Kareem - 38/11/6/7 vs. Sonics

[Purch]

And people who like to bring up Wilt's failures never seem to bring up Kareem's. But here's a post by a Wilt fan on it

Let's start with injuries shall we? Kareem broke his hand twice in his career. The first time he missed 16 games, and in the second instance, he missed two months. How about Wilt? He PLAYED in the clinching game five of the '72 Finals, with one wrist badly sprained, and the other FRACTURED. How did he do? He scored 24 points, on 10-14 shooting, blocked 10 shots, and grabbed 29 of the TOTAL of 106 rebounds (he nearly outrebounded the ENTIRE Knick team by himself.)

As for Kareem's lowest point, where do we begin? How about the '72 playoff series against an aged Thurmond, who outscored and outshot him, and held him to an EMBARRASSING .405 percentage from the floor. Or the very next series, when, by all accounts, Chamberlain thoroughly outplayed him. In fact, in the clinching game six, Chamberlain TOOK OVER the game in the 4th quarter, and led LA to a 104-100 win.

How about the next season, when, in the first round, Kareem's 60-22 Bucks were beaten by Thurmond's 47-35 Warriors, 4-2. How did Kareem do? He shot .428 from the floor. Meanwhile Oscar was brilliant, scoring 21 ppg, shooting .500, and handing out 7 apg. Of course, Chamberlain pounded Nate in the very next series, leading HIS 60-22 Lakers to a 4-1 romp over the same Warrior team that shocked Kareem's Bucks.

How about the NEXT season? Kareem took his 59-23 Bucks into a game seven against the 56-26 Celtics, and watched little 6-9 Dave Cowens outscore him, outshoot him, and outrebounded him, which led to yet another defeat for Kareem.

Maybe the 74-75 season, when Kareem played on the 38-44 Bucks (missing 16 games with that hand injury)? Meanwhile, Rick Barry leads a cast of no-names to a le.

Maybe the 75-76 season, when Kareem was traded to the Lakers. How did his former Bucks team do? They went 38-44...the exact record that they had the year before. Meanwhile Kareem's Lakers went 40-42, and missed the playoffs.

How about the 76-77 season, then? Kareem took his 53-29 Lakers up against the 49-33 Blazers...and they are promptly SWEPT.

The 77-78 season? Kareem, playing with the likes of Nixon, Wilkes, Hudson, and Dantley, takes that loaded roster to a record of 45-37, and a first round playoff loss against the Sonics. BTW, the 44-38 Bullets win the le.

No way anything could have gone wrong in the 78-79 season, right? Wrong. He takes his 47-35 Lakers, with the same LOADED roster from the year before, and they are blown out 4-1 by a Sonics team with ONE borderline HOFer (Dennis Johnson), in the second round.

Well, he played brilliantly in the 79-80 season, right? Yes he did. However, where was he when the Lakers, led by Magic, won the clinching game six in the Finals? He was at home on his couch...with an ANKLE injury. Wilt gets criticized by none other than Fatal9 for missing a few minutes of a game with a knee injury...but Kareem can't play a minute of the most important game of the season with an ankle injury?

Continuing. Kareem could only shoot .462 in the 80-81 first round of the playoffs, and his Lakers are eliminated by the 40-42 Rockets in the first round of the playoffs.

How about the rematch with Moses in the 82-83 Finals? Malone batters Kareem, and LA is SWEPT.

Then, in the pivotal game five of the 83-84 Finals, Kareem manages to come up with a 7-25 game, and a loss. The Lakers would go on to lose a series they should have won, 4-3.

In the 87-88 post-season, Kareem is AWFUL...and as bad as his play was in the entire post-season, he was even WORSE in the Finals. In the game seven, he puts up a 2-7 game, three rebounds, four points, and five PFs. His Lakers win that game and series DESPITE his play.

And, for some reason, Kareem comes back one more season, and his career ends with yet another SWEEP...in the Finals, in a series in which he does nothing.

[lefty]

1. Kareem and Hakeem






The rest is

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Let's start with injuries shall we? Kareem broke his hand twice in his career. The first time he missed 16 games, and in the second instance, he missed two months. How about Wilt? He PLAYED in the clinching game five of the '72 Finals, with one wrist badly sprained, and the other FRACTURED. How did he do? He scored 24 points, on 10-14 shooting, blocked 10 shots, and grabbed 29 of the TOTAL of 106 rebounds (he nearly outrebounded the ENTIRE Knick team by himself.)

Given that Wilt is 7'2" and one of the strongest NBA players ever, and the '72 Knicks were without starting center Willis Reed for the playoffs so they consequently had Dave DeBusschere (6'6"), Phil Jackson (6'8"), and Jerry Lucas (6'8"), none of which had remotely enough athleticism to expose Wilt's age. I'd say putting up those numbers isn't a big deal when you have a 6 inch height advantage and even at age 35 with a bad knee are still more athletic than they guys guarding you.

As for Kareem's lowest point, where do we begin? How about the '72 playoff series against an aged Thurmond, who outscored and outshot him, and held him to an EMBARRASSING .405 percentage from the floor. Or the very next series, when, by all accounts, Chamberlain thoroughly outplayed him. In fact, in the clinching game six, Chamberlain TOOK OVER the game in the 4th quarter, and led LA to a 104-100 win.

Is this the same Nate Thurmond who averaged 21 points and 16 rebounds in '72? I find this guy's definition of "aged" odd when Thurmond had only 2 other seasons with higher PPG totals, and in both of those seasons he had a lower FG%. Also, maybe his numbers weren't great in the series, but Kareem's team won in 5 games. Regarding the Lakers series, I don't understand how it's a low point to be the leader of a 63 win team that loses to a 69 win team that had the longest winning streak ever and is a team considered one of the best teams ever. Maybe Wilt took over at the end, but the 1972 Lakers were not his team. Goodrich and West were the two best players on that team, while Kareem was by far the #1 on his team. It's easy for Wilt to outplay Kareem when he's drawing attention while Wilt gets to receive passes from West and isn't even the defenses main concern.

How about the next season, when, in the first round, Kareem's 60-22 Bucks were beaten by Thurmond's 47-35 Warriors, 4-2. How did Kareem do? He shot .428 from the floor. Meanwhile Oscar was brilliant, scoring 21 ppg, shooting .500, and handing out 7 apg. Of course, Chamberlain pounded Nate in the very next series, leading HIS 60-22 Lakers to a 4-1 romp over the same Warrior team that shocked Kareem's Bucks.

"HIS 60-22 Lakers"? He was the 4th leading scorer on that team and averaged 10 points a game in the playoffs. He was a role player who's job was to rebound and protect the rim. They were in the finals because of Goodrich and West. The funny thing is, they actually were Kareem's bucks, but there were two guys on the '73 Warriors who averaged more points than Thurmond, and Thurmond's playoff numbers were terrible. It's not like he outplayed Kareem in '73, Kareem just didn't have the absolutely dominating performance his team needed for him to win.
Also, after Wiltfan raved about Wilt's finals performance in 1972 when Willis Reid was injured, it's funny how while the discussing the 1973 playoffs, he doesn't mention how Wilt did in the finals when Reid was in his 30s and past his prime, or how the Suns managed to take a 3-2 lead on the Lakers when their starting center was 6'7" Paul Silas.

Maybe the 75-76 season, when Kareem was traded to the Lakers. How did his former Bucks team do? They went 38-44...the exact record that they had the year before. Meanwhile Kareem's Lakers went 40-42, and missed the playoffs.

Right, I'm sure Wiltfan accidentally forgot to mention the fact that while they lost Kareem they also picked up a wing who made the AS game in '76 as well as a 7 footer who averaged 15 points and 11 rebounds. Instead he made it sound like the exact same Bucks team that won 38 games with Kareem won 38 without him. Also, it's probably worth noting the Lakers might have only won 40 games with Kareem but the season prior they only won 30 games.
Why not mention the '65 Warriors team that was 11-34 when they traded Wilt (on pace for a 20 win season), then won 34 games the next season. Yeah, it might be a little dishonest to leave out the fact they added Brent Barry in the 65 off season, but honesty is hard when your grasping at straws.

How about the 76-77 season, then? Kareem took his 53-29 Lakers up against the 49-33 Blazers...and they are promptly SWEPT.

LA won 53 games with Kareem missing no games. The Blazers won 49 games with Walton missing 17 games. It's safe to say that when Walton was healthy (which he was for the '77 playoffs), the Blazers were easily a better team. Kareem averaged 34 points, 17 boards and 4 assists in the 1977 playoffs, while LA's 2nd best player, a past his prime guy who was never more than a borderline all star, disappeared and barely shot 40%. I don't understand how that's a knock on Kareem.

The 77-78 season? Kareem, playing with the likes of Nixon, Wilkes, Hudson, and Dantley, takes that loaded roster to a record of 45-37, and a first round playoff loss against the Sonics. BTW, the 44-38 Bullets win the le.

"loaded roster"? This was Norm Nixon as a rookie, Jamal Wilkes who missed 31 games and had by far his worst statistical season during his prime, Lou Hudson in his 12th season way past his prime, and Dantley who they picked up midseason in a trade as a 2nd year player. Given that Kareem was also banged up that season, 45 wins really isn't ridiculously underperforming given there was a major trade and everyone on the team was either banged up, past their prime or yet to enter their prime. A 45 win team that never had any time to gel and had been in constant upheaval all year losing to a 47 win team that was a game away from winning the finals really isn't a knock on Kareem.

No way anything could have gone wrong in the 78-79 season, right? Wrong. He takes his 47-35 Lakers, with the same LOADED roster from the year before, and they are blown out 4-1 by a Sonics team with ONE borderline HOFer (Dennis Johnson), in the second round.

Except at this point Lou Hudson was more or less done, Dantley had his worst statistical season prior to age 32 and had missed time with injury, while both Nixon and Wilkes had noticeable FG% dropoffs in the playoffs. It's also funny that all he has to say about the '79 Sonics is that they had 1 borderline HoFer. He doesn't mention the fact they won 52 games, were by far the best defensive team in the NBA, won a playoff series against two other teams with better records than LA, and oh idk won an NBA championship.

Well, he played brilliantly in the 79-80 season, right? Yes he did. However, where was he when the Lakers, led by Magic, won the clinching game six in the Finals? He was at home on his couch...with an ANKLE injury. Wilt gets criticized by none other than Fatal9 for missing a few minutes of a game with a knee injury...but Kareem can't play a minute of the most important game of the season with an ankle injury?

the 1980 Lakers were led by Magic but the 1972-1973 Lakers were led by Wilt? That's faulty logic at best. Kareem can say he was the leading scorer of the 1980 Lakers in the regular season and playoffs, that's more than Wilt can say about either championship team he was on. Yes, Kareem missed that 1 finals game with an ankle injury we don't know the severity of, given that he averaged over 30 PPG during the playoffs it's still a huge reach to call Kareem out for that. They'd ultimately become Magic's Lakers, but the 1980 Lakers were Kareem's team. Magic was still a 20 year rookie who only left college early so he could join Kareem's team.

Continuing. Kareem could only shoot .462 in the 80-81 first round of the playoffs, and his Lakers are eliminated by the 40-42 Rockets in the first round of the playoffs.

Once again Wiltfan is revising history acting as if the '81 Rockets were a scrub team. The '81 Rockets made the finals and lost to Boston in 6 games. Kareem averaged 26 points 16 rebounds and 4 assists in the '81 playoffs, while Malone averaged 26 points, 14 boards and 2 assists, with an almost equal FG%, so it's not like Kareem got shat on by Malone and that's why they lost. You'd have to be a re ed dip to blame them losing to Houston on Kareem when Magic shot 38% and Jamal Wilkes has another below par playoff year.

How about the rematch with Moses in the 82-83 Finals? Malone batters Kareem, and LA is SWEPT.

OK so in 1980 and 1982 when Philly doesn't have Malone, Kareem's team wins and he plays great. In 1983 when Philly has Malone, Kareem's team loses. This sounds oddly similar to how the Lakers w/ Wilt couldn't get past the Knicks in 1970 and 1973 when Reed was playing, but in 1972 when Reed was injured Wilt has no problem dominating their platoon of 6'8" centers. I guess the difference is that in 1983, Kareem still was a dominant offensive force in the playoffs who a series prior to Malone dominated a 7'2" center in Artis Gilmore. It's also funny a past his prime Wilt got beat by a past his prime Reed in 1973, while a 35 year old Kareem was "battered" by a 27 year old Moses Malone who was clearly the best player in 1983, won NBA MVP and finals MVP in 1983. There wasn't a player in 1983 who wasn't "battered" by Moses Malone.

Then, in the pivotal game five of the 83-84 Finals, Kareem manages to come up with a 7-25 game, and a loss. The Lakers would go on to lose a series they should have won, 4-3.

"Should have won?" For a guy who loves to harp on win loss records as much as possible, this guy says a 54 win team should have beat a 62 win team? Jamal Wilks was a complete non-factor in the playoffs while James Worthy and Byron Scott were still very inexperienced. At age 36 Kareem was the leading scorer on a finals team and lost to maybe the best front court of all time. At age 36 Wilt was a role player on a team that got destroyed in the finals by a team who's center was also past his prime and had been destroyed by injuries.

The next season, at age 37 (by that age Wilt was retired), Kareem won finals MVP on the first Lakers team to ever beat Boston in the finals.

In the 87-88 post-season, Kareem is AWFUL...and as bad as his play was in the entire post-season, he was even WORSE in the Finals. In the game seven, he puts up a 2-7 game, three rebounds, four points, and five PFs. His Lakers win that game and series DESPITE his play.

And, for some reason, Kareem comes back one more season, and his career ends with yet another SWEEP...in the Finals, in a series in which he does nothing.

OK I guess Wiltfan wins this one, Kareem in his 40's doesn't perform in the post season. Deer god this one's gotta hurt his legacy, what kind of a 40 year old isn't supposed to dominate the post season.