Bill Russell game logs

I found this just  a bit ago and am still going over it.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-fRFgkADAK80/VkG0j3zRocI/AAAAAAAAHTA/swVybP9vvpE/s0-Ic42/Russell%252520blocked%252520shots%252520135g.jpg

Matty wrote:I found this just  a bit ago and am still going over it.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-fRFgkADAK80/VkG0j3zRocI/AAAAAAAAHTA/swVybP9vvpE/s0-Ic42/Russell%252520blocked%252520shots%252520135g.jpg

Matty

What is the source of this link. The nba did not keep records on game blocks back in 1956-57 - 1968-69 ( the Russell years) - While Russell and Wilt did indeed block shots at a much higher rate then in comparison to the numbers of later generations (Strictly my opinion) I have never before seen any log listing his block numbers - an Interesting find if confirmation is available.


swish

I found the link on NBA realm apparently it's a compliation of known stats of games he played in. There is another link for Chamberlin of 128 games or so.

Matty wrote:I found the link on NBA realm apparently it's a compliation of known stats of games he played in. There is another link for Chamberlin of 128 games or so.

Matty

So far - no luck in tracking down your link.


swish

Hello, my heroes. Was unable to access this website for the longest time on the Brevard (FL) County library computers, but suddenly it became available a few months ago (five gods be praised).

Anyhow, this is a topic I have some insight into because for years I had the strange hobby of visiting the microfiche section of Boston Public Library and reading accounts of Celtics games in the olden days. That's how I came to know that there was no custom of reporting anything other than points and assists and, even then, only the top players in those categories. When a reporter did add a category, it was rebounds, but that was frustratingly unreliable.

Blocked shots were rarely mentioned, even in the body of a story. I wrote a piece one time about Bill Russell's first game with the Celtics and tried to find some source for how many shots he blocked in that game. Bob Pettit said somewhere that Russ blocked his shot 3 times in that game and Charlie Share said Russ blocked every Hawk at least once. You'd never know it to read the papers, though.

Reporters back then knew little about basketball and cared even less. To read between the lines, they seemed to resent that basketball distracted fans from baseball and those perennial 'loosers', the racist Red Sox. So it isn't surprising that they didn't realize that Bill Russell had revolutionized the game with his extraordinary, exciting abilities.

One last point: this inane insistence on the primacy of statistics when analyzing the game of basketball is as moronic (okay, misguided) as the drivel spouted by the Boston reporters of the 50s and 60s.

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. As the Tao says, it's about the intangibles.

Russell's stats are beyond superlative. The NBA should name the MVP trophy after him!

rickdavisakaspike wrote:Hello, my heroes.  Was unable to access this website for the longest time on the Brevard (FL) County library computers, but suddenly it became available a few months ago (five gods be praised).

Anyhow, this is a topic I have some insight into because for years I had the strange hobby of visiting the microfiche section of Boston Public Library and reading accounts of Celtics games in the olden days.  That's how I came to know that there was no custom of reporting anything other than points and assists and, even then, only the top players in those categories.  When a reporter did add a category, it was rebounds, but that was frustratingly unreliable.

Blocked shots were rarely mentioned, even in the body of a story.  I wrote a piece one time about Bill Russell's first game with the Celtics and tried to find some source for how many shots he blocked in that game.  Bob Pettit said somewhere that Russ blocked his shot 3 times in that game and Charlie Share said Russ blocked every Hawk at least once.  You'd never know it to read the papers, though.

Reporters back then knew little about basketball and cared even less.  To read between the lines, they seemed to resent that basketball distracted fans from baseball and those perennial 'loosers', the racist Red Sox.  So it isn't surprising that they didn't realize that Bill Russell had revolutionized the game with his extraordinary, exciting abilities.  

One last point: this inane insistence on the primacy of statistics when analyzing the game of basketball is as moronic (okay, misguided) as the drivel spouted by the Boston reporters of the 50s and 60s.  

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.  As the Tao says, it's about the intangibles.

Spike,

I take it you're not a Red Sox fan.

I'm not a Bostonian, but I've always understood Boston to be a baseball town above all else. They seem to love their Patriots, Celtics and Bruins, but Fenway is the Holy Temple.

Regards