RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #10 (Larry Bird)

[Doctor MJ]

I'd like to see some vote counting so far.

I have Kobe, Oscar, Jerry, Bird, Karl Malone and Dirk all clearly above Kevin Garnett.

Please let's not indulge tactical voting...

So, just so we're all clear, from my perspective the use of a Top 3 ballot is done in part to enable tactical voting without allowing it to be really damaging.

There's absolutely no reason to vote for your #1 as someone other than your personal top pick, which means we should get an honest first past sense of how everyone's top pick is and people won't get accidentally discouraged from voting for their guy.

Beyond that, I don't mind if someone, say, includes a candidate that's getting a lot of attention in their 3rd ballot spot when he isn't actually their 3rd choice.

To put it another way: I really don't mind if a faction of anti-KG people keep KG from getting in because they keep voting for guys in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd spots that they legit see are better than KG, I just want to be able to name my top choice without being afraid I'm throwing my vote away.

[Gibson22]

Bird: best legacy, offense and peak between offensive players left, his presence lead to greatness more than almost every player in the history of the league
Jerry west: all time great offensive player, playoff performances and defense for his position
kobe bryant

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Copied.

ElGee's WOWY data NBA history spreadsheet.
0.8 SRS change, WoWY Score 0.5. Pwins change 2.
Neutral was otoh (I'm happy between 1 and -1 SRS as neutral but you could call this a small positive).
Control is Parish and McHale in (followed by brackets 55, so I assume looking at 55 total games).

Beyond the numbers the mess at guard could be a confounding factor (Shaw-Douglas trade, Brown presumably injured, Green presumably picked up.
Which players you figure as Bird's replacement and what you make of them may also be a factor (Pinckney has a productive year) in how you interpret any numbers.

1991-92 Celtics
Good luck getting WoWy to give any clarity for that team. There are too many variables. I don't think Kevin Pritchard, Brian Shaw, Bagley, Sherman Douglas, Ricky Green, Dee Brown all having turns at point guard is as big a probem for WoWy as Pinckney changing his position depending on whether or not Bird is healthy. McHale's injuries also crete a problem for WoWy isolating Bird's impact. On top of the various Celtic injuries the team had different phases.

Mchale misses 15 games while Bird also was out. The team went 9 and 6
Mchale comes back and the team goes on a road trip. They go 3-8 before Bird comes back. But McHale comming back did not make them lose. They just hit a unmotivated patch in February.

The era of McHale defending small forwards while playing along side Parrish and Bird seemed to have ended early in this season. McHale was too old to defend small forwards so the big 3 could no longer all be on the floor at the same time. McHale played a lot of center when Bird was playing and not much center when Bird was out injured.

With Bird playing, Pinckney plays small forward. With Bird not playing Pinckney plays power forward. Pinckney at small forward hurts the Celtic offense.

Pinkney was the prime recipient of Birds minutes. But Pinckney only got half of Bird's minutes.
Next level recipients of Bird's minutes are Joe Klein and Rick Fox
The level after that are some minutes that went to McHale
Level after that is extra minutes going to Parrish and Gamble.

When Bird and McHale were both out Parish played some Power forward with Kleine at center and Rick Fox played some power forward. When Bird played, Pinckneys small forward minutes take minutes away from Rick Fox and Gamble.

When Bird and McHale were out Gamble came through and helped the Celtis win.
Reggie Lewis was the biggest constant. He got the off gurd minutes all season and I did not see his minutes effected by all the other changes. Lewis was taller than Gamble but Gamble was the small forward.

Dee Brown missed the first 50 games. The team got very hot in March when Bird came back. The team stayed very hot when Bird missed the last 8 games of the season. Give this team 1986 Bird, Mchale and Parish and they might defeat the Bulls. The supporting cast played well.

[DQuinn1575]

I do think Mikan deserves consideration but between his competition being ass and the ruleset not even being half finished yet (lane was widened during his career, while the shotclock only came after he retired) I'm just not ready to vote him over guys that maybe had a little less dominance in their era but a lot less question marks besides that. He's just one of those guys you could make an argument for top 5 as well as not even top 50 and I'm undecided where I'm going to fall.

You realize that he was so good they changed the rules and then he still won 3 more titles as best player on his team? Don’t think anybody else did that.

[Odinn21]

10. Larry Bird
This might be debatable but I have Bird ahead of Magic because while Magic got his success, it was mostly against one good team, that was the NBA Finals. We saw how meaningful this is with the latest bubble playoffs. Bird, on the other hand, had to play at least 2 and more often 3 series like that to be successful. Bird being a worse playoffs performer than Magic usually ignores this. Also, after hitting his actual prime in 1983-84, Bird never had that kind of issue while playing against way tougher competition.

11. Kobe Bryant
When the top 10 is over, my tier 1 peak list will be done. And there are players peaked higher than Bryant. The thing about him is though, his overall prime was really impressive and stacks up. When I follow my process and think of 10/12 best seasons between two players. even though Bryant wouldn't take the top spot against a few names, he has 7 incredibly solid seasons going for him. Not saying all 7 would make that top 10 lists but so strong.
Another important thing to look is his rise in the playoffs from 2008 to 2010. He went from 4.9 obpm to 6.7 obpm. That 6+ obpm range while making a jump from the regular season is a pretty select company.
Surely Bryant also had his low moments. His longevity was blocked.

12. Oscar Robertson
One of the greatest offensive players that ever graced the game and his defensive performance was not bad enough to hold him down against players like Moses, Erving, Erving and Garnett.
Based on so little knowledge compared to what we have for modern times, I'd go on a limb and say Robertson's performance in 1963 was the greatest individual performance against Bill Russell's Celtics. Better than Chamberlain's, West's and Baylor's. Surely, this is not a decider or a huge factor. Just wanted to mention and would like you to entertain this idea and hit me back with some feedback.

---

TBH, I'm more hyped about the conversations about to come after top 10. We already dove deep into Garnett stuff. But talking about Robertson, West, Moses, Erving, Garnett, Nowitzki, Robinson, Wade, Curry, Durant, Malone, Barkley makes me more hyped.
Our criteria are shaped around the 10/12 usual suspects. Peak, prime, extended prime, overall longevity, postseason performances, career resume, etc. But the top names had their consistency through those things. But not the next group. The quick example would be Wade vs. Bryant. I'd rate Wade at his best higher than Bryant at his best. But Bryant stayed on that level for way longer and Wade basically has no claim over Bryant on overall. Robinson, Curry, Durant, Malone did not have postseason resilience. Barkley is an interesting case.
And we will shift our criteria to suit our opinion / feeling than the other way around and it'll be different than ranking the top 10. At least, personally for me.

[trex_8063]

Kobe vs KG

Accodales and others:
Kobe
5 rings
1 MVP
2 FMVP
18 all star games
11 times top 5 in MVP voting
11 times all-NBA 1st

Garnett
1 ring
1 MVP
15 all star games
5 times top 5 in MVP voting
4 times all NBA 1st

In accodales and rings Kobe is miles and miles ahead of Kevin Garnett.

I doubt I have to say; it's been said a thousand times around here........but I guess I'll say it anyway: many/most here are quite limited in the degree to which they'll rate and rank an individual based upon team accomplishments, or upon media-awarded [or at times: fan-awarded] accolades.

I didn't begin taking deep dives into player analysis until sometime around 2013, though I was always "into" the NBA and enjoyed idly ranking players (even just mentally) as early as somewhere around 2000.
I recall feeling at the time that Garnett had been----simply put----a better player every year of their overlapping careers thru at least Kobe's first nine seasons [thru '05], with the possible exception of '01. And in '04 in particular, I remember marveling at Garnett and feeling like he was the best player in the world by a clear margin.
Anyway, I was then sort of unsure about '06 and '07 [felt roughly a draw to me at the time], and then maybe leaning slightly toward Kobe for the first time in '08, and probably leaning mostly toward Kobe thru '13 [with a possible exception in '12], where after it swung back to KG for their respective twilights ['14-'16--->where THREE of Kobe's "All-Stars" occurred: the entire gap between them on that particular accolade].

Getting into the deep dives of player analysis has since not changed my mind on any of the years where I thought Garnett was best.....but it has changed my mind on a one or two of the years where I was leaning toward Kobe.

I've come to a point where----despite how iconic Kobe was/is [which I've acknowledged is a small consideration in my criteria]---I just can't rank him above a player who I basically thought was better than him for almost their entire careers.

[trex_8063]

Piggy-backing on my comments in post #66, I think I've figured out how I'm going to vote.

I've struggled recently with the hierarchy I want between Garnett and Bird. However, thinking about KG v Kobe [which is easier, since they were contemporaries] has helped clarify it for me, in a weird way. Because I've also struggled with Bird v Kobe [usually going with Bird in front]; so now that I've decided firmly on a Garnett > Kobe hierarchy, I somehow feel more comfortable with KG > Bird (which, admittedly, does seem more consistent with my principle of total career value......it just rubs against the grain of my "history" a little; and change comes a little bit difficult for all of us, right?). But that's the order I'm going with....

1st vote: Kevin Garnett
2nd vote: Larry Bird
3rd vote: Kobe Bryant

(Karl Malone and Dirk Nowitzki are both on my radar here, too, though I have my reasons for putting Kobe in front of them; will get into that probably in next thread)

[Odinn21]

Either I'm too skeptical about Garnett's overall / total career value or his number of great seasons just doesn't add up.
Bird's career was basically from 1979-80 to 1987-88.
I usually consider Garnett's prime from 1999-00 to 2007-08.

When I think of top performances in their respective primes, Bird is coming ahead for me, with a considerably big gap at that. The highest level in those seasons; Bird's 5 season span from 1983-84 to 1987-88 and Garnett's 2002-03 & 2003-04. Then it's Garnett from 2005 to 2008 and Bird in his first 4 seasons.

Prior to that time frame, Garnett was also pretty good in 1998-99 season and his defensive impact was massive in 2010&2012 playoffs. But that's about it in terms of additional career value outside of his prime. I mean, we entirely disregard what Bird did after his injury. Maybe not in the same manner but Garnett was also pretty affected by injuries after 2008.

I don't think Garnett's 3 or 4 seasons outside of his prime are good enough to make up for the gap on prime levels.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #68:

Kevin Garnett - 7 (drza, Dr Positivity, freethedevil, limbo, mailmp, trex_8063, Whopper_Sr)
Larry Bird - 6 (DQuinn1575, Dutchball97, Hal14, lebron3-14-3, Matzer, Odinn21)
George Mikan - 1 (penbeast0)
Kobe Bryant - 1 (Joao Saraiva)

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[quote=”sansterre”].[/quote]

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

btw lebron3-14-3, for future reference, your vote post is skirting dangerously close to having insufficient reasons or arguments, considering you've otherwise been largely inactive in the conversation.

[Doctor MJ]

Vote:

1. Kevin Garnett
2. Larry Bird
3. Jerry West

So my new addition this time is West. Other guys I considered Oscar, Kobe, Dirk, Malone, Robinson.

Obviously the West vs Oscar comparison is an eternal one.

I'll start by pointing out that both guys put up massive in/out numbers. People tend to say Oscar is slightly better, but I have too much uncertainty in everything to really say that. Both are very impressive. Both are clearly legit.

I see West as having similar evidence of impact, despite being on a better team with worse team fit and a team strategy less conducive to letting him shine for much of his earlier career.

I see that while we tend to see Oscar having more longevity, the reality is that by the '70s Oscar was a sidekick while West was the clear cut offensive alpha of the entire league. All this while having a clearly superior defensive reputation.

What about West vs Bird? I have serious debates there and would love to see more analysis from others along those lines after I'm through with KG.

A note on Dirk: I do think he has a good argument over Bird, I find it harder to go with Dirk above West. I tend to see West as a bit stronger on both sides of the ball.

On Robinson: He's basically in the tier but I tend to give other guys the nudge over him.

On Malone: I tend to put him in the middle of this pack but must confess that I'm never sure entirely what to do with him. I have a tendency to (unfairly) focus on his limitations.

On Kobe: Not going to elaborate, but I do know that it's very much a minority opinion to have West above Kobe. Most of my fellow Angelenos would consider it a kind of heresy. Know also that I have put a lot of thought into it, and I can certainly understand why knowledgeable people would have Kobe higher than me.

[eminence]

A little bit more time for this one, though still not the time to really participate in the thread.

My #1/#2 have kind of similar career arcs in my mind, spending their first ~decade toiling away on teams that were never close to championship level outside of their stars. Then combining with some other stars and accomplishing a ton at the tail of their primes. I'm left with really no doubts that either could've led dynasties comparable to some of the best in history had they had a bit more luck in terms of surrounding teammates.

1. Kevin Garnett
2. Oscar Robertson

It's a hot contest for my 3rd spot. We have Oscar's main rival in West. Another great guard with good longevity in Kobe. A pair of offensive focused big forwards with absurd longevity in Dirk/K.Malone. Mikan if you're into peak/dominance. Bird of course.

I'm not quite comfortable with Mikan yet, but I'll be including him soon (I'm pretty sure within the top 20). Dirk out for me due to a first half of playoff career weakness (for an offense focused guy) that seems pretty consistent across years. Malone's peak is the lowest here by a moderate margin for me and his great longevity isn't quite enough against a guy I consider to have solid longevity in Kobe. If West was healthy more often I'd take him over Kobe, but considering it, Kobe wins out for me. Bird I think is the best/2nd best guy here (of the 3rd place competitors) through his prime, but pretty bad longevity (comparable to Mikan relative to era, slightly behind West and well behind Kobe/Dirk/Malone).

3rd. Kobe Bryant

[trex_8063]

Either I'm too skeptical about Garnett's overall / total career value or his number of great seasons just doesn't add up.
Bird's career was basically from 1979-80 to 1987-88.
I usually consider Garnett's prime from 1999-00 to 2007-08.

While I more or less agree with the years you've designated as Garnett's "prime", I have to say KG's a bit unusual in that he [more than most players] seems to have MULTIPLE [perhaps even several] "near-prime" seasons (where he's still REALLY damn good).
Just a few examples.....

'98: PER 20.4 (tied for 18th in league [with Scottie Pippen, Allen Iverson, Mitch Richmond, and Vin Baker]), .143 WS/48, +4.2 BPM (16th in league), +5.63 PI RAPM (5th in league), while playing 39.3 mpg (12th in league)--->is actually 17th in the league in WS and 8th in VORP.
Was an All-Star.

'99: PER 22.4 (12th in league), .146 WS/48 (tied for 42nd in league [with Ray Allen, Tim Hardaway, and Clifford Robinson], although several of those ahead of them are limited minute role players), +5.3 BPM (9th in league), +6.26 PI RAPM (6th in league), while playing 37.9 mpg (tied for 15th in league)--->is tied for 22nd in league in WS and tied for 8th in VORP.
Was All-NBA 3rd Team and 10th in the MVP; only reason not an All-Star is because they didn't have an All-Star game that year.

'09: PER 21.2 (17th in league), .193 WS/48 (9th in league), +5.7 BPM (6th in league), +7.4 RAPM (2nd in league), though admittedly in "only" 31.1 mpg, and he missed 25 games that year.
Was an All-Star and All-Defensive 1st Team.

'10: PER 19.4 (tied for 28th in league), .171 WS/48 (tied for 23rd in league), +3.5 BPM (20th in league), +4.5 RAPM (tied for 7th in league), though admittedly in only 29.9 mpg.

'11: PER 20.6 (24th in league), .194 WS/48 (15th in league), +4.7 BPM (11th in league), +6.5 RAPM (3rd in league), while playing 31.3 mpg.
Was an All-Star and All-Defensive 1st Team.

'12: PER 20.4 (tied for 28th in league), .178 WS/48 (17th in league), +4.3 BPM (tied for 7th in league), +3.0 (tied for 13th in league), while playing 31.1 mpg.
Was All-Defensive 2nd Team.

'13: PER 19.2 (tied for 33rd in league), .133 WS/48, +2.6 BPM, +6.1 RAPM (3rd in league), while playing 29.7 mpg.
Was an All-Star and finished 12th in the MVP vote.

^^^I mean, he's pretty much without question a top 10 player in '09 except for the missed games, arguably top 10 in both '98 and '99, too. Bear in mind that aside from the 9-year "prime" you cited, Bird basically only has three other seasons TOTAL, and '90 was the only one in which he was maybe/probably a fringe top-10 player.

And Garnett then still has more seasons adding value: was likely top 15-20 in '11 and '12, maybe fringe top-20 in '10, and a fringe All-Star in '13, too. Though I didn't post the specs, he was basically a fringe All-Star in '97, too (DID actually get an All-Star selection, fwiw).

It's A LOT of value added on to the prime years you've cited.

I don't think Garnett's 3 or 4 seasons outside of his prime...

As noted above: was more than 3-4 seasons.

.....are good enough to make up for the gap on prime levels.

Many might say there isn't a gap in prime levels OR that the gap is in Garnett's favour.
Truthfully, I think Garnett has the better peak between them, personally.

[Odinn21]

Garnett missed 25 games in regular season and the entire playoffs in 2009.
I'd rate 1990 Bird over 2009 Garnett and wouldn't think twice about it...

2010-11 was similar in that sense. Another insanely strong start to the season to be ruined by Garnett's injury. I believe the Celtics the started the season with 23-3 until Garnett's injury and it all went down after that point for him and the team in that season.

Outside of his prime, I'd consider 1998-99, 2009-10 and 2011-12 for additional career value outside of his prime. And maybe 1997-98.

I definitely see 2004 Garnett's case against 1986 Bird. I personally would take Bird but I agree that it's close and picking Garnett is also a pretty good choice. However, beyond that, Bird's seasons on that or closer level is definitely more IMHO. Bird pulled an all-time great carry job in 1984 which no one seems to care about. Bird played #1 and #2 defenses in the ECF and then the Lakers, went 29/12/6 against those teams and had one of the best game 7 performances ever along the way.

---

BTW, that approach could be done for Bird after his injury.
1990; 21.9 per (13th), 4.1 obpm (14th), 0.154 ws/48 (28th), All-NBA 2nd, All-Star, top 10 in MVP vote
1991; 19.7 per (23rd), 2.9 obpm (20th), 0.140 ws/48 (43rd), All-Star, top 10 in MVP vote
1992; 21.0 per (21st), 4.3 obpm (9th), 0.159 ws/48 (26th), All-Star

I don't see a meaningful difference between Garnett's 2008-09, 2010-11 and 2012-13 seasons and Bird's those seasons. That would leave 1998-99 and maybe 1997-98 to make up for the gap between their primes.

Bird in those seasons; 180 games 21.6 ppg 9.2 rpg 7.2 apg 1.4 spg on .541 ts (+0.7 rts) and 21.0 per, 0.151 ws/48, 3.7 obpm, 5.1 bpm, 12.4 vorp
Garnett in those seasons; 196 games 15.1 ppg 8.4 rpg 2.4 apg 1.6 bpg on .557 ts (+1.7 rts) and 20.3 per, 0.173 ws/48, 1.8 obpm, 4.3 bpm, 9.6 vorp

Even with Garnett's massive defensive impact, I just don't see him having a meaningful gap when we're to compare those not altered seasons.

[90sAllDecade]

So I'm reviewing stats and checking film for the comparisons.

One question for Garnett supporters, what happened in the 2002 playoffs vs Dirk?

I'm going to check games, but it looks like Dirk ripped Garnett and despite the Mavs being 4th seed to Minne's 5th seed it was a sweep.

Again, I'm going to check games but this looks like Dirk dominated this series against KG. Did Garnett guard him or did they hide him?

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2002-nba-western-conference-first-round-timberwolves-vs-mavericks.html

[drza]

So I'm reviewing stats and checking film for the comparisons.

One question for Garnett supporters, what happened in the 2002 playoffs vs Dirk?

I'm going to check games, but it looks like Dirk ripped Garnett and despite the Mavs being 4th seed to Minne's 5th seed it was a sweep.

Again, I'm going to check games but this looks like Dirk dominated this series against KG. Did Garnett guard him or did they hide him?

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2002-nba-western-conference-first-round-timberwolves-vs-mavericks.html

In the series,

Garnett averaged 24.0 points (51.0% TS), 18.7 reb (5.3 ORB), 5.0 ast, 4 TO
Nowitzki averaged 33.3 points (68.6% TS), 15.7 reb (1.7 ORB), 0.7 ast, 2 TO

Short answer is that Timberwolves Coach Flip Saunders' stated strategy was to essentially let Dirk get his with hopes of slowing down everyone else. No, KG wasn't typically the main cover on Dirk that series. He was used primarily as a help defender because the Mavs routinely put out a lineup with four guys that could create off the dribble (Nash, Van Exel, Finley and Dirk) and a fifth that could volume-shoot from downtown (Raef LaFrentz) while the Wolves had three perimeter defenders that (at that point in their careers) were poor on-ball defenders (Billups, Peeler and Wally) and a center that wasn't comfortable/quick enough to defend the perimeter. Per Flip Saunders:

"The thing that makes them difficult is not only do they have the ability to shoot from the perimeter, but almost every one of their guys has the ability to beat you off the dribble," Minnesota coach Flip Saunders said. "Whether it's Nash, whether it's Van Exel, whether it's Finley, whether it's Nowitzki matched up with a 4 (power forward), they've got four guys they can put out on the floor that can create off the dribble.

"They put so much pressure on you to guard them on the three-point line, but if you get too close, they beat you off the dribble. They either get to the basket or they draw help and hit one of their other shooters."

That quote is the series in a nutshell. Believe it or not, Dirk wasn't really the engine for the Mavs' offense in that series. He was more the outcome, the finisher, than the initiator. It's part of why Dirk only had 2 total assists vs 6 turnovers in the entire series...he was being set up in position to score by guards that were crushing their matchups and kicking out to him. And Dirk was awesome enough to knock down a huge array of these good looks.

Interestingly, despite Dirk's ridiculous scoring numbers, Flip wasn't entirely wrong in his strategy. The Wolves held the Mavs slightly below their expected offensive rating in the series (based on both team's regular O- and D- ratings).

But that also doesn't lend itself to a "Dirk vs KG" mano a mano that many would like it to be. It was a lose-lose. In the games that happened, Dirk scored ridiculous (volume and efficiency) but the games were all relatively competitive. In the alternative universe where KG focuses on Dirk, then you potentially see much bigger numbers for Nash, Van Exel and Finley (all of whom had a much larger capacity to score than those Mavs teams used) and maybe the games would have been less competitive. Which, at least obliquely, Flip seemed to allude to here in one of the post-game quotes:

"In the first quarter I told our guys, when they were a little frustrated over Nowitzki scoring, 'It's a team. You know,'" Saunders said. "If we had to, if Dirk would have a big game, but we contained their other people, we'd be in good shape. What happened was we let some of their other people, mainly Van Exel, came out in the second quarter and kind of got their momentum going back in their way."

Though the two teams were seeded 4/5, the Mavs were the much better team (57-25 record) than the Wolves (50-32), so it would've been a long shot for the Wolves to win the series. And the Mavs were an atrocious matchup for those Wolves, who would've been better built to face the Kings or Spurs even though they were better teams.

In the three games, Garnett sat only 18 total minutes. While KG was on the court, the Mavs outscored the Wolves by a total of 14 points in 130 minutes. But they outscored the Wolves by 18 points in the 18 minutes that he sat. In the first game of the series, this was the difference between a win and a loss (Wolves outscored Mavs by 4 in the 44 minutes Garnett was on the floor).

:Shrugs: Make of that what you will.

[Dutchball97]

Wow looks like KG really might get in ahead of Bird. Wonder what the cut off would then be next. If you put KG over Bird can you really put Bird ahead of Karl Malone either. I mean both KG and Karl Malone are a tier worse than Bird at least but both of them have a large longevity advantage. Is John Stockton top 20 then? Is Robert Parish?

What about AD? Another guy like KG who has been very good for a long time, just that both couldn't win a thing in the play-offs before they joined up with other superstars.

[70sFan]

Wow looks like KG really might get in ahead of Bird. Wonder what the cut off would then be next. If you put KG over Bird can you really put Bird ahead of Karl Malone either. I mean both KG and Karl Malone are a tier worse than Bird at least but both of them have a large longevity advantage. Is John Stockton top 20 then? Is Robert Parish?

What about AD? Another guy like KG who has been very good for a long time, just that both couldn't win a thing in the play-offs before they joined up with other superstars.

Why do you assume that everyone thinks Bird was clearly better than KG? Peak KG has plenty of arguments over peak Bird.

[limbo]

Kobe over KG/Dirk is kind of mindblowing since all three played in the same era, their primes mostly overlap, and Kobe was rarely better than Garnett or Dirk in most of those prime seasons...

Kobe maybe had, what... 3 seasons where you could argue he outperformed KG and was thus a better player for the season. And those are 2001, solely on the back of a stronger Playoff run with a much better cast, as teams were throwing bodies at Shaq. 2007, and not by a lot despite KG playing on a historically bad team. And 2009 where Garnett got sidelined by an injury, otherwise they were close throughout the RS. People will push for 2006 because Kobe averaged 35 and squeaked into the Playoffs on a better team only to have a poor showing against the Suns, but KG was better overall, imo. At worst i can give this year a wash, as it really doesn't matter that much in the grand scheme.

97, 98, 99, 00, 02, 03, 04, 05, 08, 10, 11, 12, 13

KG better in all of those. Even if i concede 2010 (where Kobe was not that impressive in the PS despite winning the title, and KG being more integral to Boston success, and probably wins another title if Perk doesn't get injured and LA massive frontcourt just dominates Boston who has no size/physicality now) and 2013, it still KG overall easily...

Dirk was better than Kobe in 02, 05, 06, 07, 11, 12

Feel like 01, 03, 08, 10 are a wash.

Kobe was better in 00, 04, 09

Kobe's 98 and 99 are basically Dirk's 13 and 15 seasons. Kobe's 13 = Dirk's 14.

If winning bias/marketing is too strong it seems.

[Dutchball97]

Wow looks like KG really might get in ahead of Bird. Wonder what the cut off would then be next. If you put KG over Bird can you really put Bird ahead of Karl Malone either. I mean both KG and Karl Malone are a tier worse than Bird at least but both of them have a large longevity advantage. Is John Stockton top 20 then? Is Robert Parish?

What about AD? Another guy like KG who has been very good for a long time, just that both couldn't win a thing in the play-offs before they joined up with other superstars.

Why do you assume that everyone thinks Bird was clearly better than KG? Peak KG has plenty of arguments over peak Bird.

I don't think he has, which is why I'm becoming kind of desperate to get it. I think KG's 04 and 08 are on the level of Bird's 85, 87 and 88 seasons but not as good as 84 or 86.

The main argument I personally see for KG's peak over Bird is his defense but why are Shaq and Magic ahead of KG then?

I still have KG top 15 so I would've been voting for him soon anyway but I can't see him over Bird. Up untill now everyone voted in was my first choice or at least my second choice. This is the first time someone is (at least by the looks of it atm) getting in I have a tier lower than an available guy.

[70sFan]

Wow looks like KG really might get in ahead of Bird. Wonder what the cut off would then be next. If you put KG over Bird can you really put Bird ahead of Karl Malone either. I mean both KG and Karl Malone are a tier worse than Bird at least but both of them have a large longevity advantage. Is John Stockton top 20 then? Is Robert Parish?

What about AD? Another guy like KG who has been very good for a long time, just that both couldn't win a thing in the play-offs before they joined up with other superstars.

Why do you assume that everyone thinks Bird was clearly better than KG? Peak KG has plenty of arguments over peak Bird.

I don't think he has, which is why I'm becoming kind of desperate to get it. I think KG's 04 and 08 are on the level of Bird's 85, 87 and 88 seasons but not as good as 84 or 86.

The main argument I personally see for KG's peak over Bird is his defense but why are Shaq and Magic ahead of KG then?

I still have KG top 15 so I would've been voting for him soon anyway but I can't see him over Bird. Up untill now everyone voted in was my first choice or at least my second choice. This is the first time someone is (at least by the looks of it atm) getting in I have a tier lower than an available guy.

Well, for once many posters argued KG over Magic and Shaq anyway, so it's not like they voted for Magic, but not for Bird. This list will never be consistent, because it's a combination of various opinions and various criteria. i agree that Magic and Bird shouldn't be very far, but view Magic clearly higher for example.

Firstly, why do you think that KG was better in 2004 or 2008 than in 2001-03 or 2005-07? He had better teams in these seasons, but I wouldn't call 2008 KG better player than 2003 KG for example. It's not like he played poorly in playoffs every time either - he played neck and neck with prime Duncan in 2001 playoffs for example. I don't see any large difference in Garnett's impact from 2000 to 2009 until injury.

Secondly, could you elaborate why do you have 04/08 KG on 85, 87/88 Bird level, but not on 84/86? Is this because of postseason run? If so, you have to answer why Bird couldn't reach this level consistently. If that's because of health, you have to count this against him. If not, then maybe we should look at the whole 1984-88 period and then Bird's production isn't on another level really.

Then you have to think of what makes peak Bird better than peak Garnett. Here the debate is tougher, because they are much different players and I can see the case for both. Which is the point - I don't see any reason to believe that Bird was so much better at his peak it isn't even worth to discuss about it. To me, the comparison is very close and both sides have very solid arguments.

Defense vs offense is always tricky, but as someone high on individual defense I'd take KG over Bird. It's not like KG wasn't offensive superstar and he also adds far better longevity which only widened the gap - not made it.