Answer this simple question: Does Russell win as many Championships without Bob Cousey????
Oh back to my hockey analogy which some missed the point.
My point is some guys are just lucky, that is all . . .
Of coarse you knew that when Russell arrived in Boston for the first half of his career and the "first Celtic team" I mentioned, he walked in a locker room that had
FOUR Hall of Famers siting there waiting for him, namely Bob Cousy, Bill Sharman, Tommy Hiensohn, and Frank Ramsey, a few years later they were joined by
TWO MORE HOFs in Sam Jones and KC Jones, and later by John Hevlicek (of coarse some of the first HOFs had retired). and not to mention the fact that that team was coached by a HOF Coach by the name of Red Auerbach. During his career as a celtic Bill Russell always had
AT LEAST THREE HOF teammates. Which brings the count to that team had at least 4 HOFs on the team at any one given year between 1956 and 1969. After Jones boys and Russell retired 1969, the Cs only had one HOF, - Hevlicek, it was not till they got Cowens and few years later would they have a second and it was not till Larry Bird Cs did they have three again.
Regardless you need to factor in the factor that Russells
always had AT
LEAST 4 HOF on his team. whereas the 70s at best you had 2 at one time and in the 80s 3, well 4 with that one year w/ Walton, and btw they won that year, '86. (wink wink - see what happens to teams in a sport that fields only 5 players but have 4 HOFs on the bench, they win titles, Russel had 4 HOF for his entire career, see the pattern, all we need to do is to connect the dots . . .)
Hey Sam Jones played from 1959-1969 and has 10 titles in 11 years which is a higher winning percentage (91%) than Russell medicore 11 in 13 years (85%). Yah that's it, it wasn't Russell after all, it was Sam Jones, Hey . . . what kind of success did the Cs have without Sam Jones, they got only one title. It wasn't till Sam Jones arrive on the seen and help the Cs run off 10 titles in 11 years. Yah that the ticket, its was Sam Jones afterall, how foolish have we Bostonian fans have been, its was Sam Jones all this time and we never knew it . . .
Sam is probably one of the top 100 and likely top 50 players of all time (I think he was voted once to the NBA top 50 team), but even though he was a key key part of the Cs success as an offense threat and tall Gaurd, and help the Cs win 10 in 11 years, most will not put Sam Jones as the GOAT . . .
So there is my point, great players are great and can help there team wins titles, but some players, Russell, Richard, Beliveau, Cournoyer, Sam Jones, etc, come at a time in which there teams are STACKED with talent and their repsective careers come at a time which the time is everything . . . remember after the Jones Boys and Russell retired, the Cs only had one HOF in 1970, whereas in
each of the the prior 13 years they had at least 4
And please don't hand me any foolishness that Bill Russell made his teammates HOFs, that is just sillyness and shows a lack of respect for hard working talented players who earned the right to be in the BB HOF . . .
If you don't like my hockey analogy then take my Sam Jones analogy, the more accomplished winner that Bill Russell :singing:
Bill Russell was great, really great, made some key contribution to the game, keep the block inbound, know the shooter's tendency and as such where the rebound might go, etc, is very likely the greatest defender in NBA history, but I don't look at his 11 rings and defacto make him number 1 no more that I would credit it to the "more accomplished" Sam Jones . . . (see how i can use titles to make someone; namely Sam Jones,"more accomplished" than one of the 5 or 10 all time great, Bill Russell . . . its easy
