Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > NBA Forum

NBA Forum NBA Message Board - NBA Fan Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-25-2013, 03:53 PM   #31
fpliii
NBA All-star
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: nbastats.net
Posts: 9,838
fpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoHnNyBoXeR
Lol I hear what your saying but his height is his height .. He would be 6'9 in yesterday's nba and 6'9 in today's nba.. Lol

Yeah, no. That isn't the case. Who is listed barefoot today? Was Jordan 6'4" in his NBA?
fpliii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 03:57 PM   #32
LAZERUSS
NBA lottery pick
 
LAZERUSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,771
LAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputation
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fpliii
I used to have Magic along with the two of them, but recently I've held Bird in a higher regard. I don't do GOAT lists anymore, but insofar as GOAT candidacy is concerned:

• Russ/MJ are strong candidates, nobody else is, but the four below are at all at least weak GOAT candidates (there are perhaps others)
• Bird needs to be ahead of Magic
• Wilt needs to be ahead of Kareem

I don't know where everyone else figures in (nor do I care all that much really about the exact order), but I'm very confident about the above.

I don't see Bird having any case over Magic. Magic won as many MVPs (and probably deserved one in '82), more FMVPs (and was robbed of one in '88), won more rings, outplayed Bird h2h in their post-season h2h's, was a better playoff performer...

Bird is well down my list. Too many "choke" jobs in his post-season career.

Wilt outplayed Russell in the vast majority of their h2h's, and some by huge margins. And given the fact that he was battling the greatest dynasty in sports, and usually with pathetic rosters that played worse in the post-season, plus, the fact that when his roster finally neutralized Russell's, his team wiped the floor with them...very close. In fact, Wilt's teams were a total of nine polints away from having a 5-3 h2h edge in their eight playoff matchups.

As for KAJ. Take Magic away...and his career would have been considered a huge disappointment. And a peak Kareem faced quite a few of the centers that a peak Chamberlain faced earlier in his career, and he never came within the other side of the Pacific ocean of dominating them the way a prime Chamberlain did.
LAZERUSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:04 PM   #33
LAZERUSS
NBA lottery pick
 
LAZERUSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,771
LAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputation
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shade8780
Not only that, just about every great player from the 60's said they wouldn't have wanted to play with Wilt. He went on a no foul out streak that had started back in his High School days and would go on for the rest of his career, affecting his team a lot on defense in tight game situations. People who think Wilt is better than Russ should research about their games instead of their stats.

Back in his Sixers days, there was a poll made by the Lakers GM at the time asking fans if they should trade for Wilt, and the majority said no. This was during the time he was basically putting his assist count over whether his team wins or loses. Russell was 10x the competitor and man that Wilt was. Russell > Kareem >> Wilt.

A complete fabrication started by none other than Bill Simmons. Find me one article on the internet which verifies that claim. You won't. Simmons was notorious Wilt-hater, and a notorious liar.

BTW, that supposedly occurred in his Warrior days, not his Sixer days (when he led the Sixers to the best record in all three full seasons he was there.)

As for that "foul streak" claim...think about this...Chamberlain averaged 2.5 pfs per game in his post-season career, in a post-season in which he averaged 47.2 mpg. He was seldom even getting 3 fouls per game, much less five.

And there are accounts like this one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilt_Chamberlain

Quote:
In the 1972 NBA Finals, the Lakers again met the New York Knicks; the Knicks were shorthanded after losing Willis Reed to injury, and so, undersized 6'8" Jerry Lucas had the task to defend against the 7'1" Chamberlain.[92] However, prolific outside shooter Lucas helped New York to win Game 1, hitting 9 of his 11 shots in the first half alone; in Game 2, which the Lakers won 106–92, Chamberlain put Lucas into foul trouble, and the Knicks lost defensive power forward Dave DeBusschere to injury.[92] In Game 3, Chamberlain scored 26 points and grabbed 20 rebounds for another Lakers win, and in a fiercely battled Game 4, the Lakers center was playing with five fouls late in the game. Having never fouled out in his career – a feat that he was very proud of – he played aggressive defense despite the risk of fouling out, and blocked two of Lucas' shots in overtime, proving those wrong who said he only played for his own stats; he ended scoring a game-high 27 points.[92] But in that game, he had fallen on his right hand, and was said to have "sprained" it; it was actually broken. For Game 5, Chamberlain's hands were packed into thick pads normally destined for defensive linesmen in American Football; he was offered a painkilling shot, but refused because he feared he would lose his shooting touch if his hands became numb.[92] In Game 5, Chamberlain recorded 24 points, 29 rebounds, 8 assists and 8 blocked shots. (While blocked shots were not an official NBA stat at that time, announcer Keith Jackson counted the blocks during the broadcast.[citation needed]) Chamberlain's outstanding all-around performance helped the Lakers win their first championship in Los Angeles with a decisive 114–100 win.[92] Chamberlain was named Finals MVP,[43] and was admired for dominating the Knicks in Game 5 while playing injured.[92

Last edited by LAZERUSS : 05-25-2013 at 04:09 PM.
LAZERUSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:09 PM   #34
fpliii
NBA All-star
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: nbastats.net
Posts: 9,838
fpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterfpliii is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZERUSS
I don't see Bird having any case over Magic. Magic won as many MVPs (and probably deserved one in '82), more FMVPs (and was robbed of one in '88), won more rings, outplayed Bird h2h in their post-season h2h's, was a better playoff performer...

Bird is well down my list. To many "choke" jobs in his post-season career.

Wilt outplayed Russell in the vast majority of their h2h's, and some by huge margins. And given the fact that he was battling the greatest dynasty in sports, and usually with pathetic rosters that played worse in the post-season, plus, the fact that when his roster finally neutralized Russell's, his team wiped the floor with them...very close. In fact, Wilt's teams were a total of nine polints away from having a 5-3 h2h edge in their eight playoff matchups.

As for KAJ. Take Magic away...and his career would have been considered a huge disappointment. And a peak Kareem faced quite a few of the centers that a peak Chamberlain faced earlier in his career, and he never came within the other side of the Pacific ocean of dominating them the way a prime Chamberlain did.

All fair points of which I'm already well-aware, but I'm using new criteria/measures to look at impacts for now, this is just my current stance.

Regarding MVPs though, I can't really take them seriously as they're media awards from 80-81 on. The Sporting News Player of the Year was voted on by players until at least 2010-11 (I can't find any notes about voting from last season or this season, maybe it ended?), so as far as I'm concerned it's the spiritual successor to the MVP through 1980. Finals MVPs are also problematic (especially since at some point it was referred to almost as frequently as the Playoffs MVP in newspapers).

KAJ/Magic is also tough. I haven't figured out that relationship, but I'm concerned about dropping Kareem down too far. I used to think of him as a disappointment after an amazing start to his career in Milwaukee his first four years, but the league was really incredibly weak at that point compared to the mid-60s:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=300770

As you can see in post #3:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...71&postcount=3

by the rather simplistic measure used in that thread, his peak seasons can be considered (alongside the early 90s, after back-to-back multiple team expansions) one of the two weakest levels of talent depth in league history (consequently, I've also decided that the 67 Sixers > 72 Lakers for GOAT team).
fpliii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:26 PM   #35
tikay0
Banned
 
tikay0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,859
tikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong waytikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong way
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Bill Russell was one of the most athletic specimens in NBA history.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEs4KC4xHE0
tikay0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:28 PM   #36
tikay0
Banned
 
tikay0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,859
tikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong waytikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong way
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shade8780
[IMG]Changed his avatar from Noah to him as well

I don't get it. Are you mad about something?

You act like I didn't know how great Russell was. I changed my mind, and now I'd take him over MJ and Kareem. I did some extensive research on the man, and I've come to the conclusion that he had the highest IQ, and will to win in NBA history.

Why you so mad?
tikay0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:31 PM   #37
tikay0
Banned
 
tikay0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,859
tikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong waytikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong way
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

I googled "Bill Russell vs. Wilt Chamberlin" and I found this gem. Great read.

Quote:
Two of the NBA's greatest players, Bill Russel and Wilt Chamberlain, are often criticized for playing in a "weak" era. This is far from the truth, as the 1960s were a very good time for basketball. A much smaller league meant more competition for fewer spots. The fact that only the 121 best basketball players in the world could play in the NBA condensed the talent pool to nine teams. In the modern NBA, over half of the teams don't even have one all star player, nevertheless hall of famers. Examining the teams in the mid 1960s, all nine of them had Hall of Fame talents:

Boston Celtics: Bill Russel, John Havlicek, Sam Jones, Tommy Heinsolm
Cincinnati Royals: Oscar Robertson, Jerry Lucas
Philadelphia 76ers: Hal Greer
New York Knicks: Willis Reed
San Francisco Warriors: Wilt Chamberlain, Nate Thurmond
St. Louis Hawks: Bob Pettit
Los Angeles Lakers: Jerry West, Elgin Baylor
Detroit Pistons: David Bing, Dave Debusschere
Baltimore Bullets: Walt Bellamy

Russel and Chamberlain faced various legends on a nightly basis, yet still were known as the best players of their generation. Throughout the decade, the two were subject to strong competition Some of the great players Russel and Chamberlain faced included:

1960-1964:

Dolph Schayes
Bob Pettit
Walt Bellamy
Jerry Lucas

1965-1968:

Willis Reed
Elvin Hayes
Wes Unseld
Nate Thurmond

1969-1972:

Kareem Abdul Jabbar
Bob Lanier
Artis Gilmore
Billy Cunningham
Dave Cowens

One reason fans tend to lash out at these legends is the absurd stats of not only Russel and Chamberlain, but average players as well, as it was not uncommon for a player to average 15-20 rebounds per game. There are several reasons for the high rebound rates of these players:

a. A high tempo offense. The average team in 1965 shot about 600 more shots than a team in 1985 and about 1400 more shots than a team in 2005.

b. Less fouls called. In 1965, the average team had 2076 personal fouls per season. In 2005, 1856 personal fouls were called. But keep in mind that 1400 more shots were attempted, yet only 200 less fouls called. The result, a lowing field goal percentage, and more shots allowed to be rebounded.

When adjusting the field goal percentage to 45% and reducing the shots taken to the normal rate today, the rebounding rate drops to a more familiar rate for most players. Elgin Baylor would dropped to around 9 boards a game and Nate Thurmond to around 12. However, both Bill Russel and Wilt Chamberlain, even with the adjusted stats, still averaged between 16-20 rebounds per game, showing that they truly did dominate like few others.

Another common misperception is that Bill Russel and Wilt Chamberlain played against only 6'6" white centers. That is completely false. Here are the NBA players from 1960-1972 6'11" or taller who played at least 3 years in the NBA: (list does not include Wilt Chamberlain)

Kareem Abdul Jabbar: 7'2"
Dennis Awtrey: 6'11"
Walt Bellamy: 6'11"
Tom Boerwinkle: 7'0"
Nate Bowmen: 6'11"
Mel Counts: 7'0"
Walter Dukes: 7'0"
Jim Eakins: 6'11"
Ray Felix: 6'11"
Hank Finkel: 7'0"
Artis Gilmore: 7'2"
Swede Halbrook: 7'3"
Reggie Harding: 7'0"
Bob Lanier: 6'11"
Jim McDaniels: 6'11"
Otto Moore: 6'11"
Dave Newmark: 7'0"
Rich Niemann: 7'0"
Billy Paultz: 6'11"
Craig Raymond: 6'11"
Elmore Smith: 7'0"
Chuck Share: 6'11"
Ronald Taylor: 7'1"
Nate Thurmond: 6'11"
Walt Wesley: 6'11"

Two other factors to keep in mind:

a. The NBA was less interested in promoting itself 40 years ago, and therefore, did not see the need to measure players with their shoes on. Almost all players today are listed 1-2 inches taller than their actual height.

b. The NBA had 1/3 of the players that they do now. That means Bill Russel and Wilt Chamberlain faced these 25 guys 3 times more often than they would in the modern nba scheduling.

The truth is, height will never be more of a factor than skill. With several exceptions, players over 7' are typically not very successful. At a collegian level, only three 7 footers have made all-American first team in the last twenty years: Shaquille O'Neal, Andrew Bogut, and Chris Mihm. In this years all star game, Dirk Nowitzki, Pau Gasol, and Chris Kaman were the only three of 30 players selected to be 7 feet, and all are known far more for their skill sets than dominating with size. If height was such a significant factor, then Manute Bol, Shawn Bradly, and Gheorghe Muresan would be hall of fame players, not just fan favorite scrubs.

The overall talent of the 1960s is greatly underestimated as well. The stamina that players in the 1960s have is far greater than anything seen today

1965 Top 3 in minutes played per game
1. Oscar Robertson, 45.6 mpg
2. Bill Russel, 45.2 mpg
3. Wilt Chamberlain, 44.4 mpg

2005 Top 3 in minutes played per game
1. Lebron James, 42.3 mpg
2. Allen Iverson, 42.3 mpg
3. Gilbert Arenas 40.9 mpg

In addition, teams never walked up the court and held the ball for 12
3 years ago Report Abuse
Additional Details
seconds, and then have four players watch as the fifth tries to get to the hoop. Most teams in the 60s tried to get a fast break after every rebound and in the half court set, the ball moved and players were setting screens and cutting to the basket. Yet players were doing this on a nightly basis, without fancy trainers giving massages and various methods to help muscle recovery. In addition, players were far more versatile as Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, Dave Debusschere, and other players could play 3 or 4 positions. Many performances that players had would be considered triple doubles in todays game, but assist rules were far stricter in the 1960s, as the average team in the 1960s made 1000 more field goals per year than a team in 2005, yet averaged 100 less assists.

The 1960s produced some of the leagues finest stars, and it is an absolute travesty that these legends are debunked for playing in a weak era when it is clearly not the case.
tikay0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:34 PM   #38
Shade8780
GOATin
 
Shade8780's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Ireland
Posts: 15,815
Shade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CavaliersFTW
You literally made that up

And the assumption that Wilt's "no foul out streak" was a hindrance to his career - is fabricated, and baseless. Show me ANY sort of feedback from his 1960's/70's players/coaches that said "Wilt's lack of fouling out cost him/us ______ ".
No I didn't. Jerry Lucas, Havlicek, Russell, Jerry West and some others I'm not bothered to look up all criticized Wilt.
Shade8780 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:34 PM   #39
Shade8780
GOATin
 
Shade8780's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Ireland
Posts: 15,815
Shade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tikay0
I don't get it. Are you mad about something?

You act like I didn't know how great Russell was. I changed my mind, and now I'd take him over MJ and Kareem. I did some extensive research on the man, and I've come to the conclusion that he had the highest IQ, and will to win in NBA history.

Why you so mad?
I'm not mad. Chill bro. I just find it funny
Shade8780 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:35 PM   #40
tikay0
Banned
 
tikay0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,859
tikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong waytikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong way
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Another gem.

Quote:
Well said, and this if for those of you who said that Hakeem Olajuwon is the greatest center of all time.

I've seen a number of fans make the claim that Olajuwon is the best center of all time. They're wrong, but quite a few people have said it.

It could be said that the best "teammate" Olajuwon had was Clyde Drexler, although he did play with Sampson during the best part of Sampson's career.

I would not consider the 90s to be the best era for big men... you basically had 4 or 5 HOF quality centers in the league in Shaq, Olajuwon, Ewing, Robinson and possibly Zo. Maybe Mutombo if you want to go that far. But that was IT.

In the 70s, we had Jabbar, Walton when he was healthy, Cowens, Reed, Hayes, Unseld, Thurmond, Jerry Lucas, Wilt, Walt Bellamy, Bob Lanier, Moses Malone, Bob McAdoo, plus Artis Gilmore, Dan Issel and Mel Daniels from the ABA. Not all of those guys played throughout the 70s, but they were all there during that generation.

All of the NBA guys I named are Hall of Famers, Issel is a HOF as well, but Gilmore certainly should be in there too, and even Daniels has a decent argument, although I dont see him ever making it, unfortunately.

Olajuwon did destroy Ewing in the 94 finals, no question about that. And while Olajuwon's footwork was great, the "Dream Shake" is the 2nd most overplayed and overrated move in NBA history (the most overrated was Jordan switching hands on an uncontested layup in the '91 finals). Olajuwon's footwork developed while playing soccer as a child.

You've already made the point yourself that blocked shots were not an official NBA stat during the careers of Russell and Chamberlain, otherwise, they'd be 1 and 2 (or 2 and 1) in that category. While blocks were not an official stat, newspaper accounts of games involving Wilt and Russell would often mention how many shots they blocked... it was not unusual for them to block 6-8 shots in a typical game. I'm not saying that's what they averaged, I'm just mentioning that it was common for them to have numbers like that. Both players and referees confirmed those numbers in subsequent interviews over the years.

Heck, Wilt blocked 17 shots in his very first NBA game (oh and btw, he also chipped in with 43 points and 28 rebounds that night).

Blocks (and steals) were not officially kept by the NBA until the 1973-74 season (the season after Wilt retired), and the NBA does not recognize ANY blocked shots by Wilt or Russell (even though they're on film).

Olajuwon would be no better than 4th on the all time blocked shot list had the stat been kept by the NBA from day one. He might even be #5, I think Nate Thurmond probably would have blocked more shots in his prime than Olajuwon.

Both Russell and Wilt would also be high up on the steals list (for a center) had that been an official stat as well during their careers.

If Pete Newell says that Olajuwon has the best footwork he'd ever seen in a big man, I'll take his at his word. Newell's been a coach/scout/consultant for a long time, and he has indeed seen them all.

However, having the best footwork doesn't automatically make you the best player. Charles Barkley, for example, had terrible footwork, but he was still a heck of a player. I wouldn't be able to name too many forwards in NBA history who were better than he was.

Olajuwon had some weaknesses in his game that were not always easy for a casual fan to spot. His passing skills were never that great, and his in-depth knowledge of the game was lacking in some areas (he did not really play basketball at all until his late teens).

His remarkable athleticism made up for his relative lack of overall knowledge. He didnt always have a knowledge or feel for where every one of the other 9 guys were on the court.

When Olajuwon came into the league, for example, some teams used to try to play him physically by getting a strong player to lean on him. But that actually made Olajuwons job easier, because he could feel his man leaning on him and spin off of him (theres that great footwork again). However, Pat Riley discovered that if you play off of him in the post, then Olajuwon would have to physically turn in order to locate the defender (because he couldnt use the spin move). That gave a team time to double team him and take the ball out of his hands (and as a bonus, his poor passing skills could sometimes be exploited).

Thats just one example, but its something that not many people know about. All they ever talk about is the one move he made against David Robinson, and from that alone, they proclaim him as the best center ever.

Olajuwon did win 2 rings, but imho, probably would have only won 1 ring at most had Jordan not retired. Still, you play who you play, and its not his fault Jordan retired early. But Olajuwon did play great in both of those finals, and outplayed both Ewing and (a young, raw) Shaq. Still, although you say that Olajuwon didnt have any great teammates, neither did Ewing so it was one one-man team against another in 94. He deserved both rings that he won. And Im glad he won them. I always liked him and enjoyed watching him play.
tikay0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:36 PM   #41
tikay0
Banned
 
tikay0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,859
tikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong waytikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong way
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Continued.........

Quote:
In the 70s and 80s, you needed several HOF or HOF quality players in order to win a championship. The fact that Olajuwon was able to win 2 titles in the 1990s with those teammates says more about the overall weakness of the NBA and the fact that the talent was spread so thinly than it does about him being the greatest center of all time.

Btw, when Kareem was 39 years old (1986) and Olajuwon was about 23, Kareem was named first team all-NBA over Olajuwon. Kareem destroyed both Olajuwon and Sampson during those days. Dont get me wrong, Olajuwon was great even at that age, but the fact that Kareem was first team all-NBA at age 39 tells us all we need to know about who was better. You dont want to know what Kareem would have done to Olajuwon in his prime!

But Wilt, Russell and Kareem are (in some order) still the 3 best centers to ever play the game. Olajuwon is one of maybe 3 guys who have a legitimate claim to be #4 (along with Moses Malone and Shaq). Walton was actually a better player than Olajuwon as well, but we cant rate him over Hakeem because Waltons career was injury prone.

The 1990s saw a decline in the overall quality of centers. And again, dont get me wrong, its not the fault of Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson or Shaq as to when they were born. They came to the NBA when they did. But the 1990s NBA was becoming loaded down with too many guys who came right out of high school and werent ready for the NBA (other than their potential).
Source(s):
As far as the NBA being tougher when Hakeem won his titles, it wasn't all that tough with Jordan out of the league.

Are you even aware that blocks were not recorded by the NBA until 1974. Wilt retired in 1973, Russell in 1969. Steals were also not an official stat until 1974. Olajuwon's blocked shot totals would be dwarfed by Wilt and Russell had blocks been an official stat.

Russell was the smartest player ever to play the game, by far. It would have taken him no time at all to solve Olajuwon. It wouldn't be long before Russell knew what Hakeem would do before Hakeem knew himself. There were some weaknesses in Olajuwon's post game which require sophisticated analysis. Pat Riley was the one who discovered them. Russell would have easily exploited them. And Olajuwon simply would never get a shot off against Wilt.

Wilt was a 48 min/game man. He averaged 46 min/game over his career. He would have worn Olajuwon out easily simply with FAR superior strength and stamina (not to mention skill).

You wanna talk about Olajuwon's passing? Wilt was the ONLY non-guard ever to lead the NBA in assists.

Are you also aware that Kareem, at age 39, was first team all-NBA over Olajuwon in 1986? Kareem was kicking Olajuwon's a$$ all over the court even at that late age.

Greater athletes? Yeah, we sent great athletes to the Olympics in 2004 and to the World Championships in 2006, and our great athletes got their freakin' heads handed to them by teams which play basketball exactly the way it was played when Russell and Chamberlain played the game. Our 2008 team had to play together during the off season for THREE YEARS just to figure out how to play on the same d**m team.

Wilt and Russell never competed in an NBA full of high school players and one-and-done college players either. And the only players under 6 feet that played in the NBA all played while Olajuwon was playing, not while Wilt and Russell were playing. It was Olajuwon who benefited by playing in a league with a bunch of midgets. Muggsy Bogues FIVE FOOT THREE!!! There were almost no players under 6 foot when Wilt and Russell played, because a player that size would never be given a look. Sebastian Telfair? Please...

When Wilt scored his 100 point game, the Knicks' center was 6'11... he was 2 inches shorter than Wilt. So if Olajuwon's a seven footer, what was his high game against a 6'10 guy?

Russell was also (by FAR) the greatest clutch performer in NBA history... he was 10-0 in game sevens, and he also won his only game 5 of a best of 5 series, meaning he was 11-0 in winner-take-all games. And, in case you think he wasn't contributing much offensively on those championship teams, take a look at his game 7 performances:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=

Oh that's right, can't talk about rings...

Any else ever score 30 and pull down 44 rebounds in the 7th game of the finals? Not bad for a guy who was a 15 ppg scorer during his career, eh?

And as poor a FT shooter as Russell was, even THAT wasn't something he'd let defeat him. I believe he was 14-17 from the foul line in that game seven. Heck, Olajuwon missed more big free throws during his career than Russell did.

As far as the Celtics being a team with lots of HOFers, Russell MADE HOFers out of many of those guys.

Russell had the highest winning percentage, as a player, than any player in history. And the Celtics IMMEDIATELY collapsed the moment he retired, despite the presence of some HOFers.

btw, Russell and Wilt would have had an absolute field day against a robot like Patrick Ewing. Of all the great centers in NBA history, Ewing would have been absolutely the easiest to guard. He was at the other end of the spectrum from Olajuwon in terms of moves. He had about one.

NBA centers have been going downhill during the last 20 years. Which means that truly great players like Olajuwon, Shaq and Robinson played very few games against HOF quality centers. Wilt, in fact, played against more HOF centers than any player in history except Kareem.

Olajuwon might face Ewing twice a year, Shaq twice a year, and David Robinson may 4x a year, if that... Wilt and Russell played against each other 142 times in ten seasons... Olajuwon didn't play 142 games in his career against a HOF center. Then there was Nate Thurmond. And Jerry Lucas. And Willis Reed. And Dave Cowens. And Walt Bellamy. And Bob Lanier. And Bob McAdoo. And Kareem (Wilt and Kareem played 27 games against each other in 3 years....they did not meet during the year Wilt was mostly out). How many games did Olajuwon have to play before he met a HOF center 27 times. Forget it. The level of competition at the center position particularly, has done nothing but gone downhill.

The fact that Kwame Brown has been able to carve out a 10 year career in the NBA shows how weak the league is overall. The NBA has always had players who were very much below average, but they didn't used to last 9 years (as Brown has so far)

Of course, I'm sure you've seen Olajuwon's move against David Robinson in the post. That's probably where your idea originated.

Wilt would have destroyed Olajuwon statistically, and Russell would have beaten him every time. Every...time.

This is not to say that Olajuwon wasn't an amazing player. He was one of my all time favorite players to watch. And what was REALLY amazing about him is that he started playing basketball so late (in his mid-teens). He grew up playing soccer, which accounts for his remarkable footwork.

Anyway, its no crime to be the 4th best center in NBA history. Olajuwon was an awesome player to watch.
tikay0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:37 PM   #42
tikay0
Banned
 
tikay0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,859
tikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong waytikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong way
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shade8780
I'm not mad. Chill bro. I just find it funny

Nah, I think you mad.
tikay0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:40 PM   #43
tikay0
Banned
 
tikay0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,859
tikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong waytikay0 is starting to rub some people the wrong way
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundwave
Honestly, even at the center position I'd take Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, and Hakeem over Russell.

That's not a knock on Russell, but if you have a chance to draft any player in NBA history, I think you'd prefer one who's a dominant scoring threat.

A defender can only impact the game to a certain point, basketball is a sport that favors the offensive player because you can't just tackle or physically hit the offensive player.

H2H Wilt had the better numbers, but Russell did all the little things to help his team anyway way possible to win. When Wilt had the greatest team in NBA history, he beat Bill's Celtics, but guess what. The very next year, Russell led the Celtics from a 3-1 deficit to win the series.

Russell is the GOAT winner, hands down.
tikay0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:42 PM   #44
Shade8780
GOATin
 
Shade8780's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Ireland
Posts: 15,815
Shade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tikay0
Nah, I think you mad.
Nope.
Shade8780 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:43 PM   #45
Shade8780
GOATin
 
Shade8780's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Ireland
Posts: 15,815
Shade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShade8780 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: I'd take Russell > Jordan.

Why did Russell have to retire just when Kareem entered the league?!
Shade8780 is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:28 AM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site















Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy