Bill Russell

[Shaqdaddy11]

I started watching basketball LONG after he retired, so this is merely an OPINION not a fact.

Been watching videos of players and fans having him in the top 5 of all time, some of them even as high as #2.
Here's what I don't get though: He played in a league that was severely watered down.

When he started his career in the 50's, there were only 8 teams in the league. That meant there were only 7 other Centers that he had to compete against. While Wilt was one of them, the others?

Phil Jordon of the Knicks - 11ppg, 7rpg career stats
Red Kerr of the Syracuse Nationals - 14ppg, 11rpg
Jim Krebs of the Lakers - 8ppg, 6rpg

To me, the reason Bill was so successful is because his only real threat was Wilt. What if you replace Hakeem and Shaq with Bill and Wilt? Or have Bill and Wilt play in the 90s? I very much doubt they accomplish the same stats.

Again, I know, different era, different game, but personally I think that other than Kareem, there's no way Bill Russell and Wilt should be ranked higher than Shaq and Hakeem.

 

[tlance]

I started watching basketball LONG after he retired, so this is merely an OPINION not a fact.

Been watching videos of players and fans having him in the top 5 of all time, some of them even as high as #2.
Here's what I don't get though: He played in a league that was severely watered down.

When he started his career in the 50's, there were only 8 teams in the league. That meant there were only 7 other Centers that he had to compete against. While Wilt was one of them, the others?

Phil Jordon of the Knicks - 11ppg, 7rpg career stats
Red Kerr of the Syracuse Nationals - 14ppg, 11rpg
Jim Krebs of the Lakers - 8ppg, 6rpg

To me, the reason Bill was so successful is because his only real threat was Wilt. What if you replace Hakeem and Shaq with Bill and Wilt? Or have Bill and Wilt play in the 90s? I very much doubt they accomplish the same stats.

Again, I know, different era, different game, but personally I think that other than Kareem, there's no way Bill Russell and Wilt should be ranked higher than Shaq and Hakeem.

I agree.

There is a strong argument for Wilt, but not Bill.

The best case for Russell is team success, and that does not make any sense to me.

1 player is never solely responsible for a team winning. And in Russell’s case, he played alongside a handful of Hall of Famer’s.

Those Celtics were the dominant team of their era and Russell was the catalyst, but he ranks somewhere in the Karl Malone, Barkley, Pippen, Stockton range of all time greats for me. I would gladly take Hakeem, Shaq, Wilt, even David Robinson first.

 

[PatsFan2003]

I agree.

There is a strong argument for Wilt, but not Bill.

The best case for Russell is team success, and that does not make any sense to me.

1 player is never solely responsible for a team winning. And in Russell’s case, he played alongside a handful of Hall of Famer’s.

Those Celtics were the dominant team of their era and Russell was the catalyst, but he ranks somewhere in the Karl Malone, Barkley, Pippen, Stockton range of all time greats for me. I would gladly take Hakeem, Shaq, Wilt, even David Robinson first.

Russell was the Queen on that Celtics team. He was the linchpin for that team. The other players on that team were more interchangeable.

His rebounding and defensive play just transformed the game, that's all. His battles with Wilt were legendary.

 

[trojanfan12]

That's why making "all time" lists, while fun, is kind of a fools errand. We don't know how great some of these guys might be in the modern era (modern era being from the 80's on) because with very few exceptions (Kareem and Dr. J for example) we never got to see them in the modern era.

 

[BigKen]

I started watching basketball LONG after he retired, so this is merely an OPINION not a fact.

I started watching basketball in 1956 when Russell was a rookie.

Russell mde the first huge change to the position of center. He was the first center who could the court for 60 minutes. Mikan and the others were lucky if the could run the court for 6 minutes. He was also the first center with the ability to jump and block a shot because 80% of the shots at that time were "set shots", not jump shots. He was also one of the first black players in an all white league.

The league is watered down today with 32 teams. When Russell played he was playing against the best of the best available.

You might want to see if you can find more than 10 second clips of Russell and Wilt. How many of today's "great" players have scored 100 points in an NBA game??

 

[Shanemansj13]

I've been saying this for years, he played with 6 or 7 HOFr's in at one point an 8 team league. Still a great player but should never be compared to those other big men bc of the titles. But imo he was even lower on the all-time lists, I think he would be a Draymond TYPE of player in this league, fair comparison considering his role and skillset.

 

[Shanemansj13]

I started watching basketball in 1956 when Russell was a rookie.

Russell mde the first huge change to the position of center. He was the first center who could the court for 60 minutes. Mikan and the others were lucky if the could run the court for 6 minutes. He was also the first center with the ability to jump and block a shot because 80% of the shots at that time were "set shots", not jump shots. He was also one of the first black players in an all white league.

The league is watered down today with 32 teams. When Russell played he was playing against the best of the best available.

You might want to see if you can find more than 10 second clips of Russell and Wilt. How many of today's "great" players have scored 100 points in an NBA game??

So the game wasn't watered down bc someone scored 100 points in a game, you are thinking about this backwards. If it was just the "best of the best" why was Wilt dominated 6'5" centers...do you think he would score 100 on Gobert or Embiid? LOL

 

[trojanfan12]

I've been saying this for years, he played with 6 or 7 HOFr's in at one point an 8 team league. Still a great player but should never be compared to those other big men bc of the titles. But imo he was even lower on the all-time lists, I think he would be a Draymond TYPE of player in this league, fair comparison considering his role and skillset.

Good comparison and a Draymond in his prime type player is still pretty damn good.

 

[trojanfan12]

So the game wasn't watered down bc someone scored 100 points in a game, you are thinking about this backwards. If it was just the "best of the best" why was Wilt dominated 6'5" centers...do you think he would score 100 on Gobert or Embiid? LOL

No, the game wasn't watered down because you water something down by adding to it, not by keeping it the same or subtracting from it.

Because of the pay structure and initial ethnic makeup of the league, you can argue that there were players who may have been better than some of the guys in the league, but chose other professions. But when you have 8 teams choosing from the best players available to them...that is pretty much the opposite of watered down...especially when they started allowing black players to play.

A good example of a watered down league is the argument that's used against MJ...recent expansion of the league, without an expansion of the talent pool.

 

[tlance]

No, the game wasn't watered down because you water something down by adding to it, not by keeping it the same or subtracting from it.

Because of the pay structure and initial ethnic makeup of the league, you can argue that there were players who may have been better than some of the guys in the league, but chose other professions. But when you have 8 teams choosing from the best players available to them...that is pretty much the opposite of watered down...especially when they started allowing black players to play.

A good example of a watered down league is the argument that's used against MJ...recent expansion of the league, without an expansion of the talent pool.

The talent pool has grown exponentially since the 60s.

There are NBA players from the Russell era who wouldn’t get a D1 scholarship today.

 

[returnofjakedog]

Russell was also before my time, and I have always thought he was overrated in the sense that so many would list him as the greatest of all time because he had rings and his battles with Wilt.
That being said, he is a HOF player and a great defender and rebounder, particularly considering he was undersized. In a way he was kinda a defensive C version of Charles Barkley in his day: an athletic freak that was able to perform well beyond what his physical limitations would seem to allow.
He fit perfect on the Celtics at the time and was able to lock down the paint on D in a time period where that was more important than it is today. But if he hadn't had great players around him he wouldn't have all of the rings because of his limitations. If the Celtics would have had to rely on him as a main cog on the offense then he wouldn't won so many championships.
The fact that it was pre-free agent era had more to do with the Celtics domination of the time period than anything. If a salary cap was in place, and players could control their own rights then their success would have been severely tempered.

 

[returnofjakedog]

So the game wasn't watered down bc someone scored 100 points in a game, you are thinking about this backwards. If it was just the "best of the best" why was Wilt dominated 6'5" centers...do you think he would score 100 on Gobert or Embiid? LOL

Do I think Wilt would have scored 100 against Gobert or Embid? No. But I do think given more modern training techniques and competition that Wilt would still be dominant, at least as much as today's style of game would allow.

I agree with your points but the 6'5" C is a bit of an exaggeration. Even Russell at 6'7" was undersized even in his day.

I read an article that stated that the average starting C Wilt played against was 6'10". Another point was that Wilt was incredibly strong and could bench over 500 lbs and could still bench 465 lbs at 59 years old! That is incredible considering his arm length. Note that Shaq could never bench over 400 lbs.

 

[CitySushi]

It's impossible to compare across era's. Doesn't diminish their accomplishments at that time. Without Bill Russell and Wilt there is no Kareem. Without Kareem there is no Shaq, Hakeem or Robinson.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

It's impossible to compare across era's. Doesn't diminish their accomplishments at that time. Without Bill Russell and Wilt there is no Kareem. Without Kareem there is no Shaq, Hakeem or Robinson.

That is an unsubstantiated claim.

But even if it was true, Bill Russell is still not a top 10 player IMO

 

[logic]

I started watching basketball in 1956 when Russell was a rookie.

Russell mde the first huge change to the position of center. He was the first center who could the court for 60 minutes. Mikan and the others were lucky if the could run the court for 6 minutes. He was also the first center with the ability to jump and block a shot because 80% of the shots at that time were "set shots", not jump shots. He was also one of the first black players in an all white league.

The league is watered down today with 32 teams. When Russell played he was playing against the best of the best available.

You might want to see if you can find more than 10 second clips of Russell and Wilt. How many of today's "great" players have scored 100 points in an NBA game??

@BigKen it is clear that you only know the NBA periferially. There are 30 teams and a game is 48 minutes. You may want to familiarize yourself with the modern game before making claims against it.

 

[CitySushi]

That is an unsubstantiated claim.

But even if it was true, Bill Russell is still not a top 10 player IMO

I'm not saying Bill Russell is a top 10 player ever. I'm saying his influence has created the best players in the history of the game.

Kareem - 1:40 Mark says he used to go to the Garden just to watch Bill Russell play and learn from him.



Shaq - 1:40 Mark also here he said that an older coach taught him what Kareem would do to open his game up and Shaq learned from that.



This was just in about less than 5 minutes of looking on youtube. So I really don't know what you mean by saying this is unsubstantiated. Kareem learned from Russell. Shaq learned from Hakeem. Kobe was a direct reflection of Jordan. Jayson Tatum is a direct reflection of Kobe. Everything is passed down by influence by a previous generation.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

I'm not saying Bill Russell is a top 10 player ever. I'm saying his influence has created the best players in the history of the game.

Kareem - 1:40 Mark says he used to go to the Garden just to watch Bill Russell play and learn from him.



Shaq - 1:40 Mark also here he said that an older coach taught him what Kareem would do to open his game up and Shaq learned from that.



This was just in about less than 5 minutes of looking on youtube. So I really don't know what you mean by saying this is unsubstantiated. Kareem learned from Russell. Shaq learned from Hakeem. Kobe was a direct reflection of Jordan. Jayson Tatum is a direct reflection of Kobe. Everything is passed down by influence by a previous generation.

Makes sense. Agreed with that

 

[ANGELAKERAMS]

Do I think Wilt would have scored 100 against Gobert or Embid? No. But I do think given more modern training techniques and competition that Wilt would still be dominant, at least as much as today's style of game would allow.

I agree with your points but the 6'5" C is a bit of an exaggeration. Even Russell at 6'7" was undersized even in his day.

I read an article that stated that the average starting C Wilt played against was 6'10". Another point was that Wilt was incredibly strong and could bench over 500 lbs and could still bench 465 lbs at 59 years old! That is incredible considering his arm length. Note that Shaq could never bench over 400 lbs.

Russell was 6'10", not 6'7"

 

[Wamu]

Russell is the greatest winner and the most important player on the best dynasty the league will ever see. He's not in the GOAT conversation. He's not in the top 10. But that shouldn't diminish his career or his place in the history of the game.

After all the story of the league can't be told without # 6. He was a great rebounder and even better defender. I'm sure some will disagree with me on this. But if played in today's game he'd be a damn good defender, ranking near the top in blocks and rebounds yearly.

 

[tlance]

Russell is the greatest winner and the most important player on the best dynasty the league will ever see. He's not in the GOAT conversation. He's not in the top 10. But that shouldn't diminish his career or his place in the history of the game.

After all the story of the league can't be told without # 6. He was a great rebounder and even better defender. I'm sure some will disagree with me on this. But if played in today's game he'd be a damn good defender, ranking near the top in blocks and rebounds yearly.

I don’t think anyone should disagree with that.

His overall impact on the league can’t be overstated.

At the same time, there have been many players to come along since who were better on the court.