Bob Cousy claps back at JJ Redick

[dhsilv2]

Before Cousy came back for a cup of coffee, he retired in his mid 30's which is old for PG standards. I believe pretty much everyone at that age who took their conditions seriously except for perhaps world class sprinters probably on steroids gets a little slower.

Look at Cousy's last 4 years shooting free throws compared to his previous 4 years and I believe that largely explains his drop off in TS%+. He probably just legitimately lost a little shooting touch but in the areas of the court, unguarded the free throw line, he went from nearly 84% on average during a 4 year period to a little over 76% during a 4 year period. Unless I am mistaken that in itself will impact the numbers.

That really has very little to do with caliber of competition but perhaps an aging player who put in a little less work since the Celtics were winning titles every year anyways.

He retired at 33-34 and then came back at 40 for a VERY short stint in cincinnati. Again we see the first huge drop in 1958 when he shot 85% from the line, that's the 92 TS%+. We we JUST look at field goal percentage relative to the league.

51 99
52 101
53 95
54 103
55 103
56 93
57 100
58 92
59 97
60 94
61 90
62 92
63 90

So we see a similar pattern all be it, his free throw shooting enhanced his results in a few down years, but again the same basic pattern starts showing up. Keep in mind the first african americans to play in the NBA came in roughly when Cousy was entering the league in 51 (I believe the celtics drafted the first african american, but I don't think he played. Either way I believe that's roughly true). And obviously by the end of his career the league had a significant number of men of color playing. The NBA was rapidly changing over his career, perhaps more so than any other period in league history.

Just a side note but as we are pointing out his all nba selections. The 23 year old, all nba first team, point guard in 1951 (his rookie year), Ralph Beard, was banned from the NBA. We've really never had anything like that. The guy that should have been competing with Cousy for best point guard in the early 50's, at 23 years old and already seen as the best point in the game, banned for life.

If your claim is that the rest of the league got better at scoring but Cousy stood still, then go for it. His FG% his last 2 seasons were the third-best and best (tie with 1954-5) of his career. But frankly his scoring stats seem very steady for numbers that would naturally be influenced by changes in teammates, scheme and so on.

Relative to league is the ONLY thing that matters....

[dhsilv2]

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

I wasn't the person who came up with this and did the research originally. I've watched footage, what we have, and it more than passes the sniff test. He doesn't look that different in the 50's moving, and he retired at 33...not sure I'd call that mid 30's.

Keep in mind TS%+ for Bob

52-57 he's 100-105, which is decent. Then at 29....

58 - 92
59 - 99 (not bad actually)
60 - 95
61 - 93
62 - 92
63 - 91

This also consigns with the Boston team dropping in offensive efficiency (the reason Cousy was seen so highly). Now I'll go ahead and counter with, they didn't really get better offensively without Cousy either. Either way, I struggle with a poor defensive point guard (and I believe that was the view on Cousy before Russell, and certainly the celtics were the worst defense in the league before BIll) who's calling card was offense running the worst offense in the league a number of years while still making all nba teams. It just screams his name and his team success was driving his selections and as the league got better around him, he became increasingly poor at scoring relative to his peers.

He retired in the summer of 1963 at the age of 35, so yeah, he was in his mid 30s.

His statistics were very consistent through 1960. At that point he was 32, which is famously the age that most guards noticeably start to accelerate their decline. There was nothing unusual about his career trajectory in that sense.

For some reason i had his age off a on the last year, nothing changes is drastic drop off at 29 however.

[Bush4Ever]

Why do people get so confused on this topic?

1. Bob Cousy was *relative to peers*, an all-time great, HOFer, probably back end of the top 10 PGs ever, etc...(albeit in a league with significantly less overall talent).

2. Bob Cousy in *absolute terms*, time-machined to 2022, would not make an NBA roster, or even come close. No, not because of private jets and high-top sneakers...but because his game itself would be lacking.

3. The *reason* why number two above is true is (mostly) evolution in science, training, tech, medicine, and basketball itself (independent of the other factors), etc...which are not aspects anyone can control over time, especially early in a sport's tenure (1960 vs. 1990 is not the same as 1990 vs 2020 for example)

4. Number three is why we rank Cousy highly all-time, while acknowledging the truth value (hopefully) of number two.

Basketball is so weird in that there seems to be a constant pull in most places to devalue the present and uplift the past. If the players of today weren't better in absolute terms with the benefit of all these advances, it would imply they would be *wildly* behind the old school if everything was on an even playing field, which is disrespectful and silly.

Respect the ballers. We all stand on the shoulders of giants...but the people standing on the shoulders of giants *are* (figuratively) taller than the giants (maybe we should say standing on the heads of giants instead--haha).

[BobbyPortisEyes]

So much for being inefficient.. he was one of the most efficient players in the league in his prime despite being a volume shooter.

[Fencer reregistered]

Why do people get so confused on this topic?

1. Bob Cousy was *relative to peers*, an all-time great, HOFer, probably back end of the top 10 PGs ever, etc...(albeit in a league with significantly less overall talent).

2. Bob Cousy in *absolute terms*, time-machined to 2022, would not make an NBA roster, or even come close. No, not because of private jets and high-top sneakers...but because his game itself would be lacking.

3. The *reason* why number two above is true is (mostly) evolution in science, training, tech, medicine, and basketball itself (independent of the other factors), etc...which are not aspects anyone can control over time, especially early in a sport's tenure (1960 vs. 1990 is not the same as 1990 vs 2020 for example)

4. Number three is why we rank Cousy highly all-time, while acknowledging the truth value (hopefully) of number two.

Basketball is so weird in that there seems to be a constant pull in most places to devalue the present and uplift the past. If the players of today weren't better in absolute terms with the benefit of all these advances, it would imply they would be *wildly* behind the old school if everything was on an even playing field, which is disrespectful and silly.

Respect the ballers. We all stand on the shoulders of giants...but the people standing on the shoulders of giants *are* (figuratively) taller than the giants (maybe we should say standing on the heads of giants instead--haha).

Perhaps even better than that. Cousy was an MVP and perennial all-NBA First Teamer. Magic, Robertson and West have strong arguments over him, and I don't think he has much of one back. But he's very competitive with anybody else: Stockton, Frazier, Kidd, Nash, Payton, et al., however you want to rank them.

And if you do go for intangibles, he was very plus on those -- rings, perceived role on championship teams, innovating styles of play, handing over team leadership graciously to Russell, starting the Player's Association, etc.

[Fencer reregistered]

So much for being inefficient.. he was one of the most efficient players in the league in his prime despite being a volume shooter.

Good point, although one of your first two columns was unnecessary.

Actually, we could have used more rows. That's just a couple of seasons, and being 15th in an 8 team isn't that big a deal.

[SalmonsSuperfan]

how good would Naismith be with modern training and medicine?

sometimes i think about that 6th century bc greek athlete bybon, son of phola, who apparently turned a 300 pound stone into a free weight and lifted it over his head with one hand. can you imagine how strong this guy would have been with 2700 years of modern training and medicine???

[Bush4Ever]

[

Perhaps even better than that. Cousy was an MVP and perennial all-NBA First Teamer. Magic, Robertson and West have strong arguments over him, and I don't think he has much of one back. But he's very competitive with anybody else: Stockton, Frazier, Kidd, Nash, Payton, et al., however you want to rank them.

And if you do go for intangibles, he was very plus on those -- rings, perceived role on championship teams, innovating styles of play, handing over team leadership graciously to Russell, starting the Player's Association, etc.

I'm a Celtics fan who obsessively read Celtics history as a kid, so I probably know more about the old-old school than the vast majority of my cohort. Cousy was great, and an interesting person to boot. Unusually thoughtful and reflective for a basketball player.

I think the three aspects that sort of work against Cousy on that front are the smallness of the league combined with a relative lack of team accomplishment before Bill Russell (winning only two playoff series in I think six years...albeit in an 8-team league), combined with the Celtics generally having below-average offenses during the title seasons.

Getting all-stars/all-NBA/MVP top 5 ranks, etc...is harder in a 30 team league with 60 starting guards than an 8 team league with 16 starting guards.

The offensive rank of the Celtics during the title seasons were:
5/8
5/8
5/8
8/8
7/9
9/9

With all the usual caveats about cross-era comparisons, I would say:

Unquestionably above, no argument possible (IMO)
Magic
Curry
Oscar
West (if he counts as a PG)

Decidedly above, maybe small arguments required
Paul
Stockton
Nash (I'm higher on Nash than most)

Debatable, 50/50
Kidd
Isiah (I'm lower on Isiah than almost everyone)

Probably below, but maybe not 100 percent certainty
Payton
Frazier
Parker

[BobbyPortisEyes]

So much for being inefficient.. he was one of the most efficient players in the league in his prime despite being a volume shooter.

Good point, although one of your first two columns was unnecessary.

Actually, we could have used more rows. That's just a couple of seasons, and being 15th in an 8 team isn't that big a deal.

He was the most efficient PG and second most efficient guard (behind Bill Sharman) in one of those seasons. Add to that the fact that he took the second most shots that season too and "shot selection" wasn't much of a thing back then. Not saying his efficiency was amazing but it's enough to say JJ Redick's criticism about it was pretty badly off the mark.

[NO-KG-AI]

I’ve pulled a 180 on Redick. Used to really like him, but now I think he’s a disrespectful d bag for his comments about the past generation. I hate people who don’t appreciate and show respect for those who paved the way for you. Comes off like an entitled ass wipe these days.

It's more hilarious because they used to make it all about the overwhelming athleticism of these supermen today. Now that you have guys like Jokic, Doncic, Steph etc the goalposts shift lol.

[Blame Rasho]

In full disclosure, I don't think Cousy would be anything special to tell you the truth if you were to put him with today's players. I don't think he is a transcendent player like some of his peers in Pettit, Russell,Wilt,Robertson, and Baylor to name a few. It is funny how he doesn’t mention the no names of that era. Cousy was a great player relatively in his era due to the poor level of competition and skills needed to excel at his position and with that perspective and thus I don't have a high opinion of him. The fact that he could dribble with both hands in an era where most players could only do it with one hand really isn't something that I hold to a high regard. You take him off the Celtics, where does all his tangible accomplishments go? If he was playing with another team with lesser talent than the Celtics, he very well might have been irrelevant when people discuss great players of that era. You could say that if any player of that era was a ballhogging chucker, it was him.

I remember sometime back that there was a Tony Parker debate and I was just kinda indifferent to what some people were saying. Some people were rating Cousy levels above Parker but I guess people like their own team players without the context of eras. Parker shot over 50 percent various year and led the nba in points in the paint several times but would get killed in the 50s? How do you think Cousy would handle it compared to Parker?

Basketball and sports in general is an evolving sport. You really can’t compare players across eras. Boxing as an example, two guys literally fighting each other. Pretty basic right? Wrong. There are somethings even in boxing you can’t do.You can’t compare fighters who fought having same day weigh in fights and those who didn’t. You can’t compare 15 round fighters to 12 round fighters. You can’t really compare fighters who only fought the standard weight classes(135,147,160, 175, and then heavyweight) to fighters all the non traditional weight classes(140,156,168, below 200 aka cruiserweight) that came later.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

What I find interesting is that you wouldn't read the same kind of disrespectful takes about Pele or Di Stefano.
I think basketball is a game where the evolution is more visible, but I can tell you football changed almost the same.

___
Sent from my Nokia 3210 using RealGM mobile app

[Blame Rasho]

What I find interesting is that you wouldn't read the same kind of disrespectful takes about Pele or Di Stefano.
I think basketball is a game where the evolution is more visible, but I can tell you football changed almost the same.

___
Sent from my Nokia 3210 using RealGM mobile app

I think a lot of people don’t step back and put the totality of circumstances. I mean during the World Cup, a lot of people were up in arms with god forbid a cooling break being implemented. I think that is absolutely needed this coming World Cup.

Look at American football and wide receiver gloves that greatly assist on catching footballs.

Baseball with materials during deadball era.

We can go on and on, people can have their opinion but put into context why they think that.

[soxfan2003]

A minor factor but a bunch of minor factors add up. In the days of Bob Cousy, probably plenty of players wearing Chuck Taylors and other shoes like that. Cousy started off with Chuck Taylor's and then endorsed a different shoe. Having played with and without Chuck Taylor's, there is no doubt in my mind that the modern shoes are much easier to play with from cutting to even jumping.

Chuck Taylor's are fairly good basketball shoes for running straight ahead but today's players obviously have it much better with modern shoes replaced every couple of games.

[dhsilv2]

So much for being inefficient.. he was one of the most efficient players in the league in his prime despite being a volume shooter.

Good point, although one of your first two columns was unnecessary.

Actually, we could have used more rows. That's just a couple of seasons, and being 15th in an 8 team isn't that big a deal.

He was the most efficient PG and second most efficient guard (behind Bill Sharman) in one of those seasons. Add to that the fact that he took the second most shots that season too and "shot selection" wasn't much of a thing back then. Not saying his efficiency was amazing but it's enough to say JJ Redick's criticism about it was pretty badly off the mark.

TS% rank (second is number of players who qualified for ranking)

1956 - 27th of 66 nba players
1957 - 25th of 67
1958 - 48th of 66
1959 - 35th of 68
1960 - 46th of 65
1961 - 46th of 64
1962 - 51st of 70
1963 - 59th of 69

The thing to note here is that his TS% didn't "fall off" as much as the league just passed him by. Case and point his TS% in 63 was a hair above his career TS%.

[Big J]

Cousy clapped them cheeks.

[NZB2323]

Bob Cousy won an MVP award, and will always be ranked higher than JJ, but I think Cousy was in a better position than any other point guard in league history. Bill Russell would block the hall to him and he’d have Havlicek and Sam Jones running the wings. For that reason, and the fact that basketball players weren’t as athletic or skilled when Cousy played is why I don’t have him as a top 10 point guard.

For point guards I’d put Magic, Curry, Oscar, Kidd, Nash, CP3, Isiah, Stockton, Payton, and Dame over him.

Simmons had him ranked at 21 in his book of basketball rankings, ahead of KG, which I think is ridiculous, but he is an all timer.

[Nate505]

Bob Cousy won an MVP award, and will always be ranked higher than JJ, but I think Cousy was in a better position than any other point guard in league history. Bill Russell would block the hall to him and he’d have Havlicek and Sam Jones running the wings. For that reason, and the fact that basketball players weren’t as athletic or skilled when Cousy played is why I don’t have him as a top 10 point guard.

For point guards I’d put Magic, Curry, Oscar, Kidd, Nash, CP3, Isiah, Stockton, Payton, and Dame over him.

Simmons had him ranked at 21 in his book of basketball rankings, ahead of KG, which I think is ridiculous, but he is an all timer.

It's totally reasonable to believe that Cousy would be a horrible player if we could transport the 28 year old version and put him on an NBA court now. It's totally reasonable to believe Paul would absolutely crush the league if you put even the 37 version of him in a time machine and transported him back to 1955. It's totally reasonable to believe that Cousy is not a top 10 PG of all time. It's also totally reasonable to believe that even if he was born into modern training that he would suck and not make the league now or be a lower level player in the league.

What's unreasonable is this idea that NBA players, even back then, were just a group of plumbers and fireman who got together once a week for their basketball side gig that day, and that Cousy was part of some team that went around playing groups of plumbers and fireman in some sort of barnstorming tour.

[binjumper]

Redick's been great overall on TV but didn't agree with his comments re: cousy. People love to play the time machine game, but it's a complete hypothetical. There's no shame in what players accomplished against the players they actually faced. Cousy is still an all time great in that regard.

Cool but he didn't diss the great which are the only people Cousy mentioned. It was the scrubs. If you watch the footage current NBA players will destroy anyone on that court. You don't have enforcers or strong guys anymore. You actually need skill beyond being tall and strong now.

[shotsquatch]

Pro sports can only be appreciated in the context of their time.

The basketball Cousy played in the fifties is unrecognizable today. Watch two minutes of this game and tell me with a straight face that these players are on the same planet as modern NBA athletes:

Watch on YouTube

I see better play on a weekly basis at my local rec league.

Cousy was great -- for his time. And his time is long, long past.

JJ is right.