Official "Will LeBron James be better than Michael Jordan" Thread (and Wilt...)

[PauloCatarino]

Originally Posted by XxIrvingxX

Oh you mean in the finals series where he played against an injury plauged Knicks and alongside West and Goodrich, who both had bad shooting nights in the first two games? There's a reason Chamberlin was the third leading scorer on his team in that series. The only reason he got the finals mvp was because of his rebounding. That's it. Don't waste my time.

Just 3 things:

- Reed wasn't there, but Frazier, Lucas, Dave D, Bradley and Monroe played. All future champions (the following year). All (IIRC) HOFers.

- Wilt was the SECOND leading scorer in the Finals, at 20.6.ppg. At age 35.

- Isn't the 1971-72 Lakers recognized as one of (if not THE) greatest teams ever?

So, let's recap: following your logic, Wilt Chamberlain was so great, so dominant, that even when he was the fourth best player in an all-Time great team he was still their Most Valuable Player in the Finals. At age 35 and a year from retirenment (sp?).

Yup, that's GOAT right there.

[XxIrvingxX]

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

I did not ignore PER I said that Lebrons PER is current lets wait till his career is over and Wilts first 9 seasons of PER 36 kill Lebrons.

And you think that will prove anything? Lebron was 18 years old when he first started out in the NBA. 18 years. How old was Wilt Chamberlin? And what kind of talent did Wilt go up against in comparison to Lebron? I'll let you think about that one.

And above all of that, Lebron is just nearing his prime and at the moment, this is the best basketball anyone has ever played in the history of the NBA. His PER is 32.6, which beats Wilt Chamberlin's record of 31.8. And again, this is a guy who is not trying to score like crazy like Wilt does when he was averaging 50 points per game on 50% shooting.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

Rings are never a logical thing to talk about when we are talking about who is the better individual player.

Do you have any idea how to properly debate? Where is your argument here? This is exactly what Diable is talking about. All you're doing here is giving me your opinion. You aren't giving me any reason to believe that what you're saying is true. You're just telling me what you think and that's it. You need more than that, otherwise I can't take anything you say seriously. You're just coming off as being biased and that's it.

Here's an example of what you should do in an argument. Winning a championship is the goal of any NBA player. If you can't perform like a star in the moment when your team needs to, especially when you have all the help in the world that you could need, rings are definitely a logical thing to bring up. It's about the situation that matters.

See that? That's called giving a shit. And making a decent argument. Now you try.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

How has Diable done anything to me? He has actually evaded my points and just regurgitated what Wikipedia said.

...did you even read what he said?

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

You also just wiki'd stuff otherwise you'd know Baylor and Wilt were imjured and missed at least a season and then in 72 Baylor retired. This was when they all were 33+ years old and on the downslide of their peaks. On top of that they still made the finals 4 times winning it once.

If I had wikipedia'd that then I would've known that Baylor and Wilt were injured. How do I know this? Because I just got done looking at it after seeing this statement. Before I knew about Baylor's injury but not Wilt's. (and I already knew Baylor retired in 72. He wasn't on the team that Wilt was the Finals MVP in). So please, explain to me why I shouldn't believe that you're the one who is using wikipedia here?

And regardless, that doesn't matter because 1. The Celtics teams that they faced were also shells of their former selves, 2. The Knicks team that they beat one year and then lost to the next (or is that the other way around? I forget) were going through injury issues, and 3. Age doesn't matter if you're the GOAT. How do I know this? Michael Jordan won three titles while he was out of his prime. Kobe Bryant is what, 35 now? And right now he's having one of the best offensive seasons of his career. Poor excuse dude, very poor excuse.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

I would advise both of you to put aside your annoyance at me and look at Wilt face value. Go read books go find old tape. Once you do get back to me, till then I just can't take your arguments seriously.

I advise you to do some research on the game of basketball because it's clearly obvious you have no idea how the game is played, or what makes a player great for that matter. You can talk all you want about the stats that Wilt Chamberlin had when he was around in a era where he was taller than everyone else and was more athletically gifted and stronger, and the pace of the game was so fast that he was able to put up stats like this, but when you want to make statements like "no one will ever be able to do what Wilt did" as a way of saying he's the greatest, I just laugh at your idiotic statement and at the same time share a sense of disbelief at how anyone could think that would be a logical reason. Michael Jordan stormed through the NBA and became what he was because of how good he was, not because of how tall he was or how gifted he was athletically, but because he was an incredible basketball player and he was the best one out there. Right now that's the case with Lebron. And anyone who knows anything at all knows that Wilt was dominant because of the incredible strength, athleticism and height that he had at the time. And if you want to argue it was because of his skills, feel free to explain the below 50% FG percentage from his rookie year (which is horrible for a center by the way).

Oh and learn how to properly debate. You really suck at it.

[The Big Dipper]

Originally Posted by XxIrvingxX

And you think that will prove anything? Lebron was 18 years old when he first started out in the NBA. 18 years. How old was Wilt Chamberlin? And what kind of talent did Wilt go up against in comparison to Lebron? I'll let you think about that one.

I bring it up because Wilt's numbers are for an entire career, including his rookie years and his twilight years.

Lebron has no twilight numbers yet to bring his stats down. SO to compare apples to apples I have asked for you guys to compare lebrons first 9 years to Wilt's. Seems fair to me, does it to you?

I will name 5 centers Wilt faced in his career and keep in mind he played these people 7-10 times a season not 2-3 like today. Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Bill Russell, Walt Bellamy, Nate Thurmond, and Willis Reed. On top of that he was constantly double and triple teamed.

Okay now name your 5.

Originally Posted by XxIrvingxX

And above all of that, Lebron is just nearing his prime and at the moment, this is the best basketball anyone has ever played in the history of the NBA. His PER is 32.6, which beats Wilt Chamberlin's record of 31.8. And again, this is a guy who is not trying to score like crazy like Wilt does when he was averaging 50 points per game on 50% shooting.

PER is not accurate when it does not count all of Wilt's blocks and again if those PER numbers are for a career I would like to See Wilt's first 9 seasons to properly compare them. Wilt per reports was averaging like 3-5 blocks a game so I am sure his PER would be higher if they had those stats. Once again this is for an entire career.

Originally Posted by XxIrvingxX

Do you have any idea how to properly debate? Where is your argument here? This is exactly what Diable is talking about. All you're doing here is giving me your opinion. You aren't giving me any reason to believe that what you're saying is true. You're just telling me what you think and that's it. You need more than that, otherwise I can't take anything you say seriously. You're just coming off as being biased and that's it.

My goal isn't to see who is a better debater my goal is to show using stats, stats that you love to use except if it helps show how good Wilt was. It seems stats are what you base who is better off of, unless I use them to show what Wilt has done, then all of a sudden stats are meaningless.

I don't need more than that, I can tell you are one of those guys who loves to argue for the sake of arguing, this isn't debate class this is an NBA forum. And even with my "poor debate etiquette" I am still showing you how Wilt is better. He is the better scorer and even if I gave Lebron better scorer, which he isn't. Wilt is the far superior defender, rebounder and individual player.

Originally Posted by XxIrvingxX

Here's an example of what you should do in an argument. Winning a championship is the goal of any NBA player. If you can't perform like a star in the moment when your team needs to, especially when you have all the help in the world that you could need, rings are definitely a logical thing to bring up. It's about the situation that matters.

See that? That's called giving a shit. And making a decent argument. Now you try.



...did you even read what he said?

The goal of every NBA player is to win a championship but they need a team to do it. Otherwise guys who are super good, Lebron, Kobe, Durant etc would just do it by themselves.

Go tell Barkley, Malone, Stockton, Miller, Ewing, etc that they didn't have the star power to carry 4 other men to a championship.

I think you know their teams just weren't up for it. Other better teams beat them.

I think you are a little to fixated on having an arguement and a debate and a thesis anti-thesis synthesis debate blah blah bullshit you refuse to look at what is in front of you. You just want to argue, I don't have the stamina try talking to JBKB he loves to spin peoples wheels on debates and arguements I am sure he will give you the high you seek.

Originally Posted by XxIrvingxX

If I had wikipedia'd that then I would've known that Baylor and Wilt were injured. How do I know this? Because I just got done looking at it after seeing this statement. Before I knew about Baylor's injury but not Wilt's. (and I already knew Baylor retired in 72. He wasn't on the team that Wilt was the Finals MVP in). So please, explain to me why I shouldn't believe that you're the one who is using wikipedia here?

Naw I got memory and for reference I flip through 2 Wilt books I own as well as 4 other books about Bill Russel and the 60's and 70's of basketball.

Originally Posted by XxIrvingxX

And regardless, that doesn't matter because 1. The Celtics teams that they faced were also shells of their former selves, 2. The Knicks team that they beat one year and then lost to the next (or is that the other way around? I forget) were going through injury issues, and 3. Age doesn't matter if you're the GOAT. How do I know this? Michael Jordan won three titles while he was out of his prime. Kobe Bryant is what, 35 now? And right now he's having one of the best offensive seasons of his career. Poor excuse dude, very poor excuse.

Once again this is a team arguement, I won't deny that the Lakers should have won but Wilt was not the problem. He was actually forced to sit out the end of game 7.

Wilt still won a finals MVP at 35 so I guess you are right age doesn't matter if you are the GOAT.

Originally Posted by XxIrvingxX

I advise you to do some research on the game of basketball because it's clearly obvious you have no idea how the game is played, or what makes a player great for that matter. You can talk all you want about the stats that Wilt Chamberlin had when he was around in a era where he was taller than everyone else and was more athletically gifted and stronger, and the pace of the game was so fast that he was able to put up stats like this, but when you want to make statements like "no one will ever be able to do what Wilt did" as a way of saying he's the greatest, I just laugh at your idiotic statement and at the same time share a sense of disbelief at how anyone could think that would be a logical reason. Michael Jordan stormed through the NBA and became what he was because of how good he was, not because of how tall he was or how gifted he was athletically, but because he was an incredible basketball player and he was the best one out there. Right now that's the case with Lebron. And anyone who knows anything at all knows that Wilt was dominant because of the incredible strength, athleticism and height that he had at the time. And if you want to argue it was because of his skills, feel free to explain the below 50% FG percentage from his rookie year (which is horrible for a center by the way).

Oh and learn how to properly debate. You really suck at it.

My goal isn't to try and one up you as a master debator, I know you pride yourself on that but not even you can make an honest persuasive claim as to how Lebron is better. Please make one, if it is even 51% valid I will delete my account. You know why I wager that? Because you can't. He is not!

Wilt was too fast too strong to quick etc and he would still be that way in the game today, don't hate on the man because he is too good.

I'll wait for your Lebron claim if you just bring up more debate knit picking I will assume you got nothing and will move on with my life.

[hobojoe]

Originally Posted by XxIrvingxX

And you think that will prove anything? Lebron was 18 years old when he first started out in the NBA. 18 years. How old was Wilt Chamberlin? And what kind of talent did Wilt go up against in comparison to Lebron? I'll let you think about that one.

And above all of that, Lebron is just nearing his prime and at the moment, this is the best basketball anyone has ever played in the history of the NBA. His PER is 32.6, which beats Wilt Chamberlin's record of 31.8. And again, this is a guy who is not trying to score like crazy like Wilt does when he was averaging 50 points per game on 50% shooting.



Do you have any idea how to properly debate? Where is your argument here? This is exactly what Diable is talking about. All you're doing here is giving me your opinion. You aren't giving me any reason to believe that what you're saying is true. You're just telling me what you think and that's it. You need more than that, otherwise I can't take anything you say seriously. You're just coming off as being biased and that's it.

Here's an example of what you should do in an argument. Winning a championship is the goal of any NBA player. If you can't perform like a star in the moment when your team needs to, especially when you have all the help in the world that you could need, rings are definitely a logical thing to bring up. It's about the situation that matters.

See that? That's called giving a shit. And making a decent argument. Now you try.



...did you even read what he said?



If I had wikipedia'd that then I would've known that Baylor and Wilt were injured. How do I know this? Because I just got done looking at it after seeing this statement. Before I knew about Baylor's injury but not Wilt's. (and I already knew Baylor retired in 72. He wasn't on the team that Wilt was the Finals MVP in). So please, explain to me why I shouldn't believe that you're the one who is using wikipedia here?

And regardless, that doesn't matter because 1. The Celtics teams that they faced were also shells of their former selves, 2. The Knicks team that they beat one year and then lost to the next (or is that the other way around? I forget) were going through injury issues, and 3. Age doesn't matter if you're the GOAT. How do I know this? Michael Jordan won three titles while he was out of his prime. Kobe Bryant is what, 35 now? And right now he's having one of the best offensive seasons of his career. Poor excuse dude, very poor excuse.



I advise you to do some research on the game of basketball because it's clearly obvious you have no idea how the game is played, or what makes a player great for that matter. You can talk all you want about the stats that Wilt Chamberlin had when he was around in a era where he was taller than everyone else and was more athletically gifted and stronger, and the pace of the game was so fast that he was able to put up stats like this, but when you want to make statements like "no one will ever be able to do what Wilt did" as a way of saying he's the greatest, I just laugh at your idiotic statement and at the same time share a sense of disbelief at how anyone could think that would be a logical reason. Michael Jordan stormed through the NBA and became what he was because of how good he was, not because of how tall he was or how gifted he was athletically, but because he was an incredible basketball player and he was the best one out there. Right now that's the case with Lebron. And anyone who knows anything at all knows that Wilt was dominant because of the incredible strength, athleticism and height that he had at the time. And if you want to argue it was because of his skills, feel free to explain the below 50% FG percentage from his rookie year (which is horrible for a center by the way).

Oh and learn how to properly debate. You really suck at it.

You can't have it both ways. You can't discredit Wilt's numbers because the game was different and the pace they played at was much faster while at the same time saying him shooting 50% from the floor is "horrible for a center". You do realize Wilt was the first player ever to shoot 50%, don't you? Percentages in the low to mid-40s regularly led the league until he came around.

[XxIrvingxX]

Originally Posted by PauloCatarino

Just 3 things:

- Reed wasn't there, but Frazier, Lucas, Dave D, Bradley and Monroe played. All future champions (the following year). All (IIRC) HOFers.

- Wilt was the SECOND leading scorer in the Finals, at 20.6.ppg. At age 35.

- Isn't the 1971-72 Lakers recognized as one of (if not THE) greatest teams ever?

So, let's recap: following your logic, Wilt Chamberlain was so great, so dominant, that even when he was the fourth best player in an all-Time great team he was still their Most Valuable Player in the Finals. At age 35 and a year from retirenment (sp?).

Yup, that's GOAT right there.

Oops didn't even see this post lol.

20.6 points per game? Um, you might want to get your facts straight there if you're referring to the finals series where he won the finals MVP award. He averaged 19.4 points per game, not 20.6. I don't know where you got those numbers from but you couldn't be more wrong. And even then those aren't impressive numbers.

And again, the only reason Wilt won the award was because of his rebounding. That's it. Jerry and Goodrich both had bad starts to the series, had that not happened, one of them would have easily gotten the award.

And yes, all of those players are there. And they did end up being hall of famers. But I don't see why you're bringing that up. That doesn't deteriorate my point in anyway. Three of those players were guards, one was a 6 foot 8 PF/C, how would they have any affect at all when it comes to Chamberlin's (a guy who is 7 foot 2 and incredibly strong and athletic) ability to rebound the ball or score? Kind of a pointless detail to bring up there don't you think?

[XxIrvingxX]

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

I bring it up because Wilt's numbers are for an entire career, including his rookie years and his twilight years.

Lebron has no twilight numbers yet to bring his stats down. SO to compare apples to apples I have asked for you guys to compare lebrons first 9 years to Wilt's. Seems fair to me, does it to you?

Twilight years? Wilt had three dominant seasons at the start of his career, and then all of a sudden his stats just went down and never got better (except for the year he had the most assists in the NBA).

And in some ways yes and in some ways it makes no sense at all. Again we're comparing inflated stats to today's stats, where things like blocks, steals, and turnovers are accounted into the PER. I honestly don't believe that Lebron's current PER being better than Wilt's career PER proves anything, but your lack of argument towards what Diable said regarding the PER is the reason I brought it up.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

I will name 5 centers Wilt faced in his career and keep in mind he played these people 7-10 times a season not 2-3 like today. Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Bill Russell, Walt Bellamy, Nate Thurmond, and Willis Reed. On top of that he was constantly double and triple teamed.

You're joking right?

You are aware that this only helps prove my argument right? Apart from Russell, when all these guys showed up in the league, Wilt's stats weren't nearly what they were before. And then suddenly he was forced to pass more. I won't say Wilt was worse than these guys, again, Wilt is a top ten player, but for someone who's supposed to be the GOAT, he shouldn't have to change up the way he plays just because a couple more good players at his position came into the league.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

Okay now name your 5.

Do you want the five in reference to Michael Jordan? Or would you like the five in reference to Lebron?

No matter, I'll just do both. I guess I'll start first with Michael Jordan. Clyde Drexler, Reggie Miller, Joe Dumars, Allen Iverson, and Alvin Robertson, who was one of the best defensive guards of all time and made life miserable for Michael Jordan at times.

I guess Lebron is next. Kevin Durant, Paul Pierce, Carmelo Anthony, Ron Artest (even in his Sacramento days he was still an incredibly efficient player and a monster on defense) and Danny Granger. (Shouldn't I name 10 out of fairness for Wilt since he played a lesser amount of teams than Lebron did? Also, could I name Power Forwards as well since that's another position Lebron usually plays?)

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

PER is not accurate when it does not count all of Wilt's blocks and again if those PER numbers are for a career I would like to See Wilt's first 9 seasons to properly compare them. Wilt per reports was averaging like 3-5 blocks a game so I am sure his PER would be higher if they had those stats. Once again this is for an entire career.

Huh...so it looks like we agree on something. I'll give you this one.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

My goal isn't to see who is a better debater my goal is to show using stats, stats that you love to use except if it helps show how good Wilt was. It seems stats are what you base who is better off of, unless I use them to show what Wilt has done, then all of a sudden stats are meaningless.

Stats that I love to use? The only time I have mentioned Lebron's stats was when referring to his record breaking streak that he had recently. That's it. And even then, I only bring that up because of the impact that his play made for the Miami Heat when he was putting up numbers like this. Wilt clearly did not have the type of impact that Lebron James currently has when he's out there on the floor. I can't think of many players who did.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

I don't need more than that, I can tell you are one of those guys who loves to argue for the sake of arguing, this isn't debate class this is an NBA forum. And even with my "poor debate etiquette" I am still showing you how Wilt is better. He is the better scorer and even if I gave Lebron better scorer, which he isn't. Wilt is the far superior defender, rebounder and individual player.

You aren't showing me how Wilt is better. You're just showing me what stats he put up. That doesn't prove anything, not when comparing stats from this time frame to the stats that are being put up in today's NBA game, where it is more skill oriented and much harder to score.

If by better scorer you mean guy who used his unfair advantage that he had over everyone else he played against to the fullest while also considering the fast pace of the game at the time, then yes, he is the better scorer. Otherwise no, Wilt is not the better scorer, and it isn't even close. It sounds like you truly believe that Wilt was this good because he had amazing basketball skills that no one else had. No. That is not the case. It never was the case. You need to start realizing that. He didn't have a dominant/creative post game where he could be anywhere close to the basket and just shoot from there and make it. He needed to be close, inside the basket or else there was nothing he could really do. If Lebron were around in that era, do you have any idea how high his stats would be? They would have been off the charts. Look I'm not saying Wilt wasn't good, you don't score 100 points in a game while being an average at best basketball player. The guy was great. But his basketball skills were great at best. Lebron James is a whole different story.

And of course Wilt was the better rebounder...the guy is 7 foot 1, Lebron's 6 foot 8. Come on now. As for defender, I can't comment on that and neither can you. We don't have footage that shows us how good Wilt was on a daily basis on the other end of the floor. So when it comes to defense, leave that part out of this discussion.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

The goal of every NBA player is to win a championship but they need a team to do it. Otherwise guys who are super good, Lebron, Kobe, Durant etc would just do it by themselves.

And yet despite having a legendary team, Wilt could only do it twice. And hell, Lebron almost did do it by himself, he led a team with ****ing Drew Gooden as the second best player to the NBA finals.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

Go tell Barkley, Malone, Stockton, Miller, Ewing, etc that they didn't have the star power to carry 4 other men to a championship. I think you know their teams just weren't up for it. Other better teams beat them.

I'm sorry but how is this helping your argument? In the two occasions that Wilt lost to in the NBA finals, these were two teams that were supposed to be worse than the team Wilt was on. And in both of these instances, Wilt just disappeared. And don't even get me started with the playoffs.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

I think you are a little to fixated on having an arguement and a debate and a thesis anti-thesis synthesis debate blah blah bullshit you refuse to look at what is in front of you. You just want to argue, I don't have the stamina try talking to JBKB he loves to spin peoples wheels on debates and arguements I am sure he will give you the high you seek.

I'll admit, I love debating. It's fun. But that's not why I'm doing this. I'm doing this because you literally could not be more wrong. And so here we are. But if you want to throw out irrelevant opinions regarding me, by all means go ahead.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

Once again this is a team arguement, I won't deny that the Lakers should have won but Wilt was not the problem. He was actually forced to sit out the end of game 7.

So who's fault was it? It couldn't have been Jerry West's, considering how he was the finals MVP of that series. Jerry West was doing literally all he could, and Baylor was decent at best that series. Yea sure, Chamberlin was forced to sit out in game 7, but I'm sure the 8 point performance in game 6 wasn't his fault either right?

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

Wilt still won a finals MVP at 35 so I guess you are right age doesn't matter if you are the GOAT.

He won it in a series where the star center on the other team was injured and didn't play at all that series. Again, try not to overrate his performance too much here.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

My goal isn't to try and one up you as a master debator, I know you pride yourself on that but not even you can make an honest persuasive claim as to how Lebron is better. Please make one, if it is even 51% valid I will delete my account. You know why I wager that? Because you can't. He is not!

I just did not only in this post but in numerous other posts as well. Because he does what he does because of how good he is at playing the game of basketball, not because of his physical attributes. That in short is pretty much the best possible claim about it.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

Wilt was too fast too strong to quick etc and he would still be that way in the game today, don't hate on the man because he is too good.

He would be, and like I said, he would still be good if he played today, but in terms of being a top ten all time player? He wouldn't even be considered if he was playing in todays game, and you know that.

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

I'll wait for your Lebron claim if you just bring up more debate knit picking I will assume you got nothing and will move on with my life.

I've made numerous claims now. If you're too blind to see that then that is not my problem.

[The Big Dipper]

Originally Posted by XxIrvingxX

Twilight years? Wilt had three dominant seasons at the start of his career, and then all of a sudden his stats just went down and never got better (except for the year he had the most assists in the NBA).

And in some ways yes and in some ways it makes no sense at all. Again we're comparing inflated stats to today's stats, where things like blocks, steals, and turnovers are accounted into the PER. I honestly don't believe that Lebron's current PER being better than Wilt's career PER proves anything, but your lack of argument towards what Diable said regarding the PER is the reason I brought it up.





You're joking right?

You are aware that this only helps prove my argument right? Apart from Russell, when all these guys showed up in the league, Wilt's stats weren't nearly what they were before. And then suddenly he was forced to pass more. I won't say Wilt was worse than these guys, again, Wilt is a top ten player, but for someone who's supposed to be the GOAT, he shouldn't have to change up the way he plays just because a couple more good players at his position came into the league.



Do you want the five in reference to Michael Jordan? Or would you like the five in reference to Lebron?

No matter, I'll just do both. I guess I'll start first with Michael Jordan. Clyde Drexler, Reggie Miller, Joe Dumars, Allen Iverson, and Alvin Robertson, who was one of the best defensive guards of all time and made life miserable for Michael Jordan at times.

I guess Lebron is next. Kevin Durant, Paul Pierce, Carmelo Anthony, Ron Artest (even in his Sacramento days he was still an incredibly efficient player and a monster on defense) and Danny Granger. (Shouldn't I name 10 out of fairness for Wilt since he played a lesser amount of teams than Lebron did? Also, could I name Power Forwards as well since that's another position Lebron usually plays?)





Huh...so it looks like we agree on something. I'll give you this one.







Stats that I love to use? The only time I have mentioned Lebron's stats was when referring to his record breaking streak that he had recently. That's it. And even then, I only bring that up because of the impact that his play made for the Miami Heat when he was putting up numbers like this. Wilt clearly did not have the type of impact that Lebron James currently has when he's out there on the floor. I can't think of many players who did.



You aren't showing me how Wilt is better. You're just showing me what stats he put up. That doesn't prove anything, not when comparing stats from this time frame to the stats that are being put up in today's NBA game, where it is more skill oriented and much harder to score.

If by better scorer you mean guy who used his unfair advantage that he had over everyone else he played against to the fullest while also considering the fast pace of the game at the time, then yes, he is the better scorer. Otherwise no, Wilt is not the better scorer, and it isn't even close. It sounds like you truly believe that Wilt was this good because he had amazing basketball skills that no one else had. No. That is not the case. It never was the case. You need to start realizing that. He didn't have a dominant/creative post game where he could be anywhere close to the basket and just shoot from there and make it. He needed to be close, inside the basket or else there was nothing he could really do. If Lebron were around in that era, do you have any idea how high his stats would be? They would have been off the charts. Look I'm not saying Wilt wasn't good, you don't score 100 points in a game while being an average at best basketball player. The guy was great. But his basketball skills were great at best. Lebron James is a whole different story.

And of course Wilt was the better rebounder...the guy is 7 foot 1, Lebron's 6 foot 8. Come on now. As for defender, I can't comment on that and neither can you. We don't have footage that shows us how good Wilt was on a daily basis on the other end of the floor. So when it comes to defense, leave that part out of this discussion.





And yet despite having a legendary team, Wilt could only do it twice. And hell, Lebron almost did do it by himself, he led a team with ****ing Drew Gooden as the second best player to the NBA finals.



I'm sorry but how is this helping your argument? In the two occasions that Wilt lost to in the NBA finals, these were two teams that were supposed to be worse than the team Wilt was on. And in both of these instances, Wilt just disappeared. And don't even get me started with the playoffs.





I'll admit, I love debating. It's fun. But that's not why I'm doing this. I'm doing this because you literally could not be more wrong. And so here we are. But if you want to throw out irrelevant opinions regarding me, by all means go ahead.



So who's fault was it? It couldn't have been Jerry West's, considering how he was the finals MVP of that series. Jerry West was doing literally all he could, and Baylor was decent at best that series. Yea sure, Chamberlin was forced to sit out in game 7, but I'm sure the 8 point performance in game 6 wasn't his fault either right?



He won it in a series where the star center on the other team was injured and didn't play at all that series. Again, try not to overrate his performance too much here.







I just did not only in this post but in numerous other posts as well. Because he does what he does because of how good he is at playing the game of basketball, not because of his physical attributes. That in short is pretty much the best possible claim about it.



He would be, and like I said, he would still be good if he played today, but in terms of being a top ten all time player? He wouldn't even be considered if he was playing in todays game, and you know that.



I've made numerous claims now. If you're too blind to see that then that is not my problem.

Well I am at work and I want to respond but with the holiday on Monday I have a lot of catch up so here is where I am getting all of my visual Wilt evidence as to how he is a better defensive player. If you see his Laker highlights you will notice he doesn't have many offensive highlights. On the warriors and 76ers he was asked to do everything so he scored rebounded defended etc.

When he got to the Lakers they had people to score, he was asked to defend grab every rebound and throw an outlet pass for the fast break. There would be times where he would launch an outlet pass and by the time he gets to half court West or Goodrich have already scored.

Anywho lok at this youtube channel and when I get home I'll go over your points.

http://www.youtube.com/user/dantheman9758

[PauloCatarino]

Originally Posted by XxIrvingxX

Oops didn't even see this post lol.

20.6 points per game? Um, you might want to get your facts straight there if you're referring to the finals series where he won the finals MVP award. He averaged 19.4 points per game, not 20.6. I don't know where you got those numbers from but you couldn't be more wrong. And even then those aren't impressive numbers.

And again, the only reason Wilt won the award was because of his rebounding. That's it. Jerry and Goodrich both had bad starts to the series, had that not happened, one of them would have easily gotten the award.

And yes, all of those players are there. And they did end up being hall of famers. But I don't see why you're bringing that up. That doesn't deteriorate my point in anyway. Three of those players were guards, one was a 6 foot 8 PF/C, how would they have any affect at all when it comes to Chamberlin's (a guy who is 7 foot 2 and incredibly strong and athletic) ability to rebound the ball or score? Kind of a pointless detail to bring up there don't you think?

Don't need to drag this even further.

It started with you saying: "And when his dominance stopped, he ended up being the second or third or even the fourth caddy on a team."

I've showned you that in his second-to-last season in the NBA Wilt Chamberlain, age 35, was the Finals MVP. Being the second-best Laker scorer in the series, the better rebounder and defender.
The rest is you trying (and failing) to nitpick your way into a losing argument, young grasshopper.

Let's move on.

[Da Grinch]

Originally Posted by 23AJ

Dwyane Wade is a better player than Scottie Pippen. From the moment he was drafted up to this point in his career. Anyone saying otherwise is straight bull shitting you. And clearly didn't watch Pippens career. Pippen never had the sack of D Wade. And Pippen's game evolved because of the mentorship of Michael Jeffery Jordan.

So I guess all you guys who are overrating Pippen should also be giving the credit that Jordan makes his teammates better than anybody including LeBron James, after all by reading through this thread, everyone sucks that LeBron has played with, and Pippen is the bomb, but Wade .. Bosh,, all those guys on Cleveland well they sucked, guess Bron isn't so great at making his teammates better like everyone says. So all I gotta say is, stop tricking punks, your game is up, and let history be the teacher, and let James career wind down.

Put me on the record, not only will LeBron fall short of the greatest ever in MJ, but LeBron will not surprass Kobe Bryant either.

that is ridiculous scottie arguably in the 1993-94 season was the best player in the world ...wade has never been that, not even close to being a part of the discussion ...if for no other reason than he has never been better than lebron whose time in the nba mirrors his own.

jordan gets virtually no credit for mentoring , outside of being a supportive teammate and that is pretty questionable considering whats been reported as far as how good a teammate mj is reputed to be.

a week ago jordan specifically mentioned 4 players whom he felt could have been superstars in his era...wade's name wasn't mention.

scottie already proved he was.

[XxIrvingxX]

Originally Posted by PauloCatarino

Don't need to drag this even further.

It started with you saying: "And when his dominance stopped, he ended up being the second or third or even the fourth caddy on a team."

I've showned you that in his second-to-last season in the NBA Wilt Chamberlain, age 35, was the Finals MVP. Being the second-best Laker scorer in the series, the better rebounder and defender.
The rest is you trying (and failing) to nitpick your way into a losing argument, young grasshopper.

Let's move on.

How is it a losing argument when I'm not the one who's wrong here?

Seriously, second best scorer on the team in that series? 20.6 points per game? Where do you get your facts from? Wikipedia is more reliable than you are.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...72_finals.html

Take a look at the points per game category on the Lakers team. You can't even get your own facts right and you're trying to convince me that I'M the one who is in a losing argument here? And above all of that, you're trying to convince me that in a series that Chamberlin was the MVP in, where the person playing on the opposite position of Chamberlin is a player coming off the bench because Reed is injured, proves anything at all? This is as far as you could possibly go in the category of stupid. This is pretty much something I would expect from Drizzay or JBKB.

And look at the amount of shots that Chamberlin took. You would think the so called GOAT would be more aggressive in a finals series. But guess what? This was the case in all of his games in the finals. And yet, in the regular season he sure has no problem taking a shitload of shots now does he? Face it, when it came to crunch time Chamberlin was a joke, a complete non factor and the only reason he won finals MVP here was because the future hall of famer that was supposed to be his match up in the series was out for the series, so in return he got a bench player who still did a lot better than people thought he would. Trying to use inflated stats is one thing, but my god I did not expect so much stupidity out of an argument regarding Wilt Chamberlin.

I'm not the one in a losing argument here. I'm not wrong about what I've been saying, and if I am please do state where I am wrong in. I could use a good laugh. Your argument is a joke, and so is this claim that Wilt is the greatest of all time.

[The Big Dipper]

Originally Posted by XxIrvingxX

How is it a losing argument when I'm not the one who's wrong here?

Seriously, second best scorer on the team in that series? 20.6 points per game? Where do you get your facts from? Wikipedia is more reliable than you are.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...72_finals.html

Take a look at the points per game category on the Lakers team. You can't even get your own facts right and you're trying to convince me that I'M the one who is in a losing argument here? And above all of that, you're trying to convince me that in a series that Chamberlin was the MVP in, where the person playing on the opposite position of Chamberlin is a player coming off the bench because Reed is injured, proves anything at all? This is as far as you could possibly go in the category of stupid. This is pretty much something I would expect from Drizzay or JBKB.

And look at the amount of shots that Chamberlin took. You would think the so called GOAT would be more aggressive in a finals series. But guess what? This was the case in all of his games in the finals. And yet, in the regular season he sure has no problem taking a shitload of shots now does he? Face it, when it came to crunch time Chamberlin was a joke, a complete non factor and the only reason he won finals MVP here was because the future hall of famer that was supposed to be his match up in the series was out for the series, so in return he got a bench player who still did a lot better than people thought he would. Trying to use inflated stats is one thing, but my god I did not expect so much stupidity out of an argument regarding Wilt Chamberlin.

I'm not the one in a losing argument here. I'm not wrong about what I've been saying, and if I am please do state where I am wrong in. I could use a good laugh. Your argument is a joke, and so is this claim that Wilt is the greatest of all time.

Damn you are a little worm aren't you? Chamberlains amazing D and good offense gave him the mvp.

Offense is only one side of basketball.

It is very easy to say someone else is wrong how about you tell me how lebron is better. This is the third time I ask, how is Lebron better?

You are in a losing arguement. Youknow Wilt is better so you try discrediting him instead of telling us lebrons achievements.

The facts speak for themselves. Also with the lakers he was asked to be the defensive anchor. That iswhy his game changed. Once again you are just regurgitating stuff insteaf of researching.

So let's hear it, how is lebron better? He aint even better than the big O. Do you know whothat is or what he did withoutWikipedia?

[XxIrvingxX]

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

Well I am at work and I want to respond but with the holiday on Monday I have a lot of catch up so here is where I am getting all of my visual Wilt evidence as to how he is a better defensive player. If you see his Laker highlights you will notice he doesn't have many offensive highlights. On the warriors and 76ers he was asked to do everything so he scored rebounded defended etc.

When he got to the Lakers they had people to score, he was asked to defend grab every rebound and throw an outlet pass for the fast break. There would be times where he would launch an outlet pass and by the time he gets to half court West or Goodrich have already scored.

Anywho lok at this youtube channel and when I get home I'll go over your points.

http://www.youtube.com/user/dantheman9758

Just finished watching the whole thing. Now I won't make any excuses and I won't make any biased opinions towards Wilt. First I will start out with what I'm not surprised from (or the negatives in your case).

His offensive highlights didn't impress me to the least bit. They where exactly what I had expected of him. Constant dunks and constant close handed open lay ups. I have no reason what so ever to believe that with a playing style like that, that he would be a better scorer than Lebron in today's day and age, let alone Jordan for that matter. A lot of the blocks in this video were clear goal tends, and on smaller players as well. His changed role on the different teams still doesn't change my opinions regarding his scoring, for someone as talented as he was on the offensive end, there is no reason for the poor scoring performances that he had in the playoffs.

Now time for the positives.

His defense impressed the hell out of me, and his defensive awareness is outstanding. If he were to play in today's game, he could definitely average 3 blocks per game, if not more. His athleticism is incredible and his blocks on Kareems sky hook were very impressive. I believe he and Hakeem are the only players to ever block those shots. The fact that he was able to adjust the way he did to playing a different kind of style for different kinds of teams is also impressive. It's something that you would want in a player, it's one of the best kinds of players you can find in fact. And his work ethic has always impressed me. His ability to play so many minutes through out so many games a year is incredible, especially when you put into consideration the fast pace that they played at in those days.

So I've seen his defense, and although I don't think I've seen enough of it, I'm willing to admit that Wilt is the better defender of the two, not by much, but he's better. Offensively though, despite the changed roles, he isn't better. Not even close. Using your strength and athleticism to your advantage doesn't make you a better offensive player (and the same goes for you Shaq).

[Luke]

Shaq was easily a more dominant scorer than LeBron. **** flash and flair ill take the almost guaranteed two points thanks.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App

[XxIrvingxX]

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

Damn you are a little worm aren't you? Chamberlains amazing D and good offense gave him the mvp.

Offense is only one side of basketball.

It is very easy to say someone else is wrong how about you tell me how lebron is better. This is the third time I ask, how is Lebron better?

You are in a losing arguement. Youknow Wilt is better so you try discrediting him instead of telling us lebrons achievements.

The facts speak for themselves. Also with the lakers he was asked to be the defensive anchor. That iswhy his game changed. Once again you are just regurgitating stuff insteaf of researching.

So let's hear it, how is lebron better? He aint even better than the big O. Do you know whothat is or what he did withoutWikipedia?

Oscar Robertson, the only man in NBA history to record a Triple Double in a season, Kareem's teammate in Milwaukee when they won the championship. Once again, I don't use wikipedia, I haven't been using wikipedia in this debate. I don't lie about things like this, I don't need to. If you want to be like hobojoe and act like everything you say about someone is true and if they deny it they're wrong, go ahead and be my guest, but you're simply wasting your time and showing you're as pathetic as he is. That will be the last thing that I will say regarding this topic.

As for why Lebron's better (and I can't believe I'm saying this for the fourth god damn time), he is better because he doesn't just dominate the game of basketball using his physical attributes or athleticism, he dominates it using his knowledge of the game and the incredible skill set he has at his arsenal. (It looks like I will have to spell it out for you since you apparently didn't get the memo the first twelve times) When he scores, he does so in a variety of ways, whether it's lay ups, jump shots, a lot of the shots he makes in games are incredibly difficult shots and yet he does it with absolute ease. I've watched almost every single game that he was in when he was playing for Cleveland, and there were only a few rare games where I wasn't amazed by a shot he made.

Lebron has rare gifts both physically and athletically. He is one of the strongest men out on the floor and yet he is incredibly fast for someone his size. So it's hard to guard him. But the thing is, he's still better than pretty much anyone he faces out on the floor. With Wilt that was not the case. He was predictable. You knew what to expect from him. You just don't know what to expect from Lebron anymore. He now has a post game, he is one of the best players in the NBA at driving the ball in the lane, he's shooting the lights out as of late, and his passing abilities are just unreal. It was easy for Wilt to pass, I'm not saying Wilt wasn't a good passer, a couple of the passes you showed me in the video were pretty good, in fact I'd go as far as saying they were amazing passes. But Wilt didn't make people better. He didn't have a special gift of being able to get others involved. His presence just caused others to be open and he took advantage of that, as seen in the video and other videos that I have seen.

I could go on all day, but instead I'll sum it all up like this. Lebron's effect on a team is one of the greatest, if not the greatest, we have ever seen on a team. Offensively he has the scoring ability of Julius Erving (only Lebron can actually shoot) and he has the passing abilities of Oscar Robertson. He's an incredibly unselfish player and anyone who is out on the floor immediately becomes involved in the offense. Defensively he can guard all five positions (depending on who's playing center of course. If it's someone like Howard then Lebron's pretty much ****ed), and he can do it at an elite level. Starting out Lebron was decent, good at best on defense. But then in 2009 he just suddenly became one of the best defenders in the NBA. His awareness on defense is incredible, he can steal the ball, his blocks are entertaining as always. I can remember in 2010 in the playoffs when he was making life miserable for Paul Peirce on defense, who was use to being an elite scorer. You could rely on Lebron to guard basically anybody.

And finally, Lebron's ability to perform when he is needed most, something Wilt undeniably lacked his entire career, and this is what ultimately prevents Wilt from ever being considered the greatest of all time. You said it yourself. Basketball is a team game. And yet, Lebron is so good, he by himself destroyed the Detroit Pistons in 2007 and led the Cavaliers to the NBA finals. This was one of the worst teams to ever go to the finals in the history of the NBA, and Lebron brought that team there and made people notice them.

Wilt does not have these things apart from the superior defense. He does not have incredible offensive abilities, he does not have incredible skills like Lebron does, he has brute strength, incredible athleticism, and great height. That's it.

Now I don't know about anyone else, but a guy with great athleticism, a lot of strength, amazing rebounding, limited offensive abilities, no killer instinct and outstanding defensive abilities does not beat a guy with great athleticism, lots of strength, great rebounding, great defensive abilities, outstanding offensive abilities, incredibly unselfish play, and a killer clutch instinct. If you believe so, then you need your head reexamined.

[XxIrvingxX]

Originally Posted by Luke

Shaq was easily a more dominant scorer than LeBron. **** flash and flair ill take the almost guaranteed two points thanks.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App

More dominant scorer? Yes. More skilled offensive player? No. There's a difference.

And almost guaranteed? Yeah, sure, as long as no one did the hack a shaq strategy.