1st option rings - what accomplishment is bigger? It's the best GOAT argument

[3ball]

I'm confused, didn't Russell win MVP in 1958,1960,61,62 and 1965.

in the modern era/3-pointer basketball

I left that out of the cliffs.. nice catch



Revised Thread Cliffs


Since there's never been a league MVP in the modern era/3-pointer basketball that wasn't a dominant offensive player, we know Bill Russell could never win a league MVP..

And there's no way a zero-MVP player is a goat candidate, or even a top 10 candidate.. Otoh, winning as "the man" (a team's best offensive player) is the holy grail of basketball accomplishment that defined the careers of guys like Kobe (when he won without Shaq), Dirk, Durant and others.. So MJ is goat for winning the most as "the man" (6 rings as "the man", while 2nd place has 3)

Russell is simply a product of an era that didn't have a 3-point line, and therefore lacked the spacing for good team offense - this allowed a 1-way defender like Russell to dominate

[mr4speed]

I'm confused, didn't Russell win MVP in 1958,1960,61,62 and 1965.

Yes , Russell has 5 MVP's and the FMVP award did not even exist until 1969 and the first winner , I believe was Jerry West, even though he was on the losing Lakers team. If the FMVP had existed, how many would Russell have won? 5,6,7 or more? Also for me , Magic needs to come down to the 2 tier level, as the FMVP he won in 80 was actually voted for Kareem to receive the award after Magic's great game 6, but since KAJ was not present, the voters were asked to change their votes so Magic would win the award. KAJ had the better series and was why LA won the other 3 games.

[3ball]

Yes , [COLOR="DarkRed"]Russell has 5 MVP's[/COLOR] and the FMVP award did not even exist until 1969 and the first winner , I believe was Jerry West, even though he was on the losing Lakers team. If the FMVP had existed, how many would Russell have won? 5,6,7 or more? Also for me , Magic needs to come down to the 2 tier level, as the FMVP he won in 80 was actually voted for Kareem to receive the award after Magic's great game 6, but since KAJ was not present, the voters were asked to change their votes so Magic would win the award. KAJ had the better series and was why LA won the other 3 games.

^^^ Yes, in 2-pointer basketball with no spacing or viable team offense, thus allowing a 1-way defender to be an MVP-caliber player.

But in the modern era/3-pointer basketball, there's never been a league MVP that wasn't a dominant offensive player, so we know Bill Russell could never win a league MVP post-1980..

And there's no way a zero-MVP player is a goat candidate, or even a top 10 candidate.. Russell is simply a product of an era that didn't have a 3-point line, and therefore lacked the spacing for good team offense - this allowed a 1-way defender like Russell to dominate

Otoh, winning as "the man" (a team's best offensive player) is the holy grail of basketball accomplishment in the modern era that defined the careers of guys like Kobe (when he won without Shaq), Dirk, Durant and others.. So MJ is goat for winning the most as "the man" (6 rings as "the man", while 2nd place has 3)

[mr4speed]

^^^ Yes, in 2-pointer basketball with no spacing or viable team offense, thus allowing a 1-way defender to be an MVP-caliber player.

But in the modern era/3-pointer basketball, there's never been a league MVP that wasn't a dominant offensive player, so we know Bill Russell could never win a league MVP post-1980..

And there's no way a zero-MVP player is a goat candidate, or even a top 10 candidate.. Russell is simply a product of an era that didn't have a 3-point line, and therefore lacked the spacing for good team offense - this allowed a 1-way defender like Russell to dominate

Otoh, winning as "the man" (a team's best offensive player) is the holy grail of basketball accomplishment in the modern era that defined the careers of guys like Kobe (when he won without Shaq), Dirk, Durant and others.. So MJ is goat for winning the most as "the man" (6 rings as "the man", while 2nd place has 3)

I understand what you are saying but I have a problem penalizing Russell for playing when he played. Yes, the rules have changed, the court has changed, the players have changed but this is something Russell had no control over. He could only play against anyone or any team other than his own. IF Russell played today and his teams won 11 rings and he was not the leading scorer, I think there is no way he doesn't win MVP's and FMVP's given he was the same nucleus, leader, player-coach of his teams. Didn't Russell win MVP the same year Wilt averaged 50 points per game? Perhaps the old timers had a better grasp of what was more valuable than just scoring points? I think the problem stems from trying to "prove" one player is greater than another player, when it is a team game of 5 vs 5 and there are too many variables and that makes it impossible to come up with the "failproof" method or measurement. Just my 2 cents!

[3ball]

I understand what you are saying [COLOR="Navy"]but I have a problem penalizing Russell for playing when he played[/COLOR]. Yes, the rules have changed, the court has changed, the players have changed but this is something Russell had no control over. He could only play against anyone or any team other than his own. IF Russell played today and his teams won 11 rings and he was not the leading scorer, I think there is no way he doesn't win MVP's and FMVP's given he was the same nucleus, leader, player-coach of his teams. Didn't Russell win MVP the same year Wilt averaged 50 points per game? [COLOR="Navy"]Perhaps the old timers had a better grasp of what was more valuable than just scoring points[/COLOR]? I think the problem stems from trying to "prove" one player is greater than another player, when it is a team game of 5 vs 5 and there are too many variables and that makes it impossible to come up with the "failproof" method or measurement. Just my 2 cents!

Don't worry - you aren't penalizing him - he had no offense - the eye test quickly confirms that he was NOT ahead of his time offensively.. Elgin was.. Oscar was... Not Russell - he simply dominated an era that didn't have any spacing or good team offense, thus allowing a 1-way player to dominate and win the most..

You keep saying that I'm not considering what is valuable (points or other things) - I've been considering it precisely but you're ignoring it - I said Russell's 1-way defensive play was capable of being the biggest winner in 2-pointer/no-spacing basketball when team offense was impossible.. But once the 3-point line spread the floor/naturally changed where offensive players stood (even if they weren't taking the shot), team ortg's shot up and remained in the current 105-108 range for the last 30 years (since the 3-point line was introduced)..

and actually, only the last 2 seasons have ORtg's gone passed the 108 mark and into 109 and 110 territory, which shows you how much the current format of maximum threes/spacing has affected defenses and offenses.. because that's a massive increase and the first time those levels have ever been reached in hoops history - it's an absolute cakewalk to score and MJ would average at least 42-43, if not damn near 50.. that isn't an exaggeration.

[3ball]

Final Revised Thread Cliffs


Since there's never been a league MVP in the modern era/3-pointer basketball that wasn't a dominant offensive player - all 40 MVP's since 1980 were dominant offensive players - we know Bill Russell could never win a league MVP in the modern era.

And there's no way a zero-MVP player is a goat candidate, or even a top 10 candidate.. Russell is simply a product of an era that didn't have a 3-point line, and therefore lacked the spacing for good team offense - this allowed a 1-way defender like Russell to dominate and be MVP-caliber...

But the modern era requires a dominant offensive player - winning as "the man" (a team's best offensive player) has become the holy grail of basketball accomplishment that defined the careers of guys like Kobe (winning without Shaq), Dirk, Durant and others.. So MJ is goat for winning the most as "the man" (6 rings as "the man", while 2nd place has 3)