Willis Reed dunks on Happy Hairston G3 1970 NBA Finals

[Rake2204]

Griffin completed a power dunk on Gasol and Gasol tried to block it and ended up on his ass. The same thing happened with the Reed dunk..

I believe that may be oversimplifying the art of the dunk. Your statement may be like taking Omri Casspi's dunk over a seven footer - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q3bwabQYIg (no matter style, force, ferocity, power, or elevation) then saying, "Completion of slam over a seven foot center. Same thing as Jordan on Ewing."

[CavaliersFTW]

I believe that may be oversimplifying the art of the dunk. Your statement may be like taking Omri Casspi's dunk over a seven footer - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q3bwabQYIg (no matter style, force, ferocity, power, or elevation) then saying, "Completion of slam over a seven foot center. Same thing as Jordan on Ewing."

Stage matters tho, lots of things make this Reed dunk exceptional. Reeds dunk is a Finals dunk. Would probably be famous if done today, due to the way he flattens Hairston who really tried to stop the dunk. I mean, again this is during an NBA Finals ...one of Reeds 38 points too, monster game, monster dunk, Finals in which his team won... This has all the ingredients of a pretty great dunk if only a sports center were around at the time to promote it.

[Dro]

Awesome looking forward to it. Found it though




http://www.nbcuniversalarchives.com/...=clip_34983239

This is awesome. At work I can't watch stuff like youtube,etc but I can watch the videos on sites like this...

[Rake2204]

Stage matters tho, lots of things make this Reed dunk exceptional. Reeds dunk is a Finals dunk. Would probably be famous if done today, due to the way he flattens Hairston who really tried to stop the dunk. I mean, again this is during an NBA Finals ...one of Reeds 38 points too, monster game, monster dunk, Finals in which his team won... This has all the ingredients of a pretty great dunk if only a sports center were around at the time to promote it.

Stage does tend to matter in many cases, but I do not think that would have automatically made this Reed dunk famous. It's a solid dunk, but not exactly brimming with the aspects sometimes help contribute to what makes a dunk legendary.

What this dunk has going for it:

1. Name recognition: It's Willis Reed
2. Stage: It's the NBA Finals
3. Neither player shying away
4. A good finish
5. A defender falls

Where this play struggles:

1. Low leaping elevation
2. Pretty standard dunk style
3. Little windup
4. A finish that wasn't very clean or powerful (ball rattles, drops carelessly through net)
5. A defender who slowly buckles and tips over, almost more a result of a loss of balance than being flatly powered over
6. Road game: This one sounds really petty but in terms of memory, I swear it matters to many. Jordan's 35 would have never not been incredible, but the atmosphere and memory may have been decidedly different if it occurred in Portland.

Compare that Reed dunk to Bill Walton's flush on Kareem Abdul-Jabbar in the '77 Conference Finals, which is quite famous, even though it was pre-Sportscenter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_TvlkTJa0U

Abdul-Jabbar doesn't need to slowly teeter over for this dunk to eclipse Reed's. What Walton's dunk contains that Reed's does not:

1. Double name recognition: Happy Hairston's a good player, but he's not Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
2. Home crowd
3. More elevation
4. A clean, powerful, downward finish
5. 1-on-1 challenge recognized early in play, everyone knows it's coming, Walton overcomes (a sense of "Oh crap, Bill's got the rock and a clear lane! Only Kareem's in his way! Oh no he's going for it! OH MY HE DID IT!")

[CavaliersFTW]

Where this play struggles:

1. Low leaping elevation
4. A finish that wasn't very clean or powerful (ball rattles, drops carelessly through net)
5. A defender who slowly buckles and tips over, almost more a result of a loss of balance than being flatly powered over
6. Road game: This one sounds really petty but in terms of memory, I swear it matters to many. Jordan's 35 would have never not been incredible, but the atmosphere and memory may have been decidedly different if it occurred in Portland.

1. Straight up not true. You are deceived by modern zoom lenses and great camera work. Look at his hand and Hairstons hand in relation to the square. Both are at the top of the square. Both Hairston and Reed got up there. With modern camera work positioned strategically with zoom lenses, this would be deliberately replayed over and over from the angle that creates the "head near the rim" illusion. The illusion of elevation is always greatly enhanced simply by modern camera work but no matter what dunks you watch if you get a clean non-zoom look at how high players hands get, that's about as high as what is normal for athletic bigs. Heck, peak athletic Jordan dunks rarely have his hands above the upper corners of the square.
4. That's how 99% of great poster dunks are... especially in the modern era, where today players actually emphasized the grab of the rim instead of the throw of the ball through cleanly. The focal point of this dunk is the body to body contact. If how clean the ball goes through the net is so important than Shaq was a routinely terrible dunker and Wilt is the GOAT dunker. Wilt's dunks always slam clean he barely ever seemed to touch the rim, Shaq always focused on abusing the rim and as a result the ball on Shaq dunks almost always limply dropped through the net. Point being, this literally just a matter of opinion. This is a power dunk regardless how that ball fell.
5. Hairston got knocked over. By Willis Reed's powerful dunk. Period.
6. Eh. The only thing this does is take away crowd reaction. Mic'd properly, we'd hear some "oooohs" from the crowd and the announcers would be reacting regardless of home court, as it would be a Finals game.


*EDIT* Just watched your Walton link. You said more elevation - I see no less elevation, again look at their hands in relation to the square. People don't realize how important camera work is in changing peoples perception of plays. Reed and Hairston were way up there especially considering they were so much shorter than Walton and Kareem.

[Dro]

1. Straight up not true. You are deceived by modern zoom lenses. Look at his hand and Hairstons hand in relation to the square. Both are at the top of the square. Both Hairston and Reed got up there. With modern camera work positioned strategically with zoom lenses, this would be deliberately replayed over and over from the angle that creates the "head near the rim" illusion. The illusion of elevation is always greatly enhanced simply by modern camera work but no matter what dunks you watch if you get a clean non-zoom look at how high players hands get, that's about as high as what is normal for athletic bigs. Heck, peak athletic Jordan dunks rarely have his hands above the upper corners of the square.
4. That's how 99% of great poster dunks are... especially in the modern era, where today players actually emphasized the grab of the rim instead of the throw of the ball through cleanly. The focal point of this dunk is the body to body contact. If how clean the ball goes through the net is so important than Shaq was a routinely terrible dunker and Wilt is the GOAT dunker. Wilt's dunks always slam clean he barely ever seemed to touch the rim, Shaq always focused on abusing the rim and as a result the ball on Shaq dunks almost always limply dropped through the net. Point being, this literally just a matter of opinion. This is a power dunk regardless how that ball fell.
5. Hairston got knocked over. By Willis Reed's powerful dunk. Period.
6. Eh. The only thing this does is take away crowd reaction. Mic'd properly, we'd hear some "oooohs" from the crowd and the announcers would be reacting regardless of home court, as it would be a Finals game.


*EDIT* Just watched your Walton link. You said more elevation - I see no less elevation, again look at their hands in relation to the square. People don't realize how important camera work is in changing peoples perception of plays. Reed and Hairston were way up there especially considering they were so much shorter than Walton and Kareem.

Not sure I agree about Shaq.......

[CavaliersFTW]

Not sure I agree about Shaq.......

"almost always" I would change. You're right. But I've seen many Shaq dunks where he straight up rocked the backboard, and beat down the player in the way, but the ball rattled around and dropped soft. He often attacked the rim - laterally. He didn't just try and throw the ball straight down. So as a matter of opinion, I don't see why that would be so important. Dunking with power is dunking with power, whether applied more laterally or more horizontally.

[LAZERUSS]

Nice dunk.



Willis Reed>Wilt

Chamberlain was four months removed from major knee surgery going into that Finals. And against a much healthier (and MVP) Reed in the first four games of the Finals, Wilt outplayed him in two of them.

Of course, after Reed went down with a muscle tear in game five, he was basically useless. Having said that, just two years prior to that (67-68), Chamberlain suffered a similar tear in the post-season, and despite NOTICEABLY LIMPING, Wilt played every minute of the seven game EDF's, and still managed to put up a 22-25-7 series.

As for Reed>Wilt...you're kidding right?

Just the season before the 69-70 Finals (obviously the 68-69 season), a HEALTHY Wilt battled a PEAK Reed. How about these numbers?

Reed came in second in the MVP voting in '69. His Knicks went 54-28 (just behind Wilt's Lakers, who went 55-27.) However, the Knicks conducted a mid-season trade in which they shipped out Bellamy in return for DeBusschere, and the results were a 36-11 record after the deal.

Reed's numbers were excellent all season (21.1 ppg, 14.5 rpg, 2.3 apg, and on a .521 FG%.) He was also second team all-defense. But after the trade, Reed averaged 24.3 ppg and 15.6 rpg.

However, Wilt's Lakers enjoyed a 5-1 W-L record against those Knicks, including a 2-0 mark when Reed was their center. In their entire seasonal H2H's, covering all six games (again, with Bellamy at center in four of them), Reed averaged 15.0 ppg and 12 rpg, while Wilt averaged 23.7 ppg, 22.3 rpg, and shot an amazing .712 from the field. In their two H2H's when it was Reed vs. Wilt, Reed averaged 20.0 ppg and 9.5 rpg, while Wilt averaged 28.0 ppg, 22.0 rpg, and shot an eye-popping .688 from the floor. Clearly, Wilt dominated Reed in their career H2H's before his knee surgery, and this was yet another example.

Of course, we could back to the 64-65 season, when again, Reed was NY's starting center, and going against a PRIME Chamberlain:

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%.
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Wilt in 12 H2H's: 22.9 ppg, 17.0 rpg (2 known H2H's), .333 FG% (1 known game.[/COLOR]).

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.)
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Reed in 12 H2H's: 38.6 ppg, 21.2 rpg, .532 FG% (8 known games.)[/COLOR]
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.

[COLOR="DarkRed"]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[/COLOR].

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.

[Rake2204]

1. Straight up not true. You are deceived by modern zoom lenses. Look at his hand and Hairstons hand in relation to the square. Both are at the top of the square. Both Hairston and Reed got up there. With modern camera work positioned strategically with zoom lenses, this would be deliberately replayed over and over from the angle that creates the "head near the rim" illusion.

The illusion of elevation is always greatly enhanced simply by modern camera work but no matter what dunks you watch if you get a clean non-zoom look at how high players hands get, that's about as high as what is normal for athletic bigs. Heck, peak athletic Jordan dunks rarely have his hands above the upper corners of the square.

Before I dive in, I wish to agree with you that the quality of a dunk is often one's opinion, so sometimes it's tough to come to an ultimate conclusion. That said, still a fun discussion.

Now, regarding part one, what I meant by elevation was each player's jumping ability. How high their hands are on the backboard is not the tell-all, since Mark Eaton spent most of his career well above the rim despite his apparent 6'' vert.

Reed's dunk is good, but it's not exactly two high-flyers meeting in mid-air. It's a center catching a backdoor pass and poking on a defender. It's not a flat-footed play, but I would have a very, very difficult time seeing anyone being able to create a semi-believable "head at the rim" perspective on this play.

I tried to get Willis at his head's peak but I may have been a little off. Yes, I understand camera angles, but a low camera angle doesn't mean he's flying, because he's not.

4. That's how 99% of great poster dunks are... especially in the modern era, where today players actually emphasized the grab of the rim instead of the throw of the ball through cleanly. The focal point of this dunk is the body to body contact. If how clean the ball goes through the net is so important than Shaq was a routinely terrible dunker and Wilt is the GOAT dunker. Wilt's dunks always slam clean he barely ever seemed to touch the rim, Shaq always focused on abusing the rim and as a result the ball on Shaq dunks almost always limply dropped through the net. Point being, this literally just a matter of opinion. This is a power dunk regardless how that ball fell.

I believe you misunderstand that of which I was referring. The ball was not put down with a ton of force. A big man cut, caught, and dunked. It wasn't light, but it wasn't a particularly violent flush either, and the ball not going down cleanly did not help its cause.

That said, it's possible for dunks to not go down cleanly and still pass as great finishes, but that's often when many other aspects of the dunk are outstanding (ex: Wade on Varejao - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uRN7iJ5CqQ). In Reed's case, it's a relatively standard big man one-hander over a defender who's trying to extend in the air for a block.

Sidenote, I am floored by this line: "Shaq always focused on abusing the rim and as a result the ball on Shaq dunks almost always limply dropped through the net." Could you please elaborate on this quote before my head explodes?

5. Hairston got knocked over. By Willis Reed's powerful dunk. Period.

Willis Reed dunked. Happy Hairston fell. Did Hairston fall only because Reed's dunk was so powerful? No. Did Hairston fall due to a combination of factors that include Reed finishing strongly? Yes. Was he absolutely overpowered and dropped like Brandon Knight? No. Did he kinda fall down after some contact? Yes.

6. Eh. The only thing this does is take away crowd reaction. Mic'd properly, we'd hear some "oooohs" from the crowd and the announcers would be reacting regardless of home court, as it would be a Finals game.

Correct. Regardless, not trying to single out Reed, but unfortunately home team dunks often tend to ring in the minds of others for a much longer time period. Great dunks can still happen on the road, but it didn't help this one.

Above all else, a defender falling to the ground in the Finals does not automatically mean a dunk is legendary. If said fall is combined with many other incredible dunk factors, it can help, but just because a player lost his balance after absorbing contact does not mean that slam is more powerful and vicious than any other dunk in history that didn't knock a player over.

Here's a one-footed, one-handed dunk that I find carries much more elevation, authority, style, and power, even though the defender remained upright: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM_4SnoHFl0

Here's an NBA Finals road dunk that I prefer over the Reed flush: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keuRJJep3qE

And here's what I find to be a very good NBA Finals dunk from the Sportscenter era that has not been glorified and pimped by ESPN simply because it's a dunk that occurred in the NBA Finals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwQfNrlNoC0

[Rake2204]

"almost always" I would change. You're right. But I've seen many Shaq dunks where he straight up rocked the backboard, and beat down the player in the way, but the ball rattled around and dropped soft. He often attacked the rim - laterally. He didn't just try and throw the ball straight down. So as a matter of opinion, I don't see why that would be so important. Dunking with power is dunking with power, whether applied more laterally or more horizontally.

I think I may be in need of some video examples on this one. Shaquille O'Neal seems to be maybe the absolute worst possible example to illustrate whatever kind of point you may have been trying to make. And again, I mean this respectfully, but the manner with which you state this particular point seems to suggest a strong real life misunderstanding of how dunking works.

[CavaliersFTW]

Clips from Wilt and Kareem's first matchup; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puvNhQsBv40

[LAZERUSS]

Clips from Wilt and Kareem's first matchup; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puvNhQsBv40

Here was the newspaper recap:

October 24, 1969
Chamberlain Edges Lew, Guides Lakers' Victory
LOS ANGELES (AP)-The individual battle might be termed a draw with each man praising the other, but in the end it was the over-all firepower of the Los Angeles Lakers that beat an inexperienced Milwaukee Buck team.

Lew Alcindor. the million dollar rookie of the Bucks, lost his third game since high school Friday night when Wilt Chamberlain, the greatest scorer in NBA history, led the Lakers to a 123-112 victory. Chamberlain scored 25 points and grabbed 25 rebounds but Alcindor. the 7-foot-1 3/4 rookie, made his presence felt with 23 points and 20 rebounds.
It was a game of muscle under the boards.

"I thought he was more physical against me than I was against him." Chamberlain said after the game. "He's very strong, very quick and moves very well with the ball. I don't really think he surprised me at all."

"It was more physical than It was in our first three games," Lew said. "It was the first time I've played against Wilt for real and he taught me a few things."

But Lew taught a few things to Wilt, too. Using his flat hook shot and leaning toward the basket. Alcindor scored 12 first-half points and Chamberlain, facing a man taller than himself for the first time in a while, had a bit of trouble blocking shots.

After Wilt finally did block a couple of Lew's attempts, the Buck rookie began
faking the hook shot. When Wilt went up to block them. Alcindor would
turn the other way and score an easy layup.

But in the second half. Chamberlain scored 18 points and using a balanced attack, with Elgin Baylor. Jerry West and rookie guard Willie McCarter scoring freely, the Lakers broke the game open in the fourth period.

"I thought Wilt played one of his really fine games," said Larry Costello. the Buck rookie coach. "Our offense let us down tonight because they (the Lakers) were sagging on Lew. Somebody had to be open but we weren't hitting the open man."

Milwaukee held a 60-54 halftime lead, but the Lakers rallied for an 11-point margin in the fourth quarter. When the Bucks closed to 105-102, Elgin Baylor got hot and hit for six straight baskets to put the game out of reach. Baylor's 26 points was high for Los Angeles. Flynn Robinson of Milwaukee led all scorers with 33 points.

Overall:

KAJ: 23 pts, 20 rebs, 2 assts, 2 blks, 9-21 FG/FGA, 5-9 FT/FTA

Wilt: 25 pts, 23 rebs, 5 assts, 3 blks, 9-14 FG/FGA, 7-18 FT/FTA


Kareem was a rookie (albeit, he had played four years of college ball), and wasn't at his peak of course. However, I have long maintained that by the second half of THIS season, he was already nearing his PEAK. He had a monstrous post-season (arguably the best of his career), and then in the course of his next two seasons, was probably as dominant a center as anyone not named Chamberlain that the NBA has ever seen.

Chamberlain was 33, already dealing with arthritis and numerous ailments, and was past his peak. Still, with his new coach, Joe Mullaney, asking Wilt to become the focal point of the Laker offense (Wilt's previous coach, the incompetent Butch Van Breda Kolff was riden out of town following his disastrous experiment of having Wilt as a "third wheel"), Chamberlain enjoyed a rebirth, and was again dominating the NBA.

In the first nine games of that 69-70 season, Chamberlain was leading the NBA in scoring, at 32.2 ppg; was probably leading the league in rebounding, at 20.0 rpg; and likely was leading the league in FG% at .579. And his scoring numbers weren't inflated by one-or-two huge games, either. In those nine games, Chamberlain had games of 33, 35, 37, 38, 42, and 43 points. His 37 point game came against 7-0 270 lb. Tom Boerwinkle. Boerwinkle was one of the premier rebounders of his era (yes, just look up his TRB%), and gave Kareem trouble throughout his career. Wilt's 38 point game was a drubbing of the prior season MVP, Wes Unseld. His 42 point game came at the expense of Bob Rule, who was an undersized, but highly productive center. Rule was just coming into his own, but unfortunately, a year later he would suffer what was basically a career-ending injury (and was averaging 29 ppg when it occurred.) And Chamberlain's 43 point explosion was leveled on Connie Dierking. Which was interesting..because Kareem would battle a declining Dierking in 10 career H2H's, and his high games were 41 and 35 points. Even more interesting was the fact that just the season before (68-69), Wilt hung a 60 point game on Dierking. And of course, a PRIME Chamberlain just shelled Dierking throughout their careers, including a 63 point game, and a game in which he outscored Dierking, 59-4.

BTW, Chamberlain's 33 point game was his last fully healthy game of his career. With five minutes left in the third period, he inexplicably pulled up lame, and would miss almost the entire rest of the season. Before that injury, he had scored those 33 points on 13-14 shooting from the field, and was most certainly on his way to yet another 40 point game, and likely a 50 point game. So even his 32.2 ppg average was deceptive.

And, of course, there was this KAJ (Alcindor)-Wilt H2H, in which Chamberlain had outplayed Kareem.

Too bad that Wilt suffered that injury, or we likely would have had at least a couple of seasons of the two greatest centers going at it in at least close to their primes. And what really would have been interesting, would have been had the two been at their peaks. Clearly Kareem reached his while the two were still playing, but unfortunately, we never got to see what a peak Wilt would have brought to the table.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Good stuff Such a shame his career ended like it did.

Chamberlain was four months removed from major knee surgery going into that Finals. And against a much healthier (and MVP) Reed in the first four games of the Finals, Wilt outplayed him in two of them.

Of course, after Reed went down with a muscle tear in game five, he was basically useless. Having said that, just two years prior to that (67-68), Chamberlain suffered a similar tear in the post-season, and despite NOTICEABLY LIMPING, Wilt played every minute of the seven game EDF's, and still managed to put up a 22-25-7 series.

As for Reed>Wilt...you're kidding right?

Just the season before the 69-70 Finals (obviously the 68-69 season), a HEALTHY Wilt battled a PEAK Reed. How about these numbers?




Of course, we could back to the 64-65 season, when again, Reed was NY's starting center, and going against a PRIME Chamberlain:

Can't just come over and say 'great dunk'... Always posting the same type of bullshit about the same player, aways slaty af, looking biased and ignorant

[Round Mound]

Weak Era

[LAZERUSS]

Good stuff Such a shame his career ended like it did.




Can't just come over and say 'great dunk'... Always posting the same type of bullshit about the same player, aways slaty af, looking biased and ignorant

It wasn't ME that posted "Reed > Wilt."

And it was a powerful dunk, by a powerful man. He may have even had a few of those against Wilt, too, although in the vast majority of their career H2H's, Reed was popping behind screens and hitting 10-15 footers against Chamberlain. In any case, a PRIME Wilt was FAR more dominant.

Having said that, Reed was the Zack Randolph of his era (albeit, a better defender), and would be a star in today's NBA.