Kevin Garnett 2012 Compared to Bill Russell

[ManchesterCelticsFan]

If KG continues on his tear and caps off the C's run leading them to a Championship, how will the post All-Star Break KG compare to Bill Russell? (in terms of being a Center at an advanced age willing the team to win)

Are we seeing some Bill Russell in KG play now? (People who were C's fans in the 1960's, lets hear it    )

[hpantazo]

nowhere near Bill Russell, but as close as you will ever find this day and age is my guess

[CelticG1]

KG is certainly carrying this team.

Was Russell carrying the team as much in his last year? I really don't know

[Who]

I have the Game Seven of that Finals on tape. I think that's the only game I have from that season. I have other Russell games but I think that's the only one from 1969. Not sure.

Anyway ... based on that, I'd say that while KG offers a lot more offensively (as a go-to-scorer + as a scoring threat within the team's offense, comparable passers) but a lot less rebounding (Russell dominant vs KG good) ... but also, most importantly, a lot less minutes than Russell.

Imagine KG doing what he's been doing for 45+ minutes a night. That was Russell to that team. That was how dominant he was. He was the engine that drove that team and he was an ever-present on the court whereas KG's minutes have to be marshaled much more (with the team looking vulnerable in the playoffs whenever he steps off the court).

[CeltsAcumen]

I was thinking last night that KG looks very "Russellesque" in his determination to win.

I just love this team, the 2012 Celts.  I want to see them play the Spurs in the championship so badly.  Let the old guys pick and roll each other to death, that would make me very happy.

[Smokeeye123]

nowhere near Bill Russell, but as close as you will ever find this day and age is my guess

Talentwise he is. The NBA is a much harder place to play in now. If KG played 40 years ago he would be among the greats like Wilt, Magic, etc.

[GreenFaith1819]

KG's even got Pierce scowling, lol...I'm sure we all saw Pierce after his two dunks and the look on his face?

Pierce needs to keep that scowl for the next 6-7 weeks.

Thank you, KG.

Just as I viewed Russell as an emotional leader back then, KG is the emotional leader now.

[TrueGreen]

KG is certainly carrying this team.

Was Russell carrying the team as much in his last year? I really don't know

Before Russ came here we had a great team and Red was into uptempo basketball. The problem is they couldn't rebound the ball and go. Russ made Red's concept work because he got the ball.

I think in a way both were and are carrying the team, but I think that Russell invented the modern Center position and KG is the student. In other words, KG might not be doing what he's doing if not for Russ. Russ also invented the term "team ego". KG also believes deeply in that.

KG has tremendous respect for Bill Russell. He calls him "Mr. Russell". I remember when we won the championship in 2008 that KG was quick to find Russ and thank him. He was calling him "Mr. Russell".

When the KG "haters" like to get going I think they should think about the respect KG has for the game and for the great players who made his career possible. 

[Emmette Bryant]

If KG continues on his tear and caps off the C's run leading them to a Championship, how will the post All-Star Break KG compare to Bill Russell? (in terms of being a Center at an advanced age willing the team to win)

Are we seeing some Bill Russell in KG play now? (People who were C's fans in the 1960's, lets hear it    )

Hmm... well I am a Celtics fan from the 1960's so I guess I should try and give this question an answer.

First of all, you can't compare anybody to Mr. Russell.  He won 11 world championships.

My memory is that Russell was hurt most of the year but still delivered the goods in the playoffs.

Okay here's my answer:  If KG wins a championship with the Celtics this year, it will be acceptable to put both him and Russell in the same sentence.

[Celtics4ever]

Russ was a much better defender and shot blocker but I would give the edge to KG in offensive ability.   That being said Russ won 11 titles.

[mqtcelticsfan]

I'd say they're closer than the titles would lead you to believe. It really needs to be remembered that there were only 8 or 9 teams in the entire league when Russell won his titles. The amount of talent in the league today is absolutely miles ahead of where it was back then. Was Russell great? Definitely. However, KG is also great, and it's simply harder to win titles in a league with 30 teams.

[OsirusCeltics]

I'd say they're closer than the titles would lead you to believe. It really needs to be remembered that there were only 8 or 9 teams in the entire league when Russell won his titles. The amount of talent in the league today is absolutely miles ahead of where it was back then. Was Russell great? Definitely. However, KG is also great, and it's simply harder to win titles in a league with 30 teams.

No that actually has the opposite effect. If there are 30 teams instead of 8, that means the league is more watered down. Just look at the Miami Heat with Wade, Lebron, and Bosh on the same team in their primes. If the teams shrink to 8, there would be 8 Miami Heats in the league

Imagine if the 50 best players were all on only 8 teams. That would make all the 8 teams have talented players 15 deep on their roster. Like teams having the talent of Tyson Chandler starting at the 5, Kevin Love, Rudy Gay, James Harden, and Tony Parker all on the same team. It would be harder for teams to even repeat with all the 8 teams having that much talent

If you look at those 60's teams, all of the teams had at least 2 or 3 hall of famers on 1 team.. you can't say the same for teams today

[guava_wrench]

I'd say they're closer than the titles would lead you to believe. It really needs to be remembered that there were only 8 or 9 teams in the entire league when Russell won his titles. The amount of talent in the league today is absolutely miles ahead of where it was back then. Was Russell great? Definitely. However, KG is also great, and it's simply harder to win titles in a league with 30 teams.

No that actually has the opposite effect. If there are 30 teams instead of 8, that means the league is more watered down. Just look at the Miami Heat with Wade, Lebron, and Bosh on the same team in their primes. If the teams shrink to 8, there would be 8 Miami Heats in the league

Imagine if the 50 best players were all on only 8 teams. That would make all the 8 teams have talented players 15 deep on their roster. Like teams having the talent of Tyson Chandler starting at the 5, Kevin Love, Rudy Gay, James Harden, and Tony Parker all on the same team. It would be harder for teams to even repeat with all the 8 teams having that much talent

If you look at those 60's teams, all of the teams had at least 2 or 3 hall of famers on 1 team.. you can't say the same for teams today

It is WAAAAY easier to win when you are 1 of 8 teams than when you are 1 of 30. That is simple math. You can expect to win once every 8 years on average. There is less competition for titles. (That is ignoring the reality that some of the 8 teams didn't have the financial means to be interested in winning).

The # of rounds in the playoffs makes things harder today because there are more chances for upsets, even if build a dominant team.

Also, there is no reason to make your assumptions about the distribution of talent. There is no reason to assume an even distribution of talent with only 8 teams. There is also no reason to think that just because a team is guaranteed that all players on their team will be top 100 players (with 8 teams and rosters about 12 deep) that the team would be competitive. Look at all star games the enormous gap between the best players on the team and the worst. It is probably safe to say that all of the players on the 2 all star teams are probably top 50 in the league in 2012.  Yet we can think of many ways that we can split the ASG players into two teams where one is far inferior to the other.

[ram]

"KG, I played with Bill Russell. I knew Bill Russell. Bill Russell was a friend of mine. KG, you're no Bill Russell."

Kidding aside, several points:
1) This is premature. Russell carried the Celts all the way, including leading them back from 0-2 vs the Lakers in the finals.
2) Russell averaged 46 minutes per game, 20 RPG and 5 APG in that playoff run
3) Russell had John Havlicek (Pierce) and you could argue that Ray Allen = Sam Jones but he had no Rondo (journeymen Siegfried & Em Bryant). Bailey Howell was still a pretty good player > Bass
4) Russell was not only playing 46 minutes but he was the coach of the team as well.
5) The 2012 Celtics will not face any team comparable to the '69 Knicks (Reed, Debusshere, Bradley, Frazier, Barnett) or '69 Lakers (Wilt, West, Baylor)
6) This year does remind me of 1969; an aging past champion chasing younger more talented opponents with savvy, guts and tenacity.

[ScoobyDoo]

I don't know how KG compares to Russell as I never watched Russell play. But I'll say this, KG (Pierce is automatically on the list)is the closest thing I've seen in Celtic uniform that compares favorable to, in different ways, Cowens and Bird in Celtic lore.

Also:

1. If KG had arrived in Boston as a youngster - he'd be in Russell and Bird's company in accomplishments

2. Heck, if KG arrived here at 27, along with Pierce and Ray, I think we'd be looking at probably 6-8 titles by now.

People forget McHale, Bird and Parish got together young and they pulled off only three rings playing together in their prime. Our current big three started basically past their prime and were 12 minutes away from two titles and are sniffing around the door at one this year.

It's somewhat off topic but can you imagine KG, Ray and Pierce all getting together at the same times in their careers as did Bird, McHale and Parish?

Russell had way more help on a lot of those championship teams than KG, and for that matter, Pierce have had in the majority of their prime years. Particularly for KG and pretty much for Pierce as well, they toiled away on very mediocre teams for the majority of their prime.

KG is a legendary player - had he had the right talent around him, he'd probably have earned 5-8 titles. By the right talent I mean something a long the lines of:

1. Center - even a Perkins type center
2. KG
3. Pierce
4. Sub all star off guard
5. border line all star point

Not uber talent - just one legit Robin to his batman and good complimentary pieces around him.

Russell had Cousy, Hondo, Heinsohn.
Kobe had Shaq and a very good Pau Gasol at the time.
Magic had Kareem and Worthy
Duncan had Robinson, then Parker and Ginobli
Bird had McHale...

I think KG is in the conversation with Russell as a "player" in the history of the NBA, he just doesn't have the titles and Russell separates himself because of it.

If Russell played on crap teams for 12 of his 15 seasons and only won one title would he be spoken of today as he is? No, he'd be spoken of as one of the best ever, same as KG is now, but not as "the Legend"...

In heart, spirit, desire, passion, talent and performance - I'd like to think KG is in Russell's ball park.

IMHO