Note: View on Computer or on Web Version
Recommended to be read on a computer but on a mobile device I'd advise scrolling to the bottom and clicking on the 'Web Version' for the best mobile format
Despite much of the material being from a statistical perspective, I do not actually see it as the end all answer to arguments. I only used a statistical approach to counter the arguments of those who most adhere to them to discredit any player, but specifically, Wilt Chamberlain. My authentic views are not reflected through mere statistics but analyzing of a player's game which I describe throughout. Most of the statistical data done in this was made independently and the work could be shown if requested. I am not particularly concerned with the grammar or formatting of the material but any information that you feel could be factually wrong, misunderstood or added (such as a statistic or uncredited source) can be emailed to me at legendscourt@gmail.com
Wilt Chamberlain's career. From Top Left to Right: Overbrook High School, University of Kansas, Harlem Globetrotters, Philadelphia Warriors, San Francisco Warriors (Warriors were same franchise just moved), Philadelphia 76ers, Los Angeles Lakers, San Diego Conquistadors (as Coach, kind of)
Wilt's career for many reasons was one of the most difficult to analyze and in order to get this underway, let's first look at what is well known in Chamberlain's general achievements, unique physical build and pure athleticism. For starters, Wilt technically played 14 seasons in the NBA and was an All-Star in all of his healthy, eligible seasons (Only played 12 games due to injury in 1970). At the time there was only a First and Second All-NBA Team and a First and Second All-Defensive Team honor. The latter was first handed out in the 1968-69 season (Eight seasons after his career started). Important to note that because of being out most of the aforementioned 1969-70 season, Chamberlain would have only been eligible for the honor in 4 of his 14 seasons and coming solely at the end of his career, though able to focus more on defense at that point. Because of this, Wilt was on the All-Defensive First team two of his four eligible seasons which happened to be his last two seasons in the league at ages 35 and 36. In terms of All-NBA selections, Wilt was on the First Team 7 times and the Second Team 3 times. He won the league's Rookie of the Year, four MVPs, lead the league in scoring his first seven seasons, lead in rebounding 11 times (falling to Bill Russell twice) and even leading the league in assists. Ultimately, Wilt finished his career with two championships, one with the 76ers and one with the Lakers. As a Laker he won his only FMVP, an award first introduced in the 1969 NBA Finals, one would assume he would have won it in 1967 had the award been handed out. How did he accomplish all of this? For starters, the league was run by big men and he redefined the term 'big'. Patrick Ewing highlighted this when asked in 1986, "Wilt looked big didn't he?" and Ewing replied, "Big? He looked huge!". There were plenty of other legendary bigs but none that could match his combination of physical stature and athleticism. Wilt was not just a regular athlete. Not for his time nor for any as his athleticism transcends all eras. His measurements at 7'1, with a 7'8 wingspan and 9'6 standing reach, weighing between 250-300lbs+ along with what's been cited as up to a 39 inch vertical (not definite) make him one of the most intriguing physical specimens any sport has seen. But, basketball was not his only sport as Wilt and his biggest adversary, Bill Russell, were top performers in what a vast amount of people consider to be the ultimate measure of athleticism, track and field. Furthermore, Wilt was a decathlete which is fittingly referred to as the "World's Greatest Athlete". As a decathlete Wilt did not have a focus on technique instead using raw athleticism to excel in the events. It was even mentioned at the time had Wilt been dedicated to track without basketball he could have been one of the best decathlete's in the world. Connie Hawkins spoke of Chamberlain's athletic prowess saying, "If you watch film of him when he was in high school, he used to get the ball off the rebound and dribble the full length of the court. So, he was able to do that when he was in high school, even back then. If you've read his book, he was like a decathlete, he was a high jumper, he played lacrosse, and I think when he was in L.A., he did a lot of volleyball playing. A lot of people don't know it, but he was probably a world class volleyball player."
His athletic accomplishments amount to being a 3x Big 8 High Jump Champion (6'6 3/4 PR), jumping Over 46ft (at least) in the triple jump, 22ft in the long jump and running a 20.9 second 220 yard (200m), 48.9 sec 440 yard (400meter) and 1:58 880 yards (800m) coming out of high school. The feats transitioned to the throwing events as he came to Kansas able to shot put 53'4 and even placed 3rd in the event at conference. One time, Al Oerter (4x Olympic gold medalist in the discus) and Bill Nieder (Olympic gold and silver medalist in the shot put) each bet a dollar, along with others, to Wilt Chamberlain claiming they could beat him in a shot put contest. To make a long story short, Wilt came up with Nieder in the lead and threw it "about two feet farther" than either of them. This speed and endurance is made greater when adding in his limited technique in the events and the physical stature described. His factually based legend continues to the basketball court showcased through Phog Allen, the Kansas coach who recruited Wilt to show the basket should be raised to 12 feet. Allen had Wilt practice on the much taller 12 foot rim but he was still dunking it with what Wilt described as “a little more effort”. Dwight Howard was scoring big in dunk contests for dunking on 12 feet when a player from almost 50 years before was doing it consistently in a failed experiment. Controversy from such an athletic spectacle forced leagues to change the rules specifically with the way free throws were conducted because Chamberlain could take off from a few step approach and lay the ball in or simply dunk it jumping behind the free throw line. In addition to the free throw line, the NBA prepared the season prior by changing goal-tending rules and widening the lane. The strength of Wilt is well known for many reasons as told by players and even Arnold Schwarzenegger described on an occasion so I chose one from former teammate Tom Meschery describing the time he decided to get in one of his many fights but this time with Wilt, “I threw all the punches, and Wilt just held my head at arm’s length, while I was throwing all these punches. I was totally enraged and Wilt was laughing at me. I think I grazed him on the shoulder with one punch. Really, it was pretty hilarious.”
Year
|
Name
|
Points Per Game (PPG)
|
Percentage (%) of Team Points
|
1961-62
|
Wilt Chamberlain
|
50.4ppg
|
40.2%
|
1962-63
|
Wilt Chamberlain
|
44.8ppg
|
37.8%
|
2005-06
|
Kobe Bryant
|
35.4ppg
|
35.6%
|
1986-87
|
Michael Jordan
|
37.1ppg
|
35.4%
|
1963-64
|
Wilt Chamberlain
|
36.9ppg
|
34.3%
|
1987-88
|
Michael Jordan
|
35.0ppg
|
33.3%
|
1960-61
|
Wilt Chamberlain
|
38.4ppg
|
31.7%
|
1959-60
|
Wilt Chamberlain
|
37.6ppg
|
31.7%
|
1971-72
|
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
|
34.8ppg
|
30.6%
|
1966-67
|
Rick Barry
|
35.6ppg
|
29.1%
|
From scoring to passing to rebounding to defense, the best word to describe Wilt in each regard is, dominant. It is a well deserved term to describe him and often used as the only way to encapsulate his abilities. Larry Brown said, "I don't think it's fair to compare players in different eras but he was about as dominant as any one player could be in any sport, I looked at him like he was invincible" Rick Barry kept the comparison between centers but said, "Wilt Chamberlain was the most dominant and the greatest center to ever play the game bar none. I mean I love you know, you can talk about Kareem and you can talk about Shaq you can talk about Hakeem Olajuwon and there is no one, no one that is close to what Wilt Chamberlain did in his career." and on another occasion said, "This guy was a phenomenon, I mean 50pts a game for an entire season. I don't know if people have an idea just how crazy that is. I mean I played the game and scored like 36 or 37 to think I'd have to score 12-13 or 14 more points a game for 80 something games that's insane. 22 and a half rebounds a game average for a season. The man was the most dominant force ever" Alvin Gentry took it even further, "You might be able to argue with him being the greatest player in NBA history, but I don't think there is any question that he was the most dominant player ever. Michael Jordan might be the greatest, because of all his rings, but he wasn't as dominant as Wilt"
Jerry Colangelo offered up his reflecting opinion on Wilt Chamberlain’s place in history saying, "..Wilt without question, was one of the great all-time players in the history of the game. The only question that comes up is was he the best or the second best or third best. Again, his numbers speak for themselves, a man who once averaged 50 points a game one season, he got 100 points in a single game, won a couple of championships, was in the playoffs like 11 or 12 of the 14 years he played -- a phenomenal record, a phenomenal athlete. I guess the biggest thing that anyone could say is that it's a big, big loss from a big man. He made a big impact on college basketball, he changed the rules of college basketball, and certainly made a great impact on the NBA. Wilt was such a dominant big man and played so much over the rim, that everyone concentrated their efforts on stopping Wilt Chamberlain. He became one of the great passing centers of all time. In fact, in one season, I believe he had 700 assists if I'm not mistaken. As he aged as a player, he changed his game. He developed different shots as he went through his career. The "little dipper dunk," if you recall, when he would flip the ball over the rim. He had the hook shot, the sky hook. But more than anything, I would say, he could do just about anything he needed to do except shoot free throws. He always had a problem with free throws and that bothered him… Probably no player has impacted the game more in the history of the game than Wilt Chamberlain."
Karl Malone separated Wilt Chamberlain from Michael Jordan (whom he lost 2x in the Finals to) while shouting out some of the other possible candidates for best ever saying, “I’m a big guy. I’d be hard-pressed to not give a big guy the nod, I’d have to say Wilt Chamberlain was my all-time greatest ever player. [Jordan is] the greatest that ever played at his position, OK, that’s what I’m going to tell you, You’ve got some Oscar Robertsons and you’ve got some Kareem Abdul-Jabbars and some Magics and all that. So you can debate [the best ever]. But as far as I’m concerned, he’s the best to play at his position. And we can all argue, ‘Well he’s the best of all time.’ I don’t know. I don’t know if he was the best of all time. If he wasn’t the best -- if he was not the best -- put him at the second best. But he was right up there. And you could argue he was the best. He got six rings so yeah, he could be the best. But I will say this, boy did he have an unbelievable supporting cast.”
NBA legend and former coach of Chamberlain, Dolph Schayes, was asked "Is Wilt the greatest player of all-time" and responded by saying, “I think so. He wasn’t a great outside shooter but why would you put a 7-foot guy outside shooting the ball? He took advantage of his size and his strength. He averaged 50 points a game but he proved he could rebound and be a team player. It’s a terrible shame that Wilt left this earth too early because I think he’s very misunderstood as a person. [Bill] Russell got all of the accolades because he’s Mr. Right and Wilt was Mr. Wrong but that’s not the case. They were both wonderful guys. Wilt was as great a player that’s ever played this game and a very good person as well.”
Chamberlain gets the label of a bad teammate when in reality he cared for his teammates and had a good relationship with basically all of his them along with his coaches (minus Breda Kolff) despite heated arguments at times.
*Above [represents team record and win percentage without Chamberlain]
The other related information would be the team record and win percentage with Chamberlain.
Much of Chamberlain's career success can be attributed to his unparalleled rebounding, scoring and unrecognized ability to pass. Chamberlain amassed 40 or more points a record 271 times and 50 or more 118 times throughout his career. He was responsible for six of the ten 70+ point games in NBA history. The individual game dominance transitioned to individual season dominance where during his run of 7 straight scoring titles to start his career, Chamberlain saw his first five seasons feature 5/6 highest scoring seasons in NBA History along with his first four, specifically, marking the top four highest scoring seasons. Chamberlain's career was ever-changing though in terms of his shifting in roles as he began a dominant scorer, peaking as a dominant all-around player then digressed his role into more of a defensive geared focus which resulted in having high shot totals in his earlier years and shifting to fewer shots and becoming a team passer and defender later. Adjusting was one of Wilt's greatest strengths as many forget, he not only had role changes but changes in leadership. During Wilt's career he would have 9 coaching changes and 8 different head coaches (Hannum twice).
Jerry Colangelo offered up his reflecting opinion on Wilt Chamberlain’s place in history saying, "..Wilt without question, was one of the great all-time players in the history of the game. The only question that comes up is was he the best or the second best or third best. Again, his numbers speak for themselves, a man who once averaged 50 points a game one season, he got 100 points in a single game, won a couple of championships, was in the playoffs like 11 or 12 of the 14 years he played -- a phenomenal record, a phenomenal athlete. I guess the biggest thing that anyone could say is that it's a big, big loss from a big man. He made a big impact on college basketball, he changed the rules of college basketball, and certainly made a great impact on the NBA. Wilt was such a dominant big man and played so much over the rim, that everyone concentrated their efforts on stopping Wilt Chamberlain. He became one of the great passing centers of all time. In fact, in one season, I believe he had 700 assists if I'm not mistaken. As he aged as a player, he changed his game. He developed different shots as he went through his career. The "little dipper dunk," if you recall, when he would flip the ball over the rim. He had the hook shot, the sky hook. But more than anything, I would say, he could do just about anything he needed to do except shoot free throws. He always had a problem with free throws and that bothered him… Probably no player has impacted the game more in the history of the game than Wilt Chamberlain."
Karl Malone separated Wilt Chamberlain from Michael Jordan (whom he lost 2x in the Finals to) while shouting out some of the other possible candidates for best ever saying, “I’m a big guy. I’d be hard-pressed to not give a big guy the nod, I’d have to say Wilt Chamberlain was my all-time greatest ever player. [Jordan is] the greatest that ever played at his position, OK, that’s what I’m going to tell you, You’ve got some Oscar Robertsons and you’ve got some Kareem Abdul-Jabbars and some Magics and all that. So you can debate [the best ever]. But as far as I’m concerned, he’s the best to play at his position. And we can all argue, ‘Well he’s the best of all time.’ I don’t know. I don’t know if he was the best of all time. If he wasn’t the best -- if he was not the best -- put him at the second best. But he was right up there. And you could argue he was the best. He got six rings so yeah, he could be the best. But I will say this, boy did he have an unbelievable supporting cast.”
NBA legend and former coach of Chamberlain, Dolph Schayes, was asked "Is Wilt the greatest player of all-time" and responded by saying, “I think so. He wasn’t a great outside shooter but why would you put a 7-foot guy outside shooting the ball? He took advantage of his size and his strength. He averaged 50 points a game but he proved he could rebound and be a team player. It’s a terrible shame that Wilt left this earth too early because I think he’s very misunderstood as a person. [Bill] Russell got all of the accolades because he’s Mr. Right and Wilt was Mr. Wrong but that’s not the case. They were both wonderful guys. Wilt was as great a player that’s ever played this game and a very good person as well.”
Chamberlain gets the label of a bad teammate when in reality he cared for his teammates and had a good relationship with basically all of his them along with his coaches (minus Breda Kolff) despite heated arguments at times.
*Above [represents team record and win percentage without Chamberlain]
The other related information would be the team record and win percentage with Chamberlain.
Much of Chamberlain's career success can be attributed to his unparalleled rebounding, scoring and unrecognized ability to pass. Chamberlain amassed 40 or more points a record 271 times and 50 or more 118 times throughout his career. He was responsible for six of the ten 70+ point games in NBA history. The individual game dominance transitioned to individual season dominance where during his run of 7 straight scoring titles to start his career, Chamberlain saw his first five seasons feature 5/6 highest scoring seasons in NBA History along with his first four, specifically, marking the top four highest scoring seasons. Chamberlain's career was ever-changing though in terms of his shifting in roles as he began a dominant scorer, peaking as a dominant all-around player then digressed his role into more of a defensive geared focus which resulted in having high shot totals in his earlier years and shifting to fewer shots and becoming a team passer and defender later. Adjusting was one of Wilt's greatest strengths as many forget, he not only had role changes but changes in leadership. During Wilt's career he would have 9 coaching changes and 8 different head coaches (Hannum twice).
Over his last 7 full seasons Wilt Chamberlain never averaged fewer than 4apg, peaked at 8.6apg and over that time averaged 5.5apg as a whole. Wilt took on average 5 fewer shots per game in the post season than the regular season even shooting fewer than 10FGA per game 3 different playoffs. To put it in perspective, Wilt over his career averaged 22.5FGA per game which is right behind Jordan at 22.9 but in the playoffs he actually shot less, very much less for his career with only 17.1FGA while Jordan's rose to 25.1FGA. This is part of why it's hard to look at a simple career regular season versus post season scoring difference as will be more evident later in how imbalanced his percent of post season games in his scoring prime was as compared to his post season. But, his efficiency especially compared to the time stick out. In the 1967 NBA Finals, Wilt averaged 17.7ppg which was 5th on the team but he was only taking 12 shots per game. Wilt was taking half as many shots as the leading scorer, Hal Greer, but Hal only scored roughly 8ppg more than Wilt (12 more shots for only 8 points). The series showcased his effective scoring highlighted by the just stated comparison to his team's leading scorer Hal Greer, but he also showed his value for the team in many other ways. Chamberlain lead his Finals team in FG% by 4%, rebounds by 16 per game, and assists by 1.5 per game. Add in that he was the most impactful defender by far, it is obvious that he proved his greatness in the series and playoff run alone. If anything, this is an example of the true impact Wilt could have on a game. Known as the great scorer yet it was his all around impact and efficiency when he did shoot that made the difference including deciding Game 6 with 8 rebounds and 6 blocks in the fourth quarter and a noteworthy game saving block at the end of game 1. Developing into an all around great had to do with both his maturing of abilities and heightened level of teammate's abilities. His championship in 1967 he had much better shooters as compared to the 1964 Finals where only 1 teammate, Tom Meschery, with moderate minutes per game was able to shoot over 34.5% for the series. In his Finals career, Wilt shot 56% on 13.5FGA per compared to 42% for his Finals teammates altogether. When you break down the production needed in terms of scoring it becomes apparent just how valuable Wilt was, such as in 1964 against the Celtics:
In arguably the two most complete seasons of Wilt's career or of any career, Wilt took a step back in scoring and a step up in everything else and this new Wilt philosophy would continue for the rest of his career allowing him to have the highest career PPG, RPG and APG of any center in NBA History and despite those who claim he only passed when he got back in Philly, he actually was a top passer before while leading his team to the Finals in San Francisco. Below shows Chamberlain's league rank in both assists and assists per game which include the year before he came back to Philly as he brought the Warriors to the Finals.
1967-68 1 2
Wilt Chamberlain and Teammates
Wilt- 29.2ppg 51.7%
Teammates- 72ppg 34.8%
Bill Russell and Teammates
Bill- 11.2ppg 38.6%
Teammates- 94ppg 41%
In arguably the two most complete seasons of Wilt's career or of any career, Wilt took a step back in scoring and a step up in everything else and this new Wilt philosophy would continue for the rest of his career allowing him to have the highest career PPG, RPG and APG of any center in NBA History and despite those who claim he only passed when he got back in Philly, he actually was a top passer before while leading his team to the Finals in San Francisco. Below shows Chamberlain's league rank in both assists and assists per game which include the year before he came back to Philly as he brought the Warriors to the Finals.
Year Assists APG
1963-64 4 6
1965-66 7 7
1966-67 3 3
Regardless of whether or not Wilt won the title before going back to Philly he individually commanded the league with his all around abilities and proved his championship level prowess in carrying the Warriors in the years past and coming just short of the title on multiple occasions to a much more talented team in the Celtics. As said before, in the 1967 NBA Finals, Wilt culminated his skills as he lead the team in rebounds, assists and FG% while holding Nate Thurmond to 14ppg on 34% shooting. His coach, Alex Hannum, said of Wilt's all around play in 1967, "I believe Wilt Chamberlain proved himself this year to be the greatest player in the history of this game of professional basketball. We've known for years that Wilt could score with the best of them establish scoring records, one year he even averaged 50 points a game and in that year even had a 100 point effort in a single game. But this year, Wilt got the goal that he wanted, he won the whole thing he proved to everyone that he's a winner and that he can play on the greatest team, play center on the greatest team in the history of this game of basketball. Wilt has the power the strength to get the rebounds this year his defense was unparalleled in my opinion playing a team type of defense and offense we weren't relying on Wilt to do all of the scoring for us we relied on Wilt to play the center position and open things of so everyone could score. And I've got to say this when we got in trouble Wilt may not have scored a great many points through the year but when we got in trouble we did go to the big guy to respond with the big points when we needed him."
Billy Cunningham echoed these thoughts saying, “Wilt had averaged 50 points a game one season, and he had achieved all the individual goals. But he showed he was a complete basketball player, making passes, blocking shots and rebounding.”
Wilt's former coach, Dolph Schayes, expressed the same opinion as the other two saying, "They were my team. Even today, the Sixers are still my team; they’re the only team I root for. It was kind of bittersweet. It was nice to see Wilt, [Billy] Cunningham, Luke Jackson, Hal Greer and Larry Costello finally win one. Wilt won it for the team because he decided he could score 35 points with ease but they never won with him scoring. The Sixers had plenty of scoring. They didn’t need Wilt’s scoring so he decided to pass and rebound and that made them one of the greatest teams in the history of the NBA."
Wilt Chamberlain League Ranks
Billy Cunningham echoed these thoughts saying, “Wilt had averaged 50 points a game one season, and he had achieved all the individual goals. But he showed he was a complete basketball player, making passes, blocking shots and rebounding.”
Wilt's former coach, Dolph Schayes, expressed the same opinion as the other two saying, "They were my team. Even today, the Sixers are still my team; they’re the only team I root for. It was kind of bittersweet. It was nice to see Wilt, [Billy] Cunningham, Luke Jackson, Hal Greer and Larry Costello finally win one. Wilt won it for the team because he decided he could score 35 points with ease but they never won with him scoring. The Sixers had plenty of scoring. They didn’t need Wilt’s scoring so he decided to pass and rebound and that made them one of the greatest teams in the history of the NBA."
Wilt Chamberlain League Ranks
(PTS/RBDS/ASTS/FG%/PER)
1966-67
Points- 3rd
Rebounds- 1st
Assists- 3rd
FG%- 1st
PER- 1st
1967-68
Points- 3rd
Rebounds- 1st
Assists- 1st
FG%- 1st
PER- 1st
Yet, even in defeat the 1968 season was a true showing of Wilt's potential and the progress in his overall game giving him the ability to get a lot of triple doubles, something not so much tallied at the time but after the rise of Magic Johnson more praise was attributed to the feat. He was dominant in that regard famously getting 7 triple doubles in his 15 playoff games in 1967 followed by setting multiple records all of which actually occurred in the 1968 season. 1966 was another year the 76ers had a chance to win, probably the only other real chance against Russell besides winning in ‘67 and the just discussed 1968 season. Unfortunately, Wilt was the only one to show up. Wilt averaged 28ppg on 51% along with 30.2rpg. This was coupled with his stoppage of Russell. Yes, Russell was not a scorer but he kept him to 14ppg for the series. It was much different for his other competitors who Russell averaged over 21ppg against during his championship run. The rest of Wilt’s team didn’t perform as strongly with shooting woes plaguing their effort and sending the 76ers home in 5 games. Scoring for the series shown below.
Billy Cunningham (Rookie who played 4/5 games)- 5ppg on 16%
Hal Greer- 16ppg on 35%
Chet Walker- 14.5ppg on 37.5%
Wali Jones- 13ppg on 32.5%
Luke Jackson- 12ppg on 43%
Because of pace, players from all times have numbers heightened or lowered because of the available opportunities to obtain certain stats. This has caused people to use "pace adjusted" numbers. Basically, it takes account for minutes and possessions and converts the percentages of what players do today into what it would equal using the possessions of another time period. One of the many problems is that scoring would be more spaced out when playing longer, the fatigue factor and simple ability to extend a scoring rate over a much longer period, among other variables, would be difficult to replicate. Because of this, players consistently have numbers unobtainable in any era as well as blatant flaws such as Westbrook averaging 18apg in the 60s. A strong counterexample as no player even averaged 12apg in the 60s but any elite passer in this converted model breaks every record because stats are assumed by pace conversion. This idea doesn't hold up when viewing the comparisons of individual statistical categories compared across different eras. The model shows a blatant disregard for any other variables but pace conversion and those who see it as anything but a false science are either being ignorant to basketball in its most general understanding or forcing an even more exaggerated narrative for the benefit of their own argument. The rules also dictate how stats are obtained or what skills are needed to obtain them and it can be shown through the three point line rule along with countless other examples. There must be a logical balance of deciphering the effects of different variables, beneficial and non beneficial. The space brought from the 3 point line allows inside players the potential to be positioned better as compared to the cramped lanes before the line giving more players the opportunity. And, in contrast to that very variable, there is now a defensive 3 seconds which would again affect the players who have natural positioning for rebounds but also the positioning for centers in the post on offense. More obviously, the 3pt line gives players a scoring advantage besides the freed room for mid-range, it gives the benefit of an extra point for shooting further out.
But, despite pace, it does not mean every stat goes up. Even with more points and possessions, teams in the 60's did not have as many available assists. People love to cite the pace as the ultimate converting measure in comparing players yet as previously mentioned it assumes that over more minutes and possessions a player produces at the same rate and that cross era comparison's are only different because of the pace. But, pace does not take into account rules or style differences which is why if you compare the average team production from between the 1960's and the 1980's (as shown) one would not find a direct statistical change predicated on pace. Despite almost 20 more possessions in the 1960's, the average team of the 1980's actually produced 3 more assists per game and the points per game difference between the 60's and 80's was only 6 points per game. So, when people break down only 60's numbers for pace change remember that the 80's are a lot closer than it appears. Yet, based on the amount of possessions (or pace) it should not be close. This is why it is more accurate to compare available points and assists because, unlike pace, the available points and assists directly correlate with the player's individual production and show for how much of the total production would a player be relied on. This does not exactly show what each player would do on each other's teams rather what it would look like if they were needed to maintain their same percentage of the team's total production. For this idea it should be taken into account that a player with more minutes than another will most likely be producing a higher percentage of the team's total production but at the same time it shows that the player would be needed for that very purpose and shows the contrast in expectations of players throughout NBA history. The points per game for teams as shown in the scoring comparison between the 60's and 80's, shows little consistency in numbers matching the pace. This is because specific team production is not solely predicated on pace but rather the style and rules that make up the available production for each player. Back to the Russell Westbrook comparison, it would be more useful to compare the assists per game between the two teams and figure out what it would convert to based on the available assists of the teams while also considering the fact that with increased minutes he would still have to maintain the same rate of production. If you look at the Thunder in 2015-16, the team averaged 23apg which is above the average team's assist production in the 60's yet compared to Oscar's specific team is behind as they averaged 26.9apg. An important note for this is that it would also be assumed that with the added assists that a player could maintain the same team percentage of them. But, using this model, though still not an exact science rather a fun exercise, Russell Westbrook would compare to Robertson like so:Russell Westbrook had ~45.2% of team apg
Real apg- 10.4apg
1961-62 Royals conversion- 12.2apg
Oscar Robertson had ~42.4% of team apg
Real apg- 11.4apg
2015-16 Thunder conversion- 9.8apgNow, there is still a difference but in using the available production from each team, and assuming Westbrook can still take the same percentage despite more assists available, then the difference is much more realistic and in range of how the statistics really played out compared to the pace conversion system. Going hand in hand with the individual numbers only maintained by larger team numbers, the next argument is the idea that Wilt could not keep up his scoring on a team averaging fewer points because he was usually on a top scoring team (which is not unusual for the best scorer as often the player is why the team scores so well). Taking his 1963-64 Finals season we find that he averaged 37ppg and 5apg on a team that averaged only 107.7ppg which
would never rank in the top 10 in team points per game and would be on average ranked 15.5 out of a league of 23-27 between 1979-80 and 1989-90. (4 teams added in last two years of sample)
(1963-64 Warriors 7779 FGA Rank 2nd in FGA in 88 84-85 league average 7306FGA 110.8ppg)
Now, let's take it a step further in comparing Wilt to other all-time great scorers. Chamberlain was in his scoring prime as the leading shot taker on his team during each of his first 7 seasons before scaling his shot taking back to become more of a facilitator. To compare Chamberlain's scoring with the likes of Michael Jordan, it should be done with it in mind that Chamberlain took a step back from scoring to focus on passing and rebounding while maintaining great efficiency in the shots he did take. So, to be fair, the scoring prime will be compared of Wilt to Jordan. The latter was able to maintain his scoring role and prowess with a better longevity but in order to view the prime let's use each of their top 7 scoring seasons (as Wilt was the leading scorer his first 7 seasons) and compare based on percentage of team production. Again, Jordan's scoring proved greater in terms of withholding his otherworldly scoring for longer throughout his whole career but this is in regards to the peak scoring years. To do this the top 7 consecutive seasons (which end up being practically each's top 7 scoring seasons) were taken which for Wilt was his first 7 seasons and for Jordan was his 3rd through 9th seasons. Taking only the combined totals of the games each player played in that season, it is found that Jordan scored an impressive 30.93% of his team's total points during that span whereas Chamberlain scored 33.78% of his team's total. For Jordan to have reached Wilt's 33.78%, he would have needed to up his scoring from 33.2ppg to 36.2ppg and Wilt would of had to drop his scoring average from 39.6ppg to 36.2ppg. And, as shown previously, if only the top years were to be considered Wilt would still own the top two percentages of team points for a season as well as 3 of the top 5. This also works in showing what each would do if they maintained their percentages of team points during this period on each other's teams. Based on that model, Jordan would be expected to raise his scoring to 36.2ppg in Wilt's situation and if Wilt were in Jordan's, his would be expected to also drop to 36.2ppg. When it comes to the playoffs for those seasons, Wilt did not make it in 1962-63 so that is taken out and it is recalculated to 33.07%. Wilt falls to Jordan, scoring what is still a very good 30.23% of his team's points while Jordan raises his to 34.35%. In order for Wilt to have met this he would have had to raise his scoring average from 32.8ppg to 4.5ppg higher at 37.3ppg where Jordan would have been expected to be on Wilt's collected teams. On the other end, Jordan would have had to lower his average from 34.6ppg to 30.5ppg where Wilt would be expected to be on Jordan's Bulls. Though capable, the difference is apparent. Also noted is the fact that it is focused on scoring, below shows the value of Wilt's greatest quality, rebounding also considering the naturally greater defensive impact given by Chamberlain from the block at that time period. Since this is being compared, why not see how their playoff averages look when given the percentages of their team production on each other's teams using the available production percentage based model rather than pace.
*This is not an exact science and should not be treated as such. The conversion is only used to show the actual amount of team production Wilt was expected to produce compared to other players, shedding light on just how much he was asked to do.
Michael Jordan (104 Games)
Actual Average:
34.6ppg, 6.7rpg, 6.6apg
Projected Playoff Average on Wilt teams:
36.2ppg, 10.9rpg, 5.7apg
Wilt Chamberlain (52 Games)
Actual Average:
32.8ppg, 26.4rpg, 3.2apg
Projected Playoff Average on Jordan teams:
30.5ppg, 16.3rpg, 3.6apg
Many forget that despite not winning the championship in those seasons, Chamberlain was very close to winning a championship in his scoring prime. On three occasions Chamberlain got close to the championship. In 1964, while in the Western Conference, Chamberlain lost in 5 with an obvious difference in talent. But, his two closest chances against the Celtics weren't even in the Finals. For instance, in 1962, had Sam Jones not hit the game 7 winning shot with 1 second left, the Warriors would have had a tremendous chance in over time to win as Chamberlain was hot late, scoring 5 straight points in the last 50 seconds to tie the game. Then in 1965, the Celtics won by 1 point in the famous play involving Havlicek stealing the ball. Had Havlicek missed the steal or Greer lobbed it to the fronted Wilt instead, then the 76ers would have more than likely won the series and the championship. But, small details like that are what control the legacy of Wilt. In those 6 playoff seasons, that amount to 52 games, Chamberlain was producing in those playoffs numbers that outdo Kareem Abdul-Jabbar in his 1972 MVP season. In terms of production and efficiency, let's breakdown and give a similar player comparison for each category (PPG%/RPG%/APG%/FG%) to give a different perspective for the 3 general stages of his playoff career. The 3 general stages will be defined by role and playoff production. From 1960-64 were Chamberlain's most focused years on scoring, 1965-68 defined the culmination of his talents into one, all-around, dominant force, and from 1969-73 was when Chamberlain was the not scoring but dominating on defense and in rebounding. The work will also be shown for how each chosen comparison actually compares for the specific stage he was chosen as well as the culminating overall comparison using the similar producing players. When breaking down Chamberlain into the three general stages of his career, he can accurately be compared in each regard to these players from an individual and career combined perspective. The chart that breaks it down in full detail and the basic layout of it below.
Now, let's take it a step further in comparing Wilt to other all-time great scorers. Chamberlain was in his scoring prime as the leading shot taker on his team during each of his first 7 seasons before scaling his shot taking back to become more of a facilitator. To compare Chamberlain's scoring with the likes of Michael Jordan, it should be done with it in mind that Chamberlain took a step back from scoring to focus on passing and rebounding while maintaining great efficiency in the shots he did take. So, to be fair, the scoring prime will be compared of Wilt to Jordan. The latter was able to maintain his scoring role and prowess with a better longevity but in order to view the prime let's use each of their top 7 scoring seasons (as Wilt was the leading scorer his first 7 seasons) and compare based on percentage of team production. Again, Jordan's scoring proved greater in terms of withholding his otherworldly scoring for longer throughout his whole career but this is in regards to the peak scoring years. To do this the top 7 consecutive seasons (which end up being practically each's top 7 scoring seasons) were taken which for Wilt was his first 7 seasons and for Jordan was his 3rd through 9th seasons. Taking only the combined totals of the games each player played in that season, it is found that Jordan scored an impressive 30.93% of his team's total points during that span whereas Chamberlain scored 33.78% of his team's total. For Jordan to have reached Wilt's 33.78%, he would have needed to up his scoring from 33.2ppg to 36.2ppg and Wilt would of had to drop his scoring average from 39.6ppg to 36.2ppg. And, as shown previously, if only the top years were to be considered Wilt would still own the top two percentages of team points for a season as well as 3 of the top 5. This also works in showing what each would do if they maintained their percentages of team points during this period on each other's teams. Based on that model, Jordan would be expected to raise his scoring to 36.2ppg in Wilt's situation and if Wilt were in Jordan's, his would be expected to also drop to 36.2ppg. When it comes to the playoffs for those seasons, Wilt did not make it in 1962-63 so that is taken out and it is recalculated to 33.07%. Wilt falls to Jordan, scoring what is still a very good 30.23% of his team's points while Jordan raises his to 34.35%. In order for Wilt to have met this he would have had to raise his scoring average from 32.8ppg to 4.5ppg higher at 37.3ppg where Jordan would have been expected to be on Wilt's collected teams. On the other end, Jordan would have had to lower his average from 34.6ppg to 30.5ppg where Wilt would be expected to be on Jordan's Bulls. Though capable, the difference is apparent. Also noted is the fact that it is focused on scoring, below shows the value of Wilt's greatest quality, rebounding also considering the naturally greater defensive impact given by Chamberlain from the block at that time period. Since this is being compared, why not see how their playoff averages look when given the percentages of their team production on each other's teams using the available production percentage based model rather than pace.
*This is not an exact science and should not be treated as such. The conversion is only used to show the actual amount of team production Wilt was expected to produce compared to other players, shedding light on just how much he was asked to do.
Michael Jordan (104 Games)
Actual Average:
34.6ppg, 6.7rpg, 6.6apg
Projected Playoff Average on Wilt teams:
36.2ppg, 10.9rpg, 5.7apg
Wilt Chamberlain (52 Games)
Actual Average:
32.8ppg, 26.4rpg, 3.2apg
Projected Playoff Average on Jordan teams:
30.5ppg, 16.3rpg, 3.6apg
Many forget that despite not winning the championship in those seasons, Chamberlain was very close to winning a championship in his scoring prime. On three occasions Chamberlain got close to the championship. In 1964, while in the Western Conference, Chamberlain lost in 5 with an obvious difference in talent. But, his two closest chances against the Celtics weren't even in the Finals. For instance, in 1962, had Sam Jones not hit the game 7 winning shot with 1 second left, the Warriors would have had a tremendous chance in over time to win as Chamberlain was hot late, scoring 5 straight points in the last 50 seconds to tie the game. Then in 1965, the Celtics won by 1 point in the famous play involving Havlicek stealing the ball. Had Havlicek missed the steal or Greer lobbed it to the fronted Wilt instead, then the 76ers would have more than likely won the series and the championship. But, small details like that are what control the legacy of Wilt. In those 6 playoff seasons, that amount to 52 games, Chamberlain was producing in those playoffs numbers that outdo Kareem Abdul-Jabbar in his 1972 MVP season. In terms of production and efficiency, let's breakdown and give a similar player comparison for each category (PPG%/RPG%/APG%/FG%) to give a different perspective for the 3 general stages of his playoff career. The 3 general stages will be defined by role and playoff production. From 1960-64 were Chamberlain's most focused years on scoring, 1965-68 defined the culmination of his talents into one, all-around, dominant force, and from 1969-73 was when Chamberlain was the not scoring but dominating on defense and in rebounding. The work will also be shown for how each chosen comparison actually compares for the specific stage he was chosen as well as the culminating overall comparison using the similar producing players. When breaking down Chamberlain into the three general stages of his career, he can accurately be compared in each regard to these players from an individual and career combined perspective. The chart that breaks it down in full detail and the basic layout of it below.
*Age 26 is subtracted from each of the comparisons as Chamberlain did not make the playoffs in his
age 26 season*
age 26 season*
Age
23-27 Comparison
Scoring
Michael Jordan 47 games 1590/4703 33.8%
Wilt
Chamberlain 36 games
1246/3786 32.9%
Passing
Shaq
57 games
193/1240- 15.6%
Wilt
Chamberlain 36 games
101/750 13.5%
Rebounding
Moses
Malone 43 games
649/1840- 35.3% Wilt Chamberlain 36 games 922/2348 39.3%
Wilt
Chamberlain Real Average
34.6ppg,
25.6rpg, 2.8apg
Average
of Comps
35.5ppg,
23.0rpg, 3.3apg
|
Age
28-31 Comparison
Scoring
Magic
Johnson 66 games
1376/7119 19.3%
Wilt
Chamberlain 44 games
1096/5053 21.7%
Passing
Larry
Bird 78 games
543/2167 25.1%
Wilt
Chamberlain 44 games
283/1006 28.1%
Rebounding
Shaq
69 games
955/3038 31.4% Wilt Chamberlain 44 games 1208/2734 44.2%
Wilt
Chamberlain Real Average
24.9ppg,
27.5rpg, 6.4apg
Average
of Comps
22.2ppg,
19.5rpg, 5.7apg
|
Age
32-36 Comparison
Scoring
Robert
Parish 64 games
1023/7285 14.0%
Wilt
Chamberlain 80 Games
1265/8472 14.9%
Passing
Tim
Duncan 56 games
137/1158 11.8%
Wilt
Chamberlain 80 games
289/1901 15.2%
Rebounding
Dennis
Rodman 75 games
910/2458 37.0%
Wilt
Chamberlain 80 games
1783/4319 41.3%
Wilt
Chamberlain Real Average
15.8ppg,
22.3rpg, 3.6apg
Average
of Comps
14.8ppg,
20.0rpg, 2.8apg
|
Wilt Chamberlain Career Playoff Average:
22.5ppg, 24.5rpg, 4.2apg
Compared Player’s Combined Projected Playoff Average on Wilt’s Teams (based on combining stages):
22.6ppg, 20.1rpg, 4.4apg
Compared Age Range
|
23-27
|
28-31
|
32-36
|
Playoff Scoring Comp
|
Michael Jordan
|
Magic Johnson
|
Robert Parish
|
Playoff Passing Comp
|
Shaquille O’Neal
|
Larry Bird
|
Tim Duncan
|
Playoff Rebounding Comp
|
Moses Malone
|
Shaquill O’Neal
|
Dennis Rodman
|
By combining the 3 stages for Wilt Chamberlain the final product, above, is simply his career post season average. In the same way Chamberlain’s are combined to find his final average, so can the compared players. In combining all of the 3 rebounding comps, for example, using the combined percentage of team production and then inputting that into what it would look like on Chamberlain’s teams, the full comparison can be shown from an overall view. It proves that by individual stage and by overall combination, Wilt can be compared to these players which only highlights his dominant career from start to finish. Think about it. Imagine a player, based on an age comparison, who for a period of time scored close to Jordan, passed similar to Shaq and rebounded better than Moses Malone. Then, transitioned into being a formidable scorer in Magic, a great passer like Bird and rebounder like Shaq. Finally, at the tail end of his career, this player was still a valuable scoring option like Robert Parish, passed better than the likes of Tim Duncan and was rebounding better than Dennis Rodman. In terms of rebounding there wasn't even a good comparison as the likes of Shaq, Moses and Rodman paled in comparison to Wilt's ability on the boards. Overall, this gives a new perspective on just how valuable Chamberlain was to his teams throughout his whole career.
It's easy to get caught up in narratives like Wilt was just a selfish scorer, even though it was his coach and teammates who pushed him to use his scoring ability. And despite being 4th in assists and 6th in assists per game the year before he went to the 76ers where people claim he only did with them to prove to the media of all people that he could pass. According to his coach, Alex Hannum, he asked Wilt to be more of a facilitator as for the first time he had capable scorers around him and he accepted. Billy Cunningham in an article for the New York Times described how Hannum built around Wilt saying, "The 1966-67 team was a power team with everything
centered around Wilt Chamberlain. Defensively, we would funnel things toward Wilt
to take advantage of his shot-blocking and rebounding abilities. He averaged
24.1 points and 24.2 rebounds a game that season. We did not run the way teams
do today or make the outlet pass after a defensive rebound. After Wilt took
down the rebound, he held it in his huge hands like a grapefruit. He would wait
for the defense to get back, and he timed himself beautifully as we waited for
the guards, Hal Greer and Wally Jones, to come up so he could give them the
ball. We would then go down to the other end and run a set offense. Once Wilt got the ball on
offense, he would post up. The ball would remain stationary and the players
would move. Wilt averaged eight assists a game… Alex Hannum was a great coach
for that team because of the fear and the respect he commanded. He had coached
Greer, Larry Costello, Dave Gambee and Chet Walker in Syracuse and Wilt in San
Francisco. They knew what he wanted and he knew the players' capabilities. And
Alex developed a special relationship with Wilt….Then, there was one coach.
Now, teams have at least three coaches on a ball club, counting scouts... All
Alex had to do was put in a set offense and defense around Wilt."
Now, did he care about his stats and leading the league in assists? I'd assume so, but the two main facilitators on the team were Larry Costello and Wilt Chamberlain and Wilt is the only player who has been criticized for doing his role better than anyone else. He is the all time leader among centers in PPG, APG and RPG. When asked to score early on, he did not want to. but was told to by teammates and coaches and took it to heart winning 7 straight scoring titles. Wilt explained part of his mentality in developing as an all around player saying, "I like to think of myself as being as complete as I can possibly be with the exception of the foul line. And if you have a bad day shooting I always would say, "Well, Wilt then you have to go to the boards that much harder." If you have a bad day on the boards then play defense that much harder. But I always before every game said to myself, "Now this is what I need to do in this game for me to be good in this game and be a valuable asset to my team.""
*This is not an exact science and should not be treated as such. The conversion is only used to show the actual amount of team production Wilt was expected to produce compared to other players, shedding light on just how much he was asked to do.
Now, did he care about his stats and leading the league in assists? I'd assume so, but the two main facilitators on the team were Larry Costello and Wilt Chamberlain and Wilt is the only player who has been criticized for doing his role better than anyone else. He is the all time leader among centers in PPG, APG and RPG. When asked to score early on, he did not want to. but was told to by teammates and coaches and took it to heart winning 7 straight scoring titles. Wilt explained part of his mentality in developing as an all around player saying, "I like to think of myself as being as complete as I can possibly be with the exception of the foul line. And if you have a bad day shooting I always would say, "Well, Wilt then you have to go to the boards that much harder." If you have a bad day on the boards then play defense that much harder. But I always before every game said to myself, "Now this is what I need to do in this game for me to be good in this game and be a valuable asset to my team.""
*This is not an exact science and should not be treated as such. The conversion is only used to show the actual amount of team production Wilt was expected to produce compared to other players, shedding light on just how much he was asked to do.
Magic Johnson, 1987
Actual Average:
21.8ppg,
7.7rpg, 12.2apg
Projected Playoff Average on Wilt teams:
22.0ppg,11.4rpg,
11.5apg
Wilt Chamberlain, 1967
Actual Average:
21.7ppg,
29.1rpg, 9.0apg
Projected Playoff Average on Magic's team:
21.8ppg,
19.7rpg, 9.5apg
Michael Jordan,
1996
Actual Average:
30.7ppg,
4.9rpg, 4.1apg
Projected Playoff Average on Wilt's team:
38.3ppg,
7.6rpg, 4.8apg
Wilt Chamberlain, 1967
Actual Average:
21.7ppg,
29.1rpg, 9.0apg
Projected Playoff Average on Jordan's team:
17.4ppg,
19.1rpg, 9.2apg
LeBron James,
2013
Actual Average:
25.9ppg, 8.4rpg,
6.6apg
Projected Playoff Average on Wilt's team:
32.5ppg, 14.6,
8.6apg
Wilt Chamberlain, 1967
Actual Average:
21.7ppg,
29.1rpg, 9.0apg
Projected Playoff Average on LeBron's team:
17.4ppg,
16.7rpg, 6.9apg
LeBron James, 2016
Actual Average:
26.3ppg,
9.5rpg, 7.6apg
Projected Playoff Average on Wilt's team:
30.5ppg,
14.6rpg, 9.6apg
Wilt Chamberlain, 1967
Actual Average:
21.7ppg,
29.1rpg, 9.0apg
Projected Playoff Average on LeBron's team:
18.8ppg,
19.0rpg, 7.2apg
|
Larry Bird,
1986
Actual Average:
25.9ppg,
9.3rpg, 8.2apg
Projected Playoff Average on Wilt's team:
27.5ppg,13.7rpg,
7.7apg
Wilt Chamberlain, 1967
Actual Average:
21.7ppg,
29.1rpg, 9.0apg
Projected Playoff Average on Bird's team:
20.5ppg,
19.8rpg, 9.6apg
Shaquille
O'Neal, 2000
Actual Average:
30.7ppg, 15.4rpg, 3.1apg
Projected Playoff Average on Wilt's team:
37.5ppg,
23.6rpg, 3.8apg
Wilt Chamberlain, 1967
Actual Average:
21.7ppg,
29.1rpg, 9.0apg
Projected Playoff Average on Shaq's team:
17.9ppg,
19.0rpg, 7.4apg
Steph Curry,
2015
Actual Average:
28.3ppg,
5.0rpg, 6.4apg
Projected Playoff Average on Wilt's team:
33.3ppg,
7.3rpg, 6.9apg
Wilt Chamberlain, 1967
Actual Average:
21.7ppg,
29.1rpg, 9.0apg
Projected Playoff Average on Curry's team:
18.5ppg, 20.0rpg,
8.3apg
|
As one would see, when adjusting Chamberlain's basic category averages to that of the different teams, in a position that he would be needed to withhold the same team team percentages as before, he winds up being consistently strong in both passing and rebounding and formidable in his scoring relative to his all around game and when his defensive impact is attributed beyond numbers. Prior discussed was Wilt's 50.4ppg season, but let's see how it compares when 1962 Wilt is exchanged for another top all-time scorer's team and how each does based on the percentage of team points amassed on their original team. The examples used will be of some of the highest scoring NBA seasons not by Wilt being: 2006 Kobe Bryant, 2015 Steph Curry, 2014 Kevin Durant, 1967 Rick Barry, 1972 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, 2000 Shaquille O'Neal, 1994 Hakeem Olajuwon 1987 Michael Jordan and 1988 Michael Jordan. To get a perspective of Wilt's abilities visually here are some highlights of Chamberlain in the 1962 All-Star Game.
*This is not an exact science and should not be treated as such. The conversion is only used to show the actual amount of team production Wilt was expected to produce compared to other players, shedding light on just how much he was asked to do.
Michael Jordan, 1987
Actual Average: 37.1ppg, 5.2rpg, 4.6apg Projected Average on 1962 Warriors: 44.4ppg, 8.8rpg, 4.6apg Wilt Chamberlain, 1962 Actual Average: 50.4ppg, 25.3, 2.4apg Projected Average on 1987 Bulls: 42.0ppg, 15.4rpg, 2.4apg Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, 1972 Actual Average: 34.8ppg, 16.6rpg, 4.6apg Projected Average on 1962 Warriors: 38.1ppg, 23.7rpg, 4.5apg Wilt Chamberlain, 1962 Actual Average: 50.4ppg, 25.3, 2.4apg Projected Average on 1972 Bucks 45.9ppg, 18.0rpg, 2.5apg Steph Curry, 2015 Actual Average: 30.1ppg, 5.4rpg, 6.7apg Projected Average on 1962 Warriors: 32.7ppg, 8.3rpg, 6.0apg Wilt Chamberlain, 1962 Actual Average: 50.4ppg, 25.3, 2.4apg Projected Average on 2015 Warriors 46.2ppg, 16.0rpg, 2.7apg Shaquille O'Neal, 2000 Actual Average: 29.7ppg, 13.6rpg, 3.8apg Projected Average on 1962 Warriors: 36.8ppg, 21.6rpg, 4.1apg Wilt Chamberlain 1962 Actual Average: 50.4ppg, 25.3, 2.4apg Projected Average on 2000 Lakers 40.6ppg, 16.2rpg, 2.2apg Kevin Durant, 2014 Actual Average: 32.0ppg, 7.4rpg, 5.5apg Projected Average on 1962 Warriors: 37.8ppg, 12.2rpg, 6.5apg Wilt Chamberlain, 1962 Actual Average: 50.4ppg, 25.3, 2.4apg Projected Average on 2014 Thunder 42.6ppg, 15.5rpg, 2.0apg |
Michael Jordan, 1988
Actual Average: 35.0ppg, 5.5rpg, 5.1apg Projected Average on 1962 Warriors: 41.8ppg, 9.2rpg, 5.9apg Wilt Chamberlain, 1962 Actual Average: 50.4ppg, 25.3, 2.4apg Projected Average on 1988 Bulls 42.1ppg, 15.3rpg, 2.4apg
Rick Barry, 1967
Actual Average: 35.6ppg, 9.2rpg, 3.6apg Projected Average on 1962 Warriors: 36.5ppg, 9.2rpg, 4.0apg Wilt Chamberlain, 1962 Actual Average: 50.4ppg, 25.3, 2.4apg Projected Average on 1967 Warriors 49.0ppg, 25.5rpg, 2.2apg
Hakeem Olajuwon, 1994
Actual Average: 27.3ppg, 11.9rpg, 3.6apg Projected Average on 1962 Warriors: 33.9ppg, 20.6rpg, 3.6apg Wilt Chamberlain, 1962 Actual Average: 50.4ppg, 25.3, 2.4apg Projected Average on 1994 Rockets 40.5ppg, 14.9rpg, 2.4apg
Kobe Bryant, 2006
Actual Average: 35.4ppg, 5.3rpg, 4.5apg Projected Average on 1962 Warriors: 44.5ppg, 9.3rpg, 5.5apg Wilt Chamberlain, 1962 Actual Average: 50.4ppg, 25.3, 2.4apg Projected Average on 2006 Lakers 39.0ppg, 14.7rpg, 2.0apg |
This is how Wilt Chamberlain would compare to other top all-time scorers if he were in a reversed role as them and able to produce the same percentage of his team's total numbers in these three categories. If anything, it shows just how much the Warriors needed him in 1962. When you also consider his development in that year on the defensive end, covering the most efficient area for an opposing team to score, his impact strengthens to even higher levels. On January 5th, 1963, the very next season, Bill Russell described Wilt's impact saying,"Wilt Chamberlain is the greatest player alive, no doubt about that..He has set the standards so high, his point totals are so enormous that they've lost their impact....Wilt is the greatest because he's so tough at both ends of the court...he's the only player around who can beat you by himself". Even if one were to disagree with the conversion, it still further proves how valuable Chamberlain was to his team in how much he was relied on, especially early on. Let's take the first 14 seasons or the seasons that make up what's closest to 1045 games (Wilt's career) and compare the regular season and post season in how much each player was relied on using the percentages of total team points, rebounds and assists. This is done to be fair to the player's used but it should also be noted that player's like Kareem Abdul-Jabbar may not have been as dominant in their first 14 seasons but have added value because of their longevity in being productive. The best and most productive big men of all-time, LeBron James, and Michael Jordan (for interest purposes) will be compared in this with how they do in each other's situations if asked to produce the same percentage of the team's numbers.
*This is not an exact science and should not be treated as such. The conversion is only used to show the actual amount of team production Wilt was expected to produce compared to other players, shedding light on just how much he was asked to do.
*This is not an exact science and should not be treated as such. The conversion is only used to show the actual amount of team production Wilt was expected to produce compared to other players, shedding light on just how much he was asked to do.
Michael
Jordan's 15 season Career (21-34/38-39, 1072 games)
Actual Average:
30.1ppg,
6.2rpg, 5.3apg
Projected
Average on Wilt's Teams
34.1ppg,
9.6rpg, 5.3apg
Wilt
Chamberlain's 14 Season Career (23-36, 1045 games)
Actual Average:
30.1ppg,
22.9rpg, 4.4apg
Projected
Average on Jordan's Teams
26.6ppg,
14.9rpg, 4.4apg
Shaquille O'Neal's first 16 seasons (20-35, 1042 games)
Actual Average:
25.2ppg,
11.5apg, 2.7apg
Projected
Average on Wilt's teams:
29.0ppg,
17.5rpg, 2.9apg
Wilt
Chamberlain's 14 Season Career (23-36, 1045 games)
Actual Average:
30.1ppg,
22.9rpg, 4.4apg
Projected
Average on Shaq's teams:
26.2ppg,
14.9rpg, 4.1apg
LeBron James'
13 Season Career (19-31, 987 Games)
Actual Average:
27.2ppg,
7.2rpg, 6.9apg
Projected
Average on Wilt's teams:
32.2ppg,
11.4rpg, 8.1apg
Wilt
Chamberlain's First 13 Seasons (23-35, 963 games)
Actual Average:
31.5ppg,
23.3rpg, 4.4apg
Projected
Average on LeBron's teams:
26.6ppg,
14.6rpg, 3.8apg
|
Hakeem
Olajuwon's 1st 14 seasons (22-35, 1025 games)
Actual Average:
23.8ppg,
11.9rpg, 2.7apg
Projected
Average on Wilt's teams:
26.6ppg,
17.9rpg, 2.7apg
Wilt
Chamberlain's 14 Season Career (23-36, 1045 games)
Actual Average:
30.1ppg,
22.9rpg, 4.4apg
Projected
Average on Hakeem's teams:
27.0ppg,
15.2rpg, 4.5apg
Kareem
Abdul-Jabbar's first 13 Seasons (22-34, 1011 games)
Actual Average:
27.8ppg,
13.7rpg, 4.3apg
Projected
Average on Wilt's teams:
29.4ppg,
18.9rpg, 4.0apg
Wilt
Chamberlain's 14 Season Career (23-36, 1045 games)
Actual Average:
30.1ppg,
22.9rpg, 4.4apg
Projected
Average on Kareem's teams:
28.5ppg,
16.6rpg, 4.7apg
LeBron
James Seasons Between 23-31 (671 Games)
Actual
Average:
27.4ppg,
7.4rpg, 7.1apg
Projected
Average on Wilt's Teams:
32.1ppg,
12.7rpg, 7.3apg
Wilt
Chamberlain Seasons Between 23-31 (706 Games)
Actual
Average:
36.0ppg,
24.6rpg, 4.5apg
Projected
Average on LeBron's Teams
30.7ppg,
14.4rpg, 4.4apg
|
MVP’s During Wilt’s Career
|
The big man dominance was a staple before and after Chamberlain's career. From 1956-1980, the first 24 years the award was given out, a big man won it 22/24 seasons. Take out Bob Pettit at Power Forward and a center won it 20/24 seasons (Bob McAdoo was maybe an unconventional center, but was playing the position for the Braves that season). Two things are notable for this time period, whether viewed as a good or bad thing, the MVP was voted on by the players and secondly, the 3 point line was instituted in 1979-80 or the last year of this chart. The 3 point line is an important concept as before the undisputed, most efficient way to score was at the basket, raising the impact of the center on both ends. But, despite it's rarity of use early on, it still presents a newfound benefit to perimeter players, a way to be rewarded for not going inside to a big man. Also, subsequently, this devalues the center position. Competition is not only made up of MVP's though, most would want to see who the player faced on a night to night basis. MVP Between 1956-1980
 Not only were big men of greater importance, but they were the strongest position of the era and arguably the strongest collection of talent at the position in history. Wilt's competition, which excludes his own 5 MVPs, combined for a total of 14 MVP awards (Kareem 6x, Russell 5x, Unseld 1x, Reed 1x, Cowens 1x) in their careers. 11 of the listed centers were enshrined in the Hall of Fame as players and exempting the games where two of the Hall of Famers were teammates such as Willis Reed and Walt Bellamy, Wilt faced the Hall of Famers 415 times or 5.1 82 game seasons in total matched up against one of the listed Hall of Famers. Chamberlain would match up with another Hall of Fame center 2 out of every 5 games. Think about that, 40% of his regular season career was against one of the game's greats and that doesn't even take account for the other, on the verge, Hall of Fame caliber players or plain all-stars. The other point used against Chamberlain was the height of the players he faced. Many claim his positional competition overall were much shorter and therefore easier to handle. This simply is not the case. Using Basketball Reference, I took every listed center including those who were listed as both forwards and or centers and found the average height despite the fact adding in players who played center but were mainly forwards may knock down the average height. It didn't matter the amount of time the player held the position, even if it was only for limited use lineups. If the player was listed as having contributed at the position, they were counted. The time also didn't contain the exaggerations in height seen today, yet, his average opposing center was 6'9.75in (roughly 6'10). Again, with the allowance of forward-centers who may have been part time centers, but not specifically, the average height was knocked down. The only legitimate point would be the average weight was only 228lbs (roughly 230). Though lesser in weight, many of these were not updated throughout the player's careers often, rather, closer to the college weights. For example, Bill Russell is listed at 215lbs but was playing up to 240lbs and Wilt Chamberlain, listed at 275lbs, was playing at over 310lbs so the weights should be looked at but only with a grain of salt. The positional competition didn't stifle in the post season either, it strengthened to some of the greatest heights any player has had to deal with. Wilt's Hall of Fame positional match-ups in the post season (who he guarded so a player like Reed would only be counted for when he was center, not PF with Bellamy) featured Bill Russell (8 series), Nate Thurmond (3 series), Zelmo Beaty (2 series), Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (2 series), Willis Reed (2 series), Walt Bellamy (2 series), and Jerry Lucas (1 series). This doesn't even include the likes of Red Kerr (2 series), Wayne Embry (1 series) and Connie Dierking (1 series). Other series' included split minutes with the likes of Dennis Awtrey, Jim Fox and Tom Boerwinkle. Those are the players he was matched up with in post season series' and like the list of centers Wilt played against, crossover with other players listed were taken out and credit was given to whomever was the starting center or majority minutes holder. In other words, Chamberlain was directly matched up (Games) against Russell (49), Thurmond (17), Kareem (11), Bellamy (10), Reed (12), Lucas (5) or Beaty (12) (All in the Hall of Fame as players) in 72.5% of his career playoff games. That's not counting when Reed played power forward with Bellamy, Lucas at power forward next to Reed or Bob Pettit with Beaty. It also excludes players like Oscar Robertson, Rick Barry or any of the other great Celtics players. If the others are taken into consideration then it becomes even more incomparable. In his 6 Finals, Wilt's match-up (in order) was Russell, Thurmond, Russell, Reed, Lucas, then Reed. So, against two of the greatest defensive centers in NBA History, Wilt played his first three Finals then followed that up with another two hall of fame big men in Willis Reed (another great defender) and Jerry Lucas. Furthermore, Chamberlain was knocked out of the playoffs 11 times. 7 of those were to Russell's Celtics, 2 to Reed's Knicks, 1 to Kareem's Bucks, and 1 to the Nationals (during his 2nd season whilst averaging 37ppg and scoring at least 32pts in each game). Also, every team, besides the Nationals, would go on to win the championship that season meaning Wilt either won the championship or lost to the eventual champion in 12/13 playoff runs. Wilt would go on to actually join the Nationals, who became the 76ers, leading them to a championship surpassing the almost unstoppable Celtics and Wilt's former team, the Warriors. Then, after losing to the Knicks and Bucks in the previous two seasons, Wilt would go through them both in winning his 1972 championship. All of these elite teams that made him perish, he would ultimately conquer. Many focus on the idea of Wilt's losing rather than seeing who he lost to and the fact he always got them back at some point. One of Wilt's most popular defeats, the 1970 NBA Finals, the Game 7 Willis Reed return is always talked about along with Walt Frazier's all-time clutch performance. But, for that season, what is forgotten is that Wilt was lucky to even be in that series. Upon injuring his knee in November of 1969, Wilt was told by doctors that he would not be able to return that season. In response he spent up to 10 hours a day in rehab to quicken his comeback after surgery. Defying the odds Wilt was able to play by the end of the season and although fresh and looking pretty good, players are not fully recovered upon arrival. He went from averaging 32ppg his first 9 games to 12.7ppg in his limited 3 games back. Maybe his biggest career triumph came from playing through injury. In Game 5 of the 1972 Finals, Wilt finished the game with 24 points, at least 24 rebounds and 8 blocks as he finally won his second championship with the Lakers. Playing the game with no medication on his broken wrist, that was only protected by some wrap, Wilt capped off the win and received Finals MVP for his series performance. After winning Wilt said, "For a long time, fans of mine had to put up with people saying Wilt couldn't win the big ones. Now may be they'll have a chance to walk in peace, like I do." From regular season to post season it is very apparent the immense challenge of facing off every game against a top player at the position, not even adding in the other Hall of Famers at various positions. Elvin Hayes said of the era, "I've been through a generation of players...I've been part of the 1960s, the 70s, and the 80s...the Era of the late 60s, well, that was basketball, I feel those were the real golden years". Nate Thurmond possessed a similar view of the league competition saying in an interview, "First of all, there were only about 10 teams. They had Russell, Wilt, Kareem, McAdoo, Lanier, Reed, Bob Rule, every team had a guy who was a good center who you had to work against. No question the talent was less diluted then." Thurmond was quite the player himself. Known for his incredible defensive abilities was considered by Wilt to be his best defender, up with Russell, of course.
Wilt Chamberlain on Nate Thurmond's tremendous defense especially against him..
It was true, Thurmond was mentored by Chamberlain but also studied how to defend him for the inevitable future match-up. For guarding Chamberlain, Thurmond said he had to guard him "not by trying to block every shot, but by positioning myself to keep him from his best percentage shots.". But, it wasn't just Wilt who Thurmond had success against. Rather more famously Thurmond had success with the league's all-time leading scorer, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar who said of Thurmond, "A lot of people beat me up and said they played good defense against me. Nate really did. Nate was first and [Bill] Walton second.”
Thurmond spoke of going to one of his games during Kareem's rookie season to scout him and used it to make a statement in his first game, which he believed gave him the upper hand for the rest of his career against him. Thurmond described the best way to cover Kareem saying, "You had to try to take away what he was best at, the sky hook. Make him go a little further away and let him take a baseline jumper. I played him to go left and forced him to go right and take the jumper. The hook was 70 percent successful, while the baseline jumper was only about forty percent successful. You don’t let the guy who’s the high scorer get tip-ins and get easy points."
Staying within the analysis of eras it is also noteworthy that Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, another all-time great who played against 60s competition all the way through 80s competition, considered a 60’s player in Oscar Robertson as the best player he had ever seen and another 60s player in Nate Thurmond as the best defensive player he had ever faced. |
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar’s (22-25 years old) Overall Regular Season
Averages between 1969-73 (The years he faced Wilt)
31.4/15.8/4.2 55.6%
Regular Season Averages vs Wilt
17 Games
31.8/15.8/3.5 46.4%
|
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar’s (23-24 years old) Overall Post Season Averages
between 1971-72 (The years he faced Wilt)
27.5/17.5/3.6 47.5%
Post Season Averages vs Wilt
11 Games
29.7/17.4/4.5 46.4%
|
Wilt Chamberlain’s (33-36 years old) Overall Regular Season Averages
between 1969-73 (The years he faced Kareem)
16.7/18.7/4.2 61.3%
Regular Season Averages vs Kareem
17 Games
16.3/17.7/3.7 56%
|
Wilt Chamberlain’s (34-35 years old) Overall Post Season Averages
between 1971-72 (The years he faced Kareem)
16.3/20.6/3.8 50.2%
Post Season Averages vs Kareem
11 Games
15.9/19.1/2.7 48%
|
Many people have a basic view of the Kareem and Wilt match-ups. Either it is 'Wilt dominated Kareem' or 'Kareem dominated Wilt'. But, for the most part, statistically, they produced similarly to how they did against others. That's not to say that they did not have any big games against one another. Kareem, in their 28 head to head match-ups, had a 50 point game and a pair of 40 point games (one of which was in the playoffs). On the other hand, in the 1972 Western Conference Finals, Kareem averaged 33.7ppg which is a good total, but on only 45.7% (or 15/33 per game). The defense was forceful with Wilt having two notable games of 10 blocks and 9 blocks and also blocking Kareem alone a total of 13 times in the 3 game sample size that was collected. But, overall, there was a mixed bag of efficient performances by Kareem to wildly inefficient games. And, for Wilt, early on he scored pretty well averaging over 20 points per game with efficiency brought down to 51.6% (or 8/15.5) in those games but in his last two seasons he often scored in the single digits as his role on offense digressed even more. Now, is this prime for prime? No, it should be noted that this is the height of Kareem scoring between his entry into the league at 22 to 25 years old whereas Wilt with an age ranging from 33-36 was in his regressed role with regressed knees, mainly focused on rebounding, defense and using the threat of his scoring to open up shooters from the post. With that being said, I made regular season and post season comparisons of Wilt and Kareem's production against each other (shown above) with how they did against all others. Looking at it from surface view, Wilt's numbers across the board had a collected slight decrease and Kareem's had some increases in scoring and an almost 10% point decrease in regular season FG%. For the most part, their production was the same, not really the shutdown that fans of either side make it out to be besides for specific stretches such as the aforementioned 1972 Western Conference Finals Series. These are arguably the two greatest players ever and although facing off at different points in their careers, they remain an argument themselves. Only fitting to have Nate Thurmond give his take, breaking down Kareem and Wilt. His merit is more than any other player in marked by his success on the defensive end against the two. Thurmond contrasted their offensive games saying, "Kareem had more of a repertoire and was harder to stop. He had a little more versatility when he set up on the floor. Wilt liked the left side, but Jabbar set up on either side. Wilt would rely on the fade-away 70 percent of time; Kareem’s hook was in the same range. I couldn’t stop him from shooting the hook; I could make him take awkward hooks or baseline jumpers. You really couldn’t keep Wilt from taking the fade-away, but you could try to him shoot it a step further out. He was a great fade-away shooter. If you got in close, and he had you out of position, then you could foul him and save yourself one point."
Further analyzing the two along with the other all-time great center in Bill Russell, Thurmond said which one he thought was the best, "I’m going to say that Kareem was the best all-around, and with Wilt and Russell, it depended on what team you needed them for. I just happen to think that all the way around, Kareem was the best. His height, his versatility, his desire and gracefulness. Those three were so close— how they dominated, how they won, how they scored. With Russell, throw in the defense. You could put them all in a bag and take your pick. Wilt was the best scorer ever and Russell the best defensive center. What made Russ the best was that he never blocked the ball out of bounds. I liked to block it in the third row to let the guy know that I didn’t just tip it! I was making a statement."
Sticking with the Wilt versus Kareem debate, for now, another player who gave his opinion on the matter was Wali Jones. When asked if Wilt was the best player of all time, Jones responded by saying, "In history. In the history of basketball, how could you question that? As an individual, he's the greatest basketball player ever to put on sneaks. I'm honored because I've played with some great centers; Walt Bellamy, Bob Lanier, Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Moses Malone, Darryl Dawkins and Darrall Imhoff. Then you talk about Archie Clark, Hal Greer and Oscar Robertson. I've played with some of the greatest guards in the history of basketball." He was then asked about the qualities the great players (specifically Kareem, Wilt and Moses) share and said, "The intensity of wanting to rebound and dominate the boards. I played with Moses who said he was going to dominate and break some records and this was a 19-year old kid! That's the way Wilt was too. I learned how to be a professional through athletes like Larry Costello, Hal and Wilt because they set goals. To have a guy like Wilt want to dominate offensive and defensive rebounding was phenomenal. When he had 55 rebounds, that was just unbelievable. Guys get 10 rebounds and he averaged over 20."
LeRoy Ellis, who played with Wilt and faced both Kareem and Russell said Wilt and Kareem stood apart from the rest and "[Kareem and Wilt] were the best because they were so impossible to stop -- and they could stop you if they wanted to. [Bill Russell] was the greatest defensive player I ever played against, but on offense he wasn't impossible to stop like those other two."
Speaking of rebounding, only two players for their careers were even close to averaging 20 rebounds. Along with Chamberlain, the all-time leader, the only other player to average 20 rebounds was Bill Russell.
Jerry West's statement is a fair assessment saying although Wilt is the better basketball player that in a single game setting, Russell had shown his ability to make big plays and the track record to prove the sentiment with all of his championships. The 1969 NBA Finals are what have plagued Chamberlain's career with the season and specifically the game 7 loss acting as a culmination for all of Chamberlain's faults. The narrative goes that Wilt was a coach killer, all about himself and was not the winner Russell was in his career. The scene was set with Chamberlain having forced his way to the West Coast, on a team that was stacked with talent in Baylor and West, but needed that last piece to push them over after a Finals loss the previous season. The casual observer would see it this way and view it as the storybook way of telling the story of Wilt, but with that narrative came many holes. The problem is that the situation was much more complicated than that. First, critics neglect to look at the team Chamberlain was going to. Championships are won with a consistent identity that is reflected in the players the team consists of, or simply speaking, it is based on the mesh of talent not clash of talent. The previous season's Finals team was consistent with the philosophy of their coach, Butch van Breda Kolff who took one of the smallest teams in history to the Finals predicated on speed and defense. Adding a traditional big man like Chamberlain would mean that the team wouldn't be able to run (in both senses) the same type of offense as before yet they kept a supporting cast built for that offense. Feeling forced to have Chamberlain because of the attendance benefits (going up roughly 7,000 per game) while trying to prove his style effective made the Breda Kolff-Chamberlain relationship strained from the start. The two would often voiced frustrations through the newspapers (Wilt- Herald Examiner, Breda Kolff- LA Times). Chemistry doesn't happen over night and it certainly didn't with the Lakers not only because of coaching style differences but because the coaching style was reflected in the personnel chosen to fill the team. The play-styles clashed as they tried to figure out how to play with each other, especially between Baylor (whom Breda Kolff loved) and Chamberlain. Because Wilt was a traditional post player, Baylor did not have the space to use his slashing abilities when paired on the same side. In the words of Tom Hawkins, when someone would cut on the same side as Chamberlain, they would be met with Wilt saying, "My man, don't cut through here [paint] when I'm working.". Plugging in talent does not guarantee results and this was also exemplified by Tom Hawkins. The Lakers were supposed to win in 1969 "And it didn't happen, basically, it didn't happen because of the conflicts that existed with the team all year long.". Hawkins would go on to say, "I was rooming with Keith Erickson at the time and I told Keith if Elgin takes 20 shots, Wilt takes 20 shots, and Jerry takes 20 shots, what is left for us? So, whenever you get it, launch it!"
To go along with the 'Big 3' needing their touches, the team the previous season featured seven different players averaging double figures. So, with the team's philosophy changes despite little personnel changes, the individual style clash (Players/Coaches), and the attempt to balance the touches through 3 stars, the Lakers were lucky to even get to the Finals as they also went down 2-0 in the first round to the Warriors before coming back and ultimately making the Finals on "talent alone". The tension would build throughout the season and erupt in the most important game of their lives. The infamous Game 7 looked to be over but with both Sam Jones and Bill Russell with 5 fouls, the Lakers were able to take advantage on offense going to Chamberlain and (mostly) West in the fourth quarter. Chamberlain was doubled whenever he got the ball leaving West open and the team started cutting into the 17 point deficit. Then, it happened. Chamberlain went up for a rebound and severely injured his knee. At first, the medical staff came out and sprayed his knee to prevent swelling, and the game went on. Clearly hobbled, it only took one more bump on the next play to force Chamberlain to take himself out of the game and immediately was wrapped with ice. That was the beginning of the controversy. When live ball resumed, the momentum was all in the Lakers favor and the lead was cut by 10 to only 7 points. The momentum continued, fueled by West, and after turning it over on a travel, Chamberlain's replacement, Mel Counts, hit a jumper to make it a 1 point game with only 3 minutes to go. At this point Chamberlain had already told one of his teammates to let the coach know he was going to try and finish the game. For those who thought Wilt didn't care about winning, this was proof he did. Not only did Chamberlain severely mess up his knee but in a 1987 interview also revealed that he "tore apart" his achilles tendon. This would be important because even a limited Wilt could either finish over a foul troubled Russell or draw a double to keep the hot-handed West momentum, and with 3 minutes left it would only seem that the Lakers would pull it out. But, Breda Kolff had other plans. See, Counts was his style center. The Lakers would allow the Celtics to exploit his lackluster defense as long as they could push the ball up and use his outside shooting to force Russell out and thus prove his offensive style greater than Wilt's. So, when Hawkins told Breda Kolff that Chamberlain was ready to come back in, Hawkins claims Breda Kolff said, "You tell Chamberlain to go fuck himself.". After a Celtics' free throw, the lead was 2 points and without Chamberlain to draw the defense, West was doubled and subsequently turned it over then doubled the next possession and forced to pass it off. But, without Wilt in the post, the double gave no advantage as Egan passed his shot off to Erickson who couldn't get it to Baylor underneath. Had Wilt been brought back into the offense after cutting the lead down to a point the game would have been completely different down the stretch. The Lakers would have really benefited from the slower pace (as they began getting flustered and forcing plays) in that situation combined with having a reliable inside option to take pressure off of West who was stifled by the Celtics defense (doubles) late in the game. As history tells us, the Celtics would end up winning the game and Chamberlain wouldn't be able to redeem himself for another 3 years and for many, ever. Maybe it was the chemistry, maybe the injury, maybe the style clash, pick your choice. As for Wilt, he never could figure it out saying, "Yeah, we should have. Boston was not worthy to be in the same league with us. We had Elgin Baylor, who was no longer the Elgin of old. His knees had started to really bother him and yet he was still the man on the team so we played to him a lot where we maybe shouldn't have. I should have maybe become a better scorer at that time. I was placating them with passes and so forth and maybe I should have changed my game back a little to where I used to play. Our coach didn't care for me at all and I didn't care for him, so we had a lot of friction. With all that going on, no way should we have lost to Boston (in 1969). No way. I still don't know how we lost to Boston. Its a mystery to me."
Further analyzing the two along with the other all-time great center in Bill Russell, Thurmond said which one he thought was the best, "I’m going to say that Kareem was the best all-around, and with Wilt and Russell, it depended on what team you needed them for. I just happen to think that all the way around, Kareem was the best. His height, his versatility, his desire and gracefulness. Those three were so close— how they dominated, how they won, how they scored. With Russell, throw in the defense. You could put them all in a bag and take your pick. Wilt was the best scorer ever and Russell the best defensive center. What made Russ the best was that he never blocked the ball out of bounds. I liked to block it in the third row to let the guy know that I didn’t just tip it! I was making a statement."
Sticking with the Wilt versus Kareem debate, for now, another player who gave his opinion on the matter was Wali Jones. When asked if Wilt was the best player of all time, Jones responded by saying, "In history. In the history of basketball, how could you question that? As an individual, he's the greatest basketball player ever to put on sneaks. I'm honored because I've played with some great centers; Walt Bellamy, Bob Lanier, Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Moses Malone, Darryl Dawkins and Darrall Imhoff. Then you talk about Archie Clark, Hal Greer and Oscar Robertson. I've played with some of the greatest guards in the history of basketball." He was then asked about the qualities the great players (specifically Kareem, Wilt and Moses) share and said, "The intensity of wanting to rebound and dominate the boards. I played with Moses who said he was going to dominate and break some records and this was a 19-year old kid! That's the way Wilt was too. I learned how to be a professional through athletes like Larry Costello, Hal and Wilt because they set goals. To have a guy like Wilt want to dominate offensive and defensive rebounding was phenomenal. When he had 55 rebounds, that was just unbelievable. Guys get 10 rebounds and he averaged over 20."
LeRoy Ellis, who played with Wilt and faced both Kareem and Russell said Wilt and Kareem stood apart from the rest and "[Kareem and Wilt] were the best because they were so impossible to stop -- and they could stop you if they wanted to. [Bill Russell] was the greatest defensive player I ever played against, but on offense he wasn't impossible to stop like those other two."
Speaking of rebounding, only two players for their careers were even close to averaging 20 rebounds. Along with Chamberlain, the all-time leader, the only other player to average 20 rebounds was Bill Russell.
Jerry West's statement is a fair assessment saying although Wilt is the better basketball player that in a single game setting, Russell had shown his ability to make big plays and the track record to prove the sentiment with all of his championships. The 1969 NBA Finals are what have plagued Chamberlain's career with the season and specifically the game 7 loss acting as a culmination for all of Chamberlain's faults. The narrative goes that Wilt was a coach killer, all about himself and was not the winner Russell was in his career. The scene was set with Chamberlain having forced his way to the West Coast, on a team that was stacked with talent in Baylor and West, but needed that last piece to push them over after a Finals loss the previous season. The casual observer would see it this way and view it as the storybook way of telling the story of Wilt, but with that narrative came many holes. The problem is that the situation was much more complicated than that. First, critics neglect to look at the team Chamberlain was going to. Championships are won with a consistent identity that is reflected in the players the team consists of, or simply speaking, it is based on the mesh of talent not clash of talent. The previous season's Finals team was consistent with the philosophy of their coach, Butch van Breda Kolff who took one of the smallest teams in history to the Finals predicated on speed and defense. Adding a traditional big man like Chamberlain would mean that the team wouldn't be able to run (in both senses) the same type of offense as before yet they kept a supporting cast built for that offense. Feeling forced to have Chamberlain because of the attendance benefits (going up roughly 7,000 per game) while trying to prove his style effective made the Breda Kolff-Chamberlain relationship strained from the start. The two would often voiced frustrations through the newspapers (Wilt- Herald Examiner, Breda Kolff- LA Times). Chemistry doesn't happen over night and it certainly didn't with the Lakers not only because of coaching style differences but because the coaching style was reflected in the personnel chosen to fill the team. The play-styles clashed as they tried to figure out how to play with each other, especially between Baylor (whom Breda Kolff loved) and Chamberlain. Because Wilt was a traditional post player, Baylor did not have the space to use his slashing abilities when paired on the same side. In the words of Tom Hawkins, when someone would cut on the same side as Chamberlain, they would be met with Wilt saying, "My man, don't cut through here [paint] when I'm working.". Plugging in talent does not guarantee results and this was also exemplified by Tom Hawkins. The Lakers were supposed to win in 1969 "And it didn't happen, basically, it didn't happen because of the conflicts that existed with the team all year long.". Hawkins would go on to say, "I was rooming with Keith Erickson at the time and I told Keith if Elgin takes 20 shots, Wilt takes 20 shots, and Jerry takes 20 shots, what is left for us? So, whenever you get it, launch it!"
To go along with the 'Big 3' needing their touches, the team the previous season featured seven different players averaging double figures. So, with the team's philosophy changes despite little personnel changes, the individual style clash (Players/Coaches), and the attempt to balance the touches through 3 stars, the Lakers were lucky to even get to the Finals as they also went down 2-0 in the first round to the Warriors before coming back and ultimately making the Finals on "talent alone". The tension would build throughout the season and erupt in the most important game of their lives. The infamous Game 7 looked to be over but with both Sam Jones and Bill Russell with 5 fouls, the Lakers were able to take advantage on offense going to Chamberlain and (mostly) West in the fourth quarter. Chamberlain was doubled whenever he got the ball leaving West open and the team started cutting into the 17 point deficit. Then, it happened. Chamberlain went up for a rebound and severely injured his knee. At first, the medical staff came out and sprayed his knee to prevent swelling, and the game went on. Clearly hobbled, it only took one more bump on the next play to force Chamberlain to take himself out of the game and immediately was wrapped with ice. That was the beginning of the controversy. When live ball resumed, the momentum was all in the Lakers favor and the lead was cut by 10 to only 7 points. The momentum continued, fueled by West, and after turning it over on a travel, Chamberlain's replacement, Mel Counts, hit a jumper to make it a 1 point game with only 3 minutes to go. At this point Chamberlain had already told one of his teammates to let the coach know he was going to try and finish the game. For those who thought Wilt didn't care about winning, this was proof he did. Not only did Chamberlain severely mess up his knee but in a 1987 interview also revealed that he "tore apart" his achilles tendon. This would be important because even a limited Wilt could either finish over a foul troubled Russell or draw a double to keep the hot-handed West momentum, and with 3 minutes left it would only seem that the Lakers would pull it out. But, Breda Kolff had other plans. See, Counts was his style center. The Lakers would allow the Celtics to exploit his lackluster defense as long as they could push the ball up and use his outside shooting to force Russell out and thus prove his offensive style greater than Wilt's. So, when Hawkins told Breda Kolff that Chamberlain was ready to come back in, Hawkins claims Breda Kolff said, "You tell Chamberlain to go fuck himself.". After a Celtics' free throw, the lead was 2 points and without Chamberlain to draw the defense, West was doubled and subsequently turned it over then doubled the next possession and forced to pass it off. But, without Wilt in the post, the double gave no advantage as Egan passed his shot off to Erickson who couldn't get it to Baylor underneath. Had Wilt been brought back into the offense after cutting the lead down to a point the game would have been completely different down the stretch. The Lakers would have really benefited from the slower pace (as they began getting flustered and forcing plays) in that situation combined with having a reliable inside option to take pressure off of West who was stifled by the Celtics defense (doubles) late in the game. As history tells us, the Celtics would end up winning the game and Chamberlain wouldn't be able to redeem himself for another 3 years and for many, ever. Maybe it was the chemistry, maybe the injury, maybe the style clash, pick your choice. As for Wilt, he never could figure it out saying, "Yeah, we should have. Boston was not worthy to be in the same league with us. We had Elgin Baylor, who was no longer the Elgin of old. His knees had started to really bother him and yet he was still the man on the team so we played to him a lot where we maybe shouldn't have. I should have maybe become a better scorer at that time. I was placating them with passes and so forth and maybe I should have changed my game back a little to where I used to play. Our coach didn't care for me at all and I didn't care for him, so we had a lot of friction. With all that going on, no way should we have lost to Boston (in 1969). No way. I still don't know how we lost to Boston. Its a mystery to me."
Chamberlain- 10x
Russell- 10x
Lucas- 2x
Thurmond- 1x
Pettit- 1x
Wilt Chamberlain is also famously known for setting the NBA record for rebounds in a game against the era's other greatest rebounder, Bill Russell. A forgotten fact of this game was though Wilt set the new record of 55 rebounds, his team lost by 3 points and when asked afterword Chamberlain said, "Well I'd have felt a lot better if we'd won. We were trying hard to win and the loss takes the luster away from it (the record)"
This record setting game somewhat defines Wilt's career with Russell. Chamberlain sets the record and has arguably the biggest impact of any player ever yet it is still not enough. One could argue the difference in abilities between Russell and Chamberlain, their respective impacts, but it is hard to argue that from an overall career perspective that their teammates were anywhere near close in talent. Below is a breakdown of players who were named to the Hall of Fame (as players) as well as the all-stars each played with not even considering the differences in fit and talent of the other role players making up each's roster.
This record setting game somewhat defines Wilt's career with Russell. Chamberlain sets the record and has arguably the biggest impact of any player ever yet it is still not enough. One could argue the difference in abilities between Russell and Chamberlain, their respective impacts, but it is hard to argue that from an overall career perspective that their teammates were anywhere near close in talent. Below is a breakdown of players who were named to the Hall of Fame (as players) as well as the all-stars each played with not even considering the differences in fit and talent of the other role players making up each's roster.
Teammates
*All Star
+HOF as player (Tom Sanders, for example, is in as a contributor so he is not counted
Wilt Chamberlain Bill Russell
1957
|
N/A
|
*- Sharman, Cousy, Heinsohn
+- Sharman, Cousy, Heinsohn, Ramsey, Risen
|
1958
|
N/A
|
*- Sharman, Cousy
+- Sharman, Cousy, K.C., Sam, Heinsohn, Risen
|
1959
|
N/A
|
*- Sharman, Cousy
+- Sharman, Cousy, Ramsey, K.C., Sam, Heinsohn
|
1960
|
*- Gola, Arizin
+- Gola, Arizin, Rodgers
|
*- Sharman, Cousy
+- Sharman, Cousy, Ramsey, K.C., Sam, Heinsohn
|
1961
|
*- Gola, Arizin
+- Gola, Arizin, Rodgers
|
*- Cousy, Heinsohn
+- Sharman, Cousy, Ramsey, K.C., Sam, Heinsohn
|
1962
|
*- Arizin
+- Arizin, Rodgers
|
*- Cousy, Heinsohn, Sam
+- Sharman, Cousy, Ramsey, Heinsohn, K.C., Sam
|
1963
|
*- Rodgers, Meschery
+- Rodgers
|
*- Cousy, Heinsohn
+- Cousy, Ramsey, Heinsohn, K.C., Sam, Havlicek, Lovellette
|
1964
|
*- Rodgers
+- Rodgers, Thurmond
|
*- Sam, Heinsohn
+- Ramsey, Heinsohn, K.C., Sam, Havlicek, Lovellette
|
1965
|
*- Greer, Jackson, Costello
+- Greer
|
*- Sam, Heinsohn
+- Heinsohn, Sam, K.C., Havlicek
|
1966
|
*- Greer, Walker
+- Greer, Walker, Cunningham
|
*- Sam, Havlicek
+- K.C., Sam, Havlicek
|
1967
|
*- Greer, Walker
+- Greer, Walker, Cunningham
|
*- Havlicek, Howell
+- Howell, Havlicek, Sam, K.C.
|
1968
|
*- Greer
+- Greer, Walker, Cunningham
|
*- Sam, Havlicek
+- Havlicek, Howell, Sam
|
1969
|
*- Baylor, West
+- Baylor, West
|
*- Havlicek
+- Havlicek, Howell, Sam
|
1970
|
*- Baylor, West
+- Baylor, West
|
N/A
|
1971
|
*- West
+- West, Goodrich
|
N/A
|
1972
|
*- West, Goodrich
+- West, Goodrich
|
N/A
|
1973
|
*- West, Goodrich
+- West, Goodrich
|
N/A
|
Total
|
Seasons: 14
*- 25
+- 31
|
Seasons: 13
*- 27
+- 65
|
(Examples like Tom Gola, All-Star in ’62 with Warriors, was traded to NYK that season were discounted to reflect playoff support)
Part of the Celtics' dominance was not only in Russell, but his supporting casts. He played a consistent team game for his whole career, though stepping up in many key situations to lead his team to victory, it was also from key plays carried out notoriously by players like Sam Jones (on multiple occasions), John Havlicek and even Don Nelson. The difference in the two player's supporting casts may not seem much on the surface and the all-stars and Hall of Famers (as players) do not tell the whole story, because there are players that never get accounted for like a Tom Sanders having never been an all star nor in the Hall of Fame as a player. It is very striking though the sheer depth of Hall of Fame talent whether in prime or not in how the two differ. In comparing the two, without the chart, it was known that Russell's teams had the upper hand in terms of depth for the majority of his career. But, taking into account the facts the chart shows, Russell possessed over twice as many Hall of Famers in total while playing 1 fewer season and over twice as many Hall of Famers (HOF) per average season. Russell on average had 5.0 HOF teammates on average per season basically meaning that the Celtics had a starting 5's worth (not necessarily a starting 5 based on or predicated on this measure) as well as a 6th man HOFer coming off the bench every season compared to Wilt averaging 2.2 HOF players per season which in itself is impressive on the surface, not in comparison to Russell though. The Celtics at points had both Clyde Lovellette and Wayne Embry to backup Russell which is part of the added depth people refer to when comparing the teams. Two great players and Lovellette was a big help in his defense of Chamberlain off the bench. Russell said of Wilt in 1960, "I can't muscle him, like say Foust or Lovellette or some of those other guys because I don't have the strength. He's a different experience for me. Once he has the ball it's almost impossible to stop him."
Wilt had a history with Lovellette, Al Attles told of one of their encounters, "The things I saw guys do to do him was unbelievable, Clyde Lovellette hit him with that elbow that drove Wilt's lower teeth up into his jaw and put him the hospital and caused an infection. That was the worst of it, but he was always being beat up and abused."
While Russell was thinking of what knew tactics to use in covering Chamberlain, on the other side, Chamberlain did not see the same threat. Wilt said of facing Russell, "I had to worry about the Celtics, I didn't have to worry about guarding Bill Russell. I didn't think so much when I played the Celtics was "What is Russ going to do against me?" I was more worried about the whole team and the whole team played me. I mean they had 3 and 4 guys on me from town to town, Russ would just move behind me."
Wilt, himself spoke multiple times on this during and after his career and as a rookie in 1960. When asked who the best team was he immediately said, "Boston, they're beatable though. We've done it 3 times. The trouble is nobody else is anywhere near consistent against them as we are. What will happen if we meet in the playoffs is a matter of conjecture. Let's be honest. They have the best bench. We can match them in first fives but our bench, which has great potential hasn't developed yet. They send Frank Ramsey and Sam Jones who will kill you just when you think you've got em. There is no letdown when Jones comes in for Bob Cousy. I have every regard for Cousy, but Jones, next to Russell is the best player the Celts have."
In later years, Chamberlain was criticized for averaging 50 points, but not winning a title. In his defense, Warriors coach Frank McGuire said "Wilt has been simply super-human", and pointed out that the Warriors lacked a consistent second scorer, a play-maker, and a second big man to take pressure off Chamberlain. Nate Thurmond agreed with this sentiment, when asked if he agreed with his own past quote that Wilt would have won just as many championships as Russell if he were on the Celtics, Nate Thurmond said, "That’s right. That’s not taking anything away from Russell’s talent, but he was surrounded with great players." and also went on to say, "I don’t think anybody liked the Celtics. They were a hated team. They won any way they could; they would even tug on your pants. They had eight or nine (quality) players—we could go through the list—everyone else had three or four.".
Wilt actually disagreed with this in exact interpretation saying, “What I respected about Bill, more than anything else, was that he basically played me in a manner that I think the game of basketball should be played. He knew he couldn't out physical me and he never tried. He would try to steal the ball, he would use his quickness, he would use his agility, he would use the things that he had going for him to play wonderfully strong defense with the help from his team. No other player ever played me that way. That team wasn't so great until he got there. Once he got there, he was the piece that they were looking for. A lot of people have said to me, "Wilt, what if you had that team? Boy, you would never have lost!" Not true. If I was on their team, I would be taking away from some of what the other guys were doing. Everybody had a role on that team. (Tom) Heinsohn wouldn't be getting the same number of shots, nor would (Bill) Sharman, nor would (Bob) Cousy because I'd be shooting the ball a whole lot more. Bill Russell gave them just what they needed. I would've given them a little bit more in certain things, which I think would have made the team not as good. I've always believed that he made that team exactly what it was supposed to be. And you couldn't get any better.”
Chamberlain acknowledged that despite the team being better, it did not necessarily mean he would automatically win with the same roster rather that Russell was just the perfect piece for that specific team and filled the void allowing for them to win. Another way to look at it is if Wilt was given the perfect roster for his abilities he would be as, if not more, successful, but that Celtics team wasn't designed specifically for him as it was Russell.
A teammate of Chamberlain, Tom Meschery, admitted, "Bill won (vs. the Warriors) because his team was always a little better, his coach was a little better and because his team played better together than Wilt's."
Billy Cunningham said of judging the Russell vs Chamberlain debate solely on championships, "I think it is very unfair, with the supporting cast that Bill Russell had, as great of a player he was, one player doesn't win championships. You need a balanced team, and if you see how many players went on to the Hall of Fame, then you look at truly great players Jerry West and Oscar Robertson during that era, who could easily be the two best guards that ever played the game, they didn't win championships either (in the '60's). Jerry was fortunate enough to be playing with Wilt to win his first one, and Oscar had to go to Milwaukee to play with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar to win one, and Michael Jordan went several years before he got a supporting cast that helped him to achieve world championships. I think it is very unfair; the only reason that Wilt's teams have had any success was because he had to put up the numbers he did to have a chance."
Even though he lost in 7 out of the 8 series' versus the Celtics, Wilt was still able to bring four of them to 7 games where he lost those games by a total of 9 points or on average 2.25 points. Wilt's teams in most of these cases were lucky to had even brought the series that far let alone within 2 points. For example, in game 7 of their 1962 series the scene was set and the pressure was on. In game 2, Wilt scored 42 points (16 in the 4th quarter) along with 37 rebounds to pull off a 113-106 victory over the Celtics. Now, in game 7, the Warriors needed that same magic. Wilt at the time only had 17 points and with 50 seconds left was down 107-102. So, he scored 5 straight points, including a 3 point play, to tie it all up only for Sam Jones to ruin the moment with a game winning shot with 1 second left. After the game, Tom Meschery said, "The Boston players, man-for-man, were better players than the Warriors. To go as far as we did was Wilt's doing. We came within two points of the championship." In regards to my opinion of the matter, though recognizing both sides, think Wilt was the better player. As a scorer it is not close. Russell had his seldom used jumper and his hook shot but it did not compare to Wilt's arsenal. Besides the obvious strength advantage in the post, Wilt had one of the best big man fade-aways. Along with this was his finger roll and under basket scoop shots. He was better with his ball fakes and the inside-out threat, especially earlier in his career is where his separation comes from. Wilt's overall skill and ability to get the position he wanted is very much why he was so efficient. Rebounding was close as both could get up for them and Russell was very explosive, probably a little quicker, but again the advantage slightly goes in favor of Wilt because of a matching ability combined with the physical edge which is far from a small part of the battle on the boards. Passing wise, the edge lies in Russell's favor. Wilt could individually find cutters and work an offense but the difference is in just how swift Russell was in his passing, understanding set plays and how to initiate more offense in an open manner. Specifically, Russell was quick to identify shooters so he could pass off and screen his man's defender for an open jumper or drive. Chamberlain's main advantage was how he palmed and swooped the ball over and around players making an illusion of the ball moving whereas Russell's came more within the offense. Both were great fast break initiators with Russell being the quickest to outlet and Wilt either holding the ball or going for a long range pass. Both were accurate, Russell's occurring much more frequently to impact the offense. Wilt's were more timely. Maybe it's a little unfair to Wilt seeing as the Celtics' offense emphasized team play, regardless, Russell proved to be consistently great, and slightly more effective. Defensively, Russell had the range and the movement that give him the real edge. When it came to pure back to basket play or at the rim, Wilt was the guy. But, in overall ability to follow a man, cross the lane and defend another shot still with an ability to move back the other way, Russell, the greatest defender in history, wins in regards to defense. Overall, taking everything into consideration, I find Chamberlain to be the better player. That opinion comes with complete respect and understanding of Russell's greatness unlike how others comment nowadays. Simply put, not only did Chamberlain show an overall better set of abilities and ways to impact the game, he also did it in every role. Wilt could be the best scorer on a championship team (would have if not for unlucky circumstances), he proved he could do it as the lead facilitator, and always as the lead rebounder and defender. Wilt didn't need the ball to dominate and if he did, he was always the most efficient. Without the ball, Chamberlain could still rebound and protect the rim and at that time, the most effective offense was scoring at the rim which only exemplifies the importance of the center position. And no matter the public opinion is of Chamberlain, no one can deny that.
Rick Barry in an interview was asked to explain why he would pick Wilt over anyone in history and said, “Because he’s the greatest big man in the history of the game and you win with big men. And Wilt would adapt his game accordingly. If Wilt had the good fortune of having as many great teammates as Bill Russell had I think that his record of championships would have been phenomenal. If you look and you see what he accomplished when he was surrounded by great people, the 67’ Sixers team, everybody talks about that being maybe one of the greatest teams ever and what happened? Wilt helped them win a championship because he had great personnel. Then when he was even older he played on a Lakers team and they set the record for most consecutive wins, won the championship. Why because Wilt was willing to do whatever was necessary.”
I’d like to point out that he is not calling him the greatest player of all time but rather like the question asks, the player he’d start a team with. Rick Barry considers the greatest of all positions as a ridiculous claim comparing it to comparing a pitcher to a center fielder. Bill Russell, himself, had once complimented Wilt on his team play saying, "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." Now, this may not actually be something to read too far into as he probably was just using himself, as a way of putting Wilt's improvements into perspective. Part of why the 76ers won in 1967 was because of Wilt making his teammates better and the IQ of Wilt and his teammates. Wali Jones in an interview with ProHoopsHistory's Curtis Harris described the importance of this saying, “In our heads we were intellectually smart but we had Hal Greer, Larry Costello, intelligent, Chet Walker. The Reinassance man, one of the most intellectual men on our team, was Wilt Chamberlain. See when you have a man like him that would see how he could make everybody better. Now, our offense was just like Portland Trail Blazers when they won the championship. Dr. Ramsay took the same offense. Now Alex [Hannum] told us was, “He is the cog.” But what he did. He made us move and he would just and all that comes and people don’t give him the credit. Playing with the Globetrotters, I mean, he could do, Oh my goodness, the way he handled the ball. He was a great passer, not only a great passer but how to encourage you. See, guys like him, when you see your leader and we had other leaders- Hal Greer, quiet leader, Larry Costello, quiet leader. In practice, they practiced. And you would emulate, extra work, extra thought process, this is what you should do. So, intellectually, we had a very smart team that could finally compete with the Boston Celtics. But, we were all so physical.”
Wilt had a history with Lovellette, Al Attles told of one of their encounters, "The things I saw guys do to do him was unbelievable, Clyde Lovellette hit him with that elbow that drove Wilt's lower teeth up into his jaw and put him the hospital and caused an infection. That was the worst of it, but he was always being beat up and abused."
While Russell was thinking of what knew tactics to use in covering Chamberlain, on the other side, Chamberlain did not see the same threat. Wilt said of facing Russell, "I had to worry about the Celtics, I didn't have to worry about guarding Bill Russell. I didn't think so much when I played the Celtics was "What is Russ going to do against me?" I was more worried about the whole team and the whole team played me. I mean they had 3 and 4 guys on me from town to town, Russ would just move behind me."
Wilt, himself spoke multiple times on this during and after his career and as a rookie in 1960. When asked who the best team was he immediately said, "Boston, they're beatable though. We've done it 3 times. The trouble is nobody else is anywhere near consistent against them as we are. What will happen if we meet in the playoffs is a matter of conjecture. Let's be honest. They have the best bench. We can match them in first fives but our bench, which has great potential hasn't developed yet. They send Frank Ramsey and Sam Jones who will kill you just when you think you've got em. There is no letdown when Jones comes in for Bob Cousy. I have every regard for Cousy, but Jones, next to Russell is the best player the Celts have."
In later years, Chamberlain was criticized for averaging 50 points, but not winning a title. In his defense, Warriors coach Frank McGuire said "Wilt has been simply super-human", and pointed out that the Warriors lacked a consistent second scorer, a play-maker, and a second big man to take pressure off Chamberlain. Nate Thurmond agreed with this sentiment, when asked if he agreed with his own past quote that Wilt would have won just as many championships as Russell if he were on the Celtics, Nate Thurmond said, "That’s right. That’s not taking anything away from Russell’s talent, but he was surrounded with great players." and also went on to say, "I don’t think anybody liked the Celtics. They were a hated team. They won any way they could; they would even tug on your pants. They had eight or nine (quality) players—we could go through the list—everyone else had three or four.".
Wilt actually disagreed with this in exact interpretation saying, “What I respected about Bill, more than anything else, was that he basically played me in a manner that I think the game of basketball should be played. He knew he couldn't out physical me and he never tried. He would try to steal the ball, he would use his quickness, he would use his agility, he would use the things that he had going for him to play wonderfully strong defense with the help from his team. No other player ever played me that way. That team wasn't so great until he got there. Once he got there, he was the piece that they were looking for. A lot of people have said to me, "Wilt, what if you had that team? Boy, you would never have lost!" Not true. If I was on their team, I would be taking away from some of what the other guys were doing. Everybody had a role on that team. (Tom) Heinsohn wouldn't be getting the same number of shots, nor would (Bill) Sharman, nor would (Bob) Cousy because I'd be shooting the ball a whole lot more. Bill Russell gave them just what they needed. I would've given them a little bit more in certain things, which I think would have made the team not as good. I've always believed that he made that team exactly what it was supposed to be. And you couldn't get any better.”
Chamberlain acknowledged that despite the team being better, it did not necessarily mean he would automatically win with the same roster rather that Russell was just the perfect piece for that specific team and filled the void allowing for them to win. Another way to look at it is if Wilt was given the perfect roster for his abilities he would be as, if not more, successful, but that Celtics team wasn't designed specifically for him as it was Russell.
A teammate of Chamberlain, Tom Meschery, admitted, "Bill won (vs. the Warriors) because his team was always a little better, his coach was a little better and because his team played better together than Wilt's."
Billy Cunningham said of judging the Russell vs Chamberlain debate solely on championships, "I think it is very unfair, with the supporting cast that Bill Russell had, as great of a player he was, one player doesn't win championships. You need a balanced team, and if you see how many players went on to the Hall of Fame, then you look at truly great players Jerry West and Oscar Robertson during that era, who could easily be the two best guards that ever played the game, they didn't win championships either (in the '60's). Jerry was fortunate enough to be playing with Wilt to win his first one, and Oscar had to go to Milwaukee to play with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar to win one, and Michael Jordan went several years before he got a supporting cast that helped him to achieve world championships. I think it is very unfair; the only reason that Wilt's teams have had any success was because he had to put up the numbers he did to have a chance."
Even though he lost in 7 out of the 8 series' versus the Celtics, Wilt was still able to bring four of them to 7 games where he lost those games by a total of 9 points or on average 2.25 points. Wilt's teams in most of these cases were lucky to had even brought the series that far let alone within 2 points. For example, in game 7 of their 1962 series the scene was set and the pressure was on. In game 2, Wilt scored 42 points (16 in the 4th quarter) along with 37 rebounds to pull off a 113-106 victory over the Celtics. Now, in game 7, the Warriors needed that same magic. Wilt at the time only had 17 points and with 50 seconds left was down 107-102. So, he scored 5 straight points, including a 3 point play, to tie it all up only for Sam Jones to ruin the moment with a game winning shot with 1 second left. After the game, Tom Meschery said, "The Boston players, man-for-man, were better players than the Warriors. To go as far as we did was Wilt's doing. We came within two points of the championship." In regards to my opinion of the matter, though recognizing both sides, think Wilt was the better player. As a scorer it is not close. Russell had his seldom used jumper and his hook shot but it did not compare to Wilt's arsenal. Besides the obvious strength advantage in the post, Wilt had one of the best big man fade-aways. Along with this was his finger roll and under basket scoop shots. He was better with his ball fakes and the inside-out threat, especially earlier in his career is where his separation comes from. Wilt's overall skill and ability to get the position he wanted is very much why he was so efficient. Rebounding was close as both could get up for them and Russell was very explosive, probably a little quicker, but again the advantage slightly goes in favor of Wilt because of a matching ability combined with the physical edge which is far from a small part of the battle on the boards. Passing wise, the edge lies in Russell's favor. Wilt could individually find cutters and work an offense but the difference is in just how swift Russell was in his passing, understanding set plays and how to initiate more offense in an open manner. Specifically, Russell was quick to identify shooters so he could pass off and screen his man's defender for an open jumper or drive. Chamberlain's main advantage was how he palmed and swooped the ball over and around players making an illusion of the ball moving whereas Russell's came more within the offense. Both were great fast break initiators with Russell being the quickest to outlet and Wilt either holding the ball or going for a long range pass. Both were accurate, Russell's occurring much more frequently to impact the offense. Wilt's were more timely. Maybe it's a little unfair to Wilt seeing as the Celtics' offense emphasized team play, regardless, Russell proved to be consistently great, and slightly more effective. Defensively, Russell had the range and the movement that give him the real edge. When it came to pure back to basket play or at the rim, Wilt was the guy. But, in overall ability to follow a man, cross the lane and defend another shot still with an ability to move back the other way, Russell, the greatest defender in history, wins in regards to defense. Overall, taking everything into consideration, I find Chamberlain to be the better player. That opinion comes with complete respect and understanding of Russell's greatness unlike how others comment nowadays. Simply put, not only did Chamberlain show an overall better set of abilities and ways to impact the game, he also did it in every role. Wilt could be the best scorer on a championship team (would have if not for unlucky circumstances), he proved he could do it as the lead facilitator, and always as the lead rebounder and defender. Wilt didn't need the ball to dominate and if he did, he was always the most efficient. Without the ball, Chamberlain could still rebound and protect the rim and at that time, the most effective offense was scoring at the rim which only exemplifies the importance of the center position. And no matter the public opinion is of Chamberlain, no one can deny that.
Rick Barry in an interview was asked to explain why he would pick Wilt over anyone in history and said, “Because he’s the greatest big man in the history of the game and you win with big men. And Wilt would adapt his game accordingly. If Wilt had the good fortune of having as many great teammates as Bill Russell had I think that his record of championships would have been phenomenal. If you look and you see what he accomplished when he was surrounded by great people, the 67’ Sixers team, everybody talks about that being maybe one of the greatest teams ever and what happened? Wilt helped them win a championship because he had great personnel. Then when he was even older he played on a Lakers team and they set the record for most consecutive wins, won the championship. Why because Wilt was willing to do whatever was necessary.”
I’d like to point out that he is not calling him the greatest player of all time but rather like the question asks, the player he’d start a team with. Rick Barry considers the greatest of all positions as a ridiculous claim comparing it to comparing a pitcher to a center fielder. Bill Russell, himself, had once complimented Wilt on his team play saying, "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." Now, this may not actually be something to read too far into as he probably was just using himself, as a way of putting Wilt's improvements into perspective. Part of why the 76ers won in 1967 was because of Wilt making his teammates better and the IQ of Wilt and his teammates. Wali Jones in an interview with ProHoopsHistory's Curtis Harris described the importance of this saying, “In our heads we were intellectually smart but we had Hal Greer, Larry Costello, intelligent, Chet Walker. The Reinassance man, one of the most intellectual men on our team, was Wilt Chamberlain. See when you have a man like him that would see how he could make everybody better. Now, our offense was just like Portland Trail Blazers when they won the championship. Dr. Ramsay took the same offense. Now Alex [Hannum] told us was, “He is the cog.” But what he did. He made us move and he would just and all that comes and people don’t give him the credit. Playing with the Globetrotters, I mean, he could do, Oh my goodness, the way he handled the ball. He was a great passer, not only a great passer but how to encourage you. See, guys like him, when you see your leader and we had other leaders- Hal Greer, quiet leader, Larry Costello, quiet leader. In practice, they practiced. And you would emulate, extra work, extra thought process, this is what you should do. So, intellectually, we had a very smart team that could finally compete with the Boston Celtics. But, we were all so physical.”
“Intellectually, you look at guys like Wilt
Chamberlain. He knows the game, knows how to make everybody better by
controlling the ball. So, our offense was to him and rotate. So, with guys like that, they encourage me as
a guard to quarterback on offense and defense. They gave me confidence.”
“Basketball IQ. I think that’s what really made our
team defeat the Boston Celtics because not only did we have the physicality but
we had the high IQ to combat what they did. They had an oiled machine and to
overcome that machine we had to counteract what they were doing.”
Matt Guokas, a member of the championship 76ers as a player in 1967 and coach in 1983, described Chamberlain and compared them to the Moses Malone lead championship team saying,
“Wilt was such a dominant player although he pulled
back that year in 66-67. He decided that he had put up enough big scoring years
that he was now become more of an all around player, and a passer. He still
averaged 24 points, 24 rebounds that year that we won the championship but he was
passing the ball more getting guys like Hal Greer and Wali, Costy (Costello),
Billy Cunningham, Chet Walker and Luke Jackson. Getting those guys involved.
And it payed off we went 68-13 that year and it was kind of a blur of a season
when you only lose 13 games it goes pretty fast and we pretty much sailed through
the playoffs.”
“We had such a good team and we were so dominant, Wilt
was dominant because of his ability and his size and how he defended and
rebounded. He made us such a great team. Just going through the playoffs and
the championship was a big thrill”
“Both teams had great
centers. Wilt who was so huge at 7’2 350lbs and long arms was such a defensive
demon. Now Moses Malone was a very dominant center but Moses was barely 6’10.
He was not that great of a defensive player, but he was a great defensive
rebounder, and he was a great offensive rebounder. Used to, could keep the ball
live, was tough down low and just a tough competitor so he was our leader in ‘83.
Both teams were built around centers...”
The head coach of the 1983 76ers, Billy
Cunningham, compared his team to the 1967 76ers team that he contributed as a
player to saying, “Both 76er championship teams came after two seasons of
coming close to winning championships. In 1965, the 76ers lost the seventh game
of the Eastern Conference final to Boston, 110-109. That was the game in which
John Havlicek made the big steal in the closing seconds to end our hopes. In
1966, my rookie season, we lost to the Celtics in five games in the conference
final. The 1980-81 76ers went through the season with
great anticipation of a championship and lost to the Celtics in the Eastern
final, also by a point, 91-90. The 76ers were beaten for the title in six games
in 1982 by the Los Angeles Lakers. Both championships were won on the West Coast,
the 1966-67 team won in San Francisco, and this season we won it in L.A. Both
teams had two great stars whose careers were missing only a championship. Wilt
then and Julius Erving, the Doc, now. Both were past 30 and had won every individual
honor but never an N.B.A. title. From the first day of training camp each season,
both teams promised that nothing would distract them from winning the title.
Both teams had similar attitudes - that individual goals were not important.”
Following his assistant coaching tenure with Moses Malone's 76ers, Matt Guokas coached Shaquille O'Neal in Orlando. Shaq and Wilt have always been compared but the best person to compare them would be Phil Jackson who played for the Knicks against Wilt and coached Shaq in Los Angeles. Jackson compared the two saying, “Shaquille didn't have quite the same athleticism that Wilt had. He had the bounce and he had the speed, but he didn't have the endurance. One of the things we were taught, just get in Wilt's path. He doesn't like the offensive foul, you take his shoulder and you fake an offensive foul, take the charge so to speak, he really would stop being aggressive. That was the one thing that was kind of a limitation in Wilt's game. Shaq was a post sprinter. He'd go and get in the lane. Wilt was never much of a post sprinter. He used to take his time. When he rebounded, a lot of times he'd make the guards come back to him to get the ball — so he'd be down there when the ball got to the other end of the court. [O'Neal] had a jump hook whereas Wilt didn't have a jump hook, he had an array of shots, he had a hook, a finger roll and a turnaround jump shot. [Chamberlain] led the league in assists one year. Free-throw shooting? [Issues] on both sides. Even then, at that time, you fouled Wilt if he was underneath the lane."
Some have dismissed it, but like Shaq and Moses, Wilt was able to carry over his impact to the playoffs. Chamberlain naturally impacted the game but statistically many have questioned his production. Most of the criticisms are due to judging him on surface view. When diving into his playoff career, it is important to first understand his unconventional changing of roles compared to other all time greats and take into consideration the stage of Chamberlain's career when he was playing his playoff games. So, below breaks down the different instances that affected his playoff average and how best, and most in depth, analyze Chamberlain's playoff production compared to his regular season production.
Following his assistant coaching tenure with Moses Malone's 76ers, Matt Guokas coached Shaquille O'Neal in Orlando. Shaq and Wilt have always been compared but the best person to compare them would be Phil Jackson who played for the Knicks against Wilt and coached Shaq in Los Angeles. Jackson compared the two saying, “Shaquille didn't have quite the same athleticism that Wilt had. He had the bounce and he had the speed, but he didn't have the endurance. One of the things we were taught, just get in Wilt's path. He doesn't like the offensive foul, you take his shoulder and you fake an offensive foul, take the charge so to speak, he really would stop being aggressive. That was the one thing that was kind of a limitation in Wilt's game. Shaq was a post sprinter. He'd go and get in the lane. Wilt was never much of a post sprinter. He used to take his time. When he rebounded, a lot of times he'd make the guards come back to him to get the ball — so he'd be down there when the ball got to the other end of the court. [O'Neal] had a jump hook whereas Wilt didn't have a jump hook, he had an array of shots, he had a hook, a finger roll and a turnaround jump shot. [Chamberlain] led the league in assists one year. Free-throw shooting? [Issues] on both sides. Even then, at that time, you fouled Wilt if he was underneath the lane."
Some have dismissed it, but like Shaq and Moses, Wilt was able to carry over his impact to the playoffs. Chamberlain naturally impacted the game but statistically many have questioned his production. Most of the criticisms are due to judging him on surface view. When diving into his playoff career, it is important to first understand his unconventional changing of roles compared to other all time greats and take into consideration the stage of Chamberlain's career when he was playing his playoff games. So, below breaks down the different instances that affected his playoff average and how best, and most in depth, analyze Chamberlain's playoff production compared to his regular season production.
Playoff breakdown (scoring, amount of shots, series clinchers, injuries)
50+ Point Games
4 (All before Lakers)
45-49+ Point Games
4
80/160 or 50% of playoff games played on Lakers between ages 32-36
339/1045 or 33.4% of regular season came with Lakers
3 single digit playoffs (and 1 No Playoff season) in his 20s (scoring prime) affected average
1960- 9 games- 33.2/25.8/2.1 49.6%
1961- 3 games- 37/23/2 46.9%
1963- No Playoffs
1966- 5 games- 28/30.2/3 50.9%
In taking the regular season averages from every season, against each team that Wilt would face in the playoffs and attributing percentage values to each match-up based on the amount of games he'd face them in the playoffs, Wilt's projected playoff average can be found. So, throughout his career the averages would be valued and directly predicated based on the percentage of playoff games it would account for in his match-up with each team. This is important because Wilt played 70% of his games in the regular season prior to the Lakers which was when he was never outside the top 5 in points per game including 7 scoring titles in 9 years. Yet, afterward, on the Lakers in terms of FGA per game he was at points behind the likes of Goodrich, West, Baylor, Hairston, and McMillan. If we take into account he played 50% of his postseason games with the Lakers but only 30% in the regular season a huge disparity between his career regular season numbers and post season numbers should be found. To further emphasize, as previously said, the playoff games are not proportional with his regular season games so it'd be ignorant to expect his career regular season scoring average to hold up when half of his post season games were played on the Lakers compared to only 30% in the regular season. That is why I took how he did against each specific team in the regular season, making each series equally represented in terms of regular season value but when converted into his postseason averages they were converted with a figure that valued them at the percentage of games that they make up in terms of his postseason games to give the most accurate representation of his projected numbers. Once more, it's the averages against the specific teams faced in the playoffs valued at the percentage of total playoff games it makes up so a 4 game series is only 4/156 (160 total playoff games but he never faced the Hawks in the 1970 regular season so it was cut out to prevent a miscalculation) total playoff games it is valued as making up that percentage of his total points per expected. Because of this we will take the projected averages without the 1970 Hawks series so we will base it off those 156 games and recalculate his career post season points per game based on that figure which he ends up at 22.7ppg. Each series is valued based on the total of his playoff games it makes up so I take let's say a 7 game series vs the Celtics where he averaged 32.75ppg against in the regular season
7 games makes up 7/156 games or 4.375% therefore 4.375% of the 32.75ppg will be how it's valued toward his total projected points per game.
Note:* the percentage value adds up to 100% and when 100% of each projected series is put together you get the total projected points per game. The sample size is 217 total regular season games which is a fair sample size when dealing with a 156 game playoff sample size. The averages are taken because as the league grew there was a higher amount of teams therefore less match-ups so if not taken by averages then a later year of facing a team four to six times would be over-matched by the earlier years of twelve to thirteen match-ups. This would ultimately put the imbalance in the same place as we began with. One might ask if the amount of games affects the projections. Only in his 1970 injury season did he not face a team at least four times (facing Hawks no times, and the Suns and Knicks only once) and overall faced each team an average of 7.75 times compared to 5.5 times in the playoffs. That is really the only reason someone should have a problem with these specific projections. And in the previously mentioned 1970 season he scored 33 points against the Suns and 12 points against the Knicks giving a 22.5ppg average going into the playoffs, which ends in the middle only accounting for less than nine percent of his total projection.
* Each RS match-up then gets valued based on the post season percentage of games it makes up
Chamberlain's early regular season production really throws off the data as he is held to a standard that no other player would even dream of being capable of so it naturally fell early in his career while exceeding expectations later in his career.
Like I said earlier, people forget he played 70% of his RS career before the Lakers where he won 7/9 scoring titles but only 50% Pre-Lakers in the post season which means his Lakers years were valued higher based on general view lowering his numbers even more.
*Opponent = Top Performing Player Guarded by Wilt (Opposing Center)
Wilt in Series Clinchers vs. Playoffs in general
Despite popular belief, Wilt actually improved his game on the biggest stage in series clinchers from before and as previously mentioned, actually was close to maintaining his projected scoring numbers compared to his regular season performance against the teams he faced and also keeping his opposing center from outdoing his production by a substantial amount.
*Left Side is exact PPG then Total Games, and on right is percentage value*
27.3333 12G = .0114832536
37.5972222222 72G = .0688995215
34.712328761 73G = .0698564593
38.3924050633 79G = .0755980861
50.3625 80G = .0765550239
36.85 80G = .
24.14814814 81G = .
37.5972222222 72G = .0688995215
34.712328761 73G = .0698564593
38.3924050633 79G = .0755980861
50.3625 80G = .0765550239
36.85 80G = .
24.14814814 81G = .
20.5432098765 81G = .0775119617
20.6829268293 82G = .
14.7926829268 82G = .
20.6829268293 82G = .
14.7926829268 82G = .
13.2195121951 82G = .
5.7272727236+3.4641148315+10.1081339682+5.4373205724+2.4248803813+2.5904306208+.3138752156105264
= 30.0660283134 Projected PPG based on my model
31,419 (Total Points)/1,045 (Total Games)
= 30.0660287081 Actual PPG
= 30.0660283134 Projected PPG
Overall Playoff Projections Based On Regular Season Versus Each Team
3 Games .0192307692
38 (1960 Nationals, 13 Games)
39.9230769231 (1961 Nationals, 13 Games)
4 Games .0256410256
28.555555556
36.8
8.75
N/A (1970 Hawks, 0 Games)
5 Games .0320512821
48
29.125
28.3333333
20.1111111
17.8571428571 (1969 Hawks, 7 Games)
22
9.25
5.2857142857 (1973 Warriors, 7 Games)
16.8
6 Games .0384615385
14
12.5714285714 (1969 Warriors, 7 Games)
22.625
20.6666666667 (1967 Warriors, 9 Games)
39.91666666667
7 Games .0448717949
21.166666666667 (1971 Bulls, 6 Games)
12
16
33
17.125
25
32.75
41.66666666667
11.5 (1973 Bulls, 6 Games)
9.4324252198+4.222298539+6.3064840206+1.9001424471+1.4985207077
= 23.3598709342
Projected Average= 23.3435190245ppg
Actual Average= *22.6794871795ppg
*160-4 because of no data projections for Hawks series
23.34ppg would be the projected average. To have met that expectation we see it would take 0.68 more points per game meaning that in order to have surpassed his expected scoring numbers, Wilt would have needed a measly 107 more total points in his 156 game playoff career (used in data). I'd say he was close enough to how he performed against those teams in the regular season for people to see the point. This doesn't even account for the lowered team totals in the playoffs meaning, odds are, his projections based off of percentage of total team points expectations would be lower than the simple points per game projections. And, looking from either end, it is apparent that Chamberlain had greater scoring success from the surface view during series clinching games (whether won or lost). In the series clinching games this is how his numbers shaped up.
*Opponent = Top Performing Player Guarded by Wilt (Opposing Center)
Wilt in Series Clinchers vs. Playoffs in general
Playoffs PPG/RPG/APG FG%
Overall- 22.5/24.5/4.2
Before Lakers- 29.3/26.6/4.8 52%
With Lakers- 15.8/22.3/3.6 53%
Elimination Games
Wilt- 31.3ppg
Game 7s
Wilt- 25.8ppg/25.3rpg (4-5 record)
Series Deciding Games (11 Games, Winner Take All)
Wilt- 29.9ppg (2 50+ point games)
Opponent- 11.6ppg (Never outscored Wilt in any game)
Elimination Games
Wilt- 31.3ppg
Game 7s
Wilt- 25.8ppg/25.3rpg (4-5 record)
Series Deciding Games (11 Games, Winner Take All)
Wilt- 29.9ppg (2 50+ point games)
Opponent- 11.6ppg (Never outscored Wilt in any game)
Series Ending Games (29 games, Win or Lose, Final Game of Series)
Wilt- 25.3ppg
Opponent- 14.2ppg
Series Ending Games Before Lakers
Wilt- 31.8ppg
Opponent- 13.1ppg
Series Ending Games With Lakers
Wilt- 18.3ppg
Opponent- 15.4ppg
To take the aforementioned projection model further, Chamberlain's real regular season to postseason projections continue to be cleared. It turns out that if taken from both sides when judging his Finals, these results are what's achieved. Wilt Chamberlain averaged 18.6ppg in the NBA Finals. That is a true statement, not a typo and also one of the biggest points used against him along with his overall playoff averages which were previously cleared. Taking how he did in general (versus all NBA teams) during those seasons he averaged 22.0ppg. Now, this takes into account the stage of his career and if we take how he did versus the teams he faced in the Finals by season and value his averages based on the percentage of times he faced them in the Finals then we get a projected Finals average of 17.0ppg compared to his actual average of 18.6ppg. To go along with this, it's important to note his competition where he was matched up with a Hall of Fame player in every series. As previously mentioned, Wilt faced (in order) Russell, Thurmond, Russell, Reed, Lucas and Reed. For this group he had a 35 (5.8 game Post season average) game playoff sample size compared to 24 game (4 game Regular season average) regular season sample size. Unfortunately, due to making it to the Finals when he missed the majority of the season so the Knicks series was one of the only times where he faced a team fewer than four times, only facing them once. So, in this case, the projection should be taken knowing that the 1 regular season game is representing his projected production for that series itself rather than the others that contain a similar or even greater sample size compared to the Finals games. Also, going with Finals scoring, it is important to note that Wilt's teams averaged 108.9ppg in the Finals. That is not as otherworldly as one would think and is solely pointed out to counteract the argument that his numbers in the Finals are even greater due to the high scoring rates of the time. The topic of inflated points per game overall is also interesting. For Chamberlain's career, in the years his team made the playoffs (minus 1962-63 and 1964-65 only the Philadelphia games are used because he went to the playoffs with them), his teams averaged 117.8ppg. But, in the post season, his teams averaged over eight points fewer at 108.9ppg.
Team Offense
|
Total Points (%)
|
Total Points From Assists (%)
|
Total Offense (%)
|
Total Rebounds
(%)
|
Basic Production (%)
(Combined % in
Team Points, Assists & Rebounds)
|
RS Points
117.8ppg
|
RS Points
24.1%
|
RS Assists
8.5%
|
RS Total Offense
32.6%
|
RS Rebounds
34.2%
|
PS Rebounds Difference
+5.8%
|
PS Points
108.9ppg
|
PS Points
20.7%
|
PS Assists
7.7%
|
PS Total Offense
28.4%
|
PS Rebounds
39.3%
|
PS Offense Difference
-4.2%
|
PS Difference
-7.6%%
|
PS Difference
-3.4%
|
PS Difference
-0.8%
|
PS
Difference
-4.2%
|
PS
Difference
+5.8%
|
PS Production Difference
+1.6%
|
Also in looking at the scoring comparisons between regular season and post season (minus 1962-63), Chamberlain scored 24.1% of his team's total points in the regular season and 20.7% in the post season. That is a 3.4% decrease in scoring. When adding in assists totals and valuing them as the points they created (multiplied by 2 to account for the two points gained), it becomes a 4.2% decrease from regular season to post season. In the post season, Chamberlain's teams averaged 62.3rpg (9962 total) and Wilt averaged 24.5rpg (3913) or 39.3% of the total team rebounds. Though comparable data is not available for regular season rebounding with respect to totals for individual games, if the totals are taken from his complete seasons or most fully played then at least a portion of the results can be found somewhat accurately (besides the insignificantly lowered percentages due to having not played in 5 games). 11 out of 13 playoff seasons were used where Wilt only missed 5 games in totality, so using the regular season percentage of rebounds for only those playoff seasons an accurate comparison can be made. In those specific regular seasons Wilt took down 34.2% of the team's rebounds and in the same post seasons, Wilt grabbed a whopping 39.3% of his team's total rebounds. If you combine the increases and decreases, in regards to basic production (% of points, assists and rebounds), Wilt's overall playoff production in those basic categories, combined, actually goes up by 1.6% compared to the regular season.
But, this is only part of the misconceived mind set of him. Wilt Chamberlain's physical build and mindset have been exaggerated to the point that one might believe he really is the superhero or villain many describe. Wilt was the stat-padder, who was triple teamed and quadruple teamed and still took the defenders up with him to dunk or snag rebounds. Wilt was the super weapon that only he held the power to. While media will try to paint him in a general view as only playing for himself and not caring about his teammates, that he was this stat obsessed, self absorbed, egotistical player, let me tell you that you've only heard or chosen to hear the half of it. As previously shown with his scoring, besides Butch van Breda Kolff, most of his coaches had positive overall impressions of him as did his teammates. And, the majority of people know his defensive ability, but some deny it along with denying his desire to win. All of which have evidence supporting all of his motivations. To begin, Wilt was fittingly closest to the team statistician, Harvey Pollack, with whom he would argue the amount of rebounds he had, the stat that he cared the most about. But, the stats were personally gratifying because he set standards for himself that he felt if not reached would mean he was letting his team down. Al Attles said that when Frank McGuire told him to average 50ppg he held himself to that standard. If he did not get what his teammates expected from him AND they lost then he did not do enough for the team. Sportswriter, Leonard Kopett, in Tall Tales, described the way Wilt changed his game to his environment saying, "I call Wilt Chamberlain a very honest workman. By that, I mean he always did what his employer wanted. No star athlete has ever given his boss more for the money than Wilt did during his career. Eddie Gottlieb [owner of the Warriors] wanted Wilt to score like no man ever had, so Wilt did. [Alex] Hannum and some of his other coaches wanted him to pass and play defense, so he did that and he played 48 minutes a night. Those who criticized Wilt -- first for his scoring, then for not scoring more -- really should have criticized his employer."
If we want to run with the general narrative that Wilt only cared about numbers covering his losses (which he did not do much of) we should assume that he did not care about winning, right? Wrong, this generality does not hold up when we look at, for example, when Wilt was asked about the value of his 4,000 point scoring season he said "It doesn't mean a thing if we don't win the title.". Billy Cunningham reflected on Wilt's winning attitude saying, “I remember that after we had beaten the Celtics in four of the five games in 1967 in the Eastern final, they brought champagne into the dressing room for us to celebrate. It was a great feat. The Celtics had won the last eight championships. I went over to Wilt that night and offered him some champagne so that he could get involved in the celebrating. Wilt turned me down. He said, ''No champagne until I get that ring.'' We got it in San Francisco. After we beat Milwaukee for the Eastern final this season (as coach of the 1983 champion 76ers), someone in our front office asked me if I wanted champagne brought in. I told him to wait. I remembered what Wilt had told me then.”
Bill Bradley of the Knicks backed this up later calling Wilt, "..a competitor in the truest sense of the word," Connie Hawkins in 1972 said of Wilt, "He's [Wilt] admired because more than anyone else, he's his own man. A lot of players would like to be able to say the things he says to be able to say the things he says to knock their coaches or call the NBA 'bush league'. But they're afraid. Dipper isn't- and he gets away with it. They also envy him because of his wealth and fame. And there's his body; he's a giant even to us. Dipper is way over 7-2, he's near 300 pounds and he's still quick."
When on the Lakers with the newly hired Bill Sharman, he and Wilt sat for a conversation about showing up to shoot-arounds and “After talking, he told me that he would give it a try, and if he thought it helped the team, he would do it. The truth is he only ever missed two shoot-arounds, and he called me both times to tell me he wouldn’t be there. I told him that it was important for the rest of the team to see him there, and he could come and not work too hard but at least show up. “And he did.”
Fred Schaus, another former Lakers coach who had moved to the front office as the GM, agreed with Sharman on Wilt's commitment to the team, "I have great respect for Wilt. When I was with the Lakers, he never missed a practice or a game, or was late for a plane. If I asked him to make an appearance, he did it. This man has gone through life with a bad rap. We are talking about a very good person.".
The only time in Wilt's career he didn't practice during the season was with the Philadelphia 76ers where he was exempt due to his heavy minute load. Known by teammates as generous and outspoken have said they viewed him as the team leader by example from his early years to his later years yet the only time he really gave the great speech (story told below) always expected from leaders was when an older Wilt had finally realized the player he helped mentor had taken his place as the top center. In his scoring prime with a future Hall of Fame big man at his side, Nate Thurmond described being his teammate (and finally getting to take his place at center) saying, "I really liked Wilt as a person. We kept in touch after he left San Francisco, but it was a happy day for me when I heard when he was traded because I didn’t want to play forward for the rest of my life and neither did I want to play behind Wilt for the rest of my life. It was a really happy day and I was ready for it..... I had come from a small school, and I saw all the attention that he was giving what and me a gregarious guy he was. He wasn’t friendly with opponents, but he was friendly with me."
Even at the tail-end of his career, Wilt was loved by teammates. Jerry West said of his experience winning a final championship with the giant, “I also shared with him at a time when his basketball career was changing, as all older players start to do. He had changed so much as a player. It wasn't the fact that he couldn't be a dominating scorer anymore, but I think he had gotten so much criticism that his teams didn't win as much as everyone thought they should, and he was just a joy for me to play with.”
The generosity of Chamberlain carried off the court where he was known to treat local street-ballers after pick-up games to the clubs he owned and pay for all the costs in order to give them an experience they otherwise wouldn't be able to have or afford. Wilt may have been generous off the court but on it, his anger sometimes boiled over causing the demise of his opponents with examples of the most unstoppable play ever seen. Connie Hawkins would face Chamberlain in street ball games in New York and described the scene of one momentous occasion, "My first time playing against him was in the Rucker Tournament. We used to play during the summer time all the time. I've told this story before, about the team from Brooklyn playing the team from New York. I was with the team from Brooklyn and Wilt used to play with the team from New York. We had a guy by the name of Jackie Jackson who used to play on our basketball team and he was one of those guys who could jump real high. Well, Wilt used to always have this favorite shot where he would jump and shoot high off the backboard and it would go in. So, we figured out a play in the school yard. We said we were going to overplay him and let him shoot that fade-away jump shot, Jackie would come from the other side of the court and back then you could trap it on the backboard. So we decided we were going to do that. It came down, they passed it into Wilt, I overplayed Wilt, he turned around to shoot it, Jackie came from the other side and he went up and blocked it. It was like two or three feet above the top of the basket and he blocked it and everybody just went crazy. Everybody was yelling and screaming and we were running around. Back then we didn't give high fives, so I guess we were doing low fives. Everybody was slapping hands. And this was in the school yards, where the projects were, and people were just hollering and screaming and the place was packed. I turned around and looked and Wilt was just staring at us like this (Hawk glares). He called time out and everybody was still hollering and screaming, but I was focused on Wilt. He just kept staring. After the time out was over with, Wilt came up with the next 30 shots and they were nothing but dunk shots. He dunked it every way you could go. In the school yards, they have the baskets with no nets on them. And one time, he dunked the ball so hard, the ball went through the basket, hit the ground and it went over the 15-foot fence. Somebody went to go get the ball and when they brought the ball back, the basket was still shaking. That's how strong this guy was. He was just a dominating guy."
While playing in Philadelphia (besides when Alex Hannum was the coach) Chamberlain lived in New York in close range of his club. Cal Ramsey, a brief NBA player and close friend of Wilt, said, " Wilt was very generous because he was making $100,000 while most of us were making $6,000 - but we'd play for pitches of water, and Wilt would do whatever he had to do. Wilt used to own this club on 125th Street. Small's and we'd go up there in the evening and hang around. After it closed, we'd go in the back room and play cards. One night there was me, Wilt, Tom Hoover, who played for the Knicks, Carl Green and Kareem, when he was still in high school (Wilt also gave a young Kareem clothes and such as a mentor in his youth). If you lost a game, you had to drink a pitcher of water. I remember Kareem drinking one pitcher, then another, then a third. When he lost the fourth game, he said he couldn't drink any more, but Wilt said, 'If he can't drink it, we'll pour it on him' which he did.".
Part of the story is meant to show the fun of Wilt as a teammate and the other half shows the continued competitor in him.
If we want to run with the general narrative that Wilt only cared about numbers covering his losses (which he did not do much of) we should assume that he did not care about winning, right? Wrong, this generality does not hold up when we look at, for example, when Wilt was asked about the value of his 4,000 point scoring season he said "It doesn't mean a thing if we don't win the title.". Billy Cunningham reflected on Wilt's winning attitude saying, “I remember that after we had beaten the Celtics in four of the five games in 1967 in the Eastern final, they brought champagne into the dressing room for us to celebrate. It was a great feat. The Celtics had won the last eight championships. I went over to Wilt that night and offered him some champagne so that he could get involved in the celebrating. Wilt turned me down. He said, ''No champagne until I get that ring.'' We got it in San Francisco. After we beat Milwaukee for the Eastern final this season (as coach of the 1983 champion 76ers), someone in our front office asked me if I wanted champagne brought in. I told him to wait. I remembered what Wilt had told me then.”
Wilt was actually polar opposite to the notion that winning meant nothing as he wanted to win everything. He'd bet on simple competitions during team downtime or on planes, and expounded on his hatred of losing in a 1987 interview. After being asked if it hurt to not win Chamberlain said, "Of course, you know, i was raised in a very competitive world of sports and losing is something that you don't like to accept. Every time you lost at anything, whether you lost missing a foul shot, lost the whole game, it bothered me a whole great deal. It probably bothered me a lot more than I realized."
One of his close friends, Cal Ramsey, who had a brief NBA career, said, "But, he had to win. Wilt could not stand losing." Even though stats were something he clearly strove to also get, winning was still the main goal. Just like when he was asked in 1970 to say something historic as he came back from injury just in time for the playoffs, he replied by saying "I'll say something historic if we win 11 more games (NBA Championship)". He didn't talk about setting historic records or anything of that sort, he did talk about something he was obsessed over, winning. Even a few instances of NBA greats critiquing Wilt occurred such as when Bill Bradley said, "Wilt played the game as if he had to prove himself to someone who had never seen basketball. He pointed to his statistical achievements as specific measurements of his basketball ability, and they were; but to someone who knows basketball they are, if not irrelevant certainly non-essential. The point of the game is not how the individual does, but rather the team wins." and when Jerry Lucas said, "Wilt was too consumed with records: being the first to lead the league in assists, or to set a record for field goal percentage. He'd accomplish one goal, then go on to another. Russell would only ask one question: "What can I do to make us win"
The apparent Bill Bradley quote is right to an extent as he did try to focus statistically in order to value his performance but at all the points he referenced of reaching or not reaching a statistical mark he always backed it up by saying he only felt it held value in victory. The problem with the Lucas statement is that just in this research it's been shown the multitude of times he said his focus was on winning, the difference is that Wilt would want to focus on an aspect of his game and maximize it in order for the team to win. The bottom line was winning though. And when asked about the idea that he would rather lean on records than wins Chamberlain responded saying, "No, I never think about that no more than I think about people breaking my rebound record or people never fouling out of a game, centers leading the league in assists. If I really was consciously thinking about "Is anyone going to break this record?" I would have probably put that record way out of sight."
Alex Hannum said "I don't treat Wilt like everyone else, he doesn't fit the mold.". Wilt definitely got treated differently from being the only player to get his own room to not even having to go to training camps after his first one with Hannum which Cunningham said the players would try to avoid having Chamberlain on their teams for scrimmages because whoever got Wilt surely would lose. But, Cunningham said despite not having him in some training camps, "When the ball was tossed up and the game was on the line, however, he was the last man anybody wanted to play against.".One of his close friends, Cal Ramsey, who had a brief NBA career, said, "But, he had to win. Wilt could not stand losing." Even though stats were something he clearly strove to also get, winning was still the main goal. Just like when he was asked in 1970 to say something historic as he came back from injury just in time for the playoffs, he replied by saying "I'll say something historic if we win 11 more games (NBA Championship)". He didn't talk about setting historic records or anything of that sort, he did talk about something he was obsessed over, winning. Even a few instances of NBA greats critiquing Wilt occurred such as when Bill Bradley said, "Wilt played the game as if he had to prove himself to someone who had never seen basketball. He pointed to his statistical achievements as specific measurements of his basketball ability, and they were; but to someone who knows basketball they are, if not irrelevant certainly non-essential. The point of the game is not how the individual does, but rather the team wins." and when Jerry Lucas said, "Wilt was too consumed with records: being the first to lead the league in assists, or to set a record for field goal percentage. He'd accomplish one goal, then go on to another. Russell would only ask one question: "What can I do to make us win"
The apparent Bill Bradley quote is right to an extent as he did try to focus statistically in order to value his performance but at all the points he referenced of reaching or not reaching a statistical mark he always backed it up by saying he only felt it held value in victory. The problem with the Lucas statement is that just in this research it's been shown the multitude of times he said his focus was on winning, the difference is that Wilt would want to focus on an aspect of his game and maximize it in order for the team to win. The bottom line was winning though. And when asked about the idea that he would rather lean on records than wins Chamberlain responded saying, "No, I never think about that no more than I think about people breaking my rebound record or people never fouling out of a game, centers leading the league in assists. If I really was consciously thinking about "Is anyone going to break this record?" I would have probably put that record way out of sight."
Bill Bradley of the Knicks backed this up later calling Wilt, "..a competitor in the truest sense of the word," Connie Hawkins in 1972 said of Wilt, "He's [Wilt] admired because more than anyone else, he's his own man. A lot of players would like to be able to say the things he says to be able to say the things he says to knock their coaches or call the NBA 'bush league'. But they're afraid. Dipper isn't- and he gets away with it. They also envy him because of his wealth and fame. And there's his body; he's a giant even to us. Dipper is way over 7-2, he's near 300 pounds and he's still quick."
When on the Lakers with the newly hired Bill Sharman, he and Wilt sat for a conversation about showing up to shoot-arounds and “After talking, he told me that he would give it a try, and if he thought it helped the team, he would do it. The truth is he only ever missed two shoot-arounds, and he called me both times to tell me he wouldn’t be there. I told him that it was important for the rest of the team to see him there, and he could come and not work too hard but at least show up. “And he did.”
Fred Schaus, another former Lakers coach who had moved to the front office as the GM, agreed with Sharman on Wilt's commitment to the team, "I have great respect for Wilt. When I was with the Lakers, he never missed a practice or a game, or was late for a plane. If I asked him to make an appearance, he did it. This man has gone through life with a bad rap. We are talking about a very good person.".
The only time in Wilt's career he didn't practice during the season was with the Philadelphia 76ers where he was exempt due to his heavy minute load. Known by teammates as generous and outspoken have said they viewed him as the team leader by example from his early years to his later years yet the only time he really gave the great speech (story told below) always expected from leaders was when an older Wilt had finally realized the player he helped mentor had taken his place as the top center. In his scoring prime with a future Hall of Fame big man at his side, Nate Thurmond described being his teammate (and finally getting to take his place at center) saying, "I really liked Wilt as a person. We kept in touch after he left San Francisco, but it was a happy day for me when I heard when he was traded because I didn’t want to play forward for the rest of my life and neither did I want to play behind Wilt for the rest of my life. It was a really happy day and I was ready for it..... I had come from a small school, and I saw all the attention that he was giving what and me a gregarious guy he was. He wasn’t friendly with opponents, but he was friendly with me."
Even at the tail-end of his career, Wilt was loved by teammates. Jerry West said of his experience winning a final championship with the giant, “I also shared with him at a time when his basketball career was changing, as all older players start to do. He had changed so much as a player. It wasn't the fact that he couldn't be a dominating scorer anymore, but I think he had gotten so much criticism that his teams didn't win as much as everyone thought they should, and he was just a joy for me to play with.”
The generosity of Chamberlain carried off the court where he was known to treat local street-ballers after pick-up games to the clubs he owned and pay for all the costs in order to give them an experience they otherwise wouldn't be able to have or afford. Wilt may have been generous off the court but on it, his anger sometimes boiled over causing the demise of his opponents with examples of the most unstoppable play ever seen. Connie Hawkins would face Chamberlain in street ball games in New York and described the scene of one momentous occasion, "My first time playing against him was in the Rucker Tournament. We used to play during the summer time all the time. I've told this story before, about the team from Brooklyn playing the team from New York. I was with the team from Brooklyn and Wilt used to play with the team from New York. We had a guy by the name of Jackie Jackson who used to play on our basketball team and he was one of those guys who could jump real high. Well, Wilt used to always have this favorite shot where he would jump and shoot high off the backboard and it would go in. So, we figured out a play in the school yard. We said we were going to overplay him and let him shoot that fade-away jump shot, Jackie would come from the other side of the court and back then you could trap it on the backboard. So we decided we were going to do that. It came down, they passed it into Wilt, I overplayed Wilt, he turned around to shoot it, Jackie came from the other side and he went up and blocked it. It was like two or three feet above the top of the basket and he blocked it and everybody just went crazy. Everybody was yelling and screaming and we were running around. Back then we didn't give high fives, so I guess we were doing low fives. Everybody was slapping hands. And this was in the school yards, where the projects were, and people were just hollering and screaming and the place was packed. I turned around and looked and Wilt was just staring at us like this (Hawk glares). He called time out and everybody was still hollering and screaming, but I was focused on Wilt. He just kept staring. After the time out was over with, Wilt came up with the next 30 shots and they were nothing but dunk shots. He dunked it every way you could go. In the school yards, they have the baskets with no nets on them. And one time, he dunked the ball so hard, the ball went through the basket, hit the ground and it went over the 15-foot fence. Somebody went to go get the ball and when they brought the ball back, the basket was still shaking. That's how strong this guy was. He was just a dominating guy."
While playing in Philadelphia (besides when Alex Hannum was the coach) Chamberlain lived in New York in close range of his club. Cal Ramsey, a brief NBA player and close friend of Wilt, said, " Wilt was very generous because he was making $100,000 while most of us were making $6,000 - but we'd play for pitches of water, and Wilt would do whatever he had to do. Wilt used to own this club on 125th Street. Small's and we'd go up there in the evening and hang around. After it closed, we'd go in the back room and play cards. One night there was me, Wilt, Tom Hoover, who played for the Knicks, Carl Green and Kareem, when he was still in high school (Wilt also gave a young Kareem clothes and such as a mentor in his youth). If you lost a game, you had to drink a pitcher of water. I remember Kareem drinking one pitcher, then another, then a third. When he lost the fourth game, he said he couldn't drink any more, but Wilt said, 'If he can't drink it, we'll pour it on him' which he did.".
Part of the story is meant to show the fun of Wilt as a teammate and the other half shows the continued competitor in him.
When Wilt was back in Philly he was not viewed as a locker room problem, Billy Cunningham described their championship team as, "Like any great team, the chemistry was absolutely perfect on and off the court. We were a pretty close group."
Wali Jones believed the team’s chemistry helped set them apart saying, “We went out together, we went out to dinner together. We did things together. We celebrated holidays together. It’s a team family concept. I think we had a team that was the, when you say the greatest team in the first 35 year history. I don’t have to say that, other players say that. Sam said, “You guys had the greatest that he ever competed against.”
Following this, Wilt came to Los Angeles with Jerry West who was already a veteran and a super star showing his ability to adapt to new teammates and a new role. West described Wilt's arrival to Los Angeles and impact on him, "When I started to play with him, he helped make me a better player. We seemed to have a real good feel together, I think it translated into a confidence with him. All players are generally judged by the number of championships they won. Unfortunately, he only won two. His greatness as a basketball player can't be questioned. He was fun, we used to laugh at him a lot, some of the things that would happen. I once told him, no one roots for Goliath."
Even when 'Goliath' is showing his strength, the narrative doesn't change. When Wilt had his otherworldly 100 point game people said it was only because he forced it to gain himself another selfish feat. The only thing wrong with this theory is that it was proven untrue. While discussing the game, Wilt's teammate, Al Attles, said, "Wilt tried to come out of the game before he got the 100 points. Many people say "Well, he was trying to rub it in.", he was not trying to rub it in. Frank McGuire had made a pact with Wilt that we didn't know about that he was going to average 50 points that year, which he did, and then he also act like he didn't know Wilt when he was trying to get out of the game. He kept looking away from him. We were very, very happy that he scored 100 points and he was the only guy who had this down look on his face. And then I said, "Big fella, what's the matter? What are you upset about?" He said, "Well, I never thought I'd take 60 shots in a ball game.", "Yeah, but you made 36 of them so we'll take that any day of the week."
Scoring 100 points isn't just a great feat for statistical purposes but shows just how able Wilt was to find a shot and maintain the energy to produce such a high output throughout the game. Connie Hawkins, when asked about Wilt's 100 point game, put it in perspective recounting a time the scoring burden was put on him saying, "I remember one game, I'm sorry Jerry [Colangelo] is here, but I was scoring a lot of points and he told me to keep shooting. I said 'Jerry, I'm tired.' And he said, 'You can't be tired now. Keep shooting.' It's a lot of work. It really is a lot of work to score that many points."
Wali Jones believed the team’s chemistry helped set them apart saying, “We went out together, we went out to dinner together. We did things together. We celebrated holidays together. It’s a team family concept. I think we had a team that was the, when you say the greatest team in the first 35 year history. I don’t have to say that, other players say that. Sam said, “You guys had the greatest that he ever competed against.”
Following this, Wilt came to Los Angeles with Jerry West who was already a veteran and a super star showing his ability to adapt to new teammates and a new role. West described Wilt's arrival to Los Angeles and impact on him, "When I started to play with him, he helped make me a better player. We seemed to have a real good feel together, I think it translated into a confidence with him. All players are generally judged by the number of championships they won. Unfortunately, he only won two. His greatness as a basketball player can't be questioned. He was fun, we used to laugh at him a lot, some of the things that would happen. I once told him, no one roots for Goliath."
Even when 'Goliath' is showing his strength, the narrative doesn't change. When Wilt had his otherworldly 100 point game people said it was only because he forced it to gain himself another selfish feat. The only thing wrong with this theory is that it was proven untrue. While discussing the game, Wilt's teammate, Al Attles, said, "Wilt tried to come out of the game before he got the 100 points. Many people say "Well, he was trying to rub it in.", he was not trying to rub it in. Frank McGuire had made a pact with Wilt that we didn't know about that he was going to average 50 points that year, which he did, and then he also act like he didn't know Wilt when he was trying to get out of the game. He kept looking away from him. We were very, very happy that he scored 100 points and he was the only guy who had this down look on his face. And then I said, "Big fella, what's the matter? What are you upset about?" He said, "Well, I never thought I'd take 60 shots in a ball game.", "Yeah, but you made 36 of them so we'll take that any day of the week."
Scoring 100 points isn't just a great feat for statistical purposes but shows just how able Wilt was to find a shot and maintain the energy to produce such a high output throughout the game. Connie Hawkins, when asked about Wilt's 100 point game, put it in perspective recounting a time the scoring burden was put on him saying, "I remember one game, I'm sorry Jerry [Colangelo] is here, but I was scoring a lot of points and he told me to keep shooting. I said 'Jerry, I'm tired.' And he said, 'You can't be tired now. Keep shooting.' It's a lot of work. It really is a lot of work to score that many points."
Teammate Al Attles on the narrative of Wilt Chamberlain being 'selfish' and a 'bad' teammate during his 50ppg season
Teammate Al Attles on the narrative of Wilt Chamberlain being 'selfish' & 'bad' teammate during his 50ppg season pic.twitter.com/Ra3t5qk4ld— Legend's Court (@legendscourt) August 10, 2015
Wilt Chamberlain reflects on how he viewed his scoring that goes in line with how Al Attles described it
Wilt Chamberlain on the mindset and motivations resulting in his legendary 50ppg season pic.twitter.com/YJu6S8PrMh— Legend's Court (@legendscourt) July 5, 2016
Next, he went to Philadelphia again and was asked to be a team facilitator, challenged to scale back his scoring of which he would be top 7 in assists for 3 straight years including leading in one season going from scoring titles and leading the league in FGA to being tied for 3rd on the team in FGA's in 1967 and 2nd on the team in FGA in 1968 (Both seasons he led team in PPG). Despite criticisms, Wilt fulfilled his role as a lead facilitator and they won a championship because of it. Wilt was then traded to the Lakers where he would, as previously stated, be behind the likes of Goodrich, West, Baylor, Hairston, and McMillan in terms of FGA per game.
Pat Riley on Wilt Chamberlain as a teammate and the sacrifices he made for the team (so much for stat padding)
Fellow teammate, Gail Goodrich, agreed with Pat Riley saying of Wilt's impact and sacrifice in bringing a championship to the Lakers, "It made a great deal of difference, because I was able to shoot with a great deal of confidence, knowing that we had someone there to get the rebounds when I missed. I said in our championship team in 1972 that of all the players made adjustments for that team. Everybody changed their roles; Wilt probably made more adjustments and sacrifice (to the individual stats and his individuality) to contribute to that win than anybody else on that team. Wilt, as you know, was an unbelievable scorer and really changed his game. I think he led the league, or at least the centers, in assists that year. He concentrated on rebounding, he probably gave up more from a personal standpoint to win there in 1972"Pat Riley on Wilt Chamberlain as a teammate and the sacrifices he made for the team (so much for stat padding) pic.twitter.com/XlQuVuN4mP— Legend's Court (@legendscourt) August 10, 2015
Goodrich also said, "I played with Wilt for three years there with the Lakers; during those three years we were quite successful. We won a championship in '72. We won thirty-three straight games. Having played against Wilt previously and then having the chance for him to be a teammate, it was quite rewarding. You know at that time you really needed a big man to win. Certainly Wilt was a big man, there is no question."
Many people also point to the quote about how he thought Russell felt about him and that he grew more in defeat.
First of all, this is a post playing quote about the retrospect of his career but what people fail to show is the whole quote where he is saying that's how he thinks Russell felt but that the idea of his having that mindset would be false. Even after retiring Wilt maintained an active life style and despite not being in the NBA, he still would showcase his abilities against NBA players. Only this time, at UCLA pickup games. This is where his classic Magic Johnson confrontation occurred. But, this wasn't the only time he played there. Many NBA players came to UCLA to face off with Wilt and some even cited Wilt in those games as being the best player they ever faced.
His post career abilities also received serious NBA attention as he was offered many contracts in the 80's even up to age 54. Wilt in a 1991 interview had just recently been recruited by Charles Barkley of the 76ers, ``I want him,'' Barkley said. ``I want him now. We don't have a center, you know.''. Wilt rejected this idea in saying, ``It's great for the ego to think, at age 50, 52, 53, that guys think I could still go and play. And personally, I think I could do it. But I have no desire. The time I had was enough.'' In another interview that same year (1991) though, Wilt gave more of his thoughts on the league saying, ``It reminds me of when I used to play with the Harlem Globetrotters. It was very exciting. It was a great show. But sometimes I wonder if people went to see the basketball or the show. Just like now, do people go to watch Michael Jordan or do they go to watch the show? `The game's played different now. I talked to two of the major referees now, guys who were around when I played. And they said, `They opened up the lanes to make the game more exciting and let the little guys through.' And they said, `We let things go now that if we let go in your era, you'd have scored 85 or 90 points a game'' Wait, it did not end there, Wilt went on to describe size of players saying, ``The size of big people now is blown way out of proportion,...You see a lot of 7-3, 7-4 guys. But they're just there to add to the average height.'' Other teams who tried to get Wilt's services in the 80's and very early 90's he stated were,``Bulls, Cavaliers, Nets, Knicks twice, Sixers twice, Mavericks, Suns, Clippers - those are all the teams who tried to get me in the last decade,"
(Wilt Chamberlain next to Patrick Ewing (Knicks) and Shaquille O'Neal (Magic)
Offered a contract by the Nets in 1986, Chamberlain responded by saying, "I did not consider it at all, It sounded like a ploy, a joke to ask a guy in the last part of the season without any consideration to the effect on the team...It was not a fair proposal. They didn't ask what kind of shape I was in, whether I had a cold or a toothache. I respect pro basketball players too much to think I could go out and be competitive with them after they've been playing all season, doing what they do better than anybody else in the world....You don't take a guy and throw him out there with nine others, four on his team, five playing against him, and expect anything like you used to get."
Wilt Chamberlain in these cases was to be used as a limited member, none of which would be high minute starting roles, something he was not used to, which is highlighted by his conversation with Larry Brown. "He came to me in '80-'81 and said Cleveland wanted to sign him and he asked me if I thought he could still play. I said 'Yeah,' but I don't know how happy you'd be playing on a limited basis."
Chamberlain was not just going to play for the sake of playing but he wanted to be considered a vital member of the team, not having the drive to simply be on a roster as he said he had no desire at that stage of his life unless for the right price and situation.
Wilt was one of the first players to successfully, and unsuccessfully, use his on court abilities to maximize his contract from the business side of the sport.
According to multiple sources, he had a heart irregularity and it was something he had since his school days in Philly but the main source of the issue was because of pancreatitis. This situation causing him to miss the first few games of the season and with a hefty contract (combined with the expensive insurance Wilt would need), a very poor team record and a cheaper option in Nate Thurmond to build around, the owner elected to trade Wilt. It was more of a financial risk than the personnel wanting Wilt out as Coach Hannum became enraged at the thought as well as the trade being pushed through by the owner. But, now traded back to Philly for his 2nd stint, Wilt often signed 1 year contracts, as did other players of the time, to maximize his worth. In 1967, after winning the championship he continued the trend signing a 1 year deal to stay with the 76ers. In negotiations with the owner, Wilt made sure that they took off the player binding clause that would give the 76ers rights to him for a 2nd year deal because he would want to be open to other teams and thus raise his worth in a bidding war. For the 1967-68 season Wilt signed a $250,000 contract and stated his goals as winning the championship and continuing to build his incredible efficiency from the field. Following the playoff loss to the Celtics, a controversial situation arose setting up a team ultimatum. Alex Hannum, who had come on board with the 76ers, was leaving his position as coach. According to general manager Jack Ramsay, the ensuing situation unfolded as follows, “Wilt came to us after the season, we were looking for a new coach. Wilt asked, “How are you doing, who are you talking to? What would you think if I was player-coach and you helped with the Xs and Os?”
Chamberlain was not just going to play for the sake of playing but he wanted to be considered a vital member of the team, not having the drive to simply be on a roster as he said he had no desire at that stage of his life unless for the right price and situation.
Wilt was one of the first players to successfully, and unsuccessfully, use his on court abilities to maximize his contract from the business side of the sport.
According to multiple sources, he had a heart irregularity and it was something he had since his school days in Philly but the main source of the issue was because of pancreatitis. This situation causing him to miss the first few games of the season and with a hefty contract (combined with the expensive insurance Wilt would need), a very poor team record and a cheaper option in Nate Thurmond to build around, the owner elected to trade Wilt. It was more of a financial risk than the personnel wanting Wilt out as Coach Hannum became enraged at the thought as well as the trade being pushed through by the owner. But, now traded back to Philly for his 2nd stint, Wilt often signed 1 year contracts, as did other players of the time, to maximize his worth. In 1967, after winning the championship he continued the trend signing a 1 year deal to stay with the 76ers. In negotiations with the owner, Wilt made sure that they took off the player binding clause that would give the 76ers rights to him for a 2nd year deal because he would want to be open to other teams and thus raise his worth in a bidding war. For the 1967-68 season Wilt signed a $250,000 contract and stated his goals as winning the championship and continuing to build his incredible efficiency from the field. Following the playoff loss to the Celtics, a controversial situation arose setting up a team ultimatum. Alex Hannum, who had come on board with the 76ers, was leaving his position as coach. According to general manager Jack Ramsay, the ensuing situation unfolded as follows, “Wilt came to us after the season, we were looking for a new coach. Wilt asked, “How are you doing, who are you talking to? What would you think if I was player-coach and you helped with the Xs and Os?”
“[Other coaches] were reluctant to say yes or no because they didn’t know whether [Wilt] was going to stay
“Wilt’s attitude was very good. He said if we couldn’t get the kind of guy we wanted, he would coach, if I would help him.
“I thought that Wilt would play hard to match Russell. He was going to the West Coast for a week, and I said we would talk when he got back. We got together, I said, ‘Wilt, I think you’ve got a good idea.’
“He said, “I changed my mind. I want out. I am not going to play here again. If you don’t trade me, I will jump to the ABA.’
“I was surprised. He was holding all the cards, really. If he didn’t want to be here, I don’t want him.”. The other side to this, though, is that Wilt claimed part of his trade in January, 1965 was that Ike Richman, one of the owners who died and Wilt's personal lawyer, had promised him 25 percent of the team. The Warriors had been three months behind on paying his then-astronomical $100,000 a year salary, so with the promise of partial ownership, decided to come East. But, with Richman dead and no one to fully vouch for the specific details of the agreement that had not yet been made formal, GM Jack Ramsay and owner Irv Kosloff rejected following through on the deal (also including a three year contract with another large increase in salary) and thus was the end of Wilt in Philadelphia. The situation was also something that strained the team's future relationship with him for the following decades. In later interviews the blame was placed heavily on upper management. First by Wilt saying, "They (broke up) the team because of the old Portland coach, I won't call his name, but he was the general manager. We went from the best team in the world to the worst." Wali Jones thought it had a lot to do with the ways of the time saying, "I'll be rather candid. People didn't want to see five blacks starting, so they just broke it up. I wasn't being paid what I felt I should be compensated, so I left, and I think that's why the others left. There was no other reason to break up the team like that, because we were all so young." Chet Walker agreed with both players in the organization not dealing from a financial standpoint nor a social standpoint, "It was difficult, We were playing right in the middle of a revolution. There was the civil-rights movement and Vietnam, and we were playing right in an establishment environment. That was the first time in history, I think, that five blacks started in professional basketball...At the time, we had poor management, Jack Ramsay didn't want to be the general manager. We had a good coach and poor management. If we'd had Red Auerbach, we probably would've stayed together. Wilt wasn't happy with the amount of money he was making, and he liked the West Coast. A strong general manager would have been able to give him some kind of benefits."
Contract issues persisted even after being with the Lakers as after Wilt left the NBA, he began a new journey in the ABA as player-coach of the San Diego Conquistadors. With Wilt in the middle, the team was being predicted to go from terrible to a potential championship team. The potential never came to fruition as the Lakers, who still had Wilt contractually bound to them for another season, blocked Wilt's attempt to be a player for the Conquistadors, though still allowed him to coach. Without the ability to player-coach the team, the goal he had been striving for since his 76ers days, Wilt was inexcusably lazy as a coach. He missed multiple games, one of which for an, unknown to the team, autograph signing for his new book. Wilt's commitment as a coach can be questioned, but as a player, particularly on the defensive end shouldn't. Anyone who knows the trajectory of Wilt's career would understand the situation he was brought into coming into the league. He lead a team from the 3rd worst record to a 17 game win improvement (3 more games on the schedule for context) garnering the 2nd best record in the league. The major reason for this was Chamberlain's offensive abilities and in the growing pains of adjusting to the league caused, common with all rookies, a battle to balance offensive energy with defensive energy. This of course was learned early on in his career but in his first season he was criticized for not being able to steadily produce on both ends. The problem was quickly fixed as he balanced the ability to dominate and be one of the most impactful players on both offense and defense.
Contract issues persisted even after being with the Lakers as after Wilt left the NBA, he began a new journey in the ABA as player-coach of the San Diego Conquistadors. With Wilt in the middle, the team was being predicted to go from terrible to a potential championship team. The potential never came to fruition as the Lakers, who still had Wilt contractually bound to them for another season, blocked Wilt's attempt to be a player for the Conquistadors, though still allowed him to coach. Without the ability to player-coach the team, the goal he had been striving for since his 76ers days, Wilt was inexcusably lazy as a coach. He missed multiple games, one of which for an, unknown to the team, autograph signing for his new book. Wilt's commitment as a coach can be questioned, but as a player, particularly on the defensive end shouldn't. Anyone who knows the trajectory of Wilt's career would understand the situation he was brought into coming into the league. He lead a team from the 3rd worst record to a 17 game win improvement (3 more games on the schedule for context) garnering the 2nd best record in the league. The major reason for this was Chamberlain's offensive abilities and in the growing pains of adjusting to the league caused, common with all rookies, a battle to balance offensive energy with defensive energy. This of course was learned early on in his career but in his first season he was criticized for not being able to steadily produce on both ends. The problem was quickly fixed as he balanced the ability to dominate and be one of the most impactful players on both offense and defense.
In response to critics who complained of inconsistent defense in his rookie season, Wilt said, "People just don't understand the problems of players like Jack Twyman and myself. We have to let down on some phases of the game in order to score. If we don't get 30-35pts a game there is a good chance our team will lose.". People seem to point to this quote as a negative when it's from his rookie season as he was adjusting to the NBA and his leading role. Not to be taken as his overall view of defense or be seen as a continuing issue throughout his career. For those who question Chamberlain's defensive impact, in 12 years (minus 1964-65 since he split time with two teams and 1969-70 as he only played 12 games) one would find his teams were often elite on the defensive end. On average, Chamberlain's teams had a defensive rating that ranked 3.5 out of an average of 11.6 teams or in roughly the top 30% of the league every season. But, in case one denies his abilities, here are some examples showcasing or highlighting Chamberlain on the defensive end.
Frank Mcguire Comparing Wilt, Thurmond and Russell in 1967
"I consider Nate right in the same class kind of in between a Russell or a Chamberlain. Bill Russell now is a little quicker than either one of them will go to the corners block a shot or get back underneath to get the big rebound or pick up the cutter. Where Nate won't go out quite as far but he will go out a little bit farther than Wilt. Now, of course, Wilt is much stronger than both of them so he will muscle and do a better job in close."
"I've read a lot of the records and I've heard most of the numbers, And I might have to say that Wilt never fouling out of one game might be the most impressive of them all. Wow! That's crazy. Stop and think. Zero. It's the only record you can really say will never be broken." - Marcus Camby
"What I think it proves is all the stuff that Joe Gushue, Jake O'Donnell and Darell Garretson and all those other guys ever said was right. They said Wilt was as intelligent a guy as they ever reffed. I wasn't even aware of that stat until somebody told me a few years ago...He always knew what he was doing in the game. He was strong. And he never gave those guys any crap....I think what you've got to do is give your due to Wilt Chamberlain, because I think Wilt Chamberlain was smart enough not to get that sixth foul on him," said Crawford. "He was smart enough not to put himself in jeopardy. The referee is going out to call the plays....It used to be open to the individual interpretation of each different referee about what was called and what wasn't called down under the basket with the big guys, Now we have rules about what is and isn't a foul and we're expected to follow." -Referee Joey Crawford
Wilt told Bill Sharman when he became coach that not fouling out was important because "I can't help the team sitting on the bench". He also said, "I learned early from one of my very first coaches a very fundamental lesson. You can't help your team if you're not out on the court." It was not just an NBA thing, but a whole basketball philosophy as he never fouled out in high school, college or in the NBA. To go into some detail on this, most of those who have watched Bill Russell or Wilt Chamberlain would know that they possessed a similar strategy that was even implemented against one another. The idea was to not react to a simple pump fake (though difficult not to with players like Willis Reed), but give a degree of space knowing that when the ball is coming from the player's hand the incredible athletic ability they possessed could be used in reaction to a shot. Matt Guokas, a former teammate said,"He was aware of it always, Not fouling out was something he took pride in. But Wilt was not the kind of guy who was challenging players body to body. He used his size and his length and his leaping ability to go over players to block shots." Wilt's defense was a key to his teams' successes, specifically in crunch time and in the playoffs.
Chamberlain didn't foul out because of intelligence and an understanding of his value on the court versus unnecessarily aggressive actions hindering his team's ability to win, especially with how the production he was asked to uphold. Many critics have said things like, "Wilt wasn't a good defender, he stopped playing defense when he got to 5 fouls to preserve his record." This is false and a pointless theory for many reasons. First, he only averaged 2.0 fouls in the regular season and 2.6 fouls in the post season meaning he rarely put himself in position to have 5 fouls. The idea is completely discredited when one learns just how many times Wilt ever put himself in foul trouble. According to Wilt Chamberlain Archive, Chamberlain's career fouling statistics look like this:
Of the 1205 Career Games with known foul data*At least 964 games with 3 fouls or fewer
*At least 710 games with 2 fouls or fewer
*At least 402 games with 1 foul or fewer
*At least 129 games with 0 fouls
Chamberlain only reached 5 fouls 30 times!
Wilt took toughest player Frank Mcguire said vs Knicks 11 sec left was told to cover Imhoff but said "Green might be tougher to handle"
"You want him"
"Yeah, let me take Green"
"Wilt was looking for the toughest"
"You want him"
"Yeah, let me take Green"
"Wilt was looking for the toughest"
"Wilt who was so huge at 7’2 350lbs and long arms was such a defensive demon."
“We [1967 76ers] had such a good team and we were so dominant, Wilt was dominant because of his ability and his size and how he defended and rebounded. He made us such a great team. Just going through the playoffs and the championship was a big thrill”
-Matt Guokas
“We [1967 76ers] had such a good team and we were so dominant, Wilt was dominant because of his ability and his size and how he defended and rebounded. He made us such a great team. Just going through the playoffs and the championship was a big thrill”
-Matt Guokas
In the playoffs Wilt made a game winning block and rebound on Zelmo Beaty and after Richie Guerin claimed "I think Chamberlain has a license to commit murder out there on the floor"
Jan 5 1963 "Wilt Chamberlain is the greatest player alive, no doubt about that..He has set the standards so high, his point totals are so enormous that they've lost their impact....Wilt is the greatest because he's so tough at both ends of the court...he's the only player around who can beat you by himself"
-Bill Russell
Jeff Mullins in 1973 for the Warriors
After losing the series to Lakers
"We're a better team than they are but late in a game they have two things going for them-Wilt Chamberlain goes after every ball and West is a helluva clutch performer"
After losing the series to Lakers
"We're a better team than they are but late in a game they have two things going for them-Wilt Chamberlain goes after every ball and West is a helluva clutch performer"
1967 Finals Game 1
Rick Barry- "I was going to shoot and then I saw Wilt Chamberlain and decided to hand it off" Nate Thurmond took the pass and went for a shot under the basket. Chamberlain spun around and leaped over Thurmond to block it. Wilt then grabbed the rebound and called timeout with 4 seconds left to guarantee OT"
Nate Thurmond had a different reaction to the play, saying in an interview,
"It was a pick and roll with me and Rick, and Wilt goaltended. Rick has never forgiven me because I didn’t do a lot of dunking, but if I would have dunked that one, I think we would have been champions that year. That’s history, but it definitely was a goaltend."
Hall of Famer Walt Bellamy learned the hard way of Wilt's defensive prowess in 1961, his rookie year. Before the game started Bellamy introduced himself to Chamberlain followed by Chamberlain introducing himself to the league by telling him he wouldn't get off a shot in the first half. True to his word, Chamberlain blocked Bellamy's first 9 shots and going into the second half told him he was allowed to play again. Bellamy would finish with 14 points to Chamberlain's 51 points in Philly's 122-114 victory.
May 1, 1972
Lakers defeat Knicks to take a 2-1 series lead in the Finals behind Wilt's 26 points. Walt Frazier said, "I feel confident we can regroup despite the pressure they put on us. But we must be patient and play our game. We have to shoot outside instead of becoming a driving ball club." He would also cite Chamberlain intimidating the Knicks into taking bad shots and hoped the club could recover going into the fourth game.
April 15, 1972
Wilt Chamberlain hits two free throws to ice the game at 104-101 holding Kareem to 15/37 shooting and blocking 9 of his shots. Larry Costello, the coach of the Bucks, said "Wilt will block shots close around the basket and you just can't challenge him when you get in there because he has too much experience. We've got to try those 15 footers sometimes.."
Lakers coach Bill Sharman said, "It was a very important win, Goodrich got the key points and Wilt's rebounding and blocked shots saved us down the stretch."
Nov 9, 1966 (One of the first games of the championship season where it was apparent just how much Wilt had taken a step back on shooting)
Chamberlain scored 18pts, 4sts and 24rbds on 8/13FG. Despite this, the main story came in that he blocked 17 shots, more than he even took himself on offense. Afterward Chamberlain said, "Defense is the name of the game, that's what I get paid for." When asked about his lower points total Wilt said, "Why should it bother me? We're winning aren't we?"
Dec 14, 1971
The Lakers break the all time consecutive wins record with their 21st behind Wilt's 24 rebounds and 9 blocked shots.
Feb 5, 1965
The 76ers defeated the Hawks 124-119 and Wilt shined on both ends. He scored 35 points and was credited with opening up the floor for Hal Greer to score 25pts. Referred to as the "defensive ace", Wilt's biggest highlight was picking off a back court pass to Lenny Wilkens and 'galloping' three quarters of the court for a stuff.
April 16, 1973
The Lakers were down 92-91 to the Bulls in a Game 7 with a half minute to go. Wilt then blocked a shot by Norm Van Lier, quickly gathered the rebound and threw a full court pass to Gail Goodrich for a layup giving them their first lead that would end up as the winning points. Wilt ended up with 21pts and 28 rebounds saying of the last play, "I was just going after the man who had the ball. The block and the pass were just reactions."
Jan 23, 1965
Wilt Chamberlain beats his former team the Warriors (Now starting Nate Thurmond at center). Though he scored 22 points it was his defense that won the game as he finished with 12 blocked shots and 29 rebounds. Taking only 17 shots Wilt admitted it was a lower shot total than in the past and when asked if he was concerned said, "Not as long as we win."
Nov 7, 1973
Elmore Smith now replacing the retired Wilt Chamberlain, the media asked Coach Bill Sharman how they would adjust. He responded by saying, "We're still trying to do basically the same things on defense. Maybe we pick up a little higher and play a little more one on one. When Chamberlain was here we tried to run them into him. We don't do that quite as much with Smith."
After being dunked on by notorious slammer, Gus Johnson, Wilt made sure it would never happen again, "It was Gus against Wilt, Gus went in to dunk, and
Wilt caught the ball, threw Gus to the floor, and they had to take Gus off the floor with a dislocated shoulder." -Billy Cunnignham
When Wilt set the record of over 4000 points in a season and was asked about its meaning he said, "It doesn't mean a thing, if we don't win the title." Wilt would go on to say "Scoring points has always been the same since the 10th grade in Overbrook High School, but it doesn't mean a thing if we don't win the title."
2 weeks after scoring 100 points Wilt described the night he had 34pts (16 under average of 50) as an even better saying "It was one of my finest games for the whole year. Not because of the points scored, but because of my defensive play"
March 15th 1962
Chicago Packers (HOFer Walt Bellamy)
Chamberlain hauled down 33 rebounds and blocked around 20 Packers shots. Coach Frank McGuire wondered "If Wilt hadn't blocked more than 20 shots... Everybody talks about Wilt's scoring but people don't give him much credit for his great defensive ability
Wilt Chamberlain did not just put up numbers or block shots, forgotten sometimes that there was a method with skill presented through his strengths and weaknesses. What separates the game's greats is the magnitude of their strengths and the limiting of their flaws and weaknesses of which all players possess. For Wilt, he was defensively, quite possibly, the best rim protector in history as he could not only get to any inside shot but also had a great 2nd jump. Important in that he could contest a shot and force a pass but still be able to recover in time to contest or even block the next shot. In terms of overall defense of the time he is most likely placed behind both Russell and Thurmond as he preferred to stay inside while Nate and Bill were more mobile, able to contest shots from ranging further out against their man. When discussing the three all time great defenders in 1967, Coach Frank McGuire (of San Francisco) compared them saying, "I consider Nate right in the same class kind of in between a Russell or a Chamberlain. Bill Russell now is a little quicker than either one of them will go to the corners block a shot or get back underneath to get the big rebound or pick up the cutter. Where Nate won't go out quite as far but he will go out a little bit farther than Wilt. Now, of course, Wilt is much stronger than both of them so he will muscle and do a better job in close."
Wilt Chamberlain did not just put up numbers or block shots, forgotten sometimes that there was a method with skill presented through his strengths and weaknesses. What separates the game's greats is the magnitude of their strengths and the limiting of their flaws and weaknesses of which all players possess. For Wilt, he was defensively, quite possibly, the best rim protector in history as he could not only get to any inside shot but also had a great 2nd jump. Important in that he could contest a shot and force a pass but still be able to recover in time to contest or even block the next shot. In terms of overall defense of the time he is most likely placed behind both Russell and Thurmond as he preferred to stay inside while Nate and Bill were more mobile, able to contest shots from ranging further out against their man. When discussing the three all time great defenders in 1967, Coach Frank McGuire (of San Francisco) compared them saying, "I consider Nate right in the same class kind of in between a Russell or a Chamberlain. Bill Russell now is a little quicker than either one of them will go to the corners block a shot or get back underneath to get the big rebound or pick up the cutter. Where Nate won't go out quite as far but he will go out a little bit farther than Wilt. Now, of course, Wilt is much stronger than both of them so he will muscle and do a better job in close."
Obviously the idea Wilt did not come out was not meant to be an absolute as Wilt had come out and covered big men with an outside game like Reed, Bellamy, Thurmond or Lucas but not to the extent that Thurmond and Russell were able. Chamberlain said of Lucas, "Oh man, I remember when Jerry Lucas used to shoot those 90 foot shots. I remember because I used to have to guard him out there." One of the knocks that people have placed on Wilt's defense is that he may have been able to block shots but he was not a good defender in the fact that he would block shots into the third row (generally, he still did block shots in a way he could get the rebound or to a teammate but not to the extent Russell did) which makes one wonder if that means Nate Thurmond should not be considered a great defender either as he went out of his way to block shots as hard as he could, and as far away as he could. Thurmond did this, as mentioned previously, because he believed it invoked fear in his opponent and gave him an edge in that regard. The point is not whether the strategies of Wilt and Thurmond were equal to Russell, I definitely prefer Russell's general approach to blocking shots, but the point is in the foolishness of the idea that being able to protect the rim in Wilt's aggressive manner would only be a downside because of the narrative associated with the player. If Thurmond did it, many rationalize the approach, but in response to Wilt the narrative is flipped into a sort of inferior, lower IQ approach to defense in hopes of praise.
Offensively speaking, Wilt preferred a bigger defender on him because he thought he could match anyone physically but be able to take advantage of his quickness and agility against the bigger man. Similar to how Hakeem Olajuwon liked to be defended. Hakeem preferred when a team tried to beat him physically because his strength was not in power but quickness. For Wilt, if a team put a smaller defender on him he could still over power when he got it in the post so it was best to front him in and try to deny the ball. A strict 1 on 1 approach was not ideal as the most success came through his being doubled or tripled especially by the 'swarming' D of the Celtics. Earlier in his career this worked because he had the ability to pass out of the post very well but didn't always have the shooters. Later it became huge in opening up the offense as it allowed him to be a decoy scorer and force doubles before dishing it to the free man. If Wilt got it in the post he had a few go to moves; at the beginning, he actually relied heavily on his fade-away jump shot, even Nate Thurmond said, "When he was scoring all the points, it was the fade-away." (which he'd end up limiting later after Hannum thought he was wasting his physical abilities by not going inside more), his finger roll, baseline up-and-unders, and a variety of ball fakes. When Bill Russell studied him, he said he had to play him differently every time and that Wilt would come out with new moves such as when he successfully added hook shots to his arsenal against him. Wilt favored his right on shots so it was best to force him left. He didn't come off quickly he was very much a triple threat player and he was known to take his time in the post with crab dribbles unless the ball was received deep enough into the middle. On the block he'd catch and look for cutters and crab dribble to set up either his fade away or to go up inside. When taken inside, most knew what had to be done, and Tom Heinsohn (in 1991) said it best, "We went for his weakness, tried to send him to the foul line, and in doing that he took the most brutal pounding of any player ever.. I hear people today talk about hard fouls. Half the fouls against him were hard fouls." This beating and the zone defenses used against him would have Wilt contemplating retirement, though it also got him a big pay day, so one can speculate the real reasoning behind his 'retirement'. To add to that note, Wilt notably took a pay cut coming to the NBA from the Globetrotters, and the ability to leave as he would later use acted as plenty of leverage to get another raise in salary also going back to the Globetrotters was leverage he used to force the front office in his early career to accommodate those who were mistreated because of their being black in a divided nation. To quickly summarize his business philosophy, Wilt said of himself when asked of his value coming into the league in the 90's at age 22 said, "Well, I was a pretty bodacious character. I would probably ask the owners to give me the team and I'd pay them." But, finally, as Heinsohn points out, when Wilt got inside it was extremely smart to foul for reasons that don’t need to be explained (He was generously put, a poor Free Throw shooter). The Celtics had great team success, obviously lead by Bill Russell in 'speed bumping' Wilt's production. Wilt spoke of his matchup against the Celtics saying, "Even though it was a great duel and a great matchup, it was
not all together the matchup (of just Bill Russell vs Wilt Chamberlain) that you've been hearing about over the years.
Basketball is a team game, and when I faced teams, nobody wanted to face me
alone. The Celtics used KC Jones, they used Heinsohn and company, they used their
whole team against me."
In line with the beating Heinsohn described, Al Attles in Tall Tales believed that like Shaq in the modern day game, Wilt wasn't always treated the same by officials in terms of the physical abuse needed to get a foul call. "I would talk to Wilt about all the players pounding on him. Sometimes, he said he didn't notice it--he was so strong. But I also believe that there were two sets of rules. By that, I mean because Wilt was so strong, the officials let the man guarding him get away with more--almost trying to equalize the game. I also believe that Wilt just took it because he didn't want to get thrown out, and because it had always been like that with him. But I'd watch it and I'd get mad. It takes me a while to get my temper going, but when it does--look out. I'd see what the other players were doing to Wilt and what the officials were allowing, and I'd get more upset than if it were happening to me. So I jumped in there. It wasn't that Wilt couldn't defend himself. If he ever got really hot, he'd kill people, so he let things pass. But I didn't have to worry about that. I was strong for my size, but I was not about to do anything like the kind of damage would."
Wilt often didn't get the calls and when he did, his career was a model of inconsistency from the free throw line. Shooting regular form, underhand, close to the modern day 3pt line, back to underhand, Chamberlain just couldn't get the consistent percentage he desired even going as far as trying therapy to help. Despite his struggles, Wilt was still competitive with free throws. Hall of Famer and former coach of Chamberlain, Dolph Schayes, described his free throw contests with Chamberlain, “I was a good foul shooter… about 80%. I noticed the rim was 18 inches in diameter and the basketball was 10. So I made a rim 14 inches in diameter and I attached it to the regular rim. That made me shoot higher because of the physics. I practiced a great deal. Practicing wasn’t easy because you get a lot of rebounds when you’re shooting at a contraption that I made but I gave a kid a few bucks to keep throwing the ball back. I practiced with Wilt [Chamberlain] a lot when I was coaching the Sixers. I challenged him. I said we’ll shoot 25 foul shots, but if they touched the rim, they didn’t count. I would get like 20 out of 25 regularly. That would piss him off. He’d make them, but he’d touch the rim.”
No one could match everything of Wilt's, Foust and Lovellette could match strength but not speed and quickness and vice-versa for Russell, but when talking about the aforementioned 'rough-housers', Wilt went through the different kinds such as 'shovers' and 'leaners' but that he won't give them the reaction they want saying, "I'm not going to be goaded into fouling out. I'm paid to play basketball, score points, not fight." (Wilt preferred the 'leaners'.)The majority of credit should be placed in Russell's name but not in all entirety attributed to him. The Celtics' strategy to defend Wilt was better than any team and they also had the best defender to do it. As stated before, Russell created the speed bumps as did his teammates. The team knew to foul him inside, even though he could take them with him if he so pleased (ask K.C.), and with Russell on him primarily, the strategy of the swarming defense allowed a player to always be coming from different directions at Wilt while he was dealing with Russell. Especially, early in his career, Wilt did not have the shooters to pass out to making it a much safer risk of doubling or tripling him. Beginning in his second stint in Philadelphia, Wilt was still a dominant scorer but reserved in his role to be seen as more of a distributor and anchor on defense as the team had enough scoring. Though not making the highlight reels as often, Chamberlain still took his place as a leading facilitator with his ability to pass due to his knack for finding open cutters and seeking out the uncovered when doubled or as he described, 'zoned'. Wilt in his rookie year said that one thing he learned quickly was that though illegal, he was often facing modified zone defenses saying, "I was looking forward to the pro style of man to man defense. But in my case it's men on man. They sandwich me and drop other defenders off to try and steal the ball. I asked one official why he didn't invoke the no zone ruling and he replied: "I haven't called a zone in this league in 11 years, and I'm not going to start to do it now. There is too much else going on that bears watching to bother looking for so called zones"
Of course, everyone knows pressure can be taken off a big man in a zone if the outside shooting is there to spread the floor but Chamberlain attested the theory of 2 or 3 good outside shots breaking up the zone in his team's case saying, "You wouldn't want a better outside shot than our Paul Arizin but they drop off Paul to hamper me. It adds to the fact that they would rather take a chance on an outside shot than allow me to work inside.".
Unfortunately for Wilt, his 'legacy' is predicated more on his team's lack of championship success rather than appreciating his individual dominance and how far he brought his teams to make them appear on the surface as championship quality. In reality, Wilt Chamberlain was too big for his own time, too big for any. Take a different view of Goliath's story and you'll find that with every narrative and every let down, was really a man who individually defied expectations. Wilt may have looked like Goliath on the surface in his stature and seemingly unfulfilled career, but a further look and you'll find that he was more like David (especially if you consider the big man's size 14 1/2 shoe size). One who maybe had the abilities himself, but too often wasn't consistently given the tools to win against the more fortified, Russell lead Celtics. From a team perspective, Wilt triumphed over Goliath as he lead the only team to defeat the fully healthy dynasty Celtics in route to his first championship. Wilt in 1972 took out his foe, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, as well as the team who had beaten them in their last Finals appearance, the Knicks. With resiliency, Chamberlain finished them off with a broken wrist that was simply wrapped thus proving all of the doubters wrong in his commitment and worth. Finally, the critics could rest on Wilt. After a multitude of success in a variety of different roles, Wilt proved to be the best performing player on two championship teams with two different franchises. Only a few plays away from multiple championships at his peak scoring stage, Chamberlain's teams were missing the right supporting cast pieces. When Wilt finally got the pieces he needed, he evolved. Wilt took on a setback in scoring (though still one of the leagues highest scorers), won a championship with ultimate dominance in every facet of the game. At his most reserved, Chamberlain was the complete team player. Sacrificing his scoring that made him famous, Chamberlain held a second championship trophy and a Finals MVP with the Lakers at 35 years old proving his dominance at any age and in any role. In a storied career Wilt wasn't simply just the best scorer, wasn't just the best passer, wasn't just the best rebounder, wasn't just the most efficient shot taker, not even just the most dominant player ever, Wilt Chamberlain was....the greatest.
Wilt often didn't get the calls and when he did, his career was a model of inconsistency from the free throw line. Shooting regular form, underhand, close to the modern day 3pt line, back to underhand, Chamberlain just couldn't get the consistent percentage he desired even going as far as trying therapy to help. Despite his struggles, Wilt was still competitive with free throws. Hall of Famer and former coach of Chamberlain, Dolph Schayes, described his free throw contests with Chamberlain, “I was a good foul shooter… about 80%. I noticed the rim was 18 inches in diameter and the basketball was 10. So I made a rim 14 inches in diameter and I attached it to the regular rim. That made me shoot higher because of the physics. I practiced a great deal. Practicing wasn’t easy because you get a lot of rebounds when you’re shooting at a contraption that I made but I gave a kid a few bucks to keep throwing the ball back. I practiced with Wilt [Chamberlain] a lot when I was coaching the Sixers. I challenged him. I said we’ll shoot 25 foul shots, but if they touched the rim, they didn’t count. I would get like 20 out of 25 regularly. That would piss him off. He’d make them, but he’d touch the rim.”
No one could match everything of Wilt's, Foust and Lovellette could match strength but not speed and quickness and vice-versa for Russell, but when talking about the aforementioned 'rough-housers', Wilt went through the different kinds such as 'shovers' and 'leaners' but that he won't give them the reaction they want saying, "I'm not going to be goaded into fouling out. I'm paid to play basketball, score points, not fight." (Wilt preferred the 'leaners'.)The majority of credit should be placed in Russell's name but not in all entirety attributed to him. The Celtics' strategy to defend Wilt was better than any team and they also had the best defender to do it. As stated before, Russell created the speed bumps as did his teammates. The team knew to foul him inside, even though he could take them with him if he so pleased (ask K.C.), and with Russell on him primarily, the strategy of the swarming defense allowed a player to always be coming from different directions at Wilt while he was dealing with Russell. Especially, early in his career, Wilt did not have the shooters to pass out to making it a much safer risk of doubling or tripling him. Beginning in his second stint in Philadelphia, Wilt was still a dominant scorer but reserved in his role to be seen as more of a distributor and anchor on defense as the team had enough scoring. Though not making the highlight reels as often, Chamberlain still took his place as a leading facilitator with his ability to pass due to his knack for finding open cutters and seeking out the uncovered when doubled or as he described, 'zoned'. Wilt in his rookie year said that one thing he learned quickly was that though illegal, he was often facing modified zone defenses saying, "I was looking forward to the pro style of man to man defense. But in my case it's men on man. They sandwich me and drop other defenders off to try and steal the ball. I asked one official why he didn't invoke the no zone ruling and he replied: "I haven't called a zone in this league in 11 years, and I'm not going to start to do it now. There is too much else going on that bears watching to bother looking for so called zones"
Of course, everyone knows pressure can be taken off a big man in a zone if the outside shooting is there to spread the floor but Chamberlain attested the theory of 2 or 3 good outside shots breaking up the zone in his team's case saying, "You wouldn't want a better outside shot than our Paul Arizin but they drop off Paul to hamper me. It adds to the fact that they would rather take a chance on an outside shot than allow me to work inside.".
Unfortunately for Wilt, his 'legacy' is predicated more on his team's lack of championship success rather than appreciating his individual dominance and how far he brought his teams to make them appear on the surface as championship quality. In reality, Wilt Chamberlain was too big for his own time, too big for any. Take a different view of Goliath's story and you'll find that with every narrative and every let down, was really a man who individually defied expectations. Wilt may have looked like Goliath on the surface in his stature and seemingly unfulfilled career, but a further look and you'll find that he was more like David (especially if you consider the big man's size 14 1/2 shoe size). One who maybe had the abilities himself, but too often wasn't consistently given the tools to win against the more fortified, Russell lead Celtics. From a team perspective, Wilt triumphed over Goliath as he lead the only team to defeat the fully healthy dynasty Celtics in route to his first championship. Wilt in 1972 took out his foe, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, as well as the team who had beaten them in their last Finals appearance, the Knicks. With resiliency, Chamberlain finished them off with a broken wrist that was simply wrapped thus proving all of the doubters wrong in his commitment and worth. Finally, the critics could rest on Wilt. After a multitude of success in a variety of different roles, Wilt proved to be the best performing player on two championship teams with two different franchises. Only a few plays away from multiple championships at his peak scoring stage, Chamberlain's teams were missing the right supporting cast pieces. When Wilt finally got the pieces he needed, he evolved. Wilt took on a setback in scoring (though still one of the leagues highest scorers), won a championship with ultimate dominance in every facet of the game. At his most reserved, Chamberlain was the complete team player. Sacrificing his scoring that made him famous, Chamberlain held a second championship trophy and a Finals MVP with the Lakers at 35 years old proving his dominance at any age and in any role. In a storied career Wilt wasn't simply just the best scorer, wasn't just the best passer, wasn't just the best rebounder, wasn't just the most efficient shot taker, not even just the most dominant player ever, Wilt Chamberlain was....the greatest.
References
http://static.espn.go.com/nba/news/1999/1012/110738.html
http://articles.philly.com/1986-10-26/sports/26058330_1_sixers-dave-gambee-big-guards
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19910203&slug=1264118
http://www.sbnation.com/2011/11/29/2595440/when-it-comes-to-comeback-rumors-favres-got-nothing-on-wilt
http://static.espn.go.com/nba/news/1999/1012/110842.html
http://www.nba.com/warriors/catching_up_thurmond.html
http://www.slamonline.com/nba/original-old-school-best-defense/#M9X0wFDPfv8xpXuC.97
http://www.slamonline.com/nba/bill-sharman-lakers-nba/#SLLxXLF0TrUPwYlD.99Wilt
The Season of The 76ers by Wayne Lynch
http://www.nba.com/2012/history/features/03/26/season-of-giants-wilt-fouling-out/index.html
Great Moments in Pro Basketball, (by Sam Goldaper)
Tall Tales, (by Terry Pluto)
Google News Archive
Basketball Reference (http://www.basketball-reference.com/)
@WiltCArchive (Wilt Chamberlain Archive on YouTube)
http://articles.philly.com/2013-01-25/sports/36550376_1_chamberlain-franklin-mieuli-san-francisco-warriors
http://articles.philly.com/1991-10-30/news/25816245_1_chamberlain-sexual-encounter-date-books
http://grantland.com/features/the-legendary-pickup-basketball-games-wilt-chamberlain-elgin-baylor-late-1950s-washington-dc/
http://www2.kusports.com/news/1999/oct/14/novotny_remembers_chamberlain/
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/sep/21/sports/sp-crowe21
https://soundcloud.com/sixers/spirit-of-the-champion-matt-guokas-interview
https://soundcloud.com/sixers/spirit-of-the-champion-wali-jones-interview
http://a.espncdn.com/nba/s/chamberlain.html
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19910203&slug=1264118
http://www.sbnation.com/2011/11/29/2595440/when-it-comes-to-comeback-rumors-favres-got-nothing-on-wilt
http://static.espn.go.com/nba/news/1999/1012/110842.html
http://www.nba.com/warriors/catching_up_thurmond.html
http://www.slamonline.com/nba/original-old-school-best-defense/#M9X0wFDPfv8xpXuC.97
http://www.slamonline.com/nba/bill-sharman-lakers-nba/#SLLxXLF0TrUPwYlD.99Wilt
The Season of The 76ers by Wayne Lynch
http://www.nba.com/2012/history/features/03/26/season-of-giants-wilt-fouling-out/index.html
Great Moments in Pro Basketball, (by Sam Goldaper)
Tall Tales, (by Terry Pluto)
Google News Archive
Basketball Reference (http://www.basketball-reference.com/)
@WiltCArchive (Wilt Chamberlain Archive on YouTube)
http://articles.philly.com/2013-01-25/sports/36550376_1_chamberlain-franklin-mieuli-san-francisco-warriors
http://articles.philly.com/1991-10-30/news/25816245_1_chamberlain-sexual-encounter-date-books
http://grantland.com/features/the-legendary-pickup-basketball-games-wilt-chamberlain-elgin-baylor-late-1950s-washington-dc/
http://www2.kusports.com/news/1999/oct/14/novotny_remembers_chamberlain/
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/sep/21/sports/sp-crowe21
https://soundcloud.com/sixers/spirit-of-the-champion-matt-guokas-interview
https://soundcloud.com/sixers/spirit-of-the-champion-wali-jones-interview
http://a.espncdn.com/nba/s/chamberlain.html
http://www.nba.com/sixers/stories/exclusive_interview_dolph_schayes_2011_08_24.html
http://www.nba.com/suns/news/wilt_memories.html
http://www.espn.com/blog/chicago/bulls/post/_/id/9229/jordan-not-malones-pick-for-all-time-greatest
http://www.nba.com/history/chamberlain_50.html
http://www.nba.com/suns/news/wilt_memories.html
http://www.espn.com/blog/chicago/bulls/post/_/id/9229/jordan-not-malones-pick-for-all-time-greatest
http://www.nba.com/history/chamberlain_50.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1983/06/19/sports/billy-cunningham-the-76ers-2-titles.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/16/sports/la-sp-ln-phil-jackson-compares-wilt-chamberlain-shaquille-oneal-20130616
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/16/sports/la-sp-ln-phil-jackson-compares-wilt-chamberlain-shaquille-oneal-20130616
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.