Ronald Martinez/Getty Images

There has always been this debate between these two prodigious basketball players.

Who is really better? Bill Russell? Or Wilt Chamberlain? This debate has been going on long enough, but if you go to a local bookstore and buy Bill Simmons' The Book of Basketball, you'll be surprised of how much knowledge the Sports Guy gives you.

As Simmons said, Russell was all about winning. Chamberlain was all about stats. Russell wasn't selfish, Wilt was.

And it was true, actually. Also agreeable with the Sports Guy, Chamberlain layed down the law with Russell when it came towards statistics.

With Russell having over 14,000 career points, Chamberlain had over 30,000. Russell got the rebounds, with over 23,000. But Wilt dominated that too, outdoing him by over 4,000.

Russell was the guy who shared the ball. With over four-to-five great guys on his team, Russell still managed to put up great statistics.

If Russell was the only good player, he would literally just destroy Chamberlain with the statistics. But Russell didn't care, really. Winning was his priority. And that's where Russell dictated Wilt in: winning.

If you look at it, Chamberlain has only won two championships. Pretty good, right? Great stats, two rings, it's all good? Now compare that with some solid stats and eleven championship wins.

Now we're talking here. Chamberlain was a bit too selfish, and that is why he got traded so much. Russell? He spent his whole career with the Celtics. It's kind of like Peyton Manning and Tom Brady today.

Manning has the stats and a Super Bowl win. Tom Brady has the stats, and three Super Bowl wins. It's just that simple there.

Also, when the games really mattered the most, Chamberlain would walk his way out and not take the blame, as well as his teammates taking it. Selfishness took a big role, didn't it?

But Chamberlain was a good guy in the real world, but not when it comes to basketball. I mean, this is how it went.

Chamberlain looks hot in the first half, then he turns into a wuss in the second half, shooting pretty much 1/10 of his shots from last half.

That's what led to this: Chamberlain had a 4-5 record in Game Seven's in the Playoffs. Russell was 10-0. And also, Wilt is 58-84 against Russell overall. That obviously makes Russell 84-58 against Chamberlain overall.

Russell's role in statistics was big in the playoffs. Chamberlain's was the regular season.

Also, ask all the other guys on Wilt and Russell. Here's what Jerry Lucas had to say in Tall Tales:

"Wilt was too consumed with record: being the first to lead the league in assists, or to set a record for field goal percentage. He's accomplish one goal, then go to another. Russell only asked one question: 'What can I do to make us win?'

Russell made his teammates better as well as himself. Chamberlain made himself better, but no, not his teammates. Not even close.

Also, here is what Rick Barry has to say, literally just ripping of Chamberlain as much as he could in his book, Confessions Of a Basketball Gypsy:

"I'll say what most players feel, which is that Wilt is a loser... He is terrible in big games. He knows he is going to lose and be blamed for the loss, so he dreads it, and you can see it in his eyes; and anyone who has ever played with him will agree with me, regardless of whether they would admit publicly. When it comes down to the closing minutes of a tough game, an important game, he doesn't want the ball, he doesn't want any part of the pressure. It is at these times that greatness is determined, and Wilt doesn't have it. There is no way you can compare him to a pro like a Bill Russell or a Jerry West... these are clutch competitors."

Talk about some hatred, but Barry does have a point. Stats was Wilt's thing. With Simmons' knoweldge, here's a sentence he wrote on page 78 of the book:

"Here's another way to look at it: nobody has any clutch stories of Wilt Chamberlain. If they existed, I'd pass them along."

Bill Russell made his teammates better and himself better. He made his team better. He had what it takes to win. Wilt just didn't. He couldn't win. He just didn't want to win. Yeah, the stats may be good.

But if you compare that to eleven title wins, it just doesn't matter when it comes to statistics. And if Russell really cared about his stats, he would've made Wilt resemble the victims of the Saw movies.

Face it, Russell was more superior. Yeah, having stats is a good thing.

But being a team player and winning games is what really matters.

Russell had more dedication than Wilt for the game.

And that stands as my case of why Russell is better than Chamberlain.

Pages 57-84 of The Book of Basketball was helpful source in this article and for the quotes of other books.

Buy Bill Simmons' book here.

You're currently logged into Facebook

Do you want to share your Bleacher Report activity on Facebook?