G.O.A.T.: pick your greatest athlete of all time

[Prison Bitch]

With Tiger’s Masters win today, Twatter is asking if he’s the greatest athlete ever. This poll asks: name you greatest athlete you’ve seen. (So Jim Brown, Babe Ruth, Jesse Owens etc all off the table)

Use whatever criteria you wish. Can only pick one.

[ROYC75]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

The problem is that he wasn't even the best of his era. That was bill Russell, who owned wilt. There are tons of stat monsters in history who aren't even close to being in the GOAT conversation. Being a great athlete isn't just being the most talented. It's about knowing when and how to use them at the right time. Marino was a hell of a lot more gifted than Montana. Randy moss was a million times more gifted than Jerry Rice. But it's not even close which healthy player I'm taking in their prime. I just don't think wilt had the "I will slit your throat if you get in the way of winning" mentality you seem to see in Jordan or Gretzky.

THEN OBVIOUSLY NEVER SAW CHAMBERLAIN PLAY!

Wilt's team was centered around him, he had to score because he didn't have the better players around him as Russell did, who only had to play D, just get inside Wilts's head. Russell had the better players around him, reason for the championships.

Arguing that Russell was the better player than Wilt is foolish. Russell was great, he played great D and rebounded. He was never called upon to help his team win. To say Russell was better, he didn't play against Wilt's team each night to solidify your argument.

Wilt was, he was a more complete player. Below is the stats to compare the two Hall of Fame players.

Russell
Career
Games * Pts ** TRb's * Assist ** FG % ** FT% ** PER *** WS
*963 **15.1****22.5 *** 4.3 **44.0 ** 56.1 ***18.9 **163.5


Chamberlin
Career
Games * Pts ** TRb's * Assist ** FG % ** FT% ** PER *** WS
1045 **30.1****22.9 *** 4.4 **54.0 ** 51.1 ***26.1 **247.3

Wilt played 82 more games, the equivalent of 1 season
Wilt scored more points per game, twice as many.
Wilt had more rebounds, call this a push!
Wilt had more assist,call this a push!
Wilt shot 10% higher per game than Russell
Russell shot 5% higher on FT's-Somewhere,somebody bitching about FT's
Wilt had a higher PER by 7%, ****Player Efficiency Rating ****
Wilt had a higher WS by 83.8, ***** Win Shares *****

And some of you clowns want to argue who was the better overall player. Both players were Great rebounder's and played defense. Blocked shots were not kept early in there careers, but that would have been an awesome number for both.

Chamberlain was the more dominate player and it shows in these stats. The ultimate separation between the 2 was the PER and the WS. The career head to head stats would Wilt with the advantage if you want take the time to look them up.

Russell won more titles due to the players around him, NOT because he was the more dominate player night in/night out!

Think about this, you want to argue Russell was better because of Titles?
Larry Bird won 12 titles with the Celtics
Magic Johnson ( 4 ) Lebron James ( 3 ) Michael Jordan( 6 ) It basically takes these 3 players to equal the talent of Larry Bird ? Now come on, it's about titles, titles,and more titles! Right ?

No. You can not, you just can not always use the number of titles won as a gauge on who was the more dominate player in a sport I have shown you above. You simply can not, maybe sometimes,yes,but not always!

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I know what he means. And I disagree.

If you're talking about Bo Jackson or a Mike Trout... okay, maybe you've got an extraordinary athlete who wasn't blessed with a great team like Jeter or Kobe. Or maybe didn't get enough clutch situations to know how he'd deliver. These guys work hard, good IQ, good leaders and didn't pad their stats to prove their greatness. Ok, I get that.

I just can't in good conscience put a stat padder up there and then use stats as the basis for greatness. Randy Moss was great but took plays off all the time. Russell Westbrook plays hard all the time but has literally been caught putting his team in bad spots by chasing individual accomplishments. Great stats often come at the expense of team success. And great players often sacrifice great stats if it helps their team. Wilt's accomplishments arguably got in the way of being a better team. Sorry, if we're talking pure athletes... Bo is off the charts without hurting his team. I'm taking him every day over Wilt.

To me this is just bias. You've decided, without much proof, that Wilt was just a "stat padder", whatever the hell that means. You seem to imply Russell could have put up the same numbers as Wilt, but just chose not to. That has to be the biggest pile of horseshit I've ever heard. You compare Wilt to Westbrook, a player who has never won a Championship, to Wilt who won two and had the misfortune of playing against one of the great dynasties of all time.

What basis is it that Wilt held his team back? Its conjecture on your part because you can't reasonably assail the stats in any other meaningful way. I mean, this was a charge levied at him while he played. He responded that he did what the team needed him to do. If they needed him to pass the ball, he would have done that, but that is not what was asked of him. When he got challenged, he led the League in assists to show the fact he could do that too. When team's played Wilt's team, the team defended to limit Wilt. You couldn't do that to the Celtic teams. Then he gets criticized for "not showing up" instead of the other team successfully challenging the rest of the team to beat them.

But, somehow its Wilt's fault? He was selfish and just "padding stats" because there's never been another "stat padder" in history. Anybody could have streaks of 40, 50 and 60 point nights, they just don't out of deference to the team? I don't even understand how the makes sense to people. If we had lots of tape on Chamberlain and you could really go through it and showcase his "selfishness", then it might have some teeth. But we don't have that, so that write it off to "stat padding".

"He really only should have got 92 that night, that last 8 points was stat padding."

How does that not sound ridiculous? Like the 92 is something other players who stat pad do regularly as well.

[PAChiefsGuy]

Originally Posted by ROYC75

Wilt's team was centered around him, he had to score because he didn't have the better players around him as Russell did, who only had to play D, just get inside Wilts's head. Russell had the better players around him, reason for the championships.

Arguing that Russell was the better player than Wilt is foolish. Russell was great, he played great D and rebounded. He was never called upon to help his team win. To say Russell was better, he didn't play against Wilt's team each night to solidify your argument.

Wilt was, he was a more complete player. Below is the stats to compare the two Hall of Fame players.

Russell
Career
Games * Pts ** TRb's * Assist ** FG % ** FT% ** PER *** WS
*963 **15.1****22.5 *** 4.3 **44.0 ** 56.1 ***18.9 **163.5


Chamberlin
Career
Games * Pts ** TRb's * Assist ** FG % ** FT% ** PER *** WS
1045 **30.1****22.9 *** 4.4 **54.0 ** 51.1 ***26.1 **247.3

Wilt played 82 more games, the equivalent of 1 season
Wilt scored more points per game, twice as many.
Wilt had more rebounds, call this a push!
Wilt had more assist,call this a push!
Wilt shot 10% higher per game than Russell
Russell shot 5% higher on FT's-Somewhere,somebody bitching about FT's
Wilt had a higher PER by 7%, ****Player Efficiency Rating ****
Wilt had a higher WS by 83.8, ***** Win Shares *****

And some of you clowns want to argue who was the better overall player. Both players were Great rebounder's and played defense. Blocked shots were not kept early in there careers, but that would have been an awesome number for both.

Chamberlain was the more dominate player and it shows in these stats. The ultimate separation between the 2 was the PER and the WS. The career head to head stats would Wilt with the advantage if you want take the time to look them up.

Russell won more titles due to the players around him, NOT because he was the more dominate player night in/night out!

Think about this, you want to argue Russell was better because of Tittles?
Larry Bird won 12 titles with the Celtics
Magic Johnson ( 4 ) Lebron James ( 3 ) Michael Jordan( 6 ) It basically takes these 3 players to equal the talent of Larry Bird ? Now come on, it's about titles, titles,and more titles! Right ?

No. You can not, you just can not always use the number of titles won as a gauge on who was the more dominate player in a sport I have shown you above. You simply can not, maybe sometimes,yes,but not always!

Wilt had plenty of talent around him. He was a ball hog who only cared about scoring, stats and sleeping w women. It's one of the reasons he has only 2 Championships while Russell has 11.

Russell also has more MVPs than Wilt (5 to 4). You fantasy football lovers think everything is about stats. It isn't.

Bill Russell > Wilt

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by PAChiefsGuy

Explain why Russell won 5 MVP awards and Chamberlain 4 if Wilt was so much better then... MVP is an individual award if Wilt was that much better of a player id think he'd win more MVPs than Russell especially when you consider they played in the same era.

Are you really making the argument that team success has nothing to do with who wins the MVP?

Chamberlain was named All NBA First Team 7 times. Russell was named to it 3 times. I would say that is a better individual marker.

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by PAChiefsGuy

Wilt had plenty of talent around him. He was a ball hog who only cared about scoring, stats and sleeping w women. It's one of the reasons he has only 2 Championships while Russell has 11.

Russell also has more MVPs than Wilt (5 to 4). You fantasy football lovers think everything is about stats. It isn't.

Bill Russell > Wilt

We're not saying he was devoid of talent around him, just that the Celtics had the better firepower, Coach and organization. You never watched him play, how can you objectively call him a ball hog? The only non guard to ever win an Assists Title? Your argument is just based on bias.

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

LBJ is a choker

Statistically he's actually one of the clutchest players of all time. Elevates his game in both the playoffs and the Finals significantly.

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

LBJ is a choker

Myth. Statistically he's actually one of the clutchest players of all time. Elevates his game in both the playoffs and the Finals significantly.

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by Chiefaholic

Because head to head in their primes, Jordan would b****slap James all over the court.

Doubtful. There literally isn't a single aspect of the game of basketball that LeBron wasn't better than MJ at. He was an incredible physical force with the greatest basketball IQ the sport has ever seen.

[WhiteWhale]

I'd like to point out that Wilt and Russell played each other head to head in several championship series'.

Russell won more games and Wilt dominated the stat sheet. I mean head to head Wilt held Russell under 40% and outrebounded him.

Does anyone REALLY think the Celtics would have been a worse team with Wilt? Really?

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

We're not saying he was devoid of talent around him, just that the Celtics had the better firepower, Coach and organization. You never watched him play, how can you objectively call him a ball hog? The only non guard to ever win an Assists Title? Your argument is just based on bias.

Lol.

Wilt did that just to prove he could if he wanted.

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

Doubtful. There literally isn't a single aspect of the game of basketball that LeBron wasn't better than MJ at. He was an incredible physical force with the greatest basketball IQ the sport has ever seen.

How old are you?

Is Bron a better free throw shooter than MJ?

I can't think of any way this is true on defense.

I mean you can't even make those arguments at all.

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

Lol.

Wilt did that just to prove he could if he wanted.

Right, just like anyone could.

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

How old are you?

Old enough to have watched both of them play at their peaks. It isn't diminishing MJ to say that LeBron has had the better career. He simply has and that's only going to become even more obvious as he goes on to shatter his records due to his sheer longevity.

Is Bron a better free throw shooter than MJ?

No, I suppose you got me there.

I can't think of any way this is true on defense.

At LeBron's physical peak, this wasn't even close. Statistics bear it out too (1.9 DBPM to 1.1 DBPM). LeBron was one of the best defenders in the league.

[New World Order]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

Doubtful. There literally isn't a single aspect of the game of basketball that LeBron wasn't better than MJ at. He was an incredible physical force with the greatest basketball IQ the sport has ever seen.

How many scoring titles and first team all-defensive honors does Lebron have?

[Buehler445]

Wilt was flat filthy. If you look at pictures and the Little bit of film from the era he’s definitely not human. Got to be some sort of alien.

I think you have to throw in those idiot strongmen competition guys. That Thor abunchof****inglettersthatmakenosense dude that plays the mountain is the best one currently. Or that Magnus Samuelson dude that won it several times.

The current guys are really pretty agile. A bunch of them are basketball players that bulked up and just have ridiculous power and explosion. I saw a video of I think it was Brian Shaw that got on one of those rowing machines with the fan and literally tore it apart.

If you want to see insane athleticism look up Thor’s record breaking deadlift. His form isn’t even that good. He’s just ridiculous.

Jordan has to be on the list. It’s not sheer athleticism like wilt or whoever but what he did athletically within the confines of his game is special.

I honestly don’t think I could pick.