Did Wilts "100 point game" actually happen?

[Deuce Bigalow]

These 140 possessions are pure rubbish and you know it.

One more damn time...

The NBA, at it's peak, averaged 118.8 ppg, on 108 FGA and 37 FTAs per game...and in a league which had an eFG% of .426 and a FT% of .727. And, if you subtract TEAM rebounds, which were no longer added to totals after the 67-68 season, the average NBA team had about 62 rpg. THAT is all you need to know. From there you can do the math comparisons of ANY NBA season.

For example, Chamberlain's 50.4 ppg 61-62 season translates to about 40-41 ppg in 2012-2013, and to about 45-46 ppg in MJ's 86-87 season.

Another example...the NBA shot an even 75% as many FGAs in 2012-2013 as in 61-62, and rebounded at a 67% pace.

Furthermore, you HAVE to adjust for eFG%'s, or the numbers will be horribly skewed. For example, in the 61-62 season, if you adjust for the "pace" of FGA and FTAs, but do not adjust for the eFG%'s variance, the 61-62 NBA would have only averaged 86 ppg in the 2012-2013 season, and in an NBA that averaged 98 ppg.You simply can't adjust purely based on "pace" with out adjusting the eFG%.

Wilt would translate into Dwight Howard. So think 20/13-22/14 numbers.

[LAZERUSS]

Wilt would translate into Dwight Howard. So think 20/13-22/14 numbers.

Based on which Chamberlain season?

His 61-62 numbers, based on pure mathematical reasoning, translate into a 40-41 ppg, and over 17 rpg season in 2012-2013.

Here again, the NBA averaged 108 FGAs and 37 FTAs, as well as 62 rpg per team in the 61-62 season.

The 2012-2013 NBA averaged 82 FGAs, 22 FTAs, and 42 rpg.

82/108=75.9% x 39.5 FGA= 30 FGA

22/37=59.4% x 17 FTA=10 FTA

Then, the 61-62 NBA had an eFG% of .426, while the 2012-2013 had an eFG% of .496.


So, a 61-62 Wilt would have taken 30 FGAs per game in 2012-2013. He had an eFG% of .506 in 61-62, BUT, you HAVE to adjust his eFG% to 2012-2013 levels. .496/.426= 1.164 x .506 = .589.

30 FGAs x .589 = 17.7 FGM, or 35.4 ppg just on his FGA.

He shot .613 from the line in 61-62. 10 x .613 = 6.1 FTM per game.

35.4 + 6.1 = 41.5 ppg.


He averaged 25.6 rpg in an NBA that averaged 62 rpg. 42/62= .6774 x 25.6 rpg = 17.3 rpg.

Now, you can argue that a 61-62 Wilt would not be playing 48.5 mpg in the 2012-2013 season, BUT, it was not a fluke that he did so in 61-62. He had three other seasons of 47+ mpg, and averaged 45.8 mpg over his regular season career. And, on top of that, he averaged 47.2 mpg in his 160 post-season career.

Furthermore, if you were reduce Wilt's playing time, you would HAVE to raise his efficiencies (e.g, eFG% and TRB%.) So, while his numbers would drop with less playing time, his efficiencies would surely rise.

[CavaliersFTW]

Based on which Chamberlain season?

His 61-62 numbers, based on pure mathematical reasoning, translate into a 40-41 ppg, and over 17 rpg season in 2012-2013.

Here again, the NBA averaged 108 FGAs and 37 FTAs, as well as 62 rpg per team in the 61-62 season.

The 2012-2013 NBA averaged 82 FGAs, 22 FTAs, and 42 rpg.

82/108=75.9% x 39.5 FGA= 30 FGA

22/37=59.4% x 17 FTA=10 FTA

Then, the 61-62 NBA had an eFG% of .426, while the 2012-2013 had an eFG% of .496.


So, a 61-62 Wilt would have taken 30 FGAs per game in 2012-2013. He had an eFG% of .506 in 61-62, BUT, you HAVE to adjust his eFG% to 2012-2013 levels. .496/.426= 1.164 x .506 = .589.

30 FGAs x .589 = 17.7 FGM, or 35.4 ppg just on his FGA.

He shot .613 from the line in 61-62. 10 x .613 = 6.1 FTM per game.

35.4 + 6.1 = 41.5 ppg.


He averaged 25.6 rpg in an NBA that averaged 62 rpg. 42/62= .6774 x 25.6 rpg = 17.3 rpg.

Now, you can argue that a 61-62 Wilt would not be playing 48.5 mpg in the 2012-2013 season, BUT, it was not a fluke that he did so in 61-62. He had three other seasons of 47+ mpg, and averaged 45.8 mpg over his regular season career. And, on top of that, he averaged 47.2 mpg in his 160 post-season career.

Furthermore, if you were reduce Wilt's playing time, you would HAVE to raise his efficiencies (e.g, eFG% and TRB%.) So, while his numbers would drop with less playing time, his efficiencies would surely rise.

Holy shyt GOATberlain even by 'paceologist' standards drops a 41ppg 17rpg season in the modern era

[Deuce Bigalow]

Based on which Chamberlain season?

His 61-62 numbers, based on pure mathematical reasoning, translate into a 40-41 ppg, and over 17 rpg season in 2012-2013.

Here again, the NBA averaged 108 FGAs and 37 FTAs, as well as 62 rpg per team in the 61-62 season.

The 2012-2013 NBA averaged 82 FGAs, 22 FTAs, and 42 rpg.

82/108=75.9% x 39.5 FGA= 30 FGA

22/37=59.4% x 17 FTA=10 FTA

Then, the 61-62 NBA had an eFG% of .426, while the 2012-2013 had an eFG% of .496.


So, a 61-62 Wilt would have taken 30 FGAs per game in 2012-2013. He had an eFG% of .506 in 61-62, BUT, you HAVE to adjust his eFG% to 2012-2013 levels. .496/.426= 1.164 x .506 = .589.

30 FGAs x .589 = 17.7 FGM, or 35.4 ppg just on his FGA.

He shot .613 from the line in 61-62. 10 x .613 = 6.1 FTM per game.

35.4 + 6.1 = 41.5 ppg.


He averaged 25.6 rpg in an NBA that averaged 62 rpg. 42/62= .6774 x 25.6 rpg = 17.3 rpg.

Now, you can argue that a 61-62 Wilt would not be playing 48.5 mpg in the 2012-2013 season, BUT, it was not a fluke that he did so in 61-62. He had three other seasons of 47+ mpg, and averaged 45.8 mpg over his regular season career. And, on top of that, he averaged 47.2 mpg in his 160 post-season career.

Furthermore, if you were reduce Wilt's playing time, you would HAVE to raise his efficiencies (e.g, eFG% and TRB%.) So, while his numbers would drop with less playing time, his efficiencies would surely rise.

Based on factoring in competition. The league got a whole lot better from 61-62 to now.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Based on which Chamberlain season?

His 61-62 numbers, based on pure mathematical reasoning, translate into a 40-41 ppg, and over 17 rpg season in 2012-2013.

Here again, the NBA averaged 108 FGAs and 37 FTAs, as well as 62 rpg per team in the 61-62 season.

The 2012-2013 NBA averaged 82 FGAs, 22 FTAs, and 42 rpg.

82/108=75.9% x 39.5 FGA= 30 FGA

22/37=59.4% x 17 FTA=10 FTA

Then, the 61-62 NBA had an eFG% of .426, while the 2012-2013 had an eFG% of .496.


So, a 61-62 Wilt would have taken 30 FGAs per game in 2012-2013. He had an eFG% of .506 in 61-62, BUT, you HAVE to adjust his eFG% to 2012-2013 levels. .496/.426= 1.164 x .506 = .589.

30 FGAs x .589 = 17.7 FGM, or 35.4 ppg just on his FGA.

He shot .613 from the line in 61-62. 10 x .613 = 6.1 FTM per game.

35.4 + 6.1 = 41.5 ppg.


He averaged 25.6 rpg in an NBA that averaged 62 rpg. 42/62= .6774 x 25.6 rpg = 17.3 rpg.

Now, you can argue that a 61-62 Wilt would not be playing 48.5 mpg in the 2012-2013 season, BUT, it was not a fluke that he did so in 61-62. He had three other seasons of 47+ mpg, and averaged 45.8 mpg over his regular season career. And, on top of that, he averaged 47.2 mpg in his 160 post-season career.

Furthermore, if you were reduce Wilt's playing time, you would HAVE to raise his efficiencies (e.g, eFG% and TRB%.) So, while his numbers would drop with less playing time, his efficiencies would surely rise.

No way in hell does any big man average 30 FGA per fame in today's game.

Especially a big man who's point come from banging down low.


I agree that Wilt would be a dominate player today but I can't fathom him taking 30 FGA per game especially if surrounded by a few good teammates.

Even Kobe in 06 didn't take that many shots per game. And Kobe was a perimeter player.

Wilts shots came from the paint, no team is goin to dump it down to him enough times for him to take 30 shots per game

[CavaliersFTW]

No way in hell does any big man average 30 FGA per fame in today's game.

Especially a big man who's point come from banging down low.


I agree that Wilt would be a dominate player today but I can't fathom him taking 30 FGA per game especially if surrounded by a few good teammates.

Even Kobe in 06 didn't take that many shots per game. And Kobe was a perimeter player.

Wilts shots came from the paint, no team is goin to dump it down to him enough times for him to take 30 shots per game

If that big man is Wilt, he absolutely would be fed for 30 shots a game, any previously below .500 team that acquires or drafts Wilt that DOESN'T feed him for 30 shot attempts a game would have their coach fired. This is Wilt Chamberlain we're talking about, way way way above and beyond any offensive force you've ever seen play. By reputation alone a coach would TELL his players to feed him the ball and move out the way.

[TheBigVeto]

Till this day we won't know but I consider Kobe's 81 point game the record for modern day basketball.

[Psileas]

Some of these posts are way too precious...

How would the spectators, coaches, teammates or opponents even know he had 100 points? There was no player scoreboard back then, there was just the team score and time remaining in the quarter.

The only ones that would know are the statkeepers. Spectating fans don't keep track of how many points Wilt scores.

Yeah, I mean, Wilt might only have 50-60 points by the end of the game, but somehow every single spectator, player, coach, etc in the building would not be able to notice the difference between 60 and 100.

Coaches sure as hell don't and players are actually focused on winning the game.

It's really statkeepers word against all else here. We know statkeepers can be bought too, sometimes they're incredibly lenient, especially hometown statkeepers.

Again, how the heck is anyone able NOT to realize the difference between 100 and a much lower figure? Say Wilt scored "only" 60. Meaning all his other teammates were stripped by 40 pts. How come no other teammate complained about his points? You're naive if you think that at least most players don't know at least approximately how much they've scored. You think Arizin wouldn't have realized it if he had scored 26 points and was given credit for 16? Or Joe Ruklick if he had scored 2 or 4 points and was given credit for none?

Statkeepers VERY rarely will commit any mistake in scoring crediting. In stats like rebounding or shot blocking, yes, in some rare occasions. Scoring? I don't remember having seen such a gaffe at least in recent years, let alone multiple blunders in the same game.
And, while we are at it, how do we know that Wilt scored only 100 points? What if he scored 110-120 and statkeepers for some reason (e.g, to make him try even harder to score) tried to keep his totals down?

I just find it funny people take Wilt scoring 100 points as a given. Details of the actual game are scarcely documented. In conclusion, it just seems fishy to me, there's very little evidence to support it ever happening. Do you take the guy's word for it? I mean he did claim to wrestle mountain lions with his bare hands. I wouldn't say scoring 100 points in a basketball game is much more far-fetched than that.

Yes, a zillion newspapers recorded or mentioned it, statkeepers recorded it, Harvey Pollack recorded it, 4,124 fans saw it, there's audio from Q4, there's a whole book written about it, every player present in that game has offered details from that game alone, including players from the Knicks (what would be their motive?), but if Wilt hasn't fought a mountain lion, this can't be any truer...Brilliant.

[LAZERUSS]

No way in hell does any big man average 30 FGA per fame in today's game.

Especially a big man who's point come from banging down low.


I agree that Wilt would be a dominate player today but I can't fathom him taking 30 FGA per game especially if surrounded by a few good teammates.

Even Kobe in 06 didn't take that many shots per game. And Kobe was a perimeter player.

Wilts shots came from the paint, no team is goin to dump it down to him enough times for him to take 30 shots per game

Kobe, playing 41 mpg, averaged over 27 FGAs on a weak team in '06, and in a league that averaged 80 FGAs per team.

And Wilt in '62 was not just shooting inside shots. He came into the league with a range of up to 15 ft, and was taking turn-around bank shots from 12 feet.

Put a '62 Wilt on a similar crappy roster in '13, and he likely would lead the league in shot attempts. The fact that we haven't seen big men do it in the last few seasons is more of a reflection on the inept big men playing the game, than the defenses they are facing.

And as recently as the '01 Finals, Shaq averaged 26 FGAs and 15 FTAs in the the six game Finals against the Pacers, en route to a 38 ppg average. And a few years before that, Hakeem averaged 29.5 FGAs, on a team that averaged a total of 78 FGAs, against Shaq in the '95 Finals. So clearly, it was possible.

In any case, I get tired of posters attempting to use "pace" against Wilt, and coming up with ludicrous numbers like he would be a 22-14 guy. Even adjusting for "pace" Wilt's 61-62 was the greatest scoring season in NBA history.

And based on a simple math, Wilt's 61-62 season translates to a 41 ppg, 17 rpg, .590 FG% season in 12-13.

The rest would be pure speculation. BUT, we have THE "bridge" in Kareem to make cross-era comparisons. KAJ played four years IN the Chamberlain-era, and didn't come close to the huge numbers that a prime Chamberlain leveled against many of the same centers that the two faced. And we know a 39 year old KAJ was capable of 46 point games, on 70% shooting, and in only 37 minutes, against a young Hakeem. And a peak Hakeem battled a young Shaq to a near-draw in the '95 Finals. Based on Shaq being the most dominant player in the league in the early 00's, and you can draw your own conclusions as to how a peak Chamberlain would fare in today's NBA.

[LAZERUSS]

Some of these posts are way too precious...



Yeah, I mean, Wilt might only have 50-60 points by the end of the game, but somehow every single spectator, player, coach, etc in the building would not be able to notice the difference between 60 and 100.




Again, how the heck is anyone able NOT to realize the difference between 100 and a much lower figure? Say Wilt scored "only" 60. Meaning all his other teammates were stripped by 40 pts. How come no other teammate complained about his points? You're naive if you think that at least most players don't know at least approximately how much they've scored. You think Arizin wouldn't have realized it if he had scored 26 points and was given credit for 16? Or Joe Ruklick if he had scored 2 or 4 points and was given credit for none?

Statkeepers VERY rarely will commit any mistake in scoring crediting. In stats like rebounding or shot blocking, yes, in some rare occasions. Scoring? I don't remember having seen such a gaffe at least in recent years, let alone multiple blunders in the same game.
And, while we are at it, how do we know that Wilt scored only 100 points? What if he scored 110-120 and statkeepers for some reason (e.g, to make him try even harder to score) tried to keep his totals down?



Yes, a zillion newspapers recorded or mentioned it, statkeepers recorded it, Harvey Pollack recorded it, 4,124 fans saw it, there's audio from Q4, there's a whole book written about it, every player present in that game has offered details from that game alone, including players from the Knicks (what would be their motive?), but if Wilt hasn't fought a mountain lion, this can't be any truer...Brilliant.

Excellent point. IF the scorekeepers were capable of altering scoring, how come no one claims that Wilt might have had 120 points in that game?

In any case, the game's score was kept on a SCOREBOARD, for all to see. The "Wilt-bashers" would have you believe that they were using chalk on a blackboard.

[LAZERUSS]

Based on factoring in competition. The league got a whole lot better from 61-62 to now.

Chamberlain averaged 39.6 ppg against Russell in ten games that season. And how about against the 6-11 HOFer Walt Bellamy? Only 52.7 ppg in ten games. BTW, Wilt averaged 38 ppg against Russell in nine h2hs, and 43.7 ppg in ten h2h's against Bellamy the very next season.

[ILLsmak]

Dunno why people use FGA to count pace when you are looking at a league with much higher rebounding and much lower FG%. Makes you think a good portion of them were probably offensive rebounding put back attempts.

-Smak

[iamgine]

The rest would be pure speculation. BUT, we have THE "bridge" in Kareem to make cross-era comparisons. KAJ played four years IN the Chamberlain-era, and didn't come close to the huge numbers that a prime Chamberlain leveled against many of the same centers that the two faced. And we know a 39 year old KAJ was capable of 46 point games, on 70% shooting, and in only 37 minutes, against a young Hakeem. And a peak Hakeem battled a young Shaq to a near-draw in the '95 Finals. Based on Shaq being the most dominant player in the league in the early 00's, and you can draw your own conclusions as to how a peak Chamberlain would fare in today's NBA.

Bridge theory doesn't really work because it pick and choose games that serves its purpose.

Wilt himself just two seasons later wasn't able to match his great production from '61-'62. Was he declining so rapidly at the age of 28? Did he not face the same centers?

In the same season that KAJ scored 46 points on young Hakeem, he could only scored 13 points against a rapidly declining Mychall Thompson. Thus I could say KAJ couldn't even score against a "scrub" and that 46 pt game was a fluke.

[LAZERUSS]

Dunno why people use FGA to count pace when you are looking at a league with much higher rebounding and much lower FG%. Makes you think a good portion of them were probably offensive rebounding put back attempts.

-Smak

Tell me then why KAJ had four seasons, in his prime, when he shot .539, .529, .518, and even .513. And yet, in the 80's he was shooting .604, and even .599 at age 37.

Or that the entire NBA, as a whole, jumped significantly in the 80's. And CENTERS, like Gilmore and KAJ had massive increases. And then CENTERS like Hakeem, who had his highest FG% season in his ROOKIE season (in '85), or CENTERS like Ewing and Robinson having their best FG% seasons early in their careers, in the late 80's, and early 90's, and then dropping significantly.

Did the CENTERS of the early to late 60's learn to shoot DRAMATICALLY better in the late 60's? Did the best CENTERS of the 70's learn to shoot better in the 80's, and even past their primes? And did the best CENTERS that played in the 80's and 90's, suddenly forget how to shoot as they entered the 90's?

You simply have to factor in ERA shooting. Players actually shot FTs better in the late 50's than they did just last season, and yet, their FG%s were way lower. Wilt shot .461 in his rookie season. By the mid-60's he was shooting .683. Take a look at Darrall Imhoff. Had multiple seasons of .314 to ,386 early in his career, and by the late 60's, was shooting .540. Look up Johnny Green. The man was struggling in the .430's in the early 60's, and leading the NBA at .587 in the 70's. Jerry West, with the same perfect jump-shot form was shooting .419 and .445 in the early 60's, and then as high as .514 in the late 60's. Why?

There were many factors. Balls that were not uniform; venues that were cold, and even breezy; players logging more minutes, and playing with injuries; and most importantly, much more condensed schedules. Take a look at the 2011-2012 season. In the first half of that strike season, in which the schedule was condensed, teams were scoring 96 ppg on as low as .443 FG%. As the schedule became more normalized, scoring and shooting went up.

And it's not just basketball. Do you think the "Steroid Era" players would have been hitting 60-70 HRs in the "Dead Ball era?" (or in the WWII era?) And has pitching suddenly improved since the advent of drug testing, or was there something else at play?

How about passing in the early 70's? Do you think today's QBs, playing with the same set of rules that the teams of the early 70's to late 70's had, would be putting up 5000 yard passing seasons?

If you are going to use "pace" against the greats of the 60's, then you HAVE to adjust for league-wide shooting. BTW, Oscar was scoring 30 ppg on as few as 22 FGAs per game in the 60's. Does that mean that he would only be capable of 16 FGAs in the current NBA? BUT, yet MJ and Kobe could take 27-28?

[LAZERUSS]

Bridge theory doesn't really work because it pick and choose games that serves its purpose.

Wilt himself just two seasons later wasn't able to match his great production from '61-'62. Was he declining so rapidly at the age of 28? Did he not face the same centers?

In the same season that KAJ scored 46 points on young Hakeem, he could only scored 13 points against a rapidly declining Mychall Thompson. Thus I could say KAJ couldn't even score against a "scrub" and that 46 pt game was a fluke.

In his first TEN STRAIGHT games against Hakeem, Kareem AVERAGED 32 ppg on, get this... a .621 FG%. This from a 38-39 year old Kareem. BTW, he had THREE games of 40+ against Hakeem. AND, in the same week that he plastered Hakeem with a 46 point game (again, on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes), he hammered Ewing with a 40 point game, on 15-22 shooting, all while holding ewing to 9 points on 3-17 shooting. Again, from a 39 year old KAJ.