Is Larry Bird the Greatest NBA Player Of All Time?

Crenny Crenshaw wrote:

Born in the 856 wrote:

Dumb-ass, Chamberlain was better than Russell.

Russell said that Wilt played "my game better than I did". And Russell could never play Chamberlain's game near as well.

What Russell did do was to play in a manner that was always what the team needed. Wilt's biggest sin was that he did not always do this. The year he scored 44+ ppg, his team was last in scoring defense and finished 31-49. Initially one might say "you can't blame Wilt---he scored 44 ppg", but was Wilt really doing what the team needed to maximize winning? Think about a team with Wilt in the early 60's. There is no way they should be 31-49. And no way they shouldn't be dominant defensively. But Wilt cared more about a fast pace and scoring when he was capable of so much more control of a game. The next year Wilt with practically the same rotation, was made to play differently under a different coach. He scored 8 ppg less. His assist to fga ratio increased significantly and his team went to the Finals while finishing 1st in scoring defense. Wilt was sometimes too engaged in showcasing his talent than making the right plays for the team.

Born in the 856 wrote:

Crenny Crenshaw wrote:

Russell said that Wilt played "my game better than I did". And Russell could never play Chamberlain's game near as well.

What Russell did do was to play in a manner that was always what the team needed. Wilt's biggest sin was that he did not always do this. The year he scored 44+ ppg, his team was last in scoring defense and finished 31-49. Initially one might say "you can't blame Wilt---he scored 44 ppg", but was Wilt really doing what the team needed to maximize winning? Think about a team with Wilt in the early 60's. There is no way they should be 31-49. And no way they shouldn't be dominant defensively. But Wilt cared more about a fast pace and scoring when he was capable of so much more control of a game. The next year Wilt with practically the same rotation, was made to play differently under a different coach. He scored 8 ppg less. His assist to fga ratio increased significantly and his team went to the Finals while finishing 1st in scoring defense. Wilt was sometimes too engaged in showcasing his talent than making the right plays for the team.

Not quite the case. Wilt did not hall of fame teammates surrounding him as Russell did. That was the difference. Put Wilt on the Celtics and Russell on the Philadelphia Warriors- Wilt would have all those titles, period, end of argument.

Crenny Crenshaw wrote:

Born in the 856 wrote:

Not quite the case. Wilt did not hall of fame teammates surrounding him as Russell did. That was the difference. Put Wilt on the Celtics and Russell on the Philadelphia Warriors- Wilt would have all those titles, period, end of argument.

I'm not comparing championships. I'm specifically talking about getting the most out of your team, win-wise. How did Wilt ever play for a 31-49 team? That was last in scoring defense? What the bleep was Wilt doing? You can't say they were a bad team----they went to the Finals the next year with the same guys playing the most minutes. The same lot went from last in scoring defense to 1st. Wilt just wasn't doing what the team needed him to do when they were 31-49 and stopped nobody on defense. Wilt was better than Russell from an ability standpoint. Wilt COULD do anything. Wilt at times didn't do the RIGHT things. Wilt shouldn't have finished 31-49 with the Marx Bros., but he did so with a team good enough to make the Finals 1 year into the future.