Bill Russell: 13 titles in 15 seasons (1955 - 1969)

2 straight NCAA titles in 1955 and 1956 (including Gold Medal in 1956) and 11 NBA titles in 13 seasons. He played 16 total seasons in NCAA and NBA and won 13 titles (81%). Possibly the greatest winner in the history of team sport, EVER. :bowdown:

[QUOTE=ClipperRevival]2 straight NCAA titles in 1955 and 1956 (including Gold Medal in 1956) and 11 NBA titles in 13 seasons. He played 16 total seasons in NCAA and NBA and won 13 titles (81%). [B]Possibly the greatest winner in the history of team sport, EVER[/B]. :bowdown:[/QUOTE]

Of a major team sport...yes. I believe DiMaggio's ten titles would put him up there, though.

Of course, having anywhere between four to eight HOF teammates, as well as a HOF coach (and GM), helped quite a bit, as well.

Recognize.

MJ and Russell didn't win all those rings by accident. They had "it" and wanted it more than you. You can't fake the killer instinct. You either have it or you don't.

[QUOTE=ClipperRevival]Recognize.

MJ and Russell didn't win all those rings by accident. They had "it" and wanted it more than you. You can't fake the killer instinct. You either have it or you don't.[/QUOTE]

You don't think West had it?

[QUOTE=Marchesk]You don't think West had it?[/QUOTE]

He did. But he played with betas in Baylor and Wilt. So 1 ring was the result. If he would've had better superstar teammates who had killer instincts, he would've won more. I do intend on doing in-depth research on Baylor eventually and why he didn't win. It's not all coincidence. Heck, when he retired, the Lakers went on that historic 33 game winning streak. There is a right way and wrong way to play the game. Great individual stats isn't the be all, end all.

Not the best player in the league or at his position, but a winner. He won wherever he went as a player.

[QUOTE=ClipperRevival]He did. [B]But he played with betas in Baylor and Wilt[/B]. So 1 ring was the result. If he would've had better superstar teammates who had killer instincts, he would've won more. I do intend on doing in-depth research on Baylor eventually and why he didn't win. It's not all coincidence. Heck, when he retired, the Lakers went on that historic 33 game winning streak. There is a right way and wrong way to play the game. Great individual stats isn't the be all, end all.[/QUOTE]

'60: Chamberlain joins a LAST PLACE team. He immediately leads them to a 49-26 record, and after an overwhelming first round playoff series, culiminated with a 53-22 clinching game...he led that Warrior team to a game six, two point loss against a heavily-favored 59-16 Celtic team...in a series in which Chamberlain shelled Russell with an battering seldom seen between two GOATs. In that series, Chamberlain averaged 31 ppg and 27 rpg, and shot .500 from the floor, in a post-season NBA that shot .403 overall. Included was a must win game of 50-35, on 22-42 shooting.

'62. Wilt takes that nearly SAME roster, now only older, and worse, to a 49-31 record. In the first round he again puts up historic numbers, with a must win clinching performance of 56-35. He then takes that crumbling roster to a game seven, one point loss, against a HOF laden 60-22 Celtics team that was favored in EVERY game of that series. Overall, an incredible 34-27 series against a swarming Celtics team that did everything they could to stop him.

'64. Chamberlain now takes a roster that had gone 31-49 the year before, with the only addition being rookie Nate Thurmond, who plays part-time, and out of position...to a 48-32 record. In the WCF's, Chamberlain puts up a staggering 39-23 series, on .559 shooting, in a brilliant seven game campaign. In the clincher, he hangs a 39-26 10 block game. Unfortunately, he faces a Russell who has SEVEN OTHER HOFers on his roster in the Finals. And while Boston wins that series, 4-1, the last two games are decided in the waning seconds. In the clinching game five loss, Chamberlain outscores Russell, 30-14, and outrebounds him, 27-26. Oh, and how about Wilt's HOF "help" in that series? Thurmond shoots .326 from the field, and Guy Rodgers shoots a normal, for him, .258. For the series, Chamberlain outscored Russell, per game, 29.2 ppg to 11.2 ppg; outrebounded Russell, per game, 27.8 rpg to 25.2 rpg; and outshot Russell from the floor, .517 to .386 (in a post-season NBA that shot .420 overall.)

'65: Wilt is traded at mid-season, for three players, and a boatload of cash....to a Sixers team that had gone 34-46 the year before. Traded...not just joined. Big difference. In their half season to acclimated, Wilt leads the Sixers to an overall 40-40 mark. He then destroys Oscar's stacked 48-32 Royals in the first round, including a monster 38-26 clincher. Then, against all odds, he takes that same bottom-feeding roster, to a game seven, one point loss against the six-time defending, and 62-18 Celtics, who are at their peak in the dynasty run. In the clinching game seven loss, Chamberlain scores Philly's last eight straight points, to pull the Sixers to within one point. The "clutch" Russell then hits a guidewire on the in-bolunds pass, giving the ball back to Philly, and an opportunity to pull off the greatest upset in NBA playoff history. Unfortunately for Wilt... "Havlicek steals the ball!" In that seventh game, Chamberlain outscored Russell, 30-15; outrebounded Russell, 32-29; and outshot him from the floor, 12-15 to 7-16. For the series, all Wilt did was outscore Russell, per game, 30.1 ppg to 15.6 ppg; outrebound Russell, per game, 31.4 rpg to 25.2 rpg; outshoot Russell from the floor, .555 to .447 (in a post-season NBA that shot .429 overall); and even outshot Russell from the line, .583 to .472. Oh, and for good measure, he outblocked Russell, 35-22 in their known block totals. Arguably the most one-sided beatdown ever adminsistered by one GOAT on another. The only other one will be coming up shortly.

'66. Russell's Celtics romp over Wilt's Sixers, 4-1. BUT, Chamberlain again murders Russell. He outscores him, per game, 28.0 ppg to 14.0 ppg; outrebounds him per game, 30.2 rpg to 26.2 rpg; and outshoots Russell from the floor, .509 to .424. Oh, and with his teammates doing absolutely nothing in the series (they would collectively shoot a horrific .352 in that series), Wilt summons a massive clinching performance of 46 points, on 19-34 shooting, with 34 rebounds. Remember this game.

'67. While Chamberlain's demolition of Russell in their '65 EDF's was staggering, his overwhelming domination of Russell in the '67 EDF's might have been even more impressive. For the first time in his career Chamberlain has a roster the equal of Russell's, and to no one's amazement, the results were predictable. A MASSIVE rout of the eight-time defending, and 60-21 Celtics. In fact, the Sixers were a mere four points away from a sweep in game four.

And remember what I mentioned at the end of their '66 EDF's? You know, the clinching game in which Wilt blasted Russell with a 46-34 game. Well, now the shoe was on the other foot. It was now Russell who was facing elimination going into game five. Did Russell rise up and dominate Chamberlain in that must win game? Hell no, he led his team like a lamb being led to slaughter. He meekly put up a FOUR point game, on 2-5 shooting. He did grab 21 rebounds, most all of them meaningless, and basically was obliterated by an unstoppable Chamberlain. Wilt hung 29 points, on 10-16 shooting, but 22 of the came in the first half when the game was still close (showing that he easily could have hung yet another 40-50 point game on Russell had it been necessary.) He also shelled Russell with 36 rebounds, and handed out 13 assists. He and his Sixers erased a late 17 point first quarter deficit, and by mid-way thru the 4th period, they had an eye-popping 27 point lead...or an unfathomable 44 point turnaround in a little over a half...en route to a 140-116 blowout of the "Dynasty."

For the series, Chamberlain outscored Russell, per game, 21.6 ppg to 11.4 ppg; outrebounded him by a staggering 32.0 rpg to 23.4 rpg margin; outassisted him by a 10.0 apg to 6.0 apg margin...yes, a TRIPLE DOUBLE SERIES...and outshot Russell (who had shot .454 during the regular season), by a .556 to .358 margin. And when I said that they had equal rosters...think about this... the Sixers outscored Boston in that series, per game, by a 121.2 ppg to 111.2 margin...or about what Chamberlain outscored Russell by.

'68. Chamberlain takes an injury-riddled Sixers team to a first round series win over an up-and-coming Knicks team, 4-2. In the series, Chamberlain leads both teams in scoring, rebounding, assists, and FG% (25.5 ppg, 24.1 rpg, 7.0 apg, and on a .584 FG%.) BTW, Walt Bellamy had shot .541 against the NBA during the regular season, but against Wilt in the playoffs? .421.

Wilt, himself, is nursing an assortment of injuries, and would be noticeably limping in the EDF's. And even without HOFer Billy Cunningham, who broke his wrist in the Knick series, he leads the Sixers to a 3-1 series lead. And in what could have been the clinching game five, he pounded Russell with a 28-30 game, on 11-21 shooting (while holding Russell to an 8-28 game on 4-10 shooting)...but he would lose two more starters to injuries, Luke Jackson, and Wali Jones. Both would play the rest of the series, but both were essentially worthless. Chamberlain plays poorly in game six, a blowout loss, but it is now clear that he is just a shell. Still, he outplays Russell in game seven, outscoring him 14-12, and outrebounding him, 34-26...but with his teammates shooting a collective 34-96 from the floor, they lose game seven by four points. As Russell would claim after the series..."A lessor man would not have played." Of course, inferring that virtually NO ONE ELSE would have been playing under the same circumstances. For the series, Chamberlain averaged a 22-25-7, and easily outplayed Russell.

'69. The worst post-season series of Wilt's career. Of course, most all of it because of an incompetent coach, who hated Wilt so much, that he left him on the bench in the last five minutes of a game seven...in a two point loss. Of course, Russell was no better than Wilt in that series, either, and in fact, was getting his ass handed to him in game seven, when Wilt went down with a knee injury. In that game seven, Chamberlain outscored Russell, 18-6; outrebounded Russell, 27-21; and outshot Russell from the floor, 7-8 to 2-7...all in five minutes less. Oh, and subtract Wilt and Russell's shooting from that game seven, and Russell's teammates collectively outshot Wilt's by a massive .477 to .360 margin...in a two point win.


So there you have it. Russell the "alpha", and Wilt the "beta."

CONTEXT my friend...CONTEXT.

Of course John Wooden said it best...had Russell and Wilt swapped rosters, and coaches, and it would have been WILT holding all those rings.

Thanks for playing though...

[QUOTE=ClipperRevival]He did. But he played with betas in Baylor and Wilt. [B]So 1 ring was the result. If he would've had better superstar teammates who had killer instincts, he would've won more[/B]. I do intend on doing in-depth research on Baylor eventually and why he didn't win. It's not all coincidence. Heck, when he retired, the Lakers went on that historic 33 game winning streak. There is a right way and wrong way to play the game. Great individual stats isn't the be all, end all.[/QUOTE]

West with a prime Baylor...never won a championship. Chamberlain was the only guy capable of leading a team to a title against a healthy Russell.

Oh, and then in the '72 post-season, while West was puking all over the floor, Chamberlain outplayed a peak KAJ in the WCF's, and then absolutely crushed the Knicks in the Finals....which included a clinching game five performance (with one badly sprained wrist, and the other FRACTURED) of 24 points, on 10-14 shooting, with 29 rebounds (the entire Knick team had 39), and 8 blocked shots. Chamberlain hung a 19-23 .600 series...en route to the FMVP. How about West? He shot a paltry .325 from the field, and was massacred by Walt Frazier.

[QUOTE=senelcoolidge]Not the best player in the league or at his position, but a winner. He won wherever he went as a player.[/QUOTE]

In their ten years in the league together, Chamberlain held a 7-2 margin over Russell in First Team All-NBA selections. Furthermore, Chamberlain was robbed of MVPs in both '62 and '64, and certainly was a much more dominant player in '69 than the three centers who finished ahead of him in the MVP balloting (Unseld, Reed, and Russell...all of whom he waxed in his H2H's with them.)

[QUOTE]2 straight NCAA titles in 1955 and 1956 (including Gold Medal in 1956) and 11 NBA titles in 13 seasons. He played 16 total seasons in NCAA and NBA and won 13 titles (81%). Possibly the greatest winner in the history of team sport, EVER.[/QUOTE]


He won back to back state titles in high school too. And his back to back rings in college were part of a run of 55 wins in a row. And the olympic team he led to the gold...won by an average margin of victory of 53ppg. The most ever(the first dream team is second...with 44ppg).

He only lost an elimination game of any kind from age 16 to retirement....2 times. And his ankle was nearly broken for one of them(he still played 20 minutes).

Healthy? He lost one win or go home game after the 10th grade.

Elgin Baylor was a great player but the funny thing about hus career, he had a short prime with Jerry West on the Lakers. After his knee injury in 65 he was no longer the same unstoppable scoring machine he was. Just a good volume scorer and rebounder in a largely white-dominant league. :oldlol:

As Baylor's body slowly lost its athleticism he became a liability on defense. By the 72 season he couldn't really run with the team, just station to station. By letting him realize his mortality the Lakers played better with more athletic guys to run their fast break.
H
Hence the 33 game win streak.

[QUOTE=ClipperRevival]Recognize.

MJ and Russell didn't win all those rings by accident. They had "it" and wanted it more than you. You can't fake the killer instinct. You either have it or you don't.[/QUOTE]
Russell had won 10 titles (was about to win his 11th and his last), but was still throwing up before an important game.

Wilt on the other hand, was too busy with his assist count, walking over to the scorerstable multiple times per game to check if they had counted an, of what he thought, assist. He also barked at teammates when they would miss when he made a pass, as he passed up open shots for assists.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]..[/QUOTE]

[B]1960:[/B]
In the 1960 playoff series between Russell and Chamberlain, the normally non-offensive Russell had games of 19, 26, 17, and 25 points. Russell never averaged 19 ppg in a regular season of his career. Wilt's lack of defensive impact as he goes for individual accomplishments is evident.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]..[/QUOTE]

[B]1970:[/B]
In 1970, enter Willis Reed. The 1970 NBA Finals vs the Knicks was basically a lesson for Wilt at Willis Reed University. Through his first 4 healthy games, Willis averaged 32 ppg on Wilt's defense before his Game 5 injury. [B]In Games 1-4 when Willis was healthy, Wilt averaged only 19 ppg.[/B] As usual, Wilt's regular season scoring doesn't show up when the stakes were highest, but his often lacking defense carries over.

With Willis Reed injured and missing Game 6, Wilt finally takes advantage and has 45 points and 27 rebounds to tie the series 3-3. Of course, the 45 points only show up when the Knicks' best player and interior defender is injured and not playing

What happens in Game 7? Willis comes back in Game 7 of the 1969 Finals. Willis comes back in Game 7, fights through his injury, and hits the first 2 buckets to inspire the Knicks on to a blowout win in Game 7 to the title as Wilt loses in yet another Game 7 of his career, and Willis Reed gets the Finals MVP.

With Willis Reed's 27 minutes in Game 5, he only scored 4 points but his defensive presence [B]shut down Wilt to 4 points on 2/7 (29%) FG and 4 turnovers [/B]when Willis Reed guarded him in Game 7. Wilt finished 21 points, but most of his points came without Reed on him, or when the game was already over - just like we saw in 1962 EDF Games 1-3-5. [B]Willis on one leg shut down Wilt[/B], right after Wilt had a 45-27 outburst with no Willis Reed in Game 6.

The Knicks won by 14. Guess what Wilt's stats were at the free throw line in Game 7, with the NBA Finals at stake? [B]21 points with 1-11 (9%) FT shooting.[/B] If Wilt made his free throws, the Lakers would have actually been in the game. But just like he did countless times against the Celtics, he cost his team with his habitual choking at the line.

What is the excuse now?

Well, that was fun. There you have it, Wilt ''the alpha'' Chamberlain.