Better peak: Dave Cowens vs Alonzo Mourning

[70sFan]

Two very different players, but they peaked on similar level in my evaluations. One of them is much superior finisher and shotblocker, the other one is far better passer and more mobile on defense.

Who would you take for 1970s?
Who would you take for 1990s?
Who would you take for 2022?

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Relative to his era I think Cowens peaked higher, and Cowens got rings as the main man. Or was Havlicek his equal?

But if I was starting a team now I would rather have Mourning.

In the 1990s I would rather have Mourning. Too many good big centers in the 1990s i don't think Cowens is big enough to be a center but he would still be a great power forward.

No disrespect to guys like Sam Lacy that are now forgotten but were not jokes. Cowens dominating the guys of his day was not a joke.
I love Kareem especially young mobile hungry Kareem but as Kareem gold older many times I thought Kareem's will to battle with physical guys was inconsistan; so I am not going to infer that Cowens limiting Kareem to merely very very good means that Cowens could handle, Hakeem, Shaq, and pre injury David Robinson.

[70sFan]

In the 1990s I would rather have Mourning. Too many good big centers in the 1990s i don't think Cowens is big enough to be a center but he would still be a great power forward.

Cowens is roughly as tall as Mourning.

No disrespect to guys like Sam Lacy that are now forgotten but were not jokes. Cowens dominating the guys of his day was not a joke.
I love Kareem especially young mobile hungry Kareembut as Kareem gold older many times I thought Kareem's will to battle with physical guys was inconsistan; so I am not going to infer that Cowens limiting Kareem to merely very very good means that Cowens could handle, Hakeem, Shaq, and pre injury David Robinson.

Cowens had to deal with Wilt, Kareem, Lanier, Walton and Gilmore. All of them were significantly bigger than Hakeem and all besides Walton were heavier and more powerful than Robinson.

I don't see any problems for Cowens to play at center in the 1990s.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

In the 1990s I would rather have Mourning. Too many good big centers in the 1990s i don't think Cowens is big enough to be a center but he would still be a great power forward.

Cowens is roughly as tall as Mourning.

No disrespect to guys like Sam Lacy that are now forgotten but were not jokes. Cowens dominating the guys of his day was not a joke.
I love Kareem especially young mobile hungry Kareembut as Kareem gold older many times I thought Kareem's will to battle with physical guys was inconsistan; so I am not going to infer that Cowens limiting Kareem to merely very very good means that Cowens could handle, Hakeem, Shaq, and pre injury David Robinson.

Cowens had to deal with Wilt, Kareem, Lanier, Walton and Gilmore. All of them were significantly bigger than Hakeem and all besides Walton were heavier and more powerful than Robinson.

I don't see any problems for Cowens to play at center in the 1990s.

Basketball reference is listing Mourning as 6' 9" 230 pounds. Mourning was definitely a better shot blocker than Cowens. I Think Mourning was 2 inches taller than Cowens and a better leaper. I always thought Cowens was 6' 8", closer to Unseld's height than to Rick Robey in height. Rick Robey is my measuring stick because I watched the Celtics when Robey backed up Cowens. Then when the Celtics got Parish , Cowens retired before unretiring and being traded for Quinn Buckner. I Also saw Cowens and McAdoo play together. I thought Mcadoo was an inch to two inches taller and Robey 3 inches taller and Parrish 4 inches taller. Parish was a significant upgrade over not fully healthy old Cowens. Basketball reference is listing Parish as 7'' "1", I thought he was always 7' 0". What is so damn hard about measuring a players height. Actually measuring standing reach is probabably better than measuring height. McHale with his extra long arms played taller than his height and quicker than his foot speed.

Parish was more effective against Moses Malone and everybody else than old Cowens was. Reputation wise I think Mourning had a little more hype for his defensive reputation than Parish did. Everbody knew Parish was good but some people were going ga ga about Mourning. Mourning and Cowens may have been a little more active and scratch and claw than Parish but Parish would scratch and claw when efficient. Parish may have been more economical with his energy than Cowens and Mourning, no wasted energy from Parish.

Tom Barker, listed at 6' 11" in my mind was an inch taller than 6' 11 Robey an 4 inches taller than Cowens. You can be excused for not remember Tom Barker. I was excited about the Celtics having Tom Barker but I was wrong and Barker never really made it in the NBA.

Tom Barker February 12, 1979: Traded by the Boston Celtics with a 1979 1st round draft pick (Bill Cartwright was later selected), a 1979 1st round draft pick (Larry Demic was later selected) and a 1979 1st round draft pick (Sly Williams was later selected) to the New York Knicks for Bob McAdoo.

Bob McAdoo September 6, 1979: Traded by the Boston Celtics to the Detroit Pistons for a 1980 1st round draft pick (Rickey Brown was later selected) and a 1980 1st round draft pick (Joe Barry Carroll was later selected). This exchange was arranged as compensation for Boston signing veteran free agent M.L. Carr on July 24, 1979.

Joe Barry Carroll traded June 9, 1980: Traded by the Boston Celtics (as a future 1980 1st round draft pick) with a 1980 1st round draft pick (Rickey Brown was later selected) to the Golden State Warriors for Robert Parish and a 1980 1st round draft pick (Kevin McHale was later selected).

[Texas Chuck]

Cowens peaked higher. I also think Mourning is one of the most overrated players in NBA history. If he didn't volume score inefficiently he wouldn't be seen the way he is. He was a very good defender for sure, but people think of him being something offensively that he actually wasn't. He's clearly the worst of the big 3 Hoya centers by some distance but many don't understand just how much better Deke was than him.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Cowens peaked higher. I also think Mourning is one of the most overrated players in NBA history. If he didn't volume score inefficiently he wouldn't be seen the way he is. He was a very good defender for sure, but people think of him being something offensively that he actually wasn't. He's clearly the worst of the big 3 Hoya centers by some distance but many don't understand just how much better Deke was than him.

Mourning's first 8 years he 19 or more points per game at better than 50% shooting.
He averaged 51.5% shooting in the playoffs. He averaged over 20 points a game his first 7 playoff years.

Mourning is only high volume low efficiency vs the Bulls in the 1995 playoffs 1st round exit, Fg 42% for that series. Do you think FG 52% is low efficiency? His isn't Kevin McHale but I am sattisfied with high volume better than FG 50%

Dikembe was underrated probably because he wasn't a high volume scorer. I would rather have Dikembe than Mourning.

Cowens was considerably lower effeciency scoring than Mourning and lower volume than Mouring and only half the blocks of Mourning.
Cowens did help with floor spacing by taking outside shots. Cowens was a better rebounder than Mourning.

I prefer Mourning's interior defense. Maybe I over rate shot blocking.

[Texas Chuck]

He is more efficient than I realized. I should have talked about his relatively poor offensive impact. Because yeah I was wrong about his scoring efficiency. Thanks for holding me accountable on that.

[migya]

Cowens peaked higher. I also think Mourning is one of the most overrated players in NBA history. If he didn't volume score inefficiently he wouldn't be seen the way he is. He was a very good defender for sure, but people think of him being something offensively that he actually wasn't. He's clearly the worst of the big 3 Hoya centers by some distance but many don't understand just how much better Deke was than him.

Mourning's first 8 years he 19 or more points per game at better than 50% shooting.
He averaged 51.5% shooting in the playoffs. He averaged over 20 points a game his first 7 playoff years.

Mourning is only high volume low efficiency vs the Bulls in the 1995 playoffs 1st round exit, Fg 42% for that series. Do you think FG 52% is low efficiency? His isn't Kevin McHale but I am sattisfied with high volume better than FG 50%

Dikembe was underrated probably because he wasn't a high volume scorer. I would rather have Dikembe than Mourning.

Both of you underrate Mourning. He was much better than Mutombo and arguably better defender due to his mobility, and was a good number one for a very good Miami team.

[Colbinii]

Cowens peaked higher. I also think Mourning is one of the most overrated players in NBA history. If he didn't volume score inefficiently he wouldn't be seen the way he is. He was a very good defender for sure, but people think of him being something offensively that he actually wasn't. He's clearly the worst of the big 3 Hoya centers by some distance but many don't understand just how much better Deke was than him.

Mourning's first 8 years he 19 or more points per game at better than 50% shooting.
He averaged 51.5% shooting in the playoffs. He averaged over 20 points a game his first 7 playoff years.

Mourning is only high volume low efficiency vs the Bulls in the 1995 playoffs 1st round exit, Fg 42% for that series. Do you think FG 52% is low efficiency? His isn't Kevin McHale but I am sattisfied with high volume better than FG 50%

Dikembe was underrated probably because he wasn't a high volume scorer. I would rather have Dikembe than Mourning.

Both of you underrate Mourning. He was much better than Mutombo and arguably better defender due to his mobility, and was a good number one for a very good Miami team.

Mourning was the offensive #1 option for only his first season in Miami when he led the team to a bottom 6 offense.

[70sFan]

In the 1990s I would rather have Mourning. Too many good big centers in the 1990s i don't think Cowens is big enough to be a center but he would still be a great power forward.

Cowens is roughly as tall as Mourning.

No disrespect to guys like Sam Lacy that are now forgotten but were not jokes. Cowens dominating the guys of his day was not a joke.
I love Kareem especially young mobile hungry Kareembut as Kareem gold older many times I thought Kareem's will to battle with physical guys was inconsistan; so I am not going to infer that Cowens limiting Kareem to merely very very good means that Cowens could handle, Hakeem, Shaq, and pre injury David Robinson.

Cowens had to deal with Wilt, Kareem, Lanier, Walton and Gilmore. All of them were significantly bigger than Hakeem and all besides Walton were heavier and more powerful than Robinson.

I don't see any problems for Cowens to play at center in the 1990s.

Basketball reference is listing Mourning as 6' 9" 230 pounds. Mourning was definitely a better shot blocker than Cowens. I Think Mourning was 2 inches taller than Cowens and a better leaper. I always thought Cowens was 6' 8", closer to Unseld's height than to Rick Robey in height. Rick Robey is my measuring stick because I watched the Celtics when Robey backed up Cowens. Then when the Celtics got Parish , Cowens retired before unretiring and being traded for Quinn Buckner. I Also saw Cowens and McAdoo play together. I thought Mcadoo was an inch to two inches taller and Robey 3 inches taller and Parrish 4 inches taller. Parish was a significant upgrade over not fully healthy old Cowens. Basketball reference is listing Parish as 7'' "1", I thought he was always 7' 0". What is so damn hard about measuring a players height. Actually measuring standing reach is probabably better than measuring height. McHale with his extra long arms played taller than his height and quicker than his foot speed.

Parish was more effective against Moses Malone and everybody else than old Cowens was. Reputation wise I think Mourning had a little more hype for his defensive reputation than Parish did. Everbody knew Parish was good but some people were going ga ga about Mourning. Mourning and Cowens may have been a little more active and scratch and claw than Parish but Parish would scratch and claw when efficient. Parish may have been more economical with his energy than Cowens and Mourning, no wasted energy from Parish.

Tom Barker, listed at 6' 11" in my mind was an inch taller than 6' 11 Robey an 4 inches taller than Cowens. You can be excused for not remember Tom Barker. I was excited about the Celtics having Tom Barker but I was wrong and Barker never really made it in the NBA.

Tom Barker February 12, 1979: Traded by the Boston Celtics with a 1979 1st round draft pick (Bill Cartwright was later selected), a 1979 1st round draft pick (Larry Demic was later selected) and a 1979 1st round draft pick (Sly Williams was later selected) to the New York Knicks for Bob McAdoo.

Bob McAdoo September 6, 1979: Traded by the Boston Celtics to the Detroit Pistons for a 1980 1st round draft pick (Rickey Brown was later selected) and a 1980 1st round draft pick (Joe Barry Carroll was later selected). This exchange was arranged as compensation for Boston signing veteran free agent M.L. Carr on July 24, 1979.

Joe Barry Carroll traded June 9, 1980: Traded by the Boston Celtics (as a future 1980 1st round draft pick) with a 1980 1st round draft pick (Rickey Brown was later selected) to the Golden State Warriors for Robert Parish and a 1980 1st round draft pick (Kevin McHale was later selected).

So your point is that Cowens was shorter than Parish? I know that, Mourning was also shorter than Parish. He was shorter than Olajuwon who was no bigger than 6'10.

Cowens and Mourning were both undersized, so I still don't see your point.

[70sFan]

Cowens peaked higher. I also think Mourning is one of the most overrated players in NBA history. If he didn't volume score inefficiently he wouldn't be seen the way he is. He was a very good defender for sure, but people think of him being something offensively that he actually wasn't. He's clearly the worst of the big 3 Hoya centers by some distance but many don't understand just how much better Deke was than him.

Mourning's first 8 years he 19 or more points per game at better than 50% shooting.
He averaged 51.5% shooting in the playoffs. He averaged over 20 points a game his first 7 playoff years.

Mourning is only high volume low efficiency vs the Bulls in the 1995 playoffs 1st round exit, Fg 42% for that series. Do you think FG 52% is low efficiency? His isn't Kevin McHale but I am sattisfied with high volume better than FG 50%

Dikembe was underrated probably because he wasn't a high volume scorer. I would rather have Dikembe than Mourning.

Both of you underrate Mourning. He was much better than Mutombo and arguably better defender due to his mobility, and was a good number one for a very good Miami team.

So you think he was better offensive player than Cowens?

[migya]

Mourning's first 8 years he 19 or more points per game at better than 50% shooting.
He averaged 51.5% shooting in the playoffs. He averaged over 20 points a game his first 7 playoff years.

Mourning is only high volume low efficiency vs the Bulls in the 1995 playoffs 1st round exit, Fg 42% for that series. Do you think FG 52% is low efficiency? His isn't Kevin McHale but I am sattisfied with high volume better than FG 50%

Dikembe was underrated probably because he wasn't a high volume scorer. I would rather have Dikembe than Mourning.

Both of you underrate Mourning. He was much better than Mutombo and arguably better defender due to his mobility, and was a good number one for a very good Miami team.

So you think he was better offensive player than Cowens?

Probably not because of passing, Cowens was good at it, but Mourning drew alot of fouls which was key to him being very effective.

[70sFan]

Both of you underrate Mourning. He was much better than Mutombo and arguably better defender due to his mobility, and was a good number one for a very good Miami team.

So you think he was better offensive player than Cowens?

Probably not because of passing, Cowens was good at it, but Mourning drew alot of fouls which was key to him being very effective.

True, drawing fouls is significant advantage.

[ronnymac2]

Cowens was actually very good at defending pick-n-roll. He had a great motor and could move laterally better than Mourning. I think you could argue that in this era, Cowens would be the superior defensive C. Mourning's finishing and foul draw vs. Cowens' superior passing is interesting on offense. Depends what you need from a C ultimately. These are very different players.

I'll take Mourning in the 90's. Probably value rim-protection more.

In the 1970's, I think both flourish. Hard to not take Cowens, especially off those Celtic teams. His passing was crucial for that squad.

[homecourtloss]

Cowens was actually very good at defending pick-n-roll. He had a great motor and could move laterally better than Mourning. I think you could argue that in this era, Cowens would be the superior defensive C. Mourning's finishing and foul draw vs. Cowens' superior passing is interesting on offense. Depends what you need from a C ultimately. These are very different players.

I'll take Mourning in the 90's. Probably value rim-protection more.

In the 1970's, I think both flourish. Hard to not take Cowens, especially off those Celtic teams. His passing was crucial for that squad.

I rate both Cowens and Mourning highly. Mourning has some great impact numbers backing him.

Cowens played a modern game back on the ‘70s—a highly skilled, high motor, unselfish player who did things all over the court.

—he could challenge on guards on the perimeter
—he had endless motor that would be even more effective when playing shorter minutes (pace in his day was fast so he was running up down the court all game while playing heavy minutes)
—ran in transition extremely well
—was really strong and could defend inside even when young and looked more wiry than solid
—great hands
—great positioner for rebounds, had great rebound instincts
—not the greatest rim protector but did contest shots well and had good length
—could dribble and position himself for that beautiful lefty jumpshot
—was a very good free throw shooter and midrange shooter who, I think, could develop a three point shot for today’s game
—had tremendous upcourt instincts perfect for the game at the time. I love watching highlights of him grab rebounds and turn his head to look upcourt before he even lands with the ball
—very good passer, great outlet passer

[70sFan]

Cowens was actually very good at defending pick-n-roll. He had a great motor and could move laterally better than Mourning. I think you could argue that in this era, Cowens would be the superior defensive C. Mourning's finishing and foul draw vs. Cowens' superior passing is interesting on offense. Depends what you need from a C ultimately. These are very different players.

I'll take Mourning in the 90's. Probably value rim-protection more.

In the 1970's, I think both flourish. Hard to not take Cowens, especially off those Celtic teams. His passing was crucial for that squad.

I rate both Cowens and Mourning highly. Mourning has some great impact numbers backing him.

Cowens played a modern game back on the ‘70s—a highly skilled, high motor, unselfish player who did things all over the court.

—he could challenge on guards on the perimeter
—he had endless motor that would be even more effective when playing shorter minutes (pace in his day was fast so he was running up down the court all game while playing heavy minutes)
—ran in transition extremely well
—was really strong and could defend inside even when young and looked more wiry than solid
—great hands
—great positioner for rebounds, had great rebound instincts
—not the greatest rim protector but did contest shots well and had good length
—could dribble and position himself for that beautiful lefty jumpshot
—was a very good free throw shooter and midrange shooter who, I think, could develop a three point shot for today’s game
—had tremendous upcourt instincts perfect for the game at the time. I love watching highlights of him grab rebounds and turn his head to look upcourt before he even lands with the ball
—very good passer, great outlet passer

Perfect summary of Cowens game. He's one of the players you see as much better than their raw boxscore stats suggest once you start looking deeper at the tape.

[homecourtloss]

Cowens was actually very good at defending pick-n-roll. He had a great motor and could move laterally better than Mourning. I think you could argue that in this era, Cowens would be the superior defensive C. Mourning's finishing and foul draw vs. Cowens' superior passing is interesting on offense. Depends what you need from a C ultimately. These are very different players.

I'll take Mourning in the 90's. Probably value rim-protection more.

In the 1970's, I think both flourish. Hard to not take Cowens, especially off those Celtic teams. His passing was crucial for that squad.

I rate both Cowens and Mourning highly. Mourning has some great impact numbers backing him.

Cowens played a modern game back on the ‘70s—a highly skilled, high motor, unselfish player who did things all over the court.

—he could challenge on guards on the perimeter
—he had endless motor that would be even more effective when playing shorter minutes (pace in his day was fast so he was running up down the court all game while playing heavy minutes)
—ran in transition extremely well
—was really strong and could defend inside even when young and looked more wiry than solid
—great hands
—great positioner for rebounds, had great rebound instincts
—not the greatest rim protector but did contest shots well and had good length
—could dribble and position himself for that beautiful lefty jumpshot
—was a very good free throw shooter and midrange shooter who, I think, could develop a three point shot for today’s game
—had tremendous upcourt instincts perfect for the game at the time. I love watching highlights of him grab rebounds and turn his head to look upcourt before he even lands with the ball
—very good passer, great outlet passer

Perfect summary of Cowens game. He's one of the players you see as much better than their raw boxscore stats suggest once you start looking deeper at the tape.

Would love to have play-by-play data from all these years—I’m convinced Cowens would show up high on RPM/RAPM/EPM etc., boards.

[trex_8063]

Basketball reference is listing Mourning as 6' 9" 230 pounds. Mourning was definitely a better shot blocker than Cowens. I Think Mourning was 2 inches taller than Cowens and a better leaper. I always thought Cowens was 6' 8", closer to Unseld's height than to Rick Robey in height.

bbref lists Mourning as 6'10". It lists Cowens as 6'9". But despite Cowens playing in an era where they tended to NOT embellish player height, and Mourning playing in an era where they DID, you nonetheless are saying the gap is even LARGER?

Seems as though you're disregarding evidence to qualify a pre-conceived impression you've held.

For visual evidence (while I'll admit they're not standing up straight in the majority of the following):

Cowens next to Dr. J [listed as 6'7"]....

.....Note Cowens looks just as tall as [if not a smidge taller than] Dr. J's Afro.


Cowens next to Nate Thurmond [6'11"]...

.....Does he look 3" shorter?


Cowens next to Tom Boerwinkle [7'0"]....

.....4" shorter?


Cowens next to Doug Collins [6'6"]....

.....only 2" taller?


Cowens opposite Darryl Dawkins [6'11"]....

......3" shorter?


Cowens next to Tom Heinsohn [6'7"]....

.....Does he look only 1" taller?


For comparison:

Mourning [standing straight] next to a marginally stooped [and old] John Thompson [6'10"] and Pat Riley [6'4"]:


Next to 6'6" Michael Jordan:

[70sFan]

I rate both Cowens and Mourning highly. Mourning has some great impact numbers backing him.

Cowens played a modern game back on the ‘70s—a highly skilled, high motor, unselfish player who did things all over the court.

—he could challenge on guards on the perimeter
—he had endless motor that would be even more effective when playing shorter minutes (pace in his day was fast so he was running up down the court all game while playing heavy minutes)
—ran in transition extremely well
—was really strong and could defend inside even when young and looked more wiry than solid
—great hands
—great positioner for rebounds, had great rebound instincts
—not the greatest rim protector but did contest shots well and had good length
—could dribble and position himself for that beautiful lefty jumpshot
—was a very good free throw shooter and midrange shooter who, I think, could develop a three point shot for today’s game
—had tremendous upcourt instincts perfect for the game at the time. I love watching highlights of him grab rebounds and turn his head to look upcourt before he even lands with the ball
—very good passer, great outlet passer

Perfect summary of Cowens game. He's one of the players you see as much better than their raw boxscore stats suggest once you start looking deeper at the tape.

Would love to have play-by-play data from all these years—I’m convinced Cowens would show up high on RPM/RAPM/EPM etc., boards.

Me too, especially for the 1970s. We had a lot of guys that looked like high impact players despite low boxscore numbers - Cowens, Thurmond, Unseld and even lesser guys like Lacey or Boerwinkle. It would be interesting to see who ranks the highest out of them.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Article on Cowens by Bob Ryan who I think was writing for the Boston Globe, and Covering the Celtics and Red Sox when Cowens played. http://lexnihilnovi.blogspot.com/2008/09/blog-post.html

Ryan says Cowens was 6' 8" 1/2

Alonzo Mourning
https://www.olympedia.org/athletes/82807
Presumably from his Olympic measurements
Just over 6' 9" so only a 1/2 inch taller than Cowens

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/333196072416669346/
Photo makes Cowens look only a 1/2 inch taller than Havilcek
But Cowens is a lttle further from the camera, and Jo Jo white comes out not looking much shorter than Cowens