The Wilt Chamberlain Offensive Scouting Report Project Thread:

[fpliii]

What is omgili?

Site that crawls major forums, and copies over portions of some (maybe all?) notable threads with previews and links to the forum.

Someone posted it in OTC a few months ago, pretty weird site lol.

EDIT - Here's the thread:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=300117

[LAZERUSS]

Oh c'mon, we could as well tell that you or CavaliersFTW have agenda, pro Wilt bias and no presented facts will change your opinion. It was discussed many times on realGM and most better posters, from polite ones like DoctorMJ, through Elgee, Chicago76, mysticcbb or fatal, to emotional ones like Bastillon agrees that Wilt was limited scorer and his impact on the game was lower than his box score numbers suggest.

And most of them had an anti-Chamberlain agenda. El Gee posted some ridiculous formula that I trashed here regarding points per possessions, which tried to make Wilt look like an average scorer.

And we KNOW that Fatal went off the deep end regarding Chamberlain. He used to dispute every account that was given...until CavsFan started postiong VIDEO footage, and INTERVIEWS with Tex Winter and Arnold Schwartenegger. He was gone shortly thereafter.

Chamberlain single-handedly was taking LAST PLACE rosters to within an eyelash of beating the greatest dynasty in the history of the NBA. And he did so with players that were no better before they played with him, nor afterwards. None of them suffered statistically because of Chamberlain. Most were average to below average players who performed even worse in the post-season.

And while Chamberlain was being SWARMED (virtually an endless supply of first-hand accounts, as well as footage from the second half of game four of the '64 Finals), he was not only shutting down his HOF opposing centers, he was trying to defend their entire teams. In that game four of the '64 Finals, Russell stuffs the game-winner on an offensive rebound. Why? Because Chamberlain leaped out an forced Heinsohn to throw up an horriblel shot that clanked off into Russell's hands. And the game-winner in the '62 EDF's, Yep, Sam Jones (who would hit many in his post-season career)...and over guess who...Chamberlain's fingertips.

Sorry, but you guys really need to move on.

[CavaliersFTW]

And most of them had an anti-Chamberlain agenda. El Gee posted some ridiculous formula that I trashed here regarding points per possessions, which tried to make Wilt look like an average scorer.

And we KNOW that Fatal went off the deep end regarding Chamberlain. He used to dispute every account that was given...until CavsFan started postiong VIDEO footage, and INTERVIEWS with Tex Winter and Arnold Schwartenegger. He was gone shortly thereafter.

Chamberlain single-handedly was taking LAST PLACE rosters to within an eyelash of beating the greatest dynasty in the history of the NBA. And he did so with players that were no better before they played with him, nor afterwards. None of them suffered statistically because of Chamberlain. Most were average to below average players who performed even worse in the post-season.

And while Chamberlain was being SWARMED (virtually an endless supply of first-hand accounts, as well as footage from the second half of game four of the '64 Finals), he was not only shutting down his HOF opposing centers, he was trying to defend their entire teams. In that game four of the '64 Finals, Russell stuffs the game-winner on an offensive rebound. Why? Because Chamberlain leaped out an forced Heinsohn to throw up an horriblel shot that clanked off into Russell's hands. And the game-winner in the '62 EDF's, Yep, Sam Jones (who would hit many in his post-season career)...and over guess who...Chamberlain's fingertips.

Sorry, but you guys really need to move on.

I just can't believe a bunch of nerds on the internet who never saw Wilt play one day decided enough was enough about Wilt ruining their basketball discussions with all his pesky NBA records and stories of incredible size, strength and skill so they decided to contrive these 'formulas' and shit to try and support some completely 180 degree notion that WILT CHAMBERLAIN it turns out, WASN'T any good offensively ...

I can't even say that with a straight face... It's so backwards it reminds me of the corny shit conspiracy theorists would come up with. Water it turns out, ISN'T in fact wet guys! If you make adjustments to it using these formulas you'll see how dry it actually is!

[LAZERUSS]

I just can't believe a bunch of nerds on the internet who never saw Wilt play one day decided enough was enough about Wilt ruining their basketball discussions with all his pesky NBA records and his insane dominance so they decided to contrive these 'formulas' and shit to try and support some completely 180 degree notion that WILT CHAMBERLAIN it turns out, WASN'T any good offensively ...

I can't even say that with a straight face... It's so backwards it reminds me of the corny shit conspiracy theorists would come up with.

... really the statistically greatest offensive player of all time, and the physically most dominant specimen ever... was NOT any good offensively?... oh rlly!?, Oh and let's not forget they tried to say he in fact WASN'T that physically dominant either, it was 'only for his time' remember people pushing that too? IE 24 inch vertical This wasn't but a few years back, til I started doing research on his wingspan, weight, height without shoes and how it compares with modern players. As well as identifying pieces of footage where he clearly displayed his incredible size and/or athleticism.

These nerds tried penalizing Wilt for every possible thing they could, they'd even take his records and turn them into something negative. Never fouled out? "DIDN'T PLAY DEFENSE!"... Stamina/minutes played records? "WOULD NEVER PLAY THAT MUCH TODAY, MAKES STATS NOT IMPRESSIVE"... These guys thought they every angle figured out so as to have Wilt written off for good, but there is a ton of logical fallacies, assumptions (now proven to be incorrect) and holes in their agenda they came up with. Because that's what happen when you're agenda couldn't be further from the truth, they're basically trying to argue that water isn't wet This scouting video should kill any 'unksilled' nonsense. I will be glad when it is finished and out there for people to see.

AMEN Brother!

[CavaliersFTW]

[trueDS]

And most of them had an anti-Chamberlain agenda. El Gee posted some ridiculous formula that I trashed here regarding points per possessions,

Really, where?
Besides the most important thing is Wilt's impact (that's all what matters in basketball) and guys on realGM clearly showed his impact wasn't GOAT like or "unstoppable scorer" like.

And of course - if you are using rhetoric like "most of them had anti Wilt agenda" then the same can be said about you or others here: most of you had pro Wilt bias and that's why you guys don't see the truth and use personal attacks instead of reasonable discussion.

[CavaliersFTW]

Really, where?
Besides the most important thing is Wilt's impact (that's all what matters in basketball) and guys on realGM clearly showed his impact wasn't GOAT like or "unstoppable scorer" like.

And of course - if you are using rhetoric like "most of them had anti Wilt agenda" then the same can be said about you or others here: most of you had pro Wilt bias and that's why you guys don't see the truth and use personal attacks instead of reasonable discussion.

The nerds on realgm did nothing but fabricate,, err i mean 'adjust' numbers in a way that would make Wilt seem less than he actually was, because that was their ultimate objective. Penalize Wilt for his own records. Minutes played records? "PER 36 stats!!', never fouled out of a game? 'Didn't play defense!'. None of their numbers and conclusions have any merit, they re just a bunch of nerds who never saw Wilt play but were obsessed with finding a way of making him, an unbelievably dominant player, seem underwhelmingly 'normal'. They set out to explain why water isn't wet, and that's just what they accomplished. Until of course, somebody turns up the truth. That's why those guys fled ISH. Too many actual basketball historians started turning up data and film that demolished their agenda.

[stanlove1111]

Literally laughed out loud, a bunch of nerds on realgm convinced themselves Wilt Chamberlain 'was a limited scorer', aint that the cutest thing I ever heard

You really think making a video showing he did all that means anything at all, You can do that with most players who ever played if you just want to take a few examples of them doing this or that. You could do this and make Rodman seem like a good scorer. I love your video but this is nothing more then propaganda.


Compared to a lot of todays players Wilt's offense was very limited. Basketball has evolved a lot since Wilt played. He should be considered one of the best ever just because what he did during his time, and if he grew up today with todays basketball skills he might still be the best. But put Wilt from 1968 against todays league and he is not much of a scorer.

[CavaliersFTW]

You really think making a video showing he did all that means anything at all, You can do that with most players who ever played if you just want to take a few examples of them doing this or that. You could do this and make Rodman seem like a good scorer. I love your video but this is nothing more then propaganda.


Compared to a lot of todays players Wilt's offense was very limited. Basketball has evolved a lot since Wilt played. He should be considered one of the best ever just because what he did during his time, and if he grew up today with todays basketball skills he might still be the best. But put Wilt from 1968 against todays league and he is not much of a scorer.

You don't get it, I'm taking every fgm captured on film and putting it all together. I'm not 'taking a few examples of this or that'. A random 1.8-3% (between 375 and 620fg's, and the latter is a generous estimate, the total count is yet to be determined). These are also all bias towards playoff and ASG clips due to extremely limited coverage of regular season match ups in that era. Simply put there isn't enough available to 'cherry pick' even if I'd wanted too. Ergo I'm going to show it all, to at least get a vague idea of not only the variety of ways which he was capable of scoring, but also the shots he appeared to depend on to get the mother share of his points. You'll be able to see which shots within the 1.75-3% window he wanted to take the most often.

What you asserted I'm doing and what I'm actually doing are two different things. More than half of Rodman's career probably exists on film, heck maybe all of it does, not under 3 percent. You can cherry pick the crap out of his footage as you stated, but how in any way whatsoever would that compare to what I'm doing? That isn't my objective nor do I even have that capability with the Wilt footage. I'm just going to put all his known FGM on the table.

Wilt made 20,628 career FG's, less than 600 likely exists on film, heck I'd be surprised if more than 450 exists on film to be honest.

Rodman made 3216 - or a little over 5 and a half fgm per game reg season and just under 5 and a half fgm per game playoffs. 3216 * .0225 (representing a 2.25% coverage of his career) = the equivalent of just 80 totally random fgm from his career to choose from to try and show off Dennis Rodman as a 'great scorer' as you put it. Equal to about 14 random games he played. Roll the dice and pick 14 games from his career, make at least 2 of them his 2 all star game appearances actually, where he scored 16 points - the remaining 12 random games make it bias to playoff games he played in, from the latter half of his career. And that's what you'd have to work with to make it 'seem' like Dennis Rodman was a 'great scorer'. Good luck with that. Rodman hardly ever scored in any way outside of an offensive rebound or backdoor play where he was left wide open anyways. You don't understand how plays unfold in basketball if you think you can take a player who's poor at something and make him look like he's great at it. How Rodman scored vs how Wilt scored is vastly different. You can show 100 points being scored by Wilt and 100 point being scored by Rodman and Wilt is going to look more versatile and dominant doing it than Rodman. Rodman, regardless of how many times you show him score points, doesn't iso people and do a lot of work to get in position to score over defense, Wilt does.

[LAZERUSS]

I can't wait for this...

With the small influx we are getting from the "Wlit-bashers" at RealGM, this should put an end to this nonsense about Wilt's POOR offensive game.

I already KNOW that Chamberlain had EXCELLENT range of 10-12 feet in the mid-60's (it was basically unstoppable), but from the college footage that exists, and the first-hand accounts of his early seasons in the NBA, there was no question that his SKILL levels were probably among the best ever of the pure centers.

True, his FT shooting was never good, but it was adequate early in his career (and at times, even spectacular.) But, Shaq couldn't shoot from eight+ feet much, either, and was just as bad from the line. And yet there are those that would claim that he was "unstoppable."

And again, I hope that you can somehow slip in Fatal's two-minute garbage video, before the beginning of your's. Why? Because it would be the equivalent of SI running a story in late January of 1969, claiming that Wilt could no longer score...and Chamberlain unleashing the first of TWO 60+ point games on the night before it hit the newstands.

[CavaliersFTW]

Going to add a category, physical profile, would be silly not to have some testimonial and clips of his extraordinary strength to premise the rest of the clips. His extraordinary size and strength are why he had the moves that he had.

[fpliii]

Going to add a category, physical profile, would be silly not to have some testimonial and clips of his extraordinary strength to premise the rest of the clips. His extraordinary size and strength are why he had the moves that he had.

Nice.

[SpanishACB]

There's a couple of his moves we've only got 1 or 2 examples of

This should be made more clear.


By reading the thread someone could get the impression you're making a video of Wilt's offensive array. Sure. But there's nothing that proves plenty of those moves where only used 3 or 4 times in his career is there?


A highlight video is not a tool to educate the mass, it's a tool to decieve the mass like making a highlight video of Griffin's long range game or Rubio's dunks.

[CavaliersFTW]

This should be made more clear.


By reading the thread someone could get the impression you're making a video of Wilt's offensive array. Sure. But there's nothing that proves plenty of those moves where only used 3 or 4 times in his career is there?


A highlight video is not a tool to educate the mass, it's a tool to decieve the mass like making a highlight video of Griffin's long range game or Rubio's dunks.

Plenty of what moves? We've got perhaps 2% of his career field goals, there isn't plenty of anything outside of his bread and butter moves (finger roll and fade away variations). Wilt seems to have had a very clever baseline game that included some spins and up and unders that he used more rarely, much more rarely actually than his typical finger roll and fall away shot game. I don't think the clips we've got of his alternative moves however represent something he only did '3 or 4 times' in his career as some of the moves I've only got say, once, twice, or a few times are attempted in other clips a few more times that did not result in a field goal made (he gets wrapped up and goes to the line instead, etc). He repeats the moves like they are committed to memory. The sheer volume of points he scored means I don't think there was a move in his book that he ever limited to 3 or 4 uses. He didn't play in a showboat era, even all star games back then were played competitively and were not like today where it is about entertainment and showcasing skill (like Dwight taking a 3 or something). It makes more sense to assume that either a move became a part of your repertoire back then, or it didn't.

You are right about this not necessarily being a highlight, as it is every field goal that exists of his roughly 2% of available footage that I've got. It MAY be enough to kind of get an idea of the ratio how often he shot fadeaways vs finger rolls, vs spins, or how often he would alley oop, or run the floor, etc. But of course it still must be understood this is a random 2% of his career bias towards the latter half of his career, bias towards playoff games and finals games, and towards all star games. And none of the sources comes from games where he really was in an attack mode looking to drop 60 or w/e and get to the basket at will.

[longhornfan1234]

Shaq, Hakeem, Mikan, Kareem, and Moses are superior than Wilt in the post. I'm not that impressed with Wilt's game. Hopefully this footage impresses me.