Russell to LeBron: "Thank you for leaving me off your Mt. Rushmore."

Durant left Russell off of his list as well.

[QUOTE=Ca$H]Stupid "generation gay is cool" children defending Bron and talking crap about Russell. Newsflash: LeBron is nothing more than a male prostitute compared to Russell.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://i62.tinypic.com/2wcik43.jpg[/IMG]

How many people would honestly put Russell on a top 4 Mount Rushmore?

Besides CavaliersFTW's nostalgic, LeBron-hating ass I doubt there'd be a lot of people that would.

[QUOTE=tpols]Well that just all depends how you define 'mastered his craft'.
[/quote]
I have been very clear with this and the whole post is about mastering the tool he works with. Here is a guy with great, outstanding foot movement but never mastered the post move. I just have a real big problem with Pele if he couldn't handle a soccer ball better than anybody before him. If Lou Gehrig couldn't hit a baseball. Gretzky couldn't hit the puck straight.
[quote]
And your analogies are absolutely ridiculous btw[/QUOTE]
Your job doesn't require you know a skill? You're unemployed?

[QUOTE=Pointguard]Funny I just posted last week in the Giant Steps folder that you can count of Kareem saying the bitter thing toward Wilt, and nothing real about Magic. CavsFTW just posted a video of Kareem talking about big men, and the question came up about Magic vs. the guards today and, as expected, Kareem scurried away from talking about Magic (Note: that the question begged for Kareem to say the obvious about his Magic being a big guard who was able to feed the post, and see over people). Kareem went on to talk about the hand checking rule which was an aversion tactic. He will scurry away from most Magic questions. But the bitter pill is steep with Wilt.

Then you provide a link where he goes in on Wilt which is all he did in the later part of the '70s even made a sexual reference to having Wilt any way he wanted, which I'm sure caused problems with his Mosque. When coming out into the professional world Wilt took Kareem under his wing when he was coming up. To suggest that he was studying somebody else is comical. When the legend Wilt, whose height and game was definitely more similar to Kareem's height and game and was taking him under his wing letting him hold his car and letting him come see him play - not Russell. There early clips of Kareem doing finger rolls.

All of this to say if you think this is about Kareem really patterning his game after Russell instead of away from Wilt, read Kareem more often. Kareem would be trashed harder than ever that year that followed this article.[/QUOTE]
Wilt is on record saying he didn't teach Kareem a thing about basketball, because he didn't. Kareem took a few of Wilt's moves and hardly ever used them? Big whoop. Guess what Kareem's pet move was, a hook shot. Guess what Bill Russell's pet move was, a hook shot. Guess what move Wilt hardly ever used, a hook shot. Guess who's game revolved around brute strength? Wilt. Guess who's game's revolved around finesse? Russell... AND Kareem.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]This. Honestly...

You judge players by the era in which they played. For all we know...Russell would have developed completely differently in this era. He might have aged better...he might have been able to gain more muscle with advances in diet/training...etc.

And the opposite. A guy like Jordan might not develop the way he did...in fact, he wouldn't....he couldn't carry the ball and travel as frequently as he did...he wouldnt' get as many iso touches...etc. if he played at the time of Russell.[/quote]
This is exactly what I'm getting at. A player that works at his game will work til he gets it right. A player that develops his skill will likely do that in any era. A player who doesn't is the one you worry about. Jordan was a maniac with developing his game, and that is why he would excel in any era. Russell chose not to develop his game. He is the question mark.
[quote]
I could just imagine someone like Pointguard saying all the same shit about Magic in 30 years. How he wasn't a great defender or shooter....how he didn't score enough to be great. In fact, I'm sure people are already saying that shit that didn't watch Magic play.

All the evidence points to Russell being great...and a true master of his craft.[/QUOTE]
I never said he wasn't great. This is hilarious. I never said he couldn't score. I never said he didn't master his craft. You two are getting caught up in the metaphors and avoiding what I am saying.

Don't tell me what you think the evidence is, that means nothing. Who in your top ten isn't more skilled with the ball than Russell?

You won't answer it I know.

[QUOTE=Pointguard]This is exactly what I'm getting at. A player that works at his game will work til he gets it right. A player that develops his skill will likely do that in any era. A player who doesn't is the one you worry about. Jordan was a maniac with developing his game, and that is why he would excel in any era. Russell chose not to develop his game. He is the question mark.

I never said he wasn't great. This is hilarious. I never said he couldn't score. I never said he didn't master his craft. You two are getting caught up in the metaphors and avoiding what I am saying.

Don't tell me what you think the evidence is, that means nothing. [B]Who in your top ten isn't more skilled with the ball than Russell?[/B]

You won't answer it I know.[/QUOTE]
No disrespect intended, by why are you equating skill with ball-handling/scoring/shooting? If you feel you can be skilled in other facets:

1) In areas of the game other than those three, who is/was more skilled than Russell?
2) Conversely, of those other "top ten" guys, how many of them approach Russell's level of skill in those regards?

If you feel skill is only/mostly those three elements, why do you feel that way?

[QUOTE=CavaliersFTW]Wilt is on record saying he didn't teach Kareem a thing about basketball, because he didn't. Kareem took a few of Wilt's moves and hardly ever used them? Big whoop. Guess what Kareem's pet move was, a hook shot. Guess what Bill Russell's pet move was, a hook shot. Guess what move Wilt hardly ever used, a hook shot. [B]Guess who's game revolved around brute strength? [/B]Wilt. Guess who's game's revolved around finesse? Russell... AND Kareem.[/QUOTE]
Huh??? When Wilt first came up he had a great bank shot with immaculate touch. And he did dips. He moved fluidly and had great control of his body. He wasn't a Shaq by any measure and was definitely more Duncan. Later as he gained weight and wasn't scoring as much he went to more of a power game but still wasn't a Shaq game. The turn around bank shot was from the same spots of the floor Kareem's hooks were.

So Kareem would go see Wilt play and not study him? You don't think that's natural?

[QUOTE=Pointguard]This is exactly what I'm getting at. A player that works at his game will work til he gets it right. A player that develops his skill will likely do that in any era. A player who doesn't is the one you worry about. Jordan was a maniac with developing his game, and that is why he would excel in any era. Russell chose not to develop his game. He is the question mark.

I never said he wasn't great. This is hilarious. I never said he couldn't score. I never said he didn't master his craft. You two are getting caught up in the metaphors and avoiding what I am saying.

Don't tell me what you think the evidence is, that means nothing. Who in your top ten isn't more skilled with the ball than Russell?

You won't answer it I know.[/QUOTE]

This is absurd.

Who in your top 10 had the kind of career record winning titles at every level like Russell did?

Who had the combination of defense, rebounding, unselfishness, leadership...as Russell did?

You are defining "skill" very narrowly and ignoring how many different ways you can impact the game. Shit, just look at the true impact a guy like Ben Wallace had at his peak...totally arguable that he was a top 10 impact player in the league.

Now imagine a player far more skilled than Wallace, more athletic, just a better player at the things that made Wallace great. Then throw in all the intangibles...etc.

To argue that he needs to be better with the ball in his hands is just absurd.

Again, you assume he wouldn't have developed those things playing in a different era. You have no way of knowing that...so it's pointless to even debate what kind of player Russell would be like today. We have no idea...but we do know he did things virtually no other player has ever done in history...

This is why I hate breaking down players like this. Again...the Magic Johnson example is perfect for this. Some kid right now is probably saying that Lebron is clearly better than Magic because Lebron is a far better defender...which is true by the way. Lebron is a far better defender than Magic, but guess what...they are very similar players in terms of impact...and honestly...I still think Magic was slightly better at playing the game of basketball.

At the very least it's not crazy to say magic was better than Lebron....but why not? Seems like your very narrow way of thinking must lead us to Lebron being clearly better. But the problem with that is...we all know it isn't true!

If he said..

MJ, Magic, Bird, Russell:
What about Kareem?

MJ, Magic, Bird, KAJ:
What about Russell?

MJ, Magic, KAJ, Russell:
What about Bird?

Russell, Magic, Bird, KAJ:
MJ stans on suicide watch.

Can't really win hey

[QUOTE=fpliii]No disrespect intended, by why are you equating skill with ball-handling/scoring/shooting? If you feel you can be skilled in other facets:

1) In areas of the game other than those three, who is/was more skilled than Russell?
2) Conversely, of those other "top ten" guys, how many of them approach Russell's level of skill in those regards?

If you feel skill is only/mostly those three elements, why do you feel that way?[/QUOTE]

If you have the ball in your hand and you are skilled with it you can convert it to points.

If you have the ball in your hand and you are skilled with it you can make something out of nothing.

If you have the ball in your hand and you are skilled with it you can make it easier for other players.

If you have the ball in your hand and you are skilled with it you can help unbalance the defense to great extent.

If you have the ball in your hand and you are skilled with it you can be very creative with your attack.

If you have the ball in your hand and you are skilled with it you can have the most control of the game.

This part is a question.
I think with the rest you are saying is related to the Russell statement that if you add up all the minutes of the game when you are not shooting the ball its adds up to about 47 minutes and its about what you do without the ball???

I can't say I know for sure what Russell was doing outside of rebounding and blocking which he did great. I have him ranked very high based on that.

[QUOTE=Pointguard]If you have the ball in your hand and you are skilled with it you can convert it to points.

If you have the ball in your hand and you are skilled with it you can make something out of nothing.

If you have the ball in your hand and you are skilled with it you can make it easier for other players.

If you have the ball in your hand and you are skilled with it you can help unbalance the defense to great extent.

If you have the ball in your hand and you are skilled with it you can be very creative with your attack.

If you have the ball in your hand and you are skilled with it you can have the most control of the game.

This part is a question.
[B]I think with the rest you are saying is related to the Russell statement that if you add up all the minutes of the game when you are not shooting the ball its adds up to about 47 minutes and its about what you do without the ball???

I can't say I know for sure what Russell was doing outside of rebounding and blocking which he did great. I have him ranked very high based on that.[/B][/QUOTE]
Right, and my question is, isn't play without the ball skill-based as well? Doesn't play on the other end give you comparable advantages?

Rebounding and shot-blocking (plus intimidating) is big, but the Celtics teams also played a pressing defense, so he was involved with that in trapping and making sure the path to the rim wasn't available. He'd also come out to the perimeter to defend the Oscars of the world, and would help his teammates by shading onto their men. He'd throw the outlet on the break, and also pass some from the high post. There's also that line about him knowing/playing all 5 positions in each C's play on offense.

He obviously wasn't a great scorer/shooter, but from everything out there he seems extremely skilled without the ball. With the ball he was a smart passer as well.

[QUOTE=fpliii]Right, and my question is, isn't play without the ball skill-based as well? Doesn't play on the other end give you comparable advantages?

Rebounding and shot-blocking (plus intimidating) is big, but the Celtics teams also played a pressing defense, so he was involved with that in trapping and making sure the path to the rim wasn't available. He'd also come out to the perimeter to defend the Oscars of the world, and would help his teammates by shading onto their men. He'd throw the outlet on the break, and also pass some from the high post. There's also that line about him knowing/playing all 5 positions in each C's play on offense.

He obviously wasn't a great scorer/shooter, but from everything out there he seems extremely skilled without the ball. [B]With the ball he was a smart passer as well.[/B][/QUOTE]
Not to mention a much better ball handler than traditional centers like say, Wilt.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]This is absurd.

Who in your top 10 had the kind of career record winning titles at every level like Russell did?

Who had the combination of defense, rebounding, unselfishness, leadership...as Russell did?

You are defining "skill" very narrowly and ignoring how many different ways you can impact the game. Shit, just look at the true impact a guy like Ben Wallace had at his peak...totally arguable that he was a top 10 impact player in the league.

Now imagine a player far more skilled than Wallace, more athletic, just a better player at the things that made Wallace great. Then throw in all the intangibles...etc.

To argue that he needs to be better with the ball in his hands is just absurd.
[/quote]
To say somebody is GOAT, better than Jordan without the ball in his hand is absurd.

Name me an intangible we should imagine Jordan didn't have that Russell did?

[quote]
Again, you assume he wouldn't have developed those things playing in a different era. You have no way of knowing that...so it's pointless to even debate what kind of player Russell would be like today. We have no idea...but we do know he did things virtually no other player has ever done in history...
[/quote]
Tell me something he did that no other player didn't do. Don't tell me what his team did.
[quote]
This is why I hate breaking down players like this. Again...the Magic Johnson example is perfect for this. Some kid right now is probably saying that Lebron is clearly better than Magic because Lebron is a far better defender...which is true by the way. Lebron is a far better defender than Magic, but guess what...they are very similar players in terms of impact...and honestly...I still think Magic was slightly better at playing the game of basketball.

At the very least it's not crazy to say magic was better than Lebron....but why not? Seems like your very narrow way of thinking must lead us to Lebron being clearly better. But the problem with that is...we all know it isn't true![/QUOTE]
We can't assume to fill in the gaps. That's all I'm saying. In every other sport the greats are the guys who mastered the tool they work with. In life its the same way. Please show me guys who are the best in their sport without the tool they work with and I will say you are right. Its not hard. I will end the conversation. If you can't then ask yourself why are you so gullible for Russell.

[QUOTE=CavaliersFTW]Not to mention a much better ball handler than traditional centers like say, Wilt.[/QUOTE]
Good point. :cheers:

Not to nag you (I promise I won't mention it again, since you're busy and I don't want to distract you, your videos are obviously all tremendous) but I think your Russell mix will turn the most heads and change the most minds of any of your videos. On almost every single sports forum out there, Russell has been the subject of a constant barrage of disparagement since LeBron's Mount Rushmore comment came out. It's frustrating as hell.