It's very frustrating for this old timer to see the lack of respect out there for Bill. How can a player who won 11 titles in 13 years (one of the misses was when he was injured) be ranked behind two players who, combined, have less titles than he does? And a couple of Bill's titles at the end came with him as a player-coach. His last game, which came against a Lakers team on the road in a finals game 7, was a win. And three of the starters for that LA team were Jerry West, Elgin Baylor and Wilt, all HOFers.
There was a stat a while ago about how clutch Bill was. In 2 seasons of college at SF and 13 seasons in Boston, Bill was in about 20 games where had he lost his season was over. He won every single one of those. Contrast that to LeBrick James, who was shooting for some vague best record in closed-out playoff games on the road last night. I only knew about it because the announcers were ejaculating over the thought of it for much of the game. He got blown out instead.
Now a question. If the NBA took the 32 teams they have now, got rid of half of them and then redrafted, would the league be stronger or weaker? Silly question right? And yet there are a few fans who minimize what Russell did because there were less teams. Huh? Bill Russell faced tough competition and tough players every game. Another difference that goes to the overall strength of the league is that many of the titles for teams didn't come after finishing in first place.
Another argument I hear against Bill is that the current teams have a tougher time in the playoffs because they face more teams to win. The truth is that the NBA only played one less round then and there were no creampuffs for opening rounds like there are now. When I watch the watered down version of the NBA that exists now I can only laugh. I wish I had a nickel for every time I see some big guy throw up a brick from 30 feet.
And yet another lame argument that I hear is how much bigger NBA players are now. Apparently those fans never heard of Wilt Chamberlain or Wes Unseld. Combined with the less amount of teams, all the top guys played each other a hell of a lot more than the top guys play each other now.
I was lucky enough to watch Bill Russell play a few times. Back in the 60's and 70's Boston was big on hockey. I could pay a dollar and see the greatest NBA player of all time and even pick my seat if it wasn't a playoff game. The man was a 6-9, 6-10 jackrabbit that could leap through the ceiling and run like the wind. When he blocked a shot he didn't swipe it into the stands, he guided the ball to a teammate. In college and in the Olympics he was an offensive threat but concentrated more on defense with the C's. I'm glad that he did.
As great as Larry Bird was, I'd still take Bill over him, but I'd take Bird over everyone else, and I mean everyone.
There was a stat a while ago about how clutch Bill was. In 2 seasons of college at SF and 13 seasons in Boston, Bill was in about 20 games where had he lost his season was over. He won every single one of those. Contrast that to LeBrick James, who was shooting for some vague best record in closed-out playoff games on the road last night. I only knew about it because the announcers were ejaculating over the thought of it for much of the game. He got blown out instead.
Now a question. If the NBA took the 32 teams they have now, got rid of half of them and then redrafted, would the league be stronger or weaker? Silly question right? And yet there are a few fans who minimize what Russell did because there were less teams. Huh? Bill Russell faced tough competition and tough players every game. Another difference that goes to the overall strength of the league is that many of the titles for teams didn't come after finishing in first place.
Another argument I hear against Bill is that the current teams have a tougher time in the playoffs because they face more teams to win. The truth is that the NBA only played one less round then and there were no creampuffs for opening rounds like there are now. When I watch the watered down version of the NBA that exists now I can only laugh. I wish I had a nickel for every time I see some big guy throw up a brick from 30 feet.
And yet another lame argument that I hear is how much bigger NBA players are now. Apparently those fans never heard of Wilt Chamberlain or Wes Unseld. Combined with the less amount of teams, all the top guys played each other a hell of a lot more than the top guys play each other now.
I was lucky enough to watch Bill Russell play a few times. Back in the 60's and 70's Boston was big on hockey. I could pay a dollar and see the greatest NBA player of all time and even pick my seat if it wasn't a playoff game. The man was a 6-9, 6-10 jackrabbit that could leap through the ceiling and run like the wind. When he blocked a shot he didn't swipe it into the stands, he guided the ball to a teammate. In college and in the Olympics he was an offensive threat but concentrated more on defense with the C's. I'm glad that he did.
As great as Larry Bird was, I'd still take Bill over him, but I'd take Bird over everyone else, and I mean everyone.
