Garnett vs Russell

Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal

Build around today

Kevin Garnett
41
61%
Bill Russell
26
39%
 
Total votes: 67

Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,183
And1: 22,196
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#141 » by Doctor MJ » Tue Mar 25, 2025 7:34 pm

Jaivl wrote:On a completely unrelated note, what do we think about Cooper Flagg? Amen Thompson? There's a non-zero chance that's Russell's role on the current era.


Offensively I'd say it's assumed that Flagg will be a more capable scorer than Russell, and it's hoped that this will be the case for Amen.

Defensively, well, I believe Russell was considerably longer than either player and considerably more agile than Flagg.

The intelligence is more speculative, but I'd say the general hope is that Flagg's the IQ outlier - which was what Russell was.

If either Flagg or Amen end up being best-in-world level all-around players - something I'm not going to dismiss out of hand - then that's above what I'd expect from Russell. Will they do it? Time will tell.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,790
And1: 25,114
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#142 » by 70sFan » Tue Mar 25, 2025 8:42 pm

To be honest, I'd be shocked if Thompson ever had a comparable offensive top level playoff series like some of the Russell's best finals performances. I think people don't realize how many times Russell provided a lot of value on offense for the Celtics.
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 92,358
And1: 98,192
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#143 » by Texas Chuck » Tue Mar 25, 2025 8:51 pm

Disagree with some assumptions here.

But let's start easy. Jason Kidd, another all-time basketball genius comes into the league not being a shooter, and a mediocre FT shooter to boot. Yet, when he retires only one guy had made more 3's in NBA history than him. Brook Lopez, not known as a basketball genius watched his NBA paycheck go from max to min and totally reinvented himself. Nobody would have ever suggested he would go to DPOY level defender and floor spacer. Yet here we are.

But a Bill Russell who grows up having seen guys his size and bigger spamming 3's wouldn't have worked at something clearly of value? People do realize there was no value in him doing that in his day. Instead he correctly focused on what helped him win games then.

Or he can't grab and go today when he's allowed to carry the ball, even though in the limited footage we have available we see him doing this having to dribble with his hand on top of the ball at all times?

Or a great outlet passer, a pretty good half-court passer, couldn't be used in that role? He's reduced to DeAndre Jordan or Dwight Powell? Really?

These assumptions don't seem particularly reasonable or the most likely. They seem the most convenient. Our assumptions that ignore actual test cases are too limiting and shouldn't be relied upon anywhere to this degree.

I can't say if Bill Russell would even play basketball if born in 2001. He'd certainly have more options available to him today. But we need some assumption for this thread, so him playing basketball seems reasonable and quite plausible. Him choosing not to work on skills needed in the modern game seems very unlikely to me though. I won't make the claim he becomes a stretch 5. I can't. I won't make the claim he becomes an offensive hub. I can't. But nor will I suggest he's just a lob threat and a guy who just stands in the paint defensively(this one particularly egregious because he is the reason bigs don't defend like that now!!!).

I know this is for deaf ears. But I have to at least show some other, more likely imo, assumptions we could make based both on what we know of Russell, but also on what we have seen other players do.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,936
And1: 5,525
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#144 » by One_and_Done » Tue Mar 25, 2025 8:51 pm

Amen Thompson is 6-7 with top tier NBA wing speed and athleticism. There are already things he can do on offense Russell couldn't, just because a big is never going to match a small in those aspects.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 92,358
And1: 98,192
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#145 » by Texas Chuck » Tue Mar 25, 2025 8:56 pm

Huh?, we have plenty of guys bigger than him, way ahead of him offensively. So that can't be the issue.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,790
And1: 25,114
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#146 » by 70sFan » Tue Mar 25, 2025 9:02 pm

One_and_Done wrote:Amen Thompson is 6-7 with top tier NBA wing speed and athleticism. There are already things he can do on offense Russell couldn't, just because a big is never going to match a small in those aspects.

Russell was 6'10 with top tier speed and athleticism, regardless of position.
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,936
And1: 5,525
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#147 » by One_and_Done » Tue Mar 25, 2025 9:08 pm

Texas Chuck wrote:Disagree with some assumptions here.

But let's start easy. Jason Kidd, another all-time basketball genius comes into the league not being a shooter, and a mediocre FT shooter to boot. Yet, when he retires only one guy had made more 3's in NBA history than him. Brook Lopez, not known as a basketball genius watched his NBA paycheck go from max to min and totally reinvented himself. Nobody would have ever suggested he would go to DPOY level defender and floor spacer. Yet here we are.

But a Bill Russell who grows up having seen guys his size and bigger spamming 3's wouldn't have worked at something clearly of value? People do realize there was no value in him doing that in his day. Instead he correctly focused on what helped him win games then.

Or he can't grab and go today when he's allowed to carry the ball, even though in the limited footage we have available we see him doing this having to dribble with his hand on top of the ball at all times?

Or a great outlet passer, a pretty good half-court passer, couldn't be used in that role? He's reduced to DeAndre Jordan or Dwight Powell? Really?

These assumptions don't seem particularly reasonable or the most likely. They seem the most convenient. Our assumptions that ignore actual test cases are too limiting and shouldn't be relied upon anywhere to this degree.

I can't say if Bill Russell would even play basketball if born in 2001. He'd certainly have more options available to him today. But we need some assumption for this thread, so him playing basketball seems reasonable and quite plausible. Him choosing not to work on skills needed in the modern game seems very unlikely to me though. I won't make the claim he becomes a stretch 5. I can't. I won't make the claim he becomes an offensive hub. I can't. But nor will I suggest he's just a lob threat and a guy who just stands in the paint defensively(this one particularly egregious because he is the reason bigs don't defend like that now!!!).

I know this is for deaf ears. But I have to at least show some other, more likely imo, assumptions we could make based both on what we know of Russell, but also on what we have seen other players do.

I know you think you just made a good argument for Russell, but examples like Jason Kidd and Brook Lopez are actually part of the opposite argument.

I have often used Kidd’s late development of a 3pt shot as an example of why we can only judge players on what they actually did, because when we go back and rate his career it would be pretty absurd to pretend he shot at that level his whole career. Sometimes guys will improve late in their career, e.g. Hakeem, and we ultimately have no idea why. Maybe everything just clicked for them, maybe the coach reached them, maybe the “system” was tailored to help them more. We can often speculate on the whys, but in the end it’s just speculation and we will never know. Anthony Davis shot the 3 superbly in 2020… but he never did it again. It would be extremely inappropriate for us to rate AD as though he had shot like that his whole career, and the same is true of Jason Kidd.

What if Kidd had learned to shoot earlier is just a different variant of “what if Shaq could hit free throws?” or “what if Sheed had a better attitude?” or “what if Walton had modern medicine?” The reality is none of those things actually happened, so we can only judge guys on what happened, by which I mean the skill set they actually demonstrated.

Russell never demonstrated a good offensive game, so we can’t give him one. We can allow that he would deploy the offensive skills he had differently today, and to that extent I think he would be helped. No question he’d be a great rim-runner. But that’s as far as it can go. Similarly, I’m sure Russell would have great timing on blocks, wouldn’t bite on fakes, etc. But we have no evidence he would make the complex reads and react with consistent split second timing in a modern D, because we have no evidence for it and that stuff is just hard for many modern players who grew up with it and are constantly practising it.

In Russell’s day his defensive role was mostly to run back in a straight line and stand in paint and wait there until he was challenged. That skillset can’t be extrapolated to “he could execute the modern defensive schemes” because the 2 skillsets have almost nothing in common. In many ways modern D is about ignoring your instincts, and executing a counter-intuitive gameplan. All KAT’s instincts in the Denver series would be telling him not to let the guy with the ball dribble right by him while he turns his back on him and rotates to Jokic, yet that’s exactly what he was doing. Today defenders need to know where all 5 guys are on the court, know all the complex plays the other team will run, understand the switches and rotations that come with each team’s action and the counter action that it will necessitate from each of them, they need to know exactly how much to hedge and stunt and when to go under and over the screen. Guys like CP3 will tell you they live on synergy, watching and studying the plays of the other team to master this, so they know all a guy’s tendencies and habits. It’s so far removed from what Russell was good at that I don’t feel we can possibly extrapolate his skills on D to these wildly different skillsets.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,936
And1: 5,525
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#148 » by One_and_Done » Tue Mar 25, 2025 9:11 pm

70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:Amen Thompson is 6-7 with top tier NBA wing speed and athleticism. There are already things he can do on offense Russell couldn't, just because a big is never going to match a small in those aspects.

Russell was 6'10 with top tier speed and athleticism, regardless of position.

If you get a top tier 6-7 guy, and a top tier 6-10 guy, the former is almost always going to have the ability to move quicker, etc, than the taller guy. Young Russell was athletic, but not top tier by modern standards. The video of him running the length of the court for a lay-up does nothing to change that. Alot of guys much less athletic than Amen could do that.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,790
And1: 25,114
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#149 » by 70sFan » Tue Mar 25, 2025 9:12 pm

One_and_Done wrote:Guys like CP3 will tell you they live on synergy, watching and studying the plays of the other team to master this, so they know all a guy’s tendencies and habits. It’s so far removed from what Russell was good at that I don’t feel we can possibly extrapolate his skills on D to these wildly different skillsets.

The irony of this part is that Russell was very well known for studying opponents tendencies and habits and he wasn't the only one doing that. Nate Thurmond paid from his own pocket to see the first meeting between Kareem and Wilt and study young Lew tendencies.

Again, you vastly underestimate the complexity of the 1960s basketball because you don't watch it
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,790
And1: 25,114
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#150 » by 70sFan » Tue Mar 25, 2025 9:14 pm

One_and_Done wrote:
70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:Amen Thompson is 6-7 with top tier NBA wing speed and athleticism. There are already things he can do on offense Russell couldn't, just because a big is never going to match a small in those aspects.

Russell was 6'10 with top tier speed and athleticism, regardless of position.

If you get a top tier 6-7 guy, and a top tier 6-10 guy, the former is almost always going to have the ability to move quicker, etc, than the taller guy. Young Russell was athletic, but not top tier by modern standards. The video of him running the length of the court for a lay-up does nothing to change that. Alot of guys much less athletic than Amen could do that.

Russell is top tier by any standards, the way he moves is nothing short of incredible and it's not about one play from college you always bring up for no reason. If you don't see anything special about Russell's movement patterns then you simply don't have a good eye for basketball.
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,936
And1: 5,525
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#151 » by One_and_Done » Tue Mar 25, 2025 9:19 pm

70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:Guys like CP3 will tell you they live on synergy, watching and studying the plays of the other team to master this, so they know all a guy’s tendencies and habits. It’s so far removed from what Russell was good at that I don’t feel we can possibly extrapolate his skills on D to these wildly different skillsets.

The irony of this part is that Russell was very well known for studying opponents tendencies and habits and he wasn't the only one doing that. Nate Thurmond paid from his own pocket to see the first meeting between Kareem and Wilt and study young Lew tendencies.

Again, you vastly underestimate the complexity of the 1960s basketball because you don't watch it

Comparing this to watching thousands of hours of synergy and breaking the plays down is not serious.

Then there's all the other differences.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,936
And1: 5,525
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#152 » by One_and_Done » Tue Mar 25, 2025 9:20 pm

70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:
70sFan wrote:Russell was 6'10 with top tier speed and athleticism, regardless of position.

If you get a top tier 6-7 guy, and a top tier 6-10 guy, the former is almost always going to have the ability to move quicker, etc, than the taller guy. Young Russell was athletic, but not top tier by modern standards. The video of him running the length of the court for a lay-up does nothing to change that. Alot of guys much less athletic than Amen could do that.

Russell is top tier by any standards, the way he moves is nothing short of incredible and it's not about one play from college you always bring up for no reason. If you don't see anything special about Russell's movement patterns then you simply don't have a good eye for basketball.

If you think Russell was more athletic than Amen then we aren't seeing the same things. You are simply wrong on this.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,790
And1: 25,114
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#153 » by 70sFan » Tue Mar 25, 2025 9:24 pm

One_and_Done wrote:
70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:Guys like CP3 will tell you they live on synergy, watching and studying the plays of the other team to master this, so they know all a guy’s tendencies and habits. It’s so far removed from what Russell was good at that I don’t feel we can possibly extrapolate his skills on D to these wildly different skillsets.

The irony of this part is that Russell was very well known for studying opponents tendencies and habits and he wasn't the only one doing that. Nate Thurmond paid from his own pocket to see the first meeting between Kareem and Wilt and study young Lew tendencies.

Again, you vastly underestimate the complexity of the 1960s basketball because you don't watch it

Comparing this to watching thousands of hours of synergy and breaking the plays down is not serious.

Then there's all the other differences.

You genuinely believe that players watch thousands of hours of synergy today? How do they have the time to play basketball?
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,790
And1: 25,114
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#154 » by 70sFan » Tue Mar 25, 2025 9:25 pm

One_and_Done wrote:
70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:If you get a top tier 6-7 guy, and a top tier 6-10 guy, the former is almost always going to have the ability to move quicker, etc, than the taller guy. Young Russell was athletic, but not top tier by modern standards. The video of him running the length of the court for a lay-up does nothing to change that. Alot of guys much less athletic than Amen could do that.

Russell is top tier by any standards, the way he moves is nothing short of incredible and it's not about one play from college you always bring up for no reason. If you don't see anything special about Russell's movement patterns then you simply don't have a good eye for basketball.

If you think Russell was more athletic than Amen then we aren't seeing the same things. You are simply wrong on this.

Never said that, I said he's top tier athlete by any standards. So is Amen.
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,936
And1: 5,525
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#155 » by One_and_Done » Tue Mar 25, 2025 9:42 pm

70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:
70sFan wrote:The irony of this part is that Russell was very well known for studying opponents tendencies and habits and he wasn't the only one doing that. Nate Thurmond paid from his own pocket to see the first meeting between Kareem and Wilt and study young Lew tendencies.

Again, you vastly underestimate the complexity of the 1960s basketball because you don't watch it

Comparing this to watching thousands of hours of synergy and breaking the plays down is not serious.

Then there's all the other differences.

You genuinely believe that players watch thousands of hours of synergy today? How do they have the time to play basketball?

They really do. I remember a Chris Paul interview where he discussed how much synergy he was watching every day. He'd be on the treadmill or exercise bike, watching synergy. Recovering from a workout, watching synergy. Going home and watching synergy. I have no doubt guys like Paul watch thousands of hours a year.

While this isn't the interview I was thinking of, Paul more or less confirms he watches film every night at the start of this interview.
https://youtu.be/E70GhXMjgDU?si=3EP4yizRjIzZOnvw
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,790
And1: 25,114
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#156 » by 70sFan » Tue Mar 25, 2025 9:51 pm

One_and_Done wrote:
70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:Comparing this to watching thousands of hours of synergy and breaking the plays down is not serious.

Then there's all the other differences.

You genuinely believe that players watch thousands of hours of synergy today? How do they have the time to play basketball?

They really do. I remember a Chris Paul interview where he discussed how much synergy he was watching every day. He'd be on the treadmill or exercise bike, watching synergy. Recovering from a workout, watching synergy. Going home and watching synergy. I have no doubt guys like Paul watch thousands of hours a year.

While this isn't the interview I was thinking of, Paul more or less confirms he watches film every night at the start of this interview.
https://youtu.be/E70GhXMjgDU?si=3EP4yizRjIzZOnvw

Watching literally two hours per day won't give you even one thousand, let alone thousands of hours watched. Maybe Paul is just the rare example of obsessive mind, but even with that it's extremely unlikely.

I am quite confident that the vast majority of NBA players don't do anything more with tracking than what coaching staff gives them.
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,936
And1: 5,525
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#157 » by One_and_Done » Tue Mar 25, 2025 9:55 pm

70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:
70sFan wrote:You genuinely believe that players watch thousands of hours of synergy today? How do they have the time to play basketball?

They really do. I remember a Chris Paul interview where he discussed how much synergy he was watching every day. He'd be on the treadmill or exercise bike, watching synergy. Recovering from a workout, watching synergy. Going home and watching synergy. I have no doubt guys like Paul watch thousands of hours a year.

While this isn't the interview I was thinking of, Paul more or less confirms he watches film every night at the start of this interview.
https://youtu.be/E70GhXMjgDU?si=3EP4yizRjIzZOnvw

Watching literally two hours per day won't give you even one thousand, let alone thousands of hours watched. Maybe Paul is just the rare example of obsessive mind, but even with that it's extremely unlikely.

I am quite confident that the vast majority of NBA players don't do anything more with tracking than what coaching staff gives them.

Sure, not everyone is Chris Paul. But if you're going to claim Russell will have among the highest bball IQs today then step 1 is having that kind of commitment to the game. Guys like Iggy, CP3, Draymond, etc, didn't get to be elite defenders by watching the bare minimum.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,790
And1: 25,114
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#158 » by 70sFan » Tue Mar 25, 2025 10:03 pm

One_and_Done wrote:
70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:They really do. I remember a Chris Paul interview where he discussed how much synergy he was watching every day. He'd be on the treadmill or exercise bike, watching synergy. Recovering from a workout, watching synergy. Going home and watching synergy. I have no doubt guys like Paul watch thousands of hours a year.

While this isn't the interview I was thinking of, Paul more or less confirms he watches film every night at the start of this interview.
https://youtu.be/E70GhXMjgDU?si=3EP4yizRjIzZOnvw

Watching literally two hours per day won't give you even one thousand, let alone thousands of hours watched. Maybe Paul is just the rare example of obsessive mind, but even with that it's extremely unlikely.

I am quite confident that the vast majority of NBA players don't do anything more with tracking than what coaching staff gives them.

Sure, not everyone is Chris Paul. But if you're going to claim Russell will have among the highest bball IQs today then step 1 is having that kind of commitment to the game. Guys like Iggy, CP3, Draymond, etc, didn't get to be elite defenders by watching the bare minimum.

Russell did everything he could in his own era. There are plethora of anecdotes about him analyzing opponents tendencies extensively. Do you really believe the player whose competitive drive didn't soften after a decade of winning everything wouldn't have the commitment to do players do now? Is that what you are trying to say?
One_and_Done
General Manager
Posts: 8,936
And1: 5,525
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#159 » by One_and_Done » Tue Mar 25, 2025 10:07 pm

70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:
70sFan wrote:Watching literally two hours per day won't give you even one thousand, let alone thousands of hours watched. Maybe Paul is just the rare example of obsessive mind, but even with that it's extremely unlikely.

I am quite confident that the vast majority of NBA players don't do anything more with tracking than what coaching staff gives them.

Sure, not everyone is Chris Paul. But if you're going to claim Russell will have among the highest bball IQs today then step 1 is having that kind of commitment to the game. Guys like Iggy, CP3, Draymond, etc, didn't get to be elite defenders by watching the bare minimum.

Russell did everything he could in his own era. There are plethora of anecdotes about him analyzing opponents tendencies extensively. Do you really believe the player whose competitive drive didn't soften after a decade of winning everything wouldn't have the commitment to do players do now? Is that what you are trying to say?

Usually the most cerebral players make good NBA coaches. Russell was a absolutely awful coach in his post playing days. I'd be sceptical just from that, never mind that the point is that it's about what you show, not what imaginary skills you might have had if things were different.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,183
And1: 22,196
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: Garnett vs Russell 

Post#160 » by Doctor MJ » Tue Mar 25, 2025 10:15 pm

One_and_Done wrote:
70sFan wrote:
One_and_Done wrote:Comparing this to watching thousands of hours of synergy and breaking the plays down is not serious.

Then there's all the other differences.

You genuinely believe that players watch thousands of hours of synergy today? How do they have the time to play basketball?

They really do. I remember a Chris Paul interview where he discussed how much synergy he was watching every day. He'd be on the treadmill or exercise bike, watching synergy. Recovering from a workout, watching synergy. Going home and watching synergy. I have no doubt guys like Paul watch thousands of hours a year.

While this isn't the interview I was thinking of, Paul more or less confirms he watches film every night at the start of this interview.
https://youtu.be/E70GhXMjgDU?si=3EP4yizRjIzZOnvw


So, bringing up the ability to watch video like this is a really good thing to bring up when comparing eras, and an old veteran like Chris Paul is exactly the kind of guy you'd expect would max that out to get every ounce of what he can from his aging, Lilliputian body, but this is not likely what most guys do:

DeMar DeRozan Says Most NBA Players Play Video Games Instead of Watching Basketball

I think what's mostly going on is that coaches - and teams now have more than a dozen of these guys - are the ones watching this stuff obsessively and then try to get the players to listen and learn from what they have to say. It's not really all that different from coaches trying to get Ben Simmons, or ahem DeMar DeRozan, to shoot 3's adroitly.

It's all making progress generally, but I don't think it's leading to the typical NBA player being drastically smarter in the moment on the floor than they would have been in earlier eras.

I also think you have to remember that one of the key killer mental edges some guys have is incredible memory. LeBron James doesn't need to watch video to remember every single play and player move he's been involved in going back years, and while he's elite at this, he's not alone. Rondo had it for example. Particularly relevant here though is that Russell's memory along these lines was one of his big things too.

I'll also say this is an area where Ben Taylor and I really diverge. He's got a memory kinda like this - and it's part of why he's so good at making videos about players going back years, he often doesn't need to already have the clip in his filmbase to know exactly where to find what he's looking for- and I absolutely do not.

Now though: The key thing about video helping guys with great memory is in helping them see stuff that hasn't been tried on them in a game before. If you want to prepare for a guy before you play him, video really helps. If you want to prepare for a team playing a new way, video really helps.

However, we should note that even that matters less in the grand scheme of things in the pros precisely because teams don't play single-elimination games against teams they've never played before to win the chip like they do in March Madness. In the NBA, if you get burned by being unprepared for James Harden in Game 1, that doesn't mean you're screwed in Games 4-7.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!

Return to Player Comparisons


cron