Would Bill Russell's game even make it to the NBA in todays game.

[Bush4Ever.]

He is the all time rebounding leader.

Sure, he played another season but that is not a penalty to Wilt.

Does longevity not matter here? Because it sure seems like it does when one argues for LeBron.

Wilt doesn't crush Russell on per-game value either though, especially in the playoffs.

Russell played extreme minutes too, at least some years.

Wilt vs. Russell is basically a tradeoff of slightly more volume against slightly more efficiency (per-minute at least, who knows about rebounding percentages, which would be informative), and Wilt playing about one season more worth of games (slightly more in terms of minutes).

In any case, the differences certainly don't get bucketed into "major and way better" categories. Whatever advantages existed...they were extremely marginal (both ways).

I'm not arguing for Russell over Wilt as a rebounder, I'm arguing for it being way, way closer to a wash than anything powerful and decisive.

[PhutureDynasty]

Bush already gave y’all the stats. Wilt played more minutes….thats all. I’ll agree with anyone that says Wilt is the GOAT of playing time. That’s undisputed.

He is the all time rebounding leader.

Sure, he played another season but that is not a penalty to Wilt.

Does longevity not matter here? Because it sure seems like it does when one argues for LeBron.

Lebron is not the greatest scorer.
Stockton is not the greatest passer.
Pete Rose is not the greatest hitter.
Emmitt Smith is not the greatest rusher.
Wilt is not the greatest rebounder.

Is Barry Bonds not the greatest power hitter? *Leads in home runs*

Or Wayne Gretzky not the greatest hockey player? *Leads in points*

How about Steph Curry not the greatest shooter? *Leads in threes*

Maybe Brady isn't the greatest passer? *Leads in passing yards, passing completions, and passing TDs*

Or the ultimate one... Is Bill Russell not the greatest winner in team sports? *Leads in championships*

[Titan18]

Poor man’s Joakim Noah

[Bush4Ever.]

Was Russell over-rated as a Rebounder?

I could be wrong although I rarely am, so I'm only guessing that if we looked at his individual Rebound Average per year as a percentage of Boston's total Team Rebounds, his ratio wouldn't be any better (maybe even worse) than guys like Rodman, Moses, Lucas, Thurmond, Wilt, Drummond, and prolly a lot more guys I'm forgetting.

Great Rebounder, sure... like dozens of guys throughout history. The best, or even Top 2 all-time?

Hmmm...

Anyone got the numbers so we can see the facts?

It's very possible others have higher rebounding percentages than either Russell or Wilt, yes. Actually, it's almost certain Rodman and similar molds of players did.

Anyone looking at counting statistics for rebounding in the 60s and making straight across comparisons to more modern times would be making obvious mistakes.

[PhutureDynasty]

He is the all time rebounding leader.

Sure, he played another season but that is not a penalty to Wilt.

Does longevity not matter here? Because it sure seems like it does when one argues for LeBron.

Wilt doesn't crush Russell on per-game value either though, especially in the playoffs.

Russell played extreme minutes too, at least some years.

Wilt vs. Russell is basically a tradeoff of slightly more volume against slightly more efficiency (per-minute at least, who knows about rebounding percentages, which would be informative), and Wilt playing about one season more worth of games (slightly more in terms of minutes).

In any case, the differences certainly don't get bucketed into "major and way better" categories. Whatever advantages existed...they were extremely marginal (both ways).

I'm not arguing for Russell over Wilt as a rebounder, I'm arguing for it being way, way closer to a wash than anything powerful and decisive.

I acknowledge Bill is the greater player (by 2 to 3 tiers), defender (by 1.5 to 2 tiers), and winner (by 4 to 5 tiers).

I acknowledge Wilt as the greater rebounder (same tier).

It's not like I'm being unreasonable... Rob certainly is though.

[Bush4Ever.]

Is Barry Bonds not the greatest power hitter? *Leads in home runs*

Or Wayne Gretzky not the greatest hockey player? *Leads in points*

How about Steph Curry not the greatest shooter? *Leads in threes*

Maybe Brady isn't the greatest passer? *Leads in passing yards, passing completions, and passing TDs*

Or the ultimate one... Is Bill Russell not the greatest winner in team sports? *Leads in championships*

Any career volume statistic that leads a major sport requires extreme longevity combined with excellent per-game/year performance.

But there are plenty of records where a guy maximizes longevity while being clearly outside consideration for best-ever (but still "good" or "very good") in an interactive way to obtain a record.

Pete Rose and hits is a great example.

.303 batting average vs. Cobb's .366 average
194 hits per 162 games vs. Cobb's 224 hits per 162 games.

But Rose stacked on nearly 3,000 more ABs and beat Cobb by not even a 100 hits.

[Robceltsfan]

He is the all time rebounding leader.

Sure, he played another season but that is not a penalty to Wilt.

Does longevity not matter here? Because it sure seems like it does when one argues for LeBron.

Lebron is not the greatest scorer.
Stockton is not the greatest passer.
Pete Rose is not the greatest hitter.
Emmitt Smith is not the greatest rusher.
Wilt is not the greatest rebounder.

Is Barry Bonds not the greatest power hitter? *Leads in home runs*

Or Wayne Gretzky not the greatest hockey player? *Leads in points*

How about Steph Curry not the greatest shooter? *Leads in threes*

Maybe Brady isn't the greatest passer? *Leads in passing yards, passing completions, and passing TDs*

Or the ultimate one... Is Bill Russell not the greatest winner in team sports? *Leads in championships*

Many of those others have a trove of other accolades, or dominate the particular statistic, in a way that makes them the GOAT for that category.

Wilt doesn’t.

[lettherebehouse]

Russell in today’s NBA would be Darius Miles

[PhutureDynasty]

I started off this thread trolling a little because I love stanning for Wilt, but Rob's comment of...

"Anyone saying Wilt was a better rebounder is a moron."

... is blasphemy.

Zombie made the argument for other stats besides just Wilt's all time career rebounds.

"Wilt holds every meaningful rebounding record there is. Most rebounds, highest RPG, most rebounding titles ever (Wilt has 11 to Russell’s 5). The 7 highest rebounding seasons belong to Wilt.."

I'm legitimately OK with someone saying Bill is in the same tier and arguably better, but to act like Wilt has zero argument here is absurd.

If Rob does not apologize, I will quit the board.

[Bush4Ever.]

I poked around backpicks and RealGM and found estimates of Russell's rebounding percentage to range from a little under to somewhat over 20 percent (say about 19-22 percent)

That's pretty much bang on where the league leaders are for a given year.

20.5 would rate on the edge of the top 10 all-time for career, while considering some of the guys ahead are active players who could dip some as they begin to age out and decline.

I couldn't find anything for Wilt though. However, considering Russell and Wilt were basically the same on a per-game and per-minute basis, pace would be the next element to examine.

Russell's teams were paced:

1957:1/8 half-season
1958:1/8
1959:1/8
1960:1/8
1961:1/8
1962:2/9
1963: 1/9
1964:1/9
1965:1/9
1966:5/9
1967: 7/10
1968:7/12
1969: 5/14
Total: 34/121
Average: 2.6 rank out of 9.3 teams (28 percent up the scale--up equating to slower pace)

Wilt's:

1960:2/8
1961: 2/8
1962:1/9
1963: 3/9
1964: 7/9
1965: 3/9 (split between 4/9 and 2/9)
1966: 4/9
1967: 4/10
1968: 1/12
1969: 13/14
1970: Mostly didn't play
1971: 9/17
1972: 1/17
1973: 7/17
Total: 57/148
Average: 4.5 rank out of 11.4 teams (39 percent up the scale)

Taking a weighted average on games would probably push Russell into the low 30s (he missed more games early in his career with faster teams than mid or late career), but not likely much beyond that.

That's just a quick and dirty effort. Obviously, you would need to drill down into actual shot attempts (among other things) to get more precise estimates, but I'd feel comfortable saying Russell had more chances at rebounds per-minute than Wilt, but again...I doubt the differences swing things from "equivalent" to "major advantage to Wilt". My hunch is that it moves things from "small advantage to Russell per-minute" to "no real difference per possible rebound, but Wilt played a little bit more than Russell".

[kobeunderbite]

A mix between Tyrus Thomas and Andray Blatche

[Robceltsfan]

Russell would have near Jokic-level passing, top-level rebounding, top-level defense, and he'd be athletic enough and capable of running fast breaks.

He'd be a lower scoring Giannis....with better defense.

[Da Stars.]

I was out trolling for Northern pike in this thread and caught everything but a Nothern Pike. Quite entertaining.

[thedangerouskitchen]

Russell would have near Jokic-level passing, top-level rebounding, top-level defense, and he'd be athletic enough and capable of running fast breaks.

He'd be a lower scoring Giannis....with better defense.

So Russell would be the best player in the NBA today, is essentially what you're claiming.

[Robceltsfan]

Russell would have near Jokic-level passing, top-level rebounding, top-level defense, and he'd be athletic enough and capable of running fast breaks.

He'd be a lower scoring Giannis....with better defense.

So Russell would be the best player in the NBA today, is essentially what you're claiming.

Of course he'd be one of the most valuable players in the NBA. This is a guy that won 5 MVPs in the same era that Wilt existed (who only won 4 MVPs). He'd be a multiple MVP winner in today's NBA.

[thedangerouskitchen]

Russell would have near Jokic-level passing, top-level rebounding, top-level defense, and he'd be athletic enough and capable of running fast breaks.

He'd be a lower scoring Giannis....with better defense.

So Russell would be the best player in the NBA today, is essentially what you're claiming.

Of course he'd be one of the most valuable players in the NBA. This is a guy that won 5 MVPs in the same era that Wilt existed (who only won 4 MVPs). He'd be a multiple MVP winner in today's NBA.

Riiiiight... so a C who weighed 215 pounds soaking wet playing in (arguably) the weakest Era in NBA history, with no handles, couldn't dribble, no jump shot, and never had to defend the perimeter would be the best / most valuable player in the "supposed" biggest, baddest, most highly skilled and talented Era ever where, in order to thrive today (according to you / others) you MUST be able to shoot the ball, dribble real fancy, and defend the deep perimeter 90% of the time.

Did I get that right?



PS: TDK chuckles at your bush-league level trolling.

[Robceltsfan]

So Russell would be the best player in the NBA today, is essentially what you're claiming.

Of course he'd be one of the most valuable players in the NBA. This is a guy that won 5 MVPs in the same era that Wilt existed (who only won 4 MVPs). He'd be a multiple MVP winner in today's NBA.

Riiiiight... so a C who weighed 215 pounds soaking wet playing in (arguably) the weakest Era in NBA history, with no handles, couldn't dribble, no jump shot, and never had to defend the perimeter would be the best / most valuable player in the "supposed" biggest, baddest, most highly skilled and talented Era ever where, in order to thrive today (according to you / others) you MUST be able to shoot the ball, dribble real fancy, and defend the deep perimeter 90% of the time.

Did I get that right?



PS: TDK chuckles at your bush-league level trolling.

You mean a similar size to a Pippen or a Rodman?

[xer0]

Fuck no, as I said before he's a lesser version of Ben Wallace. Wilt on the other hand would empty his ass on this weak ass league.

[Robceltsfan]

Fuck no, as I said before he's a lesser version of Ben Wallace. Wilt on the other hand would empty his ass on this weak ass league.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Wilt couldn't "empty his ass" on Bill Russell in the 60's, but I'm supposed to believe he's going to do it now......when he can't make a shot outside 5 feet and can't make a free throw?

Wilt would be MVP-level, but nothing more. And if he didn't develop some type of a shot, he'd be less valuable now than he was then. Russell was the better defender and the better distributor.

[elmouse03]

Bill Russell would suck in todays game.

Bob Pettit would be the man though in todays game.