disproving the argument that Wilt's numbers were inflated.

[coastalmarker99]

It should be noted that if you take Wilt out of the equation there have only been 30 to 40 games of 60+ points in Nba history

as (Wilt had 32 by himself.)


Or only 28 30-30 games (Chamberlain had 103 on his own.)

Or only six 40-30 games (Chamberlain had 55.)

And If you take Wilt and his four highest-scoring seasons out from Nba history then MJ's 37.1 ppg would be the all-time record, and James Harden who plays today would be next at 36.1 ppg along with Rick Barry at 35.6 ppg then Kobe at 35.4 ppg.

BTW, Kareem's 34.8 ppg in '72 (also in the Chamberlain-era), is 10th all-time, and Baylor's 60-61 season of 34.8 ppg is 11th.


Furthermore.

Most 50-point games in a decade:

5 Wilt, 4 Mikan (1947-60)

113 Wilt, 14 Baylor (1961-70)

9 Kareem, 7 Barry (1971-80)

20 Jordan, 6 King, 6 Wilkins (1981-90)

10 Jordan, 3 Shaq, 3 D Rob (1991-2000)

24 Kobe, 9 Iverson, 8 LeBron (2001-10)

23 Harden, 12 Lillard, 10 Curry (2011-22)



strike Chamberlain from the record book, and the numbers are far more normal across all eras.


Here is also a fun fact.



It took everyone combined in NBA history 43 years after Wilt's retirement in 1973 to match the number of 60-point games Wilt had in his career.


Also, Wilt has 15 games over 65 points compared to everybody else in NBA history just having 8.

[coastalmarker99]

I just don't think people appreciate how dominant his peak really was.

In 1962 he was the league leader in ppg, rpg and second in field goal percentage while outscoring his two closest rivals in the scoring title race by 31.6% and almost 60%.

If that's not enough, he was probably top 2 in blocks per game along with Russell.

[bison]

7’1” track and field athlete with basketball sensibilities. So a combination of modern athleticism with a natural basketball instincts. In other words, to us, he’s like a modern player transported back in time to rack up video game numbers against primitive competitive competition. Except he’s not from our time. Video games didn’t exist in his life. He was a guy in the 60s who played in old gyms, grabbed a bunch of rebounds, sprinted down the floor, worked on every end and had astronomical numbers. He also played a full 48 minutes most games In his prime.

[HoopsNY]

I think the notion of his numbers being inflated comes from a number of reasons. Aside from the opponents being smaller and less athletic to say a Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson, Shaq, etc, I think you have to consider the pace of play and lack of defensive intensity that existed in the 60s as opposed to other eras, in addition to other points like the NBA/ABA merger.

Wilt's PER 36 for his career was 23.6 PPG. Even in 1962, when he averaged 50 PPG, his PER 36 was 37.4 PPG. The pace was significantly higher in the 60s and should be considered when weighing his scoring against other eras. If he's playing in modern eras, he's not playing 48 minutes a game. He's probably playing 38-40 max. In addition, the pace of play would be much slower and the paint would be clogged.

I don't think you truly believe if Wilt was playing in the 90s or the 00s that he'd be dropping 60+ points consistently as he was in the early 60s. But that doesn't in any way mean he wouldn't dominate.

Furthermore, being a GOAT level player isn't dependent on just scoring or even winning exclusively. There are a lot of factors that contribute to championship success, and Wilt possessed the IQ, innate skillset, and physical abilities to produce winning basketball.

It's very possible (and even likely) that Wilt would have put up 25/15/5/3 on 50% in the 1990s or 2000s and won multiple titles. For that reason, it doesn't matter to me that he put up a 100 point game, or 60+ points the most times in league history.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Additionally there have been rule changes that Chamberlain inspired that limited him. He had his 50 and 45 ppg seasons before they widened the lane. That happened in 64-65. After 1965 although maybe he could have he never averaged 30 points again. I have no doubt that he is great in any era but he's not averaging 50 in the modern NBA. Would still win multiple MVPs and be in the greatest ever arguments though. He was a 7 footer that could have been a track athlete, like Bill Russell in that regard but even bigger.

[iamgine]

Wilt was great but I don't think the OP disprove anything.

[1987_Lakers]

I think the notion of his numbers being inflated comes from a number of reasons. Aside from the opponents being smaller and less athletic to say a Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson, Shaq, etc, I think you have to consider the pace of play and lack of defensive intensity that existed in the 60s as opposed to other eras, in addition to other points like the NBA/ABA merger.

Wilt's PER 36 for his career was 23.6 PPG. Even in 1962, when he averaged 50 PPG, his PER 36 was 37.4 PPG. The pace was significantly higher in the 60s and should be considered when weighing his scoring against other eras. If he's playing in modern eras, he's not playing 48 minutes a game. He's probably playing 38-40 max. In addition, the pace of play would be much slower and the paint would be clogged.

I don't think you truly believe if Wilt was playing in the 90s or the 00s that he'd be dropping 60+ points consistently as he was in the early 60s. But that doesn't in any way mean he wouldn't dominate.

Furthermore, being a GOAT level player isn't dependent on just scoring or even winning exclusively. There are a lot of factors that contribute to championship success, and Wilt possessed the IQ, innate skillset, and physical abilities to produce winning basketball.

It's very possible (and even likely) that Wilt would have put up 25/15/5/3 on 50% in the 1990s or 2000s and won multiple titles. For that reason, it doesn't matter to me that he put up a 100 point game, or 60+ points the most times in league history.

OP is a good poster, but his bias for Wilt has him seeing tunnel vision, nobody is denying that Wilt was a great player, but his stats were obviously inflated due to the faster pace he played in. Take Elgin Baylor for example, dude was only 6 foot 5 but during his first 10 seasons he averaged 14 rpg, do you honestly think a player that size would rack up that many rebounds today?

Wilt & Russell were GOAT rebounders along with Moses & Rodman, but it's pretty damn obvious they are not averaging 23 rpg in today's league, so yes.... the numbers by definition were inflated.

[Full Court]

Excellent thread by OP.

How did I know it was going to draw in 1987_Lakers like a fly to a turd?

Wilt: #3 all time.

Bronie: Fringe top 10.

[hateraid]

Let's see if I can get Full Court triggered in another thread. Lol

[LeGoat4Life]

I always find it funny how people try to discredit wilt because of “era”

A person greatness is measure by how you are relative to your peer in the same era

If it was so easy how come no one else came close to Wilt’s stats during the same period

In the meantime players in this current era all have around the same stats. No one is clear head and shoulder above his peers

On another note: no one is this current era will survive in the 90’s. Someone like Lebron and cp3 would be role players or out of the league within 5 years. That flopping and crying shit ain’t gonna fly among their peers

[Full Court]

Let's see if I can get Full Court triggered in another thread. Lol

I've got this Bronie absolutely obsessed with me.

Nobody can say he's not my bitch.

[HoopsNY]

OP is a good poster, but his bias for Wilt has him seeing tunnel vision, nobody is denying that Wilt was a great player, but his stats were obviously inflated due to the faster pace he played in. Take Elgin Baylor for example, dude was only 6 foot 5 but during his first 10 seasons he averaged 14 rpg, do you honestly think a player that size would rack up that many rebounds today?

Wilt & Russell were GOAT rebounders along with Moses & Rodman, but it's pretty damn obvious they are not averaging 23 rpg in today's league, so yes.... the numbers by definition were inflated.

Yea though in Baylor's case, guys like Barkley and Rodman were elite rebounders at 6'4"-6'5" and 6'7"-6'8", respectively. Looking at Baylor's PER 36, the numbers are more reasonable. Does he put up 16-19 rebounds like he did early on in his career? Probably not. But maybe 10-12. Who knows, really.

The thing that's important for people like coastal, myself, and any other fan of the game really is to understand cultivating winning basketball is more than a stat line. Wilt was great enough that he could impact a team and their ability to win by putting up 20-15-5-2 if he so chose. A guy like him in the 2000s wins championships even if he's not putting up 25-30 with 15-20 rebounds a night.

So let's say Wilt goes through his career and averages 24/12/4/3/2 but wins 3 titles and goes to the finals 4-5 times. Does anyone really care that he didn't put up 50 PPG?

[HoopsNY]

I always find it funny how people try to discredit wilt because of “era”

A person greatness is measure by how you are relative to your peer in the same era

If it was so easy how come no one else came close to Wilt’s stats during the same period

In the meantime players in this current era all have around the same stats. No one is clear head and shoulder above his peers

On another note: no one is this current era will survive in the 90’s. Someone like Lebron and cp3 would be role players or out of the league within 5 years. That flopping and crying shit ain’t gonna fly among their peers

You actually make a very good point. Let's take a look at Kareem's numbers from a similar time period.

Kareem '70: 14.5 Rebs
Kareem '71: 16.0 Rebs
Kareem '72: 16.6 Rebs
Kareem '73: 16.1 Rebs

Wilt '70: 18.4 Rebs
Wilt '71: 18.2 Rebs
Wilt '72: 19.2 Rebs
Wilt '73: 18.6 Rebs

Kareem was ages 22-25 while Wilt was age 33-36. Wilt won the rebounding title every year except 1970 in the above, but only because he played 12 games.

What does this tell us? That Wilt probably wins the rebounding title in any era, whether he's averaging 12 rebounds or 15 rebounds. Dwight Howard won the rebounding title in 2013 averaging 12.4 rebounds. If Wilt is around, he's probably averaging more.

Rodman won the rebounding title in 1998 putting up 15 a game. If Wilt is playing, he probably averages more. Point is, he'll put up 12-16 rebounds easily, it just depends on what era he's in.

'60s? He'll grab 25+. 70s? He'll grab 19. 80s? He'll grab 17+. 90s? Probably the same. 2000s-2010s? Maybe 15+ or more. He'd likely win the rebounding title every single year. Who cares if it's 27 like the early 60s, or 16 if he's playing in 2000?

[LeGoat4Life]

You actually make a very good point. Let's take a look at Kareem's numbers from a similar time period.

Kareem '70: 14.5 Rebs
Kareem '71: 16.0 Rebs
Kareem '72: 16.6 Rebs
Kareem '73: 16.1 Rebs

Wilt '70: 18.4 Rebs
Wilt '71: 18.2 Rebs
Wilt '72: 19.2 Rebs
Wilt '73: 18.6 Rebs

Kareem was ages 22-25 while Wilt was age 33-36. Wilt won the rebounding title every year except 1970 in the above, but only because he played 12 games.

What does this tell us? That Wilt probably wins the rebounding title in any era, whether he's averaging 12 rebounds or 15 rebounds. Dwight Howard won the rebounding title in 2013 averaging 12.4 rebounds. If Wilt is around, he's probably averaging more.

Rodman won the rebounding title in 1998 putting up 15 a game. If Wilt is playing, he probably averages more. Point is, he'll put up 12-16 rebounds easily, it just depends on what era he's in.

'60s? He'll grab 25+. 70s? He'll grab 19. 80s? He'll grab 17+. 90s? Probably the same. 2000s-2010s? Maybe 15+ or more. He'd likely win the rebounding title every single year. Who cares if it's 27 like the early 60s, or 16 if he's playing in 2000?

Exactly. You made good points

Imagine if Wilt had the same access to medical and tech that are available now.

His stats will demolish everything

[HoopsNY]

Exactly. You made good points

Imagine if Wilt had the same access to medical and tech that are available now.

His stats will demolish everything

There are balancing effects based on time and context. 27 rebounds a game just isn't likely. For one, he'd have a massive contract if he's playing in the late 90s onward. For that reason, no organization would play him 48 minutes. The competition would likely be better facing off against peak Hakeem, Shaq, Robinson, Ewing, etc. So he'd have to work more on the defensive end.

All in all, he'd get his, but not to the extent that the early 60s allowed, which is the point that some, including myself, make.