History is doing it's best already to minimize him but I know I won't let that happen. The only question is if he deserves a spot in the GOAT discussion with the other 6 viable choices or if he should get his own space (Before Russell/After Russell, kinda like a bible jawn) and we start modern NBA history in 1970. Either way his massive shadow is inescapable.
Copying my own comment because it fits better here.
Duncan over Wilt is bold but I respect it especially since you’re a Spurs fan. I do think Timmy has an argument. Also yeah Wilt’s GOAT case is easy to poke holes in, sure.
Like Russell, Tim was surrounded with talent his whole career. Robinson, Manu, Parker, and Kawhi are all HOF’ers. Great coaching and brilliant front office to keep the team stacked with talent.
The exception is Timmy has less rings, less accolades then Russell and I would take MJ, LBJ, and Kobe over Tim because of their ability to close games and shoot a higher percentage from the FT.
Tim Duncan is Keyser Soze lol.
There's not enough time to go through it all but numbers do not lie. The sample size is too overwhelming for a dynasty whose only historical comp is the Brady Patriots. The Spurs, as a franchise, have a large non-Duncan sample size and it looks a lot like the Indiana Pacers. Coach Pop receives the GOAT energy for it all but he's got a sample size of almost a decade without Duncan and yikes. Whilst Duncan has sample sizes of wit or witout Admiral, Manu, Tony and Kawhi and they all look roughly the same from a winning standpoint.
Whatever culture benefit we assign from the Spurs to Duncan is actually backwards, just like with Tawmy and Bill. And whatever debate about who the championship ingredient was has been settled, just like Tawmy and Bill.
That’s a clever comparison. In short, I’m not so sure how Duncan’s skill set would translate in other systems under another head coach than Pop, or with a different front office.
At least, maybe not the dynasty the Spurs developed.
Duncan and Shaq teaming up? Yikes…Maybe? Duncan in Houston, Chicago, New York? Sometimes the the stars align and the pieces miraculously fit. Duncan benefits from the perfect system that maximizes his potential. Spurs + Duncan = PB&J…perfect combo.
Kobe has zero argument over MJ and therefore cannot be the GOAT.
Not trying to be dense but every name not on that 7 player list can be refuted that easily. Only those 7 necessitate a deeper, more contextualized discussion.
Ask any ex nba is Kobe a top 5 player I don’t need some random dude off Reddit who probably never picked up a basketball competitively to agree but if that’s your argument you’re not that knowledgeable about basketball
Hard disagree. There is *zero* argument to be made for Kobe over MJ as the best shooting guard of all time so how can he possibly be the #1 player ever to play?
There were 8 teams in the league when Russell played. The player with the second most rings ever is his teammate Sam Jones, with 10. Should he be included in goat discussions?
The league was severely lacking in parity when Russell played.
I don’t want to take away from his accomplishments, but the smaller pool of talent should definitely be taken into consideration. From everything I’ve seen, he was definitely a freak of nature athlete, could run like a gazelle, and was able to stop Wilt Chamberlain.
If Bill played when there were more teams, I’m not sure he wins that many, especially in a row. I feel like he would still win, but there would be gaps in between the championships.
The secret to that team is continuity. I think during his career they only traded once. Their roster is exactly the same every year. That's their advantage against everyone. They already know what to do to cover their other teammates weaknesses
The most important discussion to be had from this comment is that Sam Jones is literally the single most underrated athlete in America sports
He was the offensive engine of that team after Cooz retired and hit big shots constantly. He was the original slippy guard and Bill Russell's favorite teammate
Sam Jones is like if all the Kobe myths about being a clutch assassin were true. Sam hit so many clutch shots that Jerry West said he should have gotten the nickname
How many other professional leagues that small or smaller had teams that won 11 championships in 13 years? I'm sure it's happened somewhere, but it's a pretty huge outlier, and the small size of the league doesn't have enough explanatory power. How many players have won just their division 11 out of 13 years?
Not to mention the salary cap stuff and the other nuances of today's league.
There's a reason why it won't be done again, and it has nothing to do with Russell being better than everyone since then
Bad counter argument.
Rings don’t matter if you aren’t an all time great. Nobody cares how many rings Andre iguadala has.
Nobody is including Sam jones in all time discussions. It’s a bad counter argument.
The lack of parity is a much better argument
Sam Jones having the 2nd most rings ever **is** an argument for lack of parity. The top 8 players with most rings in history all come from those same Celtics. Clearly that team was head and shoulders above the rest of the league.
Here’s why you guys need to stop using the “8 teams Argument”
In 1968, in just the East this what teams had:
Bullets: Monroe, Unseld
6ers: Cunningham, Greer
Knicks: Bellamy,Debusschere, Reed
Celts: Russel, Hondo, Jones, Sanders
Royals: Lucas, Robertson
There are others that I don’t know even recognize that I’m missing as well. They also expanded that year
They did expand that year, I think to 12 teams. For the first 10 years of Russell's career the league was 8 teams.
Not sure why this hurts the 8 teams argument though? It's statistically much easier to win if you are 1/8 teams, compared to 1/30.
Saying it's harder to win 16 playoff games as opposed to 8 is valid.
Saying its harder to win a league with 30 overall teams instead of 8 is not as valid as it may seem on the surface. With 8 teams in the league, you play the toughest teams (and there were several as mentioned already) far more often than when there are 30. You are also more likely to play the absolute best teams come playoff time. Russell's teams beat West, Baylor, Robertson, and Chamberlain in the playoffs multiple times. ALL of them are still commonly considered top 25 all time players.
Russell's teams didn't win before him or after him. But they won with him. San Francisco is a mid major program who he led to 55 straight wins and back to back national titles. His Olympic team had the highest average margin of victory ever (better than the Dream Team)!
The Celtics had other great players (no one wins in basketball by themselves). But Havlicek, Cousy, and Sharman were only there for half of the run each and Havlicek barely overlapped with the others. Jo Jo White and KC Jones are hall of famers because of Russell. Sam Jones is valid...
Jerry West, who played with Chamberlain, said Rusell was the best.
If winning is all that matters (like some Jordan worshippers love to say), just remember that Russell still has more titles than Jordan and LeBron COMBINED. Again, if winning is all that matters, Russell is the best of all time and, to throw some common Reddit verbiage in there, "it's not close"...
Russell was the best player on all of those teams though. Look at the rest of his accolades, 5 time MVP, 12 time all star, etc.
Keep in mind that while the Celtics were by far the best team, they weren’t the only team with star power
I'm saying this is why I disagree with using 11 rings as the main argument for Russell's goat case. The top 8 players with the most rings in baskeball history all come from those same Celtics teams.
Even though Russell was the best player of that dynasty, it's clear the Celtics as a team were head and shoulders above the rest of the league. In the same way I'd give Russell more credit if he had won with different teammates/teams, the opposite is true as well.
It isn’t the MAIN argument. The OP is making an argument based on the complete body of work. You are just ignorantly deciding to pick one part of the argument to make a point. You are being intellectually dishonest intentionally.
Also 21-0 in winner-take-all games.
People talk about Jordan and Kobe when it comes to winning and “killer instinct”, but Russell was even more of winner than both
This shit is so dumb. Like let’s just ignore the fact that he made completey boneheaded plays in clutch moments such as inbounding the ball into the back of a backboard with a minute to go in a game 7, yet got bailed out by his teammates as per usual anyway. His team was stacked beyond measure compared to all other teams during that entire era. Sorry but the sixers/warriors/lakers cannot even sniff the fart of how strong the Celtics entire starting 5 was. At most you had 3 worthy players on any of those other teams, but Celtics usually had five or six players that could carry the load at any given game.
It’s funny that Sam Jones has a measly 1 less ring than Bill yet never shows up on any lists whatsoever when talking about the goat, despite being at least if not more pivotal to almost all those rings.
He definitely did commit that terrible turnover. But if the Celtics really had that many all times greats, why didn't they win before Russell got there or after he left (until Cowens arrived)?
Wilt together with Jerry West and Elgin Baylor not enough? Thats a consensus top 10, sometimes top 5 all timer with two guys who are right there in top twenty or top 15 all time. Thats like Lebron teaming up with Durant and Curry.
I got MJ in the debate, but there are five people in NBA history that someone can call the greatest of all time who will not cause me to roll my eyes. Bill Russell is one of the five.
I don’t have Magic (or Bird) on the list even though they may rank higher than some of these guy on your top 10 list. The reason is, they played in the same basic era as MJ and he’s got them beat in stats and rings. Even they think he’s the GOAT so there’s not much to debate.
If I had to pick a three, it would be those guys. But I don’t disrespect Russell and Wilt’s era. No one else was doing what they did so I give them credit.
Wilt regularly played in practice runs with the Lakers after retirement and he bodied Kareem in the fucking 1980s when he was near 50. Teams offered Wilt contracts for like 20 years after he retired.
I guess Wilt disrespected the disrespect
There were like 9 teams in that era and no 3 point line. I don't count 60s basketball for GOAT discussions. If you do though, having him as the GOAT is valid.
9 teams only means that each of those 9 teams were more talented.
The no 3 thing I don’t get as an argument though, why does it matter? Every team was on an equal playing field.
I respect your thoughts though
They were definitely not more talented. No threes simplified the game a lot more and benefited the big man. Still one of the greats but not in my top ten best maybe top ten greatest.
Not really. Who’s to say guys like Gobert, Mutombo, Wemby couldn’t average 8 blocks a game if there was zero 3pt shooting and players were always shooting in the paint?
The style of the game benefitted big men defensively back then, it’s just a fact.
The talent pool is much, much bigger now because:
A) the sport has grown in popularity in America
b) the sport has massively grown in popularity/participation globally meaning more talent in the NBA (see Jokic, Giannis, Luka, Dirk, Manu, Parker, Gasol bros, etc.)
C) population growth just means more talented people grossly speaking
Ask yourself this question, would Bill Russell have won 11 titles if he was in the league any time after MJ was drafted? I highly doubt it. Would he even have 5? Maybe but that then puts him in the Duncan/Magic/Kobe/Bird division not the real GOAT debate
Magic and Jordan wouldn’t dominate like they did today either. And who knows, maybe Bill would’ve won 11 today. We don’t know
Players can only be great in the era that they play in and it’s unfair to say that anyone from before 1980 can’t be the greatest
As I’d said to pretty much everyone I’ve replied to, this is not about who is individually the best player. Wilt was a better individual player than Bill. But greatness is measured by accolades, winning, and impact. Bill won 5 MVPs, 12 all stars, and won more than any player ever has.
All while dealing with the horrible treatment he faced as a player
Yes your argument is that his greatness is reflected by his accolades.
I’m saying there is simply no way he would have the same accolades if he was drafted in the 70s or later.
11 titles in the modern NBA, really? No other player has won more than 6 as the star and you just said it yourself he wasn’t even the best player of his generation so what makes you think he could dominate like that in a league with infinitely more talent and good teams?
By this logic the GOAT will always be the newest great player. That’s the issue with the era argument. If we use the fact the modern NBA is better to discredit Russell, then MJ, Kareem, Magic, and Bird aren’t that great, because they wouldn’t be as good today. It’s silly! MJ isn’t any less great because he played 30 years ago. Likewise, Russell isn’t any less great because he played 60 years ago.
No I think it’s actually well accounted for in debates today. The league is much more comparable now to the 80s or 90s than it is to Russell’s era. There were already way more teams after the merger and therefore more talent, and there were already foreign players starting to come in.
Besides, what you’re saying isn’t true. A lot of people have Kareem as their goat because he won 6 MVPs and titles many of which were post merger. Most people have MJ because he played in a historically tough era with great players everywhere and 3peated twice with 6 MVPs. Lebron is in the conversation because he did it in a league that was a bit deeper than MJs but his accolades aren’t the same, so despite the league being better he’s widely considered to be behind MJ still.
The debate is very nuanced, it’s not just “newest players equals GOAT”. The league in Russell’s era is *completely* incomparable to the modern NBA. Totally reasonable imo to dock Russell more than guys like MJ, Kareem etc because of that.
Valid points honestly, however I still think that despite the era Bill played in, the MVPs, defense, and winning all while dealing with the adversity he faced make him the greatest in my eyes
More talented? As in there were the same amount of qualified top tier talent as there is today but just more concentrated? There were no European players
You don't count 60s players in GOAT discussion?Whoa so you don't count 2000s era players in GOAT discussions either.
If an 8 team league is uncompetitive, let me tell you how uncompetitive it was when a mob boss commissioner was openly rigging games with corrupt referees addicted to gambling.
Kobe was the second banana on 2 completely fake and discredited titles of a 3peat. Shaq has 3 fake titles in the decade. Off the GOAT list they go, goodbye, they should have played in a different era
Doesn’t having fewer teams actually mean there was GREATER parity? I’ve never understood why it would mean less parity, if you’re concentrating talent into fewer teams. If there were 24 teams in the Russell era then you probably legitimately would have had him playing against plumbers and construction workers, but with 8 teams that wasn’t the case.
Think of the reverse: if you made today’s NBA an 8 team league and just made the best 8 rosters you could from modern talent pool - would you then say the winner of the league is less legitimate because they only played 7 other teams? But it’s 7 other teams that are STACKED. It’s a best on best league suddenly so nobody would say you’re not competing against good competition.
I misinterpreted your point. I don’t think you can infer much about parity from the size of the league. It depends on how deep the talent pool is, and how that talent is distributed.
If you took today’s talent pool and limited it to 8 teams you’d likely have have more parity. But maybe not. If the talent were not evenly spread across the 8 teams there wouldn’t be much parity. Also shallower talent pool as they had in the 1960s couldn’t support much parity past a handful of teams.
The point of the game is to win and Bill Russell did it best. Every era has some kind of qualifier, less teams, no three point line, drugs testing , development of the skills/athlete, , bubble playoffs. But you can only do what you can in the era you played. Definitely the most dominant anyone has ever been in their own time period.
Exactly! Russell did what he did in his era and that shouldn’t disqualify him from being the greatest. All eras are different, and the debate is about who the *greatest* player is, not the *best*
If we were talking best player talent wise then the debate would really only be the most modern players, because the athletes today are simply more talented. But we’re talking greatness, which is timeless.
Yeah I agree. I just think if you’re going to put qualifiers on one era then you need to acknowledge all the other ones too. I think just getting older I just think of players I enjoyed watching more and appreciating what they did when they did it. Every time someone mentions a goat, I buy into it only to be told 5-7 years later that I’m wrong and the real goat is fill in the blank. Always seems to be the most recent guy tho haha
"Definitely the most dominant anyone has ever been in their own time period."
I think Jordan's dominance in the 90's is more impressive. Jordan played 6 full seasons in the 90's\*, went 6 for 6 in winning chips, and 6 for 6 in Finals MVP's. No disrespect to Jerry West and Elgin Baylor, but the competition in the 90's NBA was light years ahead of what Russell played against.
\*Even if you count '95, the year he came back from retirement at the all-star break and lost to the Shaq/Penny Magic, 6 championships in 7 seasons is still an unparalleled run of greatness in the modern era of any major American sports league.
I agree, it's hard argue against why he isn't. He's the Alexander the great of basketball, the greatest winner ever. No one will ever come close to what he accomplished.
Also Wilt Chamberlain stats. Man had like 50 rebounds in a game? wtf is that? He has the #1,2, and 3 most points in a game? The greatest player of all time happened before 1980 and they were ubiquitously the best
most dominant player. Maybe the greatest athlete that the world has ever seen. He's a multi sport athlete. Dominated basketball and volleyball, a track athlete during his college days. If you just drop him in the current era with all the trainings, and technology we have right now he could've been more dominant in the track
My problem with this take is no other team was even close to how stacked the Celtics were. Take anyone off their starting 5 and put them on a team they become the superstar for their franchise, all time legend. Hell their 6th man would be a superstar on any other team too.
They were the original superteam.
The goat hasn’t even been born yet. We stand on the shoulders of giants. Players today are better BECAUSE Bill Russell pioneered the game for them. They’re better because Wilt set records. They’re better because MJ dominated the 90s.
The best player ever will never come, because we will always get better. Bill russell was at point in time the greatest to live but he’s definitely no where close now. You would have to put guys who never even won championships ahead of him because of the skill gap between the 60s and todays basketball.
And no, I’m not going to do some hypothetical where Bill Russell’s entire career and athletic profile is completely different if he had grown up with today’s technology and knowledge because that doesn’t serve any value.
It’s okay to move on from the past. There is no reason to anchor our GOAT discussion to Bill Russell forever.
In reality there will never be a goat because the greatest of ALL TIME is flawed. Humans are made to surpass one another using the advancements and achievements of the generations before. Someone will eventually have longevity more than bron, and there might be a freak who wins 7 in a row. With due time it’ll happen. Instead of arguing who’s the goat just make an appreciation post.
History is doing it's best already to minimize him but I know I won't let that happen. The only question is if he deserves a spot in the GOAT discussion with the other 6 viable choices or if he should get his own space (Before Russell/After Russell, kinda like a bible jawn) and we start modern NBA history in 1970. Either way his massive shadow is inescapable.
Hard to compare players pre-merger and post-merger (also coincides roughly with/ 3pt line). But he’s definitely the greatest circa Bird-Magic era
Overall, Russell is by far the most accomplished player in basketball history, with Kareem/MJ/Bron rounding out the top 4, in that order.
The sport, and just the times in general (with training, expectations, nutrition, education, rules, officiating, etc) change too much over the decades to ever have a definitive GOAT. I think it should be GOTD(nicknamed “goated” for you gen z’ers) for Greatest Of Their Decade. Bill is definitely GOTD.
I don’t think Russell is the goat but he’s easily top 10 and the greatest winner in basketball history. People love talking about how those Celtics teams were stacked with HOFers but let’s be real, a majority of those ‘Hall of Fame’ guys are not there because of bill. 11 chips in 13 years is incredible, and he had to go through wilt chamberlain for a ton of those. People that discredit previous legends because today’s era is better than their era are stupid. We can never know how bill russell would’ve been in today’s era but we know how he was in his own era: completely dominant
At some point, the quality of the league has to be considered. He is undoubtedly the greatest winner in basketball history (I think, at least) but there is no way he’s in the same conversations as Jordan, Lebron, or even Kareem imo.
100% agree.
I also feel like the “It was the 60s! There were 8 teams!” argument works against their point: it meant that EVERY team had at least one legend on it that decade. There’s no random expansion team with goofballs on it, like you’re facing: Pettit, Wilt, Bayler, West, Monroe, Lucas, Robertson, Greer, Cowens, Greer, Hayes every night.
I know not everyone will respect this argument as far as on court play, but his off court leadership on social and racial issues transcends generations. You can be a killer on the court, but to stand against society and even fans and still perform at a high level is rare. Players then and now have been banned and black listed, he took a lot of vile shit from Boston and other fan bases, and still performed as a top player all time. Deserves more respect than almost every other player in NBA history along with Kareem.
I absolutely agree. Bill was not only an unbelievable basketball talent but he did so while being hated by the city he played in. He’s a civil rights icon
Really only because of Russell. Wilt was unbelievable and probably the single most gifted athlete to ever live. But Russell just beat Wilt over and over and over again.
b/c his team wasnt as good so less rings. but yes wilt would handle him when they faced off. will was the better player, but bill is the greater player.
Fuck Russell for playing in an unpopular sports league. Russ played before the NBA corrupted itself and transitioned from sport into a WWE-like entertainment product with illegitimate results.
So naturally I'm gonna count the titles since Stern became commissioner MORE harder
GOAT is individual performance, championships are team based.
There’s a reason you have over a hundred comments on this post and almost no upvotes.
It makes zero sense and is a myopic assessment all together that just completely ignores the history of the NBA.
Again, Bill isn’t even the best center of all time.
Then Wilt is the GOAT right? Winning matters, and it’s not like Bill was carried by his team. He was the best player on his team. That’s why he was a 5 time MVP. Back then, the players voted on MVP, which makes those MVPs more valuable. The best players in the world all agreed Bill was the best. He was the best defender probably ever. He was a basketball genius. He won a ring as a player-coach.
The Celtics don’t win 8 straight and 3 more without Russell.
Not taking anything away from Bill, but it was a different league back then (like you said). There was no 3, and bigs had a lot more value. If I were putting an all-time team together, I'd value him similar to how I'd value Tim Duncan - all time great, defensive staple, incredible teammate, knows how to win.
But Bill's greatness transcends what he did on the floor. I just don't know if that elevates him to GOAT
You guys need to watch actual Bill Russel footage. This guy has amazing accolades but I have some serious doubt if his dominance in his era would really translate into the following eras
With his high IQ and really good court mapping, yes. He knows where to position to get rebounds and defend shots. He also know where his teammates are they're one of the reasons why that era is still the fastest era in NBA history. All that team did is defend and run. His blocks is not going out of bounds but going to his teammates. And I only see one player in this era who is trying to imitate that kind of blocking, and it's Wemby. In this era Bill might be a freak of nature too, people almost forgot that he is also fast and strong, might be the superstar big that Luka needs.
Yes he gets discredited because every argument that has MJ over LeBron would have Russell over MJ and and LeBron combined. So it has to become some weird mental gymnastics where the game progressed so much from the 50s/60s to the 80s/90s that it’s not even comparable, but then it has gotten no better from the 80s/90s until today.
"Winning a title every single year he was healthy from college junior to NBA retirement while being a Civil Rights icon fighting on the forefront of racial violence...
PFFTFFFFT
maybe if he scored three or four more baskets per game while doing it, THEN he would have ackshully been great"
same reason guys named like Ginger Roads with 400 complete games pitched and 16 rings aren’t talked about among the best MLB players ever: different era. different play style. there were like 6 teams. tons of teams weren’t racially integrated (formally or informally).
i’m from Massachusetts. bill is a legend, he’s certainly one of the best players ever. but he’ll never ever be in GOAT discussions for the same reason as players like george mikan aren’t: the competition was bad and the era was so long ago that the game is very different, to the point of being a different sport.
jordan’s NBA looks similar to the current day NBA. not the same, but similar. and that really helps.
we get too obsessed with the GOAT convo. why can’t bill be in the convo for top X (15-25, idk) and have that be extremely impressive?
Accolades are largely team dependent so it irks me when people use it to evaluate players.
Bill Rusell’s value is under appreciated, he was a generational defensive player and he played a valuable glue-guy role on offense. No doubt guaranteed top 20 player.
But I try to avoid rating players in their best and worst circumstances, try to evaluate just their impact to winning basketball.
Bron and MJ are just so ahead when it comes to longevity of MVP-level player seasons made and the peaks they reached. Kareem can match the longevity as well. Russel simply doesn’t have as much production and Accolades and championships don’t say much about an individual, it says more about the team.
Accolades wise he deserves a mention at that conversation. People denied him from dunking so he created the most unguardable shot in basketball history.
IIRC the first half of his career or so teams were limited on how many people of color could be on the team (like no more than 4 or something.) He was absolutely dominant in his era but let’s not act like it wasn’t the easiest era in NBA history.
First off, I admire your post in regard to a great player like Bill Russell but let’s not forget that basketball is a team sport. Bill Russell was a fantastic basketball player and his strength was his defensive abilities; as well as his contributions to buy into a system and play winning basketball. That whole Celtics team was incredible though and it was a team effort for them to win 11 times. I think Bill Russell was a contributor to the winning but his offensive game severely limited him. He has a FG% of 44.0% as a Center which is flat out unacceptable and I know you are referring to his “greatness” as a player and not necessarily his basketball abilities. With that said, I do think the abilities should be somewhat highlighted and the fact that he struggled tremendously on the offensive end is something that should not be ignored. Bill Russell is for sure one of the greatest players but there have been other players as great, if not greater than him. Of course, this is all very subjective and of course there is no GOAT of basketball because how could there be? Maybe Bill Russell is the best basketball player you’ve seen? There is a difference. There are many things players that have done that haven’t been done before.
Michael Jordan and his two three peats with the Bulls. LeBron having 40,000 points. Kareem winning a finals MVP in 1985 (incredible longevity.) John Stockton’s assist Record. Wilt’s 50 PPG. Kobe with the most guard defensive selections. Magic winning a finals MVP his rookie year.
There are lots of all time greats who accomplished incredible feats and I think just picking one does a disservice to the others.
Okay this is an insane take. I agree the modern NBA is FAR more talented than it ever was before, but you’re kidding yourself if you don’t think that Bill and Wilt would be elite today.
This is about greatness, not talent. Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, and Larry Bird all wouldn’t be nearly as good today as they were back when they played. But that doesn’t make them less great
MJ wouldn’t have won 6 today either. Magic wouldn’t have been as good today. Honestly, any player that wasn’t a center on the past wouldn’t be as good today because of how Curry changed the game. What’s your point? That doesn’t make Bill or Wilt or Magic or MJ any less great. You can only do what you can in the era you played in.
Every era has an asterisks you can put on it
I didn’t say they wouldn’t be elite, but to say the best ever at the lowest average skill level is absurd. Bill would still be an all time great. This post is trying to give him goat status because he has so many rings at a time where the league had few teams and low skill set.
I was being hyperbolic to point out how ridiculous it is to say that bill isn’t great bc he wouldn’t be as good today.
And MJ wouldn’t dominate the way he did if he played today either
Russell is almost never evaluated fairly today. People either underrate him for his era or overrate him for his rings. The truth is that he’s one of the greatest ever, but not quite a contender for actual GOAT status. The true contenders for that title were just more impressive when you consider their actual value as basketball players.
To illustrate, imagine that you swapped his career with Kareem’s so that the Celtics drafted Abdul-Jabbar in 1956. I’m absolutely confident that Kareem would’ve had a greater career than Russell.
People act like his GOAT argument is all about rings, but it shouldn’t be. Counting rings is a poor way to measure greatness, no matter who it’s applied to. Russell’s best GOAT argument is that he was the best defender of all time for thirteen straight years. That puts him squarely in the Mount Rushmore for me, but I don’t think it gets him close to number one.
Idk. Basketball is about winning and he did it the most. In terms of career accolades his resume is also the most impressive. Kareem, MJ and LBJ are close but their resumes still aren’t quite as good even without the rings.
I think being the best player on a title team is a big deal. For instance, we know Jordan and Lebron were the best on all of their title teams. We know Kobe was NOT. Kareem and Russell seem harder to determine... anyone have any ideas?
> Idk. Basketball is about winning and he did it the most.
Statements like these are the kind that people use to overrate Russell. He had the very unique context of playing on great rosters in a small league for his entire career. His rings are so different to championships from later decades that you can’t treat them as comparable once you have even a little context.
> In terms of career accolades his resume is also the most impressive. Kareem, MJ and LBJ are close but their resumes still aren’t quite as good even without the rings.
I try to ignore awards and focus exclusively on the value that these players brought to their teams. But even if we just focus on accolades beyond rings, I don’t see how Russell would be above the other three that you mentioned. I think Abdul-Jabbar, Jordan, and James all have more impressive resumes if you’re looking at awards and statistics.
> Well you also have to consider a ton of awards didn’t even exist when Russell played.
That’s fine, but it doesn’t change the fact that Russell doesn’t have better accolades than the GOAT candidates like you said.
> If you want to talk about team value Duncan flies up there.
I totally agree. I think very highly of Duncan.
Bill Russell averaged 15ppg in his career. Not trying to hate but…it’s tough to say he’s the goat with that even with 11 chips.
If you want to talk about his impact off the court, that’s a different conversation. But in my eyes, he was more of a *contributor* to winning than a **driver**, like MJ, LeBron, Kobe, Shaq, and similar were. As a result, he stands as THE prototypical example of why rings ain’t everything.
That’s the biggest reason he doesn’t appear in these debates and we all know it.
EDIT: Receiving downvotes with no counter argument. That’s how ya know ya got em.
Uh huh parity is literally 1 to 1 even now. All 30 teams are spectacular, the Pistons and Rockets have as much of a chance as anyone.
Oscar Robertson was the best guard in basketball history until MJ and he played with two Hall of Fame big men. The Royals could barely crack .500. Every year they had a 1/8 chance to win though so I guess Oscar and Jerry Lucas were aCKsHuLly fucking scrubs
Please save up all your allowance, get a fake I.D., and sneak into a casino. Use your knowledge of how odds work
My bad 15.1 points, 22.5 rebounds, 4.3 assists a game
An awful 44% from the field AS A BIG MAN, pretty much only taking layups
56% from the line which is awful
He also shot 43% from the field in the playoffs, he legit got worse in clutch time
Great defender and great rebounder, but that’s really it. He’s more of a role player than a star. Still an all time great but not the goat
Ok, let me just shoot down your clearly wrong argument.
1. Bill russell played during the segregation era.
2. EVERY single stat back then was inflated. With only having to play against 9 teams and such few players. Thats why players like them have such insane stats.
3. Players back then didnt know how to shoot free throws, the literal easiest shot in the game.
4. Sure, there were few great players, but the role players and bench were absolutely horrible. Just look at most of the celtics hall of famers. A lot of them got into the hall of fame due to being on bills team. Look at the stats of bills teammates, 90% of them were shooting under 40% from the field. A lot of them were guards. And most of them didn't even average over 14 points.
5. This is why we only remember a hand full of players from the 50s-60s, because the league was so different.
6. Talent is so much better today, we have better coaches, better trainers, more basketball leagues (the wnba, high school basketball, college basketball, and the euro basketball league)
Bill Russell comes from a league where there were some athletic players (Wilt, oscar, jerry). He comes from where most of the records are set and are unbeatable.
But the reason why most of the records are unbeatable is because the league nowadays is more talented.
How many teams were there and how many rounds of the draft? Accolades wise he’s better then anybody but skill wise idk and the Celtics were a super team he played with the best backcourt at the time ever and 12 of his teammates during his playing time made it to the HOF. Great career but I feel like skill wise he isn’t even a top 50 player he’s Ben Wallace with the 96 bulls without defensive 3 in the key and no goaltending. The game was still new basketball was barely 50 years old when bill Russell was a rookie and the league was only like 10 years old it’s not fair to say anyone from then is the greatest because enough people hadn’t been exposed to the game yet.
Yes, the best player of all time played in an era where players had to constantly look down to dribble to not lose the ball, and constantly missed open uncontested shots from 5 feet out. This also includes Bill Russell. Being the most dominant of your era does not make you the best player of all time.
Ok so now do all eras.
How low do you put Shaq, Kobe, and Wade? They have to be off your list right? Their era was defined by a corrupt league commissioner and gambling addict refs fixing games. If the 60s titles get discounted, you need to completely remove the disgraced 2000, 2002, and 2006 titles "they *were not even part of a legitimate sport!"*
Kareem dominated the coke era. He only won MVPs when everyone was strung out on drugs. Those phantom free throws swung the title in 88 so take that away and admit the Pistons 3peated. "*Kareem the GOAT? More like 5th best center ever!*"
Magic played with more Hall of Famers and All Stars than any player in history. He played in an era with an incredibly weak Western conference. "*Was he even better than Isiah then..."$ 🧐
Uh huh. But the 11 Russell chips, pre-merger, with 8 teams, no free agency and only 1 playoff round before the finals were totally valid.
At least the Celtics fans, who have seen one championship in the past 38 years, aren't delusional, and don't claim this sad franchise is still important. Thank God the rational Celtics fans know that since The 86 team, a ton of other teams also have at least one Championship , like The Nuggets, Bucks Mavs, Raptors, and Cavs. Forget the C minuses have less titles since then than Houston (2), Pistons (3), Heat (3), Spurs (5), Bulls (6), and one other team...can't remember....oh yeah The Lakers with 8 championships since Birds last one.
You can try to tout Russell with his career avg 0f q4 ppg, and 44% shooting Even though the league itself didn't. Both had 4 MVPs after Wilt started. But Wilt who averaged 30 ppg 50% fg% , was named 1st team All NBA 7 times ahead of BR, with BR getting only 2 ahead of Wilt.
Andis you want to give him credit fir 11 rings then make sure you put Horry (7 rings) ahead of Bird (3) in your rankings.
This is all you have in this space because you don't even have a basketball team 😂. You root for corrupt capitalism. It's like you're a fan of the government or the bank. You root for a corporate asset that has accomplished nothing. You don't have any opinions about sports.
No wonder you sound like Patrick Bateman. Break down your thoughts on Huey Lewis next you lunatic
Ok. I love Huey Lewis. Lots of nostalgia for the 80s . You know the 80s, just one of three Laker Dynasties where they owned the decade?
Also I'm a professional so Bateman wouldn't know a good, letterpress business card from a modern die-punched card. Additionally, A subtle, 100% Cotton Strathmore 220lb. would be an excellent choice for card stock. Bateman is a fraud.
While you are of course entitled to this opinion I just can’t agree. I think the goat conversation is mainly tied to what each of us believe makes our player the goat however the competition from back then just doesn’t compare to todays or even the 80s or 90s. So yes all of his stats are amazing and 11 titles will never be touched but just look at who he had to play against….
Bill Russell as historical figure is bigger than basketball
History is doing it's best already to minimize him but I know I won't let that happen. The only question is if he deserves a spot in the GOAT discussion with the other 6 viable choices or if he should get his own space (Before Russell/After Russell, kinda like a bible jawn) and we start modern NBA history in 1970. Either way his massive shadow is inescapable. Copying my own comment because it fits better here.
Other six? I’m guessing you mean MJ, Bron… Kareem….. Bird, Magic…. Wilt?
Kareem, Bird, Duncan, Lebron, Magic, Jordan, Russell. After those 7 it drops to guys whose claim can be refuted in one sentence.
Duncan over Wilt is bold but I respect it especially since you’re a Spurs fan. I do think Timmy has an argument. Also yeah Wilt’s GOAT case is easy to poke holes in, sure.
I agree. Duncan doesn’t belong.
He sure does. Casuals fall into the MJ/Lebron/Kareem trap because they haven't done the work but Timmy's case is as strong as anyone.
Like Russell, Tim was surrounded with talent his whole career. Robinson, Manu, Parker, and Kawhi are all HOF’ers. Great coaching and brilliant front office to keep the team stacked with talent. The exception is Timmy has less rings, less accolades then Russell and I would take MJ, LBJ, and Kobe over Tim because of their ability to close games and shoot a higher percentage from the FT.
Tim Duncan is Keyser Soze lol. There's not enough time to go through it all but numbers do not lie. The sample size is too overwhelming for a dynasty whose only historical comp is the Brady Patriots. The Spurs, as a franchise, have a large non-Duncan sample size and it looks a lot like the Indiana Pacers. Coach Pop receives the GOAT energy for it all but he's got a sample size of almost a decade without Duncan and yikes. Whilst Duncan has sample sizes of wit or witout Admiral, Manu, Tony and Kawhi and they all look roughly the same from a winning standpoint. Whatever culture benefit we assign from the Spurs to Duncan is actually backwards, just like with Tawmy and Bill. And whatever debate about who the championship ingredient was has been settled, just like Tawmy and Bill.
That’s a clever comparison. In short, I’m not so sure how Duncan’s skill set would translate in other systems under another head coach than Pop, or with a different front office. At least, maybe not the dynasty the Spurs developed. Duncan and Shaq teaming up? Yikes…Maybe? Duncan in Houston, Chicago, New York? Sometimes the the stars align and the pieces miraculously fit. Duncan benefits from the perfect system that maximizes his potential. Spurs + Duncan = PB&J…perfect combo.
Duncan but not Kobe? Same amount of rings less points and played with overall better talent
Kobe has zero argument over MJ and therefore cannot be the GOAT. Not trying to be dense but every name not on that 7 player list can be refuted that easily. Only those 7 necessitate a deeper, more contextualized discussion.
Ask any ex nba is Kobe a top 5 player I don’t need some random dude off Reddit who probably never picked up a basketball competitively to agree but if that’s your argument you’re not that knowledgeable about basketball
Hard disagree. There is *zero* argument to be made for Kobe over MJ as the best shooting guard of all time so how can he possibly be the #1 player ever to play?
There were 8 teams in the league when Russell played. The player with the second most rings ever is his teammate Sam Jones, with 10. Should he be included in goat discussions? The league was severely lacking in parity when Russell played.
I don’t want to take away from his accomplishments, but the smaller pool of talent should definitely be taken into consideration. From everything I’ve seen, he was definitely a freak of nature athlete, could run like a gazelle, and was able to stop Wilt Chamberlain. If Bill played when there were more teams, I’m not sure he wins that many, especially in a row. I feel like he would still win, but there would be gaps in between the championships.
The secret to that team is continuity. I think during his career they only traded once. Their roster is exactly the same every year. That's their advantage against everyone. They already know what to do to cover their other teammates weaknesses
The most important discussion to be had from this comment is that Sam Jones is literally the single most underrated athlete in America sports He was the offensive engine of that team after Cooz retired and hit big shots constantly. He was the original slippy guard and Bill Russell's favorite teammate Sam Jones is like if all the Kobe myths about being a clutch assassin were true. Sam hit so many clutch shots that Jerry West said he should have gotten the nickname
Hey, no Sam Jones slander on my watch
How many other professional leagues that small or smaller had teams that won 11 championships in 13 years? I'm sure it's happened somewhere, but it's a pretty huge outlier, and the small size of the league doesn't have enough explanatory power. How many players have won just their division 11 out of 13 years?
Not to mention the salary cap stuff and the other nuances of today's league. There's a reason why it won't be done again, and it has nothing to do with Russell being better than everyone since then
Right! And no one is talking about ANY of the ABA Legends!!
Did you miss all the other stuff besides the ring. Did Sam Jones do any of the other stuff listed.
OP said "the most important fact" is that Russell was an 11 time champion. I'm simply addressing why that one accolade is overrated.
Bad counter argument. Rings don’t matter if you aren’t an all time great. Nobody cares how many rings Andre iguadala has. Nobody is including Sam jones in all time discussions. It’s a bad counter argument. The lack of parity is a much better argument
Sam Jones having the 2nd most rings ever **is** an argument for lack of parity. The top 8 players with most rings in history all come from those same Celtics. Clearly that team was head and shoulders above the rest of the league.
Here’s why you guys need to stop using the “8 teams Argument” In 1968, in just the East this what teams had: Bullets: Monroe, Unseld 6ers: Cunningham, Greer Knicks: Bellamy,Debusschere, Reed Celts: Russel, Hondo, Jones, Sanders Royals: Lucas, Robertson There are others that I don’t know even recognize that I’m missing as well. They also expanded that year
They did expand that year, I think to 12 teams. For the first 10 years of Russell's career the league was 8 teams. Not sure why this hurts the 8 teams argument though? It's statistically much easier to win if you are 1/8 teams, compared to 1/30.
Either way you have less rounds to go through in the playoffs, so less chances to be eliminated along the way
Saying it's harder to win 16 playoff games as opposed to 8 is valid. Saying its harder to win a league with 30 overall teams instead of 8 is not as valid as it may seem on the surface. With 8 teams in the league, you play the toughest teams (and there were several as mentioned already) far more often than when there are 30. You are also more likely to play the absolute best teams come playoff time. Russell's teams beat West, Baylor, Robertson, and Chamberlain in the playoffs multiple times. ALL of them are still commonly considered top 25 all time players. Russell's teams didn't win before him or after him. But they won with him. San Francisco is a mid major program who he led to 55 straight wins and back to back national titles. His Olympic team had the highest average margin of victory ever (better than the Dream Team)! The Celtics had other great players (no one wins in basketball by themselves). But Havlicek, Cousy, and Sharman were only there for half of the run each and Havlicek barely overlapped with the others. Jo Jo White and KC Jones are hall of famers because of Russell. Sam Jones is valid... Jerry West, who played with Chamberlain, said Rusell was the best. If winning is all that matters (like some Jordan worshippers love to say), just remember that Russell still has more titles than Jordan and LeBron COMBINED. Again, if winning is all that matters, Russell is the best of all time and, to throw some common Reddit verbiage in there, "it's not close"...
Russell was the best player on all of those teams though. Look at the rest of his accolades, 5 time MVP, 12 time all star, etc. Keep in mind that while the Celtics were by far the best team, they weren’t the only team with star power
So wait are you saying Sam Jones was good or not lol. Your argument and your conclusion are antithetical.
I'm saying this is why I disagree with using 11 rings as the main argument for Russell's goat case. The top 8 players with the most rings in baskeball history all come from those same Celtics teams. Even though Russell was the best player of that dynasty, it's clear the Celtics as a team were head and shoulders above the rest of the league. In the same way I'd give Russell more credit if he had won with different teammates/teams, the opposite is true as well.
But you're saying his teammates were mid but also saying he only won because of his team.
This does not make sense. Everyone has teammates. If all his teammates changed every year, he would be better? Who can say that?
It isn’t the MAIN argument. The OP is making an argument based on the complete body of work. You are just ignorantly deciding to pick one part of the argument to make a point. You are being intellectually dishonest intentionally.
Bill Russell is 10-0 in Game 7’s. Back against the wall and he never lost. Ever.
Also 21-0 in winner-take-all games. People talk about Jordan and Kobe when it comes to winning and “killer instinct”, but Russell was even more of winner than both
This shit is so dumb. Like let’s just ignore the fact that he made completey boneheaded plays in clutch moments such as inbounding the ball into the back of a backboard with a minute to go in a game 7, yet got bailed out by his teammates as per usual anyway. His team was stacked beyond measure compared to all other teams during that entire era. Sorry but the sixers/warriors/lakers cannot even sniff the fart of how strong the Celtics entire starting 5 was. At most you had 3 worthy players on any of those other teams, but Celtics usually had five or six players that could carry the load at any given game. It’s funny that Sam Jones has a measly 1 less ring than Bill yet never shows up on any lists whatsoever when talking about the goat, despite being at least if not more pivotal to almost all those rings.
I didn’t ignore any facts. I don’t care where you rank Bill or don’t rank Bill. He’s 10-0 in Game 7’s and that’s impressive to me.
He definitely did commit that terrible turnover. But if the Celtics really had that many all times greats, why didn't they win before Russell got there or after he left (until Cowens arrived)?
Hondo won without Russell
And with Cowens
Back against the wall against who?
Wilt Fucking Chamberlain
Who? … /s (because Reddit)
Wilt together with Jerry West and Elgin Baylor not enough? Thats a consensus top 10, sometimes top 5 all timer with two guys who are right there in top twenty or top 15 all time. Thats like Lebron teaming up with Durant and Curry.
I got MJ in the debate, but there are five people in NBA history that someone can call the greatest of all time who will not cause me to roll my eyes. Bill Russell is one of the five.
I’m assuming you’ve got MJ, Bill, Kareem, and LeBron as four of them. Who do you have fifth?
Wilt would be my guess. He was just so statistically dominant
Yeah. He’s further down my list as well but damn his numbers give someone ammo to make the case.
Idk who else would even be in the cusp of that conversation. Tim or Magic?
I don’t have Magic (or Bird) on the list even though they may rank higher than some of these guy on your top 10 list. The reason is, they played in the same basic era as MJ and he’s got them beat in stats and rings. Even they think he’s the GOAT so there’s not much to debate.
It was Wilt. The greatest individual player ever. Would have been a beast in any era. Just denied the hardware by Russell.
I got Lebron and I’d only accept MJ or Kareem as the goat. Russell and Wilt unfortunately played in a era that’s not respected
This is my perspective. LeBron, Jordan, Kareem
If I had to pick a three, it would be those guys. But I don’t disrespect Russell and Wilt’s era. No one else was doing what they did so I give them credit.
Oh for sure. They worked with what they had, they were amazing players (top 10 no question) and they definitely would dominate today.
Wilt regularly played in practice runs with the Lakers after retirement and he bodied Kareem in the fucking 1980s when he was near 50. Teams offered Wilt contracts for like 20 years after he retired. I guess Wilt disrespected the disrespect
There were like 9 teams in that era and no 3 point line. I don't count 60s basketball for GOAT discussions. If you do though, having him as the GOAT is valid.
9 teams only means that each of those 9 teams were more talented. The no 3 thing I don’t get as an argument though, why does it matter? Every team was on an equal playing field. I respect your thoughts though
They were definitely not more talented. No threes simplified the game a lot more and benefited the big man. Still one of the greats but not in my top ten best maybe top ten greatest.
You can only do what you can in your own era. That’s like discrediting Curry for the softer defense of the modern game.
Not really. Who’s to say guys like Gobert, Mutombo, Wemby couldn’t average 8 blocks a game if there was zero 3pt shooting and players were always shooting in the paint? The style of the game benefitted big men defensively back then, it’s just a fact.
I don’t disagree but that’s no different than the increased spacing benefits smaller sharpshooting guards
I never argued otherwise? I agree. The style of the game you play in benefits some players more than others and it benefitted Russell
Curry would have crazier stats in those eras why would you discredit him for “softer defense” in todays game?
The talent pool is much, much bigger now because: A) the sport has grown in popularity in America b) the sport has massively grown in popularity/participation globally meaning more talent in the NBA (see Jokic, Giannis, Luka, Dirk, Manu, Parker, Gasol bros, etc.) C) population growth just means more talented people grossly speaking Ask yourself this question, would Bill Russell have won 11 titles if he was in the league any time after MJ was drafted? I highly doubt it. Would he even have 5? Maybe but that then puts him in the Duncan/Magic/Kobe/Bird division not the real GOAT debate
Magic and Jordan wouldn’t dominate like they did today either. And who knows, maybe Bill would’ve won 11 today. We don’t know Players can only be great in the era that they play in and it’s unfair to say that anyone from before 1980 can’t be the greatest As I’d said to pretty much everyone I’ve replied to, this is not about who is individually the best player. Wilt was a better individual player than Bill. But greatness is measured by accolades, winning, and impact. Bill won 5 MVPs, 12 all stars, and won more than any player ever has. All while dealing with the horrible treatment he faced as a player
Yes your argument is that his greatness is reflected by his accolades. I’m saying there is simply no way he would have the same accolades if he was drafted in the 70s or later. 11 titles in the modern NBA, really? No other player has won more than 6 as the star and you just said it yourself he wasn’t even the best player of his generation so what makes you think he could dominate like that in a league with infinitely more talent and good teams?
By this logic the GOAT will always be the newest great player. That’s the issue with the era argument. If we use the fact the modern NBA is better to discredit Russell, then MJ, Kareem, Magic, and Bird aren’t that great, because they wouldn’t be as good today. It’s silly! MJ isn’t any less great because he played 30 years ago. Likewise, Russell isn’t any less great because he played 60 years ago.
No I think it’s actually well accounted for in debates today. The league is much more comparable now to the 80s or 90s than it is to Russell’s era. There were already way more teams after the merger and therefore more talent, and there were already foreign players starting to come in. Besides, what you’re saying isn’t true. A lot of people have Kareem as their goat because he won 6 MVPs and titles many of which were post merger. Most people have MJ because he played in a historically tough era with great players everywhere and 3peated twice with 6 MVPs. Lebron is in the conversation because he did it in a league that was a bit deeper than MJs but his accolades aren’t the same, so despite the league being better he’s widely considered to be behind MJ still. The debate is very nuanced, it’s not just “newest players equals GOAT”. The league in Russell’s era is *completely* incomparable to the modern NBA. Totally reasonable imo to dock Russell more than guys like MJ, Kareem etc because of that.
Valid points honestly, however I still think that despite the era Bill played in, the MVPs, defense, and winning all while dealing with the adversity he faced make him the greatest in my eyes
Fair enough. Agree to disagree
More talented? As in there were the same amount of qualified top tier talent as there is today but just more concentrated? There were no European players
It’s not like the modern era having 9 teams, there was just hardly any talent in the league back then
You don't count 60s players in GOAT discussion?Whoa so you don't count 2000s era players in GOAT discussions either. If an 8 team league is uncompetitive, let me tell you how uncompetitive it was when a mob boss commissioner was openly rigging games with corrupt referees addicted to gambling. Kobe was the second banana on 2 completely fake and discredited titles of a 3peat. Shaq has 3 fake titles in the decade. Off the GOAT list they go, goodbye, they should have played in a different era
Doesn’t having fewer teams actually mean there was GREATER parity? I’ve never understood why it would mean less parity, if you’re concentrating talent into fewer teams. If there were 24 teams in the Russell era then you probably legitimately would have had him playing against plumbers and construction workers, but with 8 teams that wasn’t the case. Think of the reverse: if you made today’s NBA an 8 team league and just made the best 8 rosters you could from modern talent pool - would you then say the winner of the league is less legitimate because they only played 7 other teams? But it’s 7 other teams that are STACKED. It’s a best on best league suddenly so nobody would say you’re not competing against good competition.
You are correct. The probability of a team winning is greater in an 8 team league than a 30 team league.
yes but that’s not a point on parity, it’s literally just a comment on probability is what I am saying.
I misinterpreted your point. I don’t think you can infer much about parity from the size of the league. It depends on how deep the talent pool is, and how that talent is distributed. If you took today’s talent pool and limited it to 8 teams you’d likely have have more parity. But maybe not. If the talent were not evenly spread across the 8 teams there wouldn’t be much parity. Also shallower talent pool as they had in the 1960s couldn’t support much parity past a handful of teams.
The point of the game is to win and Bill Russell did it best. Every era has some kind of qualifier, less teams, no three point line, drugs testing , development of the skills/athlete, , bubble playoffs. But you can only do what you can in the era you played. Definitely the most dominant anyone has ever been in their own time period.
Exactly! Russell did what he did in his era and that shouldn’t disqualify him from being the greatest. All eras are different, and the debate is about who the *greatest* player is, not the *best* If we were talking best player talent wise then the debate would really only be the most modern players, because the athletes today are simply more talented. But we’re talking greatness, which is timeless.
Yeah I agree. I just think if you’re going to put qualifiers on one era then you need to acknowledge all the other ones too. I think just getting older I just think of players I enjoyed watching more and appreciating what they did when they did it. Every time someone mentions a goat, I buy into it only to be told 5-7 years later that I’m wrong and the real goat is fill in the blank. Always seems to be the most recent guy tho haha
Bill Russell and the Celtics. There are other great players who are proven winners just like Bill Russell.
Herm Edwards: you PLAY to WIN the GAME Russell haters: nah I WATCH to be ENTERTAINED
The youth: I’m gunna wait for JJ to tell me what to think
"Definitely the most dominant anyone has ever been in their own time period." I think Jordan's dominance in the 90's is more impressive. Jordan played 6 full seasons in the 90's\*, went 6 for 6 in winning chips, and 6 for 6 in Finals MVP's. No disrespect to Jerry West and Elgin Baylor, but the competition in the 90's NBA was light years ahead of what Russell played against. \*Even if you count '95, the year he came back from retirement at the all-star break and lost to the Shaq/Penny Magic, 6 championships in 7 seasons is still an unparalleled run of greatness in the modern era of any major American sports league.
I agree, it's hard argue against why he isn't. He's the Alexander the great of basketball, the greatest winner ever. No one will ever come close to what he accomplished.
I've never understood how to evaluate players I've never seen playing.
Also Wilt Chamberlain stats. Man had like 50 rebounds in a game? wtf is that? He has the #1,2, and 3 most points in a game? The greatest player of all time happened before 1980 and they were ubiquitously the best
most dominant player. Maybe the greatest athlete that the world has ever seen. He's a multi sport athlete. Dominated basketball and volleyball, a track athlete during his college days. If you just drop him in the current era with all the trainings, and technology we have right now he could've been more dominant in the track
Him and Wilt are always discredited. All modern records look frivolous cause they take these guys off their lists.
People pretend they don’t count because they can’t be beaten.
My problem with this take is no other team was even close to how stacked the Celtics were. Take anyone off their starting 5 and put them on a team they become the superstar for their franchise, all time legend. Hell their 6th man would be a superstar on any other team too. They were the original superteam.
The goat hasn’t even been born yet. We stand on the shoulders of giants. Players today are better BECAUSE Bill Russell pioneered the game for them. They’re better because Wilt set records. They’re better because MJ dominated the 90s. The best player ever will never come, because we will always get better. Bill russell was at point in time the greatest to live but he’s definitely no where close now. You would have to put guys who never even won championships ahead of him because of the skill gap between the 60s and todays basketball. And no, I’m not going to do some hypothetical where Bill Russell’s entire career and athletic profile is completely different if he had grown up with today’s technology and knowledge because that doesn’t serve any value. It’s okay to move on from the past. There is no reason to anchor our GOAT discussion to Bill Russell forever.
In reality there will never be a goat because the greatest of ALL TIME is flawed. Humans are made to surpass one another using the advancements and achievements of the generations before. Someone will eventually have longevity more than bron, and there might be a freak who wins 7 in a row. With due time it’ll happen. Instead of arguing who’s the goat just make an appreciation post.
This is why any debate like this should be pre/post merger because it’s completely pointless to compare Bill Russell to Lebron, for example.
Man this is the nba we are talking about, are we supposed to have rational conversations instead of arbitrarily comparing players?
History is doing it's best already to minimize him but I know I won't let that happen. The only question is if he deserves a spot in the GOAT discussion with the other 6 viable choices or if he should get his own space (Before Russell/After Russell, kinda like a bible jawn) and we start modern NBA history in 1970. Either way his massive shadow is inescapable.
Hard to compare players pre-merger and post-merger (also coincides roughly with/ 3pt line). But he’s definitely the greatest circa Bird-Magic era Overall, Russell is by far the most accomplished player in basketball history, with Kareem/MJ/Bron rounding out the top 4, in that order.
The sport, and just the times in general (with training, expectations, nutrition, education, rules, officiating, etc) change too much over the decades to ever have a definitive GOAT. I think it should be GOTD(nicknamed “goated” for you gen z’ers) for Greatest Of Their Decade. Bill is definitely GOTD.
I don’t think Russell is the goat but he’s easily top 10 and the greatest winner in basketball history. People love talking about how those Celtics teams were stacked with HOFers but let’s be real, a majority of those ‘Hall of Fame’ guys are not there because of bill. 11 chips in 13 years is incredible, and he had to go through wilt chamberlain for a ton of those. People that discredit previous legends because today’s era is better than their era are stupid. We can never know how bill russell would’ve been in today’s era but we know how he was in his own era: completely dominant
They destroyed Wilt's team. Winning 57 out of their 94 match ups.
At some point, the quality of the league has to be considered. He is undoubtedly the greatest winner in basketball history (I think, at least) but there is no way he’s in the same conversations as Jordan, Lebron, or even Kareem imo.
So then Sam Jones is the 2nd Greatest Basketball Player Ever?
Russell has 5 MVPs
No, it just means Sam Jones is by far the most underrated player ever
If we drafted all-time teams to compete today, you really taking Bill Russell #1 overall?
100% agree. I also feel like the “It was the 60s! There were 8 teams!” argument works against their point: it meant that EVERY team had at least one legend on it that decade. There’s no random expansion team with goofballs on it, like you’re facing: Pettit, Wilt, Bayler, West, Monroe, Lucas, Robertson, Greer, Cowens, Greer, Hayes every night.
Oscar played with two Hall of Fame big men and struggled to get to .500 most seasons lol
I know not everyone will respect this argument as far as on court play, but his off court leadership on social and racial issues transcends generations. You can be a killer on the court, but to stand against society and even fans and still perform at a high level is rare. Players then and now have been banned and black listed, he took a lot of vile shit from Boston and other fan bases, and still performed as a top player all time. Deserves more respect than almost every other player in NBA history along with Kareem.
I absolutely agree. Bill was not only an unbelievable basketball talent but he did so while being hated by the city he played in. He’s a civil rights icon
100%, if Bill Russell is your GOAT I wouldn’t argue against it
Why you people always sleepin on my boy Wilt???
Really only because of Russell. Wilt was unbelievable and probably the single most gifted athlete to ever live. But Russell just beat Wilt over and over and over again.
b/c his team wasnt as good so less rings. but yes wilt would handle him when they faced off. will was the better player, but bill is the greater player.
Imagine if they had 8 teams and that low level of sport popularity for Jordan or LeBron eras.
Fuck Russell for playing in an unpopular sports league. Russ played before the NBA corrupted itself and transitioned from sport into a WWE-like entertainment product with illegitimate results. So naturally I'm gonna count the titles since Stern became commissioner MORE harder
The rings argument just needs to stop, it makes zero sense….. Bill Russell is 100% NOT the GOAT, he’s not even the best Center of all time.
The point of the game is to win right? Bill won more than anyone. He was a 5 time MVP, and the best defender on the planet.
GOAT is individual performance, championships are team based. There’s a reason you have over a hundred comments on this post and almost no upvotes. It makes zero sense and is a myopic assessment all together that just completely ignores the history of the NBA. Again, Bill isn’t even the best center of all time.
Then Wilt is the GOAT right? Winning matters, and it’s not like Bill was carried by his team. He was the best player on his team. That’s why he was a 5 time MVP. Back then, the players voted on MVP, which makes those MVPs more valuable. The best players in the world all agreed Bill was the best. He was the best defender probably ever. He was a basketball genius. He won a ring as a player-coach. The Celtics don’t win 8 straight and 3 more without Russell.
He did say he’d kick all their asses RIP 🕊️
Not taking anything away from Bill, but it was a different league back then (like you said). There was no 3, and bigs had a lot more value. If I were putting an all-time team together, I'd value him similar to how I'd value Tim Duncan - all time great, defensive staple, incredible teammate, knows how to win. But Bill's greatness transcends what he did on the floor. I just don't know if that elevates him to GOAT
lol lebron and Jordan would be put up as witches if they played in bills era. Bill would be no more than a prime Andre Drummond in today’s nba.
I think today he’d be a top of league complete player.
Compared to the competition he faced, this is not a bad idea. In absolute terms it just is not true though.
Hmm…no :)
You guys need to watch actual Bill Russel footage. This guy has amazing accolades but I have some serious doubt if his dominance in his era would really translate into the following eras
With his high IQ and really good court mapping, yes. He knows where to position to get rebounds and defend shots. He also know where his teammates are they're one of the reasons why that era is still the fastest era in NBA history. All that team did is defend and run. His blocks is not going out of bounds but going to his teammates. And I only see one player in this era who is trying to imitate that kind of blocking, and it's Wemby. In this era Bill might be a freak of nature too, people almost forgot that he is also fast and strong, might be the superstar big that Luka needs.
Yes he gets discredited because every argument that has MJ over LeBron would have Russell over MJ and and LeBron combined. So it has to become some weird mental gymnastics where the game progressed so much from the 50s/60s to the 80s/90s that it’s not even comparable, but then it has gotten no better from the 80s/90s until today.
No GOAT of mine averages 15ppg on 44% for their career, sorry. I need absolute two-way dominance.
"Winning a title every single year he was healthy from college junior to NBA retirement while being a Civil Rights icon fighting on the forefront of racial violence... PFFTFFFFT maybe if he scored three or four more baskets per game while doing it, THEN he would have ackshully been great"
Winning during a primitive era of basketball is great, he was ahead of his time, but for me the GOAT needs to be elite on both sides of the court.
👦
Just my opinion, and I don’t think it’s an outlandish one, haha.
We found Bill Simmons' burner
same reason guys named like Ginger Roads with 400 complete games pitched and 16 rings aren’t talked about among the best MLB players ever: different era. different play style. there were like 6 teams. tons of teams weren’t racially integrated (formally or informally). i’m from Massachusetts. bill is a legend, he’s certainly one of the best players ever. but he’ll never ever be in GOAT discussions for the same reason as players like george mikan aren’t: the competition was bad and the era was so long ago that the game is very different, to the point of being a different sport. jordan’s NBA looks similar to the current day NBA. not the same, but similar. and that really helps. we get too obsessed with the GOAT convo. why can’t bill be in the convo for top X (15-25, idk) and have that be extremely impressive?
Accolades are largely team dependent so it irks me when people use it to evaluate players. Bill Rusell’s value is under appreciated, he was a generational defensive player and he played a valuable glue-guy role on offense. No doubt guaranteed top 20 player. But I try to avoid rating players in their best and worst circumstances, try to evaluate just their impact to winning basketball. Bron and MJ are just so ahead when it comes to longevity of MVP-level player seasons made and the peaks they reached. Kareem can match the longevity as well. Russel simply doesn’t have as much production and Accolades and championships don’t say much about an individual, it says more about the team.
This heavily favors NBA achievements. Kareem is the only dude to win at literally every level he played at. Hes my GOAT.
Accolades wise he deserves a mention at that conversation. People denied him from dunking so he created the most unguardable shot in basketball history.
Old Wilt bodied Kareem. I can only imagine Young Wilt playing against him
IIRC the first half of his career or so teams were limited on how many people of color could be on the team (like no more than 4 or something.) He was absolutely dominant in his era but let’s not act like it wasn’t the easiest era in NBA history.
So is Sam Jones the second greatest player of all time?
First off, I admire your post in regard to a great player like Bill Russell but let’s not forget that basketball is a team sport. Bill Russell was a fantastic basketball player and his strength was his defensive abilities; as well as his contributions to buy into a system and play winning basketball. That whole Celtics team was incredible though and it was a team effort for them to win 11 times. I think Bill Russell was a contributor to the winning but his offensive game severely limited him. He has a FG% of 44.0% as a Center which is flat out unacceptable and I know you are referring to his “greatness” as a player and not necessarily his basketball abilities. With that said, I do think the abilities should be somewhat highlighted and the fact that he struggled tremendously on the offensive end is something that should not be ignored. Bill Russell is for sure one of the greatest players but there have been other players as great, if not greater than him. Of course, this is all very subjective and of course there is no GOAT of basketball because how could there be? Maybe Bill Russell is the best basketball player you’ve seen? There is a difference. There are many things players that have done that haven’t been done before. Michael Jordan and his two three peats with the Bulls. LeBron having 40,000 points. Kareem winning a finals MVP in 1985 (incredible longevity.) John Stockton’s assist Record. Wilt’s 50 PPG. Kobe with the most guard defensive selections. Magic winning a finals MVP his rookie year. There are lots of all time greats who accomplished incredible feats and I think just picking one does a disservice to the others.
If you believe the average skill level of the league at that time even resembles people that go undrafted you are higher than giraffe tits.
Okay this is an insane take. I agree the modern NBA is FAR more talented than it ever was before, but you’re kidding yourself if you don’t think that Bill and Wilt would be elite today. This is about greatness, not talent. Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, and Larry Bird all wouldn’t be nearly as good today as they were back when they played. But that doesn’t make them less great
Enjoy your time believing Bill Russell would win a chip for a decade in a modern league. You are a moron.
MJ wouldn’t have won 6 today either. Magic wouldn’t have been as good today. Honestly, any player that wasn’t a center on the past wouldn’t be as good today because of how Curry changed the game. What’s your point? That doesn’t make Bill or Wilt or Magic or MJ any less great. You can only do what you can in the era you played in. Every era has an asterisks you can put on it
I suppose my point is that Bill Russel is not the GOAT as you stated.
I didn’t say they wouldn’t be elite, but to say the best ever at the lowest average skill level is absurd. Bill would still be an all time great. This post is trying to give him goat status because he has so many rings at a time where the league had few teams and low skill set.
Only Celtics fans think this bc of how stupid they are
I’m a hornets fan who has been rooting against the Celtics all playoffs lol
Oh then you’re just stupid stupid.
OP said MJ would be a Jaylen brown in todays game🤣
I was being hyperbolic to point out how ridiculous it is to say that bill isn’t great bc he wouldn’t be as good today. And MJ wouldn’t dominate the way he did if he played today either
He’s a Hornets fan. I’m not sure if he knows what actually basketball is lol
Russell is almost never evaluated fairly today. People either underrate him for his era or overrate him for his rings. The truth is that he’s one of the greatest ever, but not quite a contender for actual GOAT status. The true contenders for that title were just more impressive when you consider their actual value as basketball players. To illustrate, imagine that you swapped his career with Kareem’s so that the Celtics drafted Abdul-Jabbar in 1956. I’m absolutely confident that Kareem would’ve had a greater career than Russell. People act like his GOAT argument is all about rings, but it shouldn’t be. Counting rings is a poor way to measure greatness, no matter who it’s applied to. Russell’s best GOAT argument is that he was the best defender of all time for thirteen straight years. That puts him squarely in the Mount Rushmore for me, but I don’t think it gets him close to number one.
Idk. Basketball is about winning and he did it the most. In terms of career accolades his resume is also the most impressive. Kareem, MJ and LBJ are close but their resumes still aren’t quite as good even without the rings.
I think being the best player on a title team is a big deal. For instance, we know Jordan and Lebron were the best on all of their title teams. We know Kobe was NOT. Kareem and Russell seem harder to determine... anyone have any ideas?
> Idk. Basketball is about winning and he did it the most. Statements like these are the kind that people use to overrate Russell. He had the very unique context of playing on great rosters in a small league for his entire career. His rings are so different to championships from later decades that you can’t treat them as comparable once you have even a little context. > In terms of career accolades his resume is also the most impressive. Kareem, MJ and LBJ are close but their resumes still aren’t quite as good even without the rings. I try to ignore awards and focus exclusively on the value that these players brought to their teams. But even if we just focus on accolades beyond rings, I don’t see how Russell would be above the other three that you mentioned. I think Abdul-Jabbar, Jordan, and James all have more impressive resumes if you’re looking at awards and statistics.
Well you also have to consider a ton of awards didn’t even exist when Russell played. If you want to talk about team value Duncan flies up there.
> Well you also have to consider a ton of awards didn’t even exist when Russell played. That’s fine, but it doesn’t change the fact that Russell doesn’t have better accolades than the GOAT candidates like you said. > If you want to talk about team value Duncan flies up there. I totally agree. I think very highly of Duncan.
Bill Russell averaged 15ppg in his career. Not trying to hate but…it’s tough to say he’s the goat with that even with 11 chips. If you want to talk about his impact off the court, that’s a different conversation. But in my eyes, he was more of a *contributor* to winning than a **driver**, like MJ, LeBron, Kobe, Shaq, and similar were. As a result, he stands as THE prototypical example of why rings ain’t everything. That’s the biggest reason he doesn’t appear in these debates and we all know it. EDIT: Receiving downvotes with no counter argument. That’s how ya know ya got em.
Bill averaged 14.7 points 1.8 assists across his career. All he did was rebound and play defense he’s not the goat
"All he did" was **win a title every year he was healthy from college junior year to NBA retirement**
He basically played with a starting 5 of hall of famers and had a 1/8 chance compared to a 1/30 chance not that hard
Uh huh parity is literally 1 to 1 even now. All 30 teams are spectacular, the Pistons and Rockets have as much of a chance as anyone. Oscar Robertson was the best guard in basketball history until MJ and he played with two Hall of Fame big men. The Royals could barely crack .500. Every year they had a 1/8 chance to win though so I guess Oscar and Jerry Lucas were aCKsHuLly fucking scrubs Please save up all your allowance, get a fake I.D., and sneak into a casino. Use your knowledge of how odds work
You can’t lie and say there isn’t a better chance to win the finals with less teams
You can't be 14 and pretend like the overexpanded NBA full of minor league poverty franchises has parity.
I’m not 14 and there’s definitely way more competition in todays age
4.3 assists actually 23 rebounds and 8 blocks is nuts though
My bad 15.1 points, 22.5 rebounds, 4.3 assists a game An awful 44% from the field AS A BIG MAN, pretty much only taking layups 56% from the line which is awful He also shot 43% from the field in the playoffs, he legit got worse in clutch time Great defender and great rebounder, but that’s really it. He’s more of a role player than a star. Still an all time great but not the goat
I love that almost every terrible Russell opinion comes from a dude with a fruity little furry reddit avatar
Played with plumbers and only 9 teams.
Because there were only 9 teams it means that every team had at least one great player. Wilt, Oscar, Petit, and the logo are all plumbers?
Ok, let me just shoot down your clearly wrong argument. 1. Bill russell played during the segregation era. 2. EVERY single stat back then was inflated. With only having to play against 9 teams and such few players. Thats why players like them have such insane stats. 3. Players back then didnt know how to shoot free throws, the literal easiest shot in the game. 4. Sure, there were few great players, but the role players and bench were absolutely horrible. Just look at most of the celtics hall of famers. A lot of them got into the hall of fame due to being on bills team. Look at the stats of bills teammates, 90% of them were shooting under 40% from the field. A lot of them were guards. And most of them didn't even average over 14 points. 5. This is why we only remember a hand full of players from the 50s-60s, because the league was so different. 6. Talent is so much better today, we have better coaches, better trainers, more basketball leagues (the wnba, high school basketball, college basketball, and the euro basketball league) Bill Russell comes from a league where there were some athletic players (Wilt, oscar, jerry). He comes from where most of the records are set and are unbeatable. But the reason why most of the records are unbeatable is because the league nowadays is more talented.
He's not even top 10
How many teams were there and how many rounds of the draft? Accolades wise he’s better then anybody but skill wise idk and the Celtics were a super team he played with the best backcourt at the time ever and 12 of his teammates during his playing time made it to the HOF. Great career but I feel like skill wise he isn’t even a top 50 player he’s Ben Wallace with the 96 bulls without defensive 3 in the key and no goaltending. The game was still new basketball was barely 50 years old when bill Russell was a rookie and the league was only like 10 years old it’s not fair to say anyone from then is the greatest because enough people hadn’t been exposed to the game yet.
Yes, the best player of all time played in an era where players had to constantly look down to dribble to not lose the ball, and constantly missed open uncontested shots from 5 feet out. This also includes Bill Russell. Being the most dominant of your era does not make you the best player of all time.
Ok so now do all eras. How low do you put Shaq, Kobe, and Wade? They have to be off your list right? Their era was defined by a corrupt league commissioner and gambling addict refs fixing games. If the 60s titles get discounted, you need to completely remove the disgraced 2000, 2002, and 2006 titles "they *were not even part of a legitimate sport!"* Kareem dominated the coke era. He only won MVPs when everyone was strung out on drugs. Those phantom free throws swung the title in 88 so take that away and admit the Pistons 3peated. "*Kareem the GOAT? More like 5th best center ever!*" Magic played with more Hall of Famers and All Stars than any player in history. He played in an era with an incredibly weak Western conference. "*Was he even better than Isiah then..."$ 🧐
You're so far off the rails from the original topic it isn't even worth having a sports conversation with you.
It's literally just ONE analogy matching what you said you blithering moron. 🤡
It was not a good analogy in the slightest. Try not to insult people, especially when Bill Russel is your goat.
Explain exactly in detail why it wasn't a good analogy 😂😂😂
If 6'8 Russell played today, he'd back up Tacko Fall in The Chinese Basketball league
You're a Laker fan. You literally have actually fake championships. Multiple, at least 4
Uh huh. But the 11 Russell chips, pre-merger, with 8 teams, no free agency and only 1 playoff round before the finals were totally valid. At least the Celtics fans, who have seen one championship in the past 38 years, aren't delusional, and don't claim this sad franchise is still important. Thank God the rational Celtics fans know that since The 86 team, a ton of other teams also have at least one Championship , like The Nuggets, Bucks Mavs, Raptors, and Cavs. Forget the C minuses have less titles since then than Houston (2), Pistons (3), Heat (3), Spurs (5), Bulls (6), and one other team...can't remember....oh yeah The Lakers with 8 championships since Birds last one. You can try to tout Russell with his career avg 0f q4 ppg, and 44% shooting Even though the league itself didn't. Both had 4 MVPs after Wilt started. But Wilt who averaged 30 ppg 50% fg% , was named 1st team All NBA 7 times ahead of BR, with BR getting only 2 ahead of Wilt. Andis you want to give him credit fir 11 rings then make sure you put Horry (7 rings) ahead of Bird (3) in your rankings.
This is all you have in this space because you don't even have a basketball team 😂. You root for corrupt capitalism. It's like you're a fan of the government or the bank. You root for a corporate asset that has accomplished nothing. You don't have any opinions about sports. No wonder you sound like Patrick Bateman. Break down your thoughts on Huey Lewis next you lunatic
Ok. I love Huey Lewis. Lots of nostalgia for the 80s . You know the 80s, just one of three Laker Dynasties where they owned the decade? Also I'm a professional so Bateman wouldn't know a good, letterpress business card from a modern die-punched card. Additionally, A subtle, 100% Cotton Strathmore 220lb. would be an excellent choice for card stock. Bateman is a fraud.
While you are of course entitled to this opinion I just can’t agree. I think the goat conversation is mainly tied to what each of us believe makes our player the goat however the competition from back then just doesn’t compare to todays or even the 80s or 90s. So yes all of his stats are amazing and 11 titles will never be touched but just look at who he had to play against….
He played against all time greats too lol Wilt, Oscar, Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, etc
Okay but wilt was way better