Which of Wilt/Hakeem/Kareem are the best two way players of all time? Offense combined with defense

[70sFan]

Anyway, for those who are interested in their scoring numbers adjusted for pace (and league environment) and opponent TS% allowed:

1989-95 Hakeem: 24.5 pp75 on +2.3 rTS% in RS, 27.5 pp75 on +3.1 rTS% in PS
1974-80 Kareem: 25.1 pp75 on +7.4 rTS% in RS, 28.0 pp75 on +10.3 rTS% in PS
1962-68 Wilt: 25.8 pp75 on +5.9 rTS% in RS, 20.9 pp75 on +5.1 rTS% in PS

Here is the comparison for their 3 years scoring peaks:

1993-95 Hakeem: 26.4 pp75 on +3.3 rTS% in RS, 28.8 pp75 on +3.3 rTS% in PS
1977-79 Kareem: 25.0 pp75 on +8.5 rTS% in RS, 27.7 pp75 on +11.7 rTS% in PS
1964-66 Wilt: 26.6 pp75 on +4.9 rTS% in RS, 24.4 pp75 on +6.6 rTS% in PS

Kareem is on another level to these two as a scorer, while Hakeem and Wilt are quite close to each other.

i'd say wilt is clearly better in the rs and hakeem in the ps just going off the numbers. Not sure how to compare the offensive help/creation they had though.

Yeah, the main thing is that 1962-68 postseason sample is highly influenced by 1967-68 numbers when Wilt played different role on offense. That's why I used 1964-66 as his scoring peak, because I believe he developed more as an offensive player, while still playing the volume scorer role.

I'd give Wilt the edge in RS and Hakeem the edge in PS like you said, although I don't think the difference is that drastic. Overall, I may (very slightly?) prefer Wilt as an offensive player because he was a monster offensive rebounder and clearly a better passer than Hakeem, which makes him a bit more scalable in theory.

[OhayoKD]

Anyway, for those who are interested in their scoring numbers adjusted for pace (and league environment) and opponent TS% allowed:

1989-95 Hakeem: 24.5 pp75 on +2.3 rTS% in RS, 27.5 pp75 on +3.1 rTS% in PS
1974-80 Kareem: 25.1 pp75 on +7.4 rTS% in RS, 28.0 pp75 on +10.3 rTS% in PS
1962-68 Wilt: 25.8 pp75 on +5.9 rTS% in RS, 20.9 pp75 on +5.1 rTS% in PS

Here is the comparison for their 3 years scoring peaks:

1993-95 Hakeem: 26.4 pp75 on +3.3 rTS% in RS, 28.8 pp75 on +3.3 rTS% in PS
1977-79 Kareem: 25.0 pp75 on +8.5 rTS% in RS, 27.7 pp75 on +11.7 rTS% in PS
1964-66 Wilt: 26.6 pp75 on +4.9 rTS% in RS, 24.4 pp75 on +6.6 rTS% in PS

Kareem is on another level to these two as a scorer, while Hakeem and Wilt are quite close to each other.

i'd say wilt is clearly better in the rs and hakeem in the ps just going off the numbers. Not sure how to compare the offensive help/creation they had though.

Yeah, the main thing is that 1962-68 postseason sample is highly influenced by 1967-68 numbers when Wilt played different role on offense. That's why I used 1964-66 as his scoring peak, because I believe he developed more as an offensive player, while still playing the volume scorer role.

I'd give Wilt the edge in RS and Hakeem the edge in PS like you said, although I don't think the difference is that drastic. Overall, I may (very slightly?) prefer Wilt as an offensive player because he was a monster offensive rebounder and clearly a better passer than Hakeem, which makes him a bit more scalable in theory.

Interesting things is despite maybe being the worst technical passer of the "great two way bigs"(doesn't include wilt for some reason)...
(regular season)

(post-season)


Hakeem apparently is creating the most in the playoffs. I imagine the three-point shooting(best spacing ever at that point?) helps here

[FuShengTHEGreat]

69 can be seen as a bigger choke, but I don't see how that precludes Wilt from being better at his peak. Realistically given how inflated the impact of centers were in the 60's relative to basically everyone ever, I'd outright expect stuff like Wilt's 62(Pushed one of the closer to "stacked" russell teams to 7 with what i think was a genuninely bad team wuthout him) or 69 to straight up be more valuable than any year for Hakeem or Kareem(or Jordan or Shaq or any Lebron thing except for maaaybe 2016).

The Celtics were the greatest team ever by a landslide and Wilt took them to 7 with injured costars, came within a possession of winning with an outright limited cast and led an even better team in 1969 when it all came together. I think Wilt has a reasonable case as the most impactful peak ever and I'm not really sure why Wilt being less consistent precludes that as a possibility.

The same result woulda happened to Wilt in 67 if he and his team weren't facing a overmatched Warriors team in the Finals. If we're comparing that peak versioj of him to Kareem or Hakeem in the playoffs at their best, he falls short imho, although i will give him credit to being a superior rebounder.

It's ironic how segments of his fanbase uses the argument of annually losing to more talented Boston, but when his team beats the Warriors I havent seen one person acknowledge the disparity in talent between the two teams.

Basically all SF had going for them offensively was Rick Barry volume scoring on below average efficiency. If you took away Wilt the Sixers still had more prime HOF talent on their roster.

He was historically bad from the FT line in that series, only 30% which is the lowest of any Finals. Only Shaq in 00 was comparable amongst Finals MVPs, but at least he more than offset that by increasing his scoring average.

Even if Wilt was facing Nate, he still should've been better offensively with that massive advantage in firepower alongside him imho.

[70sFan]

i'd say wilt is clearly better in the rs and hakeem in the ps just going off the numbers. Not sure how to compare the offensive help/creation they had though.

Yeah, the main thing is that 1962-68 postseason sample is highly influenced by 1967-68 numbers when Wilt played different role on offense. That's why I used 1964-66 as his scoring peak, because I believe he developed more as an offensive player, while still playing the volume scorer role.

I'd give Wilt the edge in RS and Hakeem the edge in PS like you said, although I don't think the difference is that drastic. Overall, I may (very slightly?) prefer Wilt as an offensive player because he was a monster offensive rebounder and clearly a better passer than Hakeem, which makes him a bit more scalable in theory.

Interesting things is despite maybe being the worst technical passer of the "great two way bigs"(doesn't include wilt for some reason)...
(regular season)

(post-season)


Hakeem apparently is creating the most in the playoffs. I imagine the three-point shooting(best spacing ever at that point?) helps here

I think that shows Box Creation limitations here more than anything. With all respect to Hakeem, he didn't create more opportunities for his teammate than Shaq at his peak. Houston spacing is certainly a factor.

[henshao]

It depends on the series; Hakeem scored on all five of the Jazz at least a few times in his career. They would collapse the defense on him like it was football and yes Rudy T having two brain cells to rub together decided to take advantage of it with the offensive gameplan

[FuShengTHEGreat]

In the 1969 finals Baylor had three straight games of 4-18, 2-14, and 4-13 shooting from the field (and in that 2-14 game, he went 1-5 from the line, as well,...in a one point loss.)

and in that game seven, he blew chunks all over the floor with an 8-22 performance (remember Wilt and his 18 points and 27 rebound on 7-8 FG/FGA?)

As for the claim that Wilt's performance is worst ever by a goat player in the finals.

Chamberlain outscored, badly outrebounded, and badly outshot Russell in that series while playing great defensively.

As he was a incredibly dominant rim protector and it should be noted that the (Celtics bigs combined for 12 for 30 fg's) in that game seven loss.

As for Wilt's diminished scoring in the series it was clearly because VBK's game plan in the postseason involved rolling everything through West and Baylor on offence.


As in the regular season when Wilt's lack of touches on offence got so bad.


that SI ran an article claiming that Wilt could no longer score.

Wilt then caught wind of the article, and the night before it hit the newsstands, Chamberlain exploded with a 60 point game.

He then followed that up with a 66 point game (on 29-35 shooting) a few days later.

In fact, over the course of 17 straight games, Wilt crushed the league, averaging 31.1 ppg in that span.

Included were games of 30 on ROY and HOFer Elvin Hayes; 33 on Bob Rule (look him up...he had three straight outstanding seasons before he injured his knee), and even a 35 point game on Russell, which was his highest against Russell since his 46 point game in the 1966 ECF's.



Now instead of blaming Wilt for that series loss...how about blaming VBK's "strategy?"

As why didn't VBK ask his teammates to get the ball into Wilt's hands more,

As BTW in the game three 111-105 loss, Baylor and West combined to shoot 1-14 from the field in the 4th quarter while Wilt had 16 points on 6 out of 10 shooting.

Russell scored exactly at the same amount in the 69 Finals as he did in the regular season unlike Wilt who dropped steeply so he wasn't hurting Boston the way Wilt was. He was their best playmaker and although he wasn't spectacular from the FT line but at least made more than he missed. Unlike Wilt who was historically bad.

How was he worthy of more offensive touches when he was almost automatic to miss when put to the line?

I like how you don't add in 2 of the games in the series Wilt himself went 1-5 and 1-6 from the floor while West valiantly tried to pull LA through with efficient 41 and 26 pt scoring performances.

And the sad part was Wilt didn't even have to be in that situation in the first place. Given how many insist injuries held them back from beating Boston in 68, a healthy Sixers team the following season would've been favored to beat them. Especially since they went 54-28 after Wilt left.

At least in 91-92 when Olajuwon requested a trade from Houston that was from a team headed nowhere fast (only 2-10 in games he missed), with Vernon getting arrested annually off court, years of no major trade acquisitions.

Unlike Wilts crybaby entitled self who abandoned 3 prime HOF starters in Philly to go to LA and put up that awful performance in the Finals.

91-92 Hakeem would've been THANKFUL for even just ONE of Cunningham, Walker or Greer.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

All the excuses made for Wilt. He was an inferior playoff performer to either Kareem or Hakeem and thereby inferior two way player period.

So, you don't care about/account for strength of opposing defenses faced? Nobody in NBA history faced better defenses over the course of their entire career than Wilt. See: "Career Ranking" tab, here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PBH_Sb6IywvCQ8LDLtka4jOzuLdYRKIsvrjIyN67knM/edit#gid=96002192

Kareem, Entire Career, Playoffs:

Vs. Bad Defenses (24 games, 9.7% of total games):
32 mpg. 20.8 ppg. 6.5 rbg 2.7 ast. 63 TS% 8.7 rTS%

Vs. Average Defenses (114 games, 48.1% of total games):
35.8 mpg. 23.9 ppg 10.4 rbg 3.1 ast. 59.6 TS% 6.9 rTS%

Vs. Good Defenses (67 games, 28.3% of total games):
38.4 mpg 22 ppg 10.2 rbg 3.6 ast 52.6 TS% 0.7 rTS%

Vs. Elite Defenses (33 games, 13.9% of total games):
42.1 mpg. 29.4 ppg 14.2 rbg 3.8 ast 56 TS% 4.8 tTS%

Vs. All Time Great Defenses (0 games, 0% of total games):
------

Wilt, Entire Career, Playoffs:

Vs. Bad Defenses (15 games, 9.4% of total games):
47.6 mpg 26.5 ppg 22.2 rbg 7.5 ast/g 54.6 TS% 5.9 rTS%

Vs. Average Defenses (47 games, 29.4% of total games):
47.4 mpg 22.8 ppg 23.5 rbg 3.8 ast/g 54.5% TS% 5.2 rTS%

Vs. Good Defenses (26 games, 16.3% of total games):
47.1 mpg 18.6 ppg 24.7 rbg 4 ast/g 53.1 TS%. 4.9 rTS%

Vs. Elite Defenses (53 games, 33.1% of total games):
46.9 mpg 18.9 ppg 24.6 rbg 4.1 ast/g 50.7 TS% 2.1 tTS%

Vs. All Time Great Defenses (19 games, 11.9% of total games):
47.5 mpg 31 ppg 28.6 rbg 2.9 ast/g 53.3 TS 5.5 rTS%

Wilt vs. Elite + All Time Great Defenses:
45% of total playoff games played
47.2 MPG
25.0 PPG
26.6 RBG
3.5 AST/G
rTS%: +3.8%

Kareem vs. Elite + All Time Great Defenses:
13.9% of total playoff games played
42.1 MPG
29.4 PPG
14.2 RBG
3.8 AST/G
rTS%: +4.8%

Also, this project, for primes only. See post #1.

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1836300

None of this is an "excuse"; these are (very thorough/comprehensive) explanations as to why Wilt dropped off so much in offensive production in the playoffs, relative to his RS performances, overall.

Some of those statistics are also very skewered and in favor of Wilt. Notice he was logging almost 48 minutes per game which offered more statistical opportunities vs later eras. That's unprecedented in history. Absolute credit to him for his inhumane conditioning, but in reality nobody else in NBA playoff history is even logging more than 44 minutes per game.

Vs Bad Defenses Wilt was logging 15 more minutes per game than Kareem!!!

Lol....the 66-67 Warriors made that list. Nate was a great man to man defender but Wilt had MORE than enough help alongside him to not have the kind of lukewarm performance he had in that series offensively if this is supposedly the GOAT calibre individual performance.

What excuse can anyone conjure up from him being historically bad in the FT line in that series...only 30% FT? We already know Kareem and Hakeem don't have that achilles heel that teams can exploit.

Only 00 Shaq was comparable but at least he offset that by having the 3rd highest scoring average in NBA Finals history. 67 Wilt in the Finals had to rely on having a far more talented cast to offset this flaw as he didn't build on his regular season.

I don't see how he was the reliable offensive anchor Kareem/Hakeem were in the playoffs. Everyone's just supposed to brush aside his struggles from the line that playoff teams exploited and affected his usefulness as a real go to option in crunchtime.

[OhayoKD]

All the excuses made for Wilt. He was an inferior playoff performer to either Kareem or Hakeem and thereby inferior two way player period.

So, you don't care about/account for strength of opposing defenses faced? Nobody in NBA history faced better defenses over the course of their entire career than Wilt. See: "Career Ranking" tab, here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PBH_Sb6IywvCQ8LDLtka4jOzuLdYRKIsvrjIyN67knM/edit#gid=96002192

Kareem, Entire Career, Playoffs:

Vs. Bad Defenses (24 games, 9.7% of total games):
32 mpg. 20.8 ppg. 6.5 rbg 2.7 ast. 63 TS% 8.7 rTS%

Vs. Average Defenses (114 games, 48.1% of total games):
35.8 mpg. 23.9 ppg 10.4 rbg 3.1 ast. 59.6 TS% 6.9 rTS%

Vs. Good Defenses (67 games, 28.3% of total games):
38.4 mpg 22 ppg 10.2 rbg 3.6 ast 52.6 TS% 0.7 rTS%

Vs. Elite Defenses (33 games, 13.9% of total games):
42.1 mpg. 29.4 ppg 14.2 rbg 3.8 ast 56 TS% 4.8 tTS%

Vs. All Time Great Defenses (0 games, 0% of total games):
------

Wilt, Entire Career, Playoffs:

Vs. Bad Defenses (15 games, 9.4% of total games):
47.6 mpg 26.5 ppg 22.2 rbg 7.5 ast/g 54.6 TS% 5.9 rTS%

Vs. Average Defenses (47 games, 29.4% of total games):
47.4 mpg 22.8 ppg 23.5 rbg 3.8 ast/g 54.5% TS% 5.2 rTS%

Vs. Good Defenses (26 games, 16.3% of total games):
47.1 mpg 18.6 ppg 24.7 rbg 4 ast/g 53.1 TS%. 4.9 rTS%

Vs. Elite Defenses (53 games, 33.1% of total games):
46.9 mpg 18.9 ppg 24.6 rbg 4.1 ast/g 50.7 TS% 2.1 tTS%

Vs. All Time Great Defenses (19 games, 11.9% of total games):
47.5 mpg 31 ppg 28.6 rbg 2.9 ast/g 53.3 TS 5.5 rTS%

Wilt vs. Elite + All Time Great Defenses:
45% of total playoff games played
47.2 MPG
25.0 PPG
26.6 RBG
3.5 AST/G
rTS%: +3.8%

Kareem vs. Elite + All Time Great Defenses:
13.9% of total playoff games played
42.1 MPG
29.4 PPG
14.2 RBG
3.8 AST/G
rTS%: +4.8%

Also, this project, for primes only. See post #1.

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1836300

None of this is an "excuse"; these are (very thorough/comprehensive) explanations as to why Wilt dropped off so much in offensive production in the playoffs, relative to his RS performances, overall.

Some of those statistics are also very skewered and in favor of Wilt. Notice he was logging almost 48 minutes per game which offered more statistical opportunities vs later eras. That's unprecedented in history. Absolute credit to him for his inhumane conditioning, but in reality nobody else in NBA playoff history is even logging more than 44 minutes per game.

Vs Bad Defenses Wilt was logging 15 more minutes per game than Kareem!!!

Lol....the 66-67 Warriors made that list. Nate was a great man to man defender but Wilt had MORE than enough help alongside him to not have the kind of lukewarm performance he had in that series offensively if this is supposedly the GOAT calibre individual performance.

What excuse can anyone conjure up from him being historically bad in the FT line in that series...only 30% FT? We already know Kareem and Hakeem don't have that achilles heel that teams can exploit.

Only 00 Shaq was comparable but at least he offset that by having the 3rd highest scoring average in NBA Finals history. 67 Wilt in the Finals had to rely on having a far more talented cast to offset this flaw as he didn't build on his regular season.

I don't see how he was the reliable offensive anchor Kareem/Hakeem were in the playoffs. Everyone's just supposed to brush aside his struggles from the line that playoff teams exploited and affected his usefulness as a real go to option in crunchtime.

I don't think the extra minuites helps your case here. Playing more vs elite defenses would skew down a player's effiency moreso. Also not sure 2000 Shaq is the best example of playoff resiliency to use here. Besides the Lakers defense falling-off as he struggled with opposing bigs, Shaq also seems to have seen his creation plummet..

Interesting things is despite maybe being the worst technical passer of the "great two way bigs"(doesn't include wilt for some reason)...
(regular season)

(post-season)


Hakeem apparently is creating the most in the playoffs. I imagine the three-point shooting(best spacing ever at that point?) helps here

Consider that Wilt is actually an all-time-great defender whose teams frequently elevated in the post-season despite his box-numbers dropping(1962 for example) while Shaq was largely skewed towards O, and I don't think the shaq comparison is all that unfavorable for Chamberlain.