GOAT SF

[CousinOfDeath]

Also it's pretty undeniable that Bird would be a more efficient scorer in today's game than he was in the 80s strictly based on the larger emphasis on 3 point shooting. Bird only shot like 1 a game in his prime. If he played now he'd be draining them left and right and it would lead to some insane TS%'s.

[JordansBulls]

I'll just say this and be done with it. LeBron is a GOAT level talent who is prone to play at levels below his talent during the highest level of competition, moreso than any other GOAT level talent in history.

Am I biased, no, I'm disappointed because I predicted that he would be GOAT until he was on a team he was EXPECTED to win with. Then his flaws appeared.

LeBron plays at levels below his talent during the highest level of competition?

I don't know why I'm even bothering with actual facts but here we go nonetheless:

- LeBron PPG in playoff game 7s: 34.4 PPG = #1 all-time in NBA history

- LeBron PPG in playoff elimination games: 31.9 PPG = #1 all-time in NBA history

I think he is referring to going 7 games to teams clearly inferior especially being down 3-2 to teams who have a worse record as well.
I wouldn't say at the highest level when you think of series such as Boston in 2010 or Dallas in 2011 or even Orlando in game 6 in 2009.

But Bird has his fair share losing 7 series with HCA.

[HeartBreakKid]

I'll just say this and be done with it. LeBron is a GOAT level talent who is prone to play at levels below his talent during the highest level of competition, moreso than any other GOAT level talent in history.

Am I biased, no, I'm disappointed because I predicted that he would be GOAT until he was on a team he was EXPECTED to win with. Then his flaws appeared.

LeBron plays at levels below his talent during the highest level of competition?

I don't know why I'm even bothering with actual facts but here we go nonetheless:

- LeBron PPG in playoff game 7s: 34.4 PPG = #1 all-time in NBA history

- LeBron PPG in playoff elimination games: 31.9 PPG = #1 all-time in NBA history

I think he is referring to going 7 games to teams clearly inferior especially being down 3-2 to teams who have a worse record as well.
I wouldn't say at the highest level when you think of series such as Boston in 2010 or Dallas in 2011 or even Orlando in game 6 in 2009.

But Bird has his fair share losing 7 series with HCA.

Orlando had a stylistic advantage over Cleveland, what is James supposed to do, guard Dwight Howard? I mean James played great in that series, I don't get how anyone can say other wise.

Boston and Dallas proved to be the amongst the best teams in the NBA in 2010 and 2011, so how was James playing down to his competition? Dallas won the championship coming out of the tougher conference, and Boston made it to game 7 of the NBA championships...

[CaliBullsFan]

Pippen doesn't belong on this list. Only Dr. J, Bird, and LeBron deserve consideration. I'm going with Bird but LeBron is close.

Barry and Baylor>Dr J. Could argue Havlicek also.

[BattleTested]

My top 5 career wise is -

1. Larry Bird - Still #1. The main thing that holds him back is longevity. He was really only Larry Legend from 80-88. That keeps him from being a top 5 player when you compare his career to other full length careers. But when you compare him to Lebron, it doesn't. Lebron's been an elite player from 05-13 (really from 06-13) but I'll give him that sophomore season to match up to Larry's trajectory. I'm just not taking those 9 seasons over Larry's 9 seasons.

2. Lebron - He'll be #1 within a couple of years. The fact that his body of work already compares to someone like Bird's and he's only 28 is frankly pretty amazing.

3. Dr. J - Even though I'm not big on the ABA, it still counts for something. And he was an NBA MVP and the best player on a perennial contender for 6 or 7 years/2nd best player on a GOAT level team.

4. Scottie Pippen - Best perimeter defender ever. I don't think that's even a debate really. See the 91 Finals for proof (in comparison to another all time great defender in Jordan.) Offensively he was extremely versatile. He was also perfectly suited for that 2nd option. Nothing wrong with that when you're a 2nd option on a 6x champion. He's underrated around here.

5. Elgin Baylor - Somewhat selfish but he was still one of the most talented players ever (probably top 10 in this respect if you account for era.) We all talk about that 62 season where Wilt averaged 50 and Oscar had a triple double but we leave out Baylor posting a 38/19/5 then going for 39/18/4 in a Finals run where his team was one point away from beating Boston on their home floor in Game 7 (damn Frank Selvy.) Craziest thing about this season is ironically what people discredit it for. He only played 48 games so people assume he got hurt or something. In reality, he was in the Army reserves and couldn't play games on the weekends (or the weeks maybe, I don't know how it worked but he had to leave the team very frequently.) He literally wasn't going to practice or anything. He'd just show up, score 40, grab 20 rebounds and be on his way. Absolutely insane talent that guy was.

Durant is a few years from making it into this list. McGrady didn't sustain his level for long enough. Gervin was damn close and could actually be argued over Baylor. Wilkins never got to play on a good enough team (situation and fortune definitely plays a role in how we look at careers.) Pierce never had the peak and Worthy wasn't on this level. I hate Rick Barry so much it's hard to be objective about him, lol. He's certainly near the top 5 though.

My list for peaks would be

1. 86 Bird
2. 12 Lebron
3. 76 Dr. J
4. 03 T-Mac
5. 13 Durant
6. 62 Baylor
7. 75 Barry
8. 79 Gervin
9. 88 Wilkins
10. 94 Pippen

[Mr MoJo Risin]

This is got to be Larry Legend. He brought back the Celtics single-handedly. They were atrocious before Bird came onto the scene. Bird did it the right way in winning his rings. He was clutch. He had the intangibles, and could out think you and win. It's a shame that his back went out so early in his career.

Larry Legend though in my book. Clearly!

[MisterHibachi]

This is got to be Larry Legend. He brought back the Celtics single-handedly. They were atrocious before Bird can onto the scene. Bird did it the right way in winning his rings. He was clutch. He had the intangibles, and could out think you and win. It's a shame that his back went out so early in his career.

Larry Legend though in my book. Clearly!

Didn't realize there was a wrong way of winning rings..

[BattleTested]

This is got to be Larry Legend. He brought back the Celtics single-handedly. They were atrocious before Bird can onto the scene. Bird did it the right way in winning his rings. He was clutch. He had the intangibles, and could out think you and win. It's a shame that his back went out so early in his career.

Larry Legend though in my book. Clearly!

Didn't realize there was a wrong way of winning rings..

Well I think he means to imply that Bird built something from the ground up. Obviously Red Auerbach and guys like Robert Parish and Kevin Mchale had a lot to do with that, but it's still always going to be more valued to win with the team you're drafted on than it is to leave for another team. Even if you're drafted onto a great team (like Bird or Kobe) people will give you more credit for your rings if you don't jump ship.

And TBH as ridiculous as this way of thinking is, I agree with it when it comes to Lebron. We forget now that Wade has declined and Bosh has turned into a quasi-laughing stock but the guy legitimately went to another dude's team. Wade was a top 3 player in the league and his best individual rival in the conference. He had a ring under his belt and at 28, was at the peak of his career coming off two all time great seasons. Bosh was a top 10 or 15 player.

Nowadays, we look at Lebron going to Miami as not that big of a deal because he's won rings with those guys banged up, proving that he didn't need that all star team. But the decision to join that all star team over somewhere like New York or Chicago or the Clippers or staying in Cleveland understandably rubbed fans the wrong way. I was pretty disappointed as a basketball fan that the best player in the league was going to jump ship just to join up with the 3rd best player in the league. Leaving Cleveland made sense, but going to Miami was pretty damning at the time. Obviously it was his career and his decision, but that kind of thing should come into play when discussing legacies. Honestly Wade's injury problems and Bosh's injury in 2012 were the best thing that could have happened to Lebron.

[BmanInBigD]

Pains me as a long-time Bird fan, but LeBron has passed him IMO.

But I'd like to hear some justification from the the Pippen voter. WTF??

[ThunderDan9]

Pains me as a long-time Bird fan, but LeBron has passed him IMO.

I agree. Maybe he hasn't passed Bird yet, but eventually he will. Similar peak, similar prime, but the longevity decides this.

On a sidenote though, I agree with BattleTested as well. Going to Wade's Miami alongside is Bosh is something like Jordan going to NYC in the summer of 1990, maybe adding an Isiah Thomas or Dominiqe Wilkins as well. LOL

[Twelve20Nine]

Lebron is the best to play that position . Larry Bird during his last 4 seasons really declined . Lebron in 10 seasons almost has as many points as Bird did in 13 . He already has more MVPs and the same amount of Finals MVPs. Its not a good comparison . I know more people like Larry and he's even 1st on basketball reference in elo but mmmm no

[JordansBulls]

This is got to be Larry Legend. He brought back the Celtics single-handedly. They were atrocious before Bird can onto the scene. Bird did it the right way in winning his rings. He was clutch. He had the intangibles, and could out think you and win. It's a shame that his back went out so early in his career.

Larry Legend though in my book. Clearly!

Didn't realize there was a wrong way of winning rings..

Well Bird won his titles in Boston but it was not like it was some terrible franchise. They still had the most rings all time in NBA history and had just won 2 titles in the prior 7 years before Bird got there which is the most titles for any franchise in the past 10 seasons before Bird got there.
The difference I can see is that Bird didn't elect to go play with someone in there prime who already won as the man, which is what Lebron did in playing with Wade and going to his city to play. So in that sense it does matter a bit.

[Brenice]

The difference I can see is that Bird didn't elect to go play with someone in there prime who already won as the man, which is what Lebron did in playing with Wade and going to his city to play. So in that sense it does matter a bit.

Bird and the Celtics also had a rival team during its own dynasty era in the Showtime Lakers featuring the GOAT PG. LeBron and the Heat compete with who?

[PaulieWal]

Yeah, the right way is that only if you are lucky enough to be drafted by a good franchise and they can build a big 2 or big 3 around you then you can win multiple rings and be acclaimed as an all-time great. If you get drafted by a bad franchise and have to play with scrubs then you should stay there, not win rings and get labeled a choker.

If you build your team in free agency then you did it the wrong way because drafting a big 3 is the only right way.

The same people here saying LeBron did it the "wrong way" would be still calling him a choker and can't get it done had he stayed in Cleveland, still been ringless, and probably lost to OKC (with KD, RW, and JH, but hey that's the "right" big 3) in 2012 IF his Cavs even made the Finals.

[JordansBulls]

Yeah, the right way is that only if you are lucky enough to be drafted by a good franchise and they can build a big 2 or big 3 around you then you can win multiple rings and be acclaimed as an all-time great. If you get drafted by a bad franchise and have to play with scrubs then you should stay there, not win rings and get labeled a choker.

If you build your team in free agency then you did it the wrong way because drafting a big 3 is the only right way.

The same people here saying LeBron did it the "wrong way" would be still calling him a choker and can't get it done had he stayed in Cleveland, still been ringless, and probably lost to OKC (with KD, RW, and JH, but they that's the "right" big 3) in 2012 IF his Cavs even made the Finals.

Not saying he had to stay in Cleveland. But there is a difference in getting help and then going to play with someone who already won as the man on his squad.

[MisterHibachi]

The difference I can see is that Bird didn't elect to go play with someone in there prime who already won as the man, which is what Lebron did in playing with Wade and going to his city to play. So in that sense it does matter a bit.

Bird and the Celtics also had a rival team during its own dynasty era in the Showtime Lakers featuring the GOAT PG. LeBron and the Heat compete with who?

Do you have the same views regarding MJ's titles? Him and the Bulls didn't have an equal to compete against either.

[PaulieWal]

Yeah, the right way is that only if you are lucky enough to be drafted by a good franchise and they can build a big 2 or big 3 around you then you can win multiple rings and be acclaimed as an all-time great. If you get drafted by a bad franchise and have to play with scrubs then you should stay there, not win rings and get labeled a choker.

If you build your team in free agency then you did it the wrong way because drafting a big 3 is the only right way.

The same people here saying LeBron did it the "wrong way" would be still calling him a choker and can't get it done had he stayed in Cleveland, still been ringless, and probably lost to OKC (with KD, RW, and JH, but they that's the "right" big 3) in 2012 IF his Cavs even made the Finals.

Not saying he had to stay in Cleveland. But there is a difference in getting help and then going to play with someone who already won as the man on his squad.

I don't know man, seems pretty arbitrary to me. The reality is that save for Pistons in 04 and Mavs in 2011 almost every team that wins the title usually has 2 or 3 top 20 players in the league (usually top 15).

If KD gets to play with Russ, why shouldn't LeBron have Wade?

I can just go through all the duos and trios that have won the rings in the last 20-25 years and almost all of them were a Big 2 or Big 3. Now to say well he shouldn't have joined somebody who had been the man seems irrelevant and another arbitrary standard to hold LeBron to when all other greats won their rings on very good-loaded teams. Yet LeBron shouldn't have a good team? He got his own Big 3 (which ignores the fact that it was really a Big 1 in 2013) It would have been relevant if Wade was the best player on the team or was the one winning the FMVPs. Then you could have discounted LeBron's rings as a second banana.

[wallsfamily]

Does anyone know why there is an exception to the salary cap called the Bird rule? Well it is because instead of risking losing Larry Bird because of the salary cap the Celtics were given an exception to go over. Hmmmmmm. I wonder if the 80's guys had the freedom to opt out and then decide among 6 teams who all made adjustments to give you the best chance at success. Please be real about the decision. There are dozens of former players who wish they had the ability to choose where, with who and how much. The only great free agent to change teams back then was Moses and the 76ers had to give up a player and draft pick. By the way he joined a stacked team and won MVP of league and Finals.

[JordansBulls]

Yeah, the right way is that only if you are lucky enough to be drafted by a good franchise and they can build a big 2 or big 3 around you then you can win multiple rings and be acclaimed as an all-time great. If you get drafted by a bad franchise and have to play with scrubs then you should stay there, not win rings and get labeled a choker.

If you build your team in free agency then you did it the wrong way because drafting a big 3 is the only right way.

The same people here saying LeBron did it the "wrong way" would be still calling him a choker and can't get it done had he stayed in Cleveland, still been ringless, and probably lost to OKC (with KD, RW, and JH, but they that's the "right" big 3) in 2012 IF his Cavs even made the Finals.

Not saying he had to stay in Cleveland. But there is a difference in getting help and then going to play with someone who already won as the man on his squad.

I don't know man, seems pretty arbitrary to me. The reality is that save for Pistons in 04 and Mavs in 2011 almost every team that wins the title usually has 2 or 3 top 20 players in the league (usually top 15).

If KD gets to play with Russ, why shouldn't LeBron have Wade?

I can just go through all the duos and trios that have won the rings in the last 20-25 years and almost all of them were a Big 2 or Big 3. Now to say well he shouldn't have joined somebody who had been the man seems irrelevant and another arbitrary standard to hold LeBron to when all other greats won their rings on very good-loaded teams. Yet LeBron shouldn't have a good team? He got his own Big 3 (which ignores the fact that it was really a Big 1 in 2013) It would have been relevant if Wade was the best player on the team or was the one winning the FMVPs. Then you could have discounted LeBron's rings as a second banana.

You are misunderstanding the premise. Durant playing with Westbrook isn't a big deal because Westbrook had not won as the MAN, nor was he the established star on the team. No one is knocking Lebron for playing with a star, there is a difference in playing with a Melo, Deron, etc and then playing with a Wade (who won a title as the MAN). That is totally different.

[PaulieWal]

You are misunderstanding the premise. Durant playing with Westbrook isn't a big deal because Westbrook had not won as the MAN, nor was he the established star on the team. No one is knocking Lebron for playing with a star, there is a difference in playing with a Melo, Deron, etc and then playing with a Wade (who won a title as the MAN). That is totally different.

No, I completely get the premise. My question is why does that matter and why set that arbitrary standard? So by your admission playing with a star is okay and you don't hold that against him.

KD can play with Russ because Russ has "not won as the MAN, nor was he the established star on the team". But LeBron can't play with Wade because he won the FMVP in 2006? But LeBron can also play with Melo or Deron or any other star that hasn't won as the MAN.

Again, these are pretty arbitrary standards. We both know only teams with multiple stars usually win the championships and you seem to agree with that but that star can not have won prior to playing with you as the MAN? What?

I think you are misunderstanding my premise. LeBron was the undisputed best player or the MAN on the team for the 2 championship runs so why does it matter that his star had been the MAN once upon a time?