NBA to retire #6 for Bill Russell

Tom McAndrew

BWI Staff
Staff member
Oct 27, 2021
52,188
39,532
113
Has the NBA retired any other numbers?

No.

And that's part of the reason I'm not a fan of the action by the NBA. I wouldn't advocate for the league-wide retirement of any number. Where do you draw the line? Why Russell and not some others? I'm a life-long Sixers fan, so perhaps I'm biased, but I'd retire Wilt's #13 before I'd retire Russell's #. And then you get into the arguments for MJ, Kobe, Lebron, etc.

I have the utmost respect for Bill Russell. I just would not advocate for the league-wide retirement by the NBA of any number.
 

Nohow

Well-known member
Oct 25, 2021
1,189
950
113
No.

And that's part of the reason I'm not a fan of the action by the NBA. I wouldn't advocate for the league-wide retirement of any number. Where do you draw the line? Why Russell and not some others? I'm a life-long Sixers fan, so perhaps I'm biased, but I'd retire Wilt's #13 before I'd retire Russell's #. And then you get into the arguments for MJ, Kobe, Lebron, etc.

I have the utmost respect for Bill Russell. I just would not advocate for the league-wide retirement by the NBA of any number.
Lebron‘s number is retired, since it’s the same as Russell’s.
 

CF Lion

Well-known member
Oct 6, 2021
483
1,341
93
I don’t like this at all.

Baseball did it with #42 in honor of Jackie Robinson, but I see that differently since Robinson broke the color barrier.
So maybe Chuck Cooper’s number should have been retired instead.
 

psuro

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
7,747
16,964
113
Silly idea. I’m not a believer in retiring numbers at all but this one makes no sense. No 76er can wear #6 because a great player from their rival wore it? Pretty absurd.
Uhhh….huh? No Sixers can wear #6 because well…this guy…

 

Tom McAndrew

BWI Staff
Staff member
Oct 27, 2021
52,188
39,532
113
Uhhh….huh? No Sixers can wear #6 because well…this guy…

You get the idea.

I think @Connorpozlee's issue with the NBA action was a good one.

FWIW, the Sixers have retired the following numbers (players in whose honor the numbers were retired in parenthesis):

2 (Moses Malone)
3 (Allen Iverson)
4 (Dolph Schayes)
6 (Dr. J)
10 (Mo Cheeks)
13 (Wilt Chamberlain)
15 (Hal Greer)
24 (Bobby Jones)
32 (Billy Cunningham)
34 (Charles Barkley)
 
  • Like
Reactions: DC89

MacNit

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
1,231
1,222
113
No.

And that's part of the reason I'm not a fan of the action by the NBA. I wouldn't advocate for the league-wide retirement of any number. Where do you draw the line? Why Russell and not some others? I'm a life-long Sixers fan, so perhaps I'm biased, but I'd retire Wilt's #13 before I'd retire Russell's #. And then you get into the arguments for MJ, Kobe, Lebron, etc.

I have the utmost respect for Bill Russell. I just would not advocate for the league-wide retirement by the NBA of any number.
I am a huge Celtics and Russell fan, but I agree with you.

Similarly, was not a fan of PSU retiring 22.
 

wbcbus

Well-known member
Oct 8, 2021
1,254
2,551
113
No.

And that's part of the reason I'm not a fan of the action by the NBA. I wouldn't advocate for the league-wide retirement of any number. Where do you draw the line? Why Russell and not some others? I'm a life-long Sixers fan, so perhaps I'm biased, but I'd retire Wilt's #13 before I'd retire Russell's #. And then you get into the arguments for MJ, Kobe, Lebron, etc.

I have the utmost respect for Bill Russell. I just would not advocate for the league-wide retirement by the NBA of any number.

Yeah, for the number to be retired league-wide, it should be because someone transcended the sport for something greater, like Jackie Robinson and 42.
 

psuro

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
7,747
16,964
113
Yeah, for the number to be retired league-wide, it should be because someone transcended the sport for something greater, like Jackie Robinson and 42.
So what about Wayne Gretzky? Was his contribution transcendent of his sport?
 

aferrelli

Well-known member
Oct 6, 2021
1,213
2,034
113
I’ll go out on a limb here and say that I don’t have a problem with the organization (entire NBA) retiring #6. It’s the start of something new; it’s fresh and different, it creates an interest and a synergy. Hopefully, they’ll retire other #’s down the line. It’s a team game, and Bill played it as well, or better, than anyone else with 11 championships over 13 years.
 

psuro

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
7,747
16,964
113
Not in my opinion.
So, getting back to your comment about Robinson transcending the sport. That is a mindset that only took off well after Robinson was finished playing. When he entered into the big leagues, he (and his team) were met with derision and anger by fans and players of other teams.
 

ElwoodBlues

Member
Oct 12, 2021
37
55
18
So, getting back to your comment about Robinson transcending the sport. That is a mindset that only took off well after Robinson was finished playing. When he entered into the big leagues, he (and his team) were met with derision and anger by fans and players of other teams.
And your point is...? Oh, just a reminder that we're a racist nation. Of course.
 

Connorpozlee

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2021
2,265
4,293
113
So, getting back to your comment about Robinson transcending the sport. That is a mindset that only took off well after Robinson was finished playing. When he entered into the big leagues, he (and his team) were met with derision and anger by fans and players of other teams.
But do you agree that he transcended his sport?
 

IrishHerb

Well-known member
Oct 13, 2021
428
604
93
No.

And that's part of the reason I'm not a fan of the action by the NBA. I wouldn't advocate for the league-wide retirement of any number. Where do you draw the line? Why Russell and not some others? I'm a life-long Sixers fan, so perhaps I'm biased, but I'd retire Wilt's #13 before I'd retire Russell's #. And then you get into the arguments for MJ, Kobe, Lebron, etc.

I have the utmost respect for Bill Russell. I just would not advocate for the league-wide retirement by the NBA of any number.

Agreed!

League-wide retirements plus team retirements (think of all the numbers the Yankees have retired) ... and you end up with guys having to wear 99, 65, etc ... pretty soon these will run out too and we'll (well maybe not in our lifetimes) be seeing players with 1/2, 2/3, e, π, ...
 

psuro

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
7,747
16,964
113
Agreed!

League-wide retirements plus team retirements (think of all the numbers the Yankees have retired) ... and you end up with guys having to wear 99, 65, etc ... pretty soon these will run out too and we'll (well maybe not in our lifetimes) be seeing players with 1/2, 2/3, e, π, ...
John Urschel would have been the first player in any sport to wear

 
  • Like
Reactions: IrishHerb

PSU12046

Well-known member
Oct 18, 2021
1,485
2,546
113
Agreed!

League-wide retirements plus team retirements (think of all the numbers the Yankees have retired) ... and you end up with guys having to wear 99, 65, etc ... pretty soon these will run out too and we'll (well maybe not in our lifetimes) be seeing players with 1/2, 2/3, e, π, ...
Agreed. But maybe 23+24 on the jersey? @LionJim?

OR:
1660321239863.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: LionJim

Connorpozlee

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2021
2,265
4,293
113
Yes. But I am honest enough to say that at the time, I would venture to say not too many other players or fans of those teams felt that way.
Honest enough to say? Do you think there are a lot of people that don’t know that was the case? I guess maybe young people. It’s pretty well documented though.
 

psuro

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
7,747
16,964
113
Honest enough to say? Do you think there are a lot of people that don’t know that was the case? I guess maybe young people. It’s pretty well documented though.
I think they do know it's the case. But they won't actually admit to it. They want to not think about it - regardless of generation.



Fun thread.
 

ElwoodBlues

Member
Oct 12, 2021
37
55
18
I think they do know it's the case. But they won't actually admit to it. They want to not think about it - regardless of generation.



Fun thread.
Don't want to think about it - or just think it's time to MOVE ON? This self flagellation has got to stop. Does this help us as a nation, or just serve to further divide us? Every society on the planet is or was racist. Let's focus on the progress we've made for a change. Seriously, what's the point of the constant drumbeat of negativity on this issue?

That said - fine /w retiring Russell's jersey (although I still think the best #6 of all time was Dr. J)
 

psuro

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
7,747
16,964
113
Don't want to think about it - or just think it's time to MOVE ON? This self flagellation has got to stop. Does this help us as a nation, or just serve to further divide us? Every society on the planet is or was racist. Let's focus on the progress we've made for a change. Seriously, what's the point of the constant drumbeat of negativity on this issue?

That said - fine /w retiring Russell's jersey (although I still think the best #6 of all time was Dr. J)
I am not the one prolonging this. But, I wil answer the question you asked.

The "point" is that by "moving on" and not recognizing the issues of the time, it (sticking with the United States).

1) Makes it clear that certain parts of US History are to be ignored, while other parts of US History are celebrated.
2) The group of people who want to move on and not discuss are the ones who are most uncomfortable with a narrative they cannot control. This is no different than the other thread about the OU coach who got fired for "that word".


I will let you take the lead on whether you wish to continue this topic. I will only react to your lead (aka letting to you control the narrative).

By the way, the t-shirts are on national back order - it will be a few weeks.
 

ElwoodBlues

Member
Oct 12, 2021
37
55
18
I am not the one prolonging this. But, I wil answer the question you asked.

The "point" is that by "moving on" and not recognizing the issues of the time, it (sticking with the United States).

1) Makes it clear that certain parts of US History are to be ignored, while other parts of US History are celebrated.
2) The group of people who want to move on and not discuss are the ones who are most uncomfortable with a narrative they cannot control. This is no different than the other thread about the OU coach who got fired for "that word".


I will let you take the lead on whether you wish to continue this topic. I will only react to your lead (aka letting to you control the narrative).

By the way, the t-shirts are on national back order - it will be a few weeks.
But it's not ignored. Maybe it was, ok, - you can't say it is now. The whole racist nation narrative is everywhere and a lot of people are sick of the force-feeding. CNN/ MSNBC / NPR - I swear half their stories have some element of this theme. Libs dwell and obsess far more over the negative in American history than over the innumerable positives. They act like one is a rube or a redneck if he displays any hint of patriotism...you know, because this is a horrible racist nation.

FWIW / frame of reference - I'm as un-MAGA as possible and have always despised Trump and never voted for the Orange Freak. That said - I'm not voting for the party the keeps implying that I and all white males are racists.

Ok, now I think I'll just "move on."
 

PSUSignore

Well-known member
Oct 25, 2021
882
1,465
93
Eh, don't like it. Like Joe used to say, when you single out certain players then others feel slighted at what you didn't say or do. Nothing against Russell, he was one of the all time greats. But this feels over the top to me. Is the NBA going to retire 23 for Jordan for all teams too? This sets a silly precedent.
 

Connorpozlee

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2021
2,265
4,293
113
I think they do know it's the case. But they won't actually admit to it. They want to not think about it - regardless of generation.



Fun thread.
I think you’re way off base but so be it. Have a good weekend!
 

wbcbus

Well-known member
Oct 8, 2021
1,254
2,551
113
So, getting back to your comment about Robinson transcending the sport. That is a mindset that only took off well after Robinson was finished playing. When he entered into the big leagues, he (and his team) were met with derision and anger by fans and players of other teams.

Sure, and overcoming that and putting up with what he did to help move us forward as a country for good transcends the sport and is why his number being retired league-wide makes sense to me. I’m not sure what your point is. I didn’t say “transcends the sport as appreciated fully by all of the public at the time it was happening.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: doctornick

PhillyBillyReprise

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2021
574
981
93
Agreed!

League-wide retirements plus team retirements (think of all the numbers the Yankees have retired) ... and you end up with guys having to wear 99, 65, etc ... pretty soon these will run out too and we'll (well maybe not in our lifetimes) be seeing players with 1/2, 2/3, e, π, ...
We already have in baseball. Eddie Gaedel’s jersey, bearing the uniform number "1⁄8", is displayed in the St. Louis Cardinals Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum.

Just in case:
Edward Carl Gaedel was the smallest player to appear in a Major League Baseball game. Gaedel gained recognition in the second game of a St. Louis Browns doubleheader on August 19, 1951. Weighing 60 pounds and standing 3 feet 7 inches tall, he became the shortest player in the history of the Major Leagues.Wikipedia
Born: June 8, 1925, Chicago, IL
Died: June 18, 1961, Chicago, IL
Height: 3′ 7″
Base on balls: 1
On-base percentage: 1.000

Stats
YearTeamGPABRHRBIBB
1951St L Browns100001
Career100001
 
Get unlimited access today.

Pick the right plan for you.

Already a member? Login