I'd take Russell > Jordan.

[LAZERUSS]

Bird was better at his best, and Magic had a better career because of better health..I can sure see something thinking Bird was the greater player..I consider them about tied.

Plesse stop with the finals MVP talk..That has gotten really old on this site. I noticed you cherry pick. You don't bother mentioning that Bird was robbed of a FMVP in 1981 and Magic got a gift in 1980.. Not that FMVP are to be obsessed with like so many do on this site..

You mean the Bird that averaged 15 ppg and shot .419 in the '81 Finals, and against a team that had gone 40-42?

And the Magic, who without Kareem, led his team to a title-clinching win on the road, and putting up a 42-15-7 game in the process (BTW, his 15 rebounds was 5 better than anyone else in that game.)

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

While GREAT, the thing with Wilt is, the guy got his ass handed to him by Bill Russell..time and time again. In fact, Russ kicked his ass ALL THE TIME.

Wilt really never had the best playoff history either. That goes to other legends such as Shaq, Magic, Mike and of course Russell.

People will cite his rebounding but the the only reason rebounds will be mentioned is because he blatantly stat-padded.

Bottom line: Stilt should have paid attention to ONE thing, the game score.

[LAZERUSS]

How many times are we going to hear this myth that Russel only won because he had better talent..He didn't have better talent from 65-69 and won 3 out of 4. Wilt went to a team in LA that went to the finals the years before and Russell still won on his last legs. The Phila team he left ended up with the second best record in the league the year after he left.

What speaqks volumes is Russell only failed to win a ttile once in his last 15 years of basketball when he wasn't hurt..Let me guess it was all his teammates.

65-66. Wit's Sixers win their last 11 straight games to edge the Celtics in the regular season, 55-25 to 54-26. However, the seven-time defending champion Celtics had numerous missed games by their starters that season, and were healthy in the post-season. Oh, and during the regular season, Wilt leads his Sixers to a 6-3 against Boston, and in the process, he averaged 28.3 ppg, 30.7 rpg, and shot an estimated .525. In the EDF's, Wilt averaged 28.0 ppg, 30.2 rpg, and shot .509. So what happened? His teammates collectively shot .352 in that series.

66-67. Wilt leads his Sixers to a 68-13 mark, which was an all-time record at the time, and miles ahead of a loaded Celtic team which finished at 60-21. In the EDF's, Chamberlain's teammates finally neutralized Russell, and with Chamberlain's normal dominaing efforts against Russell, his Sixers blowout the eight-time defending Celtics, 4-1 (and only four point loss in game three prevented a sweep.)

67-68. Once again Wilt's Sixers romp to the best record in the league, and they finished well ahead of Boston (62-20 to 54-28.) However, in the EDF's, HOFer Cunningham misses the entir series with an injury sustained the first round of the playoffs. Still, the Sixers forge a 3-1 series lead, and even Auerbach concedes that the series is over. But, then two starters, Luke Jackson and Wali Jones are injured in game five, and are worthless the rest of the series. On top of all of that, Chamberlain is nursing several injuries, including a tear in his quad (a similar injury which reduced Reed to a statue in the last three games of the '70 Finals), and was noticeably limping from game three on. With all of that, Boston edges the Sixers in game seven, 100-96. A healthy Sixer roster probably easily repeats the 4-1 blowout of Boston from the previous season.

68-69 Wilt forces the Sixers to trade him to the Lakers, and for three players. One of them was a 20 ppg scoring all-star guard, and another was a 10-13 journeyman center. The Sixers decline from a 62-20 team, down to 55-27 record (and way down from just two years earlier when they went 68-13 en route to a dominating title.)

Then, think about this...those two players, Clark and Imhoff, combined to average 36 ppg, 20 rpg, and shot .510 in the first round of the playoffs...and against a Boston team that had gone 48-34...and yet, they were blown away, 4-1. Seems to be a DRAMATIC decline if you ask me.

As for the Lakers. Well, we know that Wilt had to replace both Clark and Imhoff, and their 29 ppg and 15 rpg. What is seldom mentioned, however, is that that Laker team also lost HOF guard Gail Goodrich, and his 14 ppg, in the expansion draft. And the only player to replace those guys, other than Wilt, was journeyman guard Johnny Egan, who would cost the Lakers a 4-1 series romp over Boston in the Finals.

So, here was Wilt, having to replace 42 ppg and 18 rpg, and yet, the Lakers still had their then best-ever record in Los Angeles, going 55-27. And that team, despite an incompetent coach, was much more competitive in the '69 Finals, than they had been in '68. Once again, with Baylor shooting his team out of three games; Egan losing the ball at a critcial time late in game four, and with LA leading in that game; a coach whose hatred for Chamberlain cost his team in game seven; and the Lakers lost a game seven, by two points.

[LAZERUSS]

While GREAT, the thing with Wilt is, the guy got his ass handed to him by Bill Russell..time and time again. In fact, Russ kicked his ass ALL THE TIME.

Wilt really never had the best playoff history either. That goes to other legends such as Shaq, Magic, Mike and of course Russell.

People will cite his rebounding but the the only reason rebounds will be mentioned is because he blatantly stat-padded.

Bottom line: Stilt should have paid attention to ONE thing, the game score.

Take a look at this and with a straight face, tell everyone here that Russell kicked his ass all the time...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...5TkFDY3c#gid=0

Of course, using your logic, and I guess Ben Wallace kicked Shaq's ass in the '04 Finals, too. Or MJ choked in the '86 playoff series against the 67-15 Celtics.

[kenuffff]

based off phil's selection, he is also stating red auerbach is a vastly superior coach than himself. red obtained the draft rights to russell realizing what potential he had, besides orchestrating and building celtics teams for 20+ years. jackson came into pre-assembled teams which he had little input into the building of and won championships. phil jackson is annoying as shit, and this comes from someone who loved the 90s bulls teams

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Take a look at this and with a straight face, tell everyone here that Russell kicked his ass all the time...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...5TkFDY3c#gid=0

Of course, using your logic, and I guess Ben Wallace kicked Shaq's ass in the '04 Finals, too. Or MJ choked in the '86 playoff series against the 67-15 Celtics.

Uh, checkout Wilt's playoff record when he won scoring titles (something people like you are SO impressed by).

His SEVEN scoring titles produced a COMBINED PLAYOFF record of, 22-30. Good for a winning percentage of 42%.

Everyone compares Wilt to the centers of the 90's...how about Shaq? When Shaq won 2 of scoring titles, his teams went 26-18 in the playoffs - a winning percentage of 59%.

Fact of the matter is, when Wilt was dominating his teams possessions, for personal glory, his teams failed. A guy like Shaq, who is a proven champion, when sked upon to score? His teams THRIVED. They were SUCCESSFUL.

Again, Wilt is NO Bill Russell (the ultimate team player / greatest winner). That's for sure.

[cltcfn2924]

Elgin Baylor and Jerry West, both teammates of Wilt, (with West eventually overseeing Kareem's entire career, and recruited/saw Shaq's saw entire LA career unfold) both said within this past year during interviews that I've collected, that looking back, they'd choose NOBODY over Bill Russell to start a franchise. Bill Russell would be their number one choice, every piece added afterwards is secondary. I know we as fans like to think we're clever getting the guys with the best stats offensively or defensively and whatnot, but there's just something about Russell's approach to the game that WINS. And for some reason, PLAYERS and COACHES that understand what Russell could do all seem to gravitate towards picking him to start their all-time-nba-team. I'm as big a Wilt fan as any... but heck, I'd even pick Russell if I wanted to win.

You are so right, but these newbies on ISH know it all. Didn't you know that? They never saw Russ or Wilt play, but they know. Wilt himself said when asked about switching rosters, he would NOT have won all those rings, because HE had to be the man. Making other players better was not in his makeup. Oh yes, Russell could have been "the man".

[Psileas]

Uh, checkout Wilt's playoff record when he won scoring titles (something people like you are SO impressed by).

His SEVEN scoring titles produced a COMBINED PLAYOFF record of, 22-30. Good for a winning percentage of 42%.

Everyone compares Wilt to the centers of the 90's...how about Shaq? When Shaq won 2 of scoring titles, his teams went 26-18 in the playoffs - a winning percentage of 59%.

Fact of the matter is, when Wilt was dominating his teams possessions, for personal glory, his teams failed. A guy like Shaq, who is a proven champion, when sked upon to score? His teams THRIVED. They were SUCCESSFUL.

Again, Wilt is NO Bill Russell (the ultimate team player / greatest winner). That's for sure.

Another reason Wilt would love to play in the more modern NBA. Having a 4-round playoff layout would allow him to pad his playoff numbers and averages just like Shaq and others did, instead of having to face the GOAT defender and winner in 56% of his playoff games during the period you mention. Especially that 1966 season: Given today's format, even if his team still lost 4-1 in the ECF's, they would probably have played like 15-18 games instead of a paultry 5 and Wilt would produce way more impressively than when having to face exclusively the Celtics.

[NumberSix]

Uh, checkout Wilt's playoff record when he won scoring titles (something people like you are SO impressed by).

His SEVEN scoring titles produced a COMBINED PLAYOFF record of, 22-30. Good for a winning percentage of 42%.

Everyone compares Wilt to the centers of the 90's...how about Shaq? When Shaq won 2 of scoring titles, his teams went 26-18 in the playoffs - a winning percentage of 59%.

Fact of the matter is, when Wilt was dominating his teams possessions, for personal glory, his teams failed. A guy like Shaq, who is a proven champion, when sked upon to score? His teams THRIVED. They were SUCCESSFUL.

Again, Wilt is NO Bill Russell (the ultimate team player / greatest winner). That's for sure.

Yes, all Wilt did was play for personal glory. Of course

That must be why in 1 series against Bill Russell, Wilt averaged 22, 32 & 10, had a quadruple double and a 41 rebound game (playoff record)

Wilt and Russell's career head to head playoff numbers are 26 & 28 for Wilt verses 15 & 25 for Russell.

Wilt dropped 50+ on Bill 7 times, 62 on him once, 55 rebounds (nba record).

Wilt was flat out better. Its a team sport and Russell was on the better team. Get over it.

[BoutPractice]

If it's about starting a franchise, I think picking Russell is a reasonable move. He's incredibly easy to build around.

I've also lately come to appreciate "greatness" as historical relevance and mythological appeal... In that respect, three players stand out: Jordan, Chamberlain, and Russell. All the other players might get forgotten some day, but as long as basketball lives, those three won't.

[NumberSix]

Career numbers...

Wilt: 30.1PPG on 54%, 22.9RPG, 4.4APG

Bill: 15.1PPG on 44%, 22.5RPG, 4.3APG


There's nothing to argue.

[LAZERUSS]

Another reason Wilt would love to play in the more modern NBA. Having a 4-round playoff layout would allow him to pad his playoff numbers and averages just like Shaq and others did, instead of having to face the GOAT defender and winner in 56% of his playoff games during the period you mention. Especially that 1966 season: Given today's format, even if his team still lost 4-1 in the ECF's, they would probably have played like 15-18 games instead of a paultry 5 and Wilt would produce way more impressively than when having to face exclusively the Celtics.

Given that Wilt probably averaged about 30 ppg on around .500 shooting against Russell in his "scoring" seasons, as well as close to 30 rpg, his numbers were impressive enough. But you have a very valid point. When Chamberlain faced the likes of Beaty, Kerr, Halbrook, Dierking, and Embry, he put up huge numbers. And the reality was, aside from the 7-3 Halbrook and then Dierking (whose career numbers against other "greats" were surprisingly good BTW), Kerr, Embry, and Beaty were league all-stars at times in their careers.

And, the typical Chamberlain-bashers never bring up the fact that he joined a last-place roster. Or that he then took the core of that last-place team that he inherited, to a very competitive six game series against Boston in his rookie season (losing game six by two points.) Or that he single-handedly carried them again two years later, to a game seven, two point loss against a 60-20 Celtic team that had HOFers in their bench.

Nor do they bring up his 63-64 season, when he took a team that had gone 31-49 the year before, to a 48-32 record, and a first round playoff series win over a much more talented Hawks team, and then to a 4-1 Finals loss against a Celtic team that had an 8-2 edge in HOFers (and Wilt's HOF teammate was rookie Nate Thurmond, who played part-time and out of position.) And in that series, Boston won the last two games in the waning seconds. In a series in which Chamberlain statistically wiped the floor with Russell.

Keep that 63-64 record, which was, once again, 48-32, in mind. And bear in mond that Wilt's second best player on that ream, was Tom Meschery, who averaged 13.5 ppg. The Warriors traded Chamberlain to a Sixer team that had gone 34-46 the year before, in the middle of the 64-65 season, for three players (and one of them being Paul Neumann.) They then moved Thurmond to the pivot, where he would go on to have a HOF career. Before the start of the 65-66 season, they had drafted Rick Barry. With Thurmond, Barry, Meschary, and Neumann, among others, they could only go 35-45. In their 66-67 season, they added Jeff Mullins, Clyde Lee, and Fred Hetzel. So, with that loaded roster, (and with Meschery averging 11 ppg, and now being their seventh most productive player), they still could only go 44-37, and were wiped out by Wilt's 68-13 Sixers in the Finals. Interesting too, that the Warriors would never beat a Wilt team in the post-season after that trade, losing to them all three times they would face each other, nor would they would ever have a better record while Wilt was in the league.

Which brings us back to Wilt's record after that trade. He took what had been a bottom-feeding Sixer team, to a 40-40 record (Wilt played in the last half of the season with them), and a first round 3-1 romp over a loaded Royals team. And in the EDF's, Chamberlain, averaging 30 ppg, 31 rpg, and shooting .555, carried them to a game seven, one point loss against a 62-18 Celtic team.

And over the course of his next three seasons in Philly, the Sixers had the best record in the league each year, as well as winning a dominating title in '67.

Chamberlain was "traded" by Philly to the Lakers before the start of the 68-69 season. And, keep in mind that the Lakers gave up a 20 ppg scoring all-star in Archie Clark, and a journeyman center, Darrell Imhoff, who was a 10-13 playerr in '68. On top of that, the Lakers lost Gail Goodrich and his 13 ppg in the expansion draft. With those losses, the Lakers still had their then, best-ever record in Los Angeles, of 55-27. And they came within two points of winning the title (and had Baylor not cost them three games, or Egan not cost them one, or Van Breda Kolf not cost them two...it would have been a Lakers title.)

How about his former team, the Sixers? Some will argue that they only dropped from a 62-20 record, down to a 55-27 record (of course, in '67 the Sixers had steamrolled the league with a 68-13 mark.) But the reality was this...even with Imhoff and Clark combining to average 36 ppg, 20 rpg, and shooting .510...they were wiped out 4-1 in the first round by a 48-34 Celtics team. And just the year before, the injury-riddled Sixers (inlcuding Chamberlain himself) lost a game seven to Boston by four points. And the year before that, they annihilated Boston en route to a world title. And the Sixers would continue to declinee after that. By Wilt's last season in the league, 72-73, Philly had plummetted all the way down to an all-time worst, 9-73.

How about Wilt's Lakers? He played in LA for five seasons. They went to four Finals, winning their first ever in Los Angeles in the 71-72 season (with a still team record of 69-13, which included 33 straight wins.) And in two of those seasons, they lost game seven's.

How about after Chamberlain retired? The Lakers immediately fell from a 60-22 record, and a trip to the Finals, to a 47-35 record, and a first round blowout loss. The very next season they would go 30-52. And even with Kareem, from the 75-76 season thru the rest of the decade, they never came close to the records, or trips to the Finals, that they had with Chamberlain in his five seasons in LA. It wasn't until the arrival of Magic, that they returned to a championship-quality team again.

Maybe the above puts a little better perspective on Wilt "the loser", and Wilt "the choker."

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Career numbers...

Wilt: 30.1PPG on 54%, 22.9RPG, 4.4APG

Bill: 15.1PPG on 44%, 22.5RPG, 4.3APG


There's nothing to argue.

Also averaged 21PPG and was 0-4 in game 7

[LAZERUSS]

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]Also averaged 21PPG and was 0-4 in game 7

[TheTenth]

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]Also averaged 21PPG and was 0-4 in game 7