Jump to content

Overrated as a motherf**ker thread


T0mShane

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 432
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, Kevin L said:

Just my opinion, but I feel Russell is more a product of his era than a truly great player. Would he have been as good if he had to bang in the paint with Shaq, Olajuwan, Ewing or Robinson? I don't think so, personally.

A lot of those "early" NBA legends don't translate well to today's NBA because of differences in the game, talent pool, etc.  I think DeAndre Jordan is a pretty fair comparison to the kind of player Russell would be if you could somehow transport him through time into today's NBA.  Not bad, considering how the game, training methods and so forth have evolved over the years.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AFCEastFan said:

A lot of those "early" NBA legends don't translate well to today's NBA because of differences in the game, talent pool, etc.  I think DeAndre Jordan is a pretty fair comparison to the kind of player Russell would be if you could somehow transport him through time into today's NBA.  Not bad, considering how the game, training methods and so forth have evolved over the years.  

Exactly. I was thinking more Ben Wallace, but you may be closer to the mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kevin L said:

Just my opinion, but I feel Russell is more a product of his era than a truly great player. Would he have been as good if he had to bang in the paint with Shaq, Olajuwan, Ewing or Robinson? I don't think so, personally.

Wilt was bigger and stronger than any of those guys. Wilt was a mega freak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jack48 said:

Russell naeutralized Wilt.  The Celts won all of those titles because Russell was there.  Do not look at his stats.  He was no scorer

The Celtics won because they were the most stacked team in a 10 team league.

Russell wasn't a scorer, which is why I compare him to Ben Wallace; a great defender/rebounder, and not much else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, jack48 said:

Russell naeutralized Wilt.  The Celts won all of those titles because Russell was there.  Do not look at his stats.  He was no scorer

If multiple triple doubles, a quadruple double and a 44 pt/43 board game is getting neutralized then sign me up to be neutralized. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kevin L said:

Just my opinion, but I feel Russell is more a product of his era than a truly great player. Would he have been as good if he had to bang in the paint with Shaq, Olajuwan, Ewing or Robinson? I don't think so, personally.

Guys like Russell and Chamberlain were a product of playing against white guys half their size and talent. Can't take their accomplishments away, but to suggest they are better talents than even a guy like Karl Anthony-Towns is ludicrous. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...