If Kareem replaces Russell on the 1960's Celtics do you think they still win 11 rings

[coastalmarker99]

It is an interesting question to ponder.

As If Kareem had played for those Celtics teams from 1957 to 1969


I see him scoring 20-25 ppg and then hanging 40+ as needed.


His defence in his prime may have actually been even better than it already was.

Due to the fact that he wouldn't have had to carry the full offensive load on his shoulders as he did with the Bucks and Lakers before Magic showed up.






Therefore I see Kareem most likely winning 11 rings from 1957 to 1969 as Russell did as the Celtics probably would not have been challenged much at all in the post-season outside of 1967 and 1969.

[AirBonner]

40 year old Wilt was abusing prime Kareem. Not sure.

[HunterSThompson]

probly not. what made Russell perfect for that team was his unselfishness. they already had a ton of scoring. they didn't need an anthony davis. they needed a draymond green

[ClipperRevival]

KAJ had a terrible personality. He galvanized no one. There is a REASON dude only won 1 chip without Magic. I can admit he is probably 2nd GOAT based on all factors but he was no Bill Russell as a leader. Russell was PERFECT for those teams. Stats don't just translate across eras/teams. Personalities, chemistry, respect, etc all play a factor. I know for a fact KAJ ain't winning 11. He probably loses quite a few to Wilt too.

People forget Russell's record in playoff elimination games? Think it's like 10-0. He had the "it" factor. KAJ was a dud as a leader.

[coastalmarker99]

40 year old Wilt was abusing prime Kareem. Not sure.

Wilt did have a history of matching up very well against Kareem but the Celtics as a whole would have the edge over Wilt's teams in talent and depth until about 1967.




And considering the devastating injuries, the Sixers suffered in 1968 I don't think they beat the Celtics that year.

[coastalmarker99]

KAJ had a terrible personality. He galvanized no one. There is a REASON dude only won 1 chip without Magic. I can admit he is probably 2nd GOAT based on all factors but he was no Bill Russell as a leader. Russell was PERFECT for those teams. Stats don't just translate across eras/teams. Personalities, chemistry, respect, etc all play a factor. I know for a fact KAJ ain't winning 11. He probably loses quite a few to Wilt too.

People forget Russell's record in playoff elimination games? Think it's like 10-0. He had the "it" factor. KAJ was a dud as a leader.


If Kareem's teammates had just played decently in 1972 & 1974 POs.


Kareem would have won 3 rings in 5 years to start his career after being drafted by an expansion team.

In the 1972 WCF, Kareem (34, 18, 5, .48.2 TS) totally outplayed Wilt (11, 19, 3, .472. TS).

But the Lakers won the series 4-2.

However, the Bucks lost games by 1, 3, and 4 points to the Lakers!

Oscar played terribly (9, 5, 6, .40.2 TS).

If Oscar plays even average, the Bucks win those close ones and win the series.

In the Finals, the Lakers easily beat Knicks 4-1 to win the title (Reed was injured). So Bucks would have likely won the title as well.


In the 1974 finals Kareem played great: 33, 12, 5, .55.2 TS.


But he got little help (Oscar: 12, 4, 8, .47.6 TS). The bucks lost 4-3.

If Kareem's teammates play slightly better the Bucks win the title that year.



Therefore If Kareem's teammates had played just slightly better in the 1972 & 1974 POs:


Kareem's in his first 5 seasons after being drafted by an expansion team would have had.

3 MVPs (plus one that was utterly robbed from him in 1973.

3 rings

3 FMVPs



Kareem in my eyes would have utterly dominated the NBA throughout the 1960s with Red coaching him just as he did in UCLA with John Wooden coaching him.

[coastalmarker99]

KAJ had a terrible personality. He galvanized no one. There is a REASON dude only won 1 chip without Magic. I can admit he is probably 2nd GOAT based on all factors but he was no Bill Russell as a leader. Russell was PERFECT for those teams. Stats don't just translate across eras/teams. Personalities, chemistry, respect, etc all play a factor. I know for a fact KAJ ain't winning 11. He probably loses quite a few to Wilt too.

People forget Russell's record in playoff elimination games? Think it's like 10-0. He had the "it" factor. KAJ was a dud as a leader.

Look at Kareem's supporting casts from 1975 to 1979 and how hard he was carrying them on both sides of the court.


Kareem's 1977 season is one of the GOAT carry jobs in NBA history by a player.

It's like saying Jordan was a dud as a leader from 1984 to 1990 when we all know he didn't have the help he needed to win titles.






From 1957 thru 1965 I do think Kareem would have easily won every single ring during that time period that is 9 rings right there as LA and the Hawks would have had no answer for him in the finals.





1966? Well, if Wilt's teammates still play as miserably as they did in the post-season (shooting a collective .35.2 without Wilt), that is now 10 rings for Kareem.




1967 I think Wilt finally beats him as he did with Russell in real life.

1968? with the 76ers destroyed by injuries (seven of their eight key players, including Wilt himself, were playing with significant injuries, or not playing at all.)


Kareem wins his 11 ring



But in 1969 I think Kareem loses to LA in the finals.

[ClipperRevival]

OP, I am not a man of "what ifs" but rather a man of actual results. I guess growing up in the MJ era and being a fan of him, it's easier for me LOL. KAJ had help in the 70's. When you lose, the first reaction is to say he had no help. I am not going to get into "what ifs" like we always do with Wilt. KAJ was a dud as a leader and that matters a lot. I'll leave it at that.

P.S. no more copy/paste stats LOL.

[coastalmarker99]

OP, I am not a man of "what ifs" but rather a man of actual results. I guess growing up in the MJ era and being a fan of him, it's easier for me LOL. KAJ had help in the 70's. When you lose, the first reaction is to say he had no help. I am not going to get into "what ifs" like we always do with Wilt. KAJ was a dud as a leader and that matters a lot. I'll leave it at that.

P.S. no more copy/paste stats LOL.


KAJ was the leader of 4 title-winning teams and he was so close to winning another three rings as the leader of his teams in 1972 and 1974 along with 1984.


To say he is a dud as a leader I think is very unfair as Kareem was the leader of the showtime Lakers until 1986.

In which during that time span of 6 years they won 3 titles and easily could have added one or two more rings to that total if not for Magic choking in 1984 and 1981

[Kawhi_Why_Not]

KAJ was the leader of 4 title-winning teams and he was so close to winning another three rings as the leader of his teams in 1972 and 1974 along with 1984.


To say he is a dud as a leader I think is very unfair as Kareem was the leader of the showtime Lakers until 1986.

In which during that time span of 6 years they won 3 titles and easily could have added one or two more rings to that total if not for Magic choking in 1984 and 1981

None of his Lakers rings are impressive. The only one that was close to being impressive was 1980 but he got hurt. The rest of the 80s rings he was a Scottie pippen level scorer.

Would you think its impressive if Durant or kawhi teamed up with magic LeBron? That's basically equal to Kareem and magic

Then he managed only 1 ring in the entire 70s decade which is pretty underwhelming for that weak era.

[coastalmarker99]

None of his Lakers rings are impressive. The only one that was close to being impressive was 1980 but he got hurt. The rest of the 80s rings he was a Scottie pippen level scorer.

Would you think its impressive if Durant or kawhi teamed up with magic LeBron? That's basically equal to Kareem and magic

Then he managed only 1 ring in the entire 70s decade which is pretty underwhelming for that weak era.


For you to say none of his Laker rings are impressive is just pure ignorance.

Kareem famously won the finals MVP at age 38 in the 1985 finals which featured both Magic and Bird who were in their primes.


And had the Lakers won in 1984 against the Celtics he also would have been the finals MVP at age 37 as he averaged 27, 8, 4 on a 51.9 TS in that series.

[coastalmarker99]

One can only wonder at the numbers that a prime Kareem would have done to the 1960's Lakers who were incredibly weak at the centre position.


Kareem would own a lot of scoring records in the NBA finals (and perhaps FG% records as well, since Russell shot .70.2 while averaging 17.2 PPG against LA in the 1965 finals.)

[iamgine]

Lets be honest, winning 11 rings are damn hard. Most people lost motivation after 3 in a row. Some lost it even after a single championship. Russell from what I read was just a different breed of person. There's no reason to believe Kareem or anyone else would win 11. It doesn't matter how much better than Russell they are.

[mr4speed]

None of his Lakers rings are impressive. The only one that was close to being impressive was 1980 but he got hurt. The rest of the 80s rings he was a Scottie pippen level scorer.

Would you think its impressive if Durant or kawhi teamed up with magic LeBron? That's basically equal to Kareem and magic

Then he managed only 1 ring in the entire 70s decade which is pretty underwhelming for that weak era.

I think you need to revisit the 85 Finals. After a bad game 1 Kareem posted this per game for the next 5 games = 28.4 points and 10.2 rebounds and 6.0 assists on 61% shooting. Kareem was the FMVP and why LA beat Boston. IF LA had won game 7 in 1984 Kareem would have been the FMVP. To answer the OP's question about winning 11 rings in Bill's place? For me, I think it could have been possible but unlikely - maybe Kareem wins 8 or 9 but 11 = I don't think so.

[John8204]

Kareem was a two way player he would have been better off with The Lakers than The Celtics in that era.