84 Celtics, Bird could take on any of the Big 3
Printable View
84 Celtics, Bird could take on any of the Big 3
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGJLMRQHuKQ&feature=PlayList&p=7F95FC33E153D2BC&index=2"]Game 3[/URL]
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2wA0Xt0EHw&feature=PlayList&p=7F95FC33E153D2BC&index=3"]Game 4[/URL]
[QUOTE=LarryLegend33]Who wins?[/QUOTE]
Give Shaq Magic and he wins more titles then Kareem did with Magic.
Stupid logic, "what ifs", everyone can do it.
I consider Shaq the second greatest player of all time.
[QUOTE=BIZARRO]Thanks, that was awesome. :applause:
Before I was a Jordan fan, I was a huge Bird fan. This brought back a lot of good memories. I remember thinking how I was kind of upset the Rockets made it instead of the Lakers that year because I knew the Celtics had the Lakers beat. They were just so dominant in '86. I know that is stating the obvious, but if you actually didn't see it, then here is more confirmation.
Would've been a good rubber match after the previous two years though. Too bad that came the next year with the spectacular and equally, if not more so, dominant '87 Lakers. Bad news for the Celts and Larry of course, and almost the end of the road as Larry broke down soon after.
Watching this game I was struck by two things:
1. Just how often Bird attacked the player with the ball on the defensive end, and how he always seemed to be in the right place at the right time on D. He stripping, stealing, breaking things up left and right. I always remembered him playing his own idea of defensive basketball and not bending mentally to usual defensive positions and practices like almost every other defensive player I have seen, and he was seemingly everywhere without getting called for anything. He seemed to get his nose dirty in so many defensive possessions and I think that has always been an underrated part of why his teams always were the best in college and the pros. And a big part of why his overall impact on a game is so much greater than, arguably, all but a few players.
2. Just how quick he was to get the ball in the hands of the player on his team in the best position to score. I mean, who thinks to throw the ball full court without seemingly even looking up the court, AT ALL? That extra split second of awareness was a huge thing that made Bird so great, kind of like Wayne Gretzky in hockey. Their minds were often faster than the game itself. Magic, same thing. Once again, seems obvious, but to see it is to truly believe. Every position, his idea was to get it into the Chief or Mchale, or to whoever any way he could as often and varied as possible. It was just demoralizing to the other team as shown in this vid by some of the Rocket's reactions.
We sometimes forget in this era of high flying players that in basketball SO much time is spent in half court sets; moving without the ball, finding the open man, getting the ball to him quickly and in the right place to score as easily as possible.
In the 5 on 5 NBA game, half court "winning" basketball relies mostly on these things, and often negates a lot of what athleticism could hypothetically bring to the table. (That being said athleticism can elevate "winning basketball" i.e. MJ, but Bird had enough to get by in almost any situation in a 5 on 5 game)
Watching this, I am now convinced a Kobe and Lebron, etc. would beat Bird and any player other than MJ, (and maybe even Bird and him as well in a 2 on 2 game), but I am also convinced watching this he was a better "winning" player than either in a 5 on 5 game. He just was like a chess master, who had one objective of making every move pertient to winning and the final score.
Lebron may get there, but Larry Legend was just such a great example of what makes "team" sports so great. He was able to use the other 4 players (and 9 really) like pieces on his chessboard regardless of physical limitations, though his physical limitations were not as limited as some think. His ability to sneak in passing lanes, box out, etc. almost made up for whatever limitations there were though.
I loved watching him (and Magic) then, and now, as their games are so rich and full of life. But for different reasons than why almost all other players are fun to watch.
Larry Legend was a true master of the game. What an incredible figure in basketball history.
#33. :bowdown:[/QUOTE]
Wait...you typed all that great stuff about Larry, and ended by saying that Lebron and Kobe would beat Bird and any other player not named Michael Jordan in a pick-up game?
[QUOTE=plowking]I consider Shaq the second greatest player of all time.[/QUOTE]
I consider you an idiot.
[QUOTE=Shepseskaf]There's a reason why most knowledgeable basketball experts who evaluate league history, without having an obvious ulterior agenda, rate Magic above Bird. The versatility, the ability to affect all phases of the game, the leadership.... it all favors the Magic Man.
No doubt this subject has been debated ad infinitum. When all is said and done, though, Magic is Top 5, while Bird is in the Top 10.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, and the reason is dislike for the Celtics.
Bird was MVP three times in a row against Magic. Bird was definitly the better leader, the smarter and more skilled player. It
[QUOTE=plowking]All of those supporting the 80's and 90's are simply ignoring the facts and don't want to accept that todays era is just as good as back then.
"Players back in the 80's and 90's were better shooters thus they had way better FG%"
Stats are shown that todays players take more jumpshots due to zone thus the lower FG%, and that all up the TS% is approximately the same.
"Now there are too many fouls called, it is all soft"
Stats show that there were more fouls called in the 80's by a good 5 free throws.
"Passing, Bball IQ, and fundamentals have all decreased"
Thats why you have players like Jose Calderon, Chris Paul, Nash, Deron averaging insanely high assist numbers, in particular Paul and Calderon in the limited minutes he played last year.
Furthermore you have Chris Paul averaging something like 2.6 turnovers while averaging something like 11.5 assists. I'd say that fundamentals are getting better when players are finding a way to keep the ball safe and still average incredible passing numbers.
"Defense is not as good as it was now"
Then there is a double standard where they say todays rules help the offensive player (which I disagree with), yet scores are being kept at the same number approximately. So therefore defense is getting better going by statistics and further rules put in place.[/QUOTE]
Fail.
The first argument is about shooting percentages. Zone defense didn't start until '04, and overall percentages and ppg went up from the previous fundamental and scoring droughts that preceded the rule changes Look at FG%s circa '98-'04, and you may get a clue as to why the rule changes were necessary. I'll give you a hint: PLAYERS COULDN'T SHOOT CONTESTED JUMPERS.
Free throw attempts. Check the number of field goal attempts in the 80's and compare that to today. That will answer your question of why they shot more free throws in the 80s. Complicated stuff.
Assists. Were much higher in the 80s.
The final paragraph of confusion about why "well, if the rules help offense, yet offense still can't score, then defense must be better" pretty much explains why garbage offense today pales in comparison to the fundamental offense of the 80s. Hello, IT'S NOT THE DEFENSE
[QUOTE=RonySeikalyFTW]Fail.
The first argument is about shooting percentages. Zone defense didn't start until '04, and overall percentages and ppg went up from the previous fundamental and scoring droughts that preceded the rule changes Look at FG%s circa '98-'04, and you may get a clue as to why the rule changes were necessary. I'll give you a hint: PLAYERS COULDN'T SHOOT CONTESTED JUMPERS.
Free throw attempts. Check the number of field goal attempts in the 80's and compare that to today. That will answer your question of why they shot more free throws in the 80s. Complicated stuff.
Assists. Were much higher in the 80s.
The final paragraph of confusion about why "well, if the rules help offense, yet offense still can't score, then defense must be better" pretty much explains why garbage offense today pales in comparison to the fundamental offense of the 80s. Hello, IT'S NOT THE DEFENSE[/QUOTE]
:applause:
Uhh, Magic is ranked higher than Bird on all-time lists because he has the better resume for various reasons, not because he was a better player at his peak. He wasn't.
All that matters is the Spartans won... Not that Indiana State had anything besides bird.
[QUOTE=RonySeikalyFTW]Fail.
The first argument is about shooting percentages. Zone defense didn't start until '04, and overall percentages and ppg went up from the previous fundamental and scoring droughts that preceded the rule changes Look at FG%s circa '98-'04, and you may get a clue as to why the rule changes were necessary. I'll give you a hint: PLAYERS COULDN'T SHOOT CONTESTED JUMPERS.
Free throw attempts. Check the number of field goal attempts in the 80's and compare that to today. That will answer your question of why they shot more free throws in the 80s. Complicated stuff.
Assists. Were much higher in the 80s.
The final paragraph of confusion about why "well, if the rules help offense, yet offense still can't score, then defense must be better" pretty much explains why garbage offense today pales in comparison to the fundamental offense of the 80s. Hello, IT'S NOT THE DEFENSE[/QUOTE]
Fail.
Defense became better during that time, and I was specifically talking about when zone was implemented as you can see I mentioned rule changes. I adressed that in the last part of my post. Players were guarded better, forcing into lower field goal percentages. This is due to players being more athletic, stronger and trained better.
Furthermore Sir Charles, you are an idiot. You said yourself in one of the above post that players are more stronger simply because of medicine and technology, not because of work ethic or whatever you said. Hate to break it to you, but stronger is stronger, whichever way you achieve it. So you contradicted yourself there.
Yes, because with increased training, more methodical ways of training and improved techniques, offense is going to regress rather then progress, just like everything in mankind has right? :rolleyes:
Furthermore with kids starting at younger ages now, you are saying basketball is going to get worse? Get real.
[QUOTE=72-10]I consider you an idiot.[/QUOTE]
So you are saying Shaq has no claim for the 2 spot?
4 championships
3 finals MVP's
Some of the greatest finals numbers ever
Most Dominant player
Possibly the greatest prime of any player
I'd say he does.
[QUOTE=RonySeikalyFTW]Fail.
The first argument is about shooting percentages. Zone defense didn't start until '04, and overall percentages and ppg went up from the previous fundamental and scoring droughts that preceded the rule changes Look at FG%s circa '98-'04, and you may get a clue as to why the rule changes were necessary. I'll give you a hint: PLAYERS COULDN'T SHOOT CONTESTED JUMPERS.
Free throw attempts. [B]Check the number of field goal attempts in the 80's and compare that to today. That will answer your question of why they shot more free throws in the 80s.[/B] Complicated stuff.
Assists. Were much higher in the 80s.
The final paragraph of confusion about why "well, if the rules help offense, yet offense still can't score, then defense must be better" pretty much explains why garbage offense today pales in comparison to the fundamental offense of the 80s. Hello, IT'S NOT THE DEFENSE[/QUOTE]
You can't back up your argument. Point invalid. I'm not looking up stats for you.
[QUOTE=plowking]Fail.
Defense became better during that time, and I was specifically talking about when zone was implemented as you can see I mentioned rule changes. I adressed that in the last part of my post. Players were guarded better, forcing into lower field goal percentages. This is due to players being more athletic, stronger and trained better.
Furthermore Sir Charles, you are an idiot. You said yourself in one of the above post that players are more stronger simply because of medicine and technology, not because of work ethic or whatever you said[U]. Hate to break it to you, but stronger is stronger, whichever way you achieve it.[/U] So you contradicted yourself there.
Yes, because with increased training, more methodical ways of training and improved techniques, offense is going to regress rather then progress, just like everything in mankind has right? :rolleyes:
Furthermore with kids starting at younger ages now, you are saying basketball is going to get worse? Get real.[/QUOTE]
[B]Are you stupid or sometin? :rolleyes: :hammerhead:
One thing is that by doing weights + vitamins you become "OVERAL STRONGER" YOURSELF (its not like a a Person is Stronger than the Other Because because of Weights Only:hammerhead: ) but That Goes by your: "NATURAL STRENGTH"
That Doesn`t Get Stronger by Vitamins and Weightlifting. That variable stats the same but The Rest Adds to that Virable Depening On How Much You Work Out and Take :pimp:
This means you will be "OVERAL STRONGER" but IT WILL NOT MAKE YOUR "NATURAL STRENGTH" = STRONGER NOR WILL WILL YOUR "NATURAL STRENGTH" BECOME STRONGER THAN SOMEONE ELSES "NATURAL STRENGTH" WHO IS BY NATURE "NATURALLY STRONGER" THAN YOU. Ofcourse if this one person that is Already by "Nature Stronger than You, Naturally Stronger" takes on the wieght programs + vitamins he will also add to his "OVERAL STRENGTH" (nothing will happen to his "Natural Strength" which is already stronger than yours!).
That is why in the Late 80s and 90s Many Players began using Weight Programs and Vitamins to get themselves more Bulked Up to look like actual and 90s players. For example Bird was many times guarded by Xavier McDaniel a 6`7SF that was one of the Best Defenders in the League his weight in the 80s was around 225 lbs and in the 90s around 240 lbs do to weight programs + vitamins but his "NATURAL STRENTH" DID NOT CHANGE! just is "OVERAL STRENGH DID" and Bird schooled him....2-3 Years before that the Whole Weight Lifting + Vitamins became popular in the NBA
Go Check Out McDaniel vs Bird and McDaniel vs the 92 Bulls and see How Bulked Up He Got in the 90s comapared to the 80s (ofcourse do to his weight lifting program + vitamins) . He could not stop Bird`s and was NOT STRONGER THAN BIRD BEFORE THE WEIGHTS, THAT IS: "WAS NOT STRONGER THAN BIRD NATURALLY" (and if you saw him in those clips youd see how Strong he Looked).
Bird was way Stronger than People think. He was Thick Boned, remember that.
Bird could Post Up and Score on Players like [COLOR="Red"]Horace Grant: 6`10/245 lbs[/COLOR].
Big Enough? [U][COLOR="Orange"]I Recall him Being Champion with the Shaq-Bryant Lakers in 2000s and as A STARTER[/COLOR][/U]!
Well this dude got permanently owned by Bird from 87 to 92. Sometimes recieving 30 or 40s Pts in his face and getting outrebounded 95% of the time :confusedshrug:
Other ones:
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Kevin Willis 7`0/ 240 lbs...I`ve see Bird guard him and get Guarded by him in the Post as well as Antoine Carr 6`8 /264 lbs[/COLOR]...Could they do Sh-it against Bird? :no:
[COLOR="Orange"]You got one of the fastest PFs Ever in James Worthy 6`9 around 240 lbs....He could not stop Bird in the Post neither when he backed away to get his jumper off. He called the hardest Forward to Guard according to James.[/COLOR] :confusedshrug:
[COLOR="Blue"]Charles Barkley 6`4-6`5/260-280 lb...He even hit a game winner on Charles whom is way Stronger than Bird. But Bird simply moved back and used is Set Skills, Foot Work to Get of His Magical Awkward Looking but Deadly & Effective, Mid Range Shot and Pum! [/COLOR]
Simple!
[U]Bird could not be Guarded by SFs nor PFs[/U] because if you put in a [U]typical quick SFs that ranged around 6`6,`6`7 or 6`8[/U] like [U]Cooper, Nique, Pippen, Jordan, Xavier, Drexler, Rodman [/U] because he would shoot over them Post Up (him around 6`9 1/2 ft and stronger than his Country Boy Look, "[I]The Hick from French Lick[/I]" [U]that Dr J warned everyone about[/U]) and neither by players that where [U]6`9, 6`10, 6`11 and 7`0 that ranged from 245 lbs 265 lbs [/U]his Set of "Talent & Skills" (which where a Mix of PG-SG-SF-PF Into One Body!) Where Too Much for PFs and "Many Times His Speed Itself"...which is not Greatest but at Average more than most PFs" (a healthy prime 23-31 year old, 1979-86 Bird ofcourse) was also enough!. Yes kiddp he could not be Guarded by "Pathetic", "Weak" and "Short" players like: [U]Worthy, Kevin Willis, Horace Grant, Buck Williams (ranging from 6`8-6`9,6`10 to 7`0) [/U]etc in the Post!!! :hammerhead:
Bird was tough as hell too. I will remind you he was like a White Trash Country Boy that was Not Fast but Was Fed Well in his Youth, Was Thick Boned Big Time and Was Strong. Bird also had a Heart ofa Lion because he often had felt Isolated at School because of his Families Background and Low Self-Esteem as a Kid (was not very wealthy compared to his peers, his dad was an alcholic whom commited suicide, his akward looking body, not a very handsome kid etc read his Biography etc)
Barkley hardy did any weights and that is why he got injured in 94. He even mentioned this in an article which he said the only time he did not listen to friend MJ`s advise whas regarding doing more weight lifting but guess what? Barkley`s [U]NATURAL STRENGTH [/U] [I]was such!!![/I] he could Pick Up Shaq from the Ground whom was around 7`1 / 340-350-360 lbs and knock him to ground in what? 0.5 seconds? 0.4 seconds ? at age 35-36:confusedshrug:
That alone and in 1985: [I]Dunking which such force [/I] that the:
Basket
The Whole Stantion (Pole, Rim, Backboard) and
The Rim (Was Bent)
Got Out of Place Some Feet Backwoards and a 20 Minute Delay was called...
Is enough to describe How Strong Barkley was "NATURALLY"...Which is All That Matters...
The Rest is Just Doing More Weight Lifting and Getting Your Vitamins, thats it!.
If Bird at age 35 and crippled Wth Back Problems..Averaged
20.2 PPG
46.6% FG%
9.6 RPG
6.8 APG
40.6% 3-Point FG% (52/128)
92.6% FT%
In a Time when there Was No Handchecking Rule, No Puss Fouls Called, Way More Competition, Fundamentals and Passing Game, A League Stretched for Just the Best American Players (not watered down) and
When MJ was in his Total Prime, Schooling the NBA + Greates like Ewing, Barkley, Hakeem, Robinson, Malone, Stockton...etc ALLL, ALL! whom Schooled the NBA till what...2000?, where in THEIR PRIMES...then what makes you think Bird could not play in the NBA today, idiot!?
In fact todays game would be easier for Bird because [U]he would Play All Day In A Slow Motion Game, which is what he Loved[/U] and in a [U]Zone Defense[/U]. Now that would be [U]A Thrill to Bird! with Him as the Best Team-Free Defender of All Time[/U]...he would school Big not just be a Star in todays era.
Not to mention he would be: Free of Handchecking, Free of Real Fouls, Sorrounded of Dumb Players with Low B-BAll IQ Around him, No One As Smart or Witty, Very Few With that of His Will to Win etc...
Get Real! "Kidd"! for Bird it would be a Piece of Cake! [/B]
This is not in response to anyone, but just a point I wanted to make. Since Dirk is ridiculously compared so much to Bird, you know what difference I see in their games other than the obvious of not being comparable? When you see Dirk play, everytime he gets the ball, you can kind of see an intangible decision being made here where he thinks, "ok, let me jab step, and try to score here." Or, "he's asking for the ball in the post, let me pass it."
But with Bird, he's like a vapor or liquid that simply encompasses the matter around him (like water that takes shape of the object containing it), he simply is Aware, and doesn't make tangible decisions (like "let me try to get up a 3 point shot here, I haven't shot the ball in about three possessions now). He simply "does."
I guess this argument in general can be made whenever comparing Bird, Magic, and Jordan, to Dirk, Lebron, and Kobe respectively. It's like those guys have to pick and choose their spots. The former simply was in control of the floor and did what came naturally.
[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]Are you stupid or sometin? :rolleyes: :hammerhead:
One thing is that by doing weights + vitamins you become "OVERAL STRONGER" YOURSELF (its not like a a Person is Stronger than the Other Because because of Weights Only:hammerhead: ) but That Goes by your: "NATURAL STRENGTH"
That Doesn`t Get Stronger by Vitamins and Weightlifting. That variable stats the same but The Rest Adds to that Virable Depening On How Much You Work Out and Take :pimp:
This means you will be "OVERAL STRONGER" but IT WILL NOT MAKE YOUR "NATURAL STRENGTH" = STRONGER NOR WILL WILL YOUR "NATURAL STRENGTH" BECOME STRONGER THAN SOMEONE ELSES "NATURAL STRENGTH" WHO IS BY NATURE "NATURALLY STRONGER" THAN YOU. Ofcourse if this one person that is Already by "Nature Stronger than You, Naturally Stronger" takes on the wieght programs + vitamins he will also add to his "OVERAL STRENGTH" (nothing will happen to his "Natural Strength" which is already stronger than yours!).
That is why in the Late 80s and 90s Many Players began using Weight Programs and Vitamins to get themselves more Bulked Up to look like actual and 90s players. For example Bird was many times guarded by Xavier McDaniel a 6`7SF that was one of the Best Defenders in the League his weight in the 80s was around 225 lbs and in the 90s around 240 lbs do to weight programs + vitamins but his "NATURAL STRENTH" DID NOT CHANGE! just is "OVERAL STRENGH DID" and Bird schooled him....2-3 Years before that the Whole Weight Lifting + Vitamins became popular in the NBA
Go Check Out McDaniel vs Bird and McDaniel vs the 92 Bulls and see How Bulked Up He Got in the 90s comapared to the 80s (ofcourse do to his weight lifting program + vitamins) . He could not stop Bird`s and was NOT STRONGER THAN BIRD BEFORE THE WEIGHTS, THAT IS: "WAS NOT STRONGER THAN BIRD NATURALLY" (and if you saw him in those clips youd see how Strong he Looked).
Bird was way Stronger than People think. He was Thick Boned, remember that.
Bird could Post Up and Score on Players like [COLOR="Red"]Horace Grant: 6`10/245 lbs[/COLOR].
Big Enough? [U][COLOR="Orange"]I Recall him Being Champion with the Shaq-Bryant Lakers in 2000s and as A STARTER[/COLOR][/U]!
Well this dude got permanently owned by Bird from 87 to 92. Sometimes recieving 30 or 40s Pts in his face and getting outrebounded 95% of the time :confusedshrug:
Other ones:
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Kevin Willis 7`0/ 240 lbs...I`ve see Bird guard him and get Guarded by him in the Post as well as Antoine Carr 6`8 /264 lbs[/COLOR]...Could they do Sh-it against Bird? :no:
[COLOR="Orange"]You got one of the fastest PFs Ever in James Worthy 6`9 around 240 lbs....He could not stop Bird in the Post neither when he backed away to get his jumper off. He called the hardest Forward to Guard according to James.[/COLOR] :confusedshrug:
[COLOR="Blue"]Charles Barkley 6`4-6`5/260-280 lb...He even hit a game winner on Charles whom is way Stronger than Bird. But Bird simply moved back and used is Set Skills, Foot Work to Get of His Magical Awkward Looking but Deadly & Effective, Mid Range Shot and Pum! [/COLOR]
Simple!
[U]Bird could not be Guarded by SFs nor PFs[/U] because if you put in a [U]typical quick SFs that ranged around 6`6,`6`7 or 6`8[/U] like [U]Cooper, Nique, Pippen, Jordan, Xavier, Drexler, Rodman [/U] because he would shoot over them Post Up (him around 6`9 1/2 ft and stronger than his Country Boy Look, "[I]The Hick from French Lick[/I]" [U]that Dr J warned everyone about[/U]) and neither by players that where [U]6`9, 6`10, 6`11 and 7`0 that ranged from 245 lbs 265 lbs [/U]his Set of "Talent & Skills" (which where a Mix of PG-SG-SF-PF Into One Body!) Where Too Much for PFs and "Many Times His Speed Itself"...which is not Greatest but at Average more than most PFs" (a healthy prime 23-31 year old, 1979-86 Bird ofcourse) was also enough!. Yes kiddp he could not be Guarded by "Pathetic", "Weak" and "Short" players like: [U]Worthy, Kevin Willis, Horace Grant, Buck Williams (ranging from 6`8-6`9,6`10 to 7`0) [/U]etc in the Post!!! :hammerhead:
Bird was tough as hell too. I will remind you he was like a White Trash Country Boy that was Not Fast but Was Fed Well in his Youth, Was Thick Boned Big Time and Was Strong. Bird also had a Heart ofa Lion because he often had felt Isolated at School because of his Families Background and Low Self-Esteem as a Kid (was not very wealthy compared to his peers, his dad was an alcholic whom commited suicide, his akward looking body, not a very handsome kid etc read his Biography etc)
Barkley hardy did any weights and that is why he got injured in 94. He even mentioned this in an article which he said the only time he did not listen to friend MJ`s advise whas regarding doing more weight lifting but guess what? Barkley`s [U]NATURAL STRENGTH [/U] [I]was such!!![/I] he could Pick Up Shaq from the Ground whom was around 7`1 / 340-350-360 lbs and knock him to ground in what? 0.5 seconds? 0.4 seconds ? at age 35-36:confusedshrug:
That alone and in 1985: [I]Dunking which such force [/I] that the:
Basket
The Whole Stantion (Pole, Rim, Backboard) and
The Rim (Was Bent)
Got Out of Place Some Feet Backwoards and a 20 Minute Delay was called...
Is enough to describe How Strong Barkley was "NATURALLY"...Which is All That Matters...
The Rest is Just Doing More Weight Lifting and Getting Your Vitamins, thats it!.
If Bird at age 35 and crippled Wth Back Problems..Averaged
20.2 PPG
46.6% FG%
9.6 RPG
6.8 APG
40.6% 3-Point FG% (52/128)
92.6% FT%
In a Time when there Was No Handchecking Rule, No Puss Fouls Called, Way More Competition, Fundamentals and Passing Game, A League Stretched for Just the Best American Players (not watered down) and
When MJ was in his Total Prime, Schooling the NBA + Greates like Ewing, Barkley, Hakeem, Robinson, Malone, Stockton...etc ALLL, ALL! whom Schooled the NBA till what...2000?, where in THEIR PRIMES...then what makes you think Bird could not play in the NBA today, idiot!?
In fact todays game would be easier for Bird because [U]he would Play All Day In A Slow Motion Game, which is what he Loved[/U] and in a [U]Zone Defense[/U]. Now that would be [U]A Thrill to Bird! with Him as the Best Team-Free Defender of All Time[/U]...he would school Big not just be a Star in todays era.
Not to mention he would be: Free of Handchecking, Free of Real Fouls, Sorrounded of Dumb Players with Low B-BAll IQ Around him, No One As Smart or Witty, Very Few With that of His Will to Win etc...
Get Real! "Kidd"! for Bird it would be a Piece of Cake! [/B][/QUOTE]
Stronger is stronger kid. I don't need to hear about your natural strength/overall strength bullcrap.
A lot of players don't take supplements today as you think, its simply a better diet, better routines, better method of exercising and more efficient techniques.
Doing weights now is not like doing weights then. There is more information on what muscle groups to work, and how to work them more effectively.
Oh and Sir Charles, just on your breaking the rim and what not.
They've got high school kids doing that now, on stronger re-enforced rings. So while it is still a massive feat to do that, high school kids are doing it today, because the next generation gets stronger and stronger.
[QUOTE=plowking]So you are saying Shaq has no claim for the 2 spot?
4 championships
3 finals MVP's
Some of the greatest finals numbers ever
[B]Most Dominant player[/B]
[B]Possibly the greatest prime of any player[/B]
I'd say he does.[/QUOTE]
Correct, he has absolutely no claim to the #2 spot, and the bold is simply wrong.
[B]4.19 to 5.30[/B]
[url]http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=rtHsXbydBkE[/url]
[B]5.04 = You Gotta Be Kidding Me!!! :wtf: :cheers: :roll: [/B]
[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]4.19 to 5.30[/B]
[url]http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=rtHsXbydBkE[/url]
[B]5.04 = You Gotta Be Kidding Me!!! :wtf: :cheers: :roll: [/B][/QUOTE]
You're a f[b]u[/b]cking moron.
[QUOTE=AItheAnswer3]You're a f[b]u[/b]cking moron.[/QUOTE]
[B]Stop the Hating....:pimp: [/B]
[QUOTE=72-10]Correct, he has absolutely no claim to the #2 spot, and the bold is simply wrong.[/QUOTE]
So who could stop Shaq in his prime?
It's opinion. I say he does deserve a spot at number 2.
[QUOTE=plowking]So who could stop Shaq in his prime?
It's opinion. I say he does deserve a spot at number 2.[/QUOTE]
If you ask me, no one can stop a Prime Shaq. Too dominant. His averages in the 00,01,02 finals were insane. It's just that some people dont put him there due to longevity.
[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]Stop the Hating....:pimp: [/B][/QUOTE]
I'm not hating. You're a moron. Ask anyone else.
[QUOTE=AItheAnswer3]I'm not hating. You're a moron. Ask anyone else.[/QUOTE]
I agree with this statement, I try not to call people names on here, but Sir Charles is just utterly stupid.
[COLOR="darkgreen"][B]Larry Bird 86 Finals Game 6 vs Hakeem-Sampson and their Rockets[/B][/COLOR]
[url]http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk4E5Q_HT2A[/url]
[COLOR="DarkGreen"][B]29 Points, 11 Rebounds, 12 Assits, 3 Steals and apperantly 1 block that was not counted (but as a Steal)[/B][/COLOR]
[COLOR="DarkGreen"][B]Bird outrebounding everyone...:pimp:[/B][/COLOR]
[U][B][COLOR="darkgreen"]At minute 3.33-3.41...Bird beats Young-Healthy Unleaping and Unathletic Hakeem for the Jump Ball :confusedshrug: [/COLOR][/B][/U]
[B]Larry Bird is liteterlly Everywhere doing Everything Well. Everything! :confusedshrug:
Kidds of Today Shut Up and Learn Your Basketball:hammerhead: [/B]
[QUOTE=stephanieg]Why the '84 Celtics and not the far superior '86 version? They actually had a bench then. The '08 Celtics would manhandle the '84 Celts...but '86 would probably involve some barn burners and brawls.[/QUOTE]
Are you being serious? The '84 team featured Kevin McHale and Danny Ainge coming off of the bench. Just those 2 alone makes the '84 bench better than the '86 bench. Carr, Buckner, and Wedman were no slouches either.
[QUOTE=plowking]Oh and Sir Charles, just on your breaking the rim and what not.
They've got high school kids doing that now, on stronger re-enforced rings. So while it is still a massive feat to do that, high school kids are doing it today, because the next generation gets stronger and stronger.[/QUOTE]
LOL ur point? Natural strength is good too.I have seen old school boxers knock out people now.U trying to say Ali would get destroyed today??U trying to say bird wouldn't be able to back down people today??When he backed down 230+ people on a daily basis.
[QUOTE=nycelt84]Are you being serious? The '84 team featured Kevin McHale and Danny Ainge coming off of the bench. Just those 2 alone makes the '84 bench better than the '86 bench. Carr, Buckner, and Wedman were no slouches either.[/QUOTE]
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :applause:
[B]And the 84 Celtics featured Cedric Maxwell to me one of the Most Underrated Forwards of All Time (Go Check Out his Scoring PPG and FG% per FGA and Per Minutes Played). If Coach Jones would have used Maxwell more in the 85 Finals and the Celtics where healthier then it would have gone to 7 games without question and who knows what would have happened...[/B]
[QUOTE=juju151111]LOL ur point? Natural strength is good too.I have seen old school boxers knock out people now.U trying to say Ali would get destroyed today??U trying to say bird wouldn't be able to back down people today??When he backed down 230+ people on a daily basis.[/QUOTE]
[B]Bird outrebounded people like 6`10 245 lbs Horace Grant and I`ve seen him Guard and Rebound over guys like 7`0 Kevin Willis, Buck Williams, Dennis Rodman etc..:hammerhead:
Larry Bird was strong as hell bone wise and had "masterful boxing out skill"s he could teach that skill to players of today....:rolleyes: :violin:
And by the way natural strenght is the only real strength: Ask Charles, as Rodman, ask Shaq...[/B]