How great are the greats really?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from brndonthagreat. Show brndonthagreat's posts

    How great are the greats really?

     If Bill Russel were to be replaced with Dwight Howard would the celtics have as many championships as they did led by Bill. Would Bill Russel even be able to lead the Magic to a finals? what would the cavs be if they had Larry Bird and Lebron were the one battling Magic's Lakers in the 80s?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BirdandCowens. Show BirdandCowens's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    Would Magic have led the Houston Rockets to 5 NBA titles?

    Also noticed how you deliberately spell Russell incorectly.  We had another troll that used to do that...........
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from brndonthagreat. Show brndonthagreat's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really?:
    Would Magic have led the Houston Rockets to 5 NBA titles? Also noticed how you deliberately spell Russell incorectly.  We had another troll that used to do that...........
    Posted by BirdandCowens

    MAN ARE YOU FOLLOWING ME. I HONESTLY SPELLED RUSSELL INCORRECTLY. I APLOGIZE TO THE CELTIC FAITHFUL. GOOD QUESTION THO. IM NOT SURE HE WOULD HAVE BUT I DO THINK HIS LEGACY WOULD NOT TAKE A BIGGER FALL THAN RUSSELLS.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BirdandCowens. Show BirdandCowens's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really?:
    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really? : MAN ARE YOU FOLLOWING ME. I HONESTLY SPELLED RUSSELL INCORRECTLY. I APLOGIZE TO THE CELTIC FAITHFUL. GOOD QUESTION THO. IM NOT SURE HE WOULD HAVE BUT I DO THINK HIS LEGACY WOULD NOT TAKE A BIGGER FALL THAN RUSSELLS.
    Posted by brndonthagreat

    11 titles in 13 years is a legacy unmatched by anyone in any sport.  Even Magic himself would admint that!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from brndonthagreat. Show brndonthagreat's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really?:
    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really? : 11 titles in 13 years is a legacy unmatched by anyone in any sport.  Even Magic himself would admint that!
    Posted by BirdandCowens



    I put more clout in lance armstrongs 7 consecutive tour de frances. Bill Russell is good but i can name 10 players who were better and some dont have a title to their name.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BirdandCowens. Show BirdandCowens's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really?:
    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really? : I put more clout in lance armstrongs 7 consecutive tour de frances. Bill Russell is good but i can name 10 players who were better and some dont have a title to their name.
    Posted by brndonthagreat


    Team sport is implied here, of course.  I will bet you never saw Russell play - therefore, your entire....ah....argument is flawed. 

    This will go right up there with that other idiot GlasgowRanger as one of the dumbest things ever written in this forum.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from mem17. Show mem17's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    You got a lot of nerve to come onto a Celtics forum and put down Bill Russell. 11 championships in 13 years speaks for itself. All your woulda, shoulda and coulda's don't mean a thing. What actually was accomplished by Russell "is what it is" as Kevin Garnett loves to say.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    Foolish to demean Russells accomplishments. First off, dont embarrass yourself comparing Howard to Russell... Bill was a great player, I watched him play and win championships and can recall the aura surrounding him on the court.

    The Celtics were always about team ball back then and there were plenty of superstars but only one team always won..the Celtics.  Read Russells book from long ago.. Go up for Glory... lets you into his mind about how he played the game and explains how he forced the game to be played the way he wanted.

    Russell is the greatest player in the history of basketball..period. Not MJ, not Larry, not Kareem or Wilt or Magic.  The man made it happen since he was in college.. 2 NCAA titles in his last 2 years at SF, then Olympic Gold, then 11 NBA titles in 13 years.. prob 12 if not for injury.  

    Think about it.. since college hes won 14 major championships (11 nba, 2 ncaa, 1 olympic)  in a 15 year period. That record cannot be denied or approached by anyone else.. as Russ is the only common denominator. Hes the greatest ever and its not even close  
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    Russell is the greatest ever. What he has you can't define by points or rebounds. Only by titles. Won at every level.

    I can't believe how people so easily and casually write off the accomplishments of Bill Russell. I wonder if the same thing will happen to Kareem, Magic, Bird and Jordan? More than likely with human nature being what it is.

    Back to Russell. Granted the league was smaller when he played. But the teams were loaded with talent. Russell was simply the best there was.

    Would he have won as many titles in the, and I hate this word, modern NBA? I don't know, I'd say he'd win at least 6 or 7 titles. I think Jordan is one of the few players who matched Russell for his competitive nature and will.

    Magic and Bird had it as well, but not to the same extent, although they did have some better competition than Jordan faced.

    I shudder to think when it comes to where players could have played. Magic was close to going to Chicago on draft day. Imagine Johnson vs Bird in the same conference?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really?:
    Read Russells book from long ago.. Go up for Glory... lets you into his mind about how he played the game and explains how he forced the game to be played the way he wanted.  
    Posted by Karllost


    Have you read his book 'Second Wind'? It's the best sports book that I've ever read. Can't recommend it highly enough. Made me appreciate the man rather than the player. Always had a ton of respect for him though.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from TeamUmbutu. Show TeamUmbutu's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    Having post players play in different eras negates some of their special abilities and capabilities that exist in there own era. Put Dwight Howard back in the 60's and he is just a big man that can rebound and can't shoot for distance. Yes, he could box out and rebound, however, he would not be allowed sumo wrestling and driving at the chest of the opposing center as he does today.

    I saw Russell play, and he was an amazing athlete. However, in the current NBA that enjoys sumo wrestling in the low post, I don't think that he would be as effective due to rule changes, and more prevalent star calls. The closest thing that the NBA has to Russell today is KG, and even though he is significantly heavier and 7'1" tall, KG can not stand up to Howard in the low post the way that he is allowed to play today. In the 60's I believe that both Russell and KG would dominate Howard in the low post.

    Howard - 6'11" 265 lbs
    Russell - 6'9" 215 lbs.
    KG - 7'1" 245 lbs.

    I do think that many non-lowpost players would be effective in multiple eras. For example Bird, and Magic might be even more effective today with the dominating star calls that are allowed, and they would probably also dominate in the 60's.

    Personally, I like the 60's style the best. It puts more control of the game into the hands of the players, and reduces the amount of control that is allowed to the referees and NBA management.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    I have to say that if Russ played in today's era he would bulk up.....I remember him being listed at 220 after his first couple of years.....my guess is he would be playing at 240 or more in today's game......20 lbs of muscle with today's regimen of weight training and supplements is a given...and let's remember.....he played effectively against Wilt who outweighed him by 30-50 lbs and had 2-3 inches on him....the man was an incredible athlete and an absolute genius when it came to basketball IQ and manipulating his opponent.....he always said....."I can't block every shot.....but they don't know when I'm going to do it".....
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUMcHale. Show RUMcHale's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    Russell won more titles than anyone as a player. Does it make him the best player? Dunno, but if you compare him to say Wilt in playing stats alone then Wilt owns the day. Sadly, the NBA in the 60s isn't what it is today with a far bigger player base along with a global element. Equally, you can only compete against what's put in front of you and Russell did that.

    Someone wrote the 60s teams were loaded with talent. This was NOT true and sadly not ALL the talent was in the NBA and if people looked at who played in the ABA it becomes patently evident the NBA didn't include all the best players. Whose to say how many foreign players in other leagues never stepped foot in the U.S were running around. Today I think it's fair to say the NBA has the best foreign players in Gasol, Nowitzki, Ginobli, Yao to name but a few. But is Russell the greatest? We all have our own definition of what that encompasses and thus our own conclusion. That should be enough for each of us on an individual basis.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    BC......you and I are almost always on the same page but I have to disagree with part of your last post....the NBA was loaded with black all stars when Russ played...just take a look at the centers....Wilt, Bellamy, Thurmond, Beaty.....guys like Oscar and Baylor....why, we even fielded the first all black starting five....the league in the '60's was loaded.....the ABA did field some great players as well....Mel Daniels and Artis Gilmore.....Dr J....George McGinnis...they had some real stars that could have started in the NBA....which actually strengthens the position that some of the greatest players performed between the late '50's and mid '70's....George Mikan was a great player in the era prior to the introduction of the shot clock and the other rule changes that brought in the "modern NBA"....of course that has been the consensus opinion for decades......twenty somethings have their own idea of the modern NBA.....they think Bird/Magic......or MJ.....or Kobe and Shaq.....but the game as we know it began in the mid '50's....
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from TeamUmbutu. Show TeamUmbutu's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    If any center from the 70's, 80's, 90's, or 2000's were to be sent back in time and play by the rules of the day, and the referee's calling style of the day, Russell would still have eleven championships and would still dominate. However, if he was brought into today's game where at one time Shaq, and now Howard are allowed to use their superior size and strength to move people around, drive away blocks, drive lighter individuals out of the way, and in general sumo wrestle Russell would have a much harder time. He would probably still be an all-star, but he would not have as many championships.

    If you watch some of the plays or games with Chamberlain, there was little or or very little contact between the two. The style was mostly fast break with less half court. Today, the play-offs are mostly half court games with low post players wrestling for position with with and without the ball.

    Bulking up would not help. At 240 lbs Russell would still not in Howard's, Shaq's, or Ming's weight class. Howard moves KG around like he is not there, and he is 245-250.

    Comparing eras for big men is difficult.

    On a side-bar, I think that the only centers since the sixties that could have given Russell a challenge in his own era, were Jabbar, and the Dream.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    Great post.....I would have to agree....
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    the premise of this post is hack kneed.  too far into a vacuum.  dwight howard couldn't mop the floors of the celts locker room in the 1960s- he wouldn't have been put on the team becuase his mental make up would not be a match, despite his physical gifts.  period. 

    likewise, bill russell likely could not be plopped into the orlando magic of today and get much of anything done- the rest of the team would probably quit because russell was too intense and therefore bothersome and they were too comfortable making their big money and achieving their mediocrity.  i honestly believe that the vast majority of players in the leauge would perform a picket strike if someone of the intensity and integrity of character of a bill russell was to show up and demand the best and beyond from each of them.

    the greatness of russell is that in an era when HOF players like tommy heinsohn and most others had to get SUMMER JOBS to make a decent living, russell was so dedicated to a game that he loved and moreover to a franchise that he loved.  NO PLAYER playing today can even hold a candle to that. 

    the only players in recent memory showing a glimpse of the intensity that russell had were cowens, bird, magic, jordan and perhaps kobe.  more than one of those players mentioned had their intensity focused more on themslves and individual achievments than the overall team, unlike russell. 

    i would also argue that in a time capsule, the paul pierce of the 2008 playoffs was at a similar level of russell intensity for the CLE and LAL series, at least worthy of being mentioned in the same realm for what he did in that window of time, not necessarily before or since.

    that's a short list of ANY players in the last forty years to even be worthy of being mentioned in the same sentence of russell style intensity and none of them were the same or even close to russell.

    that's why you can't plug and play with players across genres, you can't account for generational motivation and laziness in such comparisons.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from GlasgowRangers. Show GlasgowRangers's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really?:
    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really? : 11 titles in 13 years is a legacy unmatched by anyone in any sport.  Even Magic himself would admint that!
    Posted by BirdandCowens

    Yet he's not the greatest player of all time. That tells you about the value of 11 titles in that bush league era.

    6 is greater than 11

    That's the math in the NBA.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from GlasgowRangers. Show GlasgowRangers's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really?:
    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really? : Team sport is implied here, of course.  I will bet you never saw Russell play - therefore, your entire....ah....argument is flawed.  This will go right up there with that other idiot GlasgowRanger as one of the dumbest things ever written in this forum.
    Posted by BirdandCowens


    Only an idiot would brag about the"unmatched" legacy of a player who's not the greatest of all time. That tells you about the value of the "unmatched" legacy: worth less than 6 rings in the big-time NBA.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from GlasgowRangers. Show GlasgowRangers's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really?:
    Russell is the greatest player in the history of basketball..period. Not MJ,

    Says who? Not according to the national media. That's interesting. I can't wait...

    From NBA.com, http://www.nba.com/history/players/jordan_bio.html

    "By acclamation, Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player of all time."

    From ESPN, http://espn.go.com/sportscentury/

    Michael Jordan, who dominated the NBA and won six championships, has been named the greatest North American athlete of the 20th century by SportsCentury's distinguished 48-member panel.

    Encyclopedia Britannica,  http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/306201/Michael-Jordan

    Michael Jordan, in full Michael Jeffrey Jordan, byname Air Jordan  (b. February 17, 1963, Brooklyn, New York, U.S.), American collegiate and professional basketball player, widely considered to be the greatest all-around player in the history of the game.

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/features/jordan/news/2001/08/22/jordan_greatest/

    Bill Russell: "I cannot imagine anyone playing any better."

    Sam Jones: "He's the best I've ever seen."

    Bob Cousy: "He's by far the best since Naismith hung up the basket."

    Too bad the value of the 11 rings are dwindling, even according to some Celtics...
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from concord27. Show concord27's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    This always gets me in era discussions, almost all of us are taller than our parents.  In this era Russell would most likely have been two to three inches taller allowing him to play certainly at his circa 1960's ability.  He was a big man who dominated playing against bigger big man Wilt, Nate Thurmond, Willis Reed, Walt Bellamy and other giants.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    Right on Concord......great points!
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BirdandCowens. Show BirdandCowens's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    In Response to Re: How great are the greats really?:
    Right on Concord......great points!
    Posted by Duke4



    I agree.  Back to the basket centers are more rare now than before.  We have Howard, Bynum and Shaq...most others like to face up.  Russ would eat them alive

    And before some lakers idiot comes on here and says Wilt averaged 27 ppg vs Russ, let's just end this discussion.  In his book, Russell's Rules, Bill said they both got out of the rivalry what they wanted.  Wilt was obsessed with stats, and he got them, Bill was obsessed with winning.......................and he got it!
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from TeamUmbutu. Show TeamUmbutu's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    Acie,

    I think that everyone on the board has a favorite player, and you re no exception. Paul Pierce is many things, however, "intense" has never been on of them. Paul is a very good clutch shooter, calm under pressure, with tons of confidence and drive. The Celtics would not be the Celtics without him. Unless our definitions are different for the word, I don't see it.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from SeemsToMe. Show SeemsToMe's posts

    Re: How great are the greats really?

    Why is it that when comparing generations everyone wants to do a 'Remake' of the older generation player? Sort of sounds like a confession that the players of the 50's and 60's were not as good as the current generation. Here are a few things they would have to do to compete with the current players.  Put on 10-50 lbs, make them 2" taller, improve their shooting by 5-10%, make all the white players as quick as the black players and at the same time teach them how to separate their feet from the floor. And when dribbling the ball point out that they have 2 hands and that it is legal to use your 'off' hand. But most important of all figure out what to do with all the white players of the 50's and 60's that would not make the rosters of the modern generation.

    SeemsToMe
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share