Michael Jordan is not the greatest player of all time. [Archive]

View Full Version : Michael Jordan is not the greatest player of all time.

Pages : [1] 2

inevitable

02/27/10, 05:32 AM

I don't understand why the media can't just call him the most advertised player of all time. He's definitely not the greatest. Wilt Chamberlain was the greatest of all time, in my opinion. Thoughts?

Broken Parachute

02/27/10, 05:35 AM

You're so c-c-c-c-c-controversial.

inevitable

02/27/10, 05:45 AM

I'm so right.

Nourez

02/27/10, 05:53 AM

You're so c-c-c-c-c-controversial.

I was gonna say that.

joeag1985

02/27/10, 05:54 AM

No.

inevitable

02/27/10, 05:59 AM

No.

No?

Killadelphia

02/27/10, 06:43 AM

okay Kanye.

inevitable

02/27/10, 06:45 AM

okay Kanye.

Please explain to me how I'm wrong! How is jordan the greatest? I just want someone to please tell me, because every time someone tries to tell me he's the greatest I dismantle the myth. Someone is always better than Jordan based on whatever criteria you use.

Mibabalou

02/27/10, 06:50 AM

yeah steve nash is the best player ever

inevitable

02/27/10, 06:53 AM

yeah steve nash is the best player ever

funny

Killadelphia

02/27/10, 06:55 AM

Please explain to me how I'm wrong! How is jordan the greatest? I just want someone to please tell me, because every time someone tries to tell me he's the greatest I dismantle the myth. Someone is always better than Jordan based on whatever criteria you use.

Chamberlain was dominating, yes, but he was not the greatest of all-time. Everytime Jordan made the finals, he won. Not the case for Wilt. Don't even say Jordan had better teams because Wilt played on 2 of the greatest teams ever.

But...let's hear your myth.

How about the fact that Wilt used his height more than anything against smaller players. Wilt's FT percentage was worse than fucking Shaq's and he a poor shooter. Dude was bigger than everyone and still shot only 54%.

I'd put Robertson ahead of Wilt too.

SlappedActor

02/27/10, 06:59 AM

I don't understand why the media can't just call him the most advertised player of all time.

Yeah, that's a snappy little title. I can't believe the media hasn't picked it up and ran with it.

SlappedActor

02/27/10, 07:04 AM

Besides, even if he isn't the greatest player ever (which he is, up to this point), he automatically earned that spot when he gave the most unintentionally hilarious HOF acceptance speech of all time.

inevitable

02/27/10, 07:07 AM

Chamberlain was dominating, yes, but he was not the greatest of all-time. Everytime Jordan made the finals, he won. Not the case for Wilt. Don't even say Jordan had better teams because Wilt played on 2 of the greatest teams ever.

But...let's hear your myth.

How about the fact that Wilt used his height more than anything against smaller players. Wilt's FT percentage was worse than fucking Shaq's and he a poor shooter. Dude was bigger than everyone and still shot only 54%.

I'd put Robertson ahead of Wilt too.

Oscar Robertson is fair. I have him ahead of Jordan also. If you want to say Jordan is the greatest because of Championships, you'd have to say Bill Russell is the greatest then. He had 11 NBA championships.

Yao Ming is 7'6" and hasn't dominated. How is the height even relevant here? Ming can't back down shaq in the post. Secondly, Wilt went up against a 6'10 Bill Russell who is the most dominating defensive center in the history of the game.

Jordan definitely had a better team than Wilt. I mean having 3 other NBA all-stars on your team in the 92-93 era doesn't help?

inevitable

02/27/10, 07:08 AM

SomethingClever

02/27/10, 07:17 AM

read Bill Simmon's The Book of Basketball and he'll prove to you that Bill Russell is beter then Chamberlain.

Killadelphia

02/27/10, 07:20 AM

Oscar Robertson is fair. I have him ahead of Jordan also. If you want to say Jordan is the greatest because of Championships, you'd have to say Bill Russell is the greatest then. He had 11 NBA championships.

Yao Ming is 7'6" and hasn't dominated. How is the height even relevant here? Ming can't back down shaq in the post. Secondly, Wilt went up against a 6'10 Bill Russell who is the most dominating defensive center in the history of the game.

Jordan definitely had a better team than Wilt. I mean having 3 other NBA all-stars on your team in the 92-93 era doesn't help?

Yes, but did you notice Wilt didn't win a title until he involved his teammates instead of shooting 30-40 times a game?

Greer and Cunningham, both Hall of Famers.

You're talking about one center compared to an entire league with Russell. He couldn't shoot.

Can you imagine Jordan being 7'1" and how dominated he would have been at that height?

For his size, Jordan was without a doubt, the best player of all-time, especially when he played in a league with more teams...and better players overall.

inevitable

02/27/10, 07:25 AM

Yes, but did you notice Wilt didn't win a title until he involved his teammates instead of shooting 30-40 times a game?

Greer and Cunningham, both Hall of Famers.

You're talking about one center compared to an entire league with Russell. He couldn't shoot.

Can you imagine Jordan being 7'1" and how dominated he would have been at that height?

For his size, Jordan was without a doubt, the best player of all-time, especially when he played in a league with more teams...and better players overall.

You should compare Oscar Robertson then with Jordan if you want to use the inch for inch criteria. Robertson dominated Jordan statistically and he was 2 inches shorter. Did Jordan have 181 career triple doubles? Did Jordan ever average a triple double for an entire season? Robertson most certainly did.

My criteria for rating a player is looking at their strengths and weaknesses. Then seeing how they influenced their team. Chamberlain could be the scoring guru. He could be a center you could run an offense through as an assist man. He could even be a great defending center. Even Bill Russell said that when Chamberlain got serious on defense even he couldn't play better defense than Chamberlain.

joeag1985

02/27/10, 07:26 AM

Larry Bird.

inevitable

02/27/10, 07:28 AM

Larry Bird.

good choice. he's in my top 5 with magic, jordan, chamberlain, and robertson.

My order is Chamberlain, Robertson, Bird, Johnson, Jordan.

myownillness

02/27/10, 07:33 AM

Wilt is not the greatest ever. He cared more about his own statistics than his team's wins, got traded during the prime of his career (Chicago wouldn't have even considered trading Jordan) mostly because of his reputation as an uncoachable prima donna, and couldn't shoot a free throw to save his life. He also played before the offensive goaltending rule was instituted and scored a lot of his points by redirecting his opponents shots into the basket. You are correct in saying that Jordan's legacy is somewhat overblown because he was marketed so well, but I would still consider him the greatest ever. You could make an argument for Bill Russell, but Jordan completely revolutionized the game, for better or worse, and is a worldwide icon. Without Jordan, the NBA wouldn't be what it is today, and I don't think you can say the same, to the same extent, about any of the players who came before him.

Killadelphia

02/27/10, 07:36 AM

You should compare Oscar Robertson then with Jordan if you want to use the inch for inch criteria. Robertson dominated Jordan statistically and he was 2 inches shorter. Did Jordan have 181 career triple doubles? Did Jordan ever average a triple double for an entire season? Robertson most certainly did.

My criteria for rating a player is looking at their strengths and weaknesses. Then seeing how they influenced their team. Chamberlain could be the scoring guru. He could be a center you could run an offense through as an assist man. He could even be a great defending center. Even Bill Russell said that when Chamberlain got serious on defense even he couldn't play better defense than Chamberlain.

Yes, all 7'1" 275 lb centers should absolutely dominate on defense.

Oscar Robertson was certainly great and is probably the best player of all time, but he lacks media awards and championships.

Wilt never won shit when he was the scoring guru. In 66-67' he averaged 24 points, and only 21.7 in the playoffs. So, for him to win a title, it was Walker, Greer, and Cunningham who stepped up. You're talking to a lifelong Sixers fan here.

Even with the Warriors, Wilt played with Hall of Famers.

Yes, compare Russell to Wilt. Wilt still had 55 pounds and 4-5 inches on Russell.

He was still a God awful shooter, which means most of his points came from inside and if he could actually make free throws, his career numbers would have been better, and probably would be #1. But that is not the case.

Also 1-6 in playoff series against Russell...when with Warriors/Sixers.

Ari Christos

02/27/10, 07:41 AM

Wilt did, however, fuck 80,000 women in his life.

inevitable

02/27/10, 07:46 AM

Yes, all 7'1" 275 lb centers should absolutely dominate on defense.

Oscar Robertson was certainly great and is probably the best player of all time, but he lacks media awards and championships.

Wilt never won shit when he was the scoring guru. In 66-67' he averaged 24 points, and only 21.7 in the playoffs. So, for him to win a title, it was Walker, Greer, and Cunningham who stepped up. You're talking to a lifelong Sixers fan here.

Even with the Warriors, Wilt played with Hall of Famers.

Yes, compare Russell to Wilt. Wilt still had 55 pounds and 4-5 inches on Russell.

He was still a God awful shooter, which means most of his points came from inside and if he could actually make free throws, his career numbers would have been better, and probably would be #1. But that is not the case.

Also 1-6 in playoff series against Russell...when with Warriors/Sixers.

Should, but not all 7'1" centers do. And there have been quite a few 7'+ centers.

Also, Robertson didn't really get a quality team to support him. And a lot of the awards given out today didn't exist then.

inevitable

02/27/10, 07:49 AM

inevitable

02/27/10, 07:52 AM

Wilt did, however, fuck 80,000 women in his life.

He did do that.

inevitable

02/27/10, 07:53 AM

StrictlyBiznas

02/27/10, 07:57 AM

Wilt did, however, fuck 80,000 women in his life.

+1 for Wilt.

FondestMemory

02/27/10, 08:17 AM

Wilt is probably third best ever at his position.

Jordan dominated in a league with more teams and better athletes. Wilt wouldnt have been anything more than a 20/12 guy in the jordan era.

myownillness

02/27/10, 08:46 AM

The bulls wouldn't trade jordan because they made millions off of him. Even Phil Jackson didn't really like coaching Jordan. He was a ball hog. Furthermore he was nothing until Pippen came along.
Yeah the Bulls made tons of money off of Jordan, but they made that money because he was winning them CHAMPIONSHIPS. Like Chamberlain, Jordan was/isn't the most likeable person of all time, but find me a quote from Phil Jackson telling me he didn't like coaching Jordan. I'm sure they didn't get along all the time, but how could Jackson not like a guy who busted his ass to get better every single day, elevated his teammates' games, had an almost maniacal desire to win, won Jackson six championship rings, and helped Jackson make millions of dollars and become a coaching icon? He wasn't a ball hog. During his earlier years he didn't share the ball as much because his teammates were garbage. He didn't win championships until Pippen came along because other teams would plan their entire defensive schemes around stopping him and employ physical tactics at a time when rules were much more lenient about hand-checking and hard fouls. Jordan also won his championships with very mediocre big men. Put Luc Longley on Magic Johnson's Lakers teams in the 80's instead of Abdul-Jabbar and tell me he wins five championships. There's no way. Jordan has six championships. Wilt has two. If Wilt was so dominant, why didn't his teams win more? Because he cared more about stats than winning. Considering his physical tools, Wilt could have and should have been the best ever, but for most of his career he didn't demonstrate the passion or the work ethic necessary to secure that legacy.

myownillness

02/27/10, 08:51 AM

Wilt completely dominated the game. The rules were changed because of him, like the goaltending. However, you shouldn't just label someone the greatest ever for the sake of marketing it... although it is pure genius. Being a worldwide icon does not make him the greatest basketball player of all time, it just makes you the greatest advertised basketball player.
The fact that the rules were changed because of him proves that he used his physical prowess more so than his skills as a basketball player to achieve the statistics upon which you're basing your opinion. Put Shaq in that same era and he puts up the same, if not better numbers. Jordan isn't the greatest ever because he was marketed well. The fact that his name is synonymous worldwide with the sport of basketball is just further proof that he is the greatest player to play the sport thus far. All of his sponsorships and accolades would never have come if he didn't consistently back up that image on the court.

sleepyseanzzz

02/27/10, 08:52 AM

mugsy bogues FTW

+thecalisonme

02/27/10, 08:55 AM

http://blogs.undftd.com/undftd/aadl024larry-bird-posters.jpg

mht

02/27/10, 08:57 AM

HometownHero

02/27/10, 08:58 AM

Lol at OP

tommyishere

02/27/10, 08:59 AM

http://jehingr.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/oscar-robertson.jpg

Oscar Robertson

or George Mikan

alexcreate

02/27/10, 09:11 AM

give LeBron a couple more years and you guys won't be debating this.

Mibabalou

02/27/10, 09:27 AM

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/16/Pete_maravich.jpg

FondestMemory

02/27/10, 09:34 AM

give LeBron a couple more years and you guys won't be debating this.

Itll take more than a couple. He has to win 4 or 5 rings before the discussion even starts.

TEAMRAMROD

02/27/10, 09:39 AM

Took a while for Pistol Pete to get mentioned.

inevitable

02/27/10, 10:43 AM

The fact that the rules were changed because of him proves that he used his physical prowess more so than his skills as a basketball player to achieve the statistics upon which you're basing your opinion. Put Shaq in that same era and he puts up the same, if not better numbers. Jordan isn't the greatest ever because he was marketed well. The fact that his name is synonymous worldwide with the sport of basketball is just further proof that he is the greatest player to play the sport thus far. All of his sponsorships and accolades would never have come if he didn't consistently back up that image on the court.

You haven't shown me anything to prove that he is the greatest ever other than the market. Just because someone advertises something doesn't make it right. Hell, if that were the case I could just spend millions of dollars on a mop and call it the greatest mop of all time even though it isn't better in comparison to other mops.

inevitable

02/27/10, 10:45 AM

like someone said there was a high amount of talent level in the NBA when Jordan played. You didn't really have that prior to the Jordan era or even post Jordan. Now you just have Lebron start at the key and steam rolling shitty guys and Kobe shooting over sub par players faces. Jordan had to face dream team talent almost every night.

This is the most ignorant statement I've ever seen. There was plenty of talent before the Jordan era. You just know nothing about basketball. Please don't post if your knowledge doesn't go past the Jordan era. If you do choose to post at least try not to make an ass out of yourself.

inevitable

02/27/10, 10:46 AM

Itll take more than a couple. He has to win 4 or 5 rings before the discussion even starts.

Yes. However statistically he's on the right track to at least be in the conversation in a few years.

blowmybutthole

02/27/10, 10:47 AM

took way too long for pistol pete too get mentioned haha.

but i've been trying to decide this for a long time between Oscar Robertson and Jordan. jordan put up numbers, won defensive awards as well as scoring awards, and titles. but Oscar Robertson put up numbers that havent been touched (yet, lebron may get there). And there is always the discussion of what he would be like if he played today and people dont know notice but, it was a lot harder to dish assists back then because the rules on assists were stricter. he didnt get to play with quality talent for most of his career. he played in a market that has never been player friendly which didnt mix well with his quite demeanor.

wilt could've been higher if he had more seasons like his one where he was in the top of the league in assists.

magic unfortunately didnt get to play a bit longer.

i'd say... actually i'm going with Oscar as the greatest ever.

arizonahotrock

02/27/10, 10:54 AM

Did Jordan fuck your mom/sister/girlfriend/boyfriend/whatever?

Jesus, man. No need to get all butthurt and pissy about people thinking Jordan is the greatest ever, let alone go on internet crusades, Pope Alexander II.

SAOsurviveSTD

02/27/10, 10:59 AM

troubledbyinsects

02/27/10, 11:13 AM

this is a stupid argument, because we all know the greatest player of all time is...

http://pagesperso-orange.fr/nba-history/images/trades/stackhouse_295_041108.jpg

oh baby

CarlosLunes

02/27/10, 11:26 AM

This kid loves talking about marketing.

Ill buy you simmons book, read the chapter about wilt, and then come back to this thread.

joeag1985

02/27/10, 11:40 AM

read Bill Simmon's The Book of Basketball and he'll prove to you that Bill Russell is beter then Chamberlain.

Reading proves nothing. Viewing with ones own eyes should always be the way to prove such things.

Alex Djaferis

02/27/10, 11:58 AM

Chamberlain was amazing - but he played in a time where the game was so entirely different. With his stature and physical presence it was easy to dominate. Exaggerating his actual level of skill.

I'm not prepared to say Jordan was the best of all time, but he has a way better shout then Wilt imo -

Jordan, Magic, Bird, Robertson, Pistol Pete, Russell - I mean there are so many guys that did some incredible things, but disregarding the era they played in is foolish.

If I was pushed though, I'd say Jordan I guess.

incognitojones

02/27/10, 01:31 PM

This shouldn't even be discussed, its Michael, with a lot of other guys that were good too. The real question is who is more famous, Michael Jordan or Martin Luther King?

Drew Beringer

02/27/10, 01:36 PM

Wilt Chamberlain was not that good, he benefited from playing during a time when he was one of the few bigs. Russell dominated him year in and out. Put Chamberlain in today's game and he would barely average 14 a game.

Drew Beringer

02/27/10, 01:37 PM

This kid loves talking about marketing.

Ill buy you simmons book, read the chapter about wilt, and then come back to this thread.
this times infinity

Drew Beringer

02/27/10, 01:38 PM

Jordan is the GOAT. No one had a killer streak like him, and if he didn't retire the first time, he would have won 8 in a row.

TEAMRAMROD

02/27/10, 02:40 PM

Is Durant's streak of 25+ points still going?

Drew Beringer

02/27/10, 02:42 PM

Is Durant's streak of 25+ points still going?
no, it ended a few days ago against the Spurs, KD finished with 21, which was disappointing cause he had 17 first half points.

TEAMRAMROD

02/27/10, 02:58 PM

no, it ended a few days ago against the Spurs, KD finished with 21, which was disappointing cause he had 17 first half points.
Really? That sucks. I guess they double teamed him throughout the rest of the game?

SomethingClever

02/27/10, 04:27 PM

Reading proves nothing. Viewing with ones own eyes should always be the way to prove such things. agreed by bill simmons watches and studies and researches.

preppyak

02/27/10, 04:36 PM

Reading proves nothing. Viewing with ones own eyes should always be the way to prove such things.Haha, seriously? I'd gladly take a guy whose persective comes from his job for the last few decades, which has been to watch and commentate on basketball and sports, and who wasn't a teenager who idolized anything famous, over my own eyes that probably watch 30% of Jordan's games at most in a season and had no idea how to put that all into context

Unless you are suggesting I should go back and watch every game Wilt played in, and every game Jordan played in...and then decide...

This shouldn't even be discussed, its Michael, with a lot of other guys that were good too. The real question is who is more famous, Michael Jordan or Martin Luther King?
Know of many Michael Jordan Streets? Or Michael Jordan High Schools? That's a pretty easy answer...

joeag1985

02/27/10, 04:56 PM

Haha, seriously? I'd gladly take a guy whose persective comes from his job for the last few decades, which has been to watch and commentate on basketball and sports, and who wasn't a teenager who idolized anything famous, over my own eyes that probably watch 30% of Jordan's games at most in a season and had no idea how to put that all into context

Unless you are suggesting I should go back and watch every game Wilt played in, and every game Jordan played in...and then decide...

Know of many Michael Jordan Streets? Or Michael Jordan High Schools? That's a pretty easy answer...

This would be my first choice. Haha. I know what you're saying, but really, no matter how succinct the analysis is on paper, I could never make a decision on whether an individual was a great player or not from that on its own.

FBTMOPenguins

02/27/10, 05:04 PM

Please explain to me how I'm wrong! How is jordan the greatest? I just want someone to please tell me, because every time someone tries to tell me he's the greatest I dismantle the myth. Someone is always better than Jordan based on whatever criteria you use.

You hardly dismantle a myth by saying something contrary to said myth. If not THE best MJ was damn well up there who cares if YOU don't think he was the best. That said my favorite NBA player (of all time) is Dirk Nowitzki he's an anomaly, better than MJ of course not but a hall of famer in his own right.

preppyak

02/27/10, 05:26 PM

This would be my first choice. Haha. I know what you're saying, but really, no matter how succinct the analysis is on paper, I could never make a decision on whether an individual was a great player or not from that on its own.
Valid point. I'd love to watch every game MJ played in...but I don't have enough time to watch all the games I want to nowadays, let along go back and watch old games.

Killadelphia

02/27/10, 05:29 PM

Valid point. I'd love to watch every game MJ played in...but I don't have enough time to watch all the games I want to nowadays, let along go back and watch old games.

Personally, I believe they should not show any current NBA games and just revert back to showing old seasons.

iihungrieii

02/27/10, 06:11 PM

must be tough being a sixers fan

Formatfun

02/27/10, 06:18 PM

"in my opinion"

see.

Killadelphia

02/27/10, 06:31 PM

must be tough being a sixers fan

It's not even that. They have likable players, usually are in the game. I just think the entire NBA product is terrible. Back in the 90s, I'd watch random games all the time. Now I don't even care.

iihungrieii

02/27/10, 06:38 PM

i definitely agree with basketball in the 90s being more entertaining than it is now overall. but right now, i can't complain much as a lakers fan

Talib Scottie

02/27/10, 07:14 PM

I saw the 98 Pacers-Bulls game 7 not long ago, had roundball rock, vintage Marv Albert, MJ, Reggie, and everything else you could wish for in an NBA game.

I'd probably go 1-MJ, 2- Russell, 3- Kareem, 4- Bird, 5- Magic, 6- Wilt

Corgkowznor

02/27/10, 08:50 PM

Why is Craig Ehlo not being mentioned in this discussion

incognitojones

02/27/10, 10:02 PM

Know of many Michael Jordan Streets? Or Michael Jordan High Schools? That's a pretty easy answer...

That's what I thought too, but when I asked people most of them answered Jordan. I've heard explanations about international popularity for both sides, which is even more confusing. And when I looked them both up on wikipedia, I found out a bunch of bad ass statistics on Jordan, and that MLK cheated on his wife. A lot.

Kurt Retenauer

02/27/10, 10:03 PM

Pistol Pete.

tomahawk

02/27/10, 10:25 PM

I don't understand why the media can't just call him the most advertised player of all time. He's definitely not the greatest. Wilt Chamberlain was the greatest of all time, in my opinion. Thoughts?

You've got to give some reasons (facts, stats, anything) for your opinion if you expect any quality arguments. That being said, here they are:

http://www.michaeljordansworld.com/comparison_nba_stars.html
http://www.nba.com/history/players/jordan_stats.html
http://www.nba.com/history/players/chamberlain_stats.html

Overall, it's different. One was a center, one was a guard. They played at different times and yes, the media has an influence much to the advantage of Jordan. I don't really believe in the word "best". There's just no way to determine a best in subjective areas like this. But if one of them is close to being best, I think the research leans to Jordan's side. I don't think Wilt the stilt would even argue it.

sir j kelso

02/28/10, 01:26 AM

i feel like you started this thread just because you knew it would get alot of hits. of course MJ is the greatest player of all time. not that i disagree with you that Wilt was a beast. but MJ was the man. and as far as the media goes.....most sports writers that have named MJ the best of all time have seen WAY more footage of way more basketball players than you could ever dream of. so if you want to take a hack at the media...go ahead and do so...but dont bash them for agreeing that michael is the best of all time cuz....they're right with this one.

Deth

02/28/10, 03:33 AM

Not only is he the greatest of all time, he starred in the greatest movie of all time SPACE JAM!!

mymusicismylife

02/28/10, 07:01 AM

This post is laughable. Wilt was given so many advantages, the biggest one being that he was played in a much smaller NBA.He was just really freaking tall. Was he still one of the best ever? Sure. I'll give you that. But to compare him to Jordan is ridiculous. Jordan was an animal. A top dog. A super competitive freak. He destroyed his opponents. Wilt won, what was it, two titles? Jordan won six? And he did that while missing 2 1/2 (I think that's what it was) years during his prime?

Wilt today might not even be the best big man. Jordan today would outclass even Lebron. (Also, Jordan played in an NBA that allowed handchecking and such, meaning a much more physical, demanding game than today's game.

Honestly, this is laughable. You know nothing of basketball if you really believe this. I wouldn't even put Wilt above Kareem, much less Jordan.

losnoufy

02/28/10, 07:12 AM

If Jordan scored 100 points in a game, I'd guarantee his team would've won.

Chamberlain couldn't lead a team. His first championship was based on his freakish size allowing him to score a ridiculous 50 points per game. His second was was based on him being on the '72 Lakers. Jordan had Pippen, and obviously some great teams, but he was what MADE the teams great. That's something you can't base on any criterion. The '96 Bulls, who went 72-10, wouldn't have been a playoff team without Jordan. Chamberlain was a scorer, not a leader. He is celebrated for scoring 100 points in a game his team lost.

Killadelphia

02/28/10, 07:35 AM

troubledbyinsects

02/28/10, 07:41 AM

theactionblast

02/28/10, 10:56 AM

In all the years i've attached below he was the highest scorer in the league. He has the highest points per game average Michael Jordan displayed moves and ways to get to the rim that nobody else had even imagined. The game was very different for Wilt, and most of the players in the Jordan era would have ran circles around him. The game evolved greatly. Michael Jordan was one of the biggest factors in the game of basketball changing. Look back on film to older players that were around before Michael Jordan and see if they have the moves that MJ had. It's funny that you, being some guy that does not play pro basketball thinks that MJ is not the best, when 95% of the players think that MJ is the best. Ask Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Lebron James, Kobe Bryant.

Here are some direct quotes from some players during the Jordan Era,

"God disgused himself as Michael Jordan" - Larry Bird
"There's Michael Jordan and then there is the rest of us."—Magic Johnson (http://www.absolutepunk.net/wiki/Magic_Johnson)[1] (http://www.absolutepunk.net/#cite_note-nbah-0)

1986-87 NBA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1987_leaders.html) 37.1 (1)
1987-88 NBA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1988_leaders.html) 35.0 (1)
1988-89 NBA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1989_leaders.html) 32.5 (1)
1989-90 NBA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1990_leaders.html) 33.6 (1)
1990-91 NBA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1991_leaders.html) 31.5 (1)
1991-92 NBA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1992_leaders.html) 30.1 (1)
1992-93 NBA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1993_leaders.html) 32.6 (1)
1995-96 NBA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1996_leaders.html) 30.4 (1)
1996-97 NBA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1997_leaders.html) 29.6 (1)
1997-98 NBA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1998_leaders.html) 28.7 (1)
Career NBA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/pts_per_g_career.html) 30.1 (1)
Career (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/pts_per_g_career.html) 30.1 (1)

He has the second most steals in NBA history and was the first player ever to win Defensive player of the year and MVP. Also don't forget Michael Jordan is a 5 time MVP, tied with Russel and one behind Abdul-Jabar, when everyone knows that he should have won just a few more of those trophies. I know Michael Jordan was surrounded by great players also, but lets face it. Michael Jordan as of now, is the best player of all time. He had the best competition surrounding him. You just have to look at the players and his numbers do not lie. Highest PPG average, and almost every year in the league he scored the most. He dominated on offensive side and defense. Jerry west was quoted once saying that he felt that Michael Jordan was more impressive as a defensive player than an offensive player. Let's not forget that Michael Jordan is also undefeated in the NBA Finals and is hands down the best clutch Basketball player of all time.

You can argue this all you want, but the footage, the legend, the numbers. Do not lie.

desiguerilla

02/28/10, 11:23 AM

the best player of all time is Stephon Marbury

cory-182

02/28/10, 11:36 AM

alexcreate

02/28/10, 11:39 AM

i definitely agree with basketball in the 90s being more entertaining than it is now overall. but right now, i can't complain much as a lakers fan

i think this season has been more exciting than the nba has been in years. most teams are doing awesome in some form. outside of the nets, sometimes it's near impossible to tell who's going to win a game.

lebron is the best player in the game now, hands down. he's 25. by the time he's thirty he's going to be unstoppable by any opponent.

spansen

02/28/10, 12:01 PM

maybe not the greatest of all time for all things sports, no.. but, for basketball? absolutely.

inVINCEable1008

02/28/10, 03:12 PM

and is hands down the best clutch Basketball player of all time.

I can't believe it took so long for this to come up. Not only did he dominate during the regular season, but he stepped up his game during the playoffs. He might of had great players, but he carried those teams to six titles.

losnoufy

02/28/10, 09:26 PM

you're an idiot.

Ok, I was wrong about his team losing the 100-point game. But allow me to reply to your unaccompanied offensive statement:

Go fuck yourself.

If I'm an idiot, tell me why, don't just say I'm an idiot. I got that fact wrong, so I'll go fuck myself. But don't just say I'm an idiot. Act like you're not in high school.

tomahawk

02/28/10, 09:32 PM

Not only is he the greatest of all time, he starred in the greatest movie of all time SPACE JAM!!

This x1000

Deth

03/01/10, 02:12 AM

MJ nostalgia for you all to enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WmNHGA5jh8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBSgZso-hcE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLchS1mreoY

He holds a tier to himself. Nobody can amount to the great things Jordan has accomplished within the sport of Basketball.

Lets turn this thread into a bunch of amazing mj highlights

troubledbyinsects

03/01/10, 03:13 AM

Ok, I was wrong about his team losing the 100-point game. But allow me to reply to your unaccompanied offensive statement:

Go fuck yourself.

If I'm an idiot, tell me why, don't just say I'm an idiot. I got that fact wrong, so I'll go fuck myself. But don't just say I'm an idiot. Act like you're not in high school.
hahaha calm your shit brother. you said something stupid, i called you on it, don't be a baby.

losnoufy

03/01/10, 10:14 AM

hahaha calm your shit brother. you said something stupid, i called you on it, don't be a baby.

You caught me at a horrible time.

Also, all dumb errors aside, I still think Jordan was the best player ever. He played in such a more competitive era than Chamberlain...the 80s and 90s was the NBA's golden age, and he was at the very top of it.

guccimaneburrrr

03/01/10, 10:20 AM

Scott Weber

03/01/10, 10:40 AM

Indoor Living

03/01/10, 10:44 AM

Pistol Pete.
I saw a video of his top 10 passes, and I was literally awe-struck. Amazing.

CarlosLunes

03/01/10, 10:49 AM

wilt's in boca raton florida was always a good time, even got to meet him once

FondestMemory

03/01/10, 12:36 PM

I used to think Wilt had an argument. Then I read The Book of Basketball and watched Bill Simmons quite fairly and thoroughly destroy Wilt Chamberlain and now I'm not even sure he's in my top 5, let alone top 10.

Statistics can be extremely misleading with basketball.

exactly. i don't read simmons, but i can see how it wouldn't be too difficult to destroy wilt.

i said earlier in the thread, not only is he not the greatest ever, he's not even the greatest center ever. he's third at best, and probably even lower when you look a little deeper into it.

guccimaneburrrr

03/01/10, 12:38 PM

exactly. i don't read simmons, but i can see how it wouldn't be too difficult to destroy wilt.

i said earlier in the thread, not only is he not the greatest ever, he's not even the greatest center ever. he's third at best, and probably even lower when you look a little deeper into it.

Shaq is 3rd for me

FondestMemory

03/01/10, 12:42 PM

Shaq is 3rd for me

that's what i mean. he's third at absolute best. and once you put thought into it, he may not even be top five.

shaq's second or third for me. people tend to forget how fucking dominant he was in his prime. i don't think we'll see another center do the stuff he could do. i wouldn't be shocked if he's the last completely dominant center we see, especially the way the game is evolving.

Chris M.

03/01/10, 02:28 PM

that's what i mean. he's third at absolute best. and once you put thought into it, he may not even be top five.

shaq's second or third for me. people tend to forget how fucking dominant he was in his prime. i don't think we'll see another center do the stuff he could do. i wouldn't be shocked if he's the last completely dominant center we see, especially the way the game is evolving.

Just curious, who do you have first? Kareem, Hakeem or Bill Russell?

guccimaneburrrr

03/01/10, 02:39 PM

mine goes
1. Kareem
2. Bill Russel
3. Shaq
4. Hakeem Olajuwon

Spicoli hey bud

03/01/10, 03:40 PM

http://absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=119806

guccimaneburrrr

03/01/10, 03:48 PM

wow look how many people had wilt in their top 3 of all time

Spicoli hey bud

03/01/10, 04:37 PM

Yea basically everybody had Wilt up there... and it's interesting to see how everyone viewed the current players 4 years ago. Kobe has definitely entered the top 10 without a doubt now. And Lebron will be there eventually too.

FondestMemory

03/01/10, 05:25 PM

Just curious, who do you have first? Kareem, Hakeem or Bill Russell?

Russell.

Kareem/shaq 2 and 3 in some order. Then probably wilt and hakeem at 4 and 5.

williek311

03/01/10, 06:58 PM

Are people saying Pistol Pete being serious?

Deth

03/01/10, 11:08 PM

I can only think of my top 3 as a definite the rest would be way too difficult

1. Michael Jordan
2. Jerry West
3. George Mikan

guccimaneburrrr

03/02/10, 09:33 AM

............

Scott Weber

03/02/10, 09:48 AM

george mikan? is that a joke?

CarlosLunes

03/02/10, 10:09 AM

1. John Crotty
2. Michael Jordan
3. Billy Owens

iihungrieii

03/02/10, 11:04 AM

1. John Crotty
2. Michael Jordan
3. Billy Owens

4. JJB

CarlosLunes

03/02/10, 11:12 AM

good point

troubledbyinsects

03/02/10, 12:34 PM

Brian Scalabrine???

xbrokendownx

03/02/10, 12:37 PM

God Shamgodd

inVINCEable1008

03/02/10, 12:51 PM

4. JJB
What the hell are you talking about. It goes 1. JJB 2. DJ Mbenga

kwsqd

03/02/10, 12:53 PM

1. Kwame Brown

Deth

03/02/10, 07:49 PM

george mikan? is that a joke?

He revolutionized the game of basketball and he is a relative of mine haha. So half serious, half joke.

guccimaneburrrr

03/02/10, 07:53 PM

being revolutionary doesn't make you the best

S/T

03/02/10, 09:58 PM

Are people saying Pistol Pete being serious?

Was wondering the same thing, and I love Pistol Pete.

Poe-tryGirl

03/03/10, 12:33 PM

Is this just basketball or of all sports?

CheckeredFloors

03/04/10, 04:21 AM

Darko Milicic - Steal of the '03 draft.

What a superstar

derekmoyer4

03/04/10, 06:28 AM

Was wondering the same thing, and I love Pistol Pete.
pistol pete was flat-out ridiculous at LSU. best college player of all-time (arguably), but not the greatest basketball player of all-time. i still loved Mr. Maravich.

bastard_of_ness

03/04/10, 06:31 AM

I don't understand why the media can't just call him the most advertised player of all time. He's definitely not the greatest. Wilt Chamberlain was the greatest of all time, in my opinion. Thoughts?

Wilt was great. Many others have been great.

However... Jordan was the greatest for many reason, including the marketing that you note here. He changed everything for the NBA.

inevitable

08/05/10, 07:24 PM

Wilt was great. Many others have been great.

However... Jordan was the greatest for many reason, including the marketing that you note here. He changed everything for the NBA.

Would love to see the reasons why you think he is great. I would not argue that marketing made him great, however, he was not the greatest basketball player of all time.

joeag1985

08/05/10, 07:30 PM

Would love to see the reasons why you think he is great. I would not argue that marketing made him great, however, he was not the greatest basketball player of all time.

Why does it matter? Jordan, Bird, Abdul, Chamberlain... they're all the greatest players, irregardless of ranking.

inevitable

08/05/10, 07:32 PM

Why does it matter? Jordan, Bird, Abdul, Chamberlain... they're all the greatest players, irregardless of ranking.

I just think it's wrong to have someone tell you someone is the greatest at something when he's clearly not deserving of the title.

inevitable

08/05/10, 07:33 PM

That said I am ok with him being labeled one of the greatest players...just not the best.

xbrokendownx

08/05/10, 07:34 PM

you can think what you want and everyone has their own opinion, but to say hes not deserving of the title is fucking stupid

get the fuck outta here with that

joeag1985

08/05/10, 07:35 PM

I just think it's wrong to have someone tell you someone is the greatest at something when he's clearly not deserving of the title.

That's my whole point... this 'title' doesn't exist. The people that make these lists are fools with too much time on their hands. They're all great players.

inevitable

08/05/10, 07:36 PM

you can think what you want and everyone has their own opinion, but to say hes not deserving of the title is fucking stupid

get the fuck outta here with that

lol i love that... you basically told me i can think what i want but not to think it. brilliant. i tell you what... instead of just telling me i'm wrong why don't you go ahead and prove to me how he's the greatest ever. let me remind you statistics and facts must be involved.

inevitable

08/05/10, 07:38 PM

That's my whole point... this 'title' doesn't exist. The people that make these lists are fools with too much time on their hands. They're all great players.

The title clearly exists. The title is put out there in books, by espn, and other sports news, broadcasting, "experts", etc... not to mention look at the reaction you get just by saying he's not the greatest. people are brainwashed about it. no one can even offer me any stats or anything to prove he's the greatest. they just tell me i'm wrong and to get the **** out

xbrokendownx

08/05/10, 07:41 PM

lol i love that... you basically told me i can think what i want but not to think it. brilliant. i tell you what... instead of just telling me i'm wrong why don't you go ahead and prove to me how he's the greatest ever. let me remind you statistics and facts must be involved.

i didnt say he was the greatest ever.

but to say he isnt DESERVING of being considered the greatest ever is dumb. wilt can be considered. jordan can be considered, etc. more than 1 guy can be considered. there is no definitive answer

inevitable

08/05/10, 07:42 PM

i didnt say he was the greatest ever.

but to say he isnt DESERVING of being considered the greatest ever is dumb. wilt can be considered. jordan can be considered, etc. more than 1 guy can be considered. there is no definitive answer

i never said i had a problem with him being considered one of the greats... just a problem with him being labeled the best ever. please read what i write next time.

FondestMemory

08/05/10, 07:52 PM

I just think it's wrong to have someone tell you someone is the greatest at something when he's clearly not deserving of the title.

...

joeag1985

08/05/10, 07:52 PM

The title clearly exists. The title is put out there in books, by espn, and other sports news, broadcasting, "experts", etc... not to mention look at the reaction you get just by saying he's not the greatest. people are brainwashed about it. no one can even offer me any stats or anything to prove he's the greatest. they just tell me i'm wrong and to get the **** out

Like I said... fools. Just appreciate the players you admire and move on. It's really quite simple.

inevitable

08/05/10, 08:57 PM

...

...?

StephenYoung

08/06/10, 10:51 PM

good choice. he's in my top 5 with magic, jordan, chamberlain, and robertson.

My order is Chamberlain, Robertson, Bird, Johnson, Jordan.

So do you hang out with the kid who says that Gretzky was a one dimensional wimpy forward, Babe Ruth is outdated, and Jim Brown wasn't even that good?

Oh.

Drew Beringer

08/06/10, 11:10 PM

Broken Parachute

08/06/10, 11:18 PM

This thread makes my head fucking hurt. How do people not understand that Wilt practically played against dwarfs?

GODMACHINE

08/07/10, 03:23 AM

This thread makes my head fucking hurt. How do people not understand that Wilt practically played against dwarfs?

/ thread.

Breathoffire

08/07/10, 03:35 AM

i definitely agree with basketball in the 90s being more entertaining than it is now overall. but right now, i can't complain much as a lakers fan

hahaha. You so went to same Highschool as I did.

In other news - Michael Jordan owns all.

inevitable

08/07/10, 07:06 AM

lol @ Chamberlain being the greatest ever. Definitely need to read the chapter about him in Simmons' basketball book. The fact that this dude doesn't have Bill Russell in his top 5 proves he has no clue.

You just have to look at my criteria and you can see why I don't have Bill Russell in my top 5. Bill Russell is definitely one of the greats though. Definitely the greatest winner. It's pretty insulting that you say I have no clue but you can't even mention the others that get so hostile that I call out the "greatest player of all time" offering to debunk the myth and none of those people can even offer me a reason why jordan is the greatest. In fact their reason is just "you're stupid. he's the greatest."

inevitable

08/07/10, 07:08 AM

This thread makes my head fucking hurt. How do people not understand that Wilt practically played against dwarfs?

Why isn't yao ming dominating then?

inevitable

08/07/10, 07:08 AM

hahaha. You so went to same Highschool as I did.

In other news - Michael Jordan owns all.

In what? boxers or briefs commercials?

inevitable

08/07/10, 07:10 AM

So do you hang out with the kid who says that Gretzky was a one dimensional wimpy forward, Babe Ruth is outdated, and Jim Brown wasn't even that good?

Oh.

I see no relevance in your question as to what I have posted. Instead of asking me questions that are pointless please just prove jordan is the best.

StephenYoung

08/07/10, 07:28 AM

Why isn't yao ming dominating then?

Because Wilt is better than Yao Ming?

inevitable

08/07/10, 07:30 AM

Because Wilt is better than Yao Ming?

But this guy said Wilt dominated because everyone was shorter than him. Yao Ming is playing in a league where he makes most players look like dwarfs. So clearly size was his only advantage.

Broken Parachute

08/07/10, 07:35 AM

But this guy said Wilt dominated because everyone was shorter than him. Yao Ming is playing in a league where he makes most players look like dwarfs. So clearly size was his only advantage.Are you retarded? Yao Ming, first of all, is not as good as Wilt. Secondly, the entire league was fucking dwarfs. As of right now, I can count like 30 guys in the NBA who can match up and defend Yao. Shit I can name guys who are four inches shorter and still defend Yao. Wilt was by far the tallest talent in the league then and nobody compared. The players are better and more athletic now. What's so hard to understand about that?

inevitable

08/07/10, 07:39 AM

williek311

08/07/10, 07:41 AM

Sure Bill Russell was a dwarf at 6'9, and untalented for that matter. Nice display of knowledge.

Bill Russel also beat Wilt almost every time.

inevitable

08/07/10, 07:45 AM

Bill Russel also beat Wilt almost every time.

But wilt was playing against dwarfs that were far less talented.

Breathoffire

08/07/10, 07:49 AM

In what? boxers or briefs commercials?

Your overuse of the quote button makes you the creepiest kid in town. Noice.

Broken Parachute

08/07/10, 07:51 AM

Sure Bill Russell was a dwarf at 6'9, and untalented for that matter. Nice display of knowledge.And Bill Russell beat Wilt majority of the time, and he was a much much better player. I fail to see your point.

Killadelphia

08/07/10, 07:55 AM

lol @ Chamberlain being the greatest ever. Definitely need to read the chapter about him in Simmons' basketball book. The fact that this dude doesn't have Bill Russell in his top 5 proves he has no clue.

What bearing does Bill Simmons have on this? At most, Simmons was 4 years old the last time Chamberlain picked up a ball?

I don't consider Chamberlain the best by any means, but faulting him for using his height advantage is an hysterical argument. I would even put him behind Russell, but good players have advantages and use those advantages. I'm sure the difference in height from the tallest player in the league and his average defender is about the same if not close enough to what Wilt had. If not, that player just has to go against 7'1" morons who their only idea of defense is to jump and block a shot rather than good positioning.

For all of that, Wilt was one of the most ridiculous athletes out there at the time.

Michael Jordan was on average 4" taller than his average defender too...

Either way, you cannot compare the two.

inevitable

08/07/10, 07:57 AM

Centers heights in the 1962-63 NBA season.

LA Lakers
6-10 Leroy Ellis and Gene Wiley

Boston Celtics
6-9 Bill Russell and Clyde Lovelette

Syracuse Nationals
6-9 Red Kerr
6-8 Len Chappell (dwarf)

Cincinnati Royals
6-9 Hub Reed
6-8 Bud Olsen
6-8 Wayne Embry
6-8 Bob Boozer (Forward)

New York Knickerbockers
6-9 Cleveland Buckner
6-9 Duke Hogue
6-10 Bevo Nordmann
6-8 Gene Conley
6-9 Kenny Sears

Should I continue?

inevitable

08/07/10, 08:00 AM

And Bill Russell beat Wilt majority of the time, and he was a much much better player. I fail to see your point.

No your point was that he was the tallest player in the league and that's why he dominated. My point was that there are plenty of people that could have matched up to him just like people can match up to yao ming. My point is that jordan doesn't deserve the title greatest ever. no one has even tried to rebut that with any statistical proof, so i'd assume we're all on the same page. I gave a clear list of who i thought was the greatest players of all time, and my criteria of why i thought this. What i've stated has been clear.

Broken Parachute

08/07/10, 08:02 AM

Yes, please do continue naming players that were at best a quarter as talented as Wilt just so you can prove there weren't dwarfs. The point is Wilt trumped them all athletically in that time period.

inevitable

08/07/10, 08:04 AM

What bearing does Bill Simmons have on this? At most, Simmons was 4 years old the last time Chamberlain picked up a ball?

I don't consider Chamberlain the best by any means, but faulting him for using his height advantage is an hysterical argument. I would even put him behind Russell, but good players have advantages and use those advantages. I'm sure the difference in height from the tallest player in the league and his average defender is about the same if not close enough to what Wilt had. If not, that player just has to go against 7'1" morons who their only idea of defense is to jump and block a shot rather than good positioning.

For all of that, Wilt was one of the most ridiculous athletes out there at the time.

Michael Jordan was on average 4" taller than his average defender too...

Either way, you cannot compare the two.

You have to set up criteria to compare the two. I have stated my criteria. The fact that Drew nor anyone else have bothered to read that shows in what they post. I think no matter what anyone says about Jordan someone has always accomplished something better than him. That's why it bothers me that he's considered the greatest of all time. Wilt did more for his team than jordan and was a more versatile player than jordan as he could score at will and proved the offense could be run through him with him distributing the ball. what center averages 8.6 apg for an entire season?

inevitable

08/07/10, 08:05 AM

Yes, please do continue naming players that were at best a quarter as talented as Wilt just so you can prove there weren't dwarfs. The point is Wilt trumped them all athletically in that time period.

All you did was tell me the entire league was dwarfs compared to him. What I did was completely trump your theory. Any questions?

StephenYoung

08/07/10, 08:09 AM

But this guy said Wilt dominated because everyone was shorter than him. Yao Ming is playing in a league where he makes most players look like dwarfs. So clearly size was his only advantage.

Well no one is saying Chamberlain is bad, he's a great player and used his size to his advantage, but you can't expect every tall guy to dominate.

inevitable

08/07/10, 08:09 AM

Wilt was by far the tallest talent in the league then and nobody compared.

see what you said?

Broken Parachute

08/07/10, 08:10 AM

No your point was that he was the tallest player in the league and that's why he dominated. My point was that there are plenty of people that could have matched up to him just like people can match up to yao ming. My point is that jordan doesn't deserve the title greatest ever. no one has even tried to rebut that with any statistical proof, so i'd assume we're all on the same page. I gave a clear list of who i thought was the greatest players of all time, and my criteria of why i thought this. What i've stated has been clear.Statistical proof in basketball is a moot point.

Also, stop fucking talking about Yao Ming. He is and never will be even close to Wilt. And I'm NOT using his height as an advantage...I'm simply noting his athleticism and his size (to an extent) were beyond his years. He had the athleticism of some modern day players, something not many, if any, had in the 60's.

But then again, he did have to play against fucking Bevo Nordmann and we all know how great Bevo Nordmann was.

inevitable

08/07/10, 08:10 AM

Well no one is saying Chamberlain is bad, he's a great player and used his size to his advantage, but you can't expect every tall guy to dominate.

And I never said that, I was using Yao Ming as a point that just because Wilt was tall didn't mean that's what made him great.

Broken Parachute

08/07/10, 08:12 AM

see what you said?Jesus, you're annoying. Even if he wasn't, he was still more fucking athletic and talented than any guy you've named besides Russell. I don't understand how you can say he's overly more impressive than Jordan when Jordan played in a better and more talented league.

inevitable

08/07/10, 08:12 AM

Jesus, you're annoying. Even if he wasn't, he was still more fucking athletic and talented than any guy you've named besides Russell. I don't understand how you can say he's overly more impressive than Jordan when Jordan played in a better and more talented league.

That's just plain ignorant

Broken Parachute

08/07/10, 08:14 AM

That's just plain ignorantHow is it ignorant? You honestly believe the NBA wasn't fucking great when Jordan played?

Killadelphia

08/07/10, 08:16 AM

You have to set up criteria to compare the two. I have stated my criteria. The fact that Drew nor anyone else have bothered to read that shows in what they post. I think no matter what anyone says about Jordan someone has always accomplished something better than him. That's why it bothers me that he's considered the greatest of all time. Wilt did more for his team than jordan and was a more versatile player than jordan as he could score at will and proved the offense could be run through him with him distributing the ball. what center averages 8.6 apg for an entire season?

I don't care to. In every sport, there are great players in different eras. The fact all of us here did not see Russell or Chamberlain in their prime means our entire arguments are based off other people's opinions or numbers.

Chamberlain is not the best player and he had a number of hall of famers on his roster when he finally won a title, .iel Billy Cunningham.

Offense ran through everyone back then. The average scores were like 122-115.

inevitable

08/07/10, 08:16 AM

How is it ignorant? You honestly believe the NBA wasn't fucking great when Jordan played?

Nope just find it humorous that you think the league was that bad when chamberlain played

inevitable

08/07/10, 08:17 AM

Nope just find it humorous that you think the league was that bad when chamberlain played

also waiting for you to prove jordan is better since that's a fact to you

StephenYoung

08/07/10, 08:17 AM

And I never said that, I was using Yao Ming as a point that just because Wilt was tall didn't mean that's what made him great.

You can't compare both. Chamberlain used his size as an advantage, whatever, but Yao Ming doesn't have the skill to use his size to dominate.

Besides, what Jordan did for the sport, in completely changing how people look at basketball, adding excitement, adding awareness, etc. just makes him the greatest. Hypothetically, the NBA wouldn't be much different had Wilt never existed. If MJ never came along, the NBA wouldn't be what it is today.

Killadelphia

08/07/10, 08:19 AM

They both changed the game.

Wilt instituted the "height movement" if you want to call it that.

Jordan instituted the "athletic tall guard" movement.

Killadelphia

08/07/10, 08:20 AM

Regardless of all of this, the fact Magic Johnson isn't really considered ever is crazy too.

Killadelphia

08/07/10, 08:21 AM

Anyway, here.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/per_career.html

Broken Parachute

08/07/10, 08:21 AM

Nope just find it humorous that you think the league was that bad when chamberlain playedFind me where I said it was BAD. I said the league in the 80's and 90's was better. How is that the same thing? And your entire thread/argument is fucking stupid to begin with because comparing players you've never even seen play is so dumb, especially in basketball where statistics are not very telling of a players' talent or worth.

It's like comparing George Mikan and LeBron James. How the hell can you do something like that when our grandparents probably barely remember Mikan and that era is completely and utterly different in style of play and amount of athleticism.

Broken Parachute

08/07/10, 08:22 AM

They both changed the game.

Wilt instituted the "height movement" if you want to call it that.

Jordan instituted the "athletic tall guard" movement.Thank you. Nobody is saying Wilt wasn't a fucking great player or a dominant and athletic player.

Healthy Scratch

08/07/10, 08:31 AM

this thread is fucking retarded. you can't compare two different players, two different positions, playing in two seperate eras.
did wilt dominate? obviously yes. but put wilt in today's game, what would his stats look like? or put jordan back in the 60's, see how his stats change. statistically, you can't compare the two, its impossible.
but of all the dominating players in history, nobody has come close to jordan's celebrity. he did more for the game of basketball off the court (and sports in general) than any of the other 'dominating players', including wilt. thats why he's labeled as the best ever. its the total package.

Killadelphia

08/07/10, 08:38 AM

That's not really Wilt's fault. Wilt played in an era were the only people seeing him for the most part where the cities he played. No TV contracts. That's a real faulty argument.

And Wilt did make 20,000 women happy. I'd call that a huge impact.

Drew Beringer

08/07/10, 10:14 AM

What bearing does Bill Simmons have on this? At most, Simmons was 4 years old the last time Chamberlain picked up a ball?

I don't consider Chamberlain the best by any means, but faulting him for using his height advantage is an hysterical argument. I would even put him behind Russell, but good players have advantages and use those advantages. I'm sure the difference in height from the tallest player in the league and his average defender is about the same if not close enough to what Wilt had. If not, that player just has to go against 7'1" morons who their only idea of defense is to jump and block a shot rather than good positioning.

For all of that, Wilt was one of the most ridiculous athletes out there at the time.

Michael Jordan was on average 4" taller than his average defender too...

Either way, you cannot compare the two.
Simmons wrote a great chapter that is well researched and presented about the Russell vs Chamberlain debate. It's something everyone in this thread should read.

anyways, Chamberlain was a great a player, but not the best. he is a top 10 player for sure, but not in the top five. How can he be the best player of all time when he wasn't even the best player of his own era?

Killadelphia

08/07/10, 11:17 AM

Simmons wrote a great chapter that is well researched and presented about the Russell vs Chamberlain debate. It's something everyone in this thread should read.

anyways, Chamberlain was a great a player, but not the best. he is a top 10 player for sure, but not in the top five. How can he be the best player of all time when he wasn't even the best player of his own era?

That's still the great debate also.

In terms of Win Shares, Kareem, Wilt, Malone, Jordan are top 4.

WS per 48, Jordan, D. Robinson, Chamberlain, Kareem.

Russell was never a dominant player offensively. He was a hustle guy. Really heard for me to say a guy that was 6'9" and shot 44% was the best player of that era. I think both guys go pretty hand in hand.

inevitable

08/07/10, 11:26 PM

You can't compare both. Chamberlain used his size as an advantage, whatever, but Yao Ming doesn't have the skill to use his size to dominate.

Besides, what Jordan did for the sport, in completely changing how people look at basketball, adding excitement, adding awareness, etc. just makes him the greatest. Hypothetically, the NBA wouldn't be much different had Wilt never existed. If MJ never came along, the NBA wouldn't be what it is today.

Wrong. Please do research. Many rules were changed to try to limit the things wilt did. Wilt completely changed the game. A lot of it helped Jordan.

inevitable

08/07/10, 11:29 PM

inevitable

08/07/10, 11:32 PM

That's still the great debate also.

In terms of Win Shares, Kareem, Wilt, Malone, Jordan are top 4.

WS per 48, Jordan, D. Robinson, Chamberlain, Kareem.

Russell was never a dominant player offensively. He was a hustle guy. Really heard for me to say a guy that was 6'9" and shot 44% was the best player of that era. I think both guys go pretty hand in hand.

Good point. I'd say that Russell had a much better team than Chamberlain... considering he won nba championships all but 1 season. He had a spectacular team around him.

inevitable

08/07/10, 11:34 PM

Find me where I said it was BAD. I said the league in the 80's and 90's was better. How is that the same thing? And your entire thread/argument is fucking stupid to begin with because comparing players you've never even seen play is so dumb, especially in basketball where statistics are not very telling of a players' talent or worth.

It's like comparing George Mikan and LeBron James. How the hell can you do something like that when our grandparents probably barely remember Mikan and that era is completely and utterly different in style of play and amount of athleticism.

Didn't realize you had to personally witness players playing to debate their greatness. Sorry. Your points are so brilliant!

What you've said so far...

1. Wilt was good because he was tall... which then turned into he was great because he was athletic and tall.
2. You can't use stats. they don't matter.
3. You have to personally witness players play to be able to discuss their abilities.

Please stop posting. I could care less what you say.

Broken Parachute

08/07/10, 11:56 PM

Didn't realize you had to personally witness players playing to debate their greatness. Sorry. Your points are so brilliant!

What you've said so far...

1. Wilt was good because he was tall... which then turned into he was great because he was athletic and tall.
2. You can't use stats. they don't matter.
3. You have to personally witness players play to be able to discuss their abilities.

Please stop posting. I could care less what you say.LOL I love how you've twisted around everything I said. Also it's "I couldn't care less" not "I could care less" you fucking retard. Do us all a favor and play in traffic.

Broken Parachute

08/08/10, 12:03 AM

And if we were to examine your argument so far it is...

-Everything Jordan has done, someone has done better
-Bevo Nordmann and Red Kerr were worthy opponents and prove Wilt didn't have an easier time than players today
-Yao Ming is taller than Wilt and hasn't dominated

Burt of course, you can't argue like a normal person...you have to go and act like a total douche. Seriously get fucked. The thread was made to be controversial and you're doing a good job at it.

Killadelphia

08/08/10, 12:51 AM

Good point. I'd say that Russell had a much better team than Chamberlain... considering he won nba championships all but 1 season. He had a spectacular team around him.

To be fair, Russell's team changed over about 3 times.

That guy Red had something to do with it...

Jake Denning

08/08/10, 01:15 AM

Not only is he the greatest of all time, he starred in the greatest movie of all time SPACE JAM!!

Came in here to say this.

startBBtoday

08/08/10, 04:41 AM

That's just plain ignorant

if anything, it's ignorant to say it is as good of an era considering how few black and foreign players were in the league compared to Jordan's era.

open mind

08/08/10, 05:05 AM

greatest of all time is Muhammad Ali......and if you've seen my past posts you know i definitely mean it......the man coined the phrase and the acronym, and i almost always refuse to capitalize.....but Ali, Jesus, and the overly homophobic guy that causes you to question his sexuality don't give a Fuck.

on a serious note i'm gonna say that k to tha jabbar is the tops...don't fuck with showtime.........that said, fuck the lakers.

Healthy Scratch

08/08/10, 05:27 AM

Are you retarded? Yao Ming, first of all, is not as good as Wilt. Secondly, the entire league was fucking dwarfs. As of right now, I can count like 30 guys in the NBA who can match up and defend Yao. Shit I can name guys who are four inches shorter and still defend Yao. Wilt was by far the tallest talent in the league then and nobody compared. The players are better and more athletic now. What's so hard to understand about that?

Centers heights in the 1962-63 NBA season.

LA Lakers
6-10 Leroy Ellis and Gene Wiley

Boston Celtics
6-9 Bill Russell and Clyde Lovelette

Syracuse Nationals
6-9 Red Kerr
6-8 Len Chappell (dwarf)

Cincinnati Royals
6-9 Hub Reed
6-8 Bud Olsen
6-8 Wayne Embry
6-8 Bob Boozer (Forward)

New York Knickerbockers
6-9 Cleveland Buckner
6-9 Duke Hogue
6-10 Bevo Nordmann
6-8 Gene Conley
6-9 Kenny Sears

Should I continue?

All you did was tell me the entire league was dwarfs compared to him. What I did was completely trump your theory. Any questions?

i have no clear definative opinion on this myself, but i did appreciate this exchange.

S/T

08/08/10, 08:14 AM

My favorite part of that list is that the only name most people would recognize on it is the guy who got the better of Wilt almost every time they played. Pretty compelling stuff.

Broken Parachute

08/08/10, 08:31 AM

My favorite part of that list is that the only name most people would recognize on it is the guy who got the better of Wilt almost every time they played. Pretty compelling stuff.Don't you dare disrespect Cleveland Buckner. He's a valid piece of this argument, even if his NBA career lasted only 68 games.

S/T

08/08/10, 08:35 AM

Don't you dare disrespect Cleveland Buckner. He's a valid piece of this argument, even if his NBA career lasted only 68 games.

I was afraid I'd get jumped on for disrespecting Gene Conley. After all, he was the one who blazed the trail making it possible for Michael Jordan to play minor league baseball.

Drew Beringer

08/08/10, 10:26 AM

The argument that Russell played with better players than Wilt is untrue, Wilt played with a bunch of future hall of gamers as well.

HometownHero

08/08/10, 10:31 AM

The argument that Russell played with better players than Wilt is untrue, Wilt played with a bunch of future hall of gamers as well.

Hall of Gamers lol. I know what you meant but still funny.

And true.

Drew Beringer

08/08/10, 11:03 AM

Hall of Gamers lol. I know what you meant but still funny.

And true.
haha that's what I get for posting on my iPhone, stupid auto-correct

s.t.e.v.e.n.

08/08/10, 11:21 AM

LOL I love how you've twisted around everything I said. Also it's "I couldn't care less" not "I could care less" you fucking retard. Do us all a favor and play in traffic.

Has always bothered me. So does "irregardless" which someone used in this thread. Its not a word. Talk right. Thats all I have to add. Jordan laughs at Chamberlain.

desiguerilla

08/08/10, 11:30 AM

s.t.e.v.e.n.

08/08/10, 11:42 AM

the greatest player in the history of basketball is actually a currently active player

his name:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/62/Scal_Media_Day.png

is Brian Scalabrine, #44. Boston Celtics. Forward/Center.

/thread
/any nba discussion on this site

batmannj

08/08/10, 11:54 AM

joeag1985

08/08/10, 01:20 PM

Best player ever? There can only be one...

8K2v2XFYg_Q

inevitable

08/10/10, 05:12 AM

i have no clear definative opinion on this myself, but i did appreciate this exchange.

It doesn't matter. I showed him what he said and I was still wrong. Just goes to show you can't teach someone something when they are willfully ignorant.

Killadelphia

08/10/10, 06:21 AM

I think that sentiment goes both ways

inevitable

08/10/10, 08:28 AM

I think that sentiment goes both ways

sure. all i did was name my top 5 and state that i didn't feel jordan was the best. but you have failed to show me how i'm ignorant here. and if you say there is no way to compare the two then that means espn and all these other organizations should never have labeled jordan the greatest either.

Killadelphia

08/10/10, 08:35 AM

Statisically, Michael Jordan was the most important player to any roster...ever.

inevitable

08/10/10, 05:36 PM

Statisically, Michael Jordan was the most important player to any roster...ever.

you must only look at his statistics.

IAmNietzche

08/10/10, 07:24 PM

Wilt wasn't even the best at his position... during his career!

inevitable

08/10/10, 08:16 PM

Wilt wasn't even the best at his position... during his career!

lol

Scott Weber

08/10/10, 08:25 PM

i used to be uneducated about wilt too.

IAmNietzche

08/10/10, 08:27 PM

lol
Russell was a better player bar-none. You are just uneducated about Wilt and the era.

IAmNietzche

08/10/10, 08:35 PM

Same goes for the Russell-Chamberlain debate. Wilt was more talented; Russ gave his teams a better chance to win. Wilt had a greater statistical impact; Russ had a greater impact on his teammates. Wilt peaked in the regular season; Russ peaked in the playoffs. Wilt shrank from the clutch; Russ thrived in the clutch. Wilt lost nearly every big game; Russ won nearly every big game. Wilt averaged 50 points for one season; Russell was voted Most Valuable Player by his peers that same season. Wilt was traded twice in his career; Russ never would have been traded in a million years. Wilt was obsessed with statistics; Russ was obsessed with winning. Wilt cared about what fans, writers, and critics thought; Russ only cared what his teammates thought. Wilt never won a title in high school or college and won only two as a pro; Russ won two in college and eleven in the NBA. Wilt ignored The Secret; Russell embraced it. I shouldn’t have to waste an entire chapter on them for two indisputable reasons: Russell’s teams always beat Chamberlain’s teams, and Wilt was traded twice. Right there, it’s over. And really, it was over when Russell retired in 1969 as the greatest basketball player ever.

...

inevitable

08/10/10, 08:35 PM

Russell was a better player bar-none. You are just uneducated about Wilt and the era.

Sure. That must be it.

xbrokendownx

08/10/10, 08:37 PM

but stats dont mean everything!!!!!!1111!!!!!1

IAmNietzche

08/10/10, 08:39 PM

Sure. That must be it.
I'm glad you agree. Now that you know you're wrong you can close this thread.

inevitable

08/10/10, 08:47 PM

"Wilt is playing better than I used to -- passing off, coming out to set up screens, picking up guys outside, and sacrificing himself for team play." (Great Moments in Pro Basketball, by Sam Goldaper, p.24) Russell said this while he was player-coach of the Celtics.

inevitable

08/10/10, 08:56 PM

I'm glad you agree. Now that you know you're wrong you can close this thread.

LOL the thread is about michael jordan not being the best. I stated my criteria and if you really want to debate the wilt vs russ thing we can.

Career Numbers

Wilt 30.1 ppg 22.9 rpg 4.4 apg
Bill 15.1 ppg 22.5 rpg 4.3 apg

Career Year

Wilt 24.1 ppg 24.2 rpg 7.8 apg
Bill 18.9 ppg 23.6 rpg 4.5 apg

Wilt's first 7 years were spent primarily as a scorer and a rebounder. Frank McGuire asked him to score 50 ppg in 1962, because he knew that was the only way they would have a shot at beating the Celtics. Russell Couldn't stop Wilt, but Russell's teammates were far better than Wilt's. During the last 7 he was asked to pass more because he was with the Sixer's and they had the talent to match up with the Celtics. Wilt said he would do anything to win a championship and that's when he put up his career year... (probably single handedly the best season a player has ever had in NBA history). So before you say Russell is better you have to take into account the team he had around him. The Celtics were fantastic!

xbrokendownx

08/10/10, 08:57 PM

didnt you just fucking say stats arent everything you schmuck?

inevitable

08/10/10, 08:58 PM

didnt you just fucking say stats arent everything you schmuck?

I never said that douchebag. Someone else said that and i mocked them for it.

inevitable

08/10/10, 09:00 PM

didnt you just fucking say stats arent everything you schmuck?

P.S. Just because you have nothing to add to the conversation besides name calling doesn't mean that makes you an expert. So if you're gonna converse please do, but at least add something beneficial to the conversation that would at least back up who you think is the best. If you're not comfortable doing that, chances are the person you think is the best isn't.

IAmNietzche

08/10/10, 09:01 PM

LOL the thread is about michael jordan not being the best. I stated my criteria and if you really want to debate the wilt vs russ thing we can.

Career Numbers

Wilt 30.1 ppg 22.9 rpg 4.4 apg
Bill 15.1 ppg 22.5 rpg 4.3 apg

Career Year

Wilt 24.1 ppg 24.2 rpg 7.8 apg
Bill 18.9 ppg 23.6 rpg 4.5 apg

Wilt's first 7 years were spent primarily as a scorer and a rebounder. Frank McGuire asked him to score 50 ppg in 1962, because he knew that was the only way they would have a shot at beating the Celtics. Russell Couldn't stop Wilt, but Russell's teammates were far better than Wilt's. During the last 7 he was asked to pass more because he was with the Sixer's and they had the talent to match up with the Celtics. Wilt said he would do anything to win a championship and that's when he put up his career year... (probably single handedly the best season a player has ever had in NBA history). So before you say Russell is better you have to take into account the team he had around him. The Celtics were fantastic!

1957. Russell joins Boston mid-January after banging out military duty, 4 then the Celts squeak by Philly (featuring Hall of Famers Paul Arizin and Neil Johnston) in the Playoffs and meet St. Louis in the Finals. Boston has two stud guards in their prime (Bill Sharman and ’57 MVP Bob Cousy) and three terrific rookies (Russell, Heinsohn, and Frank Ramsey), while St. Louis has Bob Pettit (two-time MVP), Macauley (Hall of Famer) and Slater Martin 5 (Hall of Famer, second-team All-NBA that season), as well as Charlie Share, Jack Coleman and Jack McMahon (three highly regarded role players). Since Boston won Game 7 in double OT, 6 it’s safe to say these two teams were equally talented.

1958. The Hawks exact revenge thanks to up-and-comer Cliff Hagan (second-team All-NBA, Hall of Famer) and Russell’s badly sprained ankle. 7 Again, even talent on both sides.

1959. Boston starts to pull away: three All-NBA first-teamers (Russell, Cousy, and Sharman), two promising guards (Sam and KC Jones), the best sixth man (Ramsey) and one of the best scoring forwards (Heinsohn). Even then, they needed seven games to get past Syracuse (led by NBA Top 50 members Dolph Schayes and Hal Greer) before easily sweeping Elgin and the Lakers. Through three years and two titles, Russell and the Celtics had the most talent exactly once.

1960. Boston handles Philly in six and needs seven to defeat a Hawks team with four Hall of Famers (including newcomer Lenny Wilkens). Meanwhile, Wilt wins the MVP as a rookie playing with Arizin (ten straight All-Stars), Tom Gola (five straight All-Stars, Hall of Famer), Guy Rodgers 8 (four All-Stars) and Woody Sauldsberry (’58 Rookie of the Year, ’59 All-Star). Boston had more firepower, but not by much. Wilt wasn’t exactly stuck playing with Eric Snow, Drew Gooden, Sasha Pavlovic, Larry Hughes, and Turdo Sandowich like 2007 LeBron.

1961. We’re kicking off a two-year stretch for the most loaded NBA team ever: Boston easily handles Syracuse and St. Louis for title number four. Meanwhile, Philly gets swept by a weaker Nats team in the first round, leading to Wilt throwing his first coach under the bus after the season (a recurring theme).

1962. Still loaded to the gills, Boston needs seven games to defeat Wilt’s Sixers and an OT Game 7 in the Finals to defeat Baylor, Jerry West and the Lakers. I’m telling you, everyone had a good team back then.

1963. The first sign of trouble: Sharman retires, Cousy and Ramsey are slipping, and rookie John Havlicek isn’t Hondo yet. Boston needs seven games to hold off Cincy (led by Hall of Famers Oscar Robertson, Jack Twyman, and Wayne Embry) and another six to beat the Lakers. 11 Meanwhile, Philly moves to San Fran, finishes 31–49 and misses the playoffs with Wilt, Rodgers, Tom Meschery (an All-Star), Al Attles (KC Jones’ equal as a defensive stopper) and Willie Naulls (four-time All-Star). But hey, if they’d won more games, maybe Wilt wouldn’t have averaged 44.8 points that season.

1964. Cousy retires and no Celtic makes first-team All-NBA, but that doesn’t stop Boston from beating a stacked Cincy team (led by Oscar and rookie of the year Jerry Lucas) and easily handling Wilt’s Warriors in the Finals (the same group as the ’63 Sixers, only with future Hall of Famer Nate Thurmond aboard). Boston won without a point guard or power forward this season—other than Russell, they didn’t have a top-twenty rebounder or anyone average more than 5 assists—but we’ll give them a check mark in the “most talent” department for the last time in the Russell era.

1965. Ramsey retires and Heinsohn fades noticeably in his final season. Undaunted, the Celts finish with their best record of the Russell era (62–18) and smoke L.A. in the Finals thanks to their Big Three (Russell, Havlicek, and Sam Jones) and a bunch of role players (including a monster year from Satch Sanders). As for the Warriors, they self-destruct and lose seventeen in a row, eventually trading Wilt for 30 cents on the dollar to Philly midway through the season. 14 For the first time, Wilt’s team matches Boston’s talent with shooting guard Hal Greer (ten straight All-Star games), Lucious Jackson (an All-Star power forward who finished eighth in rebounding that season), swingman Chet Walker (seven-time All-Star), point guard Larry Costello (six-time All-Star) and two quality role players (Dave Gambee and Johnny Kerr). That’s why the Sixers-Celtics series comes down to the final play of Game 7 at the Garden, with Havlicek stealing the inbounds pass as Johnny Most screams, “Havlicek stole the ball! Havlicek stole the ball!”

1966. Heinsohn coughs up a fifteen-pound oyster and retires, KC Jones is fading fast, and the Celts are forced to rely on aging veterans (Naulls and Mel Counts) 15 and castoffs from other teams (Don Nelson and Larry Siegfried) to help the Big Three in Auerbach’s final season. For the first time with Russell, they don’t finish with the league’s best record as Philly edges them (55 wins to 54). As usual, it doesn’t matter—Boston beats Philly in five and wins Game 7 of the Finals against L.A. by two points. Philly had more talent this season. On paper, anyway.

1967. KC retires, another veteran castoff comes aboard (future Hall of Famer Bailey Howell), and Russell struggles mightily to handle the first year of his player-coach duties. 16 From day one, it’s Philly’s year: given an extra boost by rookie Billy Cunningham and Wilt’s sudden revelation that
he doesn’t need to score to help his team win (more on this in a second), the Sixers roll to their famous 68-win season, topple the Celtics in five, and beat the Warriors in six for Wilt’s first title. This was the perfect storm for Wilt—his strongest possible team against Boston’s weakest possible team.

1968. Wilt leads the league in assists. And Philly finishes eight games better than the Celtics. The aging Celts rally from a 3–1 deficit in the Eastern Finals to advance, then beat a really good Lakers team for Russell’s tenth title. After the season, Philly trades Wilt to L.A. for 40 cents on the dollar.

1969. With Russell and Jones running on fumes, everyone writes the Celtics off after they finish fourth in the East. In the first round, they beat a favored Sixers team in five. In the second round, they beat a favored Knicks team in six—the same group that wins the 1970 title and gets blown for the next twenty-five years by the New York media as the Greatest Team Ever. In the Finals, as 9-to-5 underdogs to Baylor, West, Wilt, and the Lakers, they rally back from a 3–1 deficit and win Game 7 in Los Angeles.

So here’s the final tally: Over a ten-year span, Russell’s teams clearly had more talent than Wilt’s teams for four seasons (’61, ’62, ’63, and ’64) and a slight edge in Wilt’s first season (1960). In ’65, Philly and Boston were a wash. From ’66 through ’69, Wilt played for stronger teams, making the final record 5–4–1, Russell. For six of those ten seasons, you could have described the talent disparity as “equal” or “relatively equal.” After Russell retired that summer, the ’70 Lakers lost the famous Willis Reed game in Game 7 of the Finals; the ’71 Lakers suffered a season-ending injury to Jerry West and lost to the eventual champions, the Bucks; the ’72 Lakers won 69 games and cruised to Wilt’s second title; and the ’73 Lakers lost a Finals rematch to the Knicks. Wilt retired after a ten-year stretch in which he played in the 1964 Finals and lost, then played for teams talented enough to win a championship every single year for the next nine. So much for Russell being blessed with a better supporting cast than Chamberlain. If there’s a legitimate gripe on Wilt’s behalf, it’s that Russell was lucky enough to have Auerbach coaching him for ten years. Then again, Red is on record saying he never could have coached a prima donna like Wilt. Also, if you’re scoring at home: Russell played with four members of the NBA’s Top 50 at 50 (Havlicek, Cousy, Sharman and Sam Jones); Wilt played with six members (Baylor, West, Greer, Cunningham, Arizin, and Thurmond). And Russell’s teammates from 1957 to 1969 were selected to twenty-six All-Star games, while Wilt’s teammates from 1960 to 1973 were selected to twenty-four. Let’s never mention the supporting-cast card again with Russell and Chamberlain. Thank you.

xbrokendownx

08/10/10, 09:01 PM

so you dont find it weird that everyone is disagreeing with you?

Broken Parachute

08/10/10, 09:06 PM

It doesn't matter. I showed him what he said and I was still wrong. Just goes to show you can't teach someone something when they are willfully ignorant.To be honest, you aren't as smart as you pretend to be either. In fact, you do nothing but attack everyone and still cannot prove anything. I wish you'd just give up and agree to disagree...because you are literally the only one who feels the way you do.

inevitable

08/10/10, 09:53 PM

so you dont find it weird that everyone is disagreeing with you?

I am not offended that someone may have a different opinion than me. I actually asked for those opinions. I'm not close-minded and insult-oriented like some posters. i enjoy debating and talking with people that can actually hold a conversation. In fact, I'm very impressed with I Am's knowledge on the subject and he brings up some very noteworthy arguments.

inevitable

08/10/10, 09:54 PM

To be honest, you aren't as smart as you pretend to be either. In fact, you do nothing but attack everyone and still cannot prove anything. I wish you'd just give up and agree to disagree...because you are literally the only one who feels the way you do.

The problem you have is that you make assumptions, i.e. wilt dwarfed everyone, i cannot prove anything, i only attack people, etc... as you can see from my previous post i complemented another member of the forum, which is much less than i can say for you as you just attacked me from the start.

Broken Parachute

08/10/10, 09:59 PM

The problem you have is that you make assumptions, i.e. wilt dwarfed everyone, i cannot prove anything, i only attack people, etc... as you can see from my previous post i complemented another member of the forum, which is much less than i can say for you as you just attacked me from the start.Oh wow, thank you for thanking another member of the forum. We are honored to be graced with your presence. It is so kind of you to compliment other members.

Scott Weber

08/11/10, 12:14 AM

I am not offended that someone may have a different opinion than me. I actually asked for those opinions. I'm not close-minded and insult-oriented like some posters. i enjoy debating and talking with people that can actually hold a conversation. In fact, I'm very impressed with I Am's knowledge on the subject and he brings up some very noteworthy arguments.
Ones that you've made zero attempts to counter because you can't.

____

08/11/10, 03:12 AM

WTF? How can this question even be asked? How is he the greatest of all time? Have you ever watched Jordan play a game of basketball? This argument is ridiculous

inevitable

08/11/10, 05:34 AM

Ones that you've made zero attempts to counter because you can't.

Where?

inevitable

08/11/10, 05:35 AM

WTF? How can this question even be asked? How is he the greatest of all time? Have you ever watched Jordan play a game of basketball? This argument is ridiculous

Once again, please provide your criteria for why Jordan is the best.

inevitable

08/11/10, 05:46 AM

1957. Russell joins Boston mid-January after banging out military duty, 4 then the Celts squeak by Philly (featuring Hall of Famers Paul Arizin and Neil Johnston) in the Playoffs and meet St. Louis in the Finals. Boston has two stud guards in their prime (Bill Sharman and ’57 MVP Bob Cousy) and three terrific rookies (Russell, Heinsohn, and Frank Ramsey), while St. Louis has Bob Pettit (two-time MVP), Macauley (Hall of Famer) and Slater Martin 5 (Hall of Famer, second-team All-NBA that season), as well as Charlie Share, Jack Coleman and Jack McMahon (three highly regarded role players). Since Boston won Game 7 in double OT, 6 it’s safe to say these two teams were equally talented.

1958. The Hawks exact revenge thanks to up-and-comer Cliff Hagan (second-team All-NBA, Hall of Famer) and Russell’s badly sprained ankle. 7 Again, even talent on both sides.

1959. Boston starts to pull away: three All-NBA first-teamers (Russell, Cousy, and Sharman), two promising guards (Sam and KC Jones), the best sixth man (Ramsey) and one of the best scoring forwards (Heinsohn). Even then, they needed seven games to get past Syracuse (led by NBA Top 50 members Dolph Schayes and Hal Greer) before easily sweeping Elgin and the Lakers. Through three years and two titles, Russell and the Celtics had the most talent exactly once.

1960. Boston handles Philly in six and needs seven to defeat a Hawks team with four Hall of Famers (including newcomer Lenny Wilkens). Meanwhile, Wilt wins the MVP as a rookie playing with Arizin (ten straight All-Stars), Tom Gola (five straight All-Stars, Hall of Famer), Guy Rodgers 8 (four All-Stars) and Woody Sauldsberry (’58 Rookie of the Year, ’59 All-Star). Boston had more firepower, but not by much. Wilt wasn’t exactly stuck playing with Eric Snow, Drew Gooden, Sasha Pavlovic, Larry Hughes, and Turdo Sandowich like 2007 LeBron.

1961. We’re kicking off a two-year stretch for the most loaded NBA team ever: Boston easily handles Syracuse and St. Louis for title number four. Meanwhile, Philly gets swept by a weaker Nats team in the first round, leading to Wilt throwing his first coach under the bus after the season (a recurring theme).

1962. Still loaded to the gills, Boston needs seven games to defeat Wilt’s Sixers and an OT Game 7 in the Finals to defeat Baylor, Jerry West and the Lakers. I’m telling you, everyone had a good team back then.

1963. The first sign of trouble: Sharman retires, Cousy and Ramsey are slipping, and rookie John Havlicek isn’t Hondo yet. Boston needs seven games to hold off Cincy (led by Hall of Famers Oscar Robertson, Jack Twyman, and Wayne Embry) and another six to beat the Lakers. 11 Meanwhile, Philly moves to San Fran, finishes 31–49 and misses the playoffs with Wilt, Rodgers, Tom Meschery (an All-Star), Al Attles (KC Jones’ equal as a defensive stopper) and Willie Naulls (four-time All-Star). But hey, if they’d won more games, maybe Wilt wouldn’t have averaged 44.8 points that season.

1964. Cousy retires and no Celtic makes first-team All-NBA, but that doesn’t stop Boston from beating a stacked Cincy team (led by Oscar and rookie of the year Jerry Lucas) and easily handling Wilt’s Warriors in the Finals (the same group as the ’63 Sixers, only with future Hall of Famer Nate Thurmond aboard). Boston won without a point guard or power forward this season—other than Russell, they didn’t have a top-twenty rebounder or anyone average more than 5 assists—but we’ll give them a check mark in the “most talent” department for the last time in the Russell era.

1965. Ramsey retires and Heinsohn fades noticeably in his final season. Undaunted, the Celts finish with their best record of the Russell era (62–18) and smoke L.A. in the Finals thanks to their Big Three (Russell, Havlicek, and Sam Jones) and a bunch of role players (including a monster year from Satch Sanders). As for the Warriors, they self-destruct and lose seventeen in a row, eventually trading Wilt for 30 cents on the dollar to Philly midway through the season. 14 For the first time, Wilt’s team matches Boston’s talent with shooting guard Hal Greer (ten straight All-Star games), Lucious Jackson (an All-Star power forward who finished eighth in rebounding that season), swingman Chet Walker (seven-time All-Star), point guard Larry Costello (six-time All-Star) and two quality role players (Dave Gambee and Johnny Kerr). That’s why the Sixers-Celtics series comes down to the final play of Game 7 at the Garden, with Havlicek stealing the inbounds pass as Johnny Most screams, “Havlicek stole the ball! Havlicek stole the ball!”

1966. Heinsohn coughs up a fifteen-pound oyster and retires, KC Jones is fading fast, and the Celts are forced to rely on aging veterans (Naulls and Mel Counts) 15 and castoffs from other teams (Don Nelson and Larry Siegfried) to help the Big Three in Auerbach’s final season. For the first time with Russell, they don’t finish with the league’s best record as Philly edges them (55 wins to 54). As usual, it doesn’t matter—Boston beats Philly in five and wins Game 7 of the Finals against L.A. by two points. Philly had more talent this season. On paper, anyway.

1967. KC retires, another veteran castoff comes aboard (future Hall of Famer Bailey Howell), and Russell struggles mightily to handle the first year of his player-coach duties. 16 From day one, it’s Philly’s year: given an extra boost by rookie Billy Cunningham and Wilt’s sudden revelation that
he doesn’t need to score to help his team win (more on this in a second), the Sixers roll to their famous 68-win season, topple the Celtics in five, and beat the Warriors in six for Wilt’s first title. This was the perfect storm for Wilt—his strongest possible team against Boston’s weakest possible team.

1968. Wilt leads the league in assists. And Philly finishes eight games better than the Celtics. The aging Celts rally from a 3–1 deficit in the Eastern Finals to advance, then beat a really good Lakers team for Russell’s tenth title. After the season, Philly trades Wilt to L.A. for 40 cents on the dollar.

1969. With Russell and Jones running on fumes, everyone writes the Celtics off after they finish fourth in the East. In the first round, they beat a favored Sixers team in five. In the second round, they beat a favored Knicks team in six—the same group that wins the 1970 title and gets blown for the next twenty-five years by the New York media as the Greatest Team Ever. In the Finals, as 9-to-5 underdogs to Baylor, West, Wilt, and the Lakers, they rally back from a 3–1 deficit and win Game 7 in Los Angeles.

So here’s the final tally: Over a ten-year span, Russell’s teams clearly had more talent than Wilt’s teams for four seasons (’61, ’62, ’63, and ’64) and a slight edge in Wilt’s first season (1960). In ’65, Philly and Boston were a wash. From ’66 through ’69, Wilt played for stronger teams, making the final record 5–4–1, Russell. For six of those ten seasons, you could have described the talent disparity as “equal” or “relatively equal.” After Russell retired that summer, the ’70 Lakers lost the famous Willis Reed game in Game 7 of the Finals; the ’71 Lakers suffered a season-ending injury to Jerry West and lost to the eventual champions, the Bucks; the ’72 Lakers won 69 games and cruised to Wilt’s second title; and the ’73 Lakers lost a Finals rematch to the Knicks. Wilt retired after a ten-year stretch in which he played in the 1964 Finals and lost, then played for teams talented enough to win a championship every single year for the next nine. So much for Russell being blessed with a better supporting cast than Chamberlain. If there’s a legitimate gripe on Wilt’s behalf, it’s that Russell was lucky enough to have Auerbach coaching him for ten years. Then again, Red is on record saying he never could have coached a prima donna like Wilt. Also, if you’re scoring at home: Russell played with four members of the NBA’s Top 50 at 50 (Havlicek, Cousy, Sharman and Sam Jones); Wilt played with six members (Baylor, West, Greer, Cunningham, Arizin, and Thurmond). And Russell’s teammates from 1957 to 1969 were selected to twenty-six All-Star games, while Wilt’s teammates from 1960 to 1973 were selected to twenty-four. Let’s never mention the supporting-cast card again with Russell and Chamberlain. Thank you.

All right. I don't want to do it, but I'll admit that that timeline proves me wrong. Good points and great information. You did say that all the teams had great players at that time and I'd have to agree with you. And I will say this, I still don't think Jordan is the greatest, but you have made a very strong case for Russell being in my top 5 instead of 6 or 7. In fact I could possibly drop Jordan out of my top 5 and put Russell at #1 followed by Wilt. Thanks for setting me straight.

inevitable

08/11/10, 05:49 AM

Oh wow, thank you for thanking another member of the forum. We are honored to be graced with your presence. It is so kind of you to compliment other members.

It's better than what you do. Making your assumptions and your false claims.

Scott Weber

08/11/10, 09:25 AM

i strongly suggest you read the entire chapter of bill simmons' "book of basketball" on this debate.

startBBtoday

08/11/10, 09:45 AM

Are we still going to ignore the fact that there were far less black and foreign players in the 50s and 60s than there were in Jordan's era? Just checking.

Broken Parachute

08/11/10, 10:00 AM

inevitable

08/11/10, 07:22 PM

i strongly suggest you read the entire chapter of bill simmons' "book of basketball" on this debate.

I'd like to. Will definitely check it out.

inevitable

08/11/10, 07:31 PM

And you still argue that Wilt played against people of about the same talent. Wilt being defended by the likes of Red Kerr and Bevo Nordmann is totally different than Yao Ming being defended by Shaq and Dwight Howard.

You haven't given one piece of substantial evidence to suggest you might be even a little bit right.

What you said:

This thread makes my head fucking hurt. How do people not understand that Wilt practically played against dwarfs?

I proved you completely wrong about this and the point of the yao ming comment was to show you that being tall doesn't necessarily make you great. Understand now?

startBBtoday

08/11/10, 07:44 PM

What you said:

I proved you completely wrong about this and the point of the yao ming comment was to show you that being tall doesn't necessarily make you great. Understand now?

Centers heights in the 1962-63 NBA season.

LA Lakers
6-10 Leroy Ellis and Gene Wiley

Boston Celtics
6-9 Bill Russell and Clyde Lovelette

Syracuse Nationals
6-9 Red Kerr
6-8 Len Chappell (dwarf)

Cincinnati Royals
6-9 Hub Reed
6-8 Bud Olsen
6-8 Wayne Embry
6-8 Bob Boozer (Forward)

New York Knickerbockers
6-9 Cleveland Buckner
6-9 Duke Hogue
6-10 Bevo Nordmann
6-8 Gene Conley
6-9 Kenny Sears

Should I continue?

is this where you supposedly proved him wrong? do you realize that a. you're listing heights of the average small forward here, b. every team in the league has at least three players taller than the TALLEST player you listed, and c. the AVERAGE height of teams in 2010 ranges from 6-6 to 6-8?

inevitable

08/11/10, 09:35 PM

is this where you supposedly proved him wrong? do you realize that a. you're listing heights of the average small forward here, b. every team in the league has at least three players taller than the TALLEST player you listed, and c. the AVERAGE height of teams in 2010 ranges from 6-6 to 6-8?

Yeah i showed him the dwarfs wilt played... what that has to do with the average height of players from 2010 is beyond me.

Broken Parachute

08/12/10, 09:57 AM

Okay, so technically he didn't play against dwarfs...but you named a bunch of average to below average players as if they give Wilt any competition.

startBBtoday

08/12/10, 11:08 AM

Okay, so technically he didn't play against dwarfs...but you named a bunch of average to below average players as if they give Wilt any competition.

I think you're still allowed to argue that those ARE dwarfs compared to modern (80's, 90's, 00's) centers and even power forwards.

Broken Parachute

08/12/10, 12:56 PM

I just love how he's trying to be high and mighty about how respectful he is as a poster and how he loves to debate...but he hasn't done anything to prove his argument at all.

inevitable

08/12/10, 02:39 PM

Okay, so technically he didn't play against dwarfs...but you named a bunch of average to below average players as if they give Wilt any competition.

I most definitely named bill russell first, and actually admitted that as a whole in terms of team improvement and winning is better than wilt. statistically not so much, but they had completely different approaches to the game.

All you said was wilt was better because he played against dwarfs. I proved that wrong. How in the world could you possibly tell me I didn't refute what YOU said. You said nothing about the way those players played. You JUST SAID THEY WERE DWARFS. That's all I had to refute. wow you are unbelievable...

inevitable

08/12/10, 02:40 PM

I think you're still allowed to argue that those ARE dwarfs compared to modern (80's, 90's, 00's) centers and even power forwards.

What?

inevitable

08/12/10, 02:42 PM

I just love how he's trying to be high and mighty about how respectful he is as a poster and how he loves to debate...but he hasn't done anything to prove his argument at all.

Once again.. where have you done anything to refute what I have said. I threw statistics of the centers playing against wilt every game and completely proved you wrong about what you said. The sad part is instead of you just admitting I proved you wrong,you just continue to say the same thing over and over again, which happens to be factually inaccurate as I've proven to you that I did in fact refute what you said successfully!

Broken Parachute

08/12/10, 02:43 PM

I most definitely named bill russell first, and actually admitted that as a whole in terms of team improvement and winning is better than wilt. statistically not so much, but they had completely different approaches to the game.

All you said was wilt was better because he played against dwarfs. I proved that wrong. How in the world could you possibly tell me I didn't refute what YOU said. You said nothing about the way those players played. You JUST SAID THEY WERE DWARFS. That's all I had to refute. wow you are unbelievable...Are you that fucking thick? You've done nothing to prove YOUR original argument at all.

inevitable

08/12/10, 02:47 PM

Okay, so technically he didn't play against dwarfs...but you named a bunch of average to below average players as if they give Wilt any competition.

You're right. Jerry West, Bill Russell, and Walt Bellamy were all horrible Hall of Famers.

inevitable

08/12/10, 02:49 PM

Are you that fucking thick? You've done nothing to prove YOUR original argument at all.

That Jordan is not the best player in NBA history?

That would be easy to do if someone would just tell me what criteria you are using there is always someone better, whether it be wilt chamberlain, bill russell, kareem, oscar robertson, etc... someone has always done something better than jordan.

Broken Parachute

08/12/10, 03:03 PM

You're right. Jerry West, Bill Russell, and Walt Bellamy were all horrible Hall of Famers.1. You didn't mention West or Bellamy on that list.
2. The heights of the guys you listed were from 6-8 to 6-9 (and two guys who were 6-10). You listed a bunch of average to below average players with the stature of an average to below average small forward whom Wilt DWARFED.

DWARF
–verb (used with object) 6. to cause to appear or seem small in size, extent, character, etc., as by being much larger or better.
ie: He dwarfed all his rivals in athletic ability.

3. If the guys you mentioned were as good as you claim they were, Wilt would not be even part of the discussion today. His weakness was his shooting ability from a non dunking/layup distance. The players he played against were not as strong or athletic as Wilt was, so they could not contain him. He was ahead of his time in terms of conditioning, strength, athleticism, and domination in the paint.

It is completely unfair to compare Wilt and Jordan in terms of "who was better" when they played different styles in different eras against a different crop of players. It works the same way in baseball. Comparing Hall of Fame pitchers from the 20's and 30's to pitchers of the 90's is completely different. The hitters were not as strong, the mound was a different height, the ballparks were bigger, etc. Comparing players, in any sport, when they played in different eras anywhere between 50 and 70 years apart is always completely pointless. The game is ALWAYS evolving.

inevitable

08/12/10, 03:12 PM

1. You didn't mention West or Bellamy on that list.
2. The heights of the guys you listed were from 6-8 to 6-9 (and two guys who were 6-10). You listed a bunch of average to below average players with the stature of an average to below average small forward whom Wilt DWARFED.

DWARF
–verb (used with object) 6. to cause to appear or seem small in size, extent, character, etc., as by being much larger or better.
ie: He dwarfed all his rivals in athletic ability.

3. If the guys you mentioned were as good as you claim they were, Wilt would not be even part of the discussion today. His weakness was his shooting ability from a non dunking/layup distance. The players he played against were not as strong or athletic as Wilt was, so they could not contain him. He was ahead of his time in terms of conditioning, strength, athleticism, and domination in the paint.

It is completely unfair to compare Wilt and Jordan in terms of "who was better" when they played different styles in different eras against a different crop of players. It works the same way in baseball. Comparing Hall of Fame pitchers from the 20's and 30's to pitchers of the 90's is completely different. The hitters were not as strong, the mound was a different height, the ballparks were bigger, etc. Comparing players, in any sport, when they played in different eras anywhere between 50 and 70 years apart is always completely pointless. The game is ALWAYS evolving.

1. I didn't even list half the teams and I actually only pulled a roster from one season.

2. You never used dwarf as a verb. You said he played against dwarfs. Obviously you thought I was going to pull out a bunch of 6-6 to 6-8 players and I pull 6-8 - 6-10 (west was actually 6'11)

3. If the guys I mentioned weren't very good they wouldn't be in the hall of fame or be recognized for awards such as nba finals mvp.

If it is unfair to compare Wilt and Jordan in terms of who is better then we must be on the same page. My problem is that the media has dubbed Jordan as the best ever. However I established criteria, which I do believe I stated here what my criteria is to really rate a player to make it "fair", and I still can't call Jordan the best. I can definitely feel ok about calling jordan one of the greats, but not the best. Hopefully this makes you feel better, because you seemed to be getting pretty worked up. I just want to debate, not throw insults back and forth. This is supposed to be fun. I find it funny when people get so upset about what I say about Jordan. It's a lot like politics. People get that upset when you say jordan wasn't the best, but when you shed some light on his accomplishments and show people who won more championships, who had the best all around game, who made his team better, etc... jordan is not the top on those lists.

Healthy Scratch

08/12/10, 03:13 PM

That Jordan is not the best player in NBA history?

That would be easy to do if someone would just tell me what criteria you are using there is always someone better, whether it be wilt chamberlain, bill russell, kareem, oscar robertson, etc... someone has always done something better than jordan.
i'm just curious. where are you from? what team do you cheer for?

inevitable

08/12/10, 03:18 PM

i'm just curious. where are you from? what team do you cheer for?

I'm from SC. I grew up a Pacers fan which is very difficult to deal with right now, but I'm sure if Granger can average 50 ppg we can win a few more games this season!

I also have a soft spot in my heart for the Celtics since they have a bunch of SC guys on the team right now... Garnett, allen, jermaine

Healthy Scratch

08/12/10, 03:37 PM

ok, just wondering if maybe there was some hometown bias going on here.
i'm a penguins fan but i get annoyed by most pen's fans determination to prove lemieux was better than gretzky. different sport but same concept. i thought maybe you were a sixers fan.

startBBtoday

08/12/10, 03:38 PM

1. I didn't even list half the teams and I actually only pulled a roster from one season.

2. You never used dwarf as a verb. You said he played against dwarfs. Obviously you thought I was going to pull out a bunch of 6-6 to 6-8 players and I pull 6-8 - 6-10 (west was actually 6'11)

3. If the guys I mentioned weren't very good they wouldn't be in the hall of fame or be recognized for awards such as nba finals mvp.

If it is unfair to compare Wilt and Jordan in terms of who is better then we must be on the same page. My problem is that the media has dubbed Jordan as the best ever. However I established criteria, which I do believe I stated here what my criteria is to really rate a player to make it "fair", and I still can't call Jordan the best. I can definitely feel ok about calling jordan one of the greats, but not the best. Hopefully this makes you feel better, because you seemed to be getting pretty worked up. I just want to debate, not throw insults back and forth. This is supposed to be fun. I find it funny when people get so upset about what I say about Jordan. It's a lot like politics. People get that upset when you say jordan wasn't the best, but when you shed some light on his accomplishments and show people who won more championships, who had the best all around game, who made his team better, etc... jordan is not the top on those lists.

anytime someone's using the, "you never said wilt chamberlain wasn't playing in the midget basketball association!!" argument, you know they've right!