The official jlauber and Wilt Chamberlain thread

[fpliii]

I don't have any problems with jlauber. He seems largely reasonable as long as you don't take a strong stance on some of the major guys from the era.

I'm not on the same page as him with Wilt, but I think he has a good idea of what he's talking about.

[Raz]

I have attempted to discuss Nate Thurmond in the past, but on every occasion without exception, the thread was derailed. Because of my disgust with this board, I no longer discuss past players here. IMO this board is a lost cause, and not worth wasting my time with trying to educate people about the past, since "most people" here don't give a damn about anyone not covered by their respective agendas. And the lack of moderation allows trolls to run wild. There's no order.

I agree with you completely. Mods really need to take care of the OP is a Ph[COLOR="Black"]a[/COLOR]ggot guys, the Did Not Read guys and people that add absolutely nothing to conversations.

I'm going to scale back to lurker, and occasional poster. This place has definitely declined.

[jlauber]

The guy never really saw Wilt play, this is the same guy who changed his mind regarding Wilt and his era just a couple of years ago and he did it over some youtube-footage and quotes.

He says that he's 57 years old and that he remembers 40 year old games in detail but this is the same guy who used to write that Wilt's competition was weak which he later changed his mind about and suddenly Wilt played in the best era...

Jlauber got exposed a long time ago, can't believe that people still find him credible on this board.

Just check this out;

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...7&postcount=53

Dickwad continually brings this up even though I have addressed it MANY times. And I will again.

But first, let's acknowledge Dickwad's creditibility.

One of Fecal9's very few intelligent posts brought up the FACT that a 38-39 year old Kareem just MURDERED a HELPLESS 23 year old Hakeem. It was just staggering. A 38-39 Kareem, who could barely play 30 mpg, and who could barely leap (only getting 6 rpg) was able to score AT WILL against Hakeem.

I have said it before, but I seriously doubt that you will ever find a string of 10 STRAIGHT H2H games in which an all-time great just CRUSHED another all-time great, like a 38-39 year old Kareem did to a Hakeem, whose averages in those seasons were on par with a supposed peak Hakeem (don't take my word for it....look them up, per mpg, they were as good as any 90's Hakeem.) 32 ppg on, get this... .630 shooting. Which included THREE games of 40+ points, and on staggering FG%'s (40 points on 16-29, 43 points on 16-24 shooting, and 46 points, in only 37 minutes, and on 21-30 shooting.) The fact was, Hakeem was HEMMORAGING when faced with an old Kareem.

Which brings me to two points. One, Kareem was "the Bridge"...the player who played in the NBA in 1969, and who retired from the NBA in 1989. His career was one year short of spanning FOUR decades. Here was a Kareem, a PRIME Kareem, who was, by ALL ACCOUNTS, outplayed by a 34 and 35 year old Wilt, on a surgically repaired knee, and at the twillight of his career. A Chamberlain who not only held a PRIME Kareem to .464 shooting in 28 career H2H games, but who held him down to .434 shooting in their LAST TEN H2H games. In fact, in the last FOUR pivotal games of the '72 WCF's, Chamberlain reduced Kareem to a .414 shooter. AND, those like myself, who saw EVERY game of that series, would attest, that even the shots Kareem made were awful looking. Wilt not only repeatedly blocked the "unblockable" sky hook, his fingertips were nearly grazing almost EVERY shot that Kareem took. And, while a much older Kareem had his skyhook blocked later in his career, it was always in his hand when it was blocked. An OLD Wilt, at 300 lbs, and on a surgically repaired knee, was blocking the skyhoo at it's APEX.

Furthermore, a PRIME Kareem who had a TOTAL of SEVEN 30+ point games, and with a HIGH game of 34 points, in 43 H2H games against an older, and declining Thurmond. Think about that...a geriatric Kareem had SIX 30+ point games, at ages 38 and 39, against a near prime Hakeem, and in only TEN H2H's (and ALL on just mind-numbing efficiencies.) And yet, in 43 H2H's against a declining Nate...SEVEN. In fact, Nate held Kareem to SEVEN games UNDER 20 points in those 43 games. Even more shocking, was that the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence suggests that Kareem may not have even shot .430 against Thurmond in those 43 H2H's. He had a KNOWN three straight playoff series of .486, .405 (in a series in which Thurmond outscored and outshot him), and .428. Oh, and BTW, a 38-42 year old Kareem not only outscored Hakeem in their 23 career H2H's, he outshot him by an astonishing .610 to .512 margin (and keep in mind that Kareem couldn't guard his grandmother at those ages, either.)

All of which is interesting. Here was a Kareem just PLASTERING not only Hakeem, and at will, but in the same week he was embarrassing Hakeem with that 46 point game, a 39 year old Kareem outscored Patrick Ewing by a 40-9 margin, in a game in which he outshot Patrick, 15-22 to 3-17!

So what you ask? Kareem never faced a PRIME Chamberlain. A PRIME "scoring" Chamberlain who had an entire SEASON, and in nine H2H games, of AVERAGING 40.1 ppg against HOFer Willis Reed. Included in those nine games were games in which Wilt outscored Reed by margins of 41-9, 52-23, and a mind-boggling 58-28 beatdown.

Oh, and back to the TEN STRAIGHT GAMES in which a 38-39 year old Kareem just BURIED Hakeem. The only as impressive run as there has been in NBA history, was a string of TWENTY (yes 20) STRAIGHT GAMES in which Chamberlain AVERAGED 48.2 ppg against 6-11 HOFer Walt Bellamy. Included in that amazing stretch, were FOUR games of 60+ points, and a HIGH game of 73 points (on 29-48 shooting, and along with 36 rebounds.)

And, a PRIME "scoring" Wilt only faced Thurmond in about a dozen games. After his 65-66 season, Wilt dramatically cut back his shooting. And, in 11 STRAIGHT games, from their last H2H in 64-65, through nine H2H's in 65-66, and even their first encounter in 66-67, Wilt AVERAGED 30 ppg against Thurmond. And he had nearly as many 30+ point games, SIX, in those 11 games, as Kareem did, seven, in his 43 H2H's against Thurmond. Included in that run were games of 30 (their first game in the '66-67 season, when Wilt's coach asked Wilt to take it to Nate in the second half...and he responded with 24 points in that half), 33, 34, 34, 38, and 45. And, Wilt was outscoring Nate by margins of 33-17, 33-10, 38-15, and even 45-13. Once again, a PRIME Kareem's HIGH game against Nate? 34 points.

Not only that, but in their known H2H FG%'s, Wilt was BLOWING Thurmond away. Interesting too, was that Kareem, in his three straight playoff series against Thurmond, could only shot .486, .428, and a HORRID .405. And yet, Wilt also faced Thurmond in three playoff series, and outshot him by margins of .500 to .392; .550 to .392; and an unfathomable (especially against Thurmond) margin of .560 to .343 in the '67 Finals (in a season in which Thurmond had his highest MVP voting...second, and behind Wilt.)

And, Wilt, in his 68-69 season, and in a season in which he hardly shot the ball, hung TWO games of 60+ point games (including a 66 point game, on 29-35 shooting, which the all-time most efficient 60+ point game in NBA history.)

What is the significance of all of the above? Kareem joined the NBA the very next season after Wilt's last two 60+ point games. And he faced the SAME centers that Wilt destroyed in those 60 point games...and never approached those numbers.

In fact, Kareem would face MANY of the SAME centers that a PRIME Chamberlain just annihilated. Where were Kareem's multiple 50 point games against Reed? Where were his multiple 60 point games against Bellamy? Where were his 38 and 45 point explosions against Thurmond? Hell, where was his 72 point game (as well as other 60 point games) against LeRoy Ellis? Where was his 60 point game against Dierking? Or his 66 point game against Fox? Or, how about this...where was Kareem's 100 point game against Imhoff?

The fact was, Kareem never came with the other side of the Galaxy at dominating the SAME centers that a PRIME Chamberlain just slaughtered. Kareem's career HIGH game, in 20 years, was a 55 point game. Chamberlain had 32 of 60+, and in only 14 seasons.

Another interesting point, as well. 6-11 265 lb. Bob Lanier joined the NBA in the '71 season. Chamberlain would face Lanier in TEN STRAIGHT games, and in his LAST two seasons, and in which Wilt AVERAGED 24.5 ppg on, get this... .750 shooting! Lanier would battle Kareem on nearly even terms throughout the 70's. As would Artis Gilmore.

Gilmore is another interesting case. I haven't been able to determine if Hakeem guarded him in their TEN H2H games in the 84-85 and 85-86 seasons, but in any case, Gilmore was, BY FAR AND AWAY, the BEST player on the floor in those TEN STRAIGHT GAMES. And, the boxscore has the two lined up in every one. In any case, in those TEN STRAIGHT H2H's, Gilmore dramatically outscored and outshot Hakeem. In fact, a 35-36 year old Gilmore AVERAGED 23.7 ppg, on, get this... .677 shooting in those games.

We KNOW that Hakeem TRIED to defend Kareem in those 10 STRAIGHT GAMES in the 84-85 season, and there is a strong possibility that he also TRIED to guard Gilmore in those other TEN STRAIGHT GAMES. If, indeed Hakeem guarded both, he was arguably the WORST defensive center in the NBA in those two seasons. Neither Kareem, nor Gilmore, came close to those numbers against the rest of the NBA in those years.

Continued...

[DKLaker]

Very solid jlauber

Hey, do me a favor, please post comparisons of how Wilt and Kareem did against Wes Unseld. I used to get pissed off at Unseld outplaying Kareem, I wasn't into stats back then so your research has made me curious.

[DKLaker]

Looks great. Nice giving props to Chick Hearn, and to Van Exel - he was part of the only Lakers team I ever liked.
Divac, Campbell, Ceballos, Jones, Van Exel. I loved that starting 5.

Thanks, yeah that 5 was fun to watch for sure.

We Lakers and Celtic fans have been blessed!!!!
Your 15 are I have to respect them.

Don't let the trolls get you down, there are plenty of good people on here that appreciate you.

[jlauber]

Continuing...

Now, the previous post brings me back to Dickwad's "credibilty." After I researched those Kareem-Hakeem H2H's, and back in around 2008, or so, I completely changed my mind on just how much better the newer generation of athletes were, as compared to those of even the 60's.

In any case, here was an OLD Chamberlain, and in the '71 season, and in TEN STRAIGHT GAMES, and against a PRIME Kareem, and on a surgically repaired knee, literally matching Kareem's points, while significantly outshooting and outrebounding him. Not only that, but in their one H2H before Wilt shredded his knee, he just ABUSED Kareem in EVERY facet of the game. He outscored Kareem, 25-23; outrebounded Kareem, 25-20; outassisted Kareem, 5-2; outblocked Kareem, 3-2 (and as Julizaver pointed out...in that first game, game recaps had Wilt with a block on a skyhook); and outshot Kareem by a 9-14 to 9-21 margin (.643 to .429.)

In that post-season, Chamberlain performed so brilliantly, that as he left the floor in the last minute of the last game, the crowd arose and gave him a standing ovation. Oh, and BTW, the game was played in MILWAUKEE.

In the very next season's WCF's, Wilt by ALL ACCOUNTS, outplayed Kareem. Now, Dickwad challenged me on that, and I produced article and link-after-link which claimed that Wilt not only outplayed Kareem, some, like Time Magazine, even went so far as to declare Wilt with a "DECISIVE WIN." BTW, where were Dickwad's sources to the contrary? That's right...as always, he couldn't produce ANY.

Even in Wilt's LAST season, and in six H2H regular season games, Wilt held Kareem to .450 shooting, while shooting a mind-boggling .737 himself. Included was even a game in which a 36 year old Wilt outscored the 26 year old Kareem, 24-21, while outshooting him, 10-14 to 10-27.

Ok, that brings us back to Dickwad's "credibilty." When I brought up those Wilt-Kareem H2H's, and then the Kareem-Hakeem H2H's, Dickwad immediately jumped in and claimed that he had WATCHED all of the Kareem-Hakeem H2H's, and that Hakeem did NOT guard Kareem. Well, as always, he was proven to be a LIAR. I produced a VIDEO of a game in the 84-85 season in which Kareem dumped 40 points on him. Then, thanks to PHILA, a newspaper recap of the game in which Kareem poured in 46 points, and in only 37 minutes. The writer ripped the Houston coach for allowing the massacre, too...and claimed that had Kareem played more minutes, he likely would have shattered his career high game of 55 points (all at age 39!)

Well, the Rocket's coach finally relented, and yanked the helpless Hakeem off of Kareem in the '86 WCF's, and with a longer and more athletic Sampson finally guarding Kareem, (and with double team help from Hakeem) Kareem could "only" average 27 ppg on .496 shooting. Of course, it was NOT Hakeem who was the primary defender, or else the bloodshot from the regular season would have carried over into that series.

In any case, Dickwad was PROVEN to be a LIAR. Which would be just one of MANY times that I nailed him here. Oh, and before Dickwad mentions that Hakeem outcored Kareem in that series (31-27 ppg), keep in mind that Hakeem was 23, and Kareem, who was 39. I have long asked Dickwad what the outcome of a series between a 39 year old Hakeem, and facing a 23 year Kareem, who led the NBA in scoring, anchored the best team defense in the league, won the MVP, and then the FMVP...would have fared? He could only respond that Hakeem was washed up by then.

Other instances? Dickwad disputed my claim that when Hakeem was paired with 6-5 Charles Barkley, that Barkley not only outrebounded Hakeem, he outrebounded him by over FOUR rpg. Of course, that was easy to prove, and as always, Dickwas was proven to be a LIAR.

He questioned Wilt's "outside shooting" by producing ONE FT, by a Wilt late in his career, in which he clanked a FT. I produced a direct quote, from a HOF coach, which validated Wilt's early career "outside shooting." Then when Dickwad contested that view, based on lack of VIDEO footage, I then produced VIDEO FOOTAGE of a young Wilt hitting shots from up to 15-16 ft, including a JUMP SHOT from behind the FT line. Dickwad challenged that footage as a "highlight reel", and that even Mbenga could look good in limited footage. Well, thanks to CavsFan and his archived footage, I produced near full games of Wilt hitting a steady stream of shots from 12-16 ft. Even Wilt's FT SHOOTING was MUCH better in that footage (and he did hit as high as .613 early in his career...including an NBA record 28 FTs in one game.)

Dickwad challenged my take that Wilt blocked 15 of Kareem's skyhooks in the '72 WCF's. I WATCHED EVERY game of that series, and it was probably MORE. We do know that SEVERAL sources, including Charley Rosen and Robert Cherry have Wilt with AT LEAST 15 blocks, in three of those games, on Kareem shots in that series (and combined it is around 21.) Even Julizaver, who was the FIRST person to post the Kareem-Wilt H2H's, had several recaps of Wilt with a ton of blocks in that series.

Not only that, but in six of their career 28 H2H games, Wilt had a KNOWN 29 blocks on Kareem (and not including a recap with "numerous blocks." Then, he had a KNOWN block of a SKYHOOK in their FIRST game. We also have VIDEO FOOTAGE of Wilt blocking, not one, but TWO skyhooks within a matter of seconds...and both at the APEX. Given that Chamberlain had a KNOWN 30 blocks, just against Kareem, in SEVEN of their 28 H2H's...doing the math, and that would translate to 120 in 28. Even if you only go with about two per game in the other 21 H2H's, that would STILL have meant that Wilt had over 70 career blocks against Kareem...and CLEARLY, the majority would have been the "skyhook", which was Kareem's go-to shot (and BTW, why would Kareem have shot anything else against Wilt, if Wilt wasn't rountinely blocking and challenging it."

True, Dickwad did challenge ONE of my sources...CavsFan, who, at one time posted that Wilt blocked 23 skyhooks in that '72 series. However, it was NOT a "typo"...it was a blatant fabrication, plain-and-simple. CavsFan is only 25, and given the fact that virtually no footage exists from the '72 WCF's (even though EVERY game was NATIONALLY televised...and I SAW them ALL.) Still, CavsFan has the most extensive video library of Wilt, and he because of that, he has been a VALUABLE source.

And the reality is/was, you can always question "sources." I mentioned Charley Rosen. He did a book on the '72 Lakers (BTW, I either listened to, or watched EVERY game that season), and his work was exceptional. He used recaps and box scores from the LA Times. HOWEVER, in the early chapter, he CLEARLY LIED about Wilt's performance in the '69 Finals. That rubbish has been blown away. Of course, those that use Bill Simmons as some kind of "source" will also be shredded in almost any debate on the Russell-Wilt rivalry.

Dickwad then made a post claiming that Wilt was seldom double-teamed in his career. Of course, I produced ARTICLE-AFTER-ARTICLE, which clearly PROVED that Wilt was not only the most defended center in NBA history, he was the most BRUTALIZED, as well.

Dickwad challenged my take that little known Gus Johnson probably had a vertical leap as high as MJ...and back in the early 60's to boot. I produced a link in which Joey Johnson finally surpassed a KNOWN leap by Gus. Of course, Dickwad challenged Joey Johnson as a leaper. And I produced SEVERAL links crediting Joey with leaps as high as 52", and with his chin above the rim.

Dickwad challenged my take that Wilt was touching the top of the backboard. I produced TWO respected first hand accounts which validated that. However, Dickwad wanted VIDEO footage (like someone would have been following Wilt around 24 hours a day back then with a camera.) Well, guess what, CavsFan came out with a VIDEO which CLEARLY depicts Wilt's fingertips within a couple of inches of the top of the backboard (CavsFan claims it was at the top level BTW), on a leap in which he had no time to react, and in which he goes straight up (no running start), and blocks the shot with his off-hand. Of course Dickwad disputed the "angle." But, as we KNOW by now, Dickwad would have disputed the video if Chamberlain were doing backflips over the backboard.

Then, Dickwad challenged my point that Wilt, with only a couple of steps behind the FT line, could dunk a ball with a leap from behind the FT line. "Impossible!" Guess what? We now have a VIDEO interview with none other tha TEX WINTER, who claimed to have seen a HIGH SCHOOL Wilt (and not yet fully grown BTW) taking three steps from behind the line, leaping, and dunking the ball. In fact, he was so stunned that he organized a committe which would ban such "freakish activity." Of course Dickwad even challenged Winter. BUT, why would have someone, as highly respected as Winter (and Sonny Hill who claimed to have witnessed Wilt touching the top of the backboard), have gone to such an extent if there wasn't something behind the motivation?

On top of all of that...while I produced articles, links, first hand accounts, VIDEO footage, stats, logical reasoning, transitory numbers, etc...where are Dickwas's "sources?" Absolutely NOTHING. Nada. He challenges MY takes (and even he has admitted he lied about the Hakeem-Kareem H2H's), yet, he can't produce anything to CHALLENGE them. Why?

There have been many other's.

However, how about this "agenda?"

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...=229509&page=6

Haha, you're the same person so you should give it up too..
And yeah, if it was possible to put Bynum in a game in the 60's vs Wilt he'd without no doubt dominate Wilt..

And, ...

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...229509&page=12

Stop it, Bynum is better.

And, if you read those idiotic posts, he is completely SERIOUS when making those claims.

Continuing...

[Legends66NBA7]

I just did a search:

The word "Dickwad" (not counting this one, since it's just an example) is mentioned 24 times by jlauber in his 2 posts above.

Me thinks these 2 don't get along too well ?

[jlauber]

Ok, back to my "changing my mind" a few years ago (back in 2007 or before)...

For years it was a given that every generation became bigger, stronger, faster, more skilled.

I remember reading an SI article in '84 which compared the '84 Nebraska Cornhuskers to their '71 counterparts. Player-after-player were bigger and faster. The fastest '71 Husker was Johnny Rodgers, who had run a 4.5 40. The '84 team had several that could run that, including Irving Fryar who ran a 4.28.

And, in 1988, Ara Parseighian claimed that the '88 Irish would have beaten his '66 National Champs by 40 points.

However, football is the one major sport which is overwhelmingly dependent on physical size and strength. Today, we see o-linemen who average 325 lbs. We have QBs that weigh 260 lbs, and even QBs that run 4.3 40's.

But, sports like baseball and basketball are far more SKILL-dependent. If they were based solely on size or strength, and players like Hank Aaron and Willie Mays would never have been dominant HR hitters (and I'll bring up Mantle in a bit.) And, if size and athelticism were the only requirement in the NBA, then James White, Priest Lauderdale, and Javale McGee would have dominated the NBA. And, how could someone like the 6-1 150 lb Tiny Archibad average 34 ppg in a season? Or 6-5 Charles Barkley lead the league in rpg? And, think about this...how many 7-3+ players have led the NBA in rebounding (hint:...ZERO)?

Anyway...in the NFL, while size and strength have grown dramatically since the 60's, SPEED has not. In fact, there have been many players even before the mid-80's who were faster than the fastest NFL player in TODAY's NFL.

Why did I change my mind?

Continued...

[jlauber]

I have made simiar posts even before this one...but in any case, this one is from 2010...

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...=194899&page=3

I have been on record as saying the GENERALLY, the players of today in the three major sports (baseball, football, and basketball) are bigger, stronger, and faster. They are probably slightly more skilled as, well, because they have had previous generations of athletes from their particular sport to build upon.

However, aside from the fact that football players of today, are considerably bigger than those of 50 years ago (my god, we have 260 lb. quarterbacks today), almost every other area has, ...IMHO...only seen a SLIGHT increase.

Most uneducated posters here believe that Wilt was a stumbling frankenstein that dunked on helpless, nerdy, skinny, 6-6 white centers. Here are some interesting FACTS: One, the average starting center in Wilt's historic 1962 season was 6-10. In fact, in the following season, Wilt wasn't even the tallest player in the league (Swede Halbrook was 7-3...and barely on a roster.) The average starting center in Wilt's last season of 72-73, was 6-11. How about in 2010? 7-0. That is a whopping two inch increase in nearly 50 years. Not only that, but those that even use the height argument are overlooking,..Two, that there has never been a 7-3+ center to ever lead the league in rebounding. In fact, there have only been THREE 7-2 centers to lead the league in rebounding, in a TOTAL of FOUR seasons. If you take Wilt and his ELEVEN rebounding titles out of the discussion, there have been far more players at 6-10, or less, who have won rebounding titles. And you only need go back a few years when 6-7 Ben Wallace (that's right...6-7, NOT 6-9) won TWO rebounding titles in a row.

Ok, let's get back to my original point here, which is that the players of today are MARGINALLY better, on AVERAGE, than those of yesteryear.

If I were to tell you that a peak Babe Ruth would be a great player in TODAY's game, you, and perhaps the vast majority of this forum would probably laugh me off the board. How could that rotund, tooth-picked legged "athlete" be a GREAT player in TODAY's game?

This is where the "bridges" come in. Players like Ted Williams, Willie Mays, Henry Aaron, and Nolan Ryan.

Ted Williams is a good place to start. His career spanned FOUR decades. In his rookie season, in 1939, he batted .327 with 31 HRs. In his LAST season, in 1960, he batted .316 with 29 HRs (in only 310 ABs.) Back to his rookie season. In his rookie year, Jimmy Foxx batted .360 with 35 HRs. So, we know that Foxx was a better player, in 1939 than Williams was. And just the year before, in 1938, Foxx batted .349 with 50 HRs. In 1932 Foxx batted .364 with 58 HRs. In that same season, Ruth, at well past his prime, batted .341 with 41 HRs. And just five years prior, Ruth slugged 60 HRs.

Ok, continuing...there were pitchers that Williams faced in 1939 that Foxx faced in 1938. There were also pitchers in 1932 that Foxx faced, that also pitched to Ruth in that season.

But wait...those players played before integration. There is no way they would have accomplished those numbers against the players post-1947. Hmmm...interesting point...except that Williams batted .406 in 1941 (pre-integration), and then, in 1957, he batted .388 (with 38 HRs in 420 ABs)...or POST-integration.

In that 1957 season, Mickey Mantle batted .365 with 34 HRs. Just the year prior, in 1956, Mantle batted .356 with 52 HRs. And just the year before that, in 1955, Willie Mays hit 51 HRs. Why is that significant you ask? Those players not only faced many of the same pitchers in the decade of the 50's, they also faced pitchers who pitched in the 40's, and pitcher's who would pitch in the 60's. Incidently, I will get back to Mantle a little later, but for now, let's go with Mays. Mays had a long career. Once again, in 1955, he hit 51 HRs. Ten years later, in 1965, he hit 52. So, his great seasons lasted for many years. How about Aaron? In 1957 he hit 44 HRs. In 1973, and well past his peak, he hit 40 in 392 ABs. He faced pitchers like Robin Roberts, Warren Spahn, Don Newcombe, and many other great hurlers in the 50's. He also faced Koufax, Gibson, Marichal, and Seaver in the 60's. And, in the 70's, he faced Carlton, Palmer, and even Ryan.

Ryan is the next "bridge." He pitched for 27 years, and in FOUR decades. In the early 70's, he was clocked (by a SLOW radar gun) at 101 MPH, in the eighth inning of a game in which he had thrown 162 pitches. His very LAST pitch, in the early 90's, and on an injured arm, was clocked at 98!

BTW, I mentioned a SLOW gun. Here is an interesting article about Ryan's speed... and it might actually have been as high as 108 MPH...

http://www.efastball.com/baseball/st...major-leagues/

Oh, and BTW, how about the name of Steve Dalkowski? He never made it the major's, but he was pitching in the 1950's and 60's. Just take a moment and read this article...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Dalkowski


Quote:
Estimates of Dalkowski's top pitching speed abound. Cal Ripken Sr. guessed that he threw up to 115 miles per hour (185 km/h).[18


Back to Ryan. While we know that Ryan was a great pitcher, and for many years, he was seldom the best in his era. There were spectacular seasons turned in by Ron Guidry and Doc Gooden, among others. Furthermore, as hard as Ryan threw (and he may have been the fastes of all time), there were MANY pitchers that threw hard long before him. Koufax reportedly was clocked at 98 MPH in the mid-60's...and after he had SLOWED down his fastball to control it. Back in the 30's and 40's, Bob Feller was throwing nearly 100 MPH. And, think about this...as hard as Feller was throwing, hw didn't have the K/9 IP that many of the pitchers of today do. In other words, even with his blinding fastball, the players of his era were hitting him. Before him it was rumored that Walter Johnson was probably close to 100 MPH in the "dead ball" era.

Ok, so we have basically covered the Williams thru the Ryan eras...or from the 30's thru the 90's...and there were MANY great players. Williams was certainly among the best, but he played against guys like Aaron, Mays, and Mantle...all of whom were as great, or nearly as great.

We have covered the hard-throwers, but how about the power-hitters? Certainly the players of TODAY hit the ball much farther, right? I recall reading an article in SI about five years ago. The writer claimed that Barry Bonds' LONGEST measured HR was 490 ft. Interesting...Reggie Jackson's HR in the '71 All-Star game may have still been rising at that distance. BTW, Jackson would clear that wall in 1984. Lou Brock, of all people, hit a HR in the Polo Grounds that cleared the 505 ft. sign. Furthermore, there were many power hitters that were hitting tape measure shots back then. 6-8 250 lb. Frank Howard, Harmon Killebrew, Willie McCovey, and Willie Stargell to name just a few.

But the most powerful HR hitter of all-time? I will submit a player that was all of 5-11, and 195 lbs. Not only that, but he was hitting "tape measure" HRs from BOTH sides of the plate. In fact, the term "tape measure home runs" was coined after him.

Mickey Mantle hit MANY HRs over 500 ft.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mickey_Mantle


Quote:
Mantle also hit some of the longest home runs in Major League history. On September 10, 1960, he hit a ball left-handed that cleared the right-field roof at Tiger Stadium in Detroit and, based on where it was found, was estimated years later by historian Mark Gallagher to have traveled 643 feet (196 m). Another Mantle homer, hit right-handed off Chuck Stobbs at Griffith Stadium in Washington, D.C. on April 17, 1953, was measured by Yankees traveling secretary Red Patterson (hence the term "tape-measure home run") to have traveled 565 feet (172 m). Though it is apparent that they are actually the distances where the balls ended up after bouncing several times,[4] there is no doubt that they both landed more than 500 feet (152 m) from home plate. Mantle twice hit balls off the third-deck facade at Yankee Stadium, nearly becoming the only player (along with Negro Leagues star Josh Gibson, though Gibson's home run has never been conclusively verified) to hit a fair ball out of the stadium during a game. On May 22, 1963, against Kansas City's Bill Fischer, Mantle hit a ball that fellow players and fans claimed was still rising when it hit the 110-foot (34 m) high facade, then caromed back onto the playing field. It was later estimated by some that the ball could have traveled 620 feet (190 m) had it not been blocked by the ornate and distinctive facade. While physicists might question those estimates, on August 12, 1964, he hit one whose distance was undoubted: a center field drive that cleared the 22-foot (6.7 m) batter's eye screen, beyond the 461-foot (141 m) marker at the Stadium.




As amazing as those numbers are, how about this link...

http://www.themick.com/10homers.html

Ok, now, after all of that, is it still laughable to presume that Babe Ruth would be a GREAT player today? Incidently, Ruth reportedly swung a 42 ounce bat. Try to swing one if you can even find one. Furthermore, can you imagine what players of yesteryear could accomplish with all of the benefits of modern technology.

Now, we have covered baseball...on to football...

[jlauber]

Continuing...

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...=194899&page=3

I already admitted that the average football player of TODAY, is considerably bigger than those of 50+ years ago. And I will be the first to admit that the AVERAGE NFL player of today is faster than those of 20-30-40-50 years ago. However, are TODAY's football players the fastest?

Let's start with another "bridge." Darrell Green played from 1983 to 2002. At his fastest, he was clocked at 10.08 in the 100 meters. Remember that number. Now, you can dispute hand-held 40 yard times if you like, but Green had some downright ridiculous one's. There was even one at 4.09. In any case, Green won the "NFL's fastest man" competition FOUR times. Furthermore, at age 40 he was clocked eletronically at a 4.35.

How about Bo Jackson in the 80's, He was a WORLD-CLASS 60 meter man. AND, he has the fastest recorded time at the NFL combine ever, of 4.13.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_Jackson


Quote:
he won the 1985 Heisman Trophy, the prize annually awarded to the most outstanding collegiate football player in the United States. He also reportedly ran a hand-timed 4.13 40 yard dash, still considered the fastest verifiable 40 time at an NFL Combine.


Deion Sanders was timed at 4.18 in the 40.

Before him, there was Hershel Walker, who reportedly ran a 10.1 100 meters in the early 80's. And before him were players like Cliff Branch and Mel Gray who were running 9.2 100 yard dash times (or probably around 10.2 in the 100 meters.) Back in the 60's OJ Simpson was part of USC's STILL world-record holding 4x100 yard relay team (I know, it is a little deceptive, since there have been teams in the last few years that ran a faster 4x100 meters.) In any case, OJ was a 9.3 or 9.4 sprinter in the 100 yards. And, players like Henry Childs and Travis Williams were running 9.3's in the 60's as well.

However, the FASTEST NFL player EVER? I will submit Bob Hayes, who played in the 60's, and was a LEGITIMATE HOF NFL player. (My god, the man AVERAGED 42 yards on his 76 career TD's.) He ran a 10.0 100 meters in the mid-60's! There has NEVER been a LEGITIMATE NFL player (not some two-bit track star that got cut, but legitimate) who has run a faster 100 meters.

Furthermore, as big as the players of today are, there were huge athletes back in the 60's. Buck Buchanon was 6-9 285 lbs. Ernie Ladd was over 300 lbs. And how about Jim Brown, who was 6-2 and 230 lbs back then (and a 9.6 sprinter)?

Ok, that was a much more brief look at the football players of today, compared to those of yesteryear...

[jlauber]

Continuing (and yes, some of this is redundant)...and keep in mind this was posted in 2010...

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...=194899&page=4

Ok, hopefully we put some the ridiculous myths to rest about Wilt's competition. Chamberlain faced players nearly the same height, on average, that Shaq would face some 40 years later. BTW, who is generally regarded as the best center of the CURRENT NBA? It is 6-10 (or shorter) Dwight Howard. And we know that Wilt was not only taller than Howard, he was bigger, stronger, more athletic, and more skilled. Chamberlain was a high-jump champion, a long jumper, a sprinter, and was not only regarded as the strongest man in the NBA at the time, but there were those that believed him to be among the strongest men in the world at the time (most noteably Howard Cosell.)

And I will apologize up front to those who have read this take many times, but, here we go again...

We have a "bridge" in Kareem that we can compare different eras with. Kareem was the best player in the league in the 70's, no question. BUT, he struggled mightily against Thurmond and Wilt in his H2H games against each.

Thanks to Alexbre and Julizaver, we have virtually EVERY H2H game between Wilt and Thurmond. Kareem faced Nate 61 times, and Wilt 28 times. He seldom scored 30 points against Thurmond (in fact, I believe his high was around 34.) In the VAST MAJORITY of those 61 games, he didn't even shoot 50%. And there were MANY in the low 40's, and even some in the 30% range. In the '72 playoffs, Thurmond not only held Kareem to an awful .405 from the floor, he outscored and outshot him. In the '73 playoffs, Thurmond held Kareem to .428 shooting, and his Warriors stunned Kareem's heavily-favored Bucks. Even well past his prime, in the mid-70's, Kareem seldom shot close to 50% against Thurmond.

Meanwhile, in the 28 H2H games between Wilt and Kareem, Chamberlain held Abdul-Jabbar, who was a CAREER .559 shooter, to a .464 FG% (while shooting 53% himself.) In the '71 WCF's, and only a year removed from major knee surgery, and 11 years older (and well past his prime), Wilt battled Kareem to a statistical draw (in fact, the recaps actually credited Wilt with outplaying Kareem.) In the '72 WCF's, and despite being heavily outscored Wilt, by virtually every account, outplayed or even "decisively outplayed" (Time Magazine) the younger Kareem who had the BEST statistical season of his career. Wilt outrebounded Kareem, and held him to .457 shooting (and only .414 over the last four pivotal games of that six game series.) In fact, Chamberlain took over in the clinching game six, and dominated Kareem down the stretch. Then, in their last six regular games, Wilt not only outshot Kareem, .637 to .450, he even outscored him in one game, despite the fact that he had dramatically cut back his shooting late in his career. Furthermore, in their only H2H game before Wilt was injured in 1969-70 season, Chamberlain just buried Kareem in EVERY aspect. Granted Kareem was a rookie, but, to be fair to Wilt, he was considerably past his "scoring" seasons of the mid-60's, and his overwhelming seasons in '67 and '68.

Continuing, in Wilt's PRIME, he pounded Thurmond on numerous occassions. He had a game in which he outscored him 45-13, and another game with 38 points and 31 rebounds. Even in the '67 season, when his coach asked him to shoot in the second half of a game against Nate, he poured in 24 second half points (30 in all), along with 26 rebounds, and 12 blocks. In fact, in their three post-season series, Wilt shot a combined 54% to Nate's 37%, and outrebounded him in all three (and by over six rebounds a game in '73.) Chamberlain shot over 50% in all three series (with a high of .560), and Thurmond NEVER shot even 40% against Wilt, (with a low of .343.)

Why is all of that significant? Because Kareem would go on to be among the best centers in the 80's. In the '85 Finals, after a poor first game, he averaged 30 ppg over the last five games against Boston's HOF frontline, and won the MVP. He had one season in the 80's when he shot .604. He had another, at age 38, when he shot .599. And amazingly, at age 39, in the '85-86 season, he had three regular season games against Hakeem, in which he scored 35, 42, and 46 points (on 21-30 shooting.) He also added a couple of 30 point games in the post-season against him that season, as well. And, in the same season, he hung a 40 point game on Ewing, while Patrick only managed a 2-16 shooting performance against him. Incredibly, Kareem played three more seasons, all from age 40 on. In those three seasons, H2H against Hakeem, in 13 games, he outshot him, .567 to .475. And, in those three seasons, he had six games against Ewing. Ewing had a slight scoring edge of 18.8 to 16.5, but Kareem easily outshot him, .551 to .483.

We all KNOW that both Hakeem and Ewing went on to be two of the best centers of the 90's. In fact, by most accounts, Hakeem was THE best center of the 90's. And we KNOW that Hakeem battled Shaq to a draw in the '95 Finals (some would even say he "won" that battle.) And, of course, Shaq would go on to dominate the early 00's.

What does all of this mean? Well, if Shaq was the best center of the 00's, and Hakeem was the best center of the 90's, and if an aged, and well past his prime Kareem could outplay Hakeem in the 80's...just what does that say about the greats of the 60's, like Wilt and Thurmond, both of whom were well past their primes when they were giving Kareem fits? In fact, if Wilt were able to win his H2H battles with Kareem, at well past his prime, and on a surgically repaired knee, just what would have a PRIME Chamberlain done to him?

Furthermore, players like 6-9 Dave Cowens gave Kareem trouble in the 70's (even outplaying him in a game seven of the Finals.) 6-7 Wes Unseld outrebounded Kareem in the '71 Finals. Meanwhile, 6-11 Walt Bellamy, who was a force in the entire decade of the 60's (he was routinely among the top scorers and shooters) went on into the 70's, and near the end of his career, in Kareem's spectacular 71-72 season, Bellamy averaged 18.6 ppg on .545 shooting. There were other's, of course. Willis Reed, Bob Lanier, Elvin Hayes, Spencer Haywood, Bob McAdoo (who outscored Kareem in two seasons in the 70's), as well as 7-2 Artis Gilmore, who dominated the ABA, and then had MANY quality seasons in the 80's (he retired as the all-time FG% leader...and still is.)

The 60's and 70's also had players like the great Russell (once again, a world-class leaper with a wingspan of a condor), Jerry Lucas who could grab 20+ rebounds per game in a season, and still shoot from as far as 25 ft. (the "Lucas Layup"), McAdoo, who was 6-11 and could score from anywhere on the floor; Rick Barry who led the NBA in scoring in '66 at 35.6, and then 10 years later, in 74-75, averaged 30.6 ppg; Connie Hawkins, Oscar, David Thompson, Jerry West (who routinely dominated Walt Frazier); Walt Frazier, a truly great guard in the 60's and 70's; Nate Archibald (he and Oscar are the only two players to ever lead the league in ppg and apg in the same season); and thye magical Pete Maravich, who would make Jason "White Chocolate" Williams look ridiculous today.

Each decade gave us new great players, but keep in mind, most of those greats in that new decade, were playing against (and often times being outplayed) by the greats of the previous decade.

Finally, I always bring up this point. If you truly believe that the players of today are MUCH better than those of yesteryear, then give me the EXACT year in which the players became competitive with those of today. Would the Shaq of 2000 be as great today? Would the Hakeem of '95 be as great today? Would the MJ of '91 be as great today? Would the Magic of '87 be as great today? Would the Bird of '86 be as great today? Would the Moses of '83 be as great today? Would the Walton of '77 be as great today? Would the McAdoo of '75 be as great today. The Dr. J of '72? The Kareem of '72? Wilt in '67? Russell in '64? Oscar and Wilt in '62? And if not all of them, give the players that would in the years that they would. But be careful...because I will show the peers of those players in the same seasons, and BEFORE.

The bottom line? Yes, today's players are MARGINALLY better than those of the 60's. But they are not SIGNIFICANTLY better...in ANY sport. I recall reading a post here a while back in which the poster claimed that WNBA all-stars would beat the best of the NBA in the 60's. Just think about how ridiculous that statement is. Do you think the gals of the current WNBA could battle someone like Gus Williams, who was 6-6 235 lbs, and was shattering multiple backboards back then? Or a 6-8 225 lb Lucas who could not only pound them on the glass, but disgrace them all from over 20+ ft? Or 6-10 WORLD-CLASS Bill Russell? Or 6-11 Thurmond with his HUGE wingspan? Or 6-5 225 Oscar? Or Jerry West, who many consider had the perfect shooting form? Or 7-1 (or taller) Chamberlain, with his 300 lbs and reported 500 lb. bench press, along with his 40"+ vertical leap?

The same goes for a "good college team" of TODAY beating the best in the NBA in the 60's. Give me a break! The top players of the 60's would be among the best players in the NBA TODAY. And they would certainly smoke a "good college team."

[jlauber]

I have been reading jlauber's posts over the years, and for a perceived homer, he does offer a lot of good history.

I have no business commenting on any basketball pre-1989. All I have watched before then is old game tapes. Ask me anything about the 90's and I'll ramble on and on for hours.

jlauber, I was wondering if you could give us some insight into your age, did you see Wilt in person, and how you formulate your posts? I know there are a lot of posters here who may be uneducated about you and they assume you copy and paste text. I'm altogether quite sure you do a lot of typing, but have sources ready for quotes etc.

I just wanted to say, that even though you're a big Wilt fan, I'm glad that you're on ISH and sharing all this history with us all.



Raz (Ced)

Thank you for the kind words...

[jlauber]

Very solid jlauber

Hey, do me a favor, please post comparisons of how Wilt and Kareem did against Wes Unseld. I used to get pissed off at Unseld outplaying Kareem, I wasn't into stats back then so your research has made me curious.

Thanks again...



I am too tired to research much of it now, but Kareem got the best of Unseld in the '71 Finals (albeit, the 6-7 Unseld outrebounded him in that series.)

And, I have posted the H2H's before, but Chamberlain just murdered Unseld in the '68-69 H2H's (which is when Unseld won the ROY and MVP...including one game in which he outscored Unseld, 25-4, while outrebounding Wes, 38-9.) Then, in their first meeting the very next season, and before Wilt shredded his knee, Chamberlain dumped a 38 point game on Unseld.

[ILLsmak]

Imagine 50 Jlaubers going at each other in the same thread.
System/board collapse?

hahaha.

I don't mind him, though, but he does come out with some shit. He brings up the same points too often. he's like Larry the Cable guy. Good at first but then you're like... didn't he just say that?

-Smak

[Colbertnation64]

damn, jlauber catching bodies in this thread.

it's sad that idiots like millwad just can't accept the fact that guys from the 1960's were actually good players and athletic. I can't imagine being so blinded that I would deprive myself of the history of the NBA. Refusing to open up to NBA history makes you lose so much perspective and miss out on so many great players.

Keep up the good work jlauber.