Bill Russell's true height FINALLY revealed

[CavaliersFTW]

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/138/7/f/russdunkolympics_by_dantheman9758-d506gc1.gif

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/college/finalfour_history/1955/index.html

1955 Sports Illustrated:
6' 9 5/8": "Don't call me 6-foot-10, I'm enough of a goon as it is."

Thus explaining why he was listed 6-10 early in his career as a collegiate athlete and Olympic athlete, but only 6-9 as a professional.

Russell's measurements:

Height: 6-9.63
Sports Illustrated 1955

Wingspan: 7-4
The book: "The Rivalry"

Hand length: 10.5"
The book: "The Rivalry"

Hand width: 9.5"
(using photoshop grid deduction based on 10.5" hand length... will post image later)

Career playing weight range: 215-240lbs
Prime playing weight range: 222-228lbs
(Various newspapers and self-admission)



http://www.nba.com/celtics/photos/bill-russell-reed-block300400.jpg





Compare with 2012 draft:
http://www.nba.com/news/2012-combine-measurements/index.html

[SpecialQue]

Final-fvcking-ly. I was sick of waiting for this.

[Punpun]

Final-fvcking-ly. I was sick of waiting for this.

I've been waiting for OVER 50 YEARS. Oh wait. No, I wasn't. Who give a shit ? :biggums:

[CavaliersFTW]

I've been waiting for OVER 50 YEARS. Oh wait. No, I wasn't. Who give a shit ? :biggums:
:cheers:

[ILLsmak]

What's his standing reach, then?

Looking at Russell dude was an amazing athlete.


-Smak

[CavaliersFTW]

What's his standing reach, then?

Looking at Russell dude was an amazing athlete.


-Smak

I've only ever seen an unverified claim circulating the internet is that it was 9-4" (and that would be in wafer thin Chuck Taylors). If that were true that would mean it was ~2" less than Wilt's and (if all shoes were created equally) ~2" more than Dwight's but I need to find out where this claim originally comes from before I can cite anything because you never know, it could be a false lead.

[JohnnySic]

Easy 6'11" in today's NBA.

[SuperPippen]

I've been waiting for OVER 50 YEARS. Oh wait. No, I wasn't. Who give a shit ? :biggums:

I do.

Nice of you to clear this up, CavaliersFTW. I appreciate and respect your knowledge on the older NBA legends.

[CavaliersFTW]

Easy 6'11" in today's NBA.
Especially considering Dwight got a pass for 6-11 even though he was 6-9 barefoot and 6-10.25 in shoes. If Russell wore the same 1.25" shoes he'd be looking down at Dwight by nearly 3/4 of an inch.

[Peteballa]

http://gallery.rennlist.com/albums/greatthread/best_thread_ever2.jpg

[CavaliersFTW]

Case in point as to why threads like this are relevant (to those that discuss 60s basketball):

Basketball Reference:
Bill Russell listed 6-9, 215
Kevin Love listed 6-10, 260

With the above information it would imply that Russell would get abused by today's "modern/bigger" athletes like Kevin Love - and none of his past accomplishments make any sense. It really does make his era seem "weak".

But research like I've done exposes why Russell and his peers so often become misunderstood and underrated Here's Kevin Love's and Bill Russell's actual anthropomorphic measurements side by side:

Height
Russ: 6-9.63 (+1.88")
Love: 6-7.75

Wingspan
Russ: 7-4 (+4.75")
Love: 6-11.25

Weight
Russ: 228 (- 7lbs)
Love: 235 < he slimmed down to this weight for this past season

So, who really has the physical advantages over who if they hypothetically went head to head? Doing research like I do uncovers information that helps explain some of the superstars that dominated the oft-misunderstood 60s and it is all completely relevant (and necessary) if fair comparisons are going to be drawn.

[Scoooter]

Love's 6'10" listing is hilarious. To not even be 6'8"...

[ProfessorMurder]

Great .gif, he got up there on that dunk.

[zay_24]

I've been waiting for OVER 50 YEARS. Oh wait. No, I wasn't. Who give a shit ? :biggums:
:lol

[Peteballa]

Kevin Love - 6'7????????????????

:biggums:

[CavaliersFTW]

Kevin Love - 6'7????????????????

:biggums:

yep, almost 2 full inches shorter than Bill Russell, yet he goes down in history as a player that is 1 inch taller than Big Bill :lol

[Euroleague]

What the hell does it even matter if he was 6-9 5/8 or 6-9 1/2.........seriously?

:rolleyes:

[eliteballer]

This isnt some secret, he would probably be listed 6-11 with shoes in todays nba.

http://media.thehoopdoctors.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/russellduncan.jpg

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0912/rare.larry.bird.photos/images/bill-russell-larry-bird.jpg

http://www.slamonline.com/online/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/bill_russell_dwight_howard.jpg

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lhlorq08Yl1qgnljvo1_500.jpg

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/z%20Funny%20NBA%20Photos/0%20Players/Greg%20Oden/gregodenbillrussell.jpg

[NumberSix]

How are his hands only as big as mine when I'm only 6'4?

[CavaliersFTW]

How are his hands only as big as mine when I'm only 6'4?

So your hands are "only" 10.5" from break of the wrist to the tip of the middle finger by 9.5 inches thumb to pinky? If they are in fact that "small", than congrats your hands are bigger than just about everyone active in the NBA save for Kawhi Leonard :lol

www.draftexpress.com/measurements

[franchise#3]

How are his hands only as big as mine when I'm only 6'4?

http://i1103.photobucket.com/albums/g474/zQZXzAgent0/tumblr_lpc0ka0UFC1qksdaf.gif

[CavaliersFTW]

This isnt some secret, he would probably be listed 6-11 with shoes in todays nba.

http://media.thehoopdoctors.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/russellduncan.jpg

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0912/rare.larry.bird.photos/images/bill-russell-larry-bird.jpg

http://www.slamonline.com/online/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/bill_russell_dwight_howard.jpg

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lhlorq08Yl1qgnljvo1_500.jpg

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/z%20Funny%20NBA%20Photos/0%20Players/Greg%20Oden/gregodenbillrussell.jpg

To you it might seem like common sense, but you'd be surprised how uncommon common sense is. To this day many NBA fans haven't figured out that (not just Bill) but the entire 1960's wasn't a "short" era at all. They have no clue that modern players have inflated listed heights while players from the past used more conservative and grounded list heights. And the ones set in their ways about it won't believe otherwise until citeable evidence is provided such as what I found.

[L.Kizzle]

Russell would probably be an inch or some bigger as in those pictures he's very ancient and his brittle bones probably shrunk over the 40+ years since he's last played.

[Round Mound]

6`10 ft

[Lebron23]

[QUOTE=CavaliersFTW]http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/138/7/f/russdunkolympics_by_dantheman9758-d506gc1.gif

What's the vertical leap of Bill Russell?

[CavaliersFTW]

[QUOTE=CavaliersFTW]http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/138/7/f/russdunkolympics_by_dantheman9758-d506gc1.gif

What's the vertical leap of Bill Russell?
Never been measured. Bill Russell claims he could look down the hoop on his best leaps in his prime. The moment he first leapt so high that he saw down the ring (NCAA game I believe) is actually described in detail in one of his books too. Startled him so much that he missed the shot or something

[jimmy77x]

I've been waiting for OVER 50 YEARS. Oh wait. No, I wasn't. Who give a shit ? :biggums:

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[jlip]

[QUOTE=CavaliersFTW]http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/138/7/f/russdunkolympics_by_dantheman9758-d506gc1.gif

What's the vertical leap of Bill Russell?

While not particularly any mention of his vertical, here are a few references to his leaping abilities.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6343150&postcount=13

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6343363&postcount=16

[ThaRegul8r]

Bill Russell claims he could look down the hoop on his best leaps in his prime. The moment he first leapt so high that he saw down the ring (NCAA game I believe) is actually described in detail in one of his books too. Startled him so much that he missed the shot or something

That'd be Second Wind. I actually have the book out right now, as I was looking for something completely unrelated, but I don't feel like typing the pertinent passage up right now.

[PHILA]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-f_gVh9h9Q

1:08 mark

"My vertical was I could get my eyes above the rim. When I jumped up straight I could get my eyes above the rim & I could touch the top of the backboard."

[La Frescobaldi]

His legs gave him trouble in later years - the number of exhibition games those guys played was astronomical and at the other end of the season he was generally in the last game of the year - and he was generally more Duncan style than in this clip

Russell had an unreal controlled ferocity.

Nobody could get the ball when he unleashed that rampage he had. It would just appear, almost for no reason at all.... and then he'd go back to his regular demeanor but the game had suddenly got real.

Lotta announcers called Russ a pogo stick, which sounds goofy today but it's actually a good description. Practically no coil at all, just almost like he jumped with his ankles.

He would just go............ up.

[jbot]

i'd rather see him shave all those cotton balls off his face.

[fpliii]

That'd be Second Wind. I actually have the book out right now, as I was looking for something completely unrelated, but I don't feel like typing the pertinent passage up right now.

For whatever reason, I actually typed it up (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7777680&postcount=30) a few months back:


In March my old team at McClymonds was preparing for the postseason tournament in northern California. Traditionally the team played a tune-up game against a rag-tag team of McClymonds alumni. That year I was the youngest member of the alumni team, only two months out of high school. I remember the game vividly. It was the first time I'd played before a crowd since the Northwest tour, and it was also the first time since the possibility of going to college had entered my life. My moves were elementary to basketball buffs, but they were there that night the way they'd been on the tour. I was showing off—scoring, rebounding, blocking shots. Then, just before half time, something so good happened that it scared me. I got the ball near the basket on offense, went up as high as I could to take a short jump shot, and suddenly realized that I was looking down into the basket. For an instant I was looking over the front edge of the rim to the back, and the basket itself looked like a skinny oval from that perspective. The sight was so strange that I missed the shot by a couple of feet. My first thought when I landed was that I could hurt myself jumping so high. It was the first time I really became conscious of altitude on the basketball court. Previously I'd thought of jumping only as a matter of time—the time you enjoyed in the air, going up, hanging there, and then coming down. Now I thought of jumping as the distance I had to fall. I had to be at least four feet off the ground in order to have my eye level rise above the rim of a standard ten-foot basket, and I was stunned at the idea that every time I jumped my system had a shock similar to jumping off a four-foot ledge.

But the fear wore off quickly. I was hypnotized by what I'd seen at the top of my jump, and in the second half I did it again. For months later I was mesmerized by those short glimpses down into the basket. I'd stand by myself in an empty gym and jump over and over, looking for that sliver of slight. I got so practiced at it that I trained my eye to see the back edge of the rim as it appeared to rise toward the level of the front edge during my jump. As I slowed down near the top of the jump, the back edge would disappear behind the front when my eye level was even with the rim, and then, for one instant, the back edge would rise above the front edge and I'd see down into the basket.

Leaping high had hooked me. Two years later, during the off-season at USF, some friends and I tested how high I could reach from a running start. I left chalk dust from my fingertips at a point fourteen feet above the floor—four feet above the basket and a foot above the top of the backboard. I loved jumping. It would have been easy for me to dunk the ball even in a twelve foot basket, and a lot of the tall players in pro basketball wouldn't have any trouble either, so the proposals that are circulated from time to time to help the shorter players by raising the basket to twelve feet are silly. If you want to help shorter players, put the basket nearer to the floor. If it's more like a hockey goal, the height advantage will diminish. As long as the basket is above our reach, height and leaping will be rewarded. The game is designed to make its players reach into the air.

[Whoah10115]

Final-fvcking-ly. I was sick of waiting for this.


:oldlol:

[SyRyanYang]

HOLY-FUCING-SHIT. Really?!?! This is unbelievable.

[Wally450]

Lol Bill, you goon.

[KOBE143]

So its true that there are over 6 footer in that era and the myth that theres only 5 foot players in that era are all lie.. Thanks for the info OP..

I search for it and they were actually two players.. Wilt and Russell.. :bowdown: :bowdown:

Can anyone confirm it? Please..

[AirFederer]

Final-fvcking-ly. I was sick of waiting for this.
:lol :lol :roll: :roll:

[G.O.A.T]

A couple months ago I heard one of the local sports talk show guys here in Detroit, Pat Caputo, an older guy (50's I believe) losing a argument with a caller when they were discussing NBA history. Caputo was saying that Russell would have to play small forward in today's NBA because players are so much bigger and more athletic.

The caller mentioned that Russell is taller than Dwight Howard and as tall or nearly as tall as Hakeem and Ewing. The host said "That's ridiculous, you need to check your facts."

This is a professional journalist and broadcaster. Sad how misinformed people are and choose to select ignorance over education.

[JohnFreeman]

Final-fvcking-ly. I was sick of waiting for this.
:roll:

[dubeta]

Kevin Love is 6-8 or 6-8 1/2 barefoot I dont buy that 6-7 considering Blake Griffin is 6-8 1/2


Love must have grown since the Combine

[fpliii]

A couple months ago I heard one of the local sports talk show guys here in Detroit, Pat Caputo, an older guy (50's I believe) losing a argument with a caller when they were discussing NBA history. Caputo was saying that Russell would have to play small forward in today's NBA because players are so much bigger and more athletic.

The caller mentioned that Russell is taller than Dwight Howard and as tall or nearly as tall as Hakeem and Ewing. The host said "That's ridiculous, you need to check your facts."

This is a professional journalist and broadcaster. Sad how misinformed people are and choose to select ignorance over education.
Ugh, shameful. :facepalm

[Marchesk]

What the hell does it even matter if he was 6-9 5/8 or 6-9 1/2.........seriously?

:rolleyes:

You're not banned? :eek: :facepalm :confusedshrug: :cheers:

What does it take here?

[HomieWeMajor]

Blake Griffin would have been listed as a 7 footer had he played in the 60s.

[fpliii]

Blake Griffin would have been listed as a 7 footer had he played in the 60s.
Didn't think that one through, did you?

[HomieWeMajor]

Didn't think that one through, did you?
The league needed to sell black/mix-raced players to the masses which is why many of their measurements were inflated. They wanted to created a superhuman effect with these players.

[fpliii]

The league needed to sell black/mix-raced players to the masses which is why many of their measurements were inflated. They wanted to created a superhuman effect with these players.
...and then you woke up. :cheers:

[LAZERUSS]

The league needed to sell black/mix-raced players to the masses which is why many of their measurements were inflated. They wanted to created a superhuman effect with these players.

Go ahead and give us YOUR facts, then. Something that is SUBSTANTIATED.

We will be waiting...

[HomieWeMajor]

Go ahead and give us YOUR facts, then. Something that is SUBSTANTIATED.

We will be waiting...
Sorry grandpa but the facts have already been posted on this forum. Search for them if you like.

[Asukal]

He kicked Wilt's ass despite being 4 inches shorter. Remarkable! :applause: :bowdown:

[LAZERUSS]

Sorry grandpa but the facts have already been posted on this forum. Search for them if you like.

I didn't think so.

Thanks for playing though...

[LAZERUSS]

He kicked Wilt's ass despite being 4 inches shorter. Remarkable! :applause: :bowdown:

You would be hard-pressed to find more than a handful of games, in their 143 career H2H games, in which Russell "kicked Wilt's ass."

But I can easily find 40-50 in which Chamberlain just CRUSHED Russell.

And swap rosters and it would have been Wilt holding 11 rings in his hands.

[Asukal]

You would be hard-pressed to find more than a handful of games, in their 143 career H2H games, in which Russell "kicked Wilt's ass."

But I can easily find 40-50 in which Chamberlain just CRUSHED Russell.

And swap rosters and it would have been Wilt holding 11 rings in his hands.

11>2. Russell=winner, Wilt=loser. Now tell me again who kicked who's ass. :lol

[LAZERUSS]

11>2. Russell=winner, Wilt=loser. Now tell me again who kicked who's ass. :lol

You obviously missed the main point...

swap rosters, and it would have been Wilt with an 11-2 (and likely 13-0) margin.

BTW, using YOUR anology...a 35 year old Wilt "kicked a PEAK Kareem's ass" in their '72 WCF's, right?

In fact, in their four seasons in the league together, Chamberlain held a 3-1 Finals advantage.

And how do explain a PRIME Kareem, in his first ten years in the league...with ONE RING, TWO Finals, TWO first-round exits (and to teams that went 47-35 in both), and TWO seasons in which he didn't even make the playoffs?

Or MJ, in his first SIX seasons, and couldnt sniff a ring. And it wasn't until he played with rosters that could go 55-27 withOUT him, that he won his rings.

Or Bird, playing with HOF stacked rosters his ENTIRE career, and only three rings? Or losing with HCA in SEVEN of them (and playing below average, to putrid in several of those)?

Or the great Hakeem...played 18 seasons, made the playoffs in 15, and was knocked out in thee first round, EIGHT times (and FIVE of those were blow-out losses)?

Or "Mr. Clutch" going 0-7 against Russell's Celtics, and needing Wilt to carry him to his only ring?

Go ahead...let's see your response to those now...

[LAZERUSS]

He kicked Wilt's ass despite being 4 inches shorter. Remarkable! :applause: :bowdown:

I KNOW that I could find more, but I will save myself some time here...

[QUOTE]

For reference, the first number of the pair next to each player's name is points in that particular game, while the second is rebounds. An example would be the first one, with Wilt scoring 45 points, and grabbing 35 rebounds (45-35), while Russell's numbers were 15 points, with 13 rebounds (15-13.)


Wilt 45-35 Russell 15-13
Wilt 47-36 Russell 16-22
Wilt 44-43 Russell 15-29
Wilt 43-26 Russell 13-21
Wilt 43-39

[Asukal]

I KNOW that I could find more, but I will save myself some time here...

Grandpa you obsess too much on stats. In Russell's case, he did less(on stats) to win more. He did whatever is necessary to win games. Wilt? He would continue playing in garbage time just to raise his totals. :oldlol:

[LAZERUSS]

11>2. Russell=winner, Wilt=loser. Now tell me again who kicked who's ass. :lol

Eaton > Hakeem
Thompson > Hakeem
Miller > Hakeem


Dumars >>>>>> MJ
Bird >>>>>> MJ

Walton > KAJ
Cowens > KAJ
Webster > KAJ
Sikma > KAJ

Of course, Moses WAS WAY greater than KAJ (going 6-1 against him in their post-season H2H's, and badly outplaying him in the majority of those.)

Rodman = Bird
Worthy > Bird

Etc. etc....

[LAZERUSS]

Grandpa you obsess too much on stats. In Russell's case, he did less(on stats) to win more. He did whatever is necessary to win games. Wilt? He would continue playing in garbage time just to raise his totals. :oldlol:

The plain TRUTH... Russell had much better supporting casts, who almost always stepped up their game, while Chamberlain's usually putrid rosters played even worse in the post-season.

Of course, how do explain Wilt in '67, with an EQUAL supporting cast, just wiping out the eight-time defending Celtics.

Oh, and how about these TWO clinching games in their post-season H2H's?

In the '66 EDF's, and with his team down 3-1, Chamberlain erupted for a 46-34 game in the clinching game five loss.

In the '67 EDF's, but now with their roles completely reversed, and Russell's Celtics down 3-1, did Russell come up with an epic clinching performance in game five? Hell, no...he meekly led his team to slaughter, scoring a meager FOUR points, while Chamberlain just CRUSHED him in every facet of the game (outscoring Russell, 29-4...with of those in the first half when the game was still close; outshooting Russell, 10-16 to 2-5; outassisting Russell, 13-7; and outrebounding Russell, 36-21.)

Again, if Russell was superior to Wilt, how come he couldn't thoroughly dominate Chamberlain in a crucial game, when his teammates were finally neutralized, and needed him to step up?

BTW, Chamberlain essentially played against Russell in almost every post-season H2H the same way...just completely overwhelming him. Russell seldom had single games against Wilt in which he even matched Wilt, much less dominated him.

[Asukal]

The plain TRUTH... Russell had much better supporting casts, who almost always stepped up their game, while Chamberlain's usually putrid rosters played even worse in the post-season.

Of course, how do explain Wilt in '67, with an EQUAL supporting cast, just wiping out the eight-time defending Celtics.

Oh, and how about these TWO clinching games in their post-season H2H's?

In the '66 EDF's, and with his team down 3-1, Chamberlain erupted for a 46-34 game in the clinching game five loss.

In the '67 EDF's, but now with their roles completely reversed, and Russell's Celtics down 3-1, did Russell come up with an epic clinching performance in game five? Hell, no...he meekly led his team to slaughter, scoring a meager FOUR points, while Chamberlain just CRUSHED him in every facet of the game (outscoring Russell, 29-4...with of those in the first half when the game was still close; outshooting Russell, 10-16 to 2-5; outassisting Russell, 13-7; and outrebounding Russell, 36-21.)

Again, if Russell was superior to Wilt, how come he couldn't thoroughly dominate Chamberlain in a crucial game, when his teammates were finally neutralized, and needed him to step up?

BTW, Chamberlain essentially played against Russell in almost every post-season H2H the same way...just completely overwhelming him. Russell seldom had single games against Wilt in which he even matched Wilt, much less dominated him.

Another truth, Wilt is not a leader. He is a mental midget who constantly feels the need to prop himself up with all these tall tales. :oldlol:

Wilt is just a physical freak of nature nothing more. He was a big sheep
who played for stats. :oldlol:

It's so easy to say his team sucked, when in fact he had enough help in the 2nd half of his career. He even played 4 years without Russell in the league, yet still couldn't dominate the league. What does that tell you? :rolleyes:

Russell won 11 rings in a league where prime Wilt played, if that is not domination then I don't know what is. :confusedshrug: :bowdown:

Wilt=GOAT choker. Doesn't deserve top 5 ATG imo. :roll: :applause:

[Cocaine80s]

op whats ur obsession with height and wingspan?

didnt you say you were like 5'10 with the same wingspan as ur height? :oldlol:

[LAZERUSS]

Another truth, Wilt is not a leader. He is a mental midget who constantly feels the need to prop himself up with all these tall tales. :oldlol:

Wilt is just a physical freak of nature nothing more. He was a big sheep
who played for stats. :oldlol:

It's so easy to say his team sucked, when in fact he had enough help in the 2nd half of his career. He even played 4 years without Russell in the league, yet still couldn't dominate the league. What does that tell you? :rolleyes:

Russell won 11 rings in a league where prime Wilt played, if that is not domination then I don't know what is. :confusedshrug: :bowdown:

Wilt=GOAT choker. Doesn't deserve top 5 ATG imo. :roll: :applause:

He only had better overall rosters than Russell in '67 and '68. And we all know what happened in '67, when his Sixers wiped out the eight-time defending Celtics. And had he, and his teammates been healthy in '68, it would have been a repeat of '67...

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9328011&postcount=14

and

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9328006&postcount=13

Wilt "only" won one ring after Russell retired, and here is why:

69-70: Chamberlain suffers a leg injury that would have probably ended the careers of many players, and not only would NO ONE else have come back to play in the playoffs, they most certainly would not have hung a 23-24 .625 seven game Finals, either.

70-71: Wilt's two best teammates, West and Baylor, BOTH miss the entire playoffs. As it was, Chamberlain outplayed a peak KAJ in their WCF's, albeit, in a losing effort.

71-72: Chamberlain LEADS his team to a title, which includes chopping down a PEAK Kareem in their WCF's (and winning four of the last five games against a team that many considered would be the next great dynasty.) And wins the FMVP, as well, with a 19-23 .600 Finals. BTW, his teammates collectively shot .414 in the ENTIRE post-season.

72-73. While KAJ takes his 60-22 Bucks down in flames against Thurmond's 47-35 Warriors in the first round, Chamberlain leads his 60-22 Lakers to a 4-1 series romp over that same Warrior team, in a series in which he dominates Thurmond. His injury-riddled Lakers lose four close games (all decided in the final minute) against a 56-26 Knicks team with SIX HOFers.

Again, if you are going to say that Russell was the better player than Wilt, based on team success, then an OLD Wilt was considerably greater than a PEAK Kareem in their four years in the league together.

[Asukal]

He only had better overall rosters than Russell in '67 and '68. And we all know what happened in '67, when his Sixers wiped out the eight-time defending Celtics. And had he, and his teammates been healthy in '68, it would have been a repeat of '67...

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9328011&postcount=14

and

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9328006&postcount=13

Wilt "only" won one ring after Russell retired, and here is why:

69-70: Chamberlain suffers a leg injury that would have probably ended the careers of many players, and not only would NO ONE else have come back to play in the playoffs, they most certainly would not have hung a 23-24 .625 seven game Finals, either.

70-71: Wilt's two best teammates, West and Baylor, BOTH miss the entire playoffs. As it was, Chamberlain outplayed a peak KAJ in their WCF's, albeit, in a losing effort.

71-72: Chamberlain LEADS his team to a title, which includes chopping down a PEAK Kareem in their WCF's (and winning four of the last five games against a team that many considered would be the next great dynasty.) And wins the FMVP, as well, with a 19-23 .600 Finals. BTW, his teammates collectively shot .414 in the ENTIRE post-season.

72-73. While KAJ takes his 60-22 Bucks down in flames against Thurmond's 47-35 Warriors in the first round, Chamberlain leads his 60-22 Lakers to a 4-1 series romp over that same Warrior team, in a series in which he dominates Thurmond. His injury-riddled Lakers lose four close games (all decided in the final minute) against a 56-26 Knicks team with SIX HOFers.

Again, if you are going to say that Russell was the better player than Wilt, based on team success, then an OLD Wilt was considerably greater than a PEAK Kareem in their four years in the league together.

How so? They both won 1 in that period. And KAJ was putting up better numbers. Not that it matters, I don't consider KAJ top 5 either. :oldlol:

[LAZERUSS]

How so? They both won 1 in that period. And KAJ was putting up better numbers. Not that it matters, I don't consider KAJ top 5 either. :oldlol:

Wilt went to THREE Finals in those four years...KAJ, only ONE. Wilt led his team to better playoff records against both the '70 Knicks, and the '73 Warriors, as well. And, when KAJ's Bucks beat Wilt's Lakers in the '71 WCF's, Wilt was without BOTH West and Baylor. The very next season, Chamberlain led his Lakers to a 4-2 series win against KAJ's Bucks.

And of course, since you claim TEAM success means more than individual success (despite the horrible inequality of surrounding rosters at times), then obviously Wilt was >>>>> than a PEAK Kareem.

But, of course, when Kareem puts up "better numbers" you completely ignore the FACT that Chamberlain not only put up FAR greater "numbers" than Russell, he did so against RUSSELL, as well.

The famous... "Wilt Double-Standard."

[LAZERUSS]

How so? They both won 1 in that period. And KAJ was putting up better numbers. Not that it matters, I don't consider KAJ top 5 either. :oldlol:

BTW,

:roll: :roll: :roll:

at Wilt and KAJ not being Top-5.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[Asukal]

BTW,

:roll: :roll: :roll:

at Wilt and KAJ not being Top-5.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

They aren't in my list. :rockon:

Of course I know your list has Wilt on the top spot. :oldlol: :oldlol: :roll:

[Asukal]

Wilt went to THREE Finals in those four years...KAJ, only ONE. Wilt led his team to better playoff records against both the '70 Knicks, and the '73 Warriors, as well. And, when KAJ's Bucks beat Wilt's Lakers in the '71 WCF's, Wilt was without BOTH West and Baylor. The very next season, Chamberlain led his Lakers to a 4-2 series win against KAJ's Bucks.

And of course, since you claim TEAM success means more than individual success (despite the horrible inequality of surrounding rosters at times), then obviously Wilt was >>>>> than a PEAK Kareem.

But, of course, when Kareem puts up "better numbers" you completely ignore the FACT that Chamberlain not only put up FAR greater "numbers" than Russell, he did so against RUSSELL, as well.

The famous... "Wilt Double-Standard."

And won one? Wilt was LeBran b4 LeBran. :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol: :lol

[LAZERUSS]

They aren't in my list. :rockon:

Of course I know your list has Wilt on the top spot. :oldlol: :oldlol: :roll:

Yeah...real funny...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_career_achievements_by_Wilt_Chamberlain

[Warfan]

How so? They both won 1 in that period. And KAJ was putting up better numbers. Not that it matters, I don't consider KAJ top 5 either. :oldlol:

Wow :facepalm

[Asukal]

Wow :facepalm

It's my list, not yours. :oldlol:

[LAZERUSS]

And won one? Wilt was LeBran b4 LeBran. :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol: :lol

"Losing seasons"

MJ: 9
Bird: 10
West: 12
Oscar: 12
Duncan: 12
Kobe: 12
Baylor: 13
KAJ: 14
Shaq: 15
Hakeem: 16

What a bunch of "losers."

[LAZERUSS]

It's my list, not yours. :oldlol:

You pulled names out of a hat, right?

[Asukal]

"Losing seasons"

MJ: 9
Bird: 10
West: 12
Oscar: 12
Duncan: 12
Kobe: 12
Baylor: 13
KAJ: 14
Shaq: 15
Hakeem: 16

What a bunch of "losers."

Where's Russell at? And Wilt? :rolleyes:

[La Frescobaldi]

It's my list, not yours. :oldlol:

you're a stan who bashes any and all other players than your boy.

[Asukal]

You pulled names out of a hat, right?

No, it's just that I have my own reasons for not including them there. Just as you grandpa over value stats in yours. :cheers:

[LAZERUSS]

Where's Russell at? And Wilt? :rolleyes:

So, in your opinion, Russell was the greatest player, and by a HUGE margin over the likes of MJ, Bird, KAJ, Duncan, Kobe, Shaq, and Hakeem, right?

All of the other's had FAR more "losing" seasons, than "winning" ones.

[LAZERUSS]

Where's Russell at? And Wilt? :rolleyes:

BTW, Wilt's TEAMs, were a TOTAL of NINE points away (margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points) from holding a 5-3 margin over Russell's Celtics, in their eight post-season H2H series. And, of course, Chamberlain either outplayed, or downright dominated Russell in all of them.

[Asukal]

So, in your opinion, Russell was the greatest player, and by a HUGE margin over the likes of MJ, Bird, KAJ, Duncan, Kobe, Shaq, and Hakeem, right?

All of the other's had FAR more "losing" seasons, than "winning" ones.

I have him #2 just slightly behind MJ and wouldn't have a problem if another says he is GOAT. I value competitive flare and getting it done by a lot, of course context is important. :lol

[Asukal]

BTW, Wilt's TEAMs, were a TOTAL of NINE points away (margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points) from holding a 5-3 margin over Russell's Celtics, in their eight post-season H2H series. And, of course, Chamberlain either outplayed, or downright dominated Russell in all of them.

Doesn't change the result tho. And many would argue if Wilt hit his FT's he would've more rings. :confusedshrug:

[Asukal]

you're a stan who bashes any and all other players than your boy.

Again? Copy pasting like jlauber now? You must be his alt. :facepalm

[LAZERUSS]

Doesn't change the result tho. And many would argue if Wilt hit his FT's he would've more rings. :confusedshrug:

Well, if his TEAMMATES, collectively, would have stepped up in those FOUR series, he most certainly would have won them all.

[Asukal]

Well, if his TEAMMATES, collectively, would have stepped up in those FOUR series, he most certainly would have won them all.

Four series and his team mates sucked? Where is dat leadership? :rolleyes: :confusedshrug:

[La Frescobaldi]

Again? Copy pasting like jlauber now? You must be his alt. :facepalm

you're a stan who bashes any and all other players than your boy.

[sick_brah07]

**** his height no one gives a shit

[Asukal]

you're a stan who bashes any and all other players than your boy.

Oh now I remember saying this b4. :oldlol: :oldlol:

Good one! :applause: :oldlol:

[LAZERUSS]

Four series and his team mates sucked? Where is dat leadership? :rolleyes: :confusedshrug:

Game seven of the '62 EDF's: Wilt's teammates collectively shoot .365. For the entire series, they shoot .345. 109-107 loss.

Game seven of the '65 EDF's. Wilt's teammates collectively shoot .329. 110-109 loss.

Game seven of the '68 EDF's. Wilt's teammates collectively shoot .343. 100-96 loss.

Game seven of the '69 Finals. Wilt's teammates collectively shoot .360 from the field. 108-106 loss.

[La Frescobaldi]

Game seven of the '62 EDF's: Wilt's teammates collectively shoot .365. For the entire series, they shoot .345. 109-107 loss.

Game seven of the '65 EDF's. Wilt's teammates collectively shoot .329. 110-109 loss.

Game seven of the '68 EDF's. Wilt's teammates collectively shoot .343. 100-96 loss.

Game seven of the '69 Finals. Wilt's teammates collectively shoot .360 from the field. 108-106 loss.
He's a stan who bashes all players other than his boy.

[Asukal]

He's a stan who bashes all players other than his boy.

:yaohappy: :lol

[Psileas]

Game seven of the '62 EDF's: Wilt's teammates collectively shoot .365. For the entire series, they shoot .345. 109-107 loss.

Game seven of the '65 EDF's. Wilt's teammates collectively shoot .329. 110-109 loss.

Game seven of the '68 EDF's. Wilt's teammates collectively shoot .343. 100-96 loss.

Game seven of the '69 Finals. Wilt's teammates collectively shoot .360 from the field. 108-106 loss.

The negative impact of Wilt's teammates' FG% in crucial games made Wilt's missed FT's look like a misdemeanor. But that's expected, apart from West (pre-70's West, to be exact, since old West had his own share of bricklaying), Wilt's best teammates were obvious chokers. As a famous wise guy would put it: "If they had had any clutch stories to tell, we'd have known about them". :cheers:

[G.O.A.T]

The negative impact of Wilt's teammates' FG% in crucial games made Wilt's missed FT's look like a misdemeanor. But that's expected, apart from West (pre-70's West, to be exact, since old West had his own share of bricklaying), Wilt's best teammates were obvious chokers. As a famous wise guy would put it: "If they had had any clutch stories to tell, we'd have known about them". :cheers:

I'm guessing your being sarcastic. If not and you'd like I can share with you numerous accounts of great clutch play by Arizin, Gola, Graboski, Walker, Greer, Cunningham and Meschery.

[Psileas]

I'm guessing your being sarcastic. If not and you'd like I can share with you numerous accounts of great clutch play by Arizin, Gola, Graboski, Walker, Greer, Cunningham and Meschery.

I'm sure you can and I sure can do the same for Wilt. I'm basically making fun of those who are too quick to point to "absense of evidence" of Wilt having clutch moments and then even name this "evidence of absense".
As obscure as these moments seem to be, they are not any worse illuminated than his teammates' clutch moments: There hardly seem to exist any, even if they do exist. Heck, even their great games are obscure. Only by looking at the rosters of these teams and finding familiar names do most fans realize that some of these rosters were good or great. A Wilt fan trying to post like a typical user of the previous "argument" (usually a hater) could have a field day doing this.

[Encre92]

Dude has 11 rings, who gives a shit how tall he was/is.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Bullshit
Bill - 11
Wilt - 2

DEAL WITH IT

[LAZERUSS]

I'm guessing your being sarcastic. If not and you'd like I can share with you numerous accounts of great clutch play by Arizin, Gola, Graboski, Walker, Greer, Cunningham and Meschery.

And I can share FAR more pure CHOKE jobs from those SAME teammates, especially in those game seven's. Again, we are using their post-season play with WILT (although Gola was putrid in virtually every post-season of his career...and was arguably the worst post-season shooter of all-time, even including his post-seasons withOUT Wilt.)

And, at the opposite end of the spectrum, you would be hard-pressed to find more than one poor game, per series, turned in by Chamberlain (especially if you factor in his rebounding, and defense, particularly against his opposing centers.) And even in the relatively poor games that Wilt had, there were usually injuries involved (especially '68...of course, damn near all of teammates had injury excuses in that series.)

But if you want to compare those "numerous accounts of great clutch play by Arizin, Gola (laughable BTW), Grabowski (again, just a complete joke), Walker, Greer, Cunningham, and Meschery"...I would be more than happy to post their CHOKE jobs in those post-season series, as well.

[LAZERUSS]

The negative impact of Wilt's teammates' FG% in crucial games made Wilt's missed FT's look like a misdemeanor. But that's expected, apart from West (pre-70's West, to be exact, since old West had his own share of bricklaying), Wilt's best teammates were obvious chokers. As a famous wise guy would put it: "If they had had any clutch stories to tell, we'd have known about them". :cheers:

It was absolutely AMAZING that Chamberlain somehow lost those four game seven's by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points, given the FACT that his teammates collectively just PUKED all over the floor in those four games. Hell, it was mind-boggling that they even got to game seven's, given just how horrifically they generally played in those series.

[LAZERUSS]

I'm sure you can and I sure can do the same for Wilt. I'm basically making fun of those who are too quick to point to "absense of evidence" of Wilt having clutch moments and then even name this "evidence of absense".
As obscure as these moments seem to be, they are not any worse illuminated than his teammates' clutch moments: There hardly seem to exist any, even if they do exist. Heck, even their great games are obscure. Only by looking at the rosters of these teams and finding familiar names do most fans realize that some of these rosters were good or great. A Wilt fan trying to post like a typical user of the previous "argument" (usually a hater) could have a field day doing this.

You and I BOTH know that Wilt's "good or great" rosters were outgunned in nearly all of his biggest post-season series. And again, not only were they outgunned, they generally played considerably worse than they did in their regular season play, as well. Meanwhile, there are at least SEVERAL crucial games in Russell's post-season career, in which one, or more, of his teammates made the CLUTCH shot, or steal. Those types of play from Wilt's teammates were almost non-existent.

And, as you stated, aside from a pre-71 West, Wilt seldom had much help from his teammates, especially in big games.

[Asukal]

It was absolutely AMAZING that Chamberlain somehow lost those four game seven's by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points, given the FACT that his teammates collectively just PUKED all over the floor in those four games. Hell, it was mind-boggling that they even got to game seven's, given just how horrifically they generally played in those series.

Funniest thing is you didn't watch those games. You researched the stats and act like you already know how the game played out. :rolleyes:

[LAZERUSS]

Funniest thing is you didn't watch those games. You researched the stats and act like you already know how the game played out. :rolleyes:

Any major playoff game that was televised from '63 on, I saw. YOU, of course, never saw a second of it, NOR have you even bothered looking up any stats, either. In fact, you contribute absolutely NOTHING to these discussions.

[Asukal]

Any major playoff game that was televised from '63 on, I saw. YOU, of course, never saw a second of it, NOR have you even bothered looking up any stats, either. In fact, you contribute absolutely NOTHING to these discussions.

Keep on lying jlauber. :oldlol:

[SHAQisGOAT]

Any major playoff game that was televised from '63 on, I saw. YOU, of course, never saw a second of it, NOR have you even bothered looking up any stats, either. In fact, you contribute absolutely NOTHING to these discussions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBScDWrcviM