The official jlauber and Wilt Chamberlain thread

[DatAsh]

in fact, he's among the best on this site, if not the best.

Jlauber has absolutely no case as the best poster on this site when there are guys who routinely post equally thought provoking and well thought out post, yet also manage to do it in an un-biased manner.

[Asukal]

Jlauber has absolutely absolutely no case as the best poster on this site when there are guys who routinely post equally thought provoking and well thought out post, yet also manage to do it in an un-biased manner.

Best poster? LOL! Jlauber understands only one thing and that is stats.

Facts:
- He is extremely biased towards Wilt.
- He will never say anything that downgrades Wilt.
- He will prop up other stars from Wilt's era to prop up Wilt.
- He will diminish other stars from Wilt's era to prop up Wilt.
- He believes every feat that is said to be done by Wilt.

Sure he does great research but who's to say everything he copy pastes is 100% accurate? Fact is jlauber is a Wilt stan, and last I checked no stan makes the best posters list. If you believe everything he posts as facts, then...

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Best poster? LOL! Jlauber understands only one thing and that is stats.

Facts:
- He is extremely biased towards Wilt.
- He will never say anything that downgrades Wilt.
- He will prop up other stars from Wilt's era to prop up Wilt.
- He will diminish other stars from Wilt's era to prop up Wilt.
- He believes every feat that is said to be done by Wilt.

Sure he does great research but who's to say everything he copy pastes is 100% accurate? Fact is jlauber is a Wilt stan, and last I checked no stan makes the best posters list. If you believe everything he posts as facts, then...

No answer for the H2H Kareem / Hakeem stats Milwad posted, so in typical Jlauber fashion, he goes on a tangent debating something else entirely.

Weird that it's only "cool" to stan when it's an oldschool player.

[Linspired]

Yes.





My point exactly.



You mean that Darrell Imhoff had an easier time scoring on Russell than Wilt? Height doesn't mean everything.

4 inches is a huge difference. not only that the standing reach difference is 7 inch + and we are talking about great Kareem, not some scrub. kareem's 9ft 8 inch standing reach is part of his strength. his sky hook wouldn't be as effective if he was 6ft 10 like hakeem was. let's not act like it doesn't matter. it matters. akeem is vastly undersized when he is going up against 7ft 2 top 3-4 greatest all time.

[Pointguard]

Jlauber has absolutely no case as the best poster on this site when there are guys who routinely post equally thought provoking and well thought out post, yet also manage to do it in an un-biased manner.

at you making sure you didn't get my full sentence.

But he has a case as being the best poster for the simple reason of attention, and energy he draws up while keeping another era relevant.

I don't know who is unbiased on this board? Why even make pretension that somebody is that way? Why come to a fan site and act like you are a computer? Not one person here is unbiased and if they have fooled you doesn't make them a good poster. This board isn't a court and posters don't need a court quality to be good. Much better to just be honest and say what you feel. Everybody here has their opinions and everybody here has an irrational one in there somewhere - there are no exceptions. You always hope that the poster is rational and coherent.

The fact that Jlauber has changed his mind, means he's in a better place than most posters. Because it means he's always assessing and evaluating what he knows. If you don't allow room for growth than you peaked before you really understood what you think you know.

When I coached a player like KG I totally felt different about KG's value to a team. I went from disliking a player to really seeing great value in him. Both were biases. Its important to distinguish judging and bias. I never judged this player as being harmful or unworthy - I initially just didn't like his style but I thought he was the best player around. I think too many of you confuse having a bias with being judgmental.

[millwad]

And yet an OLD Kareem could just annihilate Hakeem and Ewing in the mid-80's.

And both Hakeem and Ewing would go on to be among the top-4 centers of the 90's. A Prime Hakeem actually battled a young Shaq to a draw in the '95 Finals.

And, think about this...Shaq's career high game against Hakeem, was 37 points. An OLD Kareem had THREE of 40 just against Hakeem.

And Shaq would go to dominate the late 90's and early 00's.

No, Olajuwon didn't battle a young Shaq to a draw, you're obsessed with quotes so let me give you a quote from Shaq himself;

"If I can't beat you, I'll be a man and say I can't beat you. I'm not going to [cry about it]. . . . I'm the first guy to say that somebody is better than me. I was the first guy to say Hakeem Olajuwon beat me in the [1995] NBA finals. He killed me. He dominated me. I didn't go, 'Oh, he's traveling. They had experience. Wah-wah-wah.' I'm a man. Hakeem Olajuwon dusted my butt."

But still you are discrediting Olajuwon with your nonsense, you even claimed that Olajuwon got outplayed in that series but only changed your mind after people started to bash you like crazy for that BS.

It's funny how you use stats, everyone says that Olajuwon outplayed Shaq in the series in '95, even Shaq himself. You're the only one who thinks it was either Shaq outplaying Olajuwon or it being a draw.

Do you remember when you tried to make a game by game analyze after I told you to do so, you gave game 3 of that series to Shaq which proves that you didn't even see the series.

Not only that, stats makes you spam about the '95 series between Shaq and Hakeem was a draw, but you don't use the same logic when it comes to Wilt.

In his '72 series vs Kareem and the Bucks Wilt got outscored by 23 points per game on better FG% and outassisted etc, that is according to you "Wilt killing Kareem" but your logic fails completely when it doesn't fit your agenda.

You're garbage.

[DatAsh]

at you making sure you didn't get my full sentence.

I only quoted the part I disagreed with. I'm with you in the sense that Jlauber is a generally one of the better posters on this site, and he does back up his points. As an old guy myself, I appreciate the light he sheds on the NBA's past. I just can't put him on the same tier as guys like G.O.A.T. and ShaqAttack who provide just as much insight(if not more) and do it with 100x less bias.

You're right that everyone is biased to at least some degree, but you're deluded if you think that someone like G.O.A.T. is anywhere near as biased as Jlauber.

[Nevaeh]

I only quoted the part I disagreed with. I'm with you in the sense that Jlauber is a generally one of the better posters on this site, and he does back up his points. As an old guy myself, I appreciate the light he sheds on the NBA's past. I just can't put him on the same tier as guys like G.O.A.T. and ShaqAttack who provide just as much insight(if not more) and do it with 100x less bias.

You're right that everyone is biased to at least some degree, but you're deluded if you think that someone like G.O.A.T. is anywhere near as biased as Jlauber.

It seems that Jlauber only really gets biased when it comes to defending Wilt's legacy. The problem is that when he begins defending Wilt, he tends to embellish and make constant excuses for Wilt's shortcomings, while at the same time trying to downplay other Greats with half truths, hoping that he doesn't get called on them.

He goes into "Troll" mode just like everyone else here at ISH. It just looks more sophisticated because he uses a lot more paragraphs instead of a "U Mad" pic like the youngsters do. Still like him as a poster though, but he ain't no saint, at least based on how he was getting praised earlier in this thread.

[DatAsh]

It seems that Jlauber only really gets biased when it comes to defending Wilt's legacy. The problem is that when he begins defending Wilt, he tends to embellish and make constant excuses for Wilt's shortcomings, while at the same time trying to downplay other Greats with half truths, hoping that he doesn't get called on them.

He goes into "Troll" mode just like everyone else here at ISH. It just looks more sophisticated because he uses a lot more paragraphs instead of a "U Mad" pic like the youngsters do. Still like him as a poster though, but he ain't no saint, at least based on how he was getting praised earlier in this thread.

It's mainly just Wilt, but he's also fairly biased for Magic/against Bird, and really biased against Olajuwon.

[jlauber]

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]Damn, Milwad popping jhummer like a zit.

Here are the REAL facts: Wilt WILTED in the postseason. Guy averaged 50.4 ppg during the 1962 regular season yet ELGIN BAYLOR had more ppg in the playoffs.

How about Wilt in game 7's vs Boston? Just 21.0 ppg and 0-4 in those game 7

[jlauber]

No, Olajuwon didn't battle a young Shaq to a draw, you're obsessed with quotes so let me give you a quote from Shaq himself;

"If I can't beat you, I'll be a man and say I can't beat you. I'm not going to [cry about it]. . . . I'm the first guy to say that somebody is better than me. I was the first guy to say Hakeem Olajuwon beat me in the [1995] NBA finals. He killed me. He dominated me. I didn't go, 'Oh, he's traveling. They had experience. Wah-wah-wah.' I'm a man. Hakeem Olajuwon dusted my butt."

But still you are discrediting Olajuwon with your nonsense, you even claimed that Olajuwon got outplayed in that series but only changed your mind after people started to bash you like crazy for that BS.

It's funny how you use stats, everyone says that Olajuwon outplayed Shaq in the series in '95, even Shaq himself. You're the only one who thinks it was either Shaq outplaying Olajuwon or it being a draw.

Do you remember when you tried to make a game by game analyze after I told you to do so, you gave game 3 of that series to Shaq which proves that you didn't even see the series.

Not only that, stats makes you spam about the '95 series between Shaq and Hakeem was a draw, but you don't use the same logic when it comes to Wilt.

In his '72 series vs Kareem and the Bucks Wilt got outscored by 23 points per game on better FG% and outassisted etc, that is according to you "Wilt killing Kareem" but your logic fails completely when it doesn't fit your agenda.

You're garbage.

Hakeem's TEAMMATES badly outplayed Shaq's. For all of your nonsense about how little help Hakeem had, he had SAMPSON reducing Kareem's effectiveness in the '86 WCF's, and Thorpe shooting a huge percenatge while outrebounding Hakeem himself in the '94 Finals, and then he had his TEAMMATES collectively outshooting Shaq's in FG%, 2 3pt % and by a huge point differential at the foul line, in a series in which, Shaq scored 28 ppg on, get this... .595 shooting (contrast that with Kareem shooting .457, and only .414 over the course of his last FOUR games of the '72 WCF's), as well as outrebounding, outassisting, and outblocking Hakeem in that series.

And I get sick-and-tired of those that use Shaq's absolute dominance in second half over Hakeem, in a loss, as some kind of excuse. Hakeem was hanging on for dear life.

Of course, idiots like yourself also NEVER mention that Shaq BADLY outplayed Hakeem in their ENTIRE career H2H's, and especially in the '99 post-season. A young Shaq gets no excuse, even though YOU have used it in defense of HAKEEM (against Kareem), and then, you NEVER bring up a more PRIME Shaq just murdering Hakeem. BUT, you will point out a PRIME Kareem outscoring an OLD Wilt, playing on a surgically repaired knee in the '72 WCF's...and in series in which it was UNIVERSALLY accepted that Wilt outplayed Kareem.

This from the same CLOWN who, in all seriousness, claimed that Bynum would have dominated Wilt.

[Deuce Bigalow]

jlauber, who would be better in Today's League - Wilt, Bynum, Ben Wallace, or Russell?

[jlauber]

jlauber, who would be better in Today's League - Wilt, Bynum, Ben Wallace, or Russell?

You tell me.

We KNOW that Wilt was taller, bigger, longer, stronger, faster, more athletic, and more skilled than either Bynum or Wallce, though.

[Pointguard]

I only quoted the part I disagreed with. I'm with you in the sense that Jlauber is a generally one of the better posters on this site, and he does back up his points. As an old guy myself, I appreciate the light he sheds on the NBA's past. I just can't put him on the same tier as guys like G.O.A.T. and ShaqAttack who provide just as much insight(if not more) and do it with 100x less bias.

You're right that everyone is biased to at least some degree, but you're deluded if you think that someone like G.O.A.T. is anywhere near as biased as Jlauber.

GOAT does make an effort to be less biased but that doesn't make him a better poster. In the end, he still is biased. When I first came on this board I had it out with GOAT about his biases and intolerance of different opinions. Perhaps to you being clear of biases is high on your list of being a good poster: I think there's some room for that in being a journalist but its useless on message boards. A message board is a place for opinions - not scientific journalism. You're deluded if you think people go to message boards to get the unbiased and undisputed truth about basketball from guys, as in many cases on these boards, that never played organized ball. I can tell GOAT played the game - so I'm not saying this about him.

You can only be a good poster here if you are a fan of the sport and understand competition. As a poster Jlauber is competitive and goes hard to score his point. He's supposed to do that.

[Deuce Bigalow]

You tell me.

We KNOW that Wilt was taller, bigger, longer, stronger, faster, more athletic, and more skilled than either Bynum or Wallce, though.

You said Russell would be Ben Wallace in today's league, and Russell won 11 rings in Wilt's era. So you tell me.

And lol @ being stronger than Ben Wallace