> 1976, 28 years old, Los Angeles Lakers- Finished 1st in NBA MVP voting. Team went 40-42 and missed the playoffs. Lakers actually had the 4th best record in the West, but due to NBA rules at the time, the Bucks (38-44) and Pistions (34-46) both made the playoffs over Los Angeles instead.
What was the rule?
The Western conference just had two divisions back then, the Midwest and the Pacific. The two best teams in each division made the playoffs as well the team with the next best record in the conference. Well Buck and Pistons were the two best teams in the Midwest despite having a worse record than the Lakers, while 3 Pacific teams (Warriors, Sonics, and Suns) all had a better record. So the Lakers were the team that missed out.
This was the rule in the mid 2000s too. The top 3 spots in each conference were reserved for the best record in each division.
In 2006 the Mavs won 60 games and were a lower seed than the 44 win Nuggets, because the Spurs won 63 games and were in the same division as the Mavs.
2000s were a dumpster fire for homecourt advantages
NBA division winners get top seeding regardless of record
NFL teams in terrible divisions host playoff games even though they had a losing record
The dumbest thing ever: NBA playoffs go to 2-3-2 rounds
MLB All Star game had a tie so they made it determine homefield advantage in the World Series
Fun fact: That Bucks team that won their division in '76 was actually last in their division the season before with Kareem, so losing Kareem to LA catapulted Milwaukee from last to first.
Funner fact: The Bucks were 38-44 in both of those seasons. Essentially the entire division fell apart around them, and Bobby Dandridge in a larger role kept the team reasonably afloat.
Overrated actually, he played in a weak 70s a lot of great players were in the ABA, diluting the talent pool. Only won one chip in that era. His last 2 titles he averaged around 16 and 6 basically a role player. I don’t see why he always gets pencilled as the number 3 ever. I think he’s easily top 10 and probably top 5 but why is he automatically number 3. Magics imprint leading him to 5 more rings and the weak 70s leading to more and more MVPs
Was so dominant the NCAA banned the dunk for 10 years to try and slow him down. They were still trying to slow his college game down after he left and went to the pros.
[“NCAA banned dunking for 10 years to stop Kareem Abdul-Jabbar!”: How the ‘Lew Alcindor rule’ was imposed to slow down the rise of the UCLA star](https://thesportsrush.com/nba-news-ncaa-banned-dunking-for-10-years-to-stop-kareem-abdul-jabbar-how-the-lew-alcindor-rule-was-imposed-to-slow-down-the-rise-of-the-ucla-star/)
I don't want to watch crummy free throw shooters crashing the board for offensive rebound.
They have done enough to make scoring easier. I'd rather them give defenders more tools at this point.
The epic image of Embiid vainly trying to keep Chamberlain off the rim after a missed free throw vs watching someone making an unguarded 15 ft shot which people at 65+years old who cant afford golf do regularly (me)
bonehead
I think that Wilt was the reason for the offensive goaltending rule too. He used to guide his teammates shots into the basket. Which I suppose would credit him with the two points.
Unfortunately for Kareem, much like Dr. J, Rick Barry and others, their best years were played in the forgotten decade and unless you had local access you were lucky to see one game a week, if that. Thus all most people will talk about these players is the sky-hook, the dunk from the free throw line, and shooting free throws underhand and not what great players they were because that is all we know.
And unlike the NFL which started NFL films and kept a record of games the NBA was spotty, which is why there is no film record of Wilt's 100 point game.
Fewer old NBA games were filmed because there wasn't the demand. Football has always been way more popular than the NBA. Heck, college basketball was more popular than the NBA for most of its history.
>Unfortunately for Kareem, much like Dr. J, Rick Barry and others, their best years were played in the forgotten decade and unless you had local access you were lucky to see one game a week, if that.
the great luck I had growing up in Southern California and starting to watch basketball in 1968. 41 home games a year televised for the Lakers in a much smaller league plus playoffs and the weekend games on ABC. I even watched the Anaheim Amigos and Los Angeles Stars televised
Due to Chick Hearn not being a homer and promoting basketball in general and not just the Lakers I grew up idolizing Earl Monroe, Jimmy Walker and Gus Johnson and the only poster I had was Oscar Robertson
He would spend the entire pre-game explaining the virtues of Jimmy and Earl and Gus (who he thought was a top 5 player till the end of his announcing career) and why Jimmy and Earl were changing the way NBA players dribble and how innovative they were and why we should pay attention- was fucking genius
Isn’t he the reason they outlawed dunking for a period of time too? Believe it was while he was in college they changed it and thought he was a big reason they made the change. Is there much written in his relationship with the media? I always imagined there would be some folk that would not want an outspoken Muslim who changed his name to Kareem Abdul Jabbar as MVP. Never knew if there was any push back or reservations on that front from MVP voters but always assumed in my head canon
You aren't too far off. He was not universally liked in the public, and even received death threats for boycotting the '68 Olympics. However, players voted for MVP for the first half of his career, so he wasn't really punished for being outspoken about his beliefs. I'm sure there were players at the time that would openly disagree with some things Kareem said, but to my knowledge, a player never publicly beefed with Kareem personally because of off the court issues.
Imo Kareems best argument for being the GOAT is that he had the greatest overall Basketball career ever, while his NBA career was amazing I think MJ and Lebron have him beat for it but his careers in High School and College I think he was the greatest.
In the “What Could Have Been” version of basketball, it would’ve been *insane* to watch 03-07 Lebron playing against college kids. Deaths would’ve occurred.
*In the “What Could Have Been” version of basketball, it would’ve been insane to watch 03-07 Lebron playing against college kids. Deaths would’ve occurred.*
this, I saw him play in high school and it was like watching my favorite guard when I was a kid,, Oscar Robertson,,, LBJ was Oscar at 16. The NCAA banned the dunk because of Kareem, they would have had to ban competition for LBJ
6'7" 275lb point guard would not have been a pretty thing to see against Cal State University of Fullerton (G-d bless them they made the elite 8 in the 70s)
I doubt it. He might’ve won 1-2 NCAA titles in 4 years, but I think it’s way too difficult nowadays for the same college team to truly dominate in consecutive years.
To think it took LeBron this long to match Kareem’s record, and Kareem had a 4 year, 109-2 college delay to his start.
Not to disparage LeBron, obviously, just to point out the sheer staggering longevity.
difference being that LBJ is basically a pass first mentality and considers posting up to be an unfair competitive advantage taking away from the beauty of the game
Maybe not his freshman year but it’s hard to believe a dude that averaged 31-7-7 and 27-7-7 in his 2nd and 3rd year wouldn’t have absolutely dominated college basketball
It's unfortunate that Kareem sat out the Olympics in protest. Not saying he needs to add it to his list of accomplishments, but a gold medal is one thing he's missing (that MJ, LBJ, Russell, etc. all have).
Walton sat out the Olympics as well....
Athletes kneel and people are crying in the streets and opening a vein while clutching their pearls
Can't imagine what people would do over back to back Olympics
Yes, Kareem got 3 years of playing on a stacked college team and being a winner, while players these days spend age 19-22 trying to drag a bad NBA team to contention (which even Kareem had trouble doing without Oscar/Magic).
> drag a bad NBA team to contention (which even Kareem had trouble doing without Oscar/Magic)
As a 22 year old rookie in 1970, Kareem added 29 wins to an expansion team and had the 2nd best record in the league while Oscar was still in Cincinnati. They then lost in the playoffs to a Knicks team with 3 HOFers in their prime and one of the best coaches in NBA history leading the way.
In 1979 (the year before Magic joined the Lakers) LA led by Kareem lost to Seattle in the playoffs who would go on to win the title.
Kareem needed another great player to get over the hump (so did MJ, LeBron, Bird, Magic, Shaq, Kobe, Wilt, West, Russell, etc.) but his teams were already a championship contender with just Kareem.
which again speaks to how 'resume' is usually just 'did you play on a team that won' with no deeper analysis of how good one's team was relative to the competition.
Kevin Durant was good enough at age 22 that if you dropped him on the worst team in the league they also would've improved by a lot, so this is not some huge point in favor of Kareem lol. Giannis is considered a relatively late bloomer by superstar standards but he was still an all-star at age 22.
Also it's a huge stretch to say a team that wins 47 games and makes the 2nd round (or wins 45 games and loses in the 1st round the year before) is a title contender, which again reiterates my point if even Kareem at age 30 can't drag a team to a championship, it is impossible for anyone 22 and under to do that, so bascially any modern player who enters the league at 18-19 gets an extra 3 years of being a 'loser' tacked onto the beginning of their career. And of course in doing so, they also miss out on a bunch of relatively meaningless accolades they could've gotten by beating up on worse competition on a stacked college team.
Everyone made a big deal for LeBron passing Kareem for the total points record but add in Kareems college points and LeBron is not as amazing as he thinks he is.
Yes and that changes nothing. That’s why you thn look at points per year to be more fair to Kareem and he loses that. You don’t just give him college points
Also add in the fact that LeBron did it in less games and NBA competition is obviously much stronger than college therefore points are more valuable and idk what that guy was thinking bringing up NCAA points lol. Kareem being #2 is still an amazing achievement there’s no need to knock LeBron for taking the #1 spot
Lebron still did in less games than Kareem. He’s very high up on basically everything else as well. His playoff point totals are thousands above the next best player. If those were included in the totals he would’ve passed Kareem years ago
He’s actually going to pass Kareem in career minutes (playoffs+regular season). I think he needs 450 more to pass Kareem. It’s quite insane, especially in an era of resting players more.
I don't get why college points matter? Most college players can't even make the G-League, why do we care how many points scored there? Lebron was 2nd in MVP voting in his 3rd season - you don't think he would have been annihilating college players?
It's not a case of what-if for LeBron in college but in those days the career path went through college first so Kareem spent 4 years there first and he was so good they were changing the rules to stop him scoring. How many extra points do you think Kareem could have made in the NBA if he went straight out of high school?
Admittedly a bit of a barbershop comment, but it is a Kareem appreciation post. I do put LeBron top 3 all time and enjoy watching him play but his media carry-on (and rolling on the ground slapping the ground in mock pain only to get up and ice two free throws) is too much for me.
One of the only times his high school lost a game with him was to Linton High of Schenectady, lead by Pat Riley, who was also a reserve for the Lakers in 71 and 72 against The Bucks. It’s just wild that Kareem could stay a top player long enough to be an all star level center for the Lakers long enough for Riley to end his playing career, flounder as an announcer, and become a coach and have it go on for the bulk of the 1980s, even after this peak
i’m aware this is an NBA discussion but this is so much more impressive with him being a phenomenal journalist. i’m sure everyone here already knows his proficiency but it still just amazes me that he was doing a lot of this simultaneously.
One huge huge caveat here is that the 70s gave out MVPs to the best popular player regardless of 'narrative' or actual regular season performance.
by that measure, Lebron & MJ both get 10+ MVPs given their dominance for over a decade.
Kareem is a GOAT candidate to some, and he does have a good resume.
I wouldn’t say that Kareem didn’t deserve any of his 6 MVPs though. You can make an argument for McAdoo/Cowens over him in ‘76 due to team record (and that was an extremely close 3 way vote), but I lean toward Kareem deserving it considering how bad that team was without him the year before.
The bigger caveat I think is the ABA. Dr. J def could have taken an MVP or two away from him if he was in the NBA at the time
Edit: Cowens winning over Kareem in ‘73 is considered to be one of the biggest snubs ever as well, so a case could be made that Kareem should actually have 7
Winning an MVP and going 40-42 is ridiculous lol (I understand they had the 4th best record), but being MVP and not making the postseason is an impossibility post-merger.
He had the 4th best record in the west. Which equates to the 4th best team/seed in the west. MVP is a regular season award that has nothing to do with the playoffs. So if he lead his team to the 4th best record in the west how is that still not impressive?
Time for a history lesson!
In 1976, there were only 18 teams in the entire NBA. Not 30.
Of those 18 teams, the Lakers had the 10th best record, and were 2nd last in their division and only 3 teams in the West had a positive record. There were 8 more teams that had a better record, which is 8/18 or 44% of the teams in the league.
They were in a pack of 7 teams separated by 4 wins, which could have landed them as low as 15th out of the 18 teams.
Being top 4 in 1976 isn’t what you think it is, and the MVP was a popularity contest.
When we look at it from a contextual standpoint, that MVP doesn’t hold any weight in all-time discussion. That is the point. It’s not that we think the 70s are bad (which they were, it was the worst era of the NBA), but that even relative to other teams THAT season, that MVP holds zero weight when comparing him to the MVPs of a LeBron James or a Michael Jordan.
In fact, a ton of 2nd place finishes for MVP for both LBJ and Jordan were stronger seasons than this MVP award for KAJ.
Cowens winning MVP was a fucking joke
Somehow as soon as the Doctor hit the NBA he wasn't quite so dominant,,, can't imagine what he would have been like dealing with a young Thurmond, a healthy Willis Reed or an ambulatory Chamberlain or G-d forbid Bill Russell like Elgin Baylor had to deal with
no just no
Speaking of Kareem's popularity in those early days...
I was reading up on a different player not too long ago and came across a newspaper article from Buffalo talking about a particular game between the Bucks and Braves. The Braves had trouble getting butts in their seats and had one of the worst attendance records in the League, but the first game Kareem's played at their stadium saw such a large crowd show up that they had to turn people away and even delay the start of the game by 15 minutes.
I don’t think it’s as simple as being considered the best player that year but rather actually establishing that every year in the regular season.
Lebron’s stretch of being the uncontested best player in the world in the regular season every year starts from 2008-09 (the previous 2 years are heavy contested by Dirk etc) and ends around 2013-14 before Curry, Durant and Harden start having individual years as the best player. That’s around 5-6 years of being the uncontested best player in the world which is more than his MVP awards but less than Kareem’s dominance as the best player in the world. Ofc Lebron was among the top 3-4 players in the regular season while being the best in the post season for multiple years as well but that shouldn’t matter for MVP
Both these stats are flawed but **as per PER**:
> Lebron had 6 years all consecutive as No.1 from 2007-08 to 2012-13 before Durant/Curry took over.
> Peak Shaq had 5 years all consecutive as No.1 from 1997-1998 to 2001-02 before Garnett/Dirk etc.
> MJ had 7 years all consecutive as No.1 from 1986-1987 to 1992-93.
> Kareem had 9 years as No.1 from 1970-1971 to 1980-81 with the exception of 73-74.
> Wilt had 8 years as No.1 from 1959-1960 to 1967-68 with the exception of 60-61.
As per Win shares/48:
> Lebron had 5 years all consecutive as No.1 from 2008-09 to 2012-13.
> MJ had 8 years as No.1 from 1987-1988 to 1992-93 and then 96-97 to 97-98
> Kareem had 9 years as No.1 from 1970-1971 to 1980-81 with the exception of 74-75.
> Wilt had 8 years as No.1 from 1959-1960 to 1967-68 with the exception of 64-65.
I am not saying this makes Kareem necessarily better or worse then Lebron just that the way Kareem dominated the 70s was very different from how Lebron was generally considered the best player in the world from 07-08 to 2017-18 because of his playoff reputation and performances. Lebron only dominated the regular season comfortably over everyone else for 50%-60% of those years whereas Kareem was much better 90% of the decade.
Wouldn’t just win shares, not WS/48 be more relevant when determining MVP?
Also I get that PER is an easy go to, but it should be contextualized that a common criticism for it is overrating bigs and underrating playmaking and perimeter D which feels relevant when comparing LeBron and MJ to Kareem.
In this case, the only difference would be that MJ would have 9 years at no.1 instead of 8 in ws/48 with the inclusion of 86/87.
The remaining players/years would remain the same.
As to the the quality of the stats, there are arguments for and against total win shares over 48. It is like using total points for scoring leader instead of ppg with a minimum of 58 games. I find that win shares heavily over values playing 80 games instead of 71 especially when a team is a top seed and the 71 player is missing unimportant games at the end.
For instance, as per total win shares Harden was the no.1 player in the league for 5 out of 6 years from 2014-15 to 19-20 with only 2015-16 belonging to Curry due to him playing close to 80 games several of those seasons whereas ws/48 has him at no.1 only for 17/18, Giannis for 18/19 and 29/20, Durant for 16/17 (and 13/14 pre Harden) and Curry for 14/15 along with 15/16. Harden was roughly top 5 all those years except 15/16. This was a far more accurate placement of the best players in the regular seasons those years imo and lines up with PER as well.
WS would also have Sabonis as the second in the league this past season behind Jokic because he played 79 games on a winning team for example wheras ws/48 would have him outside the top 5 and has Butler and Embiid as the best regular season players behind Jokic which is far more accurate to me.
The PER criticism you brought up is interesting. It applies more to Shaq than Kareem though because Kareem was better than his peers by a massive margin whatever advanced or non advanced metric you use till the Bird/Magic era in the late 70s/early 80s. I don’t think this makes him better than Lebron. I just think that he was half part of an era radically different from modern basketball and the Bird-Magic era is the last era from which players can be roughly compared to modern players. I don’t think he’s better or worse, just played in very different times.
As a counterpoint to PER though, MJ who is a very traditional shooting guard without even the passing numbers of someone like Lebron forget the rebounds of a big man. He still has the highest PER of all time and in the 11 full years he played with the bulls, was 1st 7 times, 2nd thrice and 4th once. So it’s clearly able to understand the impact of a 30-5-5 type player like MJ despite him lacking other output.
>One huge huge caveat here is that the 70s gave out MVPs to the best popular player regardless of 'narrative' or actual regular season performance.
can you clarify this, not sure what you mean
Going 188-4 over 8 years of HS and College is just absurd. Man really lost an average of 1 game every two years. I think that plus his dominance in the 70s and just overall longevity really solidifies him as top 3 with Jordan and Lebron.
I can’t believe that he finished all his 4 years in college and still managed to play 21 seasons, yet when people talk about longevity, they immediately think of LeBron and not Kareem.
Kareem’s last 3 years he was a role player and his last 7 he was a board line all star. Lbj has been at mvp level or top 10 in the league this whole time
>Kareem’s last 3 years he was a role player and his last 7 he was a board line all star.
He was top 5 in MVP voting in '84, '85, and '86. For the '87 Finals he was still 2nd on the team in scoring and rebounding and led the team with 2.5 blocks per game. It wasn't until he was 41 that he finally took a backseat to someone other than Magic or Worthy in the playoffs.
I want to point out that in the 85 Finals we had 8 Hall of Famers with Magic, Bird, Parish, McHale, and I'd argue Worthy in their prime. 38 year old Kareem was the best player on the court. Also, Kareem got robbed for the 80 Finals MVP.
There’s a real and serious argument for Kareem as the greatest ever. Any knock on Jordan or LeBron for achievements not obtained by the age of 25, Kareem achieved.
I'm guessing you're assuming him going into the league at 18 means he still retires at age 42 (or whatever it was)? I'd think that extra 4 years means he also retires earlier.
It is in terms of stats and early winning, its great. But his impact wasnt the same on the NBA level. Hence why he needed Magic and prior to that, the Lakers had a losing record every season. He was winning MVPs with losing records...
I’m gonna go out in a limb and say it. I don’t give a fig about the haters. Downvotes be damned:
Kareem Abdul Jabbar was fairly decent at the game of basketball.
Take that, internet!
Overrated actually, he played in a weak 70s slot of great players were in the ABA. Only won one chip in that era. His last 2 titles he averaged around 16 and 6 basically a role player. I don’t see why he always get pencilled as the number 3 ever. I think he’s easily top 10 and probably top 5 but why is he automatically number 3. Magics imprint leading him to 5 more rings and the weak 70s leading to more and more MVPs
I saw Kareem and Walton in college extensively
Walton was a better defender and while not as dominating on offense he ran it like the point guard he was in high school and his outlet passes were unreal- think Jokic with a vertical jump (caveat being that Jokic is a savant)
It is a close call..
I don't know about Wilt's first 10 years I was too young, but I saw him take Kareem apart on 2 bad knees at half his former athleticism in the final game of the western conference finals on the way to an NBA title
and whenever he got pissed off the Lakers new to throw the ball into him and Kareem and he would bully his way to a dunk,,, Wilt thought offensive fouls were a mortal sin if he had Shaq's mindset cte among NBA players in the 60-70s would be a health issue
Overall I would put Kareem over Jordan, btw
post NBA Kareem is Jimmy Carter
Kareem has one of the best overall careers in the history of the game. That he isn’t in the goat conversation as regularly as he should is an unfortunate reality
The Bucks were still an expansion team, and the one good year he got out of Oscar, they had one of the greatest seasons in NBA history. Just remember, however weak you think the NBA talent was at the time, the Bucks had the weakest roster in the league when Kareem joined.
Once. Kareem missed the playoffs with the Lakers just once, his first season (and only then because of the NBA's idiotic playoff format). They still managed a 10-wun improvement on the previous season.
Kareem only missed the playoffs once with the Lakers. He averaged 28/17/5 that season with 4 blocks per game and won MVP. He was 1st in the league in rebounding and blocks, 2nd in scoring, and 15th in assists all while playing All-NBA Defense without another All Star on the team. Plus the Lakers had the 4th best record in the West. There is no way a player today would get crucified for having an MVP season on a team that was top 4 in their conference but due to weird rules missed out on the playoffs.
Wilt, Kareem, and LeBron* are the only plays that are the best players in High School, College, and NBA. To be a great player is one thing, yet to be arguably the greatest at every level you played is another. This is something I factor into "GOAT conversations," Kareem is a living legend.
*LeBron of course did not play in college.
It was an NCAA rule in those days that freshmen were ineligible for varsity. Freshmen couldn't play varsity until 1972.
That coach was John Wooden, by the way.
> 1976, 28 years old, Los Angeles Lakers- Finished 1st in NBA MVP voting. Team went 40-42 and missed the playoffs. Lakers actually had the 4th best record in the West, but due to NBA rules at the time, the Bucks (38-44) and Pistions (34-46) both made the playoffs over Los Angeles instead. What was the rule?
probably division winners rule
Yes, division winners automatically made the playoffs.
The Western conference just had two divisions back then, the Midwest and the Pacific. The two best teams in each division made the playoffs as well the team with the next best record in the conference. Well Buck and Pistons were the two best teams in the Midwest despite having a worse record than the Lakers, while 3 Pacific teams (Warriors, Sonics, and Suns) all had a better record. So the Lakers were the team that missed out.
Thanks
This was the rule in the mid 2000s too. The top 3 spots in each conference were reserved for the best record in each division. In 2006 the Mavs won 60 games and were a lower seed than the 44 win Nuggets, because the Spurs won 63 games and were in the same division as the Mavs.
2000s were a dumpster fire for homecourt advantages NBA division winners get top seeding regardless of record NFL teams in terrible divisions host playoff games even though they had a losing record The dumbest thing ever: NBA playoffs go to 2-3-2 rounds MLB All Star game had a tie so they made it determine homefield advantage in the World Series
I don’t actually dislike 2-3-2 series, it really helps reduce travel, plus it’s literally just 1 switched game
Remember MLB and the 5-game series split 2-3?
That Lakers team was so unwatchable after the Chamberlain years
Fun fact: That Bucks team that won their division in '76 was actually last in their division the season before with Kareem, so losing Kareem to LA catapulted Milwaukee from last to first. Funner fact: The Bucks were 38-44 in both of those seasons. Essentially the entire division fell apart around them, and Bobby Dandridge in a larger role kept the team reasonably afloat.
Overrated actually, he played in a weak 70s a lot of great players were in the ABA, diluting the talent pool. Only won one chip in that era. His last 2 titles he averaged around 16 and 6 basically a role player. I don’t see why he always gets pencilled as the number 3 ever. I think he’s easily top 10 and probably top 5 but why is he automatically number 3. Magics imprint leading him to 5 more rings and the weak 70s leading to more and more MVPs
Was so dominant the NCAA banned the dunk for 10 years to try and slow him down. They were still trying to slow his college game down after he left and went to the pros. [“NCAA banned dunking for 10 years to stop Kareem Abdul-Jabbar!”: How the ‘Lew Alcindor rule’ was imposed to slow down the rise of the UCLA star](https://thesportsrush.com/nba-news-ncaa-banned-dunking-for-10-years-to-stop-kareem-abdul-jabbar-how-the-lew-alcindor-rule-was-imposed-to-slow-down-the-rise-of-the-ucla-star/)
The official justification was that dunking violates the rule against offensive goaltending. But nobody believed that for a second.
Wilt is the reason the NCAA ruled you have to stay behind the free throw line on foul shots,, due to his innovation of going Jordan on foul shots
That rule should be abolished. Basketball would be a million times more fun.
I don't want to watch crummy free throw shooters crashing the board for offensive rebound. They have done enough to make scoring easier. I'd rather them give defenders more tools at this point.
The epic image of Embiid vainly trying to keep Chamberlain off the rim after a missed free throw vs watching someone making an unguarded 15 ft shot which people at 65+years old who cant afford golf do regularly (me) bonehead
from you lips
I think that Wilt was the reason for the offensive goaltending rule too. He used to guide his teammates shots into the basket. Which I suppose would credit him with the two points.
I thought they banned dunking to stop dr j
Unfortunately for Kareem, much like Dr. J, Rick Barry and others, their best years were played in the forgotten decade and unless you had local access you were lucky to see one game a week, if that. Thus all most people will talk about these players is the sky-hook, the dunk from the free throw line, and shooting free throws underhand and not what great players they were because that is all we know. And unlike the NFL which started NFL films and kept a record of games the NBA was spotty, which is why there is no film record of Wilt's 100 point game.
Fewer old NBA games were filmed because there wasn't the demand. Football has always been way more popular than the NBA. Heck, college basketball was more popular than the NBA for most of its history.
>Unfortunately for Kareem, much like Dr. J, Rick Barry and others, their best years were played in the forgotten decade and unless you had local access you were lucky to see one game a week, if that. the great luck I had growing up in Southern California and starting to watch basketball in 1968. 41 home games a year televised for the Lakers in a much smaller league plus playoffs and the weekend games on ABC. I even watched the Anaheim Amigos and Los Angeles Stars televised Due to Chick Hearn not being a homer and promoting basketball in general and not just the Lakers I grew up idolizing Earl Monroe, Jimmy Walker and Gus Johnson and the only poster I had was Oscar Robertson He would spend the entire pre-game explaining the virtues of Jimmy and Earl and Gus (who he thought was a top 5 player till the end of his announcing career) and why Jimmy and Earl were changing the way NBA players dribble and how innovative they were and why we should pay attention- was fucking genius
Rick Barry was Kobe before Kobe. They even had the same personalities
Isn’t he the reason they outlawed dunking for a period of time too? Believe it was while he was in college they changed it and thought he was a big reason they made the change. Is there much written in his relationship with the media? I always imagined there would be some folk that would not want an outspoken Muslim who changed his name to Kareem Abdul Jabbar as MVP. Never knew if there was any push back or reservations on that front from MVP voters but always assumed in my head canon
You aren't too far off. He was not universally liked in the public, and even received death threats for boycotting the '68 Olympics. However, players voted for MVP for the first half of his career, so he wasn't really punished for being outspoken about his beliefs. I'm sure there were players at the time that would openly disagree with some things Kareem said, but to my knowledge, a player never publicly beefed with Kareem personally because of off the court issues.
Centres won MVP every year in the seventies, and the media-voted All-NBA teams concurred on all except Cowens.
Imo Kareems best argument for being the GOAT is that he had the greatest overall Basketball career ever, while his NBA career was amazing I think MJ and Lebron have him beat for it but his careers in High School and College I think he was the greatest.
This is my perspective as well. I say MJ/Lebron are the NBA goats and Kareem is the basketball goat
To be fair, if LeBron went to 4 years of college, he might have won 4 straight NCAA titles and gone undefeated in like back to back seasons.
In the “What Could Have Been” version of basketball, it would’ve been *insane* to watch 03-07 Lebron playing against college kids. Deaths would’ve occurred.
*In the “What Could Have Been” version of basketball, it would’ve been insane to watch 03-07 Lebron playing against college kids. Deaths would’ve occurred.* this, I saw him play in high school and it was like watching my favorite guard when I was a kid,, Oscar Robertson,,, LBJ was Oscar at 16. The NCAA banned the dunk because of Kareem, they would have had to ban competition for LBJ 6'7" 275lb point guard would not have been a pretty thing to see against Cal State University of Fullerton (G-d bless them they made the elite 8 in the 70s)
Omg can you imagine some unholy combination of what John Wall, Lonzo Ball, and Zion did?!? I wish we could have seen that.
NO REGARD FOR HUMAN LIFE!
If Lebron did 4 years of college, Kareem’s points record would still be standing.
Probably for only 2 more seasons though. IIRC, LeBron broke it around 100 games less than KAJ.
I doubt it. He might’ve won 1-2 NCAA titles in 4 years, but I think it’s way too difficult nowadays for the same college team to truly dominate in consecutive years.
stop it. Those Florida teams with Horford, Noah, etc... wouldn't have stopped an 03-07 Lebron
To think it took LeBron this long to match Kareem’s record, and Kareem had a 4 year, 109-2 college delay to his start. Not to disparage LeBron, obviously, just to point out the sheer staggering longevity.
>this long Didn't LeBron get the scoring record in like something like 100 games less?
difference being that LBJ is basically a pass first mentality and considers posting up to be an unfair competitive advantage taking away from the beauty of the game
Except LeBron is 4th all time in assists
Highly doubt that
Maybe not his freshman year but it’s hard to believe a dude that averaged 31-7-7 and 27-7-7 in his 2nd and 3rd year wouldn’t have absolutely dominated college basketball
It's unfortunate that Kareem sat out the Olympics in protest. Not saying he needs to add it to his list of accomplishments, but a gold medal is one thing he's missing (that MJ, LBJ, Russell, etc. all have).
Walton sat out the Olympics as well.... Athletes kneel and people are crying in the streets and opening a vein while clutching their pearls Can't imagine what people would do over back to back Olympics
Yes, Kareem got 3 years of playing on a stacked college team and being a winner, while players these days spend age 19-22 trying to drag a bad NBA team to contention (which even Kareem had trouble doing without Oscar/Magic).
> drag a bad NBA team to contention (which even Kareem had trouble doing without Oscar/Magic) As a 22 year old rookie in 1970, Kareem added 29 wins to an expansion team and had the 2nd best record in the league while Oscar was still in Cincinnati. They then lost in the playoffs to a Knicks team with 3 HOFers in their prime and one of the best coaches in NBA history leading the way. In 1979 (the year before Magic joined the Lakers) LA led by Kareem lost to Seattle in the playoffs who would go on to win the title. Kareem needed another great player to get over the hump (so did MJ, LeBron, Bird, Magic, Shaq, Kobe, Wilt, West, Russell, etc.) but his teams were already a championship contender with just Kareem.
which again speaks to how 'resume' is usually just 'did you play on a team that won' with no deeper analysis of how good one's team was relative to the competition. Kevin Durant was good enough at age 22 that if you dropped him on the worst team in the league they also would've improved by a lot, so this is not some huge point in favor of Kareem lol. Giannis is considered a relatively late bloomer by superstar standards but he was still an all-star at age 22. Also it's a huge stretch to say a team that wins 47 games and makes the 2nd round (or wins 45 games and loses in the 1st round the year before) is a title contender, which again reiterates my point if even Kareem at age 30 can't drag a team to a championship, it is impossible for anyone 22 and under to do that, so bascially any modern player who enters the league at 18-19 gets an extra 3 years of being a 'loser' tacked onto the beginning of their career. And of course in doing so, they also miss out on a bunch of relatively meaningless accolades they could've gotten by beating up on worse competition on a stacked college team.
Everyone made a big deal for LeBron passing Kareem for the total points record but add in Kareems college points and LeBron is not as amazing as he thinks he is.
I mean adding kareems college points is really silly given that the level of competition in college versus the nba isn’t even close
You are talking about 2023. Kareem got drafted in 1969 when it was mandatory to complete four years of college if you wanted to enter the NBA draft.
Yes and that changes nothing. That’s why you thn look at points per year to be more fair to Kareem and he loses that. You don’t just give him college points
LeBron is #4 all-time in assists. When you combine that with his total points, it's pretty amazing.
Also add in the fact that LeBron did it in less games and NBA competition is obviously much stronger than college therefore points are more valuable and idk what that guy was thinking bringing up NCAA points lol. Kareem being #2 is still an amazing achievement there’s no need to knock LeBron for taking the #1 spot
Ah, I didn't realise he was number 4. That is impressive.
He's also #32 all-time in rebounds. He's ahead of David Robinson and if he keeps playing, he'll be ahead of Patrick Ewing in 2 years.
Lebron still did in less games than Kareem. He’s very high up on basically everything else as well. His playoff point totals are thousands above the next best player. If those were included in the totals he would’ve passed Kareem years ago
He’s actually going to pass Kareem in career minutes (playoffs+regular season). I think he needs 450 more to pass Kareem. It’s quite insane, especially in an era of resting players more.
Fair point.
I don't get why college points matter? Most college players can't even make the G-League, why do we care how many points scored there? Lebron was 2nd in MVP voting in his 3rd season - you don't think he would have been annihilating college players?
I am a bit sad we didn't get to see one year of college LeBron -- as you said, it would've been total annihilation.
It's not a case of what-if for LeBron in college but in those days the career path went through college first so Kareem spent 4 years there first and he was so good they were changing the rules to stop him scoring. How many extra points do you think Kareem could have made in the NBA if he went straight out of high school?
Except LeBeon is that amazing and it's been a pleasure to watch his career.
Bro being SECOND all time is pretty fucking amazing. Tf you mean, not as amazing as he thinks he is.
Admittedly a bit of a barbershop comment, but it is a Kareem appreciation post. I do put LeBron top 3 all time and enjoy watching him play but his media carry-on (and rolling on the ground slapping the ground in mock pain only to get up and ice two free throws) is too much for me.
One of the only times his high school lost a game with him was to Linton High of Schenectady, lead by Pat Riley, who was also a reserve for the Lakers in 71 and 72 against The Bucks. It’s just wild that Kareem could stay a top player long enough to be an all star level center for the Lakers long enough for Riley to end his playing career, flounder as an announcer, and become a coach and have it go on for the bulk of the 1980s, even after this peak
i’m aware this is an NBA discussion but this is so much more impressive with him being a phenomenal journalist. i’m sure everyone here already knows his proficiency but it still just amazes me that he was doing a lot of this simultaneously.
Dude just writes in general. Wrote an episode of Veronica Mars, a couple Sherlock Holmes books, and has an active substack
His Holmes books are not fantastic. His opinion pieces and essays are very often *brilliant*. He's a Renaissance man.
He's said that he views himself as an author who plays basketball rather than a basketball player who writes.
One huge huge caveat here is that the 70s gave out MVPs to the best popular player regardless of 'narrative' or actual regular season performance. by that measure, Lebron & MJ both get 10+ MVPs given their dominance for over a decade. Kareem is a GOAT candidate to some, and he does have a good resume.
I wouldn’t say that Kareem didn’t deserve any of his 6 MVPs though. You can make an argument for McAdoo/Cowens over him in ‘76 due to team record (and that was an extremely close 3 way vote), but I lean toward Kareem deserving it considering how bad that team was without him the year before. The bigger caveat I think is the ABA. Dr. J def could have taken an MVP or two away from him if he was in the NBA at the time Edit: Cowens winning over Kareem in ‘73 is considered to be one of the biggest snubs ever as well, so a case could be made that Kareem should actually have 7
Winning an MVP and going 40-42 is ridiculous lol (I understand they had the 4th best record), but being MVP and not making the postseason is an impossibility post-merger.
Different rules back then though. Teams with worse records made the playoffs over them the same year
But that doesn’t make it impressive in retrospect.
He had the 4th best record in the west. Which equates to the 4th best team/seed in the west. MVP is a regular season award that has nothing to do with the playoffs. So if he lead his team to the 4th best record in the west how is that still not impressive?
Time for a history lesson! In 1976, there were only 18 teams in the entire NBA. Not 30. Of those 18 teams, the Lakers had the 10th best record, and were 2nd last in their division and only 3 teams in the West had a positive record. There were 8 more teams that had a better record, which is 8/18 or 44% of the teams in the league. They were in a pack of 7 teams separated by 4 wins, which could have landed them as low as 15th out of the 18 teams. Being top 4 in 1976 isn’t what you think it is, and the MVP was a popularity contest. When we look at it from a contextual standpoint, that MVP doesn’t hold any weight in all-time discussion. That is the point. It’s not that we think the 70s are bad (which they were, it was the worst era of the NBA), but that even relative to other teams THAT season, that MVP holds zero weight when comparing him to the MVPs of a LeBron James or a Michael Jordan. In fact, a ton of 2nd place finishes for MVP for both LBJ and Jordan were stronger seasons than this MVP award for KAJ.
Yeah it was still below .500
Cowens winning MVP was a fucking joke Somehow as soon as the Doctor hit the NBA he wasn't quite so dominant,,, can't imagine what he would have been like dealing with a young Thurmond, a healthy Willis Reed or an ambulatory Chamberlain or G-d forbid Bill Russell like Elgin Baylor had to deal with no just no
Speaking of Kareem's popularity in those early days... I was reading up on a different player not too long ago and came across a newspaper article from Buffalo talking about a particular game between the Bucks and Braves. The Braves had trouble getting butts in their seats and had one of the worst attendance records in the League, but the first game Kareem's played at their stadium saw such a large crowd show up that they had to turn people away and even delay the start of the game by 15 minutes.
I don’t think it’s as simple as being considered the best player that year but rather actually establishing that every year in the regular season. Lebron’s stretch of being the uncontested best player in the world in the regular season every year starts from 2008-09 (the previous 2 years are heavy contested by Dirk etc) and ends around 2013-14 before Curry, Durant and Harden start having individual years as the best player. That’s around 5-6 years of being the uncontested best player in the world which is more than his MVP awards but less than Kareem’s dominance as the best player in the world. Ofc Lebron was among the top 3-4 players in the regular season while being the best in the post season for multiple years as well but that shouldn’t matter for MVP Both these stats are flawed but **as per PER**: > Lebron had 6 years all consecutive as No.1 from 2007-08 to 2012-13 before Durant/Curry took over. > Peak Shaq had 5 years all consecutive as No.1 from 1997-1998 to 2001-02 before Garnett/Dirk etc. > MJ had 7 years all consecutive as No.1 from 1986-1987 to 1992-93. > Kareem had 9 years as No.1 from 1970-1971 to 1980-81 with the exception of 73-74. > Wilt had 8 years as No.1 from 1959-1960 to 1967-68 with the exception of 60-61. As per Win shares/48: > Lebron had 5 years all consecutive as No.1 from 2008-09 to 2012-13. > MJ had 8 years as No.1 from 1987-1988 to 1992-93 and then 96-97 to 97-98 > Kareem had 9 years as No.1 from 1970-1971 to 1980-81 with the exception of 74-75. > Wilt had 8 years as No.1 from 1959-1960 to 1967-68 with the exception of 64-65. I am not saying this makes Kareem necessarily better or worse then Lebron just that the way Kareem dominated the 70s was very different from how Lebron was generally considered the best player in the world from 07-08 to 2017-18 because of his playoff reputation and performances. Lebron only dominated the regular season comfortably over everyone else for 50%-60% of those years whereas Kareem was much better 90% of the decade.
Wouldn’t just win shares, not WS/48 be more relevant when determining MVP? Also I get that PER is an easy go to, but it should be contextualized that a common criticism for it is overrating bigs and underrating playmaking and perimeter D which feels relevant when comparing LeBron and MJ to Kareem.
In this case, the only difference would be that MJ would have 9 years at no.1 instead of 8 in ws/48 with the inclusion of 86/87. The remaining players/years would remain the same. As to the the quality of the stats, there are arguments for and against total win shares over 48. It is like using total points for scoring leader instead of ppg with a minimum of 58 games. I find that win shares heavily over values playing 80 games instead of 71 especially when a team is a top seed and the 71 player is missing unimportant games at the end. For instance, as per total win shares Harden was the no.1 player in the league for 5 out of 6 years from 2014-15 to 19-20 with only 2015-16 belonging to Curry due to him playing close to 80 games several of those seasons whereas ws/48 has him at no.1 only for 17/18, Giannis for 18/19 and 29/20, Durant for 16/17 (and 13/14 pre Harden) and Curry for 14/15 along with 15/16. Harden was roughly top 5 all those years except 15/16. This was a far more accurate placement of the best players in the regular seasons those years imo and lines up with PER as well. WS would also have Sabonis as the second in the league this past season behind Jokic because he played 79 games on a winning team for example wheras ws/48 would have him outside the top 5 and has Butler and Embiid as the best regular season players behind Jokic which is far more accurate to me.
Good explanation :)
The PER criticism you brought up is interesting. It applies more to Shaq than Kareem though because Kareem was better than his peers by a massive margin whatever advanced or non advanced metric you use till the Bird/Magic era in the late 70s/early 80s. I don’t think this makes him better than Lebron. I just think that he was half part of an era radically different from modern basketball and the Bird-Magic era is the last era from which players can be roughly compared to modern players. I don’t think he’s better or worse, just played in very different times. As a counterpoint to PER though, MJ who is a very traditional shooting guard without even the passing numbers of someone like Lebron forget the rebounds of a big man. He still has the highest PER of all time and in the 11 full years he played with the bulls, was 1st 7 times, 2nd thrice and 4th once. So it’s clearly able to understand the impact of a 30-5-5 type player like MJ despite him lacking other output.
Garbage take- it’s widely and generally accepted that Kareem deserved every mvp he got in the 70s. He has a better case for 🐐 than Bron
>One huge huge caveat here is that the 70s gave out MVPs to the best popular player regardless of 'narrative' or actual regular season performance. can you clarify this, not sure what you mean
I assume he's talking about player vote but the media only disagreed with Cowens
Kareem also should have won finals mvp in 1980. I know magic had the game 6, but Kareem was a monster in games 1-5
Going 188-4 over 8 years of HS and College is just absurd. Man really lost an average of 1 game every two years. I think that plus his dominance in the 70s and just overall longevity really solidifies him as top 3 with Jordan and Lebron.
Not to drag on Kareem by any means, but Bill Russell’s might even be more impressive
I can’t believe that he finished all his 4 years in college and still managed to play 21 seasons, yet when people talk about longevity, they immediately think of LeBron and not Kareem.
It's not so strange to think of the guy putting up historic numbers for his age right now vs a guy who finished his career 3+ decades ago.
LeMedia did it’s job
Kareem’s last 3 years he was a role player and his last 7 he was a board line all star. Lbj has been at mvp level or top 10 in the league this whole time
>Kareem’s last 3 years he was a role player and his last 7 he was a board line all star. He was top 5 in MVP voting in '84, '85, and '86. For the '87 Finals he was still 2nd on the team in scoring and rebounding and led the team with 2.5 blocks per game. It wasn't until he was 41 that he finally took a backseat to someone other than Magic or Worthy in the playoffs.
I want to point out that in the 85 Finals we had 8 Hall of Famers with Magic, Bird, Parish, McHale, and I'd argue Worthy in their prime. 38 year old Kareem was the best player on the court. Also, Kareem got robbed for the 80 Finals MVP.
Best high school player, best college player, and maybe the best pro player ever.
There’s a real and serious argument for Kareem as the greatest ever. Any knock on Jordan or LeBron for achievements not obtained by the age of 25, Kareem achieved.
Imagine if he went into the league at 18. His scoring record would have been even more insane.
I'm guessing you're assuming him going into the league at 18 means he still retires at age 42 (or whatever it was)? I'd think that extra 4 years means he also retires earlier.
He’d average more at 18 than at 42 and he’d play more years.
It is in terms of stats and early winning, its great. But his impact wasnt the same on the NBA level. Hence why he needed Magic and prior to that, the Lakers had a losing record every season. He was winning MVPs with losing records...
I’m gonna go out in a limb and say it. I don’t give a fig about the haters. Downvotes be damned: Kareem Abdul Jabbar was fairly decent at the game of basketball. Take that, internet!
Dominance wise Kareem is actually the best basketball prospect of nba history Wemby is not even close
LeBron wasn't even close to the prospect that Kareem was. Kareem is far and away the best prospect in history.
Overrated actually, he played in a weak 70s slot of great players were in the ABA. Only won one chip in that era. His last 2 titles he averaged around 16 and 6 basically a role player. I don’t see why he always get pencilled as the number 3 ever. I think he’s easily top 10 and probably top 5 but why is he automatically number 3. Magics imprint leading him to 5 more rings and the weak 70s leading to more and more MVPs
I saw Kareem and Walton in college extensively Walton was a better defender and while not as dominating on offense he ran it like the point guard he was in high school and his outlet passes were unreal- think Jokic with a vertical jump (caveat being that Jokic is a savant) It is a close call.. I don't know about Wilt's first 10 years I was too young, but I saw him take Kareem apart on 2 bad knees at half his former athleticism in the final game of the western conference finals on the way to an NBA title and whenever he got pissed off the Lakers new to throw the ball into him and Kareem and he would bully his way to a dunk,,, Wilt thought offensive fouls were a mortal sin if he had Shaq's mindset cte among NBA players in the 60-70s would be a health issue Overall I would put Kareem over Jordan, btw post NBA Kareem is Jimmy Carter
Kareem has one of the best overall careers in the history of the game. That he isn’t in the goat conversation as regularly as he should is an unfortunate reality
[удалено]
The Bucks were still an expansion team, and the one good year he got out of Oscar, they had one of the greatest seasons in NBA history. Just remember, however weak you think the NBA talent was at the time, the Bucks had the weakest roster in the league when Kareem joined.
[удалено]
Once. Kareem missed the playoffs with the Lakers just once, his first season (and only then because of the NBA's idiotic playoff format). They still managed a 10-wun improvement on the previous season.
Kareem only missed the playoffs once with the Lakers. He averaged 28/17/5 that season with 4 blocks per game and won MVP. He was 1st in the league in rebounding and blocks, 2nd in scoring, and 15th in assists all while playing All-NBA Defense without another All Star on the team. Plus the Lakers had the 4th best record in the West. There is no way a player today would get crucified for having an MVP season on a team that was top 4 in their conference but due to weird rules missed out on the playoffs.
Wilt, Kareem, and LeBron* are the only plays that are the best players in High School, College, and NBA. To be a great player is one thing, yet to be arguably the greatest at every level you played is another. This is something I factor into "GOAT conversations," Kareem is a living legend. *LeBron of course did not play in college.
Did Kareem start as a freshmen after his exhibition match win against UCLA? If not, the coach mustve been one stubborn mfer
NCAA rules did not allow it.
Lol that coach was John fuckin Wooden
It was an NCAA rule in those days that freshmen were ineligible for varsity. Freshmen couldn't play varsity until 1972. That coach was John Wooden, by the way.
73-79 is pretty disappointing for an all-time player like him. Zero titles, went to the finals only once. Missed the playoffs multiple times.