Michael Jordan is a fraud

[eaglesnut]

In his 50 ppg season he averaged 48.5 minutes per game. He never sat down for a single minute that season.

It's heroic.

So many years and not yet another one so great.

 

[msgkings322]

Wilt was certainly slaying, if you believe his count.

Even if the count was 10x fewer, it's still very impressive

 

[msgkings322]

Kind of have to question Wilt’s 100 point game too right?

Not like there was any video proof of the game.

Disagree on that, they wouldn't have let him put up a card in the famous photo, the people there kept track and agreed he scored that many. There's a record of how many FGs and FTs he made for that particular game and no one has ever disputed it.

 

[flyerhawk]

I think that is possible.

So are the scoring records given the lack of competition.

I am just more skeptical now.

It's possible certainly but I always felt that the number seemed dubious to me. Never sat down for even a couple of minutes.

 

[tlance]

Disagree on that, they wouldn't have let him put up a card in the famous photo, the people there kept track and agreed he scored that many. There's a record of how many FGs and FTs he made for that particular game and no one has ever disputed it.

Who tracked it though?

I agree that points aren’t as easy to fudge as rebounds.

But before games were telivised?

Stuff gets exaggerated. If the same person fudging the rebounding numbers is working on the same team as the person keeping the official book, who is to say they can’t fudge that too?

 

[flyerhawk]

It's heroic.

So many years and not yet another one so great.

It also tells you about the state of the game back then and the level of competition he faced.

 

[tlance]

It's possible certainly but I always felt that the number seemed dubious to me. Never sat down for even a couple of minutes.

Was a lot more common for players to go all 48 back then.

Especially someone as physically dominant as Wilt. He can rest on the court and still be way more impactful than a back up.

Just about avoiding foul trouble, which Wilt was famous for being able to do.

 

[msgkings322]

Who tracked it though?

I agree that points aren’t as easy to fudge as rebounds.

But before games were telivised?

Stuff gets exaggerated. If the same person fudging the rebounding numbers is working on the same team as the person keeping the official book, who is to say they can’t fudge that too?

The people playing the game, and the coaches, and the statistician for that game. It's dumb to question if he really got 100 points that day just because it wasn't televised. There were a lot of people there keeping track.

 

[flyerhawk]

Was a lot more common for players to go all 48 back then.

Especially someone as physically dominant as Wilt. He can rest on the court and still be way more impactful than a back up.

Just about avoiding foul trouble, which Wilt was famous for being able to do.

Well given he never fouled out of a game in his career and only had 5 fouls 30 times, I'm not sure how concerned he was about fouling out.

 

[tlance]

The people playing the game, and the coaches, and the statistician for that game. It's dumb to question if he really got 100 points that day just because it wasn't televised. There were a lot of people there keeping track.

It isn’t dumb.

Back then there was an official book that kept the scoring stats. So it is unlikely. But that is 1 person doing that.

The players and coaches are not counting Wilt’s points. No chance of that.

Wilt might have known. A lot of people keep track of their own points. Some of the fans might have been counting. Not players and coaches.

 

[msgkings322]

It isn’t dumb.

Back then there was an official book that kept the scoring stats. So it is unlikely. But that is 1 person doing that.

The players and coaches are not counting Wilt’s points. No chance of that.

Wilt might have known. A lot of people keep track of their own points. Some of the fans might have been counting. Not players and coaches.

You don't think after the first half someone took notice and said "hey Wilt you could get 100"? I'm pretty sure by the 4th quarter the whole gym knew what was happening.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Who tracked it though?

I agree that points aren’t as easy to fudge as rebounds.

But before games were telivised?

Stuff gets exaggerated. If the same person fudging the rebounding numbers is working on the same team as the person keeping the official book, who is to say they can’t fudge that too?

not to mention if a fan is tracking, they will just account the difference to an error... the official tracker doesnt make errors...not back then...


given, you cant convince someone that 72 points was really 100... so even if it wasnt 100 it was still over 90...

 

[tlance]

not to mention if a fan is tracking, they will just account the difference to an error... the official tracker doesnt make errors...not back then...


given, you cant convince someone that 72 points was really 100... so even if it wasnt 100 it was still over 90...

Defintely was close.

Probably was legit.

Like I said, not 100% convinced though.

 

[tlance]

You don't think after the first half someone took notice and said "hey Wilt you could get 100"? I'm pretty sure by the 4th quarter the whole gym knew what was happening.

Oh, I am sure that is true.

But maybe the scorer gave him a couple extra buckets in the first half.

Point being, players and coaches are not counting his points to know for sure what he got. They just know he got a lot.

 

[msgkings322]

Oh, I am sure that is true.

But maybe the scorer gave him a couple extra buckets in the first half.

Point being, players and coaches are not counting his points to know for sure what he got. They just know he got a lot.

This is overly conspiratorial but no one can stop you from thinking it

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Defintely was close.

Probably was legit.

Like I said, not 100% convinced though.

yea... i am not arguing... i think it is very likely that it was less... like i said, if a fan and the official scorer are both tracking, and it is close... the official scorer is not going to double check their scoring based on what the fan tracked...

while the fan is going to just account the difference to their error...

 

[tlance]

This is overly conspiratorial but no one can stop you from thinking it

All I said is that it is possible.

That is it.

Games were scrutinized anywhere close to what they are today.

 

[tlance]

yea... i am not arguing... i think it is very likely that it was less... like i said, if a fan and the official scorer are both tracking, and it is close... the official scorer is not going to double check their scoring based on what the fan tracked...

while the fan is going to just account the difference to their error...

Yep.

Fans get caught in the hype too. And the story of seeing a player score 100 is a lot better than seeing him score 94.

If there were a couple fans who counted different, they are highly unlikely to say anything.

And even if they did, everyone else going to believe the official scorer got it right also. Because he is official.

 

[msgkings322]

All I said is that it is possible.

That is it.

Games were scrutinized anywhere close to what they are today.

Yes and all the Trumpies are saying is it's possible to rig an election. Same mindset.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Dude took 63 shots to get to 100...it's probably legit.