Larry Bird Had 4 Seasons Shooting under 29% from 3 Point Range

[Bless Mathews]

:biggums:

Years 2-5 bird too.

Not broken back years bird.

That's bad.

21% in 81-82. horrible.

Overrated shooter????

[Kvnzhangyay]

Meh he's a great shooter but certainly overrated on this board

[TheMilkyBarKid]

How's it compared to league average at the time?
I know threes are shot with greater frequency today and subsequently are probably worked on more.

[ottooooooo]

people like him cuz hes white

[bigkingsfan]

He only took 52 3's.

[Bless Mathews]

people like him cuz hes white
Word.

[Bless Mathews]

He only took 52 3's.
Ok. Great.

Should have made 20.

[kentatm]

the NBA didn't add the 3 point line until 79 and NCAA didn't have it nationally until 1986.

It took several years for most NBA teams to take the shot seriously.

Why would anyone be instantly good at a shot that nobody used in their league up until then?

[Meticode]

:biggums:

Years 2-5 bird too.

Not broken back years bird.

That's bad.

21% in 81-82. horrible.

Overrated shooter????
Shooting three pointers isn't the only facet of being a great shooter. He hurt you more inside the line than outside it.

During those years it wasn't his job to shoot three point shots. And amazing, even with those horrible percentages you mentioned, he shot 38% from three for his career. Over 40% for 6 seasons.

[Smoke117]

the NBA didn't add the 3 point line until 79 and NCAA didn't have it nationally until 1986.

It took several years for most NBA teams to take the shot seriously.

Why would anyone be instantly good at a shot that nobody used in their league up until then?


That actually makes sense but this stupid c-nt OP clearly hasn't taken up any kind reasoning.

[Hizack]

[code]Season Bird's 3P% League Average Bird's 3PA/G League Average
80

[Meticode]

[QUOTE=Hizack][code]Season Bird's 3P% League Average Bird's 3PA/G League Average
80

[BigTicket]

Richard Jefferson and Cuttino Mobley both have more career 3pointers and a higher career 3pt % than Bird. Jodie Meeks and Nick Young are on track to pass him next year.

[Meticode]

Richard Jefferson and Cuttino Mobley both have more career 3pointers and a higher career 3pt % than Bird. Jodie Meeks and Nick Young are on track to pass him next year.
Did any of those players shoot almost 50% from the field like Bird? When the clock is ticking and there's 10 seconds to go, who do you want shooting the ball?

[Hizack]

[code]Season Bird's 3P% League Average
79

[BigTicket]

Did any of those players shoot almost 50% from the field like Bird? When the clock is ticking and there's 10 seconds to go, who do you want shooting the ball?

Obviously I'm not saying those guys are better overall than Bird, I was just pointing out that this is one aspect of the game where the league is much better now.

[TheMilkyBarKid]

Thread backfire! What's with uneducated fools hating on Larry legend?

[chocolatethunder]

:biggums:

Years 2-5 bird too.

Not broken back years bird.

That's bad.

21% in 81-82. horrible.

Overrated shooter????
What you're really pointing out is that it was still new to the league and wasn't utilized the same way as it is now. Bird was learning the shot and after he did, he shot a great percentage. He didn't shoot it in college. So he learned on the job like any other great does. Now you have kids coming up who are shooting deep threes starting in middle school. That didn't exist back then but you didn't know that because you didn't exist back then either. There was a very simple answer to the OT yet somehow you wanted to twist it to fit some agenda. Sorry, but it didn't work.

[GimmeThat]

must took him 4 years to catch up on basketball IQ to learn that even if a 3 point shot is worth 1 point more than a 2 pointer, he still needs to have a high percentage before he just hoisting up those shots.

I would have benched him.


Don't know about you guys.




I guess he might bench me for the fact that he rarely even took them

[Rake2204]

the NBA didn't add the 3 point line until 79 and NCAA didn't have it nationally until 1986.

It took several years for most NBA teams to take the shot seriously.

Why would anyone be instantly good at a shot that nobody used in their league up until then?Quoted for its significant level of truth. The three-pointer was almost treated like a circus shot in the 80's. I'd have to go back and re-read the article, but I believe Sports Illustrated just had a piece stating that during the 1986 Finals (actually, I think it was earlier), only three 3-pointers were attempted over the course of the series.

Further, speaking from experience, I think it's going to be especially tough to develop any sort of rhythm when a player's shooting less than one three pointer per game. Putting oneself in those shoes, imagine coming out to the gym every day and only getting one three point attempt. What might your percentage look like after, say, 70 days? In contrast, if given a significant volume of attempts per day, might that percentage increase with the ability to develop a groove of sorts (similar to how Bird's percentage jumped as he began to increase his attempts)?

[Dro]

What you're really pointing out is that it was still new to the league and wasn't utilized the same way as it is now. Bird was learning the shot and after he did, he shot a great percentage. He didn't shoot it in college. So he learned on the job like any other great does. Now you have kids coming up who are shooting deep threes starting in middle school. That didn't exist back then but you didn't know that because you didn't exist back then either. There was a very simple answer to the OT yes somehow you wanted to twist it to fit some agenda. Sorry, but it didn't work.
:applause:

[ZMonkey11]

the NBA didn't add the 3 point line until 79 and NCAA didn't have it nationally until 1986.

It took several years for most NBA teams to take the shot seriously.

Why would anyone be instantly good at a shot that nobody used in their league up until then?

:applause:

[fandarko]

must took him 4 years to catch up on basketball IQ to learn that even if a 3 point shot is worth 1 point more than a 2 pointer, he still needs to have a high percentage before he just hoisting up those shots.

I would have benched him.


Don't know about you guys.




I guess he might bench me for the fact that he rarely even took them

You must be very young and probably didn't watch Bird live.

Benched him? He was one of the top players in the league coming from college. A 6-10 guy who could rebound, score, pass and play defense, who propelled his team to greatness after a period of mediocrity.

Back then, as people point out, the three point shot was seldom used, because the game was different. There were no stretch fours jacking up shots from all over the court, you had to feed your big men inside, people posted up more, etc.

Rolando Blackman was one of the best shooters ever, but he made his damage mostly within the 3 point line. Ten years later, he would have probably shot the 3 more.

Bird basically played like Dirk the last couple of seasons (when he was actally more effective than while he was shooting more often from three). He would kill people inside, back to the basket, from 20 feet, head fakes, penetrations, passing...

He didn't need to jack to many threes. I he wanted to, he could have.

[SHAQisGOAT]

:facepalm

He didn't come up with the 3pt line (or the rest of the league), it was only introduced when he was 22 and already in the pros, think that means nothing?? :rolleyes:
He still managed to shoot 40+% 6 times, shooting like 3 per game; still to this day he's 2nd in most consecutive shots made in the 3pt contest and 3rd with the most points in the final round..... All of that is great EVEN by today's standards, and that's while having to "learn" the 3pt line, with an injured/crooked index finger on his shooting hand since his 1st year, and with career ending injuries in his last years.
He stayed always at the top in terms of % and attempts, and even with those 4 seasons he's still a 38% career shooter from behind the arc. And he was a superstar getting most attention and plenty of times having to shoot contested 3's.

Furthermore, you must be dumb af to think that shooting is all about the 3pt shot, Larry was a terrific overall shooter, arguably the GOAT, he could hurt you from anywhere in any way... Looking at his prime %'s and his playing style you know he had to be cracking that 50% mark from mid-range while taking lots of them, plus he's a 89% career shooter at the FT line, and was at 90% in his prime. He's the player with most points scored per game while on the 50/40/90 club. Not to mention that he had a great post-game, a tremendous touch from close with both hands, great footwork to create his own shot, could get the shot off in any situation, and could also bang and finish inside.

Stop reaching and acting stupid.




Shooting three pointers isn't the only facet of being a great shooter. He hurt you more inside the line than outside it.

During those years it wasn't his job to shoot three point shots. And amazing, even with those horrible percentages you mentioned, he shot 38% from three for his career. Over 40% for 6 seasons.


the NBA didn't add the 3 point line until 79 and NCAA didn't have it nationally until 1986.

It took several years for most NBA teams to take the shot seriously.

Why would anyone be instantly good at a shot that nobody used in their league up until then?



Season Bird's 3P% League Average Bird's 3PA/G League Average
80–81 27.0% 24.5% 0.9 2.0
81–82 21.2% 26.2% 0.7 2.3
82–83 28.6% 23.8% 1 2.3
83–84 24.7% 25.0% 0.9 2.4

Comparing to the league average at that time it wasn't that bad at all, and not to mention in those 4 seasons Bird attempted 0.87 3-pointers per game, while in other seasons averaged 2.50 per game. Only mentioning those 4 seasons' stats is just an act of cherry-picking.


Did any of those players shoot almost 50% from the field like Bird? When the clock is ticking and there's 10 seconds to go, who do you want shooting the ball?



Season Bird's 3P% League Average
79–80 40.6% 28.0%
84–85 42.7% 28.2%
85–86 42.3% 28.2%
86–87 40.0% 30.1%
87–88 41.4% 31.6%
88–89 N/A 32.3%
89–90 33.3% 33.1%
90–91 38.9% 32.0%
91–92 40.6% 33.1%

Overall 39.8% 31.5%
If you take away his 4 seasons and look at his other seasons his 3P% numbers are superior, even in today's standard and let alone the fact that the 3P% numbers in the 80's are uglier than now. It's cherry-picking to just focus on his those 4 seasons.


Thread backfire! What's with uneducated fools hating on Larry legend?


What you're really pointing out is that it was still new to the league and wasn't utilized the same way as it is now. Bird was learning the shot and after he did, he shot a great percentage. He didn't shoot it in college. So he learned on the job like any other great does. Now you have kids coming up who are shooting deep threes starting in middle school. That didn't exist back then but you didn't know that because you didn't exist back then either. There was a very simple answer to the OT yes somehow you wanted to twist it to fit some agenda. Sorry, but it didn't work.



Further, speaking from experience, I think it's going to be especially tough to develop any sort of rhythm when a player's shooting less than one three pointer per game. Putting oneself in those shoes, imagine coming out to the gym every day and only getting one three point attempt. What might your percentage look like after, say, 70 days? In contrast, if given a significant volume of attempts per day, might that percentage increase with the ability to develop a groove of sorts (similar to how Bird's percentage jumped as he began to increase his attempts)?


You must be very young and probably didn't watch Bird live.

Benched him? He was one of the top players in the league coming from college. A 6-10 guy who could rebound, score, pass and play defense, who propelled his team to greatness after a period of mediocrity.

Back then, as people point out, the three point shot was seldom used, because the game was different. There were no stretch fours jacking up shots from all over the court, you had to feed your big men inside, people posted up more, etc.

Rolando Blackman was one of the best shooters ever, but he made his damage mostly within the 3 point line. Ten years later, he would have probably shot the 3 more.

Bird basically played like Dirk the last couple of seasons (when he was actally more effective than while he was shooting more often from three). He would kill people inside, back to the basket, from 20 feet, head fakes, penetrations, passing...

He didn't need to jack to many threes. I he wanted to, he could have.

:applause: :applause:




Quoted for its significant level of truth. The three-pointer was almost treated like a circus shot in the 80's. I'd have to go back and re-read the article, but I believe Sports Illustrated just had a piece stating that during the 1986 Finals (actually, I think it was earlier), only three 3-pointers were attempted over the course of the series.


True. Can't seem to find out what Finals that's supposed to be though, since the 1st Finals with the 3pt line both teams always attempted over 10 3's, combined.. probably talking about makes (1980 and 1983)? :confusedshrug: Certainly not 1986, Bird alone shot 17.

[GimmeThat]

You must be very young and probably didn't watch Bird live.


He didn't need to jack to many threes. I he wanted to, he could have.

Why didn't he? he went 0.7/1.7 in his rookie year over .400 clips.

I can't sit here and tell you Kevin Love is a great post up player until he performs in the game.

Nor can I tell you that he is a great post up player if he wanted to if his FG% isn't great posting up.


I'm genuinely intrigued, since the stats doesn't make sense. Unless he saved a circus shot of one 3 point attempt every game just for kicks and giggle. But then, his rookie year % contracdicts with that statement, unless he enjoyed missing.

It appears that he worked on his 2 point game after his rookie year, then worked on the 3 when he was moved to the SF position.

[GimmeThat]

:
Furthermore, you must be dumb af to think that shooting is all about the 3pt shot,

Stop reaching and acting stupid.


It's not.

But I don't know how many people are making the argument that Michael Jordan is a better 3 point shooter than Kobe Bryant.

I'm certain there are some. And would not be surprised if you agree with them.

But hey, whose to say Michael isn't a great shooter.

[dubeta]

This confirms LeBron > Bird

Better stats, more efficient scoring, better defense, same FMVPs, more MVPs, better advanced stats (PER, win shares)

Did this with 4 years with a great team instead of 12 like Bird

Since Bird is unanimously Top 6 then LeBron is confirmed Top 5

[jstern]

I once created a thread about Bird and this topic that got deleted by a mod.

Basically I was showing that the most 3s a player takes, the better his percentage. For example Jordan, in 1990 he took more 3s than all previous 5 season combined and shot .376. That's better than all but one of Kobe's 17 years in the league, not counting his rookie season because that was with the short line.

I don't know how you can look at those stats and come to the conclusion that Bird sucked for threes. It's basically, "Let me choose these 4 seasons where Bird shot horribly, and let me represent his ability, because that makes me feel the most comfortable, because I don't like him."

With that type of denial mentality, a person doesn't even consider that since the 3 pointer wasn't part of his game back then, a good portion of those 3s were going to be desperation bailout shots.

[MellowYellow]

very overrated 3 pt shooter, maybe in todays nba he would be great but he isnt.
and he shouldnt get credit for something that he didnt do. He is what he is, a fantastic player that can hit a 3 every once in a while. But he shouldnt have a higher 3pt rating than guys that shoot many 3s at high volume on a good percentage like melo durant and curry

[GimmeThat]

I once created a thread about Bird and this topic that got deleted by a mod.

Basically I was showing that the most 3s a player takes, the better his percentage. For example Jordan, in 1990 he took more 3s than all previous 5 season combined and shot .376. That's better than all but one of Kobe's 17 years in the league, not counting his rookie season because that was with the short line.



I think what you are trying to say is that when a player factors the 3point shot into their game plan /arsenal IN game, their percentages goes up, because where as before, they are taking the shot because they are put in the position to shoot it due to the system.

I guess we can translate that into "we make more of the shots we like taking/know will be taking, then the shots we are forced taking, taking for others"

[GimmeThat]

very overrated 3 pt shooter, maybe in todays nba he would be great but he isnt.
and he shouldnt get credit for something that he didnt do. He is what he is, a fantastic player that can hit a 3 every once in a while. But he shouldnt have a higher 3pt rating than guys that shoot many 3s at high volume like melo durant and curry

besides the fact a 3 point shot was 1.5 times of that of a 2 point shot. With his height, I wonder if he really understood the importance of shooting the 3 in terms of his own personal repertoire.

[fpliii]

Pretty underrated as a shooter. Remember, Fitch didn't want his players taking the shot, so a ton of his attempts are probably bailouts at the end of quarters or with the shot clock running low. Jones wasn't a huge fan either, but he wasn't as strongly opposed.

[Derka]

Pretty underrated as a shooter. Remember, Fitch didn't want his players taking the shot, so a ton of his attempts are probably bailouts at the end of quarters or with the shot clock running low. Jones wasn't a huge fan either, but he wasn't as strongly opposed.

Yeah, none of these cats supporting the OP's line of logic watched Bird play. Most of them just ran to Wikipedia to look up Bill Fitch and this "Jones" they've never heard of. Waste of a thread.

[jzek]

Post basketball reference otherwise I don't believe this. How can Larry Legend shoot under 30% from three when his name is synonymous with the 3-point shot?!?! :wtf:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ut_NlG2-WIQ

[iamgine]

With that little sample, you need to remove the desperation shots at the end of quarters/games to get a more accurate picture.

[navy]

Pretty underrated as a shooter.
:biggums:

Dont let one thread fool you. Bird is not underrated as a shooter.

[jstern]

I think what you are trying to say is that when a player factors the 3point shot into their game plan /arsenal IN game, their percentages goes up, because where as before, they are taking the shot because they are put in the position to shoot it due to the system.

I guess we can translate that into "we make more of the shots we like taking/know will be taking, then the shots we are forced taking, taking for others"

What I'm basically saying is that you build a rhythm the more threes you take. A second point is that since the three wasn't part of his game, he's going to also have a higher percentage of the 3s he made be bailout, desperation shots and that's also a factor.

[Bless Mathews]

Whoa. Whoa.

First off, I seen bird play.

I didn't like him, but I know he's one of the goat.

I was watching the bird vs magic special on nba tv and looked at his stats and noticed it.

Was surprised. Why I put the Tyrone icon.

All this type about finding out about it though, it was 5 years.

Not a season or two, but 5 whole years. Smh.

There has to be other factors. Bottom line is for 5 years and about 300 shots ( big enough sample size) he was horrible from 3.

I was shocked.

I saw him personally rain threes against my team from the bench.


Smh

[dgaras]

maybe some of you should read the thread before posting. posters already explained why his % was low

[SHAQisGOAT]

Pretty underrated as a shooter. Remember, Fitch didn't want his players taking the shot, so a ton of his attempts are probably bailouts at the end of quarters or with the shot clock running low. Jones wasn't a huge fan either, but he wasn't as strongly opposed.


Yup..

I can also do a thread stating that:

LARRY BIRD HAD 6 SEASONS SHOOTING OVER 40% FROM 3 POINT RANGE!

... even reached 43% once, at his best was shooting around 3 attempts, was a superstar getting most attention and shot plenty of contested ones, with most points per game while in the 50/40/90 club, still 2nd in most consecutive makes in the 3pt contest, still 4th for most points in the final round

... and that's while coming up without the 3pt line, in a league that didn't emphasize it, while entering the league with an injured/crooked index finger on his right hand, even counting years when he was playing with career ending injuries.

:rolleyes:

[KnicksWolves]

He took less than one 3 a game during those seasons. :facepalm

[Dragonyeuw]

Wow, players didn't shoot 3's so well in the early 80s when it was just introduced, compared to today where the 3pointer has been a part of the game for 30 years.

http://graphicashen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/mind-blown.jpg

[chocolatethunder]

Whoa. Whoa.

First off, I seen bird play.

I didn't like him, but I know he's one of the goat.

I was watching the bird vs magic special on nba tv and looked at his stats and noticed it.

Was surprised. Why I put the Tyrone icon.

All this type about finding out about it though, it was 5 years.

Not a season or two, but 5 whole years. Smh.

There has to be other factors. Bottom line is for 5 years and about 300 shots ( big enough sample size) he was horrible from 3.

I was shocked.

I saw him personally rain threes against my team from the bench.


Smh
This has to be one of the stupidest posts ever and that's saying a lot for this board. "There has to be other factors". Your English, like your reasoning, is superb. Let's see, he shot 88% from the line and 50% from 2 for his career. The 3pt shot was new to him and it was still new to the league. Lots of coaches thought of it as a gimmick. He wasn't hoisting 10 3s a game. He's easliy one of the best shooters of all time in spite of your agenda. Hell, I'm a Sixer fan and a Bird hater but I can tell you that. Please go make some more stupid posts somewhere else.

[chocolatethunder]

Why don't you re read my op fakkit.

I was surprised. Poised a question

Learn the basics of English communication.

And tell me , once again, if all this "three point shot was new and a gimmick", why DId he have double the attempts his rookie year than any of his next 4???????

Dumb fuccs.

But reasoning was "coaches thought it was a gimmick" blah blah blah. But he took double rookie year. Doesn't that blow that logic out the water???

Smh.

Read sh1t for brains. I was surprised. Smh.

It's "posed a question" you moron. You should learn the basics of English communication. Of course you were surprised because you're an idiot and can't logically deduce why this might happen. Ok well he shot 40% his first year taking 1.7 3s a game. You can't see how that would be possible? He has great mechanics and shot well his first year. The next year he shot worse because he didn't think the 3pt shot was something he needed to work on and he took less than one 3 a game which in turn resulted in a drop in percentage. Maybe he was guarded tighter at the 3pt line because he had shot 40% largely uncontested his first year. As a result, over the course of the next several years he refined his 3pt shooting. Is it that difficult to figure that out on your own?

[Bless Mathews]

It's "posed a question" you moron. You should learn the basics of English communication. Of course you were surprised because you're an idiot and can't logically deduce why this might happen. Ok well he shot 40% his first year taking 1.7 3s a game. You can't see how that would be possible? He has great mechanics and shot well his first year. The next year he shot worse because he didn't think the 3pt shot was something he needed to work on and he took less than one 3 a game which in turn resulted in a drop in percentage. Maybe he was guarded tighter at the 3pt line because he had shot 40% largely uncontested his first year. As a result, over the course of the next several years he refined his 3pt shooting. Is it that difficult to figure that out on your own?
Hahahaha

You're an idiot.

Mr know it all. You in Larry's head?

Fool. You know what he was thinking? Hahahaha

Fuccin moron.

Refined ? Hahagaha. Usually that means when you need to improve. He was doing BETTER on more attempts his first year , you fuccin idiot.

Smh.

GTFO.

[1987_Lakers]

Didn't Bird win 3 straight 3 point shootouts?:oldlol:

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Players in that time didnt grow up shooting 3s like they do now.

[chocolatethunder]

Hahahaha

You're an idiot.

Mr know it all. You in Larry's head?

Fool. You know what he was thinking? Hahahaha

Fuccin moron.

Refined ? Hahagaha. Usually that means when you need to improve. He was doing BETTER on more attempts his first year , you fuccin idiot.

Smh.

GTFO.
People do better on more attempts all the time. Look at Tim Duncan's FT %. Or Ray Allen's 3pt shooting. In his first six years he shot his highest % of that time when he took the most shots. Refined? Yes refined. Good, even great players refine aspects of their game all the time. So yeah when you're the best you are constantly refining things in order to remain the best. Do you think that once he shot 90% from the line he decided to stop trying to get better? You sir, are an idiot.

[Hands of Iron]

people like him cuz hes white

You know, that actually is sort of a bonus. :lol I'd even call him the GOAT white boy sportsman considering the particular field he dominated but actually No: His skill set is much more appealing than his skin color. Amongst the top ten players of all-time, I'd have to think Bird wouldn't be outside the Top 2-3 in terms of Basketball IQ and Instincts; Off the ball Scoring, Shooting Ability and Range; Court Vision, Passing and Playmaking -- as well as delivering in the Clutch. Consider on top of that he could score at a high volume period on top notch efficiency, could break defenders off the dribble and in the low post, rebounded incredibly well even playing next to Parish and McHale and was superb as far as team and help defense. Hell, a terror really for opposing teams when he was able to free roam in his prime before his body started failing him. Even past it, his ability to anticipate and put himself in position to make plays was exceptional. What he lacks as an on the ball defender had much more to do with a lack of lateral movement quickness than it did effort, he wasn't a slouch and he damn well could've gotten away with being one.

Probably my favorite element though goes back to his passing and playmaking ability: The best passing forward of all-time and that isn't even really predicated on assist numbers; he wasn't Boston's primary ball handler, he didn't dominate possessions and he didn't eat up shot clock. He burned you in so many ways with everyone on the team getting touches and rarely ever out of the rhythm and flow of the offense. It was a lethal combination of fundamentals, angles, cuts, deception and creativity he saw and utilized. His dimes were racked up organically and instinctively.

Stats are almost ****ing useless talking about Larry Bird's game anyway. Watch him play.

[Rake2204]

True. Can't seem to find out what Finals that's supposed to be though, since the 1st Finals with the 3pt line both teams always attempted over 10 3's, combined.. probably talking about makes (1980 and 1983)? :confusedshrug: Certainly not 1986, Bird alone shot 17.Sorry for the misdirect. I knew the year was wrong and I was going to change it, but I knew whatever I changed it to would have been wrong as well (don't know why I didn't just generalize the year).

Found the story though: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/news/20140612/nba-finals-spurs-heat-three-point-defense/

1983 NBA Finals

The quote:

[quote]The 76ers swept the Lakers, making 172 field goals in the four games, and not one of them was a three. The Sixers, according to basketball-reference.com, fired only three shots from beyond the arc, missing all. "There was no Manu Gin

[chocolatethunder]

You know, that actually is sort of a bonus. :lol I'd even call him the GOAT white boy sportsman considering the particular field he dominated but actually No: His skill set is much more appealing than his skin color. Amongst the top ten players of all-time, I'd have to think Bird wouldn't be outside the Top 2-3 in terms of Basketball IQ and Instincts; Off the ball Scoring, Shooting Ability and Range; Court Vision, Passing and Playmaking -- as well as delivering in the Clutch. Consider on top of that he could score at a high volume period on top notch efficiency, could break defenders off the dribble and in the low post, rebounded incredibly well even playing next to Parish and McHale and was superb as far as team and help defense. Hell, a terror really for opposing teams when he was able to free roam in his prime before his body started failing him. Even past it, his ability to anticipate and put himself in position to make plays was exceptional. What he lacks as an on the ball defender had much more to do with a lack of lateral movement quickness than it did effort, he wasn't a slouch and he damn well could've gotten away with being one.

Probably my favorite element though goes back to his passing and playmaking ability: The best passing forward of all-time and that isn't even really predicated on assist numbers; he wasn't Boston's primary ball handler, he didn't dominate possessions and he didn't eat up shot clock. He burned you in so many ways with everyone on the team getting touches and rarely ever out of the rhythm and flow of the offense. It was a lethal combination of fundamentals, angles, cuts, deception and creativity he saw and utilized. His dimes were racked up organically and instinctively.

Stats are almost ****ing useless talking about Larry Bird's game anyway. Watch him play.

Well said. Great post.

[Hands of Iron]

Well said. Great post.

He can hang with any player in NBA history as it pertains to basketball skills. Impact is far greater than anything a stat sheet can be able quantify and it isn't as if he didn't put up great numbers and seasons during his peak either. He was winning his MVP's in landslide-type fashion, it wasn't even remotely close or debatable at the time if you do your history. The bigger question was whether or not he was the GOAT outright.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1064545/index.htm

http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/si_online/covers/images/1986/0303_large.jpg

Seriously, there are plenty of games both on the market and free on the internet these days to get a decent grasp over the sort of player he was and the value he had beyond just highlight clips -- not that there aren't some truly immense videos put together of him.

[chocolatethunder]

He can hang with any player in NBA history as it pertains to basketball skills. Impact is far greater than anything a stat sheet can be able quantify and it isn't as if he didn't put up great numbers and seasons during his peak either. He was winning his MVP's in landslide-type fashion, it wasn't even remotely close or debatable at the time if you do your history. The bigger question was whether or not he was the GOAT outright.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1064545/index.htm

http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/si_online/covers/images/1986/0303_large.jpg

Seriously, there are plenty of games both on the market and free on the internet these days to get a decent grasp over the sort of player he was and the value he had beyond just highlight clips -- not that there aren't some truly immense videos put together of him.
You don't have to tell me, I'm 42 so I got to see his career. I'm a Sixer fan. I hated that dude growing up haha.

[Hands of Iron]

You don't have to tell me, I'm 42 so I got to see his career. I'm a Sixer fan. I hated that dude growing up haha.

Yea, it's not directed at you. :lol

[chocolatethunder]

Yea, it's not directed at you. :lol
My bad. You quoted me so I responded. Nbd

[La Frescobaldi]

you think a guy like Steph Curry practiced 3s in junior high, high school etc? Or did he wait til he went in the NBA to start shooting those.

Nobody was shooting a lot of 3s in those days, it was a low percentage garbage shot UNTIL LARRY BIRD MADE IT A DEADLY FORCE OF BASKETBALL.

[Genaro]

Bird didn't grew up with a 3 point line like players nowadays. When he got used to it, he avg good %

[MavsPoke]

the NBA didn't add the 3 point line until 79 and NCAA didn't have it nationally until 1986.

It took several years for most NBA teams to take the shot seriously.

Why would anyone be instantly good at a shot that nobody used in their league up until then?

:applause:

Well said.

[La Frescobaldi]

:applause:

Well said.
Dirkules thunderin' down some Bill Walton on that avi

[SHAQisGOAT]

You know, that actually is sort of a bonus. :lol I'd even call him the GOAT white boy sportsman considering the particular field he dominated but actually No: His skill set is much more appealing than his skin color. Amongst the top ten players of all-time, I'd have to think Bird wouldn't be outside the Top 2-3 in terms of Basketball IQ and Instincts; Off the ball Scoring, Shooting Ability and Range; Court Vision, Passing and Playmaking -- as well as delivering in the Clutch. Consider on top of that he could score at a high volume period on top notch efficiency, could break defenders off the dribble and in the low post, rebounded incredibly well even playing next to Parish and McHale and was superb as far as team and help defense. Hell, a terror really for opposing teams when he was able to free roam in his prime before his body started failing him. Even past it, his ability to anticipate and put himself in position to make plays was exceptional. What he lacks as an on the ball defender had much more to do with a lack of lateral movement quickness than it did effort, he wasn't a slouch and he damn well could've gotten away with being one.

Probably my favorite element though goes back to his passing and playmaking ability: The best passing forward of all-time and that isn't even really predicated on assist numbers; he wasn't Boston's primary ball handler, he didn't dominate possessions and he didn't eat up shot clock. He burned you in so many ways with everyone on the team getting touches and rarely ever out of the rhythm and flow of the offense. It was a lethal combination of fundamentals, angles, cuts, deception and creativity he saw and utilized. His dimes were racked up organically and instinctively.

Stats are almost ****ing useless talking about Larry Bird's game anyway. Watch him play.

:applause: :applause:



He can hang with any player in NBA history as it pertains to basketball skills. Impact is far greater than anything a stat sheet can be able quantify and it isn't as if he didn't put up great numbers and seasons during his peak either. He was winning his MVP's in landslide-type fashion, it wasn't even remotely close or debatable at the time if you do your history. The bigger question was whether or not he was the GOAT outright.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1064545/index.htm

http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/si_online/covers/images/1986/0303_large.jpg

Seriously, there are plenty of games both on the market and free on the internet these days to get a decent grasp over the sort of player he was and the value he had beyond just highlight clips -- not that there aren't some truly immense videos put together of him.

Always loved that article...


Bird's play over the recent weeks has revealed an athlete at the height of his powers. When Kevin McHale went down with a heel injury, Bird just gritted his teeth, stooped and hefted McHale's load to his shoulders. In the Celtics' eight games since the All-Star break, Bird has averaged 30.8 points, 13.1 rebounds and 7.8 assists. But those are only numbers, and numbers don't necessarily provide a true picture when one is comparing players from different eras. "The one thing you have to avoid when you talk about Bird is statistics," says Red Auerbach. "It's his presence, the total way he commands attention on the court, that counts."


"All I know is that people tend to forget how great the older great players were," says Bird. "It'll happen that way with me, too.






Sorry for the misdirect. I knew the year was wrong and I was going to change it, but I knew whatever I changed it to would have been wrong as well (don't know why I didn't just generalize the year).

Found the story though: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/news/20140612/nba-finals-spurs-heat-three-point-defense/

1983 NBA Finals

The quote:

:cheers:

[Champ]

Mychal Thompson's comment in that SI archive is pretty humorous.

Some of the posts already touched on it, but I think it's important to reiterate the influence of Bill Fitch in all of this. Fitch was a domineering coach who absolutely hated the three, and after Bird's rookie year, openly discouraged his young star from using it.

Bird, himself, was quoted as saying he didn't particularly care for the three early in his career, even though he clearly took shots in college that were from similar range.

Many of the threes that he did take during that period were often attempted near the tail-end of games when his team was trailing. This is how the three was utilized in the early-80s - a come-from-behind shot that was not typically part of regular offensive sets as we see it today.

When K.C. Jones took over as the Celtics coach in '83-'84, there was a change in attitude about the shot; and it's no coincidence that we see Bird's numbers jump at this point.

League-wide, teams started integrating the shot into their regular offensive sets around the mid-80s, as well. The introduction of the Three Point Shootout in '86 finally cemented the three as not only a useful tool, but also a celebrated one.

It's hard to estimate how Bird's percentages would bear out in the current league, but I would suspect that with today's elite guard play, and their ability to penetrate and collapse defenses and then quickly kick out to the perimeter for the open three, would make for ideal conditions for a shooter like Bird to thrive.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Some of the posts already touched on it, but I think it's important to reiterate the influence of Bill Fitch in all of this. Fitch was a domineering coach who absolutely hated the three, and after Bird's rookie year, openly discouraged his young star from using it.

Bird, himself, was quoted as saying he didn't particularly care for the three early in his career, even though he clearly took shots in college that were from similar range.

Many of the threes that he did take during that period were often attempted near the tail-end of games when his team was trailing. This is how the three was utilized in the early-80s - a come-from-behind shot that was not typically part of regular offensive sets as we see it today.

When K.C. Jones took over as the Celtics coach in '83-'84, there was a change in attitude about the shot; and it's no coincidence that we see Bird's numbers jump at this point.

League-wide, teams started integrating the shot into their regular offensive sets around the mid-80s, as well. The introduction of the Three Point Shootout in '86 finally cemented the three as not only a useful tool, but also a celebrated one.

It's hard to estimate how Bird's percentages would bear out in the current league, but I would suspect that with today's elite guard play, and their ability to penetrate and collapse defenses and then quickly kick out to the perimeter for the open three, would make for ideal conditions for a shooter like Bird to thrive.


Well said.

His career high in 3-pointers attempted is 10, he pulled it three times... and in two out of those three he reached his career high in 3-points made, which is 7 (once as a shell, vs Reggie Miller and the Pacers):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkU0ZWOVIW0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AtciQPrPnA

And, like I've said, he still did lots of great "things", as far as the 3pt shot, even by today's standards... now imagine if he had come up with the 3pt line and played in "3pt era" (I'd say even more, as far as 3pointers, for a dude like Dale Ellis but that's a whole nother discussion..).

[miller-time]

people like him cuz hes white

Yeah but people also dismiss him for that reason. Look how many x vs Bird comparisons there are. No one is comparing players to Magic or Shaq or Dr J or Kareem. Bird is the guy most people think they can compare their favourite player to and win the debate.

[Pointguard]

In the beginning Bird was inconsistent. And it got wilder in the playoffs. But he was always a threat 24 feet and in. And he could beat you in a variety of different ways. He was always really smart and got up for showdowns with other small forwards. But before 1984, Bird didn't know when his shot was going to desert him. And it did more often than not.

I don't get the people who say Bird was better than Magic before 1984 when Magic had two FMVP's Bird had none and Magic was just better and more consistent in the playoffs. In the finals it was an even bigger gap. In the playoffs Magic was rarely ever more than a basket way from Bird (ppg) and Bird's team really needed him to score. Magic shot better than Bird in every shooting metric, advanced or raw, outside of foul shooting and the few three pointers either was taking. In these days it would never fly toward Bird being better.

[Champ]

In the beginning Bird was inconsistent. And it got wilder in the playoffs. But he was always a threat 24 feet and in. And he could beat you in a variety of different ways. He was always really smart and got up for showdowns with other small forwards. But before 1984, Bird didn't know when his shot was going to desert him. And it did more often than not.

I don't get the people who say Bird was better than Magic before 1984 when Magic had two FMVP's Bird had none and Magic was just better and more consistent in the playoffs. In the finals it was an even bigger gap. In the playoffs Magic was rarely ever more than a basket way from Bird (ppg) and Bird's team really needed him to score. Magic shot better than Bird in every shooting metric, advanced or raw, outside of foul shooting and the few three pointers either was taking. In these days it would never fly toward Bird being better.

In terms of finals MVPs, Bird had only one finals appearance pre-1984 and played great. He had a fine playoff run that year, as well. Magic played in three finals, so it's not really a fair comparison.

Bird was clearly ahead of Magic in regular season play, however, during their first first four years in the league together. He won the Rookie of the Year award and finishing well-ahead of Magic in MVP voting during this period, which is why Bird was widely considered the better player at the time.

[Pointguard]

In terms of finals MVPs, Bird had only one finals appearance pre-1984 and played great. He had a fine playoff run that year, as well. Magic played in three finals, so it's not really a fair comparison.

Bird was clearly ahead of Magic in regular season play, however, during their first first four years in the league together. He won the Rookie of the Year award and finishing well-ahead of Magic in MVP voting during this period, which is why Bird was widely considered the better player at the time.

The comparison happens all the time between Durant and Lebron now. All the time. Pretty much the exact same scenario. And Bird didn't play great in his finals appearance and was inconsistent as he usually was in the playoffs before '84. He lost 5 ppg and shot bad.

[Hands of Iron]

Don't really like talking numbers but yeah, Bird undeniably took his game to another level in the 1983-84 season (also K.C. Jones first as head coach), particularly as far as scoring and he probably had a lot more freedom to do so. He had been coming off a pair of sub .430 shooting playoff runs at 17-20 ppg. In '84, he put together an immense start-to-finish run of 28/11/6 on 52% FG/61% TS throughout the playoffs. He needed that type of performance and he needed something similar again to solidify his standing, which he did in '86 (26/9/8 on 52% FG/62% TS). Bird only had nine healthy seasons (including his rookie year) before injuries finally took him out and knocked him out of his prime, yet he's still Top 5 all-time in terms of NBA MVP win shares. Undeniable impact on the Celtics over those years as well:

1978-79: 29-53 [No Bird]
~ Bird Joins Celtics ~
1979-80: 61-21 [Conference Finals] [NBA ROY/All-NBA 1st]
1980-81: 62-20 [NBA Champions] [All-NBA 1st]
1981-82: 63-19 [Conference Finals] [All-NBA 1st]
1982-83: 56-26 [Conference Semi-Finals] [All-NBA 1st]
1983-84: 62-20 [NBA Champions] [NBA MVP/All-NBA 1st]
1984-85: 63-19 [NBA Finals] [NBA MVP/All-NBA 1st]
1985-86: 67-15 [NBA Champions] [NBA MVP/All-NBA 1st]
1986-87: 59-23 [NBA Finals] [All-NBA 1st]
1987-88: 57-25 [Conference Finals] [All-NBA 1st]
~ Lose Bird for Season to Injury ~
1988-89: 42-40 [First Round]

And then he was pretty much finished as an elite player. What's alarming is that Bird is often slammed for having such a great supporting cast even though his level of opposition in the Eastern Conference and Finals is amongst the best in history, yet in 1988-89 when he went down Boston had McHale, Parish, DJ and even Reggie Lewis stepping into the mix (with 18.5 ppg) all for basically the entire season and couldn't do any better than a near .500 record and first round exit.

[TheMilkyBarKid]

Don't really like talking numbers but yeah, Bird undeniably took his game to another level in the 1983-84 season (also K.C. Jones first as head coach), particularly as far as scoring and he probably had a lot more freedom to do so. He had been coming off a pair of sub .430 shooting playoff runs at 17-20 ppg. In '84, he put together an immense start-to-finish run of 28/11/6 on 52% FG/61% TS throughout the playoffs. He needed that type of performance and he needed something similar again to solidify his standing, which he did in '86 (26/9/8 on 52% FG/62% TS). Bird only had nine healthy seasons (including his rookie year) before injuries finally took him out and knocked him out of his prime, yet he's still Top 5 all-time in terms of NBA MVP win shares. Undeniable impact on the Celtics over those years as well:

1978-79: 29-53 [No Bird]
~ Bird Joins Celtics ~
1979-80: 61-21 [Conference Finals] [NBA ROY/All-NBA 1st]
1980-81: 62-20 [NBA Champions] [All-NBA 1st]
1981-82: 63-19 [Conference Finals] [All-NBA 1st]
1982-83: 56-26 [Conference Semi-Finals] [All-NBA 1st]
1983-84: 62-20 [NBA Champions] [NBA MVP/All-NBA 1st]
1984-85: 63-19 [NBA Finals] [NBA MVP/All-NBA 1st]
1985-86: 67-15 [NBA Champions] [NBA MVP/All-NBA 1st]
1986-87: 59-23 [NBA Finals] [All-NBA 1st]
1987-88: 57-25 [Conference Finals] [All-NBA 1st]
~ Lose Bird for Season to Injury ~
1988-89: 42-40 [First Round]

And then he was pretty much finished as an elite player. What's alarming is that Bird is often slammed for having such a great supporting cast even though his level of opposition in the Eastern Conference and Finals is amongst the best in history, yet in 1988-89 when he went down Boston had McHale, Parish, DJ and even Reggie Lewis stepping into the mix (with 18.5 ppg) all for basically the entire season and couldn't do any better than a near .500 record and first round exit.
Great post, Bird's impact was beyond individual numbers, even though he could absolutely stuff a stat sheet.

[bagelred]

You realize nobody shot 3's back during those years...and those numbers are about league average.

Nevertheless, Bird ended up with an impressive 37.6% 3-point average during a time when the three was not a big part of the game, and nobody practiced the shot....

Now guys ONLY shoot 3's...the league average for 3's is crazy high now. 36% average. Wow. During those years you mention league average seemed to be about 25%. Huge difference.

[LeBird]

In the beginning Bird was inconsistent. And it got wilder in the playoffs. But he was always a threat 24 feet and in. And he could beat you in a variety of different ways. He was always really smart and got up for showdowns with other small forwards. But before 1984, Bird didn't know when his shot was going to desert him. And it did more often than not.

I don't get the people who say Bird was better than Magic before 1984 when Magic had two FMVP's Bird had none and Magic was just better and more consistent in the playoffs. In the finals it was an even bigger gap. In the playoffs Magic was rarely ever more than a basket way from Bird (ppg) and Bird's team really needed him to score. Magic shot better than Bird in every shooting metric, advanced or raw, outside of foul shooting and the few three pointers either was taking. In these days it would never fly toward Bird being better.

Yeah, but Bird should have had one (Cedric's one) and Magic stole one from Kareem (who would have got it if he bothered to show up to claim the prize). It is nothing more than revisionist nonsense that people try to paint Magic as better in those years when he patently wasn't. By 84 Magic finally cracked the top 5 in MVP voting for the first time while Larry went 4th in his Rookie year, and 2nd 3 times in a row. Magic didn't finish above Larry until 87 and in 88 Bird took over again. Which shows that in their first 9 years, Bird was superior to Magic in voting every year bar 1, despite having the inferior team and less help across the decade. It's only when Bird's injuries slowed him down that Magic got to his level.

And it's a stinking piece of doodoo to try to paint him out as a better shot as Magic clearly wasn't. Magic wasn't guarded like Bird nor was he the centre of attention like Bird in terms of scoring, nor did he have to create his own shot as often as Bird because of his teammates. The reason Magic had better shooting % was because he could pick and choose whereas Larry had to carry the team. Only a moron would think the two are even comparable.

Larry Bird is the greatest pure shooter the NBA has ever seen.

[LeBird]

And then he was pretty much finished as an elite player. What's alarming is that Bird is often slammed for having such a great supporting cast even though his level of opposition in the Eastern Conference and Finals is amongst the best in history, yet in 1988-89 when he went down Boston had McHale, Parish, DJ and even Reggie Lewis stepping into the mix (with 18.5 ppg) all for basically the entire season and couldn't do any better than a near .500 record and first round exit.

A lot of fans of players like to claim this, but it is probably the most true for Bird. Even though his numbers are amazing, he's even better than his numbers showed. If you watched him you knew why. Not every assist or point or rebound or what have you is equal. Larry had a greater share of clutch stats than anyone I've seen. By this I mean he tended to make the point, rebound, assist, steal, etc, right when he needed to and he was not a stat-padder.

[LAZERUSS]

Yeah, but Bird should have had one (Cedric's one) and Magic stole one from Kareem (who would have got it if he bothered to show up to claim the prize). It is nothing more than revisionist nonsense that people try to paint Magic as better in those years when he patently wasn't. By 84 Magic finally cracked the top 5 in MVP voting while Larry went 4th in his Rookie year, and 2nd 3 times in a row. Magic didn't finish above Larry until 87 and in 88 Bird took over again. Which shows that in their first 9 years, Bird was superior to Magic in voting every year bar 1, despite having the inferior team and less help across the decade. It's only when Bird's injuries slowed him down that Magic got to his level.

And it's a stinking piece of doodoo to try to paint him out as a better shot as Magic clearly wasn't. Magic wasn't guarded like Bird nor was he the centre of attention like Bird in terms of scoring, nor did he have to create his own shot as often as Bird because of his teammates. The reason Magic had better shooting % was because he could pick and choose whereas Larry had to carry the team. Only a moron would think the two are even comparable.

Larry Bird is the greatest pure shooter the NBA has ever seen.

Magic was better in the post-season, and by a large margin, and was better H2H, especially in the post-season.

As for Bird being a better shooter...Magic was FAR more efficient, AND, BTW, in their career H2H games, it was MAGIC who had the TWO highest games (37 and 39 points.) CLEARLY, Magic could have been an ELITE scorer had he so chosen.

I would take ANY version of Magic over ANY version of Bird.

As for the OP...

Bird played in 164 post-season games. Guess how many 3pt shots he made in those 164 games? 80 (yes 80!), or less than one every two games. And he only shot .321 from the arc in those games, as well.


Oh, and BTW, Magic was ROBBED of a FMBP in '88. He was CLEARLY the best player on the floor (and against the SAME Piston team that Bird shot .351 from the field against in the ECF's). As for Bird not winning the FMVP in '81. You are kidding right? He was a virtual no-show in two of the games (only 8 points in each, and on 3-11 shooting in each), and overall averaged 15 ppg on a .419 FG%.

And while KAJ didn't show up for the clinching win in '80, Magic DOMINATED that game. 42 points on 14-23 FG/FGA and 14-14 FT/FTA, 15 rebounds (which was FIVE more than any other player on the floor), and 7 assists. Overall, magic averaged 21.5 ppg. 11.2 rpg, 8.7 apg (as a part-time PG), and shot a series high .573 from the field. One can only wonder what his numbers would have looked like had he been the primary option in that series.