Reply With Quote
wow thats a funny thread.
I never saw any pics of Wilt with his head anywhere near above the rim. I think he meant just get a foot above the rim, not his head. Which is alot more believeable.
And even if Wilt could jump that high, it only proves that he was one of the very very few with that kind of athleticism in his time. In today's nba there are alot of guys with that kind of athleticism.
wow thats a funny thread.
I trust the Media over the Coaches intuition.
Also Stephen A Smith >> Pat Riley in basketball knowledge.
Sincerely,
Bobby Joe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAaaW...elated&search=
Some Wilt footage ...
2:00 - Wilt leads the break and throws a behind-the-back pass in the open court on the run
2:45 - Wilt blocks a shot and his head even with the rim
2:52 - Wilt gets the loose ball, dribbles to lead the break, passes it out, and runs the court to finish the fast break with a dunk
5:40 - Again, Wilt blocks a shot where he head is just below the rim
To say a guy like Wilt didn't have the requisite skillset to play in today's game is again just ridiculous. Watch all those turn-around jumpers he hits off the glass from 10-12 feet out. No one in today's game is defending that shot when he's making them. And, those two instances where he starts the break with his own dribble. A 7-footer dribbling and leading the break. You can tell he had superior athleticism than everyone else back then. But, you also look at the clips, and many of those clips aren't against little, unathletic 6-foot-7 guys. No, he's battling with real big men. Maybe not all 7-footers, but easily 6-foot-9 to 6-foot-11 guys. It's ridiculous to say that he didn't have the requisite skill set. , he led the league in assists one season. The ONLY center in the history of the game to lead the league in assists. His athleticism is without question. And, while there certainly are more athletic players in the league now, Wilt would still be a freak at 7-foot-1, 275 pounds, can high jump 6-foot-6 inches, run the 110 yard dash in under 11 seconds, run the 440 in under 50 seconds, and shot put 56 feet. The guy was a straight freak athletically. He would still be among the top 5% elite athletes in the NBA. He'd be in the class of LeBron and KG and Dwight Howard and a pre-op Amare Stoudemire. He was of that ilk, ESPECIALLY if you consider that if you put him in today's game, he would also have had modern technology in weight training, diet, nutrition, and agility and quickness enhancement. He would have been a freak just like he was in the 60s.
This is getting just silly.
Wilt would have been a megastar in today's NBA just like back then. He'd be like a Shaq or Hakeem. He'd be the athletic freak that David Robinson was. He would not be a role player. He would not just be a borderline all star. Wilt Chamberlain would still be one of the greatest players in NBA history if he played in today's NBA.
Lmao his moves all look slow and uncoordinated, and im not sure if I could slide a sheet of paper under his feet on some of those dunks he didn't have to even jump or look like he was trying to elevate over the top of those guys. That was a nice behind the back pass, though.
You can't tell me this guy > Duncan, i'm never buying it.
Wow, Duncan was able to put up the same #'s on JR Reid/Robert Horry/100 yr old Horace Grant as Shaq was on David Robinson, a top 50 all time player.
I guess that proves everything.
I vividly remember in the 2002 series Duncan struggling badly in the 4th quarters of every playoff game when the Lakers switched Shaq to guard TD.
Duncan has absolutely never dominated or outplayed Shaq head to head. As mentioned before, Shaq has publically admitted to getting outplayed by Hakeem in the 95 Finals. Anyone who actually saw that series knows that is simply the way it went, Hakeem making the key plays in that series where a young Shaq wasn't seasoned enough to make them.
You telling me SHaq didn't SEVERELY outplay Duncan in the 2001 playoffs? Duncan was awful that series against LA, neutralized by Robert Horry. I believe one game he was held to single digit points. He had 1 good game that series, and 3 awful ones.
AGain in the 04 playoffs, Duncan was really frustrated by Karl Malone's defense. If you think Duncan dominated the Lakers in the 2001, 2002, and 2004 series or outplayed Shaq, you are even crazier than your largely incoherent posts of drivel suggest. Yes, in 99 he had a great series against the Lakers awesome PF combination of JR Reid and Robert Horry.
Why is Hakeem guarding Shaq relevant? Because when Houston played Orlando or LA they knew Hakeem was their best option on O'Neal.
Duncan never had to face this responsbility; if he did he wouldnt have been as successfull offensively, period. He's just lucky he's been on teams where this option was actually available.
And you can cry about it all you want and try to spin, but Duncan is just not considered on the level of Hakeem defensively in anyone's mind but yours. Just read these thread and look at the opinions of your own fellow Spurs fans, who don't even say anything that ludicrous and self-evident.
I noticed you cant provide anything resembling a reasonable argument for why the same media who consistently have Duncan at or near the top of MVP voting Do NOT have him in the top of Defensive Player of the Year voting. Maybe because they aren't Spurs fans?!
Do you not understand that beating out PF's and SF's for all-defensive teams is a million times easier than beating out guys like David Robinson, Dikembe Mutombo, and ALonzo Mourning for All-defense honors? Duncan did not make All NBA defensive teams at CENTER.
Also, explain to me how the u know nba coaches would take exception to Duncan being considered a good defender, but not in the class of Hakeem, Russell, DRob, Scottie, MJ, etc. He pretty clearly wasn't.
If your bottom line is that Wilt Chamberlain was never as good as Duncan is, then you're a blubbering idiot for starting this whole discussion that Wilt Chamberlain (as well as Bill Russell) couldn't dominate in today's NBA.
So, now that you're back up against a wall, you throw out, well, he's not better than Duncan. Well, who the is better than Duncan.
You ing went from "Wilt couldn't dominate in today's game" to "well he's not better than Duncan."
Newsflash, there aren't many big men in the history of the game that are better than Duncan, maybe none. But, that doesn't mean they can't play in today's game.
That comment clinched it for me. I'm done.
You essentially proved you're just a complete dumbass.
How do you go from questioning Wilt's strength and skill set to play in today's NBA and then resort to the notion that he's not better than Duncan? Not being better than Duncan in no way means he couldn't be a superstar in today's game.
LOL ... so stupid ...
What are you not understanding? Wilt and Russell dominated the league against smaller, less athletic players. They dominated because of these huge advantages, they were way ahead of their time in those areas. But don't get that confused with skill. In a league where everybody is just as big, strong, as they are, if not more, they wouldn't succeed with the skills they had. Wilt would never get that slow, uncoordinated looking 12 foot turnaround over Hakeem. It would get swatted into the 7th row. Russell would never get his own rebound 2-3 times in a row over Shaq. They might, still be good, no way to tell for sure. But i can assure you Wilt would never put up 100, grab 50 rebounds, etc. Guys like Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, Robinson, even Ewing would get the better of them. Maybe even guys like Amare and KG, there's really no sure fire way to know. All I can do is look at the old film and i'm just not impressed.
You're going in all different directions on this thread so let me address your last post. Your takes on Wilt and Russell competing in this era are convoluted and totally lacking merit. Even the casual observer would concede that no one is likely to put up 100 and 50, although DRob once came close against the Clippers with 71 points to win the scoring le back in 93-94.
Wilt and Russell, especially Wilt were freaks of nature. Given today's advances in sports medicine and training they would be even more athletic and skilled then they were when they played. I think that assumption is a given. To think that they couldn't compete with Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, Robinson and Ewing is asinine. Would they be as dominant today as they were in their day, probably not. To think that they wouldn't have as many all star and MVP les as Shaq and company is just plain wrong.
We know you're not impressed with Wilt and Russell, and that's ok, everyone is en led to an opinion. But are you just going with gut instinct or do you have some type of empirical data to support your indefensible position?
I'm not going to say that they would be better then Shaq and company, but let me be clear on this imho, they would be as good as them. If you tried to share your assertion with anyone else besides your friends at ST, they'd laugh in your face. Let it die.
and Shaq said recently that just Russell and Wilt were better than he. where were Hakeem?
Instead of comparing players by statistics using raw numbers, we should look at PER's. They take into account per minute production and also takes into account team pace and other factors so guys like Shawn Marion who average 20-10 for a run and gun team like the Suns dont have their production over inflated.
All of Duncan's San Antonio teams have played at a slow pace, especially the 90's and early 00's teams. This means he will have less chance for points and shots on offense and rebounds blocks steals etc on defense. This is why PER is the best stat to use when comparing players.
Hakeem (Age 22) PER - 21.1
Duncan (Age 21) PER - 22.6
Hakeem (Age 23) PER - 24.2
Duncan (Age 22) PER - 23.2
Hakeem (Age 24) PER - 23.8
Duncan (Age 23) PER - 24.8
Hakeem (Age 25) PER - 23.4
Duncan (Age 24) PER - 23.8
Hakeem (Age 26) PER - 25.2
Duncan (Age 25) PER - 27.0
Hakeem (Age 27) PER - 25.2
Duncan (Age 26) PER - 27.0
Hakeem (Age 28) PER - 24.1
Duncan (Age 27) PER - 26.9
Hakeem (Age 29) PER - 24.3
Duncan (Age 28) PER - 27.1
Hakeem (Age 30) PER - 25.2
Duncan (Age 29) PER - 27.0
Hakeem (Age 31) PER - 23.7
Duncan (Age 30) PER - 27.0
OK i think i stuffed some up in terms of age but you get my point.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...cati01&y2=2002
Obviously PER isnt the be-all-end-all, but your statictical output will be affected by how many possessions your team has. Obviously Hakeem's Rockets played at a much faster pace than Duncan's Spurs thus there were more shots put up (more chances at shot/free throw attempts aswell as rebounds blocks steals etc) because Hakeem's numbers were a little better than Duncan's, yet when adjusted for team pace, Duncan actually had better numbers than Hakeem. And well, theres the minor part about having double the amount of les as Hakeem.
A rim is 10' above ground. If you are 5'11" and has a 35" jump, that would add up to 106", which is less than 120" (10 feet). You can have your arm over the rim, and you can get higher with a running jump, but I fail to see how you can "get a foot above the rim".
It's simple mathematics, sure beats your testimonial evidence.
And yet you said:
And yet I fail to understand how your arm could have your whole body a foot above rim.
And how Wilt could have his whole upper body above the rim.
That is nuts. Do you know nothing of basketball? Do you know how hard it is to win as many championships as Russell did? Regardless of era. Wilt had an insane amount of skill and athleticism for a man his size. I agree the compe ion might have been a little weaker, but that is trivial. The man scored 100 points. He averaged 50 points per game in a season. Both Russell and Wilt are head and shoulders above Hakeem and Duncan(for now). There is no debating that.What do cell phones and cars have to do with basketball? We are talking BASKETBALL here, try to stay on topic. Bottom line is Bill and Wilt were both the greatest two players in their respective times, but wouldn't make it in today's league. Neither IMO deserve to be in the same class as Duncan or Olajuwon.
And for whatever idiots were saying Horry dominated Duncan in the 2001 playoffs, here are Duncan's statlines.
PTS/BLK/AST/RBD
28 5 6 14
40 4 3 15
9 4 7 13
15 4 1 7
Yeah, 23 points per game is really shutting him down. I've got to tell you. Completely on lockdown.
Nice post. Really sheds some light on the topic. I think this should be an end-of-discussion post. Not only has Duncan won more, but he also now has better statistical backing, which originally wasn't even a strong point in the pro-Duncan campaign.
I didn't see who said that, but you might concede that it looks like Horry did a pretty good job on Duncan in games 3 and 4. And, game 3 was the game in which Horry played the most in that series, the same game Duncan went 3-for-14 from the field. Perhaps overall, Duncan still played well. But, even for one game, someone might remember that one game and be justified in claiming Horry defended him well.
And for whatever idiots were saying Horry dominated Duncan in the 2001 playoffs, here are Duncan's statlines.
PTS/BLK/AST/RBD
28 5 6 14
40 4 3 15
9 4 7 13
15 4 1 7
Yeah, 23 points per game is really shutting him down. I've got to tell you. Completely on lockdown.
Bobby Joe has been devestated. He's tearing up his Tigerbeat posters of Hakeem Olajuwon.
Well the spurs were nothing those two games that was simple execution
So no surprise one of their players had such low stats.
That is nuts. Do you know nothing of basketball? Do you know how hard it is to win as many championships as Russell did? Regardless of era. Wilt had an insane amount of skill and athleticism for a man his size. I agree the compe ion might have been a little weaker, but that is trivial. The man scored 100 points. He averaged 50 points per game in a season. Both Russell and Wilt are head and shoulders above Hakeem and Duncan(for now). There is no debating that.
And for whatever idiots were saying Horry dominated Duncan in the 2001 playoffs, here are Duncan's statlines.
PTS/BLK/AST/RBD
28 5 6 14
40 4 3 15
9 4 7 13
15 4 1 7
Yeah, 23 points per game is really shutting him down. I've got to tell you. Completely on lockdown.
So averaging 12 ppg in the final 2 closeout games of a series is good with your team's season on the line? My, the standards are low here for Duncan.
You also conveniently exclude the FG% and FT% that series. Duncan shot just terribly in both games in LA.
So basically, he had one great game in Game 2, one good game in Game 1, and 2 brutal games in 3 and 4. Is that a good series? Is that how low the bar is?
So when the Spurs team plays well and wins, Duncan gets assigned all the credit, so much so that in any comparison with all time greats it's Duncan's 4 championships, not the Spurs.Well the spurs were nothing those two games that was simple execution
So no surprise one of their players had such low stats.
But when he gets shut down by Robert Horry, averaging 12 ppg in the final 2 games of his team's season when his team needed him to step up to extend the series, it's not on him, but his team? I see.
News flash: Guys like Shaq, Jordan, Bird, Hakeem, etc don't average 12 ppg on sub 40% shooting in Games 3 of 4 of a series with their teams facing elimination right smack in the middle of their primes, especially when matched up with undersized defenders like Horry.
If Duncan struggled this much with Horry, how do you think he'd fare banging with Ewing, Shaq, and Robinson game after game in the 90's?!
The problem with this is 3 fold:
1) It completely neglects to factor in quality of compe ion, which was clearly far superior in Olajuwon's era. Had Duncan played in that era, he would have faced much tougher and more phsyical defenders, which would adversely impact his scoring output and FG%. PER does not account for one era having tougher compe ion than another. Many believe that while Wilt and Russell would still be great in today's NBA, they wouldn't dominate to the extent they did in their day. Something like this is never considered in PER because you are comparing one era to another, with no adjustments for the different conditions in that era.
Also, a player with superior teammates (as Duncan had relative to Hakeem's casts on balance over his careers) will find the going easier offensively in terms of shooting efficiency (better looks due to better ball movement and less collapsing), assists, etc. You think Malone didn't benefit greatly from playing with a PG like Stockton who got him so many easy looks? PER won't tell you that.
2) You also only consider regular season PER, when Olajuwon had a higher playoff PER
3) PER doesn't account for defense, aside from just the factors of defense which are quantifiable like blocks and steals. Altered shots, intimidation in the lane, and pass deflections to disrupt offensive timing are not considered. Thus, great defensive players like Hakeem dont see a translation from their oncourt defensive impact into a higher PER score. When Amare dumps 38 a game on TD in 2005, that doesnt count against his PER, but it hurts the Spurs.
PER as you point out is not something you use as a be all, end-all. It has a ton of flaws Do you consider Dirk Nowitzki, Yao Ming, and Dwayne Wade superior to Tim Duncan statistically? ALL had higher PER averages than Duncan last year.
I think if you took a poll on here, most Spurs fans would pick Tim over David Robinson. Well, guess what? David has a higher Career PER than Timmy. In fact, David Robinson has a higher PER than Wilt Chamberlain, Hakeem, Tim, and Kareem. According to PER, Larry Bird is only the 18th best player of all time...etc, etc.
PER is not the best stat to use comparing players, because it leads to some ridiculous conclusions as you see above. Guys like Wade and Yao did not have better seasons than Duncan in 2006, regardless of what some formula tells you.
You point out that Shawn Marion's stats are inflated because he's on a team that runs more. Well, a great part of that is that Marion is a terrific open court player. Trying to normalize for this aspect by saying "well, he's on a team that runs more" completely ignores the WHY part of the equation. The Suns wouldn't be able to run more if they didnt have guys like Marion who are so adept at running the court, filling lanes, and finishing. Marion's skill set adds value to the Suns, as much as something as flawed as PER tries to minimize it.
Last edited by bobbyjoe; 08-28-2007 at 06:51 PM.
When you have Danny ferry and Terry Porter, Malik Rose as your offensive power, Hakeem would have been shutdown aswell.
But Duncan faced Shaq, Malone, Both Wallaces, and stared them down. In Duncan's rookie season, he pwned Malone.
Bobby Joe, must you putdown Duncan to raise up Hakeem.
The best PF of all time?
After all PF is a Post position.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
