Auerbachian - Good or Lucky?

gyso wrote:The league back in the 50's and 60's had 6-10 teams.  The third round picks back then would all fall in the first round now.  All the draft picks lasted four years in college.  There was no free agency then, so team management had total control of player movement.

For those reasons and more, it is impossible to compare Red to Ainge.

It is fare to say that Danny Ainge is one of the better GMs in recent times.

gyso

gyso

I agree he is a top 3 gm but I am still waiting for him to draft a player that becomes an allstar.

dboss

Swish. Humblest apologies. After reading cow's silly statement, I misread your responses and grouped you with him. Ergo, I will not include you when I petition the Pope of the religion of Basketball to have cow excommunicated. I will, however, have him require you to do penance for refusing to admit that the Cousy-Russell Celtics were the greatest team of all time.

As for future HOFers that Danny has drafted, how can anyone overlook the Beast, Kendrick Perkins? I have it on good authority that, when they build a new wing in the Springfield complex to accommodate Dennis Rodman, Perk will be included as proof that there were indeed players uglier than the Worm.

Also, let's not forget Rondo, who clearly thinks he belongs there. In the Ugly Room, that is.

Then there is Delonte West, who performed the historically laughable feat of seducing Lebron's mother. He'd probably be a good fit in the Ugly Room, too, what with all those tattoos.

Danny's already enshrined in my hall for bringing number 17, as well as for making the team a power to be feared. We are not far from number 18, and if (when) that happens, we should at least retire his number.

rickdavisakaspike wrote:Swish.  Humblest apologies.  After reading cow's silly statement, I misread your responses and grouped you with him.  Ergo, I will not include you when I petition the Pope of the religion of Basketball to have cow excommunicated.  I will, however, have him require you to do penance for refusing to admit that the Cousy-Russell Celtics were the greatest team of all time.  

As for future HOFers that Danny has drafted, how can anyone overlook the Beast, Kendrick Perkins?  I have it on good authority that, when they build a new wing in the Springfield complex to accommodate Dennis Rodman, Perk will be included as proof that there were indeed players uglier than the Worm.

Also, let's not forget Rondo, who clearly thinks he belongs there.  In the Ugly Room, that is.

Then there is Delonte West, who performed the historically laughable feat of seducing Lebron's mother.  He'd probably be a good fit in the Ugly Room, too, what with all those tattoos.

Danny's already enshrined in my hall for bringing number 17, as well as for making the team a power to be feared.  We are not far from number 18, and if (when) that happens, we should at least retire his number.

Spike
Thanks for the pardon. I figured that it was a misread on your part. Now to your below statement.

"admit that the Cousy-Russell Celtics were the greatest team of all time." Just which Cousy-Russell Celtic team do you consider to be the greatest team of all time? But I can tell you in advance that I don't favor any of those 1950-60 Celtic teams as the greatest basketball team of all time - not even close.

swish

swish

I favor the '62-'63 team, Cousy's last year. That was also Sam's favorite team, if I recall correctly. I'm well aware that you think modern players are better but I strongly disagree. There has never been a center like Bill Russell and he would be as effective today as he was then (if we could somehow transport him forward). He was faster than anyone except Sam Jones, who was the fastest guy in the league. He could leap so high and with such anticipation that he dominated the boards, he had lateral quickness that was almost otherworldly, and he ran nonstop the whole game (until late in his career, anyway). His shot-blocking intimidated everyone, even Wilt. His basketball intelligence was off the scale; he literally invented the modern game. But, without a doubt, his most endearing quality was his ability to win. No matter what statistics you can quote, it's still about intangibles.

Anyway, thanks for asking. I sorely wish Sam was here to set the record straight. Did you ever raise this subject with him?

rickdavisakaspike wrote:
swish

I favor the '62-'63 team, Cousy's last year.  That was also Sam's favorite team, if I recall correctly.  I'm well aware that you think modern players are better but I strongly disagree.  There has never been a center like Bill Russell and he would be as effective today as he was then (if we could somehow transport him forward).  He was faster than anyone except Sam Jones, who was the fastest guy in the league.  He could leap so high and with such anticipation that he dominated the boards, he had lateral quickness that was almost otherworldly, and he ran nonstop the whole game (until late in his career, anyway).  His shot-blocking intimidated everyone, even Wilt.  His basketball intelligence was off the scale; he literally invented the modern game.  But, without a doubt, his most endearing quality was his ability to win.  No matter what statistics you can quote, it's still about intangibles.

Anyway, thanks for asking.  I sorely wish Sam was here to set the record straight.  Did you ever raise this subject with him?

Spike

I love these generational discussions. Sam and I went back and forth on this subject many times - both sticking to our opinions and I'm sure that both you and I will always differ as well. Different memories - different view points. Since you mentioned Cousy I thought that I would offer up a Cousy opinion dated October of 1991.

" However, toss an entire team of yore into today's NBA and.... Well, even the 1961 Celtics—the team Cousy considers the best he played on, the one that featured the Cooz, Bill Sharman, K.C. Jones and Sam Jones (all of whom wound up in the Hall of Fame, and that was just the backcourt)—couldn't hope to replicate their 57-22 record and NBA title in the '90s. Says Cousy, "Only fools could look at basketball and not say that, physically at least, the jock today is far superior. We shot 40, 41 percent. That wouldn't get you by in a Division III college game today. Shooting skills have gone through the ceiling. I watch the All-Star Came and don't recognize the sport we played 20 or 25 years ago."

Cousy and Swish on the same page. (My basketball idol of the 50's) I started following him when he was with Holy Cross in the late forties. One of his teammates was Joe Mullaney who went on to coach at Providence college (My all time favorite college basketball team)
I totally respect your opinions about our Celtics. I fully understand your loyalty to those great Celtic teams of the 1950's-60's.

swish

Oh right! I'm supposed to take on swish and Cousy, eh? I dunno. I'm too delicate and deeply bruised for this sort of work!

"I need help, ladies and gentlemens.
I need someone to stand beside me.
I need, I need someone to set a pick for me at the free throw line of life,
Someone I can pass to, someone to hit the open man on the give and go,
And not end up in the popcorn machine."

- Basketball Jones, Cheech and Chong, circa 1960s.

Yeah, yeah, I know; these old songs are not as good as the modern songs. Heavy sarcasm alert.

So! Parsing Cousy's comments, he says (quoting out of context and all that) "[. . . physically at least, the jock today is far superior. . .]" Why? Because "Shooting skills have gone through the ceiling."

That's it? What about ball-handling, passing, moving without the ball, setting picks and screens, and all the dozens of little things players used to do when men were men.

What about pace? In the modern space and pace game, is there one team that could keep up with the Cousy-Russell Celtics? Don't think so.

What about defense? One of those unavoidable facts which give me hope for the 2017 Celtics team is their record against the Dubs the past few years. Defense beats offense in basketball. That's what it says (metaphorically speaking) on all those banners in the rafters of the new Boston Garden. So if anyone can show me quotes or facts or statistics that prove modern basketball players play defense better than the oldtimers, I will personally sing the chorus of Basketball Jones (Oh baby, oo oo oo.).

For whatever it's worth I think the 80's Celtics were too big and too skilled and would have put a beating on the great Russell Celtics, who were easily the best of the their generation.

cowens/oldschool wrote:For whatever it's worth I think the 80's Celtics were too big and too skilled and would have put a beating on the great Russell Celtics, who were easily the best of the their generation.

That they would - oldschool

swish

rickdavisakaspike wrote:
Oh right! I'm supposed to take on swish and Cousy, eh?  I dunno.  I'm too delicate and deeply bruised for this sort of work!

"I need help, ladies and gentlemens.
I need someone to stand beside me.
I need, I need someone to set a pick for me at the free throw line of life,
Someone I can pass to, someone to hit the open man on the give and go,
And not end up in the popcorn machine."

- Basketball Jones, Cheech and Chong, circa 1960s.

Yeah, yeah, I know; these old songs are not as good as the modern songs.  Heavy sarcasm alert.

So!  Parsing Cousy's comments, he says (quoting out of context and all that) "[. . . physically at least, the jock today is far superior. . .]"  Why?  Because "Shooting skills have gone through the ceiling."

That's it?   What about ball-handling, passing, moving without the ball, setting picks and screens, and all the dozens of little things players used to do when men were men.

What about pace?  In the modern space and pace game, is there one team that could keep up with the Cousy-Russell Celtics?  Don't think so.

What about defense?  One of those unavoidable facts which give me hope for the 2017 Celtics team is their record against the Dubs the past few years.  Defense beats offense in basketball.  That's what it says (metaphorically speaking) on all those banners in the rafters of the new Boston Garden.  So if anyone can show me quotes or facts or statistics that prove modern basketball players play defense better than the oldtimers, I will personally sing the chorus of Basketball Jones (Oh baby, oo oo oo.).

Spike

Have you ever considered the Quality of the competition when evaluating the performance of those Russell year Celtics? They absolutely dominated those 13 years with Russell leading the way - but at a time when the talent level in the NBA , 1950's-60's, was a far cry from the level of play that has existed since the 1980's.

Consider the following.
Shooting
1960-61 (Cousy's best Celtic team) Using players with 1100 minutes played per year.
64 players,,, only 11 of them shot .450 or better = 17.2%
2016-17,,, requiring players with at least 1100 minutes played
263 players,,, 219 players shot .450 or better = 83.3%

Weight
1960-61,,, At least 1100 minutes per year,,, played center,center forward,or forward center
22 players average weight 224.0 lbs

2016-17,,, at least 1100 minutes per year,,, played center,center forward or forward center
57 players average weight = 252.2 lbs

RACE
1960-61,,, at least 1100 minutes per year,,, under 6'8"
White,,, 30 of 45 players = 66.7%

2016-17,,, at least 1100 minutes per year,,, under 6'9"
white,,, 6 of 167 players = 3.6%

To sum it up
A huge difference in Key elements of the game. Another Key aspect of the game BALL HANDLING SKILLS can't be expressed at this time by any stat - but if you have tapes of games of the 50's-60's it is very obvious that the non shooting hand was used infrequently to dribble the ball, especially in traffic - which brings me to Jerry West who stated in October of 1991 that he considered the ball handing skills of the modern player to be the greatest skill advancement over his playing days. As to defense, I'll let you show me how the oldtimers were better defensive players.

swish

What is the cut off for old timers? Dave Cowens, Olujuwon, Rodman could defend in any era, the Bird Celtics would be too big and too skilled for any teams playing today. Are the 80's old timers or modern? How about Jordan Bulls, old timers or modern? Jordan, Drexler, Pippen would all be easily HoFers if playing today, so would Larry Bird, Kevin McHale and Cowens if playing today.

cowens/oldschool wrote:What is the cut off for old timers? Dave Cowens, Olujuwon, Rodman could defend in any era, the Bird Celtics would be too big and too skilled for any teams playing today. Are the 80's old timers or modern? How about Jordan Bulls, old timers or modern? Jordan, Drexler, Pippen would all be easily HoFers if playing today, so would Larry Bird, Kevin McHale and Cowens if playing today.

Cowens

For me it's all about the passage of time - the greater the number of years that have gone by - the greater the chance that major changes will have taken place. Over the short haul changes may not be as noticeable and of very little consequence. i like to break things down in the nba by changes in Key elements of the game.
The Key elements are
* Height
* Weight
* Race = Blacks
* Shooting skills
* Ball handling skills

The 50's were by far the worst in all 5 categories
The 60's started a significant move upward in the race and shooting skills
The 70's continued the upward move in race and shooting skills and saw a significant improvement in ball handling
The 80's reached the top in shooting Skills and Race became a game changer and ball handling was improving
The 90's Shooting and race leveled off at high levels while weight became a factor.
The last 17 years Race and shooting leveled off at high levels but International players became a big factor, 3 point shooting a game changer, Weight and ball handling skill at all time high.

Note - Height is always a major factor with all generations relying on the bigs to varying degrees.

To me the 70's are a transitional period - lets say half old - half modern


And I place the 80's through the present as modern.

cowens - My opinion is that all the players that you mentioned are modern day players and would play - some would be more successful then others.

Swish

Swish glad we are in agreement that the players that I mentioned, some that played over 30 years ago still had the game/athleticism/skill to play/dominate today. I personally feel the 80's Celtics and Lakers would kick the shit out of the teams today even though the 3 point shooting and spacing has gone up. Those teams from the 80's packed the paint and ran the floor in a way this era never has. Jabbar, Worthy, Bird, McHale and Parish would put on a post up clinic in the half court and run the ball down their throats on the break. The cold stretches of today's teams from the 3 would play right into the fast break from the 80's teams.

Cowens

I have tremendous respect for the brand of ball played in the eighties but theirs no way in hell that I would bet the farm that those great teams of the eighties would man handle some of the great team of the nineties and the last seventeen years. In a city that worships the glories of past Celtics teams, all the way back to 1956-57, I think that the modern generation might just be getting short changed. The nba has had 31 years to build on the skill level that existed when the 85-86 Celtics ruled the roast. All we can do is wonder.

swish

Swish I said today's teams, just because they shoot 3's at higher volume doesn't mean they don't have weaknesses that cannot be exploited. I have a lot of respect for a lot of the 90's teams too, Jordan was the first wing to dominate to such a degree and win without a dominant big man and a good debate could be made who was the greater second banana McHale or Pippen? But getting back to this era right now, I just don't see how the 2 best teams in this era could match up against Bird or Magic in their prime with all their great HoF partners.

cowens/oldschool wrote:Swish I said today's teams, just because they shoot 3's at higher volume doesn't mean they don't have weaknesses that cannot be exploited. I have a lot of respect for a lot of the 90's teams too, Jordan was the first wing to dominate to such a degree and win without a dominant big man and a good debate could be made who was the greater second banana McHale or Pippen? But getting back to this era right now, I just don't see how the 2 best teams in this era could match up against Bird or Magic in their prime with all their great HoF partners.

cowens

Your statement below

"But getting back to this era right now, I just don't see how the 2 best teams in this era could match up against Bird or Magic in their prime with all their great HoF partners.[/quote]"

I can - and I think that's one of the reasons why sports forums that tolerate differences of opinion are so popular.
These basketball exchanges of opinion are always an enjoyable pastime for me.

swish