Amazing Larry Bird stat note

[Bano114]

Out of the 5 major stats, Points, Rebounds, Assists, Steals and Blocks. Larry Bird is only in the top 25 in one of those catagories. That was points. He is 25th on the list for all time leaders in points.

The guy is considered one of the greatest of all time by many people but was he really that dominant? For a guy regarded as highly as him you would think he would be on/higher up on some of those lists. I mean, he played 13 years which is a good length for a career.

Can anyone explain this?

Is is the awards/championships that make everyone believe he is so great? Let's face it, he is a great player. But is he a dominant player?

I love Bird and his style of play this is just something I looked up and found suprising.

http://espn.go.com/nba/history/leaders

This is the list of all time leaders in catagories.

[Hammertime]

Yay. Another thread whose sole arguments are brought to you by basketball-reference.com

:applause:

[DuMa]

Most players who get those stats are either super athletic and/or extremely smart basketball players. Bird wasnt super athletic so by default he was extremely smart. You can pretty much argue the case that he was one of the most smartest basketball players on the court of all time. He was just one step ahead of everyone most of the time in his career. That was the key

[Bano114]

Most players who get those stats are either super athletic and/or extremely smart basketball players. Bird wasnt super athletic so by default he was extremly smart. You can pretty much argue the case that he was one of the most smartest basketball players on the court of all time. He was just one step ahead of everyone most of the time in his career. That was the key

Thanks. That makes a lot of sense. Especially considering the fact that the guy could tell his defender what he was doing and still score.:oldlol:

[jlauber]

Even more amazing are his career playoff stats, including PER (for those that value it.) He cracks the top-25 in ppg, at #24 (23.76), but that is about it.

Once again, and carrying my argument from another thread...Kobe is a better player, in terms of career, than Bird was.

[Penny37]

Out of the 5 major stats, Points, Rebounds, Assists, Steals and Blocks. Larry Bird is only in the top 25 in one of those catagories. That was points. He is 25th on the list for all time leaders in points.

The guy is considered one of the greatest of all time by many people but was he really that dominant? For a guy regarded as highly as him you would think he would be on/higher up on some of those lists. I mean, he played 13 years which is a good length for a career.

Can anyone explain this?

Is is the awards/championships that make everyone believe he is so great? Let's face it, he is a great player. But is he a dominant player?

I love Bird and his style of play this is just something I looked up and found suprising.

http://espn.go.com/nba/history/leaders

This is the list of all time leaders in catagories.
If you really have to question whether or not Bird was a dominant player, then you obviously have never watched him play.

[HisJoeness]

Larry's back was done for the last 3-5 years of his career so that's why his raw numbers may not stand up to other legends. But make no mistake this dude was dominant. From 1981-86 he was the best basketball player in the world.

[Batz]

What's so special about top 25?

[joshwake]

he was probably the most clutch player to ever play in the NBA. You have to actually have watched him play basketball to know this though.

http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1274925563&sr=8-1

everyone on ISH should read that book.

[dyna]

Bird>Lebron, Kobe, Wade

[unknown101]

What's so special about top 25?

I think that was just picked because that was what the link showed. Something I noticed in that list... Hakeem is in the top 10 in steals blocks and points, and 11th in rebounds. Only other player close to being in the top 25 in all 4 is KG who is 50 steals away.

[maxwellcu]

Do these people even watch or like basketball, or are they ONLY interested in statistical analysis?

Stats are a great tool, but if your stat tells you that Larry Bird isn't an all-time great, then you are looking into the numbers waaaaaaay too much.

[SEEBASS1234]

This message is hidden because jlauber is on your ignore list.
he is on kobe stan mode because durant got knocked out

[jlauber]

he was probably the most clutch player to ever play in the NBA. You have to actually have watched him play basketball to know this though.

http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1274925563&sr=8-1

everyone on ISH should read that book.

You better take a closer look at Bird in his five NBA Finals. A case could be made that he was only the best player on the court in those five Finals, in ONE...and that was in 83-84 when LA should have SWEPT Boston in the first four games.

[Bernie Nips]

According to your logic, Kevin Garnett = GOAT.

I mean, he's in the top 25 in 3 of those categories, will probably end up top 25 in steals as well... and he's also got a very respectable amount of assists (especially for a big man).

Stats don't tell everything.

[Fatal9]

Bird didn't even play 900 games in his career, entered the NBA at 23 and his body broke down at 31. These type of cumulative stats reward longevity (at least 1000+ played games), it doesn't make him a better or worse player. Why are there so many idiots who can't realize simple things like this? He is the greatest all-around player ever, and him being or not being in the "top 25" means sh*t. You can question his longevity and durability, but not his dominance.

lol @ "was he really that dominant". For five straight years he averaged, 24/10/7, 29/11/7, 26/10/7, 28/9/8 and 30/9/6, all while being near the top on steal leaders and posting crazy shooting percentages. If Lebron posted seasons like that while on teams that won a couple of rings, you'd be creaming yourself. This while rebounding on a front line that included McHale and Parish, sharing the ball with his team and not getting nearly as many touches as star players would get from 90s onward.

[Fatal9]

You better take a closer look at Bird in his five NBA Finals. A case could be made that he was only the best player on the court in those five Finals, in ONE...and that was in 83-84 when LA should have SWEPT Boston in the first four games.
:roll:

'81 (easily the best player on the court for anyone who has seen the series)
'84 (one of the greatest finals performances ever)
'86 (one of the greatest finals performances ever)

[unknown101]

Jordan is only in 2 of them...

Does that mean Robinson, Ewing, Hakeem, Garnett, etc. who are all in top 25 3 or 4 times are all better than Jordan?

Larry Bird, just like Michael Jordan, isnt gonna be on all of the top 25's because that's really only possible for big men like the ones listed above. try to find a sg or sf thats in 3 of those categories, I dont think there is any.

[Wukillabeez78]

If you'd ever seen Larry Bird play you wouldn't be questioning his greatness. All-time stat rankings like those you are talking about have more to do with a players longevity in the league than greatness. For instance, Mark Jackson has more total assists in his career than Magic Johnson and Isiah Thomas even though the latter two were WAAAYYYYY better passers and players than he was. They played at a higher level than Mark Jackson but have inferior all-time assist totals because he played much longer than they did.

You have to be able to discern what numbers are really important when comparing players (especially if you never saw them play with your own eyes). Generally, people who only compare players by their stats do so by comparing a certain amount of time (their best 5 years for example).

I prefer looking at per game averages if I am going to solely compare players by stats. This gives you a better idea of what the player actually did as opposed to cumulative stats. There are plenty of journeyman type players who simply played a long time and have great all-time totals because of their longevity and not necessarily because they were great.

Larry was GREAT though and is definitely a top ten player all time. 24.3 ppg, 10.0 rpg and 6.3 apg??? How many small forwards have better numbers all time? He was a small forward by the way and got those numbers (esp. the rebounds) playing with a great center (Parish) and great power forward (McHale). Just for the sake of comparison, Dirk (who is a power forward several inches taller than Bird) has career averages of 22.9 ppg, 8.5 rpg and 2.7 apg. Dirk will probably play much longer than Bird and might eventually have better career totals than Bird (especially total points) but his career averages will never be better. You tell me who's the better player....

[DoubleTech]

Is is the awards/championships that make everyone believe he is so great? Let's face it, he is a great player. But is he a dominant player?


Have you ever watched the guy play? Do you have any idea how many clutch baskets he hit during his career? Do you know how tough and competitive he was? He makes today's players look like puss!es.

courtesy of Kblaze:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULvo7__wwBU

pay close attention to what Magic says at the beginning of the video.

[AirGauge23]

If you wanna see dominance, check his 60 point game against the hawks.

He did it because he felt like it.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Bird didn't even play 900 games in his career, entered the NBA at 23 and his body broke down at 31. These type of cumulative stats reward longevity (at least 1000+ played games), it doesn't make him a better or worse player. Why are there so many idiots who can't realize simple things like this? He is the greatest all-around player ever, and him being or not being in the "top 25" means sh*t. You can question his longevity and durability, but not his dominance.

lol @ "was he really that dominant". For five straight years he averaged, 24/10/7, 29/11/7, 26/10/7, 28/9/8 and 30/9/6, all while being near the top on steal leaders and posting crazy shooting percentages. If Lebron posted seasons like that while on teams that won a couple of rings, you'd be creaming yourself. This while rebounding on a front line that included McHale and Parish, sharing the ball with his team and not getting nearly as many touches as star players would get from 90s onward.

+10

Was gonna say the same thing. These people are crazy. Bird is probably the most well-rounded (and arguably the most effective) offensive player in history. It's better to look at career averages in cases like Bird's -- or, better yet, his 3-5 year peak averages. Bird was ridiculously good.

[bballer]

You can't go off stats with this one.

[juju151111]

Even more amazing are his career playoff stats, including PER (for those that value it.) He cracks the top-25 in ppg, at #24 (23.76), but that is about it.

Once again, and carrying my argument from another thread...Kobe is a better player, in terms of career, than Bird was.
LOL Larry>KB Wth are you talking about you stat whore. Lets see their playoffs stats then.

[jlauber]

:roll:

'81 (easily the best player on the court for anyone who has seen the series)
'84 (one of the greatest finals performances ever)
'86 (one of the greatest finals performances ever)

First of all, Kareem AND Magic were better in '85, and Magic was CLEARLY better in '87.

Now, on to '81. Bird averaged 15.3 ppg, 15.0 rpg, 7.0 apg, and shot .419 from the field. He didn't deserve, NOR did he win the Finals MVP. He was outplayed by his own teammate, Cornbread Maxwell, who averaged 17.7 ppg, 9.5 rpg, and shot .568 from the floor. Meanwhile Moses Malone put up a 22.2 ppg, 16.3 rpg series, with arguably a bad .403 FG%. In any case, if Bird were the best in that series, he was not very good.

'84. IF LA had not GIVEN games two and four, Bird wouldn't have won that Finals MVP. I do agree that he was the best player in that series...ALTHOUGH it was close. Bird averaged 27.4 ppg, with 14.0 rpg, 3.6 apg, and shot .484. Meanwhile Magic had a very good series (although his FT shooting down the stretch killed LA in game four.) He averaged 18.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 13.6 apg, and shot .560 from the field.

In '86 Bird's numbers were good, but debateable. 24.0 ppg, 9.7 rpg, 9.5 apg on .482 shooting. His fellow teammate, Kevin McHale averaged 25.8 ppg, 8.5 rpg, and shot .573 from the floor. Houston's Olajuwon 24.7 ppg, 11.8 rpg, 3.1 bpg, and shot .479 from the field.

In '85, Bird averaged 23.8 ppg, 8.8 rpg, 9.5 apg, and shot .450. His teammate McHale, went for 26.0 ppg, 10.7 rpg, and shot .598. Meanwhile, Kareem, after a horrible game one, dominated the rest of the series. He finished with 25.7 ppg, 9.0 rpg, 5.2 apg, and shot .604 from the field. And Magic put up 18.3 ppg, 6.8 rpg, 14.0 apg, and shot .494 from the floor.

In '87, Bird put up 24.2 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 5.5 apg, and shot .445 from the floor. Magic went for 26.2 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 13.0 apg, and shot .541 from the field.

Sorry, but these are the FACTS. Was Bird a great player, sure for a period of about five years. I have him at #10 on MY all-time list. And, yes, he is well below Magic (#2), and is even below Kobe (#8.) In terms of career, he is where he should be.

[juju151111]

Bird didn't even play 900 games in his career, entered the NBA at 23 and his body broke down at 31. These type of cumulative stats reward longevity (at least 1000+ played games), it doesn't make him a better or worse player. Why are there so many idiots who can't realize simple things like this? He is the greatest all-around player ever, and him being or not being in the "top 25" means sh*t. You can question his longevity and durability, but not his dominance.

lol @ "was he really that dominant". For five straight years he averaged, 24/10/7, 29/11/7, 26/10/7, 28/9/8 and 30/9/6, all while being near the top on steal leaders and posting crazy shooting percentages. If Lebron posted seasons like that while on teams that won a couple of rings, you'd be creaming yourself. This while rebounding on a front line that included McHale and Parish, sharing the ball with his team and not getting nearly as many touches as star players would get from 90s onward.
:applause: :applause: It's funny how jabuar is a historian and doesn't know Bird Greatest.

[jlauber]

LOL Larry>KB Wth are you talking about you stat whore. Lets see their playoffs stats then.

In terms of scoring...not even close. Bird's BEST post-season scoring average was 27.5 in '83-84. If you count this post-season, Kobe has had SEVEN post-seasons above that, including FOUR over 30! You can argue that Bird may have had better all-around numbers, but in terms of CAREER, Kobe has been a force for more seasons, AND, he is not close to being done.

[Soothsayer]

You better take a closer look at Bird in his five NBA Finals. A case could be made that he was only the best player on the court in those five Finals, in ONE...and that was in 83-84 when LA should have SWEPT Boston in the first four games.

And a case could be made that out of Kobe's 6 finals appearances, he was only the best player on the court in ONE as well, last year, when he beat the Magic.

[Showtime]

In terms of scoring...not even close. Bird's BEST post-season scoring average was 27.5 in '83-84. If you count this post-season, Kobe has had SEVEN post-seasons above that, including FOUR over 30! You can argue that Bird may have had better all-around numbers, but in terms of CAREER, Kobe has been a force for more seasons, AND, he is not close to being done.
Why do the kids think everything has to do with PPG?

[Cyclone112]

Even more amazing are his career playoff stats, including PER (for those that value it.) He cracks the top-25 in ppg, at #24 (23.76), but that is about it.

Once again, and carrying my argument from another thread...Kobe is a better player, in terms of career, than Bird was.

Seriously? Fatal already shut this thread down but you trying to bring Kobe into this based on career totals? Seriously career totals? Fine have a look at the all time rankings below.



PTS AST TRB STL BLKS TOV MINS GAMES
Bird 25 33 44 26 119 23 59 182
Bryant 12 55 175 28 177 17 38 84

[jlauber]

And a case could be made that out of Kobe's 6 finals appearances, he was only the best player on the court in ONE as well, last year, when he beat the Magic.

Not arguing that, although his POST-SEASONs have generally been better. My main point about Bird, was that he was not some god. IMHO, he was NOT a better player than Kobe.

Incidently, I have Kobe ranked below Shaq (#7)...and if you count PEAK, Shaq moves up considerably.

[shadow]

24 10 6 @ 50% shooting is pretty damn good if you ask me.

[Soothsayer]

Not arguing that, although his POST-SEASONs have generally been better. My main point about Bird, was that he was not some god. IMHO, he was NOT a better player than Kobe.

Incidently, I have Kobe ranked below Shaq (#7)...and if you count PEAK, Shaq moves up considerably.

I understand. It just seems like sometimes we cherry pick different standards to apply to different players in order to confirm our opinions. Point being, let's apply objective standards when comparing players. For instance, just focusing on "scoring" and not even "efficient scoring" obviously favors Kobe...without any justification having been offered for why volume scoring is the most important factor.

[Showtime]

Not arguing that, although his POST-SEASONs have generally been better. My main point about Bird, was that he was not some god. IMHO, he was NOT a better player than Kobe.

Incidently, I have Kobe ranked below Shaq (#7)...and if you count PEAK, Shaq moves up considerably.
So, what are you basing this opinion on other than PPG? I have yet to see a post about how Bird's efficiency, superior passing ability and IQ, clutch play, and versatility are irrelevant.

I'd rather have the guy who is a 27/12/8 threat on efficient play than a 32/5/5 guy who is less efficient, but that's just me.

[sirkeelma]

Even more amazing are his career playoff stats, including PER (for those that value it.) He cracks the top-25 in ppg, at #24 (23.76), but that is about it.

Once again, and carrying my argument from another thread...Kobe is a better player, in terms of career, than Bird was.

lDlOT.

[jlauber]

If you wanna see dominance, check his 60 point game against the hawks.

He did it because he felt like it.

Let's knock off two BIRD's with one stone here. Bill Simmons and Larry Bird...

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=120113

It's ok for Bird to score 60 points in a game that was long decided, but not ok for Kobe to score 61 against the Knicks...or even more importantly, when Kobe scored 62 against the Mavs, in three quarters (yes, Kobe 62, Dallas 61)...and took himself out of the game.

[Fatal9]

First of all, Kareem AND Magic were better in '85, and Magic was CLEARLY better in '87.

Now, on to '81. Bird averaged 15.3 ppg, 15.0 rpg, 7.0 apg, and shot .419 from the field. He didn't deserve, NOR did he win the Finals MVP. He was outplayed by his own teammate, Cornbread Maxwell, who averaged 17.7 ppg, 9.5 rpg, and shot .568 from the floor. Meanwhile Moses Malone put up a 22.2 ppg, 16.3 rpg series, with arguably a bad .403 FG%. In any case, if Bird were the best in that series, he was not very good.

'84. IF LA had not GIVEN games two and four, Bird wouldn't have won that Finals MVP. I do agree that he was the best player in that series...ALTHOUGH it was close. Bird averaged 27.4 ppg, with 14.0 rpg, 3.6 apg, and shot .484. Meanwhile Magic had a very good series (although his FT shooting down the stretch killed LA in game four.) He averaged 18.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 13.6 apg, and shot .560 from the field.

In '86 Bird's numbers were good, but debateable. 24.0 ppg, 9.7 rpg, 9.5 apg on .482 shooting. His fellow teammate, Kevin McHale averaged 25.8 ppg, 8.5 rpg, and shot .573 from the floor. Houston's Olajuwon 24.7 ppg, 11.8 rpg, 3.1 bpg, and shot .479 from the field.

In '85, Bird averaged 23.8 ppg, 8.8 rpg, 9.5 apg, and shot .450. His teammate McHale, went for 26.0 ppg, 10.7 rpg, and shot .598. Meanwhile, Kareem, after a horrible game one, dominated the rest of the series. He finished with 25.7 ppg, 9.0 rpg, 5.2 apg, and shot .604 from the field. And Magic put up 18.3 ppg, 6.8 rpg, 14.0 apg, and shot .494 from the floor.

In '87, Bird put up 24.2 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 5.5 apg, and shot .445 from the floor. Magic went for 26.2 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 13.0 apg, and shot .541 from the field.

Sorry, but these are the FACTS. Was Bird a great player, sure for a period of about five years. I have him at #10 on MY all-time list. And, yes, he is well below Magic (#2), and is even below Kobe (#8.) In terms of career, he is where he should be.

This is a joke right?

'81 finals MVP, like the '80 one was a pretty awful pick. Bird struggled in the middle of the series with his shot (though always came out with near triple doubles anyways, and didn't really shoot that much in those games FYI). The series would have been over early if it wasn't for Bird's 18/21/9 performance in game 1 and clutch shots (would have been down 0-2 otherwise). I guess you missed the part where Bird was digging out the ball with relentless rebounding against Moses and spoonfed Maxwell on the break. But you'd have to watch the games to notice that. And then in game 6, Bird was the one who closed out the Rockets on the road in the second half by hitting fadeaways from all over the court.

In '84...lol @ "it was close as to who the best player was" and you bring up Magic (aka Tragic) of all people...the guy who single handedly blew the series? :oldlol: He had one of the greatest finals performances ever. After being down 2-1, he called out his team and hit a game winner on the road in overtime (also had 29 pts and 21 boards that game). In the pivotal game 5 heatwave game, he put up 34/17 on 15/20 shooting in one of the greatest single game performances in NBA history. Averaged 27/14/4 overall. Delivered everything a superstar can leadership wise too.

In '85, he shot poorly but he had an elbow injury. And in '87, Lakers were huge favorites coming into the series because literally everyone on Boston was injured (they actually had to play tough series in the East and couldn't beat up on cupcake soft teams like the Nuggets out West).

In '86, again one of the greatest finals performances ever (top 5). Closest anyone has come to ever averaging a triple double in the finals with 24/10/10/3, and even then the stats probably sell his performance in those finals short. And then the close out game...another performance that could go down as one of the greatest ever in the finals: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3i9gt3UE0Q . You are literally the ONLY person I've met who thinks Bird wasn't the best player in the finals by a significant margin.

If you are using finals/playoffs as a reason to say Kobe > Bird, you might want to wait until he puts together a SINGLE finals performance at the level of Bird in '84 and '86. What a waste of time, this shouldn't even need to be discussed.

[juju151111]

Not arguing that, although his POST-SEASONs have generally been better. My main point about Bird, was that he was not some god. IMHO, he was NOT a better player than Kobe.

Incidently, I have Kobe ranked below Shaq (#7)...and if you count PEAK, Shaq moves up considerably.
I have ranked Magic over Bird, but KB??:wtf: Maybe with winning this year.

[Soothsayer]

This is a joke right?

'81 finals MVP, like the '80 one was a pretty awful pick. Bird struggled in the middle of the series with his shot (though always came out with near triple doubles anyways, and didn't really shoot that much in those games FYI). The series would have been over early if it wasn't for Bird's 18/21/9 performance in game 1 and clutch shots (would have been down 0-2 otherwise). I guess you missed the part where Bird was digging out the ball with relentless rebounding against Moses and spoonfed Maxwell on the break. But you'd have to watch the games to notice that. And then in game 6, Bird was the one who closed out the Rockets on the road in the second half by hitting fadeaways from all over the court.

In '84...lol @ "it was close as to who the best player was" and you bring up Magic (aka Tragic) of all people...the guy who single handedly blew the series? :oldlol: He had one of the greatest finals performances ever. After being down 2-1, he called out his team and hit a game winner on the road in overtime (also had 29 pts and 21 boards that game). In the pivotal game 5 heatwave game, he put up 34/17 on 15/20 shooting in one of the greatest single game performances in NBA history. Averaged 27/14/4 overall. Delivered everything a superstar can leadership wise too.

In '85, he shot poorly but he had an elbow injury. And in '87, Lakers were huge favorites coming into the series because literally everyone on Boston was injured (they actually had to play tough series in the East and couldn't beat up on cupcake soft teams like the Nuggets out West).

In '86, again one of the greatest finals performances ever (top 5). Closest anyone has come to ever averaging a triple double in the finals with 24/10/10/3, and even then the stats probably sell his performance in those finals short. And then the close out game...another performance that could go down as one of the greatest ever in the finals: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3i9gt3UE0Q . You are literally the ONLY person I've met who thinks Bird wasn't the best player in the finals by a significant margin.

If you are using finals/playoffs as a reason to say Kobe > Bird, you might want to wait until he puts together a SINGLE finals performance at the level of Bird in '84 and '86. What a waste of time, this shouldn't even need to be discussed.

:applause: :bowdown: :cheers:

[juju151111]

This is a joke right?

'81 finals MVP, like the '80 one was a pretty awful pick. Bird struggled in the middle of the series with his shot (though always came out with near triple doubles anyways, and didn't really shoot that much in those games FYI). The series would have been over early if it wasn't for Bird's 18/21/9 performance in game 1 and clutch shots (would have been down 0-2 otherwise). I guess you missed the part where Bird was digging out the ball with relentless rebounding against Moses and spoonfed Maxwell on the break. But you'd have to watch the games to notice that. And then in game 6, Bird was the one who closed out the Rockets on the road in the second half by hitting fadeaways from all over the court.

In '84...lol @ "it was close as to who the best player was" and you bring up Magic (aka Tragic) of all people...the guy who single handedly blew the series? :oldlol: He had one of the greatest finals performances ever. After being down 2-1, he called out his team and hit a game winner on the road in overtime (also had 29 pts and 21 boards that game). In the pivotal game 5 heatwave game, he put up 34/17 on 15/20 shooting in one of the greatest single game performances in NBA history. Averaged 27/14/4 overall. Delivered everything a superstar can leadership wise too.

In '85, he shot poorly but he had an elbow injury. And in '87, Lakers were huge favorites coming into the series because literally everyone on Boston was injured (they actually had to play tough series in the East and couldn't beat up on cupcake soft teams like the Nuggets out West).

In '86, again one of the greatest finals performances ever (top 5). Closest anyone has come to ever averaging a triple double in the finals with 24/10/10/3, and even then the stats probably sell his performance in those finals short. And then the close out game...another performance that could go down as one of the greatest ever in the finals: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3i9gt3UE0Q . You are literally the ONLY person I've met who thinks Bird wasn't the best player in the finals by a significant margin.

If you are using finals/playoffs as a reason to say Kobe > Bird, you might want to wait until he puts together a SINGLE finals performance at the level of Bird in '84 and '86. What a waste of time, this shouldn't even need to be discussed.
Post the 81 gms on YT if u have them. I like ur Bird collection.

[Kblaze8855]

Topics like this are almost painful to read.

I tried for like 10 minutes to reply to this and I couldnt think of a way to convey the extent of my disgust. Really. I sat here with a bag of BBQ skins and some Tahatian treat...thinking....trying to put into words what reading this topic made me feel. And I failed. I do believe the time has come for me to leave. I say leave and not "retire" because...I just find the idea of "retiring" from a message board lame. But damn....

Feeling real Mutomboish right about now. I have like 600 minutes of solid defense left in me and as a 9th man I can stretch that out for another season but...why?

[jlauber]

This is a joke right?

'81 finals MVP, like the '80 one was a pretty awful pick. Bird struggled in the middle of the series with his shot (though always came out with near triple doubles anyways, and didn't really shoot that much in those games FYI). The series would have been over early if it wasn't for Bird's 18/21/9 performance in game 1 and clutch shots (would have been down 0-2 otherwise). I guess you missed the part where Bird was digging out the ball with relentless rebounding against Moses and spoonfed Maxwell on the break. But you'd have to watch the games to notice that. And then in game 6, Bird was the one who closed out the Rockets on the road in the second half by hitting fadeaways from all over the court.

In '84...lol @ "it was close as to who the best player was" and you bring up Magic (aka Tragic) of all people...the guy who single handedly blew the series? :oldlol: He had one of the greatest finals performances ever. After being down 2-1, he called out his team and hit a game winner on the road in overtime (also had 29 pts and 21 boards that game). In the pivotal game 5 heatwave game, he put up 34/17 on 15/20 shooting in one of the greatest single game performances in NBA history. Averaged 27/14/4 overall. Delivered everything a superstar can leadership wise too.

In '85, he shot poorly but he had an elbow injury. And in '87, Lakers were huge favorites coming into the series because literally everyone on Boston was injured (they actually had to play tough series in the East and couldn't beat up on cupcake soft teams like the Nuggets out West).

In '86, again one of the greatest finals performances ever (top 5). Closest anyone has come to ever averaging a triple double in the finals with 24/10/10/3, and even then the stats probably sell his performance in those finals short. And then the close out game...another performance that could go down as one of the greatest ever in the finals: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3i9gt3UE0Q . You are literally the ONLY person I've met who thinks Bird wasn't the best player in the finals by a significant margin.

If you are using finals/playoffs as a reason to say Kobe > Bird, you might want to wait until he puts together a SINGLE finals performance at the level of Bird in '84 and '86. What a waste of time, this shouldn't even need to be discussed.

Let's see... in the 01-02 Finals, Kobe averaged 26.8 ppg, on .514 shooting (and .545 on 3pt shooting.) In the entire 00-01 Playoffs, Kobe averaged 29.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, and 6.1 apg. Kobe also had FOUR PLAYOFFs with 30+ ppg. Bird NEVER came close to shooting 50% in the Finals BTW, nor did he ever come close to averaging 30 ppg in the post-season.

Bird averaged about 23 ppg, on about .460 shooting in his five Finals.

Regarding "Tragic" Johnson...yeah, he was hardly clutch..except in game five of the '87 Finals, when he hit the game winner, while Bird missed a potential game winner at the buzzer. Of course, maybe you can find a Finals game like game six of the '80 Finals, when Magic put up a 42-15 game.

[juju151111]

Topics like this are almost painful to read.

I tried for like 10 minutes to reply to this and I couldnt think of a way to convey the extent of my disgust. Really. I sat here with a bag of BBQ skins and some Tahatian treat...thinking....trying to put into words what reading this topic made me feel. And I failed. I do believe the time has come for me to leave. I say leave and not "retire" because...I just find the idea of "retiring" from a message board lame. But damn....

Feeling real Mutomboish right about now. I have like 600 minutes of solid defense left in me and as a 9th man I can stretch that out for another season but...why?
LOL Why would u let a dumbass make you leave?? This is standard stuff who look at stats only in ISH. You should be use to it by know. Good job OP:hammerhead:

[Go Getter]

Bird is one of the all-time greats period. Arguing that makes you look like you don't know basketball at all--seriously.

One thing though...people always attribute his awesome career to smarts and not natural talent but hand-eye coordination is a natural talent and Bird had that in excess.

[jlauber]

Bird is one of the all-time greats period. Arguing that makes you look like you don't know basketball at all--seriously.

One thing though...people always attribute his awesome career to smarts and not natural talent but hand-eye coordination is a natural talent and Bird had that in excess.

Bird IS one of the all-time greats. #10.

[jlauber]

In '86, again one of the greatest finals performances ever (top 5). Closest anyone has come to ever averaging a triple double in the finals with 24/10/10/3, and even then the stats probably sell his performance in those finals short. And then the close out game...another performance that could go down as one of the greatest ever in the finals: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3i9gt3UE0Q . You are literally the ONLY person I've met who thinks Bird wasn't the best player in the finals by a significant margin.

Top-5!!!! You are kidding right???

Shaq in all three of his three-peat Finals. MJ in several of his. I would take Wilt in the '70 Finals (despite playing on a losing team, and only four months removed from surgery... 23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, and .625 shooting. Or Wilt's '64, when he averaged 29-27. Or Kareem in '80, '71, '74 and even '85 (his last five games he DOMINATED the Celtic front court.) Jerry West in '69. Magic in '87. Wade in '06. Olajuwon in '94 and '95.

Or how about John Hollinger's rankings (and no, I don't agree with all of the)...

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2008/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=FinalsPerformances-1

Bird's 84 shows up at #23 and his '86 shows up at #29. These are post-merger BTW, which wouldn't have any of Wilt's or West's, or Kareem's '71 and '74.

[1987_Lakers]

It's a shame people don't understand how truly great a peak Larry Bird was. His peak years from '84-'86 was the greatest peak ever if you don't include a few dominant centers & MJ's peak.

[plowking]

You can't argue Kobe was better as a player, or career achievement wise over Bird.

I could understand if you said Kobe was better than Magic though. Though once again, not career achievement wise.

[Cyclone112]

Topics like this are almost painful to read.

I tried for like 10 minutes to reply to this and I couldnt think of a way to convey the extent of my disgust. Really. I sat here with a bag of BBQ skins and some Tahatian treat...thinking....trying to put into words what reading this topic made me feel. And I failed. I do believe the time has come for me to leave. I say leave and not "retire" because...I just find the idea of "retiring" from a message board lame. But damn....

Feeling real Mutomboish right about now. I have like 600 minutes of solid defense left in me and as a 9th man I can stretch that out for another season but...why?

You can't leave, your purpose is to destroy threads like this. Get back on the horse damn you!

[asdf1990]

bird was like kobe but a better rebounder, passer, defender, shooter, more clutch and didn;t get three free rings from shaq.

[Go Getter]

Comparing stats from Bird's era to this era are deceiving in that 80's NBA was not full of floppers and guys that did all sorts of nonsense for calls.

Defenders could body up and hand check also.

A lot of current stars would not be as effective in the 80's.

[plowking]

Comparing stats from Bird's era to this era are deceiving in that 80's NBA was not full of floppers and guys that did all sorts of nonsense for calls.

Defenders could body up and hand check also.

A lot of current stars would not be as effective in the 80's.

Load of rubbish. Players play the way they grow up playing basketball. If they were raised during that time, they would play differently and hence be more effective in that era.

Vice versa, both ways.

[Go Getter]

Load of rubbish. Players play the way they grow up playing basketball. If they were raised during that time, they would play differently and hence be more effective in that era.

Vice versa, both ways.


No.

Defense is easier when you can use your hands--period.

Doesn't matter what era it's in...it's harder to score on a guy who can belly up and hand check with confidence.

being poked and prodded and directed with someone's forearm or hand(check) is uncomfortable and some current players (hard to tell who) would crumble under that type of physical play.

Book it.

[ShaqAttack3234]

First of all, Bird was definitely better than Magic. No doubt in my mind. Go watch the games and you'll see that this isn't even that good of a debate. Bird was a much better offensive player because of his scoring/perimeter shooting. Bird was the best passer of all time who wasn't a point guard as well. Bird was also as good of a rebounder as most PF/C, as smart as any player and while he wasn't a great defender, he could make good plays on that end because of his IQ and anticipation. Another area where he was better than Magic.

I put Bird's peak up there with anyone's in NBA history.

And no, Kobe isn't as good as Bird either. That's not even a debate. Kobe is a better volume scorer and defender(though he was often lazy on that end in his prime anyway), but Bird was often more consistent and efficient offensively because of his superior basketball IQ and unselfish play. And passing? As I said, Bird is the greatest passer in NBA history among non-point guards. Rebounding? Again, no contest. Leadership? I'd also take Bird over Kobe.

On the all time list. Bird is top 5, IMO. Kobe is at 9 or 10 and Magic is somewhere in the 6-8 range.

And yes, Bird was without question the best player on the court in the 1986 finals. I have the entire series on DVD and this was obvious. Olajuwon was great, explosive and at times dominant, but he still wasn't a smart or experienced player and his skillset was still fairly raw. Bird, on the otherhand, had the most polished skillset in the league and he was also probably the smartest player in the league.

[Fatal9]

:oldlol: at jlauber citing one of the worst articles I've ever read. Shawn Kemp in '96 and Clyde Drexler in '90 were better than Bird in '84 and '86 (both widely regarded as two of the greatest finals performances ever)? Wade's was the greatest ever? Billups was better? Karl Malone in '98 was better? **** you.


Post the 81 gms on YT if u have them. I like ur Bird collection.

Game 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDk9y0Vul5A)


Comparing stats from Bird's era to this era are deceiving in that 80's NBA was not full of floppers and guys that did all sorts of nonsense for calls.

Defenders could body up and hand check also.

A lot of current stars would not be as effective in the 80's.
This is simply false. How can people be so misinformed?

[Go Getter]

:oldlol: at jlauber citing one of the worst articles I've ever read. Shawn Kemp in '96 and Clyde Drexler in '90 were better than Bird in '84 and '86 (both widely regarded as two of the greatest finals performances ever)? Wade's was the greatest ever? Billups was better? Karl Malone in '98 was better? **** you.



Game 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDk9y0Vul5A)


This is simply false. How can people be so misinformed?

Not a fact. An opinion. You can assert yours but to completely dismiss mine because you feel different is arrogant and on the foolish side.

[Toizumi]

Out of the 5 major stats, Points, Rebounds, Assists, Steals and Blocks. Larry Bird is only in the top 25 in one of those catagories. That was points. He is 25th on the list for all time leaders in points.

The guy is considered one of the greatest of all time by many people but was he really that dominant? For a guy regarded as highly as him you would think he would be on/higher up on some of those lists. I mean, he played 13 years which is a good length for a career.

Can anyone explain this?


you're looking at career totals. In those list there are hardly any players who had careers shorter than Bird :confusedshrug:

And why does he have to be higher in these all time leader lists to be considered a great? He's one of the best because of how he played the game, not because of the stats he accumulated... and even if you go by his stats alone:
24 PPG
10 RPG
6 APG
496 FG%
1.7 SPG
great FT shooter..
those are great stats. way better than some of these all time leaders.



Is is the awards/championships that make everyone believe he is so great? Let's face it, he is a great player. But is he a dominant player?

I love Bird and his style of play this is just something I looked up and found suprising.

http://espn.go.com/nba/history/leaders


nope. he wasnt handed those awards, he earned them. and yes he was as great as he was dominant. go look at some youtube clips, or download some games, respect greatness and stop trolling.

[RedBlackAttack]

Bird didn't even play 900 games in his career, entered the NBA at 23 and his body broke down at 31. These type of cumulative stats reward longevity (at least 1000+ played games), it doesn't make him a better or worse player. Why are there so many idiots who can't realize simple things like this? He is the greatest all-around player ever, and him being or not being in the "top 25" means sh*t. You can question his longevity and durability, but not his dominance.

lol @ "was he really that dominant". For five straight years he averaged, 24/10/7, 29/11/7, 26/10/7, 28/9/8 and 30/9/6, all while being near the top on steal leaders and posting crazy shooting percentages. If Lebron posted seasons like that while on teams that won a couple of rings, you'd be creaming yourself. This while rebounding on a front line that included McHale and Parish, sharing the ball with his team and not getting nearly as many touches as star players would get from 90s onward.

I was very close to posting something similar after reading the first page of misinformation. Thanks for saving the me the time and effort.

Bird was as dominant a perimeter player as I have ever seen in my 31 years of watching the NBA. The only guys on his level of domination in all categories and a complete ability to completely take over a game in all facets were a prime Jordan and LeBron of the last two years.

Bird was phenomenal and the idea that he wasn't a good athlete is also a complete misnomer.

[Go Getter]

Is Bird's greatness really in question here?

I mean really...

[Dro]

smh....ive gotten dumber reading this thread.....kobes better than bird now? smfh.....children

[juju151111]

First of all, Bird was definitely better than Magic. No doubt in my mind. Go watch the games and you'll see that this isn't even that good of a debate. Bird was a much better offensive player because of his scoring/perimeter shooting. Bird was the best passer of all time who wasn't a point guard as well. Bird was also as good of a rebounder as most PF/C, as smart as any player and while he wasn't a great defender, he could make good plays on that end because of his IQ and anticipation. Another area where he was better than Magic.

I put Bird's peak up there with anyone's in NBA history.

And no, Kobe isn't as good as Bird either. That's not even a debate. Kobe is a better volume scorer and defender(though he was often lazy on that end in his prime anyway), but Bird was often more consistent and efficient offensively because of his superior basketball IQ and unselfish play. And passing? As I said, Bird is the greatest passer in NBA history among non-point guards. Rebounding? Again, no contest. Leadership? I'd also take Bird over Kobe.

On the all time list. Bird is top 5, IMO. Kobe is at 9 or 10 and Magic is somewhere in the 6-8 range.

And yes, Bird was without question the best player on the court in the 1986 finals. I have the entire series on DVD and this was obvious. Olajuwon was great, explosive and at times dominant, but he still wasn't a smart or experienced player and his skillset was still fairly raw. Bird, on the otherhand, had the most polished skillset in the league and he was also probably the smartest player in the league.
Definietly better?? Magic was dropping 42 in the finals has a rookie and the Magic was clutch in the regular season and playoffs in 87.

[plowking]

Definietly better?? Magic was dropping 42 in the finals has a rookie and the Magic was clutch in the regular season and playoffs in 87.

Yes he was. Most who were around and don't have a Laker/Celtic bias will tell you Bird was definitely better.

Bird was the better scorer, rebounder, better intangibles, and you could even argue just as good a passer. Not to mention both weren't great on defense, though once again, Bird was slightly better.
The only reason it's looked at as close is because Magic won more championships (though he played with arguably the best center ever), and because of Bird's back.

When they were playing, there wasn't a question as to who was better. Only now after there careers are done do people actually question it, simply because of what career achievements say. Same thing will happen with Jordan and Kobe if Kobe keeps winning, though we all know who was better.

[Go Getter]

Yes he was. Most who were around and don't have a Laker/Celtic bias will tell you Bird was definitely better.

Bird was the better scorer, rebounder, better intangibles, and you could even argue just as good a passer. Not to mention both weren't great on defense, though once again, Bird was slightly better.
The only reason it's looked at as close is because Magic won more championships (though he played with arguably the best center ever), and because of Bird's back.

When they were playing, there wasn't a question as to who was better. Only now after there careers are done do people actually question it, simply because of what career achievements say. Same thing will happen with Jordan and Kobe if Kobe keeps winning, though we all know who was better.


I was with you until you called Bird a better passer than Magic.

C'mon now...I am a certified Bird fan I think that's laughable.

Also, Magic's intangibles were off the meter as were Bird's...you're selling magic short and that's@ sad as these guys selling Bird short.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Definietly better?? Magic was dropping 42 in the finals has a rookie and the Magic was clutch in the regular season and playoffs in 87.

That's only one game as a rookie. He won a title that year largely due to playing with the MVP and best player in the league that season. That Laker team was stacked, along with Magic they had Kareem, Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon, Spencer Haywood and Michael Cooper.

Bird improved his team from 29 wins to 61 wins as a rookie. Magic didn't have a case for being as good as Bird until atleast 1987.

[plowking]

I was with you until you called Bird a better passer than Magic.

C'mon now...I am a certified Bird fan I think that's laughable.

Also, Magic's intangibles were off the meter as were Bird's...you're selling magic short and that's@ sad as these guys selling Bird short.

It's really not that ridiculous claiming Bird was as good a passer. He didn't set up the offense, didn't stall with the ball like most superstars today.

I'm not selling Magic short by any meter. He was great, though Bird was just better...

[juju151111]

Yes he was. Most who were around and don't have a Laker/Celtic bias will tell you Bird was definitely better.

Bird was the better scorer, rebounder, better intangibles, and you could even argue just as good a passer. Not to mention both weren't great on defense, though once again, Bird was slightly better.
The only reason it's looked at as close is because Magic won more championships (though he played with arguably the best center ever), and because of Bird's back.

When they were playing, there wasn't a question as to who was better. Only now after there careers are done do people actually question it, simply because of what career achievements say. Same thing will happen with Jordan and Kobe if Kobe keeps winning, though we all know who was better.
You couldn't argue the passing at all and Bird was the same on defense. Magic won 2 chips when KAJ wasn't even a HOF anymore. He would probably 3 peat if he wasn't injured in 89. Don't give me that Kareem BS.Mchale was killing people too. Go check his stats in 86.

[juju151111]

That's only one game as a rookie. He won a title that year largely due to playing with the MVP and best player in the league that season. That Laker team was stacked, along with Magic they had Kareem, Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon, Spencer Haywood and Michael Cooper.

Bird improved his team from 29 wins to 61 wins as a rookie. Magic didn't have a case for being as good as Bird until atleast 1987.
Most teams in the 80s were stacked and he could of loss that gm, but he poured in 42 without the MVP, when they disrespected him and gave Bird ROY. LMFAO at 87.:lol Magic was better in 80 already. Show me these Series that Bird Outplayed Magic?? The only one was in 84 and Magic still played great then, but made that one bad pass. Everytime after 84 Magics team beat them.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Most teams in the 80s were stacked and he could of loss that gm, but he poured in 42 without the MVP, when they disrespected him and gave Bird ROY. LMFAO at 87.:lol Magic was better in 80 already. Show me these Series that Bird Outplayed Magic?? The only one was in 84 and Magic still played great then, but made that one bad pass. Everytime after 84 Magics team beat them.

Magic better than Bird in 1980? :roll:

[plowking]

While they were both playing, I'd say there were maybe 3 or 4 seasons where Magic was better.

[Go Getter]

It's really not that ridiculous claiming Bird was as good a passer. He didn't set up the offense, didn't stall with the ball like most superstars today.

I'm not selling Magic short by any meter. He was great, though Bird was just better...


I guess...I mean I'm not going to argue with you on it....I'm just saying that Magic was a better passer than Bird and I don't think any unbiased person would disagree with me.

[plowking]

I guess...I mean I'm not going to argue with you on it....I'm just saying that Magic was a better passer than Bird and I don't think any unbiased person would disagree with me.

I agree. I would think it's completely correct to say Magic is the better passer, since he was a point guard and set up the offense. I'm just saying, Bird in my opinion was as good though didn't get to showcase it as much as Magic since he was asked to score, and since that was what he was good at. I really wouldn't doubt Bird putting up 10+ assists each season if he was asked to be PG.

[jlauber]

Thoe that claim Bird was a better shooter is like claiming Steve Kerr was a better shooter than MJ. Magic IMPROVED EVERY facet of his game EACH year after he came into the league. He made EVERY teammate better. And those that argue that he had better teammates are absolutely crazy. Bird played with as many as FOUR other HOFers. Kareem was still great, but was well past his peak. MAGIC made Kareem's last 10 years much better than they would have been without him (same with Oscar in the early 70's.)

And yes, Bird's 86 Finals are WAY down ANYONE elses list except Fatal's. Going back to the 60's, I could name 20-30 better, more dominant performaces. I stand by what I said, too. He was NOT the best player in that series. McHale scored more and at a much higher percentage.

And here again, those that claim Bird was a better shooter...in his five Finals, he posted .419, .484, .482, .450. and .445. I won't bother looking up all of Magic's NINE Finals, except to say that he shot over 50% in FIVE of them, and was well over 50% in his CAREER FINALS. The fact was, Michael Cooper routinely shut Bird down. NO ONE on the Celtics shut Magic down.

And, if LA hadn't given away games two and four in the '84 Finals, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. The FACT was, the Lakers outplayed Boston in FIVE of those seven games, and SHOULD have SWEPT them. It was no coincidence that LA dominated Boston in the '85 and '87 Finals.

Look, Bird was a great player. I have him at #10. WAY behind Magic, and just behind Kobe. Those that argue that against Kobe's "three-peat" rings had better take a closer look at the playoffs in each of those seasons, particularly 00-01. I will agree that Shaq's Finals were the most dominating in NBA history, but without Kobe's brilliant playoff runs (and great Finals in '01-02 BTW), LA doesn't win ANY of those titles.

Kobe has won more rings, has been in more Finals, as well as being one of the most prolific scorers in NBA history. AND, his career is far from done, too. In fact, IF he leads this year's Laker team to a title, the next question will be, is he a Top-5 player all-time?

[Go Getter]

I agree. I would think it's completely correct to say Magic is the better passer, since he was a point guard and set up the offense. I'm just saying, Bird in my opinion was as good though didn't get to showcase it as much as Magic since he was asked to score, and since that was what he was good at. I really wouldn't doubt Bird putting up 10+ assists each season if he was asked to be PG.
Now you're backpedalling a bit....Bird could never be a PG. He was too slow and for a good number of years suffered back problems that prohibited him from getting low to the floor.

I'm not going to mount any argument against Bird who I think is unquestionably the best SF ever to lace em up.

I just felt like you were selling Magic a bit short.

Magic wasn't a scorer but could give you 30-40 if you needed it.

Magic wasn't a Forward or Center, but if you asked him he would play at those spots admirably.

And most of all Magic had the supreme trust of his team like Bird but he ran the show and had moves/passes that left defenders looking completely retarded.

I remember watching his comeback game and the first time he touched the ball he faked Latrell Sprewell right out of his shorts:roll:

[Johnni Gade]

Lol. You can't change the fact that Legend Larry is one of the best ever.

[jlauber]

Lol. You can't change the fact that Legend Larry is one of the best ever.

#10

[Thorpesaurous]

These threads remind me why I don't come in here anymore.

But let me give my quick reason as to why Bird is among the top 7 players of all time, the truly elite tier, that I can't even really figure out within itself (you'll notice an overlap between these six guys and the list of guys with multiple titles and multiple MVPs (post Mikan)).

Bird brought more to the table than any player I know of. Consider that Bird is the first name thrown out for best SF of all time. Now as impressive as that is, it's even moreso when you consider he's actually a PF. The guy wound up playing SF because he was on a front line with two other HOFers. He was a dynamic post scorer, on the short list of best I've ever seen. His high release on his fall away gave him a shot on the block he could get off anytime. And he's a double digit rebounder next to those guys. If you needed him to run through him, he could pass more than well enough to that from the block or the wing, and even handle the ball well enough to do it out front. You can play him in the high part of a high low, you can run pick and pop with him because his jumper is top ten great. He can ran in the middle of a break. And while his athleticism is criticized, he was dynamic coming down the wings on the break, and would've been more so playing more at PF.

The point is, somehow over the years, people got it in there heads that player A is better than player B because they're similar, but player A played with a lousier supporting cast. Guys have gotten criticized for playing on stacked teams. The fact is that being able to play with other great players is a strength. It may be the biggest strength in the sport, especially pre cap and expansion. I'm not surprised that the value of these all floor type guys plummetted after the league thinned out. But I argue that Bird is more equipped to play with more great players, and more styles, than anyone ever. Because he can attack so efficiently both from the inside and out. His jumper and vision would even allow him to play on the weakside in something like the triangle, something no other truly great player could do. Even defensively both he and Magic get a bit of a bad rap because they don't get credit for simply the space they occupied. It was a more team oriented defensive era, because the illegal D wasn't being exploited like it did in the 90s. And players were therefore allowed to use their length a bit more.

Anyway, that's the case ... and not a single statistic.

[Fatal9]

And yes, Bird's 86 Finals are WAY down ANYONE elses list except Fatal's. Going back to the 60's, I could name 20-30 better, more dominant performaces. I stand by what I said, too. He was NOT the best player in that series. McHale scored more and at a much higher percentage.
This guy is such a fkking clown. I've never heard anyone say this :oldlol:

There was a thread about finals performances a while back, and Bird seemed to be on everyone's top 5 list: http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=136524

[juju151111]

Magic better than Bird in 1980? :roll:
Bird better then Magic on alltime list.:roll:

[BlueandGold]

And yes, Bird's 86 Finals are WAY down ANYONE elses list except Fatal's. Going back to the 60's, I could name 20-30 better, more dominant performaces. I stand by what I said, too. He was NOT the best player in that series. McHale scored more and at a much higher percentage.

rofl retard

[plowking]

Bird better then Magic on alltime list.:roll:

It's clear you weren't around, read up, or asked folk who were around at the time what the general consensus was. Bird was being called the greatest ever.

What can't you grasp?

[juju151111]

It's clear you weren't around, read up, or asked folk who were around at the time what the general consensus was. Bird was being called the greatest ever.

What can't you grasp?
Wait, do you think i care about the general consensus. I already know how they were in the 80s.

[Niquesports]

That's only one game as a rookie. He won a title that year largely due to playing with the MVP and best player in the league that season. That Laker team was stacked, along with Magic they had Kareem, Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon, Spencer Haywood and Michael Cooper.

Bird improved his team from 29 wins to 61 wins as a rookie. Magic didn't have a case for being as good as Bird until atleast 1987.
More Larry legend junk. I first want to say bird was great. A top 8 in my book but there was a reason Magic won more H2H. Big games Magic was just better. In college all the talk was how great bird was in the biggest NCAA finals ever Magic out plays him by far.In the pros same thing.only thing Bird was better at was jump shooting every other area of the game Magic was the clear better player even game IQ. It reminds me of the wilt/russ debate.its always well Wilt did this and Wilt did that and Wilt's teams weren't as good. But all that mattered to Russ was winning same with Magic. So have fun with your silly Larry legend mess give me the guy that just knew how to win

[plowking]

Wait, do you think i care about the general consensus. I already know how they were in the 80s.

I bet you were the kid that started wearing skinny jeans first in high school despite everyone thinking they're for ****. But you not caring for consensus and all...

You don't get picked as the guy called "the best ever" for no reason...

[plowking]

More Larry legend junk. I first want to say bird was great. A top 8 in my book but there was a reason Magic won more H2H. Big games Magic was just better. In college all the talk was how great bird was in the biggest NCAA finals ever Magic out plays him by far.In the pros same thing.only thing Bird was better at was jump shooting every other area of the game Magic was the clear better player even game IQ. It reminds me of the wilt/russ debate.its always well Wilt did this and Wilt did that and Wilt's teams weren't as good. But all that mattered to Russ was winning same with Magic. So have fun with your silly Larry legend mess give me the guy that just knew how to win

Magic had the far better team in college, and a better team in the pros...
Same goes for your Wilt hate pretty much most of their careers.

[Niquesports]

Magic had the far better team in college, and a better team in the pros...
Same goes for your Wilt hate pretty much most of their careers.
Funny at the time in college Bird's team was ranked higher. Also in the pros Bird played with more Hofer's than Magic in the same era yet Magic's teams were better. Its just more excuses Bird lovers give to explain why he lost to Magic. Maybe Magic's teams were better because Magic was the factor in making them better

[plowking]

Funny at the time in college Bird's team was ranked higher. Also in the pros Bird played with more Hofer's than Magic in the same era yet Magic's teams were better. Its just more excuses Bird lovers give to explain why he lost to Magic. Maybe Magic's teams were better because Magic was the factor in making them better
:oldlol:

Michigan was considered to be easily the more talented team at the time. Bird's team was simply ranked higher because of Bird, and the fact he was able to lead them to such an astounding record.

And yeah... Bird had a better team in the pros... That's why he went on a 29 win team as a rookie, and transformed them into a 60+ win team. While Magic went on a championship calibre team straight away. And what do you know, he wins a championship playing along side arguably the greatest ever center in his first year. :oldlol:
But yeah, keep holding on to the thought that Bird supposedly had the better teams.

[juju151111]

I bet you were the kid that started wearing skinny jeans first in high school despite everyone thinking they're for ****. But you not caring for consensus and all...

You don't get picked as the guy called "the best ever" for no reason...
LMFAO go defend Wade because thats the only person your not off base on. Leave this to the big boys to argue.

[Kellogs4toniee]

First off, it's clear this thread was started with the blatant agenda of putting Kobe above Bird. Whether Kobe is better or Bird is better, that is another story. What can't be debated though is how this is a perfect example of what ISH has become these days. There are so many threads with an ambiguous title and an entire paragraph that tries to defend itself by saying it has no agenda, when behind all the BS it's clear what the agenda actually is.

I remind myself everytime I come onto here that it's just a forum, and there's no reason to put anyone on your ignore list because that's ultimately the purpose of a forum : to voice your opinion.

But seriously though, it's not just the original topic, but the absolute ignorance certain people have had even when given sound rebuttals by others such as Fatal. After reading the posts JLauber and the OP have written in this thread, I think it's about time to start that ignore list.


http://robertoagudelo.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/ignorant.jpg

[HisJoeness]

Shout out to Thorpe and KBlaze for showing up in this most retarded thread. Do either of you guys have a blog or website where I can read your stuff?

[catch24]

I have Larry Bird above Magic on my all-time list, but its certainly debatable. Getting back to the OP though...my dude...lay off the ignorance, do your homework. Larry Bird was not only the most skilled player of all time (all he could really rely on), but the ultimate competitor (only player comparable to Jordan in terms of 'mental approach').

[Niquesports]

:oldlol:

Michigan was considered to be easily the more talented team at the time. Bird's team was simply ranked higher because of Bird, and the fact he was able to lead them to such an astounding record.

And yeah... Bird had a better team in the pros... That's why he went on a 29 win team as a rookie, and transformed them into a 60+ win team. While Magic went on a championship calibre team straight away. And what do you know, he wins a championship playing along side arguably the greatest ever center in his first year. :oldlol:
But yeah, keep holding on to the thought that Bird supposedly had the better teams.
You spend too much time talking to young fans who were too young to remember the game.Going into the 79 finals ISU was the # 1 team what was MSU ranked ? Do you even know.even if you want to say MSU was better Magic out played Bird in the game by far Magic was a star and Bird got shut down.
Next the pros how many changes on the roster were there from the 29 team to the 61 team also did both teams have the same coach ??? Do you know if you did you wouldn't be making it seem as if Bird did it all alone.also how many finals did that great Laker Center make before Magic with the Lakers ???? Who played with more HOFers Bird or Magic ?? Its sad when Larry Legend fans make so many excuses when these things are brought up. Sad the truth hurts doesn't it

[32jazz]

This is a joke right?

'81 finals MVP, like the '80 one was a pretty awful pick. Bird struggled in the middle of the series with his shot (though always came out with near triple doubles anyways, and didn't really shoot that much in those games FYI). The series would have been over early if it wasn't for Bird's 18/21/9 performance in game 1 and clutch shots (would have been down 0-2 otherwise). I guess you missed the part where Bird was digging out the ball with relentless rebounding against Moses and spoonfed Maxwell on the break. But you'd have to watch the games to notice that. And then in game 6, Bird was the one who closed out the Rockets on the road in the second half by hitting fadeaways from all over the court.

In '84...lol @ "it was close as to who the best player was" and you bring up Magic (aka Tragic) of all people...the guy who single handedly blew the series? :oldlol:

MAGIC SINGLEHANDEDLY blew the series?:rolleyes: Yes Magic made several UN MAgic like mistakes ,but James Worthy is still embarrassed about the gift pass to Gerald Henderson in game 2 when the Lakers were simply trying to kill the clock courtesy of a lead due to Magic's stellar play up to that point.

If Worthy doesn't panic(admits today that he wanted nothing to do with the Basketball in that situation) & simply makes a simple outlet pass the Lakers probably go on to win that game & go up 2-0 in the Garden.

Because Jlbauer simply points out that Bird was actually a human being(he still thinks the guy is a top ten player all time) you guys feel the need to trash him?

In order to make a better case for Bird you use hyperbole in an attempt to diminish Magic?(which can't be done)

If Kobe puts up some of those NBA finals shooting percentages that Jlbauer posted for Bird(low 40% shooting even 41% performance) he is trashed.

Bird & Mchale didn't really get along all that well because of the human tendency of Bird(like most great/overconfident shooters) to be able to both shoot his team IN & OUT of games.

Fortunately for Bird he doesn't have losers on the internet dissecting his performance on the internet after each game. We simply ignore the bad/average games of our beloved players of the past.

[32jazz]

Thoe that claim Bird was a better shooter is like claiming Steve Kerr was a better shooter than MJ. Magic IMPROVED EVERY facet of his game EACH year after he came into the league. He made EVERY teammate better. And those that argue that he had better teammates are absolutely crazy. Bird played with as many as FOUR other HOFers. Kareem was still great, but was well past his peak. MAGIC made Kareem's last 10 years much better than they would have been without him (same with Oscar in the early 70's.)

And yes, Bird's 86 Finals are WAY down ANYONE elses list except Fatal's. Going back to the 60's, I could name 20-30 better, more dominant performaces. I stand by what I said, too. He was NOT the best player in that series. McHale scored more and at a much higher percentage.

And here again, those that claim Bird was a better shooter...in his five Finals, he posted .419, .484, .482, .450. and .445. I won't bother looking up all of Magic's NINE Finals, except to say that he shot over 50% in FIVE of them, and was well over 50% in his CAREER FINALS. The fact was, Michael Cooper routinely shut Bird down. NO ONE on the Celtics shut Magic down.

And, if LA hadn't given away games two and four in the '84 Finals, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. The FACT was, the Lakers outplayed Boston in FIVE of those seven games, and SHOULD have SWEPT them. It was no coincidence that LA dominated Boston in the '85 and '87 Finals.

Look, Bird was a great player. I have him at #10. WAY behind Magic, and just behind Kobe. Those that argue that against Kobe's "three-peat" rings had better take a closer look at the playoffs in each of those seasons, particularly 00-01. I will agree that Shaq's Finals were the most dominating in NBA history, but without Kobe's brilliant playoff runs (and great Finals in '01-02 BTW), LA doesn't win ANY of those titles.

Kobe has won more rings, has been in more Finals, as well as being one of the most prolific scorers in NBA history. AND, his career is far from done, too. In fact, IF he leads this year's Laker team to a title, the next question will be, is he a Top-5 player all-time?

:applause:

I am a bit biased as Magic is my favorite player of all time, but thanks for being courageous enough to point out that Bird(just like Magic) was not infallible. If kobe puts up some of those shooting numbers like Bird (41 % 44%) in the NBA finals he would get trashed. But instead because you point out Bird's shakiest/least impressive performances YOU get trashed. Bird & Mchale didn't get along all that well because of Bird's extreme overconfidence in his jumpshot which(like all jumpshooters) could shoot a team IN or OUT of a game.



But please stop reminding me of the 1984 NBA Finals as I want to puke when I remember especially those Worthy/Magic errors. Bird today will tell you that there is no way the Celtics should have won that series:hammerhead:

I always say the Lakers should have won 6 rings in the 80's('84), but I must admit they probably should/could have lost to the Pistons in '88 as well ,but they dodged a few bullets.

[Soothsayer]

:applause:

I am a bit biased as Magic is my favorite player of all time, but thanks for being courageous enough to point out that Bird(just like Magic) was not infallible. If kobe puts up some of those shooting numbers like Bird (41 % 44%) in the NBA finals he would get trashed. But instead because you point out Bird's shakiest/least impressive performances YOU get trashed. Bird & Mchale didn't get along all that well because of Bird's extreme overconfidence in his jumpshot which(like all jumpshooters) could shoot a team IN or OUT of a game.



But please stop reminding me of the 1984 NBA Finals as I want to puke when I remember especially those Worthy/Magic errors. Bird today will tell you that there is no way the Celtics should have won that series:hammerhead:

I always say the Lakers should have won 6 rings in the 80's('84), but I must admit they probably should/could have lost to the Pistons in '88 as well ,but they dodged a few bullets.

Let's be clear though. Bird's worst FG% in any of his 5 finals appearances (41.9%), is Kobe's career AVERAGE FG% in 6 finals appearances. Comparing a career finals WORST to a career finals AVERAGE is kind of goofy.

[raptorfan_dr07]

Kobe has won more rings, has been in more Finals, as well as being one of the most prolific scorers in NBA history. AND, his career is far from done, too. In fact, IF he leads this year's Laker team to a title, the next question will be, is he a Top-5 player all-time?

:wtf: You wonder sometimes if they really believe the crap they spit out or are just looking for a reaction.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Thoe that claim Bird was a better shooter is like claiming Steve Kerr was a better shooter than MJ. Magic IMPROVED EVERY facet of his game EACH year after he came into the league. He made EVERY teammate better. And those that argue that he had better teammates are absolutely crazy. Bird played with as many as FOUR other HOFers. Kareem was still great, but was well past his peak. MAGIC made Kareem's last 10 years much better than they would have been without him (same with Oscar in the early 70's.)

And yes, Bird's 86 Finals are WAY down ANYONE elses list except Fatal's. Going back to the 60's, I could name 20-30 better, more dominant performaces. I stand by what I said, too. He was NOT the best player in that series. McHale scored more and at a much higher percentage.

And here again, those that claim Bird was a better shooter...in his five Finals, he posted .419, .484, .482, .450. and .445. I won't bother looking up all of Magic's NINE Finals, except to say that he shot over 50% in FIVE of them, and was well over 50% in his CAREER FINALS. The fact was, Michael Cooper routinely shut Bird down. NO ONE on the Celtics shut Magic down.

And, if LA hadn't given away games two and four in the '84 Finals, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. The FACT was, the Lakers outplayed Boston in FIVE of those seven games, and SHOULD have SWEPT them. It was no coincidence that LA dominated Boston in the '85 and '87 Finals.

Look, Bird was a great player. I have him at #10. WAY behind Magic, and just behind Kobe. Those that argue that against Kobe's "three-peat" rings had better take a closer look at the playoffs in each of those seasons, particularly 00-01. I will agree that Shaq's Finals were the most dominating in NBA history, but without Kobe's brilliant playoff runs (and great Finals in '01-02 BTW), LA doesn't win ANY of those titles.

Kobe has won more rings, has been in more Finals, as well as being one of the most prolific scorers in NBA history. AND, his career is far from done, too. In fact, IF he leads this year's Laker team to a title, the next question will be, is he a Top-5 player all-time?

It's funny how you call Kobe's finals great, but act like Bird's were average and cite shooting percentage.

2000 finals- 37% (about 2-3 more FGA per game than ppg)
2001 finals- 42%
2002 finals-51% (the one time he had a good shooting % in the finals, but he had a teammate who outscored him by almost 10 ppg)
2004 finals- 38% (as many shot attempts as points scored)
2008 finals- 41%
2009 finals- 43%

And of course the Lakers wouldn't have won any of those titles if you took Kobe off the teams, but do you think the Celtics would have even come close to any of those titles without Bird?

As great as Kobe was in 2001 and 2002, he still wasn't his team's most valuable player or as good as prime Larry Bird. And when Kobe isn't scoring or shooting well, he typically hasn't had the impact Bird does when he's not scoring. Some will cite defense, but even during his defensive prime during the 3peat, he often didn't guard the best perimeter player on the other team, like in the 2000 finals when he guarded Mark Jackson, not Reggie Miller or Jalen Rose. And even in the 2002 WCF, Rick Fox guarded Peja Staojakovic while Kobe and Fisher both took turns guarding Mike Bibby(who went off and had the series of his life).

[alexandreben]

Even more amazing are his career playoff stats, including PER (for those that value it.) He cracks the top-25 in ppg, at #24 (23.76), but that is about it.

Once again, and carrying my argument from another thread...Kobe is a better player, in terms of career, than Bird was.
stats is not everything, consider the era, Bird shined in the 80's which's way valuable than Kobe's era, plus the "hand-checking" rule issue, Kobe better than Bird? not even close...

[Niquesports]

stats is not everything, consider the era, Bird shined in the 80's which's way valuable than Kobe's era, plus the "hand-checking" rule issue, Kobe better than Bird? not even close...
I would say Kobe is hurt because for most of his early years he wasn't a great unlike the other Goat prospects. Of any of the top 10 players that most would pick Kobe has the weaker early first 5 years.now peak wise he is a top 10 but the Bird's Magic's and mj's even Iverson came into the league as stars

[alexandreben]

I would say Kobe is hurt because for most of his early years he wasn't a great unlike the other Goat prospects. Of any of the top 10 players that most would pick Kobe has the weaker early first 5 years.now peak wise he is a top 10 but the Bird's Magic's and mj's even Iverson came into the league as stars
I really hate the comments that "Kobe is better than Bird"... there's no way that Kobe should be ranked over Bird:banghead:

[GiveItToBurrito]

Out of the 5 major stats, Points, Rebounds, Assists, Steals and Blocks. Larry Bird is only in the top 25 in one of those catagories. That was points. He is 25th on the list for all time leaders in points.

The guy is considered one of the greatest of all time by many people but was he really that dominant? For a guy regarded as highly as him you would think he would be on/higher up on some of those lists. I mean, he played 13 years which is a good length for a career.

Can anyone explain this?

Is is the awards/championships that make everyone believe he is so great? Let's face it, he is a great player. But is he a dominant player?

I love Bird and his style of play this is just something I looked up and found suprising.

http://espn.go.com/nba/history/leaders

This is the list of all time leaders in catagories.

1. He only played for like ten or eleven years and was injury-prone for a while.
2. He was never in a situation where he needed to score 35 a game or dominate the ball.
3. He was an extremely well-rounded player but because of his position, he was never in a position to put up jaw-dropping numbers of rebounds or assists (Lebron's the same way).
4. He was an elite shooter who could have been the all-time leader in threes if he'd played in an era where guys like QRich will take 8 a game, but instead played back when it was a very rare shot.
5. I don't know this for a fact, but I'd imagine that Kobe's top 25 in only one category, too, at least as far as regular season stats. Doesn't make Kobe one-dimensional or any less of a player.

[jlauber]

It's funny how you call Kobe's finals great, but act like Bird's were average and cite shooting percentage.

2000 finals- 37% (about 2-3 more FGA per game than ppg)
2001 finals- 42%
2002 finals-51% (the one time he had a good shooting % in the finals, but he had a teammate who outscored him by almost 10 ppg)
2004 finals- 38% (as many shot attempts as points scored)
2008 finals- 41%
2009 finals- 43%

And of course the Lakers wouldn't have won any of those titles if you took Kobe off the teams, but do you think the Celtics would have even come close to any of those titles without Bird?

As great as Kobe was in 2001 and 2002, he still wasn't his team's most valuable player or as good as prime Larry Bird. And when Kobe isn't scoring or shooting well, he typically hasn't had the impact Bird does when he's not scoring. Some will cite defense, but even during his defensive prime during the 3peat, he often didn't guard the best perimeter player on the other team, like in the 2000 finals when he guarded Mark Jackson, not Reggie Miller or Jalen Rose. And even in the 2002 WCF, Rick Fox guarded Peja Staojakovic while Kobe and Fisher both took turns guarding Mike Bibby(who went off and had the series of his life).

First of all I NEVER said that Kobe's Finals were great. You won't find that in any post in this thread (although I did point out that his 01-02 Finals were exceptional.)

Secondly, like so MANY idiots here, the fact that LEAGUE AVERAGE is ignored is beyond me. Bird played in the 80's, when ENTIRE LEAGUE's were shooting nearly 50%. Kobe has played in th e00's, in an era of .450 shooting leagues.

Furthermore, look at Kobe's POST-SEASONS, in which he was clearly more of a force.

Once again, Bird's Finals were nothing spectaular, except as I mentioned early on, in '84. AND, in that series, if LA doesn't hand Boston TWO games, the Celts and Bird are SWEPT.

As for the RIDICULOUS Bird-Maic comparisons. There are those that are quick to point out Bird's passing ability, which, even I agree, was great. However, NO ONE here pointed out Magic's REBOUNDING ability. Magic even led the 81-82 Lakers in rebounding by a rebound-per-game more than KAREEM!

And for those IDIOTS that believe Bird was better offensively...just what games were you watching???? Oh, I see, because Bird scored more, he was a better offensive player? Of course, those that actually WATCHED Magic KNOW that he was a 30 pt game ANYTIME he wanted to. He was also a career .520 shooter (and .506 in the post-season), while Bird shot .496 in the regular season, and an even lower .472 in the playoffs.

Meanwhile, the Bird-lovers rip Kobe for scoring more on a lower FG%????

The Lakers could shut Bird down with Cooper, but Boston had no answer for Magic.

And for this absolutely pathetic argument that Magic played on better teams? Bird played alongside THREE to FOUR HOFers EVERY year in the decade of the 80's. Magic played with an aged Kareem who could no longer rebound at ALL, and Worthy, who was truly a great player, but who probably benefitted more from Magic than any other Laker player.

H2H, it was not even close. Magic dominated Bird. Simple as that. From College until retirement. And, as I said earlier, it SHOULD have been 3-0 on the Finals.

As for Fatal's "Top-5" Finals Performances with Bird's '86 Finals...

Just off the top of my head.

1. Russell in 61-62
2. Baylor in 61-62
3. Wilt in 63-64
4. Wilt in 66-67
5. West in 68-69
6. Wilt in 69-70
7. Kareem in 70-71
8. Kareem in 73-74
9. Kareem in 79-80
10. Magic in 79-80
11. Kareem in 84-85
12. Magic in 86-87
13. Magic in 87-88
14. Jordan in 90-91
15. Jordan in 91-92
16. Jordan in 92-93
17. Olajuwon in 93-94
18. Olajuwon in 94-95
19. Shaq in 99-00
20. Shaq in 00-01
21. Shaq in 01-02
22. Wade in 05-06

Take Bird's '86, 24 ppg, 9.7 rpg, 9.5 apg on .482 shooting and compare it with those..AND show me TOP-5.

[ShaqAttack3234]

First of all I NEVER said that Kobe's Finals were great. You won't find that in any post in this thread (although I did point out that his 01-02 Finals were exceptional.)

Secondly, like so MANY idiots here, the fact that LEAGUE AVERAGE is ignored is beyond me. Bird played in the 80's, when ENTIRE LEAGUE's were shooting nearly 50%. Kobe has played in th e00's, in an era of .450 shooting leagues.

First of all, the reason shooting percentages are so much lower today is because players take FAR more 3s, remember 33% on 3s is equal to 50% from the field and also, the league is far more perimeter-oriented because of the decline of big men and the rule changes which put the ball in perimeter player's hands more often.

As long as we're comparing to league averages. Compare Larry Bird's 3 point shooting to his contemporaries.


Furthermore, look at Kobe's POST-SEASONS, in which he was clearly more of a force.

On the stat sheet? Yeah, but we're not playing fantasy basketball, and you can't ignore rebounding where Bird crushes Kobe. Bird is probably the greatest rebounder ever who wasn't a PF/C.


Once again, Bird's Finals were nothing spectaular, except as I mentioned early on, in '84. AND, in that series, if LA doesn't hand Boston TWO games, the Celts and Bird are SWEPT.

Except, they weren't swept, they won.


As for the RIDICULOUS Bird-Maic comparisons. There are those that are quick to point out Bird's passing ability, which, even I agree, was great. However, NO ONE here pointed out Magic's REBOUNDING ability. Magic even led the 81-82 Lakers in rebounding by a rebound-per-game more than KAREEM!

Yeah, but go watch the games. Magic, like Jason Kidd, was getting a lot of uncontested rebounds after the big men did the boxing out. This was so Magic could start the break. How else do you think a 6'3", 33/34 year old Jason Kidd was averaging 8+ rpg at such a slow pace?


And for those IDIOTS that believe Bird was better offensively...just what games were you watching???? Oh, I see, because Bird scored more, he was a better offensive player? Of course, those that actually WATCHED Magic KNOW that he was a 30 pt game ANYTIME he wanted to. He was also a career .520 shooter (and .506 in the post-season), while Bird shot .496 in the regular season, and an even lower .472 in the playoffs.

Compare the shots Magic was taking as well as the volume of shots to Bird. Bird went off for a 60 point game, averaged 30 in 1988 ect. Bird was a much better scorer. Magic got a lot of his points in transition. Up until 1987, he wasn't even the first scoring option on his team.


Meanwhile, the Bird-lovers rip Kobe for scoring more on a lower FG%????

The Lakers could shut Bird down with Cooper, but Boston had no answer for Magic.

Bird was injured in the 1985 finals, this is well documented and in 1987, Boston's team was basically crippled by the time of the finals. Walton was done, McHale was playing on a broken foot ect.


And for this absolutely pathetic argument that Magic played on better teams? Bird played alongside THREE to FOUR HOFers EVERY year in the decade of the 80's. Magic played with an aged Kareem who could no longer rebound at ALL, and Worthy, who was truly a great player, but who probably benefitted more from Magic than any other Laker player.

That aged Kareem was league MVP in Magic's rookie year. Bird didn't have the luxuary of winning as the number 2 guy like Magic did early. And :oldlol: at Magic not playing with more talent. He entered the league with Kareem who was the best player in the league, Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon, Spencer Haywood and Michael Cooper. Later, they added Bob McAdoo, James Worthy, Byron Scott ect.


H2H, it was not even close. Magic dominated Bird. Simple as that. From College until retirement. And, as I said earlier, it SHOULD have been 3-0 on the Finals.

:roll: What do you mean it should have been 3-0 in the finals? Magic made some mistakes that caused the Lakers to lose that series. How is that an argument for Magic? And what relevance does head to head have? They didn't guard eachother.



As for Fatal's "Top-5" Finals Performances with Bird's '86 Finals...

Just off the top of my head.

1. Russell in 61-62
2. Baylor in 61-62
3. Wilt in 63-64
4. Wilt in 66-67
5. West in 68-69
6. Wilt in 69-70
7. Kareem in 70-71
8. Kareem in 73-74
9. Kareem in 79-80
10. Magic in 79-80
11. Kareem in 84-85
12. Magic in 86-87
13. Magic in 87-88
14. Jordan in 90-91
15. Jordan in 91-92
16. Jordan in 92-93
17. Olajuwon in 93-94
18. Olajuwon in 94-95
19. Shaq in 99-00
20. Shaq in 00-01
21. Shaq in 01-02
22. Wade in 05-06

Take Bird's '86, 24 ppg, 9.7 rpg, 9.5 apg on .482 shooting and compare it with those.

Wilt averaged something like 17 ppg on 56% shooting in the '67 finals. He was the 4th leading scorer on his own team!

[Alhazred]

Bird didn't even play 900 games in his career, entered the NBA at 23 and his body broke down at 31. These type of cumulative stats reward longevity (at least 1000+ played games), it doesn't make him a better or worse player. Why are there so many idiots who can't realize simple things like this? He is the greatest all-around player ever, and him being or not being in the "top 25" means sh*t. You can question his longevity and durability, but not his dominance.

lol @ "was he really that dominant". For five straight years he averaged, 24/10/7, 29/11/7, 26/10/7, 28/9/8 and 30/9/6, all while being near the top on steal leaders and posting crazy shooting percentages. If Lebron posted seasons like that while on teams that won a couple of rings, you'd be creaming yourself. This while rebounding on a front line that included McHale and Parish, sharing the ball with his team and not getting nearly as many touches as star players would get from 90s onward.

I know it's already been said, but great post. :cheers:

[jlauber]

First of all, the reason shooting percentages are so much lower today is because players take FAR more 3s, remember 33% on 3s is equal to 50% from the field and also, the league is far more perimeter-oriented because of the decline of big men and the rule changes which put the ball in perimeter player's hands more often.

As long as we're comparing to league averages. Compare Larry Bird's 3 point shooting to his contemporaries.



On the stat sheet? Yeah, but we're not playing fantasy basketball, and you can't ignore rebounding where Bird crushes Kobe. Bird is probably the greatest rebounder ever who wasn't a PF/C.



Except, they weren't swept, they won.



Yeah, but go watch the games. Magic, like Jason Kidd, was getting a lot of uncontested rebounds after the big men did the boxing out. This was so Magic could start the break. How else do you think a 6'3", 33/34 year old Jason Kidd was averaging 8+ rpg at such a slow pace?



Compare the shots Magic was taking as well as the volume of shots to Bird. Bird went off for a 60 point game, averaged 30 in 1988 ect. Bird was a much better scorer. Magic got a lot of his points in transition. Up until 1987, he wasn't even the first scoring option on his team.



Bird was injured in the 1985 finals, this is well documented and in 1987, Boston's team was basically crippled by the time of the finals. Walton was done, McHale was playing on a broken foot ect.



That aged Kareem was league MVP in Magic's rookie year. Bird didn't have the luxuary of winning as the number 2 guy like Magic did early. And :oldlol: at Magic not playing with more talent. He entered the league with Kareem who was the best player in the league, Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon, Spencer Haywood and Michael Cooper. Later, they added Bob McAdoo, James Worthy, Byron Scott ect.



:roll: What do you mean it should have been 3-0 in the finals? Magic made some mistakes that caused the Lakers to lose that series. How is that an argument for Magic? And what relevance does head to head have? They didn't guard eachother.




Wilt averaged something like 17 ppg on 56% shooting in the '67 finals. He was the 4th leading scorer on his own team!

Magic scored 42 points in a clinching game six WITHOUT Kareem...in his ROOKIE year. That is ALL you need to know about his offense. And yes, Bird put up a 60 point game, that was long since decided...and was a blatant attempt to get him to 60. If you want a GREAT scoring game...check out Kobe's 62 against the NBA Finalist Mav's...in which he outscored the ENTIRE Mavs team and then left before the 4th period started.

Bird had McHale, Parish, D.Johnson in their PRIMES almost his ENTIRE career, He also had Cowens, Maravich, and Archibald in his rookie season. Magic took a good team and made them a champion.

And these "excuses" for Bird's Finals. He was AWFUL in '81...a .419 shooter. He was LUCKY in '84. The Celtics, SHOULD have been SWEPT. It is one thing to get beat, it is quite another to BLOW a series. The Lakers BLEW that series. They easily dispatched the Celtics in '85, and CRUSHED them in '87. In the '85 and '87 series Bird was NOWHERE CLOSE to being the best player on the floor.

As for Top-5, you only mention Wilt's 66-67. Alright, I'll bite. How did Chamberlain do in that series. He aveaged 17.5 ppg, AND 28.5 rpg, 7.0 apg, and shot .560 from the field. AND, there is no doubt that he would have had a MINIMUM of 7 bpg. On top of that, he held HOF center Nate Thurmond to 14.3 ppg, on .343 shooting! Sorry, but that was a HORRIBLE example if you want to say that Bird's '86 was a Top-5 performance. Bird's 86 was rated #29, in the POST-MERGER era, by John Hollinger. I don't agree with several of Hollinger's picks...but Bird's '86 was certainly well placed at #29. Historically, it was probably much worse.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Magic scored 42 points in a clinching game six WITHOUT Kareem...in his ROOKIE year. That is ALL you need to know about his offense. And yes, Bird put up a 60 point game, that was long since decided...and was a blatant attempt to get him to 60. If you want a GREAT scoring game...check out Kobe's 62 against the NBA Finalist Mav's...in which he outscored the ENTIRE Mavs team and then left before the 4th period started.

Wait, I thought we were talking about Magic's scoring ability vs Bird's? :roll: Yes, we all know Kobe is a better volume scorer than Bird, Bird on the otherhand was the smarter, more unselfish offensive player with superior passing skills to Kobe and a more consistent and efficient offensive game.


Bird had McHale, Parish, D.Johnson in their PRIMES almost his ENTIRE career, He also had Cowens, Maravich, and Archibald in his rookie season. Magic took a good team and made them a champion.

The lakers were 47-35 before Magic arrived, the Celtics were 29-53 before Bird arrived, that tells you all you need to know about talent.


And these "excuses" for Bird's Finals. He was AWFUL in '81...a .419 shooter. He was LUCKY in '84. The Celtics, SHOULD have been SWEPT. It is one thing to get beat, it is quite another to BLOW a series. The Lakers BLEW that series. They easily dispatched the Celtics in '85, and CRUSHED them in '87.

Yeah, because scoring is the only aspect of the game. :rolleyes: Check out Bird's rebounding, playmaking as well as hustle and clutch plays in that series.


As for Top-5, you only mention Wilt's 66-67. Alright, I'll bite. How did Chamberlain do in that series. He aveaged 17.5 ppg, AND 28.5 rpg, 7.0 apg, and shot .560 from the field. AND, there is no doubt that he would have had a MINIMUM of 7 bpg. On top of that, he held HOF center Nate Thurmond to 14.3 ppg, on .343 shooting! Sorry, but that was a HORRIBLE example if you want to say that Bird's '86 was a Top-5 performance. Bird's 86 was rated #29, in the POST-MERGER era, by John Hollinger. I don't agree with several of Hollinger's picks...but Bird's '86 was certainly well placed at #29. Historically, it was probably much worse.

:roll: You're right, basically averaging 24/10/10 and winning while your starting center is getting his ass handed to him sucks.

[Alhazred]

Bird had McHale, Parish, D.Johnson in their PRIMES almost his ENTIRE career, He also had Cowens, Maravich, and Archibald in his rookie season. Magic took a good team and made them a champion.

Maravich was done by the time Bird got to Boston and although Cowens and Archibald were both still decent they had also declined significantly by then. I'll admit that the Celtic's later lineups were pretty loaded, but so were the Lakers with players like Kareem, Worthy, Scott, McAdoo, A.C. Green and Mychael Thompson over the years. Plus, they had Jamaal Wilkes and Norm Nixon along with Kareem for Magic's rookie year with Kareem still being the best player in the league.


And these "excuses" for Bird's Finals. He was AWFUL in '81...a .419 shooter. He was LUCKY in '84. The Celtics, SHOULD have been SWEPT. It is one thing to get beat, it is quite another to BLOW a series. The Lakers BLEW that series. They easily dispatched the Celtics in '85, and CRUSHED them in '87. In the '85 and '87 series Bird was NOWHERE CLOSE to being the best player on the floor.

Boston won in 84, and that's all there is to it. Citing Magic's mistakes doesn't help his case over Bird. Also, as others have already mentioned in this thread, Bird was injured in 85 and 87.


As for Top-5, you only mention Wilt's 66-67. Alright, I'll bite. How did Chamberlain do in that series. He aveaged 17.5 ppg, AND 28.5 rpg, 7.0 apg, and shot .560 from the field. AND, there is no doubt that he would have had a MINIMUM of 7 bpg. On top of that, he held HOF center Nate Thurmond to 14.3 ppg, on .343 shooting! Sorry, but that was a HORRIBLE example if you want to say that Bird's '86 was a Top-5 performance. Bird's 86 was rated #29, in the POST-MERGER era, by John Hollinger. I don't agree with several of Hollinger's picks...but Bird's '86 was certainly well placed at #29. Historically, it was probably much worse.

:wtf:

Now how exactly is that, considering Bird in 86 was easily better than 88 Magic, 70 Wilt and 06 Wade, just for starters? Don't even get me started on 62 Baylor having the second greatest Finals performance of all time. :oldlol:

[godofgods]

All these Faker **** hating on Bird, what a bunch of stupid racists.

[raptorfan_dr07]

It's funny how you call Kobe's finals great, but act like Bird's were average and cite shooting percentage.


Yeah, he's trying to harp on Bird's Finals shooting percentages, when Bird's worst is pretty much Kobe's career average in the Finals. Makes no sense. I could see an argument for Magic being better than Bird, but Kobe is way out of line.

[Niquesports]

Wait, I thought we were talking about Magic's scoring ability vs Bird's? :roll: Yes, we all know Kobe is a better volume scorer than Bird, Bird on the otherhand was the smarter, more unselfish offensive player with superior passing skills to Kobe and a more consistent and efficient offensive game.



The lakers were 47-35 before Magic arrived, the Celtics were 29-53 before Bird arrived, that tells you all you need to know about talent.

There were so many other factors to the celtics improvement,not just Bird.

Yeah, because scoring is the only aspect of the game. :rolleyes: Check out Bird's rebounding, playmaking as well as hustle and clutch plays in that series.



:roll: You're right, basically averaging 24/10/10 and winning while your starting center is getting his ass handed to him sucks.
Bird never sucked but I do feel Magic was the better player. For his postion he was as good a rebounder as Bird a better passer a better floor leader better on the break better basketball IQ all this is why his teams came out on top more than Bird's. You can use all the stats all the opinions but fact is they both played on equal good teams and Magic won more rings that's what really matters

[Niquesports]

Maravich was done by the time Bird got to Boston and although Cowens and Archibald were both still decent they had also declined significantly by then. I'll admit that the Celtic's later lineups were pretty loaded, but so were the Lakers with players like Kareem, Worthy, Scott, McAdoo, A.C. Green and Mychael Thompson over the years. Plus, they had Jamaal Wilkes and Norm Nixon along with Kareem for Magic's rookie year with Kareem still being the best player in the league.

Tiny was still very effective even making all nba in 81 Bird also had Maxwell Dj Gearld henderson scott wedman a 6th man of the year walton.

Boston won in 84, and that's all there is to it. Citing Magic's mistakes doesn't help his case over Bird. Also, as others have already mentioned in this thread, Bird was injured in 85 and 87.

Maybe he wasn't a 100percent but he played injured is when you can't play hurt is when you can and by the end of the season all vets are hurt.

:wtf:

Now how exactly is that, considering Bird in 86 was easily better than 88 Magic, 70 Wilt and 06 Wade, just for starters? Don't even get me started on 62 Baylor having the second greatest Finals performance of all time. :oldlol:
For many years fans and the media have passed this false lie that Bird was better. At the risk of someone taking this wrong he was the great white hype. His game lived up to the hype he just falls short against Magic

[plowking]

You spend too much time talking to young fans who were too young to remember the game.Going into the 79 finals ISU was the # 1 team what was MSU ranked ? Do you even know.even if you want to say MSU was better Magic out played Bird in the game by far Magic was a star and Bird got shut down.
Next the pros how many changes on the roster were there from the 29 team to the 61 team also did both teams have the same coach ??? Do you know if you did you wouldn't be making it seem as if Bird did it all alone.also how many finals did that great Laker Center make before Magic with the Lakers ???? Who played with more HOFers Bird or Magic ?? Its sad when Larry Legend fans make so many excuses when these things are brought up. Sad the truth hurts doesn't it

Bird was one of the only threats on the floor for his college team. Magic's team was stacked with talent. Bird's team wasn't even projected to be first in their conference that year, where as Magic's team was dubbed a top 8 team...
But yeah, keep living in this fantasy world where Magic carried while Bird had a stacked team... :rolleyes:
Bird carried that team to an incredible season, and with far more defensive pressure on him than Magic, you'd expect Magic to be able to play more freely.

HOFers? They both played with their fair share. I bet you're counting Tiny, Maravich, etc and all the others that he had for like 2 seasons and near the end of their careers. :oldlol:

LOL at complaining about the coaches. Pat Riley or Bill Fitch/K.C. Jones. Are you serious. That isn't even a comparison.

You want to know the main changes that occurred during the 31 game turnaround in Bird's rookie season? Adding Bird, Maxwell and an old Maravich. Yeah, it's not like Bird was the main key to the success. :rolleyes:

How many finals did Kareem make? He already won one. And he'd never played on that great a team. When you're put on a team with Cooper, Worthy, Green, Scott, Thompson, you get to show your talents.

[Go Getter]

All these Faker **** hating on Bird, what a bunch of stupid racists.

Supposedly I'm one of the biggest race mongers on the site and I'm in here defending Bird.

:confusedshrug:

Once you get to the top 10 players in NBA history it's hard to compare them. Especially when they played different positions in different eras with different rules and a different court.

[Go Getter]

Bird was one of the only threats on the floor for his team. Magic's team was stacked with talent. Bird's team wasn't even projected to be first in their conference that year, where as Magic's team was dubbed a top 8 team...


I'd say Magic was surrounded by more talent but to say Bird's teams didn't have any threats other than him is completely false.

Kevin McHale was a master assassin in the post.

DJ was a beast? Who slashed to the hoop and hit that game winner vs the Pistons?

Danny Ainge was a marksman. {capable of lighting teams up when they paid too much attention to Larry}

Robert Parrish had a steady and reliable mid-range game

You must not have watched his teams to have said that.

Magic's team was built around him beautifully yet so was Bird's.

That's what made their matchups great.

[plowking]

I'd say Magic was surrounded by more talent but to say Bird's teams didn't have any threats other than him is completely false.

Kevin McHale was a master assassin in the post.

DJ was a beast? Who slashed to the hoop and hit that game winner vs the Pistons?

Danny Ainge was a marksman. {capable of lighting teams up when they paid too much attention to Larry}

Robert Parrish had a steady and reliable mid-range game

You must not have watched his teams to have said that.

Magic's team was built around him beautifully yet so was Bird's.

That's what made their matchups great.

I was talking about their college teams.

[Alhazred]

Tiny was still very effective even making all nba in 81 Bird also had Maxwell Dj Gearld henderson scott wedman a 6th man of the year walton.

I know Boston had plenty of solid players, I was just saying Magic's teammates were at least equal or better. Both Magic and Larry had plenty of great teammates.


Maybe he wasn't a 100percent but he played injured is when you can't play hurt is when you can and by the end of the season all vets are hurt.

I'm not trying to discredit the Lakers' victories in 85 and 87, but Jlauber made it sound as if the 84 series was some kind of fluke that would never be repeated. LA may have won their later matchups regardless of the Celtics' health, but they would have been closer had Bird been healthy.


For many years fans and the media have passed this false lie that Bird was better. At the risk of someone taking this wrong he was the great white hype. His game lived up to the hype he just falls short against Magic

The only thing Magic has over Larry is longevity and passing ability. Bird was better at pretty much everything else.

[Niquesports]

Bird was one of the only threats on the floor for his college team. Magic's team was stacked with talent. Bird's team wasn't even projected to be first in their conference that year, where as Magic's team was dubbed a top 8 team...
But yeah, keep living in this fantasy world where Magic carried while Bird had a stacked team... :rolleyes:
Bird carried that team to an incredible season, and with far more defensive pressure on him than Magic, you'd expect Magic to be able to play more freely.

HOFers? They both played with their fair share. I bet you're counting Tiny, Maravich, etc and all the others that he had for like 2 seasons and near the end of their careers. :oldlol:

LOL at complaining about the coaches. Pat Riley or Bill Fitch/K.C. Jones. Are you serious. That isn't even a comparison.

You want to know the main changes that occurred during the 31 game turnaround in Bird's rookie season? Adding Bird, Maxwell and an old Maravich. Yeah, it's not like Bird was the main key to the success. :rolleyes:

How many finals did Kareem make? He already won one. And he'd never played on that great a team. When you're put on a team with Cooper, Worthy, Green, Scott, Thompson, you get to show your talents.
More silly Larry legend excuses sure he carried ISU but they were still the #1 ranked team and the favorite and not until Magic clearly out played Bird did people start with the silly excuse of him being on a weak team.

Bird may have been the best player on that team but Tiny played much better than the year before Maxwell game developed they got a steady coach and got rid of all the bad trades they made the few years before yes that helped.Pistol might have been washed up but Tiny wasn't .
Kareem was still a great player but wasn't able to lead the Lakers to a finals. Magic comes and not only do they make the fianls but win. How ever you want to look at it Magic proved his value in that gm 6 without Kareem.
Its funny ever year Bird has lost there is some excuse.just because Bird made a bad team very good and Magic made a good team great doesn't make either better they had no control over the team they went to

[Fatal9]

Here's the thing about Magic...I'll get the good out of the way first...


He is in the argument for being the most intelligent player to ever play. He understood shot distribution and read defenses better than probably any player I've seen. He was a mismatch for 90% of the teams. After about '86, his post game was dominant and that hook shot was unstoppable. You would be wrong to put him in the Bird/Jordan/Kobe league of scoring, a lot of his points were "in the flow of the game", when transition opportunities were available. I guarantee to you he probably got 20+ pts in transition in all his 40 pt games, and transition defense in the 80s..er, wasn't exactly spectacular. He's not someone you hand the ball off to play after play and ask to score. So the idea he could average 30 "if he wanted to" is false.

Early on he was the "piece" the Lakers needed. Someone Kareem could have to keep the games even while Kareem was resting. Magic fit beautifully as he could push the tempo while Kareem rested and Lakers would rarely miss a beat (unlike 70s when sitting Kareem was as good as throwing the game). It wasn't a style you could play for 48 minutes, but it worked well for the 4-5 minutes Kareem would sit. Before he came, Lakers were a good team. Kareem could take them to the conference finals even though he had to deal with injuries and his teams still weren't very good around him (check out their record when he missed start of '78 season). I know his assist numbers are gaudy but you have to understand that when he's throwing a post pass to Kareem for a contested skyhook he's getting an assist, when Worthy makes a quick turnaround jumper he's getting an assist. He was still make a ton of plays and is the best playmaker ever at his position but when you watch Magic, you always come out wondering how the hell he got 20 assists in the game you watched. Every PGs assist number in 80s were inflated (Stockton, KJ, Lever etc).

Magic to me was the best player for 2 of the 5 rings. 3 mayybe if we value regular season which Kareem would kind of coast through. The team unquestionably became his after '85. Lakers had ran through the West basically all throughout the 80s because it was that weak...like early 2000s East weak. It's part of the reason why they in addition to being the most talented team, were also the healthiest (whereas Parish/DJ were busting their ankles wrestling in long physical series vs. Pistons/Bucks etc).

Anyways, if you look at the Magic led Lakers, and how any time they faced a decent team in the West, they always had trouble making it to the finals. '86 Rockets knocked them off in five, '88 they barely squeaked by the Jazz and in '90 KJ/Chambers dispatched the Lakers in 5. His teams were healthy all throughout these runs btw (except '89 finals). His two rings as the unquestioned leader of the team came vs. Celtics in '87 who were dismantled by injuries but still made the series competitive (McHale broken foot, Walton was done, Parish had sprained ankles MULTIPLE times in the Pistons series, one of DJ/Ainge had problems too) and Pistons in '88 who could have won if not for Isiah's ankle injury. After that he was still in his late prime and got owned by MJ/Pippen in '91. If you are going to take the whole winning side for Magic, I don't see how exactly he comes out on top here.

Like I've said, the thing to question about Bird is his durability. He was injured/ill in '83, had those bone spurs in his elbow in '85 (watch how he moves in that series), and his career essentially ended in '88. At his peak when healthy though? He was devastating. I'd only take Kareem, MJ and maybe Shaq over him. Kobe vs. Magic is the more interesting debate to me but it's really hard to compare those two.

[Niquesports]

I know Boston had plenty of solid players, I was just saying Magic's teammates were at least equal or better. Both Magic and Larry had plenty of great teammates.



I'm not trying to discredit the Lakers' victories in 85 and 87, but Jlauber made it sound as if the 84 series was some kind of fluke that would never be repeated. LA may have won their later matchups regardless of the Celtics' health, but they would have been closer had Bird been healthy.



The only thing Magic has over Larry is longevity and passing ability. Bird was better at pretty much everything else.
Bird wasn't better at running a offense in the open court or half court set.Bird wasn't better dominating a game depending on what his team needed scoring,assist,rebounding .agic had the better basketball IQ when you really look at it Magic was the better all around player

[Niquesports]

Here's the thing about Magic...I'll get the good out of the way first...


He is in the argument for being the most intelligent player to ever play. He understood shot distribution and read defenses better than probably any player I've seen. He was a mismatch for 90% of the teams. After about '86, his post game was dominant and that hook shot was unstoppable. You would be wrong to put him in the Bird/Jordan/Kobe league of scoring, a lot of his points were "in the flow of the game", when transition opportunities were available. I guarantee to you he probably got 20+ pts in transition in all his 40 pt games, and transition defense in the 80s..er, wasn't exactly spectacular. He's not someone you hand the ball off to play after play and ask to score. So the idea he could average 30 "if he wanted to" is false.

Early on he was the "piece" the Lakers needed. Someone Kareem could have to keep the games even while Kareem was resting. Magic fit beautifully as he could push the tempo while Kareem rested and Lakers would rarely miss a beat (unlike 70s when sitting Kareem was as good as throwing the game). It wasn't a style you could play for 48 minutes, but it worked well for the 4-5 minutes Kareem would sit. Before he came, Lakers were a good team. Kareem could take them to the conference finals even though he had to deal with injuries and his teams still weren't very good around him (check out their record when he missed start of '78 season). I know his assist numbers are gaudy but you have to understand that when he's throwing a post pass to Kareem for a contested skyhook he's getting an assist, when Worthy makes a quick turnaround jumper he's getting an assist. He was still make a ton of plays and is the best playmaker ever at his position but when you watch Magic, you always come out wondering how the hell he got 20 assists in the game you watched. Every PGs assist number in 80s were inflated (Stockton, KJ, Lever etc).

Magic to me was the best player for 2 of the 5 rings. 3 mayybe if we value regular season which Kareem would kind of coast through. The team unquestionably became his after '85. Lakers had ran through the West basically all throughout the 80s because it was that weak...like early 2000s East weak. It's part of the reason why they in addition to being the most talented team, were also the healthiest (whereas Parish/DJ were busting their ankles wrestling in long physical series vs. Pistons/Bucks etc).

Anyways, if you look at the Magic led Lakers, and how any time they faced a decent team in the West, they always had trouble making it to the finals. '86 Rockets knocked them off in five, '88 they barely squeaked by the Jazz and in '90 KJ/Chambers dispatched the Lakers in 5. His teams were healthy all throughout these runs btw (except '89 finals). His two rings as the unquestioned leader of the team came vs. Celtics in '87 who were dismantled by injuries but still made the series competitive (McHale broken foot, Walton was done, Parish had sprained ankles MULTIPLE times in the Pistons series, one of DJ/Ainge had problems too) and Pistons in '88 who could have won if not for Isiah's ankle injury. After that he was still in his late prime and got owned by MJ/Pippen in '91. If you are going to take the whole winning side for Magic, I don't see how exactly he comes out on top here.

Like I've said, the thing to question about Bird is his durability. He was injured/ill in '83, had those bone spurs in his elbow in '85 (watch how he moves in that series), and his career essentially ended in '88. At his peak when healthy though? He was devastating. I'd only take Kareem, MJ and maybe Shaq over him. Kobe vs. Magic is the more interesting debate to me but it's really hard to compare those two.
First things the west wasn't as weak as some would want to make it. Second. Boston had trouble beating the Sixers and later the Pistons with your logic the 3peat Lakers would have had problems because the west was so much better than the east. Bottom line Magic is a top 5 and Bird is a 6 or 7

[1987_Lakers]

First things the west wasn't as weak as some would want to make it.

Anyone who knows 80's basketball will tell you the West was garbage. in 1985 the West only had two 50+ win teams in the Lakers & a Nuggets team that didn't play defense. in 1987 the Lakers probably had the easiest road to the Finals ever facing a 37 win team in the first round, a 42 win team in the second round, & a 39 win team in the WCF.

[jlauber]

Some more fascinating numbers regarding the Kobe-Bird debate...

How much more efficient was Bird in the post-season than Kobe? First of all, Kobe has OUTSHOT Bird from the 3PT line, with a post-season career average of .337 compared to Bird's .321. But for those that feel that Bird was a much more efficient FG% shooter based on his post-season career edge of .472 to Kobe's .450...

Subtract Kobe's and Bird's post-season 3pt shooting, and Bird's edge drops down to .485 to .476. Not nearly as dramatic as PERCEIVED.

Continuing...Bird came into the NBA as an immediate star at age of 23. Kobe entered the league right out of high school, at age 18, and did not play significant minutes until he was 20. AND, from age 22 to current, Kobe's post-season scoring average is 29.2 ppg., and his FG% climbs to about .457. Throw out 3 P shooting and it is at .473.

His stat line, from age 22 to current, or 9 seasons, is 29.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 5.2 apg, on .457 shooting and .473 without 3 pt shooting. And he shot .341 from the 3pt line.

Bird's in 12 seasons, ... 23.8 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 6.5 apg, on .472 shooting, or .485without the 3pt line. And he shot .321 from the 3pt line.

I just don't see how anyone can claim that Bird was a greater post-season player. And, Kobe probably has 3-4 more quality seasons left.


As for the '86 Finals. Bird put up a 24-10-10 Finals on .482 shooting. His teammate, Kevin McHale put up a 26-9-2 Finals on .572 shooting. And, on the other side, Olajuwon put up a 25-12-2 3 bpg Finals on .479 shooting. IF Bird was the best player in that series, it was clearly not by much.

Regarding the '84 Finals.

http://webuns.chez-alice.fr/finals/1984.htm

LA blew open game one with a 20 point first period lead, and coasted to a 115-109 win. In game two, they had a two point lead, AND the ball with 18 secs left. Worthy, with Magic standing right next to him, threw a cross-court pass that picked off and led to a game-tying basket, and they lost in OT. In game three, the Lakers destroyed Boston, 137-104. In game four, LA had a five point lead with 41 secs left. Magic and Worthy EACH missed TWO FTs down the stretch, and Boston was able to tie, and then win in OT. Boston would go in to win in seven games.


Regarding my 22 series list...it was in chronological order, and it was just off of the top of my head. But, for those that scoffed at Baylor's 61-62 Finals, he had a 61-22 game in game five. I can't recall what his totals were for the Finals, but for his two playoff series, including the Finals, he averaged 38.6 ppg, 17.7 rpg, and 3.6 apg. True, he only shot .439...BUT, the LEAGUE AVERAGE was .426. As for Wilt's 69-70 Finals... the ONLY 20-20 .600 Finals in NBA history (23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, and .625 shooting, and 4.0 apg (and probably well over 5 bpg)...all accomplished just four months after majr knee surgery. In a must-win game six, he put up a 45-27 game (on 20-27 shooting.) And, of course in the famous "Reed game", Wilt was criticized for "only" having a 21-24 game on 10-16 shooting. Of course Wade's 05-06 has been considered one of the greatest ever... 34.7 ppg, on .468 shooting, with 7.8 rpg, and 3.6 apg.

I haven't taken the time to breakdown a Top-20 or more All-Time Finals list, but Bird's '86 would be well down the list.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Regarding my 22 series list...it was in chronological order, and it was just off of the top of my head. But, for those that scoffed at Baylor's 61-62 Finals, he had a 61-22 game in game five. I can't recall what his totals were for the Finals, but for his two playoff series, including the Finals, he averaged 38.6 ppg, 17.7 rpg, and 3.6 apg. True, he only shot .439...BUT, the LEAGUE AVERAGE was .426.

Yeah, and the average team in 1962 scored 118.8 ppg and had 71.4 rpg so while league averages make Elgin's shooting % look better, they also make his point and rebound numbers a lot less gaudy.

[Psileas]

Magic to me was the best player for 2 of the 5 rings. 3 mayybe if we value regular season which Kareem would kind of coast through. The team unquestionably became his after '85.

Except, he was their best player from 1984 and on.
1985? 18/6/13/1.5 vs 22/8/3/2. Even if you factor in defense, I don't think you can pick Kareem, except if you think that "defense is half the game".

Playoffs? Kareem wasn't equally dominant throughout the whole post-season, he posted 20.2/7.7 before the finals vs 17.2/7.2/15.4 for Magic, so not close. Even in the Finals, when Kareem won the Finals' MVP, with 25.7/9.0/5.2, Magic still stood out, with 18,3 ppg, 6,8 rpg, 14,8 apg.


Anyone who knows 80's basketball will tell you the West was garbage. in 1985 the West only had two 50+ win teams in the Lakers & a Nuggets team that didn't play defense. in 1987 the Lakers probably had the easiest road to the Finals ever facing a 37 win team in the first round, a 42 win team in the second round, & a 39 win team in the WCF.


Anyways, if you look at the Magic led Lakers, and how any time they faced a decent team in the West, they always had trouble making it to the finals. '86 Rockets knocked them off in five, '88 they barely squeaked by the Jazz and in '90 KJ/Chambers dispatched the Lakers in 5. His teams were healthy all throughout these runs btw (except '89 finals). His two rings as the unquestioned leader of the team came vs. Celtics in '87 who were dismantled by injuries but still made the series competitive (McHale broken foot, Walton was done, Parish had sprained ankles MULTIPLE times in the Pistons series, one of DJ/Ainge had problems too) and Pistons in '88 who could have won if not for Isiah's ankle injury. After that he was still in his late prime and got owned by MJ/Pippen in '91. If you are going to take the whole winning side for Magic, I don't see how exactly he comes out on top here.

You left out several cases that don't do service to your arguments. People forget that for several seasons, it was the Celtics the ones who faced the worse playoff competition, yet the Lakers still went further. Like the 1980 season, when the West was definitely stronger than the East, yet the Lakers went all the way to win the title, after taking out teams that won 55, 56 and 59 games (including the 1979 champions), while the Celtics faced just one team of the same level and lost in 5 games (with home court advantage, too). Magic had the better individual playoff run in general (including the case when they played a common opponent), let alone if we include team results.

What happened in 1982? Despite the East's strength, where was the powerful Celtics' competition in the playoffs and when it came, what did the Celtics do? They beat the 43-win Bullets and then, when the Sixers came to town (again, the Celtics had the HCA), Boston choked. The Lakers beat 46 and 48-win teams in the West and the Sixers in the Finals, playing without HCA. Magic once again outplayed Bird in the playoffs.

1983? Again, the Celtics were unable to cope with the serious competition. They only beat the 43-win Hawks and then got swept to the 51-win, but still lesser than them Bucks...The Lakers beat a 46-win and a 53-win team to get swept to a 65-win team.
Of course, the Celtics had Bird play with the flu in a part of the series against the Bucks. Then again, the Lakers played the whole playoffs without Worth, half the playoffs without McAdoo and part of the Finals without Nixon, as well. At least, when Bird, McHale or Parish were hurt, later on, they still played.

In 1984, the Celtics win the title, but they hardly dominated, either. They beat a 35-win team (and not really easily, may I add), then they needed 7 games to beat a 47-win Knicks team. To their credit, they beat a strong Milwaukee team in 5 games, after facing the Lakers, who could have easily won the series, but blew it away (the "Tragic" Johnson series). The Lakers this time had an easier overall schedule in the West, but they lost 3 games to the Celtics' 5.

In 1985, again, I don't see the huge deal about competition. The Celtics beat a 36-win team in Round one, like the Lakers in the West, the difference being that the Celtics won all their games way, way harder than the Lakers did (even if we take out the game that Bird missed, and the Celtics lost anyway), who really swept the Suns. The Pistons were a good team (won 46 games vs the Blazers' 42), but they were not seen as a defensive juggernaut in any way/shape/form. If anything, they were nothing more than average, not better than the Blazers that the Lakers beat. Once again, the Lakers took 1 game less than the Celtics to beat their opponents. I'll give you the Conference Finals. Of course, the NBA Finals were another story, with the Lakers beating the Celtics in 6, despite getting blown in game 1 in Boston.

The 1987 Lakers did face pretty weak competition in the 1987 playoffs. Blame Seattle for this, for beating Dallas in the first round-to get swept of course later. But, again, despite the better competition, the Celtics cannot claim superiority, since they lost 6 games in the East to the Lakers' 1 in the West (and of course the Finals).

In 1988, the Celtics needed 4 games to beat a 38-win team, 7 games to beat a 50-win team and then lost to a 54-win team. The Lakers also struggled in the West, but at least they beat all their competitors, including the Pistons in the Finals, though Isiah got injured in Game 6. Let's note that Magic fared clearly better than Bird against the same Piston team.

1989 is not fair to compare, since Bird missed almost the whole season, but the Lakers' injuries in the Finals is a case of bad luck, as was the case with the Pistons in 1988.

In 1990, the Lakers choke in a series against the Suns, but the Celtics were already out, blowing a series against the Knicks (and Bird holds part of the choking responsibility in the end of the last game).

1991, not even close. The Celtics struggle to beat a 41-win team and again lose when facing the first serious opponent, with the injury plagued Bird having probably the worst playoff series that any GOAT candidate ever had. The Lakers lose only 1 game to 52-win Houston and 44-win Golden State combined. Then they beat the 63-win Portland, to lose then to Chicago, with Scott and Worthy not playing at 100% (and missing game 5 entirely).

With that said, I can't find any way you can put the 80's Celtics over the Lakers (who, as you can see, did have their share of injuries in crucial playoff parts). Furthermore, if someone compares Magic's to Bird's playoff performances, it won't be far-fetched at all to rank Magic over Bird as a playoff performer.

[Niquesports]

Except, he was their best player from 1984 and on.
1985? 18/6/13/1.5 vs 22/8/3/2. Even if you factor in defense, I don't think you can pick Kareem, except if you think that "defense is half the game".

Playoffs? Kareem wasn't equally dominant throughout the whole post-season, he posted 20.2/7.7 before the finals vs 17.2/7.2/15.4 for Magic, so not close. Even in the Finals, when Kareem won the Finals' MVP, with 25.7/9.0/5.2, Magic still stood out, with 18,3 ppg, 6,8 rpg, 14,8 apg.





You left out several cases that don't do service to your arguments. People forget that for several seasons, it was the Celtics the ones who faced the worse playoff competition, yet the Lakers still went further. Like the 1980 season, when the West was definitely stronger than the East, yet the Lakers went all the way to win the title, after taking out teams that won 55, 56 and 59 games (including the 1979 champions), while the Celtics faced just one team of the same level and lost in 5 games (with home court advantage, too). Magic had the better individual playoff run in general (including the case when they played a common opponent), let alone if we include team results.

What happened in 1982? Despite the East's strength, where was the powerful Celtics' competition in the playoffs and when it came, what did the Celtics do? They beat the 43-win Bullets and then, when the Sixers came to town (again, the Celtics had the HCA), Boston choked. The Lakers beat 46 and 48-win teams in the West and the Sixers in the Finals, playing without HCA. Magic once again outplayed Bird in the playoffs.

1983? Again, the Celtics were unable to cope with the serious competition. They only beat the 43-win Hawks and then got swept to the 51-win, but still lesser than them Bucks...The Lakers beat a 46-win and a 53-win team to get swept to a 65-win team.
Of course, the Celtics had Bird play with the flu in a part of the series against the Bucks. Then again, the Lakers played the whole playoffs without Worth, half the playoffs without McAdoo and part of the Finals without Nixon, as well. At least, when Bird, McHale or Parish were hurt, later on, they still played.

In 1984, the Celtics win the title, but they hardly dominated, either. They beat a 35-win team (and not really easily, may I add), then they needed 7 games to beat a 47-win Knicks team. To their credit, they beat a strong Milwaukee team in 5 games, after facing the Lakers, who could have easily won the series, but blew it away (the "Tragic" Johnson series). The Lakers this time had an easier overall schedule in the West, but they lost 3 games to the Celtics' 5.

In 1985, again, I don't see the huge deal about competition. The Celtics beat a 36-win team in Round one, like the Lakers in the West, the difference being that the Celtics won all their games way, way harder than the Lakers did (even if we take out the game that Bird missed, and the Celtics lost anyway), who really swept the Suns. The Pistons were a good team (won 46 games vs the Blazers' 42), but they were not seen as a defensive juggernaut in any way/shape/form. If anything, they were nothing more than average, not better than the Blazers that the Lakers beat. Once again, the Lakers took 1 game less than the Celtics to beat their opponents. I'll give you the Conference Finals. Of course, the NBA Finals were another story, with the Lakers beating the Celtics in 6, despite getting blown in game 1 in Boston.

The 1987 Lakers did face pretty weak competition in the 1987 playoffs. Blame Seattle for this, for beating Dallas in the first round-to get swept of course later. But, again, despite the better competition, the Celtics cannot claim superiority, since they lost 6 games in the East to the Lakers' 1 in the West (and of course the Finals).

In 1988, the Celtics needed 4 games to beat a 38-win team, 7 games to beat a 50-win team and then lost to a 54-win team. The Lakers also struggled in the West, but at least they beat all their competitors, including the Pistons in the Finals, though Isiah got injured in Game 6. Let's note that Magic fared clearly better than Bird against the same Piston team.

1989 is not fair to compare, since Bird missed almost the whole season, but the Lakers' injuries in the Finals is a case of bad luck, as was the case with the Pistons in 1988.

In 1990, the Lakers choke in a series against the Suns, but the Celtics were already out, blowing a series against the Knicks (and Bird holds part of the choking responsibility in the end of the last game).

1991, not even close. The Celtics struggle to beat a 41-win team and again lose when facing the first serious opponent, with the injury plagued Bird having probably the worst playoff series that any GOAT candidate ever had. The Lakers lose only 1 game to 52-win Houston and 44-win Golden State combined. Then they beat the 63-win Portland, to lose then to Chicago, with Scott and Worthy not playing at 100% (and missing game 5 entirely).

With that said, I can't find any way you can put the 80's Celtics over the Lakers (who, as you can see, did have their share of injuries in crucial playoff parts). Furthermore, if someone compares Magic's to Bird's playoff performances, it won't be far-fetched at all to rank Magic over Bird as a playoff performer.
The larry legend again exposed

[jlauber]

Well thought out post, Psileas, as always.

For those that think I am just ripping Bird here...not true. I have him ranked at #10. If you want to argue PEAK, he would move up a couple of notches. BUT, IMHO, Magic was UNDER-RATED in the first half of the 80's, and of course, he was quite simply, the best player in the second half.

Yes, Magic came to a 47-35 team. A team that had not sniffed the Finals since the Chamberlain era. BUT, he took Kareem, who was basically a career disappointment to that point, despite being the best player in the league for much of the 70's...and IMMEDIATELY made them a champ. And he did so in FIVE seasons, and took them to EIGHT Finals in the 80's (and another in the 90's.)

And how about those EIGHT Finals? LA DOMINATED in all but one of their titles ('88 againt the Pistons.) BUT, how about the other three? In the '83 Finals, in which Kareem was abused by Malone, LA lost 4-0. Take a closer look, though, HOFer Worthy was injured and did not play at all. The Lakers were in every game near the end, except game three.

'83-84? Well, I have covered that series before. There have been a few instances in professional team sports where the BEST team did not win a title, even in a seven game series. The '60 Pirates beat the Yanks, 4-3, despite being outscored 55-27. The '67-68 76ers lost to the Celtics in a close game seven without HOFer Cunningham the entire series, and with Luke Jackson going down in game five (and leading the series, 3-1.) And, then there was the '69 Finals, LA, up 2-1 and with the ball late, and a lead, lost the ball, and then Sam Jones hit a miraculous shot to win the game. The Lakers blew out Boston in game five...so in reality, they should have won that series, 4-1. As it was, they lost game seven, with perhaps the worst coaching blunder in NBA history, and on ANOTHER miraculous shot. And, in the 83-84 Finals, LA GAVE Boston TWO games. Here again, the Lakers outplayed Boston in FIVE games...and lost in seven....in a series they SHOULD have easily SWEPT.

There are those that claim that LA was lucky to beat the Pistons in '88. Maybe so, but the same could be said of Detroit in '89. Los Angeles came into the Finals with an 11-0 playoff record. Unfortunately, they lost starter Byron Scott to an injury just before the Finals, and worse still, they lost Magic in the 3rd period of game two. They lost game one by 12 points...the only game that was not close in a four game sweep. They lost the next three by three, four, and eight points (and were leading late.) One has to wonder how they would have fared with a healthy team.

So, while there are those that bring up Boston's injuries (in series' in which they were blown up)...LA lost a close four game sweep without Worthy in one, and without Magic and Scott in another. And they completely BLEW the '84 Finals.

The reality was...MAGIC LED those Laker teams to FIVE titles in the decade, and it could easily have been EIGHT.

Meanwhile, as Psileas pointed out, Bird played on three winners (and I contend that he was the best player on the floor in only one), and was outplayed by Magic in two of the three. Even more importantly, where was Bird from '86 on? He was a NON-FACTOR.

The best player of the 80's...for the ENTIRE decade...Magic. And, the better CAREER between Bird and Magic? Not even close.

[Soothsayer]

Some more fascinating numbers regarding the Kobe-Bird debate...

How much more efficient was Bird in the post-season than Kobe? First of all, Kobe has OUTSHOT Bird from the 3PT line, with a post-season career average of .337 compared to Bird's .321. But for those that feel that Bird was a much more efficient FG% shooter based on his post-season career edge of .472 to Kobe's .450...

Subtract Kobe's and Bird's post-season 3pt shooting, and Bird's edge drops down to .485 to .476. Not nearly as dramatic as PERCEIVED.

Continuing...Bird came into the NBA as an immediate star at age of 23. Kobe entered the league right out of high school, at age 18, and did not play significant minutes until he was 20. AND, from age 22 to current, Kobe's post-season scoring average is 29.2 ppg., and his FG% climbs to about .457. Throw out 3 P shooting and it is at .473.

His stat line, from age 22 to current, or 9 seasons, is 29.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 5.2 apg, on .457 shooting and .473 without 3 pt shooting. And he shot .341 from the 3pt line.

Bird's in 12 seasons, ... 23.8 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 6.5 apg, on .472 shooting, or .485without the 3pt line. And he shot .321 from the 3pt line.

I just don't see how anyone can claim that Bird was a greater post-season player. And, Kobe probably has 3-4 more quality seasons left.


As for the '86 Finals. Bird put up a 24-10-10 Finals on .482 shooting. His teammate, Kevin McHale put up a 26-9-2 Finals on .572 shooting. And, on the other side, Olajuwon put up a 25-12-2 3 bpg Finals on .479 shooting. IF Bird was the best player in that series, it was clearly not by much.

Regarding the '84 Finals.

http://webuns.chez-alice.fr/finals/1984.htm

LA blew open game one with a 20 point first period lead, and coasted to a 115-109 win. In game two, they had a two point lead, AND the ball with 18 secs left. Worthy, with Magic standing right next to him, threw a cross-court pass that picked off and led to a game-tying basket, and they lost in OT. In game three, the Lakers destroyed Boston, 137-104. In game four, LA had a five point lead with 41 secs left. Magic and Worthy EACH missed TWO FTs down the stretch, and Boston was able to tie, and then win in OT. Boston would go in to win in seven games.


Regarding my 22 series list...it was in chronological order, and it was just off of the top of my head. But, for those that scoffed at Baylor's 61-62 Finals, he had a 61-22 game in game five. I can't recall what his totals were for the Finals, but for his two playoff series, including the Finals, he averaged 38.6 ppg, 17.7 rpg, and 3.6 apg. True, he only shot .439...BUT, the LEAGUE AVERAGE was .426. As for Wilt's 69-70 Finals... the ONLY 20-20 .600 Finals in NBA history (23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, and .625 shooting, and 4.0 apg (and probably well over 5 bpg)...all accomplished just four months after majr knee surgery. In a must-win game six, he put up a 45-27 game (on 20-27 shooting.) And, of course in the famous "Reed game", Wilt was criticized for "only" having a 21-24 game on 10-16 shooting. Of course Wade's 05-06 has been considered one of the greatest ever... 34.7 ppg, on .468 shooting, with 7.8 rpg, and 3.6 apg.

I haven't taken the time to breakdown a Top-20 or more All-Time Finals list, but Bird's '86 would be well down the list.

So...you've shown that Bird was more efficient than Kobe in the postseason, even if only by a small amount.

You have also shown that Bird's 86 finals, 24-10-10 on 48.2% is better than any finals Kobe has ever put up. Kobe's best finals is probably 2002: 27-6-5 on 51%

And if Bird's 86 finals performance would rank "well down" on your personal top 20 finals performances list, Kobe's best I'm sure is down even lower.

So you seem to have shown, however unintentionally, that Bird is a better playoff performer than Kobe.

[ginobli2311]

So...you've shown that Bird was more efficient than Kobe in the postseason, even if only by a small amount.

You have also shown that Bird 86 finals, 24-10-10 on 48.2% is better than any finals Kobe has ever put up. Kobe's best finals is probably 2002: 27-6-5 on 51%

And if Bird's 86 finals performance would rank "well down" on your personal top 20 finals performances list, Kobe's best I'm sure is down even lower.

So you seem to have shown,however unintentionally, that Bird is a better playoff performer than Kobe.

Agreed.

I'll take Bird's 24 points 10 boards 7assists on a higher fg% all day long over Kobe's playoff numbers.

I think both players are very close but I will take Bird slightly ahead of Kobe mainly because of what Kobe did in the 04 and 08 Finals. If Kobe had won one of those....or at least played halfway decent....I would probably have Kobe over Bird. But shooting sub 38% in back to back finals in your prime just isn't good enough.

[Alhazred]

Bird wasn't better at running a offense in the open court or half court set.

Fair point. I concede that Magic was obviously more suited to play point guard than Bird was.


Bird wasn't better dominating a game depending on what his team needed scoring,assist,rebounding.

Well, maybe not better, but Bird was certainly just as good as Magic when it came to doing anything your team needed to win. He even outrebounded Moses Malone a few times in the 81 Finals.


Magic had the better basketball IQ when you really look at it Magic was the better all around player

I don't know, Magic wasn't a very good defender or a great outside shooter. Bird in his prime was actually a pretty competent defender and was a far more skilled scorer than Magic, plus he could dominate the boards and was an excellent passer in his own right.

Magic is the GOAT point guard, but if I had to choose between him and Bird to build a team around, I'm picking Bird.

[Fatal9]

You left out several cases that don't do service to your arguments. People forget that for several seasons, it was the Celtics the ones who faced the worse playoff competition, yet the Lakers still went further. Like the 1980 season, when the West was definitely stronger than the East, yet the Lakers went all the way to win the title, after taking out teams that won 55, 56 and 59 games (including the 1979 champions), while the Celtics faced just one team of the same level and lost in 5 games (with home court advantage, too). Magic had the better individual playoff run in general (including the case when they played a common opponent), let alone if we include team results.
I specifically pointed to when the team clear cut became Magic's (post-'85 imo). West was strong in 1980, but Kareem was the one dominating those playoffs, not Magic.

Except, he was their best player from 1984 and on.
1985? 18/6/13/1.5 vs 22/8/3/2. Even if you factor in defense, I don't think you can pick Kareem, except if you think that "defense is half the game".

Playoffs? Kareem wasn't equally dominant throughout the whole post-season, he posted 20.2/7.7 before the finals vs 17.2/7.2/15.4 for Magic, so not close. Even in the Finals, when Kareem won the Finals' MVP, with 25.7/9.0/5.2, Magic still stood out, with 18,3 ppg, 6,8 rpg, 14,8 apg
By '84? To me it was clear only around the start of '86 season. Should be noted it was a new series after game 1, after which as you know Kareem completely dominated the series averaging 29/10/6/2 on 61% on the strong Celtic frontline. I have trouble calling Kareem #2 on that team when all year Lakers played to beat one team...the Celtics. And Kareem was the one who got them there. In addition to all that, he was the #1 option in the half court in the clutch, during momentum shifts or when the tempo slowed down. And how about the looks he created on the perimeter for guys like Scott, Magic and Cooper when he'd be seeing double teams in the post? He was their best half court option. And though not as potent as he once was at defense, he was still a shotblocking presence, and you can bet his 7'3 frame changed a lot of shots in the lane. Can you really find example of someone who does all this for their team and be classified as #2? Kareem's finals performance makes me put him at 1A to Magic's 1B (lets face it, the Celtics were the only legitimate team they saw in the playoffs that year). I never try to get a into a numbers game with Magic either. Like I said, he could have 15 assists in a game but be turning the ball over like a mad man (which he often did) and collect half of them by turnaround shots in the post by Worthy or skyhooks from Jabbar, and you could pass it off as a great game.

As for the rest of your post, I'll look into it year by year since the time you say it became Magic's team. Claiming the West was even remotely as strong as the East is completely false.


'84 - Win total of Laker competition: 38, 43, 41. For Celtics: 35, 47, 50. Celtics had trouble with Knicks the same way the '08 Celtics had trouble with the Hawks. They blew out every home game while Knicks, backed by HUGE scoring nights from Bernard King, won the close games at MSG. There's a huge difference in a 7 game series like this one and a one like the Jazz/Lakers one in '88. And even with the Sixers losing in the first round, Celtics easily faced better competition in their conference.
'85 - Lakers faced 36, 45 and 52 win teams (the 52 win being the run and gun, no defense playing Nuggets who allowed 118 pts/game). For Celtics: 36, 46 and 57. Celtics face the loaded Moses/Erving/Toney/Barkley Sixers team in the finals, while Lakers don't see a team comparable to them all playoffs.
'86 - Lakers didn't make it out WCF, while a healthy Celtic team put away the same Rocket team easily in 6 games. In their own conference they swept a Bucks team that won 57 games (that's more wins than any team Lakers faced in the West throughout ALL of the 80s btw).
'87 - this is no contest again. Lakers had one of the easiest road to the finals ever while the ailing Celtics battled the tough veteran Bucks and the Pistons who finally had their "bad boy" roster together.
'88 - Lakers barely scrambled out of the West, while Celtics lost to Pistons (due to worst shooting series of Bird's career). Pistons were up 3-2 in the series when Isiah hurt his ankle, though it didn't affect him in game 6, it clearly did for game 7, which Lakers barely squeaked out by 3 points. Let's take out Magic and Worthy's ankle for the game 7 and see how the series turns out?
'89 - can't really compare because Bird was out, and Magic's hamstring injury in finals, but Pistons won.
'90 - Lakers face a decently strong Suns team in the West, and get dealt with in 5 games. Celtics lose to the Knicks, but the difference is Magic is still in his prime while Bird is not in his. You can bring up Bird's record from '90-'92, but frankly, I don't really care. You might and that's fine but I care how good you were in your prime, not when you've clearly declined to not even being a top 5 (or top 10) player any more.

During Magic's tenure as "#1" post-'85...are you really impressed by what he did winning wise vs. what Bird did? He lost nearly every time there was a decent team in the west, and the two titles in '87 and '88 came by beating injury riddled teams in the finals. The point is that the whole "winner" argument for Magic doesn't really work. Bird you can point to as winning more rings as the all important "leader" (3 vs. 2), while also being the better player at his peak.

[Psileas]

Fair point. I concede that Magic was obviously more suited to play point guard than Bird was.



Well, maybe not better, but Bird was certainly just as good as Magic when it came to doing anything your team needed to win. He even outrebounded Moses Malone a few times in the 81 Finals.



I don't know, Magic wasn't a very good defender or a great outside shooter. Bird in his prime was actually a pretty competent defender and was a far more skilled scorer than Magic, plus he could dominate the boards and was an excellent passer in his own right.

Magic is the GOAT point guard, but if I had to choose between him and Bird to build a team around, I'm picking Bird.

You can't really pick Bird's defense as being at a whole new level above Magic's. First of all, Magic was an equally potent team defender. Second, Magic was easier to look "exposed", since he played more peripheral defense, while Bird, especially in the beginning of his career, guarded players of roughly his size, including PF's. Magic himself looked better when he had to guard SF's instead of PG's, because that's what his size was more suitable of. Magic was for his position a more distant outlier than Bird was and I don't think this needs explanation.

Bird could sure dominate the boards and he almost matched Moses' rebounding in the 1981 Finals. But Magic could take over the scoring load when needed to and easily so. Sometimes, I think his altruism hurt his fame as a scorer. When in 1990 against the Suns things started getting tough for the team, he decided to take over the scoring sector, and the Suns couldn't cover themselves. He was hitting from outside, driving at will, drawing lots of fouls, things that he could do a lot more often if he wasn't aiming at creating 5 easy shots for his teammates instead of taking these shots himself. Also, he did outscore Bird in the 1987 Finals.




I specifically pointed to when the team clear cut became Magic's (post-'85 imo). West was strong in 1980, but Kareem was the one dominating those playoffs, not Magic.

This reminds me of Kobe's case in 2001 and 2002. People starting calling him a top-5 player and an MVP candidate and other laughing at this, pointing that "he's not even the best on his own team". Kareem was dominant throughout these series, but this doesn't take away from what Magic did, even as the #2. Put early 80's Bird in Magic's place and Kareem would still be the alpha guy. After all, early 80's Bird, even as the #1 guy on the Celtics, did at times take back seats to Parish or Maxwell and let them shine. Games when Bird would have a quiet 15/10/5 game were not a rarity those years.


By '84? To me it was clear only around the start of '86 season. Should be noted it was a new series after game 1, after which as you know Kareem completely dominated the series averaging 29/10/6/2 on 61% on the strong Celtic frontline. I have trouble calling Kareem #2 on that team when all year Lakers played to beat one team...the Celtics. And Kareem was the one who got them there. In addition to all that, he was the #1 option in the half court in the clutch, during momentum shifts or when the tempo slowed down. And how about the looks he created on the perimeter for guys like Scott, Magic and Cooper when he'd be seeing double teams in the post? He was their best half court option. And though not as potent as he once was at defense, he was still a shotblocking presence, and you can bet his 7'3 frame changed a lot of shots in the lane. Can you really find example of someone who does all this for their team and be classified as #2? Kareem's finals performance makes me put him at 1A to Magic's 1B (lets face it, the Celtics were the only legitimate team they saw in the playoffs that year). I never try to get a into a numbers game with Magic either. Like I said, he could have 15 assists in a game but be turning the ball over like a mad man (which he often did) and collect half of them by turnaround shots in the post by Worthy or skyhooks from Jabbar, and you could pass it off as a great game.

I know that you are a stat collector, like me, and you may have a lot of these, but you may want to look at the figures more analytically. Take the 1985 postseason, with Kareem winning the 1985 F.MVP.

First round: Kareem posts 15, 21 and 18 points in few minutes of playing time. He shoots at a fantastic %. Magic, 18, 19 and 13, to go with 19, 12 and 11 assists in also milited playing time.

W.C.S: Kareem started with a 16/11/5 game (26'), followed by 17, 26, 21 and 25 points. I couldn't find references about rebounding, which I don't thing is a good sign. Magic posted games of 12/12 ast, 19/9/18, 13/23 ast, 31/13 ast, 34/9/19 (!), which leaves little doubt about who was more dominant,

W.C.F: Kareem started with a 16/7 game, follwed by an even worse (13 on 4-16 one), then by a 27-point one, a great 29/12/8/4 one and a 15-point one. Again, I didn't find any data about rebounding or shot-blocking. Magic started with a 10/16 ast one, follwed by 13/15 ast, 7/14/15, 17/13 ast and 17/19 ast. Still, Magic was more dominant.

Then followed the Finals, when Kareem was the more dominant of the two. Overall, it seems strange to me that you "blame" the 80's Lakers for coasting in the West, but you don't recognise that Kareem was also keeping his energy for the time he'd meet the Celtics and some more big games, while Magic would not noticeably change gear throughout the whole season and postseason. You sure must have heard all the "coasting Kareem" stuff from the era, which I don't think are fair, since we're still talking about very good stats on a very deep team, but applied more to him than mid-80's Magic.

When it comes to easy assists due to having great FG shooters, this quality makes less difference than many think. Kareem and Worthy shot a really great 58.6% combined in 1985. Now, assume that half of Magic's 968 assists went to them (which is a very high ratio, probably unrealistically so). Replace them with 2 big men who shoot as much, but at only 50%, which was a good, but not spectacular figure for the mid 80's. Do the math and you'll see that Magic would post only 54 assists less, which means that he'd average 11.9 instead of 12.6. That's the difference between "normal" and "easy" passing and I remind you that we assume that an impressive 50% of Magic's assists goes to these 2 guys alone.


As for the rest of the post, which I didn't quote, because it put me above the 10,000 character posting limit, basically you're showcasing why the East was better at that point, which I agreed with, but this did not show the Celtics having generally as a team any superiority, since they didn't fare any better than the Lakers when facing serious competition. Yes, the East was better, but the Celtics usually posted worse playoff records, as well. Some of them may be a little misleading (like the 4-3 over the Knicks), but some others are also misleadingly one-sided (like the 3-1 over the Bullets) and there were even a few misleading series from the Lakers' side as well, like the 4-3 over Dallas (a strong team, BTW), when no Laker victory was a close game, while the Lakers came awefully close to winning another game.
Of course, I don't see this kind of argument used really often for other cases and eras. It would serve well the 2004 Lakers to blame their loss to Detroit to facing tougher competition. Same with the 2008 Lakers or maybe even the 2006 Mavs.

[jlauber]

So...you've shown that Bird was more efficient than Kobe in the postseason, even if only by a small amount.

You have also shown that Bird's 86 finals, 24-10-10 on 48.2% is better than any finals Kobe has ever put up. Kobe's best finals is probably 2002: 27-6-5 on 51%

And if Bird's 86 finals performance would rank "well down" on your personal top 20 finals performances list, Kobe's best I'm sure is down even lower.

So you seem to have shown, however unintentionally, that Bird is a better playoff performer than Kobe.

Not close at all. Kobe HAS been a better POST-SEASON player in his CAREER. Especially since he became a factor in his 4th season at age 22. 29.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg, and 5.2 apg, as well as being in SIX Finals, with FOUR rings. He has even been a BETTER 3 pt shooter. He dominated the Spurs in the West in the first part of the 00's, and even in his "failed" Finals against the Celtics in '08, he was sensational against the Spurs in the WCF's. He had series against the Spurs in which he averaged 35 ppg in his career.

AND, you fail to point out Bird's OTHER post-season performances...several of which were "failures" as well, particularly later in his career

And one more time...comparing Magic and Bird...POST-SEASON CAREERS OR FINALS, amd Magic was a MUCH better player.

Bird has been over-rated TOO long here. Some were even calling him the GOAT. C'mon, Magic was his equal in the first half of the 80's, and clearly much better the rest of their careers. It was no coincidence that Magic took rosters that were not as loaded as Bird and his FOUR other HOFers, to more titles and more Finals. And Magic's offense is HUGELY under-rated. What you saw in game six of the '80 Finals was a better indication of the type of offensive player that he COULD have been. Not only that, but he became a MUCH more skilled player each year after that. He improved his outside shooting, then his FT shooting, then developed a mini-hook, then developed a lefty mini-hook, then became a decent 3pt shooter.

And speaking of 3pt shooting, here again, Bird was over-rated. How many 3's did he hit in the post-season? 80...yes 80, in his post-season CAREER, which spanned 164 games...or about ONE every TWO games. And he shot .321 in the process. Clearly, his 3pt shooting was not an edge.

Here are my points, one more time. Bird's Finals, aside from the '84 season...in which LA GAVE Boston the series...were NOT great. He was probably only the best player, on the floor, in ONE of them. And, the rest of his post-season career was way over-rated.

Two, Kobe's POST-SEASON CAREER has been even better than Bird's. More Finals, more rings, and better overall playoff performances. His '00-01 Finals was more efficient than ANY that Bird had BTW.

And finally...MAGIC was a MUCH better post-season performer than Bird. Bird went to five finals. He had three rings. Magic went to NINE Finals, and won FIVE rings. H2H, Magic held a 2-1 edge over Bird...and Boston had no business getting their lone win. And, in the other two H2H's, the Lakers easily blew the Celtics away. In the first half of the decade, Magic held an edge over Bird, and then pulled away in the second half.

So, PLEASE..no more NONSENSE about Bird being the GOAT, or even Top-5. Not even close.

[Soothsayer]

Not close at all. Kobe HAS been a better POST-SEASON player in his CAREER. Especially since he became a factor in his 4th season at age 22. 29.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg, and 5.2 apg, as well as being in SIX Finals, with FOUR rings. He has even been a BETTER 3 pt shooter. He dominated the Spurs in the West in the first part of the 00's, and even in his "failed" Finals against the Celtics in '08, he was sensational against the Spurs in the WCF's. He had series against the Spurs in which he averaged 35 ppg in his career.

AND, you fail to point out Bird's OTHER post-season performances...several of which were "failures" as well, particularly later in his career

And one more time...comparing Magic and Bird...POST-SEASON CAREERS OR FINALS, amd Magic was a MUCH better player.

Bird has been over-rated TOO long here. Some were even calling him the GOAT. C'mon, Magic was his equal in the first half of the 80's, and clearly much better the rest of their careers. It was no coincidence that Magic took rosters that were not as loaded as Bird and his FOUR other HOFers, to more titles and more Finals. And Magic's offense is HUGELY under-rated. What you saw in game six of the '80 Finals was a better indication of the type of offensive player that he COULD have been. Not only that, but he became a MUCH more skilled player each year after that. He improved his outside shooting, then his FT shooting, then developed a mini-hook, then developed a lefty mini-hook, then became a decent 3pt shooter.

And speaking of 3pt shooting, here again, Bird was over-rated. How many 3's did he hit in the post-season? 80...yes 80, in his post-season CAREER, which spanned 164 games...or about ONE every TWO games. And he shot .321 in the process. Clearly, his 3pt shooting was not an edge.

Here are my points, one more time. Bird's Finals, aside from the '84 season...in which LA GAVE Boston the series...were NOT great. He was probably only the best player, on the floor, in ONE of them. And, the rest of his post-season career was way over-rated.

Two, Kobe's POST-SEASON CAREER has been even better than Bird's. More Finals, more rings, and better overall playoff performances. His '00-01 Finals was more efficient than ANY that Bird had BTW.

And finally...MAGIC was a MUCH better post-season performer than Bird. Bird went to five finals. He had three rings. Magic went to NINE Finals, and won FIVE rings. H2H, Magic held a 2-1 edge over Bird...and Boston had no business getting their lone win. And, in the other two H2H's, the Lakers easily blew the Celtics away. In the first half of the decade, Magic held an edge over Bird, and then pulled away in the second half.

So, PLEASE..no more NONSENSE about Bird being the GOAT, or even Top-5. Not even close.


Using your own stats which you provided, we see that Bird was slightly more productive in the postseason (on much lower usage I might add), and has had a better PEAK finals than Kobe ever has.

Being a slightly better 3PT shooter in the postseason is of little consequence, considering all the other areas in which Bird was superior (FG%, EFG%, rpg, apg, spg, bpg, etc.)

Kobe shot more, was slightly less efficient, and has never put up a peak finals like Bird did.

Pointing out specific series in the western conference where Kobe dominated is really pointless, as Bird dominated multiple series in the Eastern conference in the playoffs.

Let's remember, Bird's WORST finals FG% (41.9) is Kobe's finals career AVERAGE.

You claim about Kobe that "his 00-01 finals was more efficient than any Bird had."

Oh really? Kobe in the 01 finals put up 24.6 ppg, 7.8 rebs, 5.8 assists on 41.5% shooting.

I'll take Bird's 24, 10, 10 on 48% shooting and I'm sure everyone else will too.

So no, Kobe's 01 finals is most certainly NOT more efficient than anything Bird ever put up.

And, you claim that Kobe's playoff career performance is so far superior to Bird's so as to be "not close". Funny, since Bird has been slightly more efficient in the playoffs while consuming far less usage than Bryant. Add onto this the fact that Bird's PEAK finals > Kobe's PEAK finals means that it is at the very least "close", and a very reasonable argument can be made that Bird has been the superior playoff performer.

[jlauber]

Using your own stats which you provided, we see that Bird was slightly more productive in the postseason (on much lower usage I might add), and has had a better PEAK finals than Kobe ever has.

Being a slightly better 3PT shooter in the postseason is of little consequence, considering all the other areas in which Bird was superior (FG%, EFG%, rpg, apg, spg, bpg, etc.)

Kobe shot more, was slightly less efficient, and has never put up a peak finals like Bird did.

Pointing out specific series in the western conference where Kobe dominated is really pointless, as Bird dominated multiple series in the Eastern conference in the playoffs.

Let's remember, Bird's WORST finals FG% (41.9) is Kobe's finals career AVERAGE.

You claim about Kobe that "his 00-01 finals was more efficient than any Bird had."

Oh really? Kobe in the 01 finals put up 24.6 ppg, 7.8 rebs, 5.8 assists on 41.5% shooting.

I'll take Bird's 24, 10, 10 on 48% shooting and I'm sure everyone else will too.

So no, Kobe's 01 finals is most certainly NOT more efficient than anything Bird ever put up.

And, you claim that Kobe's playoff career performance is so far superior to Bird's so as to be "not close". Funny, since Bird has been slightly more efficient in the playoffs while consuming far less usage than Bryant. Add onto this the fact that Bird's PEAK finals > Kobe's PEAK finals means that it is at the very least "close", and a very reasonable argument can be made that Bird has been the superior playoff performer.

Kobe's 01-02 Finals were 26.2 ppg on .514 shooting and .545 from 3's. Bird never came close to that efficiency in ANY of his Finals. And, Kobe was sensational in the 00-01 post-season, with 29 ppg, 7rpg and 6 apg, including a 35 ppg series against the Spurs.

Also, THIS post-season is not over, but after tonight, Kobe has averaged nearly 30 ppg, 5 rpg, 7 apg, on .480 shooting and .400 3pt shooting. Truly one of the greatest post-seasons in NBA history..and against a LEAGUE AVERAGE of .460 shooting and .355 3 pt shooting.

And, yes, I am a big fan of efficiency. BUT, I am also a realist. You just saw ANOTHER example of Kobe's staggering "clutch" play tonight. Kobe can get his shot, including 3's, against ANY defense, and ANY defender(s)...and there have only been a small handful of players in NBA history (if that many) that can make that claim. In any case, as I have pointed out several times...against LEAGUE AVERAGE, Bird was NOT more efficient than Kobe. Bird's post-season .472 FG% came in a league that averaged nearly 50% for the decade. Kobe's .450 has been in a decade that averaged that.

Kobe is now going to his SEVENTH NBA Finals. He has clearly been the best player in the NBA for most of the decade of the 00's (sorry Shaq and Duncan.) You will also notice that only ONE player is now ahead of Kobe in CAREER 30 point post-season games...MJ. And there is a possibility that Kobe may get to that mark before his career is over.

IMHO, Kobe has surpassed Bird in greatness. I have him at #8 with Bird at #10. And, IF Kobe somehow manages to win his 5th ring, he will jump past Shaq and Duncan, and move into #6. There are already those claiming that Kobe is now among the all-time greats. Another ring propells him very close to the top-5 all-time, on almost ANY list.

Keep in mind that Kobe is 31, and that MJ did not get his 5th ring until age 34. I am not foolish enough to predict Kobe will win #5 this year, or maybe ever...but you certainly have to like his chances.

As for the Magic-Bird debate...Magic was FAR more EFFICIENT... .better FG%, TS%, what ever you want. And his offense was very under-rated. He was a career 20 ppg scorer that could EASILY have averaged 30.

And for the idiots that have called him "Tragic"...he hit the game winner in game five of the '87 series, while Bird MISSED a shot at the buzzer. But on top of all of that, Magic had a 42-15 game, in a close-out Finals game, and WITHOUT Kareem. I was a big fan of Kareem...but he was a HUGE disappointment for the first half of his career...despite being the best player in the game in the 70's. But,he was well past his prime when Magic joined the Lakers...and I think too many people have made this claim that HE was the best player on the team in the earlu 80's. Kareem was shooting nearly 60% at that point in his career BECAUSE of Magic. Not only that, but Magic was even a better rebounder. Magic made ALL of his teammates better...and was deserving of more MVP's early in his career. His unselfish play hurt him in the MVP voting...but he was clearly the best post-season player of the 80's.

[Soothsayer]

Kobe's 01-02 Finals were 26.2 ppg on .514 shooting and .545 from 3's. Bird never came close to that efficiency in ANY of his Finals. And, Kobe was sensational in the 00-01 post-season, with 29 ppg, 7rpg and 6 apg, including a 35 ppg series against the Spurs.

And, yes, I am a big fan of efficiency. BUT, I am also a realist. You just saw ANOTHER example of Kobe's staggering "clutch" play tonight. Kobe can get his shot, including 3's, against ANY defense, and ANY defender(s)...and there have only been a small handful of players in NBA history (if that many) that can make that claim. In any case, as I have pointed out several times...against LEAGUE AVERAGE, Bird was NOT more efficient than Kobe. Bird's post-season .472 FG% came in a league that averaged nearly 50% for the decade. Kobe's .450 has been in a decade that averaged that.

Kobe is now going to his SEVENTH NBA Finals. He has clearly been the best player in the NBA for most of the decade of the 00's (sorry Shaq and Duncan.)

IMHO, Kobe has surpassed Bird in greatness. I have him at #8 with Bird at #10. And, IF Kobe somehow manages to win his 5th ring, he will jump past Shaq and Duncan, and move into #6. There are already those claiming that Kobe is now among the all-time greats. Another ring propells him very close to the top-5 all-time, on almost ANY list.

Keep in mind that Kobe is 31, and that MJ did not get his 5th ring until age 34. I am not foolish enough to predict Kobe will win #5 this year, or maybe ever...but you certainly have to like his chances.

As for the Magic-Bird debate...Magic was FAR more EFFICIENT... .better FG%, TS%, what ever you want. And his offense was very under-rated. He was a career 20 ppg scorer that could EASILY have averaged 30.

And for the idiots that have called him "Tragic"...he hit the game winner in game five of the '87 series, while Bird MISSED a shot at the buzzer. But on top of all of that, Magic had a 42-15 game, in a close-out Finals game, and WITHOUT Kareem. I was a big fan of Kareem...but he was a HUGE disappointment for the first half of his career...despite being the best player in the game in the 70's. But,he was well past his prime when Magic joined the Lakers...and I think too many people have made this claim that HE was the best player on the team in the earlu 80's. Kareem was shooting nearly 60% at that point in his career BECAUSE of Magic. Not only that, but Magic was even a better rebounder. Magic made ALL of his teammates better...and was deserving of more MVP's early in his career. His unselfish play hurt him in the MVP voting...but he was clearly the best post-season player of the 80's.


Hey man, good debate. In your previous post, you stated that kobe's 00-01 finals was better than finals Bird put up. That was clearly not true. Now you are switching it to Kobe's 02 finals, which I agreed in a previous post was Kobe's best finals.

Personally, I'll take Bird averaging a triple double: 24-10-10 on 48% shooting over Kobe's 27-6-5 on 51% any day of the week.

You mention Kobe's 01 postseason 29-7-6 on 47%. Pretty damn good, and accomplished with 30% usage.

We could compare that, for instance, to Bird's 84 playoffs: 27.5-11-6 on 52%. That was accomplished with 26% usage.

Yes, Kobe is quite clutch. So was Bird, Jordan, Miller, West, et al. Not sure how we can compare "clutchness" without the stats to verify. Let's just call it equal. ;)

Mentioning the league average FG% isn't really relevant, due to the league becoming much more perimeter and 3PT oriented.

EFG% is much more useful to compare accurately. For instance, the league wide EFG% this past season was 50.1%.

In 1984, league wide EFG% was 49.5%.

Bird's EFG% career was .514, and .485 in the playoffs. That is superior to, and more efficient than, Kobe's career EFG% of .488, and .482 in the playoffs.

I can respect you placing Kobe perhaps slightly ahead of Bird, although I disagree, but doing so based on Kobe being more efficient, a better playoff performer, or having a better peak finals is faulty.

And yes....obviously Kobe's final chapters have yet to be written...as for that story....to be continued....

[ShaqAttack3234]

Kobe's 01-02 Finals were 26.2 ppg on .514 shooting and .545 from 3's. Bird never came close to that efficiency in ANY of his Finals. And, Kobe was sensational in the 00-01 post-season, with 29 ppg, 7rpg and 6 apg, including a 35 ppg series against the Spurs.

I'll take Bird's 1984 and 1986 finals over any of Kobe's and Kobe averaged 33 ppg vs the Spurs that season.


Kobe is now going to his SEVENTH NBA Finals. He has clearly been the best player in the NBA for most of the decade of the 00's (sorry Shaq and Duncan.) You will also notice that only ONE player is now ahead of Kobe in CAREER 30 point post-season games...MJ. And there is a possibility that Kobe may get to that mark before his career is over.

This is 2010, it's a new decade. Shaq and Duncan were definitely better than Kobe the first 6 years of the decade and even in the seventh, Shaq won another ring and in the 8th, Duncan won another ring. If anything, Shaq, Duncan and Kobe were all the players of the decade, Shaq for his dominance in the first half the decade, Duncan for his dominance in the middle of the decade and his consistency and Kobe for his dominance later in the decade.


IMHO, Kobe has surpassed Bird in greatness. I have him at #8 with Bird at #10. And, IF Kobe somehow manages to win his 5th ring, he will jump past Shaq and Duncan, and move into #6. There are already those claiming that Kobe is now among the all-time greats. Another ring propells him very close to the top-5 all-time, on almost ANY list.

:oldlol: at Kobe passing Shaq with another ring.
.

As for the Magic-Bird debate...Magic was FAR more EFFICIENT... .better FG%, TS%, what ever you want. And his offense was very under-rated. He was a career 20 ppg scorer that could EASILY have averaged 30.

No he couldn't have, he got a lot of his points in transition. He was asked to carry the scoring load later in his career and never even flirted with 25 ppg, hell, he never even had a 50 point game. He could NOT have averaged 30. He just wasn't that kind of player.

Bird was simply a better scorer. Much better 3 point shooter, better mid-range game including his deadly fadeaway, better with his left hand, you name it. Bird DID average 30 ppg on shooting percentages of 53/41/92.

Magic peaked at about 24 ppg on 52% from the field, 21% on 3s and 85% from the line. So Magic was LESS efficient in his highest scoring season despite averaging 6 fewer ppg than Bird. In Magic's other two 20+ ppg seasons, he shot 51% and 48%.


And for the idiots that have called him "Tragic"...he hit the game winner in game five of the '87 series, while Bird MISSED a shot at the buzzer. But on top of all of that, Magic had a 42-15 game, in a close-out Finals game, and WITHOUT Kareem. I was a big fan of Kareem...but he was a HUGE disappointment for the first half of his career...despite being the best player in the game in the 70's. But,he was well past his prime when Magic joined the Lakers...and I think too many people have made this claim that HE was the best player on the team in the earlu 80's. Kareem was shooting nearly 60% at that point in his career BECAUSE of Magic. Not only that, but Magic was even a better rebounder. Magic made ALL of his teammates better...and was deserving of more MVP's early in his career. His unselfish play hurt him in the MVP voting...but he was clearly the best post-season player of the 80's.

Yeah, if Kareem was a huge disappointment, then what do you call Wilt? No, I don't care about some stats that were achieved in large part due to a break-neck pace, an era where he could play as many minutes as he wanted and the luxuary of attempting an obscene number of shots. But the fact is, his production dropped in the playoffs and he didn't do anything until he had some of the most stacked teams of all time, and even then, he choked away a 3-1 lead and got shut down by Russell in his last year while his team with much more talent was defeated.

And no, Kareem wasn't well past his prime when Magic joined the Lakers, watch some games in the 1980 seasons and playoffs, he dominated like very few in NBA history have dominated.

Then again I'm arguing with a guy who thinks Magic was as good as Bird in the first half of the 80's, Wilt had a 48" vertical and was arguably a better athlete than Jordan even at 59 and Wilt had Kevin Garnett type range.

[jlauber]

It is a good debate...and I enjoy these intelligent discussions. I think you and I would both agree that Kobe certainly deserves to be ranked alongside Bird. And, IF Kobe can somehow win another ring...I just don't see how anyone can rank Bird, or even Shaq and Duncan over him.

I have acknowledged Bird's greatness. He had a great peak run from about 84-87 (although he was clearly outplayed by Magic in the '87 Finals.) Before those seasons, Magic was probably his equal (and in those post-seasons, Magic was better), and then after '87, Magic was clearly better, even into the early 90's.

I just take offense to those that have regarded Bird as a GOAT, or even a top-5 player. His career numbers don't warrant it, nor does his post-season marks. He played alongside 3-4 HOFers (in their PRIMES) for most all of the decade of the 80's, and yet, Magic carried teams that were not as star-studded to more titles. And, once again, these Kareem arguments seem to diminish Magic's legacy. Kareem won his last MVP award in Magic's rookie season...and that was his last dominant season. He would never again be the most dominant center in the league, although he would be right with them. Moses abused him in their 82-83 Finals matchup, and was probably better for the rest of the decade.

AND, what about McHale...who was, IMHO, one of the most under-rated PF's of all-time? You talk about efficiency! I think a case could be made that McHale was as dominant as Kareem in the 80's. Worthy was certainly better than Parish, but Dennis Johnson was better than either Scott or Nixon.

Player-for-player, these two teams were perhaps the best ever. BUT, Magic made his Lakers better. And you simply can't ignore the fact that Magic was better, longer, as well. FIVE titles in NINE Finals, and in a league that had the powerful Sixers in the early-to-mid 80's, and the Bad Boys in the last half of the decade...and of course, the loaded Celtics for almost the entire decade. Yet, it was Magic and HIS Laker's winning FIVE rings.

[ShaqAttack3234]

It is a good debate...and I enjoy these intelligent discussions. I think you and I would both agree that Kobe certainly deserves to be ranked alongside Bird. And, IF Kobe can somehow win another ring...I just don't see how anyone can rank Bird, or even Shaq and Duncan over him.

Hmmm, lets see, better peaks, they didn't miss the playoffs in their primes, contended more consistently and would still have more finals MVPs, hell, if they gave out playoff MVPs, Shaq would still have 3 and Duncan would have 4.

And no, Kobe doesn't deserve to be ranked alongside Bird. Bird is the 4th greatest player of all time, arguably top 3, while Kobe is certainly no higher than 8th and no lower than 10th.


I have acknowledged Bird's greatness. He had a great peak run from about 84-87 (although he was clearly outplayed by Magic in the '87 Finals.) Before those seasons, Magic was probably his equal (and in those post-seasons, Magic was better), and then after '87, Magic was clearly better, even into the early 90's.

Magic was not his equal in the early 80's. Magic was clearly Kareem's sidekick in 1980, still the number 2 guy in 1982 and I'll settle on 1.A/1.B with Kareem in 1985. Bird was consistently higher in MVP voting until 1987 and Bird was clearly the best player on his team. Bird had 3 straight MVPs from 1984-1986. And if you're going to keep bringing up Magic's 42/15/8 game in game 6 of the 1980 finals, don't forget that Jamaal Wilkes came up huge with 37/10.


I just take offense to those that have regarded Bird as a GOAT, or even a top-5 player. His career numbers don't warrant it, nor does his post-season marks. He played alongside 3-4 HOFers (in their PRIMES) for most all of the decade of the 80's, and yet, Magic carried teams that were not as star-studded to more titles. And, once again, these Kareem arguments seem to diminish Magic's legacy. Kareem won his last MVP award in Magic's rookie season...and that was his last dominant season. He would never again be the most dominant center in the league, although he would be right with them. Moses abused him in their 82-83 Finals matchup, and was probably better for the rest of the decade.

Bird played with 3-4 hall of famers in their prime? Who was the 4th? Archibald wasn't in his prime with Bird, nor were Cowens or Maravich. In fact, each of the latter 2 players were in their last season and that was BEFORE Bird won a title. DJ and Parish are really borderline hall of famers, and McHale wasn't that good in 1981 when the Celtics won a title.

Magic played with Kareem, Jamaal Wiles(20+ ppg scorer), Norm Nixon(who Magic wasn't much better than early on), Spencer Haywood and Bob McAdoo(who were past their primes, but still valuable players), James Worthy, Byron Scott, Mychael Thompson.

You call 1980 Kareem's last dominant season. He averaged 25/11 with 4.5 apg and 3.4 bpg on 60% shooting. The next season, he averaged 26/10 with 3.4 apg and 2.8 bpg on 58% shooting while playing 37 mpg compared to 38 the previous season. That's not dominant? The next season, he averaged 24/9/3 with 2.7 bpg on 58% shooting while playing 35 mpg. Such an efficient 24 ppg is great, so are 3 apg for a center and so are nearly 3 bpg, particularly on a championship team.

In 1981, Kareem averaged 27/17/4 with 2.7 bpg vs Moses. Yeah, he only shot 46%, but the rebound, particularly vs Malone is impressive.


AND, what about McHale...who was, IMHO, one of the most under-rated PF's of all-time? You talk about efficiency! I think a case could be made that McHale was as dominant as Kareem in the 80's.

:roll:

[jlauber]

I'll take Bird's 1984 and 1986 finals over any of Kobe's and Kobe averaged 33 ppg vs the Spurs that season.



This is 2010, it's a new decade. Shaq and Duncan were definitely better than Kobe the first 6 years of the decade and even in the seventh, Shaq won another ring and in the 8th, Duncan won another ring. If anything, Shaq, Duncan and Kobe were all the players of the decade, Shaq for his dominance in the first half the decade, Duncan for his dominance in the middle of the decade and his consistency and Kobe for his dominance later in the decade.



:oldlol: at Kobe passing Shaq with another ring.
.


No he couldn't have, he got a lot of his points in transition. He was asked to carry the scoring load later in his career and never even flirted with 25 ppg, hell, he never even had a 50 point game. He could NOT have averaged 30. He just wasn't that kind of player.

Bird was simply a better scorer. Much better 3 point shooter, better mid-range game including his deadly fadeaway, better with his left hand, you name it. Bird DID average 30 ppg on shooting percentages of 53/41/92.

Magic peaked at about 24 ppg on 52% from the field, 21% on 3s and 85% from the line. So Magic was LESS efficient in his highest scoring season despite averaging 6 fewer ppg than Bird. In Magic's other two 20+ ppg seasons, he shot 51% and 48%.



Yeah, if Kareem was a huge disappointment, then what do you call Wilt? No, I don't care about some stats that were achieved in large part due to a break-neck pace, an era where he could play as many minutes as he wanted and the luxuary of attempting an obscene number of shots. But the fact is, his production dropped in the playoffs and he didn't do anything until he had some of the most stacked teams of all time, and even then, he choked away a 3-1 lead and got shut down by Russell in his last year while his team with much more talent was defeated.

And no, Kareem wasn't well past his prime when Magic joined the Lakers, watch some games in the 1980 seasons and playoffs, he dominated like very few in NBA history have dominated.

Then again I'm arguing with a guy who thinks Magic was as good as Bird in the first half of the 80's, Wilt had a 48" vertical and was arguably a better athlete than Jordan even at 59 and Wilt had Kevin Garnett type range.

Magic was FAR more efficent. In their 12 seasons in the league, Magic beat him 10 times in TS%, and 10 times in EF%.

You are a complete boob if you think Magic could not score 30 ppg. NO ONE drove the lane like Magic. He could have scored much more just from the foul line. And it was no coincidence that he outshot Bird by over 1000 points from the line. I could care less if he scored 50 points in game. Bird NEVER had a more impressive championship game than Magic's 42 point game in Magic's ROOKIE season. Was Bird a better shooter? Of course, but Kerr was a better shooter than MJ too. Just not in games, however.

Kareem was a good, but not great center in the 80's. He could no longer rebound AT ALL. Incidently, laughing at your Wilt comments...Wilt at age 36 LED the NBA in rebounding...when Kareem was in his PRIME...AND, in his last post-season, Chamberlain averaged 22.5 rpg...something Kareem NEVER came close to. How about the "Great" Kareem at age 36? 7.3 rpg in the regular season, and 8.2 in the post-season! MAGIC was a better rebounder than Kareem for THREE seasons! And Moses Malone just abused Kareem in the '83 Finals, outscoring him, and crushing him on the glass.

As for Wilt. NO ONE else, in the HISTORY of the game, ever took a more mediocre roster further, and not once, but TWICE, than what Wilt did in his 61-62 and 64-65 seasons. Last place rosters when he arrived. Game seven losses by a combined THREE points.

And with a HEALTHY roster, but OUTGUNNED by HOFers, as he was in EVERY post-season that he played in...HE led the 66-67 76ers to a demolition of the greatest dynasty in NBA history. AND, in the process, he CRUSHED Russell in EVERY aspect.

Wilt's 67-68 team lost to a Celtic team that had more HOFers to begin with, and then LOST one of his before that series even started. Despite that loss, they still led 3-1. BUT, then they lost Luke Jackson to an injury. As it was, they lost a game seven, by FOUR points. A HEALTHY Sixer roster probably sweeps Boston that year...just as they nearly did the previous season.

Oh, and yes, Russell "shut Wilt down" in the '68-69 Finals. More like Van Breda Kolf shut Wilt down. As it was, in that game seven, in which Russell "shut Wilt down"...let's see here. Wilt outscored Russell, 18-6, outshot Russell, 7-8 to 2-7, and outrebounded him, 27-21...despite being benched in the last five minutes. And ONCE again, Russell's Celtics had MORE HOFers. AND, Van Breda Kolf's personal favorite, Elgin Baylor, who was just a shell at that point in his career, scored 15.4 ppg on .385 shooting. Furthermore, had Johnny Egan held onto the ball in the last few seconds of game four, LA not only wins that game, but they would go on to win the series 4-1.

And, once again laughing at Russell "shutting Wilt down." Do you realize that Chamberlain nearly AVERAGED a 30-30 game against Russell in his CAREER.

And your RIDICULOUS "inflated stats" argument. I have blown that argument over several times...but no matter which era you transport Chamberlain's stats to, he would have the highest scoring season, BY A MILE. Against Jordan's 37.1 ppg in '87, Wilt would have averaged 46 ppg. Even in 2010, he would have averaged nearly 40 ppg.

As far as your rebounding numbers. Wilt AVERAGED nearly 25 rpg in the post-season. NO MATTER what numbers you argue with, Wilt would CRUSH any of today' centers, or any of Shaq's BEST seasons. Quite simply, Wilt was the greatest rebounder, by a staggering margin, of all time. In the clinching game five of the 71-72 Finals, Wilt nearly outrebounded the entire Knick TEAM, 29, while NY had a TOTAL of 39...and out of a TOTAL number of 106 rebounds that were available. You find me ONE Finals game in which Rodman, or Shaq came close to that kind of domination...regardless of "pace."

How about shooting percentage? Wilt put up seasons of .727 and .683...and against LEAGUE AVERAGES of .456 and .441. Here again, NO ONE ELSE is close.

And Wilt's post-season production dropping...like averaging 33 ppg and 26 rpg in his first SIX post-seasons...COMBINED. Not quite like his 40 ppg average in the same amount of regular seasons, BUT he almost always faced Russell either in the first, or second rounds of those playoffs. Put Jordan against the Bad Boys of the late 80's, and his ppg dropped too. Of course, Wilt's rebounding went UP in the post-season...and he outrebounded EVERYBODY he faced. He KILLED the second greatest rebounder of all-time, by FIVE rpg, in their 142 CAREER H2H matchups.

And yes, Kareem won a Finals MVP at age 37. Wilt won one at age 35.

Now, I have always defended Shaq's post-seasons, but, he was also SWEPT NUMEROUS times. Take Kobe away from those teams, and Wade from '06, and Shaq has NO rings.

[jlauber]

Bird Top-3 or 4????!!!!

So Bird was better than Russell, than Kareem, than Wilt, who OWNS the record book and who had two rings, better than Magic, who was CLEARLY a better player in their CAREERs, better than Duncan who took several different rosters to four titles, and better than Shaq, who has four rings, more records, and a much longer career?

And no, Bird's career is NOT better than Kobe's. And yes, IF Kobe wins his 5th rings....he moves up past Shaq and Duncan.

Bird is #10.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Magic was FAR more efficent. In their 12 seasons in the league, Magic beat him 10 times in TS%, and 10 times in EF%.

Once again, look at the volume of shots they were taking. You think Magic keeps that up while taking as many shots as Bird? :roll: Once again, compare their 3 highest scoring seasons.


You are a complete boob if you think Magic could not score 30 ppg. NO ONE drove the lane like Magic. He could have scored much more just from the foul line. And it was no coincidence that he outshot Bird by over 1000 points from the line. I could care less if he scored 50 points in game. Bird NEVER had a more impressive championship game than Magic's 42 point game in Magic's ROOKIE season. Was Bird a better shooter? Of course, but Kerr was a better shooter than MJ too. Just not in games, however.

I don't think I've ever heard anyone argue that Magic was as good of a scorer as Bird.


Kareem was a good, but not great center in the 80's. He could no longer rebound AT ALL.

Right, which is why he averaged 17 rpg against prime Moses Malone in the 1981 playoffs.


Incidently, laughing at your Wilt comments...Wilt at age 36 LED the NBA in rebounding...when Kareem was in his PRIME...AND, in his last post-season, Chamberlain averaged 22.5 rpg...something Kareem NEVER came close to. How about the "Great" Kareem at age 36? 7.3 rpg in the regular season, and 8.2 in the post-season! MAGIC was a better rebounder than Kareem for THREE seasons! And Moses Malone just abused Kareem in the '83 Finals, outscoring him, and crushing him on the glass.

Kareem was an offensive specialist in his later years, just like Wilt became a defensive specialist. Kareem was deadly in the halfcourt offense for most of the 80s. He was consistently averaging over 20 ppg on great efficiency thanks to his amazing post game, plus, he remained arguably the best passing big man of the 80's.


As for Wilt. NO ONE else, in the HISTORY of the game, ever took a more mediocre roster further, and not once, but TWICE, than what Wilt did in his 61-62 and 64-65 seasons. Last place rosters when he arrived. Game seven losses by a combined THREE points.

Yeah, that roster was really mediocre in 1962. You know with 2 hall of famers aside from Wilt and Guy Rodgers who was second to only Oscar Robertson in assists.


And with a HEALTHY roster, but OUTGUNNED by HOFers, as he was in EVERY post-season that he played in...HE led the 66-67 76ers to a demolition of the greatest dynasty in NBA history. AND, in the process, he CRUSHED Russell in EVERY aspect.

Wilt's 67-68 team lost to a Celtic team that had more HOFers to begin with, and then LOST one of his before that series even started. Despite that loss, they still led 3-1. BUT, then they lost Luke Jackson to an injury. As it was, they lost a game seven, by FOUR points. A HEALTHY Sixer roster probably sweeps Boston that year...just as they nearly did the previous season.

Regardless, how many teams have blown a 3-1 lead in the conference finals?


Oh, and yes, Russell "shut Wilt down" in the '68-69 Finals. More like Van Breda Kolf shut Wilt down. As it was, in that game seven, in which Russell "shut Wilt down"...let's see here. Wilt outscored Russell, 18-6, outshot Russell, 7-8 to 2-7, and outrebounded him, 27-21...despite being benched in the last five minutes. And ONCE again, Russell's Celtics had MORE HOFers. AND, Van Breda Kolf's personal favorite, Elgin Baylor, who was just a shell at that point in his career, scored 15.4 ppg on .385 shooting. Furthermore, had Johnny Egan held onto the ball in the last few seconds of game four, LA not only wins that game, but they would go on to win the series 4-1.

Wilt averaged under 12 ppg in the series, compare that to the 20+ he averaged during the season.


And your RIDICULOUS "inflated stats" argument. I have blown that argument over several times...but no matter which era you transport Chamberlain's stats to, he would have the highest scoring season, BY A MILE. Against Jordan's 37.1 ppg in '87, Wilt would have averaged 46 ppg. Even in 2010, he would have averaged nearly 40 ppg.

You haven't blown any argument. You just bring up the same irrational arguments that most fan boys do. Wilt wouldn't be playing 48+ mpg in 1987 or 2010 and he wouldn't be getting 30+ shot attempts either. As it is, Wilt dropped to 35 ppg on 46% shooting in the 1962 playoffs.


As far as your rebounding numbers. Wilt AVERAGED nearly 25 rpg in the post-season. NO MATTER what numbers you argue with, Wilt would CRUSH any of today' centers, or any of Shaq's BEST seasons. Quite simply, Wilt was the greatest rebounder, by a staggering margin, of all time. In the clinching game five of the 71-72 Finals, Wilt nearly outrebounded the entire Knick TEAM, 29, while NY had a TOTAL of 39...and out of a TOTAL number of 106 rebounds that were available. You find me ONE Finals game in which Rodman, or Shaq came close to that kind of domination...regardless of "pace."

You always forget to factor in minutes. There's a reason why Rodman's rebounding rate is the highest of all time.


How about shooting percentage? Wilt put up seasons of .727 and .683...and against LEAGUE AVERAGES of .456 and .441. Here again, NO ONE ELSE is close.

Yeah, on put backs and open dunks in a fast paced league where defenses often broke down and there were a lot of offensive rebounds available.


And Wilt's post-season production dropping...like averaging 33 ppg and 26 rpg in his first SIX post-seasons...COMBINED. Not quite like his 40 ppg average in the same amount of regular seasons, BUT he almost always faced Russell either in the first, or second rounds of those playoffs. Put Jordan against the Bad Boys of the late 80's, and his ppg dropped too. Of course, Wilt's rebounding went UP in the post-season...and he outrebounded EVERYBODY he faced. He KILLED the second greatest rebounder of all-time, by FIVE rpg, in their 142 CAREER H2H matchups.

A 7 ppg drop from the regular season to the playoffs is HUGE and you didn't mention shooting percentages.


Now, I have always defended Shaq's post-seasons, but, he was also SWEPT NUMEROUS times. Take Kobe away from those teams, and Wade from '06, and Shaq has NO rings.

Take away any key player from a championship team and they don't win. What kind of stupid statement is that. By the way, even with Wilt having the luxuary of playing far more minutes and at a faster pace, lets compare Shaq and Wilt's playoff scoring.

Shaq- 24.5 ppg, 56.3 FG%, 50.5 FT%, 37.8 mpg, 214 games
Wilt- 22.5 ppg, 52.2 FG%, 46.5 FT%, 47.2 mpg, 160 games

[jlauber]

Once again, look at the volume of shots they were taking. You think Magic keeps that up while taking as many shots as Bird? :roll: Once again, compare their 3 highest scoring seasons.



I don't think I've ever heard anyone argue that Magic was as good of a scorer as Bird.



Right, which is why he averaged 17 rpg against prime Moses Malone in the 1981 playoffs.



Kareem was an offensive specialist in his later years, just like Wilt became a defensive specialist. Kareem was deadly in the halfcourt offense for most of the 80s. He was consistently averaging over 20 ppg on great efficiency thanks to his amazing post game, plus, he remained arguably the best passing big man of the 80's.



Yeah, that roster was really mediocre in 1962. You know with 2 hall of famers aside from Wilt and Guy Rodgers who was second to only Oscar Robertson in assists.



Regardless, how many teams have blown a 3-1 lead in the conference finals?



Wilt averaged under 12 ppg in the series, compare that to the 20+ he averaged during the season.



You haven't blown any argument. You just bring up the same irrational arguments that most fan boys do. Wilt wouldn't be playing 48+ mpg in 1987 or 2010 and he wouldn't be getting 30+ shot attempts either. As it is, Wilt dropped to 35 ppg on 46% shooting in the 1962 playoffs.



You always forget to factor in minutes. There's a reason why Rodman's rebounding rate is the highest of all time.



Yeah, on put backs and open dunks in a fast paced league where defenses often broke down and there were a lot of offensive rebounds available.



A 7 ppg drop from the regular season to the playoffs is HUGE and you didn't mention shooting percentages.



Take away any key player from a championship team and they don't win. What kind of stupid statement is that. By the way, even with Wilt having the luxuary of playing far more minutes and at a faster pace, lets compare Shaq and Wilt's playoff scoring.

Shaq- 24.5 ppg, 56.3 FG%, 50.5 FT%, 37.8 mpg, 214 games
Wilt- 22.5 ppg, 52.2 FG%, 46.5 FT%, 47.2 mpg, 160 games

Wilt's 61-62 roster had two other HOFers...Paul Arizin, in his LAST season, and Tom Gola...a career 11.3 ppg player, and a 13.7 ppg scorer in 61-62. He has as much business being in the HOF as I do. This was essentially the same roster that Wilt joined two years earlier. Meanwhile Boston had SIX HOFers. You can remove KC Jones from that list, but the rest of Russell's roster was WAY BETTER than Chamberlain's....as it would be even in their final season. Once again, Wilt's teams were outgunned by HOFers in the post-season, in EVERY season in which he played. Some were had as many as SEVEN (Boston in '60), or SIX (Boston in '62 and NY in '73.)

Yeah, Wilt's numbers dropped dramatically in the post-season. His scoring from 30 to 23, his shooting from .540 to .522 (in an era of .420-460 shooting) and his rebounding, which actually went up. AND, once again, his scoring dropped after he was surrounded by decent personel. Of course, he faced HOF centers EVERY year he played in the post-season, as well. Russell (8 times), Thurmond (3 times), Bellamy (once), Lucas (2 times,..yes, Lucas played center two years), Reed (3 times), and Kareem (2 times.) 19 HOF center confrontations in the post-season. How many HOF center confrontations will Shaq be able to say he faced when his career his over? And of course, Shaq played in 50 more playoff games, as well, ..some against the worst collection of clowns in league history. On top of all of that, Wilt was only STATISTICALLY outplayed in ONE post-season series in his CAREER (Kareem in '72...although Time Magazine still called it a "decisive" win for Wilt.) Shaq may have dominated most of the centers he faced, but Duncan clearly got the better of him in their last couple of H2H's. And most observers give Olajuwon the edge in '95.

AND, I notice you did not include rebounding and assists, in which Chamberlain has a HUGE edge. And had blocked shots been kept Wilt would be MILES ahead of Shaq in that category.

And, of course you cite Wilt's FG% records "on put backs and dunks"...which were the ONLY shots that Shaq could make in his CAREER. Why couldn't Shaq shoot .727 or even .683...or even .649, even later in his career when his scoring dropped?

Rodman's rebound rate came against an era of centers who averaged 8 rpg. AND, he was ORDINARY in the POST-SEASON. While Wilt's rebounding went up from 22.9 to 24.5 rpg in the post-season, Rodman's 13.1 dropped to 9.9 rpg. Chamberlain outrebounded EVERYBODY, even late in his career. NO ONE came close.

And while you bring up Wilt "blowing a 3-1 lead in the Finals"...how many times were Shaq's team's SWEPT in the post-season? I count FIVE!!!!!

[ShaqAttack3234]

Wilt's 61-62 roster had two other HOFers...Paul Arizin, in his LAST season, and Tom Gola...a career 11.3 ppg player, and a 13.7 ppg scorer in 61-62. He has as much business being in the HOF as I do. This was essentially the same roster that Wilt joined two years earlier. Meanwhile Boston had SIX HOFers. You can remove KC Jones from that list, but the rest of Russell's roster was WAY BETTER than Chamberlain's....as it would be even in their final season. Once again, Wilt's teams were outgunned by HOFers in the post-season, in EVERY season in which he played. Some were had as many as SEVEN (Boston in '60), or SIX (Boston in '62 and NY in '73.)

Arizin was in his last season, but still an all-star and a 22 ppg scorer(23 ppg in the playoffs).


Yeah, Wilt's numbers dropped dramatically in the post-season. His scoring from 30 to 23, his shooting from .540 to .522 (in an era of .420-460 shooting) and his rebounding, which actually went up. AND, once again, his scoring dropped after he was surrounded by decent personel. Of course, he faced HOF centers EVERY year he played in the post-season, as well. Russell (8 times), Thurmond (3 times), Bellamy (once), Lucas (2 times,..yes, Lucas played center two years), Reed (3 times), and Kareem (2 times.) 19 HOF center confrontations in the post-season. How many HOF center confrontations will Shaq be able to say he faced when his career his over? And of course, Shaq played in 50 more playoff games, as well, ..some against the worst collection of clowns in league history. AND, I notice you did not include rebounding and assists, in which Chamberlain has a HUGE edge. And had blocked shots been kept Wilt would be MILES ahead of Shaq in that category.

What do you think Shaq would do to guys like Reed and Lucas particularly? Shaq would absolutely destroy them. And no, 6'9", 240 pound Russell wouldn't be able to stop him either, nor would Walt Bellamy.

Shaq destroyed Dikembe Mutombo in the 2001 finals and had no problem scoring on Olajuwon at his peak in the '95 finals, despite Shaq being in his 3rd season.

Why the hell would I include rebounds when Wilt had such a huge advantage in his situation. Please compare the pace and minutes they played. In 1962, Wilt's teams averaged about 126 possessions per game, Shaq's in 2000? About 93 possessions per game and Wilt played 48.5 mpg while Shaq played 40.


And, of course you cite Wilt's FG% records "on put backs and dunks"...which were the ONLY shots that Shaq could make in his CAREER. Why couldn't Shaq shoot .727 or even .683...or even .649, even later in his career when his scoring dropped?

Right, because Shaq's jump hook and one-handed turnarounds didn't exist. :rolleyes:


Rodman's rebound rate came against an era of centers who averaged 8 rpg. AND, he was ORDINARY in the POST-SEASON. While Wilt's rebounding went up from 22.9 to 24.5 rpg in the post-season, Rodman's 13.1 dropped to 9.9 rpg. Chamberlain outrebounded EVERYBODY, even late in his career. NO ONE came close.

Rodman wasn't a center, and he played in an era with Mutombo, Olajuwon, Shaq, Robinson, Barkley, Ewing, Kevin Willis, Karl Malone ect.

Rodman's rebounding numbers are also brought down by his early years with Detroit when he wasn't the dominant rebounder, but rather a lockdown defensive specialist who often guarded the perimeter player. He played more than half of his playoff games with the Bad Boy Pistons, he didn't become the truly dominant rebounder we remember him as until 1992 and he didn't start in that path until 1991.


And while you bring up Wilt "blowing a 3-1 lead in the Finals"...how many times were Shaq's team's SWEPT in the post-season? I count FIVE!!!!!

Right, being swept is much worse than blowing almost a sure series win. :rolleyes:

Lets look at some of those sweeps. One came on a washed up Miami team with Shaq past his prime, Wade injured and playing poorly, an overweight Antoine Walker and basically a roster of washed up players like Gary Payton in his final season.

Another came in 1998 when Shaq averaged 32 ppg on 56% shooting, but all of his teammates played like trash against a great Utah team coming off a finals appearance the previous year. Horry and Bryant shot below 40%, Nick Van Exel shot below 25%, Jones shot just 41% ect.

Another came in 1995 when Nick Anderson single handedly lost game 1 by missing FOUR straight free throws after Shaq had led his team to almost a sure win by outplaying Olajuwon up to that point.

[jlauber]

Wilt was only STATISTICALLY outplayed in ONE post-season series in his CAREER (Kareem in '72...although Time Magazine still called it a "decisive" win for Wilt.) So a case could be made that Wilt OUTPLAYED EVERY opposing center he faced in his post-season career, in EVERY series. Can Shaq make that claim in his CAREER post-seasons?

Incidently, I forgot the Chicago series in '07...which brings Shaq's SWEEPS to SIX.

And laughing at Shaq dominating Wilt's peers...Wilt would still be scoring if he had the good fortune to have faced the plethora of clowns that Shaq faced in his career. And, my god, what would Wilt have averaged in rebounds against those bums? Hell, in the mid-80's Wilt crushed 7-4 Mark Eaton...and well into his 40's at the time.

I like the pace argument. Wilt had POST-SEASONS of over 30 rpg, and several over 28. Shaq's best was 15 (and he was playing 43 mpg BTW.) I don't care what math you use...Chamberlain's numbers DWARF Shaq's (and Rodman's BTW.) His WORST post-season was over 20 rpg, and in his LAST post-season he was at 22.5 rpg in a league with a much lower pace than in '62 BTW.

[Micku]

How many HOF center confrontations will Shaq be able to say he faced when his career his over?

And, of course you cite Wilt's FG% records "on put backs and dunks"...which were the ONLY shots that Shaq could make in his CAREER. Why couldn't Shaq shoot .727 or even .683...or even .649, even later in his career when his scoring dropped?

Wasn't Shaq was in the GOAT era of big men in the 90s and very early 00s? Mourning, Ewing, Robinson, Hakeem, Malone, Rodman, and Mutombo? Later on he went up against Ben Wallace, Duncan and Webber.

And come on. Shaq was more than just on put backs and dunks. He had some pretty good post moves, to score from inside. He was very dominant at what he did. He was quick as a big guy and excellent footwork.


Rodman's rebound rate came against an era of centers who averaged 8 rpg. AND, he was ORDINARY in the POST-SEASON. While Wilt's rebounding went up from 22.9 to 24.5 rpg in the post-season, Rodman's 13.1 dropped to 9.9 rpg. Chamberlain outrebounded EVERYBODY, even late in his career. NO ONE came close.

Did he? Rodman epic rebound rate didn't start until the 90s, and that was when the gripe load of good centers came into play? What was the stats for centers for rebounds for each decade of basketball?

But Wilt stats and achievements were legendary in his time. Who knows how he will do now. It's a different world. It's doubtful that he put up the same stats since the pacing has slow down significantly and the game is more complex. The game has changed a lot since the 90s, and it definitely changed since the 60s. I think Wilt stats will obviously change depending on which era he is in. For better or worst. The same thing goes for all NBA players though.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Incidently, I forgot the Chicago series in '07...which brings Shaq's SWEEPS to SIX.

What's your point? Shaq still won TWICE as many titles as Wilt and played considerably better than Wilt did in the finals.


And laughing at Shaq dominating Wilt's peers...Wilt would still be scoring if he had the good fortune to have faced the plethora of clowns that Shaq faced in his career. And, my god, what would Wilt have averaged in rebounds against those bums? Hell, in the mid-80's Wilt crushed 7-4 Mark Eaton...and well into his 40's at the time.

You don't think Shaq would dominate Reed, Lucas and Bellamy? :roll: :oldlol: :roll: And no, there's not anything 6'9"-6'10", 240 Bill Russell could do against 7'1"-7'2", 340 Shaq.


I like the pace argument. Wilt had POST-SEASONS of over 30 rpg, and several over 28. Shaq's best was 15 (and he was playing 43 mpg BTW.) I don't care what math you use...Chamberlain's numbers DWARF Shaq's (and Rodman's BTW.) His WORST post-season was over 20 rpg, and in his LAST post-season he was at 22.5 rpg in a league with a much lower pace than in '62 BTW.

Shaq had back to back championship runs with OVER 30/15 per game in the slowest era of the shot clock era. I'll concede that Wilt was the better rebounder, but he sure as hell wouldn't be averaging 20+ rpg in the 90's and 00's, much less while carrying a heavy scoring load.

[jlauber]

Wasn't Shaq was in the GOAT era of big men in the 90s and very early 00s? Mourning, Ewing, Robinson, Hakeem, Malone, Rodman, and Mutombo? Later on he went up against Ben Wallace, Duncan and Webber.

And come on. Shaq was more than just on put backs and dunks. He had some pretty good post moves, to score from inside. He was very dominant at what he did. He was quick as a big guy and excellent footwork.



Did he? Rodman epic rebound rate didn't start until the 90s, and that was when the gripe load of good centers came into play? What was the stats for centers for rebounds for each decade of basketball?

But Wilt stats and achievements were legendary in his time. Who knows how he will do now. It's a different world. It's doubtful that he put up the same stats since the pacing has slow down significantly and the game is more complex. The game has changed a lot since the 90s, and it definitely changed since the 60s. I think Wilt stats will obviously change depending on which era he is in. For better or worst. The same thing goes for all NBA players though.

Malone, Rodman, and Webber were not centers. Shaq faced Olajuwon, Robinson, Ewing, all in the HOF. Duncan will make it. Mourning may make it. That was it.

Wilt faced Kerr, Bellamy, Reed, Unseld, Hayes, Cowens, Lanier, Lucas, Thurmond, Russell and Kareem...all in the HOF (and I probably missed some guys too)...and dominated Gilmore in their lone meeting (and Gilmore SHOULD be in the HOF.)

Rodman's BEST post-season rebounding was 16.0 (in a 3 game series BTW.) His next best was at 14.7. Wilt had EIGHT above 24, SIX above 25, FOUR above 26, THREE above 27, TWO above 29, and one over 30. No matter what math you use there, Chamberlain CRUSHES Rodman.

And yes, Shaq had some good moves. I was being facetious...only because ShaqAttack was suggesting that that's ALL Wilt did in his .683 and .727 seasons. In his 66-67 season he was hitting jump shots, sweeping hook shots, and fall away bank shots from 12-15 ft.

[Niquesports]

Fair point. I concede that Magic was obviously more suited to play point guard than Bird was.


Ok agreed
Well, maybe not better, but Bird was certainly just as good as Magic when it came to doing anything your team needed to win. He even outrebounded Moses Malone a few times in the 81 Finals.

malone had little help where as Bird had much help its not like they were defending each other. malone had no help on the Birds where as Bird did much help which opened things up.

I don't know, Magic wasn't a very good defender or a great outside shooter. Bird in his prime was actually a pretty competent defender and was a far more skilled scorer than Magic, plus he could dominate the boards and was an excellent passer in his own right.

This is more Larry Legend junk. If the SF were killing Bird which most of them were Nique,Worthy,King,M Johnson ect.. imagine what the PG and SG would have done the guys Magic was defending. Birds D was more Hype that truth.As far as scoring goes ITs kind of like saying Moses was a better rebounder than Isiah Magic team didnt depend on him as much to scorer his skill was keeping everyone involved in the offense Bird set out to score and demanded that he take the important shots . WHen needed Magic found ways to score driving the lane later in his career a good 3pt shot and his sky hook you know the one over the whole Boston team in the finals.Bird was a great passer but Magic was a better floor general who else could have made Byron Scott the teams leading scorer with Worthy and Kareem on that team ?
Magic is the GOAT point guard, but if I had to choose between him and Bird to build a team around, I'm picking Bird.

You have your right Red did that also and West took Magic and we see the results Magic 5 rings Bird 3 not sure what Math you use but Magic won this one.

[Niquesports]

I specifically pointed to when the team clear cut became Magic's (post-'85 imo). West was strong in 1980, but Kareem was the one dominating those playoffs, not Magic.

By '84? To me it was clear only around the start of '86 season. Should be noted it was a new series after game 1, after which as you know Kareem completely dominated the series averaging 29/10/6/2 on 61% on the strong Celtic frontline. I have trouble calling Kareem #2 on that team when all year Lakers played to beat one team...the Celtics. And Kareem was the one who got them there. In addition to all that, he was the #1 option in the half court in the clutch, during momentum shifts or when the tempo slowed down. And how about the looks he created on the perimeter for guys like Scott, Magic and Cooper when he'd be seeing double teams in the post? He was their best half court option. And though not as potent as he once was at defense, he was still a shotblocking presence, and you can bet his 7'3 frame changed a lot of shots in the lane. Can you really find example of someone who does all this for their team and be classified as #2? Kareem's finals performance makes me put him at 1A to Magic's 1B (lets face it, the Celtics were the only legitimate team they saw in the playoffs that year). I never try to get a into a numbers game with Magic either. Like I said, he could have 15 assists in a game but be turning the ball over like a mad man (which he often did) and collect half of them by turnaround shots in the post by Worthy or skyhooks from Jabbar, and you could pass it off as a great game.

As for the rest of your post, I'll look into it year by year since the time you say it became Magic's team. Claiming the West was even remotely as strong as the East is completely false.


'84 - Win total of Laker competition: 38, 43, 41. For Celtics: 35, 47, 50. Celtics had trouble with Knicks the same way the '08 Celtics had trouble with the Hawks. They blew out every home game while Knicks, backed by HUGE scoring nights from Bernard King, won the close games at MSG. There's a huge difference in a 7 game series like this one and a one like the Jazz/Lakers one in '88. And even with the Sixers losing in the first round, Celtics easily faced better competition in their conference.
'85 - Lakers faced 36, 45 and 52 win teams (the 52 win being the run and gun, no defense playing Nuggets who allowed 118 pts/game). For Celtics: 36, 46 and 57. Celtics face the loaded Moses/Erving/Toney/Barkley Sixers team in the finals, while Lakers don't see a team comparable to them all playoffs.
'86 - Lakers didn't make it out WCF, while a healthy Celtic team put away the same Rocket team easily in 6 games. In their own conference they swept a Bucks team that won 57 games (that's more wins than any team Lakers faced in the West throughout ALL of the 80s btw).
'87 - this is no contest again. Lakers had one of the easiest road to the finals ever while the ailing Celtics battled the tough veteran Bucks and the Pistons who finally had their "bad boy" roster together.
'88 - Lakers barely scrambled out of the West, while Celtics lost to Pistons (due to worst shooting series of Bird's career). Pistons were up 3-2 in the series when Isiah hurt his ankle, though it didn't affect him in game 6, it clearly did for game 7, which Lakers barely squeaked out by 3 points. Let's take out Magic and Worthy's ankle for the game 7 and see how the series turns out?
'89 - can't really compare because Bird was out, and Magic's hamstring injury in finals, but Pistons won.
'90 - Lakers face a decently strong Suns team in the West, and get dealt with in 5 games. Celtics lose to the Knicks, but the difference is Magic is still in his prime while Bird is not in his. You can bring up Bird's record from '90-'92, but frankly, I don't really care. You might and that's fine but I care how good you were in your prime, not when you've clearly declined to not even being a top 5 (or top 10) player any more.

During Magic's tenure as "#1" post-'85...are you really impressed by what he did winning wise vs. what Bird did? He lost nearly every time there was a decent team in the west, and the two titles in '87 and '88 came by beating injury riddled teams in the finals. The point is that the whole "winner" argument for Magic doesn't really work. Bird you can point to as winning more rings as the all important "leader" (3 vs. 2), while also being the better player at his peak.


You say that kareem was the #1 Guy because the ball went to him. :confusedshrug: Magic was the PG he got the ball to who ever was in the best postion to score. Someone mentioned the great game Wilks had in Magics great 80's finals how many assist again did magic have ? So in your logic the year Byron lead the team in scoring he was more of a #1 than Magic. See your seeming like a ESPN baby the game is bigger than scoring which is why Russell has more than Wilt and players like Wilkins,King,English ect...fell short so often. Magic like Russ were able to dominate a game without big scoring numbers yet could when the team needed. Was it 86 or 81 when Magic went to team management and said let me run this offense or trade me the team kept him and built the team around him. Hired Riley who opened up the offense and trade Nixon this sounds like the #1 man. BIrd fans try anything to make them equal 5 plus an NCAA will always be >than 3.

[32jazz]

You say that kareem was the #1 Guy because the ball went to him. :confusedshrug: Magic was the PG he got the ball to who ever was in the best postion to score. Someone mentioned the great game Wilks had in Magics great 80's finals how many assist again did magic have ? So in your logic the year Byron lead the team in scoring he was more of a #1 than Magic. See your seeming like a ESPN baby the game is bigger than scoring which is why Russell has more than Wilt and players like Wilkins,King,English ect...fell short so often. Magic like Russ were able to dominate a game without big scoring numbers yet could when the team needed. Was it 86 or 81 when Magic went to team management and said let me run this offense or trade me the team kept him and built the team around him. Hired Riley who opened up the offense and trade Nixon this sounds like the #1 man. BIrd fans try anything to make them equal 5 plus an NCAA will always be >than 3.

Stoudamire, MArion, Joe Johnson, JRich,etc...are just 4 teammates who scored more points than Nash on the Suns ,but I doubt if many people think Nash isn't/wasn't the main man.
In 1982 season Magic was pissed & demanded to be traded after a game & Paul Westhead was fired the very next morning & eventually replaced with West(who refused the job) & then assistant Pat Riley. Then Magic made Norm Nixon disappear(poor Norm went to the Clippers) the next season so he could handle the point duties all by himself. That is what you call the 'THE f**king MAN'!

Magic like Kidd was a PG who dominated a game without scoring 30 pts & this is the first I have heard that Magic wasn't THE MAN since the early/mid 80's on the Lakers.

Go ask Dr Buss,Jerry West,Westhead,FATAL9,etc.... what happened to the 'Kareem' led Lakers the prevous 5 seasons before Magic made it to town? With a roster of Kareem, Nixon,Jamaal Wilkes, Adrian Dantley,etc.... the Lakers were a floundering franchise & the Kareem era a bit of a disappointment. That was until Magic came & ressurrected the Lakers & Kareem's legacy in L.A.


Furthermore many people here especially refuse to accept the fact that Kareem was sharing 'frickin' minutes with Mychal Thompson during the repeat(87/88). Had it not been for financial problems Kareem would have (& definitely should have) retired after '86.
By '89 it was over for the 42 year old Kareem, but DESPITE his 10 pts & 4 rebounds(playing less minutes than Mychal Thompson) the Lakers returned to the Finals & again after he retired in 91 with a young Vlade Divac.

Only the most headstrong of Kareem fans refuse to accept that he was a 'role player' sharing minutes with Thompson(sometimes even less minutes than Thompson) from 87/88/89 seasons. No one is disputing Kareem could still get off that skyhook late in his career ,but he was absolutely dreadful on the glass(never was a considered super rebounder) & just a warm body on defense.

Magic was THE MAn on those teams. Period.

[jlauber]

What's your point? Shaq still won TWICE as many titles as Wilt and played considerably better than Wilt did in the finals.



You don't think Shaq would dominate Reed, Lucas and Bellamy? :roll: :oldlol: :roll: And no, there's not anything 6'9"-6'10", 240 Bill Russell could do against 7'1"-7'2", 340 Shaq.



Shaq had back to back championship runs with OVER 30/15 per game in the slowest era of the shot clock era. I'll concede that Wilt was the better rebounder, but he sure as hell wouldn't be averaging 20+ rpg in the 90's and 00's, much less while carrying a heavy scoring load.

Chamberain faced a HOF center in EVERY one of his SIX Finals...and statistically outplayed them all. How many HOF centers did Shaq face in his Finals?

And, Shaq AND Kobe won three rings in their Finals. How many HOFers did they face in those three Finals? Let' see...Reggie Miller, Allen Iverson, and Jason Kidd. ONE each year. How about Wilt's team's? In 63-64 Wilt's Warriors faced SEVEN HOFers. In '67 Wilt's 76ers "only" faced two...Thurmond and Barry, BUT, to get to the Finals, they faced a Celtic team with FIVE. In '69 Wilt and his two other HOFers (West and an over-the-hill Baylor) faced a MUCH deeper Celtic team that had FOUR HOFers. In '70, Wilt, with West and a washed-up Baylor faced a Kncik team with FOUR HOFers. In '72, Wilt, with West and Goodrich, stomped a Knick team that had FIVE HOFers. And, in Wilt's last season, he, an injured West, and Goodrich, lost four close games to a NY team that had SIX HOFers.

When Shaq's teams faced superior teams...they lost, and in most cases, they were blown out. SIX sweeps in his career. He even lost with superior rosters, like '95, when his 57 win team was swept by a 47 win Rocket team. And, they were certainly favored over the Pistons in '04...and were blown out in five (and if it hadn't been for Kobe's game-winner, they would have been swept.)

Meanwhile, Wilt took last place rosters, against heavily loaded HOF teams, and lost two series by THREE points.

Regarding Russell, he was a MUCH better defender than Ben Wallace...who was only 6-7 BTW. Wallace may have been DPOY a couple of seasons in his career, BUT Russell is widely acknowledged as the greatest defensive PLAYER in NBA history. Shaq averaged 26 ppg against Wallace in his career. Wilt averaged 29 against Russell, BUT, in his first seven seasons, when he was a scorer, he averaged 34 ppg against him (and 40 against the league.) Wilt had SEASONS of nearly 40 ppg against Russell. AND, if you think that Shaq would have his way against Russell, you would also have to factor in that he would be battling not just Russell, but a swarming Celtic defense that concentrated almost exclusively on Wilt (just as Heinsohn....who said it was not Wilt vs Rusell, but rather Wilt vs the Celtics.) AND, Chamberlain played in a league in which defenders could use both hands, and in which Shaq would foul out for charging in the first five minutes, had he played like he did against Motumbo in '01.

Shaq had the luxury of playing against the few HOFers he faced, only 2-4 times a season (and in many, either he or his opponent were injured.) Chamberlain faced his peers up to 12 regular season games a season, and almost always 4-6. Wilt was facing a QUALITY center almost every night he played. Shaq was playing against 7-0 clods, most of whom could not jump, nor shoot, nor even tie their shoes.

Regarding "pace"...once again, Wilt was the ONLY center, to have had multiple 30+ FGA seasons (and Baylor is the only other player to have had that many...ONCE.) In fact, Bellamy was the only other center to have more than 20 in the 60's...in ONE season. So while you have this ridiculous idea that Wilt would not get 30 shots per game in today's game...he was the ONLY player getting it in his era. Not only that, but he played in league's that barely shot over 40%.

And how about these "drop offs" by Wilt in the post-season? Shaq's best post-season was arguably in 99-00 (and against Divac, Sabonis, and Smits...none of whom will sniff the HOF, unless Sabonis gets in based on his international career)...in which he averaged 30.7, on 15.4 rpg, and on .566 shooting, in a league that shot .449. How about Wilt in 63-64, in which he averaged 34.7 ppg, with 25.2 rpg, and shooting .543 in a league that shot .433? And Wilt's numbers came against Zelmo Beaty (who had seven seasons in his career of over 20 ppg), and Russell, the greatest defensive center in NBA history (unless you want to argue for Chamberlain.) His regular season numbers were 36.9 ppg, 22.3 rpg, and .524 FG%.

Furthermore, had Wilt's teammates been able to score three more points in the 61-62 ECF's, Chamberlain would gone on to face a Laker team in the Finals, that he had averaged 52 ppg against in the regular season, including three 60+ games. Not only that, but Russell's game seven in the Finals that year, a 30-40, has deservedly been considered one of the greatest in NBA history. BUT, Wilt had a 78-43 game against those same Lakers earlier in the season. One can only imagine what kind of Finals records Wilt would hold today, had his mediocre teammates been able to score three more points.


Regarding Magic and Kareem. Kareem was a career "loser" in his first 10 seasons. After his team won a title in '71 (with Oscar BTW), he would go nine seasons before he would play on a title team. He had teams with 63 wins, 60 wins, and 59 wins, either get knocked off in the first round, second round, or Finals. And only one of them made it to seven games. Amazingly, with a young Buck squad that won the title in '71, that many considered would be a dynasty for the decade of the 70's, he would only get to ONE more Final, and lose in seven games. The rest of the decade, his teams would never sniff the Finals.

It was no coincidence that when Magic arrived, LA would win FIVE titles (and could easily have been as many as EIGHT.) It was MAGIC who carried those teams. It was Kareem who was using Magic's coat-tails, not the other way around. Magic got TWO Laker teams to the Finals AFTER Kareem, too. AND, who can forget Magic's game six in the '80 Finals, a close-out game, on the road, and WITHOUT Kareem, in which he put up one of the greatest Finals' games in NBA history. And by the mid-80's, Magic was the best player in the game. And one more time, those that believe Magic was 20 pt scorer in his career...had Johnson been intent on scoring, he was easily a 30 point scorer. That he seldom scored that much was by design. And, he was even a better REBOUNDER than Kareem for several seasons.

And, he was FAR more efficient than Bird. Bird was a better 3pt shooter...all of which translated into 80 3's over a 164 game post-season career, or one every TWO games. Magic was a much better driver (and outscored Bird by over 1000 points from the line), and could shoot well enough from the outside. Magic's all-around ability was better than Bird's. Had Magic not been so unselfish, he would certainly have won more MVPs. And you have brought PEAK. How about Magic's 87 Finals, which blow away Bird's best. Magic averaged 26.2 ppg, 8.0 rpg, and a staggering 13.0 apg...on .541 shooting. Not only that but Magic hit 24-25 FTs (96%.) Hell, he even shot 50% from the 3pt line. AND, with him handling the ball the vast majority of the time, he had a TOTAL of 13 turnovers. Speaking of turnovers, Magic had a TOTAL of 696 in 190 career playoff games, to Bird's 506 in 164, or 3.7 per game to Bird's 3.1. Considering that Magic handled the ball FAR more than Bird, another amazing stat.

AND, while Bird made it to five Finals (and was only the best player in ONE)...he had SEVERAL MORE post-season "failures" compared to Magic (who was FAR more efficient his entire career, either regular season, or especially in the post-season.)

Magic was BETTER...LONGER. End of discussion.

Regarding Kobe...he has already surpassed Bird. No question. FOUR rings, and PLEASE, don't bring up this Shaq was THE man nonsense. Kobe had post-seasons over 30 WITH Shaq. His 01-02 post-season was the EQUAL of Shaq's. Shaq averaged 28.5 ppg, 12.6 rpg, 2.8 apg on .529 shooting, while Kobe averaged 29.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, and 6.1 apg, on .469 shooting. Kobe DESERVES his four rings. Last season, Kobe was clearly the best player in the playoffs, and averaged 30.1 ppg. Even in what was considered a disappointing '08, he averaged 30.1, 5.7 rg, 5.6 apg, and shot .479. And, IF Kobe continues this season's post-season pace (and it is a BIG IF, since he will be going up against the best defense in the league in the last few years), it would arguably be one of the greatest ever. As it stands right now, Kobe is averaging 29.4 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 6.2 apg, on .483 shooting (and .405 on his 3's.) And, I consider Kobe's 05-06 season as one of the greastest in NBA HISTORY. 35.4 ppg, on .450 shooting, in a league that averaged 97 ppg on .454 shooting. Why is that so great? He took a PUTRID roster (go ahead, look it up...that was a 15 win team at BEST without him) to a 45-37 record. He then took that MEDIOCRE team to a game seven loss against a loaded Suns team that went 54-28. The fact is, over the course of the last NINE seasons, Kobe has been the best post-season player in the game. Do't feed me this Shaq and Duncan NONSENSE. Neither of those guys have been close the last three years, and H2H, it was Kobe who was better than Shaq against Duncan's teams. Kobe was CLEARLY the best player in the NBA over the last five years, and over the course of the decade....not even close.

And, sorry Bird, but aside from MJ, no other player can get his shots against any defense, or any defender, or any defenders, the way that Kobe has in his career.

IF, Kobe goes on to win a ring thise year, IMHO, only Russell, Magic, Kareem, MJ, and Wilt will rank ahead of him. AND, IF Kobe goes on to win another...???

[ShaqAttack3234]

Who cares if he statistically outplayed Russell in the 1969 finals? Russell did his job. He completely shut down Wilt offensively for less than 12 ppg, hell Russell was only about 2.5 ppg off of matching his scoring. It's remarkable because Russell averaged something like 9-10 ppg that season while Wilt averaged 20+. He lost as the favorite while playing WELL below his standard.

And what hall of fame competition did he face in the 1972 finals? he faced a past his prime Jerry Lucas who was only 6'8", 230. Remember, Reed was injured.

Yes and Wilt, Hal Greer, Billy Cunningham, Luke Jackson and Chet Walker won that '67 ring.

And Wilt, Jerry West, Gail Goodrich, Jim McMillan and Happy Happy Hairston won that 1972 ring. Goodrich and West were each 26 ppg scorers, while West averaged about 10 apg, both shot an excellent 49 and 48%, respectively. Hairston was also a 19 ppg scorer on 48% shooting.

Hall of famers don't grow on trees like they did back then. Remember, Shaq carried the Lakers in the 2000 finals. He completely destroyed an all-star that season, Dale Davis in the finals despite all of the double/triple teams.

Shaq opened up by carrying Los Angeles with 43/19/4/3 on 21/31 shooting, Kobe only had 14/3/5 on 6/13 shooting. Shaq had twelve 4th quarter points, and 2 assists with gorgeous passes to cutters. Shaq scored or assisted on every basket for the first 9 minutes of the quarter except for 2 Rick Fox jumpers. It was a 6 point game when the quarter started and it was a 17 point game after Shaq's 43rd point. John Salley came in for Shaq with the game officially a blowout, and Indiana's star, Reggie Miller sat down shortly after.

In game 2, Shaq had 40/24/4/3 to carry the Lakers again after Kobe went down after 9 minutes with just 3 points scorer. Now onto the 4th quarter. He was 4 for 4 from the field and 9 for 16 from the line(good considering he was 9 for 23 entering the quarter). He also had 2 "hockey assists" that led to 's by Rice and Fisher, respectively. Once again showing the impact of the double/triple teams he draws and passing skills. A better example came with just under a minute to go when Shaq caught the ball and was swarmed, but made a gorgeous pass to Robert Horry for a layup.

Game 4 was the only time Kobe made a big contribution in the series. He had 28 points on 14/27 shooting and of course had the clutch OT performance after Shaq fouled out. Regardless, Shaq had 36/21 before that.

In game 6, Shaq 42/12/4 to closeout the series while Kobe had 26 points on 8 for 27 shooting. Shaq finished the series with averages of 38/17/3 on 61% shooting, and those weren't inflated numbers from the 60s, those were at a slow pace. Kobe finished the series averaging under 16 ppg and about 4 rpg and apg a piece. He shot under 37% and averaged more shot attempts than points while missing about 2 games.

Wilt never had a finals series CLOSE to Shaq's 3peat. You have the excuse that he faced Thurmond in 1967, fine, Shaq also faced one of the best defensive players of all time in the 2001 finals. He still averaged 33/16/5/3 on 57% shooting including a 44/20/5 game and a 28/20/9/8 game.

Yeah, the Magic were favored in 1995, but look at how Shaq's teammates performed. You have even acknowledged that you thought a 3rd year Shaq played prime Hakeem Olajuwon about even(even though I'd give Dream the slight edge for clutch play). In the series, Dream's teammates outplayed Shaq's and they wouldn't have been swept if not for Nick Anderson choking away a sure win.

In 2004? They wouldn't have been in position to get swept if Shaq's teammates showed up and Kobe didn't embarrass himself by averaging as many shot attempts as points and shooting 38%. Shaq averaged 27/11 on 63% shooting and got NO help, if you'd like to push the issue further and I'll show what his teammates did.

As far as Shaq's teams vs superior teams? The 2002 Kings were better than the Lakers on paper, so were the 2006 Mavs vs the Heat and arguably the 2006 Pistons had won 12 more games. And what about Jordan's Bulls in 1995?

:roll: Shaq faced swarming defenses his whole career..

I'd rather play against thin 6'9"/6'10" centers than strong, physical seven footers. I wonder how many of the so called hall of famers from Wilt's day would be hall of famers without the inflated stats.

No, you have this ridiculous idea that Wilt WOULD have averaged 30+ shots per game today. You clearly don't understand how the game is played today.

Shaq was guarded primarily by Dale Davis not Rik Smits in the 2000 finals who had A LOT of help with double/triple teams. But, you know, you'd have to actually watch the games to know this.

Considering the amount of shot attempts and minutes Wilt averaged in 1964, those stats don't really impress me.

Yes and Shaq's teammates failed him numerous times as well, but he still ended up with 4 rings, twice as many as Wilt.

Look at Kareem's teammates for most of the 70's and it's funny you call Kareem a career loser because Wilt was considered one in his career. He didn't win his second championship until his 12th season.

Right, Kareem rode Magic's coat-tails. :roll: Kareem was the best player on the 1980 Lakers by far, the 1982 Lakers as well and still the finals MVP and leading scorer on the 1985 Lakers.

Bird was a better scorer than Magic, get over it. Bird's career high 30 ppg season was more efficient than Magic's career high 24 ppg season.

Bird was the best player in 3 finals he played in, 1981, 1984 and 1986.

Magic didn't even have an argument for being better than Bird until the 1986-1987 season.

You're getting your seasons mixed up. Kobe averaged 26.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg and 4.6 apg on 43.4% shooting in the 2002 playoffs. And look up who came up the biggest in the 2002 conference finals vs Sacramento and finals, Shaq

The other stats you posted were from 2001 when Shaq again topped Kobe with 30.4 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 3.2 apg and 2.4 bpg on 56% shooting.

Yes, Shaq was the MVP of those championship teams, here are some stats for you since you love stats so much.

Shaq

1999-2000
Regular Season- 29.7 ppg, 13.6 rpg, 3.8 apg, 3.0 bpg, 57.4 FG%
Playoffs- 30.7 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 3.1 apg, 2.4 bpg, 56.6 FG%
Finals- 38.0 ppg, 16.7 rpg, 2.3 apg, 2.7 bpg, 61.1 FG%

2000-2001
Regular Season- 28.7 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.8 bpg, 57.2 FG%
Playoffs- 30.4 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 3.2 apg, 2.5 bpg 55.5 FG%
Finals- 33.0 ppg, 15.8 rpg, 4.8 apg, 3.4 bpg, 57.3 FG%

2001-2002
Regular Season- 27.2 ppg, 10.7 rpg, 3.0 apg, 2.0 bpg, 57.9 FG%
Playoffs- 28.5 ppg, 12.6 rpg, 2.8 apg, 2.5 bpg, 52.9 FG%
Finals- 36.3 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 3.8 apg, 2.8 bpg, 59.5 FG%

3 seasons combined
Regular Season- 28.6 ppg, 12.4 rpg, 3.5 apg, 2.6 bpg, 57.5 FG%
Playoffs- 29.9 ppg, 14.5 rpg, 3.0 apg, 2.4 bpg, 55.2 FG%
Finals- 35.9 ppg, 15.2 rpg, 3.5 apg, 3.2 bpg, 59.5 FG%

Kobe

1999-2000
Regular Season- 22.5 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 4.9 apg, 1.6 spg 46.8 FG%
Playoffs- 21.1 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 4.4 apg, 1.5 spg, 44.2 FG%
Finals- 15.6 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 4.2 apg, 1.0 spg, 36.7 FG%

2000-2001
Regular Season- 28.5 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.0 apg, 1.7 spg, 46.4 FG%
Playoffs- 29.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 6.1 apg, 1.6 spg, 46.9 FG%
Finals- 24.6 ppg, 7.8 rpg, 5.8 apg, 1.4 spg, 41.5 FG%

2001-2002
Regular Season- 25.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.5 apg, 1.5 spg, 46.9 FG%
Playoffs- 26.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 4.6 apg, 1.4 spg, 43.2 FG%
Finals- 26.8 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 5.3 apg, 1.5 spg, 51.4 FG%

3 seasons combined
Regular Season- 25.4 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.1 apg, 1.6 spg, 46.7 FG%
Playoffs- 25.3 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 4.9 apg, 1.5 spg, 44.7 FG%
Finals- 24.1 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 5.1 apg, 1.3 spg, 42.5 FG%

Shaq without Kobe during the 3peat was 25-6 and Kobe without Shaq? Just 13-12. Shaq was CLEARLY the best player and MVP of those teams.

I'm done arguing Shaq and Kareem vs Wilt here and Shaq vs Kobe because this is a Bird thread and I see that you have no valid points to make.

[OptimusPrime1]

How the hell did Russell, Kobe, Wilt, Shaq and Kareem get into this conversation? :wtf:

[chopchop20]

It's easy to get nostalgic looking back at the highlights. I think sometimes the older vets are put on a higher pedestal. I mean, Bird is know for being a great shooter but Kobe has a higher 3 pt FG% in the playoffs, 2nd most 30 point games in the playoffs, and more rings.

Honestly, I dunno if Bird is even Top 10

[32jazz]

It's easy to get nostalgic looking back at the highlights. I think sometimes the older vets are put on a higher pedestal. I mean, Bird is know for being a great shooter but Kobe has a higher 3 pt FG% in the playoffs, 2nd most 30 point games in the playoffs, and more rings.

Honestly, I dunno if Bird is even Top 10

I don't really rank players, but no one here hasn't stated that Bird was one of the greatest ball players ever.

I do agree with the'nostalgia' factor & how people look back on past greats & forget their flaws/ bad or average games.

Bird was not infallible.

Let my parents/grandparents tell it

They don't make Cars like they did in the 'good old days' nor;

music( I agree to an extent)
movies
furniture
men
women
clothes

etc....

The past is just that. Let it go.:confusedshrug:

[OldSchoolBBall]

It's easy to get nostalgic looking back at the highlights. I think sometimes the older vets are put on a higher pedestal. I mean, Bird is know for being a great shooter but Kobe has a higher 3 pt FG% in the playoffs, 2nd most 30 point games in the playoffs, and more rings.

Honestly, I dunno if Bird is even Top 10

:oldlol:

[Alhazred]

malone had little help where as Bird had much help its not like they were defending each other. malone had no help on the Birds where as Bird did much help which opened things up.

True, the Rockets didn't have the same amount of talent as Boston, but Bird held his own on the boards quite well regardless.


This is more Larry Legend junk. If the SF were killing Bird which most of them were Nique,Worthy,King,M Johnson ect.. imagine what the PG and SG would have done the guys Magic was defending. Birds D was more Hype that truth.

Not sure if I'd go that far as saying it was all hype, but I do admit that I forgot to factor in that Magic was guarding smaller and far quicker opponents. I guess I may have overrated Bird's defense a bit.


As far as scoring goes ITs kind of like saying Moses was a better rebounder than Isiah Magic team didnt depend on him as much to scorer his skill was keeping everyone involved in the offense Bird set out to score and demanded that he take the important shots . WHen needed Magic found ways to score driving the lane later in his career a good 3pt shot and his sky hook you know the one over the whole Boston team in the finals.Bird was a great passer but Magic was a better floor general who else could have made Byron Scott the teams leading scorer with Worthy and Kareem on that team?

Magic was a terrific scorer, no doubt about it, but Bird was simply a better shooter and scorer overall. Even when Magic started taking threes later in his career, he still wasn't as good as Larry when it came to shooting from long range.


You have your right Red did that also and West took Magic and we see the results Magic 5 rings Bird 3 not sure what Math you use but Magic won this one.

When determining who's better you need to take into consideration more than just who has more rings. You might as well argue that Scottie Pippen is better than Bird and Lebron, then, seeing as how he has twice as many rings as them combined.

That all being said, I understand if you feel Magic was the better player. I really don't think there's much of a gap between the two of them, to be honest.

[catch24]

It's easy to get nostalgic looking back at the highlights. I think sometimes the older vets are put on a higher pedestal. I mean, Bird is know for being a great shooter but Kobe has a higher 3 pt FG% in the playoffs, 2nd most 30 point games in the playoffs, and more rings.

Honestly, I dunno if Bird is even Top 10

Uh, LOL?

[Alhazred]

Some more fascinating numbers regarding the Kobe-Bird debate...

How much more efficient was Bird in the post-season than Kobe? First of all, Kobe has OUTSHOT Bird from the 3PT line, with a post-season career average of .337 compared to Bird's .321. But for those that feel that Bird was a much more efficient FG% shooter based on his post-season career edge of .472 to Kobe's .450...

Subtract Kobe's and Bird's post-season 3pt shooting, and Bird's edge drops down to .485 to .476. Not nearly as dramatic as PERCEIVED.

:oldlol: Weren't you making a big deal about the difference between eras when people were pointing out that Bird had a higher field goal precentage than Kobe? You should have also mentioned that the average team in Kobe's era shot far more three pointers than your typical 80s team.

1986 Celtics- 393 three point attempts over the regular season

2009 Lakers- 1516 three point attempts

Also, when Bird actually took at least three point attempts a game during the regular season, his percentage was generally close to 40%.


Continuing...Bird came into the NBA as an immediate star at age of 23. Kobe entered the league right out of high school, at age 18, and did not play significant minutes until he was 20. AND, from age 22 to current, Kobe's post-season scoring average is 29.2 ppg., and his FG% climbs to about .457. Throw out 3 P shooting and it is at .473.

His stat line, from age 22 to current, or 9 seasons, is 29.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 5.2 apg, on .457 shooting and .473 without 3 pt shooting. And he shot .341 from the 3pt line.

Bird's in 12 seasons, ... 23.8 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 6.5 apg, on .472 shooting, or .485without the 3pt line. And he shot .321 from the 3pt line.

Well, that's hardly a fair comparison. You're comparing Kobe's prime to Bird's entire career, including the seasons where he was facing numerous injuries. Plus, Kobe had 4 seasons of NBA experience by the age of 22, whereas Bird had some college experience at that point but that's hardly the same thing.


As for the '86 Finals. Bird put up a 24-10-10 Finals on .482 shooting. His teammate, Kevin McHale put up a 26-9-2 Finals on .572 shooting. And, on the other side, Olajuwon put up a 25-12-2 3 bpg Finals on .479 shooting. IF Bird was the best player in that series, it was clearly not by much.

How was Bird not better? He scored nearly the same amount of points as McHale and Olajuwon while also grabbing nearly as many rebounds and had several more assists than either of them.


Regarding my 22 series list...it was in chronological order, and it was just off of the top of my head. But, for those that scoffed at Baylor's 61-62 Finals, he had a 61-22 game in game five. I can't recall what his totals were for the Finals, but for his two playoff series, including the Finals, he averaged 38.6 ppg, 17.7 rpg, and 3.6 apg. True, he only shot .439...BUT, the LEAGUE AVERAGE was .426.

As Shaqattack noted earlier, the average team was scoring 118 points per game. It was a terrific performance judging from what little footage I've seen of it, but I can't rank it over Bird's considering the Lakers didn't even win it all.


As for Wilt's 69-70 Finals... the ONLY 20-20 .600 Finals in NBA history (23.2 ppg, 24.1 rpg, and .625 shooting, and 4.0 apg (and probably well over 5 bpg)...all accomplished just four months after majr knee surgery. In a must-win game six, he put up a 45-27 game (on 20-27 shooting.) And, of course in the famous "Reed game", Wilt was criticized for "only" having a 21-24 game on 10-16 shooting.

Those are some nice statistics, but Wilt's 45 point game came when Reed didn't even play. Other than Game 6, Wilt never scored more than 22 points. Also, Wilt didn't come close to matching his previous performance the next game when Reed was out and New York cruised to an easy victory. Why didn't Wilt simply dominate them like he did just the game before when the Knick's starting center was hobbled by injuries? LA was down by as many as 25 points going into the fourth quarter, yet he never tried to take over. Why?


Of course Wade's 05-06 has been considered one of the greatest ever... 34.7 ppg, on .468 shooting, with 7.8 rpg, and 3.6 apg.

It certainly is one of the greatest performances ever, but I'd still go with Bird's 86 performance. He had far more assists and rebounds than Wade and shot a slightly higher percentage, although Wade did outscore him. It's close.

[godofgods]

The racism in this thread is off the charts. Bird is still the GOAT SF until Lebron surpasses him.

Kobe isn't better than Bird or Lebron.