What players in NBA history could have averaged 50 PPG in 1962?

[HeartBreakKid]

The schedule might have been intense, or better said packed, the games weren't. But I don't really understand why we are checking a 1965 or a random Celtics schedule when this is a 1962 topic. 1962 was one big Eastern Conference and the Lakers. You had Chicago and St Louis on the Eastern/Central time zone border and the other 6 teams were all in the Eastern time zone. The Celtics'62 had to travel about 60,000 miles all season. Even the Lakers'62 didn't travel more than 70K during the regular season. Compare that to Celtics'20, they will travel almost 500,000 miles next season. Actually, any team will travel more than 350 thousand miles. Add less traffic and maybe even less waiting times at airports, there were some advantages too in 1962.

Besides, the schedule might have been inconvenient at times, but it's not like any one would have a burnout playing 1 season in the sixties. If the 100 players in 1962 did it, the players of today could endure it as well. Especially if they knew up front what was coming. Going to the past is not like going to the future. It's not like they would be dropped in a whole new world.

Well, the random Celtic season I checked I believe was 1962 by coincidence.


I hope you realize NBA teams can travel more now because traveling logistics is much more standardized. Pretty much all NBA Players have equal access to first class airplanes. Even if they don't all fly together, it's pretty much laid out for them.

Back then you were much more on your own. And many, many people drove. Driving is much more taxing on the body than sitting in an airplane. Sitting on an airplane when you do it a lot isn't all that taxing, it's only particularly exhausting to people who are not used to it which is not relevant to an NBA player.

Anyway back to my main point - I'm not sure how you can compare raw distance and not take into account the means of transportation (walking 10k miles is much more difficult than flying 100,k miles - while they often took planes, driving was also much more common)) or the frequency of traveling (it's significantly more exhausting to travel to 5 different cities in one small European country in 8 days then it is to go from Australia to California in one trip).

I agree that going into the airport was less of a hassle back then. There was less protocol in the 60s - you could pretty much just walk in. But coordinating traveling was not as well thought out as it is today. The cities they flew too weren't as airport friendly either (Syarcuse in the 60s?). But really - once you're in a plane, going 3 hours vs 5 hours is not much of a big deal. Frequency is what makes traveling exhausting, that is why so many people pretty much kill themselves in Euro trips.

[udfa]

Thier shooting skills are much better than 1960s guards, but their slashing abilities would be minimalized due to stricter handling, traveling and offensive fouls offciating. Without adjustements, they wouldn't score that much. With adjustements, they would be great but I doubt they would average that many points. I mean, Elgin Baylor was extremely skilled and very athletic, he didn't mind shooting a lot either and he never averaged over 40 ppg. What makes them that much better than Baylor? Or West? Or Oscar? They gap is overblown by your post here in my opinion.

Baylor in his best scoring season shot .428 FG and .492 TS. He was able to average 38.3 PPG with those awful percentages because his team had a 123.3 pace, one of the slowest teams in the league at that time. Baylor averaged 33 FGA and 13 FTA. Wilt shot 39 FGA and 17 FTA. It was all you can eat back then. In Carmelo Anthony's highest volume season he averaged 22 FGA and 7.6 FTA and shot .476 (good enough for 5th in 1962) on 2s and .830 from the line (4th in 1962), neither career highs. Give him another 15-20 scoring opportunities and lower the height of the average defender by over 2" with reduced athleticism relative to modern defenders and inferior team defense, I think it's more than plausible to say he could average 50 PPG if that was his goal.

Yes, but that was Baylor playing only 48 games, he never shot over 30 FGA in full season. The closest he got was in 1961 and he averaged 34.8 ppg on 49.8 TS% (+2.9 rTS%). That's not close to 50 ppg.

Apologies for the delay, have been too busy lately to give you a decent answer.

Why does it matter that the season Baylor averaged 38.3 he only played 48 games? Baylor got his career high 38.3 PPG because he took a career high 33.1 FGA, not because he played "only" 48 games (as though it were 10 or 15 games).

But forget about the 62 season. 34.8 PPG is plenty to make my point. Baylor got that by shooting 29.7 FGA. That's simply an incredible number of shots for a player with 49.8% TS. Baylor didn't get that volume because he was some phenomenal scorer, he got it because his team averaged 124.9 possessions per game. If Baylor played today, even if he was allowed the same usage by his team (which he wouldn't, because he's incredibly inefficient) he would average 20% less in all rate stats simply because he's now playing games with 100 possessions on each side instead of 125. That 34.8 PPG immediately becomes 27.8 PPG at a modern pace. Now put LeBron into Baylor's place and give him 30 FGA/game against 1962 defenses. In 2008 LeBron scored 30.0 PPG on 21.9 FGA/game (he shot 31.5% on 3s so he would actually score slightly more if all his 3s were converted to 2s at 53.1%) on a 90.2 pace team. In Baylor's place he could have 40% more possessions each game. 2008 LeBron's Per 100 PPG was 39.6 and there would still be 25 possessions to go.

Pace is why all the rate stats from players in the 1960s are inflated. I have no doubt Wilt was a great scorer but there is a 0.0% chance he could average 40 PPG today let alone 50 PPG because he's going to be on the court for some 30 fewer possessions every game. When Jordan scored his career high in 1987 (37.1 PPG) it was with a 95.8 pace team. With 131.1 team pace like Wilt had in 1962, 87 Jordan would shatter Wilt's 50.4 PPG.

You use Carmelo 2P%, but even in 2000s two point shots are selected, most of them are at the rim. In the 1960s all of his shots, including heaves and buzzers, would be counted as twos. Not to mention that teams plays far longer to get good shot today - either you have more efficient offense or additional 15 scoring opportunities, you can't get it both ways. Carmelo in 2013 was less efficient than Baylor in 1961 relative to league average and I don't expect him to be above 50 TS% in 1962. He wouldn't have three point line, he wouldn't have his handles and he wouldn't have possibility to use his travel pivots.

Yes, modern players generally have better shot selection. That is one reason why they are much more efficient than 60s players, and it is something that would benefit modern players in playing that environment. The other reason is modern players are much better at scoring than 60s players. Better handling the ball, better jump shooting and finishing. Pace is not the main reason the old schoolers were inefficient. The main reason they were inefficient is they were comparatively bad at basketball.

The handles of the modern players would only be marginally reduced in effectiveness. Carmelo would destroy 60s players off the dribble, forget about Jordan, Kobe, LeBron, Iverson. It would be like Dream Team Jordan vs those Olympic defenses.

Why do you want to lower height of defenders by "over 2' on average"? That's ridiculous, Carmelo is 6'6.25 without the shoes, basically identical to Elgin Baylor (6'5.5 without the shoes). He wouldn't face 6'4 forwards:

Tom Heinsohn was 6'7 without the shoes - taller than Melo
Tom Sanders was 6'6 without the shoes - as tall as Melo
Tom Gola was 6'6 without the shoes - as tall as Melo
Tom Meschery was 6'6 without the shoes - as tall as Melo
Paul Arizin was 6'4 without the shoes - shorter (Gola or Meschery would guard him anyway)
Lee Schaffer was 6'7 without the shoes - taller than Melo
Dave Gambee was 6'6 without the shoes - as tall as Melo
Dolph Schayes was 6'8 without the shoes - taller than Melo
Willie Naulls was 6'6 without the shoes - as tall as Melo
Johnny Green was 6'5 without the shoes - shorter than Melo
Elgin Baylor was 6'5.5 without the shoes - shorter than Melo
Tom Hawkins was 6'5 without the shoes - shorter than Melo
Rudy LaRusso was 6'7 without the shoes - taller than Melo
Jack Twyman was 6'6 without the shoes - as tall as Melo
Bob Boozer was 6'8 without the shoes - taller than Melo
Bailey Howell was 6'7 without the shoes - taller than Melo
Ray Scott was 6'9 without the shoes - taller than Melo
Cliff Hagan was 6'4 without the shoes - shorter than Melo
Bob Pettit was 6'9 without the shoes - taller than Melo
Andy Johnson was 6'5 without the shoes - shorter than Melo
Charlie Tyra was 6'8 without the shoes - taller than Melo

That gives us an average of 6'6.5 among forwards with most minutes played in the league. Are you trying to tell me that forwards in 2013 were 6'9 without the shoes on average?

Carmelo Anthony is 6'6.25 without the shoes
LeBron James is 6'7.25 without the shoes
Kawhi Leonard is 6'6 without the shoes
Paul Millsap is 6'6.25 without the shoes
Danny Granger is 6'7.5 without the shoes
David Lee is 6'7.75 without the shoes
Trevor Ariza is 6'7 without the shoes
Matt Barnes is 6'6.75 without the shoes
Caron Bulter is 6'5.25 without the shoes
Udonis Haslem is 6'6.75 without the shoes

to name a few.

There is a difference in their height, but it's almost meaningless - half of an inch, maybe inch at best. Carmelo wouldn't tower over 1960s forwards, he would be normal sized forward for that time.

Carmelo was a bad example because there is an unusually high disparity between his combine height and his listed height. Aside from that, your comparison is terribly broken because you completely cherry picked the 2013 players instead of taking the 21 forwards who played the most minutes as you did for the 1962 players. Here are the 21 forwards who played the most minutes in 2013:

Kevin Durant 6'9
Paul George 6'7.75
David Lee 6'7.75
Luol Deng 6'7
LeBron James 6'7.25
Nicolas Batum 6'7*
LaMarcus Aldridge 6'10
Chandler Parsons 6'8.75
Rudy Gay 6'7
Josh Smith 6'7
Tayshaun Prince 6'9
Thaddeus Young 6'5.75
Zach Randolph 6'8*
Blake Griffin 6'8.5
Tristan Thompson 6'7.5
Paul Pierce 6'6
Carlos Boozer 6'7.75
Metta World Peace 6'5*
Ryan Anderson 6'8*
Serge Ibaka 6'9*
Carmelo Anthony 6'6.25

All players are listed here by their height without shoes measured at the combine except for the * players for whom I could find no height measurements without shoes and took their BBRef listed height minus one inch. The average height of the top-21 minutes playing forwards in 2013 without shoes is 6'7.5", and this number is far more likely to be lower than accurate than higher because most of these combine heights were measured at 18-20 years, an age at which some future growth is far more plausible than the average age 22 of the players from the 60s. Some guys here likely didn't grow at all, but some definitely did the best example being Durant.

This also assumes that all of those 1962 heights you listed are indeed accurate measurements which seems doubtful since only 1 player out of 21 is listed with a 0.5 inch. Compare that with 9 of the 16 players from 2013 (not counting those who don't have their w/o shoes heights listed) having a fractional inch. That suggests many of the 1962 heights are rounded, and it is standard to round up from 0.5

I didn't pull 2" out of thin air. Look at the league average heights by all seasons:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats_per_game.html

The modern player height/weight is 6'7, 218# (weight has actually declined since 2013 when it was 223#) versus the 1962 player at 6'5, 205#. Furthermore, you can see there is a gradual progression in height and weight beginning from the earliest averages in 1952 and proceeding to the present, so unless measuring in shoes was also introduced very gradually and evenly that is not the answer to the gap. 2" and 13# on average is a huge difference, particularly when you consider that the bigger and heavier modern player is also faster and can jump higher. This shouldn't be anything shocking. People are taller now on average than 1962, and with modern strength training they're stronger, faster, more explosive and more agile at the same height as well. Just compare the height and weight of NFL players from 1962 to present. This is not a small difference.

Finally, as regards the effectiveness of modern players in 1962, just look at the tape side-by-side of Game 7 1962 vs Game 7 2016.

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

Come on, comparing these guys is a joke both in skills and athleticism. Both defense and offense in 1962 was amateur hour compared to today, and the only 1962 player who can compete with Jordan, LeBron, Shaq, etc., etc., in athleticism is Wilt. This isn't disrespect to the 1962 era players, they paved the way for the generations of NBA players who followed but as in all industries humans improved their basketball craft over the last 57 years. Not an insult, just reality.

[giordunk]

I think a lot of guys who have a reputation of being ultra-competitive, or caring more about individual stats over success have a shot.

Jordan, Kobe, Durant, LeBron could but I don't think he'd want to.

Then guys like Harden, Carmelo, Westbrook, McGrady could probably do it, Probably some other of those high volume scoring guys.

[Pg81]

None, they would not have the stamina for that feat. People like to forget that Wilt still had to anchor the defense and was leading in rebounds and blocks.

Still haven't heard btw why Jokic would not be able to average 40-50ppg, I thought this topic was about that...

Simple, he just is not as athletic and as skilled of a scorer while not having nearly as much stamina as Wilt. Jokic might lead the league in assists though.

[Mazter]

None, they would not have the stamina for that feat. People like to forget that Wilt still had to anchor the defense and was leading in rebounds and blocks.

Still haven't heard btw why Jokic would not be able to average 40-50ppg, I thought this topic was about that...

Simple, he just is not as athletic and as skilled of a scorer while not having nearly as much stamina as Wilt. Jokic might lead the league in assists though.

This stamina issue is way overblown. I believe we all remember that quadruple overtime game between the Blazers and Nuggets last May. Jokic played 64.8 minutes (36.9), ran 22,238 feet (14,546.4), had 206 touches (93.5) of which 131 in front court (55.9), dribbled 210 times , he made 164 passes (71.3) and received 141 (75.5), had the bal for 8.1 minutes (9.3), had 35 rebound chances (24.3), had 9 drives, he contested 25 shots (16.1) , 12 of them outside 10 feet, of which 6 at the 3 point line (5.5) and he had 7 screen assists (6.0) to mention somethings. In parenthesis is what the league leader averaged in the regular season, to get the idea. Did I mention that the game took over 3 and a half hours. Wilt would be snoring in his bed already by the time Jokic would get into 4th overtime. This is beyond anything what Wilt ever had to do in any game in his career. Stamina is not going to be an issue for Jokic, or any today's player for that matter. The most I could estimate Wilt's in game movement in any game is 17,000 in a triple overtime game that season, and that is taking it real extreme. His working radius, both on offense and defense, was within 6-8 feet of the basket. But in general Wilt barely moved out of the low post unless it was for a rebound or block attempt. Where Jokic needed to be all over the place on defense.

In the 3 past seasons Jokic shot between 36 to 41% from pull ups on 2 pointers, between 36 to 46% on catch and shoot, between 55 and 65% TS on drives, between 53 and 61% TS on postups, 62 to 67.4% on putbacks, 51.7 to 59.3% in transition, 47 to 57% when left open from midrange and between 49 and 66% on hook shots. He also shot between 59 tot 69% when contested inside 10 feet. There is not much wrong with Jokic's skillset nor his efficiency. Wilt was a 50.6% with a 53.6% TS kinda guy in 62. Jokic's efficiency would blow the whole league far away. Not to mention the advanced basketball mind that comes along with it. Can you imagine how frustrated those centers would be if they would need to get out of the low post to defend?

[70sFan]

Centers would be as frustrated to defend Jokic out of the best as they did when they faced Walt Bellamy or Willis Reed. Honestly, assuming that Jokic brings in his scoring repertoire something that centers never saw in 1960s is just funny. Maybe Jokic was more efficient than Reed or Bellamy (impossible to tell, given that we don't have similar scouting report for them) but he does nothing that was alien in 1960s. Absolutely nothing.

[Pg81]

None, they would not have the stamina for that feat. People like to forget that Wilt still had to anchor the defense and was leading in rebounds and blocks.

Simple, he just is not as athletic and as skilled of a scorer while not having nearly as much stamina as Wilt. Jokic might lead the league in assists though.

This stamina issue is way overblown. I believe we all remember that quadruple overtime game between the Blazers and Nuggets last May. Jokic played 64.8 minutes (36.9), ran 22,238 feet (14,546.4), had 206 touches (93.5) of which 131 in front court (55.9), dribbled 210 times , he made 164 passes (71.3) and received 141 (75.5), had the bal for 8.1 minutes (9.3), had 35 rebound chances (24.3), had 9 drives, he contested 25 shots (16.1) , 12 of them outside 10 feet, of which 6 at the 3 point line (5.5) and he had 7 screen assists (6.0) to mention somethings. In parenthesis is what the league leader averaged in the regular season, to get the idea. Did I mention that the game took over 3 and a half hours. Wilt would be snoring in his bed already by the time Jokic would get into 4th overtime. This is beyond anything what Wilt ever had to do in any game in his career. Stamina is not going to be an issue for Jokic, or any today's player for that matter. The most I could estimate Wilt's in game movement in any game is 17,000 in a triple overtime game that season, and that is taking it real extreme. His working radius, both on offense and defense, was within 6-8 feet of the basket. But in general Wilt barely moved out of the low post unless it was for a rebound or block attempt. Where Jokic needed to be all over the place on defense.

In the 3 past seasons Jokic shot between 36 to 41% from pull ups on 2 pointers, between 36 to 46% on catch and shoot, between 55 and 65% TS on drives, between 53 and 61% TS on postups, 62 to 67.4% on putbacks, 51.7 to 59.3% in transition, 47 to 57% when left open from midrange and between 49 and 66% on hook shots. He also shot between 59 tot 69% when contested inside 10 feet. There is not much wrong with Jokic's skillset nor his efficiency. Wilt was a 50.6% with a 53.6% TS kinda guy in 62. Jokic's efficiency would blow the whole league far away. Not to mention the advanced basketball mind that comes along with it. Can you imagine how frustrated those centers would be if they would need to get out of the low post to defend?

Since we have no data to compare your data to means that it is completely and utterly meaningless and useless. That being said, Wilt had a season where he played 48.5 minutes and a pace Jokic would probably collapse after 3 quarters if he would try the same. Jokic barely plays 32 minutes tops and there is a reason for that. Jokic does not even crack the top 50 for minutes per game in 2019, the season he played the most. Jokic played 2500 minutes in 2019, Wilt never had less than 3300, except for one season where he blew out his knee in 69/70 and it was up as high as almost 3900 minutes.
What do I care if he managed a lot of minutes in a series, we are talking about regular season here, 80+ games. Yeah sure most pros can play a lot of minutes for a series or short stretches, but that is irrelevant, to keep that kind of scoring effective all the way through regular season and until an extremely narrow 2 point game 7 defeat against the future champions? Jokic doing this? No way, Jokic is so far below Wilt overall that the comparison is absurd, or the notion hat he would be able to go for 50ppg at a 120+ pace while anchoring the defense and running fast breaks.
Wilt was insanely efficient for his volume and he was the most efficient scorer of his period. The only player in the top 30 all time career efficiency who played in the 60s and has a higher career efficiency is Kareem and he just played one year in the 60s. The next most efficient player is Trooper Washington, ever heard of him? Wilt to this day has to all time high record seasons, one at 68% and one at 72%. Joker shot last year at a mediocre 57% from the field at mere 15 FGA per game. That is not even half of what Chamberlain attempted in his 3rd season. Also TS comparison across eras? Really?
Wilt blows Jokic out of the water in every regard apart from passing and FTs. And no, the stamina issue is not overblown, Jokic neither played at the neck-breaking speed Wilt did nor did he ever shot close to that volume. As to Wilt's defensive behaviour, you are a fool if you believe Wilt could not adapt. He adapt to 3 vastly different roles and he was quick and fast enough to move a lot more.
Summa summarum, there is not even a hint of an indication that Jokic would have been able score 50 points per game for an entire season. He neither has the scoring skill, nor the athleticism nor the durability/stamina to compete with Wilt. Wilt was light years ahead of Jokic or almost any other center for that matter in terms of full offensive package. The only two enter who come close or have an argument over him are Kareem and Shaq.

[Mazter]

Well, the most important data and the court measurements are there. So anyone could do the math.

But...are we still talking about 1962 here? Because every chance you guys get we start talking about things that aren't really relevant. I mean, Bellamy was a rookie in 1962, any player transported back then would enter the league together with Bellamy. Willis Reed was still a sophomore in college in 62. Also I don't know what Wilt's '67 or '73 efficiency has to do with 1962. It' like saying rookie LeBron was very efficient because 9 years later he shot 57%.

Besides, this start to become a Wilt vs "anyone who enters the league" thread. It's not whether they are better than Wilt. It's about them being able to average 50 in 1962. 1962 was probably the highest paced season, and please do not confuse pace with speed, intensity or mileage. Guys were having career highs in minutes and output per minutes that season. It wasn't just only Wilt. Rookie Bellamy had highs in points and rebounds per 36 and just 0.1 mpg under his career high minutes, despite this allegedly "neck-breaking speed". Why did he not repeat it at his peak? And it wasn't just him, most (super)stars set highs in minutes and/or output per minute that season they couldn't reach later on in their careers.

1961/62 was also inaugural season of the ABL, a season where some former All stars and players walked out on the NBA, some draftees opted to play there first and where former all stars like Mikan (was 37 then), Macauley (34) or Neil Johnston (33) were still at an age a (former) superstar could play today. Also a season where "regular" injuries cut career shorts (ie former all stars Maurice Stokes, Mel Hutchins). And a period where some players preferred to work and play in the AAU because of the lack of benefits.

It's also a season where there was hardly any tape or data. So there isn't really any proof of how it went. Claims that Wilt constantly ran fast breaks, sorry, no proof of that. Maybe in future footage's (in which he did not average 48.5 minutes and 50.4 points), in 1962, we don't know. Besides that Wilt, or any one for that matter, didn't know Walt that well in 1961/62. He couldn't pop a tape into his vcr to study the guy. They would depend on scouting reports or hear say. So Walt came into the league as a rookie and average 30+, a feat he would never again achieve.

Those are the characteristics of the 1962. Now you are going to send 1 guy back with one job, try to average 50 points. Since there weren't any restrictions by the OP I suppose one could prepare before he goes. And he is not going back to play Wilt , Russel, Oscar or any one 80 times. He would play them just 8-12 times. Depending on their position they would also play against guys like Ray Scott, Bockhorn, Johnny McCarthy, Bob Boozer, Phil Jordon or Joe Graboski. So you have to see the average of the league. And it wasn't pretty.

Personally I see a lot of players averaging 50 when transported. And if it is any consolation, I wouldn't rule out that if anyone went back and average 50 that Wilt consequently would be pushed to average 55+ instead of 50.4 just to prove a point. But that's a discussion for another topic.

[Morb]

In the sixties - there were many game stops due to strict rules, so Wilt was resting right on the court.

[E-Balla]

None, they would not have the stamina for that feat. People like to forget that Wilt still had to anchor the defense and was leading in rebounds and blocks.

Simple, he just is not as athletic and as skilled of a scorer while not having nearly as much stamina as Wilt. Jokic might lead the league in assists though.

This stamina issue is way overblown. I believe we all remember that quadruple overtime game between the Blazers and Nuggets last May. Jokic played 64.8 minutes (36.9), ran 22,238 feet (14,546.4), had 206 touches (93.5) of which 131 in front court (55.9), dribbled 210 times , he made 164 passes (71.3) and received 141 (75.5), had the bal for 8.1 minutes (9.3), had 35 rebound chances (24.3), had 9 drives, he contested 25 shots (16.1) , 12 of them outside 10 feet, of which 6 at the 3 point line (5.5) and he had 7 screen assists (6.0) to mention somethings.

Not even getting into the rest of your post but Jokic was 1-5 with 3 turnovers and 3 points in those 4 OTs. He was clearly gassed. Like seriously he looked dead out there.

[Pg81]

Well, the most important data and the court measurements are there. So anyone could do the math.

But...are we still talking about 1962 here? Because every chance you guys get we start talking about things that aren't really relevant. I mean, Bellamy was a rookie in 1962, any player transported back then would enter the league together with Bellamy. Willis Reed was still a sophomore in college in 62. Also I don't know what Wilt's '67 or '73 efficiency has to do with 1962. It' like saying rookie LeBron was very efficient because 9 years later he shot 57%.

Besides, this start to become a Wilt vs "anyone who enters the league" thread. It's not whether they are better than Wilt. It's about them being able to average 50 in 1962. 1962 was probably the highest paced season, and please do not confuse pace with speed, intensity or mileage. Guys were having career highs in minutes and output per minutes that season. It wasn't just only Wilt. Rookie Bellamy had highs in points and rebounds per 36 and just 0.1 mpg under his career high minutes, despite this allegedly "neck-breaking speed". Why did he not repeat it at his peak? And it wasn't just him, most (super)stars set highs in minutes and/or output per minute that season they couldn't reach later on in their careers.

1961/62 was also inaugural season of the ABL, a season where some former All stars and players walked out on the NBA, some draftees opted to play there first and where former all stars like Mikan (was 37 then), Macauley (34) or Neil Johnston (33) were still at an age a (former) superstar could play today. Also a season where "regular" injuries cut career shorts (ie former all stars Maurice Stokes, Mel Hutchins). And a period where some players preferred to work and play in the AAU because of the lack of benefits.

It's also a season where there was hardly any tape or data. So there isn't really any proof of how it went. Claims that Wilt constantly ran fast breaks, sorry, no proof of that. Maybe in future footage's (in which he did not average 48.5 minutes and 50.4 points), in 1962, we don't know. Besides that Wilt, or any one for that matter, didn't know Walt that well in 1961/62. He couldn't pop a tape into his vcr to study the guy. They would depend on scouting reports or hear say. So Walt came into the league as a rookie and average 30+, a feat he would never again achieve.

Those are the characteristics of the 1962. Now you are going to send 1 guy back with one job, try to average 50 points. Since there weren't any restrictions by the OP I suppose one could prepare before he goes. And he is not going back to play Wilt , Russel, Oscar or any one 80 times. He would play them just 8-12 times. Depending on their position they would also play against guys like Ray Scott, Bockhorn, Johnny McCarthy, Bob Boozer, Phil Jordon or Joe Graboski. So you have to see the average of the league. And it wasn't pretty.

ersonally I see a lot of players averaging 50 when transported. And if it is any consolation, I wouldn't rule out that if anyone went back and average 50 that Wilt consequently would be pushed to average 55+ instead of 50.4 just to prove a point. But that's a discussion for another topic.

I never said he ran fastbreaks constantly, but to keep scoring at 50 while playing at that pace means he had to run a few at least. We have in fact a short video of young Wilt running fast break, where we can see him to have grabbed the defensive rebound, made a pass and still was one of the first players under the opponents basket.
Sorry no proof? Well good for us that you have so much "proof" that "many" players of today could average 50, even though there was no 3 point line, dribbling was much more restricted, shoes were terrible, players rode busses instead of clying coach to games, etc.
But sure "many players" could have averaged 50 ppg. Even though by any realistic measure none have ever shown to have the combination of stamina, fortitude, athleticism and skill like Wilt to pull it off.

In the sixties - there were many game stops due to strict rules, so Wilt was resting right on the court.

Yeah? Got any stats for that?