Bill Russell talking about the mental game of basketball. Great read.

[HylianNightmare]

Great stuff

[CavaliersFTW]

I think this is what separated Russell from Wilt, the mental game. The ability to always think and do the right thing at every situation. I bet Wilt was more of a simpleton out there, just trying to get his points. Russell was noticeably shorter and lighter than Wilt and he still won all those rings. He's a winner. Wilt is a choker. I don't think Wilt wanted it as much as Russell. And the results show.

Jesus, no.

You believe this based on nothing too.

https://youtu.be/G94iJr8ZbzM?t=11m32s

"What were his (Wilt's) best qualities?"

Russell:
"I don't know what was his best his strength, or his smarts. Cause he was equally adept at both."

Russell in other interviews has stated Wilt was the smartest opponent he faced along with Oscar Robertson.

[PHILA]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdd2biHVlyA&t=1m37s


What was the toughest thing for you playing against Wilt?

"I could never play him the same way two games in a row, because it would not work. And so the whole time we played against each other, every game was different."

[ClipperRevival]

Jesus, no.

You believe this based on nothing too.

https://youtu.be/G94iJr8ZbzM?t=11m32s

"What were his (Wilt's) best qualities?"

Russell:
"I don't know what was his best his strength, or his smarts. Cause he was equally adept at both."

Russell in other interviews has stated Wilt was the smartest opponent he faced along with Oscar Robertson.

The more I study Russell/Wilt, the more I am realizing that Wilt was more of a "let me get mine" type of guy and Russell was the, "I could care less about stats, I want to win" type of guy.

Wilt lost to Russell 5 times in game 7s in the playoffs by a combined total of 9 points. And the two that are completely unforgiveable are his loses in 1968 and 1969, which were Russell's last 2 years in the league. In both seasons, Wilt's 76ers (1968) and Lakers (1969) had the HCA and were perceived to be the far superior teams. Yet, Wilt let his team lose game 7 both times, at HOME.

They don't call him the "Big Dipper" for nothing. The guy disappeared when it mattered most. He could've easily had 4-5 rings and had Russell's ring count down to 7-8 and made this debate much more interesting. But as it stands, it's 2 to 11.

[ClipperRevival]

And in 1968, Wilt's 76ers had a 3-1 lead against the Celtics and they lost 3 straight, with game 7 at home. If that's not choking, I don't know what is. Do you think a guy like MJ would score 20 and 14 points in games 6 and 7 with the championship on the line?

[ClipperRevival]

In 1969, Wilt again is up on Russell 3-2 and his Lakers lose games 6 and 7, with game 7 at home, again. He scores 8 points in game 6 and 18 points in game 7 including 4/13 from the FT in a game they lost by 2 points.

You can't make this stuff up. This is supposed to be one of the best ever? Talent wise, he was. But clutch performance wise? Way down the list.

[DatAsh]

Do you think a guy like MJ would score 20 and 14 points in games 6 and 7 with the championship on the line?

Probably not, but he also wouldn't bring down 20+ rebounds or defend the way that Wilt did. Completely different games.

[ClipperRevival]

Or how about 1970 against the Knicks. Sure, the Knicks had the better team but playing against a hobbled Willie Reed in game 7, he should've been more aggressive. He scores 21 points and 1/11 from the FT. In game 6, he scored 45 points so he was capable of doing more. He just didn't go after it. This is what betas do. They don't have that killer instinct. They can't sense when they have a wounded animal and go for the kill.

[ClipperRevival]

Check this out. It talks about the Wilt/Russell rivalry. Starts right away and stops at about 13:00.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDpM8476YsA

[ClipperRevival]

Wilt really had a chance to cement his status as the GOAT right there with MJ. But he came up short when it mattered most and let 4-5 additional rings get past his fingertips. He lost 5 playoff series to Russell's Celtics that went to 7 games. Five of them and lost them all. That's a 5 ring swing right there!!!!

And this is exactly why there is such a thing as clutchness and choking. What good are all those individual numbers if you shrink when it matters most? Isn't the point of playing to win?

[CavaliersFTW]

Didn't Russell score 2 points in G7 of the Finals?

"He won though"

Move along people nothing but some logical Olympics here.

[ClipperRevival]

Didn't Russell score 2 points in G7 of the Finals?

"He won though"

Move along people nothing but some logical Olympics here.

Russell's game was never about scoring. It was about winning. So he tried to do all of the necessary things to win, whatever it took.

And I guess him being perfect against Wilt in game 7's prove this huh?

You can throw Wilt's rebounding and early scoring numbers at me, I could care less. It's about winning and the guy had plenty of legit chances to win many more rings but came up short. That's what's most important to me.

[BoutPractice]

Didn't Russell score 2 points in G7 of the Finals?

"He won though"

Move along people nothing but some logical Olympics here.

For a player like Russell, just counting the number of points he scored is a bit misleading - it won't tell you how good a game he had.

It's not about double standards... just simple observation. I've seen many players score in single digits yet completely dominate a game. Jason Kidd and Ben Wallace come to mind. In the latest Euro tournament, Gobert would sometimes have that kind of game as well.

Russell is probably the all-time king of that category... (Trying to keep that thread focused on him. I'm a big Wilt fan, but the eternal Wilt VS Russell debate is not as interesting as breaking down what exactly made Russell so good...).

[CavaliersFTW]

I suppose it was Russell's superior bball IQ, stability under pressure, and will to win over Chamberlain that enabled him to secure victory after "Losing the ball off the support!" on the 1965 EDF games final inbound play on his own home court.

Understanding his strengths detailed by that clippers guy it's obvious Russell's spirit left his own body and possessed John Havlicek to steal the ball and save the game. After of course, Wilt's spirit had initially possessed his own body to fu[COLOR="Black"]c[/COLOR]k up and turn it over off the inbound play.

Another flawless victory for Bill Russell and blunder for Wilt Chamberlain, according to ISH

[CavaliersFTW]

Russell's game was never about scoring. It was about winning. So he tried to do all of the necessary things to win, whatever it took.

Sounds identical to Wilt. Being that Wilt's roles and statistics changed so much team to team.

Did whatever it took. Only there's one minor difference... Wilt was actually CAPABLE of scoring (and in greater volume or accuracy than any other player ever) when it was needed of him. Unlike Russell.