"Bob Cousy wouldn't even make a current NBA roster"

[SomeBunghole]

Cousy shot 37.5% for his career... That's shots, layups, tip ins... everything... not to mention in a much weaker defensive era...

Most players in that era shot a similar percentage. Mikan was a center, and a dominant one at that, and he shot 40.4% for the career. Until Wilt, no player shot over .500 for a single season. Different game back then.

[MaxFly]

Most players in that era shot a similar percentage. Mikan was a center, and a dominant one at that, and he shot 40.4% for the career. Until Wilt, no player shot over .500 for a single season. Different game back then.

Exactly... not to mention that most of the shots were set shots against weaker defenses. The point I was making was that Cousy would have to adjust to a radically different style of basketball. Learn to shoot off of movement, or just not shoot at all.

[EricForman]

I agree with that blaze said.

I always bring up how players from the old days wouldn't hang today and people would tell me "but they would be able to adjust if given proper nutrition/training all that"

Eh.. when I say "Bob Cousy couldn't hang in today's NBA" or "Wilt wouldn't average anywhere near 50 in today's game", I am just stating, if you take them from their era, and immediately planted them in today's game and asked them to play. I am not gonna factor in, "gee, what if Bob Cousy grew up in Compton andplayed with Black kids in the 80s, then right now he may be more athletic and be more physical" and all that BS.

When we say Cousy couldn't hang in today's league, we mean if you take Bob Cousy in his NBA form, and took him to today and let him play. Not take Bob Cousy's mom and plant her in the 80s and then have Bob Cousy be born in the 80s and grow up in our era.

And I said it plenty and I'll say it again--Kobe's 81 or Iverson's 60+ was more impressive than Wilt's 100.

[LJJ]

I agree with that blaze said.

I always bring up how players from the old days wouldn't hang today and people would tell me "but they would be able to adjust if given proper nutrition/training all that"

Eh.. when I say "Bob Cousy couldn't hang in today's NBA" or "Wilt wouldn't average anywhere near 50 in today's game", I am just stating, if you take them from their era, and immediately planted them in today's game and asked them to play. I am not gonna factor in, "gee, what if Bob Cousy grew up in Compton andplayed with Black kids in the 80s, then right now he may be more athletic and be more physical" and all that BS.

When we say Cousy couldn't hang in today's league, we mean if you take Bob Cousy in his NBA form, and took him to today and let him play. Not take Bob Cousy's mom and plant her in the 80s and then have Bob Cousy be born in the 80s and grow up in our era.

And I said it plenty and I'll say it again--Kobe's 81 or Iverson's 60+ was more impressive than Wilt's 100.

But that's just stupid.

Ridiculous.

It's like saying: "If Kobe Bryant grew up in the thirties, learning basketball back then, he wouldn't even make a 2007 NBA roster, so he sucks and he is overrated."

[SRZ66]

cousy couldn't make a current nba roster. he is short, slow, unathletic etc. he had one of those goofy set shots for crying out loud. nash has great footwork and is top 5 shooters in the league, so no he's nothing like cousy. everyone on this board just loves those old timers. they would honestly get raped if they were put into the league today.

[Kblaze8855]

I actually think mosty great players from the past would be fine in any era. Especially a guy like Wilt who was a 7'1''(would be listed 7'2'' these days since they do measurements in shoes), 265, and a track star. Or a 6'10'' guy with Russells reach who was an olympic level high jumper. Guys like Oscar, West, and so on who worked so hard would be fine too. You do those drills West did you can shoot no matter what the date on the calender is.

But Cousy simply did not have maybe the most basic part of a players game today. Give him even Jason Kidds jumper and id take him.

[CavaliersFTW]

I actually think mosty great players from the past would be fine in any era. Especially a guy like Wilt who was a 7'1''(would be listed 7'2'' these days since they do measurements in shoes), 265, and a track star. Or a 6'10'' guy with Russells reach who was an olympic level high jumper. Guys like Oscar, West, and so on who worked so hard would be fine too. You do those drills West did you can shoot no matter what the date on the calender is.

But Cousy simply did not have maybe the most basic part of a players game today. Give him even Jason Kidds jumper and id take him.

Westbrook, Iverson and Rubio are/were terribly inefficient scorers and played good-great at the point in this era, and Rondo - though an efficiency concious scorer, has a shaky jumper at best and will often refuse to even attempt them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8IXS49q1DE

Cousy from the perimeter mostly shot push shots, which Nash often shoots on the run. He could drive and finish in traffic too. I saw one traditional jumper in that repertoire and being that only half a percent of his career exists on film, I think he might have had a jumper at least late in his career he just didn't prefer to use it being that we did see one in that footage. I'm more inclined to believe that Cousy would still be great in any era, he's got the tools and the work ethic to adapt to w/e minor adjustments would be necessary to play the modern game (palming, rule changes, shooting style, etc), he'd put in work in the off season to GET a jumper if a coach so requested it from him I'd have no doubt. And his natural tools, the court vision and playmaking on the break is all well above average even among HOF point guards, better than any of the 4 guys I just mentioned in that particular scenario. His strengths would shine through on the right teams.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gDLsZlLEPw

[dreamwarrior]

That's like saying Dr J wouldn't even be invited to a modern day slam dunk competition

[WillC]

It's irrelevant how well legends of the game would fare today.

It's like asking "how good would George Washington be as president today?" or "how good is a 1964 Aston Martin DB5 compared to modern sports cars?".

Funnily enough, basketball has progressed immensely since the 1950s and 60s.

But that doesn't detract from the fact that Cousy is one of the most influential, successful and legendary players in basketball history.

[CavaliersFTW]

It's irrelevant how well legends of the game would fare today.

It's fun to discuss however

It's like asking "how good would George Washington be as president today?"

This is an exaggeration by several orders of magnitude, the state of the country in George Washingtons time and all his experiences vs the state of the country now and all that modern peoples have experienced are so different that it would be virtually impossible for George Washington to be given a presidential position. Basketball on the other hand, is not so extremely different from the 1950's and 60's to the present day. Bob Cousy is still alive today. He's only 3 overlapping careers removed from modern NBA basketball (Played with Havlicek, who played against Parish, who played against Kobe)

or "how good is a 1964 Aston Martin DB5 compared to modern sports cars?".

No, that is an example of technology. Technology is not analogous in any way to athletes.

Funnily enough, basketball has progressed immensely since the 1950s and 60s.

Changed is a better word. The descriptive word "immensely" is also relative. You still fundamentally do the same things, on the same size court. 5 on 5, 10 foot goals, put the ball in the basket on offense, rebound misses, play defense, rebound, etc. Rules have tweaked how you can do some of those things.

[WillC]

I won't comment on all of the pedantic criticisms of my previous post.

Instead, I'll say this: nobody respects you more than I do for the amount of time and effort you put into the highlight reels of NBA legends. However, your unwillingness to acknowledge that those players would not dominate today really hurts your reputation. You are a bright and talented basketball fan and it wouldn't be a bad thing to admit that Bill Russell, Bob Cousy and the like would not be superstars today. It doesn't hurt the legacies of those players to admit so.

In the same way that an 1964 Aston Martin DB5 can be regarded as one of the all-time greatest cars even though it might not be any better than a modern day Skoda.

Sure, criticise the car analogy - it's not perfect, and I didn't intend it to be - but there's no point in pretending that Bob Cousy would dominate in today's League.

It does nobody any favours and, in fact, makes you look a bit delusional, which is a real shame as you have a lot to offer.

[j3lademaster]

conditioning, nutrition, and evolution of the game play a HUGE role. iam sure if those players were exposed to the same type of nutrition and conditioning that we have today they would probably be just a good.

This and the larger pool of talent. Back then playing in the NBA meant back-to-backs on greyhound buses and taking on second jobs in the offseason, so you didn't have kids all over the world growing up with hoop dreams. Nowdays NBA stars can make into the 9 digits for their careers so of course the international talent level will improve with this kind of demand. Wilt and Russell(the athletic bigs) will still dominate, but I'm not sure about everyone else. There's a reason the disparity in rebounding was so high back then: the average talent of the NBA couldn't hang with the elite physical specimens. Idc how talented Wilt was and if he was in fact more gifted than Shaq(not trying to turn this into another Wilt vs Shaq argument)... one player being able to average 50/26 is too stupid of a gap in levels of player between players who supposedly belong in the same league.

[j3lademaster]

It's irrelevant how well legends of the game would fare today.

You're right man. We shouldn't even keep stats tbh they do nothing for the game. While we're at it let's not even keep score, every game is a tie. Everyone gets a trophy at the end of the season: YMCA boys and girls club ages 8-12 rules Who cares about discussing who's better in a competitive sport right?

[WillC]

You're right man. We shouldn't even keep stats tbh they do nothing for the game. While we're at it let's not even keep score, every game is a tie. Everyone gets a trophy at the end of the season: YMCA boys and girls club ages 8-12 rules Who cares about discussing who's better in a competitive sport right?

Well if you're trying to ascertain who's better than who, then Cousy wouldn't be in the top 100 of all-time.

But in doing so, what exactly are we achieving? If you want to piss all over the history of the league, go ahead.

Personally, I like to rate players on their achievements. In which case Cousy is one of the top 20 or 25 ever.

However, he wouldn't make a roster today.

[CavaliersFTW]

I won't comment on all of the pedantic criticisms of my previous post.

Instead, I'll say this: nobody respects you more than I do for the amount of time and effort you put into the highlight reels of NBA legends. However, your unwillingness to acknowledge that those players would not dominate today really hurts your reputation. You are a bright and talented basketball fan and it wouldn't be a bad thing to admit that Bill Russell, Bob Cousy and the like would not be superstars today. It doesn't hurt the legacies of those players to admit so.

In the same way that an 1964 Aston Martin DB5 can be regarded as one of the all-time greatest cars even though it might not be any better than a modern day Skoda.

Sure, criticise the car analogy - it's not perfect, and I didn't intend it to be - but there's no point in pretending that Bob Cousy would dominate in today's League.

It does nobody any favours and, in fact, makes you look a bit delusional, which is a real shame as you have a lot to offer.

I'll make corrections of facts when and where I can, and also state my opinions from time to time. Using technology such as an automobile as an analogue to an athlete is not compatible. Machine technology can not change or reprogram itself, but people can. And people when looked at as machines, are genetically still the same, with the same potential to perform athletics. A Bob Pettit's physical tools and mind for example are still relevant basketball tools today. The tools to play great basketball were figured out before the NBA. Tall coordinated people, with a knack for peripheral vision, quick thinking, etc.

My opinion that I believe many of the past players would still be great and/or similarly impactful today, and that they'd adjust to rule changes in the game because they are people, and not machines is reasonable - in my opinion. You can call me delusional for projecting that many of the athletes I like to discuss would adapt to the changes that have taken place in the game quite easily, that's of course - your opinion. If I don't chime in when I have something to say I'm just not being honest with myself.