How is Shaq not at least top 5 all-time?

[ThaRegul8r]

Russell came to the NBA having won 2 College championships and an Olympic gold medal. That's 13 championships in what 15 years (if you include his NBA career)? All this guy did was win.

Which was all he cared about. Mission accomplished.

Those who state Russell, the greatest team player perhaps, was better than Chamberlain are sadly mistaken.

So when Russell was voted the Greatest Player of All Time in 1980, they were sadly mistaken? It's the people who came after the fact who makes these statements, which goes against what the people who were actually there said. Interesting.

Who was better, Wilt's teams or Russell's teams? The answer is simple: Russell's. His teams were STACKED. His college and Olympic teams feat fellow Hall of Famer K.C. Jones. His Celtics featured 7 future Hall of Famers including, ironically Jones.

No disrespect, but you've just taken the superficial without looking deeper, and just hurt your point. Let's take the example you used: K. C. Jones. He averaged only 7.4 points, 3.5 rebounds and 3.5 assists per game for his career. He shot 38.7 percent from the floor and 63.2 percent from the line. He never averaged more than 9.2 PPG in a single season or shot better than .409 from the field. Never once was he an All-Star. Now does that look like a Hall of Famer to you? Please explain to me how on earth you can never be an all-star during your career, but a Hall of Famer after?

*waits*

K.C. Jones got in the Hall because of Russell. I wrote something years ago about the Celtics Hall of Famers before Russell was officially named the G.O.A.T. in 1980, and afterwards. I'll see if I can find it. Suddenly all these Celtic players who were never voted to the Hall before after decades had passed were voted in. And now people say he had a stacked team full of HoFers but never actually take a look. 7/4/4 for a point guard is an example of the stacked team Russell played with.

Wilt's Sixers feat 2 HoFers and won the championship in 1967.

I know. And I've said that Wilt's 1966-67 season was the greatest season anyone's ever had. That was the one year that he got it and put it all together. I will give praise when it's due, and criticism when it's due.

A lot of people feel Wilt wasn't a team player, he won two championships though.

He could never sustain it though, and wasn't focused on sustaining it once he broke through and finally beat Russell. He decided he'd done everything there was to do now, so decided he'd lead the league in assists because no one had ever done it before. He says this himself in his autobiography. Russell led the Celtics to multiple titles. Jordan led the Bulls to multiple titles. Magic led the Lakers to multiple titles. Bird led the Celtics to multiple titles. Shaq led the Lakers to multiple titles. They were never satisfied with one ring. Wilt was capable of leading a team to some of the greatest single-season records in NBA history for one year, yet was incapable of leading a team to championship after championship. He didn't have the mindset to do it, saying there were other things in life to get worked up in basketball.

He played on the best team in league history at the time, the 1971-72 Lakers who won a Sports record 33 games in a row. The real challenge in comparing individuals in team sports is whether to include the amount of wins or championships? By this logic, Bill Russell would be the greatest basketball player ever (and many think that he is).

The NBA came to this conclusion in 1980. I don't know if you're aware of that.

If we compare individual statistics Wilt beats Russell hands down. Wilt Chamberlain was the most dominant player in NBA history. In head-to-head matchups vs. Russell, Chamberlain scored more points, grabbed more rebounds, passed for more assists...and lost more games.

Bill Russell: In order to win you have to get yourself past a lot of things that may not be vital to winning but make you feel good [

[ThaRegul8r]

He led the league in MPG per 9x. He still holds the record at 45.8 minutes per game for his career. Never has he fouled out of a game. Sounds like a team player to me.

[QUOTE]Chamberlain often seemed to be obsessed with his personal marks, to the detriment of his game

[Dizzle-2k7]

good stuff, regul8r... really good stuff.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

[QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]Which was all he cared about. Mission accomplished.



So when Russell was voted the Greatest Player of All Time in 1980, they were sadly mistaken? It's the people who came after the fact who makes these statements, which goes against what the people who were actually there said. Interesting.



No disrespect, but you've just taken the superficial without looking deeper, and just hurt your point. Let's take the example you used: K. C. Jones. He averaged only 7.4 points, 3.5 rebounds and 3.5 assists per game for his career. He shot 38.7 percent from the floor and 63.2 percent from the line. He never averaged more than 9.2 PPG in a single season or shot better than .409 from the field. Never once was he an All-Star. Now does that look like a Hall of Famer to you? Please explain to me how on earth you can never be an all-star during your career, but a Hall of Famer after?

*waits*

K.C. Jones got in the Hall because of Russell. I wrote something years ago about the Celtics Hall of Famers before Russell was officially named the G.O.A.T. in 1980, and afterwards. I'll see if I can find it. Suddenly all these Celtic players who were never voted to the Hall before after decades had passed were voted in. And now people say he had a stacked team full of HoFers but never actually take a look. 7/4/4 for a point guard is an example of the stacked team Russell played with

I know. And I've said that Wilt's 1966-67 season was the greatest season anyone's ever had. That was the one year that he got it and put it all together. I will give praise when it's due, and criticism when it's due.

He could never sustain it though, and wasn't focused on sustaining it once he broke through and finally beat Russell. He decided he'd done everything there was to do now, so decided he'd lead the league in assists because no one had ever done it before. He says this himself in his autobiography. Russell led the Celtics to multiple titles. Jordan led the Bulls to multiple titles. Magic led the Lakers to multiple titles. Bird led the Celtics to multiple titles. Shaq led the Lakers to multiple titles. They were never satisfied with one ring. Wilt was capable of leading a team to some of the greatest single-season records in NBA history for one year, yet was incapable of leading a team to championship after championship. He didn't have the mindset to do it, saying there were other things in life to get worked up in basketball.



The NBA came to this conclusion in 1980. I don't know if you're aware of that.

Bill Russell: In order to win you have to get yourself past a lot of things that may not be vital to winning but make you feel good [

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Wilt's squads lost all 4 7th games against Bill's Celtics. Russell was 10/0 in game sevens during his eventful career. The margin of a loss in those 4 7th games were 9pts. Both were bad FT shooters, but even that wasn't something that Russell would allow to defeat him. For example, he hit 14 of 17 from the line in his 30 point/40 rebound game vs. the Lakers in game 7 of the 1962 finals. Of the 24 forty-rebound games in history, Wilt had 14, Russell had 8, Jerry Lucas and Nate Thurmond each had one. People who say Wilt and Russell's rebound numbers were "inflated" due to more shots taken/attempted, then, I'd point out those two did it the best and MOST during their ERA. In an earlier thread I was talking about "pace", but I can see why people think it's detrimental/faulting that player.


Most Rebounds, 1960s: (IN ORDER)
-Wilt - 19,112
- Russell - 17,501
- Baylor - 9,786
- Bellamy - 9,716
- Lucas - 8,831

Russell and Wilt were so great because they wanted the ball. In the end, Russell said it best I think. He said that Wilt was interested mostly in numbers (his management failed to bring in the quality of players Boston did...part of the reason) and Russell in victories, and when it came down to it, each had achieved what they wanted, without doing so at the expense of the other. Wilt had better all around skills. If that's your definition of better, then Wilt was better. How the Celtics would have done with Wilt vs. how the Warriors or Sixers would have done with Russell? We will never know the answer to that debate. Boston's players always said that, with Wilt, they would have won some titles, just not as many. Anyway, that's a whole different subject (on the other hand, with Red Auerbach as coach, Wilt might have been a different player). It's difficult enough to make sense of what DID happen out there, without going into the "what-if's". Never the less great posts all around, I admire your history of the game.

Here are some quotes dedicated to Wilt:

"Wilt was one of the greatest ever, and we will never see another one like him." – Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

"When I started to play with him, he helped make me a better player. We seemed to have a real good feel together, I think it translated into a confidence with him. All players are generally judged by the number of championships they won. Unfortunately, he only won two. His greatness as a basketball player can't be questioned. He was fun, we used to laugh at him a lot, some of the things that would happen. I once told him, no one roots for Goliath." – Jerry West

"As I grew up, Wilt the Stilt was the player. Just the things he was able to do. I guess one year they told him he couldn't make as much money as he wanted because he couldn't pass the ball, so he went out and led the league in assists. Watching Wilt, you always kind of got the idea he was just playing with people. That he was on cruise control and still 10 times better than anybody else that was playing at that time." – Denver Nuggets Coach Dan Issel.

"Obviously, he was both literally and figuratively a larger-than-life sports figure of the 20th century. He dominated his sport like almost no one else." – Atlanta Hawks president Stan Kasten.

"He was the NBA. He was the guy on the top. Wilt was the guy you talked about – he and Bill Russell. He was the most dominating center – the best center to ever play in the NBA." – Former NBA center and Bulls coach Johnny "Red" Kerr, who played part of one season in Philly with Wilt and against him for six-plus years.

"He was always a person that I viewed as being bigger than life in more ways than one. I had recently heard through friends and associates that he hadn't been feeling well, but again, I felt Wilt was a person who was able to overcome anything, so I was totally shocked to hear of his death." – Al Attles, a former teammate of Chamberlain's with the Warriors and now the team's vice president and assistant general manager.

"Wilt Chamberlain had a great deal to do with the success of the NBA. His dominance, power, demeanor and the rivalry with Bill Russell says it all. He will be sorely missed by myself and everyone in the basketball community. Wilt was a great performer and a great athlete." – Former Boston Celtics coach Red Auerbach.

"He was a terrific guy. It is a great loss to the sports world. Wilt Chamberlain had a special place in basketball history and he will be missed. We had many battles with Wilt. He was a fun guy to be around; he was a 'Gentle Giant.' " – Boston Celtics great and Hall of Famer Tom Heinsohn.

"Wilt could do my role better than I could". - Bill Russell

“I believe that good things come to those who work.” - Wilt himself