# Wilt Chamberlain: The Greatest NBA Athlete?



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

I cringe when I read comments such as Vince Carter or Lebron James are the greatest athletes in NBA history. There seems to be a misconception that players from earlier eras were poor athletes, and that centers such as Wilt and Russel were stiffs who got by on their superior size.

I did a little research today to refute some of these claims and the results I found for Chamberlain surpassed my expectations by a wide margin. 

He was a track star at Kansas in the high jump (where his best was 4 inches below the world record at the time), the 100 (which he ran in 10.9), the 440 (which he ran in 49s), and the shotput which he threw 53.4, even today those would be world class marks for a pentathlete, oh yeah and he benched 550 and was 7'1". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilt_Chamberlain

While he was a world class high jumper at Kansas, unfortunately his vertical leap was never measured, it has been extrapolated from photos using his known height to be over 48".

Here's a quote by former coach Alex Hannum:

"When I coached the San Francisco Warriors, I thought Al Attles was the fastest guy on our team--by far. We used to gamble a lot--which player could jump the highest and run the fastest. So I set up a series of races, baseline to baseline. In the finals, it was Wilt and Al Attles and Wilt just blew past him. I'm convinced that Wilt Chamberlain is one of the greatest all-around athletes the world has ever seen."


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

VC/LBJ < Wilt


----------



## Like A Breath (Jun 16, 2003)

I believe everything except the 550 bench press and the 48" vertical.

To have a 48" vertical, there would be have to be pictures where his head is a foot above the rim. I have never seen him come close in any video or pictures, therefore I find it hard to believe. Even Michael Jordan didn't have more than a 40" vert.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

Like A Breath said:


> I believe everything except the 550 bench press and the 48" vertical.
> 
> To have a 48" vertical, there would be have to be pictures where his head is a foot above the rim. I have never seen him come close in any video or pictures, therefore I find it hard to believe. Even Michael Jordan didn't have more than a 40" vert.



There are actually quite a lot of players in the NBA with a vert over 40"

Just look at the recent combine results:

http://www.draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1352

Will Blalock 40"
Ronnie Brewer 41"
Jordan Farmar 42"
Rudy Gay 40.5"
Dwayne Mitchel 41.5"
Brandon Roy 40.5"

When you consider Michael Wilson of the Globetrotters has a 55" vertical I don't find it impossible to believe that Wilt could have had a 48" vert considering he was a world class high jumper in college. Also most of the videos we see are from the twighlight of his career, after injuries and a lot of miles.


----------



## neoxsupreme (Oct 31, 2005)

LeBron is probably the best NBA athlete ever. Noone else has such beautifully coordinated & balanced physical gifts as LeBron has. W/ cat-like quickness, strength, agility, athleticism & even other important qualities/intangibles that have nothing to do w/ athleticism like court vision, understanding of the game, mental maturity & hunger to be the greatest. What LeBron is doing @ such a young age are 80% sheer, physical advantages & natural talent over the other players. He's got good IQ for a 3 yr player coming out of high school but once he reaches his prime, gains more knowledge & experience, watch out. His scoring may dip as long as his supporting cast gets more & more upgraded but he'll learn in yrs that his tremendous passing ability can attribute to winning just as much or even more so than putting pts on the board. By no means am I indicating that he's 1 demensional as it's pretty obvious he's 1 of the better all-around players in the game. I'm saying that in time, he will learn when to be aggressive & force the issue & when to acknowledge his teammates. He doesn't know this as well yet. He'll also learn to embrace the ball & let it fire out of his own hands in clutch win-time situations. LeBron possesses the whole athletic package.


----------



## Krstic All-Star (Mar 9, 2005)

Like A Breath said:


> I believe everything except the 550 bench press and the 48" vertical.
> 
> To have a 48" vertical, there would be have to be pictures where his head is a foot above the rim. I have never seen him come close in any video or pictures, therefore I find it hard to believe. Even Michael Jordan didn't have more than a 40" vert.


There are pictures of Wilt jumping vertically more than 40". And everyone forgets that he was a track star, and a record-holder for a while in the high-jump...


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

Most who have seen Wilt play know that he was an athletic beast. I don't think there has been anyone gifted with as much physical and athletic ability come into the NBA. Remember, he was doing all this at 7'1. He's the most impressive athlete I've ever seen, and it's not a contest.

LeBron's great, but he wasn't as strong, wasn't as tall, and wasn't as quick. I don't know if LeBron can run under 11 seconds in a 100 or not.

You have to consider Wilt was doing this 50 years ago, when training wasn't as sophisticated and all records were a lot closer to his numbers than now.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

Lachlanwood32 said:


> *Most who have seen Wilt play know that he was an athletic beast*. I don't think there has been anyone gifted with as much physical and athletic ability come into the NBA. Remember, he was doing all this at 7'1. He's the most impressive athlete I've ever seen, and it's not a contest.
> 
> LeBron's great, but he wasn't as strong, wasn't as tall, and wasn't as quick. I don't know if LeBron can run under 11 seconds in a 100 or not.
> 
> You have to consider Wilt was doing this 50 years ago, when training wasn't as sophisticated and all records were a lot closer to his numbers than now.


That's the problem. My grandpa wasn't into basketball, so he wouldn't have been able to tell me how athletic Chamberlain was. So now there's nothing except records to prove Wilt's athleticism. I'm quite cynical, actually.


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

WTChan said:


> That's the problem. My grandpa wasn't into basketball, so he wouldn't have been able to tell me how athletic Chamberlain was. So now there's nothing except records to prove Wilt's athleticism. I'm quite cynical, actually.


There's plenty of tapes, recordings, articles, and pictures out their to prove it. I'm not saying you should believe everything you see/read/hear on the internet or in print, but there are a lot of ex-players who claim Wilt was the greatest athlete and player ever.

There's many people who have been following basketball since the 60's out there.


----------



## StackAttack (Mar 15, 2006)

Athleticism wise I wouldn't argue. But I'm convinced LeBron will be better as a player than Michael, Wilt, or anyone else.


----------



## Kuskid (Aug 18, 2004)

Lachlanwood32 said:


> Most who have seen Wilt play know that he was an athletic beast. I don't think there has been anyone gifted with as much physical and athletic ability come into the NBA. Remember, he was doing all this at 7'1. He's the most impressive athlete I've ever seen, and it's not a contest.
> 
> LeBron's great, but he wasn't as strong, wasn't as tall, and wasn't as quick. I don't know if LeBron can run under 11 seconds in a 100 or not.
> 
> You have to consider Wilt was doing this 50 years ago, when training wasn't as sophisticated and all records were a lot closer to his numbers than now.


I guarantee Bron's udner 11 for a 100, easily. I never knew all that about Wilt, and I still don't believe the 550 bench. Wilt was definitly an unbelieveable physical specimen, especially for his time period. But I just don't trust those numbers enough to say best ever, esp. from a site notorious for being, well, wrong about stuff.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

Lachlanwood32 said:


> There's plenty of tapes, recordings, articles, and pictures out their to prove it. I'm not saying you should believe everything you see/read/hear on the internet or in print, but there are a lot of ex-players who claim Wilt was the greatest athlete and player ever.
> 
> There's many people who have been following basketball since the 60's out there.


Those tapes don't really show how athletic he is. I'm not denying that Wilt is one of the best ever, but until I see something, I'm just taking someone else's word for it. I doubt anyone on this site has been watching basketball since Wilt Chamberlain times.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

Kuskid said:


> I never knew all that about Wilt, and I still don't believe the 550 bench. Wilt was definitly an unbelieveable physical specimen, especially for his time period. But I just don't trust those numbers enough to say best ever, esp. from a site notorious for being, well, wrong about stuff.



In the movie Wilt Chamberlain: The Big Dipper, made by NBA productions it stated that "Wilt had a 48" vertical leap and a 550 pound bench press when he was a 20 year old track and field star at Kansas." 

I'll assume they didn't get their info from Wikipedia. :biggrin:


----------



## arhie (Jul 4, 2006)

HEres a few things about Wilt.

He prolly could bench over 550 lbs. He prolly could run 100 m in less than 11 seconds. But he did not have a 48 inch vertical leap. 

Wilt Chamberlain was pretty much a bigger version of Amare Stoudemire with better court vision and better rebounding etc. He dominated in an era where the next best centre was Rafual Arauojo like, other than the great Bill Russell of course, who pretty much Ben Wallace himself.

Chamberlain does not have that much of a vertical leap otherwise he would put his shoulder in the rim.


----------



## lessthanjake (Jul 4, 2005)

arhie said:


> HEres a few things about Wilt.
> 
> He prolly could bench over 550 lbs. He prolly could run 100 m in less than 11 seconds. But he did not have a 48 inch vertical leap.
> 
> ...


Thats just untrue.

Ok let me take the year 1965, just a random pick but it was right in the middle of the period that Wilt dominated. There were 9 teams in the league . He changed teams mid year but here are the centers he would be playing against each different team.

Celtics: Bill Russell
Royals: Jerry Lucas
76ers: Luke Jackson (you may not have heard of him but he was an all star that year)
Knicks: Willis Reed
Lakers: Rudy LaRusso (again you may not have heard of him but he was a 5 time all star)
Hawks: Bob Pettit/Zelmo Beatty
Bullets: Walt Bellamy
Pistons: Dave DeBusschere wouldve guarded him probably
Warriors: Nate Thurmond

So out of 9 teams he'd have faced a hall of famer against 7 of them, and an all star level player against the other two.


----------



## KingWay (Jun 29, 2006)

Theres no way he benched 550, even some of the best body builders cant do that.


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

WTChan said:


> Those tapes don't really show how athletic he is. I'm not denying that Wilt is one of the best ever, but until I see something, I'm just taking someone else's word for it. I doubt anyone on this site has been watching basketball since Wilt Chamberlain times.


I hope someone that watched Wilt isn't on here. They'd have to be over 75 by now (assuming they watched him when they were in their 20's). They better have other things to do and be taking it easy.

I can understand why you wouldn't be skeptical. I've seen videos which definitely showed his athleticism. His foot speed was amazing, he was also extremely coordinated. He ran the floor like a deer.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

lessthanjake said:


> Thats just untrue.
> 
> Ok let me take the year 1965, just a random pick but it was right in the middle of the period that Wilt dominated. There were 9 teams in the league . He changed teams mid year but here are the centers he would be playing against each different team.
> 
> ...


Yep.

It's really annoying to keep reading posts scrutinizing Wilt's opposition especially when he played against more HOF centers than Shaq has.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

i will guarantee you wilt did not bench 550 pounds while a 20 year old rookie. his vertical, i guarantee you was not 48 inches. he was fast, strong, and could jump high, but don't believe the stuff that makes him out to be superman. put those numbers down to even 350 and 35 and you've still got pretty much an unprecedented athlete, even today (at 7'1). back then, it's simply absurd.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

Lachlanwood32 said:


> I hope someone that watched Wilt isn't on here. They'd have to be over 75 by now (assuming they watched him when they were in their 20's). They better have other things to do and be taking it easy.
> 
> I can understand why you wouldn't be skeptical. I've seen videos which definitely showed his athleticism. His foot speed was amazing, he was also extremely coordinated. He ran the floor like a deer.


Really? You have any links? Youtube doesn't have much.


----------



## Like A Breath (Jun 16, 2003)

kflo said:


> i will guarantee you wilt did not bench 550 pounds while a 20 year old rookie. his vertical, i guarantee you was not 48 inches. he was fast, strong, and could jump high, but don't believe the stuff that makes him out to be superman. put those numbers down to even 350 and 35 and you've still got pretty much an unprecedented athlete, even today (at 7'1). back then, it's simply absurd.


Agreed. 550 is probably impossible/near impossible for a 7 footer.

With a 48 inch vertical, his head would be a foot above the rim for rebounds. There have been no accounts or proof of that. I have seen black and white photos/footage of him and there was no way he had a 48 inch vertical. High jump does not equate to vertical.

350 and 35 would make him a 7 foot, 280 pound Amare Stoudemire, isn't that enough for a legendary athlete?


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

i don't doubt that ultimately he was benching more than 350 either. just not when he was in his early career days.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

lessthanjake said:


> Celtics: Bill Russell 6-9, 215
> Royals: Jerry Lucas 6-8, 230
> 76ers: Luke Jackson 6-9, 240
> Knicks: Willis Reed 6-9, 235
> ...


Have no idea how accurate these stats are from basketball-reference but man these guys are small and the two guy close to 7 feet are very thin


----------



## 4BiddenKnight (Jun 23, 2005)

Pioneer10 said:


> lessthanjake said:
> 
> 
> > Celtics: Bill Russell 6-9, 215
> ...


That's exactly why people like us scrutinize Wilt's competition.


----------



## 35553 (May 13, 2006)

KingWay said:


> Theres no way he benched 550, even some of the best body builders cant do that.


Body builders, no. But powerlifters easily. Body builders are all show, no go compared to powerlifters. 
But i would guess his 1 rep max at about 425-475 range.


----------



## Nuzzo (Jul 11, 2005)

Pioneer10 said:


> Have no idea how accurate these stats are from basketball-reference but man these guys are small and the two guy close to 7 feet are very thin


Sun Ming Ming is 7'9 and 450 pounds he will put pwnge and ownage on Shaq he have 8 inches and 100 pounds on Shaq :clap:


----------



## different_13 (Aug 30, 2005)

also from basketballreference.com:

Michael Jordan 6'6 195
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 7'2 225
Shaq 7'1 300
Pippen 6'7 210
Artest 6'6 244
Wilt 7'1 250


....yeah, they're really accurate, especially for the older players... :raised_ey 

As it is, maybe they used draft-measurements, or some kinda college physical..
But Jordan wasn't 195 lbs..
And everyone knows Wilt filled out to over 275.

..and I won't even mention Shaq's 300 lbs..
(nor Kareem being listed at 40 or 50 pounds below his prime playing weight)


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

different_13 said:


> also from basketballreference.com:
> 
> Michael Jordan 6'6 195
> Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 7'2 225
> ...


Jordan was 195 lbs...back in 89.

Wilt also hovered near 300 during the twilight of his career.

The weights that basketball-reference.com lists are not the weight many of the players were by the end of the career or their prime weight.

Jordan in the early 90s was around 205-210 especially after he started lifting weights.

Plus, size doesn't dictate talent.

We have a ton of big centers today but almost none of them are HOF bound.

Is anybody seriously gonna say that Pavel Podkolzin is tougher competition than Willis Reed?

The people who scrutinize Wilt don't understand history.


----------



## different_13 (Aug 30, 2005)

You misunderstand (or i've taken your words the wrong way)

I was trying to show how those earlier listings of Wilt's opponents were wrong/pointless.
Mike's prime weight was about 216, right?

Who's to say Willis didnt put on weight, or any of Wilt's other competitors for that matter?

And damn right size has nothing to do with skill, or that Sun Ming dude would be rocking everyone.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

different_13 said:


> You misunderstand (or i've taken your words the wrong way)
> 
> I was trying to show how those earlier listings of Wilt's opponents were wrong/pointless.
> Mike's prime weight was about 216, right?
> ...


No no I was AGREEING with your post.

basketball-reference.com's measurement shouldn't be use as conclusively measurements because those measurements are usually a reference to how much they weighed during their rookie year or earlier in their career. I think they still have Kobe listed at 200. We all know Kobe is 220-225 now.

Sorry for the confusion.

Mike's prime weight (his prime to me was early 90s) was around 205-210.

He was 216 or most likely even more than that during his Wiz tenure.


----------



## different_13 (Aug 30, 2005)

Sorry, thought you were correcting me (or something, can't seem to remember now..)

N yeah, those were my thoughts too - either pre-draft measurements, or the last known measurements before entering the NBA.

N hey, Wilt outplayed Kareem a few teams for sure, people wanna say he's a skinny lil scrub too?


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

Don't forget Wilt was going up against packs of 3 forwards while being hacked. It wasn't as if Wilt went one on one against many in the L. Teams would throw all their bigmen in the paint to swarm Chamberlain. Makes it a whole lot tougher.

Comparing player sizes is not proving much. Bumping, slapping, defensive 3 seconds, none of these were taken into account. Fouls weren't called frequently like today. Wilt would go in the paint and end up with 2 guys on his back and 1 guy hovering. It really doesn't make that big of a difference whether the competition is 6'9 or 7'0 when he had 3 guys on him. How often do you see the same defensive sets nowadays? Shaq has it good compared to players of the '60s.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

Lachlanwood32 said:


> Don't forget Wilt was going up against packs of 3 forwards while being hacked. It wasn't as if Wilt went one on one against many in the L. Teams would throw all their bigmen in the paint to swarm Chamberlain. Makes it a whole lot tougher.
> 
> Comparing player sizes is not proving much. Bumping, slapping, defensive 3 seconds, none of these were taken into account. Fouls weren't called frequently like today. Wilt would go in the paint and end up with 2 guys on his back and 1 guy hovering. It really doesn't make that big of a difference whether the competition is 6'9 or 7'0 when he had 3 guys on him. How often do you see the same defensive sets nowadays? Shaq has it good compared to players of the '60s.


Exactly some people look at height and weight and then just try to end their argument using only that basis without correctly assessing the entire context.

You have to factor in talent, skill, and rule changes. 

Plus those same people seem to forget as you mentioned that Wilt was rarely defended by a single man.


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

Where there's a Wilt, there's a way.

Seriously though, there are just too many tall tales surrounding the "Big Dipper" (one of the better phallic nicknames in sports). I suppose it's possible that Wilt in the 70's after he was 300+ could have benched 500, but not as a rail thin collegiate. And a 48 inch vertical? More like 34-36 max from what I've seen: which is incredible for a 7'1" athlete even now let alone in the 60's. And 20,000 women...wow.

Kind of funny how Shaq, in his own right an out of this world giant athlete, has very few tall tales of his own; just a bunch of silly nicknames.


----------



## pmac34 (Feb 10, 2006)

arhie said:


> HEres a few things about Wilt.
> 
> He prolly could bench over 550 lbs. He prolly could run 100 m in less than 11 seconds. But he did not have a 48 inch vertical leap.
> 
> ...


04/05 amare would own wilt


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

pmac34 said:


> 04/05 amare would own wilt


I'm not so sure young grasshopper. What makes you think so?


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

JPSeraph said:


> Where there's a Wilt, there's a way.
> 
> Seriously though, there are just too many tall tales surrounding the "Big Dipper" (one of the better phallic nicknames in sports). I suppose it's possible that Wilt in the 70's after he was 300+ could have benched 500, but not as a rail thin collegiate. And a 48 inch vertical? More like 34-36 max from what I've seen: which is incredible for a 7'1" athlete even now let alone in the 60's. And 20,000 women...wow.
> 
> Kind of funny how Shaq, in his own right an out of this world giant athlete, has very few tall tales of his own; just a bunch of silly nicknames.


Tales take time to develop. Shaq will develop some, probably in 30 years or so. However, the fact that there isn't footage and easy access for all of Wilt's career makes it a whole lot easier to embelish the truth.

48 inches, probably not. Around 40? Probably. 500lbs? He was probably very close. This guy was an athletic freak if I've ever seen one. His quickness and speed, strength and agility are unmatched.

20,000 women is impossible, that was all for his book. I read something once, which stated Wilt would have had to have had sex 2.5 (or something close) times a day since he was a young teenager to get anywhere near the number he threw out there. NBA players were big time pimps back then, but they didn't have that type of stamina. Not even Wilt. It would have fallen off or gone limp, I can't imagine the opportunities the modern viagra market would have had with Wilt as an endorser!


----------



## JoeD (Sep 2, 2004)

35553 said:


> Body builders, no. But powerlifters easily. Body builders are all show, no go compared to powerlifters.
> But i would guess his 1 rep max at about 425-475 range.


Exactly true about body builders. 

I find it entirely possible that he could bench 550. For you people saying he was too light and thin, that is laughable.


----------



## Like A Breath (Jun 16, 2003)

Are you guys suggesting that Wilt today would drop 60 points a game? Because some of you say that Shaq has it easy compared to him. Just wondering.


----------

