I'll throw forth a name: Wilt Chamberlain.
Wilt's statistical domination is well known: 100 points in a single game, 50 points per game in his amazing 1961/62 season. Nevertheless, I have for a long time thought that Wilt's career is overrated. Young fans will often speak in amazement at his numbers and ponder how anyone could be viewed as a better player given his statistical superiority. However, in my view his statistical domination is simply an illusion of the times in which he played. Let me explain.
If any of us were transported back to the 1960s the game of basketball would bear little resemblence to the game we know today. For years, fans and commentators applauded the Phoenix Suns for their 'seven seconds or less' offense but by the standards of 1961/62 those Suns teams would have been the slowest team in the league. Basketball for much of the 1960s was played at a pace that is today normally reserved for an All Star game. Statistically some players benefited massively from this and nobody moreso than Wilt Chamberlain.
Wilt's 1961/62 Warriors averaged almost 112 shots per game. To put that in perspective, in 2010/11 (the most recent full season) the average number of shots per game for each team was 81 shots - a difference of 31 shots per game. Consequently the average score for the Warriors was much higher in 1961/62 compared with the 2010/11 league average at 125.4 ppgs versus 99.6 points per game. The way the game was played then offered the perfect circumstances for inflated statistics and Wilt was not the only person to benefit - 1961/62 is, of course, the season that Oscar Robertson averaged his triple-double across the season.
So how impressive is Wilt's magical season in reality? Well he averaged 50.4 ppg, playing practically ever minute of every game, in a team that averaged 112 shots per game. The obvious comparison should be made against the greatest non-Wilt scoring season, which was Michael Jordan in 1986/87 when he averaged 37.1 ppg to become just the second player to score 3000 points in a season. Jordan averaged 37.1 ppg on a team that averaged 87 shots per game. However, Jordan 'only' played 40 minutes per game and so the team shot roughly 73 times while Jordan was on the court. If Wilt was playing at that slower pace, but still playing 48 minutes per game, he would have averaged 39.4 ppg. The difference is still over 2 points per game but that is largely due to the difference in minutes played - if Wilt was playing around 40 minutes per game, which would be far more normal in the 80s, he would have averaged around 33 points per game. Averaging 33 points per game is obviously outstanding but does not separate itself from other excellent scoring seasons by a variety of players. (By extension, if Jordan played every minute at the 1961/62 pace while scoring at his 1986/87 rate he would have averaged around 57 points per game).
The reality is that Wilt should never be regarded as the greatest player in the game and given how quickly his statical edge comes back to the pack when adjusted for pace and it becomes quickly evidence that he probably belongs near the bottom of a top 10 list. This is particularly true when you consider that his production fell sharply in the post-season when most of the greatest players excelled. Not to mention the quality of talent was incredibly low during the 1960s given the league was pre-dominantly white.
Obviously this type of simple analysis could be applied to other players from the 1960s. For this reason, I firmly believe that several players have had better 'all-round' seasons that Oscar Robertson's triple double season, including Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan and LeBron James. In addition, Kobe Bryant's 81 points is likely the most impressive single game scoring feat. For more, see: http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=1423.
Wilt's statistical domination is well known: 100 points in a single game, 50 points per game in his amazing 1961/62 season. Nevertheless, I have for a long time thought that Wilt's career is overrated. Young fans will often speak in amazement at his numbers and ponder how anyone could be viewed as a better player given his statistical superiority. However, in my view his statistical domination is simply an illusion of the times in which he played. Let me explain.
If any of us were transported back to the 1960s the game of basketball would bear little resemblence to the game we know today. For years, fans and commentators applauded the Phoenix Suns for their 'seven seconds or less' offense but by the standards of 1961/62 those Suns teams would have been the slowest team in the league. Basketball for much of the 1960s was played at a pace that is today normally reserved for an All Star game. Statistically some players benefited massively from this and nobody moreso than Wilt Chamberlain.
Wilt's 1961/62 Warriors averaged almost 112 shots per game. To put that in perspective, in 2010/11 (the most recent full season) the average number of shots per game for each team was 81 shots - a difference of 31 shots per game. Consequently the average score for the Warriors was much higher in 1961/62 compared with the 2010/11 league average at 125.4 ppgs versus 99.6 points per game. The way the game was played then offered the perfect circumstances for inflated statistics and Wilt was not the only person to benefit - 1961/62 is, of course, the season that Oscar Robertson averaged his triple-double across the season.
So how impressive is Wilt's magical season in reality? Well he averaged 50.4 ppg, playing practically ever minute of every game, in a team that averaged 112 shots per game. The obvious comparison should be made against the greatest non-Wilt scoring season, which was Michael Jordan in 1986/87 when he averaged 37.1 ppg to become just the second player to score 3000 points in a season. Jordan averaged 37.1 ppg on a team that averaged 87 shots per game. However, Jordan 'only' played 40 minutes per game and so the team shot roughly 73 times while Jordan was on the court. If Wilt was playing at that slower pace, but still playing 48 minutes per game, he would have averaged 39.4 ppg. The difference is still over 2 points per game but that is largely due to the difference in minutes played - if Wilt was playing around 40 minutes per game, which would be far more normal in the 80s, he would have averaged around 33 points per game. Averaging 33 points per game is obviously outstanding but does not separate itself from other excellent scoring seasons by a variety of players. (By extension, if Jordan played every minute at the 1961/62 pace while scoring at his 1986/87 rate he would have averaged around 57 points per game).
The reality is that Wilt should never be regarded as the greatest player in the game and given how quickly his statical edge comes back to the pack when adjusted for pace and it becomes quickly evidence that he probably belongs near the bottom of a top 10 list. This is particularly true when you consider that his production fell sharply in the post-season when most of the greatest players excelled. Not to mention the quality of talent was incredibly low during the 1960s given the league was pre-dominantly white.
Obviously this type of simple analysis could be applied to other players from the 1960s. For this reason, I firmly believe that several players have had better 'all-round' seasons that Oscar Robertson's triple double season, including Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan and LeBron James. In addition, Kobe Bryant's 81 points is likely the most impressive single game scoring feat. For more, see: http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=1423.
