Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Knicks411, post: 946299, member: 767"]
Yeah i definitely spent a ton of time on that website for posting in this thread so far.  I saw they recently estimated pace factors going back to like 1950 now.  It's crazy how different the game was, as an example, in 1963 the Celtics averaged 119 points per game, which wasn't even first in the league.  (It was third)  But their estimated possessions per game was 127, which means they averaged about .93 points per possession, which, believe it or not, was last in the league.  Of course, the league average was .96 points per possession.  League average now is about 1.06.

RF, ok, I follow you now.  The Celtics didn't have all of the great players in the 60's (Robertson, West, Baylor, Wilt, etc) but they probably had a greater concentration of really good players than anyone else, which might have had something to do with why they won every year.  Obviously they had Russell, who was one of (fill in your small number here) players ever, Cousy made first team all league 10 years in a row, (though he retired after like title #5, which is one of those things that blew my mind when I first saw it; as a kid growing up hearing about those teams you kind of just assume all those guys were about the same age and were together for the whole run, which is of course ridiculous, but something that makes sense as kid) Havlicek was one of the best guys in the league, Sam Jones, Heinsohn, etc.  Which is a testament to Red, who was miles ahead of the competition at that time.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?