If you were building an ALL TIME NBA TEAM....

[e-monk]

Originally Posted by RollWithEm

Wilt/Russell were battles for the ages.

not really

In those games Wilt averaged 28.7 ppg and 28.7 rpg, Russell averaged 14.5ppg and 23.7rpg

Wilt's high game vs. Russell was 62, and he had six other 50+ point games against Russell . Russell's high game against Wilt was 37, and he had only two other 30+ point games against Wilt.

Wilt's record 55 rebound game was against Russell, and he had six other 40+ rebound games vs. Bill.
Russell only had one 40+ rebound night against Wilt.

and keep in mind that while Wilt played Russell straight up Russell was getting tons of help from his teammates on double and triple teams

considered head-to-head that's not really a battle

[RollWithEm]

Originally Posted by e-monk

not really

In those games Wilt averaged 28.7 ppg and 28.7 rpg, Russell averaged 14.5ppg and 23.7rpg

Wilt's high game vs. Russell was 62, and he had six other 50+ point games against Russell . Russell's high game against Wilt was 37, and he had only two other 30+ point games against Wilt.

Wilt's record 55 rebound game was against Russell, and he had six other 40+ rebound games vs. Bill.
Russell only had one 40+ rebound night against Wilt.

and keep in mind that while Wilt played Russell straight up Russell was getting tons of help from his teammates on double and triple teams

considered head-to-head that's not really a battle

Russell's head-2-head win percentage against Wilt in right about 60%. You're right. It wasn't that much of a battle at all.

[The Big Dipper]

Originally Posted by RollWithEm

Russell's head-2-head win percentage against Wilt in right about 60%. You're right. It wasn't that much of a battle at all.

Originally Posted by e-monk

not really

In those games Wilt averaged 28.7 ppg and 28.7 rpg, Russell averaged 14.5ppg and 23.7rpg

Wilt's high game vs. Russell was 62, and he had six other 50+ point games against Russell . Russell's high game against Wilt was 37, and he had only two other 30+ point games against Wilt.

Wilt's record 55 rebound game was against Russell, and he had six other 40+ rebound games vs. Bill.
Russell only had one 40+ rebound night against Wilt.

and keep in mind that while Wilt played Russell straight up Russell was getting tons of help from his teammates on double and triple teams

considered head-to-head that's not really a battle

Wilt statistically dominated Russell but Russell, aside from 69 always had the better team.

Now that is not to take away from Russell since what he did is he MADE those teams. He made the team so much better. He had no false sense of pride, all he cared about was winning, if that meant he score 5 points but just crash the glass, so be it. If it meant getting very chummy with Chamberlain and going to Chamberlains house and having dinner with his family so be it. He was a winner.

Now back to the point Wilt v.s Russell WILT would crush him and did.

Celtics vs Warriors/76ers/Lakers Celtics would normally beat them. Of course the Warriors were a real shit team and the 76ers were the I think the Syracuse team.

Anywho while Wilt is my favorite player and the man I consider one of if not the best of all time you can not ignore that Russell along with his starting 5 of Hall of Famers just always found a way to win.

The Celtics were the better team and possibly the greatest team of all time but they didn't have the greatest player, WILT.

[e-monk]

Originally Posted by RollWithEm

Russell's head-2-head win percentage against Wilt in right about 60%. You're right. It wasn't that much of a battle at all.

wins are a team stat, and it's ridiculous to try to credit a player who was so clearly outplayed by his head-to-head match-up with his team's success

further you're now trying to change your own terms where in your original post you were very much referring to one-on-one battles

[RollWithEm]

Originally Posted by e-monk

wins are a team stat, and it's ridiculous to try to credit a player who was so clearly outplayed by his head-to-head match-up with his team's success

further you're now trying to change your own terms where in your original post you were very much referring to one-on-one battles

When the two players are the best players on their respective teams, winning and losing often comes down to who won the head-to-head battle. Not who had the better stats, who shot so often that his teammates couldn't get in a rhythm, not who played to satisfy his own ego, but who did more to actually help his team win.

[e-monk]

Originally Posted by RollWithEm

When the two players are the best players on their respective teams, winning and losing often comes down to who won the head-to-head battle. Not who had the better stats, who shot so often that his teammates couldn't get in a rhythm, not who played to satisfy his own ego, but who did more to actually help his team win.

was russell his team's leading scorer? was he his team's closer? did he run the offense? he was a defensive anchor and a great one and yes the best player on his team but the best amongst a bunch of greats which makes all the difference

and you clearly dont know much about Wilt beyond the bullshit that Pope Simmons of the church of holy pixie dust and intangibles peddles in his book (which is btw biased and unsourced and subject to a lot of pure conjecture that is in conflict with people who actually worked with Wilt have said)

these people all disagree with him and you (and one of these people is Bill Russell himself)

"I call Wilt Chamberlain a very honest workman. By that, I mean he always did what his employer wanted. No star athlete has ever given his boss more for the money than Wilt did during his career. Eddie Gottlieb [owner of the Warriors] wanted Wilt to score like no man ever had, so Wilt did. [Alex] Hannum and some of his other coaches wanted him to pass and play defense, so he did that and he played 48 minutes a night. Those who criticized Wilt -- first for his scoring, then for not scoring more -- really should have criticized his employer."
--Leonard Koppett, Tall Tales (by Terry Pluto) p. 329

"I have great respect for Wilt. When I was with the Lakers, he never missed a practice or a game, or was late for a plane. If I asked him to make an appearance, he did it. This man has gone through life with a bad rap. We are talking about a very good person."
--Fred Schaus, Tall Tales (by Terry Pluto) p. 334

"One-on-one he [Wilt] would've murdered Russell and everyone. But playing five-on-five, Wilt was consigned to a specific role because of his ability to score so easily, whereas the Celtics fit Russell into their team concept better."
--Red Holzman, A View form the Bench, p. 78

"If [the referee] is calling [the game] loose then everyone gets away with more. So, you have to handle your own man accordingly, unless it's Wilt Chamberlain. Him, you just don't handle. He's too strong. The best you can do is make him work hard." -- Bill Russell, Go up For Glory p.100.


"Wilt is playing better than I used to -- passing off, coming out to set up screens, picking up guys outside, and sacrificing himself for team play."
-- Bill Russell, Great Moments in Pro Basketball, (by Sam Goldaper) p.24

[RollWithEm]

Originally Posted by e-monk

was russell his team's leading scorer? was he his team's closer? did he run the offense? he was a defensive anchor and a great one and yes the best player on his team but the best amongst a bunch of greats which makes all the difference

and you clearly dont much about Wilt beyond the bull that Pope Simmons of the church of holy pixie dust and intangibles peddles in his book

I love the people on these boards. Truly funny stuff. If I clearly don't know much about Wilt, why are you even wasting your time talking to me about him?

[e-monk]

Originally Posted by RollWithEm

I love the people on these boards. Truly funny stuff. If I clearly don't know much about Wilt, why are you even wasting your time talking to me about him?

in hopes of educating you so you dont go through life disagreeing with Bill Russell on a subject he knows a hell of a lot more about than you do? it's all about civic mindedness

[RollWithEm]

Originally Posted by e-monk

in hopes of educating you so you dont go through life disagreeing with Bill Russell on a subject he knows a hell of a lot more about than you do? it's all about civic mindedness

I bow to your superior knowledge on this topic. I can never hope to compete with such an informed fellow. Forgive me for broaching a subject on which I am so laughably insufficient.

[The Big Dipper]

I also just want to add that even despite all the other players on those celtics teams Russell had John Hondo Havlicek. A man with an infinite amount of fuel. This guys stamina was off the charts and that coupled with the fact that he was an incredible player goes to show how Russell took care of defense while others handled offense.

Russell used to tell players, don't worry about your guy just guard him as best you can but when he gets that shot off box him out I will do the rest. He was a sprinter and track and field guy who also had amazing defensive instincts but when it came to offense he was there for put backs and low post plays if nothing else happened. Cousy, Havlicek and the Jones boys handled offense.

As for Wilt he did it all, not because he was a stat whore - which he probably was- but because he could and the team needed him too. In the Warriors he was asked to score so much because his team needed to. On the 76ers he was asked to facilitate because he got a better team around him and he didn't need to drop 50+. He had Hal Greer and the Kangaroo kid. And when he got to the Lakers they asked him to be Russell just handle defense because West Baylor and Goodrich could handle offense.

If you look at old tapes when Wilt was on the Lakers he just played hard D blocking shots and grabbing boards then launching outlet passes to those 3. Most of the times by the time he got to the other side of the court Lakers had scored and he was back on D. So in those early years - 59-66ish he was all alone. Then when he got a decent team he made progress and won 2 chips.

I will say also that out of all his defeats to the Celtics i think the total of all game 7's he lost were by a total of like 9 points. Celtics were just a better team but Russell was not a statistically better team mate than Wilt.

Russell was a better teammate, winner and possibly leader than Wilt though.

TLDR
RUSSELL HAD THE BETTER TEAM.

[The Big Dipper]

Originally Posted by RollWithEm

I bow to your superior knowledge on this topic. I can never hope to compete with such an informed fellow. Forgive me for broaching a subject on which I am so laughably insufficient.

Ugh I just read this after writing my essay, hahaha

[The Big Dipper]

Originally Posted by e-monk

"I have great respect for Wilt. When I was with the Lakers, he never missed a practice or a game, or was late for a plane. If I asked him to make an appearance, he did it. This man has gone through life with a bad rap. We are talking about a very good person."
--Fred Schaus, Tall Tales (by Terry Pluto) p. 334
p.24

Great post and quotes I will say that this one is a little misleading.

Wilt hated practice and would ****ing sleep till like 4 in the afternoon. He didn't really go to practices until the Alex Hanum days and that is only because Alex convinced him it would help the team, not Wilt but the team. and even then Wilt was still fussy about it saying I will show up to 1 thing either practice or the game pick one.

However good to know there are other people here who know so much about him and keep his legacy going strong.

[RollWithEm]

I was trying to keep myself from having this pointless conversation, but I will make a few key points just because I can't resist pointing out the inherent ridiculousness into which this thread has devolved.

1. Neither of you has anything original to bring to the table on this topic. The Russell/Wilt debate has raged on for generations through essays, articles, books, TV specials, radio debates, live debates, and basically any other medium this country has to offer. It has been my experience through reading/listening to these same rehashed, redundant, tired arguments over my 20+ years of fandom that the basketball world is basically split down the middle on this topic. Do you really think that anything you type in this thread is going to significantly sway that community one way or the other?
2. I never claimed that Russell was better than Wilt. I merely stated that they engaged in some historic battles during their careers. I can't imagine any self-respecting basketball historian arguing that I was wrong on this point.
3. At least one of you just came here to "pick a fight". I really don't want to be a part of it. Have fun double-teaming Wilt's memory on the band wagon.

[The Big Dipper]

Originally Posted by RollWithEm

I was trying to keep myself from having this pointless conversation, but I will make a few key points just because I can't resist pointing out the inherent ridiculousness into which this thread has devolved.

1. Neither of you has anything original to bring to the table on this topic. The Russell/Wilt debate has raged on for generations through essays, articles, books, TV specials, radio debates, live debates, and basically any other medium this country has to offer. It has been my experience through reading/listening to these same rehashed, redundant, tired arguments over my 20+ years of fandom that the basketball world is basically split down the middle on this topic. Do you really think that anything you type in this thread is going to significantly sway that community one way or the other?
2. I never claimed that Russell was better than Wilt. I merely stated that they engaged in some historic battles during their careers. I can't imagine any self-respecting basketball historian arguing that I was wrong on this point.
3. At least one of you just came here to "pick a fight". I really don't want to be a part of it. Have fun double-teaming Wilt's memory on the band wagon.

Ahh no worries dude, I mean honestly this forum stuff and fandom stuff is all make believe anyway. Like us talking about matchups and which transient millionaire is better than the other transient millionaire, has any effect on anything.

It's just a bit of fun. The only reason I am so into Wilt and felt the need to bombard you with it is because I have read countless books on him and have seen every video of him that is available and I find him to be fascinating on and off the court, and I think others would too.

Besides right now I am a naive young guy to this forum I am sure I will be calling you a ********** **** ***hole for not calling Wilt a god in just a couple of months. Take care.

[e-monk]

Originally Posted by The Big Dipper

Great post and quotes I will say that this one is a little misleading.

Wilt hated practice and would ****ing sleep till like 4 in the afternoon. He didn't really go to practices until the Alex Hanum days and that is only because Alex convinced him it would help the team, not Wilt but the team. and even then Wilt was still fussy about it saying I will show up to 1 thing either practice or the game pick one.

However good to know there are other people here who know so much about him and keep his legacy going strong.

Fred Schaus was a Lakers exec so his time with Wilt was post Hannum which would explain it