Wilt led the league 28 times

[DonDadda59]

Yeah, the pre Civil Rights Act era NBA was a disaster. A third tier league, and the players (including Chamberlain) knew how much of a joke it was.

The fact that no video evidence of Wilt's 100 point game exists when I can watch clips of Lew Alcindor in High School tells you just how seriously everyone involved took the NBA. The Sixers during Wilt's prime averaged about 5,000 paying fans per game and no station carried their games. More people pay to see Summer League and D-League (hell even WNBA) games today than they did NBA games back then.

The league didn't even start to really get its act together until the post ABA merger and the Larry/Magic rivalry turned the NBA into an actual first rate league.

The man who assisted on Wilt's 100th point basket:

In this time of multi-billion-dollar TV contracts, global media coverage and yes, Linsanity, it's worth noting that on March 2, 1962, an NBA game involving the sport's most dominant figure barely warranted news coverage. Even when the Warriors and Knicks met again two days later at Madison Square Garden in New York, only 9,346 fans showed up -- about half the Garden's capacity.

The game, and the nation, were paused between eras. Two years before the Civil Rights Act would pass, black players in the NBA believed there was an unwritten quota of four blacks per team.

[COLOR="Red"]"The NBA was bush league in those days," said Joe Ruklick[/COLOR], a 6-foot-9 backup from Northwestern who, at 23, threw the pass that set up Chamberlain's historic basket. "We washed our own uniforms. My wife washed my uniform, which wasn't necessary a lot. But Wilt used to put his uniform in a bag and forget to wash it for a half-dozen games. We traveled coach. Meal money was $8 a day. Some guys used to carry their lunch."

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/1...t-of-the-charm

Wilt Chamberlain himself in 1965:



Everyone, including Chamberlain, knew how much of a joke the NBA was then. He made double playing for the Globe Trotters what he did playing for the Warriors, and he was the highest paid player in the league ($30,000 per year).

[LAZERUSS]

Yeah, the pre Civil Rights Act era NBA was a disaster. A third tier league, and the players (including Chamberlain) knew how much of a joke it was.

The fact that no video evidence of Wilt's 100 point game exists when I can watch clips of Lew Alcindor in High School tells you just how seriously everyone involved took the NBA. The Sixers during Wilt's prime averaged about 5,000 paying fans per game and no station carried their games. More people pay to see Summer League and D-League (hell even WNBA) games today than they did NBA games back then.

The league didn't even start to really get its act together until the post ABA merger and the Larry/Magic rivalry turned the NBA into an actual first rate league.

The man who assisted on Wilt's 100th point basket:

In this time of multi-billion-dollar TV contracts, global media coverage and yes, Linsanity, it's worth noting that on March 2, 1962, an NBA game involving the sport's most dominant figure barely warranted news coverage. Even when the Warriors and Knicks met again two days later at Madison Square Garden in New York, only 9,346 fans showed up -- about half the Garden's capacity.

The game, and the nation, were paused between eras. Two years before the Civil Rights Act would pass, black players in the NBA believed there was an unwritten quota of four blacks per team.

[COLOR="Red"]"The NBA was bush league in those days," said Joe Ruklick[/COLOR], a 6-foot-9 backup from Northwestern who, at 23, threw the pass that set up Chamberlain's historic basket. "We washed our own uniforms. My wife washed my uniform, which wasn't necessary a lot. But Wilt used to put his uniform in a bag and forget to wash it for a half-dozen games. We traveled coach. Meal money was $8 a day. Some guys used to carry their lunch."

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/1...t-of-the-charm

Wilt Chamberlain himself in 1965:



Everyone, including Chamberlain, knew how much of a joke the NBA was then. He made double playing for the Globe Trotters what he did playing for the Warriors, and he was the highest paid player in the league ($30,000 per year).

Everything you need to know about the talent of the 60's...

A PEAK Kareem faced an aging full-time Thurmond in 37 career H2H's ('69 thru '73.) In those 37 games, a PEAK Kareem's HIGH game against Nate was... 34 points. And, in those 37 H2H's, a PEAK KAJ had a TOTAL of FIVE 30+ games against an aging Thurmond. And how about this...in those 37 games, a PEAK Kareem shot a combined... .447... against Thurmond.

Fast-forward to the mid-80's. A 38-39 year old Kareem, barely able to get 6 rpg, ...hung a TEN STRAIGHT GAME STREAK on a 22-23 year old Hakeem, in which he AVERAGED 32 ppg...on get this... a .630 FG%. And, in those TEN straight games, a 38-39 year old Kareem hung SIX games of 30+, with highs of 40, 43, and 46 points (and on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes.) Then, the next year, a 40 year old KAJ outscored a 24 year old Hakeem in their four H2H games...and outshot from the field by a .567 to .403 margin.

Overall, a 38-41 year old Kareem outscored a 22-25 year old Hakeem in their 23 H2H games, and outshot him by a .607 to .512 margin. And in those 23 H2H's, Kareem had TWENTY games of .500+; TWELVE games of .600+; and FIVE games of .700 shooting against Hakeem.

Obviously Hakeem was a POS, right?

[ClipperRevival]

[COLOR="Red"]Everything you need to know about the talent of the 60's...
[/COLOR]
A PEAK Kareem faced an aging full-time Thurmond in 37 career H2H's ('69 thru '73.) In those 37 games, a PEAK Kareem's HIGH game against Nate was... 34 points. And, in those 37 H2H's, a PEAK KAJ had a TOTAL of FIVE 30+ games against an aging Thurmond. And how about this...in those 37 games, a PEAK Kareem shot a combined... .447... against Thurmond.

Fast-forward to the mid-80's. A 38-39 year old Kareem, barely able to get 6 rpg, ...hung a TEN STRAIGHT GAME STREAK on a 22-23 year old Hakeem, in which he AVERAGED 32 ppg...on get this... a .630 FG%. And, in those TEN straight games, a 38-39 year old Kareem hung SIX games of 30+, with highs of 40, 43, and 46 points (and on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes.) Then, the next year, a 40 year old KAJ outscored a 24 year old Hakeem in their four H2H games...and outshot from the field by a .567 to .403 margin.

Overall, a 38-41 year old Kareem outscored a 22-25 year old Hakeem in their 23 H2H games, and outshot him by a .607 to .512 margin. And in those 23 H2H's, Kareem had TWENTY games of .500+; TWELVE games of .600+; and FIVE games of .700 shooting against Hakeem.

Obviously Hakeem was a POS, right?

But you're talking about a specific player, who happens to be an all-time great and HOFer. That doesn't necessarily reflect the talent pool of that era. Greatness is greatness and transcends eras. Thurmond was great so what does that really prove?

Are you saying that the talent pool during the 60's was nearly as strong as the talent pool since the 1980's to the present?

[NuggetsFan]

One thing I've always wondered about back than is how many mistakes there was. Think of today how many times they have to change a rebound, assist, bucket, fouls to another player. Assists especially there are teams that give them out way easier.

Not to mention opinions. Think of today when players, coaches, fans etc. speak. Makes you wonder just how accurate things are. The fact that Wilt's 100 point game wasn't televised is always insane to me. Isn't there only audio for the 4th quarter too?

[DonDadda59]

Everything you need to know about the talent of the 60's...

A PEAK Kareem faced an aging full-time Thurmond in 37 career H2H's ('69 thru '73.) In those 37 games, a PEAK Kareem's HIGH game against Nate was... 34 points. And, in those 37 H2H's, a PEAK KAJ had a TOTAL of FIVE 30+ games against an aging Thurmond. And how about this...in those 37 games, a PEAK Kareem shot a combined... .447... against Thurmond.

Fast-forward to the mid-80's. A 38-39 year old Kareem, barely able to get 6 rpg, ...hung a TEN STRAIGHT GAME STREAK on a 22-23 year old Hakeem, in which he AVERAGED 32 ppg...on get this... a .630 FG%. And, in those TEN straight games, a 38-39 year old Kareem hung SIX games of 30+, with highs of 40, 43, and 46 points (and on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes.) Then, the next year, a 40 year old KAJ outscored a 24 year old Hakeem in their four H2H games...and outshot from the field by a .567 to .403 margin.

Overall, a 38-41 year old Kareem outscored a 22-25 year old Hakeem in their 23 H2H games, and outshot him by a .607 to .512 margin. And in those 23 H2H's, Kareem had TWENTY games of .500+; TWELVE games of .600+; and FIVE games of .700 shooting against Hakeem.

Obviously Hakeem was a POS, right?

6'9" 230 lbs Center Dave Cowens shit all over Wilt (averagde 31/20 vs Stilt in 4 H2Hs). Cowens averaged 6 PPG against Bill Laimbeer in 5 H2Hs. Shaq averaged 25/14/3 BPG vs 11/5 in 5 H2Hs vs Laimbeer.

Therefore, Shaq>>>>>>Laimbeer>>>>>Wilt.

Triangle theories don't change the fact that the Big Dipper himself wrote articles about how the NBA during his prime was an absolute joke of a third tier league, if even that. A 'Bush League' in Stilt's own words.

[TheMan]

But you're talking about a specific player, who happens to be an all-time great and HOFer. That doesn't necessarily reflect the talent pool of that era. Greatness is greatness and transcends eras. Thurmond was great so what does that really prove?

Are you saying that the talent pool during the 60's was nearly as strong as the talent pool since the 1980's to the present?

This

No one disputes Nate Thurmond being an all time great, what most of us are disputing is the overall talent level. LOOSERUS knows damn well Chamberlain ain't averaging 50 ppg a season in the modern game.

[LAZERUSS]

But you're talking about a specific player, who happens to be an all-time great and HOFer. That doesn't necessarily reflect the talent pool of that era. Greatness is greatness and transcends eras. Thurmond was great so what does that really prove?

Are you saying that the talent pool during the 60's was nearly as strong as the talent pool since the 1980's to the present?

You bet I am.

Let me ask you this...

Give me the EXACT season in which the NBA became better than the previous season. I have read some here who believe the NBA "modernized" in 1979-80, when Bird and Magic came into the league. Let's use that season, shall we?

Guess what, the MVP that season, and for the next several seasons, would be players that played in the 70's (and even one who played in the 60's.) Same thing with the PPG leader, the RPG leader, and the FG% leader...all players who had played in the 70's.

Want more? Artis Gilmore badly outplayed Hakeem in their 10 H2H's from 84-85 thru 85-86 (24 ppg on ...get this... a .677 FG%.) An ancient Moses, way past his prime, outrebounded a prime Hakeem in a season in which Hakeem led the NBA in RPG, in their H2H's that season.

The problem with this THEORY that the game has "evolved" is that...it has been played since the 1890's. COLLEGES were playing in the late 1890's. PROFESSIONAL teams were playing in the 1920's. The NBA was formed in 1946.

Furthermore, the game has changed LITTLE since it was invented. Other than the 24 second clock, and the 3pt shot (which was actually used in the ABA in the 60's BTW)...the game is essentially the SAME. Oh sure, there have been MINOR tweaks to the rules, like goal-tending, 3 seconds, zone defense rules, etc...but again...MINOR.

Hell, the NBA widened the lane before the start of the 64-65 season in a rule that was aimed strictly at WILT. Guess what? It didn't affect Chamberlain AT ALL. In fact, in the first half of the 64-65 season, Wilt was averaging 39 ppg, which was an INCREASE over his 37 ppg average just the season before. If anything, the widening of the lane affected the REST of the league, FAR more than it did Wilt. The league-wide eFG%'s dropped! Meanwhile, Chamberlain continued to pour in 60+ point games every season throughout the 60's.

The game played today, is essentially the same game that was played in the early 1900's. Same number of players; same court dimensions; same basket height and width; basically the same size ball; with basically the SAME rules.

And it is a SIMPLE game. Players dribble, pass, shoot, rebound, and defend. Nothing new there since the 1890's.

You want another interesting fact? Thanks to the research conducted by our very own CavsFTW...players are essentially the SAME HEIGHT, today...as they were in 1962, when Wilt averaged 50 ppg. The average starting center in 1962 was 6-10. The average starting center in 2015 was 6-11. BUT, adjust for the measuring methods (players without shoes in the 60's, and players with shoes in 2015), and they are essentially the SAME height.

I could go on...but the talent levels in the NBA have changed LITTLE in the last 50 years. And if you honestly believe that "globalization" has made a difference...then I ask you...where are all of the Magic's, Bird's, Shaq's, Kareem's, MJ's, and Wilt's? I remember Pat Riley envisioning an NBA in which a team would field FIVE "Magics." Guess what? There hasn't been anyone even remotely close since the original.

And the reality is/was, there is such a minute difference in talent between the average players of today, and the average players of 50 years ago. And the good players back then, would be just as good today. And even you agree...the greats of any era...would be great today.

[DonDadda59]

LOOSERUS knows damn well Chamberlain ain't averaging 50 ppg a season in the modern game.

Forget the modern game, dude was a 20 PPG scorer by 29/30 when the talent pool had gotten better/deeper in the post Civil Rights act era.

[TheMan]

You bet I am.

Let me ask you this...

Give me the EXACT season in which the NBA became better than the previous season. I have read some here who believe the NBA "modernized" in 1979-80, when Bird and Magic came into the league. Let's use that season, shall we?

Guess what, the MVP that season, and for the next several seasons, would be players that played in the 70's (and even one who played in the 60's.) Same thing with the PPG leader, the RPG leader, and the FG% leader...all players who had played in the 70's.

Want more? Artis Gilmore badly outplayed Hakeem in their 10 H2H's from 84-85 thru 85-86 (24 ppg on ...get this... a .677 FG%.) An ancient Moses, way past his prime, outrebounded a prime Hakeem in a season in which Hakeem led the NBA in RPG, in their H2H's that season.

The problem with this THEORY that the game has "evolved" is that...it has been played since the 1890's. COLLEGES were playing in the late 1890's. PROFESSIONAL teams were playing in the 1920's. The NBA was formed in 1946.

Furthermore, the game has changed LITTLE since it was invented. Other than the 24 second clock, and the 3pt shot (which was actually used in the ABA in the 60's BTW)...the game is essentially the SAME. Oh sure, there have been MINOR tweaks to the rules, like goal-tending, 3 seconds, zone defense rules, etc...but again...MINOR.

Hell, the NBA widened the lane before the start of the 64-65 season in a rule that was aimed strictly at WILT. Guess what? It didn't affect Chamberlain AT ALL. In fact, in the first half of the 64-65 season, Wilt was averaging 39 ppg, which was an INCREASE over his 37 ppg average just the season before. If anything, the widening of the lane affected the REST of the league, FAR more than it did Wilt. The league-wide eFG%'s dropped! Meanwhile, Chamberlain continued to pour in 60+ point games every season throughout the 60's.

The game played today, is essentially the same game that was played in the early 1900's. Same number of players; same court dimensions; same basket height and width; basically the same size ball; with basically the SAME rules.

And it is a SIMPLE game. Players dribble, pass, shoot, rebound, and defend. Nothing new there since the 1890's.

You want another interesting fact? Thanks to the research conducted by our very own CavsFTW...players are essentially the SAME HEIGHT, today...as they were in 1962, when Wilt averaged 50 ppg. The average starting center in 1962 was 6-10. The average starting center in 2015 was 6-11. BUT, adjust for the measuring methods (players without shoes in the 60's, and players with shoes in 2015), and they are essentially the SAME height.

I could go on...but the talent levels in the NBA have changed LITTLE in the last 50 years. And if you honestly believe that "globalization" has made a difference...then I ask you...where are all of the Magic's, Bird's, Shaq's, Kareem's, MJ's, and Wilt's? I remember Pat Riley envisioning an NBA in which a team would field FIVE "Magics." Guess what? There hasn't been anyone even remotely close since the original.

And the reality is/was, there is such a minute difference in talent between the average players of today, and the average players of 50 years ago. And the good players back then, would be just as good today. And even you agree...the greats of any era...would be great today.

Let me ask you this, how many ppg does 61-62 Wilt score in 95 NBA, 05 NBA and 2015 NBA? And what changed to affect his scoring, if at all?

[catch24]

After ALL these years of unearthed footage, Wilt naysayers still run rampant

6'9" 230 lbs Center Dave Cowens shit all over Wilt (averagde 31/20 vs Stilt in 4 H2Hs). Cowens averaged 6 PPG against Bill Laimbeer in 5 H2Hs. Shaq averaged 25/14/3 BPG vs 11/5 in 5 H2Hs vs Laimbeer.

Therefore, Shaq>>>>>>Laimbeer>>>>>Wilt.

Triangle theories don't change the fact that the Big Dipper himself wrote articles about how the NBA during his prime was an absolute joke of a third tier league, if even that. A 'Bush League' in Stilt's own words.

Since 'whatever wilt says = fact', then surely you would agree with him saying he'd be THE best player in the 80s and 90s, better than Kareem, and that he would average over 50+ in the modern era (back in the 90's when he and Bill were interviewed by Bob Costas).

In Stilt's own words right?

[LAZERUSS]

Forget the modern game, dude was a 20 PPG scorer by 29/30 when the talent pool had gotten better/deeper in the post Civil Rights act era.

On 1/27/1969, Sports Illustrated ran an article basically claiming that a 32 year old Wilt could no longer score.

Unfortunately for them, just the night before that article hit the newsstands...Chamberlain hung a 60 point game (on Connie Dierking...the same Dierking that Kareem's high game against would be 41 points BTW.) A couple of nights later, Chamberlain hung a 66 point game (on 29-35 shooting, which is the highest FG% in a 60+ point game in NBA history.) And Chamberlain extended that rampage over the course of 17 straight games (which included a 35 point game against Russell)...in which he averaged 31.1 ppg.

After Wilt's incompetent coach was fired following the '69 Finals, the Lakers brought in a new coach, Joe Mullaney. His first order of business was to ask WILT to become the focal point of the offense. In Wilt's first nine games, he led the NBA in scoring at 32.2 ppg (on a .579 FG%.) And this average was not inflated by one or two big games, either. He pounded rookie Kareem with a 25-20 9-14 game; he hung games of 33 (33 points in 28 minutes BTW), 35, 37 (against 7-0 Tom Boerwinkle), 38 (against the reigning MVP Wes Unseld); 42 (against Bob Rule...go ahead and look him up); and 43 points (against Dierking...a player that Kareem could "only" hit 41 against.)

Unfortunately, Chamberlain shredded his knee in that ninth game, and would never be the same offensive force again.

BUT, from '60 thru '69, Chamberlain was capable of 60+ point games anytime he stepped on the floor.

[TheMan]

Let me ask you this, how many ppg does 61-62 Wilt score in 95 NBA, 05 NBA and 2015 NBA? And what changed to affect his scoring, if at all?

Waiting...

[DonDadda59]

After ALL these years of unearthed footage, Wilt naysayers still run rampant



Since 'whatever wilt says = fact', then surely you would agree with him saying he'd be THE best player in the 80s and 90s, better than Kareem, and that he would average over 50+ in the modern era (back in the 90's when he and Bill were interviewed by Bob Costas).

In Stilt's own words right?

Him saying those things about a time he was retired are hypothetical. And the only thing Wilt was GOAT in was hyping himself up. When he called the NBA a Bush League, it was in 1965, during his actual playing prime. Hypothetical vs Reality, not too hard to figure out.

On 1/27/1969, Sports Illustrated ran an article basically claiming that a 32 year old Wilt could no longer score.

Was the article penned by Chamberlain himself like his 'My Life in a Bush League' series?

[La Frescobaldi]

6'9" 230 lbs Center Dave Cowens shit all over Wilt (averagde 31/20 vs Stilt in 4 H2Hs). Cowens averaged 6 PPG against Bill Laimbeer in 5 H2Hs. Shaq averaged 25/14/3 BPG vs 11/5 in 5 H2Hs vs Laimbeer.

Therefore, Shaq>>>>>>Laimbeer>>>>>Wilt.

Triangle theories don't change the fact that the Big Dipper himself wrote articles about how the NBA during his prime was an absolute joke of a third tier league, if even that. A 'Bush League' in Stilt's own words.

Obviously you never read that article or it would be the last thing you'd use to support your opinion. You'd want that buried.

[Marchesk]

has anyone asked jeff to make a modern era NBA board for legit topics people are interested in and a pre modern forum for trash like this

Right, we need to stick to more variations on Lebron and Kobe themed threads, because they get buried by all the old time ones.