I'd take Russell > Jordan.

[tikay0]

If I was starting a franchise, I absolutely would take Russell > Jordan. Just my personal preference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn1hCM9Zv9c

When he said, "you pick Bill Russell", he was dead ass serious. Dude was the ultimate winner, and team player.

"The way I play, my team wins." Gave me goosebumps.

[mlh1981]

What about Bryon Russell?

[K Xerxes]

Omg you Jordan hater, you totally have an agenda, I know who your dupes are trololol.

[dannywpt]

I'd take Westbrook over Jordan any day too



:coleman:

[tikay0]

Omg you Jordan hater, you totally have an agenda, I know who your dupes are trololol.

:no:

[nightprowler10]

Haha OP is such a noob. He went from calling Russell a better version of Dwight Howard to GOAT in 24 hours.

[fpliii]

If I was starting a franchise, I absolutely would take Russell > Jordan. Just my personal preference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn1hCM9Zv9c

When he said, "you pick Bill Russell", he was dead ass serious. Dude was the ultimate winner, and team player.

"The way I play, my team wins." Gave me goosebumps.

:applause:

He and Russell are the two strongest GOAT candidates by far in my book. Take either one, and you're good to go.

[WWRWestbrookDo?]

Russell Westbrook > Jordan fo sho!

[LLK21]

Of course i would take Russell Westbrook over Jordan Hill.

[LAZERUSS]

:applause:

He and Russell are the two strongest GOAT candidates by far in my book. Take either one, and you're good to go.

I personally have those two, as well as Magic and Wilt. Magic never sniffed a losing season, and took an underachieiving team to a world title in his first season. Then, he guided them to nine Finals and five titles in 12 seasons. And, after he retired, the Lakers returned to the same level they were at before he arrived.

As for Chamberlain...as John Wooden said...had Wilt an Russell swapped rosters...and likely it would have been Wilt with all of those rings. An along the way, Wilt dominated his peers, including post-season play, like no other player in NBA history.

[JoHnNyBoXeR]

That's just phill Jackson having a bias towards his era of nba players.. In today's game bill Russell would be great .. But at 6'9 would be an extremely undersized center .. No doubt he'd be great but he wouldn't dominate the same way

[LAZERUSS]

That's just phill Jackson having a bias towards his era of nba players.. In today's game bill Russell would be great .. But at 6'9 would be an extremely undersized center .. No doubt he'd be great but he wouldn't dominate the same way

Russell was actually a shade under 6-10...barefoot. In today's NBA he would measure 6-11, or the same height as Dwight Howard. Furthermore, he had a 7-4 wingspan, and world ranked high jumping ability. I have no doubt that he woulld outreach Howard in a leaping contest.

[JoHnNyBoXeR]

Russell was actually a shade under 6-10...barefoot. In today's NBA he would measure 6-11, or the same height as Dwight Howard. Furthermore, he had a 7-4 wingspan, and world ranked high jumping ability. I have no doubt that he woulld outreach Howard in a leaping contest.


Lol I hear what your saying but his height is his height .. He would be 6'9 in yesterday's nba and 6'9 in today's nba.. Lol

[Nebraskanball]

"I'd take Russell > Jordan"
------------

No you wouldn't.

[stanlove1111]

:applause:

He and Russell are the two strongest GOAT candidates by far in my book. Take either one, and you're good to go.

I agree, I think these 2 are the only ones you can make a strong GOAT argument for..I always rank them tied for number .

[Kaspah]

:facepalm

[stanlove1111]

I personally have those two, as well as Magic and Wilt. Magic never sniffed a losing season, and took an underachieiving team to a world title in his first season. Then, he guided them to nine Finals and five titles in 12 seasons. And, after he retired, the Lakers returned to the same level they were at before he arrived.

As for Chamberlain...as John Wooden said...had Wilt an Russell swapped rosters...and likely it would have been Wilt with all of those rings. An along the way, Wilt dominated his peers, including post-season play, like no other player in NBA history.

But the fact that Wilt only won 2 titles with great teams from 1965-73 makes Wooden wrong..

[CavaliersFTW]

Lol I hear what your saying but his height is his height .. He would be 6'9 in yesterday's nba and 6'9 in today's nba.. Lol
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-uUOVoLBdxbc/UaD80dsycEI/AAAAAAAAEXc/Z8hXrE2b0VY/s800/Russell%2520Ewing.jpg

Except that in this situation "6-9" listed Bill Russell is virtually the same height as the "7-0" listed Patrick Ewing. Doesn't matter what the number says on list info. List info in this case, isn't correct. If the man is 6-9 and 5/8ths of an inch tall w/o shoes on than that means he's taller than Dwight Howard, and as tall as pretty much any center from any era needs to be in order to be effective. There's nothing undersized about being a shade under 6-10 w/o shoes on and having a 7-4 wingspan. That's actually a pretty imposing size considering what a gifted athlete he was.

[Shade8780]

http://imageshack.us/a/img14/2159/capturekdn.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img844/3838/87315453.jpg

Changed his avatar from Noah to him as well :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

[Soundwave]

Honestly, even at the center position I'd take Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, and Hakeem over Russell.

That's not a knock on Russell, but if you have a chance to draft any player in NBA history, I think you'd prefer one who's a dominant scoring threat.

A defender can only impact the game to a certain point, basketball is a sport that favors the offensive player because you can't just tackle or physically hit the offensive player.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

http://imageshack.us/a/img14/2159/capturekdn.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img844/3838/87315453.jpg

Changed his avatar from Noah to him as well :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

:biggums:

[Shade8780]

:biggums:
Now he's saying he's better than MJ. What's next, he's gonna get a tattoo of Russell's face on his stomach? Change his name to Bill Russell? :confusedshrug:

[CavaliersFTW]

Honestly, even at the center position I'd take Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, and Hakeem over Russell.

That's not a knock on Russell, but if you have a chance to draft any player in NBA history, I think you'd prefer one who's a dominant scoring threat.

A defender can only impact the game to a certain point, basketball is a sport that favors the offensive player because you can't just tackle or physically hit the offensive player.
Elgin Baylor and Jerry West, both teammates of Wilt, (with West eventually overseeing Kareem's entire career, and recruited/saw Shaq's saw entire LA career unfold) both said within this past year during interviews that I've collected, that looking back, they'd choose NOBODY over Bill Russell to start a franchise. Bill Russell would be their number one choice, every piece added afterwards is secondary. I know we as fans like to think we're clever getting the guys with the best stats offensively or defensively and whatnot, but there's just something about Russell's approach to the game that WINS. And for some reason, PLAYERS and COACHES that understand what Russell could do all seem to gravitate towards picking him to start their all-time-nba-team. I'm as big a Wilt fan as any... but heck, I'd even pick Russell if I wanted to win.

[Shade8780]

Elgin Baylor and Jerry West, both teammates of Wilt, (with West eventually overseeing Kareem's entire career, and recruited/saw Shaq's saw entire LA career unfold) both said within this past year during interviews that I've collected, that looking back, they'd choose NOBODY over Bill Russell to start a franchise. Bill Russell would be their number one choice, every piece added afterwards is secondary. I know we as fans like to think we're clever getting the guys with the best stats and whatnot, but there's just something about Russell's approach to the game that WINS.
Not only that, just about every great player from the 60's said they wouldn't have wanted to play with Wilt. He went on a no foul out streak that had started back in his High School days and would go on for the rest of his career, affecting his team a lot on defense in tight game situations. People who think Wilt is better than Russ should research about their games instead of their stats.

Back in his Sixers days, there was a poll made by the Lakers GM at the time asking fans if they should trade for Wilt, and the majority said no. This was during the time he was basically putting his assist count over whether his team wins or loses. Russell was 10x the competitor and man that Wilt was. Russell > Kareem >> Wilt.

[CavaliersFTW]

Not only that, just about every great player from the 60's said they wouldn't have wanted to play with Wilt. He went on a no foul out streak that had started back in his High School days and would go on for the rest of his career, affecting his team a lot on defense in tight game situations. People who think Wilt is better than Russ should research about their games instead of their stats.

Back in his Sixers days, there was a poll made by the Lakers GM at the time asking fans if they should trade for Wilt, and the majority said no. This was during the time he was basically putting his assist count over whether his team wins or loses. Russell was 10x the competitor and man that Wilt was. Russell > Kareem >> Wilt.
You literally made that up :facepalm :lol

And the assumption that Wilt's "no foul out streak" was a hindrance to his career - is fabricated, and baseless. Show me ANY sort of feedback from his 1960's/70's players/coaches that said "Wilt's lack of fouling out cost him/us ______ ".

[MavsSuperFan]

http://imageshack.us/a/img14/2159/capturekdn.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img844/3838/87315453.jpg

Changed his avatar from Noah to him as well :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

Why are you laughing at a man who is clearly schizophrenic. It is a serious mental disorder.

[Shade8780]

Why are you laughing at a man who is clearly schizophrenic. It is a serious mental disorder.
Is this sarcasm? :P

[LAZERUSS]

Elgin Baylor and Jerry West, both teammates of Wilt, (with West eventually overseeing Kareem's entire career, and recruited/saw Shaq's saw entire LA career unfold) both said within this past year during interviews that I've collected, that looking back, they'd choose NOBODY over Bill Russell to start a franchise. Bill Russell would be their number one choice, every piece added afterwards is secondary. I know we as fans like to think we're clever getting the guys with the best stats offensively or defensively and whatnot, but there's just something about Russell's approach to the game that WINS. And for some reason, PLAYERS and COACHES that understand what Russell could do all seem to gravitate towards picking him to start their all-time-nba-team. I'm as big a Wilt fan as any... but heck, I'd even pick Russell if I wanted to win.

Well, I will say that West made this comment about Chamberlain back around 2000...

http://www.nba.com/history/wilt_appreciation.html


"He was the most unbelievable center to ever play the game in terms of domination and intimidation. There's no one that's ever played the game better than Wilt Chamberlain. This was a man for all ages."

[fpliii]

I personally have those two, as well as Magic and Wilt. Magic never sniffed a losing season, and took an underachieiving team to a world title in his first season. Then, he guided them to nine Finals and five titles in 12 seasons. And, after he retired, the Lakers returned to the same level they were at before he arrived.

As for Chamberlain...as John Wooden said...had Wilt an Russell swapped rosters...and likely it would have been Wilt with all of those rings. An along the way, Wilt dominated his peers, including post-season play, like no other player in NBA history.

I used to have Magic along with the two of them, but recently I've held Bird in a higher regard. I don't do GOAT lists anymore, but insofar as GOAT candidacy is concerned:

• Russ/MJ are strong candidates, nobody else is, but the four below are all at least weak GOAT candidates (there are perhaps others)
• Bird needs to be ahead of Magic
• Wilt needs to be ahead of Kareem

I don't know where everyone else figures in (nor do I care all that much really about the exact order), but I'm very confident about the above.

[LAZERUSS]

But the fact that Wilt only won 2 titles with great teams from 1965-73 makes Wooden wrong..

How do you know? He says that if Russell and Wilt swapped rosters, that Chamberlain might very well have won all those rings. Since they didn't, we don't know. We do know that Russell enjoyed a huge edge in surrounding talent in the majority of their ten seasons in the league together, and that his teammates also outplayed Chamberlain's in nearly all of their post-season h2h's.

The fact that Russell, with far superior talent won two game seven's, by 2 1and 1 point, against what were basically last place rosters before Chamberlain arrived, and with those rosters playing horribly, just speaks volumes about how far one man could carry a team against an army.

[fpliii]

Lol I hear what your saying but his height is his height .. He would be 6'9 in yesterday's nba and 6'9 in today's nba.. Lol

Yeah, no. That isn't the case. Who is listed barefoot today? Was Jordan 6'4" in his NBA? :facepalm

[LAZERUSS]

I used to have Magic along with the two of them, but recently I've held Bird in a higher regard. I don't do GOAT lists anymore, but insofar as GOAT candidacy is concerned:

• Russ/MJ are strong candidates, nobody else is, but the four below are at all at least weak GOAT candidates (there are perhaps others)
• Bird needs to be ahead of Magic
• Wilt needs to be ahead of Kareem

I don't know where everyone else figures in (nor do I care all that much really about the exact order), but I'm very confident about the above.

I don't see Bird having any case over Magic. Magic won as many MVPs (and probably deserved one in '82), more FMVPs (and was robbed of one in '88), won more rings, outplayed Bird h2h in their post-season h2h's, was a better playoff performer...

Bird is well down my list. Too many "choke" jobs in his post-season career.

Wilt outplayed Russell in the vast majority of their h2h's, and some by huge margins. And given the fact that he was battling the greatest dynasty in sports, and usually with pathetic rosters that played worse in the post-season, plus, the fact that when his roster finally neutralized Russell's, his team wiped the floor with them...very close. In fact, Wilt's teams were a total of nine polints away from having a 5-3 h2h edge in their eight playoff matchups.

As for KAJ. Take Magic away...and his career would have been considered a huge disappointment. And a peak Kareem faced quite a few of the centers that a peak Chamberlain faced earlier in his career, and he never came within the other side of the Pacific ocean of dominating them the way a prime Chamberlain did.

[LAZERUSS]

Not only that, just about every great player from the 60's said they wouldn't have wanted to play with Wilt. He went on a no foul out streak that had started back in his High School days and would go on for the rest of his career, affecting his team a lot on defense in tight game situations. People who think Wilt is better than Russ should research about their games instead of their stats.

Back in his Sixers days, there was a poll made by the Lakers GM at the time asking fans if they should trade for Wilt, and the majority said no. This was during the time he was basically putting his assist count over whether his team wins or loses. Russell was 10x the competitor and man that Wilt was. Russell > Kareem >> Wilt.

A complete fabrication started by none other than Bill Simmons. Find me one article on the internet which verifies that claim. You won't. Simmons was notorious Wilt-hater, and a notorious liar.

BTW, that supposedly occurred in his Warrior days, not his Sixer days (when he led the Sixers to the best record in all three full seasons he was there.)

As for that "foul streak" claim...think about this...Chamberlain averaged 2.5 pfs per game in his post-season career, in a post-season in which he averaged 47.2 mpg. He was seldom even getting 3 fouls per game, much less five.

And there are accounts like this one...

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


In the 1972 NBA Finals, the Lakers again met the New York Knicks; the Knicks were shorthanded after losing Willis Reed to injury, and so, undersized 6'8" Jerry Lucas had the task to defend against the 7'1" Chamberlain.[92] However, prolific outside shooter Lucas helped New York to win Game 1, hitting 9 of his 11 shots in the first half alone; in Game 2, which the Lakers won 106–92, Chamberlain put Lucas into foul trouble, and the Knicks lost defensive power forward Dave DeBusschere to injury.[92] In Game 3, Chamberlain scored 26 points and grabbed 20 rebounds for another Lakers win, and in a fiercely battled Game 4, the Lakers center was playing with five fouls late in the game. Having never fouled out in his career – a feat that he was very proud of – he played aggressive defense despite the risk of fouling out, and blocked two of Lucas' shots in overtime, proving those wrong who said he only played for his own stats; he ended scoring a game-high 27 points.[92] But in that game, he had fallen on his right hand, and was said to have "sprained" it; it was actually broken. For Game 5, Chamberlain's hands were packed into thick pads normally destined for defensive linesmen in American Football; he was offered a painkilling shot, but refused because he feared he would lose his shooting touch if his hands became numb.[92] In Game 5, Chamberlain recorded 24 points, 29 rebounds, 8 assists and 8 blocked shots. (While blocked shots were not an official NBA stat at that time, announcer Keith Jackson counted the blocks during the broadcast.[citation needed]) Chamberlain's outstanding all-around performance helped the Lakers win their first championship in Los Angeles with a decisive 114–100 win.[92] Chamberlain was named Finals MVP,[43] and was admired for dominating the Knicks in Game 5 while playing injured.[92

[fpliii]

I don't see Bird having any case over Magic. Magic won as many MVPs (and probably deserved one in '82), more FMVPs (and was robbed of one in '88), won more rings, outplayed Bird h2h in their post-season h2h's, was a better playoff performer...

Bird is well down my list. To many "choke" jobs in his post-season career.

Wilt outplayed Russell in the vast majority of their h2h's, and some by huge margins. And given the fact that he was battling the greatest dynasty in sports, and usually with pathetic rosters that played worse in the post-season, plus, the fact that when his roster finally neutralized Russell's, his team wiped the floor with them...very close. In fact, Wilt's teams were a total of nine polints away from having a 5-3 h2h edge in their eight playoff matchups.

As for KAJ. Take Magic away...and his career would have been considered a huge disappointment. And a peak Kareem faced quite a few of the centers that a peak Chamberlain faced earlier in his career, and he never came within the other side of the Pacific ocean of dominating them the way a prime Chamberlain did.

All fair points of which I'm already well-aware, but I'm using new criteria/measures to look at impacts for now, this is just my current stance.

Regarding MVPs though, I can't really take them seriously as they're media awards from 80-81 on. The Sporting News Player of the Year was voted on by players until at least 2010-11 (I can't find any notes about voting from last season or this season, maybe it ended?), so as far as I'm concerned it's the spiritual successor to the MVP through 1980. Finals MVPs are also problematic (especially since at some point it was referred to almost as frequently as the Playoffs MVP in newspapers).

KAJ/Magic is also tough. I haven't figured out that relationship, but I'm concerned about dropping Kareem down too far. I used to think of him as a disappointment after an amazing start to his career in Milwaukee his first four years, but the league was really incredibly weak at that point compared to the mid-60s:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=300770

As you can see in post #3:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8618871&postcount=3

by the rather simplistic measure used in that thread, his peak seasons can be considered (alongside the early 90s, after back-to-back multiple team expansions) one of the two weakest levels of talent depth in league history (consequently, I've also decided that the 67 Sixers > 72 Lakers for GOAT team).

[tikay0]

Bill Russell was one of the most athletic specimens in NBA history.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEs4KC4xHE0

[tikay0]

[IMG]Changed his avatar from Noah to him as well :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

I don't get it. Are you mad about something? :confusedshrug:

You act like I didn't know how great Russell was. I changed my mind, and now I'd take him over MJ and Kareem. I did some extensive research on the man, and I've come to the conclusion that he had the highest IQ, and will to win in NBA history.

Why you so mad? :confusedshrug:

[tikay0]

I googled "Bill Russell vs. Wilt Chamberlin" and I found this gem. Great read.


Two of the NBA's greatest players, Bill Russel and Wilt Chamberlain, are often criticized for playing in a "weak" era. This is far from the truth, as the 1960s were a very good time for basketball. A much smaller league meant more competition for fewer spots. The fact that only the 121 best basketball players in the world could play in the NBA condensed the talent pool to nine teams. In the modern NBA, over half of the teams don't even have one all star player, nevertheless hall of famers. Examining the teams in the mid 1960s, all nine of them had Hall of Fame talents:

Boston Celtics: Bill Russel, John Havlicek, Sam Jones, Tommy Heinsolm
Cincinnati Royals: Oscar Robertson, Jerry Lucas
Philadelphia 76ers: Hal Greer
New York Knicks: Willis Reed
San Francisco Warriors: Wilt Chamberlain, Nate Thurmond
St. Louis Hawks: Bob Pettit
Los Angeles Lakers: Jerry West, Elgin Baylor
Detroit Pistons: David Bing, Dave Debusschere
Baltimore Bullets: Walt Bellamy

Russel and Chamberlain faced various legends on a nightly basis, yet still were known as the best players of their generation. Throughout the decade, the two were subject to strong competition Some of the great players Russel and Chamberlain faced included:

1960-1964:

Dolph Schayes
Bob Pettit
Walt Bellamy
Jerry Lucas

1965-1968:

Willis Reed
Elvin Hayes
Wes Unseld
Nate Thurmond

1969-1972:

Kareem Abdul Jabbar
Bob Lanier
Artis Gilmore
Billy Cunningham
Dave Cowens

One reason fans tend to lash out at these legends is the absurd stats of not only Russel and Chamberlain, but average players as well, as it was not uncommon for a player to average 15-20 rebounds per game. There are several reasons for the high rebound rates of these players:

a. A high tempo offense. The average team in 1965 shot about 600 more shots than a team in 1985 and about 1400 more shots than a team in 2005.

b. Less fouls called. In 1965, the average team had 2076 personal fouls per season. In 2005, 1856 personal fouls were called. But keep in mind that 1400 more shots were attempted, yet only 200 less fouls called. The result, a lowing field goal percentage, and more shots allowed to be rebounded.

When adjusting the field goal percentage to 45% and reducing the shots taken to the normal rate today, the rebounding rate drops to a more familiar rate for most players. Elgin Baylor would dropped to around 9 boards a game and Nate Thurmond to around 12. However, both Bill Russel and Wilt Chamberlain, even with the adjusted stats, still averaged between 16-20 rebounds per game, showing that they truly did dominate like few others.

Another common misperception is that Bill Russel and Wilt Chamberlain played against only 6'6" white centers. That is completely false. Here are the NBA players from 1960-1972 6'11" or taller who played at least 3 years in the NBA: (list does not include Wilt Chamberlain)

Kareem Abdul Jabbar: 7'2"
Dennis Awtrey: 6'11"
Walt Bellamy: 6'11"
Tom Boerwinkle: 7'0"
Nate Bowmen: 6'11"
Mel Counts: 7'0"
Walter Dukes: 7'0"
Jim Eakins: 6'11"
Ray Felix: 6'11"
Hank Finkel: 7'0"
Artis Gilmore: 7'2"
Swede Halbrook: 7'3"
Reggie Harding: 7'0"
Bob Lanier: 6'11"
Jim McDaniels: 6'11"
Otto Moore: 6'11"
Dave Newmark: 7'0"
Rich Niemann: 7'0"
Billy Paultz: 6'11"
Craig Raymond: 6'11"
Elmore Smith: 7'0"
Chuck Share: 6'11"
Ronald Taylor: 7'1"
Nate Thurmond: 6'11"
Walt Wesley: 6'11"

Two other factors to keep in mind:

a. The NBA was less interested in promoting itself 40 years ago, and therefore, did not see the need to measure players with their shoes on. Almost all players today are listed 1-2 inches taller than their actual height.

b. The NBA had 1/3 of the players that they do now. That means Bill Russel and Wilt Chamberlain faced these 25 guys 3 times more often than they would in the modern nba scheduling.

The truth is, height will never be more of a factor than skill. With several exceptions, players over 7' are typically not very successful. At a collegian level, only three 7 footers have made all-American first team in the last twenty years: Shaquille O'Neal, Andrew Bogut, and Chris Mihm. In this years all star game, Dirk Nowitzki, Pau Gasol, and Chris Kaman were the only three of 30 players selected to be 7 feet, and all are known far more for their skill sets than dominating with size. If height was such a significant factor, then Manute Bol, Shawn Bradly, and Gheorghe Muresan would be hall of fame players, not just fan favorite scrubs.

The overall talent of the 1960s is greatly underestimated as well. The stamina that players in the 1960s have is far greater than anything seen today

1965 Top 3 in minutes played per game
1. Oscar Robertson, 45.6 mpg
2. Bill Russel, 45.2 mpg
3. Wilt Chamberlain, 44.4 mpg

2005 Top 3 in minutes played per game
1. Lebron James, 42.3 mpg
2. Allen Iverson, 42.3 mpg
3. Gilbert Arenas 40.9 mpg

In addition, teams never walked up the court and held the ball for 12
3 years ago Report Abuse
Additional Details
seconds, and then have four players watch as the fifth tries to get to the hoop. Most teams in the 60s tried to get a fast break after every rebound and in the half court set, the ball moved and players were setting screens and cutting to the basket. Yet players were doing this on a nightly basis, without fancy trainers giving massages and various methods to help muscle recovery. In addition, players were far more versatile as Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, Dave Debusschere, and other players could play 3 or 4 positions. Many performances that players had would be considered triple doubles in todays game, but assist rules were far stricter in the 1960s, as the average team in the 1960s made 1000 more field goals per year than a team in 2005, yet averaged 100 less assists.

The 1960s produced some of the leagues finest stars, and it is an absolute travesty that these legends are debunked for playing in a weak era when it is clearly not the case.

[Shade8780]

You literally made that up :facepalm :lol

And the assumption that Wilt's "no foul out streak" was a hindrance to his career - is fabricated, and baseless. Show me ANY sort of feedback from his 1960's/70's players/coaches that said "Wilt's lack of fouling out cost him/us ______ ".
No I didn't. Jerry Lucas, Havlicek, Russell, Jerry West and some others I'm not bothered to look up all criticized Wilt.

[Shade8780]

I don't get it. Are you mad about something? :confusedshrug:

You act like I didn't know how great Russell was. I changed my mind, and now I'd take him over MJ and Kareem. I did some extensive research on the man, and I've come to the conclusion that he had the highest IQ, and will to win in NBA history.

Why you so mad? :confusedshrug:
I'm not mad. Chill bro. I just find it funny :D

[tikay0]

Another gem.


Well said, and this if for those of you who said that Hakeem Olajuwon is the greatest center of all time.

I've seen a number of fans make the claim that Olajuwon is the best center of all time. They're wrong, but quite a few people have said it.

It could be said that the best "teammate" Olajuwon had was Clyde Drexler, although he did play with Sampson during the best part of Sampson's career.

I would not consider the 90s to be the best era for big men... you basically had 4 or 5 HOF quality centers in the league in Shaq, Olajuwon, Ewing, Robinson and possibly Zo. Maybe Mutombo if you want to go that far. But that was IT.

In the 70s, we had Jabbar, Walton when he was healthy, Cowens, Reed, Hayes, Unseld, Thurmond, Jerry Lucas, Wilt, Walt Bellamy, Bob Lanier, Moses Malone, Bob McAdoo, plus Artis Gilmore, Dan Issel and Mel Daniels from the ABA. Not all of those guys played throughout the 70s, but they were all there during that generation.

All of the NBA guys I named are Hall of Famers, Issel is a HOF as well, but Gilmore certainly should be in there too, and even Daniels has a decent argument, although I dont see him ever making it, unfortunately.

Olajuwon did destroy Ewing in the 94 finals, no question about that. And while Olajuwon's footwork was great, the "Dream Shake" is the 2nd most overplayed and overrated move in NBA history (the most overrated was Jordan switching hands on an uncontested layup in the '91 finals). Olajuwon's footwork developed while playing soccer as a child.

You've already made the point yourself that blocked shots were not an official NBA stat during the careers of Russell and Chamberlain, otherwise, they'd be 1 and 2 (or 2 and 1) in that category. While blocks were not an official stat, newspaper accounts of games involving Wilt and Russell would often mention how many shots they blocked... it was not unusual for them to block 6-8 shots in a typical game. I'm not saying that's what they averaged, I'm just mentioning that it was common for them to have numbers like that. Both players and referees confirmed those numbers in subsequent interviews over the years.

Heck, Wilt blocked 17 shots in his very first NBA game (oh and btw, he also chipped in with 43 points and 28 rebounds that night).

Blocks (and steals) were not officially kept by the NBA until the 1973-74 season (the season after Wilt retired), and the NBA does not recognize ANY blocked shots by Wilt or Russell (even though they're on film).

Olajuwon would be no better than 4th on the all time blocked shot list had the stat been kept by the NBA from day one. He might even be #5, I think Nate Thurmond probably would have blocked more shots in his prime than Olajuwon.

Both Russell and Wilt would also be high up on the steals list (for a center) had that been an official stat as well during their careers.

If Pete Newell says that Olajuwon has the best footwork he'd ever seen in a big man, I'll take his at his word. Newell's been a coach/scout/consultant for a long time, and he has indeed seen them all.

However, having the best footwork doesn't automatically make you the best player. Charles Barkley, for example, had terrible footwork, but he was still a heck of a player. I wouldn't be able to name too many forwards in NBA history who were better than he was.

Olajuwon had some weaknesses in his game that were not always easy for a casual fan to spot. His passing skills were never that great, and his in-depth knowledge of the game was lacking in some areas (he did not really play basketball at all until his late teens).

His remarkable athleticism made up for his relative lack of overall knowledge. He didnt always have a knowledge or feel for where every one of the other 9 guys were on the court.

When Olajuwon came into the league, for example, some teams used to try to play him physically by getting a strong player to lean on him. But that actually made Olajuwons job easier, because he could feel his man leaning on him and spin off of him (theres that great footwork again). However, Pat Riley discovered that if you play off of him in the post, then Olajuwon would have to physically turn in order to locate the defender (because he couldnt use the spin move). That gave a team time to double team him and take the ball out of his hands (and as a bonus, his poor passing skills could sometimes be exploited).

Thats just one example, but its something that not many people know about. All they ever talk about is the one move he made against David Robinson, and from that alone, they proclaim him as the best center ever.

Olajuwon did win 2 rings, but imho, probably would have only won 1 ring at most had Jordan not retired. Still, you play who you play, and its not his fault Jordan retired early. But Olajuwon did play great in both of those finals, and outplayed both Ewing and (a young, raw) Shaq. Still, although you say that Olajuwon didnt have any great teammates, neither did Ewing so it was one one-man team against another in 94. He deserved both rings that he won. And Im glad he won them. I always liked him and enjoyed watching him play.

[tikay0]

Continued.........

[QUOTE]In the 70s and 80s, you needed several HOF or HOF quality players in order to win a championship. The fact that Olajuwon was able to win 2 titles in the 1990s with those teammates says more about the overall weakness of the NBA and the fact that the talent was spread so thinly than it does about him being the greatest center of all time.

Btw, when Kareem was 39 years old (1986) and Olajuwon was about 23, Kareem was named first team all-NBA over Olajuwon. Kareem destroyed both Olajuwon and Sampson during those days. Dont get me wrong, Olajuwon was great even at that age, but the fact that Kareem was first team all-NBA at age 39 tells us all we need to know about who was better. You dont want to know what Kareem would have done to Olajuwon in his prime!

But Wilt, Russell and Kareem are (in some order) still the 3 best centers to ever play the game. Olajuwon is one of maybe 3 guys who have a legitimate claim to be #4 (along with Moses Malone and Shaq). Walton was actually a better player than Olajuwon as well, but we cant rate him over Hakeem because Waltons career was injury prone.

The 1990s saw a decline in the overall quality of centers. And again, dont get me wrong, its not the fault of Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson or Shaq as to when they were born. They came to the NBA when they did. But the 1990s NBA was becoming loaded down with too many guys who came right out of high school and werent ready for the NBA (other than their potential).
Source(s):
As far as the NBA being tougher when Hakeem won his titles, it wasn't all that tough with Jordan out of the league.

Are you even aware that blocks were not recorded by the NBA until 1974. Wilt retired in 1973, Russell in 1969. Steals were also not an official stat until 1974. Olajuwon's blocked shot totals would be dwarfed by Wilt and Russell had blocks been an official stat.

Russell was the smartest player ever to play the game, by far. It would have taken him no time at all to solve Olajuwon. It wouldn't be long before Russell knew what Hakeem would do before Hakeem knew himself. There were some weaknesses in Olajuwon's post game which require sophisticated analysis. Pat Riley was the one who discovered them. Russell would have easily exploited them. And Olajuwon simply would never get a shot off against Wilt.

Wilt was a 48 min/game man. He averaged 46 min/game over his career. He would have worn Olajuwon out easily simply with FAR superior strength and stamina (not to mention skill).

You wanna talk about Olajuwon's passing? Wilt was the ONLY non-guard ever to lead the NBA in assists.

Are you also aware that Kareem, at age 39, was first team all-NBA over Olajuwon in 1986? Kareem was kicking Olajuwon's a$$ all over the court even at that late age.

Greater athletes? Yeah, we sent great athletes to the Olympics in 2004 and to the World Championships in 2006, and our great athletes got their freakin' heads handed to them by teams which play basketball exactly the way it was played when Russell and Chamberlain played the game. Our 2008 team had to play together during the off season for THREE YEARS just to figure out how to play on the same d**m team.

Wilt and Russell never competed in an NBA full of high school players and one-and-done college players either. And the only players under 6 feet that played in the NBA all played while Olajuwon was playing, not while Wilt and Russell were playing. It was Olajuwon who benefited by playing in a league with a bunch of midgets. Muggsy Bogues FIVE FOOT THREE!!! There were almost no players under 6 foot when Wilt and Russell played, because a player that size would never be given a look. Sebastian Telfair? Please...

When Wilt scored his 100 point game, the Knicks' center was 6'11... he was 2 inches shorter than Wilt. So if Olajuwon's a seven footer, what was his high game against a 6'10 guy?

Russell was also (by FAR) the greatest clutch performer in NBA history... he was 10-0 in game sevens, and he also won his only game 5 of a best of 5 series, meaning he was 11-0 in winner-take-all games. And, in case you think he wasn't contributing much offensively on those championship teams, take a look at his game 7 performances:

[url]http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=

[tikay0]

I'm not mad. Chill bro. I just find it funny :D

Nah, I think you mad. :D

[tikay0]

Honestly, even at the center position I'd take Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, and Hakeem over Russell.

That's not a knock on Russell, but if you have a chance to draft any player in NBA history, I think you'd prefer one who's a dominant scoring threat.

A defender can only impact the game to a certain point, basketball is a sport that favors the offensive player because you can't just tackle or physically hit the offensive player.

H2H Wilt had the better numbers, but Russell did all the little things to help his team anyway way possible to win. When Wilt had the greatest team in NBA history, he beat Bill's Celtics, but guess what. The very next year, Russell led the Celtics from a 3-1 deficit to win the series.

Russell is the GOAT winner, hands down.

[Shade8780]

Nah, I think you mad. :D
Nope.

[Shade8780]

Why did Russell have to retire just when Kareem entered the league?! :cry:

[CavaliersFTW]

No I didn't. Jerry Lucas, Havlicek, Russell, Jerry West and some others I'm not bothered to look up all criticized Wilt.
Jerry West never said anything close to what you described about Wilt, West is always one of the first people to shoot down rumors about Wilt's alleged "criticisms" and untrue rumors players never "said" about Wilt. Most of what you've heard has likely been misquoted or worse, entirely fabricated by writers. Like I said, you should post direct quotes, otherwise based on all the times Wilt's peers have gotten offended by the criticisms directed at Wilt that they all seem to agree most of what has been printed is "unfair" and "untrue" - I'm going to assume most of it didn't happen. Unless it's directly quoted. Also, context is very important.

[tikay0]

Jerry West never said anything close to what you described about Wilt, West is always one of the first people to shoot down rumors about Wilt's alleged "criticisms" and untrue rumors players never "said" about Wilt. Most of what you've heard has been fabricated by writers. Like I said, you should post direct quotes, otherwise based on all the times Wilt's peers have gotten offended by the criticisms directed at Wilt that they all seem to agree is "unfair" and "untrue" - I'm going to assume it didn't happen.


Despite all of Wilt's impressive talents, the man is a PAIN to work with. These explains why his former teams like the Warriors and 76ers was willing to trade him for LESSER talents, just to get rid of him. Russ has a much better attitude and despite of his aloof manner in public and private life, he exudes a sense of camarederie whenever he steps into the court or inside the locker room.

Some of Wilt negative attributes which could be traced to his primadonna personality includes:

- disrespecting and criticizing his coaches publicly (eg. Neil Johnston, Alex Hannum, Dolph Schayes, and of course Bill Van Breda Kolff all had bad memories working with Wilt.)

- demanding a high salary (eg. One third of the Warriors gate receipts goes to Wilt's salary but Wilt doesnt even want to do publicity gigs to boost ticket sales)

- complains like a baby to the media (eg. threatening to quit but not carrying it out in Look magazine)

- rarely practice and travels with his teammates (eg. Wilt had had feuds with Baylor and Hal Greer).

If i was an NBA coach in real life, i would dread the idea of bringing Wilt Chamberlain on my team. Hell, Alex Hannum had to challenge Wilt in a fight just to get his respect. Ask yourself what kind of a basketball player would push his coach to such lengths just to earn the player's respect. Its not worth it having him on the team unless his talents are programmed in an android devoid of his personality.

Sounds like a pain in the ass if you ask me.

[TheTenth]

Eh quotes are rather lame to begin with from players. Most have hidden agendas behind their quotes and many simply speak without thinking. Russell, Wilt, Jordan, etc. are all great without the crazy quotes to go with them.

Oh and to the poster above: Bill Russell demanded a higher salary than what Wilt got and he also was known as a poor practice player. Also none of his teammates wanted to coach him because he was too proud/egomaniac. Russell also dogged HOF teammate Heinsohn about winning ROTY, telling him that he, Russell, should have half of his ROTY winnings. Does that mean that they wouldn't want him on their team? HELL NO. Does any of what you say mean that Wilt wasn't a great player? HELL NO. But I bet that quote is from Bleacherreport so it's not really useful.

[tikay0]

You guys are forgetting that Bill Russell made a point to make Bob Cousy the best PG in the league. If it weren't for Russell, I don't think that Celtics would be filled with HOF players.

He's the ultimate leader. Does ANYTHING to make his team better. I want that dude on my team.

[tikay0]

Eh quotes are rather lame to begin with from players. Most have hidden agendas behind their quotes and many simply speak without thinking. Russell, Wilt, Jordan, etc. are all great without the crazy quotes to go with them.

Oh and to the poster above: Bill Russell demanded a higher salary than what Wilt got and he also was known as a poor practice player. Also none of his teammates wanted to coach him because he was too proud/egomaniac. Does that mean that they wouldn't want him on their team? HELL NO. Does any of what you say mean that Wilt wasn't a great player? HELL NO.

You do know that the Lakers had a 7 to 2 vote to not bring Wilt onto the team.

They eventually got him, but c'mon man. He was regarded around the league as a head case.

Bill Russell might've been a lot of things, but a bad teammate wasn't one of them.

[TheTenth]

You guys are forgetting that Bill Russell made a point to make Bob Cousy the best PG in the league. If it weren't for Russell, I don't think that Celtics would be filled with HOF players.

He's the ultimate leader. Does ANYTHING to make his team better. I want that dude on my team.
Oh right, because Cousy wasn't winning assist titles before Russell time and time again.:oldlol:

List of guys that probably would make it without Russ:
Bob Cousy
Bill Sharman
Arnie Risen
Andy Phillip
Bailey Howell
Clyde Lovellette
(^ all of them played most of their careers WITHOUT Russell)
Sam Jones
John Havlicek
(^Both talented players and Hondo had his best years without Russell.)
Tom Heinsohn (I'm iffy about this one, but he was clearly a talented player)

Guys that probably needed Russell:
KC Jones
Frank Ramsey


You do know that the Lakers had a 7 to 2 vote to not bring Wilt onto the team.

They eventually got him, but c'mon man. He was regarded around the league as a head case.

Bill Russell might've been a lot of things, but a bad teammate wasn't one of them.
Oh so a vote of players who had never been teammates with Wilt before is undeniable proof that he was a bad teammate! Nice!

[Shade8780]

Oh right, because Cousy wasn't winning assist titles before Russell time and time again.:oldlol:

List of guys that probably would make it without Russ:
Bob Cousy
Bill Sharman
Arnie Risen
Andy Phillip
Bailey Howell
Clyde Lovellette
(^ all of them played most of their careers WITHOUT Russell)
Sam Jones
John Havlicek
(^Both talented players and Hondo had his best years without Russell.)
Tom Heinsohn (I'm iffy about this one, but he was clearly a talented player)

Guys that probably needed Russell:
KC Jones
Frank Ramsey
Most of those guys weren't one on one players. They counted on Russell's passes to get them their points. Hondo said that the Celtics took a huge shock when Bill retired because they relied on him so much.

[tikay0]

April 2013, u mad? Just because Russell has a perfect game 7 record, and one of the most clutch performers of all time, AND always shined in the playoffs, you wanna hate on the guy? :confusedshrug:

Wilt was a headcase that no one liked. Deal with it.

[Shade8780]

Oh so a vote of players who had never been teammates with Wilt before is undeniable proof that he was a bad teammate! Nice!
:facepalm

[TheTenth]

Most of those guys weren't one on one players. They counted on Russell's passes to get them their points. Hondo said that the Celtics took a huge shock when Bill retired because they relied on him so much.
So? Most of them made their HOF careers WITHOUT Russell. :facepalm
And like I said, I don't find quotes as good reasoning.


April 2013, u mad? Just because Russell has a perfect game 7 record, and one of the most clutch performers of all time, AND always shined in the playoffs, you wanna hate on the guy? :confusedshrug:

Wilt was a headcase that no one liked. Deal with it.
No I think Russell is one of the greatest of all time. I just think you have faulty logic in criticizing Wilt.

[ThaRegul8r]

Why did Russell have to retire just when Kareem entered the league?! :cry:

Because there was literally nothing else to do. He'd helped his team win 11 titles in 13 seasons, and had no business winning the last two, but did it anyway. He couldn't play any more after that, because it takes a lot out of you and he'd burned out.

[CavaliersFTW]

People who feel the need to hunt for flaws and criticisms about one player, yet do not appear to hunt for flaws in the same manner or with the same enthusiasm for the player they are trying to prop up or hold in high-esteem, make for lousy discussions.

People need to stop throwing Wilt under the bus if they want Bill Russell to have any respect. Their greatness is co-dependent. You can't be throwing one under the bus and expect people to then take the other one seriously. They are each others best competition. And they were both so spectacular it seems childish to try and slander one or the other with petty criticisms in light of their incredible accomplishments and abilities.

[NumberSix]

Michael Jordan was without question a better player than Bill Russell.

[stanlove1111]

How do you know? He says that if Russell and Wilt swapped rosters, that Chamberlain might very well have won all those rings. Since they didn't, we don't know. We do know that Russell enjoyed a huge edge in surrounding talent in the majority of their ten seasons in the league together, and that his teammates also outplayed Chamberlain's in nearly all of their post-season h2h's.

The fact that Russell, with far superior talent won two game seven's, by 2 1and 1 point, against what were basically last place rosters before Chamberlain arrived, and with those rosters playing horribly, just speaks volumes about how far one man could carry a team against an army.


How many times are we going to hear this myth that Russel only won because he had better talent..He didn't have better talent from 65-69 and won 3 out of 4. Wilt went to a team in LA that went to the finals the years before and Russell still won on his last legs. The Phila team he left ended up with the second best record in the league the year after he left.

What speaqks volumes is Russell only failed to win a ttile once in his last 15 years of basketball when he wasn't hurt..Let me guess it was all his teammates.

[NumberSix]

How many times are we going to hear this myth that Russel only won because he had better talent..He didn't have better talent from 65-69 and won 3 out of 4. Wilt went to a team in LA that went to the finals the years before and Russell still won on his last legs. The Phila team he left ended up with the second best record in the league the year after he left.

What speaqks volumes is Russell only failed to win a ttile once in his last 15 years of basketball when he wasn't hurt..Let me guess it was all his teammates.
It's like April 2013 posters aren't even aware that basketball is a team sport. Yes child, the winning team having the most talent is a myth. Of course. That's the ticket.:rolleyes:

[Flash31]

Id take Russell,Wilt,Kareem,Shaq over Jordan

While Jordan is known as Goat(by most)

A Goat C beats the Goat Guard

[stanlove1111]

I don't see Bird having any case over Magic. Magic won as many MVPs (and probably deserved one in '82), more FMVPs (and was robbed of one in '88), won more rings, outplayed Bird h2h in their post-season h2h's, was a better playoff performer...

.


Bird was better at his best, and Magic had a better career because of better health..I can sure see something thinking Bird was the greater player..I consider them about tied.

Plesse stop with the finals MVP talk..That has gotten really old on this site. I noticed you cherry pick. You don't bother mentioning that Bird was robbed of a FMVP in 1981 and Magic got a gift in 1980.. Not that FMVP are to be obsessed with like so many do on this site..

[SamuraiSWISH]

I wouldn't take Russell over MJ. Guy was only the legit best player on both sides of the ball for 2 or 3 of his 11 championships. Regardless of his intangibles, how great a leader he was, how dominant of a defensive force he was ... he's still essentially a niche player. Defense wins championships, but offense is important too. Let's not forget he had the most stacked roster in his young, small pond league.

[stanlove1111]

It's like April 2013 posters aren't even aware that basketball is a team sport. Yes child, the winning team having the most talent is a myth. Of course. That's the ticket.:rolleyes:


Dumb dumb the myth I am talking about is Russell had all this great talent around him and Wilt didn't..

Wilt great talent from 65-73..2 titles..Follow long now kiddo..Son did you miss the part where I stated the fact that Wilt went to a team in 1969 that went the finals the year before without him and still lost to Russell? Did you miss the part about the Phila team that Wilt left in 1968 ended up with the second best record in the league the next year without him..Gee some lack of talent Wilt had..:lol

But keep spouting your crap..

[NumberSix]

I wouldn't take Russell over MJ. Guy was only the legit best player on both sides of the ball for 2 or 3 of his 11 championships. Regardless of his intangibles, how great a leader he was, how dominant of a defensive force he was ... he's still essentially a niche player. Defense wins championships, but offense is important too. Let's not forget he had the most stacked roster in his young, small pond league.
You have to put somewhat of an * on Russell's career due to him being in an 8 team league where the other 7 teams didn't want to have "too many" black players on their rosters.

[KG215]

Lol I hear what your saying but his height is his height .. He would be 6'9 in yesterday's nba and 6'9 in today's nba.. Lol
:facepalm

It hasn't kept Dwight from, when healthy, being the best center in the league, and they're basically the exact same height. You know a lot of the other players that are listed at 6'10"-6'11" in today's NBA? Most of them are actually 6'8" or 6'9"; the same height as or shorter than Russell. He would be listed at 6'11" today, and be just as tall (with a higher reach and better vert than most) as all the other players that are allegedly 6'11" today.

[NumberSix]

Dumb dumb the myth I am talking about is Russell had all this great talent around him and Wilt didn't..

Wilt great talent from 65-73..2 titles..Follow long now kiddo..Son did you miss the part where I stated the fact that Wilt went to a team in 1969 that went the finals the year before without him and still lost to Russell? Did you miss the part about the Phila team that Wilt left in 1968 ended up with the second best record in the league the next year without him..Gee some lack of talent Wilt had..:lol

But keep spouting your crap..
Real men make sure to display passive aggressiveness on the internet. Obvi.

:roll:

April 2013.

[tikay0]

STFU with all this height talk. Russell was easily one of the most gifted athletes in NBA history. It's true, his height would be estimated at around 6'11-7'0 in today's heavily marketed league, but c'mon, when your big man is doing things like this,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEs4KC4xHE0

Shiiiiiiieeeeeeeeet.

[ThaRegul8r]

People who feel the need to hunt for flaws and criticisms about one player, yet do not appear to hunt for flaws in the same manner or with the same enthusiasm for the player they are trying to prop up or hold in high-esteem, make for lousy discussions.

Welcome to the internet.

[IGOTGAME]

I wouldn't take Russell over MJ. Guy was only the legit best player on both sides of the ball for 2 or 3 of his 11 championships. Regardless of his intangibles, how great a leader he was, how dominant of a defensive force he was ... he's still essentially a niche player. Defense wins championships, but offense is important too. Let's not forget he had the most stacked roster in his young, small pond league.

Russel was a niche player. His niche was winning f'ing championships. Seems like he picked the right niche imo.

[KG215]

And I see we're back to, regardless of who the thread was supposed to be about, jlauber stepping in and copying and pasting walls of text about Wilt.

Someone should start a thread titled "Ranks the Centers of the 80's and 90's" and see how long it takes for him to step in and start talking about Wilt.

[tikay0]

Russel was a niche player. His niche was winning f'ing championships. Seems like he picked the right niche imo.

:applause: :oldlol:

[SamuraiSWISH]

Russel was a niche player. His niche was winning f'ing championships. Seems like he picked the right niche imo.
Meh, stacked roster, young league, not the best player for the majority of his championships. He was a terrific defensive anchor who was only the undisputed best player on his team for 3 of his championships. You want to talk about overrated due to "rings"

[IGOTGAME]

Anthony Davis= 6"10 with shoes = will dominant the NBA and be the next Tim Duncan.

Bill Russel = 6"9-6"10 = gets no respect.

You guys need to get real. Russel is the greatest defender in the history of this game.

[tikay0]

Meh, stacked roster, young league, not the best player for the majority of his championships. He was a terrific defensive anchor who was only the undisputed best player on his team for 3 of his championships. You want to talk about overrated due to "rings"

Damn son. You literally can't give no one else besides MJ credit huh? :facepalm

[IGOTGAME]

Meh, stacked roster, young league, not the best player for the majority of his championships. He was a terrific defensive anchor who was only the undisputed best player on his team for 3 of his championships. You want to talk about overrated due to "rings"

please show me these better players on those championship teams? it may be hard because they don't exist.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Damn son. You literally can't give no one else besides MJ some credit huh? :facepalm
:facepalm

How am I not giving Russell credit, kid? You never even seen him play, let alone in context, so why are you so attached?

I've done the research, I've always felt he's overrated. I give plenty of credit where it's due. Him being a defensive anchor with incredible leadership capabilities on a franchise that won 11 rings in a young, small talent pool league on a team that had top to bottom the best roster in the league every season.

The same way we pepper Kobe's 5 rings with the Shaq argument? Same goes for Russell, arguably to a greater extent.

I'm not not giving credit, I'm being HONEST and not letting "rings" and the context in how they were won sway the logical side of my brain.

I'd take Wilt, Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem maybe even Duncan over Russell as well. Bird, Magic all have a higher standing in the game's hierarchy to me than Bill Russell. It is what it is ... don't cry about it. I gave you valid reasoning why I wouldn't choose Russell. And no, I'm not taking him over Jordan.

Get off my dick, young buck. Do your research. Russell still isn't better than Wilt. Guy was essentially a Dwight Howard in a weaker, smaller, less athletic, less talented league.

[tikay0]

How am I not giving Russell credit, kid? You never even seen him play, let alone in context, so why are you so attached?

I've done the research, I've always felt he's overrated. I give plenty of credit where it's due. Him being a defensive anchor with incredible leadership capabilities on a franchise that won 11 rings in a young, small talent pool league on a team that had top to bottom the best roster in the league every season.

The same way we pepper Kobe's 5 rings with the Shaq argument? Same goes for Russell, arguably to a greater extent.

I'm not not giving credit, I'm being HONEST and not letting "rings" and the context in how they were won sway the logical side of my brain.

I'd take Wilt, Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem maybe even Duncan over Russell as well. Bird, Magic all have a higher standing in the game's hierarchy to me than Bill Russell. It is what it is ... don't cry about it. I gave you valid reasoning why I wouldn't choose Russell. And no, I'm not taking him over Jordan.

OK, kid. He was/still is the smartest basketball player to ever play the game. He's studied his opposition like no other player has ever played the game. His single driving force in life was to win CHAMPIONSHIPS. He sacrificed his stats in order for his team to have the best chance at winning. He was the greatest leader in NBA history. He knew what you were going to do, before you did.

And when you say he was a defensive anchor, I think you meant, he was the GOAT defender, period. He invented "intimidating" the opposing offensive players. He was a player coach for God's sake.

Please stop underrating the guy. MJ is the GOAT, and so is Russell.

[NumberSix]

OK, kid. He was/still is the smartest basketball player to ever play the game. He's studied his opposition like no other player has ever played the game. His single driving force in life was to win CHAMPIONSHIPS. He sacrificed his stats in order for his team to have the best chance at winning. He was the greatest leader in NBA history. He knew what you were going to do, before you did.

And when you say he was a defensive anchor, I think you meant, he was the GOAT defender, period. He invented "intimidating" the opposing offensive players. He was a player coach for God's sake.

Please stop underrating the guy. MJ is the GOAT, and so is Russell.
How the fcuk would you know? :confusedshrug:

[tikay0]

How the fcuk would you know? :confusedshrug:

Numerous accounts of people saying so. When Red Auerbach calls him the smartest player to ever play the game, that says something.

Sorry, Lebron isn't even in this conversation. He wouldn't allow Lebron to get a single bucket in the paint, and he'd probably cry himself to sleep every night, knowing he'd have to face him in a 7 game series.

[Akhenaten]

Thread starter did you witness Russell play in the 50's?

[tikay0]

Thread starter did you witness Russell play in the 50's?

You meant the 60's, when he was winning championships? :facepalm

And stop trolling SamuraiSwish.

[IGOTGAME]

Guy was essentially a Dwight Howard in a weaker, smaller, less athletic, less talented league.

where do you get off calling people "kid," and then saying stupid shit like this?

[NumberSix]

Numerous accounts of people saying so. When Red Auerbach calls him the smartest player to ever play the game, that says something.
Multiple sauces?

[NumberSix]

You meant the 60's, when he was winning championships? :facepalm

And stop trolling SamuraiSwish.
Yeah. No championships for Bill Russell In the 50's. That's for sure.

This man knows his stuff. His opinions are to be taken very seriously.
:roll:

[K Xerxes]

You meant the 60's, when he was winning championships? :facepalm

And stop trolling SamuraiSwish.

Damn, I thought you and Samurai were the same people. :lol

Anyway, there is some truth to what you say. Jordan was the better player because he was incredibly impactful on both offense and defense, but Russell had the perfect mindset and mentality to build around for a championship winning team... Plus, he's a center and is a strong interior presence.

...I don't know exactly who I'd take.. probably Jordan.. but they're the top 2.

[Rose'sACL]

Damn son. You literally can't give no one else besides MJ credit huh? :facepalm
that double negative.
I will take jordan over Russel in any era. it is just the truth that ERA in which russell played was very weak compared to the modern era.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Just an FYI: Russell was surrounded by four-to-five other HOFers his ENTIRE career and often played weak ball clubs who barely had winning records (or even had losing records) in the finals.

Not just that, his Celtics only had to play 2-3 rounds to win a ring.

I have no issue with anyone taking Russell over Jordan. The guy the GOAT winner. I just think Mike was a better 2-way player, and unlike Russell, had no weakness dominating on BOTH ends of the floor.

[tikay0]

Yeah. No championships for Bill Russell In the 50's. That's for sure.

This man knows his stuff. His opinions are to be taken very seriously.
:roll:

Yes, he won chips in the 50's, but a majority of them were in the 60's.

You use your corny emoticons like you're a 5th grader.

[NumberSix]

Damn, I thought you and Samurai were the same people. :lol

Anyway, there is some truth to what you say. Jordan was the better player because he was incredibly impactful on both offense and defense, but Russell had the perfect mindset and mentality to build around for a championship winning team... Plus, he's a center and is a strong interior presence.

...I don't know exactly who I'd take.. probably Jordan.. but they're the top 2.
As much as people bitch about today's type of centers, Bill Russell was exactly that same style of center. He's closest counterpart is probably Joakim Noah.

[tikay0]

Damn, I thought you and Samurai were the same people. :lol

LMAO. I'm a Bulls homer. He's an MJ homer.

[Akhenaten]

You meant the 60's, when he was winning championships? :facepalm

And stop trolling SamuraiSwish.

Huh? difference does it make? he played 4 seasons in the 50's, regardless, did you witness him play?

[IGOTGAME]

Just an FYI: Russell was surrounded by four-to-five other HOFers his ENTIRE career and often played weak ball clubs who barely had winning records (or even had losing records) in the finals.

Not just that, his Celtics only had to play 2-3 rounds to win a ring.

I have no issue with anyone taking Russell over Jordan. The guy the GOAT winner. I just think Mike was a better 2-way player, and unlike Russell, had no weakness dominating on BOTH ends of the floor.

guards inherently have a weakness dominating on the defensive end of the floor.

[NumberSix]

Yes, he won chips in the 50's, but a majority of them were in the 60's.

You use your corny emoticons like you're a 5th grader.
Translation: "Oh fcuk. I didn't know that. I've just been repeating what I've heard from multiple sauces."

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[tikay0]

Just an FYI: Russell was surrounded by four-to-five other HOFers his ENTIRE career and often played weak ball clubs who barely had winning records (or even had losing records) in the finals.

Not just that, his Celtics only had to play 2-3 rounds to win a ring.

I have no issue with anyone taking Russell over Jordan. The guy the GOAT winner. I just think Mike was a better 2-way player, and unlike Russell, had no weakness dominating on BOTH ends of the floor.


Russel and Chamberlain faced various legends on a nightly basis, yet still were known as the best players of their generation. Throughout the decade, the two were subject to strong competition Some of the great players Russel and Chamberlain faced included:

1960-1964:

Dolph Schayes
Bob Pettit
Walt Bellamy
Jerry Lucas

1965-1968:

Willis Reed
Elvin Hayes
Wes Unseld
Nate Thurmond

1969-1972:

Kareem Abdul Jabbar
Bob Lanier
Artis Gilmore
Billy Cunningham
Dave Cowens

And they were facing those guys on the regular.

[Akhenaten]

Translation: "Oh fcuk. I didn't know that. I've just been repeating what I've heard from multiple sauces."

:roll: :roll: :roll:

haha, dude exposed him self.

clown.

[tikay0]

haha, dude exposed him self.

clown.

How many alts do you have Numbersixx? It's pathetic. You're a little hick from Indiana that root for the Lakers, and your favorite player is Lebron.

You're a cornball kid.

[tikay0]

..................

Fan of MJ, not the Bulls.

[NumberSix]

How many alts do you have Numbersixx? It's pathetic. You're a little hick from Indiana that root for the Lakers, and your favorite player is Lebron.

You're a cornball kid.
The words of an embarrassed victim of the ether.

:lebronamazed:

[SamuraiSWISH]

where do you get off calling people "kid," and then saying stupid shit like this?
He's in my top ten, don't get your undies in a twist. And you both are kids. tikay0 more so ... I know for a fact that neither of you two watched Russell growing up in context. And here is tikay0 with his trying so desperately hard re-vamped ISH image of being an "un-biased / knowledgeable poster" ... I see right through that shit.

Apparently I'm not a Bulls fan, either. Just an MJ homer. Or whatever that means. Why? Because I can tell you precisely why I'd choose MJ over Russell? Given he was the best player on both sides of the ball, won 6 rings in a more competitive era with a roster as it related to the rest of his contemporaries that wasn't as stacked as Russell's Celtics of the 60's?

tikay0 isn't a Bulls fan, or even an MJ homer. He's a slave to ISH popular perception, because he actually cares about his "reputation" on here. Thus the sudden re-invention in trying to sound like a knowledgeable fan, spouting off things he has heard other people say.

BTW, what about any of my post on Bill Russell has anything to do with me being a Bulls fan or not? Not a single mention of the Chicago franchise.

Russell was a defensive stopper. His offensive game, was at times particularly weak. For 7 of his rings, he wasn't the leading scorer or sometimes second or even third leading scorer on his team. That's how stacked the Celtics were ... and how other players on that team were MAJOR superstar caliber contributors, just like Russell's unique niche on defense and the glass.

Russell was incredibly smart, and a great leader. He was a piece of a huge Boston Celtics puzzle. He was yearly the best player on his defense for his team, that much is acknowledged. But of his 11 championships, he's probably only the best player on 3 or 4 of those teams, undisputed. People act like he was easily the most important player on both sides of the ball for the Celtics. What about that makes him different than Ben Wallace? What about that makes him so much better than a Wilt, Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem, or Duncan?

[tikay0]

....................

Fan of MJ. Not the Bulls.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

And they were facing those guys on the regular.

Are you suggesting Russell had more competition? :oldlol:

[SamuraiSWISH]

..........
Fan of Bill Russell / Celtics ... not a fan of the Chicago Bulls or MJ.

ISH reputation whore.

[tikay0]

Fan of Bill Russell / Celtics ... not a fan of the Chicago Bulls or MJ.

ISH reputation whore.

Fan of MJ, not the Bulls.

Reputation whore? You know how much I talk shit about Lebron/Kobe? I'm not Numbersixx, I don't attract the lowest common denominator.

IMO, keyword, IMO, I'd take Russell over MJ, if I were to start a franchise. Why you so butt hurt? You're acting like I called MJ a bum.

[NumberSix]

Fan of Bill Russell / Celtics ... not a fan of the Chicago Bulls or MJ.

ISH reputation whore.
I've literally never seen the kid say a thing about Bill Russell until the past few days. He obviously has no knowledge whatsoever of Russell's history. He hears Phil Jackson say he'd pick Bill Russell, and out of the blue, he's been dick riding him the last few days. He's not smart enough to understand that smarter people have the capability of seeing exactly what he's doing.

[Akhenaten]

How many alts do you have Numbersixx? It's pathetic. You're a little hick from Indiana that root for the Lakers, and your favorite player is Lebron.

You're a cornball kid.

shut your square ass up
so anybody who laughs at a fool for being a fool is a alt account?

you didn't witness the man play you have NO frame of reference, NO context
shut the F up and take your L with you

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i102/Swizzphoto/TakeyourL.gif

[nightprowler10]

I don't get it. Are you mad about something? :confusedshrug:

You act like I didnt know how great Russell was. I changed my mind, and now I'd take him over MJ and Kareem. I did some extensive research on the man, and I've come to the conclusion that he had the highest IQ, and will to win in NBA history.

Why you so mad? :confusedshrug:
Its just damn funny that you were making sweeping claims about Russell that he wasn't close to MJ and it was obvious you hadn't done your research. Now that you have done the research its all "oh shit this guy was awesome". I can't lie though, I've done the same regarding players from the past.

[tikay0]

You're not a fan of the Bulls or MJ.

Bill Russell over Jordan? Yea, because few basketball enthusiasts would dare make that claim, let alone Bulls fans. And you're trying to convince us you're a Chicago fan.

You've admitted to me you're essentially trying to change your perception around here with new "tactics" ... no one was taking you seriously before, so this is your effort to re-invent yourself on ISH to get your opinion taken seriously.

Anyway, we don't believe you ... you need MORE people. You're not a Bulls fan, MJ fan, not even a Russell / Celtics fan. You never even seen the guy play, or evidently done research on his teams, the years he won, competition faced, state of the league, etc.

You're literally that little brother trying to interject into big brother's conversation with his friends trying desperately to sound smart in order to be taken seriously.

And much like the older brother does with his friends, we keep pushing you away. Go play with your trucks.

This is the funniest post I've ever seen posted. There's no need to prove than I'm a real Bulls fan to an MJ homer.

My reputation is intact. I ride or die with my Bulls. Anyone that says I don't, don't even matter to me.


You've admitted to me you're essentially trying to change your perception around here with new "tactics" ... no one was taking you seriously before, so this is your effort to re-invent yourself on ISH to get your opinion taken seriously.

LMAO. I said, i was going to be passive aggressive with the Lebron stans, because that pisses them off even more. The fact that you're now making shit up just shows your true character. A guy that literally says absurd stuff if you say anything negative towards MJ. No wonder why you're only known as an MJ homer.

[SamuraiSWISH]

I've literally never seen the kid say a thing about Bill Russell until the past few days. He obviously has no knowledge whatsoever of Russell's history. He hears Phil Jackson say he'd pick Bill Russell, and out of the blue, he's been dick riding him the last few days. He's not smart enough to understand that smarter people have the capability of seeing exactly what he's doing.
Pretty much, verbatim.


Fan of MJ, not the Bulls.

Reputation whore? You know how much I talk shit about Lebron/Kobe? I'm not Numbersixx, I don't attract the lowest common denominator.

IMO, keyword, IMO, I'd take Russell over MJ, if I were to start a franchise. Why you so butt hurt? You're acting like I called MJ a bum.
You're not a fan or even a self proclaimed "homer" of the Bulls or MJ. You're concerned with your ISH rep. Thus, an ISH rep whore.

See, when I troll on LeBron or Kobe, it's basically the survival of the fittest of the current state of ISH. I don't always believe the things I say, I do them in a competitive / fun nature. I have two sides of my basketball mind, or modes. One is fan mode, the other is historical perspective. In neither case would I choose Russell over MJ. Hell, probably not even over LeBron either.

Bill Russell over Jordan? Yea, because few basketball enthusiasts would dare make that claim, let alone Bulls fans. And you're trying to convince us you're a Chicago Bulls "homer"? Hahaha

You've admitted to me you're essentially trying to change your perception around here with new "tactics" ... no one was taking you seriously before, so this is your effort to re-invent yourself on ISH to get your opinion taken seriously.

Anyway, we don't believe you ... you need MORE people. You're not a Bulls fan, MJ fan, not even a Russell / Celtics fan. You never even seen the guy play, or evidently done research on his teams, the years he won, competition faced, state of the league, etc.

You're literally that little brother trying to interject into big brother's conversation with his friends trying desperately to sound smart in order to be taken seriously.

And much like the older brother does with his friends, we keep pushing you away. Go play with your trucks.

[tikay0]

Its just damn funny that you were making sweeping claims about Russell that he wasn't close to MJ and it was obvious you hadn't done your research. Now that you have done the research its all "oh shit this guy was awesome". I can't lie though, I've done the same regarding players from the past.

Exactly. I did my research, and now I appreciate his greatness even more. :confusedshrug:

If certain people can't handle that. Fugg em.

[tikay0]

.............


Fan of MJ, not of the Bulls. :no:

P.S. You're a demented guy. I said I preferred Russell to MJ, and now you're acting like a scorned child. WOW.

You're acting like Numbersixx right now.

[NumberSix]

You act like I didn't know how great Russell was. I changed my mind, and now I'd take him over MJ and Kareem. I did some extensive research on the man, and I've come to the conclusion that he had the highest IQ, and will to win in NBA history.
Hearing 1 Phil Jackson quote = extensive research

:banana:

[SamuraiSWISH]

This is the funniest post I've ever seen posted. There's no need to prove than I'm a real Bulls fan to an MJ homer.
Clearly you're a Bill Russell / ISH rep whore "homer" ...


My reputation is intact.
It's been cemented here for awhile now.


I ride or die with my Bulls.
Sure you do. Goes on to say Russell > Jordan. That makes sense.


Anyone that says I don't, don't even matter to me.
That's fine, you've pretty much never mattered to any of us.

[tikay0]

Clearly you're a Bill Russell / ISH rep whore "homer" ...


It's been cemented here for awhile now.


Sure you do. Goes on to say Russell > Jordan. That makes sense.


That's fine, you've pretty much never mattered to any of us.

:oldlol: Why you so mad? :confusedshrug:

This is the internet nikka. Calm yo sweet ass down.

Why'd you get banned though?

[NumberSix]

:oldlol: Why you so mad? :confusedshrug:

This is the internet nikka. Calm yo sweet ass down.

Why'd you get banned though?
I don't think he's mad at you and your blatant lack of awareness. It's just to kick people while they're down.

[jongib369]

That's just phill Jackson having a bias towards his era of nba players.. In today's game bill Russell would be great .. But at 6'9 would be an extremely undersized center .. No doubt he'd be great but he wouldn't dominate the same way
Ben Wallace is like 6'7 without shoes, I'd say he handled himself well

[jongib369]

Pretty much, verbatim.


You're not a fan or even a self proclaimed "homer" of the Bulls or MJ. You're concerned with your ISH rep. Thus, an ISH rep whore.

See, when I troll on LeBron or Kobe, it's basically the survival of the fittest of the current state of ISH. I don't always believe the things I say, I do them in a competitive / fun nature. I have two sides of my basketball mind, or modes. One is fan mode, the other is historical perspective. In neither case would I choose Russell over MJ. Hell, probably not even over LeBron either.

Bill Russell over Jordan? Yea, because few basketball enthusiasts would dare make that claim, let alone Bulls fans. And you're trying to convince us you're a Chicago Bulls "homer"? Hahaha

You've admitted to me you're essentially trying to change your perception around here with new "tactics" ... no one was taking you seriously before, so this is your effort to re-invent yourself on ISH to get your opinion taken seriously.

Anyway, we don't believe you ... you need MORE people. You're not a Bulls fan, MJ fan, not even a Russell / Celtics fan. You never even seen the guy play, or evidently done research on his teams, the years he won, competition faced, state of the league, etc.

You're literally that little brother trying to interject into big brother's conversation with his friends trying desperately to sound smart in order to be taken seriously.

And much like the older brother does with his friends, we keep pushing you away. Go play with your trucks.
Instead of pointing out how unaware he is why don't you go after what you claim to be the only thing he truly knows about Bill Russell and why Phil Jackson is mistaken? IF that truly is all he knows and you know that much more then him you'd just knock that and he wouldn't have anything else to argue

I'd have a hard time personally taking Russell over Jordan, but when someone like Phil says it who has an awareness of the game so much more so then you do that it dwarfs the difference between you and Tik I think its more important to say why Phils wrong then to point out people who are possibly just riding the opinions of people who are smarter then them

(I haven't read all of it yet so if you've done exactly that my bad lol)

[tikay0]

...........

He's an MJ homer, and not a Bulls fan.

[NumberSix]

I got owned
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs/20265_o.gif

[LAZERUSS]

You do know that the Lakers had a 7 to 2 vote to not bring Wilt onto the team.

They eventually got him, but c'mon man. He was regarded around the league as a head case.

Bill Russell might've been a lot of things, but a bad teammate wasn't one of them.

Find me a legitimate source on that 7-2 vote.

As far as "head case", even in Wilt's 50 ppg season, his teammates PRAISED him.

Every team Chamberlain joined instantly became a title contender, and every team he left immediately declined.

Furthermore, he was not really "traded" after the 67-68 season. He pretty much forced the Sixers into that deal. He was ready to jump to the ABA, and Philly would have received nothing.

[LAZERUSS]

Bird was better at his best, and Magic had a better career because of better health..I can sure see something thinking Bird was the greater player..I consider them about tied.

Plesse stop with the finals MVP talk..That has gotten really old on this site. I noticed you cherry pick. You don't bother mentioning that Bird was robbed of a FMVP in 1981 and Magic got a gift in 1980.. Not that FMVP are to be obsessed with like so many do on this site..

You mean the Bird that averaged 15 ppg and shot .419 in the '81 Finals, and against a team that had gone 40-42?

And the Magic, who without Kareem, led his team to a title-clinching win on the road, and putting up a 42-15-7 game in the process (BTW, his 15 rebounds was 5 better than anyone else in that game.)

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

While GREAT, the thing with Wilt is, the guy got his ass handed to him by Bill Russell..time and time again. In fact, Russ kicked his ass ALL THE TIME.

Wilt really never had the best playoff history either. That goes to other legends such as Shaq, Magic, Mike and of course Russell.

People will cite his rebounding but the the only reason rebounds will be mentioned is because he blatantly stat-padded.

Bottom line: Stilt should have paid attention to ONE thing, the game score.

[LAZERUSS]

How many times are we going to hear this myth that Russel only won because he had better talent..He didn't have better talent from 65-69 and won 3 out of 4. Wilt went to a team in LA that went to the finals the years before and Russell still won on his last legs. The Phila team he left ended up with the second best record in the league the year after he left.

What speaqks volumes is Russell only failed to win a ttile once in his last 15 years of basketball when he wasn't hurt..Let me guess it was all his teammates.

65-66. Wit's Sixers win their last 11 straight games to edge the Celtics in the regular season, 55-25 to 54-26. However, the seven-time defending champion Celtics had numerous missed games by their starters that season, and were healthy in the post-season. Oh, and during the regular season, Wilt leads his Sixers to a 6-3 against Boston, and in the process, he averaged 28.3 ppg, 30.7 rpg, and shot an estimated .525. In the EDF's, Wilt averaged 28.0 ppg, 30.2 rpg, and shot .509. So what happened? His teammates collectively shot .352 in that series.

66-67. Wilt leads his Sixers to a 68-13 mark, which was an all-time record at the time, and miles ahead of a loaded Celtic team which finished at 60-21. In the EDF's, Chamberlain's teammates finally neutralized Russell, and with Chamberlain's normal dominaing efforts against Russell, his Sixers blowout the eight-time defending Celtics, 4-1 (and only four point loss in game three prevented a sweep.)

67-68. Once again Wilt's Sixers romp to the best record in the league, and they finished well ahead of Boston (62-20 to 54-28.) However, in the EDF's, HOFer Cunningham misses the entir series with an injury sustained the first round of the playoffs. Still, the Sixers forge a 3-1 series lead, and even Auerbach concedes that the series is over. But, then two starters, Luke Jackson and Wali Jones are injured in game five, and are worthless the rest of the series. On top of all of that, Chamberlain is nursing several injuries, including a tear in his quad (a similar injury which reduced Reed to a statue in the last three games of the '70 Finals), and was noticeably limping from game three on. With all of that, Boston edges the Sixers in game seven, 100-96. A healthy Sixer roster probably easily repeats the 4-1 blowout of Boston from the previous season.

68-69 Wilt forces the Sixers to trade him to the Lakers, and for three players. One of them was a 20 ppg scoring all-star guard, and another was a 10-13 journeyman center. The Sixers decline from a 62-20 team, down to 55-27 record (and way down from just two years earlier when they went 68-13 en route to a dominating title.)

Then, think about this...those two players, Clark and Imhoff, combined to average 36 ppg, 20 rpg, and shot .510 in the first round of the playoffs...and against a Boston team that had gone 48-34...and yet, they were blown away, 4-1. Seems to be a DRAMATIC decline if you ask me.

As for the Lakers. Well, we know that Wilt had to replace both Clark and Imhoff, and their 29 ppg and 15 rpg. What is seldom mentioned, however, is that that Laker team also lost HOF guard Gail Goodrich, and his 14 ppg, in the expansion draft. And the only player to replace those guys, other than Wilt, was journeyman guard Johnny Egan, who would cost the Lakers a 4-1 series romp over Boston in the Finals.

So, here was Wilt, having to replace 42 ppg and 18 rpg, and yet, the Lakers still had their then best-ever record in Los Angeles, going 55-27. And that team, despite an incompetent coach, was much more competitive in the '69 Finals, than they had been in '68. Once again, with Baylor shooting his team out of three games; Egan losing the ball at a critcial time late in game four, and with LA leading in that game; a coach whose hatred for Chamberlain cost his team in game seven; and the Lakers lost a game seven, by two points.

[LAZERUSS]

While GREAT, the thing with Wilt is, the guy got his ass handed to him by Bill Russell..time and time again. In fact, Russ kicked his ass ALL THE TIME.

Wilt really never had the best playoff history either. That goes to other legends such as Shaq, Magic, Mike and of course Russell.

People will cite his rebounding but the the only reason rebounds will be mentioned is because he blatantly stat-padded.

Bottom line: Stilt should have paid attention to ONE thing, the game score.

Take a look at this and with a straight face, tell everyone here that Russell kicked his ass all the time...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aoy3YD7IdypTdEpOeFRwY29NRTUtWVlFWVJ5TkFDY 3c#gid=0

Of course, using your logic, and I guess Ben Wallace kicked Shaq's ass in the '04 Finals, too. Or MJ choked in the '86 playoff series against the 67-15 Celtics.

[kenuffff]

based off phil's selection, he is also stating red auerbach is a vastly superior coach than himself. red obtained the draft rights to russell realizing what potential he had, besides orchestrating and building celtics teams for 20+ years. jackson came into pre-assembled teams which he had little input into the building of and won championships. phil jackson is annoying as shit, and this comes from someone who loved the 90s bulls teams

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Take a look at this and with a straight face, tell everyone here that Russell kicked his ass all the time...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aoy3YD7IdypTdEpOeFRwY29NRTUtWVlFWVJ5TkFDY 3c#gid=0

Of course, using your logic, and I guess Ben Wallace kicked Shaq's ass in the '04 Finals, too. Or MJ choked in the '86 playoff series against the 67-15 Celtics.

Uh, checkout Wilt's playoff record when he won scoring titles (something people like you are SO impressed by).

His SEVEN scoring titles produced a COMBINED PLAYOFF record of, 22-30. Good for a winning percentage of 42%. :oldlol:

Everyone compares Wilt to the centers of the 90's...how about Shaq? When Shaq won 2 of scoring titles, his teams went 26-18 in the playoffs - a winning percentage of 59%.

Fact of the matter is, when Wilt was dominating his teams possessions, for personal glory, his teams failed. A guy like Shaq, who is a proven champion, when sked upon to score? His teams THRIVED. They were SUCCESSFUL.

Again, Wilt is NO Bill Russell (the ultimate team player / greatest winner). That's for sure.

[cltcfn2924]

Elgin Baylor and Jerry West, both teammates of Wilt, (with West eventually overseeing Kareem's entire career, and recruited/saw Shaq's saw entire LA career unfold) both said within this past year during interviews that I've collected, that looking back, they'd choose NOBODY over Bill Russell to start a franchise. Bill Russell would be their number one choice, every piece added afterwards is secondary. I know we as fans like to think we're clever getting the guys with the best stats offensively or defensively and whatnot, but there's just something about Russell's approach to the game that WINS. And for some reason, PLAYERS and COACHES that understand what Russell could do all seem to gravitate towards picking him to start their all-time-nba-team. I'm as big a Wilt fan as any... but heck, I'd even pick Russell if I wanted to win.

You are so right, but these newbies on ISH know it all. Didn't you know that? They never saw Russ or Wilt play, but they know. Wilt himself said when asked about switching rosters, he would NOT have won all those rings, because HE had to be the man. Making other players better was not in his makeup. Oh yes, Russell could have been "the man".

[Psileas]

Uh, checkout Wilt's playoff record when he won scoring titles (something people like you are SO impressed by).

His SEVEN scoring titles produced a COMBINED PLAYOFF record of, 22-30. Good for a winning percentage of 42%. :oldlol:

Everyone compares Wilt to the centers of the 90's...how about Shaq? When Shaq won 2 of scoring titles, his teams went 26-18 in the playoffs - a winning percentage of 59%.

Fact of the matter is, when Wilt was dominating his teams possessions, for personal glory, his teams failed. A guy like Shaq, who is a proven champion, when sked upon to score? His teams THRIVED. They were SUCCESSFUL.

Again, Wilt is NO Bill Russell (the ultimate team player / greatest winner). That's for sure.

Another reason Wilt would love to play in the more modern NBA. Having a 4-round playoff layout would allow him to pad his playoff numbers and averages just like Shaq and others did, instead of having to face the GOAT defender and winner in 56% of his playoff games during the period you mention. Especially that 1966 season: Given today's format, even if his team still lost 4-1 in the ECF's, they would probably have played like 15-18 games instead of a paultry 5 and Wilt would produce way more impressively than when having to face exclusively the Celtics.

[NumberSix]

Uh, checkout Wilt's playoff record when he won scoring titles (something people like you are SO impressed by).

His SEVEN scoring titles produced a COMBINED PLAYOFF record of, 22-30. Good for a winning percentage of 42%. :oldlol:

Everyone compares Wilt to the centers of the 90's...how about Shaq? When Shaq won 2 of scoring titles, his teams went 26-18 in the playoffs - a winning percentage of 59%.

Fact of the matter is, when Wilt was dominating his teams possessions, for personal glory, his teams failed. A guy like Shaq, who is a proven champion, when sked upon to score? His teams THRIVED. They were SUCCESSFUL.

Again, Wilt is NO Bill Russell (the ultimate team player / greatest winner). That's for sure.

Yes, all Wilt did was play for personal glory. Of course:rolleyes:

That must be why in 1 series against Bill Russell, Wilt averaged 22, 32 & 10, had a quadruple double and a 41 rebound game (playoff record)

Wilt and Russell's career head to head playoff numbers are 26 & 28 for Wilt verses 15 & 25 for Russell.

Wilt dropped 50+ on Bill 7 times, 62 on him once, 55 rebounds (nba record).

Wilt was flat out better. Its a team sport and Russell was on the better team. Get over it.

[BoutPractice]

If it's about starting a franchise, I think picking Russell is a reasonable move. He's incredibly easy to build around.

I've also lately come to appreciate "greatness" as historical relevance and mythological appeal... In that respect, three players stand out: Jordan, Chamberlain, and Russell. All the other players might get forgotten some day, but as long as basketball lives, those three won't.

[NumberSix]

Career numbers...

Wilt: 30.1PPG on 54%, 22.9RPG, 4.4APG

Bill: 15.1PPG on 44%, 22.5RPG, 4.3APG


There's nothing to argue.

[LAZERUSS]

Another reason Wilt would love to play in the more modern NBA. Having a 4-round playoff layout would allow him to pad his playoff numbers and averages just like Shaq and others did, instead of having to face the GOAT defender and winner in 56% of his playoff games during the period you mention. Especially that 1966 season: Given today's format, even if his team still lost 4-1 in the ECF's, they would probably have played like 15-18 games instead of a paultry 5 and Wilt would produce way more impressively than when having to face exclusively the Celtics.

Given that Wilt probably averaged about 30 ppg on around .500 shooting against Russell in his "scoring" seasons, as well as close to 30 rpg, his numbers were impressive enough. But you have a very valid point. When Chamberlain faced the likes of Beaty, Kerr, Halbrook, Dierking, and Embry, he put up huge numbers. And the reality was, aside from the 7-3 Halbrook and then Dierking (whose career numbers against other "greats" were surprisingly good BTW), Kerr, Embry, and Beaty were league all-stars at times in their careers.

And, the typical Chamberlain-bashers never bring up the fact that he joined a last-place roster. Or that he then took the core of that last-place team that he inherited, to a very competitive six game series against Boston in his rookie season (losing game six by two points.) Or that he single-handedly carried them again two years later, to a game seven, two point loss against a 60-20 Celtic team that had HOFers in their bench.

Nor do they bring up his 63-64 season, when he took a team that had gone 31-49 the year before, to a 48-32 record, and a first round playoff series win over a much more talented Hawks team, and then to a 4-1 Finals loss against a Celtic team that had an 8-2 edge in HOFers (and Wilt's HOF teammate was rookie Nate Thurmond, who played part-time and out of position.) And in that series, Boston won the last two games in the waning seconds. In a series in which Chamberlain statistically wiped the floor with Russell.

Keep that 63-64 record, which was, once again, 48-32, in mind. And bear in mond that Wilt's second best player on that ream, was Tom Meschery, who averaged 13.5 ppg. The Warriors traded Chamberlain to a Sixer team that had gone 34-46 the year before, in the middle of the 64-65 season, for three players (and one of them being Paul Neumann.) They then moved Thurmond to the pivot, where he would go on to have a HOF career. Before the start of the 65-66 season, they had drafted Rick Barry. With Thurmond, Barry, Meschary, and Neumann, among others, they could only go 35-45. In their 66-67 season, they added Jeff Mullins, Clyde Lee, and Fred Hetzel. So, with that loaded roster, (and with Meschery averging 11 ppg, and now being their seventh most productive player), they still could only go 44-37, and were wiped out by Wilt's 68-13 Sixers in the Finals. Interesting too, that the Warriors would never beat a Wilt team in the post-season after that trade, losing to them all three times they would face each other, nor would they would ever have a better record while Wilt was in the league.

Which brings us back to Wilt's record after that trade. He took what had been a bottom-feeding Sixer team, to a 40-40 record (Wilt played in the last half of the season with them), and a first round 3-1 romp over a loaded Royals team. And in the EDF's, Chamberlain, averaging 30 ppg, 31 rpg, and shooting .555, carried them to a game seven, one point loss against a 62-18 Celtic team.

And over the course of his next three seasons in Philly, the Sixers had the best record in the league each year, as well as winning a dominating title in '67.

Chamberlain was "traded" by Philly to the Lakers before the start of the 68-69 season. And, keep in mind that the Lakers gave up a 20 ppg scoring all-star in Archie Clark, and a journeyman center, Darrell Imhoff, who was a 10-13 playerr in '68. On top of that, the Lakers lost Gail Goodrich and his 13 ppg in the expansion draft. With those losses, the Lakers still had their then, best-ever record in Los Angeles, of 55-27. And they came within two points of winning the title (and had Baylor not cost them three games, or Egan not cost them one, or Van Breda Kolf not cost them two...it would have been a Lakers title.)

How about his former team, the Sixers? Some will argue that they only dropped from a 62-20 record, down to a 55-27 record (of course, in '67 the Sixers had steamrolled the league with a 68-13 mark.) But the reality was this...even with Imhoff and Clark combining to average 36 ppg, 20 rpg, and shooting .510...they were wiped out 4-1 in the first round by a 48-34 Celtics team. And just the year before, the injury-riddled Sixers (inlcuding Chamberlain himself) lost a game seven to Boston by four points. And the year before that, they annihilated Boston en route to a world title. And the Sixers would continue to declinee after that. By Wilt's last season in the league, 72-73, Philly had plummetted all the way down to an all-time worst, 9-73.

How about Wilt's Lakers? He played in LA for five seasons. They went to four Finals, winning their first ever in Los Angeles in the 71-72 season (with a still team record of 69-13, which included 33 straight wins.) And in two of those seasons, they lost game seven's.

How about after Chamberlain retired? The Lakers immediately fell from a 60-22 record, and a trip to the Finals, to a 47-35 record, and a first round blowout loss. The very next season they would go 30-52. And even with Kareem, from the 75-76 season thru the rest of the decade, they never came close to the records, or trips to the Finals, that they had with Chamberlain in his five seasons in LA. It wasn't until the arrival of Magic, that they returned to a championship-quality team again.

Maybe the above puts a little better perspective on Wilt "the loser", and Wilt "the choker."

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Career numbers...

Wilt: 30.1PPG on 54%, 22.9RPG, 4.4APG

Bill: 15.1PPG on 44%, 22.5RPG, 4.3APG


There's nothing to argue.

Also averaged 21PPG and was 0-4 in game 7

[LAZERUSS]

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]Also averaged 21PPG and was 0-4 in game 7

[TheTenth]

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]Also averaged 21PPG and was 0-4 in game 7

[LAZERUSS]

Wow! Jordan was outscored by Detlef Schrempf in game 6 when DPOY Gary Payton guarded him, he must be really bad! But Jordan can score 69 points against the Caveliers... What a stat padder!

In reality though, Wilt had 3/4 game 7's where he was asked to score less (1962, 1968, 1969) and only 1 game 7 where he was asked to score at his normal output (1965.) A good defender can hold a player below their averages, why are we surprised the greatest defender can too? Btw, Wilt held Russell belows his averages too...

The differences is, however, that Wilt also upped his RPG playing Russell which is a great accomplishment since many consider Russell a top 5 rebounder of all time.

As great a defender as Russell was, he often had help against Wilt. Even his teammates have acknowledged that it was a "team effort" to contain Chamberlain. In fact, Heinsohn claimed that they brutalized Wilt.

[TheTenth]

As great a defender as Russell was, he often had help against Wilt. Even his teammates have acknowledged that it was a "team effort" to contain Chamberlain. In fact, Heinsohn claimed that they brutalized Wilt.
Of course I thought that was obvious. A player of Chamberlain's caliber definetly warrants double/triple teams. And Russell had alot of great defenders/help defenders around him.

Watching the 1964 NBA finals tape it's almost pathetic to see how terrible shooters like Attles, Rodgers, Phillips, and Thurmond are. The Jones Boys could basically go double team with no fear of giving up open looks to Attles/Rodgers. Thurmond could never even get league average FG% as a center/pf. :facepalm

[LAZERUSS]

Of course I thought that was obvious. A player of Chamberlain's caliber definetly warrants double/triple teams. And Russell had alot of great defenders/help defenders around him.

Watching the 1964 NBA finals tape it's almost pathetic to see how terrible shooters like Attles, Rodgers, Phillips, and Thurmond are. The Jones Boys could basically go double team with no fear of giving up open looks to Attles/Rodgers. Thurmond could never even get league average FG% as a center/pf. :facepalm

Yeah...I agree 100%. Not only that, but those guys, most notably Rodgers, kept shooting. While Wilt was shooting very efficiently in that game (and series), going 12-23 from the field, and scoring 27 points, Rodgers just kept rushing dow the floor and throwing up prayer-after-prayer. It was painfilly obvious why Rodgers was considered one of the worst shooters in the history of the NBA. BTW, Wilt was often doubled and tripled in that game, but he still outscored Russell, 27-8; outshot him from the floor, 12-23 to 3-9; and outrebounded him, 38-19. All in a 98-95 loss...which pretty much summed up his the bulk of his post-season career against Russell.

[NumberSix]

Yeah...I agree 100%. Not only that, but those guys, most notably Rodgers, kept shooting. While Wilt was shooting very efficiently in that game (and series), going 12-23 from the field, and scoring 27 points, Rodgers just kept rushing dow the floor and throwing up prayer-after-prayer. It was painfilly obvious why Rodgers was considered one of the worst shooters in the history of the NBA. BTW, Wilt was often doubled and tripled in that game, but he still outscored Russell, 27-8; outshot him from the floor, 12-23 to 3-9; and outrebounded him, 38-19. All in a 98-95 loss...which pretty much summed up his the bulk of his post-season career against Russell.
Russell was pretty much the Joachim Noah of the celtics. People bitch about today's centers, but that's the exact style of center Russell was.

[stanlove1111]

Career numbers...

Wilt: 30.1PPG on 54%, 22.9RPG, 4.4APG

Bill: 15.1PPG on 44%, 22.5RPG, 4.3APG


There's nothing to argue.


First of all I can't believe anyone can claim to know much about bball and think stats tell the whole story...That's laughable..

I am going to let you in on something here..There is a thing called defense ( which Russell was known to be the best ever at) which doesn't show up in your stats..

[stanlove1111]

As great a defender as Russell was, he often had help against Wilt. Even his teammates have acknowledged that it was a "team effort" to contain Chamberlain. In fact, Heinsohn claimed that they brutalized Wilt.


Rubbish. The Celtics goal was usually to have Russell guard Wilt alone.

[stanlove1111]

You mean the Bird that averaged 15 ppg and shot .419 in the '81 Finals, and against a team that had gone 40-42?

And the Magic, who without Kareem, led his team to a title-clinching win on the road, and putting up a 42-15-7 game in the process (BTW, his 15 rebounds was 5 better than anyone else in that game.)


Did you watch the series? Are you even aware that you can play well while you are not shooting well. How many rebounds did Bird get that series, and he still set everything up for his team. He was easily the MVP of that series for the Celtics.
Jabbar was clearly the best player in the series for the first 5 games..Jabbar best player for 5 games, Magic best player for 1.

But this whole FMVP you clowns obsesse with has really gotten old..Does this really need to be explained to you? Here goes once again.
Every playoff series is equaling important..You win or go home. If a player is the 3rd best player on his team for the first 3 playoffs series but has a great finals because of a matchup issue with the opponent you guys then act like he is a better player then the player who was the best player for the first three series and the second best in the finals..Its idiotic..But if never stops with new younger fans..Not surprised.

[LAZERUSS]

Rubbish. The Celtics goal was usually to have Russell guard Wilt alone.

Since you obviously never witnessed one minute between the two...

http://www.nba.com/history/players/chamberlain_bio.html


In Chamberlain's first year, and for several years afterward, opposing teams simply didn't know how to handle him. Tom Heinsohn, the great Celtics forward who later became a coach and broadcaster, said Boston was one of the first clubs to apply a team-defense concept to stop Chamberlain. "We went for his weakness," Heinsohn told the Philadelphia Daily News in 1991, "tried to send him to the foul line, and in doing that he took the most brutal pounding of any player ever.. I hear people today talk about hard fouls. Half the fouls against him were hard fouls."



Continuing ...

http://samcelt.forumotion.net/t2803-wilt-meets-bill-and-tommy-4000-words


The Celtics didn’t have to double- or triple-team Wilt because of Bill Russell’s defense. Bill’s strategy was to deny the entry pass; if Wilt did get the ball down low, Bill stayed between him and the basket, tried to take away the lane; if Wilt got the shot off, Bill would block it if he could and always made certain to box Wilt out. Bill played Wilt clean, didn’t hack or whack, did nothing to antagonize the big man.

That assignment was given to Tommy Heinsohn. When Wilt got the ball in the low post, Tommy was detailed to stop him - punch the ball, grab his arms, and, if nothing else worked, tackle the giant. Tommy’s courage was legendary, as he proved repeatedly over the course of his career, but putting him up against Wilt seemed a horrendous mismatch. Tommy was a full head shorter and fifty pounds lighter and wasn’t the only one who considered Wilt the strongest man in the world, once calling him “King Kong in sneakers”.




Or how about KC Jones...

http://samcelt.forumotion.net/t2803-wilt-meets-bill-and-tommy-4000-words


K.C. Jones, arguably the savviest team player in the history of the game, was also a rookie that year and had a front row seat for Bill and Wilt's encounters. "Bill didn't do it all. We just used TEAM. That's a word that's thrown out all over the place, but the total personification of team is what we used. We used everybody's ability, and everybody had a role out there that was natural for them. Whoever was guarding the ball had four guys back there helping his ass out. The whole is bigger than the sum of the parts; we wrote that without knowing the phrase. We knew how good we were. And we knew how to use one another because we knew one another. The most important part of it was the understanding that we had of each teammate - what this guy likes and what that guy doesn't like and who can't play defense and who shoots the ball well. We used all that. If a guy couldn't play defense, we were there, picking him up. Let each guy do what he does best."


And finally...how about a Bob Costas interview with both of them sitting side-by-side...pay careul attention from the five minute mark...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=173M7ApCNKw

Chamberlain...

"now, when I get the ball, instead of having two and three people, and then Russ, all at me at the same time..."


Next time do us all a favor...and some real research before you blatantly spew nonsense.