Re: Talking about "Bigs"

by **swish** Wed Jul 12, 2017 5:40 pm

!956-57 vs 2016-17

Race and speed-quickness and field goal shooting percentages for players 6'7" and less.

Race - 1956-57 - 26 of 30 players white Americans - 86.6%
2016-17 - 4 of 78 players white Americans - 5.0%
Shooting - 2 point field goal percentages
1956-57 - 30 total players - shot .450 or better - 0 of 30 - shot under .400 - 22 of 30
2016-17 - 78 total players - shot .450 or better - 65 of 78 - shot under .400 - 0 of 78

Note: Ball handling skills 1956-57
Use of off shooting hand - Sparingly at best by most.
2016-17 - Off the charts

swish

by **dboss** Wed Jul 12, 2017 5:44 pm

I wanted to mention that yesterday i started watching some film on Cowens. If you get a chance google them. These are not those old 1960's grainy black and white hightlights. i was watching them and they were getting up and down the court faster than the Celtics do today.

Have you looked at Cowens stats in minutes per game. These guys now can barely play over 35 MPG. Back then the game was more physical as well.

I was really amazed at his conditioning, strength, tenacity, skill level inside and out.

I think if he was coming out of college even in a 1970 body he would definitely be able to play in today's game.

dboss

by **swish** Wed Jul 12, 2017 6:53 pm

Dboss

If your not taking the time to analyze the statistical performance level of each generation in comparison to other generations, I think you might be missing my point. I loved every minute of the Russell years - I loved every minute of the Cowens years. It was fantastic basketball by great basketball players. My opinion of the greats of the distant pass is the same for football, hockey, tennis and the Olympics as it is for basketball. Fantastic during their time but newer generations come along and continue to build on the foundation of the past. You sure can see it in the numbers that I just posted - and there's more to come.

swish

by **dboss** Wed Jul 12, 2017 8:20 pm

Swish I know how much you love stats but one of your illustrations use per 36 minutes stats. Cowens played 40 or more minutes in 5 seasons.

Find a current player that does that.

Your analysis may be flawed.

dboss

by **swish** Wed Jul 12, 2017 8:47 pm

Dboss

I generally use 36 minutes when dealing with different generations. It levels the playing field when dealing with the 50's, 60's and 70's when it was a common practice to play 40 plus minutes a game. This of course resulted in much higher per game averages. I recall Auerbach commenting on the high number of minutes back then - which he attributed to the huge drop off in talent between the starters and the subs. And by the way - they could have played in gowns and tuxedos during the Russell years back when there was so little contact. A good comparison would be touch football vs tackle football.

swish

by **cowens/oldschool** Thu Jul 13, 2017 1:45 am

Hey swish could Michael Jordan or Larry Bird play in this era? How about Clyde Drexler or Scottie Pippen? Kobe could play and there's a great game where Kobe went for 33 against an old Jordan on the Wizards and Jordan went for 36 in that game at 39 years of age. So guess Jordan could play, do you know what Birds record was against Jordan at one time? At one time including the 86 and 87 sweeps against the Bulls in the playoffs, the Bird Celtics had an 18-3 record against Jordan's Bulls. Guess Bird could play too and there's a great video of Bird in 88 hitting a game winning turnaround jumper over Pippen and Jordan leaping on his shooting hand. Some great players have a dunk over a great player, Bird has buzzer beaters over every great player in his era.

So I saw your stats proving players are getting bigger, can anybody explain how that means they have better basketball ability? Bird retired in 92, that's 25 years ago, let's say thats at least 2 generations. So according to your size and weight stats, how does that prove Bird or Jordan or Drexler or Pippen couldn't play today?

by **cowens/oldschool** Thu Jul 13, 2017 8:51 am

I've seen nothing in your stats that show how you measure the timing in jumping to snatch rebounds or ability to create your own shot or ability to read a play either end or hit clutch shots etc. So according to your measurements of size, guess Mark Eaton or James Donaldson would be able to dominate any era cause unless I'm mistaken all your going with is size and weight which does not measure shooting touch, balance, running ability, etc. Wasn't Kelly Olynck taller with more weight than Dave Cowens, he's must be better right? Whatever your basing your logic/standards on to judge players is very flawed.

by **cowens/oldschool** Thu Jul 13, 2017 4:37 pm

Let's see the best big on GS's best line up is 6'7" Draymond Green playing with Durant, Igoudala, Thompson and Curry. Cavs best line up has Tristian Thompson at 6'9" playing 5.....nah according to swish Cowens wouldn't be as effective today.

by **swish** Thu Jul 13, 2017 9:09 pm

Below is a corrected stat sheet for the 1975-76 season. Puts it in line with my 1956-57 and 2016-17 stat sheets which included all center players - not just those that were 6'9" or taller.

http://bkref.com/tiny/UkQ7L

7 players shot .500 or better
Average weight 225.0 lbs
American white players - 6'7" or shorter - 18 of 54 were white - .333%

swish

by **swish** Thu Jul 13, 2017 9:15 pm

Oldschool,

I haven't had a chance to get back to you - real busy today. Looking forward to responding to all your comments tomorrow.

swish

by **cowens/oldschool** Thu Jul 13, 2017 10:13 pm

All good swish

by **swish** Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:06 pm

cowens/oldschool wrote:All good swish

Sorry for the delay in responding to your post. Here are some numbers from the league pitting the Russell led Celtics of the 1956-57 against the Celtic led Cowens of 1975-76 - in 3 vital stat categories that are constants over the decades.
Weight, Race, Shooting Percentages . Note: All players listed are front court players from 6'8" to 7'7", minutes played per year of at least 600, minutes played at least 9 per game, 2 point field goal percentage of at least .250 listing those that shot at least .500 and those that shot at least .450.

The 1956-57 Champ Celts against below (League averages)
* Weight : 18 qualifying players averaged 211.2 lbs
* Race : 18 qualifying players - 15 of them white Americans - 83.3%
* Field goal percentages : 18 qualifying players - Shot .500 or better = 0 - shot .450 or better = 0

The 1975-76 champ Celts against below (League averages)
Weight : 65 qualifying players averaged 219.3 lbs
Race : 65 qualifying players - 21 of them white American - 33.3%
Field goal percentages : 65 qualifying players - Shot .500 or better = 9 of 65 = 13,8% - shot .450 or better = 39 = 60 %

Cowens and the 75-76 Celts with a big level of play edge over the Russell 1956-57 led Celtics Celts. What a difference about 20 years made as the quality of basketball made huge advancements.

swish

by **swish** Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:43 pm

swish wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:All good swish

Sorry for the delay in responding to your post. Here are some numbers from the league pitting the Russell led Celtics of the 1956-57 against the Celtic led Cowens of 1975-76 - in 3 vital stat categories that are constants over the decades.
Weight, Race, Shooting Percentages . Note: All players listed are front court players from 6'8" to 7'7", minutes played per year of at least 600, minutes played at least 9 per game, 2 point field goal percentage of at least .250 listing those that shot at least .500 and those that shot at least .450.

The 1956-57 Champ Celts against below (League averages)
* Weight : 18 qualifying players averaged 211.2 lbs
* Race : 18 qualifying players - 15 of them white Americans - 83.3%
* Field goal percentages : 18 qualifying players - Shot .500 or better = 0 - shot .450 or better = 0

The 1975-76 champ Celts against below (League averages)
Weight : 65 qualifying players averaged 219.3 lbs
Race : 65 qualifying players - 21 of them white American - 33.3%
Field goal percentages : 65 qualifying players - Shot .500 or better = 9 of 65 = 13,8% - shot .450 or better = 39 = 60 %

Cowens and the 75-76 Celts with a big level of play edge over the Russell 1956-57 led Celtics Celts. What a difference about 20 years made as the quality of basketball made huge advancements.

swish

And here's the stats numbers for the 1956-57 league.

http://bkref.com/tiny/5hQ8R

swish

by **swish** Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:47 pm

swish wrote:
swish wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:All good swish

Sorry for the delay in responding to your post. Here are some numbers from the league pitting the Russell led Celtics of the 1956-57 against the Celtic led Cowens of 1975-76 - in 3 vital stat categories that are constants over the decades.
Weight, Race, Shooting Percentages . Note: All players listed are front court players from 6'8" to 7'7", minutes played per year of at least 600, minutes played at least 9 per game, 2 point field goal percentage of at least .250 listing those that shot at least .500 and those that shot at least .450.

The 1956-57 Champ Celts against below (League averages)
* Weight : 18 qualifying players averaged 211.2 lbs
* Race : 18 qualifying players - 15 of them white Americans - 83.3%
* Field goal percentages : 18 qualifying players - Shot .500 or better = 0 - shot .450 or better = 0

The 1975-76 champ Celts against below (League averages)
Weight : 65 qualifying players averaged 219.3 lbs
Race : 65 qualifying players - 21 of them white American - 33.3%
Field goal percentages : 65 qualifying players - Shot .500 or better = 9 of 65 = 13,8% - shot .450 or better = 39 = 60 %

Cowens and the 75-76 Celts with a big level of play edge over the Russell 1956-57 led Celtics Celts. What a difference about 20 years made as the quality of basketball made huge advancements.

swish

And here's the stats numbers for the 1956-57 league.

http://bkref.com/tiny/5hQ8R

swish

and the stats for the league 1975-76

http://bkref.com/tiny/lDZFx

swish

by **cowens/oldschool** Mon Jul 17, 2017 7:32 pm

I would agree that the level of the game in 76 is higher than 57 without needing to look at any stats.

by **cowens/oldschool** Mon Jul 17, 2017 7:35 pm

Where I take offense is when you say a 2 time champion and MVP like Dave Cowens would not be an effective player in todays game.

by **swish** Mon Jul 17, 2017 8:33 pm

cowens/oldschool wrote:I would agree that the level of the game in 76 is higher than 57 without needing to look at any stats.

cowens,

Do you think that Cowens would have had a field day back in 1956-57 playing against that level of competition ?

swish

by **swish** Mon Jul 17, 2017 9:48 pm

cowens/oldschool wrote:Where I take offense is when you say a 2 time champion and MVP like Dave Cowens would not be an effective player in todays game.

I never said that he would not be an effective player in todays game - but just how effective is debatable - but in my opinion he wouldn't come close to dominating like he did in the 70's. There's a huge gap between the level of play back in the 1975-76 season and 2016-17 (41 years.)

swish

by **swish** Mon Jul 17, 2017 10:12 pm

swish wrote:
swish wrote:
swish wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:All good swish

Sorry for the delay in responding to your post. Here are some numbers from the league pitting the Russell led Celtics of the 1956-57 against the Celtic led Cowens of 1975-76 - in 3 vital stat categories that are constants over the decades.
Weight, Race, Shooting Percentages . Note: All players listed are front court players from 6'8" to 7'7", minutes played per year of at least 600, minutes played at least 9 per game, 2 point field goal percentage of at least .250 listing those that shot at least .500 and those that shot at least .450.

The 1956-57 Champ Celts against below (League averages)
* Weight : 18 qualifying players averaged 211.2 lbs
* Race : 18 qualifying players - 15 of them white Americans - 83.3%
* Field goal percentages : 18 qualifying players - Shot .500 or better = 0 - shot .450 or better = 0

The 1975-76 champ Celts against below (League averages)
Weight : 65 qualifying players averaged 219.3 lbs
Race : 65 qualifying players - 21 of them white American - 33.3%
Field goal percentages : 65 qualifying players - Shot .500 or better = 9 of 65 = 13,8% - shot .450 or better = 39 of 65 = 60 %

Cowens and the 75-76 Celts with a big level of play edge over the Russell 1956-57 led Celtics Celts. What a difference about 20 years made as the quality of basketball made huge advancements.

swish

And here's the stats numbers for the 1956-57 league.

http://bkref.com/tiny/5hQ8R

swish

and the stats for the league 1975-76

http://bkref.com/tiny/lDZFx

swish

I just listed some stats that pointed out the big difference between the 50's and 70's - now here's the numbers for the front court players of 2016-17

http://bkref.com/tiny/lKQ9X

* Weight : 129 qualifying players averaged 242.8 pounds
* Race : 129 qualifying players - 13 of them white - 10.2%
* Field goal percentages : 129 qualifying players - shot .500 or better = 88 of 129 = 68.2% - shot .450 or better 118 of 129 = 91.5%+

swish

by **cowens/oldschool** Mon Jul 17, 2017 10:26 pm

Swish I don't think Russell, Wilt or Baylor would put up astronomical numbers like they did, but either Wilt or Russell could still lead the league in rebounds and blocks in any era and ofcourse Wilt could still lead the league in scoring just like Jordan or Jabbar or Karl Malone could do in any era. Your last post on weights and size of players does not prove anything on ability of the great players of past eras, except we know the players today are bigger. Barkley, Russell and Dennis Rodman would be great rebounders in any era and none of them were the biggest or tallest, there's a load of players much bigger than those 3 that couldn't rebound for shit, too numerous to name them all.

by **cowens/oldschool** Mon Jul 17, 2017 10:45 pm

swish wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:Where I take offense is when you say a 2 time champion and MVP like Dave Cowens would not be an effective player in todays game.

I never said that he would not be an effective player in todays game - but just how effective is debatable - but in my opinion he wouldn't come close to dominating like he did in the 70's. There's a huge gap between the level of play back in the 1975-76 season and 2016-17 (41 years.)

swish

I kinda think Cowens would be more effective in todays game at his size than in the 80's or 90's when there were some historic big frontlines. On offense Cowens had the outside shot and would make the opposing bigger centers come out to chase him, defensively he was all over the place and was the first center to extend his defense out to perimeter. A lot of bigs of today are doing the things Cowens was already doing in the 70's.

I remember when Shaq was a rookie and he went up against Barkley and Moses Malone in 2 separate games, Suns had Barkley on Shaq for stretches, but not the the whole game. Well Barkley finished with 20 rebounds and so did Moses, obviously Shaq was still learning game, but was impressive how these crafty vets just had a better nose for the ball and all that experience/ability from having done it for all those years, it was in their muscle memory, how to play and execute.

by **swish** Mon Jul 17, 2017 11:26 pm

cowens,

Explain to me why you think that Russell would have the same level of success rebounding in 2016-17 that he had in 1956-57 - when half the front court players that he competed with were a collection of skin and bones, with even the heaviest, chuck Share, only weighing in at 235, and he was as close to being a human anchor that you could find.
18 players - By the way - all horrible shooters for there height
210 lbs - 1, 205 - 3, 200 - 2, 198 - 1, 185 - 2

swish

by **worcester** Mon Jul 17, 2017 11:45 pm

To discuss what Russell would do in 2016-17 is such a silly exercise. For God's sake, the man is 82 years old now. Of course his rebounding is going to be a little off now.

by **swish** Mon Jul 17, 2017 11:52 pm

worcester wrote:To discuss what Russell would do in 2016-17 is such a silly exercise. For God's sake, the man is 82 years old now. Of course his rebounding is going to be a little off now.

You got me on that one worcester

swish

by **cowens/oldschool** Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:22 am

Swish we are in agreement that Russell may not have put up such astronomical numbers in not only this era, but also in the 80's and 90's as he did in the 60's. I think if Barkley and Karl Malone were playing in the 60's the same time as Baylor, they would have put up even better numbers than Baylor. Having said that Wilt, Russell, Barkley and Rodman would still all rule the boards today, they just wouldn't be putting up numbers like 22.5 rebounds a game.

by Sponsored content