Russell and Wilt's TRB% in the 64-65 EDF's

[dubeta]

In any case, this blows away the theory that Wilt's rebounding was accomplished in an inflated era. TRB%, while unfair to shot-blockers, as well as those who play staggering minutes per game, still adjusts based on available rebounds. Not only that, but he just slaughtered the second greatest rebounder in NBA history in that series.

And take a look at game two...not only a 39-16 advantage...but a 31.5 TRB% to 12.9 TRB% advantage.

When everyone around you is 6'3 or shorter thats not saying much.



Prime Wilt would struggle to get 8-9 rebounds in todays league.

[LAZERUSS]

In any case, this blows away the theory that Wilt's rebounding was accomplished in an inflated era. TRB%, while unfair to shot-blockers, as well as those who play staggering minutes per game, still adjusts based on available rebounds. Not only that, but he just slaughtered the second greatest rebounder in NBA history in that series.

And take a look at game two...not only a 39-16 advantage...but a 31.5 TRB% to 12.9 TRB% advantage.

That 39-16 beatdown pales in comparison to the game in which he outrebounded Russell by a 55-19 margin (a 36.9 TRB% to 12.8 TRB% advantage.)

[LAZERUSS]

When everyone around you is 6'3 or shorter thats not saying much.



Prime Wilt would struggle to get 8-9 rebounds in todays league.

Of course in THAT series, he was going up against a 6-9 1/2 , 7-4 wingspan, world-class high-jumper...and he just annihilated him.

And yet I am supposed to believe that Wilt would struggle against say, a Demarcus Cousins, who is also 6-9 1/2, and has a 27.5 " max vertical?

Or a 6-7 1/2 Kevin Love...and this type of athleticism?

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

[PejaTheSerbSnip]

Its a shame that you guys relentlessly troll Laz.

I don't agree with a lot of what he says, nor do I agree with the notion that Wilt is the GOAT, but some of his posts contain valuable insight/facts.

Moreover, taking shots at his age/implying hes gay for Wilt is just below the belt. Totally uncalled for.

[PejaTheSerbSnip]

With that said, Laz, you're not doing yourself any favours by responding to these guys; you realize that 80% of them are being facetious? They're ****ing with you lol. They have zero interest in actually debating the veracity of some of your assertions that pertain to Wilt. Zero. Don't take the bait, when these guys are literally laughing at how they're able to coax long posts out of you.

[Elosha]

Because the TEAM that went 62-18 edged out the TEAM that went 40-40 by a 110-109 margin in a game seven (and BTW, Wilt scored 8 of his team's last 10 points, including 2-2 from the line with 36 secs left, and then a dunk over Russell with 5 secs left that pulled them to with 110-109. Then, the "clutch" Russell hit a guidewire with his inbounds pass turning the ball over to Philly under their basket, but alas..."Havlicek stole the ball!")

Some good points but you must be careful not to overstate your case. This dunk is on video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B7j...ailpage#t=1684. Wilt did not dunk "over" Russell at all, more like Russell stood on the right side of the basket like a bump on the log, barely even raised his hands on defense, and made no effort to contain, block, or impede Wilt whatsoever. The Celtics were up by 3 and I assume Russell didn't want to foul with only 5 seconds left, and give Wilt the chance for a three point play to tie. However, it was lay down and concede the basket, type of defense. Wilt simply made a quick dribble around a frozen and unmoving Russell and quickly dunked. Russell simply watched him and didn't even try to make defend the shot or make it more difficult. Overall, even given the situation, it was very poor defense.

To be honest, I haven't been very impressed with much of Russell's individual defense on Wilt that's available on video. For instance, there's tons examples of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWr...etailpage#t=62, where Russell simply stands flatfooted with his arms held out to the side (WTH?) while Chamberlain does his very commonly used turnaround jumper from the left block and banks it off the glass. I don't really know what could be possibly a worse defensive stance. He's making no attempt to block or alter Chamberlain's shot and is not even crowding or bodying him. I hate to say this about an all time great, but it looks like lazy defense; it's basically allowing Wilt to go to his pet fadeaway with no resistance whatsoever. Wilt's percentages on those shots would definitely have decreased if Russell merely played average defense on those shots, rather than basically no defense at all.

I think Russell's defense may be a bit overrated, but he obviously excelled in blocked shots and rebounds. Perhaps, though, there was something to Russell's alleged habit of playing soft defense on Wilt earlier in the action, and then surprising Wilt by changing his defensive strategy and getting stops on Wilt in more crucial points of the game.

None of these comments are meant to take away from either Wilt or Russell, however, I do believe some of the video game type of scoring, rebounds, and block numbers Wilt was putting up must be taken in context. They are a function not only of the much faster pace of the game, but also the style, strategy, and yes, overall lesser skill of the league at the time. Note I said "overall." Great players then would be great players now, although to a different degree.

[LAZERUSS]

Some good points but you must be careful not to overstate your case. This dunk is on video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B7j...ailpage#t=1684. Wilt did not dunk "over" Russell at all, more like Russell stood on the right side of the basket like a bump on the log, barely even raised his hands on defense, and made no effort to contain, block, or impede Wilt whatsoever. The Celtics were up by 3 and I assume Russell didn't want to foul with only 5 seconds left, and give Wilt the chance for a three point play to tie. However, it was lay down and concede the basket, type of defense. Wilt simply made a quick dribble around a frozen and unmoving Russell and quickly dunked. Russell simply watched him and didn't even try to make defend the shot or make it more difficult. Overall, even given the situation, it was very poor defense.

To be honest, I haven't been very impressed with much of Russell's individual defense on Wilt that's available on video. For instance, there's tons examples of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWr...etailpage#t=62, where Russell simply stands flatfooted with his arms held out to the side (WTH?) while Chamberlain does his very commonly used turnaround jumper from the left block and banks it off the glass. I don't really know what could be possibly a worse defensive stance. He's making no attempt to block or alter Chamberlain's shot and is not even crowding or bodying him. I hate to say this about an all time great, but it looks like lazy defense; it's basically allowing Wilt to go to his pet fadeaway with no resistance whatsoever. Wilt's percentages on those shots would definitely have decreased if Russell merely played average defense on those shots, rather than basically no defense at all.

I think Russell's defense may be a bit overrated, but he obviously excelled in blocked shots and rebounds. Perhaps, though, there was something to Russell's alleged habit of playing soft defense on Wilt earlier in the action, and then surprising Wilt by changing his defensive strategy and getting stops on Wilt in more crucial points of the game.

None of these comments are meant to take away from either Wilt or Russell, however, I do believe some of the video game type of scoring, rebounds, and block numbers Wilt was putting up must be taken in context. They are a function not only of the much faster pace of the game, but also the style, strategy, and yes, overall lesser skill of the league at the time. Note I said "overall." Great players then would be great players now, although to a different degree.

Excellent post.



But a few thoughts on the "video game stats" and context. For one, it was basically ONLY Wilt who was putting up staggering numbers. Here is an example:

Aside from Chamberlain, there have been 36 30-30 games in NBA history, and Russell is the leader of that group, with 7 (Bellamy and Thurmond are next with 3 each.)

How about Wilt? 132.


40-30 (or 30-40) games: Other than Wilt, the NBA has had 9 40-30 games, with Baylor being the only player to have 2.

Chamberlain? 73


50-30 games: Pettit and Baylor each with 1

Wilt? 32


60-20 games: Aside from Wilt, there have been four (Baylor with 3 and Shaq with 1)

Chamberlain? 28


60-30 games: Baylor with 1

Wilt? 8


40-40 games: There have been 8 in the history of the NBA, and Chamberlain had all of them.


50-40 games: Obviously, Wilt would be the only player to have ever have accomplsihed that feat, which he did 5 times.


70-30 games: Chamberlain has the only 2, 78-43 and 73-36 (against Bellamy.)

True, the "pace" of play was slightly higher, particularly in terms of rebounding. No rational poster is going to claim that Wilt would average 27 rpg in today's NBA. Nor would Wilt average 50 ppg, nor take 40 FGAs per game in the current NBA, either.

But again, CONTEXT. Chamberlain gets ripped by the "bashers" because his scoring dropped in the post-season. Well, guess what....so did his shooting. For example, in his 50 ppg season, he averaged 40 FGAs per game, but in that post-season, he averaged 29. You want a "video game" number? How about Hakeem in his '95 Finals? He took 116 of his team's 343 total FGAs, or 34% of them. So, his 32.8 ppg came on 29 FGAs per game. Furthermore, he shot an eFG% of .488 in that series, in a post-season NBA that shot an eFG% of .504.

Compare Hakeem's '95 Finals with Wilt's '64 Finals. Chamberlain averaged 29.2 ppg on 24 FGAs per game. And he shot an FG% of .517, in a post-season NBA that shot an eFG% of .420. And Wilt took 120 out of his team's 472 FGAs in that series, or 25% of them.

And the comparative eFG%'s are important. Transport Wilt to the '95 Finals, give him 29 FGAs, but adjust for his eFG%, and he would have shot .620 from the field...and scored 40 ppg.

And how about their TRB%'s in their respective Finals? Hakeem's was at 14.2, while Wilt's was at 22.5 in the '64 Finals (Russell was at 20.6 BTW.)


And while there is no question that rebounding numbers were "inflated" in Wilt's era, the TRB%'s now show that he was still an extraordinary rebounder...especially in his post-seasons. But even more importantly, he just shelled his peers in that area. There are numerous examples, but for instance, in the '67 EDF's, Chamberlain not only outrebounded Russell, per game by a 32.0 rpg to 23.4 rpg margin, he held a TRB% advantage of 25.2 to 18.2.

And even those TRB%'s are deceptive. As Psileas pointed out a few years ago, shot-blockers like Russell and Wilt LOSE potential rebounds with blocked shots, AND, in attempting to block shots (which often takes them out of position to get the rebound.) Furthermore, as in Russell's, and to an even greater extent, Wilt's, cases...both of them were playing heavy minutes, which surely impacted their rebounding efficiencies. On top of all of that, Chamberlain was usually carrying his team's at the offensive end, as well.


But again...great post.

[jongib369]

When everyone around you is 6'3 or shorter thats not saying much.



Prime Wilt would struggle to get 8-9 rebounds in todays league.

[coin24]

Hakeem >>>> wilt

One of the most skilled big man of all time, dominated the post season and finals.
Versus wilt who routinely shrivelled and choked..

Hakeem won as the alpha of his team, wilt was a role player..

[LAZERUSS]

Hakeem >>>> wilt

One of the most skilled big man of all time, dominated the post season and finals.
Versus wilt who routinely shrivelled and choked..

Hakeem won as the alpha of his team, wilt was a role player..

You mean Hakeem dominated in the FIRST ROUND. Don't put "Finals" and "Hakeem" in the same sentence. THREE Finals in 18 seasons.

BTW, here were some of Wilt's numbers in his FIRST ROUNDS...

As examples, in Wilt's first eight post-seasons, and in his first round, he averaged

38.7 ppg

37.0 ppg

37.0 ppg

38.6 ppg and on .559 shooting (in a post-season NBA of 105.8 ppg on .420 shooting)

27.8 ppg (and then 30.1 ppg, on .555 shooting, and against Russell)

28.0 ppg

28.0 ppg (and a great example of FG% at .612 in a post-season at .424)

25.5 ppg (and on .584 shooting, while his opposing center, Bellamy was at 20.0 on .421 shooting.)

Even in his 11th season, and only four months removed from major knee surgery, Chamberlain put up a first round of 23.7 ppg., 20.3 rpg, and .549.

And, in his 71-72 post-season, he had a 14.5 ppg, 20.8 rpg, .629 first round series (and in an NBA post-season of .446.)

Obviously, Wilt should have pulled a "Hakeem" and quit while he was "ahead."

[sd3035]

Wilt was 8 years old in that photo...

There's no way he was 8

can't take anything this old man says seriously

[stanlove1111]

Some good points but you must be careful not to overstate your case. This dunk is on video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B7j...ailpage#t=1684. Wilt did not dunk "over" Russell at all, more like Russell stood on the right side of the basket like a bump on the log, barely even raised his hands on defense, and made no effort to contain, block, or impede Wilt whatsoever. The Celtics were up by 3 and I assume Russell didn't want to foul with only 5 seconds left, and give Wilt the chance for a three point play to tie. However, it was lay down and concede the basket, type of defense. Wilt simply made a quick dribble around a frozen and unmoving Russell and quickly dunked. Russell simply watched him and didn't even try to make defend the shot or make it more difficult. Overall, even given the situation, it was very poor defense.

To be honest, I haven't been very impressed with much of Russell's individual defense on Wilt that's available on video. For instance, there's tons examples of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWr...etailpage#t=62, where Russell simply stands flatfooted with his arms held out to the side (WTH?) while Chamberlain does his very commonly used turnaround jumper from the left block and banks it off the glass. I don't really know what could be possibly a worse defensive stance. He's making no attempt to block or alter Chamberlain's shot and is not even crowding or bodying him. I hate to say this about an all time great, but it looks like lazy defense; it's basically allowing Wilt to go to his pet fadeaway with no resistance whatsoever. Wilt's percentages on those shots would definitely have decreased if Russell merely played average defense on those shots, rather than basically no defense at all.

I think Russell's defense may be a bit overrated, but he obviously excelled in blocked shots and rebounds. Perhaps, though, there was something to Russell's alleged habit of playing soft defense on Wilt earlier in the action, and then surprising Wilt by changing his defensive strategy and getting stops on Wilt in more crucial points of the game.

None of these comments are meant to take away from either Wilt or Russell, however, I do believe some of the video game type of scoring, rebounds, and block numbers Wilt was putting up must be taken in context. They are a function not only of the much faster pace of the game, but also the style, strategy, and yes, overall lesser skill of the league at the time. Note I said "overall." Great players then would be great players now, although to a different degree.

Its hard to say your post seriously after you questioned why Russell let Wilt score with 5 seconds left in game 7 with a 3 point lead. Of course that's what you are going to do.

As for Wilt's turnaround jumpers that Russell allowed againshows that maybe Russell is more of a thinker then you. If Russell was content with Wilt taking turn around jumpers why would he challenge them tighly? IF you put a stop to those then Wilt might be forced to take it to the basket more which might give Russell more trouble..N

Not a good idea to judge something like that unless you know why. And of course defense in general was not that good back then, so Russell could be the best defensive player in the world ( which he was ) and still not stack up to todays standards. The game has evolved.

[stanlove1111]

That 39-16 beatdown pales in comparison to the game in which he outrebounded Russell by a 55-19 margin (a 36.9 TRB% to 12.8 TRB% advantage.)

Off topic. Laz did you notice that they found a Knicks/Bullets game from 1971? They showed it on the MSG channel last night. Its the first I have heard of it, maybe you already knew.

[LAZERUSS]

Off topic. Laz did you notice that they found a Knicks/Bullets game from 1971? They showed it on the MSG channel last night. Its the first I have heard of it, maybe you already knew.

I didn't know about it, but thanks. I just checked YouTube, and I couldn't find a full game between them. There is a game from March 1st, 1973 that exists.

And on that topic...I have long claimed that Willis Reed was Zach Randolph before Zach was. And going along with the Bullets-Knicks theme, Wes Unseld was making Kevin Love outlets long before Love was.

BTW...I know you and I bump heads here, but I do enjoy the discussions. It's one thing to constantly battle the mindless trolls, or just plain morons that post here, but it is another to have debates with educated and knowledgeable posters, whether we agree, or not. I do respect your opinions.

[LAZERUSS]

There's no way he was 8

can't take anything this old man says seriously

Nor does posting a photo of a high school Wilt and mocking it as if that was a 30 year old Chamberlain, either.

Look at this wimp...



And some here call him the MDE...