Playoffs Dirk or Bird who u got

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

for career:coleman: :coleman:

[IncarceratedBob]

Bird is literally better at everything

[Cold soul]

Larry Bird.

[dr.hee]

Bird is literally better at everything

Bird is better, but not literally at everything.

[navy]

Dirk had one run, and let's face it Lebron choked.

Bird. Then again, his teams were STACKED. Nope, still Bird. He is just better.

[ThePhantomCreep]

Dirk had one run, and let's face it Lebron choked.

Bird. Then again, his teams were STACKED. Nope, still Bird. He is just better.
His opposition was stacked too.

[ArbitraryWater]

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=1127633&f=64


The more I look at Dirk and Bird's careers, the more I think you can make the case that Dirk is > Bird. Just look at Bird's long list of playoff failures while Dirk improves his play in the postseason:

1980- Averaged a .511 TS% in the postseason. In game 5 vs. the Sixers, he shot poorly, 5-19 with just 12 points, as the Celtics lost the game. His man (Dr. J) averaged 25 PPG in this series. His team loses in 5 games despite having HCA and winning 61 games. Had a 18.3 PER in the postseason

1981- Has a .532 TS% in the postseason. He had a bad finals where he averaged just 15 PPG on .419 shooting and .460 TS%.

1982- PPG average dropped from 22.9 PPG to 17.8 PPG. He has an embarrassing .474 TS% in the playoffs. He averaged a pedestrian 18.3 PPG against the Sixers. Averages 17 PPG in the final 2 games of the series. The Celtics lose again with HCA. The Celtics won 63 games and had the #1 SRS in the league. Has a 17.9 PER in the postseason.

1983- The Celtics get swept by the Bucks. The Celtics win 56 games and had the #2 SRS in the league and lose again with HCA. Bird plays awful again. .478 TS%. His PPG average drops 2 PPG in the playoffs. Bird missed a game in the series but that game happened to be the closest one (Celtics lose by 4). In the 3 other games, the Celtics lose by 14.3 PPG with Bird on the court.

1984- Great playoffs. Averaged 27-14-4 in the Finals and had a .607 TS% in the playoffs. First great playoff of his career. Celtics win the title over the Lakers.

1985- Celtics make the finals, but Bird's numbers drop in the playoffs. His PPG drops by 2.8 PPG, Reb by 1.2 Reb, and AST by 0.7 AST. Had an average .536 TS% in the postseason. Bird plays even worse in the finals. His PPG dropped 4.9 PPG, his Reb 1.7 Reb, and AST by 1.6 AST in the finals compared to his regular season average. His Finals TS% is just .527. Not only that, but Celtics finish with 63 wins and lose once again with HCA a constant theme in Bird's career. This is the first time in Celtics history they lost in the finals with HCA.

1986- Great year. His best year ever. Wins the title. .615 TS% in the postseason and amazing finals.

1987- I think this is his most admirable playoffs up until the finals. The Celtics were quite banged up this year. Averaged 27-10-7 in the postseason with .577 TS%. Though his numbers in the finals dropped off once again. His PPG was 3.9 PPG down from the regular season, AST down by 2.1 AST and his TS% was just .534. In game 6, Bird scored just 16 points on 6-16 (.375) shooting. In the final 3 games of this series, Bird averaged just 20 PPG on .377 shooting and .492 TS% with 3.7 TOV. This is the first time Bird has played without HCA in the playoffs and his team loses.

1988- Bird's PPG drops by 5.4 PPG, Reb by 0.5 Reb. Bird shoots an awful 40-114 (.351) against the Pistons. Has a mediocre .538 TS% and 20.2 PER in the playoffs. The Celtics had HCA and the #1 SRS in the league and you probably guessed what happened next, Larry Bird loses with HCA once again.

1989- Injured doesn't play in the postseason.

1990- Bird shoots .539 TS% and has 3.6 TOV as the Celtics once again you guessed it, lose with HCA.

1991- In the first round, his team needs to go 5 vs. the 41 win Pacers. His PPG drop by 2.3 PPG and his Rebounds and Assists also drop quite a bit. Has a .490 TS% 15.8 PER in the playoffs. Against the Pistons Bird averages 13.4 PPG on .446 TS%. His 56 win team played with you guessed it HCA and loses with it.

1992- Doesn't play in the first round as the Celtics sweep the Pacers. In round 2, his team goes 7 against the Cavs, but Bird plays in 4 games and his team was 1-3 in those games. Averages a pathetic 11.3 PPG and 4.5 Reb which are 8.4 PPG and 5.2 Reb down from his regular season average. He has a .514 TS% and 16.4 PER in the postseason.


So out of 12 years, you get 9 years under .540 TS%, 5 under .520 TS%, and 3 under .500 TS%. From 80-83, he had a 19.9 playoff PER. In that span, Johnny Moore, Franklin Edwards, Gus Williams, and Bob Lanier all had better playoff PER and WS/48. Teammates Parish, McHale, Tiny Archibald, and Cedric Maxwell had better TS% in that span. From 88-92, he had a 18.8 PER which is 25th among players with 10 playoff games played. Players who had better playoff PER's in that span include Fat Lever, Terry Cummings, Roy Tarpley, Cedric Ceballos, and Sarunas Marciulionis. His teammates Reggie Lewis and Kevin McHale had better playoff PER's in that span.

With Bird you get a nice 4 year run that had 4 straight finals appearances but outside of that you get a 4 year span of .505 TS% (80-83) and a .525 TS% span (88-92). In 12 years, you get 7 losses with HCA. Basically out of Bird's 13 year career, you have 1 injury season and 3 non-descript postseasons at the end of his plus some playoff disappointments early in his career.

May take Dirk :confusedshrug: I don't see what's so outrageous about it... Now if Dirk continues to play at this elite level for damn near 20 Years?

:confusedshrug:

[Done_And_Done]

Love the Diggler but Larry Legend for moi please...

[riseagainst]

didn't Bird out-rebound Moses Malone in the finals?
just saying.

There are other things Bird can do and did that contributed to the team other than scoring.

Dirk is probably a better pure scorer than Bird, but even then, just barely. Bird is better at rebounding and playmaking/passing, especially off the ball...

Love Dirk, but I'd take Bird.

[Harison]

Lets just say every.single.GM would pick Bird over Dirk (Cuban including), same with any fan (non-homer).

[Akrazotile]

Bird is literally better at everything


Now, we know that they are at the very least equal as three point shooters. Then you say to yourself, well Dirk is a PF so he draws a bigger defender away from the basket. So you say, well ok, why is that important? Well mainly because it creates more difficult defensive positioning for the opponent.


Now look, I don't care about playoff records and rings. It's a team game and I'm not one of the retards incapable of separating teams from individuals. We know Larry Bird was a greater play maker, mainly because, he was a greater playmaker. But Dirk is a more lethal scorer, come on now. And it's hard to deny the kind of matchup problems he creates in the modern game. So you say to yourself, well what's the verdict?

The verdict is, it's a pick em. There is no right or wrong answer to this question.

[zoom17]

Bird it sucks he had back problems later in his career.

[DirkNowitzki07]

Dirk of course

Give him Parish, Kevin McHale, Dennis Johnson, Danny Ainge, Bill Walton and he'll get you a couple of rings too

It's funny how the greatest players in the history of the game had at least another star on their team when they won the title. But yet Dirk had to do it with a washed up Kidd, an old Jason Terry, and an injured Caron Butler.

Tim Duncan has Ginobili, Parker and had Robinson.
Bird had Parish, Dennis Johnson, Kevin McHale.
Lebron has Wade, Bosh
Shaq had Kobe
Jordan had Pippen, Rodman,

:coleman:

What did Dirk ever have that came close to those types of players?

[DMAVS41]

Bird for sure.

Closer than people think though.

If it's about who "stepped up" their game more in the playoffs compared to the regular season...then it's Dirk, but Bird wins out as the better player.

The harsh truth for Dirk fans here is that Bird playing at 90% of his optimal is still better than Dirk playing at or near his optimal level. Just the truth.

Props to Dirk for being one of what I would imagine a select few that saw his scoring, rebounding, and assists go up or remain constant while also slightly improving his overall scoring efficiency.

Dirk got better than normal in the playoffs given that he played more minutes and played against better competition and increased his outputs across the board.

But that isn't enough to pass Bird...like I said above, Bird was just the better player...and even with Bird not playing at his optimal level...he was still just better than Dirk overall.

Not a blowout here or anything tough...Dirk's individual play in the playoffs is extremely under-rated here.

[fpliii]

Bird, but both are top 10 playoff performers all-time. Each had to go through a super tough conference (80s East and 00s West).

[ThePhantomCreep]

Dirk-led teams made it past the second round only three times in his now 16-year career. 6 one and dones.

Bird-led teams reached five finals and eight ECFs. Only one first round exit when Bird was on the roster, and that was after his achilles injuries.

Given this, it's useless to compare stats. One guy constantly went on deep playoff runs. The other guy rarely did. That will affect their averages, people.

[SCdac]

It's amazing that Bird averaged damn near a triple double in the '86 playoffs (26 ppg / 8 apg / 9 rpg). What an amazing passer and transcendent player. Tough as nails too.

I realize I used stats to emphasize his trip dub impact, but his all around ability goes beyond stats IMO.

http://www.imgnook.com/VwE86o.gif

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/VS/Comparision%20n%20Similarity/MJ/n%20Larry%20Legend/-1.gif

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Dirk-led teams made it past the second round only three times in his now 16-year career. 6 one and dones.

Bird-led teams reached five finals and eight ECFs. Only one first round exit when Bird was on the roster, and that was after his achilles injuries.

Given this, it's useless to compare stats. One guy constantly went on deep playoff runs. The other guy rarely did. That will affect their averages, people.
Bird lost w/ homecourt advantage alot more times and Bird got injured in like half his postseasons

[ThePhantomCreep]

Bird lost w/ homecourt advantage alot more times and Bird got injured in like half his postseasons
The only inexcusable ones were in 1983 and 1990, and those aren't nearly as bad the 2006 and 2007 losses Dirk suffered. The others losses came against the Sixers, Showtime, and the Bad Boys, all mega-teams that were considered even money when the series started. All came no earlier than conference finals either. You can live with those.

[DMAVS41]

The only inexcusable ones were in 1983 and 1990, and those aren't nearly as bad the 2006 and 2007 losses Dirk suffered. The others losses came against the Sixers, Showtime, and the Bad Boys, all mega-teams that were considered even money when the series started. All came no earlier than conference finals either. You can live with those.

How was Dirk's play in 06 worse than Bird's in 83?

Bird got swept in the 2nd round and was at like 45% TS iirc. I'm on my phone and can't verify that...someone please look up what did in that 83 series sweep.

If I'm wrong I apologize, but if it's the series I'm thinking about...no way in hell is Dirk's 06 finals "much worse"....absurd.

[Dro]

I like Dirk but how in the world is he better than Larry Legend?

[dankok8]

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=1127633&f=64



May take Dirk :confusedshrug: I don't see what's so outrageous about it... Now if Dirk continues to play at this elite level for damn near 20 Years?

:confusedshrug:

First of all let's establish the fact that Bird's impact always way overshadowed his boxscore. Hockey assists, forcing difficult shots without blocks, playing the lanes/denying space, making clutch plays, tormenting the opposition with trash-talking etc etc. Apart from Bill Russell no other player had so much intangibles.

Honestly that quoted post by Colts18 is just terrible. Cherry-picking stats, focusing on certain aspects while ignoring others, ignoring context. Reminds me of LAZERUSS sometimes when he rips on Bird... :oldlol:

First of all in the '83 playoffs and from '89 onwards Bird was severely hobbled by injuries and nowhere near himself. Those years have really no merit in judging the play of prime Bird. Yes he was injury prone... we know that... but he wasn't a choker!

1981: Yes Bird was terrible scoring the ball in the finals but he averaged 15 rpg, 7 apg, and almost 3 spg. He fought a GOAT rebounder in Moses almost even on the boards and played terrific defense throughout the series. This was a very good performance. Not to mention that his Celtics came back from a 1-3 deficit to beat the Sixers in the ECF with Larry playing out of his freaking mind!

1982: All the Celtics-Sixers playoff battles were just so brutal, physically taxing, and defensively oriented. I've seen those games and it hurts to watch. It seems not a single player on either side would get a single clean shot the entire game. Look up the numbers of other players like Tiny, Parish, Erving etc. and their shooting % in those series. Bird was clearly the best player on the floor in the 1982 series and over a still prime Julius Erving. Andrew Toney swung that series in Philly's favor and got the name "Boston Straggler" while Tiny got injured for the Celtics. Context...

1985: Bird suffered an injury in Game 4 of the ECF. Up until that point he averaged 28.8 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 6.2 apg on 48.5 %FG and 55.7 %TS. :bowdown: Besides Bird would be on a short list of players who could ever be criticized for averaging 24/9/5 against one of the GOAT teams in the finals.

And of course in the '84, '86 and '87 postseasons he was just a complete monster playing on a GOAT level that Dirk couldn't even touch. :oldlol:

Bird >>> Dirk as a playoff performer and it's not even close.

[lakers_forever]

Bird and it's not close. You are insane if you think Dirk is anywhere near a GOAT level player like Bird who led his team to 5 finals and 3 titles in the most difficult decade of them all. The one that MJ (The GOAT) did not even reach the finals.

[ThePhantomCreep]

How was Dirk's play in 06 worse than Bird's in 83?

Bird got swept in the 2nd round and was at like 45% TS iirc. I'm on my phone and can't verify that...someone please look up what did in that 83 series sweep.

If I'm wrong I apologize, but if it's the series I'm thinking about...no way in hell is Dirk's 06 finals "much worse"....absurd.

Bird shot 44% vs the Bucks, Dirk shot 39% in the 2006 Finals.

[smoovegittar]

Dirk's great and all, but Bird is the word. I remember...

[navy]

Dirk shot 39% in the 2006 Finals.
Dude was getting his shot blocked by Wade. Seriously. Talking bout refs tho :oldlol:

[Cone]

Dirk had one run, and let's face it Lebron choked.

Bird. Then again, his teams were STACKED. Nope, still Bird. He is just better.

One run?

Do you even watch his career? Just cause he has one ring (should be two), does not mean he just had one 'run'. The guy has so many epic playoff performances yet retards like you think he is all 2011.

[DMAVS41]

Bird shot 44% vs the Bucks, Dirk shot 39% in the 2006 Finals.

And we should ignore real efficiency? Why?

Bird shot 45% TS against the Bucks
Dirk shot 53% TS against the Heat

That is a massive difference in scoring efficiency...massive.

Dirk was better than Bird in 06 vs 83.

Then of course they'll be some shit about injuries or something for Bird on the other years he wasn't good. And Dirk's 07 series will be brought up constantly....and nobody will allow for Dirk not being 100% physically or mentally for the Warriors series with rumors of him hiding an injury the last month of the season in Dallas swirling around...and his dad having major surgery in the middle of the Warriors series.

Right? We should make excuses for Bird...

[mr.big35]

Bird is the GOAT player is this even a question. Bird can do everything better than Dirk. Dirk cant even tie Bird's shoes. you cant compare a GOAT to an All star.

[navy]

One run?

Do you even watch his career? Just cause he has one ring (should be two), does not mean he just had one 'run'. The guy has so many epic playoff performances yet retards like you think he is all 2011.
Nope. A playoff run isnt a run unless you win. Lebron has only 2 runs despite monster performances some years and choke jobs in the finals in others. Dirk has 1 run. 2011. :confusedshrug:

[navy]

And we should ignore real efficiency? Why?

Bird shot 45% TS against the Bucks
Dirk shot 53% TS against the Heat

That is a massive difference in scoring efficiency...massive.

Dirk was better than Bird in 06 vs 83.

Then of course they'll be some shit about injuries or something for Bird on the other years he wasn't good. And Dirk's 07 series will be brought up constantly....and nobody will allow for Dirk not being 100% physically or mentally for the Warriors series with rumors of him hiding an injury the last month of the season in Dallas swirling around...and his dad having major surgery in the middle of the Warriors series.

Right? We should make excuses for Bird...
Let's be honest, mental excuses are the worse kind.

[mr.big35]

Let's be honest, mental excuses are the worse kind.

his the biggest stan here and its not even funny.

[DMAVS41]

Let's be honest, mental excuses are the worse kind.

I don't care what the excuses are....if we are going to make them for Bird...we have to be balanced and make them for Dirk.

I'd prefer that we don't make any excuses, but Bird fans won't like that actually as we've had these talks before.

These notions that Bird in 82 and 83 was a "much" better player than 06 Dirk are just laughable.

Things have just changed and we are hypercritical now about everything...if Durant, for example, shot 45% TS in the 2nd round this year and got swept...he'd be killed for it.

Just the way it is...

[SHAQisGOAT]

Bird shot 44% vs the Bucks, Dirk shot 39% in the 2006 Finals.

Bird was injured during the post-season, in 1983... People always talk about that without even knowing it, he didn't even play 1 game vs the Bucks, not hard to figure out, funny to me.. So he technically didn't get swept.

[navy]

I don't care what the excuses are....if we are going to make them for Bird...we have to be balanced and make them for Dirk.

I'd prefer that we don't make any excuses, but Bird fans won't like that actually as we've had these talks before.

These notions that Bird in 82 and 83 was a "much" better player than 06 Dirk are just laughable.

Things have just changed and we are hypercritical now about everything...if Durant, for example, shot 45% TS in the 2nd round this year and got swept...he'd be killed for it.

Just the way it is...
Bird is overrated. There I said it. He is still top 5ish but nostalgia always has people conveniently ignoring less than flattering moments like the one's you listed.

Plus, his teams were stacked. End rant.

[DMAVS41]

Bird is overrated. There I said it. He is still top 5ish but nostalgia always has people conveniently ignoring less than flattering moments like the one's you listed.

Plus, his teams were stacked. End rant.

Okay...

So then you just agree that we either should list the circumstances for each player...or not make excuses.

I don't care which it is.

But I get sick and tired of hearing how Bird gets all these excuses for 82 and 83 and Dirk gets absolutely 0 for 07. What Dirk was going through was real...just as real as Bird being hurt...etc.

[mr.big35]

comparing bird to dirk is such a disrespectful to larry legend

[kamil]

I got Larry Bird at #2 of all time after MJ. So... yeah, Bird > Dirk

[mr.big35]

no we need a stan to tell bird is decent player and dirk is better.

[Kblaze8855]

People are in this topic judging Larry Bird...a guy on the short list of most complete offensive players in the sports history....by ****ing true shooting percentages....

Talking about Birds 81 ppg and shooting percentages.

He had 18 points, 21 rebounds, 9 assists and a shot with 19 seconds left to seal it in game 1.

Game 2 19/12/5/3 in a close loss.

Game 3 he took 11 shots...because they were up 30 points some of the game. He had 8/13/10 and 5 steals. He needs to try to score more and up his shooting so people in thirty years dont say he had a bad series?

The only actual bad game he had was game 4 when they lost and he had 8 points taking only 11 shots.

Next game...another huge blowout. Up 30 in the 3rd quarter. 12/12/8 coasting into the win.

26/13/5 in a close game 6. 3 point game late. Bird scores on 3 straight jumpers(the last being a 3) to stretch it to 10. Game over. Ring won.


But he had a bad series because of TS% and not deciding to attack and score garbage buckets up 30?

Say he decides to do what we all know he could have...demand the ball and make some so what baskets up 34 in a couple of those games...

Is the bump in his final TS%.....actually making him play better?

[SHAQisGOAT]

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=1127633&f=64



May take Dirk :confusedshrug: I don't see what's so outrageous about it... Now if Dirk continues to play at this elite level for damn near 20 Years?

:confusedshrug:


The more I look at Dirk and Bird's careers, the more I think you can make the case that Dirk is > Bird. Just look at Bird's long list of playoff failures while Dirk improves his play in the postseason:

1980- Averaged a .511 TS% in the postseason. In game 5 vs. the Sixers, he shot poorly, 5-19 with just 12 points, as the Celtics lost the game. His man (Dr. J) averaged 25 PPG in this series. His team loses in 5 games despite having HCA and winning 61 games. Had a 18.3 PER in the postseason

1981- Has a .532 TS% in the postseason. He had a bad finals where he averaged just 15 PPG on .419 shooting and .460 TS%.

1982- PPG average dropped from 22.9 PPG to 17.8 PPG. He has an embarrassing .474 TS% in the playoffs. He averaged a pedestrian 18.3 PPG against the Sixers. Averages 17 PPG in the final 2 games of the series. The Celtics lose again with HCA. The Celtics won 63 games and had the #1 SRS in the league. Has a 17.9 PER in the postseason.

1983- The Celtics get swept by the Bucks. The Celtics win 56 games and had the #2 SRS in the league and lose again with HCA. Bird plays awful again. .478 TS%. His PPG average drops 2 PPG in the playoffs. Bird missed a game in the series but that game happened to be the closest one (Celtics lose by 4). In the 3 other games, the Celtics lose by 14.3 PPG with Bird on the court.

1984- Great playoffs. Averaged 27-14-4 in the Finals and had a .607 TS% in the playoffs. First great playoff of his career. Celtics win the title over the Lakers.

1985- Celtics make the finals, but Bird's numbers drop in the playoffs. His PPG drops by 2.8 PPG, Reb by 1.2 Reb, and AST by 0.7 AST. Had an average .536 TS% in the postseason. Bird plays even worse in the finals. His PPG dropped 4.9 PPG, his Reb 1.7 Reb, and AST by 1.6 AST in the finals compared to his regular season average. His Finals TS% is just .527. Not only that, but Celtics finish with 63 wins and lose once again with HCA a constant theme in Bird's career. This is the first time in Celtics history they lost in the finals with HCA.

1986- Great year. His best year ever. Wins the title. .615 TS% in the postseason and amazing finals.

1987- I think this is his most admirable playoffs up until the finals. The Celtics were quite banged up this year. Averaged 27-10-7 in the postseason with .577 TS%. Though his numbers in the finals dropped off once again. His PPG was 3.9 PPG down from the regular season, AST down by 2.1 AST and his TS% was just .534. In game 6, Bird scored just 16 points on 6-16 (.375) shooting. In the final 3 games of this series, Bird averaged just 20 PPG on .377 shooting and .492 TS% with 3.7 TOV. This is the first time Bird has played without HCA in the playoffs and his team loses.

1988- Bird's PPG drops by 5.4 PPG, Reb by 0.5 Reb. Bird shoots an awful 40-114 (.351) against the Pistons. Has a mediocre .538 TS% and 20.2 PER in the playoffs. The Celtics had HCA and the #1 SRS in the league and you probably guessed what happened next, Larry Bird loses with HCA once again.

1989- Injured doesn't play in the postseason.

1990- Bird shoots .539 TS% and has 3.6 TOV as the Celtics once again you guessed it, lose with HCA.

1991- In the first round, his team needs to go 5 vs. the 41 win Pacers. His PPG drop by 2.3 PPG and his Rebounds and Assists also drop quite a bit. Has a .490 TS% 15.8 PER in the playoffs. Against the Pistons Bird averages 13.4 PPG on .446 TS%. His 56 win team played with you guessed it HCA and loses with it.

1992- Doesn't play in the first round as the Celtics sweep the Pacers. In round 2, his team goes 7 against the Cavs, but Bird plays in 4 games and his team was 1-3 in those games. Averages a pathetic 11.3 PPG and 4.5 Reb which are 8.4 PPG and 5.2 Reb down from his regular season average. He has a .514 TS% and 16.4 PER in the postseason.


So out of 12 years, you get 9 years under .540 TS%, 5 under .520 TS%, and 3 under .500 TS%. From 80-83, he had a 19.9 playoff PER. In that span, Johnny Moore, Franklin Edwards, Gus Williams, and Bob Lanier all had better playoff PER and WS/48. Teammates Parish, McHale, Tiny Archibald, and Cedric Maxwell had better TS% in that span. From 88-92, he had a 18.8 PER which is 25th among players with 10 playoff games played. Players who had better playoff PER's in that span include Fat Lever, Terry Cummings, Roy Tarpley, Cedric Ceballos, and Sarunas Marciulionis. His teammates Reggie Lewis and Kevin McHale had better playoff PER's in that span.

With Bird you get a nice 4 year run that had 4 straight finals appearances but outside of that you get a 4 year span of .505 TS% (80-83) and a .525 TS% span (88-92). In 12 years, you get 7 losses with HCA. Basically out of Bird's 13 year career, you have 1 injury season and 3 non-descript postseasons at the end of his plus some playoff disappointments early in his career.

That post still gets quoted? Seriously? :facepalm

1980 - As a rookie, took a team that previously had the 2nd worst record in the league (and falling apart) to the best record in season and the ECF, with basically the same roster and a new coach.. Let's give him shit for that.

1981 - With Cowens gone and adding Parish (who was already 27 and never viewed as much), he led them to a championship. In the ECF, the "real" Finals, they overcame a 3-1 deficit and a majorly outplayed MVP Julius Erving: 26.7/13.4/4.6 on 55.4 %TS vs 19.9/5.9/4.1 on 48.8 %TS.
In the Finals, Cornbread was more consistent and efficient with his scoring but Bird was flat-out better everywhere else, getting most attention, should've gotten FMVP.. Only player to ever average 15+/15+/7+ for a Finals series, almost outrebounded Moses Malone, great playmaker, played really good D, was very clutch in closing game 6 with 27/13/5.

1982 - They almost go to the Finals but yea he was underperforming and average by his standards.

1983 - Like I've said he was injured, so I mean you can't penalize him much for this one, he didn't even play 1 game vs the Bucks.. They got swep without their leader in good conditions, or able to play all-time, give full effort.

1984 - Teammtes majorly underperforming and he took them all the way, leading the team in points, rebounds, assists, steals, FG% and FT%, which is ridiculous.. Playing against some great competition, especially against the stacked Lakers in the Finals. Leading every advanced stat in the post-season. One of the greatest playoff runs ever, simply.

1985 - He suffered an elbow injury during the playoffs, plus also severely injured his right hand in a bar fight prior to the Finals. Bird suffered an injury in Game 4 of the ECF. Like dankok8 said, up until that point he averaged 28.8 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 6.2 apg on 48.5 %FG and 55.7 %TS. Besides Bird would be on a short list of players who could ever be criticized for averaging 24/9/5 against one of the GOAT teams in the finals.

1986 - Great cast around and just leads arguably the GOAT team, destroying everything in sight, playing unreal basketball on a level that very few ever reached. Go watch the 1986 Finals, simply crazy, he was Neo operating in the Matrix.

1987 - Broken down team with no bench, various players suffering from injuries in the playoffs, Bird already with issues, in his 30s playing the most minutes ever in his career.. Still led them to the Finals, after some extremely gruelsome series, especially against the Bad Boys.. Lakers with one of the GOAT teams and an easy path by their standards, they still took them to 6.

1988 - Crazy regular-season but then the back was just giving up on him and he had bone spurs in both feet.. Had to get surgeries in the off-season.

...

Won't even talk much about after 1989 because he was just a shell playing under terrible conditions, and nobody would say he had great longevity, so just holding that stuff against him like that without even saying nothing shows that whoever posted that was just hating and mad because Bird gets ranked 5 all-time. He still managed to have some great playoff moments though.

[ThePhantomCreep]

I don't care what the excuses are....if we are going to make them for Bird...we have to be balanced and make them for Dirk.

I'd prefer that we don't make any excuses, but Bird fans won't like that actually as we've had these talks before.

These notions that Bird in 82 and 83 was a "much" better player than 06 Dirk are just laughable.

Things have just changed and we are hypercritical now about everything...if Durant, for example, shot 45% TS in the 2nd round this year and got swept...he'd be killed for it.

Just the way it is...

With all the FTAs modern players get it would be virtually impossible to shoot a 45 TS%. That's basically what propped up Dirk's percentage in 2006--going to the line nearly 10x per game in a six game series (the 2006 Finals were an abomination all the way around).

What seperates 1983 Bird from Dirk is the rebounding and playmaking. Bird was a 24/11/6 player that year. Even peak Dirk doesn't match that. There's no shame in that though. Dirk is borderline top 20 all-time, whereas peak Bird is almost GOAT-esque in this brilliance.

[DMAVS41]

Whether you like it or not...shooting under 45% TS is pretty bad.

And no, lol, there is a reason why I said the following;

But that isn't enough to pass Bird...like I said above, Bird was just the better player...and even with Bird not playing at his optimal level...he was still just better than Dirk overall.

Nobody is doing it just off one thing at all. But sorry, TS% is just better than only using fg% like some of the Bird fans are doing here...

[Kblaze8855]

Shooting ___ TS is pretty irrelevant.

Larry Bird attempting to go into scoring mode and pile in garbage buckets up 30 points in two games would not mean he played better.

It would mean he shot better which would impress people in 3 decades with no idea what happened.

[DMAVS41]

With all the FTAs modern players get it would be virtually impossible to shoot a 45 TS%. That's basically what propped up Dirk's percentage in 2006--going to the line nearly 10x per game in a six game series (the 2006 Finals were an abomination all the way around).

What seperates 1983 Bird from Dirk is the rebounding and playmaking. Bird was a 24/11/6 player that year. Even peak Dirk doesn't match that. There's no shame in that though. Dirk is borderline top 20 all-time, whereas peak Bird is almost GOAT-esque in this brilliance.

But Bird didn't play close to that good in the playoffs. That's the point. Nobody, at least me, is saying that Dirk was better overall.

But if you compare the 82 and 83 playoffs to Dirk in 06 like you said Dirk was worse...that just isn't true.

You list of bird's great 24/11/6 stats...totally agree that is fantastic. But Bird wasn't that guy in the playoffs;

bird was a 19/13/6 47.5% TS player in 82 and 83 playoffs combined.

Dirk was a 27/12/3 60% TS in the 06 playoffs.

So I'd like to know how Bird was "much" better...especially given the fact that while Bird was getting swept as the favorite in 83 (0-3 in games he played)...losing a game 7 in 82 while having 20/9/11 47% TS...Dirk was upsetting the title favored Spurs and winning a road game 7 while having a 37/15/3 68% TS and making the game saving 3 point play.

Again...how is Bird's 82 and 83 playoffs better than Dirk's 06????

[DMAVS41]

Shooting ___ TS is pretty irrelevant.

Larry Bird attempting to go into scoring mode and pile in garbage buckets up 30 points in two games would not mean he played better.

It would mean he shot better which would impress people in 3 decades with no idea what happened.

Up 30? He lost in 82 and 83...the years and series we are talking about.

What are you talking about?

[jzek]

Bird only lost to Magic... who's only the best PG in history (oh yeah, Magic had KAJ too... who's only one of the top 5 players of all time).

Dirk couldn't even get past the GSW at one point who's best player is some guy who calls himself BDiddy. :facepalm

[mr.big35]

Bird only lost to Magic... who's only the best PG in history.

Dirk couldn't even get past the GSW at one point. :facepalm
but but but according to some advance stats Dirk>Bird in every way.

[D.J.]

Bird. You can argue Dirk is a slightly better scorer, but even then the advantage is minimal. They're about equal in outside shooting, but pretty much everything after that belongs to Bird. Rebounding, passing, playmaking, court vision, intangibles. They both competed in very competitive conferences, but Bird accomplished more given the circumstances. Bird did have stacked teams in Boston, but let's not act like Dirk's teams were terrible.

[Kblaze8855]

Up 30? He lost in 82 and 83...the years and series we are talking about.

What are you talking about?

I assumed you were talking to me...but its obvious what I was talking about.

The very idea of judging Bird by shooting percentages is just absurd.

In the 82 series loss alone...that one series...a series being used against him...

He had as many triple doubles as Dirk has in 16 years...

In this down series...he is being hated on for...

24/15/10
18/14/4
15/13/11
17/9/5
20/20/8
14/17/4
20/11/9

3 games had 30 point leads as well. One was a 40 point win.

So not only are we left to judge a guy by numbers in games half of which are massive blowouts so we dont know what was in a 2 point game and what was in a 36 point game making no difference....

We are including in the averages you gave out earlier games for which...we dont even have the complete stats. Much of it is just newspaper clippings which are incomplete. No steals or block numbers in several. Some just shooting numbers and no rebounds or assists...

So...its not enough to say Dirk was better in losing in 06 and base it largely off TS%....ignoring that Bird was among the greatest all around players ever....

We do the comparison based off nothing but numbers....and ignore that we dont even have all of Birds numbers....

You really have to kinda let go of the numbers at that point dont you?

The idea that Larry Bird was the GOAT in 1981 wasnt unheard of(Jerry sloan claimed it after a series vs the Celtics). By 83 it wouldnt even have been unusual to hear.

But we judge that guy...Bird in his prime....to be worse than 06 Dirk...due largely to shooting numbers....from games we dont even have full numbers.

Having watched him....you cant really even judge Larry Bird by the games we have his numbers. He wasnt that guy. And even if we tried...we have to look way past scoring numbers.

I watched some of the games in question and dont remember a damn thing. I was no doubt in front of a tv...but I dont remember it clearly. Shit I dont remember many exact details of say...the Hawks/Magic series a few years ago.

But we are going back 30 years judging Larry Bird off incomplete stats and TS%....

Too much reliance on shit that we barely even have record of.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzdsY9G1-sY


That game is over in the second quarter. Bird helps his team go up big.

30 years later we factor in poor 8-19 shooting with no threes into his 20/20/8 night with solid defense and a blowout win and what....act like he had a bad night? Not that great a night?

An inefficient night? Perhaps not looked at alone...but factored into series shooting numbers while we shine less of a light on his all around production...

Too much of the performances are lost in the mist to even really get into it and act like its fair. Especially to someone so famously well rounded.

[DMAVS41]

I assumed you were talking to me...but its obvious what I was talking about.

The very idea of judging Bird by shooting percentages is just absurd.

In the 82 series loss alone...that one series...a series being used against him...

He had as many triple doubles as Dirk has in 16 years...

In this down series...he is being hated on for...

24/15/10
18/14/4
15/13/11
17/9/5
20/20/8
14/17/4
20/11/9

3 games had 30 point leads as well. One was a 40 point win.

So not only are we left to judge a guy by numbers in games half of which are massive blowouts so we dont know what was in a 2 point game and what was in a 36 point game making no difference....

We are including in the averages you gave out earlier games for which...we dont even have the complete stats. Much of it is just newspaper clippings which are incomplete. No steals or block numbers in several. Some just shooting numbers and no rebounds or assists...

So...its not enough to say Dirk was better in losing in 06 and base it largely off TS%....ignoring that Bird was among the greatest all around players ever....

We do the comparison based off nothing but numbers....and ignore that we dont even have all of Birds numbers....

You really have to kinda let go of the numbers at that point dont you?

The idea that Larry Bird was the GOAT in 1981 wasnt unheard of(Jerry sloan claimed it after a series vs the Celtics). By 83 it wouldnt even have been unusual to hear.

But we judge that guy...Bird in his prime....to be worse than 06 Dirk...due largely to shooting numbers....from games we dont even have full numbers.

Having watched him....you cant really even judge Larry Bird by the games we have his numbers. He wasnt that guy. And even if we tried...we have to look way past scoring numbers.

I watched some of the games in question and dont remember a damn thing. I was no doubt in front of a tv...but I dont remember it clearly. Shit I dont remember many exact details of say...the Hawks/Magic series a few years ago.

But we are going back 30 years judging Larry Bird off incomplete stats and TS%....

Too much reliance on shit that we barely even have record of.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzdsY9G1-sY


That game is over in the second quarter. Bird helps his team go up big.

30 years later we factor in poor 8-19 shooting with no threes into his 20/20/8 night with solid defense and a blowout win and what....act like he had a bad night? Not that great a night?

An inefficient night? Perhaps not looked at alone...but factored into series shooting numbers while we shine less of a light on his all around production...

Too much of the performances are lost in the mist to even really get into it and act like its fair. Especially to someone so famously well rounded.


Does a triple double make one better? I could use the exact same argument right back at you.

And for those that didn't see some series (I saw both the 82 and 83 playoffs)...stats are used as objective measures of how well a player played.

Are they perfect? Of course not, but it's a lot better than someone coming on here and acting like Bird in 82 and 83 in the playoffs was playing basketball at a higher level than Dirk was in the 06 playoffs.

You are totally straw manning here, as usual, nobody is claiming that a 20/20/8 night in a win on 8 of 19 shooting...is bad.

I'm simply using everything. Watching the games...and looking at stats. And I'm not seeing any solid arguments that Bird was playing better than Dirk in the years we mentioned.

And scoring efficiency absolutely is a key thing to playing well...more important for Dirk than it is Bird. But everyone builds that in already...it's why you see Bird universally ranked higher than Dirk.

On your logic...you would see plenty of people taking Dirk because he scored more ppg and had a better scoring efficiency than Bird in the playoffs.

But you don't see Dirk on top 5 GOAT lists...so people are doing exactly what you are arguing for...so again I don't see the point.

Dirk 06 > Bird 82 and 83 in the playoffs

Eye test, stats, results...etc. Just the way it is...

It matters how well these players actually play...as it should. And Dirk simply played better in the 06 playoffs overall than Bird did in 82 and 83.

[houston]

bird wayyyyyyyyy more clutch

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Not a fan of TS% and this is why...

In Bird's era 3 point shooting wasn't the norm.. What a foul is today ain't necessarily one in the 80s or early 90s.. point being, it's hard to crunch efficiency numbers when you have two different play styles.

Again, I'm all for comparing players.. but using a stat without context isn't something I can subscribe to.

[Kblaze8855]

I dont think you have ever much cared how well anyone actually played as much as what the numbers you choose to value suggest. People concerning themselves with "How well these players actually play" dont spout off about TS% on shots taken that had nothing to do with who won or lost in games with 45 point leads. Nor do they act like a player widely known to be able to play well without shooting at all is judged by shooting numbers. I suspect they also wouldnt throw together series averages from series...without full numbers...

You're talking incomplete numbers to begin with, deciding to favor the numbers you choose, ignoring that the numbers you favor make secondary very key elements of one persons game, and then call it overall play...

You can generally tell who is a star and played well by averages.

You cant make concrete statements like ____ simply played better 25 years apart with incomplete stats when even complete stats never captured the game of even everyday players...much less the game of Larry Bird.

Take 60 seconds of basketball playing(about what stats record) we saw some of 30 years ago and use it to judge a guy whos production never touched his play....

But we are talking about actual overall play....

I rarely even see you mention an aspect of basketball that isnt shooting. A huge number of your discussions seem to end up being such and such shot ____.

I saw you mentioned that you use the most facts on ISH. And that may be. Largely because facts dont require much in the way of explanation. Which doesnt mean I think you know nothing about the game...it means I feel you dont attempt to discuss it.

You may know the game inside and out. But I can remember few times you made a point that wasnt some number you could post if you never watched the sport.

I kinda wonder what you would say if I asked you about the best entry passers you ever saw...who were not point guards(coincidentally...its probably Larry Bird)

Id actually like to discuss something with you one day...that you couldnt reduce to some number.

Just to see how it goes.

You never said anything I felt was like....so absurd basketball wise that I dont think you even watched the people in question. Its never like...._____ is a great post defender when he isnt. Its more like "___ had a 49TS%" and thats it...when I watched the guy take 3 long buzzer beating threes and miss all 3 and miss 2 rushed shots down 10 with 30 seconds to go. Im left wondering....did he not watch it or does he not care that the basketball playing is not reflected in that number?

Id love to hear who you thought the best scorer you ever saw was....with your number keys disabled.

Anyway....gone to Papa Johns.

Enjoy your night ISH.

[DMAVS41]

Nah, it's about what the numbers represent.

While Bird was hobbling through a 2nd round series in 83...seeing his team getting swept...playing poorly in 82 at times while his team gets blown out in a home game 7...

Dirk was nearly matching prime Duncan blow for blow in a series...coming up huge in the 2nd half of the series to a tune of (well, we won't even list the numbers)....putting up an all timer road game 7...etc.

Dropping 50 on the Suns in a crucial game 5...etc.

I don't need "stats"....it was obvious Dirk was playing the game at a higher level in the 06 playoffs overall than Bird did in 82 and 83. But without any objective measures, it allows people to say things like...."Dirk's 06 was much worse than Bird's 83"...where do you go from there if you can't reference anything concrete. It's just a back and forth about straight up opinion. Like you asking me how many triple doubles Dirk has had....you do realize that you are invoking stats there...right? That you clearly value assists more than efficiency in some way by saying that. And that is fine, but don't act like it's any different.


I don't think you ever really care how players play...you just form an opinion early on about a player...and then no matter what happens...you say;

"i knew that was going to happen"

But there is a difference between having the ability to do something and actually doing it...

So while it's abundantly clear to me that Bird was simply on another level than Dirk as a player, and we don't need stats for that, it's also clear to me that Dirk, at times, played the game at a higher level than Bird did.

And 82/83 vs 06 in the playoffs would be one of those times.

Best scorer I ever saw? Jordan or Durant
Best entry passer besides guards? Probably Bird actually.


Like I said above, what you are asking...almost everyone already does...and of course I do it. Which is why I don't rank Dirk over Bird. If I was just a slave to efficiency and ppg...i wouldn't rank Magic 3rd all time, Duncan 4th all time, Russell 2nd all time...on and on down the list.

Sometimes players do not play up to their ability. And I think you really have a hard time seeing that. You just think a player is who they are after a couple seasons and once your opinion is formed...no need to re adjust really regardless of what happens. It's faulty reasoning and it doesn't distinguish between the ability to do something and actually doing something in a variety of circumstances.

So when you compare directly a playoff year like 82 Bird vs 06 Dirk...how they actually play the game matters. And we don't need stats, but stats are great because they can remove total bs from the equation. And if one really thinks that 82 Bird, for example, was better against the sixers than Dirk was against the Spurs....then it's needed to invoke some kind of objective measure to show them why that conclusion is so faulty.

Also, all the things you say about stats are true...they aren't perfect. But that is why you can look at certain things. You can look at how players perform in losses, in close games, in blowouts...etc. You can look at all of the stuff...I'm all for it. I think you see "stats" and just assume it's this limited points and fg% thing and that's it. It isn't.

For example, I think Magic Johnson is probably the best overall offensive player I've ever seen. Now, I missed some players like early 70's Kareem and before that, but Magic was the best I've seen. Now...I go look at individual offensive rating and I see Magic is right up there all time...best ever in the playoffs. If Magic was, for example, like not in the top 100...I'd really be forced to re-think my conclusion.

It's like the rapm stuff that you go on and on about with Amir Johnson being ranked over Kobe. You say you understand the stat and how it works...so assuming that...you just show I guess why you think stats are over-rated. You would never compare Amir to Kobe...that isn't how that metric works. You have to compare guys playing similar roles...or at least some semblance of that. Comparing a guy like Kobe to Amir Johnson just makes no sense. But then you do that as evidence it's not worth anything...but then you also say you know how it works. So I really have a hard time taking you seriously about some of this stuff....someone that knows how rapm works would not go on about how player x playing a completely different role is ranked over player y playing a completely different role and conclude it invalidates the metric. I just think there seems to be a profound ignorance on your part when it comes to some of this stuff....and I'm not sure why we can't just use everything. We can talk about how Bird was able to do the little things while also scoring at a near 25 ppg clip. How he was one of the best tough shot makers ever, how he was a great entry passer like you said, how his toughness exuded itself on to the rest of the team...how he could split a double in the post and nearly always find a guy for an open shot a layup...making doubling him laughably stupid at times in his prime. We can talk about all that stuff. But we also have to talk about the impact of players as well. It's not like Bird forgot how to play basketball in 82 and 83...he just didn't play that well...everyone knew it at the time in the playoffs. Nobody was walking away from watching the Bucks series thinking...damn Bird was amazing overall in that series. I mean, maybe some were...and even not playing great Bird was still amazing, but you get my point.

I just really don't think this stuff is that complicated...or not as complicated as you make it out to be . There isn't some fundamental issue between watching the game and stats. It's about using as much information as we have...

I don't think you understand or give credit to just how different everyone view the games when we watch. That we all are drawn at least to some part more than others. That we all are biased whether we like it or not. You obviously, by your posts, favor all around play over efficiency. Lets say I favor significantly better efficiency than all around play. Okay...so where do we go from there? You'll be talking about Bird's triple doubles...and I won't care because I'd rather have a guy shooting 15% TS from the field in the playoffs over a guy that gives you like a handful more assists and a couple more rebounds on 6 less ppg or something. In a vacuum I say this...as Bird was a solid defender, but not a game changer...which would be what I would need to favor the all around play here.

You see my point? Just because you value all around play more means nothing. Just because I value efficient scoring more...means nothing. And when we watch the games...those biases are amplified as we are drawn to those things. It's why I probably think Durant is better than you. Probably why you most likely think Pippen is better than I do. And honestly, as you've already admitted that you watch bits and pieces of roughly half the games of players at most...I just don't see how that is enough information to draw the conclusions that you do. It's not nearly enough information without looking at the numbers. Stats are just a record of what happened....that is all.

It would be better if we just get youtube up video of every single game and post that...but we can't actually do that or we'd have no free time even if it was possible.

But I'd love to hear how Bird in the 82 and 83 playoffs was playing the game of basketball at a higher level than Dirk did in 06. Just don't talk about what Bird could do...talk about what he did do. Because those things happened....and that is what me and the other guy were debating. Not what Bird could do...how he actually played in the game 7 against the Sixers...how Dirk actually played in that game 7 against the Spurs...etc.

[tpols]

But Bird didn't play close to that good in the playoffs. That's the point. Nobody, at least me, is saying that Dirk was better overall.

But if you compare the 82 and 83 playoffs to Dirk in 06 like you said Dirk was worse...that just isn't true.

You list of bird's great 24/11/6 stats...totally agree that is fantastic. But Bird wasn't that guy in the playoffs;

bird was a 19/13/6 47.5% TS player in 82 and 83 playoffs combined.

Dirk was a 27/12/3 60% TS in the 06 playoffs.

So I'd like to know how Bird was "much" better...especially given the fact that while Bird was getting swept as the favorite in 83 (0-3 in games he played)...losing a game 7 in 82 while having 20/9/11 47% TS...Dirk was upsetting the title favored Spurs and winning a road game 7 while having a 37/15/3 68% TS and making the game saving 3 point play.

Again...how is Bird's 82 and 83 playoffs better than Dirk's 06????

Why are you guys comparing some of birds worst playoff runs to one of dirks best?

[DMAVS41]

Why are you guys comparing some of birds worst playoff runs to one of dirks best?

Because the claim was made that Dirk was worse in 06 than Bird was in 82 and 83...in the playoffs....maybe it was just 83. Can't remember.

Check the earlier posts.

I'm not arguing for Dirk over Bird. I'm not doing that at all.

Someone said that Bird's 83 was better than Dirk's 06...and then apparently we can't using anything objective to make the case because Bird is a better all around player.

Which of course he is, but it doesn't change the fact that he wasn't his norm those years.


Which is why this shit is just funny. Anyone around in 82 and 83 would admit that Bird was not very good or at least below his normal self in the 82 playoffs...and then they'll readily admit he wasn't good in 83, but that he was hurt....nobody that watched those series would say Bird played as well as 06 Dirk in the playoffs...nobody.

And that is all I've said.

[Rik Smits' Hair]

Larry and it's not close.

[gin17]

you always go with bird