How good was Dolph Schayes?

[70sFan]

I've been waiting for new package of late 1950s NBA clips and I'll make some new videos about some forgotten stars from that era. My thoughts are focused on three of them - Larry Foust, Bill Sharman and Dolph Schayes.

What do you think about Schayes game? I have only one full game with him on my collection:

Watch on YouTube

I can post full game here if anybody would like to see it.

Schayes was past his best here, but he showed some good things - despite being big (6'8 and 220 lbs by 1950s measurements, legit PF size) he showed nice first step and was crafty with his drives - floaters, bankshots, good foul drawing ability. He had real three point line range with his setshot, he also seems to be comfortable with his weaker hand. He didn't show it in this game, but based on other footage I've seen he seemed to be very good passer too.

What do you think about him?

Bonus question: would you like me to focus on any other late 1950s player? Which players from this generation would you like to see more?

[penbeast0]

I have a picture of Schayes and Sharman's game; Foust not so much. Always wondered about Kenny Sears who was one of the most efficient scorers of his era but never got much recognition. Was he a sieve on defense? What was his go-to shot? Was he justly ignored or just unrecognized?

[Dutchball97]

I'd love to see more of Paul Arizin as well.

[70sFan]

I have a picture of Schayes and Sharman's game; Foust not so much. Always wondered about Kenny Sears who was one of the most efficient scorers of his era but never got much recognition. Was he a sieve on defense? What was his go-to shot? Was he justly ignored or just unrecognized?

I'd love to see more of Paul Arizin as well.

Got it, I'll try to make Sears and Arizin videos as well. Arizin with new footage should be quite long, but I'm not sure how much I'll be able to find of Sears.

[Jack Dempsey]

I'd love to see more of Paul Arizin as well.

There is a nice Paul Arizin documentary on YouTube.

As for the OP, I don't think I have seen one single full game from the 50s yet so I can't really say all to much about his game. But according to some older people that have seen him play, Schayes was probably the 2nd best player (obviously after Mikan) of the first decade in the NBA. Some other players that were highly rated at the time were Ed Macauley, Harry Gallatin, Vern Mikkelsen, Neil Johnston and of course Bob Cousy. Unfortunately, Bob Kurland passed up on playing in the BAA/NBA and decided to join a team in an amateur league. Kurland vs Mikan would have been a great rivalry in the NBA like it was in the NCAA where, according to some experts, Kurland had the edge.

[HeartBreakKid]

For what ever reason when ever I think of Dolph Schayes game it reminds me of Al Horford.

[trex_8063]

Thanks for posting this; and absolutely I'd be happy/appreciative if you posted the full game here (please quote/notify me if you do!).

Now that he mentions it, HBK's comparison to Al Horford is pretty apt: similar height/build, both good passers, both excellent FT-shooting bigs, both have 3pt range (and for both of them it's a slow purely set-shot when they shoot from that range).

I haven't seen any of Dolph to say for sure, though based on reputation [or lack thereof] I'll give Horford the definitive edge defensively, but I'll give Dolph the edge in creating off the dribble based on the above.

He does indeed have nice touch with either hand; I recall reading he once [I forget which season] broke a bone in his shooting hand, but came back to play while still in the cast......consequently had to learn to do everything with his off hand.

And he does have a pretty nice first step (especially considering how difficult it is to take off quickly with the ball when you cannot push it forward ahead of you [because it's a carry by 1960s rules], and that he's 33 years old in his 13th [not counting NBL seasons] season in this clip).

[70sFan]

Thanks for posting this; and absolutely I'd be happy/appreciative if you posted the full game here (please quote/notify me if you do!).

Enjoy!

Watch on YouTube

[trex_8063]

Thanks for posting this; and absolutely I'd be happy/appreciative if you posted the full game here (please quote/notify me if you do!).

Enjoy!

Watch on YouTube

Thanks so much! Full game footage from this era is such a treasure.
I've watched this thru three times now, not only to do some scouting, but also because I'm thinking of compiling a database of more complete stat-keeping for these eras, including shot distance data and possibly even +/- (though exact +/- will be difficult because you don't always know how many FT's were made, as they sort of edit out most of the FT breaks).

I've got some initial stats and shot data, which I'd focused only on a handful of key players I was interested in (Guerin, Naulls, and Green for the Knicks; Schayes, Kerr, Greer, Costello, and Gambee for the Nats). I'm not sure if my stat-keeping is 100% accurate, so I think I may go thru VERY slowly a fourth time and actually write out a play-by-play log for EVERY possession and player.

I've referenced the incomplete box-score on bbref, and there are some GLARING errors there pertaining to Red Kerr. For example, they credit him with 18 rebounds this game. I counted FIVE for him (initially I only credited him for FOUR, but decided to be generous on one that I'd previously labelled a team rebound). I don't know if whichever archivist for bbref input the wrong game data into that box-score or what; but I challenge anyone to find even HALF that number (or even a third) of rebounds for Kerr.

They also credit him for 6 assists; I counted 3 for him, although there was one I wasn't sure about. It occurs at 3:16 in the video on a Dave Gambee FG. He hands off to Gambee on the left elbow while sort of setting a screen; Gambee takes the hand-off moving to his right, but makes a hard cut back left, one dribble, and pulls up and shoots.
You always hear the old guys talk about how it was much harder to get an assist in their day......how today players can catch a pass, shot fake, take a dribble or two and the guy will still get credit for the assist, but how in their day the shot basically had to go up immediately.
Well, I tried to hedge somewhat toward that sentiment in crediting assists. Obviously there are judgment calls to be made in stat-keeping, assists being one example. I'm certainly willing to change my call on that play if you guys think it should be an assist; though that still only brings Kerr up to 4 for the game.

So either that "6" credited on bbref is another mistake/typo/mis-log; or if it's legit that completely blows up this myth that assists were harder to come by then. I'm not sure I can even find two other "maybe, if I'm really generous" type of assist plays for Kerr, though.

There appears to be another error in the number of FG's credited to Hal Greer. The bbref page says he made 5 FG's......I only count 4 (and I've been thru the footage three times now). I see one at 2:23, 24:00, 24:50, and 25:40. I don't see any others.
The only other place where I could conceivable see it occurring is at 1:27---->Greer misses the shot but is fouled.......although I see no indication of this from the ref, I suppose it is possible they called defensive basket interference on Phil Jordan (it doesn't look like a goal-tend either, fwiw). And since it's edited such that they only show the LAST free-throw attempt, we don't know for sure how many Greer took on that play (although the box-score page credits him with 6/6 on FT's for the game, so it's unlikely he was given an odd number of attempts here).
In short, unless there is a play missing from the footage, he did not have 5 FG's.
I guess I'll see [after I do complete play-by-play] if the FG's I see and FT data from bbref come out to equal the final score.


Other judgment calls may include who to credit with a steal when one guy knocks the ball loose or tips a pass and another guy is the one who recovers the ball.
Or who to credit with an offensive rebound when one guy underneath taps it out to where a perimeter player just happens to be. fwiw, I generally judge those plays based on how controlled/directionally-intended the tap was, and if the other guy was simply "right place, right time" and/or had to make no effort.


Some other general observations.....
Contact
Yeah they allowed a little more than they do today. It's not a total dirty grudge-match, but there were certainly multiple instances of uncalled excessive contact that I think would have been called more often than not today.

Travelling
Although ball-handling restrictions were much tighter in general in the 60s, and although they appear to not allow much of a "gather step" upon receiving the ball here.......they're actually more lackadaisical in calling a travel when guys shuffle the feet at the start of a drive. Saw several instances (Schayes and especially Guerin, in particular) where guys shuffle their feet at the start of a dribble-drive from a stand-still, and it's NOT called.

Guerin
He could ball. The almost flat-footed set shots from 22+ feet look so weird (Guerin's not the only one; pretty much everyone was); how do they even heave it that far while using NO legs?
But he otherwise has a jump shot, looks pretty fast moving North-South, and looks like a decent finisher around the rim, even in traffic or moving at really high speed.
The other thing I was really impressed by [not expecting, either] was Guerin's passing. I credited him with 11 assists (plus one "secondary assist" [the pass leading to the pass] and two FT assists). And a few of them were high-level dimes, imo.....

25:20 ---->runs into the double-team, mid-air redirect to throw a behind-the-back pass to Green, which leads to FT's.

28:50 ---->gets the steal on one end, makes a really nice delivery to Green on the fast-break. It looks like one of those touchdown plays starting from deep in the red zone, where the receiver runs one of those out slants, and the QB just lobs it up there; needs to put it in just the right spot to give him a chance of catching it in the corner of the end-zone. That's kinda how he lobs this one where Green can do something with it; and does so off the fast-dribble, with Green moving fast, too.

38:55 ---->Beautiful no-look pass to Phil Jordon. Sort of reminiscent of Larry Bird, actually.

He also is the game high in scoring (27 pts, going 13/27 from the field, MOSTLY unassisted, too). Just a lot of creation coming from Guerin.

Kerr
I wasn't terribly impressed with him on defense. He's sort of lazy and/or reluctant to come out and contest shooters; there are a couple of times where he just vaguely flaps an arm at Phil Jordon (who clearly has OK touch out to 13-15 feet) from several feet away. He doesn't come out or otherwise hedge pnr's, either; he'll shade the play from behind, but that's it. He MOSTLY boxes out, though I saw an instance or two where he didn't.
His passing [which was heralded by teammates and contemporaries] looks a little hit or miss. He seems willing to go for the high risk/high reward passes (the kind that facilitate high-leverage scoring opportunities when completed, but run high risk of turnover, too).

Schayes
Yeah, he looks really comfortable with either hand. Lot of shots taken with his left. He's fond of little runners or push-shots off of one foot. They look sort of funny [from a modern point of view], but he's got really nice touch on them.
I'm going to make the play-by-play log to be sure I got things right, but my initial shot data has him as 4 of 5 (80%) in the 3-10' range, and 1 of 2 (50%) from 10-16' (these were mostly those kinds of runners). I know it's just one game, but still.

Johnny Green
Yeah, this guy was clearly an "NBA-level athlete", even by today's standards. He's quick, fast in the open-court, can really jump, and has a good motor. All this at a true 6'5" with sort of long(ish) arms.
He looks a little raw, skill-wise (I think I read somewhere that he never played basketball until he was like 17 or 18); but his athleticism bridges that gap). He's really active in this game, kinda fills up the box-score.

Naulls
This guy could shoot. Not just open catch-and-shoot looks either. He has one or two fairly hard contested ones. He's actually decent defensively and on the glass in this game, too.

Shaffer
He looks like he can shoot, too. I wasn't focused on him in my initial data collection, but he certainly seems to have had a hot scoring game.


I'll stop there. Will post again with more complete data after I've assured myself I've got it all right with the complete play-by-play log.
Thanks again.

[70sFan]

Thanks for posting this; and absolutely I'd be happy/appreciative if you posted the full game here (please quote/notify me if you do!).

Enjoy!

Watch on YouTube

Thanks so much! Full game footage from this era is such a treasure.
I've watched this thru three times now, not only to do some scouting, but also because I'm thinking of compiling a database of more complete stat-keeping for these eras, including shot distance data and possibly even +/- (though exact +/- will be difficult because you don't always know how many FT's were made, as they sort of edit out most of the FT breaks).

I've got some initial stats and shot data, which I'd focused only on a handful of key players I was interested in (Guerin, Naulls, and Green for the Knicks; Schayes, Kerr, Greer, Costello, and Gambee for the Nats). I'm not sure if my stat-keeping is 100% accurate, so I think I may go thru VERY slowly a fourth time and actually write out a play-by-play log for EVERY possession and player.

I've referenced the incomplete box-score on bbref, and there are some GLARING errors there pertaining to Red Kerr. For example, they credit him with 18 rebounds this game. I counted FIVE for him (initially I only credited him for FOUR, but decided to be generous on one that I'd previously labelled a team rebound). I don't know if whichever archivist for bbref input the wrong game data into that box-score or what; but I challenge anyone to find even HALF that number (or even a third) of rebounds for Kerr.

They also credit him for 6 assists; I counted 3 for him, although there was one I wasn't sure about. It occurs at 3:16 in the video on a Dave Gambee FG. He hands off to Gambee on the left elbow while sort of setting a screen; Gambee takes the hand-off moving to his right, but makes a hard cut back left, one dribble, and pulls up and shoots.
You always hear the old guys talk about how it was much harder to get an assist in their day......how today players can catch a pass, shot fake, take a dribble or two and the guy will still get credit for the assist, but how in their day the shot basically had to go up immediately.
Well, I tried to hedge somewhat toward that sentiment in crediting assists. Obviously there are judgment calls to be made in stat-keeping, assists being one example. I'm certainly willing to change my call on that play if you guys think it should be an assist; though that still only brings Kerr up to 4 for the game.

So either that "6" credited on bbref is another mistake/typo/mis-log; or if it's legit that completely blows up this myth that assists were harder to come by then. I'm not sure I can even find two other "maybe, if I'm really generous" type of assist plays for Kerr, though.

There appears to be another error in the number of FG's credited to Hal Greer. The bbref page says he made 5 FG's......I only count 4 (and I've been thru the footage three times now). I see one at 2:23, 24:00, 24:50, and 25:40. I don't see any others.
The only other place where I could conceivable see it occurring is at 1:27---->Greer misses the shot but is fouled.......although I see no indication of this from the ref, I suppose it is possible they called defensive basket interference on Phil Jordan (it doesn't look like a goal-tend either, fwiw). And since it's edited such that they only show the LAST free-throw attempt, we don't know for sure how many Greer took on that play (although the box-score page credits him with 6/6 on FT's for the game, so it's unlikely he was given an odd number of attempts here).
In short, unless there is a play missing from the footage, he did not have 5 FG's.
I guess I'll see [after I do complete play-by-play] if the FG's I see and FT data from bbref come out to equal the final score.


Other judgment calls may include who to credit with a steal when one guy knocks the ball loose or tips a pass and another guy is the one who recovers the ball.
Or who to credit with an offensive rebound when one guy underneath taps it out to where a perimeter player just happens to be. fwiw, I generally judge those plays based on how controlled/directionally-intended the tap was, and if the other guy was simply "right place, right time" and/or had to make no effort.


Some other general observations.....
Contact
Yeah they allowed a little more than they do today. It's not a total dirty grudge-match, but there were certainly multiple instances of uncalled excessive contact that I think would have been called more often than not today.

Travelling
Although ball-handling restrictions were much tighter in general in the 60s, and although they appear to not allow much of a "gather step" upon receiving the ball here.......they're actually more lackadaisical in calling a travel when guys shuffle the feet at the start of a drive. Saw several instances (Guerin and Schayes in particular) where guys shuffle the feet a bit just as they start a dribble-drive from a stand-still.

Guerin
He could ball. The almost flat-footed set shots from 22+ feet look so weird (Guerin's not the only one; pretty much everyone was); how do they even heave it that far while using NO legs?
But he otherwise has a jump shot, looks pretty fast moving North-South, and looks like a decent finisher around the rim, even in traffic or moving at really high speed.
The other thing I was really impressed by [not expecting, either] was Guerin's passing. I credited him with 11 assists (plus one "secondary assist" [the pass leading to the pass] and two FT assists). And a few of them were high-level dimes, imo.....

25:20 ---->runs into the double-team, mid-air redirect to throw a behind-the-back pass to Green, which leads to FT's.

28:50 ---->gets the steal on one end, makes a really nice delivery to Green on the fast-break. It looks like one of those touchdown plays starting from deep in the red zone, where the receiver runs one of those out slants, and the QB just lobs it up there; needs to put it in just the right spot to give him a chance of catching it in the corner of the end-zone. That's kinda how he lobs this one where Green can do something with it; and does so off the fast-dribble, with Green moving fast, too.

38:55 ---->Beautiful no-look pass to Phil Jordon. Sort of reminiscent of Larry Bird, actually.

He also is the game high in scoring (27 pts, going 13/27 from the field, MOSTLY unassisted, too). Just a lot of creation coming from Guerin.

Kerr
I wasn't terribly impressed with him on defense. He's sort of lazy and/or reluctant to come out and contest shooters; there are a couple of times where he just vaguely flaps an arm at Phil Jordon (who clearly has OK touch out to 13-15 feet) from several feet away. He doesn't come out or otherwise hedge pnr's, either; he'll shade the play from behind, but that's it. He MOSTLY boxes out, though I saw an instance or two where he didn't.
His passing [which was heralded by teammates and contemporaries] looks a little hit or miss. He seems willing to go for the high risk/high reward passes (the kind that facilitate high-leverage scoring opportunities when completed, but run high risk of turnover, too).

Schayes
Yeah, he looks really comfortable with either hand. Lot of shots taken with his left. He's fond of little runners or push-shots off of one foot. They look sort of funny [from a modern point of view], but he's got really nice touch on them.
I'm going to make the play-by-play log to be sure I got things right, but my initial shot data has him as 4 of 5 (80%) in the 3-10' range, and 1 of 2 (50%) from 10-16' (these were mostly those kinds of runners). I know it's just one game, but still.

Johnny Green
Yeah, this guy was clearly an "NBA-level athlete", even by today's standards. He's quick, fast in the open-court, can really jump, and has a good motor. All this at a true 6'5" with sort of long(ish) arms.
He looks a little raw, skill-wise (I think I read somewhere that he never played basketball until he was like 17 or 18); but his athleticism bridges that gap). He's really active in this game, kinda fills up the box-score.

Naulls
This guy could shoot. Not just open catch-and-shoot looks either. He has one or two fairly hard contested ones. He's actually decent defensively and on the glass in this game, too.

Shaffer
He looks like he can shoot, too. I wasn't focused on him in my initial data collection, but he certainly seems to have had a hot scoring game.


I'll stop there. Will post again with more complete data after I've assured myself I've got it all right with the complete play-by-play log.
Thanks again.

Thank you very much for this post. I'm waiting for even more details, you did excellent job as always

I agree with your overall impression of Richie Guerin, he looks like very good player, not only for that era.

By the way, when you finish analyzing this game I can post here 2 other full games that I have from that era (1959/60 Lakers vs Royals and 1961/62 Packers vs Knicks). Just let me know if you want to see them

[Owly]

Firstly thanks 70sFan for sharing this.

So either that "6" credited on bbref is another mistake/typo/mis-log; or if it's legit that completely blows up this myth that assists were harder to come by then.

One small data point (one player, one game) couldn't come close to "completely blow[ing] up" a myth (or not), when we're looking at such a scale. At least, to my mind.

What it might offer mild anecdotal support for is bad and/or biased score-keeping.

To me this is more a data question than a small sample watching question, at least in the first instance. What percentage of made baskets are credited as assisted. That's the best low-effort big picture guide.

From there (if you have the man-hours) if a lesser proportion of made field goals then you can ask is it a tighter threshold or are a higher proportion of shots in this era non-assisted (by whatever threshold you deem a "real" assist) and compare the real-to-official ratio of then with other eras you deem relevant though sufficiently genuinely full game footage from the 60s might be hard to come by to get a worthwhile sample (and getting a representative sample harder since you're likely to be getting Boston games).

1 player, 1 game, no control/comparison group ... not so persuasive, imo. Sorry for the digression, I can see you've put a lot of time into looking at the game and it might have been a throwaway line.

[trex_8063]

Thank you very much for this post. I'm waiting for even more details, you did excellent job as always

I agree with your overall impression of Richie Guerin, he looks like very good player, not only for that era.

By the way, when you finish analyzing this game I can post here 2 other full games that I have from that era (1959/60 Lakers vs Royals and 1961/62 Packers vs Knicks). Just let me know if you want to see them

I finished doing the play-by-play log (linked below). THERE ARE A FEW MISSED POSSESSIONS IN THE VIDEO (they are noted in the log [red print], usually with a video time-stamp).

As a result, my full accounting of box stats leave 2 pts by the Knicks unaccounted for; presumably a made FG by Cleveland Buckner (6 made FG's listed in the official boxscore, but only 5 accounted for in the video), and 4 pts by the Nats unaccounted for (presumably 2 for 2 made FT's by D.Schayes and 2 for 3 FT's by Swede Halbrook)......FT's from the official boxscore are likely accurate [one would think], as it's the easiest thing to log correctly (the action slows down, and there's basically no room for misinterpretation).

I'd mentioned I didn't see five made FG's for Hal Greer (that's what's listed in the boxscore), only four. I do, however, count FOUR made FG's for Joe Roberts (whereas the boxscore only lists THREE for him). These FG's by Roberts can be seen at the following time-stamps:
19:38
21:25
39:34
and the final goal at 43:34.

The only one I'm not sure about is the final one [did it beat the clock?]. You cannot see a ref in the shot [who may have waved it off as after the buzzer], but I tend to think this FG counted based on three observations:
1) Everyone still appears to be playing, jostling for rebounding position (indicating the clock hadn't sounded).
2) Dave Budd for the Knicks actually even takes the ball out after the make, as though to make one final inbound for NY (hardly expected behavior if the buzzer had sounded).
3) As indicated on line 492 of the log ("possessions missing"), we've already got 2 pts for Syracuse unaccounted for within these final several minutes (even with this final bucket by Roberts). If we take it away, that leaves 4 pts unaccounted for. It's highly unlikely that included in these missing late possessions is a FG by Hal Greer, given he left the game early somewhat early in the 4th quarter (see line 393 in the log) and does not appear to have been re-inserted into the line-up again.
It's also unlikely that his "missing FG" is the 2 pts unaccounted for from the first three quarters of play......because as you'll note in the log, those seem to have come by way of 1 missing point in the first half, and 1 missing point in the 3rd quarter.

So if Greer's missing FG didn't come in the first three quarters (because there's no place for a 2-pt chunk in the missing scores), and didn't come late in the game (because he was out of the line-up).......I'm led to believe the "official boxscore" has mistakenly credited one of Joe Roberts' FG's to Hal Greer.

NBA basketball was a much smaller operation at this stage in history, with fewer stat-keepers, no video replay, and fewer checks and balances. It's not hard to imagine the [likely white] local stat-keeper crediting the wrong black man in a Nationals jersey [similar numbers on jerseys, too: #12 for Roberts, #15 for Greer] with the bucket.

Anyway, that's what I believe happened. I'm copying these arguments right into the game log, so I won't forget.
I'll include the shot location data too.....

EDIT: btw, couple additional things [that don't effect that score] that are unaccounted for in the video:
0/1 FT's by Dave Budd, 0/2 FT's by Johnny Green.
Oh, and yes I'd love to see the other full games you have. I'll attempt to create game and shot-data logs for them as well.

Play-by-play log
Shot location data

[trex_8063]

Thought you might also be interested in the game had by some of the notable players in this one.....

Dolph Schayes [may as well start with him, since the thread is about him]
*23 pts (8/18 FG's, *7/7 FT's), 11 reb (2 off, 9 def), 1 ast, 4 tov, 4 pf, 1 offensive foul drawn
(*2/2 FT's not accounted for in video, come from boxscore)

Hal Greer
*14 pts (4/16 FG's, 6/6 FT's), **6 reb (**2 off, 4 def), 6 ast, 2 stl, 1 blk (not recovered by team), 1 tov, 4 pf
(*again, the official boxscore credits him with 5 FG's [and 16 pts], but I'm fairly certain that's an error)
(**I was pretty generous on one "tip attempt" [counting it as an offensive rebound and missed FGA], fwiw; I could see not counting it as anything)

Red Kerr
11 pts (5/12 FG's [all of them assisted], 1/1 FT's), 4 reb (2 off, 2 def), 3 ast (+1 FT ast), 1 stl, 4 tov, 2 pf, 1 offensive foul drawn

Larry Costello
7 pts (2/7 FG's, 3/4 FT's), 6 reb (1 off, 5 def), 6 ast, 4 tov, 4 pf

Richie Guerin
27 pts (13/27 FG's, 1/1 FT's), 6 reb (2 off, 4 def), 11 ast (+2 FT ast), 2 stl, 2 tov, 3 pf, 2 offensive fouls drawn

Johnny Green
19 pts (5/16 FG's, 9/15* FT's [*2 missed FT's not accounted for in video]), 18 reb (6 off, 12 def), 4 ast, 3 stl, 2 blk (1 recovered), 2 tov, 3 pf

Willie Naulls
21 pts (9/17 FG's, 3/5 FT's), 11 reb (3 off, 8 def), 1 ast (+2 FT ast), 4 stl, 4 tov, 2 pf


Guys like Lee Shaffer, Bill Smith, and Dave Budd all had nice games off the bench, too. Cleveland Buckner and Joe Roberts as well.

[70sFan]

That's great job trex, thanks a lot for your dedication. Your database could really help us in future, especially if I found more full games from 1960s.

Here is anohter game I have:

Watch on YouTube

[KobesScarf]

1 of the greatest free throw shooters ever

[Tim Lehrbach]

Always appreciate these. I don't recall ever seeing a single clip of Schayes before. (EDIT: Actually, now that I think about it, you might have shared a Boston playoff game where Russell destroyed an old Schayes; is that right, or could I have seen that elsewhere? In any case, if I did see that and only that of Schayes before, I am especially grateful for this better look at a legend of the game.) From this little peek, my thoughts echo trex's:

Schayes
Yeah, he looks really comfortable with either hand. Lot of shots taken with his left. He's fond of little runners or push-shots off of one foot. They look sort of funny [from a modern point of view], but he's got really nice touch on them.
I'm going to make the play-by-play log to be sure I got things right, but my initial shot data has him as 4 of 5 (80%) in the 3-10' range, and 1 of 2 (50%) from 10-16' (these were mostly those kinds of runners). I know it's just one game, but still.

"They look sort of funny" is both true and actually part of what impresses here. His abilities to dribble within the rules, gather with just one step against contact, and put up such a variety of shots shows he's a fluid athlete with great touch.

Admittedly the 50s and early 60s game remains a little hard for me to watch (although I absolutely love watching Russell, Wilt, West, and Oscar), but the high-quality footage makes a huge difference. I've always thought that colorizing it and (in a farfetched dream) even digitally modernizing the uniforms and arenas would make for an interesting experiment -- if the game looked as much like the televised product we know as possible, how much would it take the edge off our biases to see the players and gameplay itself as antiquated or funny?

[70sFan]

I'm afraid that I don't have any full game between Celtics and Nationals right now unfortunately. I have some reels of their playoffs battles, but they are not longer than 5 minutes.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Schayes hit 84.9% of his free throws despite what looks to me like a little hitch in his free throw shooting.
Schayes hit 38% of his field goals but at that time they did not know that 38% was an unacceptably bad fg%. 38% was good enough to win with in those years.

38% from the field is bad enough for me to think Danny Schayes was better than Dolph Schayes.

Dolph is hitting some difficult shots that he probably should not be taking. Reminds me a bit of Tom Heinsohn and Bob Cousy in that they hit difficult shots, but not at a percentage that was high enough to justify taking the difficult shots. You could say the same for Iverson in a modern context but Iverson's 76er finals team needed Iverson to take difficult shots because the team could not hit average shots well enough to compete. Iverson shooting difficult shots helped his weak shooting team get the easier shots that they were capable of hitting.

[70sFan]

Schayes hit 84.9% of his free throws despite what looks to me like a little hitch in his free throw shooting.
Schayes hit 38% of his field goals but at that time they did not know that 38% was an unacceptably bad fg%. 38% was good enough to win with in those years.

38% from the field is bad enough for me to think Danny Schayes was better than Dolph Schayes.

Dolph is hitting some difficult shots that he probably should not be taking. Reminds me a bit of Tom Heinsohn and Bob Cousy in that they hit difficult shots but not at a percentage that was high enough to justify taking the difficult shots. You coukd say the same for Iverson in a modern context but Iverson's 76er finals team needed Iverson to take difficult shots because the team could not hit average shots well enough to compete. Iverson shooting difficult shots helped his weak shooting team get the easier shots that they were capable of hitting.

Schayes took a lot of long range shots that would be counted as three point shots today. That would improve his efficiency drastically. He was also really good at drawing fouls, which also makes his efficiency better than it looks based on FG%.

I don't like comparison to Heinsohn, because Schayes was more efficient and better player than Heinsohn. He's above league average in his whole prime in terms of TS%. He's much more efficient scorer than Iverson too given rules changes.

Also no, Danny Schayes wasn't better basketball player than Dolph. Danny Schayes would never be a star.

[Owly]

at that time they did not know that 38% was an unacceptably bad fg%

1) It wasn't at the time. To call it whatever in some absolute term is to ignore context.
2) FG% is a bad tool anyhow. He used his outside shot to keep defenders honest for his drives and resultant (strong) foul drawing, at least based on what I've read. TS%, a better tool, factoring in his foul drawing and ft%, reflects more favorably.

Unless wild and rendering shot ineffective (and clearly it didn't), seems strong to generalize (off presumably a small sample) having a "hitch" in ft shooting motion of that era, rather than just note, consistent with era played in, appearance of a non-[modern]standard form.

Danny has a nice (for a non-all star), low-key (outlier) peak (.195 WS/48, 18.4 PER). Bar some weird, time travel with all the benefits of medicine, diet,training etc and drop them back in the 40s ... maybe ... he's not remotely close to his father.