Wilt Chamberlain Really Was Better Than Michael Jordan!

The pace of the game, which is well quantified on the basketballreference website, was MUCH higher in Wilt's day than it was in Jordan's. Take both Wilt's and MJ's most productive seasons in terms of scoring - 61/62 for Wilt when he dropped 50 per game and 86/87 for MJ when he dropped 37 per game. Wilt's Warriors team had a pace rating of 131.1 compared to the Bulls rating of 95.8. That's a whopping 36.8% difference. If we use that number to normalize the playing field then Wilt's scoring average drops to 36.8ppg if he were playing in 86/87, or conversely MJ's goes up to 50.8ppg if he were strutting his stuff in 61/62.

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!!!

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!!

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!!!

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!!

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.

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

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 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.

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!!

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 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.

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...

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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".

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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!

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

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!

Michael Jordan > Wilt

The article is retarded.

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