Bill Russel is the Most Overrated Player in NBA History

[8Ball]

Has got to be the most overrated player in NBA history. Regularly in top 10 lists and even top 1 or top 3, Mount Rushmore on many lists.

As a player:

- 6’10” and 215 lbs. Which isn’t that impressive at all.
- Averaged 15ppg on 44% which is atrocious. And shoots 56% from the free throw line which is even more atrocious.
- Playoff scoring average of 16ppg on 43%. 60% from the free throw line which would be unplayable in today’s game.
- Played 13 seasons which isn’t that much by any means, a relatively short career for a “great” player.
- Only all-nba first team 3x in his 13 year career. That means there was a better center than him 10 out of 13 years of his entire career. The voters did not even think he was the best center for the majority of Bill’s career.


Any General Manager worth their salt going back 60 years would draft the following centers prime for prime vs Bill Russell:

Jokic / Anthony Davis / Duncan / Dwight Howard / Kevin Garnett / Shaq / Hakeem / Embiid

Bill is just a vastly inferior talent compared to the rest of the all time top 10 list.

[ArbitraryWater]

Definitely a tough player to rate.


Hed have to be like twice as good as Wallace, Mutombo, etc. on defense for his rank to make sense, cause we dont elevate the other rim protectors like that.


I believe he had some nicely elevated playoff/finals scoring? but im not sure it justifies all that.

[bdonovan]

In 1956-7, Russel scored 14.7 points/game. That was good enough to be #16th best in the league (https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1957_per_game.html#per_game_stats::pts_per_g).

In comparison, Jokic was 18th in the league this year in pts/game (https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2023_per_game.html#per_game_stats::pts_per_g).

You say Russel's FG% of 44 was atrocious but it was 5th best in the league (https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1957_per_game.html#per_game_stats::pts_per_g).

The game was different then; you can't just take stats from 70 years ago and compare them apples to apples to today.

[Axe]

It's gotta be that gerbil stephen curry, at least according to 3ball.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?493318-Curry-is-the-most-overrated-player-in-history

[ArbitraryWater]

In 1956-7, Russel scored 14.7 points/game. That was good enough to be #16th best in the league (https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1957_per_game.html#per_game_stats::pts_per_g).

In comparison, Jokic was 18th in the league this year in pts/game (https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2023_per_game.html#per_game_stats::pts_per_g).

You say Russel's FG% of 44 was atrocious but it was 5th best in the league (https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1957_per_game.html#per_game_stats::pts_per_g).

The game was different then; you can't just take stats from 70 years ago and compare them apples to apples to today.


lol, why are you taking 57% for Russels average? Thats his rookie year?

In 67 that would be 38th highest.

Dont skew it.

[Im Still Ballin]

Bill Russell was 6'9⅝" barefoot and had a 7'4" wingspan per newspaper archives. 215 pounds is his rookie weight; he liked to play at 225-230 pounds. He got up to 240 later in his career. He never lifted weights. He would be 245-250+ pounds in modern times. He's roughly the same height as Giannis, Anthony Davis, DeAndre Jordan, and DeMarcus Cousins. Taller than Dwight Howard and Alonzo Mourning.

He would be like Hakeem Olajuwon and Kevin Garnett on defense. On offense, like a supercharged Bam Adebayo with GOAT athleticism and way better verticality and finishing in the paint. GOAT-level conditioning, motor, durability, and intangibles. Would elevate a franchise like Tim Duncan. Just a true winner.

[SouBeachTalents]

Jokic / Anthony Davis / Duncan / Dwight Howard / Kevin Garnett / Shaq / Hakeem / Embiid
Honestly, I’d probably take Russell over half these guys peak for peak, or at least consider it. I would take him over Embiid and not even think twice about it.

[Carbine]

If their is one player who should be immune from hate threads it's Bill Russell.

In his words of who you pick all time "you pick me, because I won't distort your offense or your defense. The way I play, my team wins"

You can't argue with him. He won two NCAA titles, 11 titles in 13 years of the NBA. Boston was first round exits before him and missed the playoffs after him.

I guess he was right. The way he plays, his team wins.

[Kblaze8855]

Guy wins back to back state titles in high school, wins 55 games in a row and back to back national titles in college for a school you never heard of, won the gold medal by like 40ppg, got drafted and won the title his rookie year, got hurt in the finals his second season so they lost…then won 8 on a row…lost once…then played and coached his teams to two more rings.

Retired and they missed the playoffs.

And we still have people talking about ppg.

If your team always ends with more points than the other team…on 4 levels….why should anyone keep asking how many of the points you scored personally like it’s a coincidence?

He just stumbled into 17 championships or what?

That guy is victory made flesh. If he gave back 4 rings and shot better from the field and scored some more….that better?

I do wonder what the criticisms would be then. Just skip right to the “So what? He played plumbers” part which is really the issue all of his haters have anyway?

There is nothing he could have done to get these peoples full credit for what he did because what he did was so out of reach of what anyone else ever will it makes the goat debate idiotic if you do credit him. So he’s not getting it. He wouldn’t get it no matter what.

If Wilt we’re the one with the 11 rings and his numbers people would still find a reason he didn’t count.

Russell doesn’t count because it was the 60s. That’s about it.

Theres obviously nothing any of those players could do to get full credit from modern fans.

[Kblaze8855]

If their is one player who should be immune from hate threads it's Bill Russell.

In his words of who you pick all time "you pick me, because I won't distort your offense or your defense. The way I play, my team wins"

You can't argue with him. He won two NCAA titles, 11 titles in 13 years of the NBA. Boston was first round exits before him and missed the playoffs after him.

I guess he was right. The way he plays, his team wins.


He really should be on some




What the hell have y'all done
To even have an opinion on what I've been doing
What the hell have y'all won?
Only thing you can identify with is losing
10 No.1 albums in a row, who better than me?
Only The Beatles, nobody ahead of me
I crush Elvis in his Blue Suede Shoes
Made the Rolling Stones seem sweet as Kool-Aid too
'96, '97, '98, '99
2000, 2001 and beyond
'02, '03, '04, '05
'06 and 7, '08, '09
Back-to-back, double plat', I did what you won't
Men lie, women lie, numbers don't
Ain't nothing changed for me except the year it is
I think have to send you a reminder, here it is:

https://www.hostpic.org/images/2306030330500348.jpeg




shit every time he’s questioned.

What the **** has anyone done to criticize Bill Russells approach to winning games?

[Full Court]

8ball finally crawls out from under his rock after melting down over the Lakers getting swept.

Did you see LeShrivel's multiple choke jobs??

:roll:

[Carbine]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgyVG-VCYAAbpfy.jpg:large

[Im Still Ballin]

Bill's offense would be like a mix of Sabonis' DHO game, prime Westbrook's defense-to-offense transition game, and prime Dwight's pick-and-roll game. A little Bam Adebayo mid-range shooting in there too.

The numbers aren't that important, but I imagine they'd look something like this:

- 18-22 ppg, 13-15 rpg, 5-8 apg, 1-2 spg, 3+ bpg
- 55-60% FG, 56% FT

A shitload of deflections, screen assists, hockey assists, and blocks tipped to teammates instead of going out of bounds. 100% effort and intensity on every play on both ends of the court - for the entire season. Never gets injured.

[BarberSchool]

Bill is a cool MF.
I love Bill Russell as a human.
Great dude.
Great player.
True champion.

But anybody putting him in their top 5, is being too generous to the elderly, for non-basketball reasons. And that’s not some terribly wrong thing to do. It’s admirable and kind. But I can’t do it.

[Kblaze8855]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgyVG-VCYAAbpfy.jpg:large


Im amazed how people just keep demanding superficial shit. Once that man’s balls dropped he pretty much didn’t lose again till he was 32 or so…then won back to back as player/coach and retired.

The ****?

How does that happen and people want more?

We really made so little progress since the college scout who remarked he was too raw and had only scored 6 points….only to be reminded by a much better scout that the other team only scored 29 and got blown out.

Bunch of fans still thinking like pre shot clock part time evaluators who don’t understand that it doesn’t matter how you win…just that you do.

I’m sure Red was happy the Hawks were this stupid. Gave him up for a good shooting 20ppg big and watched the league get destroyed.

[L.Kizzle]

The more clips I watch of Russell, he's like Draymond Green to the 10×.

[Im Still Ballin]

Swap Sabonis out for Russell and the Kings are the #1 seed and championship favorites every year. A dynasty. Even if you account for the game changing and defenses being stretched out, Bill would still have that defense elite. And both the half-court and transition offense get better.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qT5GlgXrX-0

[iamgine]

Word on the street is...while Ol' Billy Boy wasn't the unanimous best on the court, he was one of the smartest player and a heck of a leader with the mental toughness and a dog in him you can only get from years of ingrained racism. This results in his team always having the mental and poise advantage. I'd say he sounds like this year's Jimmy Butler, but smarter and a lot tougher. For his era anyways.

I'd take that over sissies like Dwight and Embiid.

[Carbine]

He was voted 5 time MVP, including 4 in 5 years.

If that isn't unanimous best on the court, I don't know what is.

[iamgine]

He was voted 5 time MVP, including 4 in 5 years.

If that isn't unanimous best on the court, I don't know what is.

Team record duh

[8Ball]

8ball finally crawls out from under his rock after melting down over the Lakers getting swept.

Did you see LeShrivel's multiple choke jobs??

:roll:

LeBron surpassed Jordan by so much this year when considering their age 38 performances that I don't need to argue LeBron vs Jordan anymore.

[Im Still Ballin]

There are stories about Bill having a greater standing reach than Kareem and Ralph Sampson. He's probably in the 9'4" ballpark - similar to Myles Turner and Greg Oden. For reference, Wilt and Shaq were 9'6" and 9'5" respectively.

Combine that with world-class jumping ability and his maximum reach is at-top-of-the-backboard level.

[8Ball]

Guy wins back to back state titles in high school, wins 55 games in a row and back to back national titles in college for a school you never heard of, won the gold medal by like 40ppg, got drafted and won the title his rookie year, got hurt in the finals his second season so they lost…then won 8 on a row…lost once…then played and coached his teams to two more rings.

Retired and they missed the playoffs.

And we still have people talking about ppg.

If your team always ends with more points than the other team…on 4 levels….why should anyone keep asking how many of the points you scored personally like it’s a coincidence?

He just stumbled into 17 championships or what?

That guy is victory made flesh. If he gave back 4 rings and shot better from the field and scored some more….that better?

I do wonder what the criticisms would be then. Just skip right to the “So what? He played plumbers” part which is really the issue all of his haters have anyway?

There is nothing he could have done to get these peoples full credit for what he did because what he did was so out of reach of what anyone else ever will it makes the goat debate idiotic if you do credit him. So he’s not getting it. He wouldn’t get it no matter what.

If Wilt we’re the one with the 11 rings and his numbers people would still find a reason he didn’t count.

Russell doesn’t count because it was the 60s. That’s about it.

Theres obviously nothing any of those players could do to get full credit from modern fans.

I am not talking aggregate accomplishments. Nobody can compete with 11 championship rings.


I am talking about just Bill Russell as a player. Look at his skill sets offensively:

- Bad free throw shooter, really bad.
- Can't shoot 3s.
- Doesn't have much of a jump shot.
- His post game wasn't dominant, very low ability to take over a game offensively.

He isn't a triple threat scorer.


All of these traits as a center is only "playable" back in the 60s and 70s. A center like this is loses value enormously over time after the 80s.

[Im Still Ballin]

I am not talking aggregate accomplishments. Nobody can compete with 11 championship rings.


I am talking about just Bill Russell as a player. Look at his skill sets offensively:

- Bad free throw shooter, really bad.
- Can't shoot 3s.
- Doesn't have much of a jump shot.
- His post game wasn't dominant, very low ability to take over a game offensively.

He isn't a triple threat scorer.


All of these traits as a center is only "playable" back in the 60s and 70s. A center like this is loses value enormously over time after the 80s.

Giannis is neither a good free-throw shooter, three-point shooter, mid-range shooter, post-up scorer, or triple-threat scorer. Doesn't stop him from tearing this modern NBA up.

[8Ball]

The more clips I watch of Russell, he's like Draymond Green to the 10×.

As great as Russell was, there is probably 10 centers I am taking over him in a draft. If I was a general manager in 1958 or whatever, I take 10 centers over him historically.


I don't even think he's a better player than Anthony Davis.


How can he be a top 5 player if he isn't even a top 5 most talented center?

[SouBeachTalents]

I am not talking aggregate accomplishments. Nobody can compete with 11 championship rings.


I am talking about just Bill Russell as a player. Look at his skill sets offensively:

- Bad free throw shooter, really bad.
- Can't shoot 3s.
- Doesn't have much of a jump shot.
- His post game wasn't dominant, very low ability to take over a game offensively.

He isn't a triple threat scorer.


All of these traits as a center is only "playable" back in the 60s and 70s. A center like this is loses value enormously over time after the 80s.
Bruh, what :lol How would he be less playable than HOF's like Ben Wallace & Mutombo, let alone the assortment of mediocre-scrub players we've seen start at center.

[8Ball]

Giannis is neither a good free-throw shooter, three-point shooter, mid-range shooter, post-up scorer, or triple-threat scorer. Doesn't stop him from tearing this modern NBA up.

Triple threat = scoring at the rim / midrange / 3 point shot.

Giannis is historically great at scoring at the rim.


Replace Giannis with Prime Russel and that Bucks team is disastrously bad.

[8Ball]

Bruh, what :lol How would he be less playable than HOF's like Ben Wallace & Mutombo, let alone the assortment of mediocre-scrub players we've seen start at center.

Is Ben Wallance where Bill Russel is talent wise? That's the overrated part of Russel.

[8Ball]

Swap Sabonis out for Russell and the Kings are the #1 seed and championship favorites every year. A dynasty. Even if you account for the game changing and defenses being stretched out, Bill would still have that defense elite. And both the half-court and transition offense get better.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qT5GlgXrX-0

If you surround Russell with a historically great perimeter offence I guess they can win a lot of games today.


Now replace Sabonis with 10 other great centers historically and you have an even better team.


That's my point.

[8Ball]

Im amazed how people just keep demanding superficial shit. Once that man’s balls dropped he pretty much didn’t lose again till he was 32 or so…then won back to back as player/coach and retired.

The ****?

How does that happen and people want more?

We really made so little progress since the college scout who remarked he was too raw and had only scored 6 points….only to be reminded by a much better scout that the other team only scored 29 and got blown out.

Bunch of fans still thinking like pre shot clock part time evaluators who don’t understand that it doesn’t matter how you win…just that you do.

I’m sure Red was happy the Hawks were this stupid. Gave him up for a good shooting 20ppg big and watched the league get destroyed.

Can we put him at top 11 or top 12?

[Im Still Ballin]

Triple threat = scoring at the rim / midrange / 3 point shot.

Giannis is historically great at scoring at the rim.


Replace Giannis with Prime Russel and that Bucks team is disastrously bad.

Isn't that a weird way to describe Giannis as a scorer? He's neither good at shooting threes nor mid-range jump shots. Bill Russell is a better perimeter shooter in my opinion.

[8Ball]

Isn't that a weird way to describe Giannis as a scorer? He's neither good at shooting threes nor mid-range jump shots. Bill Russell is a better perimeter shooter in my opinion.

Bill Russell ain't scoring 30 ppg in today's era even if you spread the floor for him.

[8Ball]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgyVG-VCYAAbpfy.jpg:large

This is my exact point with Russell.


The only way to defend Bill Russell is to point to his team accomplishments.


Bill Russell scores very badly when doing individual comparisons between players based on just ability and talent.

[John8204]

This is my exact point with Russell.


The only way to defend Bill Russell is to point to his team accomplishments.


Bill Russell scores very badly when doing individual comparisons between players based on just ability and talent.
1. Bill Russell* 133.64
2. Tim Duncan* 106.34
21. Shaquille O'Neal* 66.36
22. John Stockton* 64.93
23. Michael Jordan* 64.13

His defensive win share numbers are so insane the distance between 1 and 2 is basically the difference between 2 and 23.

Bill isn't really overrated if anything guys from his generation are historically underrated (West, Robertson, Havlicek, Pettit, Mikan, Baylor and Wilt) All of those guys deserve top twenty spots...certainly over players of the moment like Durant and Shaq.

The other thing about Bill and this is important he was doing this and leading during a period of time when black men and leaders were being assassinated. We are talking about the first black head coach in the NBA

[Im Still Ballin]

I feel like modern dribbling rules, the zero-step, hand-checking rules, and off-ball hand-checking/freedom of movement would open his offensive game right up. Bill was a great ball handler; I could see him doing some Giannis-like stuff from the perimeter.

[iamgine]

It's the problem of comparing past players. It was a different sport. The training, tactic and rules were different. Current players wouldn't be able to dribble strictly palm down, or deal with asymmetrical ball, or smoke filled arena, or a coach who only wants you to play a certain way, or the racism, the low pay, the hours of sleepless bus rides, no private chef/trainer, the shoes, etc. And vice versa.

[Kblaze8855]

The only way to defend Bill Russell is to point to his team accomplishments.

There is nothing to defend.

Youre talking superficial shit that means nothing.

The people worrying about what you criticize him for not doing are the ones who watched him win everything for their entire life. Imagine asking a guy who just had 25/32 in game 7 to win his 8th ring in a row about this bullshit.

Maybe…if he wasn’t obviously playing the way required to win he’d have cared to do something differently. Where is the evidence he needed to? And lacking that…what exactly are you asking for?

What does his team gain by him being better at whatever you think he needed to do?

16-17 titles doesn’t cut it?

What happens when he plays more efficient modern offense? They get 2 rings a season instead of one?

Whats the benefit of him doing what you feel makes him a better player?

If nothing…why are we talking about it?

[L.Kizzle]

As great as Russell was, there is probably 10 centers I am taking over him in a draft. If I was a general manager in 1958 or whatever, I take 10 centers over him historically.


I don't even think he's a better player than Anthony Davis.


How can he be a top 5 player if he isn't even a top 5 most talented center?
Are those centers going to get you 11 rings in 13 seasons?
Kareem, Wilt, Hakeem and Shaq have 14 total in 70 seasons.

[Reggie43]

Goat level defense, athleticism, toughness and leadership is hardly overrated.

[ILLsmak]

In 1956-7, Russel scored 14.7 points/game. That was good enough to be #16th best in the league (https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1957_per_game.html#per_game_stats::pts_per_g).

In comparison, Jokic was 18th in the league this year in pts/game (https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2023_per_game.html#per_game_stats::pts_per_g).

You say Russel's FG% of 44 was atrocious but it was 5th best in the league (https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1957_per_game.html#per_game_stats::pts_per_g).

The game was different then; you can't just take stats from 70 years ago and compare them apples to apples to today.


yea this is an extreme lack of context. FG% of guys was low back then. You should do what I did when I was a kid and get something like:

https://www.amazon.com/Official-Nba-Basketball-Encyclopedia-Second/dp/0679432930

sure, all the info is on the net, but it's much more easily laid out there. Obv get an updated version tho. You can read it while you take a shit. Really, looking at bball history is important otherwise you just play yourself all the time on message boards. Humm.

-Smak

[bdonovan]

lol, why are you taking 57% for Russels average? Thats his rookie year?

In 67 that would be 38th highest.

Dont skew it.

Huh? The year I showed Russel had 42% FG. And finished 5th. If you have better stats, share them.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1957_per_game.html#per_game_stats::pts_per_g

Rather than nitpick on which year, the broader point is comparing stats across 70 years has to be done more carefully.

[86Celtics]

Typical James fanboy prioritizing stats over wins. Not only that, he juxtaposes stats from the 60s with the modern era.

If the current soft and moronic Celtic team had Russell amongst its ranks, it would be a dynasty.

[ArbitraryWater]

All Im saying is, Russel is the only one who gets such a boost for his defense.


He woud literally have to have twice the defensive impact Ben Wallace, Mutombo, etc. had for his ranking to make sense.


I dont doubt he was the Cetics constant. Their backbone. Their ockeroom eader. The wise voice. He also just stuck out due to his differing role and status.

It was easy to look towards him as emotiona eader.

He was their DPOY and their leader.

But he never took on any scoring or go-to burden or was much of a playmaker.

So like Barber said, you cant put this man in the top 5.

Its hard to put him in the top 10 but maybe theres a case. Im not sure I see it yet, though.

[ArbitraryWater]

Huh? The year I showed Russel had 42% FG. And finished 5th. If you have better stats, share them.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1957_per_game.html#per_game_stats::pts_per_g

Rather than nitpick on which year, the broader point is comparing stats across 70 years has to be done more carefully.

Are you dense or something? Why would you pick 1957, a year which does not represent Russels career or prime at all?

And I rejected your broader point, by pointing out that when picking a more suitable, era representing year from the 60s, which he played in for the actual majority of his career, his FG% is not even close to top 5 but very average for a center.

[ArbitraryWater]

Word on the street is...while Ol' Billy Boy wasn't the unanimous best on the court, he was one of the smartest player and a heck of a leader with the mental toughness and a dog in him you can only get from years of ingrained racism. This results in his team always having the mental and poise advantage. I'd say he sounds like this year's Jimmy Butler, but smarter and a lot tougher. For his era anyways.

I'd take that over sissies like Dwight and Embiid.


you completely switched up your posting

[Kblaze8855]

But he never took on any scoring or go-to burden or was much of a playmaker.

He was 4th and 5th in the nba in assists in different seasons. The reason the numbers look so different is because back then they didn’t give out assists for bullshit. If the person you passed to so much as dribbles or pumped feet before shooting, you didn’t get an assist. But he was one of the best play makers in the NBA it just doesn’t show to people who don’t look into his actual role or past the numbers. After he retired John Havlicek claimed he was surprised to find he missed him more on offense than defense. He played all 5 positions and called plays. He was the gotdamn head coach for 3 years. He also led the team in ppg in the playoffs for at least one title run and was second several others:


https://www.hostpic.org/images/2306031750230377.jpeg

^
Playoffs. The 30/40 is a game 7 to win the title. He was involved in every aspect of the game. You just wouldn’t realize it looking at a stat sheet. He didn’t set out to be a scorer or indeed to do anything individually except rebound. He had an epiphany one year in college after they destroyed everybody and he was obviously the best player and they didn’t even name him the best player in northern California, and instead gave it to some white guy. He said he realized the world wasn’t going to give him his due individually so right then he stopped caring about anything but winning because nobody could take that away. You can hate him, you can refuse to award him, but you can’t beat him.

and all these years later, after it brings him the most success in the history of team sports he’s back to people who don’t understand what he was doing refusing to credit him individually for elevating literally every team he ever played on to the greatest status it ever reached.

High school, college, international and nba you just couldn’t beat this mother****er and that’s all he cared about. But now all these years later people would consider him better if he stat padded his points in some of these 49 point blowouts. I just want to know why they would be more impressed by bigger numbers in games that would have the same result. He only lost twice in his entire life. What does he or his team get out of him scoring more garbage buckets?

[Axe]

Typical James fanboy prioritizing stats over wins. Not only that, he juxtaposes stats from the 60s with the modern era.

If the current soft and moronic Celtic team had Russell amongst its ranks, it would be a dynasty.
He made his teammates better bt. The most remarkable trait about him.

[8Ball]

There is nothing to defend.

Youre talking superficial shit that means nothing.

The people worrying about what you criticize him for not doing are the ones who watched him win everything for their entire life. Imagine asking a guy who just had 25/32 in game 7 to win his 8th ring in a row about this bullshit.

Maybe…if he wasn’t obviously playing the way required to win he’d have cared to do something differently. Where is the evidence he needed to? And lacking that…what exactly are you asking for?

What does his team gain by him being better at whatever you think he needed to do?

16-17 titles doesn’t cut it?

What happens when he plays more efficient modern offense? They get 2 rings a season instead of one?

Whats the benefit of him doing what you feel makes him a better player?

If nothing…why are we talking about it?

Bill Russell was not even the best center of his era.

Winning All-nba 1st team 3 times out of his 13 year career.


What are we talking about?


We are talking about relooking at his rankings historically. He can't be anywhere in the top 8.

[8Ball]

I feel like modern dribbling rules, the zero-step, hand-checking rules, and off-ball hand-checking/freedom of movement would open his offensive game right up. Bill was a great ball handler; I could see him doing some Giannis-like stuff from the perimeter.

This is a myth.... He ain't Giannis level of talent.

[8Ball]

Are those centers going to get you 11 rings in 13 seasons?
Kareem, Wilt, Hakeem and Shaq have 14 total in 70 seasons.

Flip it around.

Throw prime Bill Russell with Kobe on those Lakers teams and I doubt they win even 1.

Does Bill Russell on the rockets win in 94 and 95? No way.

[8Ball]

Typical James fanboy prioritizing stats over wins. Not only that, he juxtaposes stats from the 60s with the modern era.

If the current soft and moronic Celtic team had Russell amongst its ranks, it would be a dynasty.

I mentioned all-nba teams which is what people that were alive back then ranked him.

10/13 years of his career someone was viewed as better.

[theman93]

I mentioned all-nba teams which is what people that were alive back then ranked him.

10/13 years of his career someone was viewed as better.

And Russell had 5 MVP’s to Wilt’s 4.

Anyways, most of those All-NBA second teams were because Wilt was first team, who many people have ranked ahead of Russell anyways. If Russell is this overrated who do you have ranked over him? Because I do agree he gets overrated.

[Full Court]

I guess trying to inflate LeShrivel wasn't working out too well for OP, so now he's shifted to trying to downplay the all time greats who are ahead of him in the rankings. :lol

Nice try.

[tpols]

He was 4th and 5th in the nba in assists in different seasons. The reason the numbers look so different is because back then they didn’t give out assists for bullshit. If the person you passed to so much as dribbles or pumped feet before shooting, you didn’t get an assist. But he was one of the best play makers in the NBA it just doesn’t show to people who don’t look into his actual role or past the numbers. After he retired John Havlicek claimed he was surprised to find he missed him more on offense than defense. He played all 5 positions and called plays. He was the gotdamn head coach for 3 years. He also led the team in ppg in the playoffs for at least one title run and was second several others:


https://www.hostpic.org/images/2306031750230377.jpeg

^
Playoffs. The 30/40 is a game 7 to win the title. He was involved in every aspect of the game. You just wouldn’t realize it looking at a stat sheet. He didn’t set out to be a scorer or indeed to do anything individually except rebound. He had an epiphany one year in college after they destroyed everybody and he was obviously the best player and they didn’t even name him the best player in northern California, and instead gave it to some white guy. He said he realized the world wasn’t going to give him his due individually so right then he stopped caring about anything but winning because nobody could take that away. You can hate him, you can refuse to award him, but you can’t beat him.

and all these years later, after it brings him the most success in the history of team sports he’s back to people who don’t understand what he was doing refusing to credit him individually for elevating literally every team he ever played on to the greatest status it ever reached.

High school, college, international and nba you just couldn’t beat this mother****er and that’s all he cared about. But now all these years later people would consider him better if he stat padded his points in some of these 49 point blowouts. I just want to know why they would be more impressed by bigger numbers in games that would have the same result. He only lost twice in his entire life. What does he or his team get out of him scoring more garbage buckets?

Gangster post.

/endthread

[tpols]

Flip it around.

Throw prime Bill Russell with Kobe on those Lakers teams and I doubt they win even 1.

Does Bill Russell on the rockets win in 94 and 95? No way.

Lebron stans are the absolute worst. Won 2 with Pau but couldn't win 1 with Bill ****ing Russell?

You guys are like the antithesis to truth.

[8Ball]

Lebron stans are the absolute worst. Won 2 with Pau but couldn't win 1 with Bill ****ing Russell?

You guys are like the antithesis to truth.

I'm talking 2000/2001/2002. Zero championships won that year with Russell instead of Shaq.

[8Ball]

And Russell had 5 MVP’s to Wilt’s 4.

Anyways, most of those All-NBA second teams were because Wilt was first team, who many people have ranked ahead of Russell anyways. If Russell is this overrated who do you have ranked over him? Because I do agree he gets overrated.

1) People don't have Wilt over Russell. Majority of people believe its Russell > Wilt because of "RINGS". Yet Wilt was the better performer during regular season as per the all-nba awards.


2) MVPs were player voted at the time and had a lot to do with team record.

A league filled with racism and hate because Wilt ****ed white women and dropped 50 ppg on their asses.



3) In no particular order these players I have ranked over Bill Russell:


Duncan / LeBron / Jordan / Wilt / Magic / Larry Bird / Kobe / Kareem / Shaq

[8Ball]

I guess trying to inflate LeShrivel wasn't working out too well for OP, so now he's shifted to trying to downplay the all time greats who are ahead of him in the rankings. :lol

Nice try.

38 year old Jordan was vastly inferior to 38 year old LeBron and nothing can change that. I don't need to type anymore words to convince anybody of that.

Its the Jordan fans that have a lot of work to do right now to catch up.

[8Ball]

Are those centers going to get you 11 rings in 13 seasons?
Kareem, Wilt, Hakeem and Shaq have 14 total in 70 seasons.


Lebron stans are the absolute worst. Won 2 with Pau but couldn't win 1 with Bill ****ing Russell?

You guys are like the antithesis to truth.

This was the post in question.


If you swapped out Kareem, Wilt, Hakeem and Shaq and replaced them with Bill Russell they win a hell of a lot less rings than 14.


All of these centers are clearly better player than Bill Russell, that's why I have a problem ranking Bill in top 9.

[Bacchus]

His scoring numbers were pretty bad when in 1960 there were only 8 teams and 96 players

[Axe]

Russell's stats look very damned compared to other atgs (esp. those that are offensive-related) but his on-court impact looked impeccable. That's what the other coaches bt praised him for, that he actually made those around him better. Yes, being a true force on offense or scoring could have garnered him a lot of fancy awards before but he just proved to the league that he didn't need to post a lot of stats in order to win.

[tpols]

I'm talking 2000/2001/2002. Zero championships won that year with Russell instead of Shaq.

You're an absolute idiot bro.

2001 Kobe was arguably his best postseason ever. He had better advanced metrics than prime Shaq.

To argue that Bill Russell and peak Kobe Bryant couldn't beat the spurs or joke Iverson sixers is beyond absurd.

Scratch that.... anybody hating on Bill Russell is a bona-fide ******.

But that suits you.

[meat]

Stupidest ****in thread I've ever seen by far. or just trolling. either way you are either a moron or an asshole 8ball. i feel sorry for you.

[8Ball]

You're an absolute idiot bro.

2001 Kobe was arguably his best postseason ever. He had better advanced metrics than prime Shaq.

To argue that Bill Russell and peak Kobe Bryant couldn't beat the spurs or joke Iverson sixers is beyond absurd.

Scratch that.... anybody hating on Bill Russell is a bona-fide ******.

But that suits you.

Wrong.

There is zero way those Lakers win any championships with Russell instead of Shaq.

[8Ball]

Stupidest ****in thread I've ever seen by far. or just trolling. either way you are either a moron or an asshole 8ball. i feel sorry for you.

Like I said, everyone loses their collective shit when Bill Russell gets challenged as a GOAT. I compare him to all the other top 10 guys and individually he just doesn't match up to them talent wise.

[8Ball]

Russell's stats look very damned compared to other atgs (esp. those that are offensive-related) but his on-court impact looked impeccable. That's what the other coaches bt praised him for, that he actually made those around him better. Yes, being a true force on offense or scoring could have garnered him a lot of fancy awards before but he just proved to the league that he didn't need to post a lot of stats in order to win.

He played at a time when not many other teams took NBA basketball seriously and there were way too many white players as the competition.

[coastalmarker99]

Russell had 11 PO games scoring 6 points or under.

He averaged 43.4 MP/G in those games.

In those 11 games:
4.7 P/G
FG: 20-89, .224 FG%
FT: 12-40, .300 FT%
Horrible!

If Mr. Winner was indispensable, you'd think Celtics went 0-11.

Wrong! 9-2! he was basically carried by his teammates on Offense.


Furthermore

Celtics played the first 24 games of 1956-57 w/o Russell who was at the Olympics.

In 24 first games w/o Russ, Celtics were

16-8, .66.7 % (pace of 55 W in 82 g)

Best record in NBA (Syracuse 2nd at .528)

105.2 P/G

100.6 P/G opponents

Thus, in 1956-57, the Celtics were by far the best team in NBA without Russell.

Also how about this?

In the 57-58 Finals, in which Russell was injured, ...the series was tied 1-1 when Russell injured his ankle in the third quarter of game three.

They lost that game by three points, but they actually outscored the Hawks in the 4th period, and without Russell, by five points.

Now, surely without Russell, Boston would have no chance, right?

Well, without Russell in game four, Boston won handily, 109-98. And, while they did lose game five without him, it was by two points.

Russell finally returned for game six, but could only play 20 minutes.

Boston would go on to lose that game by one point, but they outscored the Hawks in the second half, without Russell.

[coastalmarker99]

If you use your brain.

The simple fact is that Russell's rival in Chamberlain was better at every facet of basketball -- except free-throw shooting -- than Russell was.


When Chamberlain was afforded the opportunity to be more selective offensively, and concentrate on defense and rebounding -- as Russell did for his entire career --

Chamberlain's team dominated Russell's, and Chamberlain was measurably better in that role than Russell ever was.

There is absolutely no support for the idea that Chamberlain on the Celtics while being teamed with 8 or 10 Hall of Famers plus an elite coach and GM in Red is not the best team ever assembled in the history of the game, or sufficiently close as to be immaterial.

One can make a very good argument that a 35-year-old Chamberlain and two Hall of Famers were the best team ever assembled, in '72 -- so an additional five or so Hall of Famers clearly puts the issue to bed.


Even Russell himself made the comment that Wilt could do a better job in his [Russell's] role than Russell could do in Wilt's.

"Wilt is playing better than I used to -- passing off, coming out to set up screens, picking up guys outside, and sacrificing himself for team play."-- Bill Russell 1972 Great Moments in Pro Basketball, (by Sam Goldaper) p.24

[8Ball]

Coastalmarker99 has arrived to spit facts on this topic.


For the longest time I was on the Bill Russell >>>>> Wilt bandwagon but over time my views have changed and flipped on this matter the more I investigate.

[8Ball]

If you use your brain.

The simple fact is that Russell's rival in Chamberlain was better at every facet of basketball -- except free-throw shooting -- than Russell was.


When Chamberlain was afforded the opportunity to be more selective offensively, and concentrate on defense and rebounding -- as Russell did for his entire career --

Chamberlain's team dominated Russell's, and Chamberlain was measurably better in that role than Russell ever was.

There is absolutely no support for the idea that Chamberlain on the Celtics while being teamed with 8 or 10 Hall of Famers plus an elite coach and GM in Red is not the best team ever assembled in the history of the game, or sufficiently close as to be immaterial.

One can make a very good argument that a 35-year-old Chamberlain and two Hall of Famers were the best team ever assembled, in '72 -- so an additional five or so Hall of Famers clearly puts the issue to bed.


Even Russell himself made the comment that Wilt could do a better job in his [Russell's] role than Russell could do in Wilt's.

"Wilt is playing better than I used to -- passing off, coming out to set up screens, picking up guys outside, and sacrificing himself for team play."-- Bill Russell 1972 Great Moments in Pro Basketball, (by Sam Goldaper) p.24

If I am general manager of NBA team and I had the 1st overall pick going back the last 60 years, and every year I could pick between 21 year old Wilt or 21 year old Bill Russell....

I am picking Wilt for nearly the entirety of the NBA's history.

Wilt has 7 all-nba 1st teams to Russell's 3 during their 1960s years together. The media members that watched the games at the time thought Wilt > Russell performance wise individually.

[coastalmarker99]

Thank God you have arrived Coastalmarker99 to spit facts on this topic.


For the longest time I was on the Bill Russell >>>>> Wilt bandwagon but over time my views have changed and flipped on this matter the more I investigate.


Russell is a legend but the truth is he had a ridiculous margin for error in the playoffs compared to Wilt.


The talent disparity between their two teams made it to where Wilt had to thoroughly outplay Russell to even have a 50/50 shot at winning.

It seemed as though when Wilt thoroughly outplayed Russell was when Wilt's team won but not all the time and usually it was a close margin.

When Russell played even with Wilt or outplayed Wilt, the Celtics would blow them out.

One such example out of many is in Game 4 of the '64 Finals.

Wilt beat Russell all the way across the board with 27 points, 38 rebounds, and shot .52.2 from the floor.

While Russell had 8 points, 19 rebounds, and shot .33.3 from the floor.

Yet, the Celtics still won.


Furthermore

Look at game 2 of the 1962 Ecf for example.


As Wilt dropped 42 and 37 compared to Russell’s 9 and 20 while holding him to 4 out of 14 from the floor.

And yet the Warriors only win by seven points and had to come back from down 10 points in the fourth to win that game at home.

There's no way in hell in any game throughout the decade that Wilt would've been able to get away with it if those kinds of numbers were flipped in Russell's favor

[coastalmarker99]

If I am general manager of NBA team and I had the 1st overall pick going back the last 60 years, and every year I could pick between 21 year old Wilt or 21 year old Bill Russell....

I am picking Wilt for nearly the entirety of the NBA's history.

Wilt has 7 all-nba 1st teams to Russell's 3 during their 1960s years together. The media members that watched the games at the time thought Wilt > Russell performance wise.


Wilt truthfully should have 6 MVP's to Russell's four as he was utterly robbed of the MVP in 1962 and 1964 due to other players disliking him.

A reporter in 1962 asked a player on the Knicks why no one has Wilt Chamberlain in their MVP voting.

His response: “Don’t like the guy, personally. I wouldn’t vote for him for anything.”


That’s how absurd the MVP voting used to be back in the day lol.

As the media voted Wilt's first team over Russell but he didn’t win the MVP due to players voting.


Furthermore, the only years that Russell was voted first team over Wilt in 63 and 65

Was because Wilt had a heart attack in the 1964 offseason which bothered him greatly in the 1964-1965 season


And secondly, his team was relocated to the bay area in 1963 and he lost his coach and his second-best player as a result of them being moved from Philadelphia.

[coastalmarker99]

The fact is that had any other Goat player besides Russell.

Had close to his rings regardless of the era they played in

the Goat debate would be dead and buried.

As imagine trying to argue with a straight face against Wilt or Kareem with 8 to 9 rings or Lebron with 7 rings.


As here are the major polls taken in 1999.


Associated Press Sports 100( top 100 athletes in all sports for century)

I'm only listing basketball players in the Top 50.

Jordan(2)
Wilt(10)
Russell(16)
Bird(24)
Oscar(26)
Kareem(31)
Magic(32)

Here's ESPN's Sports Century picks for the Top 100 athletes from all sports.

These are just the basketball players in the Top 50.

Jordan(1)
Wilt(13)
Magic(17)
Russell(18)
Kareem(26)
Bird(30)
Oscar(36)
DR J((43)


SI's 25 GREATEST ATHLETES of the 20th CENTURY(bbok)

jordan(2)
Wilt(4)
Russell(11)
Bird(15)
Magic(19)




Someone such as Wilt with 8 rings would be considered the undisputed Goat nowadays regardless of the fact that he played in the 1960s.


So using that excuse on why people don't rank Russell as the Goat is a cop-out.


As Wilt was ranked above him in virtually every single all-time list before his death in 1999.

[8Ball]

Russell is a legend but the truth is he had a ridiculous margin for error in the playoffs compared to Wilt.


The talent disparity between their two teams made it to where Wilt had to thoroughly outplay Russell to even have a 50/50 shot at winning.

It seemed as though when Wilt thoroughly outplayed Russell was when Wilt's team won but not all the time and usually it was a close margin.

When Russell played even with Wilt or outplayed Wilt, the Celtics would blow them out.

One such example out of many is in Game 4 of the '64 Finals.

Wilt beat Russell all the way across the board with 27 points, 38 rebounds, and shot .52.2 from the floor.

While Russell had 8 points, 19 rebounds, and shot .33.3 from the floor.

Yet, the Celtics still won.


Furthermore

Look at game 2 of the 1962 Ecf for example.


As Wilt dropped 42 and 37 compared to Russell’s 9 and 20 while holding him to 4 out of 14 from the floor.

And yet the Warriors only win by seven points and had to come back from down 10 points in the fourth to win that game at home.

There's no way in hell in any game throughout the decade that Wilt would've been able to get away with it if those kinds of numbers were flipped in Russell's favor

Correct.


The counter argument that seems more and more bullshit to me as the years go by was:

"Bill Russell was such a great teammate he enabled his teammates to dominate and win every time"


It's the same as the "Jordan made Pippen" narrative.

[coastalmarker99]

Correct.


The counter argument that seems more and more bullshit to me as the years go by was:

"Bill Russell was such a great teammate he enabled his teammates to dominate and win every time"


It's the same as the "Jordan made Pippen" narrative.


Russell had a massive ego and was a utter prick to his teammates.

Don't let the revisionist history about his career that Boston writers did 20 to 30 years later fool you.

One incident that particularly bothered Russell occurred in 1955 when Kenny Sears of Santa Clara was picked as Player of the Year in their conference. Russell thought he should have gotten the honor and blamed Woolpert's failure to praise him in the press.

https://vault.si.com/vault/1968/04/22/triumph-in-obscurity



It's quite clear who was the adult in the room, at San Francisco, and it sure was not Russell...

"O.K.," said Woolpert, "my judgments are as imperfect as anyone's, but as a coach I have to make them. In those days I wasn't about to help give Bill an inflated sense of his own importance. As a sophomore he was a lazy player; I kicked him out of the gym many, many times for loafing during drills. When he was a junior there were a few problems; when he was a senior, none that I recall. He was furious about the Sears thing, and he told me he wouldn't show up for the presentation banquet. I said, 'Bill, that'll demean you as a man; it's beneath you.' He refused to go until the day of the dinner, then he was called on to make a speech.




The only reason that San Francisco's program fell apart two years after Russell's departure was precisely because that coach lost his desire to to coach -- not to mention practically being struck by lightning -- which you can read about in the self-same article above.


Russell had a more cordial relationship with many of his teammates with the notable exception of Heinsohn, his old rival and fellow rookie. Heinsohn felt that Russell resented him because the former was named the 1957 NBA Rookie of the Year.

Many people thought that Russell was more important even though he had only played half the season.

Russell also ignored Heinsohn's request for an autograph on behalf of his cousin and openly said to Heinsohn that he deserved half of his $300 Rookie of the Year check.


Despite Heninsohn's famous game seven performance in the 1957 finals in which he scored 37 points and grabbed 23 rebounds plus had 2 assists.


This incredible performance by Heninsohn would have made him besides Magic in NBA history to be the only player to win both the Rookie of the Year and finals MVP in the same season.


As a result of Russell's actions and words the relationship between the two was tenuous at best.


Heninsohn even refused to coach Russell after Red retired in 1966 despite Red asking him to do so.


Instead, he would wait for Russell to retire before finally coaching Boston in the 1970's.


In which he would lead Boston to two titles and a franchise win record of 68 and 14.