Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 86
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,402
    vCash
    1500

    Bill Russell Effect

    Ok...first off im a celtics fan as you can tell...

    HOWEVER

    Ive done some research and i'd like too hear opinions. Im just curious as too why hes not usually ranked in peoples top 3 centers of all time, when i think he has a case for GOAT.

    And I'd rather here opinions in this forum first..

    Now, call me a moron all you want, but read what i have typed, and than decide for yourself. Also, im not saying Russell would be the best player RIGHT NOW. im saying Russell dominated his era more than anyone has dominated there's, even more so than MJ/Wilt/Kareem, read on..

    Russells Defense is beyond legendary and was the Reason he captured back to back NCAA titles and after won 11 NBA titles in a 13 yr stretch (13 titles in 15 yrs) and if you want too go back too hs, he won 18 titles in 21 yrs..this is how good his defense is..

    YR Drtg Rank Diff from League Avg. Diff from 2nd place
    1956 90.4 6/8 -1.5
    --------------------------------------------------------
    1957 82.4 1/8 4.8 2.5
    1958 82.0 1/8 5.2 3.9
    1959 83.0 1/8 5.8 4.4
    1960 83.9 1/8 6.2 1.8
    1961 83.0 1/8 8.2 4.6
    1962 84.3 1/8 8.7 6.3
    1963 86.6 1/9 9.0 6.1
    1964 82.7 1/9 11.5 5.6
    1965 83.1 1/9 9.9 8.1
    1966 87.3 1/9 7.1 4.0
    1967 90.8 1/10 4.9 1.7
    1968 92.0 2/12 4.6 -
    1969 88.4 1/14 6.8 2.8
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    1970 98.5 7/16 0.6 -

    *1956 (the yr before Russell)

    * 1957 (the yr after Russell)

    (1) The Celtics led the league in defense in 12 of Russells' 13 years

    (2) From 1958-1966 they dominated the league defensively like no team I can find for a 9 year period

    (3) From 1961-1965 the ran off 5 consecutive historically dominant seasons. Look at those numbers.

    (4) Before Russell they were a bottom defensive team and immediately jumped 6.3 relative points and 8.0 raw points to the top.

    (5) After Russell they dropped to the middle of the pack, losing 6.2 relative points and 10.1 raw points.

    According to Neil's method at B-R, who is slightly underestimating Boston's pace relative to the simple method (because he's assuming fewer turnovers are in play), those uber-dominant Celtics teams are the 3rd, 5th, 6th, 8th and 14th best defensive teams of all time, relative to competition. And there's nothing remotely comparable in NBA history for such sustained defensive dominance.


    Basically where im getting at is the 50's-60's celtics won on defense and the driving force behind the defense was Bill Russell, He was by far the biggest part of this defense as you can see. The defense outside of Russell? it was meh, nothing special, as The graph shows.

    Now, on too my next point.

    The myth Russell had Great offensive support to cover up his one weakness (scoring)

    now, Talking about the Celtics offense. it's a mistruth that Russell had all-world offensive support. first of all, Celtics were most years below average on offense, sometimes just downright league's bottom IIRC. (that's if you look at their ORTG, not PPG inflated by pace) if those stars were really as good as advertised then Celtics would be at least above average, and more likely, one of the league leaders in that regard. that was just... not what happened.
    The Celtics offense was OBVIOUSLY good enough, but it wasn't average in some of those years, nevermind all-world offense some claim he had.
    Most of those hof'ers are in becaus They were apart of a team that won 11 titles in a 13 yr stretch, not becaus they were actual legit hof'ers. Guys like KC Jones are in the hof for god sakes.

    Now, you may be saying great, he dominated on defense, but guys like MJ could do it on BOTH SIDES, well thats flawed when Russells defense makes a Bigger Impact than even MJ had on offense. Russell made a decent group of defenders a dominating force that is like 2 ballparks above everyone else. Russell led a bunch of average defenders, into Historically GREAT defenses. Could MJ/Magic with average offense around them, Make them into Historically GREAT offenses? I don't think so...

    Now, To my next topic, advanced stats (win shares/per.)
    Years, such as 1969 People like too point out Russell was sometimes 3rd-4th in some of these numbers. Well this is EXTREMLY missleading for someone who Mastered All of the little things, that don't show up in box scores.
    Examples in '69, Russell was behind Nelson/Havlick i believe in playoff win shares/per 48. These stats don't do Russell justice as he was the main reason for opponents poor shooting. Also..

    *the Celtics without Russell and WITH Havlicek, Nelson, etc., went 0-5. Happened again in '62. Russell misses a stretch of games due to injury, Celtics can't win. Russell comes back to the lineup, Celtics win again. We saw it in '58. Russell gets injured in the Finals, Celtics don't win title. With a healthy Russell, they win eight straight. This is not a coincidence
    *Don't forget that Russell was also coaching in addition to playing 46 minutes a game at 35 years old. It baffles me that people suggesting that he would rank behind a couple of teammates because they say they had better numbers, when Russell is the one player whose contributions to winning are unquantifiable.

    Also, Too the people who like to Say wilt> Russell becaus of numbers, you need to do some serious research on each career. Its also a myth that Russell only won becaus he had better teammates. For example in '69' When the celtics were the last seed to make it in, and he led a bunch of old vets and he beat 2 better teams on paper that yr (knicks/lakers.) Including beating LA IN Game 7 ON THE ROAD, against a trio led by Wilt himself, West, and Baylor.

    Here's a great quote that sums up the competitor Wilt was

    "In a way, I like it better when we lose. Its over and I can look forward to the next game. If we win, it builds up the tension and I start worrying about the next game.- Wilt Chamberlain



    Which brings me to my last point

    * Russell is the ONLY member of those 11 title teams during that 13 yr stretch

    * The 2 longest losing streaks of that whole era, was when Russell went down with injury

    * The Celtics went from Winning there 11th title in 13 yrs in '69 to missing the playoffs the following year and failing to make the playoffs

    Also, What did Russell do when it mattered? He was a perfect 11-0 In deciding games (10-0 in game 7's, 1-0 in game 5)

    In conclusion, His stats don't look all time great, But he made his teammates better than they looked, and knew how too win, and he won ALOT. To say guys like MJ/Wilt are better based on stats imo is unfair when you can CLEARLY see Russells impact on his teams, and his impact was HUGE. So, do state tell the whole strory? Not even close...



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Glendale, CA
    Posts
    14,635
    vCash
    500
    He played against bad competition. There were what, 8 teams in the league back then. Players like Hakeem, Kareem, Wilt, Shaq achieved great things against better competition than Russell.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,402
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by chacarronsau View Post
    He played against bad competition. There were what, 8 teams in the league back then. Players like Hakeem, Kareem, Wilt, Shaq achieved great things against better competition than Russell.

    Wilt?? You mean the man that had baylor/West at home, was the favorite and couldn't beat Russells old/battered celtics?



  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    C's Forum
    Posts
    4,314
    vCash
    1500
    He played against shorter players than mj did. Mj would dominate the 60's and prob avg 70 a game. Russell would suck nowadays.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    HCA (Homecourt Advantage)
    Posts
    65,517
    vCash
    1500
    Russell is up there with MJ and Kareem.

    The year Russell came is the same year Heinsohn came and guess what it was Heinsohn who won ROY over Russell. It was Heinsohn who made 2nd team all nba while Russell did not and it was Heinsohn who was the allstar as a rookie. I have no problem with Russell getting the credit from 1959-1966 as he should, but 1957 he doesn't deserve the credit people say he does, not when he is not an allstar, nor makes an all nba team and when his teammate is the MVP and his other teammate who is a rookie is on all nba team and an allstar.

    By comparison Russell won 27 playoff series in his career while Jordan won 30 playoff series in his career. During Russell's times he basically got 11 rings winning 25 total series during that time. MJ in his 6 title runs had to win 24 series. Why you ask? Well in Russell's time for his first 8 titles he had to win 2 series and his last 3 titles he had to win 3 series. MJ had to win 4 series yearly.
    Jordan won each of his as the best player on his team, the same can't be said for Russell as he did not lead his team in PER and Win Shares ever year.

    But even so, Bill Simmons who is a Boston fan still has Russell #2 all time.

    http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums...d.php?t=439401


    But I am kinda disappointed that Russell finished 5th and behind Wilt.

    http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums...d.php?t=635088
    "Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships."
    - Michael Jordan

    Thanks MJ-Bulls for the picture.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,402
    vCash
    1500
    However...You FAIL too mention Russell wasn't on the ballot for Rookie of the Year due too olympic Commitments



  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    7,309
    vCash
    1500
    In my opinion, everyone doesn't agree on who is the GOAT because everyone has an opinion.

    Did you see Bill Russell play?
    When you got to shoot, shoot, don't talk

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,402
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by llemon View Post
    In my opinion, everyone doesn't agree on who is the GOAT because everyone has an opinion.

    Did you see Bill Russell play?
    I never saw Babe Ruth/Ted Williams play...but I can tell you they were great hitters..



  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    7,309
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos_Sports4Life View Post
    I never saw Babe Ruth/Ted Williams play...but I can tell you they were great hitters..
    I saw Russell play. He was pretty good. If you wish to believe he was the best player ever, feel free. There are quite a few that agree with you.

    And there are quite a few that don't agree with you.
    When you got to shoot, shoot, don't talk

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    HCA (Homecourt Advantage)
    Posts
    65,517
    vCash
    1500
    Russell has been getting a lot of respect as well.

    On this site Russell finished 5th which is too low IMO, he should be top 3 for sure.
    1. Michael Jordan
    2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
    3. Wilt Chamberlain
    4. Magic Johnson
    5. Bill Russell
    6. Larry Bird
    7. Shaquille O'neal
    8. Kobe Bryant
    9. Hakeem Olajuwon
    10. Tim Duncan


    On another site he was 2nd behind MJ

    This was the top 10 on another site

    1) Michael Jordan
    2) Bill Russell
    3) Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
    4) Magic Johnson
    5) Wilt Chamberlain
    6) Larry Bird
    7) Shaquille O'Neal
    8) Tim Duncan
    9) Hakeem Olajuwon
    10) Kobe Bryant


    So as you can see he has been getting more and more respect lately.
    "Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships."
    - Michael Jordan

    Thanks MJ-Bulls for the picture.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    England
    Posts
    772
    vCash
    1500
    Probably the best DEFENSIVE player of all time. Not the all round best though.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    22,380
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos_Sports4Life View Post
    Wilt?? You mean the man that had baylor/West at home, was the favorite and couldn't beat Russells old/battered celtics?
    Thing is Wilt didn't choke. It was usually someone on his team who choked it up. This goes back to his NCAA days when he faced North Carolina in the NCAA finals and the guy who was supposed to pass it to Wilt had a huge turnover in the final moments which sealed the game.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    32,657
    vCash
    1894
    Just one problem, your picking and choosing which stats to push based on your agenda.

    Your trying to capture Russels defensive impact by measuring the teams efficiency before and after, which is smart but when you apply the same logic to the Celtics O, you find that it got worse with Russ.

    This gos against your claim that Russ was a great 2 way player(by this criteria). He may have been the best defender but it would be impossible for the Celtics to be as good as they were before Russ unless they werent at least decent on one end.

    Compared to Wilt, who took a last placed team and pushed the Celtics to the limit, its not as impressive to me.

    Russel should be with Bird outside the top 10 imo.
    Yo Kobe, get at me bro, we'd have a good time, man

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    13,896
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Chronz View Post
    Just one problem, your picking and choosing which stats to push based on your agenda.

    Your trying to capture Russels defensive impact by measuring the teams efficiency before and after, which is smart but when you apply the same logic to the Celtics O, you find that it got worse with Russ.

    This gos against your claim that Russ was a great 2 way player(by this criteria). He may have been the best defender but it would be impossible for the Celtics to be as good as they were before Russ unless they werent at least decent on one end.

    Compared to Wilt, who took a last placed team and pushed the Celtics to the limit, its not as impressive to me.

    Russel should be with Bird outside the top 10 imo.
    I think I should just stop posting here altogether, Chronz you seem to have things covered.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,402
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Chronz View Post
    Just one problem, your picking and choosing which stats to push based on your agenda.

    Your trying to capture Russels defensive impact by measuring the teams efficiency before and after, which is smart but when you apply the same logic to the Celtics O, you find that it got worse with Russ.

    This gos against your claim that Russ was a great 2 way player(by this criteria). He may have been the best defender but it would be impossible for the Celtics to be as good as they were before Russ unless they werent at least decent on one end.

    Compared to Wilt, who took a last placed team and pushed the Celtics to the limit, its not as impressive to me.

    Russel should be with Bird outside the top 10 imo.

    When did I say Russell was a great 2 way player?? Allthough his blocked shots triggered the fast break, His passing was great for a center, and he was an all time great rebounder ect

    I did say he made average defenses...into ALL TIME GREAT defenses (Which by the graph, it shows it)

    Now, if you make your teams defense league avg too an all time great defense, it doesn't matter too much what you do on the offensive side...Heck, The celtics won title after title DESPITE having BAD offenses..

    So basically, The celtics during some of those years had a BELOW avg offense and an AVERAGE Defense without Russell...and Russell won every year, so It seems like people like too disscredit him becaus of HOW he won.


    Now on too Bird, im curious too know who you ranks #1 as far as SF's go



Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •