3 Year Run: 1984-86 Larry Bird vs 2012-14 Lebron James

[DFish24]

Who had the better 3-year run overall?

Accolades
Larry Bird: 2x Champion, 3x MVP, 2x FMVP, All-NBA-First x3, All-Defensive 2nd
Lebron James: 2x Champion, 2x MVP, 2x FMVP, All-NBA-First x3, All-Defensive 1st x2, All-Defensive 2nd

Overall Regular Season
84-86 Bird: 26/10/7/2/1 on 57%TS
12-14 Lebron: 27/8/7/2/1 on 63%TS

Overall Playoffs
84-86 Bird: 26/10/7/2/1 on 59%TS
12-14 Lebron: 28/7/6/2/1 on 61%TS

[LA Lakers]

Wow, Bird averaged 10 rebounds for 3 straight seasons, including playoffs? Pretty incredible if true.

[LA Lakers]

What is even more incredible about those rebounding numbers is that he had Parish and McHale under the basket.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Microscopic edge to Lebron for me. Cant go wrong either way.

[Genaro]

One of them was playing in the goat east. The other face no real competition until the finals.
I go with Bird.

[Quickening]

If you take account the different pace 30 years ago, Lebrons stats are comfortably better, you're looking at adding 10 percent to everyone one of them.

[Baller1986]

very close. I have to go with Lebron.

[Sakkreth]

Ver very close. I am going with Bron because the pace of 80s.

[LA Lakers]

When you guys say "pace" what do you mean exactly? Are you saying they played faster or slower in the 80's? And how does this validate as to who had the better run? I still can't believe Birds rebounding numbers. Someone should check if he really averaged 10 for three straight seasons, including playoffs.

[Sakkreth]

When you guys say "pace" what do you mean exactly? Are you saying they played faster or slower in the 80's? And how does this validate as to who had the better run? I still can't believe Birds rebounding numbers. Someone should check if he really averaged 10 for three straight seasons, including playoffs.

Quicker pace means inflated stats.

[raprap]

Birds stats are inflated because of pace. Nonetheless, both are great 3 year runs by an individual. :bowdown:

[Marlo_Stanfield]

Bron
he my nikka and he GOAT:applause:

[Harison]

So much disrespect for Bird in this thread, Bird >>> Lebron, and its not as close as simple box stats would suggest.

[LA Lakers]

So much disrespect for Bird in this thread, Bird >>> Lebron, and its not as close as simple box stats would suggest.
Word. History being rewritten. But the good thing is is that no one online can take away Birds game. He actually played at one time. So everyone can try, but he'll still have his damn legacy.

[LA Lakers]

Ive never had ahoops discussion in real life where people use "inflated stats" and Larry Bird in the same sentence. I guess it's an internet thing.

[raprap]

Ive never had ahoops discussion in real life where people use "inflated stats" and Larry Bird in the same sentence. I guess it's an internet thing.
We need to use pace to compare both of their stats because the game was different back then. So we need to adjust there stats to properly compare both. And no, I am not disrespecting larry legend.

[Shep]

Extremely close comparison. The answer is LeBron James' '12-'14.


One of them was playing in the goat east. The other face no real competition until the finals.
I go with Bird.
:oldlol: . Ya, goat east. '84 Celtics played against 35 win Washington in the first round, 47 win New York in Conference Semi-Finals (taken to 7 games), and 50 win Milwaukee in the Conference Finals.

'86 Celtics played against 30 win Chicago in the first round, and played a 51 win Houston team in the Finals.

The Heat had a tougher overall run.

[JohnFreeman]

LBJ

[NZStreetBaller]

Lebron is stronger and can jump about 2 times higher then bird. yet bird has way more rebounds. Lebron plays point guard alot and has the ball alot more then bird yet the assist stat is tight.

As for the FG% james dunks ALOT more and bird shoots from all over the show so Im gonna say bird was better.

[NZStreetBaller]

I know its getting old but bird stuck with his original team......... just saying:rolleyes:

[ArbitraryWater]

If you take account the different pace 30 years ago, Lebrons stats are comfortably better, you're looking at adding 10 percent to everyone one of them.

Basically.. League wide pace was at 102 from 1984-1986, while at 92 from 2012-2014.. And Heat were always pretty low, while the Celtics averaged even more than 102...

And then the defense gives Bron the edge.

To add perspective to Bird's rebounding: Celtic players used to get out of the way and let him take the rebound so he could start the fast break or throw a pass... Great qualities, but has nothing to do with his rebounding if we're honest.

[ArbitraryWater]

When you guys say "pace" what do you mean exactly? Are you saying they played faster or slower in the 80's? And how does this validate as to who had the better run? I still can't believe Birds rebounding numbers. Someone should check if he really averaged 10 for three straight seasons, including playoffs.

That whole post is so :biggums: :biggums: :biggums:

You didn't know Bird averaged 10 rebounds? How about you check? You think we're guessing here? This is 2014

Just sounds like a 12 y/o visting a message board..


Word. History being rewritten. But the good thing is is that no one online can take away Birds game. He actually played at one time. So everyone can try, but he'll still have his damn legacy.


You didn't even know what the pace argument was for... stop acting like some historian.

[r0drig0lac]

So much disrespect for Bird in this thread, Bird >>> Lebron, and its not as close as simple box stats would suggest.
:applause:

[OldSchoolBBall]

I love how these clueless morons cite "pace" without realizing that most stats DO NOT scale linearly with pace, and also that Bird was FAR less ball dominant than Lebron, and that Celtics team in general was a very equal opportunity offense. These idiots - weaned on Lebron basketball for the last 7 years - just picture plugging him into those Celtics and dominating the ball like he does and has in the modern NBA, and hence his stats rising accordingly. Doesn't work like that. First off, Lebron would never be ALLOWED to play the way he has back then, and secondly the team's performance would suffer dramatically if he did.

Bird > Lebron. I wouldn't even think twice about taking prime Bird on my team over prime Lebron, both in the RS and especially the postseason.

EDIT: Lebron probably averages 26-29 pts/7-8 reb/6-7 ast on that Celtics team (Bird was a way better reboundr than Lebron - don't kid yourself). Roughly what Bird did. But Bird doesn't need to dominate the ball like Lebron to do it, hence is a better player. I also trust him mentally way more than Lebron.

[Hands of Iron]

How inflated are Bird's numbers, really? There's a bit more of a difference in terms of assists, but it's virtually nonexistent in terms of available rebounds per game, which is why Bird has higher percentages there even in light of the faster pace. There were fewer rebounds than you might expect because players were largely better shooters on average in Bird's era. You'd also need to adjust for everybody on his team which means he's probably losing mere decimal points on his averages at the most.

TRB League Averages

1984: 43.0, 2012: 42.2
1985: 43.5, 2013: 42.1
1986: 43.6, 2014: 42.7

AST League Averages

1984: 26.2, 2012: 21.0
1985: 26.0, 2013: 22.1
1986: 26.0, 2014: 22.0

I'm also not sure why people automatically assume the No. 1 option of an offense would be the one to lose opportunities? It isn't as if Bird was hoisting up 30+ shots per game in order to put up his numbers. It's far more likely he's eating the same whether the pace is 102 or 92. In the most simplistic of arguments - and in counter to "higher pace, inflated stats" - one could just as easily turn around and say Lebron's ball dominance and usage rate makes his numbers inflated, particularly dimes.


To add perspective to Bird's rebounding: Celtic players used to get out of the way and let him take the rebound so he could start the fast break or throw a pass... Great qualities, but has nothing to do with his rebounding if we're honest.

Not necessarily untrue. Along with Bron, he's the greatest passing forward to ever play the game although their particular greatest strengths and the avenues through which they make their cases for that are different and so are their play styles. Also hardly convenient when there are opposing players on the floor fighting for the same rebounds. You'd rather secure possession of the ball than worry about Larry swooping in to get the board. Bird had a keen sense of anticipation and frequently got good positioning as well.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Bird in the second half of '86 was toying with the league.

[MrC1991]

I'd take Bird but like plenty of others have said you can't go wrong with either one.

[LAZERUSS]

It amazes me how quickly (or conveniently) the Lebron-bashers overlook his 2012-2013 season. From start-to-finish, he was miles better than any player in the league, and he carried the Heat to a 66-16 record, which included 27 wins in a row at one point. And his 2011-2012 post-season was one of the greatest ever, as well.

[Champ]

Extremely close comparison. The answer is LeBron James' '12-'14.


:oldlol: . Ya, goat east. '84 Celtics played against 35 win Washington in the first round, 47 win New York in Conference Semi-Finals (taken to 7 games), and 50 win Milwaukee in the Conference Finals.

'86 Celtics played against 30 win Chicago in the first round, and played a 51 win Houston team in the Finals.

The Heat had a tougher overall run.

They had the best regular season record in '84, so of course they played the bottom seed. Not really sure of the point your trying to make here. The reference to the "GOAT East" was based on the conference as a whole, for the whole season.

That "30 win" Bulls team played most of the '86 season without a certain superstar in the lineup - they were quite a different team in the playoffs.

But I bet you already knew that.

[Bigsmoke]

One of them was playing in the goat east. The other face no real competition until the finals.
I go with Bird.
This guy doesn't know shit:lol

[Jacks3]

Bird stans ignoring LeBron's astronomical defensive advantage. :oldlol:

[SHAQisGOAT]

Bird...

-Had a better peak as an overall player
-Took home one more MVP award
-Played in a much tougher conference, and faced the mighty showtime Lakers twice in the Finals
-Had more competition as far as superstars at the top and even SF's overall

(also, if Larry wasn't injured in 1985, the Celtics probably would've won again, but it is what it is)

Pretty close though, on all accounts, don't get me wrong.

[Champ]

The pace argument doesn't really work with these two - the game has changed in more ways than just pace.

Bird may have benefited from more possessions, but did he really possess the ball more? Ball dominance wasn't so prevalent in the 1980s.

The three point shot is another example. LeBron shot roughly 200 more threes than Bird did over the same three-year span in the playoffs.

For the regular season, the disparity is even greater.

There's an argument that Bird would've had a higher PPG avg. with way the three is utilized today.

That's why you have to watch the game, study it as it was played then vs. now.

Gameplay >> Pace.

[DaSeba5]

So much disrespect for Bird in this thread, Bird >>> Lebron, and its not as close as simple box stats would suggest.

http://www.bodylovewellness.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/well-thats-just-like-your-opinion-man-gif-the-dude-lebowski.gif

[navy]

[B]Bird...

-Played in a much tougher conference, and faced the mighty showtime Lakers twice in the Finals
-Had more competition as far as superstars at the top and even SF's overall


Implying his teams werent stacked as well?

[navy]

Cant go wrong with either to be honest.

[Champ]

Bird stans ignoring LeBron's astronomical defensive advantage. :oldlol:

Astronomical?

LeBron's the better overall defender, but when you break things down, the gap is anything but "astronomical."

Perimeter, on ball defense: LeBron, no question
Help defense: Slight advantage to LeBron, but Bird was also excellent.
Post defense: Even
Shot blocking: Even
Steals: Even
Defensive rebounding: Bird

[Champ]

If you take account the different pace 30 years ago, Lebrons stats are comfortably better, you're looking at adding 10 percent to everyone one of them.

The game is too different now. If you account for changes in pace, you need to consider other differences, as well, to get an accurate picture.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Ver very close. I am going with Bron because the pace of 80s.

If you take account the different pace 30 years ago, Lebrons stats are comfortably better, you're looking at adding 10 percent to everyone one of them.

Birds stats are inflated because of pace. Nonetheless, both are great 3 year runs by an individual. :bowdown:

We need to use pace to compare both of their stats because the game was different back then. So we need to adjust there stats to properly compare both. And no, I am not disrespecting larry legend.


You didn't even know what the pace argument was for... stop acting like some historian.


People still spilling out that pace "bullshit"? :rolleyes: :oldlol: :facepalm

Think a difference of 10% in pace is considerable or something? Especially for a superstar?? :facepalm

Bird was averaging like 20 shots per game in his prime, he wouldn't be able to do that today? Shit, he'd even be getting much more superstar treatment and them FT's, lmfao.

He averaged 10.0 RPG for his career, in 38.4 MPG, you're telling me he wouldn't do that today or be extremely close? Shawn Marion, for example, has a career TRB% of 14.4 and averages 9.0 RPG in 35.3 MPG for his career... Bird has a career TRB% of 14.5, was taller than Marion, a better rebounder and played with Parish and McHale for plenty of years, plus he'd be playing even more PF nowadays with all the small ball and the league getting shorter and less physical, no McHale to push him more to SF, either.
Bird almost outrebound prime Moses in a playoff series, Bron wouldn't be even remotely close to that, underrating Bird's rebounding like crazy here :oldlol: Some dudes don't even know what they're saying, Bird's arguably the greatest rebounding SF ever, he was physical and agressive af, incredibly smart, knew where to be, actually fought for rebounds and he's one of the GOAT weak-side rebounders.

Larry was averaging around 7 APG, at his best, with a USG% of 26 or so, which is low for a superstar, never quite being the primary ball-handler/PG, never over-handling the ball and playing in a dynamic, "free-flowing" offense where the ball is just moving around (in the Celtics' best years)... It's actually "easier" to rack up them assists playing for a slow paced offense and dominating the ball, a player gets to control everything more, gets to make the pass before the shot, run up the clock, so on... Look at Jordan, for example, 8 APG playing for the slow paced Bulls, he wouldn't get the same numbers playing for (the faster paced) Celtics or even more the Lakers, with the ball moving between everyone.

....

In 1992, the Celtics played at the average pace of 95.8, and a 35 years old Larry Bird, playing through conditions most wouldn't go through, as a complete shell of his former self, averaged 20.2/9.6/6.8/0.9/0.7, in less than 37 minutes, taking less than 17 shots, getting to the line less than 4 times per game, and ofc not on his usual efficiency from the field, with a USG% of 24.7. How about that?

And as the exclamation point, Bird was averaging about the same when playing at today's pace: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po1M--HaINA

Keep saying "inflated numbers" or other bullshit cliches like that though, thinking it is as simple as that just to prop-up your argument.
Dead all that noise, please, slowly take the ether.

[J Shuttlesworth]

I'd take LeBron for the defensive advantage, but it's pretty ****ing close. Cant' hate people for picking bird

[Champ]

Basically.. League wide pace was at 102 from 1984-1986, while at 92 from 2012-2014.. And Heat were always pretty low, while the Celtics averaged even more than 102...

And then the defense gives Bron the edge.

To add perspective to Bird's rebounding: Celtic players used to get out of the way and let him take the rebound so he could start the fast break or throw a pass... Great qualities, but has nothing to do with his rebounding if we're honest.

Serious question: Do you really think that guys like Parish, McHale, Robey, Walton, Maxwell, Cowens, etc. were making a conscious attempt to get out of Bird's way to let him get rebounds and start breaks?

I watched this team for years and never saw any evidence of this. Sounds like a terrible rebounding strategy, if you ask me, and one that would never work in a game situation.

Bird was always looking to outlet pass and start breaks on his own if he happened to grab the rebound, independent of what his teammates were doing.

[NBAplayoffs2001]

Who had the better 3-year run overall?

Accolades
Larry Bird: 2x Champion, 3x MVP, 2x FMVP, All-NBA-First x3, All-Defensive 2nd
Lebron James: 2x Champion, 2x MVP, 2x FMVP, All-NBA-First x3, All-Defensive 1st x2, All-Defensive 2nd

Overall Regular Season
84-86 Bird: 26/10/7/2/1 on 57%TS
12-14 Lebron: 27/8/7/2/1 on 63%TS

Overall Playoffs
84-86 Bird: 26/10/7/2/1 on 59%TS
12-14 Lebron: 28/7/6/2/1 on 61%TS

Way too easy... Larry Bird.

[Hands of Iron]

I love how these clueless morons cite "pace" without realizing that most stats DO NOT scale linearly with pace, and also that Bird was FAR less ball dominant than Lebron, and that Celtics team in general was a very equal opportunity offense. These idiots - weaned on Lebron basketball for the last 7 years - just picture plugging him into those Celtics and dominating the ball like he does and has in the modern NBA, and hence his stats rising accordingly. Doesn't work like that. First off, Lebron would never be ALLOWED to play the way he has back then, and secondly the team's performance would suffer dramatically if he did.

Bird > Lebron. I wouldn't even think twice about taking prime Bird on my team over prime Lebron, both in the RS and especially the postseason.


How inflated are Bird's numbers, really? There's a bit more of a difference in terms of assists, but it's virtually nonexistent in terms of available rebounds per game, which is why Bird has higher percentages there even in light of the faster pace. There were fewer rebounds than you might expect because players were largely better shooters on average in Bird's era. You'd also need to adjust for everybody on his team which means he's probably losing mere decimal points on his averages at the most.

TRB League Averages

1984: 43.0, 2012: 42.2
1985: 43.5, 2013: 42.1
1986: 43.6, 2014: 42.7

AST League Averages

1984: 26.2, 2012: 21.0
1985: 26.0, 2013: 22.1
1986: 26.0, 2014: 22.0

I'm also not sure why people automatically assume the No. 1 option of an offense would be the one to lose opportunities? It isn't as if Bird was hoisting up 30+ shots per game in order to put up his numbers. It's far more likely he's eating the same whether the pace is 102 or 92. In the most simplistic of arguments - and in counter to "higher pace, inflated stats" - one could just as easily turn around and say Lebron's ball dominance and usage rate makes his numbers inflated, particularly dimes.


The pace argument doesn't really work with these two - the game has changed in more ways than just pace.

Bird may have benefited from more possessions, but did he really possess the ball more? Ball dominance wasn't so prevalent in the 1980s.

The three point shot is another example. LeBron shot roughly 200 more threes than Bird did over the same three-year span in the playoffs.

For the regular season, the disparity is even greater.

There's an argument that Bird would've had a higher PPG avg. with way the three is utilized today.

That's why you have to watch the game, study it as it was played then vs. now.

Gameplay >> Pace


People still spilling out that pace "bullshit"? :rolleyes: :oldlol: :facepalm

Think a difference of 10% in pace is considerable or something? Especially for a superstar?? :facepalm

Bird was averaging like 20 shots per game in his prime, he wouldn't be able to do that today? Shit, he'd even be getting much more superstar treatment and them FT's, lmfao.

He averaged 10.0 RPG for his career, in 38.4 MPG, you're telling me he wouldn't do that today or be extremely close? Shawn Marion, for example, has a career TRB% of 14.4 and averages 9.0 RPG in 35.3 MPG for his career... Bird has a career TRB% of 14.5, was taller than Marion, a better rebounder and played with Parish and McHale for plenty of years, plus he'd be playing even more PF nowadays with all the small ball and the league getting shorter and less physical, no McHale to push him more to SF, either.

Larry was averaging around 7 APG, at his best, with a USG% of 26 or so, which is low for a superstar, never quite being the primary ball-handler/PG, never over-handling the ball and playing in a dynamic, "free-flowing" offense where the ball is just moving around (in the Celtics' best years)... It's actually "easier" to rack up them assists playing for a slow paced offense and dominating the ball, a player gets to control everything more, gets to make the pass before the shot, run up the clock, so on... Look at Jordan, for example, 8 APG playing for the slow paced Bulls, he wouldn't get the same numbers playing for (the faster paced) Celtics or even more the Lakers, with the ball moving between everyone.

....

In 1992, the Celtics played at the average pace of 95.8, and a 35 years old Larry Bird, playing through conditions most wouldn't go through, as a complete shell of his former self, averaged 20.2/9.6/6.8/0.9/0.7, in less than 37 minutes, taking less than 17 shots, getting to the line less than 4 times per game, and ofc not on his usual efficiency from the field, with a USG% of 24.7. How about that?

And as the exclamation point, Bird was averaging about the same when playing at today's pace: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po1M--HaINA

Keep saying "inflated numbers" or other bullshit cliches like that though, thinking it is as simple as that just to prop-up your argument.
Dead all that noise, please, slowly take the ether.



This is fuvking brutal. :lol Shame it will fall on deaf ears. Or blind eyes. Empty brains. Whatever

[J Shuttlesworth]

This is fuvking brutal. :lol Shame it will fall on deaf ears. Or blind eyes. Empty brains. Whatever
Can you give me the cliff notes bro?

[SHAQisGOAT]

Implying his teams werent stacked as well?

Who said that? Anyways, you think it's as simple as that, or it boils down to it??? You wanna go into that though? Ok...

-In 1979 the Celtics went 29-53, that's the 2nd worst record... In 1980, Bird joins the team and with pretty much the same core roster, they go 61-21,
the best record, and made the ECF.

-In 1981, Cowens is gone, and they get Parish who was already 27 and never viewed as all that (no MVP votes, no all-nba team, not an all-star, so on)... Bird leads them to a championship, outplaying MVP Julius Erving in the "real" Finals and then in the actual Finals should've been named FMVP but whatever.
McHale was a rookie and only started his prime around 1984, people love to name names though.

-In the 1984 Playoffs, most of Bird's teammates were playing well below their standards and Larry carrying them all the way, just for you to see the two sides of the coin: Bird led the team in points, rebounds, assists, steals, FG% and FT% (!!! :bowdown:)... Then they beat the mighty showtime Lakers, a better team on paper and expected to be champions.

-In 1986, when everything was clicking, healthy players playing great, McHale at his best, Parish still the same, DJ still good, Ainge coming into his own, Walton off the bench, Wedman and Sichting too... Bird leads what many call the GOAT team, and they completely destroy the whole league, with Larry playing some of the best basketball ever seen, unreal, out of his mind, even got them better somehow when McHale went down.

-It then took lots of serious injuries to teammates and to himself, a bench to laugh at, and some great teams on the rising, to keep Bird from winning more.

Keep mentioning names though, plenty of names that Bird "made"...

Oh, and Larry didn't go around and join two already established superstars in the league, one of them a top5 player (Bird never played with one) and another top10/15. Plus Bron didn't even win in that 1st year and was embarrassing to tell the least.

And again, Bird played in most likely the GOAT conference, and the GOAT era... In 9 healthy seasons he faced/beat more 50+W teams than LeBron in 11, not to mention he went against dynasties, some of the GOAT teams, some other great teams and superstars (76ers, Pistons, Bucks...) while facing the crazy stacked, showtime Lakers on the other conference.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Can you give me the cliff notes bro?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po1M--HaINA

[SHAQisGOAT]

Bird stans ignoring LeBron's astronomical defensive advantage. :oldlol:

:coleman:

Let's act like Bird wasn't a really good defensive player? Astronomical??? :oldlol: :rolleyes: :facepalm

Larry's impact is also plenty due to his overall defense, his teams got way better with him, even/also on defense...
Celtics were one of the worst defensive teams in the league before Bird got there, then with him, and basically the same core roster (no Parish or McHale), they became one of the best, while he led the league in DWS and was 6th in DRtg.
He actually led the league in DWS for 4 times, and was 7 times in the top5; once 2nd in DRtg and 6x in the top10... Other forwards in history to do such things are Rodman, KG, Pippen, Timmy and very few more... Think that's a fluke? It's not by chance that those are the only names. And he played in an era where your name alone didn't get you all-defensive teams.
Larry brought along great team D, playing passing lanes, poking the ball everywhere, protecting the paint, winning charges, knowing when to double team, didn't get lots on rotations, was good at guarding the post and above average on the perimeter when he was younger/healthy. It he was at his best when roaming around on defense, seemed like he was everywhere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpEAZMT5t_U


Astronomical?

LeBron's the better overall defender, but when you break things down, the gap is anything but "astronomical."

Perimeter, on ball defense: LeBron, no question
Help defense: Slight advantage to LeBron, but Bird was also excellent.
Post defense: Even
Shot blocking: Even
Steals: Even
Defensive rebounding: Bird

Tbh, more like:

Perimeter on-ball: LeBron
Post defense: Bird
Team defense: Bird
Overall defense: LeBron (not by ALL THAT, and it's mostly/especially due to athleticism but it is what it is)

[LA Lakers]

That whole post is so :biggums: :biggums: :biggums:

You didn't know Bird averaged 10 rebounds? How about you check? You think we're guessing here? This is 2014

Just sounds like a 12 y/o visting a message board..



You didn't even know what the pace argument was for... stop acting like some historian.
Chill out my man, I was just amazed at how high and consistent his rebounding numbers were.
And yeah, son, I dont quite know how things work in Germany, but go into any barbershop in Los Angeles and I can tell you you wont hear anyone using something like "well it was more up tempo back then and you know what that means more possession inflated stats blah blah blah" to try and devalue the game of Larry Bird. Many people that I talk to would be reluctant to pick him over Lebron for reasons that aren't basketball related. Again, no one I know says anything about inflated stats when mentioning Bird. This is the first time I've heard it to be honest with you. But I am 12, (but give me credit for being so young and still having the early signs of maturity to not use the Dave Chappelle crackhead sketch to validate myself) so please forgive me. Plus folks in LA clearly don't know basketball like folks in Berlin. Obviously no agenda online. In all seriousness though, I am glad I brought up "pace." I suppose some online basketball fans probably think Larry Bird wouldn't dominate today. If I said that guys like Lebron wouldn't be able to dominate and put up his numbers in the 80s and 90s because of the physical nature of the game, you'd call me a fool and you'd be correct. That is a foolish argument, that I hear online and on the street. Yet, somehow Larry Bird's numbers are being questioned online because of the tempo of the game? Right. Ship of fools. Next on the hit list is Jordan. Book it. Those of us privileged enough to watch Jordan or Larry or Magic play know we witnessed untouchable greats. In 30 years it'll be Lebron or Kobe on the hit list. Anyways, can't believe I let myself get trapped into responding to you. Damn. Actually I can.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Chill out my man, I was just amazed at how high and consistent his rebounding numbers were.
And yeah, son, I dont quite know how things work in Germany, but go into any barbershop in Los Angeles and I can tell you you wont hear anyone using something like "well it was more up tempo back then and you know what that means more possession inflated stats blah blah blah" to try and devalue the game of Larry Bird. Many people that I talk to would be reluctant to pick him over Lebron for reasons that aren't basketball related. Again, no one I know says anything about inflated stats when mentioning Bird. This is the first time I've heard it to be honest with you. But I am 12, (but give me credit for being so young and still having the early signs of maturity to not use the Dave Chappelle crackhead sketch to validate myself) so please forgive me. Plus folks in LA clearly don't know basketball like folks in Berlin. Obviously no agenda online. In all seriousness though, I am glad I brought up "pace." I suppose some online basketball fans probably think Larry Bird wouldn't dominate today. If I said that guys like Lebron wouldn't be able to dominate and put up his numbers in the 80s and 90s because of the physical nature of the game, you'd call me a fool and you'd be correct. That is a foolish argument, that I hear online and on the street. Yet, somehow Larry Bird's numbers are being questioned online because of the tempo of the game? Right. Ship of fools. Next on the hit list is Jordan. Book it. Those of us privileged enough to watch Jordan or Larry or Magic play know we witnessed untouchable greats. In 30 years it'll be Lebron or Kobe on the hit list. Anyways, can't believe I let myself get trapped into responding to you. Damn. Actually I can.

:applause:

[ProfessorMurder]

Shocker. People using pace to discredit Bird.

Bran doesn't play with handchecking and physical defense.

Bran shot 2.3x the amount of threes Bird took because threes weren't a part of the game back then.

Bran got 200 more free throws despite a weaker physical defensive era. (and that's including a shortened lockout year)

Bird had a lower usage rate.

Put Bird around today he murks everybody with his elite jumpshooting (over 50% midrange), and zones/help defense can cover up his defense a bit, which is already far better than people give him credit for.

[r0drig0lac]

To add perspective to Bird's rebounding: Celtic players used to get out of the way and let him take the rebound so he could start the fast break or throw a pass... Great qualities, but has nothing to do with his rebounding if we're honest.
I think the correct name is Lebron here, not Bird, because here just perfectly describe the only reason Lebron get a good number of rebounds

[Indian guy]

The gulf in a couple of key advanced stats is simply too massive to ignore.

PER
LeBron 30.53
Bird 25.43

PER (Playoffs)
LeBron 29.83
Bird 23.7

WS/48
LeBron 0.295
Bird .232

WS/48 (Playoffs)
LeBron 0.271
Bird 0.218

Besides nostalgia, what exactly is Bird's argument here? He matches LeBron in MVPs and titles, but is inferior at everything else. Worse numbers and the difference is greater than the raw numbers would suggest. He's inferior on defense. Scores less on lower efficiency, so he's inferior offensively too. His game also declines significantly more in the playoffs. And LeBron obliterates him in 2 key advanced stats. He is simply better.

[cltcfn2924]

Astronomical?

LeBron's the better overall defender, but when you break things down, the gap is anything but "astronomical."

Perimeter, on ball defense: LeBron, no question
Help defense: Slight advantage to LeBron, but Bird was also excellent.
Post defense: Even
Shot blocking: Even
Steals: Even
Defensive rebounding: Bird


You guys keep talking about Lefrauds perimeter defense. Just watch the games, he get regularly abused. He can't guard a lamppost.

[jstern]

If you adjust for pace, then wouldn't it equal like a point or two extra for Bird. For example teams back then averaged 8 to 10 shots more per game, which is about let say 7 points more. If Bird scored 20% of those points then it's an increase of around 1 or 2 points.

So I have to go with Bird due to how weak the East has been recently. And intangibles, certain Finals moment, etc. But only by a hair.

[Kvnzhangyay]

So much disrespect for Bird in this thread, Bird >>> Lebron, and its not as close as simple box stats would suggest.

Nah, no one is disrespecting Bird, but you are disrespecting Lebron.

Lebron for me, and while its close, is not really that close

[SHAQisGOAT]

The gulf in a couple of key advanced stats is simply too massive to ignore.

PER
LeBron 30.53
Bird 25.43

PER (Playoffs)
LeBron 29.83
Bird 23.7

WS/48
LeBron 0.295
Bird .232

WS/48 (Playoffs)
LeBron 0.271
Bird 0.218

Besides nostalgia, what exactly is Bird's argument here? He matches LeBron in MVPs and titles, but is inferior at everything else. Worse numbers and the difference is greater than the raw numbers would suggest. He's inferior on defense. Scores less on lower efficiency, so he's inferior offensively too. His game also declines significantly more in the playoffs. And LeBron obilerates him in 2 key advanced stats. He is simply better.

Bron's kiddie stans only using selected advanced stats... what else is new? :oldlol:
Stop talking basketball, please :rolleyes: :facepalm

Bird was a better shooter from pretty much everywhere, had better footwork and post-game, better soft-touch from close with either hand, he was a better pure passer, a better rebounder, better team defender (and in the post), brought better overall intangibles like clutchness, leadership, ability to play with any teammate and under any strategy (not changing teammates' games), more agressive and physical, tougher and hustled more, higher basketball IQ... Just a better overall player, at their best (although pretty close).
Larry easily played against better teams than LeBron, on average (GOAT era, GOAT conference while Bron plays in a pretty weak one with a stacked team), league had more superstars at the top spot too, and GOAT era for SF's. Bird won 3 straight MVP's, won 2 Finals (and would've won another if it wasn't for injuries, most likely), and before you wanna mention names check what he did, look at some of my posts above talking about his teams/teammates and his impact... Plus he never joined already established superstars in the league, one a top5 player (which Larry never had) and another a top10/15, and Bron even embarrassed himself in the Finals right after joining them.

I'll leave it at that.

[Jacks3]

LeBron's the better overall defender, but when you break things down, the gap is anything but "astronomical."

Perimeter, on ball defense: LeBron, no question
Help defense: Slight advantage to LeBron, but Bird was also excellent.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[sbw19]

I don't think 1986 Bird would lose 4 games to SA by an average of double-digit let alone 18 ppg if you put him on this 2014 Miami squad. They'd still lose, but not in an embarrassing fashion.

[stalkerforlife]

Wow, Bird averaged 10 rebounds for 3 straight seasons, including playoffs? Pretty incredible if true.

I'm pretty sure he averaged 10 rebounds per game for his CAREER.

And the answer is BIRD.

[The Choken One]

Kobe.

[Simple Jack]

I don't think 1986 Bird would lose 4 games to SA by an average of double-digit let alone 18 ppg if you put him on this 2014 Miami squad. They'd still lose, but not in an embarrassing fashion.


What exactly would Bird have done to avoid Miami losing in the fashion they did? Bron had himself a solid series; had a few big scoring runs, and Miami was still dominated. Would he be defending Mills + Kawhi/Green + Diaw all game?

[navy]

I don't think 1986 Bird would lose 4 games to SA by an average of double-digit let alone 18 ppg if you put him on this 2014 Miami squad. They'd still lose, but not in an embarrassing fashion.

He wouldnt improve the defense.....

Entire team was slow to rotate. Bird certainly would not have been much better and would no have been able to switch onto Parker.

They probably get swept.

[LeBird]

Keep saying "inflated numbers" or other bullshit cliches like that though, thinking it is as simple as that just to prop-up your argument.
Dead all that noise, please, slowly take the ether.



Oh shit, what a post. :bowdown:

[LeBird]

He wouldnt improve the defense.....

Entire team was slow to rotate. Bird certainly would not have been much better and would no have been able to switch onto Parker.

They probably get swept.

With Bird they don't get abused in the post and Bird's not afraid to go Jordanesque and shoot till they barf. Also, Bird gets easier buckets for his teammates because of his passing in the post.

Will say that it'd be hard to win for any great player because the Heat just quit.

[LA Lakers]

One guy does not beat an entire team no matter how much of a superstar baller he is. Still a team game.

[LAZERUSS]

Bird's three year peak is comparable to Lebron's three-year run, but in terms of careers, including the post-season, Lebron passed Bird a couple of years ago. And he is pulling away day-by-day...

[LeBird]

Bird's three year peak is comparable to Lebron's three-year run, but in terms of careers, including the post-season, Lebron passed Bird a couple of years ago. And he is pulling away day-by-day...


So: Lebron>Bird>>>Wilt ?:applause:

[LA Lakers]

Bird's three year peak is comparable to Lebron's three-year run, but in terms of careers, including the post-season, Lebron passed Bird a couple of years ago. And he is pulling away day-by-day...
Nope. I never saw Bird disappear and become a non factor on the court during a Finals series the way Lebron James did in 2011 against Dallas. You can say what you want" it was still Wades team, who wqs Batman who was Robin blah blh blah..." But the fact is is that he disappeared, especially in those 4th quarters. Bird may have come up short,he may have missed some clutch shots, but he never disappeared. No disrespect to Lebron James, the man is the best show in town right now. But I hope when the Mt. Rushmore books are written, we dont forget about that series in 2011.

[TheCorporation]

So much disrespect for Bird in this thread, Bird >>> Lebron, and its not as close as simple box stats would suggest.

Well, Bird certainly had the better team. Wouldn't you agree?

[LA Lakers]

Most would agree Bird was the best player in the world in '86. I think that seems to be the consensus. Look at the level of competition he had to go through to get that claim. I dont need to list all the superstars that could have had that title in 1986 but the list is long, guys. Bird is an untouchable great.

[Trollsmasher]

LeBron

Bird had it too easy with the faster pace of the '80. Easier shots all around. Put him in halfcourt and he is done.

[LAZERUSS]

So: Lebron>Bird>>>Wilt ?:applause:

Aside from FT shooting, and keep in mind that Wilt MADE 2000 more FTs in his career than Bird did...there was no other area, including passing, in which Bird was better than Wilt. And in most, Chamberlain was MILES better (rebounding, scoring, defense, efficiency, and shot-blocking.)

And Wilt could carry a 40-40 team to a game seven, one point loss, against a 62-18 Celtic team at the height of the dynasty, and with a 30-31 .555 series. Meanwhile, Bird couldn't even win a FMVP on a 62-20 team that barely beat a 40-42 Rockets team in the Finals one year. And the reality was, no one had more post-season "choke' jobs than Bird did my friend. It would take a long paragraph to illustrate that fact.

Wilt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bird

[DatAsh]

Bird stans ignoring LeBron's astronomical defensive advantage. :oldlol:

Lebron didn't have an "astronomical" advantage on defense, people on this board just never really saw Bird play defense and just go by word of mouth. Neither of them were great on ball defenders - though Lebron was better, and both were great help defenders - though Lebron was better.

Ignoring intangibles:

Lebron was a better defender overall, better in the fast break, better at driving to the basket, better at finishing around the rim, and better at controlling an offense.

Bird was better outside shooter, better off ball player, better catch and shoot player, better rebounder, and better passer.

It really depends on the team and roll your trying to make/fill. Take your pick.


Also, a 10% higher pace doesn't mean the number 1 option's stats go down 10%.

[LA Lakers]

Lebron didn't have an "astronomical" advantage on defense, people on this board just never really saw Bird play defense and just go by word of mouth. Neither of them were great on ball defenders - though Lebron was better, and both were great help defenders - though Lebron was better.

Ignoring intangibles:

Lebron was a better defender overall, better in the fast break, better at driving to the basket, better at finishing around the rim, and better at controlling an offense.

Bird was better outside shooter, better off ball player, better catch and shoot player, better rebounder, and better passer.

It really depends on the team and roll your trying to make/fill. Take your pick.
Bird was pretty exceptional at finishing around the rim. Can you imagine how many times he would get to the line today? You breathe on someone and its a flagrant. Okay I exaggerated, but he'd be taking 10 or 12 free throws a game haha.

[red1]

I don't think 1986 Bird would lose 4 games to SA by an average of double-digit let alone 18 ppg if you put him on this 2014 Miami squad. They'd still lose, but not in an embarrassing fashion.

cmon broski

[Lebron23]

cmon broski


She's actually a female.

[SHAQisGOAT]

He wouldnt improve the defense.....

Entire team was slow to rotate. Bird certainly would not have been much better and would no have been able to switch onto Parker.

They probably get swept.

He probably would've... Bird's team defense was great and better than LeBron's, at the very least in those Finals. He wouldn't be able to switch onto Parker but his team defense could be easily more impactful than such a thing. Big-like impact too, and great impact.

Bird also brought considerably better rebounding, plus agressiveness, physicality, and hustle... That's also major.

Larry also didn't need to overhandle the ball and have teammates play away from their strengths and playing style. He was better off-ball too, and at setting up plays/players with smarter basketball, no wasted motion and little ball-stopping.
Plus a better post-game, and passing out of the post, always big in the playoffs.

Game1 was still close at the end when LeBron cramped out... Bird in the "same situation" had a monster game and was really clutch while the C's won.

They probably win 2/3 games.

[Duncan21formvp]

Larry Bird for sure. He did it for his original franchise while Lebron had to join forces with a proven champion in Wade. Also Bird won a title without being down 3-2 in a series.

[bullettooth]

One of them was playing in the goat east. The other face no real competition until the finals.
I go with Bird.

This.

I go with Larry Legend as well.

[Da_Realist]

One of them was playing in the goat east. The other face no real competition until the finals.
I go with Bird.

This