further, aside from the 30ppg player Cincinnati already had when Oscar arrived, they still didn't do anything until they got Jerry Lucas (a HOFer 20/20 player), winning 52 in Lucas's rookie year. But in 3 years, Lucas and Oscar were a 39-42 team again for 2 yrs in a row, and never broke .500 again....all this in Lucas and Oscar's prime years.
Yeah, and? I was agreeing with you. That's why it was a "rhetorical question." That is a direct question... No, he was not. Because Magic (leader) depended more on Jabbar (2nd) being in place, than Russell (leader) depended on Cousey (2nd) being in place. Although, I think Mr. Finn* might disagree. Of course you can defend the merits (importance) of Cousey if you like...hmmmmm?
hey, let's get our "rhetorical question" definition down. It is a rhetorical question if one of us says it is when we write it. Can we agree on that.
Heh...actually, I thought I wrote it wrong in the context of my sentence...I had to check the definition to make sure I didn't write it incorrectly. LOL!!! rhetorical: ajd.: "a rhetorical question is one asked solely to produce an effect (especially to make an assertion) rather than to elicit a reply"
Wrong!!! Cousy made the Celtics a fastbreaking team 4 years before Russell arrived. Cousy's assist totals BEFORE Russell arrived: 1951-52- 6.7 1952-53- 7.7 1953-54- 7.2 1955-56- 8.9 And this was accomplished BEFORE there was a shot clock!!! Teams used to get the lead and run a 4-corners (stall) offense. Cousy took a lousy team and put them in the playoffs every year BEFORE Russell. Offense was not a problem for the pre-Russell Celtics, defense was. Russell added a great defensive presence to an allready accomplished offensive team.
OK, I was wrong from thinking of no up tempo really being about the rules until '56. I remember Cousy just dribbling around in the halfcourt game for his assists. You're right; Auerbach had them run when they could. Now, can you admit that Russell had a significant impact on the success of that offense. The offense and the fastbreak did get better with him, not worse or the same. Russell's defense combined with his legendary outlet passing and great trailer...made everyone say he "ignited" the fastbreak. That's commonly said. further, are you telling me that Russell's offensive rebounding had no effect on improving the offense? So, the offense was all Cousy's playmaking, and Russell was just a defender. Heinsohn, Sharman, Sam Jones and Havlichek...those guys weren't really 20ppg scorers, were they? Do you realize in Game 7 of the first title, Cousy and Sharman were 2-20 and 3-20, respectively. Why did they keep shooting like Starks? The rookies won that game. Russell with 19, and Heinsohn with 32.
Hmm. . . Finn vs. HP vs. DavidS. I'd better stay away from this. But can I just jump in and make a newbie observation and leave you guys alone after that? I think comparing players at the top echelon from the same era, let alone players from different eras, is highly subjective. We can't really decide whether Duncan is better than Garnett, or Kobe better than McGrady. How can we say for sure the top PG from one era is better than that of another era? HP, I can't believe you resorted to ring-counting as your argument. As DavidS pointed out, there are so many factors contributing to a championship run (chemistry, timing, luck, opponents, etc.), it's almost impossible to correlate greatness with championships. To me, Oscar, Magic, and Stockton should be the top 3 all time. Cousy was before my time, so I can't say anything about him. Magic's game is easier to appreciate. And he could do other non-PG things better. I voted for him. But I think Oscar and Stockton got the PG job done equally well and maybe even more efficiently.
Oh, man, you soooo did not read this thread. My whole reason for jumping into this was Cousy vs Magic. Bob* tried to make some claim that Cousy's 6 rings makes him better than Magic's 5. Check it, Easy. You are obviously coming in here trying to check me...so go ahead...check out who first mentioned rings. My ring argument was that 6 vs 5 is not worth arguing, and Russell (and 5 other HOFers) vs Jabbar (and 1 other HOF) surely tips the scale to Magic's 5 over's Cousy's 6. My Oscar argument is the guy had a 20/20 HOFer with him and his team continued to fail to get over .500. The Oscar is the best PG ever is a new phenomenon in my experience with discussing bball. I've never heard that before nba.com starting the Oscar promotion. Oscar played more like a playmaking SG with his back to the basket, and everyone knows that. PG, schmoit-guard...Magic, Kidd, Stockton, and Cousy epitomize the ability to run multiple offenses....Oscar's inability to break .500 for many of the years with Jerry Lucas just tells me the offense had to revolve around Oscar, and he couldn't adjust in order to break .500.
I'm so tired of this recent Oscar "best PG ever" propoganda that I just have to promote Jerry Lucas. You guys realize this is an NBA HOFer who played college ball with Havlichek and Bobby Knight. I mean, if you know the history of Havlichek and/or Knight you know Lucas....that Ohio State team rocked. He was a great PF who knew the game, knew how to pass, knew how to get things going. Oscar, however, wanted to play the low post...ok, fine Oscar...go get your numbers. Then, Lucas gets traded to the Knicks and the Knicks *finally* win the title the same year...ummm, that was a year when Oscar, Dandrigde, Lucius Allen and a 26yr old Jabbar got dismissed in the first round.
No, I didn't come in here to check you. I put in my "vote" right after the poll came up. Didn't check back until yesterday and saw you and Bob*Finn and DavidS debating about Cousy, Oscar and Magic. My bad for taking you out of context. I still think comparing players from different eras is pretty futile.
I meant coming into the argument to "check" me in a bbs Hockey manuever, so to speak. (Laugh Easy...come on) Otherwise you would have read the thread more carefully. You were plainly wrong in assuming I breached the lame # of rings argument first. I accept your apology.
HeyP, I never said Russell's rebounding didn't help the offense. Of course it did, thats why they won so many championships. Cousy's assist numbers remained the same (except for the 1959-60 season, his career best of 9.6). The reason is the Celtics had more talented players who could handle the ball. As for your argument that Oscar was a SG Oscar Robertson controlled games, SG's do not control games. Former teammate Jerry Lucas told the Indianapolis Star: "He obviously was unbelievable, way ahead of his time. There is no more complete player than Oscar." At age 31 and still searching for an NBA Championship, Robertson joined second-year center Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (then called Lew Alcindor) in the Bucks' lineup. With Abdul-Jabbar winning the scoring title and the MVP Award, Milwaukee posted the NBA's best record in 1970-71 at 66-16. Robertson had what for him was a typical late-career season: He played in all but one game and tallied 19.4 points, 8.2 assists, and 5.7 rebounds per contest. The sad part about Oscar is he stayed too long (much like our beloved Hakeem). His knees were not good (this was way before arthroscopic surgery) during his Milwaukee years. He was a shadow of his glory years.
