Has anyone commenting here ever actually seen Cousy play a single game? Never understood discussing players you've never seen play There's always just raw stats, but even that is flawed because it has no context ... by stats only Wilt is the greatest to ever play
We have video, too. So yeah, a lot of us have probably seen him play. Not sure why being there live to smell the sweat is the only way you can comment on something. In that case, Cousy should never be discussed...even as an all-time great. In your view, we should let him be forgotten by history, as the people who saw him play live all die out.
Fair enough. and I agreed with much of his real answer. But, he took a shot at JJ that didn't really add any context to the point he was making. He just wanted to put him in his place. JJ is paid to make hot takes, West doesnt need to do that. He didn't just take a shot at Cousy for no reason. He was trying to illustrate the difference in the level of competition and skill when discussing an all time best PG list for his job.
If JJ can give hot takes, fair game the Logo don't hold back. West (on Reddick): "I just think it's very disrespectful"
No I just leave it to those who were there and take in their information and opinions and eyewitness accounts and accept their word for it, especially when there seems to be a clear historical consensus Babe Ruth When there isn't, I abstain from the discussion and just listen What could I possibly contribute to the Bill vs Wilt debate when both retired years before I was born How can I weigh in on Mays vs Mantle with anything meaningful? Anything NBA after 1990 and I'm right in the mix Before that, I watch 30 for 30 and others that preserve history via 1st-hand sources with something relevant to say about greats I never saw
Okay, but soon there won't be anyone alive who saw them play live. At that point, there can no longer be any conversations about those players? Seems like you're doing them a massive disservice.
I just checked with Cousy's black teammates and opponents in the 1950's when he was at his peak and I could barely find any! like none! They must have all died out or something.
Just the nature of time I'm afraid The past makes way for the present in the collective contemporary zeitgeist, leaving historical scholars to have purely academic debates with nothing new to add
Well, I guess if that's your perspective, you're welcome to it. There's more to add over time, IMO. We get better at understanding the game, we get better at statistical analysis, we can apply these new lenses to older periods that didn't have those things. Baseball is an excellent example of this--someone like Steve Garvey was revered in his own time, because batting average was king and he had a lot of great batting average seasons. But we've learned since then that there are much more important things in the pursuit of winning games than batting average and as a low-power, low-walk first baseman, he wasn't actually that valuable a player. It doesn't change that he was a star in his own time, and we can appreciate that and understand that--but we can also do more than fans and experts of the time could to understand his actual value to winning. (And it goes the other way too--players who weren't as respected at the time, like Dwight Evans, can be viewed in a new light as better statistical tools show their value.) I'm glad people continue to discuss players they never saw live. It roots discussion in the longer tradition, creates interesting debates and keeps alive the legacies of players which makes for a richer conversation.
Jerry is the first guy i looked up after seeing the title. Still an elite evaluator. Able to judge across generations. Proven winner and well respected. I bet he hated having to defend a Celtic, lol
Players nowadays couldn't even bring the ball up the court without getting called for carrying if the rules were enforced now like they were back then. It just makes you look like a POS douche calling out the stars from back in the day. Are players better now, yes, they should be, sports aren't supposed to devolve. JJs punk ass would be working some normal job if guys like Cousy hadn't helped grow the game.
I think West took it personal and reacted because of the perceived disrespect, he even ended his statement with it. I think he meant to convey that these old legends contributed to the evolution of the game, while guys like Reddick or perhaps Arenas never did, only to have these modern guys saying or implying that they're better players than all these past legends. sealclubber is right. Reddick may not be a fireman or plumber now, but if not for legends of the past, he may have to choose a similarly arduous profession outside of basketball and slaves his way during the summer like they did. How would he have fared then?
Obviously the game continues to evolve over the years and overall talent level increases. But for his era, Cousy was great. He has 10 first team all NBA selections which is pretty rarified air.
You realize there's a ton of full games online from that time period, that many of us here have watched? You don't need to live in the 50s-80s and be in the stadium when the games are available now, and it also gives you way less retro bias about a player.
JJ reddick was not a scrub in the NBA.... there was actually only a handful of guys in the league who could do what he did. most players can't sprint full speed, catch, turn and shoot. was JJ as good as guys like reggie, ray, and klay ? of course not, but he its a valuable skill defenses had to respect. not that it even matters for his point about the game then vs now but i just dont think west should act like reddick was a 12th man or something so his opinion shouldn't mean anything.
