HeyP, you tell me how many points did Jabbar score between the ages of 33-42? Answer that one. Russell played when defense won championships, Magic played when offense won them.
There are too many variables to know the truth or what would happen. Especially words like "greatest" are used. It encompasses so much.
Oh, and another thing. Oscar never won a title without Jabbar, either. And you call Oscar the best. Funny thing is, Oscar played with Jabbar in his prime. Oh, and another thing...Jabbar had not won a title in 8yrs before Magic got there (the first 3 of those were with a 33-36yr old Oscar)...and those were the best 8yrs of Jabbar's career, winning 4 MVPs.
DavidS, love that sig (oscar reference) HeyP, so your saying Magic joined a team with a 4 time MVP and took them to the finals? Hmmmm...doesn't that help my side of the argument/debate that Magic is overated?
So, you refuse to compare a 33-42yr old Jabbar to a 23-29yr old Russell. OK, I see how it is. but I'll answer your question by first reminding you that offense won in the 70s, not the 80s. The 80s was the real, complete package of offense combined with defense. Jabbar scored 22,141 pts in his first 10 yrs at 28.6ppg. Jabbar scored 16,246 pts in his last 10 yrs at 20.6ppg. how's that any different than McHale with Bird or Malone with Erving? Or Sharman and Heinsohn scoring 20+ each with Cousy? <b>Now answer my question</b> By any measure you think necessary...compare a 23-29yr Russell to a 33-42yr Jabbar. You must answer this. I answered your question. Don't wiggle out of this a second time. As an added bonus, tell me what year was the only year Jabbar shot over 60%. Why do you think it was that year?
and you're saying an old Jabbar was as good as Russell in his first 6 yrs. You won't answer that question will you? I see how it is. Jabbar won only 2 playoff series *IN FIVE YEARS* in his prime before he got teamed with Magic...then they instantly won a title. Yeah, that was Jabbar's doing, like Cousy turned the Celtics around, not Russell and the ROY Heinsohn. as an aside: how many times did Oscar fail to break .500 before he teamed with Jabbar?
You are discounting the importance a "missing piece" does to a good team. Those are intangibles that you can't quantify. Youth does not automatically equal a better (smarter) player. Also, older star players might take a back seat (statically) to their younger "star" players. But it doesn't discount their importance or diminish their "greatness" to that team. It's like Jordan on the Bulls still were a bad team. Add Pippen and they were a little better. But add a few more key players and you get a winning squad. That being said, does adding Armstrong, Cartwright, and Grant validate the greatness of Jordan? Or was he great without those players? Players do not live in a vacuum where stats tell the whole story. Oscar (at the age of 31) could have easily joined a better Milwaukee team (better supporting cast) and won more than one title. Or, Oscar could have been drafted by the Bucks when he was young instead of going to Cincinnati. The Oscar/Jabbar duo could have had more time to win more. Same with Magic (20). He could have been drafted by the Clippers in 1979 and floundered. And eleven years later gone to the Lakers and squeaked out one ring (Jabbar was getting old by then!). A lot has to do with chemistry, timing, and luck. Not only talent.
Don't say I'm discounting something until you admit that a 23-29 yr Russell was much, much better than a 33-42yr Jabbar. If anyone is being overrated in this thread, it is an 33-42yr old Jabbar who went 5 years in his absolute prime winning only 2 playoff series, completely missing the playoffs twice. That isn't just missing a piece. Magic is no "piece." I can't believe you just called Magic Johnson "Jabbar's missing piece." You didn't really mean to say Magic is a just missing piece, because you will be disagreeing with a huge amount of people, not to mention 3 MVPs. You do realize the teams those Lakers had to beat, right?
23-29 Russell? Why? I was takling about Oscar/Jabbar. Not, Cousey/Russell. That somehow got mixed in with Mr. Finn*. Trust me. I've defended Russell many times! Magic took over the team in the 80's (yes, he was the leader). Jabbar was the anchor of the team. But debating about "missing piece" is all semantics. If Jabbar and Magic both joined the Lakers as rookies, then who was the lesser player? Both great!
Interesting is that you say, "much, much, better..." in regard to Russell even though Jabbar was a better scorer. That at least tells me that you look beyond points/rebounds. I've had many debates regarding what "better" means when talking about a player like Russell. I've always been on his side. You know? The great Wilt, Russell, Jabbar, Hakeem, Shaq debate... "Wilt had a better average, thus better..." "But Russell had more rings, thus better..." "Jabbar has the most points, thus better..." "Hakeem had the best moves, thus better..." "Shaq was the most dominating, thus better..." Blah, blah, blah...
HeyP, you will never get me to say that Jabbar was better than Russell at ANY age. He was not. Oh Jabbar has great stats but all Russell did was win games. Stats do not show how valuable Russell was to the Celtics. It is my opinion that the Lakers of the 80's would not have won as many championships as they did without Jabbar. Magic was a wonderful leader, but like DavidS stated Jabbar was "the anchor." It wasn't until the '87 finals, when Magic hit that hook shot to put the Celtics away (in Boston no less) that Jabbar was dethroned as the Anchor of that team. In all the other finals the Lakers were in up until then, when it came down to crunch time, the ball went into Jabbar, and the Lakers won or lost on Jabbar's sky hook. Also, James Worthy's roll on those Laker teams should not be ignored, but in the end it came down to Jabbar.
DavidS, So, you agree, that Magic and Russell were the leaders of those dynasties, and the idea that Cousy with 6 other HOFers on his teams contributed to winning 6 rings the way Magic with a combined 3 other HOFers (one an aging, Celtics outcast McAdoo) won 5 rings is pretty ridiculous.
That was my point. Jabbar was never better than Russell, and especially an old Jabbar versus a young Russell. But you said that Magic had Jabbar and Cousy had Russell, as if saying they were equal matchups. That means nothing because a young Russell is clearly the better player. You, yourself say that. You say it all came down to Jabbar...well, he wasn't on the court in game 6 for the win in 1980, was he. In the repeat years, Jabbar scored 17ppg in 1987 and 14ppg in 1988 titles...well, calling him the anchor is highly disputable. Magic scored 23.9 ppg versus Worthy's 19.4 in 1987. Who did it all come down, too? I say it all came down to Russell in each of Cousy's wins. That is not the same with Jabbar in 1987-88. btw: You know I am a Celtic's fan, right?
Since your a Celtic fan, you know that Russell anchored the defensive end but COUSY ran the offense, right? As for 1980, the Lakers would not have even been in those finals if it wasn't for Jabbar, isn't that right? Watch the tapes of the '87 finals, Jabbar was still a MAJOR factor in the Lakers offense.
Yes. I agree overall. Because to me, Russell was the "man man" on the Celtic team; the dominating force; the difference maker. Cousey was the floor leader, the 2nd main man. Magic, in 1979-80, was the leader (he earned that title) during the rest of the decade. Jabbar started to take a backseat once Magic took over. I mean, in reality, Jabbar didn't really care about garnering more accolades than he already had (something that he may have desired in his youth). All he really cared about was winning. So, it wasn't a big deal for him to step aside. Incidentally, I think this will happen with the Shaq/Kobe duo. Shaq will step aside in the next couple years. Shaq will still be a force. But the 2nd man. Back to the PG topic, choosing Oscar over Magic was a hard choice. But, it really doesn't matter. They are so close in terms of talent. I think that because Oscar played a smooth, methodical style, that he made is look easy. He wasn't as flashy. I think that takes a lot of attention from his game. But I have to give him the respect. As I do Russell over Shaq. P.S. Oscar seemed more like a SG, than a PG. Like someone else said, he had a very good post up game. And he was known for his scoring/rebounding, rather than his assist. Magic was known for his flashy assist. So he fits the PG role better.
By the way, I think it's important to realize that we are debating two different issues. One is the potential to win a ring -- an individual player; like if that ever happens -- and the other is winning the ring due to the presence of supporting players. If Jabbar wasn't on the Lakers team in 1979, then Magic probably wouldn't have won 5 rings. Now, if the Lakers traded for Hakeem, then they might have won 7! Who knows!?
So whose defense allowed the Celtics to instantly become a fastbreak team? They didn't have that fastbreak before Russell got there. He and KC Jones brought that defense and uptempo game from San Francisco. Oh, let's also just forget about all those Russell offensive rebounds. Compare that to Magic averaging more rebounds per game than Jabbar from 1983 on. As for running the offense, that was Cousy's job. The question is who ran a better offense. There is no doubt Magic was the reason for that fastbreak, and Russell had a much bigger part than Jabbar on the Celtics. Magic had really only one other HOFer who overlapped Jabbar...never both in their prime. Look at Cousy....he had 6 other HOFs, and 4 of them great scorers. Jabbar won a mere two playoff titles in the previous 5 seasons, and it was all Jabbar. yeah, right? I think you are so alone on that one. As for saying all the titles were won by the Jabbar, many games the Lakers blew out the other team in the 3rd quarter...than was the fastbreak that did that.
[edit] I meant to write that Jabbar won only 2 playoff series in the previous 5yrs before Magic showed. He played with Gail Goodrich then Adrian Dantley. Two HOFers. How could he only win 2 series in 5 seasons, and miss the playoffs twice, and we say the Lakers wouldn't have been in the Finals if it weren't for Jabbar. Well, obviously, Jabbar was going nowhere without him.
I was watching a ESPN story about Magic a few months ago. And I remember them talking about how "business like" the Lakers were before Magic. They ran everthing by the book, pure fudnamentals. Jabbar exuded the "stoic" demeanor. Who would have known that Magic would create "Showtime?" (rhetorical question) Magic couldn't have entered a more perfect situation (the structured system combined with his creativity created a soild foundation for the dynasty to grow).
So, you never heard that Jabbar as a playoff dud for 5 seasons prior, playing with two other HOFers, and he supposedly being the best player in the league. This is further borne out by how Malone and Hakeem destroyed him in 1981, 1983 and 1986. The Lakers got knocked in those series because Jabbar got destroyed. The problem was the center matchup, not anything thing else. and it did happen. In that era, the Lakers had to be the best offensive team on the planet to win with the 76ers and Celtics around, with their legendary depth/defense and frontcourts, respectively. And Cousy wasn't in a vastly more perfect situation? (rhetorical question). Further, just for statiscal fact, Cincinnati had a 30ppg before Oscar arrived, and Nate Archibald matched Oscar's production when he left. Cincinnati only lost 3 more games the year after Oscar left.
