Would Larry Bird be a starter for these Celtics

i would love to see the hick from french lick in his prime in todays game. i would absolutely love it to see all these selfish fvcking asshole ballhog glory hounds see how basketball is supposed to be played and see their stupid faces when he hands their asses to them and makes them look stupid in the process every goddam night.

CMW wrote:

So could Larry Bird start for this year's Celtics team? Maybe, probably, definitely, I don't know, but I just hate how people consistently make these claims about how great the players as a whole were back in the '80s. I think the players of today match up well enough.

The premise of this thread is that today's players are better, not worse, than those from the '80s. You should read the entire thread, especially the OP, before replying. You won't sound as stupid that way.

I would like to add to a couple of things that have already been mentioned.

First someone mentioned that Bird made everyone better. I think there is no better sign of this then his NCAA career. He goes to Indiana State University who had never played in the NCAA tournament and takes them to the championship game. In today's day and age the unselfish player is all but unknown and someone like Bird would be even better because of it.

Secondly, about the matter of Bird's abilities. I read a biography on Bird. I would recommend it to anyone but in it Magic Johnson (yes the Magic Johnson) is quoted as saying that "Bird was the only player that he was ever scared of because he was the only player who could not be stopped." This is the same Magic Johnson who played against Michael Jordan.

The fact is that Bird had one of the greatest shots ever. He could drain a 20 ft jumper with his eyes closed. So to answer the original question. Yes Larry Bird in his prime could start for the Celtics heck Larry Bird in his prime could start for any Dream Team.

lllllllllll wrote:

Doc Rivers (for the then Hawks) on Bird's 60pt job on the Hawks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iFhNi9t4L4&feature=related

Thanks, that was the one I was looking for. Doc was loving telling that story, and the video of his teammates on the Hawks bench cheering Bird on is one of the classics of all sports.

"in the trainer's lap. who wants it?"

This debate makes me long for the days when I cared about the NBA. The Knicks with Debusschere, Bradley, Reed, Monroe and Frazier. Wilt leading the league in assists one year because a writer criticized him for his passing the year before. Watching the symmetry of those Celtics teams...

The current game was summed up best by Latrell Sprewell when he said "How am I going to feed my two families on $12M?" I'll take Larry Bird any day.

Would any of these players from 2010 NBA playoff teams make the Celtics starting lineup? They are all roughly comparable to Bird in at least some statistical categories and play either SF or PF.

Dirk Nowitzski

Antawn Jamison

Rashard Lewis

Josh Smith

Gerald Wallace

Pau Gasol

Lamar Odum

Amare Stoudemire

Carlos Boozer

Lamarcus Auldridge

In Bird's *last season*, battling back troubles that limited him to 45 games and ultimately led to his retirement, he averaged 20.2 ppg, 6.8 apg, 9.6 rpg, 0.7 blocks, 40% 3pts, 0.9 steals. The only comparable player in 2010 NBA is Lebron James. This is not to say that Bird is athletically the equivalent of LBJ - simply that is takes a player of LBJ's stature to even begin the comparison. Possibly Garnett in his prime, but even then I don't think he even comes close to Bird's shooting range. Bird's defense was also underrated; I'll point out Bird's steals and blocks - he averaged 1.75 steals and 0.8 blocks for his career - which indicate quick hands and good body positioning.

Bird starts... but the more interesting question is who else starts? Does Pierce slide to SG? Garnett to C? Ray Allen 6th man?

This is the best team ever. It has to have Bird

C- Hakeem the Dream

PG- Magic

SF- Larry

PF- Tim Duncan

G- MJ

Bird in his prime (84-86) is the league MVP this year. He would dominate the game even more now than he did then. Are guys more athletic today? Maybe, but he'd have the benefit of the same advances in training that players today have and he'd work his ass off to improve. Today, expansion has weakened the talent level, no hand checking on defense and most importantly the emergence of the 3 point shot as a focus on offense would all work to his benefit.

Much of the hang-up here seems to be about the word athletic. Bird may have been far from the greatest athlete in the NBA (though he did once win the Clydesdale division of a 10k roadrace) but a lot of his success was based on developed and honed skills and on a sort of a radar and knowledge of what is and can be going on out there. He didn't jump the highest and he wasn't the fastest. He had other things working for him.

Old schooler wrote:

At his best, Bird would start on any team at any time. Who could possibly question that?

Bird would not start for the Spurs when they had Duncan and Robinson

kipketer wrote:

At about 1:50 in that video he makes a pass that would make every single person in the NBA look stupid

Actually there were a whole bushel of passes in that video that would make (and did make) NBA All-stars look stupid.

The whole "Bird wasn't athletic" meme just exposes the prejudices of the person saying that. Bird, over his entire career, consistently out-ran, out-jumped, out-maneuvered, and out-thought NBA legends. His body control was second to no one. The only player to ever come close to Bird's vision on the court was Magic Johnson, coincidentally another player who "couldn't jump". Bird was the most creative player ever, he'd make off-balance finger-tip and wrist flick passes that were completely unexpected. Every once in a while today you'll see a Bird-like highlight, but Bird did it night after night for an entire career.

Bird left supposedly quicker players flatfooted then, he'd have an easier exploiting them now.

Larry Bird Clinic (watch the Atlanta bench in the 4th quarter)

1985 & 86 WOW....my favorite in sports, all down hill after Bears and Celtics championships

Mchale was part of Celtics in 1980 but he was not part of the rotation. He was basically bench warmer then, only aveage 1.5pts game.

Tiny Archibald was starting point guard in 1980 (NBA championship).

1980 roster...the next they would pick up Mchale and Parish, and McHale was a big factor in the beginning. He later developed into a great player.

Larry make everyone better...this team proves that!...just by adding bird to this roster they improve to one the best teams in the NBA....from the worst.

Before Bird it was Dr.J.....those were the years...and both would be ALLSTARS TODAY WITHOUT QUESTION!

7 Tiny Archibald

33 Larry Bird R

30 M.L. Carr

12 Don Chaney

18 Dave Cowens

45 Eric Fernsten

43 Gerald Henderson

32 Jeff Judkins of Utah

44 Pete Maravich G

31 Cedric Maxwell F

53 Rick Robey C-F

Team and O

He had a quick release, unlimited range, great court vision, and a physical post game. He could shoot a turnaround jumper over anyone.

I do like how everyone in this thread agrees and is saying the same things but we're so insulted by the OP that it doesn't slow anyone down. Bird was awesome.

Rakunishu wrote:

Old schooler wrote:

At his best, Bird would start on any team at any time. Who could possibly question that?

Bird would not start for the Spurs when they had Duncan and Robinson

Robinson at 5, Duncan at 4. Bird is a 3 (SF). I loved that spurs team, and I have no idea offhand who was their starting SF. Are you seriously suggesting that the best small forward ever couldn't have started for that team?

gamecock wrote:

Rakunishu wrote:

Bird would not start for the Spurs when they had Duncan and Robinson

Robinson at 5, Duncan at 4. Bird is a 3 (SF). I loved that spurs team, and I have no idea offhand who was their starting SF. Are you seriously suggesting that the best small forward ever couldn't have started for that team?

sean elliot i believe?

no?

agreed - i think bird get's the nod. by a kidney.

skinnie minnie wrote:

gamecock wrote:

Robinson at 5, Duncan at 4. Bird is a 3 (SF). I loved that spurs team, and I have no idea offhand who was their starting SF. Are you seriously suggesting that the best small forward ever couldn't have started for that team?

sean elliot i believe?

no?

agreed - i think bird get's the nod. by a kidney.

Well played, sir. ;-)

Those Spurs team did start Elliot at the 3 (when he was healthy, which was about half the time), A combination of Antonio Daniels/Jaren Jackson/Vinny Del Negro/Mario Elie at the 2, and Avery Johnson at point (Terry Porter was his backup). Surely one could find someway to give The Basketball Jesus some minutes.

Amazing to look at that roster and think of how *smart* that team was. The Admiral is one of the more intellectual players ever to play the game. Duncan is called the Big Fundamental for a reason. Del Negro, Porter and AJ have all had head coaching gigs recently and probably will again. Elie and Elliot were smart, cagey players as well.

Bird could score from anywhere and his basketball IQ was about as high as anyone who ever played the game. You have to remember that if he played today he would be bigger, faster and stronger as well.

Bird was a good athlete, he just didn't move like one. He played some games with the Indiana State baseball team until Red Auerbach found out and at times he has been a low-handicap golfer. His vision and hand-eye coordination are unreal, and while people said he was slow and couldn't jump I never saw him get beat down the floor and he averaged 10 rebounds a night for his career so he ran and jumped well enough.

I was on a message board a couple of years ago and someone there said Bird was overrated. I don't understand how you can be overrated when you go 24/10/6 for your career playing in one of the most competitive eras of the game.

atownrunnin wrote:

I was on a message board a couple of years ago and someone there said Bird was overrated. I don't understand how you can be overrated when you go 24/10/6 for your career playing in one of the most competitive eras of the game.

Probably because there's a lot of players that put up similar numbers and don't get near as much recognition.

Yeah, everyone would have played Bird over Sean Elliott for those Spurs teams. Don't be ridiculous.

gamecock wrote:

Rakunishu wrote:

Bird would not start for the Spurs when they had Duncan and Robinson

Robinson at 5, Duncan at 4. Bird is a 3 (SF). I loved that spurs team, and I have no idea offhand who was their starting SF. Are you seriously suggesting that the best small forward ever couldn't have started for that team?