If a young Bill Russell and Michael Jordan were time traveled to the same draft...

[Milbuck]

I love these kinds of threads because it really exposes the intelligence of certain posters.

Some of my favorite comedy material from this thread:

- Russell was a below the rim player
- Dwight Howard would wreck Bill's competition

Oh and my absolute ****ing favorite gem,

- Russell would be a scrub on the 86 Celtics

:applause: Gotta hand it to some of the comedians on here, they really put in the work.

[MavsSuperFan]

I love these kinds of threads because it really exposes the intelligence of certain posters.

Some of my favorite comedy material from this thread:

- Russell was a below the rim player
- Dwight Howard would wreck Bill's competition

Oh and my absolute ****ing favorite gem,

- Russell would be a scrub on the 86 Celtics

:applause: Gotta hand it to some of the comedians on here, they really put in the work.

You are crazy if you don't think Dwight would rape the nba from 56-69

[MMM]

You are crazy if you don't think Dwight would rape the nba from 56-69

Does Dwight have the mental fortitude to even make the league back then with all the stuff black athletes had to deal with back in the days????

[MMM]

Man **** that. From a pure basketball standpoint nobody would score on a team he would have and in the low-post he would rape any player not named Wilt because flopping wasn't developed yet and nobody can take a elbow from this dude with full force realistically. And honestly at worst, Dwight would just miss 70% of his FT'S. Yao Ming and Shaq just get another level of worse to deal with in that era. I really can't even imagine the effect they would have on both ends. And really I'm glad those three guys weren't born back then because the people on this board would have developed the most overrated profiles of them the game has ever seen up until this century.

Dwight would be a poor man's Russell in that era if you strip him of his current modern advantages. Heck Kobe is probably a top 5 talent of all time but if he was born in the 1930's his game would developed completely different. There is no way of telling if he would be comparable to swings of that era.

[MMM]

Dwight had a back procedure that would of probably ended his career if he played in the 60's

Kobe getting german procedures to extend his career while Bird career was cut short. How do people feel comfortable at making across era rankings when there is so many variables and many great players that go forgotten or can't be ranked fairly.

[kshutts1]

How many HOFers did MJ play with?

How many HOFers did Russell play with?

Seems like MJ did more with less now doesn't it ...

MJ needed his sidekick Pippen, and for a period of time his rebound king Rodman. No doubt. But damn, look at the supporting cast Russell needed to do his winning. Significantly more help.

Not to mention that the league had a lot less teams back in Russell's day, so of course each team will have (in theory) more stars on them. IMO, that makes winning, and consistent winning, harder.

[TheMan]

Let's be honest here, Wilt > Russell

The reason Bill beat Wilt was because he had a better team around him, switch places and Wilt would be the guy with double digit rings.

Bill Russell today would be an All Star defensive center, OTOH, MJ would clearly be the best player in the game.

[iznogood]

^- yup. MJ and Russell are on a comparable level. To say Russell isn't comparable to MJ, Kareem, Wilt, and other GOAT candidates is pretty much a conscious effort at ignoring the actual history of basketball. You want to pick MJ? Great, there are reasons to pick MJ over Russell, you might simply prefer a flashier backcourt player that can score more points and put more fans in the seats. But nobody in the history of the sport could win or play defense like Bill Russell and few could rebound like him.
Jordan was an all time elite defensive player as well yet you make it sound like he was Allen Iverson. Also defense takes a team effort. Russell wouldn't have the same impact on D'Antoni's team compared to the impact he'd have on a teams like Bulls or Pacers. Great scorers however are extremely rare and excellent two way players even more. And I agree with Russell being comparable to other al time greats, I just don't believe in myths ("nobody in the history of the sport could win or play defense like Bill Russell"). Also I agree Russell was one of the best defenders of all time and would be in any era. But it's hard to compare defenders who play on different positions and comparing players from different eras is almost impossible.

[D-FENS]

Jordan. Not even close. If you time travelled Bill Russell to 2014, he'd be no better than Joakim Noah.

I think you need some perspective. We're talking about the 2014 version of Russell. He'd be quite different with all the modern shit. Same with MJ.

In this case, I'm taking Jordan. I don't think Russell would be blocking shots in 2014 and directing them to teammates (arguably his greatest skill). He was blocking crappy floaters from mediocre talent in the 50's and 60's.

[Jailblazers7]

I'd probably take Russell. Hibbert takes Indiana from a solid with no real championship chances to potentially a championship favorite. Bill Russell is better than Hibbert in every facet of the game. Jordan is a GREAT player and would certainly give your team a great shot at a ring in today's NBA but Russell would have the bigger marginal impact.

[TheMan]

The British Empire's Navy won every battle from about 1497-1917. Doesn't mean they'd win against any modern day Navy.
lol

[jlip]

I think you need some perspective. We're talking about the 2014 version of Russell. He'd be quite different with all the modern shit. Same with MJ.

In this case, I'm taking Jordan. I don't think Russell would be blocking shots in 2014 and directing them to teammates (arguably his greatest skill). He was blocking crappy floaters from mediocre talent in the 50's and 60's.

Bill Russell was blocking the shots of athletic Hall of Fame centers above the rim such as Wilt, Reed, and Thurmond, each of whom would be better than any center playing today.

Also, why would he not be blocking shots to his teammates today? That's not really a "skill". It's a mentality. Russell didn't care about the "show". He knew that if the shot was blocked out of bounds, the other team automatically got the ball back. That accomplished nothing really other than taking a few seconds off the shot clock. If it stayed in bounds, his team had an opportunity to recover it. The reasons players block shots into stands and out of bounds today is because it makes Sportscenter and makes them look "tough." They stand and pose block or wave their fingers like Mutombo because they want to be seen on camera. They could easily block those same shots in bounds if they embraced Russell's approach to the game.

[TheMan]

Put the championship (90's) Bulls in the 80's and they ain't getting 4 titles, let alone 6, I'll leave it at that.
I say otherwise, I think the 90s Bulls do get at least 3-4 titles in the 80s. Right off the bat, the 90s Bulls beat Detroit's Bad Boys 88-90 so there's two right there and they'll pick off one each vs the Celts and Lakers.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Not saying I would pick him (also depends on the team) but Russell is getting underrated like crazy here. Talk about ignorant people hating for the **** of it, talking out of their asses, clearly not knowing what they're talking about :facepalm

......

[fpliii]

What does the talent of the players have to do with the difficulty of the block?

I saw the block he had on Wilt Chamberlain, the most impressive block from him anybody has ever seen. And name one player, that is top ten in blocks this entire season who cannot make that play? It's pathetic how people hype this guy, nothing about him was GOAT level.

And Russell wasn't even close to the highest jumper of all-time, so if he was blocking shots and touch passing them as he did it, the shots were pathetic attempts by mediocre basketball players.
:lol

If you want to make an anti-Russell argument (and legitimate cases can be made against him), you're going about it the wrong way.

[fpliii]

Evidence? Don't quote me, show me.

He wasn't better than Shaq or Dwight, that's for sure.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/923942-watch-dwight-howard-break-shaqs-vertical-reach-record-for-sports-science
Just to confirm, what do you want to "be shown"? Evidence of Russell reaching 12'6" or higher? You promise you won't shift the goal posts again?

I'll look when I get home from work, but CavsFTW can probably provide it for you.

[TheMan]

I think as much as some people underrate Russell here, others overrate him. Can anyone here with a straight face argue Russell was a more complete big man than Wilt, KAJ, Shaq or Hakeem??? Again, put Tim Duncan against the competition Bill faced and TimmyD would be sporting the same if not more jewelery.

SMH at those who think the overall talent pool in the 50's-60's is comparable to today. :facepalm

[jlip]

What does the talent of the players have to do with the difficulty of the block?

I saw the block he had on Wilt Chamberlain, the most impressive block from him anybody has ever seen. And name one player, that is top ten in blocks this entire season who cannot make that play? It's pathetic how people hype this guy, nothing about him was GOAT level.

And Russell wasn't even close to the highest jumper of all-time, so if he was blocking shots and touch passing them as he did it, the shots were pathetic attempts by mediocre basketball players.

How do you know that's the most impressive block of Russell that anyone has ever seen? No...It's the most impressive block of his that YOU have seen. You know basically nothing about his game, as is clearly shown all throughout this thread, other than what you've seen from a few 5-10 minute clips on YouTube.

Arguably the most impressive block of Russell's career was something called the "Coleman Play." I know that you know absolutely nothing about that. So just Google it.

By the way, here is a picture of Bill Russell attempting to clear a 6-9 1/8 in a track meet. When Russell attempted this, the world record was 6-11 1/2 inches. Clearly you see his body is over the bar. He didn't clear it with his feet though.


http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/1105/bill.russell.rare.photos/images/russell-track.jpg

[D-FENS]

Bill Russell was blocking the shots of athletic Hall of Fame centers above the rim such as Wilt, Reed, and Thurmond, each of whom would be better than any center playing today.

Also, why would he not be blocking shots to his teammates today? That's not really a "skill". It's a mentality. Russell didn't care about the "show". He knew that if the shot was blocked out of bounds, the other team automatically got the ball back. That accomplished nothing really other than taking a few seconds off the shot clock. If it stayed in bounds, his team had an opportunity to recover it. The reasons players block shots into stands and out of bounds today is because it makes Sportscenter and makes them look "tough." They stand and pose block or wave their fingers like Mutombo because they want to be seen on camera. They could easily block those same shots in bounds if they embraced Russell's approach to the game.

NO need to wet the bed. Russell's game wouldn't translate as well to this era, it's not a burn on his past achievements. Wilt would be great in any era, I just don't see Russell being a force.

[SHAQisGOAT]

I say otherwise, I think the 90s Bulls do get at least 3-4 titles in the 80s. Right off the bat, the 90s Bulls beat Detroit's Bad Boys 88-90 so there's two right there and they'll pick off one each vs the Celts and Lakers.

Would've been extremely tough even for the best Bulls team, against the 1989 Pistons.


At least? No way. I'll say 3 and I can see the case for 4 but definitely not more than that.
Have the Bulls from 1990-1998, instead playing in 1980-1988 and they ain't getting more than 3/4, no way...

- they're not beating the Lakers in 1980

- they're not beating the 76ers in 1983

- can't see them beating the Celtics in 1986, in the EC, although it would've been one hell of a battle

- they're not beating the Lakers in 1987, although it could've been very close

- they're not getting past the Bad Boys in 1988, if you want to go further, same goes for 1989


So, I can see them winning 3, max 4, between 1981, 1982, 1984 and 1985, and that's if Jordan didn't retire, as he did.. they would've stood great chances in 1984 and 1985, but then you also have to consider the physical condition factor for the rest of the decade, in regards to Jordan, even the rest of the team. It would've been some really gruelsome series vs the Celtics, and then if they won, they were going against LA in the Finals.. that takes a lot out of a superstar player.
It was tough af to come out of the East against teams like the Celtics, the 76ers or the Bucks, then having to face the Lakers in the Finals.
If you want you can "have" the Bulls instead of the Bucks, in the 80s, even instead of the 76ers - it's better to look at it that way even in this hypothetical situation - and they're not getting more than 4 titles.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Russell/past-eras haters are pretty much getting owned in this thread though :lol Exposed as ignorant folks, just talking shit for the **** of it.

[AlphaWolf24]

I watched MJ's whole career.....and he is the best player I have seen.

I never watched Russell live....I only watch Youtube Highlights/Mixtapes.( like 99% of the people here)

I did go to a Basketball camp at USF(Russell's college) and heard from some of his teammates and players who played against him in HS / college...

goi9ng off of what we know of Russell and HOW HE DOMINATED HIS ERA ( witch is the only way players should be judged IMO)

#1) Who is better "all around" player, the answer is Bill Russell. And as far as playoff dominance, MJ isn't even close to Bill Russell.

"MICHAEL JORDAN TOOK MORE SHOTS THAN ANYONE !" So, its only logical that he's going to score more points!

Jordan took TWICE AS MANY SHOTS as Russell did. So mathamatically speaking, he should score more points than Russell. Plus, he had the benefit of the 3-point shot, which Russell didn't.

But what else has Jordan done? If it doesn't have anything to do with scoring, not much. Yes, he was a great defender, but no where as near as dominant as Russell. Remember, blocked shots were never kept as a statistic until the early 70's, otherwise Russell (and Wilt) would still own that record.

#2)

If you take Bill Russell off the Celtics, they don't win all those championships. End of story. All of his former teammates and Red Aeurbach have said this.

it was more like Russell "rescuing" the Celtics.

And back then, there were only 9-10 teams, so Wilt (the most dominant player ever) and Russell squared off at least 10-12 times a season, plus 4,5,6 or 7 time in the playoffs. So Wilt scoring 50 points 7 times is not that great a percentage, considering how many times they played each other.

When Russell did leave the Cltics they fell to the bottom of the league....when MJ's left the Bull's in 94' they were still Title contenders winning 55 games and nearly making it to the ECFinals..( again,just showing the Bull's had a great team)

Who did Russell face during his career......

Elgin Baylor> Top 50, HOF
Bob Pettit> Top 50 , HOF
Lenny Wilkins > Top 50, HOF
Jerry West > Top 50, HOF
Wilt Chamberlain> Top 50, HOF
Nate Thurmond> Top 50, HOF
Hal Greer> Top 50, HOF
Billy Cunningham> Top 50, HOF
Willis Reed> Top 50, HOF
Walt Frazier> Top 50, HOF
Dave Debusschere> Top 50, HOF
Dolph Schayes> Top 50, HOF
Oscar Robertson> Top 50, HOF
Jerry Lucas> Top 50, HOF
Elvin Hayes> Top 50, HOF
Dave Bing> Top 50, HOF
Earl Monroe> Top 50, HOF
Wes Unseld> Top 50, HOF

More hall of famers... Cliff Hagen, Vern Mikkelson, Ed Macauley, Clyde Lovellette, Gail Goodrich, Walt Bellamy, Bill Bradley, Bailey Howell.

That's 18 players in the top 50 list and 26 in the hall of fame that Russell had to compete against

#3) I never watched Russell play...I only watched Highlights and heard stories....from the guy's that did play with him.....they all say Bill is the GOAT....and the NBA did name him the GOAT in 1980.

Older Hoop heads used to say in the 90's..."MJ isn't the greatest....MJ is only the latest"...

they used to laugh at MJ hitting 3's in the first half against Portland as bieng "clutch amazing moments"......when Russell was putting up 22 pts 35 rebounds ( while Russell's eye was hemorrhaging in this game, result of getting hit... but hey, let's not forget, Jordan played with the sniffles one time)





Would I take MJ over Bill?.....probably...just because I lived and watched the MJ era.....Older heads who watched both...seem to think Russell would Mop the floor and out hustle/smart MJ....:confusedshrug:



IDK...just find it silly that people who never watched Bill or 80's MJ ( when his teams were getting mopped up) are saying dumb stuff...:lol




next

[riseagainst]

I watched MJ's whole career.....and he is the best player I have seen.

I never watched Russell live....I only watch Youtube Highlights/Mixtapes.( like 99% of the people here)

I did go to a Basketball camp at USF(Russell's college) and heard from some of his teammates and players who played against him in HS / college...

goi9ng off of what we know of Russell and HOW HE DOMINATED HIS ERA ( witch is the only way players should be judged IMO)

#1) Who is better "all around" player, the answer is Bill Russell. And as far as playoff dominance, MJ isn't even close to Bill Russell.

"MICHAEL JORDAN TOOK MORE SHOTS THAN ANYONE !" So, its only logical that he's going to score more points!

Jordan took TWICE AS MANY SHOTS as Russell did. So mathamatically speaking, he should score more points than Russell. Plus, he had the benefit of the 3-point shot, which Russell didn't.

But what else has Jordan done? If it doesn't have anything to do with scoring, not much. Yes, he was a great defender, but no where as near as dominant as Russell. Remember, blocked shots were never kept as a statistic until the early 70's, otherwise Russell (and Wilt) would still own that record.

#2)

If you take Bill Russell off the Celtics, they don't win all those championships. End of story. All of his former teammates and Red Aeurbach have said this.

it was more like Russell "rescuing" the Celtics.

And back then, there were only 9-10 teams, so Wilt (the most dominant player ever) and Russell squared off at least 10-12 times a season, plus 4,5,6 or 7 time in the playoffs. So Wilt scoring 50 points 7 times is not that great a percentage, considering how many times they played each other.

When Russell did leave the Cltics they fell to the bottom of the league....when MJ's left the Bull's in 94' they were still Title contenders winning 55 games and nearly making it to the ECFinals..( again,just showing the Bull's had a great team)

Who did Russell face during his career......

Elgin Baylor> Top 50, HOF
Bob Pettit> Top 50 , HOF
Lenny Wilkins > Top 50, HOF
Jerry West > Top 50, HOF
Wilt Chamberlain> Top 50, HOF
Nate Thurmond> Top 50, HOF
Hal Greer> Top 50, HOF
Billy Cunningham> Top 50, HOF
Willis Reed> Top 50, HOF
Walt Frazier> Top 50, HOF
Dave Debusschere> Top 50, HOF
Dolph Schayes> Top 50, HOF
Oscar Robertson> Top 50, HOF
Jerry Lucas> Top 50, HOF
Elvin Hayes> Top 50, HOF
Dave Bing> Top 50, HOF
Earl Monroe> Top 50, HOF
Wes Unseld> Top 50, HOF

More hall of famers... Cliff Hagen, Vern Mikkelson, Ed Macauley, Clyde Lovellette, Gail Goodrich, Walt Bellamy, Bill Bradley, Bailey Howell.

That's 18 players in the top 50 list and 26 in the hall of fame that Russell had to compete against

#3) I never watched Russell play...I only watched Highlights and heard stories....from the guy's that did play with him.....they all say Bill is the GOAT....and the NBA did name him the GOAT in 1980.

Older Hoop heads used to say in the 90's..."MJ isn't the greatest....MJ is only the latest"...

they used to laugh at MJ hitting 3's in the first half against Portland as bieng "clutch amazing moments"......when Russell was putting up 22 pts 35 rebounds ( while Russell's eye was hemorrhaging in this game, result of getting hit... but hey, let's not forget, Jordan played with the sniffles one time)





Would I take MJ over Bill?.....probably...just because I lived and watched the MJ era.....Older heads who watched both...seem to think Russell would Mop the floor and out hustle/smart MJ....:confusedshrug:



IDK...just find it silly that people who never watched Bill or 80's MJ ( when his teams were getting mopped up) are saying dumb stuff...:lol




next


:roll:

[CavaliersFTW]

The equivalent of being able to bench press 400 pounds but can't back down a 230 pound guy. And the high jump record NOW, is 8'3. Lol talk about better athletes.

Also, Jack Coleman............................From what they described it was like a LeBron chase down block.......Lite......

Must have been hard to block an athlete like this:
http://brendanmarshall929.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/nba1957-celtics-russellmeek.jpg

Coleman was at the peak of his jump right there and I'm not even sure he could touch the bottom of the backboard.

Another example of him dominating a scrub.
Since when was Wilt "unable" to back down Bill Russell? You keep jumping to these wild conclusions :oldlol:

[CavaliersFTW]

NO need to wet the bed. Russell's game wouldn't translate as well to this era, it's not a burn on his past achievements. Wilt would be great in any era, I just don't see Russell being a force.
You mean in this era where Joakim Noah is making MVP noises after a 5 game stretch playing like a homeless man's Bill Russell?

[TheMan]

I think as much as some people underrate Russell here, others overrate him. Can anyone here with a straight face argue Russell was a more complete big man than Wilt, KAJ, Shaq or Hakeem??? Again, put Tim Duncan against the competition Bill faced and TimmyD would be sporting the same if not more jewelery.

SMH at those who think the overall talent pool in the 50's-60's is comparable to the modern era. :facepalm
Still waiting for the Russell fanboys to answer this...

[TheMan]

[B]Would've been extremely tough even for the best Bulls team, against the 1989 Pistons.

- they're not getting past the Bad Boys in 1988, if you want to go further, same goes for 1989

Are you serious:facepalm

Those pre-championship Bulls took those Pistons teams to 6 games and then 7 games in the ECFs in consecutive years. A Bulls team with a Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant playing with their heads out of their asses beats those Pistons teams easy. Come on, bro. Did you watch those series? The 92 Bulls would spank that Pistons ass.:facepalm

[Pointguard]

Russell had a unique cat quickness that you rarely see. He pounced on the ball with great sense of timing and when a player commits. He was more like Anthony Davis in that sense than Hakeem. He moved his feet very well, like Garnett. He was unique with his smarts and he knew how to apply them. He had a unique dominance. He might have had a mental advantage on all the other GOATs except one.

If there was a draft today even with what I know, I, personal preference, would still take Shaq or Hakeem ahead of Russell in a draft. Obviously I would know of Jordan's dominance... That's the way drafts work. Skills, physical gifts, motor, mental strength. With Jordan in the draft you can't say Russell has a mental advantage on all players. You can't say Russell is the ultimate competitor which are his two biggest assets in all other drafts.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

As I said, Chicago ain't winning more than 2-3 championships in the 80s. You got Doc and Malone's Sixers, Magic and Kareem's Lakers - and of course, Bird's Celts. Mind you, these players are ALL in their peaks / primes.

I'd drop some serious cash to see these hypothetical matchups.

[DonDadda59]

Are you serious:facepalm

Those pre-championship Bulls took those Pistons teams to 6 games and then 7 games in the ECFs in consecutive years. A Bulls team with a Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant playing with their heads out of their asses beats those Pistons teams easy. Come on, bro. Did you watch those series? The 92 Bulls would spank that Pistons ass.:facepalm

I think the '96 Bulls beat every team that won a finals series in the 80s with the exception of the '85, '87 Lakers and the '86 Celtics. The Earlier 90s Bulls squads would be competitive with most finals teams as well.


As I said, Chicago ain't winning more than 2-3 championships in the 80s. You got Doc and Malone's Sixers, Magic and Kareem's Lakers - and of course, Bird's Celts. Mind you, these players are ALL in their peaks / primes.

I'd drop some serious cash to see these hypothetical matchups.

I don't think the Bulls that featured Rodman would have too much trouble taking out the 6ers. Dennis nullifies (or at least hampers) Malone's greatest strength- rebounding, and gives him hell defensively. Put Scottie on the Dr., Jordan on Toney... those guys have no answer defensively for the Bulls' triangle.

But I agree with Bird's '86 Celtics. Second year Jordan coming off a season killing leg injury dropped 63 on them, averaged 4)+ PPG and it still wasn't enough to get a single win (even though that team didn't have a fraction of the 90s Bulls talent). The earlier C's team had a still developing McHale though, I think he makes the difference in that hypothetical series. Bulls take out early-mid 80s Celtics.

[fpliii]

Really tired of seeing this thread. Bill Russell would not be considered a GOAT if he played in any era past 1980. Really an abomination to basketball talk to think he was a super human or would even stand out today.
:oldlol:

[dankok8]

So much ignorance in this thread... :no:

Please don't say MJ easily!

[jlip]

Really tired of seeing this thread. Bill Russell would not be considered a GOAT if he played in any era past 1980. Really an abomination to basketball talk to think he was a super human or would even stand out today.

I could easily say that MJ would not be considered a GOAT if he played during Russell's era. Guards rarely ever got MVPs during the 60's. He would have to compete with Wilt for scoring titles. There was no such thing as a Finals MVP until Russell's last season. There was no DPOY award. There were no all defensive teams until Russell's final season. He's likely not winning a title unless he's on the Celtics. Basically half or more of his career achievements are gone if he played most of his career in the 60's.

[CavaliersFTW]

I could easily say that MJ would not be considered a GOAT if he played during Russell's era. Guards rarely ever got MVPs during the 60's. He would have to compete with Wilt for scoring titles. There was no such thing as a Finals MVP until Russell's last season. There was no DPOY award. There were no all defensive teams until Russell's final season. He's likely not winning a title unless he's on the Celtics. Basically half or more of his career achievements are gone if he played most of his career in the 60's.
damn don't give it too em like that jlip :oldlol:

[TheMan]

I could easily say that MJ would not be considered a GOAT if he played during Russell's era. Guards rarely ever got MVPs during the 60's. He would have to compete with Wilt for scoring titles. There was no such thing as a Finals MVP until Russell's last season. There was no DPOY award. There were no all defensive teams until Russell's final season. He's likely not winning a title unless he's on the Celtics. Basically half or more of his career achievements are gone if he played most of his career in the 60's.
OTOH, Russell ain't winning no 11 chips in 13 years in any other era...and that's his biggest claim to GOAT status.

[CavaliersFTW]

OTOH, Russell ain't winning no 11 chips in 13 years in any other era...and that's his biggest claim to GOAT status.
yep, mad :oldlol:

[riseagainst]

MJ would drop 80 a game in the 60s....

[CavaliersFTW]

MJ would drop 80 a game in the 60s....
Bill Russell would drop 200 a game in the 90's

man this is fun, great bball discussion we're having here

[riseagainst]

Bill Russell would drop 200 a game in the 90's

man this is fun, great bball discussion we're having here

talking about the same guy who avged 15ppg on 44%? ok.....

at least MJ dropping 80 in the 60s would be more believable than Russell dropping 200 in a much slower paced-era.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I think the '96 Bulls beat every team that won a finals series in the 80s with the exception of the '85, '87 Lakers and the '86 Celtics. The Earlier 90s Bulls squads would be competitive with most finals teams as well.



I don't think the Bulls that featured Rodman would have too much trouble taking out the 6ers. Dennis nullifies (or at least hampers) Malone's greatest strength- rebounding, and gives him hell defensively. Put Scottie on the Dr., Jordan on Toney... those guys have no answer defensively for the Bulls' triangle.

But I agree with Bird's '86 Celtics. Second year Jordan coming off a season killing leg injury dropped 63 on them, averaged 4)+ PPG and it still wasn't enough to get a single win (even though that team didn't have a fraction of the 90s Bulls talent). The earlier C's team had a still developing McHale though, I think he makes the difference in that hypothetical series. Bulls take out early-mid 80s Celtics.

Bird in '86 was about as unstoppable of a player, offensively, thats ever lived. Not only that, but Kevin Mchale and Parish would carve up Chicago's frontline as soon you said go.

The Doctor is still getting his against Pippen, I have no doubt about that. Moses and Rodman would probably cancel each other out, tho. Mike would likely be the equalizer in that series.

Not counting Detroit in '88 and 89, Bulls win 3 chips or so.

[Psileas]

All these stupid threads just because Russell couldn't care less becoming a 20-25 ppg scorer. Ironically, a more selfish Russell would make lots of trolls stfu about his value as a player, but he would have won less titles, due to freezing out his teammates.
To add to this irony, when Russell was starting his pro career, he was also seen under the same light that he's seen now by trolls. People were also having doubts back then about his size and strength, they also questioned his scoring ability and his overall talent.

He didn't give a crap. He won against whites and blacks, he won against Pettit, against Wilt, against Thurmond, against Reed, not to mention the other non-big man legends that he kept ringless. Then he retires, enter Kareem. Kareem is a guy that lots here prefer to Russell (and some say "it's not even close"), yet Kareem loses to Reed in 1970, loses to Wilt in 1972, then loses to Thurmond in 1973, the same ones that Russell beat.
"But, it was Russell's teammates that did the difference" you may say. In 1970, his great teammates missed the playoffs altogether. If you can't understand impact beyond stats (especially ppg), you can't understand a team game. And I'm a stats lover.

[TheMan]

yep, mad :oldlol:
Nope, truth. You honestly believe Russell could pull off 11 titles in 13 years from say 1988 to 2001?? Yeah right:roll:

Seems you still haven't gotten over the way MJ merked your Cavs year in and year out:oldlol:

Let it go, homie.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Seems you still haven't gotten over the way MJ merked your Cavs year in and year out:oldlol:

Let it go, homie.

More like Russell dominating Wilt H2H in the W department. In his mind, if Chamberlain ain't winning titles, neither are Jordan's Bulls or anybody else you'd like to throw at the Russ-Celtic gauntlet :oldlol:

[TheMan]

2000 Lakers are sweeping those Celtics. No game would be close. They dominated THEIR era better but they have no shot against a more modern legendary team.
:no: But who on that Laker squad gon' keep the unstoppable Bob Cousy from getting his:oldlol: dat one handed chest high dribbling move:bowdown:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

2000 Lakers are sweeping those Celtics. No game would be close. They dominated THEIR era better but they have no shot against a more modern legendary team.

I wouldn't go that far...then again, I have no interest in debating it.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Are you serious:facepalm

Those pre-championship Bulls took those Pistons teams to 6 games and then 7 games in the ECFs in consecutive years. A Bulls team with a Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant playing with their heads out of their asses beats those Pistons teams easy. Come on, bro. Did you watch those series? The 92 Bulls would spank that Pistons ass.:facepalm

No, I've never seen those series, I don't know what I'm even talking about here :rolleyes:

Know why they were pre-championship? Because they couldn't beat the Pistons, no matter which way you wanna put it.

And you're talking lots of noise yet forget to say that that 91 team wasn't even close to what they were before, with various injuries, players getting old, banged up after lots of gruelsome series, Isiah had to get surgery on his wrist before the playoffs, played like shit as expected...

Not saying the Bulls, at their best, wouldn't win but it would've been a hell of series and extremely tough for them, stop selling the Pistons short.
Prime Bad Boys Pistons were a terrific squad, that 1989 team is one of the greatest ever, stop underrating the **** out of them :facepalm

[TheReal Kendall]

I gotta go with MJ cause I'm not sure how Russel would impact the game today.

The game now is built for guards and wing players to succeed.

I also think if Russel was born in this era his game would be totally different.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

No, I've never seen those series, I don't know what I'm even talking about here :rolleyes:

Know why they were pre-championship? Because they couldn't beat the Pistons, no matter which way you wanna put it.

And you're talking lots of noise yet forget to say that that 91 team wasn't even close to what they were before, with various injuries, players getting old, banged up after lots of gruelsome series, Isiah had to get surgery on his wrist before the playoffs, played like shit as expected...

Not saying the Bulls, at their best, wouldn't win but it would've been a hell of series and extremely tough for them, stop selling the Pistons short.
Prime Bad Boys Pistons were a terrific squad, that 1989 team is one of the greatest ever, stop underrating the **** out of them :facepalm

Yeah, I consider myself a pretty big Jordan fan (collect all his games or at least ones in circulation), but I'm not a biased idiot either. Detroit in '91 is NOT the same squad they were in 88 and 89. Not even close.

There are posters on here who actually believe the Bulls STILL win 6 titles in the 80s...and others who think they win MORE w/ the "weak era" trash :oldlol:

[TheMan]

No, I've never seen those series, I don't know what I'm even talking about here :rolleyes:

Know why they were pre-championship? Because they couldn't beat the Pistons, no matter which way you wanna put it.

And you're talking lots of noise yet forget to say that that 91 team wasn't even close to what they were before, with various injuries, players getting old, banged up after lots of gruelsome series, Isiah had to get surgery on his wrist before the playoffs, played like shit as expected...

Not saying the Bulls, at their best, wouldn't win but it would've been a hell of series and extremely tough for them, stop selling the Pistons short.
Prime Bad Boys Pistons were a terrific squad, that 1989 team is one of the greatest ever, stop underrating the **** out of them :facepalm
The Pistons average age in 91 was 29, wow, that's ancient.

Before they finally spanked that Piston ass 4-0, the young Bulls were taking them to 6 and 7 game series with a young immature pre-peak Pippen/Grant. 1992 mature Bulls team don't fall for the dirty tactics the Pistons used on them when the Bulls were going through growing pains.

I stand by what I said, a mature Bulls team easily beats any Bad Boys Pistons team.

[TheMan]

Just to add to my post, I remember a video I saw about the Bulls/Pistons rivalry where the Pistons knew that once the Bulls finally matured and ignored all that extra stuff the Bad Boys threw at them to get them out of their game, that that would be the end of the Pistons dominance over them because the Bulls were more talented and athletic. That's why when the Bulls knocked them out in a sweep, they knew their time had come to an end, they weren't ever going to compete with those Bulls ever again. And all this with a Pistons average age of 29, but I guess 29 was over the hill in the 90s:rolleyes:

[SHAQisGOAT]

I don't think the Bulls that featured Rodman would have too much trouble taking out the 6ers. Dennis nullifies (or at least hampers) Malone's greatest strength- rebounding, and gives him hell defensively. Put Scottie on the Dr., Jordan on Toney... those guys have no answer defensively for the Bulls' triangle.


It would've been an extremely close series but I think Philly would've came out on top, at the end.

Moses was at his best and playing like a total beast, one of the GOAT rebounders, could score big, hard worker, really impactful on defense that year, even with someone like Rodman on him, he'd still get his. Furthermore, Rodman plays great defense and grabs major boards but peak Moses would give you great scoring, great rebounding and great center defense, easily more impactful than someone like Rodman, and he could put anyone in foul trouble, especially smaller guys, plus physicality was his thing and you ain't getting in his head. Underrated peak. He would've eaten Bulls front court alive, to be honest.

Erving was still really good, still could score pretty well, grabbed boards, could pass the ball and was willing to, played some pretty good off-ball defense. Scottie would play great defense on him and bring really good all-around offense, of course. I'd probably say that Pippen has an edge in that matchup overall, considering their level at the time, but it's close to a wash if not one, and Erving could've had the best of him also. Jones would've played some great D on Pip too.

Jordan wouldn't be on Toney, seriously, they would've had Harper on him, Toney would wear MJ the **** out and they needed Michael on offense. Andrew Toney was a scoring machine, many people don't know about that, underrated/overlooked, at his best he could've definitely scored like 25 ppg as a 1st option. Dude was a stone cold killer, plus was unselfish and could pass the rock.

76ers would've probably tried to double MJ, play ball denial, have Cheeks on him to bother with his quickness and great pesky defense, he was small for MJ though, Toney played some D also, maybe Erving on him to bother him with size and athleticism, or Bobby Jones off the bench, great defender with size and athleticism. Jordan was amazing of course, he'd always get his.

Cheeks was a decent scorer and nice passer, Bobby Jones was a factor off the bench with great defense, all-out hustle, provided a bit of very efficient scoring, played team ball. Phila's bench was deep too.

That 1983 Sixers team also had great chemistry on the court. Terrific team, watch some games if you haven't. Team had 65W in a great league, in a great conference, and only lost once in 3 playoff series. Great offensive players, knew how to work as a team, and they had a great defensive team, they had "answers" for the Bulls defensively, no coincidence that they had 3 players on the all-defensive 1st team, and played great defense as a team.

[SHAQisGOAT]

As I said, Chicago ain't winning more than 2-3 championships in the 80s. You got Doc and Malone's Sixers, Magic and Kareem's Lakers - and of course, Bird's Celts. Mind you, these players are ALL in their peaks / primes.

I'd drop some serious cash to see these hypothetical matchups.

I agree.

Same here.

[SHAQisGOAT]

The Pistons average age in 91 was 29, wow, that's ancient.

Before they finally spanked that Piston ass 4-0, the young Bulls were taking them to 6 and 7 game series with a young immature pre-peak Pippen/Grant. 1992 mature Bulls team don't fall for the dirty tactics the Pistons used on them when the Bulls were going through growing pains.

I stand by what I said, a mature Bulls team easily beats any Bad Boys Pistons team.

[B]Yea, let's just look at average age :rolleyes: Vinnie Johnson, the 6th man, who was their 'instant scoring' off the bench plus backup guard to Isiah/Dumars was pushing 34, still had his moments but couldn't be as impactful as before; Laimbeer was 33 and almost ending his prime play, let's say, dude was always big for them; Aguirre was 32, couldn't quite play at the same level; James Edwards also pushing 35.
9 of the Pistons who've finished the 1991 season were 30 or older, but yea let's mention average roster age :facepalm


Like I've said, they were (getting) old, were banged up from lots of gruelsome series, plenty of injuries around the team, Isiah, their best player and leader, had wrist surgery before the playoffs, played way below his standards when he could be on the court... You're crazy if you think they were even close to what they were previously. You're crazy if you think the best Bulls team could've easily won against them at their best (not saying they wouldn't have won). That 1989 team, especially, was amazing and really stacked.

Let me also "back it up" with some articles from 1991..

"Changes in store for Pistons Age, injuries cripple once-powerful team":

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1991-05-29/sports/1991149108_1_pistons-dennis-rodman-detroit-team


Nine of the 12 Pistons who finished the season are 30 or older. Only three Detroit players -- Isiah Thomas, Joe Dumars and Dennis Rodman -- would bring significant value in trade. One key player, John Salley, is a restricted free agent and he is seeking a salary that would throw the Detroit pay structure completely out of whack. The two main front-court players, Bill Laimbeer and James Edwards, reached the end of this season looking like stegosauri left over from a forgotten epoch.

"That's the nature of the business," Thomas said of the coming changes. "We understand that coming in. I'm just thankful we got to do what we did together the last few years. Now, we have to make the team better. We've maxed out as a team."

Age got them, and injuries, and, in the end, a better Chicago team. For all their infirmities, however, the Pistons still had enough to push past an athletic Atlanta team and a warhorse Boston outfit that must be scratching its collective cranium right now.


"With Isiah Thomas hurt and other players also dealing with injuries, Detroit is struggling":

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1118974/index.htm
[QUOTE]
The defending, two-time world champions have had to take their guards where they could find them this season, and they have found them practically everywhere. There are intramural-league guards, old guards, older guards, school crossing guards, elite Republican Guards

[AlphaWolf24]

:roll:


What It seems like in this thread is...

Knowledgeable BBALL fans are at least trying to discuss the topic...

then you have kids who were still pissin in their pants when MJ played...just replying with icons and " MJ would have scored 50PPG in Wilts era too!"...

- This thread is prime examples of my vid..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFxIkJ6Wi1A

...and to that one dude who keeps saying Russell only won because of 10 - 14 teams...More teams and more players does NOT make the league tougher. As a matter of fact, it works the exact opposite. ( especially when there is no talent top fill positions as it was in the 90's...with the international pool so underdeveloped)The more teams and players there are, the more watered-down the league becomes.

Imagine if the Bulls had to play Larry Bird and the Celtics 10 times a year. And in that same year, they had to play Magic, Kareem and the Lakers 10 times. And in that same year, they had to play Dr. J and the 76ers 10 times. Would the Bulls have won 70 games ??? ...no...


Now, when I'm talking about the watered down era', I'm talking after 1991. The competition in the 80's was at an all-time high, when there was only 23 teams.


- again...most of us only watched MJ ...we never watched Russell's career....so I'm at least trying discuss it in a way to look at Russell and give him his due...



- Finals MVPs were not given out when Russell was dominating the Finals with performances like..

Finals game 7s:

57 NBA Finals - 19 pts 32 rebounds

59 East Finals - 18 pts 32 rebounds

60 NBA Finals - 22 pts 35 rebounds

62 East finals - 19 pts, don't have rebound number (this was against Wilt..he also held Wilt to 22 pts, after Wilt averaged 50 ppg during the regular season)

62 NBA finals - 30 pts 40 rebounds (THE GREATEST PLAYOFF PERFORMANCE IN HISTORY...THIRTY POINTS, FORTY REBOUNDS in GAME SEVEN)... Gee, wonder who would have been MVP of this final, had the award then existed?

63 East finals - 20 pts, don't have rebound number

65 East finals - 15 pts 29 rebounds 9 assists (against Wilt)

66 NBA finals - 25 pts 32 rebounds

68 East finals - 12 pts, held Wilt to 14. Also chipped in 26 rebounds

69 NBA finals - 21 rebounds vs. Wilt...won his 11th title in a 13 year NBA career... that was his final game

I mean...people say Russell played in weak era...Imagine if he played in the Modern era of ESPN and Online 24/7 media hyping everything... and came up Big in Game 7's like he did....

If Media members constantly remind everyone of MJ...

"remember that 3 pointer Michael hit in the first half of game 1 of the 92 Finals against Portland?? That's there!! Talk about clutch!!!!"

"Remember the layup he hit against the Lakers with his left hand? That's there!! ...Ohhh...maaannnn!"

Imagine what they would have said about Russell playing on a broken ankle...and a hemorrhaging eye?


( waits for icon.....and " MJ could have won 11 titles too in Russell's era...."...even though Dennis Rodman's Pistons team shut down the Bull's)

[KingBeasley08]

I always have tried to argue against Jordan stans who act like he's perfect but here, I'm on there side. He's still the GOAT and we're comparing him to a player who'd be a poor man's Kendrick Perkins today

[TheMan]

Yea, let's just look at average age :rolleyes: Vinnie Johnson, the 6th man, who was their 'instant scoring' off the bench plus backup guard to Isiah/Dumars was pushing 34, still had his moments but couldn't be as impactful as before; Laimbeer was 33 and almost ending his prime play, let's say, dude was always big for them; Aguirre was 32, couldn't quite play at the same level; James Edwards also pushing 35.
9 of the Pistons who've finished the 1991 season were 30 or older, but yea let's mention average roster age :facepalm


Like I've said, they were (getting) old, were banged up from lots of gruelsome series, plenty of injuries around the team, Isiah, their best player and leader, had wrist surgery before the playoffs, played way below his standards when he could be on the court... You're crazy if you think they were even close to what they were previously. You're crazy if you think the best Bulls team could've easily won against them at their best (not saying they wouldn't have won). That 1989 team, especially, was amazing and really stacked.

Let me also "back it up" with some articles from 1991..

"Changes in store for Pistons Age, injuries cripple once-powerful team":

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1991-05-29/sports/1991149108_1_pistons-dennis-rodman-detroit-team



"With Isiah Thomas hurt and other players also dealing with injuries, Detroit is struggling":

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1118974/index.htm




Ok, just so you don't think I'm trolling you, I'll concede that the 91 Pistons weren't as good as their two previous seasons. At the same time, the Bulls were better than their previous years, that explains the 4-0 beatdown in the ECFs (the fact that Detroit got to that round shows they weren't exactly scrubs either).

My point, and I fail to see how you can't see this is, the Bulls were taking the best version of the Pistons to 6 and 7 game series with inferior Bulls teams than their chip versions. I still stand by what I've been saying all along, the 92 Bulls with Pippen and Grant now playing to their potential (unlike their younger versions in 88-90), three years under Phil Jackson, and finally more familiarity with the triangle offense would beat any version of the Bad Boys if clearly inferior Bulls teams were taking peak Pistons teams to 6 and 7 game ECFs.

When the Bulls finally overcame the Pistons, it was a case of the Pistons declining AND the Bulls hitting their peak (not their fault they were younger than the 80s Lakers, Celtics and Pistons). I might've underrated the Bad Boys Pistons (still hate them :oldlol:) but you also underrate the 90s Bulls.

[Pointguard]

Jordan wouldn't be on Toney, seriously, they would've had Harper on him, Toney would wear MJ the **** out and they needed Michael on offense. Andrew Toney was a scoring machine, many people don't know about that, underrated/overlooked, at his best he could've definitely scored like 25 ppg as a 1st option. Dude was a stone cold killer, plus was unselfish and could pass the rock.

76ers would've probably tried to double MJ, play ball denial, have Cheeks on him to bother with his quickness and great pesky defense, he was small for MJ though, Toney played some D also, maybe Erving on him to bother him with size and athleticism, or Bobby Jones off the bench, great defender with size and athleticism. Jordan was amazing of course, he'd always get his.

Cheeks was a decent scorer and nice passer, Bobby Jones was a factor off the bench with great defense, all-out hustle, provided a bit of very efficient scoring, played team ball. Phila's bench was deep too.

That 1983 Sixers team also had great chemistry on the court. Terrific team, watch some games if you haven't. Team had 65W in a great league, in a great conference, and only lost once in 3 playoff series. Great offensive players, knew how to work as a team, and they had a great defensive team, they had "answers" for the Bulls defensively, no coincidence that they had 3 players on the all-defensive 1st team, and played great defense as a team.

Much of what you said was dead on and that 83 team was on a mission, but Toney wearing Jordan out is a bit crazy. Jordan was probably one of the best conditioned ball players ever. While Toney was good he wasn't the energy drain Reggie Miller, Mitch Richmond or Clyde was. In fact, Toney was very small for a 2. Jordan was among the strongest SG ever.

Moses wasn't an outstanding defensive rebounder. Only once getting to ten and averaging about 8 in his prime. So that would have been a weakness.

[AlphaWolf24]

I always have tried to argue against Jordan stans who act like he's perfect but here, I'm on there side. He's still the GOAT and we're comparing him to a player who'd be a poor man's Kendrick Perkins today


Ok in the same token....50 years from now when Brazil is Dominating Basketball...and there is a player averaging 39ppg and doing moves no one has ever seen before ( I mean most of MJ's moves are standard in the league now aday's...every HS player can reverse pivot and fade away....heck even MJ's dunks are dated as F@ck.....he would lose every dunk contest if he did the same ol' tired freethrowline dunk or leaner)

50 years from now I'm sure there will plenty of people saying MJ dominated in weak era against Fundamentally lacking American's who travel on every possession....and slow white guys like Craig Ehlo and Jeff Hornachek...( it already happens)