During the CelticsBlog History Month, I ‘ve had the enjoyable assignment of writing about the 11 NBA championships won by Boston during Bill Russell’s career. The Celtics of 1957-69 achieved so much, set unbreakable records, and overcame obstacles time after time, yet they are often underappreciated by today’s basketball fans and observers.
Bill Russell, left, and Red Auerbach hug as Russell is introduced and during his tribute in Boston in 1999. Russell and Auerbach forged the most successful coach/player partnership in NBA history. (Photo by Jim Davis/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)
| Boston Globe via Getty Images
That sentiment came across in some of the comments posted to the series, with some readers saying those long-ago teams should get more credit than they do.
Advertisement
The accusation that non-Celtics fans like to make is that too many of Boston’s 18 total titles were won when there was no competition. Anything that happened decades ago can’t possibly be as good as what the doubters see with their own eyes now. The grainy highlight videos from decades ago are easily mocked.
So let’s take this opportunity to provide some facts and context for common misconceptions about a) the Celtics dynasty and b) NBA basketball in general before the Eighties. Some readers might form a new opinion, but most won’t. If you’re a hardcore Wilt fan or a Celtics hater who happened upon this commentary, you may regret reading past the words “Celtics dynasty,” but here we go.
“It was too easy to win in a league with only eight teams.”
Can’t deny math. Four is more than two. Winning four series in one postseason is more difficult than winning two. However, let’s compare the longest streaks from the NBA, MLB and NHL, and see how many postseason series they won.
Advertisement
-
NBA (eight or nine teams), eight straight titles: 1959-66 Boston Celtics, won 17 consecutive series (16 best-of-seven, one best-of-five).
-
NHL (six teams), five straight titles: 1956–1960 Montreal Canadiens, won 10 series.
-
MLB/American League (eight teams), five straight titles: New York Yankees (1949–1953), won five World Series, best-of-seven, no preceding playoff rounds.
Basketball and hockey requirements are comparable, and baseball had the shortest path. The thing is, I haven’t seen hockey and baseball fans claiming the Canadiens and Yankees had it too easy. So why hoops?
If the Celtics were to win 17 straight series in this era, that would be more than equal to four championships in a row. Keep in mind that no team except Boston has ever won more than three straight titles.
Michael Jordan is famously 6-0 in Finals appearances. Taking absolutely nothing away from him, it’s worth noting that John Havlicek, Satch Sanders and K.C. Jones all had an 8-0 Finals record.
“No competition, playing against plumbers, firefighters and insurance salesmen.”
Advertisement
Did every team except the Celtics have a roster of plumbers? Not at all. Each squad actually had one or more future Hall of Famers, and teams matched up 10 or more times per season. Russell and Chamberlain were in the league together for 10 years, and played each other 143 times.
Moreover, if it was really so easy to win, why couldn’t anyone other than Russell’s Celtics do it more than once? Playoff records of the greatest players of the era versus Bill Russell teams: Wilt Chamberlain, 1-7; Elgin Baylor, 0-7; Jerry West, 0-6; Oscar Robertson, 0-3; Bob Pettit, 1-3.
Russell went to 12 Finals in 13 years and was 11-1, losing only to Pettit’s Hawks when he missed two games with a sprained ankle. In playoff series overall, Russell was 27-2. The second loss was to Chamberlain’s 76ers in the year they set a record for wins, finishing 68-13. In other words, Russell’s teams lost only when a random, rare situation occurred.
Russell was uniquely 10-0 in Game 7s for his career. If every team was stocked with “plumbers and firefighters,” why was Boston forced to the limit 10 times? It’s because the “no competition” claim is untrue. Plenty of capable teams had their chances, pushing the Celtics to the brink of elimination:
Advertisement
-
1962 Finals, down 3-2 to the Lakers after Elgin Baylor hit them with 61 points in Game 5 at Boston; Celtics stayed alive by winning Game 6 at Los Angeles and Game 7 at home in overtime.
-
1966, down 2-1 to Oscar and the Royals in Eastern best-of-five, won on the road and then at home.
-
1966 Finals, even with the motivation of wanting a title for Red Auerbach’s last year of coaching, the Celtics almost blew a 3-1 lead and barely escaped with a Game 7 win.
-
1968 Eastern Finals, Celtics were down 3-1 to the defending champs with Chamberlain, but won three straight, including Games 5 and 7 in Philly.
-
1969 NBA Finals, Celtics fell behind 2-0 and then 3-2 versus the Lakers, but won Game 6 at home and Game 7 at LA, versus the superteam of Chamberlain, Baylor and Jerry West at his peak.
“Players in the old days could never compete today.”
There is truth to this, because numerous early NBA players lacked the size, speed and physique that today’s players possess. But the training methods and medical techniques of 60-70 years ago could never produce the same results as modern practices and resources.
Today’s Celtics are guided by eight assistant coaches and a player development staff of five. Meanwhile, anyone who played for Coach Auerbach or Coach Russell had access to exactly zero assistant coaches. (John Killilea was Boston’s first assistant coach, not hired until 1972.) There was certainly no player development staff.
Other obstacles in the old days included no free agency, so if you were a guard trapped on a team that had too many guards, or if you believed you had earned a better contract, you were stuck. Worse than that, in the Jim Crow era, even well-known black players were subjected to the evils of segregation. The Celtics were no exception.
Travel was not by private jet, it was on commercial aircraft, or train, or bus. On the road, you were assigned a roommate. And the schedule was often relentless, such as the example shown here: eight games in 10 nights!
Advertisement
One more thing: Basketball in the Russell era didn’t always pay enough for a good living, causing many players to work offseason jobs. Come to think of it, Tommy Heinsohn had a very successful second career – he was a manager of insurance sales.
Russell vs. Chamberlain
It’s the classic debate: How do you define greatness? Do you take titles over statistics, or vice versa? Wilt set all the records and won twice, but Russell won 11 times and revolutionized defense during an era when defensive stats were not recorded and Defensive Player of the Year was not yet created. Nor was Finals MVP, of which he would’ve had several. If those were in place, then how many records would Russell own?
Chamberlain was by far the better offensive force – obviously, that’s not up for debate. Yet, in the season that Wilt averaged 50 points per game, he was held to 22 points in Game 7 of the Eastern Finals, a game with the final score of Boston 109, Philadelphia 107. Wilt went home, and Russell continued on to raise another banner. A lot of people would agree that (here’s more math) 11 is more than 2, and maybe the individual most responsible for the 11 is better than the other choice.
Advertisement
Remember, too, at the end, Russell was the player-coach. There have been 40 in league history, but he’s the only one to win two championships.
Let’s also note that player-coach Russell’s Celtics beat Wilt Chamberlain and his stacked 1968 Sixers AND his stacked 1969 Lakers, in both years, in Game 7, on the road.
“Russell had better teammates, multiple Hall of Famers”
Hall of Fame teammates are often mentioned in the debate, but the count is almost even.
Russell Hall of Fame Teammates (11) : Bob Cousy, John Havlicek, Tom Heinsohn, K.C. Jones, Sam Jones, Frank Ramsey, Bill Sharman, Bailey Howell, Clyde Lovellette, Carl Braun, Andy Phillip.
Advertisement
Chamberlain Hall of Fame Teammates (10):
Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, Gail Goodrich, Lakers; Billy Cunningham, Hal Greer, Chet Walker, 76ers; Paul Arizin, Tom Gola, Guy Rodgers, Nate Thurmond, Warriors.
Consider that some of the enshrined Celtics were honored simply because they won so much – and that was because they had Russell as a teammate. No disrespect intended, but honestly, Frank Ramsey, the first Sixth Man, but 13 points per game career average. K.C. Jones, one of the best defenders ever, but less than 10 ppg career average. Can’t see them making the Hall today. And Lovellette, Braun and Phillip were stars elsewhere who came to Boston for a year or two at the end of their careers.
“Lakers are historically better. Most of Boston’s titles are from too long ago.”
-
The Celtics are 9-3 head-to-head in the NBA Finals versus the Lakers. If it was, say, 6-6, many legacies would be much different now.
-
Against Russell, the Lakers were 0-7 in the NBA Finals. They finally won a Los Angeles championship in 1972 when they were coached by Bill Sharman and K.C. Jones – two former Celtics.
-
It makes no sense for LA fans to diminish the Celtics for winning titles before 1970, when the Lakers claim five Minneapolis titles from the Fifties. Yet, it happens.
-
Again, 9-3. The Lakers took their swings, and missed.
The last point here: The mental and physical toughness required to win eight consecutive NBA titles cannot be measured. Try to win something – anything – eight straight times at a world-class level. Or just try to win eight straight games to 21 at your local park. Then imagine the degree of difficulty is “infinite.”
Advertisement
Only one group of people in U.S. professional sports ever met that challenge: The Russell-era Celtics, coached by Red Auerbach. Love it or hate it, that deserves to be respected.
1969 Finals MVP Award: Still puzzling
Until 1969, the last year of the Celtics 13-year dynasty, the NBA did not choose a Finals MVP. Presumably, no one thought of it before then. So, while the Celtics were stacking championships, likely candidates Bill Russell, John Havlicek, Bob Cousy and Sam Jones had no opportunity to earn a prestigious honor that recognizes both individual achievement and team leadership at the highest levels.
Jerry West of the Lakers attempts a reverse layup against Bill Russell. (Photo by Focus on Sport/Getty Images)
| Getty Images
Then in 1969, the first trophy was awarded after a series in which, against all odds, the Boston Celtics emerged victorious. The FMVP therefore was presented to…the Lakers’ Jerry West?
Advertisement
Granted, West was incredible in the series, averaging 37.9 points, 4.7 rebounds and 7.4 assists. He had five games scoring 39 points or more. But his team lost, so the MVP is tough to justify. Havlicek averaged 28.3/11.0/4.4 while playing every minute of the seven games, and was just as worthy.
No one from a losing side has won FMVP since then. West himself said in an interview that he didn’t want the award.
“I have two dubious honors that I would not recommend to anyone,” West shared. “I was the [NCAA] MVP on a team that lost to Cal by one point and I was the Finals MVP in a seven-game series loss to the Celtics…These were not ‘honors’…These were meaningless to me.”
After the 1969 loss, West was 0-6 against the Celtics in the Finals. Naming him MVP seemed like a consolation prize. If the choice was actually made for sentimental reasons, then Russell should’ve been the pick. It’s a head-scratcher knowing that, for instance, Celtics hero Cedric Maxwell — a deserving winner in 1981 but not close to Russell’s level — possesses a Finals MVP award and the man the trophy is now named after does not.
