Peak T-Mac vs Peak Bird

[moe94]

My brother thinks T-Mac peaked higher and there is no argument to be had. :biggums:

T-Mac: 32/6.5/5.5 on 46%, 56 TS%

Bird: 30/9/6 on 52%, 61 TS%

He also said he's not sure LeBron, Durant or Kobe peaked higher than T-Mac. Basically, he really likes T-Mac.

[riseagainst]

My brother thinks T-Mac peaked higher and there is no argument to be had. :biggums:

T-Mac: 32/6.5/5.5 on 46%, 56 TS%

Bird: 30/9/6 on 52%, 61 TS%

He also said he's not sure LeBron, Durant or Kobe peaked higher than T-Mac. Basically, he really likes T-Mac.

:biggums:

[bdreason]

Peak Bird is in the conversation for greatest player ever. I was a T-Mac fan too, but he's no Larry Bird.

[Demitri98]

Bird and it's not even close. 3 MVPs in a row speak for themselves.

[inclinerator]

byrd

[riseagainst]

TMAC probably had a more aesthetically looking game. That's about it. It was smooth and beautiful to watch.

[SamuraiSWISH]

TMAC probably had a more aesthetically looking game. That's about it. It was smooth and beautiful to watch.
So was Bird's game.

[Black and White]

Peak Bird by far. No disrespect to T-Mac tho

[riseagainst]

So was Bird's game.
key word is "more"

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

My brother thinks T-Mac peaked higher and there is no argument to be had. :biggums:

T-Mac: 32/6.5/5.5 on 46%, 56 TS%

Bird: 30/9/6 on 52%, 61 TS%

He also said he's not sure LeBron, Durant or Kobe peaked higher than T-Mac. Basically, he really likes T-Mac.

When we include post-season play, Bird wins. Very clearly.

[CelticBaller]

he is an idiot

show him this thread

[Smook A.]

Larry had the better peak.

T-Mac was great but no way was he better than Larry Bird

[SHAQisGOAT]

:biggums:

No question on this one.

T-Mac had a great peak and I loved to watch him play, but Larry Bird has a top5 peak ever and the best peak for a SF (actually just forward, at that), only Lebron coming truly close, let's say (Durant's still young though).

Oh, and it's not all about the numbers (and accolades/awards even), gotta watch what he did too, look at the whole picture.

[Clyde]

Stats aren't everything.

Obviously Larry Bird at in his Prime had a lot more impact than T-mac.

Thus the answer is Larry Bird.

End Communication!

[Clyde]

:biggums:

No question on this one.

T-Mac had a great peak and I loved to watch him play, but Larry Bird has a top5 peak ever and the best peak for a SF (actually just forward, at that), only Lebron coming truly close, let's say (Durant's still young though).

Oh, and it's not all about the numbers (and accolades/awards even), gotta watch what he did too, look at the whole picture.
:cheers: :cheers:

[wally_world]

Peak Bird is better overall, but peak TMac is the better scorer, arguably the GOAT

[riseagainst]

Peak Bird is better overall, but peak TMac is the better scorer, arguably the GOAT

:lol
:roll:

[ABfor3]

Peak Bird is better overall, but peak TMac is the better scorer, arguably the GOAT
Even as a TMac stan I think that's just absurd.. He was great when he peaked but wasn't on par with Larry Legend.

[fpliii]

Bird was great in his day, but the game's evolved too much. He wouldn't be a star today, probably wouldn't start either. Should make a team though.

[Warfan]

Bird was great in his day, but the game's evolved too much. He wouldn't be a star today, probably wouldn't start either. Should make a team though.

:biggums: :lol

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Bird was great in his day, but the game's evolved too much. He wouldn't be a star today, probably wouldn't start either. Should make a team though.

I'm confused. Where is the white text?

[scm5]

I actually think a conversation could be had. I'm not saying peak Tmac > peak Bird, but there are things to consider.

Bird at his peak was an amazing scorer and passer, but the pace and league averages in ppg, rpg, apg and fg% were inflated. Also, Bird just had a more competent team around him which made it easier to rack up assists and points at a higher

Tmac's numbers at his peak were amazing not just in the typical stats everyone looks at (32/6.5/5.5) but he took care of the ball VERY well, only turning the ball over 2.7 times per game.

[moe94]

Bird was great in his day, but the game's evolved too much. He wouldn't be a star today, probably wouldn't start either. Should make a team though.
I agree. Zero athleticism. His vision and passing is greatly exaggerated and overrated, too. He did two handed passes that you'd see a middle school girl do in co-ed gym. Who is he going to go up against? Monsters like Klay Thompson instead of shitty Dominique Wilkins. Too real out here now.

He can maybe have a stretch of 9 games once in his career doing 18/10/2. That's about it.

[Boarder Patrol]

:biggums:

really all that needs to be said

[Milbuck]

Yeah, let's just act like Bird wouldn't be a high school basketball coach in this era.

The dude had the athleticism of my grandma and the belly of my 50 year old fatass alcoholic uncle. If he saw more than 5 minutes of action a game, I'd be shocked.

[ArbitraryWater]

You're brother, right..... okay. Why make this a thread? There's no damn argument.

[fpliii]

I'm confused. Where is the white text?
lol felt it was unnecessary.

[moe94]

I want him to see this thread because he's stubborn. You can believe there is no brother and I'm hyping up T-Mac or whatever. That's on you.

Dude told me Duncan wasn't even an above average defender. He's just very silly and holds baseless opinions like they're facts.

[ArbitraryWater]

I want him to see this thread because he's stubborn. You can believe there is no brother and I'm hyping up T-Mac or whatever. That's on you.

Dude told me Duncan wasn't even an above average defender. He's just very silly and holds baseless opinions like they're facts.

You're brother is a giant piece of ********

Nah kay but he's a bit, young? missinformed and ignorant.

[livinglegend]

If t-mac had played with that stacked celtics team and larry with the horrible orlando magic, 90% of people in this thread would have said peak t-mac was better. But that wasnt the case. T-mac wasnt lucky.

[Clyde]

I agree. Zero athleticism. His vision and passing is greatly exaggerated and overrated, too. He did two handed passes that you'd see a middle school girl do in co-ed gym. Who is he going to go up against? Monsters like Klay Thompson instead of shitty Dominique Wilkins. Too real out here now.

He can maybe have a stretch of 9 games once in his career doing 18/10/2. That's about it.

:no:


adding you to the ignore as you seem incompetent

[moe94]

If you're still unsure, I think Shaq would be a poor man's Al Jefferson today. 2000 was 30 years ago. Game changed too much.

But for real, Klay is a monster but Nique is shit and yet you think that's not sarcastic at all? At what point in retardation do you sit back and think "no one thinks this?"

[SHAQisGOAT]

I actually think a conversation could be had. I'm not saying peak Tmac > peak Bird, but there are things to consider.

Bird at his peak was an amazing scorer and passer, but the pace and league averages in ppg, rpg, apg and fg% were inflated. Also, Bird just had a more competent team around him which made it easier to rack up assists and points at a higher


This shit again? :rolleyes: :facepalm

Bird played at like 10% higher pace, not considerable enough to say things like that, especially for a superstar like him. So he wouldn't be able to take his 20 shots, nowadays? Shit. He'd even be getting much more superstar treatment and ticky-tack calls. 6'6.5" Shawn Marion has about the same TRB% has Bird for his career, and he averages 9.0 rpg in 35 min, at his best getting close to 12 boards per game.. and that's just one example out of numerous. Bird was avering over 7 apg while not even being the main ball-handler and being less ball-dominant than most superstars, in terms of time to do it.
At "today's" pace he averaged about the same he was putting up during those years: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po1M--HaINA
In 1992, Celtics' average pace was 95.8, and as a shell, at 35 years old with career-ending injuries, Bird averaged, in less than 37 min, 20.2/9.6/6.8/0.9/0.7 on .547 TS% (in a time where teams/players shot less 3's and players/stars didn't get the same type of calls).
I don't get the inflated notion, he was playing during that time and those were the averages, that's why you gotta compare his numbers to the rest of the league, to his peers. DRtg and eFG% are about the same also. Plus there's too much subjectivity and too much nuances when looking at things from that perspective of 'well look at the league averages'.

Look at the numbers all you want and speculate about the assists or points (Bird averaged the same or more assists as the team got worse, or even more ppg on better efficiency) but Larry turned the Celtics from 2nd worst record to the best record and the ECF, as a rookie, with basically the same roster. In his 2nd year - the major addition was Parish and they traded Cowens - Bird lead them to a title. In arguably the GOAT era, in arguably the GOAT conference, in 4 years he won 3 straight MVP's, 2 FMVP's, went to 4 straight Finals and was injured in the 1985 post-season plus didn't have enough to go all the way in 1987. In the 1984 Playoffs, his teammates were majorly underperforming and he "took" them to a championship while leading them in points, rebounds, assists, steals, FG% and FT%, going against some really stacked teams. With great teammates in 1986, he did more than what it was expected, they pretty much raped a great league. And those are just some examples.
Again, T-Mac was great, amazing to watch and gets forgotten sometimes but he was really not on the same level as prime/peak Bird, and you really can't look at "just" the numbers either.

[SHAQisGOAT]

If you're still unsure, I think Shaq would be a poor man's Al Jefferson today. 2000 was 30 years ago. Game changed too much.

GTFOH my ***** :lol



at least add some white text, some people may miss the sarcasm

[ArbitraryWater]

If you're still unsure, I think Shaq would be a poor man's Al Jefferson today. 2000 was 30 years ago. Game changed too much.

But for real, Klay is a monster but Nique is shit and yet you think that's not sarcastic at all? At what point in retardation do you sit back and think "no one thinks this?"

It still amazes me how people, all over the damn internet, cant feel the sarcasm infront of them... in your case, you do this a lot though, maybe a bit too much lol

[bizil]

To be honest with you, this is actually A LOT CLOSER than many think. T-Mac at his peak value is a top 5 SG of all time along with MJ, Kobe, West, and Wade. That's how great he was. He was great at everything for a SG in terms of scoring, passing, and boards. Mac was also very versatile and could play PG, SG, and SF. His scoring skillset is an all time great caliber one as well

But with that said, I will lean to Bird. The reason why is because of Bird's dominance as a rebounder with 10 a game for his career. And with is epic passing as well, it made him a true triple double threat. Plus Bird can swing to the PF spot in addition to his SF spot. If TMac was a dominant defender like a MJ, Kobe, or Lebron, I would likely take him over Bird. Alpha dog scorers who are dominant, versatile defenders are a rare commodity. I would take Bird and Magic over bascially any perimeter players EVER except for an MJ, Bron, or Kobe.

[SHAQisGOAT]

To be honest with you, this is actually A LOT CLOSER than many think. T-Mac at his peak value is a top 5 SG of all time along with MJ, Kobe, West, and Wade. That's how great he was. He was great at everything for a SG in terms of scoring, passing, and boards. Mac was also very versatile and could play PG, SG, and SF. His scoring skillset is an all time great caliber one as well

But with that said, I will lean to Bird. The reason why is because of Bird's dominance as a rebounder with 10 a game for his career. And with is epic passing as well, it made him a true triple double threat. Plus Bird can swing to the PF spot in addition to his SF spot. If TMac was a dominant defender like a MJ, Kobe, or Lebron, I would likely take him over Bird. Alpha dog scorers who are dominant, versatile defenders are a rare commodity. I would take Bird and Magic over bascially any perimeter players EVER except for an MJ, Bron, or Kobe.

I would say T-Mac was more of a SF, point-forward, but subjective and to each his own. And even at SG, I don't know about top5, it's definitely arguable though but don't forget about Drexler or even Gervin, and what about AI? He's more of a SG to me.

Anyways, I'll say it again, not that close even though it's not really far, when you consider everything.

Bird's one of the greatest team defenders ever, underrated impact, his team's defense was considerably better when he was on the court (before major injuries). That means a lot.

[STATUTORY]

Tmac would have put up exponentially better stats in the 80s than he did in the early 2000s, FACT

[bizil]

I would say T-Mac was more of a SF, point-forward, but subjective and to each his own. And even at SG, I don't know about top5, it's definitely arguable though but don't forget about Drexler or even Gervin, and what about AI? He's more of a SG to me.

Anyways, I'll say it again, not that close even though it's not really far, when you consider everything.

Bird's one of the greatest team defenders ever, underrated impact, his team's defense was considerably better when he was on the court (before major injuries). That means a lot.

If u look at T-Mac's primary position most of his great years in the L, it was at SG:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mcgratr01.html

Secondly, his peak value in my book is top 5 peak value at SG. I certainly didn't forget about AI, Gervin, and Drexler. T-Mac was a better all around player than Gervin while on his level as a scorer. I like T-Mac's size and versatility over AI. While being just as good of a scorer. Drexler however is a close call (even though they are all close calls), but I prefer T-Mac's total scoring skillset.

And ya Bird was a great team defender, but he wasn't a guy u could put on an island to limit guys or make them less efficient. MJ, Kobe, Cooper, Rodman, Hondo, Bobby Jones, Pippen, and Lebron can do that AND at 3-4 different positions. That's a different level of defense, even though at team defense, Bird was a great defender. It's like a corner in the NFL. Some guys may be great in a zone or system. But are they Deion, Rod Woodson, or Revis level kind of guys?

[Jacks3]

lol @ Bird being "far" better than a dude who put up 32/7/6/2/30+ PER on excellent efficiency in the greatest defensive era in history. Oh yeah, and he put up those numbers while posting one of the lowest turnover rates in the league. Peak T-Mac was truly incredible.

[L.Kizzle]

Give T-Mac McHale, Parish, DJ, Tiny Archibald, Cornbread, D.Ainge and lets see Bird run with Drew Gooden, Pat Burke and Darrell Armstrong.

[bizil]

lol @ Bird being "far" better than a dude who put up 32/7/6/2/30+ PER on excellent efficiency in the greatest defensive era in history. Oh yeah, and he put up those numbers while posting one of the lowest turnover rates in the league. Peak T-Mac was truly incredible.

I agree 100% Some prefer Bird then fine. But for people to say FAR BETTER is some delusional ass shit! And let's not forget that T-Mac shined in the Golden Era of SG's. That era put featured bonafide future HOFers like Kobe, Wade, AI, Vince, Ray, and Manu. And T-Mac was certainly on his way to HOF until the injuries started. But hopefully T-Mac gets in the HOF one day. He's made more All NBA teams than MANY guys already in the HOF!

[3243]

This shit again? :rolleyes: :facepalm

Bird played at like 10% higher pace, not considerable enough to say things like that, especially for a superstar like him. So he wouldn't be able to take his 20 shots, nowadays? Shit. He'd even be getting much more superstar treatment and ticky-tack calls. 6'6.5" Shawn Marion has about the same TRB% has Bird for his career, and he averages 9.0 rpg in 35 min, at his best getting close to 12 boards per game.. and that's just one example out of numerous. Bird was avering over 7 apg while not even being the main ball-handler and being less ball-dominant than most superstars, in terms of time to do it.
At "today's" pace he averaged about the same he was putting up during those years: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po1M--HaINA
In 1992, Celtics' average pace was 95.8, and as a shell, at 35 years old with career-ending injuries, Bird averaged, in less than 37 min, 20.2/9.6/6.8/0.9/0.7 on .547 TS% (in a time where teams/players shot less 3's and players/stars didn't get the same type of calls).
I don't get the inflated notion, he was playing during that time and those were the averages, that's why you gotta compare his numbers to the rest of the league, to his peers. DRtg and eFG% are about the same also. Plus there's too much subjectivity and too much nuances when looking at things from that perspective of 'well look at the league averages'.

Look at the numbers all you want and speculate about the assists or points (Bird averaged the same or more assists as the team got worse, or even more ppg on better efficiency) but Larry turned the Celtics from 2nd worst record to the best record and the ECF, as a rookie, with basically the same roster. In his 2nd year - the major addition was Parish and they traded Cowens - Bird lead them to a title. In arguably the GOAT era, in arguably the GOAT conference, in 4 years he won 3 straight MVP's, 2 FMVP's, went to 4 straight Finals and was injured in the 1985 post-season plus didn't have enough to go all the way in 1987. In the 1984 Playoffs, his teammates were majorly underperforming and he "took" them to a championship while leading them in points, rebounds, assists, steals, FG% and FT%, going against some really stacked teams. With great teammates in 1986, he did more than what it was expected, they pretty much raped a great league. And those are just some examples.
Again, T-Mac was great, amazing to watch and gets forgotten sometimes but he was really not on the same level as prime/peak Bird, and you really can't look at "just" the numbers either.


Not only that, but look at the effect both Bird and McGrady had on the league. When T-Mac was playing, the league was desperately trying to find the next Jordan to be the league's meal ticket. McGrady was just another star in what was seen as an era of flawed superstars and an overall flawed NBA. He did nothing to change that perception. Whereas Bird (and Magic Johnson) arrived in a league that was in much worse shape. The NBA was viewed at that time as a haven for petulant, self-centered cocaine addicts who only cared about their own stats and how much money they could get from their team--or from any team that would pay them, with no regard to team (and fanbase) loyalty or to helping their team win a championship. Attendance and TV ratings were so far down that Finals games were televised on tape delay, right after the local late-night news. Bird and Magic changed that negative perception of NBA players. Both were supremely gifted athletes with off-the-chart intelligence and fundamental skills. Most of all though, both were fanatics about winning championships (preferably against each other) and both parlayed their playing styles into making their teammates better first, with personal glory second.

McGrady, for all of his talent, never came across to me as a player who was always concerned about making his teammates better or winning championships. Now maybe he wanted just as badly to win as Bird, Magic, West, MJ, or Kobe, but it did not come across that way to me.

So yes, Bird was definitely better than T-Mac.

[bizil]

Give T-Mac McHale, Parish, DJ, Tiny Archibald, Cornbread, D.Ainge and lets see Bird run with Drew Gooden, Pat Burke and Darrell Armstrong.

Great point! People seem to forget the supporting casts Bird had to play with over the years. If T-Mac could have got a healthy Hill in Orlando or a healthy Yao in Houston for extended periods of time, I feel T-Mac would have got at least one ring.

[LAZERUSS]

I don't see any reason to post this nonsense.

Bird is/was an all-time great with a minimum of a Top-10 NBA career. T-Mac will be forgotten within a few years.

[Micku]

Great point! People seem to forget the supporting casts Bird had to play with over the years. If T-Mac could have got a healthy Hill in Orlando or a healthy Yao in Houston for extended periods of time, I feel T-Mac would have got at least one ring.

Best chance was 2009 imo. The injuries killed them. And I don't know if T-Mac would win a ring, but he'll definitely compete more often. But the 2009 team was really good. If T-Mac and Yao stayed healthy, they would have more of a chance of going to the finals.

And the cast of Bird? I would just have to point out that his rookie year and helped the immediate impact on the team 29 to 61 win team. Not even in his prime. T-Mac also had talent with the Rockets team, but injuries did them in and wasn't at his peak.

[bizil]

Not only that, but look at the affect both Bird and McGrady had on the league. When T-Mac was playing, the league was desperately trying to find the next Jordan to be the league's meal ticket. McGrady was just another star in what was seen as an era of flawed superstars and an overall flawed NBA. He did nothing to change that perception. Whereas Bird (and Magic Johnson) arrived in a league that was in much worse shape. The NBA was viewed at that time as a haven for petulant, self-centered cocaine addicts who only cared about their own stats and how much money they could get from their team--or from any team that would pay them, with no regard to team (and fanbase) loyalty or to helping their team win a championship. Attendance and TV ratings were so far down that Finals games were televised on tape delay, right after the local late-night news. Bird and Magic changed that negative perception of NBA players. Both were supremely gifted athletes with off-the-chart intelligence and fundamental skills. Most of all though, both were fanatics about winning championships (preferably against each other) and both parlayed their playing styles into making their teammates better first, with personal glory second.

McGrady, for all of his talent, never came across to me as a player who was always concerned about making his teammates better or winning championships. Now maybe he wanted just as badly to win as Bird, Magic, West, MJ, or Kobe, but it did not come across that way to me.

So yeas, Bird was definitely better than T-Mac.

For starters, we are talking strictly peak value. The stuff u are getting into is GOAT kind of criteria, which we ALL KNOW Bird has the big time edge. And had more impact on the L. And peak value wise, I narrowly go Bird because of the boards, ability to play PF in addition to SF, and triple double impact. But that's the ONLY REASON WHY peak value wise. As I've stated, if T-Mac was a dominant defender, I would have chosen him over Bird peak value wise.

And in terms of star power, T-Mac's era had Shaq and AI leading the way casual fan wise. Other than MJ, Dr. J, Magic, Charles, and Bird, what other players were a bigger deal casual fan wise than Shaq and AI since Stern took over in 1984? G Hill was on that level too until the injuries. Jordan, Ali, and Ruth will never be duplicated in terms of mass appeal and GOD status. But that doesn't mean the L lacked star power in terms of casuals.

[bizil]

Best chance was 2009 imo. The injuries killed them. And I don't know if T-Mac would win a ring, but he'll definitely compete more often.

And the cast of Bird? I would just have to point out that his rookie year and helped the immediate impact on the team 29 to 61 win team.

Of course I know Bird turned the Celtics around. I never debated that. Bird was epic and we all know that. I was just pointing out that in general Bird had way more stronger supporting casts than T-Mac ever had.

[bizil]

Many on this post are confusing peak value with GOAT criteria. We all know Bird is a top 10 GOAT icon. But the question is peak value and who's better in that sense. It's a blowout GOAT wise. But it's FAR from a blowout peak value wise.

[AintNoSunshine]

Dude, your brother is like 14 y.o., how da fukk does he know exactly?

[Micku]

For starters, we are talking strictly peak value. The stuff u are getting into is GOAT kind of criteria, which we ALL KNOW Bird has the big time edge. And had more impact on the L. And peak value wise, I narrowly go Bird because of the boards, ability to play PF in addition to SF, and triple double impact. But that's the ONLY REASON WHY peak value wise. As I've stated, if T-Mac was a dominant defender, I would have chosen him over Bird peak value wise.

And in terms of star power, T-Mac's era had Shaq and AI leading the way casual fan wise. Other than MJ, Dr. J, Magic, Charles, and Bird, what other players were a bigger deal casual fan wise than Shaq and AI since Stern took over in 1984? G Hill was on that level too until the injuries. Jordan, Ali, and Ruth will never be duplicated in terms of mass appeal and GOD status. But that doesn't mean the L lacked star power in terms of casuals.

I can see that being made into an argument. Depends on what level of defensive capability. If we talking about Pippen and Jordan levels then yeah.

Offensively, there are a few things that Bird did do better than T-Mac like passing, post up, off the ball movement and catch and shoot. Bird was also smarter. T-Mac got better handles, of course, and is no slouch to catch and shoot either. He probably is better off the dribble as well. His whole game was smooth. And is probably a better scorer...tho Bird could give you 30ppg game with better efficiency.

I feel like you would have to break down how they play and their game to judge the differences between them and which was more efficient and making their team better.

[Micku]

Many on this post are confusing peak value with GOAT criteria. We all know Bird is a top 10 GOAT icon. But the question is peak value and who's better in that sense. It's a blowout GOAT wise. But it's FAR from a blowout peak value wise.

I agree that it isn't a blowout necessary peak wise. But I also don't think that T-Mac is better than Bird peak wise. If I would pick a team and I would between peak Bird and peak T-Mac, I think I would still pick Bird because I think he impacts the game better with his contributions than T-Mac, and it's easier to build a team around peak Bird than peak T-Mac. Probably isn't fair to T-Mac because he wasn't on a good team, but I feel Bird is a bit better.

[SHAQisGOAT]

lol @ Bird being "far" better than a dude who put up 32/7/6/2/30+ PER on excellent efficiency in the greatest defensive era in history. Oh yeah, and he put up those numbers while posting one of the lowest turnover rates in the league. Peak T-Mac was truly incredible.


- Talking only about numbers (especially when Bird would put up better overall numbers in both the regular-season and post-season)

- Mentioning players' PER from two different "eras"

- Saying stuff like 'the greatest defensive era'

...

Yea, easy to see you're just a child who doesn't quite know what he's talking about.


And I agree that FAR better is stretching it, though.



Give T-Mac McHale, Parish, DJ, Tiny Archibald, Cornbread, D.Ainge and lets see Bird run with Drew Gooden, Pat Burke and Darrell Armstrong.

:rolleyes:

I'll say it again, rookie Bird led the Celtics from the 2nd worst record (29-53) to the best record (61-21) and the ECF, with terrific instant impact while being 4th in MVP voting, and that's with a new coach and basically the same core roster as the previous year.
In his 2nd year, with the major addition of Parish (27 already and was never considered all that with the Warriors; McHale wasn't doing much as a rookie) and Cowens gone, Bird led them to a title, decisively outplaying MVP Julius Erving in the "true" Finals (ECF) and should've gotten FMVP, in the Finals, in all seriousness.
In the 1984 playoffs, at the beginning of his absolute best, while most of his teammates were considerably underperforming considering their standards, Bird "took" them to the title, leading the team in points, rebounds, assists, steals, FG% and FT%, going against some great teams and the mighty showtime Lakers in the Finals.. think of how crazy that is for a second, please.
And let's not forget that he was playing in arguably the GOAT decade and in arguably the GOAT conference.

People like to throw out names for the **** of it, or even just numbers, without even knowing what they're talking about :facepalm Keep on with that :rolleyes: Fact is T-Mac, as great as he was at his best, never was that close to Bird at his best, when you consider everything.
****ing 3x MVP with 3 rings as the man just to name "something", going against great superstars and stacked teams, dude that mastered basketball like crazy, top5 peak, best forward ever, and yet let's act like T-Mac was on that level? :biggums: Seriously, some of you make me laugh with some of the shit you say :lol



If u look at T-Mac's primary position most of his great years in the L, it was at SG:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mcgratr01.html

Secondly, his peak value in my book is top 5 peak value at SG. I certainly didn't forget about AI, Gervin, and Drexler. T-Mac was a better all around player than Gervin while on his level as a scorer. I like T-Mac's size and versatility over AI. While being just as good of a scorer. Drexler however is a close call (even though they are all close calls), but I prefer T-Mac's total scoring skillset.

And ya Bird was a great team defender, but he wasn't a guy u could put on an island to limit guys or make them less efficient. MJ, Kobe, Cooper, Rodman, Hondo, Bobby Jones, Pippen, and Lebron can do that AND at 3-4 different positions. That's a different level of defense, even though at team defense, Bird was a great defender. It's like a corner in the NFL. Some guys may be great in a zone or system. But are they Deion, Rod Woodson, or Revis level kind of guys?

Oh ok, let's just look at basketball-reference and it's settled.. Want me to tell you some "errors" regarding position and/or starting lineups? With that said, again, I have nothing against calling him a SG, it's definitely arguable but if I had to "call him" something it would be a SF, a point-forward plenty of times.

He was close but I wouldn't say on Gervin's level as a scorer, although he had a better all-around game yea. Ice was the scoring champion 4 times, with tremendous efficiency (especially for a guard), once was leader in points while 7th in FG% and 6th in TS% without a 3pt line. He was able to raise his level in the playoffs more than once, while carrying the scoring load and leading the team, pretty clutch, even was a game away from the Finals, in 1979, with a team that was not all that.. I swear, Gervin gets underrated like hell, lots of times. Think about that.
Drexler also did more in his career (prime), and I'd call him more all-around than Tracy, even though McGrady was a better scorer.
Again, he can be argued of having a top5 peak for a SG (if considered a SG) but it's a very difficult call.

Many would say that "true" team defense, at the end of the day, is more important than that (not that some of those guys weren't great team defenders), and Bird's impact was really good as far as team D. Plus, you never see superstars getting big defensive assignments for long stretches and/or during numerous games, I won't compare him to defensive specialists that didn't have to work as much on offense, or that close. Furthermore, Bird's offense was incredible and very versatile/diverse, he could literally dominate in countless ways while meshing with any strategy and any type of player.. that's always major, and his defense was also pretty good, not even remotely close to something like a liability or a weakness.
Also, Bird was a good post-defender while holding his own on the perimeter well before serious injuries. It was much better for a team to having him roaming around, almost like a free safety, letting him play some great all-around team D, more impactful that way.




Great point! People seem to forget the supporting casts Bird had to play with over the years. If T-Mac could have got a healthy Hill in Orlando or a healthy Yao in Houston for extended periods of time, I feel T-Mac would have got at least one ring.

We can't tell exactly but he never came that close so I call that somewhat of an overreaction.

[SHAQisGOAT]

And in terms of star power, T-Mac's era had Shaq and AI leading the way casual fan wise. Other than MJ, Dr. J, Magic, Charles, and Bird, what other players were a bigger deal casual fan wise than Shaq and AI since Stern took over in 1984?

I don't really know the reason why all of that came about, but you've just mentioned the biggest name in basketball, adding one of its very biggest icons in Magic (Bird also in the league, obviously), a really big influential name in Dr. J, plus a popular guy like Barkley, and you got the nerve to ask "other than"? :lol Please. And I can even drop you some other names like Nique, Clyde or King...

[LAZERUSS]

McGrady never finished higher than 4th in the MVP balloting, while Bird was winning close to unanimous one's.

Again, I don't understand the point of this topic. No one in their mind would take T-Mac over Bird.

[Jacks3]

[B]
- Talking only about numbers (especially when Bird would put up better overall numbers in both the regular-season and post-season)
His numbers aren't better.


- Mentioning players' PER from two different "eras"

There's nothing wrong with comparing PER from two different era, you idiot.


- Saying stuff like 'the greatest defensive era'

...
99-04 was the greatest defensive era in history. Check the league-average TS% and ORTG compared to now or the 80's.


Yea, easy to see you're just a child who doesn't quite know what he's talking about.

Yeah, you're retarded.

\

[Round Mound]

:facepalm

[JohnFreeman]

Bird>
McGrady is Durant without the free throws

[moe94]

His numbers aren't better.


T-Mac scored 2 more points on worse efficiency while paling in every other category.

[SHAQisGOAT]

His numbers aren't better.


There's nothing wrong with comparing PER from two different era, you idiot.


...
99-04 was the greatest defensive era in history. Check the league-average TS% and ORTG compared to now or the 80's.


Yeah, you're retarded.

\

So much stupidity in one post, so much ignorance (or posting lies without knowing it :oldlol:), don't even know where to begin with.. I'll leave it at nothing, no use :rolleyes: :facepalm

[Round Mound]

- Talking only about numbers (especially when Bird would put up better overall numbers in both the regular-season and post-season)

- Mentioning players' PER from two different "eras"

- Saying stuff like 'the greatest defensive era'

...

Yea, easy to see you're just a child who doesn't quite know what he's talking about.


And I agree that FAR better is stretching it, though.




:rolleyes:

I'll say it again, rookie Bird led the Celtics from the 2nd worst record (29-53) to the best record (61-21) and the ECF, with terrific instant impact while being 4th in MVP voting, and that's with a new coach and basically the same core roster as the previous year.
In his 2nd year, with the major addition of Parish (27 already and was never considered all that with the Warriors; McHale wasn't doing much as a rookie) and Cowens gone, Bird led them to a title, decisively outplaying MVP Julius Erving in the "true" Finals (ECF) and should've gotten FMVP, in the Finals, in all seriousness.
In the 1984 playoffs, at the beginning of his absolute best, while most of his teammates were considerably underperforming considering their standards, Bird "took" them to the title, leading the team in points, rebounds, assists, steals, FG% and FT%, going against some great teams and the mighty showtime Lakers in the Finals.. think of how crazy that is for a second, please.
And let's not forget that he was playing in arguably the GOAT decade and in arguably the GOAT conference.

People like to throw out names for the **** of it, or even just numbers, without even knowing what they're talking about :facepalm Keep on with that :rolleyes: Fact is T-Mac, as great as he was at his best, never was that close to Bird at his best, when you consider everything.
****ing 3x MVP with 3 rings as the man just to name "something", going against great superstars and stacked teams, dude that mastered basketball like crazy, top5 peak, best forward ever, and yet let's act like T-Mac was on that level? :biggums: Seriously, some of you make me laugh with some of the shit you say :lol




Oh ok, let's just look at basketball-reference and it's settled.. Want me to tell you some "errors" regarding position and/or starting lineups? With that said, again, I have nothing against calling him a SG, it's definitely arguable but if I had to "call him" something it would be a SF, a point-forward plenty of times.

He was close but I wouldn't say on Gervin's level as a scorer, although he had a better all-around game yea. Ice was the scoring champion 4 times, with tremendous efficiency (especially for a guard), once was leader in points while 7th in FG% and 6th in TS% without a 3pt line. He was able to raise his level in the playoffs more than once, while carrying the scoring load and leading the team, pretty clutch, even was a game away from the Finals, in 1979, with a team that was not all that.. I swear, Gervin gets underrated like hell, lots of times. Think about that.
Drexler also did more in his career (prime), and I'd call him more all-around than Tracy, even though McGrady was a better scorer.
Again, he can be argued of having a top5 peak for a SG (if considered a SG) but it's a very difficult call.

Many would say that "true" team defense, at the end of the day, is more important than that (not that some of those guys weren't great team defenders), and Bird's impact was really good as far as team D. Plus, you never see superstars getting big defensive assignments for long stretches and/or during numerous games, I won't compare him to defensive specialists that didn't have to work as much on offense, or that close. Furthermore, Bird's offense was incredible and very versatile/diverse, he could literally dominate in countless ways while meshing with any strategy and any type of player.. that's always major, and his defense was also pretty good, not even remotely close to something like a liability or a weakness.
Also, Bird was a good post-defender while holding his own on the perimeter well before serious injuries. It was much better for a team to having him roaming around, almost like a free safety, letting him play some great all-around team D, more impactful that way.





We can't tell exactly but he never came that close so I call that somewhat of an overreaction.

Schooling in Session :applause:

[LAZERUSS]

- Talking only about numbers (especially when Bird would put up better overall numbers in both the regular-season and post-season)

- Mentioning players' PER from two different "eras"

- Saying stuff like 'the greatest defensive era'

...

Yea, easy to see you're just a child who doesn't quite know what he's talking about.


And I agree that FAR better is stretching it, though.




:rolleyes:

I'll say it again, rookie Bird led the Celtics from the 2nd worst record (29-53) to the best record (61-21) and the ECF, with terrific instant impact while being 4th in MVP voting, and that's with a new coach and basically the same core roster as the previous year.
In his 2nd year, with the major addition of Parish (27 already and was never considered all that with the Warriors; McHale wasn't doing much as a rookie) and Cowens gone, Bird led them to a title, decisively outplaying MVP Julius Erving in the "true" Finals (ECF) and should've gotten FMVP, in the Finals, in all seriousness.
In the 1984 playoffs, at the beginning of his absolute best, while most of his teammates were considerably underperforming considering their standards, Bird "took" them to the title, leading the team in points, rebounds, assists, steals, FG% and FT%, going against some great teams and the mighty showtime Lakers in the Finals.. think of how crazy that is for a second, please.
And let's not forget that he was playing in arguably the GOAT decade and in arguably the GOAT conference.

People like to throw out names for the **** of it, or even just numbers, without even knowing what they're talking about :facepalm Keep on with that :rolleyes: Fact is T-Mac, as great as he was at his best, never was that close to Bird at his best, when you consider everything.
****ing 3x MVP with 3 rings as the man just to name "something", going against great superstars and stacked teams, dude that mastered basketball like crazy, top5 peak, best forward ever, and yet let's act like T-Mac was on that level? :biggums: Seriously, some of you make me laugh with some of the shit you say :lol




Oh ok, let's just look at basketball-reference and it's settled.. Want me to tell you some "errors" regarding position and/or starting lineups? With that said, again, I have nothing against calling him a SG, it's definitely arguable but if I had to "call him" something it would be a SF, a point-forward plenty of times.

He was close but I wouldn't say on Gervin's level as a scorer, although he had a better all-around game yea. Ice was the scoring champion 4 times, with tremendous efficiency (especially for a guard), once was leader in points while 7th in FG% and 6th in TS% without a 3pt line. He was able to raise his level in the playoffs more than once, while carrying the scoring load and leading the team, pretty clutch, even was a game away from the Finals, in 1979, with a team that was not all that.. I swear, Gervin gets underrated like hell, lots of times. Think about that.
Drexler also did more in his career (prime), and I'd call him more all-around than Tracy, even though McGrady was a better scorer.
Again, he can be argued of having a top5 peak for a SG (if considered a SG) but it's a very difficult call.

Many would say that "true" team defense, at the end of the day, is more important than that (not that some of those guys weren't great team defenders), and Bird's impact was really good as far as team D. Plus, you never see superstars getting big defensive assignments for long stretches and/or during numerous games, I won't compare him to defensive specialists that didn't have to work as much on offense, or that close. Furthermore, Bird's offense was incredible and very versatile/diverse, he could literally dominate in countless ways while meshing with any strategy and any type of player.. that's always major, and his defense was also pretty good, not even remotely close to something like a liability or a weakness.
Also, Bird was a good post-defender while holding his own on the perimeter well before serious injuries. It was much better for a team to having him roaming around, almost like a free safety, letting him play some great all-around team D, more impactful that way.





We can't tell exactly but he never came that close so I call that somewhat of an overreaction.

A pure carpet-bombing...

:applause:

[houston]

Bird>
McGrady is Durant without the free throws


Durant is wayy better than mcgrady

[bizil]

I don't really know the reason why all of that came about, but you've just mentioned the biggest name in basketball, adding one of its very biggest icons in Magic (Bird also in the league, obviously), a really big influential name in Dr. J, plus a popular guy like Barkley, and you got the nerve to ask "other than"? :lol Please. And I can even drop you some other names like Nique, Clyde or King...

Im talking CASUAL FAN WISE! Shaq and AI were on a higher level casual fan wise than Nique, Clyde, and Bernard King. And Nique is my favorite player of all time too. Shaq and AI FLAT OUT TRANSCENDED the sport. Nique had every capability to do the same. But he wasn't marketed as hard as MJ, Bird, Magic, or Charles in that era. I was responding to a post that said the L was struggling since MJ to find transcendant stars. Before u get on here talking shit, KNOW WHAT THE HELL U ARE TALKING ABOUT! U had Dr. J, Magic, Bird, MJ, and Charles as the great players who were the most transcendant for Stern. From there, Shaq and AI to me came the closest to hitting that level from a casual fan point of view. Kobe was there too, but he had some bumps in the road that stopped him from being as beloved as Shaq and AI. Grant Hill had the potential to be a new age DR. J in terms of style of play and how he carried himself. But injuries knocked him out the box. Once again Im talking through the prism of CASUAL FANS!

[bizil]

- Talking only about numbers (especially when Bird would put up better overall numbers in both the regular-season and post-season)

- Mentioning players' PER from two different "eras"

- Saying stuff like 'the greatest defensive era'

...

Yea, easy to see you're just a child who doesn't quite know what he's talking about.


And I agree that FAR better is stretching it, though.




:rolleyes:

I'll say it again, rookie Bird led the Celtics from the 2nd worst record (29-53) to the best record (61-21) and the ECF, with terrific instant impact while being 4th in MVP voting, and that's with a new coach and basically the same core roster as the previous year.
In his 2nd year, with the major addition of Parish (27 already and was never considered all that with the Warriors; McHale wasn't doing much as a rookie) and Cowens gone, Bird led them to a title, decisively outplaying MVP Julius Erving in the "true" Finals (ECF) and should've gotten FMVP, in the Finals, in all seriousness.
In the 1984 playoffs, at the beginning of his absolute best, while most of his teammates were considerably underperforming considering their standards, Bird "took" them to the title, leading the team in points, rebounds, assists, steals, FG% and FT%, going against some great teams and the mighty showtime Lakers in the Finals.. think of how crazy that is for a second, please.
And let's not forget that he was playing in arguably the GOAT decade and in arguably the GOAT conference.

People like to throw out names for the **** of it, or even just numbers, without even knowing what they're talking about :facepalm Keep on with that :rolleyes: Fact is T-Mac, as great as he was at his best, never was that close to Bird at his best, when you consider everything.
****ing 3x MVP with 3 rings as the man just to name "something", going against great superstars and stacked teams, dude that mastered basketball like crazy, top5 peak, best forward ever, and yet let's act like T-Mac was on that level? :biggums: Seriously, some of you make me laugh with some of the shit you say :lol




Oh ok, let's just look at basketball-reference and it's settled.. Want me to tell you some "errors" regarding position and/or starting lineups? With that said, again, I have nothing against calling him a SG, it's definitely arguable but if I had to "call him" something it would be a SF, a point-forward plenty of times.

He was close but I wouldn't say on Gervin's level as a scorer, although he had a better all-around game yea. Ice was the scoring champion 4 times, with tremendous efficiency (especially for a guard), once was leader in points while 7th in FG% and 6th in TS% without a 3pt line. He was able to raise his level in the playoffs more than once, while carrying the scoring load and leading the team, pretty clutch, even was a game away from the Finals, in 1979, with a team that was not all that.. I swear, Gervin gets underrated like hell, lots of times. Think about that.
Drexler also did more in his career (prime), and I'd call him more all-around than Tracy, even though McGrady was a better scorer.
Again, he can be argued of having a top5 peak for a SG (if considered a SG) but it's a very difficult call.

Many would say that "true" team defense, at the end of the day, is more important than that (not that some of those guys weren't great team defenders), and Bird's impact was really good as far as team D. Plus, you never see superstars getting big defensive assignments for long stretches and/or during numerous games, I won't compare him to defensive specialists that didn't have to work as much on offense, or that close. Furthermore, Bird's offense was incredible and very versatile/diverse, he could literally dominate in countless ways while meshing with any strategy and any type of player.. that's always major, and his defense was also pretty good, not even remotely close to something like a liability or a weakness.
Also, Bird was a good post-defender while holding his own on the perimeter well before serious injuries. It was much better for a team to having him roaming around, almost like a free safety, letting him play some great all-around team D, more impactful that way.





We can't tell exactly but he never came that close so I call that somewhat of an overreaction.

In terms of position, T-Mac is more generally known as a SG, even though he played plenty of SF. U disagreed and that's your right. I came back and showed u evidence that he was AT LEAST listed as an SG the majority of his prime. Does that mean he played SG all the time NO! I'm aware he played plenty of SF too. Just like many SG's did. But there's no point in disagreeing if one calls T-Mac an SG. When I say Gervin's level of scorer, Im taking about they are both true alpha dogs with epic scoring skillsets. TMac won two scoring titles himself, and may have won more if it wasn't for injuries. I'm not underrated the Iceman at all. I just prefer TMac over him because the scoring is comparable, the all around game IS NOT!

Secondly, I've SAID I would take Bird over T-Mac for reasons of rebounding and being able to play the PF in addition. And I never said team defense wasn't valuable. And don't get on here trying to discredit great man on man defense to prop up Bird. Due to the fact Bird played plenty of PF, that made his defense better than it would be when he had to check great perimeter scorers. Hell Bird made three all defensive teams when he was playing and listed more as a PF than an SF. I'm talking mainly when the Celts went big and he really settled in at SF as his primary spot. With guys like Nique, King, Dr. J, English, Dantley, etc., Bird wasn't as effective a defender. Not hating, just facts. That's why the PF McHale often times switched over to guard those guys more often that Bird many times.

[bizil]

I can see that being made into an argument. Depends on what level of defensive capability. If we talking about Pippen and Jordan levels then yeah.

Offensively, there are a few things that Bird did do better than T-Mac like passing, post up, off the ball movement and catch and shoot. Bird was also smarter. T-Mac got better handles, of course, and is no slouch to catch and shoot either. He probably is better off the dribble as well. His whole game was smooth. And is probably a better scorer...tho Bird could give you 30ppg game with better efficiency.

I feel like you would have to break down how they play and their game to judge the differences between them and which was more efficient and making their team better.

I agree with u! In terms of D, I meant if T-Mac was the true total package on both sides of the ball like MJ, Kobe, or Bron. Or somewhere close in terms of D. Bird was indeed a better pure shooter, hell arguably the greatest shooter of all time. And your analysis of T-Mac was right on the money. When u look back at Bird and Magic back in the day, they were guys the size of PF's who had the skills and IQ of the great perimeter players on offense. What separated a smaller but yet versatile player in MJ from them was the defensive side and freak athletic ability COMBINED with great fundamentals and technique. I think T-Mac was so great on the offensive side that if his D was close to MJ's, he might have the edge on Bird peak wise. But he didn't, so I go with Bird peak wise.

[AirFederer]

...
And the cast of Bird? I would just have to point out that his rookie year and helped the immediate impact on the team 29 to 61 win team. Not even in his prime...

This says it all. Larry Legend :bowdown:

[DCL]

prime t-mac gave us memories, but bird was on another whole level of WTF in basketball. you watch him and just constantly go WTF did he just do???

[STATUTORY]

- Saying stuff like 'the greatest defensive era'


Facts are facts, 80s was a joke defensive era. time for you old timers to accept it

[Pushxx]

lol @ Bird being "far" better than a dude who put up 32/7/6/2/30+ PER on excellent efficiency in the greatest defensive era in history. Oh yeah, and he put up those numbers while posting one of the lowest turnover rates in the league. Peak T-Mac was truly incredible.

Thank goodness he was able to carry his teams to championships with his greatness. Oh wait

[SHAQisGOAT]

Secondly, I've SAID I would take Bird over T-Mac for reasons of rebounding and being able to play the PF in addition. And I never said team defense wasn't valuable. And don't get on here trying to discredit great man on man defense to prop up Bird. Due to the fact Bird played plenty of PF, that made his defense better than it would be when he had to check great perimeter scorers. Hell Bird made three all defensive teams when he was playing and listed more as a PF than an SF. I'm talking mainly when the Celts went big and he really settled in at SF as his primary spot. With guys like Nique, King, Dr. J, English, Dantley, etc., Bird wasn't as effective a defender. Not hating, just facts. That's why the PF McHale often times switched over to guard those guys more often that Bird many times.


Who discredited great m2m defense? And to prop up Bird??? Please, I just said that plenty of people will argue that great team defense can be more impactful, at the end of the day. And of course Bird was great at it, playing passing lanes, creating turnovers, protecting the paint, few weakside blocks, drawing charges, knowing when to double team, never really got lost on rotations, defensive rebounds if you wanna count them... He "won" plenty of games also due to his defensive impact, go check it out.

So, let me get this straight, you're holding him "responsible" and saying he had it "easy", for playing PF? :rolleyes: If anything it's the other way around, get your facts straight. His game was better suited as a stretch 4, he was more of a PF (and projected as one out of college), he played as more of a PF in his first years. His game was incredibly all-around and diverse so he could easily play SF and with McHale coming into his own, plus with the Celtics roster at the time, Bird switched to more of a SF and spent his best years as one. If anything he was the one making the "effort", especially at a time when he was pushing 30 and already with back problems.

What's the problem with making defensive teams as a PF? I don't get it, really. '**** Bird because by playing his "natural" position it made his defense better' :rolleyes: You're gonna say "**** Tim Duncan" for making the all-defensive team as a PF? That he's not a great defender, that he should be checking SF's??? That's stretching it a bit but something pretty similar is what you're saying. And Bird actually guarded SF's and was somewhat "forced" to play as one during his best years, which he could do and was terrific at it regardless, because of his game.
And again, you're like checking basketball-reference and making your claim, Bird even guarded SF's plenty of times when he was younger (probably more than later on) and playing more as a PF, or better yet listed as one, he was probably taking more jumpers in his younger years than in his days as a SF, but you wanna look at a website and say exactly what he was doing, right?
Also, you're saying Bird wasn't as effective as a defender against Nique, King, J, English, Worthy, and so on, out of your ass, without presenting clear facts. Anyways, no matter who his matchup was, he still played some great team defense which was more important for the team from a player like him, plus he more than held his own various times against good SF scorers (mostly before back issues). Go ahead and check some early-to-mid 80's games, from him, on youtube. And you're talking about some of the greatest scorers at the SF position, nobody was gonna keep them in check, you can't count on Bird to do something like that, shit.

So how many times have you seen the best offensive player guarding the opponent's best scorer for large stretches or during numerous games? You're gonna act like a team's best offensive player never got switched defensively (when they can do it) to save him for offense, it happens much more often than not, with MJ, Bron.. you name it. But let's blame Bird - who was more of a PF, who was already 30, who already had back problems, who was more impactful as sort of a free safety, roaming around - for "having" McHale guarding the opponent's best scoring forward, plenty of times :facepalm

Check this shit out, while you're at it, that doesn't happen by chance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpEAZMT5t_U

[Jailblazers7]

Yeah, Bird had one of the greatest peaks ever so I don't think it's really fair to T-Mac to make this comparison. Not only did Bird have all of the stats, ability, awards, etc. but he dwarfs T-Mac in terms of leadership. The stories that get told about Larry's leadership in Boston are a thing of legend and solidifies Larry's huge advantage in "intagibles."

Straight up on the court play, Bird wins...but Bird murders T-Mac in terms of intangibles and leadership.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Tmac: 30.3 PER

Bird: 27.8 PER

It's clear...

[moe94]

Tmac: 30.3 PER

Bird: 27.8 PER

It's clear...
:oldlol:

[Legends66NBA7]

Thank goodness he was able to carry his teams to championships with his greatness. Oh wait…

What teams was he supposed to carry to championships with his greatness ? If were talking about peak play, none of his Magic teams had any form of a championship team.

Peak Bird is better, but McGrady never had a luxury of being on such polished teams. Bird had either 1st or 2nd most talented teams in the league at times.

[f0und]

yeah but has bird ever scored 13 points in 35 seconds? didnt think so. next.

**sarcasm using tmac's version of kobe's 81**

[Bob Dole]

Shut this stupid thread down. I'm taking peak bird over any perimeter peak other than that guy from Wilmington, NC

[miles berg]

Not sure any player in NBA history had a better peak than Bird.

Definitely know TMac didn't and I think TMac is underrated historically.

Just not as good as Bird.

[bizil]

Who discredited great m2m defense? And to prop up Bird??? Please, I just said that plenty of people will argue that great team defense can be more impactful, at the end of the day. And of course Bird was great at it, playing passing lanes, creating turnovers, protecting the paint, few weakside blocks, drawing charges, knowing when to double team, never really got lost on rotations, defensive rebounds if you wanna count them... He "won" plenty of games also due to his defensive impact, go check it out.

So, let me get this straight, you're holding him "responsible" and saying he had it "easy", for playing PF? :rolleyes: If anything it's the other way around, get your facts straight. His game was better suited as a stretch 4, he was more of a PF (and projected as one out of college), he played as more of a PF in his first years. His game was incredibly all-around and diverse so he could easily play SF and with McHale coming into his own, plus with the Celtics roster at the time, Bird switched to more of a SF and spent his best years as one. If anything he was the one making the "effort", especially at a time when he was pushing 30 and already with back problems.

What's the problem with making defensive teams as a PF? I don't get it, really. '**** Bird because by playing his "natural" position it made his defense better' :rolleyes: You're gonna say "**** Tim Duncan" for making the all-defensive team as a PF? That he's not a great defender, that he should be checking SF's??? That's stretching it a bit but something pretty similar is what you're saying. And Bird actually guarded SF's and was somewhat "forced" to play as one during his best years, which he could do and was terrific at it regardless, because of his game.
And again, you're like checking basketball-reference and making your claim, Bird even guarded SF's plenty of times when he was younger (probably more than later on) and playing more as a PF, or better yet listed as one, he was probably taking more jumpers in his younger years than in his days as a SF, but you wanna look at a website and say exactly what he was doing, right?
Also, you're saying Bird wasn't as effective as a defender against Nique, King, J, English, Worthy, and so on, out of your ass, without presenting clear facts. Anyways, no matter who his matchup was, he still played some great team defense which was more important for the team from a player like him, plus he more than held his own various times against good SF scorers (mostly before back issues). Go ahead and check some early-to-mid 80's games, from him, on youtube. And you're talking about some of the greatest scorers at the SF position, nobody was gonna keep them in check, you can't count on Bird to do something like that, shit.

So how many times have you seen the best offensive player guarding the opponent's best scorer for large stretches or during numerous games? You're gonna act like a team's best offensive player never got switched defensively (when they can do it) to save him for offense, it happens much more often than not, with MJ, Bron.. you name it. But let's blame Bird - who was more of a PF, who was already 30, who already had back problems, who was more impactful as sort of a free safety, roaming around - for "having" McHale guarding the opponent's best scoring forward, plenty of times :facepalm

Check this shit out, while you're at it, that doesn't happen by chance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpEAZMT5t_U



For starters, I said Bird was a better defender at PF than SF. An all league caliber defender at PF at that. I was actually giving Bird credit. I wasn't dissing him at all. But he was CLEARLY a better defender at PF than SF. That's all I was saying and PLUS Bird was the size of many PF's back then anyway at 6'9 and 230 pounds.

Secondly, I would venture to say most great one on one perimeter defenders are ALSO great or very good team defenders. For a SF, Bird wasn't a great or even very good one on one defender. And sure a guy like MJ or Kobe might not guard the best perimeter player all game. And Jordan had the luxury of having an epic defender like Pip. But WHEN CALLED UPON, Jordan was lockdown defender flat out. He would see plenty of time on a team's premier perimeter scorer. Or if a team had two great scorers, Jordan would take one and Pippen another. It doesn't matter if he did it all game, he did it ENOUGH to be known as one of the greatest perimeter defenders ever! With all due respect to Bird at SF, he wasn't CAPABLE of being a lockdown defender. If he was, I would venture to say HE WOULD BE AHEAD OF MJ peak value wise if he was the caliber of a defender.

Bottom line is, NOBODY applaued Bird's one on one or lockdown defense. That's was one of the rare facets he wasn't great at. That's not a knock just the facts. And NO Bird wasn't more of a PF than SF. His skillset was more suited to me to be a perfect combo forward. The things that made Bird great were mostly more SF elements to me. Mixed with the great rebounding and hard nosed style of PF. And he could shoot over any SF and was bigger than basically any SF in the L. Kevin Love is pure stretch PF who secondary position is center. Bird is more of SF-PF hybrid. Or PF-SF hybrid. But he was great EQUALLY at either position. At times, I like size to overwhelm opponents if possible. Bird was amongst the biggest SF's in the L during his era. At PF, he's just of average size and height. He's great at either spot, but at SF he could overwhelm with his size AND SKILL! At PF, he couldn't overpower anybody, but he sure as hell could outskill them. Bird to me was not only the GOAT SF but the GOAT combo forward. Don't get on here whining about Bird having to switch positions and all that shit. Like many college players, they change positions once they came in the L.

[Fire Colangelo]

Peak T-Mac was great, and he was one of my favorite players. He had a smooth game, very smooth game. He was able to dunk over people like a few other people.

But no, he wasn't better than Bird.

[Sharmer]

I don't think we ever saw a peak T-mac. He wasn't healthy during his prime years.

[bizil]

I don't think we ever saw a peak T-mac. He wasn't healthy during his prime years.

Great point! That injury bug started hard at like 27. When he was 30, he was done pretty much as an elite player. Very different from Bird who was still awesome into his 30's, even though the injuries were slowing him some too. Bird was still getting 24.3 points, 7.5 assists, and 9.5 rebounds at 33 years of age.

[bizil]

Peak T-Mac was great, and he was one of my favorite players. He had a smooth game, very smooth game. He was able to dunk over people like a few other people.

But no, he wasn't better than Bird.

Fair statement and I agree with you!:cheers:

[Bigsmoke]

My brother thinks T-Mac peaked higher and there is no argument to be had. :biggums:

T-Mac: 32/6.5/5.5 on 46%, 56 TS%

Bird: 30/9/6 on 52%, 61 TS%

He also said he's not sure LeBron, Durant or Kobe peaked higher than T-Mac. Basically, he really likes T-Mac.

Just call him an idiot go on with your life

You're an idiot for making this shit

[fragokota]

Peak T-Mac better than peak Bird....That's a quality thread right there....

[ImKobe]

Peak T-Mac was still a 2nd round virgin

[Champ]

Give T-Mac McHale, Parish, DJ, Tiny Archibald, Cornbread, D.Ainge and lets see Bird run with Drew Gooden, Pat Burke and Darrell Armstrong.

I would argue the opposite could/would happen. Look at the numbers Bird put up when he had to lead a cast of scrubs at ISU.