There is only one "G O A T"

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

    There is only one "G O A T"

    The reason they play the games is to win the championship.......so many fans point to Phil's 11 titles with two teams as proof that he is the greatest coach in NBA history......that said......

    Bill Russell is the greatest winner in the history of team sports...

    His team won 55 straight games over two undefeated seasons on it's was to two NCAA Championships....he was it's biggest star

    His team brought home the Gold for the USA following his senior year

    He entered the NBA and revolutionized the game with his defense and rebounding.....

    His team reached the NBA Finals 12 times in 13 years, winning 11 titles (he was injured in the '58 Finals....if not for that injury his team probably wins 10 in a row)

    He was the player coach of the last two champions, leading an aging team past the younger Sixers in '68 (Wilt & Co.) and the younger Lakers in '69 (Baylor, West, and Chamberlain who took a 2-0 series lead only to lose game 7 at home)

    He was a multiple MVP and all star who was named the greatest player in history the last time they voted.....

    Big Bill was the ultimate winner.......there was no one close when it came to clutch play and leading a team to the pinnacle.....

    The difference between Russell and Chamberlain was the fact that Russ played to win championships and Wilt played to set individual records even if it meant his team would come up short in the end.... 

    That statue was a long time coming.....I am glad it will come in his lifetime...
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from LakerT. Show LakerT's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    In Response to There is only one "G O A T":
    [QUOTE]The reason they play the games is to win the championship.......so many fans point to Phil's 11 titles with two teams as proof that he is the greatest coach in NBA history......that said...... Bill Russell is the greatest winner in the history of team sports... His team won 55 straight games over two undefeated seasons on it's was to two NCAA Championships....he was it's biggest star His team brought home the Gold for the USA following his senior year He entered the NBA and revolutionized the game with his defense and rebounding..... His team reached the NBA Finals 12 times in 13 years, winning 11 titles (he was injured in the '58 Finals....if not for that injury his team probably wins 10 in a row) He was the player coach of the last two champions, leading an aging team past the younger Sixers in '68 (Wilt & Co.) and the younger Lakers in '69 (Baylor, West, and Chamberlain who took a 2-0 series lead only to lose game 7 at home) He was a multiple MVP and all star who was named the greatest player in history the last time they voted..... Big Bill was the ultimate winner.......there was no one close when it came to clutch play and leading a team to the pinnacle..... The difference between Russell and Chamberlain was the fact that Russ played to win championships and Wilt played to set individual records even if it meant his team would come up short in the end....  That statue was a long time coming.....I am glad it will come in his lifetime...
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    You conveniently left out the facts that russell played in a league that consisted of a whopping 8 or 9 teams, and that he played with how many HOFs?

    Also comparing Wilt to russell is absolutely hilarious. Look at their 142 head to head meetings. Wilt averaged 29 and 29, while russell averaged 14 and 23. Those numbers speak for themselves, but hey, you are a celtic fan, so delusions are common. Cool
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from LakerT. Show LakerT's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    Hedley Cool

    When people make comparisons between Wilt and russell as Duke attempted, you have to look at the stats of when they went head to head, as they both played the same position and were matched up on offense and defense. As the stats clearly prove, Wilt dominated russell.

    Now as far as ring conversation, Magic did not play the same position as bird, even though Magic could play any position but bird could not. Worthy and karl malone did not play the same position either, so therefore rings is the best way to look at those players careers. Nice try by you though. Surprised

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from truth-torpedo34. Show truth-torpedo34's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    head to head stats when it makes sense to argue your point, and rings when it's convenient for your argument. Tayshawn playing both sides.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from LakerT. Show LakerT's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    In Response to Re: There is only one "G O A T":
    [QUOTE]head to head stats when it makes sense to argue your point, and rings when it's convenient for your argument. Tayshawn playing both sides.
    Posted by truth-torpedo34[/QUOTE]

    Stats do not lie and neither do rings. russell has more rings than Wilt which can be attributed to his supporting cast as the hall of fame does not lie either. All that I know is that 29 and 29 is way better than 14 and 23 head to head. Cool
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from truth-torpedo34. Show truth-torpedo34's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    The hall of fame argument with wilt has been debunked already. In some years, specifically in philly, he had 3 other allstars on his teams. Jerry West himself is quoted on the record as saying that Russ was better, and inferred that Wilt was just a stat-monger. If there was a stat for choking in crunch time, he would've been up there as well.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from CelitcsFoo. Show CelitcsFoo's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    If we went by the stats of conquering females, Wilt takes home the trophy though.........
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from truth-torpedo34. Show truth-torpedo34's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    Wilt is second to none in that category.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from LakerT. Show LakerT's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    In Response to Re: There is only one "G O A T":
    [QUOTE]The hall of fame argument with wilt has been debunked already. In some years, specifically in philly, he had 3 other allstars on his teams. Jerry West himself is quoted on the record as saying that Russ was better, and inferred that Wilt was just a stat-monger. If there was a stat for choking in crunch time, he would've been up there as well.
    Posted by truth-torpedo34[/QUOTE]

    Thanks for backing up your opinions with names and stats.

    These stats are undeniable: 142 head to head meetings between Wilt and russell

    Wilt - 29 points, 29 rebounds
    russell - 14 points, 23 rebounds

    Utter and absolute domination

    russell is not even top 2 of greatest centers (Kareem and Wilt), much less greatest player of all time.Wink

    silly celtic fans
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    Tell that to Jerry West who said if he were starting a team he would start with Bill Russell...
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    Hey, during those head to head games.....whose team won more often? ......Russ played off Wilt and didn't attempt to play him defensively early in many games....which gave Wilt confidence....in crunch time Bill was there and Wilt had to work much harder to score....winning was Russell's only reason for playing....mind games helped him psych out his opponents....he was the master.....an example of taking a guy out of his game was when he played Walt Bellamy....he'd ask "Bells" why the guys weren't feeding him the ball....Walter would start talking about how his teammates weren't giving his his due respect....Bells would sulk through the rest of the game....Wilt was all about HIS stats.....he never fouled out of a game because he made it a goal....the only problem was, when he did get into foul trouble he stopped playing defense so as not to foul out.....
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from LakerT. Show LakerT's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    In Response to Re: There is only one "G O A T":
    [QUOTE]Who cares. King James is better than them both.
    Posted by tompenny[/QUOTE]

    Laughing
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from LakerT. Show LakerT's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    In Response to Re: There is only one "G O A T":
    [QUOTE]Hey, during those head to head games.....whose team won more often? ......Russ played off Wilt and didn't attempt to play him defensively early in many games....which gave Wilt confidence....in crunch time Bill was there and Wilt had to work much harder to score....winning was Russell's only reason for playing....mind games helped him psych out his opponents....he was the master.....an example of taking a guy out of his game was when he played Walt Bellamy....he'd ask "Bells" why the guys weren't feeding him the ball....Walter would start talking about how his teammates weren't giving his his due respect....Bells would sulk through the rest of the game....Wilt was all about HIS stats.....he never fouled out of a game because he made it a goal....the only problem was, when he did get into foul trouble he stopped playing defense so as not to foul out.....
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    russell's teams won more often as due to better teammates as I mentioned earlier. Wilt once averaged 50 points and 26 rebounds in a season, and you say that he needed to be gifted confidence. Hilarious!!!!

    silly celtic fans
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from LakerT. Show LakerT's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    In Response to Re: There is only one "G O A T":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: There is only one "G O A T" : Stupid, ridiculous post.  Russ MADE Sam Jones and Cousy HOF players.  Seems to me West and Baylor would have made it with or without Wilt.  Another reason Russell was so good - he took very good players and made the HOF players.  Wilt never did that - but he did play with 2 of the BEST ever - and only won ONE ring in LA!! League is more than stats - it's rings - and Russ is the king.  Can you imagine if Russ played with West and Baylor?  On the other hand, Wilt would still LOSE if he had Cousy and Sam Jones.  I know your diluted, small brain can't accept that - so here's another one - without MJ, Pippen isn't a Top 50 player, either.  But Shaq without Kobe still is - deny it all you want, cuz you're on ignore after this anyway!
    Posted by hedleylamarr[/QUOTE]

    Cool

    silly celtic fans

    When playing against each other - Wilt, 29 points and 29 rebounds versus russell, 14 points and 23 rebounds.

    It does not take a brain surgeon to figure out which is better.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ItsNot1966anymor. Show ItsNot1966anymor's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    I never saw Russell or Wilt play, so I'm not going to argue either way.  However, to say he is the greatest champion of all time based on his 11 rings in 13 years is a little overstated.  Many of those years, the league only had 8 or 9 teams, 6 of which made the playoffs, and often half of the playoff teams had losing records.  The teams with the best record in each conference got 1st round byes and only had to win 8 playoff games to get the championship.  And of course, Boston was the best during that time.  But, teams no longer get 1st round byes, and since 1984, the champion has had to win either 15 or 16 playoff games.  There have been some years when 1 or 2 of the lowest seeds have had a losing record, but unlike the Celtics glorydays, there have also been instances of the #8 seed beating the #1 seed in the first round - that has happend 4 times.  

    People often assume that the Bulls would have won 8 straight if Jordan had not retired.  I don't think so.  I doubt you will see any team win more than 3 in a row.  Teams don't even get to the Finals that often any more.  The Celtics from '84 - '87 were the last team to make 4 straight Finals appearances and they lost 2 of those.   So, while winning 11 rings in 13 years was a great accomplishment, it has to be looked at in the context of which it occcurred.  Will anyone ever do it again?  No, but only because championships are harder now.  If Russell played in today's game, he wouldn't be able to make that claim.  Phil Jackson on the other hand has coached in today's game. In my opinion, that makes his 11 even more impressive.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ItsNot1966anymor. Show ItsNot1966anymor's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    From what I've read about Russell, it seems he loved his teammates, but otherwise had no love for the organization, or its fans, for many years.  To the contrary, it appears he was indifferent, or at times disdainful due to actual (or some might argue perceived) racism, and he has only softened his attitude in recent years.  Even so, it appears Boston fans embrace him, and he is widely recognized by fans and media everywhere among the best players in NBA history.  What's funny is that, in contrast, LeBron is hated by most fans and media outside of Miami, and there is no substantive social issues underlying that hatred.  It's all bitter ex-girlfriend kind of hatred, and is to a large extent created or enhanced by the media.  Genuine social issues underlie Russell's disdain for the public, but the public embraces him.  LeBron is mostly likeable, but the public scorns him out of jealousy.  What a paradox of irony.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    In Response to Re: There is only one "G O A T":
    [QUOTE]I never saw Russell or Wilt play, so I'm not going to argue either way.  However, to say he is the greatest champion of all time based on his 11 rings in 13 years is a little overstated.  Many of those years, the league only had 8 or 9 teams, 6 of which made the playoffs, and often half of the playoff teams had losing records.  The teams with the best record in each conference got 1st round byes and only had to win 8 playoff games to get the championship.  And of course, Boston was the best during that time.  But, teams no longer get 1st round byes, and since 1984, the champion has had to win either 15 or 16 playoff games.  There have been some years when 1 or 2 of the lowest seeds have had a losing record, but unlike the Celtics glorydays, there have also been instances of the #8 seed beating the #1 seed in the first round - that has happend 4 times.   People often assume that the Bulls would have won 8 straight if Jordan had not retired.  I don't think so.  I doubt you will see any team win more than 3 in a row.  Teams don't even get to the Finals that often any more.  The Celtics from '84 - '87 were the last team to make 4 straight Finals appearances and they lost 2 of those.   So, while winning 11 rings in 13 years was a great accomplishment, it has to be looked at in the context of which it occcurred.  Will anyone ever do it again?  No, but only because championships are harder now.  If Russell played in today's game, he wouldn't be able to make that claim.  Phil Jackson on the other hand has coached in today's game. In my opinion, that makes his 11 even more impressive.
    Posted by ItsNot1966anymor[/QUOTE]


    I never saw Babe Ruth play, either, but I heard he was pretty good!
    No playoffs in baseball, then, so................he wouldn't be as good now?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ItsNot1966anymor. Show ItsNot1966anymor's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    In Response to Re: There is only one "G O A T":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: There is only one "G O A T" : I never saw Babe Ruth play, either, but I heard he was pretty good! No playoffs in baseball, then, so................he wouldn't be as good now?
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11[/QUOTE]

    I was not arguing that Russell would not be good, but that his legacy would not be bolsterd by 11 rings in 13 years.  In the modern NBA format, the Bulls won 6 of 8, the Spurs won 4 of 9, the Lakers 5 of 9, and the Lakers 5 of 11.  Jordan, Kareem, Shaq, Duncan and Kobe all have their place among the greats.  Russell should not be elevated simply because he won 11 of 13 in an era when it was easier to win.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    In Response to Re: There is only one "G O A T":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: There is only one "G O A T" : I was not arguing that Russell would not be good, but that his legacy would not be bolsterd by 11 rings in 13 years.  In the modern NBA format, the Bulls won 6 of 8, the Spurs won 4 of 9, the Lakers 5 of 9, and the Lakers 5 of 11.  Jordan, Kareem, Shaq, Duncan and Kobe all have their place among the greats.  Russell should not be elevated simply because he won 11 of 13 in an era when it was easier to win.
    Posted by ItsNot1966anymor[/QUOTE]

    So, MOST of the Yankees 26 titles are "tainted" because it was so much easier to win in the 20's - 50's?

    That would be okay with me....:)... but I don't discount anything or anyone.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    '66 you do make some very good observations and I respect your opinion....still, there were also the back to back undefeated seasons (NCAA) and the Gold Medal.......that is 14 rings in 15 years.....coincidence....? .....Russ beat his opponents with physical skills and mental games.....the year he retired the Celtics went into the tank...
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ItsNot1966anymor. Show ItsNot1966anymor's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    I think the  point is that Jordan, Kobe, Shaq, Duncan, Magic (and for the benefit of you Celtics fans, Larry Bird) never had the opportunity to play in Russell's era.  If they had, perhaps they could have won 11 of 13, or at least caused Russell to lose some of his 11.  You cannot equivocally state that Russell is the best of all time based on championships, because he didn't face the challenges of winning a championship in today's format, and one or more of the recent players I mentioned might have rivaled him in his era if given the opportunity.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    In Response to Re: There is only one "G O A T":
    [QUOTE]I never saw Russell or Wilt play, so I'm not going to argue either way.  However, to say he is the greatest champion of all time based on his 11 rings in 13 years is a little overstated.  Many of those years, the league only had 8 or 9 teams, 6 of which made the playoffs, and often half of the playoff teams had losing records.  The teams with the best record in each conference got 1st round byes and only had to win 8 playoff games to get the championship.  And of course, Boston was the best during that time.  But, teams no longer get 1st round byes, and since 1984, the champion has had to win either 15 or 16 playoff games.  There have been some years when 1 or 2 of the lowest seeds have had a losing record, but unlike the Celtics glorydays, there have also been instances of the #8 seed beating the #1 seed in the first round - that has happend 4 times.   People often assume that the Bulls would have won 8 straight if Jordan had not retired.  I don't think so.  I doubt you will see any team win more than 3 in a row.  Teams don't even get to the Finals that often any more.  The Celtics from '84 - '87 were the last team to make 4 straight Finals appearances and they lost 2 of those.   So, while winning 11 rings in 13 years was a great accomplishment, it has to be looked at in the context of which it occcurred.  Will anyone ever do it again?  No, but only because championships are harder now.  If Russell played in today's game, he wouldn't be able to make that claim.  Phil Jackson on the other hand has coached in today's game. In my opinion, that makes his 11 even more impressive.
    Posted by ItsNot1966anymor[/QUOTE]


    Point taken in regards to the size of the league when Russell was playing. However the size of the league meant that teams were stronger than in todays game. Imagine if the NBA had 20 teams today? It would be so hard to get a start, and it must have been ever more so back in the 60's. Would have had to have been extremely good just to make the roster.

    When you weigh up his accomplishments in college and winning the Olympic Gold Medal in 1956, I agree that he is the best player to have played the game. At the very least the man just knew how to win.
     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Jump-ball-overtime. Show Jump-ball-overtime's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"

    Star calls were invented for Jordan. The NBA today is the result of NBA focus on stars, after Larry and Magic showed the NBA the way to the bank.

    Before Jordan, the league was much more pure.

    Star calls in the NBA = steroids in baseball

    All records are questionable starting with Jordan's records.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Da+Flyin+Hawaiian. Show Da+Flyin+Hawaiian's posts

    Re: There is only one "G O A T"


    I enjoy all of your comments however we all need to realize that as time goes on, players change. Human beings get larger, faster, more athletic etc. This goes for all sports.  The Great Bill Russel played in a different era. If he changed as time went on, and he played today he may have been 6'11" or maybe 7'0" tall. He may have been a lot better all round. If Wilt played today he may have been as tall as Yao. How really knows. If LBJ, DH, KG as examples played 40 years or so ago they may have been any where from 6'5" to 6'9". Russel was 6'9".

    Everything is relevent. Everything changes including human beings, as time changes. If Russel played today approx. 40 years in his future, with his abilitiy that he had back then, he may have been the Best player on earth.

    If we want to compare just for the fun of it, we first need to put everything into prospective. If not, Russel may not even be in the top 30 Best Players. 

    Something on one can take away from him is all of titles that he won.


    In my mind based on what I saw going back to the 60's. The Great Bill Russel would be #1. Hands down !!

    Aloha
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share