PG: Bucks Burn Suns - DAME! BOBBY! WELCOME BACK KHRIS

[MiltownMadness]

All athletes are products of their eras and if you're going to compare athletes across eras you should do it based on what they did in their eras. What makes this conversation so weird to me is that I think people can do this with football. Art Shell is one of the greatest Offensive Tackles in NFL history, Myles Garrett would also probably use him as a tackling dummy. I don't think a lot of people view either statement as particularly controversial or contradictory. For various reasons people seem to use the teleportation device argument a lot more frequently when talking about basketball.

It's because basketball from the 50's and now is 2 different games and football remains football.

Football players would not have as hard of a time with the time machine argument. Knowledge gap for sure but when I watch football from 60's it still looks like football to me, can swap players across eras and don't have to do backflips with your brain to justify a player ranking

[tedbrogen]

AJ Green should be the fifth starter. Come at me.

[tedbrogen]

I get annoyed when dumb Gen Z's barf out clearly wrong statements like how Bill Russell, George Mikan, and Bob Pettit "would be scrubs in today's league", but certain guys like Cousy and any other 6'1 guard who can't dribble with their off-hand absolutely would be fringe NBA guys in 2024. Don't let Boston homers convince you otherwise.

Yep. There’s no amount of advancement in training and medicine that makes small guards from decades ago playable in the modern NBA. Bigs or guys who were relatively athletic for their era, sure, those skills translate. But some small guard who benefited by being on a really good team and shot sub 40% for his career, nah he doesn’t make it today.

Put those Celtics teams in today’s NBA and everyone just forces switches to go at Cousy every play.

[skbucks1985]

All athletes are products of their eras and if you're going to compare athletes across eras you should do it based on what they did in their eras. What makes this conversation so weird to me is that I think people can do this with football. Art Shell is one of the greatest Offensive Tackles in NFL history, Myles Garrett would also probably use him as a tackling dummy. I don't think a lot of people view either statement as particularly controversial or contradictory. For various reasons people seem to use the teleportation device argument a lot more frequently when talking about basketball.

It's because basketball from the 50's and now is 2 different games and football remains football.

Football players would not have as hard of a time with the time machine argument. Knowledge gap for sure but when I watch football from 60's it still looks like football to me, can swap players across eras and don't have to do backflips with your brain to justify a player ranking

I strongly disagree. In both sports the primary reason that players from a previous era couldn't compete against athletes from today if they were teleported to the present is because today's athletes are bigger, stronger and faster. The skill gap exists and its clearer in basketball whereas with football the skill gap can be somewhat lost in the schematic complexity. Conversely, football players are so much bigger today, especially offensive and defensive lineman than they were 40-50 years ago. And basketball players are as well in the aggregate, but I think it doesn't translate as much on television.

[MiltownMadness]

All athletes are products of their eras and if you're going to compare athletes across eras you should do it based on what they did in their eras. What makes this conversation so weird to me is that I think people can do this with football. Art Shell is one of the greatest Offensive Tackles in NFL history, Myles Garrett would also probably use him as a tackling dummy. I don't think a lot of people view either statement as particularly controversial or contradictory. For various reasons people seem to use the teleportation device argument a lot more frequently when talking about basketball.

It's because basketball from the 50's and now is 2 different games and football remains football.

Football players would not have as hard of a time with the time machine argument. Knowledge gap for sure but when I watch football from 60's it still looks like football to me, can swap players across eras and don't have to do backflips with your brain to justify a player ranking

I strongly disagree. In both sports the primary reason that players from a previous era couldn't compete against athletes from today if they were teleported to the present is because today's athletes are bigger, stronger and faster. The skill gap exists and its clearer in basketball whereas with football the skill gap can be somewhat lost in the schematic complexity. Conversely, football players are so much bigger today, especially offensive and defensive lineman than they were 40-50 years ago. And basketball players are as well in the aggregate, but I think it doesn't translate as much on television.

But the game remains football, basketball wasn't basketball in the 50's. That's my overlying point, I'm not going to rate players from that era seriously

[skbucks1985]

It's because basketball from the 50's and now is 2 different games and football remains football.

Football players would not have as hard of a time with the time machine argument. Knowledge gap for sure but when I watch football from 60's it still looks like football to me, can swap players across eras and don't have to do backflips with your brain to justify a player ranking

I strongly disagree. In both sports the primary reason that players from a previous era couldn't compete against athletes from today if they were teleported to the present is because today's athletes are bigger, stronger and faster. The skill gap exists and its clearer in basketball whereas with football the skill gap can be somewhat lost in the schematic complexity. Conversely, football players are so much bigger today, especially offensive and defensive lineman than they were 40-50 years ago. And basketball players are as well in the aggregate, but I think it doesn't translate as much on television.

But the game remains football, basketball wasn't basketball in the 50's. That's my overlying point, I'm not going to rate players from that era seriously

I think a 260 pound offensive lineman is equivalent to anything in that era of basketball in terms of using it as a reason to be dismissive.

[MiltownMadness]

I strongly disagree. In both sports the primary reason that players from a previous era couldn't compete against athletes from today if they were teleported to the present is because today's athletes are bigger, stronger and faster. The skill gap exists and its clearer in basketball whereas with football the skill gap can be somewhat lost in the schematic complexity. Conversely, football players are so much bigger today, especially offensive and defensive lineman than they were 40-50 years ago. And basketball players are as well in the aggregate, but I think it doesn't translate as much on television.

But the game remains football, basketball wasn't basketball in the 50's. That's my overlying point, I'm not going to rate players from that era seriously

I think a 260 pound offensive lineman is equivalent to anything in that era of basketball in terms of using it as a reason to be dismissive.

No, because the games are so drastically different you can't compare. Obviously it's easier to extrapolate a big guy blocking in 1960 to now than it is to imagine Bob Cousy a guy playing poor mans handball in 1950 to now, they are totally different games

[skbucks1985]

But the game remains football, basketball wasn't basketball in the 50's. That's my overlying point, I'm not going to rate players from that era seriously

I think a 260 pound offensive lineman is equivalent to anything in that era of basketball in terms of using it as a reason to be dismissive.

No, because the games are so drastically different you can't compare. Obviously it's easier to extrapolate a big guy blocking in 1960 to now than it is to imagine Bob Cousy a guy playing poor mans handball in 1950 to now, they are totally different games

I guess we just completely disagree because I think those two things are every bit the reason to be dismissive of the players from that era if I were to choose too

[emunney]

All athletes are products of their eras and if you're going to compare athletes across eras you should do it based on what they did in their eras. What makes this conversation so weird to me is that I think people can do this with football. Art Shell is one of the greatest Offensive Tackles in NFL history, Myles Garrett would also probably use him as a tackling dummy. I don't think a lot of people view either statement as particularly controversial or contradictory. For various reasons people seem to use the teleportation device argument a lot more frequently when talking about basketball.

It's because basketball from the 50's and now is 2 different games and football remains football.

Football players would not have as hard of a time with the time machine argument. Knowledge gap for sure but when I watch football from 60's it still looks like football to me, can swap players across eras and don't have to do backflips with your brain to justify a player ranking

Lol no way dude. Football is massively different than it was. It's at least as different as basketball if not more so.

[emunney]

Maybe we can revisit this in November when Kirk Cousins passes Unitas in passing yards.

[tedbrogen]

I think another thing being ignored is basketball and football back then were probably not even getting the best athletes.

The best athletes were more likely to probably try making it in baseball or boxing based on those sports being more popular at the time.

Other than super tall dudes like Wilt gravitating towards basketball for obvious reasons. Which is why bigs would likely translate better across eras.imo

In conclusion, Dame would make BBQ Chicken out of Cousy. Come at me, Sully.

[MiltownMadness]

All athletes are products of their eras and if you're going to compare athletes across eras you should do it based on what they did in their eras. What makes this conversation so weird to me is that I think people can do this with football. Art Shell is one of the greatest Offensive Tackles in NFL history, Myles Garrett would also probably use him as a tackling dummy. I don't think a lot of people view either statement as particularly controversial or contradictory. For various reasons people seem to use the teleportation device argument a lot more frequently when talking about basketball.

It's because basketball from the 50's and now is 2 different games and football remains football.

Football players would not have as hard of a time with the time machine argument. Knowledge gap for sure but when I watch football from 60's it still looks like football to me, can swap players across eras and don't have to do backflips with your brain to justify a player ranking

Lol no way dude. Football is massively different than it was. It's at least as different as basketball if not more so.

Do not agree at all, 60 years of development obviously it's going to look different but watching basketball in the 50's is totally a different game, do not get that same sense with football at all. I mean it's just how you take in what you're watching and rating historical players is highly personal in the first place, you can disagree but it's just what I think of what I'm watching. Like sure it would be hard to rate Don Hutson but at least it doesn't look like he is playing pickleball to me

[midranger]

This cat scored two TDs in the Superbowl while balls hungover.

Yeah. Football has changed a bit.

[MiltownMadness]

I'm not arguing if football has changed a lot, it definitely has. I can just still understand the game if I watch clips from 60 years ago. Makes it easier to rate players compared to basketball. Don't think that's outlandish

[BigO]

Using Bob Cousy as the poster child for how bad players were then is a strawman.

Cousy did win a lot of championships, but he was on the decline during the early 1960s and probably shouldn't have started. The star guards on those teams were Sam Jones (the best player I ever saw in using the backboard when shooting) and KC Jones (the Jrue holiday of his day).

The best Celtics teams of the 60s, in my view, were after Cousy left. They actually got better after him.

[MiltownMadness]

Cousy would cook Dame tbh. TJ McConnell him over and over seriously Dame makes McConnell look like Jerry West. Or maybe AG did

Basketball probably has a good argument as the major sport that has changed the most throughout its history

[RW23]

Super fun game. I wanted to shout out PatBev who plays super in the flow and in control, forces nothing, makes the right pass, and his active hands led to some clutch steals.

Also this was my first game at Fiserv, incredibly, as I rarely make it back to MKE. Much more comfortable, aesthetic experience than the Staples/Crypto arena where I normally see games in LA. The smaller size / intimacy was so nice, and nice to see a day game with some daylight streaming in. Was hugely impressed with the space, sightlines and layout etc. As I've seen noted elsewhere, it was eerily quiet at times though which to me that feels as much a function of the design and soundproofing as a lack of enthusiasm in the crowd. Also at Crypto Arena the music is constant and annoyingly loud. Felt I was more locked into the game experience at Fiserv throughout, and I credit the quiet in part for that. Can't wait to return.

I have no idea how someone can think the Fiserv is quiet, I always leave games with a hoarse voice from shouting to the person I came with the whole game lol

[emunney]

This cat scored two TDs in the Superbowl while balls hungover.

Yeah. Football has changed a bit.

Dick Vitale the GOAT

[MiltownMadness]

Super fun game. I wanted to shout out PatBev who plays super in the flow and in control, forces nothing, makes the right pass, and his active hands led to some clutch steals.

Also this was my first game at Fiserv, incredibly, as I rarely make it back to MKE. Much more comfortable, aesthetic experience than the Staples/Crypto arena where I normally see games in LA. The smaller size / intimacy was so nice, and nice to see a day game with some daylight streaming in. Was hugely impressed with the space, sightlines and layout etc. As I've seen noted elsewhere, it was eerily quiet at times though which to me that feels as much a function of the design and soundproofing as a lack of enthusiasm in the crowd. Also at Crypto Arena the music is constant and annoyingly loud. Felt I was more locked into the game experience at Fiserv throughout, and I credit the quiet in part for that. Can't wait to return.

I have no idea how someone can think the Fiserv is quiet, I always leave games with a hoarse voice from shouting to the person I came with the whole game lol

It's just how it comes across on TV, Bradley center was louder at certain moments but I've been to so many games that were loud af at Fiserv just to see VooDoo complaining about the crowd the next day.

Even game 6 of the finals wasn't Bradley center loud on TV even though there were 150,000 people concentrated in an area screaming their lungs off

[emunney]

It's because basketball from the 50's and now is 2 different games and football remains football.

Football players would not have as hard of a time with the time machine argument. Knowledge gap for sure but when I watch football from 60's it still looks like football to me, can swap players across eras and don't have to do backflips with your brain to justify a player ranking

Lol no way dude. Football is massively different than it was. It's at least as different as basketball if not more so.

Do not agree at all, 60 years of development obviously it's going to look different but watching basketball in the 50's is totally a different game, do not get that same sense with football at all. I mean it's just how you take in what you're watching and rating historical players is highly personal in the first place, you can disagree but it's just what I think of what I'm watching. Like sure it would be hard to rate Don Hutson but at least it doesn't look like he is playing pickleball to me

Dude, when Hutson played, an incomplete pass in the endzone was an automatic turnover. Defensive pass interference didn't exist until the late 1970s.