Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > NBA Forum

NBA Forum NBA Message Board - NBA Fan Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-04-2014, 07:26 PM   #16
Psileas
NBA lottery pick
 
Psileas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Great!
Posts: 5,388
Psileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
They guy with 1-4 (25%) is worse... imagine what he would shoot if he took 30 shots?

Eh, I'd be willing to bet, quite a bit better than 25%, but yes, a guy who shots 10-30 obviously hurts his team offensively a lot more than someone who shoots 1-4. The first number looks a bad night of Kobe, the second, a Bruce Bowen night. Put these two lines in the same game, whose team is more likely to have suffered offensively?
Not to mention that his not very physical style of offensive play against a player who rarely fouled anyway must have played some role in the FT differential. How do you average like 33 FGA's and only 5 FTA's per game, with a high of 7?

Quote:
Truth is both teams in the '72 WCF shot an atrocious % that Kareem's 45.7% mark was actually pretty good. See below.

Kareem shot (I guess) around 4 ptc points above his teammates. Obviously it wouldn't be fair to expect him to shoot at the 57% clip he shot in the r.season. But it's still not a good shooting display, the disparity between him and his teammates should have been bigger.

Quote:
And it's true... McMillian scored a career-high 42 points to save Game 2 which LA won by 1 point. If Bucks went up 2-0 it would probably be over and yet Jim is never praised for one of the greatest performances by a role player ever!

I agree here, but unfortunately role players are never praised anyway. I can't remember a single game of a role player which is considered legendary and is widely remembered. Sleepy Floyd scored 51 on one of the GOAT teams ('87 Lakers) and nobody remembers it. Don Nelson, John Paxson, Steve Kerr, Vinnie Johnson have made title-clinching shots and only Kerr's shot is somewhat widely remembered, because the assist belonged to Jordan.
Psileas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 08:34 PM   #17
dankok8
Serious playground baller
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 437
dankok8 is considered somewhat cooldankok8 is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psileas
Eh, I'd be willing to bet, quite a bit better than 25%, but yes, a guy who shots 10-30 obviously hurts his team offensively a lot more than someone who shoots 1-4. The first number looks a bad night of Kobe, the second, a Bruce Bowen night. Put these two lines in the same game, whose team is more likely to have suffered offensively?
Not to mention that his not very physical style of offensive play against a player who rarely fouled anyway must have played some role in the FT differential. How do you average like 33 FGA's and only 5 FTA's per game, with a high of 7?

Kareem shot (I guess) around 4 ptc points above his teammates. Obviously it wouldn't be fair to expect him to shoot at the 57% clip he shot in the r.season. But it's still not a good shooting display, the disparity between him and his teammates should have been bigger.

I agree here, but unfortunately role players are never praised anyway. I can't remember a single game of a role player which is considered legendary and is widely remembered. Sleepy Floyd scored 51 on one of the GOAT teams ('87 Lakers) and nobody remembers it. Don Nelson, John Paxson, Steve Kerr, Vinnie Johnson have made title-clinching shots and only Kerr's shot is somewhat widely remembered, because the assist belonged to Jordan.

Of course 20 missed shots hurts a team more than 3 missed shots... What I'm trying to say is if a player is shooting 25% on 4 shots I can't even imagine how terrible that same player would shoot on 30 shots. The more you shoot the worse you shoot. A guy who shoots 1-4 is a worse offensive player than a guy who shoots 10-30.

Unfortunately you're right about role players. They are unappreciated.
dankok8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 09:02 PM   #18
Psileas
NBA lottery pick
 
Psileas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Great!
Posts: 5,388
Psileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
Originally Posted by dankok8
Of course 20 missed shots hurts a team more than 3 missed shots... What I'm trying to say is if a player is shooting 25% on 4 shots I can't even imagine how terrible that same player would shoot on 30 shots. The more you shoot the worse you shoot. A guy who shoots 1-4 is a worse offensive player than a guy who shoots 10-30.

Unfortunately you're right about role players. They are unappreciated.

I'd never claim that a 1972 Wilt was a better offensive player than '72 Kareem.

Having said that, although you're generally correct about FG%'s falling when your FGA's rise, these trends apply better over the course of a whole season and for players who already take a decent number of shots, i.e, not for players who don't get enough chances to get hotter. A player who normally takes 15 FG's is more likely to shoot worse if he gets to 30 FGA's than a player who shoots 5 FG's if he gets to 10 FG's. In other words, I don't think Wilt taking per average some shots more would necessarily shoot worse.
30 is extreme, 1972 Wilt against young, healthy Kareem wouldn't attempt 30 shots, especially when he's playing for a title contender. But 4 FGA's in 40+ minutes already indicate no intentions to shoot, we don't know under what conditions he took each one and only made 1. They are simply too few to judge, it's like taking a 4-4 FG perfromance and estimate that even at 30 FGA's, he would still be at 60+%.
Psileas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 12:29 PM   #19
LAZERUSS
NBA lottery pick
 
LAZERUSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,587
LAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputation
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
Originally Posted by dankok8
Of course 20 missed shots hurts a team more than 3 missed shots... What I'm trying to say is if a player is shooting 25% on 4 shots I can't even imagine how terrible that same player would shoot on 30 shots. The more you shoot the worse you shoot. A guy who shoots 1-4 is a worse offensive player than a guy who shoots 10-30.

Unfortunately you're right about role players. They are unappreciated.

That was my point. The player shooting 10-30 IS worse than the player who shoots 1-4. Why? Because the average NBA team shoots between 45-50%. A player missing 20 shots is doing far worse than the player who misses three.

KAJ was HURTING his team in the last four games of the '72 WCF's...plain-and-simple. And to use Wilt's .452 against him was ridiculous. He missed 20 shots in that series, and came up huge in the clinching game six with 20 points on 8-12 shooting. Meanwhile, Kareem missed 107 overall, and again, shot .414 in the last four pivotal games of that series.

Incidently, over the course of their ten H2H's in the 70-71 season (five regular season, and five post-season), a 34 year old Chamberlain, who was a year removed from a major knee injury and major knee surgery, outplayed a PEAK Kareem. And it gets even worse if you include their one H2H meeting before Chamberlain's injury...

In those 11 games...

KAJ averaged 26.1 ppg, 15.6 rpg, 2.5 apg, and shot .450 from the field.
Chamberlain averaged 22.8 ppg, 17.5 rpg, 2.7 apg, and shot .497 from the field. And in the known blocks, Chamberlain held a whopping 51-18 edge.

Again, this from a nowhere near his prime Chamberlain (probably 63-64 thru 66-67) against a near peak/peak KAJ.
LAZERUSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 01:09 PM   #20
stanlove1111
Serious playground baller
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 445
stanlove1111 has an OK reputation so far
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller for 3


Wilt average 7ppg playing 45 minutes, who cares what % he shot? That's Kendrick Perkins type production, but against shorter, less athletic competition and with LA market hype making the refs gift him FTs and foul benefits

Thats when Wilt was obsessed with FG%. He made it his goal to set records in that category. he would rarely ever shoot unless it was a great percentage shot. It was typical Wilt.

Does anyone remember the 2nd to last regular season game in 1973 when the Lakers played the Bucks and home court for the playoffs was on the line? Wilt didn't even take one shot and scored zero points and the Bucks won by one point, which almost cost the Lakers home court advantage. I remember Wilt taking heat about it at the time, and he deserved it. More worried about not missing shots then winning a huge game. Right up there with being obsessed with winning assists title and not fouling out of games. Wilt while being very dominating had many flaws.
stanlove1111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 01:24 PM   #21
LAZERUSS
NBA lottery pick
 
LAZERUSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,587
LAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputation
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanlove1111
Thats when Wilt was obsessed with FG%. He made it his goal to set records in that category. he would rarely ever shoot unless it was a great percentage shot. It was typical Wilt.

Does anyone remember the 2nd to last regular season game in 1973 when the Lakers played the Bucks and home court for the playoffs was on the line? Wilt didn't even take one shot and scored zero points and the Bucks won by one point, which almost cost the Lakers home court advantage. I remember Wilt taking heat about it at the time, and he deserved it. More worried about not missing shots then winning a huge game. Right up there with being obsessed with winning assists title and not fouling out of games. Wilt while being very dominating had many flaws.

Actually in that Bucks game in which he didn't attempt a shot, while Wilt didn't intentionally try to lose that game, his reasoning was pretty simple. He knew that if his Lakers did win that game, that they would have the best record in the Western Conference, but a loss would put Milwaukee in that spot. Which would mean that whoever won that game, would likely get the Warriors and Thurmond in round one. Which is exactly what happened. And, as he reasoned, Thurmond held KAJ to yet another horrible shooting series (.428), and the 47-35 Warriors stunned the heavily-favored 60-22 Bucks, 4-2. Oh, and then in the WCF's, as evident in the OP, Chamberlain just trashed Thurmond, and he guided his 60-22 Lakers to a blowout series win against the Warriors, 4-1.

As a sidenote...in that game in which Chamberlain did not take a shot against KAJ, he held Kareem to 12-31 shooting (.387).

Nice try Stan...
LAZERUSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 03:13 PM   #22
stanlove1111
Serious playground baller
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 445
stanlove1111 has an OK reputation so far
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZERUSS
Actually in that Bucks game in which he didn't attempt a shot, while Wilt didn't intentionally try to lose that game, his reasoning was pretty simple. He knew that if his Lakers did win that game, that they would have the best record in the Western Conference, but a loss would put Milwaukee in that spot. Which would mean that whoever won that game, would likely get the Warriors and Thurmond in round one. Which is exactly what happened. And, as he reasoned, Thurmond held KAJ to yet another horrible shooting series (.428), and the 47-35 Warriors stunned the heavily-favored 60-22 Bucks, 4-2. Oh, and then in the WCF's, as evident in the OP, Chamberlain just trashed Thurmond, and he guided his 60-22 Lakers to a blowout series win against the Warriors, 4-1.

As a sidenote...in that game in which Chamberlain did not take a shot against KAJ, he held Kareem to 12-31 shooting (.387).

Nice try Stan...
Are you joking with this garbage? Chicago had a better record then Warriors and LA barely got by the Bulls. They had to come back late in the 4th quarter, Its not like the Bulls were any safer then the Warriors. And the fact that you ignoring that Wilt might very well be giving away home court to the Bucks if they net makes you post desperate.

Unless you are actually trying to say that Wilt knew the Warriors were going to beat the Bucks..That would be a good one.
stanlove1111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 03:29 PM   #23
LAZERUSS
NBA lottery pick
 
LAZERUSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,587
LAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputation
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanlove1111
Are you joking with this garbage? Chicago had a better record then Warriors and LA barely got by the Bulls. They had to come back late in the 4th quarter, Its not like the Bulls were any safer then the Warriors. And the fact that you ignoring that Wilt might very well be giving away home court to the Bucks if they net makes you post desperate.

Unless you are actually trying to say that Wilt knew the Warriors were going to beat the Bucks..That would be a good one.

Directly from Wilt himself...

"Wilt: Just Like Any Other Black Millionaire Who Lives Next Door"

Page 292...
LAZERUSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 03:32 PM   #24
stanlove1111
Serious playground baller
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 445
stanlove1111 has an OK reputation so far
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZERUSS
Directly from Wilt himself...

"Wilt: Just Like Any Other Black Millionaire Who Lives Next Door"

Page 292...

Wilt said a lot of things. This doesn't even make sense and that should be obvious to you.

Funny in a game 2 days earlier with the Bucks and Lakers fighting for the best record, Wilt scored 20 points. Huh.
stanlove1111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 03:34 PM   #25
LAZERUSS
NBA lottery pick
 
LAZERUSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,587
LAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputation
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanlove1111
Wilt said a lot of things. This doesn't even make sense and that should be obvious to you.

Actually, Chamberlain did not fear either Milwaukee or the Warriors. But he preferred to not have to battle both Nate and KAJ in the post-season.

And yes, it made perfect sense...and in fact, it worked out perfectly.
LAZERUSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 04:02 PM   #26
buddha
dude, where's my shaq?
 
buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,797
buddha is starting to rub some people the wrong way
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Wasn't Wilt like 38 years old in 1973? their nutrition and training was shit back then. If Wilt could play that long in that era I bet he would have played into his 40's in this era.
buddha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 04:06 PM   #27
LAZERUSS
NBA lottery pick
 
LAZERUSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,587
LAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputation
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
Originally Posted by buddha
Wasn't Wilt like 38 years old in 1973? their nutrition and training was shit back then. If Wilt could play that long in that era I bet he would have played into his 40's in this era.

Larry Brown recalled a Chamberlain in his mid-40's dominating summer leagues in which Magic Johnson was playing in.

And Wilt was receiving legitimate offers to return to the NBA in his 40's, and even at age 50.
LAZERUSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 04:58 PM   #28
dankok8
Serious playground baller
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 437
dankok8 is considered somewhat cooldankok8 is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Interesting thing is in the 72-73 regular season Nate Thurmond met Wilt Chamberlain in 7 games and outrebounded him in all of them!

Quote:
Incidently, over the course of their ten H2H's in the 70-71 season (five regular season, and five post-season), a 34 year old Chamberlain, who was a year removed from a major knee injury and major knee surgery, outplayed a PEAK Kareem. And it gets even worse if you include their one H2H meeting before Chamberlain's injury...

In those 11 games...

KAJ averaged 26.1 ppg, 15.6 rpg, 2.5 apg, and shot .450 from the field.
Chamberlain averaged 22.8 ppg, 17.5 rpg, 2.7 apg, and shot .497 from the field. And in the known blocks, Chamberlain held a whopping 51-18 edge.

Those numbers are heavily skewed by a single game on 03/03/71 where Kareem played very few minutes and had 15 points and 6 rebounds. Without that game Kareem is at 27.1/16.6/2.6 on 48% shooting.

Anyways you give H2H's too much weight... Kareem played everyone else better than Wilt played them. In 1971, Kareem was a much better player than Wilt.

Bottom line is we'll never know who's better peak vs peak. We can just guess.
dankok8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 06:16 PM   #29
LAZERUSS
NBA lottery pick
 
LAZERUSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,587
LAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputation
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
Originally Posted by dankok8
Interesting thing is in the 72-73 regular season Nate Thurmond met Wilt Chamberlain in 7 games and outrebounded him in all of them!



Those numbers are heavily skewed by a single game on 03/03/71 where Kareem played very few minutes and had 15 points and 6 rebounds. Without that game Kareem is at 27.1/16.6/2.6 on 48% shooting.

Anyways you give H2H's too much weight... Kareem played everyone else better than Wilt played them. In 1971, Kareem was a much better player than Wilt.

Bottom line is we'll never know who's better peak vs peak. We can just guess.

Kareem was never as dominant against his best peers in any of seasons, as a mid-60's Chamberlain was against his. Here again, a peak KAJ was being outplayed by both Wilt and Nate in his 70-71 and 71-72 post-seasons. And McAdoo was outplaying him in many of their H2H's after that, as was Gilmore and Lanier. And, of course, from 78-79 on, Moses just shelled Kareem.
LAZERUSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 07:07 PM   #30
Psileas
NBA lottery pick
 
Psileas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Great!
Posts: 5,388
Psileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Wilt Chamberlain vs Nate Thurmond 1973 WCF

Quote:
Those numbers are heavily skewed by a single game on 03/03/71 where Kareem played very few minutes and had 15 points and 6 rebounds. Without that game Kareem is at 27.1/16.6/2.6 on 48% shooting.

So few minutes that he "only" found the time to jack 21 shots (and only make 7 of them)?
Hey, if so, then also remove Wilt's Game 4 of the series vs Kareem, he also played few minutes for his standards. Without that game, Wilt averages 23.8/19.5/2.0 and Kareem 23.5/16.5/4.0.
Psileas is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:13 AM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site















Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy