Hal14 wrote:1. Bob Cousy
2. Nate Thurmond
3. Elvin Hayes
Bob Cousy - Very underrated on this board. When you look at the players from his era, Mikan and Pettit were better than Cousy. But Cousy has a strong argument for being better than any other player from his era. You could argue that Cousy was better than Schayes and Schayes got voted in a long time ago in the no. 41 spot.
Cousy - 13x all star, 10x all NBA 1st team, 1 MVP, 6x NBA title
Schayes - 12x all star, 6x all NBA 1st team, 0 MVP, 1x NBA title
Cousy has a clear edge in awards and titles over Schayes plus had greater impact on the game - decades later, Cousy was the guy all point guards modeled their game after. Did Schayes do that? Of course not - he was a PF and the guy back then all PFs modeled their game after was Pettit.
What about Arizin? He was a SF and he didn't have as much impact as Cousy either - Baylor was the guy back then all SFs would model their game after - not Arizin.
And as for awards and titles, we have:
Cousy - 13x all star, 10x all NBA 1st team, 2x all NBA 2nd team, 1 MVP, 6x NBA title
Arizin - 10x all star, 3x all NBA 1st team, 1x all NBA 2nd team, 0 MVP, 1x NBA title
Not to mention the impact Cousy had on the game and his legacy. We simply had never before seen a guy who could make the kind of passes that Cousy could. It's like he had eyes in the back of his head - able to see 2 steps ahead of the opposition, able to anticipate where his teammates would be, hit teammates perfectly in stride for transition layups. Some of the plays he made - you might watch them today in 2021 and think they are routine plays - but a) many of the plays he made were truly outstanding and not routine at all and b) He was so far ahead of his time - to make the types of plays he did back in the 50s was pretty amazing. Keep in mind back then there was much more strict rules in regards to dribbling. The way players dribble the ball in today's game - they would get called for a carry, palming or travel pretty much every time down the floor. Cousy was called the hardwood Houdini for a reason. And it's not like he was all flash and no substance (like Maravich, Jason Williams, etc.), Cousy was all about winning. That's all he cared about - winning. Scoring the basketball, making great passes to teammates to get them baskets. Hell, he was even a good rebounder for his size. He did whatever it takes to win. He became the player that all point guards who would come later on would model their games after.
Not for another 2 decades when Frazier came along would we see a player as good as Cousy at both scoring and setting up teammates for scores. Frazier was obviously a better defender, but he also had the advantage of coming along decades later, when more players were lifting weights, rules weren't as strict on palming/carrying/traveling, the ball was easier to shoot and easier to dribble than the one Cousy played with, etc. Frazier was voted in at the no. 30 spot in this poll. Is he really 26 spots better than Cousy? No way.
Cousy led the NBA in assists 8 years in a row.
Cousy was hands down the best player at his position for an entire decade, was considered the best scorer and best passer at his position for an entire decade, and completely ignore all of the awards (which were voted on be people who actually were alive back then and followed the game very closely LIVE and based their voting off not just stats but also intangibles, eye test and impact the player had on the game, reputation around the league, etc. and also completely ignoring contributing the more titles than any PG ever, a huge part of the greatest dynasty in NBA history, the guy who was the one leading the famous Celtics fast break which changed the way the game would be played from then on since up until then no one else was playing that type of push the tempo, run run run, get quick shots up before the defense is set type of style. Let's also ignore that during his career Cousy made more high degree of difficulty shots - shots that literally no one had ever even attempted, let alone made, he was also the league's best ball handler and passer for his entire career - in an era where they played with a ball that was MUCH more difficult to dribble, pass and shoot than the ball they have the advantage of playing with today.
Nate Thurmond - right in that same tier with Reed, Gilmore and Ewing. I see those four centers as pretty debatable. Ewing, Gilmore and Reed all got voted in already - it's Thurmond's time now. Thurmond has a strong case for being better than all 3 of them (probably the best defender of the group, but Gilmore has the longevity and ABA Finals MVP, Reed has 2 Finals MVPs so I've got Thurmond just barely ranked behind those other guys).
Article here:
https://www.nba.com/history/legends/profiles/nate-thurmondExcerpt:
Both Abdul-Jabbar and Chamberlain have gone on record saying they felt Thurmond was their toughest adversary. “He plays me better than anybody ever has,” Abdul-Jabbar told Basketball Digest when he was in his prime. “He’s tall, has real long arms, and most of all he’s agile and strong.” In an article in Sport, Abdul-Jabbar also said, “When I score on Nate, I know I’ve done something. He sweats and he wants you to sweat, too.”
"Some basketball observers have suggested that the 6-11 Thurmond provided the best mix of offense and defense in basketball history. Many say that his defense was better than Chamberlain’s, and that his offense was better than Bill Russell’s. With quickness and long hands, a smooth outside shooting touch, tenacious rebounding, classic shot blocking ability, and a total team attitude, Thurmond offered a perfectly balanced package."
Thurmond is one of the most underrated players of all time and is top 50, no question in my mind.
https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/warriors/defensive-dominator-thurmond-one-nbas-most-underrated-all-timeThurmond went against Wilt, Russell, Chamberlain, Kareem, Unseld, Bellamy, Beaty, Cowens, Reed - all in their prime. Yet he still managed:
-7 all star games in 14 seasons
-2 times all defensive 1st team, 3 times all defensive 2nd team...despite the fact that all defense awards didn't exist until his 6th season! Clearly one of the best defensive players of all time and one of the best rebounders of all time
-Did not make a 1st or 2nd team all NBA (obviously those usually went to Wilt/Kareem/Russell) but there's very little question he would have made quite a few all NBA 3rd team selections if it existed back when he played
-Finished 2nd in MVP voting in 66-67, finishing ahead of Russell, Robertson and Barry - Thurmond finished no. 2 behind Wilt who was no. 1. Finished 11th in 69-70, 8th in 70-7, 8th in 71-72, 9th in 72-73 and 8th in 73-74
-Helped his team to NBA Finals in 67, where they lost to arguably the greatest team of all time, the 67 Sixers. That series Thurmond averaged 14 PPG and 26.7 RPG while playing 47 MPG, going head to head vs Wilt. Thurmond's Warriors fell in 6 games to Wilt's Sixers. Let's compare that to the Eastern Division Finals - Russell (while also going against Wilt) averaged less PPG (11) and less RPG (23) than Thurmond, and Russell's Celtics lost in 5 games to Wilt's Sixers. How did Wilt do in each series? His numbers. were better in the Eastern Division Finals, going against Russell than they were in the NBA finals vs Thurmond. Wilt went from 21 PPG, 32 RPG and 10 APG vs Russell down to 17 PPG, 28 RPG and 6 APG vs Thurmond.
Elvin Hayes - here's why Hayes > Anthony Davis. Hayes = longer prime, much better longevity, much better durability. So if you're picking Davis right now you must really think that Davis peak is astronomically better than Hayes. But how good can Davis' peak really be when he's missed at least 7 games in every season of his career? He's never won MVP. He's only won 1 title and he had to join a stacked Lakers team led by LeBron James (who is literally the GOAT according to this poll) in order to win that title.
This is what Davis' Hornets/Pelicans teams did prior to Davis leaving for greener pastures, showing zero loyalty to the franchise the drafted him and teaming up with Lebron to form a super team:
2013 - below .500
2014 - below .500
2015 - swept in 1st round
2016 - below .500
2017 - below .500
2018 - lost 4 games to 1 in western conference semis
2019 - below .500
Why were Davis' teams always so bad before he arrived in LA? After all, those years (2012-2019) weren't exactly amazing years for the West. We're not talking about a stacked conference like the west was throughout the 90s or during the 2005-2009 timeframe. This was a time period where you had an old, aging Spurs team make it through a weak western conference to get to the the finals back to back years - then it was Warriors domination for the next several years with no other legit contenders in the west during that time except the 2018 Rockets. And the east was pretty weak those years as well other than Heat in 2013 and 2014 and then Cavs the next few years after that. So in a league that didn't have that many good teams - if Davis was that good of a player, how is it that he only made the playoffs 2 times out of 7 seasons, only made it out of the 1st round once and never made it to conference finals? Him, Rondo and Cousins was a solid core with some decent role players around them.
-In Davis' rookie year, the Hornets went 27-55. The year before they added Davis, they went 21-45. So after adding Davis, they won 6 more games but they lost 10 more. So that means they actually were 4 games worse after adding Davis
-In Hayes' rookie year, the Royals went 37-45. The year before they added Hayes, they went 15-67. So after adding Hayes, they got 22 games better.
Pretty significant edge for Hayes there ^
Davis has only played 8 seasons. That's simply not enough to be considered this early in the poll - only other guy with such bad longevity who's been voted in is Mikan and he was literally the best player on a championship team like 7 times - not to mention playing 7 seasons back in Mikan's era was like playing 14 seasons in the modern era.
Davis might seem like he has good numbers but consider:
1) Hayes playing in era with more possessions + playing more mins per game AND playing more games per season = he is more likely to be fatigued which accounts for his lower efficiency...whereas Davis, playing in era with less possessions + playing less mins per game and less games per season = he's less fatigued which accounts for his higher efficiency and higher numbers across the board..simply looking at per 100 possession numbers for who played 40 years apart is a slippery slope - the modern player has an unfair advantage
2) Hayes also played in a more physical era - dudes were literally getting the you know what beat out of them, there was less spacing, the paint (where Hayes operated) was more clogged up which also accounts for lower efficiency...all of that was the opposite for Davis, less physical era, so easier for him to have higher efficiency
3) No 3 point shot for most of Hayes' career (and all of his prime) so to make this an apples to apples comparison if you're looking it points per possession you'd have take all of the 3 point shots that Davis made and count them all as 2-pointers and then calculate his points. per possession.
4) The hoop/rim was different back in the 70s and so was the ball. The ball was not as favorable to dribble and shoot back then and the hoop/rim it was harder to get the ball to go in back then. The sneakers in modern era, they're more favorable, they allow you to run faster and jump higher. All of this helps Davis have better efficiency and accounts for Hayes' lower efficiency.
5) Not to mention Hayes was relied upon to carry more of his team's offensive load - teams geared up and game planned for stopping him, he saw more double teams, and it's more taxing, causes more fatigue when you have to carry the load, the shots you have to take have a higher degree of difficulty. Davis has had other guys who can score (LeBron, Cousins, etc.) so hasn't had to carry the load as much which helps his efficiency.
The durability factor is worth digging into further. Davis even during his 3 peak seasons (16-17, 17-18, 19-20) still missed 7, 7 and 9 games. If you look at his non-peak seasons, he's missing closer to 20 games per season. And this is is in an era with less physicality, more days off between games, star players playing less mins per game and the advantage of better weight training, better strength and conditioning programs, better supplements, better nutrition, better equipment, better facilities, etc. So it's not a reach to say that if Davis was playing in the 70s he would be a guy who at his peak would be missing 10-15 games a year and during non-peak seasons would be missing 30-40 games a year. You miss 30-40 games, you aren't even being remotely considered for an all NBA team. So we're looking at a player in Davis who is only a 3 time all NBA selection. Even as it stands today, Davis is only a 4 time all NBA selection. Does he really belong in the conversation for this poll? Cousy is a 12 time all NBA player and Hayes is a 6 time all NBA player.
), his case for the top 60 is just great.
