Bird Better then Jordan???
I don't think Bird was better then Jordan, but he was fun to watch!!!
so they might say Jordan = G.O.A.T ( i don't agree)
but they can't say Jordan = Legend
Legend = Larry!
Bird was a monster. I don't think he gets enough credit. He could do everything, plus he came into the NBA with that unique ability/understanding to make his teammates better.
He was better than Jordan at one point, but that's when Jordan was younger.
Bird doesn't stack up to Jordan longevity wise, since his back broke down.
Bird doesn't get enough credit!
People nowadays who never saw him play have this bizarre notion of him as this unathletic, white-guy who couldn't defend and shot his way to success in the equally unathletic game of the 80s.
The truth is Larry might have been the most skilled player of all time, he could do more than just shoot from anywhere on the court, he was the best passing forward of all time until Lebron showed up, he was an exceptional rebounder, he was a tough defender, an incredibly intense competitor and he made everyone on his team better. And the 80s and 90s were alot better than kids nowadays seem to think.
Even in 1992, at the age of 35 and after years of back problems he still averaged 20.2 PPG, 9.6 RPG and 6.8 APG. Just absurd.
I agree with everything you say except that the nba was better back in the 80s and 90s...I'm sorry but this almost always coming from the people that grew during that time and our bias and don't want to admit that this generation is better and the next one will be even better then the one now.Thats just how it works there is no possible way it can get worst
I consider myself a huge Larry Legend fan, imo he's a top 5 all-time great player, but he's not better than Mike. In his prime Larry may have been a more complete player, and along with Magic was the definition of a team player, but once MJ hit his prime no one could touch him.
Imo the ranking goes like this, 1) MJ, 2) Magic, 3) Russell, 4) Kareem, and 5) Larry.
Larry was so much fun to watch during his prime, but as previously mentioned his body really broke down. He only played 12 seasons, granted they were marvelous to watch, but he just didn't have the longevity of a MJ. However, being a top 5 player is nothing to sneeze at.
Nobody ever talks about Larry Bird the Defender...He did a great job of playing team defense...He was all defensive 2nd team 3 times...And has a better All Time defensive rating than Jordan,Kobe,Pippen and Lebron.....
Jordan was among the NBA's top 5 players after his rookie season....He won scoring titles,multiple all star games,All NBA Teams,All Defensive Teams..And the most marketable star in sports history........But he was always in Magic's and Bird's Shadow, until he Won that 1st Championship....Thats when fans and the media finally started mentioning him in the same sentence as Magic and Bird.....
Bird is absolutely a top 5 player ever. He was beyond amazing.
Putting Bird ahead of Jordan is beyond stupid. Bird was a phenomanl player in the 80s and was definitely unique in many ways...but when you look at him from a true talent stand point....a couple of things come to mind. 1. We was a far step behind Jordan. and 2. What would he be in today's game? It can't be understated how good Bird was, but it also can't be understated how less athletic the NBA was in the 80s.
I'm tired of people who didn't actually watch the game in the 1980's saying how less athletic the game was. I call BULLSH!T. The players back then were equally athletic, however they were behind in terms of the strength that players have now thanks to far superior strength and conditioning programs. However, that strength means little to me, as players today are not allowed to bang and handcheck. Back in the 80's, these guys were putting up huge numbers against defense that was far more physical than you understand. When the league stopped handchecking and banging in the post to boost scoring, scoring actually went DOWN. Just a minor quibble of mine, but there it is. Neg me... I don't care.
a couple of things come to mind. 1. We was a far step behind Jordan. and 2. What would he be in today's game? It can't be understated how good Bird was, but it also can't be understated how less athletic the NBA was in the 80s.
He dominated in the early 90s despite being 35 and having serious back problems! Bird in today's game would still be dominant, probably similar to a Dirk Nowitzki/Grant Hill hybrid
He didn't "dominate the early 90s" he was playing in a little over half the games, and playing well. The talent/athletic difference from 1992 and now is still highly underrated. Look at how many unathletic perimeter guys there were back then. Wouldn't hang around in today's game.
Look at Jon Scheyer. Can play 2-3 positions, good shooter, good ball handler, doesn't make mistakes, extremely crafty, was actually above average defender at Duke, and he can't even get in the league.
You didn't just compare Jon Scheyer to Larry Bird......you think Scheyer could've taken it to Magic Johnson even once?
No subzero. I did not compare Jon Scheyer to Larry Bird. I was making an analogy about the amount of unathletic perimeter players who were in the leagues in the 80s and early 90s. I never once said along any lines that Scheyer was even a fraction of the player Bird was. And nowhere in that post does it say that. Did guys like Scheyer play in the NBA in the 80s and 90s? Yes. That was my point. My point was the league is more athletic.
He didn't "dominate the early 90s" he was playing in a little over half the games, and playing well.
Playing well? If someone today were to average 20 PPG and almost 10 RPG and 7 APG that would be dominant. Yep, that's true that he played in just over 40 games in 1992 but that's because he was old and his back was a mess, the 45 games he did play he did dominate. In 1991 he played 60 games and averaged 19.4 PPG, 8.5 and 7.2 APG, in 1990 when kinda close to healthy he played 75 games and averaged 24.3, 9.5 RPG and 7.5 APG, so yes he did dominate the early 90s.
And I just flat out disagree with the idea that the talent/athletic difference from 20 years ago to now is that vast. There is a difference for sure, but it's nowhere near as large a gap as some people make it out to be.
Is he better than Jordan? No, not close. That was the purpose of this thread.
All I did is ask the question if he would be as good now as he was then because their is an athletic gap. Actually watch some games from the early 90s. And that's great, he was putting up those stats. Jordan's last year before his 2nd retirement he was 34 averaging 30 a game and winning MVP and Finals MVP. How this subject changed to arguing I was saying Scheyer was better than Bird, or that Bird was underrated is beyond me. All I did is question if he would have been as good now. I don't think its unfair to say he might not have been AS good as he was. That's all.
Seeing as how nobody on this thread, not even the maker of this thread argued that Bird was better I don't really see your point. You stated a particular reason as to why Bird was not better, I disagreed with that particular point although I still agree with your overall assessment. I have watched games from the early 90s, the 80s too (since that's when I grew up) and the skill and talent level were exceptional.
my response was to the OP. It was "Bird better than Jordan" With a video link for a video that defended it. That's what i responded to. I disagree with most people, I think Bird was slightly overrated. He was a great player. I never said there weren't skill and talent in the 80s. I actually never used the words skill or talent in any post I've made in this thread so you are arguing with me a point I never made. It's fine if you don't believe there is an athletic difference, but I do. I also never stated the reason Bird wasn't better was because the league was more athletic now. You can match Bird and MJ up in there respective eras as if they are equal, and MJ is still superior across the board.
I never said there weren't skill and talent in the 80s. I actually never used the words skill or talent in any post I've made in this thread so you are arguing with me a point I never made.
You sure did:
"The talent/athletic difference from 1992 and now is still highly underrated."
Anyway I'm done arguing with you about this; on the whole we both agree that MJ was better
He was in no way better then magic, mike Russell Wilt or west. He may be top 6. People always use the excuse he wasnt athletic but during his day he had the size of a power forward and played the 3 giving him a mismatch to use as well. Most of the four men now are 6'9 6'10. Plus look at his front court mckhale 6'10 walton 6"11 Chief 7'1.. So he was going to be able to have better rebounding numbers with these bigs supporting him. Larry Legend was the man. Be gets a ton of credit to. It is just Mike changed the game a lil more then him plus larry had to share his legacy with Magic. Had larry played in a different time he wouldve gotten more credit. Mike didnt have to share his Legacy with any one which is why mike has the best legacy.
Maybe I'm off here, but wouldnt having taller teammates take away from his rebounding numbers?
Lebron James is far better than Larry Bird. Just sayin'
First of all Bird wasn't athletic but he had what todays era lacks, Fundamentals why, the way he shooted and the understanding of the angles, he was a good defender a good rebounder and an amazing passer, i think he is a better passer than Lebron and a better Rebounder not hating and all 10.0 career and assists he is lower than Lebron by 0.6, second he played against less athletic players LOL... Dominique Wilkins, Spud Webb, Scottie Pippen, Clyde Drexler, James Worthy, Larry Nance, Dr,j, Mitch Richmond, Hersey Hawkins... do you want more? he even played against great defenders Pippen, Jordan, Scott, Dumars, Rodman do you want more, oh and don't say that the nba today is stronger, faster or they where smaller, because i can keep going , lets start on size
Charles Barkley- small but with great power to outrebound bigger players
Rodman was simply Rodman everyone knows why
SG Average height/weight: ~6’6”, 209 todays game
SG in that era Average height/weight: ~6’5.3”, 203.5
C Average height/weight: ~6’11.7”,268.8( i even helped this era the average had Yao's size 7'6 xD)
C Average height/weight in that era :7’0.6” 252.2
should i keep going lol, if Bird could dominate this era i don't know but he already played in a ERA where was more physical and fundamentaly sound, he could be good a player in todays game just because of his Fundamentals and shooting.
and you have good examples in this era not athletic but good players, KLove outsanding Rebounder and scorer(low post, Shooting) and he is not athletic, CP3 not athletic but controls the game by doing a little bit of everything, Steve Nash 2 times MVP, Irving fantastic scorer, Tim Duncan, Dirk Nowitzki, Kobe now in his prime everyone knows how good he was, Noah, David West, Hibbert, Bynum, Al Jefferson, Marc Gasol, Pau Gasol,Carmelo he is not athletic but his offensive skill is off the charts, Jason Kidd now.. if they can do it just by using skills/fundamentals why shouldn't we think the same about Bird LOL, thats stupid lol
This is exactly the post I wanted to write but was too lazy too. Thank you.
Old and a bad back. 34 yrs old stats... 19.4 ppg 8.5 rpg 7.2 apg 1.8 spg 1.0 bpg
45% fg 38% 3pt 89% ft
35 yrs old stats he only played 45 games because his back got worse... 20.2 ppg 9.6 rpg 6.8 apg
only his Steals and Blocks where pretty low... 46% fg 40% 3pt 92% ft