Why is MJ considered better than Bill Russell?

[Nevaeh]

Bottom line is MJ was the best of both Wilt and Russell wrapped in a single package. He had the offensive approach of Wilt, with the defensive approach of Russell. He did what he had to do when it counted the most, period. Wilt had the same opportunities to get it done just like Jordan's contemporaries did. They couldn't get it done.

It's funny that I've yet to see the level of excuse making for Barkley, K. Malone and Ewing that I've seen for Wilt. Thread after thread of "yeah but see....... yeah but don't forget about.......". Bottom line is Wilt was a great player who racked up stats but still fell short of GOAT status. History can't change that.

[Pointguard]

Nique, here are some basic concepts for you to work with.

1)Basketball was still new when Chamberlain dominates. Coaching great talents is usually problematic in the beginning because 4 other players have to be in support formation.

2)Coaches are most important in this situation: They had to caoch to the spectacular talent in Chamberlain. They had to coach to the franchise surviving - or drawing up fan support (Warriors). They had to coach to keepin the other guys in the game. Then he had to coach to the differences in the playoffs. Coach to them steping their game up and becoming more forefront in playoffs.

3)Even to this day 34ppg and above seems problematic in wining it all

4)Chamberlain seems to be the most coachable great talent in the sport. Played dramatically in different functions according to coaches - 50ppg to 8assist and taking less a lot of single digits attempts.

Some Basic Championship Formula's or Laws
5)Championship formula mandates a reliable second option.
6)Superior coaching
7)PLayers that can rise to the occassion
8)Role Players
9)Chemistry

There are more but I will leave it as such.

You need to stop acting like you don't know.