Outside of Lebron/MJ you can argue that about 8-9 more players are the 3rd best player of all time

Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal

Who is the 3rd best player of all time (From strictly skill/talent/ability/Impact)

Bird
0
No votes
Hakeem
2
4%
Shaq
3
7%
Wilt
7
16%
Bill Russell
4
9%
Kareem
20
44%
Magic
2
4%
Other
7
16%
 
Total votes: 45

FuShengTHEGreat
Analyst
Posts: 3,076
And1: 1,448
Joined: Jan 02, 2010

Re: Outside of Lebron/MJ you can argue that about 8-9 more players are the 3rd best player of all time 

Post#61 » by FuShengTHEGreat » Tue Jun 7, 2022 9:51 pm

coastalmarker99 wrote:Russell is a Goat level defender but it's clear that bad coaching had an impact on Wilt's offence in the 1969 finals.

As Wilt at that stage was still easily capable of dropping over 35 points on Russell's head

In fact, he did it in that very same season.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/196902210LAL.html


It was just terrible coaching by VBK not to feed Wilt the ball more in those finals.

As Russell was clearly fatiguing as the series progressed.

There wasn't much from him in crunch time, and in the key moments/periods.

His best performance was in game 1, and he seemed to reach rock bottom by the 5th game, in which him getting abused by Wilt on the boards was mainly responsible for the loss.

He was still operating the mid-post really well - spreading the floor, finding open shooters cutters etc.

His 5 assists per game average, including 13 assists in game 2, are an indication of this -

but there is almost no mention of Russell's defence/shot-blocking in any of the 7 games.

In fact the 4th quarter of game seven is available on Youtube and when you watch it.


Immediately after Russell picked up his 5th PF, the Lakers went right into Wilt, and he went right around the "poor defence of Russell for an easy lay-in.

For his seven make in 8 attempts.


But it would basically be the last time he touched the ball down low the rest of the game (obviously he missed the last five minutes, as well.)

BTW, as a side-note...while you are watching that footage...look for Russell.

You will seldom find him.

As he was essentially hiding the entire quarter as Wilt managed to outrebound him in that quarter despite only playing seven minutes.


Yes I've watched that game 7 quarter and I'm not seeing what you see. At 2:20 of that video Elgin darted to the basket for a uncontested basket. As Boston inbounds the ball Russell standing behind the entire LA starting 5 including Wilt yet somehow beat all of them down the floor and was fed a uncontested dunk while Wilt casually jogged back on defence. .

That's inexcusable transition defence for a game of such a magnitude. The Celtics were the oldest team prior to the 97-98 Bulls to win a title and they basically outhustled and outran the younger Lakers.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,903
And1: 25,246
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Outside of Lebron/MJ you can argue that about 8-9 more players are the 3rd best player of all time 

Post#62 » by 70sFan » Tue Jun 7, 2022 10:05 pm

FuShengTHEGreat wrote:No I don't place that series on any of those levels. The Hawks series was basically a 50/50 series. Wilts team actually won more games.

That's where we can see double standards you use:

1. "The Hawks series was basically a 50/50 series" - it's true that it went 7 games, but Warriors won the series by the margin of 5 ppg. In comparison, Bucks actually lost the series in 7 games in 1974 and 1977 Lakers beat the Warriors in 7 games with smaller margin of victory. Spurs lost the series against Mavs in 2006 as well.

2. "Wilt's team actually won more games" - yeah, Warriors won 2 games more than Hawks. Let's compare that to other series you mentioned:

- 1964 Warriors - +2 wins over Hawks,
- 1974 Bucks - +3 wins over Celtics,
- 1977 Lakers - +7 wins over Warriors and +4 wins over Blazers,
- 1999 Spurs - +6 wins over Lakers
- 2003 Spurs - +10 wins over Lakers,
- 2006 Spurs - +3 wins over Mavs.

Suddenly, having more wins in non-Wilt cases doesn't matter.

And while I do give him credit for Philly almost beating Boston in 65 one should note he was very fortunate to get traded to that situation in the first place.

He was on pace to another empty season in San Francisco just like 62-63 despite being 1/2 of the first Twin Tower duo in history with Nate Thurmond alongside him before Philly gave his season a new lease on life.

So, you give him credit but you really don't. Who would have thought?

They started 11-27 and were headed nowhere fast.

Basically 1 1/2 of Wilts "scoring prime" were leading the worst record teams any prime HOF superstar C ever had.

[/quote]
1992 Rockets had worse SRS than 1963 Warriors actually, so I wouldn't be so sure.
FuShengTHEGreat
Analyst
Posts: 3,076
And1: 1,448
Joined: Jan 02, 2010

Re: Outside of Lebron/MJ you can argue that about 8-9 more players are the 3rd best player of all time 

Post#63 » by FuShengTHEGreat » Tue Jun 7, 2022 11:07 pm

70sFan wrote:
FuShengTHEGreat wrote:No I don't place that series on any of those levels. The Hawks series was basically a 50/50 series. Wilts team actually won more games.

That's where we can see double standards you use:

1. "The Hawks series was basically a 50/50 series" - it's true that it went 7 games, but Warriors won the series by the margin of 5 ppg. In comparison, Bucks actually lost the series in 7 games in 1974 and 1977 Lakers beat the Warriors in 7 games with smaller margin of victory. Spurs lost the series against Mavs in 2006 as well.

2. "Wilt's team actually won more games" - yeah, Warriors won 2 games more than Hawks. Let's compare that to other series you mentioned:

- 1964 Warriors - +2 wins over Hawks,
- 1974 Bucks - +3 wins over Celtics,
- 1977 Lakers - +7 wins over Warriors and +4 wins over Blazers,
- 1999 Spurs - +6 wins over Lakers
- 2003 Spurs - +10 wins over Lakers,
- 2006 Spurs - +3 wins over Mavs.

Suddenly, having more wins in non-Wilt cases doesn't matter.

And while I do give him credit for Philly almost beating Boston in 65 one should note he was very fortunate to get traded to that situation in the first place.

He was on pace to another empty season in San Francisco just like 62-63 despite being 1/2 of the first Twin Tower duo in history with Nate Thurmond alongside him before Philly gave his season a new lease on life.

So, you give him credit but you really don't. Who would have thought?

They started 11-27 and were headed nowhere fast.

Basically 1 1/2 of Wilts "scoring prime" were leading the worst record teams any prime HOF superstar C ever had.


1992 Rockets had worse SRS than 1963 Warriors actually, so I wouldn't be so sure.[/quote]

Oh please at the last part :lol: . The 92 Rockets still finished 42-40. It should be noted Olajuwon missed 12 games where they went a terrible 2-10. Vernon Maxwell was getting thrown out of games or getting arrested during that span.

That's not Wilt missing 0 significant time in 62-63 and his team finishing in the basement at 31-49. Or having a HOFer Nate Thurmond alongside you and starting a awful 11-27.

David Robinson who is generally ranked far behind Wilt didn't play with the greatest rosters pre Duncan and still never led such porous teams. Further reason why I don't hold much value to some of wilts high scoring.

Winning a scoring title averaging 44ppg on a 31-49 team isn't to be celebrated imho.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,903
And1: 25,246
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Outside of Lebron/MJ you can argue that about 8-9 more players are the 3rd best player of all time 

Post#64 » by 70sFan » Tue Jun 7, 2022 11:31 pm

FuShengTHEGreat wrote:Oh please at the last part :lol: . The 92 Rockets still finished 42-40. It should be noted Olajuwon missed 12 games where they went a terrible 2-10. Vernon Maxwell was getting thrown out of games or getting arrested during that span.

That's not Wilt missing 0 significant time in 62-63 and his team finishing in the basement at 31-49. Or having a HOFer Nate Thurmond alongside you and starting a awful 11-27.

Rockets finished with -1.94 SRS, 36-46 expected record and -1.8 Net Rating.
Warriors finished with -1.86 SRS and 35-45 expected record -1.6 net Rating.

Good point on Hakeem missing 12 games, I forgot about that one. Still, even with Hakeem in the lineup, Rockets finished with -0.3 Net Rating. That's the equivalent of 40 wins.

If you bring up off-court problems for the Rockets, you should take into account that Warriors franchise was a mess after moving to the San Francisco. Players didn't want to play for the team, their coach didn't want to coach them either and they ended up with incompetent coach. The roster was unstable and most players missed significant parts of the season for various reasons.

Winning a scoring title averaging 44ppg on a 31-49 team isn't to be celebrated imho.

I agree, but nobody celebrate Wilt's 1963 season here.

Why did you skip majority of my response by the way and instead you focused on small, insignificant part of my post?

Return to Player Comparisons