Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Basketball

The Polack MSgt

(13,487 posts)

2. I can accept that argument - He was a dominant player and the winningest of all time

Reply to bottomofthehill (Reply #1)

Mon Oct 12, 2020, 01:52 PM

Oct 2020

My rebuttal would be that the 50s through 60s Celts were a juggernaut in a smaller and less athletic NBA

Bill had better team mates throughout his career than Kareem - But when he was matched up with talented team mates Kareem git rings.

In Milwaukee with an almost used up Oscar Robinson and as the post presence with the Lake Show a dozen years later.

Bill Russel never had a sub par team around him, I think that if Bill played for another team the Celts would still have won several rings without him (Not 11 obviously)

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Well, with LeBron's Lakers winning the championship, the argument intensifies [View all] The Polack MSgt Oct 2020 OP

Paging Bill Russell bottomofthehill Oct 2020 #1

I can accept that argument - He was a dominant player and the winningest of all time The Polack MSgt Oct 2020 #2

And then there is Wilt Chamberlain jmowreader Oct 2020 #3