@DIMEMAN said:
I would put the Bulls right up there winning 6 Championships in an 8 year period. And the only reason it wasn't 8 for 8 is that Jordan decided he wanted to play Baseball ...... that lasted 2 years.
Didn't last two years. Lasted a little over 1-1/2. Jordan came back and played. And lost.
LeBron consistently gets hammered for losing in the Finals 5 times when Michael lost 0. OK, fair enough. If you're going to do that, though, you have to bash Michael for not even getting to the Finals in a lot of his seasons.
I was just watching the pre game of an NBA game and to a man Paul Pierse, Jalen Rose and Chauncy Billups all said MJ is #1 GOAT and that James is maybe in the top 5. These are all ex players and their reasoning was spot on. The only people that thinks James is the GOAT is James and those who only have seen resent players. People who know Basketball and any list I have ever seen put MJ as the GOAT.
@DIMEMAN said:
I was just watching the pre game of an NBA game and to a man Paul Pierse, Jalen Rose and Chauncy Billups all said MJ is #1 GOAT and that James is maybe in the top 5. These are all ex players and their reasoning was spot on. The only people that thinks James is the GOAT is James and those who only have seen resent players. People who know Basketball and any list I have ever seen put MJ as the GOAT.
Objection all hearsay , inadmissible in a court of law. Sustained
That some guy said a thing and I agree is not proof of anything. Thats sheep thinking
Michael Jordan's First Retirement: Was It a Secret Suspension?
I'm shocked, shocked I say, to find out there's gambling going on in here. All the Pete Rose haters know where to sit and spin.
<<< I've never even heard rumors of that, but if serious, do share. >>>
You asked for it, so i posted it. This is actually old news.
Everybody back then knew that Jordan was a degenerate big time gambler. It takes very little stretch of the imagination to believe that like Rose, Jordan may have taken his gambling habit too far.
Jordan back then may have had endorsements that topped his NBA salary. When he switched to baseball with the "story" that he gave for doing so, I don't recall him losing any endorsements. So the "secret suspension" if this is what happened, which is likely what occurred, seemed to work out as best as possible for Jordan, and for the NBA which had no desire to permanently crush their superstar attraction.
There is no spin here at all, and comparing a league's decision on this situation with Jordan to Rose is basically off the mark. Michael Jordan meant infinitely more to the NBA than Pete Rose did to MLB.
I've never even heard rumors of that, but if serious, do share.
zero proof, but i find it significantly more plausible than the most competitive athlete of my lifetime forgoing two years of his prime and making a whimsical decision to go masquerade as Mario Mendoza in the lower rungs of the White Sox org
I've never even heard rumors of that, but if serious, do share.
zero proof, but i find it significantly more plausible than the most competitive athlete of my lifetime forgoing two years of his prime and making a whimsical decision to go masquerade as Mario Mendoza in the lower rungs of the White Sox org
naiveté........i try to avoid it at all cost
And it will probably always be zero proof as far as the public is concerned. Likely it was a legal agreement which both parties agreed to be permanently sealed.
Michael Jordan's First Retirement: Was It a Secret Suspension?
I'm shocked, shocked I say, to find out there's gambling going on in here. All the Pete Rose haters know where to sit and spin.
<<< I've never even heard rumors of that, but if serious, do share. >>>
You asked for it, so i posted it. This is actually old news.
Everybody back then knew that Jordan was a degenerate big time gambler. It takes very little stretch of the imagination to believe that like Rose, Jordan may have taken his gambling habit too far.
Jordan back then may have had endorsements that topped his NBA salary. When he switched to baseball with the "story" that he gave for doing so, I don't recall him losing any endorsements. So the "secret suspension" if this is what happened, which is likely what occurred, seemed to work out as best as possible for Jordan, and for the NBA which had no desire to permanently crush their superstar attraction.
There is no spin here at all, and comparing a league's decision on this situation with Jordan to Rose is basically off the mark. Michael Jordan meant infinitely more to the NBA than Pete Rose did to MLB.
Wasn't there speculation back then also that Jordan's father was murdered due to his gambling debts or involvement with known bookies?
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
James might be the GOAT but it’s so not cool to call yourself that.
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@DIMEMAN said:
LOL!!!!! He just wishes he was as great as MJ!
No,He is as great as MJ in his own way but pointing to this series as why he's the goat comes with a disclaimer for the reason i just mentioned above.
In is own mind maybe. MJ carried the Bulls to 6 Championships. He didn't have near the players helping that Lebron had to get his 3. Not even close.
You don't think playing with HOFers Pippen and Rodman didn't help? Kerr and Kukoc weren't too shabby, either.
James had virtually no one around him in Cleveland.
I didn't say MJ had nothing......but James had the big 3 in Miami where he got 2 rings and the one in Cleveland he had several real good players.
James's supporting cast in Cleveland was nowhere close to what Jordan had in Chicago. Let's not make things up.
I'm not making up:
JR Smith
Korver
Tristan Thompson
I’m still laughing at you listing those three players. They are not real good players. I’d rather have Bill Wennington, BJ Armstrong and Luc Longley then those 3 players and so would Lebron
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Michael Jordan's First Retirement: Was It a Secret Suspension?
I'm shocked, shocked I say, to find out there's gambling going on in here. All the Pete Rose haters know where to sit and spin.
<<< I've never even heard rumors of that, but if serious, do share. >>>
You asked for it, so i posted it. This is actually old news.
Everybody back then knew that Jordan was a degenerate big time gambler. It takes very little stretch of the imagination to believe that like Rose, Jordan may have taken his gambling habit too far.
Jordan back then may have had endorsements that topped his NBA salary. When he switched to baseball with the "story" that he gave for doing so, I don't recall him losing any endorsements. So the "secret suspension" if this is what happened, which is likely what occurred, seemed to work out as best as possible for Jordan, and for the NBA which had no desire to permanently crush their superstar attraction.
There is no spin here at all, and comparing a league's decision on this situation with Jordan to Rose is basically off the mark. Michael Jordan meant infinitely more to the NBA than Pete Rose did to MLB.
Wasn't there speculation back then also that Jordan's father was murdered due to his gambling debts or involvement with known bookies?
Sounds like something MS-13 would do, doesn't it?
I didn't google it, but I think that the police somehow found the two killers who did it. If i recall correctly, it was two local punks who lived nearby, where Jordan's father just happened to be resting in his car off the side of the road. Probably their motive was robbery, and they didn't want to leave a witness.
@DIMEMAN said:
I would put the Bulls right up there winning 6 Championships in an 8 year period. And the only reason it wasn't 8 for 8 is that Jordan decided he wanted to play Baseball ...... that lasted 2 years.
Didn't last two years. Lasted a little over 1-1/2. Jordan came back and played. And lost.
LeBron consistently gets hammered for losing in the Finals 5 times when Michael lost 0. OK, fair enough. If you're going to do that, though, you have to bash Michael for not even getting to the Finals in a lot of his seasons.
He lost 6 times in the Finals not 5.
Yep, forgot about the first one. Same point.
Jordan lost in the first round three times. James never has.
Lemme just add - no problem if people pick MJ #1. He's certainly not a "wrong" choice.
People act like Lebron's block was in the final seconds of that game but it happened with a 1:50 to go while Golden State still had three more offensive possessions after the block
with all due respect, if you don't understand what that "block" did to affect the Warriors and the eventual outcome of the game, well, then you have just become to accustomed to the Pat's waltzing into the AFC Championship game. in short, you don't know sports(and I know you do).
Michael Jordan's First Retirement: Was It a Secret Suspension?
I'm shocked, shocked I say, to find out there's gambling going on in here. All the Pete Rose haters know where to sit and spin.
<<< I've never even heard rumors of that, but if serious, do share. >>>
You asked for it, so i posted it. This is actually old news.
Everybody back then knew that Jordan was a degenerate big time gambler. It takes very little stretch of the imagination to believe that like Rose, Jordan may have taken his gambling habit too far.
No, thanks for sharing. That was right about the time I was heading off to college and paid a lot less attention to pro sports. My first guess was just going to be something gambling related.
Jordan back then may have had endorsements that topped his NBA salary. When he switched to baseball with the "story" that he gave for doing so, I don't recall him losing any endorsements. So the "secret suspension" if this is what happened, which is likely what occurred, seemed to work out as best as possible for Jordan, and for the NBA which had no desire to permanently crush their superstar attraction.
There is no spin here at all, and comparing a league's decision on this situation with Jordan to Rose is basically off the mark. Michael Jordan meant infinitely more to the NBA than Pete Rose did to MLB.
What they meant to their respective leagues is irrelevant, one is a well respected HOFer and team owner, and the other a pariah. The only difference being how the leagues handled it. MLB publicly throws Pete under the bus while the NBA does a backroom deal to hide MJs transgressions. I don't know how many times I've read here where Pete committed the 'ultimate sin' in sports and never heard Jordan mentioned once in those discussions.
Michael Jordan's First Retirement: Was It a Secret Suspension?
I'm shocked, shocked I say, to find out there's gambling going on in here. All the Pete Rose haters know where to sit and spin.
<<< I've never even heard rumors of that, but if serious, do share. >>>
You asked for it, so i posted it. This is actually old news.
Everybody back then knew that Jordan was a degenerate big time gambler. It takes very little stretch of the imagination to believe that like Rose, Jordan may have taken his gambling habit too far.
No, thanks for sharing. That was right about the time I was heading off to college and paid a lot less attention to pro sports. My first guess was just going to be something gambling related.
Jordan back then may have had endorsements that topped his NBA salary. When he switched to baseball with the "story" that he gave for doing so, I don't recall him losing any endorsements. So the "secret suspension" if this is what happened, which is likely what occurred, seemed to work out as best as possible for Jordan, and for the NBA which had no desire to permanently crush their superstar attraction.
There is no spin here at all, and comparing a league's decision on this situation with Jordan to Rose is basically off the mark. Michael Jordan meant infinitely more to the NBA than Pete Rose did to MLB.
What they meant to their respective leagues is irrelevant, one is a well respected HOFer and team owner, and the other a pariah. The only difference being how the leagues handled it. MLB publicly throws Pete under the bus while the NBA does a backroom deal to hide MJs transgressions. I don't know how many times I've read here where Pete committed the 'ultimate sin' in sports and never heard Jordan mentioned once in those discussions.
Perhaps Jordan didn't lie about it, as Pete Rose often did?
Likely, we may never know for sure.
Sorry to disagree with ya because in my view what baseball fan wouldn't like Pete Rose? He was great for the game. And I will never forget how he helped the Phillies win a World Series. But in my opinion, Pete threw himself under the bus.
@keets said: People act like Lebron's block was in the final seconds of that game but it happened with a 1:50 to go while Golden State still had three more offensive possessions after the block
with all due respect, if you don't understand what that "block" did to affect the Warriors and the eventual outcome of the game, well, then you have just become to accustomed to the Pat's waltzing into the AFC Championship game. in short, you don't know sports(and I know you do).
So that blocked layup is the reason why Steph Curry,arguably the greatest shooter ever, misses three three point attempts after the block? Yeam i'm not buying that one.
And that situation is in no way comparable to any football game either. If Ben Roethlisberger throws an interception or has a 4th down pass deflected with 1:50 left versus the Patriots,Game Over.
1:50 left in the NBA is an eternity where in some cases you start fouling the opposing players to stop the clock,you could realistically end up having 5-6 offensive possessions if not more. In this situation GS didn't because it was only a 3pt game and they didn't need to.
I've never even heard rumors of that, but if serious, do share.
zero proof, but i find it significantly more plausible than the most competitive athlete of my lifetime forgoing two years of his prime and making a whimsical decision to go masquerade as Mario Mendoza in the lower rungs of the White Sox org
naiveté........i try to avoid it at all cost
And it will probably always be zero proof as far as the public is concerned. Likely it was a legal agreement which both parties agreed to be permanently sealed.
I have heard the rumors before, but it really would be amazing in todays age of journalism that someone hasn't dug into it and found someone who would talk. I mean, it has been over 20 years. It would be very interesting to hear the full story.
@DIMEMAN said:
I would put the Bulls right up there winning 6 Championships in an 8 year period. And the only reason it wasn't 8 for 8 is that Jordan decided he wanted to play Baseball ...... that lasted 2 years.
Didn't last two years. Lasted a little over 1-1/2. Jordan came back and played. And lost.
LeBron consistently gets hammered for losing in the Finals 5 times when Michael lost 0. OK, fair enough. If you're going to do that, though, you have to bash Michael for not even getting to the Finals in a lot of his seasons.
He lost 6 times in the Finals not 5.
Yep, forgot about the first one. Same point.
Jordan lost in the first round three times. James never has.
Lemme just add - no problem if people pick MJ #1. He's certainly not a "wrong" choice.
Fair enough. I feel the same about Lebron,he's definitely in the conversation and this debate,like the GOAT QB debate, is opinion based. Who picks who #1 is their choice and I wouldn't try to change that.
the truth as I see it is that many, many people so loathe Lebron James that they refuse to acknowledge the effect he can have on a game and how he affects players. in the last few games of that Finals he intimidated Draymond Green. when he blocked the shot by Iguadola it was off of a pass by Curry. don't you think that affects their play in desperation time??
the end of Game 7, the last 4-5 minutes, was marred by players on both sides not being able to make shots -- the Cavs mainly at the rim and the Warriors mainly at the arc. when it reversed, Lebron blocked the shot at the rim and Irving made the shot at the arc. interestingly, the Cavs called a time-out and drew up "The Play" where they isolated the Golden Boy Curry on Irving and he made the shot after Lebron inbounded and drew the defense down to Warriors bench. the Cavs played the better defense at the end but really nobody on either Team could make a basket.
when Lebron made that free throw it really sealed things. that was a classic game.
I don't loathe Lebron in any way,shape or form and in fact I've already stated in this thread he's right up there with Jordan while also saying that series was the greatest NBA Finals history in my honest opinion. But see stuff like that gets ignored all because I asked would Lebron have pointed to this series which made him the GOAT in his eyes if Kyrie missed the biggest three point shot in NBA history and they end up losing? But seeing that I'm not ball-washing Lebron like most of his fans do,somehow that makes me loathe him? get that crap out of here already.
I've never even heard rumors of that, but if serious, do share.
zero proof, but i find it significantly more plausible than the most competitive athlete of my lifetime forgoing two years of his prime and making a whimsical decision to go masquerade as Mario Mendoza in the lower rungs of the White Sox org
naiveté........i try to avoid it at all cost
And it will probably always be zero proof as far as the public is concerned. Likely it was a legal agreement which both parties agreed to be permanently sealed.
I have heard the rumors before, but it really would be amazing in todays age of journalism that someone hasn't dug into it and found someone who would talk. I mean, it has been over 20 years. It would be very interesting to hear the full story.
It would be hard to believe that Michael Jordan would fix basketball games...but then again when i first heard of it with Pete Rose, I couldn't believe that he would do that either.
I'm still not going to buy into Jordan fixing games, until I see incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. The reason for Jordan's suspension, if it did happen, could very well have been because of his association with gamblers, perhaps the commissioner warned him about it, but Jordan didn't listen, and then the hammer came down.
I certainly don't loath James. As a person I don't like him, but as a player I agree he is one of the best in a group of 5 or 6 ever. To me to pick a GOAT in Basketball you can either go by personal stats or what they did for the team. MJ beats James in both cases. James will never match MJ's 30.1 PPG career avg. and MJ has 6 Championships to Jame's 3.
Jordan's GOAT opinion in a 2009 interview with Michael Wilbon: "If you ask me, I would never say that I am the greatest player," Jordan said. "That's because I never played against all the people that represented the league prior to Michael Jordan."
Here's a brief transcription of the interview:
Wilbon: "If you care about being called the greatest basketball player ever, does that matter, do you want that?
Jordan: "I don't want it in a sense because I think it disrespects Wilt Chamberlain, Jerry West – you know all the guys that prior to me I never had a chance to play against. What everybody is saying I am, I never had the chance to compete against other legends that was prior to me. When I hear it, I cringe a little bit because it's a little bit embarrassing because no one knows. I never had the chance to, once again, to play against those guys. I would love to have played against them but I never did. And for you to say that I'm better than him...I mean it's your opinion; it's their opinion. I accept that as their opinion. If you ask me, I would never say that I am the greatest player. That's because I never played against all the people that represented the league prior to Michael Jordan."
Jordan's GOAT opinion in a 2009 interview with Michael Wilbon: "If you ask me, I would never say that I am the greatest player," Jordan said. "That's because I never played against all the people that represented the league prior to Michael Jordan."
Here's a brief transcription of the interview:
Wilbon: "If you care about being called the greatest basketball player ever, does that matter, do you want that?
Jordan: "I don't want it in a sense because I think it disrespects Wilt Chamberlain, Jerry West – you know all the guys that prior to me I never had a chance to play against. What everybody is saying I am, I never had the chance to compete against other legends that was prior to me. When I hear it, I cringe a little bit because it's a little bit embarrassing because no one knows. I never had the chance to, once again, to play against those guys. I would love to have played against them but I never did. And for you to say that I'm better than him...I mean it's your opinion; it's their opinion. I accept that as their opinion. If you ask me, I would never say that I am the greatest player. That's because I never played against all the people that represented the league prior to Michael Jordan."
That's the difference between acting with class IE Michael Jordan...and acting like a punk IE LeBron James.
Jordan's GOAT opinion in a 2009 interview with Michael Wilbon: "If you ask me, I would never say that I am the greatest player," Jordan said. "That's because I never played against all the people that represented the league prior to Michael Jordan."
Here's a brief transcription of the interview:
Wilbon: "If you care about being called the greatest basketball player ever, does that matter, do you want that?
Jordan: "I don't want it in a sense because I think it disrespects Wilt Chamberlain, Jerry West – you know all the guys that prior to me I never had a chance to play against. What everybody is saying I am, I never had the chance to compete against other legends that was prior to me. When I hear it, I cringe a little bit because it's a little bit embarrassing because no one knows. I never had the chance to, once again, to play against those guys. I would love to have played against them but I never did. And for you to say that I'm better than him...I mean it's your opinion; it's their opinion. I accept that as their opinion. If you ask me, I would never say that I am the greatest player. That's because I never played against all the people that represented the league prior to Michael Jordan."
LeBron is greater than Jordan because Jordan was embarrassed by the praise .
LeBron 's is basically Jesus without the annoying humility .In fact LeBron is a better version of Jesus that doesn't waste time thinking of others and just focuses everything on himself.
Basketball GOAT is Jordan hands down, prefer Jordan’s response to GOAT discussions; disrespectful to leave out Russell, Jabbar, Chamberlain, etc. because of what they did in their era. He is so humble, and as Kevin McHale stated; let others speak for your greatness, not from your own mouth. “I’m taking my talents to South Beach” is a similar response from Lebron. Great to have confidence and a bit of silence as well.
It would be hard to believe that Michael Jordan would fix basketball games...but then again when i first heard of it with Pete Rose, I couldn't believe that he would do that either.
I know this was years ago, but I thought when Rose was manager of the Reds, he bet on them winning only. Never heard rumors of MJ fixing games either.
It would be hard to believe that Michael Jordan would fix basketball games...but then again when i first heard of it with Pete Rose, I couldn't believe that he would do that either.
I know this was years ago, but I thought when Rose was manager of the Reds, he bet on them winning only. Never heard rumors of MJ fixing games either.
Accordig to Dowd, there was evidence that Rose also bet against the Reds but Rose agreed to the lifetime ban so the investigation stopped.
It was also well known among bookies that Rose would not bet on the Reds when either Soto or Gullickson pitched during the 1987 season because he felt the Reds weren't likely to win in those games. In either case, his style of managing and the decisions he is going to make as a manager are very likely to be influenced by whether or not he has money riding on the outcome. For example, managing a game on which he has a large wager like a playoff game while dialing back down for a game Soto pitched because he had nothing at stake financially. That is why it really makes no difference whether Rose bet on or against the Reds~the integrity of the game is compromised in either scenario.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
@bronco2078 said:
LeBron is greater than Jordan because Jordan was embarrassed by the praise .
LeBron 's is basically Jesus without the annoying humility .In fact LeBron is a better version of Jesus that doesn't waste time thinking of others and just focuses everything on himself.
Sounds like someone in the White House.
"The vaccines work,” Trump said, adding that the people who “get very sick and go to the hospital” are unvaccinated.
“Look, the results of the vaccine are very good, and if you do get it, it’s a very minor form,” Trump continued. “People aren’t dying when they take the vaccine.”
Do your part, America 💉😷
It would be hard to believe that Michael Jordan would fix basketball games...but then again when i first heard of it with Pete Rose, I couldn't believe that he would do that either.
I know this was years ago, but I thought when Rose was manager of the Reds, he bet on them winning only. Never heard rumors of MJ fixing games either.
Accordig to Dowd, there was evidence that Rose also bet against the Reds but Rose agreed to the lifetime ban so the investigation stopped.
It was also well known among bookies that Rose would not bet on the Reds when either Soto or Gullickson pitched during the 1987 season because he felt the Reds weren't likely to win in those games. In either case, his style of managing and the decisions he is going to make as a manager are very likely to be influenced by whether or not he has money riding on the outcome. For example, managing a game on which he has a large wager like a playoff game while dialing back down for a game Soto pitched because he had nothing at stake financially. That is why it really makes no difference whether Rose bet on or against the Reds~the integrity of the game is compromised in either scenario.
<<< his style of managing and the decisions he is going to make as a manager are very likely to be influenced by whether or not he has money riding on the outcome. >>>
Another way a manager could fix a game with a pitcher is to leave a spent pitcher in there intentionally too long. No tired pitcher ever wants to come out, even when it's obvious. A manager could go to the mound, the pitcher says he can still do it, even though the manager knows he can't, but the manager leaves him in, and the pitcher gives up more runs.
I don't think many out there realize how close the Black Sox scandal could have came to destroying MLB. Of course Kenesaw Mountain Landis put a halt to that possibility with severe punitive measures against the game fixers.
Yes, the game of baseball wouldn't have been destroyed. Another league would have been formed to take its place. However the MLB team owners would have lost a fortune as their teams would have become basically worthless.
All MLB owners to this day haven't forgotten that sordid Black Sox scandal. So with the extreme value of their teams today, the owners may put up with certain shenanigans from the players, but they will never put up with players or managers betting on baseball, not even if it is legal in a particular state.
What the actual F&&q is a keneshaw mountain landis? That is the all time stupidest name I've ever heard. No one with a name like that weighing them down can do anything of value in this world.
Hearing that name flipped my opinion of the black sox thing , I'm calling it fake news now.
None of those 3 names is a a first name , is that the proper order or did you do last name first? Could anyone tell without knowing in advance?
It would be hard to believe that Michael Jordan would fix basketball games...but then again when i first heard of it with Pete Rose, I couldn't believe that he would do that either.
I know this was years ago, but I thought when Rose was manager of the Reds, he bet on them winning only. Never heard rumors of MJ fixing games either.
Accordig to Dowd, there was evidence that Rose also bet against the Reds but Rose agreed to the lifetime ban so the investigation stopped.
It was also well known among bookies that Rose would not bet on the Reds when either Soto or Gullickson pitched during the 1987 season because he felt the Reds weren't likely to win in those games. In either case, his style of managing and the decisions he is going to make as a manager are very likely to be influenced by whether or not he has money riding on the outcome. For example, managing a game on which he has a large wager like a playoff game while dialing back down for a game Soto pitched because he had nothing at stake financially. That is why it really makes no difference whether Rose bet on or against the Reds~the integrity of the game is compromised in either scenario.
was it ever determined if Rose bet on games when he was an active player?
It is very difficult to compare era's, so I won't go in detail. Obviously Wilt's stats are mostly unattainable in later eras. For instance, averaging 27 rebounds a game would not be happening in later era's, not just because there were more taller and wider players, but because there weren't as many missed shots to garner. For instance, in 1960 in the NBA there were 73 rebounds per game. In 1997 there were only 46 rebounds available per game.
The height difference of the late 50's/early 60's when Wilt put up his monster numbers, compared to the 80's/90's of Jordan, ranges from one and a half to two inches in difference, and about 15-18 pounds in weight. As someone noted above, there is also another couple inches that could be gained in wing span. So really the difference is 3-4 inches and 15 pounds. Then when you consider that the majority of the players closest to Wilt in height were typically the more un-athletic types at that time, it is easy to see how he can average insane points and rebound numbers.
One major negative in regard to Chamberlain is that his awful free throw shooting ability could cause him to be neutralized in close games because he could be coached against by simply fouling him. As long as a player had fouls to give, Chamberlain could actually become a liability at the end of the game, and that is not something that belongs on a greatest of all time's resume.
As for the titles, Jordan won in six straight FULL SEASONS he played in, and then he retired with the capability of more. In those two years he was out, obviously he was out one full season, and came back for a partial season of 17 games, and the Bulls were third in the Central that year. Your seed plays a big role in your playoff success.
In that 17 game season for Jordan, the Bulls were 34-31 without him, and 13-4 with him.
People always talk about how the Bulls only won two less games the first time he retired. True, and a fluke. That is because they had a down year record wise the year prior with only 57 wins. The year before that THEY WON 67 games with the same team. They also played above their heads to win those 55 games without him.....
Because the next year in 1994/95 they were a barely a .500 team without Jordan at 34-31, and when he came back they were 13-4 with him in that same season. Then the following FULL year with him they were 72-10.
SO that 'two less games when he retired' is simply not the whole story.
So Jordan won six titles in six years, and who knows how many more he had....seven, eight, nine?
Also, yes, one can fault Jordan for not making the Finals more...but he had some all-time teams in his own conference in his way....the Celtics and Pistons. Lebron had a crap conference so he had nobody blocking his way to the finals.
The teams Jordan lost to in playoffs: 1985 Bucks, 1986 Celtics, 1987 Celtics, 1988 Pistons, 1989 Pistons, 1990 Pistons. Those Celtic and Pistons teams are in the all-time elite team company.
So in totality, Jordan won six titles in 11 full season tries with the Bulls. He also lost two Conference Finals to the Pistons in that run. Jordan retired in the midst of that run where he had two more legit shots, and retired at the end of a three-peat where he still had more legit shots(but he retired and the bulls then chose to dismantle).
@Skin2 said:
It is very difficult to compare era's, so I won't go in detail. Obviously Wilt's stats are mostly unattainable in later eras. For instance, averaging 27 rebounds a game would not be happening in later era's, not just because there were more taller and wider players, but because there weren't as many missed shots to garner. For instance, in 1960 in the NBA there were 73 rebounds per game. In 1997 there were only 46 rebounds available per game.
The height difference of the late 50's/early 60's when Wilt put up his monster numbers, compared to the 80's/90's of Jordan, ranges from one and a half to two inches in difference, and about 15-18 pounds in weight. As someone noted above, there is also another couple inches that could be gained in wing span. So really the difference is 3-4 inches and 15 pounds. Then when you consider that the majority of the players closest to Wilt in height were typically the more un-athletic types at that time, it is easy to see how he can average insane points and rebound numbers.
One major negative in regard to Chamberlain is that his awful free throw shooting ability could cause him to be neutralized in close games because he could be coached against by simply fouling him. As long as a player had fouls to give, Chamberlain could actually become a liability at the end of the game, and that is not something that belongs on a greatest of all time's resume.
As for the titles, Jordan won in six straight FULL SEASONS he played in, and then he retired with the capability of more. In those two years he was out, obviously he was out one full season, and came back for a partial season of 17 games, and the Bulls were third in the Central that year. Your seed plays a big role in your playoff success.
In that 17 game season for Jordan, the Bulls were 34-31 without him, and 13-4 with him.
People always talk about how the Bulls only won two less games the first time he retired. True, and a fluke. That is because they had a down year record wise the year prior with only 57 wins. The year before that THEY WON 67 games with the same team. They also played above their heads to win those 55 games without him.....
Because the next year in 1994/95 they were a barely a .500 team without Jordan at 34-31, and when he came back they were 13-4 with him in that same season. Then the following FULL year with him they were 72-10.
SO that 'two less games when he retired' is simply not the whole story.
So Jordan won six titles in six years, and who knows how many more he had....seven, eight, nine?
Also, yes, one can fault Jordan for not making the Finals more...but he had some all-time teams in his own conference in his way....the Celtics and Pistons. Lebron had a crap conference so he had nobody blocking his way to the finals.
The teams Jordan lost to in playoffs: 1985 Bucks, 1986 Celtics, 1987 Celtics, 1988 Pistons, 1989 Pistons, 1990 Pistons. Those Celtic and Pistons teams are in the all-time elite team company.
So in totality, Jordan won six titles in 11 full season tries with the Bulls. He also lost two Conference Finals to the Pistons in that run. Jordan retired in the midst of that run where he had two more legit shots, and retired at the end of a three-peat where he still had more legit shots(but he retired and the bulls then chose to dismantle).
I doubt if anyone one way or the other is going to change their mind about Wilt Chamberlain being the GOAT or not.
That being said, everyone should keep in mind that Chamberlain wasn't just better than the players he faced, he set and shattered numerous records. Nobody else did that, nobody else came remotely close to doing that, and that stands as fact.
It's not like Chamberlain played a hundred years ago. He played in the NBA in the 60's and 70's, and yes the game has changed. But not to the extent that his phenomenal long list of records should just be written off for various reasons which would tarnish his accomplishments.
All of which is exactly why not only is Chamberlain the GOAT, but it really shouldn't even be a debatable point.
Chamberlain was great....but I routinely hear you say that winning is what matters...but you change that tune when it comes to Chamberlain?
Basketball is a sport where a player can amass stats to the detriment of winning.
His awful ability in shooting free throws is something that just can't be ignored. That is a big flaw when it comes to winning games. A good coach takes advantage of that...and I'm sure that was in the minds of many of them.
The NBA was basically still in its infancy when Chamberlain started. By the 70's it indeed start to change to represent a game similar to the next generation.
However, it was the early 60's where Chamberlain put up his insane numbers...and him playing against smaller players and many stiffs in the league is a big part of those numbers.
From 1959-1963 he averaged 43 points a game and 26 rebounds a game. He didn't do that in the 70's, or even close to it.
He shot 46% from the free throw line for his playoff career. Abysmal.
@Skin2 said:
Chamberlain was great....but I routinely hear you say that winning is what matters...but you change that tune when it comes to Chamberlain?
Basketball is a sport where a player can amass stats to the detriment of winning.
His awful ability in shooting free throws is something that just can't be ignored. That is a big flaw when it comes to winning games. A good coach takes advantage of that...and I'm sure that was in the minds of many of them.
The NBA was basically still in its infancy when Chamberlain started. By the 70's it indeed start to change to represent a game similar to the next generation.
However, it was the early 60's where Chamberlain put up his insane numbers...and him playing against smaller players and many stiffs in the league is a big part of those numbers.
From 1959-1963 he averaged 43 points a game and 26 rebounds a game. He didn't do that in the 70's, or even close to it.
He shot 46% from the free throw line for his playoff career. Abysmal.
Of course winning matters. However a number of Hall of Fame players don't even have as many championships as some players not even in the Hall of Fame.
For example Lonnie Smith, a decent but by no means a great baseball player, played on five pennant winning teams, three of them won the World Series.
A great QB such as Dan Marino, never won a Super Bowl, and only played in one.
Chamberlain's "problem" during a stretch of his career as far as winning championships, was the Boston Celtics, and I'm sure you likely know that whole story.
I will agree with ya about the free throws. Watching Chamberlain trying to make free throws was painful to watch. LOL
@Skin2 said:
Chamberlain was great....but I routinely hear you say that winning is what matters...but you change that tune when it comes to Chamberlain?
Basketball is a sport where a player can amass stats to the detriment of winning.
His awful ability in shooting free throws is something that just can't be ignored. That is a big flaw when it comes to winning games. A good coach takes advantage of that...and I'm sure that was in the minds of many of them.
The NBA was basically still in its infancy when Chamberlain started. By the 70's it indeed start to change to represent a game similar to the next generation.
However, it was the early 60's where Chamberlain put up his insane numbers...and him playing against smaller players and many stiffs in the league is a big part of those numbers.
From 1959-1963 he averaged 43 points a game and 26 rebounds a game. He didn't do that in the 70's, or even close to it.
He shot 46% from the free throw line for his playoff career. Abysmal.
I think a relatively fair way to think of how Wilt would have fared in other eras is to look at his later years. In his last 6 full seasons (excluding the year he played just 12 games), Chamberlain averaged under 21 points a game. The league very definitely caught up to him.
@Skin2 said:
Chamberlain was great....but I routinely hear you say that winning is what matters...but you change that tune when it comes to Chamberlain?
Basketball is a sport where a player can amass stats to the detriment of winning.
His awful ability in shooting free throws is something that just can't be ignored. That is a big flaw when it comes to winning games. A good coach takes advantage of that...and I'm sure that was in the minds of many of them.
The NBA was basically still in its infancy when Chamberlain started. By the 70's it indeed start to change to represent a game similar to the next generation.
However, it was the early 60's where Chamberlain put up his insane numbers...and him playing against smaller players and many stiffs in the league is a big part of those numbers.
From 1959-1963 he averaged 43 points a game and 26 rebounds a game. He didn't do that in the 70's, or even close to it.
He shot 46% from the free throw line for his playoff career. Abysmal.
I think a relatively fair way to think of how Wilt would have fared in other eras is to look at his later years. In his last 6 full seasons (excluding the year he played just 12 games), Chamberlain averaged under 21 points a game. The league very definitely caught up to him.
I'm not saying there isn't any merit to your point, but it can't be ignored that injuries and old age caught up to him.
Old age normally catches up to big men sooner than smaller men, especially in sports.
I think there is no question Wilt would not post the statistics in the modern game that he did back in the 60's. There is also no doubt in my mind that he would be a super star though.
Likewise, Ruth definitely would not be out homering entire teams today, but he would still be an all time great.
Pasted quote from Celtics Hall of Famer Bill Russell, who certainly wasn't prone to exaggeration:
"I hear guys say that he (Chamberlain) couldn't have played in a different time, done the things that he did then today," Russell said. "That's bull(...). If Wilt were playing today, he would be even more dominant than he was then. I don't see a center out there now that could play against him.
"The reason people don't believe that is because Wilt's numbers were so big, they seemed so impossible that they almost don't seem real. So they try to diminish the era and those he played against. People can't comprehend numbers like that, things that he did every night in just about every game. So they try to find a way to dismiss them or devalue them and try to make them not real.
"You talk about a guy that averaged 50 points a game for the whole season. Now a guy averages 29 points or 30 points and he leads the league and everybody says he's the greatest scorer. Well, Wilt was 20 points a night better. How do you compare [with] that?
I also recognize that teammates have a big impact on whether a superstar wins a championship or not.
I also still believe that Wilt's inability to shoot free throws is something that cannot be ignored and is something that pushes the needle in such close races as these.
I also don't believe that Jordan is such a slam dunk as the greatest of all time...he says it eloquently himself. Bird was every bit the basketball player that Jordan was.
I also recognize that teammates have a big impact on whether a superstar wins a championship or not.
I also still believe that Wilt's inability to shoot free throws is something that cannot be ignored and is something that pushes the needle in such close races as these.
I also don't believe that Jordan is such a slam dunk as the greatest of all time...he says it eloquently himself. Bird was every bit the basketball player that Jordan was.
More on Lebron later, but he cannot be ignored.
I dislike LeBron personally, but i have to put that aside when talking about the GOAT. I've got LeBron at #2 and Jordan at #3.
Bird was one helluva basketball player, and certainly is up there in the conversation.
Comments
I'm shocked, shocked I say to find out there's gambling going on in here. All the Pete Rose haters know where to sit and spin.
DP.
He lost 6 times in the Finals not 5.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
I was just watching the pre game of an NBA game and to a man Paul Pierse, Jalen Rose and Chauncy Billups all said MJ is #1 GOAT and that James is maybe in the top 5. These are all ex players and their reasoning was spot on. The only people that thinks James is the GOAT is James and those who only have seen resent players. People who know Basketball and any list I have ever seen put MJ as the GOAT.
you want us to spin twice?
Objection all hearsay , inadmissible in a court of law. Sustained
That some guy said a thing and I agree is not proof of anything. Thats sheep thinking
<<< I've never even heard rumors of that, but if serious, do share. >>>
You asked for it, so i posted it. This is actually old news.
Everybody back then knew that Jordan was a degenerate big time gambler. It takes very little stretch of the imagination to believe that like Rose, Jordan may have taken his gambling habit too far.
Jordan back then may have had endorsements that topped his NBA salary. When he switched to baseball with the "story" that he gave for doing so, I don't recall him losing any endorsements. So the "secret suspension" if this is what happened, which is likely what occurred, seemed to work out as best as possible for Jordan, and for the NBA which had no desire to permanently crush their superstar attraction.
There is no spin here at all, and comparing a league's decision on this situation with Jordan to Rose is basically off the mark. Michael Jordan meant infinitely more to the NBA than Pete Rose did to MLB.
zero proof, but i find it significantly more plausible than the most competitive athlete of my lifetime forgoing two years of his prime and making a whimsical decision to go masquerade as Mario Mendoza in the lower rungs of the White Sox org
naiveté........i try to avoid it at all cost
And it will probably always be zero proof as far as the public is concerned. Likely it was a legal agreement which both parties agreed to be permanently sealed.
Wasn't there speculation back then also that Jordan's father was murdered due to his gambling debts or involvement with known bookies?
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
James might be the GOAT but it’s so not cool to call yourself that.
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I’m still laughing at you listing those three players. They are not real good players. I’d rather have Bill Wennington, BJ Armstrong and Luc Longley then those 3 players and so would Lebron
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Is a statue of gold King crowns in his backyard considered cool?
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
Sounds like something MS-13 would do, doesn't it?
I didn't google it, but I think that the police somehow found the two killers who did it. If i recall correctly, it was two local punks who lived nearby, where Jordan's father just happened to be resting in his car off the side of the road. Probably their motive was robbery, and they didn't want to leave a witness.
Yep, forgot about the first one. Same point.
Jordan lost in the first round three times. James never has.
Lemme just add - no problem if people pick MJ #1. He's certainly not a "wrong" choice.
Jordan's gambling caused the death of his dad.
People act like Lebron's block was in the final seconds of that game but it happened with a 1:50 to go while Golden State still had three more offensive possessions after the block
with all due respect, if you don't understand what that "block" did to affect the Warriors and the eventual outcome of the game, well, then you have just become to accustomed to the Pat's waltzing into the AFC Championship game. in short, you don't know sports(and I know you do).
No, thanks for sharing. That was right about the time I was heading off to college and paid a lot less attention to pro sports. My first guess was just going to be something gambling related.
What they meant to their respective leagues is irrelevant, one is a well respected HOFer and team owner, and the other a pariah. The only difference being how the leagues handled it. MLB publicly throws Pete under the bus while the NBA does a backroom deal to hide MJs transgressions. I don't know how many times I've read here where Pete committed the 'ultimate sin' in sports and never heard Jordan mentioned once in those discussions.
Perhaps Jordan didn't lie about it, as Pete Rose often did?
Likely, we may never know for sure.
Sorry to disagree with ya because in my view what baseball fan wouldn't like Pete Rose? He was great for the game. And I will never forget how he helped the Phillies win a World Series. But in my opinion, Pete threw himself under the bus.
So that blocked layup is the reason why Steph Curry,arguably the greatest shooter ever, misses three three point attempts after the block? Yeam i'm not buying that one.
And that situation is in no way comparable to any football game either. If Ben Roethlisberger throws an interception or has a 4th down pass deflected with 1:50 left versus the Patriots,Game Over.
1:50 left in the NBA is an eternity where in some cases you start fouling the opposing players to stop the clock,you could realistically end up having 5-6 offensive possessions if not more. In this situation GS didn't because it was only a 3pt game and they didn't need to.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
I have heard the rumors before, but it really would be amazing in todays age of journalism that someone hasn't dug into it and found someone who would talk. I mean, it has been over 20 years. It would be very interesting to hear the full story.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
unbelievable.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Fair enough. I feel the same about Lebron,he's definitely in the conversation and this debate,like the GOAT QB debate, is opinion based. Who picks who #1 is their choice and I wouldn't try to change that.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
the truth as I see it is that many, many people so loathe Lebron James that they refuse to acknowledge the effect he can have on a game and how he affects players. in the last few games of that Finals he intimidated Draymond Green. when he blocked the shot by Iguadola it was off of a pass by Curry. don't you think that affects their play in desperation time??
the end of Game 7, the last 4-5 minutes, was marred by players on both sides not being able to make shots -- the Cavs mainly at the rim and the Warriors mainly at the arc. when it reversed, Lebron blocked the shot at the rim and Irving made the shot at the arc. interestingly, the Cavs called a time-out and drew up "The Play" where they isolated the Golden Boy Curry on Irving and he made the shot after Lebron inbounded and drew the defense down to Warriors bench. the Cavs played the better defense at the end but really nobody on either Team could make a basket.
when Lebron made that free throw it really sealed things. that was a classic game.
I don't loathe Lebron in any way,shape or form and in fact I've already stated in this thread he's right up there with Jordan while also saying that series was the greatest NBA Finals history in my honest opinion. But see stuff like that gets ignored all because I asked would Lebron have pointed to this series which made him the GOAT in his eyes if Kyrie missed the biggest three point shot in NBA history and they end up losing? But seeing that I'm not ball-washing Lebron like most of his fans do,somehow that makes me loathe him? get that crap out of here already.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
It would be hard to believe that Michael Jordan would fix basketball games...but then again when i first heard of it with Pete Rose, I couldn't believe that he would do that either.
I'm still not going to buy into Jordan fixing games, until I see incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. The reason for Jordan's suspension, if it did happen, could very well have been because of his association with gamblers, perhaps the commissioner warned him about it, but Jordan didn't listen, and then the hammer came down.
I certainly don't loath James. As a person I don't like him, but as a player I agree he is one of the best in a group of 5 or 6 ever. To me to pick a GOAT in Basketball you can either go by personal stats or what they did for the team. MJ beats James in both cases. James will never match MJ's 30.1 PPG career avg. and MJ has 6 Championships to Jame's 3.
CASE CLOSED!
Just came across this on Sports Illustrated's site that ties into this conversation.
https://www.si.com/nba/2019/01/02/michael-jordan-greatest-player-of-all-time-debate-argument-lebron-james-case
Jordan's GOAT opinion in a 2009 interview with Michael Wilbon:
"If you ask me, I would never say that I am the greatest player," Jordan said. "That's because I never played against all the people that represented the league prior to Michael Jordan."
Here's a brief transcription of the interview:
Wilbon: "If you care about being called the greatest basketball player ever, does that matter, do you want that?
Jordan: "I don't want it in a sense because I think it disrespects Wilt Chamberlain, Jerry West – you know all the guys that prior to me I never had a chance to play against. What everybody is saying I am, I never had the chance to compete against other legends that was prior to me. When I hear it, I cringe a little bit because it's a little bit embarrassing because no one knows. I never had the chance to, once again, to play against those guys. I would love to have played against them but I never did. And for you to say that I'm better than him...I mean it's your opinion; it's their opinion. I accept that as their opinion. If you ask me, I would never say that I am the greatest player. That's because I never played against all the people that represented the league prior to Michael Jordan."
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
That's the difference between acting with class IE Michael Jordan...and acting like a punk IE LeBron James.
thats class
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
LeBron is greater than Jordan because Jordan was embarrassed by the praise .
LeBron 's is basically Jesus without the annoying humility .In fact LeBron is a better version of Jesus that doesn't waste time thinking of others and just focuses everything on himself.
Basketball GOAT is Jordan hands down, prefer Jordan’s response to GOAT discussions; disrespectful to leave out Russell, Jabbar, Chamberlain, etc. because of what they did in their era. He is so humble, and as Kevin McHale stated; let others speak for your greatness, not from your own mouth. “I’m taking my talents to South Beach” is a similar response from Lebron. Great to have confidence and a bit of silence as well.
I know this was years ago, but I thought when Rose was manager of the Reds, he bet on them winning only. Never heard rumors of MJ fixing games either.
Accordig to Dowd, there was evidence that Rose also bet against the Reds but Rose agreed to the lifetime ban so the investigation stopped.
It was also well known among bookies that Rose would not bet on the Reds when either Soto or Gullickson pitched during the 1987 season because he felt the Reds weren't likely to win in those games. In either case, his style of managing and the decisions he is going to make as a manager are very likely to be influenced by whether or not he has money riding on the outcome. For example, managing a game on which he has a large wager like a playoff game while dialing back down for a game Soto pitched because he had nothing at stake financially. That is why it really makes no difference whether Rose bet on or against the Reds~the integrity of the game is compromised in either scenario.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Sounds like someone in the White House.
"The vaccines work,” Trump said, adding that the people who “get very sick and go to the hospital” are unvaccinated.
“Look, the results of the vaccine are very good, and if you do get it, it’s a very minor form,” Trump continued. “People aren’t dying when they take the vaccine.”
Do your part, America 💉😷
LeBron the GOAT? Bahaha. #HesOnlyAnAthleteToMe. #NotALebronFan.
Thanks,
David (LD_Ferg)
1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
<<< his style of managing and the decisions he is going to make as a manager are very likely to be influenced by whether or not he has money riding on the outcome. >>>
Another way a manager could fix a game with a pitcher is to leave a spent pitcher in there intentionally too long. No tired pitcher ever wants to come out, even when it's obvious. A manager could go to the mound, the pitcher says he can still do it, even though the manager knows he can't, but the manager leaves him in, and the pitcher gives up more runs.
I don't think many out there realize how close the Black Sox scandal could have came to destroying MLB. Of course Kenesaw Mountain Landis put a halt to that possibility with severe punitive measures against the game fixers.
Yes, the game of baseball wouldn't have been destroyed. Another league would have been formed to take its place. However the MLB team owners would have lost a fortune as their teams would have become basically worthless.
All MLB owners to this day haven't forgotten that sordid Black Sox scandal. So with the extreme value of their teams today, the owners may put up with certain shenanigans from the players, but they will never put up with players or managers betting on baseball, not even if it is legal in a particular state.
What the actual F&&q is a keneshaw mountain landis? That is the all time stupidest name I've ever heard. No one with a name like that weighing them down can do anything of value in this world.
Hearing that name flipped my opinion of the black sox thing , I'm calling it fake news now.
None of those 3 names is a a first name , is that the proper order or did you do last name first? Could anyone tell without knowing in advance?
insert obligatory people of walmart video here
was it ever determined if Rose bet on games when he was an active player?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
It is very difficult to compare era's, so I won't go in detail. Obviously Wilt's stats are mostly unattainable in later eras. For instance, averaging 27 rebounds a game would not be happening in later era's, not just because there were more taller and wider players, but because there weren't as many missed shots to garner. For instance, in 1960 in the NBA there were 73 rebounds per game. In 1997 there were only 46 rebounds available per game.
The height difference of the late 50's/early 60's when Wilt put up his monster numbers, compared to the 80's/90's of Jordan, ranges from one and a half to two inches in difference, and about 15-18 pounds in weight. As someone noted above, there is also another couple inches that could be gained in wing span. So really the difference is 3-4 inches and 15 pounds. Then when you consider that the majority of the players closest to Wilt in height were typically the more un-athletic types at that time, it is easy to see how he can average insane points and rebound numbers.
One major negative in regard to Chamberlain is that his awful free throw shooting ability could cause him to be neutralized in close games because he could be coached against by simply fouling him. As long as a player had fouls to give, Chamberlain could actually become a liability at the end of the game, and that is not something that belongs on a greatest of all time's resume.
As for the titles, Jordan won in six straight FULL SEASONS he played in, and then he retired with the capability of more. In those two years he was out, obviously he was out one full season, and came back for a partial season of 17 games, and the Bulls were third in the Central that year. Your seed plays a big role in your playoff success.
In that 17 game season for Jordan, the Bulls were 34-31 without him, and 13-4 with him.
People always talk about how the Bulls only won two less games the first time he retired. True, and a fluke. That is because they had a down year record wise the year prior with only 57 wins. The year before that THEY WON 67 games with the same team. They also played above their heads to win those 55 games without him.....
Because the next year in 1994/95 they were a barely a .500 team without Jordan at 34-31, and when he came back they were 13-4 with him in that same season. Then the following FULL year with him they were 72-10.
SO that 'two less games when he retired' is simply not the whole story.
So Jordan won six titles in six years, and who knows how many more he had....seven, eight, nine?
Also, yes, one can fault Jordan for not making the Finals more...but he had some all-time teams in his own conference in his way....the Celtics and Pistons. Lebron had a crap conference so he had nobody blocking his way to the finals.
The teams Jordan lost to in playoffs: 1985 Bucks, 1986 Celtics, 1987 Celtics, 1988 Pistons, 1989 Pistons, 1990 Pistons. Those Celtic and Pistons teams are in the all-time elite team company.
So in totality, Jordan won six titles in 11 full season tries with the Bulls. He also lost two Conference Finals to the Pistons in that run. Jordan retired in the midst of that run where he had two more legit shots, and retired at the end of a three-peat where he still had more legit shots(but he retired and the bulls then chose to dismantle).
Jordan's playoff opponents, their record, and their HOF representation.
27 of the 37 opponents were 50 win teams.
26 different hall of fame opponents
I doubt if anyone one way or the other is going to change their mind about Wilt Chamberlain being the GOAT or not.
That being said, everyone should keep in mind that Chamberlain wasn't just better than the players he faced, he set and shattered numerous records. Nobody else did that, nobody else came remotely close to doing that, and that stands as fact.
It's not like Chamberlain played a hundred years ago. He played in the NBA in the 60's and 70's, and yes the game has changed. But not to the extent that his phenomenal long list of records should just be written off for various reasons which would tarnish his accomplishments.
All of which is exactly why not only is Chamberlain the GOAT, but it really shouldn't even be a debatable point.
Chamberlain was great....but I routinely hear you say that winning is what matters...but you change that tune when it comes to Chamberlain?
Basketball is a sport where a player can amass stats to the detriment of winning.
His awful ability in shooting free throws is something that just can't be ignored. That is a big flaw when it comes to winning games. A good coach takes advantage of that...and I'm sure that was in the minds of many of them.
The NBA was basically still in its infancy when Chamberlain started. By the 70's it indeed start to change to represent a game similar to the next generation.
However, it was the early 60's where Chamberlain put up his insane numbers...and him playing against smaller players and many stiffs in the league is a big part of those numbers.
From 1959-1963 he averaged 43 points a game and 26 rebounds a game. He didn't do that in the 70's, or even close to it.
He shot 46% from the free throw line for his playoff career. Abysmal.
Of course winning matters. However a number of Hall of Fame players don't even have as many championships as some players not even in the Hall of Fame.
For example Lonnie Smith, a decent but by no means a great baseball player, played on five pennant winning teams, three of them won the World Series.
A great QB such as Dan Marino, never won a Super Bowl, and only played in one.
Chamberlain's "problem" during a stretch of his career as far as winning championships, was the Boston Celtics, and I'm sure you likely know that whole story.
I will agree with ya about the free throws. Watching Chamberlain trying to make free throws was painful to watch. LOL
I think a relatively fair way to think of how Wilt would have fared in other eras is to look at his later years. In his last 6 full seasons (excluding the year he played just 12 games), Chamberlain averaged under 21 points a game. The league very definitely caught up to him.
I'm not saying there isn't any merit to your point, but it can't be ignored that injuries and old age caught up to him.
Old age normally catches up to big men sooner than smaller men, especially in sports.
I think there is no question Wilt would not post the statistics in the modern game that he did back in the 60's. There is also no doubt in my mind that he would be a super star though.
Likewise, Ruth definitely would not be out homering entire teams today, but he would still be an all time great.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Pasted quote from Celtics Hall of Famer Bill Russell, who certainly wasn't prone to exaggeration:
"I hear guys say that he (Chamberlain) couldn't have played in a different time, done the things that he did then today," Russell said. "That's bull(...). If Wilt were playing today, he would be even more dominant than he was then. I don't see a center out there now that could play against him.
"The reason people don't believe that is because Wilt's numbers were so big, they seemed so impossible that they almost don't seem real. So they try to diminish the era and those he played against. People can't comprehend numbers like that, things that he did every night in just about every game. So they try to find a way to dismiss them or devalue them and try to make them not real.
"You talk about a guy that averaged 50 points a game for the whole season. Now a guy averages 29 points or 30 points and he leads the league and everybody says he's the greatest scorer. Well, Wilt was 20 points a night better. How do you compare [with] that?
Stevek
I agree Wilt would be an elite player in any era.
I also recognize that teammates have a big impact on whether a superstar wins a championship or not.
I also still believe that Wilt's inability to shoot free throws is something that cannot be ignored and is something that pushes the needle in such close races as these.
I also don't believe that Jordan is such a slam dunk as the greatest of all time...he says it eloquently himself. Bird was every bit the basketball player that Jordan was.
More on Lebron later, but he cannot be ignored.
I dislike LeBron personally, but i have to put that aside when talking about the GOAT. I've got LeBron at #2 and Jordan at #3.
Bird was one helluva basketball player, and certainly is up there in the conversation.