re: Post your top 15 players in NBA history in this thread

quote:

---

Because he was ridiculously dominant on that side of the ball and was asked to sacrifice his offensive game to the other scorers on his team. Hakeem and his Rockets never dominated, they snuck in and won two championships when the Jordan wasn't playing full seasons. BR and his teams won everything for a decade. There's just no comparison. Hakeem was a phenomenal player and a great gentleman from what I know of him - but to compare him to Russell tells me you just don't give older players any credit.

I take it from your point of view and signature picture you are a Rockets fan. You know people who are not big Hakeem fans are not going to share your point of view.

---

It's not even about Hakeem specifically or Bill Russell specifically.

I picked those two because you have one player who is one of the greatest of all time on both sides of the ball and you have one who is one of the greatest on only one side of the ball. And don't hand me this "he was asked to sacrifice his offensive game for other players" nonsense. If he was good enough to put up big numbers on the offensive end, no coach would tell him to stop scoring so much and give the other players a turn. That's nonsense that somebody came up with long after to explain away his sub-par offensive numbers.

And if you use the championships argument, then why are there players ahead of Russell with less championships?

Why is team not taken into account? Those Celtics teams were loaded back then. Plus, there were only 8 teams in the entire league.

For example... in 1964, the six players with the most minutes played on the team were Bill Russell, Sam Jones, Snatch Sanders, K.C. Jones, John Havlicek, and Tom Heinsohn.

All 6 are in the hall of fame. Then you had Willie Naulls who was a 4x all-star,

If you have 6 hall of famers on your team with only 7 other teams in the league, how would you NOT win a ton of championships and dominate the league?