How is MJ not better than Russell?

Question

I have great respect for all that Bill Russell did, but there were nowhere near the number of teams when he played nor was it as difficult to stockpile great players for a long period (cousy, havlicek, heinson, s.jones, k.c. jones etc.). Also if winning is the only criteria to base greatness of a player on, Steve Kerr and Robert Horry shall also go down in history ahead of Jordan...Again I have tremendous respect for Russell as a bball player, but I can't see how the argument can be made against MJ... But I encourage you to try ;) Please don't tell me about 11 vs. 6, I get it.

A few things about Russell to MyKill.. Zone was still allowed back then and no three point line so the idea was always to attack the basket where players like he and wilt could sit and wait so estimations of his blocked shot totals (to which he definately would have been second to Wilt, are inflated as to what they would be today). Furthermore its very easy to site expansion teams as diluting the talent pool but it also allows for many more players to shine on their respective teams, Jordan also won 5 MVPs but it should have been far greater had he not had to contend with barkley, malone, olajuwon etc. The NCAA argument is also frequently brought up which I find almost completely irrelevant... all this tells me is that Bill Russell fully developed before MJ...which would have been much easier because his game was pretty much only based on the athletisism to play defense where Jordan had to fine tune offensive and defensive skills as well as mature physically to compete in the NBA.

Also you bring up the rough play of the "bush league" era. Rough play is completely advantageous to the defense, the NBA wanted higher scoring which is why things such as handchecking (which was still allowed during the MJ era) have been elminated. Since the majority of Russell's impact was at the defensive end, these rules helped him immensely. Finally you bring up Joe Louis v. Lennox Lewis. Good choice, Lewis has always been heralded as a champ in a time of chumps. Yet Jordan was a champ in a golden era of NBA talent. I think you are absolutely right in saying the context of the era of competition should be taken into consideration when determining greatness of a player which is why i believe MJ is best. In the salary cap era, you will never see a team with 5+ hall of famers as the celtics had, ever. Nor will you see a dynasty remain in tact for more than a few years. Which is one of the many reasons why MJ is best, he could do it with a rotating cast. Russ is a close 2nd tho ;)

Answer 1

I think they were both equally great in their own way. Despite being two different positional players in two different eras their athleticism was as much cerebral as it was physical. Michael was clearly the more rounded player, at most time in his career being the best offensive player and a dogged defender. Russell staked his claim on the defensive end but could hold his own whenever needed on offense. He would often spark the offense through his spectacular defensive prowess. The truth is the Celtics were so stacked offensively Russell's scoring abilities were never fully tested in the pros.

On court leadership was dead even. Bill was at one time a player coach but he never had to reighn Dennis Rodman in on a bad day.

Off court Bill had Michael beat. He was a black athlete in a largely racist town playing in an area of thick racial tension, and he always held his head high. When the gambling and outside influences got the best of Michael he walked away from the game.

We're often defined by the opposition we face. Russell had Wilt and later Kareem, but mostly Wilt. Magic had Bird, but Michael didn't really have an archnemesis. The clyde Drexlers and Charles Barkleys and even Hakeems were step slower and a notch below him on the superstar scale.

And yes based on when they played and the caliber of talent in the league at those times 6=11 and maybe 6>11.

Deac

Answer 2

Bill Russell received eleven World Championships even as gambling for the Boston Celtics, adding eight Championships in a row. No subject what number of extra championships Michael would win, he could nonetheless no longer same what Bill Russell did, eleven NBA Titles in thirteen Years. Michael had 6 Wrold Titles in eight Years. Everything else is hypothesis. Let's simply say Michael is also the first-rate Shooting Guard within the History of Basketball and Bill Russell is likely one of the three Greatest Centers in NBA History. Kobe would possibly same or go Michael Jordan in NBA Titles, however Michael by no means misplaced within the NBA Finals and Kobe has misplaced two times already. Bill Russell additionally received two NCAA Championships and Michael Jordan received a million. Bill Russell received an Olympic Gold Medal in Basketball on the 1956 Summer Olympics. Michael did win two Olympic Gold Medals a million in 1984 and a million in 1992.

Answer 3

were steve kerr and robert horry the reasons why their teams went to the finals?

you also forget that russell played against tougher competition than what jordan had faced during his championship runs. ewing and malone are no chamberlain or jabbar. charles barkley was the best player jordan ever faced in the championship round and he is no oscar robertson either.

both russell and jordan had extreme competitive drive. both were intelligent ball players. and while jordan was a great offensive player, russell was a great defensive player. but russell will always be thought of as a better team player than jordan which ultimately led to more success for the celtics.

Answer 4

i would agree that mj is the best player of all time..... i am not saying that just because alot of everyone else does but look at all the rings he won and look at the talent he had... he made guys like luc longley, toni kukoc, etc. household names.. he not only scored but he was an extremely good passer and he made the all defense team i judge greatness by how well he makes the rest of the team look... the bulls were essentially the epitome of a team playing as a team. the only person i would maybe say is better is lebron, but only if he gets some rings... lebron has way less talent then anyone else has for a championship qualifying team so if he gets rings i would say lebron will go down as the better player and i would assuredly say that MJ is way ahead of bill russell

Answer 5

I am currently reading a biography on Michael Jordan and after reading this stuff on his college career and his early NBA career, I have evaluated that Michael Jordan in my opinion is the greatest ever and Lebron James is in all likelihood going to catch up to him once he reaches his peak. The scariest thing about him is that he hasn't even gotten to his prime yet and he's boasting MJ type numbers!

Answer 6

Russell didn't do to basketball what MJ did... when Jordan was playing basketball was HUGE... Russell on the other hand was even over shadowed by Chamberlain.

Answer 7

He didn 't necessarily made his team better. And Bill had to go through this juggernaut named Wilt to get many of his championships.

Answer 8

He is. Bill is just a better blocker. MJ is a better player. The G.O.A.T. of the NBA.

Answer 9

Stock answer for stock question . . .

The Best/Greatest basketball player, as in the the one who has accomplished the most is Bill Russell. 5 MVP's, numerous rebounding records, most of which were done during the Playoffs and Finals, and 11 championship rings in 13 years. 2 of those rings come while as a player coach (John Havlicek, the team captain, is Russell's assistant coach) .

Had blocks been listed as an official stat when he played, Russell would have ranked first if not second of that category. Unofficial counts peg his blocks somewhere between 12 and 7.

Had Finals MVP, DPoY, and Defensive teams were instituted much earlier (the awards were only first given in 1969), he wouldve won more.

Before Russell joined the Celtics in 1956, the Celtics has never went, much less win an NBA Finals even with Hall of Famers such as Cousy, Ramsey, Sharman and Red Auerbach.

Back in the '62 season, Russell took himself out for 4 games and the Celtics lost 4 straight games even with Red Auerbach, Cousy, Sharman, the Joneses, Ramsey and other HoF's.

Back in '69, Russell took himself out for 5 games because of an injury and the Celtics lost 5 straight even with HoF's Sam Jones, Havlicek and Bailey Howell.

The instances that i mentioned are the two worst losing streaks of the Russell-era Celtics. The latter is the worst losing streak of the Celtics since Red Auerbach took over the helm.

When Russell retired after the '69 season, the Celtics went down from 48 wins to 34 and they MISSED the Playoffs even with HoF's such as Havlicek, Howell and future Finals MVP Jo Jo White. A huge 14 game drop (when Jordan "retired" in '94 the Bulls went "down" from 57 wins to 55. A pitiful 2 game drop. And the Bulls played Game 7 with the Knicks on the Playoffs 2nd Round). And the modest 48 wins that the Celtics garnered during the '69 season is the lowest number of wins that the Celts have during the Russell -era and occured only because Russell spent a lot of time in the injured list and/or recovering.

Russell is the ONE CONSTANT through out the Celtic dynasty.

Not that Russell wins only because he has talented teammates. He also lead a bunch of local boys, "a playground pick up team" from USF to back to back NCAA championships and a 55 game winning streak even without the luxury of a gymnasium to call their own.

How come Jordan COULD NOT lead a school with a rich winning tradition like UNC, into the Final Four during his junior and senior years even though he have great teammates (like Sam Perkins and Brad Daugherty) and a great coach (Dean Smith)?

The '83 and '84 UNC team that Jordan lead was eliminated in the Final 8 and Sweet 16, respectively despite of their #1 and #2 ranking respectively.

Jordan won an NCAA championship during his sophomore year as a Robert Horry-role player, riding on the coattails of the team's real star James Worthy and the 1982 NCAA Most Outstanding Player. While Jordan's shot with 16 sec. left (not exactly a game winner) gave them the lead, it was Worthy's crucial steal in the dying seconds that sealed the win.

Nevertheless, lets make one thing clear, Russell's claim to the GOAT is not based SOLELY on rings. Comparing him to Robert Horry is very misleading. Please how many MVP's does Robert Horry have? Its very easy to spot the difference between a franchise player like Russ and a good supporting player like Big Shot Rob but i guess some are misinformed or plain ignorant or just feigning ignorance to spread misinformation. Russell's combination of 5 MVP's and 11 rings alone puts him way out of reach of Jordan or anyone else. Adding his statistical records particularly his rebounding numbers would be simply overkill.
___________
Myth 2: Russell played in a WEAK era of 8-10 teams and their Playoff series is less grueling.

First off, this breaks one of the cardinal rules in recognizing greatness. You judge greatness within its era. Its like saying Lennox Lewis is GREATER than Joe Louis. Nevermind that the Brown Bomber is Heavyweight champion for 12 years and dispatching 25 challengers, Lennox Lewis faced stiffer competition in the form of modern heavyweight boxers who are heavier and better CONDITIONED than the ones fought by Joe Louis in his time and that trumps whatever accomplishment Louis has achieved.

Give Joe Louis modern training and conditioning and he would kill Lewis as well as any of today's heavyweight boxers. On the same token, give the any of the top 60's or 70's NBA teams all the modern training and conditioning that most modern teams take for granted and they would still be as dominating today as they were during their era.

Could you imagine just how dominating would a smart and athletic guy with a 48+ vertical leap and a 7'4" wingspan with the speed, timing, stamina and body coordination of a track athlete like Russell would be today if he receive MODERN WEIGHT TRAINING like most modern NBA players do?

During his time, he was able to hold his own against 7'0" 290lbs Goliaths like Clyde Lovellete and Wilt Chamberlain (And Wilt is far, far more athletic than your average 7'0", 290lbs centers today. How many 7'0", 290lbs centers today could jump from the free throw line again? How many 7'0", 290lbs centers could block a Kareem skyhook at age 34?).

And also Russell thrive in the "bush league" era of the NBA where coaches and player attack fans and vice-versa quite frequently, where referees allow all sort of infractions to go unnoticed, where elbows and shoves are used to gain position, where opposing players punch you or trip whenever you do showboating moves like dunks etc.; he wont have any problem of taking on the kind of "pounding" that he would receive in today's hand check free era. He already played and survived Playoff/Finals series with a hemorrhaging eyeball, a broken ankle, strained tendons etc. at a time when there was NO team physician or trainer to mend injuries.

Second, the NBA teams in those era are loaded with talent because the NCAA and NIT talent pool is only shared by 8-10 teams. What is the 24th pick of the 1st round today would already be the 8th pick of the 3rd round in the 60's. Only the elite of the elite college players get to play in the NBA.

Unlike during Jordan's time were expansion teams diluted the talent pool. IIRC, back in '88 there were only 24 teams but by '96 there were 30. A 25% increase. It means plenty of opportunities for less talented players who would normally be NOT GOOD ENOUGH to play in the NBA.

Hell one of the reasons why the 1967 Philly team who has a regular season tally of 68-13 was voted as the Greatest NBA team of all time during the NBA 35th anniversary in 1980, instead of the 1972 LA Lakers who has a 69-13 and a 33 game winning streak was because of the detrimental effect of expansion teams to the talent pool.

Third, the difficulty of the Playoffs is based on the QUALITY of the teams not on the QUANTITY of teams. Even if there was an 8 team Playoff seed and 3 rounds before going to the Finals in Russell's time, it wouldnt matter. Only the best and the most consistent teams would survive. The Celtics and Chamberlain's team would still meet in the ECF and the winner would face West and Baylor's LA. Adding more teams in the Playoffs would just pad the number of victories for the Celtics.

Hey in Lennox Lewis time there are 3 world championship belts (at least), does that mean he faced tougher competition than in Joe Louis' -era where there is only one championship belt? [Substitute Ali, Charles, or Marciano for Louis and you get the picture.]

Answer 10

How many titles did MJ win without Scottie Pippen? That would be zero in case you didn't know.