Brian Cronin:
Also, note that Dennis Rodman was an important part of five NBA championships, so even if Russell did not adapt offensively to the modern NBA (I think he would), just on defense and rebounding alone he could win multiple titles like Rodman.

Rodman is an excellent comparison, a guy who put up monster rebounding numbers in the modern NBA at a time when fewer shots were taken, and could effectively defend bigger players. Russell was a similar athlete, perhaps even better (he had world-class track and field credentials, especially in the high jump). Other guys today put up big rebounding numbers in stretches, Kevin Love and recently Tyson Chandler are two examples.

Russell’s understanding of and commitment to winning are unparalleled, and that’s what set him apart. You might say that he turned himself into the greatest role player of all time. He not only defined his own role perfectly, he made sure that everyone on the team understood their roles perfectly. These are qualities that are in short supply in today’s NBA. Bill Simmons talks about his grasp of “the secret” at length in his Book of Basketball (he’s an unabashed Celts homer, but his chapters on Russell vs. Chamberlain and on what he calls The Pantheon are pretty good.

Regarding his shooting, take a good look at the league-wide shooting percentages, hardly anyone shot 50%. It was a run and gun game with 15-20 footers galore.

One of the most underrated athletic feats of all time is Chamberlain’s playing 48.5 mpg at a time when there were many more trips up and down the court than there are now, and having the scoring and rebounding numbers he had (he averaged 40 shots and 25 rebounds per game!) Even as a 36-year old man with bad knees in ’72-’73 he out-rebounded league MVP Kareem and played 43 mpg

But sure, if you want to go with “Dennis Rodman with an offensive game,” that’s fine, too (note that Rodman was two inches shorter than Russell).

The biggest change with Russell is that he likely would have to be a 4 in the modern NBA and not a 5, unless he’s playing in a small ball lineup.

Also, note that Dennis Rodman was an important part of five NBA championships, so even if Russell did not adapt offensively to the modern NBA (I think he would), just on defense and rebounding alone he could win multiple titles like Rodman.

The only thing is if Paul doesn’t re-sign, the Clippers are effed by not having Bledsoe.

people forget there were only nine teams in the league for most of Russell’s career, that makes titles decidedly easier in my book than in a 30 team league.

Oh yeah, that’s really the biggest roadblock to Russell winning multiple titles, the amount of teams out there. However, even with the larger amount of competition, the very best players in the NBA still tend to end up on teams that make the NBA Finals, ya know? I mean, who is the greatest player of the last 20 years to never make the NBA Finals? Chris Paul, probably, right? And would it surprise you if Chris Paul never made the NBA Finals in his career? I bet the answer to that is yes (other great players from the past 20 years never to make the NBA Finals include Yao Ming, Tracy McGrady, Grant Hill, Steve Nash, STAT and Melo , Melo and Alonzo Mourning. At least four of them still have a legit shot of eventually making it).

So I think Russell would have a good chance at making the NBA Finals still and winning a couple, even if he doesn’t get Tim Duncan luck and gets KG luck instead.