My logic is that since you know about general relativity and Newton doesn't, you have an objectively better understanding about the universe than he did. You don't seriously dispute this - in fact you presume it to be true. Very good. Well, in the same way, you can presume - correctly - that Wilt's heyday was running up stats against NBADL level talent, if even that good, in today's era. That is true. I did look at it - you conceded that it was easier to get better quality shots in the 80's - and then didn't return. This is becuase defenses were worse, on average, back then. This is a stupid analogy, since nobody is actually standing on wilt's shoulders since he's kind of been dead for awhile now - but answer my question that you refused to answer the first time. Who can reach higher? the giant or the person standing on that giant's shoulders.
Yes, despite common belief :grin: Better question: have you taken a stats class? This is not a justified sample of 28 games; it is an extended highlight reel (nothing wrong with that, however). Show missed shots if you want to say that it is 28 games worth of shots. If you want to do the math, it is about 2.6% of his total made FGs over his career. To be "game tape", so to say, missed FG have to be included too. Once again, I commend spending the time with your interests, and it was a good video. I do not want to sound like a hater against making the video; I am just disupting Wilt's dominance. It is still a top-notch video, with excellent editing and research (I assume). Interesting point. While Newton had such a great contribution to society, the actual IQ behind the discovery was not as necessary as Einstein. I like the comparison, and it is clear that somethings just get "better" with more time. These guys were hall of famers, but their offensive and defensive abilities just don't compare. That is the point. A good example of players getting better: a friend of mine, 6'6 SG, met this old-timer former division one basketball player who claimed he played with Phil Jackson at one point in college IIRC. The guy was 5'9 shooting guard, who said he could never dunk and shot a "team best" 34% from three. Compare that to my friend: 6'6 SG who throws alleys to himself, shoots a "mediocre" 40% from three, according to his coach, and is a great perimeter defender. He plays for one of the best D3 programs in the nation (in before "all D3 sucks", they have repeatly beaten D1 teams). Who is better? The D1 old-timer played in a "more competitive" division, but it was clear that if my friend matched up against the old-timer when he was young, my friend would rip him to shreds. Point is; players get better. Much better, and it is more impressive to dominate today than it was 40-60 years ago. Edit: *same college* - big difference. He is not arguing that Issac Newton had a profound impact. He is saying that in terms of raw intelligence, Einstein's theory took a lot more work/skill, and was possible because of more education. I am guessing, SamFisher can correct me if I am off. A similar comparison: Hakeem used Dirk's kickback before Dirk, but not often. So, therefore, Hakeem set the groundwork. Dirk expanded that kickback to make a HOF career out of it. So, Dirk took what Hakeem did, and built on it. With respect to THIS move, who is better at it? Dirk, just like Einstein is better at what he did, but both Dirk and Einstein used Hakeem and Newton, respectively, as foundation.
But just because I read it in some book or googled it on the internet does not make me have a greater influence on our understanding of our universe. The fact that Newton was able to come up with his theory about gravity and light and was able to push our knowledge that much further with the limited resources and understanding back in his time which makes him that great. Imagine if he was born in the time when there is already the internet and all these other scientific knowledge that we have today? But of course you can say, if he was born today circumstances might lead him away from the scientific field and his genius may have never come to fruition. But that's the argument right? You can only look at his accomplishments and compare it to everyone else at the time. Has his work been influential in moving our understanding of the universe relative of there time? It's the same as basketball. I'm not going to mark an average player 20 years from now greater than Lebron just because his playing in a time that is 20 years from now. Your argument was the point per possession by the bad boy piston's opponent is comparable to the Houston Rockets of this year. I've told you that it's because the league back then was generally post oriented which garners higher FG% than today's perimeter driven incoorporating 3 ball. If I'm wrong, then you can easily then point out that "hey the offense back then is better" right? Don't use that weak arguemnt
I wonder, can the critics of Wilt Chamberlain and/or his 'era' propose any arguments outside of the philosophy of 'progress'? It seems that the philosophy of progress has lead you guys to believe "modern players are simply better" am I correct? Well, please define this. WHICH ones are better, and WHY? Don't answer philosophically, answer with meat and potatoes, be specific, that's why I made this video. For you to address specifics. You think Wilt wouldn't dominate the hell out of players today like he did then? Great, you see what he's doing in this video, that's how he dominated opponents back then. Therefore propose a theory as to why he wouldn't be doing the SPECIFIC things you see him doing in that video. Why wouldn't he get deep position on modern centers like he did on centers in his own era, why wouldn't his left block moves work, or his right block, why wouldn't his pick and rolls back then work today, for honesty sakes be SPECIFIC and critical of actual things you can see not just babbling on about straw men and philosophical ideas. If you point out exact clips, I can tell you as much as I know about who's guarding him, how tall they were, how much they weighed, and you can proceed to rip apart their physical attributes/athleticism etc and what they are doing defensively if you so choose. But be ready for an equally specific rebuttal. Propose a counter with some substance for a change. And please, cut it with the straw man examples. Isaac Newton, swimmers, w/e... we're talking about 1 man playing the game of basketball here nothing else. Stay on topic. Bringing in outside examples of unrelated topics is a logical fallacy.
With the limited clips it would be almost impossible. From what I can see, he would be a great defender today, but not sure how he would have coped with the 3 second rule today. He seems to be also a good finisher under the basket...again this is from the limited highlights that is available
This is a scoring video... there is nothing about his defensive ability in the video at all outside of a few clips of him blocking a few shots in the 'physical tools' section which was intended to illustrated just what kind of physical specimen he was and what tools he had to work with. The video I posted is specific to revealing how he scored points from the field, nothing more.
there is no way to accurately tell how wilt would be the modern nba, and hand picked clips are not valid. you could hand pick clips to "show" certain aspects of a lot of players' game to show that they would be "capable" of doing those certain moves consistently. i could show clips carmelo passing but that doesn't make him a great passer. i could show clips of dwayne wade hitting jumpshots but that doesn't mean he has a consistent jumpshot. etc. it's all for interpretation but doesn't have much basis of fact.
It's not hard to see the way he moves under the rim, rebounding and his built and reach (plus stories about his blocking abilities) he would be a great defensive asset today. I can't comment about his scoring other than the highlight clips that you have provided....but he seems to be a good finisher and his post moves seems to be better than Howard and Asik. I'm sure he would be a dominant centre even in today's NBA. He probably would average at 28/15 and 3 blocks in today's league.
If you guys have questions pertaining to the video please ask, be it specific clips, or sources/dates of clips whatever I'm open to answer the best I can, I am quite familiar with every single one of those clips within the video as I've been organizing and sorting them for the past several months, I can tell you years and even specific games on most any clip as well as who the opponents are. The video is exactly what it says a potential tool for you guys or anyone else to "scout" or analyze exactly HOW Wilt was scoring against opponents from the field in the NBA. A lot of very specific things can be observed, learned and discussed from such a tool.
These aren't "hand picked clips" as you suggest. It's every single field goal of his that exists on film that has surfaced to date. From all games and period documentaries. Need answers about specific clips? Ask away.
*NBA-only footage I should point out, this isn't NCAA or anything though I may make one that combines NCAA and NBA in the future for real hardcore hoops junkies :grin:
i'm just talking about full game references with more analysis on each of his touches per game.. more specifically those philadelphia/san francisco warriors days.
If the old guy played with Phil Jackson in college, then he never played on a court with a 3 point line since that wasn't adopted in college until 1980.
Only player to be in basketball and volleyball hall of fame. One of the greatest athletes of all time in any sport. Good work categorizing and putting it all together.
I'm not imagining that time that doesn't exist. I'm imagining you, today, and him, then. And it's not even close as to who has access to better information and (though you are doing a damned fine job of proving that you ma be just dumb enough to squander your considerable advantage). In the same way, I'm considering the horrible NBA of the 60's, and the considerably advanced league that exists today with players that are light years ahead of Wilt and his contemporaries, not a hypothetical NBA that might have existed were you able to put Dolph Schayes into a time machine. Because that would be stupid, even by the low standards of this thread. I'm not arguing about "greater" - I'm arguing that the players that Wilt went up against were worse at basketball than players today, by a considerably That's not an argument - that's a fact. Your argument is not wrong, it's not even an argument, because you know you can't refute the fact above. 1) First, you effectively are conceding - as you must, that defenses are more effective now. 2) You are trying to rationalize this by talking about how field goal percentage was higher back then - so? All this proves is that it was easier to score baskets (whether they be post or whatever) in the 80's, directly undercutting the argument that defense back then was tougher, and reinforcing the argument that it was worse. "Defenses weren't worse, teams just were able to score more easily!" isn't an argument, it's a punchline.
I talked to my friend last night, he said "same college". Need to edit that. Was a long time ago, which is why I put an IIRC :grin:
Wilt's biggest problem isn't how he good he'd be today, but how good he actually was when he played compared to the league average. His impact as a volume scorer earlier in his career was poor for team offense, but he had great impact on offense at his peak('67) when he was focused on high percentage shots and was in playmaker role. That didn't happen until he was 30 though and he was 4th/5th scoring option as a Laker later on. Defensively he was comparable to Shaq, good he wants to be, but still had some weakness. Top 5 rebounder of all time, but people who think he'd average 20 rpg are foolish. Dwight is better rebounder than Wilt for comparison(top 5: Rodman, Dwight, Wilt, Russell, Moses/Love). Overall I don't think he is top 10 of all time compared to the league average mostly because of his playoff performance which exposed his lack of skill, since skill is more important than athleticism in the playoffs (BTW, David Robinson WS/48 in regular season: .250; Robinson WS/48 playoffs: .199; Wilt WS/48 in regular season: .248; Wilt WS/48 playoffs: .200).
Yeah, I'm so dumb not to surpass Isaac Newton Well here you are again comparing apples to oranges And you really have no respect for that has played in the past. I've always stated that you can't compare different era's...why? Because players can only be as good as what there time's bench marks (this includes knowledge etc..) was and how far there opponents can take them. If we got a time machine and plucked your Bill Russell's and Wilt's and put them in today's NBA, then no ***** Sherlock of course they will struggle. The league has changed dramatically since 70's, had less knowledge on basket and he grew up playing against opponents in his time which is not a knock on Wilt, but he dominated his competition statistically.... But let's imagine if Wilt or Bill Russell was re-incarnated in today's era and knew the knowledge of today's basketball and grew up playing today's opponents. You can't convincingly argue that they won't be able to be the top center's of today's league. Or better yet, let's imagine Lebron was born in the 70's. Do you think he would be playing the same position? Do you think he would have dominated the 70's if all he knew since he was born was the bench marks of that time and he only played against opponents of that time? It's really comparing oranges and apples. Btw do you know how many careers span almost 20 years in this league? 18 years after his rookie season Jordan avgeraged 20 points per game at the age of 40 in 2002-2003 season. Now imagine if he was age 28 again in that same year. If the league has gotten so much better with time, why the heck would this 80's rookie player whose age is 40 still be posting 20 ppg in 2002-2003? Btw he got his last MVP at the age of 35 and 14 years since his rookie season. But doesn't the league get so much better over time? Or perhaps it's better to say, Jordan was able to evolve with the league since he was active during these periods and the same basketball knowledge was available to him as other players at the time. What differentiated him was that he was very competitive and he worked and developed his skills to be higher than his opponents regardless of year. Prove to me that today's league is not perimeter driven compared to the 80s. Prove to me that today's league doesn't incorporate more 3's compared to the 80's. Prove to me that % fg's is not higher if taken closer to the basket.
