Bill Russell vs. Ben Wallace

by **EGarrett** on Wed Dec 22, 2004 6:31 am

I've been thinking about this one a bit.

If Ben Wallace had been on the 60's Celtics would they have more, less, or the same amount of championships?

What about Bill Russell playing Center for the Pistons?

And why?

I'll post my opinion later.

by **Matthew** on Wed Dec 22, 2004 6:41 am

Why wait?

I think DenisRodman was "closer" to being the next Bill Russel. The guy could do it all, dominate board, guard anybody from Jordan to Magic to Shaq. He did whatever he had to win. Ben Wallace isnt worth of this comparison yet.

by **#12** on Wed Dec 22, 2004 7:45 am

Ben Wallaces offensive game is shit, only 50% from free throw. Also not a really good man to man defender as Russell or Rodman(but hes still a good man to man defender)

by **Jowe** on Wed Dec 22, 2004 11:29 am

agreed, wallace is more of a weakside defender.

by **Matt** on Wed Dec 22, 2004 2:26 pm

I'm inclined to think that Russell and Chamberlain would be at least All-Stars if they were in the league today.

what about a Russell vs Hakeem?

by **Matthew** on Wed Dec 22, 2004 4:10 pm

I cant really see how Russel would be able to stop Hakeem's little baseline fadeaway. Remember, Hakeem was about the same size as wilt, but faster and probably just as strong. Hakeem would have been a nightmare for Russell to guard.

by **Drex** on Thu Dec 23, 2004 1:08 am

what about a Russell vs Hakeem?

Do you mean those two switching teams? Or going one-on-one?

by **MaD_hAND1e** on Thu Dec 23, 2004 1:08 pm

If you switched Ben Wallace and Bill Russell .... both teams would be worse off:
* Big Ben wouldn't have even been born yet. I don't think a sperm could defend well against anything.
* Bill Russell would be struggling to keep up with the referees let alone the rest of his team. Heck Larry Brown would probably out run him on his new rolly chair.

Bluesky · by **Andrew** on Thu Dec 23, 2004 6:46 pm

I'm inclined to believe that the Celtics wouldn't have been so successful, as Russell possessed a superior offensive game and was an incredibly intelligent defender. His passing remains particularly underrated; he averaged 4.3 assists per game for his career.

The current Pistons have only won one title though, so it's hard to say whether they would be more or less successful with Bill Russell. I'd say that they would have still won the 2004 championship with a young Bill Russell in Wallace's place.

by **Dramacydal** on Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:33 pm

Wallace isnt even worth being compared to one of the greatest ever. this is an easy choice, no doubt.

by **allamerican08** on Thu Dec 23, 2004 10:53 pm

I don't think you can make a legit comparison here, or ur not comparing it right!
If....Big Ben was playing in the 60's then he would be one of the most dominant players alive! Just look at the pictures and videos from that time of Bill Russle and Wilt! They are both as thin as you can get! Their size is viwed as a major weeknes in Collage Level! All those players who say how stong Wilt was or how good and quick Bill Russle was, are talking from their experience with them! Dont forget, those same pple were even smaller and weaker! Bill Russle would be lucky to get 8rpg in todays NBA!

But....if you comparin Bill Russle from the 60's and his effect on the game and Big Ben now and his effect in the game, then.... there is no comparison. Bill had a much greater effect on the outcome then Ben has.

by **GloveGuy** on Sat Dec 25, 2004 2:32 pm

Matt wrote:what about a Russell vs Hakeem?

Defense -- I'm gonna have to give it to Russ, along with the aspects of leadership.

Offense -- Well...could Russell do this?:

Bill Russell vs. Ben Wallace

Bill Russell switched with Ben Wallace?

Bill Russell vs. Ben Wallace

Who is online