Jordan or Chamberlin

[Drex]

Things like that make this debate impossible to end everytime is brought up. Different players, different eras. We can't decide who was better because they played in different times.

[AlwaysWhat,NeverWhy]

and in an era where he was about 4-5 inches taller than everyone(cept my main man bill)

True. But Yao is 4-5 inches taller than anyone, too. I don't see him dominate.

Anyway, my closing argument is still the same as my opening one:

Different players, different eras. We can't decide who was better because they played in different times.

[LeBron17]

Jordan vs Berlin?? wait,is it CHAMBERLAIN?
Hmm very hard to say who is better.It's hard different eras,different gamestyles.

[Matthew]

But Andrew, Jordan, Magic, Bird & Russell played on better teams tham Wilt & Oscar. Remember how many playoff failures the Bulls had before they got the right supporting cast? Magic went to a seasoned team that already had Kareem, Norm Nixon, and Jamaal Wilkes. If Wilt and Oscar had the same cast(and coach) that Russell had(year after year), don't you think they'd have more rings?

Or maybe its just that Jordan made his teamates better? Wilt never won with Elgin Baylor and Jerry West alongside him (he won with west, but not both baylor and the logo). Oscar never really made his teamates better. Jordan, if he had to, would put his team on his back and carry a team. Think back the 98 finals. Early on in that series Pippen was playing great, and Jordan was playing great as an equal to him, and made the Bulls virtually unstopable. However, in game 5 and 6, with Pippen ailing, MJ was able to take over and guide the bulls to the ring. Its almost like he is a combination of Magic and Kobe, but he is smart enough to realise when he needs to play like Magic, and play like kobe.

Wilt never dominated the league as a winner. Sure he dominated with individual sucess, but mj did that too. But Jordan dominated in both facets: individual sucess and team success. Remember, before Mike, there was a common belief that not team that boasted the leading scorer could win the championship. MJ proved them wrong. There was also common belief that no team without a strong centre (all star calibure) could win. He proved that wrong. He didnt sit back and complain and make excuses. He kicked the door down and made examples.

If Wilt won more, it would be a sign of how truely dominant he was. Instead, its like comparing Kobe to tmac: tmac posts massive numbers but has never won. Kobe has posted awesome numbers but has won as well. Thats what sets them apart.

I wonder if lebron had averaged a triple double this past season would people have said he was better than Mike. Or if Tracy McGrady had scored 100 points in a game they would say he is better than MJ. One great statistical accomplishment doesnt make you the best. But if you want eye opening stats, heres some:

NBA Finals single-series record for highest PPG average 41.0 (1993)

NBA Most Valuable Player five times (1988, 1991, 1992, 1996, 1998)

Highest career PPG ave. (minimum 400 games or 10,000 points) - 30.1

Holds record for most seasons leading the league in scoring - 10

Shares record for the most consecutive seasons leading the league in scoring - 7 (1986-1993)

All time scoring leader in All-Star history (262 points)

Scored a career playoff-high 63 points against Boston on 5/20/86 (and is also the league post season record)

Has hit 28 game-winning shots in the NBA (28! thats more than West, Bird, Reggie)

All-Star record having the only triple-double in an All-Star game (1997) (thats right, not even oscar did this)

All-time record for most consectutive double-figure scoring games

Holds the all-time playoff record for the most steals


And thats not even touching on his individual awards, such as mvp's, dpoy's, all nba teams, finals mvps (which might be his most telling accomplishment).

You want stats, winning and individual accomplishments? Nobody comes close. Maybe, if you could combine players, like oscar and wilt for their stats, russell for his winning, and kareem for his individual awards and get this one player, then you could say that player would be the best. But to hold anyone to that kind of a standard that you have to combine 3 or 4 of the top 10 (maybe even top 5) to make that arguement is proof that MJ was the best.

[Kobe101]

Jordan.

[skateballer]

Jordan.

Diddo

[Andrew]

But Andrew, Jordan, Magic, Bird & Russell played on better teams tham Wilt & Oscar. Remember how many playoff failures the Bulls had before they got the right supporting cast? Magic went to a seasoned team that already had Kareem, Norm Nixon, and Jamaal Wilkes. If Wilt and Oscar had the same cast(and coach) that Russell had(year after year), don't you think they'd have more rings?

Of course, you need a good team to win. But it's not as though they didn't have Hall of Fame teammates. The trio of Wilt/Baylor/West came up short three years in a row. Robertson had Jerry Lucas.

The other question is of course, given Russell's awesome team can you really say he is the best of all-time? Not to underestimate his abilities or for that matter his tremendous leadership, but if any player's dominance over the rest of the league with his team's success can be downplayed because of the help he had, it's Russell.

Besides, Wilt is described as being unstoppable when that's clearly not the case. Jordan, Bird, Magic and Russell all elevated their games come playoff time, Wilt did not. To me, that's one of the marks of a great player. Not only playing up to their usual standard in the big games but going beyond it.

[J@3]

To be honest, I don't think the way he played in the play-offs should really deny the fact that he was "unstoppable"... there's 82 other games in a season, 50/25 sounds pretty unstoppable to me.

Ignoring that, apart from the later stages in his career (despite a drop from the regular season) he wasn't exactly disappointing in the playoffs...

http://basketballreference.com/players/ ... =CHAMBWI01

[beau_boy04]

To be honest, I don't think the way he played in the play-offs should really deny the fact that he was "unstoppable"... there's 82 other games in a season, 50/25 sounds pretty unstoppable to me.

Ignoring that, apart from the later stages in his career (despite a drop from the regular season) he wasn't exactly disappointing in the playoffs...

http://basketballreference.com/players/ ... =CHAMBWI01

Then what is the point of doing it all if you can't make it happen when your team really needs you??? I wouldn't call that unstoppable.

[J@3]

To be honest, I don't think the way he played in the play-offs should really deny the fact that he was "unstoppable"... there's 82 other games in a season, 50/25 sounds pretty unstoppable to me.

Ignoring that, apart from the later stages in his career (despite a drop from the regular season) he wasn't exactly disappointing in the playoffs...

http://basketballreference.com/players/ ... =CHAMBWI01

Then what is the point of doing it all if you can't make it happen when your team really needs you??? I wouldn't call that unstoppable.

Because if he didn't do it at all the team wouldn't have even made the play offs .. add to that, you wouldn't call his regular season averages unstoppable? This isn't a "Jordan vs Wilt in the Play-Offs" thread.

Add to that... I don't really have an opinion on who was better.. Jordan was the better guard, Wilt was the better C.

[Jackal_]

I think it's too hard to compare Wilt and Mike... they are undoubtedly the best players to ever play the game but keep in mind they played in totally different era's. No matter what there will be some that think MJ was better and some that think Wilt was.. both were extremely good at what they did and were very successful..

If someone asked me who I'd pick I wouldn't be able to answer that...

[beau_boy04]

To be honest, I don't think the way he played in the play-offs should really deny the fact that he was "unstoppable"... there's 82 other games in a season, 50/25 sounds pretty unstoppable to me.

Ignoring that, apart from the later stages in his career (despite a drop from the regular season) he wasn't exactly disappointing in the playoffs...

http://basketballreference.com/players/ ... =CHAMBWI01

Then what is the point of doing it all if you can't make it happen when your team really needs you??? I wouldn't call that unstoppable.

Because if he didn't do it at all the team wouldn't have even made the play offs .. add to that, you wouldn't call his regular season averages unstoppable? This isn't a "Jordan vs Wilt in the Play-Offs" thread.

Add to that... I don't really have an opinion on who was better.. Jordan was the better guard, Wilt was the better C.

Yes, but we're talking about them in every aspect of the game including regular season, playoff, finals, etc Michael Jordan dominated in all 3 of them making him a better, more valuable and complete player than Wilt.

[J@3]

To be honest, I don't think the way he played in the play-offs should really deny the fact that he was "unstoppable"... there's 82 other games in a season, 50/25 sounds pretty unstoppable to me.

Ignoring that, apart from the later stages in his career (despite a drop from the regular season) he wasn't exactly disappointing in the playoffs...

http://basketballreference.com/players/ ... =CHAMBWI01

Then what is the point of doing it all if you can't make it happen when your team really needs you??? I wouldn't call that unstoppable.

Because if he didn't do it at all the team wouldn't have even made the play offs .. add to that, you wouldn't call his regular season averages unstoppable? This isn't a "Jordan vs Wilt in the Play-Offs" thread.

Add to that... I don't really have an opinion on who was better.. Jordan was the better guard, Wilt was the better C.

Yes, but we're talking about them in every aspect of the game including regular season, playoff, finals, etc Michael Jordan dominated in all 3 of them making him a better, more valuable and complete player than Wilt.

I'm not saying MJ wasn't better I'm saying you can't say he wasn't unstoppable just because he wasn't as good as MJ in the play-offs.

[Matthew]

I'm not saying MJ wasn't better I'm saying you can't say he wasn't unstoppable just because he wasn't as good as MJ in the play-offs.

But that would be a point that he was containable in the big games. He couldn't take a game over the way Hakeem, MJ, Shaq, Magic, Larry and co were able to... which means he isnt this unstopable force that people make him out to be.

[BiGrEd819]

Are you guys Fxxxing kidding me???!!! i mean... i personally dont worship MJ as much as many others do but come on... he wuz at the top with larry nd magic his rookie year, gets injured for a whole season nd still makes a playoff appearance, 5 championship rings nd made everyone in the team allstars...nd every superstar he played against, whether it wuz larry, magic, shaq, penny, drexler, malone nd stockton, he schooled them...On the other hand Wilt wuz amazing in his own ways and i dont know wut some of u guys are talkin bout but Wilt had one of the best teamates in history....remember that guy named Jerry West??!! And like MJ Wilt wznt able to get championship rings until he went to the lakers along with a great team...but in the end u hav to consider the fact that athletes back then werent as physically monstrous like today( not many gaurds weighed over 200lbs) plus the fact that they had slightly different rules nd restrictions... if u had a time machine nd if MJ wuz able to play back in the 60's nd the early 70's do u guys really think Wilt wouldve been a bigger threat...imagine gaurds who are 6'3-6'4 at average weighing barely 200lbs defending MJ who has a sizable advantage in addition to the fact that he has unstoppable jumpshots and a jaw droppin vertical leap...vice versa Wilt Chamberlain vs. superstars of the 90;s ive mentioned before with more strict rules....its not really fair to compare players in different positions especially when theyre from very different eras but Wilt wuz infact stoppable(by bill russel's Celtics) nd on the other hand MJ wznt ...

[AlwaysWhat,NeverWhy]

Oh, for crying out loud, stop this argument already... there can never be a clear-cutr decision as to who was REALLY better. We're talkning different worlds here...

[Matthew]

Dweaver, nobody cares what you think. If you dont have anything to say apart from "amen" and then criticise others for having a discussion, shut up.

Big Red, that would have been a good post if you typed properly and used paragraphs. Some good points in there. But the underlying factor (i think you touched on it): Wilt was dominant back in the 60's, but theres a question mark if he could've done it in the 80's and 90's. I dont think theres any real doubt as to if MJ could have been at least as dominant as he was in the 90's in the 60's.

[AlwaysWhat,NeverWhy]

Dweaver, nobody cares what you think. If you dont have anything to say apart from "amen" and then criticise others for having a discussion, shut up.

Lessons on debating, part 1.

Big Red, that would have been a good post if you typed properly and used paragraphs.

Lessons on debating, part 2.



Good to have you back, Matt.

[Matthew]

Lessons on making sense

Chapter one
(refer to previous post)

Chapter 2
(Refer to upcomming post by Dweaver)


It's good to be back.

[AlwaysWhat,NeverWhy]

It's good to be back.

Aye, this'll be fun.

[Fenix]

Let's make something clear. If Wilt played now, in this centreless league, he would dominate. I mean, he would still have psychical advantage over anyone not named Shaq, plus from what I have read and heard, his skill level was better than people think. Most of you point at the period of his career when he gathered all those statistic accolades (with that I mean scoring records), when his role in the he played for was scoring. There are numerous analysis which claim that he turned into a new, diferent player in the late 60' and early 70'. He took the role of Bill Russel (D, blocking, rebounding), and as Russel himself said, he did that job better than anyone before him, including Celtic's centre. That was clearly evident in the 1971-1972 season. Plus, he upgraded Russel's model with excellent passing, which he did it with such skills never before (and perhaps never agan) seen from the C position. And he didn't have to dominate the ball to average that 8.6 assists per game average in 1967/1968. Equally impressive are his rebounding numbers - he was one of the best rebounders of all time, and only because of his size and athleticism, but also because of his sheer talent. Look at his numbers in the early '70. Have they dropped comparing to his early years, when everyone were smaller? Of course, but he was still on top of the league in that category. In his last season he outrebounded eleven years younger Kareem (BTW, Jabbar was 7'2'' - an inch taller than Wilt). Now, lets compare Wilt to Jordan. Jordan showed that his team can go only as far as he can go - he needed to be the center of attention, the center of offense. But Wilt, on the other hand, proved that he's much more versatile than that: if his team needs him to score, he will score and so long with every aspect of the game. Jordan was clearly a better winner than Wilt, but if we're talking about basketball talent, then Wilt takes the cup.

[J@3]

I'm not saying MJ wasn't better I'm saying you can't say he wasn't unstoppable just because he wasn't as good as MJ in the play-offs.

But that would be a point that he was containable in the big games. He couldn't take a game over the way Hakeem, MJ, Shaq, Magic, Larry and co were able to... which means he isnt this unstopable force that people make him out to be.

How does it mean that though? The term "unstoppable" isn't used to the exact literal sense.During the regular season he played against the same teams as he would go on to play in the play-offs... in the regular season he was an absolute beast. I really don't know how people can discredit 82 games a season just because he wasn't as good in the play-offs.

But that would be a point that he was containable in the big games.

Wilt Chamberlain Play Off Stats from age 23 to 31...

31.3ppg
26.9rpg
3.8apg
.513fgp
28.4mpg

I don't know if I'd exactly call that contained... if a guy averaging 50/25 in the regular season averages 35/25 in the play-offs he's still dominating your team.

As I said before, I refuse to compare MJ to Wilt, not even because of the whole era thing but they played entirely different positions... I think MJ was better in the play-offs, he obviously won more often but I can't possibly agree that Wilt wasn't "unstoppable" (not in the literal sense, if that was the case he'd be averaging 150 a game on 100% shooting) just because his averages dipped in the playoffs. Especially despite the fact that his averages dipped, they were still huge.

[Matthew]

You think Wilt would be able to dominate against Duncan, Shaq, Amare, Yao, Ben Wallace? Remember, Wilt had his problems against the likes of Russel (6'9), Willis Reed (6'10). When matched up against Kareem, he was virtually helpless. Expect the same against Shaq, Duncan and even a motivated KG and Jermaine O'neal.

Centres are more common today then they were back in the 60's. 90% of the centres back then would be considered power forwards in today's NBA.

As for the inflated stats, remember the average for an nba team was 108 shots per game. 108! Thats about 30 more than a nba team averages these days. When a team has that many more shots, there are naturally more possesions. More possesions means more rebounds, more opportunities to score, get assists, get blocks... the same goes for oscar. If lebron gets a triple double for a season, it means that much more becuase of the amount of possesions a nba team has.

Jordan showed that his team can go only as far as he can go - he needed to be the center of attention, the center of offense.

This is not true. However Jordan was a classic example of a "do-er". If somthing needed to be done, he didnt stand there with his hands on his hips. He went out there and got the job done. As I said before, Jordan is a classic cross of Magic and Kobe. He can take over with his scoring when needed, and also he can take over with his passing. Remember, Jordan averaged 8 apg when he played point guard for the bulls, so how can you say he wasnt versatile?

Jordan was clearly a better winner than Wilt, but if we're talking about basketball talent, then Wilt takes the cup.

Talent doesnt mean a thing. Isiah Rider has more talent than Ben Wallace. Kobe has more talent than Larry Bird, Lebron has more talent than Magic. But winning, desire, and skill (not talent, skill) makes the difference.

Wilt was like kg when you think about it. Posts massive numbers, sparingly wins in the playoffs, but gets mentioned in the same breathe as duncan when he really hasnt earned it. Ditto for Tmac.

[J@3]

Isiah Rider has more talent than Ben Wallace.

With a bigger bong than Lamar Odom

[Matthew]

How does it mean that though? The term "unstoppable" isn't used to the exact literal sense.During the regular season he played against the same teams as he would go on to play in the play-offs... in the regular season he was an absolute beast. I really don't know how people can discredit 82 games a season just because he wasn't as good in the play-offs.

I'm not. Those are very impresive numbers. However, would the 72-10 bulls team be regarded as one of the best teams in nba history if they lost to seattle or orlando? Of course not! The same goes here.

And don't worry, MJ is held to the same standard. Nearly every serious NBA fan regards Jordans seasons from 91-93 as his best, when he was winning. Not when he was racking up 30-8-8, or getting 37 ppg. Winning isnt everything, but it does mean alot. Jordan's greatest seasons (and most unstopable) were when he won.

But think about this: How many of those games did he just go out there and rack up stats against inferior competition? Think about it. I'm not trying to discredit what he's done... but he didnt dominate the Celtics the way he did everyone else. He struggled against them and posted no where near what he posted against the rest of the league.

And they say the NBA was watered down in the 90's

Wilt Chamberlain Play Off Stats from age 23 to 31...

31.3ppg
26.9rpg
3.8apg
.513fgp
28.4mpg

I don't know if I'd exactly call that contained... if a guy averaging 50/25 in the regular season averages 35/25 in the play-offs he's still dominating your team.

Team success. Shaq posted very similar numbers against the Jazz in the 98 conference finals and they were swept. They left Ostertag and foster on him in single coverage alot of the time and dared eddie jones and nick van excel to beat them. Shaq of course dominated Ostertag and Adam Keefe, but he didnt dominate the jazz.

As I said before, I refuse to compare MJ to Wilt, not even because of the whole era thing but they played entirely different positions... I think MJ was better in the play-offs, he obviously won more often but I can't possibly agree that Wilt wasn't "unstoppable" (not in the literal sense, if that was the case he'd be averaging 150 a game on 100% shooting) just because his averages dipped in the playoffs. Especially despite the fact that his averages dipped, they were still huge.

That's why you're the best poster here , you make sense. You read articles here about the myth of wilt, they make out he could have averaged 150 ppg. He wasnt that good. If he was truely on that level, wouldnt he have won more?

IMHO, if wilt wasnt dead, we wouldnt even have this discussion. Before he died, people would rank magic and russell ahead of him all the time. Now, maybe becuase he died, people are quick to put him on a level he really doesnt deserve.

And just remember, I was a big Jordan and Bulls hater in the 90's.