Was Bill Russell basically Ben Wallace?

[iamgine]

Supporting evidence:

- Like Ben, Bill Russell was the 5th-7th leading scorer in his team when adjusted for minutes.

- Like Ben, Bill Russell was known for his defense


What are some of the things Bill did that was considerably better (or worse) than Ben Wallace? I don't mean the "throwing up before games" stuff. More of what he did on the court.

[LAZERUSS]

No. Not even close. He was a much better offensive player and passer.

[LBJMVP]

bill was not better offensively... everyones scoring numbers in the past are vastly overrated due to pace

russell wasn't very good offensively.

[LAZERUSS]

bill was not better offensively... everyones scoring numbers in the past are vastly overrated due to pace

russell wasn't very good offensively.

Even adjusting for pace, Russell was clearly a better offensive player than Wallace. But you don't need the numbers to prove it. Just watch video footage of a younger Russell, and compare that to a Wallace who couldn't hit the rim from five feet.

And Russell was a much better passer, too, which is seldom brought up in these "offensive" discussions.

[KOBE143]

No

Bill Russell was basically Poor Mans Joel Anthony..

[LAZERUSS]

No

Bill Russell was basically Poor Mans Joel Anthony..

So you have watched a prime Russell then, right? A Russell who had seasons of 18+ ppg, and post-seasons of 20+ ppg. A Russell who had title-clinching games of 30-38 and 30-40. A Russell who led his team in scoring in the '66 Finals, at 23.6 ppg. A Russell who had an 18 ppg, 27 rpg, and get this... a .702 FG%... in the '65 Finals.

Yep...Joel Anthony-type numbers.

[BoutPractice]

No
/endthread

[KOBE143]

So you have watched a prime Russell then, right? A Russell who had seasons of 18+ ppg, and post-seasons of 20+ ppg. A Russell who had title-clinching games of 30-38 and 30-40. A Russell who led his team in scoring in the '66 Finals, at 23.6 ppg. A Russell who had an 18 ppg, 27 rpg, and get this... a .702 FG%... in the '65 Finals.

Yep...Joel Anthony-type numbers.

WEAK Era

Joel Anthony would average 50ppg in that era.. Wilt and Russell would be lucky to be a 3rd string center today.. FACT..

[WillC]

Bill Russell was a defensive pioneer, the first player to truly intimidate his opponents with unprecedented shot-blocking ability, an exceptional help-defender, arguably the greatest leader in basketball history, a master psychologist, talented passer, incredible team player and extremely versatile for his position. Although he wasn't a great scorer, much of the Celtics offense went through Russell, who played the high-post beautifully.

How many of those things can be said about Ben Wallace?

So, in conclusion, no, Bill Russell was not 'basically Ben Wallace'.

[HylianNightmare]

...this can't be a serious thread

[NumberSix]

No, he was basically Joakim Noah.

[Electric Slide]

No he was basically Bill Russell

[BoutPractice]

Since this thread is apparently still going for some reason, I present to you: Ben Wallace!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF22xiRxHv8

[sundizz]

Well, for their respective careers that they had Bill Russell was much better than his peers than Ben Wallace was to his peers.

The real question is, how would Ben Wallace do in that era?

Probably score very little, but be an absolute beast on the defensive end. Him versus Russell would of been an odd, but likely entertaining game of physical prowess very rarely seen at that time.

4x defensive player of the year as a walk. He's one of the few crop of the modern era that I think would do just fine in the 60's and adapt his game any way necessary and be an absolute force.

[CelticPride13]