magohaydz

intense thread.....I vote MJ by the way.

__________________
JOIN CYBER DUNK TODAY! A GREAT FANTASY BASKETBALL PLAYER GAME.
CLICK HERE!!!

mysterio

The majority regard MJ as the GOAT, but after him a good number regard Kareem as the GOAT. All things considered, it's really a coin-toss, IMO.

oh, but all that is gonna change. Hear about this kid, Michael Beasley? He says he'd be offended if he were picked behind MJ. Look out!

BadBaronRudigor

Probably the best post in the thread . . . let's see if we can't match it to make the case that Bill Russell is the best ever.

These are a few basic aspects of a player's game in basketball:

REBOUNDING: Of all the raw stats (pts,reb,ast,bl,st,to,pf) this is the one that correlates most strongly with winning. Wilt is the greatest statmonger in history, he'd be easily tops in points too if he hadn't changed his style to try to imitate Russell and the only comparable rebounder in NBA history. Russell averaged 22.45 rpg for his career; the third greatest rebounder in NBA history averaged 16.22. To compare, that would be as if the third greatest scorer in NBA history averaged only 21.76ppg, a ridiculously low number. This is one of the greatest areas of dominance over even other HOF players (other than Wilt) ever recorded.

DEFENSE: Russell is generally regarded as the greatest defensive player ever. Period.

CLUTCH/PLAYOFF PLAY: Russell is the greatest winner in NBA history. Compared to Michael Jordan, for example, Russell won 11 NBA titles in 13 seasons while Jordan won only 6 in 15 NBA seasons, a clutch/playoff winning percentage over twice as great. He won even though throughout his career he was matched against Wilt Chamberlain, the most statistically dominant player ever. He won with good but not great supporting players early (the Cousy/Sharman/Ramsey trio played with HOF center Ed McCauley for 4 years before McCauley and a top pick were traded for Russell coming in 2nd,3rd,3rd,and 2nd out of a 4 team Eastern conference ... practically a textbook case of mediocrity). He won with great supporting players facing great opposing teams; not just the 3 HOF frontline of St. Louis and the West/Baylor Lakers but the 76 teams featuring Wilt, Luke Walker, Billy Cunningham, Chet Walker, Hal Greer, and Wali Jones . . . a collection of supporting talent for Wilt equal or better than the great Howell, Sanders, Havlicek, Sam Jones and KC Jones Celtics. Clutch play comes down to winning . . . Russell won . . . more than anyone . . . and it's not even close.

SHOTBLOCKING: By all contemporary accounts, Russell was probably the greatest shotblocker to ever play the game. Contemporaries estimate that he averaged 6-8 blocks a game. Former All-Pro/HOF center Neil Johnston was so supposedly so intimidated by him that he gave up basketball, ending his career before he turned 30. And shotblocking allows everyone else on the floor to play much tighter defense so rather than just shutting down one player, it helps every player on the team.

PASSING: Russell, while not a guard who started with the ball in his hands, was a great high post passing center. In an era where assists were 20% harder to get than modern ball, he averaged 4.3 assists for his career. What is more, he got them without being a featured scorer in the offense, just getting the ball as it moved around and finding cutters or open jump shooters with his outstanding court awareness. Additionally, he had two other rare skills. He was one of the great outlet passers to ever play, starting the famous Celtic fast break after rebounds, a skill that isn't measured in assists (at least under then existing rules). And, his shotblocking was so skilled, he not only blocked shots, he would redirect them to teammates like a pass thus creating even more possessions than shotblocking alone would account for.

SCORING: This is the one and only area where people say Russell doesn't compete with the other GOAT candidates like MJ, Wilt, and Kareem. But even here, Russell was not a weak point that you could ignore like Ben Wallace. Russell averaged over 15 ppg for his career, and he scored primarily from the high post, forcing the other team to have their center a bit further away from the basket than a low post scorer would.

INTANGIBLES: Finally, Russell compares only to Kareem among the other GOAT candidates in intangibles. He was always a team leader, bringing out the best in his teammates and leading by example . . . not just on the court but in civil rights (his protest of a racist restaurent caused Boston to stop playing exhibitions in the deep South). Compare to Wilt, who was solely concerned with scoring with his 10,000 (by his own estimate) girlfriends, or Jordan, Mr. Corporate America with Air Jordans produced by child labor in Indonesia. In terms of on the court impact, Russell was an immediate winner from his first year in the league, taking a formerly mediocre Celtic team to a title right away and keeping them there for his whole career. Russell didn't take several years of individual great statistical accomplishments for his team to start winning championships like Wilt and Jordan; nor was he ever considered the second best player on any of his 11 titles like Kareem was on the majority of his. Nor did Russell take years off to pursue ego trip hobbies like professional baseball leaving his team in disarray or refer to his teammates as his "supporting cast." Finally, Russell was so respected, he did something none of the other GOAT candidates ever did; he was asked to coach as well as play and he did so well enough to win 2 more NBA championships.

So, Russell was not a great scorer, but he was a dominant rebounder, shotblocker, and the greatest defensive player, leader, and winner in NBA history by a large margin. If it was just about individual stats, the GOAT would be Wilt, easily. But, the point of basketball isn't to score a lot of points, it is to score more points than your opponents enough times and in key situations to win games and championships. Bill Russell did this better than anyone in NBA history, easily. HE is the GOAT.

__________________
If you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk

PauloCatarino

This is a great post. Props.

But the more i read people putting up Russell's name in GOAT discussions (wich is concievable, don't get me wrong), the more my case for Wilt goes stronger.

Yes, one of the measurings of gratness of a basketball player is success (winning). And noone tops Russell in that department...
Still, individual domination should be regarded also. And, in this departament, noone touches Wilt. Only Oscar Robertson, Magic Johnson and Shaquille O'Neal come close.
Wilt toyed with the game itself. He was not that serious regarding playing basketball. Plenty stories are told that he would go out in wild dates, not get any sleep, and the day after scoring 50 points in a game. And grabbing 25 rebounds. Wilt was almost bigger than the game itself.
When he scored 50 ppg in a season, the runner up was 19 ppg lower. 19ppg!Can you imagine that?
And i'm not even talking about how he got the apg records for a center.
Wilt scored more, rebounded more than any other player who ever played. Period.
People talk about Russell's blocks. Yet, there are dozens of stories about opposing players never daring to go into the line trying to score on Wilt.
Wilt was the ultimate intimidator.

Sure, he didn't win as much as Russell. And he had some good supporting casts.
But, dare i say, he never had Bob Cousy or Hondo. And he never had a seasoned team of all stars accostumed to play together and under the same coach.

Not only Wilt has the record for rebounds in a game, he got it against Russell.
He had the edge over Russell in head-to-head battles (i'm too lazy to look it up, but has been posted before).

people may scoff Wilt's 100 point game. But D-Robinson only got to 71 being spoonfed the same way. And Kobe was still 19 points down.

Wether one likes it or not, Wilt Chamberlain domination on the hardwood will never be equalled.

story goes that Wilt once told Michael Jordan. "The NBA changed it's rules to try to stop me. The NBA changed it's rules to help you". And story doesn't tell Jordan's response...

__________________
(...) we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender (...)

BadBaronRudigor

True dat. Wilt is the greatest individual player in NBA history. Unfortunately, he got the numbers v. Russell but Russell got the wins (and while Hondo was legit great, Cousy was grossly overrated) so my choice is Russell. He (and Jordan, my #2) might have been lucky . . . there were a lot of last minute miracle saves (Paxson hits the three! Havlicek steals the ball!) but we are talking about comparing history and luck/destiny counts too. Most talented/most dominant/most everything but winning = Wilt.

__________________
If you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk

Deke

russell won in a league that was 1/3 of the size today. basically it was a lesser achievement then making it past the east or west.

MJ is the greatest because of his very high fg%,monster numbers, 1st team defenses and DPOY,mvps,scoring titles, and championships plus hes the only sg to ever lead a team to multiple titles and the only player to be apart of 2 different 3 peats i believe.

quite a resume.

BadBaronRudigor

greatest SG (or even non-center) sure . . . easy . . . otherwise what does it matter that he is the only SG to ever lead a team to multiple titles. Like saying someone is the only offensive tackle to lead his team to multiple titles; it only matters if his impact is greater than the opponents' quarterbacks' impact.

As for the smaller league theory, that does make it easier to win it all though nowhere near as big a difference as you make out. Problem with your reasoning is that even with a smaller league, the GREATEST players still make the teams (you just don't have as many scrubs) so Russell still faced the best basketball players in the world, they were just concentrated on fewer teams. Thus each round was more difficult (faced more concentrated talent) but the impact of having less total rounds is probably greater than that effect.

That said, 11 championships in 13 years means much more than 6 in 15 despite that. Michael played 179 playoff games, Russell 165, very similar numbers. Even with the easier earlier round serieses, Michael had a playoff series winning percentage of 83%, Russell won 93% so that argument still won't fly. Michael was the second greatest winner of all time, Russell was the greatest.

Oh, and if you include consecutive groupings of 3 straight titles, the Celtics with Russell having an EIGHTPEAT would be essentially two fourpeats so not sure what the big deal about two threepeats when making this particular comparison is.

__________________
If you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk

luther

I have to agree with Paulo in that the reason [b]people here[/i] think he's the best ever is that they've consistently heard that message from Nike and the NBA since the time they were born.

That said, he might be the best player ever. I just wouldn't confuse reality with what makes people believe something. Further, I personally don't believe that "best player ever" is worth even debating, because different eras are incompatible. Are we debating how good someone is compared to his competition, or how good he might be otherwise? If the latter, it's impossible to tell and so a waste of time anyway. Jordan was brilliant. Absolutely wonderful to watch. But so (of players I am old enough to remember seeing in person) Magic, Bird, LeBron, Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan, KG, Pippen, Stockton, Isiah, and others. As good as Jordan? No, probably not, but different. And so is this wine better than that beer? (**** apples and oranges, I prefer the aforementioned.)

I'd say this: there hasn't been a wing player better than Jordan. But at a certain point of brilliance, it barely matters how you want to argue. It's more like 1a, 1b, 1c than 1, 2, 3.

And again, I'll agree that the reason people here believe MJ is the best ever is marketing. Never give people too much credit. They almost never deserve it.

luther

The exact opposite argument could be made by the fact that he played in a smaller league. We often hear about the watering down of the league through expansion. Look at some of those old teams; they're nearly all-star teams.