What if MJ allowed a rival opponent to 8-peat

[AirBonner]

Hypothetically let’s say Charles Barkley does it. How much would this hurt MJ’s legacy?

[Axe]

https://media1.tenor.com/images/1a07ce5f0d2b1fc6e933dd0ed8f36554/tenor.gif

[3ball]

Depends

Does Barkley have 10 HOF teammates and basically need every good player the league has to beat mj?

If so, that would enhance Jordan's career

[GrayGoat]

Depends

Does Barkley have 10 HOF teammates and basically need every good player the league has to beat mj?

That would enhance Jordan's career
By your own admission if you are good enough to make the finals you are good enough to win the chip. I’m not even including the single digit wins

[coastalmarker99]

Depends

Does Barkley have 10 HOF teammates and basically need every good player the league has to beat mj?

If so, that would enhance Jordan's career

Even then with that team, their series were so close and only 9 points separated the better player from having 5 series wins over the other player who was on the most stacked team in Nba history which featured over 10 hall of famers and a hall of fame coach to boot just to stop the other player.

[GrayGoat]

Even then with that team, their series were so close and only 9 points separated the better player from having 5 series wins over the other player who was on the most stacked team in Nba history which featured over 10 hall of famers and a hall of fame coach to boot just to stop the other player.
All that player had to do was play even barely below average and he would have beat Russell. But he couldn’t

[Axe]

The goalpost would be moved. If baldan has been in the finals several times but lost more than he did won, then his stans would probably tell that he faced tough competition instead.

[3ball]

By your own admission if you are good enough to make the finals you are good enough to win the chip.




Sure maybe if you have a 1-3 all-star or "good player" deficit like MJ did in all his Finals, or 3 of Lebron's Finals

But no one overcomes an 8 HOF deficit

[coastalmarker99]

All that player had to do was play even barely below average and he would have beat Russell. But he couldn’t


They played against each other in 8 playoff years: 49 games. Those same years, Wilt played 46 playoff games against other teams/centers. The results Wilt's P/G vs. others in PO in 8 years was 26.5 Wilt's P/G vs. Russell in PO in 8 years was 25.7

So Russell held Wilt to 0.8 fewer P/G

Rebounds: 24.6 (vs. others) vs. 28.4 (vs. Russ) Wilt had 3.8 MORE rebounds vs. Russ than vs.others

TS%: . 529 vs. .518 Russell held him to 1% lower shooting

Russell vs. Others & vs. Wilt in PO in 8 years Russell P/G: 16.5 (vs. others) 14.9 (vs. Wilt) Wilt held Russell to 1.6 fewer P/G

Russell R/G: 23.8 (vs. Others) vs. 24.7 (vs. Wilt) Russell had 0.9 more rebounds

Russell TS%: .508 (vs. others) vs .456 Russell had 5% lower shooting efficiency vs. Wilt

Wilt also averaged more FTA/FGA against Russ than against other centers in the PO: .52 vs .60

Russell averaged fewer FTA/FGA against Wilt: .56 vs .37

Wilt averaged 2.5 fouls per game against Russ and 2.5 vs. others. Russell averaged 3.3 PF/G vs. others and 4.1 vs. Wilt.

Overall, Wilt vs. Russell as % of Wilt vs. others: P/G 97% Rb/G 114% A/G 84% FG% 94% FT% 114% TS% 98% FTA/FGA 115% PF/G 101%

Except for assists--which are dependent on teammates making their shots--Wilt's numbers were basically the same against Russ Russ vs. Wilt as % Russ vs. others P/G 90% Rb/G 104% A/G 98% FG% 90% FT% 99% FTA/FGA67% TS% 90% PF/G 124%

Except for rebounds, Russell's numbers were worse in every category

Thus, Wilt held down Russell more than Russ held down Wilt in the PO in those 8 years.

[coastalmarker99]

Sure maybe if you have a 1-3 all-star or "good player" deficit like MJ did in all his Finals, or 3 of Lebron's Finals

But no one overcomes an 8 HOF deficit

Wilt lost 4 game 7s to the Celtics by a combined margin of 9 points. That's about 2 points on average. And Wilt dominated Russell in those games Wilt's total combined average across these four-game sevens was 21.3 ppg and 28.5 RPG and 4 APG on A staggering .65.2 field goal percentage. Also, These are Wilt's teammates shooting percentages in the four years that he lost to the Celtics in seven.


62 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .35.4 from the field. Lose in game seven of EDF's.

'65 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .41.3 from the field. Lose in game seven of EDF's.

'68 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .41.6 from the field. Lose in game seven of EDF's.

'69 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .42.1 from the field. Lose game seven of Finals.



like cmon Wilt was far better then Russell he just didn't have the supporting cast to overcome those stacked team most years.

[3ball]

They played against each other in 8 playoff years: 49 games. Those same years, Wilt played 46 playoff games against other teams/centers. The results Wilt's P/G vs. others in PO in 8 years was 26.5 Wilt's P/G vs. Russell in PO in 8 years was 25.7

So Russell held Wilt to 0.8 fewer P/G

Rebounds: 24.6 (vs. others) vs. 28.4 (vs. Russ) Wilt had 3.8 MORE rebounds vs. Russ than vs.others

TS%: . 529 vs. .518 Russell held him to 1% lower shooting

Russell vs. Others & vs. Wilt in PO in 8 years Russell P/G: 16.5 (vs. others) 14.9 (vs. Wilt) Wilt held Russell to 1.6 fewer P/G

Russell R/G: 23.8 (vs. Others) vs. 24.7 (vs. Wilt) Russell had 0.9 more rebounds

Russell TS%: .508 (vs. others) vs .456 Russell had 5% lower shooting efficiency vs. Wilt

Wilt also averaged more FTA/FGA against Russ than against other centers in the PO: .52 vs .60

Russell averaged fewer FTA/FGA against Wilt: .56 vs .37

Wilt averaged 2.5 fouls per game against Russ and 2.5 vs. others. Russell averaged 3.3 PF/G vs. others and 4.1 vs. Wilt.

Overall, Wilt vs. Russell as % of Wilt vs. others: P/G 97% Rb/G 114% A/G 84% FG% 94% FT% 114% TS% 98% FTA/FGA 115% PF/G 101%

Except for assists--which are dependent on teammates making their shots--Wilt's numbers were basically the same against Russ Russ vs. Wilt as % Russ vs. others P/G 90% Rb/G 104% A/G 98% FG% 90% FT% 99% FTA/FGA67% TS% 90% PF/G 124%

Except for rebounds, Russell's numbers were worse in every category

Thus, Wilt held down Russell more than Russ held down Wilt in the PO in those 8 years.

Bumboclat

[coastalmarker99]

All that player had to do was play even barely below average and he would have beat Russell. But he couldn’t

Russ fans claim that Celtics 7-1 PO record shows Russ dominated and is better than Wilt as a player.

Wilt fans say he dominated Russ individually but that Russ’s teammates outplayed Wilt’s. This thread looks at the actual record, series by series and game by game.

I examined all 49 PO games. I tracked data in four categories: TS%, Pts, Reb, Ast.

The overall data showed this: PTS: Wilt: 43-6 (Wilt had more points than BR in 43 games vs. 6 games for Russ.) REB: Wilt: 32-18 (1 tie) AST: BR: 27-15 (7 ties) TS%: Wilt: 32-17

I figured out Russ/Wilt’s teammates’ data by subtracting Russ/Wilt’s stats from team stats.

PTS: BR's teammates: 40-9 (BR teammates had more points than Wilt's in 40 of those games, vs. 9 for Wilt's mates.) REB: BR teammates, 33-15 (1 tie) AST: BR teammates: 28-16-5 TS%: BR teammates, 26-23

[GrayGoat]

Sure maybe if you have a 1-3 all-star or "good player" deficit like MJ did in all his Finals, or 3 of Lebron's Finals

But no one overcomes an 8 HOF deficit

Literally every finals went to 7 games with Wilt and Russell. If you make it to game 7 you can win period. Ain’t no excuse bub

[3ball]

Literally every finals went to 7 games with Wilt and Russell. If you make it to game 7 you can win period. Ain’t no excuse bub

Nope... An 8 HOF deficit is insurmountable

[Hakkim90cc]

It depends. Does barkley have steph curry and klay thompson in his backcourt?

[coastalmarker99]

Bumboclat

Seriously I don't know how people have Russell over Wilt all time as the data about the two matchups shows that Wilt would usually own Russell but it didn't even matter as the rest of the Celtics would destroy his crap supporting cast. which would usually give the Celtics the win no matter how well Wilt played on both ends for his teams.

[Axe]

Literally every finals went to 7 games with Wilt and Russell.
What? It was only one as far as I'm concerned which was 1969, unless you're talking about pre-finals matchups.

[coastalmarker99]

Nope... An 8 HOF deficit is insurmountable

Indeed it is imagine Lebron facing twice the amount of hall of famers and a far better coach with Love being his best teammate for most of those years he would lose every year no matter how well he plays and remember that was what Wilt was facing every single year of his prime.

[3ball]

Seriously I don't know how people have Russell over Wilt all time as the data about the two matchups shows that Wilt would usually own Russell but it didn't even matter as the rest of the Celtics would destroy his crap supporting cast. which would usually give the Celtics the win no matter how well Wilt played on both ends for his teams.

There's no way Russell was anywhere near Wilt

Wilt's athleticism was otherworldly, yet he led the league in assists because he felt like it...

People praise lebron for finally leading the league in assists this year, but Wilt did that too.. there was nothing he couldn't do

[GrayGoat]

There's no way Russell was anywhere near Wilt

Wilt's athleticism was otherworldly, yet he led the league in assists because he felt like it...

People praise lebron for finally leading the league in assists this year, bit Wilt did that too.. there was nothing he couldn't do

He lost chips because he felt like it. His production dropped 12ppg in the finals because he felt like it

[3ball]

He lost chips because he felt like it. His production dropped 12ppg in the finals because he felt like it

No, but it took the whole league to beat him

An 8-team league where all the good players were on 1 team.. just to face wilt

[coastalmarker99]

There's no way Russell was anywhere near Wilt

Wilt's athleticism was otherworldly, yet he led the league in assists because he felt like it...

People praise lebron for finally leading the league in assists this year, but Wilt did that too.. there was nothing he couldn't do

I have researched Wilt's 1968 season stats his last mvp year and the year he lead the league in assists as well and he was top 5 in every single stat in the league that year including steals that is insane individual dominance.

[3ball]

I have researched Wilt's 1968 season stats his last mvp year and the year he lead the league in assists as well and he was top 5 in every single stat in the league that year including steals that is insane individual dominance.

Exactly.. he won a title as a center leading the league in assists!!!

Unheard of

[coastalmarker99]

No, but it took the whole league to beat him

An 8-team league where all the good players were on 1 team


Wilt's scoring dropped in the 1969 finals because one he barely took any shots as Baylor and West were the ones taking every single shot that series and that was a big mistake as Baylor was completely garbage on both ends for the Lakers that finals.



And two Wilt was frozen out of the offence by his coach that year as his coach hated his guts which as a result forced him to only be a garbage man on offence that series like a Dennis Rodman. Which was a massive mistake by Vbk as Wilt was still a great scorer and he showed that the very next season before he got hurt as he was averaging over 30 points a game before his injury against the suns.




And three Wilt was the key reason why the Lakers had the best defence throughout the 1969 playoffs so I blame Vbk and Baylor more then I blame Wilt for losing those finals against the Celtics in 1969.

[coastalmarker99]

Exactly.. he won a title as a center leading the league in assists!!!

Unheard of


When Wilt was allowed by his teams to only focus on playing the Russell role his teams would end up winning the title and doing it in such dominant fashion that both the 1967 Sixers and 1972 Lakers are widely viewed as being two of the top 7 teams of all time and also being better then any of Russell's 11 title-winning teams.


Russell even admitted that a Wilt who was 36 years old and who had suffered major knee injuries was doing his role better then he ever could. Like cmon, we all know deep down that if Wilt was on the Celtics instead of Russell they would have been far more dominant as a team and would have won 70 plus games some seasons.

[bullettooth]

By your own admission if you are good enough to make the finals you are good enough to win the chip. I’m not even including the single digit wins

Good enough to come out of the weakest eastern conferences in NBA history? Ok.

[GrayGoat]

Exactly.. he won a title as a center leading the league in assists!!!

Unheard of
Where do you rank Wilt all time?

[Hittin_Shots]

A team wins 11 championships with similar players nearly every starter is getting into the HoF, how is that a way to discredit the team?

Some guy said earlier 9 points separate the other team from winning 5 championships apparently. So if they'd made that difference and won 5 they would have got more players in the HoF due to being 4-5 time champions... Does that make them more than 9 points better players?

[GrayGoat]

A team wins 11 championships with similar players nearly every starter is getting into the HoF, how is that a way to discredit the team?

Some guy said earlier 9 points separate the other team from winning 5 championships apparently. So if they'd made that difference and won 5 they would have got more players in the HoF due to being 4-5 time champions... Does that make them more than 9 points better players?
Well said and Wilt did play with a loaded team let’s stop playing cute

[coastalmarker99]

Well said and Wilt did play with a loaded team let’s stop playing cute

That's bs he only got play for a loaded team for two seasons and that was the 1967 76ers and the 1968 76ers but even than the 1968 sixers all got hurt in the playoffs which is the reason they failed to defend their title.

[dankok8]

You're misinformed 3ball... Russell had better casts but not by the margins you're insinuating and Wilt had better casts in a few years as well. You have to realize that guys like Frank Ramsey and KC Jones would never be HOFers without all the rings that Russell brought them. HOFer counts have an outcome bias. If Wilt won some of those times more of his teammates could have made the hall.

Wilt's teams were definitely competitive in 1965 and 1966 and better from 1967 to 1969.

# of HOFers on Their Teams - Year by Year

1960: Russell - 7 Wilt - 4
1961: Russell - 7 Wilt - 4
1962: Russell - 6 Wilt - 4
1963: Russell - 8 Wilt - 3
1964: Russell - 8 Wilt - 3
1965: Russell - 5 Wilt - 4
1966: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1967: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1968: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1969: Russell - 4 Wilt - 3

[GrayGoat]

You're misinformed 3ball... Russell had better casts but not by the margins you're insinuating and Wilt had better casts in a few years as well. You have to realize that guys like Frank Ramsey and KC Jones would never be HOFers without all the rings that Russell brought them. HOFer counts have an outcome bias. If Wilt won some of those times more of his teammates could have made the hall.

Wilt's teams were definitely competitive in 1965 and 1966 and better from 1967 to 1969.

# of HOFers on Their Teams - Year by Year

1960: Russell - 7 Wilt - 4
1961: Russell - 7 Wilt - 4
1962: Russell - 6 Wilt - 4
1963: Russell - 8 Wilt - 3
1964: Russell - 8 Wilt - 3
1965: Russell - 5 Wilt - 4
1966: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1967: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1968: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1969: Russell - 4 Wilt - 3

Also Wilt was by far better than anyone on the Celtics. That evened things

[Kblaze8855]

He lost chips because he felt like it. His production dropped 12ppg in the finals because he felt like it


His production dropped in the finals because most of them were after he stopped trying to score and might play 47 minutes and take 8 shots....

He wasn’t making the finals when he was doing 50ppg. His finals numbers are mostly from 14-24 ppg seasons when he stopped shooting.

[Manny98]

Seriously I don't know how people have Russell over Wilt all time as the data about the two matchups shows that Wilt would usually own Russell but it didn't even matter as the rest of the Celtics would destroy his crap supporting cast. which would usually give the Celtics the win no matter how well Wilt played on both ends for his teams.

Russell played a way better brand of basketball which lead to more team success

Wilt obtained stats at the cost of team success

[coastalmarker99]

Russell played a way better brand of basketball which lead to more team success

Wilt obtained stats at the cost of team success

That's bs

All three of Wilt's teams become better teams when he joined such as getting better records and other stuff and two both the 76ers and Lakers highest regular-season win totals in history had both Wilt being on their teams as the best player and team leader.

Wilt Chamberlain MVP vote finishes by year. 1960(Rookie): 1st 1961: 4th 1962: 2nd 1963: 7th 1964: 2nd 1965(Traded midway through the season): 5th 1966: 1st 1967: 1st 1968: 1st 1969(On the Lakers now): DNP 1970(Injured): DNP 1971: DNP 1972: 3rd 1973: 4th Retires

1960: Comes into the league, as a rookie, averages 38 points(led league)/27 rebounds(led league)/2 assists on 46% shooting, the 6th highest in the league. Led the Warriors to a 49-26 record, the second-highest in the league, and a 17 game improvement from the year prior. Wins MVP and Roy along with all-star game MVP and is voted first team.

1961: Wilt averages 38/27/2 on 51%, leading the league in ppg, rpg, and FG%, leading the Warriors to a 46-33 record, third in the league. The MVP, Bill Russell, didn't even make the all-NBA first team, and Wilt did. The first of many robberies.



1962 Wilt leads the Warriors to a 49-31 record, third in the league, averaging 50/25/2.5 on 51%, leading the league in ppg and rpg. The next closest guy in scoring, Walt Bellamy, was behind by 19 ppg. Again, Wilt made 1st team all-NBA over the MVP, Bill Russell. Highway robbery.

1963 After losing Tom Gola(injury) and Paul Arizin, the Warriors move to San Fransisco, and also lose their coach, Alex Hannum. This season, Wilt puts up 45/24/3.5 on 53%, leading the league in ppg, rpg, and FG%. However, the Warriors had lost much of their offence with Gola and Arizin, and their next high scorer was Guy Rodgers, averaging 14 ppg on 39%. Due to having no offensive threat other than Wilt, the Warriors went 31-49, finishing 3 games out of the playoffs, and Wilt finished 7th in MVP voting. Not a robbery, but I think he was the best player that season.

1964: Wilt averages 37/22/5 on 53%, leading the league in ppg, and second in rpg and FG%, and leads the Warriors to a 48-32 record, the best in the West, with no other players even shooting 46%. Wilt again makes the all-NBA first team and finishes behind Oscar Robertson, who averaged 31/10/11, on 48%, on a team with a 55-25 record, second in the conference, but with a far better supporting cast. Not the worst robbery, but this is another Mvp that should've gone to Wilt.

1965 The Warriors start the season 11-27, and they need to make some changes. They trade Wilt, currently averaging 39/24/3 on 50%, to the Philadelphia 76ers. The Warriors would finish 17-63, going 6-36 in games Wilt didn't play. The Sixers had gone 36-44 the year previous and were 21-24 so far without Wilt. They didn't see immediate success, as it took them a while to gel, but they ended up going 19-16 in games Wilt played, and he averaged 30/22/4 on 53%. Russell won MVP leading the Celtics to 62 wins. I think Russell deserved to win this Mvp this season.

[coastalmarker99]

Russell played a way better brand of basketball which lead to more team success

Wilt obtained stats at the cost of team success

1966 Wilt averages 34/24/5 on 54%, leading the league in ppg, rpg, and FG%. The Sixers go 55-25, the best in the league. Wilt was by far the best player in the league, and playing on the best team. He definitely deserved this one, and this time they couldn't deny him.

1967: Wilt averages 24/24/8 on 68%, insane efficiency, leading the league in rpg and FG%, and leads the Sixers to a 68-13 record, by far the best in the league. He ran away with the MVP this year, and this showed what could happen when you finally got a team around him.

1968: Wilt averages 24/24/9 on 60%, leading the league in rpg, assists, and FG%, averaging almost a triple double, leading the Sixers to a 62-20 record, 6 games better than second place. Again, Wilt could not be denied. Just like Thanos, he was inevitable.

1969: Wilt was traded to the Lakers in the offseason. They won 52 games the year before, powered by Jerry West and Elgin Baylor. This year, with West missing time from injuries and Baylor taking a step down from his knees degrading further. It was up to Wilt to hold them together He put up 21/21/5 on 58%, leading the league in rpg and FG%, Baylor put up 25/10/5 on 45%, West put up, 26/4/7 on 47% in the games he played. The Lakers won 55 games this year. Of all the Lakers, Baylor was the only one to get MVP votes. I think Wilt should've won the Mvp this year too.

1970: In a season with high hopes for the Lakers, Wilt shreds his knee in the 9th game of the season. He had been playing very well up until this point, and while he would return for the playoffs, he was not the same player. Obviously no MVP votes this year. Lakers go 46-36.

1971: On his first year back from his knee injury, Wilt puts up 21/18/4 on 55%, first in rpg and third in FG%. The Lakers go 48-34 in a tough west. With his knee injury, Wilt was done dominating like he did in his prime, but was still a very effective player.

1972: Wilt averages 15/19/4 on 65%, leading the league in rpg and FG%. The Lakers went 69-13, rampaging through the league. Wilt finished 3rd in MVP voting behind Kareem and West, his teammate, who averaged 26/4/10 on 48%. Wilt also led the league in defensive win shares.


1973: Wilt averages 13/19/5 on 73%, first in rpg and FG%. The Lakers go 60-22, tied for best in the west. Wilt finishes 4th in MVP voting, as he plays his role, the Bill Russell role, to perfection, as good or better than Russell did. Impressive how great he was at the age of 36.

1974: Wilt retires, and in their first year without him, the Lakers go 47-35, a 13 game dropoff. Quite impressive how valuable he was to his team even at 36 on one good knee.

Wilt led the league in Rebounding: '60, '61, '62, '63, '66, '67, '68, '69, '71, '72, '73 FG%: '61, '63, '65, '66, '67, '68, '69, '72, '73 Scoring: '60, '61, '62, '63, '64, '65, '66 Assists: '68

Placement in win shares each year 1960: 1st 1961: 1st 1962: 1st 1963: 1st 1964: 1st 1965: 4th(team switch year) 1966: 1st 1967: 1st 1968: 1st 1969: T-1st 1970: DNP(injured) 1971: 4th 1972: 2nd 1973: 2nd Safe to say there were definitely some robberies there.

His MVP voting did not correlate to how valuable he actually was, and I'm guessing a large part of this is because the players were the ones who voted back the, and a lot of the players were jealous of Wilt, and his insane physical dominance, and just how much better he was.


Therefore we can see that Wilt's impact on his teams was enormous.

[coastalmarker99]

You're misinformed 3ball... Russell had better casts but not by the margins you're insinuating and Wilt had better casts in a few years as well. You have to realize that guys like Frank Ramsey and KC Jones would never be HOFers without all the rings that Russell brought them. HOFer counts have an outcome bias. If Wilt won some of those times more of his teammates could have made the hall.

Wilt's teams were definitely competitive in 1965 and 1966 and better from 1967 to 1969.

# of HOFers on Their Teams - Year by Year

1960: Russell - 7 Wilt - 4
1961: Russell - 7 Wilt - 4
1962: Russell - 6 Wilt - 4
1963: Russell - 8 Wilt - 3
1964: Russell - 8 Wilt - 3
1965: Russell - 5 Wilt - 4
1966: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1967: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1968: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1969: Russell - 4 Wilt - 3



Wilt played with 9 Hall of Fame teammates

'60 - Paul Arizen, Tom Gola '61 - Paul Arizen, Tom Gola '62 - Paul Arizen, Tom Gola '63 - T om Gola '64 - Nate Thurmond '65 - Nate Thurmond, Hal Greer, Chet Walker ' 66 - Hal Greer, Billy Cunningham, Chet Walker ' 67 - Hal Greer, Billy Cunningham, Chet Walker ' 68 - Hal Greer, Billy Cunningham, Chet Walker '69 - Jerry West, Elgin Baylor ' 70 - Jerry West, Elgin Baylor '71 - Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, Gail Goodrich ' 72 - Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, Gail Goodrich ' 73 - Jerry West, Gail Goodrich

Wilt's teammates that were All-Stars but NOT HOFers

'62 - Tom Mescherry '63 - Guy Rodgers '64 - Guy Rodgers '65 - Luke Jackson

Wilt had Hall Of Fame teammates on his team every single season of his career. 12/14 seasons he had at least 2 HOF teammates. Playoff FG%'s...

'60 Arizin .43.1 Gola .41.2 '61 Arizin .32.5 Gola .20.6 ' 62 Arizin .37.5 Gola .27.1 ' 63 Gola...played 21 games and was shipped out '64 Thurmond .43.8 ' 65 Greer .45.5 Walker .48.0 ' 66 Greer .35.2 Cunningham .16.1 Walker .37.5 '67 Greer .42.9 Walker .46.7 Cunningham .37.6 ' 68 Greer .43.2 Walker .41.0 Cunningham broke a wrist in the first round (played 3 games) 69 West .46.9 Baylor .38.5 ' 70 West .46.9 Baylor .46.6 '71 West and Baylor...both injured and do not play in playoffs. Goodrich .42.5 ' 72 Baylor retires after 9 nine games. West .376. Goodrich .44.5 '73 West .44.9 Goodrich .44.8

'62 Meschery was NOT an all-star. Shoots .39.7 in playoffs. '63 Meschery (* All-Star. Played 64 games. 16 ppg .42.5 FG% during the season.) '63 Rodgers (shoots .38.7 in the regular season. '64 Rodgers .32.9 in post-season. '65 Jackson .33.8 in playoffs.

60 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .38.0 from the field. Lose game six of EDF's.

'61 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .33.2 from the field. Lose in 1st round.

'62 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .35.4 from the field. Lose in game seven of EDF's.

'64 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .38.3 from the field. Lose in game five of Finals.

'65 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .41.3 from the field. Lose in game seven of EDF's.

'66 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .35.2 from the field. Lose in game five of EDF's.

'67 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .42.8 from the field. Wins Title

'68 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .41.6 from the field. Lose in game seven of EDF's.

'69 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .42.1 from the field. Lose game seven of Finals.

'70 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .46.9 from the field. Lose game seven of Finals.

'71 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .446 from the field. Lose game five of WCF's.

'72 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .414 from the field. Wins Title.

'73 Playoffs. Teammates collectively shoot .446 from the field. Lose game five of Finals.

Look...year-after-year Chamberlain's teammates under-performed. Hell, even in their title year of 71-72...his teammates collectively shot .41.4, in a post-season NBA that shot 44.6. And yet, because of Wilt's efficiency, rebounding, and stifling defence, that team went 12-3 and won the title. Just amazing.

[coastalmarker99]

You're misinformed 3ball... Russell had better casts but not by the margins you're insinuating and Wilt had better casts in a few years as well. You have to realize that guys like Frank Ramsey and KC Jones would never be HOFers without all the rings that Russell brought them. HOFer counts have an outcome bias. If Wilt won some of those times more of his teammates could have made the hall.

Wilt's teams were definitely competitive in 1965 and 1966 and better from 1967 to 1969.

# of HOFers on Their Teams - Year by Year

1960: Russell - 7 Wilt - 4
1961: Russell - 7 Wilt - 4
1962: Russell - 6 Wilt - 4
1963: Russell - 8 Wilt - 3
1964: Russell - 8 Wilt - 3
1965: Russell - 5 Wilt - 4
1966: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1967: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1968: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1969: Russell - 4 Wilt - 3

You should remember Dankok that Auerbach was always ADDING talent to Russell's teams. In Russell's rookie season, he not only joined with Cousy and Sharman, but he also had the ROY in Heinsohn. The next year they added Sam Jones. By the '62-63 season, they were fielding NINE HOFers, with Clyde Lovellette, who had averaged 20 ppg just the previous season, being their EIGHTH best player.

In the mid-60's they added bailey Howell, who was a 20+ ppg scorer before Russell, and a 20 ppg scorer with Russell.

And not only did they ALWAYS have HOF-laden teams, but they were always the deepest teams in the league. Furthermore, Russell played alongside those guys from between five to twelve seasons.

Even Russell, himself, admitted that Sam Jones saved the Celtic season, SIX times with crucial game-winning shots. And Havlicek was a 20 ppg scorer, who exploded to a near 30 ppg scorer after Russell.

Compare that to Wilt who had only played with 9 Hof teammates and And neither Tom Gola, nor Guy Rodgers should be in the HOF, either. Nor did Wilt play with a HOF Thurmond, either (for one full season, and when Thurmond was a rookie, playing part-time, out of position, and shooting .39.5 from the field. Hell, Chamberlain was stuck with those two in the '64 Finals, and Thurmond shot .32.6 from the field, while Rodgers shot his usual 25.8

How about Gola in his three post-seasons with Wilt? He shot 41.2, 27.1, and even .20.6 Which was about what he shot without Wilt in his post-season career.

And Baylor? Chamberlain played exactly ONE FULL season with Baylor, and in that post-season, Baylor blew chunks all over the floor.

West? The two played together for five seasons, but only three full-time seasons. Overall, West had one great post-season, another very good one (but alas, in a game seven, he was humiliated by Frazier), one below average one, and one awful one. Oh, and he completely missed yet another one in 1971

Still, most every player that Chamberlain played with, had their best seasons alongside Wilt. Players like Goodrich, Greer, Gola (yes, as bad as he was with Wilt, it was still his best season), Hairston, McMillian, Meschery, and others. And amazingly, when Wilt joined the Warriors, Paul Arizin's numbers only declined slightly, despite Chamberlain taking as many as 40 FGAs per game in a season.

[coastalmarker99]

You're misinformed 3ball... Russell had better casts but not by the margins you're insinuating and Wilt had better casts in a few years as well. You have to realize that guys like Frank Ramsey and KC Jones would never be HOFers without all the rings that Russell brought them. HOFer counts have an outcome bias. If Wilt won some of those times more of his teammates could have made the hall.

Wilt's teams were definitely competitive in 1965 and 1966 and better from 1967 to 1969.

# of HOFers on Their Teams - Year by Year

1960: Russell - 7 Wilt - 4
1961: Russell - 7 Wilt - 4
1962: Russell - 6 Wilt - 4
1963: Russell - 8 Wilt - 3
1964: Russell - 8 Wilt - 3
1965: Russell - 5 Wilt - 4
1966: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1967: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1968: Russell - 4 Wilt - 4
1969: Russell - 4 Wilt - 3

Moving one step further and responding to the argument that Wilt also had great teammates after 1965 here are some lines of the two in selected games that Boston won:

Wilt: 29/26, Russell: 3/27, with 0 FGM (1966) Wilt: 46/34, Russell: 18/31 (1966 playoffs) Wilt: 30/28, Russell: 10/29 (1967) Wilt: 26/23, Russell: 4/26 (1967) Wilt: 28/30, Russell: 8/24 (1968 playoffs) Wilt: 35/19, Russell 5/16 (1969),

and these are seasons when Wilt had good teammates (I won't even mention some even more impressive lines by Wilt in older games that Boston won). Did he dominate the ball too much and trusted his teammates too little? Not really. That Wilt was a damn good passer, as well, posting 5+ apg in 4 different seasons. Maybe it could be that, apart from the known blames of Wilt's playoff failures (and some mediocre, for his level, games), his otherwise "great" teammates didn't exactly do much to raise to the occasion, either:

Billy Cunningham was one of the best rookies of the 1966 season. Then, he completely blew it in the playoffs. Hal Greer, a 44.5% FG shooter, dove to 35.2% against the Celtics (and his overall scoring went way down, as well). Chet Walker, a 45.2% FG shooter, went 37.5% in that series. These guys sucked way more than Wilt did, yet nobody remembers this.


Add to this an inexperienced coach (Schayes) who never managed to even begin controling the egos of his players and his career practically was over before it even began (compare this to Russell having arguably the GOAT coach) and you have a recipe for disaster. Ironically, the game when Wilt trusted his teammates more than any other time (7th ECF in 1968) was also a game for which Wilt takes almost all the blame, and was another game when his teammates flopped badly.

Because, if Greer, Jones and Walker could hit just a respectable % of their FG's instead of once against being in the low-mid 30's, the Sixers would be the NBA Finalists (and probably champions, as well) and nobody would now know that Wilt barely even shot in that second half. Instead, he might very well have a 3rd ring, increasing his GOAT case among fans.

1969? It was Wilt's least productive series against Russell. Also, it was Baylor's least productive series against the Celtics, as well, and Baylor actually played even worse. If Wilt couldn't do a bit more (while guarded by Russell), why couldn't Baylor? It could be enough to give the Lakers the ring, which would increase Wilt's resume even more. Wilt, with 3 rings in a row (and 4 overall, along with 1972) would now be considered as having solved the Celtics' mystique and a legit winner, while doing nothing more than he did.




All it takes would be a little more help from some teammates who are now simply branded "too good to lose a title with them". Just like it took a little more help from Jordan's teammates and a great coach to earn him rings in the 90's, despite Jordan not being really better individually in his title seasons than, say, the 1988-90 ones, so we don't have strange debates like "who was greater, Jordan or Isiah Thomas". (Baylor, btw, also had an equally mediocre 1970 Finals series, and Wilt in both series took a low number of FGA's, so it's not as if their roles collided).

[dankok8]

^ Guy Rodgers is a HOFer.

Good posts otherwise! :cheers:

I've debated this with Wilt fans so many times. It's just not interesting to me. All I can say is that I would draft Russell over Wilt right now if I had them in the same draft and I don't think anyone can post anything to convince me otherwise. Not to be disrespectful but I am very well versed in NBA history when it comes to those two. I've watched most of the available footage and observed/participated in POTY projects, analyzed their stats in every imaginable way and read loads of articles from that time.

[Manny98]

Here's a graph showing how Wilts team offenses improved the less he scored

https://i.postimg.cc/vTcfHjBf/Wilts-Correlation-PPG-and-Team-ORtg.png

He didn't create for others at all, his fga to assist ratio is the worst of any player ever and he didn't start winning championships until he settled into a lesser role and focused on being the defensive anchor for the team

[coastalmarker99]

^ Guy Rodgers is a HOFer.

Good posts otherwise! :cheers:

I've debated this with Wilt fans so many times. It's just not interesting to me. All I can say is that I would draft Russell over Wilt right now if I had them in the same draft and I don't think anyone can post anything to convince me otherwise. Not to be disrespectful but I am very well versed in NBA history when it comes to those two. I've watched most of the available footage and observed/participated in POTY projects, analyzed their stats in every imaginable way and read loads of articles from that time.

Same as I and the data about the two and the private footage that I have seen from Nba collectors and the Nba archive has allowed me to see about Wilt has me convinced that Wilt was the better player out of the two he just didn't have the teammates to back him up against Russell and the data supports me in that which is great.


Funny fact about Guy Rodgers with 10 seconds left in the 1960 ecf game 6 and with the scores tied 107 107 each he had the chance to shoot two free throws to put the 76ers up by one or two points instead he missed both and then Tommy Heinsohn tipped the ball in the very next possession to give the Celtics the series victory.


It would have been very interesting to see a game 7 between the two in 1960 if he hadn't had missed those clutch free throws as Russell would have been trying not to blow a 3 1 series lead to a rookie Chamberlain and his team who before the series had even started were 3 and 1 underdogs to win. Therefore you have to wonder that if Wilt wins that year maybe with some of that Celtics mystique gone that he would have won in other years like 1962 1965 1968 and 1969.

[coastalmarker99]

Here's a graph showing how Wilts team offenses improved the less he scored

https://i.postimg.cc/vTcfHjBf/Wilts-Correlation-PPG-and-Team-ORtg.png

He didn't create for others at all, his fga to assist ratio is the worst of any player ever and he didn't start winning championships until he settled into a lesser role and focused on being the defensive anchor for the team


He did create for others when one player is flat out getting double and triple-teamed that frees the rest of his teammates to take wide-open shots it is not Wilt's fault that all of his teammates as a warrior would usually puke all over themselves in the playoffs and let Wilt down.






Hell, I for one think Wilt should have been more selfish offensively as a player as if he had kept up that scoring mindest in the last seven years of his career he most likely wins rings in 1968,1969 and 1973 giving him 5 rings and a far better legacy, as a result of that.


Wilt, unfortunately, sacrificed way too much for his teams past 1966 and he knows it too as in interviews and books he regrets that he lost that scoring mindset on the back end of his career as if he hadn't have done so he more then likely would have ended up with more then 2 rings and as a result of that he would have also silenced most of his critics forever.

[dankok8]

Same as I and the data about the two and the private footage that I have seen from Nba collectors and the Nba archive has allowed me to see about Wilt has me convinced that Wilt was the better player out of the two he just didn't have the teammates to back him up against Russell and the data supports me in that which is great.


Funny fact about Guy Rodgers with 10 seconds left in the 1960 ecf game 6 and with the scores tied 107 107 each he had the chance to shoot two free throws to put the 76ers up by one or two points instead he missed both and then Tommy Heinsohn tipped the ball in the very next possession to give the Celtics the series victory.


It would have been very interesting to see a game 7 between the two in 1960 if he hadn't had missed those clutch free throws as Russell would have been trying not to blow a 3 1 series lead to a rookie Chamberlain and his team who before the series had even started were 3 and 1 underdogs to win. Therefore you have to wonder that if Wilt wins that year maybe with some of that Celtics mystique gone that he would have won in other years like 1962 1965 1968 and 1969.

Well Wilt from 1960-1965 undoubtedly had worse casts. How much worse is debatable. The problem at looking at HOFers and even All-Star appearances is that there is outcome bias. Players on title teams are way more likely to get accolades and obviously HOF nods than ones that aren't.

1960... isn't that the year Wilt broke his hand in the playoffs?

[coastalmarker99]

Well Wilt from 1960-1965 undoubtedly had worse casts. How much worse is debatable. The problem at looking at HOFers and even All-Star appearances is that there is outcome bias. Players on title teams are way more likely to get accolades and obviously HOF nods than ones that aren't.

1960... isn't that the year Wilt broke his hand in the playoffs?

Yes it was the year he broke his hand in the playoffs and yet he still put 50 on Russell's head on the road during game 5 of that series which is very impressive

[dankok8]

Yes it was the year he broke his hand in the playoffs and yet he still put 50 on Russell's head on the road during game 5 of that series which is very impressive

Yes but breaking his hand was his own doing. He lost his cool and punched Heinsohn and injured his hand.

The thing with Wilt is that he didn't care about winning as much as Russell. The intangibles weren't there... But I will concede this. Maybe if Wilt had a different coach early in his career (like say Auerbach) that his mentality would have been different and that he would have grown into a winner and been more "Russell-like". It is possible...

[guy]

What is up with all these Jordan hypotheticals that weren't even close to happening? :oldlol:At some point these hypotheticals are so far from reality it basically only exists if Jordan was a lesser player. So whats the point of them?

[GrayGoat]

What is up with all these Jordan hypotheticals that weren't even close to happening? :oldlol:At some point these hypotheticals are so far from reality it basically only exists if Jordan was a lesser player. So whats the point of them?

The point is at some point winning matters. Wilt didn’t win enough

[coastalmarker99]

Yes but breaking his hand was his own doing. He lost his cool and punched Heinsohn and injured his hand.

The thing with Wilt is that he didn't care about winning as much as Russell. The intangibles weren't there... But I will concede this. Maybe if Wilt had a different coach early in his career (like say Auerbach) that his mentality would have been different and that he would have grown into a winner and been more "Russell-like". It is possible...


Red funny enough did want Wilt very badly and he desperately tried convincing a very young Chamberlain to go to Harvard so he could draft him under the rules of the time.



And if Wilt had accepted his offer I think Red would have straight-up used him as Alex did in 1967 and 1968 and if Red wants him to do the Russell role then Wilt could do that as well maybe even better then Russell ever did.





And also Red and Wilt liked each other as people Red said he actually liked Wilt a lot as a person through Wilt did hate his guts and nearly beat the crap out of him during one game before the entire Celtics team stopped Wilt from doing so. but I think that was more because Red used incredibly dirty tactics to get under Wilt's skin.


And it worked as if Wilt hadn't taken the bait in the 1960 playoffs and injured his hand as result it is more then likely that the Warriors win that series and then the title which could have completely changed the course of the 1960s for both Wilt and Russell.



If Wilt has more titles then he most likely with his stats and records to back him up he is viewed by fans nowadays at the very least as being top 3 all-time. Through the Kareem vs Wilt argument would be very tough but you would have to give it to Wilt most likely as he would have been the alpha dog for all his championship, unlike Kareem.