Wilt Chamberlain vs Bill Russell 1968 EDF stats

[dankok8]

Thanks for the research Phila!

However I don't find the injury argument foolproof. Most of the injuries sustained were in the Knicks series and yet the Sixers were able to get a 3-1 lead against Boston? Why couldn't they win one more game?

And how about Boston's injuries?

Satch Sanders missed Game 6 and 7 for Boston. Larry Siegfried was suffering through a back injury throughout and also had a debilitating bout of flu that limited him early in the series as pointed out in one of the articles above. Sam Jones had a myriad of nagging injuries and began a steep decline this entire season. The Boston team wasn't exactly in tip-top shape either and on top of all that Russell had to coach them as well.

Following some great performances by Wilt in the series (like in Game 1 and Game 5), why couldn't he have at least a solid Game 6? Or Game 7?

Obviously it's NOT JUST WILT that should be blamed but he does deserve some blame... His teammates definitely did bring it in Game 6 at the very least. And we can't look at his performance and that of his teammates completely separately. One affects the other!

[LAZERUSS]

Thanks for the research Phila!

However I don't find the injury argument foolproof. Most of the injuries sustained were in the Knicks series and yet the Sixers were able to get a 3-1 lead against Boston? Why couldn't they win one more game?

And how about Boston's injuries?

Satch Sanders missed Game 6 and 7 for Boston. Larry Siegfried was suffering through a back injury throughout and also had a debilitating bout of flu that limited him early in the series as pointed out in one of the articles above. Sam Jones had a myriad of nagging injuries and began a steep decline this entire season. The Boston team wasn't exactly in tip-top shape either and on top of all that Russell had to coach them as well.

Following some great performances by Wilt in the series (like in Game 1 and Game 5), why couldn't he have at least a solid Game 6? Or Game 7?

Obviously it's NOT JUST WILT that should be blamed but he does deserve some blame... His teammates definitely did bring it in Game 6 at the very least. And we can't look at his performance and that of his teammates completely separately. One affects the other!

Read THOSE recaps again.

The SIXERS had no business getting to a game seven. No one was really to blame, LEAST of all Chamberlain. If anything, they courageously played way over their heads, particularly Wilt.

Clearly, a healthy Sixer squad would have annihilated the Celtics.

[Deuce Bigalow]

This should finally put to rest these RIDICULOUS claims that Wilt "choked" in the '68 EDF's (or that Philly "choked.")

As Russell said, a lessor man would not have played. Or in other words, NO ONE else would have played with what Chamberlain was playing EVERY minute of that series with. Oh, and he "choked" his way to a 22-25-7 series, as well. Here again, how many other "GOATS" have had series like that...and blown away their counterpart in the process...all at well below 100%?

My god, Kareem missed a Finals clinching game with a sprained ankle. He missed chunks of seasons with broken wrists. And Wilt? He gets ripped for taking himself out of a game for two minutes (and then wasn't allowed back in by an idiotic and bull-headed coach who essentially cost his team a ring.)

And where are those that should have PRAISED Chamberlain from coming back WAY AHEAD of schedule from major knee surgery in the '70 post-season? Nope, when a one-legged Chamberlain carries his under-dog team to a game seven against a heavily favored team, and in fact, is the only player on his team to play well in that game...well, it was WILT who "choked." And Reed, with his injured leg, and doing absolutely nothing in the last three pivotal games of that series...is the HERO. Here again, Wilt, with a similar injury that Reed had in the '70 Finals, put up a 22-25-7 series in '68, playing EVERY minute, and HE is the one who "choked."

Broken wrist? Hell, Chamberlain PLAYED with one badly sprained wrist, and the other FRACTURED in the clinching game five win in the '72 Finals. Played is an understatement. he absolutely DOMINATED that game (24 points, on 10-14 shooting, with 29 rebounds, and 8 blocks.) Does anyone in their right mind believe that Kareem would have played in that game (or series)?

Just more of the many ridiculous Wilt DOUBLE-STANDARDS.

Thanks again PHILA for this brilliant research!

He had a 3-2 series lead and his teammate scored 40 points while Wilt himself shot 6-21 from the field and 8-22 from the line (14 of the 19 team FT misses). That's classic choking but continue on making excuses for blowing that 3-1 series lead though, once you allowed it to go to game 7 you already lost. Team was good enough to get 3 wins and during an elimination game have a teammate drop FORTY, Wilt just choked again.

[PHILA]

Obviously it's NOT JUST WILT that should be blamed but he does deserve some blame... His teammates definitely did bring it in Game 6 at the very least. And we can't look at his performance and that of his teammates completely separately. One affects the other!

Yes he certainly played below par in the last couple games, notably Game 6. We don't know how many of those 15 missed FGA were attempted tip-ins in a heavily congested paint, like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kvo6LfRrGE&t=41s


It could also explain the high rebounding average to a degree, many of them being offensive boards. But without the game footage it is all speculation.

In the 7th game they didn't get the ball into him in the 2nd half, probably due to the sagging defense. Remember how the Lakers almost lost in 2000 to the Blazers with their defense collapsing on Shaq. How does that season get remembered if the Blazers won?


Wali Jones admits their error in that game not feeding him in the 2nd half.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4Vtw7fbktc&t=7m55s


My main point is that the series should have ended in 5 games. Wilt came out with a great effort that game, but they went ice cold in the 4th quarter, while I believe Boston shot over 60%. Again I suspect he received few touches in that game as Boston was getting out on the fastbreak.

[PHILA]

Gettysburg Times - May 9, 1968

Idle conversation between a reporter and Vince Miller, scout-statistician for the Philadelphia 76ers of the National Basketball Association, may have solved the mystery of why Wilt Chamberlain took so few shots in the seventh and final game of the Eastern final against Boston. Miller told George Kiseda of the Philadelphia Bulletin his chart showed Chamberlain got the ball in the pivot just seven times in the second half. In the first half the ball went into the pivot 23 times. Kiseda asked Chamberlain why the 7-foot-1 center didn't point this out in answering questions about why he took only one shot in the second half.

"What would I have looked like if I had said, 'Hey, we lost because my teammates didn't get the ball into me? If Alex Hannum didn't have enough guts to lay it on the line and accept a certain amount of responsibility for the loss and name the reasons why, then I've lost a lot of respect for him, which I have and I will tell him that when I see him. You can't shoot the ball if you don't have the ball. But you know something, after the game, not one writer came up to me and said 'Hey, how come the ball didn't come into you?' Not one. But all of them did ask me, 'How come you didn't shoot more?'"

[julizaver]

Based on stats for the series we can declared Wilt the clear winner in those matchup. Had advantage in all major categories.
If we include recaps it is more like Wilt outplayed Russell in games 1, 2, 3 and 5.
Therefore we could conclude that Wilt outplayed Russell in general for the series. Russell shall receive credit for having good series at his age and holding his own against Wilt, while also for good coaching.

[Psileas]

Based on stats for the series we can declared Wilt the clear winner in those matchup. Had advantage in all major categories.
If we include recaps it is more like Wilt outplayed Russell in games 1, 2, 3 and 5.
Therefore we could conclude that Wilt outplayed Russell in general for the series. Russell shall receive credit for having good series at his age and holding his own against Wilt, while also for good coaching.

Pretty much. It's made clear the Sixers were in no physical form whatsoever to be considered the favorites for the title. I've never seen that many injury reports of significant roster players for any champion team ever and I dare Wilt detractors to refute this.
Btw, LOL at the whole "he was at 3-1, why couldn't he win one more" being considered such a strong point to make. As if the Sixers should be expected to win 3 games anyway in that series, when it wasn't a given they'd even beat the Knicks. It was considered an achievement they got so far, yet "how could this choker lose?". And keep pretending that before Wilt's Game 6, Game 5 never existed. And that basketball is only about scoring and that Wilt collapsed just about everywhere.

[dankok8]

Pretty much. It's made clear the Sixers were in no physical form whatsoever to be considered the favorites for the title. I've never seen that many injury reports of significant roster players for any champion team ever and I dare Wilt detractors to refute this.
Btw, LOL at the whole "he was at 3-1, why couldn't he win one more" being considered such a strong point to make. As if the Sixers should be expected to win 3 games anyway in that series, when it wasn't a given they'd even beat the Knicks. It was considered an achievement they got so far, yet "how could this choker lose?". And keep pretending that before Wilt's Game 6, Game 5 never existed. And that basketball is only about scoring and that Wilt collapsed just about everywhere.

Nobody is saying Wilt choked in the entire series but he did UNDERPERFORM in Game 6 and 7. Even PHILA acknowledged as much above.

Here is what Robert Cherry wrote on the shots debacle in Game 7:

[QUOTE]Hannum admitted he called the plays from the sidelines, so he must share much of the blame for Wilt not getting the ball in the second half. But Hannum isn

[Owl]

Nobody is saying Wilt choked in the entire series but he did UNDERPERFORM in Game 6 and 7. Even PHILA acknowledged as much above.

Here is what Robert Cherry wrote on the shots debacle in Game 7:

And (I suspect) no one is saying he didn't underperform in games 6 and 7 (though it would be hard to gauge a fair expectation of what you would expect given the circumstances and give a truly accurate assessment without full game footage).

However given his numbers over the series (and how they compare with those of his opposite number, the legendary Bill Russell); the degree of injuries; the clear deficiencies of his teammates in games 5 and 7 and the impossibility of scoring without possession of the basketball (would his critics have him will the ball into his hands? He was an inside player, you can deny him the ball and space with it if you're willing to give up outside shots) it seems clear that there are those on the forum who want to focus solely on Wilt's flaws (free throw shooting, the occasional below standards game) and distort these, in combination with a blinkered view of his teams' records and there are those who look at his career as whole, and find it impressive.

[julizaver]

Nobody is saying Wilt choked in the entire series but he did UNDERPERFORM in Game 6 and 7. Even PHILA acknowledged as much above.

OK, Wilt underperformed in Game 6 and 7 by his standards for whatever reason you want (injuries, choking bad coaching ...), But for the series he outplayed Russell.

[stanlove1111]

Based on stats for the series we can declared Wilt the clear winner in those matchup. Had advantage in all major categories.
If we include recaps it is more like Wilt outplayed Russell in games 1, 2, 3 and 5.
Therefore we could conclude that Wilt outplayed Russell in general for the series. Russell shall receive credit for having good series at his age and holding his own against Wilt, while also for good coaching.

Your guys always say this, but Russell was the best defender ever and there is no stat for defense and how much it effects the other team. Blocked shots are only part of it.

There is also no stat for how many blocked shots your team came up with. Russell as obviously the best ever at this and I would bet money he always had a big advantage over Wilt in this category. And this advantage is a huge difference maker. You guys can obsesse with stats all you want, and use them to compare players with different roles, but to me its pretty clear over their careers that Russell added more value to a basketball team then Wilt.

Stop acting like a 12 year old who found a stat book and think that's all you have to know.

[julizaver]

Your guys always say this, but Russell was the best defender ever and there is no stat for defense and how much it effects the other team. Blocked shots are only part of it.

There is also no stat for how many blocked shots your team came up with. Russell as obviously the best ever at this and I would bet money he always had a big advantage over Wilt in this category. And this advantage is a huge difference maker. You guys can obsesse with stats all you want, and use them to compare players with different roles, but to me its pretty clear over their careers that Russell added more value to a basketball team then Wilt.

Stop acting like a 12 year old who found a stat book and think that's all you have to know.

If we exchanged '68 Wilt with '68 Russell what will be the outcome of series ? I mean Sixers with Russell vs Celtics with Wilt ?
About stats - since we don't have enough footage we bring the recaps and that's how we evaluate players. I could agree about Russell being the greatest defensive player, but Wilt was more than capable in that department, while Russell is nowhere the scorer Wilt is.

[LAZERUSS]

Your guys always say this, but Russell was the best defender ever and there is no stat for defense and how much it effects the other team. Blocked shots are only part of it.

There is also no stat for how many blocked shots your team came up with. Russell as obviously the best ever at this and I would bet money he always had a big advantage over Wilt in this category. And this advantage is a huge difference maker. You guys can obsesse with stats all you want, and use them to compare players with different roles, but to me its pretty clear over their careers that Russell added more value to a basketball team then Wilt.

Stop acting like a 12 year old who found a stat book and think that's all you have to know.

If you are claiming that Russell was the greatest shot blocker, in the solid research that exists on the subject, Chamberlain had a DECISIVE edge....including H2H's. Now, if you are claiming that somehow Russell blocked more shots to his teammates, you will have to provide us with something other than opinions to substantiate that.

The reality was, while Russell was the game's greatest defensive force, Wilt was the game's second greatest defensive force, and I would argue, that from about 66-67 thru 68-69, Chamberlain was the more dominant defensive power.

Wilt was also a better passer. This can't be disputed by any PROOF. Clearly a better and more productive passer. Even his outlets were greater.

Scoring? Well, we all know how that went. Chamberlain had several SEASONS of 38-40 ppg against Russell. A prime scoring Chamberlain averaged well over 30 in all of their H2H's, regular season, or playoffs.

Efficiency? Even including Wilt's poor FT shooting, his TS%'s were miles ahead of Russell including their H2H's. Not to mention the fact that Wilt OUTSCORED Russell from the LINE by a staggering margin. And as for FG% efficiency...even in their H2H's, Chamberlain carpet-bombed Russell. (BTW, he reduced Russell's FG%'s more than Russell reduced his.) Chamberlain shot about 10% higher than Russell in their career H2H's.

Sorry, but I don't see it. Swap rosters, and Wilt goes at least 9-1 in their 10 years in the league together.

[Psileas]

Nobody is saying Wilt choked in the entire series but he did UNDERPERFORM in Game 6 and 7. Even PHILA acknowledged as much above.

The thing is that for most commenting on this series, everything that exists is Games 6 and 7. Supposedly nobody is saying Wilt choked in the entire series, yet the series is pretty much only known as "the series when Wilt blew a 3-1 lead". Most know or care none about Philadelphia's injuries (yes, Boston had too, but not anywhere near as many). Most only see: Sixers had won 62 games, more than Boston--> they led 3-1--> Wilt had 2 underperformances (Game 5 never existed in their minds)-->Wilt choked and his legacy suffered.

PS. I wonder why people don't also remember Wilt also winning a series when his team was down 3-1. I bet most of his detractors don't even know about this and have to look up what I'm talking about.

[stanlove1111]

If you are claiming that Russell was the greatest shot blocker, in the solid research that exists on the subject, Chamberlain had a DECISIVE edge....including H2H's. Now, if you are claiming that somehow Russell blocked more shots to his teammates, you will have to provide us with something other than opinions to substantiate that.

The reality was, while Russell was the game's greatest defensive force, Wilt was the game's second greatest defensive force, and I would argue, that from about 66-67 thru 68-69, Chamberlain was the more dominant defensive power.

Wilt was also a better passer. This can't be disputed by any PROOF. Clearly a better and more productive passer. Even his outlets were greater.

Scoring? Well, we all know how that went. Chamberlain had several SEASONS of 38-40 ppg against Russell. A prime scoring Chamberlain averaged well over 30 in all of their H2H's, regular season, or playoffs.

Efficiency? Even including Wilt's poor FT shooting, his TS%'s were miles ahead of Russell including their H2H's. Not to mention the fact that Wilt OUTSCORED Russell from the LINE by a staggering margin. And as for FG% efficiency...even in their H2H's, Chamberlain carpet-bombed Russell. (BTW, he reduced Russell's FG%'s more than Russell reduced his.) Chamberlain shot about 10% higher than Russell in their career H2H's.

Sorry, but I don't see it. Swap rosters, and Wilt goes at least 9-1 in their 10 years in the league together.

No you will have to stop acting like you are in a court of law and you are doing the bidding of your client. Its obvious from reading at the time and watching video of the two that Russell blocked his shots to teammates at a much better rate then Wilt. To deny it makes you a clown. One of Wilt's coaches even admitted he tried to talk to Wilt about it. Russell was the best defender ever..Period. There is no stat for that.

IT can not be proven that Wilt was a better passer. And for most of his career he sure was not a better outlet passer. They averaged about the same assists per game and Wilt obviously had the ball in his hands more often. Don't tell me you are going to base this on a couple of Wilt's best years and one when it was his goal to league the league in assists. Russell only cared about winning.

You can on and on with all the stats you want, but one thing I know is Russell was winning the MVP awards until he was in his 30 and past his prime.

And Russell only failed the win a title once in his career when not hurt and he had the same kind of talent that Wilt enjoyed from 65-73 when he won 2.

Again stop acting like some kid who just found a stat book.