Switch Russell for Wilt..

[LAZERUSS]

Continuing...

Here is what we do KNOW about Wilt's actual 61-62 season. He single-handedly carried a roster that was on it's last legs, thru the first round of the playoffs, and then to a game seven, two point loss to a 60-20 Celtic team. Not only that, but how about this unbelievable statistic...his teammates collectively shot .354 from the field in that post-season.

Of course, in this scenario, Wilt would actually be in his sixth season, or the equivalent of his '65 season. In the real world, Chamberlain was traded at mid-season, for three players, and a then boat-load of cash, to the Sixers...a team that had gone 34-46 the year before, and did not make the playoffs.

Chamberlain then single-handedly took THAT 40-40 team, to a first round playoff romp over Oscar's stacked 48-32 Royals, 3-1. And then to a game seven, one point loss to Russell's 62-18 Celtics in the EDF's. A Celtic team that was at it's apex. And in that series Wilt just abused a helpless Russell. He outscored him, per game, 30.1 ppg to 15.6 ppg; outrebounded him, per game, 31.4 rpg to 25.2 rpg; and outshot him from the field by a .555 to .447 margin (in a post-season NBA that shot an eFG% of .429.)

Take THAT Wilt, put him on the 61-62 Celtics, with players like Cousy, Heinsohn, Sam Jones, and solid role players and defensive specialists like KC Jones and Satch Sanders...and the rest of the league, including Russell's crappy '62 Warriors, are simply cannon-fodder. The only team that could have possibly given them trouble would have been Baylor's (and West's) Lakers. But, keep in mind, that in the '62 Finals, Russell averaged 23 ppg on a .543 FG% against LA. I have already given you Wilt's staggering numbers against the Lakers in the decade of the 60's. If need be, that Wilt would have hung 40+ ppg on that Laker roster.

6-0.

[LAZERUSS]

Continuing...

Now, think about this: Chamberlain is now a perfect 6-6 in titles. And a third-year Russell is 0-3, and perhaps not even making the playoffs.

It will get even worse for Russell.

Of course this entire topic is pure speculation, but if things played out the same for Russell, as it did for Wilt...

In the 62-63 season, the Warriors move to San Francisco. Arizin, the ONE quality teammate that Wilt actually had in his three years to that point, retired. And Gola is quickly traded away. THAT Warrior roster, aside from Wilt, was arguably the worst in NBA history. How can I say that? The very next year their new head coach, Alex Hannum, conducted a pre-season scrimmage, sans Wilt, against some rookies and scrubs. Guess which team won? Hannum was horrified.

So back to that '63 season. While a prime Russell would now be saddled with a awful roster...Chamberlain would be surrounded by ... EIGHT other HOF players!

Russell, himself not nearly the offensive force that Wilt was (44.8 ppg on a .528 FG% in '63...and BTW, easily led the NBA in Win Shares)...has absolutely no one on his roster that can shoot, nor rebound. His best teammate is Tom Meschery, a player who played better under Wilt, than at any other time in his career, and the reality was, he was able to score 16 ppg playing with Wilt, simply because he wasn't being defended. Oh, and he would only play 64 games that season.

Sorry, but there is NO WAY that Russell "elevates" that roster.

Meanwhile,a now PEAK Chamberlain destroys the Lakers in the Finals.

7-0.

[fpliii]

Continuing...

Now, think about this: Chamberlain is now a perfect 6-6 in titles. And a third-year Russell is 0-3, and perhaps not even making the playoffs.

It will get even worse for Russell.

Of course this entire topic is pure speculation, but if things played out the same for Russell, as it did for Wilt...

In the 62-63 season, the Warriors move to San Francisco. Arizin, the ONE quality teammate that Wilt actually had in his three years to that point, retired. And Gola is quickly traded away. THAT Warrior roster, aside from Wilt, was arguably the worst in NBA history. How can I say that? The very next year their new head coach, Alex Hannum, conducted a pre-season scrimmage, sans Wilt, against some rookies and scrubs. Guess which team won? Hannum was horrified.

So back to that '63 season. While a prime Russell would now be saddled with a awful roster...Chamberlain would be surrounded by ... EIGHT other HOF players!

Russell, himself not nearly the offensive force that Wilt was (44.8 ppg on a .528 FG% in '63...and BTW, easily led the NBA in Win Shares)...has absolutely no one on his roster that can shoot, nor rebound. His best teammate is Tom Meschery, a player who played better under Wilt, than at any other time in his career, and the reality was, he was able to score 16 ppg playing with Wilt, simply because he wasn't being defended. Oh, and he would only play 64 games that season.

Sorry, but there is NO WAY that Russell "elevates" that roster.

Meanwhile,a now PEAK Chamberlain destroys the Lakers in the Finals.

7-0.

Just a note, Rodgers was a very good player. Wilt himself said he had the best handles of any player he'd ever seen.

Not a supporting star to put next to Wilt by any means (since you need shooters to space the floor...I think Meschery was the player with the most range on that roster, but I could be wrong), but a great dribbler and passer.

Wilt's first few years would be a lot more interesting if he played with a Sam Jones, or hooked up with Hal Greer earlier.

[LAZERUSS]

Continuing...

In this 63-64 season, we are actually getting a '67 Wilt, who probably had the most dominant season in NBA history. Furthermore, he is paired up with SEVEN other HOFers. That roster had lost Cousy from their 62-63 team. BUT, luckily for Boston, Wilt would put up a staggering 7.8 apg in '67, and then 9.0 apg in the playoffs.

Meanwhile, Russell would be playing with essentially the same pure crap roster that he would have had in '63. They did add rookie Nate Thurmond, but he was a natural center, that played part-time, and out of position.

In REAL LIFE, Wilt single-handedly carried THAT roster to a 48-32 record, and then a game seven win over a Hawks team, with a better roster players 2-6, and in a series in which he averagd 39 ppg, 23 rpg, and on a .559 FG%.

Chamberlain's Celtics waltz to a title.


Then, it comes down to what happens next for Russell.

In his 64-65 season, his team would probably be floundering. Would Warrior ownership trade him away, as they did with Wilt (whom they thought had a heart condition)?

Or would he stay a Warrior?

If he remains a Warrior, and his team finished dead last, they would draft Rick Barry. They would also have the luxury of trading Thurmond away.

If he was traded to the Sixers, they were certainly a team with potential. They had Greer, Jackson, and Walker. And they would add Billy Cunningham the very next season.

Either way, things are finally looking up for Russell...

But in the meantime, thru 63-64...Wilt is now 8-0.

Continued...

[B-hoop]

Why all the details when everyone knows the end result in your mind will be Wilt 10000-0?

[LAZERUSS]

Just a note, Rodgers was a very good player. Wilt himself said he had the best handles of any player he'd ever seen.

Not a supporting star to put next to Wilt by any means (since you need shooters to space the floor...I think Meschery was the player with the most range on that roster, but I could be wrong), but a great dribbler and passer.

Wilt's first few years would be a lot more interesting if he played with a Sam Jones, or hooked up with Hal Greer earlier.

The problem with Rodgers was, and again, he was a horrible shooter. But to make matters even worse, he would STILL shoot.

As bad as he was with Wilt, the year after the Warriors traded Wilt away, Rodgers then took 20 FGAs per game, and shot .373! A couple of years after that, and playing 20 mpg, he shot .347. Before Ricky Rubio came along, Rodgers was arguably the worst shooter, against league average, of all-time.

And the second half of game four of the '64 NBA Finals is available on YouTube. Chamberlain actually had a very good half (for the game, he absolutely crushed Russell, outscoring him 27-8, and outrebounding him, 38-19), BUT, Rodgers repeatedly runs down the floor, and just takes shot-after-horrific-shot. Even airballs. The Warriors, who had probably had no chance in that series anyway, lose that game by a 98-95 margin. And they would go on to lose the clinching game five in the last minute, as well, 105-99.

Again, it was just amazing that Wilt could take such putrid rosters so far in the first half of his career. I just can't possibly believe that he wouldn't have swept Russell in rings in the first six years of his career (as Russell's teams would do to him, had they swapped rosters.

[LAZERUSS]

Wilt, in what would have been his 67-68 season, in a year in which he led the league in assists (and was now the best defensive player in the league), and all while scoring 24 ppg with 24 rpg, and on a 60% effciency, would have easily buried Russell's '64-65 Warriors, or Sixers, depending on what would have transpired in that year.

9-0.


I have already covered the rest of the topic.

A quick run-down:

Do Russell's '66 Sixers puke all over the floor in the EDF's, as they did for Wilt?

Can a prime Russell take an equal supporting cast, that was healthy in '67, past a 68-69 Wilt who would probably not have been so poorly coached, as he actually was in that season? I believe a Celtic Wilt, at age 32, would still have overpowered a prime 29 Russell. Possibly close, though.

Are Russell and his '68 Sixers just decimated by injuries in the playoffs, and particularly the EDF's, and against a relatively healthy Celtic team? If so, they have no chance.

Is Russell traded to the Lakers for three players, and does LA also lose Gail Goodrich in the expansion draft in 68-69? And does Baylor go AWOL in the middle three games, and then shot-jack his team right out of game seven of the Finals?


In the ninth game of the '69-70 season, does a 33 year old Russell shred his knee, and have major knee surgery a short time later? And does he miraculously come back way ahead of schedule, and then play at considerably less than 100%, and still put up a historic Finals,...and against a heavily-favored 60-22 Knicks team in the Finals?

Does a 34 year old Russell go into the 70-71 WDF's, and against a peak Kareem and his 66-16 Bucks, and without BOTH West and Baylor?

Does a 35 year old Russell put up a DPOY-type season in '72, as well as leading the league in rebounding and FG%, and average 15 ppg, and then taking over in the Finals offensively when West couldn't hit the Grand Canyon from the ledge (.325 in the Finals)?

And finally, does a 36 year old Russell, who in reality was done at age 35, take an injury-riddled Laker team to a Finals, in a season in which he would average 13.2 ppg, 18.6 rpg, and on an all-time record .727 FG%...all while being the best defensive center in the league?