Russell vs Chamberlain

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from paulliu. Show paulliu's posts

    Re: Russell vs Chamberlain

    In Response to Re: Russell vs Chamberlain:
    [QUOTE]Great point!!!   .....another example...Dave Cowens vs Kareem Abdul Jabbar......at least a 5-6 inch height difference....and a few lbs to boot......the big redhead played him quite well....and in todays NBA....Cowens would also be a star....talent, dedication, drive, and hustle still work in the association....
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    Absolutely.  Cowens played Jabbar really well.  Cowens's intensity, hustle, atheliticism and intelligence would maske him a star in any era.

    Very few people say that Jabbar wouldn't be a top center today.  Hell, I think he would stand head and shoulders above Dwight Howard if he played now.  How many centers today have Jabbar's refinerd skills?  Yet, if you ask him about Cowens he would say Big Red was one worthy adversary.

    Jabbar's career spanned generations in sports terms.  He began his career with the great Oscar Roberston and ended it with the great Magic Johnson.  He played against Wilt, Thurmond, Willis Reed, Wes Unseld, Cowens, Bob Lanier, Moses Malone, Walton, Akeem, Ralph Sampson, Parish, Sikma, etc.  So, the guy has a real basis for commparison.  When asked which center played him the toughest, he always has answered Nate Thurmond.

    There's no doubt that there are more great players today but this doesn't mean that the greats from the past would be just journeymen today.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Gasthoerer. Show Gasthoerer's posts

    Re: Russell vs Chamberlain

    In Response to Re: Russell vs Chamberlain:
    [QUOTE]Very few people say that Jabbar wouldn't be a top center today.  Hell, I think he would stand head and shoulders above Dwight Howard if he played now.  How many centers today have Jabbar's refinerd skills?[/QUOTE]
    Well, that is not a fair comparison as well. The NBA was never ever worse on the 5 Position than today. Hakeem, O'Neal, Duncan and Ewing (in their prime) would all eat Howards lunch, so would Jabbar and Wilt. Even David Robinson (as a similiar type of player) was much better than Howard is today.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from pliu. Show pliu's posts

    Re: Russell vs Chamberlain

    So if Wilt was much better than Howard and Russell played Wilt as well as anyone what does that say about Russell if he were playing today?

    My point is that there are more good players today than in past eras but that the greats from the past would still be stars today though they probably would not be as dominant than the were in their own eras.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: Russell vs Chamberlain

    Well, lets really look at this. Naturally there are more great players today than years ago because players today get paid millions and are marketed like crazy! That would naturally attract many more athletes, who start as young kids not just on the playground, but in gyms getting trained, getting workouts for strength and skills. By the time these kids are in HS, they got more training than most of the NBA players in the 50's-60's

    Specifically Russell, I get a kick out of these people saying he'd be a good role player today. Most of you never even saw the guy play. HE was 6'9", some say taller.. I dont really care. He was a track star... when someone posted he caught a player at the key from behind starting at half court, it wasnt cause he was determined...he was just plain fast as &**&

    He anticipated, he was smart and athletic. Without the benefit of any modern day training, Russell wold still be a star in todays game. With the extra training and specialization, hed be a mega star

    How can we agree Cowens handled Jabbar (which Ive posted about before).. Cowens was what, 6'8"??  How can we see Charles Barkley dominate his position at 6'5"??  Charles was a superstar against players much bigger than he. He rebounded big time too. 

    Height has its place but it isnt the only qualifier for greatness. Tiny Archibald was too smal, right? Look, there are always exception to the prototypical player. Remember rebounding is a function of positioning, timing  and boxing out... I read somewhere that most rebounds are made below the rim...  Does that explain why so many 7 footers get 4 boards per game? Why Perk doesnt get that many? Why Barkley got tons of them??

    Russell  was short by todays standards of centers ( although Ive seen him listed at 6'11" years ago but who knows) but if he was 7'1" and had the same resume, hed get more respect from those who dont feel hed be dominant in todays game. Well, Im here to tell you Bill Russell would be a superstar today.. he had all the skillset and physical/mental ability to compete against todays NBA players and rule.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Russell vs Chamberlain

    Right on Karl!  ......what are the two terms that everyone talks about these days?  ......"length" and "basketball IQ"..........Russ was 6-10 but he had the "length" of a 7 footer.....along with amazing leaping skills and quickness...as has been noted, he was a track star (including the high jump)......as for his basketball IQ?  .....the man has no peer.....he beat everyone both physically and mentally....for fans that only read about him....you cannot be objective....take Babe Ruth (and his pot belly & spindly legs).....hall of fame caliber player as a pitcher and a hitter....could steal bases and throw out runners....he would be in better shape with today's regimen....and he would still be "the Babe"....this coming from a true Yankee hater....
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from trouts. Show trouts's posts

    Re: Russell vs Chamberlain

     I don't know if anyone else has mentionned this but Russell was an innovator in that after a made-basket or rebound he whipped quick,accurate, outlet passes the likes of which noone had seen up to that time. What we now call fast-break basketball really started with this guy.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Russell vs Chamberlain

    another good post....another good point.....
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Russell vs Chamberlain

    ....continuing to read the book.....great read......Russ/Chamberlain....so many thngs to consider....stay tuned
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Indiansbacker. Show Indiansbacker's posts

    Re: Russell vs Chamberlain

    In Response to Re: Russell vs Chamberlain:
    [QUOTE]I posted the comparisons earlier....Russ played with 4 Top 50 guys.....Wilt played with 6......the last 3 years Wilt clearly played on better teams in Philly and LA....not only did Wilt's teams not go on to win titles the two years following his first one.....but his teams lost both years to a clearly aging Celtic squad.... Russ was the difference.....and winning is the sole reason they played the game.................well,other than riches and fame of course The writer mentions the fact that Wilt was so obsessed with winning the assist title that he kept checking with the official scorer often arguing over plays that he thought should have been called his way.....he also told certain teammates that he would feed them if they were hot and he got on teammates when they didn't convert...this is verified by his teammates... Wilt was also obsessed with never fouling out of a game....and played poor defense when he got to 4-5 fouls...this is also documented by former players... a quote from Wilt: "I think (Russ) may have felt that with my natural ability and willingness to work hard, my team could have won an NBA Championship every year if I was as totally committed to victory as he was....I wish I had won all those championships, but I really think I grew more as a man in defeat than Russell did in victory"...from the book "Wilt"........so Wilt didn't work hard enough (or smart enough) to lead his team to the title.....rather, his focus was on setting records.....it's no wonder Jerry West is quoted as saying he would take Russ over Wilt as a teammate....
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    Duke, you make good points, but I agree with most of what Karlost has posted.  Wilt was the most dominant force in basketball history (Jordan included!).  Wilt was also one of the top five greatest athletes of the 20th Century (along with Ali and my fave, Jim Brown).  Wilt was also a very complicated man.  Something in his psyche kept him from being a champion like Russ.  Wilt always said nobody loved "Goliath."  Like the other Greek gods (e.g., Ali, Brown), they all had their Achilles heels....                  
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Russell vs Chamberlain

    Indian..............you also make good points my friend.....there is no question that Wilt was one of the greatest athletes any sport has ever seen....
     

Share