Wilt's 100 was over some trashy ass players.. Kobe's 81 was over good defenders.. I say 81>100 .. Because all wilt really did was close hooks and dunks.. meaning wussy shots.. wilt made his 100 over some sorry players who had no game..while kobe worked his ass off getting 81..
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Umair15:</div><div class="quote_post">Wilt's 100 was over some trashy ass players.. Kobe's 81 was over good defenders.. I say 81>100 .. Because all wilt really did was close hooks and dunks.. meaning wussy shots.. wilt made his 100 over some sorry players who had no game..while kobe worked his ass off getting 81..</div> A point is a point...it doesn't matter how you get it.....there is no such thing called wussy shots...as long as the ball goes in the hoop, it's good enough to be considered as "points"..........really, just amuse me even more.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Umair15:</div><div class="quote_post">Wilt's 100 was over some trashy ass players.. Kobe's 81 was over good defenders.. I say 81>100 .. Because all wilt really did was close hooks and dunks.. meaning wussy shots.. wilt made his 100 over some sorry players who had no game..while kobe worked his ass off getting 81..</div> Good defenders? The Raptors play horrible defense. No offense to Raptor fans.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Umair15:</div><div class="quote_post">... wilt made his 100 over some sorry players who had no game..</div> yeah, players who would kick your a$$ if you played against them. it was the knicks who had 3 players with at least 30 points. wilt only shot 36 of 63. so how are they not good defenders if they managed to make "the most dominant player ever" to miss 27 shots. 28 of his points were off of free throws, which his career average was under .500. he only shot 32 FT. he obviously had to "work" for those. simply put, wilts 100 IS better than kobe's 81, although that was outstanding, as well.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting vcwannabe15:</div><div class="quote_post">Good defenders? The Raptors play horrible defense. No offense to Raptor fans.</div> None taken.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting hoops4life:</div><div class="quote_post">yeah, players who would kick your a$$ if you played against them. it was the knicks who had 3 players with at least 30 points. wilt only shot 36 of 63. so how are they not good defenders if they managed to make "the most dominant player ever" to miss 27 shots. 28 of his points were off of free throws, which his career average was under .500. he only shot 32 FT. he obviously had to "work" for those. simply put, wilts 100 IS better than kobe's 81, although that was outstanding, as well.</div> Agreed. Kobe's 81 isn't even close to as good for a few reasons. 1. Its alot easier for a guard to get the ball in scoring position than it is for a big man. Wilt had to be set up while the opposition was trying there best to deny the pass to him. Kobe can take the ball from anywhere on the court and get into scoring position with ease, and he has the 3 point shot available to him. 2. Defense was better and tougher then. Don't give me any of this "defenders are better/more athletic today", with the way the rules are there might as well be no defenders in today's game. When Wilt was playing he literally got the sh*t beat out of him from all the fouls he recieved and there were ALOT less restrictions for defenders, especially post players. Wilt was always doubled, tripled, quadrupled and from what I heard the Raptors coach didn't even want his players (who were already pretty bad defensively) doubling Kobe for a large portion of his 81 point game. 3. 81 is still not 100. You can make excuses all you want, 81 isn't 100. Both players got their big games against terrible teams. They were in very different eras so it's hard to compare, both eras have their advantages and disadvantages but at the end of the day it was 81, not 100.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Run BJM:</div><div class="quote_post"> 1. Its alot easier for a guard to get the ball in scoring position than it is for a big man. Wilt had to be set up while the opposition was trying there best to deny the pass to him. Kobe can take the ball from anywhere on the court and get into scoring position with ease, and he has the 3 point shot available to him. </div> Kobe still had an effciency rating of 71, that's the real amazing feat. As for the bolded part... I do agree with that. You can say defenses were harder then and such, but at the end of the day, I just want someone to explain to me why Wilt/Russell average 25+ rebounds per game during that era. I am inclined to believe that the athleticism of the players of that time would inflate rebounds/"big dippers"/dunks/etc. I am by all means open to changing my mind, I just want this point accounted for. At the end of day, it's not super important to me whether or not 81 is a greater accomplishment, but it is fun to discuss.
At the end of the day Kobe's a 45% FG shooter and Wilt was a 57% FG shooter. Unless you're talking about FT shooting, Wilt's dominance in the game was no match for any player. One thing about Wilts 100 is that he is a notoriously poor FT shooter a la Shaq and he made about 35 FTs on 75% that day. Also like half the team fouled out trying to use Hack-a-Wilt in an attempt to stop him from embarassing them.
Though your right Kobe had the 3pt option- that only gave him 7 extra points at the end of the day. Also- while it is harder to get the ball into the paint for the big man, when it does happen- he's right there in scoring position. He was also playing against of 6 9 guys. Your right Kobe gets all over the court with "ease" but that doesn't mean it's easy. Kobe makes things look easy that no one in this forum could ever even pull of once. Anyhow Im going to the beach with my friend jess so im out...
Personally, I think Kobe's 81 trumps Wilt's 100 in terms of impressiveness, and this is why. If you look at the 60s, there was only one other dominant big man, and that was Bill Russell. To put it simply, no one could guard Wilt. Why do you think he had a season where he averaged 50/25, and another season where he was over 40ppg and 20rpg. No one could guard him. No team had the size to guard him. It was easy for him to get in position and make the easy shot because quite frankly, no one in the league was close to his size and strength aside from Bill Russell. Kobe on the other hand, when he scored 81, while it may have been against the Raptors, he still did most of his damage from the perimeter. While he may be able to get any shot he wants, he still has to work a lot harder to get in the paint than Wilt did simply because he's only 6'7" and 210lbs, Wilt was 7' and around 300lbs...slight size differential. Because of this, he was taking some insanely difficult shots and making them. Again, with Wilt, a large amount of his shots were within a couple feet, and he was able to toss it up over the defense since no one, aside from Bill Russell, was even close to his size and strength back then. The other thing you guys may say is he had the three point shot, well, would it really have mattered for Wilt? Even if it was available, he wasn't going to use it. The other thing is that the trey is the lowest percentage shot you can get, therefore, I think the fact that he was able to hit from there is somewhat impressive, and beyond that, it's not like he lived and died by it, as only 13 or 46 shots came from it and only 7 of his 28 makes came from there. All in all, I think for a guard to be able to heat up the way he did, hitting over 50% of 46 shots, and managing to get to the line 20 times, is more impressive than Wilt being able to dominate over players that weren't even close to him in strength.
Moo2k4 thats what i said.. People couldn't hold Chamberlain..They disagreed..idk why? But i agree though.
No one can contain Shaq either, should we hold that against his feats? Was Shaq's 24 Point, 28 Rebound, 15 Block game against New Jersey any less significant considering his size and dominance? You cant hold a players dominance against him, Wilt was dominant in his era, thats not his fault, thats just the way he was born, thats just the way he was used in the game. Kobes 81 was impressive, very impressive, but from what I saw of that game, he got the majority of his baskets on fast breaks and open shots against a terrible defensive effort, are we to hold that against him?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting TimmyDMVP:</div><div class="quote_post">As much as i hate kobe i would have to say 81 today is harder but he did score it against toronto</div> So what excuse do you give to Kobe scoring 62 in 3 quarters against DALLAS. Is Dallas a bad team? I hate it when people throw in "buts" whenever talking about Kobe..."but it was against the Raptors", "but it was an off night", "but he's a ball hog". Get a life....Even if it is the Raptors...how many players did you hear scoring 81 against the Raptors last season?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Heat4Life:</div><div class="quote_post">At the end of the day Kobe's a 45% FG shooter and Wilt was a 57% FG shooter. Unless you're talking about FT shooting, Wilt's dominance in the game was no match for any player. One thing about Wilts 100 is that he is a notoriously poor FT shooter a la Shaq and he made about 35 FTs on 75% that day. Also like half the team fouled out trying to use Hack-a-Wilt in an attempt to stop him from embarassing them.</div> TS% > FG%. Wilt did not even shoot 57% that season (Kobe's 2006 season TS% was higher than all of Wilt's 50/44/36+ PPG seasons). But if you are referring to the 100 and 81 point games, Kobe shot 61% from the field (and that's not even factoring his 18-20 FT and 7-13 Three pointers). Get your facts straight.
Just a thought on Wilt. Maybe no one could stop him because he was just that good i doubt it, but no one seems to even consider it. You really dont know how good or bad those guys were, the game was too different, for all you know they would kill current teams.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting TheFreshPrince:</div><div class="quote_post">Just a thought on Wilt. Maybe no one could stop him because he was just that good i doubt it, but no one seems to even consider it. You really dont know how good or bad those guys were, the game was too different, for all you know they would kill current teams.</div> Exactly, Yao and Shaq are physically impossible to contain in today's NBA, why arent they averaging 50 points and 20 rebounds per game? <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Also- while it is harder to get the ball into the paint for the big man, when it does happen- he's right there in scoring position. He was also playing against of 6 9 guys. Your right Kobe gets all over the court with "ease" but that doesn't mean it's easy. Kobe makes things look easy that no one in this forum could ever even pull of once. Anyhow Im going to the beach with my friend jess so im out...</div> You have to remember we're not talking about today's NBA game where any physical contact is a foul, Wilt got beat on the inside to the point of bleeding and where his teammates would start fights with other players hacking at Wilt so much. Today there's nothing stopping a guard from getting anywhere he wants, theres no handchecking, no rule of verticality. All Kobe or Arenas or Wade or LeBron has to do is go around his defender, who stands no chance of stopping him without fouling, then jump full speed into a big man who is standing perectly still and its 2 FTs. If you don't see it that way you're kidding yourself. I'm sorry I'm just not as impressed by Kobe scoring 81 (which is still less for christs sake!) in David Stern's NBA designed to make games higher scoring and more fun to watch. You can believe what you want but there is, by rule, no defense in the NBA today.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Run BJM:</div><div class="quote_post">Exactly, Yao and Shaq are physically impossible to contain in today's NBA, why arent they averaging 50 points and 20 rebounds per game?</div>Disagree. While Shaq may be dominant, he can be contained. There have been other bigs in this era that were able to do so. To name some for you, Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Alonzo Mourning, Patrick Ewing, and Hakeem Olajuwon. So, that argument is obviously false in my book. Ever since Shaq has come into this league, there has been other dominant bigs. When Wilt played, there was only one other outside of him. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">You have to remember we're not talking about today's NBA game where any physical contact is a foul, Wilt got beat on the inside to the point of bleeding and where his teammates would start fights with other players hacking at Wilt so much. Today there's nothing stopping a guard from getting anywhere he wants, theres no handchecking, no rule of verticality. All Kobe or Arenas or Wade or LeBron has to do is go around his defender, who stands no chance of stopping him without fouling, then jump full speed into a big man who is standing perectly still and its 2 FTs. If you don't see it that way you're kidding yourself.</div>Bleeding huh....I never heard of this. I didn't realize it was ever legal to physically hurt someone in a game of basketball. While the NBA may have changed in the past 40 years, you make it sound like a barbaric sport. And also, there are plenty of ways to stop a guard. Playing defense is a start. Stay in front, draw a charge. Hell, you can even double or triple team him if you're that worried. There are ways to stop them, it's just that those guys you named are all good at what they do, and that's getting to the lane and either getting to the line or getting a basket. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I'm sorry I'm just not as impressed by Kobe scoring 81 (which is still less for christs sake!) in David Stern's NBA designed to make games higher scoring and more fun to watch. You can believe what you want but there is, by rule, no defense in the NBA today.</div>Not sure if you realize this but...todays NBA is much lower scoring than in previous decades. Look at the showtime era of the '80s, where it was a regular game for someone to score 120. It was much the same in the '60s and '70s. Todays NBA however, is much lower scoring. If you can average 105, you're leading the league. On most nights, if you can score around 100 or so, you're likely going to win. Take note of the NBA record of 126.5ppg Denver averaged back in the '81-'82 season. That shows how much scoring has gone down. So, to say Stern has made the games scoring much higher, is kind of false. Since the end of the '80s, scoring has went down a ton. He's just now trying to get it back up there.
i think 81 is impressive and i understand the idea of different era's, but the the ability to average 25 points a quarter is rediculous. Obviously both dominated the games they played in but it just seems unimaginable to me to score that easily that u can score 25 pts per quarter, i gotta go w/ the 100.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">Disagree. While Shaq may be dominant, he can be contained. There have been other bigs in this era that were able to do so. To name some for you, Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Alonzo Mourning, Patrick Ewing, and Hakeem Olajuwon. So, that argument is obviously false in my book. Ever since Shaq has come into this league, there has been other dominant bigs. When Wilt played, there was only one other outside of him.</div> Only one other dominant big when Wilt played? Ever heard of Kareem Abdul Jabaar, Nate Thurmond, Willis Reed, Wes Unseld, Elvin Hayes, Bob Lanier? Any of those players would be a top 2 center in the league today (behind Shaq), as a whole the competition then was alot better than it is today. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Bleeding huh....I never heard of this. I didn't realize it was ever legal to physically hurt someone in a game of basketball. While the NBA may have changed in the past 40 years, you make it sound like a barbaric sport.</div> Well you better read up then, here's a little tid bit from NBA.com's summary of his career: "In Chamberlain's first year, and for several years afterward, opposing teams simply didn't know how to handle him. Tom Heinsohn, the great Celtics forward who later became a coach and broadcaster, said Boston was one of the first clubs to apply a team-defense concept to stop Chamberlain. "We went for his weakness," Heinsohn told the Philadelphia Daily News in 1991, "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... Of course, Chamberlain didn't retire. He simply endured the punishment and learned to cope with it, bulking up his muscles to withstand the constant shoving, elbowing and body checks other teams used against him." <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">And also, there are plenty of ways to stop a guard. Playing defense is a start. Stay in front, draw a charge. Hell, you can even double or triple team him if you're that worried. There are ways to stop them, it's just that those guys you named are all good at what they do, and that's getting to the lane and either getting to the line or getting a basket. Not sure if you realize this but...todays NBA is much lower scoring than in previous decades. Look at the showtime era of the '80s, where it was a regular game for someone to score 120. It was much the same in the '60s and '70s. Todays NBA however, is much lower scoring. If you can average 105, you're leading the league. On most nights, if you can score around 100 or so, you're likely going to win. Take note of the NBA record of 126.5ppg Denver averaged back in the '81-'82 season. That shows how much scoring has gone down. So, to say Stern has made the games scoring much higher, is kind of false. Since the end of the '80s, scoring has went down a ton. He's just now trying to get it back up there.</div> Did you watch the finals this year? Prime example of how guards can't be stopped, same with LeBron vs. the Pistons and LeBron and Gilbert basically playing 1 on 1 in their series in the playoffs. I guess you're used to it by now from watching Kobe all season but I think any other fan will agree that there's no challenge for athletic guards who can get in the lane and make FTs. That was my point, Stern is making a bunch of rule changes so that the game is higher scoring because the scorers can't do it themselves. The Showtime Lakers and Michael Jordan and all those high scoring teams could score even with handchecking and without all these new lameass fouls that Stern has instituted. Scorers today can't keep up with the defenders thats why they've basically taken any and all advantages that defnders once had away so that the NBA will be high scoring again. To sum it up, the NBA game is, like you say, lower scoring today, which is why Stern is changing rules and the way games are officiated so that the game will be higher scoring.
