Re: If he wore green and white?

[bocelts@scsn.net (R. Bentz Kirby)]

Well, I pointed out that dunking is UP.  And I think that might account for some of
the stats.  The old Celtics won with team play, defense and offense.  I think that the
shooting skills have diminished as far as the outside jump shot goes.  Last year there
was a good article about how folks like Eddie Johnson stay in the league because the
kids coming up can not make the shot consistently.  In fact, Eddie even said, hey its
not my fault they can't shoot anymore.

But the dunk certainly would increase the %.

Bill Cooper wrote:

> On Sat, 30 May 1998 17:11:10 -0400, Bentz wrote:
>
> >I would say that Jordan is in the class with Russell, Chamberlain, Bird, Magic,
> >Kareem.  I am not sure that anyone else is in that class.  But to say Jordan is
> >the best.  Well, I just can't buy that no matter who he played for.  The league
> >talent is watered down from the old days.  The shooting skills have diminished as
> >the athletic dunking has increased.  I am not convinced that this Bulls team
> >could beat the great Celtic team of the 50's if those players came along today
> >and developed the same skills.  Unfortunately, they would not develope the same
> >skills.   They would play today's game.  So, as we know it is all hypothetical.
>
> This is a little bit thick.  The Russell Celtics were not a good
> shooting team, measured by the standards of the time, or compared to
> todays teams.
>
> Year              FG%               Rank           Avg FG%
> 56-57           .383                     3                  .380
> 57-58           .387                     3                  .383
> 58-59           .395                     4                  .395
> 59-60           .417                     3                  .410
> 60-61           .398                     8(last)         .415
> 61-62           .423                     5                  .423
> 62-63           .427                     9(last)         .441
> 63-64           .413                     9(last)         .433
> 64-65           .414                     8                  .426
> 65-66           .417                     8                  .433
> 66-67           .447                     4                  .441
> 67-68           .440                     7                  .445
> 68-69           .431                     9                  .441
>
> Bentz's claims about shooting skills are somewhat exagerated.
> Despite there being no reward for shooting long jumpers, the FG% in
> the 60's were lower than today's (FG% today,  would probably be close
> to 50%, were it not for the 3 point shot).  And the Celts were clearly
> the worst shooting great team ever (all three of the years they
> finished last in the league in FG%, they won more than 70% of their
> games, and of course, won the title).
>
> Interestingly, there doesn't seem to be much of a correlation between
> expansion and FG% (and, if anything, it's positive).  By 1968-69, the
> league was up to 13 teams (from 8 in the early 60's), and the league
> had also lost a substantial number of players to the ABA, but FG% were
> at their highest level ever.
>
> Bill Cooper
>
> P.S. As for dunking goes,  if it leads to higher FG% is IS a shooting
> skill.



--

Peace,

Bentz
bocelts@scsn.net
http://www.scsn.net/users/sclaw