A while ago I asked who was the 3rd best Celtic behind Russell and Bird. Quite a few ppl said Bird is not the #2 Celtic at all, it should be Hondo. So, who do you got?
LARRY is the better scorer, better rebounder, better passer, the better clutch shooter and the better leader. Hondo was good, but prime Larry was better. His peak was just insane.
JOHN is more durable, won more, is the better defender and better allround. In all the points listed pro Bird, Havlicek is no slouch either. What Larry got in peak, Hondo got in longevity.
I still got Larry, what is your choice?
Bird vs Havlicek
Moderators: bisme37, Froob, Darthlukey, Shak_Celts, Parliament10, canman1971, shackles10, snowman
Bird vs Havlicek
-
Point forward
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,200
- And1: 285
- Joined: May 16, 2007
- Location: Eating crow for the rest of my life :D
-
canman1971
- Senior Mod - Celtics
- Posts: 14,949
- And1: 8,991
- Joined: May 13, 2003
- Location: 18 Championship BLVD
-
-
GreenGrizz
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,466
- And1: 0
- Joined: Feb 23, 2005
- Location: Vermont
-
sully00
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 28,105
- And1: 7,738
- Joined: Jan 08, 2004
- Location: Providence, RI
-
I think this is real close and I am one who thinks that Havlicek is clearly no worse than 3.
3 things that are in favor of Bird are that 1) he played in the '80s the heyday for the NBA besides himself there are another 12 guys who are in the discussion of greatest of all time. Havlicek's prime years were almost as caretaker of the darkdays the league was at low point.
2) Bird's prime was longer. While Havlicek was great for longer his peak seasons were really only 3 years long. Bird was off the hook for 7 or 8 years.
3) At their best Bird was better. Havlicek's 3 best years don't compare with any of those 7 or 8 years.
Obviously Havlicek had longevity and the fact that he played a staring role, if not the headliner on the Dynasty. He was also a guard and not a forward which makes a lot of what he did even more impressive, he was also a much better defensive player.
My only reservation with giving the nod to Bird is Havlicek's postseason success especially against the Fakers.
3 things that are in favor of Bird are that 1) he played in the '80s the heyday for the NBA besides himself there are another 12 guys who are in the discussion of greatest of all time. Havlicek's prime years were almost as caretaker of the darkdays the league was at low point.
2) Bird's prime was longer. While Havlicek was great for longer his peak seasons were really only 3 years long. Bird was off the hook for 7 or 8 years.
3) At their best Bird was better. Havlicek's 3 best years don't compare with any of those 7 or 8 years.
Obviously Havlicek had longevity and the fact that he played a staring role, if not the headliner on the Dynasty. He was also a guard and not a forward which makes a lot of what he did even more impressive, he was also a much better defensive player.
My only reservation with giving the nod to Bird is Havlicek's postseason success especially against the Fakers.
-
John Locke
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,957
- And1: 38
- Joined: Nov 28, 2004
I love talking about the old days.
For me it also comes down to the fact that Bird brought the NBA back. He was the ambassador for the League and is a God in many European countries. Hondo did not enjoy the same success.
Bird also had 3 MVP titles in one of the best decades in the History of the league.
I do think that Hondo is the most underrated the player in the history of the NBA. But he is still clearly not as good as Larry Legend who is one of the best players to ever play the game.
For me it also comes down to the fact that Bird brought the NBA back. He was the ambassador for the League and is a God in many European countries. Hondo did not enjoy the same success.
Bird also had 3 MVP titles in one of the best decades in the History of the league.
I do think that Hondo is the most underrated the player in the history of the NBA. But he is still clearly not as good as Larry Legend who is one of the best players to ever play the game.
-
RoyHobbs
- Senior
- Posts: 531
- And1: 0
- Joined: Jun 14, 2007
sully00 wrote:3) At their best Bird was better. Havlicek's 3 best years don't compare with any of those 7 or 8 years.
I think you're overstating your case a bit. Havlicek's three best consecutive seasons (as a guard):
24.2 ppg / 7.8 rpg / 6.8 apg / 46.4% fg% / All-NBA defense (2nd)
28.9 ppg / 9.0 rpg / 7.5 apg / 45% fg% / All-NBA defense (2nd)
27.5 ppg / 8.2 rpg / 7.5 apg / 45.8 fg% / All-NBA defense (1st)
Larry had a four-year stretch that was better than this, but I don't know where you're getting "7 or 8" years from.
I prefer Bird, as well, but I think that (even as you paid him respect) you were underrating Hondo a bit.
-
sully00
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 28,105
- And1: 7,738
- Joined: Jan 08, 2004
- Location: Providence, RI
-
In '82-'83 Bird scored 23.6 ppg 11 rpg 5.8 apg shooting over 50% from the field and being named to the NBA All Defensive 2nd team (acknowledged fraud). I guess a case can be made that Havlicek's best year rivals this as this is essentially the weakest of the 7 years I am talking about statistically. Bird's scoring and assist totals increase over his next 6 full seasons. I did not include '88-'89 when he only played 6 games. Bird avg well over 50% from the field during this run with a low of 47%.
Essentially Havlicek's highest rebounding year is still less than Birds lowest. His best shooting year is less than Bird's lowest. While he can eclipse him in scoring or assists in a given year outside of the individual seasons I pointed to it just doesn't really quantify a better season.
Over Havlicek's 3 seasons he never cracks a PER of over 21 while Bird's lowest is 21.9. I am sure there are statistical inconsistencies but the fact still remains.
I am also not overstating anything this is a pick'em to me I think Hondo symbolizes the Celtics, he was before my time but there is plenty of stories and video to fill the void. I just went looking for the old thread about who was the 3rd greatest Celtic and may have argued it the other way to be honest. I just looked at their careers statistically and came away with the fact that Bird fella was pretty damn good.
Essentially Havlicek's highest rebounding year is still less than Birds lowest. His best shooting year is less than Bird's lowest. While he can eclipse him in scoring or assists in a given year outside of the individual seasons I pointed to it just doesn't really quantify a better season.
Over Havlicek's 3 seasons he never cracks a PER of over 21 while Bird's lowest is 21.9. I am sure there are statistical inconsistencies but the fact still remains.
I am also not overstating anything this is a pick'em to me I think Hondo symbolizes the Celtics, he was before my time but there is plenty of stories and video to fill the void. I just went looking for the old thread about who was the 3rd greatest Celtic and may have argued it the other way to be honest. I just looked at their careers statistically and came away with the fact that Bird fella was pretty damn good.
-
JJHondo17
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 972
- And1: 783
- Joined: Jul 20, 2007
- Location: Game#5 - June 4, 1976
I am personally conflicted by this debate. As you can see from my avatar, John Havlicek is my favorite Celtic of all time. Larry Bird provided me with my greatest enjoyment watching the Boston Celtics. I guess I could make an argument for either and make it convincingly. I will say this however, that Havlicek was the only Celtic that was instrumental in two distinct eras of Celtic's greatness. Also if not for a separated shoulder, the 70's Celtics would have three championships like the Celtics of the 80's. That would have given Havlicek 9 championships, 2nd only to Russell. If you ever get to watch Havlicek's performance in the 1973 Eastern Conference Finals against the Knicks, it was beyond courageous. He basically operated with one arm and got the Celtic's to a game 7 in which the Celtic's were royally screwed by the refs in Madison Square Garden.
-
TheSheriff
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,658
- And1: 3,461
- Joined: Aug 04, 2007
-
RoyHobbs
- Senior
- Posts: 531
- And1: 0
- Joined: Jun 14, 2007
sully00 wrote:Essentially Havlicek's highest rebounding year is still less than Birds lowest. His best shooting year is less than Bird's lowest. While he can eclipse him in scoring or assists in a given year outside of the individual seasons I pointed to it just doesn't really quantify a better season.
Come on... Havlicek was 6'5", and primarily played guard. Larry was a 6'9" small forward who played a lot of time at the 4. Are you really using rebounding numbers as a means of quantifying who had the better seasons? Havlicek's numbers were extraordinary for a guard, and in his prime his numbers in terms of scoring and assists eclipsed some of those seasons of Bird's that you're pointing to.
Over Havlicek's 3 seasons he never cracks a PER of over 21 while Bird's lowest is 21.9. I am sure there are statistical inconsistencies but the fact still remains.
This is the same PER that quantifies such stats as steals, blocked shots, defensive rebounds, offensive rebounds, three-pointers, etc? All stats that weren't calculated during Havlicek's era? Yeah, that sounds like a reliable evaluator.
-
Jammer
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,802
- And1: 3,324
- Joined: Mar 06, 2001
- Contact:
-
I stayed out of this at first.
But first, a correction. JJ mentioned Russell with the most championships, and Sam Jones had 10 . Sam is my favorite Celtics shooting guard of All-Time, and 2nd favorite to Michael Jordan.
Now, on to the discussion.
First, these guys played different positions.
I strongly disagree with anyone who considers Bird a small forward. He got away with it with Parish, McHale, Maxwell and Walton backing him up, but there is no way Larry B could guard Tracy McGrady or fellows like that. Out of the question. If Larry tried, HIS NET PER would be near 0, if Larry didn't foul out first . Under today's rules, Larry would probably foul out at small forward.
However, I do consider Larry the greatest power forward of All-Time, and in my All-Time Celtics team, Larry gets the nod as the starting power forward. Larry could bang and defend on the block with the best of them, his fast hands were an asset there, even though he didn't play that position for the Celtics with McHale there. But this is a rating of All-Time greats, so Larry gets my vote for All-Time best ever Power Forward in NBA history.
Now, John Havlicek could play 3 positions outstandingly, small forward or either guard position. In his prime, Havlicek's about the same size as Paul Pierce, definately less than 1/2 inch difference.
Havlicek, as has been said, was the better defender, which would be reflected in NET PER, if that had been kept in those days.
Consider that Leon Powe has an offensive PER is 20, but the men he defends average an equal PER, so Leon's NET PER is 0. Unlike Garnett, who averages a PER of 25, his man averages 9, giving Garnett a NET PER of 16, second best in the NBA, and he had been best NET PER 4 straight years.
So, Havlicek is a different player, in that he can play 3 positions at an All-Star level. Havlicek is in my starting 5 of ALL-TIME Celtics also, with Russell, Sam Jones, Bird and Dave Cowens. I consider Havlicek as a point guard for the All-Time team, because I feel that those were the 5 best players. Bird and Jones were great shooters from deep, Sam would have thrived with the 3 point shot if it had been available. Cowens was a good shooter out to 20 feet.
Havlicek's versatility was a huge factor in the teams success that led to his 8 championships. He closed out games at point guard in at least 3 of the championship runs, if not 4.
And, Havlicek's constant movement was key in the Celtics ability to redirect the ball, and quickly reverse from strong side to weak side of the defense. He'd drive, kick to a release point like Bill Russell or Dave Cowens, who would then redirect the ball to an open man or the weak side of the defense.
Another factor is what happens when there are multiple good players. Bird was king of his pecking order, with McHale, Parish, Maxwell, Archibald, Johnson et al. yielding shots to him, and deferring.
The Celtics of Havlicek were 8 time Champions to Bird's 3. They were deep, with more All-Stars. For example, Bailey Howell was a 5 Time All-Star when he joined the Celtics at age 29. His average over his first 3 years in Boston was the same 21 ppg @ 48% and 9.8 rpg that he put up his first 7 seasons, which was incredible since he was playing alongside Russell, Havlicek and Sam Jones. Yet, he only made the All-Star team once in Boston, when the Coaches decided to send Russell, Sam Jones, Havlicek and Bailey Howell to the All-Star Game.
Bird never had to share the spotlight like Havlicek, but Bird won Championships at 37% the rate Havlicek did, because he had less help, and had to do more.
When Bill Russell says that he never saw a Celtic team that could beat his teams at their best, I agree. The 1968 and 1969 teams, which played phenomenal because Russell elevated his playoff performance each year to equal his career average of 15 ppg, 22 rpg and 4 apg; I still feel would have been able to take any team since when they were on.
So, for me, it's a lot closer than anyone might think, but I ultimately go with Hondo, because of his ability to play 3 positions, which was a big reason for his 8 rings.
But first, a correction. JJ mentioned Russell with the most championships, and Sam Jones had 10 . Sam is my favorite Celtics shooting guard of All-Time, and 2nd favorite to Michael Jordan.
Now, on to the discussion.
First, these guys played different positions.
I strongly disagree with anyone who considers Bird a small forward. He got away with it with Parish, McHale, Maxwell and Walton backing him up, but there is no way Larry B could guard Tracy McGrady or fellows like that. Out of the question. If Larry tried, HIS NET PER would be near 0, if Larry didn't foul out first . Under today's rules, Larry would probably foul out at small forward.
However, I do consider Larry the greatest power forward of All-Time, and in my All-Time Celtics team, Larry gets the nod as the starting power forward. Larry could bang and defend on the block with the best of them, his fast hands were an asset there, even though he didn't play that position for the Celtics with McHale there. But this is a rating of All-Time greats, so Larry gets my vote for All-Time best ever Power Forward in NBA history.
Now, John Havlicek could play 3 positions outstandingly, small forward or either guard position. In his prime, Havlicek's about the same size as Paul Pierce, definately less than 1/2 inch difference.
Havlicek, as has been said, was the better defender, which would be reflected in NET PER, if that had been kept in those days.
Consider that Leon Powe has an offensive PER is 20, but the men he defends average an equal PER, so Leon's NET PER is 0. Unlike Garnett, who averages a PER of 25, his man averages 9, giving Garnett a NET PER of 16, second best in the NBA, and he had been best NET PER 4 straight years.
So, Havlicek is a different player, in that he can play 3 positions at an All-Star level. Havlicek is in my starting 5 of ALL-TIME Celtics also, with Russell, Sam Jones, Bird and Dave Cowens. I consider Havlicek as a point guard for the All-Time team, because I feel that those were the 5 best players. Bird and Jones were great shooters from deep, Sam would have thrived with the 3 point shot if it had been available. Cowens was a good shooter out to 20 feet.
Havlicek's versatility was a huge factor in the teams success that led to his 8 championships. He closed out games at point guard in at least 3 of the championship runs, if not 4.
And, Havlicek's constant movement was key in the Celtics ability to redirect the ball, and quickly reverse from strong side to weak side of the defense. He'd drive, kick to a release point like Bill Russell or Dave Cowens, who would then redirect the ball to an open man or the weak side of the defense.
Another factor is what happens when there are multiple good players. Bird was king of his pecking order, with McHale, Parish, Maxwell, Archibald, Johnson et al. yielding shots to him, and deferring.
The Celtics of Havlicek were 8 time Champions to Bird's 3. They were deep, with more All-Stars. For example, Bailey Howell was a 5 Time All-Star when he joined the Celtics at age 29. His average over his first 3 years in Boston was the same 21 ppg @ 48% and 9.8 rpg that he put up his first 7 seasons, which was incredible since he was playing alongside Russell, Havlicek and Sam Jones. Yet, he only made the All-Star team once in Boston, when the Coaches decided to send Russell, Sam Jones, Havlicek and Bailey Howell to the All-Star Game.
Bird never had to share the spotlight like Havlicek, but Bird won Championships at 37% the rate Havlicek did, because he had less help, and had to do more.
When Bill Russell says that he never saw a Celtic team that could beat his teams at their best, I agree. The 1968 and 1969 teams, which played phenomenal because Russell elevated his playoff performance each year to equal his career average of 15 ppg, 22 rpg and 4 apg; I still feel would have been able to take any team since when they were on.
So, for me, it's a lot closer than anyone might think, but I ultimately go with Hondo, because of his ability to play 3 positions, which was a big reason for his 8 rings.
-
sully00
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 28,105
- And1: 7,738
- Joined: Jan 08, 2004
- Location: Providence, RI
-
Why the hell are you trying to make an argument out of something you have already said you agree with me on?
What is your friggin point? For Havlicek's rebounding numbers to be "extraordinary" for a guard would Bird's assists numbers not be even more so for a forward. I will answer for you yes, especially when you factor in both's assist and rebound percentage. Based on that Havlicek's rebounds aren't as impressive as his totals tell you because there was an awful lot of bad shooters creating a lot of rebounds.
Stats are stats and Havlicek's don't measure up to Bird's. As I acknowledged you can make a case that Havlicek's best year is as good or better than Bird's least does that make you happy?
What is your friggin point? For Havlicek's rebounding numbers to be "extraordinary" for a guard would Bird's assists numbers not be even more so for a forward. I will answer for you yes, especially when you factor in both's assist and rebound percentage. Based on that Havlicek's rebounds aren't as impressive as his totals tell you because there was an awful lot of bad shooters creating a lot of rebounds.
Stats are stats and Havlicek's don't measure up to Bird's. As I acknowledged you can make a case that Havlicek's best year is as good or better than Bird's least does that make you happy?
-
Point forward
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,200
- And1: 285
- Joined: May 16, 2007
- Location: Eating crow for the rest of my life :D