Bill Russell's Offense

[colts18]

Points%, TS% relative league average

61: 14.1%, -1.5%
62: 15.6%, +1.0%
63: 14.1%, -2.8%
64: 13.3%, -2.4%
65: 12.5%, -0.7%
66: 12.2%, -3.9%
67: 11.1%, +0.7%
68: 10.8%, -3.7%
69: 8.9%, -2.4%

Average: 12.5% , -1.8 TS%
Tyson Chandler: 11.9%, +18.5 TS%

Celtics offense relative to league:
57: -0.5 (5th out of 8)
58: -1.1 (7th out of 8)
59: -0.6 (6th out of 8)
60: -0.1 (5th out of 8)
61: -3.9 (8th out of 8)
62: -1.8 (7th out of 9)
63: -3.5 (last)
64: -3.9 (last)
65: -3.4 (8th out of 9)
66: -3.2 (8th out of 9)
67: 2.0 (4th out of 10)
68: -1.7 (8th out of 12)
69: -1.9 (9th out of 14)
Average: -1.82

1 year out of 13 above average. That is terrible offensive production. You can't be the GOAT if you are below average offensively

[G35]

Somehow Russell's impact shows his defense overcomes any offensive shortcomings. I give him credit for winning 11 chips and I don't think anyone could duplicate what he did but I don't think he wins more than 2 rings with any other franchise and that's being generous......

[Brooklyn_34]

Somehow Russell's impact shows his defense overcomes any offensive shortcomings. I give him credit for winning 11 chips and I don't think anyone could duplicate what he did but I don't think he wins more than 2 rings with any other franchise and that's being generous......

he didn't have to score much....he made other players score for him .

Not to mention he shut down the paint.

[Doctor MJ]

Celtics offense relative to league:
57: -0.5 (5th out of 8)
58: -1.1 (7th out of 8)
59: -0.6 (6th out of 8)
60: -0.1 (5th out of 8)
61: -3.9 (8th out of 8)
62: -1.8 (7th out of 9)
63: -3.5 (last)
64: -3.9 (last)
65: -3.4 (8th out of 9)
66: -3.2 (8th out of 9)
67: 2.0 (4th out of 10)
68: -1.7 (8th out of 12)
69: -1.9 (9th out of 14)
Average: -1.82

1 year out of 13 above average. That is terrible offensive production. You can't be the GOAT if you are below average offensively

Okay this part drives me up the freaking wall. You just used a partial team analysis to imply serious failures to be blamed on their star...for a team that won 11 titles in 13 years. I don't understand how you can sit there typing each row of that without it coming into your head, "I'm using a line of reasoning that eliminates the star of the greatest dynasty in all modern sports history, but doesn't eliminate the stars on teams who could never beat the first star's team. How does that make sense?"

It doesn't taken on its own merits. Obviously the Celtic D was so good it overcame that weak offense.

Maybe not as obvious is the fact that the Celtics and Russell specifically adopted strategies to maximize defense at the cost of their offense.

[penbeast0]

Run the same numbers defensively and for rebounding for Michael Jordan v. Bill Russell and you will find the relative impacts reversed; Russell was a GOAT level rebounder and his defensive impact was non-parallelled. Whether that was Russell's genius or strongly era affected I will leave to argument.

There are 4 keys to the Wages of Win:
Offensive efficiency (Russell is weak here)
Defensive efficiency (Russell is far and away the GOAT)
Rebounding differential (Russell is one of the GOAT contenders)
Turnover differential (Russell could do well here with his ability to block shots recoverable by teammates -- we don't have the numbers to verify it though)

No one else excels in any two categories quite as much as Russell does in Defensive Efficiency and Rebounding Differential -- even Wilt's effect on team offensive efficiency is a long way from GOAT contention.

[PostKeynesian]

penbeast I think you meant to say whether it was Russell's genius or his GREAT team...

[JordansBulls]

Celtics offense relative to league:
57: -0.5 (5th out of 8)
58: -1.1 (7th out of 8)
59: -0.6 (6th out of 8)
60: -0.1 (5th out of 8)
61: -3.9 (8th out of 8)
62: -1.8 (7th out of 9)
63: -3.5 (last)
64: -3.9 (last)
65: -3.4 (8th out of 9)
66: -3.2 (8th out of 9)
67: 2.0 (4th out of 10)
68: -1.7 (8th out of 12)
69: -1.9 (9th out of 14)
Average: -1.82

1 year out of 13 above average. That is terrible offensive production. You can't be the GOAT if you are below average offensively

Okay this part drives me up the freaking wall. You just used a partial team analysis to imply serious failures to be blamed on their star...for a team that won 11 titles in 13 years. I don't understand how you can sit there typing each row of that without it coming into your head, "I'm using a line of reasoning that eliminates the star of the greatest dynasty in all modern sports history, but doesn't eliminate the stars on teams who could never beat the first star's team. How does that make sense?"

It doesn't taken on its own merits. Obviously the Celtic D was so good it overcame that weak offense.

Maybe not as obvious is the fact that the Celtics and Russell specifically adopted strategies to maximize defense at the cost of their offense.

The team had several stars before Russell even came and even in Russell's rookie season had 3 guys who made the allstar team over him including a guy who won league mvp and another who won ROY over him.

[Warspite]

Don Nelson esseentialy runs Auerbachs offense. The goal is to speed the game up and take as many shots as you can. They want to force you to play at a faster pace than you want to. The BIG differance is that they are a fast break high tempo team that plays defense. Auerbach is essentialy D Antonio but he has Nash and he has D Howard along with Wade, LBJ and Bosh. WIth that lineup he most certainly can uptempo the game, create turnovers and get timely stops to win games and Championships.

If Nelsons Warriors teams had Hakeem or DRob to play with Run TMC you might have had a glimpse of what the Celtics looked like.


What makes Russell so awsome is not that he played so great but that he invented many of the concepts of defense that todays players use. He is the Thomas Eddison of NBA defensive concepts. Sure others have built on what he did but he started/invented it.

[rrravenred]

I'd also say that offence contributions don't just boil down to individual scoring / efficiency. Russ' high-post passing was a key element in the Green machine (along with the outlet passing from his rebounding and blocking).

[colts18]

I'd also say that offence contributions don't just boil down to individual scoring / efficiency. Russ' high-post passing was a key element in the Green machine (along with the outlet passing from his rebounding and blocking).

Key contribution to a last place offense. Every time I read about Russell here, he gets romanticized to a ridiculous extent. Especially his offense. There is no way you can justify 13 PPG on below average efficiency on a terrible offense and call him a good offensive player because of his passing. Why didn't his passing translate to offensive success?

[ahonui06]

His offense and defense led Bill Russell to 11 titles. GOAT.

[Dipper 13]

Minus shooting he did everything at a high level.


Red and Me: My Coach, My Lifelong Friend - Bill Russell







Sports Illustrated - November 18, 1963

"In my modest opinion," says Russell, who is not a particularly good shooter, "shooting is of relatively little importance in a player's overall game. Almost all of us in the NBA are All-Americas. We became All-Americas by averaging 20 points or more a game, so by the layman's standards all of us can shoot. It's the other phases of the game that make the difference. If you're going to score 15 and let your man score 20 you're a deficit. If your value to the team is strictly as a shooter, you are of very little value. Offense is the first thing you learn as a kid in any sport: catch a pass, dribble, bat, shoot. You learn the offensive aspects of a game long before you learn there even are defensive aspects. These are the skills you come by naturally. Defense is hard work because it's unnatural.

"Defense is a science," Russell says, "not a helter-skelter thing you just luck into. Every move has six or seven years of work behind it. In basketball your body gets to do things it couldn't do in normal circumstances. You take abnormal steps, you have to run backward almost as fast as you can run forward. On defense you must never cross your legs while running, and that's the most natural thing to do when changing direction. Instead, you try to glide like a crab. You have to fight the natural tendencies and do things naturally that aren't natural.

"In rebounding, position is the key. No two objects can occupy the same place at the same time. Seventy-five percent of the rebounds are taken below the height of the rim, so timing is important, because almost everyone in the league can reach the top of the rim. A really important part of rebounding is being able to jump up more than once. You have to keep trying for that ball. Sometimes you jump four or five times before you can get your hands on it. I used to practice jumping over and over again. When I was 6 feet 2, I could jump to the top of the rim 35 times, over and over.

"You have to have strong hands. Most of the time three guys will have their hands on the ball at the same time, and you have to be able to grab it away. I guess I just naturally have strong hands, but if I didn't I would exercise until they were strong. But getting the ball is only half the job. Then you have to do something with it."

[BattleTested]

Minus shooting he did everything at a high level.


Red and Me: My Coach, My Lifelong Friend - Bill Russell







Sports Illustrated - November 18, 1963

"In my modest opinion," says Russell, who is not a particularly good shooter, "shooting is of relatively little importance in a player's overall game. Almost all of us in the NBA are All-Americas. We became All-Americas by averaging 20 points or more a game, so by the layman's standards all of us can shoot. It's the other phases of the game that make the difference. If you're going to score 15 and let your man score 20 you're a deficit. If your value to the team is strictly as a shooter, you are of very little value. Offense is the first thing you learn as a kid in any sport: catch a pass, dribble, bat, shoot. You learn the offensive aspects of a game long before you learn there even are defensive aspects. These are the skills you come by naturally. Defense is hard work because it's unnatural.

"Defense is a science," Russell says, "not a helter-skelter thing you just luck into. Every move has six or seven years of work behind it. In basketball your body gets to do things it couldn't do in normal circumstances. You take abnormal steps, you have to run backward almost as fast as you can run forward. On defense you must never cross your legs while running, and that's the most natural thing to do when changing direction. Instead, you try to glide like a crab. You have to fight the natural tendencies and do things naturally that aren't natural.

"In rebounding, position is the key. No two objects can occupy the same place at the same time. Seventy-five percent of the rebounds are taken below the height of the rim, so timing is important, because almost everyone in the league can reach the top of the rim. A really important part of rebounding is being able to jump up more than once. You have to keep trying for that ball. Sometimes you jump four or five times before you can get your hands on it. I used to practice jumping over and over again. When I was 6 feet 2, I could jump to the top of the rim 35 times, over and over.

"You have to have strong hands. Most of the time three guys will have their hands on the ball at the same time, and you have to be able to grab it away. I guess I just naturally have strong hands, but if I didn't I would exercise until they were strong. But getting the ball is only half the job. Then you have to do something with it."

Real talk. If this was Facebook, I'd give you a like for this ****.

[Dipper 13]

Real talk. If this was Facebook, I'd give you a like for this ****.

Yes, we can note that Coach Auerbach didn't try to "handle" Russell or dictate his game. Right down from owner Walter Brown, the Celtics made their players feel at home, almost like a second family.



Red Auerbach’s Winning Ways - The Editors of New Word City






Let me tell you a story: a lifetime in the game - Red Auerbach

[penbeast0]

penbeast I think you meant to say whether it was Russell's genius or his GREAT team...

I don't think the Celtics were all that great compared to other dynasties . . . very deep true but their secondary stars all had issues except maybe Sam Jones. Cousy and Heinlein inefficient and poor defensively, Sharman couldn't create for himself, Havlicek was inefficient though good defensivly, Howell was efficient but poor defensively, KC Jones and Sanders were poor offensive players . . . overall they were a mediocre offensive team and the defense and rebounding around Russell wasn't that special, they just got a bit of an overblown rep (especially in the HOF -- Satch Sanders?) because they played at a superfast pace and won all the rings with Russell.

Doesn't mean there wasn't a lot of talent, just not as impressed by the talent around Russell as I am by the talent around, say, Kareem or Magic on the Lakers, Bird on the Celtics, Wilt on the Sixers or Lakers, etc.