PDA

View Full Version : Would you draft Bill Russell in the top 100 (all-time draft)?



Federal Reserve
12-23-2017, 10:58 PM
Every player is in his prime.

If you would, please address the following points:

1) Russell's best scoring season was when he scored 18.9ppg
2) He shot a career 44% fg
3) Wilt Chamberlain had 55 rebounds (all-time record) against Russell

Here is a list of players I would draft over Russell (not ranked in any order):

1) Jordan
2) Kareem
3) Wilt
4) Duncan
5) Magic
6) Lebron
7) Bird
8) Shaq
9) Kobe
10) Hakeem
11) David Robinson
12) KG
13) Karl Malone
14) Barkley
15) Nowitzki
16) John Stockton
17) Julius Erving
18) Scottie Pippen
19) Wade
20) Drexler
21) Frazier
22) Isiah Thomas
23) Gary Payton
24) Patrick Ewing
25) Jason Kidd
26) Paul Pierce
27) Kevin Mchale
28) Steve Nash
29) George Gervin
30) Kevin Durant
31) Dominique Wilkins
32) Ray Allen
33) Reggie Miller
34) Chris Paul
45) Dwight Howard
46) Rick Barry
47) James Worthy
48) Tony Parker
49) Tracy Mcgrady
50) Pau Gasol
51) Billups
52) Vince Carter
53) Carmelo Anthony
54) Grant Hill
55) Manu Ginobili
56) Dumars
57) Chris Mullin
58) Chris Bosh
59) Bill Walton
60) Chris Webber
61) Mitch Richmond
62) Tim Hardaway
63) Steph Curry
64) Del Curry
65) Deron Williams
66) Kyrie Irving
67) John Wall
68) Russell Westbrook
69) Klay Thompson
70) Giannis
71) Embiid
72) Elton Brand
73) Gilbert Arenas
74) Derrick Rose
75) Yao Ming
76) Amare
77) Damian Lillard
78) Kawhi Leonard
79) Penny Hardaway
80) Shawn Kemp
81) Paul George
82) James Harden
83) Brandon Roy
84) Bradley Beal
85) Jimmy Butler
86) Cousins
87) Mike Conley
88) Stackhouse
89) Oladipo
90) Joe Johnson
91) Oscar Robertson
92) Jerry West
93) Petrovic

FlashBolt
12-23-2017, 11:19 PM
1) He didn't really have to score but people will give him a pass. On one end, he certainly could have scored more but it's a testament to how stacked his teams were.

2) It's low but the game was played entirely different back then where possessions of the ball mattered more than quality of the shot. It was just run and gun to the basket.

3) Wilt was miles better than Russ as an individual talent but was never the leader Russ was. Still, I don't think anyone would realistically choose Russ over Wilt.

He's easily top 15 all-time but if we're going prime by prime, he's not close to that range. But are we talking about players at their prime and assuming they stay healthy for the rest of their career?

IndyRealist
12-24-2017, 12:10 AM
Are you going to list his entire resume or just cherry pick?

europagnpilgrim
12-24-2017, 12:58 AM
Every player is in his prime.

If you would, please address the following points:

1) Russell's best scoring season was when he scored 18.9ppg
2) He shot a career 44% fg
3) Wilt Chamberlain had 55 rebounds (all-time record) against Russell


1) Russ averaged 24ppg vs the most dominant force ever and he said the reason was because the team needed him to do that to try and neutralize Wilt to a small degree, so I look at had Russ wanted to score 24-27ppg he would have and his stat line would look way more impressive once you add in the blocks that didn't get recorded but him and Wilt own that stat had it been kept track of back then, easily

2) Teams back then shot as a whole around 38-40pct so his 44pct is actually way better than the league average
3) Wilt avg about 40 and 25 his first 7 years and since the league was short on teams he saw Russell head to head a whole bunch so that is really not a big deal when we are talking about a player who literally owns the record book, Wilt would do that against any Center in any era

Russell is Dennis Rodman/B Wallace combined with the athletic ability of D Robinson mix with the IQ of Lebron James/Stockton with the coaching ability of your favorite coach, he would be what those players were that I mentioned but a way better athlete and higher IQ, that is a scary player, a perennial lock down defender inside out who could get 20boards a game and block or alternate 10-20 shots per game is a force in any era, he has to be in the circle of 25 best ever, no question

the better question would be to ask is would Mikan get drafted in the top 100

KnicksorBust
12-24-2017, 01:36 AM
The best defensive player of all-time? Yeah I probably would be okay with taking him top 100. :laugh:

ewing
12-24-2017, 02:27 AM
Is this a basketball draft?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

KingPosey
12-24-2017, 04:02 AM
1) Russ averaged 24ppg vs the most dominant force ever and he said the reason was because the team needed him to do that to try and neutralize Wilt to a small degree, so I look at had Russ wanted to score 24-27ppg he would have and his stat line would look way more impressive once you add in the blocks that didn't get recorded but him and Wilt own that stat had it been kept track of back then, easily

2) Teams back then shot as a whole around 38-40pct so his 44pct is actually way better than the league average
3) Wilt avg about 40 and 25 his first 7 years and since the league was short on teams he saw Russell head to head a whole bunch so that is really not a big deal when we are talking about a player who literally owns the record book, Wilt would do that against any Center in any era

Russell is Dennis Rodman/B Wallace combined with the athletic ability of D Robinson mix with the IQ of Lebron James/Stockton with the coaching ability of your favorite coach, he would be what those players were that I mentioned but a way better athlete and higher IQ, that is a scary player, a perennial lock down defender inside out who could get 20boards a game and block or alternate 10-20 shots per game is a force in any era, he has to be in the circle of 25 best ever, no question

the better question would be to ask is would Mikan get drafted in the top 100

good god take it easy there

Raps18-19 Champ
12-24-2017, 04:07 AM
Easy. Once you have your 1st (and 2nd) scorer, you need a guy like Russell on the team.

KnicksorBust
12-24-2017, 12:35 PM
1) Russ averaged 24ppg vs the most dominant force ever and he said the reason was because the team needed him to do that to try and neutralize Wilt to a small degree, so I look at had Russ wanted to score 24-27ppg he would have and his stat line would look way more impressive once you add in the blocks that didn't get recorded but him and Wilt own that stat had it been kept track of back then, easily

2) Teams back then shot as a whole around 38-40pct so his 44pct is actually way better than the league average
3) Wilt avg about 40 and 25 his first 7 years and since the league was short on teams he saw Russell head to head a whole bunch so that is really not a big deal when we are talking about a player who literally owns the record book, Wilt would do that against any Center in any era

Russell is Dennis Rodman/B Wallace combined with the athletic ability of D Robinson mix with the IQ of Lebron James/Stockton with the coaching ability of your favorite coach, he would be what those players were that I mentioned but a way better athlete and higher IQ, that is a scary player, a perennial lock down defender inside out who could get 20boards a game and block or alternate 10-20 shots per game is a force in any era, he has to be in the circle of 25 best ever, no question

the better question would be to ask is would Mikan get drafted in the top 100

good god take it easy there

He doesn't have ben wallace strength but I agree with the rest.

KnicksorBust
12-24-2017, 12:38 PM
Easy. Once you have your 1st (and 2nd) scorer, you need a guy like Russell on the team.

I am tempted to actually make a list and see at what overall pick I would finally take him. Asking if he is top 100 is a joke. Top 30/40 is interesting.

tredigs
12-24-2017, 01:15 PM
I'm not going to give a FedReserve thread the dignity of a real response, but rest assure, you could build a devastatingly great squad around Russell as your first pick in a snake draft. There is no better choice for a leader and defensive anchor with GOAT rebounding ability. I'll find my scoring in rounds two and three.

europagnpilgrim
12-24-2017, 02:01 PM
He doesn't have ben wallace strength but I agree with the rest.

Easily naturally stronger, Wallace was a huge weightlifter, he was basically a bodybuilder playing in the paint

Wilt had superhuman strength and though Russ got moved around he still had to guard the strongest athlete ever, Shaq couldn't even bully Wallace while Wilt would have moved him around like a teddy bear, like he moved 280lbs of Lanier like a coffee cup

Russell was a supreme talented athlete, could run and jump and was ox strong, until he met the Dipper

innate/natural strengths beats weightlifting, Russ had more the former while Wallace had the latter, Wilt had both combined in one

europagnpilgrim
12-24-2017, 02:08 PM
good god take it easy there

You better go back and watch some film on Russell athletic ability which was only 2nd to Wilt back then, and he was Rodman/Wallace combined since he is considered to be in the BOAT convo for defenders and you know he had plenty of 12+ blocks in games that didn't get kept track of and he averaged around 22rpg for his career or close to it, he was a player/coach way back in the day and once he came to Boston after winning back to back titles in college they ran off 11 titles in 13 seasons because of his intelligenceIQ/sacrifice/team first mental, the Celtics were semi stacked before Russell got there but he was the engine/heart and soul

I thought I took it easy, it could have been more added but I figured that would do

BoSox47
12-24-2017, 02:36 PM
I am tempted to actually make a list and see at what overall pick I would finally take him. Asking if he is top 100 is a joke. Top 30/40 is interesting.

Agree with this, was about to come in and say top 100 is a guarantee. He falls somewhere between 30-45 for me.

Jamiecballer
12-24-2017, 03:28 PM
I'm not going to give a FedReserve thread the dignity of a real response, but rest assure, you could build a devastatingly great squad around Russell as your first pick in a snake draft. There is no better choice for a leader and defensive anchor with GOAT rebounding ability. I'll find my scoring in rounds two and three.Well said and spot on

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120A using Tapatalk

Federal Reserve
12-24-2017, 03:45 PM
I added a list to my OP. Check it out and let me know what you guys think. I have him at 94, which is in the top 100, but I would like to hear whether you guys think he should be drafted earlier.

tredigs
12-24-2017, 03:53 PM
I love the Steph Curry/Del Curry 63 and 64. I'll admit that he's a funnier troll than most.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-24-2017, 05:04 PM
I am tempted to actually make a list and see at what overall pick I would finally take him. Asking if he is top 100 is a joke. Top 30/40 is interesting.

In an ATRD setting, 35-45 is an easy call IMO. Get your main scorer like Robertson, Durant, Curry, Dirk, etc and Russell would be the next best pick. That's when teams usually reach for centers like Dikembe, Parish, etc.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-24-2017, 05:08 PM
I'm not going to give a FedReserve thread the dignity of a real response, but rest assure, you could build a devastatingly great squad around Russell as your first pick in a snake draft. There is no better choice for a leader and defensive anchor with GOAT rebounding ability. I'll find my scoring in rounds two and three.

It's never been done I believe. Not with an early/mid first. Late first maybe but you need a good scorer to slip.

KingPosey
12-24-2017, 05:30 PM
You better go back and watch some film on Russell athletic ability which was only 2nd to Wilt back then, and he was Rodman/Wallace combined since he is considered to be in the BOAT convo for defenders and you know he had plenty of 12+ blocks in games that didn't get kept track of and he averaged around 22rpg for his career or close to it, he was a player/coach way back in the day and once he came to Boston after winning back to back titles in college they ran off 11 titles in 13 seasons because of his intelligenceIQ/sacrifice/team first mental, the Celtics were semi stacked before Russell got there but he was the engine/heart and soul

I thought I took it easy, it could have been more added but I figured that would do

No Iíve seen the same Footage everyone else has, and thatís an absurd statement.

And thereís a reason you donít see things like guys averaging 22-25 boards a game today, and itís not because guys were better athletes and had some secret rebounding talent several decades ago.

tredigs
12-24-2017, 05:41 PM
It's never been done I believe. Not with an early/mid first. Late first maybe but you need a good scorer to slip.

For clarification, "never been done" meaning the majority of millenials voting on PSD disagreed on the All Time drafts?

Maybe I'll join the next one just to prove how easy it would be. Elite scoring is a dime a dozen in an All Time draft. Russell brings a mind+skill combo to the game that is matched by maybe 3 players in history. He was born to dominate, and did it at every level against all takers.

Shammyguy3
12-24-2017, 06:01 PM
1) Jordan
2) Kareem
3) Wilt
4) Duncan
5) Magic
6) Lebron
7) Bird
8) Shaq
9) Kobe
10) Hakeem
11) David Robinson
12) KG
13) Karl Malone
14) Barkley
15) Nowitzki
16) John Stockton
17) Julius Erving
18) Scottie Pippen
19) Wade
20) Drexler
21) Frazier
22) Isiah Thomas
23) Gary Payton
24) Patrick Ewing
25) Jason Kidd
26) Paul Pierce
27) Kevin Mchale
28) Steve Nash
29) George Gervin
30) Kevin Durant
31) Dominique Wilkins
32) Ray Allen
33) Reggie Miller
34) Chris Paul
45) Dwight Howard
46) Rick Barry
47) James Worthy
48) Tony Parker
49) Tracy Mcgrady
50) Pau Gasol
51) Billups
52) Vince Carter
53) Carmelo Anthony
54) Grant Hill
55) Manu Ginobili
56) Dumars
57) Chris Mullin
58) Chris Bosh
59) Bill Walton
60) Chris Webber
61) Mitch Richmond
62) Tim Hardaway
63) Steph Curry
64) Del Curry
65) Deron Williams
66) Kyrie Irving
67) John Wall
68) Russell Westbrook
69) Klay Thompson
70) Giannis
71) Embiid
72) Elton Brand
73) Gilbert Arenas
74) Derrick Rose
75) Yao Ming
76) Amare
77) Damian Lillard
78) Kawhi Leonard
79) Penny Hardaway
80) Shawn Kemp
81) Paul George
82) James Harden
83) Brandon Roy
84) Bradley Beal
85) Jimmy Butler
86) Cousins
87) Mike Conley
88) Stackhouse
89) Oladipo
90) Joe Johnson
91) Oscar Robertson
92) Jerry West
93) Petrovic

Well that is only 93 players. I'm assuming they aren't in order of players you take ahead of him. And yes I do realize this is a bait thread, or troll thread, but it might garner real discussion. The bolded are players I do not take ahead of Russel.

So that's what, 34 players I probably take ahead of him. There are guys like Isiah Thomas, Walt Frazier, Clyde Drexler, Steve Nash, George Gervin that I may or may not take ahead of him. So, top-35 yes, arguably top-30 and maybe even higher if I thought about it longer.

Shammyguy3
12-24-2017, 06:03 PM
It's never been done I believe. Not with an early/mid first. Late first maybe but you need a good scorer to slip.


For clarification, "never been done" meaning the majority of millenials voting on PSD disagreed on the All Time drafts?

Maybe I'll join the next one just to prove how easy it would be. Elite scoring is a dime a dozen in an All Time draft. Russell brings a mind+skill combo to the game that is matched by maybe 3 players in history. He was born to dominate, and did it at every level against all takers.

I had a

Isiah Thomas
Eddie Jones
Paul Pierce
Amare Stoudemire
Bill Russell

team in an ATRD game on here before. Made it to the Semi-Finals, narrowly lost to Ebbs i believe (can't recall his team)

JasonJohnHorn
12-24-2017, 07:57 PM
His FG% was pretty good for his generation. Keep in mind, guys back then, if they grew up in today's generation, there would be an entirely different evolution to their game, to their approach to it, and to their conditioning, and to how they are utilized in the game.


Now... you want to diss him because Wilt post 55 boards against him one night? One night? Or a HOF career? That saw him win 11 titles, and saw his team STOMP all over Wilt's teams time and again? That is fawking stupid.


You want to point to his FG%? In today's NBA, assuming Russell didn't develop an offensive game or simple didn't have an aptitude for it, coaches would only let him shoot when he has a shot. See Chandler. See DaJ. See Clint Acapella. See Ben Wallace. Some of the WORST shooters in the history of the NBA have the highest FG% because coaches now know how to work around it. Back then, a 45% FG% was pretty good, so Red ran a few plans through him. Keep in mind, Cousy shot under .400 for his career. Elgin Baylor, who was considered an offensive wizard and posted nearly 40 point a game shot .433 on his career.


Russell still had a CRAZY high BB;IQ. He was still an AMAZING defender, and still an AMAZING rebounder. And with today's coaching limiting his offense, he would have been even more focused on those things, like Rodman, or Ben Wallace.


Now... you just make yourself sound silly putting Stackhouse and Oladipa on that list. Stackhouse wasn't ANY good on D, and shot UNDER .450 INSIDE the arc for his career. Oladipa? His FG% is .441 for his career (.470 inside the arc), and he certainly doesn't bring the kind of leadership, defense, and rebounds that Russell brought. Sure... he's having a good season this year, but he's a dude that's been traded twice already and hasn't even been in the league five years.

There's a lot of great players on your list. Yes. And many, if you were starting a team from scratch, would likely be better options than Russell; but many of them would also benefit GREATLY from having a teammate like Russell.

I get where you are going with this. When you go back to the beginning of the league, especially when it was segregated, there were a lot of guys who simply wouldn't make an NBA roster today. Who simply weren't athletic enough because the league was new, the sport was new, not a lot of people played it, and the very best players were excluded. I don't think, for example, that Mikan, even were he brought up in today's generation, would make an NBA roster.


But Russell? Come on man. I might buy in to the 11 rings a little too much and the mythology of the guy, but he's an All-Star in any generation, though I'll freely admit his offense would be limited in today's game.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-25-2017, 05:46 AM
For clarification, "never been done" meaning the majority of millenials voting on PSD disagreed on the All Time drafts?

Maybe I'll join the next one just to prove how easy it would be. Elite scoring is a dime a dozen in an All Time draft. Russell brings a mind+skill combo to the game that is matched by maybe 3 players in history. He was born to dominate, and did it at every level against all takers.

Not just PSD but other forums. But if you are in a position to be in a snake order draft, the audience will always be millennials. There's not really getting around that. So to suggest it can happen in a "fair" audience is uncharted territory. Getting 80 year olds, who watch Russell, to vote will be a harder task than convincing millennials about Bill Russell.

Go join. They need more bodies next draft anyway. But if you draft Russell top 15, you're probably not going to win unless you make trades considering the scorers in the late 2nd are like the Ray Allen and Reggie Millers of the world.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-25-2017, 05:49 AM
I had a

Isiah Thomas
Eddie Jones
Paul Pierce
Amare Stoudemire
Bill Russell

team in an ATRD game on here before. Made it to the Semi-Finals, narrowly lost to Ebbs i believe (can't recall his team)

Pretty sure you traded multiple times for that. He said he could do it drafting Russell in the 1st. Maybe with the draft being such a ******** with like 80-90% of the teams making the playoffs he can get through depending on the matchup.

IT and Pierce are guys who go in the top 50. And neither may be available with his 2nd. So if he drafted Russell with a top 10 pick (under the assumption he believes Russell is a top 10 player), he may not get IT or Pierce.

JasonJohnHorn
12-25-2017, 10:32 AM
No Iíve seen the same Footage everyone else has, and thatís an absurd statement.

And thereís a reason you donít see things like guys averaging 22-25 boards a game today, and itís not because guys were better athletes and had some secret rebounding talent several decades ago.

I have tremendous respect for Russell, but yes, you are correct. The game was different. Things to consider:

1. Way more possessions. The NBA was like a track meet back then.
2. Way more misses; therefore, more rebounds to grab. Guys often shot between .400-.450, compared to guys who shoot close to .500 today.
3. Guys played WAY more minutes. 40+ often times.
4. Coaches essentially had guys breaking down the court and only left the C and sometimes the PF to collect rebounds. Or, they simply had poor rebounders focus on boxing out and let the C grab the boards. I know Don Nelson had said he was a poor rebounder when he got to the team and Red or Russell said: Just box your guy out and Russell will grab the rebound.


Russell was an all time great rebounder. For sheezy. But his per-game averages are inflated due to the era he played in.

Still... I'd say a top 10-rebounder all time and top-ten post defender.

europagnpilgrim
12-25-2017, 11:28 AM
No Iíve seen the same Footage everyone else has, and thatís an absurd statement.

And thereís a reason you donít see things like guys averaging 22-25 boards a game today, and itís not because guys were better athletes and had some secret rebounding talent several decades ago.

but you have guys like Rodman and Barkley capable of getting 14-20 rebounds a game, Rodman actually avg 17 per game, guys like Howard and Drummond getting 15 boards per game so to me Wilt and Russell were better rebounders and the stats they put up proved it

Wilt scored 100 points in a game, which is super absurd when you factor the closest is 81 by Kobe who did it like 40yrs later, so why hasn't anyone passed it since you and everybody know this is the superior era of today? Wilt was and is a better athlete than anyone to step foot on the court and its no secret needed since Wilt and Russell average over 20 boards per game for entire career because well they were the best at doing that, just like they own the real total blocks record, but it wasn't secret blocking talent, Wilt would get 25 blocks in many games back then because he was that dominant, why don't you see guys getting those type of numbers today? and don't give me no lame excuse because we just saw Russ avg a triple dub that had been last done in 62' Wilt/Oscar era, these better players need to step their game up

and no you haven't seen the same footage because you are probably watching the older Celtics/Lakers footage, I am talking about looking at the Olympic style athlete in college and early few years with Celtics, whats an absurd statement? what I wrote of what Russell did and was able to accomplish is factual according to his bio/resume

the reason you don't see guys averaging those rebound numbers is because they can only max themselves out at what they are capable of doing, they are not capable of putting up those Wilt type numbers, Jordan scored like 50 or more points like 30+times in his entire career while Wilt did it 40+ times in one season, Jordan wasn't capable of putting up those 50pt games like Wilt, Wilt avg 40ppg his first 7years, and could have done it longer had he wanted to, like Jordan wanted to

europagnpilgrim
12-25-2017, 11:48 AM
I have tremendous respect for Russell, but yes, you are correct. The game was different. Things to consider:

1. Way more possessions. The NBA was like a track meet back then.
2. Way more misses; therefore, more rebounds to grab. Guys often shot between .400-.450, compared to guys who shoot close to .500 today.
3. Guys played WAY more minutes. 40+ often times.
4. Coaches essentially had guys breaking down the court and only left the C and sometimes the PF to collect rebounds. Or, they simply had poor rebounders focus on boxing out and let the C grab the boards. I know Don Nelson had said he was a poor rebounder when he got to the team and Red or Russell said: Just box your guy out and Russell will grab the rebound.


Russell was an all time great rebounder. For sheezy. But his per-game averages are inflated due to the era he played in.

Still... I'd say a top 10-rebounder all time and top-ten post defender.

1. Let me get this straight, in order to run a track meet don't you need good to really good athletes? or are just a bunch of slow un athletic players capable of playing at such a frantic pace/speed? you guys really need to make your mind up with this track meet talk because last I checked slow un athletic players cant and don't play that way, if it was way more possessions shouldn't it be way less scoring since they couldn't shoot worth a damn according to field goal? it would seem to be just a bunch of empty possessions and not a bunch of high scoring but a whole bunch of possessions watching non athletic players pass the ball around like a hot potato, like they use to do before the Wilt explosion

2. Now its way more misses with way more rebounds, so what if Russell just boxed out and told his teammates just to get the rebound would you credit him for being a great teammate helping others inflate their rebound stats or would you say Russell sucked for only averaging 10 rebounds in a era where others where getting 20 rebounds? see how that works, and players today shoot the same 40-45pct, I sware you guys kill Iverson over this same nonsense and he was drafted in 96' not 62' draft, players right now today shoot those numbers from filed, everybody cant be Lebron/KD when it comes to high fg pct but it doesn't take away from what that player is capable of doing, which is why Iverson is a superbeast regardless of his fg pct.

3. Once again you play because you are capable, Iverson played 42+ minutes like every game his first 10yrs it seemed and that was in recent nba times not in the 60's, players aren't capable of playing those minutes or they would because a true baller never wants to leave the court especially if they aren't in foul trouble, you should salute players who want to play those type of minutes, especially when they are considered the best or top tier crop you want to watch that as a spectator of the sport, duh

4. Once again this is a duh moment, Jordan was a killer scorer who told Pippen before every game that he was getting his shots/points no matter the cost, I am sure they told B Cartwright to just play defense and rebound and don't worry about scoring since we have Jordan, and Cartwright had avg like 20ppg before joining Bulls, when you are the best at something you usually want that player doing what he does best, duh

5. Russell is one of the best players ever, especially at what he did as a top 3 ever rebounder and post defender and he could guard the perimeter as well in decent spurts with his athletic ability and wiry frame, top 10 is stretching it a bit, top 3 is more on point for rebound/defense and once you factor in his 13 titles in 15 yrs from ncaa and nba and he was a player/coach playing in such a harsh racist time that makes Russell have a seat in my circle of 25 best/most dominant players

2.

Jeffy25
12-25-2017, 12:34 PM
If the question is, could I draft him today, put him in this environment, and I get his prime?

He is probably in the 50-80 range. He was still a physical beast. He could probably learn to develop an outside game with enough development at an early age like today's stars do.

Jeffy25
12-25-2017, 12:44 PM
Not just PSD but other forums. But if you are in a position to be in a snake order draft, the audience will always be millennials. There's not really getting around that. So to suggest it can happen in a "fair" audience is uncharted territory. Getting 80 year olds, who watch Russell, to vote will be a harder task than convincing millennials about Bill Russell.

Go join. They need more bodies next draft anyway. But if you draft Russell top 15, you're probably not going to win unless you make trades considering the scorers in the late 2nd are like the Ray Allen and Reggie Millers of the world.

People just find scoring sexy

KnicksorBust
12-25-2017, 01:21 PM
It's never been done I believe. Not with an early/mid first. Late first maybe but you need a good scorer to slip.

For clarification, "never been done" meaning the majority of millenials voting on PSD disagreed on the All Time drafts?

Maybe I'll join the next one just to prove how easy it would be. Elite scoring is a dime a dozen in an All Time draft. Russell brings a mind+skill combo to the game that is matched by maybe 3 players in history. He was born to dominate, and did it at every level against all takers.

If you draft russell in the 1st you will get smoked. I am sure you could nab like tmac in the 2nd and bernard king in the 3rd and feel like "my team is the best" but it wouldn't win in a popular vote.

Jamiecballer
12-25-2017, 01:53 PM
A track meet does not require speedy participants. If guys are running back and forth it's a track meet even if it's predominantly average white men.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120A using Tapatalk

europagnpilgrim
12-25-2017, 03:50 PM
A track meet does not require speedy participants. If guys are running back and forth it's a track meet even if it's predominantly average white men.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120A using Tapatalk

I get that and its the reason why I said non athletic players would play at a far different methodical slow down pace then superior athletes of today, which is trending toward back to the old ways of high scoring/fast pace

it was better athletes back in those days than people give it credit for is what I am getting at

average slow white men shouldn't be able to outpace fast talented black athletes, just like you wont get no average white man to outrun Bolt or back further with C Lewis because they are on a diff. pace/speed level

its like saying a guy who weighs 400lbs outrunning a guy who weighs 150 and lightning quick, of course the 400lb guy can finish the race at his own pace but it wont be fair to compare the two unless you are telling me the 400lb guy can run a 4.2 forty, basically what you are trying to tell me about these slow white guys playing at a faster pace than todays game, that is complete hot garbage chatter unless those white guys are more athletic than you are willing to let on, which I highly doubt they were, the pace came from Wilt and the other dominant players of that era, Wilt was doing the outlet passes that you guys think Unseld and Love created, no they just remixed it, Wilt was responsible for the high pace/scoring, because he was that dominant

europagnpilgrim
12-25-2017, 03:56 PM
People just find scoring sexy

Well that's how sports owners sell tickets/merchandise, most true franchise players can put the ball in the bucket and high rate

it works like that from NHL to MLB to NFL and Soccer and so on, I would rather see those teams/players score and score and score and score, damn a 3-2 baseball game give me a 15-12 burner, I don't like 9-6 football games give me a 48-45 burner, I don't like 90-88 nba games give me 135-30 burner, same with Hockey game give me 6-8 goal game, each team

scoring is not only sexy, its very necessary and in high demand

I respect the other components but scoring is the cure in all sports

Chronz
12-25-2017, 04:04 PM
He had a Wilt level impact, the only way that goes down is if you think your era of basketball reigns supreme. There is no doubt players are more skilled today at a younger age but its because of guys like Russell to show us the way. Would Birdman have won in Boston?

Raps18-19 Champ
12-25-2017, 05:42 PM
If you draft russell in the 1st you will get smoked. I am sure you could nab like tmac in the 2nd and bernard king in the 3rd and feel like "my team is the best" but it wouldn't win in a popular vote.

Yea cant imagine what guy would be available with a mid-late 2nd that you could convince as a #1 option on a championship team. Maybe Pierce is the best chance but even then.

More-Than-Most
12-25-2017, 07:27 PM
Entered thread.... seen Joe Johnson on the list ahead of Russ... No need to go any further.

JasonJohnHorn
12-26-2017, 12:30 AM
Entered thread.... seen Joe Johnson on the list ahead of Russ... No need to go any further.

There's worse names than that. He's bemoaning Russell's FG% and then puts Stackhouse ahead of him... WTF?

But yeah...

KingPosey
12-26-2017, 03:12 AM
but you have guys like Rodman and Barkley capable of getting 14-20 rebounds a game, Rodman actually avg 17 per game, guys like Howard and Drummond getting 15 boards per game so to me Wilt and Russell were better rebounders and the stats they put up proved it

Wilt scored 100 points in a game, which is super absurd when you factor the closest is 81 by Kobe who did it like 40yrs later, so why hasn't anyone passed it since you and everybody know this is the superior era of today? Wilt was and is a better athlete than anyone to step foot on the court and its no secret needed since Wilt and Russell average over 20 boards per game for entire career because well they were the best at doing that, just like they own the real total blocks record, but it wasn't secret blocking talent, Wilt would get 25 blocks in many games back then because he was that dominant, why don't you see guys getting those type of numbers today? and don't give me no lame excuse because we just saw Russ avg a triple dub that had been last done in 62' Wilt/Oscar era, these better players need to step their game up

and no you haven't seen the same footage because you are probably watching the older Celtics/Lakers footage, I am talking about looking at the Olympic style athlete in college and early few years with Celtics, whats an absurd statement? what I wrote of what Russell did and was able to accomplish is factual according to his bio/resume

the reason you don't see guys averaging those rebound numbers is because they can only max themselves out at what they are capable of doing, they are not capable of putting up those Wilt type numbers, Jordan scored like 50 or more points like 30+times in his entire career while Wilt did it 40+ times in one season, Jordan wasn't capable of putting up those 50pt games like Wilt, Wilt avg 40ppg his first 7years, and could have done it longer had he wanted to, like Jordan wanted to
Lol donít tell me that I for sure havenít seen something and then guess what Iíve seen. That right there ends your credibility.

He was a great player within his era, an amazing player. Just donít say ridiculous **** and completely
Romanticize a guy to the point of absurdity. Youíre just saying so many things that are absurd and arenít true I just donít have the time to argue each and every absurd opinion.

JasonJohnHorn
12-26-2017, 09:52 AM
1. Let me get this straight, in order to run a track meet don't you need good to really good athletes? or are just a bunch of slow un athletic players capable of playing at such a frantic pace/speed? you guys really need to make your mind up with this track meet talk because last I checked slow un athletic players cant and don't play that way, if it was way more possessions shouldn't it be way less scoring since they couldn't shoot worth a damn according to field goal? it would seem to be just a bunch of empty possessions and not a bunch of high scoring but a whole bunch of possessions watching non athletic players pass the ball around like a hot potato, like they use to do before the Wilt explosion

2. Now its way more misses with way more rebounds, so what if Russell just boxed out and told his teammates just to get the rebound would you credit him for being a great teammate helping others inflate their rebound stats or would you say Russell sucked for only averaging 10 rebounds in a era where others where getting 20 rebounds? see how that works, and players today shoot the same 40-45pct, I sware you guys kill Iverson over this same nonsense and he was drafted in 96' not 62' draft, players right now today shoot those numbers from filed, everybody cant be Lebron/KD when it comes to high fg pct but it doesn't take away from what that player is capable of doing, which is why Iverson is a superbeast regardless of his fg pct.

3. Once again you play because you are capable, Iverson played 42+ minutes like every game his first 10yrs it seemed and that was in recent nba times not in the 60's, players aren't capable of playing those minutes or they would because a true baller never wants to leave the court especially if they aren't in foul trouble, you should salute players who want to play those type of minutes, especially when they are considered the best or top tier crop you want to watch that as a spectator of the sport, duh

4. Once again this is a duh moment, Jordan was a killer scorer who told Pippen before every game that he was getting his shots/points no matter the cost, I am sure they told B Cartwright to just play defense and rebound and don't worry about scoring since we have Jordan, and Cartwright had avg like 20ppg before joining Bulls, when you are the best at something you usually want that player doing what he does best, duh

5. Russell is one of the best players ever, especially at what he did as a top 3 ever rebounder and post defender and he could guard the perimeter as well in decent spurts with his athletic ability and wiry frame, top 10 is stretching it a bit, top 3 is more on point for rebound/defense and once you factor in his 13 titles in 15 yrs from ncaa and nba and he was a player/coach playing in such a harsh racist time that makes Russell have a seat in my circle of 25 best/most dominant players

2.

It's like you missed the point where I agree he's one of the greatest, and they just attack the valid points I made without actually addressing them.

1. The style of game was different then. It was a track meet. They were great athletes. The game was played a little different back then, so stats had a different meaning as a result.
2. Because the game was still young, not everybody developed the same skill set; consequently, there was lower FG% and lower FG% (along with more shots due to the quick pace) meant MORE AVAILABLE rebounds.
3. Guys played more minutes so their per-game averages were more impressive. That doesn't take anything away from Russell. But when you look at per36 averages, and rebounding percentage (which accounts to some degree for the discrepancy in available rebounds), then it makes Russell's numbers look a little more human.
4. Coaches coached differently. They push their team to get on offense, while C and sometimes PF worked the boards. And on some teams with dominant rebounder, coaches would have other players focus on boxing.



None of this is a knock on Russell. I got Russell in my top-ten C's all time and top-25 over all easily. He deserves a place in the top ten.

But his stats need to be put in context. Players today could average 42 minutes a game, but coaches (other than Thibs) choose not to. A difference in coaching; not in players abilities. The game slowed down in the late 80's and 90's when there was a focus on grind-it-out post play and slow ball movement (that that used be Lenny Wilkens in ATL and Fratello in Cleveland. The players could run, but higher FG% and fewer possessions meant fewer available boards (which is why Rodman's averages were so impressive).

Shaq, while playing with Phil Jackson, was challenged to play 48 minutes a game like Wilt. He had four or five games where Phil played him 45+ minutes, and Shaq tapped out. He said he couldn't handle it. So yeah... Russell had abilities other all-time great don't. I don't deny that at all.

But if you take a raw stat like rebounds per game, and don't put it in context, and then act like it is the be-all-end-all, then you are using a flawed logic.

Again... Russell, in my mind, is a top-ten all time rebounder, and top-ten all-time post defender. But yes, his rebounding stats were inflated due to the era in which he lived, which isn't to say he wasn't an amazing rebounder: he was. It's just to say that his stats are a little misleading when taken out of context. Just like his 11 rings is impressive, but he only beat out 8 teams each year to get them. Jordan won 6 and beat out about 30 teams each year (there are differences in team count as the league expanded in both eras).

Russell's per-game averages may be bigger than say Rodman's, but he wasn't a better rebounder than Rodman. You put Rodman in Russell's era, and he's grabbing 25 a game.

Context man. Context. And read. Don't be so reactionary.

Hawkeye15
12-26-2017, 01:50 PM
well, in a redraft, I would take Duncan/Jabbar/Wilt/Shaq ahead of him at C, so I might not need Russell until late teens/early 20s. However, in the real world, Russell is a top 15 player ever, without question. I always struggle ranking him, I think offense simply means more in the game of basketball. So I have 10 guys ahead of him all time. But he just can't slip by 11th for me personally, he was too great on defense, and everything about the guy screamed "win".

bagwell368
12-28-2017, 05:48 PM
I saw Bill play starting in the Fall of 1965. I had his poster in my room. I was D first 5 in HS, and 5/4 in college. I worshipped the guy.

He had the best GM, Coach, team. He was a D monster stuck onto a high pace offense only team. If he ended up with the Pistons or Knicks he'd have had 0 titles.

He'd be a D only 5/4 today. He could barely shoot in his day, now, he'd be a put back guy like Ben Wallace without the heft.

I wouldn't draft him in the top 350. I wouldn't draft Bob Cousy in the top 5,000.

bagwell368
12-28-2017, 05:59 PM
His FG% was pretty good for his generation.

Until they added the key to slow down Wilt, Bill was one of only 3 players over 6' 8" and he couldn't dominate. His FT% sucked even for the time, his TS% is essentially average. But the quality of players in the league after 1965 was distinctly higher than in 55-60, and you can see that in his %'s. Bill could pass well and O rebound well. His offense for a supposed/possible GOAT is brutal - face it.


Now... you want to diss him because Wilt post 55 boards against him one night? One night? Or a HOF career? That saw him win 11 titles, and saw his team STOMP all over Wilt's teams time and again? That is fawking stupid.

Only 3 times did Wilt play for a team that was as good or better than the C's. The first 76'ers team melted but it wasn't Wilt, Cunningham and Walker screwed the pooch. The 3rd time was a Lakers team that played in a weaker conference and had a pumped up record. The middle time Wilt and the 76'ers killed the C's. No other franchise but few years in Philly and the Lakers could or did put together any sort of challenge to the C's. The league was very weak and remained so until about the 1981-1984 timeframe.

I can justify about 5 players from before 1980 on a top 100 list in todays game and none is Bill Russell.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-28-2017, 09:24 PM
well, in a redraft, I would take Duncan/Jabbar/Wilt/Shaq ahead of him at C, so I might not need Russell until late teens/early 20s. However, in the real world, Russell is a top 15 player ever, without question. I always struggle ranking him, I think offense simply means more in the game of basketball. So I have 10 guys ahead of him all time. But he just can't slip by 11th for me personally, he was too great on defense, and everything about the guy screamed "win".

Hakeem, Moses and D Rob would easily go above him too. The best guy you can try to justify going below Russell in a redraft is Ewing, and that's only because Ewing goes in the late 1st, early 2nd where you can get yourself a #1 option like a Dirk/Wade/Clyde/Gervin/Curry or something to pair with him.

europagnpilgrim
12-28-2017, 11:56 PM
Lol donít tell me that I for sure havenít seen something and then guess what Iíve seen. That right there ends your credibility.

He was a great player within his era, an amazing player. Just donít say ridiculous **** and completely
Romanticize a guy to the point of absurdity. Youíre just saying so many things that are absurd and arenít true I just donít have the time to argue each and every absurd opinion.

Saying something that happened needs no credibility or crutches, its what happened

Romanticize about a player who had Rodman beat athletic wise and was a rebounder and defender at the highest of all levels and a player in Wallace who was undersized and blocked shots at a lightweight Russell level is truth in that, nothing to romanticize or sensationalize at all, he just did what those guys did earlier and at higher level to me

please do when you get time to argue/scream/react to these absurd opinions

Russell wasn't a Olympic style athlete? whats absurd about him being elite level athlete right underneath the best athlete ever to step foot on the hardwood in Wilt? or is that another absurd opinion about Wilt? Wilt didn't average 40ppg his first 7yrs? Russ didn't average a triple double that Oscar did back in the 60's? Wilt and Russell don't own the unofficial record of blocks? Wilt and Russell didn't use to get 20blocks in games like it was clockwork? the late great J Ramsay use to have his stat guy keep track of Wilts blocks and he recorded like 20-25 blocks in each game they played

me saying ridiculous **** is because of those players putting up ridiculous *** numbers, all players who are the best most dominant are just that within the era they play in, no different than the best players of the 00's or the 90's or 80's

want to hear something else ridiculous? Wilt said he was averaging 70ppg for a ten game stretch before his infamous 100pt game, see how ridiculous I sound(type) for mentioning a player averaging 70 for games before dropping 100pts, and he said had he wanted to he could have avg 70ppg back then, see how ridiculous that sounds? like something out of a sports fairytale, last ridiculous opinion, Wilt owns the record books, its the unauthorized biography of Wilt N. Chamberlain aka Paul Bunyan

one more ridiculous opinion from Lebron, he said Iverson is probably the ''greatest'' pound for pound player ever, Lebron is something ridiculous I know right? come join the club, it pays well, 100k a month

europagnpilgrim
12-29-2017, 12:21 AM
It's like you missed the point where I agree he's one of the greatest, and they just attack the valid points I made without actually addressing them.

1. The style of game was different then. It was a track meet. They were great athletes. The game was played a little different back then, so stats had a different meaning as a result.
2. Because the game was still young, not everybody developed the same skill set; consequently, there was lower FG% and lower FG% (along with more shots due to the quick pace) meant MORE AVAILABLE rebounds.
3. Guys played more minutes so their per-game averages were more impressive. That doesn't take anything away from Russell. But when you look at per36 averages, and rebounding percentage (which accounts to some degree for the discrepancy in available rebounds), then it makes Russell's numbers look a little more human.
4. Coaches coached differently. They push their team to get on offense, while C and sometimes PF worked the boards. And on some teams with dominant rebounder, coaches would have other players focus on boxing.



None of this is a knock on Russell. I got Russell in my top-ten C's all time and top-25 over all easily. He deserves a place in the top ten.

But his stats need to be put in context. Players today could average 42 minutes a game, but coaches (other than Thibs) choose not to. A difference in coaching; not in players abilities. The game slowed down in the late 80's and 90's when there was a focus on grind-it-out post play and slow ball movement (that that used be Lenny Wilkens in ATL and Fratello in Cleveland. The players could run, but higher FG% and fewer possessions meant fewer available boards (which is why Rodman's averages were so impressive).

Shaq, while playing with Phil Jackson, was challenged to play 48 minutes a game like Wilt. He had four or five games where Phil played him 45+ minutes, and Shaq tapped out. He said he couldn't handle it. So yeah... Russell had abilities other all-time great don't. I don't deny that at all.

But if you take a raw stat like rebounds per game, and don't put it in context, and then act like it is the be-all-end-all, then you are using a flawed logic.

Again... Russell, in my mind, is a top-ten all time rebounder, and top-ten all-time post defender. But yes, his rebounding stats were inflated due to the era in which he lived, which isn't to say he wasn't an amazing rebounder: he was. It's just to say that his stats are a little misleading when taken out of context. Just like his 11 rings is impressive, but he only beat out 8 teams each year to get them. Jordan won 6 and beat out about 30 teams each year (there are differences in team count as the league expanded in both eras).

Russell's per-game averages may be bigger than say Rodman's, but he wasn't a better rebounder than Rodman. You put Rodman in Russell's era, and he's grabbing 25 a game.

Context man. Context. And read. Don't be so reactionary.

1. Well all I hear on this site and from others is that Wilt played against small slow footed unathletic white players in a small 8 team league so I am still trying to figure out how they played at such a hectic fast pace over superior athletes who are also more skilled and have better nutrition/training etc.

2. I mention this numerous times on here about team fg pct back in the early stages, don't know why you are repeating it to me

3. Guys played more minutes because they love to play the game and the team needs them on the court to win or keep it close, its a reason why Wilt and Russell and Oscar and Iverson and a Lebron can do 40+ minutes and be ready to go the next day another 40+, true ballers never want to come out the game and franchise players dictate the minutes they want to play for most part outside of foul trouble, the coach usually checks with the player to see if they need a breather, if any franchise player wants to stay in its his call pretty much

4. of course coaches coach differently but they all coach to win and sometimes that require to play your best player the entire game if he is built like that, Wilt and Iverson and Oscar and Russell and Lebron are, its not many built like that

if players could they would play the heavy in game minutes but its too much partying and ******** and brands
not enough serious ballers

why was it a slow down of the game? was it because of better athletes or better coaching? because we all love to see how the game has went back to the faster pace in today and now everybody is jacking up 30 threes a game and now want the more wide open space attack as opposed to the grind it out, I just call it cycles rather than better FG and coaching, because everything you see today was of yesterday

Exactly why I said those players aren't built to play 42+ minutes, Shaq and many others tapped out, Iverson and Wilt relished those type of minutes, Iverson use to cuss Brown out for subbing him out for 2 minutes of a full game, that's a true baller right there, Wilt played the entire season plus overtime, he avg more than 48mpg that season, he would be able to do that in todays era/game as well

you have to put it all in context when discussing rings and whatever else number/stat, Jordan only had to worry about the Western team when he finally broke free and had the freedom of winning titles in expansion season, you said Russell only had to beat 8 teams to win, Jordan had 30 but how many were those 30 teams really legit to win it all? I bet it wasn't 8 teams, Jordan had Ehlo and Starks to worry about and whoever came out West during his 6 title in 8yr run but prior to that Jordan couldn't beat the C's or Badboys and got beat by a Bucks team that nobody remembers were pretty damn decent if you let that era of players tell it, so Jordan didn't have 30 teams to beat, more like 1 1/2 since he had no competition outside of that Knicks team in 93' and that Pacers team in 98', so context man. Context. and read, then react

and if you put Rodman in Russell era he probably doesn't make the league back then because you cant take a player from today and put him back then because he would be just a rebounder and wouldn't be much used for nothing else but grabbing a rebound and he wouldn't be able to drop the 24ppg against Wilt that Russell did, if you guys think Russell offensive game is weak and limited you must haven't saw Rodman or Wallace on that end, put them back in the early era and they don't even have a nba job since it was only 8 teams back then and spots were limited, its similar to what Russell said to Jordan about his 6 rings and Russell told Jordan if he was back in his day he wouldn't have 6 rings because Paxson nor Kerr would have been good enough to be on a roster and both those guys hit ring clinching shots to help secure 2 of Jordan 6 rings
those advanced stats try to diminish certain players while boosting up others, Russell would have average 18+ rebounds in Rodman or Wallace or Drummond era

tredigs
12-29-2017, 01:00 AM
europag, you are the most tiring, clueless man I have seen on this site in quite a while.

basch152
12-29-2017, 05:53 AM
europag, you are the most tiring, clueless man I have seen on this site in quite a while.

yeah pretty much.

pretty annoying dealing with an incredibly ignorant person that is so gone that he can't see his ignorance.

europagnpilgrim
12-29-2017, 10:51 AM
europag, you are the most tiring, clueless man I have seen on this site in quite a while.

Truth hurts, deal with it or roll over

tregoldigger you are boring with your one liners, its replies like this that nobody on here or earth can take serious because you don't refute anything in my comments on here, you just say you are 'tiring' aka you be saying actual factual **** that we cant stump, now how clueless is that?

europagnpilgrim
12-29-2017, 10:55 AM
yeah pretty much.

pretty annoying dealing with an incredibly ignorant person that is so gone that he can't see his ignorance.

put up your cheerleader pom poms, at least tregoldigger has a die hard fan on here, your ignorance is mighty since you cant refute anything I wrote either, you guys on here never played a game of basketball in your life and no I don't want to hear about your junior high days of playing, this game of basketball has complicated you guys because you rely on advanced stats and not the eye test/dominance of players in the past, now that is some ignorance for your *** right there

when people on here start putting/copynpaste permanent up other people quotes on your postline you have just showed me your ignorance and un intelligence at levels unseen, that quote always cracks you up I bet, humpty dumpty I guess did fall off a wall and crack open

Hawkeye15
12-29-2017, 12:50 PM
Hakeem, Moses and D Rob would easily go above him too. The best guy you can try to justify going below Russell in a redraft is Ewing, and that's only because Ewing goes in the late 1st, early 2nd where you can get yourself a #1 option like a Dirk/Wade/Clyde/Gervin/Curry or something to pair with him.

Hakeem most likely. Moses, eh. D-Rob, no.

Look, in a neutral world, where we strip accomplishments away, Russell isn't even a top 50 player ever. At all. But when ranking all timers, winning does matter to some degree. Russell is the hardest player for me to rank. Offensively, he was pure crap. If you just transported him to today, he would not even make a roster. But, growing up today, his skill level would be miles ahead of where it was.

I just can't leave someone with his accolades off the top 10-20 ever. Even though I understand that purely as a player, he isn't even in the same stratosphere as a lot of other guys..

basch152
12-29-2017, 12:55 PM
put up your cheerleader pom poms, at least tregoldigger has a die hard fan on here, your ignorance is mighty since you cant refute anything I wrote either, you guys on here never played a game of basketball in your life and no I don't want to hear about your junior high days of playing, this game of basketball has complicated you guys because you rely on advanced stats and not the eye test/dominance of players in the past, now that is some ignorance for your *** right there

when people on here start putting/copynpaste permanent up other people quotes on your postline you have just showed me your ignorance and un intelligence at levels unseen, that quote always cracks you up I bet, humpty dumpty I guess did fall off a wall and crack open

at this point in not sure if you're a troll or just a ****ing idiot.

either way your arguments aren't good and are easy to counter but then you just ramble about nonsense for paragraphs.

it's literally reminiscent of the ravings of a lunatic

basch152
12-29-2017, 01:04 PM
Hakeem most likely. Moses, eh. D-Rob, no.

Look, in a neutral world, where we strip accomplishments away, Russell isn't even a top 50 player ever. At all. But when ranking all timers, winning does matter to some degree. Russell is the hardest player for me to rank. Offensively, he was pure crap. If you just transported him to today, he would not even make a roster. But, growing up today, his skill level would be miles ahead of where it was.

I just can't leave someone with his accolades off the top 10-20 ever. Even though I understand that purely as a player, he isn't even in the same stratosphere as a lot of other guys..

well the thing is, when you're talking about drafting players as if they're coming out of college, you want the best talent and athletes. not who had success against inferior competition in an 8 tram league.

in that case I EASILY take all 3 of them over him.

One Nut Kruk
12-29-2017, 02:16 PM
My head hurts from reading that pilgrims nonsense.

Hawkeye15
12-29-2017, 02:42 PM
well the thing is, when you're talking about drafting players as if they're coming out of college, you want the best talent and athletes. not who had success against inferior competition in an 8 tram league.

in that case I EASILY take all 3 of them over him.

I totally get that.

I guess I am looking at this more of an all time ranking, not drafting for a sim league or whatever. I can't imagine drafting Russell at all in a league.

europagnpilgrim
12-29-2017, 04:03 PM
My head hurts from reading that pilgrims nonsense.

Take a advil and call it a day, you guys are something special funny on here, I just say what players did and what they are capable of and all of a sudden it becomes non sense because either you don't follow and study the game and you never have played but sitting up on here talking about reading non sense when I spoke on a players ability, the ability that player showcased during his career, I get it though just complete utter nonsense, sleep well

europagnpilgrim
12-29-2017, 04:18 PM
at this point in not sure if you're a troll or just a ****ing idiot.

either way your arguments aren't good and are easy to counter but then you just ramble about nonsense for paragraphs.

it's literally reminiscent of the ravings of a lunatic

Once again you reply from a stumped position, how about actually copying what I said in 'BOLD' letters and reply to this troll **** you are talking about

how in the hell did this become an argument by me saying what they player did on the court? did Lebron not drop like 30 straight points against Detroit in 07' Conf Finals? so if I say he did that how in the hell is that an argument? you guys on here are too caught up in your emotions and using me as a deflector for it

if somebody told you a actual nba player was putting up 50+pts/30boards/10assists/20blocks/8-10 steals for many games during a 7 yr stretch of course it would sound insane since those are literally fairytale lunaticish

you sit up here and follow tv experts/mainstream lunatics to form your view, you probably never even picked up a basketball out there playing golf, you sound like a mad golfer

if they are easy to counter then do it, wouldn't that be the logic way of handling a so called ''argument'', which I never knew could be an argument if it actually happened

Wilt scored 50pts more times in one season than Jordan did for his entire career, which you would call me a troll or ****ing idiot lunatic for speaking on that, what a psd class clown you are

you and others will sit up here and post info from a lunatic corporation like a ESPN and then your rankings would be similar so you think you are smart but are naÔve sheeple and cant play the game of basketball a lick.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-29-2017, 04:49 PM
Hakeem most likely. Moses, eh. D-Rob, no.

Look, in a neutral world, where we strip accomplishments away, Russell isn't even a top 50 player ever. At all. But when ranking all timers, winning does matter to some degree. Russell is the hardest player for me to rank. Offensively, he was pure crap. If you just transported him to today, he would not even make a roster. But, growing up today, his skill level would be miles ahead of where it was.

I just can't leave someone with his accolades off the top 10-20 ever. Even though I understand that purely as a player, he isn't even in the same stratosphere as a lot of other guys..

But the situation is in an all time redraft setting and Bill's accomplishments don't hold much weight with all teams having multiple fall of famers on the team.

If we are talking about best players of all time then Bill's accomplishments have a lot to do with it and would be ranked high but not if you are talking about all time draft.

Hawkeye15
12-29-2017, 05:43 PM
But the situation is in an all time redraft setting and Bill's accomplishments don't hold much weight with all teams having multiple fall of famers on the team.

If we are talking about best players of all time then Bill's accomplishments have a lot to do with it and would be ranked high but not if you are talking about all time draft.

yep, I alluded to that a few posts up. I am basically debating all time, but I agree he wouldn't even be a top 50+ pick in a redraft.

basch152
12-30-2017, 04:18 AM
Once again you reply from a stumped position, how about actually copying what I said in 'BOLD' letters and reply to this troll **** you are talking about

how in the hell did this become an argument by me saying what they player did on the court? did Lebron not drop like 30 straight points against Detroit in 07' Conf Finals? so if I say he did that how in the hell is that an argument? you guys on here are too caught up in your emotions and using me as a deflector for it

if somebody told you a actual nba player was putting up 50+pts/30boards/10assists/20blocks/8-10 steals for many games during a 7 yr stretch of course it would sound insane since those are literally fairytale lunaticish

you sit up here and follow tv experts/mainstream lunatics to form your view, you probably never even picked up a basketball out there playing golf, you sound like a mad golfer

if they are easy to counter then do it, wouldn't that be the logic way of handling a so called ''argument'', which I never knew could be an argument if it actually happened

Wilt scored 50pts more times in one season than Jordan did for his entire career, which you would call me a troll or ****ing idiot lunatic for speaking on that, what a psd class clown you are

you and others will sit up here and post info from a lunatic corporation like a ESPN and then your rankings would be similar so you think you are smart but are naÔve sheeple and cant play the game of basketball a lick.

I don't need to counter it because it's already been done - multiple times in this thread alone.

and like I said, you then proceed to post paragraphs of nonsensical ********.

it's literally such nonsense that I have trouble believing you arent a troll because people aren't naturally this dense.

JasonJohnHorn
12-31-2017, 09:32 PM
europag, you are the most tiring, clueless man I have seen on this site in quite a while.

Thanks for that. That means I am not more than the second most tring and clueless man on this site!

Ethermark
01-05-2018, 11:36 PM
Definitely yes. He is the one of the best defensive player in NBA history

bagwell368
01-06-2018, 07:52 AM
Take a advil and call it a day, you guys are something special funny on here, I just say what players did and what they are capable of and all of a sudden it becomes non sense because either you don't follow and study the game and you never have played but sitting up on here talking about reading non sense when I spoke on a players ability, the ability that player showcased during his career, I get it though just complete utter nonsense, sleep well

I played in college. I coached for 15 years. I started watching Russell in the Fall of 1965, and have along the way viewed much of the tape of what went before. He was my boyhood hero.

offense:

before Wilt, the three tallest guys in the NBA were two 6' 8" guys (that sucked) and Bill. No key. Bill did not dominate. In his career his FG + FT were average for his time. Today? Put backs and mikan shots. A very weak scorer.

Became a good passer at the top of the key after Cousy left. Today who would place him at the top of the key?

Offense rebounds? SUre but many less due to pace of the game, much higher shooting %'s, and population of bigger and better athletes than what he saw then.

defense:

Everyone says he was great. Sure, out to 15', what about 23'? Take him away from the basket - oh oh, no rebounds. Slough off to the paint - oh oh 3!

He was one of the 5 best players of his time. He is arguably the D Goat in his time. But not today. He is the only guy that is ever mentioned as GOAT that is weak on O or D.

Hakeem, KG, Duncan, Kareem are just a few of the guys that would eat Bill alive. I don't think outside of his time he'd even be a top 250.