Cousy compares the early years of the NBA vs the later generations

Good read for the younger fan. Cousy's thoughts on the Game of his generation vs the modern game.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1140435/1/index.htm

Click onto above.

Swish

Good article, Swish. I'd like to see it updated to today. I loved the part about Cousy practicing a jumper-of-sorts again and again. And he did it day after day. The time was the summer of 1952. The site was the Holy Cross gym. And, months later, Cousy capped his own come-from-behind rally to score five points (without a three-pointer) in the last 15 seconds of the third overtime against the Syracuse Nationals in a Division playoff game. And the last two of those five points, scored as the buzzer sounded, involved Cousy racing from one foul line to the top of the other key and launching a "jumper" that tied the score and forced a fourth overtime, during which Cooz ran wild to finish with 50 points.

I think Petit had it right when he said that he'd have adapted to the times if he were playing when the article was written. In the first place, genetics, alone, would very likely have added height and muscle-based poundage to his frame. In the second place, he'd benefit from considerably more than primitive theories of training and playing the game.

As for Cousy, he made it a point to add something new to his weaponry each off-season. What a field day he'd have in today's NBA with so many candidates from which to choose every year. But, aside from his phenomenal peripheral vision, there's one thing that would have put The Cooz in the upper echelon of today's point guards even without the benefit of developments related to the passage of time. He unquestionably had the best basketball mind of any player—ever. His split-second instinct for the nuances of factors such as risk, reward, and the psychology of the game was incredible. He practiced innovations until they became fundamentals for him.

And, by the way, many of today's players are said to have great peripheral vision just because they see the floor well. It is to laugh! Cousy's peripheral vision was clinically proven to be absurd!!!!!!!

Sam

Somehow, I think his assessment of modern-day basketball couldn't ring truer than it does today.

During the late 80s/early 90s, basketball players still had the influence of those that came before them that understood the fundamentals of the game. Guys being drafted these days grew up watching players like Tmac, Vince Carter, Allen Iverson (all very talented but mostly geared towards their athletic abilities). They're constantly being told the most important aspect of basketball is athleticism. Most high school recruits can only run fast and jump high. I remember watching the most recent McDonald's All-American game and none of them could hit a jumpshot; every basket that actually went in was a layup/dunk off an iso-play.

KJ

Good observations, KJ

You're right in the age group to which I think a lot of today's game is geared. Basically, entertaining basketball rather than good fundamental basketball. Yet you obviously don't fit that pattern. Are you sure you're really only 24?

Sam

First off, I'm going to second Sam's view of KJ.  He doesn't look at the game like most 24 year olds do, and that's a very good thing.

Not to detract from Cousy one whit, here's some statements from The Houdini of the Hardwood himself about some of today's players, especially one...

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/knicks/post/_/id/13435/cousy-trading-rondo-would-be-big-mistake

3/3/12
Bob Cousy, point guard emeritus of the Boston Celtics, agrees that his old team has its share of problems. He just doesn’t count Rajon Rondo among them.

Cousy believes Celtics GM Danny Ainge would be making a big mistake if he trades Rondo by the March 15 deadline.

“I’m out of the loop, but boy, unless he’s a serial killer on the side I wouldn’t let this kid go,” Cousy said by phone. “I don’t know where you’d find a better point guard.”

The 83-year-old Hall of Famer conceded that Rondo, a three-time All-Star, is a poor perimeter shooter who struggles from the foul line, but said, “He overcomes that because he’s such a strong penetrator and a good finisher. He sees the floor well, he’s a force on both backboards, and he’s an excellent defender for that position. I think he touches all the bases.”

ESPN The Magazine’s Chris Broussard cited sources saying Boston is aggressively trying to move the 26-year-old Rondo and his high-maintenance ways, a report Ainge and coach Doc Rivers denied. The Celtics did consider dealing Rondo in past trade talks with Golden State (for Stephen Curry) and New Orleans (for Chris Paul).

Cousy doesn’t view the playmaker as Boston’s most pressing concern, not with the advanced age of the team’s Big Three -- Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Ray Allen -- threatening to keep the Celtics from legitimate title contention.

“They’re in the middle,” Cousy said, “and the worst place to finish in this league is in the middle. ... I don’t see how trading Rondo would help. Good young point guards are very hard to find.”

http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/nba/columns/story?columnist=may_peter&id=5169138

From Cousy, high praise indeed
Celtics legend says Rondo's the first point guard (since himself) to get excited about
Updated: May 6, 2010, 8:19 PM ET
By Peter May | Special to ESPNBoston.com


Yes, the Cooz is impressed. What else do you need to know?

Bob Cousy is, like most everyone else, enthralled by the play of Celtics point guard Rajon Rondo. Unlike most everyone else, Cousy's opinion matters. On the Mount Rushmore of NBA point guards, the Cooz has a place ad infinitum. Having him praise your work as a point guard is akin to Bill Gates praising your understanding of computer software.

"I've been watching the Celtics for the last 50 years,'' said Cousy, who retired in 1963 but made a brief, forgettable comeback as a player-coach with Omaha-Kansas City in 1969. "And Rondo is the first point guard since moi that I've been really excited about. Bird excited you, but he wasn't a point guard. JoJo [White] wasn't a point guard. He's the first since moi to get my attention."

There have been some pretty good point guards in the years since Cousy left and Rondo arrived. Two of them, Nate Archibald and Dennis Johnson, are Hall of Famers. But what Cousy sees in Rondo is a versatility that few have had at the position.

“People talk about the Big Three. But this is the Big One. The sky is the limit as far as I can see.”
-- Celtics legend Bob Cousy on Rajon Rondo

Rondo led the NBA in steals this season. No Celtic had ever done that. Right now, he leads the NBA in assists during the playoffs, more than one assist per game ahead of Deron Williams and more than two a game ahead of Steve Nash. Rondo recently was named to the NBA's all-defensive first team.

"What more can this kid do? He sees the floor extremely well,'' Cousy said. "He's even starting to put what my old coach, Doggie Julian, would call a little French pastry on a play, going behind the back. The kid is only 24. People talk about the Big Three. But this is the Big One. The sky is the limit as far as I can see."

Rondo supplanted Cousy as the Celtics' leader in assists per season in 2009-10, racking up 794 over 81 games. Cousy had 715 in 75 games in the 1959-60 season. Rondo also has twice tied Cousy's Celtics record of assists in a playoff game (19), once last year in a triple-overtime game against the Bulls and again this season in Monday night's Boston victory in Cleveland.

"It's nice to see him breaking a record of mine I wasn't really aware I even had,'' Cousy said with a laugh. 'It's well deserved on his part. But I think back in our day they'd pay some guy $15 a game to sit at a table and keep the stats. You never knew what was being done. No one really took individual stats seriously back then, except my roomie, [Bill] Sharman, who was fastidious about his free-throw shooting. And for good reason.

"But when someone called me to say that Rondo had broken the record, I said, 'OK, what was the record?' I think it was more amazing that the guy who had the record was able to talk about it 50 years after the fact!"


Cousy is technically on the Celtics' masthead as a team marketing consultant, but he winters in Florida and is not around the team nearly as much as when he provided television analysis for years with the estimable Gil Santos handling the play-by-play. Cousy wonders if Rondo has gotten to the point that he can get into his teammates' faces. (Answer: Yes, indeed.)

"I used to get pretty verbal in huddles, and I'd let the troops know,'' Cousy said. "But I always include myself. That's the key. It's gotta be 'us' not 'you.' ''

He also hopes to live long enough to see the day (Cousy turns 82 in August) that Rondo becomes a more confident and proficient outside shooter. In that respect, Cousy sees a lot of himself in Rondo.

"You can get into ruts at the point guard position,'' he said. "I would talk to Arnold [Auerbach, never 'Red' with Cooz] about a lot. If I were trying to find a downside in Rondo's game, that might be it. But he has a fine stroke. He gets full extension. He follows through. Someone has to convince him he's not a bad shooter, and then he'll be even tougher to guard. And he's already tough as it is."

From afar, Cousy also thinks Rondo's free-throw shooting has improved dramatically. This has always been the perceived offensive flaw in Rondo's game, as evidenced by his career average of 63 percent, which is higher than his 2009-10 average of 62.1 percent. But in the playoffs, Rondo has gone Mark Price on us, converting 80.6 percent, including 12-of-14 in Game 1 against the Cavs.

Cousy was a lifetime 80 percent shooter from the free-throw line.

"Before, I thought his stroke looked good, so I figured it had to be a mental thing with him,'' Cousy said. "But he is shooting the free throws now. To use an analogy from golf, it's like staying with the putt and following through, rather than just hitting it.

"To me, the kid has every base covered in terms of responsibilities for a point guard," Cousy said. "He does all of those. He rebounds. He gets the steals. He's the real deal."

Then, after a dramatic pause, Cousy concluded, somewhat sadly, "He's going to be a big part of the rebuilding process, isn't he?"

Longtime Celtics reporter Peter May is a contributor to ESPNBoston.com.







bob


.

It's nice to read about the habitually self-effacing Cooz actually admit that he was an exciting player in the upper echelon as PG. The only thing that kept him from leading the league in steals year after year was that they didn't keep that stat in his day. He positively lived in the defensive passing lanes once Russ came along to back him up.

Live forever, Cooz, because I have absolutely no idea what it would be like without you on this earth.

http://www.celticslife.com/2013/03/video-50th-anniversary-of-bob-cousys.html

Sam

sam wrote:Good observations, KJ

You're right in the age group to which I think a lot of today's game is geared.  Basically, entertaining basketball rather than good fundamental basketball.  Yet you obviously don't fit that pattern.  Are you sure you're really only 24?

Sam

99% of the people my age I discuss basketball with only really remark on the athletics of the game or how many points someone scores. Most of the time, I avoid those conversations because they don't really look at the game in-depth and they really wouldn't understand my perspectives.

I grew up watching basketball in the earlier 90s so I saw guys like Stockton, Mullin, K Malone, Hakeem, MJ, D. Robinson, etc.
Not to say I didn't enjoy watching guys like Vince Carter and Iverson showcasing their talents, but you could tell the game was changing and I see it now more than I did back then.

KJ

KJ,

Some day I'm going to fulfill my ambition of showing a old video to an audience from this board—presumably at a party and most likely (but not certainly) in Boston.

It's an entire game (without most of the free throws)—a 1966 Conference Final game between the Celtics and Oscar Robertson's Cincinnati Royals. The technology was way ahead of its time, as they "miked" Coach Red Auerbach, ran numerous replays in slow motion, and treated the game as a sort of combination documentary and tutorial. It's the best video representation I've ever seen of the Celtics of that era. I think you'd love it.

Whenever I feel a little down, I watch the last 10 minutes of that video. Sometimes I think up ways to get a little down, just so I have an excuse to watch it.

I've tried to work it into previous board parties, but it hasn't happened for one reason or another. Maybe I'm just barking up the wrong tree. But I'm determined to show it, even if you and I work out some way to get together without anyone else.

Suddenly I feel a little down. I'm time-traveling back to 1966. See you later.

Sam

Sam,

That reminds me of when I was around 8 or 9 and I used to watch this show on ESPN. They'd generally show playoff games from the 1980s. I always thought it was so interesting to see how the game was played before I started watching, and the intensity of the playoff atmosphere.


KJ

KJ,

Part of the thrill of becoming immersed in pro basketball during the 1950s was that the primitive nature of the setting for the sport made one feel part of the game.  From the lack of security to the patchwork nature of the facilities to the homespun introductions of the players, to the approachability of the players, there was absolutely nothing glamorous or sensationalistic about it.  Which meant that there was nothing to detract from one's fierce concentration on the game itself.  It wasn't a spectacle.  You had the feeling you could almost physically embrace it and participate in it.  It was just one step removed from shooting baskets out in the driveway.

I thought you might get a kick out of the introduction to a booklet I wrote about a personal history of the Russell Celtics.  (The entire volume appears in the "Sam's Writings" forum that is listed on the home page.)  In the introduction, I tried to set the stage for what would follow by describing the primitive setting in which the game was played.  I hope you enjoy it.

Sam

Introduction

As a backdrop for getting a feel for pro basketball in the fifties, it is important to reflect on the idiosyncrasies of the game, the playing conditions and the crowds. In those days, the rules of pro basketball tended to react to evolving player abilities. The unprecedented bulk of George Mikan, the agility of Bill Russell, and the length and power of Wilt Chamberlain forced changes in the width of the lane. When the early Celtics had a one-point lead with 30 to 60 seconds to go, Bob Cousy would dribble out the clock; so they instituted the 24-second rule. Russell forced the offensive goaltending rule to be instituted the year before Chamberlain entered the league.

Playing conditions bordered on the primitive, starting with the locker rooms. Tom Heinsohn says an issue in the Celtics dressing room would be whether a player would rate one peg or two; and the room was so small that reporters were allowed in only one at a time. Locker room temperatures could range from frigid to tropical. Temporary courtside seats were so close to the action that things were sometimes hairy for players. The one time clock at the old Boston Garden was directly overhead and very difficult for the players to see. Guy wires, stretched from the backboards to the balcony, helped only partially to reduce the vibrations of the board and rim from missed outside shots or the rare dunk attempts. Cigarette and cigar smoke often made the spectators squint, and God knows what effect it had on players (including their lungs). As Bill Sharman lamented during a later interview, rims in those days were very tight because they were bolted directly to the backboard, and the breakaway rim wouldn't be instituted for decades.

The trappings of the game (from the nightly raising of the backboards, with the guy wires stretching to the balcony, to the presence of the spectators inches from the playing floor) were so primal that spectators used to feel they were let in on secrets. We actually felt participatory, rather than entertained, at each game. We identified so closely with the team at a visceral level that any reasonably important game was an emotionally draining roller coaster ride.

One sign that someone was a real student of the game was that, despite all the emotional attachments to the team, (s)he didn't freak out whenever the opposing team went on a run. Instead, (s)he'd immediately start anticipating an answering run by the Celtics, and (s)he'd begin yelling suggestions to Red. In a very high percentage of those instances, we were so familiar with Red's approach that those suggestions squared with exactly what he'd wind up doing. The longer we continued that practice, the more emotionally close to the team we'd feel.

The lack of security and relative ease of access to players inspired youths to aspire to try to emulate them. We used to stand outside the locker room after games. When players emerged, we'd crowd around them until the one cop would start to herd us out. I'd always be at the front of the herd and would "march in place" so that I'd wind up at the end of the herd without having actually moved. Then I'd engage in conversation with a player, and the cop would let me stay, figuring I was a friend of the player.

The primitive nature of the game and accessibility of players created an intense sense of personal closeness and involvement among the fans—a feeling that unfortunately waned as the game became more remote over the decades. Tight rims and dead spots in the famed Boston Garden parquet floor. Heck, I had tight rims and lumpy footing in my back yard.

Most spectators were male, and the roar that a partial crowd could mount was unparalleled. The stentorian cacophony could make the Boston Garden balcony shake up and down as much as a foot. Particularly scary if you were seated below that balcony.

On some dates during the early 1960s, doubleheaders were played. The home team and another team would play the second game, and two other teams for which this was a "neutral court" would play the opening game. I saw only one neutral court doubleheader away from Boston but many in Boston. Although they sounded enticing, my experience was that the first game (which never involved the home team) was often sparsely attended. In those days, I believe game attendees were fans of the home team rather than spectators looking for the biggest bang for the buck.

But those ticket-holders who came to only the second game apparently didn't realize that Celtics players would invariably sit down near the floor, watching and commenting on the initial game. Given that ushers were so lax in restricting the best seats for ticket-holders, this was a golden opportunity for a fan to sit near the Celtics, listen to their comments, and occasionally interact with them. Unless a fan abused the privilege, the team members didn't seem to mind—except for Russell.

Celtics tickets were not difficult to obtain. In 1969, the prices ranged from a high of $5.00 to a low of $3.00. During the entire Russell Celtics' reign, the Celtics’ highest home attendance was in their first championship season. Attendance that season averaged only 10,517, representing 76% of the 13,909 capacity. For playoff games, we
thought nothing of camping out all night on Causeway Street. One person would hold another's place while he went for food and beverages for his section of the ticket line. We'd curl up on the sidewalk and sleep fitfully. When I took a folding chair with me one year, it was considered an innovation in the annals of Celtics ticket-waiting, and I
got my picture in the newspaper.  (I still have that picture, although it's a little faded now.)

KJ, I'm adding this part:

The fans' incredible emotional investment in the game, the cloying haze of cigar smoke, the swaying of the balcony, and the tenseness of certain key game situations combined to make Boston Garden no place for weak stomachs—and I mean that literally.  Many times I felt as though I had a boulder in my belly.  There were three in particular: (1) the timeout just before Selvy missed a Lakers game-winner at the regulation buzzer in 1962, (2) the timeout just before Havlicek stole the ball in 1965, and (3) the timeout just before Sam Jones hit the season-saving buzzer-beater in Game 4 of the 1969 Finals.  Even though Sam hit that shot, the agony was prolonged because it didn't go in cleanly.  It rolled around, just like my stomach was doing.  I was, of course, ecstatic that the Celtics had won, but my stomach didn't recover until well into the following day.  God, I can feel that boulder now!

Sam