Originally Posted by julizaver
Maybe you haven't seen my earlier post. Taken into consideration your 66-67 calculation I could repost:
How Nate shot vs Russell, Kareem and Wilt ?
vs Russell - 19,6 ppg on 0.409
vs Kareem - 18.6 ppg on 0.413
vs Wilt - 16.3 ppg on 0.382
And how the others shot against him ?
Kareem vs Nate - 24.76 ppg on 0.447
Wilt vs Nate - 14.84 ppg on 0.548
Russell vs Nate - 11.59 ppg on 4.34
The data covers the 1965-1973 period. The data for Wilt vs Nate and Russell vs Nate is still incomplete (but I have the majority of the games data).
Thanks again, Julizaver.
Dankok8 keeps mentioning Wilt and Nate's 67-68 H2H's, as if Thurmond were just waxing Chamberlain. So, I looked up their FOUR H2H games:
Nate: 11 pts, 33 rebs
Wilt: 1 pt., 18 rebs, 13 ast, and get this 0-0 FG/FGA
Nate: 18 pts, 26 rebs
Wilt: 20 pts, 27 rebs, 4 ast, 8-18 FG/FGA
Nate: 13 pts, 25 rebs
Wilt: 12 pts, 23 rebs, 4 ast, 3-11 FG/FGA
Nate: 18 pts, 23 rebs
Wilt: 20 pts, 27 rebs, 7 ast, 8/? FG/FGA
So, this was supposed to be some kind of major beatdown from Nate? First of all, we don't have any of Thurmond's FG%'s, and historically, he shot way less than 40% against Wilt. And just the season before in 12 H2H's with Wilt he shot about .335. So, there was a very good chance that he was shooting horribly against him in 67-68, too.
Then, as always, he uses a very small sampling as some kind of examples. Here again, we only have two of their NINE H2H's from 65-66, and in those two Wilt shot 8-22 and 17-32, or a total of .463. So, he assumes that Chamberlain, in a season in which he was routinely dumping 30+ points on Nate, would have only shot .463 in those NINE games.
For instance, in their 3 H2H's in the 64-65 season, Chamberlain had games of 22 points, on 9-17 shooting; 24 points, on 7-21 shooting; and then 34 on 13-20 shooting...or a combined 26.7 ppg on .500 shooting. Now, how many times in their MANY H2H games did Wilt shoot something 7-21 against Nate? Obviously that was an aberration.
Then, in the 66-67 season, we now know that in six regular season H2H's, Chamberlain averaged 20.8 ppg on an unfathomable .633 FG% (while holding Nate to 13.0 ppg on a .327 FG%.) And again, in the Finals, covering six H2H's, Chamberlain outscored Nate, per game, 17.5 ppg to 14.3 ppg, and outshot Thurmond by a .560 to .343 margin. (BTW, the Wilt-bashers would use this as an example of Wilt's decline in the post-season.)
So, all we have to go by in that 67-68 season were one game in which Chamberlain didn't even attempt a shot, and another, in which he scored 20 points, we don't have any FG% data. So, he uses the two examples, in which Wilt collectively shot 11-29, and claims that Thurmond held him a .379 FG%.
In any case, Wilt had the two highest scoring games in those H2H's, and went 2-2 in their rebounding battles (albeit Nate outrebounded in total by a 107-86 margin.)
All of which got me thinking. Just how bad did Wilt shoot over the course of the rest of their H2H's?
Here we go:
68-69 regular season: 6 games
Chamberlain averaged 13.8 ppg on a .547 FG%.
68-69 playoffs: 6 games
Wilt averaged 12.0 ppg on a .500 FG%
(Nate averaged 16.7 ppg on a .392 FG% BTW)
70-71 regular season: 6 games
Wilt averaged 10.2 ppg on a .553 FG%
71-72 regular season: 6 games
Wilt averaged 6.8 ppg on a .731 FG%
72-73 regular season: 6 games
Wilt averaged 6.0 ppg on a .722 FG%
72-73 playoffs: 5 games:
Wilt averaged 7.0 ppg on a .611 FG%
(Nate averaged 15.8 ppg on a .373 FG%.)
I just hold out a glimmer of hope that more info will turn up regarding their missing seven games from their 65-66 H2H's. Oh, and it would great if we had more of Nate's FG%'s, as well (and thanks for posting Nate's three known H2H's from that 65-66 season, as well.)