RealGM

After Jokic's historic 2000/1000/500 season this year, there's been plenty of talk of what Wilt did, what Oscar did, and so forth. So let's talk about this subject a bit more.

First, I love Wilt and he's a freak athlete and could have (IMO) real dibs on GOAT NBA athlete and just plain GOAT freak player. I've always been a huge Wilt fan. Ditto with Oscar. But I particularly love Wilt.

That said, trying to minimize Jokic's 2000/1000/500 by saying "Well Wilt did this" or "Oscar did this" won't work.

Here's why.

Both Wilt and Oscar played at a time when the pace of the game was much higher and also at a time when stars often played much heavier minutes per game (to their detriment, probably; just ask Kobe). And so when you compare the stats of Wilt and Oscar (1960's) to Jokic (2020's), you have to account for those differences.

Someone has already done some of the mathematical calculations on this. I'm not sure all of their math is correct (I'm 50 years old and my math isn't what it once was), but you get the idea. Here's some info. The link is talking about Wilt's famous 1961-62 season of 50/25/2 (Wilt's 4000/2000/192 year). Probably the best year of Wilt's career.

Here's the link:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nbadiscussion/comments/alg0wx/wilt_chamberlains_50ppg_season_adjusted_for_pace/

Just as background, Wilt's team played at a 131.1 pace that season, and Wilt averaged 48.5 minutes per game (he played every minute of every game that year; 80 games per season then). In contrast, Jokic this season plays at a 97.8 pace and averages 33.5 minutes per game. Jokic is averaging 27.1/13.8/7.9 this year in 74 games played.

Again, I'm not vouching for the math. But even if it's a bit off, the effect is obvious. The "minutes adjusted" stats in the link uses 37.5 minutes per game (which is higher than Jokic's number this year). The "end stat" number below (3064/1248/144, etc) is calculated using the adjusted number from the link and multiplying it by 80 games played (so figuring Wilt misses 2 games that season in today's load-management NBA).

RAW stats --------------> 50/25/2............4000/2000/192
Pace Adjust stats -----> 38/15/1............3064/1248/144
Minutes Adjust stats -> 29/12/1.............2368/0968/112

So, let's add up (P+R+A) here for both men, after these adjustments (which still assume Wilt playing more MPG and Games than Jokic):

Wilt ---------> 3448
Jokic --------> 3500+

The point is clear.

Again, not to minimize Wilt in any way. But anyone trying to talk down what Jokic did likely doesn't understand all the variables involved, IMO.

Now, one could say "Wilt would play more games than Jokic" and "Wilt would play more minutes than Jokic" (and thus have bigger stats). Remember, the above calculation gives Wilt 80 games to 74 for Jokic, and it gives Wilt 37.5 MPG versus Jokic at 33.5 MPG. Wilt's already getting extra help here.

In the old days, many stars played more than 40 minutes per game. Would Jokic? I don't know. Could Wilt play 40+ minutes per game in today's NBA? He could, but I doubt his team or his agent would want that to happen, so that Wilt could play as many years and earn as much money as possible (and help his team win more games by extending his career). Wilt only played 14 years, which is a short time period for an athlete of his caliber.

This same type of pace-adjusted, minutes-adjusted calculation applies to the nearly-2000/1000/500 seasons of Wilt (2 such seasons) and Oscar (1). The numbers come way down and Jokic only looks better in comparison.

The true way to understand the magnitude of what Jokic accomplished this season is to look at PER comparisons. PER is based on pace and per-minute factors. So that's baked into the PER formula.

The #1 season of PER in NBA history is Jokic this year. The #2 season ever is Wilt's 50/25/2.

That pretty much says it all. Yes, steals and blocks weren't kept then (for Wilt). Nor were turnovers. For sure it's possible Wilt's 50/25/2 season has a higher PER number than Jokic this year if blocks/steals/turnovers are known, but still Jokic is right there. And that's the point.

Jokic's season cannot be minimized in any way and stands up against any season ever. With his raw stats, PER, BPM and RAPTOR figures (all records), it very well may be the best season in NBA history.

Just throwing it out there as a neutral, I find the people scrambling to defend Jokic and his achievements equally as frustrating as those who don’t appreciate them

Sofia wrote:Just throwing it out there as a neutral, I find the people scrambling to defend Jokic and his achievements equally as frustrating as those who don’t appreciate them

I'm a stats guy, and when I see people saying "OMG yeah Jokic got 2000/1000/500 but boy that's not even close to Wilt's 4000/2000 year" then I can't let it go.

If you know something that can help inform others, you should share it, IMO. One reason I come to sites like this one is to learn more about the game, and find out things from others who know more than I do on certain subjects (stats knowledge I don't have; know more about a team they watch that I don't; etc).

Jokic doesn't need defending. But perhaps people who maybe weren't thinking of things like pace adjustments and minutes adjustments become more aware of them then they may have been previously.

That's the hope anyways.

Yeah, per game stats are rather meaningless. I also don't think 48 minutes back in Wilt's time were anywhere near as taxing as they are now. Back then centers just ran from the paint to the paint on practically every possession. There were hardly any high screen rolls, bigs rotating out to shooters, etc. etc.

No one can compare with Wilt on a statistical bases no one. He was a freak

HotRocks34 wrote:

Sofia wrote:Just throwing it out there as a neutral, I find the people scrambling to defend Jokic and his achievements equally as frustrating as those who don’t appreciate them

I'm a stats guy, and when I see people saying "OMG yeah Jokic got 2000/1000/500 but boy that's not even close to Wilt's 4000/2000 year" then I can't let it go.

If you know something that can help inform others, you should share it, IMO. One reason I come to sites like this one is to learn more about the game, and find out things from others who know more than I do on certain subjects (stats knowledge I don't have; know more about a team they watch that I don't; etc).

Jokic doesn't need defending. But hopefully people who maybe weren't thinking of things like pace adjustments and minutes adjustments become more aware of them then they may have been previously.

That's the hope anyways.

There you go.

Peregrine01 wrote:Yeah, per game stats are rather meaningless. I also don't think 48 minutes back in Wilt's time were anywhere near as taxing as they are now. Back then centers just ran from the paint to the paint on practically every possession. There were hardly any high screen rolls, bigs rotating out to shooters, etc. etc.

Yeah, I think this point is brought up in the link I had in the original post. I'd have to watch footage to comment on the subject. I know there's a video there, but I didn't watch it.

Huh, what? Robertson never had 1000 rebound season.

People STOP doing pointless minute adjusted stats. Jokic would NOT keep even near Wilts pace if he played every damn minute every game... Your production drops because you play so much. It's easy to do higher per minute stats on lower minutes and it gets insanely hard when you start to go over 40 min per game. Using anything adjusted per minute basis is extremely bad take when there is huge gap between player played minutes.

Funny thing about Wilts stats is you probably can slap 8 blocks per game there and 1.5-2 steals and 3.5-4.5 turnovers per game

Acting like every player could keep up with their production when playing nearly every minute of a game is ridiculous. It's like when people take some role player and then claim they are truly an all-star when looking at per 36 minute stats.

It's a lot harder to produce at a high level over nearly an entire game than it is to do it with say 30 MPG. Jokic is a great player, but we have seen him have trouble sustaining his production over a game when playing heavy minutes, especially when that game goes into an OT or two.

JN61 wrote:Huh, what? Robertson never had 1000 rebound season.

Here are the two Wilt and one Oscar "nearly 2000/1000/500 seasons" I alluded to in the first post.

Wilt 1966-67.......................1956/1957/630..................missed by 44 points
Wilt 1967-68.......................1992/1952/702..................missed by 08 points
Oscar 1961-62.....................2432/0985/899..................missed by 15 rebounds

Oscar was extremely close to a 2000/1000/500 season.

Again, though, that's based upon heavier minutes and a higher pace. But yeah he got very, very close that year.

monopoman wrote:Acting like every player could keep up with their production when playing nearly every minute of a game is ridiculous. It's like when people take some role player and then claim they are truly an all-star when looking at per 36 minute stats.

It's a lot harder to produce at a high level over nearly an entire game than it is to do it with say 30 MPG. Jokic is a great player, but we have seen him have trouble sustaining his production over a game especially when that game goes into an OT or two.

So this is from the link I provided in the original post. I did not watch the attached video so can't comment on it or the assertions made by the author of the post:

No player in the league today is capable of averaging 48.5 MPG as Wilt did in '62. However many have claimed that while the pace was higher in '62, the actual distance ran per minute was significantly less. This is quite noticeable in the following footage of Wilt in the '67 ECF:

Watch on YouTube

Notice how Wilt rarely moves at all in the half court on offense or defense and rarely moves faster than a jog in transition. Many modern players could average 48.5 MPG at this rate of movement.

Again, however, in today's game guys don't play the minutes that were once played. For a variety of reasons, likely chief among them avoiding injuries and extending careers (and contracts). Load management.

For example, in Wilt's monster 1961-62 season referenced in this thread, seven players averaged more than 41 minutes per game (click on the MP column in the Player Per Game data set to see the info):
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1962_per_game.html

However, in the current season, no player is playing even 38 minutes per game:
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2022_per_game.html

Different eras. If you stick Jokic back in 1961-62, he could well be a 40+ minute guy. And if you stick Wilt in today's game, he might be logging like 38 minutes per game. And so on.

Some might also mention the quality of the average athlete in the 1960's NBA versus the quality of athlete today (and global competition versus mostly North American competition in the 1960's).

monopoman wrote:Acting like every player could keep up with their production when playing nearly every minute of a game is ridiculous. It's like when people take some role player and then claim they are truly an all-star when looking at per 36 minute stats.

It's a lot harder to produce at a high level over nearly an entire game than it is to do it with say 30 MPG. Jokic is a great player, but we have seen him have trouble sustaining his production over a game when playing heavy minutes, especially when that game goes into an OT or two.

We already see it in fact and not just few long selected games. His clutch (last 5 mins in close games) stats are quite poor for typical MVP Candidate, especially when you consider how good he is before clutch time.

HotRocks34 wrote:Some might also mention the quality of the average athlete in the 1960's NBA versus the quality of athlete today (and global competition versus mostly North American competition in the 1960's).

I think that's going too far

JN61 wrote:

monopoman wrote:Acting like every player could keep up with their production when playing nearly every minute of a game is ridiculous. It's like when people take some role player and then claim they are truly an all-star when looking at per 36 minute stats.

It's a lot harder to produce at a high level over nearly an entire game than it is to do it with say 30 MPG. Jokic is a great player, but we have seen him have trouble sustaining his production over a game when playing heavy minutes, especially when that game goes into an OT or two.

We already see it in fact and not just few long selected games. His clutch (last 5 mins in close games) stats are quite poor for typical MVP Candidate, especially when you consider how good he is before clutch time.

I just looked it up now. He is 4th in clutch scoring which seems about right.

I think in the past this may have been the case due to poor conditioning (he used to be way fatter) but doesnt seem to be the case now.

Just because Wilt did xyz doesn't mean someone else's achievement should be discredited. Wilt was a freak and we'll never see someone like him again. A little while ago there was a thread on records that will never be broken and I think Wilt's 48.5 mpg definitely tops that list.

wojoaderge wrote:

HotRocks34 wrote:Some might also mention the quality of the average athlete in the 1960's NBA versus the quality of athlete today (and global competition versus mostly North American competition in the 1960's).

I think that's going too far

It might be. Although, to be fair, there were no Embiid's or Giannis's in the game back in the 1960's. No Hakeem, no Mutumbo, no Luka and so forth.

When you open up the gates to greater competition (more global areas included in the competition), things always change. As I said, I'm kind of an old/middle-aged guy and I've seen this in different sports (boxing comes to mind when guys from former closed countries like Cuba [in the past I think guys were defecting; now they will be allowed to do so officially, apparently] or old Soviet Union nations started to compete as pros rather than just as amateurs) myself.

Also, and this almost doesn't need mentioning, major league baseball looked a lot different, including from a competitive landscape, before Jackie Robinson came along.

Obviously there were great athletes in the 1960's NBA. Wilt, Russell, Oscar, etc. But for a variety of reasons, including more nations now involved and better sports science, the athletes today (in general), IMO, are vastly superior.

All that being said, Wilt may still be the greatest single athlete in NBA history. After all this time he may yet be #1 there.

Again, I'm a huge Wilt fan. Loved him in the Conan movie, loved his personality, etc. All respect to him.

miamiheat319 wrote:Just because Wilt did xyz doesn't mean someone else's achievement should be discredited. Wilt was a freak and we'll never see someone like him again. A little while ago there was a thread on records that will never be broken and I think Wilt's 48.5 mpg definitely tops that list.

100% agree on the record never being broken, and agree with all else you said.

I like pro wrestling. A term they use for fans sometimes in that arena is a "mark." I'm a huge mark for Wilt. Always was. I love that guy.

Wilt, after the NBA, went and played volleyball as a pro. The guy is just a freak, freak, special athlete and personality. He's in the volleyball hall of fame.

Here's an article on Wilt the volleyball player:
https://www.insidehook.com/article/sports/remembering-wilt-chamberlain-pro-volleyball-career

HotRocks34 wrote:

wojoaderge wrote:

HotRocks34 wrote:Some might also mention the quality of the average athlete in the 1960's NBA versus the quality of athlete today (and global competition versus mostly North American competition in the 1960's).

I think that's going too far

It might be. Although, to be fair, there were no Embiid's or Giannis's in the game back in the 1960's. No Hakeem, no Mutumbo, no Luka and so forth.

When you open up the gates to greater competition (more global areas included in the competition), things always change. As I said, I'm kind of an old guy and I've seen this in different sports (boxing comes to mind when guys from former closed countries like Cuba (at that point think guys were defecting; now they will be allowed to do so officially) or old Soviet Union nations started to compete as pros rather than just amateurs) myself.

Also, and this almost doesn't need mentioning, but major league baseball looked a lot different, including from a competitive landscape, before Jackie Robinson came along.

Obviously there were great athletes in the 1960's NBA. Wilt, Russell, Oscar, etc. But for a variety of reasons, including more nations now involved and better sports science, the athletes today (in general), IMO, are vastly superior.

All that being said, Wilt may still be the greatest single athlete in NBA history. After all this time he may yet be #1 there.

Again, I'm a huge Wilt fan. Loved him in the Conan movie, loved his personality, etc. All respect to him.

All that is true, but I have almost no doubt Wilt was playing against the best basketball players in the world at that time.

monopoman wrote:Acting like every player could keep up with their production when playing nearly every minute of a game is ridiculous. It's like when people take some role player and then claim they are truly an all-star when looking at per 36 minute stats.

It's a lot harder to produce at a high level over nearly an entire game than it is to do it with say 30 MPG. Jokic is a great player, but we have seen him have trouble sustaining his production over a game when playing heavy minutes, especially when that game goes into an OT or two.

Then again everyone would adjust to more minutes

wojoaderge wrote:All that is true, but I have almost no doubt Wilt was playing against the best basketball players in the world at that time.

I definitely agree on that point. And there were some great, great players around then. No doubt about it.