Which Players Get Too Much/Too Little Credit For Their Team's Failures/Lack of Success?

[ty 4191]

I'll start with WIlt in his supposed "Black Hole Scoring" Seasons:

Do people wonder why none of WIlt's teams won 1960-1965?

Look at his teammates and coaches, for one:

I don't think people comprehend how bad Wilt's teammates and coaches (teams) were 1960-1965.

Consider Wilt played his first three/formative years with coaches that 1) had little to no experience 2) were lousy and 3) totally misused and misunderstood Wilt.

--Neil Johnston: Coached only 2 years in the NBA, was fired after 1961.

--Frank McGuire: Coached 1 year in the NBA, resigned after 1962.

--Bill Feerick: 2 years NBA experience, total, when he took over. Was fired after 1 year.

And, Wilt also had total garbage teammates on the Warriors:

I ran a study removing Wilt and Kareem from their team's TS Added awhile ago. Here are the results.

I ran another study. "Teammates' True Shooting Added.". Since TS Added is already adjusted for Era/Offensive Context, I though it might be instructive/useful to look at the quality of teammates, offensively, for Kareem and Wilt.

Here are the results. I committed the offensive contributions of all three, for every season, from the team offensive output. Summed up teammates' TS Added. 0 would be league average offensive teammates, negative, poor offensive teammates, etc.

Code: Select all

Kareem Teammates' TS Added

1970   182
1971   405
1972   154
1973   271
1974   153
1975   -85
1976   -126
1977   -276
1978   -3.1
1979   197
1980   289
1981   -46
1982   -1
1983   256
1984   337
1985   513
1986   380
1987   520
1988   395
1989   587

Sum   +4102

Code: Select all

Wilt Teammates' TS Added

1960   -404
1961   -407
1962   -295
1963   -435
1964   -419
1965   -377
1966   -221
1967   226
1968   -14
1969   145
1970   13
1971   182
1972   385
1973   77

Sum   -1544

Wilt gets great coaching that uses him properly, great teammates, and then (in his old age, for that era), suddenly wins .718 of his games during the entire second half of his career. His teams set the record for wins twice (two *different* teams, no less).

Coaches and GMs who either overtly disliked/hated and/or totally mismanaged Wilt.

-Neil Johnston
-Ed Gottlieb
-Frank McGuire
-Bob Feerick
-Dolph Schayes
-Butch Van Breda Kolff
-Fred Schaus

Coaches who understood him well, treated him well, and used him properly/to his full potential:

-Alex Hannum
-Bill Sharman

In 14 years he only had two coaches that ever understood him, and that he could count on. That's only 6 of his 14 seasons.

Here are his team’s records for 4 of those years:

1. 68-13 (set all time record for wins)
2. 62-20
3. 69-13 (set new all time record for wins, different team)
4..60-22

That's a .793 winning percentage for 4 years. On two different teams!!!! Has anyone else in NBA history done that? I think not...

The guy still has 68 records to himself on the books, 50 years after he retied.

Strength Of Competition:
Wilt faced the Celtics 90 times 1960-1965, by far the most of anyone in the NBA at that time. The Celtics had a .740 winning percentage those years.

[AEnigma]

Here are his team’s records for 4 of those years:

1. 68-13 (set all time record for wins)
2. 62-20
3. 69-13 (set new all time record for wins, different team)
4..60-22

That's a .793 winning percentage for 4 years. On two different teams!!!! Has anyone else in NBA history done that? I think not...

It is a pretty arbitrary frame. That said…

Lebron:
1. 66-15
2. 45-17
3. 61-15
4. 50-17
.784 with three titles (and Finals MVPs) and three MVPs, across three different teams.

Kareem:
1. 66-16 (went 12-2 in the postseason)
2. 62-19
3. 60-19 (title and Finals MVP)
4. 63-15 (title)
.784 with three titles (two Finals MVPs) and two MVPs, across two different teams, and that cuts off a couple of other 60-win title seasons.

[Dutchball97]

Wilt definitely gets too much credit for 1967 when he was just 1 of 5 hall of famers on the team. I know it's not as stacked as Bill Russell's teams with legendary hall of famers like KC Jones and Satch Sanders but still there aren't many teams with that many guys making the hall. No need to look into team contexts or how good these players actually are luckily.

Another one that comes to mind for some reason is Wilt in 1972. Did you know he averaged below 15 ppg in both the regular season and play-offs? That's so bad that it'd even rank below most of Russell's championship seasons, now you see just how terrible Wilt was that year.

[ty 4191]

Wilt definitely gets too much credit for 1967 when he was just 1 of 5 hall of famers on the team.

Read on Twitter

Another one that comes to mind for some reason is Wilt in 1972. Did you know he averaged below 15 ppg in both the regular season and play-offs? That's so bad that it'd even rank below most of Russell's championship seasons, now you see just how terrible Wilt was that year.

Read this:
https://www.opencourt-basketball.com/wilt-chamberlain-closed-1972-nba-finals-with-a-broken-dominant-hand-won-finals-mvp/

Terrible? He was second in WS in the RS, second in the playoffs in WS. Sharman understood and used Wilt the way only Hannum did, much earlier in his career/pre reconstructive knee surgery (November, 1969). Wilt was ancient then (by the standards of that Era), and was playing on one good leg. He did not need to score 30 a game to still be very valuable.

He certainly wasn't "terrible" in 1971-1972.

[Dutchball97]

Wilt definitely gets too much credit for 1967 when he was just 1 of 5 hall of famers on the team.

Read on Twitter

Another one that comes to mind for some reason is Wilt in 1972. Did you know he averaged below 15 ppg in both the regular season and play-offs? That's so bad that it'd even rank below most of Russell's championship seasons, now you see just how terrible Wilt was that year.

Read this:
https://www.opencourt-basketball.com/wilt-chamberlain-closed-1972-nba-finals-with-a-broken-dominant-hand-won-finals-mvp/

Terrible? He was second in WS in the RS, second in the playoffs in WS. Sharman understood and used Wilt the way only Hannum did, much earlier in his career/pre reconstructive knee surgery (November, 1969). Wilt was ancient then (by the standards of that Era), and was playing on one good leg. He did not need to score 30 a game to still be very valuable.

He certainly wasn't "terrible" in 1971-1972.

I'm just happy to see you debunking your own criticisms of Russell.

[Jaivl]

Wilt definitely gets too much credit for 1967 when he was just 1 of 5 hall of famers on the team. I know it's not as stacked as Bill Russell's teams with legendary hall of famers like KC Jones and Satch Sanders

Was gonna answer that the 67 76ers were pretty clearly as loaded, if not more, than the best Russell teams, joke almost slipped past me. Good one.

[Jaivl]

As for OP

Too much criticism:
- 2018 Harden. By margin of victory Warriors should have won that series anyway, but man, variance is a ****. Proved it really was not a recurring issue by outplaying Curry and KD the following year.
- 2008 Kobe, 2022 KD, 2022 Trae... Being the sole focus of an all-time defense as a wing ain't easy if your name isn't Michael Jordan or LeBron James (or Luka?). In KD's case, his team even managed a great offense, which is what matters ultimately. Kobe was just overmatched vs a GOAT defense.

Too little criticism:
- Late 70s Dr. J, of course variance is a thing and the fit was far from optimal, but as the clear #2 player in the world at the time, not winning a ring in a period of relative weakness while having some great rosters is not the best look.
- Lakers Wilt. No matter the circumstances, those first years are extremely bad series of occurrences with Wilt at the forefront.
- 2010 KG, Celtics win that ring if he was at the level of his 2011-2013 self, nevermind 2008-2009. A less intense player probably waits to recover fully and is in top form for the playoffs.
Probably not a coincidence that all three are impacted by injuries, now that I think about it.

All of that considering we're talking about all-time greats (and Trae Young, who is an all-time great on one side of the ball) and the standards are what they are, of course.

[ty 4191]

I'm just happy to see you debunking your own criticisms of Russell.

1. What does this even mean? Has nothing to do with what I posted, whatsoever.

2. Are you just Trolling here, or do you have anything substantive to add?

3. At the moment, I have Russell as the second greatest player in the history of basketball. You should probably be attacking a Russell/Celtics hater. I'm neither/nor.

[OhayoKD]

As for OP

Too much criticism:
- 2018 Harden. By margin of victory Warriors should have won that series anyway, but man, variance is a ****. Proved it really was not a recurring issue by outplaying Curry and KD the following year.
- 2008 Kobe, 2022 KD, 2022 Trae... Being the sole focus of an all-time defense as a wing ain't easy if your name isn't Michael Jordan or LeBron James (or Luka?). In KD's case, his team even managed a great offense, which is what matters ultimately.

Uh...no?

[Jaivl]

As for OP

Too much criticism:
- 2018 Harden. By margin of victory Warriors should have won that series anyway, but man, variance is a ****. Proved it really was not a recurring issue by outplaying Curry and KD the following year.
- 2008 Kobe, 2022 KD, 2022 Trae... Being the sole focus of an all-time defense as a wing ain't easy if your name isn't Michael Jordan or LeBron James (or Luka?). In KD's case, his team even managed a great offense, which is what matters ultimately.

Uh...no?

Is stuffing the boxscore what matters then? I think it's clear I'm talking in the context of individual vs team numbers. Of course what ultimately matters is actually winning, no ****.

[Dutchball97]

I'm just happy to see you debunking your own criticisms of Russell.

1. What does this even mean? Has nothing to do with what I posted, whatsoever.

2. Are you just Trolling here, or do you have anything substantive to add?

3. At the moment, I have Russell as the second greatest player in the history of basketball. You should probably be attacking a Russell/Celtics hater. I'm neither/nor.

Are you acting obtuse? Because it's not like you've just joined the forum or anything. "Wilt underrated" is one of, if not, the most tired topic on the PC board and it always comes down to the most surface level arguments.

The point is you're not adding anything substantive either by bringing up Wilt's coaches, his teammates on the Warriors and the amount of triple doubles he had. All of those things are common knowledge by now for anyone who has been here for at least a couple weeks.

Maybe it's unfair to come at you for the Russell stuff as that's more coastalmarker who can't go one post without trying to tear down Russell to prop up Wilt, I'm not sure to what extent you believe in the Wilt > Russell because of ppg and less hof teammates narratives but the arguments you were bringing up so far in this thread didn't seem to meaningfully deviate from this narrative or bring up new perspectives.

After a new thread every other week about how someone found this little unknown gem called Wilt Chamberlain who scored a lot of points gets old very fast when just about every regular on here has Wilt somewhere in their top 10.

[OhayoKD]

Is stuffing the boxscore what matters then?

Well, considering your pick for greatest regular season...

I think it's clear I'm talking in the context of individual vs team numbers. Of course what ultimately matters is actually winning, no ****.

Yeah, but you can't just decouple offense and defense like that. What ultimately matters is the overall team stuff and teams sometimes elevate effiency one side of the court at the expense of the other. That aside, was KD really, "by himself" on the offensive side of things?

[Jaivl]

Is stuffing the boxscore what matters then?

Well, considering your pick for greatest regular season...

Cheeky. GOAT level regular season =/= GOAT regular season, though.

[coastalmarker99]

Wilt gets to much blame for not winning a ring with the warriors.

But he does deserve criticism for not winning more titles with the Lakers as he should have won both of those finals he lost to New York in 70 and 73.


As had he done so he would have ended his career with 4 rings and 4 finals Mvps


To go along with having a playoff record of 19 and 2 against non Celtic teams.

[Jaivl]

Wilt gets to much blame for not winning a ring with the warriors.

I don't think I've ever seen anybody blame Wilt for not winning a ring with the Warriors.

Disquisitions about suboptimal coaching/playstyle aside, I'm pretty sure the consensus is he did as much as it could be expected or even slightly overachieved, if anything.

[coastalmarker99]

Wilt gets to much blame for not winning a ring with the warriors.

I don't think I've ever seen anybody blame Wilt for not winning a ring with the Warriors.

Disquisitions about suboptimal coaching/playstyle aside, I'm pretty sure the consensus is he did as much as it could be expected or even slightly overachieved, if anything.

I would say when ranking Wilt”s years with the different teams he played on.

That he overachieved with the warriors.

Slightly underachieved with the 76ers as he should have gotten at least two titles in those four years through he gets a pass for 68 considering injuries.


He underachieved in La as he should have won in 70 73 to go along with 72.


As a Wilt fan.


those losses to New York hurt his legacy much more then his losses to Russell.

As he had he won those two titles he could have used the excuse of Russell was just a bad Matchup for me.


As he would have had a winning record against ever other top player of the 1960s and 1970s outside of Kareem in which they split

[Texas Chuck]

I try not to homer too much, but what Dirk did in the 3 years after Nash left in FA(and the final 2 years after Finley was amnestied to save tax dollars) is nothing short of incredible. We never talk about this 3 year period in terms of carry jobs because they spit the bit in 06 plus the high payroll and some names either pre or post prime make people think the roster was stronger than it was. And of course Avery Johnson was almost certainly the worst X's and O's coach in the league.

If you take an honest look at that roster/coach and see Dallas winning over 60x twice with a Finals trip mixed in. It's outrageous. And its just utterly glossed over unless I personally mention it.

[migya]

David Robinson for the success and also failures of the 90s Spurs. He carried that team to high winning seasons and was the easy focus for the defense with noone else to contribute much.

[70sFan]

David Robinson for the success and also failures of the 90s Spurs. He carried that team to high winning seasons and was the easy focus for the defense with noone else to contribute much.

I don't think anyone blames Robinson for lack of the team succees here. Nobody expected him to win anything more than he actually did.

The problem people see in his game is that his offensive production collapsed against good defensive teams. This is actually a fair criticism, because Robinson always struggled vs solid teams and it's independent of the quality of his teammates (see 1998).

You can argue that people focus too much on scoring and I'm 100% with you then, but strictly in terms of scoring this criticism is fair.

[migya]

David Robinson for the success and also failures of the 90s Spurs. He carried that team to high winning seasons and was the easy focus for the defense with noone else to contribute much.

I don't think anyone blames Robinson for lack of the team succees here. Nobody expected him to win anything more than he actually did.

The problem people see in his game is that his offensive production collapsed against good defensive teams. This is actually a fair criticism, because Robinson always struggled vs solid teams and it's independent of the quality of his teammates (see 1998).

You can argue that people focus too much on scoring and I'm 100% with you then, but strictly in terms of scoring this criticism is fair.

Robinson didn't get his usual numbers and was below his usual level against Houston in wcf 95 and Utah in r1 94. He played well and scored well many times against both those teams throughout his career, including those seasons. So he played well against those good defenses. In the playoffs the opposition knew they could focus on him and his teammates didn't step up, they were below average. Yes, he should have played better in those playoff series but the context is everything in that.