Who on the Top 10 GOAT list is most overrated?

[McBubbles]

Michael Jordan is without a doubt the most overrated. He is in reality, a high tier GOAT candidate with his placement being reasonable anywhere from #1-#3. His perception is that he's an undisputed GAWD who is miles better than even LeBron, Russell, Wilt and Kareem, who would have won 9 championships straight if he only retired in 1999 and who would win 6 Rings in any era regardless of circumstances. No, I'm not making that up, I've heard the former said multiple times and the latter said today lol.

Kobe would be my second choice, don't even think I need to elaborate on that.

And my low-key 3rd choice is Magic. I don't think he's overrated as such, or necessarily even under criticized, but I find it odd that despite his circumstances he has pretty much zero asterisks for his career in the eyes of most fans. He had the easiest career by FAR. He was on the most stacked team of all time and in the weakest Western Conference of all time, for a decade. That'd be like if the 2015-2019 Warriors were together in the 2000-2007 or 2013-2018 East. It'd be ridiculous. He managed to completely avoid the "weak competition" criticism while players like LeBron, Bill, Wilt or pre-Magic Kareem somehow did not. He also choked away a Finals, something which basically never gets brought up, but does for 2011 LeBron and 04 Kobe. He also wasn't the best player on the team for his first few championships, another criticism that massively sticks to Kobe, but bounces off Magic.

Really weird.

[DCasey91]

Chamberlains final year after the major injury/conditions:

13.2/18.6/4.5 72.7% FG 68.9 TS% and played all 82 games.

Led in rebounds, TS% and that mind boggling FG%.

That would be Russell’s best ever offensive season most likely.

Bill’s scoring is suspect when his best playoff scoring series happened post 30. Something is up and fishy and does not under any circumstances in this game hold any weight under scrutiny. Fact is he had scorers including himself to play with as excess. It fluctuates on patterns.

I’d imagine a 15 ppg slightly less Wallace Pistons led defense but giving an extra 20ppg scorer every which way. You are going to win a ton. But there is a ton to work with.

It’s a comfortable ride winning two championships putting up under 10 ppg in the Finals. You could literally be a god on defense but it won’t make you a GOAT. And I’m a defensive first guy but the fact is you still need to put the ball in the hoop.

Overs - Russell, Bird, Duncan, Lebron (not because of his candidacy it’s because he has a pretty wide deviation in the playoffs to be fair).

Unders - I reckon Shaq is somewhat undervalued relative to how high he hit the est ceiling from 95-06. He probably has less underperforming series’s than Lebron has.

Fwiw I have 4 GOAT candidates (Jordan, Kareem, LBJ, Wilt) and that’s it. Basically all of them had 5 or more seasons of what would be the pinnacle of basketball. The rest a solid no imo

[70sFan]

So basically the whole criticism on Russell is that he didn't score well enough? That basically proves that he's not overrated at all...

[penbeast0]

...

Bill’s scoring is suspect when his best playoff scoring series happened post 30. Something is up and fishy and does not under any circumstances in this game hold any weight under scrutiny. Fact is he had scorers including himself to play with as excess. It fluctuates on patterns.

...

Look at the personnel around him and you will see that the earlier iteration of the Celtics (Cousy, Sharman, Ramsey, Sanders, Heinsohn) has a lot of pure scorers, basically everyone but Sanders. The later iteration of the Celtics (KC Jones, Sam Jones, Havlicek, Sanders, Howell) has two non-scoring defensive specialists (KC and Sanders) so it's not surprising that there is more likely to be a day where Russell needs to score based on the circumstance. It's not a major deal; Russell wasn't a primary scorer in any season, but it might be a reason for the post 30 scoring playoffs.

[DCasey91]

So basically the whole criticism on Russell is that he didn't score well enough? That basically proves that he's not overrated at all...

Russell is overrated by definition being that he’s by far the worst offensive player not just scoring alone but offense in general by some distance on this list.

It’s suspect the more you pour into the numbers/players/era/depth etc etc.

Wallace still needed Billups, Rasheed etc. Gobert would still need X player.

For me Celtics were overloaded for that whole decade plus. It helps getting positionally ranked players from 1-5, the best depth, Hondo literally in the middle of it.

I don’t buy what Bill is selling but that’s my personal belief.

There’s zero markers for this being that far down the pecking order on a regular winning championship team so there’s zero basis to go off from.

All things being equal from players to coaches to gameplan I think a Wilt led team would kill a Russell led team.

You’d have to rewrite everything then and say well if that player was here today was sub average offensively in totality and his PER markers weren’t close but was streets ahead defensively we’d win multiple championships as the guy that’s not how it works.

I can’t really build a good case for Russell so I stopped ages ago. I’m betting the house there was an undercurrent that people here remiss.

[70sFan]

All things being equal from players to coaches to gameplan I think a Wilt led team would kill a Russell led team.

Why didn't he kill Russell in 1966, 1968 and 1968?

[Heej]

I'm sorry but Wilt was kind of a plodder. He wasn't that nimble. I'm sure he was explosive and strong and all that but his mobility and agility and short area quickness sees him moving a lot more like a Steven Adams type than a Giannis or Shaq. He wasn't bouncy like that either, he had to really bend his knees and charge up his power dunks. He didn't have the balance and nimbleness to explode off the floor for a dunk mid dribble from any joint angle the way Giannis can. He always had to gather and 1-2 step into his moves methodically imo.

Def moved like a big more than a forward. And as I get older I've come to realize that the most important trait for basketball success other than height is a player's movement patterns/coordination/mobility/agility or whatever the hell you wanna call it. But the more you can move with the same kinesthetic reasoning and body control of a shorter man, the better an athlete you'll be by a greater degree vs other parameters like leaping ability or strength. Thus it's gotta be Wilt for me as far as being overrated. I find Shaq to be a far more impressive athlete tbh.

[The Explorer]

LeBron James
He only got to top 10 level after he GMed his way to titles. No other goat candidate had the advantage of picking and choosing his teammates and coaches. They worked with what they had and succeeded. James never did that.

[Jaivl]

For the casual fan? Jordan easily IMO.

[penbeast0]

I wonder if OP means overrated here on the PC board rather than by the general public since the OP top 10 list is the PC board list. The top 10 list for the general public would probably be very different (it would have Kobe, maybe even Iverson for a start).

[Gregoire]

Wilt
Shaq
Lebron

[countryboy667]

Overrated by whom? For casuals and the general public, probably Magic and Bird since they were such huge cultural icons for the sport. More so Magic than Bird since he has more hardware and achievements to boast of while also playing for the most successful franchise in the league. Wilt is also in the conversation since people take the absurd box numbers and all those legendary anecdotes about his strength, fitness, physical dominance etc. at face value and are quick to proclaim him the GOAT.

For more knowledgeable/hardcore fans, I'd go with Russell. He seems to be a popular top 5 lock, and that very well may be the case, but for me the era he played in is just too primitive and undeveloped to get an accurate read on him. It reminds me of all the hype Rod Laver gets in the tennis community.

All those stories about Wilt are attested to by peers and people who knew him and saw him play or played against him. I guess they are all just liars, right? Though you may doubt them, I take them pretty much at face value because, probably unlike you, I SAW him. 20,000 women is undoubtedly exaggerated, but the fact is he never lacked for women, had a prodigious sexual appetite, often entertaining multiple women a day.
In my opinion you should do a little more digging and research before you diss Wilt and dismiss the things said about him by eye witnesses the way you have. I get the feeling you haven't done much if any of that. Read his books. Read his biographies. Of course I'm old, so (absurdly and disrespectfully) my opinion won't count with you younger guys--I understand that, but he was EASILY the most complete athlete, the whole package in nearly every respect, that I've ever seen, and at 77, I've seen almost all the premiere athletes from the 1950s on at some time or another, quite a few of them live. I don't think there's any athlete in any sport today that equals or even comes really close to him strictly as a pure athlete, and none in today's NBA that you think is so wonderful and advanced. In his prime, he'd still dominate the NBA even though "the game has changed" as younger posters are always intoning (IMO, rather, it has devolved) just as he did in the 60s and 70s. The only big in the game that might give him any problems at all--and not many at that--might be Embiid. Once he adjusted to the new rules, he would own all of them--too big, too strong, too fast, too agile, too much stamina, and in many ways too skilled for any of them.

About 90% of the stats I see posted about Wilt are straight up falsehoods. He didn't have a 48 inch vertical, he didn't have half the high school / college records people said he did, he didn't fight a mountain lion.

BUT, he's still one of the best athletes of all time and 4th all time imo. Just wish people could praise him without making **** up.

Proof, please that those things you cited (except maybe the mountain lion) are falsehoods. And there aren't any three you can name better than Wilt. If you have proof, please provide it.

[countryboy667]

nate33 wrote:

Yeah, when ever I make all time comparisons, I pretty much ignore the pre-3PT-line era. The game was so different then. It's apples and oranges. Those guys may be better or may be worse, we're never really going to know.

Yep--you're right, the game WAS different then, IMO It was BETTER because unlike today it didn't boil down to circle, circle, circle then chuck up a three by a league full of chuckers.

[falcolombardi]

LeBron James
He only got to top 10 level after he GMed his way to titles. No other goat candidate had the advantage of picking and choosing his teammates and coaches. They worked with what trhey had and succeeded. James never did that.

this argument would hold more weight if lebron handpicked teams were actually better on average than the other top 10 players teams

otherwise you are esaentially punishing him for being drafted by a small market/bad front Office compared to magic (drafted into a team with kareem) or jordan (team drafted pippen as a sidekick while cavs only could get mo williams)

[Jaivl]

All those stories about Wilt are attested to by peers and people who knew him and saw him play or played against him. I guess they are all just liars, right? Though you may doubt them, I take them pretty much at face value because, probably unlike you, I SAW him. 20,000 women is undoubtedly exaggerated, but the fact is he never lacked for women, had a prodigious sexual appetite, often entertaining multiple women a day.
In my opinion you should do a little more digging and research before you diss Wilt and dismiss the things said about him by eye witnesses the way you have. I get the feeling you haven't done much if any of that. Read his books. Read his biographies. Of course I'm old, so (absurdly and disrespectfully) my opinion won't count with you younger guys--I understand that, but he was EASILY the most complete athlete, the whole package in nearly every respect, that I've ever seen, and at 77, I've seen almost all the premiere athletes from the 1950s on at some time or another, quite a few of them live. I don't think there's any athlete in any sport today that equals or even comes really close to him strictly as a pure athlete, and none in today's NBA that you think is so wonderful and advanced. In his prime, he'd still dominate the NBA even though "the game has changed" as younger posters are always intoning (IMO, rather, it has devolved) just as he did in the 60s and 70s. The only big in the game that might give him any problems at all--and not many at that--might be Embiid. Once he adjusted to the new rules, he would own all of them--too big, too strong, too fast, too agile, too much stamina, and in many ways too skilled for any of them.

About 90% of the stats I see posted about Wilt are straight up falsehoods. He didn't have a 48 inch vertical, he didn't have half the high school / college records people said he did, he didn't fight a mountain lion.

BUT, he's still one of the best athletes of all time and 4th all time imo. Just wish people could praise him without making **** up.

Proof, please that those things you cited (except maybe the mountain lion) are falsehoods. And there aren't any three you can name better than Wilt. If you have proof, please provide it.

If he truly had a 48" vert, then he has by far the worst ratio ever in terms of true athleticism vs on court athleticism, because he looks 36-38" at best (which is still *massive* for a big man). 48 inch is "upper chest on rim" kind of vert for a +2.15 m man.

José Calderón has a 40 inch vert. Prove me wrong!

[Amares]

Agree about Jordan here, by casuals and most society he is treated as a God who would beat everyone, win everything and whenever he wanted. And people believe that, even tought his team had losing seasons most of his career.

[McBubbles]

All those stories about Wilt are attested to by peers and people who knew him and saw him play or played against him. I guess they are all just liars, right? Though you may doubt them, I take them pretty much at face value because, probably unlike you, I SAW him. 20,000 women is undoubtedly exaggerated, but the fact is he never lacked for women, had a prodigious sexual appetite, often entertaining multiple women a day.
In my opinion you should do a little more digging and research before you diss Wilt and dismiss the things said about him by eye witnesses the way you have. I get the feeling you haven't done much if any of that. Read his books. Read his biographies. Of course I'm old, so (absurdly and disrespectfully) my opinion won't count with you younger guys--I understand that, but he was EASILY the most complete athlete, the whole package in nearly every respect, that I've ever seen, and at 77, I've seen almost all the premiere athletes from the 1950s on at some time or another, quite a few of them live. I don't think there's any athlete in any sport today that equals or even comes really close to him strictly as a pure athlete, and none in today's NBA that you think is so wonderful and advanced. In his prime, he'd still dominate the NBA even though "the game has changed" as younger posters are always intoning (IMO, rather, it has devolved) just as he did in the 60s and 70s. The only big in the game that might give him any problems at all--and not many at that--might be Embiid. Once he adjusted to the new rules, he would own all of them--too big, too strong, too fast, too agile, too much stamina, and in many ways too skilled for any of them.

About 90% of the stats I see posted about Wilt are straight up falsehoods. He didn't have a 48 inch vertical, he didn't have half the high school / college records people said he did, he didn't fight a mountain lion.

BUT, he's still one of the best athletes of all time and 4th all time imo. Just wish people could praise him without making **** up.

Proof, please that those things you cited (except maybe the mountain lion) are falsehoods. And there aren't any three you can name better than Wilt. If you have proof, please provide it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/9akkos/debunking_most_every_wilt_chamberlain_track_field/

I can't objectively prove to you that Wilt is the 4th best player of all time, but I think he's worse than LeBron, Jordan and Kareem, and (kinda) Russell.

[falcolombardi]

Agree about Jordan here, by casuals and most society he is treated as a God who would beat everyone, win everything and whenever he wanted. And people believe that, even tought his team had losing seasons most of his career.

the last part is not true tho, not that it changes your point but bulls were always a winning record when jordan played (not in 86 but jordan missed 60 games)

[kendogg]

If he truly had a 48" vert, then he has by far the worst ratio ever in terms of true athleticism vs on court athleticism, because he looks 36-38" at best (which is still *massive* for a big man). 48 inch is "upper chest on rim" kind of vert for a +2.15 m man.

José Calderón has a 40 inch vert. Prove me wrong!

Wilt had a standing reach of 9'6". His leaping ability peaked while on the Globetrotters, where he played a year before he was eligible to join the NBA. Wilt almost quit the NBA after his rookie year because of how much of a beating he took, and subsequently put on muscle which detracted a tiny bit from his vertical reach. But while he was on the Globetrotters, many times he did grab things off the top of the backboard (he did it in front of crowds there are definitely firsthand witnesses to the feat), meaning his vertical reach was a bit over 13'. At a 13' vertical reach, his (running) vertical leap would be 42". So it was a bit more than that at his peak, probably 44-45".

Note that when he is blocking shots these are NOT running jumps, but for the most part a 0 or 1-step vertical leap. And despite the lack of video evidence of his era, there are still videos that show he got pretty close to the top of the backboard on his blocks. How many players do you know in history that could literally not just block a shot, but CATCH the shot in the air? Dude was a freak.

For example, check his vertical in this short video, and the first 2 blocks are from his later years on the Lakers when he was in his 30's, past his physical prime, wearing chuck taylors not modern basketball shoes, in an era that predated modern weight lifting, proper diet, etc

Watch on YouTube

[70sFan]

I'm sorry but Wilt was kind of a plodder. He wasn't that nimble. I'm sure he was explosive and strong and all that but his mobility and agility and short area quickness sees him moving a lot more like a Steven Adams type than a Giannis or Shaq.

You mean that kind of quickness and agility?

Wilt was also considerably more mobile than Shaq:

vs

I don't love either one defending the space, but calling Shaq more mobile or agile than Wilt doesn't make any sense. Shaq was very plodding on defense and I'm talking about peak Shaq - not past prime Miami version or something.

He wasn't bouncy like that either, he had to really bend his knees and charge up his power dunks. He didn't have the balance and nimbleness to explode off the floor for a dunk mid dribble from any joint angle the way Giannis can. He always had to gather and 1-2 step into his moves methodically imo.

If you think Wilt wasn't bouncy, you should check out this play:

Watch on YouTube

Don't focus on the first block, it's the second block that is the most impressive. Look at the way he positioned himself right after the first block and he stayed on the ground after the fake, ready to explode in a split second. It was a perfect example of "bounciness" and I can't imagine Shaq ever making that play.

What you're talking about his power dunks is also false, Wilt had a lot of quick yet powerful finishes on offensive glass:

If you're talking strictly about post moves, then Wilt was comfortable of going to the basket hard without long gather:

Def moved like a big more than a forward. And as I get older I've come to realize that the most important trait for basketball success other than height is a player's movement patterns/coordination/mobility/agility or whatever the hell you wanna call it. But the more you can move with the same kinesthetic reasoning and body control of a shorter man, the better an athlete you'll be by a greater degree vs other parameters like leaping ability or strength. Thus it's gotta be Wilt for me as far as being overrated. I find Shaq to be a far more impressive athlete tbh.

I'm afraid you don't realize how many "stiff" or "plodding" moments you could find in prime Shaq game. Due to his massive frame, he looked uncomfortable trying to start runnning the break. His lateral movement was extremely limited. He had to put a lot of effort on every block attempt. You won't find Shaq doing some of the most spectacular Wilt blocks, because he had to gather himself before the jump and he wasn't a quick jumper. This is a big difference between him and Wilt, probably the biggest one on defensive end.

I agree that Shaq seemed to be more explosive inside, but calling Wilt more like Steven Adams than Shaq is, to be honest, quite ridiculous. Maybe that's because most footage we have from Wilt is from the 1970s when he was old and had knees problems. Prime Wilt certainly wasn't "stiff", "plodding" or anything like that. If anything, he was bouncier and more mobile than Shaq.

I won't touch Giannis comparison, because Wilt had like 3 inches and 50 lbs on Giannis.