BuzzerBeater Forums

Woah there big boy. Relax. I never said he dunked it. I said dropped it in.

Completely relaxed! Just don't agree with you... at least, not completely. The caps were for emphasis (I wasn't yelling!). Sorry for any misunderstanding.
But perhaps you could chill a bit with the use of words like "foolishness" chief? I don't really like the implications there.

But anyway...
(haha... wiki - I get you!)
An "inbound pass from over the backboard" when applying as a shot wouldn't necessary mean a shot from directly above the backboard - it's generally applied as a simple shot (well... relative on the 'simple'!). The ability to do that would be inhuman. The top of a backboard is 13ft. Now, I've heard of guys touching the top of the backboard, but to be able to get a ball over the top of it would mean at least 15 ft. More, if you want to be able to actually see where you're shooting - as backboards weren't glass in those days.
And doing this would result in the very least some anecdotal evidence... and I've been able to find none.

Hehe... you're now putting words in my mouth! I didn't say "punish", I said "penalized" - and I was referring to your point on Kareem's longevity being the reason for his points total. Basically, I think that's unfair. As I pointed out, guy was a prolific scorer. To simply attribute it to longevity is unfair. Completely so. Actually... same with the fouls. Quite a few stories I've read on Kareem state that he was indeed a very physical player.
But no harm, no foul ('scuse the pun!).

On schools - I really think that it was irrelevant where Kareem played. You don't think he would have been the dominant player he was at a different school?

Saying Wilt never had the drive is foolishness? But I didn't say he didn't have drive, he just didn't have the drive that Kareem or Russell did. And that's true.
And to declare Russell a better athlete? On what basis? That's just as unfounded as... me declaring Kareem to have the better ability. Scoring-wise, true. But Russell's the superior defender.

Okay. Points taken, and I apologize for offending you with my vocabulary.
I say Russell was a better athlete because he ran a 49.6 440 and high jumped 6'9". I know all about Kareem's martial arts acumen, but I think Russell was a better all-round athlete.

Russell played at USF with KC Jones, so it wasn't exactly devoid of a supporting cast. Additionally, since when have smaller, Catholic universities not been able to compete in basketball?

Russell was great...but in any sport, when you have an 11 for 13 stretch, I think it may be more of an indication of lack of competition rather than greatness.

Wooden was great too...but would he have won 10 national titles in today college basketball environment?

Good points.

The lack of competition thing doesn't really fly with me as there was a guy named Chamberlain playing then, along with Jerry West, Oscar Robertson, ELgin Baylor, etc. Plus there were only 8 teams so there was very little dilution of talent. The difference was that nobody had ever played like Russell or Wilt up to that time.

Jordan won six in a row (with time off for baseball) and there was certainly plenty of competition.