Bob Cousy quote on Wilt Chamberlain

[jlauber]

Wilt is the only center to ever lead the league in assists.

Not only that, but Bill Simmons ripped Chamberlain for "stats-padding" when he did it.


Of course, Simmons forgot to add that Wilt led his Sixers to the runaway best record in the league in doing so.

That damn "selfish" Wilt...

[Sarcastic]

Babe Ruth was selfish. He used to always clear the bases with a home run, before Gehrig came to bat. He should have just hit doubles.

[jongib369]

Wilt is the only center to ever lead the league in assists.

Did you know Dwight's favorite player is Wilt? I cant find his tweet but this is something

"Q: Dwight, if you could meet with or play against one retired basketball player, who would it be?
A: "Wilt Chamberlain.

[oolalaa]

Babe Ruth was selfish. He used to always clear the bases with a home run, before Gehrig came to bat. He should have just hit doubles.

At it's core, Baseball is an individual sport. Because of that, being selfish is a virtue. A single player has little to no impact on the performance of his teammates.

[jlauber]

Agree. It's a no-win situation. Wilt shouldn't be labelled 'selfish' for his shot jacking early in his career. He almost certainly wasn't going to beat Boston, either way. That said, he should have switched to the 'Russell role' a couple of years earlier. I'm convinced he chucked away a great chance at a ring in '66.

In Chamberlain's 50 ppg season, he then took the core of the same LAST PLACE team he inherited two years earlier...to a game seven, two point loss, against a 60-20 Celtic team that boasted SEVEN HOFers.

In his 64-65 season, he took what had been a bottom-feeding Sixer team before he arrived, to a 40-40 record, and then a first round romp of the loaded 48-32 Royals. And, with a 30 ppg, 31 rpg, .555 seven game series, he took that roster to a game seven, one point loss against a Celtic team that had gone 62-18.

So, right there were TWO examples of a HIGH-SCORING Chamberlain single-handedly carrying two crappy rosters to within an eyelash of beating the greatest Dynasty in American professional team sports history.

As for '66...

Chamberlain led the NBA in scoring at 33.5 ppg; rebounding at 24.6 rpg; and FG% at .540 (in a league that shot .433.) And he also found time to hand out 5.2 apg, as well.

Futhermore, during the regular season, he led his Sixers to a 6-3 record against Russell's Celtics, and in the process, he averaged 28.3 ppg and 30.7 rpg against Russell.

In the ECF's, Chamberlain averaged 28.0 ppg, and 30.2 rpg against Russell (on .509 shooting.) Yet, playing the EXACT same way that he did during the regular season against Russell, his Sixers were wiped out by Boston, 4-1. Guess what changed? Wilt's teammates puked all over themselves, shooting an unfathomable .352 in that series. Now you tell me whose fault that series loss was?

[Notitlesince73]

When Wilt won his first championship, didn't he do it against his former team that had traded him away for nothing less than 2 years earlier?

[bmd]

I agree that stats don't mean much in basketball, the eye test is far superior, but this just seems like a dig at Wilt.

The eye test is not superior. It takes a combination.

Stats are great, but you cannot just look at stats and have it tell you the whole story.

You have to look at WHY the stats are how they are.

Two players may be averaging 20 points, but for very different reasons. This is where you use your eyes and brain to discover WHY they are averaging those points.

Stats are not meaningless, and an "eye test" is not superior. Using statistics and reasoning to explain those statistics is the best.

[Sarcastic]

At it's core, Baseball is an individual sport. Because of that, being selfish is a virtue. A single player has little to no impact on the performance of his teammates.

Basketball at its core is a 1v1 sport as well. In fact it's the only team sport that I can think of that can actually be played 1v1. It's about beating the man in front of you. Wilt happened to do it quite a lot.

[jlauber]

When Wilt won his first championship, didn't he do it against his former team that had traded him away for nothing less than 2 years earlier?

Well, yes and no. First of all, yes he wiped out Thurmond en route to leading his Sixers to a world title. But, no, he was not really traded for next to nothing. He was traded for three players and a boatload of cash.

Furthermore, the main reason the Warriors even traded him at all, was because Wilt had been ill for most of the season (and was STILL scoring 39 ppg before the trade)...and the SF team doctors mis-diagnosed Wilt with heart condition. The Warrior ownership panicked and decided to get rid of him before he dropped over.

Interesting, too, that in Wilt's last full season in SF, he led a crappy roster, with his two best teammates being Tom Meschery and Al Attles, to a 48-32 record, and a trip to the Finals.

Now, after the Wilt trade the Warriors moved Thurmond into Wilt's center position, where he would go on to have a HOF career. Even then, however, the Warriors were so bad, that there were able to draft Rick Barry, who would also have a HOF career.

So, here were Barry, and Thurmond,... TWO HOFers, and holdovers Meschery and Attles...and guess what? A 35-45 record.

THEN, the Warriors beefed up that roster by adding Jeff Mullins, Clyde Lee, and Fred Hetzel (to go along with Thurmond, Barry, Meschery, and Attles), and their record? 44-37.

THAT was the TRUE impact of Wilt's career with the Warriors. A LOADED roster couldn't even equal that putrid roster that Wilt single-handedly had taken to a 48-32 record just a couple of years before.

[bmd]

Basketball at its core is a 1v1 sport as well. In fact it's the only team sport that I can think of that can actually be played 1v1. It's about beating the man in front of you. Wilt happened to do it quite a lot.

That is so far from the truth that it isn't even funny.

If it was true, then team USA would have beat all teams by at least 30 points. Nobody in the world has the individual players that team USA has.

Basketball has a LOT to do with working as a team. Communicating is the single most important thing that makes or breaks basketball teams.

You can have all the individual talent in the world, but if you don't play as a team on defense by making the proper switches and rotations, and communicate to do it effectively, then your defense will fail as a unit.

Same thing on offense. If the team isn't working together, there will be just a lot of standing around and not much happening.

Basketball is a team sport at it's core, with the ability to break it down to 1 vs. 1.

[Sarcastic]

That is so far from the truth that it isn't even funny.

If it was true, then team USA would have beat all teams by at least 30 points. Nobody in the world has the individual players that team USA has.

Basketball has a LOT to do with working as a team. Communicating is the single most important thing that makes or breaks basketball teams.

You can have all the individual talent in the world, but if you don't play as a team on defense by making the proper switches and rotations, and communicate to do it effectively, then your defense will fail as a unit.

Same thing on offense. If the team isn't working together, there will be just a lot of standing around and not much happening.

Basketball is a team sport at it's core, with the ability to break it down to 1 vs. 1.

That holds true for all team sports, including baseball.

[KG215]

That holds true for all team sports, including baseball.

Please don't try and compare the individuality of baseball to basketball. It's not the same; not even close. Basketball, like has been pointed out, is a team sport that can, in isolated situations, be played as a 1v1 sport. If you do that for an entire game, though, odds are you're going to lose more than you win.

Baseball, on the other hand, is an individual sport in a team setting. A batter can go 4/4 every single game of the season, and it doesn't mean jack if the guys hitting in front of and behind him bat around .200 and strikeout a lot. There's literally nothing a player can do to help his teammate go to bat and put the ball in play and produce runs. Nothing. In basketball, you make a nice pass that leads to a bucket, and you had a direct hand in your teammate putting the ball in the basket. In the field, aside from the occasional double-play, or OF assist, almost every out is 100% dependent on the fielder catching a fly ball, or cleanly fielding a groundder and making a catchable throw to the first-baseman.

Maybe every once in a while a team can win if they have the best player in the league and they just ISO him the entire game and let him shoot 30-40 times; but that's not going to win games and win championships. The best and most successful basketball is heavily dependent on crisp and quick ball movement, efficient shot attempts, and off-ball movement like screens and cuts. And defensively, it's more about great team defense than great individual defense. Yes, historically there have been great defensive teams with great individual on-ball defenders, but there's other examples of great defensive teams who may not have had more than one player who was renowned for his on-ball defense, that played excellent team defense.

Just...please don't try to simplify basketball down to being an individual 1v1 sport because that couldn't be further from the truth.

[bdreason]

The problem is that one man isn't going to win a title.... I don't care how good he is. So when it comes down to it, you need everyone on the team to contribute... but you cannot expect 'roleplayers' to contribute when they are not given the opportunity, and/or the gameplan is essentially for them to contribute as little as possible.

[bdreason]

Basketball at its core is a 1v1 sport as well. In fact it's the only team sport that I can think of that can actually be played 1v1. It's about beating the man in front of you.

I hope you don't actually believe that.

[Round Mound]

Those Comments are Stupid. They Actually Sound Like Jelousy Towards Wilt.

Wilt was BY FAR THE BEST AND MOST DOMINANT PLAYER in the 60s and Probably Had The Highest PEEK Ever in the Late 60s over Jabbar and MJ.