Who is the best basketball player of all time?

Encyclopedia of Opinion

Question: Who is the best basketball player of all time?
Position‹4 of 5›: Wilt Chamberlain is the best basketball player of all time
Argument: Chamberlain's records are untouchable

Many of the statistical records set by Chamberlain have never been approached by any other player.

The argument

Wilt Chamberlain was the king of the box score, routinely putting up eye-catching numbers and setting some of basketball's most iconic and unbreakable records. Standing over seven feet tall and weighing over 250 pounds in an era when most players were comparatively undersized, Chamberlain towered over most of his competitors, and he used his extraordinary athleticism to its full potential. In most NBA seasons, scoring over 30 points per game is sufficient to be among the league's top scorers. Chamberlain is not only the sole player to have averaged more than 40 points per game for a season, but in fact averaged over 50 points per game in the 1961-62 season. Perhaps his most famous record is scoring 100 points in a game, an NBA record, on March 2, 1962. The closest any other player has come to this record is 81 points, achieved by Kobe Bryant over 40 years later. To date, Chamberlain still holds 4 of the 6 highest-scoring single games in NBA history. Aside from scoring, he holds various similarly mind-boggling records in rebounds, assists, and more obscure categories such as minutes played. Going by the numbers, Chamberlain is the greatest of all time.

Premises

[P1]Chamberlain set basketball's most iconic and unbreakable records, towering over an era of undersized players. [P2] He is the only player to average over 40 — even 50 — points in a season and scored a record 100 points in a game, a mark no one has come within 19 points of. [P3] He still holds four of the six highest-scoring games and dominant records in rebounds, assists, and minutes. [C] Therefore, because Chamberlain's records are untouchable, Wilt Chamberlain is the best basketball player of all time.

Counter-arguments

Critics reply that the argument's own framing is the objection: Chamberlain's gaudy numbers were amassed in the early 1960s against a smaller, less-developed league, at a much faster pace, and against markedly undersized opponents, which inflated the raw totals. Statistical dominance over weaker competition is not the same as being the best player. They add that box-score records measure individual accumulation, whereas "best of all time" is often decided by winning. Bill Russell's Celtics repeatedly beat Chamberlain's teams in the playoffs, and Chamberlain won only two titles, so on the criterion many weigh most heavily he falls short of rivals.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] That Chamberlain "towered over undersized players" is itself the objection — his records were set against weaker, less-developed competition at a high pace, inflating the raw numbers. [Rejecting P3] Individual records measure statistical accumulation; by team success Russell's Celtics repeatedly beat Chamberlain in the playoffs, which many weigh more heavily for "best of all time."