for the people who discredit Wilt's achievements

[bostonthreeparty]

Chamberlain had to play against Bill Russell and Red Auerbach Celtics teams for his entire Career.

in his rookie year he was playing with 6 other people 6'10" or Taller, and he put up 37.6 PPG ,27.0 RBG and 2.3 APG
so it's not like he was dwarfing over people by like 5 inches, he still had some people up in his size range 

 

[bittersweet]

There was a lack of competition back then.

 

[xtapolapacetl]

Originally Posted by Mister Friendly

Xtapolapacetl wrote:

---

Mister Friendly wrote:

---

People are stupid they act as if sport was invented in the 1980s?

In a way it was. Definitely reinvented. Modern basketball was created between 1976 and 1979 because of three factors:

1. NBA-ABA merger
2. Introduction of the 3-point line
3. Magic and Bird

And it went on to become a very different sport from the game of the early 60s when Wilt put up his monster numbers. The sport we today enjoy definitely has its roots in the 80s. The style of basketball in 2010 is most definitely closer to the style of basketball in 1985 than 1960 was to 1985.


 

  Well the 3 things you mention all work in favor of Wilt.

1.The NBA-ABA merger would make the leauge more watered down then because you have more teams, making each team less stacked.

2.The 3 point line spreads the game out and makes its harder to double the post without suffering consequences.( a 33 pct increase in ponts given up for allowing an open 3.

3. And Magic and Bird have nothing to do with Wilt;s production. You been watching too many NBA Home videos. Maybe they got a few more people interested in Basketball but stars like Jordan,Barkley,Malone,Stockton,Isiah Thomas,Olajuwon,Ewing and Mullin were all playing the game before they came along




1. Wow, what a stupid counter-argument. So hypothetically, winning a bunch of championships in a league consisting of 2 teams would be a greater accomplishment than winning a bunch of championships in a league consisting of 50 teams. Basically, more teams means more teams that you might not match up well against. On surface, he 1994 Denver Nuggets and 2007 Golden State Warriors

2. Or maybe it changes the game from a big man oriented inside game to a more perimeter oriented guard-friendly game. When Wilt played, the focus was to get the ball to your big man. Why try to shoot the ball from 25 feet when getting it to your big man will get you the same amount of points? And let's not forget that in Wilt's early years, the game was even more big man friendly because not only did they not have the 3-pointer, but the 3 second area was extremely small:

I can't begin to imagine what numbers a prime Shaq would put up with such a small 3 second area and a bunch of 6'8-6'9ers guarding him.

3. I mentioned Magic and Bird because they did change the game. Every decade up until the 80s has been dominated by big men, that is centers, with any guard/forward being a distant second: 40s: Mikan, 50s: Mikan/Russell, 60s: Russell/Wilt, 70s: Kareem. Magic and Bird ended this and ever since the league has been dominated by perimeter players, with a couple of lone exceptions.

in his rookie year he was playing with 6 other people 6'10" or Taller, and he put up 37.6 PPG ,27.0 RBG and 2.3 APG


Care to mention these people?

There wasn't a single even remotely good player who was 6'10 or above in Wilt's rookie year. The likes of Russell and Pettit were all listed 6'9 or lower, about 5 inches shorter than Wilt. The first quality player who came close to Wilt's size Wilt encountered was the 6'11 Walt Bellamy, who came into the league in 1961.

 

[tommykairaa]

/thread?

bwhahaa

 

[SplinterMatic319]

Originally Posted by blacktopking319

how come nobody talks about when wilt and kareem were playing at the same time and facing the same competition

wilt averaged 20,18,4 as a 34 year old man and kareem averaged 31,16,3 as a 23 year old

we all knew kareem stayed prevalent well into the 80's.........how do you think a prime wilt would have done in the 80's when even a old wilt could still match up with a young kareem

  

i like how no one commented on this............yea because yur mind=blown

 

[drop knee 101]

Just leave the era arguments out of it and appreciate history. You will just make yourself mad if you try to make any justification about whos better than who. Who cares? Appreciate the history. Better yet, learn about the history and you will surely appreciate your favorite sport much more.



And im not just talking about stats. Anyone can shout out stats.  Pick up some autobiographies and read through them.  There are some good reads that are overlooked by the masses of "knowledgeable fans"

 

[mister friendly]

Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl

Originally Posted by Mister Friendly

Xtapolapacetl wrote:

---

Mister Friendly wrote:

---

People are stupid they act as if sport was invented in the 1980s?

In a way it was. Definitely reinvented. Modern basketball was created between 1976 and 1979 because of three factors:

1. NBA-ABA merger
2. Introduction of the 3-point line
3. Magic and Bird

And it went on to become a very different sport from the game of the early 60s when Wilt put up his monster numbers. The sport we today enjoy definitely has its roots in the 80s. The style of basketball in 2010 is most definitely closer to the style of basketball in 1985 than 1960 was to 1985.

 

  Well the 3 things you mention all work in favor of Wilt.

1.The NBA-ABA merger would make the leauge more watered down then because you have more teams, making each team less stacked.

2.The 3 point line spreads the game out and makes its harder to double the post without suffering consequences.( a 33 pct increase in ponts given up for allowing an open 3.

3. And Magic and Bird have nothing to do with Wilt;s production. You been watching too many NBA Home videos. Maybe they got a few more people interested in Basketball but stars like Jordan,Barkley,Malone,Stockton,Isiah Thomas,Olajuwon,Ewing and Mullin were all playing the game before they came along




1. Wow, what a stupid counter-argument. So hypothetically, winning a bunch of championships in a league consisting of 2 teams would be a greater accomplishment than winning a bunch of championships in a league consisting of 50 teams. Basically, more teams means more teams that you might not match up well against. On surface, he 1994 Denver Nuggets and 2007 Golden State Warriors

2. Or maybe it changes the game from a big man oriented inside game to a more perimeter oriented guard-friendly game. When Wilt played, the focus was to get the ball to your big man. Why try to shoot the ball from 25 feet when getting it to your big man will get you the same amount of points? And let's not forget that in Wilt's early years, the game was even more big man friendly because not only did they not have the 3-pointer, but the 3 second area was extremely small:

I can't begin to imagine what numbers a prime Shaq would put up with such a small 3 second area and a bunch of 6'8-6'9ers guarding him.

3. I mentioned Magic and Bird because they did change the game. Every decade up until the 80s has been dominated by big men, that is centers, with any guard/forward being a distant second: 40s: Mikan, 50s: Mikan/Russell, 60s: Russell/Wilt, 70s: Kareem. Magic and Bird ended this and ever since the league has been dominated by perimeter players, with a couple of lone exceptions.

in his rookie year he was playing with 6 other people 6'10" or Taller, and he put up 37.6 PPG ,27.0 RBG and 2.3 APG


Care to mention these people?

There wasn't a single even remotely good player who was 6'10 or above in Wilt's rookie year. The likes of Russell and Pettit were all listed 6'9 or lower, about 5 inches shorter than Wilt. The first quality player who came close to Wilt's size Wilt encountered was the 6'11 Walt Bellamy, who came into the league in 1961.


   1. There are only so many great Basketball players available. If you have a leauge with 30 teams you're gonna end with more un-great Basketball players on rosters therefore you're have weaker teams and bigger mismatch games. In the Wilts era, you had to be a great Basketball player to make the NBA with only 8-12 teams.


2.So its Wilt's fault that he played in a big man friendly era?

 Its like knocking Tom Brady for throwing 50 TDs in this now pass friendly leauge. Nobody saying Wilt would average 50/25 but he would still dominate today.


3.The leauge hasnt been dominated by perimeter players since 1980s. Maybe in terms of popularity and capturing the audiences imagine. But with the exception of Jordan's Bulls almost every championship caliber  team has featured as a Dominant man or been a complete team. Despite permieter players popularity, dominating the post is still the surest way to win championships.

The Celtics of 1980s (McHale and Parish)The Lakers of 1980s(Kareem Abdul Jabbar) Rockets( Hakeem)  early 00 Lakers( Shaq) 00 Spurs(Duncan)09 Lakers (Gasol)


Y'all are crazy if think Wilt Chamberlain would just be another guy today.

 

[yeeupp]

Well, OP, did he smash 20,000-30,000 females?

 

[651akathepaul]

Originally Posted by LetItShine24

wilt would be a dwight howard. if he played during the 90s, his dominance would not be as much considering his opponents(shaq, hakeem,robinson,etc)

Not at all man. Wilt was rather smooth and had that athletic grace. He was very fluent with the basketball while Dwight is more like a brick with arms.

 

[letitshine24]

Originally Posted by royster

For the people who say "he played small, below average competition", I hope you know the game played back then was 20x diff than the game played now.

Fouls and hand checking were less accounted for and the beating wilt took when he played compares to no one nowadays sheesh. Y'all give him no credit dude was getting teeth busted out and dropping 50 a game....

The people who discredit him, never saw him play.

And you did? Dude was playing against nobodys. Put him in the league now, he would avg 15 and 10.

 

[royster]

Originally Posted by LetItShine24

Originally Posted by royster

For the people who say "he played small, below average competition", I hope you know the game played back then was 20x diff than the game played now.

Fouls and hand checking were less accounted for and the beating wilt took when he played compares to no one nowadays sheesh. Y'all give him no credit dude was getting teeth busted out and dropping 50 a game....

The people who discredit him, never saw him play.

And you did? Dude was playing against nobodys. Put him in the league now, he would avg 15 and 10.

Yes I did.
Of course I didn't dummy, just a way to end the argument since no one is ever going to know how good Wilt would've been in this era.
I'm just saying ya'll need to read up on Wilt and the athlete he was, he wasn't just another big tall guy.

Lucky for some of y'all statistics for blocks, and steals btw, weren't being put out yet

ya'll would've been hating, even more so, on this man if those were around....
In a guard orientated League who would put a body on him, for real?
I'm just giving credit where due.

 

[mister friendly]

LetItShine24 wrote:

---

royster wrote:

---

For the people who say "he played small, below average competition", I hope you know the game played back then was 20x diff than the game played now.

Fouls and hand checking were less accounted for and the beating wilt took when he played compares to no one nowadays sheesh. Y'all give him no credit dude was getting teeth busted out and dropping 50 a game....

The people who discredit him, never saw him play.
And you did? Dude was playing against nobodys. Put him in the league now, he would avg 15 and 10.




   You're right! ....Due to your convincing argument....I now think Wilt Chamberlain would be a mediocre player in today's NBA. He was playing against nobodys!!! The NBA didnt have any great players til Magic and Bird came along. Thanks for showing me the error in my thinking.

 

[SplinterMatic319]

smh 15 and 10? im speechless that someone would even say that...............how many skilled AND athletic 7 footers do we even have in the NBA right now???

 

[dmbrhs]

Seriously, read the ENTIRE chapter Bill Simmons wrote and even try and defend Wilt. I know NT loves to hate Simmons ( because NT likes to discredit people who know what they're talking about), but he ethered Wilt with no possible counter argument.

 

[mister friendly]

dmbrhs wrote:

---

Seriously, read the ENTIRE chapter Bill Simmons wrote and even try and defend Wilt. I know NT loves to hate Simmons ( because NT likes to discredit people who know what they're talking about), but he ethered Wilt with no possible counter argument.


   Bill Simmons is a good persuasive writer but he's an absolute Celtic homer. Its his book, is he gonna have a valid counterargument and is there fact checking afterwards? No.

You cant what he says in his book as absolute TRUTH.

If you totally believe what any author states in their book, I hope you don't start reading political books.

 

[xtapolapacetl]

Originally Posted by Mister Friendly

Xtapolapacetl wrote:

---

Mister Friendly wrote:

---

Xtapolapacetl wrote:

---

Mister Friendly wrote:

---

People are stupid they act as if sport was invented in the 1980s?

In a way it was. Definitely reinvented. Modern basketball was created between 1976 and 1979 because of three factors:

1. NBA-ABA merger
2. Introduction of the 3-point line
3. Magic and Bird

And it went on to become a very different sport from the game of the early 60s when Wilt put up his monster numbers. The sport we today enjoy definitely has its roots in the 80s. The style of basketball in 2010 is most definitely closer to the style of basketball in 1985 than 1960 was to 1985.


 

  Well the 3 things you mention all work in favor of Wilt.

1.The NBA-ABA merger would make the leauge more watered down then because you have more teams, making each team less stacked.

2.The 3 point line spreads the game out and makes its harder to double the post without suffering consequences.( a 33 pct increase in ponts given up for allowing an open 3.

3. And Magic and Bird have nothing to do with Wilt;s production. You been watching too many NBA Home videos. Maybe they got a few more people interested in Basketball but stars like Jordan,Barkley,Malone,Stockton,Isiah Thomas,Olajuwon,Ewing and Mullin were all playing the game before they came along




1. Wow, what a stupid counter-argument. So hypothetically, winning a bunch of championships in a league consisting of 2 teams would be a greater accomplishment than winning a bunch of championships in a league consisting of 50 teams. Basically, more teams means more teams that you might not match up well against. On surface, he 1994 Denver Nuggets and 2007 Golden State Warriors

2. Or maybe it changes the game from a big man oriented inside game to a more perimeter oriented guard-friendly game. When Wilt played, the focus was to get the ball to your big man. Why try to shoot the ball from 25 feet when getting it to your big man will get you the same amount of points? And let's not forget that in Wilt's early years, the game was even more big man friendly because not only did they not have the 3-pointer, but the 3 second area was extremely small:

I can't begin to imagine what numbers a prime Shaq would put up with such a small 3 second area and a bunch of 6'8-6'9ers guarding him.

3. I mentioned Magic and Bird because they did change the game. Every decade up until the 80s has been dominated by big men, that is centers, with any guard/forward being a distant second: 40s: Mikan, 50s: Mikan/Russell, 60s: Russell/Wilt, 70s: Kareem. Magic and Bird ended this and ever since the league has been dominated by perimeter players, with a couple of lone exceptions.

in his rookie year he was playing with 6 other people 6'10" or Taller, and he put up 37.6 PPG ,27.0 RBG and 2.3 APG


Care to mention these people?

There wasn't a single even remotely good player who was 6'10 or above in Wilt's rookie year. The likes of Russell and Pettit were all listed 6'9 or lower, about 5 inches shorter than Wilt. The first quality player who came close to Wilt's size Wilt encountered was the 6'11 Walt Bellamy, who came into the league in 1961.


   1. There are only so many great Basketball players available. If you have a leauge with 30 teams you're gonna end with more un-great Basketball players on rosters therefore you're have weaker teams and bigger mismatch games. In the Wilts era, you had to be a great Basketball player to make the NBA with only 8-12 teams.


2.So its Wilt's fault that he played in a big man friendly era?

 Its like knocking Tom Brady for throwing 50 TDs in this now pass friendly leauge. Nobody saying Wilt would average 50/25 but he would still dominate today.


3.The leauge hasnt been dominated by perimeter players since 1980s. Maybe in terms of popularity and capturing the audiences imagine. But with the exception of Jordan's Bulls almost every championship caliber  team has featured as a Dominant man or been a complete team. Despite permieter players popularity, dominating the post is still the surest way to win championships.

The Celtics of 1980s (McHale and Parish)The Lakers of 1980s(Kareem Abdul Jabbar) Rockets( Hakeem)  early 00 Lakers( Shaq) 00 Spurs(Duncan)09 Lakers (Gasol)


Y'all are crazy if think Wilt Chamberlain would just be another guy today.


1. That argument would work if the fact that the overall talent level in the league hasn't increased drastically since Wilt's days. If there is anything that is 100% certain about the league today and the league in Wilt's days is that the worst players in the league today are miles ahead of the worst players in the league in Wilt's days. The competition for the 300 something roster spots that are available in the NBA today is much higher than the competition for the 100 something roster spots that were available back then. That is a fact. The players in the D-league are working their butts off hoping to make the last roster spots as soon as someone in the NBA slips. Not to mention the many international players fighting for a place in the NBA. Making it to the NBA was not as difficult in the NBA in Wilt's days.

But to show what a huge hole there is in your argument, just look at the NBA/ABA merger in 1976. Players like Moses Malone and Julius Erving started their careers in the ABA, and went on to become some of the greatest NBA legends of all time. But by your logic, the addition of all those teams in 1976 would've made the league "watered down" in terms of talent.

2. I'm not saying it's his fault that he was playing in a big man friendly era and that there was noone else in the league that could physically match him. But if the fact that he played in an era where noone could match himcshouldn't be used as an argument against him, then why should it be used as an argument for him? Seems to me that the most fair thing would be to keep Wilt out of the "today's NBA" discussion all together. Because you best believe that as soon as you mention him, someone will be right there to mention how different the game was and his competition right back.

3. Overall, since 1980, the perimeter players have certainly been bigger factors in championships won since 1980 than big men. Look at the #1 guy for the championships won since 1980 and you'll see a pattern:

Championships where big men have been the #1 guy: 1980, 1982, 1983, 1994, 1995, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007
Championships where a perimeter player has been the #1 guy: 1981, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2009

just a way to end the argument since no one is ever going to know how good Wilt would've been in this era.


Then why start the argument in the first place? Just leave it like it is: Everyone knows that Wilt was dominant IN THE 60S, and just leave it at that.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

It's no questions that Wilt was helped by the era he played in and he almost assuredly would not do the same things in todays nba but one thing you guys seem to discounts is that Wilt is probably the greatest pure athlete to ever play the game, and one of the most physically gifted human beings to ever walk this earth.
Wilt claimed his vertical was around 46-48 inches? You would think he is exaggerating but when you look at his collegiate high jump, 100m, and long jump numbers, it paints a clearer picture. Here's a good post on the subject.

---

I know that Wilt was given to a lot of hyperbole, but there is really no way to overstate his athleticism. What we do know about him is what is documented in his 100 yd, 440, 880, long jump, high jump, and shot put scores. Not by him, but by his actual, recorded times in meets. We have a pretty good idea of what he could do in the 1500m and its easy to convert 100yd and 440 times to 100m and 400m times. This means that we can figure out what he would do in these events in the decathlon. 

I think it's fair to say that he could equal all of his personal bests in a decathlon if he actually focused on track. It's probably also fair to say that he could shave 0.2 seconds off a 100m time running on a modern surface vs. cinders and add 3-4 inches to his high jump using the flop technique rather than the scissor technique in the 50s. Using those assumptions, this is how Wilt would look through 5 events in the 2004 Olympics. Yeah, I said 2004, 40 years after his day, at 7-1 250 lbs, against guys using better training and nutrition:

1*Dmitriy Karpov*(KAZ)4689
2*Roman Šebrle*(CZE)4594
3*Bryan Clay*(USA) 4554
4*Dean Macey*(GBR)4454
5*Tom Pappas*(USA)4415
6*Claston Bernard*(JAM)4408
7*Chiel Warners*(NED)4387
8 Wilt Chamberlain (USA) 4330
9*Attila Zsivoczky*(HUN)4294
10*Jaakko Ojaniemi*(FIN)4261
10*Laurent Hernu*(FRA)4199

---

[font=verdana, geneva, lucida, 'lucida grande', arial, helvetica, sans-serif]and the dude was 7'2 and he also blocked the unblock able sky hook the dude was not human.

[/font]

 

[gunna get it]

Originally Posted by RyGuy45

at anyone thinking Wilt would be "just another center" in the NBA today. Another reason to love NT.

As if we dont have the last 10 years or so to use as proof of how bad majority of big men are in the NBA now.

Wilt would be an all-star center and Hall of Famer in any era, regardless if his freak stat lines went down.

RyGuy with a dose of reality 

  

 

[dipsetgeneral]

Originally Posted by play2much2004

thought this was about the women

but I haven't really seen him play so...

Co-sign... 

+

Who discredit's Chamberlain's skillset?!!??!

  

 

[mister friendly]

Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl

Originally Posted by Mister Friendly

Xtapolapacetl wrote:

---

Mister Friendly wrote:

---

Xtapolapacetl wrote:

---

Mister Friendly wrote:

---

People are stupid they act as if sport was invented in the 1980s?

In a way it was. Definitely reinvented. Modern basketball was created between 1976 and 1979 because of three factors:

1. NBA-ABA merger
2. Introduction of the 3-point line
3. Magic and Bird

And it went on to become a very different sport from the game of the early 60s when Wilt put up his monster numbers. The sport we today enjoy definitely has its roots in the 80s. The style of basketball in 2010 is most definitely closer to the style of basketball in 1985 than 1960 was to 1985.

 

  Well the 3 things you mention all work in favor of Wilt.

1.The NBA-ABA merger would make the leauge more watered down then because you have more teams, making each team less stacked.

2.The 3 point line spreads the game out and makes its harder to double the post without suffering consequences.( a 33 pct increase in ponts given up for allowing an open 3.

3. And Magic and Bird have nothing to do with Wilt;s production. You been watching too many NBA Home videos. Maybe they got a few more people interested in Basketball but stars like Jordan,Barkley,Malone,Stockton,Isiah Thomas,Olajuwon,Ewing and Mullin were all playing the game before they came along




1. Wow, what a stupid counter-argument. So hypothetically, winning a bunch of championships in a league consisting of 2 teams would be a greater accomplishment than winning a bunch of championships in a league consisting of 50 teams. Basically, more teams means more teams that you might not match up well against. On surface, he 1994 Denver Nuggets and 2007 Golden State Warriors

2. Or maybe it changes the game from a big man oriented inside game to a more perimeter oriented guard-friendly game. When Wilt played, the focus was to get the ball to your big man. Why try to shoot the ball from 25 feet when getting it to your big man will get you the same amount of points? And let's not forget that in Wilt's early years, the game was even more big man friendly because not only did they not have the 3-pointer, but the 3 second area was extremely small:

I can't begin to imagine what numbers a prime Shaq would put up with such a small 3 second area and a bunch of 6'8-6'9ers guarding him.

3. I mentioned Magic and Bird because they did change the game. Every decade up until the 80s has been dominated by big men, that is centers, with any guard/forward being a distant second: 40s: Mikan, 50s: Mikan/Russell, 60s: Russell/Wilt, 70s: Kareem. Magic and Bird ended this and ever since the league has been dominated by perimeter players, with a couple of lone exceptions.

in his rookie year he was playing with 6 other people 6'10" or Taller, and he put up 37.6 PPG ,27.0 RBG and 2.3 APG


Care to mention these people?

There wasn't a single even remotely good player who was 6'10 or above in Wilt's rookie year. The likes of Russell and Pettit were all listed 6'9 or lower, about 5 inches shorter than Wilt. The first quality player who came close to Wilt's size Wilt encountered was the 6'11 Walt Bellamy, who came into the league in 1961.


   1. There are only so many great Basketball players available. If you have a leauge with 30 teams you're gonna end with more un-great Basketball players on rosters therefore you're have weaker teams and bigger mismatch games. In the Wilts era, you had to be a great Basketball player to make the NBA with only 8-12 teams.


2.So its Wilt's fault that he played in a big man friendly era?

 Its like knocking Tom Brady for throwing 50 TDs in this now pass friendly leauge. Nobody saying Wilt would average 50/25 but he would still dominate today.


3.The leauge hasnt been dominated by perimeter players since 1980s. Maybe in terms of popularity and capturing the audiences imagine. But with the exception of Jordan's Bulls almost every championship caliber  team has featured as a Dominant man or been a complete team. Despite permieter players popularity, dominating the post is still the surest way to win championships.

The Celtics of 1980s (McHale and Parish)The Lakers of 1980s(Kareem Abdul Jabbar) Rockets( Hakeem)  early 00 Lakers( Shaq) 00 Spurs(Duncan)09 Lakers (Gasol)


Y'all are crazy if think Wilt Chamberlain would just be another guy today.


1. That argument would work if the fact that the overall talent level in the league hasn't increased drastically since Wilt's days. If there is anything that is 100% certain about the league today and the league in Wilt's days is that the worst players in the league today are miles ahead of the worst players in the league in Wilt's days. The competition for the 300 something roster spots that are available in the NBA today is much higher than the competition for the 100 something roster spots that were available back then. That is a fact. The players in the D-league are working their butts off hoping to make the last roster spots as soon as someone in the NBA slips. Not to mention the many international players fighting for a place in the NBA. Making it to the NBA was not as difficult in the NBA in Wilt's days.

But to show what a huge hole there is in your argument, just look at the NBA/ABA merger in 1976. Players like Moses Malone and Julius Erving started their careers in the ABA, and went on to become some of the greatest NBA legends of all time. But by your logic, the addition of all those teams in 1976 would've made the league "watered down" in terms of talent.

2. I'm not saying it's his fault that he was playing in a big man friendly era and that there was noone else in the league that could physically match him. But if the fact that he played in an era where noone could match himcshouldn't be used as an argument against him, then why should it be used as an argument for him? Seems to me that the most fair thing would be to keep Wilt out of the "today's NBA" discussion all together. Because you best believe that as soon as you mention him, someone will be right there to mention how different the game was and his competition right back.

3. Overall, since 1980, the perimeter players have certainly been bigger factors in championships won since 1980 than big men. Look at the #1 guy for the championships won since 1980 and you'll see a pattern:

Championships where big men have been the #1 guy: 1980, 1982, 1983, 1994, 1995, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007
Championships where a perimeter player has been the #1 guy: 1981, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2009

just a way to end the argument since no one is ever going to know how good Wilt would've been in this era.


Then why start the argument in the first place? Just leave it like it is: Everyone knows that Wilt was dominant IN THE 60S, and just leave it at that.

1. Maybe the athletic training methods have gotten better since Wilts era but I'm not sure overall talent has. You act like Wilt's athleticism wouldve stayed the same if he was using modern training methods

 

Do you think Wilt was using Michael Jordan's trainer and Tom Shaw back in the 1960s?

 Man that dude was probably doing nothing but banging breezys in his offseason. If he had numbers anywhere close 20,000 women, what do you think this man was doing in his spare time? Not concentrating on Basketball.

And Mose Malone and Julius Erving could've started in the NBA. They just want to the ABA because it paid a competitive salary just like back in the 1960s,1970s and 1980s some of the top collegiate Football talent went to play in the AFL,CFL and USFL respectively. ANyways the ABA didnt come along until 1967 a full decade into his career.

2. You act like all of today's big men are fundamentally sound, in fact I think a guy like Dwight Howard( a star big man) is far less fundamental sound then the big men on yesteryear like Kareem, Hakeem and McHale etc. You can actually check these dudes out...Go watch Hardwood Classics sometime and tell me which era has better post moves and play.


3. We all know you dont win championships with one guy. Does Kobe wins the championship last year without Gasol? No. Does Duncan win his championships without Parker or Ginobili? No.

My point is most team besides Jordan's Bulls had a dominant man or were a complete team. Also your years dont add up... Like in 2002 , You're trying to tell me Shaq was more important then Kobe was to the team. Or 2004...you're trying to tell me Rip Hamilton or Chauncey Billups were more valuble to their team then Rasheed  or Ben Wallace?

 

[xtapolapacetl]

Originally Posted by Mister Friendly

Xtapolapacetl wrote:

---

Mister Friendly wrote:

---

Xtapolapacetl wrote:

---

Mister Friendly wrote:

---

Xtapolapacetl wrote:

---

Mister Friendly wrote:

---

People are stupid they act as if sport was invented in the 1980s?

In a way it was. Definitely reinvented. Modern basketball was created between 1976 and 1979 because of three factors:

1. NBA-ABA merger
2. Introduction of the 3-point line
3. Magic and Bird

And it went on to become a very different sport from the game of the early 60s when Wilt put up his monster numbers. The sport we today enjoy definitely has its roots in the 80s. The style of basketball in 2010 is most definitely closer to the style of basketball in 1985 than 1960 was to 1985.


 

  Well the 3 things you mention all work in favor of Wilt.

1.The NBA-ABA merger would make the leauge more watered down then because you have more teams, making each team less stacked.

2.The 3 point line spreads the game out and makes its harder to double the post without suffering consequences.( a 33 pct increase in ponts given up for allowing an open 3.

3. And Magic and Bird have nothing to do with Wilt;s production. You been watching too many NBA Home videos. Maybe they got a few more people interested in Basketball but stars like Jordan,Barkley,Malone,Stockton,Isiah Thomas,Olajuwon,Ewing and Mullin were all playing the game before they came along




1. Wow, what a stupid counter-argument. So hypothetically, winning a bunch of championships in a league consisting of 2 teams would be a greater accomplishment than winning a bunch of championships in a league consisting of 50 teams. Basically, more teams means more teams that you might not match up well against. On surface, he 1994 Denver Nuggets and 2007 Golden State Warriors

2. Or maybe it changes the game from a big man oriented inside game to a more perimeter oriented guard-friendly game. When Wilt played, the focus was to get the ball to your big man. Why try to shoot the ball from 25 feet when getting it to your big man will get you the same amount of points? And let's not forget that in Wilt's early years, the game was even more big man friendly because not only did they not have the 3-pointer, but the 3 second area was extremely small:

I can't begin to imagine what numbers a prime Shaq would put up with such a small 3 second area and a bunch of 6'8-6'9ers guarding him.

3. I mentioned Magic and Bird because they did change the game. Every decade up until the 80s has been dominated by big men, that is centers, with any guard/forward being a distant second: 40s: Mikan, 50s: Mikan/Russell, 60s: Russell/Wilt, 70s: Kareem. Magic and Bird ended this and ever since the league has been dominated by perimeter players, with a couple of lone exceptions.

in his rookie year he was playing with 6 other people 6'10" or Taller, and he put up 37.6 PPG ,27.0 RBG and 2.3 APG


Care to mention these people?

There wasn't a single even remotely good player who was 6'10 or above in Wilt's rookie year. The likes of Russell and Pettit were all listed 6'9 or lower, about 5 inches shorter than Wilt. The first quality player who came close to Wilt's size Wilt encountered was the 6'11 Walt Bellamy, who came into the league in 1961.


   1. There are only so many great Basketball players available. If you have a leauge with 30 teams you're gonna end with more un-great Basketball players on rosters therefore you're have weaker teams and bigger mismatch games. In the Wilts era, you had to be a great Basketball player to make the NBA with only 8-12 teams.


2.So its Wilt's fault that he played in a big man friendly era?

 Its like knocking Tom Brady for throwing 50 TDs in this now pass friendly leauge. Nobody saying Wilt would average 50/25 but he would still dominate today.


3.The leauge hasnt been dominated by perimeter players since 1980s. Maybe in terms of popularity and capturing the audiences imagine. But with the exception of Jordan's Bulls almost every championship caliber  team has featured as a Dominant man or been a complete team. Despite permieter players popularity, dominating the post is still the surest way to win championships.

The Celtics of 1980s (McHale and Parish)The Lakers of 1980s(Kareem Abdul Jabbar) Rockets( Hakeem)  early 00 Lakers( Shaq) 00 Spurs(Duncan)09 Lakers (Gasol)


Y'all are crazy if think Wilt Chamberlain would just be another guy today.


1. That argument would work if the fact that the overall talent level in the league hasn't increased drastically since Wilt's days. If there is anything that is 100% certain about the league today and the league in Wilt's days is that the worst players in the league today are miles ahead of the worst players in the league in Wilt's days. The competition for the 300 something roster spots that are available in the NBA today is much higher than the competition for the 100 something roster spots that were available back then. That is a fact. The players in the D-league are working their butts off hoping to make the last roster spots as soon as someone in the NBA slips. Not to mention the many international players fighting for a place in the NBA. Making it to the NBA was not as difficult in the NBA in Wilt's days.

But to show what a huge hole there is in your argument, just look at the NBA/ABA merger in 1976. Players like Moses Malone and Julius Erving started their careers in the ABA, and went on to become some of the greatest NBA legends of all time. But by your logic, the addition of all those teams in 1976 would've made the league "watered down" in terms of talent.

2. I'm not saying it's his fault that he was playing in a big man friendly era and that there was noone else in the league that could physically match him. But if the fact that he played in an era where noone could match himcshouldn't be used as an argument against him, then why should it be used as an argument for him? Seems to me that the most fair thing would be to keep Wilt out of the "today's NBA" discussion all together. Because you best believe that as soon as you mention him, someone will be right there to mention how different the game was and his competition right back.

3. Overall, since 1980, the perimeter players have certainly been bigger factors in championships won since 1980 than big men. Look at the #1 guy for the championships won since 1980 and you'll see a pattern:

Championships where big men have been the #1 guy: 1980, 1982, 1983, 1994, 1995, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007
Championships where a perimeter player has been the #1 guy: 1981, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2009

just a way to end the argument since no one is ever going to know how good Wilt would've been in this era.


Then why start the argument in the first place? Just leave it like it is: Everyone knows that Wilt was dominant IN THE 60S, and just leave it at that.


1. Maybe the athletic training methods have gotten better since Wilts era but I'm not sure overall talent has. You act like Wilt's athleticism wouldve stayed the same if he was using modern training methods

 

Do you think Wilt was using Michael Jordan's trainer and Tom Shaw back in the 1960s?

 Man that dude was probably doing nothing but banging breezys in his offseason. If he had numbers anywhere close 20,000 women, what do you think this man was doing in his spare time? Not concentrating on Basketball.

And Mose Malone and Julius Erving could've started in the NBA. They just want to the ABA because it paid a competitive salary just like back in the 1960s,1970s and 1980s some of the top collegiate Football talent went to play in the AFL,CFL and USFL respectively. ANyways the ABA didnt come along until 1967 a full decade into his career.



2. You act like all of today's big men are fundamentally sound, in fact I think a guy like Dwight Howard( a star big man) is far less fundamental sound then the big men on yesteryear like Kareem, Hakeem and McHale etc. You can actually check these dudes out...Go watch Hardwood Classics sometime and tell me which era has better post moves and play.


3. We all know you dont win championships with one guy. Does Kobe wins the championship last year without Gasol? No. Does Duncan win his championships without Parker or Ginobili? No.

My point is most team besides Jordan's Bulls had a dominant man or were a complete team. Also your years dont add up... Like in 2002 , You're trying to tell me Shaq was more important then Kobe was to the team. Or 2004...you're trying to tell me Rip Hamilton or Chauncey Billups were more valuble to their team then Rasheed  or Ben Wallace?



1. You act like prime Shaq wouldn't average 50 in the early 60s if he constantly planted himself outside of that tiny 3 second area where some 6'8 white guy center half his mass was guarding him and Shaq took 40 shots per game like Wilt did.

No NBA player is focusing just on basketball during his offseason. Shaq was constantly starring in movies, recording rap albums or filming commercials in his offseasons and he still dominated. So it's not like modern players are doing nothing but working on their games in their offseasons.

I know the ABA wasn't around in the early 60s. I mentioned the NBA/ABA merger as an example of how ridiculous your statement that the less teams the league had, the less "watered down" it was. Did the league become more watered down as the amount of teams it contained increased? No. Because there was no shortage in talent, which was constantly increasing parallel with the league salaries, ready to fill all the rosters in the league.

2. Where have I called Dwight Howard a skilled player? Don't know why you're bringing that up. I've seen plenty of footage of those guys and I know the extent of their talent. But unlike Wilt, those guys all had great competition and many rivals throughout the league who could match them physically.

3. I'm not sitting here trying to argue that anyone won a championship by himself. But a clear pattern in post-1980 basketball can be seen where perimeter players leading their teams to a championship were the rule, and not the exception like in Wilt's days. And BTW Chauncey Billups won the Finals MVP. And a couple of years later when the Pistons had the best record in the league and someone from that team had to be picked as an MVP candidate, it wasn't one of the Wallaces, but Billups.

 

[airforce1king]

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

It's no questions that Wilt was helped by the era he played in and he almost assuredly would not do the same things in todays nba but one thing you guys seem to discounts is that Wilt is probably the greatest pure athlete to ever play the game, and one of the most physically gifted human beings to ever walk this earth.

^Agreed.

I feel Wilt definitely would be a factor in this league today, however, he'd blend in. We wouldn't necessarily be

 over him, but he wouldn't be a Brooke Lopez. In reality, Darron Williams playing at the level he plays now, would've averaged 35ppg, 11rpg, and maybe 10-12apg (not sure if the guys could finish back then. If they could, make that 18-20apg). Amare would've averaged 42ppg and 18rbg. Josh Smith would've averaged 32ppg, 18rbg, and 13bpg (blocks). Ray Allen would've averaged 38ppg. My point is the average players weren't anywhere NEAR as athletic then as they are now. They could do little to stop the players I just mentioned, let alone a power house like Wilt. I mean, let's say somehow LeBron went back and played for St. Vincent/St. Mary tomorrow for one season. Let's say he averaged 84ppg and had a game where he scored 311 points. Absolutely impressive but I mean c'mon, look at his competition. I don't know if Josh Childress is beasting over in Europe but if he is, it's because of the lack of competition when compared to the NBA. He couldn't do that here but went over there and became THAT guy (that's only IF he's balling over there. Again, I'm not sure).

Also, the evolution of the human being. We went from Dominique's windmill getting him 50's in a dunk competition to that being everyone's pre-game dunk. We went from between the legs being the best dunk ever to Air Up There doing 360 between the legs for breakfast. We went from 360's to 720's. We got Nate Robinson blocking Shaq and Yao. The players around Wilt back then were honestly just barely athletes WHEN COMPARED TO TODAY'S ATHLETE'S. Honestly, a starting 5 of David Lee, Erick Dampier, Drew Gooden, Rafaer Alston, and James Posey would run the league back then for at least 5 years and all would have 5 rings yet this day-and-age that same 5 would be the worse of then the Nets.

Discuss...

 

[651akathepaul]

So the NBA of yesteryear was weak? For the people with those sentiments for this argument, please tell me any center in today's game that who would stop Wilt?

 

[airforce1king]

Originally Posted by 651akathePaul

So the NBA of yesteryear was weak? For the people with those sentiments for this argument, please tell me any center in today's game that who would stop Wilt?

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WILT! He was a today type athlete back then. A man amongst boys.

I see nobody was able to rebuttal my last message.

Possible /thread? 

  

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Wilt Chamberlain wasn't a today type athlete, his vertical was 40+ inches there isn't a single center you can find with 40 inch vertical, dwight howard has a 35 inch vert.

Dude was 7-2, 250, with Vince Carter, Nate Robinson, Lebron James leaping ability, throw in high basketball IQ, and incredible coordination and body control and you have the makings of one of the 5 greatest players in the history of the game. The advantage works both ways, give Wilt Chamberlain todays nutrition, medical, and training stafs and while you would get 50 and 20 you would get something realative to what ever era he played in.



Dude was a decathlon athlete, probably at an Olympic level, he is the volley ball hall of fame, he ran marathons in his 50's, bench pressed 465 as a 50 year old.


To me Wilt Chamberlain is without question the greatest pure athlete to ever play this game.