Remember Bill Russell Winning His First NBA Championship As Player-Coach

http://www.thepostgame.com/blog/throwback/201505/remember-bill-russell-winning-his-first-nba-title-player-coach-1968



Remember Bill Russell Winning His First NBA Championship As Player-Coach

Saturday, May 2, 2015 12:01 amWritten by: ThePostGame Staff



 


May 2, 1968: Bill Russell and the Boston Celtics finish off a 4-2 series with the Los Angeles Lakers to win the NBA title, the team's 10th in 12 years.

Player-coach Bill Russell averaged 12.5 points and 18.6 rebounds in the regular season en route to the NBA Finals appearance. The Celtics won 124-109 to clinch the championship.

After the game, Lakers guard Jerry West uttered these famous words: "If I had a choice of any basketball player in the league, my No.1 choice has to be Bill Russell. Bill Russell never ceases to amaze me."





Red Auerbach retired as Celtics coach after winning the 1966 NBA title. Russell replaced him as a player-coach. In his first season, the Celtics lost in the Eastern finals to the 76ers.

The Celtics won in 1968 and 1969 with Russell, who then retired.



bob



.

Yes, I do seem to remember something about that.  Russ had grown into his dual role of player-coach, including coming to grips with reconciling his personal distaste for practice with the need for the team to spend practice practice time adjusting to the loss (through retirement) of six future hall-of-famers in the previous six years and continuing to integrate relative newbies such as Larry Siegfried, Wayne Embry, Don Nelson, and Bailey Howell.  (Embry was a pivotal figure in whipping Wilt and the Wilties in the 1968 division finals.)

Sam

I would have liked to see more clips of Russell defending and snatching some boards. Game was actually very primitive compared to todays game, even though not enough clips of Russell, he still looked like easily the most athletic player on the floor. Jerry West had one nice blow by drive on the left side and and a stop and pop, Elgin Baylor certainly doesn't look like all that compared to todays wings.

All that intricate passing, fast-breaking, and volume basketball, and none of those wonderful three-point vacations.  What a drag!

Sam

Primative??? You would have loved Russell if you had been able to watch him. He was a master, and got into Wilt's head more than you will ever know or anyone would admit to. A joy to watch.

Keep the three's, they are ruining the game. Playmaking is becoming an afterthought. Jordan was wonderful, don't get me wrong, but I will side with Jerry West. Russ would be my first pick. And don't say the game is too quick for him, he could outrun the best of them. Even Larry has said that te three's are ruining the game.

We were lucky to say we saw him play. He was the best.
\\\

cowens/oldschool wrote:I would have liked to see more clips of Russell defending and snatching some boards. Game was actually very primitive compared to todays game, even though not enough clips of Russell, he still looked like easily the most athletic player on the floor. Jerry West had one nice blow by drive on the left side and and a stop and pop, Elgin Baylor certainly doesn't look like all that compared to todays wings.

I was surprised at the lack of intensity there was back then on the defensive side.
It is so much more of a physical game now than what I saw on that video.
In all of the old videos that I watch, it is the same style of play which is so different to today's NBA.

I can't imagine what a John Wall or Russell Westbrook would have accomplished if they played back then.
This is not a knock against the Celtics or Lakers because they were great teams back then, but I always watch those old videos and feel very unimpressed and underwhelmed with the way they played defense in the NBA game back then.

Elgin:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjNS_oYE92E

Cooz:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjNS_oYE92E

Russ:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40iKnaUjz_w

TJ,

1. When you look as those old videos, do you appreciate the pace at which teams performed?  It was very much about speed in those days.  Speed of foot and speed of passing.

2. Do you know why some of us clamor for the Celtics to push the ball?  Because, when you push the ball, one of the benefits is that the other team's ability to get set on defense is compromised.

3. Well, in those days, pushing the ball was the rule, whereas today's it's the exception.

4. An ability to get set on defense didn't allow players of the time to hunker down and dig in as the defensive players of today do while they wait for the opponent to walk up the court or for an opponent to hold the ball while he's deciding what his iso move is going to be. 

5. So the defenses adapted to what they were presented with, and defense was more a matter of outscoring the opponent rather than relying on being able to stop him cold more often than not.

6. Why is it that I keep hearing about the low shooting percentages of those days?  Perhaps, in their own way, and given the fact that the rapidity of the action blunted the shooting accuracy to some degree, the defenses weren't as ineffective as might be surmised by eyes accustomed to today's slow-down ball and entrenched defenses.

7. What Russell brought to the party in those days was an anomaly...defense that could thwart even a reasonably high percentage of fast breaks.  So the Celtics had it both ways: a steamrolling offense and a defense far above serviceable variety that was in vogue at the time.  The result?  Eleven championships in 13 years.  Simple!

Sam

Sam, I give up. They just do not get how magnificent a ballplayer Russell was. Those stats that they keep quoting were done by a system that never did not really realize what they were watching.

Russell changed the game of basketball, no doubt. I would choose him first on my team, keep the razzle dazzle players.
He was the greatest.

I said before I was not going to get into these conversations, now I am definitely done!!!! Think what you want boys, you missed out on some great basketball. Take it from an old time Celtic fan. Sam and I go back all the way to almost the beginning. I am so delighted that I saw him play

Rosalie

I don't remember anyone doubting that Bill Russell was not an all time great player.

Sam, my analysis is more about the weak defense, not the pace of play back then. When I watch the old videos, the defense back then was nothing like it is today. It is much more physical even in college basketball. I watched that video and it was almost like they were standing around on defense. There was no speed of pace in that video which didn't allow the defense to set up.
I am saying this with all honesty and respect for the players back then, but the defense on that video reminded me of watching a WNBA game.

The Celtics won 11 championships in 13 years. It was well deserved. They completely dominated. This discussion to me is only about the level of play back then, especially on defense. Where was the defensive effort when Sam Jones shot the ball at about 2:40 in that video?

If someone watches that video and can tell me I am wrong about the defense back then, I am interested in hearing your perspective.

I would agree the defense, especially perimeter defense is so much more tighter today, seeing how loose that defense was was actually surprising, for some reason when I started watching around 68 with my Dad, I thought that game was faster and more physical. I still vividly remember how great I thought the Cowens Celtics defense was and in their time it was, no question. But seeing the clips of the 60's defense, I don't see any wing predators like James, Shumpert or Jimmy Butler that I am watching now on TV. The overall defense is so much more physical today, then what I'm seeing from clips of the 60's, especially on the perimeter.

Who was the best wing defender from the 60's? were there more than a few? Any Jordan, Pippen, Drexler or Tony Allen types. I don't think Elgin Baylor ever got pressed on like those type of modern types could do.

RosalieTCeltics wrote:Sam, I give up.  They just do not get how magnificent a ballplayer Russell was.   Those stats that they keep quoting were done by a system that never did not really realize what they were watching.

Russell changed the game of basketball, no doubt.  I would choose him first on my team, keep the razzle dazzle players.
He was the greatest.

I said before I was not going to get into these conversations, now I am definitely done!!!!  Think what you want boys, you missed out on some great basketball.  Take it from an old time Celtic fan. Sam and I go back all the way to almost the beginning. I am so delighted that I saw him play

Rosalie

nobody is attacking Bill Russell, I said he was easily the most athletic guy on the floor.....and Rosalie my father was Bill Russell's biggest fan.

WOW is anyone watching this Cavs-Bulls playoff game? Bulls had a 16 point lead in 3rd and Cavs cut it to 2 point game with 5 minutes left in 4th, some great team defense by Cavs, Shumpert and James and Thompson all pressing on Bulls like crazy.

Lack of physicality is the reason that I have stated often times that they could have played in Gown and tuxedo back in the 50's - 60's.

swish

Jeez Bulls pulled it out hitting some big shots to pull it out, were so many bad offensive possessions by both teams as defense was so tight and physical, every shot was contested to the 9th degree. Anyone else see this game? incredible defense by both teams. Rose took a shot chasing Irving and running into a Thompson pick with 12-15 seconds left, was holding his shoulder, almost every player is so jacked now, playoff basketball is so physical now. Its getting like rugby now as so much contact and pushing and leaning on each other away from the ball.

Man, the era to era comparisons that take place nowadays are so incredibly ill-advised (my genteel synonym for something a lot more pejorative).  What could be more condescending (a synonym for a word that shall be nameless but begins with “arro” and ends with “gant”) than arguing about the present versus the past while insisting on using the present as the gold standard?
 
The 50s and 60s were different from today.  But that doesn’t mean that teams or players were worse—relative to the times in which they lived—than teams or players of today.  Soldiers in WWI fought heroically; but does the fact that they had more “primitive” weaponry than today’s soldiers mean today’s soldiers are more heroic?  How about doctors?  How about inventors?  How about pilots?  How about makers of motion pictures?  Is it not possible that some of these era-to-era comparisons actually assume that basketball players of the past were somehow competing against their future counterparts within a set of conditions they’d never even seen and most likely never even imagined?  No, they played the cards they were dealt, just as today’s players do.  The decks simply differ.
 
TJ, you’re right that there’s not a lot of fast breaking shown on that clip.  That doesn’t mean a thing because, on 14 of the 16 portrayed possessions, the clip focuses only on the forecourt action—not showing the pace with which the ball was brought upcourt.  On the two clips showing full-court action, Celtics fast breaks were definitely involved; and both resulted in unguarded short jumpers (by Sam Jones and Bailey Howell).  Anyone who thinks that only two 16 possessions in those days involved fast breaks has only to consult the number of possessions/shots to become disabused of that ridiculous notion.  Pace ruled!
 
Many of the made shots on that clip were made through the use of great agility and stop-and-pop shots that were virtually uncoverable. 
 
None of that means the actions shown on that extremely selective clip was right.  But it was the right action for that time.  And the Celtics were the best at executing those actions.  End of story.
 
I read that the perimeter defense of the Russell era was missing.  Well perhaps that was because the perimeter itself (as defined by a three point arc) was missing.  On how many occasions do we or an announcer say something like, “The Celtics will settle all day for (opponent) to take (long) shots like that?”  And the long shots now count for three points.  What if the long shots of today only counted for two points?  Why wouldn’t teams be happy to defender the perimeter more loosely and let other teams shoot 24-footers rather than higher-percentage shots in the lane or at the rim?  Duh! Give me a break!  The major difference between then and how is that, nowadays, many defensive players would have committed an and-one foul while players of the past stood their ground or jumped from a safer distance and got their hands in the shooters’ faces.  (For an example, see Havlicek, J. stonewalling a Laker near the beginning of the clip.)
 
Defensive players against wings?  There were plenty—six of whom were Celtics named Sanders, Havlicek, Loscutoff, K.C. Jones, Sam Jones, and Sharman.  Other teams had strong defensive wings like Tom Meschery, Bob Boozer, Tom Gola, Oscar Robertson and Jerry West.
 
As for toughness, an excerpt from an article appearing on a site simply called “NBA Playoffs” reads:
 
“The 60's era in which Wilt played, was a more physical era. There were no sissy flagrant or hand-check fouls during that time. Refs allowed those physical tactics go unpunished because the owners and NBA management believed that blood and violence was what brought people to basketball games back then.”
 
I think a lot of today’s fans define toughness by the number of injuries.  How many of the injuries suffered by today’s players arise because they ignore the fundamentals of the game or get messed up while posturing for the crowd, e.g. by hanging then dropping from the rim?  That’s not toughness; that’s idiocy!  How many of today’s players play injured?  Sure, perhaps a few.  But it’s not a veritable religion, which it was in the Russell era.  In today’s terms, that may also reflect a form of idiocy; but it indisputably bespeaks toughness.  Has there ever been a game in the past several decades when it got so rough that both teams ran out of players between fights and fouls?  Check March 21, 1953.  And how many people know that Wilt Chamberlain actually retired after his first year in the league because of the toughness of the defenses against him?  As far as I know, none of his defenders wore a tuxedo, a gown or any of the dresses favored by 80s/90s defender Dennis Rodman.
 
Lenny Wilkens, the great Hall-of-fame-bound guard during the Russell era, and later coach, summarizes the era-to-era thing very well:
 
“When you compare players from the 50s and 60s to today's, you have to remember that we were the best athletes of our time, and we'd presumably benefit from the same advantages today's players have if we were somehow transported forward in time. I know that I would have been as good a player today as I was back in my era, and I believe that would be true of the best of our players from those years.”
 
But presumably you wouldn’t have lost any basketball IQ during that time trip, Lenny.  An important dimension, indeed.
 
Sam

"I read that the perimeter defense of the Russell era was missing.  Well perhaps that was because the perimeter itself (as defined by a three point arc) was missing.  On how many occasions do we or an announcer say something like, “The Celtics will settle all day for (opponent) to take (long) shots like that?”  

One thing that is striking in some of the clips was how packed in the half court sets were.  You sure didn't see players spreading the court by positioning themselves 25 feet from the basket or running away from the basket toward a non-existent 3 point line.

Neither do you see slashing drives toward the basket with kick-outs to a guy 25 feet from the basket.

There was much less of a premium on outside shooting and more of one on interior passing.

Could this be a contributing factor to less fast breaks today?  When you have players roaming 25 feet from the basket it is easier for them to get back on defense than if everyone is more often than not within 18-20 feet of the hoop.

As for physical play, hand-checking on the perimeter was allowed back then. I remember Havlicek saying that when a guy like Gus Johnson did that to you it was like carrying around another person. That would be a foul today in a league that wants to showcase athleticism.

Interesting comments, I would agree that the 3 point shot has changed alot of strategies of how the game was played, in the old days the shooting wasn't so evolved and emphasized, so in essence it was an advantage to give up the outside shot cause you wanted to protect the inside, the higher percentage shot. However hand checking or no hand checking, the physical contact/nature in the paint is much more fierce today. Look at how many times Blake Griffen gets knocked down in a game, look at how much pushing goes on between Howard and Jordan, sorry I didn't see that level of pressing/pushing infighting when Wilt and Russell played each other. Doesn't take away any of their accomplishments, the game in general is more physical all over now.

Sam lets face it, the defenders at the SG-SF position from the 50s and 60s is nothing compared to where the evolution of the game would go. Walt Frazier and Jerry Sloan, two perennial all defense defenders from the 70's pale in comparison to the Jordan, Pippen- Tony Allen, Shumpert, Jimmy Butler types that cover all over the floor today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=HE6kIu34Qsc

Above is a link to film of a Boston-Cincy playoff game from 1966.   Great footage.  Russ plays middleman on the fastbreak a couple of times hitting teammates on the dead run with pinpoint passes for layups.  Of course, there's a couple of blocks leading to Celtic fastbreaks , including one of an Oscar Roberston back-in.

Plenty of Oscar footage of some great interior passing on screen and rolls as well as something you hardly ever see any more: back-in turnaround jump shots 12-18 feet out  by play-making guards.  At 6'5" Oscar would have been a big PG even by today's standards.   With 6'1" KC guarding him Oscar was just physically overwhelming. And KC was one of the all-time great defenders. Think what Big O must have done with run-of-the-mill defenders in his era.

Great footage of Hondo, Sam Jones and KC on some insane drives as well as Jerry Lucas, Wayne Embry, etc.

Almost 50 minutes long and worth a look.

Sam the other stuff you said wasn't worth arguing about, because your probably right, I don't argue points if your right.

why does some think I'm dissing Bill Russell?

sam wrote:Elgin:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjNS_oYE92E

Cooz:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjNS_oYE92E

Russ:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40iKnaUjz_w

Hey Sam I just watched the Elgin Baylor tape and what stood out to me was how slow the team and individual defense was in the whole clip that I saw. Today probably not this years Celtics team, but all the playoff teams that I am seeing still playing right now, would gang up on Baylor and not let him drive so undeterred to the basket. Baylor was actually alot slower on his moves than I thought, and there were segments where he was posting up close to the basket on alot of players and the defenders were all atrocious, the players today defensively really get after it. I dare anybody to look at what I just saw and tell me they saw something different. I'm not saying what era is best, I don't even think the teams of today could compete with the teams from the mid 80's, but the game has evolved and evolved and I know how great those Russell Celtics were, but the defenses that I saw in the Baylor clip was no way as intense and physical as the team defense we see today.

"Baylor was actually alot slower on his moves than I thought"

This was especially true in the footage shown apparently in slow motion though I guess Baylor and every other player was so slow that it's hard to tell  at what speed the footage was shown.

"alot of players and the defenders were all atrocious..."

These atrocious defenders Baylor blew by at his snail-like pace included Russell, Havlicek, Tom Sanders and I think I saw Nate Thurmond in there as well.