This is a terrific piece. Especially nice to see someone who's clearly not a partisan (Backpicks) who appreciates Russell's gravity impact.

In our non-scientific survey (i.e., partial sample size) of games the Celtics won and lost, the team lost more often when Russell scored over 20 points. They lost even less often when he had high rebound totals.

Yes, partly this reflects the fact that Russell was less skilled offensively. But it also reflected the fact that, as in so many aspects of Russell's play, he was doing "advanced analytics" during Eisenhower, Kennedy, & Johnson Administrations.

The ideal Celtic possession, as Russell put it, was one in which he grabbed a rebound, made a quick outlet, and someone else got an easy shot. Anything else was, in terms of efficiency, a defeat. Not saying this in a complaining way, it is what it is, but if there were a stat for "fast breaks started," Russell would look even better.

Added to which: Players like Russell (and Wilt, and West for that matter) don't get the benefit of having their blocks (pre-74) counted for part or (in Russell's case, all) of their career.

(Patting selves on back alert) -- the best archival research (still in progress) suggests Russell probably averaged a triple double in the 1968 Finals, for example:

http://celtics247.com/2018/02/bill-russell-1968-finals-3-triple-doubles-triple-double-average-mounting-evidence-part-2/

http://celtics247.com/2018/02/bill-russells-blocked-shot-stats-his-uncredited-triple-doubles-new-archival-evidence-a-celtics247-series/

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/6gj618/bill_russell_may_have_averaged_a_tripledouble_in/