How come Wilt fans have to write novels to make a convincing argument?

[FreezingTsmoove]

Anyone who has watched even a little 60s basketball and seriously believes it's anywhere remotely close to the level of competition of the recent eras is laughably delusional and beyond a reasonable discussion. Textbook old man yelling at cloud delusion, don't even bother.

Coming from the white midget hick that wouldnt even make a high school team in the 60s

Get outta here MilSUCK

[Milbuck]

Coming from the white midget hick that wouldnt even make a high school team in the 60s

Get outta here MilSUCK

Rent free. Respond to me again.

[LAZERUSS]

Anyone who has watched even a little 60s basketball and seriously believes it's anywhere remotely close to the level of competition of the recent eras is laughably delusional and beyond a reasonable discussion. Textbook old man yelling at cloud delusion, don't even bother.

I wish there was a way to throw some of today's players into the 60s against the part time car salesman they had derping around then, with those dogshit defensive schemes and pace through the roof. Like put 2009 Lebron in the league. Imagine the massacre that would be Bob Cousy trying to defend Westbrook

Agreed.

How about this goofball from the 60's winning TWO MVPs. Can you imagine him in a league with Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, and Lebron?




Take a look at this 60's PG....who was a career .368 shooter BTW.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=993UTozPECc

Then take a look at this 6-8 clown from the 60's. That era was so bad that this guy could run away with the rpg title, and in only 35 mpg. He also put up a 26-12 season, as well. Just truly laughable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7TnbhJr8iY


And just look, here was a STARTING CENTER from the 60's, that was 6-5 1/2.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Chuck-Hayes-110/


And how do you think the 6-9 Bill Russell would have fared against the 6-11 Dwight Howard?



BTW, how about the "6-11" Demarcus Cousins

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...-Cousins-1318/

Oh, and take a look at that Cousins vertical, too.

Can you imagine Cousins looking like this clod...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2AlFrOj5Mc


And then how about the "6-11" DeAndre Jordan?

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...e-Jordan-1072/

Or the "7-0" Andre Drummond?

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...Drummond-5772/


Can you imagine Kareem, who played in the NBA in 1969, facing a center who gave Shaq all he could handle in the '95 Finals?

http://www.nba.com/video/channels/nb...s-rockets.nba/

BTW, Kareem was 39 years old in that game. A week later he outscored Patrick Ewing 40-9, and outshot him from the floor by a 15-22 to 3-17 margin.

Nope...no way a prime Kareem would ever make it in today's NBA.


Thanks for giving us all here your brilliant insight. We are all much better off for it.

[aj1987]

Anyone who has watched even a little 60s basketball and seriously believes it's anywhere remotely close to the level of competition of the recent eras is laughably delusional and beyond a reasonable discussion. Textbook old man yelling at cloud delusion, don't even bother.

I wish there was a way to throw some of today's players into the 60s against the part time car salesman they had derping around then, with those dogshit defensive schemes and pace through the roof. Like put 2009 Lebron in the league. Imagine the massacre that would be Bob Cousy trying to defend Westbrook

This hack scored 100 point and averaged 50 a game:



This used car salesman was an MVP and 10x All-NBA First:



2x MVP and 10x All-NBA First:



10x All-NBA First and supposed to be one of the best rebounders:



This stick figure was the best rebounder in the game and won 11 titles:



Those dudes make Nash look like a [COLOR="Black"]f[/COLOR]ucking bodybuilder.

[BigKAT]

They don't have to. It's just retired grandpas have a lot of time on their hand.

Underrated post.

[Bankaii]

Because looking at Wilt/Russell with objective measures doesn't help their cases to much.

The bigger the stage, the more of a drop off in points per game for the "most dominant scorer ever".
And Russell's stats are just pathetic. His defensive impact couldn't be that much greater than Timmy, Hakeem, etc. (who were also elite offensively) so why do we excuse the fact that he's an unreliable scorer just because of his defense?

The 60s as a whole was just weak. I wish there was a way to illustrate just how bad MJ/Kobe/Shaq/Lebron etc would wreck the 60s so we can stop overrating those 2 choking grandpas.

[SouBeachTalents]

Because looking at Wilt/Russell with objective measures doesn't help their cases to much.

The bigger the stage, the more of a drop off in points per game for the "most dominant scorer ever".
And Russell's stats are just pathetic. His defensive impact couldn't be that much greater than Timmy, Hakeem, etc. (who were also elite offensively) so why do we excuse the fact that he's an unreliable scorer just because of his defense?

The 60s as a whole was just weak. I wish there was a way to illustrate just how bad MJ/Kobe/Shaq/Lebron etc would wreck the 60s so we can stop overrating those 2 choking grandpas.

C'mon bro, Russell was clutch AF

[Psileas]

How come Wilt fans have to write novels to make a convincing argument?

What's funny is that it's the other side that started with the "novel" thing when they tried to add "perspective" to Wilt's stats and started adjusting by pace, minutes played and shit like that, as well as add "perspective" to Wilt's dominance by pointing out his supposed playoff underperformances. Of course, there are lots of retorts to their crap, but obviously they need more than 3 lines, so they're not for the average ISHer.
So, spare us with the whole "novel" excuse. It's not Wilt fans the ones that started this. Wilt fans don't need to write any "novels", because his dominance blows most other legends' dominance out of the water, regardless of stage. When it comes to individuals, dominance >> rings, because dominance=individual and rings=team. And Wilt epitomized this more than anyone else.

The only "novel" a Wilt fan would need to write would be the list of his accomplishments.

[Psileas]

Because looking at Wilt/Russell with objective measures doesn't help their cases to much.

The bigger the stage, the more of a drop off in points per game for the "most dominant scorer ever".
And Russell's stats are just pathetic. His defensive impact couldn't be that much greater than Timmy, Hakeem, etc. (who were also elite offensively) so why do we excuse the fact that he's an unreliable scorer just because of his defense?

The 60s as a whole was just weak. I wish there was a way to illustrate just how bad MJ/Kobe/Shaq/Lebron etc would wreck the 60s so we can stop overrating those 2 choking grandpas.

Too weak an attempt to try to have the cake and eat it at the same time.
So, "the bigger the stage, the more of a drop off in points per game for the GOAT" and yet Russell's defensive impact couldn't be much greater than Duncan's, Hakeem's etc? Are you serious, dude? Even ignoring your last paragraph, do you even comprehend what type of BS you're writing?

[hold this L]

We dont.

This must be how many points he scores in all his games added up during playoffs

[Mr Feeny]

This must be how many points he scores in all his games added up during playoffs

or the finals
Remember he's an 18 ppg finals scorer

[Bankaii]

C'mon bro, Russell was clutch AF

Have you see Russell's Finals stats? If any current day player put those numbers up they'd have to commit suicide to avoid scrutiny. And that's without accounting for inflation.
Give me any proof of his "clutchness" that isn't team-based. And yes I'm aware of his clutch ability on defense. But players with a GOAT case should be GOAT level on BOTH sides.

Too weak an attempt to try to have the cake and eat it at the same time.
So, "the bigger the stage, the more of a drop off in points per game for the GOAT" and yet Russell's defensive impact couldn't be much greater than Duncan's, Hakeem's etc? Are you serious, dude? Even ignoring your last paragraph, do you even comprehend what type of BS you're writing?

What I said is 100% true. It is a fact that's Wilt's PPG dropped off as he went from the RS to the PO to the Finals. Hence bigger stage=better competition=Wilt's production decreases.

And what indication do you have that Russell's impact on defense > Timmy/Hakeem? Have you seen the majority of his games or have any objective measures to prove this? Or are you just jumping on the bandwagon because everyone says how great his defense was?

[ClipperRevival]

Have you see Russell's Finals stats? If any current day player put those numbers up they'd have to commit suicide to avoid scrutiny. And that's without accounting for inflation.
[COLOR="Red"]Give me any proof of his "clutchness" that isn't team-based[/COLOR]. And yes I'm aware of his clutch ability on defense. But players with a GOAT case should be GOAT level on BOTH sides.

What I said is 100% true. It is a fact that's Wilt's PPG dropped off as he went from the RS to the PO to the Finals. Hence bigger stage=better competition=Wilt's production decreases.

And what indication do you have that Russell's impact on defense > Timmy/Hakeem? Have you seen the majority of his games or have any objective measures to prove this? Or are you just jumping on the bandwagon because everyone says how great his defense was?

How about these numbers in 10 game 7s?

18.6 PPG, 29.3 RPG

And he was 10-0 in those games. Both numbers noticeably above his career averages. And those game 7s occurred in 9 different seasons, meaning if he loses all of them, he has 2 rings versus 11.

Russell has 13 titles (2 NCAA and 11 NBA) in a 15 year span. He is without a doubt the greatest winner in North American team sport history. All this winning wasn't coincidence. It was him that made his teams win. Before he went to the Univ of SF, they were NOTHING. Ditto for the Celtics who didn't win squat before he got there. You play to win the game and he did that better than anyone.

He also wasn't just a role player. He has 5 regular season MVP and if they had given out FMVP during his era, he would have 7-9.

So:

11 rings
5 mvp
7-9 fmvp

Clutch as hell, the ultimate winner.

[Psileas]

What I said is 100% true. It is a fact that's Wilt's PPG dropped off as he went from the RS to the PO to the Finals. Hence bigger stage=better competition=Wilt's production decreases.

I've shown multiple times that half the times, Wilt's productivity increased in the playoffs compared to his regular season productivity against the same opponents. Hence, so much for the "choker" label, he was just fine, playoffs or not.
No, bigger stage does not necessarily = "better competition". For Wilt/Russell, the real test was when they clashed against each other, usually in the conference Finals, not when Russell was facing freakin' LeRoy Ellis in the Finals.

When competition gets better, most players' production decreases, regardless of their level, not just Wilt's, except maybe certain players who tend to coast in the r.s. Jordan's production decreased vs the Pistons. Shaq's production decreased vs the Spurs. Kareem's production decreased vs Thurmond/Wilt. And Wilt's production decreased vs Russell/Thurmond. It's not quantum physics.

And what indication do you have that Russell's impact on defense > Timmy/Hakeem? Have you seen the majority of his games or have any objective measures to prove this? Or are you just jumping on the bandwagon because everyone says how great his defense was?

The Celtics with Russell were so much better defensively than any other team in the league that there's not any real analogy to them, before of since.
Their offense was constantly among the least efficient in the league and it still didn't matter, it still provided them (usually) with the best record in the league. There isn't anyone else you can attribute this to than Russell. Cousy wasn't considered a good defender, KC Jones was pretty good, but a guard who wasn't even getting big minutes, Havlicek was also good, but the Celtics were equally dominant before him, Sam Jones was OK, but not special, Heinsohn was "below OK". There's no reason to believe that by replacing Russell with an average defensive center, the Celtics would be above just "OK" defensively. I can't find anything than compares, even before or during Russell's era, so, I'll say that's good evidence that Russell's defensive impact is unmatched - and I don't care what types of excuses someone may find for this.

[Asukal]

ILt has long been exposed, nothing his delusional stans can do to prove otherwise. 30>22>18=2 is all I need as an argument against his supposed dominance.