Bill Russell's Mt. Rushmore response

[majordanby]

Let's wait till Lebron actually finishes his career before we start dissecting his place in the all time greats of basketball. He's on the path to greatness given what he's already done - but, his career isnt complete. it's already difficult comparing players from different eras - it's even more difficult when comparing players who are only mid way through their careers to those who have retired a long time ago and whose careers are etched in nba lore.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by majordanby

Let's wait till Lebron actually finishes his career before we start dissecting his place in the all time greats of basketball. He's on the path to greatness given what he's already done - but, his career isnt complete. it's already difficult comparing players from different eras - it's even more difficult when comparing players who are only mid way through their careers to those who have retired a long time ago and whose careers are etched in nba lore.

That's the main reason I have the waffling "maybe someday but not yet" stuff in my comment.

Maybe he'll become a better sort of player, one who can win with a good but not great group around him. Maybe not. Maybe he gets better and keeps up with being 3rd in ppg or lasts a long time getting into the top 5 in a lot of categories.

Maybe not.

Maybe my impression will change after a few more years.

Steve B

[Peter_Spaeth]

Who has won champrionships consistently without other great players? Not Russell. Not Wilt. Not Kareem. Not Magic. Not Jordan. Not Bird. Not Oscar. It's hardly an argument against LeBron that Cleveland was not terribly successful. How successful were Oscar's teams until he played with Kareem? How successful were Kareem's Lakers before Magic came on the scene? Wilt usually lost as a Warrior/76er, but is anyone really saying Wilt is not in the very few best players ever? Russell had Cousy and Havlicek and numerous other HOFers, and played against a much smaller league besides. Jordan didn't win for quite a few years, until Pippen. Specious argument.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Who has won champrionships consistently without other great players? Not Russell. Not Wilt. Not Kareem. Not Magic. Not Jordan. Not Bird. Not Oscar. It's hardly an argument against LeBron that Cleveland was not terribly successful. How successful were Oscar's teams until he played with Kareem? How successful were Kareem's Lakers before Magic came on the scene? Wilt usually lost as a Warrior/76er, but is anyone really saying Wilt is not in the very few best players ever? Russell had Cousy and Havlicek and numerous other HOFers, and played against a much smaller league besides. Jordan didn't win for quite a few years, until Pippen. Specious argument.

And how did Pippen do without Jordan? Or for that matter the Celtics without Bird or the lakers without Magic?

All three of those guys made a team of very good players great. One interesting thing is that the three main players of each team have a lot of career overlap. That makes it hard to compare before/after without the problem of someone being at the end of a career.
The closest I can get is Parrish. About a .500 shooter before Bird, And above .540 with Bird.
Of course the opposite argument holds, Bird might not have been as good without Parrish and McHale.

Miamis two main players besides James have been a bit less productive since James arrived.

Steve B

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

And how did Pippen do without Jordan? Or for that matter the Celtics without Bird or the lakers without Magic?

All three of those guys made a team of very good players great. One interesting thing is that the three main players of each team have a lot of career overlap. That makes it hard to compare before/after without the problem of someone being at the end of a career.
The closest I can get is Parrish. About a .500 shooter before Bird, And above .540 with Bird.
Of course the opposite argument holds, Bird might not have been as good without Parrish and McHale.

Miamis two main players besides James have been a bit less productive since James arrived.

Steve B

The Lakers a team of "very good" players? I think Kareem might take offense to that characterization. McHale was also a great player in his own right, well beyond "very good" in my opinion. Same with Pippen. My point is even the very greatest players never won consistently without at least one other first tier HOF type player as their running mate. LeBron's Cleveland squad was pathetic, by contrast, so it's hardly a knock on him that he didn't win big there.

[steve B]

That's an excellent point.

My comment wasn't a knock against the other excellent players, just a recognition that aside from Kareem they weren't quite the players the top stars were. And I obviously had it wrong with the Lakers. It was more Kareem supported by Johnson, even if it didn't seem that way at the time.

When I looked at the teams stats that was one thing that stood out. Most of the great players had at least one other great player alongside them and often with a lot of career overlap. Parrish was the only one I found with enough time before and after Bird to make any comparison. Kareem of course was fantastic for a long time.

I guess the question is how good would the groups of players been individually? The Kareem/Johnson pair is interesting, When Kareem retired Johnsons assists dropped, but his scoring went up. And Kareem was very consistent, almost no difference with or without Johnson.
Bird/McHale have so much overlap they pretty much can't be separated.
Jordan/Pippen also have a lot of overlap.

Lebron did have a few guys around him who could have been that supporting player, but none of them really became consistent.

I may have to rethink some things. I'm not sure if Lebron is better than I thought because he's been great without consistent support, or if he's what I think, because he hasn't made that support consistent. He's certainly been great in Miami with a couple great players around him.
And maybe I need to rethink just how good some of the guys I thought of more as a supporting cast really were.

I'd still call it premature to put him in the top 5 all time. That's a pretty crowded space.

Steve B

[Peter_Spaeth]

Yeah I would not put Lebron top 5 yet either. Top 10 though, probably. I understand why people don't like him and are biased against him, but he is a wonderful, dominant, extremely versatile player.

These things are really hard to sort out, in part because to an extent it's subjective and in part because you can't do any controlled experiments like separate Jordan from Pippen or Bird from McHale and hold all else equal. But there is clear support for the one all-time great alone can't win regularly -- Oscar, for one. Wilt, for another, yeah Greer was good as were other 76ers but they weren't Cousy and Havlicek (Russell's mates) and they weren't West and Baylor (with whom he won more). To me, Lebron at Cleveland is analogous to Oscar with the Royals.

PS Most probably would not agree, but to me, a Celtics fan, Kareem is the best center ever.