SuperDario wrote:Is this where I express my disappointment on Wilt being criminally underrated? #6 is mind-boggling to me.
I've just gotten (and responded to) a PM from a fellow poster in this thread. He / she(?) asked me three questions (bolded below). Seeing as it was heavily about Wilt; this seems to me to be a good-enough "opportunity" to post it here. ...
-----
Thanx a lot for the compliments. You humble me.
Some thoughts:
In general, I've been weirdly-unique all my life (dad had a 190 IQ; and his relatively unique tolerance - that combo just made me different. It took me til my teen years to finally realize that nobody else was like me - and that that was the reason why I often found myself in unusual inter-personal relationships. I just didn't see the ideological-philosophical barriers that stopped others from examining questions as deeply. I don't see that I merit any credit - seeing as I mostly inherited this stuff and/or was raised that way.
His "genius" was a kind of all-purpose one - he was good at tons of stuff; and later in life worked high up in the Nixon administration; often purposed with either setting up brand new departments (like NOAA) or being head arbitrator in union-vs-industry negotiations.
My "genius" was/is more "localized". By age 8, my math ability became evident - to try to solve a math problem I ran across in a sports magazine. Somehow, I took one look at their humongous number (of the odds against a perfect bridge hand happening - somehow I "knew" their number was wrong.
My dad took my notebooks full of scribbles to the accounting department of one of the top NYC accounting firms, of which he was an exec. vp - and they came back to him a few days later and said, "No 8-year old could do this work. He completely solved this problem. See here, here he's reinvented the Calculus and Trig. He made ONLY one mistake - he solved for each player getting a specific suite rather than for any player getting any suite. Can we hire him?"
So, "naturally" I've been counting EVERYTHIING before and since then. I've made GOAT lists for the NBA-ABA-NBL since the end of the 1960 season; I've got my own version of the greatest hard-rock songs "Pablo's Top 1,000 Hard Rock Songs"; and more than a dozen others.
-------------
#1. Being that West and Baylor were your favorite players who among them was better to you and why!? PABLO: Almost every time I think about the two of them I come up with a different order for who was better. Early on Elgin was clearly better; but West caught up relatively quickly. Later on, West was clearly better; to no small degree because of Elgin's knee problems.
For my GOAT list, I rank players first BY POSITION - and I have West as GOAT #3 SG (not far behind either MJ or Kobe); whereas, I have Elgin behind: LBJ, Dr J, and bird or GOAT #4 SF (barely ahead of Barry).
The way I build my GOAT list from these POSITIONAL GOAT sub-lists is that in each descending set of 5 GOAT players, I include one player from each position.
So my GOAT Top 5 are:
1. KAJ
2. Magic
3. MJ
4. LBJ
5. TD
my next 5 are:
6. Wilt
7. Dr J
8. Kobe
9. "O"
10. Karl Malone
my next 5 are:
11. Shaq
12. West
13. Bird
14. Cousy
15. Pettit ("Shaq and the white boys")
16. Hakeem
17. Elgin Baylor
18. Stockton
19. Dirk
20. Gervin
21. Bill Russell
22. Barry
23. Kidd
24. KG
25. D. Wade
So, the net result of this system is that I have West in the GOAT #s 11-15 group; and Elgin in the next group.
Another thing for me is that the ONLY significant gap I have is between KAJ and Magic for the first two GOAT spots - for me KAJ was just that dominant with both an incredible PEAK and incredibly long PRIME. Given this, I have the gap between say MJ and Kobe as tiny - Kobe's Reg. Seas. career ranks higher for me than MJ; so MJ BARELY squeezes past him because his Post-Season was just enough superior. Likewise, I don't have West far behind MJ, nor Elgin far behind Bird.
#2. How would you rank these players based on overall skill/talent/ability/impact Wilt Chamberlain
Bill Russell
Oscar Robertson
Dr. J
Jerry West
Elgin Baylor
PABLO: I have ALl 6 as All-Time Greats, For the "decade" of the "1960's" I've got the 5 of them in this order:
1: Wilt (THE most-Era-dominant player ever - not counting Mikan who more dominated a much weaker Era).
2-4: "O", West, Baylor (though I can entirely live with any other order of them.
5. Bill Russell.
On my overall GOAT list, I have Dr J, just behind Wilt and a bit ahead of "O"-West-Baylor.
About Wilt vs Bill Russell
In my opinion, while Russell was a once-in-a-decade athlete, Wilt was a once-in-a-century FREAK of nature. Wilt had truly WORLD-CLASS skills: endurance, speed, quicks, explosiveness, strength.
The KEY to Russell's success was RED Auerbach. For me (though he's the only coach or player I ever "disliked" (I didn't care for his arrogance); Red was THE Era-Wise most dominant coach AND GM. The C's won so many of their series vs Wilt's teams in 7th games and/or in games decided by 5 points or less. Red was EASILY worth those few points - in both how he BUILT the C's and how he coached them.
During the filming of Conan The Barbarian, Wilt went with Aaaanold (Schwarzenneger) to a gym. Arnold says that Wilt lifted weights that the BIGGEST guys couldn't approach. I personally remember a game where Wilt picked up an opposing big man who was about to get into a fight and said, "We'll have none of that here." His contemporaries spoke of him picking up two guys simultaneously at arms length to stop fights. He WAS that strong.
In college, he showed up at a track meet; his school was short a high jumper. He went out and, with basically no training, jumped a world-class height. Well after his b-ball career, he went into pro Volleyball and was competitive.
Another way to put it is: Were Wilt to have been on the C's, they would have won as many Chips; while if Russell had been on Wilt's teams, they would have won LESS Chips and less Reg. Seas. games.
I TEND to think that if the Cs had had Nate the Great, they would have done about as well; and we'd be hearing as little about Russell as we do now about Nate Thurmond.
Of all my GOAT Top 50, only Mikan and Russell for me have debatable "transferability". Mikan because the play back then was just so inferior; Russell because, while he'd dominate any decade on defense, is inability to score at a decent percent for a Center - says to me that he'd not be an All-Time Great in subsequent decades. (I don't find it easy to say this about him, because his absolute DIGNITY in the face of the nasty racism of his own fans - just blew me away.)
One more thing about Wilt:
HE WAS WORLD-CLASS IN "CITIZENSHIP".
Wilt, mostly, single-handedly integrated first an entire city, Kansas City, then an entire region. This was no small feat; nor without tremendous personal risks. Southern whites were nasty and ARMED! Wilt's insistence on entering segregated establishments, and then sitting up front - EVERY TIME he did that, and he did it all the time, each time he risked his very life. That such a SELFLESS person would somehow be a "stat-stuffing" "only cared about himself and his numbers" b-ball player; I find that not just unreasonable; but downright obnoxious.
#3. Who was better to you and why between Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain!?PABLO: In "head-to-head" Reg. Seas. "evaluations"; THE one I consider, by far, THE best "measuring stick": the ALL-NBA (ALL-ABA, ALL-NBL) selections, at the Center position: Wilt & Russell finished 1st and 2nd in 9 seasons. In SEVEN of those seasons, Wilt was ALL-NBA 1st-Team - that, for me, is more than being slightly better; it is sheer dominance.
N.B. I've had big problems with the MVP voting. Russell didn't deserve it over Pettit in 1958; and Wilt deserved it over Russell in both 1961 and 1962 (!!!); KAJ deserved it over Cowens in 1973. In all FOUR cases, a Celtics player, who was ALL-NBA SECOND-Team was voted MVP over THE Center who was voted ALL-NBA 1st-Team over him. There WAS a pro-C's bias back then.
If you take away 3 of Russell's 5 MVPs and give 2 of them to Wilt; Wilt suddenly looks a heck of a lot greater; and Russell not nearly as great. That is in fact how I see them.
Keep in mind, the REPUTATION of the League then NOWADAYS is that Wilt dominated a bunch of shortish white guys. Yet, with the help of the entire C's all-world DEFENSE, Wilt only scored about 5 ppg less on Russell than he did on the rest of the League's Centers. I don't question Russell as being THE #1 DEFENSIVE force ever; but what does this then say about Wilt?
P.S. Having written all of this out; I feel like I should just go ahead and post it to the board. So, assuming I have your "permission"; I think I'll go ahead and do that.
Again, thanx for your compliments and for asking me these questions. I feel honored. Hopefully, I've provided some useful info to you.
Yours Sincerely,
Pablo