RealGM

I have noticed that on ESPN most of those dumb hacks are saying Wilt isn't a top ten player ever which is just insane.





Wilt to this day still owns over hundreds of records and he retired 50 years ago.

And for all the people who say he was a choker in the playoffs.


Wilt played different roles on different teams.

He averaged 34.6 points and 25.6 rebounds in the playoffs with the Warriors.

34/25 is better than Jordan's stat line as a scorer.

He averaged over 30/20 for 5 post seasons..

Nobody else has even had a series average of 30/20.

He was 24.9/27.5 with the Sixers where he passed more and shot less because he had a better team.

He had 30 rebound series at this time(which no one else has done) and numerous triple-doubles and quadruple doubles in the playoffs.

He would have won Finals MVP but the award didn't exist at the time.

He was 15.8/22.3 with the Lakers as he was a defensive anchor and outlet passer with them.

He won the Finals MVP with 18.8 ppg, so if it was a big problem, he wouldn't have gotten MVP.

He never had a post-season with less than 20 rebounding average.

He holds numerous playoff rebounding records including the highest rebounding average in the Finals (24.7).

Most consecutive triple-doubles, most FG made in a 7 game series, etc.

His career averages in the playoffs are lower because he played a disproportionate amount of games with the Lakers where his job was not to score.

He played 50% of his total games and 69% of his finals games as a Laker.

For as much hate as Wilt gets to this day for only winning two rings.

I'll just say that he anchored two of the greatest teams to ever play and was their leader.

The 1966-1967 Philadelphia 76ers, which went an absurd 68-13

And the 1971-1972 Los Angeles Lakers, which went 69-13, famously winning 33 games in a row.

Plus Wilt's teams over his career played 1045 season games + 160 playoff games.

They won 672 season + 88 playoff games.

Season win%: 64.3

Playoff win%: 55

Total games win%: 63.1

Plus, the only team to win more titles than his team's during his time, or have higher win%s during his time was the Celtics who were the dominant dynasty from the late 50s through the entire 60s.


Say what you want about Wilt but this "loser narrative that ESPN tries to put on him is not a logically appropriate label for him.

Who did they have in their top 10 instead of Wilt?

Dutchball97 wrote:Who did they have in their top 10 instead of Wilt?

Curry which makes no sense as Wilt destroys him in individual accolades

Wilt didn't always focus on winning but the 2 times he did his teams won 68 and 69 games and rolled to championships. So just imagine if he focused on winning all of his career. Not to mention all the records he holds.

prolific passer wrote:Wilt didn't always focus on winning but the 2 times he did his teams won 68 and 69 games and rolled to championships. So just imagine if he focused on winning all of his career. Not to mention all the records he holds.

Wilt was always focused on winning throughout his career.

He just had the misfortune of running into the greatest dynasty in sports history.


As Wilt played an astounding 49 of his first 98 playoff games against the Boston Celtics, who had a 71.5 WPCT during that period and, of course, won the Championship every single year (except 1967).

I looked at all 49 of those playoff games and found that Wilt averaged 25.7/28.0/4.1 on a 50.8 FG%.

This was against the best defensive player ever (Bill Russell) and, arguably, the best 10-year defensive franchise run in history.

His teammates, on the other hand? Overall?

They shot .38.7 from the field during those 49 games against the Celtics in the playoffs.

That is absolutely atrocious support and shooting from Wilt's teammates.


And yet still despite all of that.

Wilt was a total of nine points away from being 5-3 in his H2H with Russell.

He is not popular with social media crowd, that's why. ESPN coverage is based on twitter hot takes.

coastalmarker99 wrote:

prolific passer wrote:Wilt didn't always focus on winning but the 2 times he did his teams won 68 and 69 games and rolled to championships. So just imagine if he focused on winning all of his career. Not to mention all the records he holds.

Wilt was always focused on winning throughout his career.

He just had the misfortune of running into the greatest dynasty in sports history.


As Wilt played an astounding 49 of his first 98 playoff games against the Boston Celtics, who had a 71.5 WPCT during that period and, of course, won the Championship every single year (except 1967).

I looked at all 49 of those playoff games and found that Wilt averaged 25.7/28.0/4.1 on a 50.8 FG%.

This was against the best defensive player ever (Bill Russell) and, arguably, the best 10-year defensive franchise run in history.

His teammates, on the other hand? Overall?

They shot .38.7 from the field during those 49 games against the Celtics in the playoffs.

That is absolutely atrocious support and shooting from Wilt's teammates.


And yet still despite all of that.

Wilt was a total of nine points away from being 5-3 in his H2H with Russell.

Wilt had better teams than Russell in 68 and 69 and still lost to Russell when everybody thought he was done winning titles.

prolific passer wrote:

coastalmarker99 wrote:

prolific passer wrote:Wilt didn't always focus on winning but the 2 times he did his teams won 68 and 69 games and rolled to championships. So just imagine if he focused on winning all of his career. Not to mention all the records he holds.

Wilt was always focused on winning throughout his career.

He just had the misfortune of running into the greatest dynasty in sports history.


As Wilt played an astounding 49 of his first 98 playoff games against the Boston Celtics, who had a 71.5 WPCT during that period and, of course, won the Championship every single year (except 1967).

I looked at all 49 of those playoff games and found that Wilt averaged 25.7/28.0/4.1 on a 50.8 FG%.

This was against the best defensive player ever (Bill Russell) and, arguably, the best 10-year defensive franchise run in history.

His teammates, on the other hand? Overall?

They shot .38.7 from the field during those 49 games against the Celtics in the playoffs.

That is absolutely atrocious support and shooting from Wilt's teammates.


And yet still despite all of that.

Wilt was a total of nine points away from being 5-3 in his H2H with Russell.

Wilt had better teams than Russell in 68 and 69 and still lost to Russell when everybody thought he was done winning titles.

That entire 76ers team got destroyed by injuries in 1968 so that does not count as here was their injury report against the Celtics in the ECF that year.


-Wilt Chamberlain (partial tear of the calf muscle in his right leg, a strain in his right thigh and an injured right toe):

-Wally Jones (injured knee cartilage):

-Luke Jackson (pulled hamstring muscle):

-Hal Greer (bursitus in his right knee):

-And, Billy Cunningham (broken right wrist).



But 1969 was a huge choke I will give you that.

If you ask these guys about their top 10 five times within one month, they will give you 5 different lists. I don't see huge disrespect here, this is just hot take without any substance.

70sFan wrote:If you ask these guys about their top 10 five times within one month, they will give you 5 different lists. I don't see huge disrespect here, this is just hot take without any substance.

The disrespect is them saying that Wilt played against midgets when that is a flat-out lie.

I couldn't believe that JWill had the audacity to say that with a straight face.

coastalmarker99 wrote:

70sFan wrote:If you ask these guys about their top 10 five times within one month, they will give you 5 different lists. I don't see huge disrespect here, this is just hot take without any substance.

The disrespect is them saying that Wilt played against midgets when that is a flat-out lie.

I couldn't believe that JWill had the audacity to say that with a straight face.

Idk how Jwill is able to talk nba with his 1 average rookie season and then wrecked a motorcycle and ended his career. That's a mental midget mistake right there.

coastalmarker99 wrote:

prolific passer wrote:

coastalmarker99 wrote:
Wilt was always focused on winning throughout his career.

He just had the misfortune of running into the greatest dynasty in sports history.


As Wilt played an astounding 49 of his first 98 playoff games against the Boston Celtics, who had a 71.5 WPCT during that period and, of course, won the Championship every single year (except 1967).

I looked at all 49 of those playoff games and found that Wilt averaged 25.7/28.0/4.1 on a 50.8 FG%.

This was against the best defensive player ever (Bill Russell) and, arguably, the best 10-year defensive franchise run in history.

His teammates, on the other hand? Overall?

They shot .38.7 from the field during those 49 games against the Celtics in the playoffs.

That is absolutely atrocious support and shooting from Wilt's teammates.


And yet still despite all of that.

Wilt was a total of nine points away from being 5-3 in his H2H with Russell.

Wilt had better teams than Russell in 68 and 69 and still lost to Russell when everybody thought he was done winning titles.

That entire 76ers team got destroyed by injuries in 1968 so that does not count as here was their injury report against the Celtics in the ECF that year.


-Wilt Chamberlain (partial tear of the calf muscle in his right leg, a strain in his right thigh and an injured right toe):

-Wally Jones (injured knee cartilage):

-Luke Jackson (pulled hamstring muscle):

-Hal Greer (bursitus in his right knee):

-And, Billy Cunningham (broken right wrist).



But 1969 was a huge choke I will give you that.

68 was a big choke and counts no matter how you try to spin it and counts in the official record books. No team in history up to that point had ever had such a big lead and still managed to lose a series.

Philadelphia was still good enough to be up 3-1 in that series.

coastalmarker99 wrote:

70sFan wrote:If you ask these guys about their top 10 five times within one month, they will give you 5 different lists. I don't see huge disrespect here, this is just hot take without any substance.

The disrespect is them saying that Wilt played against midgets when that is a flat-out lie.

I couldn't believe that JWill had the audacity to say that with a straight face.

It's just lack of knowledge, nothing new in such programs. I wouldn't expect anything more from them.

coastalmarker99 wrote:

70sFan wrote:If you ask these guys about their top 10 five times within one month, they will give you 5 different lists. I don't see huge disrespect here, this is just hot take without any substance.

The disrespect is them saying that Wilt played against midgets when that is a flat-out lie.

I couldn't believe that JWill had the audacity to say that with a straight face.

Why do you care? These programs are for very average fan, so presenters are very poor quality and knowledge. It's better not to watch and ignore completely worst source and pay attention to those credible.

coastalmarker99 wrote:

70sFan wrote:If you ask these guys about their top 10 five times within one month, they will give you 5 different lists. I don't see huge disrespect here, this is just hot take without any substance.

The disrespect is them saying that Wilt played against midgets when that is a flat-out lie.

I couldn't believe that JWill had the audacity to say that with a straight face.

The term is little people or dwarf.

Since we are worrying about respect and all.

Because it gets people to repost their content elsewhere.

Must say, it's very hard to push Wilt out of any top 10, but yeah, if Curry included, I could think of 10, maybe 11 players one could take over Wilt. Not that I would agree, but everybody is entitled to an opinion. And if they mean an 11th or 12th spot with outside the top 10 there is absolutely no disrespect.