ElGee wrote:Now, why am I looking hard at Bird? Let's give him the same broad career strokes to try and narrow in on his peak season.
1980 CelticsThis is Bird's rookie year. I've written in great detail about the changes in the team, here's a quick overview for those unaware.
1979 to 1980 Celtics Changes wrote:-Took the grumpy and disgruntled Dave Cowens off the sideline as a PLAYER-COACH and replacing with him Bill Fitch
-Tiny Archibald's health improved and minutes increasing by 1100
-Replaced poor-rep guys like Marvin Barnes and Bob McAdoo with ML Carr or Gerald Henderson on the bench
-Jo Jo White, limping around on his last legs to start 1979, retired
-Went from no semblance of a rotation (3 healthy players all year, 11 players at 800 minutes, multiple starting 5's) to a team that was healthy and congruent all year
White, Billy Knight and even Earl Williams were starters at the beginning of the 79 season when they opened 2-13...They weren't on the 1980 team. They went 21-20 after a disastrous start and then finished 4-17? McAdoo and players like Curtis Rowe started and played big minutes down that stretch...and they weren't on the 1980 team.
So this massive changes from -5 to +7 SRS isn't simply the presence of Bird. There were a lot of changes. As a result, it's hard to say stuff like "Larry Bird as a rookie took a -2.3 offense to +4.2!"
Can't say that. Not close.
What we can work with is that a rookie Bird -- already 23 years old, polished and one of the best players in the world -- was
the offensive centerpiece of a +4.2 offense...the 15th-best offense by that metric in league history at that point in time. This was achieved with a re-invented Tiny Archibald at the point, an efficiency inside player (Maxwell) and some decent shooters (Carr, Ford). These are very nice results.
It also might look to some like Dave Cowens was a big name on the team. Well, Cowens missed 16 games.
w/Cowens: +6.9 SRS
w/out Cowens: +9.4 SRS
The Celtics were just fine without Cowens. This is really a team powered by Bird, augmented by Archibald and Maxwell, and filled with nice role players. Those are
seriously good results with such a roster.
1982 CelticsThis time Tiny Archibald missed 14 games. Again, look what happens to the Celtics...
w/Archibald: +6.0 SRS (68g)
w/out Archibald: +7.9 SRS (14g)
Of course in 82, Parish deserves a lot of credit. (He finished 4th in MVP.) But Fitch was doing weird things that year, and the Celtics offense dropped down to 2.9 despite looking like they should be a better offensive team. But the general point is the Celtics were always fine when key players were injured.
We see it again later during Bird's peak.
1986 Celticsw/McHale: 8.9 SRS (65g)
w/out McHale: 9.6 SRS (17g)
Just to be clear, it's not common to see 17 game samples of 9.6 SRS play. The lineup there was
Parish
Bird (slides to PF)
Wedman
Ainge
D. Johnson
Bench: Walton/Sichting
Now, I'm not saying that team would rock a 10 SRS all year (heck they finished at 9 w/McHale who obviously makes them better in the long run). And the 86 Celtics had a 12.7 SRS in the PS. They did beat the Lakers twice by 10.5 ppg in the RS.
From Mar 11 to G3 of the Finals they posted a 13.7 SRS and went 30-3. This is a ceiling, in large part, because of the high-level portability of Bird. He's still a solid defender, mostly due to his crafty team defense (more important than individual D) and ridiculously good rebounding, but he just is able to gel with seemingly any kind of player on offense.
In short, I'd make the argument that the 86 Celtics were better than the 67 76ers. (They had 2 bad losses and 40 dominant wins on the year.)
Post-peak:
1988 CelticsWe finally see McHale -- by 88 a clear superstar -- leave a dent with his absence.
McHale Out, Bird In: +3.4 SRS (13g)
McHale In, Bird In: +8.1 SRS (63g)
The no-McHale lineup was
Parish
Bird/Fred Roberts
Bird/Darren Daye
Ainge
D. Johnson
Bench: Marc Acres, some Reggie Lewis (R) -- KC didn't really like his bench.
The defense was worse without McHale -- as we'd expect here -- but the
offense was still +6.2. Just further evidence of Bird's offensive impact. And frankly, I think 88 Bird was a clear step down from 86 Bird on the defensive end, which is reflected there.
1991 CelticsBird could still play in 1991. He averaged 19-9-8 54% TS in the first 31 games, in which Boston went 27-4. He didn't bang as much around the hoop -- gone were the incredible OREB% numbers and he drew very few fouls -- but the shooting and passing were still there. As was the scoring for himself when needed.
w/out Bird: -0.7 SRS (22g)
w/Bird: 7.4 SRS (60g)
And where is most of the impact coming from? On OFFENSE...and it's a totally different team than the 80 teams or the mid-80s teams. This squad was very balanced,
without a true PG, with Reggie Lewis playing catch-and-shoot, McHale posting and Parish hitting in the mid-range.
Offense w Bird: +6.2
Offense w out Bird: +1.6
McHale actually missed 14 games in which Bird played. When McHale played with Bird, the Celtics were
w/Bird and McHale: +9.0 SRS (46g)
The offense jumps to +7.3. In multiple scenarios we are seeing just ridiculous offensive heights from these Bird offenses.
