All known blocked shot data of Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain:

[penbeast0]

Anyone up for calculating block % and comparing it to Hakeem, Dikembe, or the other great modern shot blockers?

[bballexpert]

1960's were pretty weak time in the sport and the pace is super inflated i mean there is hardly any footage on that time and most of the players worked other jobs. I know they are the pioneers of the sport but looking at the players it is just so weak and the talent pool is not even close to what it is today and for most players there like no games to watch makes it even harder to judge. I mean its cool they got a lot of blocks but take pace and era into account and it seems less impressive overall to me.

[penbeast0]

I agree that pace and style make a large difference in a stat as situational as blocked shots. That's one reason I'm interested in block% rather than raw numbers and why actually having the raw numbers to look at is still very valuable.

I don't, however, subscribe to the idea that the 1960s were a particularly weak era. The 50s and the 70s, yes due to the circumscribed player pool in the 50s and the watered down league in the 70s (and to some extent in the 80s though Magic and Bird never seem to get called out on this). Then the explosion of foreign talent has made this century's talent pool expand faster than the league so I can see thinking that the 90s were a bit weaker as well, though that's never brought up either. I tend to think that people who feel the 60s were weak (as opposed to being far less sophisticated in both offensive and defensive coaching, training, equipment, etc.) are incorrect based on both observation and looking logically at talent pools but that's their right.

[Tinseltown]

Or more likely, newspapers only reported on the number of blocks when Wilt and Russell had an unusually high number of them. A typical regular season game with 0-2 blocks wouldn't get any mention of blocks at all

Well did you actually look at the numbers? 1 and 2 block games are reported.

A lot of these newspapers come from sources which serve to compare a particular player or team match up to another. For example a lot of those Russell or Wilt blocks came in contrast to one or the other players lesser amount of blocks that same game. Or contrasted with Jabbar, Bellamy, Thurmond, etc. IE "Jabbar blocked 5 shots to Wilt's 4". It's not to boast about either player, it's just to compare their production.

In other words, they aren't newspapers or journalists just cherry picking great shot blocking games. There are games where prolific shot blocks are pointed out but there are also just games where blocked shot data is used for comparison.

I don't think it's a collection of the best games. Also, some of that data comes from film, or mentions by coaches. It isn't even all newspaper data. I believe it's unlikely that with 112 or 135 random games worth of shot block data that it will be highly biased towards the best of the best when the intent of the mention, and the variety of sources is so diverse.

Come on. I didn't say that 1-2 block games were never reported, just that it was a lot less likely. And it really doesn't matter if it's 100 games or 500 games if it's not a representative sample and I have a hard time believing that it is. Regardless of the source, people are a lot less likely to mention the number of blocks when it's a routine amount versus when it's an unusually high amount and when someone has a truly great performance it's almost certain to be mentioned.

In this case, I think almost all of the notable outlier performances were recorded and reported at the time and it's driving up the average number of blocks per game.

[Mazter]

I agree that pace and style make a large difference in a stat as situational as blocked shots. That's one reason I'm interested in block% rather than raw numbers and why actually having the raw numbers to look at is still very valuable.

I don't, however, subscribe to the idea that the 1960s were a particularly weak era. The 50s and the 70s, yes due to the circumscribed player pool in the 50s and the watered down league in the 70s (and to some extent in the 80s though Magic and Bird never seem to get called out on this). Then the explosion of foreign talent has made this century's talent pool expand faster than the league so I can see thinking that the 90s were a bit weaker as well, though that's never brought up either. I tend to think that people who feel the 60s were weak (as opposed to being far less sophisticated in both offensive and defensive coaching, training, equipment, etc.) are incorrect based on both observation and looking logically at talent pools but that's their right.

Given the missing data of the C's opponents it would be very difficult to calculate BLK%, but given the very fast pace of the Celtics, the shots they averaged a game and the minutes he played, Russell would have to average anywhere between 9 and 10 blks for his career to equal Bol.

[D.Brasco]

Or more likely, newspapers only reported on the number of blocks when Wilt and Russell had an unusually high number of them. A typical regular season game with 0-2 blocks wouldn't get any mention of blocks at all

Well did you actually look at the numbers? 1 and 2 block games are reported.

A lot of these newspapers come from sources which serve to compare a particular player or team match up to another. For example a lot of those Russell or Wilt blocks came in contrast to one or the other players lesser amount of blocks that same game. Or contrasted with Jabbar, Bellamy, Thurmond, etc. IE "Jabbar blocked 5 shots to Wilt's 4". It's not to boast about either player, it's just to compare their production.

In other words, they aren't newspapers or journalists just cherry picking great shot blocking games. There are games where prolific shot blocks are pointed out but there are also just games where blocked shot data is used for comparison.

I don't think it's a collection of the best games. Also, some of that data comes from film, or mentions by coaches. It isn't even all newspaper data. I believe it's unlikely that with 112 or 135 random games worth of shot block data that it will be highly biased towards the best of the best when the intent of the mention, and the variety of sources is so diverse.

Come on. I didn't say that 1-2 block games were never reported, just that it was a lot less likely. And it really doesn't matter if it's 100 games or 500 games if it's not a representative sample and I have a hard time believing that it is. Regardless of the source, people are a lot less likely to mention the number of blocks when it's a routine amount versus when it's an unusually high amount and when someone has a truly great performance it's almost certain to be mentioned.

In this case, I think almost all of the notable outlier performances were recorded and reported at the time and it's driving up the average number of blocks per game.

While I think this data should be taken with somewhat of a grain of salt as they aren't "official" stats. The numbers don't seem that mind boggling from what we know of Wilt and Russell. These are guys that averaged over 20 rpg for their careers and are known as the two best shot-blockers of their time.

Before I saw this data my guesstimates for their averages were within this range give or take.

[penbeast0]

I agree that pace and style make a large difference in a stat as situational as blocked shots. That's one reason I'm interested in block% rather than raw numbers and why actually having the raw numbers to look at is still very valuable.

I don't, however, subscribe to the idea that the 1960s were a particularly weak era. The 50s and the 70s, yes due to the circumscribed player pool in the 50s and the watered down league in the 70s (and to some extent in the 80s though Magic and Bird never seem to get called out on this). Then the explosion of foreign talent has made this century's talent pool expand faster than the league so I can see thinking that the 90s were a bit weaker as well, though that's never brought up either. I tend to think that people who feel the 60s were weak (as opposed to being far less sophisticated in both offensive and defensive coaching, training, equipment, etc.) are incorrect based on both observation and looking logically at talent pools but that's their right.

Given the missing data of the C's opponents it would be very difficult to calculate BLK%, but given the very fast pace of the Celtics, the shots they averaged a game and the minutes he played, Russell would have to average anywhere between 9 and 10 blks for his career to equal Bol.

I don't think he equals Bol who was an incredible freak outlier (so was Russell but in many more ways). I want to see if using BLK% he exceeds the Dikembe Mutombo, Hakeem Olujawon types and if so, by how much (has to exceed to be considered that level or better as a shotblocker, not just equal, since there were more short or medium shots in Russell's day even once the pace modifier is removed).

[bballexpert]

I agree that pace and style make a large difference in a stat as situational as blocked shots. That's one reason I'm interested in block% rather than raw numbers and why actually having the raw numbers to look at is still very valuable.

I don't, however, subscribe to the idea that the 1960s were a particularly weak era. The 50s and the 70s, yes due to the circumscribed player pool in the 50s and the watered down league in the 70s (and to some extent in the 80s though Magic and Bird never seem to get called out on this). Then the explosion of foreign talent has made this century's talent pool expand faster than the league so I can see thinking that the 90s were a bit weaker as well, though that's never brought up either. I tend to think that people who feel the 60s were weak (as opposed to being far less sophisticated in both offensive and defensive coaching, training, equipment, etc.) are incorrect based on both observation and looking logically at talent pools but that's their right.

Still feel the area is weak regardless how the 70's were they were no great either. I mean most of best players were on Celtics the league did not have much talent and most were not even full time players. Although it makes it even harder to judge them because there hardly any footage i doubt anyone here has seen a full season of this guys play. I mean these numbers are great but if i can not see with my own eyes how they looked and played it is kinda pointless to me Kareem only older guy i seen alot of games of.

[ThaRegul8r]

Anyone up for calculating block % and comparing it to Hakeem, Dikembe, or the other great modern shot blockers?

I calculated the block percentage for Wilt's last season in the league some years ago, and it is 5.92%:

BLK%
(100 * (BLK * (Tm MP / 5)) / (MP * (Opp FGA - Opp 3PA))
(100 * (446 * (3951)) / (3542 * (8409)) = 5.92

For some comparisons, Olajuwon blocked 4.8% at 36, Robinson 4.3% at 36, Mutombo blocked 5.48% at 36, but played only 26 games and 21.4 minutes per to Chamberlain’s 82 games and 43.2 minutes per. Shaq blocked 3.5% at 36.

For further comparison, Olajuwon and Robinson exceeded a block percentage of 5.9 (which, to reiterate, Wilt posted in the final year of his career) four times in their career, Mutombo eight times, Mourning five times (excluding 2007-08, '04-05, and 2000-01, when he played 25, 37 and 13 games), Ben Wallace twice.

[trex_8063]

Anyone up for calculating block % and comparing it to Hakeem, Dikembe, or the other great modern shot blockers?

I calculated the block percentage for Wilt's last season in the league some years ago, and it is 5.92%:

BLK%
(100 * (BLK * (Tm MP / 5)) / (MP * (Opp FGA - Opp 3PA))
(100 * (446 * (3951)) / (3542 * (8409)) = 5.92

For some comparisons, Olajuwon blocked 4.8% at 36, Robinson 4.3% at 36, Mutombo blocked 5.48% at 36, but played only 26 games and 21.4 minutes per to Chamberlain’s 82 games and 43.2 minutes per. Shaq blocked 3.5% at 36.

For further comparison, Olajuwon and Robinson exceeded a block percentage of 5.9 (which, to reiterate, Wilt posted in the final year of his career) four times in their career, Mutombo eight times, Mourning five times (excluding 2007-08, '04-05, and 2000-01, when he played 25, 37 and 13 games), Ben Wallace twice.

Where did you obtain the figure for Wilt's total blocks? I didn't think they were officially recorded until '74.

[ThaRegul8r]

Anyone up for calculating block % and comparing it to Hakeem, Dikembe, or the other great modern shot blockers?

I calculated the block percentage for Wilt's last season in the league some years ago, and it is 5.92%:

BLK%
(100 * (BLK * (Tm MP / 5)) / (MP * (Opp FGA - Opp 3PA))
(100 * (446 * (3951)) / (3542 * (8409)) = 5.92

For some comparisons, Olajuwon blocked 4.8% at 36, Robinson 4.3% at 36, Mutombo blocked 5.48% at 36, but played only 26 games and 21.4 minutes per to Chamberlain’s 82 games and 43.2 minutes per. Shaq blocked 3.5% at 36.

For further comparison, Olajuwon and Robinson exceeded a block percentage of 5.9 (which, to reiterate, Wilt posted in the final year of his career) four times in their career, Mutombo eight times, Mourning five times (excluding 2007-08, '04-05, and 2000-01, when he played 25, 37 and 13 games), Ben Wallace twice.

Where did you obtain the figure for Wilt's total blocks? I didn't think they were officially recorded until '74.

I no longer possess the original source, as I lost it in a computer crash several years ago, but it was printed in the newspaper just like some of the single-game block totals listed in this thread were.

[ceiling raiser]

I calculated the block percentage for Wilt's last season in the league some years ago, and it is 5.92%:

BLK%
(100 * (BLK * (Tm MP / 5)) / (MP * (Opp FGA - Opp 3PA))
(100 * (446 * (3951)) / (3542 * (8409)) = 5.92

For some comparisons, Olajuwon blocked 4.8% at 36, Robinson 4.3% at 36, Mutombo blocked 5.48% at 36, but played only 26 games and 21.4 minutes per to Chamberlain’s 82 games and 43.2 minutes per. Shaq blocked 3.5% at 36.

For further comparison, Olajuwon and Robinson exceeded a block percentage of 5.9 (which, to reiterate, Wilt posted in the final year of his career) four times in their career, Mutombo eight times, Mourning five times (excluding 2007-08, '04-05, and 2000-01, when he played 25, 37 and 13 games), Ben Wallace twice.

Where did you obtain the figure for Wilt's total blocks? I didn't think they were officially recorded until '74.

I no longer possess the original source, as I lost it in a computer crash several years ago, but it was printed in the newspaper just like some of the single-game block totals listed in this thread were.

http://www15.zippyshare.com/v/yDNL012W/file.html

5th column, top article.

[ThaRegul8r]

Where did you obtain the figure for Wilt's total blocks? I didn't think they were officially recorded until '74.

I no longer possess the original source, as I lost it in a computer crash several years ago, but it was printed in the newspaper just like some of the single-game block totals listed in this thread were.

http://www15.zippyshare.com/v/yDNL012W/file.html

Thank you. I make it a point now to backup my database on cloud storage, though, ironically, I was actually in the process of doing so when I lost it.

BTW, though it's months late, I just saw your PM. Today's the first day I've been on RealGM since the summer, so I haven't seen anything since shortly after the Finals ended until now.

[mdonnelly1989]

I wonder why Wilt wasn't known as one of the Borderline Top 5 Defensive Centers of All Time. I feel like although he isn't quite on Bill Russell's level he was still Elite on defense.

[penbeast0]

Thanks.

[SkyHookFTW]

I wonder why Wilt wasn't known as one of the Borderline Top 5 Defensive Centers of All Time. I feel like although he isn't quite on Bill Russell's level he was still Elite on defense.

Inconsistency from year to year hurts Wilt. For someone like me who saw him and Russell play a lot in person, I can say that when Wilt focused on defense he was absolutely elite. A lot of people forget that early in his career, he had to be the man on both offense and defense. No player in NBA history, let alone any big, has ever shown that they could do both at an elite level year in and year out. I don't agree with radical adjusting for pace, but when one considers how much running he had to do, and the minutes he played every game, it is almost mind boggling to think that he was able to do it at all for any serious length of time. Wilt is not the GOAT, but I've been watching the game since the early 60's, and to this day he is still the most amazing athlete I've ever seen step onto the court. Some of the Wilt hating that goes on around here is ridiculous, just as some the LeBron hate is foolish as well.

[bballexpert]

I wonder why Wilt wasn't known as one of the Borderline Top 5 Defensive Centers of All Time. I feel like although he isn't quite on Bill Russell's level he was still Elite on defense.

Inconsistency from year to year hurts Wilt. For someone like me who saw him and Russell play a lot in person, I can say that when Wilt focused on defense he was absolutely elite. A lot of people forget that early in his career, he had to be the man on both offense and defense. No player in NBA history, let alone any big, has ever shown that they could do both at an elite level year in and year out. I don't agree with radical adjusting for pace, but when one considers how much running he had to do, and the minutes he played every game, it is almost mind boggling to think that he was able to do it at all for any serious length of time. Wilt is not the GOAT, but I've been watching the game since the early 60's, and to this day he is still the most amazing athlete I've ever seen step onto the court. Some of the Wilt hating that goes on around here is ridiculous, just as some the LeBron hate is foolish as well.

Ok this is great a person who has seen them play now that someone i love to hear talk about the guy because he saw him. Just wondering i do not rank Russel or Wilt in my top 10 because i have not enough film of them actually playing the game. I was wondering what is your top 10 and were would you put them on your list having seen them play the game.

[penbeast0]

Wilt also, even in the early 70s when his defensive focus was at his peak (though at the end of his career) was not comfortable playing defense away from the basket. He was an elite basket protector but if his man moved around outside the foul line, Wilt wasn't on him nor was he particularly good at showing out. This was something people commmented on when he was young as well; Terry Pluto's book "Tall Tales" has Wilt teammates talking about this from his Warrior days as well.

Russell was not as tall as Wilt nor could he jump as high. He was quicker, both afoot and a quick jumper who didn't need to gather himself, similar to Dennis Rodman in that respect. He roamed a lot more, coming up with more blindside blocks, and would guard smaller men at times. Dipper (I think) posted Russell during his last two years bringing in his reserve center to guard Wilt because Chet Walker was killing the Celtics and switching himself onto Walker. That's not something I could see Wilt doing.

[mdonnelly1989]

I wonder why Wilt wasn't known as one of the Borderline Top 5 Defensive Centers of All Time. I feel like although he isn't quite on Bill Russell's level he was still Elite on defense.

Inconsistency from year to year hurts Wilt. For someone like me who saw him and Russell play a lot in person, I can say that when Wilt focused on defense he was absolutely elite. A lot of people forget that early in his career, he had to be the man on both offense and defense. No player in NBA history, let alone any big, has ever shown that they could do both at an elite level year in and year out. I don't agree with radical adjusting for pace, but when one considers how much running he had to do, and the minutes he played every game, it is almost mind boggling to think that he was able to do it at all for any serious length of time. Wilt is not the GOAT, but I've been watching the game since the early 60's, and to this day he is still the most amazing athlete I've ever seen step onto the court. Some of the Wilt hating that goes on around here is ridiculous, just as some the LeBron hate is foolish as well.

Ok this is great a person who has seen them play now that someone i love to hear talk about the guy because he saw him. Just wondering i do not rank Russel or Wilt in my top 10 because i have not enough film of them actually playing the game. I was wondering what is your top 10 and were would you put them on your list having seen them play the game.

And on top of this I'm assuming you think Wilt was better than Bill Russell. BUT do you think he would transition to 11 rings if he was put into the same position as Bill Russell.

Overall/Skill/talent is a different story than bringing teams over the top because of leadership skills/playing style and intangibles.....

[lorak]

I would like to see such numbers (before '74) for Thurmond (or KAJ), because then we could compare them with official blocks stats and see how much it's really worth.