Where did I say he wasn't putting up "numbers"?Kobe scored 81, Lebron averages 30 ppg, there were seasons MJ and Shaq average above 37 ppg, yet the best scoring center of all time is not putting up numbers?
I said he's not putting up 50 and 30. 
The myth that Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain never played against players over 6'5
- Thread starter UpAndComing
- Start date
I said he's not putting up 50 and 30. Since Barkley's major post move (spending 15 seconds dribbling backwards into the key slowly using his fat ass to clear space) was made illegal by the NBA twenty years ago, yet zones are now legal, hell no that fat pizza-eating midget wouldn't be dominating no low post game today. How would he get his shot off down there without any quick or polished post moves when every team has multiple fast and athletic help defenders several inches taller than him and can play a zone that collapses on him the second he gets close? Barkley couldn't live in the low post, he'd be mostly relying on his poor-man's version of Lebron's bowling-ball drive, and even that would be less effective today. He'd still be a good player, but...
The lies nikka will spin, thank God for video
Barkley would smoke 99% of these floppin' azz p*ssies in today's NBA. No era of the NBA had better defense than the 90s, and Barkley DOMINATED in that era. Somebody revoke this guy's posting privileges PLEASE. 
What legendary SGs did Jordan dominate one-on-one? Bird and Magic and Isaiah were past their prime before he could sniff the playoffs. Being guarded by the likes of Gary Payton and John Starks and sh*t. He did lose to Penny though
. Maybe Penny is the greatest SG of all time 
Your argument is so cotdamn retarded, as if height was ever the determining factor of skill at the C position. If that's the case Manute Bol and Yao Ming are the greatest centers ever 
I would take a 6'10" C with a 7'0" wingspan with handles, a hook shot, and fundamentals over a 7'5"C with a 40" vertical. Tony Allen is like 6'2" and regularly plays solid D against people 5" taller than him. IF YOU HOLD A SUPERSTAR TO UNDER 30 POINTS YOU PLAYED EXCELLENT defense. Superstarts are ALWAYS going to get their points, you can only hope to contain them. My bad only in the playoffs but you get my point.
Big Ben was probably single handedly the reason the Pistons beat the Lakers yet he was only 6'8". I don't get how these people are allowed to even make threads. Mods get on your job please and come up with some vetting procedures.
You do realize Wilt's scoring in general went down after 1966? He decided his formula for winning required him to pass more and focus on defense. It is the reason he led the league in total assists. Wilt was a freakish athlete and an arrogant ass, the latter rightly or wrongly is a trait with many all time greats. There is nothing Shaq could do he couldn't, but there are nuances to Wilt's game Shaq never mastered. If Shaq dominated in this era, what on earth makes you think Wilt couldn't? You can take shots at Russell( though disrespectful as well) but Wilt would dominate in any era. He was a once in a lifetime athlete.How are you going to talk about how "great" they are without reference to their size, skills, and who they faced?
Anyone tall, strong, and coordinated looks amazing in an era full of 6'5" White guys. Russell and the Boston Celtics were dominating the league for over a decade in Wilt's era even though the team was 3/4 White guys, Russell was often the only guy who played for them who was over 6'7", and some seasons they didn't have a single guy listed over 220lbs. Knicks made the Finals as late as 1972 despite their tallest dude (who not only had to guard Wilt, but outscored him 21ppg to 19ppg) was 6'8" Jerry Lucas.
It was a new league that wasn't very popular yet (baseball, football, boxing were all bigger), they didn't bring in any international talent and they kept a cap on the number of Black guys on the team. Of course the talent level is going to be low.
How the hell Bill Russell's skinny 220lb ass putting up 35ppg now when he was only putting up 15ppg in an era where hardly anyone was over 6'6".
Bill Russell never averaged more than 22.4ppg in a postseason EVER, was almost always under 20, and only averaged 16ppg in the playoffs for his career.
Wilt never averaged more than 23.7ppg in a postseason after 1966 and was only 22.5ppg for his career, with even that inflated by the weak-ass competition of the early 1960s. And there was way MORE scoring in their era, not less, and far EASIER defenders to go against.
Ya'all delusional as fukk.
What kind of dumbass logic are you trying to use here? Yes, the fact that Jordan was regularly guarded by shorter and less athletic guards should be taken into consideration (not only those two, most of the guys he faced in that era were only 6'2" to 6'4" at most), but we have plenty of other data to look at too where he faced bigger, athletic guys. There would have been more players to match up against Jordan now, but he still showed what he could do to them.
Wilt literally never faced a talented 7-footer in the playoffs his entire career until Kareem came into the league, and Kareem destroyed him scoring-wise. Nearly all his playoff experience was against guys 6'10" and shorter, many of them stiffs, and he often faced teams that only had one or two guys over 6'8". I have never, ever said that Wilt "couldn't play in the modern NBA", of COURSE he could, but he wouldn't be the dominant scorer that he was against short White guys.
Hell, even look at his playoff numbers in his own era. He only averaged 22.5ppg for his playoff career, only about 16ppg in the 2nd half of his career (post-1966). But he'd magically double that 50 years later when the league on average is 4" taller, 50lbs heavier, far more athletic and far more skilled?
Since Barkley's major post move (spending 15 seconds dribbling backwards into the key slowly using his fat ass to clear space) was made illegal by the NBA twenty years ago, yet zones are now legal, hell no that fat pizza-eating midget wouldn't be dominating no low post game today. How would he get his shot off down there without any quick or polished post moves when every team has multiple fast and athletic help defenders several inches taller than him and can play a zone that collapses on him the second he gets close? Barkley couldn't live in the low post, he'd be mostly relying on his poor-man's version of Lebron's bowling-ball drive, and even that would be less effective today. He'd still be a good player, but...
FreddyCalhoun
All Star
But they hyping Zion Williamson for dunking on said 5'8 white guys
Guess it doesn't matter if you aren't a big man
That dude is not gonna be that nice...He's just bigger than everyone
Fast Break
Triple Teamed
On the Block
Playing off the ball
The lies nikka will spin, thank God for video
What did you even think you showed in any of those videos that contradicts what I said?
And the 1990s DID NOT have zone defenses. You can't deny that. Their defensive schemes didn't even begin to touch some of the things teams were doing 20 years later.
What legendary SGs did Jordan dominate one-on-one? Bird and Magic and Isaiah were past their prime before he could sniff the playoffs. Being guarded by the likes of Gary Payton and John Starks and sh*t. He did lose to Penny though
Did you mysteriously forget about Clyde Drexler? He was the prototypical big elite shooting guard. You could also say Reggie, though obviously Reggie's defense left something to be desired.
What did you even think you showed in any of those videos that contradicts what I said?
And the 1990s DID NOT have zone defenses. You can't deny that. Their defensive schemes didn't even begin to touch some of the things teams were doing 20 years later.
Did you mysteriously forget about Clyde Drexler? He was the prototypical big elite shooting guard. You could also say Reggie, though obviously Reggie's defense left something to be desired.
Clyde was on par physically with VC? T-Mac? Kobe? Durant? Wade? The talent at the SG position is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY better than it was in the 90s. Does that make any of those players greater than MJ? And you said Barkley was slow and dribbled around for 15 minutes and couldn't compete in today's NBA, on top of trying to act like height was the difference maker in the post, which Barkley proved it's clearly not. You obviously never watched Barkley run the fast break for the Sixers, if so you would never spew as much idiocy as you are doing now
And for the record THE 90s DIDN'T HAVE ZONE DEFENSE BECAUSE THEY HAD BETTER DEFENDERS! You need a zone defense when your players suck individually on defense. That wasn't the case in the 90s. Now go on 
while Shaq dominating MacCulloch, Collins and Rik Smits. Wilt was facing real men like Russell, Reed, Lucas and Nate Thurmond. All HOF and all among the 50 Greatest Players ever to play the game.
What legendary SGs did Jordan dominate one-on-one? Bird and Magic and Isaiah were past their prime before he could sniff the playoffs. Being guarded by the likes of Gary Payton and John Starks and sh*t. He did lose to Penny though
And for the record THE 90s DIDN'T HAVE ZONE DEFENSE BECAUSE THEY HAD BETTER DEFENDERS! You need a zone defense when your players suck individually on defense. That wasn't the case in the 90s. Now go on
YOUR ARGUMENT IS RETARDED BECAUSE JORDAN DIDN'T FACE ANY GREAT DEFENDERS!
CLYDE DREXLER ISN'T ON PAR PHYSICALLY WITH T-MAC OR KOBE OR WADE!
THE 90s DIDN'T HAVE ZONE DEFENSE BECAUSE THEY HAD BETTER DEFENDERS!
I mean,
I should have realized when you listed Bird, Magic, Isaiah, Gary Payton, and Penny as "shooting guards", and yet somehow forgot all three of Jordan's actual biggest rivals at shooting guard in that era (Dumars, Clyde, Reggie). Then throwing in Carter/T-Mac as modern shooting guards was already borderline, but including Durant? And then you claimed the 90s had better defenders one breathe after claiming that the 90s didn't have defenders.
You're trolling, right? The 1990s were an expansion era. Six new teams were added in seven years. The talent HAD to be diluted when that happened. What made them better defenders when they added a bunch of new teams in an era with a smaller pool of talent? Magic Era Dust?
The zone was instituted when scoring in the NBA was only 95ppg and the average team was shooting 44.5% from the field. It was NOT instituted because players sucked individually on defense. It was instituted because teams were running boring-ass isolation plays, putting their best player one-on-one against his opponent, and people got sick of iso-ball. The zone did make scoring harder, causing scoring to crash to 93ppg and FG% to 43.9%, which is why hand-checking then had to be banned in order to cancel out the effect to some degree. But the purpose was to improve ball movement and make the game more interesting, so that great iso players like MJ and Shaq wouldn't just destroy the same helpless defender over and over. It made iso ball FAR more difficult.
I literally never said that Barkley was slow OR that he dribbled around for 15 minutes OR that he couldn't compete in today's NBA.
What I did say was that Barkley's main post move was slowly backing down his defender for 15 seconds, and that it was made illegal. Which is true. That was a major move of Barkley's and is WAS made illegal. I said that Barkley would be GOOD in today's NBA, but he couldn't live in the low post, because he didn't have a great array of quick post moves and because the zone specifically makes life harder for post players, especially for shorter ones. Which is true.
Last edited:
Let's just ignore that the NBA had just moved the lane out from 12 feet to 16 feet, making it much more difficult to just park yourself next to the hoop. Wilt "coincidentally" began taking fewer shots at that point.
But think about what you're saying. In an era when many teams only had 1-2 live players over 6'6" and often no one over 6'9", Wilt Chamberlain STILL couldn't win championships by dominating the scoring. Why the hell not, and why couldn't today's teams stop him even easier?
Why didn't Wilt Chamberlain score more than 14 points in the deciding Game 7 in 1968? Why didn't he shoot more than ONCE in the second half? Didn't his team NEED a few more points in that game? He was 4-9 from the field and 6-15 from the line, but you talking like he was just "picking his spots".
In the 1969 Finals, Wilt went 2-11 for 8 points in Game 4, one of THREE times that he scored in single-digits in that Finals loss. You can NOT blame that simply on a change in approach, his offense fukking sucked in that entire series, to the tune of 11.9ppg on crap shooting efficiency.
In the 1970 Finals, you can't really blame "focusing on defense" because the 6'9" Willis Reed was destroying him to the tune of 32ppg until Reed got hurt in Game 5. Yet Wilt only averaged 19ppg in the 6 games Reed played, even though Reed was injured in two of them. In Game 5, Reed went out, which left the Knicks with NO ONE at center with NBA skills, and Chamberlain's Lakers still took the L. In Game 7, Reed came back injured and limping around the court the whole game, but Chamberlain could only manage 21 points on him (including 1-11 from the line) and he lost a Game 7 in the Finals for the third straight year.
In the 1971 WCF, why's he getting outscored 37ppg to 20ppg by rookie Kareem in a 5-game loss if he's "focusing on defense"?
Saying that he was using a different approach wasn't enough. He simply wasn't dominating good teams offensively anymore in the 2nd half of his career, when the competition got tougher and the lane got wider.
And don't forget that Shaq's era was NOT this era. Once zone defenses were implemented, Shaq only scored more than 22ppg once (that first season after, when teams were still figuring out how to zone) and never again won an MVP or Finals MVP. Shaq came during the expansion era when talent got a bit diluted, and dominated only until the zone came in (a rule change specifically applied to stop him). I agree that Wilt would be a Shaq-like player, only 50lbs lighter and even worse from the free throw line. Both would be great centers in the current era, neither would dominate.
UpAndComing
Veteran
0:27
This is the same era they prop up that allows horrendous traveling
while Shaq dominating MacCulloch, Collins and Rik Smits. Wilt was facing real men like Russell, Reed, Lucas and Nate Thurmond. All HOF and all among the 50 Greatest Players ever to play the game.
They're all HOF and listed among the 50 Greatest Players because they were part of the first generation of the game and they dominated their competition. That doesn't mean they'd be great today. Paul fukking Arazin is HOF and was listed in the 50 Greatest Players too. Paul Arazin couldn't fukking start for a good D1 team today.
Now, you brag about Wilt facing real men like Russell, Reed, Lucas, Nate Thurmond. Let's work backwards:
Nate Thurmond, at 6'11" , was one of the few guys Wilt ever faced in the playoffs even close to his size, and the only one other than Kareem who was any good.
Wilt faced Nate Thurmond 3 times in the playoffs. Wilt averaged 18ppg, 12ppg, and 7ppg against Nate in those three series.
You are NOT bragging about Wilt based on his performances against Nate Thurmond.
Jerry Lucas was a 6'8" White dude who Wilt could practically rest his chin on:
The one time Wilt and Lucas guarded each other in a playoff series, Lucas outscored Wilt 21ppg to 19ppg despite giving up 5 inches and a shytload of athleticism.
You are NOT bragging about Wilt based on his performance against Jerry Lucas.
Willis Reed was a 6'9" baller who was out for 7 of the 18 games that Wilt faced him as a center in the playoffs and injured in two more.
In 1970, Wilt was outscored by the much shorter Reed 37 to 17, 29 to 19, 38 to 21, and 23 to 19 in the first four games, before Reed got hurt in Game 5. And Wilt STILL lost the series when he was only able to put up 21 points against an injured, limping Reed in Game 7.
In 1972, Reed was injured and out the whole series, the only reason the Lakers won.
In 1973, Wilt lost to Reed and the Knicks in 5, averaging only 11.6ppg on 52% shooting and 37% free throws.
Hell, in 11 games against Reed at center, Wilt only won 3 games, two of them by a combined 5 points and the other in overtime, and only because Jerry West averaged 32ppg in those three wins.
You are NOT bragging about Wilt based on his performances against Willis Reed.
Finally, you have 6'10", 220lb Bill Russell, who was a fantastic player but was the size Dwight Howard would be if Dwight did meth
Wilt faced Russell in the playoffs 8 times. He lost 7 times.
Even though Russell not only was 4 inches shorter than Wilt, he often was the only Celtic over 6'6" who got any playing time.
Some years the Celtics didn't even have a single guy on the roster listed over 220lbs.
You are NOT bragging about Wilt based on his performances against Bill Russell.
That's why this "name-dropping" shyt is stupid. You just list a bunch of names because they're old and mythical and expect that to be the whole argument. You ignore all the circumstances about how good that competition actually was, which is bad enough. But even worse, you ignore that Wilt didn't dominate ANY of the guys you named.
Last edited:
while Shaq dominating MacCulloch, Collins and Rik Smits. Wilt was facing real men like Russell, Reed, Lucas and Nate Thurmond. All HOF and all among the 50 Greatest Players ever to play the game.
I agree that Shaq had his best days when the league was still a bit diluted from the expansion era. But you're not getting away with that dumb shyt, naming a few random guys that Shaq faced without even mentioning the stars, then mentioning the stars that Wilt faced even though they all worked him.
Shaq had to go against The Dream, The Admiral, Mutombo, Sabonis, Duncan, etc, and that's JUST counting the guys he faced before the zone era changed things up for post players.
Here are a few of the big and/or good centers that Shaq faced in the playoffs (before the zone really started changing things) and how he did against them.
Against 7'0", 255lb Hakeem Olajuwon: 29ppg on 56% shooting, 51% from the line, wins one and loses one.
Against 7'1", 235lb David Robinson/ 6'11", 250lb Tim Duncan: 25ppg on 52% shooting, 56% from the line, wins two and loses one
Against 7'2", 245lb Dikembe Mutombo, 33ppg on 57% shooting, 51% from the line, wins one
Against 7'2", 265lb Luc Longley: 27ppg on 56% shooting, 54% from the line, wins two and loses one
Against 7'3", 280lb Arvydis Sabonis: 28 ppg on 55% shooting, 55% from the line, wins four times
Against 7'2", 280lb Greg Ostertag: 26ppg on 53% shooting, 51% from the line, loses twice
Against 7'1", 240lb Jim McIlvaine: 31ppg on 61% shooting, 60% from the line, wins once
Against 7'1", 235lb Vlade Divac, 31ppg on 55% shooting, 53% from the line, wins three times
Against 7'4", 250lb Rik Smits: 30ppg on 62% shooting, 44% from the line, wins twice
Against 7'0", 280lb Todd McCulloch: 36ppg on 60% shooting, 66% from the line, wins once
Remember, you could only list TWO seven-footers that Wilt had ever faced in the playoffs, and his performances against them weren't great. Even when you list the good, shorter centers that Wilt faced, he didn't offensively dominate any of them.
Yet Shaq consistently put up strong scoring and/or wins against a ton of different big centers, quite a few of them Hall of Famers.
And don't rip on Shaq dominating Rik Smits. The only time Wilt ever faced a 7'3" guy, it was an alcoholic named "Swede"....and "Swede" beat Wilt in a 3-game sweep.
Last edited: