Celtics Dynasty - Appointing FMVP Before They Gave One

[jlip]

Are we to believe that given today's emphasis on scoring a guy who was 7th on the team in scoring avg less than 10 a game on .316 shooting would win an MVP (1959)?

Twice in the 11 title run Bill Russell was within 4ppg of the scoring lead for the Celtics. Lets give him 1966 and 1962 without any debate. But I would argue that there is literally no argument to be made about 57 and 59 when Heinson's lines looked tremendous and Russell scored 13.3 and 9.3ppg on .356 and .316. And literally every other year looks to have another favorite as well.

What they were saying at the time about Russell's dominance in the 1959 Finals


"Russell's Rebounding 'Killing' Lakers Hopes"
April 7, 1959


Another link
April 7, 1959

After game 2
__________________________________________________ ______

"Cousy never ceases to amaze me," said Lakers coach, Johnny Kundla. He had 19 assists and played like a demon. Maybe I've seen him look better once before, but I can't remember exactly when it was.

For all that, I think it was Russell who beat us. We just can't do anything about that man. He's all arms. We'll see them in our sleep."

Link
April 8, 1959
After Game 3
__________________________________________________ _______

"Tuesday night (Game 3) Bob Cousy and Bill Russell killed us. Tonight (Game 4) it was Heinsohn, Sharman, and Ramsey."

Link
April 10, 1959

While most sources I've come across credit Sharman's scoring with providing the knockout punch in the series sweeping clincher, it's worth noting that several of those same sources again credit Russell's rebounding dominance with being the catalyst for the Celtic's fast break. Russell had an unofficial triple double in the series clincher. 15pts 30rbs 12blks.

Suffice it to say, Russell had an extremely strong case for the 1959 Finals MVP, especially considering the fact that the opposing coach made it explicitly clear that it was Russell whom they feared. Read below:


"Russell was the first player to help generate his team’s offense from his own defense, as dazed Minneapolis Laker coach John Kundla said after watching Russell lead the Celtics to a sweep of his team in the 1959 Finals.

“That’s quite a twist, isn’t it, having a defensive player mean the difference?” said Kundla. “We don’t fear the Celtics without Bill Russell. Take him out and we can beat them … He’s the guy who whipped us psychologically. Russell has our club worrying every second. Every one of the five men is thinking Russell is covering him on every play. He blocks a shot, and before you know it, Boston is getting a basket, and a play by Russell has done it.”

--Lakers head coach John Kundia after the 1959 Finals

Link

[G.O.A.T]

I'm going with 8-9. '57 and '64 are the two I think he most likely misses out on.

He's a lock in every year except '68 besides that I'd say. So seven is the minimum I believe.

As to using his shooting percentage as an argument in 1959, considering he took an average of two shots per quarter in that series while playing almost every minute, I'm going to ahead and assume that his shooting had little to no impact on the series. It's like complaining that Peyton Manning is not a running threat.

[LAZERUSS]

At least eight. And likely even '64, despite Wilt easily outplaying him.

He probably wins it in '57, '59, '60, '61, '62, '63, '64, '65, and '66. I think Hondo wins it in '68.

[cltcfn2924]

To be fair, we are now talking about giving the 7th leading scorer on the team, a guy who shot 31.6% from the field and 44.8% from the line the MVP. I just don't think that happens. Heinson went 24.3/8.8 on .475 shooting. Literally shot 50%+ higher.

The award is named after him. What in the name of God makes you think your opinion holds even a drop of water?