If BILL RUSSELL stays with the HAWKS instead of going to BOSTON.

If the Hawks (St Louis at that time) decided to keep Bill Russell, how different would NBA History look?

Just for clarity, the Hawks were the only team to beat the Russell-era Celtics in the Finals in 1958 (Celtics didn't make the Finals in 1967.) Hawks also made the Finals in 57, 60 and 61. If they didn't make the Finals, they'd usually lose the previous series to the Lakers out West.

Let's just say the Hawks keep things intact, with Russell around and now subtracting Ed Macauley and Cliff Hagan (both Hall of Famers.)

I think people are forgetting BOB PETTIT was the best player in the league post-Mikan and pre-Russell.

So you have a front court on Russell and Pettit.
Lenny Wilkens drafted in 1960
Zelmo Beaty & Bill Bridges drafted in 1962.
Jeff Mullins & Paul Silas drafted in 1964.
Lou Hudson in 1966.


They obtained the likes of All-Stars and Hall of Famers through the years including Joe Caldwell, Clyde Lovellette, Don Ohl and Richie Guerin.

They also selected 2 guys in the draft (Si Green & Cleo Hill.) Both were supposed to be super star players. With Russell's leadership, maybe that happenes.

On the other hand, what happens to Boston? Before Russel came along, while they were a playoff team being led by Bob Cousy, Bill Sharman & Ed Macauley they never got over the hump. They only made the conference Finals twice between 1950-1956.
Do the Jones Brothers, Heinsohn and Havlicek develop into the players we know today without Rusell?

The Celtics probably don't win 11 rings if Bill Russell plays for the Hawks.

He'd still manage to win more rings than jordan.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle;14969407]If the Hawks (St Louis at that time) decided to keep Bill Russell, how different would NBA History look?

Just for clarity, the Hawks were the only team to beat the Russell-era Celtics in the Finals in 1958 (Celtics didn't make the Finals in 1967.) Hawks also made the Finals in 57, 60 and 61. If they didn't make the Finals, they'd usually lose the previous series to the Lakers out West.

Let's just say the Hawks keep things intact, with Russell around and now subtracting Ed Macauley and Cliff Hagan (both Hall of Famers.)

I think people are forgetting BOB PETTIT was the best player in the league post-Mikan and pre-Russell.

So you have a front court on Russell and Pettit.
Lenny Wilkens drafted in 1960
Zelmo Beaty & Bill Bridges drafted in 1962.
Jeff Mullins & Paul Silas drafted in 1964.
Lou Hudson in 1966.


They obtained the likes of All-Stars and Hall of Famers through the years including Joe Caldwell, Clyde Lovellette, Don Ohl and Richie Guerin.

They also selected 2 guys in the draft (Si Green & Cleo Hill.) Both were supposed to be super star players. With Russell's leadership, maybe that happenes.

On the other hand, what happens to Boston? Before Russel came along, while they were a playoff team being led by Bob Cousy, Bill Sharman & Ed Macauley they never got over the hump. They only made the conference Finals twice between 1950-1956.
Do the Jones Brothers, Heinsohn and Havlicek develop into the players we know today without Rusell?[/QUOTE]

They wouldnt have drafted the same guys. Wouldnt have needed zelmo

Red Auerbach will probably manage to get Wilt somehow.

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;14969506]They wouldnt have drafted the same guys. Wouldnt have needed zelmo[/QUOTE]
Possibly. Pettit retired 2 years after Beaty was drafted tho.
Maybe the Celtics draft Beaty and the Hawks go for Hondo since they would have had Cliff Hagan already.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle;14969557]Possibly. Pettit retired 2 years after Beaty tho.
Maybe the Celtics draft Beaty and the Hawks go for Hondo since they would have had Cliff Hagan already.[/QUOTE]
Didn't a young high school Wilt train with the Celics at one point?

The times I looked into Russell's history I somehow always glossed over him being drafted by the Hawks but this thread got me to actually notice that detail. So the Hawks have always been doing Hawk like things? Fitting.

No question the Celtic ring count goes way down and theirs goes up, though I'm definitely not saying they take all 11 Russell rings. Red Auerbach was a visionary whose specialty was taking advantage of the rules in ways others weren't thinking to and he built champ teams even after Russell retired. No question they're would have been a lot less success but he still would have got it done eventually.

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14969572]The times I looked into Russell's history I somehow always glossed over him being drafted by the Hawks but this thread got me to actually notice that detail. So the Hawks have always been doing Hawk like things? Fitting.

No question the Celtic ring count goes way down and theirs goes up, though I'm definitely not saying they take all 11 Russell rings. Red Auerbach was a visionary whose specialty was taking advantage of the rules in ways others weren't thinking to and he built champ teams even after Russell retired. No question they're would have been a lot less success but he still would have got it done eventually.[/QUOTE]
Russell was just as much a part of that winning Expierence if not more so than Red. Russell pushes his teammates to be great, especially the Black players. Is Sam Jones the same guy without Russell?
On the other end with the Hawks, look up Cleo Hill. If Russell was pushing him instead of pushing him away like the Hawks stars allegedly did at that time.

I wonder how Russell would feel watching so many of today's NBA centers shooting three-pointers as if they were shooting guards.

He was very smart though so I guess his response would be smart and he would say that things evolve sometimes? Or he would just strongly dislike it. I have no idea.

[QUOTE=Street Hunger;14969580]I wonder how Russell would feel watching so many of today's NBA centers shooting three-pointers as if they were shooting guards.

He was very smart though so I guess his response would be smart and he would say that things evolve sometimes? Or he would just strongly dislike it. I have no idea.[/QUOTE]

What could he say? Have you seen his awful post game? Hed be a rim runner today

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;14969589]What could he say? Have you seen his awful post game? Hed be a rim runner today[/QUOTE]
He wasn't even as good as Gobert.

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;14969589]What could he say? Have you seen his awful post game? Hed be a rim runner today[/QUOTE]

Out of all the GOATs Bill Russell definitely seems like he'd struggle the most today. Can't shoot a lick and no post game. Great defense obviously but the offense just wouldn't be anything close to superstar level. Somebody like Wilt OTOH would still totally dominate today. All they'd have to do is feed him in the post, there's nobody today that could guard him like Russell or Thurmond or Kareem.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle;14969573]Russell was just as much a part of that winning Expierence if not more so than Red. Russell pushes his teammates to be great, especially the Black players. Is Sam Jones the same guy without Russell?
On the other end with the Hawks, look up Cleo Hill. If Russell was pushing him instead of pushing him away like the Hawks stars allegedly did at that time.[/QUOTE]

I took/take no credit from Russell. It's a fact though that Auerbach built multiple dynasties. Authored 6 Celtic champions that didn't have Russell. When you consider all the talent that was compiled in that Celtic team around Russell it is a statement of fact that Auerbach was always workig on improving his teams. So there certainly wouldn't have been as much winning without Russell but Auerbach definitely would have a potential championship.

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14969605]I took/take no credit from Russell. It's a fact though that Auerbach built multiple dynasties. Authored 6 Celtic champions that didn't have Russell. When you consider all the talent that was compiled in that Celtic team around Russell it is a statement of fact that Auerbach was always workig on improving his teams. So there certainly wouldn't have been as much winning without Russell but Auerbach definitely would have a potential championship.[/QUOTE]

Red never won before Russell. Russell's influence on the team was probably greater than Red's. When Red retired as coach, Russell was a the player-coach and they still won.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle;14969621][B]Red never won before Russell. [/B]Russell's influence on the team was probably greater than Red's. When Red retired as coach, Russell was a the player-coach and they still won.[/QUOTE]You need great players to win. This is obvious and not being disputed. I am pointing out that Auerbach has an extensive history of acquiring great players. You want to pretend that Russell is the reason the Celtics got Heinsohn, Cousy, Jones, Bird, Chief, McHale, Hondo, Heinsohn, etc. then whatever but in reality Auerbach was one of the greatest if not the greatest front office guys of NBA history.

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14969623]You need great players to win. This is obvious and not being disputed. I am pointing out that Auerbach has an extensive history of acquiring great players. You want to pretend that Russell is the reason the Celtics got Heinsohn, Cousy, Jones, Bird, Chief, McHale, Hondo, Heinsohn, etc. then whatever but in reality Auerbach was one of the greatest if not the greatest front office guys of NBA history.[/QUOTE]
Never said he was the reason but he's responsible for the culture. The Celtics are different if there is no Russell. Takes away all their titles and Mystic. And Red is just a 60s version of Don Nelson.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle;14969630]Never said he was the reason but he's responsible for the culture. The Celtics are different if there is no Russell. Takes away all their titles and Mystic. And Red is just a 60s version of Don Nelson.[/QUOTE]
Take away Red and the Celtics never get Bill Russell. Any time a team wins a championship there are at least 3 people you can point at that they don't win without and usually a lot more than just 3.

Which place would have been more racist to Bill?

Boston or the Deep South?

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14969631]Take away Red and the Celtics never get Bill Russell. Any time a team wins a championship there are at least 3 people you can point at that they don't win without and usually a lot more than just 3.[/QUOTE]

I did take Russell away from the Celtics. That's the premise of the thread lol.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle;14969646]I did take Russell away from the Celtics. That's the premise of the thread lol.[/QUOTE]
That doesn't change the fact that Auerbach was massively important. The list of great players he brought in to the Celtics could probably only be rivaled by the work Jerry West did in LA. His teams won 6 championships without Russell and yet you compare him to Don Nelson? Comparisons like that are hard to take seriously so instead I'll just point out that Don Nelson once hit a game winner for Russell and Auerbach's Celtics in the Finals and leave it at that.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14969410]The Celtics probably don't win 11 rings if Bill Russell plays for the Hawks.[/QUOTE]

Maybe.

[QUOTE=Lakers Legend#32;14969643]Which place would have been more racist to Bill?

Boston or the Deep South?[/QUOTE]

St. Louis definitely worse at the time. Neither were any good.

Petit and Russell would have been fearsome. Whether the Hawks front office could sustain the greatness is highly questionable.

Honestly Celtics probably win 0 titles and Hawks win a whole bunch. The whole course of history is altered.