Lowest reasonable ranking for Wilt

[ceiling raiser]

things like footwork, balance, ability to spin away from the defense or split the double team

How does a "soft" low post scrub (as you have called him) average 38.6 ppg on 55.9% FG & 56.3% TS in the seven game series against an excellent defensive player in Zelmo Beaty and a very good (1964) defensive Hawks team?

A soft scrub who couldn't score, post up, or read the defense. That is one hell of a narrative you (and many others here on RealGM) have created.

I really hope that's just selective plays bc that's some god awful post game. I'm not surprised tho.

Any footage in black and white is going to look much worse than it color. The fact that a travel (clearly incorrect) was called at the 1:26 mark in that video shows how strict that era was. I don't know what kind of eyes you have but I don't see any balance issues or poor footwork at least in the 1964 game. In the 1964 game he actually showed an excellent touch off the glass. But it's more than a little hard to dribble when there are 2-3 guys surrounding you. Against Boston, Wilt's scoring suffered not only because of Russell, but also the fact that the Celtics guards made it difficult to even get the ball into him with their full court pressing defense. In the 1967 game he didn't look as good, but he was not a big time scorer at that point and he was playing with sore knees that night (Game 4). He looks much better in the (color) footage of the other games during that season.



New York Times - Apr 8, 1967

CHAMBERLAIN HIT BY KNEE AILMENT; 76ers' Star Skips Practice but Plans to Face Celtics

PHILADELPHIA --The Philadelphia 76ers' star center, Wilt Chamberlain, who has sparked his team to three consecutive play-off victories over the Boston Celtics, did not practice today because of severe pain in both knee joints.




Take this spin move against Thurmond, which is an excellent move for anyone to have, especially an alleged scrub as he has been declared in this thread. How many players today or historically could make that block from that position? Wilt had him beat, though he should have dunked it. But Nate Thurmond makes an excellent recovery.





Also this play where he takes two crab dribbles ala Shaq and gives Russell the fake (who doesn't bite) and goes up over him anyways. Before that we can see his drop step power move off the boards.

9:02 mark

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Np29MW_XN8[/youtube]




Also his excellent baseline spin move.


2:55 mark

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjwkiXiwzCY[/youtube]


34:46 mark

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNw0c19DhIU[/youtube]





And his huge drop step. How many players today can cover this kind of ground so effortlessly in one step?


3:33 mark

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lnu5vMfPtbw[/youtube]



0:42 mark

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UShBN1POkwY[/youtube]

Tremendous stuff. Thanks as always for your work.

OT - Did you want to use the archive site? Apologies, I was logged in so I might have booted you. If you want to do research let me know, otherwise I can do another search before going to bed.

[Dipper 13]

Did you want to use the archive site? Apologies, I was logged in so I might have booted you. If you want to do research let me know, otherwise I can do another search before going to bed.

No I found the article through google news search.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract. ... 5F438685F9

[ceiling raiser]

Did you want to use the archive site? Apologies, I was logged in so I might have booted you. If you want to do research let me know, otherwise I can do another search before going to bed.

No I found the article through google news search.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract. ... 5F438685F9

Oh okay, sounds good.

[bastillon]

So now it's win shares after 3 years of the propaganda of offensive and defensive rating estimates. Why ElGee's estimates instead of Dean Oliver's? Lets remember these are all estimated figures. Just because they had an excellent defense does not mean they didn't improve offensively.

ElGee's estimates were refering to Sixers pt differential with/without Wilt. this is basic math. what I did is just add up individual win shares of a team from basketball reference. you're being delusional if you think Sixers were a much improved offense with Wilt volume scoring. they weren't and this is a FACT. it wasn't until Wilt stopped volume scoring that their offense improved by a lot.

btw, if you think those moves are supposed to impress me, you gotta be kiddin me. I've watched basically every great center in the NBA extensively and moves like that are so common every star player can do them with ease. that drop step that covered a lot of ground that was supposed to be impressive, that wouldn't work if Russell wasn't afraid of fouling out. that baseline spin move was a nice move but why didn't he do that more often? my criticism of Wilt's post game was never that Wilt was not ABLE to put on a move. it's that he didn't do it on a consistent basis (that and the fact he was extremely limited because of his nonexistent shooting touch). he should've been pulling moves like that every time in the post to even be considered in the league of Kareem or Hakeem in the post. also, stop with the refs/era nonsense. somehow it didn't stop guys like Willis Reed being far better post players. Wilt lacked skills, simple as that. I was calling him soft because he should've been backing them down and dunking all over the place instead of trying to finish with a soft fingeroll. strongest man in basketball 7'1 finishes with a fingeroll, give me a break.

[Dipper 13]

ElGee's estimates were refering to Sixers pt differential with/without Wilt. this is basic math. what I did is just add up individual win shares of a team from basketball reference. you're being delusional if you think Sixers were a much improved offense with Wilt volume scoring. they weren't and this is a FACT. it wasn't until Wilt stopped volume scoring that their offense improved by a lot.

The in/out stats do not take pace into account, which is already a shaky estimate at best in that era. In an era where almost all teams preferred to run as often as possible, Wilt preferred a half court slower pace. It's no wonder the raw point margin difference would not be as great. And then there's teams intentionally fouling him off the ball (no 2 minute rule), which I believe was banned after 1966. Then there some of the insane rules of the era, which includes every single foul resulting in a trip to line for only one shot. In this era it is impossible for a team to have an opportunity to only score 1 point on any given possession. Your opinion is not a fact, it is just a guess like all these pace estimates.

btw, if you think those moves are supposed to impress me, you gotta be kiddin me. I've watched basically every great center in the NBA extensively and moves like that are so common every star player can do them with ease. that drop step that covered a lot of ground that was supposed to be impressive, that wouldn't work if Russell wasn't afraid of fouling out. that baseline spin move was a nice move but why didn't he do that more often? my criticism of Wilt's post game was never that Wilt was not ABLE to put on a move. it's that he didn't do it on a consistent basis (that and the fact he was extremely limited because of his nonexistent shooting touch). he should've been pulling moves like that every time in the post to even be considered in the league of Kareem or Hakeem in the post. also, stop with the refs/era nonsense. somehow it didn't stop guys like Willis Reed being far better post players. Wilt lacked skills, simple as that. I was calling him soft because he should've been backing them down and dunking all over the place instead of trying to finish with a soft fingeroll. strongest man in basketball 7'1 finishes with a fingeroll, give me a break.

How do you know what he did consistently with so little game footage from his scoring days even being available? Illegally plowing through the defense would have got him kicked out in the first quarter. And my point in showing his huge stride is to show that he physically could make some moves that the average player perhaps couldn't with his ability to cover ground. Too bad we don't have video of this particular move, instead just a photograph. I have already shown his high unblockable shot release (over 10 feet) on his jump hook earlier in the thread, according to Sports Science even a guy like Dirk Nowitzki had a shot release of "only" 9+ feet. Though I agree he settled for the finger roll too much in instances when he should have dunked it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2X4Hal88Y8&t=11m55s



Even Nate Thurmond commented on Wilt's touch (off the glass). He didn't have a great touch as far as swishing his shots from distance, but he was excellent at using the glass.



Nov 12, 1965

In a candid interview in the current issue of a national magazine San Francisco Warrior star Nate Thurmond rates other stars around the league:

Jerry West -- "The best shooter I ever saw."

Elgin Baylor and Chet Walker -- "The toughest forwards to defend, you never know what Baylor is going to do and he can shoot well from incredible positions; Walker moves real quick and has quite a variety of shots."

Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell -- "Chamberlain and Russell are the top centers. Wilt is the best offensively. When he shoots that fadeaway jumper, he's impossible to defend. Bill is the best defensively. He and Wilt are the cleanest players in the league, but they get away with more because they're who they are."

[bastillon]

The in/out stats do not take pace into account, which is already a shaky estimate at best in that era. In an era where almost all teams preferred to run as often as possible, Wilt preferred a half court slower pace. It's no wonder the raw point margin difference would not be as great. And then there's teams intentionally fouling him off the ball (no 2 minute rule), which I believe was banned after 1966. Then there some of the insane rules of the era, which includes every single foul resulting in a trip to line for only one shot. In this era it is impossible for a team to have an opportunity to only score 1 point on any given possession. Your opinion is not a fact, it is just a guess like all these pace estimates.

literally, you don't know what you're talking about so let me explain my post above. I've posted 3 different team stats. first was copied from Doc MJ's post and it illustrates Sixers TS% and how it changed year to year. it shows Wilt had no impact until he stopped volume scoring. second stat was Sixers team Win Shares. put it simple, they show how many games Sixers were winning with their offense/defense. that confirms what TS% was saying. Wilt had no impact on Sixers offense while volume scoring. so far 2 different statistical measurements have nothing to do with pace and everything to do with how efficient Sixers were offensively.

now ElGee's stat is showing point differential with and without Wilt. it's showing that Wilt didn't improve the Sixers overall. it is entirely possible that he made them better on offense but that would mean he made them worse on defense because overall impact was slightly negative. so it doesn't matter whether they were playing at 120 or 130 pace because it's not relevant in terms of what this stat is trying to capture. it doesn't matter whether Wilt wanted to run or not, the overall performance of the Sixers did not improve after Wilt's trade, in fact it was slightly worse. this is accounting for both offense and defense so pace is not a factor. it would've been if we knew splits...but we don't so there's no point in bringing up pace since it's completely irrelevant.

I hope that makes it clear. two conclusions: 1) volume scoring Wilt led mediocre offenses that didn't improve when he was in the game (as it seemed) 2) Wilt's overall impact in 65 RS was pretty much a non factor; no wonder why they were playing @ 20W pace in SF.

Even Nate Thurmond commented on Wilt's touch (off the glass). He didn't have a great touch as far as swishing his shots from distance, but he was excellent at using the glass.

Nov 12, 1965

In a candid interview in the current issue of a national magazine San Francisco Warrior star Nate Thurmond rates other stars around the league:

Jerry West -- "The best shooter I ever saw."

Elgin Baylor and Chet Walker -- "The toughest forwards to defend, you never know what Baylor is going to do and he can shoot well from incredible positions; Walker moves real quick and has quite a variety of shots."

Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell -- "Chamberlain and Russell are the top centers. Wilt is the best offensively. When he shoots that fadeaway jumper, he's impossible to defend. Bill is the best defensively. He and Wilt are the cleanest players in the league, but they get away with more because they're who they are."

here's LA Times article from 1969:

Now that the seventh and perhaps pivotal game of the NBA Finals is in the can, it may be appropriate to pause and reflect for a while. Say five months.

Analysis of whatever technical errors the Lakers may have committed will be left to keener basketball minds. In this period of re-examination, I’d just like to raise one point, one I think can properly be raised by even a casual spectator.

The point is that the past season suggests, if it does not actually prove, that Wilt Chamberlain is not worth $250,000 a year. And if that’s what he’s really getting, his teammates are being insulted.

This is not the intemperate response of an embittered fan. A good friend of mine is connected with the Lakers, but I have had no real emotional attachment to the team, and never have had.

At any rate, the Lakers, with Chamberlain, lost the seventh playoff game by two points — on the Lakers’ floor. So they have come no closer with Wilt than they did without him.

But the intent here is not to charge Chamberlain with unsatisfactory performance. To be sure, there are some things he can’t do. His field goal average, on shots taken from more than a few feet from the hoop, is rotten. His free throw average, on the other hand, is even worse. Nor can he move with the ball the way Bill Russell can.

But you can’t fault a man for not doing things he is physically incapable of doing. Norm Van Brocklin was hardly a great scrambler. But you didn’t rap him for that. The man just couldn’t run. Chamberlain, from any distance, just can’t shoot.

But some say there are things Wilt is capable of doing that he does not do. They say he could play more evenly. They say he loafs.

...

The trouble is there is another dimension to Chamberlain’s salary. When you announce you are giving a man $250,000 a year (or do not deny published reports that that’s what he’s getting), you are telling your fans, in effect, that you have acquired a super force. The magnitude of the sum almost suggests here is a man against whom there can be no defense.

But it can be seen now by every Laker fan that, while Chamberlain may be a great player, he is not the ultimate weapon. The same thing can be seen by his teammates. For the record, they may tell you, “more power to the guy. He’s entitled to anything he can get.” Privately, however, they must deeply resent the fact that Chamberlain is being paid five to 10 times as much as a lot of players he is not five to 10 times greater than. It would be irrational to believe this resentment has not adversely affected the team.

I don't need quotes from anybody to know he can't shoot. I've seen his form on jumpshots and free throws. then there's a fact that he's one of the worst FT shooters ever (and THE worst postseason FT shooter ever). so please, you can believe he was a 70% FT shooter in practice like Wilt was maintaining, or that he was a great shooter off the glass, or that he'd score 70 ppg today like Wilt said he would. I don't buy it. the guy couldn't shoot, from any distance whatsoever, had a bad shooting touch, bad form, bad balance etc. I doubt a guy with those ridiculously weak fundamentals could be any shooting threat.

[Dipper 13]

that baseline spin move was a nice move but why didn't he do that more often? my criticism of Wilt's post game was never that Wilt was not ABLE to put on a move. it's that he didn't do it on a consistent basis (that and the fact he was extremely limited because of his nonexistent shooting touch).

Remember in the 1964 game he was swarmed all over with help defense and there was poor spacing. In the '67 game he was no longer the big time scorer and his knees were bad that particular night. When a few games from his scoring prime are released by the NBA, hopefully within a couple years, we will see his offensive abilities. If the defense played him tight one on one, he could just spin off them but if they played off him, he could also faceup and make an explosive move to finish. Note the example below and how Lucas' attempted strip is ineffective.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcIVXtFuobg&t=4m10s

the guy couldn't shoot, from any distance whatsoever, had a bad shooting touch, bad form, bad balance etc. I doubt a guy with those ridiculously weak fundamentals could be any shooting threat.

One time in Lakers practice he hit 4 hook shots in a row from near 3 point range.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0IC8Nwkd1w



In high school and college he had an excellent touch, at least compared to what it later became. Below at the 2:40 mark he swishes a pullup jumper from the foul line in warmups.


http://www.nbcuniversalarchives.com/nbc ... 921_s01.do




If you watch some of his game footage from Kansas you will see a big difference in his FT shooting form. He explained this in one of his books.




Wilt: Just Like Any Other 7-Foot Black Millionaire who Lives Next Door - Wilt Chamberlain (1973)

In high school, I'd been an 85 percent foul shooter. In college, with the opposition preventing us from playing the run-and-gun basketball I was accustomed to, I didn't have the same opportunities to shoot from the outside that I had had at Overbrook, and my outside shooting proficiency suffered; so did my free-throw shooting. I shot my free throws with one hand back then, taking a deep-knee bend kind of motion, and it was something of a strain on my knees; like many men who grow too quickly in their youth, I had arthritic knees from childhood on, and at Kansas, that problem was exacerbated by an exercise Coach Harp had us do — duck-waddling around the court for ten minutes every day. Then, during track after my sophomore season, I injured my knee. That did it. By the time my junior year rolled around, I had to change my free-throw style; it was just too awkward and painful for me to use my natural style. My free-throw percentage dropped to 60.8 percent — still not disgraceful, but well on its way there.

My first year with the Warriors, it got even closer — 58.2 percent. My second year, it was down to 50.4 percent. From that time on, the problem became almost completely psychological. I'd try a new stance and a new grip and a new style every few games, and I never again felt comfortable at the free-throw line. I shouldn't have let it bother me so much, but I wanted to excel at everything, and the harder I tried— the more different ways I tried to shoot — the worse I got. By my ninth year I was down to 38 percent, and I've only been over 50 percent in four of the last ten years. My lifetime NBA percentage is now 51.1 percent — lower than my field goal percentage, for Christ sake!

I've posted 3 different team stats. first was copied from Doc MJ's post and it illustrates Sixers TS% and how it changed year to year.

In addition to Cunningham improving rapidly in his 2nd year (as many rookies do), Wilt's own TS skyrocketed from 54.7 to 63.7. I'm sure his passing mode had more of an impact on a guy like Walker more than anything else, and we know he had an immediate positive impact on Greer who was getting more open shots due to the sagging defense. Nobody is saying there wasn't a big offensive jump with Hannum, but he also showed great offensive impact in other years (1965 SF, 1966 PHI).

Below we can compare the overall impact between a prime KAJ (1975-76) and a rookie Wilt (1959-60) with all of these metrics. You may say it is easier to add more lift to a bad team (which is true) but based on SRS the 1975 Lakers (-3.94) were worse than the 1959 Warriors (-2.29).



1976 Lakers Improvement

TS%: +1.6
ORtg: +2.2
+/- Per 48: +4.1
OWS: +6.1
WS: +10.8



1960 Warriors Improvement

TS%: +1.3
ORtg: +3.3
+/- Per 48: +5.6
OWS: +4.2
WS: +13.8

now ElGee's stat is showing point differential with and without Wilt. it's showing that Wilt didn't improve the Sixers overall. it is entirely possible that he made them better on offense but that would mean he made them worse on defense because overall impact was slightly negative. so it doesn't matter whether they were playing at 120 or 130 pace because it's not relevant in terms of what this stat is trying to capture. it doesn't matter whether Wilt wanted to run or not, the overall performance of the Sixers did not improve after Wilt's trade, in fact it was slightly worse. this is accounting for both offense and defense so pace is not a factor. it would've been if we knew splits...but we don't so there's no point in bringing up pace since it's completely irrelevant.

The In/Out stats were focused on 1965, when the Sixers won 11 of their first 14 games before injuries hit their two starting guards. Obviously there was an adjustment to be made.





Sports Illustrated - April 19, 1965

I Love The Game, Baby...but It Can't Go On This Way

Wilt Chamberlain, Bob Ottum

Sorry if I've sounded like a know-it-all. But this comes from a guy who loves the game, despite his gripes. It used to make me mad—mad, hell, I mean it really burned me—to hear someone say I was a born loser. That I've never played on a winning team. But I've calmed down a lot lately. It all depends on what you call a winner. If you mean it one way, you're on a winner if you're playing .500 ball. Also it can mean that you win the number of games you should with the players you have on hand. Take the 76ers. We had a real winning look. Then Hal Greer got hurt. Then Costello. Then Greer and Costello. Then Lucious Jackson. On other teams I've been on, let's face it, all the personnel did not always measure up. Thus one high-scoring center can only do so much, right? Don't forget—I can dunk baskets all night long if they'll get the ball in there to me.




Hartford Courant - Mar 3, 1965

Hal Greer scored 24 for the losers, who played without Larry Costello in going down to their fourth straight defeat. Costello suffered a pulled hamstring muscle Sunday.




The Telegraph - Mar 6, 1965

Injuries have slowed Philadelphia lately with Larry Costello the most seriously hampered with a hamstring pull in his leg. Rookie Lucious Jackson also has leg trouble while Hal Greer is slowed by a tender heel.




The Sun - Mar 7, 1965

76ers Tumble Celtics, 103-98

With its two regular guards Larry Costello and Hal Greer benched with injuries, Larry Jones, a rookie from Toledo, and the veteran Al Bianchi, teamed with Chamberlain to keep the 76ers in front.




Mar 24, 1965

The 76ers have always depended heavily on Costello to direct their running game and Costello is out for the remainder of the season with a leg injury.




Christian Science Monitor - Mar 30, 1965

The 76ers also have some injuries and particularly miss the playmaking and defense of Larry Costello.




The Sun - Mar 15, 1965

Coach Dolph Schayes was even more handicapped since his two starting guards Hal Greer and Larry Costello were sidelined with leg injuries.

[richboy]

Wilt was Dwight 08 in terms of post skills (at best):

Why 2008? Why not 2007, 2009, or 2005?

whatever. what I meant is that Wilt was a very raw post scorer. undeniably great as a finisher dunking all over people etc, possibly THE greatest offensive rebounder in history (though more like top3 behind Moses and Rodman), incredibly hard to stop when he was deep in the paint...

but in terms of 1 on 1 scoring, "score for me" type mode, he was lacking. how the hell a guy like that doesn't learn a hook shot and puts on some soft fingerolls instead? this has to be the least diversified superstar scorer ever. he has a little fadeaway but is inefficient doing it, he has a fingeroll that sometimes works but only when he's really close to the basket. no drop step, no dream shake, no skyhook, no running hook, no up and under. back in the day I imagined Wilt would be some insane scoring machine pulling moves all over the floor. what I saw was the reason I started calling him overrated. the tape of Wilt available exposes his post scoring. unless he receives a pass right for the dunk, or scores off of putback, he's completely lost. can't dribble, can't shoot, can't even throw people around in the post like Shaq could (high center of gravity because of those long legs meaning a weak lower body for a guy his size). Hannum was a genius to come up with that passing hub strategy.

Seems like your suggesting that if Wilt played today Wilt would be less than Dwight. Dwight is a superior defensive player and even with all the cries about his offense has shown 23 ppg ability with a TS% 60% in regular season and playoffs.

[lorak]

Dwight had several seasons with 60 FG% range. So Wilt, who was similar limited as postup player but BETTER finisher and offensive rebounder, could today as well average +20 ppg with around 60% from the field.

Second, you're ignoring different approach to the game in the 60s. Players then weren't necessary worse shooters skill wise. But they have taken more bad shots because of general basketball philosophy. And Wilt wasn't exception here. But in modern game he would defenietly be better in terms of shot selection. I actually think Dwight is very good comparison scoring wise - but Wilt was even better finisher and offensive rebounder.

Look, Dwight with FT% like volume Wilt (52.3%) would be still +5.6 TS% player in playoffs. So it's very reasonable to think, that Wilt, who 1) would take much less stupid shots (different era philosophy), 2) would play much less vs GOAT defender (volume Wilt played 57% of his playoffs games vs Russell) and 3) was better finisher and offensive rebounder than Dwight, would be today in playoffs +20 ppg scorer with efficiency at +4 maybe even +5 TS% level (I think Wilt today would slightly improve his FT shooting, because back in the 60s he often changed his mechanics and routine - that wouldn't happen today).

well I don't see it that way. the guy who is looking similar to Dwight is Artis Gilmore. power player who was quite efficient around the basket but had limited post moves, poor passing skills and lousy counters. but A-Train was much more efficient than Wilt. he averaged 56% FG/60% TS for his career. if you were looking for Dwight's old school version, A-Train fits perfectly.

Wilt just played completely different than Dwight. despite being a great finisher and offensive rebounder he wasn't a power player. typical Wilt post up: receives the ball down low, makes a couple fake passes and either passes it off to somebody, or starts dribbling. dribbles twice, and either turns around for a fadeaway or tries to scoop a fingeroll. this is not a power player when left to break down the defense. he was extremely soft for someone his size, with his strength and athleticism. the comparison is just bad. I refered to Dwight 2008 only to make a point that Wilt's post game was very raw. stylistically he was different than Dwight.

All true and I also refereed to Dwight mainly to point out that Wilt was similarly raw as post scorer. Styles are different, but main strengths (finishing, ORB) and weaknesses (post play, FT%) are similar and that's why DH is the best modern comparison for Wilt.

That's also why it's reasonable to think that Wilt in todays game would be capable of playing at 60 FG% level with ~20 ppg and overall TS% at around +5 level. (as I said - playoffs Dwight with FT% like volume scorer Wilt would still be +5.6 TS% player.)

I

I answered to that in part in my previous post. but let me just say one thing. the only reason you're using Kareem's Bucks years is because he struggled shooting the ball in those years in the playoffs. he played Thurmond like 3 times and Wilt twice so there's a good reason why

And you are using Wilt's years when he played more than half his playoffs games vs Bill Russell, you know GOAT defender. So sorry, but it seems like again you are using double standards.

similarly you should be using the same years for West and Oscar as for Wilt-volume scorer. but you didnt because it didn't suit your agenda.

I didn't, because I was confused what were you talking about - prime, careers, peak.
Also, keep in mind that I posted whole data - Wilt career and volume scorer, West career and prime, Oscar career and prime. Different posts, but it wasn't like I was hiding something, because it didn't suit my agenda.

so you're using career numbers for West and Oscar because they were playing a lot of playoff games then

Once again - I used career numbers because of uncertainty what criteria you were using.

either way, it makes no sense to make those efficiency adjustments to begin with. you're operating under the assumption that other players struggling to shoot impacted how Wilt shot the ball himself. but that's just not how it works. during the same time period guys like West and Oscar shot the ball a lot better (including FT shooting here). during the 60s,

That's the thing - did they shot the ball a lot better or their TS% is better because they were better FT shooters? I know, you are talking about shooting efficiency, but it's important to realize, that despite his limitations as scorer (postup) Wilt wasn't worse from the field scorer than West or Oscar:

'60-'66 playoffs only (volume scorer Wilt, but also West's and Oscar's prime)

West 31.3 PPG, 48.4 FG% (36.8% of games vs Celtics)
Wilt 32.8 PPG, 50.5 FG% (57.7%)
Oscar 30.3 PPG, 45.6 FG% (48.6%)

Of course Oscar and West shot more from midrange, but even other centers and power forwards at the time weren't as efficient from the field as Wilt:

Bellamy 20.9 PPG, 46.8 FG%
Russell 18.7 PPG, 45.4 FG% (sure, he never was a scorer, but he was great athlete, maybe even as good as Wilt, so if Chamberlain's good FG% is only result of his athleticism, then why Bill is so much worse?)
Pettit 25.6 PPG, 42.9 FG%

There's also one thing missed in that disscusion: usage. As you know - the higher usage, the lower efficiency. And Wilt's usage was probably higher than West's or Oscar's. We can't calculate it, but even looking at simple shot attempts (FGA+0,44*FTA) we see that Wilt carried bigger load:

Wilt 31.6
West 28.3
Oscar 27.0

(and 0,44 factor probably undervalues Wilt's number, because he was more often at the FT line, so he had more 1 FTA trips to the line; Bottom line - more games vs Russell + higher usage explains part of difference in TS% between Wilt and West/Oscar)

So my points are: a) you are right, Wilt was less efficient scorer (TS%) than West or Oscar, but b) Wilt still was more efficient than anyone else not named Oscar or West and c) he was the most efficient from the field d) while at the same time has the biggest usage and e) plays more often vs Bill Russell. So f) it's very reasonable to think that today he would be as Dwight from the field (both limited post scorers, but Wilt better ORB and finisher) and g) Howard with FT% like volume Wilt would still be +5.6 TS% player in playoffs. So h) prime Wilt today would be around 18-22 ppg scorer with +4 to +5 TS% in playoffs. That's how I see it.

[bastillon]

Remember in the 1964 game he was swarmed all over with help defense and there was poor spacing. In the '67 game he was no longer the big time scorer and his knees were bad that particular night. When a few games from his scoring prime are released by the NBA, hopefully within a couple years, we will see his offensive abilities. If the defense played him tight one on one, he could just spin off them but if they played off him, he could also faceup and make an explosive move to finish. Note the example below and how Lucas' attempted strip is ineffective.

first of all, I've seen the 64 game and he was NOT swarmed with help defense all over him. watch how Hakeem was being played by Sonics in 96 or how Shaq was being played by Blazers in 00. not even remotely comparable. those soft doubles Wilt was facing was something that other great offensive big men were regularly beating. I love those legends how Wilt would be swarmed by 4 or 5 players, right. except in the footage we DO have, it's not true. Wilt was usually being played 1 on 1 without any double teaming. again, watch fatal9's video:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oemQKScZ7MQ[/youtube]

this is a textbook example of team defense being able to live with a guy playing 1 on 1 and not sending double teams. compared to the attention Hakeem or Shaq received (they were doubled team on the catch or even off the ball sometimes) it's ridiculous. no team would ever guard a Shaq that way. it'd be disrespect not to send a double team.

second, in the 67 game Wilt was in midst of his best playoff series of his career. he was no longer a big time scorer not because he couldn't score anymore but because his coach told him to stop scoring! so when he did in fact tried to score he was just as perfectly capable as he had been in 60-66. the fact that coach told him not to take shots anymore did not change his abilities.

third, Lucas is one of the worst defenders ever and a complete mismatch. it's as if you put Amare on prime Shaq and told him to be on an island all by himself without help. the fact that Wilt was able to score on Lucas is not questionable but at the same time it's hardly any impressive.

One time in Lakers practice he hit 4 hook shots in a row from near 3 point range.

this is an absolutely horrible argument

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ermf1CqRLs[/youtube]

In high school and college he had an excellent touch, at least compared to what it later became. Below at the 2:40 mark he swishes a pullup jumper from the foul line in warmups.

If you watch some of his game footage from Kansas you will see a big difference in his FT shooting form. He explained this in one of his books.

In high school, I'd been an 85 percent foul shooter. In college, with the opposition preventing us from playing the run-and-gun basketball I was accustomed to, I didn't have the same opportunities to shoot from the outside that I had had at Overbrook, and my outside shooting proficiency suffered; so did my free-throw shooting. I shot my free throws with one hand back then, taking a deep-knee bend kind of motion, and it was something of a strain on my knees; like many men who grow too quickly in their youth, I had arthritic knees from childhood on, and at Kansas, that problem was exacerbated by an exercise Coach Harp had us do — duck-waddling around the court for ten minutes every day. Then, during track after my sophomore season, I injured my knee. That did it. By the time my junior year rolled around, I had to change my free-throw style; it was just too awkward and painful for me to use my natural style. My free-throw percentage dropped to 60.8 percent — still not disgraceful, but well on its way there.

this is a gem more on Wilt's shooting prowess

let's ignore all the evidence both statistical and visual that he was an incredibly untalented shooter. let's ignore the fact he was THE worst postseason FT shooter ever, that his shooting mechanics and fundamentals were outright bad, that he didn't hit almost any midrange shots in the footage we do have of him, or that both times he stopped taking shots, his efficiency skyrocketed in an unprecedented fashion. this is my last post on Wilt's shooting. your highlights don't prove anything other than being lucky to hit a shot from time to time. the truth is also that anything Wilt says we have to consider the fact that this is a guy who thought he'd score 70 ppg today. of course he's gonna brag about how he was a great FT shooter. give me a break.

also I'm tired of using his knees as an excuse to everything. somehow bad knees didn't stop him from jumping high, averaging 20-30 rebounds or blocking tons of shots (an area he'd have been the most affected by bad knees) but it stopped him from shooting free throws well incredible lies by Wilt, as is expected by a loser who won't admit to a mistake. what a moron

In addition to Cunningham improving rapidly in his 2nd year (as many rookies do), Wilt's own TS skyrocketed from 54.7 to 63.7. I'm sure his passing mode had more of an impact on a guy like Walker more than anything else, and we know he had an immediate positive impact on Greer who was getting more open shots due to the sagging defense. Nobody is saying there wasn't a big offensive jump with Hannum, but he also showed great offensive impact in other years (1965 SF, 1966 PHI).

short answer: NO

let me re-post it to you:

Sixers TS%

Code: Select all

    '63-64 -2.0% (no Wilt)
    '64-65 +0.0% (Wilt half season)
    '65-66 +0.0%
    '66-67 +6.1% (Wilt stops volume scoring)

Sixers WS:

Code: Select all

year  OWS   DWS

64   16.6   13.5  (no Wilt)
65   21.3   18.3  (Wilt half season)
66   22.1   28.5  (Wilt volume scoring)
67   37.0   22.5  (Wilt stops volume scoring but doesn't try to lead the league in assists)
68   26.3   33.6  (Wilt league leader in assists)
69   28.2   23.5  (no Wilt, Jackson injured)

Wilt Phi 1965 (42g) -0.8 to -0.5
Wilt SF 1965 (44g) 3.1 to -4.1
courtesy of ElGee

Below we can compare the overall impact between a prime KAJ (1975-76) and a rookie Wilt (1959-60) with all of these metrics. You may say it is easier to add more lift to a bad team (which is true) but based on SRS the 1975 Lakers (-3.94) were worse than the 1959 Warriors (-2.29).

one thing you failed to acknowledge is that Lakers traded for Kareem, meaning they gave up assets to get the guy. Elmore Smith who was their center was I believe NBA's leading shotblocker and one the best defenders in the game. your comparison is dishonest at best.

let's take rookie Kareem v rookie Wilt...

Code: Select all

    player      OWS     DWS     WS

    Kareem 70   15.0    6.1    21.1
    Wilt 60      4.2    9.4    13.8

Kareem wins that comparison easily. note how Wilt came to the worst offensive team in the NBA (59 Warriors were putrid 8.8 OWS) and only improved them to 13 offensive wins (+4.2) which meant that Wilt was leading an offense far below league average. that's while averaging 38 ppg. and you're wondering why I'm extremely suspicious about his impact? Kareem went to a team that was already better offensively than Warriors with Wilt and DOUBLED their offensive win shares, from 15 to 30.

when both were volume scoring, they were worlds apart; anyone who thinks they were close is being delusional. it's neither about era nor about bad knees and has everything to do with Kareem's far superior offensive skillset and Wilt's statpadding approach to the game. he just didn't make as much impact as people think.

The In/Out stats were focused on 1965, when the Sixers won 11 of their first 14 games before injuries hit their two starting guards. Obviously there was an adjustment to be made.

this is a good argument and I'm waiting for someone to check it out. after all Sixers played well in the postseason so perhaps those raw point differentials from the RS alone are underestimating Wilt's impact overall. either way I don't think Wilt made a big impact offensively, if Sixers did in fact improve overall, it was probably due to his increased effort defensively. I was never questioning Wilt's ability to make a very good impact on defense (though effort was often an issue so he was very inconsistent). his size and athleticism makes him a dangerous defensive presence when he's into it. still not nearly as good as Russell and not even as good as Thurmond but a great defender regardless.

[Dipper 13]

again, watch fatal9's video:

I don't just mean on his shot attempts. Below is the full 2nd half, where he is double teamed quite a few times and the Celtics guards are pressing full court to try and keep the ball out of his hands.


1/3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ti2Ncll2K64 (10:20 and 14:33)
2/3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wEzEHPZi3w
3/3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6Daeb0pi2M

[Dipper 13]

Wilt's statpadding approach to the game. he just didn't make as much impact as people think.

So you are of the belief that Dean Oliver's estimates are incorrect and unreliable? Also note how the offense dropped down in 1970 with Wilt playing only 12 games.







What statistic was he chasing in 1965-66? At least besides the all time scoring record held previously by Pettit. Below is a recap from that game.




The Nevada Daily Mail - Feb 15, 1966

This was the big one Wilt Chamberlain wanted most. And now he's got it - all-time leading scorer in the National Basketball Association.

"Sure, this has to be the big one for me and it is," the 7-foot-1 Philadelphia 76ers ace said Monday night after collecting 41 points to break the career mark set by Bob Pettit of the St. Louis Hawks

Wilt's scoring splurge powered the 76ers past the Detroit Pistons 149-123 and spiraled Chamberlain's seven-year NBA total to 20,884, four over Pettit's standard.

"This means more to me than anything, even more than scoring 100 points," Wilt said, referring to his 100-point performance against New York in a game four years ago.

"The scorers are getting better and better and I think someone will score 100 points, or maybe more," he said. "But this one may stick around for a while. And this means a lot because it means a sustained performance over a long time. Yep I really wanted this."

Before some 5,000 fans in the Charleston Civic Center he played the role of playmaker in he first half and tallied only 10 joints as Philadelphia ran up a 70-51 margin.

"That was the way it was supposed to be," Wilt said. "We looked real bad in our last two games and we wanted to shake the offense loose. This was the best way to do it but it meant I wasn't going to do much scoring.

"Oh sure, I went after the record when we were way out in front in the last quarter and the guys started to move the ball to me," Wilt said.

He went into the last 12 minutes with 22 points and then they started to come furiously. He dropped in six field goals and a free throw and the crowd started to chant, "give it to Wilt."

A stuff shot with 2:46 remaining gave him 37 points to tie Pettit's record and a free throw with one minute and 32 seconds left gave him the record.

[lorak]

I'll humor you though. going by that logic of adjusting for era efficiency in the 60s makes Oscar and West better scorers than Michael Jordan. they're +8-9% TS in the postseason which would make them #1 and #2 all-time playoff scorers at their volumes.

Not true. It's really interesting how you point out pace over and over again when you talk about Wilt's stats, but in other cases you suddenly forgot about high 60s pace ;]

As I showed above West and Oscar were between +4 and +5 TS% in playoffs. If we adjust their volume to 90 pace (assuming in the 60s they played at 115 pace in playoffs) then we got Oscar as 17 ppg scorer and West 23 ppg. It's far away from Jordan who was 33.5 ppg scorer with +3.1 TS%

You have some great breakdowns, thanks for your work. I'm just wondering, have you done breakdowns against Russell and everyone else for West, Oscar in the playoffs (I think the Royals and Celtics only played each other in three series during Russell's tenure)? I'm interested in seeing the TS% and scoring volume shifts (I'd suggest Pettit and Baylor as well, but we don't have a spreadsheet for Pettit yet and I think the data on Baylor is spotty at best).

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1270141

[Squeedump]

I'm curious, bastillon--how many starting centers in the NBA today do you consider better than Wilt? How many that have been active since 1990?

[lorak]

Sixers TS%

Code: Select all

    '63-64 -2.0% (no Wilt)
    '64-65 +0.0% (Wilt half season)
    '65-66 +0.0%
    '66-67 +6.1% (Wilt stops volume scoring)

Hey, didn't you criticize TS% relatively to LA several posts ago? ;]
Besides numbers quoted by you are incorrect. Here are good ones:

Code: Select all

season   team   TS%   diff
1958-59    ---   0,438   -1,9
1959-60    PHW   0,451   -1,2
1960-61    PHW   0,466   -0,3
1961-62    PHW   0,485   0,6
1962-63    SFW   0,490   -0,3
1963-64    SFW   0,477   -0,8
1964-65    38G   0,446   -3,3
1965-66    ---   0,473   -1,4
         
1963-64    -----   0,479   -0,6
1964-65    35 G   0,481   0,2
1965-66    76ers   0,490   0,3
1966-67    76ers   0,528   3,5
1967-68    76ers   0,509   1,1
1968-69    ----   0,506   1,5


So Wilt as volume scorer improved Warriors TS% (but with that kind of volume nothing special should be expected), as well as 76ers.

[Dipper 13]

I don't need quotes from anybody to know he can't shoot. I've seen his form on jumpshots and free throws. then there's a fact that he's one of the worst FT shooters ever (and THE worst postseason FT shooter ever). so please, you can believe he was a 70% FT shooter in practice like Wilt was maintaining, or that he was a great shooter off the glass, or that he'd score 70 ppg today like Wilt said he would. I don't buy it. the guy couldn't shoot, from any distance whatsoever, had a bad shooting touch, bad form, bad balance etc. I doubt a guy with those ridiculously weak fundamentals could be any shooting threat.

Here he drives to the basket right out of the pivot, much like KAJ did often in his early days.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pV254jqzzS0&t=1m58s




He was also a master at getting the defensive player subtly off balance at the rim. How does a guy who has such tremendous control of the ball and his body be deemed someone with poor balance or coordination? It's because you see him making certain movements that may seem unorthodox, but remember he is one of a kind physically. I believe he habitually developed a quick ball fake under the rim in what seems to be anticipation of a hard foul. Almost like he is bracing himself for a hit, or it could just be a way to get the defender off his feet. A few examples below:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBo5AlV8KGM&t=36s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lnu5vMfPtbw&t=8m12s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aECiYcdvIE&t=20m9s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Np29MW_XN8&t=1m55s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwCmKvHJNoQ&t=2m57s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Phho8i6rj0Y&t=24s




Below are a few examples where Wilt shows quick and graceful footwork.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsvliMTVxS8&t=1m48s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMIFXBZSk9U&t=1m13s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85PQWObHWP4&t=2m45s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNw0c19DhIU&t=8m32s



Here he spins baseline from Russell immediately off the catch ala Hakeem Olajuwon, before K.C. takes the intentional foul and a frustrated Wilt hits the stanchion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5O3kE95tBZU&t=8m15s



Nice up and under moves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNw0c19DhIU&t=30m38s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Np29MW_XN8&t=9m19s





Two more baseline spin moves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PcEqa2l5eE&t=4s




In this clip Chick Hearn calls his turnaround shot "beautiful". You may be focusing on the aesthetics too much. Now I understand how his shooting would be poor in 1969 when he was not getting much if any lift or separation at all on his shot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9Gbb9_XAtU&t=14m43s



His shot in 1969 footage didn't look this smooth and controlled.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mrRELuaYUA&t=17s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNw0c19DhIU&t=8m12s



As he got bulkier and older it seemed his shot began to look worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNw0c19DhIU&t=24m53s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNw0c19DhIU&t=25m06s


You and others have several times tried to liken him to Dwight Howard, who doesn't have half the basketball awareness or the hands that Wilt did. Below is a clip of this attempted trap of Hal Greer by Havlicek and Embry, and Wilt makes himself available to Greer for the pass and dunk, unlike Dwight in the Miami game. You may have to watch in slow motion to really see the whole play.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Np29MW_XN8&t=27m53s


A couple more examples of failed baseline traps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwCmKvHJNoQ&t=17m29s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwCmKvHJNoQ&t=22m13s

[lorak]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lnu5vMfPtbw&t=8m12s

2:18 - Bill Russell At age 35 he was the quickest guy on the floor.

[ceiling raiser]

I don't need quotes from anybody to know he can't shoot. I've seen his form on jumpshots and free throws. then there's a fact that he's one of the worst FT shooters ever (and THE worst postseason FT shooter ever). so please, you can believe he was a 70% FT shooter in practice like Wilt was maintaining, or that he was a great shooter off the glass, or that he'd score 70 ppg today like Wilt said he would. I don't buy it. the guy couldn't shoot, from any distance whatsoever, had a bad shooting touch, bad form, bad balance etc. I doubt a guy with those ridiculously weak fundamentals could be any shooting threat.

Here he drives to the basket right out of the pivot, much like KAJ did often in his early days.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pV254jqzzS0&t=1m58s




He was also a master at getting the defensive player subtly off balance at the rim. How does a guy who has such tremendous control of the ball and his body be deemed someone with poor balance or coordination? It's because you see him making certain movements that may seem unorthodox, but remember he is one of a kind physically. I believe he habitually developed a quick ball fake under the rim in what seems to be anticipation of a hard foul. Almost like he is bracing himself for a hit, or it could just be a way to get the defender off his feet. A few examples below:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBo5AlV8KGM&t=36s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lnu5vMfPtbw&t=8m12s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aECiYcdvIE&t=20m9s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Np29MW_XN8&t=1m55s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwCmKvHJNoQ&t=2m57s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Phho8i6rj0Y&t=24s




Below are a few examples where Wilt shows quick and graceful footwork.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsvliMTVxS8&t=1m48s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMIFXBZSk9U&t=1m13s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85PQWObHWP4&t=2m45s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNw0c19DhIU&t=8m32s



Here he spins baseline from Russell immediately off the catch ala Hakeem Olajuwon, before K.C. takes the intentional foul and a frustrated Wilt hits the stanchion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5O3kE95tBZU&t=8m15s



Nice up and under moves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNw0c19DhIU&t=30m38s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Np29MW_XN8&t=9m19s





Two more baseline spin moves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PcEqa2l5eE&t=4s




In this clip Chick Hearn calls his turnaround shot "beautiful". You may be focusing on the aesthetics too much. Now I understand how his shooting would be poor in 1969 when he was not getting much if any lift or separation at all on his shot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9Gbb9_XAtU&t=14m43s



His shot in 1969 footage didn't look this smooth and controlled.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mrRELuaYUA&t=17s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNw0c19DhIU&t=8m12s



As he got bulkier and older it seemed his shot began to look worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNw0c19DhIU&t=24m53s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNw0c19DhIU&t=25m06s


You and others have several times tried to liken him to Dwight Howard, who doesn't have half the basketball awareness or the hands that Wilt did. Below is a clip of this attempted trap of Hal Greer by Havlicek and Embry, and Wilt makes himself available to Greer for the pass and dunk, unlike Dwight in the Miami game. You may have to watch in slow motion to really see the whole play.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Np29MW_XN8&t=27m53s


A couple more examples of failed baseline traps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwCmKvHJNoQ&t=17m29s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwCmKvHJNoQ&t=22m13s

Random note - I've been in communication with the site owner at nbaondvdbest.com, and he's finally found that Knicks/Lakers Finals game. I asked him to confirm that it was correct and he said:

"10:15 AM (29 minutes ago)

Hello. I suppose I'll able to get this game within a few weeks from now. This is 1 disk only, so I can try to upload it somewhere. And yes, this is the game 5 of 1973.

Thanks"

He said it's "letterbox format MGS Rebroacast ABC-TV". Once I hear back from him I'll get it to you guys.

[Dipper 13]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lnu5vMfPtbw&t=8m12s

2:18 - Bill Russell At age 35 he was the quickest guy on the floor.

Sports Illustrated - October 25, 1965

Things are a lot tougher than that in the pros, of course, but psychology is always a help. Say we are playing Baltimore, and Walt Bellamy, as usual, is giving me trouble. Well, I do not breathe hard around Bellamy; he knows this psych. I breathe easily—to throw him off—but then I do not run down the court on the fast break, to throw him off again. He thinks I am tired but trying not to show it. When I feel he is relaxed, I burst down on the break, and we murder him. But this works just once and two points do not win a ball game.

Random note - I've been in communication with the site owner at nbaondvdbest.com, and he's finally found that Knicks/Lakers Finals game. I asked him to confirm that it was correct and he said:

"10:15 AM (29 minutes ago)

Hello. I suppose I'll able to get this game within a few weeks from now. This is 1 disk only, so I can try to upload it somewhere. And yes, this is the game 5 of 1973.

Thanks"

He said it's "letterbox format MGS Rebroacast ABC-TV". Once I hear back from him I'll get it to you guys.

This will be an excellent game to watch.

[Squeedump]

Bastillon once more--what starting centers in the league today do you think ar better than Wilt? Which ones that have been active in the last 15-20 years?

BTW, I was under the impression there was a code of conduct on this board, yet you disdainfully tell someone they "don't know what you ar talking about." With all due respect, in my opinion that's both rude and arrogant. and that sort of thing is the last resort someone who can't win an argument with reason and logic.

I think--just my opinion--as intelligent as you obviously are, you are often too focused on arcane stats--and if one fails you, you discard it and see if another will stick if you throw it against the wall. Basketball is really a very simple game, unlike baseball, which is much more complex, as is football, which is of amost chesslike complexity. Because of that, I think raw stats such as FG%, FT% PPG, RPG, Assists, blocks, etc in basketball are a better judge of a player's and a teams' effectiveness than the more involved analyses you are fond of. Unlike the other two sport I mentioned, I think it's easy to overthink and overanalyze the game.

You also have an unfortunate tendency to disregard testimony from Wilt's peers, many of them still involved in the NBA in professional positions where their expertise is accepted and valued, about just how good and exceptional Wilt was. Either they are all senile (as I think is your assessment of me) or they are liars. Which is it?

Be that as it may, I would like to--politely--ask you once again to answer my question.