Author Topic: Memory Jogger Thread  (Read 7380 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #15 on: July 27, 2010, 04:13:11 PM »

Online CelticsWhat35

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2954
  • Tommy Points: 356
I lost respect for Wilt Chamberlain when he started talking crap in the 90's about how he would've averaged even more than the 50 ppg he scored that one year for Philly if he was playing in the current league in his prime.  That's moronic.  He would've been a more athletic Shaquille O'Neal with a worse offensive game.

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #16 on: July 27, 2010, 04:18:13 PM »

Offline RebusRankin

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9143
  • Tommy Points: 923
I lost respect for Wilt Chamberlain when he started talking crap in the 90's about how he would've averaged even more than the 50 ppg he scored that one year for Philly if he was playing in the current league in his prime.  That's moronic.  He would've been a more athletic Shaquille O'Neal with a worse offensive game.

I disagree. When you read about Wilt, they always talk about his offensive game and how he didn't rely on brute strength but finesse. He had a fade away jump shot, a finger roll, a bank shot. Shaq never showed any of those.

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #17 on: July 27, 2010, 04:29:16 PM »

Online CelticsWhat35

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2954
  • Tommy Points: 356
I lost respect for Wilt Chamberlain when he started talking crap in the 90's about how he would've averaged even more than the 50 ppg he scored that one year for Philly if he was playing in the current league in his prime.  That's moronic.  He would've been a more athletic Shaquille O'Neal with a worse offensive game.

I disagree. When you read about Wilt, they always talk about his offensive game and how he didn't rely on brute strength but finesse. He had a fade away jump shot, a finger roll, a bank shot. Shaq never showed any of those.

All I know is, the guy was playing against players half his size, and he still only shot a little over 50% for most of his career, and was an even worse FT shooter than Shaq.  He may have been better than Shaq at bank shots, etc, but I doubt he would've been a more dominant scorer than Shaq if he played during that era, and Shaq never averaged 30 ppg.

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #18 on: July 27, 2010, 04:35:24 PM »

Offline RebusRankin

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9143
  • Tommy Points: 923
I lost respect for Wilt Chamberlain when he started talking crap in the 90's about how he would've averaged even more than the 50 ppg he scored that one year for Philly if he was playing in the current league in his prime.  That's moronic.  He would've been a more athletic Shaquille O'Neal with a worse offensive game.

I disagree. When you read about Wilt, they always talk about his offensive game and how he didn't rely on brute strength but finesse. He had a fade away jump shot, a finger roll, a bank shot. Shaq never showed any of those.

All I know is, the guy was playing against players half his size, and he still only shot a little over 50% for most of his career, and was an even worse FT shooter than Shaq.  He may have been better than Shaq at bank shots, etc, but I doubt he would've been a more dominant scorer than Shaq if he played during that era, and Shaq never averaged 30 ppg.

Actually not all Centers were tiny back then. My point is he had a great offense game by all accounts and didn't rely on his strength like Shaq. You put the two together and he likely could have put up 30+ in the 1990s.

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #19 on: July 27, 2010, 04:39:34 PM »

Offline oldmanspeaks

  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 397
  • Tommy Points: 70
Yes Wilt might still have scored 50ppg because the rules are different now.(that is the problem, you are never sure because he had such incredible athletic talent). His turnaround fall away bank shot was the most unstoppable shot in basketball. When he started in the league he passed for crap. At the end he was an extremely good passer. For him to hit 50ppg, he would need to be able to pass like he did later in life to prevent "hack a Wilt".
I would like to see if the modern players really understand what "and one" means. I once saw a guard grab Wilts arm with both hands and Wilt still dunked the ball with the guy hanging on with both hands. I saw it and still can't believe he did that. The 3pt shot would have helped Wilt tremendously because they wouldn't have doubled teamed him constantly. (people don't remember that Attles was 8 for 8 the night that Wilt scored 100. He didn't take more shots because they wanted Wilt to get 100). If you have a Ray Allen in the corner and Pierce in the other corner, Wilt wouldn't have been double teams all the time. By the way, the Celtics were one of the few teams that didn't double Wilt throughout the game. Wilt would get 35 and 20 but Russell's Celtics would win the game.

In his best day Shaq was never as athletic as Wilt although Shaq might have been as strong in his prime. What was amazing about Wilt and Bill Russell was their tremendous athletic ability even with their size. Wilt was a great shot blocker with a great leap. Russell was out of this world as he actually would stop the ball when he blocked it and then catch it as it went down.
As to his shooting percentages, in much of his early career he was on crap teams and was the first, second and third scoring options. He took a lot of shots that were less than optimum because it was his job.
In reality, it would be best if he only scored 35 but had 10 assists in the modern game.

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #20 on: July 27, 2010, 04:41:21 PM »

Offline freshinthehouse

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1626
  • Tommy Points: 158
I remember reading somewhere that Wilt had talks with the Nets in the early 80s about a comeback.  I think he would've been in his late 40s.

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #21 on: July 27, 2010, 04:42:03 PM »

Online CelticsWhat35

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2954
  • Tommy Points: 356
I lost respect for Wilt Chamberlain when he started talking crap in the 90's about how he would've averaged even more than the 50 ppg he scored that one year for Philly if he was playing in the current league in his prime.  That's moronic.  He would've been a more athletic Shaquille O'Neal with a worse offensive game.

I disagree. When you read about Wilt, they always talk about his offensive game and how he didn't rely on brute strength but finesse. He had a fade away jump shot, a finger roll, a bank shot. Shaq never showed any of those.

All I know is, the guy was playing against players half his size, and he still only shot a little over 50% for most of his career, and was an even worse FT shooter than Shaq.  He may have been better than Shaq at bank shots, etc, but I doubt he would've been a more dominant scorer than Shaq if he played during that era, and Shaq never averaged 30 ppg.

Actually not all Centers were tiny back then. My point is he had a great offense game by all accounts and didn't rely on his strength like Shaq. You put the two together and he likely could have put up 30+ in the 1990s.

Okay, I'll give you that.  But how about 60+?  70+?  I wish I could find the interview.  I'm sure he said it on more than one occassion, but the one that I remembered was when he did an interview with Bill Russell, and Russell just kept his mouth shut when Chamberlain said he would've averaged 70 ppg.  I believe it was during the NBA's 50th anniversary.

That was the difference between Wilt and Russell.  Wilt cared about stats, while Russell cared about winning.

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #22 on: July 27, 2010, 04:44:46 PM »

Offline RebusRankin

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9143
  • Tommy Points: 923
I agree the 60-70 is nuts. I could see Wilt being a 35ppg, 18rpg kind of guy though.

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #23 on: July 27, 2010, 04:56:24 PM »

Offline Greenbean

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3739
  • Tommy Points: 418
I lost respect for Wilt Chamberlain when he started talking crap in the 90's about how he would've averaged even more than the 50 ppg he scored that one year for Philly if he was playing in the current league in his prime.  That's moronic.  He would've been a more athletic Shaquille O'Neal with a worse offensive game.

A more athletic Shaq?

Do you realize how athletic Shaq was for a man his size? Let me remind you..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfFpeTjwPr0

Also, Shaq didnt have an offensive game until his 5th or 6th season and still dominated.

So Wilt is a more athletic Shaq which I agree. Scary as hell.

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #24 on: July 27, 2010, 04:57:36 PM »

Online CelticsWhat35

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2954
  • Tommy Points: 356
I agree the 60-70 is nuts. I could see Wilt being a 35ppg, 18rpg kind of guy though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eIE5cznPS8

fast forward to 6 minutes in.

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #25 on: July 27, 2010, 04:59:20 PM »

Online CelticsWhat35

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2954
  • Tommy Points: 356
I do realize how athletic Shaq was.  But I'm also going to give credit where I think it's due, and by most reports, Wilt was one of the most athletic players ever in the league.

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #26 on: July 27, 2010, 05:12:25 PM »

Offline Greenbean

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3739
  • Tommy Points: 418
I do realize how athletic Shaq was.  But I'm also going to give credit where I think it's due, and by most reports, Wilt was one of the most athletic players ever in the league.

Exactly so if there was ever a guy who was as big as Shaq but somehow more athletic, I dont see why he couldnt score as many points as he wanted in any era of basketball...and he did.

Of course no team could ever win with one guy scoring 70 ppg but he could definitely put those numbers up IMO if he was allowed.

Edit: Also, I am responding to your post saying you lost all respect for Wilt along time ago...now you are giving respect? I am lost here???
« Last Edit: July 27, 2010, 05:18:17 PM by Greenbean »

Re: Memory Jogger Thread
« Reply #27 on: July 27, 2010, 06:23:24 PM »

Online CelticsWhat35

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2954
  • Tommy Points: 356
I do realize how athletic Shaq was.  But I'm also going to give credit where I think it's due, and by most reports, Wilt was one of the most athletic players ever in the league.

Exactly so if there was ever a guy who was as big as Shaq but somehow more athletic, I dont see why he couldnt score as many points as he wanted in any era of basketball...and he did.

Of course no team could ever win with one guy scoring 70 ppg but he could definitely put those numbers up IMO if he was allowed.

Edit: Also, I am responding to your post saying you lost all respect for Wilt along time ago...now you are giving respect? I am lost here???

I said I lost respect for the guy, not "all respect".  I can still appreciate what he's done, but the guy was completely delusional to think that he would average 50-70 ppg in the 90's era.  There were TEAMS that averaged under 90 ppg those years.  Wilt talked about how the game was so much more geared for the offensive player after he left.  Really??  Teams were throwing up shots left and right back then and didn't play much defense.  The game slowed down so much in the 90's and there was a huge emphasis on defense.  Wilt took almost 40 shots and 20 free throw attempts per game when he averaged 50 ppg.  Would you see that flying today??  Absolutely not.