Wilt Chamberlain One On One Interview With Chris Myers (1997)

[La Frescobaldi]

Naw.. it wan't 3pt shooting, I remember he said he didn't make a single shot or some bullshit. A quick check of his rookie games will show how dumb his statement was.

huh

i must have missed that one.
Chamberlain as far as I ever heard was always blunt about Jordan being one of the greatest players ever (although he thought, at least publicly, that MJ was overrated) but not a great shooter. But I never heard that one

[jlip]

Pretty much reflective of this thread

[LAZERUSS]

Was this Wilt trolling? He certainly was with his claim that he would score 70 ppg if he played in the 80s.





Shaq salty already. Wilt was right though. Imagine Wilt and Russell on ESPN alongside Shaq.

The 80's would have been interesting for a prime Chamberlain. There were really only a handful of elite centers in the 80's, and even a couple of those were past their peaks (KAJ and Gilmore.)

And Gilmore is a good example. A Gilmore from his early to mid-30's was scoring around 20 ppg on unfathomable (for everyone other than Wilt anyway)...FG%'s.

Even a way-past his prime Kareem was hanging career high FG%'s.

In fact, the ENTIRE NBA was shooting light's out. Hell, a 30-52 team in the mid-80's shot .504 from the field, and the Lakers had seasons in which their entire TEAM shot .548.

The "pace" would have suited a prime Wilt just fine, as well. I have always felt that it was more than just a coincidence that league-wide scoring jumped up considerably in Wilt's rookie season. If anything, Wilt's incredible speed and athleticism FORCED the league to keep up. BTW, scoring declined after Wilt retired too (and in fact, it started in his last season.)

A prime Wilt, playing in an era of "weak" defense, and against a plethora of inept centers...who knows what kind of scoring and efficiency numbers he would have put up? And no, it wouldn't have been 70 ppg (although Walt Frazier said he would have averaged that just a few years ago)...

but I suspect that 40+ ppg seasons, on .600+ FG%'s would have been entirely possible.

[Dr.J4ever]

The 80's would have been interesting for a prime Chamberlain. There were really only a handful of elite centers in the 80's, and even a couple of those were past their peaks (KAJ and Gilmore.)

And Gilmore is a good example. A Gilmore from his early to mid-30's was scoring around 20 ppg on unfathomable (for everyone other than Wilt anyway)...FG%'s.

Even a way-past his prime Kareem was hanging career high FG%'s.

In fact, the ENTIRE NBA was shooting light's out. Hell, a 30-52 team in the mid-80's shot .504 from the field, and the Lakers had seasons in which their entire TEAM shot .548.

The "pace" would have suited a prime Wilt just fine, as well. I have always felt that it was more than just a coincidence that league-wide scoring jumped up considerably in Wilt's rookie season. If anything, Wilt's incredible speed and athleticism FORCED the league to keep up. BTW, scoring declined after Wilt retired too (and in fact, it started in his last season.)

A prime Wilt, playing in an era of "weak" defense, and against a plethora of inept centers...who knows what kind of scoring and efficiency numbers he would have put up? And no, it wouldn't have been 70 ppg (although Walt Frazier said he would have averaged that just a few years ago)...

but I suspect that 40+ ppg seasons, on .600+ FG%'s would have been entirely possible.

I think Wilt would have dominated the 80s.

It was a high scoring and fast breaking era, and if those CavsFTW videos are correct, Wilt would have even gotten himself lots of transition opportunities. Add that to his post ups in the half court, which seemed to be very difficult to stop in the 80s, and you can project monster numbers.

Maybe 35-38ppg/20rpg on 54%FG would not have been out of the question. I mean if Adrian Dantley standing at 6'4 was able to average 29ppg on mostly post ups, what would Wilt do?

[SamuraiSWISH]

2. He doesn't think MJ is necessary the best. He thinks Jerry West, Oscar Robinson, Bill Russell is possibly greater at the time.

Insecurity. Flat out Morton's SALT ...

By this point, MJ had:

4x Championships
4x MVPs
DPOY
4x Finals MVPs
72-10 season

Then that season, he matched the best Wilt / West / Baylor did and went 69-13 to follow up that 72 win seson. How on earth could any of those guys be considered better than Jordan at that point to a sane person?

4. He thinks that Gheorghe Muresan had more talent than Shaq. He thought Shaq gets away from too many offensive fouls, and he thought that Muresan had a better touch around the rim. He believed if they called the rules fairly, and Washington Bullets gave Muresan the ball more, he'll average about 30 ppg or something around that level.

More obnoxious, insecurity. AKA SALT. Like are you serious? At least the previous MJ statement had him being compared to former all-time greats. But this comment?

Wilt is hilariously bitter. What a loser. He brings the LOLz, just like his playoff career.

[Dr.J4ever]

cool interview.
I don't agree with you about the league today though, in many ways the league as a whole is better than it was in the '90s. There are still stacked teams, and there are dogs... same as then. But paintball has recovered to a certain extent - although the defensive rules are absolutely ridiculous and need to revert - and three shooters are just coming out of the woodwork. On the other hand, the East is pathetically bad right now. There are actually 5 teams under .300 at the moment, and it is nutty that the Celtics are on top of Atlantic with 11-14. So maybe you are right.

Chamberlain was very intellectual in some ways and also provocative in many of his points. He would take a position on something - like Shaq here - and then support it very strongly.... almost like a debater in a way.

Shame he didn't see Shaq win rings it would be interesting to see what he thought about that!!

I agree with you about the game being better today in many ways than in the 90s. The advent of the international player has also added a unique flair to the game. At the very least though, it is more entertaining with the great shooting and less "hero ball".

I also agree with Wilt about his comment about Shaq. AT THE TIME, and this was mentioned in a OPEN COURT episode, that maybe Shaq didn't deserve to be among the top 50. I mean, he only was in his 4th year.

[Micku]

huh

i must have missed that one.
Chamberlain as far as I ever heard was always blunt about Jordan being one of the greatest players ever (although he thought, at least publicly, that MJ was overrated) but not a great shooter. But I never heard that one

I do remember reading that he said MJ couldn't shoot beyond 15 or 16 feet. I wonder when did he actually said it?

MJ seemed like he became really good at it in the late 80s. By 92, he was automatic from the midrange.

[Marchesk]

he was right at the time though, comon now nobody deserved a top 50 after four seasons. what if shaq had a career ending injury the next year? retrospect is 50/50

Wilt might be the one exception to that.

[jongib369]

huh

i must have missed that one.
Chamberlain as far as I ever heard was always blunt about Jordan being one of the greatest players ever (although he thought, at least publicly, that MJ was overrated) but not a great shooter. But I never heard that one

Yeah he said he wasn't the best of shooters outside 15 feet. Granted this was within Michael's first few years of playing so he never commented on his improvement.

[jongib369]

I agree with you about the game being better today in many ways than in the 90s. The advent of the international player has also added a unique flair to the game. At the very least though, it is more entertaining with the great shooting and less "hero ball".

I also agree with Wilt about his comment about Shaq. AT THE TIME, and this was mentioned in a OPEN COURT episode, that maybe Shaq didn't deserve to be among the top 50. I mean, he only was in his 4th year.

He had already proved himself at that point IMO. He was so physically dominent, coordinated and everything else you can dream of for a player that size it doesn't surprise me he didn't need the usual resume, which tends to be judged strongly on team accomplishments anyway. But individually Shaq is second to no one besides Wilt IMO. When you jump into the league and put up numbers like that, while showing it wasn't a fluke the next few seasons you're going to get in. Even with LeBron, anyone who couldn't tell he was a top 50 within his first 5 years is crazy.

[StephHamann]

He was certainly wrong about Shaq...but still, O'Neal was voted among the 50 greatest players of all-time...after only his FOURTH NBA season.

Happy jerking!

[Dr.J4ever]

He had already proved himself at that point IMO. He was so physically dominent, coordinated and everything else you can dream of for a player that size it doesn't surprise me he didn't need the usual resume, which tends to be judged strongly on team accomplishments anyway. But individually Shaq is second to no one besides Wilt IMO. When you jump into the league and put up numbers like that, while showing it wasn't a fluke the next few seasons you're going to get in. Even with LeBron, anyone who couldn't tell he was a top 50 within his first 5 years is crazy.

You can't just have stats and get in the top 50. Lots of guys had stats but didn't get in. Ex. Dominique, Bob Mcadoo. Somehow, it was perceived their numbers didn't have enough of an impact on winning.

Shaq had yet to win a title at that point. What if Shaq's career started regressing at that point? What if the Lakers kept losing in the 2nd round and Shaq didn't have great playoff series'?

I don't know the circumstances involved in Shaq getting in on his 4th year in the NBA, but I didn't like it at the time. Whatever though, time sure proved he belonged on the next list of players after the top 50.

[La Frescobaldi]

Insecurity. Flat out Morton's SALT ...

By this point, MJ had:

[COLOR="Red"]4x Championships ~ team accolade
4x MVPs ~ not one was voted on by players as in Chamberlain's day, and there were two guys from his time who had 4, and 5. Jabbar had 6.
DPOY ~ didn't exist in Chamberlain's day
4x Finals MVPs ~ after 10 years of career with no FMVP but 8 trips to the Finals... Jerry West won the first FMVP in '69... on a losing squad
72-10 season ~ team accolade[/COLOR]

Then that season, he matched the best Wilt / West / Baylor did and went 69-13 to follow up that 72 win seson. How on earth could any of those guys be considered better than Jordan at that point to a sane person?


More obnoxious, insecurity. AKA SALT. Like are you serious? [COLOR="Green"]At least the previous MJ statement had him being compared to former all-time greats.[/COLOR] But this comment?

Wilt is hilariously bitter. What a loser. He brings the LOLz, just like his playoff career.

[COLOR="Green"]And here is Chamberlain, comparing Jordan to former all-time greats.[/COLOR]

Try harder.

[La Frescobaldi]

You can't just have stats and get in the top 50. Lots of guys had stats but didn't get in. Ex. Dominique, Bob Mcadoo. Somehow, it was perceived their numbers didn't have enough of an impact on winning.

Shaq had yet to win a title at that point. What if Shaq's career started regressing at that point? What if the Lakers kept losing in the 2nd round and Shaq didn't have great playoff series'?

I don't know the circumstances involved in Shaq getting in on his 4th year in the NBA, but I didn't like it at the time. Whatever though, time sure proved he belonged on the next list of players after the top 50.

McAdoo was flat cheated out of the accolade and it was an outrage.