Do some people really think Larry Bird couldn't dominate like he did, in this era?

[cuad]

I saw some Larry Bird games on youtube. He was so white and so slow, and everybody would try to body him up in the post, but Larry Bird scored on them every single time. It looked ugly as hell, yes, but he just destroyed people.

[ralph_i_el]

If dirk can win a chip i don't see why bird can't win a couple in the same era

anyone who watches even 1 highlight video of him can see. shooting is king in any era

[TheBigVeto]

Translation: don't mind me I'm just sucking Pippen's d[COLOR="Black"]i[/COLOR]ck again.

Dude is Larry Bird's biggest hater in this board (outside of the Kobetards).

[Pushxx]

Dude is Larry Bird's biggest hater in this board (outside of the Kobetards).

Yep. The same guy who said Gerald Green would beat prime Larry Bird 1-on-1.

That was a fun one to argue with him. Read this page: http://insidehoops.com/forum/showthr...=249026&page=2 post #26

[Carbine]

His basketball IQ, his passing and fundamentals would translate to now and in a 100 years.

[BoutPractice]

I don't get the Dirk comparison.

Dirk is much taller and a more accurate shooter, which makes him a more dangerous overall scorer.
Bird is decisively better in most of the other aspects of the game. He's an all-around player.

They're different enough that you can't infer from one's dominance in this era that the other would succeed as well.

I do think Larry Bird would absolutely kick ass in this era, but it has nothing to do with Dirk. Just with the fact that he's Larry Bird.

[macmac]

I don't get the Dirk comparison.

Dirk is much taller and a more accurate shooter, which makes him a more dangerous overall scorer.
Bird is decisively better in most of the other aspects of the game. He's an all-around player.

They're different enough that you can't infer from one's dominance in this era that the other would succeed as well.

I do think Larry Bird would absolutely kick ass in this era, but it has nothing to do with Dirk. Just with the fact that he's Larry Bird.

What makes you think Dirk is a more accurate shooter? And the difference in height doesnt matter when one is more athletic and crafty to get their shot off whenever they want.

Dirk is not the better scorer nor all around player.

[Alan Shore]

if you underrate bird as a player in this era you demonstrate a shallow understanding not just of the player but the eras being compared.

he was a complete player, not a specialist. complete players are rare, especially today.

not only was he a rare complete player but the game for him was slowed down because of his combination of skills and court vision.

he was a tenacious competitor who was able to psych out opponents, get into their heads and under their skin. much of this was related to his arsenal of ball, head, shoulder, and foot fakes. that art of deception nullified whatever supposed faults he had so far as being slow and unathletic which in itself is kind of silly when you remember what he was like during the first half of his career. no doubt back problems caught up with him eventually but still....

once a franchise player, always a franchise player.

[livingby3's]

if he were to play in this era, style, mentality, will all change due to media, competition, and rules. I don't get why people keep bringing players back and fore in time. players ain't gonna be the same. I kinda get what u guys are saying but it's really like saying how a iPhone 5 today would dominate the phones of the past. just my personal input

[SHAQisGOAT]

Dirk is much taller and a more accurate shooter, which makes him a more dangerous overall scorer.

Got like 2 1/2 inches on Bird, not much taller, plus Bird was more athletic (before injuries).

More accurate shooter? Not a chance, plus Bird had a better postgame (outsides of their fadeaways), was better at driving, better from inside and ambidextrous from close range, crafty on a level above Dirk, so I don't see how Dirk is the more dangerous overall scorer.

[BoutPractice]

What makes you think Dirk is a more accurate shooter? And the difference in height doesnt matter when one is more athletic and crafty to get their shot off whenever they want.

> To answer your first question, it is
1) the fact that Dirk averaged more playoff PPG
2) the fact that he got to the line more, making him more reliable even when his shot was off
3) his better 3P percentage
2) the very small difference in playoff percentage between the two despite the fact that Dirk had to consistently create his own offense whereas Bird got looks off of doubles and other situations that allowed him to catch&shoot more often. (And that's discounting the difference in defense/pace in the 80s)

Against the Mavs, opposing teams could focus solely on stopping Dirk. Against the Celtics, you had to crowd the paint to prevent one on one situations for Parish and McHale.

Bird also had a lot of series where it was obvious that he was struggling to score at his usual elite level. He even had back to back 8 point games in the Finals. That's not because he was a choker, but because tough defense made it more difficult for him to score when his jumpshot was broken, whereas Dirk could use his height to draw fouls.

Also, in no universe is Dirk less athletic than Bird, especially taking into account the fact that Dirk is a 7 footer. Dirk was actually fairly athletic by Euro standards when he was young - a 7 footer who could play some SF. And that's not a diss on Bird, it's just a fact of nature that he wasn't the best basketball body - if anything it makes his accomplishments more impressive.

Besides, I agree that Bird is far and away the better overall player, and again, he would absolutely destroy players in this era.

[SHAQisGOAT]

> To answer your first question, it is
1) the fact that Dirk averaged more playoff PPG
2) the fact that he got to the line more, making him more reliable even when his shot was off
3) his better 3P percentage
2) the very small difference in playoff percentage between the two despite the fact that Dirk had to consistently create his own offense whereas Bird got looks off of doubles and other situations that allowed him to catch&shoot more often. (And that's discounting the difference in defense/pace in the 80s)

Against the Mavs, opposing teams could focus solely on stopping Dirk. Against the Celtics, you had to crowd the paint to prevent one on one situations for Parish and McHale.

Bird also had a lot of series where it was obvious that he was struggling to score at his usual elite level. He even had back to back 8 point games in the Finals. That's not because he was a choker, but because tough defense made it more difficult for him to score when his jumpshot was broken, whereas Dirk could use his height to draw fouls.

Also, in no universe is Dirk less athletic than Bird, especially taking into account the fact that Dirk is a 7 footer. Dirk was actually fairly athletic by Euro standards when he was young - a 7 footer who could play some SF. And that's not a diss on Bird, it's just a fact of nature that he wasn't the best basketball body - if anything it makes his accomplishments more impressive.

Besides, I agree that Bird is far and away the better overall player, and again, he would absolutely destroy players in this era.

1) First Bird got more than 1000 games than Dirk, 'till he was 35, let Dirk career reach the end. Still Bird averaged like 6.5 APG in the playoffs, Dirk has 2.6, Bird always looked to make the right play rather than being always the scorer. When he scored 60 points he had like 3 assists so you can see what a scorer he could've been, even had like 50+ points, 10+ assists games.

2) Do you really think if Bird played in this superstar treatment era, he wouldn't average the same or more, FTA than Dirk?

3) Bird injured his shooting finger right before entering the NBA, some say he was a better shooter in college, still he didn't come up with a 3pt line and to do what he did is terrific. Shooting is not only 3pt and Larry had a much better FG%, why don't you mention that?

4) Catch and shoot isn't creating offense? Dude was the better off ball player I've seen. Doubles from who McHale? Guy was a black hole, could pass but not really a passer. Bird could create his own shot in much more ways than Dirk. What defense? Seen the guys I posted in the OP, plus they could held, scratch and whatnot while he was shooting, against Dirk touch him and it's a foul. Much harder to shoot.


LOL don't give me that, it was the Finals in his second year, and he did a great all around job when he wasn't scoring, plus he had no player really playing like a superstar that year, he killed it when he had to.

Bird was more athletic than Dirk ever was when he was younger, if you don't know that you never saw him play. Look it up.

[BoutPractice]

I have seen games of both when they were young. And old.

I don't dispute the fact that Larry Bird is more than the slow, unathletic white guy some take him for.
But Dirk was very athletic when he was young as well... when he was 18, the way he ran the floor had scouts drooling over him. You'd think Dirk is pure skill, but he also benefits from a great body - tall, quick, agile, well conditioned.
Both are underrated in that regard.

[tontoz]

I am old enough that i watched Bird vs Magic in the 1979 NCAA finals so i remember Bird well. Watched his entire prime with the Cs.

He was a better overall player than Dirk for sure but not a better perimeter shooter than Dirk. Bird was much better in the post and getting to the basket than Dirk but was prone to slumps from the perimeter much moreso than Dirk.

[Poetry]

I kinda get what u guys are saying but it's really like saying how a iPhone 5 today would dominate the phones of the past. just my personal input

iPhone?

Technology is better today, but that doesn't necessarily mean every modern aspect of life dominates its past counterpart.

Shakespeare is still the GOAT writer for instance. And the only people who come close to him are writers from the past not the present.