MVP + Finals MVP..

[Man In Black]

This means you didn't hear all the talk radio shows of that era that discussed Russell and the other players, or read the newspapers from then, and so on. Players such as Wilt, West, Pet , Robertson, Baylor, and Cousy were considered best of all time with higher stock than Russell. That was the opinion then. The opinion now is Russell may even be better than Wilt, and it's because everyone who says it follows what people say now, and that's no different than how people agreed with what people said back then. The only difference is back then it was mostly people involved with the game, now it's mostly fans on internet sports forums.

I call bull on your bull . Talk Radio shows of that era? Who are you kidding? I was born in the 60's I got to watch some of the games Russell played in the 70's. And you're going to tell me what? That you lived in Boston.
I know of only 2 stations in the Boston area that carried any kind of radio programming with regards to basketball and I can tell you when they started. So...what show are you talking about that discussed Bill Russell and other players and more importantly, who hosted each show?

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

A lot of what you say is interesting stuff...

I think heights of players have been exaggerated either way for a long time. You'd have players stretching 6'3 into 6'5, perhaps arguing "with shoes" and rounding up. And you have some players like KG and Duncan who have rounded down to get under that "7-foot" imaginary line of distinction so as not to be considered "centers" in the game. Seems like the listed heights of players back in the 60s and 70s, at least as they've been listed now years later, were more reflective of their heights "without shoes." Who knows really? I've followed the NBA since the mid 80s, so again I don't know about the accuracies of height and weight back before then. But listed heights have actually intrigued me a lot when it comes to NBA players. I remember in the early to mid 90s when Jordan and the Bulls were meeting in the Knicks in the playoffs, John Starks suddenly went from 6'3 to getting listed 6'5. Again, who knows the rhyme and reason, much less the actual accuracy.

Here are some interesting pictures though:

This is one of the better pictures to show the difference, because a lot of the in game action pictures I saw had one or both of them in bended and contorted body positions. But, this picture shows Wilt even somewhat slouching and still much, much more physically imposing than Russell. Eye level and waist level, Wilt has a good 3-4 inches at least on Russell.




I know Kareem has that afro but look at the eye-level difference. Damn. Maybe Kareem really was closer to 7'4 than he was 7'2.




Kareem might have an inch or so on Wilt, perhaps even two. Both giant men. I think Russell was still a big man by the standards of that era in NBA history, but his size was not at the same level as Wilt or Kareem.

Thanks for those photos!

I have internet access at my brother's house and this thread has me curious. We talked about player heights a bit last night, so I checked back and glad I did. I don't want to come back next week and find thread dead. If I can add anything to it before then, I'll try to check back.

After all these years, the memories fade but the discrepencies of heights remain. I always thought Bill Russell and Willis Reed were closer to 7 feet, yet they are both listed at 6'9"

Now, with that in mind, look at this photo of legendary Knicks players and see how the player's heights don't seem to make sense from what you see. Matter of fact, they are way off!

Left to Right
McGuire 6'0"
Richie Guerin 6'4"
Willis Reed 6'9"
Walt Frazier 6'4
Bernard King 6'7"
Patrick Ewing 7'0"

Click thumb to enlarge. Copy to desktop, open it, and enlarge manually if you wish to see even clearer.





If you google images for Willis Reed and Bill Russell, you will find a photo of Reed about to block him. They are both listed at 6'9" and it's hard to tell if one is larger than the other. Hard to find old player photos.

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

Kobe is damned talented and he's a winner as much as Duncan, but hey, what would have happened to Kobe if he didn't play alongside Shaq, who was a constant double and triple-team guy during his prime? I believe, no one, in any era can handle Shaq during his prime. I agree that both players needed each other during their run, but Shaq, was clearly the bigger part of the equation than Kobe.

Duncan, in his prime, could carry a team to a championship as evidenced by what he did in 2003. What did he have back in 2003? A very young and erratic Parker, a good but still wet behind the ears Manu, an inconsistent S-Jax, and a good, but already fading D-Rob. If that's your definition of stacked, then ok.

Hey, you know your Spurs 100 X better than I do. I'll say this though, those names seem stacked. Throw in Bruce Bowen though, you left him out.

Again, you know your team, I don't, but I looked at the box scores of the Spurs western run. (Have a look too, at www.basketball-reference.com) Although I agree Tim is the team leader the box scores say to a neutral observer the bench won every series. Matter of fact, the scoring versatility of that 2003 team was off the charts! Kerr, Claxton, Parker, Ginobili, Rose, Bowen sometimes had a lot of points. The Suns, Lakers, and Mavs benches seemed to be dead for scoring. If you remember the games, you might remember some nice runs by the Spurs when the bench came in. With depth like that team had, at least the bench was stacked!

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

I call bull on your bull . Talk Radio shows of that era? Who are you kidding? I was born in the 60's I got to watch some of the games Russell played in the 70's. And you're going to tell me what? That you lived in Boston.
I know of only 2 stations in the Boston area that carried any kind of radio programming with regards to basketball and I can tell you when they started. So...what show are you talking about that discussed Bill Russell and other players and more importantly, who hosted each show?

And I'll prove bull on your bull . You seem to think I am from Boston because you insinuate you know about their talk radio shows and hosts from way back then. So are we to venture you are from Boston too and a Celtics fan?

However, any true Celtics fan knows Bill Russell retired in 1969! You were born in the 60's and saw him play in the 70's? You just exposed your lying ass right there. If you were born in 1960 the oldest you could have been was 9 years, and sorry, you won't remember much about how Russell played. Any younger forget it. If you are a Celtics fan from Boston, you are just butthurt I am picking on Russell's legacy.

For the record, I couldn't tell you who I listened to talk about old style basketball or exactly when or who, We're taliking 40+ years ago dude. However, media was liomited, there wasn't an internet back then.

Thanks for being my , you are not worth bantering with.

[picc84]

He not only has the second best big man(best offensively) but great role players as well. It is not just pau and kobe you idiot.

He could if he had the kind of talent kobe has had and the officials help. By the way Kobe doesn't win every year either. You should know this unless you are a two year old.

Best player of the past decade.

Every le team in the history of the league has had great role players. If it was possible to win in todays league without a second star and great role players, Lebron would have done it already. And Duncan wouldn't be getting kicked out of the early rounds every year.

The Celtics have 4 ACTUAL allstars on their team. How anyone expects a team to compete for a le this year without transcendent amounts of help is beyond me. This ain't 2003, son. You actually need to have a great team to take home the gold.

[Man In Black]

It was late. You're right, I mistyped the 70's thing but hey, happens. I saw whole games on film then, but whatever.
But there were still only 2 radio shows at that time. We lived in the New England Area at that time. Bantering? Wow, you used a 5 cent word. Amazing.
Anyways, you would have known that Johnny Most did a live radio show then.

[TheMACHINE]

He not only has the second best big man(best offensively) but great role players as well. It is not just pau and kobe you idiot.

He could if he had the kind of talent kobe has had and the officials help. By the way Kobe doesn't win every year either. You should know this unless you are a two year old.

Best player of the past decade.

haha...omg...a championship team has good role players! Blasphemy!!

what a ing noob.

[Cry Havoc]

Hey, you know your Spurs 100 X better than I do. I'll say this though, those names seem stacked. Throw in Bruce Bowen though, you left him out.

Again, you know your team, I don't, but I looked at the box scores of the Spurs western run. (Have a look too, at www.basketball-reference.com) Although I agree Tim is the team leader the box scores say to a neutral observer the bench won every series. Matter of fact, the scoring versatility of that 2003 team was off the charts! Kerr, Claxton, Parker, Ginobili, Rose, Bowen sometimes had a lot of points. The Suns, Lakers, and Mavs benches seemed to be dead for scoring. If you remember the games, you might remember some nice runs by the Spurs when the bench came in. With depth like that team had, at least the bench was stacked!

Your posts in this thread are very on-point, but the Spurs in 2003 were pretty weak overall as a team. Parker was the only other consistent scorer for the Spurs. We had no penetration outside of him.

I think the reason we had so many guys knocking down shots for us is simply because Tim Duncan demanded such a massive amount of attention inside. Perimeter players often got caught unawares because they weren't even watching their man on D, instead waiting for Timmy to make his move inside and then try to play some semblance of help D. He faced double teams nightly, even in the playoffs. Heck, the Pistons (one of the best defensive teams of all time) triple-teamed him in the Finals. He still got the job done. And yes, Kerr saved our bacon in one of the games, but he wouldn't have been open all day from 3 if Duncan wasn't imposing his will inside. The team did have a lot of heart, they were just short on guys that really scared the other team. It was a collection of one-dimensional players and a guy who did everything at the highest level possible that season.

Only in Hakeem's first championship did I see a player do so much with so little. That team worked because Duncan overcame every weakness we had. Robinson was fairly bad in those playoffs -- I remember cringing every time he put up a jumper. Rough for me since D-Rob is my favorite all-time player and I was practically dying every time he rose up outside of 8 feet. Outside of Duncan, that team had no post presence on offense or defense.

[Nathan89]

Every le team in the history of the league has had great role players. If it was possible to win in todays league without a second star and great role players, Lebron would have done it already. And Duncan wouldn't be getting kicked out of the early rounds every year.

The Celtics have 4 ACTUAL allstars on their team. How anyone expects a team to compete for a le this year without transcendent amounts of help is beyond me. This ain't 2003, son. You actually need to have a great team to take home the gold.

Why do all you lakers fans hate on Lebron then?

[Nathan89]

haha...omg...a championship team has good role players! Blasphemy!!

what a ing noob.

Clearly championship teams need nice role players but kobe has had insane talent around him and yet he barely wins. Duncan has won with a lot less talent than kobe. This is why I think duncan is better.

[TheMACHINE]

Clearly championship teams need nice role players but kobe has had insane talent around him and yet he barely wins. Duncan has won with a lot less talent than kobe. This is why I think duncan is better.

ooo Kobe BARELY wins...lets create a new stat called "barely win percentage" hahah

[DPG21920]

You can't really refute the fact Tim has won with much less than Kobe though.

[redzero]

You can't really refute the fact Tim has won with much less than Kobe though.

Stop defending Tim like he's one of your relatives.

Damn.

[DPG21920]

Lame .

I wrote one well thought out sentence. You went full on PMS mode and started with multiple posts.

LOL Hornets.

[redzero]

Oh, that's two posts.

You better stop now because this is getting embarrassing.

[DPG21920]

Wrong again Hornet fan. The second post said nothing about Duncan. Almost all of your posts said something to this extent:

CP3 is soooooooooo much better

[DPG21920]

I have never seen someone (excuse the internet lingo) so butt hurt . It is scary good.

[redzero]

You mad. One post and you are bent out of shape and now you're posting two in a row? Take a chill pill, bro.

And you are a Jazz fan, so stop calling me a Hornets fan as if you are some unbiased observer.

And here was my second post in that topic.

[DPG21920]

lol defending yourself. Just admit you were butt hurt and it will all be ok. You are going full Lefty right now. Hypocrite.

Why don't you post some edgy video in your sig to detract from your lameness right now.

[redzero]

Actually, I am using your stupid logic against you, Mr. Hypocrite. My second post in that topic wasn't even about Chris Paul.

But I see that you are butthurt, so I'll drop it. No need to be such a crybaby.

[DPG21920]

I can't believe you have the nerve to call out Lefty when you do the same thing. You mess up, deny it, then act like it is not what it seems.

Did you or did you not post over and over about CP3 defending him with regards to DWill? K thanks.

Imma call you Mr. Lefty.

[TheMACHINE]

You can't really refute the fact Tim has won with much less than Kobe though.

doesnt matter...when you have teammates you win. Are you telling me that Duncan didnt have teamates in 2004 and 2006, but suddenly had them in 2003, 2005 and 2007? Win when you are suppose to. Simple as that.

[DPG21920]

I agree with that, I was just making the other point. Kobe definitely was in an easier position to win talent wise when he did vs when Duncan had championship talent.

[FkLA]

Hey, you know your Spurs 100 X better than I do. I'll say this though, those names seem stacked. Throw in Bruce Bowen though, you left him out.

Again, you know your team, I don't, but I looked at the box scores of the Spurs western run. (Have a look too, at www.basketball-reference.com) Although I agree Tim is the team leader the box scores say to a neutral observer the bench won every series. Matter of fact, the scoring versatility of that 2003 team was off the charts! Kerr, Claxton, Parker, Ginobili, Rose, Bowen sometimes had a lot of points. The Suns, Lakers, and Mavs benches seemed to be dead for scoring. If you remember the games, you might remember some nice runs by the Spurs when the bench came in. With depth like that team had, at least the bench was stacked!

Youre one of the few Laker fans making solid points. But 2003 was all Tim Duncan...I mean sure some of those players had their moments, along with Stephen Jackson whom you didnt mention. But none of them really performed at a high level consistently. Parker was benched in 4th quarters in favor of Claxton cause he was melting down not once, not twice, but numerous times. Ginobili was a pretty wild and erratic rookie, Jackson could hit 5 threes one game and miss them all the next not to mention his terrible turnovers, Bowen brought the D but was still somewhat of an offensive liability. Kerr played like one game, had a huge impact in it though obviously.

Not trying to discredit these players to boost Duncan, they had their moments and it wasnt the worse supporting cast in the world...but can you honestly say that it even remotely compares to what Kobe has had throughout most of this decade?

[redzero]

You mess up

When did I mess up?

deny it

Deny what?

then act like it is not what it seems.

Where? Here?

Did you or did you not post over and over about CP3 defending him with regards to DWill? K thanks.

In which topic? "Ranking the point guards, 10 through No. 1." I actually talked about Chris Paul being better than Deron Williams once in that topic. After that, I wasn't talking specifically about the comparison.

I talked about Paul and Williams a lot more in the topic from a few days ago that was comparing the two players. But you didn't respond to that one, did you?

Imma call you Mr. Lefty.

And I'll call you Mr. Butthurt Hypocrite.