RealGM

They went 56-26, 46-14 with Bird, 10-12 without him. They were 5th in net rating as well with Bird missing 22 games and McHale missing 14 games. Any chance they challenge the Bulls that year in the East if Bird is healthy? They eventually lost to Detroit in 6 with Bird missing game 1 (loss).

Hook_Em wrote:They went 56-26, 46-14 with Bird, 10-12 without him. They were 5th in net rating as well with Bird missing 22 games and McHale missing 14 games. Any chance they challenge the Bulls that year in the East if Bird is healthy? They eventually lost to Detroit in 6 with Bird missing game 1 (loss).

They were also outscored by a negative SRS team in the first round

OhayoKD wrote:

Hook_Em wrote:They went 56-26, 46-14 with Bird, 10-12 without him. They were 5th in net rating as well with Bird missing 22 games and McHale missing 14 games. Any chance they challenge the Bulls that year in the East if Bird is healthy? They eventually lost to Detroit in 6 with Bird missing game 1 (loss).

They were also outscored by a negative SRS team in the first round

This isn't true (at least per Reference).
Indiana were a negative SRS team (-0.37).
Boston weren't outscored by them. Boston score 594 points on the series, Indiana 592.


To OP's question. How healthy is "healthy" Bird? If he's 87-88 Bird's passing and shooting but with motor and mobility of a younger Bird then we have a new peak Bird. If healthy means "on court" then Bird played 41mpg in the games he was in for the Detroit series (fwiw, Isiah Thomas plays 4 games at 26mpg for the Pistons). Between those extremes there's a fair range of outcomes.

If the question is ... would Boston and Bird have been in a better position if they hadn't played him over 38mpg in the RS the answer is probably yes. It's hard to know for sure who that is most "on".

Could an upgraded, healthy version of a 5.22 SRS team beat a 8.57 SRS team in a 7-game series ... yes that is plausibly possible.

Hook_Em wrote:They went 56-26, 46-14 with Bird, 10-12 without him. They were 5th in net rating as well with Bird missing 22 games and McHale missing 14 games. Any chance they challenge the Bulls that year in the East if Bird is healthy? They eventually lost to Detroit in 6 with Bird missing game 1 (loss).

The record was deceptive. They were not good enough to beat the past their peak Pistons in a playoff series. They were my home team.

Lewis was very good. Dee Brown, Kevin Gamble and Brian Shaw were solid.
McHale and Parish were getting old as well as nagging injury Bird getting old.

No chance they challenge the Bulls.

Owly wrote:

OhayoKD wrote:

Hook_Em wrote:They went 56-26, 46-14 with Bird, 10-12 without him. They were 5th in net rating as well with Bird missing 22 games and McHale missing 14 games. Any chance they challenge the Bulls that year in the East if Bird is healthy? They eventually lost to Detroit in 6 with Bird missing game 1 (loss).

They were also outscored by a negative SRS team in the first round

This isn't true (at least per Reference).
Indiana were a negative SRS team (-0.37).
Boston weren't outscored by them. Boston score 594 points on the series, Indiana 592.

Just checked, you're right. still a pretty big underperformance me thinks. Did pretty well against the Pistons though

I don't think that team just needs a fully healthy version of 91 Bird to have a chance against that Bulls team. They'd need a fully healthy version of 86 Bird. Bird's issue wasn't just injuries after 86 or 87. It's that his body just wore down over the course of a season and all the different injuries adding up over the years. So by 91 he was really a shell of himself but could still just get by with his shooting and bbiq to be a positive but it caught up to him by the playoffs when he was just horrendous. I will say those early 90's Celtics had great overall talent though. That's how they compensated for their big 3 aging out. With a prime big 3 they probably win like 65 games and beat the Bulls.