Isn't there only 1 greatest??

Question

Bill is best all time no question, Finals MVP's is the only real way to judge who is the best Bill gets it for his MVP and JOrdan is second cause nobody else has 6 finals mvps. Rings don't matter, Finals MVP's is all that does.

Answer 1

his airness is the greatest.. no doubt

Answer 2

Finals MVP didn't exist in Bill Russel's era except for his last year...

So you can't judge by FMVP ..

So how you judge players ?

Skills?

Rings ?

MVP ?

Edit:  Bill Russel has 5 regular MVP .. not Finals MVP ..

Of course Jordan didn't lose on Finals .. since he didn't make finals like Russel did .. Plus Russel was injured in finals

i'm sure Jordan would have lost in Finals .. if he made it to Finals 12 times.. in 13 years !!!!!

Answer 3

surely if we are really educated about this matter we ourselves can. but opinions do matter in the aspect jordan has skills and other great player do but he stands out among the others, he used his talent well thats why he got that kind of success, the other player for example bill, larry did well also its also a matter of appreciation, if you could just see what they have done for this sport, it would be great. but I think that jordan is really known for what he did regardless of the rings and mvp's.

Answer 4

Jerry west won the first finals MVP... and the lakers lost the finals. think he really wouldn't of wanted a ring instead? he's always looked at that feat as a nice consolation prize compared to winning a ring.

also... besides that one isolated incident.

that means 99% of team that win the championship the best performer wins mvp.

any player would give up an finals mvp for a ring.

also russell won regular season mvps not finals.

but lets pretend.

also based on your theory, wouldn't that mean jordan (6 finals mvp awards) is better than russell (five mvp awards)?

also jordan never lost in the finals. bill did.

hmmm... just saying.

Answer 5

Are you dumb?He has 5 regular season MVP award.He doesn't have any Finals MVP.

Answer 6

Finals mvp's matter, but the ability to take over the game single handedly is what garners the "best of all time" label. As much as I rooted against him, the answer is Jordan

Answer 7

Bill Russell has 5 regular season MVP's. The first Finals MVP was awarded by Sport magazine and iirc, wasnt sanctioned back then by the NBA, to Jerry West as a consolation prize after losing to the Russell-lead Celtics in '69.

The problem i have with Finals MVP is that it only tracks a particular player's performance in a limited number of games against one opposing team. An inconsistent player might get a favorable matchup against the opposing team and perform very well and win the Finals MVP. James Worthy won the '87 Finals MVP for scoring very well but we all know Magic was the one that made Worthy's points possible. Also Finals MVP can be a sort of popularity contest with the most recent performances getting the most attention. Back in the 80's, rookie Magic was awarded the Finals MVP instead of Kareem because of his superb Game 6 performance where he played all 5 positions . . . . the voters conveniently forgetting how overpowering Kareem was against Philadelphia in the previous 5 games.

As for who is greater between Bill and Mike . . .  .

*cuts and paste from previous post*

Bill Russell: 5 MVPs, 11 rings in 13 years as pro.

Michael Jordan: 5 MVP's, 6 rings in 15 years as a pro.

Bill Russell: 1 NCAA Most Outstanding Player, 2 NCAA titles in 3 years of college.

Michael Jordan: 0 NCAA Most Outstanding Player, 1* NCAA titles in 3 years of college.

*See below for explanation

Jordan is great but in terms of achievements, Bill Russell is GREATER than Jordan. Token awards such as Finals MVP doesnt exist during Russell's time. The same with the Naismith and Wooden college player awards.

Media overhype is what made Jordan the greatest in the eyes of many. Nothing draws the fans in to the game other than telling him the "greatest" player is currently playing on television. Give Russell, Wilt, Oscar, Kareem, Dr. J etc. the benefit of advance cable and satellite television like it was during Jordan's time and they would be the ones bringing ther NBA to a global audience.

Russell is an awesome rebounder averaging 22rpg, a suprisingly good ball handler for a big man since he often runs the ball after rebounding to get a clear pass downcourt and start the fastbreak, and of course a great defender. He is also a great passer; he was even ranked #5 in assists in one time and he is a center. Not most guards could do that. His scoring is alright at 15ppg. Not exactly mind blowing numbers but then EVERYONE on the 60's Celtics doesnt have mind blowing PPG. Red Auerbach runs a structured offense wherein all five guys on the floor have the opportunity to shine and score. The highest scorer on the team averages on 22ppg and there are five to six other guys scoring in double digits. Russell or anyone else on the Celtics need not to fully exert themselves on offense because the scoring is distributed. Russell has the same shooting percentage as the top two scorers (Sam Jones and Havlicek) on the team. Anyway back in college, Russ was scoring 20ppg with a 52FG%. The man has an all around game.

In short, you cant use Jordan's "all around game" as an excuse to put him over Russell in a GOAT debate. He has a much higher college scoring average than Jordan (17 something PPG).

Anyway, players playing as centers or power forwards - the tall guys usually - are drilled to have specialized skills (like rebounding and low post manouvers). They help the team better by focusing on these skills which is why they are usually not encouraged to have all-around skills like guards and forwards. There are exceptions of course like Wilt who lead the NBA in assists as a center and Russell. Using the argument "so and so guard/forward has more all around skills than so and so center/PF, therefore so and so guard/forward is greater" is FLAWED and BIASED.

Also, Russell has the same number of rings as Jordan(6) and Magic(5) COMBINED. I think the aforementioned phrase puts Russell's ring advantage over Jordan in a proper perspective.

Also, in terms of the evolution of basketball skills and concepts, Russell is on the same plane as the opponents he faced in the 60's. Jordan too is on the same plane as the opponents he faced in the 90's. In other words, in terms of difficulty of opponents, Russell and Jordan faced the same difficulty. Its not like Jordan was playing with antiquated 60's skills and concepts during his 90's championship run to make his experience more difficult. If Jordan learned his basketball in the 50's and played basketball in the 60's, he wont be doing modern stuff.

The key difference between the two is on the quantity and concentration of the talent when they are playing. The level of talent during Jordan's time was DIFFUSED across 30 teams and international players are still few and hardly made an impact (like Dirk, Manu, Nash etc. in post-2000) to counterbalance this. Also, the top players in Jordan's time rarely match up each other to test thier abilities. To give an example, Shaq only faceoff with Ewing in the East 4x and facesoff with Hakeem and Robinson in the West 2x. The top centers spend most of their time fending off middling talent like Ilgauskas. Where is the challenge in that?

In contrast, in Russell's time, the NCAA and NIT (when it still mattered) was concentrated in only 8-9 teams. The 24th pick of the 1st round today would be the final pick of the 3rd round in the 60's. Only the cream of the crop get to play in the NBA in the 60's. In addition, Russell would face off Wilt Chamberlain 8-9 times a season. When he is not fighting Wilt, he is fending off other Hall of Famers 8-9x again like Nate Thurmond, Jerry Lucas, Willis Reed etc. you get the drift. They have to work their butts off almost everytime.

In fact, most teams in the 60's have multiple Hall of Famers in their rosters.

And im not even factoring in the million dollar salary, the VIP treatment, the modern training, nutrition, and medicine that Jordan and modern players enjoy.



And to debunk the myth that Bill Russell only won championships because of his talented teammates . . . . .

The Celtics NEVER went to the NBA Finals before Russell even with Hall Of Famers like Coach Auerbach and players like Macauley, Cousy, Sharman, and Ramsey.

Back in the '62 season, Russell took himself out for 4 games and the Celtics lost 4 straight games even with Red Auerbach, Cousy, Sharman, the Joneses, Ramsey and other HoF's.

Back in '69, Russell took himself out for 5 games because of an injury and the Celtics lost 5 straight even with HoF's Sam Jones, Havlicek, Satch Sanders, and Bailey Howell.

The instances that i mentioned are the two worst losing streaks of the Russell-era Celtics. The latter is the worst losing streak of the Celtics since Red Auerbach took over the helm.

When Russell retired after the '69 season, the Celtics went down from 48 wins to 34 and they MISSED the Playoffs even with HoF's such as Havlicek, Sanders, Jo Jo White and Howell. A huge 14 game drop.

And the modest 48 wins that the Celtics garnered during the '69 season is the lowest number of wins that the Celts have during the Russell -era and occured only because Russell spent a lot of time in the injured list and/or recovering.

Theoretically speaking, the Celtics with an "Allstar" cast like that should be able to shrug off Russell's departure and continue the Celtic dynasty, in reality, they couldnt.

The Celtic dynasty started and ended, at least the first part pre-Cowens, Silas etc., with Bill Russell.

Russell has 5 rings w/o Cousy. He also has 5 rings without Havlicek. He also has 2 rings without Red Auerbach as coach. How many rings does Jordan have without Pippen and Phil Jackson?

Theoretically speaking, the Bulls should have dropped 15 games and be knocked off Playoff contention w/o its "leader" and "franchise player" , the supposed GOAT, Michael Jordan in the lineup, according to coach Phil Jackson himself. In reality, it DIDNT HAPPEN. Reality check basketball fans!

How come that when Jordan "retired" in '94 the Bulls went "down" from 57 wins to 55? A pitiful 2 game drop. How come that the Bulls played Game 7 with the Knicks on the Second Round of the Playoffs ? Scottie, Phil jackson, and Myers, a defensive specialist from the CBA and Jordan's replacement would have lead the Bulls to the ECF if it wasnt for a bad call from ref Hue Hollins in the closing seconds of Game 6 shifted the momentum to the Knicks. The Bulls know its futile to try and win because the refs would just cheat them again in game 7, in order to preserve the illusion of Jordan's importance to the team.

Going back to Russell, he doesnt win only because he has talented teammates. He also lead a bunch of local boys, "a playground pick up team" from USF, a school with no gymnasium of its own, to back to back NCAA championships and a 55 game winning streak.

How come Jordan COULD NOT lead a school with a rich winning tradition like UNC, into the Final Four during his junior (UNC was ranked #1 in '83) and senior (#2 in '84) years even though he have great teammates (like Sam Perkins and Brad Daugherty) and a great coach (Dean Smith)?

Jordan won an NCAA championship during his sophomore year as a Robert Horry-role player, riding on the coattails of the team's real star James Worthy, the '82 MOP. While Jordan's shot with 16 sec. left (not exactly a game winner) gave them the lead over Ewing's Hoyas, it was Worthy's crucial steal in the dying seconds that sealed the win.