When people ask Coach Nick (bballbreakdown) about Wilt Chamberlain:

[SamuraiSWISH]

Actually ... Damn:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bibFELnW6HM

Puts Shaq's skill level to shame.

[RightTwoCensor]

Actually ... Damn:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bibFELnW6HM

Puts Shaq's skill level to shame.

Now find me 200 more clips of him making jumpers from one season and you could consider him a jump shooter.

Don't worry, I'll wait. No really, I will.

[deja vu]

Wilt would average 25-28 ppg along with 13-15 rpg.

Anyone who says 35 ppg or more is stupid. The past 25 years only Kobe reached that mark and he was chucking and taking tons of 3s. Forget about a big man doing that.

Plus teams would hack him and send him to the FT line where he would struggle.

[CavaliersFTW]

You know what's sort of funny/ironic? CavsFTW and Euroleague hate each other, yet they're both very similar posters. Only difference is that in Euroleague's delusions Euroleague is better than the modern NBA and in CavsFTW's delusionals 60s era basketball is better than the modern NBA.

Nah I don't believe that.

The rules are different. The talent is different. The game is still played as elite as can possibly be played with the given talent out there... it's just a slightly different version of it with different talent running the show.

I think Wilt's time was also just as interesting a time. Just a slightly different brand of game, as I said. I do believe Wilt is more talented than any center playing today. That much should be clear.

[DaRkJaWs]

Wilt would average 25-28 ppg along with 13-15 rpg.

Anyone who says 35 ppg or more is stupid. The past 25 years only Kobe reached that mark and he was chucking and taking tons of 3s. Forget about a big man doing that.

Plus teams would hack him and send him to the FT line where he would struggle.

63%. And guess what? He had the record for both free throws attempted and made that year. So tell me how today would be different, again?

[Overdrive]

Shaq shot jumpers too. Nobody told him to stop.

Shaq mostly put up jump hooks, but he was deadly on them to 15 ft out. Real jump shots weren't his thing.

[pauk]

To bad he couldnt explain what he means exactly....

Wilt was great & would be great in any era..... everybody knows that, but everybody also knows he would NOT drop those numbers.... he would be dominant but not THAT dominant.... you take his numbers from an era where every single team averaged league & franchise high poss. per game to an era today that averages league low poss. per game (around 40-45% less poss. per game today) it would drop his best statistical year/season down dramatically to something like 25-30 ppg, 10-15 rpg, which is still great, but not 60s Wilt great...... there is a reason his PER is the way it is despite averaging 50-30-10-10-10-10-10-50-2304-023203.......

There is just nowhere enough possessions allowed for him by ANY team in the NBA today for him to get that kindof amount of FG & rebound opportunities he had in the 60s....

[La Frescobaldi]

Shaq mostly put up jump hooks, but he was deadly on them to 15 ft out. Real jump shots weren't his thing.

15 feet out? Is that a typo?

I can remember O'Neal taking a very, very few last second shot clock jumpers from that range but... jump hook?

[La Frescobaldi]

To bad he couldnt explain what he means exactly....

Wilt was great & would be great in any era..... everybody knows that, but everybody also knows he would NOT drop those numbers.... he would be dominant but not THAT dominant.... you take his numbers from an era where every single team averaged league & franchise high poss. per game to an era today that averages league low poss. per game (around 40-45% less poss. per game today) it would drop his best statistical year/season down dramatically to something like 25-30 ppg, 10-15 rpg, which is still great, but not 60s Wilt great...... there is a reason his PER is the way it is despite averaging 50-30-10-10-10-10-10-50-2304-023203.......

There is just nowhere enough possessions allowed for him by ANY team in the NBA today for him to get that kindof amount of FG & rebound opportunities he had in the 60s....

lolol I notice you are still making up numbers. Now you're trying to say the pace was double... again.
Do you have to get destroyed on this every other week?

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=343655

Quit doing this Pauk.

Explain how.... go ahead, lets see how stupid it is... there is wanting something to be stupid due to being butthurt/due to agenda and there is PROVING something is stupid....

Just one attempt, go ahead... waiting... until then you are just another delusional hater, one of very many here....

"Originally Posted by pauk
if you are curious, here is the factual estimations of league history possessions per game:

2000s & current poss. per game = 90-100
1990s poss. per game = 90-100
1980s poss. per game = 100-110
1970s poss. per game = 110-130
1960s poss. per game = 140-160"

Based on no fact nor is there any way to make an estimate.
Then:

Wow, did Wilt and them have close to 200 possessions in a game??? His numbers were reduced nearly in half.

Then:

1. Not buying the 150 possessions thing about the 60's, sorry. Especially 1966. Generally, look at the differences in the numbers of shots taken, FT's taken, etc. Compare 1966 to 1972. How the heck did you get to a difference of 30 possessions?

2. If it was anywhere near accurate to take a league with supposedly 150 possessions and project stats in a league of 100 or vice-versa without accounting for severe changes in efficiency (and therefore, other stats linked with it, like rebounds and assists), modern teams would be foolish NOT to try and get 150 possessions themselves nowadays.

3. Linked with #2. Why don't you also post the adjusted numbers for their whole teams, so that we really see who's more impactful statistically for his team? Also, how about posting their FGAs?

4. Linked with #3. Since you are a PER fan, if Wilt's stats are "mortal", how come he still has the most impressive individual season PERs of all time, which comes AFTER accounting for possessions? Why does Wilt's PER blow Magic's out of the water if Magic supposedly almost matches Wilt's scoring (LOL!), probably exceeds his efficiency (due to FT's) and Magic's assists advantage is wider than Wilt's rebounding advantage? Something doesn't add up here...

Then:
Originally Posted by pauk
For 1960s i have been reading/finding different results, anything from specific teams averaging 126 to 145 (a book i have here at home, saying it was 145 poss. p/g in 1967) 130 to 156 and to a whooping 165 poss. per game and the best teams (Russell/Wilt/Oscar teams) averaged the most.... not being sure what to go with i went with something in the in the middle, 150

If you're not sure how to come up with a reasonable estimate, then the logical thing to do would be to not venture any figure on the subject whatsoever.

You were never able to rebut a single one of those and never even tried. Because you can't.
[COLOR="Red"]And now you're sourcing it like it's some kind of a valid reference, which it never was.[/COLOR]

[La Frescobaldi]

Wilt would average 25-28 ppg along with 13-15 rpg.

Anyone who says 35 ppg or more is stupid. The past 25 years only Kobe reached that mark and he was chucking and taking tons of 3s. Forget about a big man doing that.

Plus teams would hack him and send him to the FT line where he would struggle.

Wilt Chamberlain would have Kevin Love numbers? That's all he could do is be like a Jerry Lucas level?

[Dresta]

"much longer"?

What a ****ing clown.

[senelcoolidge]

Now find me 200 more clips of him making jumpers from one season and you could consider him a jump shooter.

Don't worry, I'll wait. No really, I will.

The jump shot was a part of Wit's arsenal, but he went away from it in his latter years. Unfortunately there isn't a lot of footage of 60's games. He was a stone scorer, jump shots, post moves, baselines..etc. Much more skilled than Shaq.

[julizaver]

Shaq mostly put up jump hooks, but he was deadly on them to 15 ft out. Real jump shots weren't his thing.

They called it "baby hooks" or something like that. But he took it close to the basket, it is like the modern equivalent of Wilt's finger rolls. Although Shaq was training real hook shots as a young boy he did not used it in college or NBA for reasons of bein "old-fashioned".

Shaquille O

[Dr.J4ever]

Why is Wilt's ability to shoot jumpers or fade aways taken against him? Some of Cavs clips definitely show this, Wilt's shooting touch . I mean, in comparison, Shaq had no shooting touch almost, except maybe very close to the rim.

Surprisingly, despite his reputation for strength, Wilt seemed to have more of a finesse game as compared to Shaq. But shooting jumpers just make makes him even more potentially acclimated to today's game.

[Elosha]

These Shaq/Wilt comparisons are kind of like Jordan v. Lebron. We need to be fair to both and acknowledge each had some advantages/skillset that the other didn't. Now I will never argue that Lebron is better than Jordan because it's pretty clear to be that he's not, and never was. Doesn't have the mentality or complete skillset necessary. But the question of Shaq v. Wilt is much closer in my mind.

Now when I review the footage of Wilt's career, (and even though it's only 2+%, it's enough to give us a general idea of how he played), I see a player who has significantly more moves and a broader range of offensive weaponry than Shaq. However, I don't know how effective things like Wilt's finger roll and fadeaway bankshots actually were. We only see his makes on the highlight films, but I've also seen a few where he misses badly. Was he shooting the bankshot from the left post at a high percentage or was it well below his closer range shots? It unquestionably helps to have a diverse scoring skillset, so unless Wilt was far less "efficient" on his jumpshots and/or finger rolls, than his dunks, hooks, and other closer range shots, it still is a point in his favor.

Moreover, Cavs point that the game was called more closely and lots more ticky tack calls were made against guys like Wilt might be true, although I note that Wilt never fouled out of a game, which might call into question just how easy it was draw cheap fouls as well as Wilt's physicality on offense.

However... Shaq was also a very gifted scorer and had an adequate amount of moves and countermoves. Plus, I've never seen any center, including Wilt, with the sheer amount of aggressiveness and power around the rim. Shaq in his prime was simply a bigger and more physical player than Wilt ever was. And by judging the footage, I'd say that Shaq played against a lot more double and triple teams close to the basket than Wilt did. Again, acknowledging the limited footage that we have, the defense against Wilt on the footage we have is often underwhelming. Quite often, just one defender, greatly undersized, just passively waits for Wilt to receive an entry pass and receives little to no help from his teammates, leaving Wilt free for an easy dunk or layup. In contrast, Shaq was often double and triple teamed, and as physical as he was, he received an enormous amount of hard fouls, many of which he still finished with the three point play.

I will note, however, that Shaq tended to fade and diminish often in the fourth quarter and this was not just because of poor free throw shooting. Often, even during the Lakers' championship years, it looked like Shaq was much less aggressive and confident with a game on the line, particularly in the playoffs. This is a plight that has affected lots of big men, and I'm not sure if Wilt falls into that category or not.

The bottom line is that both Wilt and Shaq had advantages over the other. Along with KAJ, they are the three greatest centers in my mind, and you can put them in any order you want, with Russell a close fourth due to how much he won. But you can put the first three on any team and in any era, and they'd dominate. I don't believe that would be the case with Russell.