In those games Wilt averaged 28.7 ppg and 28.7 rpg, Russell averaged 14.5ppg and 23.7rpg

Wilt's high game vs. Russell was 62, and he had six other 50+ point games against Russell . Russell's high game against Wilt was 37, and he had only two other 30+ point games against Wilt.

Wilt's record 55 rebound game was against Russell, and he had six other 40+ rebound games vs. Bill.
Russell only had one 40+ rebound night against Wilt.

Wilt's teams lost all 4 seventh games against Russell's Celtics... (Russell's Celtics were 10-0 in game 7s during his career).

The total margin of defeat in those four 7th games was nine points

(begin the teammate argument because head-to-head is a no-contest)

Russell was limited offensively, Wilt limitless. Now since I was right about the Russel/Wilt issue I'm just going to assume my memory is right about Jabbar/Cowens and not look it up. But you know what they say about assuming.

Established history says Russ beat Wilt. Of course Russ says he beat Wilt. Their matchup can be likened to Cowens/Jabbar, Daniels/Gilmore, or Reed/Wilt -- the smaller player beating the larger/stronger/more athletic man while racking up fewer pts/rebs/assists.

Now, do I necessarily swallow that story? No. I think the Sixties Celtics were a better team than Wilt's Warriors, & that the Seventies Celts/Pacers/Knicks were better teams than the Finals rivals they slew. But bucking established history shouldn't be done lightly. Dipper himself admitted that had he played on the Sixties Celtics they mightn't have meshed & won as often as Russell's clubs breathtakingly did.

Chemistry is as important as any aspect of hoops. Obviously, Michael Jordan needed Scottie Pippen in order for his clubs to post a .500 season, because MJ went oh-for-five w/out Scottie. The most "chemical" players I ever saw were Pippen, Russ, & Magic -- they could win games w/out scoring a point. Remember when Reggie Jackson's hip hit a throw to 2nd base & turned the '78 World Series around, allowing the Yanks to take four straight from LA? Jax said he deserved the MVP for that brilliant quick-thinking play, & he was right. But he didn't MVP in that Series because he didn't hit five HRs as he had in '77.

Put in context for the whippersnappers, Dirk Nowitzki mayn't've put up stats in the '011 Finals to outshine LBJ or Wade. But his team's gameplan was superior, for the slothful pace played nowadays. Had such a slow team as the Mavs been playing in 1986 they'd've been run off the floor by the quicker-thinking top clubs of that era.

Think about that statement's implications for a moment: Are those of us who are "white/Hispanic" somehow less biased than others who are red/yellow/black &/or non-Hispanic? O en otras palabras, nosotros los hispanos habriamos superado las ignorancias y debilidades mentales de los demas? Dudoso -- I don't think so.

Does the fact that white imported pro bkb players & Black imported Hispanic baseballers are starring in the USA somehow signify they hail from a "superior culture" than their white US-born brethren? Can the "cultures" of Venezuela, Dom Rep, Cuba, & Panama even be seriously called one & the same, thus superior? Or does each country have its own culture superior to that of US-born Afro-Americans?

Nope -- there's no superior culture at work. Nowitzki isn't of a Master Race that made his team beat LeBron's. He just outsmarted & outworked LBJ & the rest of the Heat. Pro bkb has classically been characterized by intelligence topping overreliance on physical skills aka athleticism. See Russ confounding Wilt, Cowens trouncing Jabbar, Walton whipping Dawkins, Hakeem shackling Shaq, etc. All those guys were obviously outstanding athletes, yet the better gameplan typically is what makes the ultimate difference. Of course the more bkb gets dumbed-down & micro-managed the less likely creatively intelligent players will win out.

There are Hispanics of African descent that you're trying to skim over in baseball. There are also Afro-Brazilians who dominate soccer (Pelé, Garrincha, Brazil in the 90s, and Brazil in the 2000s). I consider soccer more athletic than baseball too, which is much more static. Keith notice I've been trying to use words like "culture" instead of African-American or any specific minority. The point is a different culture of people dominate the top ten in basketball, soccer, baseball, track, etc., wherever athleticism is required.

Keith I am white-Hispanic (mestizo) for the record, so I'm not biased at all. I'm quite familiar with the demographics and history of Soccer and baseball. I haven't seen you bring up a single point to refute that a different culture of people dominate basketball, soccer, baseball, etc. at the very top. The only position not dominated by minorities is in the NFL at quarterback, where Quarterbacks are usually very immobile and precision based. Integration is much more natural and the numbers (demographic percentages) show it.

The modern era is superior because racism is much more uncommon, and the most important culture (minorities) is better represented. As I said anyone from any race or background can become a superstar. However the top ten, twenty, thirty lists in basketball are dominated by a different culture.

Best,
Fred

Given Wilt's high regard for high-fouling ballhawk/playmaker Guy Rodgers, who helped him average 50 ppg, picking the then-new-to-starting Stockton out of a crowd doesn't seem so odd. But in the interview Dipper quickly adds that Magic Johnson is "still my favorite."

I see Huevon (#144) has carried his cultural-primacy beliefs to their logical extension & made light of the achievements of Jackie Robinson & the rest of the pre-Civil Rights pioneers. Yet labelling integration "natural" in 2011 doesn't explain why the number of US-born Afro-Americans playing major-league baseball has halved over the past twenty years -- since about the time the disappearance of US-born Caucasian stars in the NBA became noticeable, as Sikma, Bird, Price, Mullins & then Stockton faded away, to be replaced by less-defensive-minded Smitses, Dirks, Drazens, Pejas, & Steve Nashes.

Integration isn't "natural" -- that's why civil rights legislation takes place. It either happens, or it doesn't, depending on lots of reasons. Certainly not some imagined greater enlightenment on the part of people in 2010, or 1990, or 1950.

I forgot to mention, I think you're indirectly bringing up chemistry. Definitely some skill-oriented players are better to pair up with. The core starts with the uber-athletic player though, and then you can worry about how to build around that guy.

It doesn't matter what culture dominated the past though, so their claims about superiority aren't comparable. The integrated era didn't begin until recently going by the demographics and US law. Only recent accomplishments have been attained in a fully accepting time. The league also looks more athletic, there's no big surprise really.

US history tells us that there wasn't a civil rights act until 1964. There's a reason for that, and it isn't because Jackie Robinson played in such a diverse and accepting time. His era should be downgraded and this era put on a higher plane, because integration is more natural now.

#131

This discussion is about GOAT-like superstars. Extreme Athleticism is rare actually, but common throughout the top players in the history of the NBA.

Use athletic markers like Free throw attempts and correlate that to WS/48. You'll see who dominates the list.... Extreme athleticism is the only thing that matters if you want to be GOAT.

#142

I remember reading a blog post here that said the 60's/50's were over-represented, going by era. The basketball Hall-Of-Fame is kind of a silly notion anyway, since it is so unscientific.