Does Manute Bol have a case for the greatest shot blocker of all time?

[DatAsh]

I've always considered Russell and Wilt as the game's undisputed best shot blockers ever. Both of those guys probably averaged 7-8 blocks per game for most of the early 60s and 6-7 blocks a game in the late 60s and early 70s.Recently, and admittedly just for fun, I got to looking at Manute Bol's Basketball Reference page, and to be completely honest, I had no idea that Bol put up 5 bpg in just 26 mpg.

If you translate his minutes to Russell/Wilt minutes, you're looking at a couple seasons of over 9 bpg and a career average of ~8 bpg.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm well aware of the fact that Bol was completely incapable of playing Russell/Wilt minutes, so I guess I should really revise my question.

On a per minute basis, does Manute Bol have a legitimate argument for best shot blocker of all time? In other words, was Manute Bol the hardest player in history for another player to shoot over without getting his shot blocked?

I think he does.

[ProfessorMurder]

He's top ten. His block numbers are stupid, but he just couldn't play a lot of minutes. In pure blocking ability he's probably #6 behind

(In no order)
Eaton
Hakeem
Mutombo
Russell
Wilt

Then you have guys like Robinson, Ewing, Kareem, Ben Wallace, Zo, etc.

There are a bunch of guys I'd rather have that are more durable, but Bol had a great impact when he was on the court and produced blocks.

[The Iron Fist]

Mark Eaton.

[DatAsh]

He's top ten. His block numbers are stupid, but he just couldn't play a lot of minutes. In pure blocking ability he's probably #6 behind

(In no order)
Eaton
Hakeem
Mutombo
Russell
Wilt

Then you have guys like Robinson, Ewing, Kareem, Ben Wallace, Zo, etc.

There are a bunch of guys I'd rather have that are more durable, but Bol had a great impact when he was on the court and produced blocks.

Not sure if you read my whole post, but I did revise my question to a purely per minute basis. You're right that Bol wasn't durable enough to be considered one of the best shot blockers of all time(I even mentioned that in my original post), but for the time that he's actually on the court I think he has a case. He's easily better than Eaton, Hakeem, and Mutombo, but Russell and Wilt I'm still not quite sure of.

[DatAsh]

Mark Eaton.

Averaged less blocks per minute than Manute Bol.

[The Iron Fist]

Averaged less blocks per minute than Manute Bol.

So youd rather a chick give you dome for one great minute than one who can do it for twenty?

[Hank]

Remember this like yesterday

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaLCju0CQ3c

[ProfessorMurder]

Not sure if you read my whole post, but I did revise my question to a purely per minute basis. You're right that Bol wasn't durable enough to be considered one of the best shot blockers of all time(I even mentioned that in my original post), but for the time that he's actually on the court I think he has a case. He's easily better than Eaton, Hakeem, and Mutombo, but Russell and Wilt I'm still not quite sure of.

No I read your first post, but I can't in good conscience call a guy 'the greatest shot blocker' when he couldn't play consistent minutes. He's a top ten shot blocker for sure and his per minute stats are great... But I'd take overall stats and durability over a guy that plays 15 minutes a game. He's in the 5-10 range in my opinion and I'm a big time Bol fan.

[iamgine]

Bol was completely capable of playing 35+ minutes as he had done so plenty of times. He just couldn't average them for a season. For a 7 game series though, he's completely capable.

[DatAsh]

Mark Eaton.

Just for comparison, here are some of these guys' best 5 year stretch.

Per 36 min

Hakeem - 3.92
Eaton - 5.60
Bol - 6.78
Mutombo -3.78

Keep in mind I'm asking on a purely per minute basis.

[DatAsh]

So youd rather a chick give you dome for one great minute than one who can do it for twenty?

Absolutely not, and I consider Olajuwon to be a better blocker all time than Bol in an absolute sense, but that's not the question I was asking in the original post.

My original post is asking on a purely per minute basis. Number of minutes/games played plays ZERO bearing on the question I originally asked assuming the sample size is large enough to gather a reasonable data set.

[Legends66NBA7]

You could try using Block %. They calculate how much a player would block when he was on the floor (not sure if that answers your question).

It might give you good feel on way to rank those shot blockers too. Off course, we can't do that for guys like Russell and Wilt, because the stats weren't fully kept in track.

[ProfessorMurder]

Just for comparison, here are some of these guys' best 5 year stretch.

Per 36 min

Hakeem - 3.92
Eaton - 5.60
Bol - 6.78
Mutombo -3.78

Keep in mind I'm asking on a purely per minute basis.

That's like calling Alex English the greatest scorer of all time, because he was the highest scorer of the 80s.

He's ONE OF the greatest scorers, but not the greatest.

[DatAsh]

No I read your first post, but I can't in good conscience call a guy 'the greatest shot blocker' when he couldn't play consistent minutes. He's a top ten shot blocker for sure and his per minute stats are great... But I'd take overall stats and durability over a guy that plays 15 minutes a game. He's in the 5-10 range in my opinion and I'm a big time Bol fan.

You may have read the entire post but you're still answering the wrong question. I know Bol isn't "the greatest shot blocker" of all time, and I right with you on the reasoning for that (he couldn't play consistent minutes).

But how does does that affect the question in the original post. The question in the original post is

On a per minute basis, does Manute Bol have a legitimate argument for best shot blocker of all time?

Number of minutes played should have zero affect on that question assuming both players played enough minutes to get a reasonable sample size.

[DatAsh]

That's like calling Alex English the greatest scorer of all time, because he was the highest scorer of the 80s.

He's ONE OF the greatest scorers, but not the greatest.

Completely different. I'm not calling Bol the greatest blocker of all time. I'm not calling him anything.

I'm ASKING if he has a case for greatest blocker/min of all time. There is indeed a difference.