Retro POY '71-72 (Voting Complete)

[Sedale Threatt]

I just wish more of this stuff was available to watch. I was trolling around on ebay to see what kind of recordings they have for sale, and some guy with a isht load of football/baseball games was saying in an ad for a Bulls/Lakers game from 71 that there are only two -- TWO! -- complete TV broadcasts from before 1970 in known existence. That's just pitiful. All that history, gone.

[Doctor MJ]

So is this the year we say the ABA is more like street ball or the D-league? I'm looking at Erving's numbers and wanting to have his baby.

I'd say that's '70-71. If you look at the all-rookie teams this year, it's just glaringly apparent that the ABA was the league getting the big talent. One might object giving too much credit to rookies, but keep in mind that the rookies of back then tended to be able to come right in and star.

Not that that means you need to put an ABA player in the top 5, but after this year it really becomes sparse. You've got Barry who is a world class player, but who is constantly injured in this time. Hawkins and Haywood are candidates but they took a huge drop when they went to the NBA (Hawkins possibly because of injury though). Other than that who? Daniels? Beaty?

[Manuel Calavera]

I just wish more of this stuff was available to watch. I was trolling around on ebay to see what kind of recordings they have for sale, and some guy with a isht load of football/baseball games was saying in an ad for a Bulls/Lakers game from 71 that there are only two -- TWO! -- complete TV broadcasts from before 1970 in known existence. That's just pitiful. All that history, gone.

I heard from TLAF that there is only 1 game prior to I think around 1966~. It's crazy how little the NBA does for it's history and it's no surprise you have guys like Hollinger and Simmons who try to dismiss anything prior to the merger.

[lorak]

Question - David Robinson was criticized for bad play in playoffs against psychical defenders. Now we see that KAJ also played bad against psychical defenders, but he isn't criticized so much. How is that possible?

[Doctor MJ]

Question - David Robinson was criticized for bad play in playoffs against psychical defenders. Now we see that KAJ also played bad against psychical defenders, but he isn't criticized so much. How is that possible?

I think that's a good point to consider. Of course he is being knocked for it, so the question is: why isn't he knocked more?

Well, Robinson had a more clear trend of 1) his stats going down in the playoffs and 2) his team getting upset in the playoffs, AND the statistical impact meant he slipped below often several of the other comparable stars in the league - whereas, the series this year with Thurmond is the first one we've seen is the first time another big man can claim to have better stats and that came in a series where Kareem's still won, and the opposing team was undoubtedly focusing far more energy on stopping Kareem than Kareem's team was in stopping the always inefficient Thurmond.

[lorak]

re: point no 1.

I know one thing:
From 1990 to 1996 Robinson's drop off in playoffs was -1.6 PPG and - 035 TS% while playing 1.2 MPG more
From 1970 to 1975 KAJ's drop off in playoffs was -0.7 PPG and -0.37 TS% while playing 2.1 MPG more

So it's very close.

re: point no 2.

Bucks were upset in 1970, 1973 and 1974; in 1975 they missed playoffs (KAJ's injury). So they were upset 3 times in 4 seasons (I don't count that injured year)

Spurs: 1991, 1994, 1995 and 1996

additionaly in 1993 they won with PTB despite lower seed. (BTW, Robinson had triple double and 7 blocks in deciding game, won in overtime)

So upset in 4 of 6 season and one win as underdogs.

So again - KAJ's and Robinson's teams were doing very similiar. Of course KAJ won one title, but he also had much more help.


But your last point, about KAJ being outplayed only once, is good one. Robinson was outplayed more often (I guess three times?), but it seems it's the only major difference.

[JordansBulls]

Question - David Robinson was criticized for bad play in playoffs against psychical defenders. Now we see that KAJ also played bad against psychical defenders, but he isn't criticized so much. How is that possible?

This has been my point the entire time for Kareem in the 70's. Yes Kareem is clearly better than Robinson, however his numbers in the season have been better than the playoffs most years but Robinson was getting ranked lower while Kareem was getting higher.

[semi-sentient]

Kareem is being punished (slap on the wrist?), but he's so far ahead of everyone due to his dominant RS play that it isn't enough to drop him down. Robinson was never head and shoulders above the rest of the league, so he doesn't get as much leverage.

Also, he played poorly for his standards, but he was still up among the best as far as overall play is concerned. Who played better overall is the question, and when you look at Wilt (slightly worse, statistically speaking), Frazier (same same), etc., none of them did enough to make up for what Kareem did as a whole.

Regular Season

- 2nd in minutes played
- 1st in field goals
- 1st in field goal attempts
- 2nd in field goal pct
- 5th in free throws
- 2nd in free throw attempts
- 2nd in total rebounds
- 1st in points (by a lot)
- 2nd in minutes per game
- 1st in points per game (by a lot)
- 3rd in rebounds per game
- 1st in player efficiency rating
- 2nd in true shooting percentage
- 2nd in effective field goal pct
- 1st in offensive win shares
- 2nd in defensive win shares
- 1st in win shares
- 1st in win shares per 48 minutes

Post Season

- 2nd in field goals
- 2nd in field goal attempts
- 2nd in total rebounds
- 5th in points
- 3rd in minutes per game
- 1st in points per game
- 2nd in rebounds per game
- 1st in player efficiency rating
- 5th in total rebound pct
- 2nd in defensive win shares

[Sedale Threatt]

Kareem is being punished (slap on the wrist?), but he's so far ahead of everyone due to his dominant RS play that it isn't enough to drop him down.

It's a good comparison to make. Ultimately, David was probably treated a bit too harshly. But ultimately this is what stands out the most to me.

Look at last year. If there had been a stronger field, I don't have much doubt Kareem would have been knocked down to second or even third. But there just weren't many serious candidates to consider in the years being mentioned. Sorry, but Walt Frazier's playoff wins shares just didn't do it for me.

In the rare instances when there were good candidates, with Dr. J or Walton especially, Kareem's case was still pretty rock solid. As in, he was the best player in the league, and he either went down swinging like a champ or didn't make the playoffs because his team flat-out sucked.

In comparison, David was knocking heads with the likes of prime Jordan, Magic, Barkley, Olajuwon, Malone, Ewing, etc. That's a brutal field that even at his best he would have had difficulty topping. The margin for error is so much slimmer.

Even in 95 and 96, he still managed to finish second -- behind Michael Jordan, who he was never going to beat, because he was never better, and Dream after one of his Hurculean "carry my team to the title" seasons.

[fatal9]

Bucks were upset in 1970, 1973 and 1974; in 1975 they missed playoffs (KAJ's injury). So they were upset 3 times in 4 seasons (I don't count that injured year)

Bucks were upset in '70 and '74? That's revisionist history. In '70 they lost to the better championship winning New York team no one expected them to beat. In '74 they had HCA, but they lost their second or third best player in Lucius Allen right before the playoffs started. Kareem had one of the greatest individual runs to not result in a championship and led a weak roster with no all-stars to one game from a ring.

Not seeing the D-Rob comparison. From '70-'75, the only playoffs Kareem failed in was '73. And '72 was the only other year where he statistically fell off from the RS (but still averaged 34/18/5/4 on 46% against an all-time great defender). In that span, he had one of the greatest runs to a championship (led team to ring and led league in scoring) in '71, had two of the best playoff runs to not result in a championship in '70 and '74 and a "failure" in '73 which came due to bad shooting against probably the best one on one defender ever at his position. Aside from '72 and '73, his stats have always risen in the playoffs or been very great. With the Lakers he didn't have a single bad series until he got in his mid 30s. Seems odd to put him in D-Rob class when he put up absurd numbers in the playoffs all throughout the 70s, and penalize him for losing one series that he shouldn't have.

[Dr Positivity]

1. Kareem
2. Wilt
3. Frazier
4. Havlicek
5. West

Kareem was the league's dominant player, did enough against Wilt to get #1. Wilt was the Finals MVP, dominant defense/rebounding big with super high % scoring. Surprised he's getting so much more love this year than 73, but I voted for him pretty there too, so w/e. Frazer-Hondo-West were my 3-5 over the ABA guys. Put West last cause of his poor playoff shooting, despite having the best RS. Frazier vs Hondo... Frazier scores less at a higher efficiency, Hondo more at a lower one. Went with the former. Also looks like Frazier was the better PS player

[JordansBulls]

Bucks were upset in 1970, 1973 and 1974; in 1975 they missed playoffs (KAJ's injury). So they were upset 3 times in 4 seasons (I don't count that injured year)

they were upset in 1973 and 1974 not 1970 because Willis Reed was the best in the league getting League and Finals MVP the same season. In 1974 they were upset as they had the best record in the league and the best player on the floor.

[ElGee]

I'd love to hear more discussion about Havlicek, Thurmond and the ABA guys. Gilmore was MVP in what looks to be regarded as a pretty dominant opening campaign. Doc got into it a bit but Erving went bonkers in the playoffs. Even some thoughts about Spencer Haywood and why he's off the radar.

A final point about Los Angeles, which I believe speaks to West's postseason "impact."

Statistically, the 72 Lakers postseason wasn't all that impressive. Yes, they played an elite team in Milwaukee, but the Bucks were injured. They played New York, but New York was injured. Here are the playoff ORtg/DRtg differential of some of the historically renowned RS teams:

96 Bulls 12.1
87 Lakers 11.3
86 Celtics 10.4
83 76ers 6.6
72 Lakers 2.8*

*Estimated

One thought might be, "OK, but with expansion they probably picked on weak teams." While that might be true to a degree, LA was actually 29-8 against +.500 teams, and 3 of those losses were at the beginning of the season without Jerry West. I think it's fair to say that West's poor shooting has a sizeable impact on the offensive decline LA saw in the postseason. The team was just so good that they won anyway...

[ThaRegul8r]

Wilt was the Finals MVP, dominant defense/rebounding big with super high % scoring. Surprised he's getting so much more love this year than 73, but I voted for him pretty there too, so w/e.

He should get more love, because he played better this year than in '73. He was higher in the MVP voting, his defense on the league MVP in the WCF was pivotal in advancing to the Finals, and he was the Finals MVP when West averaged 19.8 points on 32.5% FG and 38.1% TS, putting up a 24 pt/29 reb/10 blk/4 ast triple double in the deciding game with a broken hand. Whereas in '73, he didn't step up against the Knicks, allowed a hobbled man to have his best offensive production of the postseason in the last three games—all losses, and the Lakers were upset despite Chamberlain being their biggest advantage. What he actually did on the court this year > '73, and the Lakers won a title because of it. He deserves it this year.

(And Chamberlain still finished third in '73, while he's going to finish second this year.)

[Doctor MJ]

Bucks were upset in 1970, 1973 and 1974; in 1975 they missed playoffs (KAJ's injury). So they were upset 3 times in 4 seasons (I don't count that injured year)

Others have pointed out that the Bucks were not upset in 1970, but they said it in a way that might make you think they were objecting debatable. The reality the Bucks lost to a team with a better record, a much better SRS, and considered by some the greatest team in history. You definitely read something wrong.

The 1973 upset is legit.

The 1974 upset is not a "Robinson upset". Kareem was by far the best guy on the court, and no one disputed that. Part of Robinson's problem is that he has a series of upsets with him either clearly underperforming, or with an opposing star looking superior.

[Sedale Threatt]

That's another factor, for sure. Kareem never got roasted like David did in 95, did he?

[ThaRegul8r]

Bucks were upset in 1970, 1973 and 1974; in 1975 they missed playoffs (KAJ's injury). So they were upset 3 times in 4 seasons (I don't count that injured year)

Others have pointed out that the Bucks were not upset in 1970, but they said it in a way that might make you think they were objecting debatable. The reality the Bucks lost to a team with a better record, a much better SRS, and considered by some the greatest team in history. You definitely read something wrong.

As fatal9 said, it's nothing short of revisionist history for anyone to say Milwaukee was upset in 1970. I was going to save this for when we got to '69-70, but since it's been mentioned here, I'll post this now:

NEW YORK (UPI)—When the odds are 5-1 in your favor, you’re in pretty good shape. Just ask the New York Knicks.

Stop Lew Alcindor and you stop the Milwaukee Bucks was the figuring before the start of the New York-Milwaukee playoffs for the National Basketball Association’s Eastern Division Title. But, the Knicks knew better. Don’t stop Big Lew and you can still stop the Bucks.

New York proved its point conclusively Monday night by running Milwaukee off the court with a 132-96 triumph that eliminated the Bucks from the playoffs in five games and earned the Knicks the right to meet Los Angeles for the NBA championship beginning Friday night at New York.

“We knew Lew would score his points and get his rebounds,” said Knick captain Willis Reed who, despite the statistics, was relatively successful in containing the NBA’s Rookie of the Year. “We play a team style,” Reed added, “and as a team, we knew we could outscore them. We got contributions from everybody, that’s how we won the Eastern Division during the regular season.

Reed applied the finishing touches in the final game when his 32 points and 27 more by veteran Dick Barnett, including 16 in a torrid first quarter, made a farce of the contest. Alcindor, who had averaged 36 points through the first four games, tallied 27, but made only six of 17 field goal attempts in the first half when New York rolled to a commanding 69-45 lead and twice was benched by Bucks Coach Larry Costello.

Costello removed Alcindor with 1:30 left in the first half and his team trailing, 62-39, in an attempt to shake up the frustrated Bucks and benched his star for good midway through the third quarter with the game obviously out of hand.

Costello paid the Knicks the supreme compliment by saying, “No team ever played any better against us. Their shooting was fantastic, they got off to a great start and they kept pressuring us with their defense.”

“We shouldn’t even have been here,” Alcindor said. “We’re a young team, just our second year in the league. I believe I did my job. I’m not disappointed because the Knicks are a better team. We don’t have anything to feel ashamed about. You can’t be disappointed when a better team beats you.”

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=sJ ... 88,3413886

[lorak]

Sorry guys, my bad with that "1970 Bucks upset". That's how it ends when writing something in a hurry ;/

And ok, you convinced me that overall KAJ-Robinson comparison isn't too good, but still one fact remains: 70-75 KAJ's drop off in playoffs scoring efficiency was similiar to 90-96 Robinson's:
-1.6 PPG and - 035 TS% while playing 1.2 MPG more
to
-0.7 PPG and -0.37 TS% while playing 2.1 MPG more

[ThaRegul8r]

Sports Illustrated article on the first four games of the WCF:

April 24, 1972
Bombs Away Out West
Milwaukee blew open the first game and someone threatened to blow up the arena in the third. But at the end of four, the series was even—with the biggest explosions to come
Peter Carry

This was the week the NBA planned to give us the Los Angeles Lakers and the Milwaukee Bucks in that long-awaited smash thriller, the Western Conference championship playoffs. The show would star Jerry West, everybody's alltime playoff favorite, plus a huge cast of big-name players who would amaze us with their soaring choreography, leave us agape at their virtuosity and grip us with their dramatic intensity.

Indeed, there were glimpses of all those things. Yet somehow the production, intended as high suspense, often dropped to the level of simple farce. Perhaps it was the bad lighting or the comic score in the first act, or possibly it was the squat little referee who made an unexpected cameo appearance in the second. The bomb scare that sent the audience scurrying after the third act didn't exactly help. But fortunately there were some unexpectedly good performances to uplift the entire show. Wilt Chamberlain, never noted for extraordinary postseason success, was often spectacular in his whirling duels with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. And one of the least-known Lakers, a self-acknowledged spear carrier known among his teammates as Floyd Butterball, suddenly became a bright new Los Angeles celebrity.

Retired star forward and official team nicknamer Elgin Baylor gave that title to his successor, Jim McMillian (No. 5 on cover), when he decided that McMillian looked like a rotund facsimile of Floyd Patterson. McMillian is, indeed, a heavyweight—last summer he ballooned to 235 pounds—but still he hit the Bucks for his pro high of 42 points just when it seemed that Milwaukee had the Lakers on the ropes. After his team stumbled off to a horrendous start, McMillian's shooting evened the series, and then, joined by Gail Goodrich on offense and Chamberlain on defense, he kept firing while Los Angeles won the third game.

At least the comedy overtones were gone when the Lakers faced Milwaukee for the fourth session Sunday evening. When the series had started, it seemed that the Bucks would get all the laughs. In the opener at Los Angeles, Milwaukee's defense, overplaying and double-teaming the Lakers, pushed them away from their favorite shooting spots. Thus, a number of off-target attempts by the Lakers—even when men were open—resulted in a dismal 27% shooting average. Los Angeles managed merely eight points in the third period and lost by the high school total of 93-72.

On the day before that first game, several Lakers, led by Goodrich, complained during practice about the extra lights ABC television had installed in The Forum. Although an identical lighting setup had been used to televise the 1970 playoffs, the Los Angeles front office asked ABC to change it. Network technicians worked until midnight to make the modifications, but when Laker Owner Jack Kent Cooke arrived at The Forum on the next morning he said the lighting was still unacceptable and told ABC to remove even more globes. Out they came.

After the game and the stunning Laker loss, both Cooke and some members of the Los Angeles press seemed convinced that the only reason the Lakers could have dropped 50 points below their usual scoring average was the lighting—even though the Bucks played under the same conditions. Cooke called in the heads of the ABC crew for further lighting conferences, initially demanding that only The Forum lights be used for the second game, then eventually agreeing to a configuration only minimally different from the one ABC had intended to use in the first place. Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Herald-Examiner seemed ready to call technical fouls on everyone from the network to Thomas Edison. The dispute ended abruptly after the second game, which the Lakers won 135-134.

"The change in the lights did take away some of our home-court advantage in the first game; it changed the environment somewhat," whispered Laker Coach Bill Sharman, who is suffering through his second month with strained vocal cords and sounds these days like Walter Brennan with a strep infection. "If we had lost by one point, I might have said the lights could have had something to do with it. But when you lose by 19, it's not the lights. It was simply that our good shooters were all way off. Gail made two of 14, Jimmy hit three of 20 and Jerry four of 19."

McMillian and Goodrich broke their slumps in the second game, but West did not. He hit merely 10 of 30 shots and said afterward, "I know what I'm doing wrong. I'm turning my hand over too much, and I've got a slice like in golf. I can't get it stopped; it's just got to go away by itself." Something which would not go away by itself was Oscar Robertson, who guarded West tightly, harassing him with firm hand checks and his superior size and strength despite a deep muscle pull in his stomach which restricted his normal quickness. Since Robertson arrived in Milwaukee in 1970, West has not played well against the Bucks: last season he hit only 32% of his shots, and by the fourth game of this year's playoffs he was still under 40% for the series. In the third game West scored on nearly half his attempts, but he tried only 19 shots and generally took only wide open ones.

In the first Laker win, McMillian, shooting mostly long jumpers from the corner, outscored Jabbar, who threw up a mixed bag of precise hooks and jump shots, by 42-40. "I can't really tell you how I fit into this team," McMillian said. "I'm just the fat, little dude wearing No. 5. To tell you the truth, I was thinking the other night when I was in bed that after we win it all I ought to go to Sharman and ask him how my play measured up this year to what he had in mind for me. He's really never defined what he expects of me. But that's not too important in my case. With Jerry, Wilt and Gail it is, but I'm not as important to the core of the team as they are."

He was too modest. In the next game, McMillian's pinpoint bombing (16 of 25 shots) led the Lakers to a victory they could hardly have expected, since the Bucks shot an extraordinary 61%. Milwaukee actually outscored Los Angeles by 10 points from the field, but the Lakers were awarded 21 more free throws and made 11 of them. In fact, in all the games, Los Angeles got many more foul shots than the Bucks, a circumstance that sent Milwaukee, particularly Coach Larry Costello, into continual tirades against the officials. And no official action infuriated the Bucks more than the incident involving Referee Manny Sokol in the crucial final moments of that second game.

With Los Angeles leading 133-132, the Bucks began closing in on West as he brought the ball over the 10-second line. Trapped against the sideline by Robertson and Jabbar, West tried to reverse his direction and cross over his dribble. The ball squirted away from him and was hopping rapidly toward the backcourt—where it automatically would have become the Bucks' property—when it hit Sokol, who was trailing the play and was unable to jump clear of the ball's path. Rebounding off the referee's thigh, the ball bounced directly back to West, who was again challenged by Jabbar. This time the big Milwaukee center batted the ball from West's hands, and Jerry narrowly outraced him to it. "It was like he was eight feet tall," West said, an observation that is not too far from wrong.

Before the third game, both teams staged secret practice sessions in the Milwaukee Arena. The Bucks worked out in characteristic near-silence, Costello guiding his tightly organized drills with little exchange of amenities or information with his players. The Lakers, who practice more than any other pro team, were looser. Neither West nor Chamberlain (who arrived in one of his custom-made pinstriped blue suits and walked through the patterns in his stockinged feet), participated fully in the drills. Even on strategy questions Sharman consulted with his players, who often made suggestions that were readily accepted.

After the game plans were set, the Lakers split into groups of twos and threes for their competitive shooting drills—conducted with plenty of cheating, laughter, ribaldry and lower forms of gamesmanship. At one point West bet Goodrich $100,000 (a substantial chunk of the two-year, $600,000 contract Jerry reportedly has approved for the coming seasons) that Gail could not make eight six-foot jump shots in a row. Goodrich easily made 10; collecting his winnings will be considerably more difficult. Wilt, long a great outside shooter in practice—he made 28 of 29 free throws this day—then defeated Goodrich in two of three games of shooting corner shots for $5 apiece.

The next night Chamberlain took only three shots in the entire game as Goodrich (30 points) and McMillian (27) again led the Laker offense. And again the Bucks lost a slim lead in the closing minutes. But it was Chamberlain who turned the game to the Lakers' favor. Chamberlain's tactic of overplaying Jabbar to his left had not been effective in the first 18 minutes of play; the Buck center had scored 17 points. Wilt's intent was to prevent Abdul-Jabbar from swinging leftward for his deadly hook shot, but Kareem had reacted by rolling to his right for short jumpers and several easy layups. But from 5:13 of the second period until 5:38 of the third, Wilt held Jabbar scoreless and blocked five of his shots, including a dunk and a layup in which Jabbar crashed into Wilt, knocking Chamberlain to the court in pain.

Meanwhile, McMillian scored 15 points as Los Angeles surged from three points behind to six ahead. Then Abdul-Jabbar, fooling Wilt with head fakes and flashy ball handling, scored four consecutive baskets, bringing the Bucks to a 72-72 tie. In the fourth quarter Chamberlain regained his mastery, holding Kareem without a field goal in the final 11:10. In all, Abdul-Jabbar scored 33 points and outrebounded Wilt, but Chamberlain had forced him to take 37 shots to hit his total.

Several minutes after the game was over some of the Bucks were seen scampering from the arena still wearing their warmup suits, perhaps to escape the press, but also perhaps to avoid another bombing. During the evening a caller had informed arena officials that a bomb was inside, due to go off about 10 minutes after the game. Unlike the Lakers, it never went off.

Then came Sunday afternoon. And out came the Bucks, breathing fire, belching smoke, spitting venom and acting generally mean. Milwaukee broke to an 11-0 lead, and the Lakers never again came closer than five points as they lost 114-88.

It was a simple brute win—no comedy. All three of the Buck starting frontcourt men outrebounded Chamberlain (Milwaukee finished with a 75-43 advantage on the boards), and Kareem showed Wilt every move from a behind-the-back dribble to outside jump shots to a rare left-handed hook. He scored 31 points to celebrate his 25th birthday.

But more important than Jabbar's superiority over Wilt—which is never unexpected—was the performance of his Buck teammates. Robertson again stymied West, who scored on only nine of 23 shots and, more surprisingly, turned in a sloppy floor game. "I'm tired of shooting, I'm tired of doing everything," West had complained earlier. "I'm supposed to score, and then I'm supposed to defend against the other team's high-scoring guard. I played too many minutes again this year. When there are 17,000 people in The Forum, for example, I have to play 40 minutes whether the game is close or not."

Slender Bob Dandridge outmuscled McMillian, scoring 24 points, pulling in 15 rebounds and holding the bigger man to 18 points. Although he was the only Laker regular shooting accurately, McMillian only took four shots in the second half as Dandridge, with ample help from Jabbar, screened him from the ball. Still, McMillian was occasionally left wide open while other Lakers were taking difficult shots.

"Don't ask me how it happened," he shrugged. And then he pointed at West and Goodrich sitting in front of adjacent lockers. "Ask them. They're the guys with the ball."

Thus, after splitting the first four games, the Lakers headed back to the Coast and its theoretic edge, the home-court advantage. But perhaps Milwaukee held a bigger one. In the composite of those games, the Bucks had outshot, out-rebounded and outscored Los Angeles. Twice they had defeated the Lakers embarrassingly. "They really haven't proved they can beat us yet," said Costello. "They've won by one point and three; we've won by 21 and 26." If the Lakers can keep the games close, they should win. But the Milwaukee Bucks may not stand still long enough for that to happen.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm

[Sedale Threatt]

Long day, tired of typing.

1. Kareem
2. Wilt
3. Clyde
4. Thurmond
5. West

EDIT -- swapped Thurmond for Gilmore