A great game by Jaylen, no doubt about it. But not exactly dropping "half a Wilt".

Two things:

1. All Chamberlain's shots from the field in that 100 point game vs the Knicks were two pointers. The game was played in 1962, and Wilt retired in 1973, and the NBA did not adopt the three point shot until 1980. Brown made several threes in his 50-point game. Brown has had the advantage or good fortune to be playing in the era of the three point shot.

2. This was an overtime game, and Brown played in and scored in the overtime period. Wilt's 100 point game record was set in a regulation 48 minute game against the Knicks.

Another impressive (for him) stat from Wilt's game vs the Knicks was he made 28 out of 32 free throws, an .875 percentage. He shot FTs at only 0.613 for the season in 1962, and .only 511 for his NBA career.

Good history, SFCB! Yeah, I was making a smart aleck reference to 50 points without stating the number.

Your post made me think of Pete Maravich and his college stats:


"For his collegiate career, the 6'5" (1.96 m) guard averaged 44.2 points per game in 83 contests and led the NCAA in scoring for each of his three seasons.[11]

Maravich's long-standing collegiate scoring record is particularly notable when three factors are taken into account:

First, because of the NCAA rules that prohibited him from taking part in varsity competition during his first year as a student, Maravich was prevented from adding to his career record for a full quarter of his time at LSU. During this first year, Maravich scored 741 points in freshman competition.[10]

Second, Maravich played before the advent of the three-point line. This significant difference has raised speculation regarding just how much higher his records would be, given his long-range shooting ability and how such a component might have altered his play. Writing for ESPN.com, Bob Carter stated, "Though Maravich played before [...] the 3-point shot was established, he loved gunning from long range."[12] It has been reported that former LSU coach Dale Brown charted every shot Maravich scored and concluded that, if his shots from three-point range had been counted as three points, Maravich's average would have totaled 57 points per game.[13][14] And 12 Three Pointer per game.

Third, the shot clock had also not yet been instituted in NCAA play during Maravich's college career. (A time limit on ball possession speeds up play, mandates an additional number of field goal attempts, eliminates stalling, and increases the number of possessions throughout the game, all resulting in higher overall scoring.)" Wikipedia

I forgot that Pete was of Serbian ethnicity. As you know, there are many good Serbian players in today's game.



*I didn't realize there were so many guys in the 3000 points Club

List of NCAA Division I men's basketball career scoring leaders - Wikipedia


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NCAA_Division_I_men%27s_basketball_career_scoring_leaders

SFCityBear said:

---

A great game by Jaylen, no doubt about it. But not exactly dropping "half a Wilt".

Two things:

1. All Chamberlain's shots from the field in that 100 point game vs the Knicks were two pointers. The game was played in 1962, and Wilt retired in 1973, and the NBA did not adopt the three point shot until 1980. Brown made several threes in his 50-point game. Brown has had the advantage or good fortune to be playing in the era of the three point shot.

2. This was an overtime game, and Brown played in and scored in the overtime period. Wilt's 100 point game record was set in a regulation 48 minute game against the Knicks.

Another impressive (for him) stat from Wilt's game vs the Knicks was he made 28 out of 32 free throws, an .875 percentage. He shot FTs at only 0.613 for the season in 1962, and .only 511 for his NBA career.

---

if you're going to era adjust then you have to factor in that Wilt played in a time of way more possessions per game than exist today. Wilt's 100 point game was a 169-147 win. That's 316 points in a regulation game. The teams combined for 233 FGA and 93 FTA. If we assume 2 FTA = 1 possession that means 279 possessions in the game before counting turnovers (which don't appear to have been a recorded stat back then).

Jaylen's game was a 116-111 win for a total of 227 points. Wilt's game had 39% more scoring despite Jaylen's going to OT. The teams combined for 180 FGA and 55 FTA (again, despite the game going to OT). That's 207 possessions not counting turnovers. That's 35% more possessions.

If you adjust for pace (standardizing to Wilt's pace), Jaylen scored 67 while playing 2 less minutes than Wilt did. If you subtract 5 points for the 5 3s (making them 2s instead) that's 62. So still more than half a Wilt if you want to get into era adjustment stuff.

Or we can just appreciate that Jaylen had a big game without feeling the need to pump up Wilt.

Well, this is an NBA thread. Close enough:

" Kyrie Irving is expected to make his season debut Wednesday night in Indiana as a part-time Nets player, suiting up only for road games where his unvaccinated status doesn't break local mandates, Jeff writes.

Why it matters: Irving will be the NBA's first part-time player since 1962, when Chicago Zephyrs rookie Terry Dischinger balanced basketball and books a far different situation than the one Irving is in.

After being drafted, Dischinger an All-American out of Purdue and a 1960 Olympic gold medalist had one condition: The Zephyrs had to let him complete his chemical engineering degree.

He spent the first semester studying in Indiana on weekdays and joining the Zephyrs who became the Baltimore Bullets in 1963, and are now the Washington Wizards on weekends and holidays.

"One time after class I left Purdue at 4pm, taped my ankles in a cab and played that night in San Francisco," he recalled years later.

The part-time gig worked out quite well for Dischinger, who averaged 25.5 points, eight rebounds and three assists en route to an All-Star berth and Rookie of the Year honors, beating out John Havlicek.

The big picture: Dischinger made two more All-Star teams in his nine-year NBA career. After retiring, he became a dentist and moved to Oregon, where he still lives today." Axios


Terry Dischinger poses for an action portrait in 1962. Photo: NBA Photos via Getty Images


Terry Dischinger, the dentist. Screenshot: YouTube

bearister said:

---

Well, this is an NBA thread. Close enough:

" Kyrie Irving is expected to make his season debut Wednesday night in Indiana as a part-time Nets player, suiting up only for road games where his unvaccinated status doesn't break local mandates, Jeff writes.

Why it matters: Irving will be the NBA's first part-time player since 1962, when Chicago Zephyrs rookie Terry Dischinger balanced basketball and books a far different situation than the one Irving is in.

After being drafted, Dischinger an All-American out of Purdue and a 1960 Olympic gold medalist had one condition: The Zephyrs had to let him complete his chemical engineering degree.

He spent the first semester studying in Indiana on weekdays and joining the Zephyrs who became the Baltimore Bullets in 1963, and are now the Washington Wizards on weekends and holidays.

"One time after class I left Purdue at 4pm, taped my ankles in a cab and played that night in San Francisco," he recalled years later.

The part-time gig worked out quite well for Dischinger, who averaged 25.5 points, eight rebounds and three assists en route to an All-Star berth and Rookie of the Year honors, beating out John Havlicek.

The big picture: Dischinger made two more All-Star teams in his nine-year NBA career. After retiring, he became a dentist and moved to Oregon, where he still lives today." Axios


Terry Dischinger poses for an action portrait in 1962. Photo: NBA Photos via Getty Images


Terry Dischinger, the dentist. Screenshot: YouTube

---

The mention of Dischinger's ChemE degree reminded me of a great Cal hoops player, Doug True (1976-1980). For those of you who don't know, that is a b*tch of a major and I remember being amazed to learn that True could pursue a ChemE degree and not just play, but be named All-Pac-10 his senior year and a third-round pick of the Phoenix Suns. I believe he chose not to sign with the Suns, saying he wanted to get on with his real career.

HearstMining said:

---

bearister said:

---

Well, this is an NBA thread. Close enough:

" Kyrie Irving is expected to make his season debut Wednesday night in Indiana as a part-time Nets player, suiting up only for road games where his unvaccinated status doesn't break local mandates, Jeff writes.

Why it matters: Irving will be the NBA's first part-time player since 1962, when Chicago Zephyrs rookie Terry Dischinger balanced basketball and books a far different situation than the one Irving is in.

After being drafted, Dischinger an All-American out of Purdue and a 1960 Olympic gold medalist had one condition: The Zephyrs had to let him complete his chemical engineering degree.

He spent the first semester studying in Indiana on weekdays and joining the Zephyrs who became the Baltimore Bullets in 1963, and are now the Washington Wizards on weekends and holidays.

"One time after class I left Purdue at 4pm, taped my ankles in a cab and played that night in San Francisco," he recalled years later.

The part-time gig worked out quite well for Dischinger, who averaged 25.5 points, eight rebounds and three assists en route to an All-Star berth and Rookie of the Year honors, beating out John Havlicek.

The big picture: Dischinger made two more All-Star teams in his nine-year NBA career. After retiring, he became a dentist and moved to Oregon, where he still lives today." Axios


Terry Dischinger poses for an action portrait in 1962. Photo: NBA Photos via Getty Images


Terry Dischinger, the dentist. Screenshot: YouTube

---

The mention of Dischinger's ChemE degree reminded me of a great Cal hoops player, Doug True (1976-1980). For those of you who don't know, that is a b*tch of a major and I remember being amazed to learn that True could pursue a ChemE degree and not just play, but be named All-Pac-10 his senior year and a third-round pick of the Phoenix Suns. I believe he chose not to sign with the Suns, saying he wanted to get on with his real career.

---

I guess Doug did pretty well in his real career https://www.nei.org/about-nei/leadership/doug-true

Quote:

---

Doug True is NEI's chief nuclear officer and senior vice president of generation and suppliers.

True is a veteran of the nuclear industry with more than 30 years of experience in nuclear regulatory policy and implementation, playing a substantial role in U.S. policies and regulatory activities ranging from the industry response to challenges like ***ushima and 9/11 to major contributions to the formation and implementation of risk-informed regulation.

Prior to joining NEI, he served as executive vice president of the power services group at Jensen Hughes Inc. In this position, he was responsible for one of largest specialty engineering organizations in the nuclear industry covering a broad range of analysis, testing, design and research consulting services. True has served on the NEI board of directors since 2016, and has been a contributor to NEI, Electric Power Research Institute, Institute of Nuclear Power Operations and federal government guidance on a broad spectrum of technical and regulatory issues.

True earned a Bachelor of Science in chemical engineering from the University of California, Berkeley.

---

No mention of his basketball background. Probably so he can sandbag for his rec league team .

Thanks! Mention of Doug True inevitably left me wondering what he has been up to the past 40 years. Great student, great basketball player and great Golden Bear!

boredom said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

A great game by Jaylen, no doubt about it. But not exactly dropping "half a Wilt".

Two things:

1. All Chamberlain's shots from the field in that 100 point game vs the Knicks were two pointers. The game was played in 1962, and Wilt retired in 1973, and the NBA did not adopt the three point shot until 1980. Brown made several threes in his 50-point game. Brown has had the advantage or good fortune to be playing in the era of the three point shot.

2. This was an overtime game, and Brown played in and scored in the overtime period. Wilt's 100 point game record was set in a regulation 48 minute game against the Knicks.

Another impressive (for him) stat from Wilt's game vs the Knicks was he made 28 out of 32 free throws, an .875 percentage. He shot FTs at only 0.613 for the season in 1962, and .only 511 for his NBA career.

---

if you're going to era adjust then you have to factor in that Wilt played in a time of way more possessions per game than exist today. Wilt's 100 point game was a 169-147 win. That's 316 points in a regulation game. The teams combined for 233 FGA and 93 FTA. If we assume 2 FTA = 1 possession that means 279 possessions in the game before counting turnovers (which don't appear to have been a recorded stat back then).

Jaylen's game was a 116-111 win for a total of 227 points. Wilt's game had 39% more scoring despite Jaylen's going to OT. The teams combined for 180 FGA and 55 FTA (again, despite the game going to OT). That's 207 possessions not counting turnovers. That's 35% more possessions.

If you adjust for pace (standardizing to Wilt's pace), Jaylen scored 67 while playing 2 less minutes than Wilt did. If you subtract 5 points for the 5 3s (making them 2s instead) that's 62. So still more than half a Wilt if you want to get into era adjustment stuff.

Or we can just appreciate that Jaylen had a big game without feeling the need to pump up Wilt.

---

I already said Jaylen had a great game. Isn't that appreciation?

There is no need for a nobody like me to pump up Wilt Chamberlain. His achievements are in the records. And he did his own talking, and usually backed it up.

What happened was, I misunderstood Bearister's comment, and I mistakenly replied by defending Chamberlain's game. That is what I do when it comes to the appearance of trivializing the players and game of yesteryear. All players of all eras are important, and even though it is fun to compare them, it is really impossible to honestly compare players of different eras, because the game has changed so much.

Maybe you can answer this question: Why is it that so many basketball fans, as opposed to baseball fans, or football fans denigrate the players and game of years gone by? Willie Mays shows up to a Giants game, and it is an event, everyone stands up and cheers him, with most of the fans never having seen him play. Baseball and football are totally different sports now, with players specializing and playing far less minutes per game. If Joe Montana comes to a Niner game, he'd get a standing O. Look at all the accolades when John Madden is remembered. But in basketball, some Cal fans trivialize the game and the players Pete Newell coached, again with never having seen Pete's teams play.

As for pace, it is a modern statistic, a calculated number. The change in pace was the result of several rule changes, made to favor the offensive player over his defender, to promote scoring again in a game which had become dull and rather boring as defense carried the day. The idea was to make the game more attractive, attract more fans. The NCAA in Wilt's day (1957) was 22 teams, while last year the NCAA was 68 teams. The 1957 Final was attended by 7,778 fans, and there was no network TV (and maybe no TV at all) Today it is a huge cash cow, with 72,068 fans attending the Final, and millions more watching on TV. The NBA has had similar success, with NBA franchises making far more money and now worth far more than ever before.

As far as era adjusting goes, the rule changes are a better driver of the way the game is played than any of the stats or metrics, including pace, but unfortunately they can't be quantified by stats or numbers. The modern player on offense can carry the ball, walk with it, and charge into his defender. The defender is not allowed to hand check or otherwise impede the progress of the man he is guarding. Years after they had retired from the NBA, Bill Russell interviewed Wilt Chamberlain. He asked Wilt, "Wilt, you averaged 50 points per game one season. How many points could you average in today's game?" Wilt replied, "Oh, about 75 points." Russell laughed. Wilt then said, "I averaged 50 points one season. How many points do you think I could score with no one being allowed to put their hands on me or lay a body on me?" In those days players tried everything to stop Wilt. Grabbing, shoving, even stepping on his feet. He was just too strong. Wilt also said in the interview, "I could not have set the one game scoring record without my teammates. When I got to where it looked like I might be able to score 100, they began feeding me on every play." Maybe if Jaylen Brown or another star is fortunate enough to have teammates who will pass him the ball on every play like Wilt did, maybe they too will score 100 or more.

SFCityBear said:

---

boredom said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

A great game by Jaylen, no doubt about it. But not exactly dropping "half a Wilt".

Two things:

1. All Chamberlain's shots from the field in that 100 point game vs the Knicks were two pointers. The game was played in 1962, and Wilt retired in 1973, and the NBA did not adopt the three point shot until 1980. Brown made several threes in his 50-point game. Brown has had the advantage or good fortune to be playing in the era of the three point shot.

2. This was an overtime game, and Brown played in and scored in the overtime period. Wilt's 100 point game record was set in a regulation 48 minute game against the Knicks.

Another impressive (for him) stat from Wilt's game vs the Knicks was he made 28 out of 32 free throws, an .875 percentage. He shot FTs at only 0.613 for the season in 1962, and .only 511 for his NBA career.

---

if you're going to era adjust then you have to factor in that Wilt played in a time of way more possessions per game than exist today. Wilt's 100 point game was a 169-147 win. That's 316 points in a regulation game. The teams combined for 233 FGA and 93 FTA. If we assume 2 FTA = 1 possession that means 279 possessions in the game before counting turnovers (which don't appear to have been a recorded stat back then).

Jaylen's game was a 116-111 win for a total of 227 points. Wilt's game had 39% more scoring despite Jaylen's going to OT. The teams combined for 180 FGA and 55 FTA (again, despite the game going to OT). That's 207 possessions not counting turnovers. That's 35% more possessions.

If you adjust for pace (standardizing to Wilt's pace), Jaylen scored 67 while playing 2 less minutes than Wilt did. If you subtract 5 points for the 5 3s (making them 2s instead) that's 62. So still more than half a Wilt if you want to get into era adjustment stuff.

Or we can just appreciate that Jaylen had a big game without feeling the need to pump up Wilt.

---

I already said Jaylen had a great game. Isn't that appreciation?

There is no need for a nobody like me to pump up Wilt Chamberlain. His achievements are in the records. And he did his own talking, and usually backed it up.

What happened was, I misunderstood Bearister's comment, and I mistakenly replied by defending Chamberlain's game. That is what I do when it comes to the appearance of trivializing the players and game of yesteryear. All players of all eras are important, and even though it is fun to compare them, it is really impossible to honestly compare players of different eras, because the game has changed so much.

Maybe you can answer this question: Why is it that so many basketball fans, as opposed to baseball fans, or football fans denigrate the players and game of years gone by? Willie Mays shows up to a Giants game, and it is an event, everyone stands up and cheers him, with most of the fans never having seen him play. Baseball and football are totally different sports now, with players specializing and playing far less minutes per game. If Joe Montana comes to a Niner game, he'd get a standing O. Look at all the accolades when John Madden is remembered. But in basketball, some Cal fans trivialize the game and the players Pete Newell coached, again with never having seen Pete's teams play.

As for pace, it is a modern statistic, a calculated number. The change in pace was the result of several rule changes, made to favor the offensive player over his defender, to promote scoring again in a game which had become dull and rather boring as defense carried the day. The idea was to make the game more attractive, attract more fans. The NCAA in Wilt's day (1957) was 22 teams, while last year the NCAA was 68 teams. The 1957 Final was attended by 7,778 fans, and there was no network TV (and maybe no TV at all) Today it is a huge cash cow, with 72,068 fans attending the Final, and millions more watching on TV. The NBA has had similar success, with NBA franchises making far more money and now worth far more than ever before.

As far as era adjusting goes, the rule changes are a better driver of the way the game is played than any of the stats or metrics, including pace, but unfortunately they can't be quantified by stats or numbers. The modern player on offense can carry the ball, walk with it, and charge into his defender. The defender is not allowed to hand check or otherwise impede the progress of the man he is guarding. Years after they had retired from the NBA, Bill Russell interviewed Wilt Chamberlain. He asked Wilt, "Wilt, you averaged 50 points per game one season. How many points could you average in today's game?" Wilt replied, "Oh, about 75 points." Russell laughed. Wilt then said, "I averaged 50 points one season. How many points do you think I could score with no one being allowed to put their hands on me or lay a body on me?" In those days players tried everything to stop Wilt. Grabbing, shoving, even stepping on his feet. He was just too strong. Wilt also said in the interview, "I could not have set the one game scoring record without my teammates. When I got to where it looked like I might be able to score 100, they began feeding me on every play." Maybe if Jaylen Brown or another star is fortunate enough to have teammates who will pass him the ball on every play like Wilt did, maybe they too will score 100 or more.

---

the bolded is what I meant by my pump up comment. It seemed unnecessary to talk about how great Wilt was and how Jalen's game didn't measure up.

As to your question, I don't think basketball fans celebrate the greats of long ago less than football fans. Probably less than baseball. Sure Montana gets adulation when introduces - he won 4 titles and played when most Niner fans were alive. The Warriors don't have an equivalent. I would guess that if Larry Bird was introduced at a Celtics game (as a spectator cheering for the Celtics and not as a rival coach or front office guy) he gets an ovation too. I'd be shocked if 20 or 30 years from now Steph Curry got introduced at a Warrior game and didn't get a standing O.

More generally speaking - basketball hasn't been all that popular for all that long. It didn't really take off until the 80s I think (at least on the pro side). That's not a lot of time to build lore. Baseball seems like it's been a big attraction for over a century. Football is kind of in between but (again, on the pro side) took off much closer to when basketball did than when baseball did.

Additionally, the marketing really varies. The Giants are very front and center with honoring their past. The ballpark is in some ways a museum. The 49ers built a literal museum but I think you have to pay to get in. The Warriors' arena in Oakland didn't do much promotion of old teams and Cohan was too incompetent to do other stuff (the current ownership is better: they are currently doing something where they honor an old player each game on the tv broadcasts but Warrior history has some slim pickings and they had some old timers in the championship parades).

Finally, I would argue that baseball has changed less than basketball or football. Baseball has undergone more change in the last few years with more focus on lifting the ball and shifts and whatnot but strikes me as much closer to what it was in the 1950s or 60s than basketball or football. Both in terms of style of play and physical characteristics of players (e.g. today's linemen are 100lbs bigger than the old timers but today's catchers are probably roughly the same size as the old timers). If you somehow teleported a random modern baseball fan to a game at Chavez Latrine in the 1960s I think they'd get less thrown off than if you took a modern football fan to a random game at Lambeau in the 60s or a random basketball fan to MSG in the 60s.

Regarding Wilt and what he'd do today: I never saw him play live so I won't speculate other than to say it's nice that he was very self confident (and completely delusional if he's not joking) and that there's plenty of physicality in today's game. Shaq was defended very physically (not today exactly but probably chronologically close to whenever Wilt's comment was made). Steph gets grabbed, bumped, pushed, and scratched repeatedly every game with no whistles. It depends on the player I suppose; some guys (e.g. Kobe; Harden before the rules changes; nut punch Paul) you can't breathe on without being called for a foul.

Wilt was a unique athletic talent. Many have opined he could have been a Gold Medal winning Olympic decathlete but for his Achilles heel: he couldn't pole vault worth taffy.

I just took the OP's post title as clever (and non-cliche)

I didn't take it in any other way as reflection or statement on a former super star.