Lakers

[FN Phat]

The letter reminds me of a grandpa sitting down with the children and laying down the law and the glory years. It helps that he is correct.

[il Padrino Ute]

DDD, thanks for posting that letter from Kareem to Pippen. Nothing that Kareem wrote there can be disputed, especially his comments about Chamberlain. MJ was a terrific player, but the NBA never changed the rules of the game in order to try to level the playing field - so to speak - for MJ's competition.

[Jacob]

DDD, thanks for posting that letter from Kareem to Pippen. Nothing that Kareem wrote there can be disputed, especially his comments about Chamberlain. MJ was a terrific player, but the NBA never changed the rules of the game in order to try to level the playing field - so to speak - for MJ's competition.

The NBA did change the rules to try to replicate what MJ did, because nobody could do it like him afterward i.e. hand check rules.

[TripletDaddy]

The NBA did change the rules to try to replicate what MJ did, because nobody could do it like him afterward i.e. hand check rules.

hand check rules?

how about banning the dunk entirely because of Kareem? That is a rule change.

[il Padrino Ute]

The NBA did change the rules to try to replicate what MJ did, because nobody could do it like him afterward i.e. hand check rules.

Offensive goaltending was not against the rules until Chamberlain came along. Nor was jumping from the line toward the basket when shooting free throws. The NBA also widened the lane in order to allow more room for players to be able to get inside Chamberlain to rebound.

If there is any rule that should have been changed during MJ's days, it would be pushing off. And that really never needed to be changed, but enforced. (That was for you, DDD).

[TripletDaddy]

Offensive goaltending was not against the rules until Chamberlain came along. Nor was jumping from the line toward the basket when shooting free throws. The NBA also widened the lane in order to allow more room for players to be able to get inside Chamberlain to rebound.

If there is any rule that should have been changed during MJ's days, it would be pushing off. And that really never needed to be changed, but enforced. (That was for you, DDD).

We now know Jacob must be younger than 30.

[Jacob]

Offensive goaltending was not against the rules until Chamberlain came along. Nor was jumping from the line toward the basket when shooting free throws. The NBA also widened the lane in order to allow more room for players to be able to get inside Chamberlain to rebound.

If there is any rule that should have been changed during MJ's days, it would be pushing off. And that really never needed to be changed, but enforced. (That was for you, DDD).

Are you suggesting that they wouldn't have made those rule changes but for Wilt? Nobody is going to argue that Wilt dominated his competition. But the question of who is the greatest player ever doesn't come down to when the goal-tending rule was instituted.

I'd suspect all reasonable people agree that Wilt wouldn't have dominated in the same fashion (51 points and 25 rebounds) if he played in MJ's NBA. They almost certainly would't have made those same rule changes you mentioned for Shaq et al.

[TripletDaddy]

Are you suggesting that they wouldn't have made those rule changes but for Wilt? Nobody is going to argue that Wilt dominated his competition. But the question of who is the greatest player ever doesn't come down to when the goal-tending rule was instituted.

I'd suspect all reasonable people agree that Wilt wouldn't have dominated in the same fashion (51 points and 25 rebounds) if he played in MJ's NBA. They almost certainly would't have made those same rule changes you mentioned for Shaq et al.

move along jacob. Your contributions to this discussion are not needed.

Go start a thread about how Allen Iverson is the greatest point guard of all time.

[il Padrino Ute]

Are you suggesting that they wouldn't have made those rule changes but for Wilt? Nobody is going to argue that Wilt dominated his competition. But the question of who is the greatest player ever doesn't come down to when the goal-tending rule was instituted.

I'd suspect all reasonable people agree that Wilt wouldn't have dominated in the same fashion (51 points and 25 rebounds) if he played in MJ's NBA. They almost certainly would't have made those same rule changes you mentioned for Shaq et al.

It seems you answered your question with your 2nd paragraph.

The greatest player criteria is so subjective, that it's almost impossible to find a way to do it, but it seems that it comes down to two criteria - domination of the competition and championships. MJ was the best player of my generation, but he never dominated the competition like Chamberlain did, nor did he win as many championships as Bill Russell did. It could be argued that both of those players were better than MJ.

Edit: I misunderstood your post. I would argue that Chamberlain would have dominated during MJ's days as he did, simply because he would have been playing against a diluted league. The teams in Wilt's days were deeper because of fewer teams.

[il Padrino Ute]

Go start a thread about how Allen Iverson is the greatest point guard of all time.

Please. Iverson wasn't even the best pure point guard.

[creekster]

Are you suggesting that they wouldn't have made those rule changes but for Wilt? Nobody is going to argue that Wilt dominated his competition. But the question of who is the greatest player ever doesn't come down to when the goal-tending rule was instituted.

I'd suspect all reasonable people agree that Wilt wouldn't have dominated in the same fashion (51 points and 25 rebounds) if he played in MJ's NBA. They almost certainly would't have made those same rule changes you mentioned for Shaq et al.

First, Kareem calls wilt out as the greatest scorer. He doesn't actually claim he was the greatest player ever. Second, no one, at least not int this thread, suggests that the only way to determine who is the greatest player ever is by looking at when and for what reason the goal tending rule was changed. But when looking at his objective numbers, adding this fact does give an appreciation for just how thoroughly he dominated his era. And comparing his numbers then to MJ's period is a little difficult because they played under different rules, remember? That said, I have no problem imagining Wilt tear up the league in the 80s and 90s.

[TripletDaddy]

It seems you answered your question with your 2nd paragraph.

The greatest player criteria is so subjective, that it's almost impossible to find a way to do it, but it seems that it comes down to two criteria - domination of the competition and championships. MJ was the best player of my generation, but he never dominated the competition like Chamberlain did, nor did he win as many championships as Bill Russell did. It could be argued that both of those players were better than MJ.

actual quote from Bill Russell, when asked what he thought about the Bulls' three-peat: "Not much."

[Eddie]

MJ led the league in scoring in consecutive seasons for 10 years but he did this in an NBA that eventually expanded into 30 teams vs. when Wilt played and there were only 8 teams.

This argument always bothers me.

If someone were to say "there were 10 teams last year, and now there are 20 teams" then I would get the watered down competition argument. But on the whole, this argument seems to ignore the fact that - the population of the USA has, in fact, increased over the past 40 years.

Even more incredibly, perhaps, the population of the world as a whole has increased over the past 40 years. Unbelievable! And players from other countries are MUCH more likely to come to the US to play than they were 40 years ago - so it isn't just a small increase in competition.

Why can't people just say "Wilt AVERAGED 50 and 25 per game. NO ONE has ever done that!" Why do people have to say the league is watered down? I don't buy that. I think that due to a number of factors, there are more kids playing more organized sports at a much higher rate than ever before - leading to a pretty good pool of potential players.

This doesn't mean I don't think that Wilt was amazing. I think he would be pretty good in today's NBA. That said - I would laugh at Kareem if he suggested that Wilt would score and rebound even MORE in Today's NBA - because the league is watered down now, you know...

[il Padrino Ute]

actual quote from Bill Russell, when asked what he thought about the Bulls' three-peat: "Not much."

Spoken like someone who won 8 straight titles.

[il Padrino Ute]

This argument always bothers me.

If someone were to say "there were 10 teams last year, and now there are 20 teams" then I would get the watered down competition argument. But on the whole, this argument seems to ignore the fact that - the population of the USA has, in fact, increased over the past 40 years.

Even more incredibly, perhaps, the population of the world as a whole has increased over the past 40 years. Unbelievable! And players from other countries are MUCH more likely to come to the US to play than they were 40 years ago - so it isn't just a small increase in competition.

Why can't people just say "Wilt AVERAGED 50 and 25 per game. NO ONE has ever done that!" Why do people have to say the league is watered down? I don't buy that. I think that due to a number of factors, there are more kids playing more organized sports at a much higher rate than ever before - leading to a pretty good pool of potential players.

This doesn't mean I don't think that Wilt was amazing. I think he would be pretty good in today's NBA. That said - I would laugh at Kareem if he suggested that Wilt would score and rebound even MORE in Today's NBA - because the league is watered down now, you know...

But the leagues is watered down. How much better would the teams all be if there were only 8 teams in the NBA today?