Lebron James or Larry Bird???

[Thomas82]

Now that Lebron finally got his ring, does he finally overtake Larry Legend as the best small forward of all-time, or does Larry still have that distinction?


Discuss

[whitemamba]

bird has 3 rings...

[lefty]

With or without ring, I take Bird

Fun fact : both are actually left handed

[whitemamba]

With or without ring, I take Bird

Fun fact : both are actually left handed

they shoot right..

[lefty]

they shoot right..

No shit

[whitemamba]

No shit

sherlock?

[FkLA]

Didnt watch Bird tbh, but Ill take King James. Once his career is over the King will at the very least be the 2nd GOAT.

[lefty]

Didnt watch Bird tbh, but Ill take King James. Once his career is over the King will at the very least be the 2nd GOAT.

Didnt watch Bird but still going with James ?

[HeatChamps]

Lebron is the complete package. Bird only played on one side of the court. ;)

[Kidd K]

Bird's career has still clearly been better.

If LeBron won in Cleveland before going to Miami, then he'd have a much better argument right now.

LeBron's best argument WOULD have been: Larry Bird had tons of help, so his rings don't mean as much as LeBron's. . .

But whoops. LeBron went to Miami to play with Wade and Bosh. LeBron pretty much killed his only chance of getting put above people with less rings. Now he absolutely can't be put above MJ, Bird, Magic, etc, unless he at LEAST ties them in rings.

[HarlemHeat37]

:lol rings are the most overrated metric of greatness, tbh..

Bird's career is currently better, he ranks higher on the all-time list..

However, as a peak player, Lebron is better..only Jordan is clearly ahead of Lebron, from a peak perspective..

[AussieFanKurt]

Depends on generation you ask I think. Most older blokes would probably say Larry but today's supporters probably LeBron.

[pass1st]

They both could score, pass and rebound. I'd say Bird was a more versatile scorer, but Lebron defends better.

Bird has the edge for being a much better leader, but that can change if LBJ leads his team to more titles.

[-21-]

If LeBron continues to win while playing like he is now, he's definitely taking the top SF spot.

[whitemamba]

Depends on generation you ask I think. Most older blokes would probably say Larry but today's supporters probably LeBron.

Yeah, people who didn't witness Larry bird are going to have a hard time making a case for him, but lebitch is a far more superior athlete

[Kai]

Only a matter of time. LeBron will be the best SF of all time when it's said and done. The sky is the limit for him.

[cobbler]

:lol rings are the most overrated metric of greatness, tbh..

Bird's career is currently better, he ranks higher on the all-time list..

However, as a peak player, Lebron is better..only Jordan is clearly ahead of Lebron, from a peak perspective..

Oh yeah cause clearly Jordans "peak" year with an average of 50 points per game, 25 rebounds per game, and 2.5 assits per game outshines Brons average of 30 points per game, 12 rebounds per game, and 11 assists per game.

Oh wait... :lol

[Clipper Nation]

LeClutch, aka LeClass, aka LeGold, aka Ring James, aka Bron, aka the Kang, any day over Larry Bird, tbh....

[Pelicans78]

:lol rings are the most overrated metric of greatness, tbh..

Bird's career is currently better, he ranks higher on the all-time list..

However, as a peak player, Lebron is better..only Jordan is clearly ahead of Lebron, from a peak perspective..

I agree.

[Sportstudi]

:lol rings are the most overrated metric of greatness, tbh..

Bird's career is currently better, he ranks higher on the all-time list..

However, as a peak player, Lebron is better..only Jordan is clearly ahead of Lebron, from a peak perspective..

Only Jordan? Did you watch KAJ in his prime?

[Pelicans78]

Cobbler makes a good point too.

Wilt and Kareem arguably had better peak performances than Jordan and Lebron.

Those 4 have had the best peak performances.

[DMC]

I'd take prime Bird over prime James. Anyone who says otherwise is foolish.

[8FOR!3]

Is the argument who's had the better career or who's the better player? LeBron right now is capable of some pretty incredible things.

[lefty]

Bird shits on Lebron

It's not even up for debate, even if Birdie himself is a fan of Lebron


Lebron still shits on Kobe though

[scanry]

:lol rings are the most overrated metric of greatness, tbh..

Bird's career is currently better, he ranks higher on the all-time list..

However, as a peak player, Lebron is better..only Jordan is clearly ahead of Lebron, from a peak perspective..

KAJ probably had the scariest peak and Shaq was pretty close in his MVP season. Jordan is not clearly ahead. Lebron put up some scary number with such ease.

From a fan's perspective, Lebron is the best player since Jordan. Kobe is a close second and i think most of them (apart from non delusional ones) would agree.

[Clipper Nation]

From a fan's perspective, Lebron is the best player since Jordan. Kobe is a close second and i think most of them (apart from non delusional ones) would agree.
:rollin

Duncan and Shaq are far closer to "best player since Jordan" status than Food Stamps, let's be real now....

[scanry]

:rollin

Duncan and Shaq are far closer to "best player since Jordan" status than Food Stamps, let's be real now....

Talent wise maybe, but Kobe gets the nod over Duncan & Shaq because not everyone can play Robin for like 6 years and then take the lead. Shaq had the talent to be the greatest ever, but ate himself out of the league. Imagine Shaq with Dwight Howard's body & work ethic.:wow And Shaq was close to that in his Orlando days.

His career was an underachievement in my book. And considering his accomplishments, he would've surely become the GOAT.

[stretch]

:lol rings are the most overrated metric of greatness, tbh..

Bird's career is currently better, he ranks higher on the all-time list..

However, as a peak player, Lebron is better..only Jordan is clearly ahead of Lebron, from a peak perspective..

This.

:toast

[stretch]

I'd take prime Bird over prime James. Anyone who says otherwise is foolish.

You're a fucking moron.

[stretch]

Oh yeah cause clearly Jordans "peak" year with an average of 50 points per game, 25 rebounds per game, and 2.5 assits per game outshines Brons average of 30 points per game, 12 rebounds per game, and 11 assists per game.

Oh wait... :lol

Oh yeah cause clearly Wilt was consistently going against competition that could physically match up with him on a nightly basis, and every time he faced a player who could even somewhat match up with him physically, he completely dominated them.

Oh wait... :lol

[jeebus]

Lebron has one decent season with the superfriends and he's suddenly the goat. ok.

[Clipper Nation]

Lebron has one decent season with the superfriends and he's suddenly the goat. ok.

Larry Bird had many decent seasons with his Superfriends tbh...

[Killakobe81]

KAJ probably had the scariest peak and Shaq was pretty close in his MVP season. Jordan is not clearly ahead. Lebron put up some scary number with such ease.

From a fan's perspective, Lebron is the best player since Jordan. Kobe is a close second and i think most of them (apart from non delusional ones) would agree.

This. Clips fan is a shittier version of my Okc troll

[Killakobe81]

LeBron is not there yet, but he needs 2 more rings to end the debate. We all know Spur fans live to discount rings when convenient... But rings separate the HOFers (Malone) from the all time greats (Duncan) focusing on PER and win shares won't win much debates between pickup games or the barbershop. Maybe it helps at dorkapoolza ...but rings are the ultimate decider if 2 players are close. You can b make a case it's not close so if LeBron gets 1 more I would favor him over Bird. I use rings when players are close ...

[DMC]

You're a fucking moron.

So Lebron is one of the top 10 greatest players of all time with one ring that he needed two other team's franchise players to get?
http://tap.rubiconproject.com/oz/feeds/appnexus/tokens?token=7629690777175304783&expires=30

[cobbler]

Oh yeah cause clearly Lebron was consistently going against competition that could physically match up with him on a nightly basis, and every time he faced a player who could even somewhat match up with him physically, he completely dominated them.

Oh wait... :lol

[LkrFan]

Didnt watch Bird tbh, but Ill take King James. Once his career is over the King will at the very least be the 2nd GOAT.

Don't be a blind faggot. Go watch some youtubes or something.The only thing LeBron can do better is dunk. That's it. Better passer, rebounder, higher hoops IQ, better shooter - advantage Bird. This from a diehard Laker fan who grew up hating the Celtics.

[LkrFan]

:lol rings are the most overrated metric of greatness, tbh..

Bird's career is currently better, he ranks higher on the all-time list..

However, as a peak player, Lebron is better..only Jordan is clearly ahead of Lebron, from a peak perspective..

All LeBron has on Bird is that he is more athletic. Name one thing LeBron can do better - besides a plethora of FTAs to boost his scoring averages? He does beast Bird in another category I guess: Bronze medals. :lol

[pass1st]

All LeBron has on Bird is that he is more athletic. Name one thing LeBron can do better - besides a plethora of FTAs to boost his scoring averages? He does beast Bird in another category I guess: Bronze medals. :lol

LBJ does got Bird on defense, mostly for just being a freak athlete. Also things related to athleticism, driving to the basket and whatnot.

A good argument would be who's the better passer

[stretch]

So Lebron is one of the top 10 greatest players of all time with one ring that he needed two other team's franchise players to get?
http://tap.rubiconproject.com/oz/feeds/appnexus/tokens?token=7629690777175304783&expires=30

You didn't say Bird's Career > Lebron's Career

You said Bird's prime > Lebron's prime

Two completely different things.

Lebron at his best is without question superior to Bird at his best. He does basically everything better than Bird did except for jumpshooting.

[Venti Quattro]

Larry play can't play defense but his clutch gene is way ahead of LeBron's.

[stretch]

:cry :cry :cry Wilt is the best ever!!!!!! :cry :cry :cry

So Lebron is defended by people who are 6-8 inches shorter, and 40+ lbs lighter than him on a nightly basis?

[stretch]

Larry play can't play defense but his clutch gene is way ahead of LeBron's.

Is it his clutch gene, or his jumpshooting gene?

Lebron simply does not do a lot of jumpshooting. It's like saying Shaq was incapable of performing in the clutch since he didn't get the highlight reel game winning jump shots, when we all know Shaq found his ways to make his mark on the game in crunch time. Lebron has always found his ways to make his mark on the game in crunch time as well, whether creating easy shots for others, hitting game winning jump shots (although not as frequently as others), clutch defense, clutch rebounds, absorbing double and triple teams, etc...

Now I'm not saying Larry isn't clutch, or that Lebron is more clutch than Larry, just saying that Lebron has a different way of making clutch plays, while Larry's (as well as MJ, Kobe, Dirk, etc...) is the most noticable, with clutch jumpshots. Same could be said for Magic Johnson. He was capable of hitting clutch shots, but he usually came up big in the clutch in other ways, very much like Lebron.

[Venti Quattro]

Why shoot jumpshots when you can bulldoze anyone? Besides it's not like his jumper is bad

[stretch]

LBJ does got Bird on defense, mostly for just being a freak athlete. Also things related to athleticism, driving to the basket and whatnot.

A good argument would be who's the better passer

Bird makes more fancy passes.

Lebron makes more PG types of passes, as his vision is incredible. You can have Lebron run PG. Larry is not a guy you want running PG.

[stretch]

Why shoot jumpshots when you can bulldoze anyone? Besides it's not like his jumper is bad

For one, late in games, refs will call far less fouls. You can frequently get the crap fouled out of you in last second shots, and get no calls. Why drive if the opposing team can just clobber the mess out of you, with no call?

I think until this year, Lebron's biggest fear was being called a ballhog, or selfish. I think he saw all the crap that Kobe dealt with, and didn't want the same thing. But it seemed like in the Boston series this year, he finally just said "screw it" to himself and started just taking any shot he wanted late in games, especially if his teammates aren't helping much.

[stretch]

This from a dumbass faggot who grew up loving cock in my ass.

fify

[stretch]

But rings separate the HOFers (Malone) from the all time greats (Duncan) focusing on PER and win shares won't win much debates between pickup games or the barbershop. Maybe it helps at dorkapoolza

So basically you are saying black people are lazy, emotional debaters who don't do research before backing up their points? Rather, they have their groupies yell and go "ooooohhh!!!!!!" to try to "validate" their points in the eyes of other dimwitted faggots.

[DMC]

I've defended Lebron on here countless times, but Stretch takes man love to a whole other level. Stretch was worshiping him even before he went to Miami. It's no surprise he would defend Lebron against any comparison, and get really emotional in the process.

[DMC]

For one, late in games, refs will call far less fouls. You can frequently get the crap fouled out of you in last second shots, and get no calls. Why drive if the opposing team can just clobber the mess out of you, with no call?

I think until this year, Lebron's biggest fear was being called a ballhog, or selfish. I think he saw all the crap that Kobe dealt with, and didn't want the same thing. But it seemed like in the Boston series this year, he finally just said "screw it" to himself and started just taking any shot he wanted late in games, especially if his teammates aren't helping much.

I think he was just afraid of the moment. He doesn't mind dancing like a monkey on the side during the game but is too classy to take a pressure shot? Sure.

[pass1st]

Bird makes more fancy passes.

Lebron makes more PG types of passes, as his vision is incredible. You can have Lebron run PG. Larry is not a guy you want running PG.

Larry isn't athletic enough to be a PG, but to say his passes are just fancy is ignoring the fact that they both had similar passing statistics. LBJ had a few more assists, but Bird has a few less TOs. In this respect, neither one has an unquestionable upper hand.

Bird also averaged more rebounds, which is impressive considering he our-rebounded Parish often and wasn't nearly the athlete as Lebron.

Lebron is unquestionably a better defender, though, since his athleticism lets him be a much more versatile defender. Still, Bird was a good defender, not a great one; the gap isn't huge.

Leadership is a variable right now, Bird is still the better leader by leaps and bounds, but Lebron will likely have a long career and time to make a case for that.

Saying that Lebron is unquestionably better from a skillset perspective isn't really correct. Larry did just about everything at an acceptable to prodigal level. Lebron makes a strong case to take the throne from Bird, but he still needs to accomplish more at the high level he's been playing at to prove he's the best SF without question.

[cobbler]

So Lebron is defended by people who are 6-8 inches shorter, and 40+ lbs lighter than him on a nightly basis?

The average height of centers in Wilts era was 6'10. Look it up instead of tossing out bullshit numbers with no basis in fact. That would be a 3 inch advantage on average. A far cry from your 6-8 inch fabrication.

Wilt was a superior athlete and yes his size and athleticism were an advantage in very much the same way Lebrons is.

The point of my original post was to refute, once again, an absurd remark by HoBoy that Jordan and Lebron have had the best peaks in thier careers. Heck, 3 players in 60-61 alone had better peaks. Look it up...

[Clipper Nation]

Larry play can't play defense but his clutch gene is way ahead of LeBron's.
:lol Lame Skip Bayless-esque take

By that logic, Food Stamps needs to go back to his German steroid doctors to get his "clutch gene" fixed, because LeClutch's clutch stats are better than Food Stamps'... "Clutch" doesn't determine who the better player is, especially when there isn't even an agreed-upon definition of "clutch".... Bron bless

[Killakobe81]

:toast
So basically you are saying black people are lazy, emotional debaters who don't do research before backing up their points? Rather, they have their groupies yell and go "ooooohhh!!!!!!" to try to "validate" their points in the eyes of other dimwitted faggots.

Questions ...

What does that have to do with race?

So you are telling me during a pickup game or at work over lunch with your boys you discuss win shares, win value adds, PER etc? Forum debates, sure. But you actually bring that up in those scenarios?:wakeup

Do you only play ball with Black dudes? I grew up in SF Valley hooped with plenty of Filipinos, mexicans, whites and blacks. But maybe Dallas is different. :toast

I am not what would be considered black, by most. Both my parents are Belizean a culture with african, mayan and latin roots. I was born in the states but my ethinicity is mixed. So again what does this have to with blacks or race? :bang

I love your depiction of a basketball debate, seems like it comes from the classic Do the Right thing scene when they accost the biker who stepped on Bugging out Jordan's while wearing the Larry Bird jersey ... :rollin

[HarlemHeat37]

I didn't say Lebron is #2 on the peak list, I said Jordan in '91/'92 is the only player that is ahead without needing an argument..

I can make the argument that Lebron had a better peak than Wilt and Kareem, considering the questionable talent in their era of basketball..

There are arguments for those guys, '94 Hakeem, 2000 Shaq and 2003 Duncan..maybe Magic, but his defense is questionable..all these guys are ahead of Lebron on the all-time list, but for only one year, it would be difficult to go against 2012 King James..

Even ignoring my biased perspective, Lebron just had a year where he won MVP and Finals MVP in the same season, with no coaching, and with Bosh(1/3 of Miami's only players that can create their own shot) missing half the playoffs..add a Gold medal to the list, too..only Jordan can touch that..

If you want to quantify his impact, his advanced numbers measure up against any player in history..

[Killakobe81]

I didn't say Lebron is #2 on the peak list, I said Jordan in '91/'92 is the only player that is ahead without needing an argument..

I can make the argument that Lebron had a better peak than Wilt and Kareem, considering the questionable talent in their era of basketball..

There are arguments for those guys, '94 Hakeem, 2000 Shaq and 2003 Duncan..maybe Magic, but his defense is questionable..all these guys are ahead of Lebron on the all-time list, but for only one year, it would be difficult to go against 2012 King James..

Even ignoring my biased perspective, Lebron just had a year where he won MVP and Finals MVP in the same season, with no coaching, and with Bosh(1/3 of Miami's only players that can create their own shot) missing half the playoffs..add a Gold medal to the list, too..only Jordan can touch that..

If you want to quantify his impact, his advanced numbers measure up against any player in history..

Never saw the old guys but I would say:

1. MJ' s first title
2. Shaq in 2000
3. Hakeem in 1994
4. Magic in 1987
5. Bird in 1984
6. Duncan in 2003

Lebron's 2012 compares favorably with them, tbh ...

[cobbler]

I can make the argument that Lebron had a better peak than Wilt and Kareem, considering the questionable talent in their era of basketball..



Just more typical generalities from you based in nothing but bullshit. You guys have no clue what came before your MTV/NIKE Jordan hype era and comments like this prove it. No basis in facts.


I read this awhile ago and it sums it up rather nicely:

Did Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russel have real competition?

Two of the NBA's greatest players, Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain, are often criticized for playing in a "weak" era. This is far from the truth, as the 1960s were a very good time for basketball. A much smaller league meant more competition for fewer spots. The fact that only the 121 best basketball players in the world could play in the NBA condensed the talent pool to nine teams. In the modern NBA, over half of the teams don't even have one all star player, nevertheless hall of famers. Examining the teams in the mid 1960s, all nine of them had Hall of Fame talents:

Boston Celtics: Bill Russell, John Havlicek, Sam Jones, Tommy Heinsolm
Cincinnati Royals: Oscar Robertson, Jerry Lucas
Philadelphia 76ers: Hal Greer
New York Knicks: Willis Reed
San Francisco Warriors: Wilt Chamberlain, Nate Thurmond
St. Louis Hawks: Bob Pettit
Los Angeles Lakers: Jerry West, Elgin Baylor
Detroit Pistons: David Bing, Dave Debusschere
Baltimore Bullets: Walt Bellamy

Russell and Chamberlain faced various legends on a nightly basis, yet still were known as the best players of their generation. Throughout the decade, the two were subject to strong competition Some of the great players Russell and Chamberlain faced included:

1960-1964:
Dolph Schayes
Bob Pettit
Walt Bellamy
Jerry Lucas

1965-1968:
Willis Reed
Elvin Hayes
Wes Unseld
Nate Thurmond

1969-1972:
Kareem Abdul Jabbar
Bob Lanier
Artis Gilmore
Billy Cunningham
Dave Cowens

One reason fans tend to lash out at these legends is the absurd stats of not only Russell and Chamberlain, but average players as well, as it was not uncommon for a player to average 15-20 rebounds per game. There are several reasons for the high rebound rates of these players:

a. A high tempo offense. The average team in 1965 shot about 600 more shots than a team in 1985 and about 1400 more shots than a team in 2005.

b. Less fouls called. In 1965, the average team had 2076 personal fouls per season. In 2005, 1856 personal fouls were called. But keep in mind that 1400 more shots were attempted, yet only 200 less fouls called. The result, a lowing field goal percentage, and more shots allowed to be rebounded.

When adjusting the field goal percentage to 45% and reducing the shots taken to the normal rate today, the rebounding rate drops to a more familiar rate for most players. Elgin Baylor would dropped to around 9 boards a game and Nate Thurmond to around 12. However, both Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain, even with the adjusted stats, still averaged between 16-20 rebounds per game, showing that they truly did dominate like few others.

Another common misperception is that Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain played against only 6'6" white centers. That is completely false. Here are the NBA players from 1960-1972 6'11" or taller who played at least 3 years in the NBA: (list does not include Wilt Chamberlain)

Kareem Abdul Jabbar: 7'2"
Dennis Awtrey: 6'11"
Walt Bellamy: 6'11"
Tom Boerwinkle: 7'0"
Nate Bowmen: 6'11"
Mel Counts: 7'0"
Walter Dukes: 7'0"
Jim Eakins: 6'11"
Ray Felix: 6'11"
Hank Finkel: 7'0"
Artis Gilmore: 7'2"
Swede Halbrook: 7'3"
Reggie Harding: 7'0"
Bob Lanier: 6'11"
Jim McDaniels: 6'11"
Otto Moore: 6'11"
Dave Newmark: 7'0"
Rich Niemann: 7'0"
Billy Paultz: 6'11"
Craig Raymond: 6'11"
Elmore Smith: 7'0"
Chuck Share: 6'11"
Ronald Taylor: 7'1"
Nate Thurmond: 6'11"
Walt Wesley: 6'11"

Two other factors to keep in mind:

a. The NBA was less interested in promoting itself 40 years ago, and therefore, did not see the need to measure players with their shoes on. Almost all players today are listed 1-2 inches taller than their actual height.

b. The NBA had 1/3 of the players that they do now. That means Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain faced these 25 guys 3 times more often than they would in the modern nba scheduling.

The truth is, height will never be more of a factor than skill. With several exceptions, players over 7' are typically not very successful. At a collegian level, only three 7 footers have made all-American first team in the last twenty years: Shaquille O'Neal, Andrew Bogut, and Chris Mihm. In this years all star game, Dirk Nowitzki, Pau Gasol, and Chris Kaman were the only three of 30 players selected to be 7 feet, and all are known far more for their skill sets than dominating with size. If height was such a significant factor, then Manute Bol, Shawn Bradly, and Gheorghe Muresan would be hall of fame players, not just fan favorite scrubs.

The overall talent of the 1960s is greatly underestimated as well. The stamina that players in the 1960s have is far greater than anything seen today

1965 Top 3 in minutes played per game

1. Oscar Robertson, 45.6 mpg
2. Bill Russell, 45.2 mpg
3. Wilt Chamberlain, 44.4 mpg

2005 Top 3 in minutes played per game

1. Lebron James, 42.3 mpg
2. Allen Iverson, 42.3 mpg
3. Gilbert Arenas 40.9 mpg

In addition, teams never walked up the court and held the ball for 12 seconds, and then have four players watch as the fifth tries to get to the hoop. Most teams in the 60s tried to get a fast break after every rebound and in the half court set, the ball moved and players were setting screens and cutting to the basket. Yet players were doing this on a nightly basis, without fancy trainers giving massages and various methods to help muscle recovery. In addition, players were far more versatile as Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, Dave Debusschere, and other players could play 3 or 4 positions. Many performances that players had would be considered triple doubles in todays game, but assist rules were far stricter in the 1960s, as the average team in the 1960s made 1000 more field goals per year than a team in 2005, yet averaged 100 less assists.

The 1960s produced some of the leagues finest stars, and it is an absolute travesty that these legends are debunked for playing in a weak era when it is clearly not the case. Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain are two of the greatest, if not the two greatest players to ever play the game of basketball, and it is a shame they will never be fully recognized for their magnificent accomplishments.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100727234728AAZxTUR

[DMC]

Larry isn't athletic enough to be a PG, but to say his passes are just fancy is ignoring the fact that they both had similar passing statistics. LBJ had a few more assists, but Bird has a few less TOs. In this respect, neither one has an unquestionable upper hand.

Bird also averaged more rebounds, which is impressive considering he our-rebounded Parish often and wasn't nearly the athlete as Lebron.

Lebron is unquestionably a better defender, though, since his athleticism lets him be a much more versatile defender. Still, Bird was a good defender, not a great one; the gap isn't huge.

Leadership is a variable right now, Bird is still the better leader by leaps and bounds, but Lebron will likely have a long career and time to make a case for that.

Saying that Lebron is unquestionably better from a skillset perspective isn't really correct. Larry did just about everything at an acceptable to prodigal level. Lebron makes a strong case to take the throne from Bird, but he still needs to accomplish more at the high level he's been playing at to prove he's the best SF without question.

I hope you meant "prodigious".

[DMC]

I didn't say Lebron is #2 on the peak list, I said Jordan in '91/'92 is the only player that is ahead without needing an argument..

I can make the argument that Lebron had a better peak than Wilt and Kareem, considering the questionable talent in their era of basketball..

There are arguments for those guys, '94 Hakeem, 2000 Shaq and 2003 Duncan..maybe Magic, but his defense is questionable..all these guys are ahead of Lebron on the all-time list, but for only one year, it would be difficult to go against 2012 King James..

Even ignoring my biased perspective, Lebron just had a year where he won MVP and Finals MVP in the same season, with no coaching, and with Bosh(1/3 of Miami's only players that can create their own shot) missing half the playoffs..add a Gold medal to the list, too..only Jordan can touch that..

If you want to quantify his impact, his advanced numbers measure up against any player in history..
Just admit you're full of shit and you live in Canada. That solves both issues.

[LkrFan]

fify

M:lolvs

[Latarian Milton]

bird & bron different styles of players imho. bird could shoot lights out any given night, while bron also make 3pt shots they're more of a smack rather than a main dish for him. bron rarely take them cheap shots, more often than not he'd rather go deep to shove the defenders and make a jumper off the contact

[The Franchise]

Didnt watch Bird but still going with James ?

I watched Bird and I'll still go with James. Not even a hard decision.

[dunkman]

Bird is in the same class as Magic or MJ, LeBron still has way to go but unlike Kobe, imo he could get there. Bird was clearly the best NBA player the years he won the 3 consecutive MVP's and 2 'ships, never saw somebody dominate like that. He was an above average defensive player BTW. He was much better rebounder than LeBron, he shot much better, he passed better and he was clutch like no other NBA player.

[outmap]

Larry Bird's defense is very underrated, he's very pesky.
Plus the man would literally die for the game, all heart.
The only advantage James has is his athleticism.

[Ashy Larry]

I'll take Bird right now but it will not be long before James is the top SF ......

[stretch]

The average height of centers in Wilts era was 6'10. Look it up instead of tossing out bullshit numbers with no basis in fact. That would be a 3 inch advantage on average. A far cry from your 6-8 inch fabrication.

Fabrication? Lets see if you have actually done your own research, faggot. I'm going to list the height of everyone not on Philly who was listed as a center in the 61-62 season, when Wilt averaged 50 ppg.

6-8
6-10
6-9
6-7
6-9
6-7
7-3
6-9
6-7
6-8
6-7
6-9
6-9
6-9
6-7
6-11
6-7
6-8
6-7
6-8
7-0
6-8
6-9
6-9
6-5
6-10
6-10
6-11
6-8
6-7
6-8
6-7
6-6
6-7
6-8

The three most common heights in that list are:

1) 6-7
2 & 3) 6-8, 6-9 tied

Only two players in that list were 7-0 and higher, and neither were big time players, one averaging 24 mpg, the other averaging 14 mpg.

Interesting considering how strongly you claimed that the average height was 6-10, when 6-10 and up were a pretty uncommon height. 7 out of 34 listed centers were 6-10 or taller, which is barely above 20%.

Want to go further into this debate? I guarantee the average weight was a good 40+ lbs less than Wilt as well. I noticed a lot of them were 220 and less.


The point of my original post was to refute, once again, an absurd remark by HoBoy that Jordan and Lebron have had the best peaks in thier careers. Heck, 3 players in 60-61 alone had better peaks. Look it up...

Which three players? Oh wait, you are talking about an era of 9 teams, where basically the league was dominated by 3-4 individual players because most everyone else blew ass. If you have one guy average 50 ppg, another average a triple double, another average 38 and 18, and another average about 25 rebounds per game, all in the same season, then that's not quality play. That's shitty ass competition.

[stretch]

Here are the NBA players from 1960-1972 6'11" or taller who played at least 3 years in the NBA: (list does not include Wilt Chamberlain)

Kareem Abdul Jabbar: 7'2"
Dennis Awtrey: 6'11"
Walt Bellamy: 6'11"
Tom Boerwinkle: 7'0"
Nate Bowmen: 6'11"
Mel Counts: 7'0"
Walter Dukes: 7'0"
Jim Eakins: 6'11"
Ray Felix: 6'11"
Hank Finkel: 7'0"
Artis Gilmore: 7'2"
Swede Halbrook: 7'3"
Reggie Harding: 7'0"
Bob Lanier: 6'11"
Jim McDaniels: 6'11"
Otto Moore: 6'11"
Dave Newmark: 7'0"
Rich Niemann: 7'0"
Billy Paultz: 6'11"
Craig Raymond: 6'11"
Elmore Smith: 7'0"
Chuck Share: 6'11"
Ronald Taylor: 7'1"
Nate Thurmond: 6'11"
Walt Wesley: 6'11"

:lmao

leave it up to a faggot like cobbler to name all the tallest players over a DECADES span to try to back up his bullshit takes.

basketball sucked ass in Wilt's era. just accept it.

[stretch]

Larry isn't athletic enough to be a PG, but to say his passes are just fancy is ignoring the fact that they both had similar passing statistics. LBJ had a few more assists, but Bird has a few less TOs. In this respect, neither one has an unquestionable upper hand.

Bird also averaged more rebounds, which is impressive considering he our-rebounded Parish often and wasn't nearly the athlete as Lebron.

Lebron is unquestionably a better defender, though, since his athleticism lets him be a much more versatile defender. Still, Bird was a good defender, not a great one; the gap isn't huge.

Leadership is a variable right now, Bird is still the better leader by leaps and bounds, but Lebron will likely have a long career and time to make a case for that.

Saying that Lebron is unquestionably better from a skillset perspective isn't really correct. Larry did just about everything at an acceptable to prodigal level. Lebron makes a strong case to take the throne from Bird, but he still needs to accomplish more at the high level he's been playing at to prove he's the best SF without question.

Small things I disagree (or moreso just may dispute) with here, but all in all, a fair post. Mainly I just think it's sometimes hard to compare numbers when comparing eras, due to different paces. It would be more fair to compare their stats if we have per-100-possession stats, as opposed to per game.

I think Lebron will end up being considered the greatest SF ever for sure, and still even has a shot at the GOAT title, although it might be tough. But more time is needed for sure. But if I was getting either player at their very best, I take Lebron 10 times out of 10.

[stretch]

I think he was just afraid of the moment. He doesn't mind dancing like a monkey on the side during the game but is too classy to take a pressure shot? Sure.

I don't get how he goes from consistently being a clutch player in Cleveland, hitting multiple game winning shots as well as his incredible performance against Detroit in game 5 of their series in 07, to going to Miami and suddenly being a choker who is "afraid of the moment" as you suggest.

It was pretty obvious that with Wade and Bosh being there, he was more focused on trying not to overstep boundaries, especially with the exponentially higher amount of scrutiny he was under, due to "The Decision".

[DMC]

I don't get how he goes from consistently being a clutch player in Cleveland, hitting multiple game winning shots as well as his incredible performance against Detroit in game 5 of their series in 07, to going to Miami and suddenly being a choker who is "afraid of the moment" as you suggest.

It was pretty obvious that with Wade and Bosh being there, he was more focused on trying not to overstep boundaries, especially with the exponentially higher amount of scrutiny he was under, due to "The Decision".

He was never under the expectations in Cleveland that he's under in Miami. After the Decision, as you point out, he has been under the microscope. He didn't want the role of savior on that team, and like a few other all time talents (Shaq for one), he has just recently begun to recognize that he's unstoppable and that Wade and Bosh aren't. So he was afraid of the moment. He won't be next year, not after the incredible year he's had.

[pass1st]

Small things I disagree (or moreso just may dispute) with here, but all in all, a fair post. Mainly I just think it's sometimes hard to compare numbers when comparing eras, due to different paces. It would be more fair to compare their stats if we have per-100-possession stats, as opposed to per game.

I think Lebron will end up being considered the greatest SF ever for sure, and still even has a shot at the GOAT title, although it might be tough. But more time is needed for sure. But if I was getting either player at their very best, I take Lebron 10 times out of 10.

He's on pace to overtaking Bird since LBJ doesn't have injury problems which could hamper his longevity/development. I think his ceiling is cracking the top 5, maybe top 3. If he can play like this into his mid-30s then it's a new discussion. I personally wouldn't place him until he retires.

[Thomas82]

LeBron is the superior athlete, but LB is the superior player.

[LkrFan]

"stretch my asshole" with the emo butthurt bads. :downspin:

[LkrFan]

I'd love to see Bird play in today's NBA. You think un-athletic _irk be balling? Bird would be shitting on fools and talking mad shit to the monkeyballers in the process. :lol He'd avg 30/8/8 in today's game. Easily. FT: 90%; FG: 50+%; 3pt Bombs: 45+%. Dude kicked ass in the golden era of basketball - the '80s. In today's game? Fugetaboutit.

[DMC]

Fabrication? Lets see if you have actually done your own research, faggot. I'm going to list the height of everyone not on Philly who was listed as a center in the 61-62 season, when Wilt averaged 50 ppg.

6-8
6-10
6-9
6-7
6-9
6-7
7-3
6-9
6-7
6-8
6-7
6-9
6-9
6-9
6-7
6-11
6-7
6-8
6-7
6-8
7-0
6-8
6-9
6-9
6-5
6-10
6-10
6-11
6-8
6-7
6-8
6-7
6-6
6-7
6-8

The three most common heights in that list are:

1) 6-7
2 & 3) 6-8, 6-9 tied

Only two players in that list were 7-0 and higher, and neither were big time players, one averaging 24 mpg, the other averaging 14 mpg.

Interesting considering how strongly you claimed that the average height was 6-10, when 6-10 and up were a pretty uncommon height. 7 out of 34 listed centers were 6-10 or taller, which is barely above 20%.

Want to go further into this debate? I guarantee the average weight was a good 40+ lbs less than Wilt as well. I noticed a lot of them were 220 and less.



Which three players? Oh wait, you are talking about an era of 9 teams, where basically the league was dominated by 3-4 individual players because most everyone else blew ass. If you have one guy average 50 ppg, another average a triple double, another average 38 and 18, and another average about 25 rebounds per game, all in the same season, then that's not quality play. That's shitty ass competition.

The average height of those numbers is 80.61" or 6'8.7"

[ambchang]

Bird had an incredible prime. Lebron has the potential, but he is not there yet.

[LkrFan]

Bird had an incredible prime. Lebron has the potential, but he is not there yet.

This. Some of these posters were born in 1998 or something. Bird was a bad dude.

[whitemamba]

This. Some of these posters were born in 1998 or something. Bird was a bad dude.

:clap

[TheNextGen]

Lebron is black..i go with Lebron.

[stretch]

Bird was amazing no doubt. One of my 5 favorite players of all time (the others being Dirk, Lebron, Barkley, and MJ).

But he put up big numbers in a league that played far less defense than todays NBA, had a much faster pace of game in general, without the types of athletes we see today.

Athleticism isn't everything, as we see in guys like Gerald Green. But it most certainly still means a whole hell of a lot. For example, look at Manu Ginobili. I've said for a long time that he is probably one of the most skilled players ever. If you think and look closely, there is basically nothing skill-wise that Kobe can do that Manu cannot do. He is a better shooter, has the same incredible footwork, ball-handling, passing, vision, etc... (give or take a small amount in different areas, but in the end, they are extremely comparable skill-wise) but what holds him back from being anywhere close to as good as Kobe is that he is no where near as athletic as Kobe. The athletic advantage allows Kobe to use his skills in ways that Manu cannot, even though Manu possesses just as much skill as he does, if not arguably more in various areas.

As skilled as Bird was, can you imagine if he had the athletic ability that MJ had??? He would have been the best basketball player ever, in a landslide. MJ wouldn't even come close most likely.

How about Wilt? If he wasn't the athlete that he was (in a league of non-athletes), would faggots like cobbler be sitting here trying to argue that he is the greatest player ever? Hell no. That athletic advantage he had is the biggest reason why he was so dominant for his time.

Don't sell the athletic part of the game so short. It certainly means a lot and makes a huge difference for players.

[stretch]

I'd love to see Bird play in today's NBA. You think un-athletic _irk be balling? Bird would be shitting on fools and talking mad shit to the monkeyballers in the process. :lol He'd avg 30/8/8 in today's game. Easily. FT: 90%; FG: 50+%; 3pt Bombs: 45+%. Dude kicked ass in the golden era of basketball - the '80s. In today's game? Fugetaboutit.

This is fucking stupid.

[LkrFan]

This is fucking stupid.

Fact: Bird would dominate today. _irk is a weak imitation of him. Unless you are saying _irk > Bird? :downspin:

[pass1st]

Hard to imagine an athletic Bird, he already had his way with anybody defending him.

[Trainwreck2100]

bird walks into 3 point shooting contest says "who is coming in second" walks out with trophy. Doesn't give a fuck

[stretch]

Fact: Bird would dominate today. _irk is a weak imitation of him. Unless you are saying _irk > Bird? :downspin:

No im not saying that at all. Bird > Dirk. Although it's funny you keep saying _irk. You might as well say Bir_.

[stretch]

Hard to imagine an athletic Bird, he already had his way with anybody defending him.

Which is exactly my point. If he had anywhere remotely close to MJ or Lebron type athletic ability... he would be the best player ever, and would be no questions about it. It would be:

Bird

MJ

Kareem
the rest of the list...

[DMC]

Hard to imagine an athletic Bird.
The falcon comes to mind.

[dirk4mvp]

The _Allas Mavericks disgust me more than any other team in pro sports history. I actually relocated my family down to Port Arthur because of that team. Ever since Jason Terry punched Michael Finley below the belt, I promised my wife I'd never set foot in that trashy city again. Well, it's been 4 years since then and I'm proud to say I kept my word.

Not only that but I get to root for a team with real class, and that's the San Antonio Spurs. There's a reason we got 4 rings, and those chokers led by _Irk will never see one.

[DMC]

Bird was amazing no doubt. One of my 5 favorite players of all time (the others being Dirk, Lebron, Barkley, and MJ).

But he put up big numbers in a league that played far less defense than todays NBA, had a much faster pace of game in general, without the types of athletes we see today.

Athleticism isn't everything, as we see in guys like Gerald Green. But it most certainly still means a whole hell of a lot. For example, look at Manu Ginobili. I've said for a long time that he is probably one of the most skilled players ever. If you think and look closely, there is basically nothing skill-wise that Kobe can do that Manu cannot do. He is a better shooter, has the same incredible footwork, ball-handling, passing, vision, etc... (give or take a small amount in different areas, but in the end, they are extremely comparable skill-wise) but what holds him back from being anywhere close to as good as Kobe is that he is no where near as athletic as Kobe. The athletic advantage allows Kobe to use his skills in ways that Manu cannot, even though Manu possesses just as much skill as he does, if not arguably more in various areas.

As skilled as Bird was, can you imagine if he had the athletic ability that MJ had??? He would have been the best basketball player ever, in a landslide. MJ wouldn't even come close most likely.

How about Wilt? If he wasn't the athlete that he was (in a league of non-athletes), would faggots like cobbler be sitting here trying to argue that he is the greatest player ever? Hell no. That athletic advantage he had is the biggest reason why he was so dominant for his time.

Don't sell the athletic part of the game so short. It certainly means a lot and makes a huge difference for players.

I agree with this in theory, but in reality had Bird been MJ like athletic, his other skills wouldn't have developed because he wouldn't have needed them as a youngster.

[cobbler]

The average height of those numbers is 80.61" or 6'8.7"

Stretch obviously doesn't grasp the difference between the average and the mode. Go figure.

And leave it to the moron to argue that athleticism gives you an advantage in a sport! Duh.

Classic! What a stretch!

[stretch]

Stretch obviously doesn't grasp the difference between the average and the mode. Go figure.

Cobbler obviously doesn't understand that 6'8.7 is still closer to 6'8 than 6'10 and higher.


And leave it to the moron to argue that athleticism gives you an advantage in a sport! Duh.

Classic! What a stretch!

cool comeback, bro

[stretch]

I agree with this in theory, but in reality had Bird been MJ like athletic, his other skills wouldn't have developed because he wouldn't have needed them as a youngster.

Well, in the end this is all a bunch of coulda woulda shoulda. Point is, athleticism matters, and too many people here are selling it short.

[Latarian Milton]

Bird was amazing no doubt. One of my 5 favorite players of all time (the others being Dirk, Lebron, Barkley, and MJ).

But he put up big numbers in a league that played far less defense than todays NBA, had a much faster pace of game in general, without the types of athletes we see today.

Athleticism isn't everything, as we see in guys like Gerald Green. But it most certainly still means a whole hell of a lot. For example, look at Manu Ginobili. I've said for a long time that he is probably one of the most skilled players ever. If you think and look closely, there is basically nothing skill-wise that Kobe can do that Manu cannot do. He is a better shooter, has the same incredible footwork, ball-handling, passing, vision, etc... (give or take a small amount in different areas, but in the end, they are extremely comparable skill-wise) but what holds him back from being anywhere close to as good as Kobe is that he is no where near as athletic as Kobe. The athletic advantage allows Kobe to use his skills in ways that Manu cannot, even though Manu possesses just as much skill as he does, if not arguably more in various areas.

As skilled as Bird was, can you imagine if he had the athletic ability that MJ had??? He would have been the best basketball player ever, in a landslide. MJ wouldn't even come close most likely.

How about Wilt? If he wasn't the athlete that he was (in a league of non-athletes), would faggots like cobbler be sitting here trying to argue that he is the greatest player ever? Hell no. That athletic advantage he had is the biggest reason why he was so dominant for his time.

Don't sell the athletic part of the game so short. It certainly means a lot and makes a huge difference for players.

manu preponderates kobe skill-wise and thats why hes a better player than TOSB kobe right now imho. dude may still make a dunk once in a long while but you don't see him throwing himself at the hoop that often like he used to do

MJ got a perfect blend of athleticism and skills and that's why he was the greatest to ever play this game w/o a doubt

[cobbler]

Cobbler obviously doesn't understand that 6'8.7 is still closer to 6'8 than 6'10 and higher.



cool comeback, bro

You even refuted your own original post you moron. You claimed 6 to 8 inches shorter and I called you out on it. I didn’t even add em up and guesstimated 6'10 from a glance which was pretty damn close.

It's far cry from your original 6'3 to 6'5 fabrication that for sure. Yikes!

[Brazil]

TOSB kobe t

somewhere DOK is :cry

[stretch]

I didn’t even add em up and guesstimated 6'10 from a glance which was pretty damn close.

You "guesstimated", yet you were the one being a faggot about doing research?

rofl

Still wondering how a bunch of 6'7 and 6'8 guys who are 40-50 lbs lighter than their opponent are supposed to be able to match up defensively as you continue to suggest...

[dunkman]

:lol @ Bir_

Bird was lightning quick, with great anticipation and fastest hands ever, he was excellent defender on the ball and off the ball. He couldn't jump out of the gym, but he could block and dunk. He was also a great defensive rebounder.

[stretch]

Bird was lightning quick, with great anticipation and fastest hands ever, he was excellent defender on the ball and off the ball.

:rollin:rollin:rollin:rollin:rollin:rollin:rollin: rollin:rollin

[ALVAREZ6]

lmao I'd love to see Bird trying to defend Lebron...and then vice versa.

[ALVAREZ6]

Bird was amazing no doubt. One of my 5 favorite players of all time (the others being Dirk, Lebron, Barkley, and MJ).

But he put up big numbers in a league that played far less defense than todays NBA, had a much faster pace of game in general, without the types of athletes we see today.

Athleticism isn't everything, as we see in guys like Gerald Green. But it most certainly still means a whole hell of a lot. For example, look at Manu Ginobili. I've said for a long time that he is probably one of the most skilled players ever. If you think and look closely, there is basically nothing skill-wise that Kobe can do that Manu cannot do. He is a better shooter, has the same incredible footwork, ball-handling, passing, vision, etc... (give or take a small amount in different areas, but in the end, they are extremely comparable skill-wise) but what holds him back from being anywhere close to as good as Kobe is that he is no where near as athletic as Kobe. The athletic advantage allows Kobe to use his skills in ways that Manu cannot, even though Manu possesses just as much skill as he does, if not arguably more in various areas.

As skilled as Bird was, can you imagine if he had the athletic ability that MJ had??? He would have been the best basketball player ever, in a landslide. MJ wouldn't even come close most likely.

How about Wilt? If he wasn't the athlete that he was (in a league of non-athletes), would faggots like cobbler be sitting here trying to argue that he is the greatest player ever? Hell no. That athletic advantage he had is the biggest reason why he was so dominant for his time.

Don't sell the athletic part of the game so short. It certainly means a lot and makes a huge difference for players.

+1


Skills are more important, but superhumanretard athleticism + skills is unstoppable. LeBron, Jordan, Shaq...the most dominant offensive and defensive players are athletic and skilled. Lebron is pretty much as close as you can get to the perimeter version of Shaquille O'Neal, who dominated offensively and defensively because of his skill, height, weight, and athletic ability. Both are/were absolute freaks of nature, with skills (minus FT shooting, they both blow at that).


1v1, Lebron absolutely shits on Bird, diarrhea style after a long night of wings and 15+ beers. LMAO thinking Bird would have a chance against 6'8" 260 lbs man that jumps insanely high, who could be a starting NFL wide receiver, tight end, or defensive end, depending on his training + diet.

[cobbler]

You "guesstimated", yet you were the one being a faggot about doing research?

rofl

Still wondering how a bunch of 6'7 and 6'8 guys who are 40-50 lbs lighter than their opponent are supposed to be able to match up defensively as you continue to suggest...

Wow... the obligatory "faggot" grade school comeback. Impressive.

Research? I googled and posted someone else's pretty good effort that pointed out the very same thing I told you off the top of my head. Your 6-8 inch taller comment was nothing but pure fabrication on your part no matter how you spin it. My post has nothing to with weight or athleticism but yet you felt the need to bring that in to somehow make your bs seem more credible.

And again, you just don’t grasp what the difference between mode and average is Look it up. The average was 6'8.7 which is closer to 6'9. That means there were just as many guys 6'10 as there were the 6'7 you keep referring to.

And again, a far cry for the 6'3 to 6'5 in your original bullshit post. I happened to actually see that era of basketball and the elite in that era could hang in today’s NBA no problem. And your argument about only having a 9 team league is bogus as well but I really don't feel the need to explain that to you as you cannot even grasp simple mathematical concepts.

#17 is going to be soooo sweeeet!

[Thomas82]

Hard to imagine an athletic Bird, he already had his way with anybody defending him.


Which is exactly my point. If he had anywhere remotely close to MJ or Lebron type athletic ability... he would be the best player ever, and would be no questions about it. It would be:

Bird

MJ

Kareem
the rest of the list...


Yeah, that would be NASTY!!

[DMC]

Well, in the end this is all a bunch of coulda woulda shoulda. Point is, athleticism matters, and too many people here are selling it short.
I think a lot of people are choosing skills over athleticism.

You cannot name a player who's highly skilled who doesn't do well. We judge skill by results. You can name plenty who are very athletic and don't do well. There are guys who can snatch a quarter off the top of the backboard and cannot hit a free throw or dribble the ball without traveling or turning it over. The inner city leagues are full of athletic guys, but not a lot of highly skilled ones. A highly skilled player with very limited athleticism (like Nash or Dirk or Tim Duncan) can effect the outcome of the game much more so than a highly athletic player who's not very skilled.

So I think almost everyone here understands that skill > athleticism. Lebron has both in quantity, but he doesn't have Bird like skills. What he does have is a high basketball IQ (nowhere near Bird's but still way up there). By the end of his career, he might have better results however. We'll see. I don't know if Miami can spend like LA can.

[Latarian Milton]

manu's athleticism is underrated just as much as the skills of those monkey ballers imho. it's stupid logic to use someone who can still dunk and fly at age 35 as an example of the lack of athleticism, and if you compare him to his argentinian teammates or opponents of other teams, he's still quite a beast tbh. you can't be a superstar like bron if athleticism is the only thing you live on, and it makes sense the other way round too

[LkrFan]

No im not saying that at all. Bird > Dirk. Although it's funny you keep saying _irk. You might as well say Bir_.

Troof. :rollin:lmao :rollin