PDA

View Full Version : If ESPN came out with it's list of Greatest SF's of All-time???



JordansBulls
03-08-2012, 03:23 PM
They have done the following thus far?

PF's --> 2005 - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2074360

PG's --> 2006 - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime-greatestpointguards

Centers's --> 2007 - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime-greatestcenters

SG's --> 2008 - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-greatestsgs


If ESPN came out with it's list of Greatest SF's of All-time??? What would the list look like right now?

Raps18-19 Champ
03-08-2012, 03:27 PM
Something similar to the greatest of all time list we made.

Or just look in the G.O.A.T project page.

celtNYpatsHeels
03-08-2012, 03:29 PM
are you implying thast Lebron would be espn's #1 SF?

celtNYpatsHeels
03-08-2012, 03:32 PM
my list

Larry
DR J
Havlicek
Baylor
Pippen
Wilkins
Worthy
English

Im done at 8, i cant think of anymore. lebron coule be #3 when he's done with his career

Forgot about Barry, King and Dantley. Maybe Pierce

Raps18-19 Champ
03-08-2012, 03:32 PM
are you implying thast Lebron would be espn's #1 SF?

Who's implying that?

kArSoN RyDaH
03-08-2012, 03:36 PM
Nearly 60K posts JB. Damn.

IversonIsKrazy
03-08-2012, 03:54 PM
It's weird that they delayed that list. ESPN could be waiting on LeBron's first ring then writing how he's #1 lol.

boolish
03-08-2012, 04:02 PM
Jeremy Lin would be right at the top.

Rivera
03-08-2012, 04:04 PM
Id say paul george is #1 because hes 6'10

Hellcrooner
03-08-2012, 04:10 PM
1 Jack Haley






























































the rest

b@llhog24
03-08-2012, 04:49 PM
Larry's still number one, but Lebron will probably overpass him.

Bruno
03-08-2012, 04:54 PM
LBJ needs a couple of finals MVPs to pass Bird in my book.

KB-Pau-DH2012
03-08-2012, 04:58 PM
Larry's still number one, but Lebron will probably overpass him.

Stats wise, LeBron


Everything else, Larry Legend.


I can't believe you guys insulting Larry like he's a walkover in the galore of NBA history.

Lakersfan2483
03-08-2012, 05:05 PM
1. Larry Bird
2. Julius Erving
3. Elgin Baylor
4. Lebron James (he will be higher when he retires)
5. Rick Barry
6. John Havlicek
7. Scottie Pippen
8. James Worthy
9. Dominique Wilkins
10. Paul Pierce

Honorable Mention: Alex English, Adrian Dantley, Carmelo Anthony, Bernard King

ghettosean
03-08-2012, 05:08 PM
Depends who makes the list if its Ric then he'll probably have Sonny Weems in there

asandhu23
03-08-2012, 05:13 PM
Ricardo Barry

BklynKnicks3
03-08-2012, 05:15 PM
lol @ worhty being better then Melo

Raph12
03-08-2012, 05:51 PM
Lebron's stats eat Larry's and Lebron hasn't had great, or even good, teammates until last season... If Lebron gets a ring or two, he surpasses Larry in my book.

Trueblue2
03-08-2012, 05:55 PM
Durrant will make that list by the end of his career. He's not on it yet, but when it's all said and done I see him anywhere 5-10 depending on team accomplishments.



And I think ESPN is waiting to make the list because of all the great/really good SF's in the league right now. It's never been a position saturated with talent until like 5 years ago.

JordansBulls
03-08-2012, 09:11 PM
It's weird that they delayed that list. ESPN could be waiting on LeBron's first ring then writing how he's #1 lol.

Yeah I'm not sure how they do those other lists one year apart on each and now 4 years later still not one for SF's as if they are waiting to put Lebron as high as possible.

KB-Pau-DH2012
03-08-2012, 09:17 PM
lol @ worhty being better then Melo

What has Carmelo Anthony ever accomplished in his career?

Absolutely nothing. He got out of the first round once, and that's due to Chauncey Billups. Do you even know that Carmelo Anthony hasn't won even one single individual NBA award in his 9 yrs in the league?

James Worthy had to subjugate his game to play with Kareem and Magic. Worthy was a 4 time NBA Champion and a 1-time Finals MVP, having a triple double in a game 7 of the finals against the Bad Boy Pistons.


Please, don't even compare Melo to Big Game James.

KB-Pau-DH2012
03-08-2012, 09:23 PM
Lebron's stats eat Larry's and Lebron hasn't had great, or even good, teammates until last season... If Lebron gets a ring or two, he surpasses Larry in my book.

Larry's Rings (3), Finals MVP (2) and countless regular and playoff heroic and clutch plays eat LeBron for breakfast.

I don't hate LeBron, but some of you guys love to put him on a pedestal and give him a quick chance to surpass the all-time greats based alone on stats, PER, win share % etc. etc.


You can say he is the most physically gifted small forward of all-time with the greatest stats at that position. Even with 1 or 2 rings however, I don't think he surpasses Larry.


Larry was a killer on the court from day one of his college days in Indiana to his first day as a Celtic in the NBA. He had that killer's mentality and hated it to lose under any circumstances.

Slimsim
03-08-2012, 09:25 PM
Benard king

bulldog312
03-08-2012, 09:32 PM
lol @ worhty being better then Melo

Sarcasm?

IndiansFan337
03-08-2012, 10:19 PM
are you implying thast Lebron would be espn's #1 SF?

Right now he wouldn't be ahead of Larry Bird, but he certainly could be once his career is over.

theheatles
03-08-2012, 10:26 PM
lol amare is 11 as PF just behind dirk at 10

valade16
03-08-2012, 11:47 PM
Lebron's stats eat Larry's and Lebron hasn't had great, or even good, teammates until last season... If Lebron gets a ring or two, he surpasses Larry in my book.

Eat Larry's? :laugh: no, they don't.

According to basketballreference.com LeBron's highest efficiency rating was 32.82 (it doesn't have this years) while Larry Legend had 34 or above 3 times.

Larry had comparable stats to Bron, just stop with the Bron grovelling...

amos1er
03-09-2012, 12:03 AM
Larry's Rings (3), Finals MVP (2) and countless regular and playoff heroic and clutch plays eat LeBron for breakfast.

I don't hate LeBron, but some of you guys love to put him on a pedestal and give him a quick chance to surpass the all-time greats based alone on stats, PER, win share % etc. etc.


You can say he is the most physically gifted small forward of all-time with the greatest stats at that position. Even with 1 or 2 rings however, I don't think he surpasses Larry.


Larry was a killer on the court from day one of his college days in Indiana to his first day as a Celtic in the NBA. He had that killer's mentality and hated it to lose under any circumstances.

This.

beliges
03-09-2012, 01:36 AM
Lebron's stats eat Larry's and Lebron hasn't had great, or even good, teammates until last season... If Lebron gets a ring or two, he surpasses Larry in my book.

Thats just a silly statement. Bird would put up 25+ppg 10+ rpg and 6+ apg routinely year after year. One of the top 7 or 8 players to ever play the game. Lebron puts up great statistical numbers no doubt, but you gotta remember there are others out there who did it before him and did it better than him. Not only did Bird put up similar numbers, but hes got 3 titles and a few Finals MVPs.

Raph12
03-09-2012, 01:38 AM
.

Raph12
03-09-2012, 01:39 AM
Larry's Rings (3), Finals MVP (2) and countless regular and playoff heroic and clutch plays eat LeBron for breakfast.

I don't hate LeBron, but some of you guys love to put him on a pedestal and give him a quick chance to surpass the all-time greats based alone on stats, PER, win share % etc. etc.


You can say he is the most physically gifted small forward of all-time with the greatest stats at that position. Even with 1 or 2 rings however, I don't think he surpasses Larry.


Larry was a killer on the court from day one of his college days in Indiana to his first day as a Celtic in the NBA. He had that killer's mentality and hated it to lose under any circumstances.

Nobody cares about what he did in college, Melo won a national championship in both HS and college, but it doesn't do anything for his NBA rankings. As for the comparison, a ring or two and everyone will be saying "Larry-who?"


Eat Larry's? :laugh: no, they don't.

According to basketballreference.com LeBron's highest efficiency rating was 32.82 (it doesn't have this years) while Larry Legend had 34 or above 3 times.

Larry had comparable stats to Bron, just stop with the Bron grovelling...

LMFAO!!! No Larry's highest PER was 27.8, which Lebron has already eclipsed in 5 different seasons lol. No one in league history has put up 33+ like Lebron is doing this season and Lebron's playoffs numbers are significantly better as well; statswise it isn't even close.

Larry's numbers are weak always have been, playing with McHale and Parish did wonders for his career; now that Lebron has some great players to play with, we'll see how he does as well... Oh and Finals in their first season together is a GREAT start.

beliges
03-09-2012, 02:02 AM
Nobody cares about what he did in college, Melo won a national championship in both HS and college, but it doesn't do anything for his NBA rankings. As for the comparison, a ring or two and everyone will be saying "Larry-who?"



LMFAO!!! No Larry's highest PER was 27.8, which Lebron has already eclipsed in 5 different seasons lol. No one in league history has put up 33+ like Lebron is doing this season and Lebron's playoffs numbers are significantly better as well; statswise it isn't even close.

Larry's numbers are weak always have been, playing with McHale and Parish did wonders for his career; now that Lebron has some great players to play with, we'll see how he does as well... Oh and Finals in their first season together is a GREAT start.

Where exactly are you getting your information from? Bird has put up numbers just as good, if not better, than Lebron's. As I said earlier, he has routinely averaged 26-10-6. Nobody is trying to diminish Lebron's game but you dont need to just make stuff up to make him look better. Lebron's great as he is. But you need to remember, all-time greats dont just become all time greats for nothing. Bird not only put up numbers as good as Lebron's, but he did so while winning. Lebron will probably get his very soon. But as far as right now and the immediate future, Bird is still the #1 SF. In 10 years it might be a different story.

Raph12
03-09-2012, 02:11 AM
Where exactly are you getting your information from? Bird has put up numbers just as good, if not better, than Lebron's. As I said earlier, he has routinely averaged 26-10-6. Nobody is trying to diminish Lebron's game but you dont need to just make stuff up to make him look better. Lebron's great as he is. But you need to remember, all-time greats dont just become all time greats for nothing. Bird not only put up numbers as good as Lebron's, but he did so while winning. Lebron will probably get his very soon. But as far as right now and the immediate future, Bird is still the #1 SF. In 10 years it might be a different story.

Per game averages don't mean smack dude, the game has changed and stats have to be adjusted; Larry's advanced numbers (PER, WS48, AST%, OWS, DWS, etc...) were weak and don't hold up among all-time greats... Bird is #1, but if Lebron gets a pair of rings (as Finals MVP), the comparison is over.

IrightI
03-09-2012, 05:13 AM
Nobody cares about what he did in college, Melo won a national championship in both HS and college, but it doesn't do anything for his NBA rankings. As for the comparison, a ring or two and everyone will be saying "Larry-who?"



LMFAO!!! No Larry's highest PER was 27.8, which Lebron has already eclipsed in 5 different seasons lol. No one in league history has put up 33+ like Lebron is doing this season and Lebron's playoffs numbers are significantly better as well; statswise it isn't even close.

Larry's numbers are weak always have been, playing with McHale and Parish did wonders for his career; now that Lebron has some great players to play with, we'll see how he does as well... Oh and Finals in their first season together is a GREAT start.

hmm where was this game played at?

BklyNyk
03-09-2012, 05:53 AM
Anyone in this thread trying to discredit Larry Bird should delete their account at once. You can't be ****ing serious. I can GUARANTEE that said posters never saw Bird play. Stop speaking out of your ***. Your opinion is worth less than dog **** at this point.

Swashcuff
03-09-2012, 06:48 AM
lol @ worhty being better then Melo

This right here is the reason good Knicks fans get a bad name on PSD :pity:

eugene
03-09-2012, 07:08 AM
No love for Clyde Drexler??

b@llhog24
03-09-2012, 12:52 PM
Lebron is a better player than Bird ever was. As I said Bird is still #1 but when its all send and then once Bron-Bron has rings it'll be no comparison. And I don't even like the guy.

b@llhog24
03-09-2012, 12:54 PM
No love for Clyde Drexler??

Drexler's normally viewed as SG.

valade16
03-09-2012, 01:23 PM
LMFAO!!! No Larry's highest PER was 27.8, which Lebron has already eclipsed in 5 different seasons lol. No one in league history has put up 33+ like Lebron is doing this season and Lebron's playoffs numbers are significantly better as well; statswise it isn't even close.

Larry's numbers are weak always have been, playing with McHale and Parish did wonders for his career; now that Lebron has some great players to play with, we'll see how he does as well... Oh and Finals in their first season together is a GREAT start.

I didn't say PER, I said EFF, they are different stats.

Statwise it isn't even close eh? The only thing that's not close is your opinion of LeBron and reality, look at the career advanced stats below:

eFG%
Bron .516
Bird .514

TS%
Bron .569
Bird .564

TRB%
Bron 10.5%
Bird 14.5%

AST%
Bron 34.2%
Bird 24.7%

STL%
Bron 2.3%
Bird 2.2%

BLK%
Bron 1.6%
Bird 1.2%

TO%
Bron 12.0%
Bird 12.7%

Ortg
Bron 115
Bird 115

Drtg
Bron 102
Bird 101

They are literally neck and neck in virtually every category, which really makes me wonder how LeBron has such a higher PER to begin with.

But you and your clearly childish view of the history of the game shows the epidemic with these advanced stats, every single person who watched him play said Larry was one of the best to ever play the game, simply phenomenal. Heck, he won 3 straight MVPs in a league with Jordan, Magic, and Hakeem.

Yet your going to come in here and tell me Bird's stats were "weak"? :speechless: Honestly, personally, you've just lost your ability to give any kind of valid insight into the game of basketball.

If your so in love with numbers, go find a math forum and get to it, but if you really want to know about Basketball, I suggest you shut up and listen to what people say about Larry Bird, oh, and go try to tell ANYBODY in the NBA that Larry's stats were weak...

valade16
03-09-2012, 01:26 PM
Lebron is a better player than Bird ever was. As I said Bird is still #1 but when its all send and then once Bron-Bron has rings it'll be no comparison. And I don't even like the guy.

Translated as: I never saw Larry Bird play.

Lakers + Giants
03-09-2012, 01:30 PM
lol @ worhty being better then Melo

LMFAO he was :laugh:

Melo sucks. . .

Worthy>Melo all day, easily

beliges
03-09-2012, 01:34 PM
Per game averages don't mean smack dude, the game has changed and stats have to be adjusted; Larry's advanced numbers (PER, WS48, AST%, OWS, DWS, etc...) were weak and don't hold up among all-time greats... Bird is #1, but if Lebron gets a pair of rings (as Finals MVP), the comparison is over.

You were the one saying Bird's #'s arent even close to Lebron's. The numbers I showed essentially tells you that not only were Bird's numbers just as good, but in certain circumstances, they were better. And please, enough with these PER, WS48, DWS crap. You do understand those numbers are generated from a subjective formula by a single individual right? They are novelty stats, not real stats. Anyone can generate a formula to make their player's stats look more impressive than another player. WHat doesnt lie however are raw numbers and success. Lebron is not on Bird's level yet. After a couple of championships itll be a better debate. But right now, theres no point.

BGeer091
03-09-2012, 01:59 PM
I can't believe that people are really acting like Bird was a bum. The guy could do it all. I know that LeBron scores, assists, and rebounds. Well Bird was probably one of the best shooters ever. He was clutch. His defense is just as good as LeBrons. I feel like the argument for LeBron is only because he is in the here and now. Most of the people couldn't have seen Bird play, and still think LeBron is better.

For me the top 10 are this.

1. Bird
2. Pippen
3. Havelicek
4. Dr. J
5. LeBron
6. Wilkins
7. Worthy
8. English
9. Bernard King
10. Reggie Miller

Swashcuff
03-09-2012, 02:34 PM
I can't believe that people are really acting like Bird was a bum. The guy could do it all. I know that LeBron scores, assists, and rebounds. Well Bird was probably one of the best shooters ever. He was clutch. His defense is just as good as LeBrons. I feel like the argument for LeBron is only because he is in the here and now. Most of the people couldn't have seen Bird play, and still think LeBron is better.

For me the top 10 are this.

1. Bird
2. Pippen
3. Havelicek
4. Dr. J
5. LeBron
6. Wilkins
7. Worthy
8. English
9. Bernard King
10. Reggie Miller

One of these things is not like the others one of these things just doesn't belong. :whistle:

Cano4prez
03-09-2012, 02:51 PM
One of these things is not like the others one of these things just doesn't belong. :whistle:

:laugh2:

PatsSoxKnicks
03-09-2012, 02:55 PM
I can't believe that people are really acting like Bird was a bum. The guy could do it all. I know that LeBron scores, assists, and rebounds. Well Bird was probably one of the best shooters ever. He was clutch. His defense is just as good as LeBrons. I feel like the argument for LeBron is only because he is in the here and now. Most of the people couldn't have seen Bird play, and still think LeBron is better.

For me the top 10 are this.

1. Bird
2. Pippen
3. Havelicek
4. Dr. J
5. LeBron
6. Wilkins
7. Worthy
8. English
9. Bernard King
10. Reggie Miller

I think Bird is for now the better player but his defense was not better than Lebron's. In fact, I've seen claims that Larry's D was overrated. Lebron, is right now, the best perimeter defender in the NBA (or Iggy is). Larry was never the best perimeter defender in the NBA. In fact, apparently, McHale used to be the one who drew the tough assignments on defense.

As for the rest of their game, there's no doubt Bird was the better shooter. Not sure about the passing and rebounding. Lebron is the better scorer though.

valade16
03-09-2012, 03:09 PM
I think Bird is for now the better player but his defense was not better than Lebron's. In fact, I've seen claims that Larry's D was overrated. Lebron, is right now, the best perimeter defender in the NBA (or Iggy is). Larry was never the best perimeter defender in the NBA. In fact, apparently, McHale used to be the one who drew the tough assignments on defense.

As for the rest of their game, there's no doubt Bird was the better shooter. Not sure about the passing and rebounding. Lebron is the better scorer though.

And here's where the advanced stats kind of get called into question, according to Drtg Bird was everybit as good as LeBron (when in reality it's obvious LeBron is a better defender), but according to Ortg LeBron is apparently better than Bird when it's painfully obvious Bird was a better shooter, 3-pt shooter, better post-up player, etc.

So at what point do you trust what everyone says and you observe, or the advanced stats?

Raph12
03-09-2012, 03:40 PM
I didn't say PER, I said EFF, they are different stats.

Statwise it isn't even close eh? The only thing that's not close is your opinion of LeBron and reality, look at the career advanced stats below:

eFG%
Bron .516
Bird .514

TS%
Bron .569
Bird .564

TRB%
Bron 10.5%
Bird 14.5%

AST%
Bron 34.2%
Bird 24.7%

STL%
Bron 2.3%
Bird 2.2%

BLK%
Bron 1.6%
Bird 1.2%

TO%
Bron 12.0%
Bird 12.7%

Ortg
Bron 115
Bird 115

Drtg
Bron 102
Bird 101

They are literally neck and neck in virtually every category, which really makes me wonder how LeBron has such a higher PER to begin with.

But you and your clearly childish view of the history of the game shows the epidemic with these advanced stats, every single person who watched him play said Larry was one of the best to ever play the game, simply phenomenal. Heck, he won 3 straight MVPs in a league with Jordan, Magic, and Hakeem.

Yet your going to come in here and tell me Bird's stats were "weak"? :speechless: Honestly, personally, you've just lost your ability to give any kind of valid insight into the game of basketball.

If your so in love with numbers, go find a math forum and get to it, but if you really want to know about Basketball, I suggest you shut up and listen to what people say about Larry Bird, oh, and go try to tell ANYBODY in the NBA that Larry's stats were weak...

Career is irrelevant bro, Lebron came out of highschool while Larry Legend played 4yrs of college ball. If you compare numbers from Lebron at the age of 23-to-present (when Larry got into the league), he eats Larry statswise.

A ring or two and this comparison is about as close as MJ vs Kobe.

b@llhog24
03-09-2012, 05:08 PM
Translated as: I never saw Larry Bird play.

Ok?

valade16
03-09-2012, 05:12 PM
Career is irrelevant bro, Lebron came out of highschool while Larry Legend played 4yrs of college ball. If you compare numbers from Lebron at the age of 23-to-present (when Larry got into the league), he eats Larry statswise.

A ring or two and this comparison is about as close as MJ vs Kobe.

Why don't you just come out and say what's really on your mind "Anything that refutes LeBron as being the best ever is irrelevant bro."

The NBA, where 12 year old stat geeks think they know everything.

b@llhog24
03-09-2012, 05:19 PM
And here's where the advanced stats kind of get called into question, according to Drtg Bird was everybit as good as LeBron (when in reality it's obvious LeBron is a better defender), but according to Ortg LeBron is apparently better than Bird when it's painfully obvious Bird was a better shooter, 3-pt shooter, better post-up player, etc.

So at what point do you trust what everyone says and you observe, or the advanced stats?

You should never use stats alone to evaluate a player that is one thing, second Drtg is influence by your teamates thus Bird's Drtg is inflated due to playing with Mchale, Parish, basically a good defensive team in general. Lebron's Ortg basically because 2 points is 2 points no matter how you score them via fadeaway, jumpers, etc. Difference is Lebron converts his two points at a higher rate.

JordansBulls
03-09-2012, 05:27 PM
Lebron is a better player than Bird ever was. As I said Bird is still #1 but when its all send and then once Bron-Bron has rings it'll be no comparison. And I don't even like the guy.

Bird never lost 3 years in a row with HCA. He did lose 7 series with it though. Lebron has lost 3 years in a row while having HCA and being the heavy favorite. And whether you think he should not have won the title, the fact is he lost to teams he should have beaten in the playoffs which is what matters.

b@llhog24
03-09-2012, 05:56 PM
Bird never lost 3 years in a row with HCA. He did lose 7 series with it though. Lebron has lost 3 years in a row while having HCA and being the heavy favorite. And whether you think he should not have won the title, the fact is he lost to teams he should have beaten in the playoffs which is what matters.

So basically Bird had the better team? Thanks.

valade16
03-09-2012, 06:05 PM
So basically Bird had the better team? Thanks.

Like last year right :rolleyes:

b@llhog24
03-09-2012, 06:09 PM
[QUOTE=valade16;21267522]Like last year right :rolleyes:]

Sample size isn't large enough if you're meaning years when Lebron had a good enough cast to win and didn't. And the Bird's Celtics team-Bird>Last Year's Miami Heat's team-Lebron.

valade16
03-09-2012, 06:38 PM
[QUOTE=valade16;21267522]Like last year right :rolleyes:]

Sample size isn't large enough if you're meaning years when Lebron had a good enough cast to win and didn't. And the Bird's Celtics team-Bird>Last Year's Miami Heat's team-Lebron.

Context my friend.

Showtime Lakers > Anyone the Heat faced.

Raph12
03-09-2012, 06:44 PM
Why don't you just come out and say what's really on your mind "Anything that refutes LeBron as being the best ever is irrelevant bro."

The NBA, where 12 year old stat geeks think they know everything.

I'm 23 grandpa, and judging by how you analyze players, I'd say you're either a 40+yr old man clinging to his childhood/prime years or just not bright enough to effectively compare players... Statswise Lebron's prime eats Bird's, so if you don't like it, tough.

mightybosstone
03-09-2012, 07:00 PM
Strictly my opinion and with very little digging, but my list would look like this:
1. Larry Bird
2. John Havlicek
3. Lebron James
4. Julius Irving
5. Scottie Pippen
6. Elgin Baylor
7. Rick Barry
8. Dominique Wilkins
9. Paul Pierce
10. James Worthy

I understand the advanced statistical reasoning behind Lebron being the GOAT, but I can't justify putting him ahead of Larry Legend or Hondo when they were superior clutch players and have the rings to prove it. I did laugh at some other people's lists, though. Baylor ahead of Havlicek? Reggie Miller a SF? Melo better than Worthy? :laugh:

b@llhog24
03-09-2012, 07:10 PM
[QUOTE=b@llhog24;21267579]

Context my friend.

Showtime Lakers > Anyone the Heat faced.

And this proves?

naps
03-09-2012, 07:26 PM
Bird never lost 3 years in a row with HCA. He did lose 7 series with it though. Lebron has lst 3 years in a row while having HCA and being the heavy favorite. And whether you think he should not have won the title, the fact is he lost to teams he should have beaten in the playoffs which is what matters.

cleveland was an one man team that overachieved during the regular season. That cleveland team minus Lebron james was the worst team in the league. Lebron never played with hall of famers in their prime. better record in regular season doesn't mean you are supposed to be the best team in the playoffs too. stop. making your oinaions look like rules and laws.

beliges
03-09-2012, 09:32 PM
cleveland was an one man team that overachieved during the regular season. That cleveland team minus Lebron james was the worst team in the league. Lebron never played with hall of famers in their prime. better record in regular season doesn't mean you are supposed to be the best team in the playoffs too. stop. making your oinaions look like rules and laws.

Lebron is on the best team in the league now. He has more talent around him than probably any other player right now with two superstars in their primes playing by his side. He needs to win 2 or 3 titles at least before anyone can possibly place him above guys like Bird. Yes, Lebron is in the moment and hes the best now, but people are quick to forget that there have been greats that came before him, did it better than him, and dominated the league in a way Lebron has been unable so far in his career. Putting up great regular season numbers does not put one up there with the all-time greats like Bird. He needs to win when it matters and he needs to do it over and over and over again before he can reach that level.

KnicksorBust
03-09-2012, 10:22 PM
Strictly my opinion and with very little digging, but my list would look like this:
1. Larry Bird
2. John Havlicek
3. Lebron James
4. Julius Irving
5. Scottie Pippen
6. Elgin Baylor
7. Rick Barry
8. Dominique Wilkins
9. Paul Pierce
10. James Worthy

I understand the advanced statistical reasoning behind Lebron being the GOAT, but I can't justify putting him ahead of Larry Legend or Hondo when they were superior clutch players and have the rings to prove it. I did laugh at some other people's lists, though. Baylor ahead of Havlicek? Reggie Miller a SF? Melo better than Worthy? :laugh:

MBT, Aren't we due for a redraft soon? :clap:

Anyway, this is actually a ****ing boss list. It gives Pip mad respect. I put LeBron over Johnny Havlicek stole the ball but otherwise great list. Hits all the checkmarks. I'm also very high on Barry but he's in about the right spot. The toughest of all-time for me to rank is Elgin Baylor.

mightybosstone
03-09-2012, 10:59 PM
Lebron is on the best team in the league now. He has more talent around him than probably any other player right now with two superstars in their primes playing by his side. He needs to win 2 or 3 titles at least before anyone can possibly place him above guys like Bird. Yes, Lebron is in the moment and hes the best now, but people are quick to forget that there have been greats that came before him, did it better than him, and dominated the league in a way Lebron has been unable so far in his career. Putting up great regular season numbers does not put one up there with the all-time greats like Bird. He needs to win when it matters and he needs to do it over and over and over again before he can reach that level.

I agree with this to some extent, which is why I refuse to place him ahead of Bird or Hondo. But the guy is bound to win at least one title, and once he's got a couple in his belt, there is nothing preventing him from leapfrogging Bird and becoming the greatest SF of all time. If he ever realizes his full potential and starts winning rings like Jordan, he still has the potential to be the greatest player of all time, period.

If he manages to break both the single season PER and WS/48 records (which he's on pace to do) while winning a title, MVP and Finals MVP, it will be hard to argue against this being the single greatest season a player has had in NBA history.

mightybosstone
03-09-2012, 11:02 PM
MBT, Aren't we due for a redraft soon? :clap:

Anyway, this is actually a ****ing boss list. It gives Pip mad respect. I put LeBron over Johnny Havlicek stole the ball but otherwise great list. Hits all the checkmarks. I'm also very high on Barry but he's in about the right spot. The toughest of all-time for me to rank is Elgin Baylor.

You can pretty much swap Barry and Baylor back and forth, and it doesn't matter one way or the other, but I'm sticking by Hondo over Lebron until the King earns his crown. If he wins one title, he takes the No. 2 spot, if he wins two titles, he takes the No. 1 spot IMO.

But, yeah, it's about time for another re-draft. I've got a fever, and the only medicine is an NBA re-draft. :nod:

(And I was totally kidding I said the last one was going to be my last. I'm pretty sure that I'm addicted and I'll be doing re-drafts until I die or until professional sports no longer exist.)

Raps18-19 Champ
03-09-2012, 11:03 PM
You kept on your Rockets All Time Redraft sig?

My sig was better than yours though. It had the Italian Stallion.

mightybosstone
03-09-2012, 11:05 PM
You kept on your Rockets All Time Redraft sig?

My sig was better than yours though. It had the Italian Stallion.

Pft... I picked 28th and made it to the second round in a stacked conference. I wear my sig like a badge of honor. Plus, I'm just way too lazy to change it.

But, seriously, someone needs to get working on the next NBA re-draft. We had a nice little hiatus, but I'm ready to go...

Raps18-19 Champ
03-09-2012, 11:39 PM
I picked 27 and made a decent comback after being ranked pretty much last before I made my trades.

I've been waiting for it to start too. Hopefully they don't start one like 1 or 2 weeks before Finals.

Bos_Sports4Life
03-10-2012, 12:02 AM
Give me Bird...Every day of the Week.

PG- Magic SG- MJ SF- Bird PF- Duncan C- Russell...Greatest players ever at there position..

JordansBulls
03-10-2012, 12:40 AM
So basically Bird had the better team? Thanks.

And playing against much better teams as well.

GottaLoveCubs
03-10-2012, 01:45 AM
What a lot of you Lebron stat lovers don't realize is how the game has changed from when Bird played it till now. The rules have changed to make scoring much easier. You can throw out all the pers and crap you want, but if Bird played in this era, he'd avg 40pts a game.

mightybosstone
03-10-2012, 02:17 AM
What a lot of you Lebron stat lovers don't realize is how the game has changed from when Bird played it till now. The rules have changed to make scoring much easier. You can throw out all the pers and crap you want, but if Bird played in this era, he'd avg 40pts a game.

No he wouldn't. I love Larry Bird's game, and you can certainly add a few points to his total, but 40 points a game is ****ing ridiculous. In the history of the NBA only one player has averaged 40 ppg, and that was Wilt playing in 62 and 63 against pitiful, short, slow white dudes. Kobe averaged a ridiculous 35.4 in 06 and he did it in 27 freakin' shots a game and an insane 38.7 USG%. Bird never averaged more than 20.3 shots a game or higher than a 30.2 USG% in his entire career (both of which are still pretty high). So, clearly you have no idea of what you're talking about.

And the reason why Lebron will eventually go down as the greatest SF in the history of the NBA isn't because the dude can just score, it's because he's got unbelievable court vision and passing ability for a SF, as well as crazy good rebounding, shot blocking and steals numbers to go with freak athleticism. He's like a 6'8" Oscar Robertson. The best all around game of any wing player in the history of the NBA. Period.

PatsSoxKnicks
03-10-2012, 02:48 AM
Pft... I picked 28th and made it to the second round in a stacked conference. I wear my sig like a badge of honor. Plus, I'm just way too lazy to change it.

But, seriously, someone needs to get working on the next NBA re-draft. We had a nice little hiatus, but I'm ready to go...


I picked 27 and made a decent comback after being ranked pretty much last before I made my trades.

I've been waiting for it to start too. Hopefully they don't start one like 1 or 2 weeks before Finals.

I'm ready to go for another NBA re-draft. We should get the ball moving on doing one, before I get busy doing my Masters.

b@llhog24
03-10-2012, 03:53 AM
And playing against much better teams as well.

Doesn't really matter, Bird superior supporting cast made an off game by him result in a win. Lebron still doesn't have that luxury. He just has a team that once the main 3 stars get their numbers they basically will win.

Bos_Sports4Life
03-10-2012, 01:11 PM
In the history of the NBA only one player has averaged 40 ppg, and that was Wilt playing in 62 and 63 against pitiful, short, slow white dudes..

The whole 6'6" 220 lb center theory is a complete myth, The 1960s was chalked full of great big men including Russell, Bellamy, Reed, Thurmond, and many more. Also keep in mind the NBA was less about promoting players back then, so tools like measuring with shoes and height exaggeration were not commonplace back then, unlike today.

Even still, The average center of the 60's was listed at around 6'10''..

Russell/Wilt Dominated more so because of speed/leaping ability more so than there height. Russell was only 6'9'' for example yet was the cornerstone too 11 titles in a 13 yr stretch..

Bos_Sports4Life
03-10-2012, 01:25 PM
And the reason why Lebron will eventually go down as the greatest SF in the history of the NBA isn't because the dude can just score, it's because he's got unbelievable court vision and passing ability for a SF, as well as crazy good rebounding, shot blocking and steals numbers to go with freak athleticism. He's like a 6'8" Oscar Robertson. The best all around game of any wing player in the history of the NBA. Period.

Blocking- Lebron has averaged 0.8 block/game, hes an overrated shot blocker. Bird also averaged 0.8..its a wash

Rebounding- Bird AVERAGED 10.0 rebounds/game in his career. Lebron has never averaged 8.0 in a full season..Advantage Bird

Passing ability? Bird is on of the best passers of all time as far as SF's go.

Stealing- Both Bird/Lebron averaged 1.7

Bird was also FAAAAR more clutch, he simply relished taking the final shot

Bos_Sports4Life
03-10-2012, 01:32 PM
Doesn't really matter, Bird superior supporting cast made an off game by him result in a win. Lebron still doesn't have that luxury. He just has a team that once the main 3 stars get their numbers they basically will win.

The celtics also played teams like the lakers who were MUCH better than anyone lebrons faced..

Fact is, The celtics went from 29-53 to 61-21 Birds rookie season..32 game diff and Bird was just a rookie..

MTar786
03-10-2012, 01:53 PM
james
bird
erving
baylor
pippen

Bos_Sports4Life
03-10-2012, 01:58 PM
james
bird
erving
baylor
pippen

:speechless:

PatsSoxKnicks
03-10-2012, 02:30 PM
Blocking- Lebron has averaged 0.8 block/game, hes an overrated shot blocker. Bird also averaged 0.8..its a wash

Rebounding- Bird AVERAGED 10.0 rebounds/game in his career. Lebron has never averaged 8.0 in a full season..Advantage Bird

Passing ability? Bird is on of the best passers of all time as far as SF's go.

Stealing- Both Bird/Lebron averaged 1.7

Bird was also FAAAAR more clutch, he simply relished taking the final shot

Poor comparison as none of this is pace adjusted or opportunity adjusted.

Blk%- Lebron: 1.6% Bird: 1.2%. However, the big difference is in their primes. Lebron's Blk% goes up to 2.4% in his best season, including 2 other seasons over 2%. Bird's career high in Blk% was 1.7%, having never had a season where he blocked 2% of his opponent's shot opportunities. So, no, its not a wash. You're attempting to use flawed numbers to make it a wash.

TRB%- Bird has the advantage here. You're right about that.

Passing ability- Yes, Bird was one of the all-time best passers. However, Lebron is a pretty good passer himself too. In terms of Ast%, Lebron has the advantage and its not really that close. However, Ast% doesn't necessarily measure passing ability.

TOVs- Lebron has the edge in TOV% (12.0 for Lebron to 12.7 for Bird). Bird's best season was better than Lebron's best season but he also has the 3 worst seasons in terms of TOV%. Lebron has more seasons with a TOV% under 12 than Larry has so he's been a little more consistent in this regard.

Ballhandling- Based on passing #'s and TOV #'s, Lebron has the edge. However, as I said earlier Ast% doesn't necessarily measure passing ability. It's possible Bird was a better pure passer but just assisted less. Still, on average, Lebron's teammates have been worse, so the fact that he has an edge in Ast% is something in his favor.

Stealing- Lebron's Stl% is at 2.3%, while Bird's is at 2.2%. Basically even. However, Lebron has the best stl% season at 2.8% and in none of his seasons does he have a Stl% below 2. Bird has 4 such seasons and they didn't necessarily come when he was older- 1 of those 4 seasons came in his prime when he led the NBA in WS. So while they have similar career rates, Lebron was a more consistent stealer and at his best, he was the better stealer.

That is a much more accurate assessment rather than using per game #'s which help Bird look better.

Final tally comes down to Bird being the better rebounder and maybe he was the better pure passer, while Lebron has the edge in stealing, blocks, taking better care of the ball and assisting on more of his team's baskets. He's also the better defender.

Finally, as great as Bird was as a shooter, Lebron has the better career TS% and most of his seasons were better than Bird's in career TS%. Basically, the only reason their career TS% #'s are so close is because Lebron was terrible in his rookie season, much worse than Bird was. So while Bird was the better shooter no doubt, Lebron was still the better scorer (especially when you consider how many possessions each used- Lebron has a big edge there). Although, this doesn't take into account the rule changes which certainly help Lebron amass better scoring #'s.

Numbers wise, it's hard to make a case for Bird as the better all around player. Maybe he had more overall ability but the #'s don't show it. Although, don't get me wrong, Larry Bird is the better player until Lebron wins a ring. He was also as you said, more clutch. And maybe, in terms of pure ability, he was the better passer but in terms of assists, he wasn't.

You can try to maintain its not close but if you take out rings and clutchness, Lebron would be the better player. Obviously you can't do that which is why Larry Legend still remains #1.

b@llhog24
03-10-2012, 02:47 PM
The celtics also played teams like the lakers who were MUCH better than anyone lebrons faced..

Fact is, The celtics went from 29-53 to 61-21 Birds rookie season..32 game diff and Bird was just a rookie..

Bird's roster support was still stacked enough for him to win a majority of his years in the league and I still stand by that. Yes competition matters but his teams where normally the team to beat rather than the one looking to win. Lebron has freaking ONE year where he had adequate roster support to be the team that could qualify as the team to be "beat." If you want to penalize him for that then that's on you, I won't.

Raps18-19 Champ
03-10-2012, 02:48 PM
Blocking- Lebron has averaged 0.8 block/game, hes an overrated shot blocker. Bird also averaged 0.8..its a wash

Rebounding- Bird AVERAGED 10.0 rebounds/game in his career. Lebron has never averaged 8.0 in a full season..Advantage Bird

Passing ability? Bird is on of the best passers of all time as far as SF's go.

Stealing- Both Bird/Lebron averaged 1.7

Bird was also FAAAAR more clutch, he simply relished taking the final shot

For a guy who likes advanced stats so much, you seem to go with simple stats that don't tell the whole story.

b@llhog24
03-10-2012, 02:53 PM
For a guy who likes advanced stats so much, you seem to go with simple stats that don't tell the whole story.

Yeah, I was wondering what was up with that. :eyebrow:

PatsSoxKnicks
03-10-2012, 03:20 PM
For a guy who likes advanced stats so much, you seem to go with simple stats that don't tell the whole story.

Well, the simple stats make Bird and Lebron's numbers look closer, so it's not exactly surprising why he'd use it ;) :p

Bos_Sports4Life
03-10-2012, 04:01 PM
For a guy who likes advanced stats so much, you seem to go with simple stats that don't tell the whole story.

I don't like guys who arn't mentally strong...

I'd take Kobe over Lebron any day of the week...And Lebron has better #'s.
Lebron so far in his career isn't mentally tough and ive seen him pack it in..in the playoffs in the 4th against the celtics with my own eyes.

Lebron also from everything ive read doesn't have the greatest work ethic. He is also not the leader a guy like Bird was..

Bos_Sports4Life
03-10-2012, 04:17 PM
Poor comparison as none of this is pace adjusted or opportunity adjusted.
Blk%- Lebron: 1.6% Bird: 1.2%. However, the big difference is in their primes. Lebron's Blk% goes up to 2.4% in his best season, including 2 other seasons over 2%. Bird's career high in Blk% was 1.7%, having never had a season where he blocked 2% of his opponent's shot opportunities. So, no, its not a wash. You're attempting to use flawed numbers to make it a wash.

Overall blocks are a pretty useless number. how many extra wins is lebron adding over bird due too Lebron james being a better blocker by .4%?


TRB%- Bird has the advantage here. You're right about that.

And thats with better rebounders on his team..


Passing ability- Yes, Bird was one of the all-time best passers. However, Lebron is a pretty good passer himself too. In terms of Ast%, Lebron has the advantage and its not really that close. However, Ast% doesn't necessarily measure passing ability.

:nod:

Ive watched enough games too know passing is a wash..




Stealing- Lebron's Stl% is at 2.3%, while Bird's is at 2.2%. Basically even. However, Lebron has the best stl% season at 2.8% and in none of his seasons does he have a Stl% below 2. Bird has 4 such seasons and they didn't necessarily come when he was older- 1 of those 4 seasons came in his prime when he led the NBA in WS. So while they have similar career rates, Lebron was a more consistent stealer and at his best, he was the better stealer.

Comparing 2.2 and 2.3 is basically splitting hairs...




Finally, as great as Bird was as a shooter, Lebron has the better career TS% and most of his seasons were better than Bird's in career TS%. Basically, the
Numbers wise, it's hard to make a case for Bird as the better all around player. Maybe he had more overall ability but the #'s don't show it. Although, don't get me wrong, Larry Bird is the better player until Lebron wins a ring. He was also as you said, more clutch. And maybe, in terms of pure ability, he was the better passer but in terms of assists, he wasn't.

You can try to maintain its not close but if you take out rings and clutchness, Lebron would be the better player. Obviously you can't do that which is why Larry Legend still remains #1.


If you take out Clutchness/Mentally toughness ect..

Lebron would be CLEARLY better than Kobe..

Heck Bill Russell has a lower WS/48 than guys like Manu Ginobili...Russell imo is the greatest of all time. If you dissagree read my 2 blog entries and than you can make your points..

IMO advanced stats can only go so far. You have too look at the makeup of the player, How much of a leader that player is ect ect..Guys like Bird KILL Lebron and i'd take Bird, Magic, Duncan ect over Lebron every day of the week.

PatsSoxKnicks
03-10-2012, 05:27 PM
I don't like guys who arn't mentally strong...

I'd take Kobe over Lebron any day of the week...And Lebron has better #'s.
Lebron so far in his career isn't mentally tough and ive seen him pack it in..in the playoffs in the 4th against the celtics with my own eyes.

Lebron also from everything ive read doesn't have the greatest work ethic. He is also not the leader a guy like Bird was..

Kobe has his own issues, which are pretty well documented. To be honest, Kobe isn't exactly a good leader. And, I don't really see how you could make an argument for Kobe over Lebron right now?? All-time? Yeah, Kobe is definitely the better player. But right now? It's not close, Lebron hands down.

Anyways, one of the reasons I prefer Lebron over Kobe is because Lebron typically makes the right basketball play- the high % play that is more likely to increase the team's chances of winning. Kobe does this too but not always. There are games where he's a straight up ballhog, something I don't think you could ever really accuse Lebron of being. Heck, there are some games where Kobe is a straight up chucker. Personally, I do prefer my guys to be a little more team oriented, which Lebron is.

In regards to Lebron not being mentally tough and packing it in, yes, he's been bad in the Finals and last year, it certainly looked like he was mentally weak in the Finals.

As for the 2010 series vs. the Celtics, I assume you're talking about game 5, where he wasn't very good. But then why did he come back with a triple double in the next game? If he had quit at that point, you would've think he would've, ya know, packed it in, not had a triple double.

I'll give you that he does seem to get too passive in the 4th quarter at times. But at other times, he doesn't. For example, I'm sure you've conveniently forgotten this game:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chdWSvVkeV4

That game did happen and it might've been one of the greatest performances in playoff history. Decisive game 5 and he literally scored ALL of his teams points in both OTs. That was 1 guy vs. the Pistons team and the 1 guy won.

As for Lebron's work ethic, I don't know where it rates all time but I wouldn't say he's lazy or anything. He did work on his post game in the offseason and obviously, you wouldn't do that if you had no work ethic. Is it Kobe or MJ's caliber? No, probably not.

As for Bird, he probably kills both Lebron and Kobe in terms of leadership, as obviously, he led his teams to multiple rings and unlike Kobe, he wasn't selfish/ballhog at times.

Mr Costanza
03-10-2012, 05:30 PM
If espn makes a list but nobody takes it seriously, does it actually exist?

Raps18-19 Champ
03-10-2012, 05:39 PM
I don't like guys who arn't mentally strong...

I'd take Kobe over Lebron any day of the week...And Lebron has better #'s.
Lebron so far in his career isn't mentally tough and ive seen him pack it in..in the playoffs in the 4th against the celtics with my own eyes.

Lebron also from everything ive read doesn't have the greatest work ethic. He is also not the leader a guy like Bird was..

What does this have to do with what I've said?

You purposefully used simple stats to downgrade Lebron. Yet in other case to benefit other Celtics players, you seem to be so high on using things like PER, WS and TS%.


I've brought other aspect that doesn't involve stats regarding other players yet you've basically pulled stats out of your *** to refute back.

I was just saying have some sort of consistency. Don't say "Bird has more MVP's, faced harder teams, etc" to benefit you yet in other cases when others have used MVP's, competition level, etc, you use advanced stats to save your ***.

PatsSoxKnicks
03-10-2012, 05:42 PM
Overall blocks are a pretty useless number. how many extra wins is lebron adding over bird due too Lebron james being a better blocker by .4%?

Obviously not a lot. But it does contribute, even if it is small.



And thats with better rebounders on his team..



:nod:

Ive watched enough games too know passing is a wash..





Comparing 2.2 and 2.3 is basically splitting hairs...

Yup, but I think Lebron does have the edge in overall defense. As I said earlier in the thread, I've heard some people claim that McHale was the real defensive presence on that team and that Bird used to draw the easier assignment of the 2. In any case, at no point was Bird ever considered one of the top 2 defenders in the league, something which Lebron has probably been considered for the last couple of years. Even the biggest Bird fan has to concede that Lebron is better defensively.







If you take out Clutchness/Mentally toughness ect..

Lebron would be CLEARLY better than Kobe..

Heck Bill Russell has a lower WS/48 than guys like Manu Ginobili...Russell imo is the greatest of all time. If you dissagree read my 2 blog entries and than you can make your points..

IMO advanced stats can only go so far. You have too look at the makeup of the player, How much of a leader that player is ect ect..Guys like Bird KILL Lebron and i'd take Bird, Magic, Duncan ect over Lebron every day of the week.

Lebron right now IS better than Kobe. There's no way you can argue against it. Actually, Kobe isn't really that clutch to begin with:
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/24200/the-truth-about-kobe-bryant-in-crunch-time

Mental toughness, yeah Kobe might be more mentally tough, though often to the detriment of his team. He shoots recklessly in close games in the 4th quarter, often taking ill advised low % shots that don't help a team win. But yeah, I'll give you he's more mentally tough, but that doesn't make him better, especially when him being mentally tough isn't always good for the team.

As for Russell, I honestly don't see how you can make a case for him over MJ. That guy was god reincarnated lol. He literally had it all- the numbers, the rings, the clutch shots, etc. And his competitiveness was flat out ridiculous (I know Russell was super competitive too- he used to throw up before games). But anyways, I'll check out your blog entries when I get the time (which may not be for awhile).

Bird, Magic and Duncan were/are some of the greatest leaders this game has ever seen and obviously, you take them as leaders over Lebron. Even as all-time players go, they are definitely ahead of Lebron because of their success.

However, if Lebron does get a couple championships, it'll be hard to bring up these same critique's of him.

Raps18-19 Champ
03-10-2012, 05:46 PM
Well, the simple stats make Bird and Lebron's numbers look closer, so it's not exactly surprising why he'd use it ;) :p

He'll use whatever method he needs to persuade the argument to his favour, even if he's argued against those same methods in other situations.

I'd find it hard to argue with someone who seems to go flip flop just to benefit him.

bcc
03-10-2012, 06:07 PM
Right now he wouldn't be ahead of Larry Bird, but he certainly could be once his career is over.


This could turn out to be true but right now he's light years away. Bird had five trips to The Finals and his two losses were to the 5-time champion L.A. Lakers. To this point, LeBron's one trip to The Finals consists of a loss to (what will be) the one-and-done champion Dallas Mavericks. And remember, Bird was the foundation on his championship teams, not an added piece like LeBron. Lastly, were it not for the Bias tragedy who knows how much longer and more successful Birds career could've been? That was a HUGE deal that directly affected his minutes and thus, brought about his career-ending back problems.

And the Worthy vs. Carmelo argument is 5 times more absurd than this one.
'melo's never won anything. He's a talent, not a cornerstone.

PatsSoxKnicks
03-10-2012, 07:22 PM
I'm a Knicks fan and whoever said Melo is better than Worthy should be shot to improve the human intelligence level on this planet. It's people like this that give our fanbase a bad name.

Lakers + Giants
03-10-2012, 07:34 PM
I'm a Knicks fan and whoever said Melo is better than Worthy should be shot to improve the human intelligence level on this planet. It's people like this that give our fanbase a bad name.

LMAO. This post is epic. The Irony. .

valade16
03-10-2012, 08:07 PM
If your going to use advanced stats I want you to be consistent, if advanced stats make player A better than player B then EVERY person who has better advanced stats than another is better.

As the other poster said, Manu Ginobili is a superior player to Bill Russell because he has better advanced stats. Now if you don't believe that's true then you've just set the precedent that a player who has inferior advanced stats can better than a player with superior advanced stats.

So it's entirely possible that Larry Bird can be better than LeBron despite worse advanced stats. I believe he is. Given that, your counterpoint can't simply be showing the advanced stats, because we know that alome is not enough to concretely declare someone better; so why outside of advanced stats is Bron superior to Bird?

PatsSoxKnicks
03-10-2012, 08:56 PM
If your going to use advanced stats I want you to be consistent, if advanced stats make player A better than player B then EVERY person who has better advanced stats than another is better.

As the other poster said, Manu Ginobili is a superior player to Bill Russell because he has better advanced stats. Now if you don't believe that's true then you've just set the precedent that a player who has inferior advanced stats can better than a player with superior advanced stats.

So it's entirely possible that Larry Bird can be better than LeBron despite worse advanced stats. I believe he is. Given that, your counterpoint can't simply be showing the advanced stats, because we know that alome is not enough to concretely declare someone better; so why outside of advanced stats is Bron superior to Bird?

Are you talking to me? I never said Bron was better than Bird. Another main reason working against Bron as of right now is he's missing big time on the longevity factor. That's obviously due to him being an active player but its still true.

I was simply saying that Lebron could be considered the better in terms of all around play, not necessarily making him better due to being behind in clutch play and rings. As I said earlier, I do have Bird ahead of Lebron.

b@llhog24
03-10-2012, 09:04 PM
If your going to use advanced stats I want you to be consistent, if advanced stats make player A better than player B then EVERY person who has better advanced stats than another is better.

As the other poster said, Manu Ginobili is a superior player to Bill Russell because he has better advanced stats. Now if you don't believe that's true then you've just set the precedent that a player who has inferior advanced stats can better than a player with superior advanced stats.

So it's entirely possible that Larry Bird can be better than LeBron despite worse advanced stats. I believe he is. Given that, your counterpoint can't simply be showing the advanced stats, because we know that alome is not enough to concretely declare someone better; so why outside of advanced stats is Bron superior to Bird?

Advance stats well at least the set available to the general public doesn't really take into account defense (which makes Bill better than Manu btw), with the exception of Drtg but that is heavily influenced by the players that are on the floor with you. Hence why Manu's stats are better due to him being one of the most efficient two guards in Nba history. No they aren't an exact science but when used in the right context they can tell us more than per game numbers.

AIRMAR72
03-10-2012, 10:27 PM
What a lot of you Lebron stat lovers don't realize is how the game has changed from when Bird played it till now. The rules have changed to make scoring much easier. You can throw out all the pers and crap you want, but if Bird played in this era, he'd avg 40pts a game.
i agree and mchale would probaly average 45points coming off the bench but in reality bron is superior athletically but at the NBA level it really come down to mental tuffness and discipline thats when the advantage goes to Larry Bird it mental tuffness thats always a player to be clutch its mental tuffness alway a player to takes a charge its mental tuffness that allow a player to become a true teamleader

JordansBulls
03-10-2012, 11:50 PM
I'm curious on why some think Lebron has passed Bird????

Bos_Sports4Life
03-11-2012, 12:09 AM
What does this have to do with what I've said?

You purposefully used simple stats to downgrade Lebron. Yet in other case to benefit other Celtics players, you seem to be so high on using things like PER, WS and TS%.


I've brought other aspect that doesn't involve stats regarding other players yet you've basically pulled stats out of your *** to refute back.

I was just saying have some sort of consistency. Don't say "Bird has more MVP's, faced harder teams, etc" to benefit you yet in other cases when others have used MVP's, competition level, etc, you use advanced stats to save your ***.

Yes I MUST be biased towards celtics players which also leads me too being biased towards Kobe.. :rolleyes:

I use advanced stats AND I factor in other things. The last comparison was pierce/Iverson and lets face it, when factoring other variables that just makes me learn more so towards pierce.

There's a BUNCH of players all time i'd take over lebron. I hate kobe a HECK of a lot more than I do Lebron, Yet if I wanted too win a title i'd take a prime kobe..

Bos_Sports4Life
03-11-2012, 12:27 AM
Lebron right now IS better than Kobe. There's no way you can argue against it. Actually, Kobe isn't really that clutch to begin with:
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/24200/the-truth-about-kobe-bryant-in-crunch-time


Well I agree Lebron is better now, I was talking about Prime, sorry I forgot too mention that.

As far as clutch, Its really hard too define clutch but imo if a guy can come up big in the 4th in a close game, thats clutch. The whole it has to be in the last 1-2 minutes in order for it to be clutch is nonsense..and in this case its the final 24 seconds..


Mental toughness, yeah Kobe might be more mentally tough, though often to the detriment of his team. He shoots recklessly in close games in the 4th quarter, often taking ill advised low % shots that don't help a team win. But yeah, I'll give you he's more mentally tough, but that doesn't make him better, especially when him being mentally tough isn't always good for the team.


Kobe has a much bigger drive too win, He cares about winning much more than lebron ever will. I hate the guy as a c's fan and I do think there are downsides to kobe (Ego kicked out shaq) yet...I don't question his drive at all...


As for Russell, I honestly don't see how you can make a case for him over MJ. That guy was god reincarnated lol. He literally had it all- the numbers, the rings, the clutch shots, etc. And his competitiveness was flat out ridiculous (I know Russell was super competitive too- he used to throw up before games). But anyways, I'll check out your blog entries when I get the time (which may not be for awhile).

Bird, Magic and Duncan were/are some of the greatest leaders this game has ever seen and obviously, you take them as leaders over Lebron. Even as all-time players go, they are definitely ahead of Lebron because of their success.

However, if Lebron does get a couple championships, it'll be hard to bring up these same critique's of him.


IF he wins multiple titles WHILE being the man, than Lebron has a case for #1 at SF...Sure.


As for Russell the blogs prove several things including..

* The defense with Russell was historically good all 13 years he played and the defense the season before and the season after was average at best.

* The myth the 50's/60's celtics had good offensive output. The celtics were one of the worst teams in the NBA as far as efficieny goes finnishing last or 2nd too last 6 times out of those 11 titles.


Basically, The celtics relied 100% on defense and without Russell the celtics team defense wasn't good.

b@llhog24
03-11-2012, 02:27 AM
I'm curious on why some think Lebron has passed Bird????

Hardly anyone if any has said that. Everyone is saying when/if Lebron gets some rings he will be better than Bird.

PatsSoxKnicks
03-11-2012, 02:51 AM
Well I agree Lebron is better now, I was talking about Prime, sorry I forgot too mention that.

As far as clutch, Its really hard too define clutch but imo if a guy can come up big in the 4th in a close game, thats clutch. The whole it has to be in the last 1-2 minutes in order for it to be clutch is nonsense..and in this case its the final 24 seconds..

Read the whole article (http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/24200/the-truth-about-kobe-bryant-in-crunch-time) though. There's even evidence that Kobe isn't clutch in the last minutes of the 4th quarter, game within +/- 5 points.

In fact, using the shot data from basketball-reference (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/plus/shooting.cgi?&player_id=bryanko01&year_id=2012&quarter=4&time_quarter=0-3&margin=0-5), we can find Kobe's clutch #'s.

I set the criteria as 4th quarter, margin <= 5 points, last 3 minutes of the quarter and tallied up Kobe's totals over the 10 year period that basketball-reference has data. Here were his total #'s for that:

Kobe's FG% is 38.8% over that time period and his eFG% is 42.4% in those situations over that time period. His overall numbers in that time period- eFG% of 48.8%. So thats nearly a 6.5% decline in clutch situations at the end of games with over 10 years of data (and 877 FGA, which is a little more than a full season).

Those aren't horrible numbers but they aren't spectacular either. For reference:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/plus/shot_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id=&match=single&year_id=2011&is_playoffs=&team_id=&opp_id=&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&shot_pts=&is_make=&shot_type=&shot_distance_min=&shot_distance_max=&q4=Y&time_remain_minutes=3&time_remain_seconds=0&time_remain_comp=le&margin_min=-5&margin_max=5&c1stat=fga&c1comp=ge&c1val=25&c2stat=&c2comp=ge&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=ge&c3val=&order_by=efg_pct

That would put him roughly 40th out of those 70 guys for last year. So it's certainly not an above average %. Also, don't forget, this INCLUDES the playoffs.

Here's the data for the year before:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/plus/shot_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id=&match=single&year_id=2010&is_playoffs=&team_id=&opp_id=&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&shot_pts=&is_make=&shot_type=&shot_distance_min=&shot_distance_max=&q4=Y&time_remain_minutes=3&time_remain_seconds=0&time_remain_comp=le&margin_min=-5&margin_max=5&c1stat=fga&c1comp=ge&c1val=25&c2stat=&c2comp=ge&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=ge&c3val=&order_by=efg_pct

Again, puts him roughly in the middle of the pack.

The evidence that Kobe isn't that clutch is there, that is if you care to look at it.

Here's the raw data if you want to calculate eFG% or FG% for yourself:


FG 3p FGA
2011-12 10 1 39
2010-11 28 6 84
2009-10 37 8 82
2008-09 39 10 89
2007-08 36 5 73
2006-07 29 8 86
2005-06 30 5 84
2004-05 13 2 50
2003-04 26 7 65
2002-03 26 5 72
2001-02 36 5 81
2000-01 30 2 72
340 64 877




Kobe has a much bigger drive too win, He cares about winning much more than lebron ever will. I hate the guy as a c's fan and I do think there are downsides to kobe (Ego kicked out shaq) yet...I don't question his drive at all...

Oh, I don't question his drive to win. However, I do question his decision making. He has an ego that gets in the way of the Lakers actually winning at times. Again, consider the evidence above as well as this:
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/38519/kobe-has-not-been-clutch-this-season
He's been awfully bad this year (though it makes sense since his ability is declining)

We've all seen Kobe play hero ball (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7649571/nba-kobe-bryant-not-money-think-espn-magazine)- that is shoot the low % shot with 3 defenders draped all over you as opposed to passing to a more open guy (this year, their bigs who shoot over 50%)

Also, in regards to Lebron not caring about winning, I don't know if thats entirely true because why would he have gone to Miami if he didn't care about winning? Maybe it was just to play with his friends but playing alongside that kind of talent is also something he's never been fortunate enough to have in his career until he joined Miami. I assume you'd want to play with talented teammates because you feel it'd improve your chances at winning. But maybe not, maybe he just wanted to play with his friends. No one really knows the answer to that except Lebron.



IF he wins multiple titles WHILE being the man, than Lebron has a case for #1 at SF...Sure.

His career may not even be at the half way point, so we shall see.



As for Russell the blogs prove several things including..

* The defense with Russell was historically good all 13 years he played and the defense the season before and the season after was average at best.

* The myth the 50's/60's celtics had good offensive output. The celtics were one of the worst teams in the NBA as far as efficieny goes finnishing last or 2nd too last 6 times out of those 11 titles.


Basically, The celtics relied 100% on defense and without Russell the celtics team defense wasn't good.

Isn't that also a knock on him though? The fact that the Celtics weren't that great offensively? I still don't think Russell is a 2-way superstar, which is why I'd have trouble ranking him as the GOAT.

And what case does he have against MJ? MJ won DPOY as a SG and was the most dominant offensive player to ever play the game. He's basically THE greatest offensive player ever and probably among the top 3 defensive wings ever. How does Russell's offense (which is not of superstar status) top this?

Bos_Sports4Life
03-11-2012, 02:25 PM
Read the whole article (http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/24200/the-truth-about-kobe-bryant-in-crunch-time) though. There's even evidence that Kobe isn't clutch in the last minutes of the 4th quarter, game within +/- 5 points.

In fact, using the shot data from basketball-reference (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/plus/shooting.cgi?&player_id=bryanko01&year_id=2012&quarter=4&time_quarter=0-3&margin=0-5), we can find Kobe's clutch #'s.

I set the criteria as 4th quarter, margin <= 5 points, last 3 minutes of the quarter and tallied up Kobe's totals over the 10 year period that basketball-reference has data. Here were his total #'s for that:

Kobe's FG% is 38.8% over that time period and his eFG% is 42.4% in those situations over that time period. His overall numbers in that time period- eFG% of 48.8%. So thats nearly a 6.5% decline in clutch situations at the end of games with over 10 years of data (and 877 FGA, which is a little more than a full season).

Those aren't horrible numbers but they aren't spectacular either. For reference:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/plus/shot_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id=&match=single&year_id=2011&is_playoffs=&team_id=&opp_id=&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&shot_pts=&is_make=&shot_type=&shot_distance_min=&shot_distance_max=&q4=Y&time_remain_minutes=3&time_remain_seconds=0&time_remain_comp=le&margin_min=-5&margin_max=5&c1stat=fga&c1comp=ge&c1val=25&c2stat=&c2comp=ge&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=ge&c3val=&order_by=efg_pct

That would put him roughly 40th out of those 70 guys for last year. So it's certainly not an above average %. Also, don't forget, this INCLUDES the playoffs.

Here's the data for the year before:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/plus/shot_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id=&match=single&year_id=2010&is_playoffs=&team_id=&opp_id=&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&shot_pts=&is_make=&shot_type=&shot_distance_min=&shot_distance_max=&q4=Y&time_remain_minutes=3&time_remain_seconds=0&time_remain_comp=le&margin_min=-5&margin_max=5&c1stat=fga&c1comp=ge&c1val=25&c2stat=&c2comp=ge&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=ge&c3val=&order_by=efg_pct

Again, puts him roughly in the middle of the pack.

The evidence that Kobe isn't that clutch is there, that is if you care to look at it.

Here's the raw data if you want to calculate eFG% or FG% for yourself:


FG 3p FGA
2011-12 10 1 39
2010-11 28 6 84
2009-10 37 8 82
2008-09 39 10 89
2007-08 36 5 73
2006-07 29 8 86
2005-06 30 5 84
2004-05 13 2 50
2003-04 26 7 65
2002-03 26 5 72
2001-02 36 5 81
2000-01 30 2 72
340 64 877




Oh, I don't question his drive to win. However, I do question his decision making. He has an ego that gets in the way of the Lakers actually winning at times. Again, consider the evidence above as well as this:
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/38519/kobe-has-not-been-clutch-this-season
He's been awfully bad this year (though it makes sense since his ability is declining)

We've all seen Kobe play hero ball (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7649571/nba-kobe-bryant-not-money-think-espn-magazine)- that is shoot the low % shot with 3 defenders draped all over you as opposed to passing to a more open guy (this year, their bigs who shoot over 50%)

My deff of clutch is diff...if its a huge and he starts draining shots with 8 min left, I consider that clutch.




Also, in regards to Lebron not caring about winning, I don't know if thats entirely true because why would he have gone to Miami if he didn't care about winning? Maybe it was just to play with his friends but playing alongside that kind of talent is also something he's never been fortunate enough to have in his career until he joined Miami. I assume you'd want to play with talented teammates because you feel it'd improve your chances at winning. But maybe not, maybe he just wanted to play with his friends. No one really knows the answer to that except Lebron.

If what ive read is correct, he has complained about the amount of work in practices..and SEVERAL reports have come out saying he doesn't like pat riley..

Just last season he admited that everyone hating him bothered him so much it his hurt his play/teams chances of winning...that screams mentally weak..





Isn't that also a knock on him though? The fact that the Celtics weren't that great offensively? I still don't think Russell is a 2-way superstar, which is why I'd have trouble ranking him as the GOAT.

And what case does he have against MJ? MJ won DPOY as a SG and was the most dominant offensive player to ever play the game. He's basically THE greatest offensive player ever and probably among the top 3 defensive wings ever. How does Russell's offense (which is not of superstar status) top this?


Basically using the graphs it shows Russell made AVERAGE defenses into ALL TIME GREAT defenses. Can MJ make average offenses into all time great offenses? no

The celtics were so good on defense because of Russell they often finnished in the bottom 2 in FG%..

(8 teams)
1956-57: 1st in attempts/4th in %/1st in ppg
1957-58: 1st in attempts/3rd in %/2nd in ppg
1958-59:1st in attempts/4th in %/1st in ppg
1959-60:1st in attempts/3rd in %/1st in ppg
1960-61:1st in attempts/8th in %/2nd in ppg

(9 teams)
61-62: 1st in attempts/5th in %/3rd in ppg
62-63: 1st in attempts/9th in %/3rd in ppg
63-64: 1st in attempts/9th in %/2nd in ppg
64-65: 1st in attempts/8th in %/3rd in ppg
65-66:3rd in attempts/8th in %/7th in ppg
(10 teams)
66-67: 6th in attempts/4th in %/4th in ppg
(12 teams)
67-68: 7th in attempts/7th in fg %/8th in ppg
(14 teams)
68-69: 3rd in attempts/9th in %/10th in ppg


Basically is a MYTH he had this great offensive production around him. That run was built on defense and the defense without Russell? not good

YR Drtg Rank Diff from League Avg. Diff from 2nd place
1956 90.4 6/8 -1.5
--------------------------------------------------------
1957 82.4 1/8 4.8 2.5
1958 82.0 1/8 5.2 3.9
1959 83.0 1/8 5.8 4.4
1960 83.9 1/8 6.2 1.8
1961 83.0 1/8 8.2 4.6
1962 84.3 1/8 8.7 6.3
1963 86.6 1/9 9.0 6.1
1964 82.7 1/9 11.5 5.6
1965 83.1 1/9 9.9 8.1
1966 87.3 1/9 7.1 4.0
1967 90.8 1/10 4.9 1.7
1968 92.0 2/12 4.6 -
1969 88.4 1/14 6.8 2.8
------------------------------------------------------------
1970 98.5 7/16 0.6 -

*1956 (the yr before Russell)
* 1957 (the yr after Russell)
(1) The Celtics led the league in defense in 12 of Russells' 13 years
(2) From 1958-1966 they dominated the league defensively like no team I can find for a 9 year period
(3) From 1961-1965 the ran off 5 consecutive historically dominant seasons. Look at those numbers.
(4) Before Russell they were a bottom defensive team and immediately jumped 6.3 relative points and 8.0 raw points to the top.
(5) After Russell they dropped to the middle of the pack, losing 6.2 relative points and 10.1 raw points.

According to Neil's method at B-R, who is slightly underestimating Boston's pace relative to the simple method (because he's assuming fewer turnovers are in play), those uber-dominant Celtics teams are the 3rd, 5th, 6th, 8th and 14th best defensive teams of all time, relative to competition. And there's nothing remotely comparable in NBA history for such sustained defensive dominance.

JordansBulls
03-11-2012, 03:19 PM
Bird's roster support was still stacked enough for him to win a majority of his years in the league and I still stand by that. Yes competition matters but his teams where normally the team to beat rather than the one looking to win. Lebron has freaking ONE year where he had adequate roster support to be the team that could qualify as the team to be "beat." If you want to penalize him for that then that's on you, I won't.

2010 the Cavs came in as favorites and 2009 they were favorites once KG was down with an injury.

Eastern Conference for 2009-2010


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=OffseasonPredictions09-EastStandings

#1 Cavs 61-21
#2 Boston 57-25
#3 Orlando 56-26



http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=OffseasonPredictions09-EastChamps

Cavs - 32 Votes
Celtics - 13 votes
Orlando - 8 votes


NBA Champion for 2009-2010

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=OffseasonPredictions09-NBAChamps

Lakers - 19 votes
Cavs - 18 votes
Spurs - 8 votes
Celtics - 5 votes
Orlando - 3 votes


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Cavaliers



Last year's collapse in the Eastern Conference finals only made LeBron hungrier and more willing to expand his game. Now, opponents can expect to see him in the post more. Scary. And look for a resurgence from a truly motivated Shaq.

b@llhog24
03-11-2012, 04:49 PM
2010 the Cavs came in as favorites and 2009 they were favorites once KG was down with an injury.

Eastern Conference for 2009-2010


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=OffseasonPredictions09-EastStandings

#1 Cavs 61-21
#2 Boston 57-25
#3 Orlando 56-26



http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=OffseasonPredictions09-EastChamps

Cavs - 32 Votes
Celtics - 13 votes
Orlando - 8 votes


NBA Champion for 2009-2010

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=OffseasonPredictions09-NBAChamps

Lakers - 19 votes
Cavs - 18 votes
Spurs - 8 votes
Celtics - 5 votes
Orlando - 3 votes


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Cavaliers

Just shows what Espn really knows. :shrug: And what does this even have to do with my statement of Bird having sufficient roster support? :eyebrow:

JordansBulls
03-11-2012, 06:09 PM
Just shows what Espn really knows. :shrug: And what does this even have to do with my statement of Bird having sufficient roster support? :eyebrow:

I never said Bird didn't have sufficient roster support, but you said Lebron was never expected to win prior to joining the Heat and results shows that for the 2010 season they were favorites and the only team that you could excuse beating him was the Lakers. In 2009 he was not the favorite initially but became the favorite once KG was out the entire playoffs due to injury. Again maybe not the favorite to beat the Lakers, but definitely the favorite to get out of the East.

b@llhog24
03-11-2012, 06:15 PM
I never said Bird didn't have sufficient roster support, but you said Lebron was never expected to win prior to joining the Heat and results shows that for the 2010 season they were favorites and the only team that you could excuse beating him was the Lakers. In 2009 he was not the favorite initially but became the favorite once KG was out the entire playoffs due to injury. Again maybe not the favorite to beat the Lakers, but definitely the favorite to get out of the East.

You're putting words in my mouth now? Ok cool. I said that Lebron never had the sufficient roster support to be considered legitimate title contenders. Or at least that's what I meant. Just because others don't conform to your twisted logic of HCA, all start selections, and copy and pasted links doesn't make them wrong.

JordansBulls
03-11-2012, 06:21 PM
You're putting words in my mouth now? Ok cool. I said that Lebron never had the sufficient roster support to be considered legitimate title contenders. Or at least that's what I meant. Just because others don't conform to your twisted logic of HCA, all start selections, and copy and pasted links doesn't make them wrong.

And the results of them being favorites coming into the 2010 season shows otherwise. Also the numerous articles on them being heavy favorites over Orlando as well.

In 2009 they were #1 in SRS rating and Expected W-L and #1 in Opp PPG.

PTS/G: 100.3 (13th of 30) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 91.4 (1st of 30)
SRS: 8.77 (1st of 30) ▪ Pace: 88.7 (25th of 30)
Off Rtg: 112.4 (4th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 102.4 (3rd of 30)
Expected W-L: 65-17 (1st of 30)

So yeah they were the favorites.

In 2010 they were 2nd in SRS rating with Orlando being #1. So them losing to Boston was an upset as well.

Now if you want to point me to articles showing that the Celtics or Magic were favorites as I have done be my guest.

alexander_37
03-11-2012, 06:32 PM
lol @ worhty being better then Melo

LOLOLOL at this comment! What are you 14?

JordansBulls
03-27-2012, 08:01 PM
LOLOLOL at this comment! What are you 14?

I think you could argue that Melo 2009 was as good as peak Worthy though.

KB-Pau-DH2012
03-27-2012, 08:04 PM
I think you could argue that Melo 2009 was as good as peak Worthy though.
Worthy had that game 7 title clincher triple double against the bad boy pistons. In fact, many say that Worthy subjugated his game to fit in with the ShowTime Lakers.

Raps18-19 Champ
03-28-2012, 08:04 AM
I never said Bird didn't have sufficient roster support, but you said Lebron was never expected to win prior to joining the Heat and results shows that for the 2010 season they were favorites and the only team that you could excuse beating him was the Lakers. In 2009 he was not the favorite initially but became the favorite once KG was out the entire playoffs due to injury. Again maybe not the favorite to beat the Lakers, but definitely the favorite to get out of the East.

Just because some people thought them to win, doesn't mean they were actually the favourites in terms of talent and matchup.

JordansBulls
03-28-2012, 01:53 PM
Just because some people thought them to win, doesn't mean they were actually the favourites in terms of talent and matchup.

Some people??? How about every analyst expected them to beat Orlando and Boston in 2009 and 2010.

JordansBulls
03-28-2012, 01:54 PM
Worthy had that game 7 title clincher triple double against the bad boy pistons. In fact, many say that Worthy subjugated his game to fit in with the ShowTime Lakers.

Not doubting that.

kubernetes
03-28-2012, 06:04 PM
Regardless of the stats, I would take Bird in a heartbeat over LeBron. Bird was a natural-born killer on the court, no disappearing act in the 4th qtr. He wasn't as athletic, but he could score from anywhere, effortlessly. The guy shot a whole game left-handed because he got bored!

Rndy
03-28-2012, 06:09 PM
I can't stand going through the history of stats for the guys before this era. It's not fair. Lebrons numbers look better then Birds because he's in a much easier Era to score. Comparing the two is a joke really.

Chronz
03-28-2012, 07:32 PM
You heard him JB, can MJ make a great offense?

SteveNash
03-28-2012, 07:36 PM
Some people??? How about every analyst expected them to beat Orlando and Boston in 2009 and 2010.

People didn't know how Mo would crumble. How Delonte would be the Cavs second best player. Are you really going to blame LeBron for averaging 35/10/8 or whatever against Orlando?


I can't stand going through the history of stats for the guys before this era. It's not fair. Lebrons numbers look better then Birds because he's in a much easier Era to score. Comparing the two is a joke really.

That's why teams averaged 10 PPG higher and 5 FG% points higher right?

beliges
03-28-2012, 07:57 PM
I can't stand going through the history of stats for the guys before this era. It's not fair. Lebrons numbers look better then Birds because he's in a much easier Era to score. Comparing the two is a joke really.

That is such a false statement. It is not easier to score today. Players are bigger, quicker, stronger and more athletic today than they ever have been. Furthermore defenses are much less restrictive today than they were 15 years ago. However I dont understand where people come off stating Lebron has better numbers than Bird. Bird has a handful of seasons that are just as good, if not better, than any season Lebron has put up. Lebron is a phenomenal player in his own right, but it is simply unfair to him to compare him to the all time greats of this league at this point. He certainly puts up great numbers, but there have been players that came before him that put up similar numbers. However the difference between those all time greats and Lebron is that those players put up those numbers on the biggest stages, they carried their teams through the playoffs and won championships. Lebron is yet to accomplish that. Until that happens, theres not a chance he would be considered the best SF to ever play when a Larry Bird played the same position.