Celtics legend Bill Russell to receive inaugural NBA Lifetime Achievement Award

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/19647511/celtics-legend-bill-russell-receive-inaugural-nba-life-achievement-award?src=rss

Celtics legend Bill Russell to receive inaugural NBA Lifetime Achievement Award

Associated Press

NEW YORK -- Bill Russell will be honored with the Lifetime Achievement Award during the first NBA Awards.

The Hall of Fame center and 11-time NBA champion with the Boston Celtics will be given the award by the NBA and Turner Sports, it was announced Thursday.

Russell was one of the league's dominant defensive players and won five NBA MVP awards. The NBA Finals MVP award is named in his honor. The first player to win an NBA championship, college title and Olympic gold medal, he went on to become the first African-American to coach a team in one of the major professional sports.

The awards show will be June 26 in New York and be televised by TNT.

Now I have a reason to watch the NBA awards night show on June 26th.

Such an award could not be given to a better recipient!!!!!

Say what you want about Bill Russell, but remember that he won almost twice as many rings
as the basketball god, Michael Jordan. When Jordan holds up his rings, Bill will still need another
complete hand to show off all of his.

Don't forget super star Robert Horry who has 7 rings - 1 more than Jordan.

swish

Acknowledging Russell this way, with this "new wave" of players is the very right thing to do. Listening to all these reporters talk, game after game, and never mentioning Russ at all. Jordan, Magic, Bird, that's who we hear about. Tommy one night got so frustrated he threw up his hands and told them all they had no idea......

Finally I can applaud the NBA for giving Russ his pat on the back again. He kept the league going, along with Wilt during the 60's

It is really amusing listening to the insignificant debates about who is the best and where Lebron factors into the all time rankings.  And all we here is that Lebron got 3 rings but Kobe has 5 and Jordan has 6..etc. ect.

It's false news...fake news because Russell sits their at the top of the mountain with 11 and yet his name barely gets mentioned.  His accomplishments  were so great that nobody looks at him as THE measuring stick anymore because no player is likely to even approach his hardware.

I am always thrilled whenever Bill Russell's greatness is honored.

dboss

Aren't rings a TEAM honor?

swish

Let's be serious here. Of course they are a TEAM thing, but would they ever have happened without having Russell at the head of it all.

You have been around a long time, I am sure you have seen even more games than me, however, it seems that giving Russsell his just rewards seems to bother you. No one ever questions the accolades thrown at Jordan and LeBrong. Why are we questioning Russell's contributions

swish wrote:Aren't rings a TEAM honor?

 swish

Of course they are. But if that is the measuring stick then they should count his rings,,, That way no one can ever be better than #2.

Yes, rings are certainly earned by "teams". And, that is why the Cs have seven/eight other guys with more rings than Jordan.

Can you name them?

RosalieTCeltics wrote:Let's be serious here. Of course they are a TEAM thing, but would they ever have happened without  having Russell at the head of it all.

You have been around a long time, I am sure you have seen even more games than me, however, it seems that giving Russsell his just rewards seems to bother you. No one ever questions the accolades thrown at Jordan and LeBrong.  Why are we questioning Russell's contributions

RosalieTCeltics

I was 24 years old when Russell came to town and I absolutely idolized him more than I have any any other Celtic player in history. I happen to think that Wilt and Bill dominated their generation more than ANY OTHER PLAYER has in the generation that they played in. And I do offer my opinion in regards to Russells standing in regard to his ratings vs the modern players - which I realize runs contrary to most other Celtic OLD TIMERS. Now in my most recent post I question the Value of using a team honor to validate Russells greatness. You see - during his 13 years, on an annual basis, Russell was at all times surrounded by a cast of Hall of famers that exceeded the hall of famers on the other teams that he faced in the playoffs. A LOADED team led by a GREAT player was the formula that got the Celts 11 championships in 13 years.

swish

swish wrote:

RosalieTCeltics wrote:Let's be serious here. Of course they are a TEAM thing, but would they ever have happened without  having Russell at the head of it all.

You have been around a long time, I am sure you have seen even more games than me, however, it seems that giving Russsell his just rewards seems to bother you. No one ever questions the accolades thrown at Jordan and LeBrong.  Why are we questioning Russell's contributions

 RosalieTCeltics

 I was 24 years old when Russell came to town and I absolutely idolized him more than I have any any other Celtic player in history. I happen to think that Wilt and Bill dominated their generation more than ANY OTHER PLAYER has in the generation that they played in. And I do offer my opinion in regards to Russells standing in regard to his ratings vs the modern players - which I realize runs contrary to most other Celtic OLD TIMERS. Now in my most recent post I question the Value of using a team honor to validate Russells greatness. You see - during his 13 years, on an annual basis, Russell was at all times surrounded by a cast of Hall of famers that exceeded the hall of famers on the other teams that he faced in the playoffs. A LOADED team led by a GREAT player was the formula that got the Celts 11 championships in 13 years.

  swish

I disagree because in Russell's era there were so few teams, the talent was easier to build, weren't so many crappy teams like now. Of course the skills and athleticism is greater every generation, but if there were 5-6 less teams right now we would see much better and competitive games....the league would be really strong, like in the 80's. In 68 and 69 he sure didn't have the superior teams and in 64 Cousy retired and he went up against the first twin towers, Wilt and the great Nate Thurmond and showed his greatness by getting past them. He had plenty of obstacles to overcome, Oscar also had a very competitive team with Jerry Lucas.

and a lot of the players Russ played with, he made them HoFers, they wouldn't have made it without him.

swish wrote:Aren't rings a TEAM honor?

 swish

What's your point? I believe Steph Curry won 2 MVPs because he was best player on the winning team, even though there are plenty of players at his own position like Russell Westbrook and John Wall that could destroy him one on one.

cowens/oldschool wrote:

swish wrote:

RosalieTCeltics wrote:Let's be serious here. Of course they are a TEAM thing, but would they ever have happened without  having Russell at the head of it all.

You have been around a long time, I am sure you have seen even more games than me, however, it seems that giving Russsell his just rewards seems to bother you. No one ever questions the accolades thrown at Jordan and LeBrong.  Why are we questioning Russell's contributions

 RosalieTCeltics

 I was 24 years old when Russell came to town and I absolutely idolized him more than I have any any other Celtic player in history. I happen to think that Wilt and Bill dominated their generation more than ANY OTHER PLAYER has in the generation that they played in. And I do offer my opinion in regards to Russells standing in regard to his ratings vs the modern players - which I realize runs contrary to most other Celtic OLD TIMERS. Now in my most recent post I question the Value of using a team honor to validate Russells greatness. You see - during his 13 years, on an annual basis, Russell was at all times surrounded by a cast of Hall of famers that exceeded the hall of famers on the other teams that he faced in the playoffs. A LOADED team led by a GREAT player was the formula that got the Celts 11 championships in 13 years.

  swish

I disagree because in Russell's era there were so few teams, the talent was easier to build, weren't so many crappy teams like now. Of course the skills and athleticism is greater every generation, but if there were 5-6 less teams right now we would see much better and competitive games....the league would be really strong, like in the 80's. In 68 and 69 he sure didn't have the superior teams and in 64 Cousy retired and he went up against the first twin towers, Wilt and the great Nate Thurmond and showed his greatness by getting past them. He had plenty of obstacles to overcome, Oscar also had a very competitive team with Jerry Lucas.

Oldschool

I'll respond to your below comment later

"I disagree because in Russell's era there were so few teams, the talent was easier to build, weren't so many crappy teams like now"

But 1st a look at the teams involved in the finals during the Russell years when the Celtics picked up 11 rings.

!956-57,,, Celts win % .775 - 7 hofers
Hawks win % .472 - 4 hofers
1957-58,,, Celts win % .681 - 8 hofers
Hawks win % .569 - 4 hofers
1958-59,,, Celts win % .722 - 7 hofers
Lakers win % .458 - 2 hofers
1959-60,,, Celts win % .787 - 7 hofers
Hawks win% .613 - 4 hofers
1960-61,,, Celts win % .722 - 7 hofers
Hawks win % .646 - 4 hofers
1961-62,,, Celts win % .750 - 6 hofers
Lakers win % .675 - 2 hofers
1962-63,,,,Celts win % .725 - 8 hofers
Lakers win % .663 - 2 hofers
1963-64,,, Celts win % .738 - 7 hofers
Warriors win .600 - 3 hofers
1964 65,,, Celts win % .775 - 5 hofers
Lakers win % .613 - 2 hofers
!965-66,,, Celts win % .675 - 4 hofers
Lakers win % .563 - 3 hofers
1967-68,,, Celts win % .659 - 4 hofers
Lakers win % .634 - 3 hofers
!968-69,,, Celts win % .585 - 4 hofers
Lakers win % .671 - 3 hofers

Dominating Celtic TEAMS of the 1950's - 60's - led by the great Bill Russell.

swish

RosalieTCeltics wrote:Let's be serious here. Of course they are a TEAM thing, but would they ever have happened without  having Russell at the head of it all.

You have been around a long time, I am sure you have seen even more games than me, however, it seems that giving Russsell his just rewards seems to bother you. No one ever questions the accolades thrown at Jordan and LeBrong.  Why are we questioning Russell's contributions

I remember an SI article after the C's won #10 under Russ...

There was a quote that went something like this...

"The spokes on the wheel changed over the years, but the HUB that they all revolved around remained the same."

beat

swish wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:

swish wrote:

RosalieTCeltics wrote:Let's be serious here. Of course they are a TEAM thing, but would they ever have happened without  having Russell at the head of it all.

You have been around a long time, I am sure you have seen even more games than me, however, it seems that giving Russsell his just rewards seems to bother you. No one ever questions the accolades thrown at Jordan and LeBrong.  Why are we questioning Russell's contributions

 RosalieTCeltics

 I was 24 years old when Russell came to town and I absolutely idolized him more than I have any any other Celtic player in history. I happen to think that Wilt and Bill dominated their generation more than ANY OTHER PLAYER has in the generation that they played in. And I do offer my opinion in regards to Russells



standing in regard to his ratings vs the modern players - which I realize runs contrary to most other Celtic OLD TIMERS. Now in my most recent post I question the Value of using a team honor to validate Russells greatness. You see - during his 13 years, on an annual basis, Russell was at all times surrounded by a cast of Hall of famers that exceeded the hall of famers on the other teams that he faced in the playoffs. A LOADED team led by a GREAT player was the formula that got the Celts 11 championships in 13 years.

  swish

I disagree because in Russell's era there were so few teams, the talent was easier to build, weren't so many crappy teams like now. Of course the skills and athleticism is greater every generation, but if there were 5-6 less teams right now we would see much better and competitive games....the league would be really strong, like in the 80's. In 68 and 69 he sure didn't have the superior teams and in 64 Cousy retired and he went up against the first twin towers, Wilt and the great Nate Thurmond and showed his greatness by getting past them. He had plenty of obstacles to overcome, Oscar also had a very competitive team with Jerry Lucas.

 Oldschool

I'll respond to your below comment later
   
"I disagree because in Russell's era there were so few teams, the talent was easier to build, weren't so many crappy teams like now"

But 1st a look at the teams involved in the finals during the Russell years when the Celtics picked up 11 rings.

 !956-57,,,  Celts win % .775 - 7 hofers
                Hawks win % .472 - 4 hofers
 1957-58,,, Celts win % .681 - 8 hofers
                Hawks win % .569 - 4 hofers
 1958-59,,, Celts win % .722 - 7 hofers
                Lakers win % .458 - 2 hofers
 1959-60,,, Celts win % .787 - 7 hofers
                Hawks win% .613 - 4 hofers
 1960-61,,, Celts win % .722 - 7 hofers
                Hawks win % .646 - 4 hofers
 1961-62,,, Celts win % .750 - 6 hofers
                Lakers win % .675 - 2 hofers
 1962-63,,,,Celts win % .725 - 8 hofers
                Lakers win % .663 - 2 hofers
 1963-64,,, Celts win % .738 - 7 hofers
                Warriors win  .600 - 3 hofers
 1964 65,,, Celts win % .775 - 5 hofers
                Lakers win % .613 - 2 hofers
 !965-66,,, Celts win % .675  - 4 hofers
               Lakers win % .563 - 3 hofers
 1967-68,,, Celts win % .659 - 4 hofers
                Lakers win % .634 - 3 hofers
 !968-69,,, Celts win % .585 - 4 hofers
               Lakers win % .671 - 3 hofers

     Dominating Celtic TEAMS of the 1950's - 60's     -  led by the great Bill Russell.

  swish

 

Care to name each player? many only made HoF because of Russell

cowens/oldschool wrote:

swish wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:

swish wrote:

RosalieTCeltics wrote:Let's be serious here. Of course they are a TEAM thing, but would they ever have happened without  having Russell at the head of it all.

You have been around a long time, I am sure you have seen even more games than me, however, it seems that giving Russsell his just rewards seems to bother you. No one ever questions the accolades thrown at Jordan and LeBrong.  Why are we questioning Russell's contributions

 RosalieTCeltics

 I was 24 years old when Russell came to town and I absolutely idolized him more than I have any any other Celtic player in history. I happen to think that Wilt and Bill dominated their generation more than ANY OTHER PLAYER has in the generation that they played in. And I do offer my opinion in regards to Russells



standing in regard to his ratings vs the modern players - which I realize runs contrary to most other Celtic OLD TIMERS. Now in my most recent post I question the Value of using a team honor to validate Russells greatness. You see - during his 13 years, on an annual basis, Russell was at all times surrounded by a cast of Hall of famers that exceeded the hall of famers on the other teams that he faced in the playoffs. A LOADED team led by a GREAT player was the formula that got the Celts 11 championships in 13 years.

  swish

I disagree because in Russell's era there were so few teams, the talent was easier to build, weren't so many crappy teams like now. Of course the skills and athleticism is greater every generation, but if there were 5-6 less teams right now we would see much better and competitive games....the league would be really strong, like in the 80's. In 68 and 69 he sure didn't have the superior teams and in 64 Cousy retired and he went up against the first twin towers, Wilt and the great Nate Thurmond and showed his greatness by getting past them. He had plenty of obstacles to overcome, Oscar also had a very competitive team with Jerry Lucas.

 Oldschool

I'll respond to your below comment later
   
"I disagree because in Russell's era there were so few teams, the talent was easier to build, weren't so many crappy teams like now"

But 1st a look at the teams involved in the finals during the Russell years when the Celtics picked up 11 rings.

 !956-57,,,  Celts win % .775 - 7 hofers
                Hawks win % .472 - 4 hofers
 1957-58,,, Celts win % .681 - 8 hofers
                Hawks win % .569 - 4 hofers
 1958-59,,, Celts win % .722 - 7 hofers
                Lakers win % .458 - 2 hofers
 1959-60,,, Celts win % .787 - 7 hofers
                Hawks win% .613 - 4 hofers
 1960-61,,, Celts win % .722 - 7 hofers
                Hawks win % .646 - 4 hofers
 1961-62,,, Celts win % .750 - 6 hofers
                Lakers win % .675 - 2 hofers
 1962-63,,,,Celts win % .725 - 8 hofers
                Lakers win % .663 - 2 hofers
 1963-64,,, Celts win % .738 - 7 hofers
                Warriors win  .600 - 3 hofers
 1964 65,,, Celts win % .775 - 5 hofers
                Lakers win % .613 - 2 hofers
 !965-66,,, Celts win % .675  - 4 hofers
               Lakers win % .563 - 3 hofers
 1967-68,,, Celts win % .659 - 4 hofers
                Lakers win % .634 - 3 hofers
 !968-69,,, Celts win % .585 - 4 hofers
               Lakers win % .671 - 3 hofers

     Dominating Celtic TEAMS of the 1950's - 60's     -  led by the great Bill Russell.

  swish

 

Care to name each player? many only made HoF because of Russell

oldschool

Your the one making the claim - you name them.

swish

Swish your always so down on the abilities of the 50's and 60's level to the game, this just proves my point that a lot of those HoFers that played with Russell were not the 10 time all star types that are needed qualifications today, but were players that filled certain roles and played with the great Bill Russell. Would KC Jones get in if he played with West or Robertson? I don't think so, obviously he was a very good defender, he got in cause of all the championship teams he played on.

oldschool

Your statement below

"and a lot of the players Russ played with, he made them HoFers, they wouldn't have made it without him."

You named K C Jones. Anyone else?

swish

swish I don't even know who they all are....that made the HoF? maybe you can enlighten me?

cowens/oldschool wrote:swish I don't even know who they all are....that made the HoF? maybe you can enlighten me?

oldschool

And yet you state that the only reason they made the HOF was because of Russell - it might help to know a little more about them.

swish

swish wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:swish I don't even know who they all are....that made the HoF? maybe you can enlighten me?

oldschool

And yet you state that the only reason they made the HOF was because of Russell - it might help to know a little more about them.

  swish

never said all of them, definitely some

I've enjoyed discussing this matter with you oldschool - but I think its time to move on to another subject.

swish