Starting a franchise, would anyone pick Thurmond over Russell?

Either during their time, today, or in an all time draft where all the other great bigs were drafted already.

I've got my opinions on contrasting the two, but for others who know a lot, or have seen them I'd like to hear YOUR thoughts

[QUOTE=jongib369]Either during their time, today, or in an all time draft where all the other great bigs were drafted already.

I've got my opinions on contrasting the two, but for others who know a lot, or have seen them I'd like to hear YOUR thoughts[/QUOTE]

Russell easily. Thurmond was a slightly better scorer on a team that needed a lot more scoring. But as a result, his FG% was lower. Russell was a better passer, a a better team player by far, and a much smarter player.

They are probably about comparable as individual defenders, and Thurmond might even have an edge here. But Russell was a better team defender, and a much better shot blocker. Both were great athletes: Thurmond stronger, Russell faster, quicker and a much better jumper.

For me, it would not even be close.

I think I would roll with Russ due to Russ's passing ability and defensive versatility. I think peak Russ was capable of defending three to four positions at a high level. But Nate was a beast no doubt!