Greatest basketball player of all time?

[LikeLinus]

Michael Jordan. <---yes that's a period

Wilt was great, BUT - He was a man against boys.

MJ could play with anyone in the history of the sport.

Wilt only really had Russell (who was 6-9). He didn't have the talent to play against like The Dream, Shaq, Ewing, Yao, KG, Mutumbo (sp?) and others in their prime. These guys filled the lane and I don't think Russell would have been as effective in todays game.

Basketball when Wilt played was still a primative game that was played mostly below the rim. His blocks were mostly against smaller players who were jump shooters. People now adays drive the ball, dunk and play much more physical. Not to mention the fact that they are taller and FAR stronger than they have ever been.

Jordan played todays game and simply dominated. It's fast pace, more athletic and all around harder.

Not to knock wilt, he's top 5 of all time, but he's simply not the greatest in my mind. He was just ahead of his time and the game.

Take Jordan's game to the 50's - would he dominate? By far YES

Take Wilt's game to the 90's - would he have 6 championships and dominate? Much hard to say yes to.

 

[DougK62]

Originally posted by: DingDingDao

Originally posted by: DougK62
Basketball is a team sport, so I have to vote for someone who made the biggest impact on his team and was a great team player. I say Bill Russell.

Michael Jordan was a ball-hogging thug. He was the anti-team player.

Assists per game (career):
Bill Russell - 4.3
Michael Jordan - 5.3

You were saying?

That, and I don't think an anti-team player is going to make first team all-defense nine times (Russell made first team all-defense once).

Don't get me wrong, I think Bill Russell is easily top 5, and arguably the greatest ever to play, but the opinion you have of Michael Jordan is clearly misguided.

Uh, you DO realize that they played different positions, right? A guard is supposed to have more assists. And 5.3 is downright SAD for such a prominent player at his position.

Jordan was a ball hog and thought that he was God's gift to sports (and still does). Watch old Jordan games and then watch old Russell games. Russell's teammates actually liked him.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: DougK62

Originally posted by: DingDingDao

Originally posted by: DougK62
Basketball is a team sport, so I have to vote for someone who made the biggest impact on his team and was a great team player. I say Bill Russell.

Michael Jordan was a ball-hogging thug. He was the anti-team player.

Assists per game (career):
Bill Russell - 4.3
Michael Jordan - 5.3

You were saying?

That, and I don't think an anti-team player is going to make first team all-defense nine times (Russell made first team all-defense once).

Don't get me wrong, I think Bill Russell is easily top 5, and arguably the greatest ever to play, but the opinion you have of Michael Jordan is clearly misguided.

Uh, you DO realize that they played different positions, right? A guard is supposed to have more assists. And 5.3 is downright SAD for such a prominent player at his position.

Jordan was a ball hog and thought that he was God's gift to sports (and still does). Watch old Jordan games and then watch old Russell games. Russell's teammates actually liked him.

Yup, it's pretty tough to compare different positions from different era's. The main questions, like I said above is were both of them leaders who elevated their teammates's play? Did they both have better passing skills/lane vision than their peers of their position? Could they both score at will? You can say yes to all 3 of them for both, so I don't think one of them is better than the other.

Sure one of them may have been better in another category of greatness (MJ - scoring, BR - passing) but they both had great ability in comparison to the peers of their era. I don't think you can directly compare them and say one did more for their team, one had better passing/scoring ability compared to their peers, both were leaders and champions of dynasties and both could be considered for the greatest of all time title IMO.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Comparing players across eras is pretty dumb. The best play I have ever seen has to be Jordan. I never saw the others play so I have no idea. Stats can lie so I have to trust other people who actually saw the other people play to make a decision.

So, for the 80s to present I have to say Jordan.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax
I don't doubt that Chamberlain's numbers were better than Russell's in head to head meetings.

But that means nothing if Chamberlian lost. If Russell scored no points, got no assists, got no rebounds, no blocks and no steals in any head to head matchup against Chamberlain, but won everyone of them, then I still say Russell is better at the game.

This is because the game has 4 other players on the court and the ultimate goal is to win.

It's like in poker where there are 5 cards on the board. You can have the nuts through the turn, but if you have the second best hand on the river, then you still lose.

But Chamberlain WON his matchups against Russell. Chamberlain outplayed Russell 1 on 1. Chamberlain was only able to win 2 championships against Russell's team, but that was because Chamberlain's teammates weren't producing good enough numbers. If Chamberlain was on the Celtics instead of Russell, they would have easily won all 13 championships.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: JSFLY
He played in an Era where players were not as skilled as they are now.

Basketball has changed so much over the years, it wouldn't be fair to compare the players of yesturday with the players of today.

You're right, they were skilled better! Chamberlain played in an era without fancy motels, airplanes, shoes, workout equipment and during a time when the game was much more fast-paced. Chamberlain (AS A FREAKING CENTER!) could jump half a foot higher than Jordan and could run faster. Yes, they were better players back then.

 

[ksaajasto]

magic, or bird, definately....

 

[Shlong]

I would say MJ. How would have Wilt & Russell competed night in & night out against the likes of Ewing, Olajuwon, Shaq (7'2" 300 early in his career, 350+ later), David Robinson, Mourning in Jordan's era. Wilt was 7'1" 250, the C's of that era were more Russell size at 6'9" and 215. All the C's of Jordan's era were 7'0" or taller and over 230 (usually 240 - 250). I think both Wilt & Russell would've been good players but not put nearly the same numbers they did. And back when Russell was winning those championships there were under 10 teams (later about 12 teams at the end of the run) & on some of those Celtic teams they had 7 Hall of Famers playing.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: iamme

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: iamme
Michael Jordan, plain and simple.

Wilt had tremendous stats that might overshadow MJ's, but what MJ did for the game off the court was unparalleled. MJ couldn't walk down the streets anywhere in the world without being mobbed. MJ's basketball brand generates millions every year, even though he doesn't even play anymore. it may not be your critieria, but when i think of greatest basketball player of all time, i think of the man who lifted the game to ridiculously new heights. that was Michael Jordan.

besides, Wilt was a freak of nature athlete in his time period. there were stories of him competing in so many non-basketball sports and competitions and excelling. i think that today's average NBA player has more athleticism than yesteryear's. i think a guy like Kevin Garnett transported back into Wilt's day would have shattered records as well.

wilt could stand at the free throw line and take a standing jump and dunk the ball, not a running start a standing jump.

he was indeed a freak of nature but that does not take away from his status as greatest player of any generation.

also, all the marketing hype stuff you guys attribute to MJ, without stern, magic and bird, none of that would have happened, MJ by himself would never have become a household name like that, it is ridiculous to attribute ALL of that to just MJ.

do you have a link to that? not that i don't believe you, but i haven't heard that one until now.

i don't remember where i read it, but i remember reading that the NBA change the free throw rules because wilt was so bad from the free throw line and he could take a standing jump from the line and dunk it, so he would. they subsequently outlawed that.


wilt was clearly the babe ruth of basketball.

 

[wheresmybacon]

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2
How is this even debatable? Michael Jordan without question or competition.

edit: Where's the poll?

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: Shlong
I would say MJ. How would have Wilt & Russell competed night in & night out against the likes of Ewing, Olajuwon, Shaq (7'2" 300 early in his career, 350+ later), David Robinson, Mourning in Jordan's era. Wilt was 7'1" 250, the C's of that era were more Russell size at 6'9" and 215. All the C's of Jordan's era were 7'0" or taller and over 230 (usually 240 - 250). I think both Wilt & Russell would've been good players but not put nearly the same numbers they did. And back when Russell was winning those championships there were under 10 teams (later about 12 teams at the end of the run) & on some of those Celtic teams they had 7 Hall of Famers playing.

You're right, they wouldn't have put up the same numbers...they would have put up more! Wilt is much stronger than ANY of those centers you said and considering that Jordan played during a period of time when the rules all catered to scoring offense (no zones, 3-point line was moved in, no elbowing, etc), Wilt would have had no problem against the slower players of the 1990's.

Consider this. Shaq in his best years had no problem scoring. Now imagine Wilt Chamberlain. Wilt is much stronger than Shaq. Wilt can jump much higher than shaq. Wilt has much longer arms than Shaq. Wilt is much faster than Shaq. Wilt has better foot-work than Shaq. Wilt is a better shooter than Shaq. Wilt is a better offensive rebounder than Shaq.

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: DougK62

Uh, you DO realize that they played different positions, right? A guard is supposed to have more assists. And 5.3 is downright SAD for such a prominent player at his position.

Jordan was a ball hog and thought that he was God's gift to sports (and still does). Watch old Jordan games and then watch old Russell games. Russell's teammates actually liked him.

Do YOU realize that he played the SHOOTING Guard position? He never really played point guard. Those task were left to the likes of Steve Kerr, John Paxton and others. He was supposed to take his shots. It's his job (see Shooting guard) to score and shoot the ball. Additionally, this is a business - It doesn't matter if your teammates like you or not. They won and they won big. Sports is about WINNING. Not friendships. But, you also have no clue about the relationship he has off the court with his teammates. Watching a game doesn't mean jack. I may have missed all those games though of his teammates running over and grabbing him when he hit the game winning shot. Yeah I saw the hate.

Honestly, how can you call someone a ball hog when they were:

Six-time NBA champion (1991-93, 1996-98); MVP (1988, '91, '92, '96, '98); 10-time All-NBA First Team (1987-93, 1996-98); All-NBA Second Team (1985); Defensive Player of the Year (1988); Nine-time All-Defensive First Team (1988-93, 1996-98); Rookie of the Year (1985); 14-time All-Star; All-Star MVP (1988, '96, '98); One of 50 Greatest Players in NBA History ('96); Olympic gold medalist (1984, '92).

Call him whatever you like, but it's obvious he's the greatest player to ever play the game.

Not to mention that MJ totally revolutionized the sale and marketing of the game, footwear and clothing. He created a virtual empire with his name. You say Jordan around the world and everyone knows who you're talking about.

He brought the game to a worldwide level with his play and personality. Everyone loves Jordan. Only Detroit fans from the late 80's really hated him

Not to mention an entire team had to create a D scheme for a single player.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
i don't remember where i read it, but i remember reading that the NBA change the free throw rules because wilt was so bad from the free throw line and he could take a standing jump from the line and dunk it, so he would. they subsequently outlawed that.


wilt was clearly the babe ruth of basketball.

Yes the NBA had to change that rule. Just run a simple google for those who don't believe it. He could STAND and dunk from the free throwline. MJ couldn't even dunk from the free throw line with a running start (I've seen him with his foot barely over the line, but never clearly behind the line).

 

[moshquerade]

Michael Jordon.

 

[Baked]

Kobe.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Call him whatever you like, but it's obvious he's the greatest player to ever play the game.

Wilt holds around 50 NBA records. Wilt put up bigger numbers. Wilt was a great assister for a center, Jordan was not a great rebounder for a guard. Wilt did all this without fancy motels, shoes, marketing, extra time to sleep and rest on road games, and during a time when it was much harder to score points. Jordan played during the easiest era to score points and had preferential treatment for referees, who called fouls on opposing players for just breathing on him.

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: Shlong
I would say MJ. How would have Wilt & Russell competed night in & night out against the likes of Ewing, Olajuwon, Shaq (7'2" 300 early in his career, 350+ later), David Robinson, Mourning in Jordan's era. Wilt was 7'1" 250, the C's of that era were more Russell size at 6'9" and 215. All the C's of Jordan's era were 7'0" or taller and over 230 (usually 240 - 250). I think both Wilt & Russell would've been good players but not put nearly the same numbers they did. And back when Russell was winning those championships there were under 10 teams (later about 12 teams at the end of the run) & on some of those Celtic teams they had 7 Hall of Famers playing.

You're right, they wouldn't have put up the same numbers...they would have put up more! Wilt is much stronger than ANY of those centers you said and considering that Jordan played during a period of time when the rules all catered to scoring offense (no zones, 3-point line was moved in, no elbowing, etc), Wilt would have had no problem against the slower players of the 1990's.

Consider this. Shaq in his best years had no problem scoring. Now imagine Wilt Chamberlain. Wilt is much stronger than Shaq. Wilt can jump much higher than shaq. Wilt has much longer arms than Shaq. Wilt is much faster than Shaq. Wilt has better foot-work than Shaq. Wilt is a better shooter than Shaq. Wilt is a better offensive rebounder than Shaq.

Can you show me stats on Wilts vertical jump, his 40 dash speed, wingspan, footwork and various other things?

Slower players of the 90's? You must be smoking some serious crack. No joke, that's about the stupidest thing I've heard. Have you ever looked at the weight lifting regiments and training of current players vs the early years of the league? Now people take supliments, they work out every day, they practice every day, they lift, they use tools that were not available during the era of Wilt.

ANY educated sports person would tell you hands down athletes of our generation are better in just about every aspect of their bodies.

Not to mention they are taller and more skilled at their position. You talk about Wilt as a scorer. Name 5 other centers in his playing years that averaged what:

Kevin Garnet
Dirk
Shaq
Yao
Tim Duncan

All these guys are 7 footers. Hell, find me 5 other 7 foot players in one year that Wilt played.


The rules of the game doesn't really matter. He's playing within the rules and his game is supposed to be good regardless.

Jordan was never a big 3 point shooter. No elbowing? Happens all the time. A foul is called sometimes, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Check into Dekembe Mutumbos game. He's broken peoples noses during games!

Zones are back in the NBA. I still saw Kobe scoring over 36 points a game. Zone isn't as great as it's made out to be. Iverson is scoring 31pg this year. You think MJ couldn't keep up his scoring avg, but Iverson could? What a joke. It's a good team D and rotation sceme, but it's not going to stop a prolific score. It's to stop/block passing lanes and cut ball movement. It's quick rotations, but if a score has a step, he can open up space and take the shot. MJ is the best ever at that fade jumper that one one could block.

Study up on some basketball and you'll understand.

 

[oCxTiTaN]

Wilt. Even though Jordan tied him at 30.1 PPG, you have to remember Wilt only had FT's and 2-PT field goals...MJ had 3-pointers too...

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Yes the NBA had to change that rule. Just run a simple google for those who don't believe it. He could STAND and dunk from the free throwline. MJ couldn't even dunk from the free throw line with a running start (I've seen him with his foot barely over the line, but never clearly behind the line).

Wait, Jordan was 6'6 and Wilt was 7'2?

Did mommy drop you on your head or something?

Additionally, You are WRONG.

"Wilt Chamberlain
When Wilt Chamberlain was in high school, he had a unique way of shooting free-throws. He would stand at the top of the key, throw the ball up toward the basket, take two steps, jump toward the rim and jam the ball through the net. Doing this resulted in basketball rules to state that a player cannot cross the plane of the free-throw line when shooting a free-throw.

Chamberlain had problems shooting free-throws throughout his career. The rule did not really improve is already dominant game."

http://www.schoolforchampions.com/sports/basketball_rule_changes.htm

He didn't just jump and dunk, he threw the ball and caught it himself. It is illegal in the NBA now.

Edit: Not to mention he was a career 50% FT shooter. So why are we discussing this? He wasn't clutch at the end of games while getting fouled?

Wilt might have been the most dominate player for his generation. But, I don't think he was the overall greatest ever.

 

[thesurge]

Order is:
1) Michael Jordan
2) Wilt Chamberlain
3) Kareem Abdul Jabbar
4) Oscar Robertson (ridiculous stats)

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Study up on some basketball and you'll understand.

First of all, if you don't think there were any 6'11", 7', or 7'2" or whatever centers during the era Wilt played, you are mistaken. There were plenty of big men, and at least 5-6 are in the hall of fame. Russell, Jabar, Thurmond, and Bob Lanier. Lanier isn't in the hall of fame, but averaged almost a double-double for his career.

You have a double-standard. You say that these modern guys have all this great training stuff and you keep saying that he would fail in todays game. Well if you're going to put Wilt in today's game, you have to give him every aspect. Seeing as how Wilt BACK THEN was stronger than all of today's players (with all of their supplements, trainers, equipment, etc), he would be even more strong against today's players because he would also have all of those supplements and equipment.

Wilt did the high jump at 6'6" and long jumped 22 feet. He could run the 100-yard dash in 10.9 seconds. You don't think the NBA had fast men back then? Attles? Robertson? Barry?

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Edit: Not to mention he was a career 50% FT shooter. So why are we discussing this? He wasn't clutch at the end of games while getting fouled?

Actually that's wrong. If you read up on him, you'll see that he was a great clutch freethrow shooter and his percentage went way up during the closing minutes of each game.

Okay, so he's a center and he wasn't a great FT shooter. To counter that, I can say that Michael Jordan wasn't a great 3 PT shooter as a shooting/point guard, especially since he played when the 3PT line was moved in a little to help scoring.

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Edit: Not to mention he was a career 50% FT shooter. So why are we discussing this? He wasn't clutch at the end of games while getting fouled?

Actually that's wrong. If you read up on him, you'll see that he was a great clutch freethrow shooter and his percentage went way up during the closing minutes of each game.

Okay, so he's a center and he wasn't a great FT shooter. To counter that, I can say that Michael Jordan wasn't a great 3 PT shooter as a shooting/point guard, especially since he played when the 3PT line was moved in a little to help scoring.

Michael Jordan was a career .327 3pt shooter. He was a career 83.5% FT shooter. He was a career .497 FG shooter. He played a shooting position and still only shot .04 less over his career than Wilt. Centers play closer to the basket and naturally have higher FG%.

Lets put that into perspective. John Stockton was a career .384 3pt Shooter. I'd say MJ held his own. He was never a big 3 point shooter though. Not to mention the 6 in a row he made against Portland during the NBA Finals with the classic shrug.

Actually, I did read up on Wilt:

Apart from not being a great clutch player, he was also a miserable foul shooter, shooting an anemic .511 from the free throw line; however, this is not uncommon in big men, as proven by the struggles of today's top centers such as Shaquille O'Neal or Ben Wallace, who also barely make half of their free throws.

Height:

Kareem - drafted in 1969.He was 7'2 but he really never played against wilt during his prime. He was drafted 10 years after Wilt even started playing.
Russell - 6'9"
Thurmond - 6' 11"
Lanier - 6' 11"

You still haven't shown me anyone over 7 foot. I can name you atleast 5 off the top of my head in todays game. People are bigger, stronger and faster. It's fact of current sports.

Edit: Additionally, you need to READ what I actually wrote. I never said Wilt would fail. I said he wouldn't dominate like he did in his time.


Jordan in the 60's - clear and utter domination

Wilt today - I can't see it happening. He'd probably be like Tim Duncan/KG. But he wouldn't change the game or dominate like he did. It was a different era and the game was still new and changing. The game now is basically to form and not changing much.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Michael Jordan was a career .327 3pt shooter. He was a career 83.5% FT shooter. He was a career .497 FG shooter. He played a shooting position and still only shot .04 less over his career than Wilt. Centers play closer to the basket and naturally have higher FG%.

As I have been saying, Wilt was a center who's scoring mainly came from outside jumpers and hookshots. Jordan took the ball to the hoop and dunked and layed it in many times.

Actually, I did read up on Wilt:

Apart from not being a great clutch player, he was also a miserable foul shooter, shooting an anemic .511 from the free throw line; however, this is not uncommon in big men, as proven by the struggles of today's top centers such as Shaquille O'Neal or Ben Wallace, who also barely make half of their free throws.

Read a more in depth biography about Wilt. Wilt shot over 70% in college, but hurt his knee early in his NBA career (or maybe late college, I can't remember). After he hurt his knee, he could never bend them the same and couldn't shoot free throws the same. But if you read a biography about him, you wil see that he shot much better in the closing minutes.

Height:

Kareem - drafted in 1969.He was 7'2 but he really never played against wilt during his prime. He was drafted 10 years after Wilt even started playing.
Russell - 6'9"
Thurmond - 6' 11"
Lanier - 6' 11"

You still haven't shown me anyone over 7 foot. I can name you atleast 5 off the top of my head in todays game. People are bigger, stronger and faster. It's fact of current sports.

Jabar was over 7'. Do some more reasearch...those were the best players, but there were still guys over 7'. There were great 6'10-6'11" centers in the 90's too. Was Manute Bol or Mark Eaton great because they were 7'7"? It just doesn't matter that much.

Edit: Additionally, you need to READ what I actually wrote. I never said Wilt would fail. I said he wouldn't dominate like he did in his time.

And I'm saying that Wilt would have an easier time with all of the rule changes to help scoring, the fact that nobody would be able to guard on him as easily since fouls are called much more often, and the fact that he would be the strongest man in the NBA (as he is all time in the NBA, according to the experts and you'll hear it quite often when they talk of Shaq's strength).

Jordan in the 60's - clear and utter domination

Wilt today - I can't see it happening. He'd probably be like Tim Duncan/KG. But he wouldn't change the game or dominate like he did. It was a different era and the game was still new and changing. The game now is basically to form and not changing much.

Tim Duncan? Wilt is stronger, faster, and way more athletic than Tim. He is also a better shooter than Tim. You keep saying that the players are more athletic today, you are wrong. Jordan couldn't even compete on an olympic scale where Chamberlain could. The people Chamberlain went up against were also very athletic and overall played a much faster game back in the 1960's (ask any expert).

I just don't understand how you see Jordan being the best. He didn't put up as good of numbers, he didn't dominate like Wilt did, he was given huge Nike contracts and was loved by the media, and he played during a time when scoring was easier. During the 1960's, the guys played a lot harder, more physical, faster and the players were just as athletic on paper as they are today. Could the players of the 1960's not dunk? Nope, there were guys under 6' tall that could easily dunk, just like today...so athleticism is not a question.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
I just don't understand how you see Jordan being the best. He didn't put up as good of numbers, he didn't dominate like Wilt did, he was given huge Nike contracts and was loved by the media, and he played during a time when scoring was easier. During the 1960's, the guys played a lot harder, more physical, faster and the players were just as athletic on paper as they are today. Could the players of the 1960's not dunk? Nope, there were guys under 6' tall that could easily dunk, just like today...so athleticism is not a question.

Don't worry, dude. People who know the history of b-ball know it was all Wilt. With modern training and nutrition, he would absolutely kill everyone else on the court.