shot in the 2nd half of that crushing loss?
A) He was still the most physical specimen in the game, its why guys of the era flopped against him. And I disagree with the opinion that he didn't try to win at all costs, come playoffs, he abandoned many principles he believed in.

B) Being smarter than someone doesn't make you a better player tho, nor does it offset your advantages with your supporting cast.


That one season is just an example of the type of negligence Wilt put up with for many seasons, yet he was never thoroughly dismantled to such a degree. The woe is me card doesn't work one iota with Bill Russell, not when his management was decades ahead of the competition in a league that prevented player movement/freedom. It was basically a monopoly on championships.

G7. The team had trouble getting him the ball and he wasn't aggressive enough, Im going to guesstimate the figures cuz I dont want to research the numbers but Wilt was typically given the ball 47 times in a half and in the 2nd half of that G7 he received like 15 post entree passes. It was really jarring, Russell wasn't even guarding Wilt to close that series, he had switched himself onto Chet (iirc) in order to clamp down the Sixers main source of offense with all the injuries they were dealt. Even Wilt himself was severely hobbled, a result of him insisting on playing so hard during the RS.

In todays NBA, Wilt would be preserved and would've performed at peak efficiency.

TheMightyHumph
07-01-2016, 05:42 PM
A) He was still the most physical specimen in the game, its why guys of the era flopped against him. And I disagree with the opinion that he didn't try to win at all costs, come playoffs, he abandoned many principles he believed in.

B) Being smarter than someone doesn't make you a better player tho, nor does it offset your advantages with your supporting cast.


That one season is just an example of the type of negligence Wilt put up with for many seasons, yet he was never thoroughly dismantled to such a degree. The woe is me card doesn't work one iota with Bill Russell, not when his management was decades ahead of the competition in a league that prevented player movement/freedom. It was basically a monopoly on championships.

G7. The team had trouble getting him the ball and he wasn't aggressive enough, Im going to guesstimate the figures cuz I dont want to research the numbers but Wilt was typically given the ball 47 times in a half and in the 2nd half of that G7 he received like 15 post entree passes. It was really jarring, Russell wasn't even guarding Wilt to close that series, he had switched himself onto Chet (iirc) in order to clamp down the Sixers main source of offense with all the injuries they were dealt. Even Wilt himself was severely hobbled, a result of him insisting on playing so hard during the RS.

In todays NBA, Wilt would be preserved and would've performed at peak efficiency.

I just know what I saw as I was a Wilt fan, and was incredibly disappointed in his offensive performance in crunch time.

He didn't choke when it came to rebounding and shotblocking.

And who flopped against Wilt? Chamberlain won 7 scoring Titles and never fouled in a game despite averaging over 45 mpg over his career.

europagnpilgrim
07-01-2016, 05:44 PM
If young Wilt and Baylor were playing together in the 59-60 season I dont see them having the miserable 25-50 record that enabled them to have the #2 overall pick that turned into Jerry West.

Then the Lakers would have just added another lethal threat to the team some how some way,they stole 5 titles from the Minny franchise so it wouldn't have been hard to add on to a dynamic tandem that Dipper/Baylor would have been, Lakers always had top level talent even in the 90's when they didn't win a title they still had 50 win teams and end up flipping Divac for Kobe and signed Diesel as a free agent coming off a 53 win or so season, nothing new under the sun

you are right though they wouldn't have had a miserable season to have such a high pick but it wouldn't have surprised me if they would have hi jacked him from some team a few years later or on draft day

bagwell368
07-02-2016, 10:21 AM
Russell directed his blocks to teammates or himself. The year before Wilt came in the league two stiffs 6' 8" and Russell is what u had. By '65 when I started to watch every team had a 7 footer or very close. But they were athletically weak (outside of br, wilt, and thurmond) after all Lucas is hof shooting from his sternum. Hakeem and those two are probably best ever. Ill take Hakeem