View Single Post
Old 01-09-2014, 12:34 AM   #36
Local High School Star
dankok8's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,260
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Bill Russell 1968 EDF stats

Originally Posted by LAZERUSS
Again, the 64-65 Sixers were NOWHERE near as talented as the 64-65 Celtics. The Sixers had been 34-46 the year before, and it's not like they just acquired Wilt. They traded THREE players to get him (and over 21 ppg in the process.) They were still relatively young, had not drafted Cunningham yet, and were clearly outmatched, player-for-player, by a 62-18 Celtic team at the peak of their dynasty. The reality was, Chamberlain almost single-handedly beat Boston by himself in that series with the most incredible beatdown by a prime GOAT center administered on another prime GOAT center in NBA history.

And, I already explained why the 65-66 Sixers just edged out Boston by one game in the regular season. Boston's roster was littered with their best players missing games that year. They were the seven time defending champions, as well. And, of course, they completely shelled Chamberlain's teammates in the EDF's.

In the 68-69 season, Boston was much deeper, had far more weapons, and the Lakers were saddled with an incompetent coach whose hatred for Wilt cost them the Finals. Still, had the idiotic VBK had West handling the ball at the end of game four, instead of the nomadic Egan, LA would have won that game, and with their solid win in game five, would have won that series, 4-1.

As for 66-67 and 67-68...agreed. Philly was the better team, although not by a large margin. The 66-67 Celtics went 60-21, and yet were completely destroyed by the 68-13 Sixers in the EDF's. And as we ALL know by now, the 67-68 Sixers were just decimated with injuries, including Chamberlain, himself, and Boston still barely eked out a game seven win. The reality was, (and the newspaper articles by PHILA confirmed it), that Sixer team had no business even making this a series, much less barely losing it. Clearly, a healthy Sixer team would have repeated their carpet-bombing from the 66-67 EDF's.

Had Wilt been given equal rosters in his entire career, and he likely would have won nearly all of their H2H's. And futhermore, had Wilt enjoyed the one-sided margin in talent that Russell had in their first six seasons in the league together, and there is little doubt that Chamberlain would have had a resounding 6-0 margin in rings.

You look at Wilt's and his teammates' performance in a vacuum. It doesn't work that way. One AFFECTS the other... Wilt is partly responsible for his teammates performing poorly. Taking too many shots, not passing the ball effectively/willingly, discouraging his teammates with his crazy antics like living in NYC and skipping practices...

Is it a coincidence that the 66-67 Sixers with basically the same players as the year prior suddenly became a powerhouse? NO... Wilt changed his style of play and his team blossomed.

Even if Wilt doesn't deserve to get ripped so much then Russell should be praised. Do you not believe in intangibles or you just pretend they don't exist?
dankok8 is offline   Reply With Quote