Probably the best example of team chemistry was the '66 -'72 Knicks dynasty. At their heigth in '72 - Reed, Frazier, Monroe, Bradley, Debusschere, Barnett, Lucas - One Great Team.
Probably the best example of team chemistry was the '66 -'72 Knicks dynasty. At their heigth in '72 - Reed, Frazier, Monroe, Bradley, Debusschere, Barnett, Lucas - One Great Team.
The answer to your question is yes, if Larry Bird were playing today he would be a starter for the 2010 Celtics.What burning question would you like to debate now... whether Secretariat would have a shot in this year's Belmont?
I love this game wrote:
watching the Celtics game last night I mentioned to the people I was watching the game with that I was not sure Larry Bird would have even been a starter for this Celtics team which seems so much stronger and faster than the teams of the 80s. I just dont think Bird could have matched the athleticism of the new age Celtics. This created a really interstinig debate as some of the room agreed and some disagreed. What do you think?
"Why is this? Obviously it can't be answered definitively, but I just feel that players these days have far fewer open shots than the players of 20-30 years ago did and that is partially because players are more athletic and quicker on average than they were back in those days"
No one moves on offense anymore. They stand around and watch 1 guy jack up ridiculous shots.
Surprise! wrote:
"Why is this? Obviously it can't be answered definitively, but I just feel that players these days have far fewer open shots than the players of 20-30 years ago did and that is partially because players are more athletic and quicker on average than they were back in those days"
No one moves on offense anymore. They stand around and watch 1 guy jack up ridiculous shots.
true in some cases, but not in all. The Celtics current team moves a lot without the ball. Pierce does some iso's, but even then it is often as a decoy/set-up because just when you are sure he is trying to go one on one (or one on three), the opposing team helps out on D and he finds a cutter.
The current Celts team is a great team. Rondo is a fantastic point guard, Pierce is a brilliant all-around star (can do it all), Allen is solid in many areas and when hot (though he is hot and cold) a lights out shooter, KG is a tremendous defensive player, rebounder, and very good shooter, and then they have several very good role players, which championship teams always need (perkins, davis, Tony Allen, Sheed). And most of all, they play extremely smart, great team D, and play as a team (the chemistry thing).
These Celts are really good and a pleasure to watch, as much as most of the "good ol' days" teams.
I hated Bird but Magic admits Bird was a great player and the only player he feared.
If I remember correctly Bird ran a 5 mile road race in the 31 minute range. Not great but not bad for a 6'10" 230 pounder.
you are under the impression wilt chamberlain has 2 nba championships correct?
This thread sent me looking for stats. The only guy today whose numbers even begin to compare to Bird's is Lebron. But the only areas in which Lebron compares favorably are influenced greatly by changes in the league these days. Lebron actually averages about half an assist more per game than Bird. But I remember back in the 80s bitching and moaning that assists were so hard to get in the east compared to the west. Nowadays, even the old west-coast standard would be strict. The other area is points. But when you break it down, Lebron makes literally twice as many threes per game as Bird did, even when Bird was universally recognized as the best 3-point shooter in the NBA. (He makes a lower percentage, but everybody shoots a lot more.) He also gets a bunch more points at the line, partly because of the way fouls are called these days (again, he makes less of his attempts, but he gets to the line a lot more.) I will say this, though--I had no idea LBJ's stat line was so good. FAR better than Kobe, or any other modern player. (Oh, one more comparison--by the time Bird was LBJ's age, he had a title. By the time he was in the league as long as Lebron has been now, he had three, in 5 finals appearances.)
The way the 3-pt line has been utilized has changed so drastically over the last 20 years or so, especially once it became a rule in HS and college. I graduated HS one year before the line was put in, and at the time our coach had a dotted line arcing the court about 17 feet from the basket -- a line we were told NOT to shoot behind! It's now so accepted because the players have used the line their entire careers. In my son's basketball league they start counting them in 7th grade, so there are some pretty good deep shooters even before they get to freshman ball.
As far as Larry goes, it was interesting to note that only a couple of times in his career did he average 3 threes attempted a game. LeBron averages around 5 and Kobe averaged a little over 4. Not a big difference but if Larry jacked up 5-6 threes a game he would have made on average at least one more, and given the way the games are called would have conceivably gone to the line a little more often. All of the sudden he is a 30 PPG scorer.
Good discussion of Lebron v. Larry
http://rotosynthesis.rotowire.com/Old-School-vs-New-Larry-Legend-vs-King-James-BBD739.htm
Let’s compare the Legend’s first six seasons with the King’s to see how LeBron stacks up to the consensus best small forward ever.
Raw Box Scores:
Bird: 479 games, 38.2 min, 23.6 points, 10.6 rebounds, 5.8 assists, 1.8 steals, 0.9 blocks, 3.2 TOs, 49.6% FG, 86.3% FT
James: 450 games, 40.7 min, 27.5 points, 6.9 rebounds, 6.6 assists, 1.8 steals, 0.9 blocks, 3.3 TOs, 47.0% FG, 73.4% FT (Through early March 2009)
using stats does not at all quantify what larry gave to the game. he had far better talented teammates...the 85-86 celtics crew is thought to be one of the greatest of all time. mchale, parrish, DJ, larry, and bill coming off the bench. larry was much more efficient and much more of a "true shooter" than lebron. lebron james does not have any type of shooting touch, he hoists up shots because of his strong upper body and because so many defenders back off of him at the 3pt line because of his ability to drive to the basket. larry did not struggle with that, he could shoot from anywhere on the floor at any time. someone should pull up video of larrys 3pt shootout at the all star game in the 80's he made something like 12 or 13 straight shots.
larry bird would start on any team, ever. you find a team he wouldn't start on and you're lying.
and if you guys want stats, use
That stats comparison was very interesting. People keep talking about how Bird had better teammates, which is undoubtedly true. But that is a double-edged sword. Imagine what sort of numbers Bird might have put up if he didn't have to share the ball with those hall-of-famers. (In '86, McHale could have been the MVP if only he had been the best player on his own team--he averaged about 20 and 10 while shooting 60% from the floor and 80% from the line.) Probably the most impressive stat is the fact that adding Bird as a rookie took the Celtics from very bad to very good, and this was well before he reached his prime. There are very few teams in the history of the NBA that wouldn't have taken Bird at small forward in any year of his career (except, of course, for the '89 season when he only played 6 games).
Another factor you have to weigh - a very, very important factor - is percentage of games won. That's the bottom line, isn't it?
No question, one player doesn't win on his own, but, there are certain players that tend to push their teams onto victory. Certainly Bird did that at Indiana State and on the Boston Celtics. The same would be true, of course, for Michael Jordan.
Bird was adept at making his teammates better players. That doesn't show in stats - unless you read the win/loss record.
Larry Bird would not only be a starter on today's Celtics, he would be by far their best player and probably the best player in the league. Let's face it, he was a FAR better shooter and passer than Kobe or Lebron could ever dream of being; he was a much better rebounder too. Bird wouldn't take control of the game the same way those two do, but what he would do in today's game is exactly what he did in the 80s: he'd elevate the level of play of those around him, hit clutch shots, and win games. Do you really think guys who he beat, like Michael Jordan, Dominique Wilikins, and Julius Earving were less athletic than today's players? No. Give me Larry Bird over anyone in the league today. I am not even an old-timer who has some false recollection of the 'glory days', I was born in 1989. The fact of the matter is Larry Bird was and still is one of the greatest players the game has ever seen.
I have no doubt that more of today's players are great athletes. I'm just not so sure too many of them know how to play basketball.
yeah white people!
WG wrote:
That said, Bird would be insane on the new three-point line.
The 3 point arc is exactly the same today as when Bird played.
no it is not. it was lengthened in the 1998-1999 season. the 3pt line only came to existence in the early 80's, people like larry and magic were not raised shooting the three like the AAU whores lebron and company. kids now a days are encouraged to stand out there on the 3pt line and either to take the shot if open, or drive to the basket for a possible foul and layup. the beauty of basketball is the midrange game and that is what a lot of players today do NOT have. lebron james has absolutely no midrange game. he dribbles at the top of the key, if he hasn't run a P&R or ISO by that time he will either drive and kick or just drive and take the foul if given. great shooters in the game (jordan, bryant, west, robertson, bird, ect) have had excellent midrange shooters which makes you nearly impossible to guard. lebron james could learn a thing or two from watching larry play. or actually magic johnson. if lebron watched showtime lakers video footage that is the way you run the floor if you're a point foward. post up and dish to the cutters.
okpiugyftgc wrote:
no it is not. it was lengthened in the 1998-1999 season. the 3pt line only came to existence in the early 80's,
The 3-point line was 22/23-9 up to 1994, then shortened for 3 years (95-96-97) then lengthened back to 22/23-9. It is the same line that Bird shot from.