Bob Cousy claps back at JJ Redick

Fencer reregistered · Post #221 » by **Fencer reregistered** » Sat May 21, 2022 2:30 pm

Fencer reregistered · Post #222 » by **Fencer reregistered** » Sat May 21, 2022 2:41 pm

This is kind of hilarious: Cousy, in business clothes, 66 years old, running dialogue with Nick Nolte on a film set, and hitting a whole lot of FTs in a row.

Watch on YouTube

Pantsman · Post #223 » by **Pantsman** » Sat May 21, 2022 2:54 pm

Modern nba players would be burned at the stake and accused of witchcraft if they played in the 50s.

KembaWalker · Post #224 » by **KembaWalker** » Sat May 21, 2022 3:34 pm

Pantsman wrote:Modern nba players would be burned at the stake and accused of witchcraft if they played in the 50s.

People would just be confused about why they're breaking literally every rule in the book every time down the floor. NBA players now can't even catch and shoot a ball without shuffling their feet to get "set". Let alone the dribbling, traveling etc

Curmudgeon · Post #225 » by **Curmudgeon** » Sat May 21, 2022 3:39 pm

KembaWalker wrote:
Pantsman wrote:Modern nba players would be burned at the stake and accused of witchcraft if they played in the 50s.

People would just be confused about why they're breaking literally every rule in the book every time down the floor. NBA players now can't even catch and shoot a ball without shuffling their feet to get "set". Let alone the dribbling, traveling etc

Yes. Most modern NBA players would average 20 turnovers a game. They would also lose plenty of teeth after showboating a few times. In the 50's players were just players, not entertainment properties protected by the league.

dhsilv2 · Post #226 » by **dhsilv2** » Sat May 21, 2022 4:02 pm

DavidSterned wrote:
dhsilv2 wrote:
Fencer reregistered wrote:
He fell from First Team All-NBA to Second Team his last two seasons, when he was 33 and 34 years old, with the guys ahead of him being Oscar Robertson and Jerry West.

Big collapse.

because all nba teams were SOOOO good back then, lol.

You literally just wrote that he was showing his lack of athleticism by the 1960s, which implies that relative to the rest of the league at that time he was looking limited. And yet he was clearly still considered a top PG in the league when he first retired in 1962-63. Can't have it both ways dude.

I address the mental aspect of the game that improves with age. I addressed that the selections for teams was poor. I'm not sure what more you want here. I stated his decline (or more directly, the improvement in athletic talent in the league) dropped him from a guy with MVP talent in the mid 50's to an allstar by the 60's.

But hey, just watch this game and tell me Cousy doesn't stand out as one of the least athletic guys on the floor.

Watch on YouTube

Snowwy · Post #227 » by **Snowwy** » Sat May 21, 2022 4:15 pm

Lalouie wrote:jj doesn't make the nba 40-60 years ago so of course he's all in on today's game

Are you saying that if Reddick was alive at another era he would not have been in the NBA? You need to watch a game from that era. Plenty in this thread. :crazy:

Optms · Post #228 » by **Optms** » Sat May 21, 2022 4:18 pm

vital_signs wrote:Bunch of people that weren't around when Cousy played taking his side to be edgy and sound historical. JJ wouldn't make the nba back then? Foh

No he wouldn't. He was barely a roster lock during the 00's and if you look at the trajectory of his career and when the game became nothing but 3's, his production increased and he became more production into his 30's.

Did he actually get better? No. The game changed and so 3 pointers became in. Therefor his production increased and so did his role/value. But JJ played in 2 different eras.

One era, he was barely an 8th man on the roster and the next he was a starting caliber player. Put him in an era where the 3 ball is meaningless and he is useless. This is because JJ was nothing more than a 3 point specialist. He had no other notable skills.

DavidSterned · Post #229 » by **DavidSterned** » Sat May 21, 2022 5:30 pm

dhsilv2 wrote:
DavidSterned wrote:
dhsilv2 wrote:
because all nba teams were SOOOO good back then, lol.

You literally just wrote that he was showing his lack of athleticism by the 1960s, which implies that relative to the rest of the league at that time he was looking limited. And yet he was clearly still considered a top PG in the league when he first retired in 1962-63. Can't have it both ways dude.

I address the mental aspect of the game that improves with age. I addressed that the selections for teams was poor. I'm not sure what more you want here. I stated his decline (or more directly, the improvement in athletic talent in the league) dropped him from a guy with MVP talent in the mid 50's to an allstar by the 60's.

But hey, just watch this game and tell me Cousy doesn't stand out as one of the least athletic guys on the floor.

Watch on YouTube

Or, just going out on a huge limb here, it was him going from his 20s to his mid 30s.

First Step · Post #230 » by **First Step** » Sat May 21, 2022 5:37 pm

Watch on YouTube

Jcity08 · Post #231 » by **Jcity08** » Sat May 21, 2022 6:15 pm

Ive always been confused about the era discussions, it usually sounds like taking a modern player with all their training, knowledge, nutrition...ect...ect...and the prebuilt advantages of today and then saying they'd dominate in an era that didnt have any of those advantages. Like if Lebron as he is currently walks into a Time Machine and goes to the 60s. Of course he'll find success.

But that doesnt seem like a charitable way to go about that discussion IMO. If Lebron grew up under the same conditions, limitations and barriers players faced during the 50s/60s, would he be able to dominate? Maybe, probably but the question becomes more nuanced.

Nate505 · Post #232 » by **Nate505** » Sat May 21, 2022 6:26 pm

I still don't understand the fireman and plumber comment. It's so dumb, yet the other morons on the show were agreeing with it (including the Master Moron of Ceremonies, SAS). Like I really think those dopes believe that if Ms. Thompson's sink were leaking on a game day that these players would be rushing over to fix it instead of earning their decent NBA salary at the time.

It's like they just can't believe that guys would have part time jobs in the off season. I mean, if I were making $65k for half the year (or however long the NBA season was), why wouldn't I be working part time during the off season? Are you supposed to just twiddle your thumbs and do nothing for the other six months? I get that modern players train all year round now, but that's because the financial incentive to do so is huge. It just wasn't as huge then.

The better point that could be made is that when the NBA was founded, there were probably talented players who didn't join the league because there were better job opportunities for them after they played college ball that paid a lot more, and they probably preferred to get started in that industry than to pay a fairly well paying job but in a league that may or may not exist in a few years.

Curmudgeon · Post #233 » by **Curmudgeon** » Sat May 21, 2022 6:50 pm

1962-3 was Cousy's thirteenth and last year in the league (except for his very brief stint in 1969 when he was coaching the Kings). Yes, he had lost what athleticism he had as a younger player.

It was just a different game in 1950, when Cousy entered the league, as opposed to when he left. There were no Black stars until Russell and Chamberlain. with the possible exception of Sweetwater Clifton, a 6-5 forward who never averaged more than 13 points a game. But by 1963, the year Cousy retired, Black stars dominated the league: Russell, Chamberlain, Baylor, Robertson, Green, Grier, Embry, Bellamy, Wilkins and Rodgers were all-stars in 1963. At least half of those players would be all-stars today.

Post #234 » by **slick_watts** » Sat May 21, 2022 8:18 pm

j.j. made a stupid, hamfisted comment but personally i don't pay much attention to basketball prior to the merger. it was like a different sport. i consider it a historical curiosity.

KyRo23 · Post #235 » by **KyRo23** » Sat May 21, 2022 8:32 pm

Someone really said JJ wouldn't make the NBA in that era :lol:

D.Brasco · Post #236 » by **D.Brasco** » Sat May 21, 2022 9:07 pm

slick_watts wrote:j.j. made a stupid, hamfisted comment but personally i don't pay much attention to basketball prior to the merger. it was like a different sport. i consider it a historical curiosity.

You don't think people will say the same thing (some do) about the NBA before the emergence of the primacy of the 3 point game over the the last 5+ years?

Individual players today average more 3 point attempts than whole teams did in the 80s and 90s. Radically different game from that angle. Play from the 60s to the early 2000s might be more similar than today from the stand point of dominant post playing big men and mid-range jump shooters.

Every era of basketball leads into the next, they are all the same game in the big picture.

Post #237 » by **slick_watts** » Sat May 21, 2022 9:47 pm

D.Brasco wrote:
slick_watts wrote:j.j. made a stupid, hamfisted comment but personally i don't pay much attention to basketball prior to the merger. it was like a different sport. i consider it a historical curiosity.

You don't think people will say the same thing (some do) about the NBA before the emergence of the primacy of the 3 point game over the the last 5+ years?

no.

Post #238 » by **tsherkin** » Sat May 21, 2022 9:49 pm

I kinda wish Cousy had been the bigger man here.

Post #239 » by **zimpy27** » Sat May 21, 2022 10:15 pm

The players of today are nothing compared to the players of 2050.. I'm a big fan of those 2050 players

Fencer reregistered · Post #240 » by **Fencer reregistered** » Sat May 21, 2022 10:28 pm

Nate505 wrote:The better point that could be made is that when the NBA was founded, there were probably talented players who didn't join the league because there were better job opportunities for them after they played college ball that paid a lot more, and they probably preferred to get started in that industry than to pay a fairly well paying job but in a league that may or may not exist in a few years.

Sam Jones' obituaries suggested that his choice between joining the Celtics and a teaching career could have gone the other way if one of the annual salaries had been $500 different.

I don't know what an exactly correct inflation multiplier would be on that, but 10X is probably close enough for the sake of discussion