The Celtics had hall of fame players because they played as a team. I'm not saying it's Wilt's fault he dominated the basketball. Wilt was a circus freak back then. And the owners of the teams he played on viewed him as such and had him play as such so they could cash in. If Wilt had played on more teams that really played the team game, there is no doubt he would have eclipsed Russell, 11-2 or better. And a bunch of Wilt's mates would be in the HOF.
Do you really believe that Russell was able to eat him alive? Are you still believe in Santa? Second half highlights of the Finals Game <object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9c0AXu3Qljo?version=3&hl=ru_RU"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9c0AXu3Qljo?version=3&hl=ru_RU" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>
Some guys just don't know the fundamentals If you have the dominant big man, you have to feed him the ball as much as you can, cause he will always score in much more effective way than the perimeter players, especially with no three point shot
That's true. When his scoring dropped to 24 ppg in Philly, he averaged 8 apg! I mean, they probably quadruple-teamed him every time he touched the ball. He could have about 3 wide open teammates to pass to.
The criticism might be true, but if you replace Russel with Wilt, I argue the Celtics still win all those championships. Replace Wilt with Russel, I argue Russel's career championships look a lot like Wilt's. You realize basketball is a team sport, right? Do you think Isiah Thomas is a better PG than John Stockton?
BTW - - zero disqualifications in his career. Averaged 48mpg for full seasons. Got annoyed at hog rep so became assist leader of league. Wilt was special in so very many ways. He was The Most Dominant. Ever.
Wilt's FG%, FT%, and thus TS% isn't that impressive by the standards of modern All-Star big men. But to be fair to Wilt, he seems to have been VERY efficient by the standards of his day. That's leaving aside the subject of turnovers, which weren't tracked back then. Wilt's TS% back in his prime averaged from the low to mid 50s, not much higher than his raw FG% since he was so lousy from the FT line. But the average team back then shot a FG% of around 0.38 to 0.4. Looking at a couple of their seasons, the dominant Boston Celtics dynasy averaged a TS% of around 0.46. As others have pointed out, the great Bill Russell averaged about 0.44 FG%. According to basketball-reference.com, Wilt had the #1 FG% in the league for most of the 1960s. It was a different game back then, an ultra fast paced ball chucker league. The overall skills and conditioning of the player population weren't nearly as developed as they are now. According to some stories I've read, the stadiums were often ice cold, and the balls they played with were in poor condition. If you watch some videos of Wilt in his prime, he doesn't look that amazing compared to the stars of today. Judging from what I've seen, his go-to moves were a turn around fadeaway or a simple finger roll. No dunking or hard moves to the rim. But everyone looked worse back then. The way the guards dribbled and set up for shots was really awkward, compared to today. It's pretty hard to judge things back then, since turnover stats and opponent FG% allowed wasn't tracked. But I would guess that the Celtics won with dominant team defense. I wouldn't say that Wilt held his team back offensively.
FWIW - - when Wilt went for 100 (in a game neither televised nor recorded for future viewing) he hit an amazing 28-32 FTs.
It's weird when some people, especially the younger fans and posters think he would be at a disadvantage in today's game. I heard one poster said that Andrew Bynum would be a better center than Chamberlain could in his prime in today's game. Bynum is nowhere near that athletic, while Dwight doesn't have that kind of scoring ability. No modern big man comes close to that kind of endurance, especially considering the pace game was at during 60s. It was nothing, but running up and down floor. Wilt could almost average 48 minutes for his career, if he played now, easily.
Right, during HIS ERA his field goal % was excellent. Wilt's highest FG% seasons actually came AFTER age 30. From age 30 til retirement he averaged 61.6% in those years. 72.7% his FINAL year age 36 (on half the shots) but still thats right there in the modern era.
Even in today's game, it would be considered just as high and freakish. 1. Falling into advanced statistics, Wilt's win shares heavily trump, any active center (all star or not) in today's game. 17.6 per season, while topping out at 25 and 23.1. Dwight Howard's best season, 14.4. Patrick Ewing's 13.5. Olajuwon's 15.8. Robert Parish 10.9. Assist numbers speak for themselves, statistically he produced the most points from his assist more than any other center in NBA history and averaged the most per game. Already, that is not a typical center, even in today's game. A center winning the assist title would dominate NBA headlines for months. I do not see any kind edge someone, like Kendrick Perkins, Emeka Okafor, Nene, Noah, or etc. There's nothing unique or special about their games. I will even use players, like Kevin Love, Zach Randolph, Carlos Boozer, Al Jefferson, and Chris Bosh. They are fun players to watch, but they do not have traits in their game that would make dominant, while Wilt still had the traits and game to be in the same league with Lebron, Kobe, and Dwight. More in regards to Dwight, he doesn't command that type of will over his opponents in the same way that Wilt did. Moreover, his offensive moves are not that much more profound than Wilt's. In fact, Dwight's offensive itself is lacking to some of his contemporaries, such as Andrew Bynum, Yao Ming, Marc Gasol, and etc. There's nothing unique about his offensive game (not saying he doesn't have post moves), but it's not a rare display of talent. I watched some of those old all-star games on NBA TV and few Lakers games in the NBA Finals. I wrote a big thread about back this summer. Wilt is one of the rarest talents in NBA history, and this was me watch him in the twilight of his career. He had no problem jumping around the backboard blocking shots and stuffing loose balls back in for dunks. He's easily one of the best leaping centers in NBA history, while I never saw him lumber down the floor, in fact he was beating alot of wing players down the floor. Or, maybe something is wrong with my sight. 3.Kareem's toughest opponent (by his own admission): Wilt Chamberlain. Nate Thurmond, Willis Reed, and Spencer Haywood all had their battles with Wilt. If that's not enough see what Jerry West, Larry Brown, Bill Russell, Magic Johnson (a story in his rookie year about challenging a 40 something year old Wilt), and few others. He was far from a run of the mill star. 4. Players generally are better conditioned and better skilled, but how many players could you see playing 46 mpg, during any era of basketball. 5. Even in the limited footage that I've seen of Wilt, I see a very nimble, athletic, and fluid player, who is very active and motivated, while you must not forget this is a 7,1-7,2 270 - 285 pound guy (very long and lean build with a crazy wingspan). There are very few players, if any who could stop him in his tracks, especially he gets position into the low post. I might could see into "he doesn't look that amazing compared to today's stars," I could see a little bit in comparison to Olajuwon, Kareem, Shaq, Robinson, Ewing, and Mourning. If we are talking about stars, today at center, I completely disagree. 6. Most modern day centers (and some power forwards) lack the aggressive scoring mentality that Wilt had. That wouldn't change in today's game, if he played. Moreover, Wilt still has size advantage over alot of defender, while he was considered (probably was) one of the strongest players in NBA history. He could survive and even dominant with a few go to moves. Just watching Wilt in few video clips, even in the grave he still has more offensive moves and prowess than say Joahkim Noah, Al Horford, Samuel Dalembert, or Kendrick Perkins. Those guys give alot of effort, but they are blocks of flesh
I doubt any player from the 60's looks amazing compared to what we see today, as far as skillsets go. But you also need to realize that they were playing with different gear and under different rules that didn't allow half the stuff that we see today. But from a physical standpoint, Wilt looked completely amazing, even compared to players of today. His measurements are bigger than every center in the league, including Shaq, and how many centers could do this type of stuff (athleticism with that size...7'1 barefoot): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaXHYlPECcc&t=12m25s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lv5GrV1GAnA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYq4CWeWaKg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9cUpYe6G10 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHAJjP6e6pg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlhhne8ElfM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXRhO6Rxu98 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3jkRpOfP9k&t=4m49s And that was in old school shoes.
During the later part of his career he became more efficient, but during his early years his TS% approached you guess every-bodies "non efficient" whipping boy rudy gay. It just kind of shows you how you can use advanced stats can be used to make dumb conclusions.
