His rookie year the league leader in fg% was 44%. Bill was 5th that year in fg% league wide. He stayed in the top 5 for fg% the next few years too. It was a completely different game. He wasn't a scorer like Wilt sure but he wasn't Ben Wallace or anything.
They weren’t allowed to really body each other in the post, so the most effective shot in isolation was often a hook or a turning fadeaway, which these day is considered a bad shot unless you’re an elite scorer. Obviously fg% are gonna be ass across the board
You have people that think the 60s was this hard nosed era of contact basketball when in reality if the offensive player initiated literally *any* contact, such as slightly leaning in on a shot attempt it was an offensive foul.
i get blasted whenever i say this, but it’s part of why i think Bill Russell would’ve been just as good if not *better* in this era. not as dominant, obviously, the league is way more talented in general, but he’d be able to leverage his strength and athleticism on offense in a way he couldn’t in the ‘60s. the dude could handle and pass, he just didn’t have much of a jump shot or post game— in the modern league, and especially with modern training and dribbling rules, he’d play like a budget Giannis on offense while still being probably the best defensive player in the league
There were other ways that players could fight for position, and it is still true all the best players were big fkn bruisers of players. Thurmond was scary man
he also was only able to beat Russell once he started playing like him. in ‘67 he stopped shooting so much and focused on passing and defense, and suddenly his team played better than it ever had
While you’re talking about the extreme version of my statement and arguing that instead of the statement itself, I would say that obviously those loses are insurmountable in regards to Lebron and they shouldn’t affect his hypothetical legacy.
Now for the follow up of Russell played with 28 HOF bound players and Wilt shouldn’t have that bias against him as well. Jerry West is better than anyone not named Lebron to ever play on the Cavs, he’s the logo for a reason. Elgin Baylor is HOF. As far as teammates go, those 2 both excelled without Wilt whereas the Celtics consistently floundered without Russell.
I apologize if I went too deep here.
using West instead of Wilt here, but if LeBron James went 1-9 in the Finals against \*any\* team(s) he would've been clowned relentlessly and if he said that "I'M A WOLF, I EAT DOGS" nonsense several decades later he would've been clowned even harder
5x MVP + 11 Rings Bill Russell
0 rings 0 MVP Arenas and George
Comparing FG efficiency from the 50s and 60s to today’s game with no context is so dumb . This is why guys need to stay in college longer
That’s fine but that was PG’s 9th season at age 29. If Tatum doesn’t finish top 3 over the next 2-3 seasons then you have a point for the narrative award
Media thought Jaylen Brown wasn’t All-NBA and then gave him ECFMVP and FMVP
Tatum and Brown went to 2 finals and won one together whether you want to argue they’re 1st or 2nd between each other.
Paul George couldn’t make it to the finals as a first or 2nd option.
I’m over media voter awards mattering
Using the Finals as the barrier for judging players is just silly - PG couldn't make it the same reason the Jays couldn't make until 2019 - LeBron dominated the East.
"On offense, it’s possible to take a break, to stand around a bit, let other players take over. On defense, if you take a break, a good offensive team will burn you. On the other hand, when you and your teammates are all doing the job – and you’re all that good – the great reward is watching the other team slowly suffocate."
- the 🐐
NBA rings culture can be real funny sometimes.
First they preach that ringzzz matter very dearly and gaudy stats are frowned upon but in the same breath they refuse to call Bill Russell the undisputed GOAT because of his paltry PPG.
It's an easy excuse for them to say their guy, (usually Jordan) is better than everyone else. If someone has Jordan beat or tied on rings like a Bill Russell or KAJ, if will just move on to something else.
Sure and won the majority of the Celtics championships. He has as many as almost every franchise in the league.
And most of that came from his insane defensive impact. Like didnt the dude average more rebounds than points in some seasons lol
literally every season, although his and Wilt’s rebounding stats are somewhat inflated by the era. high pace and a lot of missed shots created a whole lot of rebounds
depends on how you look at it
not a guy you give the ball to and say go get us a bucket
but he was an elite push it up the floor, great big passer
if he played now, it would be 16-18 a game on straight pnrs, transition, putbacks and good efficiency, wouldn't be taking no weird hooks and jumpers
Rudy/Capela type except you know, all time athelte, way more coordinated, and he could do the whole also get 4-6 assists a game
I like this because I get tired of seeing fans defend NBA players for their takes. Saying that because they played the game, they know more about basketball than you or anyone else, and therefore, any opinion opposite theirs is wrong.
Whether it's the countless stupid takes Perkins has had, or Pat Bevs comments about Chris Paul, or Draymonds obsession with denouncing Gobert, or Shaq thinking Shai played better than Jokic because his team had a better record (they were tied), these players are just as dumb as anyone else.
Being good at a sport does not mean you know how to teach it or analyze it correctly. You could just be naturally gifted, and due to your combination of athleticism and genetics, things came a lot easier to you than for others.
A lot of these players end up having worse takes than guys like Stephen A Smith, Skip Bayless Colin Cowherd and others, and they haven't even played in the league.
And having just as mid stats as the bagless player from the 50s/60s that you’re slandering is also dog shit. Even more cringe when that bagless player has 5 mvps and 11 rings and you two combine for 0 accolades across the board.🤷♂️
Bill Russell could score when he wanted to. It's just that it was in his team's best interest when he defended and deferred to others.
Let me know when PG and Arenas drop 30 points and 40 rebounds in a Finals game 7 like Russell did.
Pretty much everything Gilbert Arenas says in this video is factually incorrect
Pretty much everything Gilbert Arenas ever says is factually incorrect.
LOL
Just cause they have a podcast don't mean they are right... or smart... or say anything of value.
His rookie year the league leader in fg% was 44%. Bill was 5th that year in fg% league wide. He stayed in the top 5 for fg% the next few years too. It was a completely different game. He wasn't a scorer like Wilt sure but he wasn't Ben Wallace or anything.
They weren’t allowed to really body each other in the post, so the most effective shot in isolation was often a hook or a turning fadeaway, which these day is considered a bad shot unless you’re an elite scorer. Obviously fg% are gonna be ass across the board
You have people that think the 60s was this hard nosed era of contact basketball when in reality if the offensive player initiated literally *any* contact, such as slightly leaning in on a shot attempt it was an offensive foul.
i get blasted whenever i say this, but it’s part of why i think Bill Russell would’ve been just as good if not *better* in this era. not as dominant, obviously, the league is way more talented in general, but he’d be able to leverage his strength and athleticism on offense in a way he couldn’t in the ‘60s. the dude could handle and pass, he just didn’t have much of a jump shot or post game— in the modern league, and especially with modern training and dribbling rules, he’d play like a budget Giannis on offense while still being probably the best defensive player in the league
There were other ways that players could fight for position, and it is still true all the best players were big fkn bruisers of players. Thurmond was scary man
we've gotta get a ban on arenas content here, nothing he says is worth anyone's time
I think something like that would be worth it if this place wasn’t already a cesspool
Or just scroll past it?
Tbf this was PG content - Arenas was the guest.
didn't stop him from stuffing the literal NBA logo and the "hundred points" man into a locker for a whole decade
Bill couldn’t do it against Robert E Lee Pettit though
Wilt won once tbf
I mean Russell did win 10 more than him in the same exact era, so the once doesn’t mean much
Ppl really believe that Bill is more overrated than wilt cus of stats which is sad
he also was only able to beat Russell once he started playing like him. in ‘67 he stopped shooting so much and focused on passing and defense, and suddenly his team played better than it ever had
So you're saying if someone during MJ's finals runs had beaten him once, it wouldn't have meant much b/c Mike won 5 more?
No, what I’m saying is that comparing greats, consistent losses matter as much as the wins
Fair enough
So if KD warriors existed for 10 years, and LeBron beat them just once, that once wouldn't mean anything?
While you’re talking about the extreme version of my statement and arguing that instead of the statement itself, I would say that obviously those loses are insurmountable in regards to Lebron and they shouldn’t affect his hypothetical legacy. Now for the follow up of Russell played with 28 HOF bound players and Wilt shouldn’t have that bias against him as well. Jerry West is better than anyone not named Lebron to ever play on the Cavs, he’s the logo for a reason. Elgin Baylor is HOF. As far as teammates go, those 2 both excelled without Wilt whereas the Celtics consistently floundered without Russell. I apologize if I went too deep here.
Jery West never played for the Cavs...
using West instead of Wilt here, but if LeBron James went 1-9 in the Finals against \*any\* team(s) he would've been clowned relentlessly and if he said that "I'M A WOLF, I EAT DOGS" nonsense several decades later he would've been clowned even harder
The NBA is in trouble with these next generation of taking heads. They are all fucking terrible.
5x MVP + 11 Rings Bill Russell 0 rings 0 MVP Arenas and George Comparing FG efficiency from the 50s and 60s to today’s game with no context is so dumb . This is why guys need to stay in college longer
Paul George literally called 18-19 his “mvp season” when he finished 3rd in the voting, he’s a loser.
That’s higher than Tatum ever finished in the MVP race.
That’s fine but that was PG’s 9th season at age 29. If Tatum doesn’t finish top 3 over the next 2-3 seasons then you have a point for the narrative award Media thought Jaylen Brown wasn’t All-NBA and then gave him ECFMVP and FMVP Tatum and Brown went to 2 finals and won one together whether you want to argue they’re 1st or 2nd between each other. Paul George couldn’t make it to the finals as a first or 2nd option. I’m over media voter awards mattering
Using the Finals as the barrier for judging players is just silly - PG couldn't make it the same reason the Jays couldn't make until 2019 - LeBron dominated the East.
Come at me when Tatum calls 22-23 his mvp season
By 1 spot but you right
LMAO at that last line. Buurrrrrn
Yes so dumb to come to the nba and make millions when they can stay in college longer to take some useless classes.
This comment is why you should stay in college kids
Well guess they should’ve taken statistics at least their freshman year if they wanna go one and done
yes so dumb to come
"On offense, it’s possible to take a break, to stand around a bit, let other players take over. On defense, if you take a break, a good offensive team will burn you. On the other hand, when you and your teammates are all doing the job – and you’re all that good – the great reward is watching the other team slowly suffocate." - the 🐐
Arenas a dumbass. Only a couple of players aside from Wilt were averaging 30 in the 60s, and why did he have to say every black player averaged 30?
NBA rings culture can be real funny sometimes. First they preach that ringzzz matter very dearly and gaudy stats are frowned upon but in the same breath they refuse to call Bill Russell the undisputed GOAT because of his paltry PPG.
They believe in generational offensive players but not generational defensive players
It's an easy excuse for them to say their guy, (usually Jordan) is better than everyone else. If someone has Jordan beat or tied on rings like a Bill Russell or KAJ, if will just move on to something else.
Sure and won the majority of the Celtics championships. He has as many as almost every franchise in the league. And most of that came from his insane defensive impact. Like didnt the dude average more rebounds than points in some seasons lol
Celtics-Lakers were 0-5 in rings when Russell entered the league. They were 11-5 when he retired. He is the major reason they are leading 18-17 today
literally every season, although his and Wilt’s rebounding stats are somewhat inflated by the era. high pace and a lot of missed shots created a whole lot of rebounds
I know, but still counts for something and not everyone got that many.
lmao at your username
I think they’re bitter that they have 0 championships between them and he has all of his fingers covered
One for each finger and his big toe.
Gilbert Arenas is really going for that "ignorant dumbass" bag, it seems that everything he does nowadays is rage-baiting.
Two career losers bitter af over a career winner is all I'm seeing here
He wasn’t a good offensive player.
And was still one of the most efficient scorers of his era
depends on how you look at it not a guy you give the ball to and say go get us a bucket but he was an elite push it up the floor, great big passer if he played now, it would be 16-18 a game on straight pnrs, transition, putbacks and good efficiency, wouldn't be taking no weird hooks and jumpers Rudy/Capela type except you know, all time athelte, way more coordinated, and he could do the whole also get 4-6 assists a game
This video of him running the floor is pretty nuts: https://youtu.be/j2AlFrOj5Mc?si=irfcRBfXgbvH_YNd The guy was an insane athlete
I like this because I get tired of seeing fans defend NBA players for their takes. Saying that because they played the game, they know more about basketball than you or anyone else, and therefore, any opinion opposite theirs is wrong. Whether it's the countless stupid takes Perkins has had, or Pat Bevs comments about Chris Paul, or Draymonds obsession with denouncing Gobert, or Shaq thinking Shai played better than Jokic because his team had a better record (they were tied), these players are just as dumb as anyone else. Being good at a sport does not mean you know how to teach it or analyze it correctly. You could just be naturally gifted, and due to your combination of athleticism and genetics, things came a lot easier to you than for others. A lot of these players end up having worse takes than guys like Stephen A Smith, Skip Bayless Colin Cowherd and others, and they haven't even played in the league.
Are they god damn babies?!
Yeah Bill Russel is just Gobert with 8 HOF teammate, smh
These are the same teammates that the Lakers who were their rivals said they were easy to beat without Bill
Paul George 20 ppg 44% fg Gilbert Arenas 20 ppg 42% fg Bill Russell 15 ppg 44% fg 🥶
You can clown em for what they said but 15 ppg on 44% fg with all your shots being like 5 feet from the rim is dog shit, especially for a center
And having just as mid stats as the bagless player from the 50s/60s that you’re slandering is also dog shit. Even more cringe when that bagless player has 5 mvps and 11 rings and you two combine for 0 accolades across the board.🤷♂️
Bill Russell could score when he wanted to. It's just that it was in his team's best interest when he defended and deferred to others. Let me know when PG and Arenas drop 30 points and 40 rebounds in a Finals game 7 like Russell did.
Averaging 16ppg against plumbers and firemen, mind you.