Wow Dave Cowens was screwed out of the MVP in 76 by Kareem

[LAZERUSS]

@LAZERUSS

You are missing the point by mentioning their head-to-head games... Nobody ever said that Russell was a better individual player than Wilt just that he was very very valuable. In terms of value to his team one can argue Russell added more than Wilt (and Kareem).

Defensively from 1960 to 1966 Russell was considerably more impactful than Wilt. 86.2 to 50.1 cumulative lead over those seven seasons in DWS. You can't tell me that KC Jones who is a guard and Tom Sanders who was playing mid-20's in minutes (remember Havlicek only entered the league in 1963...) made Boston into a juggernaut. Besides Wilt had a few very talented defenders on his team like Guy Rodgers, Al Attles, and Tom Gola too.

Wilt may have blocked more shots but Russell had the impact. It would be like calling Serge Ibaka the best defender in the league over prime Ben Wallace because he blocked more shots. It's stupid.

Find me one article from those years that calls Wilt a better or equal defender to Russell.

Anyways I never said Kareem was the MVP in 1976. I just said he was clearly the best player in the league. And besides Kareem in 1976 was better than Cowens ON BOTH ENDS of the floor. Unlike Wilt and Russell. Like I said Kareem himself would lose some MVP's to Russell. Bill Russell was that good!

And again calling me anti-Wilt and anti-Magic is crazy... I just try to be objective. I've criticized Kareem for 1973 plenty of times too.

First of all, I apologize for being too harsh on your assessments. Again, you are one of the few posters here that I truly respect (even if we don't often agree.)



As for defensive impact, the problem is, there is/was, no real way of quantifying it.

I would agree with you, that based on what we know, that Russell was a better team defender, at least from '59-60 thru 62-63. And perhaps even a slightly better individual defender in that period, albeit, Chamberlain was swarmed by Russell's Celtics, and yet his efficiency declined little. Meanwhile, Chamberlain played Russell one-on-one, AND, defended the entire Celtics team (as evidenced by Sam Jones hitting two critical shots over Wilt in the waning seconds of game seven of the '62 EDF's...and later, Wilt altering Heinsohn's potential game-winner in game four of the '64 Finals.) And, as you know, Wilt dramatically lowered Russell's efficiency in their career H2H's. For instance, in Russell's '60 season, he shot a career-high .467 against the NBA. In their 11 regular season H2H's... .393 against Wilt. And then in the '62 regular season, Russell shot .457 against the NBA. Against Wilt in the EDF's... .399. And there were regular seasons in which held Russell to FG%'s of as low as .283 and .301.

I don't put much stock in team DRtg. Just as I didn't in the ORtg. I have blown that ORtg to bits in the topic of Wilt's true impact in the 60's. But even if I were to acknowledge that it had some value...Wilt's TEAM's finished a close second behind Russell's in Chamberlain's ROOKIE season (and Wilt, himself, finished a close second behind Russell in DW shares.) And same in '64, '66, '67, and '68. In fact, in '68, Wilt's team finished ahead of Russell's. And clearly, there is something wrong with the DWS when Wilt's '67 DWS was "only" 7.0.

And regarding DWS's...Wilt has the two highest "non-Russell" seasons in NBA history, and five of the Top-30. And again, that stat is pure nonsense if Wilt's '67 season is not his greatest.

As for TEAM defensive impact...Russell held this edge in teammates in the Top-10 in DWS's...

'60: 3-3
'61: 4-1
'62: 6-0
'63: 6-0
'64: 5-1
'65: 6-1
'66: 4-1
'67: 3-0
'68: 2-2
'69: 3-0

Collectively, a 42-9 margin!

And yet, there were seasons in which Wilt's TEAMs were right behind, or even ahead of Russell's in DRtg.

Clearly Wilt's defensive IMPACT was VERY under-rated.

And in terms of one-on-one defense...Chamberlain had MORE impact. He reduced Bellamy, Thurmond, Reed, AND Russell, more than Russell did to Bellamy, Reed, Thurmond, and Wilt.

And your claim that Wilt's shot-blocking didn't have the IMPACT that Russell's did? Prove it. Hell, an old Wilt INTIMIDATED a PEAK Kareem BECAUSE of his shot-blocking, and yes, there are articles which validate that claim. But not only was Wilt knocking Kareem's skyhook all over the court, he was blocking the entire Bucks TEAM shots all over the gym, and often in rapid-fire succession.

Wilt was THE greatest RIM-PROTECTOR in NBA history, and that is not disputed. He was capable of blocking shots at 12+ feet, and EVERYONE knew it. Hell, even his "goal-tends" were often questionable (as in the waning seconds of game seven of the '62 EDF's, and against Sam Jones.)


All of which gets us back to the BEST player. Even if I were to concede that Russell was the better defensive player, and I wouldn't after '64...Wilt was LIGHT YEARS ahead of Russell at the offensive end. There was not a single season in their ten years in the league in which Russell was really the better player. And in the two years, out of the 10, in which Russell was voted ahead of Wilt on the First Team...Wilt played on a losing team in '63, (and he battered Russell in their nine H2H's), and was traded mid-season in '65 (and then destroyed Russell H2H in the EDF's.)

I'll concede that Kareem was the best player in the league for much of the 70's (not in '75, nor in '79), but then you would have to concede that Chamberlain was the best player in the entire decade of the 60's. And as Helix commented...I would argue that Wilt was on his way to being the best player in the league in '70, as well, when he shredded his knee.

One more time, though...

[La Frescobaldi]

whoa

yeah.

that is probably a little low.

[dankok8]

@LAZERUSS

Good post!

I don't disagree that Wilt is a superior individual player. Nor do I disagree that the offensive gap in favor of Wilt is larger than a defensive one in favor of Russell. I'm just saying that Russell's superior team records and intangibles gave him a solid case against Wilt. And it would give him a solid case against any great player that ever played the game IMHO.

As far as defense... Wilt was a truly great defensive center and like you mentioned he did excel at rim protection and man defense. Against any other all time great C like Hakeem, Kareem etc. he's definitely as good as they are on D and has a case for #2 greatest defender ever. Russell though was a whole different animal.

Bill Russell has the top 6 seasons as far as DWS with 16.0, 14.4, 12.6, 11.6, 11.4, and 11.3!! That's insanity. Boston's average team DRtg during Russell's career is 86.4. That's incredible because NO TEAM IN HISTORY ever had a DRtg in any single year as low as Boston's average. Celtics' three best results of 83.6, 83.7, and 84.2 just make no sense. Wilt's DWS best is 10.6 and Thurmond's best in the 60's is 6.1 so Russell is literally miles ahead of even the other greatest defensive centers of the era. Even when Wilt focused on defense and put in maximum energy on that end he couldn't match Russell's best.

Again Russell had some great defensive teammates but both on his and Wilt's teams it was he and Wilt who had the LION'S SHARE of the defensive impact. Especially in an era with far fewer outside shooting, a center had enormous impact on the defensive end. And here is the Celtics defense without Bill Russell... not including his rookie year when he joined halfway through the season.

In 28 regular season games Russell missed from 57-58 to 68-69, Boston went 10-18 (29 win pace...) and allowed 123.2 points a game which would have been dead last in the league in any season! In the games in which Russell played they allowed a league best 108.6. That's a differential of 14.6 points a game! Best with him, worst without him.

As for best player in the league...

Wilt was not the best in 1969.

Kareem was the best in 1975 (injuries aside...). Kareem was a better rebounder, passer, and defender than Bob McAdoo and surely his equal in scoring. While Kareem put up less points he could do so at higher efficiency. In their head to head Kareem completely outplayed McAdoo.

1974 (3 games)

Kareem: 35.0 ppg, 16.0 rpg, 4.0 apg, 2.7 bpg on 58.0 %FG
McAdoo: 30.3 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 2.7 apg, 2.7 bpg on 56.2 %FG

1975 (4 games)

Kareem: 32.0 ppg, 16.5 rpg, 4.5 apg, 4.3 bpg on 57.3 %FG*
McAdoo: 34.3 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 2.5 apg, 2.3 bpg on 41.8 %FG*

* missing FG% for one game

1976 (4 games)

Kareem: 25.8 ppg, 18.5 rpg, 7.5 apg, 4.3 bpg* on 57.6 %FG
McAdoo: 32.0 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 2.3 apg, 0.8 bpg on 39.1 %FG

* missing blocks for one game

In 1979 Kareem was a better scorer, passer, and defender than Moses. Crushed him in all advanced stats, was a more experienced player, and had a far better postseason. Even their head to heads were a draw.

1979 (3 games)

Kareem: 30.7 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 6.7 apg on 60.9 %FG
Moses: 31.0 ppg, 23.0 rpg, 1.7 apg on 66.7 %FG

The 1981 postseason and 81-82 regular season signaled the end of the "Kareem era".

[LAZERUSS]

@LAZERUSS

Good post!

I don't disagree that Wilt is a superior individual player. Nor do I disagree that the offensive gap in favor of Wilt is larger than a defensive one in favor of Russell. I'm just saying that Russell's superior team records and intangibles gave him a solid case against Wilt. And it would give him a solid case against any great player that ever played the game IMHO.

As far as defense... Wilt was a truly great defensive center and like you mentioned he did excel at rim protection and man defense. Against any other all time great C like Hakeem, Kareem etc. he's definitely as good as they are on D and has a case for #2 greatest defender ever. Russell though was a whole different animal.

Bill Russell has the top 6 seasons as far as DWS with 16.0, 14.4, 12.6, 11.6, 11.4, and 11.3!! That's insanity. Boston's average team DRtg during Russell's career is 86.4. That's incredible because NO TEAM IN HISTORY ever had a DRtg in any single year as low as Boston's average. Celtics' three best results of 83.6, 83.7, and 84.2 just make no sense. Wilt's DWS best is 10.6 and Thurmond's best in the 60's is 6.1 so Russell is literally miles ahead of even the other greatest defensive centers of the era. Even when Wilt focused on defense and put in maximum energy on that end he couldn't match Russell's best.

Again Russell had some great defensive teammates but both on his and Wilt's teams it was he and Wilt who had the LION'S SHARE of the defensive impact. Especially in an era with far fewer outside shooting, a center had enormous impact on the defensive end. And here is the Celtics defense without Bill Russell... not including his rookie year when he joined halfway through the season.

In 28 regular season games Russell missed from 57-58 to 68-69, Boston went 10-18 (29 win pace...) and allowed 123.2 points a game which would have been dead last in the league in any season! In the games in which Russell played they allowed a league best 108.6. That's a differential of 14.6 points a game! Best with him, worst without him.

As for best player in the league...

Wilt was not the best in 1969.

Kareem was the best in 1975 (injuries aside...). Kareem was a better rebounder, passer, and defender than Bob McAdoo and surely his equal in scoring. While Kareem put up less points he could do so at higher efficiency. In their head to head Kareem completely outplayed McAdoo.

1974 (3 games)

Kareem: 35.0 ppg, 16.0 rpg, 4.0 apg, 2.7 bpg on 58.0 %FG
McAdoo: 30.3 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 2.7 apg, 2.7 bpg on 56.2 %FG

1975 (4 games)

Kareem: 32.0 ppg, 16.5 rpg, 4.5 apg, 4.3 bpg on 57.3 %FG*
McAdoo: 34.3 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 2.5 apg, 2.3 bpg on 41.8 %FG*

* missing FG% for one game

1976 (4 games)

Kareem: 25.8 ppg, 18.5 rpg, 7.5 apg, 4.3 bpg* on 57.6 %FG
McAdoo: 32.0 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 2.3 apg, 0.8 bpg on 39.1 %FG

* missing blocks for one game

In 1979 Kareem was a better scorer, passer, and defender than Moses. Crushed him in all advanced stats, was a more experienced player, and had a far better postseason. Even their head to heads were a draw.

1979 (3 games)

Kareem: 30.7 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 6.7 apg on 60.9 %FG
Moses: 31.0 ppg, 23.0 rpg, 1.7 apg on 66.7 %FG

Wilt and Kareem were the two greatest "peak" players in NBA history. BTW, and as you know, Kareem anchored the best defenses of his era from '71 thru '74. IMO, at his peak, he was among the greatest defensive players in NBA history.

[DatAsh]

First of all, I apologize for being too harsh on your assessments. Again, you are one of the few posters here that I truly respect (even if we don't often agree.)



As for defensive impact, the problem is, there is/was, no real way of quantifying it.

I would agree with you, that based on what we know, that Russell was a better team defender, at least from '59-60 thru 62-63. And perhaps even a slightly better individual defender in that period, albeit, Chamberlain was swarmed by Russell's Celtics, and yet his efficiency declined little. Meanwhile, Chamberlain played Russell one-on-one, AND, defended the entire Celtics team (as evidenced by Sam Jones hitting two critical shots over Wilt in the waning seconds of game seven of the '62 EDF's...and later, Wilt altering Heinsohn's potential game-winner in game four of the '64 Finals.) And, as you know, Wilt dramatically lowered Russell's efficiency in their career H2H's. For instance, in Russell's '60 season, he shot a career-high .467 against the NBA. In their 11 regular season H2H's... .393 against Wilt. And then in the '62 regular season, Russell shot .457 against the NBA. Against Wilt in the EDF's... .399. And there were regular seasons in which held Russell to FG%'s of as low as .283 and .301.

I don't put much stock in team DRtg. Just as I didn't in the ORtg. I have blown that ORtg to bits in the topic of Wilt's true impact in the 60's. But even if I were to acknowledge that it had some value...Wilt's TEAM's finished a close second behind Russell's in Chamberlain's ROOKIE season (and Wilt, himself, finished a close second behind Russell in DW shares.) And same in '64, '66, '67, and '68. In fact, in '68, Wilt's team finished ahead of Russell's. And clearly, there is something wrong with the DWS when Wilt's '67 DWS was "only" 7.0.

And regarding DWS's...Wilt has the two highest "non-Russell" seasons in NBA history, and five of the Top-30. And again, that stat is pure nonsense if Wilt's '67 season is not his greatest.

As for TEAM defensive impact...Russell held this edge in teammates in the Top-10 in DWS's...

'60: 3-3
'61: 4-1
'62: 6-0
'63: 6-0
'64: 5-1
'65: 6-1
'66: 4-1
'67: 3-0
'68: 2-2
'69: 3-0

Collectively, a 42-9 margin!

And yet, there were seasons in which Wilt's TEAMs were right behind, or even ahead of Russell's in DRtg.

Clearly Wilt's defensive IMPACT was VERY under-rated.

And in terms of one-on-one defense...Chamberlain had MORE impact. He reduced Bellamy, Thurmond, Reed, AND Russell, more than Russell did to Bellamy, Reed, Thurmond, and Wilt.

And your claim that Wilt's shot-blocking didn't have the IMPACT that Russell's did? Prove it. Hell, an old Wilt INTIMIDATED a PEAK Kareem BECAUSE of his shot-blocking, and yes, there are articles which validate that claim. But not only was Wilt knocking Kareem's skyhook all over the court, he was blocking the entire Bucks TEAM shots all over the gym, and often in rapid-fire succession.

Wilt was THE greatest RIM-PROTECTOR in NBA history, and that is not disputed. He was capable of blocking shots at 12+ feet, and EVERYONE knew it. Hell, even his "goal-tends" were often questionable (as in the waning seconds of game seven of the '62 EDF's, and against Sam Jones.)


All of which gets us back to the BEST player. Even if I were to concede that Russell was the better defensive player, and I wouldn't after '64...Wilt was LIGHT YEARS ahead of Russell at the offensive end. There was not a single season in their ten years in the league in which Russell was really the better player. And in the two years, out of the 10, in which Russell was voted ahead of Wilt on the First Team...Wilt played on a losing team in '63, (and he battered Russell in their nine H2H's), and was traded mid-season in '65 (and then destroyed Russell H2H in the EDF's.)

I'll concede that Kareem was the best player in the league for much of the 70's (not in '75, nor in '79), but then you would have to concede that Chamberlain was the best player in the entire decade of the 60's.

One more time, though...

Individual defensive win shares are worthless, if anything they're less than worthless. Unfortunately the best we can do for perimeter defenders of that era is to just read about what was being said of them at the time. Guys like Sanders, Hondo, Sharman and K.C. were all great defenders, but so were guys like Thurmond, West, Wally, Attles, and Greer.

The question is, how much better is the first group defensively? Does that difference account for the difference in team defensive rating from one guy to the other.

Looking at Wilt first (negative is good)

Warriors
[CODE]
Year Rank Diff from Mean
59 [COLOR="Green"]3/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.5[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Wilt joins
60 [COLOR="Green"]2/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-3.3[/COLOR]
61 [COLOR="Green"]3/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.7[/COLOR]
62 [COLOR="Green"]3/9 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.6[/COLOR]
63 [COLOR="Red"]5/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]+1.1[/COLOR]
64 [COLOR="Green"]2/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-5.6[/COLOR]
65 [COLOR="Green"]3/9 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.2[/COLOR] (38 games)
--------------------------------------Wilt leaves
66 [COLOR="Green"]3/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]+0.4[/COLOR]
[/CODE]

76ers
[CODE]
Year Rank Diff from Mean
64 [COLOR="Red"]7/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.4[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Wilt joins
65 [COLOR="Red"]5/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]+1.1[/COLOR]
66 [COLOR="Green"]2/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-2.9[/COLOR]
67 [COLOR="Green"]3/10 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-1.8[/COLOR]
68 [COLOR="Green"]1/12[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-5.4[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Wilt leaves
69 [COLOR="Green"]6/14[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-1.3[/COLOR]
[/CODE]

Lakers
[CODE]
Year Rank Diff from Mean
68 [COLOR="Red"]7/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]+0.4[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Wilt joins
69 [COLOR="Red"]8/14[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.3[/COLOR]
70 [COLOR="Green"]4/14[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.5[/COLOR]
71 [COLOR="Green"] 8/17 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-1.3 [/COLOR]
72 [COLOR="Green"]2/17[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-8.76[/COLOR]
73 [COLOR="Green"]3/17[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-8.58[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Wilt leaves
74 [COLOR="Green"]7/17[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-3.03[/COLOR]
[/CODE]

And then Russell

Celtics
[CODE]
Year Rank Diff from Mean
56 [COLOR="Red"]6/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]+1.5[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Russell joins
57 [COLOR="Green"]1/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-4.8[/COLOR]
58 [COLOR="Green"]1/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-5.2[/COLOR]
59 [COLOR="Green"]1/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-5.8[/COLOR]
60 [COLOR="Green"]1/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-6.2[/COLOR]
61 [COLOR="Green"]1/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-8.2[/COLOR]
62 [COLOR="Green"]1/9 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-8.7[/COLOR]
63 [COLOR="Green"]1/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-9.1[/COLOR]
64 [COLOR="Green"]1/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-11.5[/COLOR]
65 [COLOR="Green"]1/9 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-9.9[/COLOR]
66 [COLOR="Green"]1/9 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-7.1[/COLOR]
67 [COLOR="Green"]1/10 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-4.9[/COLOR]
68 [COLOR="Green"]2/12 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-4.6[/COLOR]
69 [COLOR="Green"]1/14 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-6.8[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Russell leaves
70 [COLOR="Red"]7/16[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]+0.6[/COLOR]
[/CODE]

Looking at that, it's clear that both guys were having incredible impact on the defensive end. Wilt's best defensive years were 68, 72, 73, 67, 64. I'd say he was a better defender than 67-69 Russell in those years.

It seems weird that recently you've been trying to convince people that Wilt was every bit the defender Russell was (you're stance on the matter has grown increasingly aggressive). The important thing to realize is that Wilt doesn't have to be a better defender - or as good - in order to be a better player. Wilt was considerably better on offense, and it's the combination of offense and defense that counts. I think most people would agree that if you factor in offense and defense, Wilt > Russell.

[LAZERUSS]

Individual defensive win shares are worthless, if anything they're less than worthless. Unfortunately the best we can do for perimeter defenders of that era is to just read about what was being said of them at the time. Guys like Sanders, Hondo, Sharman and K.C. were all great defenders, but so were guys like Thurmond, West, Wally, Attles, and Greer.

The question is, how much better is the first group defensively? Does that difference account for the difference in team defensive rating from one guy to the other.

Looking at Wilt first (negative is good)

Warriors
[CODE]
Year Rank Diff from Mean
59 [COLOR="Green"]3/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.5[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Wilt joins
60 [COLOR="Green"]2/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-3.3[/COLOR]
61 [COLOR="Green"]3/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.7[/COLOR]
62 [COLOR="Green"]3/9 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.6[/COLOR]
63 [COLOR="Red"]5/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]+1.1[/COLOR]
64 [COLOR="Green"]2/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-5.6[/COLOR]
65 [COLOR="Green"]3/9 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.2[/COLOR] (38 games)
--------------------------------------Wilt leaves
66 [COLOR="Green"]3/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]+0.4[/COLOR]
[/CODE]

76ers
[CODE]
Year Rank Diff from Mean
64 [COLOR="Red"]7/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.4[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Wilt joins
65 [COLOR="Red"]5/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]+1.1[/COLOR]
66 [COLOR="Green"]2/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-2.9[/COLOR]
67 [COLOR="Green"]3/10 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-1.8[/COLOR]
68 [COLOR="Green"]1/12[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-5.4[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Wilt leaves
69 [COLOR="Green"]6/14[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-1.3[/COLOR]
[/CODE]

Lakers
[CODE]
Year Rank Diff from Mean
68 [COLOR="Red"]7/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]+0.4[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Wilt joins
69 [COLOR="Red"]8/14[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.3[/COLOR]
70 [COLOR="Green"]4/14[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-0.5[/COLOR]
71 [COLOR="Green"] 8/17 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-1.3 [/COLOR]
72 [COLOR="Green"]2/17[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-8.76[/COLOR]
73 [COLOR="Green"]3/17[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-8.58[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Wilt leaves
74 [COLOR="Green"]7/17[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-3.03[/COLOR]
[/CODE]

And then Russell

Celtics
[CODE]
Year Rank Diff from Mean
56 [COLOR="Red"]6/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]+1.5[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Russell joins
57 [COLOR="Green"]1/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-4.8[/COLOR]
58 [COLOR="Green"]1/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-5.2[/COLOR]
59 [COLOR="Green"]1/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-5.8[/COLOR]
60 [COLOR="Green"]1/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-6.2[/COLOR]
61 [COLOR="Green"]1/8[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-8.2[/COLOR]
62 [COLOR="Green"]1/9 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-8.7[/COLOR]
63 [COLOR="Green"]1/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-9.1[/COLOR]
64 [COLOR="Green"]1/9[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-11.5[/COLOR]
65 [COLOR="Green"]1/9 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-9.9[/COLOR]
66 [COLOR="Green"]1/9 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-7.1[/COLOR]
67 [COLOR="Green"]1/10 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-4.9[/COLOR]
68 [COLOR="Green"]2/12 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-4.6[/COLOR]
69 [COLOR="Green"]1/14 [/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]-6.8[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------Russell leaves
70 [COLOR="Red"]7/16[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]+0.6[/COLOR]
[/CODE]

Looking at that, it's clear that both guys were having incredible impact on the defensive end. Wilt's best defensive years were 68, 72, 73, 67, 64. I'd say he was a better defender than 67-69 Russell in those years.

It seems weird that recently you've been trying to convince people that Wilt was every bit the defender Russell was (you're stance on the matter has grown increasingly aggressive). The important thing to realize is that Wilt doesn't have to be a better defender - or as good - in order to be a better player. Wilt was considerably better on offense, and it's the combination of offense and defense that counts. I think most people would agree that if you factor in offense and defense, Wilt > Russell.

I wouldn't argue with Russell as the GOAT defensive player. And you pretty much summed up my take as well. Chamberlain had more impact from '67 thru '69.

There was no question that Russell covered the entire floor much more than Wilt (or anyone else for that matter.)

Still, those numbers are TEAM numbers, and the fact was, Hondo, KC Jones, and especially Satch Sanders were considered the best defensive players at their respective positions for the majority of the decade of the 60's.

And you really can't Boston's '70 team, since Russell left after the draft, and they didn't have a replacement center. It didn't take long for Cowens to lead Boston back to glory, though. By his 72-73 season, the Celtics had an all-time best 68-14 record, and then would win two titles in the next three years.

BTW, I have Russell winning the MVP in '61, '63, and '65. Was he the best player in the league in those years? Nope. And Wilt should have won the MVP in '62 and '64, and really, he was the best player in the league in '69, as well.

Nor do I have a problem with KAJ winning it in '72. He was the best player in the league, and deserved it, ...but if Russell were to easily beat out Wilt in '62, then what changed in the voting from '62 to '72?

Same with KAJ's '76 MVP. If he deserved the award in '76, what changed in '63 and then in '76?


In any case, Russell has a case for GOAT, and is #5 on my all-time list. But to be honest, any of those would be interchangeable (Wilt, MJ, Magic, Kareem, and Russell.)


Oh, and not that you probably care, but you are also on my short list for respected posters here.

[dankok8]

I agree there are inconsistencies in voting... I mean it doesn't make sense for 1960 Wilt to win MVP but for 1962 Wilt not to. He did play better defense in his rookie year but still his offensive production was much much worse. I would have given Russell the MVP in 1960 and Wilt in 1962. 1964 is a toss up between Wilt and Oscar but I might lean to the Big O because Cince won 7 more games.

Anyways though Russell was the GOAT on defense and better than Wilt on that end. Cowens was worse than Kareem on defense. Also the gap in wins in favor of Russell (58-31) was much greater than the gap in favor of Cowens (54-40). I don't really see much of a parallel between 1963 and 1976 to be honest. 1976 Kareem had a much better case for MVP than 1963 Wilt.

The data posted by DatAsh is incredible... Wilt had four elite defensive years in 1964, 1968, 1972, and 1973. Russell was elite in all thirteen of his really. 1964 he was just bonkers.

If you compare them year by year defensively I'd only give Wilt a slight edge over Russell in 1968. Russell has a slight edge in 1967 and a very clear edge for the entire span from 1960-1966 and 1969.

[feyki]

That was close race . Doesn't matter . Cowens was as good as Kareem and Erving at that year.

Btw , Cowens was most underrated defensive player with Ewing in nba history . And he had great playmaking and solid rebounding .

[jongib369]

I can't believe they awarded Kareem the MVP in 76 when the Lakers were 40-42 and didn't even make the playoffs. Dave Cowens clearly should have been the MVP that year. Was he as dominate as Kareem? No, but there are a lot of players who dominate on losing teams but don't receive the MVP. Either way it was probably Cowens best season and he actually led the Celtics to 54-28 record and then eventual champions. Dave Cowens is easily the most underrated Center there has been. Nobody talks about him.

Random note, from games Ive seen of him Cowens is surprisingly Quick... IDT he'd have trouble "adjusting" at all

[jongib369]

Cowens has said he actually enjoyed playing against Wilt. Like Shaq, Wilt didn't like to go outside of the paint to guard him. Not that he couldn't, anyone who's spent 10 minutes watching Wilt would know he did.

[Lebron23]

I can't believe they awarded Kareem the MVP in 76 when the Lakers were 40-42 and didn't even make the playoffs. Dave Cowens clearly should have been the MVP that year. Was he as dominate as Kareem? No, but there are a lot of players who dominate on losing teams but don't receive the MVP. Either way it was probably Cowens best season and he actually led the Celtics to 54-28 record and then eventual champions. Dave Cowens is easily the most underrated Center there has been. Nobody talks about him.

In todays NBA MVP Voting Dave Cowens would definitely be the league's MVP because Kareem missed the playoffs.

[Roundball_Rock]

Cowens had 4 HOF on his team. Kareem was traded to a 30 win team that gave up an all-star, a 16/11 center, the #2 and #8 picks to acquire him. So you are looking at a 20-25 win caliber roster that he inherited. He clearly was the best player in the league. Put Cowens on the Lakers and what happens?

Kareem did not miss the playoffs. The Los Angeles Lakers did. This isn't boxing.

[Whoah10115]

Cowens had 4 HOF on his team. Kareem was traded to a 30 win team that gave up an all-star, a 16/11 center, the #2 and #8 picks to acquire him. So you are looking at a 20-25 win caliber roster that he inherited. He clearly was the best player in the league. Put Cowens on the Lakers and what happens?

Kareem did not miss the playoffs. The Los Angeles Lakers did. This isn't boxing.

No one is saying he missed it like he didn't get it done. It's being said in the context of his winning MVP and people evaluating the details and the criteria.

[Roundball_Rock]

No one is saying he missed it like he didn't get it done. It's being said in the context of his winning MVP and people evaluating the details and the criteria.

There is no criteria.

[Whoah10115]

There is no criteria.

How is there no criteria?