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

[QUOTE=Akrazotile]The way I see it, I'm not gonna say Russell couldn't be the same player he was back then in today's game. I mean if guys like Ben Wallace or Dennis Rodman can do it, why not Russell.

But there's no question most decent 'modern bigs' like Hibbert or Varajao could have the impact Russell had back then. The competition simply was not that great. There were 9 teams, and most of them had players who wouldn't even get a D-1 scholarship today.[/QUOTE]
The thing that annoys me about Russell is that his delusion knows no bounds. Like, have some perspective. Yeah, you won 11 titles in an 8 team D-League. Congrats. But this guy once said in the 90s when the league had 27 teams something to the effect of "if I played in this era, I'd still win 11 championships or maybe more" and he was being dead serious.

[QUOTE=Akrazotile]The way I see it, I'm not gonna say Russell couldn't be the same player he was back then in today's game. I mean if guys like Ben Wallace or Dennis Rodman can do it, why not Russell.

[B]But there's no question most decent 'modern bigs' like Hibbert or Varajao could have the impact Russell had back then. The competition simply was not that great. There were 9 teams, and most of them had players who wouldn't even get a D-1 scholarship today.[/[/B]QUOTE]

In 1965 Bill Russell won his 5th MVP, was all NBA first team, and led the league in rebounding. In the half court the Celtics' offense was run through him. The Celtics' starting pg avg. 5.6apg. Russell avg. 5.3apg. Russell led the team in assists in the playoffs and avg. 18/25/6 on an NBA record 70.5fg% in the Finals. (Neither Rodman nor Ben Wallace ever had the team's offense run through them.) The following players were starting centers and his "not so great competiton" as you put it that season.

Wilt Chamberlain
Willis Reed
Walt Bellamy
Nate Thurmond (Became starter after Wilt was traded)

So we have a 9 team league, and over half of them (Russell's Celtics included) have a Hall of Fame starting center. With 9 teams, that means you play a minimum of 7 games (depending on the division) against each team. More than half of your games are against a Hall of Fame center. How many games against Hall of Fame centers does Howard, Hibbert or Noah play today? Please list me one center in today's game that you know is better than either one of those four centers that Russell faced in more than half of his games in 1965.

[QUOTE=NumberSix]The thing that annoys me about Russell is that his delusion knows no bounds. Like, have some perspective. Yeah, you won 11 titles in an 8 team D-League. Congrats. But this guy once said in the 90s when the league had 27 teams something to the effect of "if I played in this era, I'd still win 11 championships or maybe more" and he was being dead serious.[/QUOTE]

The same way MJ or people from his era claim that he would easily avg. 40ppg in the league today and are serious?

[QUOTE=jlip]The same way MJ or people from his era claim that he would easily avg. 40ppg in the league today and are serious?[/QUOTE]
No, because Jordan already did 37. He could feasibly do 40 with the relaxed defences of today if he was chucking it away on a fast paced team.

Can't believe Lebron put Oscar on the Mount Rushmore thing, that guy is a bonafide empty stat padder. I guess Lebron aspires to be that. :confusedshrug:

The Mount Rushmore should be:
The Greatest Player
The Greatest Rivalry in the greatest era (80s) that revitalized the NBA to new heights
The Greatest Winner

[QUOTE=Pointguard]Its obvious that those three players [B]did not pattern their game[/B] after Russell because Kareem and Hayes had whole different priorities on the court. They came in taking 24 and 25 shots per game. They played a skilled game. They didn't look to facilitate on offense. They didn't outlet like Russell. Its been years since I seen the Haye's clip but I recall he came in a gunner and later on became defensive minded, but it didn't stick either. It would serve Reed no advantage at all to think like playing like Russell. That's like Barkley emulating Gervin.


I only said he wasn't skilled with the pill in his hand and its been written he didn't like to practice. Everything else you are saying. I have him in my top five all time. So, that's no diss. And I am one of a few, that argues about the strength of defense when comparing players here. He has a flaw and its a flaw that few people would let go. In the Mount Rushmore of all sports in the OTC section, all of the people seriously mentioned were SUPER duper skilled players and were magical with the tool they worked with. Not average or below average. Its not a crazy request on my part. And people have a right to want skilled craft as the pillar of their criteria of greatness.[/QUOTE]
Sorry but you are just straight up wrong here.

[QUOTE=FrobeShaw]No, because Jordan already did 37. He could feasibly do 40 with the relaxed defences of today if he was chucking it away on a fast paced team.[/QUOTE]

Do you know how difficult it is to increase your career high ppg by three points over an entire 82 game season? We're not talking about a 5-7 game stretch. How do we know that MJ didn't max out in 1987 in terms of the energy required to take that many shots a game over an entire season?

Russell so salty :oldlol:

[QUOTE=DaSeba5]You simply can't have a Mt Rushmore of basketball players.[/QUOTE]

Well stated.

[QUOTE=tpols]How does one pattern their game off Bill Russell? Hes a defensive and rebounding beast, master of intangibles and team play. He wasnt flash..Pointguard, by your definition of greatness, Allen Iverson is a top 5 GOAT candidate :oldlol:
[/quote]
I have no idea of what you are saying. Where did you see my definition??? Asking to have skill isn't a giant request at all. If you lack skills at work you won't have a job. If you have few skills with your wife she will leave you. If you have no parenting skills your kids will resent you. Being a team player will help you but it isn't a substitute.

[quote]
Kids want to play like whats in style.. what looks cool. Crossovers, dunks, fadeaways.. thats why Dr. J, Jordan, Kobe etc. are the ones you see kids copying and trying to be like.

Who patterns their game off of a guy like Russell or Rodman? Thats just hard work lol.. no oohing and ahhing over it but its what wins. Such a arbitrary and unimportant way of judging something. Has absolutely nothing to do with the impact they had.[/QUOTE]
Actually it is disrespectful to call Russell a hustle player. I have said he had great impact. While I have seen seen Reggie Evans pump up the Junk Yard Dog and Faried talk of other hustle players glowingly, they respect the work. But at the top, there is always somebody in every thing we do, that has mastered his craft.

[QUOTE=Pointguard]I have no idea of what you are saying. Where did you see my definition??? Asking to have skill isn't a giant request at all. If you lack skills at work you won't have a job. If you have few skills with your wife she will leave you. If you have no parenting skills your kids will resent you. Being a team player will help you but it isn't a substitute.


Actually it is disrespectful to call Russell a hustle player. I have said he had great impact. While I have seen seen Reggie Evans pump up the Junk Yard Dog and Faried talk of other hustle players glowingly, they respect the work. But at the top, there is always somebody in every thing we do, that has mastered his craft.[/QUOTE]

Well that just all depends how you define 'mastered his craft'.

I could, for example, say Jordan didnt master his craft because he never made his teammates better at an elite level like that of Russell or Magic. He couldnt facilitate a great team/offense as well as Russell/Magic could and that is every bit a 'skill' in the game of basketball. Everyone has a hole you could poke in their game..



And your analogies are absolutely ridiculous btw

:applause: :applause: :applause: the only thing he forgot to mention was "I won not 4 but 5 MVPs and still have a full head of hair"

[QUOTE=tpols]Well that just all depends how you define 'mastered his craft'.

I could, for example, say Jordan didnt master his craft because he never made his teammates better at an elite level like that of Russell or Magic. He couldnt facilitate a great team/offense as well as Russell/Magic could and that is every bit a 'skill' in the game of basketball. Everyone has a hole you could poke in their game..



And your analogies are absolutely ridiculous btw[/QUOTE]


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.

What we do know is that no matter when and where Russell played...he won...and he won more than anyone ever all things considered. And he was known by his peers as being as good as Wilt...which is truly shocking considering the beast Wilt was and the "skill" and athleticism with which he played.

Yes, those he didn't see him play should proceed with caution when ranking him, but there is nothing wrong with using the evidence at hand to place Russell near the top all time.

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.

unrelated, but did you guys see the KD interview during the rising stars game?, he said his mount rushmore was Vince Carter, Tmac and two other players... think another was KG, Ive been trying to look for the clip or a story on it, but have had no luck.

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=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]

:biggums:

you say that while typing on a computer to whine about nonsense on the internet

a luxury that allows you to make trillions of threads on lebron

but yeah, cool generation as you've accomplished a lot in this life :applause:

[QUOTE=jlip]“Coach Don Nelson of the Bucks equates Abdul-Jabbar's transformation with that of Wilt Chamberlain in his final years of pro basketball. Chamberlain, once a great scorer, concentrated on defense and passing as he led the Lakers to an NBA title...

Kareem responded by saying: "Wilt had all the stats and personal glory. But Bill Russell won the championships and was held in higher esteem. [B][U]Russell was the first player I ever watched closely, and I'm playing similarly to Russell now.[/U][/B]"

[URL="http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=EmMaAAAAIBAJ&sjid=MyoEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6402,3265566&dq=wilt+had+all+the+stats+and+personal+glory+but+bill+russell+won+the+championships+and+was+held+in+higher+esteem&hl=en"]--Kareem in 1978[/URL][/QUOTE]

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.

Calls basketball a team sport, proceeds to list his personal accomplishments:facepalm

[IMG]https://www.google.ca/search?q=lebron+james+playing+violin+gif&espv=210&es_sm=93&tbm=isch&imgil=iITcBCC7PQNIOM%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcRpY-kyAryayA0VM9HSHGlN94ndJRiPjLK6eVQTPmClezO2EAS6%253B400%253B300%253BIg2p-llMFXTGzM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fgifrific.com%25252Flebron-james-playing-the-worlds-smallest-violin%25252F&source=iu&usg=__LdqVeA7QiktAQTo8RhepTUXCm7A%3D&sa=X&ei=qncCU5XlE8uNqAGhioD4Aw&ved=0CCoQ9QEwAA&biw=1241&bih=599#facrc=_&imgrc=iITcBCC7PQNIOM%253A%3BIg2p-llMFXTGzM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fgifrific.com%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2012%252F04%252FLeBron-James-Smallest-Violin-Gif.gif%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fgifrific.com%252Flebron-james-playing-the-worlds-smallest-violin%252F%3B400%3B300[/IMG]

[QUOTE=heavensdevil]unrelated, but did you guys see the KD interview during the rising stars game?, he said his mount rushmore was Vince Carter, Tmac and two other players... think another was KG, Ive been trying to look for the clip or a story on it, but have had no luck.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1960965-kevin-durant-names-his-all-time-nba-mount-rushmore[/url]

Bird, Magic, Jordan, Kareem.

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.

[QUOTE=chosen_one6]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]
What? How many people don't have Russell in their top 4 all time?

Russell
Is overrated by titles he was not a dominant force as a player just a very good team player and piece of puzzle.

I started a thread several hours ago;
[QUOTE=Odinn]It's gone too far. And I was thinking about not starting a thread about it. But the following thing must be clear;

[B]LeBron listed the most [U]influential[/U] players to him. Picking Mount Rushmore is more like picking the most influential ones rather than the greatest ones.[/B]

If Shaq declares his Mt. Rushmore I can see him naming Hakeem which Shaq respects the most among all-time great bigs.[/QUOTE]
[B]fpliii[/B] and [B]CavaliersFTW[/B], I respect you guys. But I have to say it, you're just too sensitive in this particular thread.

Tho, I saw some posts of Pointguard via quotes and it's saddening that he just keeps BSing around...

[QUOTE=Kingwillball]Russell
Is overrated by titles he was not a dominant force as a player just a very good team player and piece of puzzle.[/QUOTE]
:facepalm He's arguably the best defensive player of all time. Piece of a puzzle?

[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. With the ball he was a smart passer as well.[/QUOTE]
Good one fplii, you made the great point. Have to leave work now. I just moved Russell into my four spot and he might be still climbing.