Phil Jackson picks Bill Russell over MJ & basically says MJ or Kobe is a pick 'em

[QUOTE=tikay0]Who do you think is the closest representation of him ATM?

Noah? A super, super, super bootleg version of Russ.[/QUOTE]
Marc Gasol. A great defensive big man who's great at passing and is great because of the little things he does that aren't on the stat sheet. He's different offensively and no where near as athletic as him but he's still kind of similar. Gasol will never be the player Russell is though so there really isn't a close representation of him. The closest to him in the past was peak Bill Walton. A poor man's Walton would be a good comparison for Gasol.

[QUOTE=fpliii]Did Walton ever get any 'next Bill Russell' hype? Everything I've read has painted him as a different player than Wilt or Russ, but I feel like it must've been there to some extent.[/QUOTE]

Walton received some comparisons to Russell both in UCLA and at Portland, and if I remember correctly, I think Russell himself was asked about it while he was a commentator. It wasn't to the extent that, to give more modern examples, David Robinson at Navy or Patrick Ewing at Georgetown were hyped as "next Bill Russells" before setting foot in the NBA, but Walton was likened to Russell during Walton's short-lived prime due to their outlet passing, defense and making teams better, and I remember a couple people saying afterward that Walton was the only center who came closest to Russell's impact. I could send you some stuff later, if you wish.

First he said MJ was better, but now he can't make a decision on who to pick?

[QUOTE=Shade8780]Marc Gasol. A great defensive big man who's great at passing and is great because of the little things he does that aren't on the stat sheet. He's different offensively and no where near as athletic as him but he's still kind of similar.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, but when I think of Russell, I think of a crazy athletic specimen that's flying up and down the court, wreaking havoc.

In a way yes, Gasol can be compared to Russ, but aesthetically wise, Gasol is too lumbering for me to compare the 2.

What about a 200-300x better version of Kenneth Faried with much better offensive awareness?

[QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]Walton received some comparisons to Russell both in UCLA and at Portland, and if I remember correctly, I think Russell himself was asked about it while he was a commentator. It wasn't to the extent that, to give more modern examples, David Robinson at Navy or Patrick Ewing at Georgetown were hyped as "next Bill Russells" before setting foot in the NBA, but Walton was likened to Russell during Walton's short-lived prime due to their outlet passing, defense and making teams better, and I remember a couple people saying afterward that Walton was the only center who came closest to Russell's impact. I could send you some stuff later, if you wish.[/QUOTE]
Agreed. Walton was an amazing player at his peak. Too bad injuries got to him.

[QUOTE=tikay0]Yeah, but when I think of Russell, I think of a crazy athletic specimen that's flying up and down the court, wreaking havoc.

In a way yes, Gasol can be compared to Russ, but aesthetically wise, Gasol is too lumbering for me to compare the 2.

What about a 200-300x better version of Kenneth Faried with much better offensive awareness?[/QUOTE]
No. Faried is a good rebounder and athletic. That's it. He isn't a great defender which was Russell's biggest skill.

[QUOTE=Shade8780]No. Faried is a good rebounder and athletic. That's it. He isn't a great defender which was Russell's biggest skill.[/QUOTE]

I guess you're right. OK, Faried with 500x better defense and 300x better on offense. :confusedshrug:

When will people realize that Phil just says this shit for attention?

As far as picking Bill Russell he's the greatest winner in NBA history as a player. Isn't that the point of the game?

Order of players I would draft first as a GM:

1. Bird
2. MJ
3. Russell
4. Magic
5. Kareem
6. Shaq
7. Wilt

[B]THIS IS [U]NOT[/U] MY TOP 10...BIG DIFFERENCE.[/B]

Not that I care what Phil thinks, I form my own opinions and saying something is true just because Phil Jackson said so is a fallacious argument. But it's funny how all the usual Kobe detractors were quoting Phil like his words were gospel from the bible when it fit their agenda, but now that he says he was willing to flip a coin because Kobe and Mike were both so dominating, you haters don't like it and say "who cares what Phil says, he's just trying to appease Kobe". :oldlol:


[QUOTE]he wasn't talented enough or smart enough to create better shots. [/QUOTE]

Uh, no. Kobe/Phil have already talked about this

Kobe has SMALL HANDS and can't control the ball when going to the basket like Mike. MJ was more athletic, which allowed him to get to the basket at a better rate. Kobe doesn't take tougher shots cause he's not smart or has a low basketball IQ, he just didn't get the same physical gifts as Jordan or LeBron. He's already on the record saying that if he had bigger hands, that he would take it to the basket every play and dunk the ball or lay it up. He just can't do it because he didn't win the genetic lottery like LeBron or Mike.

Which is why him being who he is becomes so impressive. This is a guy with average-good athleticism, but not the outta this world athleticism that Mike, LeBron or even Vince Carter have, yet he's been able to place himself right there with Bron and MJ. That is why I respect and admire Kobe. He dedicated time to develop his skills and worked around his short-comings. He isn't who he is because he's an anomaly of biology like LeBron James who simply cannot be stopped because he's a 6'8" 270 pound freak of nature with the speed and agility of a 6'4 200 pound point guard.

[QUOTE=Mr. I'm So Rad]No surprise. If given the choice, Phil would also take Shaq over MJ. He's always felt that basketball is a big man's game.[/QUOTE]

Yup, he even said a few years ago he would take Dwight over LeBron to build a team.

[QUOTE=Ne 1]Not that I care what Phil thinks, I form my own opinions and saying something is true just because Phil Jackson said so is a fallacious argument. But Kobe all the usual Kobe detractors were quoting Phil like his words were gospel from the bible when it fit their agenda, but now that he says he was willing to flip a coin because Kobe and Mike were both so dominating, you haters don't like it and say "who cares what Phil says, he's just trying to appease Kobe". :oldlol:




Uh, no. Kobe/Phil have already talked about this

Kobe has SMALL HANDS and can't control the ball when going to the basket like Mike. Kobe doesn't take tougher shots cause he's not smart or has a low basketball IQ, he just didn't get the same physical gifts as Jordan or LeBron. He's already on the record saying that if he had bigger hands, that he would take it to the basket every play and dunk the ball or lay it up. He just can't do it because he didn't win the genetic lottery like LeBron or Mike.

Which is why him being who he is becomes so impressive. This is a guy with average-good athleticism, but not the outta this world athleticism that Mike, LeBron or even Vince Carter have, yet he's been able to place himself right there with Bron and MJ. That is why I respect and admire Kobe. He dedicated time to develop his skills and worked around his short-comings. He isn't who he is because he's an anomaly of biology like LeBron James who simply cannot be stopped because he's a 6'8" 270 pound freak of nature with the speed and agility of a 6'4 200 pound point guard.[/QUOTE]


becuase Kobe is so skilled. Which is why I respect Larry Bird as well.

[QUOTE=tikay0]Yeah, but when I think of Russell, I think of a crazy athletic specimen that's flying up and down the court, wreaking havoc.

In a way yes, Gasol can be compared to Russ, but aesthetically wise, Gasol is too lumbering for me to compare the 2.

What about a 200-300x better version of Kenneth Faried with much better offensive awareness?[/QUOTE]
Would Russell be like KG?

Both absurd defenders and can guard out to half court, great rebounder, great vocal leaders, great passing, and the weakest part of their overall games was scoring but they still did that at a high level.

They have the same body frames too.

[QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]Walton received comparisons to Russell both in UCLA and at Portland, and if I remember correctly, I think Russell himself was asked about it while he was a commentator. It wasn't to the extent that, to give more modern examples, [B]David Robinson at Navy or Patrick Ewing at Georgetown were hyped as "next Bill Russells" before setting foot in the NBA[/B], but Walton was likened to Russell during Walton's short-lived prime due to their outlet passing, defense and making teams better, and I remember a couple people saying afterward that Walton was the only center who came closest to Russell's impact. [B]I could send you some stuff later, if you wish.[/B][/QUOTE]

The bolded is what I had in mind. During his UCLA days, there seems to have been some chatter of him being 'Russell on defense, Chamberlain on offense', but I haven't seen anything likening him to Russ directly. If you have a chance later on, I'd definitely like to take you up on that offer.

I just did a few quick searches ("next Bill Russell", "next Russell", "second coming of Bill Russell", "second coming of Russell"), and got the following results:

Artis Gilmore: 1
Len Elmore: 4
Cliff Ray: 1
Patrick Ewing: 14
Ralph Sampson: 1
David Robinson: 1
Alonzo Mourning: 1

so I decided to do look more closely into Walton's UCLA days. There are some comparisons to Walton (i.e. "similar impact", "the next great center", "he can be like what Russell was for those Celtics teams"), etc.), but not many direct stylistic comparisons. I'll look again when I have some free time. Here's the link with the PDFs used in the above count:

[url]http://www75.zippyshare.com/v/42050006/file.html[/url]

(NOTE: PDF results generally tail off after the mid-90s, so these aren't representative of the discussion thereafter).

[QUOTE=tpols]Would Russell be like KG?

Both absurd defenders and can guard out to half court, great rebounder, great vocal leaders, great passing, and the weakest part of their overall games was scoring but they still did that at a high level.

They have the same body frames too.[/QUOTE]

Great comparison. KG is arguably the best defender of our generation. I definitely see the comparisons.