Wilt! Wilt?

Blackjack · November 6, 2013

So I'm running a historical league and attempting to recreate a realistic result. However Wilt is wrecking everything. I'm in year 6 of his career and he has won the NBA title every year but one (lost in the finals to Russell) and he is averaging 49 ppg. Anyone else have a less effective Wilt?

IMO Wilt is the best to ever play and I don't see it being all that close. Sure he didn't win championships, couldn't shoot FTs, and he was a freak of nature but none of those really change the fact that he was the most dominate player to play the game. I'm a lifelong UNC fan and have followed Jordan since he was Mike Jordan as a freshman in college, however I don't see how anyone can think he was better than Chamberlain.

BHK1978 · November 7, 2013

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Blackjack" data-cite="Blackjack" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="36979" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>So I'm running a historical league and attempting to recreate a realistic result. However Wilt is wrecking everything. I'm in year 6 of his career and he has won the NBA title every year but one (lost in the finals to Russell) and he is averaging 49 ppg. Anyone else have a less effective Wilt? IMO Wilt is the best to ever play and I don't see it being all that close. Sure he didn't win championships, couldn't shoot FTs, and he was a freak of nature but none of those really change the fact that he was the most dominate player to play the game. I'm a lifelong UNC fan and have followed Jordan since he was Mike Jordan as a freshman in college, however I don't see how anyone can think he was better than Chamberlain.</div></blockquote> I agree, though most people will say Jordan. The way I look at it is the NBA made rules to stop Wilt because he was such a force of nature. When the league has to do that, then you are the best of all-time.

TLCJR4LIFE · November 7, 2013

There weren't very many rule changes in direct response to Wilt, other than to stop him from dunking free throws which they simply created the foul line violation.

And possibly the offensive goaltending call which is a bit of common sense.

Suggesting that the widening of the lane was entirely due to Wilt is a bit disingenuous and in fact had been done before Wilt had ever played a game before when Mikan was still playing.

But if we are going to get into simplistic, daft nothing arguments to present the idea that Wilt was the greatest and present them indisputable fact, it's not worth arguing.

As far as his numbers it is difficult because he will shoot so much but you could try editing his stats and lowering his strength a bit.

The sim tries to replicate his prime scoring years where he scored 44 and 50.

The problem is, it is at a much lower efficiency than typically recorded in the game. Wilt was not that efficient of a scorer most of his career and his teams were routinely last in defense during his best scoring years....probably due to the fact that they made it a spectacle of trying to get Wilt as many shots as he could at the compromise of actually winning basketball games.

Naturally you could lower his stats and increase his teams pace..which should get a more realistic result.

BHK1978 · November 7, 2013

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TLCJR4LIFE" data-cite="TLCJR4LIFE" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="36979" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>But if we are going to get into simplistic, daft nothing arguments to present the idea that Wilt was the greatest and present them indisputable fact, it's not worth arguing. </div></blockquote> You stated your point in the previous two paragraphs. However, I hardly see the point of saying what you said above, I guess it is to prove that you think you are smarter than others or maybe you think you are some sort of an expert. My point being if you disagree with someone there is no reason for you to say their opinion is stupid. I guess you lack the decorum to prove your point without trying to insult others which means that you are probably not as smart as you seem to think you are.

TLCJR4LIFE · November 7, 2013

A: Do not present your argument as if it was inarguable as in post 1.

B: Do not present your argument as if it were fact and back it with a simplistic premise which is both inane and disingenuous. As in post 2.

For example, suggesting that Robert Horry is a top 5 all time player because he accrued 7 championships would be entirely disingenuous for obvious reasons.

It is entirely easy to "support" a thesis with misleading circumstantial evidence, and doesn't inspire anything but insipid, redundant pseudo-debate.

The main rule of argument on the internet that it seems smart to abide by is only debate something of merit, so perhaps both sides and spectators can learn something. Otherwise only bother to correct misinformation and ignore hasty generalizations.

RayW · November 7, 2013

I think what BHK is saying is that the comment he quoted only comes across as arrogant and rude. You'd already stated your point previously, so this comment isn't really needed.

Most opinions come across as fact, not because the people say it is fact, but because saying "in my opinion" before every single opinion becomes very repetitive, very quickly.

I didn't see their comments as "fact" just as their opinion, which gives you the right to challenge their opinion, tell them yours, and debate. It does not give you the right to say it is stupid or daft.

There are no rules to "arguing on the internet". Just because you're on an Internet forum doesn't mean that politeness and etiquette get thrown out of the window. This isn't a pro wrestling dirt sheet forum where everyone is so eager to make their opinion the only opinion that matters.

In short, argue people's opinions, but don't be out right rude about it. You'd feel hard done by if someone done that to you.

prw18 · November 7, 2013

I think what BHK is saying is that the comment he quoted only comes across as arrogant and rude. You'd already stated your point previously, so this comment isn't really needed.

Most opinions come across as fact, not because the people say it is fact, but because saying "in my opinion" before every single opinion becomes very repetitive, very quickly.

I didn't see their comments as "fact" just as their opinion, which gives you the right to challenge their opinion, tell them yours, and debate. It does not give you the right to say it is stupid or daft.

There are no rules to "arguing on the internet". Just because you're on an Internet forum doesn't mean that politeness and etiquette get thrown out of the window. This isn't a pro wrestling dirt sheet forum where everyone is so eager to make their opinion the only opinion that matters.

In short, argue people's opinions, but don't be out right rude about it. You'd feel hard done by if someone done that to you.

Well put, RayW.

TLCJR4LIFE · November 7, 2013

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="RayW" data-cite="RayW" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="36979" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I think what BHK is saying is that the comment he quoted only comes across as arrogant and rude. You'd already stated your point previously, so this comment isn't really needed. Most opinions come across as fact, not because the people say it is fact, but because saying "in my opinion" before every single opinion becomes very repetitive, very quickly. I didn't see their comments as "fact" just as their opinion, which gives you the right to challenge their opinion, tell them yours, and debate. It does not give you the right to say it is stupid or daft. There are no rules to "arguing on the internet". Just because you're on an Internet forum doesn't mean that politeness and etiquette get thrown out of the window. This isn't a pro wrestling dirt sheet forum where everyone is so eager to make their opinion the only opinion that matters. In short, argue people's opinions, but don't be out right rude about it. You'd feel hard done by if someone done that to you.</div></blockquote> Not really. The extreme hyperbole definitely presents the statement as some sort of objective truth. Things like "it really isn't close" "I don't see how anyone can think" Point being don't post opinions in grandiose fashion without any support. It's tactless. Lastly there was no statement calling his opinion stupid or daft but rather the presentation of his argument. I'm not sure how the confusion started its precisely worded in the post. His actually thesis isn't worth arguing to me, I don't really care about it and it really wasn't the point I was making.

RayW · November 7, 2013

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TLCJR4LIFE" data-cite="TLCJR4LIFE" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="36979" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Not really. The extreme hyperbole definitely presents the statement as some sort of objective truth. Things like "it really isn't close" "I don't see how anyone can think" Point being don't post opinions in grandiose fashion without any support. It's tactless. Lastly there was no statement calling his opinion stupid or daft but rather the presentation of his argument. I'm not sure how the confusion started its precisely worded in the post. His actually thesis isn't worth arguing to me, I don't really care about it and it really wasn't the point I was making.</div></blockquote> But those statements are part of his opinion. He isn't saying it is fact. For example, I don't see how anyone can think that Fallout Boy have any talent. That's my opinion. It isn't a fact. People do think they have talent, and that is their opinion. Ghostbusters is my favourite movie, and nothing else can come close. The idea of anyone not liking that movie is obsured... Again, all opinion. That is all Blackjack and BHK said, too. If someone's theory or opinion isn't "worth arguing to me" then I don't bother trying or commenting. You started by attempting to argue their opinions, then tell them that the argument is daft and simplistic, and not worth getting into - yet you already got into it. The whole act of telling them that is extremely rude.

TLCJR4LIFE · November 7, 2013

I didn't argue anything. I corrected misinformation.

Also your post clearly shows no knowledge of positive vs normative statements.

Someone saying the like Ghostbusters is much different than saying Ghostbusters is the greatest movie of all time and it isn't even close.

One is normative in that it is inherently subjective while the other suggests empirical evidence.

RayW · November 7, 2013

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TLCJR4LIFE" data-cite="TLCJR4LIFE" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="36979" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I didn't argue anything. I corrected misinformation. Also your post clearly shows no knowledge of positive vs normative statements. Someone saying the like Ghostbusters is much different than saying Ghostbusters is the greatest movie of all time and it isn't even close. One is normative in that it is inherently subjective while the other suggests empirical evidence.</div></blockquote> It wasn't misinformation, it was their opinion. I gave my examples in pretty much the exact same way they expressed theirs. This argument is clearly going nowhere, as now you're resulting to trying to belittle me.

Blackjack · November 7, 2013

Yes, I stated it was my opinion and I really didn't intend to lay out all of the facts behind my opinion. I believe it is a minority opinion at that. I was simply pointing out how dominate Wilt is in this game and was in real life. Which other players do I need to adjust their real life numbers to keep them from Averaging 50 a game and winning the title every year they are in the league? Not many if any I'm guessing but we'll see as I move forward.

BHK1978 · November 8, 2013

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="RayW" data-cite="RayW" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="36979" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I think what BHK is saying is that the comment he quoted only comes across as arrogant and rude. You'd already stated your point previously, so this comment isn't really needed. Most opinions come across as fact, not because the people say it is fact, but because saying "in my opinion" before every single opinion becomes very repetitive, very quickly. I didn't see their comments as "fact" just as their opinion, which gives you the right to challenge their opinion, tell them yours, and debate. It does not give you the right to say it is stupid or daft. There are no rules to "arguing on the internet". Just because you're on an Internet forum doesn't mean that politeness and etiquette get thrown out of the window. This isn't a pro wrestling dirt sheet forum where everyone is so eager to make their opinion the only opinion that matters. In short, argue people's opinions, but don't be out right rude about it. You'd feel hard done by if someone done that to you.</div></blockquote> This is exactly what I meant. I made what I thought was a throwaway comment agreeing with what Blackjack had said. There was no grandiose intent behind it. I did not expect someone to get offended by what I wrote, it is my opinion (I also think that Babe Ruth was the best all around player in the history of Baseball, I am sure others would argue that as well.). I guess from now on every time I have an opinion on here I will have to write "in my opinion" so that TLCJR4LIFE doesn't feel the need to "teach"<img alt=":rolleyes:" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/rolleyes.png.4b097f4fbbe99ce5bcd5efbc1b773ed6.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> others why my opinion is wrong or why I am giving out misinformation. So let me say this, in my opinion I think Wilt is one of the best if not the best player in NBA history because he was arguably the most dominate player of his time. He so dominated the game that the NBA did put rules in to curtail his dominance (That is a fact, that is not circumstantial evidence or misinformation. Heck it says it right in his official NBA bio, but there are some who think they know more about the NBA than the actual NBA does...). Yes the widening of the lanes was first done to curtail George Mikan but they were further widen to curtail Wilt. Now there are some who feel that those rules would have been changed regardless of if Wilt had come along or not. Perhaps they are right but said people have the benefit of hindsight. That is all I will say on the subject. Feel free to "teach" people the correct way to think on the subject...or don't I really could care less.

TLCJR4LIFE · November 8, 2013

Those NBA bios aren't written by NBA officials. They are written by writers.

Antonin · November 10, 2013

..The main rule of argument on the internet that it seems smart to abide by is only debate something of merit, so perhaps both sides and spectators can learn something. Otherwise only bother to correct misinformation and ignore hasty generalizations.

The main rule of argument on the internet is--or should be--to practice courtesy, and never use your anonymous message board handle as a license to say things to people that you would never say if you were sitting next to them in a bar or restaurant.

You present your own statements as objective truth, and you are very rude in doing so. You would never behave this way if you were speaking face-to-face to someone that you do not know. Maybe it's a generational thing. I notice that you are much, much younger than I am.

It's disappointing, because this is usually a very friendly forum. So, as soon as I post this, I will look for this forum's 'ignore' function and make use of it.

I come here because I want to associate with friendly people who love basketball and love this wonderful game.

Condors · November 10, 2013

being an oldhead from philly i can offer my .02

You can't compare different eras fairly.

I am a long time Wilt was the best guy.

Russell is considered one of the greatest defensive players that has ever played in the league and Wilt many times dominated him like a school girl.

Wilt did what Wilt wanted to do and nobody could stop him. The game was played differently back then though. Although i do maintain if Wilt was a rookie today he would end up leading the league in points, rebounds, blocks and assists and could win titles if he was in the right situation.

Anyways talking about this guy or that guy a believe alot of people feel it is a slight on Jordan or Lebron or Baylor or whoever they like as the best and it can bring out negative emotions. I think it is just good for basketball that

people can be passionate about the game. (i hear alot of people from the generation before me tell me that Baylor is the greatest ever)

TLCJR4LIFE · November 10, 2013

The main rule of argument on the internet is--or should be--to practice courtesy, and never use your anonymous message board handle as a license to say things to people that you would never say if you were sitting next to them in a bar or restaurant.

You present your own statements as objective truth, and you are very rude in doing so. You would never behave this way if you were speaking face-to-face to someone that you do not know. Maybe it's a generational thing. I notice that you are much, much younger than I am.

It's disappointing, because this is usually a very friendly forum. So, as soon as I post this, I will look for this forum's 'ignore' function and make use of it.

I come here because I want to associate with friendly people who love basketball and love this wonderful game.

Correction, I would never SPEAK to someone face-to-face that I would not know.

Unless for some reason they jumped into my discussion...then I'd probably be even more condescending.

Secondly, I'm not sure what gave you license to speak to me as if you were some wise sage reprimanding me on some moral garbage. If you had the capacity to ignore a post you' wouldn't need a button, nor would you feel the need to respond to something that had nothing to do with you.

being an oldhead from philly i can offer my .02

You can't compare different eras fairly.

I am a long time Wilt was the best guy.

Russell is considered one of the greatest defensive players that has ever played in the league and Wilt many times dominated him like a school girl.
Wilt did what Wilt wanted to do and nobody could stop him. The game was played differently back then though. Although i do maintain if Wilt was a rookie today he would end up leading the league in points, rebounds, blocks and assists and could win titles if he was in the right situation.

Anyways talking about this guy or that guy a believe alot of people feel it is a slight on Jordan or Lebron or Baylor or whoever they like as the best and it can bring out negative emotions. I think it is just good for basketball that
people can be passionate about the game. (i hear alot of people from the generation before me tell me that Baylor is the greatest ever)

Wilt defenders say he always got his against Russell but never ever acknowledge the fact that his efficiency dropped drastically in the playoffs when it actually mattered against Russell and got his points at the expense of his team. In fact, many of Wilt's best scoring years were highlighted by the fact that Wilt score at the expense of his team rather than as an aid.

The year he scored 50 per game his team was awful and I allowed the second highest points in the league, anecdotally I've often heard the Warriors would fly up the court as quickly as possible to get Wilt a shot(he played the whole game) and wouldn't bother to defend...this matches up with the limited statistical data and the even scarcer film. Although to be fair, film isn't kind to pretty much anyone besides a few select players and the Celtics pre mid 70s....the games generally look sloppy and extremely basic...especially defenses with the lack of ball pressure and any sort of defense off the ball...or denial of the post...these were simply concepts that didn't exist until almost the 80s and even beyond.

Given this happened in the stone ages of basketball where shots weren't taken outside of 20 feet, most people were under 200lbs regardless of position and dribbling with one's off hand was considered some sort of sorcery, Offensive and Defensive Rating and more advanced efficiency stats aren't readily available, but I can certainly say with confidence the only stat rookie Wilt would even have a shot at leading the league in would be blocked shots.

Oh and despite his glossy rebounding stats done against greatly inferior opposition than the standard(the lowest in the history of basketball sans Mikans opposition), Wilt's total rebound percentage greatly lags behind his more modern contemporaries, his rebounding totals are largely due to pace inflation because of the YMCA style basketball played back then.

And the fact that teams generally shot ridiculously poorly from the field thus generating more rebounding opportunities.

I'm generally utterly unimpressed with Wilt dominating a sport that no one played because it wasn't even financially viable and was only in existence for about a decade..thus had an extremely small player base.

This is not even accounting that the modern athlete greatly outclasses the athlete of 50 years ago...even relative to other sports of that era basketball had an extremely weak playerbase due to the NBA being a relative joke of a league at the time. We're talking about a league that had about half the teams in the league fold at some point and could have possibly went bankrupt until it was saved in the late 70s-early 80s and developed in the cultural phenomenon that it is today, especially among the urban community.

In the 60s and 70s many people who played basketball recreationally made more money selling crack, it simply wasn't a competitive field and all of these factors add in to the mythology.

Therefore on principal it's just ridiculous to me to call even a guy like Russell the greatest.

Any NBA All-Star born after 1972 could've won multiple championships in what was largely an 8 team league....and that's being generous because 2 of those teams any given year were liable to fold during those years.

The playoffs was literally 2 rounds.

It's amazing that more people don't take those accomplishments with a grain of salt. It's like talking about a hitter in 1908 that hit for .425. Yeah, big deal. Lots of guys did that against regular Joe pitchers that pitched damn near every day and no one even touched the 90s in velocity. It doesn't make Nap Lojeie a better hitter than Pete Rose or even Joe Mauer.

RayW · November 10, 2013

You do realise that any "best off all time" is pure opinion, don't you? If they believe it is Wilt then that is their prerogative. I believe Maradona is the best attacking footballer off all time and Bobby Moore the best defensive midfielder off all time. Is that fact? No. It's an opinion, and sports journalists will have their own opinions, heck even FIFA have their own opinions - when they conducted a poll at the turn of the 21st century to decide who was the greatest of all time, Maradona won it. However, FIFA wanted to award Pele it, so they called it a draw. See? Point being, their opinion isn't fact, but neither is yours. Even if the NBA said "this player is the greatest off all time", it's irrelevant. That is the boards opinion at that time. If it was a different board it could have been someone else they nominated. Stop being so childish and accept that people have opinions that differ to yours.

TLCJR4LIFE · November 10, 2013

Fascinating.

BHK1978 · November 10, 2013

One more comment then I truly am done. Ray there is no way to reason with a know it all. They know more than you, they are always right and if you disagree with them they will always try to "teach you" or prove you are wrong.

That is why I hate to debate people on the internet because I basically do not care enough to get into a long drawn out debate over trivial stuff. I tend to make a comment and if people agree with my that is cool, if not well that is cool as well. After all this world would be a pretty boring place if we all thought the same way. However, to some people they need to prove why they are so much smarter than the rest of us and I think that is what we are seeing here.

TLCJR4LIFE · November 10, 2013

And yet..

It's trivial yet long winded and largely irrelevant getting into nonsense about interwebs ethics, quite frankly the only person here that made an on topic reasonable post was Condors.

yeah826 · November 10, 2013

Im actually enjoying this thread more debates makes this more lively especially about basketball.

Condors · November 11, 2013

TLCJR4LIFE- You really should watch some of Wilt in his heyday. After watching him you may have a better understanding of how great an athlete he was. While physcially smaller players back in the day the skill sets where head and shoulders above what big men today are required. They could have the offense run through them. They were required to be able to catch pass and dribble. It sounds simple but if you watch almost any big man in the league today they could not do the job back then without being a turnover machine. I do not disagree with everything you are saying but it seems you believe Wilt wasn't good because basketball wasn't any good back then. That is short sighted the game was different and players played differently. Alot of old time players will say the defense in today's game is a joke and the product is water downed with too many players that don't have all the skills required to play on a team.

TLCJR4LIFE · November 11, 2013

Of course they will say they.

A: They are senile.

B: They have an overinflated sense of importance.

There isn't a single coach on the planet on any level that would use game film from anything pre 2000 to coach his team. Period.

Offense and defense is entirely to sophisticated to take anything from the days of 3 foot post catches and turns.

Secondly, there's no doubting Wilt was a great athlete, it's just funny how overstated it is. Like for example people saying that he routinely outran guards out the floor. First of all, Wilt is not the only big man ever to outrun guards. David Robinson used to do it, Shaq in his prime could do it, and even modern players such as Drummond and Blake Griffin have tremendous foot speed. Secondly the smaller players were mostly a joke back then and almost none of them were renowned for being particularly athletic.

Most of the point guards back then couldn't even dunk the ball. It isn't like he was outrunning Michael Jordan or Russell Westbrook or some of the supreme run-jump athletes we've seen in the last two decades.

Furthermore, Wilt himself was a turnover machine, so that says a lot about his supposed skill set...

First of all....the 60s probably had the softest defense of any era ever...any marginal contact was considered a foul, and they rarely deny the post making it extremely easy for the large center to catch the ball 3 feet from the hoop and score.

Nikola Pekovic who is only a decent center could've easily averaged 25 points per game going against defenses like that.

There is no denying Wilt was a tremendous athlete. He would easily be the biggest, most athletic player in the league if he played today, but he's not going to outscore a guy like Durant who puts up numbers by the 3 and he's probably not outrebounding a guy like Kevin Love.

Condors · November 11, 2013

TLCJR4LIFE- Now your just trolling

Everyone over 50 is not senile and your importance does not diminish with age.

Hakeem Olajuwon spends the offseason with top all stars teaching them how to play down low are you sure there are no coaches showing tape of him?

Or Reggie Miller or Michael Jordan?

How much Wilt have you seen? How old are you? Turnover machine??? that is incorrect

60's softest defensive ever? you are mistaken What they did with their elbows and forearms back then would be flaggerant fouls today.

I will maintain that is Wilt was 18 he would be the first pick in the draft and would have a dominating hall of fame career and would lead the league in points rebounds and blocks. (If he was told he couldn't enough he would lead in assists again too because that is what made him do it then).

He was have so much better training and medical asstance today so much better travel conditions. There are arguements you can make for Wilt not being the greatest ever but you are off base on some of your facts here.

Sign In

Wilt! Wilt?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Archived