|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Who's the all-time best Laker Defender? |
| Kobe |
|
28% |
[ 43 ] |
| Cooper |
|
62% |
[ 96 ] |
| Other |
|
9% |
[ 14 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 153 |
|
| Author |
Message |
mcatboy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 22 Dec 2002
Posts: 999
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 12:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DrDoom wrote: | People on here must be kidding theirselves if they think the centers of the past ten years are leaps and bounds ahead of those of the past. Quite the opposite actually, in the last 10 years the 5 position has weakened to the point where this may be the worst it has ever been in league history.
Seriously, put Amare where he belongs as a pf, and with the aging of O'Neal and we have Brad Miller (injury prone, super-soft stiff), Yao (tired from playing 11.5 months of the year) Ming, and Big (feet and known to miss 20-30 games a year) Z as the best centers in the league??
That is a travesty.
Doom |
Sadly,you are so correct here. For years, it was believed that winning in the NBA started with a great center. Once they adapted the game (offiicating mostly) to spotlight MJ, they devalued centers. There is no reason for a big man to develop a traditional center's game, because it is not rewarded like it once was. While the list of all time greats at the 2, 3, and 4 are rich in recent players, the list for the 5 is rich in older players. I think the 1 is the only spot that has a good balance.
Expansion has certainly played a roll, because centers that should be carrying a clipboard during the games after serving as a cardboard cutout during practices are now getting significant minutes. Could you imagine how average centers of the past would thrive in today's game. Rik Smits and Yao Ming are pretty close to being the same player. Smits was fifteen years too early. Unseld is Ben Wallace with an offensive game. Nate Thurmond would be an allstar nowadays.
On the bright side, if Bynum can develop into an average talent, given the state of the NBA, he's a potential superstar. It also makes it so that replacing Mimh is not a priority. We can get by with a Mimh at center, because there is no Sikma, Eaton, Edwards, etc... as the league's average center. Mimh now defines average. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
smitco
Starting Rotation
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 121
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 12:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| smitco wrote: | | Arsenal wrote: |
Kobe might be the most overrated Laker defender in history... |
Kobe overrated? are you a hater? kobe made all defensive first team thrice and second team twice. Do you really have any basis in making such an ignorant statement? |
| macatboy wrote: | Rule 17.3 A in the how to argue as a Lakers fan handbook:
When faced with an argument you're not sure how to handle, simply refer to the debating opponent as a "hater."
Are you a Cooper hater?
As far as defense goes, Kobe does not compare to Cooper. Kobe is a great defender when he feels like it, but there is a lack of consistency that makes him a level below a Cooper. He shuts down Bibby in a big game, then we don't see that for a few games. He is an overrated defender when his name is used in the same breath as Michael Cooper.
Winning a veiled-offensively minded award for defense does not support a player as a great defender. It's like saying the Gold Glove award in baseball means something. Sure, there are some great defenders who win defensive notoriety, but the first and second teams have some marginal choices at best.
When players like Jason Kidd (1999 (1st) and 2000 (2nd)), Manute Bol, Fat Lever, Larry Nance, Mookie Blaylock, Tim Duncan (multiple first teamer), and Karl Malone (after turning 34 he got his first award of a few) make the all-defensive team, you have to consider it an award of popularity more than merit. It's often given for okay defense by an offensive talent. Let me second Arsenal's notion that Kobe might be the most overrated defender on the Lakers. Over the years, Cooper, Jones, Smith, Green, and Kobe have all been mentioned for their defense. Kobe on his best is certainly worthy of that group, but on his indifferent days, he's not in that category. Hence, he is the most overrated Lakers defender. It's not a knock on Kobe; it's an appreciation for other great Lakers defenders. |
Did you even bother reading all of my post in this thread before saying that i am a cooper hater?
To remind you, in my previous post i specifically said that cooper, at present, is a much greater defender compared to kobe and that kobe might probably surpass him in the future. I used the word "might" because kobe's career is far from being over yet.
With respect to your statement that being included in the all nba defensive team is an award of popularity rather than merit. Are you joking? WTH are you taking about. You mean to tell me those players who received mulitiple defensive team citations (at present:duncans; garnetts; kobe; ben wallace; and past players jordan; pippen; and like) were merely included in the defensive team because they are popular? Man your argument does not really make any sense? Being included in the defensive team, especially the 1st team is a concrete evidence that you play great defense. Being cited several times makes you a spectacular defender. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
freshprince
Star Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2003
Posts: 2659
Location: originally from the NJ
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| i was going to say the same thing. coop was better all around as a defender but if i had to pick one guy to guard the oppostitions most explosive player as along as it was a 2 or a three i would go kob on that one! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jlkr42
Starting Rotation
Joined: 30 Jan 2003
Posts: 845
Location: DVNH
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Russell never shut down Wilt. Russell beat Wilt only because he always had better teammates. Wilt used to have 40/20 games against the Celtics routinely. Wilt's single game rebound record of 55 came against Russell. Several of his NBA-record 78 games of 50+ points came against Russell. The real difference between the two is that Russell always played with at least 3 HOF teammates every year he was in the league. Go to the history section at nba.com and check out all the old rosters. Yes, Russell made his team better and he gets credit for that, but Wilt never had the teammates that Russell did.
BTW, Coop gets my vote for Lakers all-time defender. Kobe is as skilled, but he doesn't bring it nearly as consistently as Cooper did. Yes, Kobe has more minutes and more responsibility than Cooper ever had.
_________________
I ventured to talk, but I never lost my place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeToShaq
Starting Rotation
Joined: 24 May 2004
Posts: 174
Location: Kalmazoo, MI
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
one doug-collins-overhyped defensive season in 99-00 and now this guy is the best Laker defender all time??? ask larry bird who the best laker defender ever was... he coached against kobe and played against coopaloop.
lets stop the arguments here. kobe bryant has become one of the most severely-overhyped defensive players in the NBA. the last 2 seasons have been very indicative of his liabilities, and quite honestly the first 4 seasons showed his weakness in the post defensively. he still gambles entirely too much, plays his own self-determined form of zone defense, he rotates poorly, has admitted to save energy for offense, and rarely if ever locks up his man as opponents continue to get open triples. a strong defensive year from kobe (and that includes help in rebounding, blocking out his man, rotating like everyone else on the team does) might be as important as anything else in determining our road to the playoffs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TIME
Starting Rotation
Joined: 23 Sep 2003
Posts: 278
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| waterman40 wrote: | | Cooper, hands down, no discussion necessary. Best Laker defender, ever. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Drifts
Retired Number
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 28374
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| drzucchini wrote: | | jumpinmp wrote: | | bambam wrote: | | Drifts wrote: | | drzucchini wrote: | | lal4l wrote: | | Coop gave JORDAN the hardest time as admitted BY HIM. |
Hmm, don't seem to recall Jordan ever saying that. I've always thought that he said that Dumars gave him the hardest time. |
I also remember the same thing... |
And Jordan said so when he came back from retirement. Dumars was the "only guy who made me work"... |
I remember Jordan saying Mitch Richmond was his toughest, or one of his toughest defenders. I guess he likes to change his tune from time to time. |
Actually, I've heard the thing about Mitch Richmond, too. That wasn't really a testament to Richmond's defense but rather a testament to Richmond's offense. His offensive skills made Jordan work harder and use up more of his energy on the defensive end. |
exactly, if I remember correctly...Jordan said Mitch was the 2nd best off-guard...of course, next to himself...if I may add, a very far 2nd...
also, about Bill Russell and Wilt...Wilt once upon a time hang 60+ on Bill Russell...but yeah, Bill was a great defensive force. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cirehawk
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 5525
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KobeToShaq wrote: | one doug-collins-overhyped defensive season in 99-00 and now this guy is the best Laker defender all time??? ask larry bird who the best laker defender ever was... he coached against kobe and played against coopaloop.
lets stop the arguments here. kobe bryant has become one of the most severely-overhyped defensive players in the NBA. the last 2 seasons have been very indicative of his liabilities, and quite honestly the first 4 seasons showed his weakness in the post defensively. he still gambles entirely too much, plays his own self-determined form of zone defense, he rotates poorly, has admitted to save energy for offense, and rarely if ever locks up his man as opponents continue to get open triples. a strong defensive year from kobe (and that includes help in rebounding, blocking out his man, rotating like everyone else on the team does) might be as important as anything else in determining our road to the playoffs. |
While at this point I would agree that Cooper is the best, I disagree completely with the statement that Kobe is "severly-overhyped". So he's not just overhyped, he's severly over-hyped. Kobe had a down year defensively, but there are other factors that have already been mentioned.
Also, to say "just ask Bird who the best was" is not evidence of the best. One can easily say "just ask TMAC who the best is". Kobe has locked him up on more than one occasion, all while going off on the offensive end as well. The one game where Kobe had an injured shoulder and still locked him up was some of the best defense I've seen.
So yes, I say Coop at this point. But Kobe is no dog defensively. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
j-dawg
Franchise Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2001
Posts: 12177
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cooper. Kobe hasn't really shown consistancy on defense, at least on a year by year basis and even game by game recently.
| Arsenal wrote: | Kobe is the master of guarding 2 players at once. He gives up open 3's constantly. He gives up open shots to players he doesn't respect.
If he was guarding Redd for 82 games he'd be DPOY, year in year out. But he simply doesn't give that effort on defense except for a few games a year against certain players. |
I agree to an extent, but Kobe was playing help defender. He has to help because Fisher's and Atkin's of the world were getting blown by at will. Once they cross the halfcourt line, The Lakers PG is in trouble and needs help. If Kobe doesn't cheat (which is a big risk either way), then the PG either creates, scores or puts our bigs in foul trouble.
Til this day, the Lakers have not had a PG in the Kobe era that has allowed Kobe to stay on his man. The Lakers have simple ignored defense at the 1 altogether. Smush Parker is the only real sign of life at targeting defense at that position, but not enough because he's unproven. And Aaron McKie is not a point guard, he's a combo guard. You will see Kobe on PG's once again this year. If Mitch Kupchak thinks McKie is the solution to our PG problems, he's wrong. McKie can play the point on offense, but what about defense? I think he can play defense, but only at the 2 or 3. Not the 1 with his knees |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
magic_bryant
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 18179
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mcatboy wrote: | | TheMagicMan32 wrote: | | magic_bryant wrote: |
WHOA!!! I was feeling your post up until that. Come on! The name Bill Russel ring a bell? And since you're going to say "you haven't seen him play, so how could you know?" I will also say Rodman. Could lockdown anyone from SG to C. He's MY choice for greatest Defender ever. |
Bill Russel was only 6'9', in todays game he wouldn't be all world, and Rodman could defend SG's?? LOL Thats laughable. |
Russell would dominate today's game like he did back then. If Ben Wallace can be defensive player of the year at 6'8", then Russel with an extra inch and one of the highest alltime basketball IQs would dominate. He shut down Wilt, much to my dismay, many times. He would own today's weaker centers.
As for Rodman shutting down SGs, in his early years (before discovering Ms. Clairol green dye #47), he would regularly take on the best player the opposing team had to offer (SG to C) and make them work their butt off for every point. I think it was Clyde Drexler who said Rodman was the best he ever faced, and I would have to say Clyde qualifies as a pretty good SG. I'm not sure Rodman's the greatest ever, but he's an alltime great.
| smitco wrote: | | Arsenal wrote: |
Kobe might be the most overrated Laker defender in history... |
Kobe overrated? are you a hater? kobe made all defensive first team thrice and second team twice. Do you really have any basis in making such an ignorant statement? |
Rule 17.3 A in the how to argue as a Lakers fan handbook:
When faced with an argument you're not sure how to handle, simply refer to the debating opponent as a "hater."
Are you a Cooper hater?
As far as defense goes, Kobe does not compare to Cooper. Kobe is a great defender when he feels like it, but there is a lack of consistency that makes him a level below a Cooper. He shuts down Bibby in a big game, then we don't see that for a few games. He is an overrated defender when his name is used in the same breath as Michael Cooper.
Winning a veiled-offensively minded award for defense does not support a player as a great defender. It's like saying the Gold Glove award in baseball means something. Sure, there are some great defenders who win defensive notoriety, but the first and second teams have some marginal choices at best.
When players like Jason Kidd (1999 (1st) and 2000 (2nd)), Manute Bol, Fat Lever, Larry Nance, Mookie Blaylock, Tim Duncan (multiple first teamer), and Karl Malone (after turning 34 he got his first award of a few) make the all-defensive team, you have to consider it an award of popularity more than merit. It's often given for okay defense by an offensive talent. Let me second Arsenal's notion that Kobe might be the most overrated defender on the Lakers. Over the years, Cooper, Jones, Smith, Green, and Kobe have all been mentioned for their defense. Kobe on his best is certainly worthy of that group, but on his indifferent days, he's not in that category. Hence, he is the most overrated Lakers defender. It's not a knock on Kobe; it's an appreciation for other great Lakers defenders. |
Funny how little respect Rodman earns. The man shut down every position from SG to C. But because he played PF for the Bulls, people only remember him for that. Just like when someone posts Rodman's rebounding numbers when he was with the Pistons, people on here act like "OMG, he was a rebounder for them TOO!?!?!?" :roll:
_________________
Stephon Marbury on Kobe: "He's the only person on 'dis earth that can do 'dat. He guards people, like shuts 'em down. Then, to do 'dat on 'da offensive end. It's like 'Damn, I can't score on him AND he about to bust my ass." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RG73
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2001
Posts: 11508
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mcatboy wrote: | | Russell shut down the likes of Chamberlain for years, |
This is utter nonsense. Russell did no such thing ever. Wilt averaged 28.7 pts and 28.7 rebounds in 142 meetings against Russell over their careers. This veruss Russells 22.9 pts and 14.5 rebounds (8 less rebounds per game than Russell's career average). Wilt scored 62 on Russell once and over 50 on 6 occassions. Wilt also got the all-time record for most rebounds in a game--55--against Russell, along with 6 other 40+ rebounding games (though Russell had his share of monster rebound nights against Wilt too). In 1967 playoffs, when the Sixers beat the Celtics finally, Wilt averaged 22 pts, 32 rebounds and 10 assists. Shut down? I think not. More like schooled badly.
What Russell did was beat Wilt--a lot. But that was because he had much better, much deeper teams around him. It had absolutely nothing to do with Wilt being shut down or even slowed in the slightest by Russell. Wilt had 4", 60 odd pounds, way more strength, way more athleticism than Russell--there is simply not a way that Russell could slow down Wilt--other than having teams stacked 6 or 7 deep with future hall of famers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aloha
Star Player
Joined: 30 Dec 2001
Posts: 7612
Location: Honolulu->LA
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Laker Great Defense...
Not sure different ERA's different Rules
_Cooper received alot of accolades and prides his "D"
From PG, SG, to SF
Consistently throughout his career...
_Kobe is first thought of as the "Offense"...
and may be one of the All-Around Offense & Defensive Greats...
can be a "Stopper" but really for SG and traditional SF (Some PG)
As the athletes of today are more non-traditional Size/etc
...with SF (7" Garnetts) - It's a mismatch and with Speedy PG... too
_Wilt was pure dominate when he concentrated on D-FENSE
and his later years- Great Rebounder...
_West was a good defender & offense...
_Rodman aka prime
I hated him when he was in Detroit- just shutdown BigGame or Magic...
Fierce single competitor
One of the G.O.A.T-Rebounder
As a Laker - he wasnt the big D
_Magic was a decent defender but with Coop there, he didnt draw the
big play...
Recalling Magic playing for his first :bling: he was playing PointCenter...
(Defense he switched) but he tore them up Offensively...
_Malone for a short stint, I used to h8 him but  him for the 1 season, which I gained alot of respect for him...
(And his throwing elbows...)
Lakers All-Time Defensive Team:
PG:Cooper, Magic
SG:Kobe, West, -Riley?
SF:????? James?, Elgin (>?_never saw him???)
PF:Thompson, Rambis, AC (kidding the 1 yr he made All-Star)
C:Wilt, Elmore Smith, ++++ plus all those great centers i dont recall....
(Too many to name)
_
G.O.A.T ...
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bambam
Star Player
Joined: 03 Jul 2003
Posts: 9013
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jlkr42 wrote: | | Russell never shut down Wilt. Russell beat Wilt only because he always had better teammates. Wilt used to have 40/20 games against the Celtics routinely. Wilt's single game rebound record of 55 came against Russell. Several of his NBA-record 78 games of 50+ points came against Russell. |
.
^^exactly!
"Russell shut down wilt" ??  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Startrout
Star Player
Joined: 06 Aug 2004
Posts: 2143
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jlkr42 wrote: | | Russell never shut down Wilt. Russell beat Wilt only because he always had better teammates. Wilt used to have 40/20 games against the Celtics routinely. Wilt's single game rebound record of 55 came against Russell. Several of his NBA-record 78 games of 50+ points came against Russell. The real difference between the two is that Russell always played with at least 3 HOF teammates every year he was in the league. Go to the history section at nba.com and check out all the old rosters. Yes, Russell made his team better and he gets credit for that, but Wilt never had the teammates that Russell did. |
Exactly, I couldn't believe he posted that Russell shut down Wilt - not. I saw many of those games when they happened and Wilt dominated everyone. Wilt was a very good defender as well. If they had kept blocking stats back then, he'd probably still hold all the records in that too.
I'd probably go with Coop for Lakers players. Rodman was awesome and definitely one of the best defenders of all time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Money$hot!
Star Player
Joined: 18 Dec 2002
Posts: 5911
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RG73 wrote: | | mcatboy wrote: | | Russell shut down the likes of Chamberlain for years, |
This is utter nonsense. Russell did no such thing ever. Wilt averaged 28.7 pts and 28.7 rebounds in 142 meetings against Russell over their careers. This veruss Russells 22.9 pts and 14.5 rebounds (8 less rebounds per game than Russell's career average). Wilt scored 62 on Russell once and over 50 on 6 occassions. Wilt also got the all-time record for most rebounds in a game--55--against Russell, along with 6 other 40+ rebounding games (though Russell had his share of monster rebound nights against Wilt too). In 1967 playoffs, when the Sixers beat the Celtics finally, Wilt averaged 22 pts, 32 rebounds and 10 assists. Shut down? I think not. More like schooled badly.
What Russell did was beat Wilt--a lot. But that was because he had much better, much deeper teams around him. It had absolutely nothing to do with Wilt being shut down or even slowed in the slightest by Russell. Wilt had 4", 60 odd pounds, way more strength, way more athleticism than Russell--there is simply not a way that Russell could slow down Wilt--other than having teams stacked 6 or 7 deep with future hall of famers. |
THANK YOU.
I'm not disparinging Russell's legacy, just saying that its often forgotten that Russell was regularly overmatched by Wilt. Even though Russell was a good defender he wasn't what many seem to want to remember (or might have read a quote or two about). Coop OTOH many of us wittnessed his impact on games. Now are either the greatest defensive player ever? Maybe, but it's by no means unanimous and is definately arguable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tlim
Star Player
Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 6649
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm reminded of a story that has a corollary to this poll.
IIRC, when Kobe was being worked out for the Lakers, he was doing really well. They decided to bring in their big defensive gun at the time to help out, in Cooper, and wasn't shut down by Coop, which impressed management to no end. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90306
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Cooper was the better of the two because he was a specialist, just like Steve Kerr was a 3 point specialist who was better at that than MJ. The great thing about Kobe and MJ is that both are the guys you want taking the last shot or locking another guy up with the game on the line (ask Iverson about Mr. bryant's defense!).
By the way, Pippen always drew the toughest perimeter player, which worked with all the 6-6 through 6-8 guys the Bulls had. pippen took the best perimeter guy, Rodman grabbed the best big, and everyone else adjusted. People don't like to remember that Jordan was capable of giving up a lot of baskets to his guy in the course of a game/ season. Look up Craig EHlo's career averages vs. MJ. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcatboy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 22 Dec 2002
Posts: 999
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From the barrage here, it seems like many people see the Chamberlain jersey in the rafters and give him the benefit of the doubt as being better than a player in a Celtic jersey. I'm guilty of that when it comes to West, Goodrich, Fisher, Magic, and Cooper. They are the true blue (make that true purple) Lakers for life. I just don't see Jabbar or Chamberlain in that same light, because they came from other teams. I base my opinion of Russell's defense on what I saw in the one year I saw them play head-to-head. Seeing is believing, and watching their matchups made me believe.
A few of you toss stats around, and they certainly point out how great Wilt was. But in context, they show that Wilt's performances against Russell were notably lower than how he did against the rest of the league.
Point 1:
Wilt scored 50+ points 118 times in his career. He played in 1045 games (1205 counting playoffs). That means that 1 out of every 8.9 regular season games he scored 50+.
Six times he scored 50+ against Russell. According to a previous poster, he matched up against Russell 142 times, meaning he went for 50 or more 1 out of every 23.7 games. Relative to what he averaged, Russell held Chamberlain in check more than most centers. While many will say that even a single 50+ game is ownership, keep in mind that scores were generally higher in those days. Taken in context, you must also consider that Russell held Wilt to below 10 points on three occassions.
Chamberlain played in the league with Russell for a total of ten years (from 59-60, Chamberlain's rookie year to 68-69, Russell's last season). During that time, Chamberlain averaged 34.8 points per game. In those seasons, Wilt averaged 25.3 points per game against Russell. While 25.3 is pretty solid, it is 9.5 ppg below his average against the league. Russell held Wilt in check compared to his normal game.
The reality is that Wilt is the greatest scorer to ever play the game, and no one truly shut him down. But his performance definitely dropped against Russell.
Point 2
Russell actually outrebounded Chamberlain in head-to-head matchups. While it is true that Chamberlains 55-rebound game came against Russell, Russell went for 49, 47, and 46 twice against Wilt. They brought the best out of each other.
Point 3
If you watched the matchups, you could see Russell take Chamberlain out of his game many times. It was always so damn frustrating as a Lakers fan. Granted, I was only cogniscent for one season of their matching up head-to-head, and they were both getting up there in age, but it was beautiful. I assume most of the people adamantly opposing the notion that Russell kept Wilt in check are stat mongers who never actually saw them play. I assume this, because one poster refers to the Sixers versus the Celtics in the NBA playoffs of 66-67. Wilt never played for the Sixers. He played for Philadelphia, but they were the Warriors, not the Sixers.
You also are omitting the four other times Chamberlain's Warriors played Russell's Celtics in the playoffs. You put up his best performance, why didn't you put them all up?
There is also one more to include, but it absolute sucks as a Lakers fan. In 68-69, there was no way the Lakers should have not taken home the trophy. West was amazing, but unfortunately, Chamberlain averaged less than 20 points a game in those finals. Russell forced Chamberlain to miss a bunch of shots. Because of those finals, I became a believer that Russell was a defensive force. Seeing is believing.
I hate the Celtics with a passion and would love to see Auerbach humbled, but I have to concede that Russell was a great defender. He altered shots with those abnormally long arms. He was always in the right spot at the right time. If Chamberlain played with half the brains or half the heart of Russell, this thread would not be diverging this way.
And for the multiple posters dropping the cliche response about Russell being flanked by HOFers, it is true. But then again, Wilt played with Baylor, West, and Goodrich, a pretty impressive collection of HOFers as well.
It all comes down to what we have actually witnessed. For those of us lucky enough to see the West-Baylor-Goodrich-Chamberlain Lakers, we witnessed their greatest all around lineup ever. Not that Magic's team and Kobe's teams weren't great too, but with the overexpansion of the NBA, a great team nowadays needs only two star players. Back when there were about half the teams, the league's best teams had four stars.
Perhaps this argument should be tabled, because it's going to become nothing more than me throwing my geritol and some of kids and your Uggeoh (spelling?) cards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakeShow29
Starting Rotation
Joined: 23 Oct 2002
Posts: 254
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| smitco wrote: | | LakeShow29 wrote: | | smitco wrote: | | Arsenal wrote: | | Kobe might be the most overrated Laker defender in history... |
Kobe overrated? are you a hater? kobe made all defensive first team thrice and second team twice. Do you really have any basis in making such an ignorant statement? |
Why is he a hater just b/c he is critical of Kobe? I don't know his basis, but my basis of kobe being a overrated defender is watching the games. Don't get me wrong, kobe is a great defender, when he wants to be. I understand he has to carry the offense, but I definitely see his defense slip alot, whether it's from conserving energy or what not. He gambles to much, and plays the lanes to much. Especially the last 2 years. He needs to concentrate on staying with his man more. Again, he can be as good a defender as anyone, and he was 3-4 years ago. But as of now, it's mostly from his past reputation that he's considered a great defender. |
So why is it that you say that kobe is overrated when you yourself even say that he is a great defender? You cannot use "great defender" and "overrated" at the same time, it is just to contradictory.
You say that kobe's defense had slip for the last two season. May i politely remind you that kobe made all defensive 1st team for the 2003-2004 season. He was chosen as part of the all defensive 1st team through a consensus amongst coaches, GM, sportswriters and players. Slip? the facts proves otherwise. May i remind you again than he made first team all defensive thrice(00,03,04) and second team twice(01 and 02). How can this be overrated?
Yes i agree, kobe's defense might have slip last season. But can you really say that his defense is overrated just because he did not have a good defensive season last year? Reasons, reasons..... there are a lot of reason why kobe's defense was not as good last year than his previous years. To cite a few:
1. His teamates relied on him so much, both on offense and defense, he over exerted himself.
2. He was constantly injured.
3. New coach(rudy), new defensive schemes.
4. his backcourt partner(atkins) does not play any defense. |
Um, all you told me was that he was voted 1st team all nba defense. And I explained that with the fact that he's overrated on defense. He got voted nba 1st team defense b/c of his reputation, again as I stated before. Also, I'm not looking for reasons for a slip in his defense. I just stated that his defense slipped the last few years, regardless of reasons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcatboy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 22 Dec 2002
Posts: 999
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakeShow29 wrote: | | smitco wrote: | | LakeShow29 wrote: | | smitco wrote: |
Kobe overrated? are you a hater? kobe made all defensive first team thrice and second team twice. Do you really have any basis in making such an ignorant statement? |
Why is he a hater just b/c he is critical of Kobe? I don't know his basis, but my basis of kobe being a overrated defender is watching the games. Don't get me wrong, kobe is a great defender, when he wants to be. I understand he has to carry the offense, but I definitely see his defense slip alot, whether it's from conserving energy or what not. He gambles to much, and plays the lanes to much. Especially the last 2 years. He needs to concentrate on staying with his man more. Again, he can be as good a defender as anyone, and he was 3-4 years ago. But as of now, it's mostly from his past reputation that he's considered a great defender. |
So why is it that you say that kobe is overrated when you yourself even say that he is a great defender? You cannot use "great defender" and "overrated" at the same time, it is just to contradictory.
You say that kobe's defense had slip for the last two season. May i politely remind you that kobe made all defensive 1st team for the 2003-2004 season. He was chosen as part of the all defensive 1st team through a consensus amongst coaches, GM, sportswriters and players. Slip? the facts proves otherwise. May i remind you again than he made first team all defensive thrice(00,03,04) and second team twice(01 and 02). How can this be overrated?
Yes i agree, kobe's defense might have slip last season. But can you really say that his defense is overrated just because he did not have a good defensive season last year? Reasons, reasons..... there are a lot of reason why kobe's defense was not as good last year than his previous years. To cite a few:
1. His teamates relied on him so much, both on offense and defense, he over exerted himself.
2. He was constantly injured.
3. New coach(rudy), new defensive schemes.
4. his backcourt partner(atkins) does not play any defense. |
Um, all you told me was that he was voted 1st team all nba defense. And I explained that with the fact that he's overrated on defense. He got voted nba 1st team defense b/c of his reputation, again as I stated before. Also, I'm not looking for reasons for a slip in his defense. I just stated that his defense slipped the last few years, regardless of reasons. |
Great point 29, but I'm afraid it will be lost here. I refrain from ever criticizing Kobe, because it automatically gets the "are you a hater?" response. You can count on it. A true Lakers fan loves the team no matter what, hurts when they lose, is jubilant when they win, applauds when they do something great, and ciriticizes when they can improve. But for some reason, criticism is not allowed in the eyes of some. And you and Arsenal aren't even criticizing, you are pointing out the obvious. When I first got here, I made a disparaging remark that the Big Mumbler was a cancer. It got blasted from all sides. Now it is an accepted no-brainer. I have a feeling Arsenal's comment will become a no-brainer in time.
Your post is 100% on the money. The poll results show that the majority of posters know this to be true too. I don't think you'll have much luck arguing with someone who actually believes that first and second team all defense means that you are the best or second best defender at your position. It's hard to argue when someone naively believes that to be true. In baseball, it is accepted that most Gold Gloves go to a great offensive player who plays pretty good defense. Popularity certainly helps. When Jason Kidd gets a first team all defense nod and Sprewell and Christie never sniff even second team that year, you know the system is not based on merit. I gave up arguing here when he didn't realize that my asking if he was a "Cooper hater?" was to spin it for perspective and not actually ask him if he was.
Save your fingertips and trust that the poll results accurately reflect your opinion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcatboy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 22 Dec 2002
Posts: 999
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Startrout wrote: | | I couldn't believe he posted that Russell shut down Wilt - not. I saw many of those games when they happened and Wilt dominated everyone. Wilt was a very good defender as well. If they had kept blocking stats back then, he'd probably still hold all the records in that too. |
Being around back then meant you probably saw Elmore Smith playing for a couple of seasons. Now he was a great defender, probably the best defensive center we ever had. He will get no accolades for his work and results, because he was only here a couple of years and his stint as a Laker was flanked by two HOFers. But for those who saw him play, I'm sure they will they will tell you that he dominated on the defensive end. I remember a game where he blocked at least ten in the first half alone. He blocked LaRue Martin twice on the same play and then again on the next trip. I think he set the records for blocks that game, but I'm not exactly sure. Being that you have been watching for a long time, you have to appreciate how great of a defender he was. Remember all of the comments about going from an offensive center to a defensive center after Chamberlain retired? I know Smith had to go when Jabbar came, but I was sad to see him depart.
What I'm really curious about though, is how you were so lucky to witness so many Wilt vs. Russell matchups. You are really lucky. For me, I only got to see them go head-to-head for one year, because Chamberlain came to the Lakers during Russell's last season. I lived in Los Angeles, so I was limited to local media. Given that they didn't televise home games back then, I had to listen to Chick on the radio. They also didn't televise all of the road games, so it was hard to "see" them play. In the previous years, before Chamberlain was with the Lakers, there was no national televison, satellite, cable, etc..., so it would seem that the only way anyone could have "seen" so many of those matchups was to be in Boston or Philadelphia. Being in LA, I never got to see their matchups before that one and only season. That must have been great for you to see "those games when they happened", because no one else on the west coast got to do that. I take it you lived in Boston or Philadelphia back in the mid 60s.
Being that I lived out here, I really only got to see the them playing in the NBA finals that one season, and that was on channel 13 (I think it was that or 5). In those games, Russell outplayed Wilt. I had to listen on radio for some of the games, but luckily a few were televised. I'm sure you remember Chick commenting on how Wilt was underachieving in that series. I trust that Chick knew what he was talking about. So given that "Wilt dominated everyone" of the games you saw, you obviously were not watching the Boston versus Lakers finals of 68-69, because both Chick and I saw it differently. You must be referring to games when the Warriors played the Celtics.
What games did you get to see them play? I would have loved to watch Wilt dominate Russell, but being in LA at a time with no national televison for regular season games not involving the Lakers, it was not possible for me. The sad thing is that they showed some playoff games taped delayed, often on the weekends, so I didn't see many of those either. I don't remember seeing too many East coast playoff games on national television though. Back then, LA sports television was dominated by baseball and football on the weekends. Football was off-season, so luckily we got some of the NBA playoffs (western conference and Lakers road games at least). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RG73
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2001
Posts: 11508
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 10:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mcatboy wrote: | | A few of you toss stats around, and they certainly point out how great Wilt was. But in context, they show that Wilt's performances against Russell were notably lower than how he did against the rest of the league. |
28.7 ppg and 28.7 rpg against the Celtics. Career is 30.1 ppg and 22.9 rpg. He scored a free throw less and got 6 more rebounds on average against Russell than he did on everyone else.
Bottom line, if a guy goes for nearly 30 and 30 every time you play then you are being destroyed. Great Russell "stopped" Wilt from getting 50 and 50. :roll: Even Russell admits he could do nothing but slow down Wilt, but I guess we don't want to take Russell at his own word do we?
| Quote: |
Point 1:
Wilt scored 50+ points 118 times in his career. He played in 1045 games (1205 counting playoffs). That means that 1 out of every 8.9 regular season games he scored 50+.
Six times he scored 50+ against Russell. According to a previous poster, he matched up against Russell 142 times, meaning he went for 50 or more 1 out of every 23.7 games. Relative to what he averaged, Russell held Chamberlain in check more than most centers. While many will say that even a single 50+ game is ownership, keep in mind that scores were generally higher in those days. Taken in context, you must also consider that Russell held Wilt to below 10 points on three occassions. |
28.7 and 28.7.
| Quote: | | Chamberlain played in the league with Russell for a total of ten years (from 59-60, Chamberlain's rookie year to 68-69, Russell's last season). During that time, Chamberlain averaged 34.8 points per game. In those seasons, Wilt averaged 25.3 points per game against Russell. While 25.3 is pretty solid, it is 9.5 ppg below his average against the league. Russell held Wilt in check compared to his normal game. |
No he averaged 28.7 ppg against Russell. And 28.7 rebounds. What part of this don't you get? A guy who gets those numbers against you isn't being stopped.
| Quote: | | The reality is that Wilt is the greatest scorer to ever play the game, and no one truly shut him down. But his performance definitely dropped against Russell. |
Points, yes. Rebounds went up. Don't know about blocks. Still a wash, Wilt did what he pleased. It is laughable that you'd even suggest a guy who was a good 3-4" shorter and 60+ lbs. lighter and not as athletic could shut Wilt down (again, when by his own account he admitted that he could do no such thing).
Point 2
Russell actually outrebounded Chamberlain in head-to-head matchups. While it is true that Chamberlains 55-rebound game came against Russell, Russell went for 49, 47, and 46 twice against Wilt. They brought the best out of each other.
| Quote: | Point 3
I assume this, because one poster refers to the Sixers versus the Celtics in the NBA playoffs of 66-67. Wilt never played for the Sixers. He played for Philadelphia, but they were the Warriors, not the Sixers. |
Apparently you never saw them either.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/1967.html
Wilt was on the Warriors for the first 4 years of his career. Then he played for the Sixers. The Sixers beat the Warriors to win the championship in 67. Some of us apparently have hazy memories that shouldn't be trusted.
| Quote: | | You also are omitting the four other times Chamberlain's Warriors played Russell's Celtics in the playoffs. You put up his best performance, why didn't you put them all up? |
No I am not omitting anything. I was pointing out how Wilt, when he had a good team around him, was able to destroy the Celtics. When he didn't have a good team, like on the Warriors, he still got 30 odd points and 20 odd rebounds. His numbers were always sick--didn't matter if it was against Russell or not.
| Quote: | | There is also one more to include, but it absolute sucks as a Lakers fan. In 68-69, there was no way the Lakers should have not taken home the trophy. West was amazing, but unfortunately, Chamberlain averaged less than 20 points a game in those finals. Russell forced Chamberlain to miss a bunch of shots. Because of those finals, I became a believer that Russell was a defensive force. Seeing is believing. |
Chamberlain had 31 in game 5 no? Yes, he had two totally abysmmal games, but you neglect to mention that the real reason Wilt wasn't scoring is because West was scoring all the points. And who's going to complain after West drops 53 points in game 1? Wilt did fine on the boards in that series--the Lakers were not running the offense through him, but through West. Elgin got some touches too, no? If Wilt had gotten the FGAs he'd have scored more.
| Quote: | | If Chamberlain played with half the brains or half the heart of Russell, this thread would not be diverging this way. |
You're the only one sticking up for Russell. Not even Russell would stick up for Russell in this argument.
| Quote: | | And for the multiple posters dropping the cliche response about Russell being flanked by HOFers, it is true. But then again, Wilt played with Baylor, West, and Goodrich, a pretty impressive collection of HOFers as well. |
Yes, and he won with West. He didn't have a good team on the Warriors, but he still managed to battle the Celtics to the end. He had a great cast on the Sixers and won. They should have won the 69 Finals, but there were some bad coaching decisions by Breda Kolff (like holding Wilt out at the end of a close 4th quarter which pissed off West to no end). Wilt was injured most of 70 and played injured in the playoffs. 71 they got beat by a young Kareem--no shame in that. And 72 they won. So if not for bad coaching and an injury to Wilt that Lakers squad should have won 3 championships.
| Quote: | | It all comes down to what we have actually witnessed. |
Like Wilt on the Warriors in 1967? That would have been impossible to witness.
But seriously, yes, Russell played Wilt hard and made his life more difficult than any other player. Wilt acknowledged this. But Russell never claimed he could "shut down" Wilt--just make his life really hard. I don't know how you can debate something that not even the guys involved would debate. Wilt was unstoppable, Russell was about as good of a defender as there has ever been. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PurpleHayz
Star Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2002
Posts: 2078
Location: Ripperside
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Is that even in question? Coop everyday of the week.
_________________
One Love.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcatboy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 22 Dec 2002
Posts: 999
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 1:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RG73 wrote: | | 28.7 ppg and 28.7 rpg against the Celtics. Career is 30.1 ppg and 22.9 rpg. He scored a free throw less and got 6 more rebounds on average against Russell than he did on everyone else. |
The career stats (30.1/22.9) include some very down years after Russell retired. If you truly want to compare Russell to Chamberlain, you can only consider the ten years where they overlapped. In that time, Wilt averaged 34.8 during the regular season. In regular season match ups, according to the NBA encylopedia numbers, Wilt averaged 25.3 points per game against the Celtics. Russell clearly had some effect. Wilt said so on many occassions. But I guess we don't want to take Wilt at his own word do we?
Also, we need to take those statistics in context. Back then, the free throw rule on shooting fouls was three to make two, so given that he was about a .500 career free throw shooter who got to the line about 11 to 12 times a game, he got a couple extra points there. Not that it's much, but it's enough to inflate his ppg by a 2 or so.
Also, you need to consider his field goal percentage. He shot .540 over his career. His regular season average against Russell is about .470 (it was calculated by averaging the season vs. Celtics numbers for ten seasons, not by total field goals made by total attempted, so it might be off by about .005 or so in either direction). He had a 15% better percentage overall than against Russell. That supports the notion that Russell played him better than any other center. From the few games I watched, it was due to Russell getting a few blocks in there. This also explains partially why Chamberlain's offensive rebounds went up when he played against Russell. He was retrieving the balls Russell blocked a few times each game.
| RG73 wrote: | | Bottom line, if a guy goes for nearly 30 and 30 every time you play then you are being destroyed. Great Russell "stopped" Wilt from getting 50 and 50. |
Nice stretch from "nearly 30 and 30" to 50/50, which by the way, Chamberlain never had a 50/50 game in his career. Keeping a 34.8 player to 25.3 I'd say is doing a pretty good job against the greatest all around player to ever lace up sneakers.
| RG73 wrote: | | No he averaged 28.7 ppg against Russell. And 28.7 rebounds. What part of this don't you get? A guy who gets those numbers against you isn't being stopped. |
You keep quoting one statistic from NBA.com without undertsanding where those numbers come from. They include playoffs and regular season. That's the only statistic you have, and by itself it looks impressive. Compared to numbers today, it looks impressive. But given that teams averaged over 120 a game at that time compared to 90 now, 28.7 equates to 21.5 nowadays. Rebounds were also more plentiful at that time, but not by quite the same factor as scoring (probably because of the three-to-make-two rule). The only way to measure Russell's performance against Wilt is to compare it to the rest of the league during the same period. Wilt clearly scored less against Russell. I don't have the rebounding numbers (and am too tired to calculate them), but they look about the same during that period. Wilt averaged 24.3 rebounds per game during the regular season over the ten-year period he was in the league with Russell. The 28.7 you seem so obsesssed with included playoffs, so we can't compare it exactly. Given that Wilt's playoff rebounding average is higher than his regular season rebounding average by about 2 rpg, Let's just call it about 26.7 rpg against Russell in the regular season. Great number, and certainly more than the 24.3 he got overall. But if he managed to chase down three balls following Russell's blocks, that accounts for the difference with room to spare.
| RG73 wrote: | | Quote: | | The reality is that Wilt is the greatest scorer to ever play the game, and no one truly shut him down. But his performance definitely dropped against Russell. |
Points, yes. Rebounds went up. Don't know about blocks. Still a wash, Wilt did what he pleased. It is laughable that you'd even suggest a guy who was a good 3-4" shorter and 60+ lbs. lighter and not as athletic could shut Wilt down (again, when by his own account he admitted that he could do no such thing). |
Rebounds went up slightly, and again, that could very well be due to Wilt's recovering blocked shots. Chamberlain had four inches on Russell and 50-60 pounds (so says the article you quote), but it said they were about equal in terms of athleticism. What you are ignoring is Russell's stronger will to win and his better understanding of the game. Granted, I only saw Chamberlain in his last few seasons (right about the time he was deciding he was a volleyball player--with about the same success Jordan had as a baseball player), but he was always the last one down the court. I learned words like "loafing" and "lethargic" from Lakers broadcasts back then.
| RG73 wrote: |
Apparently you never saw them either. Wilt was on the Warriors for the first 4 years of his career. Then he played for the Sixers. The Sixers beat the Warriors to win the championship in 67. |
You are right. I apologize, because I was way off on that. Admittedly, my first cogniscent watching of the NBA was that great Lakers season when Wilt arrived. As I mentioned in another post, I never saw Wilt play in any uniform other than the Lakers, which was the start of his drop in numbers.
| RG73 wrote: | | Quote: | | You also are omitting the four other times Chamberlain's Warriors played Russell's Celtics in the playoffs. You put up his best performance, why didn't you put them all up? |
No I am not omitting anything. I was pointing out how Wilt, when he had a good team around him, was able to destroy the Celtics. When he didn't have a good team, like on the Warriors, he still got 30 odd points and 20 odd rebounds. His numbers were always sick--didn't matter if it was against Russell or not. |
You are omitting those numbers, because the NBA.com article you are using as your sole source of information doesn't list them. Wilt is the greatest all around player to ever play the game. Russell played Wilt better than anyone. Wilt on three occassions had under ten points against the Celtics. BTW, on the Warriors (where he played for five and a half seasons, not four), he averaged 41.6 and 25.3. And you are so right, those are sick numbers.
As another point of interest, Chamberlain with the Warriors had Arzin and Greer, while Russell had Cousy and Heinson. Who are these bad players surrounding Chamberlain you keep talking about? And how do they compare to the Celtics. The reality is that the d*** Celtics just found a way to win. The b******s just didn't lose. I hate everything about Heinson and Auerbach and Cousy, but I have always had respect for Russell. He was just a winner, much like Magic. Not sure how either one of them did it, but they made players around them better. Chamberlain is the greatest ever, but he didn't make his teammates better.
| RG73 wrote: | | Quote: | | There is also one more to include, but it absolute sucks as a Lakers fan. In 68-69, there was no way the Lakers should have not taken home the trophy. West was amazing, but unfortunately, Chamberlain averaged less than 20 points a game in those finals. Russell forced Chamberlain to miss a bunch of shots. Because of those finals, I became a believer that Russell was a defensive force. Seeing is believing. |
Chamberlain had 31 in game 5 no? Yes, he had two totally abysmmal games, but you neglect to mention that the real reason Wilt wasn't scoring is because West was scoring all the points. And who's going to complain after West drops 53 points in game 1? Wilt did fine on the boards in that series--the Lakers were not running the offense through him, but through West. Elgin got some touches too, no? If Wilt had gotten the FGAs he'd have scored more. |
You saw these games? You know how the offense was being run? I must admit that I am recalling more of the commentary from Chick than the performances (had to listen to some games on the radio). I know you are reading box scores and reaching those conclusions. While West had a remarkable series, Wilt loafed up and down the court, so the ball was often going to the hoop as Wilt arrived. And one game of 31 is your selling point after you referred to him as 50/50 and a guaranteed 30/20 in earlier lines. You have to admit from the numbers, a 20/20 series was below his averages.
[quote="RG73"] | Quote: | | And for the multiple posters dropping the cliche response about Russell being flanked by HOFers, it is true. But then again, Wilt played with Baylor, West, and Goodrich, a pretty impressive collection of HOFers as well. |
Yes, and he won with West. He didn't have a good team on the Warriors, but he still managed to battle the Celtics to the end. He had a great cast on the Sixers and won. They should have won the 69 Finals, but there were some bad coaching decisions by Breda Kolff (like holding Wilt out at the end of a close 4th quarter which pissed off West to no end). Wilt was injured most of 70 and played injured in the playoffs. 71 they got beat by a young Kareem--no shame in that. And 72 they won. So if not for bad coaching and an injury to Wilt that Lakers squad should have won 3 championships.[quote="RG73"]
How can you say his Warriors team wasn't good? You throw this comment out repeatedly, but don't substantiate it. Please explain your reasoning. In Chamberlains rookie season, the Warriors had the second best record in the NBA. In his second and third seasons, they had the third best record. They won the west in his last season (fifth season) with the Warriors. Please explain how that describes a bad team that was so undermanned. Know your facts.
| RG73 wrote: | | But seriously, yes, Russell played Wilt hard and made his life more difficult than any other player. Wilt acknowledged this. But Russell never claimed he could "shut down" Wilt--just make his life really hard. I don't know how you can debate something that not even the guys involved would debate. Wilt was unstoppable, Russell was about as good of a defender as there has ever been. |
Yeah, you have a good point. I chose the wrong words in describing their rivalry. Chamberlain was the greatest player ever. Russell was the greatest defender ever. Russell slowed Chamberlain, and for that, he gets his accolades. I'm just remembering (in that hazy fog you mentioned) Russell managing to get his hand on a bunch of Chamberlains shots. The man had a wing span of thirty-eight feet it seemed like. If you ever see any pictures of Russell blocking or rebounding, the man's arms are always at least four inches longer than his opponents, including Chamberlain.
| RG73 wrote: | | Some of us apparently have hazy memories that shouldn't be trusted. |
At least not trusted with power tools and sharp objects, but that's another story.
Thanks for the banter. In an off-season where we are stretching for anything to talk about, it's nice to get the memory fired up. The reality is that I was barely a grade schooler when I was watching that series, so my opinions were formulated by Chick's words more than anything. I just remember hearing many a disgruntled grown up complain about Chamberlain loafing getting up and down the court. Greatest player ever, who went for 50.4/25.7 in a season. Had he slept (and I mean slumber, not his 10,000 cohorts) and taken care of himself, I wonder if he could have pulled off a few more of those types of numbers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phantasyman
Starting Rotation
Joined: 15 Jun 2008
Posts: 635
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2022 2:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kobe hands down. No comparison |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
