RealGM

walton and olajuwon won 1 each with 0 hofers

russell won 11 with 2-5 hofers

Hakeem has two championships. EDIT - I guess you mean the one without Drexler.

Bill Russell.

That consistency of winning 11 rings in 13 years as the best player on Celtics is completely insane.

People don't talk enough how ridiculously impactful Bill Russell was in his prime.

A lot of factors to consider but without knowing anything else, I’ll take the guy who won 11 rings. Assuming he was the best player for most of them.

But if you win multiple championships, doesn't that mean some of your teammates will automatically make the hall of fame because of it?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using RealGM mobile app

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.

GeorgeMarcus wrote:A lot of factors to consider but without knowing anything else, I’ll take the guy who won 11 rings. Assuming he was the best player for most of them.

Yea, it's a hard question to appropriately answer when is simplified to such an absurd level.

Russell's opponents had some HoFers too. He won his last Finals against a team with West, Baylor and Wilt. The Hawks had Pettit, McCauley and Hagan. Etc.

11 has to be more impressive. Superstars have played with other HoF’ers/superstars and have failed to win even 1 title, let alone multiple. Winning 11 is crazy, regardless of who you have alongside you.

But it would have to be 11 in this kind of league. It’s impressive either way, but the talent pool wasn’t quite the same/nearly as deep.

Some of those 5 hof are hof’ers because they won 11

The league was too different back then - the number of teams (less than 10 teams until 1967 vs 27 teams in 1994), the amount of playoff series and wins to win a championship (in 1965 Boston played just 2 series and only 8 wins to win the championship vs 1994 Houston who needed 4 series and 15 wins to win the championship) , no free agency etc...

but like most everyone else, assuming best player on the team, 1 vs 11 championships is just too big of a gap...

And by the way -- there's nobody who won all 11 of those championships with Russell. No teammates. No coach either.

11 no question.
1. they are equal(lets not act as if most singular rings aren't in reference to the leagues best player or the current dynasty)
2.you win enough everyone becomes HOFers.

PD28 wrote:But if you win multiple championships, doesn't that mean some of your teammates will automatically make the hall of fame because of it?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using RealGM mobile app

Dupp wrote:Some of those 5 hof are hof’ers because they won 11

It's like when people talk about all stars and winning. Are they all stars because their teams are winning or are their teams winning because they're all stars? Context matters

Dirk has the hardest modern championship x

At first glance I thought this had to do with Durant and haters.

2 chips and 11 haters or 1 chip and 2 to 5 haters.

The 2 most pathetic things I’ve seen....

1. Durants titles. He still has 0 in my opinion, I’m not counting that weak ****.
2. Stockton & Malone. They played 87 years together, if they were that good, they’d have won at least 1 title.

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

I thought this was about Larry Brown vs Phil Jackson...

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