100 vs. 81

[NetsForce]

Who's scoring performance was more impressive Wilt's 100 point outburst or Kobe's 81 point massacre?

[MaNs1]

Why not Wilt's 100 point massacre and Kobe's 81 point outburst?

[Patterns]

81

[bballcool34]

81

Just curious as to why it was more impressive?

[Patterns]

-= original quote snipped =-




Just curious as to why it was more impressive?

There has been plenty of articles posted explaining why 81 was superior. Look them up.

[bballcool34]

-= original quote snipped =-


There has been plenty of articles posted explaining why 81 was superior. Look them up.

Cop out answer?

Perhaps there have been, but what's your own explanation of it? Do you even have one?

Edit: I know some arguments that you can use, and there are some, but I want to see if you even have an explanation.

[hermes]

kobe's
i heard wilt dunked his ft's

[Patterns]

-= original quote snipped =-



Cop out answer?

Perhaps there have been, but what's your own explanation of it? Do you even have one?

Why? Here's my simple and short explanation. You can look up in depth explanations from journalists with plenty of stats analysis.

The game wasn't close in Wilt's game. It was a blowout from start. Wilt played the game for the record. His teammates were fouling the other team just to get the ball back to Wilt.

Kobe's game was the complete opposite. Kobe was trying to wheel his team into victory. The Lakers were down 18 on their home court and the Raptors were embarrassing them. Kobe decided to take everything on his own and unleashed 81 points to help his team win.

That's the difference.

And if you have ESPN Insider, Hollinger can explain to you why Kobe's 81 is more impressive statistically too.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/ ... %3d2303136

Marc Stein also agrees with me:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/s ... id=2302749

You'll recall, sadly, that there's no footage of Chamberlain rumbling for triple digits in Hershey, Pa., on March 2, 1962. Which makes it tough to commission an in-depth analysis comparing Wilt's feat (scoring 100 of his team's 169 points that day) to Kobe's (81 of 122). But there's really no need. The folks who did see the 100-pointer and the game's historians would be forced to tell you that the entire fourth quarter was a back-and-forth scramble between one team trying desperately to get Wilt the record and another trying to keep him from getting it. Wilt himself is quoted on the Basketball Hall of Fame's Web site as calling that fourth quarter "a farce."

[deeney0]

David Robinson 71

[bballcool34]

Well, it's not really your explanation.

But, yes, it is an argument, and one that I agree with.

Just wanted to see if you were capable of giving or finding actual evidence.

[Patterns]

Well, it's not really your explanation.

But, yes, it is an argument, and one that I agree with.

Just wanted to see if you were capable of giving or finding actual evidence.

You think I am (Please Use More Appropriate Word)?

[rsavaj]

Kobe's 81

[Albanian Damien]

IIRC Wilt had like 80 when the 4th started. So that whole 4th quarter argument doesn't go against wilt. I mean no one else has ever scored 100(or ever will IMO). The only people who can think Kobe's was more impressive are
A) Blind kobe jock strap lovers
or
B) The people who think today's players are so much superior to the ones generations ago.

[Patterns]

IIRC Wilt had like 80 when the 4th started. So that whole 4th quarter argument doesn't go against wilt. I mean no one else has ever scored 100(or ever will IMO). The only people who can think Kobe's was more impressive are
A) Blind kobe jock strap lovers
or
B) The people who think today's players are so much superior to the ones generations ago.

The only people who think Wilt's 100 is better always uses the same 100 is higher than 81 excuse without looking under the hood.

[bballcool34]

-= original quote snipped =-


You think I am (Please Use More Appropriate Word)?

Not at all- but I have noticed that you tend to always support Kobe, which is understandable as a Lakers fan.

I wanted to see if you actually think about a question involving Kobe rather than just support him because he's your favorite player.

[Patterns]

-= original quote snipped =-





Not at all- but I have noticed that you tend to always support Kobe, which is understandable as a Lakers fan.

I wanted to see if you actually think about a question involving Kobe rather than just support him because he's your favorite player.

Read through my posts. I've always supported other players if they deserved it. For example, you'd me supporting CP3 for MVP if you look through my posts.

[writerman]

it's all just BS from kobe arse-kissers who are all 30 or under (if even that old) who know nothing or next to nothing about Wilt.

Ket's see Kobe average 50 for a season--or 27 boards. Or even eight assists (and they didn't pass out assists like penny candy in Wilt's day the way they do today.)

Some Kobe adorer pointed out that he is now third on the list of career 40-point plus games. They didn't mention he'd have to play until he was old enough to draw social security to match Wilt in that regard.

Wilt was a real, complex, intelligent person who (unlike Kobe) actually had a personality. And Wilt was probably the greatest all-around athlete of at least the last 100 years--maybe even longer than that.

It's also notable there's no record (also unlike Kobe) that Wilt ever had to force a woman into sex.

I've never said Kobe wasn't immensely talented. He is, but no more so (and I think much less) than Wilt was. But as a person, from what I've seen and heard about him, personally he seems to be a repulsive narcissistic creep that you have to be a totally fanatic unreasoning Laker fan to love.

[NetsForce]

IIRC Wilt had like 80 when the 4th started. So that whole 4th quarter argument doesn't go against wilt. I mean no one else has ever scored 100(or ever will IMO). The only people who can think Kobe's was more impressive are
A) Blind kobe jock strap lovers
or
B) The people who think today's players are so much superior to the ones generations ago.

Defenses today are easily better than defenses in the past, mainly because defensive coordinators have had years and years to come up with new defensive strategies and now have the aid of video replays, computer simulations, etc.

Many "broken" rules have also been done away with since the NBA's early days...

I guess other important things to consider are the influx of talent in the league (the NBA is a global game now), and the fact that players today have more training / practice playing basketball than players in the past because for the most part players nowadays started playing basketball at a younger age / had better coaching at a younger age than players in the 60's or 70's...

*I'm talking about the average player. For the most part I feel that a star player in one era is a star player in any other era, but I do often wonder if some of the players in the 60's / 70's would even sniff a team's roster nowadays.

[writerman]

-= original quote snipped =-



Defenses today are easily better than defenses in the past, mainly because defensive coordinators have had years and years to come up with new defensive strategies and now have the aid of video replays, computer simulations, etc.

Many "broken" rules have also been done away with since the NBA's early days.

Yeah, sure they are --how many times does Kobe get to the line for touch fouls? OTOH, every time Wilt got the ball he got mugged. It's on record--evidence of that is easy to find in comments from his peers. Your assertion is jusr another nonsense argument, easily discounted...

[D.Brasco]

Only kobe fans can have the balls to go against actual tangible numbers. Im sorry 100 equals more points than 81 anyway you put it. If u wanna include bs intagibles etc. anyone could very then easily argue MJ's 69 point game is more impressive than kobe's 81 due to his impressive all-around stats.