Tim Duncan

[GGGG]

If I'm putting a team together of the best in the past 30 years:

PG  Magic
SG  Jordan
SF   Bird
PF   Duncan
C    Shaq (even thought he played until 1989, I'm excluding Jabbar from the past 30 years since his prime was mid 70's).

Here we go again.

No statistical justification for putting Bird in over Lebron.  James is the better player by far.

[Benny B]

Here we go again.

No statistical justification for putting Bird in over Lebron.  James is the better player by far.

Sure there is, we're talking only the past 30 years... and LeBron won't hit his prime until next year.

[GGGG]

Here's what I said about this before the Finals:

"He's a better shooter based on career eFG% (.532 v. .514) shooting roughly the same amount per game (19.7 v. 19.3).  He's a better passer, in terms of assist percentage (34.6% v. 24.7%).  He's more efficient based on PER....slightly better offensive and defensive ratings...almost 50 more win shares after the same number of seasons...turns the ball over less based on turnover percentage...etc. etc. etc.

Bird was a better rebounder based on total rebounding percentage.  He was also a better three point shooter - you would think "of course" right?  Only 37.6% 34%.  Or three additional makes over 100 shots.

Bird has one more championship (3 v. 2) in one less appearance (5 v. 6)

Larry Bird played with three additional members of the Basketball Hall of Fame (DJ, Parish, McHale).  Lebron didn't play with any his first go around in Cleveland...likely two in Miami...and a couple of "we'll see" type players now."


Of course James now has the same number of titles.  And did so in a playoff performance that exceeded every single one of Larry Bird's playoff performances every year for his entire career.  Bird never had a higher EFG% as James did these playoffs.  Never had a higher PER, assist percentage, win shares, etc. etc. etc.

There is absolutely no logical reason to say Bird was a better player than James.  None.

[MerrittsMustache]

Here's what I said about this before the Finals:

"He's a better shooter based on career eFG% (.532 v. .514) shooting roughly the same amount per game (19.7 v. 19.3).  He's a better passer, in terms of assist percentage (34.6% v. 24.7%).  He's more efficient based on PER....slightly better offensive and defensive ratings...almost 50 more win shares after the same number of seasons...turns the ball over less based on turnover percentage...etc. etc. etc.

Bird was a better rebounder based on total rebounding percentage.  He was also a better three point shooter - you would think "of course" right?  Only 37.6% 34%.  Or three additional makes over 100 shots.

Bird has one more championship (3 v. 2) in one less appearance (5 v. 6)

Larry Bird played with three additional members of the Basketball Hall of Fame (DJ, Parish, McHale).  Lebron didn't play with any his first go around in Cleveland...likely two in Miami...and a couple of "we'll see" type players now."


Of course James now has the same number of titles.  And did so in a playoff performance that exceeded every single one of Larry Bird's playoff performances every year for his entire career.  Bird never had a higher EFG% as James did these playoffs.  Never had a higher PER, assist percentage, win shares, etc. etc. etc.

There is absolutely no logical reason to say Bird was a better player than James.  None.

Did you take into consideration Bird's performance in Celtic Price compared to LeBron's in Trainwreck?

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

They're showing a bunch of old spurs games on NBA TV and it's amazing how different the game is. I only counted 3 attempted 3s in the first quarter of one game, which the Warriors sometime put up in a minute. Weren't many taken in the game until Stephen Jackson and Speedy Claxton started jacking up 3s to get the Spurs back in the game.

[forgetful]

Here's what I said about this before the Finals:

"He's a better shooter based on career eFG% (.532 v. .514) shooting roughly the same amount per game (19.7 v. 19.3).  He's a better passer, in terms of assist percentage (34.6% v. 24.7%).  He's more efficient based on PER....slightly better offensive and defensive ratings...almost 50 more win shares after the same number of seasons...turns the ball over less based on turnover percentage...etc. etc. etc.

Bird was a better rebounder based on total rebounding percentage.  He was also a better three point shooter - you would think "of course" right?  Only 37.6% 34%.  Or three additional makes over 100 shots.

Bird has one more championship (3 v. 2) in one less appearance (5 v. 6)

Larry Bird played with three additional members of the Basketball Hall of Fame (DJ, Parish, McHale).  Lebron didn't play with any his first go around in Cleveland...likely two in Miami...and a couple of "we'll see" type players now."


Of course James now has the same number of titles.  And did so in a playoff performance that exceeded every single one of Larry Bird's playoff performances every year for his entire career.  Bird never had a higher EFG% as James did these playoffs.  Never had a higher PER, assist percentage, win shares, etc. etc. etc.

There is absolutely no logical reason to say Bird was a better player than James.  None.

You are comparing statistics across eras, where style of play, rule emphasis, play design are all different. 

Bird played his career with 3 other HOF players and still put up gaudy stats.  Hard to do with having to share the ball around.  If Bird hadn't had back problems and required a double achilles surgery he would have had even more absurd numbers and more titles.

I'll also note that the further you go back in time, statistics like eFG%, PER, offensive and defensive ratings lose comparative value. 

You are free to prefer Lebron.  I've watched them both play extensively.  I'd much rather have Bird on my team than James.  Especially with Jordan already guaranteed a spot.

[Celtic Truth]

Here we go again.

No statistical justification for putting Bird in over Lebron.  James is the better player by far.

[GGGG]

You are comparing statistics across eras, where style of play, rule emphasis, play design are all different. 

Bird played his career with 3 other HOF players and still put up gaudy stats.  Hard to do with having to share the ball around.  If Bird hadn't had back problems and required a double achilles surgery he would have had even more absurd numbers and more titles.

I'll also note that the further you go back in time, statistics like eFG%, PER, offensive and defensive ratings lose comparative value. 

You are free to prefer Lebron.  I've watched them both play extensively.  I'd much rather have Bird on my team than James.  Especially with Jordan already guaranteed a spot.

I watched both extensively throughout their respective careers.  I think your preference is absurd.

Substitute Lebron onto those Celtics teams and they are better.  Substitute peak Bird onto this years Cavs team and I doubt they even make the Finals. 

[GGGG]

LOL.

You take Bird's peak year and compare it to arguably Lebron's worst.  WHAT A GREAT IDEA!!!

Career stats Lebron is way better.  Not even close.

[Benny B]

I watched both extensively throughout their respective careers.  I think your preference is absurd.

Substitute Lebron onto those Celtics teams and they are better.  Substitute peak Bird onto this years Cavs team and I doubt they even make the Finals. 

The problem is that you're overlooking the one obstacle that has nothing to do with performance or stats.  LeBron can't be on the same team with Jordan because you can't have two guys wearing the same number on their jersey.  I'm not making this up, it's actually in the NBA rule book... no two players may wear the same number on the court or be submitted to the scorekeeper as having the same number.

Sorry, but the correct answer is Larry Bird, period.  Debate over... unless you're going to exclude Jordan, in which case, I recommend you prepare for the imminent and universal onslaught against your sanity.

[wadesworld]

The problem is that you're overlooking the one obstacle that has nothing to do with performance or stats.  LeBron can't be on the same team with Jordan because you can't have two guys wearing the same number on their jersey.  I'm not making this up, it's actually in the NBA rule book... no two players may wear the same number on the court or be submitted to the scorekeeper as having the same number.

Sorry, but the correct answer is Larry Bird, period.  Debate over... unless you're going to exclude Jordan, in which case, I recommend you prepare for the imminent and universal onslaught against your sanity.

You'd be right, but remember, LeBron publicly lobbied for all NBA players to refuse to wear #23 in honor of MJ.  What an honorable guy.  Oh wait, he went right back to #23 himself?  Well, there goes that thought.  You're correct, then.

[forgetful]

I watched both extensively throughout their respective careers.  I think your preference is absurd.

Substitute Lebron onto those Celtics teams and they are better.  Substitute peak Bird onto this years Cavs team and I doubt they even make the Finals.

We are in disagreement.  Part of what made Larry Legend a legend was that he came on to a team with all-stars and turned them all into HOF players and a legendary dynasty.  He did that by being a consummate team player that didn't need the ball in his hands to dominate the game. 

He was a lot like Duncan in that regards.

All with a broken body that required him having to learn to run differently because of the severe pain in his back.

[GGGG]

We are in disagreement.  Part of what made Larry Legend a legend was that he came on to a team with all-stars and turned them all into HOF players and a legendary dynasty.  He did that by being a consummate team player that didn't need the ball in his hands to dominate the game. 

Again, that's just false and doesn't hold up to statistics.

Lebron has taken 19.7 FGA per game during his career.  18.2 per 36 minutes.  Larry took 19.3 and 18.1 respectively.  Negligible difference.

Lebron has more assist per game and per 36 (6.9 and 6.4) than Bird (6.3 and 6.0).  Furthermore his assist rate is much better than Birds.  34.6 v. 24.7.  All while turning the ball over less.

He didn't "make his teammates better."  There is absolutely no evidence of that.  He simply benefited from having better teammates. 

I think you are basing your opinion on some romantic notion because objectively you are wrong.

[Spotcheck Billy]

As a huge Bucks fan in Bird's day (we never missed when the Celtics, Lakers and Sixer's came to town) perhaps it's just my eternal hate for how good Bird's Celtics teams were but I feel that Lebron is no Larry Bird. It seems like Bird never missed a shot including those he took laying flat on his back.

[HouWarrior]

Sorry, but the correct answer is Larry Bird, period.  Debate over...

I always chuckle at this type of comment.

For some of cheapest drinks in town we would go to the workingmen's bar on 17th and National(?),
Invariably, there would always be some guy pretty far gone who would have all the answers, and begin his sentences with ..."I'll tell you what's really wrong with this world"...or ... "I dont care what anybody says".....and he'd end his BS with ....you guessed it....."period, end of sentence,debate over".
Of course ....we always agreed he was right on and buy him another drink.lol

[Celtic Truth]

Larry legend would bully lebron just like Pierce and Garnett did. Lebron is a mental midget and bird was a mental giant and a true winner. Bird dominated when the 3 point line wasn't even a big part of the game either. Rewatch the finals vs Dallas and learn all you need to know about lebron. Once in a lifetime talent but he has held himself back. Give me the overachiever over the underachiever anytime

[DegenerateDish]

Always found it interesting how huge of a Bears fan Duncan is.

[reinko]

Larry legend would bully lebron just like Pierce and Garnett did. Lebron is a mental midget and bird was a mental giant and a true winner. Bird dominated when the 3 point line wasn't even a big part of the game either. Rewatch the finals vs Dallas and learn all you need to know about lebron. Once in a lifetime talent but he has held himself back. Give me the overachiever over the underachiever anytime

Lookee everyone,  Tommy from Quinzee is in the house.

Not too mention,  I have lived in the Boston area for 13+ years,  you sir are in the 5% of C's fans that still believe that drivel above that you call a take.

[GGGG]

Larry legend would bully lebron just like Pierce and Garnett did. Lebron is a mental midget and bird was a mental giant and a true winner. Bird dominated when the 3 point line wasn't even a big part of the game either. Rewatch the finals vs Dallas and learn all you need to know about lebron. Once in a lifetime talent but he has held himself back. Give me the overachiever over the underachiever anytime

LOL...Lebron is as much of a "winner" as Bird is.  Same number of titles after same number of seasons.  These arguments are getting sillier by the post.

[Benny B]

I always chuckle at this type of comment.

That was the part that made you chuckle?  At least Sultan figured it out.

If only there was a font color we could all use to make the obvious more absurd (or vice versa).

[forgetful]

Again, that's just false and doesn't hold up to statistics my opinion.

In a completely different era and entirely different styles of play and types of officiating, Lebron has taken 19.7 FGA per game during his career.  18.2 per 36 minutes.  Larry took 19.3 and 18.1 respectively.  Negligible difference.

Lebron has more assist per game and per 36 (6.9 and 6.4) than Bird (6.3 and 6.0).  Furthermore his assist rate is much better than Birds.  34.6 v. 24.7 (This is one of the worst statistics out there).  All while turning the ball over less.

He didn't "make his teammates better."  There is absolutely no evidence of I refuse to believe that, because it doesn't fit my narrative.  He simply benefited from having better teammates, their improvement with him on the court was coincidental, and the decline in stats of Lebron's teammates means nothing.

I think you are basing your opinion on some romantic notion because objectively you are wrong I disagree with you.

Fixed it for you! 

Also, you are vastly undervaluing Bird and what he does without the ball.  Lebron requires the ball to impact the game.  Bird and Duncan impacted the game regardless.  That aspect never shows up in statistics that are highly dependent on style of play and officiating.

It is why Bird and Duncan will always be under appreciated. 

BTW stats:

Bird:          24.3 ppg   10.0 rpg   6.3 apg  1.7 spg  0.8 bpg  3.1 TO
James:       27.2 ppg    7.2 rpg    6.7 apg  1.7 spg  0.8 bpg 3.4 TO

Bird did that with an all-star cast that splits stats around.  Bird played in an era where 3pt shooting wasn't emphasized.  If you let Bird grow up with a 3pt line and it being a part of the game like it is now, his stats would climb considerably (he did with the first 3 3 pt contests for a reason).

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Larry legend would bully lebron just like Pierce and Garnett did. Lebron is a mental midget and bird was a mental giant and a true winner. Bird dominated when the 3 point line wasn't even a big part of the game either. Rewatch the finals vs Dallas and learn all you need to know about lebron. Once in a lifetime talent but he has held himself back. Give me the overachiever over the underachiever anytime

Says the Celtics fan. Don't know how you can say LeBron has underachieved.l or is a mental midget after putting the Cavs on his back during the finals. I don't like Lebron, I like Larry. But Lebron is such a better player than Larry Bird.

Also, I really want to like the Celtics this year. They have a very fun roster, I love Brad Stevens and Nader actually has a chance to make the team, but Boston fans just make it so hard to do.

[GGGG]

Lookee everyone,  Tommy from Quinzee is in the house.

Not too mention,  I have lived in the Boston area for 13+ years,  you sir are in the 5% of C's fans that still believe that drivel above that you call a take.

I don't mind a dude being a homer and being proud of his guy.  At some point however, even homers have to acknowledge the inherent bias in their homerism.

[GGGG]

Fixed it for you! 

Also, you are vastly undervaluing Bird and what he does without the ball.  Lebron requires the ball to impact the game.  Bird and Duncan impacted the game regardless.  That aspect never shows up in statistics that are highly dependent on style of play and officiating.

It is why Bird and Duncan will always be under appreciated. 

BTW stats:

Bird:          24.3 ppg   10.0 rpg   6.3 apg  1.7 spg  0.8 bpg  3.1 TO
James:       27.2 ppg    7.2 rpg    6.7 apg  1.7 spg  0.8 bpg 3.4 TO

Bird did that with an all-star cast that splits stats around.  Bird played in an era where 3pt shooting wasn't emphasized.  If you let Bird grow up with a 3pt line and it being a part of the game like it is now, his stats would climb considerably (he did with the first 3 3 pt contests for a reason).

No correction needed.  You are simply wrong.  Lebron James is a better basketball player than Bird.

And I have already addressed the statistical argument.  I will repeat it once again.

"He's a better shooter based on career eFG% (.532 v. .514) shooting roughly the same amount per game (19.7 v. 19.3).  He's a better passer, in terms of assist percentage (34.6% v. 24.7%).  He's more efficient based on PER....slightly better offensive and defensive ratings...almost 50 more win shares after the same number of seasons...turns the ball over less based on turnover percentage...etc. etc. etc.

Bird was a better rebounder based on total rebounding percentage.  He was also a better three point shooter - you would think "of course" right?  Only 37.6% 34%.  Or three additional makes over 100 shots."

[forgetful]

No correction needed.  You are simply wrong.  Lebron James is a better basketball player than Bird.

And I have already addressed the statistical argument.  I will repeat it once again.

"He's a better shooter based on career eFG% (.532 v. .514) shooting roughly the same amount per game (19.7 v. 19.3).  He's a better passer, in terms of assist percentage (34.6% v. 24.7%).  He's more efficient based on PER....slightly better offensive and defensive ratings...almost 50 more win shares after the same number of seasons...turns the ball over less based on turnover percentage...etc. etc. etc.

Bird was a better rebounder based on total rebounding percentage.  He was also a better three point shooter - you would think "of course" right?  Only 37.6% 34%.  Or three additional makes over 100 shots."

I'll repeat, you are comparing statistics across eras with different styles of play and different styles of officiating. 

In Birds era, the 3-pt shot was brand new.  They didn't grow up focusing on it as a major part of play.  Mid-range jump shots were much more prevalent.  Bird was a jump shooter, his eFG% is lower based on more 2-pt jump shots and fewer 3-pt attempts because of style of play.  James is a slasher/dunker, and a terrible jump shooter.  His eFG% is higher because of differences in style of play in the two eras.

Bird is a better shooter period.  To say otherwise based on statistics is ignorant of how the game is played.

And PER, assist percentage, ORT, DRT are other stats that don't compare well over eras.  Anything over 20 years ago shouldn't be compared directly using those stats.  Most of those stats you are using are largely based on the fact that Lebron dominates the ball and that Bird played on a team where the ball was shared around, and/or are overly influenced by how the role of the 3-pt shot changed over time.  They have little to do with aspects comparing players.

I'll take the team player that averaged 10% fewer pts, 42% more rebounds, 5% fewer assists, but 10% fewer turnovers.

I'll also note that Bird put up those rebounding numbers playing with HOF players Kevin McHale and Robert Parish.  He wasn't just a little better rebounder than Lebron, he was absurdly better.