RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #4

[Hornet Mania]

My vote hasn't changed since last thread, though I'm actually waffling a bit about how I rank these two. Shaq's insane peak is tough to vote against.

Official vote: Tim Duncan
2nd vote: Shaquille O'Neal

A lot of strong contenders for the next few spots. Duncan gets my vote because of his incredible longevity, two-way impact (particularly on defense where it is hard to give proper credit via stats) and intangibles that directly led to success. An all-time great defensive big for roughly two decades who in his prime could also be used as the backbone of a capable offense (and, as 03 proved, a championship team), the wins speak for themselves.

The NBA evolved quite a bit over his career yet Tim Duncan continued to have an elite impact in whatever role he was put into, some of that is probably Pop, but the majority credit belongs to Duncan. He started his career winning a title with David Robinson in a Twin Towers setup during a grinding defensive era, dethroned the Shaq/Kobe juggernaut (the real Finals that year) with middling support by historical standards for an eventual champ, welcomed Lebron to what would be the first of many Finals with a sound thumping, and then years later when Lebron was on a new (and far better) team Duncan was still an integral part of the roster for a truly epic 2013 series and 2014's decimation of the Heat that showed Lebron it was time to go. Duncan was timeless, just a great player who contributed to wining year in and year out while setting a great example for teammates and never shrinking from the challenge. As he got older he didn't seem to be as essential (he was far more responsible for beating Lebron's Cavs in 07 than he was for beating Lebron's Heat in 14 for example), but even as his role shifted he was in an absolute elite percentile at whatever he was doing for the duration he was doing it. Duncan was just great, and as he got older he played less minutes but was hardly any less great in them, his fundamental ability was really incredible to watch for purists but also contributed to him not really being appreciated by casual fans until he was nearly retired. I have heard many different fans claim he made greatness boring, which is one of the most interesting compliments I've ever heard even though most of those folks intended it as an insult. If you can bore people with your success, well, you're pretty damn successful.

All that said...man, it was hard to not put Shaq over Duncan. Shaq's peak was, imo, the best ever aside from MJ and I'm not even sure the GOAT was honestly better than a locked-in Shaq. After seeing him against Duncan at the peak of their respective power it's no contest, Shaq was hands-down better. The problem for Shaq was his extracurricular flaws. He could make teams great just by his presence and one star wing, but then he'd feud with them when the spotlight inevitably had to be shared. For a guy who brought titles (or at least conference titles) to every team he played for in his prime he somehow managed to leave under acrimonious circumstances consistently. Regular season conditioning was often poor, and from a leadership perspective Shaq was not going to galvanize a listless group. He was just The Most Dominant Ever. Get him the ball with solid post position and it's practically over. His sheer size and power forced team to tilt themselves against the juggernaut, but it was never enough when he was fully motivated and healthy. Shaq, by all rights, should be the GOAT. If he had Jordan, or Lebron, or (gasp) Kobe's work ethic I have no doubt he would be. The reason he isn't is all between his ears. Now...that sounds rough. But I'd still very seriously consider Shaq with the 1st pick in an all-time draft knowing all the potential problems, because at his best there is arguably no one better.

[Clyde Frazier]

Posting my vote from the last thread for now.

Vote 1 - Tim Duncan
Vote 2 - Bill Russell

I really struggled with this one. Went back and forth on a few guys after skimming the discussion, and I landed on Duncan looking back at my Kareem pick for #2. Duncan's longevity and ability to adapt to a different role later in his career, but still maintain a high impact was very impressive. The marked consistency over the years from a dominant force on both ends (his 03 title run was incredible) to a reliable offensive player and solid defensive player is hard to match.

The culture the spurs developed over his time in san an was as much a benefit to him as he was a benefit to his teammates. Right out of the gate he fit in seamlessly next to robinson, who was still a star player even though he was nearing the end of his prime. I don't know how many other guys would be able to do that (see: magic, for example -- it's rare).

He then went on to form a bond with parker and ginobili, staying together long enough to become the winningest trio in league history. While parker developed into an impressive PG over the years and ginobili is clearly a special player, Duncan was the constant that kept everyone together, as they've both reflected on since he retired.

Later in his career as he started to take a back seat to kawhi's development, he was still a very effective player. I found it especially impressive that he was able to adapt to the faster pace and space style popovich emphasized in 2013 and 2014. The way the spurs bounced back specifically in 2014 to pull off that title run really beat the odds.

Regarding russell, i'm having trouble discerning his impact vs. the teammates he played with. A quick survey of guys he played with:

Cousy, Sharman, Heinsohn, Frank Ramsey, Sam Jones, Havlicek, KC Jones

That's a lot of talent (mainly offensive) to play with over the course of your career. Of course, russell was the constant in all this, the defensive anchor and team leader. I just didn't feel comfortable voting for him over duncan who i view similarly, but had a better handle on his place on those spurs teams.

[O_6]

I agree with you on Russell's athleticism. But 'comfortable running point' seems to vastly overstate Russell's ball skills from every game I've ever watched of his. Do you have any particular games you could point to that you feel demonstrate this?

He was literally a part-time PG during their late 60s run. Unlike Wilt, Russell dribbled the ball and wasn't racking up pure mid-post hub assists. He had ability to pass the ball off the dribble.

Russell had no problem at all bringing the ball up the court under 60s rules. Hakeem had a nasty crossover, but he really struggled to bring the ball up the court with 90s rules. Russell, with his giant mitts, would have an even easier time bringing the ball up with more lenient carrying rules of today. With his change of direction skills + his ability to keep the ball really low with his long arms means he could do more than just straight-line dribble like Robinson.

So... any particular games to recommend?

It's all blended together to me. I went through a Russell-watching phase about a year ago where I tried to watch all the games/highlights of him on YouTube. I can't think of specific games off the top of my head now, especially since I don't have YouTube access at work right now. The 1966 season clips video is a good one.

Let me rephrase my "comfortable being PG" comment, I probably should have said "comfortable handling the ball full court" + "capable of making passes off the dribble". I don't mean that he was a floor general, I was more focusing on his face-up dribbling skills/potential. The significant majority of his good passes still came from outlet passing + mid-post hub passing, but I do remember a few plays he made nice passes off the dribble. Just comparing Russell to Wilt, it just seemed like he had more face-up potential in the modern game.

[Senior]

I'm not really sure how many posts I can make in these threads (I'm not a voter and I don't have the consistent time to commit to the project) but I did want to say something about the Celtics around Russell.

Clyde, you mention Cousy/Sharman/etc as teammates of Russell's. However, Russell wasn't playing with all of those guys at the same time. Sharman and Cousy left before Hondo's 2nd year. Heinsohn retired in 65. Ramsey in 64. KC, who wasn't a good offensive player left in 67. Veteran role players came and went. Howell came on in the end.

Compare that to Duncan, who had Parker/Manu for 15 and 14 years respectively (those tenures are longer than Russell's entire career, btw) D-Rob for the first 5 years. Kawhi for the last 5. Plenty of shooting in between.

Obviously it's a different league and atmosphere, but there's no meaningful difference in their supporting casts relative to the league. If anything Russell is the one who dealt with the constantly shifting roster compared to Duncan who had Parker/Manu for an eternity.

FWIW, Duncan would win most chemistry/leader arguments easily...but Russell's like the one guy that can match him.

[janmagn]

Vote: Hakeem Olajuwon

For me, Hakeem was MUCH more dominant than any other candidate. Yes, he won only two championships, but just look at his supporting casts. The guys he had in '94, namely Otis Thorpe, Kenny Smith, Vernon Maxwell and Mario Elie, were decent NBA players, but they weren't guys who could be the #2 guy for a championship winning team. Hakeem dominated his opposition, and if it wasn't for other superstars having better teammates, he could have multiple championships. We saw his pure dominance in '95. When David Robinson stole MVP from him, Hakeem just KILLED DRob in the playoffs. Olajuwon averaged 35/13/5 AGAINST THE MVP. Just dominant. He had one of the best moves of basketball, The Dream Shake. He was able to get great looks, because he always got the defender to doubt and off balance. His dominance continued to defense. He leads the NBA in career blocks. He averaged 3.1 blocks and 1.7 steals per game. Hakeem also stepped up his game in the playoffs, a fact that can be seen in his regural season stats versus playoffs.

A quote from Michael Jordan in 2005 interview:
"But if I had to pick a center, I would take Olajuwon. That leaves out Shaq, Patrick Ewing. It leaves out Wilt Chamberlain. It leaves out a lot of people. And the reason I would take Olajuwon is very simple: he is so versatile because of what he can give you from that position. It's not just his scoring, not just his rebounding or not just his blocked shots. People don't realize he was in the top seven in steals. He always made great decisions on the court. For all facets of the game, I have to give it to him."

Here's the link if someone wants to read the whole interview
http://www.cigaraficionado.com/webfeatures/show/id/One-on-One-with-Michael-Jordan_6189/p/2

2nd Vote: Tim Duncan

[Narigo]

Vote: Wilt Chamberlain
Second Vote: Tim Duncan

Wilt proably has the best stamina out of anyone in NBA History. Wilt usually play almost the entire game with almost little rest. He is usually called on to be best offense and defensive player for almost 48 minutes a night and for at least 72 or more games a season. That incredible. Not to mention, he was very impactful all the way to to his final season.

If Wilt played today, his prime would have lasted a bit longer. From 60-68 Wilt played a total of 33,044 minutes. From 00-10, Kobe Bryant played a total of 32,311. From 04-14 LeBron played a total of 33,276. I think you get my point. Wilt with reasonable mintues would have at least 10-12 prime seasons today.

I might edit more later

[ardee]

I am voting Russell here but I still do not understand this thing that people put forward about Wilt's earlier years, as if we're supposed to ignore that:

1962: They came within a game 7 buzzer beater of beating Boston
1964: They made the Finals
1965: Havlicek stole the ball.

It's not as if his style of play made it impossible for them to win. Acting as if Wilt's teams those years were so definitively inferior to the Celtics is acting like the 2013 Spurs were definitively inferior to the 2013 Heat.

If Ray Allen misses that shot, you still give LeBron the same credit right? So because Jones made that shot or Hondo made that lucky steal, why are those singular plays taking Wilt's credit?

Ah, this is good.

What you're saying it that it appears that I'm letting luck determine how I see these players, as if in the end, I'm just counting rings.

But I'm not counting rings. Let's took at team records for the years in question:

'62: Boston 60, Warirors 49
'64: Boston 59, Warriors 48
'65: Boston 62, 76ers 40

In the regular season in each of these years, Wilt's team wasn't in Boston's league. So then, what you're doing is essentially throwing out the large sample size in favor of the small sample size...despite the fact that the team that was better all year still won in the small sample size.

It is true that that had Wilt won enough of these small sample size series it would influence my analysis of him, but the roots of my opinion on Wilt come from the RS not the playoffs, and I don't see that as remotely unfair to the man given that the playoff results were no more in his favor when all was said and done.

Answer my question though... if Ray Allen misses that shot, do you still consider 2013 LeBron so GOAT-y?

Because if the answer is yes, then it's inconsistent to not give Wilt the same credit, because he was as close to beating Boston multiple times as LeBron was to losing to the Spurs.

[THKNKG]

I'll go ahead and post my vote now. I'll fill in my reasoning later (you've seen most of it, but I have more to add).

VOTE:
1. Tim Duncan
2. Bill Russell

[Gibson22]

Vote: Hakeem Olajuwon

For me, Hakeem was MUCH more dominant than any other candidate. Yes, he won only two championships, but just look at his supporting casts. The guys he had in '94, namely Otis Thorpe, Kenny Smith, Vernon Maxwell and Mario Elie, were decent NBA players, but they weren't guys who could be the #2 guy for a championship winning team. Hakeem dominated his opposition, and if it wasn't for other superstars having better teammates, he could have multiple championships. We saw his pure dominance in '95. When David Robinson stole MVP from him, Hakeem just KILLED DRob in the playoffs. Olajuwon averaged 35/13/5 AGAINST THE MVP. Just dominant. He had one of the best moves of basketball, The Dream Shake. He was able to get great looks, because he always got the defender to doubt and off balance. His dominance continued to defense. He leads the NBA in career blocks. He averaged 3.1 blocks and 1.7 steals per game. Hakeem also stepped up his game in the playoffs, a fact that can be seen in his regural season stats versus playoffs.

A quote from Michael Jordan in 2005 interview:
"But if I had to pick a center, I would take Olajuwon. That leaves out Shaq, Patrick Ewing. It leaves out Wilt Chamberlain. It leaves out a lot of people. And the reason I would take Olajuwon is very simple: he is so versatile because of what he can give you from that position. It's not just his scoring, not just his rebounding or not just his blocked shots. People don't realize he was in the top seven in steals. He always made great decisions on the court. For all facets of the game, I have to give it to him."

Here's the link if someone wants to read the whole interview
http://www.cigaraficionado.com/webfeatures/show/id/One-on-One-with-Michael-Jordan_6189/p/2

2nd Vote: Tim Duncan

He has the heart to say "People don't realize" when he mentions patrick ewing like he's a goat center contender

[Doctor MJ]

I am voting Russell here but I still do not understand this thing that people put forward about Wilt's earlier years, as if we're supposed to ignore that:

1962: They came within a game 7 buzzer beater of beating Boston
1964: They made the Finals
1965: Havlicek stole the ball.

It's not as if his style of play made it impossible for them to win. Acting as if Wilt's teams those years were so definitively inferior to the Celtics is acting like the 2013 Spurs were definitively inferior to the 2013 Heat.

If Ray Allen misses that shot, you still give LeBron the same credit right? So because Jones made that shot or Hondo made that lucky steal, why are those singular plays taking Wilt's credit?

Ah, this is good.

What you're saying it that it appears that I'm letting luck determine how I see these players, as if in the end, I'm just counting rings.

But I'm not counting rings. Let's took at team records for the years in question:

'62: Boston 60, Warirors 49
'64: Boston 59, Warriors 48
'65: Boston 62, 76ers 40

In the regular season in each of these years, Wilt's team wasn't in Boston's league. So then, what you're doing is essentially throwing out the large sample size in favor of the small sample size...despite the fact that the team that was better all year still won in the small sample size.

It is true that that had Wilt won enough of these small sample size series it would influence my analysis of him, but the roots of my opinion on Wilt come from the RS not the playoffs, and I don't see that as remotely unfair to the man given that the playoff results were no more in his favor when all was said and done.

Answer my question though... if Ray Allen misses that shot, do you still consider 2013 LeBron so GOAT-y?

Because if the answer is yes, then it's inconsistent to not give Wilt the same credit, because he was as close to beating Boston multiple times as LeBron was to losing to the Spurs.

I do my best to try to make sure I'm not letting Ray's shot change how I see LeBron. I do the same with everyone else.

You're making some assumptions you shouldn't if you think that means I undercredit Wilt.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[ThaRegul8r]

This isn't related to the project, but I just became aware of a book talking about captains of pro sports teams and their impact on their team's success, and Duncan and the Spurs are among the players and teams covered. It doesn't seem to be what I posted, as I have many interests and often apply findings in other fields to other areas when applicable, including sports, and this isn't what this is doing. But now that it's on my radar, I'll see if I can track it down. I'll add anything pertinent to my file, and I may post interesting excerpts from it here, though of course it wouldn't have anything to do with this project.

[Doctor MJ]

This isn't related to the project, but I just became aware of a book talking about captains of pro sports teams and their impact on their team's success, and Duncan and the Spurs are among the players and teams covered. It doesn't seem to be what I posted, as I have many interests and often apply findings in other fields to other areas when applicable, including sports, and this isn't what this is doing. But now that it's on my radar, I'll see if I can track it down. I'll add anything pertinent to my file, and I may post interesting excerpts from it here, though of course it wouldn't have anything to do with this project.

I would be very interested in that. Thank you Reg!

[THKNKG]

Does anyone have that spreadsheet of ORtg/Drtg from 50s to present day with z scores and all?

[Clyde Frazier]

Vote: Hakeem Olajuwon

For me, Hakeem was MUCH more dominant than any other candidate. Yes, he won only two championships, but just look at his supporting casts. The guys he had in '94, namely Otis Thorpe, Kenny Smith, Vernon Maxwell and Mario Elie, were decent NBA players, but they weren't guys who could be the #2 guy for a championship winning team. Hakeem dominated his opposition, and if it wasn't for other superstars having better teammates, he could have multiple championships. We saw his pure dominance in '95. When David Robinson stole MVP from him, Hakeem just KILLED DRob in the playoffs. Olajuwon averaged 35/13/5 AGAINST THE MVP. Just dominant. He had one of the best moves of basketball, The Dream Shake. He was able to get great looks, because he always got the defender to doubt and off balance. His dominance continued to defense. He leads the NBA in career blocks. He averaged 3.1 blocks and 1.7 steals per game. Hakeem also stepped up his game in the playoffs, a fact that can be seen in his regural season stats versus playoffs.

A quote from Michael Jordan in 2005 interview:
"But if I had to pick a center, I would take Olajuwon. That leaves out Shaq, Patrick Ewing. It leaves out Wilt Chamberlain. It leaves out a lot of people. And the reason I would take Olajuwon is very simple: he is so versatile because of what he can give you from that position. It's not just his scoring, not just his rebounding or not just his blocked shots. People don't realize he was in the top seven in steals. He always made great decisions on the court. For all facets of the game, I have to give it to him."

Here's the link if someone wants to read the whole interview
http://www.cigaraficionado.com/webfeatures/show/id/One-on-One-with-Michael-Jordan_6189/p/2

2nd Vote: Tim Duncan

He has the heart to say "People don't realize" when he mentions patrick ewing like he's a goat center contender

Huh? Your statement legitimately doesn't make sense...

[ThaRegul8r]

Vote: Hakeem Olajuwon

For me, Hakeem was MUCH more dominant than any other candidate. Yes, he won only two championships, but just look at his supporting casts. The guys he had in '94, namely Otis Thorpe, Kenny Smith, Vernon Maxwell and Mario Elie, were decent NBA players, but they weren't guys who could be the #2 guy for a championship winning team. Hakeem dominated his opposition, and if it wasn't for other superstars having better teammates, he could have multiple championships. We saw his pure dominance in '95. When David Robinson stole MVP from him, Hakeem just KILLED DRob in the playoffs. Olajuwon averaged 35/13/5 AGAINST THE MVP. Just dominant. He had one of the best moves of basketball, The Dream Shake. He was able to get great looks, because he always got the defender to doubt and off balance. His dominance continued to defense. He leads the NBA in career blocks. He averaged 3.1 blocks and 1.7 steals per game. Hakeem also stepped up his game in the playoffs, a fact that can be seen in his regural season stats versus playoffs.

A quote from Michael Jordan in 2005 interview:
"But if I had to pick a center, I would take Olajuwon. That leaves out Shaq, Patrick Ewing. It leaves out Wilt Chamberlain. It leaves out a lot of people. And the reason I would take Olajuwon is very simple: he is so versatile because of what he can give you from that position. It's not just his scoring, not just his rebounding or not just his blocked shots. People don't realize he was in the top seven in steals. He always made great decisions on the court. For all facets of the game, I have to give it to him."

Here's the link if someone wants to read the whole interview
http://www.cigaraficionado.com/webfeatures/show/id/One-on-One-with-Michael-Jordan_6189/p/2

2nd Vote: Tim Duncan

He has the heart to say "People don't realize" when he mentions patrick ewing like he's a goat center contender

Ewing isn't a GOAT center contender, but he was a great center when Jordan actually played, whose team Jordan went against multiple times in the playoffs, and he prefaced his picks by saying it was biased because he didn't play in the days of Chamberlain, Russell, and other great stars prior to him. (Literally every single time I've seen that quote cited on the internet, that part's left out.) When he said "people didn't realize," he was talking about the fact that Hakeem was "in the top seven in steals." It's literally right there in the quote.

Which is rather funny, because the majority of Hakeem supporters who talk about him bring up the fact that he's in the top ten in steals as a center. That and being #1 in career blocks since they've been recorded is the case they present for Hakeem being the GOAT defender. And 2005 is into the internet age, so that isn't true at all. Though, without knowing him, I'm reasonably certain he didn't spend time on internet basketball forums to get an idea of what people were saying, so he wouldn't know this.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #135:

Bill Russell - *12 (*Arman_Tanzarian, ardee, BasketballFan7, Doctor MJ, drza, JordansBulls, kayess, Outside, penbeast0, SactoKingsFan, scabbarista, Tesla)
Wilt Chamberlain - 6 (wojoaderge, Winsome Gerbil, Narigo, mischievous, lebron3-14-3, Joao Saraiva)
Tim Duncan - 4 (Clyde Frazier, Hornet Mania, micahclay, trex_8063)
Hakeem Olajuwon - 1 (janmagn)

*Arman_Tanzarian - I cannot count your vote unless you provide some manner of justification or arguments for Russell.

This thread will be open for about 16 more hours for any who want to get their comments and votes in.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[Joao Saraiva]

Vote: Hakeem Olajuwon

For me, Hakeem was MUCH more dominant than any other candidate. Yes, he won only two championships, but just look at his supporting casts. The guys he had in '94, namely Otis Thorpe, Kenny Smith, Vernon Maxwell and Mario Elie, were decent NBA players, but they weren't guys who could be the #2 guy for a championship winning team. Hakeem dominated his opposition, and if it wasn't for other superstars having better teammates, he could have multiple championships. We saw his pure dominance in '95. When David Robinson stole MVP from him, Hakeem just KILLED DRob in the playoffs. Olajuwon averaged 35/13/5 AGAINST THE MVP. Just dominant. He had one of the best moves of basketball, The Dream Shake. He was able to get great looks, because he always got the defender to doubt and off balance. His dominance continued to defense. He leads the NBA in career blocks. He averaged 3.1 blocks and 1.7 steals per game. Hakeem also stepped up his game in the playoffs, a fact that can be seen in his regural season stats versus playoffs.

A quote from Michael Jordan in 2005 interview:
"But if I had to pick a center, I would take Olajuwon. That leaves out Shaq, Patrick Ewing. It leaves out Wilt Chamberlain. It leaves out a lot of people. And the reason I would take Olajuwon is very simple: he is so versatile because of what he can give you from that position. It's not just his scoring, not just his rebounding or not just his blocked shots. People don't realize he was in the top seven in steals. He always made great decisions on the court. For all facets of the game, I have to give it to him."

Here's the link if someone wants to read the whole interview
http://www.cigaraficionado.com/webfeatures/show/id/One-on-One-with-Michael-Jordan_6189/p/2

2nd Vote: Tim Duncan

He has the heart to say "People don't realize" when he mentions patrick ewing like he's a goat center contender

Huh? Your statement legitimately doesn't make sense...

Jordan talking good about the guys from his era and including Ewing because he played him several times. Nothing new here, many players make this type of statements with an agenda and to protect their legacies.

[ThaRegul8r]

This isn't related to the project, but I just became aware of a book talking about captains of pro sports teams and their impact on their team's success, and Duncan and the Spurs are among the players and teams covered. It doesn't seem to be what I posted, as I have many interests and often apply findings in other fields to other areas when applicable, including sports, and this isn't what this is doing. But now that it's on my radar, I'll see if I can track it down. I'll add anything pertinent to my file, and I may post interesting excerpts from it here, though of course it wouldn't have anything to do with this project.

I would be very interested in that. Thank you Reg!

It's interesting to me, because looking at some of what the author says about the book:

the book’s main conclusion is that the only one factor that must be present in order to maintain greatness over a long period of time is the presence of a particular kind of selfless, relentless, independent-minded, publicity-averse, emotionally composed captain with strong communication skills. And that’s Tim Duncan. Duncan was a pure example of the species.

And this is on the heels of research I had been doing independently, that I recently posted about. The book just came out last month, so it's new. But I've said before in the past, that people can take different roads/approaches, but if there's an objective truth, then no matter what approach one takes, they should all arrive at the same conclusion.

[O_6]

Dipper 13 (ironically a top 4 realGM poster ever) made a great some great posts about Russell vs Wilt in terms of their production based on the 8-12 partial games of film he saw. It was roughly 550 possessions after '65 of Russell and 500 possessions post '67 for Wilt.

Wilt had a ~25 DRB% and a ~4.5 BLK% in his late defensive years during this sample.

Russell had a ~36 DRB% and a ~7 BLK% over this sample.

*These were playoffs often Finals games for both.

The general consensus seems to be that Wilt and Russell blocked the same amount of shots and rebounded the same. But this sample from an unbiased Wilt fan showed me that things might not be what they seem.

IF Dippers stats are accurate over their careers, Russell was clearly a tier or 3 better of a defender than the "less volume scoring/more D oriented" Wilt.

It's possible that despite equal rebounding totals, WIlt was more Moses/Barkley vs. Russell being Garnett/Duncan in terms of O/D rebounding split. It actually sounds likely. Although if this is true, Wilt was probably a better pure ORB force than Russell was a DRB force based on Wilts edge as a rebounder head to head. Still, Russell just seems like he was way better on D than their rebound totals and estimated block totals make it out.

Just based in watching personally, Russell did not commit nearly as many goaltending blocks because his Hakeem-like jump had him blocking it earlier than Wilts "Highest reach ever probably" slower jump.

[Gibson22]

Dipper 13 (ironically a top 4 realGM poster ever) made a great some great posts about Russell vs Wilt in terms of their production based on the 8-12 partial games of film he saw. It was roughly 550 possessions after '65 of Russell and 500 possessions post '67 for Wilt.

Wilt had a ~25 DRB% and a ~4.5 BLK% in his late defensive years during this sample.

Russell had a ~36 DRB% and a ~7 BLK% over this sample.

*These were playoffs often Finals games for both.

The general consensus seems to be that Wilt and Russell blocked the same amount of shots and rebounded the same. But this sample from an unbiased Wilt fan showed me that things might not be what they seem.

IF Dippers stats are accurate over their careers, Russell was clearly a tier or 3 better of a defender than the "less volume scoring/more D oriented" Wilt.

Tell us your top 4!