[VIDEO] Oscar Robertson Highlights - THE LEGEND IN HIS PRIME

Calm down sir. It's simply and opinion. I'm not saying Oscar Robertson was devoid of talent--which you seem to think I'm implying, I'm simply suggesting that a player like LeBron James would put up even crazier numbers than Oscar Robertson.

You're right, I wasn't around in the 60's to witness Robertson play in person, but based on available footage of players from his era, it would be somewhat ignorant to declare that the players of yesteryear are just as talented as they are today. They are not--and far from it. You don't have players like Kevin Durant that are 6-10 that are able to put the ball on the floor and play like guards, nor do you have players like Derrick Rose that possess the same ball-handling prowess, acrobatic ability, and extraordinary athleticism. The game has evolved and players overall are more talented than they were back in the day. The overall talent level in the league is stronger today than it was nearly half a century ago, that much to me is common sense.


Athletes today are bigger, faster, stronger than they were 50 years ago. This much is fact for the very same reasons you stated above and isn't limited simply to the game of basketball. You can attribute it to better workout facilities, improved training methods, evolution of sports science, performance enhancing drugs, etc., but athletes have plenty more options when it comes to improving their overall athletic ability at their disposal than they did 5 decades ago.


Again, I think Oscar Robertson was a heck of ball player during his era, however, I highly doubt that his numbers would be as crazy if he played in the league today. I'm not trying to take anything away from Robertson's legacy and I consider him one of the pioneers of the game, however, you simply can't compare players today and player's from nearly half a century ago. Again, it's simply an opinion, so no need to get your panties in a wad.

 

Oscar was simply the best player on the floor; that's why he played PG-- similar to MJ at the end of his career. They wanted the ball in his hands as much as possible.

The link to your stats is for NBA prospect and camp attendees at camps for NBA aspirants: everything from The Combine to the Portsmouth Invitational to individual camps run by the likes of Durant, LBJ, Amare et al. Therefore, those are not NBA player stats.

Did a quick review of the actual 1963 Boston Celtics roster when they went 59-21 and won the NBA title. Here is their roster and the listed sizes of those players:

G: 6-1 (Cousy), 6-1, 6-3, and 6-4
F: 6-3, 6-6, 6-5 (Havlicek), 6-6, 6-6 and 6-7 (Heinsohn)
C: 6-9 and 6-9 (Russell)

Did a quick review of the actual 1963 Cincinnati Royals roster when they went 55-25. Here is their roster and the listed sizes of those players:

G: 6-1, 6-2, 6-2, 6-4 and 6-5 (Oscar)
F: 6-5, 6-6, 6-7, 6-8, 6-8 (Jerry Lucas)
C: 6-8 and 6-8

By comparison here is the 2012 Sacramento Kings (former Royals) roster:

G: 5-9, 6-2, 6-4, 6-6, 6-6 and 6-6
F: 6-6, 6-7, 6-8, 6-9, 6-11 and 6-11
C: 6-11 and 7-0

 

Riiiight. The vast majority of the clips I saw where of him shooting jump shots over little white dudes. Mindblowing...

Those oversized clips you posted also prove my point....little white dudes everywhere. Did they ever play defense back then? Good lord...

 

Yes there are. We discussed this on this board awhile back. Wilt regularly went against 6-6 centers who werent' exactly Chuck Hayesian in their defensive skill sets....and the help defense, to the extent there was any, was coming from a 6-3 forward from Youngtsown Ohio with lots of consonants in his name rather than Shawn Marion or Robert Horry.

 

At the same time, I don't think any modern day centers have played any guys to the quality of Bob Lanier, Nate Thurmond, Bill Russell, Willis Reed, Wes Unseld, Artis Gilmore, Walt Bellamy, or Kareem Abdul Jabbar.

It's ironic isn't it.

 

But this logic is circular. Were there so many great big men or was it really the fact that there weren't enough....I mean come on, you brought up Walt Bellamy.

Great numbers, but if there ever was a poster child for the inflated reputation of players from the 60's based on raw stats and nothing else....he is definitely it.

Nate Thurmond is another guys who looking back, doesn't look so hot. 6-11 220lb career 42% shooter? I think Dwight Howard can handle it. But hey, great raw rebounding numbers, due in part to the super-high octane pace and low FG%'s of the day.

Same with a lot of those guys. I see a number of denensive players from today able to replicate Russell's performance in the 60's...do you think Marcus Camby or Serge Ibaka or even Sam Dalembert, Kelvin Cato etc would have a hard time blocking shots or gobbling up rebounds back then? They would have an absolute field day swatting away two handed set shots from scandanavian small forwards and regularly log 20 rebound games.

Again, players like Wilt and Russell would have been great or at least allstars in the modern era, but the second tier of the Bellamies and THurmonds of the universe who basically

 

I dunno, I feel like I could make the same argument about Oscar.

How good would Oscar be if he had todays training and dietary information?

 

Oh, and what is the evidence for this, other than just you arbitrarily saying it? How do you know if 60's heights were "barefoot" or not?

Give them all an extra inch and you still have complete midgetry by today's standards, it's not even close. And it's not surprising either, there are exponentially more players now than there were back then. As the size of the pool increases, average heights are going to increase

 

Clutchfans: Where people argue Oscar Robertson wasn't a great player and Kyle Lowry is a superstar

 

This is why comparing players across different eras is not very meaningful. Later eras are built on earlier ones. You have to look at players relative to their peers.

Today's players SHOULD be better due to the advancement of so many things, not to mention changes in rules and their interpretations. The way today's players dribble would have been called carrying back then.

 

i wish i could rep that...

 

Close to projectile oatmeal on that one

 

Not sure who is thought to be saying that Oscar wasn't a great player. Different era. Different athletes. Different game. If you really want to project Oscar into the "ultra modern" era of basketball we need to see a highlight reel of his dunks....

 

I feel like dominance in an era shows you're great. Great players will always be great.

 

I guess we can agree to disagree, because it's not simply about blocked shots and rebounds. Circular logic, I disagree.

Bill Russell, Walt Bellamy, Nate Thurmond, Wes Unseld, Bob Lanier, and others were good, because they were very skilled players (that's been my whole argument, especially with centers). These players had some very high basketball IQs (I hate to say this, but that's lacking in alot of big men nowadays) and great basketball ability.

Could lesser players, like Ibaka, Dalembert, Cato, and Camby average Russell numbers? Possibly, scoring and rebounding. Assists, no way. In most other areas of basketball, I highly doubt it. It's not just numbers, it was how they got their numbers. Players with size didn't necessarily put up big numbers, it was the more skilled big man. You guys don't seem to realize not every player was routinely averaging over 20 rebounds. For the most part, it was mostly Russell and Chamberlain.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/trb_per_g_career.html


It's the same with Chamberlain, people often focus on his scoring numbers and rebounding, yet never pay attention to his assists statistics, never fouling out of NBA game (name one other player who could've done that in their career), and his conditioning. People often say he wouldn't be quite as dominant or would may not even be in all-star, yet look what most NBA greats have to say about Wilt, even a center like Kareem Abdul Jabbar (who had his struggles with an older Wilt Chamberlain).


Chamberlain in the NBA right now, would still be a monster (maybe not 50 ppg). I've said before and I've said again, the only players over the last decade that would stand a chance against him is Shaq, Dwight Howard, and a healthy Yao. A team would never go small ball with a player like Wilt in the game. He's not quite as tall Yao Ming, but he's much more athletically gifted, better scoring mentality, and is better in several area offensively and defensively. With Howard, he could be more athletic, but he's not quite as long as Wilt and is nowhere as skilled, either.


Those modest centers you named Ibaka, Cato, Dalembert, or Camby ... I don't think they would stand much of chance against any all-time great center.


Most of the greatest players ever wouldn't drop off in today's game. Some players are slightly more athletically, but they are not skilled, no go-to moves, and are mental midgets.

 

Clutch Fans delusions, whatever they say, the opposite is true. If they think a #14 pick or #21 pick is a future superstar lying in wait ... he's got high bust potential reality.

If it's a superstar player or a great hall of fame player, then they are possibly overrated. I don't see the logic of these people, sometimes.

Oscar Robertson is like Magic Johnson, but with more scoring ability and prowess. Most of all, Oscar Robertson would probably be close to 235-240 in the modern NBA (weight training). It's laughable to suggest someone like Ginobili or Joe Johnson would be on his level. It's almost like thinking Johnny Unitas or Joe Montana couldn't run a modern NFL offense, when they were kind of the pioneers of things that are happening today. Though in basketball, I don't think you lose shooting ability, passing ability/court vision, and basketball IQ. You are talking about some of the greatest basketball skill sets ever, when you mention Oscar Robertson, Larry Bird, or Wilt Chamberlain.

I told posters that it was much more difficult to get assists in 60s, because assist were more like pass to teammate and the ball could never touch the ground. Pace was much faster, yet the statistics on assist were way more conservative. Someone even pointed out in a realgm thread of how assists are much more inflated nowadays.

 

I'm sorry, but how are you extrapolating that these guys were "very skilled" compared to guys today? Nate Thurmond, as previously mentioned, was a horrible shooter for a big man.....42% would earn any center today a trip to the D - League. What precisely was his skill set that would allow him to overcome today's bigger, stronger, faster players? Are you basing this on grainy youtube clips of uncontested layups, a few hook shots and some jumpers? None of that stuff is a rare commodity now.

By playing in the NBA equivalent of NBA Live 95 on 10 minute quarters on Amateur difficutly? That's precisely what I'm saying though. Once you control for those things, namely the huge amount of possessions they got to go through per game, , other than Wilt, the 60's crew doesn't stack up nearly as godlike with things liek winshares/PER/rebound rating

Of course they are. Reboundign has been disucssed ad nauseum. If you want to pick one stat that's most distorted by the ridiculous pacing and horrid shooting of the early 60's - it's rebounding.

It's the same with Chamberlain, people often focus on his scoring numbers and rebounding, yet never pay attention to his assists statistics, never fouling out of NBA game (name one other player who could've done that in their career), and his conditioning. People often say he wouldn't be quite as dominant or would may not even be in all-star, yet look what most NBA greats have to say about Wilt, even a center like Kareem Abdul Jabbar (who had his struggles with an older Wilt Chamberlain).

And David Robinson, Hakeem, Dikembe, Ben Wallace and pretty much any other all-star center, and probably many who werent' as well.

Going up against Willie Knauls while occasionally having to combat a beanpole seven footer isn't the same thing as playing in the modern era. Sorry, it's just not even in the same ballpark.

 

So basically he's a shorter, wider Tracy McGrady.

Listen, I used to worship these guys as well, but as you watch and read more and more basketball it's easy to see how much stats are distorted and how big a part this played in their curretn legacy, and unless you're claiming to be an eyewitness, they're all we have to go on along with grainy film.

 

All without a single carry or crab dribble.

DD