You're right, Ben Wallace is an amazing rebounder! Wow, 12 per game, oooh, that's like 3 rebounds a quarter. How does he do it? I'm sure Bill Russell (who's career high is 51) would be very proud!Wow, you know Bill Russell once pulled down 32 rebounds in ONE HALF, or Nate Thurmond, he grabbed 18 in ONE QUARTER, but you're right, they are nothing compared to the greatness of Dwight Howard. Okay? Dwight f*cking Howard, what's his average? like 11 per game? Jesus, you've got to be kidding me.Open your mind...just a little bit, it will help. These are some great players you're throwing in the trash.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Michael Bryant @ Oct 11 2006, 01:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You're right, Ben Wallace is an amazing rebounder! Wow, 12 per game, oooh, that's like 3 rebounds a quarter. How does he do it? I'm sure Bill Russell (who's career high is 51) would be very proud!Wow, you know Bill Russell once pulled down 32 rebounds in ONE HALF, or Nate Thurmond, he grabbed 18 in ONE QUARTER, but you're right, they are nothing compared to the greatness of Dwight Howard. Okay? Dwight f*cking Howard, what's his average? like 11 per game? Jesus, you've got to be kidding me.Open your mind...just a little bit, it will help. These are some great players you're throwing in the trash.</div>Again, you're ignoring the facts, and make it seem like Bill would average 20RPG in today's NBA....he wouldn't! He isn't nearly as athletic, strong or agressive as Ben, and would be undersized in today's era where he was average in his era.Try 13RPG. Those stats mean nothing considering the lack fot alent back in those days. Players were far less athletic, far less muscular and strong, they were shorter and weighed less, and weren't as smart as today's NBA players. Not to mention in today's NBA the league average in PPG is below 100, whereas back then it was over 120PPG. The league was smaller back then and that is what they RAN RAN RAN. It allowed for many more oppertunities for rebounds. Then consider that today's players are far more athletic, stronger, quicker, tall and smart, and that now SG/SF's are grabbing a ton of rebounds....those players simply wouldn't have near those numbers in today's NBA.I'm not throwing anyone in the trash. For the time they were the greatest players in the world, but if you put them into today's NBA, forget about it. Just because I feel that Wilt wouldn't grab more RPG than Howard, Wallace, or KG in today's NBA doesn't mean that he will drop out of my top 5 in favor of them. Wilt was the greatest player of his era, and top 3 all time. But could he dominate the era we are in like, say MJ could? No. Would het get 30/20? No. Would he be so far advanced in post moves, athleticism and size? Average in 2 of those 3 categories.
<span style="font-family:Book Antiqua">Damn.. This is beyond disrespect now. You guys are questioning the legend's game? I bet that if any one of you guys were to play in that era, you wouldn't have done the same.</span>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Illosophee @ Oct 12 2006, 12:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><span style="font-family:Book Antiqua">Damn.. This is beyond disrespect now. You guys are questioning the legend's game? I bet that if any one of you guys were to play in that era, you wouldn't have done the same.</span></div>Seriously, I don't get it either. These guys act like the biology of players have changed. Athleticism, strength and talent has not changed. It's the conditions. Imagine what Wilt could do with Gatoraide, Air Jordans, a modern athletic trainer and a perfect air conditioned 72 degree arena. Players in the 60's had no luxury, they played 4 games a week in overheated stuffy gyms with relatively poor equipment. Honestly, these guys seriously don't have a clue what they are talking about. Dwight Howard? Jesus, I've heard some stupid sh*t in my time but, that might take the cake. What's next? Bo Outlaw is a better defender than Bill Russell just because Outlaw plays in the modern NBA? Good God, how about an education.
It seems to me that both of you are taking the extreme sides of this debate. Lets looks at it locically. How many players back in Wilts time averaged 15+ rpg? Alot more than now days! So the numbers show that rebounding WAS easier back then. The arguement that Bill Russell got 50(something) boards in a game once means nothing. Whole teams often don't get that in todays game. So if you go back and look at the stats, find an average to good player (rebounds wise), and compare that to an average to good player (rebounds wise) in todays game. That alone will show that players in general got more rebounds back then.THAT BEING SAID, Wilt was one of the most adaptive players ever. He decided that he wanted to lead the league in assists so he did it!! Sure he played against shorter, less athletic whiteys (YES I know that Russell played back then but Wilt didn't play the Celtics everynight.) But he was a very smart, comptitive ,athletic player. And fit as a fiddle! No matter the competition it would still be hard running up and down and rebounding 25 a game plus scoring 50. He would adapt and be a very dominant player. I think he would be about as dominant as Hakeem with better passing and range. TO SUM IT UP, Wilt would not get 50 and 25 in todays game. He would be dominant though! 30 and 13 and 5-6 assists seems about right to me.- still unstopable and one of the best all time. =D
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Michael Bryant @ Oct 12 2006, 01:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Seriously, I don't get it either. These guys act like the biology of players have changed. Athleticism, strength and talent has not changed. It's the conditions. Imagine what Wilt could do with Gatoraide, Air Jordans, a modern athletic trainer and a perfect air conditioned 72 degree arena. Players in the 60's had no luxury, they played 4 games a week in overheated stuffy gyms with relatively poor equipment. Honestly, these guys seriously don't have a clue what they are talking about. Dwight Howard? Jesus, I've heard some stupid sh*t in my time but, that might take the cake. What's next? Bo Outlaw is a better defender than Bill Russell just because Outlaw plays in the modern NBA? Good God, how about an education.</div>What I have been talking about all along, is if you take Wilt Chamberlain from that time, without all the training techniques of today and then put him into today's game he wouldn't do half as well. I can't speak for Nitro, but that is what I have been talking about. Obviously he would be just as good as today's players if he grew up in this time, and had their training and advantages. The anatomy hasn't changed, but everything that trains you has. And how do I know, that people of today are more athletic than people of the past? Because all of the records that was set in the past, are being broken these days as far as pure records. Speed records, strength records they are all getting matched and beaten these days. Hell, a good majority of those records that only one person could do back then, like 5 or 6 people can do these days. Are you aware, when my stepdad was in high school, only 1 person on his team could run a 4.5 40? Including me, 6 people in my high school ran a 4.5 40 or better. If you can't tell players of today are better athletes, then your just an idiot.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fouled Out @ Oct 10 2006, 11:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>To be fair, I always thought it was wrong to compare players from different eras to each other. There's just too many things factored in. Hell, outside of baseball, professional sports weren't all that important back then. What if there was an AAU circuit when Wilt was a kid? What if college programs weren't corrupt or had parity? You can say the same for today's game.. What if there wsasn't an AAU circuit? What if there were only a couple really good college teams? What if weight training wasn't as big a deal?Come on, there's so many issues at play it's not even funny.Wilt is what he is, probably the most dominant center of his era.</div>Your point about not comparing players from eras is somewhat valid. But there are just those certain players who played back in the day that you KNOW would still be great today. And Wilt is one of them.Wilt is a top 5 player of all time. And I think EVERYONE can agree with that. Some of his accomplishments are skeptical though. Like the 100 pt game. The next tallest guy on the court next to Wilt was 6'7. And he was on the same team. Was basically the equivalent of me playing center on a middle school team. His numbers are VERY MUCH inflated due to the state of the league at the time. Players today ARE much larger and much more athletic than the players of his time. Wilt would still be an all star today, but the debate of best center of all time would be even harder to argue. I say Wilt puts up 25 and 12 in todays league.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (valo35 @ Oct 12 2006, 05:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What I have been talking about all along, is if you take Wilt Chamberlain from that time, without all the training techniques of today and then put him into today's game he wouldn't do half as well. I can't speak for Nitro, but that is what I have been talking about. Obviously he would be just as good as today's players if he grew up in this time, and had their training and advantages. The anatomy hasn't changed, but everything that trains you has. And how do I know, that people of today are more athletic than people of the past? Because all of the records that was set in the past, are being broken these days as far as pure records. Speed records, strength records they are all getting matched and beaten these days. Hell, a good majority of those records that only one person could do back then, like 5 or 6 people can do these days. Are you aware, when my stepdad was in high school, only 1 person on his team could run a 4.5 40? Including me, 6 people in my high school ran a 4.5 40 or better. If you can't tell players of today are better athletes, then your just an idiot.</div>Bingo.MichaelBryant- If you can't accept the fact that players of today are far advanced in training, training techniques, athleticism, conditioning and overall skill level, then ther eis no point in debating with you. The quantity of quality players has risen so dramatically. And most of it doesn't have to do with having personal trainsers and all of that, but because basketball's popularity has risen, so has the need to start at a much earlier age and stay with that 1 sport all year 'round instead of playing 2-3 different sports. They have leagues like AAU with intense practices and advanced techniques from that of the '60's. Players have gotten taller, and because of such competition, start lifting weights and getting stronger/faster at earlier age. And again, it's natural evolution of the game. As the game and players have adapted and changes, so has coaches. They are much smarter with defense and offense now, and coaches know how to slow down great players like never before. Now, more than ever, you can put smaller players on larger players and they will do a very effective job. Just look at Ben Wallace when he guards Shaq. Now they are more effective with double teams, zone defenses are far more effective, and coaches are just smarter.No one is discrediting Wilt's greatness, he is top 3 all time IMO. But if you put that same player into an NBA game today he'd be totally out of it, assuming he had same knowledge. He would have an extremely hard time adjusting to various important rule changes, such a huge increase in athleticism, better defenders, taller players, etc...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nitro1118 @ Oct 12 2006, 02:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Bingo.MichaelBryant- If you can't accept the fact that players of today are far advanced in training, training techniques, athleticism, conditioning and overall skill level, then ther eis no point in debating with you. The quantity of quality players has risen so dramatically. And most of it doesn't have to do with having personal trainsers and all of that, but because basketball's popularity has risen, so has the need to start at a much earlier age and stay with that 1 sport all year 'round instead of playing 2-3 different sports. They have leagues like AAU with intense practices and advanced techniques from that of the '60's. Players have gotten taller, and because of such competition, start lifting weights and getting stronger/faster at earlier age. And again, it's natural evolution of the game. As the game and players have adapted and changes, so has coaches. They are much smarter with defense and offense now, and coaches know how to slow down great players like never before. Now, more than ever, you can put smaller players on larger players and they will do a very effective job. Just look at Ben Wallace when he guards Shaq. Now they are more effective with double teams, zone defenses are far more effective, and coaches are just smarter.No one is discrediting Wilt's greatness, he is top 3 all time IMO. But if you put that same player into an NBA game today he'd be totally out of it, assuming he had same knowledge. He would have an extremely hard time adjusting to various important rule changes, such a huge increase in athleticism, better defenders, taller players, etc...</div>Oh no, I do know about today's training techniques. That's part of my argument, I'm saying that Wilt didn't have that advantage that players today have and he was still a great athlete.My problem is that you guys seem to underrate or discredit all the things he did by saying he was bigger than everybody else or that the competition was weaker. If you ask me, that is a poor assessment. Anybody who takes the time to look in detail at the play and players of that time know that it wasn't a bunch of chump white guys. Players like Wilt, Elgin Baylor, Jerry West and Bill Russell were great individual players. It wouldn't matter what era or who they're going up against, a great player is a great player and they'll get their numbers no matter what. That has nothing to do with the competition, rather it is a testiment to how great those players were. MJ could compete in any era, those guys I mentioned are no different. I'm saying, you guys should give them the credit they deserve rather than just take cheap shots at them and make excuses for their stats.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Michael Bryant @ Oct 12 2006, 07:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Oh no, I do know about today's training techniques. That's part of my argument, I'm saying that Wilt didn't have that advantage that players today have and he was still a great athlete.My problem is that you guys seem to underrate or discredit all the things he did by saying he was bigger than everybody else or that the competition was weaker. If you ask me, that is a poor assessment. Anybody who takes the time to look in detail at the play and players of that time know that it wasn't a bunch of chump white guys. Players like Wilt, Elgin Baylor, Jerry West and Bill Russell were great individual players. It wouldn't matter what era or who they're going up against, a great player is a great player and they'll get their numbers no matter what. That has nothing to do with the competition, rather it is a testiment to how great those players were. MJ could compete in any era, those guys I mentioned are no different. I'm saying, you guys should give them the credit they deserve rather than just take cheap shots at them and make excuses for their stats.</div>Yes, he was a very good athlete, but he'd be average in athleticism in today's NBA, and would find it much harder to adjust to that.No one is saying that, I acknowledged, as other have, he is at the very least top 5 all time. But just because he was the MDE ever in the NBA doesn't mean he would do half as well in today's NBA.Stats can be very decieving. Whether you want to admit it or not, whether it was because you grew up with that era or are totally transfixed by their overblown stats, that these players would NOT be nearly as great in today's NBA. Elgin Baylor, who was not a great shooter, and who relied on athleticism for his points, would be dominated by the bigger, stronger, and far more athletic players of today, along with better defenses. Bill Russel, whow as average height for a center in the '60's and had little competition, would go up against taller, far more muscular, and FAR more athletic big men who are also more agressive than the rebounds of that era. I have not seen enough of Jerry West to make a fair assesment of him.Basically what everyone is saying is that the great players of their era would not be nearly as great as in this era. Rule changes, far more muscular and athletic players, better defenses, and 40 more years of experience and evolution of the game (decades of coaches, and players, testing and succeeding in seeing what does and doesn't work and forming more and more new techniques) wouldn't allow Wilt to be a 40PPG scorer, or Elgin to be a 30PPG scorer. It just wouldn't happen.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nitro1118 @ Oct 12 2006, 06:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yes, he was a very good athlete, but he'd be average in athleticism in today's NBA, and would find it much harder to adjust to that.No one is saying that, I acknowledged, as other have, he is at the very least top 5 all time. But just because he was the MDE ever in the NBA doesn't mean he would do half as well in today's NBA.Stats can be very decieving. Whether you want to admit it or not, whether it was because you grew up with that era or are totally transfixed by their overblown stats, that these players would NOT be nearly as great in today's NBA. Elgin Baylor, who was not a great shooter, and who relied on athleticism for his points, would be dominated by the bigger, stronger, and far more athletic players of today, along with better defenses. Bill Russel, whow as average height for a center in the '60's and had little competition, would go up against taller, far more muscular, and FAR more athletic big men who are also more agressive than the rebounds of that era. I have not seen enough of Jerry West to make a fair assesment of him.Basically what everyone is saying is that the great players of their era would not be nearly as great as in this era. Rule changes, far more muscular and athletic players, better defenses, and 40 more years of experience and evolution of the game (decades of coaches, and players, testing and succeeding in seeing what does and doesn't work and forming more and more new techniques) wouldn't allow Wilt to be a 40PPG scorer, or Elgin to be a 30PPG scorer. It just wouldn't happen.</div>Yeah, if you ask me, Wilt was a good enough athlete that he'd fair pretty well in todays league, he had amazing stamina, and great physical strength that he'd do just fine.Well, I try not to let my bias get in the way(whether you believe me or not is up to you, you'll have to just trust me). But I must say that his or any other players stats aren't over blown. Taking into account changes in game tempo, rules, coaching styles, competition, conditions and strategy mean that Wilt's numbers wouldn't be exactly like they were in his heyday, but they'd still be relatively great. Example: Wilt averaged 35% of his teams rebounds, in today's league that would equal a shade under 15 per game. That there is leading the league, second, he'd have around 30 games with 20+ rebounds and 5-10 games with 30+ rebounds. FG% wouldn't change much seeing as how, the the number of "great" centers he'd be going against is a little less, besides, he shot 72% from the feild in 1973. He'd average 4-5 blocks per game easy. Scoring is the variable, as he did what his coaches wanted, if they want a defensive stopper, he'll score less, if they want him to lead the league he'll do that. He can lead todays league in scoring. These are somewhat conservative numbers, but I hope you get the idea. He could lead today's league in scoring, blocks and rebounding if he wanted to.To add, Wilt holds 56 NBA records, the majority of which will never be touched. That's no fluke, the dude was sick.As for Elgin, he'd still be able to score in today's league. He went up against hard hitting defenses in his day, defenders today aren't even allowed to look at the ball carrier anymore so, yeah, Elgin would still get to the hoop.Jerry West would also do fine, the PG spot historically has been constant throughout the years, he had an untouchable release and a sweet stroke. His numbers may take a hit, but only a little, he'd still be a top 10 pg today. Seriously.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Michael Bryant @ Oct 10 2006, 12:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Hands down. You guys act like he's f*cking Minute Bol.I've even heard some people say that Dwight Howard is a better rebounder! Jesus! are you guys serious? come on, have some respect for the greatest center to ever live.</div>Last I checked everyone rated him a Top 10 PlayerLast I checked most rated him Top 5Last I checked there were some who rated him #1
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KMartAce @ Oct 13 2006, 09:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Last I checked everyone rated him a Top 10 PlayerLast I checked most rated him Top 5Last I checked there were some who rated him #1</div>You know, just about everybody here holds him pretty high, but it's in the debates were he all of a sudden falls.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Michael Bryant @ Oct 12 2006, 08:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Example: Wilt averaged 35% of his teams rebounds, in today's league that would equal a shade under 15 per game. That there is leading the league, second, he'd have around 30 games with 20+ rebounds and 5-10 games with 30+ rebounds. FG% wouldn't change much seeing as how, the the number of "great" centers he'd be going against is a little less, besides, he shot 72% from the feild in 1973. He'd average 4-5 blocks per game easy. Scoring is the variable, as he did what his coaches wanted, if they want a defensive stopper, he'll score less, if they want him to lead the league he'll do that. He can lead todays league in scoring. These are somewhat conservative numbers, but I hope you get the idea. He could lead today's league in scoring, blocks and rebounding if he wanted to.</div>First let me say that I believe Wilt to be an amazing talent and worthy of Hall of Fame easily.That being said I think the stats are a bit misleading. Do you think Wilt would have averaged 35% of his teams rebounds with a Dwight Howard with him? Or even a Chris Kaman or Jamaal Magloire?Would he get those with guys like that AGAINST him? So much like the rebounding numbers are probably not where they would be the percentages would be different too.I wish I knew where to get stats on average height in Wilt's timeframe, but I don't. The fact remains that though that era put out some amazing talents (Wilt; Elgin; Jerry) the AVERAGE player in the league back then wasn't as good as the average player today. So that means today's defenses would be harder to score against (so I doubt he'd get 72% today).The quality of people you play against impacts numbers just as much as skill level.I think a really good player of today would also have inflated stats in Wilt's day (do you think Kobe could score 50+ points a game back then? I do...) but I still believe that Wilt would be a top tier player in today's (or ANY day's) league. I think 25-11-7 would be reachable, if not 30-12-8. 4-5 blocks a game? I think that might be reachable too.But do I think he'd DOMINATE guys like Shaq and Yao? While I imagine he'd get his, I still think they'd get theirs. Shaq in his prime against Wilt in his prime would be a great matchup, one I think would be pretty even.
If he grew up today, he would be healthier and have much greater competition growing up resulting in a even better wilt and negating the effects of "if he played today" .... any top 15 player of all time in their prime cant be stopped by anyone
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (LBJ @ Oct 14 2006, 07:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If he grew up today, he would be healthier and have much greater competition growing up resulting in a even better wilt and negating the effects of "if he played today" .... any top 15 player of all time in their prime cant be stopped by anyone</div><span style="font-family:Book Antiqua">There you go. You hit the nail on the head! That's exactly what I think. Wilt was highly adaptable to new rules.</span>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (LBJ @ Oct 14 2006, 08:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If he grew up today, he would be healthier and have much greater competition growing up resulting in a even better wilt and negating the effects of "if he played today" .... any top 15 player of all time in their prime cant be stopped by anyone</div>The debate is whether or not you took that SAME Wilt from the '60's and plopped him into the NBA today. Do you know how long it would take to get used to the new rules, MUCH stronger/athletic/muscular players, taller players, players with more skill, EVERYONE on court being extremely skilled, and smaller players with 40" leaps that grab a ton of RPG? It would take a VERY long time for Wilt to adapt to that and eventually become an elite player again.If you take Wilt from HS, develop him through college, then plop him into NBA, then it's a different story.
