more impressive: 1 chip with 0 hofers or 11 with 2-5 hofers?

[AussieRules]

11 rings and I don’t care if you’re the best player on the team for all them either.

Basketball is a team sport, you play every year to be the last team standing. Nothing sucks more than the pain of defeat, I’d rather be the last man standing with more jewellery to show for it.

[post]

out of the 4-8 official hall of famers i say he arguably had 2-5 real hall of famers for every chip

so you could see it as 11 chips with a bare minimum of 2 real hall of famers every time and plenty of non hall of fame depth

i don't think it's crazy to think 1 chip with 0 hall of famers is more impressive

[Fencer reregistered]

it's actually 4-8 hofers for russell

he never won with less than 4 hofers and he never won with more than 8 hofers at the same time

how many of them are actually hofers is subjective

You may be right. I'd completely forgotten Arnie Risen.

And you weren't even making the mistake of counting Don Nelson.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Most of Those hall of famers that everyone uses to detract from Russell are only HOF guys because of their titles.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

With no rings which of Russell's teammates would be Hall of Farmer?

Russell is a Hall of Famer.

Cousy might be a Hall of Famer without rings but not because he was a dominant player. Cousy' shooting percentage was horrible. Cousy's defense and athleticism are nothing special. Cousy is a borderline Hall of Fame player without rings because he changed ball handling.

John Havlicek Belongs in the Hall without rings for what he did after Russell retired. Havlicek was a good defender and had infinite stamina and worked hard but he was not a good shooter for most of his years with Russell. Havlicek could get an open shot but he did not hit the shots all that well until later in his career.

Sam Jones is an All-Star without rings but not a Hall of Famer.

Heinsohn shot undefendable shots but he shot horribly by modern standards and was only mediocre by the standards of the day.

Sharmin was a good shooter for his era. Not good by modern standards. Without rings Sharmin would not be a Hall of Famer.

KC Jones, Frank Ramsey and Satch Sanders are just role players.

Is Bailey Howell in the Hall? His scoring was important at the end of the Russell Celtics run.

Still without the Rings only Russell, Havlicek and maybe Cousy get into the Hall.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

out of the 4-8 official hall of famers i say he arguably had 2-5 real hall of famers for every chip

so you could see it as 11 chips with a bare minimum of 2 real hall of famers every time and plenty of non hall of fame depth

i don't think it's crazy to think 1 chip with 0 hall of famers is more impressive

I think none of Russell's teammates where top 10 players in the league during any of his champions. His teams were more like the Ben Wallace Pistons only Russell was a lot more dominant than Ben Wallace was. His teams were deep with borderline All-Star level talent and good role players.

I would argue that Havlicek only became a top 10 level player for a few years in the 1970s after Russell was retired.

[post]

Most of Those hall of famers that everyone uses to detract from Russell are only HOF guys because of their titles.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

With no rings which of Russell's teammates would be Hall of Farmer?

Russell is a Hall of Famer.

Cousy might be a Hall of Famer without rings but not because he was a dominant player. Cousy' shooting percentage was horrible. Cousy's defense and athleticism are nothing special. Cousy is a borderline Hall of Fame player without rings because he changed ball handling.

John Havlicek Belongs in the Hall without rings for what he did after Russell retired. Havlicek was a good defender and had infinite stamina and worked hard but he was not a good shooter for most of his years with Russell. Havlicek could get an open shot but he did not hit the shots all that well until later in his career.

Sam Jones is an All-Star without rings but not a Hall of Famer.

Heinsohn shot undefendable shots but he shot horribly by modern standards and was only mediocre by the standards of the day.

Sharmin was a good shooter for his era. Not good by modern standards. Without rings Sharmin would not be a Hall of Famer.

KC Jones, Frank Ramsey and Satch Sanders are just role players.

Is Bailey Howell in the Hall? His scoring was important at the end of the Russell Celtics run.

Still without the Rings only Russell, Havlicek and maybe Cousy get into the Hall.

yes, bailey howell is in the hall

according to this article there is a 100% probability havlicek makes the hall with no chips, 99.99% probability cousy makes the hall with no chips and 92.99% sharman makes the hall with no chips

https://www.reddit.com/r/bostonceltics/comments/4zhyub/throwback_thursday_iv_how_stacked_were_the_bill/

sam jones was the leading scorer in the playoffs during 3 chip runs and the second leading scorer during 3 other chip runs. he is 33rd all time in win shares per 48 in the regular season. he shot above league average throughout his career. according to the article he has a 39.49% of making the hall with no chips. i see that as a vast underestimate

out of 8 chips heinsohn won he was the leading scorer for boston in the playoffs during 4 of those and in the top 3 in 3 of the other 4. he shot above league average in 4 of 8 of those years. pretty impressive and arguably hall material

[Fencer reregistered]

Most of Those hall of famers that everyone uses to detract from Russell are only HOF guys because of their titles.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

With no rings which of Russell's teammates would be Hall of Farmer?

Russell is a Hall of Famer.

Cousy might be a Hall of Famer without rings but not because he was a dominant player. Cousy' shooting percentage was horrible. Cousy's defense and athleticism are nothing special. Cousy is a borderline Hall of Fame player without rings because he changed ball handling.

John Havlicek Belongs in the Hall without rings for what he did after Russell retired. Havlicek was a good defender and had infinite stamina and worked hard but he was not a good shooter for most of his years with Russell. Havlicek could get an open shot but he did not hit the shots all that well until later in his career.

Sam Jones is an All-Star without rings but not a Hall of Famer.

Heinsohn shot undefendable shots but he shot horribly by modern standards and was only mediocre by the standards of the day.

Sharmin was a good shooter for his era. Not good by modern standards. Without rings Sharmin would not be a Hall of Famer.

KC Jones, Frank Ramsey and Satch Sanders are just role players.

Is Bailey Howell in the Hall? His scoring was important at the end of the Russell Celtics run.

Still without the Rings only Russell, Havlicek and maybe Cousy get into the Hall.

I think you're being too harsh. Cousy was MVP along with being All-NBA many times. Sharman peaked at 5th in MVP voting, was 8x All-Star, and made 7 All-NBA teams. Sam Jones had two top-5 MVP seasons, made 5 All-Star games, and was on 3 All-NBA teams. Heinsohn got a few MVP votes himself, was a 6x All-Star, and made 4 All-NBA teams. Whatever we think of the others, those four guys were all solid HoFers.

[Lalouie]

walton and olajuwon won 1 each with 0 hofers

russell won 11 with 2-5 hofers

every champion will tell you it's harder to repeat, so what i gather from that is "you've had your day in the sun. now do it again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again."

did i get all the agains

[post]

Most of Those hall of famers that everyone uses to detract from Russell are only HOF guys because of their titles.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

With no rings which of Russell's teammates would be Hall of Farmer?

Russell is a Hall of Famer.

Cousy might be a Hall of Famer without rings but not because he was a dominant player. Cousy' shooting percentage was horrible. Cousy's defense and athleticism are nothing special. Cousy is a borderline Hall of Fame player without rings because he changed ball handling.

John Havlicek Belongs in the Hall without rings for what he did after Russell retired. Havlicek was a good defender and had infinite stamina and worked hard but he was not a good shooter for most of his years with Russell. Havlicek could get an open shot but he did not hit the shots all that well until later in his career.

Sam Jones is an All-Star without rings but not a Hall of Famer.

Heinsohn shot undefendable shots but he shot horribly by modern standards and was only mediocre by the standards of the day.

Sharmin was a good shooter for his era. Not good by modern standards. Without rings Sharmin would not be a Hall of Famer.

KC Jones, Frank Ramsey and Satch Sanders are just role players.

Is Bailey Howell in the Hall? His scoring was important at the end of the Russell Celtics run.

Still without the Rings only Russell, Havlicek and maybe Cousy get into the Hall.

I think you're being too harsh. Cousy was MVP along with being All-NBA many times. Sharman peaked at 5th in MVP voting, was 8x All-Star, and made 7 All-NBA teams. Sam Jones had two top-5 MVP seasons, made 5 All-Star games, and was on 3 All-NBA teams. Heinsohn got a few MVP votes himself, was a 6x All-Star, and made 4 All-NBA teams. Whatever we think of the others, those four guys were all solid HoFers.

yeah, cousy made all nba 12 straight years. that's incredible

[post]

walton and olajuwon won 1 each with 0 hofers

russell won 11 with 2-5 hofers

every champion will tell you it's harder to repeat, so what i gather from that is "you've had your day in the sun. now do it again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again."

did i get all the agains

walton's career was destroyed by injuries

olajuwon repeated, but only won once with 0 hall of famers. olajuwon arguably could've won 11 chips in russell's place

try again

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Still without the Rings only Russell, Havlicek and maybe Cousy get into the Hall.

yes, bailey howell is in the hall

according to this article there is a 100% probability havlicek makes the hall with no chips, 99.99% probability cousy makes the hall with no chips and 92.99% sharman makes the hall with no chips

https://www.reddit.com/r/bostonceltics/comments/4zhyub/throwback_thursday_iv_how_stacked_were_the_bill/

sam jones was the leading scorer in the playoffs during 3 chip runs and the second leading scorer during 3 other chip runs. he is 33rd all time in win shares per 48 in the regular season. he shot above league average throughout his career. according to the article he has a 39.49% of making the hall with no chips. i see that as a vast underestimate

out of 8 chips heinsohn won he was the leading scorer for boston in the playoffs during 4 of those and in the top 3 in 3 of the other 4. he shot above league average in 4 of 8 of those years. pretty impressive and arguably hall material

I am ignoring Olympics and college. I think Frank Ramsey might be in the Hall partly for what he did in college if my vague memory is right.

I don't know about Sam Jones without the rings. He was a reliable scorer. Was he better or worse for his era than Paul Pierce for his era. I think Sam Jones is one step below Paul Pierce for his era. In this era players a rung down from Paul Pierce without rings don't get in the Hall of Fame. It was easier to get into the Hall of Fame in Sam Jones Era even for non-champions. But the thread is probably thinking that 1960s Hall of Famers without rings are the equivalent in impact for their era as modern Hall of farmers without rings.

Who on Sam Jones level in his era got into the Hall without a ring based on their NBA work?

Heihnson was in the 10 to 15 range on the NBA leading scores list. Most of the other top 20 scorers shot more efficiently than Heihnson. Heinhson's most efficient scoring year was something like FG %42. The league average fg% was low but not much lower than Heinsohn's percentage.

I don't think Heinsohn has much of a case for being in the Hall without rings. After seeing a few Heihnson games on video I was impressed by the difficulty of some of the shots he took but it looked like bad shot selection. It might be a bit of an Alan Iverson situation in that on a team with bad half court offense somebody has to put up difficult shots therefore Iverson gets a pass for his low shooting percentage.

[Lalouie]

walton and olajuwon won 1 each with 0 hofers

russell won 11 with 2-5 hofers

every champion will tell you it's harder to repeat, so what i gather from that is "you've had your day in the sun. now do it again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again."

did i get all the agains

walton's career was destroyed by injuries

olajuwon repeated, but only won once with 0 hall of famers. olajuwon arguably could've won 11 chips in russell's place

try again

for what possible reason are you making this utterly absurd comment. you've been watching too much alternate reality movies.

and NO, "the man in the high castle" did not really happen!

[post]

Still without the Rings only Russell, Havlicek and maybe Cousy get into the Hall.

yes, bailey howell is in the hall

according to this article there is a 100% probability havlicek makes the hall with no chips, 99.99% probability cousy makes the hall with no chips and 92.99% sharman makes the hall with no chips

https://www.reddit.com/r/bostonceltics/comments/4zhyub/throwback_thursday_iv_how_stacked_were_the_bill/

sam jones was the leading scorer in the playoffs during 3 chip runs and the second leading scorer during 3 other chip runs. he is 33rd all time in win shares per 48 in the regular season. he shot above league average throughout his career. according to the article he has a 39.49% of making the hall with no chips. i see that as a vast underestimate

out of 8 chips heinsohn won he was the leading scorer for boston in the playoffs during 4 of those and in the top 3 in 3 of the other 4. he shot above league average in 4 of 8 of those years. pretty impressive and arguably hall material

I am ignoring Olympics and college. I think Frank Ramsey might be in the Hall partly for what he did in college if my vague memory is right.

I don't know about Sam Jones without the rings. He was a reliable scorer. Was he better or worse for his era than Paul Pierce for his era. I think Sam Jones is one step below Paul Pierce for his era. In this era players a rung down from Paul Pierce without rings don't get in the Hall of Fame. It was easier to get into the Hall of Fame in Sam Jones Era even for non-champions. But the thread is probably thinking that 1960s Hall of Famers without rings are the equivalent in impact for their era as modern Hall of farmers without rings.

Who on Sam Jones level in his era got into the Hall without a ring based on their NBA work?

Heihnson was in the 10 to 15 range on the NBA leading scores list. Most of the other top 20 scorers shot more efficiently than Heihnson. Heinhson's most efficient scoring year was something like FG %42. The league average fg% was low but not much lower than Heinsohn's percentage.

I don't think Heinsohn has much of a case for being in the Hall without rings. After seeing a few Heihnson games on video I was impressed by the difficulty of some of the shots he took but it looked like bad shot selection. It might be a bit of an Alan Iverson situation in that on a team with bad half court offense somebody has to put up difficult shots therefore Iverson gets a pass for his low shooting percentage.

yes, ramsey is in the hall but i wasn't counting him as a "real" hall of famer. his playoff win shares per 48 for his career was higher than russell's. i'm not saying that makes him better than russell, but it's additional evidence how much talent russell had on his teams

jones made 3 all nba teams when they only had 10 picks per year. pierce made 4 all nba teams when there were 15 picks per year. i'd say that's a rough way to say they are similar quality. jones's playoff peak ppg was higher than pierce's

paul arizin is arguably on sam jones's level and won 1 ring to jones's 10. it's a vast disparity in rings but not a vast disparity in talent

is it really conceivable a player could be the leading scorer on 4 championship teams, as heinsohn was, and not be a hall of famer? perhaps, but i don't think it's all that plausible

[AdagioPace]

fun fact: Hofer is one of the most common surnames in the Tyrol area

[JN61]

Dirk has the hardest modern championship x

Unless we listen to blind witnesses.

[post]

every champion will tell you it's harder to repeat, so what i gather from that is "you've had your day in the sun. now do it again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again."

did i get all the agains

walton's career was destroyed by injuries

olajuwon repeated, but only won once with 0 hall of famers. olajuwon arguably could've won 11 chips in russell's place

try again

for what possible reason are you making this utterly absurd comment. you've been watching too much alternate reality movies.

and NO, "the man in the high castle" did not really happen!

the simple answer is olajuwon was the superior player

[Eric Millegan]

Robert Horry should be a Hall of Famer IMO so that cancels out Hakeem.

[Eric Millegan]

out of the 4-8 official hall of famers i say he arguably had 2-5 real hall of famers for every chip

so you could see it as 11 chips with a bare minimum of 2 real hall of famers every time and plenty of non hall of fame depth

i don't think it's crazy to think 1 chip with 0 hall of famers is more impressive

I think none of Russell's teammates where top 10 players in the league during any of his champions. His teams were more like the Ben Wallace Pistons only Russell was a lot more dominant than Ben Wallace was. His teams were deep with borderline All-Star level talent and good role players.

I would argue that Havlicek only became a top 10 level player for a few years in the 1970s after Russell was retired.

Ben Wallace Pistons had 4 All Stars.

[Eric Millegan]

At face value, anyone with sense would take 11 rings over 1 no matter the context but the NBA was just too different back then. With no free agency, one team could hoard all the talent and just dominate for years, which is exactly what happened with the Celtics.

That all said, Bill Russel's impact on the Celtics is incredibly underated, especially the defensive end.

How is it underrated?? The Finals MVP trophy is NAMED after him.

[Eric Millegan]

2. Stockton & Malone. They played 87 years together, if they were that good, they’d have won at least 1 title.

They made it to the NBA Finals TWICE. In a deep Western Conference full of Shaq and David Robinson and Hakeem Olajuwon among others. They also were a shot away from making Game 7 in both series. They lost both because Jordan was and is the GOAT. By the way 1998 is shady. In Game 6, a three point shot by Howard Eisley was waived off when it was clearly before the buzzer and then later in the game, they counted a shot by Ron Harper that should not have counted. I still claim Jazz won that game and we were robbed of a Game 7.