Could a Walt Bellamy (4th best center of the 1960's) be the best center today?

[LAZERUSS]

A peak Chamberlain in his '64-65 season...(and again, I haven't updated my topic with nbastats.net's more recent finds...)

64-65.

Overall, here were the HOF centers numbers against the league:

Bellamy: 24.8 ppg, 14.6 rpg, and .509 FG%.
Russell: 14.1 ppg, 24.1 rpg (led league), 4.7 apg, and .438 FG%.
Reed: 19.5 ppg, 14.7 rpg, and a .432 FG%.

Nate (full season): 16.5 ppg, 18.1 rpg, .419 FG%.
Nate (as a starter- 40 games): 20.9 ppg 24.9 rpg (known 17 games), no known FG% games.

Wilt (with SF...38 games): 38.9 ppg, 23.5 rpg, 3.1 apg, .499 FG%.
Wilt (with Phil... 35 games): 30.1 ppg, 22.3 rpg, 3.8 apg, .528 FG%.
Wilt (full season ...73 games): 34.7 ppg, 22.9 prg, 3.4 apg, .510 FG%.

BTW, the NBA averaged 110.6 ppg on an eFG% of .426. And in the post-season, it averaged 113.7 ppg on an eFG% of .429.


Reed's stats vs the other HOF centers:

Thurmond in 3 H2H's: 9.7 ppg, no known rpg, and no known FG%s.
Russell in 9 H2H's: 19.7 ppg, 18.6 rpg, no known FG%'s.
Bellamy in 10 H2H's: 21.2 ppg, 17.0 rpg (3 known games) and no known FG%.
Wilt in 12 H2H's: 22.9 ppg, 17.0 rpg (2 known H2H's), .333 FG% (1 known game.).

Reed had games of 38 and 35 points against Wilt. His high game against Russell was 25 points. His high game against Nate was only 15 points. And his high game against Bellamy was 31.



Bellamy's stats vs. the other HOF centers:

Thurmond in 5 H2H's: 17.4 ppg, 13.0 rpg (3 known games), no known FG%'s.
Reed in 10 H2H's: 22.6 ppg, 14.0 rpg (only 1 known game), no known FG%'s.
Russell in 9 H2H's: 25.8 ppg, 15.8 rpg (5 known games), no known FG%'s.
Wilt in 9 H2H's: 26.3 ppg, 14.1 rpg (7 known games), no known FG%'s.

Bellamy's high scoring game against Russell was 45 points. He also had two other 32 point games against him. He had games of 30 and 31 points against Reed. He had a 30 point game against Nate (his next highest was 20.) And his high games against Wilt were 37, 33, 32, and 31 points.



Thurmond's stats against the other HOF centers:

Reed in 3 H2H's: 20.0 ppg, 30.0 rpg (1 known game), no known FG%'s.
Bellamy in 5 H2H's: 22.0 ppg, 29.7 rpg (3 known games), no known FG%'s.
Russell in 4 H2H's: 22.0 ppg, 22.7 rpg (3 known games), no known FG%'s.
Wilt in 3 H2H's: 18.7 ppg, 20.0 rpg (1 known game), no known FG%'s.

Thurmond had a monster 30-32 game against Bellamy, as well as another 28-37 game against him. He had a 21-30 game against Reed, and a high point game of 22 points against him. He had games of 26-20, 22-19, and 21-29 against Russell in their four H2H's. And against Wilt he had a 25-20 game.



Russell vs. the other HOF centers:

Nate in 4 H2H's: 12.0 ppg, 32.7 rpg (3 known games), .333 FG% (1 known)
Reed in 9 H2H's: 16.0 ppg, 21.1 rpg (8 known), .547 FG% (6 known games)
Bellamy in 9 H2H's: 12.9 ppg, 19.7 rpg, .475 FG% (5 known games.)
Wilt in 11 reg H2H's: 12.6 ppg, 22.2 rpg, 4.6 apg, .281 FG% (10 known)

Russell had games of 20-25, 22-30, 24-23, and 24-24 against Reed (and another with 38 rebounds.) Russell had one game against Nate of 20-41 (yes 41 rebounds.) He had games of 22-17 and 22-22 against Bellamy. And against Wilt, Russell's high point game was 18, and his high rebounding game was 27.

And continuing with the Laker H2H's for both Russell and Wilt:

Russell against LA in 10 reg H2H's: 15.9 ppg, 26.7 rpg, .436 FG% (9 known)
Russell vs. LA in 5 Finals games: 17.8 ppg, 25.0 rpg, .702 FG% (yes .702.)

Russell vs, Wilt in 7 EDF games:
15.6 ppg, 25.1 rpg, 6.7 apg, .447 FG%.

Russell's high point game in the EDF"s against Wilt was 22 points. His high rebounding game was 32.



Wilt vs. the other HOF centers:

Bellamy in 9 H2H's: 38.3 ppg, 21.7 rpg, .547 FG% (8 known games.)
Reed in 12 H2H's: 38.6 ppg, 21.2 rpg, .532 FG% (8 known games.)
Russell in 11 reg H2H's: 25.4 ppg, 26.5 rpg, 4.2 apg, .473 FG%
Nate in 3 H2H's: 26.7 ppg, 26.3 rpg, .500 FG%.

Chamberlain had a horrible 7-21 FG/FGA game against Nate, but historically, that was an aberration. He also had a 34-26 game, on 13-20 FG/FGA against him, as well. Overall, in their 3 H2H's, Wilt held a 3-0 scoring margin, and a 1-0 margin in their only known rebounding H2H.

Wilt just shelled Reed in the majority of their 12 H2H's. He outscored him 11-1, including margins of 37-22, 29-12, 46-25, 52-23, 41-8, and 58-28. He also had rebounding games of 28, 32, and 32 against Reed.

Wilt continued his plastering of Bellamy, too. He held a 7-2 scoring margin edge, including margins of 51-33, 43-25, 56-37, 40-16, and 53-20. Chamberlain also held a 6-1 edge in their known rebounding H2H's, which included margins of 29-16, and 28-10.

The Chamberlain-Russell duels were continuing to become more-and-more one-sided, as well. In their 11 regular season H2H's, Chamberlain enjoyed a 10-1 scoring edge (and Russell's lone "win" was 11-8 in a game in which Wilt left injured.) Included were margins of 24-6, 31-7, and 37-16. Wilt also outrebounded Russell by an 8-3 margin, which included margins of 32-24, 26-17, 34-17, and 43-26. And again, look at Russell's known FG%... an unfathomable .281 in the known 10 of their 11 season H2H's (and in one game Russell shot an unbelievable 0-14!)!

And, Wilt vs. LA in 8 H2H games:

29.9 ppg, 22.4 rpg, and on a .476 FG%.

This was Wilt's worst season against the Lakers to date, but he still put up three 40+ games (with a high of 41 points.)

Wilt vs Russell in 7 EDF's games:

30.1 ppg, 31.4 rpg, 3.3 apg, and a .555 eFG%.

Wilt outscored Russell in all 7 games, including margins of 30-15, 34-18, 30-12, 30-12, and 33-11. Chamberlain also held a 5-2 margin in rebounding H2H's in that post-season, including margins of 37-26, and 39-16.

Again...just total domination against four HOF centers.


So, as you can see, Thurmond averaged a near peak HIGH in ppg in that season. His scoring would drop slightly after that when the Warriors adeed rookie Rick Barry and also Jeff Mullins. In terms of pure athleticism...a PEAK Nate played from '65 thru '67. Injuries slowly took a toll after that.

As for his 73-74 season...he was in a state of severe decline. He only played in 65 games, and his overall production took a HUGE drop.

So, the reality was, a prime Nate played from '65 thru '73. And a PEAK Thurmond played from '65 thru '67. And as you and I both know, he came in second in the MVP balloting in the '67 season (and behind Chamberlain.)


BTW, here were Nate's and Wilt's H2H numbers from that '64-65 season, thru their six H2H's in the '65-66 season, and their first two H2H's in the 66-67 season...or first 14 games...

Nate: 16.1 ppg, 18.9 rpg, .356 FG% (4 known games)
Wilt: 28.2 ppg, 26.2 rpg, .514 FG%.

Chamberlain outscored Nate in those 14 games by a 13-1 margin, and outrebounded him by a 12-2 margin. And again, in those 14 games...SIX games of 30+ points, (30, 30, 33, 34, 38, and 45 points), including margins of 30-10, 33-17, 38-15, and 45-13.

Overall, and thru their first 24 h2H's, which covered the '67 Finals...Chamberlain enjoyed a 21-2-1 scoring margin, and an 18-5-1 rebounding margin.

And then '65-66...

65-66:

Thurmond vs Wilt in 9 regular season H2H's:

Nate: 16.1 ppg, 19.7 rpg, 1.1 apg, .382 FG% (3 known games)
Wilt: 28.6 ppg, 25.4 rpg, 4.4 apg (8 known games), .489 FG%

Wilt held an 8-1 scoring margin in their nine H2H's. He had four games of 30+ (30, 33, 38, and 45.) Nate had a high game of 30 points. Chamberlain had games in which he outscored Thurmond by margins of 33-17, 30-10, 38-15, and 45-13.

Chamberlain held a 7-2 rebounding margin in those nine games. Nate's high game was 32, while Wilt had games of 30 and 31. Wilt had rebounding margins of 30-19, 29-10, and 28-7.

Wilt outassisted Nate in Chamberlain's known eight games.

And Chamberlain had shooting games of 13-22, 17-32, and 15-22 against Thurmond. Nate shot 8-17, 6-16, and 7-22 in his three known games.



Bellamy vs Wilt in 11 regular season H2H games:

Bellamy: 25.2 ppg, 16.4 rpg, 4.0 apg, no known FG% games.
Wilt: 33.0 ppg, 19.9 rpg, 5.0 apg, and on a .565 FG%

Wilt held a 9-1-1 scoring margin over Bells. Bellamy's high games were 36, and 39 points. Chamberlain had 7 games of 30+ against Bellamy (Walter only had two against Wilt) and his high games were 35, 37, 38, and 50.

Chamberlain held a 10-1 margin in rebounding, albeit, many were close games. Amazingly, Wilt had two games of only 12 and 13 rebounds. He also had six of 20+ with a high's of 25 and 26. Bellamy's high games were 22 and 24.

Wilt held a 7-4 advantage in assist games, with highs of 10 and 12. Bellamy's high was 7.

Chamberlain had a remarkable FG% against Bellamy in that season. Overall, Wilt shot .540 against the entire NBA, and .565 against Bellamy.



Russell vs. Wilt in 9 regular season H2H's:

Russell: 9.6 ppg, 21.2 rpg, 4.9 apg, and on a .301 FG%
Wilt: 28.3 ppg, 30.7 rpg, 4.1 apg, and on a .473 FG%.

Wilt outscored Russell in all nine games. In fact, he annihilated Russell by margins of 27-6, 32-8, 30-5, 31-11, and 37-14.

Chamberlain outrebounded Russell by a 6-3 margin. Included were margins of 32-22, 30-20, 36-20, 30-10, 40-17, and 42-25.

Russell held a slight edge in apg, with a high game of 9. Wilt's high game was 7.

Russell did an outstanding job of holding Wilt's efficiency down (.473), BUT, Chamberlain did an even better job against Russell (.301.)


Russell vs Wilt in 5 EDF games:

Russell: 14.0 ppg, 26.2 rpg, 5.6 apg, and on a .424 FG%.
Wilt: 28.0 ppg, 30.2 rpg, 3.0 apg, and on a .509 FG%.

Wilt held a 4-1 margin in scoring; and a 4-1 margin rebounding. Russell held a 3-2 margin in apg. Chamberlain outshot Russell from the floor in every game. In the clinching game five loss, Wilt outscored Russell, 46-18, on 19-34 shooting to Russell's 6-11, and outrebounded Russell, 34-31.

[dankok8]

Wilt' scoring dropped dramatically in that period, as well.

I have posted their seasonal H2H's, and Chamberlain just DESTROYED Bellamy almost every season. Even in their '66-67 H2H's, when Bellamy FINALLY had a seasonal edge in scoring (and it was just barely), Wilt outshot him from the floor by a .709 to .449 margin.

Prior to that season, Wilt's career scoring margin over Bellamy was likely 10-15 ppg. As an example, Bellamy averaged 34.7 ppg against Chamberlain in their 10 H2H's in the '61-62 season...and Wilt outscored him by a full 18 ppg (52.7 ppg!).

And I haven't taken the time to double-check nbastats.net since I did my topic on a prime Wilt's domination of his peers, but in his 62-63 season, he outscored Bellamy, per game, in their 10 H2H's, by a 42.8 ppg to 29.7 ppg margin, and in the known nine games Wilt shot .542 against Bellamy.

Oh, and a prime Chamberlain met Bellamy in the '68 EC playoffs, and outscored him, per game, 25.5 ppg to 20.0 ppg; outrebounded him, per game, 24.2 rpg to 16.0 rpg,; outassisted him, 6.7 apg to 3.5 apg; and outshot him from the floor by a .584 to .421 margin (BTW, Bellamy shot .541 against the NBA in the regular season.)

You're right.

Not doubt Wilt killed Bellamy. It was pretty one-sided in their match-ups. I'd say the only time Bells played him almost even was the 1970 WDF when he outscored and outshot Wilt but even then his team was swept.

My point was I tried to explain why Bellamy's numbers against Russell seem better than against Wilt. It's because he played four more seasons in the twilight of his career against Wilt.

Bellamy vs. Thurmond

Regular Season (46 games)

Thurmond: 18.5 ppg, 16.3 rpg (43 games), 3.0 apg (32 games) on 44.3 %FG (23 games)
Bellamy: 12.5 ppg, 11.8 rpg (35 games), 2.4 apg (28 games) on 42.2 %FG (22 games)

I only took the games after Wilt got traded in Jan 1965 and Nate became the starting center. He did the best against Bells by far. Another victim of Nate that shows he is the GOAT man-to-man defender.

[bizil]

Bellamy was more efficient in an era that had a faster pace. Cousins is not efficient in today's era. Bellamy had range and a supreme post game compared to anything in the league today minus Duncan perhaps. He could defend which Cousins can't. Bellamy had the talent to lead the league in rebounding or at least be top 3. He was more athletic than Cousins. He could run the floor and finish. Sorry I can't see Cousins being better than Hall of Famer Bellamy.

But in today's era, u don't have as many dominant centers. Boogie's style of play at center fits more into today's style. Boogie is still a beast on the glass getting 12 boards a night. And his TOTAL SCORING SKILLSET is better than Bellamy's was. In terms of being efficient, Cousins shot 50% from the field two years ago. I wouldn't call that being inefficient.

His scoring skillset is also more varied than Bellamy's. ALSO KEEP IN MIND that Cousins is 6'11 and 270 pounds. He has like a 30-40 pound weight advantage on Bellamy. Bellamy was great, but he wasn't Wilt, Kareem, etc. I can see an argument either way actually. But I PREFER Cousins versatility WHICH IS MORE CONDUSIVE for today's game. The only edge I would give Bellamy FOR SURE is defense.

[LAZERUSS]

You're right.

Not doubt Wilt killed Bellamy. It was pretty one-sided in their match-ups. I'd say the only time Bells played him almost even was the 1970 WDF when he outscored and outshot Wilt but even then his team was swept.

My point was I tried to explain why Bellamy's numbers against Russell seem better than against Wilt. It's because he played four more seasons in the twilight of his career against Wilt.

Bellamy vs. Thurmond

Regular Season (46 games)

Thurmond: 18.5 ppg, 16.3 rpg (43 games), 3.0 apg (32 games) on 44.3 %FG (23 games)
Bellamy: 12.5 ppg, 11.8 rpg (35 games), 2.4 apg (28 games) on 42.2 %FG (22 games)

I only took the games after Wilt got traded in Jan 1965 and Nate became the starting center. He did the best against Bells by far. Another victim of Nate that shows he is the GOAT man-to-man defender.

Excellent research...as always.

[LAZERUSS]

But in today's era, u don't have as many dominant centers. Boogie's style of play at center fits more into today's style. Boogie is still a beast on the glass getting 12 boards a night. And his TOTAL SCORING SKILLSET is better than Bellamy's was. In terms of being efficient, Cousins shot 50% from the field two years ago. I wouldn't call that being inefficient.

His scoring skillset is also more varied than Bellamy's. ALSO KEEP IN MIND that Cousins is 6'11 and 270 pounds. He has like a 30-40 pound weight advantage on Bellamy. Bellamy was great, but he wasn't Wilt, Kareem, etc. I can see an argument either way actually. But I PREFER Cousins versatility WHICH IS MORE CONDUSIVE for today's game. The only edge I would give Bellamy FOR SURE is defense.

Cousins is 6-9 1/2 with a 28 " vertical. And his skill-set includes "carrying the ball", which is something he would not have gotten away with in the 60's.

And I have found an article that actually lists Bellamy's height at 7-0.

[GIF REACTION]

Shut the **** up laz

Demarcus is 6-11, 290 and ALL muscle. He is far too athletic for Walt to handle.

[LAZERUSS]

Shut the **** up laz

Demarcus is 6-11, 290 and ALL muscle. He is far too athletic for Walt to handle.

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

[CavaliersFTW]

But in today's era, u don't have as many dominant centers. Boogie's style of play at center fits more into today's style. Boogie is still a beast on the glass getting 12 boards a night. And his TOTAL SCORING SKILLSET is better than Bellamy's was. In terms of being efficient, Cousins shot 50% from the field two years ago. I wouldn't call that being inefficient.

His scoring skillset is also more varied than Bellamy's. ALSO KEEP IN MIND that Cousins is 6'11 and 270 pounds. He has like a 30-40 pound weight advantage on Bellamy. Bellamy was great, but he wasn't Wilt, Kareem, etc. I can see an argument either way actually. But I PREFER Cousins versatility WHICH IS MORE CONDUSIVE for today's game. The only edge I would give Bellamy FOR SURE is defense.

Bellamy topped out at 265 (albeit, overweight), and liked to play at 245 in an era when weight lifting wasn't fashionable. Turn Bellamy's out of shape weight into muscle mass and that's likely what he'd play at today with weight training no? So about 260-265?

[GIF REACTION]

He's 6-11.

[GIF REACTION]

Demarcus is way too versatile on offense for Walt

[LAZERUSS]

He's 6-11.

Bellamy?

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/15/sp...ll/15TALL.html

Some players prefer to be smaller than they actually are. Blake said Walt Bellamy, a Hall of Famer, asked to be listed at 6-11 even though he was 7 feet tall.

"I know he was 7 feet, but Walt thought it made him look extraordinarily tall," Blake said.

So, Bellamy would have TOWERED over the 6-9 1/2 Cousins (with his 28" vertical... )

[GIF REACTION]

He's 6-11.

[LAZERUSS]

He's 6-11.

Keep believing it. And I'm reasonably sure that the Tooth Fairy will be leaving a nickel under your pillow tonight, too.

[Jameerthefear]

no he'd be like top 10 probably though

[bizil]

Cousins is 6-9 1/2 with a 28 " vertical. And his skill-set includes "carrying the ball", which is something he would not have gotten away with in the 60's.

And I have found an article that actually lists Bellamy's height at 7-0.

But we are talking IN TODAY'S GAME!! If the refs let him get away with it then OH WELL! We are talking about in today's game!! And let's face it, Demarcus HASN'T even hit his prime yet. I just think that Cousins' versatility, size, and rebounding would trump Bellamy in today's game.

I do see the argument for Walt though. But Walt IS NOT Kareem, Wilt, or Walton from the 60's and 70's. So ITS NOT out of the question for Cousins to be better. Some of you guys act like THERE IS NO WAY Cousins could be as good or better than Bellamy!