I'm not sure of the stats Isaac, but I know Russell wasn't particularly known for his offence.

Defence on the other hand, he had no peer. He was so far ahead of all his contemporaries because he had exceptional athleticism AND he out-thought his opponents all the time.

Apparently he used to size up his opponents. He would let them get the shots they wanted early in games, work out how he could stop that shot and then, at the end of the game, he'd shut them down just when their team was depending on them for clutch buckets.

Over time, he would mess with people, sometimes taking away their shots, sometimes letting them shoot. Just so they were never sure whether they had a good look or not.

He also realised that horizontal space was more important than vertical space on a basketball court. At a certain point, being able to jump higher than your opponent becomes redundant, because the rim is only 10 ft high!

Being able to control the horizontal, or lateral space is far more important:
- staying in front of your man to prevent penetration
- forcing your man towards help
- closing down passing angles with good positioning
- getting to rebounds, whichever direction they fly off
- creating space to get your shot off through good offensive spacing and the ability to create it for yourself

All of these things are about lateral movement and positioning, rather than leaping ability.

If he played in the modern era, I believe he would still be a dominant defensive player, simply because his athleticism, drive and intelligence were all elite. The only thing he was lacking back then was knowledge of modern nutrition, fitness, etc that all players have today.

I think a good modern comparison might be an intelligent Dennis Rodman who also blocks shots! :-)

are we picking a team to play in the 60's ?

This Phil Jackson guy clearly knows nothing about Basketball.

"In my estimation, the guy that has to be there would be Bill Russell. He has won 11 championships as a player," Jackson said in an interview with Time. "That's really the idea of what excellence is, when you win championships."

Not just patting himself on the back is he?

I dont understand why everyone thinks Phil Jackson is such an amazing coach. He walks into stacked teams and wins championships with them...
He has never built a team from the ground up into a championship team and when the star players leave..he is next to abandon the team.

Only reason Bill or Wilt would have any struggles in modern NBA would be due to Stern changing rules so that bigs can't play the position properly. Both of these guys would run circles on most the NBA bigs today

He was also a ridiculous passer from what has been said; after Cousy left they pretty much ran the offence through Russell for the other 5 championships. He might not have been a great scorer/shooter, but he was fantastic at every other aspect of the game

I do think Russell was a great player but I wouldn't rate him in Jordan. Imo I would go
Pg. Magic
Sg Jordan
SF Lebron
Pf Bird
C. Shaq

Yeah, picking Russell ahead of Jordan would be like picking Bradman ahead of Ponting for your cricket team, 'cos cricket was "essentially amateur/rec league stuff back then". Now there's a powerful and well thought out argument!

He's not necessarily naming the best player of all time. He's picking the starting piece for a dream team aiming to win championships.

Not sure about the cricket analogy tbh

Psycho, Hakeem > Shaq regardless of championships

I would choose Russell over Jordan to start a team any day!

Russell is the greatest defender of all time and he can rebound ridiculously well.

However...I will admit Jordan is the better player of all time and based on pure talent alone, I would pick him.

But Russell is a far better leader, winner and a larger will to win, so for the back bone of my team I would choose Russell without blinking an eye

GRIFFINRONDOPIERCE23, you know all this about Bill Russell because you watched him play yeah?

Anonymous "Prime Hakeem barely outplayed young Shaq", are you kidding? He completely outplayed him

Shaq-28.25pts(46/82[56%])12.25rebs,3.5blks,5asts,5.25 TO
Hakeem-32.5pts(54/108[50%])11.75rebs,1blk,6.75asts,2.75TO

Also don't believe the stats either, go back and watch the games. Hakeem clearly outplays him as well in crunch time.
His defence in that series is phenomenal, something the stats don't show. Shaq is no where near close to be as good a defender as Hakeem is

You honestly think that Hakeems supporting cast was better than Shaq's that year? Isn't the whole idea that the best player makes everyone else better? Every time it got to a clutch moment Hakeem delivered. Plus in the final moments they could pass the ball to Hakeem unlike Shaq who would just be fouled by the opposing team

Hey guys settle down now Phil just wants to crate hype for his book. I am the greatest.

I'd love to see Oscar Robertson play in the professional era, he had traits and skills and size superior to your average benchwarmers but how good would he have been ?

Never noticed before, but his FG% is low for a centre - 43%. Was that the norm for that era?

ha ha thumbs up to MJ, you are the greatest in my book.