@craig44 I am circling back to you specifically because you offer good insight and opinions. But to be clear, I’m not trying to antagonize in any way.
Russell’s shooting percentage is first (best) or second on the Celtics in all but one season from his rookie year until his age 30 season. So, again, to say he wasn’t capable of scoring just isn’t an accurate statement nor is the statement that his shooting less would some how make him less efficient.
This thread was started (by me) as a commentary on how dominant an offensive force Wilt Chamberlain was - the most dominant the game has ever seen and by a considerable margin. It is also only half of the game and the responsibility. However prolific you may be there is another half of the game. Bill dominated on D the way Wilt did on O; that is probably the best and the most comprehensible way to put it.
It seems like the argument here that because we don’t have stats to correlate to it that defense doesn’t matter and should be ignored?
That doesn’t make much sense; quantified or not, it was played and like in a lot of sports it’s impact on a game often goes understated or ignored yet in the very same breath most of those same people immediately revert to its being the foundation of winning championships.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
Seeing that was my phrase,I'll respond to it with the only defensive metric available for that era, career Defensive Win Shares and Bill Russell owns that one by a landslide.
Imma stay out of the debate because it's been beat to death, but I do want to say that defensive win shares don't work. They are calculated with a whole bunch of formulas to give the appearance that they are related in some way to Bill James' Win Shares for baseball, but they're not. And they can't be, because basketball is a team sport and the entire Win Shares concept doesn't work in team games.
NBA defensive win shares start with a statistic called "defensive rating", which is fatally flawed. If the hypothetical GOAT defender plays with four defensive Keystone Cops, that GOAT's "defensive rating" will be terrible. There is an attempt made to disentangle each player from his teammates, but it doesn't work because it isn't possible that it could work. Because basketball is a team game. All else equal, a great defender will have more defensive Win Shares than a terrible defender, but when is all else equal? Certainly not in a Russell/Chamberlain comparison, and Russell's higher position on this list doesn't really tell us anything important in that comparison.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
I said a long time ago that it's hard to consider someone the GOAT when he didn't skate meaningful minutes after his 27th birthday. @Goldenage has never answered my argument.
@daltex said:
I said a long time ago that it's hard to consider someone the GOAT when he didn't skate meaningful minutes after his 27th birthday. @Goldenage has never answered my argument.
He played as long as Jim Brown did, and Brown is a GOAT with Sanders.
GOALIES — Patrick Roy, Martin Brodeur, Ken Dryden, Bernie Parent, Terry Sawchuk, Glenn Hall, Jacques Plante
DEFENCEMEN — Bobby Orr, Doug Harvey, Nicklas Lidstrom, Eddie Shore
FORWARDS — Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, Maurice Richard, Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau
In Bowman's own words:
“It’s so hard ... I can’t narrow it down.
“The easiest one is on defence. Orr, Harvey — Eddie Shore, I didn’t see him play but I know what people told me about him -— and Lidstrom. I don’t think anyone would argue about those four. Those are mine.
“Up front, I’d still have Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe, Richard. I’d have a hard time pushing any of them out. Jean Beliveau, you could throw him in there. But to me, Howe and Richard, their accomplishments speak for themselves. Gretzky, Lemieux as well. I mean, who else would you have in there?
“The Rocket, a lot of people never saw him play. I saw him play a ton. Talk about putting people in the rink. Do I want to be excited to go and watch this guy play? Oh my God.
“I talked a lot to (Hall of Fame Canadiens coach) Toe Blake when I was working in Montreal. And this is amazing. He said the three players that pulled him out of his seat continuously — Howie Morenz, Rocket Richard and Bobby Hull. Those were his guys.
“A lot has to do with excitement. Before Gretzky, before expansion — and I lived through this — the argument always was, who’s the better player, Howe or Richard? This is what people always said: If you want to fill your building, you pick the Rocket. If you want to win championships, you pick Howe.
“In goal, well, in the modern day era, it would be hard to go against Brodeur and Roy. I had Dryden with me and I know how good he was. Dryden was an exceptional goalie on a great team. It’s not easy to get 18, 20 shots, you’d better be ready for every one of them. Sawchuk, Hall, Plante, Frankie Brimsek. I go to those four but Brimsek, he only played 10 years. The next era, Dryden, Parent, Roy, Brodeur. Patrick and Brodeur, longevity.”
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
@erikthredd said:
I found a quick way to check Wilt vs Russell head to head in the playoffs and how his points per game were affected with Russell covering him compared to Wilt vs the rest of the NBA.
Wilt's point per game averages below are listed as"
his ppg in regular season that year
his ppg in playoff rounds before facing Boston
his ppg vs Russell/Boston in the next round
1959-60
37.6ppg regular season
38.7ppg in 1st round vs Syracuse in playoffs
30.5ppg vs Russell in round 2. Boston won series 4-2 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1961-62
50.4ppg in regular season
37.0ppg in 1st round vs Syracuse
33.6ppg vs Russell in round 2. Boston won series 4-3 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1963-64
36.9ppg in regular season
38.6ppg in 1st round vs STL in playoffs
29.2ppg vs Russell in Finals. Boston wins series 4-1 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1964-65
34.7ppg in regular season
27.8ppg in 1st round vs Cincinnati in playoffs
30.1ppg vs Russell in round 2. Boston wins series 4-3
WIlt scoring went up vs Russell in this playoff series
1965-66
33.5ppg in regular season
28.0ppg vs Russell in round 1. Boston wins series 4-1 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1966-67
24.1ppg in regular season
28.0ppg in 1st round vs Cincinnati in playoffs
21.6ppg vs Russell in round 2. Philly wins series 4-1 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell but Philly wins series
1967-68
24.1ppg in regular season
25.5ppg in 1st round vs NY in playoffs
22.1ppg vs Russell in round 2. Boston wins series 4-3 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1968-69
20.5ppg in regular season
12.0ppg in 1st round vs SFW
19.2ppg in 2nd round vs ATL
11.7ppg in Finals vs Russell. Boston wins series 4-3 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
Wilt played against Russell in 8 playoff series (including two Finals) and in 7 out of the 8 series his scoring average went down with Russell covering him head to head. That one playoff series when Wilt averaged more vs Russell he still ended up losing the series. Russell won 7 out of the 8 playoffs series vs Wilt.
So to sum this comment up,when Russell faced Wilt in a playoff series 87.5% of the time his defense held Wilt to less points than he came in averaging. In two series it was considerably lower than what Wilt was averaging during the regular season.
Nice research. Proves what a great defender Russell was. I am surprised that Wilt's scoring average EVER went up against Bill.
I don't think anyone has disputed that Russell is one of, if not the best defenders of all time.
How you Russell fans completely ignore the fact that Wilt scored TWICE as many points in roughly the same amount of games is astounding.
Just because the Celtics had the best team doesn't automatically prove their best player was the GOAT.
Since you guys like to play "what if"; what if Wilt didn't have to score so much for his teams and could focus mostly on defense?
He was already top 5 (?) defensively all time. Probably puts him first. He probably still scores more points, but it wouldn't be by such an ASTRONOMICAL number.
MVP awards are another silly way to compare the two. The MVP often goes to the best player on the best team, not the best player in the league.
I am going to stop on these two and simply restate what I said earlier.
I can't believe anyone would rate Bill Russell above Wilt Chamberlain.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
GOALIES — Patrick Roy, Martin Brodeur, Ken Dryden, Bernie Parent, Terry Sawchuk, Glenn Hall, Jacques Plante
DEFENCEMEN — Bobby Orr, Doug Harvey, Nicklas Lidstrom, Eddie Shore
FORWARDS — Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, Maurice Richard, Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau
In Bowman's own words:
“It’s so hard ... I can’t narrow it down.
“The easiest one is on defence. Orr, Harvey — Eddie Shore, I didn’t see him play but I know what people told me about him -— and Lidstrom. I don’t think anyone would argue about those four. Those are mine.
“Up front, I’d still have Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe, Richard. I’d have a hard time pushing any of them out. Jean Beliveau, you could throw him in there. But to me, Howe and Richard, their accomplishments speak for themselves. Gretzky, Lemieux as well. I mean, who else would you have in there?
“The Rocket, a lot of people never saw him play. I saw him play a ton. Talk about putting people in the rink. Do I want to be excited to go and watch this guy play? Oh my God.
“I talked a lot to (Hall of Fame Canadiens coach) Toe Blake when I was working in Montreal. And this is amazing. He said the three players that pulled him out of his seat continuously — Howie Morenz, Rocket Richard and Bobby Hull. Those were his guys.
“A lot has to do with excitement. Before Gretzky, before expansion — and I lived through this — the argument always was, who’s the better player, Howe or Richard? This is what people always said: If you want to fill your building, you pick the Rocket. If you want to win championships, you pick Howe.
“In goal, well, in the modern day era, it would be hard to go against Brodeur and Roy. I had Dryden with me and I know how good he was. Dryden was an exceptional goalie on a great team. It’s not easy to get 18, 20 shots, you’d better be ready for every one of them. Sawchuk, Hall, Plante, Frankie Brimsek. I go to those four but Brimsek, he only played 10 years. The next era, Dryden, Parent, Roy, Brodeur. Patrick and Brodeur, longevity.”
That’s right.
Best forwards ever are Howe, Rocket, 66 and 99.
Best D ever was #4.
Who gets to be paired with #4 is a tough one. Too many way below #4 but on a good level.
it all comes down to this. I can prove to you how good wilt was on offense. you cannot prove to me how good russell was on defense. you have to rely on anecdotes and one fairly useless stat.
at any rate, this is a fun thought experiment.
You can dismiss the DWS but I did say repeatedly that it was the only defensive metric available for that era. That obviously changed due to Russell's dominance on defense (and Wilt's play too,i'll add.) This subject goes much deeper than you're willing to give it and that's fine but don't sit there and just ignore how Russell's defense changed how the NBA tracked that side of the ball.
Its not just his/all defense that the NBA started to track but they also decided to start handing out a Finals MVP award in Russell's final season as a player/coach that saw them beat the Lakers for his 11th title in 13 seasons.
He won 11 titles and had their been a Finals MVP he probably would have won,at the very least,anywhere from 7-9 if not more in those 11 seasons. This whole Russell/Wilt debate would have still be going on had that happened but it would have changed quite a bit in Russell's favor. You know this is true because us Pats fans have been using the same argument for Brady's Rings/FMVPs for years.
One thing i want to know is if Wilt was this great statistical monster on both sides of the ball then how did Bill Russell win 5 regular season MVP awards to just Wilt's 4? You would think that all of Wilt's points,rebounds and assists he was averaging would have counted for something more with the MVP voters. 😉😉😉😉😉
Empty stats like that puts you in that James Harden/Russell Westbrook all time grouping,imho. 😎
We all know that MVP, the vast majority of the time, goes to the best player on the best team and not necessarily the best player in the league. That has been going on forever.
It is also not just me that dismisses DWS, but just about any serious basketball statistician i have read.
I dont think anywhere in this thread have I said Russell wasnt great on defense. I just dont know HOW great. and neither do you. I can SHOW you how great wilt was on offense and on the boards. all you can do is tell me how great those who saw Russell at the time said he was. I cannot use that kind of anecdotal evidence to say anything about russells defense other than it was great. was it greater than rodmans? greater than jordans? greater than gary paytons? maybe, but we dont know and you cant prove it either way.
yes, the celtics won lots of titles and russell was a great defender. one is a team stat and the other is anecdotal. If you want to say that russell was the greatest WINNER of all time, i can get on board with that. but greatest PLAYER of all time, you will have to prove it to me.
@erikthredd said:
I found a quick way to check Wilt vs Russell head to head in the playoffs and how his points per game were affected with Russell covering him compared to Wilt vs the rest of the NBA.
Wilt's point per game averages below are listed as"
his ppg in regular season that year
his ppg in playoff rounds before facing Boston
his ppg vs Russell/Boston in the next round
1959-60
37.6ppg regular season
38.7ppg in 1st round vs Syracuse in playoffs
30.5ppg vs Russell in round 2. Boston won series 4-2 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1961-62
50.4ppg in regular season
37.0ppg in 1st round vs Syracuse
33.6ppg vs Russell in round 2. Boston won series 4-3 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1963-64
36.9ppg in regular season
38.6ppg in 1st round vs STL in playoffs
29.2ppg vs Russell in Finals. Boston wins series 4-1 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1964-65
34.7ppg in regular season
27.8ppg in 1st round vs Cincinnati in playoffs
30.1ppg vs Russell in round 2. Boston wins series 4-3
WIlt scoring went up vs Russell in this playoff series
1965-66
33.5ppg in regular season
28.0ppg vs Russell in round 1. Boston wins series 4-1 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1966-67
24.1ppg in regular season
28.0ppg in 1st round vs Cincinnati in playoffs
21.6ppg vs Russell in round 2. Philly wins series 4-1 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell but Philly wins series
1967-68
24.1ppg in regular season
25.5ppg in 1st round vs NY in playoffs
22.1ppg vs Russell in round 2. Boston wins series 4-3 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1968-69
20.5ppg in regular season
12.0ppg in 1st round vs SFW
19.2ppg in 2nd round vs ATL
11.7ppg in Finals vs Russell. Boston wins series 4-3 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
Wilt played against Russell in 8 playoff series (including two Finals) and in 7 out of the 8 series his scoring average went down with Russell covering him head to head. That one playoff series when Wilt averaged more vs Russell he still ended up losing the series. Russell won 7 out of the 8 playoffs series vs Wilt.
So to sum this comment up,when Russell faced Wilt in a playoff series 87.5% of the time his defense held Wilt to less points than he came in averaging. In two series it was considerably lower than what Wilt was averaging during the regular season.
yes, russell slowed wilt. he could not stop him. that is the point. compare their head to head numbers. wilt wins, and big. he doubles up russell in points. Wilt also averaged more rebounds per game. in the regular season, Wilt held Russell to 37% shooting. thats right, 37%. wilt shut him down.
Wilt had 20 regular season games with 40+ points vs. russell with a high of 62!!
wilt was still averaging over .500 fg% in the playoffs as well, so he was not getting shut down at all.
@1951WheatiesPremium said:
Is the argument here that because we don’t have stats to correlate to it that defense doesn’t matter?
That doesn’t make much sense to me.
It is not a coincidence that when Michael Jordan decided to address his biggest deficiencies and become a better defender, that the Bulls began to win games and championships. And he was always a scoring champion - from the jump - so the noteworthy change is defense. Not easy to quantify and therefore winning is more directly correlated to the defense, not the scoring.
@JoeBanzai - you are one of my favorite people I’ve encountered on the boards.
Please read my statements about Bill Russell; there are no what ifs, just grounded statements about basketball, how the game works and comparison and analogy to make people understand where I am coming from.
I will return to the Tim Duncan analogy. He averaged just 19 points a game yet was the best player in the league for a prolonged period. No flash, no mouth, great, unselfish team player who lead his teams to multiple championships and finals appearances.
Could Tim Duncan have taken more shots and scored more points?
Absolutely, beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Would that have produced better team results?
Highly improbable.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
@1951WheatiesPremium said:
Is the argument here that because we don’t have stats to correlate to it that defense doesn’t matter?
That doesn’t make much sense to me.
It is not a coincidence that when Michael Jordan decided to address his biggest deficiencies and become a better defender, that the Bulls began to win games and championships. And he was always a scoring champion - from the jump - so the noteworthy change is defense. Not easy to quantify and therefore winning is more directly correlated to the defense, not the scoring.
did anyone say defense "doesn't matter"?
Well, if there aren’t any valid quantifying metrics (which there really aren’t) and you are unwilling to accept peer player and coach analysis, commentary and testimonials then how else should I interpret it?
Offense is half the game, defense is half the game. We have measurables that state Wilt was an incredibly prolific scorer and that he was. Bill Russell’s stand out attributes were largely defensive, we don’t have measurables for it and he is therefore not receiving his due credit.
If I misinterpreted you somehow, I am more than willing to listen.
And again, Bill Russell was first or second in field goal percentage on the Celtics every year from his rookie year to age thirty (when I stopped looking). Their lineup featured incredibly equal shot distribution and featured 5-6 guys every year averaging in double figure point totals (allowing for rounding off, like how calling 39.5 shots a game 40 is a product of round off and not some grossly overstated claim).
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
@erikthredd said:
I found a quick way to check Wilt vs Russell head to head in the playoffs and how his points per game were affected with Russell covering him compared to Wilt vs the rest of the NBA.
Wilt's point per game averages below are listed as"
his ppg in regular season that year
his ppg in playoff rounds before facing Boston
his ppg vs Russell/Boston in the next round
1959-60
37.6ppg regular season
38.7ppg in 1st round vs Syracuse in playoffs
30.5ppg vs Russell in round 2. Boston won series 4-2 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1961-62
50.4ppg in regular season
37.0ppg in 1st round vs Syracuse
33.6ppg vs Russell in round 2. Boston won series 4-3 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1963-64
36.9ppg in regular season
38.6ppg in 1st round vs STL in playoffs
29.2ppg vs Russell in Finals. Boston wins series 4-1 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1964-65
34.7ppg in regular season
27.8ppg in 1st round vs Cincinnati in playoffs
30.1ppg vs Russell in round 2. Boston wins series 4-3
WIlt scoring went up vs Russell in this playoff series
1965-66
33.5ppg in regular season
28.0ppg vs Russell in round 1. Boston wins series 4-1 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1966-67
24.1ppg in regular season
28.0ppg in 1st round vs Cincinnati in playoffs
21.6ppg vs Russell in round 2. Philly wins series 4-1 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell but Philly wins series
1967-68
24.1ppg in regular season
25.5ppg in 1st round vs NY in playoffs
22.1ppg vs Russell in round 2. Boston wins series 4-3 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
1968-69
20.5ppg in regular season
12.0ppg in 1st round vs SFW
19.2ppg in 2nd round vs ATL
11.7ppg in Finals vs Russell. Boston wins series 4-3 WIlt scoring went down vs Russell
Wilt played against Russell in 8 playoff series (including two Finals) and in 7 out of the 8 series his scoring average went down with Russell covering him head to head. That one playoff series when Wilt averaged more vs Russell he still ended up losing the series. Russell won 7 out of the 8 playoffs series vs Wilt.
So to sum this comment up,when Russell faced Wilt in a playoff series 87.5% of the time his defense held Wilt to less points than he came in averaging. In two series it was considerably lower than what Wilt was averaging during the regular season.
yes, russell slowed wilt. he could not stop him. that is the point. compare their head to head numbers. wilt wins, and big. he doubles up russell in points. Wilt also averaged more rebounds per game. in the regular season, Wilt held Russell to 37% shooting. thats right, 37%. wilt shut him down.
Wilt had 20 regular season games with 40+ points vs. russell with a high of 62!!
wilt was still averaging over .500 fg% in the playoffs as well, so he was not getting shut down at all.
We all have different criteria as to defining which player is GOAT in a certain sport and I,personally,include winning championships. I've done it with Brady & Jordan for years and I'm not changing my view now with Russell. I won't consider any player in the four major sports as GOAT if they haven't won at a high level. Call it a team sport all you want but individual stats don't mean crap to me when the other guy in the debate has over handful of rings that went directly through your player to win. Your guy isn't the unstoppable force everyone makes him to be if Russell repeatedly won out even though both teams were loaded with HOF players. To Wilt's credit he finally won a couple titles near the back end of his career but, imo, that wasn't nearly enough to move him past Russell.
Wilt was a great scorer,an even better rebounder and arguably one of the most dominating players in NBA history but not only would I rank Bill Russell higher than him in this GOAT debate, I'd also add Kareem & Shaq before him as well and thats just the Centers in this argument. I also have Jordan,Lebron,Magic,Bird & Kobe ahead of him as well. Wilt put up incredible,but empty stats, for years that were no different than Russell Westbrook or James Harden.
I'd compare Wilt to Drew Brees in football. Put up great stats,won a ring and arguably might be the best passing QB of all time but when dig into the GOAT debate in football I wouldn't even put Brees in the top 5 QBs let alone top 5 best players.
We can agree to disagree on which player is better, I'm not going to continue down this road all day again. Last night it was a great distraction from watching that abortion we call the NE Patriots getting smacked around by Buffalo.
Here’s something worth mentioning: Bill Russell pioneered the blocked shot turnover. This is blocking a person’s shot with such skill and athleticism that you actually control the ball while blocking it. It wasn’t just a block into the third row where the team maintains possession after inbounding. This is fingertipping the ball to yourself. So adept was Russell at this skill that his teammates would be keenly aware of one coming and begin their fast break on the heels of such a block, which often led to east fast break points.
As I recall, Hakeem Olajuwon stands out as one who was quite good at this, as well.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
@1951WheatiesPremium said:
Here’s something worth mentioning: Bill Russell pioneered the blocked shot turnover. This is blocking a person’s shot with such skill and athleticism that you actually control the ball while blocking it. It wasn’t just a block into the third row where the team maintains possession after inbounding. This is fingertipping the ball to yourself. So adept was Russell at this skill that his teammates would be keenly aware of one coming and begin their fast break on the heels of such a block, which often led to east fast break points.
As I recall, Hakeem Olajuwon stands out as one who was quite good at this, as well.
Thank you for the kind words! I enjoy debating with you and think highly of you as well.
NOT debating the GOAT here, but didn't they have to widen the lane because of Wilt? I heard that a long time ago.
I also heard that Wilt never fouled out of a game in his entire career, actually playing more minutes per game than there were minutes in the games.
Merry Christmas to you and your family, Happy New Years too!
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
As I understand it, the lane widening took place because of and in reaction to the rise of the dominant bigs: George Mikan, Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell. The rule change took place in 1955.
Yes, Wilt never fouled out a game.
And I’m pretty sure Wilt had just the one season of 48.5 mpg, where he played every minute of every game and overtime.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
what i find truly fascinating is that there is a protracted debate taking place in this thread as to who was goatier -- Bill or Wilt -- yet neither one of those greats were even the best at their position (imo)
Comments
@craig44 I am circling back to you specifically because you offer good insight and opinions. But to be clear, I’m not trying to antagonize in any way.
Russell’s shooting percentage is first (best) or second on the Celtics in all but one season from his rookie year until his age 30 season. So, again, to say he wasn’t capable of scoring just isn’t an accurate statement nor is the statement that his shooting less would some how make him less efficient.
This thread was started (by me) as a commentary on how dominant an offensive force Wilt Chamberlain was - the most dominant the game has ever seen and by a considerable margin. It is also only half of the game and the responsibility. However prolific you may be there is another half of the game. Bill dominated on D the way Wilt did on O; that is probably the best and the most comprehensible way to put it.
It seems like the argument here that because we don’t have stats to correlate to it that defense doesn’t matter and should be ignored?
That doesn’t make much sense; quantified or not, it was played and like in a lot of sports it’s impact on a game often goes understated or ignored yet in the very same breath most of those same people immediately revert to its being the foundation of winning championships.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Imma stay out of the debate because it's been beat to death, but I do want to say that defensive win shares don't work. They are calculated with a whole bunch of formulas to give the appearance that they are related in some way to Bill James' Win Shares for baseball, but they're not. And they can't be, because basketball is a team sport and the entire Win Shares concept doesn't work in team games.
NBA defensive win shares start with a statistic called "defensive rating", which is fatally flawed. If the hypothetical GOAT defender plays with four defensive Keystone Cops, that GOAT's "defensive rating" will be terrible. There is an attempt made to disentangle each player from his teammates, but it doesn't work because it isn't possible that it could work. Because basketball is a team game. All else equal, a great defender will have more defensive Win Shares than a terrible defender, but when is all else equal? Certainly not in a Russell/Chamberlain comparison, and Russell's higher position on this list doesn't really tell us anything important in that comparison.
I said a long time ago that it's hard to consider someone the GOAT when he didn't skate meaningful minutes after his 27th birthday. @Goldenage has never answered my argument.
He played as long as Jim Brown did, and Brown is a GOAT with Sanders.
Where the GOAT started.
Parry Sound.
Taken last week. Black ice.
Sent it to Bobby. Said they are glad they’re in Florida. 😂
I’m not saying this to put anyone down, but Scotty Bowman and I understand hockey the same way.
Bobby is the GOAT, with Gordie a close second. It’s very easy to understand for those who understand the game at a higher level.
Out of curiosity, what did the nine other lists look like?
It references 9 other ‘lists’ that were comprised and I’m curious how many other media members, coaches and players had Orr listed first…
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
SCOTTY BOWMAN
GOALIES — Patrick Roy, Martin Brodeur, Ken Dryden, Bernie Parent, Terry Sawchuk, Glenn Hall, Jacques Plante
DEFENCEMEN — Bobby Orr, Doug Harvey, Nicklas Lidstrom, Eddie Shore
FORWARDS — Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, Maurice Richard, Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau
In Bowman's own words:
“It’s so hard ... I can’t narrow it down.
“The easiest one is on defence. Orr, Harvey — Eddie Shore, I didn’t see him play but I know what people told me about him -— and Lidstrom. I don’t think anyone would argue about those four. Those are mine.
“Up front, I’d still have Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe, Richard. I’d have a hard time pushing any of them out. Jean Beliveau, you could throw him in there. But to me, Howe and Richard, their accomplishments speak for themselves. Gretzky, Lemieux as well. I mean, who else would you have in there?
“The Rocket, a lot of people never saw him play. I saw him play a ton. Talk about putting people in the rink. Do I want to be excited to go and watch this guy play? Oh my God.
“I talked a lot to (Hall of Fame Canadiens coach) Toe Blake when I was working in Montreal. And this is amazing. He said the three players that pulled him out of his seat continuously — Howie Morenz, Rocket Richard and Bobby Hull. Those were his guys.
“A lot has to do with excitement. Before Gretzky, before expansion — and I lived through this — the argument always was, who’s the better player, Howe or Richard? This is what people always said: If you want to fill your building, you pick the Rocket. If you want to win championships, you pick Howe.
“In goal, well, in the modern day era, it would be hard to go against Brodeur and Roy. I had Dryden with me and I know how good he was. Dryden was an exceptional goalie on a great team. It’s not easy to get 18, 20 shots, you’d better be ready for every one of them. Sawchuk, Hall, Plante, Frankie Brimsek. I go to those four but Brimsek, he only played 10 years. The next era, Dryden, Parent, Roy, Brodeur. Patrick and Brodeur, longevity.”
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Nice research. Proves what a great defender Russell was. I am surprised that Wilt's scoring average EVER went up against Bill.
I don't think anyone has disputed that Russell is one of, if not the best defenders of all time.
How you Russell fans completely ignore the fact that Wilt scored TWICE as many points in roughly the same amount of games is astounding.
Just because the Celtics had the best team doesn't automatically prove their best player was the GOAT.
Since you guys like to play "what if"; what if Wilt didn't have to score so much for his teams and could focus mostly on defense?
He was already top 5 (?) defensively all time. Probably puts him first. He probably still scores more points, but it wouldn't be by such an ASTRONOMICAL number.
MVP awards are another silly way to compare the two. The MVP often goes to the best player on the best team, not the best player in the league.
I am going to stop on these two and simply restate what I said earlier.
I can't believe anyone would rate Bill Russell above Wilt Chamberlain.
That’s right.
Best forwards ever are Howe, Rocket, 66 and 99.
Best D ever was #4.
Who gets to be paired with #4 is a tough one. Too many way below #4 but on a good level.
Didn’t even read them. Went right to Bowman’s . 100% honest answer.
I’ve read Scotty and he’s a genius.
We all know that MVP, the vast majority of the time, goes to the best player on the best team and not necessarily the best player in the league. That has been going on forever.
It is also not just me that dismisses DWS, but just about any serious basketball statistician i have read.
I dont think anywhere in this thread have I said Russell wasnt great on defense. I just dont know HOW great. and neither do you. I can SHOW you how great wilt was on offense and on the boards. all you can do is tell me how great those who saw Russell at the time said he was. I cannot use that kind of anecdotal evidence to say anything about russells defense other than it was great. was it greater than rodmans? greater than jordans? greater than gary paytons? maybe, but we dont know and you cant prove it either way.
yes, the celtics won lots of titles and russell was a great defender. one is a team stat and the other is anecdotal. If you want to say that russell was the greatest WINNER of all time, i can get on board with that. but greatest PLAYER of all time, you will have to prove it to me.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
yes, russell slowed wilt. he could not stop him. that is the point. compare their head to head numbers. wilt wins, and big. he doubles up russell in points. Wilt also averaged more rebounds per game. in the regular season, Wilt held Russell to 37% shooting. thats right, 37%. wilt shut him down.
Wilt had 20 regular season games with 40+ points vs. russell with a high of 62!!
wilt was still averaging over .500 fg% in the playoffs as well, so he was not getting shut down at all.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
did anyone say defense "doesn't matter"?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
@JoeBanzai - you are one of my favorite people I’ve encountered on the boards.
Please read my statements about Bill Russell; there are no what ifs, just grounded statements about basketball, how the game works and comparison and analogy to make people understand where I am coming from.
I will return to the Tim Duncan analogy. He averaged just 19 points a game yet was the best player in the league for a prolonged period. No flash, no mouth, great, unselfish team player who lead his teams to multiple championships and finals appearances.
Could Tim Duncan have taken more shots and scored more points?
Absolutely, beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Would that have produced better team results?
Highly improbable.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Well, if there aren’t any valid quantifying metrics (which there really aren’t) and you are unwilling to accept peer player and coach analysis, commentary and testimonials then how else should I interpret it?
Offense is half the game, defense is half the game. We have measurables that state Wilt was an incredibly prolific scorer and that he was. Bill Russell’s stand out attributes were largely defensive, we don’t have measurables for it and he is therefore not receiving his due credit.
If I misinterpreted you somehow, I am more than willing to listen.
And again, Bill Russell was first or second in field goal percentage on the Celtics every year from his rookie year to age thirty (when I stopped looking). Their lineup featured incredibly equal shot distribution and featured 5-6 guys every year averaging in double figure point totals (allowing for rounding off, like how calling 39.5 shots a game 40 is a product of round off and not some grossly overstated claim).
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
We all have different criteria as to defining which player is GOAT in a certain sport and I,personally,include winning championships. I've done it with Brady & Jordan for years and I'm not changing my view now with Russell. I won't consider any player in the four major sports as GOAT if they haven't won at a high level. Call it a team sport all you want but individual stats don't mean crap to me when the other guy in the debate has over handful of rings that went directly through your player to win. Your guy isn't the unstoppable force everyone makes him to be if Russell repeatedly won out even though both teams were loaded with HOF players. To Wilt's credit he finally won a couple titles near the back end of his career but, imo, that wasn't nearly enough to move him past Russell.
Wilt was a great scorer,an even better rebounder and arguably one of the most dominating players in NBA history but not only would I rank Bill Russell higher than him in this GOAT debate, I'd also add Kareem & Shaq before him as well and thats just the Centers in this argument. I also have Jordan,Lebron,Magic,Bird & Kobe ahead of him as well. Wilt put up incredible,but empty stats, for years that were no different than Russell Westbrook or James Harden.
I'd compare Wilt to Drew Brees in football. Put up great stats,won a ring and arguably might be the best passing QB of all time but when dig into the GOAT debate in football I wouldn't even put Brees in the top 5 QBs let alone top 5 best players.
We can agree to disagree on which player is better, I'm not going to continue down this road all day again. Last night it was a great distraction from watching that abortion we call the NE Patriots getting smacked around by Buffalo.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
Here’s something worth mentioning: Bill Russell pioneered the blocked shot turnover. This is blocking a person’s shot with such skill and athleticism that you actually control the ball while blocking it. It wasn’t just a block into the third row where the team maintains possession after inbounding. This is fingertipping the ball to yourself. So adept was Russell at this skill that his teammates would be keenly aware of one coming and begin their fast break on the heels of such a block, which often led to east fast break points.
As I recall, Hakeem Olajuwon stands out as one who was quite good at this, as well.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Thank you for the kind words! I enjoy debating with you and think highly of you as well.
NOT debating the GOAT here, but didn't they have to widen the lane because of Wilt? I heard that a long time ago.
I also heard that Wilt never fouled out of a game in his entire career, actually playing more minutes per game than there were minutes in the games.
Merry Christmas to you and your family, Happy New Years too!
As I understand it, the lane widening took place because of and in reaction to the rise of the dominant bigs: George Mikan, Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell. The rule change took place in 1955.
Yes, Wilt never fouled out a game.
And I’m pretty sure Wilt had just the one season of 48.5 mpg, where he played every minute of every game and overtime.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
what i find truly fascinating is that there is a protracted debate taking place in this thread as to who was goatier -- Bill or Wilt -- yet neither one of those greats were even the best at their position (imo)
(Kareem tops my centers list)
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet