Wilt Chamberlain Really Was Better Than Michael Jordan!

I agree with you on this one.

yeah,great

I'll keep your post

I'm very like your Hub?

Have a nice day?

??????????

Excellent post! However, you left out perhaps the most important statistic of all regarding the argument: "Who was better--Wilt or Jordan?" That statistic? Jordan had the prettier smile. By that, I don't mean for a minute to demean Jordan's athletic prowess (as I noted on the other hub on this topic, I consider him to be one of the greats of all-time), but as far as public perception is concerned, you can't discount charisma--something Jordan had plenty of (Magic is the only other player I can think of that could equal him in this regard). Chamberlain himself noted that it's hard to love a giant, and it's easy to understand why when children's fairy tales and films depict the giant almost universally as the villain. Combine this fact with Chamberlain's temporal remoteness--few people under 50 have ever seen Chamberlain play a complete game--and the fact that he competed against the greatest team of all-time (the Boston Celtics) which limited his championship rings to 2, and it's clear why most modern commentators give the nod to Jordan. Your post, however, convincingly argues the opposite. Alas, I don't see it convincing many in the under 40 crowd. Cheerio!

Michael Jordan was fun to watch, but so was Wilt Chamberlain. He gets my vote, but I am over 40.

Some day, I'd like to write an article: KU JAYHAWKS, basketball Champs of 1984! It would reflect an alternate universe of sanity, where Ted Owens WASN'T fired, where all of those "slow" players Larry Brown bad-mouthed all year would have had a coach who respected them, AND knew how to use--a team that would have had the full-year use of Bogney and Aikens. I believe with every fiber of my being that THAT team would have been a final 4 team, Big 8 Champs, and possibly NCAA Champs. Alas, we'll never know.

Yup! You're forgetting one rather prominent individual, a player who continues to make a difference for KU today--albeit indirectly. That player? Carl Henry, Xavier's Dad*. As you may recall, Carl was a very good player. He lacked the quickness one might hope for in a person his size (6'6) but he was strong, a very good rebounder, could make his own shot and was a pretty good defender. He averaged just over 17 points a game in his 2 years at KU (and if memory serves--I can't find a source on-line--he averaged about 7 rebounds a game). So, recall that the Brown coached '84 team had a decent year (22-10, 2nd in Big 8)--in spite of the inept coaching (inept in that he hadn't a clue as to how to handle this talented, but relatively slow, team--bad-mouthing them from the beginning of the year to the last, resulting in one of its most talented players, Boagni, leaving at the semester break)--winning the post season tournament over an Oklahoma team that was a legitimate NCAA title contender, and going on in 1985 with this core team to be one of the best in the nation. So, you take that very same team, add Curtis Aiken (4 year starter for some pretty good Pittsburgh teams), keep Boagni, and give them a coach who knew what to do with them, and you have the makings of a great team, one that would be right up there with Ted Owens' best--the '71 and '78 teams.

*And let's not forget Owen's other recruit for 1984, Jim Pelton!

Very odd. I was trying to remember Jerry Johnson's name! Yes, the supposed second coming of Dr. J--whose only resemblance to same was his first initial. Of course, I enjoyed Manning also--likely the second best player ever to play for the Jayhawks (Hmm. A good debate could be had over who was KU's THIRD best). Nontheless, KU had no (good) reason to fire Owens. If I had had any say in that outcome, even if I could've seen the future and known Manning and a national title were on the way, I would have kept Owens. That's probably why I enjoyed our most recent title even more than the one of '88. That one seemed a bit tainted by the axing of Owens.

I had wondered if Kelly might have been on that team. I always liked him--a decent player. His inclusion on the list of players that would have been available to Owens makes their trip to the final four a near certainty. And yes, Brian Martin WAS still around, assuming he played his senior year. Of course, his presence would have added nothing to their on-court prowess. Let's see: I guess you'd have Dreiling (So.) as starting center, Boagni (So.) as starting power forward, with Kelly Knight (Sr.) subbing for each and providing a huge dose of experience and stability. Then you'd have Carl Henry (Sr.) playing both shooting guard and small forward, but undoubtedly starting at the two guard. Then you'd have Ron Kellogg (So.) and Calvin Thompson (So.) at small forward (at that stage of their careers, Thompson would start [He lit up Oklahoma for 30 as a freshman in Owens' next to last game] as Kellogg was too erratic as a Sophomore, though you could see his potential--still the best shooter in KU history by me), and Aiken at point. So far, I haven't been able to find out who his back-up would be (Jeff Guiot?--actually, I'd imagine that Owens would have picked up another guard, possibly from the Jr. college ranks, in the latter days of recruiting) which is a rather critical question. But one thing is for certain, that would have been a dynamite rebounding team with a lot of depth (except possibly at point). Looking over that roster, I can't say that this was a group so talented that they would surely have won the title--but it does look good enough to make a run at it. Could they have upset Georgetown? We'll never know.

A lot of good choices for the 3 spot. Historically speaking, Clyde Lovellette would be the logical choice, but speaking of ability/talent in the modern game--he probably would just be a decent player now. The ones you mentioned are all possibilities, and we could throw in Hinrich, Collison, Robish, and maybe Valentine. I think I'd pick Jo Jo White--with all due respect to Valentine and Hinrich and Vaughn and Walters--the best guard in KU history.

PS. Just saw Kentucky play. Ugh! They looked too good. The alley-oop to their point guard, who slammed it BACKward over his head, was ridiculous. Ouch!

In the 1960s, Wilt couldn't win championships even though he had both Jerry West and Elgin Baylor on his team. I mean, how much talent do you need to be surrounded by to win the championship? Of course, you can argue that Rodman and Pippen combined were better than West and Baylor (laugh).

I have to laugh at this blog! For beginners, what name pops up when the question is asked which player in NBA history had absolutely no weaknesses? It's Michael Jordan's name that comes to mind, not Wilt Chamberlain's. Wilt had a number of short comings to his game. Not a good free throw shooter, not very skilled with the long range shot, only a right handed shooter, etc. There's more to that list too. That right there should silence the M.J. critics and doubters. The part that cracks me up even more about this blog is where this guy Mike Lickteig mentions about a dozen great rebounders that fall short of Wilt's remarkable numbers but he neglects to see is that these guys had to battle each other for the rebounds. No wonder why their numbers were cut in half! Bill Russell was Wilt's greatest adversary in this category and he was only 6ft.9 to Wilt's towering 7ft.1! Take a look at the league stats during that time and notice the average height of centers in Wilt's prime and then ask yourself if there's any reason why he shouldn't have out rebounded those guys! Put him in the era when jordan played from the start of his career until the end and he would have been facing guys like Moses Malone, Kareem Abdul Jabbar (Who played against both players), Artis Gilmore, Ralf Sampson, Mark Eaton, Patrick Ewing, David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon, Shaq, Alonzo Mourning, Kevin Garnett, Dikembe Mutombo, Maunute Bol, Bill Lambier, Robert Parish, Tim Duncan, etc. the list goes on and let's see how much he would have dominated! These guys were all somewhere around his height and had a lot more skill and athleticism than the opponents he faced in the prime of his career and this is by a long shot! To argue this point would only make you look very uneducated! The reason why Wilt was so dominant was not only because of his size but also because of his skill. I'll give you that but when the only other superstars in the league at the time that had similar talent to Wilt's were guards and small forwards like Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, Oscar Robertson, etc., it's not some strange phenomenon why Wilt dominated. Where were the star centers beside Bill Russell during that era? That was the position Wilt played wasn't it? Where was his competition? Granted, some better centers came along towards the twilight of his career but that was after he already posted those huge numbers and he was in his declining years. Post him up against guys like Shaq, hakeem, Robinson, etc. and if he still rules the painted area, you'll finally have a point to make! Unfortunately, that will never happen so we'll never know exactly how good he was will we? He just got really lucky to play in an era with smaller players, lesser talent in his position and fewer teams in the league! Jordan on the other hand had no size advantages what so ever. As a matter of fact, even though he was listed a 6ft.6, his true height was 6ft.4 3/4. Yet, he still dominated the league! His dominance was purely because of his superior skill and athleticism physically and his heart and intelligence mentally. That's it in a nutshell. There is no comparison between these two. Wilt was great for his time but he would have been just another star center along with the guys that I mentioned in Jordan's era while Jordan still reigned over the entire NBA!

I also have to comment on the ridiculous question of why Rober Horry isn't considered to be the greatest of all time because he won one more ring than Michael Jordan. Gee, should we start with Jordan's 6 finals MVP awards? How many does Robert Horry have? Should we mention that M.J. was the leader of his team while Robert Horry wasn't? Should we bring up the facr that Jordan was the only player in the history of the game that proved that a scoring champion could also win titles? Even Chamberlain had to give up a lot of his game to win championships. How about the fact that M.J.'s game was flawless where Robert Horry was known to slack off during the regular season but some how manage to hit clutch shots in major playoff and finals games? I can go on and on but what's the point? You've got to give us a break with this argument. It's just silly!

First of all, Jordan had an average outside shot? I'm sorry but 33% from behind the arc and 50% from the field overall is not average. He was one of the greatest jump shooters of all time. Maybe you missed game 1 of the 1992 finals. Maybe you missed the 1989 and 1996 seasons where he was shooting around 38% from 3-point range. Maybe he was a very intelligent player who had great 3-point shooters on his team like, Paxson, Hodges, Armstrong, Kerr, etc. and really didn't feel a need to focus on that part of his game. Jordan was a marginal passer? You need to watch some Bulls games and highlights from that era. Jordan was actually an underrated exceptional passer. His passing was sharp, very accurate and most importantly, he knew WHEN to pass. He couldn't defend? Are you kidding me? Michael Jordan was not only the greatest defender of his time but arguably the greatest perimeter defender of all time. Even his worst critics will attest to that. You're in the minority there, buddy! He didn't look for open teammates? Where were you during the 1991 finals when M.J. out assisted Magic Johnson who is the all time post season assist leader to win his first title? He not only kept a 30 point average but was averaging somewhere around 10 assists per game as well! His assists also picked up quite a bit after his introduction in the NBA as his team became more seasoned and the players around him got better. Read the statistics. When he first came into the league, no one on his team could make a shot so it was no mystery why he would decide to take it! All of those points you made regarding his so-called weaknesses are inaccurate and very weak! On to the next subject... most of those star centers you named during Wilt's era other than Bill Russell and maybe one or two others were not in the league during Wilt's prime while he was breaking all of those records. The ones who were actually playing against him at that time were at a big height and weight disadvantage. As I said before, most of the talent in the center position came out during the twilight of his career. When Jabbar entered the league, Wilt himself said that for the first time in his career he was finally matched up with a guy that he actually needed help to guard! Kareem was a guy who might have been Wilt's height but he still had to give away at least 30 lbs. to him! The influx of talented centers that came out during M.J.'s time wouldn't have given up such size advantages and seriously, are you really going to tell me that the centers you named are even in the same league as the centers and power forwards that I named? I would have loved to see Wilt Chamberlain try to stop someone like Shaq! Also for your information, it would have been interesting to see Chamberlain up against a guy like Mark Eaton considering that he has the record in blocked shots. It would have been interesting as well to see Wilt up against a guy like Manute Bol who was 7ft.7 where the major height advantage would go to the other guy for a change! I'm not claiming that these centers are anywhere near the same class as Wilt Chamberlain but what they brought to the table would have either exposed his weaknesses or demonstrated his strengths. Again, we'll never know how that might have played out.

As for Dennis Rodman, He was an incredibly hard working 6ft.7 phenomenon. He won 7 rebounding titles in that era and he would have done it in Wilt's too! In fact, he probably would have done even better considering the opposition in the league at that time. Maybe you should be giving the man some credit rather than showing disregard towards the other players of M.J.'s era.

There's nothing amusing about an entire league full of talented centers and power forwards stealing rebounds from each other. It's called competition. Something Wilt Chamberlain went without during most of his career other than with Bill Russell who was 4 inches shorter! He broke all of those records against one star center and a league full of players with major size disadvantages. These guys that I mentioned had to share the spotlight with many others in their size range and skill range as well, big difference!

This next subject makes me want to give up on this debate entirely because your remark is ridiculous! Jordan never went up against stiff opposition? Huh? What sport were you watching? Let me throw some names out there just for the fun of it. I'll start with players he matched up against beginning from early on in his career until the end. Please forgive me if I miss a few. Lol! Dr.J, Dominique Wilkins, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Clyde Drexler, Isiah Thomas, Charles Barkley, Reggie miller, Gary Payton (defensive player of the year), Grant Hill, Chris Mullen, Penny Hardaway, John Stockton, etc. These are some of the all time greats who at least match up to the players you mentioned only there's a lot more of them! Granted, some of them are small forwards but never the less, he was still matched up with them from time to time. Then he faced Kobe Bryant and burned him badly four or five times in the 1998 allstar game when Kobe was young, with fresh legs and trying to stop him. M.J. was 35! When he came back as a Wizard, he went up against players like Allen Iverson, Kevin Garnet, Steve Nash, Tim Duncan, Tracy McGrady, Vince Carter, etc. and he still averaged more than 20 points a game while keeping the rest of his all around numbers up as a 39 and 40 year old man! This is not to mention all of the centers and power forwards that I named earlier who were waiting for him at the rim throughout his entire career. I'm sorry but your argument here holds absolutely no water. M.J. went up against the most talent the league has ever seen BY FAR!!!

Last but not least, I'm not trying to diminish Wilt Chamberlain's accomplishments because I do think that he was one of the greatest players of all time reguardless of his size advantages. However, it is definitely worth pointing out that M.J. who didn't have those size advantages dominated the league in the same fashion but with more teams, with stronger and more talented opposition and in a very physical era where hard fouling was rarely called and handchecking was still legal. As I said before, M.J. was only 6ft.4 3/4! He earned everything he got and he did it ONLY by being heads and shoulders above the rest. Chamberlain earned his keep as well but you can't ignore the fact that he was a giant among small men. Even in boxing they say that a good big man will always beat a good little man. The same rules apply in the game of basketball which was one of Chamberlain's major weapons. That's why Air Jordan was better!

I have enjoyed this debate as well!

Okay, enough of the opinionated nonsense here! Here are the facts...

You gave me a list of what you would call star centers that Wilt Chamberlain had to go against in his prime and I did some research on all of them! I'm going to give you some size comparisons based on Wilkapedia stats as well as other stat sites that are very accurate. I'll also demonstrate when these players came into the league during Wilt's career. Keep in mind that when these players were drafted, they were rookies their first year going against a seasoned Wilt Chamberlain in his prime!

We'll start with Wilt. He was listed at 7ft.1 275 lbs in his prime but he eventually surpassed the 300 pound mark by the time he was a Laker! The years that he won 7 straight scoring titles and was dominant over the league went from 1959-1966. That was his prime.

I'm going to start with the earlies players and end with the ones that came into the league last and I will demonstrate how long they played against Wilt during his prime. I will also give you the size comparisons.

1. Bill Russell 1956-1969 He played through all of Wilt's prime years. He was 6ft.9 (4 inches shorter than Wilt) and he weighed 220 lbs (55 lbs less than wilt).

2. Walt Bellamy 1961-1974 He played through 5 years of Wilt's prime with one of them as a rookie. He was 6ft.11 (2 inches shorter than Wilt) and weighed 225 lbs (50 lbs less than Wilt) 3. Nate Thurmond 1963-1977 He played through 3 years of Wilt's prime with one of them as a rookie. He was 6ft.11 (2 inches shorter than wilt) and he weighed approx. 230 lbs (45 lbs less than Wilt).

4. Jerry Lucas 1963-1974 He played through 3 years of Wilt's prime with one of them as a rookie. He was 6ft.8 (5 inches shorter than Wilt) and he weighed 230 lbs (45 lbs less than Wilt).

5. Willis Reed 1964-1974 He played through 2 years of Wilt's prime with one of them as a rookie. He was 6 ft.9 (4 inches shorter than Wilt) and he weighed 240 lbs (35 lbs less than Wilt).

6. Elvin Hayes 1968-1984 He missed Wilt's prime entirely. He was 6 ft.9 (4 inches shorter than Wilt) and he weighed 235 lbs (40 lbs less than Wilt).

7. Wes Unseld 1968-1981 He missed Wilt's prime entirely. He was 6 ft.7 (6 inches shorter than Wilt) and he weighed 245 lbs (30 lbs less than Wilt).

8. Kareem Abdul Jabbar 1969-1989 He missed Wilt's prime entirely. He was 7 ft.2 (1 inch taller than Wilt) and he weighed 225 (50 lbs less than Wilt).

9. Dave Cowens 1970-1983 He missed Wilt's prime entirely. He was 6ft.9 (4 inches shorter than Wilt) and he weighed 230 lbs (45 lbs less than Wilt).

10. Bob Lanier 1970-1984 He missed Wilt's prime entirely. He was 6 ft.10 (3 inches shorter than Wilt) and he weighed 265 lbs (10 lbs less than Wilt).

I think you need to come up with a new list, man! What a ridiculous advantage in size Wilt Chamberlain had over these guys. Never mind being taller, he outweighed all of these players by an average of at least 40 lbs! That's astonishing. Also, Out of the 10 centers you named, only 5 of them played during Wilt's prime! Out of those 5, one of them played for two years against him but with his rookie year included, two of them played for three years against him but with their rookie year included and that only leaves two players who were actually matched up with him throughout most of his prime. Walt Bellamy and Bill Russell. That's astounding isn't it? Take a look at Chamberlain's numbers after the 1966 season. They dramatically dropped and what a coincidence, that just happens to be when the greatest centers out of your list besides Russell joined the NBA! He didn't dominate so much afer that did he? My case rested!

As for your comments about Michael's shooting... first of all, his percentages did not drop at all going from his original style of driving the lane to a jump shooter later in his career. He still maintained 50% shooting from the field even after changing his game. Look it up. Secondly, I never said that his 3-point shot belonged with the all time greats. I simply told you that it was not a weakness to his game and when he needed it the most, it came through for him. It wasn't just one instance in his career either. There were many times that his long range shot or three pointer would win the game for the Bulls. You were giving me percentages that players like Bird and Miller had who were known for the 3-point shot. As for your comment about Rodman and Pippen being greater defenders than Jordan, you need to look up what defense is. That last I remember, neither of those players ever led the team in steals and blocked shots while Jordan was playing. Granted, they were both great defenders in their own right but to say that they were better than Jordan is ludicrous! He was the NBA steals leader three times, he got the Defensive player of the year award and he consistantly led the team in blocked shots. I'm also shocked that a basketball fan such as yourself would tell me that all of those players I mentioned who were non-guards ever guarded Michael Jordan. How about M.J.'s 55 pointer in the 1993 finals against the Phoenix suns? Who made the game winning shot with Barkley guarding and fouling him? How about in the 1991 finals when Jordan was having to guard Vlade Divac, a 7ft. center? How about the 1998 allstar game when Michael Jordan shot a fade away jumper with Kevin Garnett in his face and guarding him? Guards don't always guard other guards. I shouldn't have to tell you that. I can come up with example after example too but you've watched the game so it's ridiculous for me to continue on with this point. As for Dennis Rodman, no one has to be ashamed that he out rebounded them. They can just appreciate him for his efforts! Hell, he's almost the size of some of those centers that played during Wilt's time so I'm sure he would have out banged them on the boards too! I can keep going on with this debate but I don't want to hog up all the room on this site! We'll let someone else step in. Take it easy.

I do have a couple of more points to make and then I'm done here for real! For beginners, Michael Jordan didn't guard Vlade Divoc for a possession or two, he guarded him throughout a good portion of a couple of games in that series while Pippen was matched with Magic Johnson. I didn't see him getting dunked on repeatedly either so I have no idea what you're talking about there. Secondly, I understand how switches, screens, drives and defenses work but that's not what I'm talking about at all here. Sure, I gave a few examples of that but I've also seen game after game throughout M.J.'s career where the opposing coaches would try practically everyone on their team to guard Michael Jordan at different points in the game. When one player didn't work, they'd put someone else on him and this includes players of all positions, not just guards. He was also double and tripple teamed quite often as well! There's no way that you missed all of that if you claim that you watched him play. One more point I'd like to make on this subject is your outrageous comment that M.J. never guarded the other team's best player. Did you miss the 1996 finals where he was matched against Gary Payton? Did you miss the 1998 Nba allstar game when he guarded Kobe Bryant? Did you miss the 1991 finals where he and Pippen traded off guarding Magic Johnson? I can keep going if you'd like! As for your constant down play on M.J.'s shooting skill, let's do some math here. It's safe to say that he became a jump shooter when he returned to the NBA from his first retirement. So I will show you his shooting stats from 3 point range and from the field for the last three years that he was a Chicago Bull. His percentages dropped off as a Wizard but again, he was 39-40 yeard old! Wilt wasn't even playing then.

1. 1995-96 season - He was .427 from 3 point range and .495 from the field.

2. 1996-97 season - He was .374 from 3 point range and .486 from the field.

3. 1997-98 season - He was .238 from 3 point range and .465 from the field.

That's an average of .346 (35%) from 3 point range and .482 (48%) from the field. Maybe his shooting percentages were a little above 50% when he was in his prime and driving the lane but this is pretty close to the 50% that I was referring to. Also, I don't see where shooting 35% from 3 point land is sub par either so again, I don't know what you're talking about! If M.J.'s weakness was his shooting, that's quite a weakness! He was from 32 to 35 years old at that point when he was putting up these numbers too. We won't even discuss what Wilt was doing by this stage in his career! Perhaps out rebounding guys who were 4 to 5 inches shorter? Lol!

Speaking of that, Wilt Chamberlain was taller than everyone in the league, quite a bit heavier whiched helped him get position in the low post and a former high jumping champion as well. He SHOULD have out rebounded everyone else in the league and as far as I'm concerned, it's not something to marvel at either! It's also doesn't make him the greatest player of all time. If he was matched against Shaq and pushing him all over the paint, he would probably make an instant believer out of me! Unfortunately, he was over powering guys who were smaller AND less skilled. The analogy you came up with and the question you asked about why Rodman could out rebound guys like Bol and Eaton is ridicoulous! Yes, they were bigger than him but no where near as skilled as Rodman was in that department. Rodman lived for rebounding. Their strengths were in other areas of the game so Rodman's dominance in rebounding over them isn't a mystery. A smaller man who is a more skilled rebounder is going to win against a larger man who doesn't specialize in rebounding. This is not the same scenerio with Wilt who was larger than his opponents AND a more skilled rebounder. They could have at least been his size for crying out loud or matched him and skill! They did neither. His opponents never had any advantages over him so he really didn't have any competition throughout his career. On the other hand, Rodman had to not only overcome the size disadvantage he had going against him but he also had to bang against centers and power forwards in the league that were much better than what Wilt had to play against. Rodman would have at least shared domination in rebounding with Wilt and Russel during the time they played if he was around then. I guarantee that. Does this finally answer your question?

One more point of interest I have to bring up is M.J.'s passing vs Wilt's. Sure, his overall assists per game wasn't much higher than Wilt's but Wilt wasn't part of a triangle offense either which was geared for passing. When Wilt passed the ball, it was an assist. Often times when Jordan passed the ball, it was then passed again to a wide open player who was usually John Paxson or later on, Steve Kerr. The Bulls were a passing team. Just because every pass Jordan made didn't turn into an immediate assist, doesn't mean that he wasn't passing more than Wilt Chamberlain. M.J. was under a different offensive structure but he was a great passer who could elevate, see the floor and always get it to the right guy at the right time.

This is my last go around and then I agree that it is pointless to continue on from here! I'm just going to respond to each of your numbers...

1. When Phil Jackson made the switch from Michael Jordan to Scottie Pippen to guard Magic Johnson in the 1991 finals, M.J. was assigned to guard Vlade Divoc and he guarded him for pretty lengthy periods of time. Go back and watch the series. Yes, before that it was Bill Cartwright guarding Divoc and Jordan did defend against Byron Scott and Michael Cooper during different parts of that series but that switch was made by Phil Jackson on a couple of occasions and in at least two games that I know of, PERIOD!

2. I guess you forgot when Ron Harper got injured during that 1996 finals series and was out? Who do you think was guarding Gary Payton then? I guess I don't remember Payton being "too fast" for Jordan and burning him but I sure do remember Payton guarding Jordan and getting burned badly on several occasions even though he was "defensive player of the year" and was doing a better job on Jordan than most players have in the past. He still couldn't stop him though.

3. Of course, each year that any player after his prime plays in the league, their skills are going to decline. Especially when they're beyond the age of 35. Wilt was no exception to that rule so I don't know what point you were trying to make here. I was merely stating that 48% from the floor was pretty close to the original 50% that I guestimated and that 35% from the 3 point line wasn't poor shooting at all. The funny thing is, M.J. was STILL dominating the league and winning championships even at that time!

4. The statement you made where you thought I was insinuating that Jordan wasn't allowed to make an assist because of the triangle offense is absurd! The real point that I was attempting to make is that because of the way that offense was structured, a lot of M.J.'s great passes that led to scoring were overlooked because you didn't see them in the stats book under where it says assists!

5. To answer your question AGAIN, we're are looking at two totally different situations between Jordan's career and Wilt's. Both players dominated the league but for different reasons. Wilt dominated it not only because his skill was greater than anyone else's at the time but also because of his huge size advantage. Michael dominated it ONLY because of his superior skill and his will to overcome bigger men who were also skilled. When did Wilt Chamberlain ever have to do that? His reputation was established by dominating smaller and less skilled men. You can't make the same claim for Michael Jordan. He was maybe average size in the league. You also have to look at who was more clutch in the playoffs and in the finals. There's not even a comparison there. Jordan owns all of the record books. These things are what make Air Jordan the greatest player EVER!

6. "give it up, Steve"? You didn't make any point here! Lol! I never claimed that height ONLY was what mattered. I said that height AND skill put together was what Wilt had during his prime and that no one else in the league had that combination! How can you call someone the greatest baller ever if they never had to compete against other greats at their size and skill level? That's how greatness is achieved. If nothing else, Rodman had to overcome taller guys but with less rebounding skill. Someone like David Robinson had to overcome smaller guys but with greater rebounding skill like Rodman, Barkley, etc. See, everyone but Wilt had to overcome something whether it was in size or skill. Wilt had no competition. That's my point!

This has been a lot of fun but I've made up my mind that no matter how you respond, I'm going to have to chew my lip regardless of how enticing it might be to respond. Lol! take care my friend.

You have some good pints. Cheers!

Thank you and you look sexy!

Thank you Mike! This has been fun. I've joined some Kobe/Jordan debates as well and the best part about this is you learn more about the game as you go on because it forces you to do research in order to validate your points! I'm glad that you have this out here for people to indulge in. Take it easy. P.S. Everyone has a right to have a favorite player and if Wilt Chamberlain is yours, that's not a bad choice!

I love it- why stop? It was like watching my son arguing with his friends which is the better game- halo or modern warfare - except no "Nu-uhs"...

I think you're both right and both wrong. It's preposterous to argue. First of all- its a team sport, each offering their own dynamic in their own time, heck- even their own moments of every game on the floor.

Who would win in a game of 1 on 1? Remember that Kareem/Dr J travesty- size kills.

Who would get picked first in a game of pickup? Has anyone on the planet every matched Jordan's insane drive, with even 1/2 as much talent? You mentioned Kobe, Steve, and not to get sidetracked but separates Jordan isn't talent or work-ethic- Kobe has him at least matched- it's his insane will. I don't think he ever let anyone beat him at anything...

Back to the subject- there are so many intangibles its unreasonable to compare a center and a guard, let alone players in 2 completely different eras. Skills aside, I've only seen footage of Wilt, but he doesn't seem nearly as mean or coldblooded as Jordan does every single time down the court. But again- Jordan couldn't win with out complementary players- forget Scottie- how about Armstrong/Longley/Wennington - not all stars- not even starters on lots of teams -but perfect for to complement his style.

Having said all that I'll reverse field on my argument for this point- is there anyone in any sport at any time that you want to have the ball for a final possession than Jordan?

I love this piece. It's a great read, and makes very solid points, however, I'm not sold on Wilt being the best ever, especially since it's arguably that he wasn't even the best player in his own era.

I understand your point about size, but I think your comparison using Shawn Bradley and Manute Bol is off base. Sure those guys were tall, but they were weak, and played in the league with plenty of other 7 foot-plus players.

Wilt was so physically dominant, which I agree shouldn't count against him. But what should count against him is the fact that Chamberlain was continually beaten by the only player close to his stature that played in his era, in Bill Russell.

I'm not sure Jordan is better, but he beat every other great player in his era. He beat Isaiah, Magic, Bird, Barkley, Ewing, Malone, Robinson, Drexler, etc.. In fact, he kept some of the NBA's greatest players from winning titles.

It's so hard to compare players from different eras, and Although I think both Russell and Jordan are ahead of Wilt, I have no problem with someone picking Wilt as the greatest ever.

I'm just not sure it's a shands down as many people think it is.

Great read though.

The lack of ESPN in Wilt's era definitely hurts him. Looking at numbers and championships I still feel he falls short of Jordan as the GOAT. Your argument is a good one, but to me there are only two guys Magic Johnson and Bill Russell who I think have a strong argument for GOAT over Jordan. Magic has one less championship and he was probably as dominate an offensive player as Jordan just in a different way. Russell has more championship rings and was the best defensive player of his era.

Anyone traded twice in their prime has a tough time justifying himself in the "greatest ever" argument. Not to mention that in individual matchups with Bill Russell, Chamberlain was stymied, maybe not statistically, but in the wins column.

Very interesting, Mike. I've never seen Chamberlain's play, but anyway it must be difficult to compare so differents player, differents positions,but on top of playing during differents seasons. Probably at this moment, when centers seem to be not so important as before, Wilt would make better numbers than during the seasons he played.

What do you think about Pau Gasol. No, i'm not crazy, wait for a couple of years.

NBA 5 MAJOR CATEGORIES

1. Scoring - Tied. Both ended their careers with a 30.1 ppg.

2. Rebounding - Winner: Wilt Chamberlain. He was the best rebounder of all time.

3. Shot blocking - Tied. Since they didn't have that statistic in Wilt Chamberlain's time, we really don't know how good he was in this category. What we do know was that he was a premier shot blocker. Micheal Jordan was also an exceptional shot blocker for being a shooting guard.

4. Steals - Winner: Michael Jordan He was the steals leader three times during his career and finished second of all time.

5. Assists - Winner: Michael Jordan Although it wasn't by much, he is still the winner.

Notes: 2 categories are tied, Wilt Chamberlain wins 1 and michael Jordan wins two.

OTHER FACETS OF THE GAME

1. Free throw shooting - Winner: Michael Jordan At around 85%, it wasn't close.

2. The three point shot - Winner: Michael Jordan At around 33%, it wasn't close.

3. Dunking - Winner: Michael Jordan A two time slam dunk champion and a player who dominates most of the spectacular highlights in this category.

4. Driving the lane - Winner: Michael Jordan He was the best ever at slicing through the lane and getting to the hole.

5. Defense - Winner: Michael Jordan Wilt chamberlain was an underrated defender based on the fact that a lot of statistical categories didn't exist during his time but you only need to watch both players in their prime to know the answer to this. Michael Jordan was defensive player of the year, was a steal champion 3 times, was the only player in NBA history to get 200 steals and a 100 blocks in the same season and he did it twice, he consistantly led his team in blocked shots over the forwards and centers and he was widely considered as the greatest perimeter defender of all time.

Notes: Michael Jordan wins all 5 categories.

ATHLETICISM

1. Leaping ability - Tied. We really don't know the answer to this. Wilt chamberlain was a high jumping champion and Michael Jordan had anywhere from a 48 to a 50" verticle leap. Both of them had incredible hops.

2. Foot speed - Winner: Michael Jordan Wilt Chamberlain was very fast in the open floor for such a big man but he did not have 4.3 40 speed like Michael Jordan had.

3. Inside quickness - Winner: Michael Jordan Again, Wilt chamberlain was very quick for such a big man but was no where near as quick as Michael Jordan was on the inside.

4. Hang time - Winner: Michael Jordan He rules in this department and it was very pivitol in game situations where he could hang up there long enough to see the floor and make the right pass or take the right shot.

5. Strength - Winner: Wilt Chamberlain You only need to look at the man to have your answer here! However, Michael Jordan was very strong for his size as well.

Notes: 1 category is tied, Wilt Chamberlain wins 1 and Michael Jordan wins 3.

MENTAL CAPABILITIES

1. Competitive drive- Winner: Michael Jordan He was the most determined player ever.

2. Mental toughness - Winner: Michael Jordan We don't know how mentally tough Wilt Chamberlain really was because he wasn't physically challenged the way that Michael Jordan was and that's when you really have to use your mind to conquer your demons. Watching Michael Jordan get physically abused by rough teams like the Detriot Pistons and the New York Knicks, made a believer out of the general public when it came to his mental toughness.

3. Basketball I.Q. Winner: Michael Jordan Wilt Chamberlain was an intelligent player without a doubt but there has never been a player like Michael Jordan who could continually find ways to silence his critics. Examples: "Michael Jordan is a selfish player". Result: he out assisted Magic Johnson in the 1991 finals. "Michael Jordan can't shoot three's like Clyde Drexler can". Result: Michael jordan sets an NBA record in the 1992 finals by hitting 6 three's in a half. "Michael Jordan isn't that good of a defender". Result: Michael Jordan became one of the best defenders in NBA history. "You can't be a scoring champoin and win titles". Result: He won 10 scoring titles and 6 championships, most of which were at the same time. Michael Jordan always found a way to win and do what was considered to be impossible.

Notes: Michael Jordan wins all 3 categories.

OVERALL ACCOMPLISHMENTS

1. Championships - Winner: Micheal Jordan 6 to 2.

2. Scoring titles - Winner: Michael Jordan 10 to 7.

3. Gold metals - Winner: Micheal Jordan 2 to 0.

4. Steals titles - Winner: Michael Jordan 3 to 0.

5. League MVP's - Winner: Michael Jordan 5 to 4.

6. Finals MVP's - Winner: Michael Jordan 6 to 1.

Rebounding leader - Winner: Wilt Chamberlain. He would have won this award year after year.

7. Blocked shots champion - Winner: Wilt Chamberlain. Again, he would have shared the domination in this category with Bill Russellif they had this stat in those days.

8. Slam dunk champion - Winner: Michael Jordan 2 to 0.

9. NBA allstar MVP's - Winner: Michael Jordan 3 to 1.

10. Defensive player of the year - Tied. I think that Wilt Chamberlain would have at least won 1 over Bill Russell.

Notes: 1 category is tied, Wilt Chamberlain wins 1 and Michael Jordan wins 8.

This can go on and on because both players have set numerous NBA records but I do believe that I have covered the most important aspects of the game. There's only one question left... who do you think was the greatest player of all time?

If anything is "Scewed, it's everything you just said to try and twist things around in Wilt Chamberlain's favor. You're not arguing with me, you're arguing with pure facts and statistics. That's your choice I suppose. It doesn't make you look very good though. I could go back and rebutt everything you said by making counter statements and we can go on and on but what's the point? The viewers who truly know basketball will see the difference in our arguments here such as the "watered down NBA" during Michael Jordan's championship reign as you put it. How many teams were in the NBA during Wilt Chamberlain's prime? How many allstar caliber players were in the league then? You have a very weak point here. If anything, the league was just starting out and trying to identify itself when Wilt Chamberlain was in his hay day. By the time Michael Jordan rose to the top, the league was well established so I'm not sure what the term "watered down" means to you but I'm quite certain what it means to everyone else. Also, the object of the game of basketball is simple. It's to win. Michael Jordan won multiple championships. Wilt Chamberlain did not. Plain and simple. Michael Jordan also accomplished at least as many individual accolades as Wilt Chamberlain did or more. My guess is if you tallied them all up like I just did, more. Significantly more. That's also a fact. To argue with record books and indisputable numbers seems to be a bit nieve to me. Logic has to raise the question that if winning is the object of the game and Michael Jordan won more than Wilt Chamberlain did (as the leader of his team) both in the framework of a team and in an individual sense, how can Wilt Chamberlain be better or even as good for that matter? I guess I'm confused. I do have to comment on your assessment of two categories that you attempted to manipulate and then I have nothing else to say because the rest of your analogies are too absurd to respond to. How can you possibly admit in one breath that Michael Jordan had a higher overall assists rate and then in the next breath, call Wilt Chamberlain the better passer? A stat is a stat. Go ahead and argue with the stat if you'd like. I guess that's your choice. Also, please submit some proof that Wilt Chamberlain had an average of 7 to 8 blocked shots per game. I can prove that Michael Jordan had 200 steals and 100 blocked shots per season (an NBA record) for two consecutive seasons. I can also prove that he led his team in blocked shots. That's amazing for a man of his position so he deserves his due respect there. Where is your evidence? I might conceed that Wilt Chamberlain probably blocked more shots per game throughout his career than Michael Jordan did but that's just speculation and he was not better than Michael Jordan was in this area considering each players respected positions. Besides, we really don't know what kinds of numbers Wilt Chamberlain really put up in this category so it's a moot argument. One last statement I will make here before I sign off is that there has never been a player like Michael Jordan. Most of his peers, players from Wilt Chamberlain's time and coaches from that era as well, agree that Michael Jordan was the greatest player of all time with Jerry West being a prime example. Are you going to argue with him too even though he played with and against Wilt Chamberlain? He has openly stated time and again even after watching Wilt Chamberlain play in his prime, that Michael Jordan was the greatest player he had ever seen. I'd love to give you his number if I had it so you could argue with him. I'd just hope that you wouldn't mind if I sat in. I would love to see how you would counter his arguments and call his points arbitrary! Another fact is that Michael Jordan's creativity was unmatched by any player in history which is another attribute he had over Wilt Chamberlain that I forgot to mention. Oops! My fault. What else could he have possibly done to cement his legacy? He accomplished everything a basketball player could accomplish and left nothing hanging in the balance by the time his career was concluded. If he left something out, please let me know. There's arguments about who could have been the greatest center of all time but there is no question who the greatest player was.

P.S. Calling my conclusions "arbitrary" and dismissing the facts that I presented is not being a good sport on your part. My conclusions came from the record books. Where did yours come from?

I'm sorry but it's too irrestistible not to comment on two other ludicrous points that you tried to make! Hang time is a myth? Well, I'm quite certain you're right. I'm sure that since Wilt Chamberlain supposedly had a 50 inch verticle leap, that would explain why we always saw him making multiple moves in the air! That's why his nickname was "Air Chamberlain"! I can't even believe that comment was made. Talk to anyone in the NBA and ask them about hangtime. How do you explain a player having an alleged 2 inch greater verticle leap who can't stay in the air long enough to make the moves that the other guy can? I'd love to hear this! Secondly, I was at a loss of words when you gave Wilt Chamberlain the nod on dunking over Michael Jordan! You might want to consider taking some medication for this! I was really trying to be objective but after your insults on my observations, I have decided to return the favor. Let me say that I have watched tons of footage that's available on Wilt Chamberlain and have never seen him do leaner dunks, rock the cradle dunks, 360's, reverse slams, windmills, etc. Are you crazy? He might have been able to dunk from the foul line but at 7 ft.1, that's not near as impressive than doing it at just under 6ft. 5. Wilt Chamberlain was no where near as being the creative athlete that Michale Jordan was and everyone except for you knows that!

It's difficult for me to tell if you just enjoy being the devil's advocate or you simply refuse to acknowledge facts!

For beginners, it is a distortion of the truth to say that there were more of the NBA's greatest players who played during Wilt Chamberlain's time than played in Michael Jordan's time considering two key points... #1. A lot of those players who came from Wilt Chamberlain's era were still playing when Michael Jordan came into the league. Kareem, Dr.J, George Gervin, Bill Walton, ect. You can't just give those players to Wilt Chamberlain. #2. Then you have to consider the influx of talent that Michael Jordan had to play against who came into the league after the NBA's 50th anniversary when the top 50 players were established. Allen Iverson, Kobe bryant, Grant Hill, Steve Nash, etc. A number of those players with extraordinary skill and athleticism came into the league at that time and would have easily made the top 50 list while eliminating several of the "lesser gifted" players that were named during Wilt Chamberlain's time. Please don't tell me next that Kobe Bryant wouldn't have taken John Havlicek's place on that list, soforth and so on!

As for Wilt Chamberlain's passing title, even the great Red Auerbach once said that Wilt Chamberlain was all about breaking NBA records. That's what his sites were set on rather than team accomplishments. Would you like to argue with him as well? Without deliberately going out and breaking that assists record, his career APG would have been considerably lower. Do you honestly think that Michael Jordan didn't have the skill to set out and accomplish the same thing if he wanted to? The difference was that Michael Jordan was all about his team winning. The other thing to take into consideration is the effectiveness and the creativity of one's passing. Take John Stockton and Magic Johnson for instance. John Stockton owns the NBA record for assists but most everyone one agrees that Magic Johnson was the greater passer. Why? Because Magic Johnson's passing not only got him to win championships but he also dominated all of the spectacular highlights which put more fans in seats. There's no way that you can convince anyone that Wilt Chamberlain's passing was more effective and had superior creativity over Michael Jordan's unless maybe you're speaking to Stevie Wonder!

I NEVER said that Michael Jordan was a better shot blocker than Wilt Chamberlain was. I simply stated that they should be considered equals in this area since there are no records to refer to in Wilt Chamberlain's case and we know how exceptional Michael Jordan was in this category for a shooting guard. There's no way on earth that Michael Jordan blocked more shots in his career than Wilt Chamberlain did in his but considering the circumstances that I just mentioned, they should be considered tied in this category.

As for hangtime, I was hoping that you would have a better answer than that! If you think that all Michael Jordan did was "wave the ball around", you need to go back and watch some Chicago Bulls videos my friend. What disrespect for such a phenomenal player. Hang time is not a myth. It's a real asset of the game and it consists of a multiplicity of things. Verticle leap, long jumping, vision, creativity and the skill to finish the shot. It's all of these things combined in one leap in the air! Maybe Wilt Chamberlain could jump with Michael Jordan but there's no way you can tell me that he had all of those intangibles that I meantioned to maximize his leaping ability the way that Michael Jordan did.

You mentioned a couple of dunks that Wilt Chamberlain could do, I mentioned several that Michael Jordan could do. It's just a simple fact that you can choose to ignore if you want to, but Michael Jordan's creativity was exceptional to Wilt Chamberlain's and it's almost infantile to argue! I can't even imagine Wilt Chamberlain doing most of Michael Jordan's dunks. Using the example of league's rule changes against Wilt Chamberlain as part of your argument, doesn't prove a thing either. By the time Michael Jordan entered the league, those rules had already been established. Believe me, if Michael Jordan existed in those days instead of Wilt Chamberlain, they would have changed those same exact rules for him!

I think it is totally impossible to compare players from different eras and who played different positions. It was a different game in Wilt's day. In Wilt's day there were fewer games less travel. Jordan had more games to play, better athletes to compete against. What you need to do is appreciate what both contributed to the game of basketball.

Hey Mike, to answer your question... "flash" means entertainment which is pivitol to the sport and keeps it alive. Without it, you wouldn't have any airtime, very few tickets would be sold as a result of not capturing the public's interest and there wouldn't be any such thing as evolution of the game. This is one of the main attributes that make a player great. Sure, you can use another star athlete to exemplify their equality in effectiveness but the one who is mesmorizing to watch is the player that's going to keep the sport alive! The other point to make is that "flash" also means creativity. To be more creative makes you unpredictable and increasingly difficult to stop which is one of the major keys to Michael Jordan's success. I agree that we won't deter each other from our original thinking but I do want to wish you the best of luck with this article and I thank you for your time.

This is a debate I've had to take part in 100's of times over the years and let me tell you: as a kid in high school and now in college, I've been in several discussions where I was the only one in Wilt's camp. This post is very good and while I've read many like this and have many points of my own, this post brings up some that I haven't heard before and that really make solid points.

Great post

Also, I'd like to point out that it can be VERY difficult to compare players from different eras, impossible even, but a nice way to think about it is to question what kind of player they would be if they were born 25-30 years ago instead of 50, 60 or 70. Had Chamberlain and Jordan both been born and played in the modern era, they would have been better players, simply because of the advancements in athletic training and the much larger role that sports play in modern society. I don't think there's any doubt that if Chamberlain were born into this era, he would become something reminiscent of Lebron James (in the way he's so ahead of his time physically) but to the nth degree and translated to the center position. Chamberlain 50 years ago was more athletic than athletes of any decade and had he had the opportunity to compete today, the result would be something we haven't seen yet and may not see for a long time. It truly is a shame that Wilt's genes were never passed on....

blasphemy

trespass30 in Chapel Hill NC

I'm sorry we stole your coach, but he was ours first anyway

Our car plates say "first in flight" and we are not talking about Orville and Wilbur. An excellent but flawed article.

I've always been of the opinion that there is no way to determine a true GOAT. There are way too many variables to consider including eras, positions, roles, rules, strength of competition, quality of teammates, and the social contexts. (I would imagine being a Black players during the Civil Rights Movement which was an extremely turbulent time was much different from being a Black player in the '90s where you're loved and celebrated by everyone and are the face of the league.) It should be understood that EACH era provided the players of its time with certain advantages and disadvantages that other generations didn’t have.

Then as humans we all suffer from what I have termed, “eracentrism”. I define this term as the tendency to view the game of basketball through the lens of our own favorite era’s norms. What takes place in our era is the model for what the game should look like and how it should be played. Anything apart from that era is instinctively considered an aberration from the model in our unconscious and thusly an inferior brand of basketball.

All of us are guilty of "eracentrism", but I often find younger generations who, despite the fact that we (I'm only 33)have never watched one full season of basketball from the 1960's, to be especially guilty of this. We often have perceptions of the era that are not based upon a true or sufficient understanding of the times and the game, but are based upon an inherent prejudice against that era.

Despite MJ being a player from my era I am often disturbed by the matter -of- fact declaration by some that he's the GOAT as if there is no debate. There is a debate, and until there is some uniform criteria for determining this there will continue to be a debate.

I read a comment previously on this thread that said...

"[MJ] beat Isaiah, Magic, Bird, Barkley, Ewing, Malone, Robinson, Drexler, etc..."

That's misleading. Firstly basketball is a team sport, and no ONE player beats another. Truth be told, MJ's teams were much better than the media has given them credit for.

Finally I would never say that MJ defeated Bird. MJ's teams' records against Bird's is HORRENDOUS. In head to head matchups Bird's Celtics defeated MJ's Bulls 23 out of the 34 times that they met. Bird's Celtics were 6-0 against MJ's Bull's in the playoffs. MJ's Bulls NEVER beat Bird's Celtics in the playoffs.

Thanks for your reply, Mike. Also let me add that I genuinely appreciate the level of respect for opposing views you've maintained as you've presented your arguments even when it appears that it may not have been reciprocated at times.

Allow me to piggyback off a point you made, and that is the impact of the media on our point of view. You're so correct. I really don't think that my generation understands how powerful the constant, repetitive indoctrination of MJ as the untouchable "god of the nba" by the media has influenced how we view him in comparison to other legends. We don't know what it was like before ESPN and 24 hour sports networks were available to bombard us with tales of how great a player is. For that reason, we too often minimize the accomplishments of players who preceded our time, impulsively chalking those feats up to playing in a weaker era when we honestly are not speaking from first hand knowledge but from first hand prejudice.

A few weeks ago I finished reading one of the best sports books I've ever read which happens to be a new biography on Russell. It's entitled, King of the Court: Bill Russell and the Basketball Revolution. In it the author mentions how for two years during the 60's the NBA didn't even have a national television contract. We would have a completely different view of MJ if he had played with those media limitations. On the contrary could you imagine if ESPN had existed in 1962 (Wilt's 50ppg and Big O's triple double season)? Imagine a reporter saying:

"Wilt had a pretty poor game tonight against the Celtics. He was held much below his season's averages. He only had 38pts and 21rbs. The Celtics really got to him." LOL

or

"The Lakers definitely had Oscar Robertson's number tonight. Despite avg. 30ppg 11apg 12rpg for the season, the Lakers held him to just 27pts 8ast 9rbs. They've done a really good job on him." LOL

before i start off...i'll admit i've never seen wilt play bball,

woah my bad, i accidentally clicked on the Post Comment box :P

back to discussion,i did however see some of his videos on youtube, and i must say he does have a pretty good turnaround mid jumper (even though he was known to be a bad freethrow shooter)

on the other hand, i have been a MJ fan all my life and pretty much seen all his videos (tbh, i still see them even to this day); YES, I BELIEVE MJ > WILT

i did some research on the two legends, and one primary reason I believe (and most would too, even u at even a minute extent) MJ was better than wilt was because he excelled at the playoffs, especially at the scoring level where both are usually compared at (the playoffs are what should rly puts a superstar like these two to the test), i'd say MJ beats wilt; yes, like u said somewhere in the earlier posts, that back then the league was smaller which meant most teams were stacked with good players, but that means 'these other stacked teams' should have beaten the also stacked celtics...but they couldn't (btw,one could assume obviously by entering the playoffs among the other stacked teams, the Philadelphia/San Francisco were among the better teams in the nba, and hence should have stopped the celtics 8-9 consecutive runs as champions); how did the celtics achieve success?? through the play of a superstar and EXCEPTIONAL TEAMWORK (which rly wasn't there in chamberlains game until later in the career, and i still find it surprising he won only two rings). Sounds familiar to another team in the 1990s?

now don't get me wrong, i admit chamberlain was a very, and i mean, a very very talented athlete. not every average person like me can even dream of possessing the same skill level as wilt did, even on track and field events. but thats what also makes MJ so special. if u recall, he was cut from the high school basketball because he was 'apparently' too short?!?! at that second, most people would quit, but Jordan didn't; he worked harder and harder and the rest is history; this is excatly why people like myself are fortunate to witness a legend like MJ, who some doubted that he even even make it to the high school bball team, let alone having a better future than sam bovie LOL;

i know i want to talk more, but i'm running late for dinner; this is rly a very good article with very good points from yourself and from the others. like some said, no one can rly pint-point who is better between two good players with rather different playing styles from different eras; everyone is free to choose their own opinion; and i respect yours :)

sorry for my bad English, its not my first language

you put wilt in today's game and he'll get killed out there.wilt did his thing as a player,but the generations are way different.i dont even feel like talking on this cause im not a fan of either,but i do respect what they did.never really liked jordan,lebron is okay.

But who i really like is kevin durant.That boy got ol school game.The game is weak now.players crying about this and that.They wouldn't last in the 80s.But thats what i think about that.

Wilt was a little before my time, but from any highlights I was able to see, in of course my research(I love it) - I think you make an extremely valid point. Personally, I always felt Jordan was a selfish player, he only lost this as he matured. Particularly, as a guard, being selfish is more looked down on, than for a center, in my opinion. So for Wilt to pass the ball the way he did, puts him well over MJ in this particular category.

The game is ALOT softer than it was back in my "heydays" of the 80's, but I think Wilt would have been fine as well. No one is going to avg 20+ boards a game today, but he would have still been a load down low, and 7-2 isn't something you can teach.

As always, great article.

Interesting article, not sure i agree but you did support your opinnions well and i really enjoy the debate that filled the comments section. It was as good as the article itself. Having watched both them play it's really hard to compare. They played in different eras and different positions. I can say one thing for sure. Wilt was the most dominant player in the paint and Jordan was the best outside the paint. I know that's a politically correct answer but it's the best i can come up with.

Wow...I used up a lot of my evening reading through all this! Nice Stuff though!

Let me preface what I'm about to say by stating for the record that I grew up a staunch Boston Celtics fan and didn't miss a single Sunday's TV broadcast with Chris Shenklel and Jack Twyman...I'd even pull in a 76er's radio broadcast from WCAU (I think) in Philadelphia when conditions were right in my Indiana home...I couldn't get enough basketball period!

For a time I darn near hated Wilt Chamberlain.

Then slowly, without me even knowing it, I began to appreciate his abilities...in the end I was able to accept him as the truly great player he was.

I watched him over the course of his career do literally everything his coaches and teammates asked him to do, and more...and I watched him carry himself like a gentleman through it all

I remember one particular Sunday game between the Celtics and the 76er's, an intense, near the end of the year regular season game (the kind I don't see much of anymore)...Russell got his 5th foul and Chamberlain got his 5th foul...the game was on the line, it might even have been overtime...I'm thinking "Chamberlain's never fouled out of a game, he's going to play soft"...Wilt goes up for a two-handed stuff on Russell and WHAM, Russel smacks it out of Wilt's hands...the Celtics feed Russell, he wheels and goes up for a dunk on Wilt and WHAM Wilt smacks it out of Russell's hands...5 fouls and all, neither gave an inch...these were titans and it was a privilege to learn how the game should be played by watching them play it!

Wilt and Russell may have gotten a few more rebounds in their day because of the rules, but not their competition...in those days a center could park himself in the paint and play a one-man zone...can't do that today...but they never got more rebounds because of lack of competition - they dominated because these were two-sport athletes who had terrific eye-hand coordination, great leaping ability, uncanny timing, a superb sense of where the ball was going to go after it left a shooter's hands, and a determination that allowed them to play nearly 48 minutes every game, 81 or so times a year while getting thumped the entire time.

Just because an athlete is from another era doesn't mean he or she couldn't excel in some other time...MJ would have excelled in the 60's...but I'm also thinking that Ted Williams could probably hit today's pitching, Pele could probably make a play or two in today's World Cup...and I'm thinking that if Wilt had started his career in 1980, 1990, or 2000 he would still have ended up as one of the top 50 players of all-time

Michael Jordan > Wilt

The article is retarded.

I voted for Larry Bird and it's because of his work ethic, teamwork, and crazy talent. He's definitely been the most fun for me to watch. Michael Jordan is the best. Why- just ask him!

Wilt was the most gifted NBA player. Jordan does not stand a chance. Wilt was both greatest offensive and defensive player.Sorry russell and jordan.No one gives credit to the other celtics 7 HOFers who also played with russell.Russell one on one did not stand a chance against Wilt.In his prime wilt could outrun most the NBA players on the floor. I have seen all the great centers play from the 1960's til today 2010.Strength and ability unmatched.You can arg

It's real obvious looking around the internet that those people who saw both Chamberlain and Jordan play invariably say Chamberlain was the more dominating player.

I saw both of them (and just about all of the greats of the 60s-90s) play on TV and from the stands.... and I certainly agree that it's not even close. Chamberlain was overwhelmingly powerful and amazingly skilled at every part of the game. People bash his ball handling skills - but only those people who didn't see him live. I saw him dribble behind his back to beat Jerry West from the top of the key. Saw him dribble between his legs to get past Russell, saw him pull some Globetrotter-esque passes out of his historical hat. With little or no TV in those days, those kinds of things are "forgotten" by the media.

There's no doubt Jordan was a spectacular performer. He reminded me over and over of the greats Elgin Baylor and David Thompson. I'd bet big money he watched a lot of film of those guys.

But when you look at the whole package, Mike goes head to head against Chamberlain in scoring, but in no other category.

Chamberlain doesn't just hold the vast majority of the NBA scoring records; he holds virtually every rebounding record too. And would rate 1st or 2nd in blocked shots if that stat was kept in those days. Overwhelming domination in every category. No question that he was a far more complete player.

There has been no one - ever - who could rocket a blocked shot off a bleacher the way Chamberlain could. I will never forget standing out in the hall and hearing a ball slam into the bleachers, over the roar of the crowd.

His late-career skillset, as a Laker - after he'd had a ruined knee- would utterly destroy today's centers. People that watch 2 or 3 minutes of footage on Youtube just don't see how he took over entire games from the tipoff to last whistle. I love to watch Pau Gasol play - monster - but he would be completely cowed by a late-career Chamberlain. I firmly believe if the Chamberlain that I saw, 1967-1974, played in today's game, even the all time great Kobe Bryant would be little more than a subliminal message on ESPN.

I loved watching MJ throughout his career, but it always bothered me to see him cheat, game after game, and not get a whistle. I don't know of any other player who could push off his defender to get the open shot without a foul call. Of course there have always been bad calls; but I remember over and over watching a ref standing right next to Jordan while he shoved his defender off and not blow a whistle.

Jerry West, Magic, Larry Bird, Artis Gilmore - they got whistled down when they shoved off like that.

To me that is a gigantic - sign hanging over Jordan and it will always be there. Anyone can win if they're allowed to cheat.

The other thing I see more and more of, is jogging from set to set - - half court ball. The stamina we saw in the 60s is missing from the game. Chamberlain gets Iron Man kudos for his 45 minute playing time average. But what's astounding is that he did it at the pace of those days. Today we see 8 or 10 fast breaks in a game... but those old players STAYED in a sprinting transition game sometimes for 2 or 3 minutes at a time. Just FAST like soccer.

* * *

The only problem I have with your well written monograph is that it's not fair to MJ to compare him with Wilt Chamberlain. Compare him to someone he has a chance to shine against!

I have written an article to dispute your claim that Wilt was better than Jordan.

Your article was simply amazing, Although I didn't use your article as a template of my article, I see many points in which you break down scientifically the strengths in Wits game. You argue that the players

a couple note however

in the 2010 NBA, the average rebounding per game is 42

in the 1990 NBA, the average rebounding per game was 43

in the 1970 NBA, the average rebounding per game was 53

in the 1960 NBA, the average rebound per game was 77

so the rebound is approximately 45 percent less when Wilt was a rookie that it is now. Also, a rebound isn't counted after a block as it was then when blocks were not counted as stats back then. This means relatively little and Wilt would rebound at a 112-15 rebound clip in the NBA throughout his career, but of course this would not stun people as 22 rebounds a game does.

This also meant more possessions and field goal attempts and to compare

2010 saw an averages of 82 shots per game per team

1990 was 87

1970 was 98

and 1960 was over 108 shots per game, this mean that players back in the day had more possessions per game than current players and therefore, better stats.

Still your article has moved me to put Wilt a few notches up in my top ten rankings. Great read and you have yourself a new follower.

Wilt, hands down. Some reporters discredit Wilt because he wasn't cordial toward them, whereas, jordan maintained a likable personality around reporters. Nevertheless, there is no question as to the best player of all time-its Wilt.

Just noticed this debate, and haven't spent the required 8 hours to read the full thread :-)

MJ was awesome, but as I've stated on other sites, Wit in his prime was surreal. Sure he was taller than most centers, but MJ was taller than most guards. Wilt had to play against Russell and Thurmond 10-12 times per year, which goes a long way towards destroying the "weaker league" myth that people like to quote these days.

Steve made some good arguments for Jordan earlier in the debates, but I have to take exception to his claim that MJ was one of the greatest jump shooters of all time. That's just pure fallacy; its like saying Magic was a great shooter because he shot 50% for his career.

Excellent article, Mike.

I have questions for the Wilt detractors.

If you attribute Wilt's dominance to his "size," then how do you explain him leading the league in assists?

Why do you hold Wilt's size against him, but you don't hold Magic Johnson's size against him? Wasn't Magic the tallest PG in NBA history? Didn't he present matchup problems for the smaller guards against whom he played?

Why is it that in one breath you say, "you can't compare eras," but in another breath you say, "Jordan is the greatest player of all time?" Aren't you essentially comparing Jordan to players from present and previous ERAS and still concluding that he is the best out of everyone? I see a contradiction.

Mike, another thing I should pinpoint about Wilt's assists is that the assist category was regulated on a stricter scale during the 1960s when compared to the 1980s. In the 1960s, a pass had to lead to an immediate basket. If the receiver of the pass dribbled the ball once, then the passer would not be accredited with the assist. In the 1980s, the assists ruling was much looser. Along with "scorekeeper's discretion", this guideline was given: if a player receives a pass and makes a direct line to the basket, without altering his course due to a defender, then the passer receives an assists. Despite playing in an era of looser rules governing assists, Jordan only finished with a career apg average of less than one more apg than Wilt. If we put Wilt in the 1980s, he could possibly have more assists than Jordan.

Wilt could fulfill more roles than Jordan. Earlier in his career, he was asked to score at all costs. Even Frank McGuire asked him to score 50 ppg, and Wilt responded with the most dominant scoring performance the NBA has ever seen, or will see. He posted more 50 point games in 1962 than Jordan scored in his entire career. Put Jordan's seven best scoring seasons against Wilt's first seven seasons, and there is no comparison.

I will add more to this post later. I'm at work. lol

I have a simple question for you. When do the greatest players step up their level of play? I think most people would agree with me that the greatest players step it up in the big games (i.e. the playoffs). Yes, Wilt's regular season statistics are impressive. However, compare the playoff statistics of Jordan and Wilt. Quite frankly, Wilt's playoff statistics pale in comparison with Jordan's (with the exception of rebounds).

Also, your comment about Wilt playing against more of the 50 Greatest is an insanely skewed statistic. Jordan was still playing at the time the 50 greatest were chosen. Therefore, many of the people Jordan was playing against had not been playing long enough to even be considered in the top 50, even though they could very well be ranked in the top 50 at the ends of their careers.

You brought up how dominant Wilt was at rebounding. you are correct, he was very dominant against the competition he had at that time. However, his rebounding average could easily be at least cut in half, for a couple of reasons: (1) the size of the players in today's game would take away the size advantage Wilt had during his time; and (2) the key has been widened since Wilt's time, which would prevent him from camping so close to the rim. These two factors could easily cut his rebounds in half.

Yet another reason that Jordan is greater than Wilt is the fact that Jordan carried his team to 6 NBA Championships, something Wilt failed to do. In the 2 championships that Wilt one, he had 2 hall of famers playing with him on each of those teams (Hal Greer and Billy Cunningham; and Jerry West and Gail Goodrich). Jordan had 1 (Scottie Pippen). He also had Robert Parrish for one year, but that was far after Robert Parrish's prime. Jordan had to carry the team himself.

If your defense for Wilt's stats dropping because he became more of a team player, that's just ridiculous. Why would the greatest player of all time (or so you claim) sit by and allow his teammates try and fail to win 4 NBA Championships? If he was truly the greatest ever, wouldn't he have stepped up his game and carried his team when they needed him? Do you really think the greatest player of all time (so you claim) was content with losing 4 NBA Championships because he was more concerned with being an unselfish player than winning? That is the most selfish thing you could possibly do as a teammate (allowing your team to lose 4 championships because you do not want to step up your game to win it for them). If you really think that is the reason Wilt lost those four championships, and not that he simply did not have the ability to carry his team, there is no point in arguing with you, because you aren't using any logic. If you do agree with me, then it proves my point that Jordan is truly the greatest ever to step foot on a basketball court.

If you would like to try to defend Wilt more, I am glad to shoot down your points time after time. Thank you for your time.

Also, regarding your comment that in your opinion, no statistical argument exists that proves Jordan was superior to Wilt as a player, please take a look at these career playoff statistics for each player. Please note again that the greatest players step up their level of play during the big games (i.e. playoffs).

Here is your statistical proof, the career playoff statistics, with Wilt's stats first: PPG - 22.5; RPG - 24.5; APG - 4.2; Total points - 3,607; Total rebounds - 3,913; Total assists - 673; Most points in a playoff game - 56; Most points in a NBA Finals Game - 45.

Here are Jordan's: PPG - 33.4; RBP - 6.4; APG - 5.7; Total points - 5,987; Total rebounds - 1,152; Total assists - 1,022; Most points in a playoff game - 63; Most points in a NBA Finals Game - 55.

This doesn't even mention the fact that Jordan won 6 out of 6 NBA Finals that he was in, and Wilt won 2 of 6.

There is your statistical proof.

I think it's funny that you choose to state that Jordan was playing against Jeff Hornacek and Byron Scott, but you fail to mention that the Utah Jazz also had 2 of the 50 greatest on their team (John Stockton and Karl Malone). Also, to say that Jordan never faced difficult competition is preposterous. In his second year in the league, he faced the 1985-86 Boston Celtics in the playoffs (a team generally considered to be the best of Larry Bird's career and one of the best in the history of the NBA). He scored 63 points against one of the greatest teams in the history of the NBA.

Also, your statement that Wilt was asked by his coach to score less, if true, proves that Wilt had much better teammates than Jordan did. And if he was the greatest ever, why would his coach say, "Look, I know you're the greatest to ever play the game, but let's go ahead and give these other guys a chance at winning us a championship. I know they couldn't do it the last three times we asked them to, but it would be really nice if they could do this without you." That must have been the dumbest coach ever. Personally, if I had the greatest player in the history of the NBA, I would take advantage of that and let him go out there and destroy the other team, just as Phil Jackson allowed Jordan to do.

Regarding rebounds, if you cut his rebounds in half, his playoff stats are almost identical to Kevin Garnett's. Would you say Kevin Garnett is the greatest to ever play the game? Also, the reason people couldn't keep Dennis Rodman from getting rebounds is because he was a great rebounder. I don't see your point of comparing the two. They both were great rebounders, but a huge reason Wilt was so dominant at rebounding was because of the size advantage he had during his time. Put him in today's NBA and his numbers would be much closer to that of Kevin Garnett, who is a great player, but absolutely not the greatest.

This is a good article, but the only proof that Wilt supporters have in him being the greatest ever are his stats during his first few years in the league. Even some of the greatest players ever recognized Jordan as the greatest. Magic Johnson said, "There's Michael Jordan and then there is the rest of us."

After Jordan scored 63 against the great 1985-86 Celtics team in the playoffs, Larry Bird described Jordan as "God disguised as Michael Jordan.", and this was in Jordan's 2nd year in the league. His is quite obviously the greatest ever, and the other great players recognized this.

Mike, do you honestly think Wilt's rebounding numbers would not drop drastically in today's game with the size of the players and the new rules? Yes, Wilt may have played against Kareem and out-rebounded him, but Kareem was not a dominant rebounder. Larry Bird averaged nearly as many rebounds as Kareem. The rules back in Wilt's era made it very easy for big players to rack up rebounds. First, the key is wider now than it was during the beginning of Wilt's career, plus the three-point line has been added. Both of these factors would reduce Wilt's rebounds and points drastically. The wider key would not allow Wilt to camp so close to the basket, reducing both points and rebounds. The 3-point line makes for longer rebounds (allowing guards a chance to get the rebounds) reducing the number of rebounds Wilt would get. Also, the 3-point line would significantly reduce Wilt's scoring, as there is now a point to taking longer shots.

Obviously rebounding was much easier for big players back in Wilt's era, as Bill Russell (who stood only 6'9") averaged 22.5 RPG throughout his career.

If you put Jordan with all of the players in Wilt's era, Jordan's athleticism would make them look like fools. Yes, even in Jordan's era, Wilt would out-rebound and out-block Jordan, but those are the only stats he would have over Jordan, and that would only be because of his size. Jordan's basketball skills are WAY better than Wilt's Wilt was a man among boys more because of his size than his skill. Jordan was a man among boys because of his skill. Jordan is the better basketball player.

You really make some great points and take some perspectives that i did not consider before. I think you're also missing the point that Wilt was a flat out amazing athelete. A track and field star... So those that use Wilt's size against him imagine someone being Shawn Bradley's size (or the tallest in the NBA) having Dwight Howard's strength (the strongest) and being an agile, atheletic force that can average 48.5 mpg over a season.

A common rebutle i get when saying that Wilt was the greatest was people say that Wilt had 'weak' defenders and it was just easy for him. However with fewer teams that meant wilt would play russell 14 times in a season some years and try telling me that Russell was a 'weak' defender.

Also the fact that wilt had such a superior offensive effeciency, one year averaging 73% from the field.

Always, always people say that Jordan was great because he "won" Jordan never beat Larry Bird, Magic Johnson or Isiah Thomas... Jordan started winning when they were done, Jordan beat Shawn Kemp and Karl Malone...? Wilt was still able to beat amazing teams to win his titles, Jordan's era was one of the weakest in NBA history other than just prior to the Bucks championships with Jabbar and Oscar.

The "size" argument is still, in my opinion, the weakest argument of all time when putting into context Wilt's abilities.

Is anyone familiar with Walter Dukes? He was the first seven footer in NBA history, yet he never led the league in rebounding or scoring; why is that? He enjoyed a size advantage over all his opponents.

Is anyone familier with Harvey "Swede" Halbrook? He was a 7'3 giant, even towering over Wilt Chamberlain, but he never came close to leading the league in any major statistical category. His career high was 7 rpg. How can this be given his size advantage?

Some previous poster acknowledged that it was not only Wilt's size that made him great but also his skill. Ok, Kareem had a size advantage over many of his opponents, as well as skills, but still never dominated as thoroughly as Wilt, and I believe he has only ONE rebounding title on his resume.

You can use the "size," as well as the "size AND skill," rationale to detract from Wilt's accomplishments, but those arguments will not hold up as there are many examples of players who had a size advantage as well as a "size and skill" advantage over their counterparts, but they STILL could not dominate like Wilt.

Why is it that among the top 15 rebounders in NBA history, only four (Chamberlain, Abdul-Jabbar, Parish, & O'Neal) were 7 feet tall?

If rebounding is primarily a product of size, then how come Charles Barkley (6'5) led the NBA in rpg in 1987?

Even if we compare the rebounding prowess of Wilt and Rodman, relative to their peers, Wilt would still come out on top because Wilt led the NBA in rebounding 11 times, but Rodman only led the NBA 7 times.

It does not matter how many rebounders there were to be had in Wilt's era because he almost always led the league anyway.

One last factor to consider is that Wilt played an insane amount of minutes, which helped him tally such astronomical statistics. He averaged roughly 46 mpg. Playing those kinds of minutes, many players could be more productive. Dwight Howard is the best rebounder in the game today. In his career season, he averaged 14.2 rpg while only playing 38 mpg. Imagine how many more rebounds he could grab if he played 46+ mpg like Wilt.

If Wilt played in today's era, I don't think he would quite average 23 rpg, but I think 18 rpg would be a reasonable number when we take into account his skills as well as the number of minutes his body would allow him to play. He had AMAZING stamina, and he could pace himself quite well.

What next? Are Wilt detractors now going to hold his stamina against him? lol

If I make little sense, sorry its 5am and have yet to go to sleep. However, this statistical who is better is borderline absurd. Someone pointed out the astronomical rate that shots were jacked up in Wilt's era which aided his rebounding totals, I have not seen anyone mention the fact that there was not a rule against offensive goaltending while Wilt was throwing up 55 rebounds either. Taking that in to consideration, you can scratch a HUGE number of points and rebounds from him. Wilt was great, but was he as great as Jordan? no, wilt was compared to shaq several times in this and they should be. Both players never touched their potential in their era despite the gaudy stats. Had wilt care as much about winning as say russell (whom id also rank above wilt) would have have won more titles? Id venture to say yes. This is not a debate on who would be the best had they fully understood the game of basketball, its who was the best player. Wilt never would die to win a game, Jordan, Russell, Bird these guys would refuse to lose, Wilt stated in his book he almost preferred to lose because it was easier the next night as opposed to winning streaks. That is not a man I want playing for me. Ranking Wilt over the likes of those men would be like ranking Marino over Montana because of his stats. The west/baylor/Chamberlain trio never worked, sadly Baylor retired the year they won, but before then had you subtracted Wilt and inserted Russell would they have won more titles? Im leaning toward yes. Wilt was driven simply by stats, his assist years? he would CONSTANTLY pass up wide open layups to pass the ball off for the assist, watch clips, he did it more often than youd think. His streak without fouling out, should that be something to be proud of? Wilt would get his fourth foul and simply stop playing defense, as a coach I would rather see my player foul out playing smothering defense than do it for three quarters then become a Magic Johnson like defensive liability (for those throwing Magic in with the best ever debate, dont.... I could score on magic. For all that Wilt did was quite impressive, but by no means is he top two even of all time. I personally think hakeem olajuwon would have dominated that era to an extent that Wilt would have been an afterthought. It was also stated that Wilt would lead any era in rebounding, I very much see Moses Malone giving him fits in the late 70's early 80's this may be silly but I take the rebounding numbers from that era with a grain of salt, look at the top 100 single season rebounding totals...finding a person not from that era is harder than finding waldo. Wilt may have statistically dominated his era more than Jordan, but Jordan has the rings and like it or not, Wilt historically had better teams, he just couldnt beat russell. He would not dominate the current era either, he couldnt block Hakeem's fadeaway and most centers now can play 10-15 feet away from the basket, which wilt was not strong at doing it, he would either see a huge dip in rebounds or leave opposing centers open in hopes that they would miss in order to pad his stat fixation. Wilt was more or less the perfect storm, the right style of player in the right era, his career would not come close to replicating that had he started his career even 15 years later. Jordan on the other hand would have dominated any area. As much as people hate to admit it he would have a field day with jones, west, cooz, oscar, archibald, etc. the sheer athleticism difference would be enough. its not sheer luck that the average high jump is a foot higher now than it was in wilts era and that he had retired for nearly 10 years before someone broke a 10 second 100 meter, it is simply different eras. I am sure someone will simply start throwing stats at me again and thats fine, but if you honestly dont think shaq, or Hakeem would drop 40 every night if they played against a bunch of slow white guys, then I dont know that God himself could change your mind.

oh and since in threw in more names than just wilt and jordan... ill just throw in my top 5:

Jordan

Russell (knock his offense, but the man more or less played point guard from the center position, think John Stockton playing center)

Bird

olajuwon (knock this all you want, but the man did things that hasnt been done or will be done at the center position)

Kareem/Wilt hard to pick on this, kareem was a much better passer, but Wilt was better defensively. toss up to me.

It has nothing to do with any levels of admiration for shaq, he is by no means on my list for elite centers, but to me he is most like wilt. Wilt was athletic for his time, but I mentioned the comparison to Hakeem simply because there never has been a center with his athletic ability, wilt included. You can argue this all you want to, but Hakeem was a soccer player before basketball, not many people have the footspeed and coordination required for soccer and oh yea happen to be 6'10. I use him as the example because he could DOMINATE games on offense or defense and could do it for four quarters. He always did what was best for his team, whether it be take the shot or pass the ball. Wilt never understood this... im sorry you can say he is the greatest all you want, but if im making a team, im taking hakeem, ill take russell, ill take a healthy walton becaue they all understood what was best to win, all wilt understood was what was best for himself. I dont hate or dislike the man, but all the talk about him being the best ever or better than russell, jordan need to stop. Wilt never willed his team to win, he never accepted responsibility for a loss and never cared enough to beat russell. You're running too much with stats man, if there are 2 minutes left in the game you can not tell me youd take Wilt over Russell, Bird, Jordan, Walton etc. Basketball was always a 5v5 game, not 1v1. Sure Wilt out scored russell, but was he a better player as for his team. You keep bringing up stats, assist, etc, the way they score assist has changed a million times and depending on the era depends on numbers, so the wilt assist numbers could very well just be again incorrect by todays standards much like his rebounding numbers. You mention jordans lack of passing, several of his defining moments were passing the ball, look at careers of players with versus without jordan, all of them experienced more success with jordan. Rodman went from being simply rebounding obsessed to once again committing to complete defense. And again, list all the stats you want but russell and jordan simply won. Wilt one A championship as the main guy, the lakers were west team. Much how a baseball player generally doesnt win mvp on a losing team, I cant say Wilt is the best when Russells Celtics beat his teams head in year after year after year. you can say Boston had more talent etc but look, of the 11 years, boston was better 5 times, 1-2 were a coinflip and wilt had the better team 5 times. It was always close, Russell just wanted it more. That being said, I can not put Wilt in the same boat as your birds, russells, jordans. they would win and want more wilt would win and wonder how many flight attendants the title trophy would bring him in. To be the best you have to win, and Wilt never had it in him.

I think the entire idea of this is that you arent going to change your mind nor is many of those posting. While I never say wilt play (Im 29, huge shocker) I actually had my father read this post who watched both players throughout their careers. Oddly he did not agree with me on the Jordan being the best ever, (he did rank him above wilt by a HUGE margin) He considered Russell the best ever for the same reasons I rank him above wilt. He made his teammates better. I am sure you will disagree with this to the end as from what I saw you are a die hard Kansas fan, so big shocker there youre going to pull for wilt being that he was a Jayhawk, but if you are going to insist he was the best ever, explain why there is not a single player from that era that would pick wilt over russell as a teammate. This is not stretching things, this is fact. If you read quotes from his peers wilt was thought of as a loser, a whiner, and selfish player who was unwelcome in many cities as a player. If you can explain why someone would pass up the "greatest player to lace up shoes" to play with a great defender with no offensive skills as you put it, then please enlighten me. As far as your comparing wilt to several players, my reasoning for that is wilt barely if at all breaks the top five. You can have all the skills in the world, but if you dont have the drive and desire, youre just another talented ball player. Your need to use stats as your motivation. Fact was, where was wilt when they needed him to win? He was hiding, he was terrified to have the ball when it mattered and to me that alone removes him from the top spot. And lastly, your assist comment, totally wrong, were assist given more freely in 1970 than say the mid 90's where mark jackson of all people were throwing up assist at a record rate, well no. it was easier but jordan played just as many seasons in the 80's as the 90's where they were far more strict with the rule. With your arguements, Tiny Archibald is the best ever as he lead the league in points AND assist in the same season, so might as well hand him the crown. Fact is Wilt had more than enough supporting cast to win it all and with the exception of one year could not beat russell. You can claim better teammates, but first, if wilt was THAT great, they still would have won, if you both made the finals, the team with the better BEST player generally wins, but MJ had one other top 50 player and with the exception of seattle he always played the team with just as many on the list. You claim detroit was too old, but come on man, they were just removed from a title then got straight swept out of the playoffs, NO ONE declines that fast. Jordan just beat them, this happened several times when it counted, knicks, pacers, pistons lakers, Jordan simply played out of his mind to get the win. Wilt simply hid in the stands because he did not want the loss to fall on his shoulders, jordan embraced it, russell wanted it, bird, thrived off of it. That is why wilt is not in my starting five nor in anyone who understands how to win a basketball game.

This fellow Ryan seems to be saying Bill Russell's teammates were not better than Wilt Chamberlain's. He obviously did not watch those teams.

I copied this from an Inside Hoops blog, but it is readily available all over the internet for anyone willing to do a little research.

Unfortunately, Ryan's point of view about the respective merits of Russell's teammates vs. Wilt's, is false.

I have shown only the complete top 20 NBA players for the first season, 59-60... other years focus only on Wilt & Russell's teams.

1959-60 NBA Expanded Leaders

Player Efficiency Rating

1. Wilt Chamberlain*-PHW 28.0

2. Elgin Baylor*-MNL 25.2

3. Bob Pettit*-STL 23.7

4. Clyde Lovellette*-STL 23.3

5. Cliff Hagan*-STL 22.0

6. Kenny Sears-NYK 21.8

7. Richie Guerin-NYK 21.4

8. Jack Twyman*-CIN 21.1

9. Dolph Schayes*-SYR 20.5

10. Bill Russell*-BOS 20.1

11. Willie Naulls-NYK 20.0

12. Bob Cousy*-BOS 18.7

13. Bill Sharman*-BOS 18.5

14. Tom Heinsohn*-BOS 18.4

15. George Yardley*-SYR 18.2

16. Bailey Howell*-DET 18.1

17. Paul Arizin*-PHW 17.2

18. Red Kerr-SYR 15.7

19. Larry Costello-SYR 15.6

20. Gene Shue-DET

Wilt 2, Russell 4

1960-61 NBA Expanded Leaders

Player Efficiency Rating

2. Wilt Chamberlain*-PHW 27.8

11. Tom Heinsohn*-BOS 18.4

12. Bill Russell*-BOS 18.1

14. Sam Jones*-BOS 17.7

15. Bob Cousy*-BOS 17.4

17. Paul Arizin*-PHW 17.1

Wilt 2, Russell 4

1961-62 NBA Expanded Leaders

Player Efficiency Rating

1. Wilt Chamberlain*-PHW 31.8

8. Tom Heinsohn*-BOS 20.0

9. Bill Russell*-BOS 19.4

12. Bob Cousy*-BOS 18.3

14. Sam Jones*-BOS 17.9

It's Wilt vs. the Celtics.....

1962-63 NBA Expanded Leaders

Player Efficiency Rating

1. Wilt Chamberlain*-SFW 31.8

9. Sam Jones*-BOS 19.1

12. Tom Heinsohn*-BOS 18.8

14. Bill Russell*-BOS 18.2

18. Bob Cousy*-BOS 16.6

20. John Havlicek*-BOS 15.4

It's Wilt vs. the Celtics....

1963-64 NBA Expanded Leaders

Player Efficiency Rating

1. Wilt Chamberlain*-SFW 31.6

9. Bill Russell*-BOS 19.3

13. Sam Jones*-BOS 17.7

15. Tom Heinsohn*-BOS 17.0

18. John Havlicek*-BOS 16.9

It's Wilt vs. the Celtics....

1964-65 NBA Expanded Leaders

Player Efficiency Rating

1. Wilt Chamberlain*-TOT 28.6

6. Sam Jones*-BOS 20.7

8. Bill Russell*-BOS 19.5

16. Nate Thurmond*-SFW 16.5

18. John Havlicek*-BOS 16.3

Wilt 2, Russell 3 (wasn't Nate a rookie?)

1965-66 NBA Expanded Leaders

Player Efficiency Rating

1. Wilt Chamberlain*-PHI 28.3

4. Sam Jones*-BOS 21.7

11. Bill Russell*-BOS 17.3

15. John Havlicek*-BOS 16.7

19. Hal Greer*-PHI 15.9

20. Billy Cunningham*-PHI 15.7

Wilt 3, Russell 3 this was the year Wilt was traded to to the 76ers, in the most important trade in NBA history. The $150,000 + players that the Warriors received literally saved the Warrior franchise from bankruptcy. It should be noted that the 76ers moved from Syracuse, and the Nationals were a team Chamberlain loathed for their dirty play.

1966-67 NBA Expanded Leaders

Player Efficiency Rating

1. Wilt Chamberlain*-PHI 26.5

7. Bailey Howell*-BOS 19.5

8. Billy Cunningham*-PHI 19.3

9. John Havlicek*-BOS 19.2

10. Bill Russell*-BOS 18.6

11. Sam Jones*-BOS 18.5

14. Chet Walker-PHI 17.9

Wilt 3, Russell 4

Wilt finally had a great coach, so his team won.

1967-68 NBA Expanded Leaders

Player Efficiency Rating

1. Wilt Chamberlain*-PHI 24.7

13. Billy Cunningham*-PHI 18.6

15. Sam Jones*-BOS 18.3

16. Bailey Howell*-BOS 18.1

17. John Havlicek*-BOS 17.7

Wilt 2, Russell 3

Playoffs? Billy Cunningham broke his arm. {A similar recent injury people who never saw Chamberlain might know about, was last year's knee injury to Kendrick Perkins. Did that have an impact on the 2010 Finals going into G7?} Luke Jackson was limited minutes with a hamstring, and was not a lot of help. Hal Greer had hamstring problems too and was hobbled. 1968 was the heartbreaker in Philly because all season long the Sixers were just dynamite, but injuries stopped that team cold. Nobody expected Philly to win that series with all those players out, but since people never even watched those games, sorry to be blunt, they don't know what they're talking about.

There's no way anyone who has looked at these teams - let alone watched them - can say Wilt's teams were as strong as the Celtics. 1 single year he had a better team in the playoffs, and a coach that could do something with talent.

I'm not sure why this discussion is even necessary. Anyone who knows anything about professional basketball knows that Jordan isn't qualified to carry Wilt's jockstrap. Chamberlain did whatever he wanted to do on a basketball court. One example: after winning yet another scoring and rebounding title, some smart-arse reporter joked to Wilt that he'd never led the league in assists. What did Chamberlain do? He went out the following year and led the league in assists (of course), the only time in history that a player other than a guard has done this. Jordan couldn't even dream of doing this, let alone attempt it, let alone accomplish it. He just wasn't a good enough player. The only thing Jordan coud do better than Wilt was shoot free throws; whoop-de-freakin'-do! The fewest number of minutes that Wilt averaged for an entire season during his career is still more than the most minutes Jordan ever averaged for an entire season during his career. Jordan just didn't have the stamina (aka "balls") to play that many minutes. Wilt's career scoring average would be a lot higher if he hadn't purposefully reduced his scoring output when he joined the Lakers, but then he was joining a team with HOF'ers Baylor, West and Goodrich, so he wasn't needed as much in that department as he was when he was with the Warriors and 76ers (though he did have some huge scoring games with LA, and again, whenever he felt like it).

But forget about hoops for a minute; Wilt's track and field accomplishments were also legendary. Here's a sample: "Wilt took up his first love of track and field at the University of Kansas in Lawrence, Kansas while also playing basketball there. The 7'2" goliath ran a sub 11 second 100 yard dash and also threw the shot put 56 feet. Despite competing and excelling in both sprinting and throwing his best events were not surprisingly the jumping events as Chamberlain triple jumped in excess of 50 feet and successfully won the Big 8 Conference high jumping competition three years in a row. In the world of track and field it is an extraordinarily rare athlete that can compete at the highest level in the shortest sprints, all the jumping events, and the throwing events. This dynamic collection of talents is so rare in fact that Wilt might be the only man ever to possess this unique skill set."

Wilt could also "flagpole" his 7'2" frame, i.e. bring his entire body up to a 90 degree angle, and hold it there, while holding on to a pole with his hands. I would pay money to see Jordan attempt that while in his prime; that would be hilarious.

I could go on (and on, and on, and on, and on...), but I think the point has been made. Jordan was a very good guard, possibly the third best guard that ever played the game after "The Big O" and Kobe. But Wilt? No one is at that level but him.

Mike. This is directed at your comment about Wilt's coach not putting him back into a game 7. If I am thinking of the same game 7, Wilt pulled himself out of the game due to an injury. His team then began making a run and closing the gap on the other team.

Mike I think that's not entirely correct about that chump van breda kopf. He coached the Pistons for a year or two I think, but he definitely coached the Suns, because I remember Bill Russell as an announcer saying dummKopf almost certainly cost Wilt that '69 championship by pulling him out of the game because the Celtics were out of gas. DummKopf was fired by the Suns.

Russell also ruined his friendship with Chamberlain after that game with his snide remarks about the injury (which was in fact a ruined knee that caused Wilt to miss the next season), and he definitely hurt his relationship with the Celtics too, when he retired abruptly without telling Auerbach. I've always thought he retired because he couldn't face the thought of Chamberlain AND Jabbar the next season. Red drafted the great JoJo White, thinking he didn't have to worry about a center.... they were fortunate though to get Dave Cowens, one of the all time best Cs.

Russell was such a great player, I was glad to see him honored by the President recently. If there is anyone who deserves that award as much, it would be Muhammad Ali who stood defiantly before the government and said we got no quarrel with those Viet Cong.

Great athletes, great men, all those guys were.

Good day, Mike. Just wanted to pick your brain with some questions, and give my personal views. When comparing Wilt vs. MJ, many people like to emphasize Jordan's "competitive drive" and "will to win." Personally, I will admit that Jordan probably had Wilt beaten in the area of fiery competitiveness. However, do you believe that argument is valid enough to give Jordan the nod over Wilt?

I personally have Wilt as # 1 on my all-time list, but in review of his career, I think he had more of a mentality that he wanted to win, but if he didn't, he was content with giving it his best. I gathered this after reading a couple of his books. For some people, this is enough to say, "see, he didn't have the drive of a Russell or Jordan; therefore, he can't be 'better' than them."

One of the personal knocks I have against Wilt is that I think he was too sensitive to criticism. Whenever the media said he couldn't do something, or questioned his all-around game, he set out to prove them wrong. Was it to the detriment of the team? I am not sure. He led the league in assists in 1968, but some people felt that was more important to him than winning. I am not sure if I agree, but I do know that the year he accomplished this feat, the 76ers finished the regular season with the best record, if I am not mistaken.

Do you believe Wilt was a "selfish" player who placed personal accomplishments ahead of winning? This is the universal knock I hear on Wilt. Your opinions to my questions/comments will be appreciated.

Late comment...

Disclaimer: I watched MJ's entire career. I only recall the end of Wilt's, supposedly past his prime.

It may surprise you then that I am awestruck by Wilt. I have been reading the comments, and I can't believe commentators who would question his defensive prowess. Even in his "past prime" years the man was incredible. I would agree that 6-8 blocks were normal for Wilt, and may even be an understatement, it certainly seemed that way watching him on TV. I once remembe a playoff game where Wilt blocked one of Kareem's "sky hooks"(!!!)

To give you an idea of the man's athleticism, and his defensive prowess, I recall a story of an informal pickup game played with Magic Johnson and several other NBA players with Wilt, then in his 40s. Early in the game there was a ticky-tack foul called on Wilt, and Wilt responded with: "OK, that means from here on out, no one's gonna score". Wilt then proceeded to dominate the area around the basket, blocking shot after shot after shot, to demonstrate his point. This was by a man *in his 40s* playing against current professionals *in their 20s*. Imagine him in his prime!

Lastly, about the "he didn't win enough championships" accusation: I'm sorry, but in all team sports measuring athletes by the number of championships they won is a highly questionable standard. Some of the greatest players never get the chance, while some greats "only" win one. Wilt won two, and two championships are generally considered good enough in most other sports. Bill Russell, who is most often portrayed as Wilt's nemesis and the victories by his Celtics are most often cited as why Chamberlain wasn't truly "great", differs with this opinion. Russell unequivocably calls Chamberlain "the best center who ever played" and moreover adds "People say I beat Wilt. But I never beat Wilt. My team beat his team because we had the better team". Russell also says that Chamberlain was "the most intelligent player he ever faced" and that "unlike some people, who you could figure out, Wilt never played you the same way twice".

Great hub I really enjoyed your opinion on the subject even though I am not a person who believes in the term "Greatest of All-Time". We all forget about the rule changes that have taken place from the time Wilt played unti now. I remember reading an article where Bill Russel said he used to wrestle Wilt under the basket for positioning. If he did that now a days they would call a foul on him. I never was able to see Wilt play other than in old clips on ESPN, youtube, or dvd's but with the rule changes he would have a tough time defending a guy like Shaq, David Robinson, The Dream, or Ewing I am not saying they would dominate him I am just saying they all play the game differently then the way any of the guys he played against played. Let's face it you can't teach a guy to be 7 feet 2 inches tall 350 pounds Shaq was a freak of nature who will give any all time greats fits. Wilt is a great player one of the all-time greats unfortunately for him and Jordan becuase they can not play the great players from all era's in their prime you can not name any one the "Greatest Player" because it is just an opinion to each individual which has no meaning to anyone else.

Juice76, I do agree that no one player can make an outright claim to being the "greatest player ever," but I believe there is something to be said about a player who is so great that rules had to be changed to mitigate his dominance. Such was the case with Wilt. Jordan, on the other hand, was the beneficiary of rules which enhanced his abilities and inflated his statistics. For instance, from 1995-97, the league moved in the 3-pt line to help generate more scoring. If you take a look at Jordan's 3-pt shooting in 95, 96, & 97, he posted his best 3-pt shooting percentages of his career. Apart from those seasons, Jordan, for the most part, was a lousy perimeter shooter. Actually, if you discard his 3-pt shooting in those years, Jordan shot 29% from the 3-pt line for his career -- terrible.

If anything, since the days of Wilt and Russell, the rules that have changed have made the game easier . The NBA today is not nearly as physical, and superstars receive more preferential treatment from the officials. I actually read that the league allowed Wilt to receive excessive physical punishment as a means of curtailing his dominance; this nearly forced Wilt into early retirement. In today's game, he would be protected which could help him dominate more.

I honestly don't think Wilt would have a problem in today's league against Shaq. While it is true that Wilt would have his hands full against a physical specimen like Shaq, Shaq would also have a problem with Wilt. Whenever you hear Russell talk about his bouts against Wilt, he always mentioned Wilt's "intelligence" as much as his physical abilities. I think Wilt would outsmart Shaq, and his skill level and athleticism will force Shaq to play at a level to which he was never accustomed to playing. Shaq was not really the type to outsmart an opponent; he mainly just threw his weight around and knocked them back. What would Shaq do when he tries to body Wilt in the paint, and he realizes he can't move him? Shaq was big, but Wilt was pure muscle. What will Shaq do when he goes up for a shot, and Wilt knocks the ball into the cheap seats? What will Shaq do when Wilt hits one fadeaway jumper after another, and there is nothing he can do about it? I think Wilt would enjoy the challenge of facing Shaq, and Wilt would prove to the world that even in Shaq's era, Wilt would still be the biggest fish in the pond.

I agree with you that Wilt was great....but what makes Jordan the best is not just about the scores and his stats... But he made Basketball the best sport in the World. Try to talk to guys who loves to watch and play hockey and tennis about Basketball? And they would tell you Jordan made them aware that there is Basketball. That is something Wilt did not have... Jordan puts the game above the level of most sports audiences...that's is spectacular achievement...that made him a legend.

I think Jordan was the beneficiary of sports media coverage that the likes of Wilt, Russell, Oscar, Baylor, West, etc. did not have. I think these players, in some ways, were just as talented as MJ, if not more.

The league and media bent over backwards to promote Jordan and his talents. Sometimes, I wonder if Jordan would still be considered "the greatest" if he played in the NBA pre-1980.

Regarding assists, although Jordan was a guard, he rarely brought the ball up the court. When he did play point guard consistently when John Paxson got hurt in 1989, he had 10 out of 11 games with triple doubles.

Obviously, you are correct that Wilt did not bring the ball up the court. However, without a 3-point line, the game revolved around big men (why take long shots when they're worth the same as dunks?). This meant Wilt was likely to touch the ball nearly every time down the court, meaning he is more likely to get assists. Look at Bill Russell's assist average. He averaged 4.3 APG during the regular season compared to Wilt's 4.4 APG. In the playoffs, Russell averaged 4.7 APG compared to Wilt's 4.2 APG. Obviously, it was a completely different game back then that almost completely revolved around getting the center the ball. This makes Wilt's assist average much less impressive (although still impressive).

Regarding rebounds, the lack of a 3-point line made players more likely to take shots closer to the basket, which creates shorter rebounds (i.e. easier for big men that camp next to the basket to get rebounds). I'm not saying Wilt's

Another interesting fact is that once the NBA widened the lane from 12 feet to 16 feet, Wilt did not average 30 or more PPG in a season for the rest of his career.

Also, you mention the fact that Jordan did not play against as many of the 50 greatest players. The reason so many of the 50 greatest came from Wilt's era is because it's much more difficult to name someone as one of the 50 greatest that has ever played when their careers are not complete. Even if you don't agree with this, here's another thought for you. How many of the 50 greatest players did Michael play WITH? How many did Wilt play WITH?

Thanks for this article and the resulting discussions Mike. Has helped me a lot for my speech "Wilt Chamberlain is the best basketball player of all-time: :D

What makes you think that Jordan played in the league during one of its weakest points ever? The top 10 teams in NBA history were also named at the same time that the 50 greatest players were named. Of those top 10 teams, Jordan and Wilt were each on two teams. Of the remaining 6 teams, Wilt played against 2 and Jordan played against 3.

Also, Jordan had a scoring record that not even Wilt could touch, and it was against one of the top 10 teams in NBA history. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about... 63 points in a playoff game against the 1985-86 Celtics. And that was a Celtics team with 4 of the 50 greatest players ever, and 5 hall of famers. Not even Wilt - the most dominant scorer ever (in the regular season) - could touch that record. The closest he got in the playoffs was 56 against a team with only 1 of the 50 greatest.

As a baskeball journalist of 35 years and a basketball fan of 47 years I have met or seen play all of the greatest players in the modern era of the game. Without a doubt Wilt was the most dominant player in NBA history. Forget the facts and stats. Watch him play. Nohing comes close. End of story

Curtis, I respect your opinion on this. Obviously you have a lot of experience and credentials, and I would not necessarily disagree with you that Wilt may have been the most dominant player in NBA history... at times (i.e. regular season). It is obvious that he was extremely dominant during the regular season. The games in which he dominated, he did in more impressive fashion than possibly anyone. That's obvious with games such as his 100 point game, or his 55 rebound game... However, I do not believe this makes him the greatest basketball player to ever play the game. If he would have done those same things in the playoffs, then I would completely agree with you that he was the greatest ever. However, he didn't do that in the playoffs. His numbers dropped off significantly in the playoffs, when his team needed him the most.

Like I said, I respect your opinion, but it's apparent that we have different ideas about what makes someone the greatest player ever. I'll agree that Wilt was the most dominant regular season player ever. But I don't believe that makes him the greatest ever.

Interesting that nobody catches the huge flaw in their own argument about Jordan and the "modern" NBA.

If the 90s-00s were so much harder than the 60s, just how did Jordan score so many points? How did Kobe Bryant just pass the 60s greatest guard (Oscar) on the all-time scoring list?

There is no logic in calling Jordan's era harder when not only did Jordan score more than any 60s era player....... HE DIDN'T EVEN LEAD SCORING IN HIS OWN ERA!!!

Karl Malone outscored Jordan by 5,000 points in that so-called harder era.

Another fact: NBA scoring leaders, year in, year out, average 28-35 points per game.

1962

1. Wilt Chamberlain*-PHW 50.4

2. Walt Bellamy*-CHP 31.6

3. Bob Pettit*-STL 31.1

4. Jerry West*-LAL 30.8

5. Oscar Robertson*-CIN 30.8

Bellamy, Pettit, West, Robertson - all scored at the same pace as the league leaders every year since 1955.

Check out 1992 for comparison

1. Michael Jordan*-CHI 30.1

2. Karl Malone*-UTA 28.0

3. Chris Mullin*-GSW 25.6

4. Clyde Drexler*-POR 25.0

5. Patrick Ewing*-NYK 24.0

Same level of scoring as 1962.

2002

1. Allen Iverson-PHI 31.4

2. Shaquille O'Neal-LAL 27.2

3. Paul Pierce-BOS 26.1

4. Tracy McGrady-ORL 25.6

5. Tim Duncan-SAS 25.5

Same level of scoring as 1962.

Pick ANY year, that elite level of scoring is the same 28-35 points per game.... from George Gervin to Bernard King to Kevin Durant.

Chamberlain not only scored more points than anyone in history that 1962 season, the margin of difference between his numbers and everyone else's is astronomical.

Naturally the game has changed over the years - fads come and go in basketball just like they do in everything else.

The fact remains.

The players in Chamberlain's era put up the same numbers as players from every other era, which makes arguments about era inane.

Have watched the NBA since 1967 and have met in person nearly all of the greatest players. As a journalist and historian of the game will have to concede that Wilt was indeed the greatest ever and would dominate the game today.

HoW can I say that I agree w you but I don't? 2 diff time periods and Wilt might ultimately be better Jordan was always and will always be the best in my book. Plus I was born and raised in Chicago if that helps. I am younger as well so I dont know to many of the older players. I barely got a chance to see MJ play. Much less Johnson, Larry Bird and Kareem and The Big Dipper the Great Wilt Chamberlain. Curtis agrees w you and he's watched the Nba before I was even thought of so I do agree Wilt is better but Jordan to me will always be the best and my fave for the above reasons. Maybe ill catch some games on espn classics and they'll change my mind. 100 point game tho! That is truly amazing! 55 rebounds! and a 5,000 assists. a career total of 31k points! Man either way they are both up there.

Great hub.

Watch this video, I actually think it exposes MJ as the most overrated player ever to play basketball.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53dn_D6FWBk&fea...

I know I've already commented on this forum, but I just don't understand how Jordan, a player of such limited ability, can be universally hailed as the "greatest player in NBA history." He didn't have the most impact in his team's W-L column like Wilt, Russell, Oscar, Bird, or Magic Johnson, and he certainly wasn't the most dominating player, especially compared to Wilt. He was an excellent, complete player, and his clutch ability was legendary.

He was a great player (he's in my top 5), but the "greatest player" he is not.

Mike, have you visited Air Judden's webpage? In addition to the arguments you make against MJ (which were very good), he also makes convincing, powerful arguments as to why Jordan was supremely overrated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4WZXiaDzyc

A must-watch Wilt Chamberlain video for anyone on the fence about him - rare footage and commentary

I agree completely!! Although I would say Russell is the greatest of all time for winning 11 titles. Chamberlain was dogged for being selfish and winning only 2 titles. But his numbers are so astonishing that no one comes close. 50 Point Games: Chamberlain 118, Jordan 38.

Chamberlain's rookie season of 38 PPG and 27 RBG is so far off the charts that no one is even in the same building. And that was as a rookie!!

I still have Wilt # 1 on my list. I might respect an argument for Russell being the best, but one would have to come with a much better argument than him having 11 rings. Winning is a TEAM accomplishment. Yes, I am aware of Russell's impact with the Celtics, but he didn't win those titles alone. I would have to see a very detailed argument in Russell's favor before I even begin to consider him as the best.

If rings are what seperates players, then Derek Fisher is better than John Stockton; Luc Longley is better than Patrick Ewing; Robert Horry is better than Karl Malone.

Mike, i am a huge mj fan and would argue he is the best in a mimute but reading this hub has actually changed my mind tremendously. I am only 17 and i am fascinated with wilts athletic capabilities. And people say wilt was too big for his era which is why he dominated? 7'1 and 275 is still a little bigger than many centers in the league today. Plus who else could 100 points in one game with the 3 point line existing? Clase closed

I must correct my mistake at the end of my post. He scored 100 points in a game WITHOU

T the three point line existing

Your argument for why him being much taller than most of the league is irrelevant doesn't really fly. You mention tall guys that played later and question why they didn't dominate, but the answer is simple. They weren't towering over the rest of the league like wilt did, they were playing against guys every night that were just as tall and just as athletic. Wilt was seven feet tall when being seven feet tall was a freakish thing. Half the league is guys 6'10" and over now. And most of the guards in the modern game are the height forwards used to be in his days.

He also had to be fed the ball while standing two feet from the rim to score. A lot of rules have changed since wilt's days. Because they realized what in idiotic advantage it gave somebody by just being tall under the old rules. He wasn't extraordinarily athletic or skilled he was just tall, and the rules of the time played to that strength. He would be about as dominant as Darko Milicic in today's NBA.

Lol Wilt was a track man and played 45.8mpg for his career but no matter how fit you are you're not going to play 42+ mpg and not over 44mpg in any single season in Today's NBA. When Making an argument for The Greatest player of All time- Michael Jordan.... There's No excuse you can say back. There are so many for Wilt and every other player. Wilt in the 60's could finger roll it over people's heads because EVERY SHOT WAS BADLY CONTESTED UNLESS IT'S WILT, RUSSELL OR THURMOND! So as for Yao Ming dominating and all that nonsense, he has heavier and better defenders to play against. So much more on why Wilt is not Better than many players!! He wasn't a Winner, he beat Russ Once Why didn't he do it again ? He had the same team!!

Mike,

Quick question. Of course, you and I both know that Wilt had the durability and stamina to play an exorbitant amount of minutes, but it has been said by some critics that coaches today wouldn't allow Wilt to play as many minutes as he did then. Do you necessarily believe this?

Personally, I think it would be foolish for any coach, with knowledge of Wilt's ability to play at an extremely high level, while playing so many minutes, to NOT entertain the thought of playing him a ton of minutes.

I don't know what I admire most,your writing or your patience with young nba fans many of whom where not even born when magic and larry entered the league.Someone can point out the fact that shaq "only" measured 6'11.75" in his bare feet but since players are now measured with their shoes on there is a misconception that todays players are taller.If Swede Halbrook,Red Kerr and Dolph Schayes where listed with todays shoes on they would probably list as 7'5",6'11"and 6'9",thats an imposing front line.If walter bell and Willis Reed where listed as today they would be 7'1" and 7'.0. Walter Dukes 7'1" or 7'2",Ray Felix 7"1''.Of course Wilt himself would measure 7'3" and come into a league that allows offensive players,like shaq,to bump there way closer to the basket,where defenders have to leave the paint after 3 seconds and with a landing zone for dunkers where no one could take a charge.Wilt would come into a league where none of its superstars can average 40 mpg.No Wilt would probably not average fifty,at least not every season.

Dude, do u even know that Wilt was one of the worst FT shooters ever???? He does not belong in the top 5, let alone be compared to Mike. People like u is the reaon I never tried crack.

Eric,

Nobody's denying that Wilt was a bad free throw shooter; he certainly had a weakness -- but so did M.J.

Do you even know that M.J. was a lousy 3-pt shooter? In his first four seasons, his 3-pt field goal shooting was under 20% in each season. Had the NBA not moved in the 3-pt line in 1994-97, (which btw, was the league's attempt to HELP players score more, and a rule from which Jordan greatly benefitted) Jordan would have shot around 29% from the 3-pt line for his career -- that is terrible. His career average of 33% is nothing to brag about either, as there were many perimeter shooters throughout league history who shot much better than that.

And don't talk to me about Jordan's seven 3-pters against the Blazers, as I could talk about Wilt making 28 of 32 free throws in his 100 point game.

Hi,

a guy who averages 22+ rebounds per game and had a 50+ point season.. there's just not much to say after that. oh wait, there is.. he has so many other stats to mention.

I have a different question. Has there been any other athlete to so completely dominate their sport?

I loved reading the comments and would like to add about the passing debate that Wilt led the league in passing in 67-68 with a league high 702 assists which means he ONCE LED THE LEAGUE IN ASSISTS!!!

One other thing as we know basketball is a team sport. How interesting when Wilt is finally on a great team not only does he win a championship, but he does so setting the NBA record for most consecutive wins with 33 straight wins. Not even the STACKED Miami Heat team has done this yet though they came CLOSE last season!!

Is just that time generation gap argument we grew up watching Michael Jordan, Bird, Magic etc...but it's awesome just reading about Wilt Chamberlain averaging 50 points per game and scoring 100 in one...whew!!!