What research, they didn't keep track of turnovers, blocks, PERs, any of that stuff, and what they did track was done with a pencil and paper and subject to human error. Still some of his official stats are downright pathetic. He finished with a career fg% of .540 and a free throw % of .511. For comparison, Rudy's career % in those areas are presently .650 and .634. Due to the fact that games were considerably longer and Wilt averaged 45.8 minutes per game compared to Rudy's 31.6 mins per game (for their careers, excluding Rudy's first year), things like rebounds and assists are difficult to compare. Sure Wilt averaged 22.9 rebounds per game for his career and Rudy has a paltry 12.4 (excluding his first year where he barely played), but Rudy seems to have turned a corner here due to increased strength and by comparing 15 boards per game for 32 minutes compared to Wilt's average at that age (29) of 24.6 rpg for 47.3 minutes, we can see that Gobert is not far behind on a per minute basis. The remaining advantage for Chamberlain in this department could easily be attributed to today’s three point shot which decreases the natural rebounding advantage the big man has. And when you factor in what they allowed them to get away with in those days combined with Wilt's strength you can see where making a truly objective comparison in this department becomes nearly impossible.
But beyond the numbers, I was there! I watched many of those classic encounters between Chamberlain and Jabbar, and Chamberlain and Russell. If he was so damn dominant why do his closest contemporaries and rivals have better winning records? In 16 seasons, Wilt only managed to win two rings whereas Russell won 11 titles in 13 seasons and Jabbar won 6 rings in 20 seasons. Let's also remember just how small the league was in those days. One would think that a truly phenomenal freak center would have fared a little bit better. What I remember of Wilt towards the end was an almost freakishly scared to be fouled athlete ala Ben Simmons last season that would alternately shoot underhand, overhand to the side of the line or actually stradling at the top of the circle shooting the ball two hand between the legs.
Regardless what you want to believe or argue, it was a truly different game back then, played over more minutes and with more laissez faire officiating. I remember when Earl the Pearl Monroe came along, because until that time a guard that could penetrate and finish among the trees was unheard of. He and Nate the Skate Archibald ushered in a new era with better ball skills and quicker more athletic players IMO. Comparing the players of that era in terms of accomplishments is almost like apples and oranges - very difficult to do.
And for the record, please don't try to tell me what I can and can't say on this forum, you're no more of an authority than I am.
Foster was better most nights IMO.
