“You watch Michael Jordan’s game, or you watch Kareem… you will be thoroughly impressed” - BJ Armstrong says the fundamentals of the game never change, says Steph Curry is no different to Bob Cousy

Former NBA player B.J. Armstrong chimed in on what he thinks about comparing players from different eras. On the most recent episode of his podcast, "The Hoop Genius Podcast," Armstrong and his co-host Mo Mooncey talk about the evolution of the game of basketball.

Comparing players from eras isn't something new in basketball. Fans constantly compare their favorite players to those who came before. Oftentimes, we see LeBron James being compared to Michael Jordan. Like the fans, the media has had neverending debates about which player is better. Most of the time, players from different generations are usually put side to side.

B.J. Armstrong, a former Chicago Bulls star, weighed in on this topic in response to JJ Redick's controversial take on NBA legend Bob Cousy. If you have forgotten what was controversial about his take, here's a refresher:

His "plumbers and firemen" comments have made rounds all over numerous NBA circles. It also reached LA Lakers legend Jerry West, who shared his thoughts on the matter:

With that exchange, many former players went on to share their thoughts on the topic. This includes Armstrong, who took the time on his podcast to voice out his opinion.

"watching Steph Curry right now is no different than watching Bob Cousy," Armstrong said as he compared two legendary players. That never changes and that is to me what makes this a beautiful game. ... It's the fundamentals, the core of who we are."

BJ Armstrong concluded with this:

"You watch Michael Jordan's game or you watch Kareem (Abdul-Jabbar) ...you will be thoroughly impressed if you just watch the fundamentals of the game."

---

B.J. Armstrong's point is valid when it comes to comparing players from different eras

Three-time champion B.J. Armstrong

In the early part of the episode of B.J. Armstrong's podcast, they discussed the difference in situations of different eras.

The league back then was very different. In the past, players didn't have signature shoes, the 3-point line was barely new and there were no insanely massive contracts. Fast forward to today, the aforementioned things are now a constant in the NBA and fans have become accustomed to it as a normal thing.

The one-time All-Star supported West's point about players not having enough resources. When players were injured back then, some of them were forced to play through it, since they didn't have the luxury to have world-class medical treatment compared to what players have today.

Shoes were different as well. Most players had Converse Chuck Taylor as their basketball shoes. If you've experienced playing with those, you know how much it hurts.

It's never a good idea to compare current players to those who paved the way and had the experience of doing all the hard work. Redick's take may seem valid to some, but B.J. Armstong makes a strong case for stopping the comparison of players. People can always argue about who's the greatest, but it's better not to discredit those who did all the hard work.