I think one big difference is that it wasn't that far outside the realm of Wilt's normal ability/production to score 100 points. I would guess that if he really wanted to, he could have done it again or come very close.
Eh, it required quite a perfect storm for Wilt to put up his 100.
Exactly, Wilt was never really viewed as a winner, he only won his 2 championships when he stopped leading the league in scoring and focused on defense more which he was also great at, Jordan won his championships as a scorer and an allround player and had no real failures in his resume, plus he elevated his level even in the playoffs.
That being said Wilts first 7 seasons in the NBA are the most dominant in NBA History and if he could have won championships in such a convincing way playing like that he would probably be considered the best. In that way there's the difference between him and Babe Ruth and Gretzky as they also won championships in such dominating fashion. For some Wilt is kinda viewed as a stad padder that played against small guys.
The key word is "viewed" as a winner. Of course winning is the goal of athletics, but it shouldn't be the only or, perhaps even the primary, way of evaluating a player. From what I've read, Wilt really wanted to win, but often didn't have the supporting talent to do so.
When you read some of the quotes about Wilt, it's pretty obvious that he wasn't just "playing against small guys." If so, I guess guys like Manute Bol and Mark Eaton should have been all-time greats.
"When challenged, Wilt could do almost anything he wanted. In 1961 a new star named Walt Bellamy came into the league. Bellamy was 6-foot-10, and was scoring 30 points a game. First time they played against each other, they met at half court. Bellamy said, 'Hello, Mr. Chamberlain. I'm Walter Bellamy.' Chamberlain reached for Bellamy's hand and said, 'Hello, Walter. You won't get a shot off in the first half.' Wilt then blocked Bellamy's first nine shots. At the start of the second half Wilt said to Bellamy, 'Okay, Walter. Now you can play.'"
Of all his memories of Wilt Chamberlain, the one that stood out for Larry Brown happened long after Chamberlain's professional career had ended. On a summer day in the early 1980s, when Brown was coaching at UCLA, Chamberlain showed up at Pauley Pavilion to take part in one of the high-octane pickup games that the arena constantly attracted. "Magic Johnson used to run the games," Brown recalled Tuesday after hearing that Chamberlain, his friend, had died at 63, "and he called a couple of chintzy fouls and a goaltending on Wilt. "So Wilt said: 'There will be no more layups in this gym,' and he blocked every shot after that. That's the truth, I saw it. He didn't let one [of Johnson's] shots get to the rim."
Several years after Wilt stopped playing, he toyed with the idea of a comeback. On the day he visited the Knicks' offices in Madison Square Garden, he talked to Red Holzman, then strode out to the elevator. When it opened, two deliverymen were struggling with a dolly piled high with boxes of office supplies, mostly letterheads and envelopes. The load was so heavy, the elevator had stopped maybe four inches below the floor level and now the deliverymen were huffing and puffing, but they couldn't raise the dolly high enough to get it on the floor level. After maybe two minutes of the deliverymen's huffing and puffing, Wilt, his biceps bulging in a tank top, peered down at them and intoned, "Gentlemen, maybe I can help." They stepped back, he stepped into the elevator, grabbed each end of the rope slung under the dolly and without much exertion, quickly lifted the dolly onto the floor level. Looking up in awe, the deliverymen said, "Thank you." Wilt said, "You're welcome." Wilt stepped into the elevator and rode down to the street level as another witness followed the two deliverymen toward the Knick offices and asked, "How much does all this weigh?" They quickly surveyed the stack of big boxes of office supplies. "Close to 600 pounds," one said.
"One time, when I was with Boston and he was with the Lakers, Happy Hairston and I were about to get in a scrape," said Charlotte Hornets coach Paul Silas, who was a rugged, no-nonsense enforcer. "All of a sudden, I felt an enormous vise around me. I was 6-7, 235, and Wilt had picked me up and turned me around. He said, 'We're not going to have that stuff.' I said, 'Yes sir.'"
"On the trip to Russia with the Harlem Globetrotters, we were in Lenin Stadium, and they assigned a dressing room to the team. The players were getting dressed for one of their games. They were in rather close quarters. Remember, these were young kids-Wilt was 23. The others were his age. They were like kittens. You bump me, i'll bump you back. And before you know it, two of the guys set on Wilt. They started playfully pushing and shoving him. And finally one of his teammates hit Wilt a little too hard. He took these two guys, twisted each of their shirts, and lifted both of them off the ground. Each of these guys weighed over 200 pounds. It looked like he had two little crackers in his hands. I thought he was going to hit their heads together. It was an amazing demonstration of strength".
"The greatest play I've ever seen was one of the last games of the 1966-67 season and were playing Baltimore. We [Philadelphia] were going for the best record in NBA history. There was a play earlier in the game where Gus Johnson had dunked one over Wilt. Gus was a very strong player. I weighed 220 pounds, and with one hand Gus could push me out of the lane. The man was a physical specimen [6-foot-6, 230 pounds], all muscle. He loved to dunk and was a very colorful player. When he slammed it on Wilt, he really threw it down, and you could tell that Wilt didn't like it one bit.
Later in the game, Gus was out on the fast break, and the only man between him and the basket was Wilt. He was goin to dunk on Wilt--again. Gus cupped the ball and took off--he had a perfect angle for a slam. Wilt went up and with one hand he grabbed the ball--cleanly! Then he took the ball and shoved it right back into Gus, drilling Gus into the floor with the basketball.
Gus was flattened and they carried him out. It turned out that Gus Johnson was the only player in NBA history to suffer a dislocated shoulder from a blocked shot."
--Billy Cunningham
When guys like Bill Russell and Kareem make it clear that Wilt was the best ever, you have to respect that to a great degree.
Is there really doubt that a 7'1" 275 lb. guy who could run like the wind, had about a 4 foot vertical leap and even in his 40's could lift 600 pounds with ease... would be able to dominate today? If people are ridiculed for suggesting that Gordie Howe played against small guys or Bobby Orr played against slow guys, then saying Wilt played against small guys has to take the cake. Pretty much any human being in history would be small/weak/slow compared to Wilt.
Last edited by Czech Your Math: 03-07-2012 at 04:25 PM.
It's not on par with what Wilt did but it's as close as anyone has ever gotten.
It's certainly better than Mario's 5 ways feat since that was in large part luck. The fact that he was able get a penalty shot in itself is incredibly fortunate considering the rarity of them.
Here's a recently published look at Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game, drawing conclusions from the boxscore. (That's all we have, as well as memories from participants, because the game was played in front of 3000 spectators in Hershey, PA, was not televised, and there is no existing video.)
Conclusions:
Quote:
1. The Warriors force fed Wilt the ball in the second half to get him to 100 (which is fine);
2. The Knicks made him earn the 100 by putting him on the line; but,
3. The Warriors, and possibly Wilt himself, laid down on defense to get more scoring opps for Wilt in the second half, which in my mind taints the result.
Basically the opposing team's big men, and especially their backup big men (who Chamberlain would have been playing against after the starter fouled out) shot for a lot of points at a high percentage and took very few free throws, suggesting that Wilt stopped playing D as he pushed for 100 points in the second half.
Of course Mario, Wayne, Sittler, Gagner, and other hockey players having big games may have stopped playing D and started looking to get their points as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math
The key word is "viewed" as a winner. Of course winning is the goal of athletics, but it shouldn't be the only or, perhaps even the primary, way of evaluating a player. From what I've read, Wilt really wanted to win, but often didn't have the supporting talent to do so.
When you read some of the quotes about Wilt, it's pretty obvious that he wasn't just "playing against small guys." If so, I guess guys like Manute Bol and Mark Eaton should have been all-time greats.
The quotes you provided are very interesting and show what a physical specimen Wilt was. I agree that he would have dominated offensively in any era. But then you have to question why Wilt wasn't a better defensive player in the NBA. With his unparalleled athleticsm, he should have been the greatest defensive player of all time, defending the basket and dominating the paint. Instead, his contemporary Bill Russell (who was athletically gifted himself with quick feet, great leaping ability, and incredibly long arms) is generally considered to be the greatest defensive player of all time, despite giving away 4 inches and 50 pounds to Wilt.
Among Wilt's strangest stats was the fact that he never fouled out of a single game in his career, despite playing almost every minute of every game. This suggests that if he got a few fouls in a game, he would stop playing defence so as not to risk fouling out, because ordinary defensive effort sometimes results in a foul. While Wilt was certainly capable of being a great defensive player, I can't believe he always gave a strong defensive effort with that record. This is important because defensive play by big men is an extremely important part of basketball that is very difficult to measure with boxscore stats. And it's entirely consistent with his record as a player who put individual accomplishments before team accomplishments.
Basically the opposing team's big men, and especially their backup big men (who Chamberlain would have been playing against after the starter fouled out) shot for a lot of points at a high percentage and took very few free throws, suggesting that Wilt stopped playing D as he pushed for 100 points in the second half.
Of course Mario, Wayne, Sittler, Gagner, and other hockey players having big games may have stopped playing D and started looking to get their points as well.
You make a good point and show why any single game accomplishment should be taken with a grain of salt. Some people refer to "peak", but that can be somewhat flukey. I think "established peak" is much more important. For Wilt, in a single game, 100 points (although previously predicted by some) was a bit "flukey". However, his established peak game of 70+ points in a game is still dominating, as are his seasonal and career records.
There are plenty of players who "cheat" on the defensive side to a varying degree, whether they are close to some sort of record or not. They may not give full effort on the defensive side, to either give the team better offensive opportunity, or to save energy for the offensive zone. Whether this actually helps the team or is purely selfish could be open to interpretation and depends on such things as how much/often the player sacrifices defense, and how much greater/successful the offensive opportunities are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass
The quotes you provided are very interesting and show what a physical specimen Wilt was. I agree that he would have dominated offensively in any era. But then you have to question why Wilt wasn't a better defensive player in the NBA. With his unparalleled athleticsm, he should have been the greatest defensive player of all time, defending the basket and dominating the paint. Instead, his contemporary Bill Russell (who was athletically gifted himself with quick feet, great leaping ability, and incredibly long arms) is generally considered to be the greatest defensive player of all time, despite giving away 4 inches and 50 pounds to Wilt.
Among Wilt's strangest stats was the fact that he never fouled out of a single game in his career, despite playing almost every minute of every game. This suggests that if he got a few fouls in a game, he would stop playing defence so as not to risk fouling out, because ordinary defensive effort sometimes results in a foul. While Wilt was certainly capable of being a great defensive player, I can't believe he always gave a strong defensive effort with that record. This is important because defensive play by big men is an extremely important part of basketball that is very difficult to measure with boxscore stats. And it's entirely consistent with his record as a player who put individual accomplishments before team accomplishments.
From what I know, he was still an outstanding defensive player. He probably did not play such aggressive defense when in foul trouble, so that the team wouldn't lose his offensive contribution. He took a beating and the refs basically let a lot of would-be fouls go when they were committed against Wilt.
I'm not an expert on Wilt, but one thing I like about HoH is that I often end up learning more about the subject through others' posts and/or reading up on the subject myself. Here are some more quotes about Wilt that may shed light on some of what you said:
"Wilt is playing better than I used to -- passing off, coming out to set up screens, picking up guys outside, and sacrificing himself for team play."
-- Bill Russell
"One-on-one he [Wilt] would've murdered Russell and everyone. But playing five-on-five, Wilt was consigned to a specific role because of his ability to score so easily, whereas the Celtics fit Russell into their team concept better."
[Carl Braun said] "He [Wilt] disorganizes you under the basket the same way [as Bill Russell, on defense]. With Wilt, of course, there's that offense on top of it, which is better than Russell's.
--Red Holzman
"I call Wilt Chamberlain a very honest workman. By that, I mean he always did what his employer wanted. No star athlete has ever given his boss more for the money than Wilt did during his career. Eddie Gottlieb [owner of the Warriors] wanted Wilt to score like no man ever had, so Wilt did. [Alex] Hannum and some of his other coaches wantedhim to pass and play defense, so he did that and he played 48 minutes a night. Those who criticized Wilt -- first for his scoring, then for not scoring more -- really should have criticized his employer."
Wilt gave a strong effort on defense and had great results, such as the countless number of shots he blocked. If he wasn't considered as capable a defender as Russell, that doesn't mean he wasn't and certainly doesn't mean he wasn't a great defender himself.
It's not on par with what Wilt did but it's as close as anyone has ever gotten.
It's certainly better than Mario's 5 ways feat since that was in large part luck. The fact that he was able get a penalty shot in itself is incredibly fortunate considering the rarity of them.
Mario's 5 in 5 ways game is really impressive more as an event than as an accomplishment for this reason.
The odds of it happening again are beyond high, but he had games where he had to work harder for his 5 goals.
Mario's 5 in 5 ways game is really impressive more as an event than as an accomplishment for this reason.
The odds of it happening again are beyond high, but he had games where he had to work harder for his 5 goals.
Never understood the "record/achivement" fuzz about it either. Impressing to say the least. But that´s the 5 goal part of it. Doing it in five different ways is to me a fun fact, more like records achived at skill competions - not a record you set out to achive.
As for the thread, of course hard to compare different sports. I think Czech Your Math is on to something. If it would have been say Gretzky, Orr, Richard, Howe or Lemieux getting 10 points it would have been an extraordinary night by on of The Greats instead of a "fluke" night by one of the very good and therefore I think it would be regarded even higher. Sittler was a great player but, as in the case with Chamberlins record, it kind of validates itself if it is done by one of the true greats. "10 points on one night, only Gretz could have pulled that of...".
One big difference between hockey and basketball is that defense plays a much bigger role in hockey. And once you get by the defense, you still have to beat the goaltender, not shoot into a hoop.
A perfectly executed individual effort in basketball is literally unstoppable, so the individual game basketball records are more personal achievements. For Sittler, not only did he have to play well, but he also had to have his teammates play well enough to score on his passes, and he had to have the opposing team's defense and goaltender play poorly.
There is also a bigger element of luck in hockey on an individual game basis - much more likely to get 13 good bounces than 50 (or however many baskets Wilt had to reach 100 points).
It's a lot more complicated than 10 points in hockey = 100 in basketball
