Will the game ever see someone this dominant again?

[throatpoker]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

i didn't watch that full clip, but i can see the beginning of it is just cut from the nba tv documentary "wilt 100". as someone who isn't old enough to have watched him play actual games, only clips, i can't comment on his dominance. i can however see that his stats aren't as impressive as they appear. the 100pt game alone is a sham. no tv cameras around, no media, etc. just fouling on purpose to extend the game, feeding him every time down the court just so he can score as many points as possible. the other team didn't even have a center on their roster for the game (he was busy puking). it's no different than the college guard a couple of years ago that scored 130 points from snow birding the whole game. his rebounding stats are less impressive than they appear. you see 20 something rebounds a game average or 50 in single games and think "wow, unbelievable". however, when viewed in context of how the game was played during wilt's time it takes a lot away. there were something like 150 rebounds per game on average to be had because there were no skilled players. when shaqplayed the average was like 80 rebounds per game. he averaged more than shaq even with adjusted stats, but what he did is not possible regardless of level of domination in any other era of basketball

Originally posted by Blue Angel:
Wilt Chamberlain - A Real Superman

I'm Old.

.



This post was edited on 1/9 12:01 PM by throatpoker

 

[Mojocat]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

First, by the standards of this board, I'm ancient - 47. Having said that, I can't argue for or against Wilt being the best ever, never saw him. I'll make the same point I always make when this comes up, though: the average of the other 7 starting centers in 1962, his best year, was probably 6'8 (I forget exactly and am too lazy to go look it up again). He was 7'1 and, what, 275? Shaq was 7'1 and probably 300 or so near the end, but typically faced another 7 footer in his games.....

 

[throatpoker]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

Originally posted by Mojocat:
First, by the standards of this board, I'm ancient - 47. Having said that, I can't argue for or against Wilt being the best ever, never saw him. I'll make the same point I always make when this comes up, though: the average of the other 7 starting centers in 1962, his best year, was probably 6'8 (I forget exactly and am too lazy to go look it up again). He was 7'1 and, what, 275? Shaq was 7'1 and probably 300 or so near the end, but typically faced another 7 footer in his games.....

it's actually a myth the players were shorter, but feel free to prove me wrong.

"Point"

Wilt's rookie year, 37 active, avg = 6-1.89"​
1989-2011 NBA draft (sample size avail, 93) avg = 6-1.02"​

"SF/Guard"
Wilt's rookie year, 25 active, avg = 6-6.08"​
1989-2011 NBA draft (sample size avail, 91) avg = 6-6.40"​

"PF"
Wilt's rookie year, 24 active, avg = 6-7.83"​
1989-2011 NBA draft (sample size avail, 127) avg = 6-7.95"​

"Center"

Wilt's rookie year, 9 active, avg = 6-11.06" (6-10.81" excluding Wilt)​
1989-2011 NBA draft (sample size avail, 67) avg = 6-10.44"​

 

[BLEEDBLUE444]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

Catsareback, Lake James is an incredible place, had some fun times there myself, and I no longer live in Statesville as I have now relocated to Lexington KY, not Lexington NC haha

 

[throatpoker]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

If I recall from the "Wilt 100" doc, he played all but like 9 minutes an entire season. Something crazy like that. He would definitely dominate Snack in the stamina department during any era.

 

[docholiday51]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

Originally posted by Desperado_1955:

Originally posted by musrat59:

In my opinion, Wilt Chamberlain was the best big man of all time.

Yep. Shaq was great, no question, but Wilt the Stilt was on another level even than him.

Agree,People that never saw him can't grasp how far above the level of play he was at that time.

 

[elwood_blue]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

Now I swear, the next one of you primates that even dares to use dominate instead of dominant....

This post was edited on 1/9 1:07 PM by elwood_blue

 

[BLEEDBLUE444]

Ahhh damn it you're right!!! Must have been my phone, I swear I'm a fan being grammatically correct

This post was edited on 1/9 1:03 PM by BLEEDBLUE444

 

[Big_Blue79]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

Originally posted by BlueSince92:

Originally posted by UKWildcats#8:
My God the center position is so deep as far as GOAT and even making a top 5 list is hard. You have Kareem, Wilt, Russell, Shaq, Hakeem the Dream, Robinson, Ewing, and I have no doubt missed some that DEFINITELY should have been mentioned.

Mailman

Karl Malone was a PF, and not a Duncan type that plays C like half the time. My top 5 would be:
1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Wilt
4. Shaq
5. Olajuwon

Then you have Moses Malone, Robinson, Ewing, etc...

 

[throatpoker]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

Originally posted by docholiday51:
Agree,People that never saw him can't grasp how far above the level of play he was at that time.

that's the easiest thing for someone who never watched him play to grasp. it couldn't be any easier to comprehend. the level of play was trash, hence the ease of making an argument against his dominance for those who want to do so.
.

 

[caneintally]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

Originally posted by BlueSince92:

Originally posted by BLEEDBLUE444:
Cheers to a long life and health caneintally

This.

appreciate it ! And yes the center is position is soo deep . Having been to young almost even to see much video of Wilt i just don't have much of an opinion on him. Wish i could see more of him in his hey day.

 

[throatpoker]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

Originally posted by caneintally:

Originally posted by BlueSince92:

Originally posted by BLEEDBLUE444:
Cheers to a long life and health caneintally

This.

appreciate it ! And yes the center is position is soo deep . Having been to young almost even to see much video of Wilt i just don't have much of an opinion on him. Wish i could see more of him in his hey day.

All you need to know is he was the ultimate stat padder. Averaged 50 points per game one season. Oh lookie, he is so great! Yeah, with no context. The dude took 40 shots a game to do it. lmao. Do you really think jordan, Snaq, or any other all time great couldn't of done the same thing? Jordan averaged 37 in one season on 28 shots. The only thing wilt did better than stat pad was choke.

 

[JulesCamara=GOD]

There is little footage of Wilt, but a guy on the NBA subreddit compiled one over a long period of time. Both are awesome big men.

1 hour of Wilt Highlights

 

[throatpoker]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

Originally posted by MdWIldcat55:


But if the question is who would I take as a center with the goal of winning an NBA championship, I'd rate them 1. Wilt 2. Hakeem 3. Shaq.

care to elaborate on why you would choose a player who couldn't produce championships (or didn't care to, too selfish) for a stated goal of winning said championships?

 

[wildcatdonf]

Originally posted by JulesCamara=GOD:
There is little footage of Wilt, but a guy on the NBA subreddit compiled one over a long period of time. Both are awesome big men.

20,000

 

[BLEEDBLUE444]

These Wilt highlights are very awesome, man if only we could see him and Shaq go at it in their primes!!

 

[AnarchoNeoLuddite]

Surprised no one has mentioned DMC. Physically he might be the most dominant big right now, strong as hell and mean on the blocks

 

[fatguy87]

What happens when Anthony Davis learns to shoot the 3?

 

[throatpoker]

Originally posted by MdWIldcat55:
"care to elaborate on why you would choose a player who
couldn't produce championships (or didn't care to, too selfish) for a
stated goal of winning said championships?"

I'll ignore your parenthetical, as it is uninformed, but address the rest. Wilt won two championships, Hakeem two and Shaq 4. The simple explanation is teammates: Three of Shaq's were with Kobe, who is on any short list of greatest scorers in NBA history, and one was fairly late in his career, in a series that Dwyane Wade dominated. WIlt's career was of a different era when players had much, much less control over how their fates were managed. For example, WIlt had to stay in college three years then play for the Globe Trotters, because the NBA wouldn't take players before their class's senior year. He had much less ability to determine which teams he could play for in the NBA, at least in his prime years. Finally, Wilt's prime occurred during a magnificent Boston dynasty. For younger people, imagine the Bulls' dynasty under Jordan. Shaq didn't break through that, either.

I stopped reading after you gave credit to Wilt for a title in 72, but tried to explain them away from Snaq under nearly identical circumstances.

 

[throatpoker]

3rd fiddle on arguably the greatest nba team of all time and you're talking about quality of teammates. Jesus Christ. Only on rafters.

 

[BluegrassBaron]

Originally posted by throatpoker:
3rd fiddle on arguably the greatest nba team of all time and you're talking about quality of teammates. Jesus Christ. Only on rafters.

Ask Russell or Kareem who they thought the best center ever was. Ask Red Auerbach. Ask Willis Reed or Jerry West. Ask Pat Riley. Wilt a selfish player? Is that why he was a great passer, had plenty of assists, and deferred to other players for the latter half of his career?

Your hatred of Wilt is both comical and asinine.






This post was edited on 1/9 4:31 PM by BluegrassBaron

 

[BIGBLUE402]

You guys think AD will continue to be a Center? Or move over and play the four like Duncan?

 

[UKWildcats#8]

The 72 Lakers are one of the best NBA teams in history. Wilt was not the guy on that team, but just one of many great players. Jerry West, Gail Goodrich, and Wilt were the big 3 of sorts...but there were other guys who did great as well.

 

[EMMCAT]

Wilt Chamberlain AVERAGED 50 points a game in an entire NBA season! Now that's dominance . Oscar Robertson AVERAGED a triple double in an entire NBA season. That's dominance. Being able to dunk, Shak's principal "skill" is a capability shared with dozens of payers past , present and future, none of whom were, are or will be dominant. BTW, I am Shak fan. I am just judicious in the use of the word 'dominant'.

 

[CondorCat]

Shaq is such an imposing physical presence.... even today.

Here's a recent shot of Barkley, actor Mark Wahlberg, The Rock, and Shaq.

For comparison, The Rock is 6' 4" and 260 lb.

 

[GonzoCat90]

Here's the thing:

Ever notice that all of these unbelievable statistical anomalies seemed to occur decades and decades ago but not now?

Do you think players are getting worse in that time, or is the competition better, the style different, and the talent pool deeper? Oscar's triple double, Wilt's 50 per game, etc. are all the product of all-time greats in an era conducive to those numbers, not a measuring stick against today's players.

Use the NFL for example. Do you think Matt Stafford is a better QB than Joe Montana? Look at his numbers (obviously excluding wins and rings, I'm talking stats). In 50 years, how do you think that would be viewed based completely on the numbers without context?

 

[mj2k10]

Originally posted by BIGBLUE402:

You guys think AD will continue to be a Center? Or move over and play the four like Duncan?

?

AD has barely played center at all, only doing so when NO goes to a small-ball lineup. Omer Asik is their center.

 

[BluegrassBaron]

Not saying he was the best, but ol' Moses Malone at least needs to be mentioned in this conversation. Man, could this guy ever score. He could shoot and had post moves like nobody's business. Plus, Moses was a great rebounder.

I was never a Sixers fan, but I always respected them in the old days, and that guy Moses could sure play.

 

[rhstoess]

Dont wanna get too ahead of myself, but i honestly believe anthony davis could end up being one of the best basketball players to ever live

 

[Big_Blue79]

Originally posted by EMMCAT:
Wilt Chamberlain AVERAGED 50 points a game in an entire NBA season! Now that's dominance . Oscar Robertson AVERAGED a triple double in an entire NBA season. That's dominance. Being able to dunk, Shak's principal "skill" is a capability shared with dozens of payers past , present and future, none of whom were, are or will be dominant. BTW, I am Shak fan. I am just judicious in the use of the word 'dominant'.

Besides the fact that a triple double is pretty arbitrary (is 15/10/10 more valuable than 45/8/8 because thousands of years ago humans went to a base 10 number system?), the Big O's (and others) numbers were inflated by an incredible pace of play. I mean, they were both awesome, but there's a reason we tend to use advanced stats in 2015 that can account for things like pace and shot attempts (I hope a HOF would score a lot on 40 shot attempts/game).

Lol, you're a "Shak" fan and you think his principle skill was being able to dunk? Are you thinking of Harold Minor? Shaq was the best player in the league for a multi-year stretch when he was trying... so, maybe not too many regular seasons, but in the playoffs he was nigh unstoppable. It wasn't because his principle skill was dunking. Chris Anderson is a much better dunker than Shaq ever was, yet Chris Anderson is orders of magnitude worse than Shaq.

 

[fatguy87]

Originally posted by GonzoCat90:

Ever notice that all of these unbelievable statistical anomalies seemed to occur decades and decades ago but not now?

Do you think players are getting worse in that time, or is the competition better, the style different, and the talent pool deeper? Oscar's triple double, Wilt's 50 per game, etc. are all the product of all-time greats in an era conducive to those numbers, not a measuring stick against today's players.

Style of play is different.

Teams used to play a much faster tempo in the past than today. A faster pace leads to more possessions which provides more opportunities to accumulate counting stats. Players also were generally shooting inferior FG%'s which further increased the chances for rebounds.

This excerpt provides a pretty good explanation how pace and poor shooting nourished Chamberlain's gaudy 27.2 RPG in the '60-'61 season:


The less informed version of the "Chamberlain/Russell Caveat" (CRC for short) typically goes something like this: "Rodman led the league in rebounding 7 times, making him the greatest re bounder of his era, even though his numbers come nowhere near those of Chamberlain and Russell." It is true that, barring some dramatic change in the way the game is played, Chamberlain's record of 27.2 rebounds per game, set in the 1960-61 season, will stand forever. This is because, due to the fast pace and terrible shooting, the typical game in 1960-61 featured an average of 147 rebounding opportunities. During Rodman's 7-year reign as NBA rebounding champion (from 1991-92 through 1997-98), the typical game featured just 84 rebounding opportunities. Without further inquiry, this difference alone means that Chamberlain's record 27.2 rpg would roughly translate to 15.4 in Rodman's era - over a full rebound less than Rodman's ~16.7 rpg average over that span.

When comparing across eras, one has to recognize the evolution of play. The game looked and played differently even just 20 years ago. Players today don't accumulate the counting stats of past players, but that doesn't make them any less dominant.

 

[EMMCAT]

I am 76 years old. I went to college in Boston from 1956 to 1960 at the start of the Wilt vs. Russell rivalry. I have personally seen every great player for the last 60 years. ( Is aw Hagan and Ramsey play against one another in the state tournament in 1949 ,I think). With that as preamble:

The players today are on average bigger .stronger and much more skilled than 60 even 30 years ago. Ball handling has dramatically improved as has shooting.

But the operative word in the OP's comment was 'dominant' which implies competition or comparison. I cannot compare Shaq (a great player) to Wilt because they never played against one another but I can compare Wilt to his contemporaries and I can assure you that Wilt was more "dominant" in his time. No one came close to his numbers . Granted today's pace of play is slower and the defense is much better so comparing one number (like pts/game) I can be misleading but step back and compare Wilt's numbers to his contemporaries.

As for Oscar I actually played against him (what a joke) . He came to the Fenwick Club in Cincinnati to work out and joined the pickup games playing at half speed most times for fun the way an 18 year old plays against 13 year olds. I can tell you, he was a great ,great player (and a nice person). BTW, an assist was a lot harder to get in the 1960's than today.

Suffice to say that basketball is better today than at anytime in the past but some of the great players of yesteryear could step in today and compete at a very high level. Wilt and Oscar are certainly two of them.

 

[John Frusciante]

Originally posted by EMMCAT:
Wilt Chamberlain AVERAGED 50 points a game in an entire NBA season! Now that's dominance . Oscar Robertson AVERAGED a triple double in an entire NBA season. That's dominance. Being able to dunk, Shak's principal "skill" is a capability shared with dozens of payers past , present and future, none of whom were, are or will be dominant. BTW, I am Shak fan. I am just judicious in the use of the word 'dominant'.

He wasn't dominant because he could dunk; he was dominant because, if there wasn't a fairly quick double team, he would dunk almost every time( in his prime).

Read up on what happened the few times teams decided to let Shaq get his points and not double-team him. Usually only tried by a team that thought they had a great defensive center and the strategy usually abandoned by the end of the 1st quarter.

 

[st-louie-blue]

I would have liked to have seen Shaq and Wilt play against each other.

 

[WildcatFan1982]

ha. in 4th or 5th grade (Shaq's rookie year in the NBA) i had to write a paper in my class about who my hero was. I chose Shaq. My mother was rather upset that I didn't choose her or my father. Mainly because my main reason for choosing Shaq was "he can dunk"

 

[OSOK]

Wilt for sure and I am 67.

Other centers: Nate Thurman (sp), Walt Bellamy, both 6"11". Jerry Lucas, 6"8 1/2", Bill Russell 6" 9", Bob Love 6'9".

He was the Best low-post offensive player in the history of the game and one of the best defensive players in the history of the game. He never once fouled out of a game. He had a 40 inch vertical jump. He could throw a 16lb shot over 60 feet with both hands. He could palm a bowling ball.

I live in Hickory.

 

[BLEEDBLUE444]

OSOK Hickory NC?

 

[Bkocats]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

Originally posted by Mojocat:
First, by the standards of this board, I'm ancient - 47. Having said that, I can't argue for or against Wilt being the best ever, never saw him. I'll make the same point I always make when this comes up, though: the average of the other 7 starting centers in 1962, his best year, was probably 6'8 (I forget exactly and am too lazy to go look it up again). He was 7'1 and, what, 275? Shaq was 7'1 and probably 300 or so near the end, but typically faced another 7 footer in his games.....

ok, first of all, 47 can't POSSIBLY be ancient - I'm 45 myself and still young and beautiful

About Shaq vs Chamberlain - and about any comparison of greats. Unless they were of an age to play against each other - or be within a few years, it's hard to compare them. Different styles in the game, changes in rules, even the athletes themselves are conditioned and work out differently. Nutrition, everything - different.

What would happen if you put Wilt in Shaq's time period with everything HE had? Heck, even ten years difference - look at Ewing vs Shaq

Look at Shaq vs the guys we have NOW - Cousins would probably, IMO, be closest. But even so, the game is different, and the players are different.

 

[BluegrassBaron]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

Originally posted by Bkocats:

Originally posted by Mojocat:
First, by the standards of this board, I'm ancient - 47. Having said that, I can't argue for or against Wilt being the best ever, never saw him. I'll make the same point I always make when this comes up, though: the average of the other 7 starting centers in 1962, his best year, was probably 6'8 (I forget exactly and am too lazy to go look it up again). He was 7'1 and, what, 275? Shaq was 7'1 and probably 300 or so near the end, but typically faced another 7 footer in his games.....

ok, first of all, 47 can't POSSIBLY be ancient - I'm 45 myself and still young and beautiful

About Shaq vs Chamberlain - and about any comparison of greats. Unless they were of an age to play against each other - or be within a few years, it's hard to compare them. Different styles in the game, changes in rules, even the athletes themselves are conditioned and work out differently. Nutrition, everything - different.

What would happen if you put Wilt in Shaq's time period with everything HE had? Heck, even ten years difference - look at Ewing vs Shaq

Look at Shaq vs the guys we have NOW - Cousins would probably, IMO, be closest. But even so, the game is different, and the players are different.

Agree on two fronts. One, the game of basketball changes constantly. Two, I'm 43 and as damn handsome as any man. Not to mention, I can bowl with the best of them and know more about Mopars than just about anyone over 6-feet tall.



This post was edited on 1/10 11:31 AM by BluegrassBaron

 

[throatpoker]

Re: Will the game ever see someone this dominate again?

Originally posted by Bkocats:
What would happen if you put Wilt in Shaq's time period with everything HE had? Heck, even ten years difference - look at Ewing vs Shaq

Wilt would dominate in any era, but his stats would be comparable to Snaq. Same as if you put Snaq in Wilt's era, he would be the one with 50, 100, 20.

Wilt's numbers are only mind boggling if you look at them with no context. 50 pts in a season, yeah on 40 shots. Snaq averaged 29 twice on half the number of shots. Wilt, 20+ rbpg average, sure, with 150 rebounds available per game. Snaq 10 rbpg average with 80ish rebounds per game average. The numbers are very comparable when you factor in how terrible basketball was back then. Wilt was just 20-30 years ahead of his time.

The funny thing about this whole discussion is I haven't once said I think Snaq was "more dominant", I'm simply stating the facts about the reality of Wilt's stats. They would not hold up in modern basketball and he would still be a loser in terms of producing championships unless he had 3 other hall of famers to carry him.

This post was edited on 1/10 9:36 AM by throatpoker