Larry Bird - Greatest Clutch Player Ever - Top 3-5 GOAT

[DMAVS41]

The only difference is the wording. As long as you include context in your reasoning. Context is everything. As what it does is take into consideration the different roles and situations of the topic.

For instance, your elgin baylor example. I wholeheartedly agree with this. But for some reason you only try to use this logic for certain players. That I don't understand.

Let look at jlauber. Great poster. He's adjusted my way of thinking on basketball statistics. But he's extremly biased. And can't really put wilts accomplishments into proper perspective. The league was so diffeerent when he played. And defense has evolved so much. As well as the competition.

everything with you comes back to one example concerning pippen and magic. i don't flip flop around at all. and i don't base every argument off stats only.

what you want is for people to evaluate pippen like he was scoring 24 or 25 points a game because you think he could. even though he never did at any point in his career.

we just fundamentally disagree on the game of basketball. really nothing more to say. its not that i don't respect your opinions and views, its just that they are fundamentally different than mine. i honestly would say magic johnson was maybe 2 to 3 times better than pippen as a player. you think pippen was a better player. we are so far apart on that and our other views that it just isn't even worth debating anything.

and furthermore, you can't just claim that competition is much better now. is it really? for centers? no doubt the game has changed, but you have to account for some type of adaptation or just admit that the game of basketball is an art form. its not always about bigger/stronger/faster....how come steve nash is still so damn good? how about kevin love dominating the glass? how about dirk torching the league? and i could go on and on....the beauty of basketball is that it can be played so many different ways and each of them can be successful.

its like our debate about individual offense vs individual defense. you have a very stringent way of thinking. you think that the more "complete" player is always better than a specialized player. not the case at all. but once again, you don't see the game that way. you see a player like pippen and question how its possible that a guy like dirk is better. or magic. or bird...or barkely..etc. when they all were pretty clearly better in my opinion. the game just isn't that simple.

[jlauber]

The only difference is the wording. As long as you include context in your reasoning. Context is everything. As what it does is take into consideration the different roles and situations of the topic.

For instance, your elgin baylor example. I wholeheartedly agree with this. But for some reason you only try to use this logic for certain players. That I don't understand.

Let look at jlauber. Great poster. He's adjusted my way of thinking on basketball statistics. But he's extremly biased. And can't really put wilts accomplishments into proper perspective. The league was so diffeerent when he played. And defense has evolved so much. As well as the competition.

And yet, a PRIME Kareem had a season, in the middle of the 70's, when he shot .513 from the floor. He also had two other seasons, in his statistical and physical PRIME, in which he shot .539 and .529.

And how come Nate Thurmond could hold a PRIME Kareem to probably well under .450 shooting in their 50+ H2H games (and a HIGH game of 34 points), and yet, an OLD Kareem could bury Hakeem with THREE games of 40+, and hang a SEASON, in five H2h games, of 33.0 ppg on .634 shooting (as well as having a game against Ewing in that same 85-86 season, in which he outscored Patrick, 40-9, and outshot Ewing, 15-22 to 3-17)? Or that an OLD Wilt would hold a PRIME Kareem to .464 shooting in their 28 H2H games, and even blocked some 15+ skyhooks in the '72 WCF's (in a series in which Kareem shot .457, and only .414 over the last four games)?

Or that 6-9 Dave Cowens could outplay a PRIME Kareem in EVERY facet of the game in a game seven, and on Kareem's home floor?

[ShaqAttack3234]

I don't recall making that comment, but, I have stated that Bird's career FG% of .496 has to be taken in proper context. Bird played the entire decade of the "defenseless 80's", a decade in which EVERY player was shooting nearly 50%. The Lakers TEAM had a season of .548 shooting, and even the 30-52 Kings shot .504 one season.

The average player didn't take the amount of shots that Bird did either.

Bird was slightly below the league average from the field in '80 and '81 and equal to league average in '84. But he was also well above the league average in FT% and led the league in '84.

Look at '86 and '87, Bird clears the league average in FG% while also leading the league in made 3s and FT%.

And about Bird's '86 season.

Bird injured his back paving a driveway during the offseason and wasn't himself to start the season. At Christmas, Bird was averaging just 23.8 ppg, 9.4 rpg and 6.1 apg on 44.6 FG%/52.5 TS%. Far below his usual level. He averaged 26.8 ppg, 10.1 rpg and 7.1 apg on 52.3 FG%/61 TS% over the final 54 games. Right around Bird's usual numbers from '85-'88 and extremely similar to his '86 playoff numbers

THEN, in the post-season, Bird dropped to .472. AND, in his five Finals, he shot .455. In fact, Bird had as many games of shooting under 40%, as he did in shooting 50%+, 11 each, in his 31 Finals games. As for clutch, as was pointed out previously, Bird had some HORRIBLE shooting playoffs. In game seven of the '84 Finals, he shot 6-18. On top of that, in his best statistical regular seasons, he had some of his WORST post-seasons.

Bird's regular season stats from '80-'88 were 25/10/6 on 50 FG%/57 TS%. His playoff numbers were 25/11/6 on 48 FG%/56 TS% during that same time with injuries of course affecting him in the '83 and '85 playoffs and even causing him to miss games.

There's no real drop there. Even great playoff performers usually see a slight drop in efficiency like Bird did.

Who won that game 7 in '84? Bird averaged 27/14/4 on 48% shooting in that series, by the way.

Your mistake is that you seem to think that scoring summed up Bird's game or that statistics do his game justice. He was a great scorer, but I don't even think of him as primarily being a scoring. He was also the greatest passing forward ever, arguably the best rebounding small forward ever and contrary to some revisionist history, his team defense was excellent which is why he made 3 all-defensive second teams.

As far as his worst post seasons during his best regular seasons? Well, you can cite '88 and only his series vs Detroit was subpar.

As far as '85? If you actually knew what you were talking about then you'd know about Bird being injured and missing some games during this run. That's not exactly a secret. And his numbers for the playoffs were still very good, especially when you consider the injuries.

And how about his '84 championship run? He averaged 28/11/6 with 2.3 spg and 1.2 bpg on 52 FG%/61 TS%? Up from 24/10/7, 49 FG%/55 TS% and 1.8 spg/0.8 bpg during the season.

Then there's '86, he had excellent series in all 4 rounds and finished at 26/9/8/2 on 52 FG%/62 TS%. Averaged 27/10/7 on 48 FG%/58 TS% during the '87 playoffs.

Bird did have some subpar series and failures like every other player, but JLauber is making Bird out to be WAY worse than he is. He's already proven his ignorance on Bird many times as well as his bias against Bird.

[97 bulls]

And yet, a PRIME Kareem had a season, in the middle of the 70's, when he shot .513 from the floor. He also had two other seasons, in his statistical and physical PRIME, in which he shot .539 and .529.

And how come Nate Thurmond could hold a PRIME Kareem to probably well under .450 shooting in their 50+ H2H games (and a HIGH game of 34 points), and yet, an OLD Kareem could bury Hakeem with THREE games of 40+, and hang a SEASON, in five H2h games, of 33.0 ppg on .634 shooting (as well as having a game against Ewing in that same 85-86 season, in which he outscored Patrick, 40-9, and outshot Ewing, 15-22 to 3-17)? Or that an OLD Wilt would hold a PRIME Kareem to .464 shooting in their 28 H2H games, and even blocked some 15+ skyhooks in the '72 WCF's (in a series in which Kareem shot .457, and only .414 over the last four games)?

Or that 6-9 Dave Cowens could outplay a PRIME Kareem in EVERY facet of the game in a game seven, and on Kareem's home floor?

But your extrapolating a few games to make a weak point. Obviously kareem had some amazing games vs some young up an comming great centers. But he didn't avg 40 ppg the whole year. So what if I go back and just pick out a few of his not so good games vs some of the scrub centers? He obviously had them to bring his final end of the year avg to 17-20. What your saying isn't much. Older players always show up against the players that are supposed to be their eventual replacement.

[jlauber]

The average player didn't take the amount of shots that Bird did either.

Bird was slightly below the league average from the field in '80 and '81 and equal to league average in '84. But he was also well above the league average in FT% and led the league in '84.

Look at '86 and '87, Bird clears the league average in FG% while also leading the league in made 3s and FT%.

And about Bird's '86 season.

Bird injured his back paving a driveway during the offseason and wasn't himself to start the season. At Christmas, Bird was averaging just 23.8 ppg, 9.4 rpg and 6.1 apg on 44.6 FG%/52.5 TS%. Far below his usual level. He averaged 26.8 ppg, 10.1 rpg and 7.1 apg on 52.3 FG%/61 TS% over the final 54 games. Right around Bird's usual numbers from '85-'88 and extremely similar to his '86 playoff numbers



Bird's regular season stats from '80-'88 were 25/10/6 on 50 FG%/57 TS%. His playoff numbers were 25/11/6 on 48 FG%/56 TS% during that same time with injuries of course affecting him in the '83 and '85 playoffs and even causing him to miss games.

There's no real drop there. Even great playoff performers usually see a slight drop in efficiency like Bird did.

Who won that game 7 in '84? Bird averaged 27/14/4 on 48% shooting in that series, by the way.

Your mistake is that you seem to think that scoring summed up Bird's game or that statistics do his game justice. He was a great scorer, but I don't even think of him as primarily being a scoring. He was also the greatest passing forward ever, arguably the best rebounding small forward ever and contrary to some revisionist history, his team defense was excellent which is why he made 3 all-defensive second teams.

As far as his worst post seasons during his best regular seasons? Well, you can cite '88 and only his series vs Detroit was subpar.

As far as '85? If you actually knew what you were talking about then you'd know about Bird being injured and missing some games during this run. That's not exactly a secret. And his numbers for the playoffs were still very good, especially when you consider the injuries.

And how about his '84 championship run? He averaged 28/11/6 with 2.3 spg and 1.2 bpg on 52 FG%/61 TS%? Up from 24/10/7, 49 FG%/55 TS% and 1.8 spg/0.8 bpg during the season.

Then there's '86, he had excellent series in all 4 rounds and finished at 26/9/8/2 on 52 FG%/62 TS%. Averaged 27/10/7 on 48 FG%/58 TS% during the '87 playoffs.

Bird did have some subpar series and failures like every other player, but JLauber is making Bird out to be WAY worse than he is. He's already proven his ignorance on Bird many times as well as his bias against Bird.

I don't think that his '88 playoffs against Detroit, in arguably his greatest statistical regular season was his ONLY poor playoff series...but someone else beat me to it earlier...

Just look at Bird's long list of playoff failures while Dirk improves his play in the postseason:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1989- Injured doesn't play in the postseason.

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

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

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


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

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

Let's not put Bird on some god-like pedastal. Even one of his rings, in which he was not even the best player on the floor, was suspect, since it came at the hands of a 40-42 Rockets team.

And his SHOOTING in his FIVE Finals was downright pathetic. He shot .455 in his 31 Finals games (in leagues that averaged well over .480), and had as many games under 40%, as he did over 50% (11 of each.) He even had TWO games of under 30%!

BTW, a HEALTHY Magic probably wins rings in '81 (depriving Bird of one of his), and again in '89.

[D-Wade316]

Bird is indeed overrated. Without the rings, he would be called out for his epic choke job in the playoffs.

[AlphaWolf24]

I don't think that his '88 playoffs against Detroit, in arguably his greatest statistical regular season was his ONLY poor playoff series...but someone else beat me to it earlier...



Let's not put Bird on some god-like pedastal. Even one of his rings, in which he was not even the best player on the floor, was suspect, since it came at the hands of a 40-42 Rockets team.

And his SHOOTING in his FIVE Finals was downright pathetic. He shot .455 in his 31 Finals games (in leagues that averaged well over .480), and had as many games under 40%, as he did over 50% (11 of each.) He even had TWO games of under 30%!

BTW, a HEALTHY Magic probably wins rings in '81 (depriving Bird of one of his), and again in '89.

the most overrated player on the internet.....doesn't really take a rocket scientist to understand why either...

[ShaqAttack3234]

I don't think that his '88 playoffs against Detroit, in arguably his greatest statistical regular season was his ONLY poor playoff series

I meant it was his only poor series during the '88 run just so people wouldn't mistake it as a run where Bird played poorly for the entire playoffs.

...but someone else beat me to it earlier...

Yeah, and that post has a lot of garbage in it(as evidenced by the use of win shares) as well as ignorance. Which isn't to say to there's no useful information there, but completely ignores context, and ignores Bird's crippling back injury that plagued him in the early 90's and forced him to retire.

Let's not put Bird on some god-like pedastal. Even one of his rings, in which he was not even the best player on the floor, was suspect, since it came at the hands of a 40-42 Rockets team.

And this once again shows your ignorance. If you watched the series instead of focusing on one category in the stat column then you'd know that Bird was easily the Celtics best and most valuable player that series.

And you're also forgetting that Boston beat a 62-20 team to get to the finals that season.

And his SHOOTING in his FIVE Finals was downright pathetic. He shot .455 in his 31 Finals games (in leagues that averaged well over .480), and had as many games under 40%, as he did over 50% (11 of each.) He even had TWO games of under 30%!

What does the league average have to do with the finals? Last I checked, the average team doesn't play in the finals. And the league average wasn't well over 48% every year Bird was in the finals either.

BTW, a HEALTHY Magic probably wins rings in '81 (depriving Bird of one of his), and again in '89.

Magic arguably cost LA that series in '81 and wasn't even the best player on his own team(Kareem was the best in the league), a luxury Bird never had. Not sure how you can say that they probably win in '89 either. Makes me question your knowledge and objectivity once again.

And if you want to play that game. How about a healthy Bird in '85, or a healthy Celtics team in '87? Or if Bird never hurt his back? How many rings could he have finished with?

[colts19]

Your mistake is that you seem to think that scoring summed up Bird's game or that statistics do his game justice. He was a great scorer, but I don't even think of him as primarily being a scoring. He was also the greatest passing forward ever, arguably the best rebounding small forward ever and contrary to some revisionist history, his team defense was excellent which is why he made 3 all-defensive second teams

I think this is what everyone is missing. Birds scoring was great but it was the other things that seperated him from other great players. When Bird was shooting bad in a series, how many times did he get a key rebound or make a great pass when the game was on the line. He was also very good a getting steals in key situations.

I saw every home game Larry played in college, and one of the first things I noticed was that he could miss 10 shots in a row but still find a way to help his team win. Same thing in the NBA.

[jlauber]

I meant it was his only poor series during the '88 run just so people wouldn't mistake it as a run where Bird played poorly for the entire playoffs.



Yeah, and that post has a lot of garbage in it(as evidenced by the use of win shares) as well as ignorance. Which isn't to say to there's no useful information there, but completely ignores context, and ignores Bird's crippling back injury that plagued him in the early 90's and forced him to retire.



And this once again shows your ignorance. If you watched the series instead of focusing on one category in the stat column then you'd know that Bird was easily the Celtics best and most valuable player that series.

And you're also forgetting that Boston beat a 62-20 team to get to the finals that season.



What does the league average have to do with the finals? Last I checked, the average team doesn't play in the finals. And the league average wasn't well over 48% every year Bird was in the finals either.



Magic arguably cost LA that series in '81 and wasn't even the best player on his own team(Kareem was the best in the league), a luxury Bird never had. Not sure how you can say that they probably win in '89 either. Makes me question your knowledge and objectivity once again.

And if you want to play that game. How about a healthy Bird in '85, or a healthy Celtics team in '87? Or if Bird never hurt his back? How many rings could he have finished with?

As always you make some good points. Still, IMHO, and in terms of career accomplishments, I don't see Bird having a case over Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, nor Shaq and Duncan. I think it is a three-horse race for the 8th spot between Bird, Kobe, and possibly Hakeem.

[jlauber]

Your mistake is that you seem to think that scoring summed up Bird's game or that statistics do his game justice. He was a great scorer, but I don't even think of him as primarily being a scoring. He was also the greatest passing forward ever, arguably the best rebounding small forward ever and contrary to some revisionist history, his team defense was excellent which is why he made 3 all-defensive second teams

I think this is what everyone is missing. Birds scoring was great but it was the other things that seperated him from other great players. When Bird was shooting bad in a series, how many times did he get a key rebound or make a great pass when the game was on the line. He was also very good a getting steals in key situations.

I saw every home game Larry played in college, and one of the first things I noticed was that he could miss 10 shots in a row but still find a way to help his team win. Same thing in the NBA.

Good post. I certainly never claimed that Bird was not a great player. I just don't think he has the career resume of at least the top-seven... Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, and Duncan.

[97 bulls]

everything with you comes back to one example concerning pippen and magic. i don't flip flop around at all. and i don't base every argument off stats only.

what you want is for people to evaluate pippen like he was scoring 24 or 25 points a game because you think he could. even though he never did at any point in his career.

we just fundamentally disagree on the game of basketball. really nothing more to say. its not that i don't respect your opinions and views, its just that they are fundamentally different than mine. i honestly would say magic johnson was maybe 2 to 3 times better than pippen as a player. you think pippen was a better player. we are so far apart on that and our other views that it just isn't even worth debating anything.

and furthermore, you can't just claim that competition is much better now. is it really? for centers? no doubt the game has changed, but you have to account for some type of adaptation or just admit that the game of basketball is an art form. its not always about bigger/stronger/faster....how come steve nash is still so damn good? how about kevin love dominating the glass? how about dirk torching the league? and i could go on and on....the beauty of basketball is that it can be played so many different ways and each of them can be successful.

its like our debate about individual offense vs individual defense. you have a very stringent way of thinking. you think that the more "complete" player is always better than a specialized player. not the case at all. but once again, you don't see the game that way. you see a player like pippen and question how its possible that a guy like dirk is better. or magic. or bird...or barkely..etc. when they all were pretty clearly better in my opinion. the game just isn't that simple.

And again, you bring this back to scottie pippen. Why? I'm questioning your whole inconsistant philosophy. Not just your view on pippen. Its your overrating dirk, the offense/defense discussion we had, as well as scottie pippen. And this is among other things I've read from you since we've been chatting.

And yes the comparisons go far past eras. I just queestion why do you only give certain considerations to some players. Why does your criteria fluctuate? I remember you posting somethin to the effect that 30 ppg now holds a different weight from the early 00s. But why doesn't the same hold true for the 80s/90s comparisons?

I'm not saying wilt would be some scrub now. But I do try to put his amazing statistical accomplishments into context.

What larry bird, magic, dirk, jordan, and whoever else you want to name has done is amazing. But I've always maintained they won cuz they were on the best team. You don't realize how much of a luxery it is to be able to shoot 42% as your teams best player but still win? Or in magic johnsons case literraly not play a lick of defense?

And yes, there is more to basketball than just being the biggest, strongest and fastest. Again, I've aways maintained that you don't have to be a scorer to be effective. Nash uses skill. Love uses hustle and yes strength.

Then people will try to say "well, you can't build a team around etc." And my response is that your gonna need etc to win.

That's what I'm about bro. Winning.

[colts19]

Good post. I certainly never claimed that Bird was not a great player. I just don't think he has the career resume of at least the top-seven... Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, and Duncan.

You could be right, I always respect your post. I look at it differently in that if you look at their whole career you might think that Duncan was better than Bird, but if you just watch them play, I think it's clear Bird was better.

I would never argue Russell, Wilt or Kareem weren't better, but Mj, Magic to me are on the same level as Bird with Shaq and Duncan a little behind.

I will never place Shaq in my top 5 because he didn't make the most of his talent. Plus when you run over someone its a foul.

[Math2]

The thing about Bird is that he didn't need to score. Shooting bad? Fine, he'll distribute the ball masterfully. Or he'll mix it up in the boards. Or he'll energize the team with all-out hustle. And then, without fail, he'll hit the game winner.

[goldenboy_smith]

Greatest White Player Ever.

LMAO TRUE DAT