While Wilt Chamberlain altered his style to win a second championship, Bill Russell remains the Lord of the Rings.
Who would have been more successful if Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell had exchanged teams during the 1960s? Wilt Chamberlain begins his career with the Celtics in 1959, while Russell begins his career with the Warriors in 1957. I believe Wilt wins titles up to 1966 after joining the Celtics, and while I can see Russell winning rings in 1957, 1958, and 1959, that’s where I believe it ends. Russell, however, joined the Sixers in 1965 after leaving the Warriors, so I can imagine the Sixers winning in 1968—if injuries don’t occur in 1968, as they did for the Sixers in real life. If they do, though, the Celtics win in 1968.
The Lakers would have had much greater team chemistry in 1969 had Russell played for them instead of Wilt, and I firmly believe that the Lakers would have won the championship that year. Because of this, I believe Wilt would have at least seven rings if Russell had played for the Celtics and his team had won five titles.
Russell is renowned for being one of the best teammates ever, while Wilt is known for being a lousy teammate who only cared about himself. Not because of his ability level, but rather because of his excellent teammateship, Russell’s teams were successful. That’s because, despite being the finest player in the league, he allowed others shine by using his defensive prowess. That alone leads me to think Wilt would never have succeeded with the Celtics.
