Gap Closer Defensively Between Bill Russell and Wilt or Hakeem & Ben Wallace/Mutombo.

[mdonnelly1989]

Whoever you think is better defensively between Ben Wallace and Mutombo. Personally I think it's a CLEAR WASH

People say that BIll Russell is the greatest defensive player of all time. But Wilt is consistently in top 5ish defensive big men of all time. So curios what the Gap is there?

For me Hakeem is comfortably the best defensive player of all time behind Bill. But Ben Wallace/Mutombo aren't leagues apart there. They are comfortably behind, but not significantly.

[70sFan]

Mutombo has a very reasonable case over Hakeem defensively, Wilt doesn't have any case over Russell on defense.

[Jaivl]

The defensive gap between Russell and X is always gonna be bigger, unless you compare the other player with Trae Young or something.

[henshao]

I found this graph interesting a video on Hakeem:

Spoiler:

Watch on YouTube

"Defense" can be a pretty blanket term though. As mentioned you could argue Mutumbo was overall a more impactful defender than Hakeem (I wouldn't, though) but the same is not true between Wilt and Bill

[No-more-rings]

I’m not sure if Hakeem is even decisively better than Mutumbo on defense.

[Owly]

I found this graph interesting a video on Hakeem:

Spoiler:

Watch on YouTube

"Defense" can be a pretty blanket term though. As mentioned you could argue Mutumbo was overall a more impactful defender than Hakeem (I wouldn't, though) but the same is not true between Wilt and Bill

It's not nothing (nor suggesting that you aren't aware of limitations) but ...

1) it's limited spans
2) against a limited pool
3) the percentile of "all-star" changes over time (sample of games gets smaller, standard higher as league expands)
4) depending on time, division which all-stars you're facing will differ (and some you'll have less room to decrease, some you may be fine with scoring their averages or even taking more primacy - say a Duckworth with slightly below average shooting, awful passing and better weapons elsewhere)
5) TS% includes opponent free throw luck (unless stated as neutralized for)
6) Opponent shooting/ scoring volume are two aspects of man defense which is one aspect of a centers defensive responsibility (man might include obscuring passing lanes, denying offensive rebounding position, general positioning and harrying so as to deny a shot and eat the clock - plus if you're taking enough off efficiency you might want to keep the volume up? though if you were still having the same time on ball then cutting their shooting probably means later clock attempts for others? - then obviously team level stuff affecting 4 others players both directly and deterrence ...).
Between the above and team strategies differing, like I say not nothing but quite a limited part of the job.

Also I'd kind of like to see more of a sample as to what other centers (say the likes of a Daugherty) did to get more of a sense of scale (and how much playing with the spans selected changes where guys land).

Oh and Ewing's time frame ...

[henshao]

I found this graph interesting a video on Hakeem:

Spoiler:

Watch on YouTube

"Defense" can be a pretty blanket term though. As mentioned you could argue Mutumbo was overall a more impactful defender than Hakeem (I wouldn't, though) but the same is not true between Wilt and Bill

It's not nothing (nor suggesting that you aren't aware of limitations) but ...

1) it's limited spans
2) against a limited pool
3) the percentile of "all-star" changes over time (sample of games gets smaller, standard higher as league expands)
4) depending on time, division which all-stars you're facing will differ (and some you'll have less room to decrease, some you may be fine with scoring their averages or even taking more primacy - say a Duckworth with slightly below average shooting, awful passing and better weapons elsewhere)
5) TS% includes opponent free throw luck (unless stated as neutralized for)
6) Opponent shooting/ scoring volume are two aspects of man defense which is one aspect of a centers defensive responsibility (man might include obscuring passing lanes, denying offensive rebounding position, general positioning and harrying so as to deny a shot and eat the clock - plus if you're taking enough off efficiency you might want to keep the volume up? though if you were still having the same time on ball then cutting their shooting probably means later clock attempts for others? - then obviously team level stuff affecting 4 others players both directly and deterrence ...).
Between the above and team strategies differing, like I say not nothing but quite a limited part of the job.

Also I'd kind of like to see more of a sample as to what other centers (say the likes of a Daugherty) did to get more of a sense of scale (and how much playing with the spans selected changes where guys land).

Oh and Ewing's time frame ...

It's only a limited snap shot for sure but I do like that Hakeem, Mutumbo, Russell and Wilt are on there, in regards to the topic

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Russell was blocking shots that never should have been taken. It was like some of those shootes had never seen a shot blocker before.

[70sFan]

Russell was blocking shots that never should have been taken. It was like some of those shootes had never seen a shot blocker before.

Literally all shotblockers blocked shots that never should have been taken. I fail to understand your criticism.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Russell was blocking shots that never should have been taken. It was like some of those shootes had never seen a shot blocker before.

Literally all shotblockers blocked shots that never should have been taken. I fail to understand your criticism.

It isn’t a criticism and it is sort of off topic.
I am not saying that Russell did not make plenty of difficult blocks against good shots.
To be on topic I should not even think about Russell vs Hakeem. I should only be thinking Russell vs Wilt.
Also the 10 blocks per game statements that some folks make for Russell in the absence of any shot blocking stats might be true for early 1960s Russell. Maybe 7 blocks a game is more accurate. In the Later 1960s I think the blocks per game went down because with Russell, Wilt, Nate Thurmond and others playing I think the little guys got more clear about what a shot blocker could do. Guys throwing up shots that they should not be throwing up against a shot blocker is just just something that caught my eye watching early 1960s Celtic video. Players today won’t throw up low trajectory shots if Jaren Jackson Jr is around. Jaren Jackson may still block their shot but the shooters won’t make the shot blocking easy.

[70sFan]

Russell was blocking shots that never should have been taken. It was like some of those shootes had never seen a shot blocker before.

Literally all shotblockers blocked shots that never should have been taken. I fail to understand your criticism.

It isn’t a criticism and it is sort of off topic.
I am not saying that Russell did not make plenty of difficult blocks against good shots.
To be on topic I should not even think about Russell vs Hakeem. I should only be thinking Russell vs Wilt.
Also the 10 blocks per game statements that some folks make for Russell in the absence of any shot blocking stats might be true for early 1960s Russell. Maybe 7 blocks a game is more accurate. In the Later 1960s I think the blocks per game went down because with Russell, Wilt, Nate Thurmond and others playing I think the little guys got more clear about what a shot blocker could do. Guys throwing up shots that they should not be throwing up against a shot blocker is just just something that caught my eye watching early 1960s Celtic video. Players today won’t throw up low trajectory shots if Jaren Jackson Jr is around. Jaren Jackson may still block their shot but the shooters won’t make the shot blocking easy.

That's just not true though, some players still attack shotblockers and get caught. Have you ever tracked all Russell blocks and concluded that most of them were easy? If not, then with all respect but your impression based on some short videos isn't the best argument.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Literally all shotblockers blocked shots that never should have been taken. I fail to understand your criticism.

It isn’t a criticism and it is sort of off topic.
I am not saying that Russell did not make plenty of difficult blocks against good shots.
To be on topic I should not even think about Russell vs Hakeem. I should only be thinking Russell vs Wilt.
Also the 10 blocks per game statements that some folks make for Russell in the absence of any shot blocking stats might be true for early 1960s Russell. Maybe 7 blocks a game is more accurate. In the Later 1960s I think the blocks per game went down because with Russell, Wilt, Nate Thurmond and others playing I think the little guys got more clear about what a shot blocker could do. Guys throwing up shots that they should not be throwing up against a shot blocker is just just something that caught my eye watching early 1960s Celtic video. Players today won’t throw up low trajectory shots if Jaren Jackson Jr is around. Jaren Jackson may still block their shot but the shooters won’t make the shot blocking easy.

That's just not true though, some players still attack shotblockers and get caught. Have you ever tracked all Russell blocks and concluded that most of them were easy? If not, then with all respect but your impression based on some short videos isn't the best argument.

Full game videos.
Everybody is great on highlight videos so I prefer game video to see the frequency of spectacular plays. I like seeing missed shots so I can see what kind of defesense makes them miss.

I was watching early 1960s game video and saw some shots that were usual by modern standards because of how boclakble they were. Shots you might be more used to a college freshman taking today. So I started paying attention to the blockability of shots versus Russel because he waa the guy blocking the shots.

Boston was my original home town so I tended to watch more old Celtics video than other teams.All those 1960s Celtics names were burned into my head as a child but I had actually seem then play until the internet and videos happened. I finnaly got to watch Jungle Jim Loscutoff.

I got to realize how good of a defender Satch Sanders was. Cousy’s passing was as good as advertised but please Cousy son’t shoot the ball. I did not see much of Bill Sharman. fine to have Russell shoot driving layups but the only Celtic I trust with a jump shot waa Sam Jones.

Those strange stop and set a pivot foot as if you have a bad dribble, plays start making a lot more sense after you see some of the traveling calls the refs make. It would take modern players years to learn to dribble by those rules.

My observation is subjective. I am not going to chart blocks as to whether the shot waa too blockable and woukd not be shot by a modern player.

Then there was Tommy Heinsohn. He shot some low shots but his shots were not blockable because he was shooting a lot of bizarre circus shots.

[70sFan]

We have like 3 early 1960s Celtics games available that are semi-complete. It's extremely small sample of size.

Unless you have more than we do, then I would be really glad if you share them.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

We have like 3 early 1960s Celtics games available that are semi-complete. It's extremely small sample of size.

Unless you have more than we do, then I would be really glad if you share them.

Are you sure there are not 5 games? I am calling 1964 and earlier early 1960s and I am calling a late 1950s game vs the Hawks a early 1960s game.

I wish all those stupid videos of electronic game versions of classic games were not out there making it harder for me to find real games.

Some of those games I watched were only a half. I watched early Jerry West an Baylor vs the Celtics recently. It waa only a half. They did not show overtime. All the Celtics fouled out. I would have liked to have seen the Celtics backups win the overtime.

There are games. Game 6 1963 finals. I am not even sure that I have seen that game before

Watch on YouTube

[coastalmarker99]

Wilt's post-season FG% allowed vs centers

59-60:

Kerr regular season FG% against the league: .39.2

Kerr against Wilt in the playoffs: .29.4

Dierking regular season FG%: .36.5

Dierking vs Wilt in the post-season: .33.3

Russell regular season: .46.7

Russell vs. Wilt in the post-season: .44.6


60-61:

Kerr regular season: .39.7

Kerr vs Wilt: .32.1

Halbrook regular season: .33.5

Halbrook vs Wilt: .38.7


61-62:

Kerr regular season: .44.3

Kerr vs. Wilt: .37.6

Russell regular season: .45.7

Russell vs Wilt: .39.9


63-64:

Beaty regular season: .44.4

Beaty vs. Wilt: .52.0

Russell regular season: .43.3

Russell vs. Wilt: .38.6


64-65:

Embry regular season: .45.6

Embry vs Wilt .43.8

Russell regular season: .43.8

Russell vs. Wilt 44.6


65-66:

Russell regular season: .41.5

Russell vs. Wilt: .42.4


66-67:

Dierking regular season: .39.9

Dierking vs Wilt: .42.7

Russell regular season: .45.4

Russell vs. Wilt: .35.8

Thurmond regular season: .43.7

Thurmond vs. Wilt: .34.3


67-68:

Bellamy regular season: .54.1

Bellamy vs. Wilt: .42.1

Russell regular season: .42.5

Russell vs. Wilt: .44.0

68-69:

Thurmond regular season: .41.0

Thurmond vs Wilt: .39.2

Beaty regular season: .47.0

Beaty vs. Wilt: .38.3

Russell regular season: .43.3

Russell vs. Wilt: .39.7


69-70:

Walk regular season: .47.0

Walk vs Wilt: .39.5

Fox regular season: .52.4

Fox vs Wilt: .36.2

Bellamy regular season: .52.3

Bellamy vs Wilt: .45.6

Reed regular season: .50.7

Reed vs Wilt: .48.3


70-71:

Boerwinkle regular season: .48.5

Boerwinkle vs Wilt: .46.3

Fox regular season: .45.8

Fox vs Wilt: .43.4

Kareem regular season: .57.7

Kareem vs Wilt: .48.1


71-72:

Ray regular season: .49.9

Ray vs Wilt: .52.9

Kareem regular season: .57.4

Kareem vs Wilt: .45.7

Lucas regular season: .51.2

Lucas vs Wilt: .50.0


72-73:

Awtry regular season: .48.0

Awtry vs Wilt: .54.2

Thurmond regular season: .44.6

Thurmond vs Wilt: .37.3

Reed regular season: .47.4

Reed vs Wilt: .49.3

[coastalmarker99]

From what I gather and I have seen it seems like Wilt was every bit the defender if not better than Russell when he was fully locked in.

1967 ECF vs Celtics.

Game 1:

Wilt - 24 points, 32 rebounds, 12 assists, 12 blocks, 69% FG

Game 2:

Wilt - 15 points, 29 rebounds, 5 assists, 5 blocks, 45% FG

Game 3:

Wilt - 20 points, 41 rebounds, 9 assists, 5 blocks, 57% FG


Game 4

Wilt - 20 points, 22 rebounds, 10 assists, at least 4 blocks, 44% FG


Game 5:

Wilt - 29 points, 36 rebounds, 13 assists, 7 blocks, 63% FG



Series average

Wilt - 21.6 ppg, 32.0 rpg, 10.0 apg, 7+ bpg, 56% FG


My favourite stat about Wilt's defensive dominance is after suffering a career-threatening injury and returning way ahead of schedule.

He put together a ridiculous stretch from Game 5 to 7 vs the suns in the 1970 playoffs to led his team to three straight wins to take the series

Game 5: 36 points, 14 rebounds, 3 assists, 10 blocks
Game 6: 12 points, 26 rebounds, 11 assists, 11 blocks
Game 7: 30 points, 17 rebounds, 6 assists, 11 blocks

Sweet mother of god. That's three consecutive triple-doubles including a quadruple-double.

Just straight dominance on both ends of the floor...

[coastalmarker99]

Wilt is playing better than I used to –passing off, coming out to set up screens, picking up guys outside, and sacrificing himself for team play.’’ –Bill Russell, great moments in pro basketball, (by Sam Goldaper)p.24

We have Wilt averaging Hakeem-like steals in the available footage we have of him which is why I think he may actually be an underrated stealer, at least in his most defensively focused seasons.


Funnily enough, and despite his reputation, I've seen less similar footage by Russell up to now, although it's obviously still a small game sample.

[coastalmarker99]

Russell is an underrated offensive player look at his finals numbers vs LA and Hawks.

1960

16.7 ppg, 24.9 reb 47% fg (4th in scoring on team)

1962

22.9 ppg, 27 reb 54% fg (1st in scoring on team)

1963

20 ppg, 26 reb 47% fg (3rd in scoring on team)

1964

11.2 ppg, 25.2 reb 39% fg (4th in scoring on team)

1965

17.8 ppg, 25 reb 70% fg (3rd in scoring on team)

1966

23.6 ppg, 24.3 reb 54% fg (1st in scoring on team)



It's deeply impressive that Wilt utterly locked him down when they matched up against each other.

1959-1960 regular season in 11 H2H's

Russell: 19.8 ppg, 23.7 rpg 3.5 APG 39.3 FG%

Wilt: 39.1 ppg, 29.7 rpg,46.5 FG%, 1.3 apg.


1960 ECF in six postseason H2H's

Russell: 20.7 ppg, 27.0 rpg, 44.6 FG%, and 2.8 APG.

Wilt: 30.5 ppg, 27.5 rpg,.50.0 FG% and 2.0 APG



1960-1961 in 13 H2H matchups

Russell: 18.8 ppg, 25.4 rpg, 39.8 FG%, and 3.6 APG

Wilt: 35.5 ppg, 30.6 rpg, 49.2 FG%, and 1.8 apg.


1961-62 in 10 regular season H2H's:

Russell: 18.5 ppg, 24.6 rpg, 38.3 FG%, and 4.4 APG.

Wilt: 39.7 ppg, 28.8 rpg, 46.8 FG%, and 2.1 apg.


1962 ECF in seven postseason H2H's

Russell: 22.0 ppg, 25.9 rpg, .39.9. FG%, and 4.6 APG.

Wilt: 33.6 ppg, 26.9 rpg, .46.8 FG%, and 2.9 apg.


1962 -1963 in 9 regular season H2H's:

Russell: 15.3 ppg, 27.8 rpg, .38.14 FG%

Wilt: 38.1 ppg, 28.9 rpg, . 51.1 FG%


1963-1964 in 8 regular season H2H

Russell 14.3 ppg, 25.3 rpg , 5 APG 39.81 FG%

Wilt 29.1 ppg ,26.8 rpg, 3.6 APG 53.9 FG%


1964 finals in five postseason H2H's

Russell 11.2 ppg, 25.2 rpg, 5.0 APG 38.6 FG%

Wilt 29.2 ppg 27,6 rpg, 2.4 APG 51.7 FG%


1964 - 1965 in 11 regular season H2H

Russell 12.6 ppg, 22.2 rpg 4.6 APG, 28.1 FG%

Wilt 25.4 ppg, 26.5 rpg, 4.2 APG, 47.3 FG%



1965 ECF in seven postseason H2H's

Russell 15.6 ppg, 25.1 rpg, 6.7 APG,44.7 FG%.

Wilt 30.1 ppg, 31.4 rpg, 3.3 APG 55.5 FG%.



1965 -1966 in 9 regular season H2H

Russell vs Wilt in 9 regular season H2H's:

Russell: 9.4 ppg, 21.2 rpg, 4.9 APG, .30.1 FG%

Wilt: 28.3 ppg, 30.7 rpg, 4.1 APG 47.3 FG%



1966 ECF in five postseason H2H's

Russell: 14.0 ppg, 26.2 rpg, 5.6 APG, 42.4 FG%

Wilt: 28.0 ppg, 30.2 rpg, 3.0 APG 50.9 FG%


1966 -1967 in 9 regular season H2H

Russell: 12.2 ppg, 21.1 rpg, 4.1 APG .44.7 FG%

Wilt: 20.3 ppg, 26.7 rpg, 6.3 APG, .54.9 FG%



1967 ECF in five postseason H2H's

Russell: 11.4 ppg, 23.4 rpg, 6.0 APG, 35.8 FG%

Wilt: 21.6 ppg, 32.0 rpg, 10.0 apg, 55.6 FG%



1967-1968 in 8 regular season H2H

Russell: 7.8 ppg, 17.5 rpg, 5.1 APG 29.1 FG%

Wilt: 17.1 ppg, 26.1 rpg, 8.5 APG, .46.1 FG%



1968 ECF in seven postseason H2H's


Russell: 13.7 ppg, 23.9 rpg, 4.1 APG, 44.0 FG%.

Wilt: 22.1 ppg, 25.1 rpg, 6.7 APG, 48.7 FG%.



1968-69: in six regular-season H2H

Russell: 6.7 ppg, 15.8 rpg, 5.8 APG on 34.0 %FG

Wilt: 16.3 ppg, 24.0 rpg, 4.8 APG on 50.7 %FG


1969 finals in seven postseason H2H's

Russell: 9.1 ppg, 21.1 rpg, 5.1 apg on 39.7 %FG

Wilt: 11.7 ppg, 25.0 rpg, 3.0 apg on 50.0 %FG


One thing Wilt deserves a lot of credit against Russell for is that he made him virtually useless on the offensive end of the court.

As to reduce a center to a shooting percentage of under 30 percent when you are matched up against them is the definition of lockdown defence.

[coastalmarker99]

If you put Wilt on those Celtic teams and he fully buys into Red's system as he did with Sharman.

There wouldn't even be a debate on who the Goat defender is.

Russell even said himself when he was a commentator for CBS that a 35-year-old Wilt post knee injury on the Lakers was playing his role better than he ever did.


In all honestly, I think Wilt on the Celtics easily wins every single title outside of 1969.

The talent disparity between their two teams made it to where Wilt had to thoroughly outplay Russell to even have a 50/50 shot at winning.

It seemed as though when Wilt thoroughly outplayed Russell was when Wilt's team won but not all the time and usually it was a close margin.

When Russell played even with Wilt or outplayed Wilt, the Celtics would blow them out.

One such example out of many is in Game 4 of the '64 Finals.

Wilt beat Russell all the way across the board with 27 points, 38 rebounds, and shot .52.2 from the floor.

While Russell had 8 points, 19 rebounds, and shot .33.3 from the floor.

Yet, the Celtics still won.


Now think about a prime Wilt who could concentrate solely on the defensive end going up against Russell who would have to do far more offensively for his teams to even stand a chance.

[70sFan]

Are you sure there are not 5 games? I am calling 1964 and earlier early 1960s and I am calling a late 1950s game vs the Hawks a early 1960s game.

If you include 1964, then we have 4 semi-complete (so not really) Russell games:

- game 7 of 1962 finals (incomplete),
- game 6 of 1963 finals (complete),
- game 4 of 1964 finals (2nd half only),
- game 5 of 1965 finals (incomplete).

That's it, we don't have anything else.

Some of those games I watched were only a half. I watched early Jerry West an Baylor vs the Celtics recently. It waa only a half. They did not show overtime. All the Celtics fouled out. I would have liked to have seen the Celtics backups win the overtime.

There are games. Game 6 1963 finals. I am not even sure that I have seen that game before

Watch on YouTube

This one is the most popular one by far.