Russell is diminished by some for not being a dominant scorer. However, this is never brought up vis-a-vis Magic, who led his team in scoring only three times and only once during the Lakers title years. Let's compare their respective roles in terms of scoring.
Magic Johnson
1980
Magic's scoring rank: 3rd
Top scorers: KAJ 25, Wilkes 20, Magic 18, Nixon 18
1981
Magic's scoring rank: 3rd
Top scorers: KAJ 26, Wilkes 23, Magic 22, Nixon 17
1982
Magic's scoring rank: 3rd
Top scorers: KAJ 24, Wilkes 21, Magic 19, Nixon 18, Kupchak 14
1983
Magic's scoring rank: 3rd
Top scorers: KAJ 22, Wilkes 20, Magic 17, Nixon 15, McAdoo 15, Worthy 13
1984
Magic's scoring rank: 2nd
Top scorers: KAJ 22, Magic 18, Wilkes 17, Worthy 15, McAdoo 13
1985
Magic's scoring rank: 2nd
Top scorers: KAJ 22, Magic 18, Worthy 18, Scott 16
1986
Magic's scoring rank: 3rd
Top scorers: KAJ 23, Worthy 20, Magic 19, Scott 15
1987
Magic's scoring rank: 1st
Top scorers: Magic 24, Worthy 19, KAJ 18, Scott 17
1988
Magic's scoring rank: 3rd
Top scorers: Scott 22, Worthy 20, Magic 20, KAJ 15
1989
Magic's scoring rank: 1st
Top scorers: Magic 23, Worthy 21, Scott 20
1990
Magic's scoring rank: 1st
Top scorers: Magic 22, Worthy 21, Scott 16
1991
Magic's scoring rank: 2nd
Top scorers: Worthy 21, Magic 19, Scott 15, Perkins 14
KAJ was the #1 option from 1980-1986 and Magic was part of the supporting scorer group. The Lakers used a balanced attack where several people contributed to scoring. KAJ was the go-to guy in the clutch as well.
Bill Russell
1957
Russell's scoring rank: 4th
Top scorers: Sharman 21, Cousy 21, Heinsohn 16, Russell 15
1958
Russell's scoring rank: 4th
Top scorers: Sharman 22, Cousy 18, Heinsohn 17, Russell 17, Ramsey 17
1959
Russell's scoring rank: 4th
Top scorers: Sharman 20, Cousy 20, Heinsohn 19, Russell 17, Ramsey 15
1960
Russell's scoring rank: 4th
Top scorers: Heinsohn 22, Cousy 19, Sharman 19, Russell 18, Ramsey 15
1961
Russell's scoring rank: 3rd
Top scorers: Heinsohn 21, Cousy 18, Russell 17, Sharman 16, Ramsey 15, S. Jones 15
1962
Russell's scoring rank: 2nd
Top scorers: Heinsohn 22, Russell 19, S. Jones 18, Cousy 16, Ramsey 15
1963
Russell's scoring rank: 3rd
Top scorers: S. Jones 20, Heinsohn 19, Russell 17, Havelick 14
1964
Russell's scoring rank: 4th
Top scorers: Havelick 20, S. Jones 19, Heinsohn 17, Russell 15
1965
Russell's scoring rank: 3rd
Top scorers: S. Jones 26, Havelick 18, Russell 14, Heinsohn 14
1966
Russell's scoring rank: 4th
Top scorers: S. Jones 24, Havelick 19, Sigfried 14, Russell 13, Sanders 13
1967
Russell's scoring rank: 5th
Top scorers: S. Jones 22, Havelick 21, Howell 20, Sigfried 14, Russell 13
1968
Russell's scoring rank: 4th
Top scorers: S. Jones 21, Havelick 21, Howell 20, Russell 13
1969
Russell's scoring rank: 7th (10 ppg)
Top scorers: Havelick 22, Howell 20, S. Jones 16, Sigfried 14
Recap
Magic's scoring rankings: 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 3, 1, 3, 1, 1, 2
Russell's scoring rankings: 4, 4, 4, 4, 3, 2, 3, 4, 3, 4, 5, 4, 7
Conclusion
As you can see, both were supporting scorers for most of their careers. By "supporting scorer" I mean someone who was not the leading scorer but was still a significant scorer. This was done in the context of balanced offenses where the scoring was spread out. These weren't teams where there was one 28-30 ppg scorer, a second 20-22 ppg type and everyone else lagged behind. In pretty much every season the Celtics' leading scorer was in the low 20's while Russell would be in the mid to high teens. Russell was not a significant contributor in his final years, but he was right in the mix for most of his career. As to Magic, he led his team in scoring only three times--and only once did they win the title in those years. When the Lakers won rings Magic was 3rd, 3rd, 2nd, 1st, and 3rd in scoring, suggesting the offense worked best when he focused on being a distributor and downplayed a scoring role.
Both players made their most significant contributions to the team's success outside of scoring, namely defense and rebounding in Russell's case and playmaking in Magic's. Yet only one of these two is penalized for not being a great scorer. Magic even gets credit for rings as a "first option" when he was 3, 3, 2, and 3 in scoring. KAJ was the #1 scoring option in 1980, 1982, and 1985 and in 1988 it was Scott. I can understand someone holding Russell's scoring against him, but in order to be consistent you have to do the same with Magic.
What do you attribute the double standard to? I think it largely is due to a bias against the 60's in general and Russell in particular. Russell is a giant wrench into the thinking of many fans because of the obsession with "rings as the man." However, if one is serious about "rings as the man" being the ultimate metric of greatness then logically Russell is the clear GOAT. So to avoid that incongruity he is diminished, either by downplaying his role on those teams or not counting his rings due to the era (which itself is open to debate--in Wilt/Russell's era every starter was a good player so they didn't get nights playing scrubs).
Results 1 to 15 of 58
-
07-20-2014, 01:48 PM #1Consensus Top 20-30 AT
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Posts
- 11,998
Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
-
07-20-2014, 01:54 PM #2NBA Legend
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
- Posts
- 16,317
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
Magic was a much better scorer than Russell, and was far more efficient. And we saw examples many times in his playoff career in which he would take over a game at the offensive end. Even in his rookie season, and in the clinching game of a Finals, he could put up a 42 point game on 14-23 FG/FGA, and 14-14 FT/FTA.
Originally Posted by Roundball_Rock
And in the last half of Magic's career he was capable of putting up incredible runs of 30+ point games, and even back-to-back 40+ point playoff games. And in his '87 season, he was quite simply, and by far, the best offensive player in the Finals.Last edited by LAZERUSS; 07-20-2014 at 01:56 PM.
-
07-20-2014, 01:56 PM #3Curry fam
- Join Date
- Jan 2014
- Posts
- 15,095
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
Because the points Magic didnt score were made up by his assist.
-
07-20-2014, 01:56 PM #4NBA Legend and Hall of Famer
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Posts
- 35,058
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
there's a pretty wide gap in those scoring numbers...
20 ppg 51% shooting to 16 ppg 43% shooting ?
Thats a huge difference.
-
07-20-2014, 01:58 PM #5NBA Legend
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
- Posts
- 16,317
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
And EVERYONE knows that Magic could have easily been a 25+ ppg scorer, and a peak Magic, probably a 30 ppg scorer, had he been so inclined. Originally Posted by tpols
-
07-20-2014, 02:01 PM #6GOAT
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,954
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
Roundball_Rock has moved on to putting down Magic now to go along with his MJ hate.
-
07-20-2014, 02:05 PM #7Very good NBA starter
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Posts
- 8,828
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
Lmao 50s and 60s fans nonsense logic Originally Posted by Warfan
-
07-20-2014, 02:05 PM #8Consensus Top 20-30 AT
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Posts
- 11,998
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
Originally Posted by sportjames23
Roundball_Rock has moved on to putting down Magic now to go along with his MJ hate.
The point is both were crucial to their team's winning but they contribute primarily in ways other than scoring.
He wasn't asked to do so, though. Neither was Russell. They both executed their roles superbly and have a lot of success to show for it. Neither should be penalized for not being dominant scorers. They were not needed to be such. Could Russell have scored 30 ppg? No, but he could have increased his scoring if he was asked to. Would he be a better player if his peak scoring year was 23 ppg and not 19 ppg?And EVERYONE knows that Magic could have easily been a 25+ ppg scorer, and a peak Magic, probably a 30 ppg scorer, had he been so inclined.
-
07-20-2014, 02:12 PM #9NBA Legend
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
- Posts
- 16,317
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
One thing that I have never seen addressed...
In a "must-win" game five of the '66 EDF's, Wilt exploded against Russell with a monstrous 46 point game (on 19-34 shooting.) His inept teammates continued to puke all over the floor, though (they collectively shot .352 in that series), and Boston eked out a clinching game win.
However, in the very next season, it was now RUSSELL who was faced with the exact same scenario. His team was down 3-1 (and in fact, had narrowly avoided a sweep in game four), and for the only time in the Russell-Wilt playoff H2H's, Chamberlain's teammates were finally neutralizing Russell's.
So, did Russell come out in that game five with "guns ablazin?" Nope, he quietly led his team like a lamb to slaughter. He scored FOUR points, on 2-5 shooting, in a blowout loss. Meanwhile, Chamberlain "the choker" poured in 29 points (22 of which came in the first half when the game was still close), on 10-16 shooting, to go along with outassisting Russell, 13-7, and outrebounding Russell, 36-21. He even found time to block seven Celtic shots.
The reality was, Russell never was capable of taking over a game offensively against Wilt. And yet we have MANY examples of Wilt just destroying Russell and his swarming teammates on the offensive end.
As for Magic, everyone knows about his 42 point game in the clinching game six of the '80 Finals (and in his rookie season.) But, how about this? In his '90 playoff series against the Suns, and with his team down 2-1, he put up back-to-back games of 43 and 43 points, and on 15-26 Fg/FGA shooting in both (and BTW, he shot a combined 25-28 from the line, as well.) True, they lost them both, but Magic did not go down without a fight. Clearly, Magic was capable of putting up HUGE scoring games.Last edited by LAZERUSS; 07-20-2014 at 02:17 PM.
-
07-20-2014, 02:15 PM #10College superstar
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
- Posts
- 4,769
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
Great thread. For anyone being up FG%, just check out the league averages for FG% during the 80s and then for the 60s.
-
07-20-2014, 02:17 PM #11Curry fam
- Join Date
- Jan 2014
- Posts
- 15,095
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
For centers? Anyone got the stats? Originally Posted by Ne 1
-
07-20-2014, 02:22 PM #12NBA Legend
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
- Posts
- 16,317
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
I agree that Russell played his role superbly. And he had playoff series in which he was exceptional on the offensive end. But the real question would have been...could Russell have carried lessor rosters on the offensive end? Swap Russell's '63 roster with Wilt's, and does he lead that team to a title? Same with '64 (and Wilt did carry them to the Finals)? Originally Posted by Roundball_Rock
The point is both were crucial to their team's winning but they contribute primarily in ways other than scoring.
He wasn't asked to do so, though. Neither was Russell. They both executed their roles superbly and have a lot of success to show for it. Neither should be penalized for not being dominant scorers. They were not needed to be such. Could Russell have scored 30 ppg? No, but he could have increased his scoring if he was asked to. Would he be a better player if his peak scoring year was 23 ppg and not 19 ppg?
-
07-20-2014, 02:32 PM #13NBA Legend
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
- Posts
- 16,317
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
Whether I agree with everything he posts, or not, he at least puts in the research and well constructed arguments. That is all I ask in any of these discussions. Originally Posted by sportjames23
Roundball_Rock has moved on to putting down Magic now to go along with his MJ hate.
-
07-20-2014, 02:36 PM #14Banned
- Join Date
- Feb 2014
- Location
- Kobe > MJ
- Posts
- 686
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
Didn't Russell average like 15ppg in that weak ass era
? That translates to about 1 or 2ppg in this era . "GOAT" 
-
07-20-2014, 02:36 PM #15NBA lottery pick
- Join Date
- Apr 2014
- Posts
- 5,208
Re: Bill Russell's scoring role compared to Magic Johnson's
So what you're saying is Russell's teams were more stacked than Wilt's and that's why he has 11 rings and Wilt has 2? Originally Posted by LAZERUSS
Reply With Quote
