Nate 'Tiny' Archibald: 'I wished I had 10 basketballs' on 1980-81 Celtics

Thanks, guys. I`m having fun here.... now about that top 20 list!

swish wrote:jrleftfoot and NYCelt

Thanks for understanding that differences in opinion can be the result of having a different set of values as a base.

 swish

so where is Artie "Hambone" Williams?

beat

I will say that, (showing my age) that I did watch Cousy, but I was young enough when he retired to appreciate all that he did but enjoy many who came after him. I know that Tiny was an awesome ballplayer, but I also felt that JoJo White was terrific too. You bring up DJ, who I loved and felt never got the appreciation that he truly deserved. So it is a perfect discussion to say that most anyone we have talked about could be considered THE GREATEST,

I laugh to myself when I think about how protective Sam was of that era of ball players, because that is the way I feel also. This is a whole new world of basketball players, so much more athletic than the guys back then. So Swish, toche'. I admire that you laid it all out there why you felt the way you do, and who are we to argue that?

Great debate! Thanks Gyso and NYCelt and Beat for answering me!!!

gyso wrote:Rosalie,

I am only entering this discussion because you asked.

I never got to watch Cousy play, but my minds eye view of him is dribbling around using only one hand, which pretty much agrees with swish's assessment.  In his day, he was probably the best at his craft. He may have helped to bring about the first big change of the game, the 24 second clock.  Sam ways said that Cousy added a new trick to his game every off season, sadly many new players just rest on their laurels year after year.

With that said, I will agree with Ram to say that he was the greatest Celtics point guard of all time.  Was he the best Celtics player at that position?  IMO, no.  Do I pick Tiny?  Also, no.  I pick DJ.

I do agree with swish that the overall skills in the NBA has greatly advanced from those displayed in the 50's and 60's.  The NBA went from a kind of part time job to a 24-7 365 days a year full time endeavor.  Back then, most players had to work a real job during the off season to make ends meet.  Now, that would be considered ridiculous.

I will add that girls/womens basketball has taken a similar transformation.  Back when I was in Jr. and Sr. high school, the saying in regards to girls basketball was, "two dribbles and a squeal".  Then came Cindy Blodgett.  She turned woman's basketball into a truly watchable sport up my way.  She put the U of Maine on the map for a couple of years and went on to play as a pro.  Now, there is a pro league, the WNBA, as well as a very exciting world-wide woman's game.

I have to say that this thread has been quite enjoyable to read.  Lots of different perspectives and viewpoints, and it has mostly been respectful.  I really love this board for that reason.

gyso

Please note that my stated opinion was simply - Tiny over Cousy. You take DJ over Tiny - I agree. Nod to DJ based on 9 all defensive selections.



swish

RosalieTCeltics wrote:I will say that, (showing my age) that I did watch Cousy, but I was young enough when he retired to appreciate all that he did but enjoy many who came after him. I know that Tiny was an awesome ballplayer, but I also felt that JoJo White was terrific too. You bring up DJ, who I loved and felt never got the appreciation that he truly deserved. So it is a perfect discussion to say that most anyone we have talked about could be considered THE GREATEST,

I laugh to myself when I think about how protective Sam was of that era of ball players, because that is the way I feel also. This is a whole new world of basketball players, so much more athletic than the guys back then. So Swish, toche'. I admire that you laid it all out there why you felt the way you do, and who are we to argue that?  

Great debate! Thanks Gyso and NYCelt and Beat for answering me!!!

I can't remember the C's before 1991 (although there is a picture of me at 5 watching the Bird-Nique shootout in '88 with my Bird shirt on). However, I am very protective of the 50's/60's era because I am protective of stats and rules. There is a rule that you cannot be placed above another player on an all-time greats list for one team if you played 8 less seasons on that team AND had worse stats AND won less rings. Just not going to happen. 

Stating that Cousy comes in ahead of Tiny on an all-time greatest CELTICS list is 100% FACT. There is no debate there. I don't care that Tiny played 20 years later than Cousy. That is a FACT. 

Now you can debate Cousy's place in an all-time Celtic list, is he #4 or more like #8? And you can debate Tiny vs. DJ because it is 5 years vs. 7. But you cannot debate Cousy vs. Tiny on an all-time greatest Celtic list the same way you cannot debate KG vs. Cowens or Ray Allen vs. Sam Jones. 

As I've said this entire thread, there is no issue with placing Tiny ahead of Cousy as far as who was the more talented player, who would be picked first on the playground, who would you want for a hypothetical roster of Celtic greats for one season or one game. 

But Cousy over Tiny on an all-time greatest Celtic list is a fact. Nobody can call that an opinion.

DJ was definitely the best defender of his era, until Jordan arrived, was actually watching the Jordan 63 point game recently and DJ had a few steals and a great block on MJ, he actually defended him well, but Jordan was unbelievable that day and took a ton of shots. Offensively DJ wasn't a traditional point guard, he was okay, but he wasn't a good enough scorer or passer to carry a team, he played with Larry Bird and the offense went thru Larry. DJ couldn't put up points or assists or initiate an offense like a young Tiny. Once we lost Tiny, our backcourt was exposed and had nobody that could handle Andrew Toney or Magic Johnson, and Tiny couldn't handle either of them either. So I agree with DJ over Tiny.

Defense is the most underappreciated skill and stat, but its essential to win in this league and its why I don't think Keven Durant is a superstar.

RosalieTCeltics wrote:I will say that, (showing my age) that I did watch Cousy, but I was young enough when he retired to appreciate all that he did but enjoy many who came after him. I know that Tiny was an awesome ballplayer, but I also felt that JoJo White was terrific too. You bring up DJ, who I loved and felt never got the appreciation that he truly deserved. So it is a perfect discussion to say that most anyone we have talked about could be considered THE GREATEST,

I laugh to myself when I think about how protective Sam was of that era of ball players, because that is the way I feel also. This is a whole new world of basketball players, so much more athletic than the guys back then. So Swish, toche'. I admire that you laid it all out there why you felt the way you do, and who are we to argue that?  

Great debate! Thanks Gyso and NYCelt and Beat for answering me!!!

RosalietCeltics

Don't ever stop loving your favorite Celtics. May the nostalgia of those treasured memories be with you forever. They still brings a smile to my face when I recall those many special moments of those glorious 50's-60's. They were fantastic times to be a Celtic fan.

swish

Sorry I'm so late to the party, Rosalie!

This is something I have always had a hard time with, but I try to break it down to a few things. First I see 2 different type of players when looking at Cousy & DJ. I have always thought of DJ as more of a defensive player & Cousy as a floor master, so there is no way I can compare the 2.

As far as Tiny & JoJo, I would have to spend a ton of time watching old film and would probably come up scratching my head.

So, I'll ask a question. Which is easier, to compare individual players from one era to another, or to compare teams? This may seem like a stupid question based on a couple players verses multiple, but maybe not.

Pete

Pete

Not to answer for Rosalie but one thing that to me stands out. Roles under Red were clearly defined. Cousy didn;t have to be a standout defensive player for ONE obvious glaring reason RUSSELL was behind him. His job was to pass the ball first and to initiate the offense AND run the fast break when appropriate.

I just don't see roles nearly as defined now as then.

Look at the iso's now. If there is a mismatch now the offensive player gets the ball and others clear out. I really don't recall that in the 60's (50's are just a little too far back for me)

And for my purposes in citing an all time Celtic greats, they have to have played the majority of their career here to be HIGH up on any list I have.
Heck Dominique Wilkins, Pete Maravich, Artis Gilmore, Bob McAdoo, Jermaine and Shaquille O'Neal, Gary Peyton, Charlie Scott, Bill Walton and Dave Bing all had stellar careers, and they all had a cup of coffee wearing the green to either close out or were near the end of their careers. ( and I am sure there are several others) Yet most would not put them anywhere near the top on an all time Celtic list, with some exceptions of course.

just one persons opinion. comparing eras is dangerous and has NO definitive answers.

beat

beat,

Good point, and I agree. Its is a real tough thing to do, but we all have our favorite players, and would put together different starting fives from those past & present.

Pete

pete wrote:Sorry I'm so late to the party, Rosalie!

This is something I have always had a hard time with, but I try to break it down to a few things. First I see 2 different type of players when looking at Cousy & DJ. I have always thought of DJ as more of a defensive player & Cousy as a floor master, so there is no way I can compare the 2.

As far as Tiny & JoJo, I would have to spend a ton of time watching old film and would probably come up scratching my head.

So, I'll ask a question. Which is easier, to compare individual players from one era to another, or to compare teams? This may seem like a stupid question based on a couple players verses multiple, but maybe not.

Pete

Pete

  I enjoy comparing players and teams from different era's.  For me it all starts out with analyzing a variety of stats that are common to all the era's being reviewed.  For the years 1950 through 1989 I use Height, Race (Players 6'7' or shorter) and 2 point field goal shooting percentage. I'm basically looking to find out if Basketball, like life in general, is constantly improving its game. My below stats are based on all players that played at least 1100 minutes in the season.  1100 minutes will yield about 8 players from each team - which is the number most associated with as being the regulars on most clubs.  The below stats are for league evaluations for the years 1956-57, 1966-67, 1976-77, 1985-86 (Selected because of most posters familiarity with that years great Celtic team)

   

 Shooting Percentages,,,, number of players with under .450 shooting percentage for the year
     1956-57,,,, 64 of 64*** - 100 %        ***This 2nd number is the total number of players that played at least 1100 minutes
     1966-67,,,, 51 of 80 - 63.8 %
     1976-77,,,,  67 of 182 - 36.8 %
     1985-86,,,, 13 of 199 - 6.5%

 Height,,,, 6'10" or taller
     1956-57,,,, 4 of 64 - 6.3 %
     1966-67,,,, 9 of 80 - 11.3 %
     1976-77,,,, 33 of 182 - 18.1 %
     1985-86,,,, 51 of 199 - 25.6 %

 Race,,,, Black vs White (The speed positions of 6'7" or shorter)
     1956-66 - White,,,, 44 of 48 - 91.7%
     1966-67 - White,,,, 31 of 60 - 48.3%
     1976-77 - white,,,, 26 of 113 - 23.0%
     1985-86 - white,,,, 17 of 110 - 15.5%


     As you can see from the above the game has experienced tremendous change in those 30 years since Russell played his 1st game in Boston.
Another huge factor that is not represented by any available statistical data is the big advantage in ball handling skills of the present day players over those of the 50's-60's.

 With the above data it becomes quite easy to determine the quality of play that each individual player faced on a daily basis




  swish



Below is data for the 1956-57 season

http://bkref.com/tiny/hcbv9



Below is data for the 1985-86 season

http://bkref.com/tiny/uSr5G

Swish,

I don't think I've ever seen a comparison broken down in quite this way.  I've always thought there has to be a way to compare different eras, but couldn't determine just how to set them up in an equivalent manner to review.  I'm enjoying the way in which you're presenting this.  Looking at stats in common to different eras does help.  The racial difference is too often ignored, and has had a huge and positive impact on the game.

You might be changing my mind Swish.  Maybe you can compare teams and players across eras.

Regards

NYCelt wrote:Swish,

I don't think I've ever seen a comparison broken down in quite this way.  I've always thought there has to be a way to compare different eras, but couldn't determine just how to set them up in an equivalent manner to review.  I'm enjoying the way in which you're presenting this.  Looking at stats in common to different eras does help.  The racial difference is too often ignored, and has had a huge and positive impact on the game.

You might be changing my mind Swish.  Maybe you can compare teams and players across eras.

Regards

NYCelt

Thanks for your interest. I've been researching this subject matter for about 8 years and have a lot more supporting data, much of which deals with the Racial aspect. The very same pattern of generational improvement is also evident in Pro football as well as track and field events in the Olympics. I'm also a Baseball fanatic ( earlier years) and will attempt to track Baseball's trends over the years. However I don't think that I will meet with any success as I doubt that I will be able to find the answer to a key question that I'm confronted with. Tomorrow I will Lay out the same data for the 2015-16 season.

swish

Swish,

One of these days I'd love to gather your thoughts on generational changes in football and baseball.  I think we've had a couple of brief exchanges on baseball over the past few years.

Having played and coached both, I've seen significant change over the years.  Although I acknowledge that cross-era comparisons are difficult at best, I doubt MLB, NFL or NBA players from even 15 - 20 years ago could compete at nearly the same level today.  Of course I say that based on the tools they had available to them at that time.  What if Jim Brown had today's knowledge available when he played?  He might have bagged the acting career and kept playing!  How about Brown operating out of today's spread offense as the lone back? And after an offseason of modern conditioning? Training and equipment has changed so much in the last decade alone.  Technology and research have advanced what an athlete can do.

In just the past couple of seasons, for example, the entire approach to coaching pitchers has changed.  New thinking on proper mechanics and delivery, combined with arm health programs, have increased velocity while decreasing arm stress.  Hopefully young pitchers today will be able to reduce the epidemic of Tommy John surgeries, yet still throw at speeds unimaginable to yesterdays players.

Similar examples abound in every major sport I'm familiar with.  Imagine what a teenage Russ or Ruth could grow to become today.

Regards

NYCelt wrote:Swish,

One of these days I'd love to gather your thoughts on generational changes in football and baseball.  I think we've had a couple of brief exchanges on baseball over the past few years.

Having played and coached both, I've seen significant change over the years.  Although I acknowledge that cross-era comparisons are difficult at best, I doubt MLB, NFL or NBA players from even 15 - 20 years ago could compete at nearly the same level today.  Of course I say that based on the tools they had available to them at that time.  What if Jim Brown had today's knowledge available when he played?  He might have bagged the acting career and kept playing!  How about Brown operating out of today's spread offense as the lone back?  And after an offseason of modern conditioning?  Training and equipment has changed so much in the last decade alone.  Technology and research have advanced what an athlete can do.

In just the past couple of seasons, for example, the entire approach to coaching pitchers has changed.  New thinking on proper mechanics and delivery, combined with arm health programs, have increased velocity while decreasing arm stress.  Hopefully young pitchers today will be able to reduce the epidemic of Tommy John surgeries, yet still throw at speeds unimaginable to yesterdays players.

Similar examples abound in every major sport I'm familiar with.  Imagine what a teenage Russ or Ruth could grow to become today.

Regards

NYCelt

"One of these days I'd love to gather your thoughts on generational changes in football and baseball."
Per your above thoughts on this subject - Any time is fine with me. I live for sports discussions of this nature.


swish

swish wrote:
Pete

  I enjoy comparing players and teams from different era's.  For me it all starts out with analyzing a variety of stats that are common to all the era's being reviewed.  For the years 1950 through 1989 I use Height, Race (Players 6'7' or shorter) and 2 point field goal shooting percentage. I'm basically looking to find out if Basketball, like life in general, is constantly improving its game. My below stats are based on all players that played at least 1100 minutes in the season.  1100 minutes will yield about 8 players from each team - which is the number most associated with as being the regulars on most clubs.  The below stats are for league evaluations for the years 1956-57, 1966-67, 1976-77, 1985-86 (Selected because of most posters familiarity with that years great Celtic team)

 Shooting Percentages,,,, number of players with under .450 shooting percentage for the year
     1956-57,,,, 64 of 64*** - 100 %        ***This 2nd number is the total number of players that played at least 1100 minutes
     1966-67,,,, 51 of 80 - 63.8 %
     1976-77,,,,  67 of 182 - 36.8 %
     1985-86,,,, 13 of 199 - 6.5%

 Height,,,, 6'10" or taller
     1956-57,,,, 4 of 64 - 6.3 %
     1966-67,,,, 9 of 80 - 11.3 %
     1976-77,,,, 33 of 182 - 18.1 %
     1985-86,,,, 51 of 199 - 25.6 %

 Race,,,, Black vs White (The speed positions of 6'7" or shorter)
     1956-66 - White,,,, 44 of 48 - 91.7%
     1966-67 - White,,,, 31 of 60 - 48.3%
     1976-77 - white,,,, 26 of 113 - 23.0%
     1985-86 - white,,,, 17 of 110 - 15.5%


     As you can see from the above the game has experienced tremendous change in those 30 years since Russell played his 1st game in Boston.
Another huge factor that is not represented by any available statistical data is the big advantage in ball handling skills of the present day players over those of the 50's-60's.

 With the above data it becomes quite easy to determine the quality of play that each individual player faced on a daily basis

Below is data for the 1956-57 season

 http://bkref.com/tiny/hcbv9


Below is data for the 1985-86 season

  http://bkref.com/tiny/uSr5G

These era comparisons are interesting and can be used when it comes to comparing the careers of guys like Heinsohn, Max and Antoine, who played a similar number of years in Green. Or guys like George Mikan vs. Pau Gasol. 

But the bottom line is you can't put a guy who played 5 years here above a guy who played 13, regardless of the competition he faced and excelled against, when the stats, awards and team success are all greatly in favor of the guy who wore a Celtic uniform for almost 3x as many seasons.

http://www.si.com/vault/1991/10/16/125161/could-cousy-play-in-todays-nba-bob-cousy-was-brilliant-in-his-day-but-would-he-and-his-peers-succeed-in-the-game-of-the-90s


Above 1991 article features comments by Cousy, West and Pettit - and that was 25 YEARS AGO.



  swish

gyso wrote:Swish,

There was a cool article there about Carl Yastrzemski from 1961, before his rookie season.  He was my all time favorite Sox player.  It was a very fun read.

gyso

Obviously your a big Sox (gyso) fan. You couldn't go wrong with him as your favorite. A lot in common with Havlichek. Yaz and Hondo - big time Boston favorites.

swish

swish wrote:

gyso wrote:Swish,

There was a cool article there about Carl Yastrzemski from 1961, before his rookie season.  He was my all time favorite Sox player.  It was a very fun read.

gyso

 Obviously your a big Sox (gyso) fan.   You couldn't go wrong with him as your favorite. A lot in common with Havlichek.  Yaz and Hondo - big time Boston favorites.

   swish

Everyone here seems to be a Sox fan (yes, I realize where I am)

My son is a Yankees fan.

How can this Orioles fan find any peace?

NYCelt wrote:

swish wrote:

gyso wrote:Swish,

There was a cool article there about Carl Yastrzemski from 1961, before his rookie season.  He was my all time favorite Sox player.  It was a very fun read.

gyso

 Obviously your a big Sox (gyso) fan.   You couldn't go wrong with him as your favorite. A lot in common with Havlichek.  Yaz and Hondo - big time Boston favorites.

   swish

Everyone here seems to be a Sox fan (yes, I realize where I am)

My son is a Yankees fan.

How can this Orioles fan find any peace?

NYCelt

Yankee fan since 1946. If your son has any questions about the "Yankee Clipper",or any other of those old time Bronze Bombers, tell him to fire away. Imagine being a Yankee fan in the 40's,50's and 60's and than having the good fortune to witness the Celtics glory years of the 50's and 60's. I grew up in sports heaven.


swish

swish wrote:

NYCelt wrote:

swish wrote:

gyso wrote:Swish,

There was a cool article there about Carl Yastrzemski from 1961, before his rookie season.  He was my all time favorite Sox player.  It was a very fun read.

gyso

 Obviously your a big Sox (gyso) fan.   You couldn't go wrong with him as your favorite. A lot in common with Havlichek.  Yaz and Hondo - big time Boston favorites.

   swish

Everyone here seems to be a Sox fan (yes, I realize where I am)

My son is a Yankees fan.

How can this Orioles fan find any peace?

NYCelt

 Yankee fan since 1946. If your son has any questions about the "Yankee Clipper",or any other of those old time Bronze Bombers, tell him to fire away. Imagine being a Yankee fan in the 40's,50's and 60's and than having the good fortune to witness the Celtics glory years of the 50's and 60's. I grew up in sports heaven.


  swish

Swish,

Another Yankee fan; just what I need.

My mom just turned 90 and drives around with a Derek Jeter bobblehead stuck to her car's dashboard.

I'm getting razzed by my 12 year old son and 90 year old mom about the past two games the Evil Empire has blown out my O's.

Worse yet, I'm discussing it on a Boston sports board. Bumpy road here. Very bumpy!

Regards

swish wrote:http://www.si.com/vault/1991/10/16/125161/could-cousy-play-in-todays-nba-bob-cousy-was-brilliant-in-his-day-but-would-he-and-his-peers-succeed-in-the-game-of-the-90s

Above 1991 article features comments by Cousy, West and Pettit - and that was 25 YEARS AGO.

  swish

Again, interesting info that isn't able to be taken into consideration because as I said:

the bottom line is you can't put a guy who played 5 years here above a guy who played 13, regardless of the competition he faced and excelled against, when the stats, awards and team success are all greatly in favor of the guy who wore a Celtic uniform for almost 3x as many seasons.

Enjoying this discussion...and clearly seeing it as unlying a greater issue. That everyone is ready for the season to begin.

I can see both sides here, but as with most other discussions about "favorite this or that", it comes down to person preference as much as stats.

My favorite Celtic is Kevin McHale and IMO, he is a perfect example of someone who sacrificed his career stats for the glory of the team. I have no doubt in my mind that if Kevin played for almost any other team in the NBA, he could have led the league in scoring and maybe rebounding and blocks as well.

His 1986-87 season was one of the best I can remember. First team All NBA, First Team All Defensive, nearly 61% FG%, 26 PPG, 10 RPG, 3 assists, 2.5 blocks- and this was on a team with Bird outscoring him almost every night taking 20 shots per game.

In addition, Kevin McHale significantly shortened his career by playing while injured. He gave his heart, soul and body to the City of Boston. If he had not done this, he would have played 3 or 4 more years and had much better lifetime stats. So unless you can predict the unpredictable, not sure how you can even use stats as the only criteria for picking A over B.

So my all time starting 5 is

Russell
Bird
McHale
Pierce
Havlicek

Does that mean that I dont like or respect Sam Jones or Bob Cousy? Not at all, just my opinion.

I would not take Tiny over Cousy, but I dont see how anyone's opinion can be dismissed considering stats are only part of the story.