If LBJ ends up with Back-2-Back "MVP Sweeps", He is LOCKED IN Top 10 GOAT

[secund2nun]

Big men do rule the NBA. Most of the best bball players ever are big men. The only perimeter players that can match the top big men are MJ, Magic, Lebron. All other perimeter players like Kobe, Wade, Iverson etc are overrated and cannot compare to top big men. It's just that the big men are not considered sexy so they are not promoted, and thus underrated while flashy sexy outside players are promoted so they are overrated.

[fpliii]

Big men do rule the NBA. Most of the best bball players ever are big men. The only perimeter players that can match the top big men are MJ, Magic, Lebron. All other perimeter players like Kobe, Wade, Iverson etc are overrated and cannot compare to top big men. It's just that the big men are not considered sexy so they are not promoted, and thus underrated while flashy sexy outside players are promoted so they are overrated.

For 90% of the NBA's history this is true, but IMO rule changes have made it impossible for a big man to dominate the league today, and nigh-impossible to succeed at a very high level. As a wise man once said (was this Shaq? I forget...), "seven-footers don't sell sneakers".

[secund2nun]

Rule changes may have hurt big men a little, but they are still the most important position. It's just that there are none anymore. It's still all about big men. Dwight dragged trash to the 2009 finals. The Lakers went from 1st round knock out to back to back NBA finals with the addition of Gasol and development of Bynum.

Dallas collapsed once Tyson Chandler left. If Miami were to suddenly trade Wade or Bosh for Chandler, Howard, Bynum, etc they would become a far superior team (especially if they had a Bosh + legit center front counrt). Duncan is still dominating and leading the Spurs to a top record. If prime Shaq was playing today he would wreck the league just like he did in 2000.

[ThaRegul8r]

Pretty sure Bill Russell would have some of these, if only...

I'm not sure how many he'd have, but at least a few (and not all 11 obviously, since West won in 69). Wilt in 67 probably would have one too. Maybe Cousy in 57 (have to read up on that Finals more, though I believe Russell and Heinsohn were both big from my recollection of articles)? The MVP didn't exist prior to 55-56, but you gotta imagine Big George Mikan would've had at least one.

If we include ABA, Connie Hawkins has one (68), and Dr. J has two (74, 76).

He'd have a minimum of 7, had the award existed his whole career. I don't have a problem going with the low end, so that's the number I usually use.

[fpliii]

He'd have a minimum of 7, had the award existed his whole career. I don't have a problem going with the low end, so that's the number I usually use.

Thanks. Which seasons are we definitely giving to him? I'm guessing (apologies for anything inaccurate):

57 - Heinsohn, Cousy, Russ have a case
58 - nonissue, was injured
59 - Heinsohn, Sharman have a case (Russ might, GOAT rebounding series I believe?)
60 - Russell
61 - Russell
62 - Russell
63 - Russell
64 - Sam Jones, Russ have a case
65 - Russell (Sam Jones outside case, but wouldn't make much sense)
66 - Russell
67 - nonissue, wasn't in Finals
68 - Havlicek and Russ both have a case
69 - nonissue, goes to West

Aside from the bolded, I guess you went with 59 and 65 (I think you've said you have Havlicek in 68)? Of the five, 61-63 (back-to-back-to-back) would qualify as "MVP sweeps", and 65 could potentially as well (again, apologies if I'm off base).

[Kiddlovesnets]

Even if he does not end up with b2b MVP Sweeps, he still will become top 10 of all time sooner or later. Hes just entering his prime.

[ThaRegul8r]

Thanks. Which seasons are we definitely giving to him? I'm guessing (apologies for anything inaccurate):

57 - Heinsohn, Cousy, Russ have a case
58 - nonissue, was injured
59 - Heinsohn, Sharman have a case (Russ might, GOAT rebounding series I believe?)
60 - Russell
61 - Russell
62 - Russell
63 - Russell
64 - Sam Jones, Russ have a case
65 - Russell (Sam Jones outside case, but wouldn't make much sense)
66 - Russell
67 - nonissue, wasn't in Finals
68 - Havlicek and Russ both have a case
69 - nonissue, goes to West

Aside from the bolded, I guess you went with 59 and 65 (I think you've said you have Havlicek in 68)? Of the five, 61-63 (back-to-back-to-back) would qualify as "MVP sweeps", and 65 could potentially as well (again, apologies if I'm off base).

Correct. Russell doesn't win in '57, I believe that would likely go to Heinsohn. People will go for Heinsohn's scoring numbers. '59, as you said, was the GOAT rebounding series. Lakers' coach John Kundla specifically said, "We tried as much as possible to keep him away from the boards, but there really isn't much you can do with the guy" (The Milwaukee Sentinel, Apr 7, 1959). "I think it was Russell who beat us. We just can't do anything about that man. ... He grabs that ball, wings it to Cousy and Boston has got three men breaking against our one back before we know what hit us" (The Evening Independent, Apr 8, 1959). Russell's rebounding was the catalyst for their offensive attack, and people were appreciating what he was doing despite not having gaudy scoring numbers. And he finished the sweep with a triple-double of 15 points, 30 rebounds and 12 blocks.

He then wins '60-'63 without question. He puts up back-to-back 20/20 series in '62 and '63, of course having one of the great Game 7s in Finals history in '62, with his entire frontcourt fouling out. I give '64 to Jones, because I acknowledge that voter fatigue might set in at this point and it might go to someone other than Russell. Though Jones did have a six points on 2-for-6 shooting and one-rebound stinker in there, and Russell had to contend with both Chamberlain and Nate Thurmond. Russell wins '65. He set a still-standing record for FG% for a 5-game series, shooting 70.2%, and had 22 points, 30 rebounds and four assists in the deciding Game 5 while Jones had a mere 10 points, which would kill any outside chance he might have at FMVP. Russell wins in '66, averaging another 20/20, leading the team in scoring at 23.6 points on 53.8% FG and 57.4% TS, 24.3 rebounds, 3.7 assists and shooting 74% from the free throw line.

'68 is between Russell and Havlicek. I gave it to Havlicek because, as I said regarding '64, it might go to Someone Other Than Russell, and I account for the fact that Russell is likely not going to get all 10 that would be available for that reason. For example, in '98, Pippen was regarded as the favorite for Finals MVP until Game 5 and his injury, and in '96, there were people who regarded Rodman as the true Finals MVP (if Kemp didn't pull a Jerry West). Since Russell was involved in so many more Finals than Jordan was, I figure he loses a couple of FMVPs, but he still wins more than anyone else ever does.

[fpliii]

Correct. Russell doesn't win in '57, I believe that would likely go to Heinsohn. People will go for Heinsohn's scoring numbers. '59, as you said, was the GOAT rebounding series. Lakers' coach John Kundla specifically said, "We tried as much as possible to keep him away from the boards, but there really isn't much you can do with the guy" (The Milwaukee Sentinel, Apr 7, 1959). "I think it was Russell who beat us. We just can't do anything about that man. ... He grabs that ball, wings it to Cousy and Boston has got three men breaking against our one back before we know what hit us" (The Evening Independent, Apr 8, 1959). Russell's rebounding was the catalyst for their offensive attack, and people were appreciating what he was doing despite not having gaudy scoring numbers. And he finished the sweep with a triple-double of 15 points, 30 rebounds and 12 blocks.

He then wins '60-'63 without question. He puts up back-to-back 20/20 series in '62 and '63, of course having one of the great Game 7s in Finals history in '62, with his entire frontcourt fouling out. I give '64 to Jones, because I acknowledge that voter fatigue might set in at this point and it might go to someone other than Russell. Though Jones did have a six points on 2-for-6 shooting and one-rebound stinker in there, and Russell had to contend with both Chamberlain and Nate Thurmond. Russell wins '65. He set a still-standing record for FG% for a 5-game series, shooting 70.2%, and had 22 points, 30 rebounds and four assists in the deciding Game 5 while Jones had a mere 10 points, which would kill any outside chance he might have at FMVP. Russell wins in '66, averaging another 20/20, leading the team in scoring at 23.6 points on 53.8% FG and 57.4% TS, 24.3 rebounds, 3.7 assists and shooting 74% from the free throw line.

'68 is between Russell and Havlicek. I gave it to Havlicek because, as I said regarding '64, it might go to Someone Other Than Russell, and I account for the fact that Russell is likely not going to get all 10 that would be available for that reason. For example, in '98, Pippen was regarded as the favorite for Finals MVP until Game 5 and his injury, and in '96, there were people who regarded Rodman as the true Finals MVP (if Kemp didn't pull a Jerry West). Since Russell was involved in so many more Finals than Jordan was, I figure he loses a couple of FMVPs, but he still wins more than anyone else ever does.

Excellent information, thanks. I'm glad we're on the same page (I have all the Boston Globe articles from the Russell years, have to go through the Finals PDFs in detail when I have a chance; if you're interested let me know and I can upload them and link in PM).

Regarding the other seasons during which the regular season was awarded...

58 and 67 are obvious (so Wilt would have an "MVP Sweep", Pettit wouldn't...Arizin probably wins in 56 but Pettit was regular season MVP); does Cousy have any case in 57 in your opinion, or would it go to Heinsohn? If it's him, would Heinsohn be the only guy to win ROY and Finals MVP in the same season (though obviously there will be dissenting opinions in favor of Russell for both)?

As for Pippen, I forget which season (97 or 98), but I think Jordan himself was calling him the Finals MVP (or maybe I'm 'misremembering' and it was just the Bulls MVP?). Does this sound familiar, or am I just nuts?

[LebronairJAMES]

[Mr. Jabbar]

Ok, if I remember math class correctly:

2011 Finals = -1 ring
2012 Finals = 0.5 ring
*2013 Finals (if they win fair) = 1 ring

-1+1+0.5 = 0.5 ring

Is half a ring worthy of top 10? I don't think so...

[KOBE143]

Ok, if I remember math class correctly:

2011 Finals = -1 ring
2012 Finals = 0.5 ring
*2013 Finals (if they win fair) = 1 ring

-1+1+0.5 = 0.5 ring

Is half a ring worthy of top 10? I don't think so...

If Im correct LeBron right now has an -1 ring.. How about the 2007?

[Mr. Jabbar]

If Im correct LeBron right now has an -1 ring.. How about the 2007?

OMg didn't remember those Finals, complete sweep. -1 for sure.

Its 0.5-1 = -0.5 , bron still in the negative ring count even if wining fair and square (imposible) in 2013

[ThaRegul8r]

Excellent information, thanks. I'm glad we're on the same page (I have all the Boston Globe articles from the Russell years, have to go through the Finals PDFs in detail when I have a chance; if you're interested let me know and I can upload them and link in PM).

Regarding the other seasons during which the regular season was awarded...

58 and 67 are obvious (so Wilt would have an "MVP Sweep", Pettit wouldn't...Arizin probably wins in 56 but Pettit was regular season MVP); does Cousy have any case in 57 in your opinion, or would it go to Heinsohn? If it's him, would Heinsohn be the only guy to win ROY and Finals MVP in the same season (though obviously there will be dissenting opinions in favor of Russell for both)?

I don't believe Cousy ever wins a Finals MVP had the award existed. His best chance would be in the beginning before people realize/appreciate what Russell is doing and it's clear he's the dominant force behind Boston's winning. Both he and Sharman had horrible Game 7s in '57, and it was the rookies who led them to victory.

I believe Heinsohn does win ROY and Finals MVP. Russell didn't play enough games to win ROY, Heinsohn was their leading scorer in the postseason, and then there is also the racial factor to consider. Russell was MVP of the league the following year (voted by the players), yet he wasn't voted to the All-NBA First Team (which wasn't determined by the players). With that, I don't believe the league was ready for a black Finals MVP yet (which wouldn't have been decided by the players), so I don't believe Russell would have won the first Finals MVP in any event. I don't believe the defensive player gets the recognition of Finals MVP for the first title. After that though, it can't be denied.

I'll mention though, that it was Heinsohn's failure to box out Cliff Hagan that led to Hagan's tip-in of a Bob Pettit miss that was the game-winner for a 96-94 St. Louis in Game 6 to send it to a seventh and deciding game in the first place. And I believe Heinsohn fouled out of Game 7 if I recall correctly.

As for Pippen, I forget which season (97 or 98), but I think Jordan himself was calling him the Finals MVP (or maybe I'm 'misremembering' and it was just the Bulls MVP?). Does this sound familiar, or am I just nuts?

No, you're not nuts. It's most likely '98. It's been over a decade now since I watched that series, but that's the year Pippen was getting MVP talk. That was also the year he locked down Mark Jackson against Indiana in the postseason, so people were recognizing his contributions to Chicago's success.

[fpliii]

I don't believe Cousy ever wins a Finals MVP had the award existed. His best chance would be in the beginning before people realize/appreciate what Russell is doing and it's clear he's the dominant force behind Boston's winning. Both he and Sharman had horrible Game 7s in '57, and it was the rookies who led them to victory.

Thanks for the info,...here's a file with some sources:

http://www8.zippyshare.com/v/96170157/file.html

the contents of folder [1] might be useful here.

I believe Heinsohn does win ROY and Finals MVP. Russell didn't play enough games to win ROY, Heinsohn was their leading scorer in the postseason, and then there is also the racial factor to consider. Russell was MVP of the league the following year (voted by the players), yet he wasn't voted to the All-NBA First Team (which wasn't determined by the players). With that, I don't believe the league was ready for a black Finals MVP yet (which wouldn't have been decided by the players), so I don't believe Russell would have won the first Finals MVP in any event. I don't believe the defensive player gets the recognition of Finals MVP for the first title. After that though, it can't be denied.

I considered the defensive player issue, but didn't have race in mind. It might've indeed been in issue though in 1957. There wasn't even a vote for the first few years of the Finals MVP's existence...from 69-78 it was awarded by the editors of 'Sport Magazine', and thereafter was subject to a media vote. [2]

I'll mention though, that it was Heinsohn's failure to box out Cliff Hagan that led to Hagan's tip-in of a Bob Pettit miss that was the game-winner for a 96-94 St. Louis in Game 6 to send it to a seventh and deciding game in the first place. And I believe Heinsohn fouled out of Game 7 if I recall correctly.

Again I don't know offhand, I'll check later (busy dumping archives at the moment). [1]

No, you're not nuts. It's most likely '98. It's been over a decade now since I watched that series, but that's the year Pippen was getting MVP talk. That was also the year he locked down Mark Jackson against Indiana in the postseason, so people were recognizing his contributions to Chicago's success.

Just checked...there was media talk in 98 (prior to that poor game he had), but it turns out Jordan proclaimed Pippen co-MVP in 97 (though I think he was a FA that season, so it might've been praise with the intention of keeping him in Chicago). [3]

[fpliii]

sorry for the bump, but I just added the link