Greatest basketball player of all time?

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
so by your argument you'd take John Pax over John stocton. or Danny Ainge over Clyde Drexler . . .

the argument that an inferior team from a winning team is better than the superior player from the losing team is about the stupidest there is.

You're the idiot if you think that is what I was saying. I was talking the clear leader on the team and you talk two role players. Stop putting stupid words in my mouth and then calling them stupid.

let's use your words.

Originally posted by: 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.

if bill russell did indeed did what you posted he CLEARLY WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN the leader on the team, hence he would have been nothing but a role player. :roll:



edit

btw, you are the one that started this ridiculous argument to the extreme. to say that even if russel scored ZERO POINTS, ZERO RBS, etc etc but won he would still be better. :roll:

wtf kind of logic is that. if he did indeed put up all those zero's than EVEN in a TEAM concept one would conclude that his contribution is ZERO.

 

[Art Vandelay]

MJ FTW

 

[BlancoNino]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilt_Chamberlain

As blocks only became official stats after his career, there are no figures, however, in the early 1980s, at UCLA's practice courts, Chamberlain was playing in a pickup game, including a young Magic Johnson. Johnson called goaltending on Chamberlain, who then said: "There will be no more lay-ups in this game." Chamberlain, who was in his mid-40s, went on to block every lay-up attempt in the game. This was recounted after Chamberlain's death by coach Larry Brown, who was then coaching UCLA.[4]

1) If Wilt in his mid 40's can still play that well against the Lakers and their soon-to-be championship team, which can play that well against the Boston Celtics, which were just a few years before Jordan's era...clearly there is not much drop-off in athleticism. But surely there has been a huge dropoff in shooting ability and fundamentals (especially on defense).

2) Wilt's scoring doesn't stand out? That's because he's not flashy and the camera technology wasn't as advanced. 2-points = 2-points and he was able to consistently get them no matter who guarded him (big or small, hall of famer or not).

3) Wilt's championships? He was able to put a 2-year dent in Red Aurbach (the greatest NBA coach, ever) and his legacy. When Wilt joined the Lakers they immediately went from a losing team to a winning team. When Michael Jordan joined the Bulls they were STILL a losing team and couldn't win a championship until Pippen came around. Russell had John Havlicek, Bob Cousy, Sam Jones, Frank Ramsey, and Bill Sharman (to name a few). ALL of them are in the NBA hall of fame.

4) Jordan's all-defensive awards are a joke. In a couple of years, Phil Jackson put Scottie Pippen on some guys because Jordan had lost some of his speed and was getting beat...and Jordan STILL won the award. Media bias was all about Jordan(but anyone with an IQ over 20 knows that).

You guys still just don't realize that Wilt's ability. BIG MEN usually can't be that athletic. You never see really tall guys being able to compete in track, jump really high, etc...but Wilt could. We're talking a guy who is bigger and stronger than Shaq, and faster and higher jumping than Jordan. No reasonable person wouldn't put him number 1.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCJ/is_7_31/ai_n6189410

" I'll take Wilt over Shaq any day for athleticism, strength, finesse..."

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0150219/bio

"While in college at Kansas, he was recorded as having a 550 pound bench press."

So, players back in the 60's weren't as athletic as modern day players, huh? Wilt is a perfect example of that argument being thrown out into the toilet.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Jordan was not the best. Chamberlain simply dominated in more statistics than Jordan. Chamberlain was stronger, faster, and more athletic than Jordan. Chamberlain couldn't be stopped when asked to score. Players tried to elbow him (illegal today and in Jordan's era), play zones against him (illegal in Jordan's era), and plus Michael Jordan wasn't allowed to be touched without a foul...lots of preferential treatment, Jordan got. With Wilt it was just the opposite...the refs consistently DIDNT call fouls on Wilt's defenders (blatant ones) because Wilt was so strong (he could bench-press 500 pounds) that he didn't seem affected by it.

Wilt is almost dead-even in career scoring average (with Jordan taking WAY more shots than Wilt!). Wilt is the all-time leading rebounder. Wilt was great at assists, and if the rules were the same then as today (the definition of assists), Wilt would probably have a higher assists per game career average (AS A CENTER!). He's the best blocker of all time and one of the best stealers. He took piss-poor losing teams to NBA championships and playoffs by himself. Jordan's teams could not post a winning record until Pippen came along.

Next, please.

It's ridiculous to compare a center to a point guard in most of the areas you seek to compare Wilt to Jordan. Obviously Wilt was stronger - he was a much larger man - and it is similarly obvious that he'd have a higher field-goal percentage, since so many of his "shots" were dunks or layups. It's stupid IMO to say he was faster or more athletic. Wilt was much bigger and stronger than his contemporaries, so he put up some gaudy numbers, but Bill Russell had a more successful career in the same era in terms of championships.

 

[zinfamous]

I refuse to vote until David Thompson is added to the list. No one was more athletic than him. If it weren't for his unfortunately short career, he would easily be number 1 in most people's minds. No one could, or can jump higher--He is why MJ started playing basketball. And the alley-oop was invented for him (when dunking was illegal in NCAA bball). Yeah, it may be a stretch to put him as best-ever...but most in-the-know regard him as the greatest to play in college; and had his NBA career not been so short, he'd be in this discussion as well. He was in the top 2 for the scoring title during his first 2 years in the league, and it usually came down to the final game. ...he was also the first to draw real attention out of highschool. The Lakers were scouting him, and encouraging him to leave for the NBA during his first year in college.

Anyhoo, It has to be a toss-up b/w Michael Jordan (UNC rat-bastard that he his) and Oscar Robertson (can you imagine anyone else averaging a triple double for a season? no, you can't.). I'm surprised that there aren't too many supporting the big O. I guess most of you think basketball started with Jordan?

Well, the support for Chamberlain makes that last statement a tad fecetious...After the Jordan/Robertson number 1 would probably be Bill Russell, then Wilt. I agree that you can't compare the abilities of point guards with centers, but you can compare how they dominated the game. Chamberlain played in an era where almost no one could match him--except Bill Russell, who almost always sent him back home without yet another championship. Jordan's dominance was in an era where the overall athletecism and talent in the league was vastly superior to that during Chamberlain's time. I doubt Chamberlain would be as successful today with Shaq, Duncan, (he would eat up Yao though) and others. I also can't imagine him playing in the 80s when centers dominated even more. He would have been good, no doubt; just not as successful as he was in his day. Bill Russell will always be considered above him not just because Russell usually won those matchups, but b/c Russell made his teammates so much better (it's hard for a lot of current players in the "NBA" to understand this, but that's a large part of playing basketball). He was a leader and a coach. Skills very hard to come by on top of real talent.

 

[GeneValgene]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Jordan was not the best. Chamberlain simply dominated in more statistics than Jordan. Chamberlain was stronger, faster, and more athletic than Jordan. Chamberlain couldn't be stopped when asked to score. Players tried to elbow him (illegal today and in Jordan's era), play zones against him (illegal in Jordan's era), and plus Michael Jordan wasn't allowed to be touched without a foul...lots of preferential treatment, Jordan got. With Wilt it was just the opposite...the refs consistently DIDNT call fouls on Wilt's defenders (blatant ones) because Wilt was so strong (he could bench-press 500 pounds) that he didn't seem affected by it.

Wilt is almost dead-even in career scoring average (with Jordan taking WAY more shots than Wilt!). Wilt is the all-time leading rebounder. Wilt was great at assists, and if the rules were the same then as today (the definition of assists), Wilt would probably have a higher assists per game career average (AS A CENTER!). He's the best blocker of all time and one of the best stealers. He took piss-poor losing teams to NBA championships and playoffs by himself. Jordan's teams could not post a winning record until Pippen came along.

Next, please.

you lost all credibility to me there...go watch any of the bulls-piston matches where joe dumars guarded jordan. hand checking back then constituted slapping on the arms and face, adn it was completely legal, and never called by the refs. you can't do that nowadays

 

[OSUCowboy]

Popeye Jones

 

[GeneValgene]

luc longley

 

[interchange]

I think the fact that Jordan was more recent and played longer helps his popularity, but in truth it was his marketing. Anyone who watched Magic in his prime would have to seriously consider him.

Wilt, as said, only won 1 championship. While it's not the barometer of a player, it counts for enough to give Magic the nod in my eyes.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Well, the support for Chamberlain makes that last statement a tad fecetious...After the Jordan/Robertson number 1 would probably be Bill Russell, then Wilt. I agree that you can't compare the abilities of point guards with centers, but you can compare how they dominated the game. Chamberlain played in an era where almost no one could match him--except Bill Russell, who almost always sent him back home without yet another championship. Jordan's dominance was in an era where the overall athletecism and talent in the league was vastly superior to that during Chamberlain's time. I doubt Chamberlain would be as successful today with Shaq, Duncan, (he would eat up Yao though) and others. I also can't imagine him playing in the 80s when centers dominated even more. He would have been good, no doubt; just not as successful as he was in his day. Bill Russell will always be considered above him not just because Russell usually won those matchups, but b/c Russell made his teammates so much better (it's hard for a lot of current players in the "NBA" to understand this, but that's a large part of playing basketball). He was a leader and a coach. Skills very hard to come by on top of real talent.

Yup agree that even though Wilt was more athletic, Russell was a better leader. Although I don't agree that Wilt would eat Yao up. You say Shaq would give Wilt trouble but Yao gives Shaq trouble so that statement doesn't make sense. As for David Thompson, don't know enough about him in his short career to comment.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Jordan was not the best. Chamberlain simply dominated in more statistics than Jordan. Chamberlain was stronger, faster, and more athletic than Jordan. Chamberlain couldn't be stopped when asked to score. Players tried to elbow him (illegal today and in Jordan's era), play zones against him (illegal in Jordan's era), and plus Michael Jordan wasn't allowed to be touched without a foul...lots of preferential treatment, Jordan got. With Wilt it was just the opposite...the refs consistently DIDNT call fouls on Wilt's defenders (blatant ones) because Wilt was so strong (he could bench-press 500 pounds) that he didn't seem affected by it.

Wilt is almost dead-even in career scoring average (with Jordan taking WAY more shots than Wilt!). Wilt is the all-time leading rebounder. Wilt was great at assists, and if the rules were the same then as today (the definition of assists), Wilt would probably have a higher assists per game career average (AS A CENTER!). He's the best blocker of all time and one of the best stealers. He took piss-poor losing teams to NBA championships and playoffs by himself. Jordan's teams could not post a winning record until Pippen came along.

Next, please.

Wilt only played against how many teams? You can't say he "would have been one of the best stealers" because you don't know, it's stupid to compare present day athletes to older ones: Jordan/Magic played against way more HoFers than Wilt ever did. Jordan/Magic played in an era where nutrition/conditioning was superior, players were bigger, faster, and stronger and there were more teams (more competition). Also, Jordan/Magic had much better shooting ability than Wilt. Two words prove this: FREE THROWS. 51.1% lifetime. Wilt may have been slightly stronger, but he couldn't shoot worth a dam (think double team from today's bigger/stronger guys and if he would have to develop a hook/jumpshot), there is no proof of his leadership ability, and no way in hell to tell whether Wilt could defend against modern day post moves because nobody had that ability back then (no, not even Russell).

BTW: MJ WAS FASTER than Wilt:
Smith says Jordan is the hardest worker he's ever coached. In high school Jordan hustled so, he was nicknamed The Rabbit. Rabbit, run. When he enrolled at Chapel Hill, Jordan ran the 40-yard dash in 4.6 seconds. This fall he ran a 4.3.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basket...ba/1999/jordan_retires/archive/831128/

MJ ran a 4.3 40, Wilt a 4.4. Speed definitely helped MJ more than Wilt because of fast breaks, how often did Wilt's teams fast break? Could you even say Wilt would have been skilled on the Fast break? Nobody knows. We do know MJ was one of the best on the fast break.

Another little tidbit: Shaq benchpresses 450lbs. Wilt was probably slightly stronger, but tell me another center in Wilt's era who has the size and strength (not to mention quickness at that weight) of the Diesel. None! Shaq and Zo doubleteaming a star big guy like Wilt would shut him down in today's NBA. And we're not even getting into the speed and/or strength of some of the modern day guards that Magic/MJ had to face off against. Again, that's why it's stupid to compare different eras.

 

[Mermaidman]

Dwayne Wade--if the refs keep treating him like a golden child.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Mermaidman
Dwayne Wade--if the refs keep treating him like a golden child.

yeah, I think Wade and LeBron may give a run for it by the end of their careers. hard for me to say though, as I stopped paying much attention to the NBA around 7 years ago. Don't know why they decided to stop showcasing basketball....

EDIT: Oh, why hasn't anyone mentioned Sam Bouie? He was considered worth more than Jordan at some point....
Akeem Olajuwon would make Wilt look like a little baby girl. The stilt would be putty in the face of the "Dream Shake." <greatest individual bball move ever.

 

[bobsmith1492]

What about Pistol Pete (Marovitch - sp?) ? Didn't he basically revolutionize the way basketball is played?? I suppose that doesn't make him the very best ever, but in a way you could say he taught those that came after everything they know, or at least the basics. Or, maybe I have no idea what I'm talking about?

 

[zinfamous]

Pistol Pete was the shiznit. Local Raleigh boy does good.

 

[OCNewbie]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
54 votes for Jordan? Ridiculous :roll:

Make that 62 =P I thought this was like a no brainer.

 

[BlancoNino]

I guess ESPN has brainwashed you all into thinking he's the greatest because everyone says so despite not being able to put up the numbers to prove so. Like I said, nobody seems to have a counter-argument to the fact that Jordan played during an era where almost every rule change was to help scoring. Jordan was a guard that could not put up great rebounding numbers. Chamberlain was a center who COULD put up great assist numbers (along with blocks, steals, points, and rebounds of course) despite being a center (Jordan put up pathetic assist numbers for a semi-point guard).

The whole argument that Wilt had no competition in his era is just plain tiring, unproven, and if anything completely opposite of the truth. Wilt joined a team that improved when he joined, Jordan joined a team that did NOT improve until Pippen joined. When Jordan left, the Bulls' season record dropped TWO games...wow big difference he made!

 

[zinfamous]

I have to say; Blanco makes a pretty good argument. More substantial than the other arguments I've seen him make in these forums. Doesn't mean I agree with him on this, but he does have a point...

EDIT: and believe me; I hate to consider Jordan as the best. He is no-good scum who attended an equally worthless punk-producing school of feces. However, as I am a generally rational person...I can't imagine anyone really being better than he was.

RE-EDIT: I still don't see David Thompson...or Kurt Rambis on your poll. Make the necessary changes and I'll consider voting.

 

[wheresmybacon]

Originally posted by: zinfamous
I have to say; Blanco makes a pretty good argument. More substantial than the other arguments I've seen him make in these forums. Doesn't mean I agree with him on this, but he does have a point...

EDIT: and believe me; I hate to consider Jordan as the best. He is no-good scum who attended an equally worthless punk-producing school of feces. However, as I am a generally rational person...I can't imagine anyone really being better than he was.

RE-EDIT: I still don't see David Thompson...or Kurt Rambis on your poll. Make the necessary changes and I'll consider voting.

you guys should get a room

the only argument he's made is hearsay and opinion



edit: spelling

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: hungfarover
the only argument he's made is hearsay and opinion

Oh, because everyone else is using scientific facts to prove that modern players are better? Please.

 

[python023]

jordan
magic
the big O
the rest

 

[Motorheader]

Originally posted by: rocadelpunk
pound for pound?

mugsy bogues : P

or maybe mark price

or maybe john stockton

or maybe scott skiles

: P

I'm still laughing - you named 4 guys that couldn't guard Jordan alone - probably not even as a group.

 

[Ameesh]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
I'd have to give it to Wilt Chamberlain. This guy dominated in EVERY statistic (yes, steals and assists too). Who would you say is the best? Lets argue!

where is kobe?

 

[Motorheader]

Jordan was a result of the joining of Stern's timely marketing of the NBA, NIKE, and a player(s) to ride that to the bank. The Bulls didn't win a championship until he was on his 4th different coach. Collins got boned after two winning seasons. Good god if you breathed on Jordan at that time it was a foul. He was a great player - but not the greatest.

Russell, Jabbar, Chamberlin, or Johnson were better - even the Big O.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: hungfarover

Originally posted by: zinfamous
I have to say; Blanco makes a pretty good argument. More substantial than the other arguments I've seen him make in these forums. Doesn't mean I agree with him on this, but he does have a point...

EDIT: and believe me; I hate to consider Jordan as the best. He is no-good scum who attended an equally worthless punk-producing school of feces. However, as I am a generally rational person...I can't imagine anyone really being better than he was.

RE-EDIT: I still don't see David Thompson...or Kurt Rambis on your poll. Make the necessary changes and I'll consider voting.

you guys should get a room

the only argument he's made is hearsay and opinion



edit: spelling

not really. the records of teams before and after someone played with them are easily quantifiable. whether or not teammates of a certain player are in the hall of fame are facts. none of that can be hearsay.

arguing about potential assists or blocks...that's BS of course; and discredits an otherwise solid argument. don't get me wrong--I find most of Bianco's arguments and opinions in these forums baseless and ridiculous, i'm just saying that he makes a good argument here. I still think the Big O is the greatest ever, with Jordan perhaps, but Bianco does make some good points.