Alright who do you think is the better player Nate Archibald or Oscar Robertson? And while we're at it which feat is better Archibald's leading the league in scoring and assists or Robertson's averaging a triple double for the season? What do you think?
I go with Oscar Robertson. Anyone who can average a triple double in a season, that's simply amazing. And, yea, I think his triple double average was better than Tiny leading the league in scoring and assists. Cause, a triple double is hard enough to get, but, if you can average it for a season, that's just astounding.
A triple double is rare already but for someone to get one constantly is really good its better then leading scoring and assists becuase your doing three things in double figures.
They both held there own against anybody but as an overall player its definitely the Big O. Getting a triple double is hard enough but averaging one?? DAMN..
I think leading the leauge in points AND assists is just as hard... The Big O had a height advantage over most guards of his time... He was the 60's Magic, Could play anywhere from the 1 to the 4... If you don't believe that he could play the power forward I have a name for you : Elgin Baylor... Tiny was 6'1" and Oscar 6'5"... So, again you have that height advantage, where in Robertson gets profite from his size... Plus, When Oscar played there weren't many players who could guard him just BECAUSE of his height... While Tiny led the leauge in 1974 in APG&PPG he was probably THE or one of the smallest players in the NBA...
Definatly Big O, averaging a Triple Double in the season is seriously f*cked. I'd like to see anyone try and do that nowadays in this league. His stats are wicked messed man.
I have to go with Robertson. As said, look at how hard it is to get a triple-double now, imagine a player averaging one. Big-O was a seriously dominant player that year, and throughout his whole career, more so than Archibald. Not taking anything away from Nate, he was a great player and had his own great accomplishment, but it's not really worth much now. Big-O is still recognized for averaging a triple-double that season, not to mention a couple other things he has on his resume. Try to keep Nate from getting shadowed too much by Big-O, he's a small guy.
Oscar Robertson. Averaging a triple double is flat out amazing. I doubt anyone will be able to do that again.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Chucksta:</div><div class="quote_post">I think leading the leauge in points AND assists is just as hard... The Big O had a height advantage over most guards of his time... He was the 60's Magic, Could play anywhere from the 1 to the 4... If you don't believe that he could play the power forward I have a name for you : Elgin Baylor... Tiny was 6'1" and Oscar 6'5"... So, again you have that height advantage, where in Robertson gets profite from his size... Plus, When Oscar played there weren't many players who could guard him just BECAUSE of his height... While Tiny led the leauge in 1974 in APG&PPG he was probably THE or one of the smallest players in the NBA...</div> I understand where you come from. But, the height advantage can only really help him with the points things. I don't understand how it would help him get assists. That makes no sense at all. And for the rebounds, he still had to get in there and bang with people bigger than him in order to get some of them. So, I don't really think your argument against him makes all that much sense in those aspects.
i must say Big O. Averageing a triple double is much better than leading the league and points and assist. Big O is a better Overall player. I forget what year but Grant Hill almost averaged a triple double. Too bad his career ended short. He will never be the same again IF he comes back.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">I understand where you come from. But, the height advantage can only really help him with the points things. I don't understand how it would help him get assists. That makes no sense at all. And for the rebounds, he still had to get in there and bang with people bigger than him in order to get some of them. So, I don't really think your argument against him makes all that much sense in those aspects.</div> I never said that would help him with the assists But in the rebounding thing, I still believe he had a clear advantage because the thing you just said : bang down low... When The Big O played almost every player trusted on finesse and positioning for a rebound, not really on vertical leap, strenght, etc. Those days there were only 3 people who really hit the weight room : 2 Centers (Russell & Chamberlain) AND a guard : Oscar Robertson... I bet Oscar didn't trust much on his positioning and finesse as Russell and Baylor( Well, he trusted also on his vertical leap) but used his his strenght for the rebound by pushing smaller or less stronger opponents out of the way... The year when the Big O averaged a triple double there were only 2 players in the leauge over 7feet... Now there are playing 15-20 7footers... And in 1961-62 you had a bunch of 6-10,6-9 players (Russell, Bellamy) and that was it... He really HAD advantage of his height in comparison to nowadays or the 1973-1974 season when Tiny played (though he has nothing to do with the rebound stuff) ... And by that he was able to get his triple-double on nightly basis... But you can see on his stats that his rebounding dropped year by year, while his Prime Year ( As I call it ) would've been something around the 1966-1967 season... My conclusion : He DID have a advantage by his height and by hitting the weight rooms as the only freakin' guy under 6'9"...
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MavsJ33:</div><div class="quote_post">That's still pretty good. And people do you think I should make more of these comparison threads?</div> Well, not much... Yeah, you should, but don't bring up those with the endless debate... Chamberlain-Russell , Bird-Magic, West- Robertson etc. Pick some other as Pettit-Schayes, Maravich-Havlicek or Hal Greer-Bernard King... Though not many people know those they could be heavily discussed...
