₦airaland Forum

1. Michael Jordan
2. Pele
3. Tiger Woods
4. Pete Sampras (going out on a limb)
5. Shaquille O'Neal

. . .According to John Hollinger

Dwyane Wade, Miami, 2006

It's hard to overstate how awesome Wade was in leading the Heat to their lone championship, particularly in the final four games when Miami rallied from a 2-0 deficit to stun the Mavs.

Wade started the comeback by leading the Heat back from a 13-point fourth quarter deficit in Game 3, scoring 12 points in the final 6½ minutes to send the game to OT. He also made the biggest play of the series with his crazy dribbling foray to the rim at the end of overtime in Game 5 that -- controversially -- earned a whistle from referee Bennett Salvatore and a trip to the line for the winning free throws.

For the series, Wade averaged 34.7 points, 7.8 rebounds, 3.8 assists and 2.7 steals -- and this in a slow-paced series (neither team cleared the century mark in regulation in any of the six games). His basket attacks were so deadly because the Mavs couldn't stop fouling him. Wade shot a whopping 97 free throws in the six games -- the most of any player since the merger -- including 25 in Game 5.


Overall, Wade's 33.8 PER is easily the best of any Finals performer since the merger. While it seems strange to have somebody besides Michael Jordan in the top spot, the truth is Jordan never dominated a Finals to this extent. At the time, many called Wade's performance Jordanesque. It turns out they might have been selling him short.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2008/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=FinalsPerformances-1

The question may seem blasphemous, but consider that during the 1994 and 1995 seasons, Olajuwon received an NBA MVP, two Finals MVPs, led his team to two championships, and garnered a Defensive Player of the Year award. In 45 playoff games during those two years (against teams that averaged 56.4 wins), Olajuwon averaged 30.9 points, 10.7 rebounds, 4.4 assists, 3.4 blocked shots, 1.5 steals, a .526 field goal percentage, a .500 three-point field goal percentage (4-, and a .738 free throw percentage, going through all the other great centers in the game (Patrick Ewing, David Robinson, and Shaquille O'Neal).

davidif:
@millico88
You definitely don't know what you're talking about, Jordan came back from retirement (he was playing pro baseball) in midseason that's why they lost to the Shaq led orlando magic. Also, there is no way that Hakeem would have ever won the NBA championship had MJ not retire, and contrary to what you said Hakeem never beat him in the Finals. This gives me more proof that you know nothing about basketball.

@seanT21
You said that MJ cannot be compared to Magic right? but guess what, even Magic refuted your statement himself, he once said "there is michael Jordan and then there is the rest of us". Need i say more, i don't think so.

In 1995 an albiet rusty MJ lost to Shaq's Orlando Magic. Shaq was immature and had not entered his prime at that point. The Magic were then swept in the Finals where Dream throughly dominated Shaq. The next year, Shaq went to the western conference and MJ never had to face him in the playoffs again.

If the Bulls had any weaknesses, it was at the center position but fortunately they never had to face a center better than Ewing. All the dominant centers were in the Western Conference such as The Admiral, Shaq and Dream. Other than an aging Ewing, who was there in the East? Rick Smits? Yet when the Admiral, Shaq and Dream all made it to the Finals, it was years the Bulls weren't there. Instead MJ faced, Vlade, Kevin Duckworth, Sam Perkins, Mark West and Ostertag twice.

A legit question basically for believers in Christanity. But with the global economy tanking and fuel prices soaring. I used to think people were crazy thinking that, but now I am not so sure, maybe we are living in end days soon, maybe within 20 years.

davidif:
millico and idoltroll;
Honestly when did you guys start watching basketball because i am really curious, and Millico88 i am interested how you went to the Boston garden to watch Bill Russell play during the Jim Crow era, please stop trying to fool us. Winning 6 championships in 8 years (it could have been 8 of 8 had he not retired abruptly) is more impressive than just looking at stats of the old era and saying woah, Russell won 11 championships!!! of course if i played soccer against primary school students, i would be the next Ronaldo. A better analogy would be comparing Cassius Clay to Rocky Marciano. Rocky had the better record (undefeated) because he fought vastly inferior oponents and an aging Joe Lewis, Clay on the other hand fought some of the greatest heavyweights to have ever entered the Ring and lost a few but he is regarded as the greatest of all time. Yes Bill played some worthy adversaries at the time but they were just a few (West, Baylor, Oscar and Wilt) compared to MJ who was playing against many many many more talented players that i can't even begin to rattle off my head.
Finally to settle the debate, the NBA came out with the list of the greatest players to ever play the game sometime around 1998 and Michael Jordan was on top of the list. nuff said.

I saw Russell play in his last season and talked about him with my dad for many years after that.  Remember Russell was a TV analyst for a number of years and the stories would always start about what Russell meant.  Kareem was just starting and Wilt was still around, so the stat comparisons were going on. 

I've told this story before to friends, but I'll repeat it for you. My dad was a big Wilt fan (not a Laker fan per se) because of some story in Life magazine.  After the Celts won in 1969, I asked him how could the Lakers have lost if they had Wilt and West and Baylor while the Celtics were old.  He just looked at me and said, "Because Bill Russell doesn't lose."  I've never forgotten that because it came from a guy who'd been rooting against Russell for years.

Talk to anyone who watched basketball in the 60s and they'd tell you the same thing.  There was "something" about Russell in that he could will his team to a victory, but it wasn't by taking over the game offensively the way you saw with Jordan.  It was by elevating the level of his TEAM's play.  It's like his teammates wanted his respect so much they didn't want to let him down.  Not out of fear, but because if Bill Russell thought you were a player, it mattered to you deep in your soul.  It's like when you finally get the respect and pride from your father.  There's no feeling quite like that.  Russell was able to have that kind of relationship with his teammates.

[quote author=A-40 link=topic=131275.msg2279502#msg2279502 date=1211304846]@millco and idoltroll
Please read my post its not about how many rings or whatever its the level of competition.Could you name 5 strong teams in the Bill Russell era? your excuses do not exactly hold water didnt his competitors and rivals also have advanced training and medicine.I mean look at all these great players i mentioned these are all hall of famers or hall of famers in waiting and still they couldnt win anything when Jordan was around.Miller,Malone,Stockton,Olajuwon,Hardaway,Shaq,Ewing these are who Jordan dominated[/quote]First off, Olajuwon won while Jordan was around in '95 and Shaq and A. Hardaway's Magic defeated Jordan's Bulls in the 1995 playoffs.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199505120CHI.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199505160ORL.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199505180CHI.html

Secondly, although I agree that it would be harder for Russell to win as regularly in today's NBA (a less consolidated league, more player movement, more parity, more "complexity,", you also have to consider that an NBA with fewer franchises could produce more "super-teams," such as the 1969 Lakers. They featured Wilt Chamebrlain, Jerry West, and Elgin Baylor, arguably three of the twelve or fifteen greatest players ever, and they still lost to Russell's Celtics.

http://webuns.chez-alice.fr/finals/1969.htm

davidif:
millico and idoltroll;
Honestly when did you guys start watching basketball because i am really curious, and Millico88 i am interested how you went to the Boston garden to watch Bill Russell play during the Jim Crow era, please stop trying to fool us. Winning 6 championships in 8 years (it could have been 8 of 8 had he not retired abruptly) is more impressive than just looking at stats of the old era and saying woah, Russell won 11 championships!!! of course if i played soccer against primary school students, i would be the next Ronaldo. A better analogy would be comparing Cassius Clay to Rocky Marciano. Rocky had the better record (undefeated) because he fought vastly inferior oponents and an aging Joe Lewis, Clay on the other hand fought some of the greatest heavyweights to have ever entered the Ring and lost a few but he is regarded as the greatest of all time. Yes Bill played some worthy adversaries at the time but they were just a few (West, Baylor, Oscar and Wilt) compared to MJ who was playing against many many many more talented players that i can't even begin to rattle off my head.
Finally to settle the debate, the NBA came out with the list of the greatest players to ever play the game sometime around 1998 and Michael Jordan was on top of the list. nuff said.

I'm not arguing against Jordan per se, but a poll taken or a list compiled in 1998 was going to naturally favor a current player as opposed to one who'd played thirty years earlier.

So that doesn't settle the debate at all, especially since any list or poll simply reflects opinion, not rock-hard science.

[quote author=A-40 link=topic=131275.msg2267507#msg2267507 date=1210958316]@davidif
I agree with you a lot of idoltroll's analysis are very very flawed comparing Bill Russells achievement to M.J's tell me how many good players where in the league as at that time?Comparing M.J to Larry Bird holds no water that was a very weak point why not compare both players in their prime[/quote]You also need to consider the advantages afforded to athletes in different eras. Russell was supremely athletic and more athletic than any big today (not relative to the time, I mean absolutely). Give him the advantages of the modern athlete, and I'd think we'd see something special.

Jordan had advance medicine, training, and 2 eras of players to emulate his game after.

Russell had people throwing hot dogs at him and calling him the n word in St.Louis.

davidif:
@idoltroll
Obviously you are just new to watching basketball so you go look at stats on google and dare to compare Bill Russell to Michael Jordan if you said this in public that winning 11 championships in the 50's is as impressive as winning 6 championships in 8 years in the 90's, people would laugh so hard till they fall from there chairs. Comparing Bill Russell to MJ is like comparing Rocky Marciano to The Great Prophet Ali (Cassius Clay), a man who went undefeated while fighting nobodys to a man who fought against some of the greatest of all time and lost a few fights. Lets get one thing straight, Bill Russell was one of the few black players in a league that was not competitive in other words he was going up against inferior unathletic white players, also let's not forget the fact the league hadn't merged with the ABA yet so there was a small talent pool at the time. I would sure love to see Michael Jordan dunk on Bill Russell that would make  a sportcenter highlight reel.
Your assertion that Michael Jordan struggled in the 80's is one of the most unbelievable comments i've ever read, this guy was scoring over 50 points over a Larry Bird led Celtics which made Larry Bird say that "there is Michael Jordan and there is everybody else".

You are like the only person in the world to think that Bill Russell is as good as MJ. For further validation, when the list of the top 50 players of all time was released in 1998 Michael Jordan is considered to be the greatest player of all time so be quiet.
By the way, did you ever watch Bill Russell play, i don't think so but i watched Michael Jordan play.

Well, I watched Bill Russell play.  I also watched Michael Jordan get beaten three times by the Pistons.  That's more playoff losses than Russell had in his entire career.  BTW, you do realize that Russell won 9 of his titles in the 60s, not the 50s like you alluded to.  And he beat some pretty decent players to get them -- guys named Wilt, Oscar, West and Baylor.

If you want a play that would show up on SportsCenter, take Jordan.  If you want a guy that would be on the winning team, take Russell.  He's the greatest winner in the history of team sports.  And in a league where postseason success is how the greats are determined, no one can touch him.

davidif:
@poster
How dare you put Bill Russell ahead of MJ. This is basketball heresy, if you said this in basketball circles everybody would laugh at you. You obviously don't sound like a knowledgable basketball fan because everybody agrees that MJ is hands down the G.O.A.T (THE GREATEST OF ALL TIME). Having said that Bill Russell was great but he is not even regarded as the best of his era, Wilt Chamberlain was and also both this guys played in an era where there were no good athletes, only stiff little white guys, that's why they dominated, i would love to see them play in this mordern day era.

What exactly did Jordan do that was so much better than what Russell did, other than doing it later so that you actually remember it?? They each won 5 MVPs. Russell also finished 2nd twice, 3rd twice and 4th twice; Jordan finished 2nd three times and 3rd twice. I said there isn't much of a difference, but it's hard to overlook 11 rings in 13 years. Think about it, Russell lost two playoff series in his entire career, and he was hurt for one of them. Jordan lost more than that to the Pistons.

Russell won titles when he was on the best team, when there wasn't a clear favorite and when his team was the underdog. In the NBA where playoff success is how we separate the great from the not so great, no one can touch Russell.

Russell is the GOAT IMO. 11 rings in 13 years trumps Jordan and they have the same number of MVPs, 5.  The Celtics didn't win before Russell got there and they stopped winning as soon as he left.  Plus the Celtics didn't have a team like the Pistons that dominated them the way they did Jordan.  It's not a big gap, and I can certainly understand people taking Jordan.  But there are enough little things to sway me to Russell.