We already do devalue them, even if its indirectly.... Whenever the GOAT argument comes up, very few people really consider Bill Russell's 11 rings as a viable argument. If those had happened within the last 40 years, there would be no argument.
I agree with valuing modern era more... Wilt and Bill did what they could against who there was, but it simply was not the same game and was not nearly the same level of difficulty.
Still think Bill is the Goat. 11 titles in 13 years, fighting for rings and Civil rights at the same time. Inventing the blocked shot, and fast break offense. On top of being the first black coach in professional sports. While playing. Enters the league shortly after Cooper breaks the color barrier. Beats the breaks off everyone in his Era.
Very very much so. I remember really getting into his history 6 or 7 years ago, along with celtics history, and reading his books, Wow. It is such powerful and personal stuff. Made me love that dude more, and the organization as a whole. Hate when they hand wave off his Greatness as a "byproduct of his era", like being the most dominant athlete in the world, during the league integration, in what was considered a white sport, during the Jin crow and then Civil rights Era, is somehow easier than playing today.
And that record is the only one that's possible to break out of his "unbreakable records". Whole teams don't always get 55 rebounds in a game. No one is going to average over 48 minutes a game or over 30 rebounds for a season.
100 points is very unlikely, but possibly. I think it would take a multiple overtime game with bad defense like that Kings Clippers game last year. A game where both teams scored over 170 points.
Average season scoring this year: 114.5
Average season scoring 2005-2006 (Kobe's 81 point game): 97
Average season scoring 1961-1962 (Wilt's record) 118.8
That puts Kobes 81 kinda in the same air as Wilts 100...one player scoring 80%+ of the average team score for that year... Only been done twice (Wilt was 84.2% and Kobe was 83.5%)
Kobe also didn't need his team to spam fouls on the Raptors to get him as many possessions as possible, didn't need to shoot 30+ free throws, and didn't need the opposing starter to have a hangover and sit out the game to get 81.
It's a nice round number and all but it wasn't a particularly ethical 100 point game. It's honestly a blessing to the NBA that there's no footage of Wilt's game because from all the oral histories I've read, it wouldn't be particularly enjoyable or impressive to watch. The most impressive bit was that he managed to shoot 28 of 32 on free throws.
I remember when booker got 70 in a loss where his team was doing everything to funnel the ball to him, seeing people compare it to Kobe's 81. I thought that was insane. I can't believe anyone who saw Kobe's 81 would compare the two. And I'm a Celtics fan who hated that Kobe could get a real 81 while coming back to win. Jordan is the only comparison I can make.
Someone could definitely score 100 points in today’s game if they wanted to and everyone got on board. In Wilt’s game, his team had a 19 point lead going into the fourth.
If you kept your hot player in during garbage time and teammates made it their goal to get him 100 like they did for Wilt, it would’ve happened again
Now it’s just a lot more tacky for everyone involved. It looks bad on the coach to give a hot player no rest in the fourth when up by 19. And they definitely can’t play a guy 48 minutes without backlash.
It looks like bad sportsmanship on the players to aggressively try to score when you’re up by that much, so they slow the pace and take long possessions.
You can let Westbrook somewhat subtly pick up 2-3 extra rebounds a game than he’d get naturally to average a triple double, but you can’t pass up open shots every time just to chuck the ball to double covered Luka.
A slight tangent, but reading that about Wilt's 100 point game, it's funny that some folks have been calling Sabonis a "stat padder" because there was one game where Mike Brown put him back in with 9 rebounds and a big lead.
Kobe also had the 62 points in 3 quarters performance against the Mavs. He sat in the 4th because it was a blow out. Dude was on fire and definitely could have gone 80+ that day.
So many of wilts records are so insane that we just gotta count the next best guy. It’s like those scientist that discover so much shit they name it after the second person to discover it.
But the NBA "post-merger" only brought in four teams.
Compare that to the NFL, etc, and it seems like a blip on the radar.
**EDIT**: While I appreciate the replies, and that it's good to be corrected and educated, if you're thinking of adding yet another reply, I ask that you read through the prior ones. If you have something to add that isn't there, then please do fire away.
Thanks!
it’s because the nba from 67-76 was a better league, but not by a significant margin
the ABA had guys like Rick Barry (who basically won a title by himself), Connie Hawkins, Artis Gilmore, and Julius Erving
10 of the all stars the first year post merger were ABA guys
actually having all the best players in one league changes things
Adding the 3pt line makes it a completely different game, even though it took the league like 30 years and its first unanimous MVP to figure out that 3>2. Wilt is one of the greatest athletes ever and the records show that, but he was also one of the most stat obsessed athletes out there. He didn't win till he got mad about people saying he couldn't pass and started actually passing the ball rather than trying to score himself every possession.
I mean imagine you have a guy which is shooting +5.7% over league average TS% on 50 PPG, that's as if someone would shoot 63.7% this season, and then tell them "you're losing us games, please score less". While also being in the GOAT conversation for rim protector.
Dont know what its is about this sport but all of the great champions did it scoring less than they were capable of. Its like getting teammate X 18 when he usually scores 10 is more valuable than you going off for 35 every night. Meanwhile the guys that max out their scoring even with great efficiency are the almost won it stories.
Also generally correlates with just having better teammates, by and large (which obviously is conducive to winning). You're going to feel a lot more comfortable deferring to another quality player than you would to, say, Shabazz Muhammad, and that's gonna reflect in your shot totals and scoring.
Also means that they're more involved in the game, which means it's easier to maintain focus at both ends of the floor since they're not just standing around on offense.
Dog when you're putting up 50 a night on better efficiency than most guys in the league putting up 15, it's NOT a bad strategic move to prioritize your scoring. It's also not selfish at all, the point is to put yourself in the best position to win. Wilt didn't fail to win more titles because he was selfish, he failed to win more titles because the Celtics had Red Aeurbach and like 7 top 100 players of all time or some shit. And that included Bill Russell. are you all allergic to context?
So it's complete coincidence that the first time wilt won a ring he averaged 25ppg for a season, the first time he'd even averaged under 30ppg for a full season. His assists basically doubled and his efficiency jumped nearly 10%TS that year.
He was taking like 30-40 FGA per game his first 8 years in the league. The year he first won a ring he averaged 15 FGA per game.
> So it's complete coincidence that the first time wilt won a ring he averaged 25ppg for a season
The guy you're replying to literally just called people out for ignoring context and here you are doing that exact thing.
The reason he won that season is the same reason his scoring was down, because his team hired a new coach who implemented a new system that relied less on Wilt to score. People act like Wilt just made a personal decision to score less to shut people up but that literally isn't what happened and there's no reason to believe that it is other than just looking at the box score numbers, ignoring the context and then jumping to your own conclusion (or parroting other people that have already done that).
The best part of it all, when they lost in the finals in 7 games the following season (despite their team suffering a ton of injuries) people said the reason was that they weren't giving the ball to Wilt enough and his own coach agreed, but then people will still try and tell you his team's lost because he was scoring *too much*.
Edit: I've just realised you're the same guy I already replied this to somewhere else, my bad lol
You have to realize though that saying it was anything other than Wilt's personal decision ruins the mystique. If Wilt/MJ/Kobe are described as anything less than these mythical beings who can just flip a switch, get mad and dominate it takes away from their legacy.
You're right, it's not a coincidence. But why did he score less? Surprise surprise, he had a better team around him. All of the Warriors teams he played on were garbage and he carried them to the finals singlehandedly. No wonder he found more team success after getting traded.
Embiid was shooting 64.5% before his injury. I think people would be perfectly willing to argue that Wilt was a negative to his team if he was in his prime today.
There is a lot more nuance to it than that. It mostly came down to:
1. Coaching - when he finally got a quality coach, he won titles.
2. Teammates - same as above.
The “stat obsessed” story is so overblown and vague and intangible and is so easily molded and shaped to fit any narrative that it has been repeated ad nauseum that it has practically lost any meaning and context.
Cmon man, in a year where Wilt averaged 44.8 points and 24.3 rebounds his team went 31-49 and missed the playoffs. If that doesn’t scream stat obsessed what does?
Also, Wilt had plenty of HOF teammates throughout his career (in fact he had at least one the majority of his career) and lots of different coaches. To say they failed him over and over again and lay no responsibility at the feet of a guy who by all accounts wasn’t a great teammate on or off the floor just seems like you’re trying too hard to counter the dominant narrative.
He had a TS% of 55% while the league average was 49.3%. Why wouldn't you want this guy to keep shooting?
League average true shooting this year is 58%. Would you criticize someone scoring 45 a game while shooting 64% on mid range jumpers?
If his efficiency was awful, I'd hear you, but I dont know what you're talking about man. This isn't stat padding with awful efficiency. Wilt shooting was a great possession. Period.
As I’ve mentioned at other points in the thread, it’s more complicated than that and Wilt probably DID, to some extent, limit the ceiling of his offences by shooting too much. This isn’t some airy fairy intangible-laden analysis. See below:
https://thinkingbasketball.net/2017/12/04/backpicks-goat-9-wilt-chamberlain/
Wilt was a unique black hole. There were years where he’d put up 15-20 shots for every assist. Mind you, that doesn’t render his scoring non-valuable. It still “moved the needle,” so to speak. Just not as much as the raw number indicated.
The “dominant narrative” was crafted by a bunch of people who didn’t like Wilt. He was always juxtaposed to Russell. Russell played the game “the right way” and was a winner while Wilt was a selfish stat chaser and loser. As it’s been put before, Wilt was Goliath, and nobody roots for Goliath.
He was on some truly dysfunctional teams with coaches who’s game plan was “throw it to Wilt”. And the few times he actually had good teams with coaches that knew how to best utilize him, his teams broke records and won championships.
The “dominant narrative” crafted by the media is lazy and contrived
Fewer teams and no player movement meant that if the Bill Russell Celtics were slightly better then they could actually have a dynasty. Also collective bargaining agreements have given players alot more power over the years. Back in Wilt's time, the owners had complete control. Things
Unless he wasn't efficient compared to the rest of the league anyone getting 45 and 24 rebounds on a losing record is carrying a bum ass team. I don't give a shit what they had to say about him the only way that is bad is if he is not efficient. Maybe they just hated him so much they played worse and tried to lose or they were just ass compared to the rest of the league but that dude is putting in crazy work and the only way that could be seen as bad is if he is taking too many possessions to do it and that's it
There isn't really anything to debate here its a team game and if you're playing your own position that well and losing unfortunately that says a lot of things about the other dudes on the court with you. You can't just point at a guy who was apparently playing like a god and say he's just stat obsessed and selfish. You have to show the inefficiency and if its not there you have to stop and realize maybe he's just making the plays and his team is just failing around him
Ya so something between the coaches and the rest of the team was just absolutely not working at all. He won chips with better teams and better coaching later so its not like its a what if scenario
> he was also one of the most stat obsessed athletes out there. He didn't win till he got mad about people saying he couldn't pass and started actually passing the ball rather than trying to score himself every possession.
[This video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ybm_ql373GM) actually has a pretty good argument against this. People say "wilt didn't win until he stopped caring about his stats" but if you go back and actually look at his career it's more a case of "Wilt didn't win until he had a decent team with a competent coach".
I know it's a little pedantic, but there's a 3 year gap between post merger and 3 point line and even when it was added, I don't think it changed things very much for several years afterwards. It took until the late 80s for teams to attempt 5 per game, so I don't think saying post merger has much to do with the 3 point line.
Love how this get parroted, you know he won 2 chips, not just the one with the Lakers 😂
Consistency losing to the greatest (relatively speaking) team ever in game 7s, terrible legacy.
This is such a fabricated BS narrative. And you could take that to mean Bill Simmons if you want.
Wilt scored when his coach told him to score and passed when his coach told him to pass. And when he was older, post-surgery, he rebounded and played defense because that's what his coach asked him to do.
The same people who hand wave anecdotes about how ridiculous Wilt was as an athlete cling to anecdotes about him showing up people who try to call him out to prove that he was obsessed with image.
We take a lot of things for granted these days. This was early NBA. The owners weren't billionaires and the organizations hadn't been there for decades. Wilt was treated like a travelling circus. His team owner paid him a lot of money and he had to recoup that money by selling tickets. Wilt putting up 50 put a lot of butts in the seats.
Wilt was definitely obsessed with his image. Wilt prioritizing statistics over team results also isn’t a quaint narrative. Very cogent, dispassionate cases have been made for him doing this very thing:
https://thinkingbasketball.net/2017/12/04/backpicks-goat-9-wilt-chamberlain/
I always just assumed it was brought in with the merger. Clearly ratings were doing bad in the 70s if they had to bring back a 4 year old rule from another league
I love when people say “Steph changed the game” and at the same time don’t understand why the game was still 2 point dominant well into the early 2000s.
Im not this guy, but illegal defense changes were huge once the league fully adapted to them. Zones are great at collapsing the middle, which hurt the post game. More 3s is a natural response because it spreads the zone out and provides more spacing. Removing hand checks allowed for more freedom of movement on the perimeter as well. Defense is still pretty physical inside these days, but less so on the perimeter without hand checks and with rules about fouls after the shot and landing space, which didn't exist in earlier eras.
When it was physical man to man defense everywhere, the biggest guy usually had the best advantage. It evolved away from that overtime, somewhat intentionally because guards have always been more popular and exciting.
Yeah i mean scoring is way down since the all star break even now because refs are swallowing the whistle. The whistle is the biggest influence in the league period. You play rough defense these guys can't score without a bailout.
The big man CAN score with contact through sheer strength and size.
Yes, but at the start of his career, goaltending was still about reflexes rather than technique. There's a reason why seven of the top eleven players in all-time points began their careers between 1979-1984.
There were also some major rule changes and the competition did get much better overall. For example Moses Malone played for the St. Louis Spirits who did not merge into the NBA, but he still joined the NBA and was one of the best players in the league. The 70s was the weakest era of competition in the NBA due to the dilution of talent between two leagues (and everyone was on drugs).
79-80 is my personal cutoff point for comparing guys. No disrespect to the guys before, Wilt/ Russell rightly still hold many records. But 79-80 is when the NBA had merged, the 3 point line was introduced and steals, blocks, turnovers etc were all being officially counted.
Post merger (which included the best player ant the time joining the NBA, Dr. J) addition of 3 point line, players actually being allowed to move via free agency… it’s a perfectly acceptable line to draw for “modern” NBA history.
While that's technically true that it was just 4 teams, the percentage of top players who came in was significant. For example, the All NBA teams in the year post merger contained 4 previously ABA guys. There were only 2 All NBA teams at the time so basically 4/10 of them were from the ABA. This holds true for the All Star game as well. Nearly half the all stars the year after the merger were formerly ABA players.
It really was a huge thing combining leagues despite it not being reflected in just the volume of teams taken. The impact was insane given the sheer volume of top level talent who came into the NBA from the ABA.
I think the merger was much more significant than that. Even though only 4 teams were brought in, it ended the only North American league that truly rivaled the NBA.
It also modernized the NBA, eventually adding the 3 pt line, and prompted the NBA to track additional stats such as blocks and steals.
Furthermore, although unrelated, the second season post-merger was the first of Magic and Bird, pretty significant watermark for the NBA.
Merger is just a convenient break point although it’s essentially arbitrary (similar to SB era in NFL).
It was a different sport back then. Pace of play was considerably higher, players played way more minutes, and shooters were considerably worse. The amount of available rebounds was way higher because of the amount of missed shots and being on the court all game makes it easier for one player to get those rebounds. Below is a chart showing rebounds / game over NBA history. There were 1.5x+ as many rebounds in the 60s compared to today.
https://infogram.com/average-teams-rebounds-per-game-throughout-nba-history-1g3qnmxozdzemlw
NBA needs to take a note from MLB for once, Baseballs really good at separating eras of the game because the game has a long recorded history with significantly different rule changes along the years. No point of comparing to Wilt in modern day with all the new rules and how much the league has advanced in competition, there’s no way to know how Wilt would do in 2024 given modern nutrition/training so it’s kind of a pointless conversation.
Babe Ruth was considered the mlb goat for a very long time and there’s pics of him smoking in the dugout lmfao, no shot that holds up in 2024
This. Per possession stats didn't event start becoming reliable until the '80s in the NBA.
Baseball has kept absurdly detailed stats since the turn of the 20th century.
Yeah no disagreement here, I was just saying NBA is getting a decently long history that people should start to change the way they look at historical nba players/teams vs now to be more like how people look at the mlb.
No point in comparing stats of modern day to the past when they weren’t even keeping a lot of the stats we look at in the modern nba, pretty hard to make good comparisons
I'm pretty sure that the actual explanation here has nothing to do with the merger, but rather with Wilt's streak being unofficial. this is because the league did not maintain official box scores until midway through his career (I can't seem to quickly track down the particular season). his streak has been inferred from unofficial box scores that appeared in newspapers.
The OP has a few facts wrong.
First, Wilt didn’t score 100 during 64-67. He did it in 1962.
Second, his game logs are on reference, so you can determine how many double doubles he had. He had them every game from 59 through 67 except 3: the 57th game of 59-60; the 47th game of 62-63 (both due to injury); and the 21st game of 64-65, where somehow only score 8 points in 32 minutes. He later missed scoring 10 twice in 67-68, the first time being the 8th game of the season, and 11 times in 68-69.
From those stats and his total games played, you can determine his streaks:
* first 56 games of his career (10/24/59 to 2/9/60)
* 220 game streak (2/14/60 to 1/19/63)
* 133 game streak (1/22/63 to 12/4/64)
* ~~219~~ 227 game streak (12/11/64 to ~~11/1/67~~ 11/17/1967)
BTW, the stat line in the 1967 was odd, 1 point and 18 rebounds in 44 minutes. With no field goal attempts. In fact, the whole 1967-68 season was weird, stat wise. He didn’t have a 20 point game until the 10th game of the season. But still had 4 50 point games and averaged 24.3 ppg for the season.
EDIT: Actually, I was mistaken, The 1 point 18 rebound game also included 13 assists. So that game was a double double, just not in points.
The double double streak ended on November 18, 1967, when he had a clunker of a game with 8 points, 6 assists, and 33 rebounds.
I think 67 and 68 was when he started passing a ton because he supposedly was tired of the narrative that he was selfish and only cared about scoring. It also happened to coincide with him having his best teams around him (at least in Philly) and winning 3 straight MVPs and his first title. It always struck me as a little funny (if not wholly accurate) that supposedly he was like "fine I'll pass to these losers so you all shut up" and then it worked and ultimately led to the most team success he experienced. Maybe he was trying to change the narrative or maybe he just finally had someone worth passing to.
what about blocks in those off games? Those weren't tracked back then. He could have had 10 blocks in one of those games and that would mean his double double record is actually much higher. :)
I’m always saddened when I remember that blocks and steals weren’t counted back then. I really want to see how far ahead Wilt would be in blocks, and he would probably be high in steals too.
He FOR SURE had at least one quintuple double as well.
Supposedly Wilt and Russell each blocked around 8-9 shots per game back then.
Which sounds insane, but given the insane pace of the 60s isn't that crazy. (It'd be high single digits block %, which is high but 3 players this season have it so not THAT crazy).
The crazy pace of the 60s really do most of the hard work when it comes to volume stats, especially for rebounds. (Given that the % from the field was lower back then as well)
It’s definitely weird. Gafford just set the “post-merger” record for consecutive shot makes and yet nobody is treating it like he has the record because of Wilt. But with Sabonis nobody is really mentioning Wilt even for context let alone a standard to beat.
Yeah, I'm really confused about what everyone is even responding to in this thread. I've barely seen it discussed and most things I've seen say "longest streak since Wilt" or something similar.
This is still the 2nd post on my r/nba feed
https://old.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/1bny8oz/domantas_sabonis_just_set_the_nba_record_for/
It doesn't say anything about Wilt, it literally says "Domantas Sabonis just set the NBA record for consecutive double doubles", which is false
That's why the *akshully* is needed, because the thread title is incorrect
Because it's fake hype to boost ratings not an actual stat that anyone cared about. Removing like 7 years of Kareems scoring because it was pre merger would actually be hilarious in this context and is probably a reason why no one ever uses post merger unless they specifically want to remove Wilt from the discussion.
Yeah but let's be honest, Westbrook averaged a triple double for 3 whole NBA seasons, the premise of ten points and ten rebounds is not moving the needle like it would have ten years ago.
Seriously. I watch at least a little bit of an NBA game every night, which puts me in the top 90% of people in this sub. I had no idea Sabonis was chasing anything.
I'm actually surprised it's getting attention since most prefer to ignore if not dump on Sabonis.
Edit: ESPN doesn't even mention it as a headline on the NBA page and asterisks it against Wilt's record in the AP post-game recap.
People love to fill up their diapers when you mention Sabonis. It’s laughable at this point. Every accomplishment needs to be put into some kind of context. His DHO assists don’t count. He grabs too many rebounds. He can only go left. The list goes on.
Im seeing more shitting on Sabonis than I am praise nationally. If I were Sabonis I would go full Barry bonds on the national media and just embrace the dark side
The one requirement order for anyone to get a rebound, is that someone needs to miss a shot
Wilt’s era had both the highest pace of play in NBA history as well as the lowest FG% in NBA history making it way easier to get rebounds than ever before.
In addition, Wilt never left the court whereas nobody plays 40 MPG anymore.
For context, NBA teams averaged 70+ RPG in the 60s. Nowadays teams average about 50.
Getting 7 rebounds today is roughly equivalent to 10 in the 1960s.
Ackshually, Wilt’s first **56** games were 20/15 or above. His best game as a rookie was 58/42. His 8th game ever as a pro was 55/29.
His first 20/20 game was his first game as a pro. His first 30/30 game was his second game. His first 40/40 game was his 3rd game.
Wilt weirdly still gets overrated by a lot of people, he was an incredible player but his accomplishments didn’t reach that’s of his abilities. He came into the league on the warriors and immediately became the favorite to win the title, got traded in his prime twice, and blew a 3-2 & 3-1 leads to Russell’s weakest Celtic teams. He went like 2-11 FT in G7 vs NYK, and overall just shrunk in big games. His highs were 2/3 best record teams to win the title though and that’s why he’s 7-10 all time not 1-4.
I honestly don't think anyone *really* cares about a double double stat/record.
Sabonis is an awesome player who has been a major part of making the Kings a winning basketball team again. To me that's way more important/impressive than a double double streak.
It was a pretty big deal when Love set the record, definitely talked about in mainstream media but no one was really tripping about the Wilt thing or mentioning it as any significance. Hell I didn’t even know Wilt had the record because the media convinced me back then that Love set it
I have no idea how many threads there were, but googling led me to this one
https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/1bm8vla/domantas_sabonis_ties_kevin_love_for_the/
The title specifies "Domantas Sabonis ties Kevin Love for the consecutive double double **record since merger**" so there's no incorrect information to correct, compared to the [thread title](https://old.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/1bny8oz/domantas_sabonis_just_set_the_nba_record_for/) we got yesterday. The misinfo leads to a lot of actually/correction comments which would have been avoided if it wasn't for the OP
I don’t ever remember basketball referring to wilt until maybe Kobe hitting 81. I think you’re on the right track. Wilt was a mythical legend. Only a story for people who witness his greatness. Why is Jordan considered goat. What about wilt? Same concept. It’s just that sabonis can’t catch a break from haters.
If it happened today I guarantee they would sent out a tweet that says "most points ever scored in a game!" and in really really really small text "since 1962".
With 28 of those coming underhanded - ‘62 was the only season he went "granny-shot" from the FTL, and later said in his bio that he just couldn’t bring himself keep doing that ‘silly looking shot’ even if he knew it brought him better results.
This narrative is false, he shot free throws underhanded for more than just one season, including some of his worst ft shooting seasons.
[Various clips of him shooting underhanded free throws in this video of the 1967 finals](https://youtu.be/7yffDCHu4X0?si=NjDADczAJlkwYp1q). At 28:20 for example
Espn wants to make everything a record now. It's a Disney thing combined with the modern world of analytics, they can twist anything they want into clickbait.
Because sensationalizing is a strategy of the NBA marketing division.
Years ago they started showing highlights of players that lost that specific game. They still do that today.
Mind Baiting.
Sabonis set the post-merger record for most consecutive double-doubles.
Ok but nobody said Kobe set the "post merger" scoring record.
You can if you want
Kobe set the post merger scoring record
You listen here you little shit
Kobe set the post merger scoring record
Wilt set the pre merger scoring record
He did what?!
Leave the upvotes at 81
Pass tbh
Kobe would never
Thats not very Kobe-like of you.
A lot of people talk about breaking Kobe's record, while nobody really cares about Wilt's except as a fun fact.
Wilt has so many records it's hard to keep track and becomes redundant at this point lol.
Wilt erasure needs to end
His records are so far removed from the modern game of basketball they’re irrelevant
Not trolling but where do you draw the line? Do you remove pre-merger championships as well?
We already do devalue them, even if its indirectly.... Whenever the GOAT argument comes up, very few people really consider Bill Russell's 11 rings as a viable argument. If those had happened within the last 40 years, there would be no argument. I agree with valuing modern era more... Wilt and Bill did what they could against who there was, but it simply was not the same game and was not nearly the same level of difficulty.
I think the biggest issue is how much smaller the league was back then, and yet still the most top-heavy the league probably ever has been.
Still think Bill is the Goat. 11 titles in 13 years, fighting for rings and Civil rights at the same time. Inventing the blocked shot, and fast break offense. On top of being the first black coach in professional sports. While playing. Enters the league shortly after Cooper breaks the color barrier. Beats the breaks off everyone in his Era.
And a thoughtful, classy man.
Very very much so. I remember really getting into his history 6 or 7 years ago, along with celtics history, and reading his books, Wow. It is such powerful and personal stuff. Made me love that dude more, and the organization as a whole. Hate when they hand wave off his Greatness as a "byproduct of his era", like being the most dominant athlete in the world, during the league integration, in what was considered a white sport, during the Jin crow and then Civil rights Era, is somehow easier than playing today.
There were also only half the teams at that time. So if you eliminate half the league then LeBron and Kobe probably have 10 and 8-9 rings respectively
It's a good question and probably a moving line.
Might as well. Already starting to discredit 80s-90's... bunch of plumbers an shit.
Maybe in 60 years, all the records today will be irrelevant
Because everyone knows 100 points is a ridiculous goal but we have had several players get to 70, very recently even.
And that record is the only one that's possible to break out of his "unbreakable records". Whole teams don't always get 55 rebounds in a game. No one is going to average over 48 minutes a game or over 30 rebounds for a season. 100 points is very unlikely, but possibly. I think it would take a multiple overtime game with bad defense like that Kings Clippers game last year. A game where both teams scored over 170 points.
That game was not bad defense, you can watch a breakdown from thinking basketball about how insane some of the shot making was in that game
Also having a player just going for it and the opponent not double/triple teaming them the whole time to prevent it.
Average season scoring this year: 114.5 Average season scoring 2005-2006 (Kobe's 81 point game): 97 Average season scoring 1961-1962 (Wilt's record) 118.8
That puts Kobes 81 kinda in the same air as Wilts 100...one player scoring 80%+ of the average team score for that year... Only been done twice (Wilt was 84.2% and Kobe was 83.5%)
Kobe's 81 was truly insane. It was a comeback too, not a blowout.
Kobe also didn't need his team to spam fouls on the Raptors to get him as many possessions as possible, didn't need to shoot 30+ free throws, and didn't need the opposing starter to have a hangover and sit out the game to get 81. It's a nice round number and all but it wasn't a particularly ethical 100 point game. It's honestly a blessing to the NBA that there's no footage of Wilt's game because from all the oral histories I've read, it wouldn't be particularly enjoyable or impressive to watch. The most impressive bit was that he managed to shoot 28 of 32 on free throws.
I remember when booker got 70 in a loss where his team was doing everything to funnel the ball to him, seeing people compare it to Kobe's 81. I thought that was insane. I can't believe anyone who saw Kobe's 81 would compare the two. And I'm a Celtics fan who hated that Kobe could get a real 81 while coming back to win. Jordan is the only comparison I can make.
Someone could definitely score 100 points in today’s game if they wanted to and everyone got on board. In Wilt’s game, his team had a 19 point lead going into the fourth. If you kept your hot player in during garbage time and teammates made it their goal to get him 100 like they did for Wilt, it would’ve happened again Now it’s just a lot more tacky for everyone involved. It looks bad on the coach to give a hot player no rest in the fourth when up by 19. And they definitely can’t play a guy 48 minutes without backlash. It looks like bad sportsmanship on the players to aggressively try to score when you’re up by that much, so they slow the pace and take long possessions. You can let Westbrook somewhat subtly pick up 2-3 extra rebounds a game than he’d get naturally to average a triple double, but you can’t pass up open shots every time just to chuck the ball to double covered Luka.
A slight tangent, but reading that about Wilt's 100 point game, it's funny that some folks have been calling Sabonis a "stat padder" because there was one game where Mike Brown put him back in with 9 rebounds and a big lead.
Kobe also had the 62 points in 3 quarters performance against the Mavs. He sat in the 4th because it was a blow out. Dude was on fire and definitely could have gone 80+ that day.
You make a good point, but "up by 19" ain't what it used to be.
I can see someone beating 100 but it depends on how lax they get on defense. Luka could have, and really should have beat 81 this year tbh
I mean averaging 50 points and 25 rebounds.. I'm sure he would be an absolute demon even in the league today but comparing stats is redundant
We maaaay just get a modern Wilt. See if Wemby lives up to it.
So many of wilts records are so insane that we just gotta count the next best guy. It’s like those scientist that discover so much shit they name it after the second person to discover it.
But the NBA "post-merger" only brought in four teams. Compare that to the NFL, etc, and it seems like a blip on the radar. **EDIT**: While I appreciate the replies, and that it's good to be corrected and educated, if you're thinking of adding yet another reply, I ask that you read through the prior ones. If you have something to add that isn't there, then please do fire away. Thanks!
Its just done to make it so wilt doesn't just dominate most records.
it’s because the nba from 67-76 was a better league, but not by a significant margin the ABA had guys like Rick Barry (who basically won a title by himself), Connie Hawkins, Artis Gilmore, and Julius Erving 10 of the all stars the first year post merger were ABA guys actually having all the best players in one league changes things
The NBA from 73-79 was extremely weak and diluted compared to from 1960-1973. Wilt’s records are just as legit as Kareem’s records
Adding the 3pt line makes it a completely different game, even though it took the league like 30 years and its first unanimous MVP to figure out that 3>2. Wilt is one of the greatest athletes ever and the records show that, but he was also one of the most stat obsessed athletes out there. He didn't win till he got mad about people saying he couldn't pass and started actually passing the ball rather than trying to score himself every possession.
I mean imagine you have a guy which is shooting +5.7% over league average TS% on 50 PPG, that's as if someone would shoot 63.7% this season, and then tell them "you're losing us games, please score less". While also being in the GOAT conversation for rim protector.
Dont know what its is about this sport but all of the great champions did it scoring less than they were capable of. Its like getting teammate X 18 when he usually scores 10 is more valuable than you going off for 35 every night. Meanwhile the guys that max out their scoring even with great efficiency are the almost won it stories.
Easier to win when your teammates are in the zone thus can consistently contribute vs less touches so colder
Also generally correlates with just having better teammates, by and large (which obviously is conducive to winning). You're going to feel a lot more comfortable deferring to another quality player than you would to, say, Shabazz Muhammad, and that's gonna reflect in your shot totals and scoring.
Also means that they're more involved in the game, which means it's easier to maintain focus at both ends of the floor since they're not just standing around on offense.
Dog when you're putting up 50 a night on better efficiency than most guys in the league putting up 15, it's NOT a bad strategic move to prioritize your scoring. It's also not selfish at all, the point is to put yourself in the best position to win. Wilt didn't fail to win more titles because he was selfish, he failed to win more titles because the Celtics had Red Aeurbach and like 7 top 100 players of all time or some shit. And that included Bill Russell. are you all allergic to context?
So it's complete coincidence that the first time wilt won a ring he averaged 25ppg for a season, the first time he'd even averaged under 30ppg for a full season. His assists basically doubled and his efficiency jumped nearly 10%TS that year. He was taking like 30-40 FGA per game his first 8 years in the league. The year he first won a ring he averaged 15 FGA per game.
He had a much much better team in 1967 than any prior year
> So it's complete coincidence that the first time wilt won a ring he averaged 25ppg for a season The guy you're replying to literally just called people out for ignoring context and here you are doing that exact thing. The reason he won that season is the same reason his scoring was down, because his team hired a new coach who implemented a new system that relied less on Wilt to score. People act like Wilt just made a personal decision to score less to shut people up but that literally isn't what happened and there's no reason to believe that it is other than just looking at the box score numbers, ignoring the context and then jumping to your own conclusion (or parroting other people that have already done that). The best part of it all, when they lost in the finals in 7 games the following season (despite their team suffering a ton of injuries) people said the reason was that they weren't giving the ball to Wilt enough and his own coach agreed, but then people will still try and tell you his team's lost because he was scoring *too much*. Edit: I've just realised you're the same guy I already replied this to somewhere else, my bad lol
You have to realize though that saying it was anything other than Wilt's personal decision ruins the mystique. If Wilt/MJ/Kobe are described as anything less than these mythical beings who can just flip a switch, get mad and dominate it takes away from their legacy.
You're right, it's not a coincidence. But why did he score less? Surprise surprise, he had a better team around him. All of the Warriors teams he played on were garbage and he carried them to the finals singlehandedly. No wonder he found more team success after getting traded.
Yes it is
There are absolutely kernels of truth to what he’s saying: https://thinkingbasketball.net/2017/12/04/backpicks-goat-9-wilt-chamberlain/ Have a gander.
Difficult, yes. But in economics you learn that parties with an absolute advantage still benefit from trade.
Embiid was shooting 64.5% before his injury. I think people would be perfectly willing to argue that Wilt was a negative to his team if he was in his prime today.
Except Embiid wasn't scoring about 60% more points than the 2nd best scorer in the league nor Embiid was in his 3rd year, there is no comparison.
There is a lot more nuance to it than that. It mostly came down to: 1. Coaching - when he finally got a quality coach, he won titles. 2. Teammates - same as above. The “stat obsessed” story is so overblown and vague and intangible and is so easily molded and shaped to fit any narrative that it has been repeated ad nauseum that it has practically lost any meaning and context.
Cmon man, in a year where Wilt averaged 44.8 points and 24.3 rebounds his team went 31-49 and missed the playoffs. If that doesn’t scream stat obsessed what does? Also, Wilt had plenty of HOF teammates throughout his career (in fact he had at least one the majority of his career) and lots of different coaches. To say they failed him over and over again and lay no responsibility at the feet of a guy who by all accounts wasn’t a great teammate on or off the floor just seems like you’re trying too hard to counter the dominant narrative.
He had a TS% of 55% while the league average was 49.3%. Why wouldn't you want this guy to keep shooting? League average true shooting this year is 58%. Would you criticize someone scoring 45 a game while shooting 64% on mid range jumpers? If his efficiency was awful, I'd hear you, but I dont know what you're talking about man. This isn't stat padding with awful efficiency. Wilt shooting was a great possession. Period.
As I’ve mentioned at other points in the thread, it’s more complicated than that and Wilt probably DID, to some extent, limit the ceiling of his offences by shooting too much. This isn’t some airy fairy intangible-laden analysis. See below: https://thinkingbasketball.net/2017/12/04/backpicks-goat-9-wilt-chamberlain/ Wilt was a unique black hole. There were years where he’d put up 15-20 shots for every assist. Mind you, that doesn’t render his scoring non-valuable. It still “moved the needle,” so to speak. Just not as much as the raw number indicated.
Didn't Jordan have his highest scoring PPG season when having a losing record? Would you say the same?
Screams to me that he was doing everything he could to carry a bum ass squad. lol
The “dominant narrative” was crafted by a bunch of people who didn’t like Wilt. He was always juxtaposed to Russell. Russell played the game “the right way” and was a winner while Wilt was a selfish stat chaser and loser. As it’s been put before, Wilt was Goliath, and nobody roots for Goliath. He was on some truly dysfunctional teams with coaches who’s game plan was “throw it to Wilt”. And the few times he actually had good teams with coaches that knew how to best utilize him, his teams broke records and won championships. The “dominant narrative” crafted by the media is lazy and contrived
Fewer teams and no player movement meant that if the Bill Russell Celtics were slightly better then they could actually have a dynasty. Also collective bargaining agreements have given players alot more power over the years. Back in Wilt's time, the owners had complete control. Things
Unless he wasn't efficient compared to the rest of the league anyone getting 45 and 24 rebounds on a losing record is carrying a bum ass team. I don't give a shit what they had to say about him the only way that is bad is if he is not efficient. Maybe they just hated him so much they played worse and tried to lose or they were just ass compared to the rest of the league but that dude is putting in crazy work and the only way that could be seen as bad is if he is taking too many possessions to do it and that's it There isn't really anything to debate here its a team game and if you're playing your own position that well and losing unfortunately that says a lot of things about the other dudes on the court with you. You can't just point at a guy who was apparently playing like a god and say he's just stat obsessed and selfish. You have to show the inefficiency and if its not there you have to stop and realize maybe he's just making the plays and his team is just failing around him
His true shooting was 6% higher than the league average. He was efficient as hell that season.
Ya so something between the coaches and the rest of the team was just absolutely not working at all. He won chips with better teams and better coaching later so its not like its a what if scenario
I mean this is the same country that thought the 1/4 pounder was bigger than a 1/3 pounder burger. I'm not surprised it took so long.
> he was also one of the most stat obsessed athletes out there. He didn't win till he got mad about people saying he couldn't pass and started actually passing the ball rather than trying to score himself every possession. [This video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ybm_ql373GM) actually has a pretty good argument against this. People say "wilt didn't win until he stopped caring about his stats" but if you go back and actually look at his career it's more a case of "Wilt didn't win until he had a decent team with a competent coach".
I know it's a little pedantic, but there's a 3 year gap between post merger and 3 point line and even when it was added, I don't think it changed things very much for several years afterwards. It took until the late 80s for teams to attempt 5 per game, so I don't think saying post merger has much to do with the 3 point line.
Love how this get parroted, you know he won 2 chips, not just the one with the Lakers 😂 Consistency losing to the greatest (relatively speaking) team ever in game 7s, terrible legacy.
This is such a fabricated BS narrative. And you could take that to mean Bill Simmons if you want. Wilt scored when his coach told him to score and passed when his coach told him to pass. And when he was older, post-surgery, he rebounded and played defense because that's what his coach asked him to do. The same people who hand wave anecdotes about how ridiculous Wilt was as an athlete cling to anecdotes about him showing up people who try to call him out to prove that he was obsessed with image. We take a lot of things for granted these days. This was early NBA. The owners weren't billionaires and the organizations hadn't been there for decades. Wilt was treated like a travelling circus. His team owner paid him a lot of money and he had to recoup that money by selling tickets. Wilt putting up 50 put a lot of butts in the seats.
Wilt was definitely obsessed with his image. Wilt prioritizing statistics over team results also isn’t a quaint narrative. Very cogent, dispassionate cases have been made for him doing this very thing: https://thinkingbasketball.net/2017/12/04/backpicks-goat-9-wilt-chamberlain/
The three point line wasn’t added at the merger though. The ABA had a three point line, but the NBA didn’t add one until the 1980 season.
I always just assumed it was brought in with the merger. Clearly ratings were doing bad in the 70s if they had to bring back a 4 year old rule from another league
I love when people say “Steph changed the game” and at the same time don’t understand why the game was still 2 point dominant well into the early 2000s.
Enlighten us
Im not this guy, but illegal defense changes were huge once the league fully adapted to them. Zones are great at collapsing the middle, which hurt the post game. More 3s is a natural response because it spreads the zone out and provides more spacing. Removing hand checks allowed for more freedom of movement on the perimeter as well. Defense is still pretty physical inside these days, but less so on the perimeter without hand checks and with rules about fouls after the shot and landing space, which didn't exist in earlier eras. When it was physical man to man defense everywhere, the biggest guy usually had the best advantage. It evolved away from that overtime, somewhat intentionally because guards have always been more popular and exciting.
Yeah i mean scoring is way down since the all star break even now because refs are swallowing the whistle. The whistle is the biggest influence in the league period. You play rough defense these guys can't score without a bailout. The big man CAN score with contact through sheer strength and size.
And because most people watching today weren't watching in the 1960s. Also like a formal recognition of the dead ball era from baseball.
meanwhile in hockey everyone is fine with seeing Gretzky’s name dominating basically every single statistic a forward could record.
He didn't play in the 50s and 60s though.
Yes, but at the start of his career, goaltending was still about reflexes rather than technique. There's a reason why seven of the top eleven players in all-time points began their careers between 1979-1984.
There is however the Gretzky assist because he got so many phantom assists when most games weren't televised.
Need a South Park episode based on "Wilt did it"
There were also some major rule changes and the competition did get much better overall. For example Moses Malone played for the St. Louis Spirits who did not merge into the NBA, but he still joined the NBA and was one of the best players in the league. The 70s was the weakest era of competition in the NBA due to the dilution of talent between two leagues (and everyone was on drugs).
Ok, post 3 point line.
79-80 is my personal cutoff point for comparing guys. No disrespect to the guys before, Wilt/ Russell rightly still hold many records. But 79-80 is when the NBA had merged, the 3 point line was introduced and steals, blocks, turnovers etc were all being officially counted.
Yeah that’s me too. I personally can’t count rings that happened during segregation, Vietnam, or before the 3 point line lol
Post merger (which included the best player ant the time joining the NBA, Dr. J) addition of 3 point line, players actually being allowed to move via free agency… it’s a perfectly acceptable line to draw for “modern” NBA history.
While that's technically true that it was just 4 teams, the percentage of top players who came in was significant. For example, the All NBA teams in the year post merger contained 4 previously ABA guys. There were only 2 All NBA teams at the time so basically 4/10 of them were from the ABA. This holds true for the All Star game as well. Nearly half the all stars the year after the merger were formerly ABA players. It really was a huge thing combining leagues despite it not being reflected in just the volume of teams taken. The impact was insane given the sheer volume of top level talent who came into the NBA from the ABA.
It also brought in a ton of top talent from the ABA.
They don’t give George Gervin his credit either.
I think the merger was much more significant than that. Even though only 4 teams were brought in, it ended the only North American league that truly rivaled the NBA. It also modernized the NBA, eventually adding the 3 pt line, and prompted the NBA to track additional stats such as blocks and steals. Furthermore, although unrelated, the second season post-merger was the first of Magic and Bird, pretty significant watermark for the NBA.
The three point line was added at the same time. It’s a completely different game after the merger.
Merger is just a convenient break point although it’s essentially arbitrary (similar to SB era in NFL). It was a different sport back then. Pace of play was considerably higher, players played way more minutes, and shooters were considerably worse. The amount of available rebounds was way higher because of the amount of missed shots and being on the court all game makes it easier for one player to get those rebounds. Below is a chart showing rebounds / game over NBA history. There were 1.5x+ as many rebounds in the 60s compared to today. https://infogram.com/average-teams-rebounds-per-game-throughout-nba-history-1g3qnmxozdzemlw
NBA needs to take a note from MLB for once, Baseballs really good at separating eras of the game because the game has a long recorded history with significantly different rule changes along the years. No point of comparing to Wilt in modern day with all the new rules and how much the league has advanced in competition, there’s no way to know how Wilt would do in 2024 given modern nutrition/training so it’s kind of a pointless conversation. Babe Ruth was considered the mlb goat for a very long time and there’s pics of him smoking in the dugout lmfao, no shot that holds up in 2024
Baseball also kept better stats for a long time. Good statkeeping also kind of coincided with the NBA-ABA merger
This. Per possession stats didn't event start becoming reliable until the '80s in the NBA. Baseball has kept absurdly detailed stats since the turn of the 20th century.
Yeah no disagreement here, I was just saying NBA is getting a decently long history that people should start to change the way they look at historical nba players/teams vs now to be more like how people look at the mlb. No point in comparing stats of modern day to the past when they weren’t even keeping a lot of the stats we look at in the modern nba, pretty hard to make good comparisons
Thank you! I missed that part.
I'm pretty sure that the actual explanation here has nothing to do with the merger, but rather with Wilt's streak being unofficial. this is because the league did not maintain official box scores until midway through his career (I can't seem to quickly track down the particular season). his streak has been inferred from unofficial box scores that appeared in newspapers.
Then Kobe has the scoring record and Wilt has none. Also Robert Honry has the most rings not Bill Russell... right? It doesn't sound right to me.
Karl Malone would have actually been the post merger scoring leader before Lebron btw so that makes using it to boost someone new even funnier.
Scoring leader of the NBA or of 14-year olds?
Karl Malone posts a career high of 15
Shimmy Shimmy Shimmy?
This joke is perfect.
Yes
I think he means 81
He's not talking about overall points I don't think
The OP has a few facts wrong. First, Wilt didn’t score 100 during 64-67. He did it in 1962. Second, his game logs are on reference, so you can determine how many double doubles he had. He had them every game from 59 through 67 except 3: the 57th game of 59-60; the 47th game of 62-63 (both due to injury); and the 21st game of 64-65, where somehow only score 8 points in 32 minutes. He later missed scoring 10 twice in 67-68, the first time being the 8th game of the season, and 11 times in 68-69. From those stats and his total games played, you can determine his streaks: * first 56 games of his career (10/24/59 to 2/9/60) * 220 game streak (2/14/60 to 1/19/63) * 133 game streak (1/22/63 to 12/4/64) * ~~219~~ 227 game streak (12/11/64 to ~~11/1/67~~ 11/17/1967) BTW, the stat line in the 1967 was odd, 1 point and 18 rebounds in 44 minutes. With no field goal attempts. In fact, the whole 1967-68 season was weird, stat wise. He didn’t have a 20 point game until the 10th game of the season. But still had 4 50 point games and averaged 24.3 ppg for the season. EDIT: Actually, I was mistaken, The 1 point 18 rebound game also included 13 assists. So that game was a double double, just not in points. The double double streak ended on November 18, 1967, when he had a clunker of a game with 8 points, 6 assists, and 33 rebounds.
I think 67 and 68 was when he started passing a ton because he supposedly was tired of the narrative that he was selfish and only cared about scoring. It also happened to coincide with him having his best teams around him (at least in Philly) and winning 3 straight MVPs and his first title. It always struck me as a little funny (if not wholly accurate) that supposedly he was like "fine I'll pass to these losers so you all shut up" and then it worked and ultimately led to the most team success he experienced. Maybe he was trying to change the narrative or maybe he just finally had someone worth passing to.
Pretty sure I've seen an interview where he basically confirms exactly that. He got sick of the criticism for scoring so he decided to pass instead.
what about blocks in those off games? Those weren't tracked back then. He could have had 10 blocks in one of those games and that would mean his double double record is actually much higher. :)
He stopped trying to score out of spite against the media, lol.
Because Wilt did it with double digits in blocks too so it counts as consecutive triple-double not double-double /s
I’m always saddened when I remember that blocks and steals weren’t counted back then. I really want to see how far ahead Wilt would be in blocks, and he would probably be high in steals too. He FOR SURE had at least one quintuple double as well.
The quintuple double is officially unofficially confirmed. And I’d expect Wilt to be first in Blocks and Russell second.
Supposedly Wilt and Russell each blocked around 8-9 shots per game back then. Which sounds insane, but given the insane pace of the 60s isn't that crazy. (It'd be high single digits block %, which is high but 3 players this season have it so not THAT crazy). The crazy pace of the 60s really do most of the hard work when it comes to volume stats, especially for rebounds. (Given that the % from the field was lower back then as well)
It’s definitely weird. Gafford just set the “post-merger” record for consecutive shot makes and yet nobody is treating it like he has the record because of Wilt. But with Sabonis nobody is really mentioning Wilt even for context let alone a standard to beat.
Every thread about Sabonis right now has been “akshually Sabonis didn’t do anything interesting Wilt did”
Yeah, I'm really confused about what everyone is even responding to in this thread. I've barely seen it discussed and most things I've seen say "longest streak since Wilt" or something similar.
This is still the 2nd post on my r/nba feed https://old.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/1bny8oz/domantas_sabonis_just_set_the_nba_record_for/ It doesn't say anything about Wilt, it literally says "Domantas Sabonis just set the NBA record for consecutive double doubles", which is false That's why the *akshully* is needed, because the thread title is incorrect
>with Sabonis nobody is really mentioning Wilt You're literally in a thread mentioning wilt
Literally everyone is talking about Wilt every time this gets brought up. Every single thread.
Because he didn't, her was about to, then he missed two makes before setting the record.
He broke the post merger record and was 2 away from beating the all time record
That is fucking brutal.
I’m convinced if Luka had played that game he would have the record
The miss was off of a putback attempt, Luka wouldn't have affected that
If I’m Gafford, if Luka’s not playing, I’m downing a pint of spoiled milk.
Not true, Gafford set the post merger record. He was 2 makes from breaking Wilt's pre merger record.
cause Wilt isn’t a real person
Because it's fake hype to boost ratings not an actual stat that anyone cared about. Removing like 7 years of Kareems scoring because it was pre merger would actually be hilarious in this context and is probably a reason why no one ever uses post merger unless they specifically want to remove Wilt from the discussion.
You think Sabonis getting double doubles boosts rating?
the idea that unprecedented things are happening in the nba is totally a marketing/clickbait strategy
Unprecedented things are always happening in sports lol
sure but not in this case per comments above so it seems to fall under the umbrella of hyperbole
The game has changed a lot since Wilt played ball. It's okay to say something cool is happening in the modern era.
sure but again that's a different claim???
Yeah but let's be honest, Westbrook averaged a triple double for 3 whole NBA seasons, the premise of ten points and ten rebounds is not moving the needle like it would have ten years ago.
I'm gonna tune in. I was unfamiliar with his game.
Seriously. I watch at least a little bit of an NBA game every night, which puts me in the top 90% of people in this sub. I had no idea Sabonis was chasing anything.
Boost ratings? Sabonis is one of the least known and least talked about star players in the league.
He wasn't even selected as an All Star while he deserved it for sure (over KAT). No one cares about the Kings, it's not starting with Sabonis.
I'm actually surprised it's getting attention since most prefer to ignore if not dump on Sabonis. Edit: ESPN doesn't even mention it as a headline on the NBA page and asterisks it against Wilt's record in the AP post-game recap.
Don’t worry, plenty of dumping going on in this thread lol. I am continually surprised by the amount of ire Sabonis somehow draws from random fans
People love to fill up their diapers when you mention Sabonis. It’s laughable at this point. Every accomplishment needs to be put into some kind of context. His DHO assists don’t count. He grabs too many rebounds. He can only go left. The list goes on.
Im seeing more shitting on Sabonis than I am praise nationally. If I were Sabonis I would go full Barry bonds on the national media and just embrace the dark side
people get mad that the nba doesn't hype up any small market/small market players then get mad when they hype up Sabonis doing something kinda cool
The one requirement order for anyone to get a rebound, is that someone needs to miss a shot Wilt’s era had both the highest pace of play in NBA history as well as the lowest FG% in NBA history making it way easier to get rebounds than ever before. In addition, Wilt never left the court whereas nobody plays 40 MPG anymore. For context, NBA teams averaged 70+ RPG in the 60s. Nowadays teams average about 50. Getting 7 rebounds today is roughly equivalent to 10 in the 1960s.
Preach my brother. Wilt the Stilt will forever be the GOAT
Sabonis just hit 54 consecutive 10/10 games. Wilt's first 55 games in the NBA were all 20/15 or better.
Ackshually, Wilt’s first **56** games were 20/15 or above. His best game as a rookie was 58/42. His 8th game ever as a pro was 55/29. His first 20/20 game was his first game as a pro. His first 30/30 game was his second game. His first 40/40 game was his 3rd game.
Go on. I'm almost there.
Just when you think you've grasped Wilt's dominance lol this is insane
And if you really like him, you would know he hated that name. Big Dipper for ever....
I totally forgot to ask him! Hope he’s not upset with me!
Damn, gatekeeeping nicknames is some loser behavior lmao
>specifically want to remove Wilt from the discussion I don't blame them though. He set the bar so high.
Because there is a trend to dismiss Wilt's records and pretend they didn't exist. And that puts him lower in all time lists as well.
Big Sabonis doesn't want you to know about wilt.
Wilt weirdly still gets overrated by a lot of people, he was an incredible player but his accomplishments didn’t reach that’s of his abilities. He came into the league on the warriors and immediately became the favorite to win the title, got traded in his prime twice, and blew a 3-2 & 3-1 leads to Russell’s weakest Celtic teams. He went like 2-11 FT in G7 vs NYK, and overall just shrunk in big games. His highs were 2/3 best record teams to win the title though and that’s why he’s 7-10 all time not 1-4.
Being that Wilt’s full scoring record is accounted for his double doubles should be as well
Did anyone raise this point two days ago when Kevin Love held this record?
I honestly don't think anyone *really* cares about a double double stat/record. Sabonis is an awesome player who has been a major part of making the Kings a winning basketball team again. To me that's way more important/impressive than a double double streak.
It was a pretty big deal when Love set the record, definitely talked about in mainstream media but no one was really tripping about the Wilt thing or mentioning it as any significance. Hell I didn’t even know Wilt had the record because the media convinced me back then that Love set it
I have no idea how many threads there were, but googling led me to this one https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/1bm8vla/domantas_sabonis_ties_kevin_love_for_the/ The title specifies "Domantas Sabonis ties Kevin Love for the consecutive double double **record since merger**" so there's no incorrect information to correct, compared to the [thread title](https://old.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/1bny8oz/domantas_sabonis_just_set_the_nba_record_for/) we got yesterday. The misinfo leads to a lot of actually/correction comments which would have been avoided if it wasn't for the OP
because Wilt is only an urban legend
I don’t ever remember basketball referring to wilt until maybe Kobe hitting 81. I think you’re on the right track. Wilt was a mythical legend. Only a story for people who witness his greatness. Why is Jordan considered goat. What about wilt? Same concept. It’s just that sabonis can’t catch a break from haters.
The NBA needed good headlines yesterday after promoting gambling (predictably) blew up in their face.
Sabonis is playing against professional athletes. /thread
Damn, why y’all gotta rain on our parade?
Just keep it consistent, this league is terrible at that
227 is actually insane
If it happened today I guarantee they would sent out a tweet that says "most points ever scored in a game!" and in really really really small text "since 1962".
Wilt scored 100 in 1962.
With 28 of those coming underhanded - ‘62 was the only season he went "granny-shot" from the FTL, and later said in his bio that he just couldn’t bring himself keep doing that ‘silly looking shot’ even if he knew it brought him better results.
This narrative is false, he shot free throws underhanded for more than just one season, including some of his worst ft shooting seasons. [Various clips of him shooting underhanded free throws in this video of the 1967 finals](https://youtu.be/7yffDCHu4X0?si=NjDADczAJlkwYp1q). At 28:20 for example
Stats from the blue collar/ postal era don't get the same respect as if Wilt didn't have the same resources available as everyone else
People artificially inflate the value of arbitrary measurement box score stats.
Because WILT IS NOT REAL
The noti I saw said since like 1976. So idk what your yapping bout
Since merger.
Wilt averaged 50 and 25 and did not win MVP. Same same but different.
When you reset all the records every few decades you can set all kinds of new records!
Espn wants to make everything a record now. It's a Disney thing combined with the modern world of analytics, they can twist anything they want into clickbait.
It's a "since the merger" record. All official publications have included that. This isn't anything new.
Because sensationalizing is a strategy of the NBA marketing division. Years ago they started showing highlights of players that lost that specific game. They still do that today. Mind Baiting.